Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News

Wednesday, December 22, 2021

Thousands of Gazans who are given permits to leave never come back

Yesterday, Hamas sent out a text message to the merchants who have permits to visit Israel for trade and have not returned:

"Brother merchant, for the sake of your interest, we ask you to return to Gaza no later than Thursday 23/12. Your delay will prevent you from automatically renewing your permit."

It seems that many of these merchants take advantage of the permit system to escape Hamas permanently.

Since 2016, nearly 3,300 Gazans who were given permits to leave for any reason (including visiting relatives in hospitals) have not returned, according to Israeli authorities, causing some alarm from the Im Tirtzu NGO worried that they are terrorist sleeper cells.

It is a small percentage of all permits given - about 3% - and those who have business permits are vetted.

We have noted in the past that the Christian population of Gaza has plummeted from 5,000 when Hamas took over to less than 1,000 now, and the reason is that when the Christians are given permission to visit Jerusalem and Bethlehem on Christmas, many never come back. Israel seems to know about this and quietly allows them to stay with relatives in the West Bank, knowing how bad it is for Christians in Gaza.

The statistics released do not break down the non-returnees by the reason for the permits, so it is hard to know how many escaped using business or hospital/prisoner visits as the excuse and how many left for religious reasons. But Hamas' text message indicates that at least some of them are merchants who use their permits to escape.

Yesterday, the head of Israel's Islamist Ra'am party shook the Palestinian street with an interview that is getting wide coverage in Arabic:

The head of the first major Arab party to enter a government coalition said Tuesday that Israel’s status as a Jewish state could not be changed, advising the Arab community to follow his pragmatic approach rather than trying to challenge the country’s identity.

“Israel was born as a Jewish state. And that was the decision of the Jewish people, to establish a Jewish state. The question is not ‘what is the identity of the state?’ That’s how the state was born, and so it will remain,” said [Mansour] Abbas, the head of the Islamist Ra’am party.

“This is the reality. The question is not the about the state’s identity — but what the status of Arab citizens will be in it,” Abbas said.

Arab antiemites are angry. One Israeli Arab newspaper derogatorily calls Abbas a "Shabbos goy."

There was another momentous revelation.

A Jordanian businessman and regular columnist who lives in the UAE, Hasan Ismaik, wrote an op-ed in the Jerusalem Post about the six biggest Arab mistakes. It is one of the most clear-eyed and honest self-analyses I've ever seen from an Arab who writes in Arabic language media. Excerpts:

Legendary Israeli diplomat Abba Eban observed after the failed 1973 Geneva peace conference, “The Arabs never miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity” to end the Arab-Israeli conflict. Eban’s wry assessment rings true almost 50 years later. Missing an opportunity is a mistake; never failing to miss an opportunity is a sin against oneself. Endlessly repeated, mistakes become fatal sins when used by a clever opponent to their advantage. Let us count the ways.
The first sin is not accepting the Jewish people as a valued and ancient component of the Middle East. ...
The second sin is choosing the wrong alliances to further the Palestinian cause. From the alliance with Nazism and fascism to the dependence on the Soviets and Arab leaders for whom the Palestinian cause is nothing but a tool to achieve their own purposes, Palestinian leaders have almost always chosen the most harmful allies for their cause.
The third sin is the Yasser Arafat paradigm. Many may be surprised to find the former head of the Palestinian Liberation Army and the Palestinian Authority on this list. Yet he is the man who established the principle of violent resistance that armed non-state organizations follow today: If the price is the blood of Arab Palestinians, then there is no harm in paying it to defeat the occupation.
The fourth sin is the Palestinian people suffering more from the decisions of their leaders and allies than from the actions of Israel. Like Arafat, Hamas’s allies of political Islamic leaders are all too eager to fight Israel until the last Palestinian falls dead.
The fifth sin is viewing the conflict with Israel as an “all-or-nothing” war to the death. Standing between the Palestinians obtaining any of their legal and moral rights is their battle cry to satisfy all historical grievances, reclaim the entire land, expel all Israelis, and eliminate the State of Israel. What has the all-or-nothing approach succeeded in gaining? Very little, if anything at all.
The sixth sin is exploiting the Palestinian cause for political gain. Not all, thank God, but some Arab political leaders in the region and even some governments use the Arab-Israel conflict as a smokescreen to hide their own deficiencies, failures, and hidden agenda. No peace in the Middle East? No state of Palestine? No economic security or prosperity for all citizens? Unrest and uprisings? Don’t blame us, blame Israel. If Israel didn’t exist, we would have no social or economic problems, the Palestinians would have their own state, and the region would be a paradise on earth.

These are all issues I've written about myself over the years, and it is nice to see that some Arabs can see how counterproductive their hate has been. Again, the Abraham Accords are a huge factor in making it possible for Arabs to publicly say things like these with less fear than before.

Until recently, the only thing Arabs agreed on was hating Israel. Without that consensus, assumptions that were accepted as readily as gravity have been crumbling. It is a step in the right direction.

The Israel haters, faced with these Arab turncoats, try to demonize Arabs who want peace with Israel - and that is not a good look, especially for organizations with the word "peace" in their titles.

There are cracks in the dam, and the haters can't patch them up.

El Balad is Egypt's third most popular news site, with about 3 million visits per month.

It has been publishing a series of articles by Najat Abdul Rahman that seem to be concentrating on attacking the Muslim Brotherhood. But it is based on conspiracy theories, and all conspiracy theories lead to Jews.

Last week she mentioned that Egyptian cinema was overrun with immorality, and it seemed to her to be a fulfillment of the ninth Protocol of the Elders of Zion of spreading vice.

This week she delves a little more into the Protocols, and gives a new history of the fraudulent antisemitic document.

According to her, the Protocols were authored by a group that included none other than Theodor Herzl. They were leaked from the top-secret Jewish cabal and made their way to the Pope. Their publication caused Russians to slaughter tens of thousands of Jews, which prompted Herzl to scream about how the documents were stolen from the Jewish "holy of holies" and therefore exposed Jews to pogroms and calamities.

Rahman goes on to describe several of the Protocols, pointing out how the Muslim Brotherhood was following them in Egypt in concert with their Israeli mentors.

There will be more about the Protocols next week.

This is a mainstream and popular Egyptian newspaper that is spreading pure hate for Jews, today. And there is never a word of objection from the self-appointed experts on antisemitism from the Left about this daily incitement in Arab media.

12/21 Links Pt2: Andrew Pessin: What All Antisemites Can Agree On; Irish media is helping to spread antisemitism; Welby, Israel and the meaning of persecution

From Ian:

Andrew Pessin: What All Antisemites Can Agree On

In October, in San Antonio, a neo-Nazi group protested outside a church holding a fundraiser for Israel. “Horrified” to see them there was a member of Jewish Voice for Peace, a far-left group that was also protesting the church. These two ostensibly ideologically-opposed groups are perhaps not, as we’ll see, such strange bedfellows.

Those who follow the campus scene know that not all is well for Jewish students, especially for those who do not hate Israel. Swastikas, nasty graffiti, and hateful flyers; vandalism, even arson, against Hillels and Chabads; dorm room mezuzot and public menorahs torn down; “anti-normalization” campaigns promoting their ostracization; in May literally hundreds of academic departments and programs issuing hateful one-sided condemnations of Israel, all accompanied by frequent threats of violence from their student peers, such as this recent one from a “Diversity Senator” who proudly announced, “I want to kill every motherf**king Zionist.” It’s no surprise that a recent poll of “openly Jewish” students found that more than 65% felt unsafe on campus, 50% felt the need to hide their Jewish identity, and 10% feared physical attack. Almost 70% were aware of or had personally experienced a verbal or physical attack.

Perhaps most alarming is that the hatred is also coming from the professors.

Enter Scott Shay’s important new book, Conspiracy U. By focusing on his own alma mater, Northwestern University, Shay masterfully diagnoses the general state of today’s campus, and is actually speaking about many campuses when he remarks, in distress, that Northwestern “has enabled some of its professors to openly promote conspiracy theories” (xi). That is precisely the problem: what too many professors are promoting are “conspiracy theories,” and their institutions “enable” them. These theories, naturally, target the Jews. It is indeed no surprise that Jewish students do not feel safe when dominant campus actors openly proclaim they are part of an international cabal to perpetrate evil.

Sound far-fetched? Read on.

Stunningly, Northwestern has been home for some fifty years to Prof. Arthur Butz, whose 1976 Holocaust-denying book has gone through at least four editions in its 45 years in print. Butz claims that Zionism is a sinister movement to despoil Arabs and rob the world, that it invented the Holocaust to obtain Palestine and massive reparations, that it “framed up” the Nuremberg trials to manipulate American leaders into doing their bidding, etc. Classic, far-right, neo-Nazi conspiracy theory here, easily identified as antisemitic. Outrageous as this is, however, Butz and his ilk are not the problem: they have almost no presence on campuses.

The Zionism = racism lie isn’t over

By revoking resolution 3379, the UN determined that Zionism is not a form of racism, a determination it has not made regarding any other national movement. Clearly, this has been a setback for those seeking to use the UN as a platform to advance their extreme anti-Israel agenda. Will they learn from this experience and act differently in the future?

Sadly, Israel’s adversaries have not relented. Last May, following the hostilities between Israel and Hamas, the UN Human Rights Council established a Commission of Inquiry responsible for investigating “systematic discrimination and repression based on national, ethnic, racial or religious identity” in the Palestinian areas and inside Israel, language previously used to allege that Israel is guilty of apartheid policies. Evidently, the term apartheid is meant to reintroduce the Zionism-racism equation under a different heading.

In 1948, the same year the term apartheid was first used to denote legal separation of the races in South Africa, Israel issued its Declaration of Independence. To the Arab inhabitants of Israel, this Declaration promised “full and equal citizenship and due representation in its provisional or permanent institutions.” Consistent with these principles, Israel has maintained a democratic political system based on majority rule. Israel’s Arab citizens participate fully and actively in this system and are represented in the Knesset. Indeed, an Arab political party is a member of the current governing coalition. The relationship between majority and minority is never simple, and Israel is no exception, all the more so because of the ongoing Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Yet despite the difficulties, Israel has achieved a remarkable degree of coexistence between the Jewish and Arab communities, flying in the face of the allegations that Israel is conducting “apartheid policies.”

David Collier: Irish media is helping to spread antisemitism

The Irish Times has just produced yet another rancid article attacking Jews. This in the same week that Ireland’s ‘bestselling’ political magazine ‘the Phoenix’ was busy spending its time smearing those Jews that fight antisemitism. When we look for a central pillar of Ireland’s widespread antisemitism, we really have to look no further than the Irish media.

When it comes to Israel, the people of Ireland are woefully misinformed. If any people in Europe should naturally support the State of Israel – it should be the Irish. The Jews were betrayed by the British. The Jews saw their land – that was set aside for them by the League of Nations – divided by the British to create the colonial non state of Trans-Jordan.

The British went on to renege further on their international duties by slowly strangling Jewish immigration. In fact, by the late 1940’s – with the British putting Jewish concentration camp survivors back into camps rather than allowing these refugees a safe haven – the Jews were in open warfare with them. Israel was the product of an anti-imperial fight by a chained people in desperate need of freedom and self determination

But this is not the first time Ireland has been on the wrong side of history when people came for the Jews. When Hitler’s genocidal thugs were eradicating European Jewry – Ireland chose to (at best) sit on the fence. Partial Irish support for the Nazi regime has been well documented. This time around the Irish media is visibly helping to lead them astray.

Oh lookie, one of those graph things.

Showing that Palestinians lives are safer in the WB than Irish lives are in Ireland.

And they accuse Israel of 'genocide' 😂😂😂

Are the lying antisemites paying attention? pic.twitter.com/rDtGaCp0Y8
— David Collier (@mishtal) December 21, 2021

(corrected)

Children's book erases Jews and Israel from the Middle East (UPDATE)

Here is a map of the Middle East from the children's book, Amazing Women of the Middle East:

You will notice that there is no Israel in this map. It is replaced with "Palestine."

Modern nations like Jordan and the UAE are mentioned, so it cannot be that the map refers to a time period before 1948.

Iran and Turkey are shown, so this isn't a map of only Arab countries.

It is a clearly deliberate attempt to erase Israel from the map.

The list of women that the book discusses seems to be missing a certain type of people as well:

• Scheherazade, Persia, narrator

• Nefertiti, Ancient Egypt, 1370 BCE, Queen of Egypt

• Queen of Sheba, 1050 BCE, modern-day Ethiopia

• Semiramis, ancient Iraq, 811 BCE, Queen of Babylon

• Cleopatra VII, Egypt, 69 BCE, last queen of Egypt

• Zenobia, Syria, 240 CE, Queen of Palmyra

• Theodora, 497 CE, Empress of Byzantium

• Rabiya al Adawiyya, Iraq, 714, poet

• Shajarat al Durr, Egypt, early 13th Century, Sultana of Egypt

• Hurrem Sultan, Ukraine, 1502, Sultana of Ottoman Empire

• May Ziadeh, Nazareth, Palestine, 1886, writer

• Nazik el Abid, Syria, 1887, activist

• Anbara Salam al Khalidi, Lebanon, 1897, activist and feminist

• Saloua Raouda Choucair, Lebanon, 1916, painter

• Fairuz, Lebanon, 1933, singer

• Zaha Hadid, Iraq, 1950, architect

• Anousheh Ansari, Iran/USA, 1966, astronaut

• Somayya Jabarti, Saudi Arabia, 1970, editor-in-chief

• Nadine Labaki, Lebanon, 1974, film maker and actress

• Amal Clooney, Lebanon/British, 1978, lawyer

• Manahel Thabet, Yemen, 1981, economist and mathematician

• Maha Al Baluchi, Oman, pilot

• Nadia Murad, Iraq, 1993, rights activist and Nobel Peace Prize winner

• Zahra Lari, UAE, 1995, ice skater

• Azza Fahmy, Egypt, jewellery designer

Hmmm. No Jewish women make the cut of Amazing Women of the Middle East. No Queen Esther or prophet Deborah or Golda Meir.

Some people complained to a Canadian book chain, which removed the book from its shelves. The publisher, Michel Moushabeck who founded Interlink Publishing, wrote a snarky and demeaning response:

This past week, Interlink and my family were subjected to some vicious trolling by a small number of people on social media started by a pro-Israel group, which resulted in the removal of copies of a children’s picture book, Amazing Women of the Middle East, from the shelves of Indigo Books, a large bookstore chain in Canada. The book was banned because the group complained that it was anti-Semitic because the word Palestine—instead of Israel—appeared on the accompanying map that helped identify to children where the women featured in the book originally came from (one was from Palestine).

We are saddened to see such an important book that celebrates Middle Eastern women of all faiths, be disparaged online. Unfortunately, this is not the first time we have been recipients of false accusations of anti-Semitism and this will likely not be the last. The notion that Palestinians are intrinsically anti-Semitic is a harmful and false narrative rooted in racism. This stereotype is harmful to not only Palestinians, but ignores the very REAL problem of anti-Semitism happening around the world. The books we publish amplify marginalized and underrepresented voices, including indigenous Palestinians, who are often left voiceless in Western media. We also publish talented Jewish, Muslim, Christian, Hindu, Buddhist, agnostic, etc. authors who further our cultural understanding of their lived experiences.

He then went on to make fun of one tweet.

One of the women profiled is Scheherazade, from Persia. Persia is not listed on the map, which means the children won't be able to identify where she came from! So from the outset, we can see that the publisher is not being intellectually honest in his defense of a propaganda map that erases Israel.

Moushabeck goes on to misrepresent and demean the feelings of the people complaining. No one is saying that "Palestinians are intrinsically antisemitic." If the map drew Palestine as being in the West Bank, no one would have cared.

But the decision to erase the Jewish state is indeed antisemitic.

Including women who represent all religions and areas of the Middle East except for members of one religion and one nation is indeed antisemitic. (And saying that women of "all faiths" are celebrated means that to the publisher, Jews don't count.)

There is also another implication in this letter: that women from ancient powerful empires like Egypt, Persia and the Ottoman Empire represent "marginalized and underrepresented voices," that Christians and Muslims who make up billions of people are "marginalized." Is Cleopatra really that marginalized? But the tiny number of Jews from a small ancient kingdom to a small modern democracy are not worth mentioning.

Let's be honest. The reason there are no Jews or Israel in the book is because the author and publisher do not believe that Jews have any rightful place in the region, historically or today.

Let's be even more honest. If the book treated Jewish women on par with the others, and included Israel in the map and Israeli women like Nobel Prize winner Ada Yonath or Israel Supreme Court President Dorit Beinisch or poet Leah Goldberg, the book would be boycotted by the target audience.

So cut the crap. This has nothing to do with Palestinians and everything to do with what can only be considered a deliberate mindset that Jews are outsiders, colonialists - in short, the enemy.

That's why this book is antisemitic.

The publisher's letter that twists the arguments about the book and belittles the Jews who were insulted by it proves the underlying antisemitism more than the book itself does.

I don't like censorship but this book promotes the idea that Jews do not belong in the region, and it is therefore utterly unsuitable to be bought by anyone who supports the liberal stance that Interlink Publishing pretends to espouse.

(h/t Jim W)

UPDATE: The UK publisher has pulled the book from its website after a legal action by UK Lawyers for Israel.

UK Lawyers for Israel warned Pikku Publishing the book, called ‘Amazing Women of the Middle East: 25 Stories from Ancient Times to Present Day,’ could be in breach of education laws if used as a teaching aid in schools because it featured no Israeli women and had erased Israel from a map of the region.

The book, which is marketed to children over the age of nine, is listed on a web page marked “Teachers’ Resources” on the publisher’s website.

UKLFI warned self-publishing company Pikku if the book were used as a teaching aid in schools it would be likely to result in a breach Section 406 of the Education Act 1996.

This forbids ‘political indoctrination’, which is defined as the promotion of partisan political views in the teaching of any subject in the school.

The UK Lawyers for Israel requested the publishers both in the UK and the USA withdraw the book and re-publish it with the correct map and featuring at least one ‘Amazing Woman’ from Israel.

The title has been withdrawn both from Pikku’s website and the teaching resources based on the book have also been removed from the ‘teachers’ resources’ section.

12/21 Links Pt1: Arab Party Leader Abbas: Israel ‘Will Remain’ Jewish State; IOC: Countries banning Israel can’t hold competitions; Apartheid in Israel? Look at how Lebanon treats Palestinians

From Ian:

Emily Schrader: Two-state solution still is Israel's only option

It has suddenly become very popular on the Left and Right to declare the two-state solution dead. In fact, recent statistics bolster such claims, with popularity and support for the two-state solution decreasing over time.

Last week, former adviser to former prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Mark Regev, wrote about how the two-state solution is problematic when you have the Palestinians refusing to accept the legitimacy of a Jewish state. He’s not wrong, but he’s also not providing realistic solutions for what that means.

Here is the reality: there is no alternative to the two-state solution unless you either support an apartheid state, or don’t care about having a Jewish majority state. The only option for the survival of a Jewish and democratic state of Israel is a two-state solution where compromises will have to be made for peace. Both Israelis and Palestinians are refusing to accept reality when it comes to a long-term solution, and in doing so, they have made it even more complicated and unpleasant to find a lasting agreement that respects the rights to self-determination of both peoples.

Palestinian rejectionism, I believe, is the core reason for the lack of peace and a long-term solution. It is absolutely true that Palestinians have refused every opportunity for peace, and that public opinion is very much against a compromise that allows the state of Israel to exist side by side in peace with the Palestinians. That is why Fatah and Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas are cursed at and criticized as “collaborators” with Israel. That being said, it also doesn’t really matter that it is unpopular because there is no alternative.

Palestinians who refuse to accept that the state of Israel is not going anywhere are perpetuating a fantasy that prevents them from moving forward in a healthy and prosperous society, and this will continue as long as public opinion pushes this narrative in schools, television, newspapers, and government. Perhaps more problematic for the Palestinians than for the Israelis, the longer they wait to actually negotiate in good faith, the less they have to bargain with – a fact even Mahmoud Abbas agreed with when he stated in an interview that the Palestinians were wrong to reject the UN Partition Plan.

Arab Party Leader Abbas: Israel ‘Will Remain’ Jewish State

Prominent Israeli-Arab politician Mansour Abbas, head of the Islamist Ra’am party, on Tuesday broke with the traditional stance of Israel’s Arab parties by declaring that Israel will always be a Jewish state.

“Israel was born a Jewish state, that was the decision of the people, and the question is not what is the identity of the state — it was born this way and it will remain this way,” Abbas said in an interview with Channel 12 News commentator Mohammad Magadli

“The question is what is the status of the Arab citizen in the Jewish State of Israel. That is the question. And this challenge does not just stand in front of Mansour Abbas, but in front of the Jewish community and the Jewish citizen,” the MK continued.

Arab parties in the past have promoted the view that Israel should be a state for all citizens, including advocating for changing the Law of Return that allows Jews in the diaspora to move to Israel and acquire citizenship.

This past summer Abbas made history by joining the “change coalition” that unseated Benjamin Netanyahu after 12 years as Israel’s longest-serving prime minister. In doing so, he became the first Arab party leader to join a coalition government.

Muhammad, Yosef, David, Tamar and Maryam were some of the most popular baby names in various sectors in 2020, the Central Bureau of Statistics reported Tuesday.

Muhammad was the most popular baby name overall in Israel and among Muslims, with 2,396 boys receiving the name in 2020.

The most popular name in Israel after Muhammad was Yosef, with 1,176 Jewish boys and 656 Muslim boys (Yusef) receiving the name. The third most popular name in the country was Ariel, with 1,223 Jewish boys and 579 Jewish girls receiving the name.

Among Jewish girls, the most popular names were Tamar and Maya, with 1.85% (1,116) of girls named Tamar and 1.84% (1,107) named Maya.

The other names in the top 10 for Jewish girls were Avigail, Noa, Sarah, Ayalah, Adele, Yael, Shira and Esther.

By Daled Amos

Vicious antisemitic attacks against Jewish students on campus are certainly nothing new, but one particular incident led to a potential tool that could both help protect Jewish students and offer acknowledgment of their Zionist identity.

Let's take a look back.

In 2016, San Francisco State University was rated 10th on The Algemeiner's List of the US and Canada’s Worst Campuses for Jewish Students, based on the ongoing disruption of activities and deliberate intimidation of the students. One of the incidents that earned SFSU their inclusion on The Algemeiner's list was their response to an appearance by the then-Mayor of Jerusalem, Nir Barkat when he came to speak. Anti-Israel students disrupted the speech.

But it was more than just a disruption.
And it resulted not only in being included on a list -- it led to a lawsuit.

According to a Lawfare Project press release, the disruption in 2016 demonstrated that the administration of San Francisco State University itself was part of the problem:

The lawsuit was triggered following the alleged complicity of senior university administrators and police officers in the disruption of an April, 2016, speech by the Mayor of Jerusalem, Nir Barkat. At that event organized by SF Hillel, Jewish students and audience members were subjected to genocidal and offensive chants and expletives by a raging mob that used bullhorns to intimidate and drown out the Mayor’s speech and physically threaten and intimidate members of the mostly-Jewish audience. At the same time, campus police – including the chief – stood by, on order from senior university administrators who instructed the police to “stand down” despite direct and implicit threats and violations of university codes governing campus conduct.

The civil rights lawsuit was brought by The Lawfare Project the following year against then-president Leslie Wong along with several other university officials. The lawsuit alleged that the situation had deteriorated to the point that “Jews are often afraid to wear Stars of David or yarmulkes on campus, and regularly text their friends to describe potential safety issues and suggest alternate, often circuitous, routes to campus destinations.”

In March 2019, California State University public university system settled.

As part of the settlement, SFSU agreed to the following:

o Public statement: Issue a statement affirming that "it understands that, for many Jews, Zionism is an important part of their identity";

o  Coordinator of Jewish Student Life: "Hire a Coordinator of Jewish Student Life within the Division of Equity & Community Inclusion" and dedicate suitable office space for this position;

o External review of policies: "Retain an independent, external consultant to assess SFSU’s procedures for enforcement of applicable CSU system-wide anti-discrimination policies and student code of conduct";

o  Independent investigation of additional complaints: "SFSU will, for a period of 24 months, assign all complaints of religious discrimination under either E.O. 1096 or E.O. 1097 to an independent, outside investigator for investigation";

o  Funding viewpoint diversity: "SFSU will allocate an additional $200,000 to support educational outreach efforts to promote viewpoint diversity (including but not limited to pro-Israel or Zionist viewpoints) and inclusion and equity on the basis of religious identity (including but not limited to Jewish religious identity)"; and

o  Campus mural: Engage in the SFSU process to allocate "space on the SFSU campus for a mural to be installed under the oversight of the Division of Equity & Community Inclusion, paid for by the University, that will be designed by student groups of differing viewpoints on the issues that are the subject of this litigation to be agreed by the parties (including but not limited to Jewish, pro-Israel, and/or Zionist student groups, should such student groups elect to participate in the process)."

That first condition -- San Francisco State University publicly acknowledging that "for many Jews, Zionism is an important part of their identity" -- was an unprecedented recognition of the importance of Zionism to Jewish identity.

Just imagine if universities across the country followed this example in recognition of Zionism. It could be the academic equivalent of the legislative campaign to have the boycott of Israel made illegal in all 50 states.

When I asked Ziporah Reich, Director Of Litigation at The Lawfare Project, about the potential to establish these guarantees at other universities around the country, she responded that

we think Jewish students will recognize the need to fight for the same guarantees we’ve received in our settlement agreement with SFSU. We also believe that our success will serve as fertile ground upon which Jewish students can begin their journey to fight for their rights on campus.

This is not something that should require legal enforcement. Take, for example, the stand taken in 2019 by Martha Pollak, president of Cornell University, in response to the demand by JVP to divest from Israel:

BDS unfairly singles out one country in the world for sanction when there are many countries around the world whose governments’ policies may be viewed as controversial. Moreover, it places all of the responsibility for an extraordinarily complex geopolitical situation on just one country and frequently conflates the policies of the Israeli government with the very right of Israel to exist as a nation, which I find particularly troublesome. [emphasis added]

Pollak not only took a stand against BDS. She publicly stated her personal rejection of BDS and went beyond vague appeals to diversity and respect for ideas on campus.

But how many university presidents have been willing to deal head-on with the problem of Zionophobia on campus?
What are the chances of other universities adopting the measures in the settlement?
For that matter, has San Francisco State University really learned its lesson?

Apparently not.

In September 2020, the terrorist Leila Khaled was invited to speak at SFSU. Khaled participated in the hijacking of TWA Flight 840 from Rome to Tel Aviv in August 1969. The following year she took part in the hijacking of an El Al flight from Amsterdam to New York City.

So how did the president of SFSU, Lynn Mahoney, respond in light of the lawsuit settlement?

Let me be clear: I condemn the glorification of terrorism and use of violence against unarmed civilians. I strongly condemn antisemitism and other hateful ideologies that marginalize people based on their identities, origins or beliefs.

At the same time, I represent a public university, which is committed to academic freedom and the ability of faculty to conduct their teaching and scholarship without censorship.

Mahoney went on to pay lip service to the now-required recognition of the Zionist identity of the university's students:

My conversations with SF Hillel and Jewish student leaders have enhanced my appreciation for the deeply painful impact of this upcoming presenter, as well as past campus experiences. I understand that Zionism is an important part of the identity of many of our Jewish students. The university welcomes Jewish faculty and students expressing their beliefs and worldviews in the classroom and on the quad, through formal and informal programming. [emphasis added]

Prof. Judea Pearl, professor of computer science and statistics at UCLA and president of The Daniel Pearl Foundation, was unimpressed by Mahoney's attempt to reconcile welcoming a terrorist who targets Jews on the one hand with declaring support for the Jewish Zionist identity on the other. He points out:

it is a logical contradiction from the scientific perspective and a breach of contract from the legal perspective...and I’m known to be expert on the logical perspective.

For their part, The Lawfare Project, which spearheaded the drive to keep Khaled's proposed appearance at SFSU off of Zoom, agrees with Prof. Pearl from the legal perspective. I was told in no uncertain terms:

Should Khaled ever speak on campus, not only would that be a breach of the settlement agreement, but also a gross violation of the university’s fundamental responsibility to protect its Jewish students. [emphasis added]

But what is happening is more than just a continuation of antisemitic hatred on college campuses with the typical weak response by the university administration. We are all familiar with groups that claim to affiliate with the Jewish community while rejecting Israel and a Zionist identity.

What is being overlooked is that there is a pro-Zionist voice at the beginning stages of asserting itself, and the public statement required by the lawsuit settlement is part of that -- even if imperfectly implemented by the university.

In a recent interview with Moment Magazine, Prof. Pearl described the developing situation:

I predict American Jewry will soon undergo a profound, painful and irreparable split. I cannot think of another period in Jewish history where the schism was so deep, and growing deeper so rapidly. I see the split in every aspect of life and on many levels...On the surface, most of our faculty and students are still sitting on the fence, true, but the polarization is growing; the Zionist group is becoming more assertive and is closing ranks rapidly, while the Zionophobic group is becoming louder, more organized and more aggressive. [emphasis added]

That pro-Zionist voice showed itself in response to a student at USC, Yasmeen Mashayech, who attacked Jews with tweets such as:

o "I want to kill every motherf**cking Zionist"
o "Death to Israel and its b**tch the U.S."
o "Israel has no history just a criminal record"
o "yel3an el yahood [curse the Jews]."

But even more important than those tweets and the criticism of the university's weak response is the reaction from Jewish leaders -- something that has been ignored by the media.

In An Open Letter to the Leadership of USC, more than 65 faculty members at USC took a stand:

We, the undersigned faculty, wish to register our dismay about ongoing open expressions of anti-Semitism and Zionophobia on our campus that go unrebuked. The silence of our leadership on this matter is alienating, hurtful, and depressing. It amounts to tacit acceptance of a toxic atmosphere of hatred and hostility.

The letter went beyond just condemnation of antisemitism and rejecting the university claim that because of legal considerations, USC "cannot discuss university processes or actions with respect to a specific student, much less denounce them publicly." The faculty said it was time for the university to publicly welcome Zionists on campus:

Most importantly, Jewish, Zionist, and Israeli students, as well as those who support the right of the State of Israel to exist need to hear from our leaders that they are welcome on our campus. Such a statement would not infringe on free speech or take sides in political dispute. It is a call for character and dignity. It is overdue. [emphasis added]

This would parallel the SFSU's settlement agreement recognizing the Zionist identity of its students -- and not because Zionists need to be protected as victims. More than that.

Again, Prof. Pearl:

We want the university to say there is something noble about Zionism. Zionists are welcome here not because everybody needs to be protected, but because they can contribute here.

This is what has been missing till now from the hand wringing of universities, with their vague promises to their Jewish students that they will deal with antisemitism on campus.

This is what has to change.

And the SFSU lawsuit and the USC faculty letter show that there are those willing to start to demand it.

The @ACLU human rights head rails about "Jewish supremacy." A brief history of that term.

Jamil Dakwar is the director of the ACLU Human Rights Program. He is a lecturer at various New York colleges. He formerly worked for Human Rights Watch.

And this human rights leader uses language that mimics that of antisemites of the past 150 years.

He tweeted:

Ah, so it's "Jewish supremacy." I'm not sure how that explains the exception Israel made for the Miss Universe pageant, or the Flag Football championships, which both occurred after Israel shut down travel (and caused grumbling among Jews who couldn't visit Israel.)

It isn't the first time Dakwar has used that phrase. When Ilhan Omar issued a clarification for her comparison between the US/Israel and Hamas/Taliban, she said “I was in no way equating terrorist organizations with democratic countries with well-established judicial systems.” Dakwar responded, "disappointed she had to clarify her statement and affirm that Israel is a democracy with well-established judicial system. Israel, at best, is a democracy for Jewish citizens with well established legal system protecting Jewish supremacy and institutional racism."

The earliest mentions of the phrase "Jewish supremacy" I could find werereferring to Germany in the 1880s.

The Chicago Tribune, December 12, 1880, discussed the German Anti-Semitic League:

...

The following year, newspapers reported about German clergy railing against "Jewish supremacy."

In 1892, proud German antisemite Hermann Ahlwardt was placed on trial for defamation when he claimed that arms manufacturer Ludwig Loewe & Co. was a Jewish-French conspiracy to sell defective rifles to the German army to weaken the country. During the trial, witnesses in his defense openly spoke of Jewish supremacy schemes: (London Times, December 7, 1892)

Ahlwardt was sentenced to five months in prison, but never served, because by the time the trial was over he was elected to the Reichstag, running on an antisemitic platform.

In 1895, he visited the United States to preach Jew-hatred:

The next prominent person to preach about Jewish supremacy was antisemite Henry Ford, who often used that phrase in his newspaper The Dearborn Independent:

And German antisemitism which used that phrase continued, before and of course during the Nazi era.

The charge of "Jewish supremacism" went out of fashion for a while, but it came back, as antisemitism always does:

Nowadays, however, the phrase "Jewish supremacy" is used far more often by the Left than the Right.

One would think that people who claim to hate Nazis and antisemitism - and who are very sensitive to microaggressions - would be a little more reluctant to use a phrase that was proudly used by right-wing antisemites for well over a century. One would think that people whose very jobs are supposed to support human rights would be skittish about using such a term that has been used as an excuse to murder millions of Jews.

However, the modern antisemites enthusiastically embrace the language of the old-style antisemites, because they share their goals.

Palestinian Media Watch translated a column in the official PA newspaper Al Hayat al-Jadida, by Muwaffaq Matar.

Matar is a member of Fatah's Revolutionary Council and a regular columnist for the official newspaper.

On November 21, he wrote:

It would not be an exaggeration if we say that the racist occupation government has worked to export the ‘COVID-19’ (Coronavirus) epidemic to us, after our institutions succeeded in limiting and reducing the scope of its spread, as [Israel] used the virus as a new weapon to weaken the scope of economic life to the lowest point, and to leave it in an almost fateful dependency on its economy!

Jews purposefully infecting non-Jews just so they become richer?

Nah, nothing antisemitic about that.

It is worth repeating that the outrageous part isn't that some idiot writes something racist. It isn't even outrageous that the editors of the newspaper have no problem publishing bigotry.

The outrageous part is that this pure Jew-hatred is published every day, and there is no Palestinian media that disagrees. There is no debate in Palestinian media about this - Jews are evil, and that is accepted as fact.

People who claim they want peace are curiously unconcerned about this.

12/20 Links Pt2: Jews Were Massacred in 1948 Too, So Why Dwell Only on the Nakba?; DC 3rd graders made to reenact Holocaust ‘because Jews ruined Christmas’

From Ian:

We need you to take back Israel's story - opinion

“Why is Israel carrying out apartheid against the Palestinians?”

I am sure you have encountered a statement that resembles this question plenty of times.

Often when Israel supporters are presented with this sort of question, they find themselves unsure of the best way to answer. So they remain silent.

But the problem is that this silence creates a vacuum that raging antisemites fill with attacks on Jews at an LA restaurant, on a Jewish man walking down a street in Manhattan, and numerous BDS resolutions on college campuses.

If Israel’s detractors continue to fill the space left by our silence then things can get worse.

UK lawyer Trevor Asserson once said that his greatest fear is that, “the democracies of the West and in particular America will get to such a pitch in terms of their attitudes towards Israel that it is simply politically not viable to be seen in any way to be supporting Israel.”

If this happens, Asserson warned, “we are finished.”

And while many Israel advocacy groups work non-stop to promote the truth, it's often the one-on-one conversations that will change someone's mind.

The anti-Israel haters are hell-bent on vilifying Zionism and ultimately destroying Israel through their false narrative and delegitimization campaign. We cannot afford to lose the battle for public support, and we need every voice to help win the battle.

"#Zionism is nothing more - but also nothing less - than the Jewish people's sense of origin and destination in the land linked eternally with its name [#Israel]. It is also the instrument whereby the Jewish nation seeks an authentic fulfillment of itself."

~ Abba Eban, 1975 pic.twitter.com/AvDaae7St2
— Arsen Ostrovsky (@Ostrov_A) December 20, 2021

Canadian film describes Jewish refugee plight

The experiences of Jews forced to leave Egypt, Iraq, Tunisia, Lebanon, Algeria, Morocco and Iran are told in a new documentary, ‘L’Exode Silencieux’.

The film , which is 56 minutes long in its full version, was made by the Communauté Sépharade Unifiée du Quebec and the Montreal Consulate of Israel to mark the 30 November annual commemoration of the exodus of more than 850,000 Jews from Arab countries and Iran. It begins by describing the comfortable lives of these middle class Jews. Attitudes towards them changed over time, with the rise of pan-Arabism and repercussions of the Arab-Israeli conflict. Many left with nothing.

Some acknowledge that they were refugees, but never enjoyed the rights of refugees. However, one speaker, Abraham Elarar, objects to describing Moroccan Jews as refugees : he says they left for economic reasons or Zionism.

On the other hand, the historian Georges Bensoussan says that they left out of fear and therefore the word ‘refugee’ could apply to almost all Jews who left the Arab world.

While conditions did vary from country to country, there is no hope of reconciliation while Arab countries distort their own history, Bensoussan claims.

For the first time, Sylvain Abitbol of Justice for Jews from Arab Countries (JJAC) discloses that JJAC appointed the accountancy firm Baker Tilly to carry out an assessment of lost Jewish property and assets. The total value is estimated to be between $300 and $330 billion while the Palestinian losses are estimated to total $30 billion.

Ha'aretz: Jews Were Massacred in 1948 Too, So Why Dwell Only on the Nakba?

However, for Haaretz that was more than enough. The editorial published two days later already stated, categorically and sweepingly: “Soldiers of the Israeli army committed war crimes during the War of Independence, chief among them were massacres in Palestinian villages that were captured in the decisive battles in the lowland plain between the coast and Jerusalem, in the Galilee and in the Negev. People who were alive then described mass murders of Palestinian civilians by the troops who conquered their villages; execution squads; dozens of people being herded into a building that was then blown up; children’s skulls smashed with sticks; brutal rapes and villagers who were ordered to dig pits in which they were then shot to death.”

And Gideon Levy, in a column on the very same editorial page, went, as could have been expected, one step further: “What we did then to the Palestinians we continue to do now, only more forcefully… the mechanisms of whitewash and justification will cover up any disclosure from 1948… Please don’t disturb us, we are carrying on – with the same crimes, or similar ones.” In other words, according to the recent recipient of the Sokolow Prize, Israel’s top award for journalism, today, too, Israel Defense Forces soldiers in the territories murder Palestinians in their masses, smashing children’s skulls, committing violent rape and ordering villagers to dig pits before shooting them to death in those same pits.

What we have here is a truly ecstatic celebration of exaggeration, falsehoods and self-undermining and flagellation, and wallowing in feelings of guilt. If we truly want to pursue a serious discussion of the 1948 war, it must be balanced. If the truth, then the whole truth. If one is quoting historian Benny Morris, please also quote his factual and superb book “1948,” and not only the breakthrough “Birth of the Palestinian Refugee Problem.” And without evading the basic facts: The Palestine Arabs launched murderous acts of hostility immediately after the adoption of the partition plan, which they opposed, by means of 400 armed local militias. Arab armies invaded the Jewish state immediately upon the termination of the British Mandate in order to destroy it and to erase any memory of its existence; those armies included expeditionary forces from distant Iraq and also thousands of volunteers of the Arab Army of Salvation.

If the ideal is the sanctity of historical research and truth, we need to ask where the Palestinian versions of Adam Raz, Akevot Institute and Zochrot are. In any event, my Haaretz colleagues don’t make do with clarifying the facts and often seem to feel that Israelis are required to offer an “apology.” It’s disheartening to be dragged back there again 74 years after the war erupted, but the apology was already formulated by Ephraim Kishon in his genius: “So sorry we won.”

Hague throws out dumb lawsuit against IDF leaders. It's almost a shame, because the "victims" were terrorists and human shields.

From Al Jazeera:

Israeli Defence Minster Benny Gantz and another former senior military officer cannot be held liable in a case brought by a Palestinian Dutch man who lost six relatives in a 2014 air attack in Gaza, a Dutch appeals court ruled.

Ismail Ziada’s mother, three brothers, a sister-in-law, a young nephew and a friend were killed in the attack during Israel’s 2014 offensive targeting Gaza.

Universal jurisdiction allows countries to prosecute serious offences such as war crimes and torture regardless of where they were committed.

Ziada’s case was thrown out by a lower Dutch court in January 2020, which ruled that the principles of universal jurisdiction could be applied for individual criminal responsibility, but not in civil cases.

The case against Gantz and former air force commander Amir Eshel could not proceed because the men have “functional immunity from jurisdiction”, The Hague District Court ruled at the time.

The Hague Court of Appeal said on Tuesday the lower court was right to rule that Gantz – who was a senior military officer at the time of the attack – and Eshel had immunity because they were carrying out Israeli government policies.

“Dutch courts are not competent here to judge the claim. The [lower] court rightly decided that,” The Hague Court of Appeal said.

“High-ranking military personnel have carried out official policy of the state of Israel, which renders a judgement on their actions moribund.”

The court added it was “not blind to the plaintiff’s suffering”.

Mondoweiss is whining about "justice denied" and adds the delicious detail that Ziada has to pay 3,837 Euros to the court, and to Benny Gantz and Amir Eshel’s lawyers (US $ 4,300), a sum to be increased by 85 Euros if payment is not made within fourteen days.

What Al Jazeera and Mondoweiss are pointedly not reporting is that the Ziada house was a valid military target, and that the adults had knowingly put their family in danger by making them human shields for Hamas.

Here is his brother Omar, member of the Qassam Brigades.

And here's Omar with younger members of the family, teaching the family traditions.

In the memorial for the victims, Hamas' Al Qassam Brigades singled out four Ziada family members as its members - including 12 year old Sha'ban, who appears to be one of the kids in the photo above:

Another person was in their home and using the family as human shields. His name was Mohammed Mahmoud al-Maqadma:

The IDF Military Advocate General summarized the reason the house was targeted:

… on 20 July 2014, the IDF carried out an aerial strike on a structure that was being used as an active command and control center by the Hamas terror organization. The attack aimed to neutralize both the command and control center and the military operatives who were manning it, and who, according to information received in real-time, were involved in terror activity which threatened IDF forces operating in the area. It was further indicated, that the structure was also utilized by the military operative Mohammed Muqadama, a senior figure in Hamas’ military observation force. Findings indicated that among the casualties were three military operatives in the Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad terror organizations, who were members of the Ziyadeh family, as well as the senior military operative mentioned above, Mohammed Muqadama.

Much more can be found here.

It is almost a shame that the case didn't go to trial, because the world doesn't understand the depravity of Hamas to routinely use women and children as human shields, deliberately placing command and control units in the houses of large families.