The anti-Israel NGO Adalah issued a condemnation of Israel for not providing enough computers for Arab students to learn from home.
150,000 Arab students in Israel lacking computers, electricity, or internet access are unable to connect to online remote-learning solutions and cannot secure their basic right to education.
Adalah – The Legal Center for Arab Minority Rights in Israel has sent a series of letters to Israeli education and communications authorities demanding they provide computers and internet access so that some 150,000 Palestinian Arab schoolchildren stuck at home due to COVID-19 are able to connect to online remote learning systems together with their peers.
What is left unsaid is that haredi children have the exact same issues, so this is not an Arab problem but a problem of not enough resources.
Number of computers allocated by Israel’s Education Ministry
Nazareth
5,000
1,868
Umm al-Fahem
4,000
1,835
Qalansawe
1,961
704
Chances are the Education Ministry is calculating the number of computers per household, not student, which is the most efficient way to spread around a limited number of devices.
The absurd part comes later in the Adalah report:
In addition, another 50,000 Bedouin schoolchildren living in unrecognized villages in the Naqab (Negev) region also lack computers as well as basic infrastructure such as electricity and internet access.
As we've seen, Bedouin have built hundreds of illegal villages, willy nilly, all over the Negev, without coordination with Israel. Israel has set up towns for them to move into with full infrastructure but most of them refuse to abandon their makeshift homes that they are using to stake a claim to state land.
Now Adalah is demanding that Israel provide electricity, plumbing and Internet to hundreds of illegal sites, some of them with only one family!
If they cared about education, they would ask that the Arabs move into the free housing Israel is offering where the kids can have the necessary infrastructure. Instead, they are using COVID-19 as an excuse to demand that Israel legalize their illegal communities.
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.
Palestinian Muslims are proud to share videos of them insulting their fellow Muslims at Al Aqsa when they happen to come from Gulf countries.
In this case, the Palestinian is saying, "Get out you dog, you trash, bye-bye" and other insults.
If Palestinians want to see their popularity continue to plummet among other Arabs, they are executing their plan perfectly.
(h/t Ibn Boutros)
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.
The 65 year-old Palestinian chief negotiator, Saeeb Erekat, is deteriorating so badly from Covid-19 that he has been rushed from his home in the “West Bank” to a hospital in Israel. It is Hadassah hospital in Jerusalem.
That fact is presumably deeply unpalatable to Erekat’s comrades in the Palestine Liberation Organisation. In a statement on Sunday, the PLO said:
Following his contraction of Covid-19, and due to the chronic health problems he faces in the respiratory system, Dr Erekat's condition now requires medical attention in a hospital. He is currently being transferred to a hospital in Tel Aviv.
The Times of Israel reported that the PLO couldn’t even bring itself to say he was being admitted to hospital in Israel, but said he was being transferred to a hospital in the 1948 areas.
The BBC reported for most of today that Erekat has been admitted to hospital in Tel Aviv, Israel with Covid-19.
In fact, as the Jerusalem Post, Times of Israel and jns.org correctly reported, he had been admitted to Hadassah hospital in Jerusalem, Israel. The BBC finally updated its website report this evening to identify the Israeli hospital as Hadassah.
There he will receive the finest care by Israeli doctors in the attempt to save his life. Those doctors will be both Israeli Jews and Israeli Arabs. He will be nursed by a staff consisting of Israeli Jews and Israeli Arabs. He will be treated alongside patients who are both Israeli Jews and Israeli Arabs, and he will be dealt with, as they all are, according to the priority dictated by his clinical needs.
It does not take much imagination to envision a scenario in which a U.S. withdrawal from the MFO results in the collapse of the organization. The United States provides the largest portion of force protection capability for the MFO, and most of the other nations contribute troops to the MFO based on their relationship with Washington. If Washington were to pull the U.S. military contingent from the MFO, many other troop-contributing nations would worry for the safety of their forces. Some nations would also no longer see any serious benefit in retaining troops there in terms of their relationship with the United States.
It would hardly be surprising to see Beijing or Moscow step into the vacuum created by an American departure, seeking to work with Cairo to establish a new civil or military presence in the Sinai. Ironically, in such a scenario, an American effort to reduce a modest military commitment in the Sinai to compete more effectively with China and Russia elsewhere would give Beijing and Moscow an opportunity to establish a coveted strategic outpost vital to energy, economic, and military security at the intersection of Africa, Asia, and Europe.
Thankfully, key leaders in Congress appreciate the bigger picture. In an extraordinary bipartisan broadside, the Democrat and Republican leaders of the House and Senate Foreign Relations, Armed Services, and Appropriations Committees sent a letter to Secretary Esper and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo regarding the MFO on May 13. The members of Congress warned that a withdrawal of the U.S. contingent from MFO would represent a “grave mistake” that could “ultimately make it more difficult to implement the NDS.”
The Pentagon is right to review U.S. military posture in every combatant command to ensure an optimal military posture that fully aligns ends and means. In the Middle East, an objective review would demonstrate that ending the modest U.S. military contribution to the MFO would endanger key NDS objectives and represent a short-sighted and self-inflicted wound to American national security interests.
Intelligence information could also help make the case that Iran fits the Shields Act’s criteria for listing as a “foreign state that … knowingly and materially supports, orders, controls, directs, or otherwise engages in” human-shields use by Hezbollah. It may well be possible to make such a case, as Iran has reportedly been sending PGM parts to Hezbollah for assembly at locations such as the Janah, Laylaki, and Chouaifet sites.69 In addition, Israel has said that Rammal was “manufacturing precision-guided missiles in cooperation with Iranian forces,” and that “as part of his role, he visited Iran a number of times.”70
Apart from the legal requirements of the Shields Act, there are strong policy reasons to hold Hezbollah accountable for human-shields use. Hezbollah’s use of human shields puts civilians in danger of explosives accidents, such as those that decimated the Port of Beirut in August71 and detonated a Hezbollah arms depot in the Lebanese village of Ain Qana a few weeks later.72
In addition, a formal U.S. government determination that Hezbollah is engaging in a war crime through the use of human shields could strengthen the argument for the European Union to designate Hezbollah as a terrorist group.73 This argument is made more compelling by recently publicized discoveries that Hezbollah has been storing large quantities of ammonium nitrate, a bomb-making ingredient, in various European countries.74
Imposing Shields Act sanctions on Hezbollah in response to its clear recent violations would also be an important first step toward countering human-shields use against the U.S. and allied militaries by groups such as the Islamic State and the Taliban. In his 2019 request to NATO member countries, General Scaparrotti, in his capacity as NATO supreme allied commander Europe, said, “[I]t is essential that further measures be taken at the national level to maximise enforcement of the international legal prohibition of the use of human shields.” Scaparrotti specifically urged “imposition of sanctions” and “spotlighting of violations.” In light of the frequency and effectiveness of human-shields use against NATO forces, Scaparrotti said that such national measures “would decidedly become a major and substantial contribution” to NATO operations.
Imposing sanctions on Hezbollah for using human shields would set a strong U.S. example for its NATO partners of taking action on these requests from the NATO supreme allied commander Europe. It would also hopefully pave the way for the U.S. government’s collection and deployment of sufficient evidence to impose Shields Act sanctions on the Islamic State and Taliban for their human-shields uses since the date of enactment (December 21, 2018).
It has been nearly two years since the Shields Act became law. Despite considerable prior evidence of human-shields use by terrorist groups, the Trump administration has yet to impose any sanctions under the law. It is time for the U.S. government to use the Shields Act to hold terrorists and their material supporters publicly accountable for the war crime of using human shields.
“The Israel tech sector is super advanced, so obtaining some of that
knowhow—the sharing of studies, research and development—will help expand and
improve the UAE’s talent pool. Education for the UAE tech sector will be
massive. The post-grad learning opportunities are substantial.”
But while Israel is an acknowledged leader in global technology, it's not as
if Israel is late to the game.
Yehoshafat Harkabi wrote a doctoral thesis a month before the outbreak of the
1967 Six Day War. It was later published and then appeared in English as
Arab Attitudes To Israel. In a chapter on Israel, he has a
section on Favourable and Ambivalent References.
In the introduction to his book, Harkabi writes:
The Arab attitude to Israel is, of course, affected by the vicissitudes of
time and war can certainly change public attitudes and make descriptions of
previous situations out of date. It seems, however, that my description of
the attitude is still valid. [p. xv; all quotes are from the English
edition]
Let's see if Harkabi is right.
He writes that the many pejorative Arab statements he quotes in his
book are not the whole story. Instead, there were statements made in the Arab
world that praised Israel and presented it as a model to be imitated.
In 1955, no less than Nasser himself recommended in a speech in Gaza:
All I ask of you is to persevere, and unite, and act, and be patient, and
take an example and a lesson. [emphasis added; p. 337]
A lesson in what?
Harkabi sums it up that in the Arab praises of Israel,
major prominence is given to her efficiency and modernity,
her achievements in technology and science, her thorough planning
instead of improvisation. Israel stands for dynamic enterprise and
achievement. [emphasis added]
Of course, these compliments are not for the sake of praising Israel, but
rather to point out attributes that the Arabs should imitate -- especially the
Palestinian Arabs. Harkabi refers to Arnold Hottinger's book,
The Arabs: Their History, Culture and Place in the Modern World where
he writes of the Palestinian Arabs that they view Israel's victory in 1948 as
being because of her modernity, an ideal to be imitated.
This recognition of Israeli accomplishments in science and technology even led
to arguments among the Arabs themselves.
In 1962, The Syrian prime minister, Nazim al-Qudsi spoke to students and noted
the high percentage of engineers and physicians in Israel -- and emphasized
the need for Syria and other Arab countries to follow suit. For that, he was
severely criticized by Cairo Radio and the Egyptian press.
A Damascus Radio commentator snapped back:
Qudsi drew the attention of the Arab nation to the truth: Israel our enemy
is not--as Nasserist propaganda describes her--weak and unstable in her
social structure; she is a State with various possibilities and human
potential. By revealing this truth, Qudsi is stimulating the Arabs to
comprehensive action and progress in all fields. [p. 337]
Aref al-Aref, a journalist, historian and former mayor of East Jerusalem,
wrote in his book The Disaster about how Jews study and delve into
matters. Similarly, Walid Qamhawi -- who later led the Palestinian National
Fund -- praises Israel numerous times in his book
Disaster and Reconstruction. [p. 338]
So, no, Israel did not just suddenly appear on the world stage as a modern
leader in technology.
And it's not as if the Arab world is only now recognizing that fact and
wanting to emulate it -- the same attitude of admiration for Israeli
technological prowess existed back then too.
So why is it only now that countries in the Arab world, including those who
already have covert relations with Israel, willing to step forward to sign
agreements -- and even normalize relations -- with Israel?
One reason, of course, is the threat of Iran
But another reason is how the Middle East has changed.
Dr. Kedar notes how radical leaders such as Abdul Nasser of Egypt, Hafez
Al-Assad of Syria, Saddam Hussein of Iraq and Muammar Gaddafi of Libya once
dominated the Middle East, under the aegis of the then Soviet Union and wanted
to unite the Arab world.
In such a situation, more-traditional Arab countries such as Saudi Arabia, the
UAE, Kuwait and Oman felt under threat from these radical leaders who
considered those countries as counter-revolutionaries because they stuck with
the old traditions and did not actively partake in their attacks on Israel.
But now, over the past 10 years, things have changed.
The Arab countries that once were in the forefront, no longer are.
o Syria is suffering from a bloodbath
o Iraq is dysfunctional o Libya is a
swamp of problems o Egypt has its own problems with the
Nile, rapid population growth and unemployment
Under such conditions, the dream of Arab nationalism has been a failure.
And Israel is not the enemy anymore.
Egypt made peace, albeit a cold one, with Israel.
Likewise, Jordan has a 'cold' peace with Israel.
Between Egypt and Jordan on the one hand, and these dysfunctional states on
the other, Saudi Arabia and the other traditional countries feel free to
pursue their own interests -- and those interests include living in peace,
developing their countries and preparing the day when their oil runs out.
That means working with those countries that are leading the way in
progress. And that means working with Israel.
That segment begins at 22:54 below automatically.
That is quite a change.
But this is not to say that the road to real peace is certain and secure.
It is not.
Dr. Kedar points out that during the 1990's, both Qatar and Tunisia had good
relations with Israel to the extent that Israel opened commercial offices in
those countries flying the Israeli flag. Those were not embassies, but they
were still official.
Both countries canceled their agreements with Israel following the outbreak of
the second intifada.
An agreement can be breached.
It remains to be seen whether the Abraham Accords will meet expectations.
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.
I saw this cartoon by the antisemitic Carlos Latuff published in August with the caption "#Israel is pounding #Gaza day after day. Are you seeing this on the mainstream media?"
Since it shows a Palestinian mother and her dead child, I wondered - when was the last Gaza fatality from Israeli action?
It was February 24th, when the IDF killed an Islamic Jihad terrorist who was setting roadside bombs outside the Gaza fence.
Not one Gazan has been killed since then by Israel. Plenty have died in "work accidents" but none from Israeli fire.
Nearly eight months without a fatality.
Now, that's something that the mainstream media is ignoring. Let alone the "pro-Palestinian" community that routinely claims that Gazans are being killed daily.
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.
A German intelligence report from July 10, 2020 revealed Iranian intelligence activities inside Germany, which were involved in spying against synagogues and other targets. The report referred to the Islamic Center in Hamburg which is considered “the most important center for Iran in Germany.” The center has established a national network of contacts within many mosques and Shiite societies and exercises of great influence over them. The report added that Iran "is trying to link the Shiites of different nationalities to itself, and to spread the basic social, political and religious values of the Iranian state in Europe."
The percentage of Muslims in Germany is about 4.7 million and Shiites represent about 7%, or over 300,000. An estimated thousand members of Hezbollah are in ermany.
The Islamic League (Islamische Gemeinschaft der Schiitischen Gemeinden Deutschlands, or IGS) represents the most prominent organization accused of being an expansionist arm of Iran in Germany.
The Islamic Center of Hamburg (IZH) is another prominent arm of the Iranian regime in Germany, according to a report reported by the Office for the Protection of the Constitution in August 2020, which referred to IZH as a tool of the mullahs working side by side with the Tehran embassy, and its officials are known as the Supreme Leader's envoys to Berlin. The center is suspected of involvement in financing and cooperating with Hezbollah.
Other apparent fronts for Iran are the Center for Islamic Culture Frankfurt, the Counseling Association of Berlin (Markaz-Al-Qaem Al-Irshad), and the Al Hassanein Center of Berlin (Markaz Al-Hassanein Berlin), associated with Hezbollah.
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.
The National Council of Resistance of Iran announced that they have proof that Iran was violating the terms of the JCPOA even before President Trump withdrew the US from that agreement.
In a press conference on Friday, the group announced that Iran's Organization of Defensive Innovation and Research (Sazman-e Pazhouheshhaye Novin-e Defa’i), known by its Persian acronym SPND, started building a secret nuclear site near Tehran in 2012 and started moving personnel into it in 2017.
The new site is built in an existing area already under control of the Defense Ministry where missiles are being built.
The NCRI also announced that a second site that they had revealed in June 2019 was destroyed by the IRGC shortly thereafter, and only after a year of sanitizing the site did they allow the IAEA to inspect it this past August.
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.
One of the main achievements of the Abraham Accords—which normalized diplomatic relations between Israel and the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain—is their very name. After losing hope of defeating Israel on the battlefield, Israel’s enemies focused on creating an anti-Israel narrative. Their ambition was to erase all of Zionism’s intellectual foundations—distort history, negate the legitimacy of the Bible and paint Israel as an evil state, certainly not as a state seeking to promote progress and good in the region.
One of the primary avenues of this narrative-based attack is “occupation”—a buzzword that the State of Israel has been most identified with by international organizations and media outlets across the globe. This nefarious term, “Israeli occupation,” implies all that Israel’s enemies wish to convey: that Israel is a colony of the “white man” in the heart of the Middle East, a European foothold, a foreign entity seizing Arab lands and violating the human rights of the natives, the original people of the land: Palestinian Arabs.
How does one fight this? How do we express the Jewish people’s deeply-rooted connection to this land, which is the backbone of the State of Israel, and undo the image of the heartless occupier? The answer to this question lies in this new treaty, and is predicated upon a single word: “Abraham.”
US Vice President Mike Pence visited Israel in January 2018 and spoke to the Knesset. In that speech, he elucidated the importance of Abraham: “Nearly 4,000 years ago, a man left his home in Ur of the Chaldeans to travel here, to Israel. He ruled no empire, he wore no crown, he commanded no armies, he performed no miracles, delivered no prophecies, yet to him was promised ‘descendants as numerous as the stars in the sky.’
“Today, Jews, Christians and Muslims—more than half the population of the Earth, and nearly all the people of the Middle East—claim Abraham as their forefather in faith,” he said.
It’s evident, then, that the phrase “Abraham Accords” denotes that the treaty was forged by the descendants of Abraham’s children—Arabs and Jews—and thus redefines Jewish presence in the region as ancient and therefore legitimate. This runs exactly counter to the “occupation” narrative. It also appears the UAE has adopted the figure of Abraham as a unifying element in the region. In Abu Dhabi, construction has already begun on a magnificent inter-faith complex named the Abrahamic Family House, which will consist of three main buildings—a mosque, church and synagogue—for the purpose of invoking peace and coexistence among the three Abrahamic faiths: Christianity, Islam and Judaism.
More Arab and Muslim countries are likely to make peace if US President Donald Trump is reelected, Secretary of the Treasury Steven Mnuchin said on a flight to Bahrain with a US-Israeli delegation on Sunday.
“We are very hopeful there will be other announcements,” he said. “Our expectation is, obviously, that President Trump wins and this continues… There is a lot more in the works.”
Asked if a Trump loss would stop the momentum of Arab states establishing ties with Israel, he said: “I surely hope not.”
The Abraham Accords between Israel, the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain are “the most extraordinary outcome in the last 25 years,” Mnuchin said.
“I think 10 years from now when we look back at this, this will be as significant – if not more significant than both the Egyptian treaty and the Jordanian treaty [with Israel] – in how it has changed the whole region economically in particular, but also from a security standpoint and a cultural standpoint,” he said.
The opportunities for trade between Israel, the UAE and Bahrain are enormous, Mnuchin said.
A joint US-Israeli delegation arrived in Bahrain Sunday afternoon to sign a series of bilateral agreements between Jerusalem and Manama, including a so-called Joint Communiqué that will formally establish diplomatic relations between the two countries.
El Al Flight 973 — a nod to Bahrain’s country code — landed in Manama after taking off from Ben Gurion Airport in the first-ever nonstop passenger flight from Israel to the Gulf kingdom.
Bahraini Foreign Minister Abdullatif bin Rashid Al-Zayani welcomed the joint US-Israeli delegation at the airport.
During a ceremony held on the tarmac, Israel’s National Security Adviser Meir Ben-Shabbat said in Arabic that Israel “extends its hands for genuine peace with the Bahraini people.”
“Together we will change the reality in the region for the benefit of our nations. God willing, we will host you in Israel soon,” he said.
Switching to Hebrew, Ben-Shabbat noted that the Knesset approved the Israel-UAE peace treaty three days ago. He said the current delegation, like a previous one to the United Arab Emirates, flew nonstop from Tel Aviv, and added that he hoped the route would become a regular route in the near future. He thanked Bahrain’s King Hamad bin Isa al-Khalifa for making peace.
“In a certain sense, this visit today closes a circle for Bahrain’s role in bringing peace,” Ben-Shabbat said, presumably referring to last year’s Peace to Prosperity conference in Manama.
Wafa and a whole bunch of other Arab sources report:
Settlers cut, today, Saturday, about 30 olive trees from Qaryut lands, south of Nablus.
The official in charge of the settlement file in the northern West Bank, Ghassan Douglas, told "Wafa" that settlers cut down about 30 olive trees in the town's lands, owned by Bilal Mahmoud Raja.
This is not an exaggeration. It is his job, and he has been quoted in major media outlets who cannot believe that he is a professional liar.
In this case, as in virtually all the articles he is quoted in, there is no photographic evidence of the crime he is accusing Jews of doing.
Every article I saw about this absurd accusation, that the religious Jews of communities near Nablus would chop down trees on Shabbat, shows "archival footage" rather than any actual photos of the destroyed trees.
Even though every adult nowadays is walking around with a high resolution camera in their pocket, there are no photos.
That's truly amazing!
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.
But the Palestinian Authority has been reducing the number of permits of sick Palestinians to go to Israeli hospitals in recent years.
In 2017, it drastically reduced the number of Gazans given permission to travel to Israel for medical treatment.
Earlier this year, in order to fulfil a promise by Mahmoud Abbas to end all coordination with Israel, the Palestinian Authority stopped all transfers of patients to Israel - resulting in some deaths. Israeli NGOs scrambled to try to allow the most sick patients to come to Israel for treatment, while Palestinian NGOs angrily said that they would not try to help save Palestinian lives - the principle of non-cooperation was far more important than mere human life.
Well, that only applies to expendable Palestinians. But not the VIPs.
Apparently, the PLO rules of Palestinian honor only extend to allowing normal Palestinians to die for the cause, but not highly placed PLO officials.
A government that actively works against the interests of its own people does not deserve to exist to begin with. But when it distinguishes between the masses of its people it doesn't care about and its own top officials, it shows that it doesn't even adhere to its own stated principles to justify treating its citizens like dirt.
Palestinians deserve better leaders than this.
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.
On Friday, a jihadist in France beheaded a teacher, Samuel Paty, who showed his class the Mohammed cartoons that caused controversy (and murder) when published a few years back.
In Tunisia, a member of Parliament, Rached Khiari, wrote a post on Facebook seemingly agreeing with the murder.
He wrote, "Offending the Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings be upon him, is the greatest crime, and whoever performs it bears the consequences whether they are a state, group or individual."
Immediately, Khiari attracted critics - and supporters.
The spokesperson for the Tunis court of first instance, Mohsen Dali, announced that the prosecutor has launched an investigation into the post, saying that the post is comparable to a terrorist act, in accordance with the Tunisian anti-terrorist law, since it constitutes a justification for terrorism.
On the other hand, other prominent people and media came to Khiari's defense. Islamist media said that the critics were all trying to make themselves look good to the French.
Professor and lawyer Hanan Al-Khumairi denounced the media campaign against Khiari and supported his statements, claiming that they did not glorify the killing.
Khiari doubled down in Facebook, writing that "I may give up immunity and parliament, but I will not give up on my condemnation of the crime of offending the Messenger of Allah Muhammad peace and blessings be upon him. Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah more important and greater than glory, parliament, politics and the whole world."
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.
If Trump wins an historic level of support among American Jews, it will be a testament to the wisdom of an unprecedented percentage of American Jews. For American Jewry this year's presidential election is without question the most critical one ever.
Over the past four years, anti-Semitism has become an undeniable, and central characteristic of the Democrat Party to which the vast majority of American Jews have pledged their loyalty for the better part of the past hundred years while anti-Semitism in the Republican Party has dropped to historic lows.
Democrat anti-Semitism has seemingly appeared out of the blue but in truth, the party has been on a largely one-lane road to radicalization for the past fifty years. It's just that the path turned into a highway over the past four years with the rise of open anti-Semites like Rashida Tlaib, Linda Sarsour, Andre Carson, Keith Ellison and Ilhan Omert to commanding positions in the party.
Anti-Semitism runs through Democrat politics, policies and behavior across a spectrum of issues. In foreign policy, hating Israel has become the most passionate position of the progressive grassroots.
Biden announced early on that if elected, he will restore the US's commitment to the Iran nuclear deal he forged with Barack Obama. That means that a Biden administration will cancel the economic sanctions on Iran, ensuring the survival of the regime. It means a Biden administration will enable the cessation of the UN arms embargo enabling Iran to purchase whatever advanced weapons systems it wants. It also means a regime pledged to annihilate the largest Jewish community in the world – Israel – will have an open path to a nuclear arsenal.
Biden has agreed to restore the Palestinians to center stage. This isn't a pro-peace position. After all, the Abraham accords are the result of Trump marginalizing the Palestinians. The purpose of a Palestinian-centric policy is it is to delegitimize Israel, justify a US foreign policy that is hostile to Israel and domestic policy that is hostile to Israel's supporters in America.
Then there is anti-Semitism itself. The good news is that like Trump, Biden can be expected to take on white supremacists. The bad news is that in stark contrast to Trump, Biden can be expected to turn a blind eye to the growing anti-Semitism in his own political camp.
‘Cynical Theories – how universities made everything about race, gender, and identity and why this harms everybody.’
By Helen Pluckrose and James Lindsay
The word cynical, in the title of the book, is deliberate; the authors assert that many of the ideas informing the theories are pessimistic, rejecting objective truth and modernity. Radical skepticism about modernity is a defining feature. There is a sense of hopelessness and a preoccupation with the superficial. The authors deem these key features ‘reactionary’. (The theories are also often characterised by obscurity of language. *)
The authors suggest that universities , and academia, are sites in which the theories are mainly located, and are significant generators of activism and intolerance. Scholarship and rigorous research are tainted by the cynical theories, open debate is stifled. This has affected a wide range of studies including STEM subjects. And ‘what happens in universities doesn’t stay in the universities’.
The book comprises 10 chapters dealing with interrelated topics such as CRT and Intersectionality, Postcolonial theory, Feminism and Gender studies, and explores what I call the heavy stuff originating in the 1960s – Foucault, Lyotard, Derrida, etc – whilst later chapters consider ways in which the theories have shaped the debate in subjects such as Queer theory and Fat studies.
Of particular interest are two chapters on Social Justice scholarship, thought, and action. Whilst a concern for justice in society is necessary, social class – previously considered an important topic – is rarely considered by the theory. Instead it ‘seeks to apply deconstructive methods and postmodern principles to the task of creating social change’. Theory and activism are based on the assumption that racism and bigotry are everywhere, consequently there is a preoccupation with, and elevation of, victimhood. There is no room for criticism: disagreement is interpreted as a sign of intellectual and moral failure. There is ‘little time for universal principles and individual intellectual diversity’. (h/t L King)
New York’s scapegoated Haredi communities appear to be the last Americans capable of maintaining a sane balance between science and faith
Like, say, the idea of science. If you believe in it—truly, deeply, and unequivocally—you understand that science isn’t a faith-based system. It cares little for politics or virtues. It’s a blissfully agnostic methodology that makes guesses, compares them with available evidence, and amends, alters, or rejects them based on results. So, if you’re being true to science, say, here’s how you should be thinking about public gatherings: Are they unsafe? Then they’re as unsafe for the proponents of Black Lives just as they are for the Satmars. Are they safe under some conditions? Then let us be clear about precisely what these conditions are.
Take, for example, Gov. Cuomo’s decree that no more than 10 people are allowed in a house of worship at any given time. If you possess even a modicum of common sense, you realize that this idea is, at its core, profoundly anti-scientific, as it has nothing to say about the size of the house of worship in question. Ten people in a small one-room shtiebel is a real risk; 10 people in a grand synagogue built to seat thousands is a real farce. A governor serious about science and public safety rather than about seizing power would’ve understood that and acted accordingly, offering guidelines that were sensible and measured and concrete. The only ones pointing out this travesty are the Haredim.
It’s of little surprise, then, that the main flag on view during the Haredi protests last week was the Gadsden flag. Don’t Tread on Me, that quintessentially American cri de coeur, is, these days, primarily the domain of the Haredi community. Everywhere else in the Jewish world, the slogans recited are the confused and exhausted and meaningless truisms of nice liberals who can’t or don’t care to explain the staggering contradictions, violations, hypocrisies, and usurpations committed with their tacit support.
Flatten the curve, wear a mask, close the shuls—all were accepted without too much attention to detail or rationale and without asking what, in effect, we’re risking when we sign away so many of our freedoms to officials who seem to have nothing but the vaguest grasp on science and democracy alike. There’s nothing less Jewish, or less American, than that. The Haredim understand that by succumbing to the tyranny of illogic, the sort that restricts attendance regardless of the size of the venue or deems one form of gathering acceptable but not another, all will be lost. To surrender thusly would be a total disruption of their Jewish and American way of life. Their critics, sadly, prefer instead to worship at a very different altar, sanctifying their leftist bona fides and reverence to leaders from the correct political party rather than asking hard but obvious questions. What we see in Brooklyn these days, then, is nothing less than a religious war, in which the Haredim, in a delicious twist of fate, have actual science on their side. Here’s hoping they prevail.
Last month, the Jewish Chronicle reported that the City of David organisation had complained to BBC executives about Rosie Garthwaite, a senior BBC producer working on a new documentary about Israeli activities in eastern Jerusalem. Its vice president wrote she had “repeatedly presented us with one-sided and inaccurate statements” and that the program “intends to vilify Israel, Jewish history and Jewish charities and present a number of false and misleading claims.”
The paper also discovered that Garthwaite admitted sharing “inaccurate” pro-Palestinian propaganda on social media and had shared several other false or controversial claims about Israel, including attacking “British duplicity” over the signing of the Balfour Declaration, wrongly suggesting Gaza’s “one” border was controlled by Israel and retweeting an article from Middle East Eye describing the troublemaker Ahed Tamimi as an “icon for Palestinian resistance.”
These are but a tiny sample of the BBC’s institutionalised hostility towards Israel. For years, it has uncritically recycled Palestinian propaganda as innately credible and true, while treating demonstrably factual Israeli statements as mendacious propaganda.
It systematically downplays or disregards Palestinian attacks on Israelis and generally treats any eruption of violence as a story which only “kicks off” (as one BBC reporter said gleefully during an escalation of hostilities) when Israel retaliates with force. Israeli victimisation is simply not seen as a story at all.
When Israel is forced to defend itself, the BBC frequently portrays its armed forces —the most ethical and human rights-obsessed military in the world — as monstrous child-killers and aggressive destroyers.
The immediate and demonstrable effect on the British population is hatred of Israel and a spike in attacks on British Jews. It is no exaggeration to say that when it comes to Israel, the issue is not BBC bias. It is BBC incitement to baseless hatred.
The BBC is regarded around the world as a byword for objectivity and accuracy. That’s why its departure from those ideals is so pernicious.
Perhaps the most chilling thing about it, though, is this. BBC executives are genuinely, painfully aware of the news outlet’s unique power and reach, and of their duty under its founding charter to uphold objectivity and fairness and hold the line for the middle ground.
But they are simply unable to process the fact that they view Israel, among other issues, through a profoundly distorting ideological prism. And that’s because they believe implacably that the positions they hold are unarguably objective and fair, that they do represent the middle ground, and that therefore by definition those who claim the BBC is biased are themselves extremists and can be safely disregarded.
In other words, BBC group-think is a hermetically-sealed thought system. Which is why, if whoever takes over at the top wants to restore the once iconic BBC to elementary standards of objectivity, fairness and decency, they will have their work cut out for them.
Campaign Against Antisemitism contacted the BBC this week for an update on how it has dealt with an employee caught in a controversy over antisemitic and trolling tweets, but the BBC refused to disclose whether it has taken any action beyond launching an investigation. Today, however, The Times has learned that the journalist, Nimesh Thaker, has resigned, leaving questions about how seriously the BBC took the matter and why it refuses to divulge its actions.
Last month, Campaign Against Antisemitism and the JC revealed that Mr Thaker, who has been a BBC journalist for more than twenty years at BBC World News, used a Twitter account in his name and then an anonymous account to post controversial and even antisemitic tweets, in clear breach of the BBC’s guidelines.
Mr Thaker used both accounts to conduct official BBC business as well.
Using an account in his own name, Mr Thaker posted tweets describing antisemitism accusations against Jeremy Corbyn and the Labour Party as “smears” and trolled public figures who were campaigning against antisemitism. He also used the account to troll Campaign Against Antisemitism and to harass the editor of the JC and the actress and writer Tracy-Ann Oberman, tweeting at them dozens of times. He has also retweeted controversial political activists who themselves have come under fire for antisemitism, such as the notorious antisemite Jackie Walker, trolled Labour MPs over antisemitism, and defended Ken Livingstone and supported the disgraced former Labour MP, Chris Williamson. He also trolled his own BBC colleagues. The JC showed that he also behaved similarly with an anonymous account.
The Culture Secretary called the revelations “very concerning”, and the BBC launched an investigation, during which Mr Thaker reportedly resigned, thereby apparently escaping scrutiny.
Rabbi Lord Jonathan Sacks, the former chief rabbi of Great Britain, was recently diagnosed with cancer, a spokesperson for his office announced on Thursday.
"Rabbi Lord Jonathan Sacks has been recently diagnosed with cancer and is currently undergoing treatment to aid his recovery," a spokesperson for his office said.
Rabbi Sacks will be stepping back from his work for a short period of time to focus on his treatment. His office noted that he is looking to get back into the swing of things as soon as possible.
For those who wish include Rabbi Sacks in their prayers, his Hebrew name is Harav Ya’akov Zvi ben Liba.
WE HAVE discussed the decline of the Middle East ossifying dictatorial regimes since 2010 and the defeat of insurgencies and rise of Turkey, as well as Israel’s lessons from past wars. What is missing in this discussion?
First we need to acknowledge that with the new generation of leaders, such as the young Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman (MBS) in Saudi Arabia and Mohammed Bin Zayed (MBZ) in the UAE, there is a new era. The era of jihad, embodied by Osama bin Laden, is largely over. Even the Hamas leaders who now meet with Turkey’s Erdogan are not the Islamic rabble-rousers of the 1980s.
It may be that the Islamist extremism which grew out of the region and led to ISIS is being reduced. It is being replaced by Turkey’s sponsorship of extremism, but this state sponsorship is quite different than the 1980s when Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and later the Taliban were dabbling in extremism. It is no longer as chaotic. The unstable areas of the Middle East, stretching from the Sahel to Somalia, Yemen and Iraq, may be more stable today.
Iran has largely entered the vacuum where there was chaos. That means the old jihadist lines that led via the Euphrates River Valley to Iraq are now being digested by an Iranian octopus with bases of Shi’ite militias where jihadists once roamed. Iran has its fingers in Yemen too. This means that much like the Soviets took over former Nazi properties in eastern Europe, Iran has taken over the property of Sunni insurgents in Iraq and elsewhere. Iraq is now Iran’s “near abroad,” as Ukraine and Poland were for imperial Russia.
This era of changing leadership in the Middle East is festooned with younger men trying to fill the shoes of fathers and grandfathers. Bashar Assad in Syria, Saad Hariri in Lebanon. The Emir of Qatar. The King of Jordan. Masrour and Nechirvan Barzani, as well as Qubad and Bafel Talibani in the Kurdistan region. The new leaders of Kuwait and Oman are similar, as is the King of Morocco. This is a region still rooted in monarchy, family, tribe. That has been challenged by revolution, whether Nasser’s Arab nationalism or Ba’athism, or the Islamic Revolution and Muslim Brotherhood. But not everything changes in the region.
What does change is the US administration. The American election in November could bring Joe Biden to the White House. Countries in the region are concerned about what that change could mean. Tehran hopes Trump will be removed. The Taliban, oddly, reportedly prefer Trump, as does Erdogan in Turkey and the Gulf allies of Israel. That’s a group of strange bedfellows, but it is brought about by the transactional nature of the Trump administration and its doctrine of combining pro-Israel support with the desire to end the US role in Syria and Afghanistan, and overturning the Iran Deal.
It’s unclear what a new US administration will bring. Most countries in the region assume the US is drawing down its role. This means larger regional and global powers such as Russia, China, Iran and Turkey will play a leading role in the Middle East. The West’s role is declining.
If we look back at that Sirte meeting 10 years ago, it represented the end of an era of powerful Arab leaders. Today the region is more about Erdogan and Iran, alongside an emerging Israel-Gulf-Greece alliance system. (h/t Zvi)
The Knesset on Thursday approved Israel’s normalization deal with the United Arab Emirates with an overwhelming majority, all but ensuring that it will be ratified in the near future.
Eighty lawmakers voted in favor of the agreement, including many from the opposition.
Only 13 parliamentarians — all from the Arab-majority Joint List — voted against the agreement, criticizing it as a scheme to undermine the Palestinian people.
There were no abstentions, while 27 MKs did not participate in the vote.
The vote took place after nearly nine hours of an at times stormy debate, during which more than 100 ministers and MKs spoke. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu addressed the plenary twice — at its start at 11:00 a.m., and right before the vote after 8:00 p.m. — hailing the agreement as a paradigm shift in the Arab world’s approach to Israel, while touting his role in bringing many Sunni nations closer to Israel due to his vociferous public opposition to Iran.
“Since the start of Zionism, one of our hands has been holding a weapon in defense and the other hand was stretched out to everyone who wants peace,” he declared in his early speech. “They say peace is made with enemies. False. Peace is made with those who have stopped being enemies. Peace is made with those who desire peace and who no longer remain committed to your annihilation.”
Netanyahu said the agreement with the UAE was different from Israel’s peace treaties with Egypt and Jordan in that it does not require Israel to relinquish any territory. “It’s a warm peace, between peoples,” he said, recalling being moved at seeing social media footage of Emirati children draping themselves in an Israeli flag.
Dr. Nasser al Lahham, editor of the independent Ma'an news agency, wrote an explicitly antisemitic editorial today where he accused all rabbis in Israel of wanting to enslave Arabs and he predicted that Arabs will eventually take brutal revenge against Jews.
He started it off by claiming two alleged racist quotes from Israeli Jews. the first, which he attribute to a "settler" who had cut down olive trees speaking to Palestinian farmers, is that "we are the children of God and you serve us." The second was supposedly from a Tel Aviv restaurant owner who is claimed to have said, "I want Arabs and Arab girls to serve me, for Fatima to clean the bathrooms and Aisha to be work in the kitchen."
I cannot find either quote anywhere. I have never even seen any quote from any Jew who admitted to cutting down olive trees. I asked Dr. Lahham for the source but have not received an answer.
This doesn't mean that there aren't Jewish racists - of course there are - but like any bigot, Lahham extends the alleged racism of two random Jews based on probably fabricated quotes into all Jews in Israel.
He claims that "The rabbis of Israel have lost their mind - the rabbis of Safed issue rulings to enslave Arabs, steal olives and cut down trees." This is fiction.
He then ludicrously claims "we see Jewish settlers from Hebron and Yitzhar entering the Al-Aqsa Mosque and insulting the Prophet Muhammad inside the mosque." This is an absurd lie. Jews never even enter the mosque, and Jews visiting the Temple Mount are interested in the holiness of the site and its history, not in insulting any Muslim prophet.
Once Lahham incites his readers to hate Jews with lie after lie, he then goes on to issue a warning to American rabbis. Unless they do something to reign in the rogue Israeli racist Jews who want to enslave and murder all Arabs, Lahham warns, "no one, not even Facebook, Fox News, or a loud Trump will be able to prevent hundreds of millions of Arabs from taking revenge and tearing up Jewish flesh on the streets."
Ma'an claims to be a professional news organization with the highest standards of journalism. Its editor literally makes things up and reports them as fact - with the intent to incite violence. Then, like any mobster, he "warns" that unless people do what he wants, bad things will happen - which happen to be the bad things that he himself is encouraging with his bald-faced lies.
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.
Yesterday, a delegation of Gulf Arabs - there is disagreement as to whether they were from the UAE or Oman - visited the Dome of the Rock on the Temple Mount.
Mahmoud Abbas' Fatah party issued a statement that they consider any Arabs who visit the Al Aqsa Mosque compound without coordinating the visit with them to be no more legitimate than the Jewish "settlers" visiting the site. They used to claim that Al Aqsa was the heritage of all Muslims; now they are saying that "sovereignty over the holy sites is Palestinian and only Palestinian."
Palestinian Muslims on the Mount were upset by the delegation, and some of them harassed and insulted them, which had to be protected by Israeli police. Here one says "may Allah's curse be upon your sheikh" and calls them "impure."
Jews are protecting the right of Muslims to worship - in the holiest Jewish spot on Earth - and Palestinian Muslims are the ones trying to take away that right.
If Arabs are still on the fence about what to think about Palestinians, this should clinch it.
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.
Richard Falk, the fanatically anti-Israel former UN “Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the Palestinian territories occupied since 1967, has found a place to publish his pseudo-scholarly screeds.
After being interviewed by the mouthpiece of the Islamist, terror supporting regime numerous times, now Falk decided to cut out the middleman and write for the mullahs himself.
In his article there this week Falk says how evil AIPAC is and praises the BDS-supporting anti-Israel Jewish Voice for Peace.
Part of the effectiveness of AIPAC is due to money and tight organizational discipline, and part of its influence is due to the absence of countervailing Jewish organizations that speak for liberal Zionism and progressive Jews. J-Street has attempted to provide a voice for liberal Zionism in Washington, and has limited success at legislative levels, but not in relation to party platforms or the selection of national candidates. Jewish Voice for Peace is an admirably balanced NGO, but its influence is mainly felt in civil society, where it has created growing support for a just outcome of this struggle that has gone on for a century, which includes supported [sic] the realization of the Palestinian right of self-determination whether in the form of a viable separate sovereign state or a single state whose foundational principle is ethnic equality.
Falk is such a moral paragon that he chooses to publish for a regime that hangs gays.
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.
American liberalism is in danger from a new ideology—one with dangerous implications for Jews
The dominoes are falling hard and fast. That’s how you get pulpit rabbis who argue that Jews should not claim ourselves to be indigenous to the land of Israel. Or an organization meant to fight anti-Semitism that aligns itself with Al Sharpton. Or a tinderbox in the city with the largest Jewish population in the country, whose communal outfits seem to care more about lending cover to politicians than ensuring the physical safety of Jews.
Last month, I participated in a Zoom event attended by several major Jewish philanthropists. After briefly talking about my experience at The New York Times, I noted that if they wanted to understand what happened to me, they needed to appreciate the power of that new, still-nameless creed that has hijacked the paper and so many other institutions essential to American life. I’ve been thinking about what happened next ever since.
One of the funders on the call launched into me, explaining that Ibram X. Kendi’s work was vital, and portrayed me as retrograde and uncool for opposing the ideology du jour. Because this person is prominent and powerful enough to send signals that others in the Jewish world follow, the comments managed to both sideline me and stun almost everyone else into silence.
These people may be the most enraging: those with the financial security to oppose this ideology and demur, so desperate to be seen as hip; for their children to keep their spots at the right prep schools; so that they can be seated at the right tables at the right benefits; so that they are honored at Brown or Harvard; so that business does well enough that they can renovate their house in Aspen or East Hampton. Desperate to remain in good odor with the right people, they are willing to close their eyes to what is coming for the rest of us.
Young Jews who grasp the scope of this problem and want to fight it thus find themselves up against two fronts: their ideological enemies and their own communal leadership. But it is among this group—people with no social or political capital to hoard, some of them not even out of college—that I find our community’s seers. The dynamic reminds me of the one Theodor Herzl faced: The communal establishment of his time was deeply opposed to his Zionist project. It was the poorer, younger Jews—especially those from Russia—who first saw the necessity of Zionism’s lifesaving vision.
Funders and communal leaders who are falling over themselves to make alliances with fashionable activists and ideas enjoy a decadent indulgence that these young proud Jews cannot afford. They live far from the violence that affects Jews in places like Crown Heights and Borough Park. If things go south in one city, they can take refuge in a second home. It may be cost-free for the wealthy to flirt with an ideology that suggests abolishing the police or the nuclear family or capitalism. But for most Jews and most Americans, losing those ideas comes with a heavy price.
(h/t jzaik)
Conclusion: Why the Jews are still being cast as getting in the way of universal redemption
Hertzberg’s argument also suggests, as we have already noted, reasons why we should expect antisemitism to recur as a disease of the radical, or fundamentalist versions of political or religious movements, including ones consciously ‘anti-racist’ in their own estimation. Hertzberg makes the point that Montesquieu was less hostile to Jewish demands for emancipation than Voltaire because he represented ‘a tradition of enlightened thinking that ran counter to all this intellectual absolutism in the name of an appreciation of the Jew and Judaism as one of the many valid forms of culture and religion.’ Trevor-Roper, in his review, fully grants this difference between the two. ‘Now that there is a profound difference between the philosophy of Montesquieu and the philosophy of Voltaire no one would deny; and it is equally undeniable that Montesquieu was the more liberal of the two. Montesquieu was a relativist: he believed that societies were formed by a plurality of forces, and that they differed from one another, and differed legitimately, in accordance with the differences of those forces. His attitude to minorities was logically the result of his general philosophy . . . On the other hand Voltaire, a far less subtle or consistent thinker, believed in the linear progress of mankind toward a unitary truth of ‘philosophy’, and tended to judge men by their willingness to move in that direction. He had little of Montesquieu’s respect for the non-intellectual pressures of tradition, custom, or social force. It was for this reason that Gibbon, a disciple of Montesquieu, ended by repudiating Voltaire as in some respects ‘a bigot, an intolerant bigot.’[19]
The fundamentalist wing, not only of the Enlightenment but of any radically reforming movement, political or religious, left or right, tends to be defined by its determination both to simplify the goals of the movement and to treat them as ‘unitary truths of ‘philosophy’‘ to which, if the movement is to succeed, everyone without exception must be brought to accord an equally unitary and comprehensive submission. It is the fundamentalist wing of any such movement, therefore, that has the most to fear from the obstinate facts of human diversity, not only in the shape of what Trevor-Roper terms ‘the non-intellectual pressures of tradition, custom, or social force,’ but in that of competing intellectual systems. Hence it is that wing of any such movement that will always stand in most need of a story that will somehow make it plausible to regard all such pressures and constructs as the work of alien forces endlessly striving to corrupt a social order otherwise ready and waiting to respond positively and without serious dissent to the proffered opportunity of universal redemption. That, it seems to me, is ultimately what Hertzberg’s book has to teach us concerning the enduring tendency to antisemitic delusion on the part of the more radical elements, not only of the French Enlightenment, but of more recent versions both of progressive and anti-progressive thought.
THE COMMON interests of the new allies will enable the creation of a new conflict-free Middle East.
Israel’s isolation is ending but its commitment toward its new allies has also become stronger. Israel today proves to the world that it has genuinely wanted peace; peace that will stabilize the region, create opportunities for Israeli youth, end its demonization by its neighbors, and allow it instead to be embraced. The opportunities that will be created will give the Palestinian youth political and economic stability, too, by enhancing cooperation between our countries on all levels.
In this process, we hope to also see a drastic change in the Palestinian leadership, and see leaders who can genuinely negotiate that which serves their people in an ethical manner.
Looking into the history of the Palestinian leaders, one cannot deny the lost opportunities to bring an end to the conflict with, Israel. February 2007, Palestinian leaders, representing Hamas and Fatah met King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia, who wanted to resolve the differences between them.
After two days of negotiations, they presented Abdullah with a document that contained the agreements of all the assembled leaders. Everyone believed that this time the Palestinian leaders were serious. Abdullah asked them to honor their promise and had them swear on the Koran that the document was their final deal. Within 48 hours after their return, the Palestinian leaders broke their word.
Today, major players in the region will have a more crucial political role that will achieve peace and stability and enable the economies of all the countries involved to grow.
Today, a door has been opened to negotiations and alliances with new players in the region. The new players were always supportive of the Palestinian people and the UAE’s and Bahrain’s stance. Ethics and principles can never change.
Israel is officially a friend today, a friend we trust. And I truly believe that the moment those agreements were signed, all the parties involved had great intentions and will work closely together to make sure no one’s rights are violated and that the people of the region will eventually live in peace. A new dawn has finally begun.
Yet again, a tendentious article by a person who supposedly cares deeply about peace against Israel making peace with anyone until a highly specific set of arbitrary criteria are fulfilled.
This one is by Rev. Dr. Mae Elise Cannon, executive director of Churches for Middle East Peace, writing in The Forward. Her arguments against the Abraham Accords are the same as the others we have seen:
1. They aren't peace accords because Israel was never at war with the UAE or Bahrain.
Whatever nomenclature you use, up until now they didn't speak to Israel officially and now they are. Tourism is being set up, partnerships announced, Jews sending messages of peace in Arabic and Arabs sending messages of peace in Hebrew. Who could be against this?
"Peacemakers."
2. Bahrain is run by a Sunni minority over a Shiite majority; the UAE is involved in the Yemen war, so they violate human rights and Israel shouldn't make agreements with them.
By that logic, Israel shouldn't make peace with the Palestinians either, since they have no respect for human rights - for women, for gays, for their own prisoners, for political opponents.
For that matter, the US should never have made any agreement with Iran on the nuclear issue either.
These all make exactly the same amount of sense.
3. The agreements don't address "occupation" or Palestinian demands.
Does that make them bad? Seemingly so.
All of these arguments are grasping at straws, meant to obfuscate the real problem that these "peacemakers" have with the accords: they hate Israel and anything good for Israel must be opposed.
CMEP supports the thoroughly antisemitic Kairos Palestine document. They have supported the PFLP-infested "Defense for Children Palestine" that routinely makes up facts to demonize Israel. They have called Israel an "apartheid" state. It has routinely partnered with BDS advocates.
It is not a "peace" organization. It is an anti-Israel organization hiding behind a façade of "peace."
Every single person and organization that has come out against these agreements has been found to be against the existence of Israel as a Jewish state. All the arguments they are using are excuses to cover their real objection to the accords: they don't want Israel to have any legitimacy.
This article proves this perfectly.
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.
Berkeley, October 15 - Activists campaigning for the economic, diplomatic, and cultural isolation of the world's only Jewish state disclosed today they prefer the three-letter shorthand term for their movement to any more honest name, which would require them to use a cumbersome moniker indicative of the real-world negative effect the movement has not on Israel, but on Jews everywhere else.
Local chapter leaders of several groups billing themselves as pro-Palestinian or focused on human rights, but who somehow muster their numbers and voices only against Israel, explained in interviews that the initials of "Boycott, Divest, Sanctions" lend themselves to punchier, more nimble rhetorical use than any name that would convey the actual outcome of the groups' activities, such as "The Movement to Make Jews Feel Unsafe Anywhere" or "The Committee for Thinly-Veiled Threats of Antisemitic Violence on Campus."
"Speaking out our actual aims, not to mention accomplishments, would be a real mouthful," lamented Bay Area Jewish Voice for Peace coordinator Timothy al-Masri. "Many of us would like to think that our campaigns have resulted in even a single instance of boycotting, divesting, or sanctioning Israel, and we can sometimes even glom onto an instance of someone canceling a concert there, or whatever, and claim our pressure did it, but we also know deep down no one actually cares what we think, and that Israel is far too powerful economically and politically for us to have any hope of real impact. The truth is most of us just really hate Jews and loathe the idea of Jewish sovereignty. Our real accomplishment isn't in the metrics of celebrity visits to Israel canceled, or corporate partnerships prevented, but in creating an environment here in Berkeley, or across the US and Europe, where Jews feel threatened. That's what happens as if my magic everywhere we do our thing. It just doesn't have a catchy set of initials to capture it, so we go with 'BDS' instead. That's a compromise we're all willing to accept."
Some activists have suggested rebranding with even shorter, catchier, terminology: several suggestions have emerged for various phrases whose initials spell out SS, such as Sanction the Shlomos and Sovereignty Struggle. These ideas have found little resonance among activists, most of whom view the nomenclature as a distraction from their chief mission: singling out Jewish sovereignty as a unique evil, the fight against which requires support for actions that demonstrate what happens to Jews in the absence of such sovereignty.
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.
This blog may be a labor of love for me, but it takes a lot of effort, time and money. For 20 years and 40,000 articles I have been providing accurate, original news that would have remained unnoticed. I've written hundreds of scoops and sometimes my reporting ends up making a real difference. I appreciate any donations you can give to keep this blog going.
Mimouna and the myth of Jewish-Arab coexistence
-
In 2016, Jimmy Bitton wrote effusively about the ‘re-emerging coexistence
that once existed between Jews and Muslims’ in Morocco. This symbiosis was
sym...
Sheila Raviv: Israel THE DAY AFTER
-
[image: Sheila Raviv: Israel THE DAY AFTER] Sheila Raviv: Israel THE DAY
AFTER IsraelSeen.com
Sheila Raviv: Israel THE DAY AFTER Shabbat Shalom. Shabbat wi...
Shabbat Shalom from Israel
-
Well folks, we are supposedly in the beginning few days of a 2 week
ceasefire. The north of the country is still getting missiles from
Hezbollah consta...
The Forward Dulls Mahmoud Khalil’s Sharp Teeth
-
Key Takeaways: The Forward frames Mahmoud Khalil as a reassuring voice,
while downplaying his record of extremist rhetoric. Khalil’s most
controversial cla...
Is Anti-Zionism to be Considered Anti-Semitism?
-
Anti-semitism is the hate of Jews for being Jews.
Being Jewish includes the belief that the Land of Israel is the covenanted
homeland of the Jewish natio...
The Art That We Keep Or Destroy
-
The Mayor of Providence, Rhode Island, has called for the removal of a
mural of Iryna Zarutska, a young Ukrainian refugee whose brutal murder was
caught ...
New Passover Haggadah-- Az Nashir
-
I couldn't resist this new Az Nashir Haggadah for many reasons. One
important reason is that many of my friends were involved in writing and
editing i...
Now What?
-
Today, Jews cannot walk down the street in North America, Europe, or even
Australia without the possibility of being spat on, beaten, or even
murdered. Cou...
Closing Jews Down Under Website
-
With a heavyish heart I am closing down the website after ten years.
It is and it isn’t an easy decision after 10 years of constant work. The
past...
‘Test & Trace’ is a mirage
-
Lockdown II thoughts: Day 1 Opposition politicians have been banging on
about the need for a ‘working’ Test & Trace system even more loudly than
the govern...
Monday, October 19, 2020
Elder of Ziyon
