Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News

Tuesday, June 15, 2021

06/15 Links Pt1: Bret Stephens: Israel’s Coalition of Patriotic Traitors; UK must boycott Durban IV; Nikki Haley warns Biden Iran policy 'death wish' to Israel

From Ian:

Bret Stephens (NYTs): Israel’s Coalition of Patriotic Traitors

Israel’s new government must be a puzzle for anyone who thinks of the Jewish state as a racist, fascistic, apartheid enterprise.

Issawi Frej is Arab and Muslim and used to work for the Peace Now movement. Now he’s Israel’s minister for regional cooperation. Pnina Tamano-Shata is Black: The Mossad rescued her, along with thousands of other Ethiopian Jews, from hunger and persecution when she was a small child. She’s the minister for immigration and absorption. Nitzan Horowitz is the first openly gay man to lead an Israeli political party. He’s the health minister. At least one deputy minister, as yet unnamed, is expected to be a member of the Raam party, which is an outgrowth of the major Islamist political group in Israel.

As for Benjamin Netanyahu, “King Bibi” has finally left office — churlishly, bitterly, pompously — but in keeping with the normal democratic process. He faces criminal indictments in multiple cases. His immediate predecessor as prime minister, Ehud Olmert, spent 16 months in prison on corruption charges.

It’s some fascist state that subjects its leaders to the rule of law and the verdicts of a court. Meanwhile, Mahmoud Abbas, president of the Palestinian Authority, “postponed” elections in April. He’s in the 17th year of his elected four-year term of office.

A new government, even one as fragile and fractious as Israel’s, is always an opportunity for a course correction. But the course correction Israel most needs is not the one its critics generally suppose.

Netanyahu lasted in office as long as he did not because Israelis wanted a strongman or someone who would crush the Palestinians. He lasted because he was, in many ways, good at the job.

David Collier: An open letter to Boris Johnson – do not u-turn on antisemitism

Boris Johnson PM

I basically have just one question to ask you – are you a man of your word? After all that British Jews have been through over the last few years, after all your promises and supportive words – it seems as if you are about to go back on everything that you promised. You are about to betray British Jews.

We all know about Durban IV. It is an upcoming anniversary celebration of that vile, antisemitic UN event in 2001. The Iranian sponsored conference of hate that did not just spawn the anti-Israel boycott movement, it also helped to legitimise and spread antisemitism throughout the west. The then UK Prime Minister David Cameron, withdrew the UK in 2011 from the anniversary event, saying that it should be condemned not celebrated. That has been the UK policy. We clearly should not be going in 2021. Both the Board of Deputies and the Jewish Leadership Council have asked that you follow the previous government position and boycott the event.

If you attend Durban IV you are reversing the UK policy on antisemitism. Why would you do this? If anything has changed since 2011, it has only got worse.

Looking back at the comments of Boris Johnson on Israel, antisemitism and the United Nations, this case is a simple one:

You have stated that you have ‘always been proud to be considered a friend of Israel’, even having spent time there as a Kibbutz volunteer. You rightfully recognise Israel as the only ‘pluralist, open society” in the region.

Boris Johnson has already shown that he knows that the boycott movement is a sinister extremist strategy to undermine and weaken Israel solely because it is the Jewish state. You spoke out against BDS even before you were Prime Minister. Your government has moved forward with anti-boycott legislation in order to thwart its spread, even including it in this years Queens Speech – thus making it an official part of your agenda. UK universities have faced growing pressure to reign in the toxic antisemitic activity and ideologies of their students. Given all this – it is unimaginable that under your watch the UK will actively participate in a conference that explicitly demonises Israel as a pariah state, and promotes the full BDS Boycott – with all of its sinister aims.

Campaigners call on Boris Johnson to boycott 'Jew-hate fest' Durban IV conference

Jewish groups have intensified calls on the Prime Minister to boycott the 20th anniversary of the notoriously antisemitic Durban conference at a time of rising Jew-hatred in Britain.

Tweeting under the hashtags #NoUKAtDurbanIV and #Durban IVTargetsJews, the Zionist Federation (ZF), Likud-Herut UK and Sussex Friends of Israel joined the Board of Deputies (BOD) and the Jewish Leadership Council (JLC) to demand that Britain pulls out of the "Jew hate fest".

"Boris Johnson and Dominic Raab, don't betray UK Jewry," the ZF tweeted. "By pulling out of Durban IV, Boris Johnson will be placing the UK on the right side of history."

Lekud-Herut UK added: "Do the right thing and pull out of the Jew hate fest." And anti-racism campaigner David Collier tweeted: "Why is the UK promoting Jew hate? Get out now!"

They acted in advance of a planning meeting for Durban IV, scheduled for Wednesday, in which Government representatives are expected to take part.

The campaign groups warn that a planned revival of the UN’s infamously antisemitic 2001 ‘anti-racism’ summit in Durban, South Africa, set to take place in New York this September, may legitimise anti-Jewish bigotry on a global scale.

If Britain takes part, they say, it would risk fuelling a fresh wave of race hatred in this country, which has seen a rash of antisemitic incidents linked to recent pro-Palestine rallies.

Twenty years ago, the UN-hosted World Conference Against Racism resulted in the now notorious Durban Declaration, which singled Israel out for criticism.

Israeli and Jewish delegates were hounded and harassed, and antisemitic material was widely distributed.

Israel Advocacy Movement: UK must boycott Durban IV

It's shameful that as anti-Jewish racism surges in Britain, instead of protecting Jews, the British government is taking part in Durban IV… an antisemitic conference!

In March, Senator Rob Portman (R-OH) introduced S.1061 - Israel Relations Normalization Act of 2021 in the Senate. A companion bill, H.R.2748, was introduced by Rep. Bradley Scott Schneider (D-IL) in Congress.

The bills are very good. They seek to promote and expand the existing Abraham Accords, to work to find other Arab peace partners for Israel, to fight antisemitism and Holocaust denial in the Arab world, and - crucially - to protect Arabs who desire peace with Israel from being persecuted in their own countries who have "anti-normalization" laws.

I cannot find any reason why anyone would object to these bills. Yet for some reason, the bills have gone nowhere.

The Senate bill has just sat there since March. The Congressional bill was referred to the Subcommittee on Middle East, North Africa and Global Counterterrorism and to the House Committee on Foreign Affairs, with no new news since April 30.

These bills have received very little attention in the media.

It may be worthwhile for US citizens to contact your senator and representative and ask that they help push these bills through Congress and to become law.

"Day of Rage" in NYC: More proof that Palestinianism is just antisemitism in new clothing

Today, Palestinian groups in the US are planning a "Day of Rage" protest outside the Israeli consulate in New York City:

The purpose of the rally is to "stand against the Zionist settler invasion on Al Aqsa in Jerusalem Palestine."

Which means to stop Jews from peacefully walking on Judaism's holiest site.

Here's one such recent "invasion:"

This isn't a pro-Palestinian rally. This isn't even a rally against the Jerusalem Flag March, which will not enter the Temple Mount.

The entire stated purpose of this rally is to deny Jews any religious rights to Judaism's most sacred spot.

Denying Jews basic human rights is the very definition of antisemitism.

When it comes down to it, every "pro-Palestinian" demand is a variant of denying the right of Jews to live in peace and security in their ancestral homeland.

Professor Ahdia Ahmed Al-Sayed is the first woman to chair the Bahraini Journalists Association.

Speaking to the American Jewish Press Association, she said that the Bahraini community did not accept her and many of her fellow journalists because of their explicit support for Israel’s normalization agreement.

“Yes, I was bullied and harassed on social media,” she said.

Al-Sayed strongly implied that she was threatened, saying that her attackers went beyond “what can be said about women” in Bahrain.

Earlier, during an interview with Israeli radio, she stated that “the Palestinians have not offered themselves anything for seventy-two years, yet the normalization agreement with Israel does not contradict Palestinian interests.”

Al-Sayed plans to lead the first delegation of journalists from Bahrain to Israel this year.

06/14 Links Pt2: Dore Gold: The Baseless Charge that Israel Is an Apartheid State, Again; Why ‘the Jews’?; Ilhan Omar is a wakeup call for American Jews

From Ian:

Dore Gold: The Baseless Charge that Israel Is an Apartheid State, Again

The baseless accusations that Israel has adopted an apartheid system similar to South Africa's pre-1994 racial doctrine just won't go away.

Former South African Supreme Court Justice Richard J. Goldstone, chief prosecutor of the UN International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia and Rwanda, wrote in the New York Times on October 31, 2011, that descriptions of Israel as an apartheid state are "unfair and inaccurate slander." "In Israel there is no apartheid. Nothing there comes close to the definition of apartheid under the 1998 Rome Statute." Goldstone headed a UN fact-finding mission on the Gaza conflict in 2008-9, which tried to argue that Israel had deliberately killed civilians in that war. Goldstone eventually retracted the principal conclusions of his own report.

The details here matter. In apartheid South Africa, there were white hospitals and black hospitals. Yet anyone today who wanders into the Emergency Room at Hadassah Hospital in Jerusalem will find both Jewish and Palestinian Arab patients treated by both Jewish and Palestinian doctors working side-by-side. Charging Israel with apartheid is not only unfair, it is completely inaccurate.

So why do writers persist to argue that Israel is an apartheid state? Because Israel's adversaries are waging an ideological war against the Jewish state. Advocates of the Israel-apartheid libel hope that their campaign will lead to Israel's eventual replacement with a Palestinian Islamic entity.

This campaign against Israel has had vile aftereffects that need to be noted. It is no coincidence that the world is witnessing an upsurge in anti-Semitism. Anti-Israel demonstrations today frequently have signs that refer to apartheid. Those pushing the "Israel is an apartheid state" rhetoric are playing with fire.

MEP's call on UN chief to investigate UNRWA over hate teaching

Letter also sent to EU Commission president demanding probe into antisemitism, incitement to violence

A cross-party group of Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) sent a letter Monday to the UN Secretary-General and EU Commission president demanding an investigation into the United Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA) over the revelations of antisemitism and incitement to violence in its educational materials.

The 26 MEPs, who represent all the major parties in the European Parliament, initiated by MEP David Lega (EPP, Sweden) and MEP Miriam Lexmann (EPP, Slovakia), raised significant concerns about the kinds of materials that UNRWA uses.

The letter expressed alarm about "UNRWA’s continued use of hateful school materials that encourage violence, reject peace, and demonizes both Israel and the Jewish people. We deeply deplore the agency’s lack of oversight, transparency and accountability with regard to the repeated revelations of teaching hate and incitement to Palestinian children under UNRWA’s care.”

Crucially, the letter condemns the use of EU taxpayers’ money to fund hate teaching and antisemitic provocation, which the authors maintained was a "grave misuse in violation of our values."

They added that the revelations were particularly "disturbing" given that UNRWA's Commissioner-General Philippe Lazzarini addressed the European Parliament just last November, he personally guaranteed that in UNRWA schools 'there is absolutely no room for any teaching which would encourage violence, discrimination, racism or antisemitism.'"

“The EU condemned UNRWA in May for teaching hate and these members of the European parliament are absolutely right in turning to Secretary-General Guterres for answers they have not been able to receive from UNRWA itself, including who authored and authorized the hateful UNRWA-produced teaching material," maintained IMPACT-se CEO Marcus Sheff.

Scorecard: Half of UN Human Rights Council Members Opposed Action for Victims

Nearly half the countries on the UN’s top human rights body—which the U.S. is now seeking to rejoin, and which opens a 3-week session on Monday, June 21st—are using their membership negatively, opposing instead of supporting action for victims of arbitrary detention, torture and other abuses, according to a new report released today by UN Watch, an independent non-governmental human rights organization in Geneva that monitors the world body.

UN Watch’s scorecard measured all 47 UN Human Rights Council member states based on their 2020 votes on resolutions concerning victims in such places as Belarus, Burundi, Eritrea, Iran and Yemen, as well on resolutions that define human rights concepts.

Thirteen countries were rated as having “Destructive” voting records, including Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Libya, Namibia, Nigeria, Qatar, Senegal and Somalia.

Another 10 council members were rated as having “Very Destructive” records, including Eritrea, Mauritania, Pakistan, the Philippines, Sudan and Venezuela.

“When 60 percent of the UN Human Rights Council is composed of tyrannies and other non-democracies—absurdly, China, Cuba and Russia this year joined existing members such as Libya, Pakistan and Venezuela—we should not be surprised that so many use their votes to oppose action against the world’s worst abusers, or to support counterproductive resolutions that legitimize dictatorships and terrorists,” said Hillel Neuer, executive director of UN Watch.

“Even worse, most of the world’s worst situations of widespread abuse never even come to a vote, with major violators of human rights such as China, Cuba, Egypt, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Turkey and Zimbabwe enjoying complete impunity at the UNHRC, escaping any censure or scrutiny in the form of council resolutions, inquiries or special sessions,” said Neuer.

Only 24 of the 47 Council members had mixed or positive records. Twelve countries received a “Constructive” score: Austria, Brazil, Denmark, Germany, Italy, Japan, Netherlands, Poland, Slovakia, South Korea, Spain, and Ukraine. These countries contributed constructively to the council’s work between 70% and 89% of the time.

The Kerem Shalom crossing, which is the main crossing for goods to and from Gaza, has not yet fully re-opened since the May mini-war.

This is a little surprising, because that re-opening is always one of the major pre-requisites for the cease fire.

Merchants and manufacturers in Gaza say that the goods they have ordered are stuck in the Ashkelon port, and they cannot get them transported to Gaza. (They are also charged for storage at the port.)

The Gisha NGO says that only food, animal feed, humanitarian aid, medication, and fuel for international organizations are allowed into Gaza - not even fuel for the Gaza power plant. Nothing is being exported, either.

Perhaps there is some sort of security concern, but I cannot imagine what it is.

I know that the PA wants to be in the loop on allowing reconstruction materials into Gaza so there may be some political infighting between them and Hamas in allowing imports to resume - they have argued over tax collection from imports in the past.

Not re-opening the crossing in the way it was before could provide an excuse for the rockets to resume.

06/14 Links Pt1: We must recognize Netanyahu's achievements despite his flaws; Senior Fatah official supports Hamas rockets “that put Israel in bomb shelters”

From Ian:

David Horovitz: Israel awakens to its most representative government ever, courtesy of Netanyahu

Israel awoke Monday to a new, post-Netanyahu dawn — to a fragile and phenomenally diverse coalition whose members chorused their determination to work for the good of the country. The sun rose as usual, just as Naftali Bennett had promised last week that it would, except he was now prime minister. “King Bibi,” it turned out, was not a monarch after all.

As they assembled for the traditional photograph with the president, there was no mistaking the breadth of Israel represented by the ministers in the government headed by Prime Minister Naftali Bennett and Alternate Prime Minister Yair Lapid. On one side of President Reuven Rivlin sat Bennett, Israel’s first Orthodox prime minister and the former head of the Settlers Council. On the other sat Lapid, the secular centrist who drew together the radically improbable eight-party mix that on Sunday unseated Benjamin Netanyahu after 12 years.

Among those arrayed behind them stood an Ethiopia-born minister (Pnina Tamano Shata), a former IDF chief of staff (Benny Gantz), Israel’s first openly gay party leader (Nitzan Horowitz), a minister from the Arab community (Issawi Frej), other ex-army officers, and immigrants from the former Soviet Union. In her wheelchair to Lapid’s left was Karine Elharrar (she has muscular dystrophy), the incoming energy minister.

For Rivlin, who publicly declared his discomfort when charging Benjamin Netanyahu with forming a government after the March 23 elections, but expressed no such reservations when transferring the mandate to Lapid in May after Netanyahu failed, Monday’s ceremony was a fortuitously timed delight. Rivlin’s seven-year term ends next month, and he relished this most significant of his final events, taking the time to shake hands with all, and embrace many, of the 27 ministers in the government that has ended Netanyahu’s rule.

Not only does Israel’s new government hail from diverse backgrounds, however, but its component parties are advocates of radically contrasting ideologies.

JPost Editorial: We must recognize Netanyahu's achievements despite his flaws

There is something ironic and yet symbolic about Israel entering the post-corona era this week with a new government – but one without Benjamin Netanyahu at its head.

As of Tuesday, Israelis will no longer be required to wear masks anywhere, thus removing the last public regulation of corona. Israel’s success in countering the pandemic is due to many factors, but one main one is certainly Netanyahu’s success in bringing sufficient vaccines to the country, which were then efficiently and effectively distributed via the country’s health fund system.

Netanyahu probably thought that this alone would be enough to enable him to be reelected to the position he has held for 12 straight years (in addition to his first term between 1996 and 1999.) But he underestimated the mood of the country, and certainly the political forces that were intent on replacing him.

As Netanyahu moves out of the Prime Minister’s Residence and takes over the position of leader of the Opposition, we must look back at his term in office and say thank you for his achievements.

Netanyahu’s last few years in particular have been very divisive, with unbridled attacks on the justice system, the media, the police, and anybody he considered a political rival.

Moreover, Netanyahu is leaving the premiership under a cloud of corruption, standing trial for bribery, fraud and breach of trust. Like any citizen, he should be considered innocent until proven guilty; but this does not allow him the right to actively undermine the institutions that make up Israel’s delicate democratic fabric. It is this rhetoric that many Israelis will now remember.

Nevertheless. there is a Jewish tradition of hakarat hatov – expressing gratitude. Netanyahu is a human being with faults and failings, but he is also someone who has dedicated his life and career to the Jewish state, and has achieved an impressive list of accomplishments.

Fmr. Ambassador Michael Oren on Netanyahu, New PM Bennett

Honest Reporting: Benjamin Netanyahu: A Political Timeline

Netanyahu: The Early Years
Benjamin Netanyahu, referred to by many as “Bibi,” was born in Tel Aviv in 1949. By 1963, his family had moved to Pennsylvania, where he attended high school.

At the age of 18, Netanyahu was drafted into the Israeli military, serving in Sayeret Matkal, an elite special operations unit. Over the next few years, he took part in several counter-terrorism missions, notably aiding in rescuing a hijacked plane at the Tel Aviv airport in 1972.

From 1972-76, Netanyahu attended the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, where he received a Bachelor of Science in Architecture and a Master’s in Business Management.

After his brother, Jonathan, was tragically killed in action while rescuing hostages from German leftist and Palestinian terrorists in Entebbe, Uganda in 1976, Netanyahu started an anti-terrorism foundation known as the Jonathan Institute. By 1982, Netanyahu had become a well-known public figure, serving as Israel’s deputy chief of mission in Washington, D.C. He became Israel’s ambassador to the United Nations in 1984.

In 1988, Netanyahu was elected to the Knesset, Israel’s parliament, for the first time as a member of the right-wing Likud party. He served as deputy minister of foreign affairs until 1991, when he became deputy minister in then-prime minister Yitzhak Shamir’s office.

Continuing to gain traction, Netanyahu was elected chairman of the Likud party in 1993.

Commentary Magazine Podcast: Bibi Goes Bye-Bye

Bret Stephens joins the podcast crew today to discuss the change in Israel’s government—and the complex legacy of Benjamin Netanyahu. Then we talk NATO, Biden, and the end of the pandemic. Give a listen.

Jewish woman visits UAE mosque. Arab media says she "desecrated" it.

Are Jews allowed to visit mosques under sharia law?

Sura IX, Repentence, verse 17-18 states: "It is not for the idolaters to tend Allah's sanctuaries... He only shall tend Allah's sanctuaries who believes in Allah and the last day and observes proper worship,

pays the poor-due and fears none save Allah"; verse 28: "O ye who believe! The idolaters only are unclean. So let them not come near the inviolable Place of worship."

Since Jews (and Christians) are dhimmis, not idolators, these verses do not apply to them, and they should be allowed to visit mosques. In the early days of Islam, they could.

Under the Ottoman empire, though, additional restrictions were placed on Jews and Christians, and they were not allowed to visit the Tomb of the Patriarchs or the Temple Mount. These are not based on Islamic law.

Last week, a Saudi journalist tweeted this:

Vanesa, a Jewish Israeli lady expresses how welcome she feels inside Sheikh Zayed Grand Mosque 🕌

This is what my great religion Islam promotes, and these are the values of the UAE 🇦🇪♥️ pic.twitter.com/guISS9HWGz
— Loay Alshareef لؤي الشريف (@lalshareef) June 13, 2021

Loay Alshareef was already considered very bad in some Arab circles for having participated in a Chanukah ceremony last year. Here, the Egyptian-born, Bahraini citizen is taking a Jewish Israeli woman on a tour of the Sheikh Zayed Grand Mosque in Abu Dhabi. She really enjoyed her visit.

But Arabs who saw this video are upset.

Saudi news site El Dorar's headline says that Loay "desecrated" the mosque by bringing the Jewish woman there.

So do sites in Yemen. and elsewhere.

The issue isn't that she is Israeli - if she was an Israeli Arab she would not have been condemned this way. And the mosque welcomes visitors from around the world no matter what religion.

No, the only part that upsets these Arab sites is that she is Jewish.

Evyatar is a new outpost that some Israelis have set up recently with caravans, in response to the murder of Yehuda Guetta in early May. It was originally created in memory of Evyatar Borowski who was murdered at that location by Arab terrorists in 1982, but Israel has not allowed building there since it was first attempted to be built in 2013.

Israel has not legalized this settlement, and it has banned bringing building materials into the area, but there is pressure to allow it to be built. Israel is studying whether the area of Evyatar should be considered state land which would be a first step on legalization.

Palestinians are keenly watching what happens with Evyatar, which they call Jabal Sabih. There have been major riots over the outpost and one Palestinian teen was killed on Friday during one riot.

On Sunday night, Ma'an reports that Palestinians set fires in areas near the outpost, burning tires and setting off fireworks, and in fact they have been doing this every night.

In an apparent move to force new Prime Minister Bennett into a difficult situation, Bibi Netanyahu instructed defense minister Benny Gantz not to demolish the outpost, which means if Bennett changes that order he will look like a "leftist." Gantz said that he will evacuate the outpost today, and only Bennett can stop that. Yet his coalition will not want to legalize it.

Netanyahu, of course, had legalized very few new settlements during his time in office, and had slowed down new construction in existing, legal settlements. This is all politics.

Bibi did something similar with pushing the Jerusalem flag march to tomorrow, making it Bennett's headache as well.

It is difficult enough being a prime minister in Israel without having landmines purposefully planted there.

When politicians put their own interests and childish vendettas ahead of what is best for the country, everyone suffers.

Washington Post apparently has no idea why Israel bombed parts of Gaza, and doesn't bother asking

The Washington Post has an article about the damage done to Gaza by Israeli airstrikes, based on satellite imagery of before and after the mini-war in May.

According to the UN, 459 buildings were destroyed or damaged. Forty impact craters were detected on roads.

The destruction, which can be seen across the entire 25-mile strip was concentrated in the north, around Gaza City, and the southeast.

Rights groups decried the targeting of Gaza, which is one of the most densely populated places in the world.

Tensions boiled over in May after Hamas fired rockets into Israel in response to Israeli police cracking down on Palestinian protesters in Jerusalem. Israel responded with airstrikes, setting off nearly two weeks of hostilities.

You see? Hamas rocket fire didn't set off two weeks of hostilities - Israel's response is what started the war!

We saw the same dynamic in 2008: Hamas announced the name of the war and shot hundreds of rockets at Israel, but only when Israel responded was when the media declared that Israel started a war.

That isn't the worst part of this article, though.

The article goes in detail on the damage caused, almost all of it by Israel, but not once does it describe why Israel might have performed over a thousand airstrikes. It does not describe what Israel's targets might be, with the exception of "militants" and Hamas' offices in the Al Jalaa media building.

The word "tunnels" is not mentioned once, even though Israel described during the war that they were considered a major target and Hamas' most important strategic asset. Chances are very good that the reason Wehda Street was so heavily targeted is that the bustling commercial center was sitting on top of critical Hamas tunnels.

Why has no reporter asked the IDF that question?

The Washington Post could have easily looked at what Israel targeted in previous wars - command and control centers, major terrorist leaders, rocket launchers, arms and explosives caches. But it didn't even consider that Israel might have had excellent intelligence and good reasons for choosing the targets it did, even sometimes with the knowledge that innocent civilians might get killed because the target is that important.

Instead, the vague impression that one gets from the article is that Israel just randomly chose arbitrary targets and bombed the hell out of them.

The reporters didn't even bother asking the IDF to comment on why the damage is what can be seen. Meaning, the only people in the world who know exactly why Israel chose its targets weren't asked that question in the preparation for this article.

In the end, this is a one-sided article that only discusses damage and doesn't even speculate on why a professional army would choose its targets, or why Hamas chooses to place military targets among civilian objects and infrastructure.

The Washington Post's slogan is "Democracy Dies in Darkness." Yet the article doesn't illuminate - on the contrary, it purposely obscures.

And one can only imagine why such an article gets approved to begin with.

When Chaim Herzog submitted the Biblical story of Abraham's purchase in Hebron as an official document to the UNGA

Chaim Herzog, the former Israeli representative at the UN and father of the just elected president of Israel, Isaac Herzog, sent this letter in 1976 to then UN-Secretary General Kurt Waldheim, to counter an Arab submission that denied any Jewish connection to Hebron.

(h/t Irene)

06/13 Links: Richard Landes: Lethal, own-goal war journalism; David Collier: Gaza, Sky News and the Islamist march on London; PA continues its “Pay-for-Slay” policy in breach of the US Taylor Force Act

From Ian:

Richard Landes: Lethal, own-goal war journalism

The month of May 2021 taught us Israelis many unfortunate things—things we hoped were not true (and continue to hope are not true)—about the sad straights of Israeli democracy; the relentlessly authoritarian nature of Palestinian or, for that matter, Arab and Muslim political culture; the troubled relationship between Jews and Arabs in Israel; the rising strength of religious hatred in the region and the world; and, at least for me, the most senseless yet persistent phenomenon that crops up every time open conflict between Israelis and Arabs breaks out: namely the own-goal, lethal war journalism of the Western media and the wave of hatred it predictably unleashes around the world.

A brief preliminary discussion about the three types of unethical forms of “war journalism” is in order. There is patriotic war journalism: reporting as news your own side’s war propaganda; lethal war journalism: reporting as news a foreign belligerent’s war propaganda; and own-goal war journalism: reporting your enemy’s war propaganda as news.

Modern, professional journalism considers patriotic war journalism unethical, a prostitution of its high calling. While reporters sometimes sympathize with one “side” in a foreign war, lethal war journalists systematically give credence to one belligerent’s narratives, depicting the other side as an atrocious enemy. The third category seems wholly improbable, since why would anyone do something that stupid?

And yet, in the 21st century, the land “between the river and the sea” has given birth to a peculiarly virulent case of both lethal and own-goal journalism among Western news providers. From 2000-2002, a wave of the most ferocious and provocative lethal journalism in the history of modern, professional journalism came from Western journalists who published dishonest Palestinian claims about Israeli evil-doing (targeting kids, massacring civilians) and ran them as news.

When those claims were disproven, as they all were, these news outlets did nothing to correct their errors. In the spring of 2002, when lethal journalists filled the global public sphere with reports of Israeli massacres in Jenin (just like the Nazis in Poland), progressives in Europe protested by wearing mock suicide belts in solidarity with an enemy about to attack their own countries. Own-goal journalism scored a massive blow for an enemy whose viciousness was embodied in those very suicide belts that these demonstrators, inebriated with virtue, wore so proudly.

Democrats must require Palestinian leaders to do better

In early June, Democratic Rep. Jamie Raskin wrote a letter to Sen. Jim Risch, the ranking Republican on the Foreign Relations Committee, asking him to remove a temporary hold on restoring Palestinian aid. That hold was put in place only until the United States can verify, with any sense of certainty, that the recipients will not directly or indirectly funnel the money to terrorists. Releasing it before that happens would be a terrible mistake.

The letter, which was signed by a group of Raskin’s Democratic colleagues, was misleading and generally reflective of a failed Middle East approach that they desperately need to abandon.

The letter was misleading because it is full of partial omissions and false promises. For example, it notes that this “humanitarian and development aid was passed in FY20 with bipartisan support and signed by the former President,” but completely fails to mention that there was also overwhelming bipartisan and executive support for the very limitations that Risch is trying to uphold.

Raskin claims that the money “is to be provided in full accordance with U.S. law. It is administered and overseen by our government and by trusted and vetted partners …. Hamas and other terrorist groups will not benefit from our humanitarian assistance.” The truth, however, is that during a May 24 special briefing, a senior State Department official publicly admitted that while the U.S. would be “working in partnership with the United Nations and the Palestinian Authority (PA) to try and channel aid there,” at the end of the day “there are no guarantees” it would not end up with Hamas.

It is also problematic and unlawful even to pretend (while noticeably declining to mention them by name) that the PA has suddenly become a “trusted and vetted partner” that the U.S. can work with on distributing aid in the region.

Setting aside the fact that as recently as May 19, during the conflict in Israel, the PA released a public statement calling for a unity government with none other than Hamas, the PA itself consistently calls for violent uprisings and intifada. The PA also doesn’t stop at merely glorifying violence; it literally pays for it by guaranteeing convicted murderers a monthly salary for life, with amounts increased according to the number of victims and the severity of the harm. It spends hundreds of millions annually incentivizing terror, much of it from international aid. (h/t Yerushalimey)

David Collier: Gaza, Sky News and the Islamist march on London

In fact, I went back six months on the Sky Twitter feed and there is not a single tweet, not one, about the persecution of Christians.

Instead there is an endless stream of demonising, anti-Israel propaganda.

The BBC, the Guardian all have similar issues and a similar focus. When these news outlets publish a story against Israel, it goes viral. Their advertisers pay more, their subscriptions increase. But they are chiefly speaking to the Islamist crowd who use the material as fodder for new recruits and they are egged on by the same Islamist mob screaming ‘what about Palestine?’

Where is the front cover of the New York Times displaying rows of Nigerian children who have been lost? There isn’t one. Nobody cares.

Muslim footballers hold aloft the Palestinian flag and everyone takes this as a sign that ‘Palestine’ is the real humanitarian issue of our age. It is nothing of the kind and it is a disgrace that the FA took no action. This is people like Liverpool’s Sadio Mane turning it into a religious conflict and publicly using their fame and football clubs to do it. This isn’t about human rights – it is about their ‘brothers’, ‘Islam’ and the ‘Ummah’. Black Lives Matter is being co opted by the Palestinian cause – like the Palestinian cause co-opts every cause. But when it comes down to it – look at those people in Africa who are really suffering that nobody wants to talk about. Black lives don’t seem to matter at all.

People like the Sky News journalist Mark Stone get to feel important. His following increases, people begin speaking his name. The fool even thinks this somehow means he is doing the right thing- so he does it more often and more loudly. The growing applause confirms to him he is on the right track. After all, there are only 1.8 billion Muslims in the world and truth is a numbers game. The level of the man’s stupidity is only beaten by the size of his ego. A sad combination for a journalist.

We are being let down. There is no excuse for the Israel obsession – none. It is part of an Islamist narrative – and it is what these Islamists want to talk about – all the time. Our media have followed these Islamists down the anti-western, anti-Israel, rabbit hole. They run scared of the Islamists in the newsroom. Our police run scared of them on the street. The government knows that if it takes action – it will be labelled Islamophobic. This is a train heading for a crash – and the sooner we stop it – the less damaging the impact will be.

Hate is hate.

Except when that hate targets Jews.

Then it's legitimate complaint.

Like when you try to burn down a synagogue because you're angry at Israel.

And don't you dare call it antisemitism!

We saw that a few years ago when a German court affirmed a ruling that synagogue arson is not anti-Semitic. The case was about 3 men "of Palestinian descent" in July 2014. After the end-of-Ramadan celebration, they threw Molotov cocktails at a synagogue, resulting in minimal damage and no injuries.

The 3 men testified they were high on marijuana -- apparently they were just a little ahead of their time. But as it turned out, they did not have to claim diminished capacity. The court ruled there was no antisemitic motive because the men claimed they were taking out their anger on Israel because of the war with Gaza and didn't intend to hurt anyone.

Considering what has been going on in Jewish communities these past weeks, maybe these men were a little ahead of their time with this excuse as well.

Now, last month, Jewish houses of worship were again targets for vandals who ostensibly are reacting to events in the Middle East. On May 12, it was reported that Israeli flags were burned in front of 2 synagogues in Germany and the words "Free Palestine" were spray-painted on a synagogue in Spain.

Meanwhile, in the US, the words "Free Palestine" were sprayed outside a synagogue in Kenosha, Wisconsin, during protests against the police shooting of Jacob Blake in August 2020. An excuse offered this time was that the synagogue brought the attack upon itself by "blurring the lines" when it flies an Israeli flag.

Jews just have to be careful how they express themselves.

Jewish -- and only Jewish -- identity has to make sure it does not draw attention to itself.

And that goes for their synagogues too.

What about other synagogues?

Did they "blur the line"?

Did the Jews of the Tree of Life Congregation in Pittsburgh blur the line between acceptable and non-acceptable expression of Jewishness and invite that massacre?

How about the Poway Synagogue shooting?

Should we check to make sure there was no Israeli flag outside the synagogue, egging the shooters on?

A 2019 article in Haaretz lists these and other attacks on synagogues:

- Attempted arson at the Anshe Sholom Bnai Israel congregation in Chicago

- Similar attacks on Chabad Houses in Massachusetts

- An arson attack in the West Rogers Park section of Chicago (where 2 visibly Orthodox Jews were shot dead the previous year, possibly by the same gunman)

But if synagogues should not display Israeli flags with Jewish stars, is it at least OK for Jews to wear Jewish stars?

Not if they want to be normal.

Romance novelist Casey McQuiston has a line in her 2019 novel "Red,White & Royal Blue" where the president jokes that the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations “said something idiotic about Israel, and now I have to call Netanyahu and personally apologize.”

And that one sentence got McQuiston in trouble with the Twitter mob:

A handful of Twitter users wrote that even mentioning Israel in fiction “normalizes” the occupation of Palestine. Their complaints were amplified by a fan account of the book, which prompted McQuiston to say the line would be changed for future printings. McQuiston has a new book coming out this year. [emphasis added]

So while the UAE, Bahrain, Sudan and Morocco normalize relations with Israel, Israel cannot be mentioned in polite company, lest it be considered like other countries?

And even Jews cannot be accepted as normal unless they remove anything identifying them as Jews -- and therefore identifiable with Israel.

Remember that rally Sarsour organized last year, inviting everyone except Zionists and cops?

On the one hand Jews are being told they are not welcome if they identify openly with Israel.

On the other hand, we have to be careful about identifying too openly as Jews.

Jews have to worry that they may be singled out and attacked

For:

wearing a Star of David
wearing a kippah
speaking Hebrew

Having mezuzahs

The "progressive" left has been working overtime to define what Israel is.

They are also working on 'helping' Jews define themselves.

Are they undermining Jews in order to undermine Israel?

Or are they undermining Israel in order to undermine Jews?

Last week, Youssef Munayyer wrote a piece in Jewish Currents claiming that the Palestinian expression "From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free" is not at all antisemitic, and not a call fo rethnic cleansing of Jews, and is only a yearning for a state where Jews are treated equally with Arabs. It is, as he quotes, “part of a larger call to see a secular democratic state established in all of historic Palestine.”

This is gaslighting on a massive scale.

Saddam Hussein was explicit when he said, "Palestine is Arab and must be liberated from the river to the sea and all the Zionists who emigrated to the land of Palestine must leave."

Shiite scholar M. Da'ud wrote about the Muslim messianic Mahdi:

Google Books references to the phrase before 1990 are mostly snippets, but they are very clear that the phrase means ethnic cleansing of Jews.

From Record of the Arab World: Yearbook of Arab and Israeli Politics (1970):

From a 1970 Egyptian radio broadcast, captured by the CIA:

Or from the 1980 Near East/North Africa Report - Issue 2130 - Page 12:

INTER - ARAB AFFAIRS TRIPOLI REPORTS RESULTS OF PALESTINIAN CONFERENCE LD291504 Tripoli Domestic ... of keeping the Palestinian revolution ablaze until all the territories of Palestine -- from the river to the sea -- are liberated .

Hamas leaders have used the term - and they are quite explicit in their desire to replace all of Israel with an Islamist state where Jews do not have equal rights.

Hell, even Osama Bin Laden used the term, and I don' tthink even Munayyer would pretend that he meant equal rights for Jews.

Even this past month, when Palestinian Arabic media reports on Israeli objections to the phrase, they never say that the meaning of the phrase is any different than what Israel says it is. Only in English do we see such apologetics.

No one, when speaking to an Arab audience, even pretends that the phrase means anything but ethnic cleansing of Jews.

And even far socialist media understands this, as this November 2012 Workers Liberty article shows: