Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News

Monday, October 28, 2019

J-Street's session on "The Trump Legacy on Israel/Palestine"

On Sunday, the J-Street conference hosted a panel session entitled "Scorched Earth: The Trump Legacy on Israel/Palestine."

The participants were:

Debra Shushan, Director of Policy and Government Relations, Americans for Peace Now (Moderator)
Khaled Elgindy, Nonresident Senior Fellow, Brookings Institution
Ilan Goldenberg, Senior Fellow and Director of the Middle East Security Program, Center
for a New American Security
Dr. Dahlia Scheindlin, Political Analyst, Public Opinion Expert
Daniel Seidemann, Founder and Director, Terrestrial Jerusalem

Shushan gave a monologue at the beginning. She reviewed most of Donald Trump's moves, all of which she considered to be awful, and she wanted her panelists to describe how all of them can be rolled back in a future Democratic administration.

She called the move of the US Embassy to Jerusalem "the hostile takeover of the consulate in Jerusalem by [David] Friedman's embassy."

She also encouraged the audience to boo Friedman, the US ambassador to Israel. It is axiomatic at J-Street that certain government officials must be treated with utmost disrespect, something Democrats complained bitterly about - rightly - when Obama was president.

In addition, Shushan sarcastically said that Israeli claims that annexation of the Golan Heights and the West Bank would be legal based on the principle that one can annex land won in a defensive war was a brand new, legally untenable position. While most modern legal scholars agree with Shushan that land cannot be legally annexed in any circumstances, it is not unanimous nor has it been uniformly applied since the UN Charter, as Eugene Kontorovich has demonstrated.

Daniel Seidemann described how he gave a tour of Jerusalem to Jared Kushner and Jason Greenblatt. He told them that Arabs in Jerusalem east of the Green Line "are not entitled to receive citizenship" in Israel.

He is lying and he knows he is lying. (He is an expert on Jerusalem so it is disappointing when he knowingly pushes lies.) The process has been difficult but thousands have become citizens and many more are on their way; Israel is trying to streamline the process.

Khaled Elgindy said during his main talk that Clinton and Obama tried to make peace - but for some reason never mentions that Palestinian rejectionism was what stopped the initiatives. Later on someone asked him bout whether Arafat missed the boat in rejecting the Clinton peace plan and Elgindy denied that Arafat did that, saying that both Barak and Arafat accepted the plan. He later tweeted me his proof:

I responded that Clinton had no desire to sabotage any chance for peace while he was in office by insulting Arafat but not long after he left office he made it clear that Arafat was the rejectionist and Barak was ready to give major concessions:

And this as well:

While I agree that technically both Arafat and Barak accepted the plan with reservations, Clinton showed afterwards that Barak was the only one serious about it and Arafat was playing games (which Barak elaborates on in great detail.)

The bigger point is that Jews have been accepting and proposing peace offers since before 1948 and each of them has been consistently rejected by the Palestinian Arabs. That is a key point in any discussion on peace, which J-Street claims it cares about, yet only Israel is blamed for the lack of peace. This is a major blind spot in the liberal world which then leaks into a blind spot for everyone who does not spend serious time researching the topic.

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.

Arab media reveal super-secret plan by Jewish Agency to encourage aliyah

Al Araby, the British pan-Arab newspaper known in its English edition as The New Arab, has a scoop.

The Jewish Agency in Israel is secretly trying to get Jews to move to Israel!

YNet reported:

The Jewish Agency's board of trustees was meeting in Jerusalem on Sunday to approve a strategic action plan of action for the next decade, addressing the challenges facing the Jewish people in the modern era - and at its center the sharp rise in anti-Semitic incidents around the world.

According to the plan, the Jewish Agency will work to ensure the security of Jewish communities around the world, and will fight vigorously against the manifestations of anti-Semitism and anti-Zionism.

The agency will work with the government of Israel, Jewish communities and other organizations in three key areas.

1. Political, which will include activities involving heads of state, parliaments and law enforcement bodies

2. Security, which will increase the protection for Jewish institutions

3. Educational, which will focus on eliminating the phenomenon of anti-Semitism through in-depth study, bolstered by hundreds of Israeli emissaries and working with local educators

The Jewish Agency will also encourage immigration to Israel – helping those immigrate freely as well as conducting clandestine "emergency aliyah" operations in hostile nations.

That last item becomes the most important on in Arab media, where the headline is on a "secret plan" to encourage Jews to move to "Palestine." They say "The main aim of the plan, described by the paper as 'an additional goal,' is to encourage Jewish immigration to Israel by providing assistance to those who choose voluntary immigration to Israel. "

Who knew the Jewish Agency encouraged aliyah?

Here is the illustration in the Al Araby article:

Scary religious Jews!

And that is not only in Al Araby. The same article in other Arab media uses a similar picture:

Scary Jews doing Talmudic rituals!

The idea of Jews moving to Israel causes panic among Arabs, ever since they got the British to limit immigration from Jews in the 1930s. And these pictures are of the scariest Jews around to them - the ones who actually have a spiritual attachment to the land.

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.

Iran drops out of youth chess tournament for fear of being banned for refusing to compete with Israelis

Earlier this month, an Iranian youth chess champion refused to play with his Israeli counterpart.

For once, the FIDE chess federation made its displeasure public in this tweet from its vice president Nigel David Short:

Iran seems to be spooked.

From Radio Farda:

A series of "considerations" and "financial complications" has forced the Islamic Republic's Chess Federation not to dispatch Iran's team to the World Youth Under-16 Chess Olympiad in Turkey, says the federation president.

Without further elaboration, Mehrdad Pahlavanzadeh insisted on Sunday, October 26, that the international chess federation (FIDE) has not eliminated Iran from the list of competing countries, and Tehran has voluntarily decided to stay out of the championship.

Based on an "unwritten law," Iranian athletes are banned from competing with their Israeli counterparts or attending medal ceremonies alongside them.

Iranian athletes' refusal to compete with Israelis has triggered a series of disputes between Tehran and international sports federations.

Reacting to Iran's refusal to participate in the World Championship in Turkey, FIDE said in a statement last week that it would punish the Islamic Republic's Chess Federation in a way that would detrimental for the Iranian chess players.

Earlier this month the International Judo Federation (IJF) enacted a provisional ban on Iran over its refusal to allow its judokas to face Israelis.

Sports federations are finally starting to show some backbone.

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's conference had a panel on "Fighting Anti-Semitism and its Weaponization in American Politics."

Already by equating antisemitism with its supposed "weaponization" (which exists but is not nearly as big an issue,) the panel was doomed from the start from seriously looking at the problem.

The panelists were:

Rabbi Jill Jacobs, Executive Director, T’ruah: The Rabbinic Call for Human Rights (Moderator)
Peter Beinart, Professor of Journalism and Political Science at the City University of New York
Maya Berry, Executive Director, Arab American Institute
Haile Soifer, Executive Director, Jewish Democratic Council of America
Eric Ward, Executive Director, Western States Center

The entire discussion was naturally about antisemitism on the Right. It is a real problem, but not the way it was framed here. Haile Soifer wasted no time in attacking Donald Trump, the only president who has a Jewish daughter and grandchildren. She claimed falsely that he excused the white supremacists in Charlottesville, and she claimed that he failed to condemn antisemitism ever (although she accidentally said "condone.") She also claimed that the white nationalists who have attacked blacks and Jews in the US all were aligned with Trump, when they almost all hated him because he was too philosemitic.

I do not disagree that Trump has said things that embolden racists in the US. There is plenty to criticize him for in dividing the nation. (It is not so clear that the number of racist incidents increased under Trump, when the 2018 FBI hate crimes statistics are released we'll have a better idea. 2017 showed a marked increase but also many more agencies were added to the reporting compared to 2016, so the data sets may not be comparable.) But when you criticize him, do it accurately.

Peter Beinart said "I agree with everything [Haile] said." So, truth is certainly not something that this J-Street panel prizes.

Beinart also said, to applause, that anti-Zionism is not antisemitism, but his reasoning was quite bizarre:

"The vast majority of Palestinians are anti-Zionist...The Palestinian experience with Zionism has been a very bitter, painful, traumatic experience. You do not have to be an antisemite...to be in solidarity with the Palestinian experience...Any definition of antisemitism that dehumanizes and silences Palestinians is not a response to bigotry - it is an expression of bigotry."

Would Beinart say that Jews who say that there is no room for Palestinians to have any political power in the region are not bigots? Of course not. But Palestinians who say that Jews have no right to live in the region as anything but second class citizens - which is the standard and mainstream Palestinian position - cannot be called antisemitic because that would "silence" them!

Sorry, Peter, antisemitism's definition is not dependent on whose feelings it might hurt. Arab and Muslim antisemitism is a thing, as much as you don't want to admit it. Saying that the Jews are not a people - the official PLO position! - is antisemitic. Saying that they do not have the right for self-determination in their historic homeland is antisemitic. And having a different standard for what Jews can say about Palestinians and what Palestinians can say about Jews in the area is itself an example of bigotry.

Maya Berry of the Arab American Institute categorically rejected the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance Working Definition of Antisemitism with no dissent from the Jewish panelists:

"The reality is that the definition of antisemitism that was developed for use overseas that has been adopted by some here in the United States ...that they are attempting to use that definition on our college campuses, that is not an acceptable definition of antisemitism. As a result, we're entering in this sort of grey space...[During a time of worries about white supremacist violence] we're trying to decide how much I can criticize the State of Israel before I get labeled a certain thing. I think that's crazy. "

So now we are told by a Muslim that Jews cannot define what antisemitism is because she demands the right to compare Israel to Nazis or say Israeli Jews love to kill children and poison the wells. IHRA has no problem with criticism of Israel, and Berry knows that - but she wants the right to demonize any Jew who supports Israel or to demonize the Jewish state for actions that would be considered nothing in every single Arab state.

(I have yet to see a critic of the IHRA definition say which specific examples given there of anti-Zionist antisemitism they do not agree with. Because they know that double standards for Israel is in fact antisemitism.)

She also said, "I think one of the biggest mistakes J-Street makes is the position its taken on BDS. [Applause!] Because if you equate the entire movement with antisemitism then the logical conclusion is Rashida [Tlaib] is an antisemite. And that is a problem we should all be very concerned about."

This is after she noted that Jews never considered the previous Muslim members of Congress to be antisemitic, and it is only because Tlaib and Ilhan Omar support BDS that they are considered as such.

This is a mirror of Beinart's argument that if a definition of antisemitism ends up calling someone you like an antisemite, it must be wrong. That is not how definitions work.

(Also, J-Street does not say that BDS is antisemitic.)

Perhaps the most offensive part of the session was a question from a J-Street board member, Victor Kovner, that was itself antisemitic:

"I'd like to ask an easy question about whether white nationalism is rising within the Jewish community....Is it true, that because of policies about Israel, that white nationalism is rising among particularly the ultra-observant community? Is that true? And is it also rising in the Israeli settler movement?"

In other words, are religious Jews the disgusting racists I think they are?

Of course no one called Kovner out for his fairly clear bigotry. Beinart tackled the question but watered it down for public consumption, saying that some Zionists naturally will ally with like-minded political groups, as if Jews are willing to accept right-wing Tree of Life-level Jew-hatred for Israel. But the question revealed much more about how the (mostly elderly) leftist J-Street attendees really think.

In short, it was an antisemitic question that was tolerated at a panel supposedly about antisemitism.

Kovner, a major J-Street fundraiser, described J-Street's goal in a 2008 New York Times article this way: "Candidates would also be able to use the group’s endorsements as a shield against accusations that they were anti-Israel."

Does this sound like someone who loves either Israel or Jews?

This panel was a disgrace for a supposedly Jewish, pro-Israel organization that pretends to care about antisemitism.

(h/t Daled Amos)

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.

10/27 Links: Trump announces death of Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi: He died like a dog; Islamic State leader’s death is important, but not a game changer; Gaza death cult celebrates the anniversary of the Qassam Rocket

From Ian:

Trump announces death of Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi: He died like a dog

US President Donald Trump delivered a special announcement on Sunday announcing the death of ISIS leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi in a US Special Ops raid, explaining that the success could not have been achieved without the acknowledgement and help of other nations such as "Russia, Turkey, Syria and Iraq."

"The United States has been searching for Baghdadi for many years," Trump began. "He died... whimpering and screaming. The only ones remaining were Baghdadi in the tunnel, and he had dragged three of his young children with him that were led to certain death. He reached the end of the tunnel as our dogs chased him down. He ignited his vest, killing himself and his three children.

"The thug that tried so hard to intimidate others spent his last moments in total fear," Trump continued. "Baghdadi's demise demonstrates... our commitment to the enduring and total defeat of ISIS and other terrorist organizations. Our reach is very long."

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu congratulated Trump for the killing of Baghdadi, calling it an “impressive achievement.”

Netanyahu, who released a statement within moments of Trump ending his press conference where he announced Baghdadi's killing, said that it “reflects our shared determination – of the United States and all free states – to fight terrorist organizations and terrorist states.”

Netanyahu said that while this was an “important milestone,” the campaign against terrorism is “still in front of us.”

Trump additionally clarified that no US personnel were killed in the operation, though one dog was injured entering the tunnel. He stated that the number of people killed on Baghdadi's end of the operation will be announced in the next 24 hours.

He described watching the operation, which he saw along with Secretary of Defense Mark Esper, Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Mark Milley, National Security Advisor Robert O'Brien, and several other military and intelligence officials, as something "like a movie."

"Today's events are another reminder that we will continue to pursue the remaining ISIS terrorists," Trump stated. "That also goes for other terrorist organizations. Baghdadi and the losers who work for him, and losers they are, had no idea what they were getting into. In some cases, they were very frightened puppies; in other cases, hardcore killers. Baghdadi was vicious and violent, and he died in a vicious and violent way; as a coward, running and crying."

Defense Officials Release Shocking Details Of Al-Baghdadi Raid: ‘Six Helicopters,’ ’50-70 Members Of Delta Force’

Defense Department officials are slowly leaking out details of the shocking raid in western Syria that resulted in the death of ISIS mastermind, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi — and there may even be video of the exact moment al-Baghdadi detonated his own suicide vest, killing himself and several members of his family so that he couldn’t be taken alive by the American military.

The Daily Mail reports that “between 50 and 70 members of the US Army Delta Force and Rangers flew in on six helicopters and surrounded al-Baghdadi during the overnight raid in Syria’s Idlib province,” per sources.

The attack had been planned for weeks, President Donald Trump told reporters during a press conference Sunday morning, and a special team of soldiers was amassed for the raid. The team knew, based on information from friendly intelligence sources in the area, that al-Baghdadi was “lurking in Syrian border towns, often wearing non-traditional or ‘regular’ clothes, using a civilian car, and making sure anyone around him had no mobile phones or electronic devices in order to bypass detection,” according to Fox News.

Al-Baghdadi arrived at the compound where he ultimately perished a mere 48 hours before the U.S. military’s raid. He was accompanied there by two of his wives and several of his children, all of whom were outfitted with suicide vests.

Islamic State leader’s death is important, but not a game changer

US special forces carried out a high-level raid in Syria against Abu Bakr al-Bahgdadi, killing the elusive Islamic State terror group’s leader. The assassination of Baghdadi is a major symbolic blow to the organization and everything it represents, but its impact must not be overstated. His death does not mean the end of IS.

The organization’s modus operandi will not change dramatically and its operations are more likely to be constrained by larger military and financial issues than by the death of one man. Now, after the disintegration of its territorial empire, the Islamic State is already more of an idea than a concrete reality and, as such, it is expected to continue, in a changed form, to plague the West for years to come.

The big question we should be asking at the moment is what will happen to the larger idea of Salafist jihad? After the death of Osama bin Laden, IS stepped into the newly created jihadist leadership vacuum. The organization ascended to new levels of brutality that surpassed, in many ways, even the tactics employed by the notoriously vicious al-Qaeda.

There are still several other competing jihadist groups, such as Tahrir a-Sham, operating in Syria’s Idlib province, where Baghdadi was killed. Harried by Syrian and Russian airstrikes, their capacities are limited, and it is more than likely that we will see the ascension of another organization, led by a figure no less charismatic than Baghdadi, that will push a radical agenda, perhaps more extreme than that of IS, if such a thing can be imagined.

With a $25 million US bounty on his head, Baghdadi was the world’s most wanted man, responsible for steering his chillingly violent organization into mass slaughter of opponents, and directing and inspiring terror attacks across continents and in the heart of Europe.

Shifting away from the airline hijackings and other mass-casualty attacks that came to define al-Qaeda, Baghdadi and other IS leaders supported smaller-scale acts of violence that would be harder for law enforcement to prepare for and prevent.

The stupidity of @HRW's Sarah Leah Whitson comparing Gaza to Hong Kong

An amazingly vacuous tweet from a person and organization that we've come to expect such from:

Human Rights Watch sees a similarity between protests in Hong Kong and riots in Gaza?

The goal of the Hong Kong protests is (generally) to move towards independence from China. The goal of the Gaza protests is to destroy Israel - not to build an independent Palestinian state but to invade the independent Jewish state.

Hong Kong demonstrators don't shoot rockets into China. It doesn't start fires with balloons or kites in China. Most of all, they are not controlled by internationally recognized terrorist groups that decide if and where the protesters gather, when, and what activities they will do. Terror groups that decide how many children will approach the fence with Israel and put their lives in danger.

Hong Kong protesters don't have Molotov cocktails (as the PCHR article she links to admits) and guns.

The only comparison between Gaza and Hong Kong is that Gaza could have become a Hong Kong by now if its citizens and rulers wanted to. After Israel's disengagement they could have built a Mediterranean paradise, tourist hub and high tech center - there was no blockade then.

Instead, they decided that they wanted to keep attacking Israel.

This is a very false analogy, but HRW and Whitson have a monomaniacal hate for Israel that trumps all logic.

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 likes to pretend that it is pro-Israel and that the people on the Right who claim to be pro-Israel are really anti-Israel by considering parts of the West Bank to be part of Israel in any final status agreement.

But as this excerpt from the J-Street Conference indicates, Michelle Goldberg of the New York Times thinks that any Democratic candidates who are "too" pro-Israel are also "far-Right."

"What I think is interesting is that this is going to be...the first presidential primary where some candidates will pay a price for being too pro-Israel, and that was never a thing before. That could potentially change politics if there is a price to be paid too far-Right as well as being too far-Left."

Even subconsciously, she associates being pro-Israel with the political right and being anti-Israel with the political Left, at an unabashedly anti-Right conference that claims to be "pro-Israel."

And yes, she actually implied that some Democratic candidates were so pro-Israel as to be considered "far Right."

(I have no idea what candidate she has in mind who could remotely be considered "too" pro-Israel to the extent that it would hurt him or her. I certainly haven't seen anyone in the Democratic presidential field who remotely qualifies as such.)

She did preface this by saying that most of the candidates were still sticking to the old "pro-Israel" playbook of supporting our only democratic ally in the Middle East, which (in my impression of what she means) sounded like everyone knows this is just something they have to say even if they don't believe it. I was honestly expecting her to finish that statement with "blah, blah, blah."

The entire video is filled with smug, "we know better than Israel" comments. Similarly, tossing around idiotic statements like the US and Israel are turning "fascist" is regarded as accepted wisdom. J-Streeters position themselves as messianic figures who are the only ones who see the truth and everyone else is simply too dense to recognize their brilliance.

The smugness inspired me to tweet this morning, "Telling Arabs how to act morally is condescending and colonialist. Telling Israelis how to act morally without bothering to ask their side of the story is woke."

The J-Street Conference also includes PLO speakers. Jeremy Ben Ami defended that, and I responded:

I read the PLO positions in the original Arabic. I know very well how they really think. If you think that what they say to a @jstreetdotorg conference is remotely accurate compared to how they speak in Arabic, you are a complete fool. And you are willing to push their lies.
— Elder Of Ziyon ҉ (@elderofziyon) October 25, 2019

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.

10/26 Links: Melanie Phillips: Elizabeth Warren and the destruction of the west’s moral compass; Sanders’s presidential campaign selects anti-Semitic comedian as surrogate

From Ian:

Melanie Phillips: Elizabeth Warren and the destruction of the west’s moral compass

The Democratic presidential hopeful, Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren, has suggested that she would consider cutting military aid to Israel to force it to halt construction of settlements in the disputed territories.

“It is the official policy of the United States of America to support a two-state solution, and if Israel is moving in the opposite direction then everything is on the table,” she said. To ensure that no one failed to understand her threat, she repeated her final phrase.

Her comment furnished more evidence that Warren resembles British Labour Party leader Jeremy Corbyn in her far-left and Israel-bashing views. This threatens to harm not only the sole democratic U.S. ally in the Middle East, but also the interests and security of America itself.

Nevertheless, opposing Israeli settlements and taking the side of the Palestinian Arabs is unlikely to damage Warren’s prospects in broader progressive circles because these are views that they generally share.

This is not merely a divisive policy stance. It also displays a fundamental misconception about the Arab war against Israel that is shared widely within the Jewish as well as non-Jewish world.

At the most obvious level, bashing the settlements is historically and legally wrong.

Israel is entitled to retain and settle these territories twice over. The 1922 Palestine Mandate, whose terms have never been abrogated, gave the Jews alone the right to settle in what is now Israel, the “West Bank” and Gaza. In addition, international law upholds Israel’s right to retain land taken, as it was in 1967, in a war of defense against those who still continue to use it as a landing stage for attacks.

Moreover, the belief that the settlements prevent the creation of a Palestine state that would end the Middle East conflict is transparently false and historically illiterate.

The Palestinian Arabs think all Israel is a “settlement” of squatters with no rights to the land, and they want all of Israel gone. They make this plain in their deeds, their propaganda, and their maps and flags.

Lyn Julius: Buffeted by Egyptian winds of exile

‘There is hatred for everything that is different,’ a friend tells the incredulous young woman, as their world collapses around them in Nasser’s Egypt.

‘Le dernier Khamsin des juifs d’Egypte’ is the novel (in French) which the author Bat Ye’or ( her pen name, meaning Daughter of the Nile) had always wanted to write. Instead the Cairo-born Jewess’s life was thrown off course by her pioneering research into the dhimmi, the subaltern status of Jews and Christians under Islam.

The Hamsin is the hot wind blowing in to Egypt from the Sahara. For the 80,000 Jews of Egypt, riots combine with state-sanctioned persecution to blow this age-old community out of the country, never to return.

The book is written in an impressionistic style but is nuanced and covers all aspects of the exodus. It is heavily autobiographical. Arriving in 1957 as a young refugee in London to study at the Institute Z, Elly ( Bat Ye’or) comes from a well-heeled family. Now she is struggling to survive on a handout of eight pounds a month. Depressed in the cold and the fog, she tries to make sense of what has happened. She is haunted by flashbacks and ghosts from her Egyptian past. Her long-dead, observant relatives are resigned to their fate, but Elly, of a new breed of educated, secular, independent women, can’t accept that Egyptian Jewish life is being wiped out. Elly’s father is burning their family archives lest they be accused of Zionism before their hurried departure. They can’t leave without signing a declaration forfeiting their property.

The storm has been brewing for 100 years. Egyptian nationality was only granted to those who could prove roots going back to 1845.

The Needle

Last month, the world marked the 80th anniversary of Hitler’s invasion of Poland and the start of WWII. In Israel, too, this was a big milestone: Kids discussed it at school, academics held conferences at the various universities, newspapers ran articles and editorials. But this wasn’t, of course, always the case in Israel. For years, the war—and the Holocaust—were taboo topics. European Jews, many Israelis felt, had gone to the camps like sheep to the slaughter, without resisting, without putting up much of a fight.

Then that perception changed, almost overnight, as a result of one major event: the capture and trial of Adolf Eichmann. Every other Israeli, it seems, claims to have been connected to that heroic operation. But for years, one man who actually was at the heart of the covert kidnapping did all he could to erase himself from the history books. Gregory Warner and Daniel Estrin bring us the complicated story of Dr. Yonah Elian, the anesthesiologist who sedated one of the world’s most notorious Nazis. Today’s episode comes from Rough Translation, an NPR podcast that tells stories from around the world that offer new perspectives on familiar conversations.

10/25 Links Pt2: Caroline Glick: Trump, Israel and the Democratic crackup; Palestinian Advocacy Group Touring US Has Ties To Terrorist Organization; Exposé: Antisemitism at Columbia/Barnard

From Ian:

Caroline Glick: Trump, Israel and the Democratic crackup

In March, when the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) held its annual policy conference, the Democratic presidential candidates opted not to attend. This weekend, five Democratic presidential hopefuls will participate in J Street's national conference.

And they aren’t alone. Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer are also scheduled to address the J Street audience. J Street’s ability to draw top Democrats, including the presidential candidates who refused to attend the AIPAC conference, makes clear just how comfortable the Democratic leadership has become with their party’s sharp turn away from Israel. This weekend the top Democrats will publicly identify with an organization whose easily discerned purpose is to water down and undermine the US-Israel alliance.

Then too, last weekend two top Democratic presidential candidates, Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) and Mayor Pete Buttigieg indicated they supported using US military aid to Israel as a means to coerce the Israeli government into denying the property rights of Israeli Jews in Judea, Samaria and unified Jerusalem. In July, their fellow leading presidential candidate Senator Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) expressed a similar position.

These statements are noteworthy for two reasons. First, they show how ridiculous the impeachment hearings are. There is no substantive difference between Trump’s alleged use of US military assistance to Ukraine as a means to coerce Ukraine to bow to his will and their intention to use US military aid to Israel to achieve a similar outcome. But of course, Warren, Buttigieg, and Sanders are coddled by the partisan media and left untouched by the bureaucracy. And Trump is being subjected to an impeachment probe.

The second noteworthy aspect of their threated action is what it means for the future of US-Israel ties in a post-Trump America. With the Democrats in the media and the federal bureaucracy now full partners in their party’s radical actions and initiatives, there is every reason to expect that after they finish with Trump, they will turn their attention to Israel.

Progressive Jewish Americans and the legitimacy of Zionism

In a column titled, “I Was Protested at Bard College for Being a Jew,” Batya Ungar-Sargan, a liberal Zionist and the Opinion Editor of The Forward, a paper that is decidedly to the left, was targeted by progressive anti-Zionists because the panel was comprised of three Jews, including the esteemed Ruth Wisse of Harvard University.

She said the university had no plans to stop “what was fixing to become an ugly disruption of Jews trying to discuss anti-Semitism.” What shocked her more was the support of the academics and intellectuals in the audience who “applauded” the blatantly anti-Semitic disruption. “These vaunted intellectuals, flown in from across the country … were commending a display of racism against Jews,” she wrote.

Welcome to a world where far-left progressives find commonality with far-right fascists.

Unlike liberal Zionists of the 20th century, many 21st-century progressives attending our leading universities learned that Israel’s founding was the original sin of the Middle East, the ethnic cleansing of the indigenous Arab minority by the interloping Jewish Zionist.

As New York Times columnist and author of How to Fight Anti-Semitism Bari Weiss wrote, “Where once only Israel’s government was demonized, now it is the Jewish movement for self-determination itself” that is delegitimized.

Israel, a nation whose existence is dedicated to a particular people, is an anathema to the universalism of the progressive intellectual, whose dream is a globalized world of universal values, and a distorted understanding of human rights and social justice.

Why Israel is singled out to be the only country whose very existence offends progressives – who seem to ignore other religiously or ethnically dominated states whose actions are far more egregious than Israel’s imperfect democracy – raises troubling questions.

Southern Poverty Law Center Adds Pro-Israel Evangelical Group to Hate List

The evangelical organization Proclaiming Justice to The Nations (PJTN) has recently been placed on the Southern Poverty Law Center’s list of hate groups.

PJTN’s main goal is to fight anti-Semitism through encouraging state legislators to act against anti-Semitism and BDS. But the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) added the group, which is headquartered in Franklin, Tennessee, to its hate group list.

This could result in the US Terrorist Screening Center (TSC) adding PJTN personnel to the national no-flight list.

Laurie Cardoza-Moore, president and founder of PJTN, commented: “If being pro-Israel and against anti-Semitism is now considered a hate crime, I will wear the SPLC listing as a badge of honor. Placing Proclaiming Justice to The Nations alongside bigots and Nazis minimizes the true meaning of hate. In reality, PJTN is on the front lines fighting against anti-Semitism on a daily basis. We will continue to fight hate through our thousands of PJTN Watchmen around the globe. Our answer to this absurd listing will be to open more PJTN chapters in America and fight harder to have anti-Semitism defined and confronted throughout the free world.”

But according to SPLC, the pro-Israel group was added to the list because of its anti-Muslim statements: “Anti-Muslim groups remain a force in the US with Donald Trump and important administration members as allies in the White House,” SPLC explains.

It's time for @CodePink Follies in Iran! (Featuring @ArielElyseGold!)

The pseudo-progressive group Code Pink is in Iran, and they are so happy to be there!

Unfortunately for them, their tweets and blog entries show what idiots they are.

For example, on day 2, they visited a mosque. Of course these progressive women were very happy to bring bedsheets to cover themselves up as much as possible so as not to offend their liberal hosts, while the men could be bareheaded and in shirtsleeves.

So feminist!

By way of contrast, when they visited the Western Wall in Israel, they didn't really take religious sensibilities into account:

In Israel, the are free to protest Israel. In Iran, they are free to protest - Israel.

But that's who Code Pink is. They pretend to care about human rights and feminism, but they are very selective as to whose rights they want to protect. And if visiting Iran means they must cover up, who are they to argue?

On day 2 they also visited the US Den of Espionage Museum, where they were treated to posters like this one implying Jews control America:

The group's reaction to hate and antisemitism? Wide smiles:

On Day 3, their diarist noted that they were pretty much prisoners the entire trip:

I need to share with you that we have phenomenal guides, always looking out for us, always ready with answers to my innumerable questions, and treating us, each in their own individual way, like family. They truly are a fine imitation of helicopter parents, hovering over us, and telling us mainly what not to do! I cannot say enough about their professionalism, competence and caring.

In other words, they couldn't wander over to talk to ordinary people without their "guides" approving. Who employs their "guides?" It isn't them!

Prolific tweeter Ariel Elyse Gold was ecstatic over what she believed was a synagogue:

Um, no. This is a Shiite Alam, from a tradition of Shiite metalwork.

Gold, who loudly uses her Jewishness to justify her anti-Zionism, doesn't even know what a menorah looks like.

The term "useful idiots" has rarely been more appropriate.

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.

10/25 Links Pt1: 25 years on, Israel and Jordan ignore peace treaty anniversary; Israeli Security Officials Warn of Looming Iranian Threat; Arms Embargo on Iran Due to Expire in 2020

From Ian:

Colder than ever: 25 years on, Israel and Jordan ignore peace treaty anniversary

Twenty-five years ago, on October 26, 1994, Israel and Jordan ended decades of enmity and bloody wars when they signed a “Treaty of Peace” in the Arava Valley on the Israeli side of the border.

The next day, before King Hussein flew back to Amman, his Royal Jordanian plane, escorted by Israeli F-15 jets, circled over Jerusalem several times. The king and his wife were said to have been very moved as they looked at the Old City from above.

Nearly five years later, in January 1999, the king visited Israel again, and when he left, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu decided to honor the monarch by having two Israel Air Force fighter planes escort his aircraft in what the Foreign Ministry at the time called “a special salute fly-past.”

Royal visits have long since stopped, and so have grand gestures celebrating the bilateral relationship.

Netanyahu is again prime minister, but a quarter century after the historic peace agreement between the Jewish state and the Hashemite Kingdom was signed neither country is doing anything remotely significant to celebrate the historic milestone.

Among the Jordanian public, the so-called Wadi Araba Treaty was always largely regarded with resentment and suspicion. “It is a cold peace, and our relationship is getting colder,” Hussein’s son and heir King Abdullah II acknowledged in an interview 10 years ago.

But even Israel, where the accord is widely appreciated, and where the government often cites its peace with the Hashemite Kingdom as a blueprint for future interest-based agreements with other Arab states, has not organized any events to mark the anniversary.

Book Review: Spies in the Basement

The prime minister’s chief of staff asked me to mark off Oct. 26. “Leave it free. Don’t make any appointments that day,” he instructed.

“It’s a long time off,” I said. “The Messiah might arrive between now and then.”

“Did you hear what I said?” his voice bellowed, and Halevy added that just as I had kept silent in London, so must I seal my lips now. “Not a word to your wife or friends, Be’er,” Haber commanded.

Chapter 4. A few months later the news arrived with great fanfare: Peace with Jordan! A treaty with the Hashemite Kingdom would be signed at the Arava Valley border crossing on Oct. 26, 1994. The very date Haber had told me to reserve in my diary! Things began to become a bit clearer, but I hadn’t heard a thing from him or his office. At 2 a.m. on the night between the 24th and 25th of October a military police motorcycle screeched to a halt in front of our home, just like in an old thriller. The courier hand delivered an envelope from the prime minister, addressed to my “eyes only,” with a personal invitation to the Peace Treaty ceremony.

Epilogue. Standing by the edge of the stage, before the ceremony began, Efraim Halevy was once again engrossed in whispered conversation with the short, solid, broad-shouldered, mustachioed, Levantine-looking man. The very same man I had seen him with 15 years earlier in the London basement. It was Crown Prince Hassan bin Talal, brother of King Hussein. His back was a bit more stooped, and his hair now had a touch of gray. As soon as I could get Halevy alone I approached him with a warm greeting. He asked why I thought he and Haber had found me worthy of an invitation to this historic event, which capped countless secret meetings held over many years. “Why, indeed?” I answered his question with one of my own, in inimitable Jewish fashion. Halevy answered, “Because on that very day in London you were witness to the first contact between me and Prince Hassan, and on that afternoon at Café Apropos you caught me fresh from my return from Amman where the king and his brother and I settled on the date to sign the peace treaty. Since I didn’t want to inform the prime minister by telephone—everything was still secret, and you know how things leak—I made a date to pass the information via Eitan, who lives near the café. By fate’s guiding hand you were there at the start and also at the finish line. That’s why we thought it was only right to invite you to be here today.”

What Jordan’s plans for Naharayim mean for the Israelis near the border

Although the loss of Naharayim is painful, he has focused on what he considers to be the most important element here – that the peace has held between Israel and Jordan.

“It is a good relationship. We will not allow anyone to harm this relationship. When the ceremonies end and the politicians leave, we will still go out and work in the fields, and the Jordanians farmers will go out and work in their fields,” Grinbaum said.
Both sides will have to work together and share scarce resources, such as water.

“This is the most important thing,” he added. “There is no holiness in the land. Life is much more important than the land.”
Fifty years ago, Jordanians stood on the other side and shot at Israelis. Now the lights twinkle peacefully on the other side at night, he said.
So if leaving Naharayim is the painful price that has to be paid to maintain the peace, he is willing to pay it.

But, he added, there is a cautionary note here for those considering the details of a future peace plan with the Palestinians.
“I believe that the late King Hussein and the late Yitzhak Rabin, both of whom are not with us, when they signed the peace agreement in 1994, they never imagined that after 25 years [Naharayim] would become an issue,” he said.

When it comes to the Trump administration’s “Deal of the Century,” he said, people should ask themselves: If we do a great deal today, who will know what will happen 25 years from now?

“Consider what you sign and with whom,” he said, adding that Naharayim “should be a lesson for all of us.”

Here is Husam Zomlot, the PLO representative in the UK (who calls himself the "Ambassador of Palestine at the UK,") discussing how the Palestinians never wanted a two state solution next to a Jewish state.

Two states, he says, was merely a concession to the international community, but it is not a Palestinian desire. The entire land is solely theirs, and Jews have no rights there.

This is not usually said in English. Usually in English the Palestinians claim they want to live in peace with Israel. But now they are officially admitting that they never even wanted that; their real desire (as polls have shown) is to have a single Arab state from the Jordan to the Mediterranean, and the two state idea was merely a stage towards that end.

(This was at the Pearson Global Forum in Berlin earlier this month.)

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.