Friday, May 07, 2021

  • Friday, May 07, 2021
  • Elder of Ziyon
Iran's Tasnim news agency, which has ties to Iran's Revolutionary Guards, highlights a video for Quds Day today.

It starts off showing Iranian children, and then a quick montage of about 20 photos of children suffering in war. The Iranian children then piece together an oversized jigsaw puzzle with those photos of injured children to make a large Palestinian flag under the landmark Azadi Tower in Tehran.




The montage starts at 0:21:


Most of the photos of suffering or injured children I could identify are of Syrian children - suffering under the Iranian-backed Assad regime. (At least one was from the aftermath of an ISIS attack, there may be some from Yemen as well.)

I couldn't verify a single photo as being of Palestinian children.


Somehow, I don't think they really care about Palestinian children.












The first leader of Iran after the 1979 revolution, the Ayatollah Khomeini, wrote a book called Islamic Government: Governance of the Jurist: Velayat-e Faqeeh, which is a manifesto he wrote in 1970 and is the theological basis for Iran today.

It is also thoroughly antisemitic.

The entire book is online with an official translation from the Institute for Compilation and Publication of Imam Khomeini’s Works.

On the very first page of the introduction, Khomeini says, "From the very beginning, the historical movement of Islam has had to contend with the Jews, for it was they who first established anti-Islamic propaganda and engaged in various stratagems."

On page 22, he refers to Israel as "a handful of wretched Jews."

Page 53: "Since the Jews of Bani Qurayza were a troublesome group, causing corruption in Muslim society and damaging Islam and the Islamic state, the Most Noble Messenger (‘a) eliminated them."

Page 78: "the imperialists, the oppressive and treacherous rulers, the Jews, Christians, and
materialists are all attempting to distort the truths of Islam and lead the Muslims astray....We see today that the Jews (may God curse them) have meddled with the text of the Qur’an and have made certain changes in the Qur’ans they have printed in the occupied territories. It is our duty to prevent this treacherous interference with the text of Qur’an. We must protest and make the people aware that the Jews and their foreign backers are opposed to the very foundations of Islam and wish to establish Jewish domination throughout the world. Since they are a cunning and resourceful group of people, I fear that —God forbid— they may one day achieve their goal, and that the apathy shown by some of us may allow a Jew to rule over us one day. May God never let us see such a day!"

It is hard to explain this away as mere "anti-Zionism." Clearly, to the Ayatollah, hate of Israel and hate of Jews were one and the same. 

Iran was literally founded with an antisemitic philosophy.

Today, Iranians claim that they are against antisemitism and only hate Israel. If that is true, then where are the Iranian leaders who object to the first Supreme Leader's obvious Jew-hatred? 

And for Western leftist apologists for Iran who are quick to "cancel" American historical figures because of their actions that are being judged by today's standards, is Khomeini's antisemitism reason to cancel him as well? 

(h/t L_King)







Thursday, May 06, 2021

From Ian:

Amb. Dore Gold: “Why Is a Meeting in San Remo 101 Years Ago So Important?”
On April 29, 2021, Dr. Dore Gold, President of the Jerusalem Center, was interviewed by Professor Ugo Volli of Turin University in Shalom Magazine, published in Italy. Below is the translation of excerpts from “Siamo Ancora un Popolo Che Dimora Da Solo” – Intervista a Dore Gold

What is the 101-year-old San Remo Conference, and why is it important today?
In the late 19th and early 20th centuries, states were born through great international conferences. For example, the Congress of Berlin took former Ottoman territories in 1878 and granted them independence, creating Romania, Serbia, and Montenegro. Bulgaria also emerged from this division of Ottoman territories. After the First World War, international conferences of the victorious allied powers led to a division of formerly Ottoman territories as well. It was in San Remo, Italy, that the powers decided on the emergence of a national home for the Jewish People that established the State of Israel. The Balfour Declaration of 1917 was a statement of British policy; the San Remo Resolution of 1920 was a formal international treaty that was legally binding.

In the years between 1919 and 1922, many states were established. Why, after one century, is the right of the State of Israel to exist still disputed?
Israel is the only state whose legal foundation was rooted in acts of the League of Nations and the United Nations. Its legitimacy was backed by both bodies. But Israel is a state that is not protected by coalitions of countries. If a group of states wants to challenge the existence of Belgium, they will confront the collective power of the European Union. If Singapore’s existence is called into question, then the ASEAN states will “circle the wagons.” The American veto in the UN Security Council has provided Israel with protection from one-sided attacks on Israel. But that is not applicable in the General Assembly with its 193 members. Israel is still what the Bible (Numbers 23:9) describes as “a people that shall dwell alone, and shall not be reckoned among the nations.”

Yet, after the Balfour Declaration, San Remo and the League of Nations, a large non-government organization, Human Rights Watch, can criticize the existence of the state of the Jewish People as “racist.” Is it a political issue, or is it anti-Semitism?
This is pure anti-Semitism. Why do French people have a right to France, but the Jewish people have no right to a state of their own? Double standards are one of the indicators that anti-Semitism is present. And the apartheid charge is yet another form of anti-Semitism that ignores the reality of modern Israel.

In apartheid South Africa, there were separate hospitals for blacks and whites. Anyone who visits an Israeli hospital, like Hadassah in Jerusalem, will see in the Emergency Room and all wards Arab and Jewish doctors working together taking care of Arab and Jewish patients. In the 1980s, Israel sent its air force into Africa to bring out Ethiopian Jews. Is that an apartheid state?


Israeli President Pays Homage to David Raziel, First Commander of the Etzel Pre-State Militia, on 80th Anniversary of His Death
Israeli President Reuven Rivlin on Wednesday paid tribute to David Raziel — the co-founder and first commander of the Irgun Zvai Leumi (Etzel), the pre-state right-wing Zionist militia — on the 80th anniversary of his death.

Speaking at the memorial ceremony for Raziel, Rivlin called him a “great leader on behalf of the people and the country.”

The Etzel grew out of the right-wing Revisionist Zionism movement led by Ze’ev Jabotinsky, who personally appointed Raziel to lead the militia in 1938.

Rejecting the mainstream Labor Zionism policy of restraint in response to Arab violence, the Etzel under Raziel undertook a series of retaliatory attacks against Arab targets that aroused considerable controversy in the Zionist movement.

During World War II, however, the Etzel put aside its opposition to British power over Palestine in favor of collaborating in the fight against Nazism. Despite having been imprisoned by the British in 1939, Raziel chose to support the war effort upon his release. Sent to Iraq by British intelligence to fight an attempted pro-Nazi coup, Raziel was killed in action by a German air attack in 1941.

Building on the framework that Raziel established, Menachem Begin eventually took command of the Etzel and led it through a guerrilla war against the British power in Palestine.

The Etzel’s revolt was eventually credited with helping to push the British out of Palestine, paving the way for the establishment of the State of Israel.
Jonathan Tobin: New York courts prove that woke politics endangers Jews
The problem is that those who have taken the lead in promoting measures like bail reform in the name of social justice not only drew no conclusions from the dismal results of this legislation with respect to the rest of society, they are also unmoved by the way it endangered Jews.

In the days after Burnette’s release, the Anti-Defamation League, which continues to pose as the defender of the Jewish community against anti-Semitism, said nothing about the case. Since his release, both the group and its CEO, Jonathan Greenblatt, found time to publicly advocate for Facebook to continue its ban on posts from former President Donald Trump and to claim that American police were engaging in “systemic racism” against African-Americans. Although they raise massive funds from liberal donors by seeking to depict Jews as under siege from hate crimes, they were mum about the way those who committed such crimes have benefited from bail reform.

The reason for this is that Jordan Burnette is not the kind of anti-Semite that interests the ADL.

We know that had he been a right-wing extremist, the attacks on synagogues in Riverdale would have been considered a threat to all Jews. Whether or not there was evidence for it, they would have linked it to Trump and Greenblatt fodder for more lectures about white supremacists in which he would have analogized the shattered glass of Riverdale synagogues to Kristallnacht. But since Burnette didn’t fit into that scenario, the ADL has remained silent about a Jewish community being terrorized and then having to endure the sight of their assailant sent back out onto the street.

The shame here goes deeper than the way the ADL has betrayed its mandate. That is merely a symptom of a broader problem in which liberals have sacrificed Jewish security on the altar of woke politics and maintaining alliances with allies like race-baiter Al Sharpton. Doing so doesn’t merely tie them to radical causes that undermine law enforcement and falsely label America as an irredeemably racist nation. It also leads them to treat attacks on Jews by those who can’t be tied to their partisan opponents as something to be minimized or ignored so as to avoid having to confront the consequences of their ideological choices. “Bail reform” hasn’t just hurt New Yorkers. It exposed the Jewish left’s willingness to treat Jewish security as an afterthought.
  • Thursday, May 06, 2021
  • Elder of Ziyon
Stuff I posted on Twitter....










Our weekly column from the humor site PreOccupied Territory.

Check out their Facebook page.


Credit: Zaher333 via Wikipedia.

Umm el-Fahm, May 6 - Weeks of Arab violence against Jews in Israel have some among the Arab political leadership in the country to urge their voters to calm the situation by inflicting beatings and attempted murder only in a responsible manner.

Faction leaders of Arab parties in the Knesset and mayors of Arab locales across Israel have, in the wake of several near-lynchings of Jews in Jaffa, Ramle, and Jerusalem by Arab assailants, stated in no uncertain terms that random street violence remains out of the question, and that the only proper outlet for expressing their frustrations or ambitions lies in deliberate, careful rioting and beating Jews.

"We call on the youth of our people to cease irresponsible behavior, and on the adults among us to curb it," declared MK Mansour Abbas. "The times demand something other than random outbursts, which betray both a regrettable lack of discipline and seldom prove effective. We must train our youth to attack Jews only in a responsible fashion, and not in some slapdash or extemporized heat of the moment."

Abbas's colleague Dr. Ahmad Tibi invoked historical precedent to stress the point. "Our ancestors, some of whom are still alive, could tell you," he stated in an online video message to Arab voters in Israel. "It was Arab disunity and haphazard planning, if any, that doomed the efforts in 1947 and 48 to keep Jews at the mercy of others. This time around we must take a more measured, strategic approach, and not dismiss our enemy as just a bunch of weak, cowardly dhimmi. If we are to restore the place of the Muslim as supreme in our society, and not continue to suffer the unbearable shame of being subject to the descendants of apes and pigs, of having lost to a ragtag group of refugees and Holocaust survivors even though we outnumbered and outgunned them by a ridiculous margin, we cannot achieve that end by random acts of violence in the streets. A responsible, sober attitude will serve us better."

The Arab leaders' exhortations caused some confusion in the streets. "I need to understand," queried a hesitant twenty-year-old in Jerusalem's Sheikh Jarrah neighborhood. "If I see a Jew or two walking there, just asking to be attacked and hopefully killed, do I need to have a plan? Like how much of a plan? I already know not to bother if there are any police or soldiers in the vicinity, because, while they're pathetically ineffective at deterrence, they will get in the way before I can strike the fatal blow. If they mean more planning than that, I need more instructions, but I probably won't wait for them."

From Ian:

Shin Bet: Palestinian terror group stole millions from European aid donors
The Shin Bet security service on Thursday accused the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine of pilfering millions of euros from European aid organizations and governments to fund terrorist activities.

The Shin Bet in recent weeks arrested a number of those suspected of involvement and said that indictments against them would be filed shortly, including against a woman with Spanish citizenship, Juani Rishmawi.

In light of the investigation, the Foreign Ministry met with European diplomats in Israel and sent Israeli diplomats in Europe to meet with representatives of their host governments to ask them to refrain from donating to Palestinian non-governmental organizations linked to the PFLP.

“During these conversations, the representatives of the Israeli Foreign Ministry explained to the European diplomats the severity with which Israel sees these issues and presented them with the findings of the investigation, including proof that European government funds went to the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, which is recognized in Europe as a terrorist organization,” the Foreign Ministry said in a statement.

According to the security service, the PFLP used its health organization, the Health Work Committee, to defraud various Europe organizations and countries of millions of euros over the course of several years.

“PFLP institutions deceived aid organizations in Europe through a number of methods – reporting on fictitious projects, transferring false documents, forging and inflating invoices, diverting tenders, forging documents and bank signatures, reporting inflated salaries, and more,” the Shin Bet said in a statement.


Douglas J. Feith: Perverse Incentives Discourage Palestinian Leaders from Making Peace
Successive Israeli governments have been willing to make reasonable compromises for peace. The actual problem is the ideological inflexibility of the Palestinians and the corruption of their leaders. Those of Hamas are notoriously extremist. This is why progress toward peace requires empowerment of a new Palestinian leadership.

The world incentivizes Palestinian leaders to perpetuate the conflict with Israel. Because they are widely celebrated as embodying an important, as-yet-unfulfilled national cause, those leaders are granted extraordinary diplomatic attention and generous financial aid, much of which they divert improperly for the huge houses they have built for themselves in Ramallah and Gaza. Were they to settle the conflict, reducing themselves to mere functionaries in a state in poor condition, they would lose much international solicitude and money.

Israel's new friends in the Arab world have an interest in changing the economic and political landscape of Palestinian politics. They may be able to empower Palestinians who are not enmeshed in the perverse incentive system that requires perpetuation of the conflict against Israel. Therein lies the best hope for progress toward peace. If the Biden team has its eye on the prize, it will direct its energies not at recreating the old "peace process" but at working with Arab states to encourage the rise of new Palestinian leaders.

By Daled Amos


The goodwill and cooperation generated by the Abraham Accords continue. Just last month, Israel and the UAE signed an agreement for the two countries to collaborate on healthcare and healthcare technology. But more than that, there have been public expressions of goodwill on holidays and condolences on other occasions.


How far can this spirit of goodwill go?

Last December, I suggested this could extend inwardly as well as outwardly and the Abraham Accords could even affect Israeli relations between Arabs and Jews. Mansour Abbas, an Israeli Arab politician and head of the United Arab List (Ra'am), has openly spoken about working with and from within the Israeli government. More importantly, this approach is supported by a majority of Arab Israelis. Yousef Makladeh of the consulting company StatNet, reported that "over 60% of the [Israeli] Arab population supports MK Mansour Abbas’ approach, that they can work with the [Jewish] right.”

Makladeh sees the Abraham Accords as a part of this:
“The [Arab Israeli] public wants peace, it does not matter with whom, because it will bring them economic advantages,” he said. More trade with the UAE, more UAE investors coming to Israel, and Israeli companies going to the UAE, will mean more opportunities for Arab-Israelis, who will be seen as the logical middlemen. [emphasis added]

So just how far can the effects of the Abraham Accord go?

Writing in Newsweek, Seth Frantzman -- Executive Director of the Middle East Center for Reporting and Analysis -- believes the accords may play a part in diminished criticism of Israel:

Today's Middle East realities, with [1] new peace agreements and [2] concerns about China's emerging role, has less time to focus on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Consequently, we are likely seeing the last generation of professional Israel critics.

In addition to the global events that draw some of the attention away from the Middle East, Frantzman believes that we are past the point where "being an Israel critic once offered an entrée to fame and a feeling of instant expertise," leading potential critics to go into other areas and conflicts. The coronavirus has played a part too, cutting down on the number of anti-Israel publicity stunts.

And then there are the Abraham Accords:

There is less hunger in the Middle East for input from Western activists who propose new "solutions." And in the West, there is less readiness to see Israel as a major issue in the world when there are so many others happening. Anti-Israel activism gained fuel from regimes in the Middle East and even the Soviet Union in the decades before Oslo. These factors have all since shifted, moving the West toward a more reasonable discussion about Israel's policies and how Israel can play a positive, stabilizing role in the Middle East. The conversation now is about interfaith dialogue, coexistence and reducing tensions. [emphasis added]

It is early yet to say so definitively, but as more and more positive news appears on social media -- not only about economic ties and military agreements, but about tourism and friendly exchanges -- a gradual shift in the narrative of the Middle East in general and Israel, in particular, may appear.

But it won't be easy.

Frantzman comments

But these activists, who we got used to seeing at the anti-Israel Durban conference in 2001 and again in the "boycott, divestment and sanctions" movement, are growing older and becoming less relevant.

He wrote these words a month ago, before the HRW report claiming that Israel is an apartheid state. So how does that report fit in with Frantzman's thesis?

On that point, consider Herb Keinon's article last month in the Jerusalem Post, The HRW apartheid report: Does it matter? He responds that it does...and does not.

It doesn’t matter that much anymore in the corridors of power in Western democracies. Evidence of this is that few if any government will issue a statement or communiqué on the basis of this report.

Even though the State Department spokesperson may well be asked what Washington thinks of the report at a daily press briefing, it is highly unlikely that the White House or the State Department will deem it necessary to respond of its own volition. Not only Washington, but also in other capitals around the world.

A State Department spokesperson did in fact make a statement that "It is not the view of this administration that Israel’s actions constitute apartheid" -- while at the same time saying it would not “offer public evaluations of reports by outside groups.”

Keinon goes on to quote an Israeli official that another factor mitigating against the impact of the HRW report is that the "golden age" of such human rights organizations is over. One reason is that many countries are more nationalist and less globalist. Another factor is growing skepticism about these organizations, based on revelations such as the HRW trip to Saudi Arabia in 2009 when it used its work against Israel as part of its sales pitch to get money from wealthy donors.

This is separate from the obvious influence the report will have on those with a limited grasp of the facts.

Last October, Luke Akehurst, Director of We Believe in Israel, was already claiming that undercutting the apartheid claim was one of Four ways the Abraham Accords dismantle the anti-Israel camp’s narrative:

[T]he Abraham Accords demolish the narrative that Israel is engaged in a race-based and hence racist oppression of the Palestinians, and hence the apartheid smear and the BDS policies that flow from the false comparison with apartheid South Africa. Emiratis and Bahrainis are the same ethnicity as the Palestinians: Arab. If Israel is able to have normalised and mutually beneficial relations with other Arab states it stands to reason that the occupation is down to a political impasse with the Palestinians, not a race-based desire to subjugate them.

Maybe.

But reason has little to do with the accusations of apartheid coming from groups like HRW and B'tzelem.

Akehurst believes that the accords also undercut the BDS movement as well:

[T]he Abraham Accords sound the death knell for the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) campaign. BDS was built on the foundations and legacy of the Arab Boycott of Israel, initiated as a boycott of the pre-state Yishuv by the Arab League in 1945. With key Arab states now formally embracing trade and diplomatic deals with Israel, it looks ridiculous and out of touch with the reality of the region or Arab opinion for radicals in Europe and North America to continue to pursue a boycott policy.

But again, if the accords are going to have any such effect on changing the narrative, it will be gradual and over time. It will depend on continued, positive developments between Israel and Arab countries on the one hand and regular, reliable posting of these developments on social media on the other.

Most importantly, a lot depends on the support for the Abraham Accords by the US. And if Saudi support for the accords were key in getting the UAE and other Arab countries on board, anything that appears to diminish that support may undercut what is now being accomplished.

For that reason, Biden's measures against the Saudis are worrying -- 3 in February alone.

o  February 4, the White House announced the Pentagon would no longer support the Saudis against the Iran-backed Houthis that have been terrorizing both the Yemenis and the Saudis for the past 10 years.
o  February 16, the State Department rescinded the designation of the Houthis as a Foreign Terrorist Organization
o  February 26, Biden had the Office of the Director of National Intelligence release a report confirming Saudi responsibility for the murder of Jamal Khashoggi at their consulate in Turkey

And now the Saudis are talking with Iran.

An article in Haaretz examines the prospect of the Abraham Accords falling apart in light of these secret negotiations:

The Saudis appreciate Israel's attempts to sabotage Iranian nuclear ambitions, but do not believe these efforts can entirely halt Iran's converging paths to a nuclear weapon, nor rein in its takeover of neighboring countries.

Despite the Trump administration's inelegant attempts to have Israel and the Arab states play nice in order to join forces to counterbalance Iran, co-operation to that end is still limited.

If, as may be the case, Netanyahu is replaced as Prime Minister, the question of the future of the Abraham Accords becomes sharper.

But for now, Israel is benefitting from the remarkable friendship and goodwill of multiple Arab countries, with potential far beyond economic and military ties.








  • Thursday, May 06, 2021
  • Elder of Ziyon
The headlines from Sheikh Jarrah almost all ignore the basic facts of the issue: The buildings in question are owned by Jews and the Arab residents have refused to pay rent - even though they had agreed in a 1982 court case.


According to the Supreme Court, the land in question “was owned by Chief Rabbi (Hacham Bashi) Avraham Ashkenazi and Chief Rabbi Meir Orbach until the War of Independence [1948], after they purchased it in 1875 from its Arab owners.”
Subsequently, two Jewish organizations, Va’ad Eidat HaSfaradim and Va’ad HaKlali L’Knesset Yisrael, worked to register the land with British Mandatory government in 1946.
The properties were registered with Israeli authorities under these two organizations in 1973.
These organizations sold the properties to the Nahalat Shimon organization in 2003.

According to a 1979 High Court decision, and re-affirmed repeatedly in subsequent cases, as in the case of any tenant living on someone else’s property, residents living on the land owned by these organizations were required to pay rent to the organizations that owned the properties. Their failure to do so, along with instances of illegal building and illegally renting properties to others, resulted in the current legal proceedings against them, culminating in the District Court decision.

Crucially, in 1982, a number of residents- including those whose descendants appealed to the District Court- agreed in Magistrate Court that the 2 Israeli non-profits were the legal land owners.
The Arab claims that they are the legal owners have been proven to be false in court many times over the years.

Israel-haters, however, are calling evicting a few dozen illegal squatters "ethnic cleansing."

Today, the Palestinian National Council sent letters to the heads of parliaments around the world and the Inter-Parliamentary Union, demanding support to stop the "ethnic cleansing of Jerusalemites"  in Sheikh Jarrah.

Ethnic cleansing? The properties in dispute are only a small percentage of the area of Sheikh Jarrah.  This UN map shows the areas that are claimed by Jews:


The same people who are screaming about "ethnic cleansing" of a small number of people are very clear as to their own goals: the eviction not of  dozens but of 675,000  Jews from Judea, Samaria and Jerusalem.

A large part of the world insists that the kicking out Jews - and only Jews, not Israeli Arabs - from their historic homeland, where many of them have lived all their lives, is "justice" - while evicting a few illegal squatters who refuse to pay rent is what they call "ethnic cleansing."










  • Thursday, May 06, 2021
  • Elder of Ziyon



On Wednesday, both Ilhan Omar and Rashida Tlaib linked to articles in Middle East Eye in their tweets.

Tlaib, saying Israel was guilty of apartheid, linked to an article quoting a Palestinian who claims his lands were torched by Jews the previous night. 

Omar linked to a completely different article about Sheikh Jarrah.

This is notable because Middle East Eye is not exactly an objective news source. It is a pro-terrorist site.

And it is linked to  the Muslim Brotherhood and Hamas.

Delving into the details of MEE, however, show that it acts far less as a traditional journalistic outlet and far more as an English-language front for Qatari-supported groups like the Muslim Brotherhood and Hamas. British corporate records, for example, show that Jamal Awn Jamal Bessasso, a former official for both Al Jazeera in Qatar and the Hamas-affiliated al-Quds TV in Lebanon, owns and operates MEE through M.E.E. Ltd. 

... The Hamas links run as deep. A former official of Interpal, a United Kingdom-based charity designated by the US Treasury Department as a financial supporter of Hamas, registered the Middle East Eye website. Prior to joining MEE, [news editor Rory] Donaghy worked for organizations founded by Hamas (such as the House of Wisdom in Gaza) and the Muslim Brotherhood (Emirates Center for Human Rights, which was set up with financing and assistance from the Cordoba Foundation, a Muslim Brotherhood entity).

Bessasso, meanwhile, has openly supported radical groups. In 2012, he shared a Facebook post praising Hamas. The following year, he shared a quote from Muslim Brotherhood theologian Yusuf Qaradawi encouraging followers to utilize “violence against those who deserve it.” Over the years, the MEE has bolstered its content with “exclusive” access to Hamas, seemingly acting as the terrorist group’s preferred outlet to the English-speaking world. Hearst has penned editorials praising and defending the Muslim Brotherhood and political Islam.
The National (UAE) had an extensive investigation with similar conclusions in 2014.

Beyond those ties, there is no question that MEE is a pro-Hamas website and mouthpiece. Hamas is, of course, a US-designated terrorist group.

Two members of Congress trust and amplify articles from a pro-Hamas and pro-terror site that may in fact be owned and run by enemies of the United States.






Wednesday, May 05, 2021

abuyehuda

Weekly column by Vic Rosenthal


Forty-five people attending a festival to celebrate the holiday of Lag b’Omer at the tomb of Rabbi Shimon Bar Yochai on Mt. Meron were crushed to death last weekend, in a catastrophic but totally predictable stampede which – one official of a first-responders group said – had only been prevented by annual miracles. This year there was no miracle. The facilities at the site were woefully inadequate to support even a tenth of the 100,000 people that showed up, an agreement to limit the number was ignored due to political pressure, and what had been predicted occurred.
The site had not been improved over the years despite many reports from various bodies including the police and the mevaker hamedina, an independent official who oversees the operations of the government and reports to the Knesset, which is required by law to respond and if needed, act on them.

Why has nothing been done? Because the site, which is officially under control of the government, in practice “belongs” to several Haredi [“ultra-Orthodox”] sects, who object to changes proposed by any of the others, and even more to outsiders telling them what they can do. They have depended on the protection of Hashem, based on the principle that nothing bad can happen to someone who is in the process of performing a mitzvah, an idea which ignores the fact that Hashem gave his human creations brains and expects them to be used.

The authorities, who recently forced an acquaintance of mine to stop using his tiny (and licensed) ham radio transceiver on a deserted beach for “safety reasons,” do not dare interfere with Haredi events. This is a particular case of the partly unwritten principle of Haredi autonomy: although they live in the State of Israel, Haredi communities are not in practice subject to the same laws or expectations as secular, traditional, or national-religious Jews.
At the time of the founding of the State of Israel, in order to obtain the support of the observant community, Ben Gurion and other secular Zionists found it necessary to promise them certain things, such as rabbinical control of family law, observance of Shabbat and Kashrut in all official functions, and freedom to determine the content of their school curricula, as long as certain secular subjects were included.

As time passed, the official “status quo” between secular and observant Israelis grew to include draft exemptions for Torah students, and government funding for educational systems outside of the state system. At the same time, there developed an unofficial hands-off attitude toward the Haredim. Haredi schools reduced or eliminated instruction in secular subjects such as English and Mathematics, in violation of the status quo. Laws to limit exemptions from military or other national service could not be enforced. Tax evasion is common in Haredi communities. During the Covid epidemic, Haredi schools and yeshivot were opened in defiance of the regulations when other schools were closed. Rules established by the Ministry of Health were widely flouted, with high-profile weddings and funerals attended by thousands of tightly-packed people.
Video of such events, while police were harassing non-Haredim for walking maskless in the park, created a great deal of animosity toward Haredim, especially among those whose memories of massive traffic jams caused by Haredi anti-draft demonstrations were fresh. The political interference with the extradition of Malka Leifer to face sex abuse charges in Australia was another flashpoint. It doesn’t matter that the small extremist faction that blocked traffic, or the particular Hasidic group that counts both Malka Leifer and perennial government minister Ya’akov Litzman as a member, do not represent all Haredim; anti-Haredi feeling is widespread.
The other side of the coin is that Haredi communities distrust and disrespect the state. Some are explicitly anti-Zionist, but even those that aren’t believe that “Torah law” – which is whatever their rabbi says it is – overrides the laws of the State of Israel. They believe that secular and non-Haredi religious Jews have no right to criticize them in any way, and in some cases consider such criticism “antisemitic.” They relate to the State of Israel the way their great-grandfathers related to the Tsar or the Porte.

The problem is that the “status quo” has developed into a complete autonomy, a mini-state into which the organs of the larger state don’t reach. The Haredi political parties have been in almost every Israeli government, and they often hold the balance of power. Police and other officials don’t even try to enforce laws when they know they will be countermanded (and possibly punished) by the political connections of the communities.

Haredi leaders have demanded more and more autonomy, and have received it, both officially and in practice. But this disaster has illustrated that it has gone too far. After the deaths, many blamed the police. But it’s clear that the police cannot be blamed for failing to protect people when there are laws for that very purpose that they are prevented from enforcing. Some Haredi rabbis and politicians are beginning to understand this.

The Haredi autonomy is not the only one in the country. Arab citizens of Israel also live in an autonomy that is in many ways similar. They have been granted an exemption from the draft and national service. There is rampant tax evasion in Arab towns. During the epidemic, they persisted in holding large weddings. Today they are suffering from a wave of violent organized crime which has placed law-abiding citizens in fear for their lives. Every week sees new murders. They too, blame the police, which is ironic since – like the Haredim – they previously preferred to keep the police as far away as possible.

There is yet another autonomous group in Israel, and that is the Bedouin tribes of southern Israel. They too have experienced an increase in criminal behavior which has been ignored by the state; but unlike the Arab villages of the North, their banditry victimizes the Jewish residents of the area.

These problems have been shoved under the rug by successive governments, for various reasons. In the case of the Haredim, it’s a combination of factors. The most important, of course, is the political power wielded by this community, which represents about 12% of the population; as well as the mistrust, and dare I say it, dislike on both sides.

The Arab and Bedouin communities have never fully cooperated with the Jewish authorities, and law enforcement is difficult without cooperation. As long as the crime stays within the community, it’s tempting for police officials to concentrate their effort elsewhere. That, however, is wrong, as well as stupid, because the crime will not stay in the communities where it starts.

Israel is not a large country and it can’t afford have several autonomous enclaves that don’t consider themselves part of the state. The lack of respect for the laws made by the national government is corrosive. It wouldn’t hurt to pay more attention to the reports of the mevaker hamedina, and ensure that problems in law enforcement as well as in the allocation of all kinds of resources are dealt with in a reasonable time.

To some extent, Israel is like Russia, a country where everything is illegal but laws are enforced selectively. The psychological and political issues, for both Arabs and Haredim, are difficult. I don’t know how to change their deeply alienated mindsets, or if it’s possible. But I think the first thing that has to change is that the laws must be enforced, fairly, on all citizens.


From Ian:

Clifford D. May: Human Rights Watch crosses the line with latest attack on Israel
HRW appears to believe that Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank have a right to demand citizenship from a state whose destruction they seek. No such right exists anywhere on earth, and for Israelis to grant it would be suicidal.

The Kohelet Policy Forum, an Israeli think tank, has issued a detailed response to HRW. It deserves to be read in its entirety. I have space here to highlight only a few points.

Apartheid, it points out, is not “a grab bag of policies that HRW happens to disagree with.” Apartheid implies “the physical separation — apartness — of people based on a legislated racial hierarchy.” As noted above, that’s not the situation in Israel. There are no racial distinctions in Israeli law. Nor are Jews and Palestinians two distinct racial groups. Israelis are, in fact, multiracial, with more than half coming from families who are indigenous to the Middle East and never left the Middle East.

Can one find instances of bias, bigotry or discrimination in Israel? In which nations is that not the case? The answer is none which is why “no country since the end of South African apartheid has ever received the distinction.”

Not China, where Uighurs and Tibetans face egregious persecution; not the Islamic Republic of Iran which severely oppresses Bahais; not Pakistan, which has for decades been driving out Hindus, Sikhs, Christians, Ahmadis and other minorities.

HRW claims that Israelis stepped over the “threshold” to apartheid with their “Nation State Law.” Kohelet responds: “While the wisdom of the Nation State law can be criticized, it does nothing like what any of the apartheid laws did, and instead closely resembles numerous European democratic constitutional provisions. Indeed, it is almost entirely declarative; its one substantive provision guarantees rather than denies Palestinian Arab rights (it guarantees Arabic language rights).”

What’s more, states throughout the broader Middle East proudly proclaim themselves Arab and/or Muslim. It is only Jewish identity and self-determination that HRM deems a “crime against humanity.”

Credit where it’s due: The Biden administration last week stated explicitly that it does not consider “that Israel’s actions constitute apartheid.”

As noted above, evidence of HRW’s animosity toward Israel comes as no surprise. More than a decade ago, Robert Bernstein, the founder of HRW and its chairman from 1978 to 1998, accused the organization of “helping those who wish to turn Israel into a pariah state.”

But now it is HRW, not Israel, that has crossed a threshold. Its latest attempt to defame and delegitimize the Jewish state provides aid and comfort to those — including Hamas, Hezbollah and Iran’s rulers — who incite and vow genocide. The definition of genocide is plain, and it is unequivocally a crime under international law.

Defenders of HRW might say: “I’m sure that’s not their intention!” Critics of HRW might respond: “Trust me, they know exactly what they’re doing.”


Why Human Rights Watch is Attacking Israel’s Law of Return
If you’re Jewish and live in the Diaspora, chances are there’s been some event in the news or in politics that at some point has made you say to yourself, “Well, if things really go south here, I can always go to Israel.”

I’m sure many American Jews had those thoughts after the murders in Pittsburgh, Poway, Jersey City and Monsey. In the United States in 2019, the most recent year for which FBI data is available, there were 953 hate crimes committed against Jews, or more than 60 percent of religiously based hate crimes.

Many French Jews are probably having such thoughts now, since France’s highest court has ruled, functionally, that there is no criminal responsibility for killing a Jew if the killer was high on marijuana. Indeed, in the aftermath of the 2006 kidnapping, torture and murder of 23-year old Ilan Halimi, the 2012 murders of three Jewish children and a rabbi at a Jewish school in Toulouse, and the 2015 shooting at the Hyper Cacher kosher supermarket, French Jews acted on that sentiment in record numbers.

But Human Rights Watch has targeted the Israeli law that ensures that Jews have just such a refuge. Among other things, HRW’s latest anti-Israel propaganda report takes aim at Israel’s Law of Return. HRW invokes the historical racial segregation in the U.S., complaining that “a two-track citizenship … effectively regards Jews and Palestinians separately and unequally.”

The report characterizes Israel’s Law of Return as part of its “Discriminatory Restrictions on Residency and Nationality.” Later in the same report, the law is characterized primarily as motivated by demographic concerns.

But, as NGO Monitor explains, “HRW deviously erases the context: the Law of Return was enacted in the shadow of the Holocaust, to provide a safe haven for Jews who for centuries suffered persecution around the world. The sharp rise in physical violence and other forms of anti-Semitism around the world in recent years only highlights the need for Israel as a safe refuge from persecution.”

The fact that many Jews who attempted to flee the Holocaust were turned away by the U.S. and other countries seems to be of no concern to HRW. One might wonder, as well, without the Law of Return, what HRW would have liked to see happen to more than half a million Jews who settled in Israel between 1948 and 1972, after fleeing or being expelled from Arab countries.


Michael Danby: Palestine recognition ‘invalid’
FORMER federal Labor MP Michael Danby has claimed the party broke its own rules by not giving him an opportunity to speak against the recent change in its platform on recognising a Palestinian state.

A 2018 conference motion “calling on the next Labor government to recognise a Palestinian state” was elevated at the party’s platform conference in March. Danby said he was denied the right to speak against it.

“I requested to speak against the reception of the report ‘Australia and the World’ as was my right as a delegate under Standing Order 6A for this conference,” he wrote to Labor national secretary Paul Erickson last week.

“Yet despite repeated phone calls on the morning of the conference, I found when the debate was called on that I was unfairly excluded from the speaking list and blocked from entering the speakers’ green room.

“I hereby request that you refer this matter to the next National Executive meeting as it is my belief that this report was accepted in clear breach of the ALP’s own rules and is therefore invalid.”

A Labor insider told The AJN this week that Danby “may have a point”.
Bob Carr out of control
Zionist Council of New South Wales Israel affairs director Arsen Ostrovsky said Carr “seems to have a rather unhealthy obsession with Israel, dominated by his irrational hatred of the Jewish State and willingness to be a pawn of the Palestinian propaganda machine”.

“It is high time that the Labor Party, both federal and state, rein Carr in,” he said.

Macnamara MP Josh Burns said Carr’s accusations and those of Human Rights Watch “do not reflect the views of the Australian Labor Party and does not advance the cause of peace”.

His predecessor, former Melbourne Ports MP Michael Danby called it “Corbyn-style Labor”.

“Add the twist of Beijing’s most odious advocate in Australia attempting to divert attention from China’s concentration camps in Xinjiang and its aggression against Hong Kong and Taiwan,” he said, adding it was “ironic that Carr whinges about the Palestinians not having a vote on the day PA boss Abbas cancels the Palestinian elections”.

Asked for a comment at a Victorian Parliamentary Yom Ha’atzmaut function, former federal Labor leader Bill Shorten said he had made it a practice not to comment about Carr’s comments, “Because you can be here all day.”

A one-time co-founder of Labor Friends of Israel, Carr’s Israel agitation has steadily increased over recent years.
Financial Times editor embraces HRW's apartheid lie
The charge of “irredentism” – a policy of advocating the restoration to a country of any territory formerly belonging to it – needs to put in perspective, particularly since Gardner compared Israel to Russia, China, Turkey and India.

Russia has 17.13 million square km of land. China has 9.597 million km. India has 3.287 million km. And, Turkey has 783,562 square km.

Israel has 22,145 square km – representing a meager 0.2 percent of the landmass of the Arab world. The entire West Bank – only a third of which was designated to Israel by the Peace to Prosperity Peace Plan – is 5,628 square km. To compare Israeli ‘expansionism’ (that is, Israeli claims over disputed territory) in the same political universe as that of Russia, China, Turkey and India is grossly misleading.

Gardner ends by noting, hopefully and in the context of the HRW report, that “the price for Israel disdaining [Palestinian] rights…may be rising”.

So, what did Gardner write about Palestinian political responsibilities and moral obligations in the context of the quest for peace? Nothing. Absolutely nothing. As is almost always the case with such pieces, Gardner completely robbed Palestinians of their agency, casting them as passive victims of Israeli malevolence. Decades of bad Palestinian decisions, particularly their choice to pursue violence and embrace antisemitism, was erased by the Financial Times editor.

Forget about the ‘bigotry of LOW expectations’, Gardner appears to have NO expectations of Palestinians or their leaders.


It all began with a private message: “Arabs are passing out sweets on Twitter to celebrate the death of Jews in Meron.” There was a link to a tweet.

Screenshot, because as we bloggers like to say: "If you don't take a screenshot it didn't happen."

I went to Twitter to take a closer look. I didn’t want to engage the guy, so I decided to retweet with a comment. It was my way of making a statement: Let the world see how these evil people rejoice when Jews are killed. Let the world see how even those Jews who live in cities inside the green line are reviled as “settlers.” And let the world see the way even Hassidic Jews who do not typically consider themselves “Zionist” are lumped together with the others.

Screenshot, or it didn't happen.

Because it’s not about Zionists or occupation or even settlers. It’s about JEWS.

Frankly, they hate us.

But of course, just because I stood on the sidelines and commented only to my followers, doesn’t mean I stayed out of the fray. Someone with vague associations to both Hezbollah and anime (@HezBallerMisaka) attempted to draw me into a debate on the topic.

“Even in a garbage can in occupied Palestine they would still be a settler.”

So I asked him, “What are the borders of ‘occupied Palestine?’”

And he tweeted back a photo of all of Israel, draped in the colors of the Palestinian flag.


I kept going back and forth with the guy until he made some comments sufficiently antisemitic that I felt it within my rights to fill out a report. And so he stopped. But then another one of his antisemitic ilk came out of the woodwork. And maybe it was a good thing, because he drew my attention to a Wikipedia page called “Zionism” which contains the stunning lie that the link between the Jews and Israel is based only on “memory, emotion, and myth.”


I decided to go in and make an edit to reflect the truth: Jews are indigenous to Israel, linked by history and religious precepts such as the return to Zion as a precondition for the arrival of the Messiah, and the Torah commandment to dwell in the Land of Israel. It had been awhile since I had done a Wikipedia edit, but I thought I could figure it out. How hard could it be?

As it turned out, damned hard.

The first stumbling block in my way was that this particular page had been designated “extended confirmed protected,” which made me think of a certain movie.

via GIPHY

But what it really meant was that the page was locked for editing. And as it turns out, there are only three pages in all of Wikipedia with this designation and (surprise!) two of them are about Israel.


Just three pages make the grade.

I was almost ready to throw in the towel, but I looked a little further and found that it was still possible to request an edit, which turned out to be many, MANY hoops to jump through. For one thing, you have to learn wiki-speak. There’s all this Wikipedia-specific code you have to use. But I was determined to try.


Sample I of what I call "Wiki code"

Sample 2 of my feeble attempt at mastering what I call "Wiki code."

I gathered all my sources, googled all the codes I needed, and got to work. I botched my first attempt because there’s a learning curve. But I heard back from an honest-to-goodness live editor person who said my edit request was unintelligible. I was still encouraged, because s/he hadn’t outright refused the request. I did some more editing, and am waiting to see if this edit met with the editor’s approval.

There’s always hope. And maybe I’ll be able to update this piece so that this story has a favorable outcome. You know what they say: “Hope dies last.” But let’s face it, Wikipedia is not really a fair marketplace of ideas when it comes to the Jewish people. In fact, this very same week, David Collier wrote a piece called Wikipedia – the most active spreader of antisemitism on the planet (emphasis added):

It has probably held true for a number of years that more people have their opinion shaped by Wikipedia on a daily basis – than by any other information source. I do not believe that most people fully understand the damage that Wikipedia is doing, nor the fact that action must be taken to challenge it.

When I write about Wikipedia, I always face the same three arguments:

Firstly the idea that everyone can edit Wikipedia. It is simply not true. Everyone can go onto a mundane page and make an edit – but the more important pages on Wikipedia are protected – which means only certain editors can make a change. These protections do not just stop abuse – they prevent challenges to the bias of the editors.

Collier also mentions the fact that too many people use Wikipedia as if it were a credible source, even though they know better (emphasis added):

Secondly, is the notion that because most people know Wikipedia is not a reliable source it mitigates the damage. This is a deflection. Even many of those that know Wiki is tainted, still recommend using it as a starting point – especially teachers and academics. Google, the world’s leading search engine, literally treats Wiki as the best source in the world. All those seeking information by starting on Wikipedia are still guided by the additional links that are on Wiki’s pages – and are left blind to those facts and arguments that have been airbrushed out.

This leads back to why I discovered the blatant lie on Wikipedia’s “Zionism” page in the first place. @HezBallerMisaka tweeted a screenshot (since deleted) of that Wikipedia lie as soon as I suggested that Jews are indigenous to Israel.

Screenshot of deleted tweet citing the Wikipedia claim that the Jewish connection to Israel is a "myth."

At any rate, here is my edit request, for which I cited four sources (I could have found more, but I was thinking “overkill”):

please change "However, other Zionists emphasized the memory, emotion and myth linking Jews to the Land of Israel." to "However, other early Zionist leaders emphasized that Jewish history; the Torah tenet that calls on the Jewish people to return to Zion; and the commandment to dwell in the Land of Israel, all irrevocably link Jews to the Land of Israel."

Will my suggested edit make the grade?

Stay tuned. Oh--and keep in mind that whatever happens, change consists of ordinary people standing up and at least making the attempt to make a difference. I believe that, or I wouldn't be here writing this blog.

UPDATE: While the editor didn't use my (very long) suggested edit, I achieved some partial success. The sentence now reads (emphasis added): "However, other Zionists emphasized the memory, emotion and tradition linking Jews to the Land of Israel."







AddToAny

EoZ Book:"Protocols: Exposing Modern Antisemitism"

Printfriendly

EoZTV Podcast

Podcast URL

Subscribe in podnovaSubscribe with FeedlyAdd to netvibes
addtomyyahoo4Subscribe with SubToMe

search eoz

comments

Speaking

translate

E-Book

For $18 donation








Sample Text

EoZ's Most Popular Posts in recent years

Hasbys!

Elder of Ziyon - حـكـيـم صـهـيـون



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.

Donate!

Donate to fight for Israel!

Monthly subscription:
Payment options


One time donation:

subscribe via email

Follow EoZ on Twitter!

Interesting Blogs

Blog Archive