The world will doubtless mark the 75th anniversary of the Nuremberg trials, which began in November 1945, as a model of international law. For the first Nazi executed at Nuremberg, however, the trial embodied not multilateralism but rather the revenge of the Jews. This was made clear in an eerie moment 11 months later, one whose historical and theological lessons reverberate to this day.
On October 16, 1946, Julius Streicher—the Nazi’s Nazi, publisher of Der Stürmer, the man who personally ordered the destruction of the Great Synagogue of Nuremberg on Kristallnacht—was taken to be hanged. As Newsweek reported, Streicher did not die with dignity: “He had to be pushed across the floor, wild-eyed and screaming ‘Heil Hitler!’ Mounting the steps he cried out: ‘And now I go to God.’ He stared at the witnesses facing the gallows and shouted: ‘Purimfest 1946.’”
That is a reference to the Jewish holiday of Purim, which marks the tale told in the book of Esther: the rise of Haman as vizier of Persia and his attempt to wipe out the Jews. In the end, Haman himself is hanged on the gallows, and later, following a war against his allies, Haman’s 10 sons are hanged as well. In invoking Purim, Streicher drew on an anti-Semitic trope with a long German lineage. Purim, for Martin Luther, reflected the bloodthirsty nature of the Jews, as he noted in a text called On the Jews and Their Lies:
They are real liars and bloodhounds who have not only continually perverted and falsified all of Scripture with their mendacious glosses from the beginning until the present day. Their heart’s most ardent sighing and yearning and hoping is set on the day on which they can deal with us Gentiles as they did with the Gentiles in Persia at the time of Esther. Oh, how fond they are of the book of Esther, which is so beautifully attuned to their bloodthirsty, vengeful, murderous yearning and hope.
That Streicher went to his death echoing Luther’s anti-Semitism was appropriate, for he had lived his life following Luther’s advice: “First to set fire to their synagogues or schools and to bury and cover with dirt whatever will not burn, so that no man will ever again see a stone or cinder of them…I advise that their houses also be razed and destroyed.”
A great gulf looms between the image of Mennonites as a peaceful Christian denomination engaged in humanitarianism and peace building around the world, including in the Middle East, and what historians have begun to reveal about the entanglement of a substantial minority of Mennonites with National Socialism during the 1930s and ’40s. So, who hid the Mennonite involvement with Nazism and how?
After World War II, the primary narrative that Mennonite leaders in Europe and North America crafted about their churches’ activities in the Third Reich emphasized repression and hardship. The denomination’s leading aid organization, Mennonite Central Committee (MCC), worked during the late 1940s and early 1950s to help resettle thousands of European Mennonites who were displaced as a result of the war. MCC relied on financial and legal assistance from larger refugee agencies affiliated with the United Nations. In dealing with their United Nations colleagues, MCC officials insisted most of their wards “were brutally treated by the German occupation authorities” and “did not receive favored treatment.”
One of Mennonite Central Committee’s star witnesses was a refugee named Heinrich Hamm. Like tens of thousands of other Mennonites who had experienced the Nazi occupation of Eastern Europe, Hamm was from Soviet Ukraine, and had retreated westward with German troops in 1943 to avoid again coming under communist rule. Five years later, Hamm was an MCC employee, helping to run a large refugee camp in occupied Germany. MCC’s special commissioner in Europe passed to United Nations officials Hamm’s story of evacuating from Ukraine to more western areas:
It is quite an erroneous idea to think that all Mennonites were brought to Poland to be settled on farms. I and my family came to a camp Preussisch-Stargard in the Danzig area. Immediately representatives of various works and concerns came to fetch cheap labour. I had to work in a machine factory where I remained until the end of the war. Besides the four Mennonite families many Ukrainians, Frenchmen and Poles worked there also. There was no difference in the way these various national groups were treated.
The efforts after the war by Mennonite Central Committee to portray refugees like Heinrich Hamm as victims of Nazism were largely successful. Based on statements from MCC officers and many migrants themselves, refugee agents affiliated with the United Nations believed that “the majority of those [Mennonites] who found themselves in Germany at the end of the war had not come voluntarily to that country. They were deported alongside other Russians to be used as slave labourers.” As another evaluation concluded, Mennonites were fundamentally “an un-Nazi and un-nationalistic group.” MCC ultimately succeeded in relocating most of the refugees under its care with United Nations assistance to new homes in West Germany or overseas, mostly in Canada and Paraguay.
Hamm and his colleagues at Mennonite Central Committee wanted United Nations-affiliated refugee organizations and other interested parties to think that any collaboration by members of the denomination with National Socialism was exceptional and insignificant. They implied that if some young men had perhaps gotten carried away, surely this was because they had been drawn away from their faith under Soviet rule. But wartime records do not corroborate this story.
Shannon Nuszen is coming up against Jewish opposition to her
work at Beyneynu, which is all about exposing the true nature of Christian
missionaries inside Israel. These evangelical Christians are careful not to
use overt language in describing their mission to the Jewish Israelis they meet
and work with. But Nuszen captures the truth by way of videos created by the
Christians for their supporters abroad, in which their mission is stated in
explicit terms. And the truth is that these Christians are in Israel for the
express purpose of converting Jewish Israelis to Christianity.
Why would any Jew not want this truth exposed? It’s not a
mystery: money talks, nobody walks. Evangelical Christians give a lot of money
to Israel, and they’re very nice people. No one wants to believe they have any
underlying, hidden purpose in being here. The Jews don’t want to believe these
Christians are anything other than what they purport to be: nice people who
support the Jews and the Jewish State.
Jews are tired of being hated. When someone shows them a bit
of love, they drink it up. They are like Sally Fields at the Oscars gushing, “You like me! You really like me!”
They need to believe these Christians don’t have an ulterior
motive. They need it for their self-esteem. And of course, there’s the money.
Lots and lots of it. And a lot of these Christians are working the vineyards of
Samaria, for free. Which is as good as financial support, right?
So we have a situation where Shannon Nuszen, through her
organization, Beyneynu, is distributing videos to Jewish journalists in which
Christians expose their true purpose on camera. And Jews are going around
behind the scenes and sometimes, shamelessly, right in front of Nuszen, casting
aspersions on her work.
These Jews tell the journalists and anyone else who will
listen that Shannon is disturbed, that because of her past, she has a vendetta—that
these Christians are REALLY NICE PEOPLE who have told them, the Jews, that converting the Jews is the furthest thing from
their sweet little innocent minds. These Christians LOVE the Jews, say the
Jews, and only want to help and support them.
Would that all that were true. But it’s not. And Shannon is
only curating words said by these very same Christians—words which clearly have
no other context—that is, if one is being honest about this stuff. The
Christians are in Israel for one sole purpose. They want to bring the Jews to
Jesus.
They’ll swear up and down it isn’t so. But the videos say
otherwise, if you can get past all the Jews out to destroy the messenger,
Shannon. To them I say, “Methinks thou dost protest too much.”
The Jews know on which side their bread is buttered. And it’s
actually a really shameful thing to witness how they grovel to those trying to
convert them while speaking out against their own: Shannon. But you know what?
Let’s give Shannon a chance to explain it all in her own words. And then you
can decide whom to believe: Shannon, or the Jewish naysayers who benefit from
these Christians and work behind the scenes to deride their fellow Jew:
Varda Epstein: Can
you tell us a bit about your background?
Shannon Nuszen: I was born and raised in Evangelical
Christianity. My father was a minister, and for many years I was a missionary myself
with a tremendous love for Israel and a focus on the Jewish people.
In 2005 I visited Israel for the first time and returned
home more determined than ever to prove to myself and every Jew I knew that
Jesus was indeed the messiah prophesied in the bible.
However, homing in on that one issue and fully immersing
myself in learning about the fulfillment (or lack thereof) of these prophecies
did not result in any reaffirming of my faith, or in me perfecting my arguments
for bringing Jews to Jesus. The opposite happened, and through learning the
Jewish perspective, it became clear that everything I knew and believed in was
false.
Long story short, I ended up converting to Judaism and have
been living as an Orthodox Jew ever since. I now live in Israel.
Varda Epstein: Why
did you decide to focus on exposing and fighting missionaries in Israel? Is
this really a significant presence or threat to the Jews of Israel?
Shannon Nuszen: I was on the other side. I was one of those
missionaries. I understand better than most how aggressive and unyielding these
missionaries are. Most Jewish people, though they may have encountered these
missionaries, really do not understand the full scope and danger they present
to our people. We are not just dealing with Christians trying to convert Jews.
It’s worse than that and more insidious because they are playing word games.
The missionaries misappropriate Jewish symbols, icons, and
traditions in order to evangelize the Jews. They are portraying Christianity in
a Jewish way to get Jews to believe in Jesus. I know this because I was one of
those people. As a result, I feel a heavy responsibility, almost a burden, to
alert the Jewish community to the problem that confronts them.
It is shocking. It is
a stage four cancer, and there is no stage five. These missionaries have
managed to infiltrate and become a part of the highest echelons of the Israeli
government and its leadership. Because of their financial and political support
for Israel these evangelicals have managed to blind Israelis to the inherent dangers
of their mission. Evangelical support comes at an extremely high price, and I
understand why Israeli leaders and many ordinary Israelis and Israeli
businessmen turn the other way. We have many enemies, and therefore we are
willing to work with anyone, even when it comes at a very dangerous price.
Varda Epstein: Would
you tell us about some of the people and organizations you’ve worked with on
the issue of missionaries in Israel?
Shannon Nuszen: In my quest to research and supply
information about specific missionary groups that are active in Israel, I have
worked with and continue to work with every organization I know of in this
field. In an official capacity I began this work 13 years ago in Houston,
countering local missionaries in a grassroots effort with Rabbi Stuart Federow.
During this time, I also worked for Outreach Judaism for a span of a few years.
Most of my work in this field, however, has been with Jewish Israel, as their North American
liaison.
Varda Epstein: Tell
us about Beyneynu. Why did you decide to found this organization and what is
its purpose?
Shannon Nuszen: Beyneynu is a nonprofit organization that
monitors missionary activity in Israel and works with government and community
leaders to create proper boundaries in their partnerships with faith-based
organizations.
Are we against Christian support for Israel? No! We simply
draw the line at missionary efforts, and do not believe Jewish organizations should
be forming alliances or partnerships with those who have as their agenda the
desire to bring Jews to faith in Jesus.
I do not consider myself a “counter missionary,” and Beyneynu
is not another counter missionary organization. Our focus is on alerting the
Jewish community to missionary efforts, and to help the Israeli leadership to
identify those who threaten the Jewish character of the State of Israel.
Varda Epstein: You’ve
released some shocking videos of missionaries in Israel and abroad. How are
these videos created?
Shannon Nuszen: These videos are created the same way news
publications produce videos. They scour hours of videos and take the most
germane elements they find and broadcast them to the public. This is critical
to this effort.
Most videos put out by the missionaries are over an hour
long. The Jewish community needs to know about the elements in these videos
that specifically speak about their intentions in regard to the Jewish people
of Israel.
It’s important to understand that if these missionary groups—based
as they are inside of Israel—were self-sustaining, they wouldn’t take the risk
of discussing these topics in videos, but all their financial support comes
from abroad, from outside of Israel. The videos are created precisely for this audience:
evangelical Christians who live beyond the borders of Israel. Virtually nothing
comes from native Israeli missionaries, therefore they must convey to evangelical
Christians abroad the work that they are doing, and that is “winning Jewish
souls for Yeshua.”
These people all, without exception, use language that serves
as dog whistles for their followers. None of them would ever come straight out
and use the term “convert Jews to Christianity” to describe their mission. That
type of language is no longer used among the Jews because Jewish people
translate “convert to Christianity” as losing their Jewish identity (and they’re
right).
This was clear in another video Beyneynu released not long
ago where the CEO of God
TV, Ward Simpson, clearly stated “We
don’t want Jews to convert to Christianity, we simply want them to accept Jesus
as their messiah.”
Varda Epstein: There
have been some accusations that you are selectively editing these videos to
show something that isn’t really there. They say you have a vendetta, because
you were one of them, and have now converted to Judaism. What would you say to
your accusers?
Shannon Nuszen: The accusers are not bystanders. They are
the same activists who repeatedly carry water for these evangelical Christian
groups by repeating their talking points, because they work with them and
depend on them for their financial support. They have a vested interest in
protecting these missionaries.
The real question for these accusers (or perhaps “handlers”
is a better word) is: Do these Christians believe it is their obligation to carry
out “The Great Commission?” Matthew 28:19 “. . . to make disciples of all
nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the
Holy Spirit.”
In our latest video, these Christians are clearly speaking
of this obligation to their followers, if not in so many words. If the
naysayers cannot answer to the charge or prove that it’s not the case, then the
only tactic left for them is to attack the messenger: me.
As far as having a vendetta, I would say the opposite is
true. Just as much as I feel it is an obligation to warn fellow Jews of this
danger, I would love to be able to demonstrate to Christians the pain their
actions inflict on the Jewish people in order to foster some understanding.
Varda Epstein: Why
are so many Jews against your work, and speaking out against this work and even
you, personally? What do they stand to gain by allying with Christians, and
working against you, a fellow Jew?
Shannon Nuszen: I do not think even our most fierce
opposition opposes the goal of our work. This is the one issue that Jews across
the spectrum agree on. The entire Jewish world is against efforts to convert
Jews. They just refuse to believe that the Christians who give them financial
support, and who support their programs, could possibly have any missionary
agenda. It becomes for them a very personal issue.
The information we present, however, is not our opinion. We
are not quoting out of context or interpreting what these Christians are
saying. Our only aim is to inform.
Varda Epstein: Is
there anything else you would like to say to your accusers?
Shannon Nuszen: I try
not to focus on the negative attention or answer those who are aligning
themselves with missionaries. They have their reasons for what they do, and
they will have to answer for that. My focus is on the effect of these missionaries
on Jewish communities worldwide.
Varda Epstein: Can
you give us some examples of things these missionaries have said for which the
context is undeniable, and cannot possibly be explained away by selective
editing?
Shannon Nuszen: The undeniable issue that cannot be disputed
is “The Great Commission,” which you’ll find being preached in each of the
videos we have curated, and is common to all missionaries. “The Great
Commission” is the commandment given by Jesus himself “. . . to make disciples
of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of
the Holy Spirit.” Those who teach this concept are fully committed to living by
this commandment and everything they say and do is by way of fulfilling this
obligation.
The methods and language used to explain this in ways that
won’t offend Jews are many, but the bottom line is that they do not believe
they are exempt from this commandment or that they should refuse to participate
in its fulfillment. They see this commandment, “The Great Commission,” as their
primary goal, and crucial factor in the “restoration” (you’ll hear them say
that word a lot) process that in their belief, serves as preparation for the
second coming of Jesus.
Varda Epstein: Where
are you and Beyneynu going with this work? What can we expect to see coming up
next?
Shannon Nuszen: Beyneynu’s efforts are primarily behind the
scenes working with government
and Jewish leadership to understand the dangers of partnering with
missionaries. With the tremendous outpouring of love and support coming from
the Christian world, it is important that we understand who we can and cannot
trust.
Sometimes our efforts include informing the public of
problematic events or relationships that require their help to demand action.
This was the case with God TV. Even though they had already secured a contract
with the cable provider, and had been licensed by the Israeli government to
broadcast this programming, it was public outcry that brought about the
complete reversal of this state of affairs and caught the attention of the
world.
That is the message that every organization looking to
partner with us should understand. We appreciate the support for Israel, but we
must draw the line when it comes to missionary activity.
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, I was in the mood to find old, public domain comic books and change the dialogue. Romance comics work best because they are so dramatic.
Enjoy!
I also took an Ali Abunimah tweet and put the words, verbatim, in one of the romance comics where it seems to work very well!
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 indictments of U.S. foreign policy under President Donald Trump are as varied as his critics. The mandarins of the foreign-policy establishment have led the charge by insisting that the norm-shattering president has weakened U.S. alliances and empowered the country’s adversaries. Overlooked is the fact that the Trump administration has pursued a successful Middle East policy. And it succeeded precisely because it challenged entrenched assumptions. In the end, Trump will hand President-elect Joe Biden a region that is more stable than it was four years ago and an alliance network that is stronger than the one Trump inherited. This is a worthy legacy that will be squandered by the Democrats if they are determined to eviscerate all things Trump.
Among the world’s revisionist powers, none has taken the battering of Iran. Trump’s successes have confounded his critics. At first, many in the commentariat insisted that if Trump were to pull the United States out of the Iran nuclear deal, known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, Washington would stand alone and be incapable of maintaining multilateral economic sanctions. In the end, the European co-signatories of the deal may have complained—but more importantly, European businesses complied. The next pillar of wisdom to fall was the notion that should the United States walk away from the deal, Iran would rush to the bomb. Tehran has accelerated some parts of its nuclear activities, but the country is still years away from having a nuclear bomb. The sabotage of Iran’s nuclear installations by unconfirmed intelligence actors has moved the atomic goal post further out of Tehran’s reach. And finally, the last notion to fall was that Trump’s killing of Iran’s famed Quds Force commander, Qassem Suleimani, would spark a war. Instead it provoked a missile attack on a relatively unoccupied potion of a U.S. military base in Iraq—with sufficient forewarning by Tehran to Washington that was passed on via the Swiss.
The stark reality is that the clerical oligarchs were prepared to negotiate with either winner of the 2020 U.S. presidential election. A regime that cannot stabilize its currency or protect its people from the ravages of a pandemic needs relief from sanctions and understands that the pathway to the global economy and financial system runs through Washington. The problem is that the Americans who will show up at the table after Jan. 20 may be so disdainful of Trump’s maximum pressure strategy that they fail to appreciate its many advantages.
When President-elect Joe Biden finally starts getting intelligence briefings, he may want to pay special attention to Israel’s successful operation against Abu Muhammad al-Masri, al-Qaeda’s second in command.
The significance of that operation, which took place in August and saw al-Masri shot dead in the street, is its location: Iran. According to the center-left conventional wisdom, this sort of thing should be impossible. While many analysts acknowledge that senior al-Qaeda leaders fled to Iran after the fall of the Taliban in Afghanistan, they have insisted that there was no significant relationship between the Shiite majority regime in Tehran and the Sunni-jihadist terrorist group.
In fact, al-Qaeda’s No. 2, who was wanted by the FBI for his role in planning the 1998 attacks on U.S. embassies in Africa, was living freely in an Iranian suburb. It should be obvious by now that Iran is willing to cooperate with al-Qaeda when their interests converge.
Iran and al-Qaeda have cooperated for decades against U.S. targets in the Middle East. “There is ample evidence going back to the 1990s that Iran is willing to work with al-Qaeda at times,” said Thomas Joscelyn, a founding editor of the Long War Journal. “Sometimes their interests are opposed and sometimes they converge.”
This came to the public’s attention in 2017, after the CIA released a batch of documents recovered at the compound of Osama bin Laden in Pakistan. One of those documents is a 19-page memo laying out the quarter-century history of al-Qaeda’s relationship with Iran. It says Iranian intelligence offered al-Qaeda money, arms and training and facilitated the travel of some operatives, while providing safe haven for others. Indeed, after the fall of the Taliban, the wives and children of bin Laden and his deputy fled to Iran.
A group of Republican senators led by Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) sent a letter to President Trump this week urging him to issue an executive order allowing goods produced in the Jewish settlements in the West Bank to be labeled “Made in Israel." Axios obtained a copy of the letter.
Why it matters: While the rest of the world views the settlements as illegal under international law and not part of Israel, the Trump administration has taken several steps intended to legitimize them and blur the differentiation between Israel and the West Bank.
- The letter — signed by Sens. Cotton, Ted Cruz (R-Texas), Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) and Kelly Loeffler (R-Ga.) — pushes the administration to issue the order before Jan. 20.
The letter was sent to Trump, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin and acting Secretary of Homeland Security Chad Wolf.
- The senators warned that a Biden administration would return to a policy of differentiating between Israel and the Jewish settlements in the West Bank.
- That would make goods from the settlements “prime targets for BDS boycotts," they wrote, referring to the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement.
The havdalah ceremony involves wine. Muslims are forbidden to drink wine. So the Muslim policeman stopped the Jews from their own weekly religious ritual because it violates Muslim precepts.
The Palestinian Arabs at the time (and today) would argue - but what about our religious practices? Don't they deserve to be protected?
And the world, facing a disagreement between the (seen as fanatic) Arabs and the (seen as reasonable) Jews, would take the Arab side - because, really, is this something worth fighting over? The Jews should concede to keep the peace.
Now, every single Jewish holy place in the region is also (by sheer coincidence, of course!) also considered a Muslim holy spot. If the Palestinian Authority - which defines itself as Muslim - has physical control over an area, it would always place the Muslim demands over the Jewish demands, on sites that were Jewish for may centuries before Mohammed was born.
This incident is a blueprint of what happens when Palestinian Arabs are given control of Jewish holy places.
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.
Saudi writer Osama Yamani wrote a bombshell article published by the official Saudi Okaz news agency that questions whether the Al Aqsa Mosque mentioned in the Quran is actually in Jerusalem.
While traditional Islamic orthodoxy says that Mohammed's miraculous Night Journey to the "farthest mosque" went to Jerusalem, nowhere in the Quran is that location identified.
The mosque known today as Al Aqsa on the Temple Mount was built decades after Mohammed died.
Yamani brings a number of sources, even saying that it is not definitive that the first qibla (prayer direction) for Muslims was towards Jerusalem.
He then says that the original "farthest mosque" was in Al-Jarana, between Mecca and Taif in Saudi Arabia, some 18 miles from the Kaaba in Mecca.
He further asserts that the only reason Muslims say Al Aqsa is in Jerusalem is political, not historic.
This is causing an earthquake of anger in the Muslim world, especially since this was published by the official Saudi news agency which would not publish anything not approved by the Kingdom. Articles and television reports are claiming that the Saudis have swallowed Zionist lies. Palestinians are incensed.
Notably, Saudi currency features both the Jerusalem mosque and the Dome of the Rock.
Why would the Saudis want to publish such an article? They might want to align with Israel against Iran but they are not suddenly Zionist, claiming that Jerusalem is primarily a Jewish holy city.
It is possible that the Saudis are nervous about the potential flood of Gulf Arabs flying to Israel to visit the Al Aqsa Mosque in Jerusalem, feeling that it is a threat to the Mecca tourist industry, especially hard hit during the pandemic. Videos and photos of UAE pilgrims visiting the Temple Mount must sting. Promoting another Saudi site as the original site of Mohammed's Night Journey is a way to counter that.
Daniel Pipes has written the most definitive article in English debunking the idea that the Al Aqsa mentioned in the Quran is in Jerusalem. He continually updates it here with new information.
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.
Six years ago today, two Palestinian terrorists equipped with axes, a meat cleaver and a gun entered the Kehilat Bnei Torah synagogue while worshipers were praying the silent Amidah prayer. They hacked four rabbis to death and injured seven other worshipers, one of whom died nearly a year later after never waking from his coma. They also shot a Druze policeman to death.
At the time, the PFLP claimed responsibility. The terrorists were cousins and were related to a PFLP terrorist convicted of attempted murder who had been released earlier in 2014 as an Israeli goodwill gesture to restart "peace talks." Israeli police say that the murderers, who worked in a nearby grocery store, seemed to have acted alone.
Its disgusting article says, "Today the sixth anniversary of a heroic operation at the hands of the mujahideen Uday and Ghassan Abu Jamal inside a synagogue, using a large ax and two revolvers, on the land of Deir Yassin, west of Jerusalem, where the Abu Jamals managed to attack five rabbis, killing them and wounding others."
"Uday and Ghassan were distinguished by high morals and humanity, as they were distinguished by love, patience, will, strength and courage, and they were very keen to provide assistance to every needy person. Uday was always sitting near his 90-year old grandmother, inviting her to chant the songs of the Palestinian revolution and the fedayeen, which had a great impact on his upbringing, and paving the way for his path towards martyrdom. As for Ghassan, the compassionate father of three children (Walid, Salma and Muhammad), he was distinguished by his intense love for his children, and perhaps this love was a reason for him to sacrifice his blood to secure a future free of humiliation and dishonor, full of pride and dignity," the article continues.
As usual, there is not the slightest pushback from other Palestinian media denouncing a major news site celebrating the massacre of people because they were Jews. I have never seen any Palestinian (outside the ones who are famous for their dissent like Bassem Eid) condemn this bloodlust in website comments or social media. Articles like this that celebrate the most heinous attacks are part of the fabric of Palestinian society and no one in that world - no "moderate" PLO member, no newspaper columnist, no Facebook poster - finds this celebration of murdering rabbis the least bit objectionable.
This is Palestinian society. Celebrating the murder of religious Jews at prayer is mainstream, not fringe.
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.
Today, Palestinian prime minister Mohammed Shtayyeh said that the Palestinian Authority will continue to pay the salaries of terrorists and their families.
Speaking at a videoconference call, Shtayyeh said, "We will continue to pay aid to the families of martyrs and prisoners to ensure a decent life for their families, and we will not abandon them."
The Palestinian leadership pretends that these are some sort of welfare payments, but the amount paid is proportional to the severity of their crimes.
In 2017, the Washington Post estimated that payments reached over $350 million, which is a significant percentage of the total PA budget.
Remember, in an honor/shame society, financially supporting people who have murdered Jews is on the "honor" side.
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.
Should she apologize? She did, but I don’t care. We know what’s in her heart, and that’s enough, or too much, for me.
Anyway, you cannot come clean after airing thoughts like this. The stain will always be there, and it will always be part of her legacy. Her bed to sleep in.
What should offend me more, the Holocaust inference, or the Trump reference? I don’t know. As a Jewish-American Trump supporter, I’ll take a spoonful of each.
By way of saying that we do not watch CNN in our home. So we do not know what goes on in that universe, and when something like this gets out, we say, “consider the source.”
For decades, CNN was PLO headquarters, where Hanan Ashrawi was only a dial away from Ramallah to blood libel Israel.
Now they are in the building. Well, they always were, but Amanpour’s obscenity amounts to doubling down.
Oddly, by the way, she said what she said at about the time when Biden’s Antifa and BLM goons were beating up MAGA men, women and children on the streets of DC.
Shades of the Reich’s Brown Shirts, if you ask me…speaking of Kristallnacht.
But I do not think Amanpour is hip enough to get the timing, nor the connection.
I have read the articles where she is being implored to understand the pain she has caused by bringing up the Holocaust…all useless to closed minds and deaf ears.
You can lead a cow across all the wonders of the world, but when it comes back it is still a cow.
You are a well-known journalist with a global audience both on CNN and social media. What you say matters to many.
That’s why your commentary on November 12 likening Kristallnacht to the Trump era was so troubling. Because it comes from you. Because it carries with it an aura of authority and credibility. Because you haven’t backed away from it.
Since we all carry our own “baggage,” let me put mine on the table up front.
I am the first person in my extended family born in the United States. Every relative older than me was touched by the Second World War and Holocaust. That includes my father, who was a target of Kristallnacht in Austria.
Moreover, I represent a strictly nonpartisan organization, American Jewish Committee, so I have absolutely no political axe to grind in writing to you.
What was wrong with your commentary? Two main things.
First, in setting the stage for your attack on the Trump administration, you purported to describe the events of November 9-10, 1938, which came to be known as Kristallnacht, or the Night of Broken Glass.
You said it was an assault on “fact, knowledge, history, and truth.”
But something striking was missing from your description. Not a single word about the actual targets of the Nazi assault in Germany and Austria. Those targets were Jews, synagogues, and Jewish-owned businesses.
In the opening segment of her regular daily affairs program on Thursday, Amanpour spoke of the anniversary of Kristallnacht and how the Nazis upended human civilization, which led to genocide.
While showing footage of the events from that November 8/9, 1938 night, she maintained, “and, in that tower of burning books, it led to an attack on fact, knowledge, history, and truth.”
“After four years of a modern-day assault on those same values by Donald Trump, the Biden-Harris team pledges a return to normal,” she declared.
Israeli officials and Jewish groups denounced the comparison and called for an immediate apology. However, some commentators and analysts noted that at no point in her apology did Amanpour mention the words “Jews” — the people against whom the 1938 pogrom was committed.
Surprised by the @camanpour apology, yes. Satisfied by it, not so much.
While she admitted that Trump isn't as bad as Hitler, she said nothing about her complete Jew-washing of Kristallnacht. The thousands of victims of the pogrom were only the Jews of Germany & Austria. Say it.
The reason was because the Vatican worried that Jews would take over Christian sites in Jerusalem.
The Pope at the time, Leo XIII, was not just an anti-Zionist. He (and the Church altogether) was antisemitic.
From Encyclopedia Judaica:
CIVILTÀ CATTOLICA, LA, official Catholic bi-monthly.
Founded in 1849 by Jesuit writers, and published first in Naples (1850) then in Rome, this review has been the faithful interpreter of papal thought and gained an influence far beyond Catholic circles. ...
With the accession of Pope Leo XIII (1878), the casuistic approach was replaced by systematic defamation. Civiltà wrote of “Jewish hatred… against mankind – Jews excepted” (vol. 32 (1881), no. 5, 727); of the “anti-social spirit of Judaism”; and of the “necessity of hating it” (ibid., no. 6, 603, 608). Worst of all was the review’s attitude concerning the blood libel. More than a century earlier Cardinal Ganganelli (later Pope *Clement XIV) had declared the accusation groundless but Civiltà Cattolica nonetheless wrote of the Jews of Trent, “mingling unleavened bread with Christian blood, every year, at Passover,” and of the “present Jewish use of Christian blood in paschal bread and wine.” Civiltà dwelt further on “the reality of the use of Christian blood in many rituals of the modern synagogue” (vol. 34 (1883), no. 1, 606ff.) as “demonstrated” in the Tiszaeszlar case, which Civiltà considered to be authentic beyond doubt. Likewise Captain Dreyfus could be nothing but a traitor, while France was governed by Freemasonry, which itself was controlled by the Jews. However, the Jews should not be exiled from France for they were a people accursed by God, scattered to the four corners of the earth in order to testify by their ubiquity to the truth of Christianity (vol. 49 (1898), no. 1, 273–87). Thus, anti-Jewish prejudice had again been given a moral nihil obstat and an encouragement to proceed with the worst excesses. Nor did Civiltà relent during the following decades, although “blood” charges were dropped.
Note that the bolded part was also a reason for anti-Zionism.
That publication got worse. Much worse.
Three years after the advent of the Third Reich, the review actively competed with Nazi propaganda, setting out in detail all the arguments for Christian antisemitism as distinguished from the racial antisemitism of the Nazis. The Jews, stated the writer, “have become the masters of the world” (vol. 87 (1936), no. 37–8); “Their prototype is the banker, and their supreme ideal to turn the world into an incorporated joint-stock company” (ibid, 39–40).
Even after the Holocaust, the publication blamed the Jews for their own genocide!
Later, the “unprecedented cruelty of the massacres of Jews and Poles,” and “the horror of concentration camps, gas and torture chambers,” were mentioned in an article which raised doubts about the very principle and objectivity of the Nuremberg trials and stated, among other things, that “conceding even that, on the diplomatic ground, Germany had been the one to set the gunpowder on fire, historically, they had been compelled to do so” (vol. 97 (1946), issue 2297).
Antisemites and anti-Zionists. Peas in a pod.
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.
Palestinians have now said that they would accept the money Israel owes them for tax revenues, and will resume coordination with Israel, after stopping both in June when Benjamin Netanyahu made noises about annexing part of Judea and Samaria.
That annexation never happened, but Netanyahu didn't say it was permanently off the table, so the Palestinian leadership couldn't resume the previous arrangements - without losing its "honor."
Meanwhile, it went further and further into debt, it slashed salaries of public workers, and it pretended that it would have elections or unify with Hamas - all while hoping that Biden would win and they would have a little leverage against Israel.
Still, there was the honor issue. How to reverse this policy and appear to have won?
Today, they announced that things will go back to the way they were before June.
The PA's civil affairs minister Hussein Al-Sheikh said that "in light of the international contacts made by President Mahmoud Abbas regarding Israel's commitment to the agreements signed with it, and based on the official written and oral messages we received, confirming Israel's commitment to that, the relationship with Israel will be resumed."
PA prime minister Muhammad Shtayyeh said that the Palestinian Authority received a document from Israel pledging to abide by existing agreements.
Some five months of pain could have been avoided if the PA was not so hung up on "honor." This honor/shame mentality is truly the main obstacle for peace in the Middle East. The PLO is literally willing to make their people suffer so as to avoid perceived shame - even though no one in the world would have blinked if the PA had accepted the funds in August after Israel said it was putting the annexation plans on hold.
That is the refreshing part of the normalization with the UAE. There is no shame there. On the contrary, the Emiratis seem eager to take advantage of peace with Israel to create win/win scenarios.
To the PA, a win/win scenario is a violation of honor - the enemy must appear to have lost. This is why they are making up a story about Israel signing an agreement to abide by existing agreements. Maybe some Israeli minister scribbled something on a Post-it Note to make the Palestinians feel that they won, but there was almost certainly nothing official from Israel. It is as if the PA insisted that someone throw a shoe at an Israeli flag and Israel said, sure, if that makes you happy.
In a sense, BDS is also an "honor" initiative. The BDSers insist it is shameful to treat Israelis as normal human beings and they use shame to keep people in line.
It used to work. It doesn't any more. The sooner the Palestinians learn that the only ones being hurt by their fake pride is their own people, and take responsibility for it, the sooner everyone benefits.
UPDATE: Here's the letter Israel sent to the Palestinians. As I suspected, it simply says that Israel never stopped abiding with the existing agreement, and it was the Palestinians that changed the rules. But the Palestinians are reading this as a huge honor win.
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.
In terms of power, commerce, and security co-operation in the region, more has transpired in the last four years in the Middle East than the previous forty. The Democrats’ loathing of President Trump aside, reaffirming a commitment to an utterly discredited policy experiment would be a disastrous early foray into foreign policy.
Iran is now thought to have accumulated enormous amounts of enriched uranium. It continues to finance global terrorist networks and, most importantly, because of this leaked information, is now publicly linked to support of al-Qaeda.
And that, perhaps, is most interesting of all in this intrigue. Shi’ite Iran is not a natural ally of Sunni al-Qaeda, but the Iranians have proven to be accommodating when it comes to financing and controlling terrorist entities with aligned interests. But now, this exposure of a key al-Qaeda operative being protected by the regime makes it much more difficult for the Biden administration to court Iran. American forgiveness of al-Qaeda is not a popular position and would appear to play into the extreme left-wing of the Democratic party, which Biden is under extraordinary pressure to control and marginalize.
The leak of this operation will surely heighten the pressure on Biden to rethink his approach to JCPOA and Iran. Perhaps that was the point.
Americans are likely to be enraged by the prospect of appeasing a nation that harbors and supports al-Qaeda’s leadership. And that will mess things up for Biden. It has far less to do with Trump and much more to do with the alliances forged between Israel and its neighbors in the wake of Obama’s JCPOA dream. Whether they can see clearly through their hatred of the outgoing president and properly assess the Middle East four years on remains to be seen.
What is clear is that the prospect of getting all chummy with al-Qaeda benefactors makes JCPOA 2.0 way more difficult.
The emerging coalition between Israel, the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, and others brokered by the Trump administration has greatly checked Iran's ambitions. The Gulf Arabs now understand that Israel is the "only regional element that has a strong enough motivation to fight Iran" and "can be trusted because it must fight Iran for its own good."
However, Schueftan believes the "one major mistake" in the Trump administration's Middle East policy is its underestimation of the danger of Turkey, which he suggests is "going in the direction of a totalitarian regime" under President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan. Not only is Turkey projecting its military power, notably in Syria and Libya, but it is sponsoring the Muslim Brotherhood, which has a presence throughout the Arab world. "The Muslim brothers are extremely dangerous because they have learned to pretend to be moderate ...They are as radical as you can possibly get, but smart enough to hide it."
Schueftan strongly recommends "persisting with the existing [U.S.] policy of maximum pressure on Iran" and "supporting local allies" against it, and he believes the same two-fold approach should be applied to Turkey. This means "see[ing] to it that Erdoğan's economy is undermined ... once he is economically challenged, he may lose a lot of support in Turkey." It means not only "backing the Greeks and the Cypriots against the Turkish attempt to dominate the Eastern Mediterranean," but also supporting the Kurds.
"Anything that the Iranian regime agrees to is ipso facto bad and dangerous for the other side."
Trying to reach an accommodation with either Iran or Turkey is a bad idea in Schueftan's view. "Anything that the Iranian regime agrees to is ipso facto bad and dangerous for the other side, if they agree to something, it means that we have been given a raw deal." The same zero-sum principle applies to Turkey. "Whatever is bad for Erdoğan, I think is good for the region."
What is the hardest part of brokering a peace agreement?
-- Sometimes, it's just getting the two sides to sit down in the same room.
-- Other times, the problem is getting the two sides just to talk.
-- Even then, there is the problem of getting them to negotiate and be willing
to make concessions.
And then there is the problem when you just run out of time.
Following the Yom Kippur War, in which Egypt and Syria were nearly victorious,
a unique possibility for peace between Israel and Egypt presented itself.
Nixon's airlift of crucial arms during the war was critical to Israel's
victory -- and created an opportunity.
Richard Nixon. Public domain
Seeking to take advantage of this opportunity, in June 1974, Nixon became the
first US president to visit Israel while in office.
As Rabin explained in a press conference after Nixon returned to the US:
"Ever since the airlift of the Yom Kippur War, the Arabs have come to
understand that America will not allow Israel to be weakened. A defeat of
Israel is a victory for the USSR.
Paradoxically, this is what has raised America's prestige in the Arab
world, and has given Washington leverage. Today in the Middle East, Moscow is a synonym for instability and war,
Washington for stability and negotiation." (Yehuda Avner, The Prime
Ministers, p. 270)
Yitzhak Rabin. Public domain
This leverage as an honest broker would make it possible for the US to go
beyond being a supporter of Israel's interests, and show that it was a strong
and reliable ally to address the interests of the Arab world as well.
Meanwhile, Nixon began discussing with Egypt's Sadat the possibility of a
final settlement, going step-by-step. On June 25, Nixon wrote to Sadat:
Mr. President, I am convinced that we have witnessed in recent months a
turning point in the history of the Middle East -- a turning toward an
honorable, just, and endurinable peace -- and have ushered in a new era in
U.S.-Arab relations. A direction has been set, and it is my firm intention
to stay on the course we have chartered. (p. 271)
Two months later, Nixon resigned.
The following month, Rabin was meeting with President Ford -- and Kissinger --
to continue what Nixon had started. The following year, in March, Kissinger
came to the Middle East to conduct his "shuttle diplomacy," bouncing back and
forth between Israel and Egypt. Kissinger pressured Rabin on a withdrawal from
the Sinai, especially from the Mitla and Gidi passes, while Rabin wanted Sadat
to commit himself to a "termination of the state of belligerency" with Israel.
Kissinger's efforts failed -- and he blamed Israel.
In the end, however, another attempt was made, culminating in an interim
agreement known as Sinai II.
Just to get an idea of what Rabin was up against, here is an excerpt from
the notes of a conversation between Sadat and Foreign Minister Fahmi with Ford
and Kissinger. The context is the early warning stations in the Sinai that Rabin wanted to
retain -- and Sadat's idea of a compromise, where they would be manned by US
troops. Note the highlighted portions.
The term "honest broker" is overrated.
In any event, Rabin too ended up resigning because of the 'scandal'
surrounding his wife, who had retained a bank account from the years when
Rabin was Israel's ambassador to the US from 1968 to 1973. After that, the
Israeli law forbidding citizens from holding bank accounts abroad came into
play. However, another law prevented Rabin from resigning outright once the
date for the next elections has been set. Instead, Rabin withdrew from the
race as leader of the Labor Party, to be replaced from Shimon Peres to face
Menachem Begin.
Begin became prime minister -- and it was during his term that a peace treaty
with Egypt was signed.
Rabin felt his role in making that peace treaty possible was never
acknowledged, but at the same time he understood that was the way of things.
In his memoirs, Rabin wrote:
When President Sadat made his historic visit to Jerusalem on 19 November
1977 I was no longer prime minister. Yet that visit -- and the subsequent
moves toward achieving a peace treaty -- could never have come about were it
not for the course my government adopted in signing the 1975 interim
agreement. That our policy provoked the anger of Likud has not prevented Mr.
Begin's government from reaping the fruits of our labors.
Of course, that is how things should be, since the quest for peace is not
a contest between political parties...The 1975 agreement with Egypt was never meant to be an end in itself. As
its title implies, it was designed to advance the momentum toward peace, and
in that sense it achieved its purpose. [emphasis added] (quoted in The Prime
Ministers, p.302)
Begin benefited from the foundation set by Nixon and the groundwork laid by
Rabin, both of whom left their work unfinished.
But that was not the last we heard from Rabin.
After serving as prime minister from 1974 to 1977, Rabin became prime minister
again in 1992.
And he was still focused on peace. In 1994, he received the Nobel Peace Prize
for his part in the Oslo Accords, along with Shimon Peres and Arafat. Rabin
also signed a peace treaty with Jordan that same year.
In late 1995, Rabin described to Yehuda Avner his view of the Middle East, a
description that 25 years later sounds familiar:
Number one: Israel is surrounded by two concentric circles. The inner circle
is comprised of our immediate neighbors—Egypt, Jordan, Syria, and Lebanon,
and, by extension, Saudi Arabia. The outer circle comprises their
neighbors—Afghanistan, Iran, Iraq, Sudan, Yemen and Libya. Virtually all of
them are rogue states, and some are going nuclear.
Number two,
Iranian-inspired Islamic fundamentalism constitutes a threat to the inner
circle no less than it does to Israel. Islamic fundamentalism is striving to destabilize the Gulf Emirates, has
already created havoc in Syria, leaving twenty thousand dead, in Algeria,
leaving one hundred thousand dead, in Egypt, leaving twenty-two thousand
dead, in Jordan, leaving eight thousand dead, in the Horn of Africa—the
Sudan and Somalia—leaving fourteen thousand dead, and in Yemen, leaving
twelve thousand dead. And now it is gaining influence in the West Bank and
the Gaza Strip.
Iran is the banker, pouring millions into the West Bank and Gaza in the form
of social welfare and health and education programs, so that it can win the
hearts of the population and feed religious fanaticism.
Thus, a confluence of interest has arisen between Israel and the inner
circle, whose long-term strategic interest is the same as ours: to lessen
the destabilizing consequences from the outer circle. At the end of the
day, the inner circle recognizes they have less to fear from Israel than
from their Muslim neighbors, not least from radicalized Islamic powers
going nuclear.
Number three: the Arab-Israeli conflict was always considered to be a
political one: a conflict between Arabs and Israelis. The fundamentalists
are doing their level best to turn it into a religious conflict—Muslim
against Jew, Islam against Judaism. And while a political conflict is
possible to solve through negotiation and compromise, there are no solutions
to a theological conflict. Then it is jihad—religious war: their God against
our God. Were they to win, our conflict would go from war to war, and from
stalemate to stalemate. [emphasis added] (p. 707)
The context for this description of the Middle East is Rabin's response to
Avner's question as to why he shook Arafat's hand at the signing of the Oslo
Accords:
He and his PLO represent the last vestige of secular Palestinian
nationalism. We have nobody else to deal with. It is either the PLO or
nothing. It is a long shot for a possible settlement, or the certainty of no
settlement at all at a time when the radicals are going nuclear.
With the growing threat of Islamic fundamentalism, negotiating with secular
Palestinian Arabs made sense to Rabin.
Neither he -- nor then-President Clinton -- saw the potential in negotiating
and working with other Arab states within those concentric circles. There's no
reason they would, when all the contemporary thinking was focused on the
Palestinian Arabs as a key to peace, a cold peace in line with the peace
treaties signed with Egypt and Jordan with no thought of normalization.
According to that thinking, it is either the Palestinian Arabs or nothing.
The Middle East achievements of the Trump administration this year took
Rabin's outline and acted on it.
What Rabin might have further accomplished, we will never know.
He was stopped again, this time by a bullet, from pursuing peace.
But like Nixon and Rabin, Trump too will not be pursuing his vision for peace
to its full extent.
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 FBI Hate Crimes report for 2019 has been released, and - as usual - more than half of all the anti-religion hate crimes recorded are against Jews.
This year 62.7% of all hate crimes are against Jews, but since 2012 that number has averaged some 59%. This year is worse because the total number of hate crimes incidents against Jews increased from 835 to 953, a 14% increase.
People want to find easy to understand reasons for the increase in hate crimes against Jews in recent years, but that is virtually impossible. Many articles automatically blame Trump for the increase, but if that was true, one would expect a much faster increase of anti-Muslim hate crimes. In reality. anti-Muslim hate crime rates has been an almost perfect inverse of anti-Jewish rates, with the anti-Muslim rates increasing during the Obama administration and decreasing during the Trump administration:
Given that Trump is considered to be pro-Jewish and anti-Muslim, if the president exerts so much influence over hate crimes, one would expect the trends to be quite different.
What is indisputable is that Jews are targeted far out of proportion to their population in the US, no matter who is President.
As far as I can tell, the FBI has not embraced the IHRA definition of antisemitism in determining what an anti-Jewish hate crime is. So, if the leaders of AIPAC or the Zionist Organization of America get death threats, I don't think these would be included in the hate crime statistics.
They should be. The hate exhibited by self-declared anti-Zionists is the same as that exhibited by any other bigots.
Think about it: Among the far Left, the worst insults that one can possibly give to another person are:
* Colonialist
* Nazi
* Apartheid-enabler
* White supremacist
* Racist
* Genocidist
* Baby killer
* Islamophobe
* Antisemite
* Anti-gay
* Sexist
* Global warming denialists
The first eight of these epithets are routinely hurled at Zionists by the socialist Left. Some have tried to accuse Zionists of antisemitism as well. And the last three, which Israel cannot remotely be accused of being guilty of, are inverted into the "X-washing" meme that the only reason Israel does anything admirable is an attempt to whitewash its crimes. This proves that the irrational hate of these people is so intense that they must turn virtues into vices as well - they cannot even conceive that there is anything good one can say about Israel or Zionists.
This is not "criticism." This is hate. The psychology behind it is every bit as irrational as any kind of bigotry.
And it is impossible to say that the irrational hate of one nation, which outweighs the hate of any other nation, has nothing to do with the fact that that nation is filled with and controlled by Jews.
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.
According to Arab media, the Saudi film "3-2-1 Action" that premiered on November 5 closed after five days with absolutely no revenue.
A few days into the release, the distributors tried to give away tickets for free - and no one wanted to go.
On IMDB, it is rated 1/10, with 209 reviewers, so somehow people saw it. However, they universally hated it, with some hilarious reviews like "To be honest, the book is way better than the movie...because it doesn't exist."
Apparently many of the actors are social media stars who have no idea how to act.
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.
To even consider using Kristallnacht in the same sentence as Donald Trump, let alone in an attempt to compare Trump to the Nazi Party, is to stand on the ashes of European Jewry. Hitler and the Nazi Party openly acted upon their expressed desire to eradicate the Jewish people. Given that the Trump administration has yet to discriminate against Jews in any manner, when Amanpour said “after four years of a modern-day assault on those same values,” what exactly does she mean?
Donald Trump and the Republican Party do not have an official paramilitary wing, and any relevant policies during Trump’s first term have been overwhelmingly pro-Jewish and pro-Israel. When it comes to the targeting of Jewish businesses, homes, or places of worship, there are certainly anti-Semites on the radical wings of both sides, but the mainstream implicit endorsement of such actions are unique to one side of the political spectrum, and it’s not the political Right.
After all, it was not a Republican who used the same rhetoric of “hypnosis” and “wealth” when condemning the “evil doings” of the Jewish state. It was not a Republican who supported the boycott of Jewish businesses. It was not a Republican who endorsed a one-state solution which would result in the expulsion or mass murder of millions of Israeli Jews.
So, we must conclude that Amanpour is using one of the darkest moments in Jewish history as a proxy to describe a supposed attack on some unknown set of “values” which Biden and Harris will somehow defend and prevent. For her, the suffering of Jews is a disposable weapon which can be wielded in pursuit of Leftism and the Democratic Party.
It doesn’t matter that it is the mainstream Left who are burning books. It doesn’t matter that it is the mainstream Left who wish to actively enable nations who have called for the destruction of the Jewish State. And it doesn’t matter that it is the mainstream Left who are using the very same language which fueled Kristallnacht and the Holocaust.
Israeli Consul-General in Atlanta Anat Sultan-Dadon wrote a letter to CNN executive vice president Rick Davis, obtained by The Jerusalem Post on the condition that it not be quoted. The letter, sent two days after Amanpour’s remarks, explained that the Nazis murdered at least 90 Jews on Kristallnacht. They also arrested over 30,000 Jews and deported them to concentration camps. The night of Kristallnacht was the opening chapter of the Holocaust.
The consul-general expressed outrage at Amanpour’s use of the Holocaust for political means, and said it disrespects those who perished.
Amanpour’s statements set off an immediate backlash on Twitter.
Former Israeli consul-general in New York Danny Dayan tweeted that “the foolish comparison Amanpour made between Kristallnacht and Trump must bring about her immediate dismissal from CNN. There is no immunity for Holocaust deniers.”
White House Press Secretary Kayleigh McEnany called Amanpour's remarks "despicable," and said the CNN anchor "must apologize for trivializing the Holocaust & the tragic genocide of millions of Jews.
"They must also apologize for slandering the most pro-Israel President in history," she said.
2. Amanpour has thrived because her hatred for the Jewish state is considered "sophisticated" in her little, sick bubble of Western elitists who have spent the past 70 years pretending that anyone could have been Nazis -- especially the Jews. This erases Germany's culpability..3
In about a year, Israel will send its second astronaut into space.
Former fighter pilot Eytan Stibbe will be trained in the United States, Germany and Russia before taking off from Florida in December 2021 for a 200-hour stay on the International Space Station (ISS).
This mission will be the first to the ISS manned entirely by private astronauts. Stibbe is donating his time and all costs of the journey, including expenses related to the experiments to be chosen for him to bring into space designed by Israeli scientists, entrepreneurs and students.
The announcement was made today at the President’s Residence in Jerusalem by the Ramon Foundation, the Israel Space Agency and the Israeli Ministry of Science and Technology.
Ran Livne, CEO of the foundation, will lead the project. He plans on special broadcasts from the space mission for Israeli children, including dozens of demonstrations, experiments and live calls from the ISS with schoolchildren across the country.
Israel’s first astronaut, Ilan Ramon, died in the explosion of the Space Shuttle Columbia in February 2003. Receiving his pilot wings in 1978, Stibbe flew under Ramon’s command in the 117 F-16 squadron.
Ramon’s son Tal said that Stibbe “and his family escorted us through the years through everything we went through, the good and the bad, and their family has become our family.”
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.
UNPACKED: Is Palestine’s map actually shrinking?
-
UNPACKED: Is Palestine’s map actually shrinking? IsraelSeen.com
UNPACKED: Is Palestine’s map actually shrinking? The story of the land
between the river ...
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...
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...
Wednesday, November 18, 2020
