The New Trend in Hate Crimes: Black Murderers and Jewish Victims

The terrible murders at a kosher supermarket in Jersey City, NJ in December 2019, was a continuation of a number of trends in hate crimes: more murders, more Jewish victims and more Black murderers.

EMT cleans the area outside a kosher supermarket on December 11, 2019 (photo: Tariq Zehawi/NorthJersey.com)

The FBI reports its findings about hate crimes in the United States every November. While Jews have always been the most likely to suffer from hate crimes, the nature of the attacks were often in the form of vandalism, intimidation and assault.

This trend has changed over the past few years.

Murder: The average number of hate crimes from murder was high between the years 2000 and 2003, averaging 13.5 murders per year during those four years. The average number of hate crime murders dropped significantly between 2004 and 2014, to just 6.2 killings per year. However, from 2015 to 2018, the average number of hate crime murders jumped to 16.5 people killed per year, a staggering figure.

Religion: Hate crime murders are typically not based on religious bias, as the murderers are more frequently motivated by hatred against the victim’s race and/or sexual orientation. Between 2000 and 2015, murders targeting religion accounted for an annual average of 10% of the total hate crime murders, but that figure jumped to 19% in the years 20016 to 2018. During the sixteen years 2000 to 2015, one Jew and six Muslims were killed. That has flipped, with eleven Jews and no Muslims killed as a result of hate crimes from 2016 to 2018.

Race of Murderers: While White people have been the majority of the murderers in all hate crimes, it is lower than one would expect based on demographics. There are roughly 5.7 times more White people than Black people in the United States so one would expect a similar rate of hate crimes. However, from 2000 to 2015, White people committed 3.4 times the number of hate crime murders (96 to 28), implying that an average Black person was committing 66% more hate crime murders than an average White Person. From 2016 to 2018 the trend accelerated, when White people committed 1.75 times the number of hate crime murders by Black people (28 to 16), suggesting that Black people were 226% more likely to commit a hate crime murder than White people.


The brutal shooting of innocent Jews by Black anti-Semites last week in New Jersey horrified all decent people but the trendlines over the past three years should make it less surprising. The U.S. is seeing an uptick in hate crime murders, more of them targeting Jews and more of the killings committed by Black people.


Related First.One.Through articles:

Black Hate Crimes of 2018

Mayor De Blasio is Blind to Black Anti-Semitism

What Kind of Hate Kills?

Don Lemon, Here are Some Uncomfortable Facts about Hate Crimes in America

Covering Racism

NY Times Discolors Hate Crimes

Anti-Semitism Is Harder to Recognize Than Racism

First the Attackers Were Radical Islamic Extremists

Muslim Women Debate Anti-Semitism

Rep. Ilhan Omar and The 2001 Durban Racism Conference

Subscribe YouTube channel: FirstOneThrough

Join Facebook group: FirstOne Through Israel Analysis

Sources:

FBI Hate Crimes 2018, 2017, 2016, 2015, 2014, 2013, 2012, 2011, 2010, 2009, 2008, 2007, 2006, 2005, 2004, 2003, 2002, 2001, 2000

Opinions on Facebook

On December 10, 1948, the United Nations General Assembly passed Resolution 217A, known as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The backdrop behind its passage was the Holocaust of European Jewry, in which an entire people was dehumanized, hunted and slaughtered, and the consequent global goal of making sure that it never happens again.

The first two stances in the resolution’s preamble make this clear:

“Whereas recognition of the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family is the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world,

Whereas disregard and contempt for human rights have resulted in barbarous acts which have outraged the conscience of mankind, and the advent of a world in which human beings shall enjoy freedom of speech and belief and freedom from fear and want has been proclaimed as the highest aspiration of the common people,”

All people inherently deserve “freedom, justice and peace” and the common goal of humanity is the enjoyment of “freedom of speech and belief” as well as “freedom from fear and want.”

The resolution goes on to enumerate many ways to achieve such goals, such as banning slavery (Article 4) and torture (Article 5), the ability to marry and divorce (Article 16) and change one’s religion (Article 18). While these seem fundamental rights in the western world, they are unfortunately not present in much of the Middle East and Africa.

But the western world has its own challenges with other items published in the UDHR, that of freedom of speech in the world of social media. Article 19 states:

“Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.”

The notion that people have the right to “impart information… through any media… regardless of frontiers” is specifically being called out in the western world today.

The CEO of Facebook has been called before Congress and people have argued that Facebook must fact-check items before posting them as well as ban political ads.


Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg testifying before Congress

At a speech before the Anti-Defamation League, the actor and comedian Sacha Baron Cohen argued that Facebook, Twitter and Google have created “the greatest propaganda machine in history,” one that would have allowed Hitler to run 30 second ads contributing to fringe ideas “going mainstream.”

But such condemnation should be addressed towards the individual or group posting the vile viewpoints, not the platform itself. Facebook is a megaphone / modern soapbox for ideas. It is not a newspaper with a staff which writes opinions of its own.

We have become enamored with attacking the large social media giants by adopting false progressive notions that: 1) social media is media; 2) any kind of “fear” is real and should be considered; and 3) simply being large and powerful is inherently evil.

Social Media versus Media

Social media enables millions and billions of people to connect with each other. The platforms enable third parties to share ideas and pictures with both friends and family as well as people they’ve never met. The interactions may be cordial or hostile; the content, funny or sad.

The social media companies are distribution companies. This is vastly different than a media company which either writes and produces its own content or pays people to write content for them. As companies like Google begin to hire professionals to produce content on platforms like YouTube, it is only at that point that they become media companies themselves.

These distribution companies decide for themselves whether they wish to publish particular content. If Twitter opts to not publish political ads, that is its choice. If Facebook does not want to be a platform for nudity, it has full discretion to do so.

But it is the content itself which should be the focus of attention and possible derision.

Freedom from Fear

While Article 19 of the UDHR clearly articulates that all opinions should be available on any media, the preamble to the resolution makes clear that people should be able to live with “freedom from fear.” As such, any content which calls for violence against any person or group should be banned from all platforms. No ifs, ands or buts.

But what constitutes “fear?” A perceived insult or slight might trigger “microaggressions” such as using the wrong pronoun for a transgender person. But that cannot truly be the benchmark of what the UDHR had in mind.

Many videos by the conservative Prager U have been banned by YouTube, despite the videos not advocating any violence. Dennis Prager testified before Congress in July 2019 that the social media platforms have been banning conservative voices because the media outlets are run by “coastal liberal latte-sipping politically-correct out-of-touch folks,” as President Obama called them. Prager said that “liberals and conservatives differ on many issues but they have always agreed free speech must be preserved. While the left has never supported free speech, liberals always have.

Prager considered that “the left” has become overly sensitive about a wide range of issues and have used that as an excuse to shut down free speech with which they disagree. The notion of “freedom from fear” is being abused to shut down free speech.

The Powerful Institutions versus the Common Man

These same alt-left progressives have taken to the notion that large institutions like Google, Facebook, Amazon, Goldman Sachs and Walmart are inherently evil. The socialists in Congress have been looking to pass numerous laws to punish them, tax them and break them apart. While Prager sees the social media companies as liberal outlets, the left sees them as corporate thieves who helped defeat Hillary Clinton in the 2016 election.

As such, the left-wing socialists have waved the banner of support for the failing media companies who have peddled their half truths for years, arguing that they are on the front lines of democracy. (If only it were true.) But these media outlets can still write their pieces – and use the social media companies as outlets for distribution.


The big social media companies should NOT be in the fact checking business. However, they can improve upon their core distribution business by allowing people to see the source of the content placed before them and have greater control of the algorithms which tailor the content they see.

Allow people to have “freedom from fear” but not freedom from opinions of which they disagree.


Related First.One.Through articles:

Uncomfortable vs. Dangerous Free Speech

The Noose and the Nipple

Students for Justice in Palestine’s Dick Pics

The Press Are Not Guardians of the Galaxy

New York Times: “Throw the Jew Down the Well”

Ban Ki Moon Defecates on the Universal Declaration of Human Rights

Elie Wiesel on Words

Apostasy

Selective Speech

Subscribe YouTube channel: FirstOneThrough

Join Facebook group: FirstOne Through Israel Analysis

The War Against Israel and Jewish Civilians

Antisemitism has always been a problem around the world. In the United States, an average Jew is three times more likely to suffer a hate crime than an average black person, and twice as likely to be attacked as an average Muslim person. Yet the media often fails to call out the antisemitism (even while it calls out racism and highlights anti-Muslim sentiments). Americans are also much more likely to believe that there is more anti-Muslim bigotry (82%) than anti-Jewish (64%) according to a Pew Report, even though the statistics clearly indicate otherwise regarding actual hate crimes.

There is a real gap between perception and reality in both the general public and media.

Some of this difference may be due to the belief that violence is warranted in some cases and is consequently not based on discrimination.

A Gallup study showed that a society’s inclination towards violence against civilians was most directly correlated towards human development and governance. In particular, it noted a sharp increase in support for killing civilians in places with “social unrest and national instability.” Indeed, according to a Pew Report, the places with the highest support of suicide bombings against civilians are the Palestinian territories at 40% and Afghanistan at 39%. That compared to other Muslim countries of Indonesia and Iraq which are almost uniformly against suicide bombings.

The calls for the destruction of Israel and violence against Jewish civilians among Palestinian supporters are not confined to the streets of Gaza. In November 2019, Muslim protesters screamed in the center of New York’s Times Square that Israel had no right to exist and should be destroyed. They called for an “initifada” and “resistance until the end – until every inch of Palestine is free.” The celebrated “intifadas” are guerrilla wars against soft targets in Israel which have raged on and off since 1987. From 1967 until 1985 much of that guerrilla warfare happened in the international sphere, such as the Palestinian Arab assassination of U.S. Senator Robert Kennedy, the murder of athletes at the Olympics, and the hijacking of airplanes and cruise ships.

The movement to attack Jews around the world based on the solidarity with “Palestinian rights” has been gathering momentum since 2014, when Israel was last engaged in an all out war with Hamas in Gaza. At that time, thousands of people attacked Jews throughout Europe, even as the media refused to label the attacks as anti-Semitic.

In the United States, social unrest brought its own version of crimes against Jews.

Black Americans are attacking Jews in ever greater numbers, with a spike of 58% in Black-on-Jew hate crimes in 2018. Black people might view these attacks as justified and not particularly based on religious hatred, as the leader of the Nation of Islam, Louis Farrakhan said (to a standing ovation) “I’m not an anti-Semite. I’m an anti-termite.” Farrakhan and his followers believe that they are a resistance movement against the tyranny of Jewish power, and not driven by antisemitism.

This is the oxymoronic logic that festers in social unrest.


Louis Farrakhan talking about Jews
(November 2018)

Black people have no monopoly on channeling social unrest to attack Jews. The alt-right has shot Jews in synagogues and marched in the streets because they were worried that Jews were facilitating Muslim immigration into the United States, pushing White people into a minority (they fail to note that Muslims are expected to surpass the number of Jews in the U.S. by 2050, and Muslims are much more likely to be anti-Semitic than Christians according to ADL polls). Perhaps they feel that Jews are masochists.

People who feel wronged cannot recognize their own hatred, and hold their aggrieved status as a bold pardon to lawlessness. The “woke” progressive and alt-right communities demand that Jews give up their land, their wealth, their power, their privilege, their victimhood, their rights and opinions, and anything else that they deem illegal, unearned, undeserved, disproportionate or incorrect as their terms of coexistence.

Social unrest bleaches racism, and always, always comes for the Jews.


Related First.One.Through articles:

First the Attackers Were Radical Islamic Extremists

The New York Times Whitewashes Motivation of Palestinian Assassin of Robert Kennedy

The Crime, Hatred and Motivation. Antisemitism All The Same

Considering Nazis and Radical Islam on the 75th Anniversary of D-Day

Seeing the Holocaust Through Nakba Eyes

Bitter Burnt Ends: Talking to a Farrakhan Fan

Mayor De Blasio is Blind to Black Anti-Semitism

The Palestinians aren’t “Resorting to Violence”; They are Murdering and Waging War

For The NY Times, Antisemitism Exists Because the Alt-Right is Racist and Israel is Racist

Between Right-Wing and Left-Wing Antisemitism

Ramifications of Ignoring American Antisemitism

I See Dead People

The NY Times Will Not Write About the Preferred Violence of Palestinians

Linda Sarsour as Pontius Pilate

What do you Recognize in the Palestinians?

First.One.Through videos:

Palestinian Xenophobia (music by Mr. Rogers)

1001 Years of Jewish Expulsions (music from Schindler’s List)

Jews and US Foreign Policy (music by Vangelis)

Netanyahu Apology to Erdogan (music by Joe Cocker)

The UN Looks to Believe the Palestinians (music by Rod Stewart)

Judea and Samaria (music by Foo Fighters)

Subscribe YouTube channel: FirstOneThrough

Join Facebook group: FirstOne Through Israel Analysis

Jews, Judaism and Israel

There are many debates being waged around the world about whether anti-Zionism is anti-Semitism, how it is possible that some Jews may be against Israel, and why some Jews who do not believe in either God or religion are still considered Jews. This article will not tackle all of those issues but will seek to define, segment and size the nature of Jews, Judaism and Israel to better frame discussions on those topics.

Judaism

Judaism is a religion that takes the source of its teachings from the Five Books of Moses. Biblical scholars over thousands of years have interpreted the various events and commandments found in the Old Testament to frame how a Jewish person should act and live. The approaches changed over the millenia, with some sects like Sadducees, Essens and Karaites fading away while the Pharisees survived with the publication of the Talmud.

Over the last few hundred years, newer religious denominations came about including Conservative, Reform and Reconstructionist Judaism. Each adopted different approaches as to whether the Bible was written by God or was simply divinely-inspired, and how to translate the ancient stories into relevant lessons for today.

Jews

Jews are most often defined by their lineage. Abraham, the father of monotheism, is considered the first Jew in Judaism. His grandchild Jacob became known as Israel and Jacob’s sons were the basis for the twelve tribes and the nation of Israel. Jews consider themselves direct descendants of these biblical characters.

According to the Orthodox and Conservative streams of Judaism, a person’s religion is decided by matrilineal descent (the religion of the mother), while the Reform and Reconstructionist groups have a broader allowance, in that they include patrilineal descent as well. Converts are also welcomed as Jews (although they are not encouraged) and tradition maintains that the new Jews do not only take upon themselves the religion, but the ancestry of Jews as well. A convert’s new Hebrew name will be “______ son of Abraham” or “_____ daughter of Sarah” to show that they are now included as part of the heritage of Jewish peoplehood.

Israel

Judaism is a unique religion in that it has ties to a specific piece of land. The Bible clearly relays to Abraham, Isaac, Jacob and the descendants afterwards that the land of Canaan is their inheritance. The Bible describes specific commandments that can only be kept in Israel, and to this day, every Jew around the world prays facing the Temple Mount in Jerusalem, Israel.

Jews have always lived in the LAND of Israel. Indeed, they were the only religious group to move to the holy land throughout the 19th century and Jews have been a majority in the city of Jerusalem since the 1860’s, BEFORE the push for Jewish sovereignty and advent of Modern Zionism.

Jews, Judaism and Israel

Despite the intersection of Jews, Judaism and Israel, not every Jew follows the religion nor lives in Israel.

Religion and Zionism In Israel

There are roughly 14.2 million Jews alive in the world today. Of that total, roughly 6.7 million live in the Jewish State of Israel. There are another 2.3 million non-Jews that live in Israel, with a population that now exceed 9 million.

  • Religious Jews 3.4 million
  • Secular Jews 3.3 million
  • Non-Jews 2.3 million
    • Total 9.0 million people in Israel

The Pew Forum estimates that Haredi and Orthodox Jews account for 10% and 12% of Israeli Jews, respectively, with Conservatives and Secular Jews accounting for 28% and 49% of the Israeli Jewish population, respectively. Using a Venn diagram, one can plot the 3.3 million Secular Israelis as being Jews connected to the land of Israel (People + Land) but not to the Religion.

Among the religiously-affiliated Israeli Jews, the Haredi Jews are the least Zionistic, while most of the other streams are very passionate about Israel having Jewish sovereignty. The black hat/ Haredi community is less enamored with the Modern Jewish State as it is not based on Orthodox religious law and many believe that such a state should only come into being with the arrival of the Messiah.

Denomination Population% Total Zionist% Total
Haredi 10% 0.7 10%            0.1
Orthodox 12% 0.8 100%            0.8
Conservative 28% 1.9 95%            1.8
Secular 49% 3.3 90%            3.0
Total in millions 6.7 5.7

If one were to assume that only 10% of the Haredi population are Zionists and almost all of the other denominations are Zionists, roughly 1 million Jews in Israel today would not be considered ardent Zionists.

This is not an oxymoron, and goes to the nature of the confusion of different people’s opinions about Zionism. Many Jews living in Israel are against the GOVERNMENT, not the idea of Jews living in the land. Haredi Jews consider themselves anti-Zionist because they think a secular Jewish state has no legitimacy in the Jewish holy land. However, they believe very strongly that the land is the Jewish holy land and they have the right to live Israel. This is in sharp contrast to Muslim anti-Zionism around the world which believes both that the Israeli government should be destroyed and that Jews should be expelled from the land.

Diaspora Jewry on Israel and Judaism

A little more than half of world Jewry lives outside of Israel, roughly 7.5 million people. The vast majority of diaspora Jews live in the United States (over 5 million) with France, Canada and the United Kingdom accounting for over 1 million more.

The United States is a bit of an anomaly compared to Jews around the world, with strong Conservative and Reform movements. In much of the rest of the world, Jews are either Orthodox or secular. In considering the breakdown of Jews in the Venn diagram, assumptions are made for the 5.3 million Jews in the U.S. and then for the rest of the world.

America Population% Total Zionist %  Total 
Orthodox 10% 0.5 50%            0.3
Conservative 18% 1.0 70%            0.7
Reform 35% 1.9 40%            0.7
Unaffiliated 37% 2.0 20%            0.4
Total in millions 5.3 2.1

The Pew Forum estimated the breakdown of Jewish denominations in the United States and the percentages for people who consider themselves Zionists are educated guesses. The Conservative denomination is assumed to be the most pro-Israel, as the Orthodox group includes Anti-Zionist Haredi factions. Using these figures would suggest less than 40% of American Jewry is pro-Israel.

Different percentages are used in making estimates in the rest of the world, below:

ROW Population% Total Zionist %  Total 
Orthodox 25% 0.6 60%            0.3
Conservative 10% 0.2 70%            0.2
Reform 30% 0.7 40%            0.3
Unaffiliated 35% 0.8 40%            0.3
Total in millions 2.2 1.1

The figures for the 2.2 million Jews in the rest of the world are broad estimates. In some countries like France, 60% of the population is Sephardic which almost always considers itself Orthodox, even when not actively practicing Judaism. In general, the unaffiliated/ Reform account for a majority of the population.

Among the diaspora Jews outside of the U.S., Israel holds a more significant role as they suffer more discrimination and are much more likely to emigrate to the Jewish State. Using these figures – which are arguably low – approximately half of the Jews in the rest of the world would be considered active Zionists, 10% more than American Jewry.

Laying out these figures in the Venn diagram above shows that there are about 5.6 million affiliated Jews, of which roughly three-quarters are pro-Israel. This compares to approximately 8.5 million unaffiliated Jews of which only 45% are pro-Israel.

**This breakdown might be viewed by many as unfair. For example, according to Pew, 87% of American Reform Jews consider themselves only Jews through Peoplehood and not religion, while 50% of Unaffiliated Jews felt the same way. This would suggest 4.0 million Affiliated American Jews (both People and Religion) as opposed to the 1.5 million used in the chart above.**

However, the concept remains the same. There are Jews who consider themselves only Jews in the notion of peoplehood, those who consider themselves both Jews by peoplehood and religion, and further, those within each camp who consider themselves tied to Israel (whether they live there or not) and those who do not. The warring factions within the Jewish people of Zionist/anti-Zionist and Jewish anti-Semites often breakdown among these categories.


Jews, Judaism and Israel are all deeply connected yet are distinct at the same time. Before delving into the nuances related to antisemitism and anti-Zionism, it is important to understand the important interrelationship of land-government, people and religion while also acknowledging the varied preferences among Jews in how they define themselves and convey their passions.


Related First.One.Through articles:

For Liberals, It’s Israelis, Palestinians, and Indifference

Heritage, Property and Sovereignty in the Holy Land

The Non-Orthodox Jewish Denominations Fight Israel

Not Remembering, Forgetting and Never Knowing

From Promised Land to Promised Home

In Defense of Foundation Principles

An Orthodox Rabbi at the Capitol

Iran’s New Favorite Jewish Scholars

First.One.Through videos:

God is a Zionist (music by Joan Osborne)

The Green Line (music by The Kinks)

Judea and Samaria (music by Foo Fighters)

The Anthem of Israel is JERUSALEM

Subscribe YouTube channel: FirstOneThrough

Join Facebook group: FirstOne Through Israel Analysis

The Jewish Israeli Rosa Parks

On December 1, 1955, a black seamstress in Montgomery, Alabama refused to give up her seat at the front of the bus for a white man. In those days, segregation, the law that kept races apart, ruled the land. While black people were allowed on public transportation, they had to cede their seats in the front of the bus to white people. On that day 64 years ago, Rosa Parks was defiant and would not cater to the indecent law. Riots ensued, but ultimately, in 1964, the United States passed the Civil Rights Act which desegregated society.

Eight years earlier, on November 29, 1947, the United Nations General Assembly voted to partition the remaining portion of the British Mandate of Palestine (the land east of the Jordan River had previously been handed to the Hashemite Kingdom at the sole discretion of the British), into distinct Jewish and Arab states. While the vote was designed to create peace by separating the two peoples living in the land by establishing two clear majority-societies based on religion and culture, it still sought to allow the minority populations to live, pray and work in the majority-ruled lands. To minimize religious tension, the holy cities of Greater Jerusalem and Greater Bethlehem were voted to be placed under an international regime.

But the Arabs rejected the partition vote as they considered all of the land to be Arab and Muslim, and launched a war to destroy the Jewish State. At war’s end, they evicted all of the Jews from the lands they conquered, including all of the holy sites in Jerusalem, Bethlehem and Hebron. The Arabs forbade any Jew from living, praying or visiting their Jewish holy sites during their period of control from 1949 to 1967.

The Arabs would try to destroy Israel again, with the Jordanian Arabs (and Palestinian Arabs whom had been granted Jordanian citizenship) attacking Israel in 1967, losing their illegally seized lands. Under Jewish control, Israel opened up the holy sites in Jerusalem, Bethlehem and Hebron and enabled everyone – even Jews! – to visit, but they opted to maintain the ban on Jewish prayer at Judaism’s holiest locations, the Temple Mount, hoping to placate the broader Muslim and Arab worlds.

It did not.

The Arab and Muslim countries dug in deeper and turned the United Nations into a complete circus of antisemitic hate. While Palestinians began hijacking planes over the following decade, the other Arab nations advanced the political theory that Zionism was racism on November 10, 1975. After the United States finally led its repeal in December 1991, the Arab world advanced the same premise at the 2001 Durban Conference Against Racism, pushing the notion that not only should Jews be barred from living in parts of the holy land, but their refusal to acquiesce to antisemitic edicts was itself racist.

The September 2000 visit by Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon to the Temple Mount coincided with Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat’s destruction of the Oslo Accords and launch of the Second Intifada which killed thousands. Rabbi Yehuda Glick’s advocacy for Jewish prayer on the Temple Mount in October 2014 also brought Palestinian terrorist to shoot him and launch a “stabbing intifada.” As the antisemitic Hamas Charter says, “Israel, Judaism and Jews challenge Islam and the Moslem people.” The presence of Jews in Muslim lands and holy sites is considered appalling.

The United Nations joined the chorus penned by over 50 Arab and Muslim nations that Israeli Jews should not be permitted to pray on the Temple Mount, nor live east of the 1949 Armistice Lines in the Old City of Jerusalem and in the “West Bank,” the lands which the Jordanians had seized. In December 2016, the UN Security Council, with the tacit approval of the United States’ Obama administration, passed Resolution 2334 which said that banning (not even segregating!) Israeli Jews is legal, and that such people have no rights to live and work in their holy land.


Today, there are hundreds of thousands of Israeli Jewish Rosa Parks who defy the notion that laws banning Jews from natural activities which others enjoy is in any way immoral or illegal. These Jews live in Judea and Samaria, in the Old City of Jerusalem and Hebron and fight for open access and prayer at their holy sites on the Temple Mount of Jerusalem and throughout the Cave of the Jewish Patriarchs and Matriarchs in Hebron. Perhaps it is time to erect a monument for these “settlers” at the UN Plaza, much as Rosa Parks got a statue in Montgomery, AL.


Jerusalem on Sukkot, a full Kotel Plaza,
but no Jews on the Temple Mount


Related First.One.Through articles:

Tolerance at the Temple Mount

I’m Offended, You’re Dead

Active and Reactive Provocations: Charlie Hebdo and the Temple Mount

When You Understand Israel’s May 1948 Borders, You Understand There is No “Occupation”

A Native American, An African American and a Hispanic American walk into Israel…

Joint Prayer: The Cave of the Patriarchs and the Temple Mount

It is Time to Insert “Jewish” into the Names of the Holy Sites

The United Nations and Holy Sites in the Holy Land

Visitor Rights on the Temple Mount

Taking the Active Steps Towards Salvation

Israel Has Much Higher Claims to The West Bank Than Golan Heights

The EU’s Choice of Labels: “Made in West Bank” and “Anti-Semite”

Considering Carter’s 1978 Letter Claiming Settlements Are Illegal

First.One.Through videos:

The Green Line (music by The Kinks)

Judea and Samaria (music by Foo Fighters)

10 Ignored Facts about Moslem and Jewish Population in Israel (music by Seal)

Israel Provokes the Palestinians (music by The Clash)

The Anthem of Israel is JERUSALEM

Subscribe YouTube channel: FirstOneThrough

Join Facebook group: FirstOne Through Israel Analysis

The Anti-Israel Community in a Jewish House of Worship

On November 26, 2019, a progressive Reform Temple in Westchester County, New York brought together a collection of people from the far-left and anti-Israel community to talk about the situation in “Israel/Palestine.” The discussion was civil and disappointing.

The Israel Action Committee of the Temple Israel of New Rochelle put together the event with “Friends of Mossawa,” an organization based in Tarrytown, NY which claims to fight for equality in Israel, and the United Nations, an organization which claims to be a unifying agency for people all over the world. As the evening demonstrated, what unites these parties is their strong distaste for Israel.

The speakers included Laura Wharton, a left-wing, anti-Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu member of Jerusalem’s City Council; Rana Abu Farha, a host on the Palestinian run Ma’an 24 news show; and Hanan Al Sanah, a representative of an NGO in the Negev which advocates for Bedouin women. It was moderated by Paul Warhit, President of the Westchester Jewish Council.

Hanan Al Sanah, Rana Abu Farha, Laura Wharton and Paul Warhit at TINR
November 26, 2019
From the outset, the tone of the two hour evening discussion was clearly not going to follow the script as laid out in the invitationThe Lived Reality in Israel and the Palestinian Territory: Current Political Developments and the Prospects for a Peaceful Settlement of the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict.” The members of the TINR clergy and Israel Action Committee who welcomed the fifty-person audience repeatedly referred to “Israel/Palestine,” and not the “Palestinian Territory,” upgrading the PA-ruled lands to an actual country. They also noted that one of the evenings invited speakers, Ali Ghaith, an “activist and freelance journalist” was not able to attend as he had recently written a negative piece about Netanyahu and was therefore not able to get a travel visa from Israel. Various people in the audience booed Israel’s actions.

The Left-Wing Israeli Politician

Wharton began the discussion stating that she has “complete solidarity with the Palestinian people” and would state later that she is both pro-Israel and pro-Palestine. Her comments during the evening really only proved the latter.

Even though she serves as a member of the Jerusalem’s City Council, she was woefully ignorant of the city’s composition stating that only about 2,000 Jews live in “East Jerusalem,” even though the actual number is over 200,000 in the eastern part of the city.

Wharton was particularly worried about mixed Arab-Jewish neighborhoods in Jerusalem. She said that it was “worrisome that more Israelis are moving into Palestinian neighborhoods,” especially right-wing Israelis. She said that Jerusalem will ultimately need to be divided as part of a peace agreement and the Jewish presence among the Palestinians made that separation harder. She voiced her belief that the Jewish Quarter and the Western Wall should remain in Israeli hands, but the balance of East Jerusalem should be part of Palestine, with Christian holy places under the jurisdiction of the United Nations.

Wharton believed that the problems in Jerusalem paled relative to the West Bank. She commented that the settlements are illegal by international law and many are also illegal under Israeli law. She believed that all of the settlements complicated matters significantly by placing Jewish towns alongside Arab towns. Neither she nor the moderator chose to mention how Jews and Arabs get along just fine in Haifa, the headquarters of Mossawa.

Wharton ended her remarks by stating that she supported the B.D.S. movement of Israeli goods made in the West Bank but urged people in the audience to not boycott Israel in its entirety, as it silenced the voices of the dovish Israelis like herself and gave ammunition to the right-wing.

The Anti-Israel Palestinian Newscaster

Rana made Laura’s pro-B.D.S. comments look tame.

She decried the “occupation” throughout her remarks, stating that the over 130 Israeli settlements consisting of 1 million Jews pushed 2.5 million Palestinians to live in “ghettos.” (The actual number of Jews in the West Bank is half that number). She said that Netanyahu went to war in Gaza the other week because he feared he was losing the election so thought it would help to kill Arab civilians to excite the Israeli public. She added that the entire notion that Israel is democratic is a joke, and that it just holds election as a marketing ploy to the western world that it shares democratic ideals when it is really just a racist colonial occupier. The moderator chose not to push back aggressively on these libels.

The Palestinian newscaster went on that she thought that every single settler must leave the West Bank and that all 6 million Palestinian refugees (there are actually 5.5 million registered with UNRWA) should be allowed to move to Israel. When asked by Warhit how Israel could possibly allow 6 million Arabs into the country to overwhelm the Jews, she simply stated that “it’s their land so it’s their choice.” The members of the UN and Friends of Mossawa who sat in the audience grunted their approval. Warhit could only summon that he appreciated her position about getting rid of the settlements but could not imagine Israel allowing 6 million Arabs into the country. The TINR organizer of the event admonished Warhit to not share his opinion and just get the panel talking.

The Bedouin Arab

Compared to the other people on stage, Hanan was actually quite good, even while her English was the weakest. She said that she considered herself an Israeli but was frustrated by the country’s lack of investment in the Bedouin community and Israel’s refusal to allow them to live in their traditional lifestyle. At the same time, she acknowledged that she was also frustrated by her own Bedouin traditional lifestyle that kept women illiterate and as second-class citizens. She was advocating for change in the Bedouin culture to empower women, but for more of the traditional status quo from the Israelis to not force them to move into conventional cities.

End Points

The Q&A at the end of the panel discussion was mostly a repeat of prior comments. When asked about the Palestinian and left-wing Israeli poll in the summer of 2018 that showed that almost all Israeli Arabs were in favor of capping the number of refugees coming to Israel and in favor of Israel’s Nation State Law, the denials began to flow.

The questioner was first directed by the panelists to call Israeli Arabs as “Palestinian Citizens of Israel” and told that the poll figures must be wrong. Both Laura and Rana mentioned the huge protests in the streets after the Knesset passed the law which undermined the poll’s statistics. Wharton considered the poll’s point of Israeli Arabs wanting to cap refugees as perhaps stemming from Palestinian Arab viewpoint of Israeli Arabs as collaborators with Israel while they suffered in refugee camps. Rana effectively ignored the question and repeated that all of the Palestinians have a natural right to return to their homes (or more accurately, grandparents’ homes).

At program’s end, when Rana was asked how many Jews she thought could live in a Palestinian State, she repeated that every settlement had to be removed. Pushed further if she would accept a situation in which every Israeli soldier left the land, and every Jewish civilian in the West Bank opted to become a Palestinian citizen, she reiterated her stance that no settlers could remain. When challenged as to why she would take such an antisemitic stance to forbid any Jew from living in a Palestinian State, the organizer of the event from TINR jumped in and said “don’t put words in her mouth” and then tried to escort her out of the room.


Temple Israel of New Rochelle is proud of its progressive bona fides. Its rabbi serves on the board of J Street (a left-wing Israel advocacy group), Planned Parenthood, and Rabbis for Human Rights. It was therefore not surprising to see such a progressive organization give a warm welcome to people advocating for a boycott of Jews in the West Bank, expulsion of all the Jews living there, and changing Israel into a bi-national state. Such is the state of progressive views about Israel today.


Related First.One.Through articles:

A Disservice to Jewish Community

Rick Jacobs’ Particular Reform Judaism

Unity – not Unanimity – in the Pro-Israel Tent

There are Standards for Unity

Arabs in Jerusalem

The Fault in Our Tent: The Limit of Acceptable Speech

The Reform Movement’s Rick Jacobs Has no Understanding of Tolerance

J Street is Only Considered “Pro-Israel” in Progressive Circles

On Heretics and Slanderers

The Non-Orthodox Jewish Denominations Fight Israel

Fake Definitions: Pluralism and Progressive / Liberalism

In Defense of Foundation Principles

J Street is a Partisan Left-Wing Group, NOT an Alternative to AIPAC

J Street: Going Bigger and Bolder than BDS

First.One.Through videos:

The Green Line (music by The Kinks)

Judea and Samaria (music by Foo Fighters)

10 Ignored Facts about Moslem and Jewish Population in Israel (music by Seal)

Israel Provokes the Palestinians (music by The Clash)

The Anthem of Israel is JERUSALEM

Subscribe YouTube channel: FirstOneThrough

Join Facebook group: FirstOne Through Israel Analysis

Trump Reverses the Carter and Obama Anti-Israel UN Resolutions

The United Nations is a group of 193 countries of various sizes, races, religions and political philosophies. From the time the UN was created in 1945 as an outgrowth of the League of Nations until today, the total number of member countries has swelled, mostly with monarchies, dictatorships and authoritarian regimes. As such, votes in the UN General Assembly are often at odds with decency and freedom, such as the 1975 “Zionism is Racism” resolution.

To counteract the world circus, the UN established the UN Security Council which was chaired by world powers to “lead” in matters of security. Regrettably, the makeup of the council’s five permanent representatives from the United States, Russia, China, France and the United Kingdom already included two non-Democratic countries. Depending on the makeup of the additional five rotating members in the UNSC, it was often left for the United States to be the sole voice of logic, reason and empathy.

Those voices of reason and decency were absent when the two most left-wing US presidents sat in office: Jimmy Carter (1977-1981) and Barack Obama (2009-2017).

Anti-Jewish Jerusalem Resolutions Under Carter

While anti-rational anti-Israel UNGA resolutions started soon after Israel took lands in its defensive war in June 1967, the anti-Jewish nature of the UNSC resolutions gained credibility and momentum in 1980 under the watch of President Carter.

As Israel prepared to annex the eastern part of Jerusalem which had been illegally annexed by Jordan in 1950, and declare the city Israel’s undivided capital on July 30, 1980, the UN Security Council began to pass resolutions attacking the move in harsh language.

The March 1, 1980 UNSC Resolution 465 stated (incorrectly) that:

  • the Fourth Geneva Convention related to Israelis moving into Jerusalem. It was nothing of the sort. Jews have been a majority in Jerusalem since the 1860’s and were expelled from the eastern part of the city by the invading Jordanians. Jerusalem was designated by the UN in 1947 to be an internationally-administered city, a “corpus separatum,” not part of another country to which the Geneva Convention applies.
  • As noted above, Jerusalem was neither a Palestinian nor Arab territory as “deplored” in the UNSC resolution.
  • The comment that the UN cared about Jerusalem’s “need for protection and preservation of the unique spiritual and religious dimension of the Holy Places in the city,” when it did nothing about the Jordanian expulsion of the Jews, annexation of the city and refusal to allow Jews to enter, pray or live in the city was insulting, disgusting and reeked of Jew-hatred.
  • Further calling for all Jews to be evicted from Jerusalem to reestablish the “demographic composition” of the purely Arab Old City which the Jordanians had created and enforced, blessed the Muslim antisemitism.

And the United States under Carter let such vile resolution pass, as it did a few months later on June 30 when the UNSC passed Resolution 476 which called on the entire world to join in on the antisemitic edict as it sought to enforce its ban on Jews in the city.

On December 6, 2017 President Trump marked the United States objection to and rejection of the UNSC resolutions and recognized the fact that Jerusalem is the capital of Israel and soon moved the US embassy to the city.

Anti-Jewish Judea and Samaria Resolution Under Obama

In the waning days of the Obama administration, the anti-Israel voices inside the White House and the United Nations pulled together anti-fact anti-Israel UN Security Resolution 2334.

  • The UN resolution’s use of the term “Palestinian Territory occupied since 1967” is interesting nomenclature. The UN does not recognize Palestine as an official country. Does the resolution refer to Armistice Lines that Israel agreed to with Jordan (not Palestine)? Does it refer to incremental land that Israel took beyond the 1947 Partition Plan up to those Armistice Lines?
  • The resolution again “condemned” the shift in the “demographic composition” of that “Palestinian Territory including East Jerusalem.” Too many Jews. Too many Jews. Too many Jews. Too cynical? Do you think that the resolution was concerned that the Arab population grew four-fold from 1967 to 2017? I don’t think so.
  • The presence of those Jews was deemed a threat to “the viability of the two-State solution based on the 1967 lines.” While past resolutions were only concerned about arriving at a peace agreement, now the contours of the peace agreement which was theoretically to be negotiated between the Israelis and Palestinian Arabs themselves, now had a predetermined outcome. So why negotiate at all?
  • If the presence of Jews threatened the existence of an Palestinian state, does the presence of Arabs threaten Israel? If so, the UN’s declaration that Palestinian refugees should be moved into Israel is a direct threat to the viability and existence of a member state of the UN, a war crime.
  • The resolution declared definitively that any place in which an Israeli Jew lives beyond the June 4, 1967 lines has “no legal validity
  • Significantly called on the entire world to actively “distinguish, in their relevant dealings, between the territory of the State of Israel and the territories occupied since 1967” in a move not seen in any disputed territory around the world.

This last statement enabled the UN to compile a “blacklist” of companies operating in the Israeli territory of Area C (which was agreed to by the Palestinian Authority in the Oslo Accords). So on November 12, 2019, the European Union declared that labeling products made in Area C had to have a distinct label than items produced in Israel.

Not a week later, it was time for the Trump Administration to respond in kind.

On November 18, 2019 the Trump Administration marked the United States objection to UNSC Resolution 2334 and stated that Israeli civilian settlements are NOT illegal and do NOT hamper peace.

President Trump has sought to reverse the terrible damage done by the Carter and Obama administrations at the United Nations with its overtly anti-Jewish resolutions, by standing proudly and defending the Jewish State. Hopefully other countries will follow.


President Trump visiting the Western Wall in Jerusalem,
the first sitting U.S. president to visit the site, in May 2017


Related First.One.Through articles:

President Herod

The Legal Israeli Settlements

When You Understand Israel’s May 1948 Borders, You Understand There is No “Occupation”

Anti-“Settlements” is Anti-Semitism

Republicans Do Not Believe There is Any “Occupation”

The Arguments over Jerusalem

Enduring Peace versus Peace Now

First.One.Through videos:

The Green Line (music by The Kinks)

The Anthem of Israel is JERUSALEM

Subscribe YouTube channel: FirstOneThrough

Join Facebook group: FirstOne Through Israel Analysis

 

President Herod

There once was a mad king who lived in Judea in the first century BCE who was one of the greatest builders in the holy land. His second coming may be here.

U.S. President Donald Trump has never been shy about taking claim for accomplishments. In his remarks about the trade war with China, he referred to himself as “the chosen one,” which many people thought was akin to anointing himself as the Messiah, as the Jews are commonly known as “the chosen people.” A more apt comparison might be to a particular king in Judea from 2,000 years ago.

Like King Herod (73 – 4 BCE), Trump is an accomplished builder. Herod built the expanded Temple Mount to enable better flow of thousands of Jews to the Second Temple in Jerusalem, aqueducts in Caesarea, the large edifice atop the Cave of the Jewish Patriarchs in Hebron and many other buildings across the holy land. For his part, Trump has built numerous buildings in New York City and around the world. In addition to those buildings which he financed, there are many others which bear his name.

In addition to their real estate bona fides and reaching political stardom, both Herod and Trump have been characterized as paranoid madmen. Herod had many people close to him killed, including his wife and her sons; Trump has preferred to off people on Twitter who do not show complete loyalty.

But more than anything else, Donald Trump may earn the title of President Herod for continuing to fortify Jewish permanence in their holy land.

Just as Herod was able to secure more lands for Judea from his patrons in Rome, Trump has recognized Israel’s capital in Jerusalem, its rule in the Golan Heights, and on November 18, 2019, the natural and acceptable existence of Jewish homes throughout Judea and Samaria, in contrast to the United Nations which labeled them as illegal (with the tacit nod from former President Obama).


President Trump visiting the Western Wall in Jerusalem,
the first sitting U.S. president to visit the site, in May 2017

For those people excited about the various efforts of Trump on behalf of the Jewish State, history shows that celebrations can be short-lived. The Jewish Temple was destroyed in 70 CE, only seven years after the Temple Mount complex was completed. Just sixty-five years later after the failed Bar Kochba revolt, the Romans expelled the Jews and renamed Judea as Syria Palestina, thoroughly weakening the Jewish people and their presence in their homeland. Herod’s glorious buildings remained, but were assumed by pagan and Arab interlopers over the following centuries.

Donald Trump knows that to make an enduring mark in history, he can forge a peace agreement in Israel when so many others have failed, and/or he can further help build the Jewish State. While he hopes to achieve both, he is not waiting on the latter and is actively supporting America’s ally.

Trump may have picked the “chosen one” moniker for himself, but others may begin to refer to him as President Donald Herod.


Related First.One.Through articles:

The Legal Israeli Settlements

When You Understand Israel’s May 1948 Borders, You Understand There is No “Occupation”

Anti-“Settlements” is Anti-Semitism

Republicans Do Not Believe There is Any “Occupation”

Marking November 29 as The International Day of Solidarity with Jews Living East of the Green Line

The “Diplomatic Settler”

The Recognition Catch Up

Enduring Peace versus Peace Now

The Arguments over Jerusalem

The Three Camps of Ethnic Cleansing in the BDS Movement

Israel Plans to Build in Israeli Territory. It’s News

Heritage, Property and Sovereignty in the Holy Land

The Evil Architects at J Street Take a Bow

Palestinian Jews and a Judenrein Palestine

First.One.Through videos:

The Green Line (music by The Kinks)

The Anthem of Israel is JERUSALEM

Subscribe YouTube channel: FirstOneThrough

Join Facebook group: FirstOne Through Israel Analysis

 

Black Hate Crimes of 2018

The FBI released its annual report of Hate Crimes for 2018 this week. It’s always a sad report to learn about the number of attacks committed against people for who they are, whether for their race, religion or sexual orientation. These are crimes between complete strangers, who simply attack other people because of bias.

Once again, crimes committed based on racial hatred were the most common, followed by religion. Once again, attacks against blacks were the most frequent and assaults on Jews were the most common for religious-based crimes. Those items received the headlines in the media.

What was not covered was that an average Jew was almost three times as likely to be attacked as an average black person (896 attacks against a Jewish population of 5.4 million compared to 2,325 attacks against roughly 40.5 million black people). The news also didn’t cover that Hispanics continue to commit the fewest number of hate crimes, even while they are trending upwards (committing 7.5% of all hate crimes in 2018, up from 6.0% in 2016, even though they account for close to 17% of the population).

More disturbing, was the enormous increase in hate crimes committed by black Americans.

While the number of total hate crimes in 2017 jumped by 15%, driven by a 20% spike in hate crimes committed by white people, the 2018 statistics were vastly different. The total number of hate crimes increased by just 1%, but hate crimes by black people jumped an astounding 32%. The most significant was the spike of black hate crimes committed against Jews, jumping 58% compared to 2017. Overall, black hate crimes account for 29.0% of all hate crimes, up from 25.4% in 2017, even though blacks account for just 12.3% of the total population.


Black gang in Brooklyn, NY attacking synagogue

Is black antisemitism on the rise because of the vile speeches of Nation of Islam’s Louis Farrakhan? From the BlackLivesMatter platform that vilified the Jewish State as participating in apartheid? That the mayor of New York (who is married to a black woman) decided to ignore black antisemitism, where an average Jew is 13 times more likely to be the victim of a hate crime than an average black person? That progressives have embraced the notion of intersectionality and joined forced with radical black and Muslim voices in attacking Jews as part of the white elite establishment which must be torn down?

Eleven Jews were murdered in the United States in 2018, just for being Jewish, compared to four black people and three white people killed for the color of their skin. There were four times the number of anti-Jewish attacks as anti-Muslim. But the media will tell you that ‘Islamophobia’ is the major problem while the candidates for president solely focus on racism against blacks.

There was a time when blacks and Jews stood together against hatred and when black leaders celebrated the Jewish State. But those days seems to be long gone, with only a few voices like Chloe Valdary raising their voices in support of Jews and the Jewish State, and clearly rebuking antisemitism.

The black and Muslim progressive alliance may not only be pushing America against the Jewish State; it may be also be encouraging blacks to attack American Jews.


Related FirstOneThrough articles:

Don Lemon, Here are Some Uncomfortable Facts about Hate Crimes in America

Farrakhan’s Democrats

Examining Ilhan Omar’s Point About Muslim Antisemitism

Ilhan Omar Isn’t Debating Israeli Policy, She is Attacking Americans

Bitter Burnt Ends: Talking to a Farrakhan Fan

Anti-Semitism Is Harder to Recognize Than Racism

I See Dead People

Black People are Homophobic

Covering Racism

Where’s the March Against Anti-Semitism?

Fact Check Your Assumptions on American Racism

NY Times Discolors Hate Crimes

Leading Gay Activists Hate Religious Children

Ramifications of Ignoring American Antisemitism

Subscribe YouTube channel: FirstOneThrough

Join Facebook group: Israel Analysis and FirstOneThrough

Pakistan’s Muslim Leader Cannot Address Fellow Muslim Leaders

The leader of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, Prime Minister Imran Khan, took to the floor of the United Nations for almost an hour in September 2019. He covered four principle areas, including “Islamophobia” and the conflict in Kashmir. He shared his thoughts and observations and asked the western world and the United Nations to take particular actions; actions he did not consider for fellow Muslim leaders.

Pakistani President Imran Khan at United Nations, September 2019
(photo: AFP)
Consider his remarks about Islamophobia which he claimed came into being after the terrorist attacks of 9/11/2001. At 23:27 of the speech he said:

In the western society, and quite rightly, the Holocaust is treated with sensitivity, because it gives the Jewish community pain. That’s all we ask. Do not use freedom of speech to cause us pain by insulting our holy prophet.”

Nazi Germany’s butchering of one-third of the world’s Jews is “rightly… treated with sensitivity” in the western world. But it is not treated with any sensitivity in the Muslim world.

The Islamic Republic of Iran has been hosting Holocaust cartoon contests since 2005, shortly after Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s inauguration as president. The contests have continued after he left office, including a contest in 2016 which awarded $50,000 towards the top three winners.

Palestinian Arabs elected Mahmoud Abbas to the presidency of the Palestinian Authority in 2005. Abbas wrote his doctoral thesis on Holocaust denial. For its part, Abbas’s rival political party Hamas, a designated foreign terrorist organization, has a charter lifted from the anti-Semitic forgery the Protocols of the Elders of Zion. In Hamas’s enclave in Gaza, it refuses to allow the United Nations to teach about the Holocaust in UNRWA schools.

And while Pakistan’s leader was asking the western world to use the same care in talking about the Islamic prophet as it does in talking about the Holocaust, the Prime Minister of Malaysia was spitting Holocaust denial uptown at Columbia University.

Khan did not care about reciprocal respect, common courtesies or similar sensitivities. He knew that Muslim leaders would never insult the Islamic prophet, and narrowly addressed his remarks to the non-Muslim world, even when he fully understood that the Muslim world offered no comparable concern for Jews.

The hajj of hypocrisy at the United Nations would continue.

The main focus of Khan’s remarks were about the disputed territory of Kashmir. At 47:47 he said:

What is the world community going to do? Is it to appease the market of 1.2 billion [people in India] or is it going to stand up for justice and humanity? If this goes wrong – you hope for the best but be prepared for the worst – if a conventional war starts between the two countries, anything could happen. But supposing, a country seven times smaller than its neighbor is faced with a choice: either you surrender or you fight for your freedom until death, what would we do? I ask myself this question. And my belief is that there is no God but one. And we will fight. And when a nuclear armed country fights to the end, it will have consequences far beyond the borders. It will have consequences for the world… This is a test for the United Nations. You are the ones who guaranteed the people of Kashmir the rights of self-determination.”

The words were unmistakable: the Pakistani leader urged the United Nations to take action to protect the people of Kashmir, or the outnumbered people of Pakistan would resort to using nuclear weapons against India, and maybe elsewhere.

But how did Pakistan and the United Nations react in early 1967, when the leaders of the Arab Muslim world threatened to wipe Israel off of the map? The population in Egypt was 32.5 million, in Syria 5.7 million, and in Jordan 1.4 million, a combined total that was 14 times the Israeli population of 2.75 million, or twice the disparity between India and Pakistan today.

During the Six Day War, Pakistan sent members of its air force to fight alongside its Muslim brothers, despite its overwhelming numerical superiority. To clear a pathway for the genocide of the Jews, the United Nations pulled its UNEF observer force from the Sinai peninsula and Gaza in May 1967 at the urging and direction of Egypt. Both the UN and Pakistan participated in the stated goal of destroying the nascent Jewish State, not two decade post the Holocaust.

The leader of Pakistan was no doubt sincere about his long-winded requests and warnings before the United Nations. His hypocrisy was equally as true.


Related First.One.Through articles:

Mahmoud Abbas’s Particular Anti-Zionist Holocaust Denial

Seeing the Holocaust Through Nakba Eyes

Palestinians of Today and the Holocaust

Extreme and Mainstream. Germany 1933; West Bank & Gaza Today

Pick Your Jihad; Choose Your Infidel

Abbas’ European Audience for His Rantings

Considering Nazis and Radical Islam on the 75th Anniversary of D-Day

Both Israel and Jerusalem are Beyond Recognition for Muslim Nations

I’m Offended, You’re Dead

Blasphemy OR Terrorism

Reuters Can’t Spare Ink on Iranian Anti-Semitism

Active and Reactive Provocations: Charlie Hebdo and the Temple Mount

Blessing Islamophobia

Subscribe YouTube channel: FirstOneThrough

Join Facebook group: Israel Analysis and FirstOneThrough