Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News

Thursday, September 12, 2024

The mistakes in ABC's question about Israel to Kamala Harris, and more in her answer

Here is the question about Israel during the presidential debate Tuesday night:

LINSEY DAVIS: Turning now to the Israel-Hamas war and the hostages who are still being held, Americans among them. Vice President Harris, in December you said, "Israel has a right to defend itself" but you added, "It matters how." Saying international humanitarian law must be respected, Israel must do more to protect innocent civilians. You said that nine months ago. Now an estimated 40,000 Palestinians are dead. Nearly 100 hostages remain. Just last week Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said there's not a deal in the making. President Biden has not been able to break through the stalemate. How would you do it?

The question implies that Israel is not adhering to international humanitarian law. It is, and every expert that visits Israel and checks out the conduct of the IDF testifies to that, including an article published Wednesday in The Times of London.

Beyond that problem, who, exactly, "estimated" 40,000 Palestinians killed? The answer is - Hamas. Not only did Davis use the figure as if it is factual, but she also implied that most or all of those killedwere civilians.

Kamala harris' answer was rehearsed and consistent with how the Democratic Party, the EU and now the UK look at Israel. And it is more problematic than the question was.

VICE PRESIDENT KAMALA HARRIS: Well, let's understand how we got here. On Oct. 7, Hamas, a terrorist organization, slaughtered 1,200 Israelis. Many of them young people who were simply attending a concert. Women were horribly raped. And so absolutely, I said then, I say now, Israel has a right to defend itself. We would.

So far, so good. But not for long.

And how it does so matters. Because it is also true far too many innocent Palestinians have been killed. Children, mothers.

What we know is that this war must end. It must end immediately, and the way it will end is we need a cease-fire deal and we need the hostages out. And so we will continue to work around the clock on that.

Harris didn't say that Hamas must be utterly defeated, or that its leadership must leave Gaza. Any talk about ending the war and leaving Hamas in place is immoral.

Work around the clock also understanding that we must chart a course for a two-state solution. And in that solution, there must be security for the Israeli people in Israel and in equal measure for the Palestinians.

The two state idea is a solution in search of a problem. It wouldn't solve a thing. Palestinians have made it abundantly clear for decades that they consider any territorial gains to be spaces from which they will demand more. Three decades after Oslo, their official logos and schoolbooks still do not recognize Israel.

Talking about a Palestinian state after 10/7 is far worse. It is irresponsible, because the message being given is that terror must be rewarded.

In 2013, the Obama administration presented a framework for peace. Netanyahu accepted it, Abbas rejected it. The US sweetened the deal behind Israel's back, offering a Palestinian capital in Jerusalem - and still Abbas didn't accept it.

What has changed since then? Has the PA shown more flexibility? Has it shown it rejects terror?

Not at all. It still names schools and monuments after terrorists, it still teaches incitement to children, and the vast majority of Palestinians supported the October 7 massacres.

Kamala Harris wants to reward this by adding pressure to Israel to accept a Palestinian state where they can invite Iran or Syria or Turkey to build military bases.

A real leader would say that the two state solution is off the table without significant Palestinian movement towards peace. The Palestinians' embrace of 10/7 must not be rewarded.

But the one thing I will assure you always, I will always give Israel the ability to defend itself, in particular as it relates to Iran and any threat that Iran and its proxies pose to Israel.

The US policy has been to help Israel defend itself, but it is not keen on Israel winning any wars. A nation that is behind fences and always worried about where the nect attack can come from is not a secure country, no matter how good its defense is.

If Harris was serious about supporting Israel, she would say she supports an Israeli victory - not another detente with terror groups that led to October 7 to begin with.

But we must have a two-state solution where we can rebuild Gaza, where the Palestinians have security, self-determination and the dignity they so rightly deserve.

Palestinians have done nothing to indicate they are ready for real peace with Israel. A Palestinian state with the daily incitement and cheering of terror would not bring peace, but more attacks. We've seen it time and time again - suicide attacks during Oslo, an enthusiastic second intifada, followed by Mahmoud Abbas inciting more violence resulting in car rammings, stabbings, rockets and Islamist militias openly organizing in the West Bank under PA rule.

Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism today at Amazon!

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424.

Read all about it here!

09/11 Links Pt2: Twenty-three years into the long war; New York City’s Laboratory for Hate; Kamala’s Islamists; Unpacked: Is Zionism Dead?

From Ian:

Clifford D May: Twenty-three years into the long war, the threat matrix keeps expanding

In the weeks after 9/11, I sat down with Jack Kemp, a Republican politician who had been close to President Ronald Reagan, and Jeane Kirkpatrick, a political scientist and self-described “AFL-CIO Democrat” whom Reagan appointed as his U.N. ambassador. Also in these discussions: a visionary philanthropist to whom they introduced me.

We began organizing a think tank that we named the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies. It was our conviction that, after the collapse of the Soviet Union, the U.S. had taken a “premature peace dividend” and “a holiday from history.”

We correctly foresaw that this would be a long war. We incorrectly believed that, after 9/11, no one in a position of authority would defend terrorists.

Before long, prominent journalists and academics were asserting that “one man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter.”

That led, ineluctably, to what we now see: Herds of ignorant students, tenured activists and professional agitators are trampling over American campuses in solidarity with murderers and rapists who are torturing hostages at this very moment.

On Sept. 20, 2001, President George W. Bush announced the Global War on Terrorism, which he said would not end “until every terrorist group of global reach has been found, stopped and defeated.”

Before the year’s end, the Taliban, which ruled Afghanistan and had hosted al Qaeda, would be ousted from power. Two years later, Saddam Hussein would be toppled in Iraq.

In 2011, President Barack Obama withdrew all U.S. military forces from Iraq, leading to the rise of the Islamic State group, aka ISIS, and further opening Iraq to Iran’s influence.

In 2021, President Biden withdrew all U.S. military forces from Afghanistan. That proved that Khaled Sheikh Mohammed, planner of the 9/11 attacks, was correct when he told his CIA interrogators that jihadis can be confident of victory because “we only need to fight long enough for you to defeat yourself by quitting.”

For many years, Americans hoped that Russia and China would side with us in the Global War on Terrorism.

Surely, the arc of post-Soviet Russian history was bending toward liberal democracy. In June 2001, Mr. Bush said he found President Vladimir Putin “very straightforward and trustworthy.”

Near the end of 2001, China was welcomed into the World Trade Organization in the hope that as China grew wealthier, its rulers would moderate.

It soon became apparent that this experiment failed — though many influential Americans and Europeans still refuse to see that.

In March 2023, Waller R. Newell, perhaps the world’s leading expert on the history of tyranny from ancient times to the present, joined me in writing a column on what we called the “Axis of Tyrannies.”

Xi Jinping, China’s Communist ruler, and Mr. Putin, Russia’s neo-imperialist dictator, had agreed to a “no-limits” partnership in February 2022, just days before Russian troops invaded Ukraine. Both went on to establish close relations with Ali Khamenei, the Islamist “supreme leader” of Iran.

Mr. Khamenei has begun sending ballistic missiles to Russia. There are numerous other examples of military cooperation among the members of what is often called the Axis of Aggressors. North Korea, Cuba and Venezuela are also members.

Beijing, Moscow and Tehran are building their military capabilities as fast as they can. Bipartisan commissions have found the U.S. defense budget and military size inadequate given this expanding threat matrix.

New York City’s Laboratory for Hate

Bratman says the tenor of the violence worsened over the summer, with demonstrators becoming more frustrated and volatile, last week marching outside Hillel with a white sign painted in red letters reading: “Bring the war home,” illustrated with a machine gun. “These people are not just insane,” says Bratman. “They’re criminally insane. We have a lot of insane people in New York on every block. But these people are dangerous. They’re not the regular guy that throws shit at the wall in Times Square.”

A seasoned Army veteran who saw action in Iraq, Bratman is naturally cool, engaging, and funny—a genuine hail-fellow-well-met. But his instincts now tell him that violence is coming. It’s the very beginning of the school year and everyone is distracted, and he desperately needs more press coverage to get the attention of the CUNY administration.

“What’s new about this round of protests?” I asked Bratman. To propose a story to my editor, I’ll have to say what’s new. Bratman just about lost it. “Protesters stalked, menaced, harassed, and followed Jewish students to a kosher restaurant, like they would have done on Nov. 9, 1938, and blocked the entrance, screamed obscenities, and banged on windows calling for violence against Jews,” he told me. “They not only terrorized students, but also other Jews, random New York Jews having dinner. The cops came, didn’t do anything, even though they heard distinct, specific threats against the lives of the Jews inside.”

Bratman grew up in the Soviet Union, so he believes that he understands where all this is headed if brave and well-intentioned people don’t step up and insist on what should not require saying: Jewish people enjoy the same rights as any other citizen of the U.S. “This is not a freedom of speech story,” he states. “These people are breaking the law. Free speech rights end when the speech is menacing, threatening, or intimidating—or when the speaker prevents me from moving freely through a public space. For whatever reasons,” he says, “the police are not enforcing the law.”

A lawyer and Navy SEAL named Bill Brown, who is trying to help Jewish students fight hate on campus, happened to be visiting Baruch College just as the protests began. He told Tablet, “These were not demonstrators. Demonstrators do not follow students to a restaurant and spew racial hatred and use derogatory language. These were criminals who wore kaffiyehs over their faces to intimidate, and they blocked the entrance to the restaurant so the victims felt trapped.” He praised the “bravery” of the Hillel students “who did a good job staying together in a group and looking out for each other.” He encouraged them to continue to document the violence and urged others both inside and outside the Jewish community to “stand up and peacefully make their voices heard.” He encouraged everyone to document all incidents via video, because it “helps others see just how bad things are” and provides evidence to support possible legal action.

The day after the restaurant melee, CUNY Chancellor Félix V. Matos Rodríguez issued a statement: “I was deeply disappointed to learn demonstrators disrupted a Hillel welcome dinner for students from CUNY and universities across the City, turning an event designed to help freshmen acclimate to college life into a disruptive hate-filled display that has no place in our city.” He affirmed that he was investigating the “incident” and said the school “will not hesitate to enforce CUNY disciplinary actions, as appropriate, if any of the demonstrators are members of the CUNY community.”

Bratman reported several students and one faculty member he saw at the protest. The ADL called on Baruch College President David Wu to condemn the violence. Wu did not return a request from Tablet for comment. William C. Thompson Jr., the chairman of CUNY’s Board of Trustees, responded to Tablet via his press spokesman on Sunday, calling the protesters’ behavior “deplorable.” He said, “We will not condone hateful rhetoric and any member of the CUNY community who participates in any actions that intimidate, threaten, or promote hate and violence, will face disciplinary consequences.”

Bratman believes that the large Jewish organizations like ADL and AJC should put their money where their mouths are and hire teams of lawyers to sue the colleges and students and faculty who are breaking the law—often repeatedly, and for months on end. He says that he’s tired of hearing excuses from the funders like: “the wheels of justice turn slowly.” In response, he says “we need to make the wheels turn faster. I guarantee you, if it was about a merger of two financial firms, lawyers would make that happen quickly.” The famed Louis D. Brandeis Center for Human Right Under Law “is great,” he says, but its capacity is too limited to help the numerous colleges that are in need.

David Collier: BBC Hamas coverage shows broadcaster must choose between truth and misinformation

The British public should not be forced to fund an organisation that, through its reporting, legitimises a group like Hamas and in turn strengthens Iran’s hand. This is not what the BBC was created for, nor is it what the British public expects from a publicly funded broadcaster.

There is a moral duty here, not just to Israel, but to every British citizen whose money has unwittingly contributed to the dissemination of this warped narrative.

And so, the BBC must be held accountable. This is not merely about restoring journalistic standards — it is about confronting the very real consequences of media complicity in the rise of antisemitism and the legitimisation of terror.

The Asserson Report lays out in forensic detail the extent of these failings, and yet, even now, the BBC refuses to reckon with the full gravity of its actions. Instead, it doubles down, insisting that it has maintained impartiality, even as the facts tell a different story.

There must be an independent inquiry — one that does not allow the BBC to hide behind platitudes of “due impartiality” while it continues to advance a narrative that serves the interests of those who would see Israel destroyed.

And unlike the decades-long hidden "Balen report", the 20,000-word document that assessed anti-Israel bias at the BBC back in 2004 and has been gathering dust in a secret filing cabinet ever since, the findings of the newly proposed one most certainly needs to be released without qualification. The British public deserves transparency, and the Jewish community as well as Israel deserve justice.

History has taught us what happens when powerful institutions turn a blind eye to the consequences of their actions. During the Second World War, it was all too easy for some to excuse or ignore the dangers of aligning with an ideology that sought the eradication of Jews. Today, the BBC must not be allowed to fall into the same trap. It is time for the BBC to face the reality of its failures, to confront the consequences of its reporting, and to restore the trust it has so grievously betrayed.

This is not just about the BBC. It is about the broader moral question of how we as a society respond to the forces of hatred and terror. The BBC must decide whether it stands for truth or for the kind of dangerous misinformation that fuels violence and division. It is time to choose.

09/11 Links Pt1: Gen. McColl: I fought in Iraq — I know Israel’s doing all it can to save civilians; Hamas makes half billion from ‘humanitarian’ aid

From Ian:

Seth Mandel: The Free World Has a Duty to Let Israel Win This War

The discovery of Hamas’s tunnels, along with the Israeli military’s release of Hamas’s tunnel-training handbook, offers lessons. “First, traditional intelligence systems must put greater emphasis on the tunnel systems of Iran (concealing its nuclear program), North Korea (hiding not only nuclear weapons but also the launchers to deploy them) and terrorist groups.” To do this will require the refinement of technology and the sharpening of human intelligence wherever such tunnels are found—such as in Gaza. Underground systems of this size and complexity are newly discovered territory.

Next, once we get a picture of these tunnels from the inside, Stavridis implores the West to train its militaries specifically for combat underground and to integrate engineering units into that training.

From there, the focus would shift to improving technology: “These include intelligence systems that can detect and measure tunnel complexes from space or using long-dwell drones. (This would potentially include hyperspectral technology — high-resolution imaging based on information across the electromagnetic spectrum — to see the movement of earth as tunnels are expanded.) Also necessary are unmanned above-ground capabilities — sonic, infrared and light-detecting — that can operate ahead of human troops to reduce casualties. It would be useful to find new ways to make life underground unpalatable: reducing air and water for example, or by creating unpleasant vapors.”

That last part is complicated at the moment, as Stavridis notes: Hamas is still holding innocent hostages in the tunnels. They cannot all simply be flooded or destroyed at will, nor can they be used to test air-and-water reduction with civilians still in them. So long as that remains the case, Stavridis writes, “count on other adversaries to take a page from Hamas’ book and start conflicts by kidnapping a substantial number of civilians or military personnel.”

As always, the military innovations developed by terrorists and rogue states for use against Israel will be used against the rest of the world. Israel’s discovery of those tunnels came too late to save its own people from a massive attack. But the lessons here can save millions in the future.

Unless, of course, the West forfeits those lessons. Stavridis says nothing about the end game of this war, because that is not the subject of his column. But the pressure on Israel to agree to a ceasefire that would leave part of Hamas and part of its underground infrastructure permanently intact and uninvestigated would be a global calamity.

Israel must win this war, and it must be allowed to define victory for itself. The dismissive comments from Joe Biden and others that total victory is either impossible or unidentifiable are dangerous nonsense. Hamas must be defeated completely and those tunnels must serve as a textbook for military strategists. No one in the West who truly values life and liberty should want any corner of this tunnel system left unseen or untouched. Israel’s sacrifices can only pave the way for the upholding of the security of the free world if the free world desires that very safety and security for itself.

General Sir John McColl: I fought in Iraq — I know Israel’s doing all it can to save civilians

The level of casualties in Gaza is significant and will undoubtedly result in criticism of the IDF. The alternative is to clear the buildings by hand with the inevitable loss of life that would entail, especially as Hamas terrorists wait for IDF entry to set off lethal booby traps via remote detonators. Rebuilding Gaza will take an enormous international effort.

The IDF briefed us that 1,500 aid trucks were flowing into the Gaza Strip weekly and gave assurances that the quantity of food and medical supplies that they carry is sufficient to meet the needs of those displaced.

While it was not possible to verify these claims we did see a significant number of aid delivery trucks as we moved along the Philadelphi corridor near Rafah. We also saw drone video footage which appeared to show that some of the trucks entering Rafah and other towns were being intercepted at gunpoint by Hamas terrorists before reaching the refugees.

The perspectives that we gained were as a result of a relatively short visit; they are not comprehensive or definitive. However, they do indicate that there is balance missing in the reporting of events in Gaza.

In our discussions with senior officers, officials and politicians, including the defence minister and the prime minister, we urged them to open up the conduct of operations as fully as possible to objective media reporting.

There are obvious safety problems but they can and must be overcome. Journalists, too, must make a greater effort to report more accurately. I came away from the trip satisfied that the IDF’s operations and rules of engagement were rigorous compared to the British Army and our western allies.

War is terrible, but sometimes necessary. And Israeli soldiers are fighting in conditions of extraordinary complexity and risk. It’s time for the world to have its eyes opened to that.

Ruthie Blum: Restating the obvious: Hamas isn’t negotiating

Protesters took to the streets of Tel Aviv, Jerusalem, Haifa, Beersheva, Netanya and other locations across Israel on Saturday night in what is being reported as one of the largest demonstrations in the state’s history. According to some figures, there were some 500,000 people at the main rally in the White City and an additional 250,000 spread out elsewhere.

Whether or not these numbers are accurate, anybody observing the crowds in person or on TV could see that they were massive. The explanation for the exceptional turnout was twofold.

First, the entire country was reeling from the recovery the previous weekend of the bodies of six hostages who had been executed in cold blood by their Hamas captors a mere two days or so before they were discovered by Israel Defense Forces troops. The victims of the barbarians who abducted them 11 months ago were identified as 23-year-old Hersh Goldberg-Polin; Eden Yerushalmi, 24; Almog Sarusi, 25; Alexander Lobanov, 32; Carmel Gat, 40; and IDF Master Sgt. Ori Danino, 25.

It was believed by the families of these and other hostages that the first stage of a rumored deal for their release would have seen at least three of the above on the list to return home.

The second reason for the increase in participants in the otherwise waning anti-government protests—the key goal of which all along has been to topple Prime Minister Benjamin (“Bibi”)Netanyahu and his right-wing coalition—is the looming one-year anniversary of the Oct. 7 massacre.

Not a single Israeli is apathetic to the terrifying plight of the 101 remaining captives, and all can only imagine with horror what the spouses, parents, grandparents, siblings and children of the captives are going through every minute of every hour of every day.

To make matters worse, the war against terrorists in Gaza is continuing and claiming the lives of heroic soldiers, while the north is being bombarded by Hezbollah rockets and drones.

Disclaimer: the views expressed here are solely those of the author, weekly Judean Rose columnist Varda Meyers Epstein.

The Trump-Harris debate was on every politically-aware person’s mind for the past month. We heard commentator after commentator weigh in in the run-up to that time: it’s crucial that he focus on substance, and not be, well, Trump, they all said. But we all knew, as did the commentators, that Trump would be Trump.

We hoped that Tulsi Gabbard, who had been enlisted to prepare Trump for the debate, would be a moderating influence. But we knew better. We knew that Trump would be Trump and that there was nothing and no one who could change that.

A lot of people like that about Trump—that he is what he is and doesn’t care what we think of him. But a lot of people don’t like that about Trump. And those are the people he needs to sway—the others were going to vote for him anyway.

I went to bed Monday night, knowing that the debate would begin while I slept here in Israel. I wasn’t upset about that. I only felt down, so sure was I that Trump would be Trump, and that as a result, Israel would have to contend with a hostile Harris-Walz government.

I woke up, and not at all hopeful, caught the tail end of the debate. It was exactly as we all knew it would be. Trump didn’t care how he said what he said, didn’t stop to think how offensive it would be for a Jew to hear from his lips, “Israel will not exist within two years from now.”

This is offensive on so many levels and some of those levels are difficult to express. There’s a visceral recoiling from those words, it’s instinctive, and surely that’s not what Trump wants the undecided Jewish voter to feel right now. Trump thinks he will frighten us into voting for him. In actual fact, the statement gives grave offense to us. We existed before Trump, and we will continue to survive as a nation should he lose, but it would, God forbid, take a toll. A “terrible” toll, as Donald Trump might say.

Still, it’s an alienating thing to say; and if Trump alienates the Jews, they won’t vote for him, and as a result, Harris may win. And that is exactly why I blame Trump for what happened last time. I believe Trump’s bull-in-a-china-shop attitude, at least in part, led to a win for Biden. Trump’s attitude and manner of behavior is every bit as much to blame for the division in America as the politicians who slander anyone who does not agree with them, and the news media and the echo chamber that echo them.

So much of what Trump said was good and true. But the effect of that is destroyed when he says, “I believe that Israel will not exist within two years from now” (emphasis added):

[When] she mentions Israel, all of a sudden, she hates Israel. She wouldn't even meet with Netanyahu when he went to Congress to make a very important speech. She refused to be there because she was at a sorority party of hers. She went to go to the sorority party. She hates Israel. If she's president, I believe that Israel will not exist within two years from now, I've been pretty good at predictions. I hope I'm wrong about that one.
She hates Israel. At the same time, in her own way, she hates the Arab population, because the whole place is going to get blown up. Arabs, Jewish people, Israel, Israel will be gone.
It would have never happened. Iran was broke under Donald Trump. Now, Iran has $300 billion because they took off all the sanctions that I had. Iran had no money for Hamas or Hezbollah or any of the 28 different spheres of terror. And they are spheres of terror, horrible terror."

Is Donald Trump wrong about any of this? Aside from saying Israel won’t exist, he’s probably right. But even if he’s not wrong about any of it, God forbid, that’s not the way to say it. The right way to say this is—as I’m sure Tulsi Gabbard tried to impress upon Trump— “A Harris win poses an existential threat to Israel.”

Would it be so hard for him to say those words instead of the ones that make us bristle?

At the Republican Jewish Coalition summit last week, speaking to a Jewish audience, it was even worse, and at the same time, even better. Trump expanded on what he would do to help Israel were he to win. He listed many good things he has done in the past and also all the good things he will do for Israel and the world should he win the election. Many, many good things.

Unlike at the debate, Trump’s words at the RJC summit were heartening and hopeful in many respects. At the same time, it’s upsetting to see how Trump sabotages his own campaign, likely losing the Jewish vote again, only for his refusal to speak like a human being instead of like an ape.

The RJC speech, on balance, is very fine, and worth reading in full, as I found out when I read over the transcript I cobbled together from YouTube auto-generated text. If it weren’t for the threats and childish nicknames he slings at his opponents, the good would outweigh the bad, and Trump would have many more Jewish votes in his pocket. But Trump can’t seem to help himself—or rather, doesn’t care enough about Israel and the Jews—to even try to speak and comport himself with enough moderation to tip the scales in his favor (emphasis added):

Take a look at what's happening with that whole group. Harris Biden Administration has sought to cast blame for these deaths on Israel. They have not been your friends. I don't understand how anybody can support them and I say it constantly, if you had them to support, and you were Jewish, you have to have your head examined. They have been very bad to you, let me state this very clearly; the blame for these wicked murders lies with Hamas and Hamas alone.
Only an evil and inhuman, really inhuman ideology, kidnaps, tortures, and murders innocent men, women, and children, and likewise, only a deeply sick political party here in America would make common cause with those who sympathize with such evil, and they are, there's nobody been close, closer than this group of people, radical left people running for office right now, and they're not going to win because they can't win, because we wouldn't have a country any longer and then Israel would not have an ally. That I can tell you and only a morally rotten president and vice president would seek to blame Israel for heinous acts of terror committed against its own citizens.
Joe Biden and Kamala Harris are a disgrace to your nation and to my nation. If Kamala Harris and Crooked Joe Biden are looking for another cause for this crisis, they should do nothing more than look in the mirror: they are the cause. They gave you no support. They gave Israel no support.
The October 7th attack on Israel would never have happened if I was president. Zero chance. It was not going to happen, just like the disaster in Afghanistan would never have happened, and frankly the invasion of Ukraine by Russia would not have happened. Happen this November, we're going to replace weakness with strength; cowardice with courage and clarity; and war with peace. We're going to tell Comrade Kamala Harris, “You're fired.”
[Applause]
Thank you.
Now we have no choice in doing so. You'll never survive if they get in and our country America will never survive if they get in.
When I left office, America was safe. Israel was safe. The Jewish people were safe, and the whole world was at peace. Under my leadership, we obliterated the Isis caliphate. 100% done. We did it in four weeks. It was supposed to take five years I did it in four weeks, and it was done, over.
I withdrew from the horrendous Iran nuclear deal, and imposed the toughest ever sanctions on the regime. Iran was weak. Iran was broke. They had no money and they wanted to make a deal.
As president, I withdrew from the antisemitic United Nations Human Rights Council, which is terrible, absolutely terrible.
I defunded the Palestinian Authority and choked off the money to Hamas, and we actually defunded that. We were paying them a fortune every year. The United was States was paying a fortune, and I said we're not going to pay, they're not our friends, and not the friend of Israel.
I recognized Israel's eternal capital and opened the American Embassy in Jerusalem, something which every president said they were going to do, and they never did it. I got it done, and I also got the embassy built. Somebody else would have never gotten it built.
I also recognized Israeli sovereignty over the Golan Heights. The Golan Heights was a big thing. We were talking to a lot of people. I got it done in 15 minutes. They've been negotiating it for 52 years. Nothing was ever going to happen without me.
With the historic Abraham Accords, we made peace in the Middle East. We had wonderful support, and had I been president for the remainder of that, the time that we're talking about, this year, period. Everybody, every country virtually, would have been signed into the Abraham Accords whereas Biden and Harris have done nothing. Nobody signed.
So, here at home, American Jews felt safe on our streets and college campuses when I was president, and we kept radical Islamic terrorists out of our country. They were out. They weren't allowed to come in, but all of that changed with Comrade Kamala Harris and Crooked Joe Biden in the White House.
Harris restored funding to the Palestinian Authority and even much more money than they were being paid before; and the UN Relief and Works Agency, which both funnel money now to Hamas, and they funnel a lot of money to Hamas, and nobody knows that better than you.
She supported removing the Houthis, to list—we had a terror list that was really, uh, very important for them to be on that terror list, and she took them off the terror list, a group whose motto includes the words “Death to America, Death to Israel” and “A curse on the Jews.”
This is their motto and they don't want them on a terror list.
Kamala Harris helped deliver over $100 billion in sanctions relief to Iran. Gave him all the money. They gave him $6 billion for hostages. They gave them money that Iran never expected—never, never could have made—and now because of them, in three and a half years they've got $350 billion.
When I was there they had no money. They wanted to make a deal, and we would have had a deal very easily if the election turned out the way it should have turned out, frankly, but the regime used it to expand its terror brigades and to fund Hamas. Iran was doing that, and funding them at a level that nobody thought even possible.
Kamala Harris is the candidate of the forces who want to destroy Western civilization and Israel. I am the candidate of those who want to defend Western civilization; defend Israel; and defend of course, the United States of [Applause] America. When I'm president, the United States will once again stand shoulder to shoulder with the State of Israel.
I will support Israel's right to win its war on terror and we will win fast. You have to win, and you have to win fast. We will restore stability and peace in the Middle East, and we will be using a phrase that's been used by some very great leaders over the years, including Ronald Reagan. “Peace through strength.”
You will have peace through strength.
If Kamala Harris wins, terrorist armies will wage an unceasing war to drive Jews out of the Holy Land and you know it, and we've had a great relationship with Israel, but I can say honestly that we got 25% of the vote, we got 26% after four years, after I did more for Israel than any other president by far, and this year we're probably around a 50% mark.
But I only ask you who are the 50% of Jewish people that are voting for these people that hate Israel and don't like the Jewish people, why are they, why are they voting, why? How do they exist?
Iran and his proxies will spread bloodshed and death all around the globe, and as she continues to set the world on fire, Kamala Harris will support unlimited migration from terrorist hotbeds into the United States, and will totally abandon Israel. You're going to be abandoned if she becomes president, and I think you have to explain that to your people because they don't know it, they have no idea what they're getting into.
You're not going to have an Israel if they become, if she becomes president Israel will no longer exist. When I'm president we will deport the foreign Jihad sympathizers and Hamas supporters from our midst. We don't want them in our midst, thank you very much, thank you. If you hate America, if you want to eliminate Israel, then we don't want you in our country.
[Applause]
I will ban refugee settlements from terror-infested areas like the Gaza Strip. We will arrest the pro-Hamas thugs who vandalize federal property, and I will put every single college president on notice. The American taxpayer will not subsidize the creation of terrorist sympathizers on American soil. Colleges will and must end the antisemitic propaganda or they will lose their accreditation and federal support. No money will go to them if they [Applause] don't.
In the Republican Party, we know that militant antisemitism and support for terror have no place in a civilized society. They have no place. We must reject antisemitism in our schools; reject it in our foreign policy; reject it in our immigration system; and reject it at the ballot box this November.
You must get Jewish people or people that love Israel, you must get them to vote for Republican {sic].
You must get them to vote for Trump, and if you don't, you're not going to have a country. I am telling you I've been very good at predicting things. You will not have a country. This is a radical left Marxist that we have running, you will not have a country.
With your vote, we will defend our citizens. We will defend our values; and we will defend our country America; and Israel will be respected [Applause] again.
We will deliver low taxes; low regulations; low energy costs; low interest rates; and low inflation. We will stop the invasion, end migrant crime; support our police; strengthen our military; build a missile defense shield like you have, slightly larger; keep critical race theory and transgender insanity out of our schools; and keep men out of women's sports in our country.
[Music]
We will defend the Second Amendment; restore free speech; and we will secure our elections. In everything we do, I will put America first. I will keep America safe, and I will work with you to make sure that Israel is with us for thousands of years. We're not going to let go of it.
If they win, Israel is gone. Just remember that if they win, Israel is gone. You can forget about Israel. That's what's going to happen, so they have to get out on November 5^th, and they have to vote for Trump. If they don't I think it's going to be a very terrible situation.
We're going to make America great again. We're going to, frankly, help Israel become great again. Right now, what you're going through is horrible, that you have to go through that, with all the death, destruction, and waste, and ruining a civilization.
You have to go on. You have to win, but you need a partner. You can never have that partner if these radical Marxists win the election, so I thank you, and God bless Israel, God Bless America, I'll see you soon, thank you very much.

As stated in his speech, the list of good things Trump would do for us is detailed and it is long. And many of us know that Trump would do each and every one of these good things for Israel and for the world. We know and we believe that he would defund every bad and evil influence possible; the gross George Soros people persecuting Jewish youth on campus; UNRWA; Iran. He’d defund them all, Trump would.

But first he has to get into office. And I fear that last night, with his threatening remarks at the debate, Trump has lost the election yet again, by alienating Jewish voters, put off by his off-putting words. Trump would have been smart, instead, to learn from the closing remarks of Douglas Murray when he faced off against Mehdi Hassan in June:

The Jewish State and the Jewish people have survived an awful lot worse than this. They have seen off every single one of their enemies, from Pharaoh to the Abyssinians, to the Babylonians, the Greeks, the Romans. They will see off Hamas. They will see off Mehdi, and they will outlive everybody in this [Applause] room.

Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism today at Amazon!

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424.

Read all about it here!

From JNS:

Senior Israeli defense officials warned earlier this week that “everything” must be done to prevent another war front from opening up, Channel 12 reported on Tuesday.

Security officials on Sunday night laid out seven recommendations, which received the backing of Israeli Defense Minister Yoav Gallant, Israel Defense Forces Chief of Staff Lt. Gen. Herzi Halevi and Israel Security Agency (Shin Bet) head Ronen Bar, according to Channel 12.

The security chiefs were said to have urged ministers to authorize the entry of more Palestinian workers from Judea and Samaria into the pre-1967 lines, blaming the rise in terrorism on financial hardship stemming from the decision to revoke permits in the wake of the Oct. 7 massacre.

In 2010, the Palestinian Central Bureau of Statistics, the Palestinian Ministry of Health and United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA) issued a report about Palestinian workers in Israel.

This report was only published in Arabic, and it is no longer on the UNFPA website. The archived version is here.

The workers interviewed expressed an obsession with sex and Israeli women - both claiming that Israeli women were seducing them and that some of them felt that having sex with Israeli women was a major goal to be achieved.

From the examples given, they interpreted any Israeli women not being hidden away the way Muslim women are to be a form of sexual harassment and an invitation to sex:

The workers talked about the behavior of the Israeli women towards them, saying sexual harassment is not rare, they talked about it considering that the Israeli society is an open society, and about that they say: “The Israeli women move around with the Arab youth and this is something that is inevitable, in addition to the Jewish women moving around with the Arab youth among the workers is something very normal, especially since this is something normal in the Israeli society, and in the shops you find the Jewish girl at a certain time and she does whatever you want with the Jewish girl in a normal and natural way.”

They regarded any perceived attention by Jewish women to be harassment, but harassment that they were powerless to resist. 77% claimed to have been sexually harassed by Israeli women!

The Arab workers would particularly want to have sex with Jewish women without protection. And they like their victims to be drunk:

"The possibility of sexual relations increases because she is drunk, and thus the process of taming her is very easy, and she goes with anyone because she does not distinguish between Arabs and Jews, and then we quickly take advantage and have sex without caring about protection because it is an opportunity and we must take advantage of it.”

This is effectively rape that is being bragged about, without any negative comment from the UNFPA.

But the most concerning part of the report - one that received no media coverage - was that some of the workers considered sex with Jewish women to be a form of jihad:

Others try to explain having sex with Israeli women as a “jihadist” and vengeful act against the Israelis, and about that they said: “The Jews are open-minded, does he want to be in a room or a bed? Wherever they are, they have sex, in the street, in hidden places, and in any place, it doesn’t matter to them, as long as one has sex. These Israeli women are usually drunk and take drugs, so they have no problem with where they have sex. Some people consider sex with Israeli women to be an act of jihad."

Another testimony in the report:

I was working in the “Mahane Yehuda” market, and there was a school for Israeli girls there. The girls would invite us to go to their house because they thought we Arabs were pretty, especially the Russians. One time I went with one to the house, and after a while I stripped her (meaning I had sex with her), and the desire was more for revenge than sex.

The report makes recommendations about educating Palestinian youth about STDs and protection, but there is not a word about teaching them to treat Jewish women with respect. The overwhelming thought is that Jewish women are "asking for it" and therefore deserve to be taken advantage of and sexually abused.

This is what Israel's security professionals are recommending.

Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism today at Amazon!

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424.

Read all about it here!

Yemen news site quotes David Duke antisemitic 9/11 conspiracy theories to mark anniversary

Yemen news site 26Sep.net has an article on the anniversary of 9/11 that uses as its primary source - David Duke.

They quote Duke as claiming that only one Israeli died on September 11, 2001, "proving" that Israelis had advanced warning of the attack and were behind it.

The article freely admits that Duke is a right-wing antisemite, but uses that as praiseworthy: "He is one of the far-right activists in the United States, as his party is extremely hostile to the Jews on a racial basis, and his primary desire at the present time is to liberate America from Jewish and Zionist control, which he considers the greatest danger to America and the world."

Here is the illustration for the article:

The article quotes Duke as being a patriotic American as well as a steadfast friend of the Palestinian people:

I have dedicated my life to a free, secure, sovereign America, an America loyal to our people and our interests, not to the terrorist goals of a foreign terrorist state... Let us tell the truth about the worst terrorist state on earth: Israel.

If you do this, you will not only help save the Palestinian people, but also save the lives and freedom of the American people as well.

It is difficult to find a better illustration of the horseshoe theory than seeing far-Left protesters chanting in support of the Houthis who idolize David Duke's antisemitism.

Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism today at Amazon!

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424.

Read all about it here!

UN Special Coordinator for the Middle East Peace Process, Tor Wennesland, issued a statement condemning the IDF airstrike in Khan Younis yesterday condemning Israel for hitting a civilian area. But his statement was unusually balanced for a UN official:

While the IDF said it struck Hamas militants who were operating in a command-and-control center embedded inside the Humanitarian zone, I underline that international humanitarian law, including the principles of distinction, proportionality, and precautions in attack, must be upheld at all times. I also emphasize that civilians must never be used as human shields.

Yet again, such actions only underscore that nowhere is safe in Gaza.

Wennesland appears to have added the statement about human shields to appear even handed. His tweet on the statement didn't mention that part of it.

But Wennesland emphasized that using human shielding is unacceptable and said that was one of the reasons that "nowhere is safe in Gaza."

And almost no one reported on this part of his statement.

The BBC quoted it without elaborating. So did some non-western media. But most didn't even mention that a UN official assigned nearly equal blame to Hamas as to Israel for its part in endangering civilians.

Typical is how the New York Times covered the statement:

Israeli [sic] has long said that Hamas embeds itself among civilians to use them as human shields. International law experts have said Israel still has a responsibility to protect civilians during its military operations. More than 40,000 people have been killed in Gaza in 11 months of war, according to the Gazan Health Ministry, whose figures do not distinguish between civilians and combatants.

The U.N. special coordinator for the Middle East peace process, Tor Wennesland, condemned the strike. “The killing of civilians must stop, and this horrific war must end,” he said.

The United Nations and other rights organizations have said that there is no safe place in Gaza.

While it is rare, this is not the first time a UN official has noted that Hamas employs a human shield strategy. UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres said in November, "Hamas and other militants use civilians as human shields." Under-Secretary-General for Political and Peacebuilding Affairs Rosemary DiCarlo said a week ago, "Civilian objects in Gaza, including infrastructure are also reportedly being used to shield fighters and military objectives, endangering the lives of civilians in and around them. Civilians should not be used as human shields."

These were either never reported or buried in anti-Israel stories.

Hamas doesn't merely use human shields. Hiding behind and underneath Gaza civilians is a crucial component of its entire military strategy. And it is the party primarily responsible for the deaths of Gaza civilians, not Israel.

After all, Wennesland's understanding of international law is flawed. He is charging Israel with violating "the principles of distinction, proportionality, and precautions in attack," Yet Israel issued the names of the Hamas terrorists they killed, proving that they adhered to the principle of distinction; they emphasized that they took all possible precautions, and international law's understanding of proportionality in other wars have shown that killing 16 civilians along with 3 high value military targets is not disproportionate at all. In fact, the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia ruled that NATO bombing a broadcast station used for military purposes, which only knocked it out for several hours, was not a disproportionate attack even though it also killed 16 civilians.

The Geneva Conventions says very clearly: "The presence or movements of the civilian population or individual civilians shall not be used to render certain points or areas immune from military operations, in particular in attempts to shield military objectives from attacks or to shield, favour or impede military operations. "

The media, and to a large extent the international community, is not just doing a disservice by ignoring the deliberate use of human shields by Hamas. It is endangering civilians in future wars. Since one's impression of international law from the media and international officials is now saying that the principle of proportionality is far more restrictive than it has been in previous wars, they are encouraging terrorists to rely even more on a human shield strategy.

It is a big deal for a UN official to say that Hamas is even partially responsible for the deaths of civilians in Gaza. It is unconscionable and irresponsible for the media to pretend that the statement was never said.

Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism today at Amazon!

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424.

Read all about it here!

From Liberation (French):

An Israeli film festival in Alsace was cancelled under "pressure" from pro-Palestinian groups , according to its organizer, and reactions are pouring in. The Representative Council of Jewish Institutions of France (CRIF) Alsace denounced this Sunday, September 8, "intellectual terrorism" , after the cancellation of the Shalom Europa festival, which was to be held from September 8 to 10 in Strasbourg.

In a press release entitled "No to intellectual terrorism and the establishment of a climate of fear and hatred in Strasbourg!" , the Crif Alsace deplores that " the pressures, intimidations and threats on the Star cinema and its staff (have) got the better of the Israeli film festival cancelled by the operator after 15 years of programming" . "We do not accept the totalitarian methods of small groups that are working to deny Israel the right to exist, its citizens and its artists the right to express themselves" , writes the Crif Alsace.

Stéphane Libs, manager of the Star cinemas, announced on Friday that the festival had been cancelled, denouncing "pressure" exerted by pro-Palestinian groups. "The decision to cancel was taken so as not to add violence to the tense context and to protect employees and audiences ," he explained. Several pro-Palestinian groups had called for the cancellation of this festival, which was initially scheduled to take place in June and had already been postponed amid tensions linked to the conflict in the Gaza Strip.

"Shame on these French associations that are doing censorship work worthy of authoritarian regimes and that are exploiting the tragedy taking place in the Middle East to give free rein to their hatred ," denounced the CRIF Alsace. The association calls on "local authorities to replace the festival's partner, as well as state services to do everything possible to ensure that this festival can take place and thwart this censorship . "

Strasbourg's Green mayor Jeanne Barseghian on Saturday deemed "unacceptable" the "threats and pressures weighing on the festival and its partner cinema."

When even the leading Green party member in Strasbourg says that pro-Palestinian groups are acting like thugs, you know that things were much worse than being reported.

This is how pro-Palestinian groups work. They know they cannot win any debate so they resort to threats and censorship to silence anyone who disagrees with them.

The problem is much bigger than this. By using threats to silence Zionist voices, the haters manage to keep the "genocide" slander as the only acceptable description of the Gaza war. This leads to antisemitism, to incitement to violence, and to delegitimizing the most progressive state in the Middle East in a desire to replace it with a regressive, Islamist, terror supporting regime.

When the Jordanian truck driver murdered three Israelis, it wasn't because he was a member of a terror group. It was because he was brainwashed into thinking that every Israeli must be killed as "justice." This is the message given not only in France but int he Western world on anti-Israel social media and during demonstrations.

The threats to this festival are from the same playbook. Brainwash people to associate Israel with genocide, and they logically think Israel is as bad as Hitler and must be stopped by any means possible. Part of brainwashing is silencing any other viewpoints.

This sort of thing is not funny anymore. It is deadly. It encourages violence against Jews in France and elsewhere. And the Western world tolerates and encourages this intolerance.

Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism today at Amazon!

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424.

Read all about it here!

09/10 Links Pt2: How Anti-Zionists Are Unintentionally Killing DEI; PA: “Biden should stand trial as a war criminal; ”Tucker Carlson – The anti-William F. Buckley

From Ian:

Matti Friedman: When We Started to Lie

Exactly ten years ago, during an Israel-Hamas war that seemed major at the time but seems minor now, I published two essays describing my time reporting on Israel for the Associated Press. “Is there anything left to say about Israel and Gaza? Newspapers this summer have been full of little else,” I wrote at the time. “Television viewers see heaps of rubble and plumes of smoke in their sleep.” It wasn’t the volume of coverage that unsettled me in the summer of 2014. I was writing about something that had gone unreported, and which has done much to shape reality in the decade since—a change not in the news but in the newsroom.

The essays—the first for Tablet, and the second for The Atlantic—described my experience as a reporter watching from the inside as a major news organization lost its way in one of the world’s most heavily covered stories. To this day, nothing I’ve ever written has been quoted back at me more often. The essays go back into circulation every time there’s an explosion of violence here, and it happened again after the Hamas attack of October 7. I reread them recently, as the new tragedy in Gaza balloons into a moment that feels like a civilization shift, as rallies against “Zionism” become a staple of life in cities across the liberal West, and as a war launched by Muslim fundamentalists is recast with global success as a story of Jewish brutality, influence, and mendacity.

The most important thing I saw during my time as a correspondent in the American press, it seemed to me, was happening among my colleagues. The practice of journalism—that is, knowledgeable analysis of messy events on Planet Earth—was being replaced by a kind of aggressive activism that left little room for dissent. The new goal was not to describe reality, but to usher readers to the correct political conclusion, and if this sounds familiar now, it was both new and surprising to the younger version of myself who was lucky to get a job with the AP’s Jerusalem bureau in 2006.

The story I found myself part of proposed, in effect, that the ills of Western civilization—racism, militarism, colonialism, nationalism—were embodied by Israel, which was covered more heavily than any other foreign country. (Israel takes up one one-hundredth of one percent of the surface of the world, and one fifth of one percent of the landmass of the Arab world.)

By selectively emphasizing some facts and not others, by erasing historical and regional context, and by reversing cause and effect, the story portrayed Israel as a country whose motivations could only be malevolent, and one responsible not only for its own actions but also for provoking the actions of its enemies. The activist-journalists, I found, were backed up by an affiliated world of progressive NGOs and academics who we referred to as experts, creating a thought loop nearly impervious to external information. All of this had the effect of presenting a mass audience with a supposedly factual story that had a powerful emotional punch and a familiar villain.

“The lasting importance of this summer’s war, I believe, doesn’t lie in the war itself,” I wrote as the fighting petered out in 2014. “It lies instead in the way the war has been described and responded to abroad, and the way this has laid bare the resurgence of an old, twisted pattern of thought and its migration from the margins to the mainstream of Western discourse—namely, a hostile obsession with Jews.” It’s possible that I understated the problem.

From academic guardians to political operatives

It’s hard to deny the once-storied AAUP, esteemed for its commitment to academic integrity, has been captured by activists who are more concerned with advancing their political goal of dismantling the Jewish state than with advancing the group’s scholarly mission.

This shift from scholarship to anti-Israel politics, as expressed by the AAUP’s approval of academic boycotts, not only corrupts AAUP’s mission and degrades its reputation, it can cause real harm to higher education in America and beyond.

What few people realize is that although an academic boycott of Israel ostensibly targets Israeli universities and scholars, there is simply no way it can be implemented without directly suppressing the educational opportunities and academic freedom of students and faculty on U.S. campuses, as well as inciting antisemitic animus and harm towards Israel’s on-campus supporters.

Specifically, implementing academic BDS means boycotting the educational programs in or about Israel on one’s own campus, and seeking to cancel or shut down Israel-related events and activities; encouraging academic programming and campus events that portray Israel in a wholly negative light, as a pariah state unworthy of normalization; shunning collaborations with Hillel and other Jewish organizations and the students and faculty who affiliate with them; and denigrating, protesting and harassing members of the campus community who express positive views about Israel.

The AAUP’s reversal of its long-standing opposition to academic boycotts marks a significant blow not only to Jewish students and faculty but to the future of higher education and the society that vitally depends upon it. By condoning an academic boycott that replaces genuine scholarship with political activism aimed explicitly at dismantling the Jewish state and purging Zionism and Zionists from the academy, the AAUP has made a mockery of the professional standards it has, for more than 100 years, been relied upon to uphold. It has shown itself to be a deeply corrupt organization, antithetical to the core principles of American higher education, and wholly unworthy of the public’s trust.

Yisrael Medad: The Jewish 'status quo' violated? Jewish historical narratives are too often ignored

Until 1911, that is
On Monday, April 13, during Passover, the Parker Expedition Affair, the search for “Solomon’s treasures,” exploded. The guardian of the Haram al-Sharif was bribed to let the British adventurers in to the Dome of the Rock. Their digging was discovered. Riots broke out in Jerusalem. At the Wall, the Sephardi custodian was set upon and beaten. Benches were broken.

It is unclear whether there is a direct connection, but in early November that year the status quo came to an end. Jews were informed that no benches or stools would be permitted at the Western Wall. The complaint of the locals was that Jews bringing chairs would allow them in the future to assert ownership. Chairs, tables, and separation screens now were deemed “innovations.” Appeals went out to the sultan in Turkey.

A British official was to later testify that if chairs were allowed, next would come benches, then permanent seating, “and before long, the Jews would have established a legal claim to the site.”

The July 26, 1912, issue of the Chicago Sentinel, a Jewish weekly, reported, a bit garbled, that an order from Constantinople “announces that the recent interdict prohibiting the Jews from worshiping on Friday evenings at the Western Wall in Jerusalem has been removed.” What the editor couldn’t have known as he went to press was that on July 22, the night of Tisha B’Av, the Western Wall had been smeared with feces. And not for the first or last time.

It was from this period that the struggle over the rights of Jews at the Western Wall became a central political element in the relations between Jews and Muslims in the early years of the Mandate. Chaim Weizmann tried solving the matter by purchasing the neighborhood, as did others before him.

In May 1920, a month after the riots, the Wakf unilaterally attempted to fix the upper layers of the Wall. Benches were removed by the Wakf in early 1922 and Yom Kippur 1925. In 1923, the approach to the Wall was closed to Jewish worshipers on the first day of Passover, as the British feared disturbances.

Following the violent incident of the removal of a partition on Yom Kippur, September 29, 1928, Mufti Amin al-Husseini organized actions that would highlight the Muslims’ exclusive claims to the Temple Mount and its environs. He ordered new construction in proximity to the Western Wall.

Eventually, on November 19, 1928, a white paper was issued. Quoting the 1911 prohibition, Leopold Amery, secretary of state for the colonies, pronounced there had been an infraction of the status quo, which the government was unable to permit.

As a result of the ensuing 1929 riots, an international commission was appointed. On December 1, 1930, it declared a prohibition on bringing “benches, carpets, mattings, chairs, curtains, and screens” to the Wall and “to blow the ram’s horn” at the Wall, all in force until 1948.

That situation continued throughout the Jordanian occupation.

No full Jewish rights. No Jewish privileges. No more previous status quo. That is, until 1967, when full Jewish sovereignty was renewed.

09/10 Links Pt1: South Africa trying to delay ICJ genocide case for lack of evidence; IDF video shows ‘horrific conditions’ in hostage tunnel

From Ian:

South Africa trying to delay ICJ genocide case for lack of evidence

South Africa is attempting to extend the deadline for presenting evidence against Israel at the International Court of Justice in The Hague because it is unable to prove its allegations of genocide, Kan News reported on Tuesday.

The move comes some nine months after the country submitted a suit against the Jewish state over the Israel Defense Forces’ conduct in the war against the Hamas terror group in Gaza, claiming that the IDF is committing genocide.

South Africa is required to submit its evidence on Oct. 28, but is trying to extend the deadline by several months in the hope that evidence proving their genocide accusations will come from other places.

Kan noted how unusual the tactic is, as plaintiffs generally want to expedite the proceedings, and the defendant, in this case Israel, wants to slow it down.

Axios reported on Monday about an Israeli campaign to exact a heavy price in the diplomatic arena for South Africa’s ICJ suit, with the Israeli Foreign Ministry in recent weeks engaged in a diplomatic effort to prevent South Africa from moving forward with the case, including sending a classified cable to the Israeli embassy in Washington and all Israeli consulates in the United States.

“We are asking you to immediately work with lawmakers on the federal and state level, with governors and Jewish organizations to put pressure on South Africa to change its policy towards Israel and to make clear that continuing their current actions like supporting Hamas and pushing anti-Israeli moves in international courts will come with a heavy price,” the cable read.

Netanyahu: ICC prosecutor pushes ‘pure antisemitism’ by again asking court to arrest Israelis

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu immediately criticized the chief prosecutor of the International Criminal Court after he urged justices on Tuesday to issue a swift ruling on arrest warrants for the Israeli premier, Defense Minister Yoav Gallant and two top Hamas terrorist leaders.

Karim Khan’s comparison between Israel, “which is fighting murderous Hamas terrorism in accordance with the laws of war, and war criminal [Yahya] Sinwar, who executed Israeli hostages in cold blood, is pure antisemitism and a moral disgrace of the highest order,” he stated.

“Unfortunately, we have seen from the beginning that the proceedings in The Hague are politically biased and have no professional legal basis whatsoever,” the premier added in a statement published by his office.

In a filing to the ICC’s Pre-Trial Chamber on Monday, Khan expressed frustration with the court’s delay in issuing the arrest warrants, urging action ahead of Netanyahu’s scheduled address to the United Nations General Assembly later this month, Israel’s Ynet outlet reported.

“The prosecution respectfully requests that the Chamber issue its decision on the applications for the warrants of arrest against Yahya Sinwar, [Mohammed] Deif, Benjamin Netanyahu, and Yoav Gallant with utmost urgency,” Khan wrote in a six-page letter to the ICC justices.

The arrest of the four, the prosecutor insisted, “is necessary to, inter alia, ensure that they do not obstruct or endanger the investigation or court proceedings, prevent the continuing commission of the crimes alleged and/or the commission of other Rome Statute crimes. “

In May, Khan demanded the arrest of Netanyahu and Gallant for alleged war crimes. He lumped the two Israelis together with then-Hamas chief Yahya Sinwar, Hamas “military” leader Mohammed Deif and Hamas “political” head Ismail Haniyeh. (Deif was reportedly killed in Gaza and Haniyeh in Iran, both in July, by Israeli forces as part of Swords of Iron.)

The ICC has no jurisdiction as Jerusalem is not a signatory to the Rome Statute, which established the court. But in a legalistic sleight of hand, the court claimed jurisdiction by accepting “Palestine” as a signatory in 2015, even though no such state exists under international law.

'Shocking Failure': Cotton Blasts UN Human Rights Council for Refusing To Call Hamas a Terrorist Org

Sen. Tom Cotton (R., Ark.) is pressing the United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC) to explain its "shocking failure to condemn the terrorists of Hamas," blasting the international organization for its "moral blindness" and "obscene penchant for targeting and smearing Israel."

Cotton, a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, instructed the council to explain why it continues to call Hamas terrorists "Palestinian armed groups," a term the senator says is meant to whitewash its ongoing crimes.

"While you preen as the moral voice of the world, you’ve refused to call Hamas a terrorist organization and repeatedly drawn a false equivalence between Hamas and Israel," Cotton wrote to UNHRC high commissioner Volker Türk in a Tuesday letter, according to a copy obtained by the Washington Free Beacon. "You and your United Nations colleagues should immediately and unequivocally call Hamas what it is: a terrorist organization."

The letter comes after Hamas claimed responsibility for the torture and murder last week of six hostages, including one American citizen, who were held in the intricate tunnel system running underneath the Gaza Strip. Shortly after the mass killing, the UNHRC issued a statement attributing the slaughter to "Palestinian armed groups," even though Hamas had already claimed responsibility.

"Although you professed that you were ‘horrified’ by the executions, you failed even to mention Hamas as the murderer and called for an ‘independent’ investigation into the killing," Cotton wrote. "Hamas had already admitted to these barbaric murders, so I’m not sure what such an investigation would prove."

"Moral blindness," he added, "unfortunately seems to be your modus operandi—never more evident than in your statement earlier this month after Hamas executed six hostages."

The @WashingtonPost knows they are quoting Hamas liars, but they keep doing it

At first, the Washington Post reported:

An Israeli strike on Mawasi, a tent encampment near Khan Younis that Israeli forces designated a humanitarian zone, killed at least 40 people and injured at least 60 on Tuesday, a Gaza Civil Defense official, Mohammed al-Mughair, told The Washington Post. The Israel Defense Forces said it had struck a Hamas command and control center hidden there — a claim Hamas denies.
Israeli war planes hit the area with about five missiles in the middle of the night, leaving three large craters inside the camp and sending ambulances scrambling, another Gaza Civil Defense spokesperson, Mahmoud Bassal, told The Post. The strike took place near the British Hospital, he added. Rescue workers are still working to recover 15 missing people, al-Mughair said.

"Gaza Civil Defense Officials" are Hamas. The WaPo quotes two Hamas terrorists, who claim "at least 40" dead and "15 missing people" under the rubble - 55 dead at the very least.

Hours later, the newspaper modified the story:

An Israeli strike Tuesday on Mawasi, a coastal tent encampment in southern Gaza that Israeli forces designated a humanitarian zone, killed at least 19 people and injured more than 60, the Gaza Health Ministry said.

Rescue workers were still trying to reach people trapped under rubble and debris, it added. A Gaza Civil Defense official, Mohammed al-Mughair, put the death toll at 40 earlier Tuesday. Ahmad al-Naqa, another Civil Defense official, said later in the day that the previous number was an estimate and that the Health Ministry reports the final numbers.

No one seems concerned that the "estimate" is nearly triple the number the Gaza health ministry claims. No one seems to notice that Hamas routinely inflates casualty numbers by a factor of two, three or more.

But this story indicates that the Washington Post knows that Hamas civil defense officials lie. Saying "at least 40 dead and 15 missing" " is not an estimate, it is a statement of fact. An estimate would be "we fear dozens have been killed."

But even after the newspaper proves that Hamas lies - they continue to quote them!

Israeli warplanes hit the area with about five missiles in the middle of the night, leaving three large craters inside the camp and sending ambulances scrambling, said another Gaza Civil Defense spokesman, Mahmoud Bassal, on Tuesday morning. The strike took place near the British Hospital, he added.

The Washington Post has unusually good access to Hamas terrorist spokespeople. Maybe because Hamas knows the Post will quote them uncritically, time and time again, even after they are proven to be liars.

Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism today at Amazon!

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424.

Read all about it here!

Some Hamas statements are too bizarre for even the anti-Israel media to believe

While the media is more than happy to parrot Hamas' claims about deaths and injuries in Gaza, sometimes Hamas says something so obviously false than the media chooses to ignore it.

Because if they would report it, then everyone might start to wonder about the veracity of the Hamas statements that they do believe.

The Jerusalem Post reports:

The Israeli Air Force (IAF) struck Hamas terrorists Samer Ismail Khadr Abu Daqqa, Ayman Mabhouh, and Osama Tabesh in a strike in Khan Yunis in the Gaza Strip, the military said on Tuesday.

The terrorists were operating within a terrorist command and control center embedded in a designated humanitarian area of Khan Yunis, the IDF added.

The military specified that Mabhouh was a senior Hamas terrorist, Abu Daqqa was the head of Hamas’s Aerial Unit in Gaza, and Tabesh served as chief of the Observation and Targets Department in the terror group's Military Intelligence Headquarters.

That is pretty specific. The IDF wouldn't claim to have killed named terrorists if they didn't.

Hamas responded to the IDF report by denying everything:

The Islamic Resistance Movement Hamas confirmed today, Tuesday, that the massacre of Mawasi Khan Yunis in the southern Gaza Strip is a crime that comes within the occupation's plan to exterminate the Palestinian people.

Hamas stressed that the occupation's allegations of the presence of resistance fighters at the targeted site are blatant lies to justify these heinous crimes.

She pointed out that the resistance has repeatedly denied the presence of any of its elements in civilian areas or their use for military purposes.

Hamas itself has published dozens of videos showing them shooting rockets and guns from civilian areas and humanitarian zones.