Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News

Wednesday, March 05, 2025

Why isn't the mainstream media talking about the sole remaining living American hostage, Edan Alexander?

Edan Alexander

The Washington Post has an article about the remaining hostages in Gaza. It appears to have been written some three months ago and is continuously updated.

It lists all the hostage names, and adds "One American hostage is still believed to be alive in Gaza, and the bodies of four others are still being held there. Washington is seeking an accounting of their deaths, according to the State Department. "

But it doesn't even identify him by name, Edan Alexander.

There is only one living American hostage - where are all the news articles profiling him and his family? I only see one such article, from Fox News two weeks ago.

In many ways, Alexander grew up like many American kids. He went to Tenafly High School, was a swimmer and loved the New York Knicks. All that separated him from most American teenagers was his frequent trips to Israel to visit family and the fact that he spoke Hebrew at home.

After graduating from high school, Alexander decided he would enlist in the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) rather than enroll in college.

Edan Alexander was forced to make a Hamas propaganda video in November. There were a couple of interviews with his family at the time, as well as a guest essay by his parents in the New York Times September 1, probably approved because they spend most of the essay trashing Netanyahu, making this the kind of angle the NYT loves to promote.

But now he is the last American. He should be the focus of all articles in US media about the hostages. Every one of them, when mentioning that Hamas still holds 24 living hostages, should be adding the phrase "including one American, Edan Alexander."

In normal circumstances, an American hostage being held by an Islamist group would be major news. Maybe not front page but one would expect profiles of Edan in mainstream media in the same way that Fox did.

But when the hostage is a Jew with Israeli citizenship, it seems the rules change.

Buy EoZ's books on Amazon!

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

PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism (February 2022)

From the New York Times:

Arab countries countered President Trump’s proposal to expel Palestinians from Gaza and transform it into a beachfront destination with their own vision on Tuesday, endorsing a plan to keep the population there, rebuild the territory and turn it into part of a future Palestinian state, without Hamas in government.

The Egyptian framework envisions putting a committee of technocrats and other figures unaffiliated with Hamas in charge of Gaza for an initial period.

Where have we seen technocratic governments before? Oh, yes, the Palestinian Authority.

Salam Fayyad's government from 2007–2013 and Rami Hamdallah's from 2013–2019 were also based on supposed experts, not politicians.

In a limited way, like for economic policies and reducing corruption, they were far better than the Fatah-dominated PA governments. The problem is that this is only a subset of what a proper government should do. Hamas' reaction highlights the issue:

Hamas officials have said they would be willing to hand over control of civilian affairs to a governing committee of which the group was not a part, as long as Gaza’s postwar future was determined by Palestinian “national consensus,” according to a Tuesday statement.

That's the problem - Hamas wants to wash its hands of "civilian affairs" and concentrate on terror. It doesn't want to hand over its military or police functions to this government, and of course it doesn't want anyone to disarm it which is what any sane government should do.

Though a number of Arab countries would like to see its armed wing disband, Tuesday’s declaration does not outright call for Hamas to lay down its arms. The language was left somewhat murky, proposing that security and weaponry should be managed by “legitimate Palestinian institutions” based on the principles of a single armed force and a single legitimate authority.

Hamas has rejected demilitarization, with an official Hamas media outlet reporting on Tuesday that “the resistance’s weapons are a red line.” But Israel and the Trump administration have demanded exactly that — a seemingly irreconcilable difference.

Any plan that doesn't disarm Hamas is no plan at all. The technocratic government is busywork to make it look like they made a plan but none of the hard decisions were made.

The real goal of this plan is to find a way for Gazans to not take refuge in the very Arab states that formulated it. This is not a plan for peace nor for creating a future for Gazans. It is selfishness dressed up as humanitarianism.

Buy EoZ's books on Amazon!

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

PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism (February 2022)

The UN has published more information about sexual abuse by aid workers in Gaza. Like the earlier reports that tangentially mention the issue, the media has not taken notice.

The latest I could find was from November 2024, "Gaza GBV Case Management Taskforce Report

1 Sep – 30 Sep 2024." (GBV is Gender Based Violence.)

It uses indirect language to describe what is going on.

Page 2:

In addition to the denial of access to resources, the Case Management Taskforce (CMTF) recorded a significant number of denials of services. The reports indicate that most of these service denials were perpetrated by traditional humanitarian providers—International Non-Governmental Organizations (INGOs), National Non-Governmental Organizations (NNGOs), and United Nations agencies. This is likely another dimension of the worsening food crisis, where service providers are forced to prioritize and, at times, refuse to provide services, potentially abusing their power.

Since this is a report on gender based violence, it is talking about using aid to abuse women.

On page 3 it is a little clearer:

The second most reported type of incident is physical assault....More than half of the perpetrators were reported to be intimate partners (spouses), followed by reports of physical violence committed by family members, non-family members, and, finally, several cases involving non-traditional humanitarian actors (e.g., contracted vendors for cash and voucher assistance).

Page 4, on "Emotional and Psychological Abuse," mentions abuses not only by aid workers but by Hamas as well, and not only to women but also to underage girls:

Girls [12-17] reported this type of abuse the most, followed by the denial of access to services and resources, and physical assault. The sources of abuse include family members (such as a brother, father, mother, or other immediate family member), spouses, non-family members, and even humanitarian workers and armed groups. The latter is linked to conflict-related experiences in public spaces and at checkpoints.

Finally, page 5 has the most explicit mention of sexual abuse by aid workers:

Trend 4: Sexual Exploitation and Abuse (SEA)
A concerning trend of SEA by humanitarian workers has been noted, particularly involving staff at distribution points and vendors in cash and voucher programs. GBV AOR members are increasingly raising concerns about SEA involving non-traditional humanitarian personnel, as response options are limited due to the lack of effective law enforcement.

The report still downplays the extent of the abuse, as had been indicated in earlier reports. A UN document from last May that mentioned that humanitarian workers were forcing Gaza women into prostitution in exchange for food:

Insufficient and unreliable aid, distributed under conditions of insecurity that do not allow adequate targeting, expose vulnerable groups to violence, exploitation and abuse, trafficking and forced prostitution, including by aid workers. Specific risks observed in Gaza associated with aid include the presence of unofficial humanitarian workers without identification [in] mixed distribution lines for men and women. There are reports of individuals adopting harmful coping mechanisms, such as reducing food and liquid intake, to minimise such risks.

An April UN document warned of an "epidemic" of abuse by aid workers in Gaza, as I had reported:

While stories about sexual abuse by aid workers in other areas of the world have gained publicity over the past year, for example in Sudan, Haiti, Bangladesh and Chad, there have been practically no articles about sexual abuse in Gaza by aid workers. I can only find one.

The UN itself explains why in the April report: it says that "Media attention to safeguarding incidents ...can also have an uncontrolled political manipulation."

In other words, the UN is doing everything it can to downplay and obfuscate the reports of sexual abuse by aid workers - because of politics. The UN wants to focus on its themes of Israel as an unparalleled evil actor, and anything that dilutes from that focus must be underplayed.

Do Gazan lives matter at all when Israel cannot be blamed? Based on how the UN tries to minimize this story while having entire organizations dedicated to uncovering and reporting on this exact topic, apparently the answer is no.

There are two scandals here: the abuse by the supposedly angelic humanitarian actors in Gaza like UNRWA, and the cover-up of that abuse by the UN and media.

Buy EoZ's books on Amazon!

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

PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism (February 2022)

From The Herald (Scotland):

Coca-Cola will no longer be served at the Glasgow Film Theatre after objections from staff.

Last week, workers at the cinema announced they would not be handling any goods connected to the BDS (Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions) movement.

Coca-Cola products are part of that list and the cinema will now take them out of use for the duration of the film festival.

The theatre knuckled under to the workers. Their statement about it showed how cowardly they are, by saying that they are considering letting the hate group tell them how to do their business.

But reading their statement you can see that they are really afraid of violence from the Israel haters:

A spokesperson for the Glasgow Film Theatre said: "On Monday 24th February Unite the Union staff alerted us they would refuse to sell Coca-Cola and Diet Coke from 28th February. At this stage our Board of Trustees had started but not completed a review of the Unite staff requests. The goal of the review is to ensure that any decisions made do not infringe our legal and charitable obligations and that all staff can have their voice heard.

"We decided to halt the sales before completion of our formal review as we identified the risk of potential confrontations that could impact the welfare and wellbeing of all staff and customers during the charity’s busiest time of year. Therefore, GFT has agreed the temporary removal of Coca-Cola and Diet Coke until the end of Glasgow Film Festival.

In plain English, they are saying that if they go through proper procedures to evaluate their vendors, they are afraid of violence during the film festival. What else might impact the wellbeing of customers?

This behavior by the union directly violates Glasgow Film's own policies against bullying:

The BDS-supporting union threatened to disrupt the film festival. They intimidated the theatre to accede to their demands. The literally refuse to complete the tasks that are part of their job, and they are undermining the authority of the Theatre. The actions of the union fit exactly under Theatre's definition of bullying.

So much for zero tolerance

Notice that the theatre is not worried that Zionists will violently protest the boycott. Only one side engages in threats and violence.

And only cowards let them set the agenda.

(h/t Mattis)

Buy EoZ's books on Amazon!

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

PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism (February 2022)

03/04 Links Pt2: Columbia’s Choice: Hamasnik Anarchy or Taxpayer Cash; Michael Rapaport: A Message to My Haters up North; Trump Admin To Review $5 Billion in Columbia Grant Funding

From Ian:

Seth Mandel: Columbia’s Choice: Hamasnik Anarchy or Taxpayer Cash

The biggest myth regarding the campus anti-Semitism crisis is that it’s about speech. It is a self-serving myth: Institutions and activists that want to disregard their abuse of Jewish students will fall back on the claim that any attempt to hold them accountable for their actions is actually an attack on free speech.

Columbia University is learning what happens when that disingenuous trick starts to backfire: Students and professors take it as a license to do whatever they want, people end up in the hospital, and the government steps in to say this cannot continue to be done on their dime.

The Biden administration was fearful of standing up to the Hamas youth groups on campus. The Trump administration is happy to do so. Thus we have the announcement that three government agencies—Health and Human Services, the Department of Education, and the General Services Administration—will be reviewing federal contracts and grants with Columbia totaling around $5 billion.

Crucially, the announcement clearly avoids the penalizing of mere speech:
“Americans have watched in horror for more than a year now, as Jewish students have been assaulted and harassed on elite university campuses,” Education Secretary Linda McMahon said in a statement. “Unlawful encampments and demonstrations have completely paralyzed day-to-day campus operations, depriving Jewish students of learning opportunities to which they are entitled. Institutions that receive federal funds have a responsibility to protect all students from discrimination. Columbia’s apparent failure to uphold their end of this basic agreement raises very serious questions about the institution’s fitness to continue doing business with the United States government.”

Assault isn’t speech. Harassment, the definitions of which are laid out in these schools’ policy handbooks, doesn’t include “criticism of Israeli government policy,” as activists and well-meaning but foolish free-speech groups routinely claim. At Harvard, for example, “such aggression must be sufficiently severe or pervasive, and objectively offensive, that it creates a work, educational, or living environment that a reasonable person would consider intimidating, hostile, or abusive and denies the individual an equal opportunity to participate in the benefits of the workplace or the institution’s programs and activities. Unless sufficiently severe or pervasive, a single act typically would not constitute bullying.”

Last, discrimination is also not speech. I wrote about one such prominent example last week: George Washington University’s professional psychology program penalized Jewish students for their religious background and Israeli students on the basis of their national origin, a textbook Title VI civil-rights violation.

Rise of the antisemitic psychologists

In February, the western world was shocked when a TikTok video exposed two Australian nurses, Ahmad “Rashad” Nadir and Sarah Abu Lebdeh, openly reviling Jews and Israelis, insinuating they would not only refuse to treat, but might actually kill — or have killed — an Israeli patient that presented at their hospital. The duo have rightfully been banned from practice anywhere in Australia, but that will not soothe Australian Jews’ fear that this loose-lipped pair are the tip of an iceberg constituted of less self-sabotaging, but equally hateful fellow travellers.

In a previous era, it was well understood in the healing professions that practitioners must never bring their personal biases to the workplace. That is no longer the case. Nobody in the medical community is encouraging nurses to kill Israeli patients, to be sure, but in professional mental-health circles dominated by far-left ideology, discrimination against Jewish students, practitioners and patients is well tolerated, and sometimes encouraged. In short, the domain of mental health, including social work, has become a psychological minefield for North American Jews.

For example, at a November psychology conference in Philadelphia, Villanova University Counseling Center director Nathalie Edmond gave a presentation on “dismantling oppression” featuring a slide show, including one titled “the colonized mind,” which positioned Zionism as equivalent to “internalized racism,” “homophobia” and “rape culture.” Social media pushback came fast and furious, but no heads rolled.

This anecdote captures the spirit of the movement to exclude therapists who identify as Zionists — that is, people who believe Israel has a right to self-determination as a nation-state — from the therapy community. In March 2024, the Facebook group Chicago Anti-Racist Therapists endorsed a blacklist of “therapists/practices with Zionist affiliations that we should avoid referring clients to,” justifying it as a strategy to preclude the promotion of “White supremacy via Zionism.” A responsive flashback to Nazi Germany is not an over-reaction. One “shocked and scared, but not surprised” blacklisted therapist, Michelle Magida, founded a private Jewish therapist Facebook page.

As psychiatrist Sally Satel notes in a Free Press article on the subject, two issues arise from the story. The first, trying to prevent clinicians who support the existence of Israel, or are simply Jewish, from treating patients “constitutes a grave breach of professional ethics.”

The second is the “alarming” trend in psychotherapy — she calls it “critical social justice therapy” — to insist on psychotherapy as “foremost, a political rather than a clinical enterprise.” Under this rubric, therapists with the “wrong” politics are not trustworthy with patients. As for patients with the same “wrong” convictions, correction of their error should be the focus of treatment.

This Sovietization of psychotherapy is a cross-border phenomenon, and so is a heavy antisemitic presence in therapy associations. The American Psychological Association (APA), the largest psychological association in the world, is considered a hotbed of antisemitism by many observers. A just-published Open Letter “demanding accountability” from APA, replete with evidence, signed by 3,556 “Psychologists against Antisemitism,” notes that “(w)hile APA has issued statements in solidarity with Ukraine and apologized to People of Color for perpetuating racism, it has remained inactive regarding the 500% spike in attacks against Jews, who represent only 2% of the population yet experience over half of all religion-based hate crimes according to FBI statistics.”

Michael Rapaport: A Message to My Haters up North

I’ve seen a lot of hate in the past 513 days. Two months after Hamas’s massacre, anti-Israel groups launched a social media campaign to discourage people from attending my show in Sacramento. In January last year, my show in Portland, Oregon, was protested, too. Six months after that, a Chicago venue canceled my act over “safety concerns.” And the day after hooligans chased Jewish soccer fans through the streets of Amsterdam in November 2024, hundreds turned up to demonstrate against my gig in Lakeview, Illinois—a Chicago suburb heavily populated with Jews.

I’m not alone. Many of my fellow Jewish performers are facing this kind of abuse right now simply because we support the existence of a Jewish state.

But on Friday morning, I woke up to the craziest campaign against me yet.

When I checked my social media feed, I saw that Heather McPherson, who is in the Canadian Parliament and a member of the New Democratic Party, was not just attacking me, but calling on her government to deny my entry into the country.

“New Democrats are alarmed that American personality Michael Rapaport is scheduled to perform in Canada,” she posted.

“Rapaport, who has a significant criminal history, also has a long history of racist and Islamophobic speech, and of inciting violence and supporting terrorism. We are witnessing an alarming increase in Islamophobia in Canada and globally. All Canadians deserve to feel safe in our communities.”

At the end, she once again urged Justin Trudeau’s party to take action against me, saying: “New Democrats are calling on the Liberal government to deny entry to Michael Rapaport.”

Now, I’ve got no beef with Ms. McPherson. I’ve never met her or even heard of her, which is something I have in common with most people. But I guess what ticked her off is that I’m headed to Canada this week to perform five stand-up shows in Edmonton, Alberta’s capital city, which McPherson represents.

03/04 Links Pt1: Could Hamas Possibly Make This Any Clearer?; Kontorovich: International Law Is No Bar to Trump's Gaza Proposal; Is it time to declare the failure of the Oslo Accords?

From Ian:

Seth Mandel: Could Hamas Possibly Make This Any Clearer?

There is one clear goal regarding postwar Gaza: The absence of Hamas. That absence could be brought about by the terror government’s total defeat in the battlespace or by its surrender, in which it would hand over all governing institutions to an approved non-Hamas entity after returning the remaining hostages.

The reason Hamas cannot be left in a position of political power in Gaza is that such an outcome would guarantee the resumption of war. Hamas has made clear, through its statements just as much as its behavior, that as long as it survives it will launch periodic wars of annihilation against Israel. In a region as confusing and volatile as the Middle East, this is one of the few things we know with certainty: Death, taxes, and Hamas trying to burn people alive.

No one disputes this, and no one is naïve to it. If you support leaving Hamas in Gaza, it means you are comfortable with the status quo of permanent war. Hamas rules Gaza with an iron fist, and because of its foreign backing (Iran, Qatar, Turkey) it cannot easily be dislodged by rival parties, even if there were rival parties willing to take it on.

All of which makes Hamas’s overtures remarkably daft. The West wants Hamas out of government because it wants an end to the cycle of war. So Hamas… promises to stay out of government but asks only that it be allowed to remain for the sole purpose of waging war?

Egypt is trying to be accommodating, so it has proposed a middle ground: Hamas disbands as a party but Hamas members join a new joint governing committee with officials from the Palestinian Authority and—crucially—Hamas leaders turn over missiles and rockets to be guarded by a third party until the establishment of a Palestinian state. “But Hamas’s senior negotiator, Khalil al-Hayya, categorically refused the proposal during a meeting with the head of Egyptian intelligence, Hassan Rashad, in February, Egyptian and Hamas officials said,” the Journal reports.

Again, the fact that Hamas officials are among the sources here takes a lot of the guesswork out of these negotiations. We don’t have to wonder if Hamas is aware of what’s being floated on its behalf. Hamas is part of the conversation. And it is saying very clearly that it exists for the sole purpose of total war against the Jews.

This is why Hamas’s presence makes it harder to raise financial contributions from any donor nation not named Qatar. It is a waste of money to build structures that Hamas will immediately rig with explosives.

The choice here, according to Hamas itself, is between Hamas and the possibility of a peaceful life for Palestinians. Those who are even considering choosing the former should stop lecturing Israel, the U.S., or anyone else about the welfare of the Palestinians.

The Genocide Libel: How the World Has Charged Israel with Genocide

This essay concerns the post-October 7 accusation of genocide against Israel. Genocide is the crime of crimes. States committing genocide are viewed as permanently illegitimate. By itself a genocide accusation is not antisemitic. During the Cold War, the charge was leveled dozens of times by government officials, legal scholars, and activists against France, Portugal, Nigeria, China, Cambodia, the US, and other states.[1] Since the end of the Cold War, judicial proceedings for genocide have been carried out against officials from former Yugoslavia, Rwanda, and elsewhere both in ad hoc tribunals and at the International Criminal Court.[2]

Genocide accusations against Israel are different. First, Israel, unlike other states, has been charged with genocide throughout its existence.[3] The genocide accusation is tied to charges of racism, colonialism, and other accusations leveled against Israel since the 1960s.[4] Second, the speed and fury with which the accusations exploded after the Hamas massacres of October 7, 2023, are unusual in the annals of lawfare.[5] And yet regarding Israel’s 2023 war against Hamas in the Gaza Strip, there has been not only a rush to judgment but an effort to redefine genocide itself so that the constitutive elements of the crime itself are lowered.

The genocide libel also deploys a range of antisemitic tropes. One is the linkage of genocide to violent passages in the Hebrew Bible, a linkage which plays on the theme of Jewish chosenness at the expense of others’ existence and which even claims that God is genocidal. Another is the whitewashing of Hamas’s own genocidal intent in lieu of tropes concerning the outsized Jewish thirst for vengeance in the form of disproportionate response.[6] A third is the coupling of the genocide charge with the deliberate killing of children, images of whom are ubiquitous on NGO, social media, and other platforms that charge Israel with genocide.[7] A fourth is the attribution of special powers to the Israeli government by which it and its supporters have fooled western governments into believing that Israel’s actions are legitimate and that the history of the Israeli- Arab conflict is too complex for snap judgments.[8]

A fifth, and this is what makes the genocide libel particularly dangerous, is the association of all Jews with the crime. Jews worldwide are all in on it, either as Zionist enablers, as dishonest back-room lobbyists, or as community leaders who, we are told, “weaponize” the charge of antisemitism to silence the truth-tellers.[9] Other genocide charges over time have not targeted Hutus living in Belgium or Serbs living in Germany. But the genocide libel, fueled by everything from electoral campaigns to public demonstrations to social media, drives rage against Jews throughout the world.

In North America, Europe, and Australia, antisemitic incidents have been too numerous to count, ranging from physical threats against Jews in New York City, to a pre-planned pogrom in Amsterdam, to synagogue attacks stretching from Montreal to Melbourne.[10] And as the Conseil represéntatif des institutions juives de France [CRIF] noted in a January 2025 report concerning the nearly 1,600 antisemitic acts in France the previous year, “The hammering of the false genocide accusation, and its corollary of accusing Israel’s supporters of being ‘pro-genocide,’ have helped to demonize the image of Jews in France and justify hostile . . . behavior towards them.”[11]

My aim, though, is not to discuss why the genocide charge is antisemitic. Nor is it to point to the numerous instances of mass violence in Syria, Sudan, and elsewhere for which activists can never seem to summon the outrage. Nor is it, here anyway, to dismantle the South African genocide charges against Israel from December 2023 or the subsequent ruling of the International Court of Justice that it is “plausible” that Israel is committing genocide in Gaza. Rather my aim is to discuss some of the history of how the genocide accusation has been leveled at Israel and the Jews. By looking at the history, which began even before the genocide convention was completed, we can begin to deconstruct the charge itself, how it has been used against Israel over time, and the stunningly bad faith behind the genocide accusation.

Eugene Kontorovich: International Law Is No Bar to Trump's Gaza Proposal

EU and UN officials who have insisted that President Trump's Gaza plan would violate international law are wrong. Gaza is one of the very few pieces of land not under the sovereignty of any nation in international law. A distinct Gaza came into being as a result of Egypt's invasion of Israel in 1948.

When Israel retook Gaza in 1967's Six-Day War, it had sovereign claims on it. These were based on Gaza's location within the boundaries of the League of Nations Mandate for Palestine, the predecessor entity to Israel. As an experiment in "land for peace," Israel withdrew its entire civilian population and military presence in 2005. Since then, Gaza has been up for grabs.

Because Gaza isn't a state, it isn't subject to military occupation under the Fourth Geneva Convention, making the restrictions the treaty places on occupying powers irrelevant. The sovereignty gap makes a U.S. bid legally feasible. Israel, having taken parts of the territory in a war of clear self-defense, should be able to claim sovereignty over all or part of the territory, as it did in the Golan Heights.

The "right of self-determination" doesn't allow local ethnic groups to choose which country they are in - ask the Kurds, the Catalans or the Greenlanders. In any case, the Palestinian population has categorically rejected sovereignty unless it includes Jerusalem, which is Israeli sovereign territory, and is accompanied by the migration of millions of Arabs into the sovereign borders of Israel.

Jordanian MP: "Don't give our water to Jews!"

From Jordan's Jo24:

MP Khamis Attia revealed information he has about the Ministry of Water starting negotiations with the Israeli government; in order to exchange water between the two sides.

The information revealed by MP Attia indicates that the negotiations have reached the conclusion that "the Israelis will obtain the Disi water, through the Ministry of Water pumping water to the Israelis from the Disi basin, in exchange for the Zionists pumping water from Lake Tiberias to northern Jordan."

He expressed his surprise at the negotiations, adding on his Facebook page: "I do not know what the genius of the Ministry of Water is, to resort to the Israelis in a water exchange process to solve the water problem in the north!"

He called on the government to "backtrack on these plans that waste our water for the benefit of the Jews, and the Disi water is the water of the Jordanians, and it cost the Jordanian people billions to reach the citizens."

Representative Attia rejected "these plans that waste our water rights," stressing the need for the House of Representatives to take a strong position to reject the step of exchanging water with the Jews.

I'm not quite sure why the minister is surprised. Israel and Jordan have been negotiating a version of this agreement - exchanging desalinated water from Jordan in the south for Israel supplying water in the North (in the planned excahnge, the UAE would provide solar energy to power the Jordanian desalination plant.)

The weird part is that he says "Disi water." The Disi aquifier is mostly under Saudi Arabia but some is under Jordan, it seems strange that Jordan would pump from there to Israel, especially since it is a limited resource that does not get replenished from rain. But maybe that is the current negotiations, and that might be what upsets him so much, calling it Jordanian water.

Note that he says "Jews" in addition to Israelis and Zionists.

Buy EoZ's books on Amazon!

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

PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism (February 2022)

"Anti-normalization" Arabs freak out over new Mizrahi Jewish "Radio Abraham"

From the Jerusalem Post:

Radio Abraham is now available online. A new initiative spearheaded by Ahmed Charai, publisher of The Jerusalem Strategic Tribune and CEO of World Herald Tribune Inc., a Washington-based publishing company, the Internet-based service will enable people of different faiths and backgrounds to connect through shared heritage, traditions, and aspirations, in the spirit of the Abraham Accords.

A champion of peace and a strong advocate for greater understanding between Israel and the Arab world, Charai has dedicated his career to advancing the principles of diplomacy, dialogue, and mutual respect. His publishing platforms have become essential forums for intellectual exchange, bringing together thought leaders from across the political and cultural spectrum to engage in meaningful discussions on regional affairs.

The website of Radio Abraham makes it clear that its focus is for Mizrahi Jews.

Nothing upsets Israel haters more than the idea of dialogue and mutual respect. Here is the completely unhinged reaction from a leader of an anti-Israel group in Morocco:

Ahmed Wehhaman, head of the Moroccan Observatory for Anti-Normalization, affirmed that the launch of "Radio Abraham" by the "We Are All Israelis" gang was not merely a passing media event, but rather another blatant step toward enabling Zionist infiltration.

In a post on his Facebook account, Wehhaman stated that "Radio Abraham" serves as a tool for Zionist infiltration, which has advanced significantly in undermining religious beliefs. He warned of the dangers of this trajectory and its severe consequences for both the state and society as a whole.

He continued: "This time, even the masks that the so-called Abrahamic propaganda attempted to wear over the past years have been completely discarded."

He argued that "this initiative did not emerge in a vacuum but rather at a critical moment when the contours of the colonial Abrahamic project are becoming clear, proving that ‘Abrahamism’ is nothing more than the new name for ‘Israel’ and that ‘Israel’ is the practical embodiment of this Abrahamic project."

He added: "For a long time, we needed to put significant effort into explaining the ‘Abrahamic project’ and warning that it is ‘the new face of colonialism in the 21st century,’ as renowned Egyptian researcher Dr. Heba Gamal El-Din titled one of her most significant studies on the subject."

Wehhaman further elaborated: "We exerted efforts to analyze concepts such as the ‘Abrahamic commonality,’ the ‘United Arab States program,’ and the ‘Abraham Path,’ as well as their connection to what is known as the ‘Deal of the Century,’ which was formulated by Israeli war general Giora Eiland and pushed forward by U.S. President Donald Trump from his first term in office."

He continued: "We also exerted additional efforts to explain the nature of the ‘Committee of 100,’ which consists of fifty religious figures from the three monotheistic faiths (Judaism, Christianity, and Islam) and fifty diplomats affiliated with the U.S. State Department. This committee has operated directly under the authority of the U.S. Secretary of State since the tenure of Hillary Clinton."

He added: "But today, none of that explanation is necessary anymore. The ‘We Are All Israelis’ gang has revealed the whole truth. The leader of this gang himself informed us that his own leader, the man behind the slogan and statement ‘We Are All Israelis,’ is the very same person behind this initiative. No further effort is needed to understand the nature of this project."

He continued: "With a bit of simple analysis, it becomes clear that his superior is none other than Colonel Eran Lerman, a former officer in the Israeli military intelligence unit (Aman), responsible for infiltrating media and cultural systems in the Arab world. This, in turn, reveals the real mission of Radio Abraham."

Wehhaman emphasized that "just one step up the administrative hierarchy is enough to see the picture in full clarity and scandalous exposure: ‘Radio Abraham’ is not a media project but a purely Zionist propaganda platform designed to brainwash minds and pave the way for the acceptance of the new Zionist colonialism under the guise of ‘peace’ and ‘coexistence.’"

He added: "It is an open declaration that ‘Abrahamism’ no longer needs intermediaries or deceptive slogans. We have now entered the public and scandalous phase: genocidal ‘Israel’ is speaking directly to Arabs through its platforms and tools, with no disguise whatsoever."

This guy is truly nuts. He believes that there is a religion called Abrahamism being created just to lead Muslims astray.

His other theories similarly have no relationship with any facts. Giora Eiland had nothing to do with Trump's "Deal of the Century" and Elan Lerman has nothing to do with Radio Abraham. There was no State Department initiative called the "Committee of 100" founded by Hilary Clinton. The only thing Wehhaman says that is slightly related to reality is that Radio Abraham founder Ahmed Charai wrote an article on October 7 called "We Are All Israelis."

This is the level of intelligence in the Arab anti-normalization space - creating and spreading insane rumors and antisemitism. It is published in Arab media as if this is normal, mainstream thinking.

Because it is.

Buy EoZ's books on Amazon!

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

PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism (February 2022)

Biden promised aid would not go to Hamas. The USAID policies to support that promise were a joke.

Less than two weeks after October 7, President Biden visited Israel with a message of solidarity and support. One of his priorities, however, was to force Israel to allow humanitarian aid into Gaza.

During his speech in Tel Aviv, he tried to reassure Israelis:

The people of Gaza need food, water, medicine, shelter.

Today, I asked the Israeli cabinet — who I met with for some time this morning — to agree to the delivery of lifesaving humanitarian assistance to civilians in Gaza. Based on the understanding that there will be inspections and that the aid should go to civilians, not to Hamas, Israel agreed that humanitarian assistance can begin to move from Egypt to Gaza.

Let me be clear: If Hamas diverts or steals the assistance, they will have demonstrated once again that they have no concern for the welfare of the Palestinian people and it will end. As a practical matter, it will — it will stop the international community from being able to provide this aid.

Since then, we've seen that humanitarian aid has been the major source of income for Hamas, especially since Israel took over the Rafah crossing last year. This hasn't stopped the US from sending over $2.1 billion to Gaza.

How did this happen?

Last week, Gregg Roman of the Middle East Forum testified in Congress that much of the aid from the US bypassed standard USAID vetting due to emergency waivers. I have not been able to verify this.

Perhaps more importantly, he pointed out that even USAID vetting is close to useless:

The oversight is as weak as a house of cards in a windstorm—like handing out cash in a dark alley and hoping it doesn’t buy trouble. USAID’s vetting system is archaic, relying heavily on self-reported data with no real-time checks or teeth. Primary grantees are entrusted to vet their own subcontractors, even when those grantees themselves might sympathize with radical causes. In places like Gaza or Sudan, groups with blatant extremist affiliations slip through because the “gatekeepers” have no incentive—or even ideological desire—to shut them out. This isn’t a glitch; it’s a feature of a broken system.

Roman didn't make this up. Last July, USAID's own Inspector General looked at the aid going to Gaza and concluded that there was no serious oversight to stop it from going to Hamas.

USAID's oversight plan to Congress says that it relies on the organizations it funds to tell it when the aid is being misused:

To mitigate the risk that U.S. taxpayer dollars will be diverted to Hamas or other U.S.-designated terrorist entities, U.S. Government [USG] award recipients [implementing organizations] are required to promptly report any suspected incidents of diversion, fraud, waste, and abuse to USAID or State and their respective OIGs.

That's the "oversight" - handing out billions of dollars and then asking the recipients politely to let them know if it is being abused so they'll get less money.

The OIC report notes that it is even worse when USAID gives vast amounts of money to UN agencies, also with the instructions to report any abuses. The UN agencies almost never report anything suspicious. The report says, "reports to OIG of potential misconduct from UN agencies performing

USAID awards in Gaza remain sparse, underscoring shortcomings in USAID’s reliance on self reporting. "

Not only that, but while USAID relies on self-reporting to ensure that the key members of grantees are not associated with terrorists, it relies on those very organizations to identify who those key individuals are. So if they have a treasurer, say, who is linked to the PFLP, the organization just has to omit that person from their list of "key individuals." (USAID claims that they try to verify the information using open-source research.)

When it comes to the UN, however, USAID doesn't even ask that question.

Notably, USAID’s MO 21 exempts UN organizations from USAID’s partner vetting process. ...USAID asserts that vetting of awards to UN organizations is distinct from vetting of awards to other types of implementing organizations due to the UN agencies’ “international character, privileges & immunities, and the special nature of our relationship, including presence on certain UN agency boards to influence their policies and procedures.”

The report notes that some grantees had hidden their ties to terrorist organizations, like the American University of Beirut and Norwegian Peoples Aid (forced to return $700K and $2 million, respectively.) But this requirement of cosmetic vetting doesn't apply to contractors of the grantees, so in the end, there is next to no oversight of how these billions of dollars are spent.

In Gaza, the situation is arguably worse than in other areas USAID funds, because Hamas threats would ensure that these grantees would lie to USAID. They live in Gaza and know that Hamas would kill them if they don't do what it says.

The Biden Administration knew about this report showing that aid to Gaza was being sent without any real oversight on how it would not be diverted to Hamas. Yet it kept on sending hundreds of millions more to Gaza without USAID changing a single procedure.

When Israel says it will stop all aid to Gaza, it is doing what Biden promised to do, and never did.

(h/t WSJ for Biden quote.)

Buy EoZ's books on Amazon!

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

PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism (February 2022)

Hamas imports lots of Caterpillar equipment. BDS silent.

For years, Caterpillar has been a major target of BDS. Israel haters disrupt meetings, threaten executives, demand that institutions divest from investing in Caterpillar - the usual drill.

Hamas, however, loves Caterpillar.

During the ceasefire, lots of earth moving equipment was imported to Gaza - and as far as I can tell, every such vehicle was a Caterpillar.

Most of the equipment isn't bought by Hamas, but it is being bought by Arab countries. You can see the Egyptian flags on many of them going into Gaza through Rafah.

Clearly, Hamas isn't following the BDS demands.

Nor is Hamas listening to Code Pink and many other Israel hating groups are insisting that everyone boycott the company.

Small front end loaders start at $100,000 and go up from there, medium ones stat at about $200,000. These photos alone show tens of millions of dollars going to Caterpillar equipment entering Gaza.

The BDS movement freaks out when they see violations of their "rules," claiming that they are created by "Palestinian civil society." They even complained when the Palestinian Authority brought in Caterpillar equipment last year.

Yet when Hamas does the same thing, they are silent.

Do we need any more evidence that BDS supports terrorists?

Buy EoZ's books on Amazon!

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

PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism (February 2022)

03/03 Links Pt2: The Oscars and the Plight of the ‘Good Jew’; Deborah Lipstad: Why I Won’t Teach at Columbia; Islamism: The Left’s moral black hole; Decorated Israeli diplomat Dore Gold dies at 71

From Ian:

Seth Mandel: The Oscars and the Plight of the ‘Good Jew’

What’s interesting here is the assumption that Abraham’s involvement helped the film gain visibility not because he is good at his work but because he is a Jew and Hollywood supposedly still requires Jewish mascotry. Nor is it suggested that perhaps Abraham’s perspective as an Israeli is helpful to the story being told. The most telling of the complaints was also one of the more popular ones: that the Oscars victory heralds “normalization,” the idea that Jews and Arabs can work together or be friends.

The problem for these Palestinian activists, then, is simply: coexistence. Abraham helped make this documentary because, he says, he believes in coexistence. But he has badly misread his audience. Fans of an agitprop production like this aren’t in it for the coexistence, they’re in it for the resistance. To them, to get up on stage and suggest an equivalence between an innocent Israeli baby murdered in captivity and the Hamas terrorist responsible for that murder is offensive—to the Hamasnik.

“There is a different path,” Abraham said in his acceptance speech last night. That path, he said, is one of “national rights for both of our people.” Then he said something rather sad: “I have to say… the foreign policy in this country is helping to block this path.”

In fact, the foreign policy of the United States has done the opposite. For half a decade now, U.S. policy has been structured around Arab-Israeli peace deals, expanding coexistence and mutual recognition in the region. But while numerous Arab polities have embraced this path, the Palestinians have not. This path has been open to the Palestinians for decades; an explicit offer of full “national rights for both… people” has been on the table for a quarter-century. But America cannot force the Palestinians to say yes to their own state.

No doubt Abraham’s phone has been ringing off the hook with industry insiders and peers and peace activists telling him how brave he is. Their admiration is not nothing—Abraham’s career depends on earning just this type of praise from just those types of people. He won’t get the whole world, but he might get his Wales. And a whole lot of resentment from the people he thinks he’s doing all of this for.

Deborah Lipstadt: Why I Won’t Teach at Columbia

My decision to withdraw my name from consideration for a teaching post at Columbia is based on three calculations.

First, I am not convinced that the university is serious about taking the necessary and difficult measures that would create an atmosphere that allows for true inquiry.

Second, I fear that my presence would be used as a sop to convince the outside world that “Yes, we in the Columbia/Barnard orbit are fighting antisemitism. We even brought in the former Special Envoy to Monitor and Combat Antisemitism.” I will not be used to provide cover for a completely unacceptable situation.

Third, I am not sure that I would be safe or even able to teach without being harassed. I do not flinch in the face of threats. But this is not a healthy or acceptable learning environment.

On too many university campuses, the inmates—and these may include administrators, student disrupters, and off-campus agitators as well as faculty members—are running the asylum. They are turning universities into parodies of true academic inquiry.

We are at a crisis point. Unless this situation is addressed forcefully and unequivocally, one of America’s great institutions, its system of higher education, could well collapse. There are many in this country—including those in significant positions of power—who would delight in seeing that happen. The failure to stand up to disrupters who are preventing other students from learning gives the opponents of higher education the very tools they need.

Meanwhile, absent direct and comprehensive action to protect Jewish students and the campus environment, I will not be teaching on Columbia’s campus.

How to Save Jewish Babies

When Jewish babies were kidnapped, the then-president of the United States planned a pier to bring aid to their captors. Kfir and Ariel were suffering unspeakably beneath Gaza, and the then-vice president said Israel could not move heaven and earth to get them back—she had looked at the maps, and it just wasn’t worth it. The Joe Biden administration and its USAID Director Samantha Power sent $2.1 billion in “emergency” supplies to Hamas-controlled areas of Gaza, openly funding our enemy’s war of extermination against us under the pretense of “evenhandedness.” And that was the reaction of our supposed best friend, while the rest of the planet from London to Beirut brayed for our blood and defamed us daily for fighting back.

The new U.S. president, himself disgusted by the humiliating procession of Jewish hostages and caskets, has stopped U.S. aid to our enemies and publicly released Israel from a deal designed to ensure our defeat. It’s time to end this desecration. Reports are that, with the hostages retrieved, Israel plans to resume the war and conquer the Strip in the coming month. We do not need anyone’s mercy. We are no longer powerless and need not pray over our children as if we were. We are free to fight our wars and win. We are free to be powerful. Our babies should sleep soundly at night because their “community” will use that power to defend them by any means necessary—if we can find the courage.

We have become more religious since Oct. 7, not less. I still sing for God’s blessing at bedtime. I pray my son will soon be the Jewish leader who embodies the lessons learned from this hideous episode: Stand up for your fellow Jew, and for all decent people. Do what you must to ensure that there are no more Oct. 7s, and for that matter no more Feb. 19s. We will no longer be tormented, and we will take proactive steps to ensure that. We cannot worry about what the world will say.

We cannot get bogged down worrying about the abstractions that somehow always conclude, “and the Jews should accept their fate.” International law didn’t save Kfir and Ariel. Neither did social justice, or human rights, or any of those high-minded concepts. And they never could. If anything, they served as cudgels to stop the Jews from using our power to save precious Jewish babies. We can only focus on doing what is necessary to defend ourselves, because no one else will do it for us.

I will still sing a lullaby for Kfir and Ariel, and the dozens of Jewish children whose spilled blood failed, once more, to arouse the world’s conscience. I know a song set to Deuteronomy 32:43, a verse that belongs on the lips of all who love God and hate evil.

“Rejoice, O nations, over His people, for the blood of his servants He will avenge; their vengeance he shall return upon His enemies, and atone for His people upon His land.”

03/03 Links Pt1: Why International Law Allows Israel to Lay Siege to Gaza; Damning IDF probe: Social media leaks enabled Hamas raid on Nahal Oz; Israel files ICJ complaint regarding hostage held in UNRWA facility

From Ian:

Washington’s U-turn on Ukraine a ‘challenge’ for Israel, experts say

According to Chatham House senior fellow and former Knesset member Ksenia Svetlova, “what happened in the White House with Zelensky shows that the U.S. doesn’t have a constant policy or permanent allies. If there are no permanent allies, if Ukraine is thrown into the trash after all these years … no one is immune.”

According to Svetlova, the fact that the Biden administration froze some weapon shipments to Israel amid domestic political pressure shows that “there are no holy cows, not even Israel.”

“Even in the current term, Trump can change. If there are no constant interests or doctrines, that means anything can change. Israel must be prepared to become like Ukraine,” she said.

Emmanuel Navon, CEO of European pro-Israel organization ELNET and an international relations lecturer at Tel Aviv University, argued that while Trump could theoretically change his mind at any time, Israel is in a different situation because it has strong backing in Trump’s coalition of supporters.

“Ukraine is a place that most Americans don’t really care about, especially not Trump’s constituents,” Navon said. “Israel is important to evangelical voters. Trump cares about his voters and they care about Israel, not Ukraine.”

As for the cease-fire agreement that the Trump administration is trying to negotiate between Russia and Ukraine, Svetlova warned that Trump is “forcing an agreement without a security guarantee [for Ukraine] after three years of a war started by a violent neighbor … No defense will come of that.”

Yet, Svetlova said there is no comparison to the Trump administration’s involvement in Israel-Hamas cease-fire negotiations, where Israel has every advantage over Hamas – with the notable exception of the hostages.

Rather, Svetlova said, Trump’s approach to Ukraine could be a warning sign to Israel that he may push an Iran nuclear deal that is not sufficiently robust.

“It’s a matter of life and death for Israel,” she said. “The Saudis and Emiratis are in the same boat. [The countries] need to seriously discuss a policy not to cross Trump but also not to be a victim of this kind of coercion.”

The fact that Ukraine policy is creating a rift between the U.S. and Europe is also a problem for Israel when it comes to a coordinated response to the Iranian threat. The U.K., Germany and France are the only Western countries with the power to snap back all pre-2015 sanctions on Iran, an ability that expires in October.

Svetlova suggested that Israel plays a mediating role between the U.S. and Europe on Iran, pointing out that “sanctions will be much more effective if there is unity in the Western world on this. Any division is not good for us.”

Navon described European leaders as “completely horrified” at the Trump-Zelensky meeting.

Still, Navon said that there is an opportunity for Israel in the Trump administration’s confrontational attitude towards Europe, citing Vice President J.D. Vance’s speech in Munich last month: “He castigated the Europeans, but said that if you want America to have your back, you have to be more respectful of our common Western values based on Christianity.”

He noted that the European right sees Israel as “one of the pillars of Western civilization” defending those values.

“This is great for Israel because you have quite a few conservative parties in Europe who are open to this message and supportive of Israel,” Navon added. “Israel can use this rift between the U.S. and Europe to its advantage.”

Khaled Abu Toameh: Why Arabs Don't Want To Receive Palestinian Ex-Prisoners

The Jordanians and Lebanese, for their part, have not forgotten how Palestinians sparked civil wars in their countries in the 70s and 80s.

[The Arab countries'] refusal to take in Palestinian prisoners probably arises from the fact that these countries actually do not care about the Palestinians and even consider them an ungrateful people and troublemakers. Many Arabs also seem to have lost faith in the Palestinians' ability to implement reform and end rampant financial and administrative corruption in their governing bodies in the West Bank and Gaza Strip.

"The Muslim Brotherhood is a terrorist organization. Help us modern-minded, secular, liberal Muslims marginalize their influence by declaring what they are: a terrorist organization." — Dr. M. Zuhdi Jasser, in testimony before the US House Oversight and Government Reform Subcommittee on National Security, July 11, 2018.

"In point of fact, nothing would be more pro-Muslim than the marginalization of the Muslim Brotherhood and its direct affiliates. Making the Muslim Brotherhood radioactive would allow the light to shine upon the most potent antagonists in Muslim communities: those who reject political Islamist groups and believe in liberty and the separation of mosque and state." — Dr. M. Zuhdi Jasser, in testimony before the US House Oversight and Government Reform Subcommittee on National Security, July 11, 2018.

"Call on American Muslim leaders to take a position on the Muslim Brotherhood and its overarching theo-political ideology. I ask my fellow Muslims: Will they be the side of freedom, liberty, and modernity, or will they be on the side of tyranny of the Muslim Brotherhood, Turkey's AKP, the Iranian Khomeinists, or Pakistan's Jamaat e-Islami?" — Dr. M. Zuhdi Jasser, in testimony before the US House Oversight and Government Reform Subcommittee on National Security, July 11, 2018.

"Develop foreign policy mechanisms to disincentivize Qatari and Turkish Government facilitation of the Brotherhood and ultimately think about suspending Turkey from NATO." — Dr. M. Zuhdi Jasser, in testimony before the US House Oversight and Government Reform Subcommittee on National Security, July 11, 2018.

"And please stop engaging Muslim Brotherhood legacy groups in government, media, and NGOs, and recognize their Islamist terrorist sympathies." — Dr. M. Zuhdi Jasser, in testimony before the US House Oversight and Government Reform Subcommittee on National Security, July 11, 2018.

Such a designation would also make it far more difficult for the countries that support the Muslim Brotherhood, especially Turkey and Qatar, to keep on doing so. The Muslim Brotherhood has already been declared a terrorist organization by the governments of Austria, Russia, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain.

Gaza standoff: Netanyahu and Hamas' high-stakes cease-fire gamble

Over the weekend, Israel and the U.S. announced that they had agreed upon a framework whereby the cease-fire would be extended for 50 days, and in exchange Hamas would release the remaining hostages, both living and dead, in two separate batches. Hamas so far appears to be rejecting the proposal. Ron Ben-Yishai explains the strategic logic at play, and why Gaza’s terrorist rulers may feel themselves under a new kind of pressure:

The main threat is the credible risk of an Israeli military operation to reoccupy Gaza. Five IDF divisions are already positioned around the Strip, ready for rapid deployment. . . . . Second, internal pressure within Gaza is mounting as civilians demand relief. In an effort to intensify this leverage, Israel announced this morning that it was halting humanitarian aid to Gaza so long as Hamas continues to reject the [new cease-fire] plan.

The third and strongest pressure point is U.S. support. President Donald Trump has shown no signs of losing interest in resolving the crisis.

Hamas, for now, is playing tough, banking on the assumption that Israel would avoid resuming large-scale military operations for fear of endangering the hostages. But recent statements from Benjamin Netanyahu and Defense Minister Israel Katz suggest that if Hamas refuses the deal, Israel may be willing to take that risk.

Palm Beach Post opinion editor fired after offensive Gaza cartoon. The coverage is more antisemitic than the cartoon is.

From Stet News of Palm Beach County:

The owners of The Palm Beach Post fired Editorial Page Editor Tony Doris last month after the paper published a syndicated cartoon condemned as antisemitic.

Executives with Gannett, the nation’s largest daily news publisher with more than 200 newspapers and 19 in Florida, fired Doris on Feb. 17. They did not respond to requests for comment.

Doris, 67, had been editorial page editor since April 2021. He said he viewed the cartoon by Jeff Danziger of Counterpoint Media, which ran on Jan. 26, as anti-Israel but not antisemitic.

“They’re conflating criticism of the government of Israel with antisemitism,” Doris told Stet News. “I fully support Israel’s right to exist. … I think you can feel that way and still be open to discussion of the issue of violence that has taken place there. They don’t get to shut down the conversation just because they’re not comfortable with it.”

Doris said he was told he had been fired for violating Gannett guidelines and standards.

In “An Open letter to the Community” published Feb. 9 in The Post, the Jewish Federation of Palm Beach County said the cartoon trivialized “the suffering of Israelis kidnapped and brutally held captive for 16 months” and “even worse, it spread dangerous antisemitic tropes, including the false and inflammatory accusation of bloodlust — a modern-day ‘blood libel’ used for centuries to incite hatred and violence against Jews.”

The full-page ad, co-signed by the federation’s Palm Beach Center to Combat Antisemitism & Hatred, continued: “We cannot stay silent. Hate speech turns into hate crimes. Journalism must inform, not incite. We welcome opportunities to work with media organizations to educate the public on the danger of antisemitism.”

The cartoon is thoroughly disgusting.

It the dead of Gaza as being all civilians, and Israelis as being callous towards the death toll. it implies that caring about the hostages is hypocritical when so many Gazans have been killed because of Hamas' human shields strategy.

As far as I can tell, though, the Jewish community did not demand that anyone be fired. They wrote an open letter, published as an ad, describing how offensive the cartoon is and trying to ensure that something like this doesn't get published again.

It was Gannett's decision to fire Doris. I don't agree with that decision; I prefer to stand on the side of freedom of speech, and the cartoon, as bad as it is, does not cross the line into incitement.

But the story is being framed as the powerful Jews imposing their will on a newspaper. See this New York Times headline:

It could have said that this is a story about freedom of speech or about how skittish institutions are on offending different groups.

There is nothing wrong with the Jewish community complaining, there is nothing wrong with meeting them and understanding how this cartoon was a gross but consistent misstatement of the truth of what happens in Gaza and how it demonizes Jews, albeit indirectly.

But the Jewish community didn't fire him. They didn't, as far as I can see, even ask for him to lose his job. That was purely a Gannett decision.

Instead of writing about how a newspaper may or may not have overstepped, or about how the Gaza war coverage has been filled with bias culminating in this disgusting cartoon, this coverage itself will fuel antisemitism. The impression being given is that those Jews are again censoring any opinions they don't agree with and controlling the media.

The cartoon was awful. Framing this as the Jewish community imposing its will on an editor that didn't deserve to be fired is the real incitement.

Buy EoZ's books on Amazon!

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

PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism (February 2022)