Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News

Sunday, September 18, 2022

"Yonkle, the Cowboy Jew" - 1907 novelty song is all kinds of wrong

In 1907, a novelty song was released called "Yonkle, the Cow-Boy Jew."

It is antisemitic and anti-Indian, and simply wrong in all sorts of ways. I do not know if the lyricist, Will J. Harris, was Jewish. (Someone with that name had some hits in the 1920s but that one was born in 1900.)

The sheet music is out there, but here are the lyrics, which are incredibly offensive.

A Jew named Yonkle Finklestein
Went out west one day;
Just to shoot wild Indians,
That's what the neighbors say.
Didn't care a snap for home,
Left his wife and little child;
Met a pretty cowboy girl
Then his Yiddish brain went wild
To his friends he sent a note,
And this is what he wrote.

Chorus
Western life is fine and dandy
I have got no kick;
When I think of the pawnshop bus'ness
Oi, it makes me sick.
Ev'ry time I see some Indians
I just kill a few,
So I've changed my name from Finklestein

To Yonkle, the Cowboy Jew.

Now Yonkle made love to the girl
That he met out west;
But she told her beau on him,
And he then did the rest.
With a shooter in his hand
Cowboy made poor Yonkle dance;
Then he yelled, "You Tenderfoot,
Run while you have got the chance,"
Yonkle then commenced to pray
And swore he'd never say:

Even worse is the photo series someone created to publicize the song, showing "Yonkle" with his foot on a dead or captured American Indian. (This is from the Library of Congress site.)

Oi, indeed.

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!

09/18 Links: Amnesty Int’l’s distortion of humanitarian laws has become an art form; The Islamic Republic’s ‘morality’ murder and US appeasement

From Ian:

Amnesty Int’l’s distortion of humanitarian laws has become an art form - opinion

AMNESTY’S PRONOUNCEMENTS are routinely transcribed directly into media headlines, then cited verbatim in academic publications – without due care for the integrity of the claims they make, never mind the accuracy of their findings. There is something to be said about leading the blind, or blinding to lead.

The issue here is the organization’s propensity to exploit its status in the media and academia to influence not only minds but policies. Rather than hold true to its self-proclaimed impartiality, Amnesty International has systematically taken very political positions, weaponizing human rights law, international humanitarian law, and the laws of armed conflicts to advance a private agenda, untrammeled by oversight.

The problem with the attack on Ukraine’s right to self-defense, protecting the very idea of the state’s sovereignty and independent identity, is the same as with the oversight of Amnesty’s use of imagery on their campaigns. It is set up to rebuke any rebuttal through the apparent, morally elevated self-portrayal of the organization, and our acceptance of their proclamation of infallibility.

Reports are built on anonymous tips and witness reports. None of the “facts” can be independently verified, yet we are called upon to accept them as truths. Truths withstand scrutiny… if indeed they are that!

It is pandering to the abominable to validate Putin’s criminal war narrative against Ukraine, his torment of Russians in the opposition, terror aggressions toward Israel– not to mention crimes committed against Palestinians, whether through indoctrination or physical violence, or the propagation of martyrdom by misguided ideologues the world over.

It is left to us now to admit, once and for all, that the rights organization has stretched the definition of “charity” to be, instead, a party to bloodshed and political radicalism.

Munich Massacre and DW’s Farah Maraqa A German Litmus Test on Safeguarding Israeli Civilians

Are German authorities speaking from both sides of their mouths about their obligations towards protecting the lives of Jewish Israeli civilians?

With this month’s 50th anniversary of the Munich Olympics massacre, widespread publicity focused on belated German acknowledgement of the government’s failure to safeguard the lives of Israeli civilians competing on its soil. Simultaneously, far under the media radar, a German court decision emerged which, it seems, reprehensibly rejected the lives of Israeli civilians as worth protecting.

In the official commemoration of the Sept. 5, 1972 Palestinian Black September terror attack, in which 11 Israeli athletes and a police officer were killed, German President Walter Steinmeier addressed the victims’ families, seeking forgiveness for the “inadequate protection afforded to the Israeli athletes.” He also lamented the German authorities’ decades-long “obstruction, ignorance and injustice.” Notably, a compensation settlement between the bereaved family members and the German government was finally reached the previous week.

Meanwhile, Berlin-based pundit Farah Maraqa deemed Monday as “a day for celebrations” following a local labor court reportedly ruling that the termination of her employment as a journalist at German public media outlet Deutsche Welle was “legally unjustified.”

DW fired Jordanian-Palestinian Maraqa and six other Arab employees earlier this year at the conclusion of a two-month internal antisemitism probe. Last week, she and her lawyers claimed that the Berlin court ordered Germany’s public broadcaster to reinstate her and pay all legal expenses. (The court have not confirmed the information; Deutsche Welle, which only four days before had introduced a new Code of Conduct where it states its support of “the right of Israel to exist,” said it has “taken due notice of the ruling.”)

David Singer: Biden and Blinken silent on Hashemite Kingdom of Palestine

The Saudi plan’s author – Ali Shihabi - is a confidante of Saudi Arabia’s next King – Crown Prince Mohammad Bin Salman. Shihabi’s Plan was published in Al Arabiya News – owned 60% by the Saudi Government.

This latest Saudi plan supersedes the 1981 and 2002 Saudi Peace Plans.

The rationale for creating the Saudi-proposed merged state as against the Biden-proposed brand new state was recently explained by Shihabi:

“We have seen from recent experience that state building is a virtually impossible task, particularly in a polarized environment so creating a “Palestinian State” from scratch is a fool’s errand. At the same time Jordan is a decently run country by regional standards and hence its government infrastructure can be used to incorporate 'Palestine' which will instantly have a globally recognized and respected government with all the basics like security, government bureaucracy etc.”

Shihabi’s two-state solution – if implemented – would consign Biden’s two-state solution – “a fool’s errand” says Shihabi - to the diplomatic graveyard.

Significantly - Palestinian Authority President Abbas, Jordan’s King Abdullah and Hamas leaders have not voiced any objection to the Saudi proposal since its June publication. Rejection by any of them would have stopped the Saudi plan in its tracks.

I sought State Department clarification on 6 September:
“I refer to the Peace Plan emanating from Saudi Arabia published in the Al Arabiya Times on 8 June 2022 proposing the merger of Jordan, Gaza and part of the West Bank into one territorial entity to be called the Hashemite Kingdom of Palestine (Saudi Plan):

Could you please advise in relation to Secretary of State Blinken:
1. When he first became aware of the Saudi plan?
2. Has he commented on the Saudi plan since its release on 8 June 2022?
3. If so – when and where were such comments published?
4. If he has made no comment – would he like to make any comment on the Saudi plan that I can publish verbatim and attribute to him in an article I am writing on the Saudi Plan?

I would appreciate a reply within the next 72 hours.”

The State Department has yet to reply.

Biden and Blinken’s silence is baffling.

From i24News:

German police knew that one of the Palestinians who took Israeli athletes hostage during the 1972 Munich Olympics lived in Berlin for several years following the attack, the Suddeutsche Zeitung daily reported on Saturday.

The three suviving hostage-takers were captured, but released weeks later in an exchange when gunmen hijacked a Lufthansa plane on October 29, 1972, and demanded their release.

On Saturday the German daily said that one of the three Palestinians who was released then lived for years in Berlin, citing a report in Munich police archives.

According to the report, the Munich police - in charge of investigating the attack - was told by the BKA federal police that the Palestinian in question was living in West Berlin and that he went to East Berlin almost daily, to work at the office of the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO).

Following the release of the three hostage-takers, a theory made the rounds that then West Germany had facilitated the release in order to avoid any more operations by Palestinian militants on its territory.

"We can pose the question if the police really wanted to act or if they wanted to give up arresting someone to avoid a new attack by Palestinian militants" in West Germany, German historian Dominik Aufleger, who had access to the same documents as the paper for his research on the attack, told the daily.

It would be unbelievable if we didn't already know that the German government was involved in planning that hijacking to release the terrorists.

I guess here's something to add to my list of Munich massacre facts that most people don't know.

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!

Adin Haykin published a huge thread on Twitter detailing every Palestinian killed (or purportedly killed) by the IDF so far in 2022 in the West Bank.

He finds that the huge majority of the 83 killed were either members of terror groups or were killed while performing terror acts like stabbing or throwing Molotov cocktails.

By my count, 34 of them were members of Islamic Jihad, 18 from Fatah, five Hamas, and one each from the DFLP and PFLP.

Of the others, most of them were involved in stabbing, violent riots and throwing Molotov cocktails. One tried to use a hammer on a policeman. Two were killed trying to infiltrate into Jewish communities.

Four women were killed while trying to attack soldiers.

Three were killed accidentally during fighting, including Shireen Abu Akleh.

One died of a heart attack and Israel is being blamed.

Of those killed, at least 17 were children - and they were all involved in violence.

Read the thread and compare that information, accompanied with photos of their "martyr posters" and weapons, with how the UN and others describe them all as "victims."

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!

International Association of Judges meeting in Tel Aviv today

The International Association of Judges is holding its 64th annual meeting starting today in Tel Aviv.

Besides the lectures, there will be excursions to Jerusalem, Masada and the Dead Sea.

As the welcome video says, they ask the jurists that are visiting to "judge with your own eyes."

One country that won't be there is Algeria. Their National Union of Judges announced that they will boycott the meeting:

The National Union of Judges announced the boycott of an annual meeting of the International Association of Judges due to its being held in the occupied Palestinian territories. After receiving an invitation from the International Association of Judges to participate in the annual meeting to be organized in Tel Aviv in the occupied territories, the Algerian organization formally informed the President of the Federation and the African Group of Judges Unions of its boycott of this event, explaining in its statement that the boycott decision came out of its belief in the principles of justice and human rights, and in line with Algeria's official and popular position on the Palestinian cause and in solidarity with the Palestinian people.

Yes, the Algerian judges are judging themselves morally superior and more concerned with human rights to the 94 countries that are attending.

The World Justice Project ranks Algeria in the bottom half of all countries in the rule of law, 82nd among 139 countries ranked.

I don't think their presence will be missed.

Outside Morocco, Algeria, Iraq and Tunisia. most Middle East Arab countries are not even members of the IAJ.

Notice that Algeria considers Tel Aviv to be in "occupied territories."

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!

09/17 Links: America’s Holocaust failure through the lens of 21st-century politics; Hamas Comes to Harvard; Facebook bans, reverses decision on Holocaust movie ads that ‘violated’ race policy

From Ian:

Jonathan Tobin: America’s Holocaust failure through the lens of 21st-century politics

The film asks whether Americans will respond to future catastrophes with more concern. But while such pious sentiments seem appropriate, they are also entirely beside the point. We already know how Americans act when confronted with other genocides. In the case of Rwanda, they did nothing. The same is true with respect to the horrors being visited on the Uyghur people in Western China by the Chinese Communist Party regime in Beijing right now.

Genocide is, of course, globally very different. Those being perpetrated outside of the context of a world war in which the murderers are also bent on conquest are bound to be treated less seriously, and that is why no one in the West lifts a finger when mass murders happen in places like Africa or central Asia, where no strategic interests are in play and few journalists are present.

As historian Deborah Lipstadt, the current State Department Special Envoy to Monitor and Combat Anti-Semitism, correctly notes in the film, Nazi Germany largely achieved many of its goals with respect to the Jews. As the late historian Lucy Dawidowicz wrote in her classic work, The War Against the Jews, the German war waged on the Jews was entirely separate from the one they were fighting against the Allies. They won the former while losing the latter. The Allies never really cared about the war on the Jews—or at least not enough to do anything about it before their victory ended the slaughter.

Moreover, the attempt to frame the Holocaust as a function of general intolerance is always a mistake. Anti-Semitism isn’t merely hateful sentiments; it’s a political organizing principle that has attached itself to a number of different ideologies. Then it was Nazism, today it is the Islamism embraced by an Iran that seeks a nuclear weapon with which another Holocaust can be perpetrated. The answer to such threats isn’t open borders for America, amnesty for illegal immigrants or even more people reading The Diary of Anne Frank. The only way to deter a future genocide of the Jews is Jewish empowerment and their ability to defend themselves, something they would only gain after the war with the creation of the state of Israel.

Like all of Burns’ films, “The U.S. and the Holocaust” makes for riveting television and provides plenty of fodder for serious thought. For those who know little about the history of American anti-Semitism and the basics of the Holocaust, it provides an introduction to these subjects.

Yet contrary to the film’s conclusion, the Holocaust tells us nothing about what to do about America’s contemporary immigration debates. The fact that a CNN interview with Burns led to a discussion in which efforts by Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis to ship illegal immigrants to Martha’s Vineyard, whose liberal residents advocate for open borders, were compared to the actions of the Nazis shows just how misleading the filmmaker’s efforts to frame the issue along these lines are. Nor should it help fuel efforts to falsely label those political opponents whom the liberal establishment is trying to smear as fascists and Nazis threatening democracy.

The Holocaust was a chapter of history marked by American failure. But as much as the documentary is told through the prism of what it meant to America, the responsibility for the murder of 6 million Jews belongs to the Nazis and their collaborators. It was a crime that the United States may not have had the power to deter, but it could have done more to stop once it began had its political leadership been willing to do so. That is bad enough. But those who want to apply that lesson to complicated 21st-century political debates while ignoring actual genocides going on in real-time now or seeking to render Israel defenseless in the face of those who are actively plotting another Holocaust, shouldn’t pretend they’ve learned anything from the past.

US congressman calls on FBI to probe handling of antisemitic crimes in New York

US House Representative Ritchie Torres on Thursday called on the FBI and US attorney general to investigate New York’s response to surging antisemitism.

Torres, from New York, called for the federal investigation in a letter to FBI Director Christopher Wray, US Attorney General Merrick Garland and Assistant Attorney General Kristen Clarke.

“I am respectfully asking the Civil Rights Division of the Justice Department to consider investigating New York’s systematic failure to police and prosecute hate crimes and to issue recommendations to reform,” Torres said, after expressing his concerns about antisemitic violence.

“The federal government can no longer stand by passively as antisemitic violence goes unchecked and unpunished in America’s largest city,” said the letter, which was provided to The Times of Israel.

Democrat Torres represents New York’s 15th Congressional district in the Bronx and is a firm supporter of Jewish communities and Israel.

In the letter, he highlighted statistics from the Anti-Defamation League showing record numbers of antisemitic attacks in recent years, and an article from Tablet on the low number of serious punishments for anti-Jewish hate crimes.

Hamas Comes to Harvard

After the fighting between Israel and Hamas in 2012, Tunisian President Moncef Marzouki announced that he wanted to visit Gaza.

“I congratulate Ismail Haniyeh (the Hamas prime minister) on the victory in Gaza,” he said.

Marzouki had previously met with delegations from Hamas and Islamic Jihad. His support for the Muslim Brotherhood terrorist group was so blatant that even the PLO had warned him not to come to Gaza. After leaving office, Marzouki boarded the Hamas flotilla invading Israel. When the flotilla was intercepted, Israel deported him. These days, Tunisia doesn’t want him either.

But Massachusetts does.

More recently an arrest warrant was issued for the arrest of Marzouki by his own country. He was sentenced to four years in prison for national security violations last year.

Marzouki, then in Paris, was quoted as warning that, “I’ll soon return home to Tunisia and overthrow the incumbent regime” and “I’m waiting for a signal from the militants in Tunisia to decide on the date of my return to Tunis”.

Instead, he’s going to Harvard where there are even more militants than in Tunis.

The Ash Center for Democratic Governance at Harvard’s Kennedy School announced that it’s appointing the international fugitive and longtime Islamist ally as a senior fellow. The Harvard announcement makes no mention of either Marzouki’s support for Islamic terrorism against Jews or the fact that he is a wanted criminal. But they do hail him as a hero of the Arab Spring.

Last year, after a barrage of Hamas rockets and terrorist attacks, Marzouki had phoned Hamas boss Ismail Haniyeh to congratulate him for the “victory for the Arab and Muslim Ummah.”

In an interview with Al Jazeera, Marzouki told the Qatari Islamist media operation, “I have always supported Hamas because it is a national resistance movement. When I was president of Tunisia, I received Khaled Meshaal and Ismail Haniyeh, totally ignoring the US ambassador’s indignation at the meeting.”

Harvard has no objection to this. And instead describes Marzouki as a “freedom fighter.”

09/16 Links Pt2: Abraham Accords stronger than ever, two years later; The NYT's botched attack on Jewish schools; The Jews of the Jews; How American Anti-Semitism Helped the Nazis

From Ian:

JPost Editorial: Abraham Accords stronger than ever, two years later

This week marked the second anniversary of the Abraham Accords, under which Israel signed normalization agreements with the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain, which were later extended to Morocco.

Skeptics at the time noted that Israel had not been at war with these Arab Muslim states and downplayed the idea that the accords – reached under the Trump administration and Netanyahu government – could be called “peace treaties.”

But their importance should not be underestimated. The Abraham Accords marked a strategic diplomatic shift for Israel and the region and the relationships with the countries has flourished beyond even optimistic expectations.

As the UAE minister of state for foreign trade Thani Al Zeyoudi wrote in an opinion piece in yesterday’s Jerusalem Post, “It was a moment that changed the course of history. On the bright, sunlit morning of September 15, 2020, when Abdullah bin Zayed al-Nahyan, foreign minister of the UAE; Israel’s prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu; and Abdullatif bin Rashid al-Zayani, foreign minister of Bahrain, held aloft signed copies of the Abraham Accords in front of the White House, it signaled not simply the end of 48 years of hostility and distrust but the beginning of a new political and economic era for our region.

“In establishing full diplomatic relations, the UAE, Bahrain and Israel had chosen prosperity over politics, cooperation over isolation, opportunity over suspicion. Everyone present on the South Lawn understood the magnitude of the occasion – and its potential to elevate the lives of people across the Middle East in the decades to come.”

What about today?
Today, it seems natural that a minister from a Gulf state would write in The Jerusalem Post praising the relations between the countries, but we need to remind ourselves that it was not always obvious. Similarly, to mark the anniversary, Prime Minister Yair Lapid yesterday hosted the UAE Minister of Foreign Affairs and International Cooperation at the Prime Minister’s Office in Jerusalem. It is important to note that although the administration and government in the US and Israel changed in the meantime, the accords hold firm, as seen, for example, in the so-called Negev Summit earlier this year. This is the mark of true treaties between countries rather than agreements between leaders.

What has the game-changing Abraham Accords accomplished after two years?

Israel has spent much energy touting the success of the Abraham Accords and encouraging other countries to join. In July, U.S. President Joe Biden visited Israel and Saudi Arabia, where there was speculation over warming ties between Jerusalem and Riyadh.

While Jordan and Egypt remain aloof from the developments, in part due to the Palestinian issue as well as widespread anti-Israel public sentiment in the two countries, the Abraham Accords, and Israel’s subsequent close ties with the UAE and Bahrain in particular, have led to agreements on everything from tourism to defense. Trade between the countries has reached approximately $2 billion annually and is expected to pass $10 billion within the next five years; Israeli officials point to this as a sure sign of success, with more to come.

But a poll in July by the Washington Institute reports that the proportion of those who view the Abraham Accords favorably in Saudi Arabia, Bahrain and the UAE “has dropped over the past year to a minority view,” David Pollock and Dylan Kassin said in an analysis.

According to them, “current attitudes contrast with the relative optimism exhibited by a significant percentage of Emiratis, Bahrainis, Saudis and even some Egyptians in the months after the announcement of the Abraham Accords.”

The authors also noted, however, that the data “indicates a countercurrent of openness to allowing business and social ties with Israelis in some parts of the Gulf, especially in comparison to their peers in Egypt, Kuwait and the Levant.” Opposition to allowing business or sports ties with Israel “remains at 85% in Egypt and 87% in Jordan despite long-standing official relations,” they wrote.

It is unclear whether there is a difference in these countries between the older generation, which has spent decades considering Israel as an enemy, and the younger generation, which is connected on social media and may have differing opinions on the subject.

Critics note that the Abraham Accords have failed in a number of ways. First, they have not led to new agreements with other Gulf Cooperation Council countries such as Oman, Qatar or Saudi Arabia, and they do not appear to have led to an improved view of Israel on the street. The agreements have also not led to any tangible improvement on the Palestinian front.

The March 2022 “Negev Summit,” a gathering of foreign ministers from Bahrain, Egypt, Israel, Morocco and the UAE, and facilitated by U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken, went off course when Blinken used it to talk about the Palestinian issue instead of focusing on Iran, which was the original purpose of the gathering.

However, according to Gerald Feierstein and Yoel Guzansky of the Middle East Institute, “normalization has opened new opportunities for defense and security cooperation, especially among Israel, Bahrain and the UAE, which share a common perspective on the security threat posed by Iran.”

They said the Negev Forum that grew out of the Negev Summit and which folded Egypt into the Abraham Accords coalition “offered additional possibilities for cooperation on shared interests, including energy, food and water security, health and other issues.”

Jonathan Schanzer, senior vice president of research at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, told JNS that “normalization is a process, not an event. There is no timeline or handbook for establishing warm ties after decades of enmity.”

Still, he remains optimistic about Israel’s ties with the UAE, Bahrain and Morocco. He is also confident that other Arab countries “will prioritize their national interests over the Palestinian issue.

“Much of the region is undeniably ready to steer their countries toward stability and prosperity,” Schanzer said.

Others are optimistic as well.

Abraham Accords: A promising start with challenges ahead

Despite this somewhat optimistic view, it is essential that we invest serious effort to bolster the framework of the Abraham Accords and expand it, while doing our utmost to prevent Iran from wielding its negative influence to halt the trend of progress.

In addition to the security-related activity, and the economic, commercial progress being made, the policymakers in Israel would do well to consider adopting the following steps:

Firstly, strengthening the circle of peace-supporting countries and expanding it. It is important to invite Sudan and Chad (which was unjustly left out of the states party to the accords) to participate in all forums and working groups. It is important for them too to enjoy the fruits of peace and benefit from their decision to engage in normalization with Israel. As, if this is not the case, it might well result in negative momentum, possibly even leading to withdrawal – either publicly declared or discreetly – from the agreement. This will serve to encourage additional countries to join too.

Secondly, recognition of Morocco's sovereignty over Western Sahara. Although Israel provided no outright commitment to this, there is clear expectation of this in Rabat, especially after Washington and others have declared their recognition.

Thirdly, the opening of an overland trade route via Israel (or from it) to the Gulf States. Such a route would be considerably more efficient and less expensive than those currently in use, it would provide significant economic profits to the regional states and to the EU states too, which would be able to benefit from it for both the import and export of vehicles. This would be a tremendous boost to trade among the member countries of the Abraham Accords, while also contributing to the global economy.

Fourthly, expediting joint ventures for marketing solutions to globally urgent problems in the fields of energy, food and water, while exploiting the relative advantages of Israel and the Gulf States.

Fifthly, expanding educational and cultural initiatives to reinforce deeply-entrenched attitudes in favor of peace and so weaken separatist approaches and radical Islamic ideas.

This is a critical component for establishing peace at the popular level, between citizens and peoples, rather than just between states and governments.

Another idiotic antisemitic argument

Today I tweeted this meme:

Some Jew-hating idiot responded that today's Jews have nothing to do with the Jews of Jesus' time, and gave as proof "'EDOM IS IN MODERN JEWRY.' The Jewish Ency. 1925 Ed., Vol. 5, Pg. 41."

This was new to me, so, for fun, I looked this up. And this quote is all over antisemitic websites, I even saw a video about it on "GoyimTV."

They are claiming that the Jewish Encyclopedia says that Jews are really descendants of Edom (Esau.)

So I looked up page 41 of volume 5 of the 1925 Jewish Encyclopedia. It really is the entry on Edom, although it doesn't say at all what they claim it says.

What it does say is that during the Hashmonean era, some of the Edomites (Idumeans) were forcibly converted to Judaism by John Hycranus I (which is the only case of forced conversion to Judaism in recorded history.)

The Idumeans did become enthusiastic members of the religion - King Herod was Idumean. They were obviously still a minority among Jews. (There is an interesting halachic issue mentioned in the article about whether Edomites were allowed to join the Jewish people, but that is a separate matter.)

Even so - they were considered Jews living in what would later be called "Palestine" in Jesus' time. They are clearly of MIddle East origin, native to the region. Even if some of them survived to remain Jews today, how, exactly, does this hurt the Jewish claim to Israel? The Idumeans lived as Jews in Judea seven centuries before Islam!

All this proves is that antisemites, like anti-Zionists, will seize a tiny piece of real information and build an entire fictional universe around it to fit 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!

This week was the wedding of the Chabad rabbi of the UAE Levi Duchman to Leah Hadad. Khaleej Times reports:

It was pure joy and excitement in the UAE capital as guests from all around the world attended the first ever wedding of a rabbi in the country.

The rabbi to the UAE, Rabbi Levi Duchman, married Lea Hadad of Brussels, Belgium on Wednesday, September 14, at a magnificent ceremony held at the Hilton Yas Hotel.

1,500 guests from around the world attended the wedding – the largest Jewish event in the Arabian Gulf in recent history – including prominent rabbis and dignitaries. More than 20 ambassadors, including those from Japan, South Korea and Finland, were also in attendance.

Yemen news site 26 September was not happy:

It is a dance of shame about normalization at a huge wedding ceremony for the chief rabbinic in Abu Dhabi, in a new dedication to the shame of publicizing normalization between the Emirates and the Zionist entity

...Leaked wedding videos showed very intimate relations between the Jewish attendees and Emirati officials.
The event, which coincides with the second anniversary of the Abraham Accords, highlighted the growing openness of Jewish life in the Emirates.

Until 2020, the country's Jewish community preserved the privacy of its traditions and services. But recently, the UAE government has welcomed more public festivities and celebrations.

That's the shame that the wedding viscerally brings up to Yemen. Not the normalization, but Jews publicly celebrating in an Arab country with Muslims.

The caption on this video is "Normalization Dance."

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!

09/16 Links Pt1: IDF purity of arms and Palestinian Authority bloodlust; Abu Mazen is trying to blackmail Israel; Chile apologizes after president refuses Israeli ambassador's credentials

From Ian:

Ruthie Blum: IDF purity of arms and Palestinian Authority bloodlust

WITHOUT SKIPPING a beat, US Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs Barbara Leaf told reporters in a phone briefing on Wednesday that “the security conditions on the West Bank do concern us greatly, but they also concern Israel and they also concern the Palestinian Authority.”

Never mind that the PA is at fault for those conditions, which make a mockery of the rules of Israeli engagement that place heroes like Falah in extra peril.

“Our part in this is to ensure that, to the greatest degree possible, security cooperation is robust and continuing,” she said, adding incomprehensibly, “but those other things are done around and outside that security cooperation that sustains it.”

She went on to spew the same old platitude, proven time and again to be totally false, about how improving “economic conditions” in the West Bank and Gaza “can help and sustain improvement in security conditions.”

Not a word about PA and Hamas terrorism. Perhaps Lapid and Gantz didn’t mind so much, since they tend to agree with her overall assessment.

They also must be patting themselves on the back for responding so forcefully about the IDF doctrine that Foggy Bottom slightly eased up on its criticism. Ironically, it did so before Falah was killed, through US Ambassador to Israel Tom Nides and State Department spokesman Ned Price.

“Israel is a sovereign country and will make their own decisions,” Nides said on Monday at The Jerusalem Post Annual Conference in New York.

“No one knows the IDF’s processes and procedures better than the IDF,” Price told the press during his daily briefing on Tuesday. “And so, it is not on us or any other country or entity to say precisely what the IDF or any military or security organization around the world should do.”

On the other hand, he stressed, “It is incumbent on us to continue to underscore the importance that we place on mitigating civilian harm and taking steps, including revised policies and procedures, that would mitigate the possibility of civilian harm.”

Falah is but a single casualty of Israel’s gargantuan efforts over the years to avoid hurting civilians, including those used by terrorists as human shields. May he rest in peace, while the IDF remembers that it’s at war.

Abu Mazen is trying to blackmail Israel

On Wednesday, terrorists in the West Bank opened fire at an IDF checkpoint, killing Bar Falah, a thirty-year-old major. Falah’s comrades quickly killed the shooters, one of whom was a Palestinian Authority (PA) security officer. Last week, thanks to good luck and the vigilance of police, a major terrorist attack in Tel Aviv was thwarted. Yoni Ben Menachem believes these and many other recent incidents are not so much the result of the aging PA president Mahmoud Abbas losing his grip on the reins of power, but of his decision to resume violence:

Abbas is trying to blackmail Israel and the U.S.; he sees the new wave of terrorism that broke out independently in the field as a lever of pressure on Israel in everything related to creating a “political horizon” and renewing negotiations about the establishment of an independent Palestinian state.

Abbas, who has reached the end of his political career, is not interested in calming the situation. So long as the armed terrorists do not threaten the Muqata in Ramallah, [the Palestinian equivalent of the White House], and he has American and European backing as well as that of moderate Arab countries, he feels that this is the right time to squeeze major concessions out of Israel. . . .

Next week the PA president will go to New York to deliver his annual speech at the UN General Assembly. The PA has been engaged in a political campaign for several weeks now with the aim of obtaining the agreement of the United Nations to recognize “Palestine” with full membership in the organization. Today it has the status of an observer state. Israel strongly opposes this move. President Biden also opposes it, and last week he sent Barbara Leaf, a U.S. assistant secretary of state, to Ramallah. Abbas refused to meet with her, but in a meeting with Hussein al-Sheikh, [his deputy and likely successor], she clarified her position that the U.S. might veto the Palestinian request in the Security Council.

Abbas is playing with fire and if he doesn’t come to his senses he may end his rule just like Yasir Arafat: Operation Protective Shield in 2002 resulted [effectively in the end of Yasir Arafat’s political power]. If Abas pushes Israel into a corner, another IDF operation in Judea and Samaria in the style of Protective Shield may bring him closer to the end of his rule.

Mark Regev: Israel can engage with Mahmoud Abbas despite Holocaust revisionism

Over the years, Abbas has repeatedly revisited such themes. In 2018, at a meeting of the Palestinian National Council, he stated that European Jews were massacred because of their “social role related to usury and banks.”

Unfortunately, Abbas’s comments are reflective of a Palestinian society plagued by antisemitic stereotypes, where spurious references to the Holocaust are pervasive.

It is not just the ubiquitous charge that the IDF acts with Nazi-type brutality, or that the crimes of the Holocaust are deliberately magnified for political purposes; rather, it is widely accepted that the Palestinians themselves, and not the Jews, are the ultimate victims of the Holocaust.

In this skewed narrative, the Palestinians lost their homeland to pay for Europe’s crimes against the Jews, as if their political leadership was on the right side of history during the genocide.

Forgotten is Grand Mufti Amin Husseini, the preeminent Palestinian political leader of the 1920s, 1930s and 1940s, who was the Arab world’s chief Nazi exponent and spent World War II in Berlin, broadcasting Hitler’s propaganda to the Middle East.

Husseini was aware of, and supported, the Holocaust, encouraging Bosnian Muslims to volunteer for the Waffen SS. At the end of the war, he fled Europe to escape prosecution by the Nuremberg war crimes tribunal. He eventually surfaced in Gaza in 1948 to be elected president of the All-Palestine Government, despite his notorious Nazi affiliations.

The current Palestinian leader has nothing critical to say about Husseini’s wartime activities; instead, Abbas prefers to propagate bogus theories of Zionist-Nazi collaboration. But while Abbas’s revisionism is very real, he nonetheless can be seen as one in a long list of unsavory characters with whom Zionists have negotiated.

Zionist negotiations with antisemites, pogrom participants
In 1903, Theodor Herzl, the father of political Zionism, met with tsarist interior minister Vyacheslav Plehve, who many held responsible for the Kishinev pogrom. Herzl had few illusions about his counterpart, but the goal was to enlist Russia’s support for a Jewish state that could absorb the masses of persecuted Jews of the tsarist empire.

In 1921, Zionist leader Ze’ev Jabotinsky met with the Ukrainian leader Symon Petliura, who had been accused of complicity in pogroms in which thousands of Jews were murdered. Jabotinsky sought Petliura’s support for the establishment of Jewish military units that could protect Ukraine’s Jews from future pogroms.

Most well known, in 1933, Haim Arlosoroff, the head of the Jewish Agency’s Political Department, negotiated an arrangement with Germany’s new Nazi regime. The Ha’avara Agreement enabled the emigration of some 60,000 German Jews to Mandatory Palestine, saving their lives.

THE AFOREMENTIONED negotiations provided Israel’s enemies with ammunition for allegations of Zionist collusion with antisemites. Such accusations were a staple of Soviet anti-Israel propaganda throughout the 1970s and 1980s (when Abbas wrote his PhD in Moscow) and were echoed by the hard left across the West, reemerging in the UK in Jeremy Corbyn’s Labour Party.

Zionists weren't complicit, they practiced realpolitik
But rather than proving a nefarious complicity between Zionists and Jew-haters, these diplomatic efforts by Zionist leaders merely demonstrate the omnipresence of political realism in all international relations. This type of realpolitik, decried by the Soviets when exercised by Zionists, was a practice in which they themselves were consummate specialists.

Times of Israel reports:

The head of a yeshiva in the southern West Bank settlement of Carmel said Friday that he was leading a study session when one of his students was struck in a suspected terror shooting.

The 18-year-old was moderately wounded in the attack Thursday night and taken to the hospital for treatment. Israeli security forces launched a manhunt in the area after the assailant fled.

Speaking with Kan public radio, Rabbi Natan Ofner of Yeshiva Reuta said his pupil was now listed as lightly hurt and was due to undergo surgery to remove shrapnel.

Palestinian terror groups are falling over themselves to praise the heroism of someone shooting through a yeshiva window, hoping to kill Jews.

The People's Republic affirmed that this heroic operation comes in fulfillment of the blood of the martyrs of our people and a victory for the suffering of the prisoners,...The People's Republic stressed that this process confirms the extension of the resistance act, and proves the ability of the resistance in the West Bank to penetrate the complex Zionist security measures, in light of the continuation of security coordination and the pursuit of the resistance. To continue the option of struggle until the last Zionist usurper leaves our land, and you should expect more of these honorable operations in the coming days.

Hazem Qassem, a Hamas spokesman, said, "From the north of the West Bank in Jenin al-Qassam, to its south in Khalil al-Rahman, the rebellious youth in the West Bank continue their fight against the occupation army and its settlers."

The Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine praised the heroic operation: "It proves once again the efficacy of revolutionary armed violence in responding to the crimes of the occupation. "

The Popular Resistance Movement in Palestine blessed the heroic Hebron operation, saying: "Once again, the Palestinian resistance proves that it is capable of striking the Zionist security system, and its criminal plans against our Palestinian people fail." It added that "the Hebron operation represents a painful blow to the security coordination and to all calls for settlement and defeatism of the Zionist enemy, and the escalation of heroic operations carried out by our brave men in the Palestinian West Bank, will continue as long as the occupation is perched on our occupied land."

It seems that they are trying to convince themselves that this was a monumental victory, hoping that these tales of heroism will help them to recruit more members. I don''t know if Palestinians are buying any of this.

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!

J-Street, the self-styled "pro-Israel, pro-peace" organization, is definitely anti-truth.

An email sent out to the J-Street mailing list signed by their deputy Israel director, Eve Lifson, says:

Almost every day, my fellow Israelis are sent to guard wrecking crews.

Young soldiers have to tell children and their parents that bulldozers have come for their family home. They hold back distraught relatives as jackhammers tear into bedrooms, kitchens and living rooms.

It’s not the vision of defending our homeland that most young Israelis had in mind.

The truth? Demolishing family homes to make way for settlements has nothing to do with Israel’s security, and everything to do with the right-wing’s efforts to entrench permanent control over occupied land.

The idea that Israel demolishes Palestinian homes in order to build Jewish communities in their place is rampant among anti-Israel social media activists, but it is a lie. Jewish communities are not built anywhere near existing Arab communities. (The only exception is Hebron, where Jews lived way before Arabs did, and which J-Street wants to ethnically cleanse today just as it was in 1929.)

There are only two reasons why Arab homes are demolished nowadays. Either the home was built without a permit, or it was the home of a terrorist and the demolition is meant to dissuade future attacks.

Before Israel withdrew from Gaza, it sometimes demolished homes to clear land for security purposes (as in the Rachel Corrie incident.)

Lifson lives in Israel, which means that either J-Street hires the most ignorant Israelis to work for them, or she is knowingly lying.

And Lifson isn't ignorant. She's been obsessed with Israeli home demolitions since she was in high school. She considers home demolitions to be part and parcel of what anti-Israel activists call "creeping annexation." It is only a short mental leap between that belief and telling people that Israel is building settlements on destroyed Palestinian villages.

Her hallucinations may be shared with many modern antisemites, but that doesn't make them true.

But if anti-Israel organizations cared about truth, they wouldn't have very much to say.

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!

Survey: US Jews are not Islamophobic - but 26% of Muslims themselves are!

The Institute for Social Policy and Understanding has released its 2022 survey on Muslims in America.

The survey shows that Jews are the one faith group that is most tolerant towards Muslims.

Even more than Muslims themselves!

The Discrimination and Islamophobia section of the survey shows that in their Islamophobia Index, which averages to responses for several questions about Muslims, Jews were by far the most tolerant - and Muslims looked at themselves in a worse light than the average American does.

17% of Jews were considered Islamophobic according to this index, while 25% of the general public did - and 26% of Muslims themselves.

The findings on the specific questions that make up the definition of Islamophobia are even more interesting.

While only 9% of Jews say Muslims are prone to violence, 24% of Muslims say that - the highest faith group to believe that by far and nearly triple that of the general public.

For the question of "Do you agree that most Muslims living in the United States are hostile to the United States," again the highest score went to Muslims themselves - 19% - compared to only 4% for Jews.

Nearly identical results came from the question of whether respondents agree that US Muslims are less civilized than other Americans.

Another result of the survey is that white Muslims are far more Islamophobic than Muslims of color - and it is getting worse.

ISPU tries to spin these results, saying that the Muslims who are self-hating have been brainwashed by mainstream Islamophobic tropes.

Endorsing negative stereotypes about one’s own community is referred to as internalized oppression, or internalized bigotry or racism in the case of a racial group. ... Some studies on internalized racism have surprisingly found that endorsing negative stereotypes about one’s own group is associated with a higher locus of control. This suggests that internalized prejudice may actually be a defense mechanism against the trauma of bigotry at the hands of the dominant group by agreeing with those in power but believing one has the choice (locus of control) to not be like those tropes.

That would make sense if the mainstream was indeed bigoted - one could expect a small percentage of the minority group to be influenced by the majority. But as theses result show, the majority isn't Islamophobic compared to Muslims themselves, which makes that theory nonsensical.

One other point: if a Muslim organization has no problem noting that over a quarter of US Muslims are Islamophobic by their definition, why is it considered so awful for Jews to point out that some Jews are antisemitic?

(h/t Adam Albilya)

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!

09/15 Links Pt2: Before criticizing Israel, US should clean up at home; U.S. Supreme Court rules Yeshiva University must recognize LGBTQ club; Israel Scores No. 1 in Digital Quality of Life Index

From Ian:

Statistics show Israel haters are wrong

Anti-Israel commentators also usually neglect to acknowledge that Palestinians have been waging a terrorist war against Israel's existence since the state's birth in 1948. Much of Palestinian suffering results from Israel defending itself against these unrelenting attacks, as well as the Palestinian refusal to accept offers of land for peace and a state of their own.

Israel is often also faulted for passage of its "nation-state law" in 2018 – which declares that the country exists to fulfill the Jewish people's "right to self-determination." This attack, however, is a red herring, attempting to discredit a statute that in no way limits Israel's democratic liberties.

Note that this law does not infringe on the rights of individual Israelis, including its two million Arab citizens. Like many other nation states, it merely formalizes symbols of its people – in this case the Jewish people – such as the flag, national anthem and holidays.

Note, too, that while the nation-state law declares Hebrew to be the national language, this is not different than in the United States, in which English is the mother tongue. Nor does Israel's nation-state law establish any official religion – unlike some seven European countries that declare state religions in their very constitutions.

All of this is to point out that Israel can be a proud nation of the Jewish people while still cherishing and implementing one of the most diverse and freest democracies on earth. In fact, some would argue that it is precisely Jewish values that fortify and help guarantee Israel's robust democracy.

In short, no matter what slanderous accusations Israel's enemies employ, the Jewish state objectively remains one of the strongest and most successful democracies on earth. Tiny Israel provides political freedoms and economic opportunities unmatched by the overwhelming majority of the world's nations.

Note finally that the suffering and political plight of the Palestinians has little to do with Israel and is in fact almost entirely the result of authoritarian governance by its terrorist dictatorial regimes and their obstinate refusal to make peace.

Before criticizing Israel, US should clean up at home

Israel has one of the highest numbers of foreign journalists per capita in the world. Many are critical, some outwardly hostile towards Israel; nevertheless, they are not banned from covering the news in Israel or the disputed territories. If Israel wanted to kill reporters who write negative things about the country, dozens would be dead. The idea that the government would intentionally target journalists is preposterous.

Imagine Israel's Foreign Ministry releasing statements calling for the United States to review its rules of engagement considering the casualties caused by its armed forces. It would never happen.

It was good to see Prime Minister Yair Lapid stand up for his nation's sovereignty by stating: "No one will dictate our open-fire policies to us when we are fighting for our lives. Our soldiers have the full backing of the government of Israel and the people of Israel." He added, "I will not allow an IDF soldier that was protecting himself from terrorist fire to be prosecuted just to receive applause from abroad."

Similarly, Gantz rightly said, "The chief of staff, and he alone determines and will continue to determine the open-fire policies, in accordance with the operational need and the values of the IDF, including the purity of arms. … There was and will be no political involvement in the matter."

Notably, in 2014, after the war in Gaza, Gen. Martin Dempsey, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, talked about how "Israel went to extraordinary lengths to limit collateral damage and civilian casualties." The Pentagon, he said, sent a team of officers to Israel to learn lessons from the fighting, including "the measures they took to prevent civilian casualties."

The United States is Israel's most important ally. Still, America's leaders sometimes need to be reminded that Israel is a sovereign nation, as Menachem Begin did after the Reagan administration took a series of measures to punish Israel for annexing the Golan Heights. "Are we a vassal state of yours? Are we a banana republic?" he asked the US ambassador to Israel. "We have enough strength," Begin declared, "to defend our independence and to defend our rights."

Would the United States ever deign to tell Britain, Germany or France how its military should perform its duties?

No, which makes the approach towards Israel a double standard, one of the examples of anti-Semitism in the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance's (IHRA) working definition used by the State Department.

Before Special Envoy to Monitor and Combat Antisemitism Deborah Lipstadt takes another trip abroad, she should clean up her own house.

Clifford D. May: Fascism for dummies

Fascism, Nazism and other "national socialisms," he writes, "had their roots in the 19th century and even earlier," in ideas promulgated by such philosophers as Rousseau, Hegel and Nietzsche.

The term derives from fascio, Italian for a bundle or sheath, conveying "strength through unity," the unifying force being the government and its supreme leader. As Mussolini put it: "Everything within the state, nothing outside the state, nothing against the state."

In common with communism, fascism in its diverse forms opposes liberalism, defined as "individualism and the apparently chaotic conclusions of private enterprise."

Also akin to communism, fascism has had a "passion for science" that often turns out to be pseudo-science. The Soviet Communists had Lysenkoism. Nazis believed, as Nazi ideologue Alfred Rosenberg wrote, that "history must be judged from the point of view of race."

The poet Ezra Pound, a well-known American fascist, moved to Italy in 1924, where he wrote for publications owned by the British fascist Oswald Moseley (whose street fighters also were called Blackshirts). Pound supported Hitler's rise, including in paid radio broadcasts attacking the United States, the United Kingdom, Roosevelt, Churchill and Jews. Among the ideas he championed: "race pride."

As George Mosse notes in "Fascist Aesthetics and Society: Some Considerations," the "human body indicates the structure of the mind."

Another attribute of fascism is hyper-nationalism. The Axis powers all invaded neighbors and folded them into their expanding empires.

Neither Trump nor Biden has displayed any interest in foreign conquests, as far as I'm aware. On the contrary, I see too many Republicans and Democrats succumbing to the siren song of isolationism.

This is an opinion column and I'll close with this one: A serious argument can be made that Vladmir Putin, Xi Jinping, Ali Khamenei and Kim Jong-un exemplify 21st century varieties of fascism. Had President Biden addressed the increasing national security threats they pose, he might have helped unite us against those who hate us – Democrats and Republicans, progressives and conservatives, the woke and the unwoke. He chose not to.

I think that's because he wants to win in the worst way. And it's hard to imagine any way worse than this: slandering his political opponents as fascists while posing as a modern Mussolini in the City of Brotherly Love.