Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News

Wednesday, June 24, 2020

06/24 Links Pt1: Kontorovich: Don't Buy the "Annexation" Hype; Belgium to vote on recognizing Palestinian state, sanctions on Israel; Iran is ready for talks if US apologizes over nuclear pact

From Ian:

Prof. Eugene Kontorovich (WSJ): Don't Buy the "Annexation" Hype (google link)

Applying Israeli civilian law to West Bank settlements wouldn't preclude peace or violate Palestinian rights. It is widely described as an Israeli "annexation." But annexation has a precise meaning in international law: the forcible incorporation by one state of the territory of another state.

The land to which Israel seeks to apply its laws isn't legally the territory of any other state. Neither the U.S. nor the European Union recognizes the existence of a Palestinian state, and Israel's sovereign claim to the territory is superior to any other country's.

Over the past 53 years, Jews have returned to Judea and Samaria, territories from which they had been ethnically cleansed by the Jordanians in 1949. After five decades of Palestinian rejectionism, it is hard to argue that the legal regulation of these communities must remain in limbo until a far-off peace deal is signed.

Past peace efforts have been based on the morally repugnant and impractical assumption that the creation of a Palestinian state must be preceded by the expulsion of all Jews from its territory.

The application of Israeli law wouldn't affect the treatment of Palestinians. In the West Bank, they would continue to be governed by the Palestinian Authority.

The Israeli move may help bring the Palestinians to the table, as it would show Palestinian leaders that turning down negotiations weakens their hand.

David Horovitz: Netanyahu’s annexation bid is bad for Israel. Our ally the US should just say no

Many in the international community, too lazy or ideologically blinded to distinguish between cause and effect, have castigated Israel through the decades for the ostensible crime of defending itself against those who have sought our destruction, when the most cursory of inspections would confirm that the “Middle East conflict” would end if the aggression against Israel were to halt.

But Israel itself has known the truth. Its very resilience — its capacity not merely to survive but to thrive through decades of warfare, terrorism, and efforts to demonize it — is the greatest testament to that domestic confidence in our cause and legitimacy.

Unilaterally extending Israeli rule into the West Bank — preempting the Trump administration’s declared effort to foster a negotiated accord, with a land grab that turns Israel into the rejectionist party — marks the very opposite of our national interest. It not only damages the way we are perceived around the world, it remakes the way we present and see ourselves.

The Palestinian Authority rejected the Trump plan before it was even unveiled. It routinely incites against Israel, and its president, Mahmoud Abbas, in incendiary speeches designed to foster intolerance and intransigence, repeatedly seeks to separate modern Israel from its historic Jewish heritage. We cannot safely relinquish territory to this Palestinian leadership, not in the toxic climate it has helped create. We are also, of course, mindful of the devastating consequences of having relinquished adjacent territory to the north (the South Lebanon “security zone” in 2000) and south (the Gaza Strip in 2005), where in both cases terrorist organizations filled the vacuum, sparked wars and conflict, and pose ongoing danger.

But neither should we subvert our own long-term goals, the foundational principles of our own Declaration of Independence — to flourish as a Jewish and a democratic state ready and willing to defend itself against its enemies, and with its hand stretched out in peace to those neighbors who truly wish to live in tranquility alongside it.

Why Netanyahu purports to see a “historic opportunity” in the declarative extension of Israeli sovereignty to disputed parts of the West Bank, deepening Israel’s entanglement among the hostile Palestinians and ceding the moral high ground that is central to Israel’s own resilience and self-confidence, is hard to fathom. He was previously wary of the dangers of a bi-national state between Jordan River and Mediterranean Sea in which Israel would either lose its Jewish majority or have to subvert its democracy.

But he has said he will only go ahead with the approval of the US, our most important, trusted and closest ally. And so it falls to the Trump administration, now deliberating whether to green light Netanyahu’s gambit, to just say no.

In January, US President Donald Trump unveiled a proposal avowedly designed “for the benefit of Palestinians, Israelis and the region as a whole” as a recommended basis for direct Israeli-Palestinian negotiation on a “realistic two-state solution.”

Let’s stick with that.

Australia Takes a Stand Against Anti-Israel Bias

COMMUNAL leaders have lauded the Australian government’s stance at the United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC), after it was the only country to vote against all five anti-Israel resolutions at UNHRC’s 43rd session.

The UNHRC, which has a history of systemic bias against the Jewish State, passed five resolutions against Israel, leading the Australian Mission to the United Nations to blast its “disproportionate focus”.

“Australia has been consistent in its principled opposition to biased and one-sided resolutions targeting Israel in multilateral forums,” the mission said.

Stating, “Our position has not changed,” it added the resolutions “do nothing to contribute to lasting peace and stability for Israelis and Palestinians”.

Meanwhile, Australia’s ambassador to the UN Sally Mansfield said the UNHRC “holds Israel to a higher degree of scrutiny than any other state”.

Noting that Australia has “insisted on bringing these resolutions to a vote, so that they cannot simply be waved though as consensus resolutions”, Executive Council of Australian Jewry co-CEO Peter Wertheim said, “The Australian government is to be highly commended for consistently voting against these resolutions, and for exposing the bias and puncturing the hypocrisy which motivates them.”

Zionist Federation of Australia president Jeremy Leibler said the Prime Minister and Foreign Minister had refused to “kowtow to the UN’s obsessive focus on Israel”.

Jews: From Asiatic, Mongoloid, Slavonic, Low-Level Caucasians To Privileged White Supremacists (Daled Amos)

By Daled Amos

When it comes to spreading Jew-hatred, Tamika Mallory -- a disciple of Al Sharpton -- learned her lessons well. Back in 2018, she was quoted in a New York Times article, about how much she knew about those white Jews:

Since that conversation, we’ve all learned a lot about how while white Jews, as white people, uphold white supremacy, ALL Jews are targeted by it.

Labeling Jews as "white" and accusing them of having "white privilege" has proven to be a winning strategy for Jew-haters, as protests in response to the police killing of George Floyd have devolved into riots, some of them deliberately targeting Jewish businesses and synagogues.

But as we've pointed out before, Jews Were Not Always Considered "White" In The US

In her article, Diabetes and Race: A Historical Perspective, Arleen Marcia Tuchman writes about how difficult the US government found it to pigeonhole Jewish immigrants at the turn of the century. The Dillingham Commission, a US Congressional Committee set up in 1910 to ascertain the "whiteness" of immigrant groups, apparently had their hands full with the Jews:

In the 19th century, the United States Bureau of Immigration had classified Jews as “Slavonic,” a subgroup of the elite Aryan stock. However, the Dillingham Commission took issue with this, insisting that linguistic and physical criteria, including the “Jew’s nose,” placed them among the Semites, lower down on the Caucasian ladder.

...extreme nativists, who were determined to end the influx of eastern European Jews into the United States [referred] to the Jews’ physical stature, moral traits, and origins as a nomadic tribe, they insisted that the Jews not be classified as Caucasian at all, but as “thoroughbred Asiatics.”...One author could not hide his disdain for the “primitive, tribal, Oriental” character of the Jews. Yet another wrote disparagingly of the “Mongoloid traits” of the Jews, which he attributed to the blood of the Mongolian Khazars allegedly coursing through the Jews’ veins.

Now at last the Jews have finally made it as full-fledged members of the white race in the US -- only to find out that now being "white" is a bad thing.

How are Jews supposed to respond to the charge of being White?

One recourse has been to point out that not all Jews are white -- a fact that is part of the complex history of the Jews.

Ethiopian Jews are, of course, only one example of Jews of Color.

Here is another example of a Jew of Color:

Gal Gadot. Youtube screencap

When Wonder Woman hit theaters in 2017, the Comicbook / DC site confirmed:

Yep, with a quick google search, it turns out that Gal Gadot is not actually Caucasian, but is in fact Israeli.

For proof that Gal Gadot is not "white", the article pointed its readers to a post by Dani Ishai Behan on the Times of Israel Blog, who addresses the question -- Are Jews A People of Color?

At issue is the culture of antisemitism on the "anti-racist" left:

if we are “just white people with funny hats”, then we are perforce not “really” an oppressed group, thereby enabling anti-racists to retain their credentials without having to listen to Jews or take our concerns seriously.

And by extension, labeling Ashkenazic Jews as "white," makes it that much easier to portray Israel as a "white colonial project," based on some religious whim, taking advantage of the Arabs.

Behan responds by saying straight out that Jews -- including Ashkenazic Jews -- are People Of Color:

For one thing, we are an indigenous people of the Middle East. Our identity, our DNA, our culture, our language, and our history all attest to who we are as a people – centuries of exile doesn’t change that.

An obvious rebuttal is that the fact remains that Ashkenazic Jews are...white.
Behan's response is -- so what?

but this is fairly common among all Levantine groups, not just Jews. Moreover, fair skinned Latinos, Iranians, Pashtuns, and Native Americans aren’t exactly rare either. This is called “white passing”: the ability to blend in and escape some of the more immediate effects of non-whiteness while still suffering from the marginalization and othering that non-Jewish minorities experience. To put it another way, looking white is not the same as being white. [emphasis added]

You know, Behan may have a point.

Linda Sarsour. Youtube screencap.

In a second post, Behan writes that Ashkenazic Jews also qualify on the basis of their history for inclusion in the PoC club:

An indigenous people of the Middle East, Ashkenazi Jews were driven out of their homeland by European (and later Arab) colonists and taken as slaves to Europe where they were consistently regarded as savages, periodically massacred, and excluded from society on the grounds that they are a foreign, non-Christian, and non-European (or in the words of our European oppressors: Oriental/Asiatic) presence on European soil. [emphasis added]

The fact that today, Ashkenazic Jews are able to pass as "white," mix with them, and be accepted by them still misses the key point that Behan made before: "looking white is not the same as being white" --

having to hide one’s ethnic background just to be treated as a “normal” human being is not privilege, because white people (*actual* white people, not Jews) don’t have to do this. They don’t need to change their names, or flatten their noses, or bleach their skin, or straighten their hair, or take their kippahs off, etc. The fact that Ashkenazim, and white passing Jews in general, need to *work* just to be seen as regular people really says it all...

A perfect recent example in Winona Ryder, who spoke in an interview of her own experiences of antisemitism as an actress:

“There are times when people have said, ‘Wait, you’re Jewish? But you’re so pretty!’ There was a movie that I was up for a long time ago, it was a period piece, and the studio head, who was Jewish, said I looked ‘too Jewish’ to be in a blue-blooded family.”

True, Jews, to some extent, are able to "pass" themselves off as "white" and do not suffer from the same kind of racism as other groups. But those who exploit this difference in order to attack Jews in the US as benefiting from "white privilege" are jumping the gun -- and show a certain amount of hypocrisy as well:

All in all, we mustn’t make the mistake of assuming Jews enjoy “white privilege” just because our experiences are not symmetrical with those of African-Americans or Hispanics, as to do so would be unreasonable, fallacious, and hypocritical (again, no other ethnic minority is held to this standard). Anti-Jewish racism looks different because the stereotypes are different. In other words, we are not viewed by society as “uneducated thugs”, but as “dishonest”, “conniving”, “clannish”, and “bloodthirsty” mongrels who control everything behind the scenes, and these racist tropes play out in the way we are treated in this country. [emphasis added]

Those who will argue that the economic success of Jews is proof of their "white privilege" are willfully blind to history. There was a time that Jews enjoyed that same level of economic success in Germany and France -- and we all know how fleeting and impermanent that turned out to be.

Bottom line, those elements that combine to make a Jew an Ashkenazic Jew make him non-white as well:

Inasmuch as a group’s non-whiteness is contingent on their history, experiences, heritage, and relationship with the concept of “white” as defined by its pioneers, Ashkenazim certainly do qualify as a non-white people.

If other people from the Middle East are considered to be "people of color" -- regardless of their appearance, then the same must go for Jews as well, and the length of time that Jews have been displaced from their home in the Middle East does not make one bit of difference -- "Centuries of displacement from our land does not change this fact, and alleging otherwise is a form of erasure and antisemitism."

Yet, of all ethnic groups, it is the Jews who continue to be begrudged their Middle Eastern roots on account of the color of their skin.

Now that's creepy.

Saeb Erekat’s nephew, killed during an attack at a checkpoint, seems to have made a farewell video (UPDATE)

Yesterday, Israeli forces killed Ahmad Erekat, a nephew of PLO negotiator Saeb Erekat, as he appeared to purposefully swerve into an Israeli soldier at a checkpoint. The Erekat family is calling it a cold blooded execution:

Palestinians said a man shot and killed by Israeli forces during an alleged car-ramming attempt was actually rushing to pick up his sister and mother ahead of a family wedding later Tuesday evening, accusing Israel of executing him in cold blood.

Senior Palestinian official Saeb Erekat said his cousin, Ahmad Moustafa Erakat, was only rushing when Border Police shot him dead at the “Container” checkpoint in the neighborhood of Abu Dis, north of Bethlehem. Erekat rejected the Israeli account that the 28-year-old victim had attempted to run over a female officer in an attempt to commit a terror attack.

“My cousin, the nephew of my wife, was executed, murdered in cold blood and Netanyahu bears responsibility,” Erekat was separately quoted as having told the Kan public broadcaster.

According to Border Police, the younger Erekat was speeding when he arrived at a checkpoint at the entrance of Abu Dis. When an officer flagged him to halt, the driver veered toward her and slammed into the checkpoint tower. He subsequently got out of the vehicle and advanced toward forces who opened fire and killed him.

The Border Police have not yet released the video of the incident* (see below) which could clear up a lot. But a video has surfaced, from Ahmad’s phone, that appears to show that he was depressed and fighting some sort of accusations against him of collaborating with Israel, and that he had shamed his family:

The audio is unclear, but Shimrit Meir, who broke this story, says that he is saying, “Your brother is not a spy, I have never betrayed my homeland. I didn’t look at other men’s girls; ever since I got to know that girl, I didn’t know any secret of hers nor she of mine…Look at the situation I am in, I started telling things….I brought shame on my parents, and myself. …What happened to me has to do only with my fear and the thing that they put in my drink, and nothing else.”

I verified that this is consistent with what other Arabic speakers can understand from the video.

UPDATE 1: Meir says there was another similar video on his phone as well, where he spoke about the Shin Bet trying to recruit him, his saying some names to them, and something about his photo on the COGAT page, which may be what shamed him.

The part that Erekat says about shame, together with his exiting the car after the crash and approaching the border police, strongly indicates that Ahmad was intending “suicide by cop.”

The shirt in the video seems to be the same one he was wearing when he was shot, which means that this video might have been made only minutes before the attack. (I don’t know the provenance of this photo.)

It seems possible that Ahmad was the target of a “honeytrap” where an Israeli poses as an Arab girl and strikes up a friendship to get information, and the family suspected.

The family claims that Ahmad was engaged to be married next month. Perhaps Erekat was also pressured to become engaged to a girl he did not want.

There are still questions to be sure, and the Erekat family is also accusing Israel of allowing him to die without giving him medical attention – there is one video showing him still moving while a border police officer walks near him. Without knowing more, it appears that more could have been done to save his life.

But the video from the car strongly indicates that Ahmad Erekat fully intended to die and to erase his shame for some incident with a girl.

(h/t Yisrael Medad and Ibn Boutros)

UPDATE 2: Video of the incident shows what can only be a deliberate car ramming attempt.

Palestinians are REALLY sick of Abbas

The latest Palestinian Center for Policy and Survey Research poll shows that Hamas and Fatah are virtually tied if evections were held today in the West Bank and Gaza.

If new legislative elections were held today with the participation of all factions, 66% of Palestinians say they would participate in such elections. Out of those, 34% say they will vote for Hamas and 36% say they will vote for Fatah, 8% will vote for all other third parties combined, and 23% are undecided.

Four months ago, the same question gave Hamas 32% of the vote and and Fatah 38%.

Also, if Mahmoud Abbas would run against Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh, Haniyeh would win 49% to 42%. Abbas would also lose against imprisoned terrroist Marwan Barghouti.

An astonishing 58% of Palestinians want Abbas to resign (it was 62% four months ago.)

Perhaps Palestinians are no longer fooled by the wall-to-wall photos on social media and in posters of Abbas and Arafat together as equals.

06/23 Links Pt2: Two thirds of Americans think it's okay to question US-Israeli ties; 8 American monuments celebrating anti-Semites; What isn’t being said about the Reading attack victims?

From Ian:

Two thirds of Americans think it's okay to question US-Israeli ties - online poll

Some two-thirds of Americans believe it is acceptable to question the US-Israel relationship, a new Washington Post poll has found. The poll was conducted online by Prof. Shibley Telhami of the University of Maryland, among 2,395 participants.

According to the poll, 43% of the participants believe that “it is acceptable for a member of the US Congress to question the US-Israel relationship,” (42% of Republicans, 46% of Democrats, and 39% of independents). An additional 24% said that “it is the duty” of a member of the House to question the relationship between the two countries.

Notably, Republican and Democrat voters were split on whether it is the duty of Congress to defend the relationship between the US and Israel or to question it. A third (32%) of Republican participants said that a House member must defend the support for Israel. In comparison, only 9% of Democrat voters agreed.

On the contrary, 35% of those who identify as Democrats said it is a duty of Congress people to question the relationship between the countries, with only 11% of Republican voters agreeing with the statement.

Participants were asked how important of an issue the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is for the US interests. Almost half (47%), said it is among the top five issues, while more than a third (35%) said it is not among the top five. Only 17% thought that the conflict is at least among the top three, or is even the most significant issue for the US interests.

8 American monuments celebrating anti-Semites

In the weeks since protests against racism began after the killing of George Floyd, activists around the world have been toppling statues, either by pressuring public officials or by tearing the monuments down themselves.

Activists have naturally focused on memorials to Confederate leaders or others who enacted racist policies, and associate monuments to anti-Semites with Europe, where they are common. The United States has its own such memorials.

Mary Elizabeth Lease
Lease, born in 1850, was an 19th century Populist and a leader of the women’s suffrage movement. She campaigned in favor of women’s and farmers’ rights, as well as the prohibition of alcohol. One scholar has claimed that Lease, who was based in Kansas for much of her fame, was the inspiration for the character of Dorothy in “The Wizard of Oz,” written by L. Frank Baum. But her crusade against bankers, who she felt were oppressing farmers, often veered into anti-Semitic conspiracy theories. People who were forced to take out bank loans were “paying tribute to the Rothschilds of England, who are but the agent of the Jews,” she claimed.

A statue of Lease was erected in Wichita, Kansas in 2012 by the Hypatia Club, the state’s oldest women’s club, which Lease founded. “She was an incredible role model when she couldn’t even vote,” a club member told the Wichita Eagle.

Thomas E. Watson
Watson was a Georgia [Democrat] congressman and newspaper publisher who served as a vice-presidential nominee for William Jennings Bryan’s Populist Party in 1896. During the 1913 trial of Leo Frank, a Jewish man falsely accused of murdering a 13-year-old Christian girl, Watson’s paper whipped up anti-Semitic sentiment. After Frank was convicted and his sentence was commuted, Watson advocated for Frank to be lynched, which he eventually was. Watson was elected to the Senate in 1922 but died in office a year later. In addition to his anti-Semitism, Watson was also a white supremacist and anti-Catholic.

The statue of Watson on the steps of the Georgia state capitol was long controversial. Then-Gov. Nathan Deal removed the statue in 2013, but claimed that his move was only for renovation purposes. The statue is now located in a park across the street from the building.

Douglas Murray: What isn’t being said about the Reading attack victims?

Imagine if on Saturday evening a white neo-Nazi had stabbed three men to death. Imagine, furthermore, if in the wake of the killings it had turned out that all three of the victims were gay. Or ‘members of the LGBT community’, to use the lexicon of the time. And then imagine if two days later nobody in the UK or anywhere else was very interested in any of this. So what if the victims were all gay? Why bother sifting around for motives. What are you trying to say? Bigot.

Well something that might well be analogous to that happened in Reading on Saturday evening and over the days since.

On Saturday evening, Khairi Saadallah went on a stabbing spree in Forbury Gardens, Reading. His victims were three gay men, James Furlong, David Wails and Joe Ritchie-Bennett. It has since emerged that the 25-year old suspect, who is now in police custody, came to the UK from Libya in 2012. He is reported to have come to the attention of MI5 last year as an individual who had the potential to travel overseas for terrorism purposes. The Security Service apparently decided that he was not an immediate risk.

The families of Furlong, Wails and Ritchie-Bennett might beg to differ on that last point. But who knows. So far there has been almost no interest expressed in the possible motives of the attacker. Quite possibly there is a mental health component. In which case I would expect that to be looked into. Quite possibly there will be some drugs-related component. In which case I would expect the usual voices to demand an investigation into that. But anything else to see here? Any other reason why a migrant from Libya who was given asylum in the UK might want to go around stabbing gay men? Well who would even ask such questions? What do you want to find? Bigot.

Something new for Leftist Israel haters to blame on “pinkwashing”

It didn’t make major headlines, but Israel quietly swore in its sixth openly gay Knesset member on Monday, Yorai Lahav Hertzanu of Blue and White.

Five percent of Israeli lawmakers are now openly gay, the fourth-highest figure in the world, according to political scientist Andrew Reynolds.

It comes “after Britain, 8.1 percent, Liechtenstein, 8 percent, and the Scottish parliament, 7.7 percent,” said Reynolds, who directs an LGBT representative programme at the University of North Carolina in the United States.

The BBC adds:

The country has the most progressive attitude towards LGBTQ people in the Middle East, despite opposition from some conservative sections of society.

They are protected by anti-discrimination laws, have adoption and same-sex inheritance rights, and have been allowed to serve in the military since 1993.

Last year, Amir Ohana, from Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's Likud party, became Israel's first openly gay member of cabinet when he was appointed acting justice minister. He is currently minister of public security.

In a normal world, people on the Left who push for LGBTQ rights would be celebrating. Instead, we have Israel haters who say that everything Israel does for gay rights is simply a smokescreen to hide how evil it is.

The accusation is a crazed example of bigotry. But I think if everyone in the world would do good things to hide bad things, the world would be a better place.

06/23 Links Pt1: Friedman to Democrats: Palestinian Authority needs to condemn terror; EU, UN officials attend Fatah-sponsored anti-annexation rally

From Ian:

Friedman to Democrats: Palestinian Authority needs to condemn terror

Israelis condemn violence by their own against Palestinians, but the Palestinian Authority does not do the same, US Ambassador David Friedman wrote in a letter to Democratic members of Congress on Monday.

"In the three years that I have served in this position," Friedman wrote, "I have observed far too many murders of Israeli civilians by Palestinian terrorists where the Palestinian leadership has failed to condemn these acts."

Friedman pointed out that Hamas openly celebrates terrorism, while "the so-called moderate" Palestinian Authority pays terrorists a regular stipend.

The Palestinian Authority paid NIS 517.4 million ($150.5m.) in salaries to terrorists in prison and released prisoners in 2019.
"In contrast, in the less frequent circumstance of a violent crime by an Israeli against a Palestinian, the act is condemned by the Israeli government and virtually the entire population of the State of Israel," Friedman wrote.

The ambassador's remarks came in response to a letter from over 50 members of Congress from the Democratic Party sent to him earlier this month, calling on him to denounce violence by Israeli settlers against Palestinians. The J Street-supported letter was initiated by Rep. Deb Haaland (D-NM), and among its signatories are major Israel critics in Congress, such as Betty McCollum (D-MN), Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) and Ilhan Omar (D-MN)

Friedman noted in his response that the letter did not call on him to denounce Palestinian terror against Israelis.

Top House Republicans Back Netanyahu as He Pushes to Annex West Bank Territory

A delegation of congressional Republicans wrote to Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Monday to express its support for the Israeli leader's decision to annex portions of Palestinian territory in the West Bank, saying Israel has the right to execute any policy it sees as integral to its security.

One-hundred-sixteen Republicans led by Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R., Calif.) and other senior lawmakers told Netanyahu that they fully support Israel's move, which would see the country take over several contested territories long-controlled by the Palestinians. Netanyahu is reportedly seeking to take this step early next month.

"We are aware of and deeply concerned by threats being expressed by some to retaliate against Israel as it makes decisions to ensure defensible borders," the lawmakers wrote, according to a copy of the letter obtained by the Washington Free Beacon. "It is shortsighted to threaten relations with Israel, a long-time friend and critical ally that shares our democratic values."

Democratic lawmakers are frustrated by the decision to send the letter. They recently warned Israel that such a move would fray the historically close ties between the United States and Israel. Congressional Republicans, however, flatly reject this view.

The letter highlights a growing partisan schism in Washington over the Israeli government's policies under Netanyahu. While the Trump administration and its Republican allies in Congress have been a reliable partner for the conservative Israeli prime minister, Democrats have become increasingly frustrated over moves they see as damaging to the peace process and U.S. relations with the Jewish state.

The GOP lawmakers expressed in their letter support for the Trump administration's recently unveiled Israeli-Palestinian peace plan, which has inflamed tensions in the region and has been rejected by the Palestinian leadership.

"We assure you that we will stand shoulder-to-shoulder with Israel and oppose any effort to apply pressure," the lawmakers wrote.

The White House has not publicly commented on the annexation plan yet and is likely waiting to see how Netanyahu proceeds in the coming days.

IDF generals urge Trump to stand behind Netanyahu’s sovereignty plan

A group of IDF generals has written a letter to US President Donald Trump urging him to support Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s annexation plan to apply sovereignty over parts of the West Bank.

The group, known as habit'honistim – Protectors of Israel – holds that the plan offers Israel an unparalleled security opportunity to place 30% of the West Bank within Israel’s permanent borders.

“Your farsighted vision for peace, which includes a recognition of Israel’s sovereign rights in Judea and Samaria – the cradle of Jewish civilization – has put wind in the wings of thousands of Israel Defense Force officers and warriors and buffeted the sails of the Israeli nation as a whole,” the group wrote.

“Mr. President, thanks to your friendship and visionary leadership, we stand now at an historic crossroad in the 4,000-year history of the Jewish people in the Land of Israel,” it continued.

“We trust that you will continue to work to secure the future peace of the people of Israel and of the Middle East as a whole by standing with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu as he applies our sovereignty to our eastern frontier, the Jordan Valley and to our cities, villages and farms in Judea and Samaria in accordance with your visionary peace plan,” the group said.

“As God Almighty said to Joshua as he stood before the Jordan River, poised to lead the Nation of Israel to the Promised Land, so we say to you today: “Be strong and of good courage,” they wrote.

The idea of Israeli sovereignty over 30% of the West Bank, including all of the settlements, is already incorporated into Trump's peace plan to resolve the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

Here is @HabithonistimEn's letter to @realDonaldTrump which also appears as a full page ad in today's edition of @thehill. pic.twitter.com/4s4XAB2ZkS
— Caroline Glick (@CarolineGlick) June 23, 2020

This is the beginning of a three-part series published in Sotal Iraq and Palestinian news site Amad:

The features of the Children of Israel, their attributes, what is ingrained in their chests, and the hatred of their hearts, their hatred, envy and grudge .. appear from the days of their father, Israel, peace be upon him !!! When they plotted, planned, and stayed under the cover of darkness, a demonic, evil, malicious intrigue, to kill their little brother Joseph, peace be upon him, and get rid of him !!! Under a false pretext, and a weak argument, that their father loved him, cared more about him !!!
From that moment on, their attributes bearing all the characteristics of criminality, murder, maliciousness and conspiracy were evident, which then passed down through the generations to their children, their offspring, and their successors. It swelled, took root in their depths, took root more and more, and became entrenched in the dynasty of the Children of Israel !!!

The article goes on to say how the evil Jews rebelled against Moses and turned into apes and pigs, and how the Jews tried to kill Jesus.

Part 2 talks about how the Jews continuously betrayed Mohammed.

Obviously part 3 will be about how today’s Jews are keeping up their tradition of “disbelief and denunciations of their covenants, their greed, their prostitution and injustice, their foolishness, immorality, and their tyranny.”

But the only antisemitism that is allowed to be reported in the media is the neo-Nazi flavor.

77711185f6e8cd048427c37d4fc88c39cb3c3c4f

From MEMRI:

Hamas MP Mushir Al-Masri said at a June 19, 2020 rally that was aired on Al-Aqsa TV:

Oh enemies, Netanyahu and Gantz, with the accursed Trump behind you, if you think that you can pass the Deal of the Century, annex the West Bank, Judaize Jerusalem, and do away with it, while we remain silent - then you are deluding yourselves! We are holding our weapons in our hands and we are firm in our resolution. We are ready with our weapons. We are ready with our rockets. We are ready to blow up buses. We are ready to carry out martyrdom-seeking operations. Our people are ready for a powerful revolution against the occupier. Allah Akbar and all praise be to Allah!

This sounds like normal Hamas threats against Israel, but another Hamas announcement today may indicate something more:

The Islamic Resistance Movement Hamas called on our masses of the people to revolt everywhere, in order to purify our lands and our sanctities from the impurity of the occupation, stressing that our enemy is weaker than the spider's house if we move together to resist it and expel it from our lands and our sanctities.

Hamas called on our people to participate actively and in all activities and events against the annexation decision, considering participation as a religious, moral and patriotic duty.

The “revolution everywhere” language indicates that Hamas is calling on attacking targets worldwide – probably Israeli embassies but possibly American and moderate Arab targets as well.

Hamas probably doesn’t have the infrastructure for worldwide terror, but it has friends (like Iran and its Hezbollah proxy) that does.

(h/t Ibn Boutros)

Reuters published a story ahead of World Refugee Day last Friday about Palestinian “refugees” in Gaza.

It is a typical mainstream news story – meaning it is an outrageous story that makes no attempt to put any context around the anti-Israel points it wants to make.

On the United Nations’ World Refugee Day on Saturday, Marwan Kuwaik, a 70-year-old Palestinian in Gaza, will be focused on trying to eke out a living by selling snack food on the street.

In Gaza, Kuwaik earns about 30 shekels ($8.50) a day selling lupin beans from his bicycle. He is among 1.4 million Palestinians U.N.-registered refugees in the impoverished and crowded enclave, whose economy has suffered from years of Israeli and Egyptian blockades.

Because Hamas and other terror groups have used Gaza as a literal launching pad for rockets and other terror attacks. Reuters doesn’t mention this.

Kuwaik’s parents were among the hundreds of thousands of Palestinians who fled or were forced to leave their homes in what is now Israel during the fighting that surrounded its founding in 1948.

He was born two years later in Gaza and lives in the outskirts of its Beach refugee camp. The U.N. registers as refugees the descendants of those Palestinians displaced more than 70 years ago.

By the official UN definition of “refugee,” Kuwaik is not a refugee for two reasons: one because it doesn’t apply to descendants, and two because he still lives in “Palestine” and refugees are by definition those who are outside their country. Reuters doesn’t mention this.

“We will return,” Kuwaik vowed in his house as he filled small plastic bags with lupin beans. “If we die our sons will rise, and if they die then our grandchildren will do it.”

There are no other “refugees” from the 1940s in the world. Everyone settles someplace. But Palestinians are the only people who are considered “refugees” in perpetuity. Reuters doesn’t mention this.

Hamas controls Gaza. There is no reason for there to be any “refugee camps” in Gaza. The people should have been moved into regular housing long ago, and Israel attempted to do this in the 1980s – and the UN condemned Israel for that. Reuters doesn’t mention this.

UNRWA doesn’t try to resettle refugees or make them independent of handouts from the world. On the contrary, UNRWA’s existence is dependent on keeping the fake ”refugee” issue alive. Reuters doesn’t mention this.

When Kuwaik speaks of “return,” he is parroting a Palestinian propaganda that keeps “refugees” in misery in order to eventually destroy Israel by flooding it with Arabs. That is the entire purpose of “return” as Arabs have admitted for decades. Reuters doesn’t mention this.

For World Refugee Day, Reuters decided to use its platform to create anti-Israel propaganda with highly selective facts that conveniently are all exactly the same as the narrative that Hamas and the PLO tells the world.

Reuters can point to the story and swear there is nothing incorrect, but there is a huge difference between being not lying and being accurate. This story is not even close to accurate.

The Left turns on the only member who admits Roger Waters is an antisemite

As I write this on Monday night, I have seen only one anti-Zionist Leftist explicitly call out Roger Waters’ blatant antisemitism and lies, Mairav Zonszein.

Leftist Jewish groups mostly retweeted a very generic tweet that sort of implied distaste at his words without mentioning Waters’ name, so their readers could easily have thought that they were talking about the far Right.

This way they could claim to be against antisemitism without actually criticizing Waters.

The crazed responses to Zonszein from her fellow anti-Zionists, however, are something to behold.

This one has some practical advice: Waters might be an antisemitic jerk, but criticizing him is worse:

There are the predictable denialists, hand wavers and subject changers:

Some are flabbergasted that an anti-Zionist can have an original thought that is not in lock-goose-step with the masses:

My favorite:

“They.”

And, inevitably, those who get so angry at basic facts that they attack the person who was their heroine five minutes beforehand:

I disagree with practically everything Zonszein writes, but she is the only anti-Israel Leftist I see who actually called out this perfect example of Left antisemitism. All the others are cowards or sycophants.

06/22 Links Pt2: When Everyone Kneels, Who Will Stand Up for Western History and Culture?; Biden blasts BDS: Why it matters; How goats have become fire fighters in Israel

From Ian:

Selective Outrage

I have written before about the case of Rutgers professor Jasbir Puar, lionized by academics on the left despite or because of her anti-Semitic attacks on Israel.

Recently, the most egregious of Puar’s claims resurfaced in an incident at Florida State University. The Student Senate President, Ahmad Daraldik, reportedly built a website that, among other things, accuses Israel of organ harvesting. But she adds a twist: Just as “the Nazis conducted many different types of experiments on the inmates of the concentration camps,” so, too, do the Israelis harvest organs.

In Puar’s case, the charge goes back to unsourced rumors concerning Israel’s activities during the “knife intifada” of 2015-16. In our student’s case, the charge goes back to the 1990s and concerns a single facility in which corneas, heart valves, and skin grafts were taken, sometimes without family permission, from approximately 150 cadavers. Among those bodies were, as Daraldik’s web site tells you, Palestinians. Also among them, as it does not tell you, Israeli soldiers and civilians.

To compare this incident, in which a pathologist broke a law and thereby harmed Jewish and non-Jewish families, to Nazi experimentation is gross Holocaust minimization and inversion. As Miriam Elman of the Academic Engagement Network says, the comparison is “unequivocally anti-Semitic.” Yet a Student Senate that quite recently, in an overwhelming vote, removed its president over remarks he’d made in an online group chat—he’d stressed the incompatibility between his Catholicism and queer and transgender politics on the other—voted to keep Daraldik in office. Perhaps they were motivated to do so by a letter, signed by numerous purportedly progressive organizations, that mentions Daraldik’s First Amendment rights, doesn’t mention the website, and pretends that Daraldik is the victim of a “smear campaign” to suppress legitimate criticism of Israel.

In fact, critics are instead perpetuating the view that Daraldik can be held to account for noxious views that—though it is unclear when exactly the website went up—he has not disowned.

Biden blasts BDS: Why it matters

In a policy paper posted on his campaign website in May, Biden, referring to the boycott divestment and sanctions (BDS) campaign, vowed that his administration will “firmly reject the BDS movement – which singles out Israel and too often veers into antisemitism – and fight other efforts to delegitimize Israel on the global stage.” Biden also said that if elected president he will “sustain our unbreakable commitment to Israel’s security,” including “the guarantee that Israel will always maintain its qualitative military edge.”

Biden reportedly made similar comments online at a May 19 virtual event. And on other occasions, he has referred to the US’s “longstanding, moral commitment” to Israel, declaring that “the only way to ensure” that the Holocaust “could never happen again was the establishment and the existence of a secure, Jewish State of Israel.”

BIDEN’S FIRM rejection of BDS contrasts with the views of several members of Congress led by Representatives Ilhan Omar (D-MN) and Rashida Tlaib (D-MI), both of whom have explicitly endorsed BDS. In July 2019, the House passed by a 398 to 17 vote a resolution stating the House’s opposition to BDS. While those opposing the resolution accounted for less than 10% of the 234 Democratic House members, they worryingly included many of the Democratic Party’s most voluble legislators.

Much is at stake: Disagreements between allies are bound to occur. If Biden were president, how would he address disagreements over annexation and BDS? How would he lead in the face of challenges from within his party? These policy statements signal how a President Biden would govern.

NEW VIDEO! Florida pastor and @TruNews host Rick Wiles' Craziest Anti-Semitic Conspiracy Theories. Watch and SHARE! pic.twitter.com/x703F1TjV4
— Canary Mission (@canarymission) June 22, 2020

Salient cases of antisemitism in Germany in the past decade

This incident highlighted the ongoing efforts to demonize Israel by a group of extreme anti-Israel MPs led by Inge Höger and Annette Groth. Both of these parliamentarians were on board the controversial 2010 Mavi Marmara Gaza flotilla that carried armed passengers who intended to break the so-called "blockade" of Gaza, and upon their return to Berlin were hailed by many of their party’s MPs.

The SWC wrote that Groth, Höger and Left party official Claudia Haydt and MP Heike Hänsel - as organizers and participants - played a crucial role in stoking hatred of Israel during the “Toiletgate” scandal. All were present at the Blumenthal/Sheen talk. They are a part of a sizable group of hardcore anti-Israel Left party MPs.

In response to the “Toiletgate” scandal, a petition signed by the reform wing of The Left party MPs, regional politicians and members stated: “By stoking obsessive hatred of and demonizing Israel, members of our party in positions of responsibility are promoting antisemitic patterns of argument and a relativization of the Holocaust and the German responsibility for the extermination of millions of European Jews.”

The 2016 SWC report details how Leaders of the local German Teacher’s Union (GEW) in Oldenburg called for a total boycott of Israel. In September, the Oldenburg GEW local published a pro-BDS article by Christoph Glanz, a public school teacher and fanatic opponent of the Jewish State. Glanz, who has tried posing as a Jew to avoid charges of antisemitism called for the eradication of the State of Israel and relocation of its Jews to southwestern Germany.

In 2019, the most extreme antisemitic event was the failed attack on the synagogue in the German city Halle. Tens of Jews praying in that synagogue on Yom Kippur - Judaism’s holiest day - miraculously escaped certain injury or death at the hands of a neo-Nazi as the attacker failed to break down a security door outside a synagogue in the city. After failing to enter the synagogue, Stephan Balliet, 27, armed with a sub-machine gun and explosives, killed 2 civilians nearby and injured 2 others. Balliet admitted that he was motivated by his hatred of Jews. In his manifesto, he stated, “Kill as many anti-Whites as possible, Jews preferred.”

From the 2019 report: Germany is in the midst of an 18-month stint on the UN Security Council. Its UN Ambassador, Christoph Heusgen made the SWC Top ten list in 2019. He created an uproar after word spread regarding the number of anti-Israel votes he has cast, but above all by his equating 130 rockets fired by terrorist organization Hamas at Israeli civilians in one week in March, with the Jewish state’s demolition of terrorists’ homes.

Heusgen declared: “We believe that international law is the best way to protect civilians and allow them to live in peace and security and without fear of Israeli bulldozers or ‘Hamas rockets.’ Bild, Germany’s best-selling daily, accused Heusgen in an editorial, of “pure malice” against the Jewish State. Heusgen cast 16 anti-Israel votes at the UN in 2018, abstaining once. In 2019, he voted for nine anti-Israel resolutions, including one labelling Jerusalem’s holiest sites as “Palestinian Occupied Territory,” while abstaining three times and opposing only one anti-Israel resolution.

This is much less than one percent of my notes on antisemitism in Germany. Yet it very succinctly shows that the country is far from succeeding in eradicating antisemitism. The publication of Augstein’s article by Der Spiegel, the boycott-promoting teachers union and Heusgen’s comparison of Israel and Hamas reflect how this hatred has permeated and is alive in the German mainstream.

Fatah's "anti-annexation" rally was not impressive

Earlier today I mentioned that Fatah and other PLO factions were setting up an "anti-annexation" rally in Jericho, with government workers being bused in from all parts of the West Bank.

I was curious how large the crowd would be. A large crowd would mean that this is a topic that is affecting Palestinian Arabs enough to make them want to spend several hours attending; a smaller crowd means they really don't care.

In the end, the crowd was in the thousands - but not the tens of thousands. It looks like just the government workers and a few others, but this is not a groundswell. This is tiny compared to the rallies regularly seen in Gaza for Hamas and Islamic Jihad.

We have lots of ideas, but we need more resources to be even more effective. Please donate today to help get the message out and to help defend Israel.

Who is the liar: Human Rights Watch’s Ken Roth, or the Trump administration? (UPDATE)

This tweet from Human Rights Watch chief Ken Roth is typical, and still incredible:

Let’s parse this:

“The United Nations Human Rights Council, which if you listen to Trump only criticizes Israel”

Is this true? No, quite the opposite. When the US pulled out of the UNHRC it said it was partially because of its relentless and disproportionate criticism of Israel, but no one ever said that it “only” criticizes Israel. This is Ken Roth’s bizarre recollection of what happened. But the facts show that the Trump administration was accurate, and Roth is a liar.

“just condemned Iran (yet again) …”

“Yet again”? Roth, whose entire job is supposed to defend human rights, is implying that the UNHRC is spending too much time attacking the human rights record of Iran. But he is quite happy with the daily criticism of Israel at the UNHRC.
Am I exaggerating? No. On Thursday, the UNHRC passed a resolution condemning Israel yet again.
On Wednesday, during a debate about police brutality in the US, “speakers stated that Israel’s systematic shoot-to-kill policy of Palestinians amounted to apartheid.” There is, of course, no systemic “shoot to kill” policy for Palestinians who are not actively engaged in a life-threatening attack.
But the UNHRC lies, just like Ken Roth. This is why they are so simpatico.

“by a vote of 22 for, 8 against, and 15 abstaining.”

Meaning that the UN’s human rights body could not muster a majority of votes to condemn Iran’s human rights violations – 23 countries decided not to vote to condemn Iran versus 22 that did.
Which goes to show how morally corrupt the UNHRC is – but to Roth, this condemnation was overkill.

UPDATE: Ken Roth lied about the Iran resolution too! It never condemned Iran!

My good friend @KenRoth lies again.

Today's UNHRC resolution on Iran does NOT condemn the regime. And not a single human rights abuse is mentioned.

On the contrary: Listen to resolution sponsor Sweden call it a "short, procedural text," then praise Iran's "positive engagement." https://t.co/cAOiNTpFxS pic.twitter.com/1vFpjSVwL3
— Hillel Neuer (@HillelNeuer) June 22, 2020

06/22 Links Pt1: Palestinians and Israelis Will Both Gain From Israeli Sovereignty Over West Bank; Jordan Backs PLO in Rejecting Trump Deal of the Century

From Ian:

Palestinians and Israelis Will Both Gain From Israeli Sovereignty Over West Bank

Palestinians and Israelis will both gain from what is wrongly being labeled West Bank "annexation." Soon after July 1, Israel is expected to apply its civilian law to roughly half of "Area C" of Judea and Samaria (i.e., the West Bank), which it governs under a power-sharing agreement made with the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) 25 years ago. Area C is where almost half-a-million Israelis reside alongside a much smaller number of Palestinians. Naysayers from Israel and abroad have labeled the move an "illegal annexation" that would be responded to with regional violence. The more mundane reality is that applying Israeli law to the disputed area will have two main salutary effects that will benefit all the residents of the area, Israeli and Palestinian alike.

First, after 53 years, military administration of the affected areas will end. Military rule is far from ideal, and residents' needs will be better met under ordinary civilian governance provided by officials who have to answer for their actions at the ballot box.

Second, residents will no longer be subject to the antiquated mix of Ottoman, Mandatory British, Jordanian and military rules that confound even the simplest transactions. Area C's law is full of anomalies, from the absence of environmental law to a ban on the purchase of land by non-Jordanians. Non-Israeli residents of Area C have no access to Israel's unemployment insurance, subsidized national health care and other welfare programs. Israel's Supreme Court has essentially blocked piece-by-piece legislation to clean up the mess. Applying Israeli law as a whole will grant citizens the benefits of a modern liberal democratic legal codex.

Despite the obvious benefits of applying Israeli civilian law, opponents have decried the proposal on what they describe as legal and practical grounds.

The legal objection is easily summarized and easily refuted. Opponents note that international law forbids annexation justified by conquest of sovereign territory of another state during an unlawful war (or perhaps any war at all). They then attempt to characterize Israel's action as an example of such an unlawful annexation by connecting the rule to a string of falsehoods. They assume the PLO is a state, though it meets none of the conditions of international law, erase the history of the League of Nations designating the West Bank for a Jewish homeland (as it did in 1922), deny the international doctrine of uti possidetis juris that granted Israel sovereignty over Judea and Samaria upon its independence in 1948, pretend the PLO received sovereign title of the West Bank from Jordan's illegal conquest and annexation of the territory during its 1948 attempt to destroy Israel, imply the illegality of Israel defending itself from Jordan's aggression in 1967 and therefore misinterpret Israel's application of its civilian law to part of Area C as an attempt to gain sovereignty over another country's territory.

Sadly, those who wrongly claim that Israel's proposal is unlawful are rarely challenged to articulate their assumptions—let alone to justify their mendacity. Yet the truth remains that Israel's application of its law to parts of Area C is lawful and beneficial, and has nothing to do with annexing another state's sovereign territory. Israel already has a valid claim to territorial sovereignty, whether it applies its civilian law to the area or not.

The practical objections are more difficult to summarize, because they are, in large part, contradictory as well as illogical.

On the Left, opponents of the proposal claim it will destabilize the Palestinian Authority, lead to violence, foil the creation of a Palestinian state and destroy the chances of a peace agreement. On the Right, opponents claim the proposal will strengthen the Palestinian Authority and inevitably lead to a peace agreement and the creation of a Palestinian state on those parts of the West Bank where Israeli law is not applied. They view this as an unacceptable security threat and inimical to a true peace.

Netanyahu: Applying Israeli Law in Parts of West Bank Will Not Affect a Single Palestinian Neighborhood

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Sunday explained his plan to apply Israeli law in parts of the West Bank in a memo to Knesset members from his Likud party.

"There can be no realistic Israeli-Palestinian peace accord in which the Judea and Samaria Jewish communities are evacuated. These are established communities in which hundreds of thousands of Israelis live. Relinquishing these territories would not only constitute a historic injustice; such a move would create an immediate existential threat to the Jewish state since Judea and Samaria border central Israeli cities."

The planned measure would replace the current military government "with Israeli law and civil administration in already existing Israeli communities in the territories so that those living there can be treated equally under the law like all Israelis."

The move should not be called an annexation, as this word "connotes the forcible acquisition of one state's territory by another state. Israel is doing no such thing. Israel has valid legal claims to the territories while no other state claims the area." Applying Israeli law would not change the status of the Palestinian Authority "in a single Palestinian neighborhood."

UN envoy tells Palestinians rallying against annexation not to give up on statehood dream

United Nations envoy Nikolay Mladenov tells Palestinians never to give up on their dream of statehood, emphasizing that Israel’s planned annexation of the West Bank was not only illegal but “would kill the dream of peace.”

“You’re not renting a house here, this is your home. You do not throw away the keys to something that you have been building for 25 years. You protect it and you invest in the future, a future that is built on shared values of democracy, accountability and prosperity for everyone,” Mladenov says.

“People of Palestine — never give up, never give up, never give up,” Mladenov concludes, “because peace is what we’re all for.”

During his speech, Mladenov also leads a moment of silence for Iyad Hallak, a young Palestinian with special needs killed by Israeli police earlier this month.

David Singer: Jordan Backs PLO in Rejecting Trump Deal of the Century

Jordan has backed the PLO in rejecting President Trump’s deal of the century – as Israel readies to regain sovereignty after 3000 years in 30% of Judea and Samaria (aka West Bank) – the biblical heartland of the Jewish people.

Jordan’s Foreign Minister Ayman Safadi met with PLO President Mahmoud Abbas this week to confirm that Jordan stood in solidarity with the PLO against the Trump plan to create a Palestinian State in the remaining 70%:
“The stance that I have carried today is the Kingdom’s historical position: Attaining the rights of our brothers in Palestine to freedom and a full Palestinian state with occupied Jerusalem as its capital on the June 4, 1967 lines is the only means to realise a just and comprehensive peace”.

Safadi’s statement of Jordan’s historical position was false.

No Palestinian State – “full” or otherwise – was ever contemplated during Jordan’s illegal annexation of the West Bank between 1948 and 1967. To the contrary Jordan extended Jordanian citizenship to all the Arab residents of the West Bank from 1954 to 1988.

Jordan’s rejection of the Trump Plan could see Trump dealing with Jordan similarly to the way he dealt with the PLO’s rejection of Trump’s Plan – sight unseen – two years before its release on 28 January 2020:
“’We told Trump we will not accept his project, the ‘deal of the century,’ which has become the ‘slap of the century’. But we will slap back.
“We do not take instructions from anyone, and say ‘no’ to anyone if it is about our destiny, our cause, our country and our people… 1,000 times no'”

Trump answered the PLO by progressively:
· Recognising Jerusalem as the capital of Israel and moving the US Embassy there
· Recognising Israeli sovereignty in the Golan Heights
· Cutting off funding for Palestinian refugee programs
· Closing down the PLO diplomatic office in Washington
· Confirming that the Israeli settlements in the West Bank did not contravene international law

Responses to Jordan’s defiant stance could see Trump:
· Agreeing to Israel extending its sovereignty beyond the 30% of the West Bank currently contemplated in Trump’s Plan. This proposed area is in fact only 50% of Area C - already under Israel’s complete security and administrative control pursuant to the Oslo Accords – so there is plenty of scope for enlarging the area of Israeli sovereignty.
· Reviewing existing US-Jordan security and financial agreements
· Calling on Jordan to replace the PLO in negotiations with Israel to allocate sovereignty in the remaining 70% of the West Bank between their two respective states.

Jordan’s King Abdullah would find Trump’s offer to regain a major part of “The West Bank of the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan 1950-1967” difficult to reject.

Abdullah’s father the late King Hussein wrote in "Uneasy Lies The Head" (page 118):
"Palestine and Jordan were both under the British Mandate, but as my grandfather pointed out in his memoirs, they were hardly separate countries. Trans-Jordan being to the east of the River Jordan, it formed in a sense, the interior of Palestine"

The Changing Face of Black Antisemitism (Daled Amos)

By Daled Amos

When you have the Internet, who needs encyclopedias?

If nothing else, encyclopedias do offer a snapshot of the times in which they were published and the attitudes that were prevalent at the time.

Take the Encyclopedia Judaica, for example -- published in 1971.

The article on Anti-Semitism, describes the post-WWII period in the US, when there were relatively few openly antisemitic conflicts. However:

Some social anti-Semitism does remain, for, as repeated studies have shown, the Jews are the only white group in the United States for whom social rank is consistently lower than economic status. [3:136]

According to the article, tensions existed between the Jewish and Black communities. At the time, Jews -- being generally the last occupants in Black neighborhoods at the time -- were visible as landlords and storekeepers, giving rise to tensions. On the other hand, Jews were among the leading proponents of integration and were a major source of the money and power behind the movement for equal rights for Black Americans, which itself was a cause of resentment for those who wanted to see the revolution as their own.

Rabbi Abraham Joshua Heschel (with beard) in front row of civil rights march with Martin Luther King Jr. (Fair Use)

Nevertheless,

Whatever the future may hold for anti-Semitism in America, its present temper is such that it is generally regarded as a minor problem.

Oh for the good old days.

That piece was contributed to the encyclopedia by Rabbi Arthur Hertzberg, who at the time was the Associate Adjunct Professor of History at Columbia University. Two years earlier, in 1969, he wrote his popular book, The Zionist Idea, so it is not surprising that he also contributed to the EJ article on Zionism.

What is interesting is that there too he mentions the developing tensions between the Jewish and Black communities, leading to "confrontation in the name of group identity and group interests." Hertzberg writes that

Within such an atmosphere many Jews were pushed toward identification with the specific interests of the Jewish community and its own peculiar destiny. The alternative for some of the young who had cut their teeth politically in the black movement, was to come to Israel. [16:1063]

There is a certain irony that today, this time around, Jewish identity is weakening and along with that there is a growing division between American Jews and Israel. In contrast to the 1970's, today there are fringe groups identifying themselves as Jewish, who openly attack Israel.

The tension between the Black and Jewish communities was serious enough to warrant a separate entry in the EJ under "Negro-Jewish Relations in the U.S.," explaining that

It was argued that black anti-Semitism was essentially anti-whitism, based on real situations in which a Jew often was the only white in the black neighborhood -- as shop owner, landlord, social worker, teacher.

But these days, Jew-hatred has moved beyond "anti-whitism," as Jews are apparently deserving of attack all on their own -- with flyers being passed around such as this one:

and this one

In the first flyer, some of the data is misquoted from the Jerusalem Post article, while some of it does not come from the article at all.

And why doesn't the flyer just come right out and say they want to institute racial quotas in colleges instead of basing college acceptance on qualifications?

In the second flyer, the reference to usury is gratuitous and clearly intended to stoke Jew-hatred, considering that money lending has nothing to do with how these billionaires made their fortunes.

In addition, the suggestion that at the time -- in 2013 -- half of all billionaires were Jewish is debunked by later articles by Forbes, which in 2016 listed 540 billionaires in the US and in a separate article in 2018 listed 106 US billionaires as being Jewish -- which comes out to 19.6% instead of 48%.

There was a time that the tension between the Black and Jewish communities could be attributed to Jews being the 'face' of "white Americans" in the Black neighborhoods themselves.

Today, under the banner of "Black Lives Matter," there is an attempt to single out Jews who have achieved success either academically or financially beyond what BLM deems acceptable.

These days, intersectionality is in, but the Black community -- at least as far as Black Lives Matter is concerned -- has no interest this time around in allying itself with the Jewish community.

At a time that the 'cancel culture' has not only caused statues to be torn down but people to lose their jobs, the attacks on Jews being carried out in the name of "Black Lives Matter" are a serious threat that adds to the already rising tide of antisemitism and the physical attacks on Jews living in the US.

Today, the PLO is calling on the “masses” to protest Israeli plans to extend sovereignty over parts of Judea and Samaria.

Fatah, the PFLP and other PLO factions are calling for Palestinians to converge on Jericho for a rally at 5 PM.

Featured speakers include UN Special Coordinator for the Middle East Peace Process Nickolay Mladenov as well as the EU representative, the British consul, the Chinese ambassador and other diplomats.

The PLO is providing buses from all governates under its control.

In addition, they are calling for Palestinians in Europe and around the world to protest in front of Israeli and American embassies.

The Palestinian Federation of Trade Unions is urging people to attend. The Teachers’ Union said this is a “national duty.”

Undoubtedly there will be a large number of government workers who come because they will be forced to, and the Palestinian Authority is the biggest employer in the West Bank.

In a few hours we will see how many other people bothered to show up.

Here is the full interview of antisemitic, washed up rock star Roger Waters at Hamas-linked Shehab News.

Some lowlights that were not covered in the portions excerpted by MEMRI:

2:30 he says that BDS was started by "Palestinian civil society," a lie.

Around 7:15 he says "Israelis pay huge amounts of money to artists to whitewash their apartheid racist regime." So now Israeli concert promoters aren't interested in making money?

Around 10:00 he invokes Menachem Begin while talking about Oslo, and says that Begin managed to hoodwink the world. Given that he gave up a great deal of territory for peace with Egypt, it sounds like Waters is anti-peace.

Around 15:10 he claims that Israel is against human rights.

Around 15:40 he makes the absurd claim that for 72 years, most of Palestinian "resistance" has been "largely non-violent."

We have lots of ideas, but we need more resources to be even more effective. Please donate today to help get the message out and to help defend Israel.80

Any Leftist (or media outlet) that doesn’t immediately denounce Roger Waters for antisemitism is a disgusting hypocrite

After the Pittsburgh synagogue shooting, the media took note of the shooter’s love of conspiracy theories where George Soros was the “puppetmaster” in running the world. Everyone accepted that the idea of a Jewish puppetmaster was a pernicious, centuries-old antisemitic trope.

From Vox soon after the attack:

Anti-Semitic pamphlets and imagery throughout the 19th and early 20th centuries visually portrayed the Jew as something between a corporate fat cat and a shadowy overlord; someone “cosmopolitan,” urbane (and urban), and dangerous.

This rhetoric reveals the extent to which Jews were seen as scapegoats, responsible for somehow manipulating the current world order in order to destabilize white Christian identity. It’s the exact same story we see today in narratives around Soros: that of the scheming Jewish billionaire, without any real (i.e., blood) loyalty to the country that allows him to be a citizen, actively seeking to undermine white Christian unity.

…Last weekend’s attacks on the Tree of Life synagogue — the deadliest ever attack on Jews on American soil according to the Anti-Defamation League — reveal just how noxious the “Jewish puppet master” trope can be, and just how long it can survive.

Similarly, a cartoon by Ben Garrison that showed Soros as a puppetmaster of US government officials along with the Rothschilds, was vilified across the board as an unquestionably antisemitic, and the Left was correctly incensed that the artist was invited to the White House (an invitation later rescinded: )

Other media were unanimous that calling Soros a “puppet-master” is antisemitic.

The trope is quite old.

Now listen to Roger Waters, in a section of the interview on Hamas-linked Shehab News, where he describes Jewish Sheldon Adelson as literally a “puppetmaster” of the US working together with Benjamin Netanyahu and the Israeli right. (This was not the section transcribed by MEMRI on Sunday, which included other antisemitism from Waters.)

If the accusation of Soros – who all but rejects his Judaism - controlling the world is antisemitic, then by any yardstick the accusation of a proudly Jewish billionaire as being in cahoots with the leaders of the Jewish state as the puppet-master is even more antisemitic. Especially when you combine it with Waters' characterization of Adelson as believing that all non-Jews are subhuman, another Nazi-era antisemitic trope.

Yet there has been no criticism of Waters from the media or from the Jewish Left at this time. Nothing from Jewish Voice for Peace, nothing from IfNotNow, nothing from Mondoweiss, nothing from Electronic Intifada, nothing from J-Street, nothing from Robert Mackey, and nothing yet from the ADL. The people who screamed about the antisemitism of the Soros puppetmaster meme seem quite forgiving of a washed-up rock star calling Adelson the exact same thing.

Any credibility the Left has in pretending it is against antisemitism is shredded. Anyone who condemned the Soros accusations who remains silent about Roger Waters doesn’t give a damn about antisemitism, and only uses the issue to attack their political enemies.

And using Jews as pawns to attack your enemies while not giving a damn about antisemitism on your own side really is antisemitic.