Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News

Monday, September 16, 2024

09/16 Links Pt1: For lasting peace, Hamas must be destroyed; Iran using Houthis’ Yemen as weapons ‘testing ground’; Trump defiant after 2nd assassination attempt

From Ian:

‘The world will respect Israel when it respects itself’

Former U.S. Ambassador to Israel David Friedman’s new book, One Jewish State: The Last, Best Hope to Resolve the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict, currently being launched and distributed, presents a coherent political doctrine aimed at shifting approaches and perceptions.

In it, he argues that Israeli rule over the entire territory not only aligns with Israel’s historical, biblical right to the land but will also benefit all parties involved, both Jews and Arabs.

Friedman has drawn on his years of policy experience, which played a significant role in key actions such as relocating the American embassy to Jerusalem and securing U.S. recognition of the Golan Heights as sovereign Israeli territory, to write his book addressing a wide range of political, security, civil and economic issues. Friedman is well aware of the multifaceted challenges involved in such a political plan.

We held a three-way conversation about this topic with him and Knesset member Ohad Tal, a key figure in advancing President Donald Trump’s plan within the Israeli political arena.

At the outset, Friedman summarizes the main points of his plan, which views the application of sovereignty as a step towards achieving the political goal of securing two things.

“No. 1 to bring stability, safety, security, prosperity for the State of Israel. No. 2 is to be faithful to the will of God with regard to the way in which the Jewish people should hold the Land of Israel. These are achieved through sovereignty. But it’s not about achieving sovereignty. It’s about achieving these two goals.”

Friedman outlines the path to his goal in several stages. “I don’t think it can happen overnight. The most important thing is for the State of Israel, by a meaningful consensus, to decide this is the right thing for the State of Israel before any other country gets involved. The State of Israel has to decide that. And I think the State of Israel should decide that through a process, which is deep and robust and thoughtful. I mean, I think people really need to discuss it.”

Friedman cautiously adds that while he doesn’t mean to offend anyone, the discussion around such a move needs to be approached somewhat differently from the hasty manner in which the judicial reform was promoted “by a narrow majority that created a lot of dissension. This issue is much bigger and if it’s going to go forward, it must do so with the support of a significant majority of the people in Israel.”

For lasting peace, Hamas must be destroyed

Decisive victory is the breeding ground for lasting peace and stability. Take, for example, the end of World War II. When the war was over, Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan were utterly crushed, their regimes disbanded, and their capacity to wage war and genocide obliterated. When Allied forces released German and Japanese prisoners of war, there was no concern that they would rise again to rebuild the military might of their former nations. Why? Because those powers had been completely defeated. There was no Nazi war machine left to restart. Imperial Japan no longer had the resources to continue its brutal campaigns. It is unthinkable to imagine, say, a negotiated agreement with Nazi Germany where their army was left intact or their weapons were untouched.

This brings us to Gaza. Thousands of Hamas militants currently sit in Israeli prisons. If any number of those prisoners were released without the utter decimation of Hamas’s capacity to wage terror against Israel, what would stop them from rearming, regrouping and reigniting the same bloody cycle of violence? How could negotiating a settlement with Hamas in this stage of the war ensure that Israel can live without fear of Hamas terrorism? For there to be any hope of peace in Israel and Gaza, Hamas must be thoroughly dismantled and their infrastructure of terror obliterated so that they no longer have the means to fight.

In fact, Israel may need to go even further. A portion of Gaza itself may need to come under Israeli control for a set period—think of China ceding Hong Kong to the British for 99 years in the aftermath of the First Opium War, which ended in 1842. This model could allow for a new generation in the coastal enclave to grow up free from Hamas’s tyranny and radicalization, paving the way for a society that values peace, culture and economic prosperity.

Another historical model is that of the Punic Wars between Rome and Carthage. Rome, recognizing Carthage as a continuous existential threat, ultimately decided that Carthage had to be destroyed. While the level of destruction used by Rome is not appropriate today (the Romans leveled Carthage and salted the ground), the lesson remains: Existential threats must be defeated so completely that they can no longer pose a danger. Gaza, under Hamas, remains a threat to Israel’s existence, and only through Hamas’s defeat can that threat be neutralized.

Additionally, we must understand the cultural dimension at play. In the Arab world, shame and honor are powerful forces. A thorough and humiliating defeat of Hamas would bring shame to the movement in the eyes of the Arab people—much in the same way that Germans still carry the weight of the Nazi era. Hamas must become an emblem of failure and disgrace, not resistance and heroism.

If Hamas were to be defeated, Gaza itself could have a future of prosperity. There’s no reason it couldn’t evolve into a cultural and economic beacon in the Middle East, akin to Tel Aviv. The people of Gaza deserve the chance to build a future free of terror. But for that to happen, Hamas must first be removed from the equation entirely.

In the end, wars end with victory or defeat, and for peace to flourish in Gaza and Israel, Hamas needs to be soundly, unequivocally defeated.

Trudeau Liberals buying Hamas 'lies': author/soldier John Spencer

John Spencer, the world’s foremost expert on urban warfare, has choice words for the Trudeau government: “Do your homework.”

At a lecture at a Toronto synagogue late last week, he said that the federal Liberals, “believe lies” coming from Hamas, and “base their policies on them,” including withholding weapons from Israel needed to fight the terror group. (Foreign Affairs Minister Mélanie Joly announced on September 10 that Canada suspended about 30 permits for arms shipments.)

A 25-year veteran of the U.S. Army, Spencer has been on fact-finding missions in Gaza three times since last December, where he was embedded with the Israel Defense Forces.

He claimed that “you have national leaders just repeating the talking points of Hamas,” including their casualty numbers, and the Al-Ahli Arab Hospital bombing in Gaza City on Oct. 17, 2023, that turned out to be an errant rocket from Palestinian Islamic Jihad.

Contrary to the reports coming from Hamas – believed by NGOs and many world leaders – Israel is not exercising disproportionate or excessive force, and takes “every step possible” to avoid civilian casualties, he said.

Their enemy is doing the reverse: “That’s called human sacrifice, not human shields, when Hamas wants its entire population getting in the way of battle.”

When asked by moderator Amir Epstein, director of Tafsik, whether there was a genocide in Gaza, Spencer’s simple answer: no.

The International Court of Justice, which called on Israel to “take all measures” to prevent a genocide of the Palestinians, “did not make a ruling to tell Israel, in the meantime, stop the operation,” Spencer said. The UN’s definition of genocide, he continued, includes a list of specific criteria – including intent to systematically erase a culture, identity, nationality and people – which Israel is not guilty of. This is clear, to him, everywhere from the aid flowing in, “a flood of vaccinations,” and Israel “doing everything it can to avoid innocent casualties,” he said.

The Associated Press has reported that Israel’s offensive following the Oct. 7 attack has killed over 40,000 Palestinians, according to Gaza’s Hamas-run Health Ministry, which does not distinguish between civilians and combatants in its count. The war has caused widespread destruction, forced the vast majority of Gaza’s 2.3 million residents to flee their homes, AP reports.

South Africa last year accused Israel at the International Court of Justice in The Hague, Netherlands, of violating its obligations under the Genocide Convention. Israel has strongly rejected the claim and has argued that the war in Gaza is a legitimate defence against Hamas for the attack that killed around 1,200 people and took 250 hostages.

Spencer served two tours in Iraq, advised four-star generals and Pentagon officials, and serves as a colonel in the California State Guard as director of urban warfare training. He is also chair of urban warfare studies at the Modern War Institute at West Point.

It is his belief that “international pressure had caused Israel to slow down,” the counteroffensive, similar to past campaigns in Gaza, where the Jewish State was “not allowed to win wars.”

But once Hamas is defeated, the next step is deradicalization, that could take “a decades-long” process. “But it cannot start until you get the radicalizer out.”

One of those purges should be United Nations Relief Works Agency (UNRWA), that to his mind is anti-Israel. “There is enough data” to show how the NGO and Hamas have a symbiotic relationship. “You can’t have someone working in Gaza without Hamas accepting it,” he said, also noting how UNRWA schoolbooks preach incitement against Jews.

With the discovery of Hamas tunnels beneath UNRWA facilities, including a substantive data centre, “that alone – UNRWA has to justify it. Explain how a number of employees were involved in Oct. 7. Explain the number of UNRWA facilities where Hamas has turned into military headquarters.”

Guest post: A lifelong Jewish Democrat holds his nose and will vote for Trump

[The author asks to remain anonymous, and explains why - EoZ]

Why I have requested anonymity for this piece:

There is intense social pressure on American Jews to be against Israel, especially on campuses. I am a professor at a liberal arts college where there is intense hostility to Israel; my Zionism has already caused me to be an outcast on my campus. Were I to publicly take the next logical step—conclude that drastic political changes are required to stem the public tide of Jew-hatred, even as drastic as supporting the presidential candidate “they” all uniformly despise—I sincerely believe my personal safety would be in question. That is why this essay both needs to be published, and to be anonymous. The situation is that dire.

As a Lifelong Jewish Democrat It Pains Me to Say This: Put Your Own Oxygen Masks on First!

That somber moment when the flight attendant says, “Though we do not anticipate a change in cabin pressure,” so heavy with portent (at least for those of us with darker dispositions), and then the sage advice: “If you’re traveling with someone who may need assistance, put your own oxygen mask on first.” Sage, if perhaps unnecessary, given the normal human instinct for self-preservation: I’m reminded of the Seinfeld episode in which a fire breaks out at a children’s birthday party and George knocks children and elderly out of the way in order to escape. A moment of levity back then, the final calm, perhaps, before the storm, back when being Jewish was still somewhat cool.

This may just be my darker disposition speaking, but I believe the cabin pressure has changed.

If you don’t already know this, or perhaps have been out of the country—or off the planet—for the past year, a brief survey should catch you up. Franklin Foer summed it up back in March with his Atlantic article, “The Golden Age of American Jews is Ending.” That title, though perhaps optimistic in using the present continuous rather than past perfect, nails it. Combine it with Jacob Savage’s 2023 article, “The Vanishing: The Erasure of Jews From American Life,” documenting the disappearance—a euphemism for “exclusion”—of Jews from academia, from all sorts of leadership positions, cultural institutions, activist organizations, legal positions such as judgeships, prestigious fellowships like Guggenheims and MacArthurs, and so on. An article from just last week by Joshua Hoffman is entitled, “American Jews are increasingly excluded from leadership positions—because they are Jewish.” Being Jewish is also increasingly uncomfortable—another euphemism—in medical schools, law schools, and (anecdotally, though not yet well documented) business schools. The vanishing is complete in the CUNY system, once extraordinarily friendly to Jews in the American city with the largest Jewish population, now the largest urban university in the country with some 25 campuses and approximately 230,000 people—where “of the Top 80 senior leadership positions including campus presidents, as of April 2023, there were ZERO Jews remaining.” Five years ago the ever-prescient Liel Leibovitz urged Jews to “Get Out” of the elite American university system, where they were so clearly unwelcome; well that call has been heeded, if not by the Jews themselves then by the administrators and admissions officers who have kept them out, as the percentages of Jews in the Ivy League has plummeted over the last decade or two. As Armin Rosen’s article last year put it, we have witnessed an “Ivy League Exodus.” Back to “The Vanishing”:

Eric Kaufmann finds that just 4% of elite American academics under 30 are Jewish (compared to 21% of boomers). The steep decline of Jewish editors at the Harvard Law Review (down roughly 50% in less than 10 years) could be the subject of its own law review article.

Put it all together and we have seen what can only be called a purge, a purge of Jews from public life, from leadership, from elite institutions, and, most forebodingly of all, from the pipeline itself. If Jews are being hounded out of medical, law, and business schools, the next generation of physicians, lawyers, and businesspeople will be sparse with Jews. If Jews are being hounded out of elite universities and graduate programs—if the past year of relentless demonstrations and riots expressing hatred and sometimes violence toward Jews on major campuses doesn’t convince you, then nothing will—the next generation not just of leaders but specifically of professors will be sparse with Jews. If that is the case then universities will only continue becoming less and less friendly (euphemism for more and more hostile) toward Jews, and that Jew-less pipeline will propagate itself and intensify, becoming ever emptier of Jews as Jews nearly entire disappear from all aspects of public life.

This is not just my darker disposition speaking.

It seems to me an objective fact that, while we were distracted, living it up with our bagels and schmears and Curb Your Enthusiasm bingeing, the cabin pressure itself plummeted—and now, like George Costanza, we need to follow Leibovitz’s advice, and get out.

What getting out looks like in practice can take many forms in many contexts, but there is one immediate, pressing way it should manifest itself.

I am, like so many largely secular American Jews, a lifelong Democrat. There are many obvious reasons for this. So many such Jews see themselves as “liberal,” as caring and empathetic, they stress Judaism’s concern for the oppressed and marginalized, they are attracted to at least their own conception of Judaism’s famous notion of tikkun olam (“repairing the world”), yes they were largely all in on supporting BLM, #MeToo, the various rainbow coalitions, and they see all that as better aligned with the traditional Democratic party than by the Republican. These Jews want to be good people and do good things. True to that, they haven’t merely made major contributions over the years to science, medicine, education, business, and culture, throughout our “Golden Age,” but, given their nature and ambitions, used their success and status in these endeavors to become philanthropists and benefactors. We are all aware of the disproportionate number of Jewish names on hospitals and university buildings, just for a start. America has been good to the Jews, and the Jews returned the favor, in being good citizens, in being good for America. Jews want to continue to do good, and so many, as I myself have for years, see the Democratic Party as the better fit to do that good.

But now, my fellow Jews, we can only continue to do that good, as Jews, if America allows us. If, within the next generation, we are excluded from leadership positions, from medical, law, and business schools, from elite colleges, from all areas of public life, where exactly will we be? In the past year we have seen so many of those university buildings with Jewish names being vandalized, graffiti’d, having hostile messages projected on to them, even getting renamed by rogue students. What Jewish benefactors will there be to donate those buildings and support their programs, if there are no Jews among the leaders in American society?

Jews can only do all the good they like to do, they are driven to do, which their Judaism teaches them to do, if they are allowed to flourish in society. We’re not asking for a handout or any “privilege”—the code word that has been weaponized to motivate the purge—but the same opportunity to work hard for what we achieve that we seek to afford to others. Nor are we asking for it all. We are not the fictional, defamatory Elders of Zion that used to be the exclusive delusion of right-wing antisemitism but has increasingly been coopted by the left. We are very big on sharing, on diversity, on inclusion. We are very big on fighting injustice, on helping the marginalized and the oppressed improve their situation and status. Most of us were all in on the social justice movement of the past decade, even as we were increasingly aware that we were among its primary targets. I remember deciding to continue supporting the Black Lives Matter movement even after reading the vile antipathy to Israel included on its online platform.

But now: Never mind the obvious concern about our being excluded, ghettoized, discriminated against, and marginalized ourselves; we cannot be expected to contribute to the general good at the cost of our committing collective suicide.

We simply cannot do all the good we want to do if we are vanished.

And it is precisely all this that is in play across the spectrum.

As a lifelong Democrat it pains me to say this, but it seems obvious to me that the assault against Jews will only get worse under a Harris administration. I won’t fully make that case here, though others have, for example here and here; I’ll only say that the social and political forces that the Biden-Harris administration has succored, the far-left wing of its party that it continually appeases, the numerous Jew-unfriendly political appointments and policy decisions they have made, and the continuous hostility to Israel that goes along with the occasional proclamations (and sometimes appreciated gestures) of support strike me as the upper cabins opening up and the oxygen masks dropping down. Where has the Biden-Harris Justice Department been as university, and K-12, antisemitism have exploded over the past year? Just this week twenty-four state Attorneys General issued a letter warning Brown University of legal and fiscal consequences should Brown choose to divest from Israel; twenty-two of the twenty-four work for Republican administrations, while Democratic administrations seem almost universally disinterested in combatting the antisemitic divestment movement sweeping over dozens of campuses. Add to these concerns the fact that all indications are that Harris atop the ticket will be even less friendly to Israel and to American Jews than Biden-Harris, starting with her personnel choices and her regular expressions of compassion and empathy toward the pro-Hamas cohort of her constituents.

I now ask every liberal Jewish Democrat to honestly confront the facts about the Jewish purge presented above, begun some years ago but deeply accelerated during the Biden-Harris years and especially during the past year, and honestly ask themselves whether a Harris administration will likely slow, simply accept, or accelerate that purge. As a lifelong Democrat I share the antipathy to Trump, both on the personal level and the political, and though it pains me to say this I must admit: Trump just stated that “there has never been a more dangerous time since the Holocaust if you happen to be Jewish in America,” and for once I agree with the man. As a lifelong Democrat I find Trump to be profoundly flawed, not to be trusted, and far from a panacea regarding the problems above—but it also seems obvious to me that on this one question, at least, the question of Jewish life and status in America, a Trump administration is less likely to accelerate the purge and possibly might slow it, or at least try.

I have a close friend, another lifelong Democrat, a fellow secular liberal Jew, a committed Zionist whom I deeply respect but whose antipathy for Trump (like many) outweighs the concerns just sketched. His response to these concerns was to say that he cares deeply about several issues: the environment and climate change, upholding democracy, and Israel and American Jewish life, among others. Though he agrees with my analysis he plans to vote for Harris, saying that he will vote on the first items and lobby hard on the Israel-Jewish item.

I understand that, and even respect it, but I think it’s shortsighted.

That so many Jews want to “do good,” to give back to the country that gave them so much, to support the oppressed and the marginalized, is wonderful, a true reflection of the second rhetorical question of Hillel’s famous saying: “And if I am only for myself, what am I?” But we cannot forget the first part of it as well, which, in my view, not only chronologically but logically and necessarily must come first: “If I am not for myself, who will be for me?” Nobody can be asked to help others at the cost of committing collective suicide. Nobody can help anybody else unless they have the resources to help. You cannot be for others unless you are first for yourself, even if you see being “for yourself” as the means toward the end of being “for others.” That’s of course why you must put your oxygen mask on first, because you cannot be of assistance to anyone else if you are dead.

This friend is a lawyer, a committed Zionist but one who must keep his Zionism on the down-low because, you know, it could cause complications for him, both professional and personal. He wants to continue doing all the good things we as Jews are prone to do, save the environment, save democracy, support the marginalized, which traditionally manifested itself through the Democratic party and liberalism. But the way things are going, the way the purge has accelerated especially since October 7, if word of his Zionism gets out—he may well be out of a job, if not on the receiving end of one of the pogroms—yes pogroms—that have already occurred in his (by the way very Democratic) city.

Not a whole lot of good you can do when unemployed, or beaten up, or ostracized into the ghetto—or dead.

For the greater good, for all the good you admirably want to do: you need to save yourself first.

Hillel of course concludes, “And if not now, when?” Well, apparently, we do for the moment have an answer to that otherwise rhetorical question: November 5, 2024. I can’t help but think that, for the greater good, secular liberal Jews like me, lifelong Democrats, might be best advised to hold our noses and vote for—no, I can’t bring myself to say it, and I feel so bitter at the Democrats for putting me in the position that I find myself actually preferring the victory of that man.

But say it I must: If you can vote for that man, then do it. But if you cannot—at least do not vote for Harris.

It appears I am not alone in reaching this difficult conclusion, as there are reports that Jewish voters are gravitating away from the Democratic nominee in unprecedented numbers. But for those remaining Jews, still perhaps the majority, please consider, lastly, that the fact that I must publish this anonymously for my own safety is itself the best argument for its conclusion.

The purge tolerates no dissenters.

An earlier version of this article appeared here.

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!

My algorithmic, short and useful definition of antisemitism has been discussed in an academic conference and in a scholarly book.

This definition has been included in the syllabus of the course "Antisemitism: A History" being taught at Brown University as part of their Judaic Studies curriculum. Here's the course description:

Antisemitism: A History
Antisemitism is sometimes called the "longest hatred," and from Pittsburgh to Paris it is on the rise. This course will examine the history of antisemitism and antisemitic tropes; theoretical approaches to its persistence; and individual case studies. Topics will include: Christian and Muslim anti-Judaism; racism; economic stereotypes; and modern manifestations in the U.S. and Europe.

The course is being taught by Michael L Satlow, Dorot Professor of Judaic Studies and Religious Studies. The syllabus says:

All I can ask for is that my definition is debated and compared to the others. I think mine has great advantages - brief, accurate, precise, and the easiest one (by far) to be used to answer the question of whether some event or statement is antisemitic or not. If people find shortcomings in my definition, I'd love to hear them.

I don't know Michael Satlow, but I thank the professor for including my definition in his course.. I hope other universities and academic papers do the same.

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!

Evidence mounts that Hamas was manipulating polls in Gaza: Only 6% of Gazans would vote for Hamas; half want to leave

Last month, the IDF reported that they uncovered a memo written by Hamas about how the terror group had manipulated a PCPSR poll in March to make Hamas appear much more popular in Gaza than it really was. Moreover, the memo indicated that Hamas' information manipulation of all data in Gaza is far more extensive than anyone had realized.

As usual, Israel haters are skeptical about any IDF claims, pretending that the Israelis are making things up.

And as usual, the IDF claims are supported by other facts.

In this case, a more recent poll by AWRAD, the Arab world for Research and Development, shows that contrary to PCPSR polling, Hamas popularity in Gaza is lower than it ever was.

In the poll taken last month and released on September 8, AWARD found that only 6% of Gazans would vote for Hamas if legislative elections were held today.

Gazans hate Hamas, but they are still in fear of the group.

One other interesting finding: Half of Gazans would like to leave Gaza if they could.

Gazans who can leave are no in danger. yet "human rights" groups are adamantly against allowing Gazans to take refuge in other countries.

You will never find any human rights group against anyone leaving any country for safety, economic or any other reason especially in wartime. With the only exception of Gaza.

Of course, they frame that refusal to allow Gazans to be able to make their own decision as to where they want to live as "human rights," too. Funny how human rights groups can contradict themselves so easily without anyone calling them out.

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!

Hypocrisy: CAIR supports "safe spaces" for Muslims; opposes them for Jews (@CAIRNational)

The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) said in 2021 that "Mosques should serve as a welcoming safe space for EVERY member of the community. "

In 2022, CAIR wrote, “It is important that school officials recognize Ramadan is a very special time for their Muslim students and work to create safe spaces for students fasting and praying – now and throughout the year. "

Earlier this year, it extended this desire: "All houses of worship should be a beacon and a safe space for the community."

But CAIR emphatically does not want synagogues to be safe spaces.

In June, there were violent anti-Israel protests that blocked Jews from entering the Adas Torah synagogue in Los Angeles. Even President Biden called those protests antisemitic. In response, the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors voted to consider ordinances establishing a “bubble zone” that protects individuals entering or exiting healthcare facilities, places of worship, public facilities, community centers, and "other locations where identity-based gatherings are conducted, or services are administered." The ordinance would make it a misdemeanor for anyone who obstructs or blocks another person from entering or exiting synagogues and other facilities and would prohibit a person from harassing anyone entering or exiting such a place.

In short, the proposed ordinance would create safe zones for Jewish and other communities.

CAIR doesn't like that - at all. While they want to ensure Muslims are free of harassment, they consider harassing Jews to be a First Amendment right.

CAIR-LA Policy Manager Basha Jamil said:

“It is deeply concerning that, after nearly a year of witnessing Israel’s genocide in Gaza, the LA City Council not only remains silent, but also continues to introduce measures designed to stifle the voices of those speaking up for Palestinian human rights and criminalize their constitutional right to free speech and assembly. By penalizing peaceful protests simply based on their proximity to geographic landmarks, this motion threatens to push protesters out of sight, effectively chilling their speech, further disenfranchising already vulnerable groups.

The laws, or course, would not criminalize protests, but just ensure that they do not infringe on the rights of others. There is no First Amendment right to protest anywhere one wants. CAIR is arguing that they have the right to harass Jews directly outside their synagogues and community centers and that they have every right to intimidate Jews and make them feel unsafe in their own places of worship.

Disgustingly, CAIR frames the right to harass Jews as something that makes Muslims feel safer themselves. In May, protesters targeted the heavily Orthodox Jewish town of Jackson, NJ. The mayor said that they had not applied for a permit for the protest, and CAIR-NJ said that this response was anti-Islamic and made the antisemitic protesters feel unsafe:

CAIR-NJ condemns Jackson Township and its mayor’s hostile treatment towards individuals wanting to exercise their first amendment rights. Their treatment of protestors as threatening and dangerous is harmful and puts them at risk. By telling the community to remain vigilant in the face of peaceful assembly creates the harmful rhetoric that pro-Palestinian protestors are dangerous, violent and even implicitly criminal.

CAIR-NJ urges Jackson Township to aid in providing a safe space for individuals wanting to exercise their right to peacefully protest for any reason.

To CAIR, mosques must be safe spaces for Muslims. Schools must be safe spaces for Muslims. And even protests targeting Jews must also be safe spaces for Muslims.

But for CAIR, there cannot be any safe spaces for Jews.

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!

The Borat-style guerilla documentary "Am I Racist?" shows conservative commentator Matt Walsh attending a DEI (Diversity, Equity sand Inclusion) training program then going undercover as a pony-tailed woke progressive to actually become a DEI "expert" and ultimately trainer himself.

It does a nice job exposing the inanity of DEI and how racist the anti-racists are. Beyond that, he shows how the top DEI speakers, like "White Fragility" author Robin DiAngelo, get caught up in their own stupidity when asked sincere-sounding questions.

While there are laugh-out loud moments, it was a bit too long for my tastes - I think it would have been a good one-hour film.

One of the best parts of the film was halfway through. Walsh, after hearing numerous "experts" claim that white people are irredeemably racist and must feel guilty forever, not to mention that America itself is a terrible country that should be taken down, then interviews both the stereotypical racists and their victims. He visits a biker bar with muscular Trump posters on the wall and asks the people about their whiteness and how racist they are, and they all say that they don't give a damn about skin color when they interact with people. He then goes to a poor southern predominantly Black town and asks residents if they feel that they are victims of racism, and they agree they are not - and they love America.

By the end of the movie, Walsh becomes a DEI trainer himself, making up absurd exercises for people to eliminate their "whiteness" and even being a guest on local TV shows to discuss his class. He makes thousands of dollars charging people to feel white guilt. (To their credit, several people leave the class when he goes over the top, but most stay at least until the "self-flagellation" exercise.)

While it is easy to laugh at the real DEI training sessions Walsh films, I was troubled by thinking how Jews would be and probably are treated in these sessions. It is impossible for the sessions to not be hostile towards Jews, because they consider Jews to be privileged whites who cannot possibly imagine what it is like to be discriminated against, when antisemitism predates racism by, oh, about 3,000 years.

I couldn't help wondering whether I would face consequences from my employer if I would challenge this false narrative of the lives of my ancestors, my Holocaust survivor parents or myself. The "microaggressions," not to mention real aggression, that the DEI classes complain about are part and parcel of the daily lives of visible Jews. Wearing a yarmulka outside New York City and several heavily Jewish towns makes one the object of curiosity at the workplace, at the market and on the street. I did grow up with people throwing pennies at me or stealing my yarmulka. A sukkah I built in college was found destroyed when I returned on the intermediate days of the holiday. (It didn't even occur to me to call the police. No one talked about "hate crimes" in those days.). Today, Hasidic Jews have to tolerate "oppressed" youths stealing their hats or knocking them to the ground and beating them, for fun.

Jews only became considered white at roughly the time that whiteness became considered oppressive.

So for me, the movie was not as enjoyable as it should have been because, to Jews, DEI is not just something to be mocked but something dangerous. It is used to justify modern antisemitism.

I don't blame Walsh for not bringing up this topic, because that is not the point of the movie, but it is a little harder to laugh when I can easily see how these sessions would target Jews as the most guilty of white, colonialist, oppressive people.

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!

09/15 Links: The Falsehoods and Culpable Demonisation Office; Deradicalizing Gaza; How Hamas Uses Brutality to Maintain Power

From Ian:

Melanie Phillips: The Falsehoods and Culpable Demonisation Office

The Foreign Secretary, David Lammy, intoned: “Israel’s actions in Gaza continue to lead to immense loss of civilian life, widespread destruction to civilian infrastructure, and immense suffering”.

An American diplomatic official complained to The Times about the “relentlessness and ferocity” of Israel’s war and said it was a “head-scratcher” why Israel thought “this scorched-earth policy” was the best way to fight its enemies.

This was all drivel. If Israel’s war had really been “ferocious” and “scorched- earth”, the population of Gaza would have been decimated. Instead, the IDF has been regularly moving the entire population out of harm’s way — while Hamas has been using those civilians as cannon fodder and human shields.

The only people claiming “immense loss of civilian life” are Hamas, its UN patsies and other fellow-travellers. The number of civilians killed in Gaza according to Hamas statistics is ludicrous, since not one terrorist is acknowledged among the total. Given the number of terrorists whom Israel says it has killed in this war, the ratio of civilians to combatants killed in Gaza is unprecedentedly low and a fraction of the proportion of civilians killed in British and American wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Of course, this hallucinatory anti-Israel derangement is now widespread. But how does one explain its grip amongst officials in government departments that actually deal daily with foreign affairs?

The British foreign service has a history of vicious opposition to the Jewish homeland, going back to the Palestine Mandate in the 1920s. Foreign Office diplomats were entranced by an entirely romantic view of the Arab world combined with an entirely cynical estimation of its value to British interests.

This older “camel corps” has been superseded by a new breed of Israel-hating officials, the “progressive” leftists who subscribe to the brain-dead myth that Israel is a colonialist interloper that has oppressed the “indigenous” Palestinians and deprived them of a state of their own.

Precisely because they specialise in world affairs, western diplomats are the supreme worshippers at the shrine of universalism, the doctrine that fetishises transnational courts where international law has been turned into a weapon of Israel’s destruction.

In addition, the one-time intellectual powerhouse of the Foreign Office has become dismayingly dumbed down. In the London Review of Books in 2016, a despairing letter from a former Foreign Office official lamented that, from 2007 onwards, it had become a “hollowed-out shell”, with “a cult of managerialism that seemed to regard foreign policy as an inconvenient side-issue” — and was now known to the general public only for its travel advice.

It was bad enough under the (mostly) Israel-friendly Conservatives. Now that Israel-bashing Labour is in the government stables, Foreign Office bigotry is free to gallop out of control.

BHL: "I Cannot Let People Say that Israel Is Targeting Civilians, because That Is Wrong"

Bernard-Henri Levy interviewed by Celia Walden
French philosopher, war reporter and documentary-maker Bernard-Henri Levy described the scene at what was left of Kibbutz Kfar Aza in Israel on Oct. 10. "The bodies of the victims had been buried by that point, but there were still pieces of bodies that hadn't been assigned yet. They were stacked in a corner of a vegetable shed that was being used to house unidentified body parts. And that image? There is not a day or a night when I do not see it in my head. It follows me around constantly."

We're speaking on Zoom. For the past year, he has been living in an undisclosed location under very heavy police protection, after intelligence officials discovered that the Quds Force of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) had paid an Iranian drug dealer $150,000 to assassinate Levy, who has been critical of the country's leadership.

He says that after Oct. 7, "there's a realization not just that things will never be the same again, but that things were not what we thought they were before....Hours after the attack, there were...actual, veritable explosions of joy. Professors at U.S. universities with huge online followings recorded and broadcast messages of absolute joy. This, when the bodies of the dead had not even all been buried." He points out that even many of those who did offer early support began to fall away within the ensuing weeks and months.

Asked if he still believes Israel's response has been just, he doesn't have to think about it for a second: "Yes. I still don't think the response has been disproportionate." When filming the liberation of Mosul in 2016, he says, "I saw what indiscriminate hits looked like, what the desire to destroy a place from top to toe looks like, and let me tell you: that is not what is happening in Gaza."

He also stands by the assertion that Israel "has done everything to avoid civilian casualties....I've been covering wars for 40 years, and it's the first time in my life that I've ever seen an army open up a corridor every day between 6 a.m. and noon in order to warn civilians that they are going to hit an area where they are. The Israeli army is the first army in the world that I have seen say: 'We're going to hit here - please move'."

"I cannot let people say that the hits are indiscriminate and targeting civilians, because that is wrong. And I cannot allow it to be said that there has been a genocide, because that is wrong."

Deradicalizing Gaza

After World War II, there was no postwar insurgency. After the Nazis and imperial Japanese surrendered, groups of disaffected soldiers did not lead violent campaigns to restore the defeated regimes. The occupations of Germany and Japan were peaceful. Both countries became reliable American allies. Hundreds of thousands of the defeated regimes' supporters - including senior officials, including war criminals - escaped serious punishment, rejoined society, and sometimes gained political influence. And still the peace was kept. How did the populations that had supported and fought for the Axis regimes get moderated?

Politically speaking, ideas can certainly be destroyed, just as they can be weakened, or die peacefully, or be resurrected. Imperialism was destroyed in Japan. Baathism was destroyed in Iraq. Communism died (without war) in Russia. Nazism was destroyed in Germany. Hamas's bellicose Islamism might be destroyed in Gaza, not necessarily because Gazans stop believing, deep down, that Hamas has noble ideals. Rather, because Hamas's ideals are deprived of the instruments of political power - armed militants.

Military losses and urban destruction can improve political cultures. Populations can abandon the aims that motivated them very recently to support aggressive wars and the regimes that start them. Deradicalization begins as civilians are persuaded of the futility and costliness of the aims of those who rule them. The German and Japanese peoples lost their homes, their streets, and their comfort, brought on by their regimes' failed wars. Military defeats showed the Axis projects to be futile. In great measure, the German and Japanese peoples were deradicalized by the war itself.

Since Oct. 7, Israel has undertaken a war of Palestinian regime change and is doing a remarkable job given its political constraints. Hamas's Gaza leadership is hiding or dead. The majority of Hamas battalions have disintegrated into gangs. More than 17,000 fighters have been killed. Israel's current campaign makes a moderate Gaza more likely, not less. Destroying Hamas not only deprives Islamists of the ability to rule - it proves the futility of armed resistance to Israel, a condition for peace.

A noteworthy obstacle to moderate Palestinian governance is the lack of much precedent for it. For a hundred years, Palestinians have been led either by out-and-out Islamists like Hajj Amin al-Husseini - a wartime guest of the Third Reich - and like Hamas, or by better-marketed militants like Palestinian Authority chiefs Yasser Arafat and Mahmoud Abbas. Palestinian leaders have shared certain broad commitments: to brutalizing their domestic opponents and to terrorizing Jews.

A long-term Israeli military presence will be needed to protect non-Hamas Palestinian leaders after main hostilities calm down. The Palestinians are now suffering as never before for their leaders' viciousness. The leaders themselves are in dire condition, with more killed every week. The Hamas movement looks like a losing, destructive, and pathetic cause. Palestinians know it, more or more each day.

The Emir of Trans-Jordan planned to sell his own land to Jewish settlers in 1933, rescinded offer after Arab threats

The New York Times, January 18, 1933, reported that Emir Abdullah of Trans-Jordan (later to become King Abdullah I) offered to lease 17,500 acres of fertile land in the Jordan Valley to the Jewish National Fund - on the east bank of the Jordan river.

The land was given to the Emir by the British. Abdullah hoped to have the Jews help develop his country economically and he promised to protect them personally.

The antisemitic Mufti of Jerusalem went nuts, and threatened the Emir, scuttling the deal. From JTA, January 26, 1933:

Submitting to the pressure of the Palestine government and Arab leaders, Emir Abdullah today announced the cancellation of the agreement to lease 70,000 dunams of his personal domain for Jewish settlement, the reports of which have been agitating Jewish and Arab circles for the past fortnight.

The Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, Amin el Husseini, is believed to have played an important role in bringing about the cancellation of the lease as the Emir’s action follows on the heels of the Grand Mufti’s visit to him in Amman yesterday.

E### Abdullah’s cancellation of the lease is in line with the demands of Arab nationalists in Palestine, Syria, and Iraq, who have threatened him with reprisals. The Istiklal, Arab Independent Party, had threatened to overthrow him unless the agreement with the Jews were rescinded.

The difficult economic situation in Transjordan was the reason given for Emir Abdullah’s lease of his land.

Since the dawn of Zionism, brave Arabs have knows that it makes sense to cooperate with the Jews and that together they can prosper. But the number of Arabs brave enough to deal with the majority of people who are antisemitic is diminishingly small - the Abraham Accords is the example that proves the rule.

When it comes down to it, the same "shame" approach to bully leaders into treating Jews as pariahs is happening today, among members of the so-called "progressive" movement.

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!

A worthy IDF commander (Forest Rain)

By Forest Rain

"Every Hebrew mother must know she entrusted the fate of her sons to worthy commanders"

Brig. Gen. Ofer Winter isn’t 10 feet tall or made of steel. He is a man who, if he told you to walk through fire, you’d do it - because he’d go first and show you how it’s done.

Winter became a household name in Israel while serving as the commander of the Givati Reconnaissance Battalion during Operation Protective Edge (2014) when he invoked God before battle in a letter to his soldiers. This is part of what he wrote:

“A great privilege has befallen us to command and serve in the Givati Brigade at this time. History has chosen us to be at the forefront of the struggle against the 'Gazan' terrorist enemy who defies, curses, and reviles the God of Israel’s Armies. We will act together with determination and strength, initiative and strategy, and we will strive to engage with the enemy. I trust you, each and every one of you, that you will act in this spirit, the spirit of Israeli fighters who lead the way for the camp. 'The spirit that is called Givati.'

I lift my eyes to the heavens and call out with you, 'Hear, O Israel: the Lord our God, the Lord is One.' May the God of Israel grant us success in our ways, as we go forth to fight for your people Israel against the enemy that insults Your name. In the name of the IDF fighters, and particularly the fighters of the brigade and the commanders.

May the scripture be fulfilled in us that is written: 'For the Lord your God is the One who goes with you to fight for you against your enemies to give you victory.' And we say, Amen.

Together, and only together, we will prevail."

The full text of his letter

Certain elements in Israeli society objected vehemently to framing the war as a battle between “the Gazan enemy who reviles the God of Israel’s Armies”. Many of Israel’s elites, including the highest-ranking officers in the IDF, insisted that Israel is not in a religious war, certainly not with all of Gaza, and loudly demanded that God not be made a part of it.

That was the point when the Israeli public began to have an inkling that there is something wrong with the highest levels of the IDF.

Ignoring the uproar, Winter led his men in battle with courage and determination, as he’d done for the last three decades, and returned, reporting of prayers answered in battle.

No wonder the elites of the IDF pushed him out.

In the aftermath of the Hamas invasion, it was shocking to learn that the man widely regarded as an exceptional commander, with an illustrious career, who knows how to win, was considered “unfit” for promotion. The leaders responsible for our security when Gaza invaded, had no position for Winter.

Shocking but perhaps not surprising. Hellenists fear Maccabees. Jewish strength, under the auspices of God, doesn’t mesh with the mindset of those who desire the auspices of America or NATO. Today the divide is most obvious between the field ranks in the IDF, soldiers who witnessed the carnage and are fighting for the honor of sisters defiled, brothers slaughtered, and hostages who must be brought home versus the high-ranking officers, those currently serving and retired officers who have become politicians and news “analysts” – the elites of Israeli society who instinctively adhere to the American Don’t and have convinced themselves that victory isn’t something tangible.

Last week, I was at a conference, in a crowd of people who understand the necessity of victory. We listened to several prominent, intelligent speakers discuss the state of our nation, one year after the invasion. Although Israelis tend to be cynical and rarely get excited about specific individuals when Brig. Gen. Ofer Winter walked into the room there were hushed whispers of anticipation. He came quietly, with no fanfare, and sat, waiting his turn to speak.

When he walked to the podium the crowd broke out into enthusiastic, appreciative applause. So much so that this warrior turned red in embarrassment.

Brig. Gen. Ofer Winter is astonishingly humble. He explained that he never saw the military as a career, for him it was only about service. He wasn’t there for the title, ranks, or glory. He wanted to protect the nation and bring his soldiers home safely.

He proceeded to give a breathtaking speech (that Hebrew speakers can hear here – note some of the applause has been cut out of this clip).

Winter pointed out that as Jews, we have the concept of peace deeply ingrained in us. The word peace appears repeatedly in the prayers said three times a day, every day. It’s the word we use in Hebrew for both hello and goodbye. Someone else pointed out that the blessing after meals ends with a request for God to give us courage and bless us with peace. Courage comes before peace.

And that is what Winter wanted to say - peace is part of our Jewish DNA, so much so that we melt a little when anyone offers peace and yet we must understand that in the Middle East, these offerings are false. There is no peace, only a truce accepted when weak, to allow for time to gain strength and destroy the other party later on. To be safe we must fight.

He spoke about his experiences on October 7th, highlighting the individual heroes who saved the Nation (with no focus on what he did that day). He discussed the concept of responsibility, the necessity for unity to win, and faith that while things look very bleak now, he doesn’t believe that God would keep the Nation of Israel for thousands of years, bring us back to our ancestral homeland, only to allow us to be destroyed.

He says that it doesn’t matter how he was treated by the system. What matters is that now, all the IDF units, the field soldiers, and their direct commanders invoke God before entering Gaza.

He made everyone stronger with his words. We all saw that he means what he says and lives what he believes, and he does it with strength and gentleness, courage and humility.

Afterward, I went to thank him.

I told him: “You said you aren’t used to applause but, you see, we don’t have any other way to thank you.”

He turned red again and said “I know”, trying to avoid more compliments but I hadn’t finished.

“I want to explain what people are thanking you for. You see, we were always told "Every Hebrew mother must know that she has entrusted the fate of her sons to commanders who are worthy of it." (a saying that has been part of the IDF ethos since Ben Gurion). We all thought that that was what we were doing. On October 7th we learned that not all commanders are worthy of that trust and a national ideal was shattered. That hurts a lot. But then there is you.”

Listening quietly and thinking deeply about my words, his eyes filled with tears.

I continued: “You show us that the ideal we always had DOES exist. And you provide a role model so that our sons can know what a commander is supposed to be like. THAT is what we are thanking you for. Thank you.”

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!

Former US ambassador to Saudi Arabia spreads absurd anti-Israel libel about an "IDF patch for Greater Israel"

Chas W. Freeman Jr. is a former US ambassador to Saudi Arabia and an energetic hater of Israel.

I saw in an Arabic website that Freeman claimed that "Ultimately, Israel has a goal not only to empty Palestine of Palestinians, but also to dominate its region." He added that there is a military badge worn by some people in the Israeli Defense Forces "showing Greater Israel , which includes parts of Egypt , northern Saudi Arabia , all of Jordan , Syria, Lebanon, and even the Euphrates in Iraq, that is, parts of Iraq."

I could not find this specific interview, but I saw where Freeman made the claim about the "military badge" on a mailing list on June 19:

He is claiming that IDF soldiers publicly display a map of "greater Israel" showing their goal to conquer all the land from the Nile to the Euphrates, with the Hebrew phrase "The Promised Land of Israel."

Where did he find this photo?

It was first tweeted by anti-Israel journalist Motasem A Dalloul (profile: "Follow me to help me expose #IsraeliCrimes and #GazaGenocide") on June 16. He gave no source as to where he found this. It spread, using a lot of fake accounts, and then was then picked up by a Jordanian site Roya News where it went viral.

There is no evidence of such a patch on sale, or any photos of it before this date. Ryan McBeth, an open source intel analyst, did some research on it and found (among other things) that IDF policy does not allow any unauthorized patches on uniforms. However, I have seen at least one soldier wear a "Moshiach" patch so I don't know how well this is enforced. (And the Moshiach patch, which can be found online, might even be authorized.)

From my own perspective, the fact that the image uses a green-tinged grey scale indicates to me that it was easier for someone to Photoshop a grey scale image - color is much more difficult. The "Greater Israel" patch is also much brighter than the Israeli flag patch,

In short, the only source for this image is highly suspect. No Gazan could have taken that photo and no Israeli source can be found for it. One can be certain that if soldiers were wearing such patches, Haaretz and +972 would be reporting it.

McBeth rates the chances of this being a legitimate image as "highly unlikely" and based on the pattern of social media spreading it in the three days between the initial post and Freeman's post, that it is likely part of a disinformation campaign.

This story is about as credible as the Arab insistence (that Yasir Arafat spread) that the two blue lines on the Israeli flag represent the Nile and the Euphrates.

Freeman did not do any research. He saw the post and immediately assumed it is legitimate.

Because that's how antisemites think - they work backwards from their pre-existing hate to make any "evidence" fit the crime.

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!

Last week the Toronto Blue Jays gave the ceremonial first pitch to 97-year old Holocaust survivor Irene Kurtz. Here's the video, courtesy Friends of the Simon Wiesenthal Center:

A heartwarming story, right?

Not entirely. Because antisemites started attacking Kurtz online.

And not just the right-wing neo-Nazi types, but self-styled "progressive anti-Zionists."

Absolutely disgusting that they had a Israeli with a state of Israel committing genocide against the Palestinians open up for the Blue Jays

Does she support genocide though?

Well then she should be an expert on the Holocaust Israel is committing now.

A genocide does not justify another genocide. Fuck you Zionists

The resilience to colonize a country, kill off and drive out its inhabitants, institute an apartheid regime and finish it off with a genocide. The Zionist movement is one of the most criminal movements of the last 100 years.

She must've thrown a 6,000,000 miles per hour pitch 😳

hopefully the blue jays lose, and the genocidal state of israel is dismantled like nazi germany 🍾

Disgusting to support a country of r@pists and ped@s

My grandpa had his foreskin turned into a lampshade in the holocaust 😞

People like Irene are still alive today, they live in Palestine and are victims of a genocide by Israel

I understand that one cannot generalize from social media idiots. But the evidence of true antisemitism from people who claim to be "pro-Palestinians" or "anti-Zionist" or "progressive" is so overwhelming, one would think that these people who claim they hate antisemitism along with all types of racism and bigotry would loudly denounce the Jew-hatred from their allies, wouldn't you?

But there is no pushback. No criticism. Only silence.

In this case, the anti-Zionists and the proud antisemites share the same space, post the same bile, and are indistinguishable from each other.

As much as the "progressive" side claims that they are motivated by morality and a genuine concern for human life, their viciousness is easily recognizable as being old-fashioned hatred of Jews. The ceremony wasn't celebrating Israel but a Jewish survivor of genocide. And left-wing antisemites are no less tolerant of anything that makes Jews appear sympathetic than neo-Nazi antisemites are.

The Nazis of the 1930s put their antisemitism in moral terms as well, claiming that Jews must be removed because they were a threat to the purity of the Aryan race. Todays' anti-Zionist arguments are just as meritless - and just as based on hate - as the Nazis were.

And it is getting worse every day.

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!