Wednesday, January 08, 2025


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

Black lives matter. Of course they do. Everyone’s lives matter. But you don’t just go and support a group with an agreeable name without some due diligence. Or do you?

My progressive Jewish friends don’t seem to think any due diligence is necessary when it comes to being gung-ho for organizations like Black Lives Matter, or the Women’s March. If Black Lives Matter says it’s against racism then gulldarnit, my progressive Jewish friends are going to put a clenched fist BLM badge on their Facebook profile pic. If they think the Women’s March is for women, they’re going to put on a pink hat with a name that inwardly makes them feel thrillingly naughty as they outwardly express their righteous indignation.

These same progressive friends at some point take down the badges from their profile pics as the truth outs, as truth so inconveniently tends to do. Now they know: BLM is inherently antisemitic and anti-Israel—really the same thing. Were they sheepish when the Women’s March and the Chicago Dyke March excluded women and dykes if they happened to be Jews or Zionists? Or did they just quietly take down the badges on their profile pics and find something hopefully innocuous to support—something that doesn’t hate Jews or Zionists? (Good luck with that.)

But why didn’t they give these groups a thorough vetting before throwing their support behind them? The answer is pathetic: they didn’t believe that someone protesting racism could hate Jews. They didn’t believe that someone speaking up for women’s rights didn’t believe in Jewish women’s rights.

Even very, very intelligent Jewish women—women like Bari Weiss—were surprised when all the groups fighting against sexual violence, looked the other way when the victims of sexual violence were Jews. In her introduction to a podcast with Sheryl Sandberg to discuss the documentary Screams Before Silence, Weiss said, “Sheryl Sandberg watched the horrors of October 7th unfold and assumed that everyone she knew would rally against these unspeakable atrocities—particularly after reports of sexual violence and rape committed by Hamas started pouring in. But when she saw that many people didn't, or worse, that they denied it was even happening, she was stunned. She was particularly shocked that many of her would-be allies—prominent feminists and progressives in this country and around the world—stayed silent.”

During that same podcast, Sandberg described when drove her to make the documentary. “I never thought I would do this, and I wish this didn't have to be made. When October 7th happened, I was shocked. I think everyone was shocked. I was even more shocked afterward. The single most surprising thing I found was that in the weeks following, people started coming out with what I thought was clear evidence that this wasn't just mass murder; there was rape. Women were found naked and bloodied. Over and over, the stories were coming out, and what I then expected to happen is for people to say, ‘Oh my God, rape is never supposed to be used as part of war. No sexual violence is part of conflict.’ But that just wasn't happening.”

Sandberg made the video to convince the rape deniers who only deny rape when Jews are involved. But it didn’t much help. People who hate Jews hate them whether or not they are gang raped, tortured, kidnapped, and abused. They hate Jews whether or not they are Zionists, hate them whether or not they live in Israel.

“We made a video,” said Sandberg, “and that video went very viral. I tried to make that video really carefully. I mean, I have strong views on what's going on, but there were no views in this video. This video said, ‘No matter what flag you're flying,’ carefully including half Palestinian flags and half Israeli flags, ‘No matter what you believe, we have to stand united against the clear use of sexual violence.’

“Yet people were still not believing it. So, I helped organize a conference at the UN where we brought witnesses who stood there and cried and said, ‘Here's what I saw with my own eyes.’ Then I took those same witnesses to parliaments in Europe, where I felt they needed to speak out, but we still encountered some denial and significant silence.”

Bari Weiss details the various denials of October 7 rape even in the face of the rape videos that the terrorists proudly shared. “Max Blumenthal, a commentator and journalist, said that a woman’s body found naked from the waist down was simply because women at festivals like to dress in skimpy attire. Another example is the prominent British commentator Owen Jones, who said there's no evidence of rape. This is a guy with a million Twitter followers.

“Then there’s Briahna Joy Gray, who was Bernie Sanders’s press secretary in 2020. She said Zionists are asking that we believe the uncorroborated eyewitness accounts of men who describe alleged rape victims in odd fetishistic terms. She said, ‘Shame on Israel for not seriously investigating claims of rape and collecting rape kits.’ How do you understand the logic or the worldview that leads people to say things like that?

“Before this conversation,” said Weiss, “I checked in with some of the top feminist organizations in the country. Since October 7th, the National Organization for Women made a statement two months after the fact, which didn’t mention Hamas. UN Women, a group whose mission is to create an environment where all women can exercise their human rights, waited 55 days before saying anything. The International Committee of the Red Cross has issued nothing. I could go on for hours detailing the silence—or worse, weaselly statements where they fail to mention the perpetrators of evil actions.”

So much for “Believe all women.” (Perhaps they should change that to “Believe all shiksas.”)

As for Black Lives Matter, their adherents thought they were invincible. Probably because they saw how all my progressive Jewish friends were using that clenched fist badge on their Facebook pics. They saw how easy it was to pull the wool over our eyes under the guise of a fight against racism. But now we all know about the corruption of those at the top of the BLM food chain.

Take Black Lives Matter cofounder Patrisse Cullors, for example. Cullors resigned from the “charity” in 2021 after getting caught with her hand in the proverbial cookie jar. Back in June, the Washington Free Beacon reported that BLM is still reeling from Cullors’ abuse of power:

Black Lives Matter cofounder Patrisse Cullors resigned from the embattled charity in 2021, but the charity suffered from the excesses of her tenure well into 2023, according to a copy of its latest tax return obtained by the Washington Free Beacon.

Under Cullors’s leadership, Black Lives Matter Global Network Foundation doled out massive contracts to her friends and family, purchased a $6 million mansion in Los Angeles in 2020, and financed the purchase of an $8 million mansion in Canada in 2021. By the end of its 2023 fiscal year, the tax forms show, Black Lives Matter saw the $80 million windfall it raked in during the George Floyd riots of 2020 diminish to under $29 million as it hemorrhaged cash fulfilling lingering contractual obligations to Cullors’s associates.

Those individuals include Damon Turner, the father of Cullors’s only child, whose art firm Trap Heals received $778,000 from Black Lives Matter in 2023 despite performing no work for the charity that year.

But hey, Black Lives Matter, gulldurnit, so all those progressive Jewish women rushed to put up that clenched fist badge on their Facebooks. It made them feel good, like they were making a statement about their own goodness, I suppose. Because those badges certainly didn’t do a THING for black people or against racism. And neither did Black Lives Matter.

The Movement for Black Lives (M4BL), under whose umbrella Black Lives Matter falls (or at least did, originally), is drenched in Jew hatred. In its original 2016 platform, M4BL stated that “[the] US justifies and advances the global war on terror via its alliance with Israel and is complicit in the genocide taking place against the Palestinian people,” that “Israel is an apartheid state,” and that “[the] US [has funded an] apartheid wall.”

The US justifies and advances the global war on terror via its alliance with Israel and is complicit in the genocide taking place against the Palestinian people. The US requires Israel to use 75 percent of all the military aid it receives to buy US-made arms. Consequently, every year billions of dollars are funneled from US taxpayers to hundreds of arms corporations, who then wage lobbying campaigns pushing for even more foreign military aid. The results of this policy are twofold: it not only diverts much needed funding from domestic education and social programs, but it makes US citizens complicit in the abuses committed by the Israeli government. Israel is an apartheid state with over 50 laws on the books that sanction discrimination against the Palestinian people. Palestinian homes and land are routinely bulldozed to make way for illegal Israeli settlements. Israeli soldiers also regularly arrest and detain Palestinians as young as 4 years old without due process. Everyday [sic], Palestinians are forced to walk through military checkpoints along the US-funded apartheid wall.

Cullors, back in 2015, while speaking as a guest lecturer at Harvard Law School's 'Globalizing Ferguson: Radicalized Policing and International Violence' forum, opined that people must "end the imperialist project that's called Israel." “Palestine is our generation's South Africa. If we don't step up boldly and courageously to end the imperialist project that's called Israel, we're doomed.”

Is this really what my progressive Jewish friends, relatives, and acquaintances wanted to support as they watched BLM gain momentum? Did my fellow Jews support an end to Israel? Probably not. But they hadn’t bothered to check what BLM actually stands for. Black Lives Matter was a sentiment that brooked no criticisms or doubts about the respectability of the group going under the mantle of that oh-so-progressive-sounding name.

That same year, Cullors and her friends organized a solidarity trip to Nazareth called “Ferguson to Palestine.” To liven things up, they did a flash mob “specifically calling for the boycott, divestment, and sanctions of the state of Israel. We who believe in freedom cannot rest until it’s won.”

Here’s some of the other Jew-hating bullpucky they spouted:

We came here to Palestine to stand in love and revolutionary struggle with our brothers and sisters. We come to a land that has been stolen by greed and destroyed by hate. We learn of laws that have been co-signed in ink but written in the blood of the innocent. We stand next to people who continue to courageously struggle and resist the occupation. People continue to dream and fight for freedom. From Ferguson to Palestine, the struggle for freedom continues.

We who believe in freedom cannot rest. We who believe in freedom cannot rest until it’s won. We who believe in freedom cannot rest.

We sit in a sea of settlements while the sound of suffering is lost in the listening, as the voices of heartache hail the power of presence. People are portals, passports to heaven. Here is a protest in the form of a prayer. God is in the holy water lining the lower lids of a child’s eyes, a tear running against a cheek in Old Jerusalem. The lonely storyteller sits on a leaning chair in the market.

God is a woman holding a crying baby in her arms at a checkpoint, waiting at the gates like cattle. God is in the rubble, with gnarled hands rinsing in an open fire. A journey of dreamers sings through empty streets in Bethlehem. We survive in the telling, unafraid. We survive in the telling.

What if the occupations drain the Palestinians who had thrills underneath their teeth, and they suddenly awoke to see the ships at the Bay of the West Bank shore, discovering that the occupation existed no more? What if Zionism is the second coming of Christ? Destruction is the matriarch of sight, for if we are the Messiah, then God is not white. What if life is the afterlife, and we are already dead? The footage of the moment loops in your head, replaying until you die for the second time.

What a power influence your intelligence and mind, and those with lesser means—the oppressors. Would you still steal this land under that pressure?

Free Palestine! Palestine and Ferguson in the occupation. Ferguson and Palestine, we fight to free our nations.

Black lives matter! Black lives matter!

I believe! I believe!

They know that we know. They know that we win. We are all right.

Group hug! Come on!

Black lives matter! Black lives matter!


See? As long as you say it under the rubric of “Black Lives Matter!” you can say any gulldurned hateful lie you can think of. It’s all good. Good enough for my progressive Jewish friends to not bother to even do a rudimentary check of what these people are plugging—and they ain’t plugging DEI—they’re plugging antisemitism.

There really was such a wealth of material out there, attesting to the disingenuousness and horrifically hateful views of BLM. If only my progressive Jewish friends had been interested in examining even a modicum of the evidence. In 2016, for example, several horrible people made a film comparing anti-black racism, to “Palestinian” suffering under the supposed thumb of Israel.

From Moment Magazine:

Stragglers arrive; extra seats are formed into rows, and even more latecomers will be forced to stand. The lights dim, and a video recently released on YouTube begins to play on the projection screen. Entitled When I See Them, I See Us, it features activist-scholars Angela Davis and Cornel West, musician Lauryn Hill, actor Danny Glover, writer Alice Walker and dozens of other prominent activists, Palestinian and black. Narrators recite the title in rhythmic repetition as the activists hold up a series of slogan-bearing signs: “Racism is systemic. Its outbursts are not isolated incidents.” “Your walls will never cage our freedom.” “End state racism.” “Gaza stands with Baltimore.” Photos of dead Palestinian children alternate with photos of black victims of police shootings and scenes of Gaza rubble.

When the three-minute video ends—directing viewers to the website blackpalestiniansolidarity.com—the room bursts into applause. Dajani introduces the guest speaker for the evening, Reverend Graylan Scott Hagler, the senior minister of the Plymouth Congregational United Church of Christ in Washington, DC. From his temporary pulpit, Hagler weaves a web of parallels—the walls of a maximum-security prison in Massachusetts to Israel’s separation barrier in the West Bank; property destruction in Baltimore in the wake of the death of Freddie Gray to the first and second intifadas. His voice frequently reaches sermon pitch, his audience full of nodding heads, murmurs of approval, snapping fingers, and calls of “Yes.”

For all my progressive Jewish friends who so proudly displayed BLM FB badges until they didn’t, here’s a taste of that film script:

When I see them, I see us.

Every 28 hours, a Black life is stolen by police or vigilantes in the U.S. Every two hours, a Palestinian child is killed in Israel's attacks on Gaza.

Eric Garner, 43 years old, father of six, grandfather, friend. Seven-year-old killed when an Israeli missile struck her home. Hashem Abu Maria, 45 years old, father of four, human rights worker. Ayanna Jones, seven years old, killed in her sleep by Detroit police.

I see us—harassed, beaten, tortured, dehumanized, stopped and frisked, searched at checkpoints, victims of administrative detention, youth incarceration. When I see them, I see us—from Rikers Island to Ophir Prison, from Raeford to Chicago, lives are being stolen.

Remember them. We are not statistics. We are not collateral damage. We have names and faces: Sakia Nadeem Kimani, Renisha Muhammad. They burned me alive in Jerusalem. They gunned me down in Chicago. They shot out our water tanks in Hebron. They cut off our water in Detroit. They demolished our homes in New Orleans. When I see them, I see us.

They see our rooms as dangerous, label us as demographic threats. They sterilize us without our knowledge and mark our children as criminals. We say no to all forms of oppression in U.S. cities and on the streets of Palestine. We respect the uniqueness of our struggles and our varied histories. When I see them, I see us—resilient, steadfast, determined.

I see who we were meant to be: alive, free, liberated, mapping out our destiny. I see hope, strength, love—a place where our children can dream. I see a road, a partner, a family, a world where we can rise and be seen.


Now, with Cullors out of the picture, it has become clear that the BLM people need a new Jew-hater in charge. Which is why they just hired Yonasda Lonewolf!

The Washington Free Beacon reports:

Black Lives Matter Grassroots announced in a New Year's message to its supporters on Thursday that it hired Yonasda Lonewolf, a rapper and activist with close ties to Farrakhan, as a "special projects specialist" to help the group as it works to "claim victory over the white-supremacist systems designed to kill our people." Black Lives Matter Grassroots said in the message it would enter 2025 with "the revolutionary spirit of our Haitian forebears" and featured an image of Haitian revolutionaries in the early 1800s lynching French military officers.

Lonewolf doesn’t shy from her devotion to Farrakhan, who has praised Adolf Hitler as a "very great man" and casts Jews as "termites" and "enemies" who control black people. She professed her love for Farrakhan in a 2016 Facebook post and later, in a 2020 Instagram post, described the minister as "my grandfather Min. Farrakhan who also eased my spirit." In 2023, Lonewolf attended Farrakhan’s annual keynote address, where she told the ministry’s propaganda website that she felt "rejuvenated" by his message.

"We are all under attack right now, and it’s the fight against good and evil, at the end of the day," Lonewolf told the Final Call, the Nation of Islam's official publication. "The fact that we still have a great leader amongst us is a testament that he’s standing, that we need to be able to continue." Other Farrakhan devotees interviewed in that article praised the Nation of Islam leader's stand against "the Satanic Jews" and "the Jewish powers that be."

As to the pink pussy hats, they were all the rage with progressive Jewish women. But that didn’t go very well, either.

From Barbara Kay in the National Post:

It should be obvious to progressive Jewish women by now that the Women’s March, an allegedly feminist movement, which allegedly supports the rights of all women, just isn’t into Jewish women. To progressive ideologues, Jews are burdened by the original sin of Zionism, whether they are pro-Israel or not.

This was made very clear in June 2017, at the Chicago Dyke March, when three Jewish LGBT Pride marchers carrying flags adorned with a Star of David (similar to, but not the flag of Israel) were ousted from the parade. This was an act of pure anti-Semitism by radical feminists. 

In fact, at the event in question, the 21st annual Chicago Dyke March, a member of the group said that the women were told to leave because the flags “made people feel unsafe” and that the March was both “anti-Zionist” and “pro-Palestinian.”

Two years later, things had not much (read “not at all”) improved. But at least the rules of the 2019 DC Dyke March were clear.

From JNS (emphasis added):

The DC Dyke March, returning to Washington, D.C. on Friday after a 12-year absence, will prohibit Jewish and pro-Israel pride symbols, including flags.

“Jewish stars and other identifications and celebrations of Jewishness (yarmulkes, talit, other expressions of Judaism or Jewishness) are welcome and encouraged. We do ask that participants not bring pro-Israel paraphernalia in solidarity with our queer Palestinian friends,” Yael Horowitz, a Jewish organizer of the D.C. march, told A.J. Campbell, who wanted to bring a Jewish Pride flag to the march, in a Facebook messagereported The Washington Post.

The progressive Jews I know are on the whole, accomplished professionals with Ivy League educations. Why then, do they completely lack the ability to see when they’re being taken for a ride? How is it that they’re so quick to support what isn’t? BLM isn’t about equal rights for black people. It’s about misusing funds and hating Jews. The Women’s March and Dyke Marches aren’t about women or dykes. If it were, Jews and their symbols showing up in solidarity would be welcomed. After all, what does Israel have to do with the women’s rights movement in the United States?

Answer: not a thing. It’s not even intersectional. The marches are a pretext to hate whatever floats their hate boat. Straights, whites, Jews, Donald J. Trump . . . whatever they hate most at the moment. None of it hangs together in any cohesive form whatsoever.

In the run up to the election, a friend explained to me that she could not vote for Trump because she feared her elementary school-aged granddaughter would someday not be able to get an abortion as a result. But Trump didn’t do anything with abortion in his first term, and has no intention of having much to do with it now. It’s not even a thing. He’s leaving it up to the states to decide these things for themselves.

And guess what, they already have. There is no place in America where a woman cannot get an abortion where there is a risk to the life of the mother. In fact, there are very few places in America where the usual exceptions are not in place. 


But you know, Kamala Harris told them otherwise, so they believe her. And voted for her. Because they are Jewish progressives, so they embrace whatever cause they are told is progressive without even the smallest effort made at verifying the facts. 

Are they aware that Kamala Harris supports student protests against “Israel’s genocide in Gaza” and tells them they have a right to “their truth?”

 

Probably not. Again, because they don’t care. What they care about is the appearance of being consonant with progressive values. They want to belong, so when others scream BLACK LIVES MATTER, they put those badges up on their Facebook pages. And when Kamala tells them that Donald J. Trump wants to control their bodies, they vote for her, despite her hatred of their homeland and the people who live there. They comfort themselves by saying, there's no way she hates Jews. Her husband is Jewish!

Will Jewish progressives wake up in time to save themselves? Probably not. They are too intellectually lazy to perpetuate their own species. That expensive education their Yiddisher parents paid for is basically a framed diploma on a wall. They graduated a long time ago, and no longer have to use their brain cells to dig deep and critically think about anything much at all.



Buy EoZ's books  on Amazon!

"He's an Anti-Zionist Too!" cartoon book (December 2024)

PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism (February 2022)

   
 

 

  • Wednesday, January 08, 2025
  • Elder of Ziyon
Found in Kamal Adwan - or were they?


Yesterday, I noted that the evidence of Hamas using the Kamal Adwan Hospital for terror purposes was unassailable. 

They have published photos and videos of weapons found here. They caught known October 7 terrorists trying to escape from the hospital. They showed an interview with one of the Hamas operatives there confirming everything they said.

Not only that but it fits a pattern of Hamas having used many other hospitals in Gaza.

Now see how the New York Times tries to cast doubt on the video interview the IDF released:

The military released footage of what it said was an interrogation of one of the more than 240 militants it had arrested in raiding the hospital, saying it backed up Israel’s allegations that Hamas and other armed groups deliberately embed themselves in hospitals in violation of international law.

The New York Times was not able to independently verify the claims made in the video, or to determine the circumstances under which the detainee made the admission. Israel has detained many Gazans in Sde Teiman, an army base in southern Israel, where many have been held in demeaning conditions and in which former detainees described beatings and other abuse. The Israeli military has denied accusations of systematic abuse there.
Ah, so the Israelis tortured the terrorist into saying what they wanted! 

Students of conspiracy theories recognize what the New York Times is doing. No matter what evidence is brought, it can always be doubted because a huge influential entity can fake anything. The photos and videos of weapons are planted, the arrests were of innocent people, the detainees are coerced.

The implication is that the IDF is deliberately attacking hospitals for no valid military reason. Not only that, but even though the Israelis know that the laws of armed conflict specifically ban attacking hospitals unless they are being actively used for military purposes, they attack them anyway just because they are that evil, and then they hide their criminal activities with an elaborate coverup involving staging weapons, torturing confessions and getting shot at.

Soldiers are trained to attack enemies, not civilians. If Israel was just choosing a hospital to attack because they are hellbent on genocide - which is the only possible reason to do so that the New York Times would consider - wouldn't there be lots of disillusioned soldiers saying so?  Wouldn't the NYT reporters be inundated with former soldiers anxious to tell their stories?

Not when the Times believes in conspiracy theories. Because it isn't the IDF only, but all of Israel - soldiers, reservists, their relatives, every newspaper and TV station and WhatsApp group, pretty much every Jew in the country - that is part of the plot. 

The one thing the New York Times knows for sure is that Jews cannot be trusted. 

But the claim that Palestinians are being held in "demeaning conditions" is reported as if it is factual, even though it came from an UNRWA report and UNRWA is not exactly an innocent objective party. 





Buy EoZ's books  on Amazon!

"He's an Anti-Zionist Too!" cartoon book (December 2024)

PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism (February 2022)

   
 

 

  • Wednesday, January 08, 2025
  • Elder of Ziyon
A columnist named Ahmed Salama writes in Jordan's Ammon News about Jordan's and its citizens' priorities.
Firstly, his connection to Jerusalem is a spiritual one, driven by pure religious motives, as expressed years ago by that elderly man from Karak on a television network, saying: “I would die, I and my children, just to pray in Jerusalem.” I mean that for the Jordanian, Jerusalem is not merely a Palestinian cause of solidarity with brothers. Those who use terms like "the Palestinian file" or "the Syrian file" in their prioritization of Jordanian matters are either ignorant of what it means to be Jordanian or even more ignorant of their national sentiments.

Jerusalem is not simply a solidarity issue with brothers. Jerusalem is where we shed the blood of many Jews defending it during the two battles, and we were the first to capture Jews during the 1948 confrontation. They, too, inflicted losses on us, martyring our sons—deaths that became a source of pride, befitting the dignity of a martyr who gave his life in unyielding defense of a place imbued with religious sanctity and an aura of reverence that warms the soul.

...What surrounds Jerusalem is the issue of a group of people honored by their sweet belonging to Jordanian identity—citizenship and a steadfast commitment to action for more than tens of years. Yet, for reasons beyond their and our control, they have been removed from our national equation. I mean the people of the West Bank!
Even though Jordan hasn't claimed control of the West Bank for thirty years, Salama believes that Palestinians there are still Jordanians and the West Bank is still part of Jordan. 

He also believes Jerusalem is a Jordanian issue, not a Palestinian issue. He notes that Jordan fought "Jews" for control of the city, twice, and praying at Al Aqsa is the deepest desire for every Jordanian.

Except there is nothing stopping any Jordanian from visiting Jerusalem and praying at al Aqsa or any other mosque in the city.

What Salama is really saying is that the entire Palestinian national project is a facade. The goal isn't establishing a Palestinian capital in Jerusalem; the goal is to take Jerusalem away from Jews, no matter who else controls it. In his mind, "Palestine" is just a facade to grab the land, but in reality the Palestinians are Jordanians - and Palestine is Jordan.




Buy EoZ's books  on Amazon!

"He's an Anti-Zionist Too!" cartoon book (December 2024)

PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism (February 2022)

   
 

 

  • Wednesday, January 08, 2025
  • Elder of Ziyon
Haaretz reports:
Is It Egypt's Turn Now? Anti-Sissi Campaign Gaining Traction on X
Egyptian President Abdel Fattah al-Sissi and his allies fear online calls for an uprising - including the trending hashtag 'It's your turn, Dictator' - may spark offline protests, inspired by the fall of Assad in Syria
This is a story worth watching, but posts on X are not usually a bellwether for anything. Journalists tend to overstate the importance of social media, where armchair activists can write what they want risk-free, unlike actual events on the ground. This is probably since the reporters spend so much of their own time within their own social media echo chambers. 

There are superficial similarities between pre-revolution Syria and Egypt - both had dictators and an Islamist opposition. But Egypt already had its regime change in 2012 when the Muslim Brotherhood won elections. Islamist rule quickly became unpopular and there was mass public support for the military coup by now-president Sisi. Average Egyptians have no appetite for the Islamists to return to power, and the Islamists are the ones who are behind the social media campaigns that so impress clueless journalists. 

The place to look next is not Egypt but Iraq. 

Critical Threats' Iran Update published in yesterday's report:
Six notable Iraqi Sunni politicians issued a statement on December 14 calling for a “comprehensive national dialogue” to address political and economic grievances. 

The officials emphasized the need to address issues that have caused “widespread public discontent and anger,” including corruption and “injustices in prisons.” The officials also emphasized that Iraq should be an independent country void of external influence. The officials rejected the use of violence to achieve political transformation and reforms. The Baghdad-based Center for Political Thought interpreted the statement as a warning to the Shia Coordination Framework that the Iraqi federal government could face a major “restructuring” if it does not address these grievances.

So far the Iraqi leadership has been rejecting calls to reform. 

The Iranian backed militias in Iraq are clearly nervous about the Syrian revolution, so much so that they declared that they would stop attacking Israel. This indicates that the Iraqi people are not interested in being used as pawns in Iran's proxy game. 

Iraq is about 55% Shia and 40% Sunni, but many of the Shiites are nationalist and do not want Iranian influence either. Prominent Shia cleric Ayatollah Ali al Sistani is one of them. He seems to support a recent US backed initiative to dismantle the Iranian-backed Popular Mobilization Forces (PMF), an umbrella group that includes militias more loyal to Iran than Iraq - including groups that have fired drones at Israel. 

The Arab world doesn't like to back losers, and Iran has been looking a lot like a loser over the past several months. Iran still make daily promises to attack Israel directly, but after two months of those threats no one is taking them seriously, and Iran knows that Israel would respond with far less restraint than its October reprisal attack. 

The "strong horse" model is still a major factor in Arab politics and Iran's horse looks mighty sickly to the Arab public.




Buy EoZ's books  on Amazon!

"He's an Anti-Zionist Too!" cartoon book (December 2024)

PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism (February 2022)

   
 

 

  • Wednesday, January 08, 2025
  • Elder of Ziyon
New York City reported that crimes had gone down in 2024 compared to 2023, with a reduction of 3,662 crimes.

It also had fewer hate crimes than in 2023, with the number of hate crimes against Black people down by 30%, anti-Asian hate crimes down by 33%, anti-Hispanic hate crimes down by 45% and those targeting sexual orientation down 26%.

But the number of antisemitic hate crimes went up. 

Here is a chart of NYC hate crimes for 2023-2024.


There were more hate crimes against Jews than against everyone else combined. This pie chart shows the comparison for 2024:


There were nine times as many anti-Jewish hate crimes than anti-Black hate crimes. Now take a guess as to how many hours NYC students and employees get on training about the evils of racial discrimination compared to antisemitism.

New York publishes statistics of the ethnicity and gender of those arrested. Only the first three quarters are published for 2024, with 111 arrests for anti-Jewish hate crimes. 

There is no pattern - people of all racial categories, genders and ages attack Jews in New York City. 

The attackers were 36% white, 32% Black, 20% Hispanic and 9% Asian/Pacific Islanders.



They represent all age groups from children to seniors.


14% of the attackers were women.

Antisemites are a rainbow coalition. 







Buy EoZ's books  on Amazon!

"He's an Anti-Zionist Too!" cartoon book (December 2024)

PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism (February 2022)

   
 

 

Tuesday, January 07, 2025

From Ian:

Why they rewrite the intifada
The wave of Palestinian Arab violence that raged from December 1987 to the autumn of 1993—the intifada today’s campus extremists idolize—featured constant murderous bombings, shootings and stabbings.

Perhaps a few examples will suffice to refresh the memory of an international community that always seems to be afflicted with amnesia when Jewish victims are involved:

• In 1988, Palestinian terrorists threw hand grenades inside a Haifa mall, wounding 25. Near Beersheva, intifadists hijacked a bus full of Israeli women traveling to work and murdered three of them. They also murdered an Israeli teenager in a Jerusalem park and hid bombs in loaves of bread in a Jerusalem supermarket; three children were injured.

• In 1989, an intifada terrorist steered an Israeli bus into a ravine, killing 14 passengers (including U.S. citizen Rita Levine) and wounding 27 (five of them Americans). Also that year, Palestinian Arabs bombed a Tel Aviv market, injuring four, and went on a stabbing rampage in a Jerusalem shopping area, murdering two and wounding three. On Purim day in Tel Aviv, an Arab terrorist stabbed two Israelis to death with a commando knife and severely wounded a third. One of the victims was an elderly scientist who had been delivering holiday treats to the poor.

• In 1990, intifada terrorists carried out bomb attacks in a Jerusalem marketplace (one dead, nine wounded), the Tel Aviv beachfront (one dead, 20 wounded) and the Ein Gedi springs (four wounded). In Jerusalem, a Palestinian Arab terrorist stabbed three Israelis to death. Another knife-wielding terrorist murdered an Israeli and wounded three more on a Tel Aviv bus.

• In 1991, intifadists stabbed and wounded two Israelis in Jerusalem; bombed a Beersheva market, injuring two shoppers; and ambushed a bus north of Jerusalem, killing two and wounding six (five of them children). Palestinian Arab terrorist atrocities in 1992 included the murder of 15-year-old Helena Rapp in Bat Yam, the kidnapping and murder of Nissim Toledano and a stabbing rampage in Jaffa (two murdered, 19 injured).

• The bloodshed continued in 1993 with stabbing attacks in Tel Aviv that left one dead and four wounded in one instance, and two dead and seven wounded in another. There was also a car bombing at the Mehola Junction that killed one person and injured 21; and the murder of 11-year-old Chava Wechsberg in an attack on an Israeli automobile near Karmei Tzur.

And those are just a few examples from each of those years.

During the first four years of the intifada, there were some 600 bombing or shooting attacks on Israelis, and another 100 hand-grenade attacks, not to mention more than 3,600 attempts to burn Israelis to death with Molotov cocktails. Altogether, 27 Israelis were murdered and 3,000-plus wounded during that period. Twenty-five more were murdered in 1992 and 65 in 1993.

Far from being a spontaneous uprising—as Palestinian advocates portray it—the intifada was carefully orchestrated. A PLO department called the Unified Leadership of the Intifada issued daily instructions on how much violence should be used and against whom.

So the question is: Why do The New York Times and other media outlets never explain what took place during this time period that the campus radicals are so loudly applauding? Why do they deliberately downplay the extent of the Palestinian Arab violence?

The answer is that it’s all politics, of course. Major media outlets sympathize with the Palestinian Arab cause and its campus cheerleaders. Acknowledging the extent of Palestinian atrocities makes their cause look bad.

That’s why that Times Sunday Magazine article emphasized the “boycotts” and rock-throwing, and omitted the bombings and shootings and hijackings. That’s also why The Washington Post and CNN never mention that the rocks can be fatal—and that 16 Israelis have been murdered by Arab rock-throwers.

That, in short, is why they rewrite the intifada. Because telling the truth would make readers stop and ask: Does it really make sense to give these intifadists a sovereign state in Israel’s backyard?
The Trump anti-jihad ripple effect
Europe is grappling with significant challenges as antisemitism rises and radical Islamist ideologies gain traction. In countries like France, Germany and the United Kingdom, Jewish communities increasingly face violent attacks and growing hostility. The impact of radical Islam extends far beyond antisemitism. Muslim communities in major Western European cities struggle with assimilation and too often advocate for the adoption of Islamic laws and cultural practices that conflict with the values of their host societies. This dynamic has contributed to expanding “no-go zones” where local law enforcement faces significant challenges in maintaining control. These zones further isolate young Muslims, perpetuating a vicious cycle of alienation and radicalization. High-profile incidents like the Paris riots, the Brussels bombings and the London Bridge attack highlight the need for action.

Israel is the West’s first line of defense against radical Islam, so Trump’s unequivocal support for Israel further demonstrates his commitment to preserving Western culture. Key achievements in his support of Israel include relocating the U.S. Embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem, recognizing the Golan Heights as Israeli territory, and brokering the Abraham Accords, which normalized relations between Israel and several Arab nations. Trump is messaging his intent to enthusiastically continue supporting Israel in its defensive, justified, and, so far, very successful war against Iran and its proxies. These actions not only strengthen U.S.-Israel ties but also showcase a path towards regional stability through decisive leadership.

A transatlantic partnership, led by America and rooted in firm opposition to radical Islam and antisemitism, will reverse the gains made by extreme Islamists in the United States and abroad. It will also deny a quarter to young, impressionable Muslims who will no longer be emboldened by the West’s apparent capitulation to jihadists’ efforts. Trump’s policies emphasize rejecting jihadist ideologies while fostering integration and inclusion for Muslim communities willing to embrace democratic values. In recognition of this, many in the American Muslim community supported Trump for president. This balanced approach serves as an antidote to the progressive left’s tolerance of Islamist extremism, which has allowed these ideologies to gain a foothold. By prioritizing firm opposition to radical Islamism in all its forms alongside support for genuine inclusion, a united front can safeguard democratic principles while buying the West time to address the root causes of Islamic extremism.

The Trump anti-jihad effect offers a beacon of hope for a Western civilization under siege by radical Islam and antisemitism. Trump’s policies, grounded in moral clarity and decisive action, aim to dismantle these movements’ ideological and cultural threats. By resisting the progressive left’s pro-Islamist sentiment in America and countering unfettered immigration from radicalized regions of the world, Trump’s approach provides a blueprint for safeguarding the Judeo-Christian values that underpin Western society.
The Lower East Side anti-Jewish riot that changed the way Jews do politics
You might be forgiven for never having heard of the worst anti-Jewish riot in American history. It happened on the Lower East Side over a century ago and largely slipped from history. Jewish memory was overloaded with subsequent calamities, from Kishinev and Auschwitz to Pittsburgh and October 7.

But as Scott Seligman argues in his new book, “The Chief Rabbi’s Funeral,” the mob attack on July 30, 1902, that left 196 Jewish mourners beaten and bloodied, also left a legacy of Jewish political activism that remains a model for today. The attack on the funeral procession of Rabbi Jacob Joseph led a fractious Jewish community to organize, seeking justice for the victims and punishment for the perpetrators.

“The lesson of the 1902 riot is that when antisemitism crosses the line, and it morphs into violence and intimidation against Jews, then it needs to be punished, and our best response is to unify and to organize,” Seligman, a historian based in Washington, D.C., told me this week. “Which is what they did, using whatever political power and influence they had.”

Seligman and I last spoke in 2020, after the publication of his book “The Great Kosher Meat War of 1902,” which formed the germ of his latest book. Actually, he told me, an article I wrote about the earlier book, focusing on the rabbi whose funeral inspired the riot the same year, inspired Seligman to dig deeper into that part of the story.

Joseph was a Vilna Talmud scholar who was brought to New York in 1888 to serve as a sort of chief rabbi to the city’s teeming Jewish community (and rationalize its corrupt and unreliable kosher meat business). It turned out to be easier to merge all of New York’s boroughs into a single municipality than get the Jews to agree on a chief rabbi.

By 1895, Joseph was no longer being paid by the groups who brought him over, and his authority was recognized only by a handful of downtown Orthodox congregations. Before suffering a stroke in 1898, he worked as a hired kosher supervisor for some wholesale butchers.

When he died in 1902 at the age of 62, a penitent Lower East Side decided to give him in death the respect that had eluded him in life. Hundreds of thousands of mourners joined his funeral procession, which wound past neighborhoods in lower Manhattan before his body was put on a ferry for burial in Brooklyn.
From Ian:

Thank Israel for no nuclear fears in post-Assad Syria
Following the collapse of Bashar al-Assad’s murderous regime, protracted uncertainty or outright chaos should be expected in Syria. Among other things, assorted remnants of al-Qaeda and ISIS terrorist groups will configure or reconfigure in the area, and Sunni Islamic states such as Turkey, Qatar, and Saudi Arabia could present Israel with a unique and unpredictable foe. Though Iran will suffer a temporary strategic loss from the defeat of its surrogate in Damascus, Jerusalem will not have to face any consequent nuclear threats. The core reason for this relatively good news lies in the Jewish state’s Operation Orchard, executed in September 2007.

Until then, Israel’s most visible effort to prevent an enemy nuclear state had been its widely remembered June 7, 1981, Osiraq raid against Iraq. Nonetheless, a later preemption was undertaken in Syria. Code-named Operation Orchard, it expressed Israel’s country-specific Begin Doctrine and also the general international law principle of anticipatory self-defense.

Meticulously planned, as was Operation Opera in 1981, Orchard represented a prudent defensive action against then-originating Syrian nuclear infrastructures. In essence, if the already-genocidal Damascus regime had not been the object of this 2007 Israeli preemption, nuclear weapons could eventually have fallen into the hands of Sunni jihadi terrorist organizations now beginning to contend for power in post-Assad Syria.

Israel’s first use of anticipatory self-defense against a potentially nuclear adversary in 1981 was directed at Saddam Hussein’s developing reactor near Baghdad. It was the broader international community’s failure to act in a similarly decisive fashion against North Korea that created still-expanding security woes with Kim Jung Un. Ironically, North Korea – which secretly built the Al Kibar plutonium-producing heavy water reactor destroyed by Orchard in 2007 – had been sending assembled nonnuclear arms to Syria. At that point, North Korean arms transfers supported Shi’ite Iran’s destructive influence in the region.

There are noteworthy regional intersections. Whatever the United States might assume about Pyongyang, it will be necessary to prevent Kim Jung Un from undertaking any North Korean aggressions against Japanese or South Korean nuclear power plants. In any such eventuality, especially in extremis atomicum, a further danger would surface: Unlike the Israeli preemptions against Osiraq and Al Kibar, which had been directed against pre-operational nuclear reactors, these prospective North Korean targets could suffer nuclear core meltdowns. Such events could produce calamities far worse than what was caused by the catastrophic accidents in Chernobyl and Fukushima.

During the attack on Osiraq, Israeli fighter-bombers destroyed Iraq’s nuclear reactor before it was ready to go “online.” Nonetheless, following the attack, the immediate global community reaction was generally hostile. In Resolution 487 of June 19, 1981, the UN Security Council indicated that it “strongly condemns” the attack and declared “Iraq is entitled to appropriate redress for the destruction it has suffered.” Largely forgotten is that then-US president Ronald Reagan took multiple steps to ensure the United States would vote in favor of this resolution of condemnation.
Seth Mandel: How Amnesty International Became Its Own Repressive Regime
Amnesty International is free to operate in Israel, but Amnesty Israel isn’t free to operate within Amnesty International.

That is the important takeaway from the news that the anti-Zionist NGO is suspending its Israel branch for the crime of disagreeing with management.

Even when groups like Amnesty and Human Rights Watch begin operating in good faith, they inevitably fall into a trap they have set for themselves: Dictatorial and authoritarian regimes don’t let them operate in their countries, but democracies do. So “human rights” organizations end up focusing their reporting on places with far fewer human-rights violations, skewing the entire concept of humanitarian law and ultimately serving as little more than dictatorships’ organs of Sovietesque whataboutism.

Democracies end up looking bad because they’re free. And the leaders of these supposed humanitarian organizations end up serving as the willing shields of repression.

So it is, ironically enough, with Amnesty itself. It has officially become the thing it was founded to expose.

The background to this current kerfuffle is recent and deceptively simple.

In early December, Amnesty International produced a report accusing Israel of committing genocide in Gaza. The report was an unmitigated disaster for Amnesty: It was leaked because employees were embarrassed by its lack of scholarship. The report admitted that Amnesty was changing the definition of genocide in order to apply it to Israel, and Amnesty’s Israel branch—the organization’s researchers on the ground—publicly disputed its conclusions and revealed that they had not even been consulted on the report that was all about Israel.

Amnesty International has responded by suspending Amnesty Israel.

Which is to say, the supposed “human rights” organization now operates on authoritarian principles.

I would say this is a case of Amnesty becoming what it hates, but it’s not clear to me that Amnesty ever actually hated authoritarianism or repression.

In explaining its decision to suppress dissent, Amnesty unintentionally admitted its critics were right, though the communications team clearly thought it was making a different point when it released this statement:
“AI Israel has sought to publicly discredit Amnesty’s human rights research and positions. Its efforts to publicly undermine the findings and recommendations of Amnesty’s 2022 report on Israel’s Apartheid against Palestinians and, more recently, Amnesty’s 2024 report on Israel’s genocide against Palestinians in Gaza, have been deeply prejudicial to Amnesty’s human rights mission, threatening our credibility, integrity and operational coherence.”

“Operational coherence” means Amnesty intends for its leader’s voice to be its only voice, and that the company line must be toed at all times. “Threatening our credibility” means Amnesty Israel has exposed the fact that Amnesty International has bypassed its country-specific researchers so that their expertise won’t interfere with the predetermined conclusion handed down from on high.
Amnesty International suspends Israel branch for rejecting NGO's reports
Former Amnesty Israel director Yonatan Gher supported the article in a December 17 social media post, asserting that the Israeli branch served as “the guardian of the Israeli government against the human rights movement.”

Amnesty Israel criticized the 2022 report for painting the country in broad strokes, ignoring the differences between different groups and exaggerating some of the framings, The Times of Israel reported.

Anonymous sources within Amnesty International disagreed with claims that the Israel branch’s characterization was “hostile” to criticism of the country, contending that the local group had been critical both of the Israeli government as well as Palestinian bodies, addressing human rights issues regardless of where they arose.

One source shared with The Jerusalem Post that AI didn’t allow local branches to review the 2023 genocide allegation report, limiting access to the executive summary. This was reportedly a unique practice.

AI also said that it was suspending the Israeli branch because of “endemic anti-Palestinian racism.”

“AI Israel has failed to respond effectively to findings of endemic anti-Palestinian racism – a situation which led to complaints from Palestinian board members to the international board in 2022, and successive resignations in 2022, 2023, and 2024,” said Fa’afiu.

'Palestinian voices low on the agenda' - then-Amnesty Israel chair
The international board shared a notice from then-Amnesty Israel chair Daniil Brodsky announcing his resignation on November 29, as well as the resignation of his vice chair and another board member ahead of the genocide allegation report.

“During the last members’ assembly, it quickly became apparent that Palestinian voices were not just something low on the agenda, but that they were actively silenced,” said Brodsky.

“One of the Palestinian board members was humiliated in a racist and disgusting way at the assembly. We could not respect the decisions made by the assembly, and certainly not represent them.

“We could not condone a space hostile to Palestinians, and a human rights space for Israeli Jews only is one that I can scarcely justify.”

Brodsky claimed in the letter and a December 10 The Forward article that he had attempted to introduce more Palestinian representation in managerial roles, but to no avail.

According to him, not only did Amnesty Israel not have the legal experts to criticize the genocide report, but it didn’t have Palestinian input in its analysis. This was part of an alleged systemic problem in the group in which Palestinians were ignored.

“Amnesty Israel finds itself in the awkward position of being neither a source of legal expertise nor providing a diverse human rights perspective of Israelis and Palestinians,” wrote Brodsky.

“It is just another place for Israeli Jews to express themselves.”

AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL insiders told the Post that they didn’t believe reports about anti-Palestinian racism in the Israel branch, noting its commitment to Palestinian human rights issues.

The sources were also suspicious about the proliferation of the allegation and material like Brodsky’s article, with one source going so far as to assert that the AI leadership had laid the groundwork for the racism allegation to justify the suspension.
  • Tuesday, January 07, 2025
  • Elder of Ziyon


This morning, the IDF released a video of an interrogation of an employee at the Kamal Adwan Hospital who was also a Hamas Al Qassam Brigades member.

I am Anas Mohammed Said Al-Sharif, 21 years old.
I work at Kamal Adwan Hospital as a supervisor of cleanliness.
I joined the Izz ad-Din al-Qassam Brigades in 2021, serving in the Nukhba Force in the western battalion. [I was arrested] at the Kamal Adwan Hospital, where medical staff was staying alongside operatives from Hamas, Islamic Jihad, the Al-Nasser Brigades and other organizations in northern Gaza.

There were medical staff members whom I dealt with on a daily and direct basis.
There were also activists from Hamas, Islamic Jihad, Al-Nasser Brigades, and various organizations in the northern area.

Why were you hiding in Kamal Adwan Hospital? 
They thought it was a safe haven for them because the army could not directly target it.

What would you say is the reason they considered it a safe haven?
Because it contained civilians and patients, and they believed that the army would not target it directly.
They thought the army could not directly target it with an F-16 missile or completely destroy it.

When the operatives were in the hospital, what were they doing?
They were transferring equipment and weapons, like AK-47s, bullets and pistols. The weapons were brought to and from the hospital, in and out. Reconnaissance units and patrols would leave the hospital late at night.

The operatives were present, bringing in weapons like Kalashnikovs, pistols, and M-sets.
They transported them in and out of the hospital, from the outside to the inside and vice versa.
Inside the hospital, they used the facility to transport reconnaissance personnel and operatives.

During the late-night hours, they would leave the hospital, returning by morning.
From within the hospital, they were distributed to various locations, such as defensive positions, ambushes, underground tunnels, command centers, and control sites, whether in Kamal Adwan Hospital, Al-Faluja [Jabalya camp], or in areas where the army was present. These activities were managed there.
This is not the first time the IDF published an interview with a terrorists that shows that they used hospitals for military purposes. It shows that IDF intelligence is accurate and that when Israel says that terrorists are using hospitals, schools and mosques they know what they are talking about. 

Here's a video about Kamal Adwan and other Gaza hospitals that you would not know exists based on media coverage.



Yet despite the huge amounts of evidence, the media continues to downplay the proof and portrays the arrests at the hospital as abhorrent. Here is a video by Reuters interviewing a nurse at Kamal Adwan who says that medical staff were beaten, with no skepticism at all, the only mention of Israel's claims that it was used for military purposes is immediately followed by Hamas' denial, which together with this interview combines to make the IDF look like liars.


Most of the news articles are about demands for Israel to release its director, Husam Aby Safiya, who is also a Hamas colonel (a fact they ignore completely.)

These are war crimes. And the media (outside Israeli and Jewish media) prefers not to publish these stories. Instead, it casts doubt on anything Israel says.

It is a consistent pattern of disbelieving Jews to the extent that it chooses to believe terrorists above them. And of course NGOs don't say a word either. 

World media is hopelessly corrupt.




Buy EoZ's books  on Amazon!

"He's an Anti-Zionist Too!" cartoon book (December 2024)

PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism (February 2022)

   
 

 

By Daled Amos

Mexico has never fired rockets into the US.

But that hasn't stopped people from comparing such a theoretical attack with Hamas firing rockets into Israel. How else to illustrate Israel's right to self-defense from a terrorist entity that exists right on Israel's doorstep?

However, one US neighbor has proven to be a threat to the US in more than just theory.

In October 1962, the US discovered that the Soviet Union was installing nuclear missiles in Cuba, 90 miles off the US coast. This threat to US national security led to the Cold War confrontation between the US and the Soviet Union known as the Cuban Missile Crisis. On October 22, President Kennedy called for a naval "quarantine" of Cuba to block any more weapons or military equipment from reaching the island. Both the US and the Soviet Union mobilized their forces, but all-out war was averted.



The Cuban Missile Crisis poses an interesting parallel to Israel's current situation.

Cuba, like Hamas, was a proxy, acting on behalf of the USSR. Cuban troops and advisors supported the Marxist MPLA government in Angola during its war. Castro supplied the manpower, while the Soviets provided the weapons. Cuba also acted on behalf of its sponsor in 1977-1978, when it backed the Soviet-aligned Ethiopian government. 

But, in 1962, it served as a proxy of the USSR against the US. The missiles pointed at the US but fell just short of being used like the Iranian-supplied rockets targeting Israeli civilians.

As a proxy, Cuba not only helped protect other Marxist governments. It also assisted in the Soviet goal to spread Communism. Hamas, for its part, fit into Iran's goal of spreading radical Islam throughout the Middle East and beyond.

The Soviet Union eventually proved to be a paper tiger. The Soviet bloc eventually disintegrated, and its various components turned away from Communism. The case of Iran is not nearly as clear-cut, but like Russia, it no longer projects power as it once did, and its proxies no longer serve as reliable extensions of its Islamist program.

Then there is the terrorist element.

Che Guevara symbolized the Cuban cause just as much as Fidel Castro did. And like Hamas "heroes", Guevara too was a terrorist. Jonah Goldberg writes in his book, Liberal Fascism:
Guevera reveled in executing prisoners. While fermenting revolution in Guatemala, he wrote home to his mother, "It was all a lot of fun. What with the bombs, speeches and other distractions to break the monotony I was living in." His motto was, "If in doubt kill him," and he killed a great many. The Cuban American writer Humberto Fotova described Guevera as "a combination of Beria [former chief of Stalin's secret police] and Himmler." [p. 194]
Yet in 1964, Guevara, like Arafat addressed the United Nations General Assembly--and received enthusiastic applause from his audience. And of course, we are all familiar with the the Che T-shirts:


While we are unlikely to be bombarded with images of Yahya Al-Sinwar on T-shirts, college students today enthusiastically wear keffiyehs, calling for "Intifada" instead of "Revolution," even hours after an ISIS-flag-wielding terrorist fulfilled their chant, killing 15 in New Orleans.

These days, almost no one remembers the threat of missiles aimed at the US from Cuba, which is only 90 miles away from Key West, Florida. All that has survived is the myth of Che Guevara, which survives today in the blind enthusiasm of college students and other left-wing activists who impulsively call for an Intifada.




Buy EoZ's books  on Amazon!

"He's an Anti-Zionist Too!" cartoon book (December 2024)

PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism (February 2022)

   
 

 

  • Tuesday, January 07, 2025
  • Elder of Ziyon
Amnesty International writes on its "Freedom of Expression" webpage:
Your voice matters. You have the right to say what you think, share information and demand a better world. You also have the right to agree or disagree with those in power, and to express these opinions in peaceful protests.

Amnesty International supports people who speak out peacefully for themselves and for others – whether a journalist reporting on violence by security forces, a trade unionist exposing poor working conditions or an indigenous leader defending their land rights against big business. We would similarly defend the right of those who support the positions of big business, the security forces and employers to express their views peacefully.
As usual, there is a Jewish exception.

The Jerusalem Post reports that Amnesty International has suspended its Israeli branch for two years, saying it was because of supposed "anti-Palestinian racism" - but mainly because it publicly criticized two of Amnesty's reports about Israel.

"We take this action in response to evidence of endemic anti-Palestinian racism within AI Israel, which violates core human rights principles and Amnesty values, and evidence of AI Israel’s misalignment with and hostility to Amnesty positions," Amnesty International interim chair Tiumalu Lauvale Peter Fa’afiu wrote in an email.

"AI Israel has sought to publicly discredit Amnesty’s human rights research and positions. Its efforts to publicly undermine the findings and recommendations of Amnesty’s 2022 report on Israel’s Apartheid against Palestinians and, more recently, Amnesty’s 2024 report on Israel’s genocide against Palestinians in Gaza, have been deeply prejudicial to Amnesty’s human rights mission, threatening our credibility, integrity and operational coherence," Fa'afiu wrote.

"This action is taken under the authority of Article 34 of the Statute of Amnesty International (POL 20/8464/2024) and is necessary to protect the reputation, integrity and operational coherence of the Amnesty Movement at large," Fa’afiu said in the Monday email.

Fa'afiu's email twice mentions protecting Amnesty's "operational coherence" as the reason to suspend AI Israel for publicly disagreeing with Amnesty's reports. However, that phrase does not appear in Article 34 of the Amnesty statute; instead it says the International Board may suspend membership of an entity  if it "considers such action necessary to protect the reputation, integrity or operation of the movement." 

There is a big difference between "operation" and "operational coherence." The latter phrase means that no one within the movement is allowed to publicly criticize Amnesty. Internal debate is evidence of a culture of free speech; a demand for "operational coherence" is the opposite.

The phrase "operational coherence" does not appear anywhere in Amnesty's site. This is a brand new rule that Amnesty made up just for its Israeli branch.

Amnesty's report made up and justified a new definition of "genocide" just for Israel, as well as previously making up new definitions of "apartheid" and "occupation" solely for Israel. Here they made up a new policy just to silence criticism within the organization. 

This is Soviet-level newspeak from a supposed human rights organization.

Moreover, we've seen numerous instances where Amnesty does not consider supporting literal antisemites to harm its "reputation and integrity." 

Amnesty-UK has refused to allow a Jewish - not Israeli, Jewish - group from renting its premises while it has allowed clear Jew-haters to use their space. 

Amnesty has praised a Palestinian group, "Youth Against Settlements," which has posted antisemitic fake Talmud quotes. 

Amnesty-USA has sponsored a speaking tour of Bassem Tamimi, who has posted that Israel details Palestinian children to steal their organs and then the Zionist-controlled media blocks reporting of the story.

In 2015, the only resolution rejected by Amnesty at its annual conference was one condemning antisemitic attacks in Britain.

In 2012, an Amnesty researcher tweeted a "joke" saying that England's Jewish MKs support bombing civilians in Gaza.

None of these antisemitic incidents resulted in Amnesty suspending anyone for damaging its reputation or integrity. Amnesty proudly supports its antipathy towards Jews, and it writes its reports to appeal to antisemites who support that reputation.

Because antisemitism is part of Amnesty's "operational coherence."





Buy EoZ's books  on Amazon!

"He's an Anti-Zionist Too!" cartoon book (December 2024)

PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism (February 2022)

   
 

 

  • Tuesday, January 07, 2025
  • Elder of Ziyon
At Egypt's Youm7 (Seventh Day) news site, columnist Dandrawy Elhawary shows his displeasure at the Muslim Brotherhood and its offshoots like ISIS, Al Qaeda and HTS by pointing out that they have never engaged in battle with Israel, unlike Egypt.

The Muslim Brotherhood has never participated in a single struggle against Israel, whether when it occupied Sinai after the 1967 setback or in the great October 1973 victory. However, since the events of January 25, 2011, the truth about the group and the organizations that emerged from it with different names has been revealed, from Jihad, the Islamic Group, Al-Qaeda, ISIS, and the Al-Nusra Front, previously, to Hay’at Tahrir al-Sham, currently, and other names that are abundant in the file of political Islam. The masks have fallen and the faces of their leaders and members have become uncovered. It has been proven, with evidence, that they have courted Israel, and that all the slogans they were calling for that were hostile to it, were merely camouflage.
So far this is a fairly typical Arab article, where different factions argue that their political enemies are secret Zionists. Hamas and Fatah do this all the time. 

But Elhawary's proof comes from not hating Jews sufficiently as evidence:
Erian

Even when they were justifying their positions on Israel on the ground, by saying that they were not in power, they had the opportunity in the black year of 2012 in Egypt [when the Muslim brotherhood was in power,] and we found the group’s closeness to Israel and intimacy in relations, which can be summarized in ... the strange public statements of one of its most prominent leaders, Dr. Essam El-Erian, in December 2012, in which he demanded the necessity of the return of Jews to Egypt, and he said verbatim: “I call on Egyptian Jews to return to their homeland, and they must refuse to continue living under the shadow of an oppressive and racist regime stained with crimes against humanity.”
So asking Jews to return to Egypt - as a pretext for Palestinians to all move to Israel so Palestinians could become the majority - is evidence of loving Israel? 

No, Erian's crime is considering it acceptable for Jews to live in Egypt! In fact, he was forced to resign from his government position shortly after this suggestion because Egyptians were so upset at the idea of Jews moving to Egypt.

Even though Egyptian leaders would insist they are not antisemitic but only anti-Zionist, we see that patriotic Egyptians know that Jew-hatred is a pre-requisite for being a real Egyptian. 

The article's headline calls on Egypt, as a nation, to "liberate Jerusalem."




Buy EoZ's books  on Amazon!

"He's an Anti-Zionist Too!" cartoon book (December 2024)

PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism (February 2022)

   
 

 

Monday, January 06, 2025

From Ian:

No Israel, No Palestine: A Thought Experiment
On October 5, 2005, former Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad declared that Israel was a “disgraceful blot” that should be “wiped off the face of the earth.” Despite the genocidal nature of his statement, the world did not respond by isolating him or Iran. Instead, in 2011, Ahmadinejad was invited to address the United Nations, reflecting a disturbing tolerance for such rhetoric.

On October 7, 2023, just eighteen years later, or roughly one generation, Iran attempted to make good on their promise, as Hamas, their proxy, carried out the deadliest massacre of Jews since the Holocaust. Their explicit aim? Murdering as many Israelis as possible to eradicate the Jewish state “from the river to the sea.”

Given this continuing obsession with destroying the Jewish state, and the global obsession with a “free Palestine,” it’s worth conducting this thought experiment: Imagine if Israel is no more. We can start with the War of 1948 and the Armistice borders of 1949, which reveal much about an Israel-free Middle East. Indeed, when five Arab armies attacked the fledgling Jewish state, there was no call to “liberate” an Arab Muslim Palestine.

On the contrary, Jordan expanded and amassed Judea Samaria and Egypt annexed the entire Gaza Strip. Paramount to the lie of the “Disappearing Map of Palestine” is the certainty that from 1949 to 1967, neither Jordan nor Egypt “freed” these territories and helped to create an Arab Muslim Palestine. Indeed, variations of the phrase “from the River to the Sea” appeared only after 1967, documented in graffiti and used in protest chants. Put differently, when Jordan and Egypt “occupied” the region of Palestine, Arab Muslims did not consider themselves living under occupation.

If Israel had lost the First Arab-Israeli War of 1948, the five Arab countries would likely have further divided up the region. While we cannot be certain who would have gotten what, what is certain, as evidenced by the 1949 Armistice Lines, no Arab Muslim Palestine would have ever been created.

The result of a sovereign Jewish vacuum from the river to the sea will be fought over between Hamas and the Fatah Party, the Palestinian Authority that governs Areas A and B in Judea Samaria. The bloodbath that would ensue would be colossal but would not, of course, garner the world’s attention as Jews will no longer be part of the equation.

Just ask the Kurds, or Sudanese, or Nigerians what happens when there is actual slaughter but no Jews. The most stunning case, perhaps, is the silence of the world, especially the human rights world as Bashar al-Assad, the Syrian former dictator, gassed half a million of his own population. Mass graves are being discovered in Syria, yet the International Criminal Court (the ICC) makes no demand that Assad be tried for crimes against humanity.
Jonathan Tobin: Liberal media mainstreams a blood libel about Israeli ‘apathy’
That is why to all but a small minority of Israelis, the events on Oct. 7 and the widespread support it received from Palestinians in Gaza and elsewhere remains a conclusive argument that a two-state solution is a formula for endless war and the slaughter of Jews. That is also why—whether or not they wish to replace Netanyahu as prime minister—they are fully in favor of the war against Hamas in Gaza.

In adopting such an attitude, Israelis are behaving no differently than any country that has been assaulted by a deadly foe led by extremists like the fanatics that run and fund Hamas would have done.

Yet contrary to the “apathy” argument that portrays them as indifferent to the suffering of the Palestinians sacrificed by Hamas, the Jewish state has demonstrated great humanity with respect to their foes.

From the beginning of the current war, Israel has allowed a steady stream of supplies of food, fuel and other essential goods to be shipped into Gaza, including those areas where Hamas still prevails. The difficulty in getting food to Gazans is not due to hard-hearted Israelis obstructing the flow of aid but to the fact that Hamas and criminal Palestinian gangs have stolen the majority of the aid brought in by humanitarian groups, most of which are compromised by their connections to the terrorists.

What country would be expected to feed and aid those trying to kill their citizens while those enemies were still in arms and “resisting” its existence?

Hamas could have ended this war at any point since October 2023 by releasing the hostages and accepting Israeli offers in which the terrorists would be allowed safe passage out of Gaza. They hold on because they believe that their propaganda will convince the West to turn on Israel and someday hand it to them on a silver platter. Those who participate in pro-Hamas demonstrations are not just engaging in antisemitism with their “from the river to the sea” and “globalize the intifada” chants. Like the journalists who accept the false narrative in which Israel is branded as the villain in the war that began on Oct. 7, they are helping to prolong the war.

Progressives believe that they can turn America against Israel. Through their dominance of the education system, culture and much else, they have tried to indoctrinate a generation of youth to accept the toxic myths of intersectionality and critical race theory. In doing so, they have sought to convince the country that not only was America an irredeemably racist nation but that Israel and the Jews were “white” oppressors. Those who accept this false ideology wrongly believe that Israel is a “settler-colonial” and “apartheid” state that has no right to exist. That leads them to ignore the truth about the conflict and to think that Israel is always in the wrong and the Palestinians are always right, no matter what either side actually does. That is a prime factor in enabling the slanders of Israel as well as the whitewashing of Palestinian brutality and intransigence.

Antisemites are frustrated
Israel’s foes are not only deeply frustrated by the military success of the IDF against the Iranian-sponsored terrorists of Hamas and Hezbollah as well as the defeat that Tehran has suffered (largely as a result of the Jewish state’s actions against its proxies in Lebanon) in Syria. They are also unhappy about the victory of President-elect Donald Trump. The prospect of Trump and a host of other ardent supporters of the Jewish state taking office in two weeks is a decisive defeat for those who seek to isolate Israel.

But as another Times article recently noted, Palestinians and their foreign cheerleaders have not lost hope. This doesn’t mean that they are ready to live in peace with Israel or reject a vision of their national identity that is firmly linked to endless war on the Jews. Rather, they believe that sooner or later their victories in a propaganda war in which Israel is delegitimized will ultimately allow them to fulfill their fantasy of extinguishing the one Jewish state on the planet.

Corporate media and other outlets that spread the claim that Israelis are immoral for supporting their country’s defensive war against genocidal terrorists are engaging in antisemitism. But they are also helping to perpetuate a self-destructive mindset that means more bloodshed and suffering for both Jews and Arabs.
Commemorate Auschwitz liberation at Western Wall if Poland honors ICC blood libel
The United States should boycott the upcoming international ceremony on Jan. 27 marking the 80th anniversary of the liberation of the Auschwitz-Birkenau concentration and death camp unless Poland renounces its support of the International Criminal Court’s warrant against Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and guarantees his safe transit. Poland’s threat to arrest Israel’s leader if he attends the memorial labels the Jewish state as today’s Nazi regime, mocking the 6 million Jews murdered by the Nazis and their collaborators, along with the victims of Oct. 7, 2023.

Poland’s stance is also a direct threat to America’s national security, as the ICC threatens to use the same lawless playbook to have countries seize American service members on trumped-up charges.

The ICC criminal charges are a blood libel demanding that Jews not defend themselves and attempting to erase a key lesson of the Holocaust: Never again will Jews be defenseless against genocidal enemies.

“Operation Al-Aqsa Flood,” the worst massacre of Jews since the Holocaust, was perpetrated by Palestinian Arabs in the Gaza Strip (from where Israel completely withdrew in 2005), which is governed by Hamas and whose charter calls for genocide against the Jewish people. Fatah, which controls the Palestinian National Authority (P.A.), joined the attack, as did ordinary Gazans. The vast majority of Gaza residents and Arabs living in Judea and Samaria supported the Oct. 7 invasion and resulting atrocities.

The name Al-Aqsa Flood emphasizes the goal of destroying Israel, not creating a state alongside it. Al-Aqsa is the Muslim name for Jerusalem and derives from the Jewish Beit Hamikdash (Holy Temple). Islamists recognize the historic Jewish link to Jerusalem but are determined to supplant that connection. Yasser Arafat—the chief of the Palestine Liberation Organization, and the founder of Fatah and the Palestinian Authority—hailed Nazi collaborator Grand Mufti Haj Amin Al-Husseini as his role model and similarly styled his five-year war against Israel that began in September 2000 as the “Al-Aqsa Intifada.”

On Oct. 7, in the worst massacre of Jews since the Holocaust, the invaders murdered more than 1,200 Israelis and foreigners, mostly civilians, and also dragged as many as 251 men, women and children back into Gaza. The attack was also reminiscent of the Holocaust because of the unspeakable atrocities motivated by blind hatred of Jews.

AddToAny

Printfriendly

EoZTV Podcast

Podcast URL

Subscribe in podnovaSubscribe with FeedlyAdd to netvibes
addtomyyahoo4Subscribe with SubToMe

search eoz

comments

Speaking

translate

E-Book

For $18 donation








Sample Text

EoZ's Most Popular Posts in recent years

Hasbys!

Elder of Ziyon - حـكـيـم صـهـيـون



This blog may be a labor of love for me, but it takes a lot of effort, time and money. For 20 years and 40,000 articles I have been providing accurate, original news that would have remained unnoticed. I've written hundreds of scoops and sometimes my reporting ends up making a real difference. I appreciate any donations you can give to keep this blog going.

Donate!

Donate to fight for Israel!

Monthly subscription:
Payment options


One time donation:

Follow EoZ on Twitter!

Interesting Blogs

Blog Archive