Dog whistle politics is defined as the use of certain code words or phrases that are designed to be understood by only a small section of the populace. Generally speaking, these are phrases that have special meaning to that subsection entirely independent of its meaning to others, and represent a particularly insidious use of loaded language.
In the wake of the Ilhan Omar tweet about AIPAC, I decided to make a list of antisemitic dog whistles. All of these words may be used legitimately, of course, but they also have special meanings to antisemites and in some contexts, to some audiences, they mean something far more hateful than the words or phrases themselves.
This list applies both to people on the left and the right, although they tend to use different dog-whistles, so some of these are surprising to some.
Adelson
AIPAC
Cultural Marxists
Dual loyalty
Elite
-Cultural Elite
-Hollywood Elite
Globalist
Hasbara
International bankers
Israel Lobby/Jewish Lobby
Likud
Neocon
New York values
Rothschilds
Settler
Shekels
Soros
Talmudic
White Jews
Zionist
Some people on Twitter think "Benjamins" qualifies, since it is a Jewish name as well as referring to a hundred dollar bill. I'm not convinced - although that could change as a result of Omar's tweet.
These is not to be mixed up with words like "goyim" or "Shlomos" which hardly ever have a double meaning when used nowadays. They aren't dog whistles - they are whistles.
Certainly words like "ZioNazi" and "kike" are not dog whistles, but pure antisemitism.
This list, though, seems a pretty good representation of words that can cause hate while hiding in plain sight. The responses in social media to when they are used, or looking up how they are used in antisemitic neo-Nazi websites, gives one a good idea that these words are not always innocent.
We have lots of ideas, but we need more resources to be even more effective. Please donate today to help get the message out and to help defend Israel.
The ACLU has long argued that although private parties have the right to refuse to do business with people for ideological reasons, the government need not fund such conduct. “Taxpayer dollars must not fund discrimination” carried out by private parties, the ACLU states in its issue brief on government-funded discrimination. It has successfully pushed measures banning the federal government from contracting with companies that engage in certain boycotts. And it “strongly” supported legislation that would bar federal funds from being used by states in contracts with companies that engage in boycotts.
Identity politics is the key to understanding the ACLU’s apparent change of heart. The antiboycott laws the ACLU has defended are meant to protect gays and lesbians, an identity group they favor. The ACLU acknowledges that in many states it is “legal to fire or refuse to hire someone based on their sexual orientation,” but argues that companies that do so “must not be allowed to do so with taxpayer dollars.” It inexplicably ignores that the logic of those antiboycott laws applies equally to Israel.
The ACLU may think that refusing to do business with people because of their sexuality is immoral while refusing to do business with people connected with Israel is a blow for justice. That’s an intelligible political position, but it’s lousy First Amendment jurisprudence. First Amendment protections are the same regardless of what one thinks of the underlying conduct.
I played a role in developing the state anti-BDS laws, submitting testimony to legislatures and advising private groups that supported the measures. To avoid any constitutional doubts, I stuck to the model of antiboycott laws that the ACLU supports, comfortable in the knowledge that their constitutionality was unquestioned. I underestimated how much changes when sexual identity is replaced with Israeli identity.
There is more at stake here than hypocrisy. The ACLU’s enthusiasm for Israel boycotts has led it to take legal positions that threaten to undermine the antidiscrimination norms it has worked for decades to achieve. Now it is prepared to risk legal protections for sexual minorities for the sake of creating a constitutional right to boycott Jews. The ACLU probably hopes to have it both ways, arguing that boycotts of Israelis are “political” and boycotts of gays and lesbians are just mean. But courts won’t maintain one standard for boycotts of progressives’ favored targets and another standard for everyone else.
Read my new op-ed in @WSJ: "The ACLU opposes laws against boycotting Israel, even though the laws are patterned after those that protect gays and lesbians" https://t.co/PyOpRb4FJF via @WSJOpinion
It is rare for mention of Jews of Arab countries to penetrate the mainstream international media, let alone for a voice in the maligned Israeli government to make itself heard. This piece in Newsweek by the minister of social equality, Gila Gamliel, bucks both trends. Gamliel recently launched a new app for uploading the stories of Jews from Arab countries to an oral history website, Seeing the Voices.
Gila Gamliel: story with us for good
Like most things, this history has its good and its bad periods; peaceful neighborly relations were followed by economic discrimination and then deadly violence as thousands of Jews were murdered in violent rioting caused by blood libels and false accusations.
My father Yosef escaped Yemen at the age of 10, and came to Israel as an orphan, where he was adopted by a Polish Jewish family. My mother Aliza came from Libya to Israel at the age of 6, the oldest of 12 brothers and sisters.
Aliza and Yosef were just two people among the 850,000 other Jews from Arab countries who were forced to leave their homes.
For seven decades, the story of the Jews from the Arab countries—both the good and the bad—was left largely untold both in Israel and around the world.
Now as a Minister in the Government of Israel, I am working to preserve the rich cultural history of our parents and grandparents from the Arab world.
We’ve just launched an app allowing Israeli citizens to document the testimony of family members and friends; we’ve promoted research on this history by academics and historians, we have marked an annual commemoration of the Jewish communities from the Arab countries; and we’ve made sure this history is in our classroom schoolbooks.
I can say with satisfaction that this important part of history is now with us for good.
It is a critical part of the story of the Jewish people who over centuries of steadfast determination managed to maintain their identity and religion, along with the dream of one day returning to the Holy Land.
President Reuven Rivlin flew to Cyprus Tuesday to mark 70 years since the closure of British detention camps on the island for Jews trying to reach Palestine after World War II.
He was to visit a monument in Nicosia dedicated to the 2,200 children of Holocaust survivors who were born in British colonial camps there between 1946 and 1949.
Rivlin also held talks with Cyprus President Nicos Anastasiades.
Cyprus and Israel aim to upgrade relations, “especially on energy, security, economy, tourism, research and innovation,” tweeted Anastasiades.
Rivlin said cooperation between Israel and Cyprus on intelligence, security and terror prevention has made the Mediterranean “much, much safer.”
After the talks Tuesday with Anastasiades, he said Israeli-Cypriot security ties “have never been better” with the two countries’ navies and commando units sharing “space, knowledge and experience.”
He added that the focus of the neighbors’ strategic partnership, which includes Greece, is developing the East Med gas pipeline that “could be one of the greatest underwater projects in the world.”
The envisioned pipeline would carry natural gas from deposits in the eastern Mediterranean to Europe via Greece and Italy.
I also tweeted this from Wikipedia about the different types of fake apologies out there ("fauxpologies") that Ilhan Omar's apology fit the definitions of:
Tactical apology—when a person accused of wrongdoing offers an apology that is rhetorical and strategic—and not necessarily heartfelt
Explanation apology—when a person accused of wrongdoing offers an apology that is merely a gesture that is meant to counter an accusation of wrongdoing. In fact, it may be used to defend the actions of the accused
Formalistic apology—when a person accused of wrongdoing offers an apology after being admonished to do so by an authority figure—who may also be the individual who suffered the wrongdoing
All of them can be seen in her "apology," as well as an additional one I would call the "Deflection Apology":
Deflection apology - when a person accused off wrongdoing offers an apology but tried to change the subject by saying that others do the same or are worse.
We have lots of ideas, but we need more resources to be even more effective. Please donate today to help get the message out and to help defend Israel.
Michelle Goldberg, who most recently defended anti-Zionism and then BDS in "as-a-Jew" op-eds in the New York Times, tackles Rep. Ilhan Omar's tweets, and she is not happy.
Not because it normalizes antisemitism in the US. Not because it was disgusting on its own merits. Not because it started an avalanche of antisemitic support on Twitter and brought left-wing Jew haters out of the woodwork.
No, Goldberg zeroes in on what she considers to be the real problem with Omar's tweet - that it empowers Republicans.
Excerpts:
Left-wing anti-Semitism is a gift to the right.
Consciously or not, Omar invoked a poisonous anti-Semitic narrative about Jews using their money to manipulate global affairs. ...Her words were a gift to Republicans, who seek to divide the Democrats over Israel, even as their president traffics in anti-Semitic imagery and stereotypes.The knives were out for Omar and she ran right into them.
Omar herself has been subject to vicious Islamophobic smears, and has also come under attack for supporting the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement, which seeks to use economic pressure to secure Palestinian rights. Perhaps such criticism is why she’s sometimes seemed unwilling or unable to distinguish between disingenuous political pile-ons and good-faith calls to respect Jewish sensitivities. But whether from carelessness or callousness, her weekend tweets damaged her political allies and squandered some of her own hard-won power.
Goldberg is doing everything she can to minimize Ilhan's statement.
Worse, she disgustingly provides a link to an anti-Israel organization which came out with a self-serving definition of antisemitism that is mostly centered on Protocols of the Elders of Zion-type Jew-hatred, ignoring of course the antisemitism that is associated with demonizing and wanting the destruction of the Jewish state, or evilly comparing Israel to Nazi Germany and apartheid South Africa. The essay she links to is obsessed with "Ashkenazi dominance" and supposed white Jewish racism towards Mizrahi Jews.
Her link includes this bigoted piece of crap:
In effect, Goldberg is promoting that kind of antisemitism where "white Jews" are evil colonizers and racists.
Goldberg does refute the idea that AIPAC is influencing Americans to support Israel, noting that much support comes from Americans who she considers to be bigots:
I certainly have no problem with denunciations of Aipac, which plays a malign role in pushing American policy in the Middle East to the right. [AIPAC has been supportive of the two state solution for a long time now and plenty of moderate Democrats support AIPAC. - EoZ]
In truth, while Aipac’s influence is extensive, no one needs to pay off conservatives to make them support Israel. Evangelicals, a far bigger constituency than American Jews, tend to be pro-Israel for religious reasons; some believe that the return of Jews to their biblical homeland is a precondition for the rapture and the Second Coming of Christ. Plenty of others on the right love Israel because it’s a nationalistic, pro-American power in the middle of the Middle East. You can’t blame Jewish money for Kevin McCarthy’s terrible politics.
Apparently, no one supports Israel because it is the only Jewish state in a world that has historically treated Jews badly. No one supports Israel because it is a liberal bastion in a shockingly backwards Middle East. No one supports Israel because it has managed to survive after seven decades of attacks, both militarily and politically. No, if you support Israel you must be a crazy religious nut, or a white supremacy apologist.
Not long after Pelosi’s statement, Omar released one of her own, apologizing “unequivocally.” She wrote, “Anti-Semitism is real and I am grateful for Jewish allies and colleagues who are educating me on the painful history of anti-Semitic tropes.” Personally, I’m happy to accept her apology.
Goldberg sickeningly refuses to publish the rest of the text of Omar's "apology," where she said "At the same time, I reaffirm the problematic role of lobbyists in our politics, whether it be AIPAC, the NRA or the fossil fuel industry. It's gone on too long and we must be willing to address it."
That means her apology about the power of the "Jewish lobby" is anything but unequivocal. And even after Goldberg notes how wrong Omar's opinion of AIPAC is, she doesn't have a problem with Omar maintaining that opinion even after her supposed apology.
And later Omar praised another thread where someone claims to have seen a candidate for office jump through hoops to get a $5000 donation from AIPAC. It is a lie - AIPAC does not give money to candidates, since it is not a PAC, and even a $5000 contribution from a pro-Israel donor would be only a tiny amount of the million dollars that candidate raised.
It is obvious that Omar's apology is not real, but it is good enough for Michelle Goldberg (and many others like Chelsea Clinton), who need any excuse to go back to de facto supporting left-wing antisemites and using antisemitism as just another political weapon rather than attacking it by and of itself. There are antisemitic dog-whistles on both sides and pretending that the ones on your side can be excused with a fake apology is not fighting antisemitism.
We have lots of ideas, but we need more resources to be even more effective. Please donate today to help get the message out and to help defend Israel.
J-Street issued a press release over the Ilhan Omar kerfuffle, and showed itself to be even more hypocritical than we knew. It says that, sure, "elected official" should be careful with their words... but Omar sort of had a point:
Elected officials should be particularly sensitive and careful on the question of the role played by campaign contributions in influencing US policies toward Israel and the Middle East. There is no doubt that money often plays a major role in our political system.
Since the only group Omar specifically mentioned in her offensive tweet was AIPAC, it is obvious that J-Street is agreeing with her that traditional lobbying for Israel is problematic and potentially could cause officials to change their positions to follow the money.
J-Street is stunningly hypocritical.
J-Street absurdly styles itself as being "pro-Israel" even though there is very little daylight between its positions and those of the PLO. And the J-StreetPAC page brags that the largest "pro-Israel lobby" in the US is - J-StreetPAC!
Not only that, it brags about its money influencing Congress!
In the 2018 midterm election, J Street successfully worked to shift the balance of power in Washington by electing a diplomacy-first Congress that will act as a check on President Trump’s dangerous agenda and ideology. JStreetPAC shattered its own records in the 2018 cycle, distributing nearly $5 million for 163 congressional candidates, including nearly $2.3 million for House challengers, 30 of whom were victorious. JStreetPAC reaffirmed its status as the nation’s largest pro-Israel PAC, raising over 53 percent of all pro-Israel PAC money distributed this cycle. The success of diplomacy-first candidates in some of the country’s most competitive districts confirmed a major shift in the politics of foreign policy.
If pro-Israel PACs are problematic for the amount of money they give to candidates, then J-StreetPAC - which gave more to its candidates than all the real pro-Israel PACs combined in 2018 - must be worse!
So which is it, J-Street? Is money to candidates a good thing or is it evil?
Obviously, their money is kosher. Actual money from Zionists is immoral.
________________________
J-Street continues on with its slander:
Elected officials should also refrain from labeling all criticism of Israeli actions or policies as “anti-Semitic,” in a transparent effort to silence legitimate discussion and debate. Such attacks only undermine the vital effort to counter the actual scourge of anti-Semitism in the United States and around the world.
NO ONE DOES THAT. No elected official has ever said that all criticism of Israel is antisemitic. No leader of any Zionist organization has ever said that.
Criticism of Israel is antisemitic when it violates the 3D test that Natan Sharansky posited back in 2004 - when Israel is demonized, delegitimized or subjected to double standards. The test is pretty easy to understand and is the best definition of when criticizing Israel is crossing the line out there.
It is the people who want to violate the 3D test who are the only ones who complain that "all" criticism of Israel is considered antisemitic.
J-Street obviously does not subscribe to the 3D test of what is antisemitic. In fact, J-Street seems to consider no criticism of Israel - or even calls to boycott the Jewish state - to be antisemitic. while I see lots of charges on its site that Republicans are antisemitic, I cannot find a single time where J-Street admits that Arabs have said a single antisemitic thing. Equating the Jewish state with Nazi Germany - silence. Calling Israel an 'apartheid state" - silence.
This press release where J-Street pretends to be "nuanced" shows, when analyzed, that J-Street's position towards Israel is indeed perilously close to those of the antisemites who are obsessed with destroying the Jewish state.
We have lots of ideas, but we need more resources to be even more effective. Please donate today to help get the message out and to help defend Israel.
Newly elected Minnesota Congresswoman Ilhan Omar suggested on Sunday that Jewish money was behind American elected officials’ support for Israel, sparking widespread condemnation and fresh allegations of anti-Semitism.
Omar, one of the first Muslim women elected to Congress, was responding on Twitter to Republican House Minority Leader Kevin McCathy’s vow to “take action” against her and Michigan Rep. Rashida Tlaib, both of whom support the anti-Israel Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) campaign.
“It’s all about the Benjamins baby,” Omar tweeted, reacting to another tweet from the prominent journalist Glenn Greenwald, who said it was “stunning how much time US political leaders spend defending a foreign nation even if it means attacking free speech rights of Americans,” referring to McCarthy’s pledge.
Benjamins are a slang term for $100 bills, which feature US founding father Benjamin Franklin.
When one journalist followed up by saying she wondered who Omar thought was paying American politicians to be pro-Israel, Omar responded: “AIPAC!,” referring to the American Israel Public Affairs Committee.
While the pro-Israel lobby wields considerable influence in Washington, it does not contribute to campaigns, nor does it make endorsements.
Omar, a Somali-born refugee from Ethiopia, was recently appointed to the powerful House Foreign Affairs Committee. In recent weeks, Omar and others have been vociferous critics of two anti-BDS bills that are being pushed in Congress.
Anti-Semitic Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN) promoted anti-Semitic conspiracy theories on Sunday and retweeted a tweet that said "[Omar] might as well call [Jews] hook-nosed."
Omar's vile remarks came in response to a Haaretz report that stated that Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy was going to take action against anti-Semitic Reps. Rashida Tlaib (D-MI) and Omar.
"If [Democrats] do not take action I think you’ll see action from myself," McCarthy said. "This cannot sustain itself. It’s unacceptable in this country."
Omar, who has promoted anti-Semitic conspiracy theories that were used by Nazi Germany, said that the GOP's support for Israel was "all about the Benjamins baby."
An hour later, Omar promoted another anti-Semitic conspiracy theory, falsely stating that The American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) is paying American politicians "to be pro-Israel."
Omar then retweeted the following tweet that stated she "might as well call [American Jews] hook-nosed."
"I’m one of those American Jews who opposes the occupation, laments Israel’s anti-democratic drift, and doesn’t regard the country as especially central to my Jewish identity," Politico magazine editor Joshua Zeitz tweeted. "And I know exactly what the congresswoman meant. She might as well call us hook-nosed."
Congresswoman @IlhanMN just retweeted a criticism of her anti-Semitic tweet which said that “she might as well call us hook-nosed.” pic.twitter.com/VLjEglThZf
Embattled anti-Semitic Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN) is scheduled to speak alongside a senior charity official who has praised the killing of Jews on social media.
"Islamic Relief USA is hosting a fundraising dinner for aid to Yemen on February 23," the Middle East Forum reports. "Rep. Ilhan Omar is due to speak alongside senior Islamic Relief USA official Yousef Abdallah, who was widely criticized in 2017 after the Middle East Forum found he had expressed violently anti-Semitic ideas on his social media accounts."
The Middle East Forum's report provides screenshots and descriptions of numerous anti-Semitic social media posts from Abdallah:
Abdallah, who serves as Islamic Relief USA's "operations manager," shared a "very beautiful" story about "martyrs" who provide guns to "kill more than 20 jews" and "fire rockets at Tel Aviv."
Other posts referred to Jews as "stinking," and claim "the Jews put the outside wall of Al Aqsa [the mosque in Jerusalem] on fire." Abdallah also 'liked' a comment on his Facebook post that calls on God to wreak "revenge on the damned rapists Zionists. O God they are no challenge for you . Shake the Earth beneath their feet and destroy them as you destroyed the peoples of ʿĀd, Thamud and Lot."
And in 2014, after Republican politician Chris Christie apologized for referring to the West Bank and Gaza as "occupied," Abdallah wrote: "Christie kneels down on his knees before the jewish lords and says 'I am sorry'. Only money makes stuff like this happen. Mr. Christie.. Muslims should remember this very well."
Another day, another anti-Semitic controversy for freshman Rep. Ilhan Omar (D., Minn.).
This time, she found herself being called out by one of her own Democratic colleagues, Jewish organizations and even Chelsea Clinton for tweets claiming Republican support for Israel is bought and paid for by AIPAC.
Omar linked to a tweet by left-wing journalist Glenn Greenwald, who was criticizing House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R., Calif.) for threatening punishment against Omar and fellow anti-Israel Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D., Mich.). She wrote, "It's all about the Benjamins baby" with musical notes, a reference to $100 bills with Benjamin Franklin's face on them.
Forward opinion editor Batya Ungar-Sargon criticized Omar for tweeting an "anti-Semitic trope" and said she'd love to know who is "paying American politicians to be pro-Israel." Omar responded, "AIPAC!", the name of the pro-Israel lobbying organization.
Omar's tweets were met with sharp criticism even from members of her own party, including Rep. Max Rose (D., N.Y.). Rose, who is Jewish, tweeted out a statement calling her words "hateful and offensive."
Clinton tweeted in agreement with Ungar-Sargon that the congresswoman had again crossed a line.
"We should expect all elected officials, regardless of party, and all public figures to not traffic in anti-Semitism," Clinton wrote.
On Sunday, after Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN) displayed her blatant anti-Semitism by tweeting that GOP support for Israel was "all about the Benjamins," and followed by accusing AIPAC of paying American politicians to support Israel, bipartisan condemnation of her remarks erupted, although no leading Democrats said a word about their colleague’s vile rhetoric.
Omar’s initial anti-Semitic tweet was triggered by famed anti-Semite leftist Glenn Greenwald, who tweeted, "GOP Leader Kevin McCarthy threatens punishment for @IlhanMN and @RashidaTlaib over their criticisms of Israel. It's stunning how much time US political leaders spend defending a foreign nation even if it means attacking free speech rights of Americans."
Omar delightedly responded, "It’s all about the Benjamins, baby."
Former U.N. Ambassador Nikki Haley, an incredibly staunch supporter of Israel who saw Israel get attacked incessantly at the U.N., fired back, "To see this at the UN was a fight every day. This CANNOT be tolerated in our own Congress by anyone of either party. In a time of increased anti semitism, we all must be held to account. No excuses."
McCarthy himself blasted, “Anti-Semitic tropes have no place in the halls of Congress. It is dangerous for Democrat leadership to stay silent on this reckless language.”
Former New York State Assemblyman Dov Hikind, who has been virtually the only Democrat willing to call out members of his own party for their anti-Semitism, snapped, "Defending Israel from antisemites is 'all about the Benjamins'? Really? It’s about money? Another antisemitic trope for @Ilhan Omar? She’s like an antisemitic pinball machine that spits out old canards as the ball bounces around her brain. She’s the gift that keeps on giving!"
Israel haters love to claim that Israel engages in organ trafficking, or that Israel takes out organs of Palestinian terrorists without their permission.
Yet these oh-so-moral people are silent when there is real organ trafficking by Arab nations.
According to a 2018 report, the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime has collected data on 700 incidents of organ trafficking, primarily from north Africa and the Middle East. Yet these figures are conservative, at best. The true scale of the industry is difficult to assess, as the majority of cases go unreported, with victims reluctant to come forward for fear of deportation, arrest or shame.
The trade appears to be flourishing in Egypt, bolstered by an EU-funded clampdown on refugees by security forces. There, the hostile environment created by the arbitrary detention of migrants, and the hike in smugglers’ fees, is creating a perfect opportunity for unscrupulous organ brokers who prey on those desperate to raise funds to cross the Mediterranean.
Outrageous? Nah. Arab countries are expected to act this way, so the moral police are OK with it.
(h/t Yoel)
We have lots of ideas, but we need more resources to be even more effective. Please donate today to help get the message out and to help defend Israel.
Palestine Today quotes an "expert" that says that there will be a "third intifada" if the PLO cannot pay the salaries of terrorists and their families as a result of Israel deducting that amount from tax revenue.
Abdel Hadi says , "If the Palestinian Authority can not raise other funds to fill the funds that Israel intends to deduct from the Palestinian Authority revenues, this decision will affect the security situation, especially since the budget of the Palestinian Authority already suffers from a great shortage."
He says that if the Palestinian Authority is unable to provide the amount estimated tens of millions of shekels, the resulting demonstrations "may be the spark of a third intifada."
There have been regular threats of a third intifada for over a decade now.
We have lots of ideas, but we need more resources to be even more effective. Please donate today to help get the message out and to help defend Israel.
Hopes that the 2015 nuclear deal would lead the Tehran regime to moderate its behavior have proved misplaced. The ayatollahs may have kept to the letter of the deal, but they have intensified their malign policies around the region. Where Israel is concerned, they implacably oppose not only government policy but also the country's very existence.
This hatred of Israel is not confined to the clerics. It is also the declared position of figures that the West has misidentified as "moderate." So it is misguided to see Iran as following the principles of realpolitik. It is ultimately defending and where possible extending ideological interests. The ideology is driven by a belief that religion should be converted into a political system of government. Such a worldview necessarily becomes totalitarian.
This politicization of religion is the bane of the Middle East. In a world where economies succeed by being open, and countries prosper by being open-minded, such a view of religion divides people, misdirects political energy and causes extremism.
Where Iran is exercising military interference, it should be strongly pushed back. Where it is seeking influence, it should be countered. Where its proxies operate, it should be held responsible. Where its networks exist, they should be disrupted. Where its leaders are saying what is unacceptable, they should be exposed. Where the Iranian people are protesting for freedom, they should be supported.
Forty years of disappointment should make us clear-eyed. The revolution has made Iran the single biggest destabilizing force in the Middle East. Ultimately the Iranian people will find a way to the future without this outdated theocracy.
A senior commander in Iran’s elite Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps threatened on Monday to destroy two of Israeli’s largest cities if the country is attacked by the United States.
“The United States does not have the courage to shoot a single bullet at us despite all its defensive and military assets. But if they attack us, we will raze Tel Aviv and Haifa to the ground,” Brig. Gen. Yadollah Javani was quoted as saying by state news agency IRNA, according to Reuters.
Top political and military leaders in Iran regularly call for Israel’s annihilation, with a senior general recently claiming it would defeat the Jewish state “within three days” in the case of a war.
Javani, the deputy for the IRGC political bureau, was speaking at a rally marking the 40th anniversary of the Islamic Revolution, when the US-backed monarchy was overthrown and replaced in power by Islamic fundamentalists.
Along with the chants “Death to America” and banners bearing slogans calling for “Death to Israel,” Monday’s marches were also a backdrop to the military’s display of Iranian-made missiles, which authorities showcase every year during anniversary celebrations.
Uri Akavia, a researcher at Kohelet Policy Forum, recently published a new paper titled “Is UNRWA’s hereditary refugee status for Palestinians unique?” In it, of course, he details the origins of the issue since 1948, the year Israel was established, and its ensuing state of affairs.
“People have finally realized that UNRWA [U.N. Relief and Works Agency], is a very large and important organization that is perpetuating a problem that should not have even existed after 70 years,” he told JNS.
When U.S. President Donald Trump announced last year that he would pull $300 million in funding for UNRWA, which is in charge of resolving the Palestinian refugee problem, Jerusalem’s Mayor Nir Barkat realized that he now had an opportunity to kick UNRWA out of Shuafat, a Palestinian neighborhood in Jerusalem the body considers to be a refugee camp.
“The U.S. decision has created a rare opportunity to replace UNRWA’s services with the services of the Jerusalem Municipality,” he said. “We are putting an end to the lie of the ‘Palestinian refugee problem’ and the attempts at creating a false sovereignty within a sovereignty.”
For Akavia, Barkat and those who have followed the situation closely, UNRWA, tasked with resolving the Palestinian refugee problem, has only perpetuated and not solved the refugee problem. They argue, and many Israelis agree, that it has utterly failed in its mission.
According to Dore Gold, president of the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs, “UNRWA has so many problems,” he told JNS. “The fact is that so many of the worst Hamas terrorists were educated in UNRWA schools, and UNRWA was used as a place where Hamas could store its weaponry in violation of all kinds of U.N. resolutions that prohibit conversion of refugee camps to military facilities.”
However, Gold pointed to what he thinks is UNRWA’s worst sin: The “conversion of the Palestinian refugee problem to a challenge locked into perpetuity.”
Only a month ago, Forward editor Batya Ungar-Sargon ripped into Jews calling out antisemitism and support for Palestinian terror from black people, saying "We Jews need to stop being the face of tearing down black people, or anyone of color who supports Palestinians."
This was accompanied by a photo of Angela Davis smiling next to a convicted terrorist.
She wrote an article a few days later where she defended prominent blacks against Jews pointing out their antisemitism, seemingly because of their skin color - and the skin color of the Jewish critics of antisemitism.
It has been a sort of obsession at The Forward where someone's blackness is a defense against antisemitism or of supporting Palestinian terror, for example Marc Lamont Hill invoking the antisemitic libel of Jews poisoning the wells of Palestinians, or Tamika Mallory's defense of antisemite Louis Farrakhan as the "greatest of all time." (The Forward has been fairly consistent in criticizing Alice Walker.)
But this weekend, Ungar-Sargon seems to have done the same herself. In response to Minnesota member of Congress Ilhan Omar saying that Congress supports Israel because of Jewish and AIPAC money, Ungar-Sargon wrote that this was antisemitic.
The funny thing is that Omar's assertion, while ignorant and false, is arguably less antisemitic than what Walker and Lamont Hill said.
Is Batya Ungar-Sargon now guilty of the racism that she accused the organized Jewish community of by pointing out antisemitism among black leaders? Or is there some loophole in intersectionality calculations that allow some Jews sometimes to defend themselves against accusations from black people without being considered evil racists?
Since I created the intersectionality calculator that has been eerily accurate as far as which side "progressives" would be on in any disagreement or conflict based only on external factors, I am curious if there is some adjustment I need to make. But I don't think so - based on the tweets in the threads, plenty of "progressives" are taking Omar's side over that of Batya or even Chelsea Clinton, who also called out Omar's offensiveness.
And of course, Omar as a Muslim and a black woman, has a much higher intersectionality score (21) than Batya (2) or Chelsea (5).
We have lots of ideas, but we need more resources to be even more effective. Please donate today to help get the message out and to help defend Israel.
The “Ministerial to Promote a Future of Peace and Security in the Middle East,” held jointly by the United States and Poland, will take place in Warsaw, Poland on February 13-14. We have received very positive responses from our partners and allies around the world, with dozens of countries expressing their willingness and intention to participate in this constructive dialogue.
This Ministerial will be an opportunity for countries to share their perspectives both from within and outside the region. This includes a conversation on current regional crises as well as international efforts to address them. During the Ministerial, participants will also discuss the following topics:
Regional crises and their effects on civilians in the Middle East;
Missile development and proliferation;
Cyber security and emerging threats to the energy sector; and
Countering extremism and illicit finance.
Countries will come together to prioritize these regional challenges, share information, and discuss how we can cooperate more effectively to address them. There will be a press briefing held at the conclusion of the Ministerial to summarize the event’s discussions as well as present a joint statement by the Ministerial co-chairs – the United States and Poland.
Notice that the Palestinian issue is not mentioned at all.
The Palestinian Authority was invited, but their response was pretty much that unless the Palestinian issue is the central focus of any conference on the Middle East, they want nothing to do with it.
Fatah spokesman Osama Qawassmeh warned that any Palestinian or Arab who accepts Trump’s “deal of the century” would be accused of betraying Jerusalem and Islamic and Christian holy sites. ... In the past two weeks, several PA officials have called on the Arab countries to boycott the upcoming conference and to remain committed to the 2002 Arab Peace Initiative, which calls for normalizing ties between Israel and the Arab countries only after a full Israeli withdrawal to the pre-1967 lines.
Qawassmeh warned on Saturday that any Arab leader who meets with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu at the Warsaw conference would be “stabbing Jerusalem and our Palestinian people.” The Palestinians, he added, are opposed to any form of normalization “with the Israeli occupation entity because that would be a free gift to Tel Aviv.”
The PA Ministry of Foreign Affairs accused the US of “declaring war on the just Palestinian cause” and international resolutions.
It claimed that the US was convening the conference in Warsaw as part of its effort to impose a new world order. The ministry warned all countries against participating in the conference, saying it was also part of an American-Israeli “conspiracy” to eliminate the Palestinian issue.
This conference will be a test of waning Palestinian political power. If Arab governments ignore the PLO's demands to boycott the conference, it shows that there is no longer any fear on their part to appear to be turning their backs on Palestinian demands.
The list of attendees will be very interesting indeed.
We have lots of ideas, but we need more resources to be even more effective. Please donate today to help get the message out and to help defend Israel.
A Saudi preacher ignited a big controversy by saying that the sacrifice that Abraham did was of Isaac, as the Torah says, and not Ishmael.
On a TV show on MBC TV, Salih al-Mughamsi said that his interpretation of the Quran is that the "sacrifice" is of the prophet of God, Isaac, not his brother Ishmael.
He said that Ibrahim (Abraham) left Hajar (Hagar) and his son Ishmael in Mecca, then at the age of 75 returned to his people to preach to them, and then married Sara, who gave them Isaac, and God ordered him in a dream to slaughter his son.
The thing is - the Quran doesn't contradict him!
The story of the sacrifice in the Quran doesn't mention Ishmael once. Isaac is mentioned after the event, which is why many Quranic scholars believe that the main passage doesn't refer to Isaac.
The Quranic text (37:99-113) says:
And [then] he said, “Indeed, I will go to [where I am ordered by] my Lord; He will guide me. My Lord, grant me [a child] from among the righteous”. So We gave him good tidings of a forbearing boy. And when he reached with him [the age of] exertion, he said, “O my son, indeed I have seen in a dream that I [must] sacrifice you, so see what you think.” He said, “O my father, do as you are commanded. You will find me, if Allah wills, of the steadfast”. And when they had both submitted and he put him down upon his forehead, We called to him, “O Abraham, You have fulfilled the vision.” Indeed, We thus reward the doers of good. Indeed, this was the clear trial. And We ransomed him with a great sacrifice, And We left for him [favorable mention] among later generations: “Peace upon Abraham”. Indeed, We thus reward the doers of good. Indeed, he was of Our believing servants. And We gave him good tidings of Isaac, a prophet from among the righteous. And We blessed him and Isaac. But among their descendants is the doer of good and the clearly unjust to himself.
According to this site, 38 of Mohammed's companions support the Isaac theory, and only 28 support the Ishmael theory. Both traditions have serious support within Islam.
It is interesting that a preacher is willing to even say this out loud nowadays.
We have lots of ideas, but we need more resources to be even more effective. Please donate today to help get the message out and to help defend Israel.
This blog may be a labor of love for me, but it takes a lot of effort, time and money. For over 19 years and 40,000 articles I have been providing accurate, original news that would have remained unnoticed. I've written hundreds of scoops and sometimes my reporting ends up making a real difference. I appreciate any donations you can give to keep this blog going.
Weekend long read
-
1) The INSS reports on a ‘Russian Influence Campaign Against Israel’.
“Since the October 7th massacre, Russia has stepped up its semi-covert
disinformati...
Weekend long read
-
1) The INSS reports on a ‘Russian Influence Campaign Against Israel’.
“Since the October 7th massacre, Russia has stepped up its semi-covert
disinformati...
Jonathan Sacks: Holy People, Holy Land Acharei Mot
-
Jonathan Sacks: Holy People, Holy Land Acharei Mot IsraelSeen.com
Jonathan Sacks: Holy People, Holy Land Acharei Mot I had been engaged in
dialogue for t...
Soros Funds the Protests and the Protested
-
Outside the mob of Hamas supporters were chanting “Genocide Joe” while
inside Joe Biden was trying to raise more money.
Yet the terrorist supporters ...
Out of the Box
-
[image: Dry Bones cartoon,War, America, Gaza, Jews, Jewish, Israel, Donate,
Oct 7, Jews, Mexico, Gaza Pier,]
* Here's an even BETTER IDEA!*
Help Dry Bones...
The Palestinian “Two-State” Plan: Duping the West
-
One of the great unsolved mysteries of the 21st century is why, given what
a catastrophe it proved to be, anyone, much less a whole phalanx of
politicians,...
Closing Jews Down Under Website
-
With a heavyish heart I am closing down the website after ten years.
It is and it isn’t an easy decision after 10 years of constant work. The
past...
‘Test & Trace’ is a mirage
-
Lockdown II thoughts: Day 1 Opposition politicians have been banging on
about the need for a ‘working’ Test & Trace system even more loudly than
the govern...
Tuesday, February 12, 2019
Elder of Ziyon
