Because of MEMRI, the ADL and others, most of Israel's Arab neighbors learned long ago that their media should replace attacks on Jews and Judaism with purported attacks on "Zionists" and "Zionism."
Further away, however, the original antisemitism is still around.
In Sudan's case, it is so ingrained that even articles that are supportive of peace with Israel have antisemitic themes.
Here are some recent ones, all from Sudanile which publishes a large variety of opinion pieces, both pro and anti-normalization..
Abu Hurairah Abdul Rahman, a "writer and human rights defender," writes in Sudanile that it is of practical benefit to Sudan to make peace with Israel to help its economy. After all, he says,
The total number of Jews in the world is 15 million. Within America, they number 6 million, or less than 3% of the total American population. In a study on the wealth of the Jews in America in (2016-2017) that the wealth of the rich in the United States is estimated at 84 trillion dollars, and that 3 million Jews out of 6 million Jews Americans own 75% of the American wealth, according to the estimation of Credit Suisse.
Needless to say, there was no such study by Credit Suisse of Jewish wealth.
This article is similar - Jews are so rich and powerful so Sudan might as well be on their side:
The Jews own 75% of the total wealth of America. The Belza Ryan Report stated that 80% of the major positions in America are occupied by the Jews, just as the Jews have a great influence in the world. So, what is our interest to antagonize an entity with this strength and for whom? Why? Have we sacrificed our souls and our interests to support the oppressed in the world so much we have forgotten our interests? The cause of the Palestinians may be just, so why do they not fight for their cause on their own? And why do we fight on their behalf? We have seen them in the media enjoying quality hospitals and high-end schools, and they do not stand in line for bread for 4 hours, nor do they have petrol or gas rations, so why should we sacrifice for them ??! Do we have any possibility to sacrifice for others ?? A large part of what we suffer today and in the past is the product of our hostility to Israel, our funding and our arming of Hamas, and if we sacrifice ourselves for the support of the oppressed Muslims in the world, why should I not support the Rohingya in Myanmar? Or the people of Kashmir against India? Why are we facing this burden? There are 57 Muslim countries in the world, of which we are the weakest.
Dr. Farrag Sheikh Fazari, writing in the same site, also is OK with Jews, as he describes how prominent Jewish families used to live in Sudan. But his article starts off this way:
Before normalization with the Jewish state, we were safe and secure, far away from the deception of the Jews and the ambitions of the Jewish moneylender, who the English writer Shakespeare was able with great ingenuity to draw the features of his character and his bloody desire for revenge against anyone who stands before his limitless ambitions, as stated in the play "The Merchant of Venice."
This antisemitism is completely subconscious - the writers are sure that they are being complimentary towards Jews.
We have lots of ideas, but we need more resources to be even more effective. Please donate today to help get the message out and to help defend Israel.
Last week, France's president Emmanuel Macron said, during a memorial ceremony for beheaded teacher Samuel Paty, that France "will not give up cartoons" that depict Mohammed.
This statement has angered much of the Muslim world, who are now calling to boycott French goods.
The battle lines can be seen in two statements, one from the Organization of Islamic Coordination and the other from Emmanuel Macron himself.
The General Secretariat of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) has been following the ongoing practice of running satirical caricatures depicting the Prophet Muhammad (PBUH), being struck with astonishment at so unexpected a discourse from certain French politicians, which it deems to be harmful to the Muslim-French relations, hatemongering and only serving partisan political interests.
The General Secretariat says it will always condemn practices of blasphemy and of insulting Prophets of Islam, Christianity and Judaism.
Taking an unequivocal condemning stance against all acts of terror in the name of religion, the General Secretariat had earlier condemned the brutal murder of French citizen Samuel Paty.
While dissociating this horrendous crime from Islam and its magnanimous values, blaming it as an individual or collective terrorist enterprise punishable by law, the General Secretariat continues to decry justification for blasphemy-based harassment of any religion in the name of freedom of expression.Furthermore, the General Secretariat deplores pairing Islam and Muslims with terrorism, urging for a review of anti-Muslim discriminatory policies, unjustifiably provocative to the feelings of a billion and a half Muslims across the world.
We respect all differences in a spirit of peace. We do not accept hate speech and defend reasonable debate. We will always be on the side of human dignity and universal values.
Taking both at face value, we see both commonalities and differences. It is worthwhile to examine the exact differences between the positions.
The OIC and Macron seem to agree that hate speech should not be accepted. The both agree that terrorism is unacceptable, even terrorism that is ostensibly defending religious figures from attack.
The difference is in what speech is acceptable.
Macron is against "hate speech." The OIC, representing Muslims, is against "blasphemy-based" speech.
That is the key.
The Muslims are insisting that the West accept Sharia law in determining what is acceptable. Macron rejects that.
Muslim anger is centered on the cartoon depiction of Mohammed far more than on the words or context of those images. Macron is concentrating on the context - if it is based on hate it is unacceptable, if it is based on debate it must be defended.
Charlie Hebdo's cartoons, offensive to all religions and groups, are not motivated by hate. Even though this cover that equates Israel's treatment of Palestinians with Nazi treatment of Jews is inarguably offensive, in the context of Charlie Hebdo which delights in offending literally everyone, this is not hate speech. Whether it is funny is another question - offense for the sake of offense is puerile, not witty. In practically every other context, that equation of Jews to Nazis is unquestionably antisemitic and hate speech, meant to hurt Jews. For Charlie Hebdo, it is "look at us and how edgy we are," the equivalent to dead baby jokes.
The OIC is pretending to care about insults to Judaism and Christianity but it is really saying that since Islamic law prohibits the depiction of any prophets, the entire world must adhere to those standards. After all, no Jew or Christian would be insulted by this cartoon, which is prohibited in Islam because it depicts Moses:
Macron is saying that the intent is the key for determining what is hate speech and what is allowed. The OIC is saying that the intent is irrelevant - things are objectively offensive if they violate Islamic law.
Macron is saying that all groups must be treated equally. The OIC is saying that Muslims must be treated with kid gloves because they get offended by more things than other groups do.
When you examine their positions, it is apparent that Macron is correct. One may and should choose to respect others and their beliefs, but this is out of courtesy and kindness rather than compulsion, as the Muslim groups are insisting. The line is crossed at incitement and hate, and the evidence of that is often based on looking at the entire history of the words of the alleged inciter.
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 NYU - American Association of University Professors issued a statement about Zoom denying PFLP terrorist Leila Khaled on their platform.
10/23/2020
Today, Zoom unilaterally shut down a webinar hosted by the NYU chapter of the AAUP, and co-sponsored by several NYU departments and institutes. The webinar was scheduled to discuss the censorship, by Zoom and other big tech platforms, of an open classroom session last month at SFSU, featuring the Palestinian rights advocate Leila Khaled.
Of course, we recognize that it is an act of sick comedy to censor an event about censorship, but it raises serious questions about the capacity of a corporate, third-party vendor to decide what is acceptable academic speech and what is not.
The shutdown of a campus event is a clear violation of the principle of academic freedom that universities are obliged to observe. Allowing Zoom to override this bedrock principle, at the behest of organized, politically motivated groups, is a grave error for any university administration to make, and it should not escape censure from faculty and students.
The NYU administration has told us they knew nothing about Zoom’s decision, and that they have taken up the issue with the company’s representatives. We urge the administration to issue a strong statement denouncing this act, and to revisit the terms of its contract with Zoom.
If Zoom will not walk back its policy of canceling webinars featuring Palestinian speech and advocacy, college presidents should break their agreements with the company.
The AAUP chapter is committed to organizing an event for the NYU community to discuss this appalling breach of academic norms.
Back in ancient times of a couple of decades ago, university professors were expected to tell the truth. It seems to be a minimum requirement for the job. But at NYU, the AAUP seems to be allergic to veracity.
Nowhere in this letter does it say the reason Zoom does not allow Leila Khaled on its platform. This is strange because anyone can read Zoom's Prohibited Use policy:
Prohibited Use. You agree that You will not use, and will not permit any End User to use, the Services to: ... use the Services in violation of any Zoom policy or in a manner that violates applicable law, including but not limited to ...anti-terrorism laws and regulations...
Hosting and promoting a terrorists violates anti-terrorism laws.
The reason is because Khaled is a member of a terror group, not because she is an advocate for Palestinians.
When the NYU-AAUP says Zoom has a policy of "canceling webinars featuring Palestinian speech and advocacy," they are not only lying - they are knowingly lying. There are plenty of pro-Palestinian Zoom meetings, every single day.
Almost as bad is saying that Zoom is "censoring" anything by adhering to its own rules against using the platform for terrorism that it has had in place since 2012.
The AAUP, with this statement, has destroyed its credibility - in support of an unrepentant terrorist and current member of an active terror group.
Not to mention that the AAUP has not, to my knowledge, ever said a word in support of academic freedom when gangs of Israel-haters who disrupt lectures and speeches by Zionists or Israelis. This only becomes a "bedrock principle" when a terrorist is affected. Which is its own kind of sickness.
(h/t Andrew P)
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.
Over a thousand mostly Orthodox Jews gathered for a rally in support of Donald Trump in Brooklyn on Sunday, using the opportunity to loudly air their grievances against Democratic leadership in New York while calling for four more years of the Republican US president.
The demonstration in Brooklyn’s Marine Park came after weeks of tensions in many of the borough’s Orthodox neighborhoods over new restrictions imposed by New York Governor Andrew Cuomo and New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio in response to rising COVID-19 cases in those areas.
Some ultra-Orthodox communities in Brooklyn have found themselves in national headlines due to accusations that their refusal to adhere to coronavirus guidelines led to a spike of new cases in September. Orthodox leaders accuse Cuomo and de Blasio of unfairly singling out their communities and adopting punitive measures rather than engaging with them.
While the infection rate has since waned and restrictions have begun to be lifted in some places, they still mostly remain in Brooklyn, along with tensions between the Jewish community and the city and state leadership.
“Hey Cuomo, you probably wouldn’t have allowed this [gathering]… Come get me!” said the rally’s emcee Nachman Mostofsky, the executive director of the right-wing, pro-Israel policy group Chovevei Zion.
The rally was the final destination of a parade convoy that chugged through the streets of Rockland County’s Monsey, Long Island’s Five Towns, Manhattan, and a number of pre-dominantly Orthodox neighborhoods in Brooklyn.
Hundreds of New York Ultra-Orthodox Jews Hold Pro-Trump Rally
Skirmishes broke out between supporters and opponents of US President Donald Trump as a Jews For Trump convoy of hundreds of cars draped with American flags and Trump 2020 banners rolled slowly through Manhattan and Brooklyn on Sunday afternoon.
The demonstration was planned as part pre-election rally for the Republican president and part protest against coronavirus restrictions in some heavily Jewish areas of New York where spiking infection rates have been recorded.
The caravan traveled from Coney Island to the Trump Tower in Manhattan before heading to a rally in a Brooklyn park. Cars in the procession blasted remix versions of the president’s speeches, festive Jewish music and soundtracked campaign slogans.
Videos shared on Twitter showed several protesters pelting the vehicles with eggs or stones, snatching flags and shouting insults.
In one video showing physical fights between several people, police officers detain an unidentified man and protesters chant “let him go.” Another video showed a small group of people throwing objects from a Brooklyn highway overpass at vehicles bedecked with Trump flags.
Trump’s personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani briefly greeted supporters from the passenger seat of a car driving near Trump Tower during the parade, videos showed.
A family of seven ‒ including four kids ‒ were pepper-sprayed by violent rioters on Sunday while participating in a “Jews For Trump” rally in New York City.
placeholder
A spokesperson for the New York Police Department said 11 people were taken into custody after the rally descended into chaos and violence Sunday afternoon. Six people were charged with disorderly conduct, obstruction of government administration and harassment, while a seventh person was charged with assaulting a police officer and resisting arrest, the NYPD said Monday.
A convoy of hundreds of cars draped with American flags and "Trump 2020" banners rolled slowly through Manhattan and Brooklyn on Sunday afternoon. The caravan traveled from Coney Island to the Trump Tower in Manhattan before heading to a rally in a Brooklyn park.
At some point, skirmishes broke out between supporters and opponents of the president.
A member of the family that was pepper-sprayed told Fox News that the unprovoked attack happened while the family was driving down Fifth Avenue with the car windows down and Trump flags displayed.
The man, who wished to remain anonymous fearing his family could be targeted, said a car pulled up next to them and unleashed pepper spray into their vehicle.
"Immediately the kids started crying and screaming and I jumped out of the car after I was peppered [sic] sprayed as well," the man said.
The man said the attacker chased him down the avenue trying to pepper-spray him again. His mother flagged down an officer and the suspect was arrested.
At the heart of a University of Toronto hiring scandal is an academic whose critique of Israeli settlements in Palestine is not what most people would call radical.
At York University, a professor is facing death threats and a campaign to stop him from teaching human rights courses — a campaign that accuses him of anti-Semitism after he debated the definition of anti-Semitism.
While the Israeli-Palestinian conflict has long been a flashpoint on campuses across Canada, legal experts and advocacy groups are raising concerns that these recent incidents suggest an escalation of silencing even moderate critiques of Israel, and not just in the halls of academia, but in the media, the political sphere and social interactions.
Are the two academics pictured here "moderate critics" of Israel?
The professor on the left, York University Law Professor Faisal Bhabha, said during a June 10 webcast that Zionism is just “Jewish supremacy.” He later said “I am equating Zionism with white supremacy” and then added for good measure that it was possible that Israel is “exaggerating the Holocaust.”
This isn't moderate criticism. This is demonizing Israel and Jewish Zionists as being bigots, and his suggestion that Israel exaggerates the Holocaust is pure antisemitism.
These "one staters" never call for India, Pakistan and Bangladesh to become one state to ensure equal rights. They never propose nations in the Balkans of different ethnicities to merge together. Only the Jewish State is expected to be destroyed in the name of equal rights - with no regard to the human rights of Jews who would, in their world, inevitably become a minority in a majority hostile Palestinian Arab nation.
It is possible to criticize Israel without calling it an apartheid state, or a Nazi state, or calling for its destruction. No one demands Syria's destruction, or China's.
No one is calling actual legitimate criticism antisemitism. But invariably, the people who complain that they are being "silenced" by accusations of antisemitism are proven to have a crazed obsession with insisting that Israel follow rules that they do not demand of any other nation.
That's double standards, and that is 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.
Peter Beinart writes in the socialist Jewish Currents site:
ON OCTOBER 23RD, Donald Trump announced that Sudan would begin the process of normalizing relations with Israel. The declaration, which was part of a deal to remove Sudan from the US list of state sponsors of terror, follows last month’s pledges by the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain to recognize the Jewish state. Trump and Benjamin Netanyahu have claimed that those peace deals—dubbed “The Abraham Accords”—will promote “human dignity and freedom” in the Middle East.
Twelve days after the Abraham Accords were signed, a poet named Dhabiya Khamis tried to exercise her freedom to leave the UAE. Her government barred her from boarding the plane. “The ban is probably because of my announced opinion against Zionism and normalization,” Khamis declared. “I fear for my freedom and life from being threatened and arrested.” Those fears were well-founded. According to a report in Middle East Monitor, “scores of Emiratis, Palestinians and Jordanians living in the UAE” had already been jailed “for opposing Abu-Dhabi’s peace deal with Israel.”
I'm not going to defend the human rights record of any Muslim country, but there is absolutely no evidence that Khamis was blocked from leaving because of her political positions. She made that claim; it was eagerly repeated by Iranian media and skeptically quoted by BBC Arabic.
What is the proof that the UAE arrested opponents of the deal? Tracing back the source, it came from a very sketchy NGO called the Euro-Mediterranean Human Rights Monitor, which mentioned that some people from the UAE, Bahrain and Mauritania were arrested during protests against the Abraham Accords. Not one person arrested was named - the NGO stated that it received "complaints."
Based on these tenuous reports, Beinart reaches some conclusions:
Khamis’s experience illustrates a harsh truth: Although Israel’s diplomatic breakthroughs in the Persian Gulf have elicited bipartisan praise in Washington, they rely on—and contribute to—brutal repression. In Sudan, which is undergoing a fragile transition after three decades of dictatorial rule, normalization imperils democracy too. The reason is simple. In a region where sympathy for the Palestinian cause still runs deep, recognizing Israel elicits fierce popular opposition. To implement normalization agreements, therefore, Netanyahu and Trump need their Arab partners to quash domestic dissent. For years, Israel’s boosters have bemoaned the lack of democracy in the Middle East. Ironically, it is that lack of democracy on which Israel’s peace diplomacy largely depends.
And he uses curious logic. He says that since the UAE has used software from Israel's private NSO Group to spy on citizens, that means Israel is culpable for that use. He says that since Bahrain has previously banned Shiite parties from its parliament, Israel is benefitting from the king's repression. As always, to the Left, Arabs aren't responsible for their own actions - Israel is pulling the strings.
As far as Sudan goes, Beinart goes further out on a limb:
In a country where—according to an Arab Center for Research and Policy Studies poll—almost 80% of people oppose normalization, rapidly establishing diplomatic ties to Israel could destabilize the fragile transitional government. The announcement has already sparked public protests. And the leader of Sudan’s largest political party, which has close ties to the protest movement that overthrew Bashir, claims that the normalization agreement “contradicts the Sudanese national law” and could mean “the ignition of a new war.” Sarah Leah Whitson, executive director of Democracy for the Arab World Now (DAWN), told me she fears Sudan’s generals may use the resulting instability as the pretext for a “full military takeover and end to the democratic transition.” In which case Sudan would be on its way to resembling the UAE and Bahrain.
So many bad things could happen - and people who are against normalization are saying it - so, to Beinart, we can assume they will, which makes normalization awful!
Unlike Beinart, I spend time reading primary sources. Bahrain, the UAE and Sudan are all different nations with different priorities and aspirations. But none of them - government or opposition - are going to risk a civil war over the Palestinian issue. Nobody cares that deeply about it. The doomsday scenarios on Sudan are ridiculous.
Not to say there isn't opposition to the deal. There is. But Sudan's main desire is to get off the terror list and to help its economy. The Palestinian issue is barely line noise. If the price to get what they so desperately need is peace with Israel, that is a relatively small price to pay. The opposition will complain, like oppositions everywhere. But no one is going to start a war or a coup because of their love of Palestinians.
No matter how much the Beinarts of the world hope that will happen.
Another major point that Beinart chooses to ignore: the entire reason for wall-to-wall historic opposition to Israel is a combination of antisemitism - which the socialist Left pretends does not exist in the Arab world - and decades of non-stop anti-Israel propaganda. In the UAE and in Bahrain this propaganda has ended. In Sudan, there are articles in the media that are pro-normalization, some antisemitic articles against it, and many that are pragmatic about the idea.
This is why the idea of normalization is gaining currency in so many Arab countries - for the first time, ordinary people are reading both sides of the story in their own local media.
To the Peter Beinarts of the world, this is a catastrophe. They need Arabs to be anti-Israel and antisemitic to justify their arguments that the Middle East will explode if Israel bypasses the intransigent Palestinians. But support for Palestinians was always ankle-deep at best, and the Western Left never understood that basic fact - mostly because every Arab diplomat, for honor reasons, would parrot the anti-Israel line whenever they spoke to their Western counterparts.
In the end, every Arab nation will act in their self-interest.
The UAE aspires to be a modern, high tech state whose economy is no longer dependent on vanishing oil supply and demand. Israel is a natural partner for this enterprise.
Bahrain wants to be known as the most tolerant Muslim country. Embracing Jews is the most visible and public means to reach that goal.
Sudan wants to end its long nightmare of the last decade and become a respectable nation. Peace with Israel helps them in that direction far more than continued slogans for Palestinians.
And one more thing Beinart chooses to ignore. As much as he wants to paint Israel as a brutal dictatorship, he knows that Israel has the most concern for human rights and free speech of any nation in the region, and is among the best in the world. Israel will influence Arab nations to be more open, not less. It is Israel's concern for equal rights, for education, for scientific research and development, for innovation and for the free market that gives it a competitive advantage - and these are all things that will bring Arab nations out of the backwardness they have been in for so long.
In literally every argument Beinart gives for his thesis, he shows not only that he is wrong, but that he has turned into a hater. Because in the end, his thesis rests on the assumption that Israel is evil, and therefore whatever it does will be evil. It is bigotry.
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.
Intelligence Minister Eli Cohen added that a peace accord with Sudan strikes a blow to Iran’s aspirations of regional hegemony. “Sudan is an important country in the region, having previously served as a way station for weapons between Iran and Gaza,” Cohen said. “Taking it off the US list of state sponsors of terrorism enables us to sign another agreement and to develop several important tracks of cooperation that will greatly contribute to Israel.”
From Israel’s point of view, this is also an opportunity to discuss the repatriation of thousands of Sudanese migrants who have sought refuge here in recent years. But the two countries are also expected to negotiate several mutually beneficial cooperation agreements, including in agriculture and technology.
The US and Israel have pledged to help bring both investment and debt relief to Sudan. Washington is offering a billion-dollar aid package, while Israel will provide agritech to help boost its dire economic situation. For its part, Sudan – Africa’s third-largest country – has huge swaths of arable land.
But on the flip side, there is concern that such a major foreign policy move at a time of deep economic crisis in Sudan could upset the delicate balance between the military and civilian authority, which is why Sudanese Prime Minister Abdalla Hamdok is expected to push for his country’s transitional parliament to approve the deal first. The chairman of Sudan’s Sovereignty Council, Abdel Fattah al-Burhan, is scheduled to hand over control of the council to Hamdok in 2022.
We should not ignore recent protests that have taken place in Khartoum against the normalization agreement with Israel, that have included the burning of Israeli flags. According to the Sudanese newspaper, Al-Intibaha, demonstrators chanted slogans against establishing relations and demanded that political parties who supported the step revise their position. At least two political factions in Sudan – the Popular Congress Party and the Sudanese Baath Party – issued statements condemning the decision to forge ties with Israel.
As the US heads to a critical election next week, we urge the new administration – whether under Trump or Biden – to continue pursuing the path of peace between Israel and Arab states. Perhaps the UAE, Bahrain and now Sudan can help to get the Palestinian leadership back to the negotiating table with Israel.
"For some odd reason, prior administrations decided to indulge Palestinian fantasies about what could happen that were totally out of touch with reality."
"I spent most of yesterday in closed door meetings, with [U.S. Treasury] Secretary Mnuchin, Prime Minister Netanyahu, [and] the finance minister of the United Arab Emirates....I'm in the room and I'm seeing people that really, really want to advance the ball as far as it will go.....They were almost...tripping over each other to come up with more and more ideas about what could be done. The sky is truly the limit, and it's fun to watch, because...we don't need to police this or oversee it; they're doing that on their own."
"I think the Palestinians are sort of in one of those final stages of denial. It's hard to watch. It's completely self-defeating. There was a leadership problem. There was significant corruption at the top....I've traveled with Prime Minister Netanyahu to the United States. I've been on his plane a few times....He flies like a regular commercial passenger. And Mahmoud Abbas, where the Palestinian GDP per capita is maybe 1/15th that of Israel, he flies around in a $75 million Boeing business jet....You've got a lot of concentration of wealth among the upper elite and a lot of people are really unhappy about it."
"America has provided the Palestinians with more financial, humanitarian assistance per capita than any other place in the world by far. And we have given more money to the Palestinians compared to any other nation by a power of at least five compared to every other country. So, we've got nothing to apologize for in terms of our assistance to the Palestinians....It is a bridge to nowhere. The Palestinians want to take, but they're not willing to really engage in a serious way."
"We want to help the Palestinian people. By the way, the State of Israel wants to help the Palestinian people. It is in Israel's interest for the Palestinian people to be healthy, to be prosperous, to have hope and optimism about their lives....Enough of the histrionics. Enough of the tantrums. Just sit down and have civilized discussions on serious issues and there'll be progress."
Secretary-General of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) Yousef Al-Othaimeen told Sky News on Monday that Palestinians need to "think outside the box" in their search for an end to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
"One is required to think outside the box in search for peace. I do not think a reasonable person - whether Palestinian, Arab or Muslim - would refuse any initiative to resolve the [Palestinian] cause in any way," he said.
"The [Palestinian] cause has been going on for 70 years. We have tried wars, we have tried to throw Israel into the sea and we have tried many other things," the former Saudi Arabian minister said.
Othaimeen said that the goal of the Palestinian cause is a two-state solution, with east Jerusalem as its capital, and that a younger generation should not be afraid to try new approaches to get there.
Sec.-Gen. of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation Yousef Al-Othaimeen: The Palestinians Need to Think Outside the Box, Try Different Ways to Achieve Peace with Israel, Two-State Solution pic.twitter.com/8GLK0GvFAX
One interesting feature is a "word cloud" showing the relative frequency of bias crimes by type, sizing each type by how frequent they are.
As we have seen in the past, anti-Jewish crimes are by far the most prevalent in New York, although for the first half of the year they were not more than half of all the bias crimes. Still, the word cloud is startling:
If the United States is structurally racist, then perhaps it is endemically antisemitic. (I don't believe that.)
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.
Almost lost among the flurry of announcements around Israel's peace with Bahrain was this Memorandum of Understanding between the US State Department Office of the Special Envoy To Monitor and Combat Anti-Semitism and Bahrain's King Hamad Global Centre for Peaceful Coexistence.
Here it is:
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN THE KING HAMAD GLOBAL CENTRE FOR PEACEFUL COEXISTENCE AND THE OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES SPECIAL ENVOY TO MONITOR AND COMBAT ANTI-SEMITISM
WHEREAS Arabs and Jews are both Semitic peoples that are threatened by hatred or intolerance toward Semitic peoples;
WHEREAS all peoples of the Middle East should aspire to coexist in tolerance and mutual respect;
WHEREAS the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) has adopted a widely accepted definition of anti-Semitism that incorporates examples of its various manifestations;
WHEREAS anti-Semitism is a vile poison that must be eradicated from the world;
WHEREAS purveyors of anti-Semitism in the Middle East seek to spread this evil as a political tool to manipulate the Arab and Muslim world;
WHEREAS His Majesty King Hamad bin Issa Al-Khalifa has made it a top priority for Bahrain to lead the Middle East toward a future of tolerance, mutual respect, and cooperation between Muslims and Jews; and
WHEREAS President Donald J. Trump and Secretary of State Michael R. Pompeo have made it a top priority for the United States to combat all forms of anti-Semitism in all parts of the world;
THEREFORE, the King Hamad Global Centre for Peaceful Coexistence (the King Hamad Centre) and the Office of the United States Special Envoy to Monitor and Combat Anti-Semitism (SEAS), hereinafter the Participants, hereby set forth the following understandings:
(1) The King Hamad Centre and SEAS intend to work together to develop and implement programs to promote mutual respect, appreciation, and peaceful coexistence between the Arab and Jewish peoples and their respective nation-states, and between all faiths in the Middle East; The spirit of this cooperation is intended to be guided by the principles of The Kingdom of Bahrain Declaration of July 3, 2017;
(2) The King Hamad Centre and SEAS intend to work together to develop and implement programs to recognize and celebrate the periods of good will and harmony that existed between Jews and Arabs living side-by-side throughout the Middle East;
(3) The King Hamad Centre and SEAS intend to cooperate in developing educational programs aimed at teaching all children of the Middle East the values of mutual respect, appreciation, and peaceful coexistence; such programs are intended to build upon the King Hamad Faith in Leadership Fellows Programme, The King Hamad Cyber Peace Academy, and other related programs;
(4) The King Hamad Centre and SEAS intend to work together to share and promote best practices for combating all forms of anti-Semitism, including anti-Zionism and the delegitimization of the State of Israel;
(5) The King Hamad Centre and SEAS intend to work together to share and promote best practices for combating other kinds of intolerance and hatred;
(6) The King Hamad Centre and SEAS each intends to bear its own costs for any cooperation and activities taken in furtherance of this Memorandum of Understanding (MoU);
(7) The King Hamad Centre and SEAS intend to develop the activities and areas of cooperation under this MoU through a periodic work plan and intend to develop the first work plan within six months of signature of this MoU;
(8) As used herein, the term "anti-Semitism" is defined by reference to and in accordance with the Working Definition of Antisemitism as adopted by the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) in its Bucharest plenary on May 26, 2016, including the examples set forth as part of the definition;
(9) Cooperation under this MoU is intended to commence upon signature and is intended to be operative for three years, subject to written renewal for a similar period. Either the King Hamad Centre or SEAS may unilaterally discontinue this MoU at any time, with written notice given to the other Participant.
SIGNED at Washington, DC, this 22nd day of October, 2020, in duplicate in the English language.
For the first time, an Arab nation has accepted that anti-Zionism is a form of antisemitism. Arabs of course know this well - while they have been arguing since the 1940s that the two are separate, they know quite well that antisemitism has been used to fuel anti-Zionism in the Arab world and that opposition to Israel has always been based on antisemitic theories, theories which we have documented here many times from Arab media.
That is not even the most astonishing part!
This MOU calls for "peaceful coexistence between the Arab and Jewish peoples and their respective nation-states," meaning that Bahrain accepts Israel as the nation-state of the Jewish people.
Note that the text says "Arabs and Jews are both Semitic peoples." This shows that Bahrain accepts Jews as a people, not merely members of a religion as the Palestinians insist. (Yes, the agreement is with the King Hamas Center and not the government, but the King Hamad Center represents the King.)
Not only that, but it accepts Jews as a Semitic people, meaning that that are an indigenous people of the region that belong there every bit as much as Arabs.
Even beyond that, this MOU says that Bahrain will work to establish peace between Israel and all Arab states to establish peace in the entire region. Peace between Israel and Bahrain is not looked upon as a narrow bilateral agreement but as a springboard to establishing Israel as a permanent part of the Middle East.
Elan S. Carr, the US Special Envoy to Monitor and Combat Anti-Semitism, has been working on this for quite a while. First news of an MOU came in February and it is unclear if they waited for Israel/Bahrain peace for issue the text (I could find no stories of an actual signing of the MOU as planned in March), since it would have been awkward for Bahrain to accept Israel as the Jewish state before the normalization agreement.
In some ways, this is even more amazing and groundbreaking than the Israel/UAE agreements announced so far.
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.
173. If a person does any of the following, then he is liable to one year imprisonment:
(1) he publishes a publication that is liable crudely to offend the religious faith or sentiment of others;
(2) he voices in a public place and in the hearing of another person any word or sound that is liable crudely to offend the religious faith or sentiment of others.
There is obviously tension between this law and freedom of expression, and the LOC lists various examples where freedom of expression won out - allowing the showing of the film The Last Temptation of Christ, or allowing the distribution of the Charlie Hebdo cover that showed Mohammed saying "I am Charlie."
The document lists only a single case where this law was invoked:
In a 1998 decision the Supreme Court rejected an appeal from a conviction of attempting to injure religious sentiments by trying to post flyers in Hebron, a city with a majority of Muslims that had experienced a high level of tension between Jews and Arabs in recent years. The flyers depicted a pig wearing an Arab head cover and labeled “Muhammad” stepping on an open book titled “Quran.” The Court noted that, considering that freedom of speech constitutes a basic principle of a democratic state, indictments under section 173 of the Penal Law were rare. In the circumstances of the case, however, there was no need for expert opinions to prove that the flyers could cause injury to the feelings of Muslims in Hebron and crossed the line of what was permitted as free speech.
This means that, as far as I can tell, the only time this law meant to protect members of a religion from being offended in Israel was invoked was when the offended people were Muslims.
This is also a case where the situation where Israeli residents of the territories have different laws than the Palestinian citizens is to the Palestinians' advantage. The Jews of Hebron have to adhere to Israeli law not to crudely offend their Muslim neighbors, but the Israeli courts cannot force the Muslims there to act the same way towards Jews.
(h/t Irene)
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.
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 word "Sudan" means "black" in Arabic (bilad as-sudan means "Land of the Blacks"). Over hundreds of years, Sudan was infiltrated by Islam. Essentially, all of East Africa used to be called "Cush," which is traditionally considered the eponymous ancestor of the people of the "land of Cush," an ancient territory that is believed to have been located on either side or both sides of the Red Sea. As the centuries passed, three main population groups formed. Islam, in its flexibility, joined two of these groups together.
One group was the Arab Muslims in the fertile, wealthy northern part of Sudan, and the other was the Africans who were converted to Islam but to this day pass on the harsh memories of the days they were hunted by slave traders. Another group, in the southern part of Sudan, consists of black Christians who essentially formed the bridgehead for relations with Israel during the premiership of Golda Meir.
The relations that developed at that time formed complexities that are difficult to comprehend. On one hand, Israel sent Mossad agents led by David Ben Uziel ("Tarzan") to help the Christians in South Sudan defend themselves against genocidal campaigns. Jaafar Nimeiri, who recognized the autonomy of South Sudan in the early 1970s, permitted Ethiopian Jews to immigrate to Israel more than a decade later. He was also the only one in the Arab world who supported former Egyptian President Anwar Sadat when he made peace with Israel. Under Nimeiri's leadership of Sudan, however, an Islamist leader named Hassan al-Turabi rose to prominence. Al-Turabi pushed Sudan toward Islamism and an alliance with Iran immediately after the Khomenei-led Islamic Revolution in 1979.
"Turabi was among those who celebrated Sadat's murder, and his people later tried assassinating [former Egyptian President Hosni] Mubarak," Koren said, noting that a "process of Islamist radicalism had begun." This was the world of al-Bashir and al-Turabi up until 2011. They had a hand – beyond acts of genocide inside Sudan – in efforts to topple moderate Arab regimes. This period of time was disastrous for Sudan. "Bashir's successors, [Abdel Fattah] al-Burhan and [Abdalla] Hamdok, who seized power following the protests that ousted [al-Bashir], essentially followed a path he had set," according to Koren. "Bashir understood his situation was increasingly precarious, and the matter of establishing relations with Israel was part of the answer to this decline."
As early as three or four years ago, voices began emerging and articles began being written in favor of relations with Israel. The important point is that Arab nationalism, followed by the period of Islamism, didn't inculcate the Sudanese population with a hatred of Israel, contrary to countries in the Arab world. Egyptian society, to this day, is imbued with a deep, venomous anti-Semitism.
Swinging a gigantic, vast country (population of 42 million) such as Sudan, which sits on the Red Sea, is an extremely significant geopolitical move. The new Middle East is bustling with realignment in the face of Turkey's Ottoman ambitions and Iranian imperialism. For the first time, it appears the forces predicated on militaristic anti-Israel ideology are becoming isolated.
Ambassador to Israel David Friedman has represented the United States through a period that belies the Middle East’s reputation for stagnation and intransigence. Not without controversy, the region emerged as what is arguably the Trump Administration’s strong suit as a series of “impossibilities” fell by the wayside.
The Media Line’s Felice Friedson sat with the ambassador at his residence in Herzliya where they discussed the issues and events that define the Trump term to the Middle East.
TML: American polling raises the specter of a change in US administrations. There’s concern that these achievements we’ve discussed could be walked back. And in particular, pressure on Iran might be lifted. Can the achievements in the Middle East survive a change of a US administration?
Ambassador Friedman: Well, look, I think an administration with a different approach could do huge damage. No question about it. The most obvious area would be with regard to Iran. Iran is on the ropes. They are weakened. They’re far weaker now than they were before we let them off the hook with the JCPO, right? If you let them off the hook again, we will all have to answer to our children and grandchildren as to how we created a terrorist nuclear power, which is what we will do if we let Iran off the ropes right now. So, I don’t want to predict what will happen in the future with regards to a new administration. I frankly don’t think there’ll be a new administration, but look, it’s a big risk. I think it’s important because I think people do tend to politicize this too much, whatever we’ve done with regard to the Middle East has been done because we thought it was in the best interest of the United States.
That’s always been the lens that we’ve looked at everything, what’s in the best interest of the United States? Not what’s on anyone’s political wish list. I would hope that because of that, all the things that we’ve done would be enduring, would stand the test of time. I’ve heard already that there’s no desire to move the embassy back from Jerusalem. Well, of course there shouldn’t be, that’s the national wellness, the Jerusalem Embassy Act. Why would anybody want to do that? Why would anybody want to talk about giving the Golan Heights to a butcher, like Bashar Assad and threaten Israel’s security? I mean, why would anybody want to undo that? By the same token, why would anybody want to take the most threatening malign sponsor of terrorism in the world and fund them? To me, these are easy things that should be perpetuated because they’re great for America, but I do worry.
While progressives are the ideological grandchildren (to the extent that they possess an ideology) of Marxists, they are members of a cult, the ideological fault lines of which pass not through class but through race and ethnicity. Progressivism borrows a bit from Marxism, but its main weapons are passion and faith, not logic and reason. At its core it is closer to the early Church than to Marx or Lenin.
The belief system of the progressives contains a number of “original sins,” one of which is the establishment of the State of Israel. The Palestinians are viewed as analagous to Jesus: innocents who were sacrificed by the Zionists (or the Jews, if the speaker is not careful enough) on the altar of global white imperialism. Thus every Jew must condemn Israel and Zionism to rid himself of the association.
Given that there will always be Jews who are unwilling to abandon the main tenet of Jewish national identity, the Progressive movement is guaranteed a perpetual enemy. As the movement “matures,” Israel/Zionists/Jews take on more and more diabolical roles unrelated to the Middle East. The Zionists are accused of running the world, its finances in particular, and are presented as the vanguard of white imperialism.
If there is anything the Progressives have thoroughly borrowed from the Soviets, it is intense antisemitism presenting itself as anti-Zionism. The Progressive platform on Jews and Zionism sounds familiar to anyone who read Pravda in the 1970s and 1980s. Intersectionality, the pillar of the Progressive worldview, mandates that enemies be found everywhere, in the most bizarre incarnations.
If the Arab-Israeli conflict is to continue to exist, it will be thanks to the antisemitism of the Progressive movement. Members of that cult will never let the conflict disappear, as to do so would undermine one of their articles of faith.
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.
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...
Hamas planned for a future without Israel in 2021
-
In a Gaza conference held in September 2021, Hamas declared that ‘victory
was nigh’ and set out its vision for a future without Israel. The event
(picke...
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,...
06-Feb-24: Obituary: Naftali Gordon
-
The obituary that follows was published yesterday by *Times of Israel* under
the headline "*Master Sgt. (res.) Naftali Gordon, 32: A man of ‘honesty and
...
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, October 27, 2020
Elder of Ziyon
