Monday, May 23, 2022



Palestinians are gathering excuses to attack Israel next Sunday, Jerusalem Day.

Ma'an is not affiliated with any terror organization. Yet even that news outlet is saying that there is no reasonable alternative to attacking Israeli Jews next Sunday with rockets, terrorism or both.

Last year's Jerusalem Day was marked with Hamas rockets towards Jerusalem - endangering the very holy places that Muslims claim are so important to them. To Palestinians, the war was a net positive because it showed that they could still affect Israel and stop Jews from celebrating the reunification of Jerusalem. 

They don't look at a war that killed hundreds and that destroyed part of Gaza as a loss - to them, it was a victory, and Hamas rode a wave of popularity for months afterwards, as it took on the mantle of "defender of Al Quds and Al Aqsa." 

All the Palestinians need is an excuse to repeat their purported victory. And they are collecting them.

1.) The march itself, which is an unacceptable provocation to the feelings of millions of Muslims.
2.) A court decision, not being enforced by Israeli police, allowing Jews to pray aloud on the Temple Mount.
3.) Jews continuing to visit and silently pray at the holy site, as they have done for years now.
4.) "Price tag" attacks by far right settlers, even though they are denounced by almost all Jews.
5.) Naftali Bennett not even mentioning Palestinians at his UN speech last September, which they find disrespectful.
6.) Israel rooting out terror cells in Jenin.
7.) The death of Shireen Abu Akleh.
8.) Israeli police attacking people trying to take her body on a different route at her funeral.
9.) The US taking Kahana Chai off the list of terrorist organizations.

None of these are remotely a reason to start attacking Jewish civilians. But in the Palestinian honor/shame system, not attacking Jews is being framed as unacceptable and shameful.

The editorial ends with not a threat but a virtual promise:

The statement of the Palestinian Authority and the statement of the Kingdom of Jordan to hold the occupation responsible for the upcoming religious war represents more than a warning of what will happen.

The question is no longer if a new battle will take place next Sunday. Rather, the more accurate question: What is the miracle that can prevent the occurrence of such a battle?
Palestinians are being primed in all their media for a war. 

Israel needs to plan accordingly. And it should say, in no uncertain terms, that while the accusations against Israel are false and exaggerated, anyone who starts a war on May 29 will not be pleased with the outcome. 

And it needs to publicize and translate the threats today, not next week.




Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism  today at Amazon!

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424. 

Read all about it here!

 

 

  • Monday, May 23, 2022
  • Elder of Ziyon
Bakr Abu Bakr, writing in Al Arab, says that the idea of Jews being a chosen people is inherently racist because God doesn't treat any people as special. 

Let me refer to a term that is popular, even if it is attributed to the Torah, because it was exploited politically by Protestant Zionism and then by the Zionist movement, up to the present time! 

The racist term “chosen people” is one of many Jewish religious myths that have no historical, legal, political and scientific value. Religiously, the Creator was never a racist nor a real estate dealer at all, to seal or name a “people” or a tribe with its evil and benefactor with an eternal holy seal!? 
Allah of course is no racist, and would never treat anyone special. Jews, by  claiming to be the Chosen People, are promoting a racist god.

So he is not only attacking Zionism but Judaism itself. Good to know.

However, the Quran also says that Allah had a special relationship with the children of Israel:

2:40 - O Children of Israel, remember My favor which I have bestowed upon you and fulfill My covenant [upon you] that I will fulfill your covenant [from Me], and be afraid of [only] Me.

2:47 - O Children of Israel! Just recall to mind My favour that bestowed upon you, and remember that I exalted you above all the peoples of the world.

There are plenty of others. While the Quran also says that the children of Israel violated this covenant and are no longer favored, clearly Allah at one point favored the Jews - meaning, according to Abu Bakr, Allah is a racist.

Perhaps sensing this argument, Abu Bakr goes on to say that Jews aren't Jews anyway, and their original tribe is long gone. Whew! 

Good thing they were wiped out, or else Allah would have to ensure that they keep winning wars and gaining political, military and economic power.





Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism  today at Amazon!

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424. 

Read all about it here!

 

 

From Ian:

Time for a reality check
How convenient it is for the coalition that characters like Joint Arab List MKs Ofer Cassif and Ahmad Tibi are part of the opposition. When they are caught on camera hitting a police officer or disrupting police in the line of duty, then the coalition can adopt its combative tone. Prime Minister Naftali Bennett and Public Security Minister Omer Barlev can put on a grave expression and condemn the opposition MKs for crossing a red line, and they can back up the police and the security forces while deputy minister Abir Kara collects signatures to impeach Cassif for his "anti-Israel" comportment.

But the maelstrom surrounding Cassif's slap of a police officer is no more than a veil, and an efficient one at that, for the government's other chagrins. Cassif is the same Cassif and Tibi is the same Tibi – both of them are at the far end of the opposition and are well known for their constant and flagrant provocations against the core values of Israeli statehood. The very same statehood that the "government of change" swore to rehabilitate.

If we wish to pretend to be shocked by an anti-Israel stance and debasement of the security forces then we should do so with regard to someone who was allowed to walk into the halls of Israeli statehood thanks to a "political accident." I am referring to Ra'am MK Waleed Taha who said: "How ugly and pitiful is the face of the damned occupation! The occupation murdered Shireen Abu Akleh in cold blood, and also prevents the masses from participating in the pain of her death."

Yamina MK Nir Orbach immediately responded "the fundamental error is in the word 'occupation'" adding, "enough of this mendacious terminology." This led his coalition colleague Meretz MK Mossi Raz to suggest that he look up, "the definition of the term occupation before claiming it does not exist." While it's nice that the opportunity has been found to conduct a symposium on the semantics of the Israeli-Arab conflict, occupation or not, the key term in Taha's tweet was "murder in cold blood."


JPost Editorial: Rinawie Zoabi can no longer represent Israel in China
It’s too early to say for sure whether Meretz MK Ghaida Rinawie Zoabi got what she wanted out of the coalition crisis she manufactured last week – other than attention. But the case shines a light on many problems both in the country’s political system and in the way that diplomatic appointments are made. Rinawie Zoabi surprised Prime Minister Naftali Bennett and his partners when she suddenly announced that she was leaving the coalition to protest what she claimed was a series of problems within the Arab community. Among other things, she cited recent clashes on the Temple Mount, Sheikh Jarrah, settlements, house demolitions, the Citizenship Law and land confiscations in the Negev. The last straw, she said, was the clash between police and the Palestinians who carried the Palestinian flag-draped coffin of Al Jazeera journalist Shireen Abu Akleh in Jerusalem.

Rinawie Zoabi is no stranger to making bold protest measures. In January, she voted against the government’s bill on the ultra-Orthodox military draft, which as a result did not pass. She said then that she was voting to protest JNF tree planting on land which Bedouin residents of the Negev claim is theirs. Largely as a result of this protest gesture, instead of being punished within the coalition, Rinawie Zoabie was rewarded with a prestigious diplomatic appointment meant to remove the unpredictable lawmaker from the Knesset. She was, the government decided, to become Israel’s consul-general in Shanghai. Tellingly, Foreign Minister Yair Lapid gave the appointment to a Meretz MK, rather than to a member of his own Yesh Atid list. This was another reason to suspect that the appointment was largely a means to remove Rinawie Zoabi from the Knesset where she could endanger the government’s survival.

Her decision to resign from the coalition (but not the Knesset) was interpreted as a protest at what she sees as stalling over her appointment as consul-general, which still has to go through different channels for approval, like any official diplomatic appointment.

Although the position is considered to be more focused on commercial and financial ties, a field in which she is indeed qualified, the fact that she frequently attacks the government and the country makes her unsuitable for a post representing it. During a barrage of Hezbollah rockets from Lebanon in August, she went as far as telling KAN Radio that “Bennett knows that if the government enters into a military confrontation, the coalition will fall because Meretz and Ra’am will not agree to such a thing.” It was an open warning to the government that it could not respond to attacks from the terrorist organization and survive.
New Dialogue and Collaboration between EU and Israel
European Parliament President Roberta Metsola is visiting Israel and will address the Knesset on Monday, symbolizing an encouraging and dramatic change in Europe's tone and approach in its relations with the Jewish state.

Europeans have become much more suspicious of Iran. The danger of Iran's nuclear and hegemonic ambitions was amplified after the Russian invasion of Ukraine and Russia's nuclear threats, which shook the Europeans at their core. Statements criticizing anti-Zionism as a disguise for anti-Semitism are also becoming more prevalent among Europe's most influential voices. The EU has withheld funds from UNRWA due to the incitement against Jews and Israelis in Palestinian textbooks.

Moreover, a number of European nations have experienced acts of radical, Islamic terror and are wary of shifting demographics within their own societies that could be susceptible to further Islamic radicalization. At the same time, Israel's economic success and its pioneering prowess in the high-tech sector have increased its stature in Europe.
  • Monday, May 23, 2022
  • Elder of Ziyon
During the Temple Mount riots in April, a 21 year old Palestinian named Walid al-Sharif was injured and fell into a coma for three weeks before he died. 

The media universally reported that he was shot by the Israeli police on the Temple Mount, quoting "witnesses," even when the police denied it and said that he fell down and apparently injured his head on his own while running away after throwing stones.



Now, medical examinations reveal that the Israeli police were telling the truth and he wasn't shot. From Haaretz:

The Palestinian who died during last month’s unrest on the Temple Mount wasn’t hit by a sponge-tipped bullet, an investigation into his death concluded.

The findings, which were obtained by Haaretz, are based on medical opinions and medical documents, including documents from Hadassah University Hospital, Ein Karem, where Walid al-Sharif was hospitalized after being injured.

Al-Sharif, 21, of East Jerusalem, collapsed last month while fleeing from the Temple Mount after police stormed it and was taken to the hospital with mortal injuries. The Palestinians claimed he was hit by a sponge-tipped bullet fired by police. Police said he had been throwing stones at them, but was injured when he fell while running away. He died of his injuries on May 14.

According to the medical documents, there are no marks on Al-Sharif’s body indicating that he was hit by a sponge-tipped bullet. Medical experts at the hospital think he collapsed due to a heart attack, and the heart attack is also what caused the massive brain injury that led to his death.

Video footage from the Temple Mount shows Al-Sharif running away swiftly and then suddenly falling on his face. The police gave him first aid, along with medics at the scene, and he was taken to the hospital with severe facial injuries.

But the medical findings show that the injuries suffered during his fall weren’t what caused his death. Moreover, medical experts said, the kind of massive brain injury he suffered can be caused by a heart attack.
Note that the hospital didn't publicize this. The Israeli government didn't announce this. Haaretz, no doubt looking for evidence that Israeli police did shoot him and the police were lying, found the opposite.

Almost invariably, the IDF and Israeli police are proven to be telling the truth and Palestinian "eyewitnesses" are proven to be lying. Time and time again. Even an Amnesty researcher has noted that Palestinian "eyewitnesses" are unreliable and often follow a disinformation script rather than accurately tell the truth.

Which is yet another reason why the "eyewitnesses" to Shireen Abu Akleh's death are not to be believed, especially when the main one has a track record of lying himself





Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism  today at Amazon!

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424. 

Read all about it here!

 

 

  • Monday, May 23, 2022
  • Elder of Ziyon
In 2003, Scott Plous edited a celebrated anthology called "Understanding Prejudice and Discrimination" that includes a section widely spread across the Internet called "Ten myths about affirmative action." 

The "myths" include:

Myth #1: The only way to create a color-blind society is to adopt color-blind policies.

Although this assertion sounds intuitively plausible, the reality is that color-blind policies often put racial minorities at a disadvantage. For instance, all else being equal, color-blind seniority systems tend to protect White workers against job layoffs, because senior employees are usually White (Ezorsky, 1991). Likewise, color-blind college admissions favor White students because of their earlier educational advantages. Unless pre-existing inequities are corrected or otherwise taken into account, color-blind policies do not correct racial injustice—they reinforce it.

Myth #7: You can't cure discrimination with discrimination.

The problem with this myth is that it uses the same word—discrimination—to describe two very different things. Job discrimination is grounded in prejudice and exclusion, whereas affirmative action is an effort to overcome prejudicial treatment through inclusion. The most effective way to cure society of exclusionary practices is to make special efforts at inclusion, which is exactly what affirmative action does. The logic of affirmative action is no different than the logic of treating a nutritional deficiency with vitamin supplements. For a healthy person, high doses of vitamin supplements may be unnecessary or even harmful, but for a person whose system is out of balance, supplements are an efficient way to restore the body's balance.

Myth #8: Affirmative action tends to undermine the self-esteem of women and racial minorities.

Although affirmative action may have this effect in some cases (Heilman, Simon, & Repper, 1987; Steele, 1990), interview studies and public opinion surveys suggest that such reactions are rare. For instance, a recent Gallup poll asked employed Blacks and employed White women whether they had ever felt that others questioned their abilities because of affirmative action (Roper Center, 1995c). Nearly 90% of respondents said no (which is understandable—after all, White men, who have traditionally benefited from preferential hiring, do not feel hampered by self-doubt or a loss in self-esteem). Indeed, in many cases affirmative action may actually raise the self-esteem of women and minorities by providing them with employment and opportunities for advancement. There is also evidence that affirmative action policies increase job satisfaction and organizational commitment among beneficiaries (Graves & Powell, 1994).
This isn't my field so although I might have some intuitive issues about whether these ideas are myths, I cannot bring studies to argue with them.

Until now.

Because a recently available paper criticizes Israel for doing exactly the things that are celebrated by progressives elsewhere - and Israeli academia is positioned as being racist because of it.

Sarab Abu-Rabia-Queder is a well-regarded Bedouin sociologist and expert on gender studies at Ben Gurion University of the Negev. She wrote a paper in 2019 titled "The paradox of diversity in the Israeli academia: reproducing white Jewishness and national supremacy." The abstract:

This paper claims that policies designed to promote diversity and provide Ethiopian Jews with opportunities in Israeli institutions of higher learning create a paradox where, rather than diversifying student bodies and faculties in universities, they bolster the reproduction of national and religious supremacy of white Jews in the Israeli academia. Interviews with 50 Ethiopian students reveal that the racialized cultural indexes on which Israeli society structures its racialized attitudes towards Ethiopian immigrants have not been purged from university campuses. Instead, I argue, they continue to suffuse and shape those very programs designed to combat them by reinventing Jewish privilege and national exclusivity in Israeli universities.

In short, when the most progressive and liberal Israelis do exactly what progressives worldwide insist must be done with minority students, those very progressive actions are racist themselves.

Her paper is a remarkable funhouse mirror that supports conservative arguments against affirmative action in the West, twisted to position progressive Israeli Jews as racist Jewish supremacists.

Using the most modern sociology methodology, Abu Radia Queder interviewed 50 Jewish women either born in Ethiopia or with parents who had been born there,  using open ended questions so they can construct a narrative that she synthesizes into a coherent whole.  (I suspect that this methodology leaves great latitude for subconscious bias by the researcher to be manifested, but this is not the place for that discussion.)

The interviewees speak of a situation in which the academic establishment is interested in aiding the Ethiopian population and facilitate its access to the academia through extensive full-funding scholarships to Ethiopian candidates, but also describes how this ‘generosity’ stigmatizes its recipients, and the Ethiopian population as a whole, as dependent. As Herzog claimed (1993, 264), the inherent problem of affirmative action is that it strengthens the group’s boundaries rather than dissolves them and fuels stigmas about them, essentially that ‘Ethiopians’ cannot compete on the basis of merit. This is echoed on Shoshana: 

I won’t say no to funding. But to me it’s kind of another nail in our coffin. Makes us more and more dependent. And you’re always getting stuff: in the army you’ll get a special course to help you out, in the university they’d give you extra courses. It’s as if they never let you go, never let you actually compete for anything. It’s also important to make the distinction between Ethiopians who immigrated during the 90’s and the 2000’s. Because it really is two entirely different stories. But the issue is, as far as the government is concerned, I’m basically still a newly-arrived immigrant [Ola Khadasha]. There’s one definition to every immigrant in Israel, and then there’s one for an Ethiopian immigrant. An Ethiopian immigrant is anyone whose parents were born in Ethiopia. That’s to say that my child, when and whether they’ll be born [in Israel], would still be labelled as ‘newly arrived’. And to me it’s very disturbing to think that I’ll have a child who’ll be eligible from birth to benefits of a newly arrived immigrant, when he really isn’t one, never immigrated anywhere. 

This extension of such lavish aid to black women effectively robs them of credit for their achievements, their success is always seen as derived from the aid they have been given, as Rachel tells: 

If I pass something it’s because they’re doing me a favor and I’m Ethiopian. And that’s kind of disappointing. It’s like it’s not an empowering experience. There’s no question of forgetting . . . that the academy counts it to its own benefit, the place I am at right now.
We see that Israel is pouring money to help Black people - "lavish aid to black women," full scholarships - and this is framed as more evidence of white Jewish racism!

The paper includes more quotes: An Ethiopian academic who thinks that white colleagues consider her having been hired to meet a quota, self-congratulatory and irritating white progressive students constantly complimenting Ethiopians about how articulate they are or how amazing their culture is.

The three "myths" about affirmative action quoted above are all contradicted by the interviews of strong, proud  Ethiopian women this paper. 

To be sure, the Ethiopian interviewees experience some classic racism in the progressive halls of Israeli academia that mirror that of Blacks in America. One of them makes a stunning point about how the curricula maintains a racist attitude, which is perhaps worth its own post. But while American universities are positioned as trying their best to eradicate racism, Israeli universities are framed as being racist precisely for their efforts to eradicate racism - the same efforts that are defended to the death by academics in the West.

Perhaps the most ironic section and telling section of the paper is at the end: 

The racist Jewish supremacist white Israeli government funds, for three years, the research of a Bedouin Muslim woman - but she disrespects the state so much that she cannot properly capitalize the name of the government ministry that gave her the funds to write a paper damning Israel as racist.

Racism exists - on the Right and the Left. It is not likely to ever go away. But the double standards shown here against the most progressive Israeli Jews for doing exactly what progressives insist must be done to end racism in the West proves that antisemitism is just as systemic in the Left as racism is.




Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism  today at Amazon!

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424. 

Read all about it here!

 

 

"Jihad" original AI-produced artwork


We've seen this show before. And it keeps repeating because the world lets it happen.

The Jerusalem Magistrate’s Court ruled that three Jewish teenagers who bowed down and said the "Shema" prayer on the Temple Mount should not have been banned because they didn't violate the law.

The State of Israel is appealing the decision - meaning that the state is against Jewish rights on the Temple Mount.

That's crazy enough. But the court ruling is starting an entirely new round of incitement from Palestinian Arab leaders, saying that this is a holy war. 

Hamas official Mushir al-Masri called this "a declaration of religious war" and said  "If our messages do not reach the occupation through mediators, they will find their way through missiles."

Similarly, Palestinians are warning that there will be violence if the Flag March on Jerusalem Day goes to the Temple Mount. There is no way that it will, but they are inciting violence for that day - getting hotheaded youth ready for violence whether Israel does anything or not, preparing their firebombs and stones, and with no desire not to use them.

And then, when violence breaks out, the Palestinians say that they were reacting to being "provoked," and the world blames Jews for causing Muslims to become violent.

It seems obvious, but it needs to be emphasized:

Jewish prayer on the Temple Mount isn't incitement.
Marching in Jerusalem with flags isn't incitement - even if it is on the Temple Mount.
Drawing a picture of Mohammed isn't incitement.
Even burning a Koran isn't incitement. 

They may be extraordinarily disrespectful, or they may be freedom of speech or freedom of religion, or they may be knowingly provocative. But they do not cause violence.

Muslim reactions to them cause violence. Incitement and stabbings and Molotov cocktails are the responsibility of the people who call for violence and those who act on it - no matter what the provocation.

The Western world has accepted a narrative where Jews are expected to turn the other cheek when they are insulted or provoked, but Muslims are expected to turn violent - meaning that the Jews are at fault no matter what. 

This is not only antisemitic. This is disrespect and bigotry against Muslims. 

It is a bigotry that is eagerly sought by Muslims who want to be framed as perpetual victims. Those who stab random Jews are given a pass because of "occupation" or, if it is within the Green Line, some other imagined justification. Arabs and Muslims are animals with no free will, according to "progressive" people who always say Jews are at fault, no matter what.

Until the world makes it very clear that Palestinian violence is not a result of Israeli actions, but a decision made by Palestinians themselves and they are wholly responsible for it. When NGOs and the media link Palestinian violence to "occupation" or fictional "apartheid" or whatever the fashionable euphemism for Jewish evil is nowadays, they are accepting that violence. And Palestinians are happy to take on the role of wild animals who cannot control themselves. 

The truth is clear cut. Terrorists are responsible for their actions. Not those who the terrorists blame. 

We are seeing incitement to terror happening, today - and the world is silent. It is not acceptable and it encourages more attacks on Israelis and Jews. 



Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism  today at Amazon!

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424. 

Read all about it here!

 

 

Sunday, May 22, 2022




"Truth is stranger than fiction, but stranger still are lies" is a quote from Philip Roth's Great American Novel. 

I think about that quote often when researching anti-Israel propaganda. 

A group of actors and other entertainers signed an open letter for "Artists for Palestine UK" that says, in part:

We are deeply disturbed by the Israeli occupation forces’ killing of the highly respected Palestinian journalist Shireen Abu Akleh, as she arrived, wearing a clearly marked press vest, to report on an Israeli incursion in the occupied city of Jenin last Wednesday. As we grieve her loss, we call for full accountability for the perpetrators of this crime and everyone involved in authorizing it.  
The killing of Shireen Abu Akleh is a grave breach of international humanitarian law and an attack on journalism and freedom of expression. UN and international human rights experts have said that it may constitute a war crime and should be subject to an independent, transparent international investigation.   
Who needs facts? Hollywood stars - including Susan Sarandon, Tilda Swinton, Mark Ruffalo, Kathryn Hahn and Steve Coogan, along with film directors, authors and musicians - have declared that the Israeli government authorized the murder of Shireen Abu Akleh, and insist that an investigation take place - but only an investigation that will reach the same verdict that they already reached.

Israel's already doing an investigation and has already shown a willingness to accept responsibility if it is at fault? Irrelevant!

Palestinians refusing to cooperate in a transparent investigation? Who cares?

Israeli sniper rifles have a different caliber than the bullet that killed Shireen? Hasbara!

Video with audio of sprays of gunshots at the time she is hit, knowing that the IDF only shoots single rounds at a time? Please, that's just Zionist propaganda!

Not only don't the celebrities care about the facts - they are confident that their fans don't, either, and that they won't be embarrassed by their obvious lies. 

Lies are indeed strange. People are conditioned to believe those who speak earnestly and passionately. They are in general not going to bother to fact-check a famous actor or author - what incentive do they have to lie so egregiously, so nakedly?

And yet, they do. I don't know if they lie as easily about global warming or racism, but they sure lie about Israel, and knowing that should cast doubt on everything that comes out of their mouths. 

In a world that values truth.

That is no longer the world we live in, if it ever was. 

The people who tell the truth are at a disadvantage.The world audience prefers newsmakers to be either wearing black hats or white hats, and they are forced to judge between the truth-tellers speaking in shades of grey who say "we don't have enough information yet" and the liars who confidently say, "GUILTY!" 

"The truth will come out" may be correct in some cases but by the time it does, the audience for the truth has already moved on, having decided for themselves who is right based on how earnest and photogenic the debaters are. And they are a bit more antisemitic.

Which is, of course, the goal.





Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism  today at Amazon!

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424. 

Read all about it here!

 

 

From Ian:

Did Abraham use a smartphone?
The question, of course, is anachronistic and the answer is no. The first smartphone was released (by IBM) in 1994, less than 30 years ago. Abraham,,Patriarch of the Jewish nation, lived 4000 years earlier. He could not possibly have used a technology invented thousands of years later.

That is why no-one suggests Abraham Avinu (Hebrew for the Patriarch Abraham), used a smartphone. That revisionist history would be too laughably obvious to try to put over on the public.. However, UNESCO does seriously allege that Abraham and Sarah’s tomb, a world heritage site, is “Palestinian”.

That’s elevating anachronism to sacrosanct status – because the term “Palestinian” is every bit as new an invention as the smartphone is. “Palestinian”, describing members of the Arab Umma who live in Eretz Israel, was coined in the twentieth century – 4000 years after the Cave of the Patriarchs in Hebron was purchased and consecrated by Abraham Avinu.

Of course, UNESCO has its excuses ready. UNESCO says that the Cave of the Patriarchs is “Palestinian” because Hebron is situated in what they intend to be a “Palestinian” state. But this too is incorrect. First, Hebron belongs to the Jewish people, as recognized by the unanimous and irrevocable internationally legal decision at San Remo. Second, the area allocated to the Palestinian Authority in the Oslo accords does not include the Cave of the Patriarchs. Third, the Palestinian Authority is not a state.

Fibbing has turned into a serious international problem. During COVID, wide-spread fibs caused untold millions to refuse crucial vaccines.

When fibs in the “Palestinian” arena first surfaced, the United States justified its status as the world’s superpower by refusing to take the fibs lying down. In 1989, the PLO first tried to elbow its way into the World Health Organization (WHO). But international organizations like WHO are joined only by states, not by social groups, political parties, or terrorist organizations. The PLO was pretending to be a state, and the international community was expected to acquiesce in the fib.


Jonathan Tobin: Who is really responsible for Palestinian suffering?
Resolutions proposed in the US House of Representatives mean nothing. They give members an opportunity to pay lip service to various causes favored by their constituents but don't commit the government to action. They are almost always not worth noticing. But every once in a while, a resolution is put forward that demands attention. This week that is exactly what happened when Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.) proposed House Resolution 1123, "Recognizing the Nakba and Palestinian Refugee Rights."

The word nakba means "disaster" or "catastrophe," and that is how Palestinian Arabs and their supporters refer to the events of 1948 and the birth of the State of Israel. The text is a thumbnail guide to Palestinian propaganda about their suffering and the events that led to approximately 750,000 Arabs to flee their homes during Israel's War of Independence. What happened to them is a tragedy deserving of sympathy, but the story told in the resolution provides not even half of the truth about the conflict or why nearly 10 times the number of Arabs who fled the war now claim to be Palestinian refugees.

As an attempt at telling this history, the resolution is a despicable farce that deserves little notice. But it's important because it represents the way the left-wing of the Democratic Party led by the so-called "Squad" – of which Tlaib, who is of Palestinian descent, is a charter member – has fully embraced intersectional ideology. Other "Squad" members are co-sponsors, including Reps. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY), Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.), Cori Bush (D-Mo.), Jamaal Bowman (D-NY) and Betty McCollum (D-Minn.). This attempt to treat the war on Israel's existence as analogous to the struggle for civil rights in the United States and an integral part of the progressive political agenda represents a sea change in American politics.

So, while the resolution itself is contemptible, it merits a full debate and vote in the House rather than to be tabled and forgotten.

The pro-Israel community has generally ignored the Palestinian narrative about 1948. The story of Israel is one that stands on its own and is widely accepted by the overwhelming majority of Americans. It is the one Jewish state on the planet and represents the 2,000-year-old dream of Jews for a return to their ancient homeland. Israel has not known a single day of peace in the 74 years since its modern-day establishment on May 14, 1948. Few thought it would survive being invaded by five Arab armies immediately after its birth, or the subsequent wars and terrorist campaigns aimed at destroying it. It is the only democracy in the Middle East and one where all people, including its Arab minority, have equal rights under the law. And it has grown from a poor and tiny country into a regional economic and military superpower.

But seen through the funhouse mirror of the nakba rhetoric in Tlaib's resolution, which mimics the rhetoric of the anti-Semitic BDS movement that she and co-sponsor Omar support, Israel is an "apartheid state" whose creation was an injustice. Moreover, the resolution also demands recognition of the Palestinian "right of return" in which the 7 million descendants of the 1948 refugees would have the right to reclaim the homes of those who left and essentially eliminate Israel as a Jewish state.

While Tlaib and the other Progressive Caucus members who co-sponsored the resolution want to frame their gesture as a matter of support for human rights and recognition of the suffering of Palestinians, it is actually nothing of the kind. Its purpose is to place on the record, congressional support for the elimination of Israel.
‘Ideology of Rage’ Comes to Congress
It is the sort of resolution one would expect to be tabled before the UN General Assembly or even Iran’s parliament, the Majlis, but not the US Congress.

Last week, a group of left-wing Democratic legislators led by Rep. Rashida Tlaib and backed by her House colleagues Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY), Ilhan Omar (D-MN), Cori Bush (D-MO), Jamaal Bowman (D-NY), Betty McCollum (D-MN) and Marie Newman (D-IL), presented a resolution on the subject of the nakba — an Arabic word meaning “disaster” or “catastrophe” that Palestinians use as shorthand when talking about the creation of the State of Israel in 1948. In keeping with the language and themes that feature in the UN’s ritual denunciations of Israel, the resolution portrays the Jewish state as an incorrigible colonizer. “[T]he Nakba refers not only to a historical event but to an ongoing process of Israel’s expropriation of Palestinian land and its dispossession of the Palestinian people that continues to this day,” the resolution argues.

We shouldn’t be under any illusions about the core message of this resolution. Without saying so explicitly, the resolution effectively denies Israel’s right to exist by endorsing UN General Assembly Resolution 194 of December 1948, which specifies the right of Palestinians who fled from Israel during the War of Independence in that year to either return to their original homes or receive compensation. Especially as the original 750,000 refugees now number more than 5 million — thanks to the transfer of refugee status to subsequent generations of Palestinians — incorporating such an enormous and largely hostile population within the borders of Israel would almost certainly result in appalling acts of terrorism and violence, as well as the demise of a sovereign Jewish state.

While the resolution doesn’t explicitly demonize Zionism as a form of racism, as the United Nations expressly did in 1975, that is the conclusion its authors would like you to reach. This is no appeal for a historic accord between Zionism and Palestinian nationalism based on compromise and a final partition of the land between sovereign states. Rather, the resolution is an orthodox anti-Zionist screed that denies both the indigeneity of the Jewish population and the legitimacy of its national project. It is, in other words, the “original sin” version of history holding that the Jews stole Palestinian land and then justified the theft by invoking an invented past — the exact same discourse that has bedeviled peace efforts for decades through its insistence that the resolving the Palestinian question requires Israel to cease its independent existence, and the Jews to recognize that they are not a nation but a confession.

Of the many distortions of past and present contained within the resolution, one of the most glaring is its claim that the transfer of refugee status across multiple generations of Palestinians is legally and morally justified.“[P]rotracted refugee situations are the result of the failure to find political solutions to their underlying political crises,” it states. UNRWA, the refugee agency dedicated exclusively to the Palestinians, says much the same: “Under international law and the principle of family unity, the children of refugees and their descendants are also considered refugees until a durable solution is found.”
  • Sunday, May 22, 2022
  • Elder of Ziyon
Early Saturday morning, there was a firefight in Jenin where Amjad al-Fayed was killed.

The official Wafa news agency said:

A Palestinian teenager was killed and another one injured early this morning by the Israeli occupation forces during an Israeli army raid of Jenin city, north of the occupied West Bank, according to the Ministry of Health.

It said Amjad Fayed, 17, was killed and another one, 18-years-old, was seriously injured during the raid. 

An Israeli military force stormed Haifa Street in Jenin sparking confrontations with residents during which Israeli soldiers fired live bullets at the Palestinians killing one and injuring another, who was reported in critical condition at a local hospital.
Photos shows a smiling teen:


It doesn't show the full photo, though, with the gun at his belt:


It turns out that Fayed was an Islamic Jihad terrorist. Which they bragged about:

The resistance fighter, Amjad Walid Al-Fayed, was martyred at dawn today, Saturday, during armed clashes that took place between Palestinian resistance fighters and the Zionist occupation forces that stormed the city of Jenin.

The Palestinian Ministry of Health announced the death of the 17-year-old Al-Fayed shortly after he was transferred to Ibn Sina Hospital, critically wounded as a result of being targeted by the occupation forces on Haifa Street in Jenin.
Other photos of this child victim:




Which means that Islamic Jihad recruits child soldiers. 

Where are the NGOs that pretend to care about Palestinian children?





Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism  today at Amazon!

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424. 

Read all about it here!

 

 

  • Sunday, May 22, 2022
  • Elder of Ziyon
Payton Gendron, the 18 year old white supremacist who targeted Black people as he murdered 10 at a Buffalo supermarket last weekend, wrote a 180 page manifesto where laid out his bizarre philosophy.

The document is divided into three major sections. The first describes Gendron's racial theories, the second describes in detail his preparations for the massacre, and the third is his call to action for white people.

For the most part, his racial theories are copy/pastes from far Right websites. He does not have any real original thoughts. (One interesting deviation is that he describes himself a "ethnically White" but admits having partial Italian ancestry, and Italians were not historically considered to be white people for much of American history.)

His chapter on Jews in the first section likewise copies both text and graphics from far Right websites. However, there is a bit of cross-pollination between the far-Left and the far-Right in how they regard Jews. One can see that his sources both take materials from the far-Left antisemites and that Leftist antisemites take materials from the same far-Right materials that he quotes. 

His document includes talking points taken directly from the "anti-Zionist" Left as well as from the Arabs that he hates as well:


He also takes talking points from the Nation of Islam:

Some of his neo-Nazi antisemitism is adopted by heroes of the Left, like Alice Walker and Roger Waters, who have said things about Jews and the Talmud that directly come from the same mistranslated Nazi sites that Gendron quotes. In the case of Walker, both say falsely say that Judaism allows rape of three year old girls and that gentiles must be killed; in the case of Roger Waters, that religious Jews believe that non-Jews exist to be their slaves and are not considered human. 

Like the antisemitic Left, Gendron argues that he doesn't hate all Jews: "When referring to 'the Jews' I don’t mean all ethnic or religious Jews. Some can be actually decent, and make significant progress to humanity. However many of them are not." Is there any difference between what he says and the antisemitic Left saying that their obsessive hate of Israel has nothing to do with hating Jews, since they think there are "good Jews" as well?

Finally, Gendron reproduces the graphics that far-Right sites use to "prove" Jewish influence in the media, government, porn and pharmaceutical industries:


Which is no different from David Miller's graphs of Jewish ("Zionist") influence over British institutions:



Also, while Gendron's philosophy pretends that his hate of Jews is purely racial, you see things like this in his screed:


There is no "Jewish blood" in her body, but Gendron considers her a Jew. In fact, even non-Jews are Jews to him if they act in "Jewish ways."

I should also mention that not all “Jews” are ethnic or religious Jews. Jeff Bezos for example is not a religious or ethnic Jew, but may be considered a Jew. All elitists and globalists may be considered a “Jew” simply because they act like one.
The hate for Jews is suddenly not a race issue but simply associating Jews with whatever it is he hates most. It suddenly morphed from hating Jews as an ethnicity or people to turning Jews into a symbol of everything the far-Right finds odious. Jews support Blacks, Jews support transgenderism, Jews support socialism.

Is this any different from the crazed hate from the far-Left for Israel and Zionism? Like Gendron and the far-Right, the far-Left will associate Israel with whatever they consider to be the biggest crimes they can think of: they claim that opposing Israel is a social justice issue, from animal rights to feminism to environmentalism and opposing US police brutality. 

The fact that right-wing antisemites say they oppose Jews for the exact opposite reasons does not faze them. 

The far-Left and the far-Right might say they hate Jews for different reasons, but neither of them have a problem with using the arguments and methods of the other side. Because, in the end, the real goal is to get the majority to hate Jews - that is the only consistent philosophy that both sides have, prompting both sides to paper over the obvious and massive self-contradictions in their pretense of having  a cohesive philosophy to justify their hate.




Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism  today at Amazon!

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424. 

Read all about it here!

 

 



David Miller, the British professor fired for antisemitism last year, was defended at the time by a large array of well-known intellectuals.

One letter of support said, "We oppose anti-Semitism, Islamophobia and all forms of racism." It was signed by many prominent academics including Noam Chomsky, Ilan Pappe and Judith Butler. Here' s one page of its signatories.


Another letter of support came from prominent leftist Jews including Norman Finkelstein, Rabbi David Mivasair and Tony Greenstein.

I think it is time to give these people a chance to show their support for Miller again. Because last week he went full antisemite on Twitter, and no sane person could think that he was only attacking "Zionists."

Here are excerpts of his thread:

There seems to be some confusion about who the occupation for Palestine began. Jonathan @Freedland appears to believe it started in 1967. But it didn't.

So did the occupation begin in 1948 - the #Nakba - when thousands were massacred and 750,000 expelled? No, not then either.

Did the occupation begin in 1909? That was when the first ‘Kibbutz’ was created in Umm Juni, by Arthur Ruppin, the head of the Zionist Organization office in Palestine.... 

No, not 1909: what about 1878? ‘Petah Tikva’, often described as the ‘Mother of settlements’, was created then with financial help from Baron Edmond de Rothschild. but, it did not begin then, either. 

What about 1815 when a settlement was created in Hebron by the extremist Chabad-Lubavitch sect (which originated in Russia/Ukraine)? Today it is headquartered in Brooklyn, New York City. Here is what it says about Hebron.

But no, it may have been earlier: Russian Chabadniks had created settlements in Safed from 1777.

Things you should know about Chabad-Lubavitch: It's a supremacist organisation at the extreme end of the settler movement. According to Shin Bet ( Israeli intelligence agency) it’s responsible for about 80% of ‘price-tag’ revenge attacks on Palestinians.
(Here he links to a video from that authoritative source on Judaism, Iran's PressTV.

So, in conclusion: The settlement and occupation of Palestine has been a long time coming. The descendant's [sic] of the earliest settlers are still there continuing the #Nakba through violence and land theft. Time to end the occupation. 
David Miller is saying that the continuous return of Jews to Eretz Yisrael over the centuries is all evil Zionist settlement and occupation. 

No one would mistake the Chabadniks from the 18th century for modern Zionists. They moved to the Holy Land for the same reasons Jewish groups have been moving to Palestine since the Second Temple was destroyed - because that is the center of Jewish religious life. 

In the 13th century many prominent French rabbis moved to Palestine. Nachmanides moved to Israel in 1267. The Arizal, Rabbi Isaac Luria, moved to Tzfat in 1579. Many Chassidic leaders and their followers  moved to Tzfat and Tiberias in the 18th century. 

Miller also cannot distinguish Chabad from any other religious Jews. Chabad isn't responsible for 80% of "price tag" attacks - that's completely absurd, and the Shin Bet never said that. To Miller, any Jew wearing a kippah is the same. 

Miller is saying that any Jew who moved to Eretz Yisrael in the centuries before modern Zionism is an illegal settler and occupier. His link to PressTV's video about Chabad (which also conflates Chabad with all religious Jews)  shows not only his ignorance and lack of critical thinking abilities when it comes to Jews, it proves his own hatred of Jews who are public about their observance.

He is saying that not only the Jews who moved to Israel from elsewhere are stealing Palestinian land, but the Jews who lived there beforehand and their descendants are also illegal thieves of the land. Even the PLO and Iranian leaders say that Jews who lived in Israel before 1917 are "Palestinian" and can stay when the other Jews are ethnically cleansed - but that opinion is too pro-"Zionist" for David Miller.

So it is time to explicitly ask Noam Chomsky and Judith Butler and Norman FInkelstein if they still think that David Miller has no antisemitic tendencies. Do these academics who claim so loudly that they are against antisemitism denounce David Miller's clear hatred for Jews, not Zionists?

Pick names from the hundreds of academics and Jews who defended him from the links above, and tweet asking them what they think of someone who calls Jews who moved to Palestine for religious reasons, centuries before modern Zionism, "thieves." 




Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism  today at Amazon!

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424. 

Read all about it here!

 

 

Saturday, May 21, 2022

From Ian:

The world made Israel necessary by refusing to help Jews in WWII
Headlines in March 2022, stemming from the prime minister of Canada, said that Canada would accept as many refugees fleeing the Russian attack on Ukraine “as we can.” But 84 years ago, from July 6 to July 15, 1938, when representatives of 32 countries met in the French spa town of Evian-les-Bains to search for a solution to a Jewish refugee crisis, the response was very different.

The crisis was precipitated by the intense antisemitism unleashed by the Nazis in Germany in 1933 and in Austria in 1938. Hundreds of thousands of Jews were stateless. The Evian Conference, the initiative of US president Roosevelt, was convened to find a solution. It has been argued that the conference was a cynical ploy designed by Roosevelt for appearances only; there was never any intention to raise US immigration quotas (or even fill existing quotas) to save Jews.

The conference was an abject failure. With the exception of the Dominican Republic (in the end, only a little more than 700 Jewish refugees found sanctuary there), no country agreed to accept Jewish refugees. The countries represented at Evian included a European bloc, another large group representing Latin America, as well as the US, Canada, Australia and New Zealand.

Canada, today a federation of ten provinces and three territories, was created in 1867 as a self-governing dominion, although full independence with regard to foreign policy only came about in 1931. Today, the Jewish population of Canada (about 390,000) is the fourth largest in the world, after Israel, the US and France. At the start of World War II, the Jewish population had reached 160,000 in a population of 11 million.

Canada’s record with regard to Jewish refugees before and during World War II is shameful and well documented in None Is Too Many, by Irving Abella and Harold Troper (1983). The title, a reply by an unnamed bureaucrat to a question as to how many Jews should be admitted to Canada after World War II, is not an exaggeration.

Partly due to the Great Depression and a struggling economy, but largely because of antisemitism, only 5,000 Jews were admitted to Canada from 1933 to 1945. The frantic efforts of the leaders of the Canadian Jewish community were useless; even in cases related to family reunification or when affluent applicants offered to transfer substantial assets to Canada.
How do Putin and Zelenskyy get the Holocaust so wrong?
It's a piece of the Holocaust that even scholars misunderstand, or neglect altogether. And it's a story unknown even to the descendants of a quarter-million Holocaust survivors.

The United Nations Holocaust Outreach Program hosted author and academic Mikhal Dekel on May 11 to discuss her book, "In the East: How My Father and a Quarter Million Polish Jews Survived the Holocaust," a finalist for the Sami Rohr Prize for Jewish Literature, the National Jewish Book Award and the Chautauqua Prize. Dekel's book – part-historical, part-memoir – presents a unique narrative about the Polish refugees fleeing the terror of the Holocaust en route to the Soviet Central Asian Republics and the Middle East.

Investigating her late father's mysterious identity as a "Tehran Child," Dekel delved deep into rare Soviet archives previously unavailable to Western scholars, charting the path of Holocaust refugees to Siberia, Uzbekistan and Tehran, where her father and aunt were among those who survived the war.

Why do the Russians insist that they are de-Nazifying Ukraine? How can Ukraine's president lecture Israel's parliament, the Knesset, that his country aided the Jews during the Holocaust? According to Dekel, it revolves around a Soviet perspective of the Holocaust that has little to nothing to do with Jews.

Jewish News Syndicate chatted with her to understand what has eluded even dedicated students of the Holocaust.

Q: I don't like stretching or trying to make comparisons that don't exist. And so, I'll try to avoid it here. Do you feel at all that the current tensions between Israel and Russia will lead to more research and more questioning of the Soviet era during this time? Do you feel that might evolve in some way?

"I think it will. Somebody asked me that in the UN event – not exactly in these terms – but they asked how this current war affects the way my book is being read, and I said that first of all, it makes reading my book more possible because people are thinking about Soviet crimes. And in fact, my book is very much related, because of a few things. But one of them is this rhetoric that Putin is using when he says, 'I'm fighting Nazis.' To us, it's insane, right? Where is he getting this? This is a cynical use of World War II. But, in fact, when you travel in the areas that I traveled, World War II is not even over. They're still talking in these terms. You started by saying Holocaust teaching is on the decline, but you have to understand that in those regions, they don't know anything about the Holocaust. You think here it's on the decline? They think the war between the Nazis, or the fascists, and the Soviets is that this is Russia vs. the world. The Jews have nothing to do with it or very little to do with it. They don't even know about the concentration camps, half of these people. It's shocking."

Q: It brings up (Ukrainian President Volodymyr) Zelenskyy's interview recently, where he described his own family members perishing in the Holocaust but never used the word "Jew." Or Holocaust, for that matter. It really speaks to a perspective of the Holocaust that isn't known outside of that region.

"I agree with that completely. Zelenskyy's perspective as someone who grew up in Ukraine is also completely off because, if you'll recall, he spoke to the Knesset and said Jews should save Ukrainians the way the Ukrainians saved the Jews, and people are sitting there saying, 'Oh, my G-d.' But he wasn't being cynical because he grew up on that. It doesn't matter that he's a Jew. He grew up in that education system; they tell a whole other story. They tell the story of Soviet and Nazi aggression against Ukraine. Again, the Jews are not part of this, and in fact, the Ukrainians were the great, poor victims, and so ethnic Ukrainians were just as much victims as the Jews. We know that's not true from every piece of evidence we have. There were, of course, exceptions, but I'm speaking generally. That's the story that's being told in Poland and in Ukraine and Lithuania. Both Putin and Zelenskyy are speaking from a cultural, social, political world that I don't even understand. I mean, I understand it, but the general public in the United States doesn't understand it or in Israel, so I think maybe this will help unearth these things. Before this war, there were few scholars working on this. My book came out, and it's kind of the right moment for it."


Australian PM concedes defeat, ending party’s 9-year rule; was firm backer of Israel
Opposition leader Anthony Albanese will be sworn in as prime minister after his Labor party clinched its first electoral win since 2007. The party was last in power in 2013 when it led a minority government.

Morrison, who heads the Liberal Party, was considered a good friend of Israel, heading one of a handful of governments to somewhat follow former US president Donald Trump’s lead on Jerusalem, recognizing the western side of the city as Israel’s capital.

Also during his tenure, the Australian government listed all of the Iran-backed Lebanese Hezbollah, and the Gaza Strip-based Hamas as terror groups. At the time, Foreign Minister Yair Lapid said that “Australia is a close friend of Israel in the fight against global terrorism.”

Albanese in the past has described himself as “a strong advocate of justice for Palestinians,” and has said he is “very critical of a lot of Israel’s policies.”

Speaking to The Australian Jewish News earlier this month, Albanese said his party continues to support a two-state solution based on the right of Israel to live in peace within secure borders and reflecting the aspirations of the Palestinians to statehood.

“Labor’s national platform makes clear the desire of the conference to recognize Palestine as a state while acknowledging this will ultimately be a matter for a future Labor government,” Albanese told AJN.

“And Labor governments have always understood that any just and lasting resolution to the Middle East conflict cannot be at the expense of either Palestinians or Israelis. The only way that a two-state solution can be achieved is through a negotiated outcome between the two parties,” he added.

Friday, May 20, 2022

From Ian:

Antisemitism isn't a strong enough word
UCLA Professor Judea Pearl has suggested we refer to their malignancy as "Zionophobia." A phobia is an irrational fear. One might argue that their demonization of Jews and the double-standard of treating Jews differently than any other people are irrational, but BDSers don't fear Jews; their hatred is based on an assertive desire to eliminate the Jewish people as punishment for their crimes.

There are some "Judeophobes," but they are mostly conspiracy theorists. While some BDSers may subscribe to some of these fictions, they are not driven by them. BDS is not an extension of QAnon.

An apt term would be "ethnic cleansers," but that's a bit awkward. Run-of-the-mill antisemites are again distinguishable from the BDSers since they don't insist on ethnically cleansing the State of Israel. Ironically, it is also two-state proponents who want to ethnically cleanse a future Palestinian state of Jews. As it is, their attitude towards settlements is essentially antisemitic because they insist that there is one place on earth where Jews should not be allowed to live despite the fact it is part of their homeland. Imagine the reaction if anyone agreed there should be two states and that Palestinians should not be permitted to reside in one of them.

BDSers and other like-minded folks, like Islamists, belong in the same category as reprobates who have sought to exterminate a particular group of people. We could call them "liquidators" but that sounds too conventional, like a store going out of business. "Exterminators" fits but is too associated with pest control. BDSers also generally don't have the Hitlerian view of Jews as vermin, at least not that they would admit. "Terminators" makes you think of Arnold Schwarzenegger, but while their goals are frightening, the BDSers themselves aren't the least bit scary (Schwarzenegger, incidentally, is an avid supporter of Israel).

Better terms would be either "genocidists" or "genocidaires." Still, we need to distinguish them from Pol Pot, Stalin, Rwandans or other mass murderers who did not specifically target Jews.

Referring to BDSers as "antisemites" is too good for them. They are Judeocidists.


Melanie Phillips: The ‘broken windows’ strategy for combating Israel demonization
Palestinianism has worked because of a strategy, applied over decades and backed by huge funds, to seed an entirely false narrative among gullible Western liberals that has reversed aggressor and victim and demonized Israel and its defenders.

Those defenders need to adopt a similar pro-active and aggressive strategy against Israel’s foes but on the basis of truth rather than lies.

That means creating an infrastructure that seeks to frame public debate rather than just react to it. The principal aim should not be to tell people about Israel and the Jewish people (important though that remains). Its main purpose should be to alert the public to the key fact of which they are almost wholly unaware—that they are being lied to, and that the cause they may be supporting in good faith is an evil and genocidal one.

It is astounding, for example, that Israel’s defenders aren’t regularly publicizing the eye-watering and deranged anti-Semitic cartoons, sermons, and statements that are perpetually pumped out by Palestinian Arab media and carefully translated and displayed on the websites of the Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI) and Palestinian Media Watch.

Such material provides a weapon with which to target the Israel-haters’ Achilles heel—their narcissistic self-regard. For what’s of prime importance to such individuals is their self-belief as people of conscience committed to anti-racism, anti-colonialism, anti-imperialism and so on.

An effective pro-Israel strategy would name and shame all such offenders—media outlets, specific journalists, academics and other cultural leaders—by rubbing their noses in what is being said by the Palestinians they champion, in order to expose such “progressives” as facilitators of racism, ethnic cleansing and Arab imperialism.

Most people in the West have no idea that the Palestinians they support are spewing out Nazi-style incitement against Israel and the Jewish people. That’s because no one—in the Jewish world or anywhere else—is making use of such material to ask how any civilized person could ever support such people. Instead, an increasing number of liberal Jews are themselves also supporting them.

Media monitors like the Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting and Analysis (CAMERA) and Honest Reporting do excellent work in exposing the lies, but who outside the Jewish community hears about their work? A joined-up strategy would ensure that political and other figures whose utterances are news-worthy give these findings a megaphone. It might even give them a TV station.

All this would require an enormous investment of money, people and time. Most importantly, though, it would need the pro-Israel world to adopt a totally different mindset—creating a strategy to break the enemy’s windows before they break any more of your own.


Roths pressure monarch
ARNOLD and Frimet Roth have thrown their support behind draft legislation in the US Congress to compel Jordan to extradite Ahlam Tamimi, a terrorist involved in the bombing of a Jerusalem pizzeria that claimed the life of their Australian-born daughter Malki 21 years ago.

The Roths have publicly endorsed a bill by Congressman Greg Steube, a Florida Republican, which would commit Congress to recognising Jordan has an extradition treaty with the US. Malki, 15, was a US citizen through her American-born mother.

The couple’s endorsement coincided with a visit to Washington by Jordan’s King Abdullah II last Friday to meet with US President Joe Biden over a Jordanian bid to increase the Waqf presence on the Temple Mount after recent unrest, a move rejected by Israel, which has sovereign jurisdiction there.

Tamimi was charged with terrorist crimes by the US in 2013 and is on a list of the FBI’s most wanted terrorists. The bill proposes penalising Jordan if it does not extradite Tamimi. Said Steube, “Our US tax dollars will not continue to flow to a country harbouring a Hamas terrorist with American blood on her hands.”

Jordan maintains its extradition treaty with the US was never ratified, but the Roths cite documentation contradicting this.

Tamimi, one of the bombers of the Sbarro pizzeria in 2001 which killed 15 and injured 140, served part of a sentence in Israel but was extradited in a prisoner swap to free Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit from Hamas. She is now a Jordanian media personality and remains unrepentant about her role in the attack.

“Ahlam Tamimi’s obscene, ongoing freedom in Jordan has to be on the agenda of every meeting the Jordanian monarch is granted,” Arnold Roth said of King Abdullah II’s US visit.

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