Often, when Israel-haters accuse Israel of some crime, they use terminology that they have given a completely different definition than it has in any other context.
This is quite deliberate. They first choose the crime they want to accuse Israel of, and then change the definition of the crime to fit (or pretend to fit) Israel.
Related is how the word "refugee" means something different for Palestinians than it does for everyone else.
These are all words with precise, legal meanings, whose very definitions are different when Israel is involved.
There are other, less precise words, that are also misused by the haters in ways that are not obvious unless one knows what to listen for. They include "justice" - no one is against justice, but only one side is allowed to seek it. Also "peace activists," "human rights activists" and "pro-Palestinian activists" that really mean "anti-Israel activists" (cf. the Mavi Marmara.)
These are the terms that have made it to the mainstream, despite their clear inaccuracies.
Palestinians themselves have plenty more absurd words they use and are trying to spread to be as mainstream as the others. They are just waiting for these terms to be used by first the far Left and eventually "human rights" organizations and mainstream media. These include "cultural genocide," "legitimate resistance," "holocausts," "peace activists," "storming," "Talmudic rituals," "settlers" (referring to any Jew in Israel,) "civilian," "child," "open air prison," "concentration camp," "Judaization," "indigenous," "struggle," "defense," "surrounded," "martyrs..." the list is really endless, and Orwell himself couldn't have come up with some of these.
Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism today at Amazon!
Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424.
Then Goldstone went and changed his mind and all hell broke loose. It took him a year and a half, but very publicly, in the Washington Post he retracted everything. “Civilians,” he wrote, “were not intentionally targeted as a matter of policy.” To everyone it came as a shock, to some a shock and a blow. They would not admit that Goldstone had changed his mind. Goldstone, on the other hand, could not have made himself clearer:
“I had hoped,” he said, “that our inquiry into all aspects of the Gaza conflict would begin a new era of even-handedness at the U.N. Human Rights Council, whose history of bias against Israel cannot be doubted.” (Washington Post, 1 April, 2011)
The credo, however, withstood the shock, as it had done after the hoax massacre. Amnesty would not settle for anything less than a crime. In Jenin its globe trotter wandered around looking for the corpses that Israel “hid.” Now a respected Jewish lawyer had gone and spoilt the plot. He particularly upset the resident expert at the UN Human Rights Council. Professor John Dugard took the position Amnesty had taken in Jenin: Israel can’t ever be innocent.
“He (Goldstone) could not possibly have meant that Israel did not “intentionally target civilians as a matter of policy” in the legal sense of intention. That Israel’s assault was conducted in an indiscriminate manner with full knowledge that its consequences would be the killing and wounding of civilians is a matter of public record fully substantiated by the Goldstone report and other, equally credible findings.” (The New Statesman, 6 April 2011)
The statement is interesting. Dugard is angry with captain Goldstone for saying that Israel was not guilty. Israel had not targeted civilians. Goldstone, he insists, could not possibly have meant that. Israel has to be guilty. And Dugard hits upon the oddest reason – Israel is guilty in the “legal sense.” It targeted civilians, in the “legal sense.” He could be speaking nonsense; Dugard won’t elaborate what that means. The burden of proof, in his law volumes, only requires that Israel can’t ever be innocent. Forget burden of proof, he thinks, look at the public record. For sure look – Eh, what is the public record, and where can it be found, “fully substantiated?” Retorts Dugard, ‘Where? Where else than in the report Goldstone signed, sealed and delivered. Ha, but captain Goldstone had second thoughts: no proof that Israel had done the deed. In plain English the verdict, said the captain of the crew, was mistaken. He retracts completely.
He can do what he likes, retorts Dugard. The captain did not sign the report alone. There were other signatories, not to mention “other, equally credible findings.”
The credo, ‘Israel can’t ever be innocent,’ seems to reduce the brains of a professor to pulp. Dugard the law professor is piqued into making a statement that would amuse his undergrad class. A report of an unsubstantiated crime, rubbished by a Jewish legal brain, must be treated as credible evidence of wrongdoing. Did not Amnesty declare similarly? Corpses not found are credible proof of a Jewish crime.
“In all of mankind’s history, there has never been more damage done than by people who ‘thought they were doing the right thing’.” Who said that? Lucy said it, when her pal Charlie Brown admits he took away small Linus’s blanket comforter. With that remark “Peanuts” cartoon strip creator, Charley Schulz, hit upon the dodgy ideologue and bigot that employs human rights for an excuse never to let Israel be innocent.
The Committee to Protect Journalists has documented 13 reporters killed by the American military in Iraq. One example: In 2003, Tareq Ayyoub, a Jordanian working for Al Jazeera, was killed when an American missile struck the station’s Baghdad bureau. U.S. Central Command said that American forces were responding to enemy fire and that Ayyoub was caught in the crossfire. Al-Jazeera denied that any fire came from its building.
More recently, the United States has declined to cooperate with investigations by the International Criminal Court involving American troops and CIA officers accused of war crimes in Afghanistan. Neither the United States nor Israel recognizes the authority of the ICC.
So, why go after Israel? According to Axios, both the White House and the State Department have told the Israeli government that “they were not behind the FBI decision.”
Who was? Sen. Van Hollen has been adamant that the United States must distrust Israel. “There are a number of us that are not going to allow this to be swept under the rug,” he said at an August Senate sub-panel hearing that was intended to focus on China.
In September, he called on the United States to determine whether the IDF had “committed a gross violation of human rights” and should be denied further American military assistance as punishment.
Van Hollen even disputed the IDF’s claim—and the conclusion of the American three-star general—that Israeli soldiers were “returning fire” at militants, insisting that there is no evidence of “such firing at the time.” Perhaps he thinks Abu Akleh was in Jenin to cover peace talks?
He also might consider the root cause of this tragedy. Last week, two people were killed in Poland by what was likely a surface-to-air missile misfired by Ukrainians attempting to defend themselves from Russian missiles. Rep. Adam Smith, Democratic Chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, observed that blame for the tragedy should fall on Russia for “invading and attacking Ukraine.”
As noted above, terrorists from the West Bank—members of Hamas, Palestinian Islamic Jihad and other groups funded and directed by the Islamic Republic of Iran—have for months been infiltrating into Israel and murdering Israelis.
Why is Sen. Van Hollen giving them a pass? Could it be related to the fact that Israel is the world’s only Jewish-majority state? Does he believe that some lives matter less than others?
Final question: Did no one from the FBI or the Justice Department think to have a discussion with the White House or State Department before proceeding with a probe sure to damage America’s relations with its closest Middle Eastern ally?
The least bad—and perhaps most likely—end to this episode: The FBI takes one more look at the evidence, finds nothing new or surprising, and then quietly closes the case, confirming the conclusions of the USSC and the IDF.
Some of us, however, will continue to wonder: Why were Sen. Van Hollen and his colleagues so determined to sic the FBI on the IDF?
Such biased thinking against the Jewish state will now be greatly enhanced through the recent appointment of the Reverend Dr. Jerry Pillay to become the general secretary of the World Council of Churches.[xxxii] A Presbyterian minister and academic dean at the University of Pretoria in South Africa, Dr. Pillay is on record supporting movements to boycott Israel and comparing what he calls ‘the exclusionary and violent character of the Israeli Zionist project’ to South Africa’s racial apartheid regime. Indeed, following a visit to ‘the Holy Land,’ in which he confesses he found nothing ‘holy,’ he reports that he and his fellow black South Africans discovered a situation there that was ‘worse than they had seen or experienced in South Africa.’ He has accused Israel of subjugating ‘the indigenous people of the land’ and urged Christians to ‘resist the empirical ambition of Israeli Jews.’ Other comments of his about Jews and Israel are in line with these, including that ‘Jewish leadership’ [helped] ‘influence European nationalism and colonization with a common desire to establish the state of Israel on the land of Palestine.’[xxxiii]
The World Council of Churches is a large organization representing an estimated 500 million Christians around the world. Never an Israel-friendly body, it is likely to become even less so under the Reverend Dr. Pillay’s leadership.
CONCLUSION
I began by referring to the defacement of a Holocaust Museum in Florida with swastikas and the words, ‘The Jews Are Guilty.’ The list of sins for which Jews are said to be guilty is long and growing. Also growing are the hostile passions that trigger heated accusations of Jewish malevolence. These passions are today widespread and intense and provoke a growing number of attacks on individual Jews, Jewish communal institutions, and Israel. In his early book on antisemitism, Jean Paul Sartre recognized the aims of such hatred: ‘What the antisemite wishes for, and prepares for,’ he wrote, ‘is the death of the Jew.’[xxxiv] We can add, ‘What the anti-Zionist wishes for, and prepares for, is the death of the Jewish State.’
To lend religious sanction to such wishes is obscene, but such obscenities, sometimes on open display, at other times dressed up in the language of religious piety, are now regularly and brutally directed at Jews and Israel. They are dangerous and must be vigorously and effectively opposed.
When Kanye (Ye) West finally managed to out himself as an
antisemite, the response was predictable. Demand an apology. Demand that the
offender’s lucrative business deals be canceled. This is the pattern we’ve seen
over the past several years, as antisemitism grows, even in America, the
Goldene Medina. But is it working?
It certainly didn’t work with West. The rapper only doubled
down and refused to apologize, even after several very profitable business contracts
were canceled, as a result.
Kanye (Ye) West
The following exchange took place during an
interview with Piers Morgan:
Piers Morgan: “Do you now regret saying ‘death con 3 on
Jewish people’… Are you sorry you said that?”
Kanye: “No… Absolutely not.”
Bottom of the barrel. Kanye West goes on Piers Morgan’s show, presumably because that’s the only show that would have him on, and offers most ridiculous half-assed apology ever. pic.twitter.com/HzOSvLAwA7
In other words, despite the fact that Ye lost out on
billions of dollars in potential earnings, he has shown little to no contrition
for the hateful things he said about the Jewish people.
Yet Morgan persisted until he at last managed to eke out a
semblance of an apology from West:
“I will say I’m sorry for the people that I hurt with the ‘Death Con’ — the
confusion that I caused. I feel like I caused hurt and confusion. And I’m sorry for the families of the people
that had nothing to do with the trauma that I have been through, and that I
used my platform, where you say hurt people hurt people, and I was hurt.”
Some media outlets referred to Kanye’s non-apology as an
apology.
(Yahoo)
(The Wrap)
Others were more honest.
(TMZ)
(Daily Beast)
Once allowed back on Twitter after a six-week ban, Ye collectively mocked the Jewish people by tweeting a single word, “Shalom.” As if to say, “You Jews exploited me and stole my money as you always do, but I refused to bow my head.”
The same irritating pattern was repeated with athlete Kyrie
Irving. There was a tweet with hateful content, this time in the form of a link
to an antisemitic movie: "Hebrews to Negroes: Wake Up Black America."
The ADL put pressure on a sports shoe company—Nike—with West it was Adidas—and
an apology was demanded but not received. Irving was also suspended from his
position as a guard for the Brooklyn Nets.
Sources: Nets have delivered Kyrie Irving six items he must complete to return to team:
- Apologize/condemn movie - $500K donation to anti-hate causes - Sensitivity training - Antisemitic training - Meet with ADL, Jewish leaders - Meet with Joe Tsai to demonstrate understanding
But Irving was smarter than Ye, or at least saner. He figured
out that he stood to lose a LOT of money if he didn’t apologize to those damned
Jews. So after he tried to get away with not apologizing, followed by a non-apology
that everyone knew was a non-apology, he finally made an actual apology—or at
least said the words—whether he meant them is anyone’s guess (and I’m guessing
not).
“I don’t have hate in my heart for the Jewish people or
anyone that identifies as a Jew . . . The difficult aspect is just processing
all this, understanding the power of my voice, the influence I have. I am no
one’s idol, but I am a human being that wants to make [an] impact and change.”
“I really want to
focus on the hurt that I caused. I just want to apologize deeply for all my
actions throughout the time that it’s been since the post was first put up. I’ve
had a lot of time to think,” said Irving.
Having at last issued an apology—whether heartfelt or not—Kyrie
was reinstated by the Nets.
Nick Cannon
The antisemitism of Kyrie and Ye are lately in the news. But
we’ve seen this show before. There was Nick
Cannon’s 2020 podcast with Richard “Professor Griff” Griffin. From the
transcript:
Nick Cannon: Right. So let’s dive into it. Who are they?
When we speak up, because this is where it truly is. And we talk about the six
corporations, when we go as deep as the Rothschilds, centralized banking, the
13 families, the bloodlines that control everything even outside of America.
When we talk about the people who, if we were truly the children of Israel, and
we’re defining who the Jewish people are, because I feel like if we actually
can understand that construct, then we can see that there is no hate involved.
When we talk about the lies, the deceit, how the fake dollar controls all of
this, then maybe we can get to the reason why they wanted to silence you, why
they want to silence Minister Farrakhan, and they want to throw that we are
having hate speech when it’s never hate speech, when it’s not. You can’t be
anti-Semitic when we are the Semitic people, when we are the same people that
who they want to be, that’s our birthright.
Richard “Professor Griff” Griffin: It’s our birthright.
Nick Cannon: So if that’s truly our birthright, there’s no
hate involved.
Richard “Professor Griff” Griffin: It’s not.
Nick Cannon: How did this message gets so misconstrued?
Richard “Professor Griff” Griffin: When we came back to
claim it. When we woke up and we came back to claim … If you steal my bicycle,
when we were six years old, and you riding around the hood with my bike, now
I’m 12, and I understand …
Nick Cannon: I want my bike back.
Richard “Professor Griff” Griffin: I want my bike back, man.
Now you’re going to kick up dust.
Nick Cannon: Right, right. Right.
Richard “Professor Griff” Griffin: You understand what I’m
saying?
Nick Cannon: And I’m
baller enough to get my bike back. . .
Richard “Professor Griff” Griffin: You understand what I’m
saying? That’s showing and proving that that’s my bike, and I’m here to claim
it, man. You got, you have to give it back. So when you start hearing songs
like Michael Jackson “hike me, kike me” and blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, nah,
you can’t say that.
Nick Cannon: You can’t say that. That’s hate speech.
Richard “Professor Griff” Griffin: When you see Puffy
talking about “I’m getting paid like the Hebrew,” you know what I’m saying?
Nick Cannon: Right, right. They want to mute the Hebrew.
Richard “Professor Griff” Griffin: They want to mute that.
You understand what I’m saying?
Nick Cannon: Even we the true Hebrews.
Richard “Professor Griff” Griffin: Exactly. So we can’t even
tell the truth now.
Nick Cannon: Right.
Richard “Professor Griff” Griffin: Not on record, not on
television shows, not on YouTube. . . .
Nick Cannon: Because we’re not saying anything hateful, and
that’s the thing when they want to put that on the Minister Farrakhan, was
saying, even the term “white devils” or just devils in general …
Richard “Professor Griff” Griffin: Right, right, right.
Nick Cannon: … when he was really speaking about the people
who devalue our communities and themselves, and that’s really where the word
“devil” comes from and how he’s speaking it. But they want to take the sound
bites and say, “This is antisemitic.” And so how does that occur? And why does
that occur? Is that great? Is that spiritual warfare or is that just truly just
us just silencing each other?
Richard “Professor Griff” Griffin: That’s the psychological
covert, meaning hidden, war on the higher, infinite power healing our people.
Further on in the podcast is this exchange:
Nick Cannon: So ultimately are we saying that there’s a
certain group of people that maybe they’re scared of the truth?
Richard “Professor Griff” Griffin: I think there’s Jewish
people, but I just think there’s a group of Jewish people inside of that. You
could call them Zionists. You can call them whatever.
Nick Cannon: Let’s dig into that for a second because that’s
where I, and even sometimes I find myself wanting to debate this idea, and it
gets real wishy-washy and unclear for me when we give so much power to the
“they,” and then the theys then turn into the Illuminati, the Zionists, the
Rothschilds …
Richard “Professor Griff” Griffin: The Freemasons.
Nick Cannon: The Bilderberg group, the Freemason. And as a
community I feel, and I’ve done this myself, I want to blame others for the
position that I’m currently in. And that often becomes when you say the
privileged white girlfriend comes into the room or the apologists or these
people come in and say, “Why aren’t you guys over slavery already?” or “Why are
you always complaining? And why don’t you do for yourself? Pull yourself up by
your own bootstraps. And my people were also oppressed.”
But as was the case for Kyrie Irving, money talks, nobody walks. After ViacomCBS dropped Cannon like a hot potato, he found himself (shocker!) ready to apologize.
That’s the pattern: demand an apology—and it doesn’t seem to
matter whether or not it is sincere—and hit the hater in the wallet. Perhaps it’s
time to question the wisdom of this method. Do the antisemitic beliefs
evaporate once the apology is issued? Do the apologies matter at all? And doesn’t
placing financial pressure on antisemitic offenders only reinforce classic
tropes about Jews, money, and power?
Ye’s claim that Jared Kushner’s actions between Israel and
Arab nations was driven by his desire for financial gain corroborates
long-standing antisemitic tropes about alleged Jewish control of money and
financial institutions. His vague suggestion that a prominent Jewish holiday is
associated with “financial engineering” also reinforces this stereotype.
Overall, Ye's suggestions about Jewish people, holidays and the monetary
implications of the two lends credence to the baseless idea that Jews can
leverage their power for insidious purposes because of the stronghold they have
on financial institutions.
Claims about Jewish
Control of Media and Government
In many of his recent interviews, Ye repeatedly referenced
purported Jewish control over various industries — he used the phrase “Jewish
media” over twenty times on “Drink Champs” alone. Ye also spoke about “Jewish
Zionists” and “Zionist media handlers.” He made multiple references to
prominent Jewish individuals, including George Soros — the Hungarian
Jewish billionaire, philanthropist and Holocaust survivor who is a frequent
bogeyman for both avowed antisemites and the political right — and Jared
Kushner, as supposed examples of Jewish power.
Ye’s insinuations about Jewish control perpetuate the longstanding
antisemitic trope that Jews wield an inordinate amount of power and exert
control over global systems as part of a quest for world domination. These
views are regularly promoted by extremists and antisemites of a wide variety of
ideologies, from white supremacists and extremist Black nationalist groups to
conspiracy theorists and Holocaust deniers.
·“Jared Kushner is an example of how the Jewish
people have their hand on every single business that controls the world.” (Ye
on “Drink Champs,” 10/16/22)
·“We’re not going to be owned by the Jewish media
anymore…Every celebrity has Jewish people in their contract…And these people,
if you say anything out of the line with the agenda, then your career can be
over.” (Ye on “Cuomo,” 10/17/22)
·“Kim [Kardashian, Ye’s ex-wife] has Zionist
media handlers surrounding her.” (Ye on “Piers Morgan Uncensored,” 10/19/22)
·“I said the Jewish people because, by the way,
it’s a barrage…George Soros knows, like, ‘wow, this guy is like a younger guy
that’s looking at what I did and looking at how I control the world silently
and he’s calling it out’…That’s what George Soros sees, right, when he’s
dealing with me.” (Ye on the “Lex Fridman Podcast,” 10/24/22)
Claims that Jews
Exploit Black Artists for Financial Gain
Antisemitic tropes about alleged Jewish power and greed intersect
in Ye’s comments about purported Jewish control of the music industry and exploitation
of Black artists. This trope has been present in the discourse of other Black
performers and activists in the past and is a common talking point within more
extremist groups. Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan, for example, frequently makes
this accusation.
·“Jewish people have owned the Black voice…The
Jewish community, especially in the music industry, in the entertainment [industry]
period, they’ll take one of us, the brightest of us, right, that can really
feed a whole village, and they’ll take us and milk us till we die.” (Ye on
“Drink Champs,” 10/16/22)
·“There’s so many Black musicians signed to
Jewish record labels and those Jewish records labels take ownership not only of
the publishing…but also ownership of the culture itself…It’s like a modern-day
slavery.” (Ye on “Cuomo,” 10/17/22)
·“I’ve been wronged so many times by Jewish
businessmen…They’re taking money out of my children’s mouths and putting it
into their children’s mouths!” (Ye on “Piers Morgan Uncensored,” 10/19/22)
·“90% of Black people in entertainment — from
sports, to music, to acting — are in some way tied into Jewish
businesspeople…Like if Rahm [Emanuel] is sitting next to [President] Obama or
Jared [Kushner] sitting next to [President] Trump, there’s a Jewish person
right there controlling the country, the Jewish people controlling who gets the
best video or not, controlling what the media says about me.” (Ye on the “Lex
Fridman Podcast,” 10/24/22)
So let’s see, Jonathan Greenblatt, after pressuring
Adidas (of the Nazi
past) to break its very generous contract with Ye, educates us on classic
Jewish tropes relating to money and power. Isn’t this a contradiction in terms?
Of course it is. And a lot of Jews think the ADL has outlived its usefulness,
and in fact, causes more harm than good.
The Dassler shoe factory--where Adidas and Puma were born--in Herzogenaurach, Germany circa 1930s. Source: Wikimedia Commons
Which of these two individuals do you find more problematic?
Kyrie Irving, a kooky basketball player who believes that
the Earth is flat, that JFK was shot by bankers, that the COVID vaccines were
secretly a plot to connect all Black people to a supercomputer, and that Jews
worship Satan and launched the slave trade?
Or Jonathan Greenblatt, the head of the Anti-Defamation
League, who accepted $500,000 from Irving last week without even meeting or
even talking to the all-star—and who was then forced to give back the donation
when Irving blatantly refused to apologize?
Let’s think about it for a minute. One of these guys is a
weirdo with dumb opinions he may or may not actually believe. The other is
running a soulless racket which just made it clear that you can say whatever
you want about the Jews and buy your indulgences at a discount price.
Don’t get me wrong: I absolutely believe that Irving’s
endorsement of a Black nationalist documentary based on an obscure Jew-hating
book, to say nothing of Kanye West’s meltdown, will most likely contribute to a
surge in antisemitism in America, particularly in the Black community. But we
Jews don’t control Kyrie Irving; in theory, we do control the ADL, and we shouldn’t
want our chief defense group to behave in a way that advances antisemitic
conspiracy theories about shadowy Jews trafficking in money and influence for
fun and profit.
As for the pro forma apologies, not everyone is so eager to accept
them. Meghan
McCain, for instance, who, remarking on Nick Cannon’s apology said that
antisemitism remains “the last form of passable bigotry in America.”
Meghan McCain at the No Fear: A Rally in Solidarity with the Jewish People, July 11, 2021, (Ted Eytan, Wikipedia.)
“This isn’t just about Nick Cannon,” said McCain. “It’s why
we, as Americans, seem to find more forgiveness in our heart for antisemitism
than we do of racism of any other kind.”
“I think my concern is, for some reason, antisemitism is
something we let people forgive a lot easier than any other forms of bigotry
and racism.” McCain noted that “we’re having conversations about canceling Dr.
Seuss,” but we say nothing about works by other authors which contain “deeply
antisemitic characters.”
“I find that people who say antisemitic things are forgiven
a lot easier than anything else,” said McCain, “And I think that’s something we
really need to examine as a society.”
McCain is right. We are too forgiving, and the pattern of
demanding apologies and forcing companies to cancel big name antisemites just
isn’t working. If it were working, we’d
see less antisemitism, rather than more, as in our current situation, with both
Ye and Irving coming out of the (antisemitic) closet, so to speak.
Raoul Wallenberg
The problem perhaps, is that the demands and pressures are
coming from the Jews, when it would be preferable to have non-Jews fight this
battle for us. But we have learned an unfortunate lesson from our tragic Jewish
history. People like McCain, and even more so, righteous gentiles like Raoul
Wallenberg who saved thousands of Jews during the Holocaust, are rare birds. For
the most part, no one sticks up for the Jews, except for the Jews themselves.
Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism today at Amazon!
Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424.
The Palestinian Commission of Detainees and Ex-Detainees Affairs announced that over 50,000 Palestinian children were detained by Israel since 1967.
Where did they get this number from? They made it up.
Oddly, the number seems to have gone down. In April, the very same commission announced that Israel had arrested (not just detained!) more than 53,000 Palestinian children since 1967.
A different group, Military Court Watch, sent a report to the UN claiming that 95,000 Palestinian children were incarcerated (not merely arrested or detained!) since 1967. And that report was in 2015!
Given that there are never more than a couple hundred prisoners under 18 at one time, that is a neat trick.
This is similar to the "750,000" or "million Palestinians" supposedly imprisoned by Israel since 1967, another totally made up number that I thoroughly debunked here.
Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism today at Amazon!
Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424.
Two explosions at two bus stops near entrances to Jerusalem on Wednesday morning killed one person and left another 22 people injured, police and medics said.
Police described the explosions as a terror bombing attack.
The first explosion occurred close to the main entrance of Jerusalem in Givat Shaul, shortly after 7 a.m., peak commuter hour.
Eighteen people at the bus stop were injured in the blast, including two critically and two seriously, medical officials said. The victims were taken to two hospitals in Jerusalem.
One of the victims injured in the first blast later died at Shaare Zedek Medical Center, hospital officials said. He was named as 16-year-old Aryeh Schupak, a yeshiva student from Jerusalem’s Har Nof neighborhood, and a dual Israeli-Canadian national.
A second blast occurred shortly after 7:30 a.m., at Ramot junction, another entrance to Jerusalem.
Five people lightly hurt by shrapnel or suffered from anxiety in the second explosion were taken to the Hadassah Mount Scopus Medical Center, hospital officials said.
A bus at the station was damaged by the explosion. It was unclear if the victims were at the station or on the bus itself.
A senior officer said police were hunting for an organized terror cell that detonated two “high quality” explosive devices at two bus stops near entrances to Jerusalem on Wednesday morning, killing one and wounding more than 20 others.
Speaking to reporters, the head of the police operations division said the “two high-quality, powerful explosive devices with a high level of damage” were hidden behind the bus stop and in a bush.
The first explosion occurred close to the main entrance of Jerusalem in Givat Shaul, shortly after 7 a.m., peak commuter hour. The second blast occurred shortly after 7:30 a.m., at Ramot junction, another entrance to Jerusalem.
A 16-year-old yeshiva student, Aryeh Schupak, was killed and 22 people were hurt in the two attacks, including one listed as critical and another three in serious-moderate condition, according to medical officials.
Schupak, who was killed in the first bombing, was a Canadian national as well as an Israeli citizen, according to Canada’s ambassador to Israel.
The remotely detonated devices were packed with nails to maximize casualties, according to police officials.
Due to the nature of the attack with two near-identical bombs exploding within half an hour of each other at two bus stops, Deputy Commissioner Sigal Bar Zvi said police suspected an organized cell was behind it, rather than just one person.
“I believe we will capture the terror cell,” she said.
Victims and witnesses described the terrifying moment they were caught up in the twin bomb attacks at Jerusalem bus stops on Wednesday morning.
Aryeh Schupak, 16, was killed, and at least 20 injured in the two blasts at entrances to the city.
Many of those caught up in the terror were children and teens on their way to school.
The first explosion hit a bus stop at the entrance to the city at around 7:05 a.m., and barely half an hour later another bomb went off at another stop near the Ramot neighborhood in the northwest of the capital.
Shahar Sorkis and Neta Varshavski, both 14-year-olds who attend a school in Ramot, saw the second explosion as they traveled with other schoolkids on a nearby bus.
“We saw loads of shrapnel flying off the bus… it was a mess,” Varshavski told the Ynet news site. “We heard a noise and then we saw a lot of people running, a lot of children crying.”
“When we saw the explosion a lot of the girls began to cry. There was a lot of stress,” Sorkis added.
Police and security personnel at the scene of a terror attack in Jerusalem, on November 23, 2022. (Olivier Fitoussil/Flash90)
The explosion damaged a No. 67 bus that was passing at the time. The driver, Motti Gabay, told Ynet that he quickly realized it was a terror attack.
“There was panic,” he said.
Gabay, who has been a bus driver for 23 years, including the period of the Second Intifada in the early 2000s when Palestinian terrorists frequently targeted buses with bombs, said he had expected that such attacks would one day return.
“First of all, I opened the doors and people got off,” he said, noting that Israelis “are used to this already.”
The Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People
(CEIRPP) held closed consultations with Civil Society Organizations (CSOs), titled “Advocating
for Accountability in the Occupied Palestinian Territory”, on 8 November 2022, as a virtual
meeting under the Chatham House Rule. Participants included CSO representatives from
Palestine, Israel and the United States, as well as from members and observers of the
Committee.
When a meeting is held under the Chatham House Rule, neither the identity nor the affiliation of the speakers or participants may be revealed. The purpose of the rule is to encourage open discussion since anything said is "off the record".
So we do not know the names of the "civil society organizations" who participated. They could include organizations linked with Islamic Jihad, the PFLP or other terror groups. The speakers could include convicted terrorists. There is no transparency.
The normal reason for Chatham House rules is to encourage discussion. In this case, though, the reason seems to be that the UN knows that some of the speakers and organizations have explicitly supported antisemitism, and they don't want that fact to be publicized which would distract from their higher calling of coming up with new ideas on how to destroy Israel.
One thing is certain, though: not a single pro-Israel CSO was invited.
The CSOs essentially set the agenda for the UN, rather than acting as consultants:
During the questions and answers session, one participating CSOs formulated several
recommendations to the Committee, including the continuation of its advocacy to expose the
abuses committed in the OPT. Participants stressed that additional suggestions for the Committee
action could be drawn from the fight against the Apartheid regime in South Africa. Seeking an
Advisory Opinion from the International Court of Justice was also mentioned, as a first step.
Member States could take further action in the meantime. Furthermore, the international
community needed to increase attention towards corporate responsibility as only a general
backlash by Member States would have an impact. Among other measures, making public
corporate lists available would provide tools for future advocacy against Israeli abuses. Speakers
therefore called for an update of the OHCHR database of all enterprises making business in
Israeli settlements in the OPT.
Committee members stressed the crucial role of the ongoing partnership with CSOs and
mentioned how their inputs and recommendations added value to the work of the Committee.
Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism today at Amazon!
Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424.
Columbia professor Joseph Massad is very upset that Jews are claiming the right to self-determination. If Jews indeed have the right to self-determination, then opposing that really is a form of antisemitism, and antisemites like Massad cannot admit to that.
His normal method is to claim that Jews aren't a people, and that most Jews do not originate in the Middle East. If they aren't a people, then they have no right to self-determination.
But Massad knows that everyone knows that is a lie besides dyed in the wool antisemites who call Jews "Khazars."
So he has come up with a new argument: that the self-determination argument was never a Zionist tenet, rather it was a Palestinian Arab one.
Since the inception of their war against the Palestinian people, Zionist ideologues did not argue for Jewish self-determination but rather sought to delegitimise the indigenous Palestinians’ right to it. In the tradition of all colonial powers which denied that the colonised were a nation, the Zionists began by denying the nationness of the Palestinians.
Actually, the Zionists didn't even address the "nationness" of the Palestinian Arabs, who themselves didn't assert such a status (except for a tiny number of intellectuals) until decades after Zionism was established.
At the Paris Peace Conference at the end of World War I, the Zionist Organisation (ZO) did not invoke any "Jewish" right to self-determination, even though self-determination was all the rage at the conference, with colonised peoples from around the world affirming this right to liberate themselves from the colonial yoke.
The ZO instead argued that Palestine "is the historic home of the Jews…and through the ages they have never ceased to cherish the longing and the hope of a return".
Massad takes this statement out of context. The ZO's proposals were not meant to be a definition of Zionism, rather recommendations to the allies with an eye to what was politically possible. Even so, they did use the language of rights in their suggested conference statement: "The High Contracting Parties recognize the historic title of the Jewish people to Palestine and the right of Jews to reconstitute in Palestine their National Home. "
Massad then makes an astoundingly incorrect assertion:
It is most important to note in this regard that, unlike the more recent and increased use by Zionists of the notion of Jewish self-determination, neither Herzl’s writings, the 1897 first Zionist Congress, the Balfour Declaration of 1917, nor the 1922 Palestine Mandate employed the language of "rights", let alone the right of self-determination.
Herzl's definition was "Zionism has for its object the creation of a home, secured by public rights, for those Jews who either cannot or will not be assimilated in the country of their adoption."
The phrase "public rights" was coined by Italian jurist Pellegrino Rossi in the 1830s. It meant universal rights for people - what it now called human rights. Herzl's definition of Zionism was based on the idea that Jews have the same rights as any other people, which would by implication include self-determination, a phrase that didn't gain popularity until the 1910s.
Massad cherry picks specific documents and statements and says that because they don't invoke "rights' or "self-determination,"then Zionists as a whole didn't use that language until recently. That is laughable.
A book on Zionism and the Jewish question by famed juror Louis Brandeis in 1915 says, "Jews collectively should enjoy the same right and opportunity to live and develop as do other groups of people."
Similarly, Jessie Ethel Sampter published "A Course in Zionism "in 1915, and wrote, "The Jew is always foremost in every modem movement towards justice. In the 18th century he fought for individual human rights, as his rights. In the 20th century he fights for the rights of the small nations to life and autonomy, also as his right. It is the democracy of nations, internationalism. "
Massad is even wrong in his assertion that self-determination is a new claim by Zionists. "A Jewish State in Palestine" by David Werner Amram (1918) says that the Zionist movement was partially a result of the "consciousness of the right of self-expression and self-determination of the Jewish people." The phrase did not have to be said explicitly by the early Zionists; it was well understood as one of many national rights that Jews should have as a people.
Similarly, the preface to a book written by the Zionist Organization in London in 1918 says, "Only by their resettlement in their ancestral land of Palestine...will the Jews be able to exercise the right of self-determination."
Early Zionists always asserted their national rights as the Jewish nation as well as the right of self-determination. It is not a new phenomenon. Massad's pretense that this is a new definition of Zionism is yet another failed attempt to delegitimize Zionism - and to push his brand of modern antisemitism.
Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism today at Amazon!
Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424.
As Palestinian terror groups fall over themselves to praise the twin bombings in Jerusalem this morning, one of them is more notable than others.
The Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine issued a statement:
Today, Wednesday, the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine praised the heroic operation in the occupied city of Jerusalem, during which a number of settlers were injured.
The people confirmed that this qualitative heroic operation that took place at the central bus station comes within the framework of the continuous response to the crimes of the occupation and its terrorist settlers against our people.
It was only a year ago that every major human rights group was up in arms over Israel closing down six NGOs that have links, or were originally founded, by the same PFLP terror group that praises terror attacks today.
Given the ties between these NGOs and PFLP terrorists, it is not surprising that one cannot find a single condemnation of PFLP terror attacks from any of these "civil service organizations."
And the major human rights groups Amnesty, Oxfam and Human Rights Watch regard the PFLP not as a terror group but merely a "political organization."
We still do not know the group that planted these bombs, but it could just as easily been the Leftist Palestinian groups like the PFLP and DFLP as the Islamist terror groups Hamas or Islamic Jihad.
Palestinians don't make such petty distinctions between the political Right and Left - as long as they unite in their desire to murder Jews.
Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism today at Amazon!
Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424.
Kareem Abdul-Jabbar retired from the NBA in 1989, but he remains one of the greatest basketball players of all time. Many argue he is simply the greatest.
He is still—even with Michael Jordan and Steph Curry and Lebron and Shaq and Kobe—the NBA’s all-time leading scorer (38,387 points) and the league’s only six-time MVP. In March, the basketball news site HoopsHype included Abdul-Jabbar in its list of the top ten most influential players of all time. ESPN called him the greatest center in NBA history.
As Jews say every Passover: It would have been enough.
But there’s so much more that makes the 7-foot-2-inch Abdul-Jabbar a true giant. His religious conviction, his integrity, his wide-ranging intellectual proclivities, his outstanding performance in the 1981 movie Airplane!—and the unusual fact that this black, Muslim basketball star has been a consistent and outspoken voice against antisemitism.
For all those reasons, I wanted to speak with Abdul-Jabbar about the various firestorms of late: Kanye and his antisemitic rants; Kyrie Irving’s promotion of an antisemitic movie that denies the Holocaust; and the alarming rash of anti-Jewish hate crimes seemingly inspired by their worldview. A few weeks ago, a banner declaring “Kanye was right” hung over the 405 in Los Angeles as people gave Nazi salutes. On Halloween, the side of a townhouse in an Atlanta neighborhood was sprayed with graffiti: “Jews kill Blacks.” On the stop sign around the corner: “Jews enslave Black lives.” Last week, headstones at a Jewish cemetery in Chicago were vandalized with swastikas and the phrase “Kanye was rite.” And in Brooklyn, physical attacks against Orthodox Jews have become routine.
I asked Abdul-Jabbar about all of that and more in the Q and A below. And if you’re looking for more from Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, check out his Substack, where he writes and talks about everything from basketball to pop culture to politics. — BW
BW: I want to focus on Farrakhan’s influence. He believes that Jews are parasitic, that Jews are behind a plot to exploit black Americans, and that blacks are the real Jews from the Bible. We’re hearing these ideas come out of the mouths of musicians like Kanye West (“Jewish people have owned the black voice”) and athletes like Kyrie Irving (“I cannot be antisemitic if I know where I come from”). For many Jews, hearing this kind of rhetoric is shocking, but many black Americans have noted that these views are more commonplace than we’d like to admit. So what I think a lot of people are afraid to ask is: How mainstream are these beliefs among black Americans? Are Kanye and Kyrie unique? Or has the influence of people like Farrakhan made this strain of antisemitism somehow more normal than many want to believe?
KAJ: Certain black leaders do exactly what certain white leaders do who want to gather followers, money, and power: They find a scapegoat they can blame. They can’t blame others who are marginalized because of the color of their skin, like Latinx or Asian-Americans, so they go for the default villain of fascists and racists: Jews.
What astounds me is not just the irrationality of it, but how self-destructive it is. Black people have to know that when they mouth antisemitism, they are using the exact same kind of reasoning that white supremacists use against blacks. They are enabling racism. Now they’ve aligned themselves with the very people who would choke out black people, drag them behind a truck, keep them from voting, and maintain systemic racism for another hundred years. They are literally making not only their lives worse, but their children’s lives. The fact that they can’t see that means the racists have won.
David Baddiel, a comedian-turned-activist against antisemitism who calls himself “one of the U.K.’s very few famous Jews,” was holding court in the basement of one of Britain’s best-known TV studios.
As a reporter headed hurriedly for the exit, Baddiel slouched into his chair, seemingly exhausted by the interview he had just completed about the forthcoming documentary based on his 2021 bestseller, “Jews Don’t Count.”
“I am speaking to many people like the last journalist who had not thought about any of this in their life,” he said.
The “this” Baddiel was referring to was to the idea, outlined in his book, that progressive anti-racists are guilty of hypocrisy towards Jews by not viewing them as worthy of similar protection or championing as other minorities because they are seen as white, privileged and wealthy.
When the book came out last year, it received rave reviews, and Baddiel has since become seen by some as a “voice for Britain’s Jews.” He often litigates the finer points of contemporary antisemitism as a guest on radio and television, and he has been quick to square off with trolls and critics on Twitter.
Now, with the premiere of an hour-long documentary also called “Jews Don’t Count” on Britain’s public Channel 4 network, Baddiel gets a primetime slot to make his case to a bigger audience. Featuring Baddiel’s interviews with Jewish stars of pop culture in both Britain and the United States — ranging from comedian Sarah Silverman to novelist Jonathan Safran Foer to actor Stephen Fry — the film argues that “in a culture where all forms of racism are being monitored, called out and held accountable, one form is apparently invisible.”
If a comic with a huge following like Dave Chappelle goes over the line, he will immediately be put under a societal microscope that will analyze and respond from every possible angle, as I’m doing now.
If you run an organization that fights antisemitism, or simply cares for the welfare of the Jewish community, it’s almost certain that you will feel obligated to respond. Many of those responses follow the usual dance of “expose, condemn and ask for an apology.”
Chappelle himself poked fun at that dance at the start of his monologue: “Before I start tonight, I just wanted to read a brief statement that I prepared. I denounce antisemitism in all its forms and I stand with my friends in the Jewish community. And that, Kanye, is how you buy yourself some time.”
Chappelle exposed the uneasy truth of celebrities getting caught saying something offensive and then releasing a statement that everyone knows was written by a PR handler. By revealing the goal of “buying yourself some time,” he captured the phoniness of the whole exercise.
That was cutting and funny. It’s when he played up antisemitic tropes around the “all powerful” Jew that he entered dicey territory.
“I’ve been to Hollywood,” he said. “And I don’t want y’all to get mad at me, I’m just telling you this is just what I saw. It’s a lot of Jews. Like a lot.”
Perhaps realizing he was on sensitive ground, he called the idea that Jews run show business a “delusion,” but then added: “It’s not a crazy thing to think. But it’s a crazy thing to say out loud in a climate like this.”
In other words, it’s not crazy to think that Jews run the show; just don’t say it out loud.
Whether he intended it or not, that “hush hush” vibe suggests mystery and conspiracy, precisely the ancient trope that fuels Jew-hatred and makes so many Jews nervous.
Which brings us back to the “Chappelle trap.” It’s one thing to fight antisemitism when it comes from places like a neo-Nazi march or a BDS group or even celebrity musicians or athletes. None of those people make a living by making us laugh.
Chappelle does.
Because Chappelle plays in the very Jewish playground of comedy, it makes it that much harder to calibrate our response. How do we fight a comic without losing our sense of humor, without losing what made America love us in the first place? At what point do we say, “We can’t take this joke because it goes too far?”
If the ritual of “expose, condemn and ask for an apology” is phony anyhow, is it worth losing our sense of humor? And does complaining so loudly, as much as it makes us feel good, make things better or worse?
In the classic Jewish tradition, I have more questions than answers.
I wanted to learn more about this, but couldn't find anything online about "Staroshentzi" or the people named here.
So I crowdsourced the research on Twitter.
I was pointed by Aviva Hadara to the town of Storozhynets, Ukraine, sometimes spelled Storozhynets' [Ukr], Storozhinets [Rus], Storojineţ [Rom], Storojinet [Ger], Shtrozshnitz [Yid], Stordjinet [Yid], Storojineti [Hun], Storozynetz, Strizinitz, Strozynetz, or Sorojinet.
Then SD Homnick pointed me to another person who saved Jews from Storozhynets, also an agronomist, so chances are he was the real hero.
Attempts to save Transnistria deportees were severely punished by the regime; therefore, rescue efforts—and they were not few—deserve great respect. Unfortunately, no systematic research has been done on this topic. However, several individual cases are highly relevant. .... Serban Flondor, a doctor of agronomics and renowned specialist in heraldry and geneology and son of Iancu Flondor (who played an important role in uniting Bukovina with Romania), supplied the Jews in the Storojinet camp with food. Additionally, with the assistance of railway managers, he sent Jews to Bucharest by locking them in unoccupied sleeping car compartments. While serving as councilor for the Chamber of Agriculture, he used his train car to take Jews from Bukovina to Bucharest, where they could hide more easily.
Agronomist engineer, deputy in the interwar Romanian Parliament, a well-known genealogist and mayor of his hometown, Storojinet, Serban Flondor was truly a character-hero, of a refinement and intelligence that all the Bucharest aristocrats of the interwar period and who would measure his own humanity in terrible times.
A few years after this photograph, Serban Flondor would fight to save the lives of dear Jewish friends, simple acquaintances or people he had never seen: Rubi Klein (whom he hid in the house in the yard of which the photograph was taken, at Storojinet), students Zalman Leon, Elias Corneliu or Iancu Moscovici from "Cultura" and "Ciocanul" high schools (he got involved and obtained their pardon), whole families from a death train heading towards Transnistria and which he managed to stop en route.
The chief rabbi of Storojinet, Benzion Katz, knew the exceptional merits of Serban Flondor and, years later, gave him a distinction from the heart, a gold plaque on which a wish for long life was engraved in Hebrew. The count from Bucovina wore this gold plate until his death (1971), saying that this is the only treasure he would like to take with him.
Sam Gold found the original report from the Jewish Anti-Fascist Committee in Russian, where JTA got the story from. Not sure about the accuracy but it adds details not in the original story:
Before the war, more than three hundred Jewish families lived in Starozhenets, Chernivtsi region: they were mostly craftsmen, workers and employees of local enterprises. Having captured the city, the German-Romanian fascists began to deport Jews to Transnistria, where special ghettos were created.
In the third week of their rule, the invaders issued an order ordering the entire Jewish population to appear at Vokzalnaya Square at a certain time, taking only the most necessary with them. Death was threatened for violating the order.
By this time, many refugees from Germany, Czechoslovakia, Austria and other places had accumulated in Bukovina. They knew what these "special ghettos" meant. The Bukovinian Jews also knew about this, but there was no way out. The Romanian “siguranza” (okhrana), under the leadership of Gestapo instructors, cordoned off the Jewish quarters and expelled all Jewish residents from their apartments. All the janitors were called to the Gestapo. They were warned that if a hiding Jew was found in any house, the janitor would be shot along with him.
Jews filled Vokzalnaya Square. For three weeks they were kept here in the open air, waiting for the train. One and a half thousand souls - women with babies, old people, children were lying on the damp earth. Many of the cold, dampness and hunger died right there on the square. Some managed to escape and went into the forest.
The forest watchman Stepan Burlecu and his two daughters-in-law, who lived near the railway station, with the assistance of the agronomist Paskaranu, rescued a large group of Jews. They hid them for some time in the forest and finally, dressing them in peasant clothes, they sent them to work - in the forest, in the field.
Burleca and Pascarana rescued music teacher Hecht with his wife and child; tailor Gaiser with his wife and two daughters; soap factory master Gottlieb with a young daughter (his wife died on Vokzalnaya Square); engineer Behler, whose wife was shot for trying to escape from Vokzalnaya Square; Finder's teacher and his two boys, tannery and soap factory workers Solomon Neumann, David Rubinger, Moses Rosner, Yakov Singer and Ariel Kurtzman.
In addition to all these, some Jewish families survived, who dared, despite the threat of the death penalty, not to appear on Vokzalnaya Square and hid with their Moldavian neighbors.
Janitors Geku Lupescu, Nicolai Peranu and Jan Bruzha rescued the lawyer Bislinger and his family, the director of the real school Dr. Welt, the pharmacist Ribaizen and the accountant of the city bank Kantarovich.
The town was still the site of horrific massacres. Even though some Jews were saved, compared to the entire population, it was still a tiny percentage.
Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism today at Amazon!
Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424.
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.
The Unreal Politics of Unreal Men
-
“Social media isn’t real life.” It’s a phrase we hear a lot. But is that
really true?
When Congress threatened to block China from controlling TikTok, ...
On Jabotinsky's Views on Arabs
-
From here, Shlomo Avineri:
"In connection with the central position of national existence in
Jabotinsky’s theoretical concept, his approach to the positi...
Confrontation with Iran: Who Won?
-
The West likes its Jews passive, dependent, and weak. When American
officials say “Israel has a right to defend [herself]” they mean that they
will allow h...
The Palestinian “Two-State” Plan: Duping the West
-
One of the great unsolved mysteries of the 21st century is why, given what
a catastrophe it proved to be, anyone, much less a whole phalanx of
politicians,...
06-Feb-24: Obituary: Naftali Gordon
-
The obituary that follows was published yesterday by *Times of Israel* under
the headline "*Master Sgt. (res.) Naftali Gordon, 32: A man of ‘honesty and
...
Closing Jews Down Under Website
-
With a heavyish heart I am closing down the website after ten years.
It is and it isn’t an easy decision after 10 years of constant work. The
past...
‘Test & Trace’ is a mirage
-
Lockdown II thoughts: Day 1 Opposition politicians have been banging on
about the need for a ‘working’ Test & Trace system even more loudly than
the govern...
Thursday, November 24, 2022
Elder of Ziyon
.jpg)
.jpg)
