The Washington Post was harshly criticized - justly - for illustrating an article about a measles outbreak in the Somali community of Columbus, Ohio with a photo of Chassidic Jews in Brooklyn on Tuesday.
What makes this worse is that the Somali community is known for its low vaccination rates. They had a breakout of measles in 2017 and also this year in Minnesota. The Hill wrote about the Ohio breakout without mentioning them at all, and NPR's 2017 article tried to explain why the Somali community was reluctant to immunize.
The contrast with how the media treated the Orthodox Jewish community during COVID could not be starker. The Somali angle is minimized and contextualized; the Jewish angle was trumpeted.
The Washington Post has another problematic article, on a completely different topic: a review of a biography of famed children's book author Roald Dahl, the review written by Pulitzer Prize-winner Michael Dirda.
Yet to adult eyes, Dahl frequently goes uncomfortably too far in depicting an anarchic Hobbesian world of savagery and violence. When “Charlie and the Chocolate Factory” first appeared in 1964, the Oompa Loompas were racist caricatures of African pygmies (though later changed to hippie-ish, rosy-skinned dwarfs). The depiction of Veruca Salt’s father, in that same book, sails close to Jewish stereotypes. Not least, while Dahl defended his notorious “anti-Israeli” political views as justifiable anger over that nation’s treatment of the Palestinian people, many felt this argument was a cover for antisemitism.
Dirda makes it sound like Dahl's antisemitism was simply "anti-Zionism" that may have gone a little bit too far. This is simply false. He admitted himself that he was an antisemite!
Dahl's family has publicly admitted he was antisemitic as well, and apologized for it. "We loved Roald, but we passionately disagree with his antisemitic comments," they said.
And Dahl's comments themselves show how antisemitism and anti-Zionism are two sides of the same coin.
In a review of a book about the Lebanon War that appeared in the August 1983 edition of the British periodical Literary Review, Dahl wrote, in reference to Jewish people, “Never before in the history of man has a race of people switched so rapidly from being much-pitied victims to barbarous murderers.”
He also made reference to “those powerful American Jewish bankers” and asserted that the United States government was “utterly dominated by the great Jewish financial institutions over there.”
Later that same year, he doubled down on his statements in an interview with the British magazine New Statesman. “There is a trait in the Jewish character that does provoke animosity, maybe it’s a kind of lack of generosity towards non-Jews,” he said. “I mean, there’s always a reason why anti-anything crops up anywhere; even a stinker like Hitler didn’t just pick on them for no reason.”
A few months before his death in 1990, Dahl stated outright that he was anti-Semitic in an interview with The Independent.
After claiming that Israel’s 1982 invasion of Lebanon was “hushed up in the newspapers because they are primarily Jewish-owned,” he went on to say, “I’m certainly anti-Israeli and I’ve become anti-Semitic in as much as that you get a Jewish person in another country like England strongly supporting Zionism. I think they should see both sides. It’s the same old thing: we all know about Jews and the rest of it. There aren’t any non-Jewish publishers anywhere, they control the media—jolly clever thing to do—that’s why the president of the United States has to sell all this stuff to Israel.”
In that New Statesman interview, Dahl told the reporter - after his other antisemitic statements - that he didn't see any Jews fighting in World War II. The reporter, angry, responded:
Firmly but not rudely I told him that my father was Jewish, that my grandfather had won all sorts of medals in North Africa and Europe, that Jews fought in enormous numbers in all of the Allied armies, were often over- rather than under-represented, and that this slimy canard of Jewish cowardice was beneath him. At which point he coughed, mumbled something about “sticking together”, and then promptly ended the interview.
This is hardly ambiguous.
Dirda is clearly knowledgeable about Dahl, it is not possible that he is unaware of Dahl's antisemitism. Yet he chose to downplay it as just some people's opinions, not something that Dahl and his family freely admits and supported by his own clear bigoted statements.
What gives, Washington Post?
(h/t Nathan)
Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism today at Amazon!
Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424.
An invitation to the Jewish Media Summit is both an honor
and an opportunity. The honor part became even more apparent after the fact,
when some attendees of the last summit complained at having been left off the guest
list this time around. As for opportunity, where else would you meet some 100
Jewish journalists from all over the world, representing Milan, Rome, Paris,
Istanbul, Zagreb, Buenos Aires, and so many other faraway places where Jewish
journalists are hard at work? Perhaps they were invited to bring home a rosy
picture of the state of things in the State of Israel. Instead, the visiting
foreign journalists were to hear an oft-repeated refrain: the incoming Israeli
government is extremist, nay even corrupt.
The idea that the new government is far right and extremist
was first voiced by outgoing Minister of Diaspora Affairs Nachman Shai, the
first speaker at the opening gala. Shai had a brief period of fame as the voice
on the radio that soothed Israelis in their safe rooms during the 1991 Gulf War.
“Drink water” he would say to us calmly as the world crashed and burned outside
our windows and our babies drank milk from bottles through a weird plastic
tent.
Outgoing Minister of Diaspora Affairs Nachman Shai
But that was a long time ago. Today Shai is an outgoing MK. And
in his speech, as in the speeches of the other outgoing ministers who spoke to
us during the four-day summit, one can detect the taste of sour grapes: “Some
of the elected officials lack sufficient experience and in any opinion, some of the coalition’s demands contradict
and even contravene the democratic character of the state of Israel,” said
Shai. “They have been given a playground
of powers;they are high on zeal and
euphoria. It is alarming, it is dangerous and it will potentially damage our relationship with the global Jewish
world and the international entente and
the very future of the state of Israel.”
As an Israeli, I objected to Shai’s speech. Not only because
of what he said, but because he said it to more than 100 foreign Jewish
journalists. This is not the kind of message I personally want these
journalists to take home to Hungary, Poland, and Panama. I want to hear the
positive stressed. Certainly, the positive in Israel abounds.
Shai, like so many other speakers to come, could have
stressed the fact that the new government was democratically elected by the
people of Israel. One of whom was yours truly, sitting in the audience. Every
demonizing word he spoke maligned me and my choices, as well. “First and
foremost, I am concerned that the
incoming government will damage the ties between the Jewish global community
and Israel,” said Shai. “And not necessarily intentionally, but partly as a
result of differences in ideology, partly as a result of political affiliation
and partly because ofignorance and unwillingness to understand
the situation on the ground.”
Shai had, in my view, just told 100 foreign journalists that
I had voted to damage ties between Israel and their countries. He had told them
that I had voted for ignorance and intolerance. All this as if there were no
other perspective to be heard. And that was only the opening speech.
The next day was better. Sort of. We went to the Ministry of
Foreign Affairs where we had a choice of panels and one lecture to choose from.
I chose the lecture “'Iran, Iran, Iran’: Nuclear Deal, Protests and the Regional
Effects on Israel” which proved so popular that the summit organizers
implemented a sign-up sheet, and I believe I was the last one to squeak in. It
was, however, a disappointment. Everyone said so.
The Iran lecture was given by Nevo Barchad, director of the Regional
Security & Counter-Terrorism Department (Strategic Affairs Division). At
our final session of the summit, where we aired compliments and grievances
alike, Barchad (along with Israeli President Isaac Herzog) was described by
some as “low energy” and with nothing new to say—nothing we didn’t already
know.
It did, however, seem to break the tension surrounding the subject of
Iran when I raised my hand and asked Barchad, “Do you sleep at night?”
The audience of journalists laughed and so did Barchad who
said, “No. I don’t sleep at night. I have a four-year-old,” and then, in a more
serious tone, “Yes. I sleep at night.”
“That’s because you know things I don’t.” I said to him—to
me it was no joke. “You sleep because you know things we don’t. I don’t sleep at night.”
— Varda Epstein #JusticeforMalkiRoth (@VardaEpstein) December 20, 2022
After the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, we were off to the
Knesset. There we heard from four members of Knesset, two from the outgoing and
two from the incoming governments. Plus one left-leaning journalist, Jerusalem
Post Deputy Managing Editor Tovah Lazaroff.
They saw me with a cane and drove me up to the very doors of the Knesset. The driver was so cute--serenaded me and pointed out the grandeur of the gardens. #jmsisrael2022pic.twitter.com/YxtMoiJMAk
— Varda Epstein #JusticeforMalkiRoth (@VardaEpstein) December 20, 2022
The two MKs from the outgoing government (Sharren Haskel and
Reform Rabbi Gilad Kariv) plus Tovah Lazaroff, told us that the incoming
government was illiberal, intolerant, and extreme, and that they would undo all
the good works of the outgoing government. The MKs representing the winning
side, (Yuli Edelstein and Rabbi Yitzchak Pindrus) meanwhile assured us that the
new government would be reasonable and do good things for all Israel’s people.
The way this presentation played out did not seem balanced
to me. One side attacking the other, the other defending itself (now where have
we seen that paradigm before?). And it did not seem a smart strategy, at all.
Smart would be to show a unified face, one that honors
Israel’s own electoral process. Outgoing MKs should be good losers when talking
to the foreign press from the podium. Speak of your accomplishments if you have
any to speak of, but stop with the epithets in regard to the victor—stop
tossing out the word “extreme” ad nauseam—and instead be gracious and promise
to help your successor.
That is the sporting thing to do.
But sporting is not what this roomful of international Jewish
journalists got, and that is sad and even tragic. We didn’t present Israel in
its best, true light. Instead, we brought over 100 journalists to Israel to
tell them of our no-good horrible government and our continued disunity. It is
difficult to understand why we needed to put such a grim face on a popular Israeli
decision for all the world to see.
Very cool board at the Knesset. You can see at a glance, who is in the house. The grayed out people are absent. You can click on different people to see how they vote. More stuff. #jmsisrael2022pic.twitter.com/LTPyhWLxjC
— Varda Epstein #JusticeforMalkiRoth (@VardaEpstein) December 20, 2022
As for equal time, it seemed to me that the opposition plus
one got way more time than the winning side. When a video of the two-hour event
was distributed to us, I was able to time each speaker’s time at the podium:
prepared remarks plus in all but one case, a question and answer period. The
combined time on the podium of those demonizing the government (Sharren Haskel,
Gilad Kariv, and Tovah Lazaroff) was three times that of incoming MKs Pindrus
and Edelstein. I overheard two foreign journalists remark that they felt
unsatisfied by Pindrus’ answers, and felt their questions had been more fully
answered by Kariv. Well, no wonder. Kariv had spoken twice as long as Pindrus.
Perhaps it was the journalist Tovah Lazaroff who tipped the
balance so heavily against the side that won. Her talk at the summit had been
moved up as a result of a scheduling conflict, necessitating the insertion of
her speech somewhere in between those of the MKs. That made it three against two,
Lazaroff being virulent about her dislike for the incoming government. Which
was no surprise to me. I was already familiar with her work.
Following the Knesset was a tour and dinner at the Friends
of Zion Heritage Center. When I had earlier told my husband of this item on the
itinerary, he said, “You can’t go in there.”
I said, “I had no intention of going in there. I would NEVER
go in there.”
The museum was paean to Christians for how much they love
the Jews. The funding came from Mike
Evans’ “Jerusalem Prayer Team.” Evans is widely suspected of missionary
activity in the Holy Land, which is a particularly galling location for his
“work.” Many summit attendees complained about the selection of the museum as
an event on our itinerary, some going so far as to call this choice of venue
“offensive.”
Well, it was
offensive. Perhaps it was a good choice for the Christian Media Summit, held the
week before. But it wasn’t the right choice for us as Jewish journalists at a
Jerusalem summit.
— Varda Epstein #JusticeforMalkiRoth (@VardaEpstein) December 21, 2022
The next day we had a choice of two tours. I chose to go to
the south where we toured the Tze’elim military training base and Kibbutz
Nirim. Both places were fabulous, but Brigadier General
Bentzi Gruber during his tour and talk, did not neglect to bash Haredim
after a prompt from an intolerant audience member. Haredim don’t serve, blah,
blah, blah. After the presentation, I told him with what the writer in me thinks
of as “visceral anger," “My sons serve. They serve in combat units: Givati,
Kfir, Shiryon. . .”
He answered, “Do you know how many Haredim serve? Nine
percent,” he said.
“More and more are serving each year. If you want more of them
to serve, maybe stop maligning them,” I said.
I went home and looked at the numbers. Not so much the
number of Haredim who serve, but the number of Israelis who serve in the army overall. I found this: “Compulsory
military enlistment in Israel is but an old
myth. In reality, 35% of the Israeli population carries the burden, while
the remaining 65% find ways to avoid military service without having to suffer
any consequences.”
But hey. Any opportunity to bash the Haredim. Always good
for a gripe.
Brigadier General Bentzi Gruber
On the final day of summit I finally had a chance to have my
say. Rabbi
Daniel Tropper founder and president emeritus of Gesher, a nonprofit which
is all about forging connections between different sectors of Jews led a
session called, “70 Faces of Torah: How do we live together in spite of our
disagreements?” Instead of telling us how to live together, Tropper took the
opportunity to refer to the new government as “corrupt.”
Well, of course he would. His son Hili is part of the
outgoing government as minister of Culture and Sports. Hili Tropper is
affiliated with the failed Blue and White Party. The party led by outgoing
Defense Minister Benny Gantz, who spoke after Shai at the gala.
Rabbi Tropper also took the opportunity to disparage Haredim,
saying that they “won’t even talk to a Reform rabbi.”
Rabbi Daniel Tropper
I raised my hand to ask a question. “Rabbi Tropper,” I
began. “I have lived in Israel for 43 years. For much of that time, your name
has been synonymous with coexistence and tolerance. But here you are,
demonizing a government that was voted in by more than half of us. I don’t love
Bibi,” I said. “I don’t like many of his policies, but I want him for Iran.
“As a voter, when I go to the polls, my main issue is Iran,”
I continued. “And for that I want Bibi. Someone experienced, diplomatic.
"And as for Ben Gvir, I understand he spoke at the Christian Media Summit last week and wowed the crowd. They didn't think he was extreme. Maybe he's not?"
"Finally, in regard to Haredim, I am Haredi and would never refuse to speak with a Reform rabbi and no one in my
social circles would refuse to do so either.”
Tropper responded to the first part of my question. The new
government, he said, had to pass laws in order to form a coalition. “That has
never happened before in an Israeli election. Passing laws to form a
government? That’s corrupt. It’s corruption.” he said.
I don’t believe in follow-up questions, really. I say thank
you and sit down and receive politely whatever is said to me. But I also don’t
believe it was the first time in history that laws were changed in order to
form an Israeli government. Later, my husband commented that Meir Kahane’s Kach
Party was excluded from a race through a law that was hastily proposed and
passed. Laws to include or exclude MKs: on either side of the aisle, it’s the
same.
As I sat down, the lovely woman sitting next to me showed me
that she had snapped two photos of me asking my question. “It was an important
point,” she said.
She was not the only one to say so. It seemed obvious.
Coexistence also means coexisting with the winning side and respecting the
choices of the Israelis who voted differently than yourself. Tolerance means not
saying bad things in public about people who observe their religion in a different
way.
Not to mention, look how many of the participants had
flocked to the lecture on Iran. I had voted for Bibi for a reasonable, valid
reason. We all know of Netanyahu’s famous bomb speech, and the way he stood up
to Obama. Even Nitzan Chen, head of the Government Press Office (GPO) and host
of the summit, was struck by the point I had made. Because in truth, to
paraphrase Gwen Guthrie, there ain’t
nothing going on but Iran.
Chen asked me in Hebrew if I were a newspaper reporter and
lifted my name tag to look closer. “Ah,” he said, when he read the name of the
website that hosts this column, remembering me now. I’d been at previous
summits. “That was an important point,” he said. “A very important point.”
Nitzan Chen, head of the GPO
In between photo opps with actress Neta Riskin, who plays
the part of Gittie in Shtisel; and Tuvia Tenenbom, of “Catch the
Jew,” fame, there were more panels.
Me and Netta from Shtisel. Everyone was lining up for photos. When it was my turn, I said, "I love your Gittie, and I'm Haredi," and she put her arm around and leaned in like you see here. Such a lovely moment. #jmsisrael2022pic.twitter.com/lmcxQ3l2SN
— Varda Epstein #JusticeforMalkiRoth (@VardaEpstein) December 22, 2022
— Varda Epstein #JusticeforMalkiRoth (@VardaEpstein) December 22, 2022
President Herzog spoke and I tried not to space out, and failed.
Israeli President Isaac Herzog
Winding up, Ambassador Michael Oren gave a talk, “2048: A Vision of Israel on its 100th Birthday,” during the course of which he spoke of two different types of sovereignty, self-determination, and sovereignty over territory. Regarding territorial sovereignty, Oren mentioned the Negev and the south and touched on illegal Bedouin construction. This prompted another question from me:
“You spoke of territorial sovereignty and mentioned the
south and illegal Bedouin construction. How do you feel about sovereignty in
Judea and Samaria, and what do you think of the work of Regavim?”
Oren gave a great answer, in my opinion, because he was
unequivocal in stating that he believed in sovereignty over Judea and Samaria,
and in every part of Israel. He qualified his remarks, stating that we shouldn’t
take over Ramallah or Jaffa, even though these too, belong to us. That was a
sensible thing to say and I was good with that. However, Oren did not answer my
question regarding Regavim.
Ambassador Michael Oren
After this we had lunch. On the way to and during lunch,
fully six people came up to me and laughing, repeated my question to Oren—the
question that had gone unanswered: “And what do you think of Regavim?”
The event organizer for #jmsisrael2022 was so excited to learn that I write for @elderofziyon. She said, "That's where I get my news. I don't trust ANYONE else."
— Varda Epstein #JusticeforMalkiRoth (@VardaEpstein) December 20, 2022
All in all, I had a wonderful time at the summit. I made so
many great friends and contacts and learned so much. I am grateful for the
opportunity. I only wish a more optimistic picture of Israel’s democratically
elected government had been presented to this large assembly of visiting Jewish
journalists. It kind of felt that they had been kept away from a more positive
view of the winning team. This is no way to generate support for Israel. And with
Iran breathing down our throats, we need all the support we can get.
Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism today at Amazon!
Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424.
Terrestrial Jerusalem and Ir Amim, two Jewish NGOs that spend all of their energy to oppose any Jewish rights in Jerusalem, are alarmed:
On December 27, 2022, the Elad settlers of Silwan accompanied by a heavily armed detail of Israeli police, took over a large plot of land immediately adjacent to the Pool of Siloam in Silwan (from which the name Silwan derives).
The settler takeover is not exclusively a settler initiative. In a press release touting the commencement of excavations on the site, this is being presented as a joint venture between the Elad settlers, the Israel National Parks Authority (INPA), and the Antiquities Authority (IAA). For all those needing proof, this is further evidence that in Silwan, the settlers and the Government of Israel are one of the same.
The land in question has been owned by the Greek Orthodox Church and leased to a Palestinian family since the 1930s. A family member was arrested last night (26 December) in a pre-emptive arrest, and three more were detained this morning.
The Government of Israel and the settlers have decided there is no better time to take over Church property, in a place of cardinal importance to Christianity, than the Christmas week. There is nothing new in this. The settlers and the Government customarily reserve Christmas week for their most problematic initiatives, assuming, not without reason, that the diplomats and decision-makers are all on leave and will not pay attention.
An ancient Jerusalem pool that was used by millions of Jewish pilgrims during the time of the Second Temple two millennia ago as a ritual bath before ascending the Temple Mount, and revered by Christians as the site where Jesus cured a blind man, will be fully excavated and then opened to the public, the Israel Antiquities Authority announced on Tuesday.
The Pool of Siloam, located in the southern portion of the City of David, the ancient epicenter of Jerusalem, and just outside the Old City walls is expected to become one of the most important historic and tourist sites in the city.
The pool has been a focal point for archaeologists and scholars for the last 150 years. The excavations are set to begin in January and will continue for at least several months, while the site is expected to open to the public in about a year.
And, crucially:
The planned excavation of the five-dunam site (about 1.25 acres) is getting underway after a 14-year legal battle culminated in June when Israel’s Supreme Court found no reason to challenge the validity of the Ateret Cohanim organization’s purchase of 99-year leases, renewable for an additional 99 years, from the Greek Orthodox Church, the largest landowner in Jerusalem.
One of Ateret Cohanim’s goals is to purchase land in the history-rich area for public viewing, said Doron Spielman, vice president of the City of David Foundation. Previously, the area, which was off limits to everybody, lay barren for decades and was littered with garbage, he said.
“It is not every day that we find an icon in Jerusalem,” Spielman said. “This is not just a huge find, it is a mega-find.”
Jerusalem Mayor Moshe Lion said in a statement, “The Pool of Siloam in the City of David National Park in Jerusalem is a site of historic, national and international significance. After many years of anticipation, we will soon merit being able to uncover this important site and make it accessible to the millions of visitors visiting Jerusalem each year.”
According to TJ and Ir Amim, the Jews are stealing away Christian land.
In reality, they legally purchased the rights to the land, and it will become available for millions of Christians to visit!
These people who pretend to be defending Jerusalem prefer that precious historical site be strewn with garbage and inaccessible to all rather than fixed up and available to all.
The transfer of the lease is legal, above board and helps improve Jerusalem.
Which begs the question: who really cares about Jerusalem?
Certainly not Terrestrial Jerusalem or Ir Amim.
Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism today at Amazon!
Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424.
The EU insists that Israel should abide by the Oslo Accords, as it still believes that within this area, a Palestinian state should be established within the framework of a comprehensive peace agreement. At the same time, according to the leaked document, it tries to strip Israel of its rights per that same agreement.
So that’s where humanitarian law comes in; the very set of laws that are supposed to help the EU circumvent Israel’s authority in Area C. This means that the EU has found a way to fund construction in Area C without violating the Oslo Accords, or so we are tricked to believe. The claim is that the construction is meant for humanitarian ends and is not politically motivated. Yet the EU construction takes place in locations that are highly sensitive, precisely for the sole purpose of creating new facts on the ground and preparing the area for a Palestinian takeover without any final peace agreement.
Many times the political motivation is obvious, as the construction is conducted without permits and in such places where Israel has no choice but to demolish it, for example, a school adjacent to a dangerous highway or other construction in places where there are no facilities and thus are not considered habitable environments. The political motivation becomes even more obvious when the document explicitly states the EU’s plan to curb Israel’s archeological activities in order to minimize the Jewish connection to the land.
Moreover, the EU does not seem to consider building in Area A and Area B where all they would need is a permit from the Palestinian Authority. Apparently, in those areas, there is no need for humanitarian aid at all.
Needless to say, the news of the leaked document hit Israel really hard. Subsequently, a letter signed by 40 Knesset members was sent to EU leaders.
The letter, initiated by Likud MK Amichai Chikli, reminds the EU of Europe’s past when it used to taunt Jews to “go to Palestine,” and now, in essence, claims that Jews are foreigners in their own homeland.
The letter continues to state that the leaked document “completely ignores our people’s historical affinity to our homeland and completely ignores the status of the State of Israel in Area C.” Furthermore, the letter points out that no nation turns its back on its own heritage and reminds the EU that we have not forgotten our history.
Finally, the letter ends by calling upon the EU to immediately cease its illegal construction, halt the damage being caused to heritage sites and the nature in Judea and Samaria, and immediately desist from funding delegitimizing organizations that promote antisemitic propaganda, including Israeli organizations that serve EU interests.
The letter is, in fact, a fitting response to the leaked document and the reasons are twofold. For one, the EU has no jurisdiction in any of those areas and secondly, it has clearly misused humanitarian law and thus violated international law in broad daylight.
Now that the EU’s intentions are exposed, it should reconsider its positions, stop masking its political positions with laws and put its cards on the table for an honest discussion that is, in reality, a political and moral debate and not primarily about the law. They should do that before EU-Israel relations deteriorate any further.
As for Israel, it should invest more time and energy in defending its rights and preempt such initiatives, whether it comes from the EU, the United Nations or elsewhere.
Our reforms are aimed at developing the area’s infrastructure, employment and economy for the benefit of all. This doesn’t entail changing the political or legal status of the area. If the Palestinian Authority decides to dedicate some of its time and energy to its citizens’ welfare rather than demonizing Jews and funding the murder of Israelis, it would find me a full partner in that endeavor.
Additionally, we seek to halt the execution of the Fayyad plan, a massive European Union-funded project to facilitate the Palestinian takeover of Area C, the one part of Judea and Samaria where Jews are currently permitted to live under the Oslo Accords. The authority is building housing, infrastructure and more in areas that are outside its jurisdiction to surround Jewish communities and other strategic locations in Area C in an attempt at de facto annexation. The EU contends its funding is purely humanitarian, but recent reporting has revealed this is not the case. This unrestrained usurpation poses mortal dangers to Israelis living there and risks significant damage to the natural environment and to historical sites. Among other measures, we will beef up enforcement of existing laws and agreements to stop this deliberate abuse.
Israel’s justice system also needs urgent reform to restore democratic balance, individual rights and public trust. In the U.S., elected politicians appoint federal judges, including Supreme Court justices, making the bench at least indirectly responsive to the people. In Israel, sitting Supreme Court justices have veto power over new appointments to the court.
Israel also lacks a written constitution, but in the 1990s the Supreme Court began striking down democratically enacted laws based on its own idea of what Israel’s constitution ought to be. This has created legal and economic uncertainty, precipitating a severe decline in the public’s trust in judicial and law-enforcement institutions. The Supreme Court ignores written law and, worse, invalidates government action even if it violates no law, but rather the court’s own notions of sound policy, or “reasonableness,” as it calls it. Moreover, the Israeli criminal-justice system also lacks basic procedural safeguards for defendants, such as the exclusionary rule, and there is no effective oversight on government prosecutors, who too often abuse their wide scope of authority.
Our emphasis on judicial reform is meant to bring Israel closer to the American political model with some limited checks to ensure the judicial system respects the law. We seek to appoint judges in Israel in a process similar to America’s; to define the attorney general’s scope of authority and relation to elected representatives in a manner similar to what’s set down in America; to develop effective oversight mechanisms for law enforcement to ensure they protect basic rights; and to restore the Knesset’s authority to define the fundamental values of the state and its emerging constitution.
All Americans should appreciate the wisdom and justice in these plans. They should shed their preconceptions and unite to support the resurgence of accountable government, prosperity, individual rights, and democracy in the Jewish homeland.
Israel has a long legislative process. To become law, bills must be passed seven times, four in the plenum and three in committee. The controversial laws already passed by the new Knesset are – of course – fair game for criticism, but the rest will take their time.
Plenty of governments never get around to passing even their core goals. The outgoing government intended to pass legislation that could have limited Netanyahu from running again but never completed the process. Leaders of all its coalition parties were willing to make significant changes to the Western Wall prayer site, but for various reasons, they did not.
The previous coalition had an anti-LGBT party in Ra’am (United Arab List), which had four seats in a coalition of 61 that ended up taking unprecedented steps to help the LGBT community.
This coalition has an anti-LGBT party in Noam, which has one seat out of 64. It has Israel’s first gay Knesset speaker in Amir Ohana and a prime minister in Netanyahu who has repeatedly promised to prevent any harm to the community.
If the past two months of infighting inside Israel’s right-wing bloc are any indication, the new government will be less homogeneous than previously thought. It will likely have trouble passing bills that most of the parties in the coalition agree on, amid fights over credit and disputes over which party is more hawkish than another.
The new government has come to power with one clear mandate: To improve the security of Israeli citizens. This is a relatively uncontroversial goal, and its success would improve the lives of Jewish, Christian and Muslim Israelis as well as Palestinians.
According to official IDF figures, in the month prior to the election, there were 382 terror attacks in the West Bank (Judea and Samaria) and Jerusalem alone. That number includes shootings, stabbings, explosives and Molotov cocktails.
There were three European countries where Far Right parties gained strength in recent elections. But in France, Italy and Sweden, there were nowhere near 382 terrorist attacks in the month prior to the election, so the rise of extremists there is arguably harder to justify.
But will those countries come under as much international scrutiny as Israel? Probably not.
To its credit, the Biden administration in the US has been careful to give the incoming Israeli government the benefit of the doubt until it takes steps it deems problematic and unacceptable.
The international media should consider following America’s lead.
On January 1, Fatah will celebrate its 58th anniversary.
Well, not really. It is the 58th anniversary "of the launch of the contemporary Palestinian revolution," meaning the anniversary of their first terror attack, That attack was meant to disrupt Israeli's access to water. It was a direct attack on civilian infrastructure, and those terror roots are an inherent part of Fatah, today.
It came up with a typically unwieldy slogan for the occasion: "Just as we dropped the deal of the century and the annexation project...we will defeat the neo-fascists."
Fatah is taking credit for Donald Trump's "Deal of the Century" not being successful.
How did they accomplish this Herculean task?
By saying "no."
The same way they "defeated" every other chance for peace and an end to conflict with Israel.
Their desire to keep the conflict going is something they are very proud of!
What happened after their latest rejection of any peace plan without a counter-offer? Bahrain and the UAE said, we've had enough of the Palestinians acting like spoiled babies, so we will normalize our own relations with Israel, ignoring their long standing demand that they hold veto power over our foreign policy.
But we want something in return - so they demanded that Israel rescind a partial annexation plan. The far-right extremist Netanyahu, wanting peace, agreed.
So I guess, in a convoluted way, the Palestinians were responsible for the shelving of that plan! I somehow doubt this is what they intended, though.
And how will they defeat the "neo fascists" of Israel's new government? Well, in a few years there will be new elections again, with different ministers, so then the Palestinians will claim that they "defeated" them.
The Palestinian leadership is incompetent and impotent, supporting terror to the last penny and unable to do anything remotely constructive. But they want to pretend that they are in the center of everything.
For a long time, much of the West believed it. Now, even the most hardened Israel hater realizes that the Palestinian leaders have become irrelevant, which is the worst thing that can happen to you in an honor/shame society.
Fatah still holds on to that pretense.
Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism today at Amazon!
Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424.
The Journal of International and Intercultural Communication (JIIC) is published by the National Communication Association. JIIC says it "publishes original scholarship that expands understanding of international, intercultural, and cross-cultural communication" and that "articles in this journal have undergone rigorous peer review, including screening by the editor and review by at least two anonymous referees."
Its most recent issue featured the theme, "Writing occupied Palestine: Toward a field of Palestinian communication and culture studies." Of course, the articles in the issue have little to do with Palestinian culture and everything to do with demonizing Israel under the rubric of "communications studies."
Besides the introduction and forward, there are four articles in the issue on this theme.
Following (Kraidy, M. M., & Murphy, P. D. (2003). Media ethnography: Local, global, or translocal? In P. D. Murphy & M. M. Kraidy (Eds.), Global media studies: Ethnographic perspectives (pp. 299–307). Routledge; Kraidy, M. M., & Murphy, P. D. (2008). Shifting Geertz: Toward a theory of translocalism in global communication studies. Communication Theory, 18(3), 335–355. 10.1111/j.1468-2885.2008.00325.x) call to look at global communication through lenses of translocalism and hybridity, I find that global boycotts are hybridized sites that facilitate translocal recognition. Using Boycott Eurovision as a case study, two locales are investigated: petitions and Globalvision. By uncovering the translocal recognition in each locale, global boycotts become crucial avenues of inquiry to understand how global social movements grapple with globalization. The essay describes the importance of understanding the vulnerabilities of international boycotts’ hybridized status, calling forward analysis of structure, specific initiatives, and the enactments of hegemonic ideologies found in locales.
The article itself should not have passed even a cursory editorial review, let alone a "rigorous peer review." It is a polemic, not analysis. It deliberately uncapitalizes "Eurovision," it refers to the IDF as the "Israeli Occupation Forces," it fully accepts as truth that Israel engages in "settler-colonialist, apartheid, and military violence against Palestinians."
The author, Sarah Cathryn Majed Dweik, writes, "I focus on introducing vocabulary innate to Boycott Eurovision, heeding Lechuga’s (2020) call to develop praxis-driven theory within rhetoric." In other words, she can write whatever she wants because she creates her own vocabulary.
An example is in how she calls Israel racist by defining it as "white:"
[T]he Israeli national identity replicates the historical whiteness and settler-colonialism crafted by early Zionists and the British empire. I define whiteness as a global system of domination that reflects the logics of colonialism, racism, anti-Blackness, patriarchy, classism, ableism, and heteronormativity to recenter the white subject as that which is normal and required to attain (see Al-Saif & Ghabra, 2016; Ahmed, 2009; Ghabra, 2020a; Nakayama, 2020). In the historical moves that Israel made to establish itself as a country, Israel crafted the Jewish national subject in relation to Europeanness, whiteness, and settler-colonialism through the juridical exclusion of the Palestinian and Arab Others (Erakat, 2015) and relying on the state to guide where whiteness presents itself within the Israeli national identity (Yadgar, 2011). By utilizing whiteness as a heuristic to obscure specific meanings of Jewish-ness and Israeli-ness, material spaces are necessary to participate in this work, such as a fun singing competition.
Why bother to mention that Israel has had Mizrahi, Arab and Black Ethiopian contestants for Eurovision? Facts get in the way of the all-important discourse. Dweik can simply define them all as "white" for her purposes, and the reviewers are none the wiser.
The participants were recruited between November and December 2020 from a pool of children who accessed a local center organizing psychosocial activities. Researchers targeted a purposive convenience sample of 22 participants across various settings (villages, cities, and refugee camps) in the West Bank....[B]oth caregivers and participants were carefully informed about the aim of the task, the purposive confidentiality procedures, and their right to refuse or discontinue their participation at any time. All participants and families provided informed consent.
And what were the aims of the task that the caregivers had to agree to? We don't know the exact words used, but it is very clear both from the very title of the paperand the contents that they were told that this was a study meant to demonize Israel:
Thus, the present study explored the diverse everyday experiences of structural colonial oppression in children living in the Occupied Palestinian Territories. Our research aimed to investigate the main antecedents and determinants of risk and violence exposure in a setting characterized by settler-colonial violence and military occupation.
Only those who agreed to participate with that purpose in mind are included in the study! If there was ever a self-selecting group, this is it.
There are well over a million children in the West Bank. The vast majority live in Area A, under full Palestinian control where Israeli forces only rarely enter (as they did this year when the PA did not act to restrain the "Lion's Den" terrorists.) If they don't participate in demonstrations, they would only see Israeli soldiers at checkpoints, and the vast majority pass right through. Yet the study includes a very high number of kids who supposedly experienced Israeli forces invading their schools or homes, or even shooting them.
Statistically, this isn't close to a random sample. But the peer reviewers don't know that.
This issue, except for the last article on how Palestinian kids use Tiktok, shines no new light on Palestinians and communications. On the contrary, it is anti-Israel propaganda that hijacks an academic discipline for promoting hate - just as Palestinian academics do with other disciplines.
It is a shame that the social sciences are so susceptible to being manipulated and taking part in incitement disguised as academic studies.
Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism today at Amazon!
Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424.
On Sunday, the Acre Secondary Girls School in Khan Younis, Gaza, along with many other schools, hosted a Palestinian official over video link who spoke about the evils of normalization and the necessity of boycotting the "Zionist entity."
Most of the signs say "No to normalization" and "don't pay for Israeli bullets."
Gaza stores are filled with products from Israel. Hamas controls Gaza. They could ban all Israeli goods - but they don't, because this is what Gazans want.
And since Gazans started working in Israel again, everyone is trying to get work permits.
Hamas itself isn't boycotting Israel, and every Gazan knows this. So what is this about? Why a school day wasted on having the girls make posters and pose?
Because the point isn't boycott. It is to instill hate for Israel. That hate has to be reinforced day in and day out, and "normalization" is another vector, along with whipping up anger at Israel in other ways.
Let's look closer at the people in the picture.
Front and center, we have a girl holding a sign that says, "Normalization is treachery."
With a dagger on her sign.
No one has a problem with a violent image.
Now let's look at the principals of the school in the background:
They look like they are in Afghanistan.
The heads of the school are teaching the girls that a burqa is the preferable way to cover up, not just a hijab. Students can barely read their expressions.
Finally, the name of the school itself - Acre, named after a city in Israel. The school's very name is meant to teach the girls that they will "return" to Acre and other Israeli towns, and they will get rid of the Jews there.
This is an ordinary photo from Gaza - but it teaches a lot, if you are willing to learn it.
(h/t Ibn Boutros)
Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism today at Amazon!
Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424.
The events over the last couple of months involving the black and Jewish communities have triggered a lot of thought-provoking questions and concerns. During my entire time working for Jewish non-profits, leaders of these organizations encouraged us to use the strong history of solidarity between black and Jewish communities as part of our outreach.
When educating Jewish university students, we always discussed the special relationship between Dr. Martin Luther King and Rabbi Heschel. We used quotes from influential black leaders to showcase how these figures were supporters of Zionism at a time when Israel was vulnerable.
Looking back now, I realize that historically, the relationship between both communities is a lot more complicated, and today is no different. While black and Jewish solidarity during the civil rights movement sounds beautiful, those stories don’t resonate with my generation because it’s not our reality anymore. Historically the black and Jewish communities supported one another, but clearly, things are different now.
So what happened? How did we get here?
Since the civil rights movement, different events have caused friction between our communities, which have dampened the good relationship which black and Jewish people once shared. Over time, antisemitism and racism have infested both groups. In addition, various events, like the Crown Heights riots, created tension. Hate also spewed from extremist groups and organizations like the Nation of Islam, causing more friction.
Today, black nationalists like Louis Farrakhan and his followers are normalizing antisemitic rhetoric. And now, prominent figures like Kanye West openly spreads antisemitic conspiracy theories while promoting extremists from the Black Hebrew Israelite community who openly support Hitler and the Nazis on the streets of New York.
The black and Jewish communities have, in the past, worked together as vulnerable groups to fight for equality. Over the years, they lived as neighbors in segregated neighborhoods in the US.
Their alliance had some profound moments. Jewish philanthropist Julius Rosenwald teamed up with Booker T. Washington to create schools for black children in the south. Rosenwald donated $70 million to build 5,000 schools for black children.
Black colleges also stepped in during World War II to rescue Jews from Germany. After the Nazis took power, the US failed to take immediate action, thus administrators from Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs) saved 50 Jewish-German scholars by hiring them.
Sixty years ago, Algeria declared its independence from France after a bloody war that is thought to have claimed over a million lives. In the course of throwing off the French colonial yoke, Algeria divested itself of 800,000 “white settlers” or pieds noirs. But along with the settlers went 130,000 native Algerian Jews.
There was a reason for this: Within a year of independence, it was clear that there would be no place for non-Muslims in the new Algeria. Indeed, the country’s constitution stipulated that only those with a Muslim father or grandfather could acquire Algerian citizenship.
The Jewish refugees, who held French citizenship, were “repatriated” to France, where they had never lived. One of them was Shmuel Trigano, then 14-years-old. Within two days and with two suitcases in hand, his life changed forever. Uprooted from the only home he had ever known, he was left permanently scarred.
However, it was only relatively recently, when he saw Palestinians brandishing the keys to homes they had left in 1948, that Trigano realized there was a political dimension to his trauma.
“We also had keys,” he says of the 900,000 Jews forced to flee Arab countries. “But we were too modest. We did not make claims—and because we were silent, we allowed a false narrative to fill the vacuum.”
In order to counter what he calls a massive distortion of the facts, Trigano set about applying the tools of his trade as a professor of sociology. He constructed a conceptual framework to make sense of the post-1940s Jewish exodus from 10 Arab countries over a period of 30 years.
A Gazan has just scammed anti-Zionists out of £1000s. Pete Gregson, the Scottish man who ran the campaigns has even just admitted it. The truth here is that this is a cycle; The lies of anti-Israel propaganda creates anti-Zionists, anti-Zionism embeds antisemitism, and antisemitism makes people targets for scams. And trust me on this, the people in Gaza and the West Bank are fully aware of it.
A Gazan scammer – the backstory
Keeping this part short: Those who read this blog will know that throughout 2022, I ran several articles on the relationship between Pete Gregson, an active antisemite from Scotland, and a Gazan by the name of Mohammed Almadhoun. Gregson put out an endless stream of fundraisers to help Almadhoun and even ran the Gaza- Edinburgh twinning campaign alongside him. I went digging (as did one or two friends), tracking down Almadhoun and all his claims. It took a while, we had to dig deep – and I even ended up speaking to an Egyptian surgeon referenced in one of the campaigns (who denied ever operating on Almadhoun). My research showed beyond doubt that not only did Almadhoun’s family have ties to both Islamic Jihad and Hamas, but that the fundraising campaigns were a scam.
A Christmas Eve notice and the Boxing Day email
Pete Gregson carried on with his campaigns, ridiculing my research and standing by his Gazan ‘friend’. Until on Christmas Eve the latest campaign was suddenly closed. Then yesterday (Boxing Day), Pete Gregson personally sent an extraordinary email to all those that had contributed. It began like this (full email – see image) : “It greatly pains me to admit to our having been victims of a humongous scam “
He even openly admitted that I had been right:
Gregson explains that he now knows that Almadhoun, the Gazan scammer will ‘tell lies with impunity if he can scam money‘
Since 2018, there have been three violent attacks on worshippers at American synagogues; numerous others were attempted, threatened, or successfully foiled by law enforcement. Under these circumstances, Jewish communities have adopted various protective measures, including arming themselves. State laws in Maryland and New York, however, specifically prohibit carrying weapons in houses of prayer. Stuart Halpern and Tevi Troy argue against such regulations:
Legally speaking, the laws appear to violate the Second Amendment guarantee of the right to bear arms. Indeed, the New York law was challenged on that basis, and the Maryland law may face a legal challenge as well. But the laws could also be subject to a First Amendment challenge, as they could be seen as an unreasonable burden on the free exercise of religion. After all, if you can’t worship safely because of the threat of anti-Semitic violence, how can you be free to practice your religion?
Legalities aside, there is a larger problem here: these laws may be well-meaning, but the fact remains that, if enacted, potential victims will comply with the law, while their potential attackers won’t. As a result, the attackers will remain armed and dangerous, while potential protectors will be disarmed and limited to the run, hide, and fight directives of local synagogue security committees. These committees do great work, but they necessarily tell congregants, as a last resort, to throw a siddur (Jewish prayer book) at an attacker. A siddur, alas, is a poor substitute for a gun in a firefight.
The 3,000-year-old Jewish tradition has examined the tension between sanctity and safety in the synagogue. In the book of Exodus, the Almighty offers instructions for building a sacrificial altar—what would become a central component of the holy sanctuary. The Israelites are told that it is not to be made of hewn, or carved, stone. Using a sword—a weapon—in the construction of a ritual object, the Bible makes clear, would profane what is meant to be sanctified. Yet the Jewish tradition also recognizes instances of violence as necessary in defense of holy places. The book of Kings recounts how the rebellious Joab, after a failed coup, tries to avoid capture from King Solomon by grasping the sanctuary altar. Solomon ordered him executed there nonetheless.
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.
Christmas Eve
-
[image: Dry Bones cartoon, Christmas, Bethlehem, Israel, antisemitism,]
And to all a Good Night!.
* * * Please support DRY BONES (through PayPal or your Cr...
Ireland is Committing Genocide Against Itself
-
The obsession of the Irish government with falsely accusing Israel of
genocide is only equaled by its determination to commit an actual genocide
against...
This Week’s Sanity Report from Israel Dec. 22, 2024
-
[image: This Week’s Sanity Report from Israel Dec. 22, 2024] This Week’s
Sanity Report from Israel Dec. 22, 2024 IsraelSeen.com
This Week’s Sanity Report f...
Israel’s Anti-UNRWA Campaign is Working
-
The IDF has gathered evidence that proves that dozens of UNRWA staff
members took part in the atrocities — rapes, tortures, mutilations, murders
— carried ...
An Observation on Israelis and Archaeology
-
Ariel David of Haaretz reported on a new find, one that appears here and
deals with An Israelite Residency at Mahanaim in Transjordan?
It deals with "th...
Hamas/Gaza War Musings #36- Dangerous Surrender!
-
As a student of the Bible/Tanach, most recently Prophets/Navi, that's the
message. Gd will save us if we do the right thing. That's how we won the
1967...
One Choice: Fight to Win
-
Yesterday Israel preempted a potentially disastrous attack by Hezbollah on
the center of the country. Thirty minutes before launch time, our aircraft
destr...
Closing Jews Down Under Website
-
With a heavyish heart I am closing down the website after ten years.
It is and it isn’t an easy decision after 10 years of constant work. The
past...
‘Test & Trace’ is a mirage
-
Lockdown II thoughts: Day 1 Opposition politicians have been banging on
about the need for a ‘working’ Test & Trace system even more loudly than
the govern...
Wednesday, December 28, 2022
Elder of Ziyon
.jpg)
.jpg)
