Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News

Tuesday, March 01, 2022

03/01 Links Pt1: Bernard Henri Levy: Ukraine’s Hero President Z; Russia Promotes ‘Israel Lobby’ Author To Defend Invasion of Ukraine; What If Russia Loses?

From Ian:

Bernard Henri Levy: Ukraine’s Hero President Z.

I don’t know if, by the time this article appears, Volodymyr Zelensky will still be alive.

We do know that he is in Kyiv, surrounded by his generals, in a bunker that the Sukhoi fighter jets seek.

And we have just seen him in a video where he appears helmetless, outside, like a young Churchill walking in the poor neighborhoods of London during the Nazi Blitz of September 1940.

But I also know that he is at the top of the Kremlin’s kill list, according to the English-language press.

His recent farewells come to mind—on Friday, Feb. 25, to his counterparts over Zoom during a special meeting of the European Union: “This is maybe the last time that you will see me alive.”

What is greatness?

True greatness, as taught by European chivalry?

Perhaps it is that.

That heroism, calm and proud.

A touch of Allende the night before the assault of the Moneda by Pinochet’s death squads.

The way he told President Biden, who offered up an exfiltration—“I need weapons, not a taxi”—and Putin, today’s Pinochet: “You can try to kill me, I am ready for it, since I know that the idea lives in me and will survive me.”

The first time I met him was on March 30, 2019, the night before the first round of his stunning election, in a seafood restaurant near the Maidan.

I had just performed, at the Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv, Looking for Europe, the theatrical monologue that I was bringing then to the European capitals. My friend Vladislav Davidzon, one of the last American journalists still in Ukraine—reporting for Tablet—had arranged the meeting.

Tablet’s Vladislav Davidzon gained special access to Volodymyr Zelensky, Ukraine’s enigmatic new leader who once played the president on TV. Here, Davidzon shares his impressions of Zelensky and his predictions for Ukraine’s political future. byVladislav Davidzon

Volodymyr Zelensky was, at the time, a very young man. Looking like a paper boy in jeans, old sneakers, and a black T-shirt with a worn neckline, he had spent the night celebrating the final performance, in an old Kyiv skating rink turned café-theater, of “Servant of the People,” the one-man show that had made him famous.

Israel takes nuanced approach to UN emergency session on Ukraine

“We should take a picture together.”

Israeli Ambassador to the United Nations Gilad Erdan strolled across the General Assembly floor on Monday morning, making a direct line for his counterpart from Ukraine. Six months earlier, Sergiy Kyslytsya had visited Israel as part of a delegation invited by Erdan.

On this morning, Kyslytsya was hoping he would have a country to go back to at all.

Erdan patted the seated Kyslytsya on the back and they shook hands. After days of painful diplomatic neutrality, Jerusalem made a choice. Still sensitive to Russian control of Syrian airspace and Israel’s freedom of movement to attack Iranian and proxy forces to its north, Jerusalem said it would vote yes to a resolution condemning Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in an extraordinary emergency session of the General Assembly, not seen in decades.

“Israel was and will be on the right side of history,” Israeli Foreign Minister Yair Lapid said in a Monday statement. “We have a moral duty and historical obligation to be part of the effort.” This followed Israel’s silence on a U.N. Security Council resolution late last week demanding a halt to Russia’s hostilities, with Jerusalem, much to the disappointment of the U.S., reportedly reaching a late decision not to co-sponsor the resolution, knowing it would be vetoed by Russia, a permanent Security Council member, anyway.

Israel's UN ambassador makes a show of supporting his Ukrainian counterpart at the UN General Assembly. https://t.co/jvAgd4uguv
— Haviv Rettig Gur (@havivrettiggur) February 28, 2022

David Singer: UN should try using its Israel-bashing model on Russia

Reversing Russia’s flagrant violation of the UN Charter justifies the General Assembly adopting its Israel-bashing model to establish the following Ukrainian-dedicated agencies to humiliate and bash Russia into withdrawing from Ukraine: - Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Ukrainian People (CEIRUP):

To institute a programme that will enable the Ukrainian people to exercise their inalienable rights to self-determination, national independence and sovereignty without external interference; to return to their homes and property from which they have been displaced.

- Department for Political and Peacebuilding Affairs' (DPPA) Division for Ukrainian Rights: To serve as the Secretariat of CEIRUP and provide the following core functions:

-Organising the meetings of CEIRUP and its Bureau at UN Headquarters;
-Monitoring political and other relevant developments;
-Organising programmes of international meetings, conferences and CEIRUP delegation visits;
-Implementing a publications programme;
-Developing and maintaining the United Nations Information System on the Question of Ukraine (UNISUKR) and managing CEIRUP’s outreach efforts including via social media;
-Cooperating with civil society organizations active on the Russia-Ukraine issue; -Organising an annual observance of the International Day of Solidarity with the Ukrainian People;

Armenia has broken with Russia and abstained in a vote at the UN Human Rights Council over whether to hold an urgent debate on Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.

Armenia has previously offered muted support for Russia’s actions internationally. pic.twitter.com/lujlcaKJOq
— OC Media (@OCMediaorg) February 28, 2022

Palestinian media call suggested Negev community for escaping Ukrainian Jews "settlements"

The World Zionist Organization is making plans for setting up temporary communities for an expected influx of thousands of Ukrainian Jews.

The plan would have to be approved by the Israeli government.

Their plan includes placing caravans on both sides of the Green Line, including the Jordan Valley. But Palestinian and other Arab headlines are concentrating on the Negev.

And they call the planned communities in the Negev "settlements."

Liberal Jews and Palestinians all agree that "settlements" and "occupation"are the problem. Just the liberal Jews still don't realize that for Palestinians, "settlements" and "occupation" include all of Israel.

Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism today at Amazon!

Palestinian Authority claims terrorists are "civilian martyrs"

Last night, Palestinian Islamic Jihad terrorists in Jenin opened fire on Israeli soldiers who were arresting another terrorist in Jenin. The IDF fired back, killing two of them.

Here are photos of the two from Palestine Today, an Islamic Jihad newspaper:

Islamic Jihad openly calls them both "resistance fighters from the Jenin Brigade."

There is video of the terrorists shooting at the Israeli troops.

But the Palestinian Authority has decided to treat them as innocent victims.

PA prime minister Mohamed Shtayyeh condemned Israel for killing them as he led a cabinet meeting, calling it "the execution of two young men." The Palestinian health ministry called them "civilian." So did the official PA newspaper Al Hayat al Jadida.

The official Wafa news agency is covering the terrorist funeral as if they are heroes.

Here's the interesting thing: Earlier on Monday, the Palestinian Authority itself raided Jenin to arrest Islamic Jihad terrorists! This caused a lot of criticism from the locals.

Apparently, the PA decided it didn't want to look bad, and publicly switched sides to pretend to support the terrorists they raided only hours before.

Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism today at Amazon!

The San Francisco Chronicle makes it sound as if a Jewish employer fired a woman out of spite because he disliked her boyfriend's antisemitism.

A popular Bay Area yoga instructor was fired over the weekend because of her relationship with a Petaluma man who runs an antisemitic website and organization that the Anti-Defamation League said is responsible for "at least 74 antisemitic propaganda incidents," including recent events in which antisemitic flyers were distributed in the Bay Area.

Jeff Renfro, who owns Hella Yoga and Funky Door Yoga in Berkeley and Yoga Hell in Petaluma, told The Chronicle he fired instructor Kelly Johnson over the weekend and terminated an agreement to sell one of the businesses to her because of the involvement of her boyfriend, Jon Minadeo Jr., in Goyim TV, a website that broadcasts antisemitic videos and other antisemitic activities.

...In a phone interview, Johnson told The Chronicle that she does not share her boyfriend's beliefs and that she was hurt by her depiction as a racist.

... In an email to present and past customers, Renfro said he decided to fire Johnson because she seems to share Minadeo's beliefs and had assisted him in his business of hate. He told The Chronicle he found evidence on a computer they shared that Johnson registered Goyim TV as a California corporation.

"I am really hurt that they have gone this far to lie about me and say these things about me that are untrue," Johnson said. "I am a very loving person and have relationships and friendships with all kinds of people. It's really hard to read this. It's all lies."

Johnson described herself as a "giving person" who "wants to be known for making a difference in people's lives," adding that she and Minadeo had sought out legal advice.

"This is the most slanderous, lying, evilest thing I have ever seen someone do to anyone else," Minadeo said. Minadeo said Goyim TV is about uniting all races against the Jewish supremacy. His girlfriend, he said, doesn't share his beliefs and isn't involved in his activities.

From reading the article, it appears that firing Johnson was not warranted. She shouldn't be punished for her boyfriend's bigotry. As much as I abhor GoyimTV, that was my first thought on reading this article, whose headline is, "Bay Area yoga teacher fired over boyfriend’s involvement with antisemitic website."

Then I looked at the original article in JWeekly which broke the story. And the Chronicle is leaving out a critical part of the story.

In late 2021, Renfro said he noticed a change in Johnson, that “bigoted” comments were coming out of her mouth, about Black Lives Matter protests. He alleges she made a comment about sitting next to “smelly Jews” on a plane. He wasn’t sure what to make of her comments, but suspected Minadeo was influencing her, he said, and gave her the benefit of the doubt because of their longstanding business relationship and friendship.

[About two months ago] Renfro said he found evidence that Johnson helped Minadeo with paperwork for her boyfriend’s LLC, Goyim TV LLC, on her work computer. Minadeo formed the business entity last year. Renfro also alleged Johnson helped Minadeo improve the technology on his livestream.

If the paperwork for incorporating GoyimTV is on her work computer, that is a fireable offense by any measure. Not only is it using a work computer for personal business, but it is using a work computer to help encourage antisemitism.

Now, why didn't the Chronicle - which admits that JWeekly broke the story - mention this? Why do they instead interview the antisemitic boyfriend and his defense of his girlfriend?

In fact, the Chronicle article spends far more space quoting the antisemite than the Jew, let alone the girlfriend who insists there is nothing wrong with helping an antisemitic organization.

The Chronicle is pretending to be balanced - between a Jewish store-owner and a white supremacist. And they are giving the white supremacist and his girlfriend more of an opportunity to say their side of the story than the Jew.

Maybe they thought that the Jew was too smelly to listen too hard to his side of the story.

Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism today at Amazon!

02/28 Links Pt2: New Zealand’s Jewish problem; The Jordanian woman who bombed Sbarro has earned another title; Blogger ‘Elder of Ziyon’ Reveals His Protocols

From Ian:

Blogger ‘Elder of Ziyon’ Reveals His Protocols

“As long as there have been Jews,” the blogger Elder of Ziyon observes in his new book, “there has been Jew-hatred.” His new book, “Protocols: Exposing Modern Antisemitism,” chronicles the many ways in which the virus of antisemitism has mutated.

Elder’s blog has been widely acclaimed — and for good reason. In addition to his scoops, his work is consistently well researched, well sourced, and well written. His book, thankfully, is no different.

The last several years have seen a renewed interest, both academically and popularly, in the subject of antisemitism. And not without reason — antisemitism has skyrocketed in the West, much of it dressed up as anti-Zionism, a more socially acceptable form of hate.

Yet, as Elder makes clear, there is no difference between the two.

“People don’t hate Israel and Zionism because of Zionist philosophy or Israeli government actions,” he observes. Rather, they “hate Israel because it is Jewish.” This might seem obvious to some, but regrettably it is far from obvious to our Congressional representatives in the “Squad” or their apologists in the press, among others.

As George Orwell once observed, “To see what is in front of one’s nose needs a constant struggle.” And in this, Elder’s new book offers an important contribution.

The writing is clear and concise, and the arguments are cogently made. Nearly every chapter contains a quotable line or thought. And there is an admirable bluntness to the points that he makes.

New Zealand’s Jewish problem

New Zealand, Australia’s South Pacific neighbour, is a nation boasting of magnificent fjords, snow-capped mountains and pristine forests. Its indigenous Maori people have inhabited the country for approximately 1000 years. In 1769, Captain James Cook mapped the islands, now known as New Zealand, which was followed by the arrival of explorers, missionaries and sailors. The 1840 Treaty of Waitangi, ensured Maoris were given rights in this new addition to the British Empire. This was followed by extensive British settlement over the remainder of the 19th century. About 1.3 million people immigrated in 1907 which was the peak year for new arrivals.

Some Nazi war criminals, escaping justice in Europe after WW2, settled in New Zealand. New Zealand now champions human rights, but has refused to open files on its Nazi fugitive immigrants. One fugitive Jonas Pukas, served as a machine gunner with the 12th Lithuanian Police Battalion which massacred tens of thousands of Jews. Pukas settled in Auckland in 1950 and reportedly smiled as he described Jews “screaming like geese” and how they “flew into the air as they were shot.”

Another immigrant was Willi Huber, who had served in the ruthless Waffen SS. Huber remarked in an interview with police detective Wayne Stringer, that Hitler was “very clever” and that he had no inkling of the massacre of Jews in Poland and Russia where he served, despite the Waffen SS being pivotal in the extermination of Jewish communities. Huber never expressed remorse and in fact was honoured by having a ski run, restaurant and commemorative plaque at Mt Hutt named after him.

New Zealand (NZ) does not invest in Holocaust education, is not a member of the IHRA and also has not adopted the IHRA definition of antisemitism as other democracies have.

Canterbury University located in the city of Christchurch, accepted a Master’s thesis that concluded “the Nazis did not exterminate Jews in gas chambers or have extermination policies as such.”

Holocaust Museum in Indonesia Highlights Internal Muslim Disputes

A proponent of humanitarian Islam, Staquf joined global leaders in commemorating the United Nations’ International Holocaust Remembrance Day last month.

“Holocaust remembrance serves as a memorial and vivid reminder of the cruelty, violence, and suffering that so many human beings … have, for thousands of years, inflicted upon others. Today, in remembrance of the Holocaust and its millions of victims, Nahdlatul Ulama and I wish to raise our voices in a simple, heartfelt call: Let us choose compassion,’” Staquf said, in a virtual event co-hosted by the Los Angeles-based Simon Wiesenthal Center.

Unlike the Indonesian council, Staquf did not shy away from recognizing the genocide against the Jews while at the same time demanding justice for the Palestinians.

“Palestinian self-determination is a humanitarian mandate. All parties, including Hamas, Fatah, and the world community at large, must set aside their subjective interests and focus upon improving the lives of the Palestinian people,” Staquf said.

The divergence in approach between Satquf and the Indonesian Council spokesmen is about much more than the Palestinian issue. It is about what the essence of Islam should be an Islam that looks backward and nurtures grievances, or an Islam that seeks to reach out, build bridges, and find solutions.

Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism today at Amazon!

The UN Human Rights Council opened its 49th session today in Geneva where it was decided to hold an urgent debate on Ukraine.

Many high ranking national officials spoke, as they always do. Most spoke about their concern over Ukraine. Many spoke about Covid-19 challenges to human rights (including Spain, Thailand, Moldova,) or worries about nuclear war (Marshall Islands), or other issues of human rights that affect the entire planet.

One, however, ignored everything else happening in the world and stuck to his only theme: Israel is evil and the world is treating Israel too well.

Here is the UN summary of Palestinian foreign minister Riyad Maliki's speech:

RIAD AL-MALKI, Minister for Foreign Affairs of the State of Palestine, said every year the international community met to discuss international human rights and international human rights law. But the reality for millions of victims of egregious human rights violations continued to deteriorate, the right to justice continued to be ignored, and the culture of impunity reigned. The reason behind this was double standards. Respect for international human rights and international humanitarian law should be ensured universally. This hall had borne witness to outrageous statements justifying war crimes and crimes against humanity, many committed against the Palestinian people. The Palestinian people had suffered from this, with the Israeli Government given special treatment, allowing it to commit crimes with utter impunity. Hundreds of Palestinian families lived under the intolerable threat of dispossession. Israeli settlers enjoyed legal protection, whilst the Palestinian people were punished for protecting themselves. Israel continued to expand, stripping all Palestinians from their fundamental rights. Some States rewarded Israel with special status: only double-standards and exceptionalism could explain this upside-down reality.

States that respected international law had nothing to hide; they did not bar United Nations officials, nor ban human rights defenders. When they did, they were met with justifiable international disapproval, and yet Israel banned international investigators and got away with it, as it wished for no proof of its crimes, and could count on special treatment by the international community. Palestine called on the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights to update the database of companies involved in illegal activities in Palestine. Exceptionalism was also applied by some Member States who continued to work against item seven on the Human Rights Council agenda.

You get that? No other nation has a dedicated permanent item on the HRC's agenda. No other nation has a database dedicated to attack companies that work on its soil. But Maliki says that the double standards are practiced by those who object to these double standards the UNHRC applies to Israel!

As of this moment, there has been only silence from the Palestinian Authority about the Ukraine crisis. Not even a statement of concern about the loss of civilian lives, or a call for a cease fire or negotiations. Not a word. Because the "State of Palestine" has only one purpose for existing: to deny the right of the Jewish state to exist. There is little interest in building a functioning society, there is no interest in helping Palestinians live dignified lives, there is no tolerance for anyone who points out that they are led by a split between two dictators who don't want to even see Palestinian unity.

Everything is a distraction from the only purpose of the Palestinian Authority/PLO/"State of Palestine:" using any political power it gains to use against Israel. To them, the UNHRC is not a human rights body and the UN isn't an international organization and international accords are not meant to be adhered to. To them, they are all simply tools to be used to attack Israel diplomatically, and when they are used for anything else, the Palestinians are irritated that they are not the center of attention.

You can read Maliki's entire speech here. Compare the universal messages of the other speeches with the Palestinian focus on demonizing the only Jewish state. Maliki informs the UNHRC of the supremely important human rights violation that "settlers raid the Al-Aqsa Mosque Compound and provoke religious sentiments" meaning he is telling the Human Rights Council that Jews should have no human rights, no equal rights, no rights at all.

And no one says a word.

This speech is only one of hundreds of examples proving Palestinian entity is the most self-centered, malicious member of the international community.

Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism today at Amazon!

02/28 Links Pt1: How Zelensky Gave the World a Jewish Hero; Sharansky: Israel must take ‘a clear moral stand’ against Putin over Ukraine

From Ian:

Statement on the War in Ukraine by Scholars of Genocide, Nazism and World War II

As we write this, the horror of war is unfolding in Ukraine. The last time Kyiv was under heavy artillery fire and saw tanks in its streets was during World War II. If anyone should know it, it’s Vladimir Putin, who is obsessed with the history of that war.

Russian propaganda has painted the Ukrainian state as Nazi and fascist ever since Russian special forces first entered Ukraine in 2014, annexing the Crimea and fomenting the conflict in the Donbas, which has smoldered for eight long years.

It was propaganda in 2014. It remains propaganda today.

This is why we came together: to protest the use of this false and destructive narrative. Among those who have signed the statement below are some of the most accomplished and celebrated scholars of World War II, Nazism, genocide and the Holocaust. If you are a scholar of this history, please consider adding your name to the list. If you are a journalist, you now have a list of experts you can turn to in order to help your readers better understand Russia’s war against Ukraine.

And if you are a consumer of the news, please share the message of this letter widely. There is no Nazi government for Moscow to root out in Kyiv. There has been no genocide of the Russian people in Ukraine. And Russian troops are not on a liberation mission. After the bloody 20th century, we should all have built enough discernment to know that war is not peace, slavery is not freedom, and ignorance offers strength only to autocratic megalomaniacs who seek to exploit it for their personal agendas.

Yad Vashem condemns comparison of Holocaust to Ukraine conflict

The Yad Vashem Holocaust Research Center on Sunday condemned comparisons to the Holocaust for propaganda purposes surrounding Russia's military invasion of Ukraine.

In a series of Twitter posts, Yad Vashem chair Dani Dayan wrote, "Yad Vashem deplores the Russian invasion of Ukraine, which will inevitably lead to dire consequences. We fear in particular for the wellbeing of innocent civilians and deplore any deliberate endangerment of their safety.

"Moreover, the propagandist discourse accompanying the current hostilities is saturated with irresponsible statements and completely inaccurate comparisons with Nazi ideology and actions before and during the Holocaust. Yad Vashem condemns this trivialization and distortion of the historical facts of the Holocaust."

The US Holocaust Memorial and Museum on Thursday condemned Russia's invasion of Ukraine, saying that Russian President Vladimir Putin had "misrepresented and misappropriated Holocaust history."

Putin justified the invasion of Ukraine by calling it a military operation to "de-Nazify" the country, despite its democratically elected Jewish president Volodymyr Zelenskyy, who has many relatives who were killed in the Holocaust.

An estimated 1.5 million Jews were killed in Ukraine by Nazi mobile units called Einsatzgruppen who shot their victims at close range in what is described as the "Holocaust by Bullets."

Sharansky: Israel must take ‘a clear moral stand’ against Putin over Ukraine

Natan Sharansky, the former prisoner of Zion, human rights activist, Israeli government minister and Jewish Agency chief, urged Israel to take "a clear moral stand" against Russian President Putin's assault on Ukraine.

Sharansky, who was born in what is now Donetsk, Ukraine, called Putin's attack a challenge to "all the basic principles of the free world." "It's not cowardice for Israel to seek to avoid irritating Putin. We are in a situation where, because of the weakness of the West, Putin holds the keys to the skies in our area. To protect ourselves from Iran, from the military bases Iran would establish [directly across Israel's borders], we need good ties with Russia."

Putin "is seeking to change the entire post-World War II order in which your stronger neighbor cannot take away your freedom. To challenge the entire free world. He believes that he is the only one in the world ready to use force, and that he will restore historic Russian dominance." The only thing that can stop him "is the absolute solidarity of the free world."

"There are genuine considerations of realpolitik. Israel has very serious arguments about why it needs to be careful. I hope it takes a clear position in spite of that."

Israel to condemn Russia's invasion of Ukraine at UNGA - Lapid

Israel will cosponsor a United States and Albanian resolution condemning the Russian invasion of Ukraine at the UN General Assembly that will be held Monday in New York, Foreign Minister Yair Lapid said.

“Israel was and will be on the right side of history,” Lapid said. “These are our values. Our alliance is with the US.”

At the same time, Lapid says that “even our American allies realize we have to be careful [because] Russia is the significant military force in Syria.”

Coordination with Russia “helps in our determined struggle against Iranian entrenchment.”

Still, Lapid said Israel will join the UNGA resolution against Russia and will be part of the international effort to provide humanitarian aid to Ukrainians.

He spoke after Israel ignored a US request to sign onto a resolution condemning Russia that failed to pass the UNSC on Friday.

Kyiv was surprised that Israel did not sponsor last week’s UN Security Council resolution against Russia, in light of its planned support for the UN General Assembly resolution on Monday, a Ukrainian diplomatic source said.

Monday's emergency special session marks only the 11th time in United Nations history that such a meeting has been called.

This great review for my "Protocols" book by Daled Amos captures it perfectly

Bennett Ruda (Daled Amos) wrote a review of my book "Protocols: Exposing Modern Antisemitism" in The Jewish Press that is truly great. Not only because he appears to love my book, which I of course appreciate, but his review captures the essence of my book beautifully.

Read his review, and then order the book! (And then write reviews on Amazon!)

_______________________________________

In his introduction to his new book, Protocols: Exposing Modern Antisemitism, Elder of Ziyon writes about the reason for the image of Rashi that appears on his website:

Rashi earned fame for his encyclopedic knowledge as well as his uncanny ability to explain texts clearly and concisely...He is a role model for my writing...

Anyone who is familiar with the Elder of Ziyon website can attest to the breadth of information available there and the clarity with which it is presented. The same is true as well in this new book, based on articles he has written. But make no mistake -- this is more than a collection of "Elder of Ziyon's Greatest Hits." The 51 articles in the 350-plus pages form a coherent whole which delve into five distinct areas:

Modern antisemitism
International law
The experts get it wrong
The dishonesty of Israel's demonizers
The NGO jihad against Israel

Once you read the first article, you see that beyond having a breadth of knowledge and clarity of presentation, Elder of Ziyon is innovative too.

In A new, better definition of antisemitism, he discusses the need to first define antisemitism before one can address it, and traces the attempts to do just that. He starts with Natan Sharansky's 3D test of demonization, double standards and delegitimization. He then proceeds to the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) definition, which has become the most accepted. Elder of Ziyon also addresses, and critiques, the watered-down definitions suggested by the Jerusalem Declaration on Antisemitism and the Nexus Task Force.

And then he offers his own definition:

Why bother with another definition of antisemitism?

For one thing, his definition makes clear that "denigration" -- i.e. unfair criticism -- as opposed to legitimate criticism, is antisemitic. This clearly counters those who claim that antisemitism is being defined in order to prevent all criticism of Israel.

But more than that:

The "malicious lies" clause is crucial. This covers not only Holocaust denial but all sorts of clearly antisemitic lies about Jewish history, such as the Khazar origin myth that Ashkenazic Jews are not really Jewish; that Jews have no historic ties to Jerusalem; or that Zionists collaborated with the Nazis. The other definitions do not cover these lies...This is perhaps the biggest shortcoming of the other definitions.

Innovative.

Elder of Ziyon's fresh insights are evident throughout his book. For example, in the section on international law.

Let's face it. Not everyone has the time or the patience to investigate claims that Israel is in breach of international law or to plow through the lengthy legal reports that purport to prove that Israel is guilty of major violations. The articles in this section are not only typically clear and concise, but along the way they also point out aspects of international law that are not commonly brought up.

In his introduction to the chapter, Elder of Ziyon points out:

The Fourth Geneva Convention protects civilians in times of war -- but it balances those protections with protections for armies, too.

Anti-Zionists pretend the conflict is about Palestinian human rights. It isn't. It is about everybody's human rights and balancing competing rights. [emphasis added]

When was the last time anyone pointed out that the Geneva Convention protects the armies as well as the civilians?

How does this insight play out in this chapter? Check out some of the articles:

The article on The principle of distinction notes that the Convention clearly states that military attacks must be limited to military targets. This we know. We also know that this issue is brought up against Israel whenever there is collateral damage when Israel responds to Hamas terrorist attacks.

What might not be generally known is that when this particular article in the Geneva Convention was ratified, a number of countries made a point to clarify that the limitation on military attacks did not make an army responsible for collateral damage. In other words, international law allows an army to attack a military target even if there are some civilians there.

Elder of Ziyon quotes both the Military Manual of the Netherlands and Sweden's International Humanitarian Law manual that agree the decision on what constitutes a valid military target is up the military commander. And the US Naval Handbook makes clear:

the commander must also consider the safety of his or her own troops.

But what about human rights in this equation?

The chapter on The principle of proportionality quotes the Prosecutor of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia that states the obvious, that a human rights lawyer and an experienced military commander would not value a military advantage and the injury to non-combatants in the same way -- and then concludes that the decision to evaluate those values and weigh them against each other is up to the military commander.

When Israel is put under a microscope, the validity of such an approach is usually ignored.

The chapter Human shields, hostage-taking, and Human Rights Watch provides an opportunity to debunk both The New York Times and Ken Roth of HRW.

Regarding the Hamas use of human shields, the New York Times claims that the legal definition of a human shield under international law only applies when civilians are forced to stay in the area under attack. The International Committee of the Red Cross proves The New York Times wrong, defining even the exploitation of an area of civilians as a breach of international law. The New York Times is basing itself on Ken Roth's error, but examples of other condemnations of human shields by HRW are given to illustrate that the normal definition is used for other countries and the application of force to define humans shields is only required when Israel is defending itself.

Speaking of Hamas, the chapter Hamas violations of international law points out that Hamas rockets into Israel are more than rockets aimed at civilians. Because there is no military advantage to be gained, those attacks are by definition disproportionate -- a fact never raised by HRW, which limits its criticisms of Hamas to mentioning rockets in general, ignoring 19 other kinds of violations of international law that Elder of Ziyon suggests Hamas terrorists are guilty of.

The chapter on The "right of return" myth quotes General Assembly resolution 194 which supposedly supports the right of Palestinian Arabs to return to their homes. In the course of making various points in debunking this claim, Elder of Ziyon notes a double standard, in that the resolution does not single out Arabs as the sole beneficiaries of this right:

Yet no one who supports "return" says Jews have the right to return to the places they lived across the Green Line, whether in Jerusalem or Gush Etzion.

Among the points he makes in Amnesty, HRW and the "right of return" for descendants, he notes that despite their apparent concern for Palestinian Arab refugees,

Amnesty and HRW have never called on Arab nations to naturalize Palestinians who have lived in their countries for over seven decades.

Terrorism is not legal "resistance" debunks in just 4 and a half pages the Hamas claim that their acts of terrorism are permitted under international law, quoting both a UN Security Council resolution -- binding under Chapter 7 -- and a clear statement by the UN Secretary General that the occupation does not justify targeting and killing civilians.

The section on The experts get it wrong has a timely article on Linkage turned on its head: the Abraham Accords addressing the long-held theory that once Israel gives into Palestinian demands and there will be peace in the region. Elder of Ziyon points out:

The discredited linkage theory has been turned on its head. Instead of claiming the Palestinian issue is the key to solving all Middle East problems, now the problem is in solving other Middle East problems without giving the Palestinians veto power over what Israel does with other Muslim states.

To see the accuracy of this observation, one need only to read about NY Rep. Jamaal Bowman's recent announcement that he was withdrawing his support for the Abraham Accords because he claims they "isolate" Palestinian Arabs.

The section on The dishonesty of Israel's demonizers has articles taking on Peter Beinart's propaganda that denies to Israel rights while extending them to Palestinian Arabs, Edward Said's admitted revulsion at Eleanor Roosevelt and Martin Luther King, Jr, Judith Butler's claim that Moses was Egyptian and therefore an Arab, and Joseph Massad's demand that Arab countries given Palestinian Arabs unlimited and unconditional support.

The last section, The NGO jihad against Israel, has an article on Oxfam's errors in math and basic agriculture in its claim that Israel is destroying Palestinian Arab olive trees. There are articles on Amnesty International's lack of expertise in military matters in minimizing Hamas terrorism, its annoyance at Israeli pride in its 3,000 year history and its support for a children's book that is supposed to illustrate freedom of religion but seems instead to teach children to hate Jews.

Then there is HRW.

In one article, Elder of Ziyon takes apart their report on last years war between Israel and Hamas. He gives examples not only of HRW bias, but also outright mistakes in their evaluations and conclusions.

In the other article, he tackles their report claiming that Israel is guilty of apartheid. He looks at 3 legal definitions of apartheid, shows how HRW is forced to cobble together its own brand new definition, and notes a part of one of those definitions which HRW omitted that casts doubt on the definition itself.

The HRW report attempts to strengthen its argument with graphic examples, using drawings of Israelis and Arabs to illustrate what it claims are differences in basic rights. After giving counter examples to debunk those arguments, Elder of Ziyon notes something odd about the pictures HRW uses:

The Jews all have lighter skin. The Jews have light, straight hair. The Palestinians have darker skin and wavy/curly hair.

He points out that Israelis are portrayed as 'white,' which in today's volatile age of reaction against 'white supremacy' sends a distinct, if subliminal message.

In his conclusion, Elder of Ziyon writes that modern antisemitism is more than just an issue with the Right:

Not all antisemitism involves violence. Most antisemitism manifests as insults, stereotyping, derogatory language, incitement and demonization. And nowadays, the bulk of that kind of antisemitism comes from the socialist Left.

...The same hate that animates the physical attacks on Jews lies behind the op-eds, NGO reports, and demonstrations that paint the Jewish state as uniquely evil.

Protocols: Exposing Modern Antisemitism, with its short and concise chapters, is an informative book to read. But it also demonstrates in chapter after chapter that many of the claims against Israel by supposed objective authorities is in reality biased and error-ridden demonization. That makes it a useful reference, since we know that these antisemitic attacks are not going stop.

Elder of Ziyon's book is one of the tools that enable us to see these attacks for what they are -- and what they aren't.

Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism today at Amazon!

Emad Moussa writes in The New Arab about how wonderful the Palestinian penchant for chanting at demonstrations is, and he claims that "from the river to the sea" is not at all genocidal, no way:

“From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free”: An anti-Semitic Hamas slogan that warrants police action, according to UK’s Secretary of State for Education Nadhim Zahawi. A “call to destroy Israel,” say pro-Israel groups.

But to Palestinians and their supporters, the accusations are politically motivated and unjust. The chant has existed long before Hamas was established and in fact, is as old as the Palestinian struggle against Zionism.

It is present in several Palestinian folklore and revolutionary songs and has multiple Arabic derivations, most common of which are: min el-maiyeh lel mayieh (from the water to the water – the wording of which refers to the Mediterranean Sea and the River Jordan).

The phrase is deeply cultural and closely related to the formation of Palestinian identity and peoplehood – it emphasises the connection to the land, calls for decolonisation, freedom, and an end to the apartheid regime in Palestine, replaced with a unitary civic state with equal rights for everyone.

But in Palestine, as the controversy around the chant indicates, it is hard to separate culture from the political sphere within which it operates. Because this sphere is over-dominant and overarching, it has produced equally dominant cultural expressions and artefacts to challenge the occurring power structure.

Especially visible among these cultural expressions is chanting.

He then goes on to describe how incredibly important chanting is to Palestinian culture.

I could not verify the expression "min el-maiyeh lel mayieh" as being used before the "river to the sea" chant. I'm no expert, but if it was true, I would expect to see it somewhere on the Web in that context (the closest I could find was Arabic textbooks describing the water cycle with a variant of this.)

But the most interesting piece of this revisionist article is that it ignores other antisemitic chants that have been heard at anti-Israel rallies for decades.

The most famous is, of course, "Khaybar Khaybar, ya yahud, Jaish Muhammad, sa yahud" or "Jews, remember Khaybar, the army of Muhammad is returning". It is a call to genocide of Jews as Mohammed massacred them in Khaybar.

There are also chants of "Itbach al-Yahud" - slaughter the Jews - heard in rallies, which pre-dates Israel.

Once we are talking history, "Al Yahud Kelabna," - "The Jews are our dogs" - has been an Arab and Palestinian Arab chant for over a century.

This wonderful Palestinian tradition of chanting, so movingly described as an essential part of Palestinian culture by Moussa, has spawned an equally inspiring tradition of antisemitic chants in English:

"Long live the intifada"

"There is only one solution - intifada revolution"

"Hey hey, ho ho, Zionists have got to go"

“With fire and blood, we will liberate Palestine!”

And the popular European chant, "Hamas, Hamas, Jews to the gas"

For some reason, this article that rhapsodizes about the importance of chants to Palestinian culture, which argues that they are completely innocuous and misunderstood by the racist West, completely missed these other examples of Palestinian and pro-Palestinian chants. Must have been an oversight.

(h/t JW)

Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism today at Amazon!

Whenever Israel is forced to defend itself from Hamas rockets, the media falls over itself to show the "human face" of the "horrors of war" - with detailed descriptions of how Palestinian civilians have died.

Sometimes these civilians aren't really civilians and are actually militants.

Most often they were used as human shields, with Palestinian terror groups hiding behind them in (and under) apartments. I've documented literally hundreds of cases of Israel targeting Hamas and Islamic Jihad leaders and the victims are either their relatives or people hosted in their houses.

Some of the victims are killed by terrorist rockets themselves, but the media blames Israel.

Occasionally, the victims appear indeed to have been the victims of a tragic mistake that occurs during war.

The media, pretending to care so much about the innocents, goes into detail on all of these victims. THe media always has a reason to give these details to their audience, and they always have a reason to avoid giving any context of how Hamas cynically makes it appear as if Israel was targeting children - a ludicrous and slanderous charge.

Yet here we are days into a war where over a hundred civilians have been killed in Ukraine (AP says over 350.) If you dig hard, you can find out details about how they were killed.

But there is none of the "victim porn" that Arab and Western media revel in when they can blame Israel.

All the excuses that they use to highlight the victims in Gaza apply a hundredfold more to Ukraine - yet the stories of the civilian victims, some horrific, are buried and difficult to find. Besides this BBC article, how many have you seen? There is no "Gaza Ministry of Health" to give precise-sounding statistics to be parroted by reporters.

It isn't as if there aren't lots of reporters on the ground in Kyiv and elsewhere.

The media are shown to be hypocrites by their disinterest in offering details of anyone killed when Jews cannot be blamed.

Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism today at Amazon!

Not Russia. Not Iran. Ilhan Omar only supports sanctions against - Israel.

Representative Ilhan Omar issued a statement earlier this month where she said she was against sanctioning Russia over its aggressive moves towards Ukraine in a proposed Ukraine defense bill:

The proposed legislative solution to this crisis, escalates the conflict without deterring it effectively. With a very soft trigger, it vaults Ukraine overnight into the third highest recipient of U.S. security assistance and weapons sales in the world. The consequences of flooding Ukraine with half a billion dollars in American weapons, likely not limited to just military-specific equipment but also including small arms and ammo, are unpredictable and likely disastrous. It also threatens unbelievably broad and draconian sanctions that will utterly devastate the Russian economy, likely doing very little to deter Putin’s aggression while causing immense suffering among ordinary Russian civilians who did not choose this.

When Turkey invaded Syria, she was against sanctions then as well, and included sanctions against Iran and Venezuela in her denunciation:

In the White House announcement on Oct. 14 of sanctions on Turkey, Trump said, “I am fully prepared to swiftly destroy Turkey’s economy if Turkish leaders continue down this dangerous and destructive path.”
This is an unmistakable echo of the failed U.S. strategy of “maximum pressure” on Iran and Venezuela. And just as with those two countries, it would be a humanitarian and geopolitical disaster.

Her Foreign Policy page shows that she is against sanctions as a general rule:

I am pushing to end the use of sanctions and embargoes as a means of punishment and control, and instead focus instead on diplomatic solutions with a long-term strategic vision.

Sounds like a principled, consistent position, right?

Except that Omar supports the BDS movement and even planned to introduce a pro-BDS bill in Congress.

And the "S" of BDS stands for "Sanctions."

It seems that she is against sanctions for the worst human rights violators in the world, the states that invade other countries, the ones who treat their own citizens with contempt. But the only state she supports sanctions for is the only one that has a majority Jewish population.

Hmmm.

(h/t iTi)

Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism today at Amazon!

02/27 Links: International law was supposed to protect Ukraine — it failed; What Israel Must Learn From Ukraine’s War; Israel helped Lebanese, Syrian citizens reach Ukraine border

From Ian:

Seth Frantzman: International law was supposed to protect Ukraine — it failed

The lessons of appeasement led to democracies being more forthright in their demands that countries adhere to these norms. The Cold War, however, brought with a litany of new abuses and because the world was divided it was hard for countries to agree on international norms and enforcement. The concepts laid down by US President George H.W Bush during the Gulf war were designed to resurrect the rules-based international order.

Although this international order has not been ideal, there have been attempts to make it work. That means the US intervened in the Balkans in the 1990s to stop ethnic cleansing. The US stumbled during the global war on terror, but the pretense of international law remained. In fact it is Russia that has often voices support for these norms in places like Syria, demanding the US leave Syria and claiming that it is Russia that stands by international norms, like soviergnn states and such concepts.

Now Russia has torn up that rule book in an unprovoked attack on Ukraine. Russia didn’t set any kind of ultimatum or red line before the attack. The excuse that Russia was concerned about NATO expansion holds no water, because Russia didn’t even try diplomacy with Ukraine. Russia simply started bombing without any warning or pretense of why it was launch an attack.

This shows that Russia didn’t feel a need to justify this attack. It didn’t distribute talking points before the war to its media and embassies. It didn’t even bother to try to explain the conflict. It doesn’t have regular press updates. This is because Russia knows it was violated international norms.

The problem for Ukraine was that these norms were supposed to protect Ukrainians. The western countries that talk tough on sanctions and US vows about “unprecedented” sanctions still continue to ring hollow. This is because the unprecedented actions are not yet being fully taken. The US especially seems keen to continue to work with Russia on energy issues and the Iran deal. That means this war casts shadows over enforcement of any issues relating to Iran. The story of “snap back” sanctions on Iran was largely a myth. Iran can keep on enriching uranium and nothing will be done.

Unfortunately for Ukraine the same letdown of relying on western democracies had led to war today, much as it did in the 1930s. Whether or not the west can step up and give Russia some real repercussions will be a key to seeing if this attack on Ukraine has a result that sends a message to others not to try the same thing.

Gerald Steinberg: What Israel Must Learn From Ukraine’s War

The first lesson to be learned (or relearned) from Russia’s invasion of Ukraine is that the absence of deterrence can be fatal for any nation. The bravery and determination displayed by the leaders and citizens of Ukraine are impressive, but have not prevented Putin’s onslaught. In the West — mainly the United States and NATO — good intentions and strong words of support notwithstanding, the lack of a credible deterrent to dissuade Putin was clearly evident, including to the Kremlin.

Deterrence of a powerful and determined opponent is inherently complex and uncertain. During the Cold War, strategists agonized over the best means of preventing Moscow from challenging and weakening American power and the NATO alliance, including MAD — mutual assured destruction. But when the Soviet state collapsed, and the end of history was declared, deterrence was largely forgotten, allowing Putin to build up his forces without interference. By the time the United States and NATO woke up to the threat, Russia had full control.

For Israel, the events in Ukraine are an important reality check. Israelis recognize that no outside power, not even the United States, can be relied on to guarantee survival in the face of a powerful threat. In 1948, after defeating the combined Arab attack at great cost, David Ben-Gurion understood the need for the tiny Jewish state to be capable of defending itself against future threats, as was demonstrated in 1967. Later, having America as an ally added to Israel’s security, but did not replace the centrality of self-reliance.

As a result, for 74 years, Ben-Gurion, his successors and Israel’s security establishment have continued to prioritize strategic deterrence. The best means of preventing an attack is by convincing enemies that the response will be swift and intolerable, and that in threatening Israel’s survival, their own existence would be at stake.

However, in recent years, lapses in deterrence have been cause for concern and require strengthening and reinforcement. Specifically, in the face of ongoing threats from the Iranian regime and its proxies, and against Hamas in Gaza, Israeli responses fall short. Against threats to wipe “the Zionist entity” off the map, a series of pinpoint and anonymous attacks attributed to the Mossad have not stopped Tehran’s efforts to acquire nuclear weapons. And in Lebanon, under the eyes of the United Nations and the so-called international community, Hezbollah acquired and deployed tens of thousands of rockets and missiles stored in civilian areas, and aimed at the Israeli population. This force is the forward arm of the Iranian threat.

Michael Oren: Israel navigating perilous diplomatic terrain in Ukraine

Finally, perhaps it's also fitting to ask: Why is Israel so afraid of the Russian military presence in Syria? After all, this force consists of some 4,000 troops and a few dozen planes. Does our seemingly constant projection of trepidation damage our image and deterrence capabilities in the region?

It's important to note here that despite our repeated requests, Moscow has chosen to continue selling some of the most advanced weapons systems in the world to our enemies. Hezbollah in Lebanon and even Hamas in Gaza are equipped with Russian weapons, and Russia built the nuclear plant in Bushehr, Iran, and has promised to build another eight in the Islamic republic.

As stated, navigating this environment is exceedingly perilous and requires Israel to tread very lightly. On one hand, it must keep as many channels with Russian President Vladimir Putin open and must continue caring for the welfare of Ukrainian and Russian Jewry, including the possibility of a mass absorption of immigrants.

On the other hand, Israel mustn't remain silent – not in the face of the Ukrainian people's courageous fight, which could be reminiscent of the dogged resistance to Soviet occupation after World War Two; and not in the face of public opinion in the US, our most important ally. Israel should continue offering its services as a mediator and continue providing humanitarian and medical support to the Ukrainian people. We should also uphold our purpose as a strong and ethical Jewish state.

Arab media: Israel "exploiting" Ukraine to save Jews. But they won't report that Israel is helping Arabs from enemy countries escape, too.

Arab media is now permeated with stories like this healine from Al Jazeera:

Adopting the employment of wars to promote settlement... An Israeli emergency plan aims to bring in 8,000 Jews from Ukraine.

Since the emergence of the Zionist movement, the Israelis have exploited wars and conflicts in Europe, Africa and various parts of the world to recruit hundreds of thousands of Jews to replace the Palestinians.

Because saving Jewish refugees is a war crime, or something.

But they won't report on this:

Israeli diplomats have been assisting Lebanese, Syrian and Egyptian citizens to evacuate from Ukraine, transporting them from the war-torn nation alongside Israeli refugees, the Foreign Ministry confirmed on Sunday.

A spokesman for the ministry stated that citizens of several regional states, including those currently in a state of war with Israel had boarded a bus organized by Israeli diplomats on the Polish side of the border and that the embassy is also ready to “help Israeli residents from East Jerusalem.”

Israeli Ambassador Michael Brodsky said that there were no conditions on Israeli aid to residents of Arab states, telling Haaretz by phone from Poland on Sunday afternoon that any assistance rendered was “purely humanitarian.”

Another Haaretz reporter, Fadi Amun, tweeted:

A Lebanese citizen in #Ukraine with a group of Arab Israelis told me he's not getting help to escape. So an Israeli official now said in response: "We have no problem helping Lebanese or any other Arab citizens as well. He can join the Israeli bus"
A spokesman of @IsraelHebrew also confirms to me "there are Lebanese, Syrian and Egyptian citizens on the Israeli bus, some of them crossed the border of #Ukraine as refugees. The embassy also help Israeli residents from East Jerusalem"

Amun spoke to a Lebanese student who complained that the Lebanese embassy was not doing enough to get its citizens out of Ukraine, and Israel is doing more for Lebanese than Lebanon is.

It is especially notable that Lebanon and Syria are not exactly on the fence about signing peace treaties with Israel. These aren't goodwill gestures to promote a diplomatic solution. This is purely altruistic.

It will be interesting to see how this gets reported in the media of friendly Arab countries, and the responses.

(h/t Yoel)

Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism today at Amazon!

Kuwaiti columnist suspended for friendly tweets to an Israeli

Kuwaiti newspaper Al Qabas announced yesterday that it had fired one of its opinion columnists for his support of treating Israelis as normal people.

The newspaper tweeted, "Al-Qabas affirms its firm and steadfast stance towards the crimes of the miserable Zionist enemy, and its full support for the valiant Palestinian resistance. And it announces the suspension of one of the opinion writers who called for normalization with the Zionist enemy, on his social media accounts."

The person suspended was Jassim al-Juraid.

On February 20, Israeli journalist and Arab expert Edy Cohen tweeted that the self-declared "chief rabbi" of Saudi Arabia, Yaakov Herzog, invited Jews worldwide to spend Passover in the Kingdom, and that matzoh would be available. Cohen said that he hoped Jews worldwide would come and get to know Saudi Arabia, "the kingdom of peace and coexistence," and said,"God willing, my family and I will try to join."

In response, Kuwaiti writer Jassim al-Juraid tweeted, "Happy with this progress in Saudi Arabia, and the invitation to our Jewish friends there. Congratulations my friend, hope to see you soon in Kuwait🤝🏼🌹"

When some Kuwaitis complained, al-Juraid doubled down, saying to Cohen, "My friend @EdyCohen: They think the pressure of these people will stop our brotherly journalistic relationship. You and the honorable family have served with love and affection."

His friendly tweets to Cohen are what led to his suspension.

Reaction to the suspension are mixed. Many are supporting the suspension, including Palestinians, and even including the Palestinian Media Forum, which may be the only journalist group in the world to openly oppose freedom of speech. Many Kuwaitis agree with the suspension, saying that "Palestine is a red line." On the other hand, other Kuwaitis oppose the move, with one academic quote-tweeting, "if Palestine is a red line, then freedoms for us as Kuwaitis are a thousand red lines."

Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism today at Amazon!

It had to happen: Arabs blaming Jews for Ukraine war

It was only a matter of time before a conspiracy theory blaming Jews for the situation in Ukraine would pop up.

This one was published in Al Wafd, an Egyptian newspaper, anbd written by Gamal Roshdy.

It is a little hard to follow the logic, but here's how it begins:

All the wars, conflicts and epidemics in the world, since before the First World War until now, are arranged and manufactured by global Zionism: the fall of the British Empire on which the sun did not set, and the emergence of America as a superpower, all of this is in a great Zionist arrangement.

The goal is the alleged dream of the “Greater Kingdom of Israel from the Euphrates to the Gulf,” and that kingdom, according to its plan, is a unified government that rules the world under the umbrella of a new religion called “Abrahamic” within an economic globalization with one currency and one military with one army.

Now the dream is approaching, for that Zionist goal does not require a culture of freedom and democracy in which the West lives, because that culture contradicts the approach of the goal of the unified government that requires the dictatorship of decision-making, and since it aims at a unified religion, army and economy within a unified political administration, here several steps must be taken.

First, elimination of the Christian West by igniting a major war between them, to destroy everything, so that the theory of freedoms and democracy with all their military, economic and political derivatives disappear, so that the leaders of the Zionist scheme can form a unified government according to what is planned.

In short, Jews have been scheming to take over the world for a long time.

Things get convoluted after that. Israel is apparently preparing to dump the US and ally with China, the next superpower, which it will control as well. And India, which supports the "Abrahamic religion," is on board as well.

What about Ukraine? Well, since the government of Ukraine is dominated by Jews, clearly they were doing the Zionist plan. Russia has resisted the Zionist infiltration, so in this narrative, Russians are the good guys.

Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism today at Amazon!