Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News

Wednesday, April 16, 2025

Google AI search result says 1,732 Jews "defiled the Al-Aqsa Mosque" on Tuesday

I saw in Arabic sites that the Waqf said that 1,732 Jews has ascended to the Temple Mount on Tuesday. When I Googled "1,732 Temple Mount," Google AI rephrased a Hamas news site, Palestine Information Center, saying that "approximately 1,732 Jewish settlers defiled the Al-Aqsa Mosque on the Temple Mount in Occupied Jerusalem during the third day of the Passover holiday. These settlers, with police escort, entered the mosque through the Maghariba Gate and provocatively toured its courtyards, receiving lectures and performing Talmudic prayers. "

This is above the search results, so the first thing visible is a Hamas propaganda site, promoted by Google.

Saying that this "Generative AI" is "experimental" is not an excuse to parrot the lies of a Hamas website as if it is a news site. AI modified the PIC article slightly to call it the Temple Mount.

The good news is, 1,732 Jews proudly visited their holiest site on Tuesday.

Buy EoZ's books on Amazon!

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

PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism (February 2022)

04/15 Links Pt2: Agam Berger: I Kept My Freedom in Hamas's Captivity; From Gaza to the Ivory Tower: The War on Israel; Trump freezes $2.2 bil in grants to Harvard

From Ian:

Seth Mandel: Whose Freedom?

The defenders of these institutions are merely demanding that Trump let them go back to the status quo of having academic freedom for some but not for others. If these groups would as emphatically demand the protection of Jewish academic freedom, we’d know they were sincere. As of now, there are zero such groups.

Same goes for free speech and free expression. On these campuses, Jewish and Israeli students have been repeatedly singled out, student organizations have placed exclusions on Jewish participation and identifiable Jews have been systematically attacked, harassed, and prevented from enjoying the same free expression that is routinely granted the pro-Hamas mobs calling for death to the Jews.

Harvard’s Jews were told they could not keep their Hanukkah menorah up overnight because the school would not guarantee its safety. That’s the status quo Harvard that its defenders seek to return to. Not a single one of them is truly interested in free speech, free expression, or academic freedom.

These institutions also take money from authoritarian, anti-American regimes such as Qatar. A 2022 study found that “as funding from Middle Eastern countries increases — and becomes less transparent to the public — certain campuses experience campaigns to silence academics, an erosion of democratic values, and a lack of response to attacks on students’ freedom of expression.” Harvard was part of this trend.

Does Harvard abhor the deleterious effects of government funding on academic freedom? Or does Harvard abhor the effects of U.S. government funding while ignoring the effects of cash infusions from anti-democratic regimes?

These institutions and their defenders would likely find more sympathy in dealing with the Trump administration’s overreach had they ever defended academic freedom, freedom of speech and expression, and true independence from government when it mattered.

Andrew Pessin: The Greatest Conspiracy Theory Ever Told — And the Real Conspiracy Nobody Talks About

Prior to 1967, much of the world understood it as a conflict between the Jews and the Arabs, the minority Jews struggling against the more powerful majority Arabs, the Jews a David versus the Arabs’ Goliath.

But after 1967, the Soviets began stressing the same propaganda terms with which they had been framing their more general battle against the West. During much of the Cold War and the period of global decolonization, they proclaimed themselves to be “anti-colonialists” supporting “national liberation movements” against the “imperialist” West, and so now the Middle East conflict was deliberately reframed as one in which the indigenous (newly invented) “Palestinian people” were fighting off the “imperialist-colonialism” of the invading Jews.

Overnight, the “Jewish-Arab” conflict became the “Israeli-Palestinian” conflict, where the Israelis looked big and strong and the Palestinians puny and weak, thus instantly reversing the “David-Goliath” framing. Some go so far as to say that the very “Palestinian” identity was formed or crafted in this period precisely to play this role, with the Soviets, via their work with the Palestine Liberation Organization and Arafat, being the central agent.

In other words, the whole thing was a psy-op — an extremely successful one that, to this day, brings the political Left across the globe into the global conspiracy against the Jews.

The second point is once again to emphasize the role of propaganda (in particular, as produced by the “intellectuals,” the “scientists,” the “professors”) in developing and advancing this conspiracy. In addition to the Moscow Institute of Oriental Studies Tabarovsky also discusses the “KGB-supervised Anti-Zionist Committee of the Soviet Public” (2019), itself producing the literature then translated into other languages and distributed abroad by the Novosti Press Agency, “a news service and an important arm of Soviet foreign propaganda.”

But now to get a more “vivid picture of Moscow’s approach to solving its Zionist problem” we can glimpse at just one example of the many that Tabarovsky (2019) examines, an article from 1969 or 1970 entitled “Anatomy of Israeli Aggression.” Written by Yevgeny Yevseyev, “one of the key ideologues of … Soviet anti-Zionism — the so-called Zionologists,” the article reports on yet another Soviet conference, the “Second International Conference in Support of the Arab Peoples” occurring in Cairo in 1969.

“Protocols”-style, the article frames Zionism as part of an imperialist global conspiracy against the national liberation movement and communism, affiliated with and a continuation of Nazism, and inevitably engaged in “genocide, racism, perfidy, duplicity, aggression, annexation,” and therefore, in essence, an enemy of most of the globe. The goal was thus to mobilize “world public opinion” by disseminating information about alleged “Israeli atrocities.”

If all that sounds familiar, it is because you are aware how the anti-Zionist “progressive” world approaches Israel to this very day, only it was all hatched quite deliberately over the past five decades. What we see in this article is literally a sketch of the playbook — the protocols — of the campaign to destroy the Jews and their national endeavor.

And just as we saw with the Nazis, the campaign against the Jews would borrow many of the methods allegedly laid out by the Jews themselves in the fabricated “Protocols” — while being motivated by (falsely) accusing the Jews of being guilty of them!

And lest you underestimate the true scale of this campaign against the Jews, note that this article was published in the “World Marxist Review — the English edition of the Prague-based Soviet theoretical journal ‘Problems of Peace and Socialism.’ Published in 40 languages and distributed in 145 countries, the journal reached an estimated half million of the most committed leftists around the globe” (2019).

Another way to think about the scale of this: At its peak, the Soviet Union was more than a thousand times bigger than the sliver which is the State of Israel, with nearly a hundred times its population in 1967 (a particularly salient year in the anti-Zionist conspiracy). If it were just the Soviet Union versus Israel, it already would be an enormous Goliath against a tiny David.

But it wasn’t just the Soviet Union; it was the Soviet Union, the entire Arab and Muslim worlds, and most of the Third World. We have nothing less than an actual mammoth global campaign to subjugate the Jews and destroy their national endeavor, all based on the fabricated (and delusional) allegation of that tiny population’s conspiracy to subjugate the behemoth instead.

Gadi Taub: From Gaza to the Ivory Tower: The War on Israel

Right before the war, Haaretz editor Aluf Benn published an op-ed arguing that it was time to remove the word “Jewish” from the phrase “Jewish and democratic.” That was a direct call to abandon Zionism in favour of a non-national state—probably one that includes Gaza and Judea and Samaria—and renounces the Jewish character of Israel.

This wasn’t surprising. They’d been undermining Zionism quietly for years, but now they said it out loud. Why then? Because it was clear that judicial reform had failed, and the power of Israel’s Supreme Court had been cemented—maybe even expanded. The Court holds a radical, progressive, post-nationalist worldview that is sympathetic to a non-Zionist vision of Israel.

The only way to make Israel not Jewish is to subvert its democracy. If you have universal suffrage and a Jewish majority, that majority will always vote to preserve a Jewish state. So Aluf Benn likely saw an opportunity: The danger of democratic reform had passed, and now was the time to push the anti-Zionist agenda more openly. But then October 7th happened, and suddenly abandoning the Jewish state didn’t seem like such a good idea.

Also worth noting: the Israeli Left has shut down a right-wing media outlet. It was a radio station, and it’s the only case in Israeli history where a media outlet was shut down—and it was on the right. When Ben-Gurion tried to shut down a communist newspaper, the Supreme Court protected it. But only the right has ever been silenced like this.

Haaretz, on the other hand, screams “censorship” any time someone criticises them. But why should the government be giving them advertising revenue? Why should civil servants be able to subscribe to Haaretz at taxpayers’ expense? Why should we help fund a newspaper whose publisher is calling for sanctions against Israel in wartime?

So now, finally, there’s some courage to push back—because the case is so clear. But Haaretz is not in danger of being shut down. They can raise their own subscriptions. We just shouldn’t be forced to pay for it.

Even abroad, people are noticing. Jeffrey Goldberg—hardly a right-winger—said he cancelled his Haaretz subscription because he was getting too many links to it from neo-Nazis. And it’s true: if you look at neo-Nazi sites like The Daily Stormer, which sees itself as the successor to Der Stürmer, there are hundreds of references to Haaretz articles. Because when someone like Gideon Levy writes, “Stop Living in Denial: Israel Is an Evil State,” the antisemites say, “See? Even the Jews say it.”

David Duke has cited Haaretz hundreds of times. They’ve become one of the most effective producers of antisemitic material in the world. And because it’s coming from Jews, it’s treated as authoritative—as self-testimony.

What’s also collapsing now, hopefully, is the broader machinery of lies—the same system that promoted the Iran nuclear deal. That’s what Ben Rhodes was famous for: creating an “echo chamber,” planting narratives in the media, and manufacturing a false sense of consensus.

That machine began to fall apart during the Trump–Biden debates. People started to realise they’d been lied to for three years. “He’s sharp as a tack,” they were told. Then suddenly it’s Kamala Harris and Joy Reid we’re supposed to accept as the real voices. The whole thing started to unravel.

A big part of that was Elon Musk buying Twitter. He broke a huge piece of that narrative-control machine.

Then there’s Trump himself. And Netanyahu. And Netanyahu understands something that’s often missed: beyond the battlefield, there’s a war of narratives.

One narrative—promoted by the Biden administration, the Israeli Left, Haaretz, most of the liberal media, and academia—is that Zionism is a relic of Western colonialism. It needs to be dismantled.

The other narrative—Netanyahu’s narrative—is that Zionism is not the rear guard but the avant garde of the West. Israel is the front line in the battle between the West and its enemies.

According to the first view, jihad is just armed resistance—a reaction to Western guilt. And the solution is to make amends and offer reparations.

But Netanyahu’s view is: These are our mortal enemies. They must be taken seriously. And Israel is leading the struggle. That’s what he said in his speech to Congress, where he got 37 standing ovations: “Our war is your war. Our victory will be your victory.” The West needs to shake off its postcolonial illusions, see the threat clearly, and stand with us.

04/15 Links Pt1: Hamas Is Exploiting the Freedoms It Wants to Destroy; Why the UN Must Now Be Placed on Trial; John Spencer on Peirs Morgan!

From Ian:

Why Israel should embrace its role as a regional power

Iran remains the primary long-term challenge. Regime change should be policy, but regime containment must be first. This includes:
Bolstering internal opposition through digital and humanitarian channels;
Continuing cyber deterrence;
Disrupting regional supply lines and proxy funding;
Keeping military options credible and visible;
And most critically, dismantling its nuclear capacity. Diplomacy may stall it, but force must remain on the table.

Engagement from a position of strength is not weakness. If Tehran ever moderates, Israel should be ready to pivot with diplomatic creativity–as long as security guarantees remain ironclad.

Becoming a regional power: Steps to take
National strategy: Form a strategic council on regional influence, composed of defense, diplomacy, economic and tech leaders.
Public diplomacy: Launch an initiative to rebrand Israel regionally, with Arabic content, youth engagement and collaborative platforms.
Infrastructure diplomacy: Lead regional mega-projects in water, food security and AI.
Military doctrine update: Shift from reactive defense to a proactive-plus doctrine with strategic depth.
Educational exchange: Establish scholarship programs for Arab and African students in Israeli universities.

The benefits of thinking bigger
Security: Stable neighbors and joint frameworks reduce existential threats;
Economy: Regional markets and logistics corridors can turbocharge growth;
Prestige: Israel becomes a shaper, not a responder;
Innovation: Diverse partnerships drive tech and research; and
Diaspora Pride: Global Jewish communities see Israel not as besieged, but as a beacon.

The obstacles
Of course, this is not a utopia.
Some Sunni regimes are fragile or duplicitous.
Domestic political fragmentation may block a bold vision.
Iran and its proxies will continue asymmetrical warfare.
Great power rivalries can squeeze policy space.
Regional rivals such as Turkey and Qatar will try to outmaneuver diplomatically.

But as the Arab saying goes, “man jadda wajada”—“He who strives, succeeds.”

And maybe, just maybe, it’s time we stop waiting for the world to hand us legitimacy. Like the Duchy of Grand Fenwick in that delightfully absurd film, we too might discover that acting with audacity creates the reality we seek.

Israel has roared. Now it must lead.

Prof. Efraim Inbar: Time to Revise Israel's Military Doctrine

Israel's original military doctrine, formulated by David Ben-Gurion, emphasized three core elements: deterrence, early warning, and decisive victory. However, Israel suffered major deterrence and intelligence failures in October 1973 and October 2023. In both instances, the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) failed to deter its adversaries and Israel's intelligence apparatus did not provide adequate warnings of the impending attacks.

Deterrence is an elusive and problematic psychological concept. Military superiority and the threat of retaliation do not always succeed in dissuading an adversary from the attack. For Hamas, the anticipated benefits of confronting Israel outweighed the costs of potential punishment, as its religious motivations overrode the logic of rational deterrence. Israel underestimated Hamas's resolve to destroy it and its belief that this objective is attainable. Furthermore, Israel failed to recognize that its containment policy, implemented over two decades, had eroded its deterrence.

With regard to intelligence failures, analysts overlooked evidence that did not support existing theories. Israeli intelligence knew about Hamas's attack plan, but this was not effectively communicated to decision-makers with the appropriate context. Analysts misread signals and intentions. In addition, the IDF was overly reliant on technological means of intelligence collection at the expense of human intelligence.

Human beings are inherently fallible. Consequently, we cannot expect to receive early warning about the erosion of deterrence or an imminent attack. Instead, Israel has no choice but to build a better defensive posture while facing a multifront scenario. Israel needs a larger standing army along with larger reserve units in border communities.

The former policy of containment/restraint has proven counter-productive. Containment conveys weakness in a region where the political culture values the use of force. Fear remains the most effective political currency in the Middle East. Kicking the can down the road is rarely a prudent course of action. Despite the inherent risks involved, Israel must use preemptive strikes, a core element of its original military doctrine. Today Israel is paying a staggering price for its delay in mounting a strong military response to the buildup of military capabilities by Hamas and Hizbullah.

Jonathan Sacerdoti: Hamas Is Exploiting the Freedoms It Wants to Destroy

Hamas - the Iranian-backed terror group responsible for the 7 October massacre - is petitioning British courts to lift its designation as a terrorist organization. Aided by British lawyers, Hamas is seeking to launder its blood-soaked record under the false banners of "liberation" and "resistance." This is not mere absurdity. It is a direct assault on the integrity of British democracy - and on the very survival of Western civilization.

We must as a society avoid at all costs giving legitimacy to groups which openly seek the destruction of the very freedoms they exploit. Hamas's legal challenge frames it as a Palestinian Islamic liberation movement. Yet its founding charter, issued in 1988, remains a naked manifesto of genocidal intent. It declares all of Israel an Islamic trust to be reclaimed through jihad, rejects any negotiation, and traffics in classic antisemitic conspiracy theories.

From the suicide bombings of the 1990s, to the relentless rocket barrages against Israeli civilians, to the mass rapes, murders and kidnappings of 7 October, Hamas has been unwavering in its purpose: the annihilation of Jews and the eradication of the Western-style democracy of Israel.

Hamas's attempt to portray itself today as a political movement wronged by Western injustice is not merely dishonest - it is part of a broader strategy of political Islam to manipulate and subvert Western democratic systems. Britain's legal tradition is being cynically weaponized by an organization that would, given the chance, dismantle its very freedoms. If we allow Hamas to succeed in this grotesque charade, we will have surrendered the very principles that make Britain worth defending.

Reuters reports:

Jordan said on Tuesday it had arrested 16 people linked to the Muslim Brotherhood who were trained and financed in Lebanon and had plotted attacks on targets inside the kingdom involving rockets and drones.

Authorities said at least one rocket was ready to be launched as part of an operation that had been under surveillance by security forces since 2021.

A security source said the suspects were connected to the Muslim Brotherhood, the country's largest opposition group, while the head of the cell who trained some of its members was based in Lebanon.

The Brotherhood have been accused of instigating anti-government street protests in Jordan, which has a large Palestinian population.

Security forces found a rocket manufacturing facility alongside a drone factory, according to a statement by the General Intelligence Department released on state media.

"The plot aimed at harming national security, sowing chaos and causing material destruction inside the kingdom," the statement said.

The original version of the story linked the plot to Hamas. That has been excised from the newer versions of the article.

Is there a Hamas connection?

It seems unlikely to me that the Muslim Brotherhood in Jordan would want to turn explicitly violent. It knows that Jordan would crack down on them mercilessly. The MB would rather remain in the background, feeding stories to media, quietly supporting anti-government protests, but trying to build an arsenal where the targets are within Jordan seems far-fetched.

Jordanian media is featuring this story with extra details:

The cell, which was preoccupied with dark plans aimed at undermining national security, included three main members. It began its plans after a main instigator named Ibrahim Mohammed proposed the idea of manufacturing missiles in Jordan illegally. Ibrahim, who belongs to the unlicensed Muslim Brotherhood group, according to the confessions of the cell's defendants, is the same main defendant who is being tried before the State Security Court in the case of transporting and storing approximately 30 kg of TNT, C4, and SEMTEX-H, highly explosive materials.

The report indicated that the instigator Ibrahim arranged for two members of the weapons manufacturing cell (Abdullah Hisham and Moaz al-Ghanem) to visit Lebanon. The visits were aimed at connecting with the organizational official in Beirut for planning and training on implementing the plan, while the task of transferring funds from abroad was assigned to the third member (Mohsen al-Ghanem).

The Lebanese connection and funding makes this sound like an Iranian plot with Hamas and Hezbollah, not a Muslim Brotherhood plot.

If this was Iran or Hamas, Jordan would not want to publicize this either way. If it was Hamas as the primary instigator, then the rocket fire would be aimed at Israel and would be an attempt for Israel to respond and, they would hope, start a war or at least drop the Jordan/Israel peace deal.

If Iran was behind it, Jordan would not risk an international incident over this.

Plus, Jordan hates the MB, and would happily pin this on them, especially since Hamas is linked to the Brotherhood as well.

But the Muslim Brotherhood in Jordan being behind this? That angle makes little sense.

Buy EoZ's books on Amazon!

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

PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism (February 2022)

The three tiers of the Jewish ethical framework

Previously, we have discussed and listed a set of Jewish ethical values.

However, a list of values is not enough to build an ethical system.

Again using Progressivism as an example, progressives have values too: equity, inclusion, anti-racism, environmental justice, anti-colonialism, and others. They also would seem to be aligned with some Jewish values, like preserving life, helping the downtrodden, and justice.

Yet we showed how their values ended up supporting things that are absolutely immoral, like support of terrorism.

The perversion of Progressivism comes from their overemphasis on some values and downplaying others. Anti-colonialism is one of their values, but if is interpreted as "colonialism is the ultimate evil and must be fought by any means necessary" that can then be used to indeed justify terrorism against perceived colonialists. The "preserving life" value is somehow defined as less important than the "resisting injustice" value. We've seen how the term "colonialism" has been applied as a crime only for specific Western states (not Chinese imperialism, the Islamic conquest or the Ottoman Empire), strongly indicating that the value itself is being politicized beyond its definition.

A separate problem is that when they make these sorts of determinations of the relative weight of values, there is no transparency. They just say that they want "justice" and their loudest members are the self-appointed judges. When they make a values-based decision, the relative importance of conflicting values is not explained.

A third problem is that they apply their definitions dishonestly. They declare Israel is "colonialist" or "settler colonialist," period. They can point to academic papers to support their viewpoint, but they consciously ignore papers that refute it. They elevate their biased opinions to the status of proven scientific theory - and anyone who disagrees is essentially excommunicated.

The problem isn't necessarily that their values are definitionally invalid. It is that the process of applying those values is subject to subversion and perversion. In the end literally anything can be justified under the Progressive ideological system.

A moral system that can justify immorality is not a moral system.

Most moral systems have the same shortcomings. Many only define themselves by their values. Some have additional rules. But only the Jewish value system has extensive checks and balances on how it is applied and implemented. Moreover, it has full transparency and self-correcting mechanisms built-in so it virtually impossible for it to be hijacked and politicized. While Judaism is criticized as being outdated and inflexible, in reality the Jewish ethical system, refined over millennia, is better positioned to address and adapt to new situations then any other.

The Jewish moral framework we are building has three tiers*:

Core Values: A list of foundational Jewish ethical ideas rooted in Torah, Talmud, and rabbinic tradition. As we've seen, these include concepts such as Pikuach Nefesh (the supreme value of life), Emet (truth), Tzedakah and Chesed (justice and kindness), Tzelem Elokim (human dignity), and Lashon Hara (ethical speech), among others.
Adjudication: The methodology for balancing and applying these values in real-world or complex situations.
Integrity: This governs how the framework is applied and ensures the process maintains integrity. It is not about the outcome, but the process of reaching and explaining the outcome.

We've already listed the core values tier. Here are the informal rules of the adjudication tier:

Internal Coherence – Does not contradict itself across cases.
Context-Sensitivity – Values may weigh differently depending on the situation.
Value Fidelity – Ethical decisions must be faithful to the source values; they cannot be a smokescreen for violating them.
Ethical Triage – Provides tools to weigh competing values (e.g., when truth and peace are in tension).
Balance of Principles – Encourages multi-value analysis rather than moral flattening to a single imperative. Every ethical decision must consider whether it violates any of the others, and if so, it must be justified.

The adjudication tier adds important controls to the moral system to ensure that, for example, values are not ignored when they seem to contradict others.

Already, this makes the Jewish ethical system more mature and less prone to being hijacked than most other systems.

Uniquely, however, the Jewish system goes beyond these two to another tier that ensures the integrity of the entire system:

Transparency – Moral reasoning must be public and explainable, modeled after shailot u'teshuvot (responsa literature). Like a good rabbinic teshuva, decisions should be laid out with their logic and sources made clear. This allows others to understand, critique, or build on the decision. Transparency isn't just good practice; it makes the system self-correcting and proof against manipulation.
Replicability – Others should be able to follow and potentially reproduce the reasoning.
Open Participation – Anyone can take part in the interpretive process—Jew or non-Jew, scholar or layperson—if they agree to play by the rules. This is not centralized authority but decentralized legitimacy. Authority is earned through fidelity to the values and the process, not conferred by title. (It becomes a meritocracy - the wisest interpreters generally get reputations that give their opinions more weight, but brilliant newcomers can "break in" to the top tiers.)

Contrast this to other systems where authority is centralized and often coercive.
Critique-Friendly – The system is designed to be challengeable. Reasoning must be principled and sourced, and those offering interpretations are obligated to respond to valid critiques - either refuting them or admitting that they were wrong (intellectual honesty.)
Humility – No interpreter claims omniscience. The system assumes human fallibility and encourages correction when mistakes are found. Disagreement to uncover the truth (lishmah) is a central value.
Curiosity and Sincerity – Those using the system must aim to learn and improve, not score points. Seeking out competing views is not a weakness—it is a requirement.
Insulation from Power – The process must resist co-optation for personal or political gain. Interpretations that favor powerful interests without transparent justification should be met with suspicion and scrutiny. The top Jewish ethicists rarely hold political positions nor even head major institutions.
All issues are important - Questions that revolve around a dispute over a penny are treated seriously, because the underlying values are the same for seemingly important and unimportant cases.

A comparison to open-source software is helpful: anyone can contribute to Linux, but their contribution must meet the standards of the codebase. If they add code that is hiding a virus or malware, the open source allows others to discover the attempt, expose it, and even sanction the offender so they will never be trusted to contribute again. Similarly, anyone can make a moral argument within this Jewish ethical algorithm, but they must do so transparently, responsibly, and in alignment with the core principles.

This structure prevents capture by ideology. If someone begins to distort or selectively apply the values - say, always interpreting them to benefit one group or political stance - their reasoning can be challenged, dissected, and rejected by others in the community. It is a form of built-in resistance to corruption.

Most moral systems fall apart not necessarily because their core values are wrong, but because the people interpreting and applying them are either unaccountable, dishonest, or inconsistent. Jewish ethics, through centuries of practical development, has built a system of moral reasoning that includes safeguards against this. To gain respect, the top authorities must be experts in the process, well versed in other fields and of impeachable moral standards.

The third layer is what gives this moral system its staying power. It acknowledges human fallibility and creates a structure that rewards honest reasoning, respects dissent, and allows course correction.

A secondary but important benefit is that by keeping the system and logical processes transparent, anyone who learns the system can apply the rules themselves to any situation they find themselves in. When they are presented with any information - a newspaper article, a video, a lecture, an advertisement - this process gives everyone the tools to evaluate them objectively. People try to manipulate us all the time, whether to join their cause or to buy their toothpaste. the Jewish moral methodology helps defend us all against being seduced into doing things that might not align with our own values.

This is not just a framework—it is a blueprint for moral civilization.

It is Jewish, yes—but it is also universal, precisely because it demands clarity, integrity, and accountability from everyone who engages with it.

This is a mature, time-tested system of ethical trust. And anyone willing to uphold its standards is welcome to participate.

----

* I want to emphasize that while these tiers have existed for centuries, this may be the first time they are described in these terms.

Buy EoZ's books on Amazon!

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

PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism (February 2022)

Elliott Abrams describes the problem perfectly:

First, the United States demanded direct negotiations while Iran wanted indirect talks. The talks in Oman were indirect, with the Omani foreign minister as go-between. It seems that there was a hello chat and handshake between U.S. envoy Steve Witkoff and Iran’s foreign minister Abbas Aragchi, but no more than that.

Second, the key critique of the JCPOA, the 2015 Obama-Iran agreement, noted that it dealt only with nuclear weapons and ignored both Iran’s support for terrorist proxies and Iran’s missile program. According to press reports, the talks in Oman dealt only with nuclear matters. That is exactly what Iran wants.

Third, the United States appears to be signaling weakness right from the start—abandoning the goal of ending Iran’s nuclear program. As The New York Times put it, “Mr. Trump and Mr. Witkoff indicated that their real bottom line is ensuring that Iran can never build a nuclear weapon—despite harsh demands from Trump officials before the talks that Iran dismantle its nuclear program entirely as well as abandon its missile program and its support for regional proxies.” (Let’s ignore for the moment that bit of Times editorializing in a news story, calling the demand that Iran stop supporting terror and building intercontinental ballistic missiles “harsh.”)

Mr. Witkoff’s negotiating practices are difficult to understand. He told The Wall Street Journal just before the talks that “I think our position begins with dismantlement of your program. That is our position today. That doesn’t mean, by the way, that at the margin we’re not going to find other ways to find compromise between our two countries. Where our red line will be, there can’t be weaponization of your nuclear capability.” This the definition of a pre-emptive concession: ‘Here’s my bottom line—but if you don’t like it, I’ll find another one.’

It is even worse than that.

All non-Hezbollah Lebanese are hoping that the negotiations would cut off Iranian weapons to Hezbollah, but there is no indication that Iranian military proxies like Hezbollah and the Houthis are even on the table.

The same goes for Iran's ballistic missile program.

In 2018, the first Trump administration described why the US is withdrawing from the JCPOA agreement and he listed all the reasons beyond Iran's violations:

President Trump is making clear that, in addition to never developing a nuclear weapon, the Iranian regime must:
Never have an ICBM, cease developing any nuclear-capable missiles, and stop proliferating ballistic missiles to others.
Cease its support for terrorists, extremists, and regional proxies, such as Hizballah, Hamas, the Taliban, and al-Qa’ida.
End its publicly declared quest to destroy Israel.
Stop its threats to freedom of navigation, especially in the Persian Gulf and Red Sea.
Cease escalating the Yemen conflict and destabilizing the region by proliferating weapons to the Houthis.
End its cyber-attacks against the United States and our allies, including Israel.
Stop its grievous human rights abuses, shown most recently in the regime’s crackdown against widespread protests by Iranian citizens.
Stop its unjust detention of foreigners, including United States citizens.

None of these demands are being publicly stated in any Trump administration announcements about the current negotiations.

Which indicates that these negotiations are pretty much to reinstate the JCPOA - the agreement that Trump repeatedly called one of the worst deals in history.

Buy EoZ's books on Amazon!

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

PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism (February 2022)

Front page article in @Harpers filled with lies and whitewashes Palestinian terrorist attacks on Jews

This is the cover of the current issue of Harper's (not yet online):

The 14-page propaganda piece, by Ben Ehrenreich, is remarkable in how one-sided it is - even for him.

The theme of the article is that Palestinians in the West Bank tried non-violence but the evil Jews kept attacking them for no reason, so now they are sadly forced to become violent.

The central falsehood of the article is the myth of historical Palestinian nonviolence.

Some version of what has come to be called nonviolent resistance dates back more than a century....The idea is simple: to stand together, to refuse the fate chosen for you by your oppressor, and with your courage inspire others to do the same. That was the basis for mass mobilization during the uprising of 1936, throughout the First Intifada in the late Eighties and early Nineties, and in the early weeks of the next one, the fall of 2000. As the Second Intifada dragged into its third year and the losses piled up, nonviolent tactics gained their appeal.

Wow.

About 400 Jews were killed in the 1936-39 "revolt." About 277 Israelis were killed in the "non-violent" first intifada. And the "early weeks " of the second intifada featured the murders of about 12 Israelis including the vicious lynching of two Israelis who made a wrong turn into Ramallah.

This is the tone of the entire article. The atrocities of October 7 are not mentioned. Terror attacks against Israeli civilians since that date - at least 30 killed by West Bank Palestinians - are not mentioned at all. The article implies that the only "resistance" since October 7 is militants defending their homes in Jenin and Tulkarem, not murdering Jewish civilians.

Astoundingly, the word "Hamas" is not mentioned once - even though it is the most popular political group in the West Bank. Not only that, but Hamas tried to spread the October 7 attacks into the West Bank and wanted to activate sleeper cells there, which would explain Israel's aggressiveness in the territories in the weeks and months afterwards.

Of course, Harper's and Ehrenreich don't want their readers to know this.

The entire article is riddled with falsehoods - claiming that 70,000 were killed in Gaza, way beyond what even Hamas claimed. Or even small details like this:

Shireen Abu Akleh was shot to death by an Israeli soldier in May 2022. The monument erected to her had been bulldozed. Across the street was the new martyrs’ cemetery, built for Palestinians killed by Israeli forces. The earliest graves dated to July 2023, and it was already half full.

The cemetery was there when Akleh was killed.

Manal Tamimi is presented as a non-violent peace activist, while her social media is filled with celebrations of terror attacks. And Ehrenreich knows this quite well, because there have been articles criticizing his praising of the Tamimi family in years past.

This is not journalism. This is curated anti-Israel propaganda.

That this level of distortion passed editorial review at one of America’s most prestigious magazines says more about Harper’s than it does about Ehrenreich.

Buy EoZ's books on Amazon!

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

PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism (February 2022)

04/14 Links: A Tale of Two Abrahams; Gov. Shapiro’s home was targeted in an arson attack; Murray, Rogan and the limits of ‘edgelordism’; ‘Dry Bones’ cartoonist Yaakov Kirschen dies at 87

From Ian:

A Tale of Two Abrahams

REVIEW: 'Abraham: The First Jew'
Julius retells the idol-smashing midrash and the canonical biblical Abrahamic narrative with bold creative license—Terah "was a manufacturer, a retailer, and a trader, the owner of shops in Ur and elsewhere, a person of substantial means and well-connected to the ruling circles in the city." He has a teenage Abraham arguing against the mighty pagan king Nimrod who sought to punish the boy for his stunt defending himself in language no teen would ever use—"Adolescence is an underrated period in a person's life!" the unbowed Abraham shouts. "You by contrast are nothing more than a geriatric dictator. Indeed, you are immobilized in that role, without creativity or prospects for growth or change." When three angels appear before Abraham in the guise of men in an episode described in Genesis's 18th chapter, Julius rewrites the opening scene meditatively: "He saw three men. They were not ordinary men. Perhaps they were not men at all. Perhaps there were not three but only one. Perhaps it was not one but the One."

Amid the action, Abraham the first argues with the second. "In your fidelity to faith, your meta-faithfulness, you imprison yourself in the logic of others—of the Other," the former flings at the latter. "You have no piety," Abraham the second replies. "You think humanity is nothing but an indifferent accident on the surface of being."

Unlike the two seemingly disparate accounts of the first human's origin, there is no indication in the biblical text that there are two sides to Abraham's persona. He receives revelation from God at the start of his journey to the Promised Land (the Bible offers no details about his youth) as well as decades later. He demonstrates commitment to the covenant with God despite challenges, from fleeing to Egypt during a famine to arguing for the sparing of Sodom to mourning the death of his beloved wife Sarah.

"Every Jewish life is two lives, the lives of the two Abrahams," Julius insists.

Julius's Abraham is, of course, a stand-in for the author's wrestling with his own spirituality. In analyzing the near-sacrifice of Isaac, known as the Akedah, or Binding of Isaac, he cites the author Wendy Zierler's complaint that "the Akedah seems to fail as a recipe for passing on religious convictions to living children who we love." "I respond, yes of course it does," says Julius. "That is its purpose, or at least part of its purpose. Its 'failure' is its triumph. It makes Judaism difficult." To Julius, the Akedah asks readers to wonder: "Is sacrifice truly the highest spiritual value? Can God truly be trusted? Should we truly elevate religion above ethics? These questions are Judaism's challenge to itself."

The coda of the book presents the reader with a brief summary of perspectives on Abraham by various faith communities and seminal modern thinkers, including pre-rabbinic Judaism, the Talmud, Christianity, Freud, Hegel, and Kafka.

A quip about the medieval Jewish philosopher Maimonides seems apt. He has been so used and misused by subsequent scholars in support of their personal beliefs that there is My-monides and Your-monides. Julius has offered us his Abraham. The reader may choose to sacrifice it on the altar.

Ukraine and Israel are fighting two fronts in the same war — the West must support both

Domestic politics play a role in this positioning. Canada’s large Ukrainian diaspora — one of the biggest in the world — ensures that support for Kyiv is a near-universal political consensus. By contrast, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is deeply polarizing, with large segments of the Liberal electorate critical of Israeli policy. To avoid alienating key voter blocs, Carney has opted for a middle ground that lacks strategic coherence or vision.

But if Israel faces another escalation from Iran or Hezbollah, or if Washington pressures allies to align more closely with its pro-Israel position, Canada may be forced to choose between diplomatic neutrality and its alliance with the U.S. A failure to support Israel could deepen divisions within the western alliance.

Ultimately, the U.S. and Canada’s opposing priorities are self-defeating. The same adversaries are behind both conflicts. Tehran supplies Moscow with drones and other advanced military equipment to sustain its war against Ukraine, while Russia has provided Iran with military aircraft, intelligence and assistance in bypassing sanctions.

In addition, both countries seek to undermine the West by draining its resources, eroding its unity and proving that democracies lack the will to fight. If the West cannot recognize this interconnected challenge, it will remain a step behind its adversaries.

This division also fuels cynicism among allies. In eastern Europe, there is growing frustration that the U.S. prioritizes Israel over Ukraine. In the Middle East, there is anger that western countries that rush to defend Ukraine show hesitation when Israel is attacked. These perceptions matter. They shape alliances and determine how willing nations will be to stand with the West in future crises.

Moreover, failing to support both Ukraine and Israel weakens deterrence elsewhere. Nowhere is this clearer than in Taiwan. China watches how the U.S. and its allies handle these conflicts. A western failure to sustain Ukraine would reinforce Beijing’s belief that the U.S. will not intervene forcefully if Taiwan is attacked. Taiwan is now more vulnerable than ever.

All told, the West does not have the luxury of picking its battles. The U.S. should not allow domestic politics to weaken Ukraine’s war effort, and Canada must overcome its reluctance to fully support Israel — its strongest and oldest regional ally.

Instead of reacting to crises as they arise, the West must proactively strengthen deterrence against authoritarian actors. This means permanent military aid for Ukraine and Israel, enhanced NATO co-ordination in eastern Europe and a clearer containment strategy for Iran.

If the West cannot muster the will to defend Ukraine and Israel simultaneously, it will lose more than two wars — it will lose its credibility, its deterrence and, ultimately, its global leadership.

‘Dry Bones’ cartoonist Yaakov Kirschen dies at 87

Israeli cartoonist Yaakov Kirschen, whose iconic daily cartoons were published by JNS for the last several years, died at Meir Medical Center in Kfar Saba on Monday after a lengthy illness, aged 87.

After making aliyah in 1971, the Brooklyn-born Kirschen began sketching his trademark “Dry Bones” cartoons in 1973. The cartoon was internationally syndicated and published in The Jerusalem Post for 50 years, after which Kirschen moved to JNS.

The name of Kirschen’s comic strip referred to the biblical vision of the “Valley of Dry Bones,” with its main character named Shuldig, which is Yiddish for guilty or blame.

“The cartoon started on January 1, 1973,” he once explained. “I named it Dry Bones, thinking that everyone would immediately connect the name with the ‘dry bones’ that will rise again, from the Book of Ezekiel. But the question that I get asked most often is ‘Where does the name ‘Dry Bones’ come from?’ So what I thought would be most obvious was not obvious at all.”

A member of the U.S. National Cartoonists Society and the Israeli Cartoonists Society, Kirschen won several awards and was considered a “national treasure of the Jewish people.” Among the prizes he received were the Israeli Museum of Caricature and Comics’ Golden Pencil Award and the 2014 Nefesh B’Nefesh Bonei Zion Prize for his contribution to Israeli culture and the arts.

He is survived by his artist wife, Sali Ariel, three daughters, three grandchildren and three great-grandchildren.

04/11 Links Pt2: Meir Soloveichik: America and the Exodus; Lee Smith: The Edgelords; Douglas Murray To Joe Rogan: Stop ‘Just Asking Questions’

From Ian:

Meir Soloveichik: America and the Exodus

In every generation, one is obligated to see himself as if he had left Egypt.
—The Haggadah

In 1956, millions of Americans flooded cinemas to see the Exodus story brought to life in Cecil B. DeMille’s The Ten Commandments. Among those moviegoers were American Jews, who could not help but feel that the film spoke to them, personally and profoundly. When Charlton Heston’s Moses is asked whether he is ashamed upon learning he is not a prince of Egypt but rather a son of slaves, he responds: “If there is no shame in me, how can there be shame for the woman who bore me, or the race that bred me?”

In his book America’s Prophet: How the Story of Moses Shaped America, Bruce Feiler recounts how, in the 1950s, DeMille had pleaded with Paramount Pictures to make a film about Moses but received only resistance, until its CEO, Adolph Zukor, an assimilated Hungarian Jew, rebuked his Jewish colleagues: “We should get down on our knees and say thank you that he wants to make a picture on the life of Moses.” At a time when “many Jews still struggled with assimilation,” Feiler notes, “Moses’ open embrace of his faith was a powerful statement of self-confidence.” (DeMille was himself of Jewish descent; his mother, Matilda Beatrice Samuel, was a cousin of 1st Viscount Herbert Samuel, the first commissioner of British Mandate Palestine. But he was himself raised in the faith of his Christian father.)

For many Orthodox Jewish immigrants, recently arrived on American shores, such assimilation was out of the question. Yet many of them also went to see the film, in the knowledge that there was a deep connection between their own faith and the culture of the American society that they had just joined. This belief was reinforced in the film’s prologue, in which DeMille himself appeared on-screen and addressed the audience. “Ladies and gentlemen, this may seem an unusual procedure, speaking to you before the picture begins,” DeMille said. “The theme of this picture is whether men ought to be ruled by God’s law or whether they are to be ruled by the whims of a dictator like Ramses. Are men the property of the state, or are they free souls under God? The same battle continues throughout the world today.”

To these religious Jews, recently arrived in America, this message was remarkable: One of the screen’s legendary directors, the man who helped found Hollywood itself by making a film there in 1913, was telling them that America owed its greatness to the Jewish Passover story.

DeMille was right.

In his important book The Hebrew Republic, Harvard’s Eric Nelson writes that while it is assumed the achievements of modernity, such as democracy and religious freedom, were the result of progressive secularization, the reverse was the case. The Renaissance, Nelson notes, reflected the pagan inheritance of antiquity and generated an approach to politics that was secular in character, whereas following the Reformation, “Christians began to regard the Hebrew Bible as a political constitution, designed by God himself for the children of Israel.” Liberty, Nelson argues, took root in the political Hebraism of the English-speaking world.

It is therefore significant that Ben Franklin made this proposal for a seal for the United States: “Moses standing on the Shore, and extending his Hand over the Sea, thereby causing the same to overwhelm Pharaoh who is sitting in an open Chariot, a Crown on his Head and a Sword in his Hand. Rays from a Pillar of Fire in the Clouds reaching to Moses, to express that he acts by Command of the Deity. Motto, Rebellion to Tyrants is Obedience to God.”

Franklin’s suggestion reminds us that the Haggadah’s central exhortation—that we must see ourselves as if we had been slaves in Egypt and had been guided out by a mighty hand and an outstretched arm—is not only a religious idea but also one with political and moral implications. The late Rabbi Jonathan Sacks has noted that modernity was formed by four revolutions: the British (in 1688) and American on the one hand, and the French and Russian on the other. In Britain and America, one source of inspiration was the Hebrew Bible. Secular philosophy guided the French and Russian revolutions. The former led to free societies, while French and Russian utopian revolutions ended in tyranny.

Nicole Lampert: I never felt part of the Jewish community. Since October 7 that’s all changed

Being among big groups of Jews used to terrify me. Even when I went to look around a Jewish school with my eldest son a few years ago, I had those familiar and perhaps contradictory feelings of both claustrophobia and being left out.

Everyone seemed to know each other. I was too busy hiding from those I did recall. My kids don’t go to Jewish school.

I grew up in north London, the bosom of British Jewish life, but never completely felt part of it. My family was intensely secular – although officially we were members of a shul, which we occasionally visited on Yom Kippur. We had challah on a Friday night but also a big Christmas tree and prawns in the fridge. I was a shy child and never joined a Jewish youth movement. Occasionally I would go to Carmelli’s on a Saturday night with a Jewish school friend – as Jewish kids did in those days – and we would feel like outsiders looking in at the air kisses.

And then October 7 happened. It happened to Israel but it happened to each of us in the diaspora too.

There are few British Jews who haven’t lost friends since Israel was attacked by a terrorist organisation – when we found ourselves being attacked too for sympathising with other Jews. I was accused of “drinking the Kool Aid” when I berated one acquaintance for parroting Hamas propaganda. Mostly I noticed the silence even as I was spending every day interviewing victims of the attacks, families of hostages and documenting the rise of antisemitism.

Writing about antisemitism for a national newspaper drew lots of amazing comments from strangers on social media platforms, who told me “we are with you”, but often nothing from those who were my closest friends. That silence was deafening.

But now I have some wonderful new friends, and have grown closer to old ones. And suddenly, I am part not just of one Jewish community but dozens. And I surprise myself by feeling totally at home.

October 7 and the world’s reaction to it – those parties on the streets – made us feel isolated as well as bereft. But it has also given us something special too. Our community is stronger for it.

04/11 Links Pt1: Mahmoud Khalil Can Be Deported, Judge Rules; The Profound Wisdom of ‘Don’t Start a War with Israel’; A Passover lesson for Jews who oppose Trump more than antisemitism

From Ian:

Seth Mandel: The Profound Wisdom of ‘Don’t Start a War with Israel’

Brett McGurk gave a deceptively simple answer when the Times of Israel asked him what the lessons of Oct. 7, 2023 and the ensuing conflict were.

“Don’t start a war with Israel,” the former National Security Council official said.

One is tempted to say that that’s an obvious statement, but folks keep starting wars with Israel anyway, and will continue to do so. And that is why there is something more profound behind McGurk’s statement: You can learn a lot about an entity by examining why it has started a war with Israel.

McGurk’s plain meaning was that Israel can be a devastating military opponent. “Ask Sinwar, Nasrallah or Khamenei how they’re doing today compared to October 6,” he added, suggesting that Israel, like the Mounties, always gets its man.

That, however, only works as a deterrent to those who don’t want to lose.

Case in point: Egypt. Israel’s victory in the Six-Day War in 1967 arguably made the case that Egypt should stop going to war with the Jewish state, that Israel had convincingly displayed its permanence. But there was no doubt after the Yom Kippur War of 1973. After all, that was the war in which Egypt, not Israel, had the element of surprise. And yet afterwards Egypt still had to negotiate to get its land back.

Egypt’s decision to bow out of the “destroy Israel or die trying” party meant Syria would be at a steep disadvantage if it ever decided to invade Israel again in the future. So even though there wasn’t a peace deal between Israel and Syria (as there was between Israel and Egypt), Damascus and Jerusalem have since avoided all-out war. That doesn’t mean the now-deposed Assad family had accepted Israel’s legitimacy. It means the Assads knew their window of opportunity to defeat Israel in war had long gone by.

Jordan was never all that enthusiastic about fighting Israel after the 1948 War of Independence, so the Hashemite Kingdom arguably didn’t even need to learn its lesson firsthand. Amman has found it quite easy to abide by the principle of “don’t start a war with Israel.”

Lebanon is a basket case but its only elements that start wars with Israel answer to Iran. Tehran’s proxy, Hezbollah, knows you don’t start a war with Israel unless you’re prepared to lose. But Hezbollah isn’t concerned about what happens to Lebanon, because it is an agent of Iran.

And herein lies the lesson: The entities that still start wars with Israel know the devastation that is headed their way from the start. The devastation is the point. Hezbollah wants to see death and destruction come to Lebanon, because “Lebanon” as a concept is meaningless to it. Hezbollah is engaged in the practice of human sacrifice.

Jonathan Tobin: A Passover lesson for Jews who oppose Trump more than antisemitism

The question American Jews must ask when they sit down at their seder tables is: What matters most to them? Do they care about Israelis who were murdered, raped, tortured and kidnapped by the people all those the campus mobs are cheering for? Are they indifferent to the prospect of more Oct. 7 massacres of Israelis? Are they willing to delegitimize the heroic actions of the Israel Defense Forces in fighting the terrorists? Or are their relationships with liberal and left-wing erstwhile political allies who side with the victimizers of those Jews the only thing that is meaningful to them?

Passover is an exercise in atavism in which we are asked not merely to identify with our ancestors but to imagine that we were actually there in Egypt, suffering in slavery and then liberated by the strong hand of God that led the Israelites to freedom and the land of Israel. That normally requires a leap of imagination and faith that can prove to be difficult when we are living in times of peace and security.

Yet now, when antisemitism is on the rise, is it really so hard to think back on Jewish history, and all the moments when Jews spoke of liberation and “Next Year in Jerusalem,” even when those who sought their deaths were at their doorsteps?

As our liturgy teaches us, many Jews who fled Egypt longed for it and felt uncomfortable when presented with the dilemmas and responsibilities of freedom. Call it “Stockholm Syndrome” avant-la-lettre, but Jews have been identifying with their oppressors and in a state of denial about reality since the Exodus. At every point in history, there have been Jews who preferred to look away when danger was near or to rationalize, excuse or dismiss the peril that threatened them.

That many Jews would take this point of view is unsurprising when you consider how many rewritten Haggadahs omit key parts of the traditional seder that refer to the perennial threat to Jewish life, such as the key line that teaches that: “For not only one enemy has risen up against us to destroy us, but in every generation, they rise up to destroy us. But the Holy One, Blessed be He, delivers us.” Similarly, many leave out the admonition of the traditional service that speaks of resisting those who seek Jewish genocide by asking God to “pour out Your wrath upon the nations that do not know You and on regimes that have not called upon Your name.” By leaving this out, Jewish self-defense and even the help of allies are delegitimized in the name of a universalism that seeks justice for all except the Jews.

Trump is neither Moses nor Pharaoh, but by seeking to fundamentally reform American higher education by fighting the left-wing antisemitism that is normative there, he is providing leadership that much of organized Jewry has failed to provide. Opposing him on this issue is not a defense of American liberty or the Jews or Jewish values. It is a betrayal of all of them.

The lessons of history
This year, as it has so many times throughout Jewish history, Passover provides a lesson about standing together and supporting the cause of the Jewish people as they continue to fight for their survival. It teaches us that an abstract belief in freedom stripped of the moral values of faith and tradition is a path that leads toward oppression. Those who find excuses to stand apart from the plight of their fellow Jews—and against efforts to defend them—are identifying with the proverbial “wicked son” that the Haggadah speaks of, who asks what the ritual “means to you,” thereby excluding himself from the community.

If there is anything that Jewish history teaches us, it is that those who take such stands will be condemned by their posterity as having sided with the oppressors of their time. For the rest of us, the seder is the reminder that we must find the courage and faith to carry on just as previous generations have done.

We should do so with confidence that we are not alone. We have many friends in the Christian community, as well as faith in the power and strength of the Jewish state—the only true memorial to the Holocaust.

For us, the closing refrain of “Next year in Jerusalem” should not be dismissed as symbolism or an ancient and outdated tradition. It must be a clarion call to arms to defend Israel and the Jewish people and to refuse to let this generation’s enemies triumph. Just as past generations of Jews took heart from the promise of liberation inherent in the seder, so, too, must we do the same.

Wishing all of JNS’ readers, listeners and viewers a very happy, healthy and inspired Passover. Chag Pesach Sameach!

Chag Kosher v'Sameach!

One of the small pleasures of visiting Israel is being constantly surprised at seeing Jewish themes in everyday secular life. Graffiti that says "Am Yisrael Chai," or Scriptural verses on the sides of delivery trucks - and one of my favorites, buses that wish you a kosher and happy Passover. (Picture from 2013, h/t the Shmiklers.)

Israelis may be blasé about how embedded Judaism is in their everyday lives, but things like this are not small at all. The are what makes Israel feel like home for Jews, even the first time you visit.

Wishing you a chag kosher v'sameach!

If you still need a Haggadah, my Elder of Ziyon Haggadah is still available for download.

Being stuck in the Disapora, I will not be blogging or tweeting between Friday evening and at least Monday night.

Buy EoZ's books on Amazon!

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

PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism (February 2022)

From Palestinian Sada News:

Israeli occupation police handed Al-Aqsa Mosque preacher Sheikh Muhammad Salim an order banning him from entering the mosque for a week, with the possibility of renewal. The order was issued after he was summoned for interrogation upon leaving Al-Aqsa.

The forces summoned Sheikh Salim for investigation after Friday prayers.

The Jerusalem Governorate reported that the occupation forces summoned Al-Aqsa Mosque preacher, Mohammed Salim, for investigation by its intelligence services after he prayed for the people of the Gaza Strip during his Friday sermon. The governorate noted that Israeli police detained Salim after he left the mosque and handed him the summons.

I cannot yet find his sermon online, but I can guarantee one thing: he wasn't merely "praying for the people of the Gaza Strip" unless those prayers included the fervent wish that they murder more Jews.

Buy EoZ's books on Amazon!

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

PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism (February 2022)

Here's the latest absurdity from the "human rights" community: Military dogs whose only purpose is to save lives are illegal when the lives saved are Jewish.

The Euro-Med Human Rights Monitor is one of the many NGOs that have been created purely to delegitimize Israel under the false pretense of human rights abuses.

Today, they released a report (Arabic only so far) saying that the Netherlands sends trained dogs to the IDF and this is a violation of humanitarian law, somehow:

Geneva - The Euro-Mediterranean Human Rights Monitor holds the Dutch government directly legally responsible for complicity in the crimes committed by Israel in the occupied Palestinian territory, particularly in the Gaza Strip, due to its continued direct and indirect support for the Israeli war machine.

The Euro-Mediterranean Human Rights Monitor said in a press release that the Netherlands continues to export military dogs to the Israeli occupation army and other Israeli security services, despite their use as a tool for systematic torture and intimidation of Palestinians, as part of the Israeli system based on imposing comprehensive domination over them, stripping them of their human dignity, and completely destroying their existence.

The IDF uses dogs for various purposes, none of which are torture and all of which save human lives:

Explosive Detection: Dogs are used to sniff out hidden explosives, such as improvised explosive devices, in urban and rural environments. Their acute sense of smell helps identify dangerous materials that could threaten soldiers or civilians.
Search and Rescue: They assist in locating survivors or remains in collapsed structures or disaster zones, leveraging their ability to navigate debris and detect human scent.
Attack and Neutralization: Some dogs are trained to engage threats directly, subduing suspects or protecting handlers in combat situations. They can operate in both open areas and confined spaces like tunnels.
Tracking and Pursuit: Dogs track individuals or groups, such as during manhunts or border security operations, following scent trails to locate targets.
Tunnel Operations: In regions like Gaza, dogs are trained for underground warfare, entering tunnels to detect traps, explosives, or hidden fighters, often equipped with cameras to provide real-time intelligence.

I cannot find any credible evidence that the dogs are used in torture, and it seems highly unlikely that Dutch or any other companies would train the dogs for such a purpose. The IDF Oketz unit that uses dogs has strict guidelines on how they are used and treated. Independent military experts have praised how well the IDF uses their canine units. There are scattered reports of Palestinians accusing the IDF of using the dogs aggressively, but the only cases that have any corroboration are those that the IDF itself investigated.

A 2014 incident where a soldier was disciplined itself proves how moral the IDF use of dogs is. During a confrontation in Beit Umar, a 16-year-old Palestinian, Hamza Abu Hashem, was attacked by an Oketz dog after throwing stones at soldiers. The IDF investigated and found the soldiers’ actions “professionally unacceptable” and “morally mistaken,” as the dog was unleashed against orders. The West Bank Division commander suspended K-9 operations temporarily, ordered retraining, and restricted dog use to brigade commander approval. Disciplinary actions were taken.

This was against a stone thrower, not an innocent boy. Yet the incident was considered so grave that the entire unit was suspended.

So the idea that dogs are used to wantonly attack Palestinians is utterly unfounded.

The canine units exist for one reason only: to save lives. And the "Euro-Med Human Rights Monitor" cannot stomach saving the lives of Jews.

(Note: the bullet list of how dogs are used and the summary of the 2014 case were generated by AI,)

Buy EoZ's books on Amazon!

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

PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism (February 2022)