Anti-“Settlements” is Anti-Semitism

Consider this scenario:

There are three houses on a street in Silwan in eastern Jerusalem, two for sale. One is purchased by an Israeli Arab from Haifa and another by an Israeli Jew from Tel Aviv. The third is owned by an Arab who decides to finally take Israeli citizenship, an offer that had been outstanding for decades.

  • The Palestinian Authority welcomes the Arab purchase, but will sentence to death the person who sold the house to the Jew. It will ignore the Arab who became an Israeli.
  • The United Nations has no issue with the Arab’s purchase or taking Israeli citizenship, but considers the Jew’s purchase illegal.
  • The Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (B.D.S.) movement appreciates that the Arab purchase maintains the “Arab character” of Silwan, put demonizes the Jew’s purchase as an obstacle to peace. No opinion about the Arab become an Israeli.
  • Airbnb will list the homes of the new Arab owner and the Israeli Arab on its website but will donate any profit from the Jewish owner’s listing.

Those blatant antisemitic actions are the not only reality today, but are celebrated by Islamic extremists and are being mainstreamed by the alt-left. Rather than loudly calling out the vile Jew-hatred, people are loudly calling for more.


The neighborhood of Silwan in eastern Jerusalem,
founded by Yemenite Jews in the late 19th century

(photo: First.One.Through)

After the Jordanians attacked Israel in 1948 and ethnically cleansed all Jews from the west bank of the Jordan River and eastern Jerusalem, the Arab world celebrated. The Jordanians annexed the region in a move not accepted by almost every country on the world and then granted citizenship to anyone who wasn’t a Jew in 1954.

When B.D.S supporters call out for the “good old days,” this is what they seek to reestablish – those Jew-free days between 1949 and 1967. That’s the reality which the United Nations wants to recreate when it makes statements that every Jew has no rights to live east of the Green Line.

How has it not occurred to people that the statement that “settlements are an obstacle to peace,” stems from the noxious antisemitism of Palestinians demanding a Jew-free country?


Does Airbnb believe that coexistence means condoning Palestinian Authority’s laws
which call for killing people who sell homes to Jews?


Related First.One.Through articles:

The Long History of Dictating Where Jews Can Live Continues

The Legal Israeli Settlements

Real and Imagined Laws of Living in Silwan

Obama supports Anti-Semitic Palestinian Agenda of Jew-Free State

No Jews Allowed in Palestine

The United Nations Bias Between Jews and Palestinians Regarding Property Rights

The Three Camps of Ethnic Cleansing in the BDS Movement

The Israeli Peace Process versus the Palestinian Divorce Proceedings

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

BDS is a Movement by Radical Islamists and Far-Left Progressives to Block Your Freedoms

Abbas’s Speech and the Window into Antisemitism and Anti-Zionism

The “Diplomatic Settler”

Related First.One.Through videos:

Judea and Samaria (music by Foo Fighters)

The 1967 “Borders” (music by The Kinks)

Subscribe YouTube channel: FirstOneThrough

Join Facebook group: FirstOne Through Israel Analysis and FirstOneThrough

Advertisements

The Debate About Two States is Between Arabs Themselves and Jews Themselves

The common refrain surrounding the Arab-Israeli Conflict is that the Israelis and Arabs need to find a compromise solution that will work for both parties. People on the left believe that Israel, as the entity which is much stronger than the Palestinian Authority, must make the majority of that compromise. For those on the right, Israel is the smaller party that has always been under attack by the surrounding Arab and Muslim world, and therefore will demand that Arabs must make significant concessions.

This viewpoint is valid in concept, but lacks any nuance to capture the situation as it exists today. In reality, it is the Palestinian Arabs themselves and the Israelis themselves who are torn on the path towards an enduring peace. Until each party can arrive at a consensus internally, the only bridge with consensus regarding a two state solution is found between the Palestinian Authority leadership and far left progressive Jews; a failed partnership, as the PA is despised by the Arab masses and fellow Jews in Israel and the diaspora consider the progressives a dangerous fringe group, as discussed below.

The Arabs

The Palestinian Arabs have three distinct viewpoints regarding the conflict, and a fourth approach among Israelis Arabs who share some commonality with Jews.

  1. Hamas. Hamas has no interest in a two-state solution as they believe that Israel has no right to exist. While it may make some short-term accommodations related to a cease-fire or an interim acceptance for a two-state solution, the concept of an enduring peace between two countries is abhorrent to Hamas and all of its supporters.
  2. The Palestinian Authority. The PA is a corrupt and inept kleptocracy which seeks a two-state solution to empower and enrich themselves. It has stated it will make the great “compromise” of not demanding the entirety of Israel as part of its state and “very reasonably” demand that its country be stripped of any Jews while refusing to accept Israel as a Jewish State. From such perch, the PA flies around the world with honor, pomp and circumstance while fattening their bellies as foreign nations pour money into the wallets of its leadership.
  3. The Palestinians. The Palestinian Arabs have no interest in a two-state solution according to their own polls, even if they get everything which the PA demands. They are fed up with everybody – the PA, Hamas, the Israelis and the Arab world which has forgotten about them. They view any and every deal with deep distrust.

This is not very promising. The only Palestinians who want the two-state solution today is a leadership which has no legitimacy as it is ten years past its stated term limit, and the majority of Palestinians want the acting leadership to resign.

A softer position in the Arab world which is closer to the Jewish positions on two states is held by Israeli Arabs.

Israeli Arabs. The Israeli Arabs are eager for a two state solution which looks very different than what the PA has proposed. They want NO RETURN of any Palestinian refugees into Israel. They want Israel to be recognized as the nation state of the Jewish people. They demand institutions that are transparent and devoid of any fraud – all desires which the PA will not accept.


Arabs in the Old City of Jerusalem
(photo: First.One.Through)

The wide range of opinions regarding a two state-solution is not limited to Arabs, as Jews also have their own spectrum of ideas.

The Jews

  1. The Far Right. Israel has a number of political parties including Yisrael Beiteinu, United Right (each with 5 seats in the new Knesset), Zehut and the New Right (which got zero seats in the 2019 election) who support annexing Judea and Samaria/ the area east of the Green Line (EGL) commonly called the “West Bank.” The extent of Palestinian “sovereignty” would be limited to Gaza which will be denied any standing army, and essential be an entity with autonomy but will likely need to be a territory of either Egypt, Jordan or Qatar. Israel would likely never permit it to be aligned with Turkey.
  2. The Right. Is represented by the majority Likud party and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. It is in favor of annexing blocs of the West Bank such as the Gush Etzion area and Maale Adumim, but would give the Palestinian Authority large sections of the West Bank where the majority of Palestinian Arabs live including Areas A and B and parts of Area C. There would be no admittance of any Stateless Arabs from Palestine (SAPs). Good news is that the Israelis just held elections so there is clarity that this is the majority consensus view.
  3. The Left.The left is represented by the Blue and White party which came in second in the Israel elections. They would allow as many as 100,000 SAPs into Israel as part of a peace deal and give virtually the entirety of the West Bank and eastern Jerusalem to the PA. A bit further to the left in Israel are the Labor and Meretz parties in Israel (6 and 4 seats, respectively) and in the diaspora in groups like J Street and the Israel Policy Forum who oppose the notion of Israel as the Nation State of the Jewish people.
  4. The Far Left. Believes that Israel should cease to exist as a Jewish State. They advocate for folding all of Israel, the West Bank and Gaza into a bi-national state with no special rights or privileges for Jews. Essentially the Hamas platform, without the murder of Jews, but with all of the demonization. There is virtually no one in Israel with such views, but is in vocal extremist diaspora organizations like Jewish Voice for Peace, the New Israel Fund and Code Pink.

Lining up the groups against each other reveals interesting bedfellows between Arabs and Jews:

  • Hamas <> JVP/ Code Pink
  • the PA <> Labor/ J Street
  • Israeli Arabs <> Likud/ Republican Jewish Coalition
  • some Israeli Arabs <> Yisrael Beiteinu/ the New Right
  • The Palestinians <> everyone who has given up hope for any solution

Hamas, JVP, Code Pink, Students for Justice in Palestine and similar groups have tried to gain legitimacy in the public sphere. Former US President Jimmy Carter blessed Hamas despite its vile antisemitic charter and the United Nations has sought to fold it into the Palestinian Authority. Groups like SJP are getting awards on college campuses like New York University. These are hate groups and should be condemned and boycotted by everyone who wants to see an enduring peace in the Middle East. They will never be accepted by any Israeli administration forging a peace settlement, and will only make Israelis move further rightward.

J Street and progressives around the world have been reaching out to the PA as the best chance for peace. However, the PA is despised and disrespected by Palestinians. Until there are legitimate Palestinian elections, reaching out to the PA is a fool’s errand. Most Jews and conservatives see through the chimera and think J Street’s moves to weaken Israel and go against the Israeli government by advancing condemnations at the United Nations and promoting a deeply flawed Iranian nuclear deal are dangerous and divisive. The liberal media mostly follows this narrative and will promote the PA as “moderate” which is counter-factual and J Street as “mainstream” which is liberal wishful thinking. However, if they can tack towards the center instead of continuing to lurch leftward, perhaps they can be part of forging an enduring solution instead of today’s alt-left miasma.

For their part, Israeli Arabs and Likud consider the past decade a tremendous success. While the neighboring region had wars killing nearly a million people in Iraq, Syria, Yemen and other countries; with millions of war refugees scattered around the world; military coups taking over Egypt and almost Turkey; and heads of state chopped off in Libya, Israel was relatively calm. When the financial markets took the western world into an abyss, Israel emerged unscathed and its economy boomed. Riding the status quo has worked, and selectively extending that secret sauce with more global partnerships and annexing blocs of the West Bank are logical next steps.

However, the masses are unhappy. The lack of self-determination for the SAPs is not in anyone’s interest and everyone should want to see a resolution to their status. But with no consensus between the Arabs themselves and Israelis themselves, there is little hope for an enduring peace anytime soon.

It may therefore be time for some Israeli Arabs to assume a leadership role in the negotiations to help both the Arabs and Jews each reach a centrist consensus among themselves, and then ultimately with each other.


Israeli Arab women entering the Western Wall Plaza
(Photo: FirstOneThrough)


Related First.One.Through articles:

The Israeli Peace Process versus the Palestinian Divorce Proceedings

“Peace” According to Palestinian “Moderates”

The Only Precondition for MidEast Peace Talks

The Time Factor in the Israeli-Arab Conflict

The Hebron Narratives: Is it the Presence of Jews or the Israeli Military

Subscribe YouTube channel: FirstOneThrough

Join Facebook group: FirstOne Through Israel Analysis and FirstOneThrough

 

 

The Jews of Jerusalem In Situ

The Cambridge Dictionary defines the term “in situ” as “in the original place, or the place where something should be,” or, alternatively, “in the original place instead of being moved to another place.” In the world of archaeology, there is nothing more valuable than finding an object “in situ” as it gives the ancient room, building and town where the object was found, important context in both time and purpose. Unfortunately, due to ancient sites being raided for centuries, most historical finds are traded in the black market, destroying the ability to accurately relay the provenance of the object and the story of the place from which it was taken.

However, last week the world was blessed by two remarkable discoveries in the City of David, just south of the Old City of Jerusalem’s external walls, of ancient Jewish objects found in situ.

In the ruins of what is currently thought to be a large municipal building dating back to the 6th or 7th century BCE, was a clay seal bearing the inscription “LeNathan-Melech Eved HaMelech – which translates to “[belonging] to Nathan-Melech, Servant of the King.” Such servant to the king is mentioned in the Hebrew Bible in 2 Kings 23:11.

The second item is a blue agate seal saying “LeIkar Ben Matanyahu” – “(belonging) to Ikar son of Matanyahu.”

Finding these two items in their original location is a blessing and curse for many. For those people who enjoy learning about history, these ancient Jewish finds in what is believed to be the original capital of the unified kingdom of Israel under King David is considered an important piece of the puzzle to understanding the location and way of life of the Jewish people in Jerusalem thousands of years ago. However, for those people who want to see modern Jews evicted from Jerusalem in favor of Arabs, the findings present an obstacle in convincing Jews that they should abandon their history and religion.

Like the finding of the seal of King Hezkiah in Jerusalem in December 2015, and the burnt remains of a Torah scroll found in a synagogue in Ein Gedi, these findings attest to the long history of Jews living throughout the area east of the Green Line. Arab news sites like Al Jazeera refuse to print any of these stories, in an effort to continue to lie to its readership about the history of the Jews in the holy land which predates Islam by thousands of years.

The incredible discoveries makes one consider the two alternative definitions for “in situ” described above: the ancient Jewish finds in Jerusalem were located “in the original place instead of being moved to another place,” while the Israeli Jews themselves and the capital of the Jewish State are “in the original place, or the place where something should be,” in Jerusalem.


Related First.One.Through articles:

Gimme that Old-Time Religion

Squeezing Zionism

The New York Times will Keep on Telling You: Jews are not Native to Israel

Subscribe YouTube channel: FirstOneThrough

Join Facebook group: FirstOne Through Israel Analysis and FirstOneThrough

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

Pure hatred is ugly in any situation. Hatred begotten of a sick mindset that views certain people as being deeply sinister and sub-human is yet a darker shade in the evil shadow of mankind. That’s what racism and antisemitism is and has always been, and it should be unremarkably easy to denounce clearly and without condition.

But the increasingly far-left turn of mainstream media like The New York Times cannot do so.

On April 5, 2019, the paper ran a cover story with no picture called “Extremes of Right and Left Share an Ancient Bias.” The title made this writer hopeful that the paper would finally acknowledge the mainstreaming of antisemitism that has infected the alt-left, just as it continues to address the antisemitism of the alt-right.

But the Times could not.

The paper relayed its perceptions as to the causes of the spike in antisemitism over the past five years. It described the hatred from the alt-right as coming from racists and neo-Nazis in Europe and America. The paper included three color photographs on page A8 highlighting some of those attacks.

The Times would also include one color photograph of an opposition march against the UK Labour Party which has been peddling anti-Semitic and anti-Israel propaganda for several years. There was however, no picture of the Labour party head Jeremy Corbyn celebrating with Islamic terrorists and sporting the four finger Muslim Brotherhood “rabia” salute or dozens of other anti-Israel and antisemitic stories emanating from the UK’s left-wing party.

There were no pictures of Ilhan Omar, Louis Farrakhan or other Muslims and people of color who comprise the third ugly leg of the antisemitic trifecta. There were no pictures of the victims throughout Europe of Muslim antisemitism, or of the Chabad House in India where Muslim terrorists went out of their way to kill the handful of Jews in India, while engaged in a massive terrorist operation. Of course, there were no pictures of Muslims attacking Jews in Israel.

The Times has taken the position that the antisemitism from the alt-left and Muslims is because of Israel’s actions against Palestinian Arabs. The final 14 paragraphs of the article – meant to discuss antisemitism – described how Israel’s government is comprised of far right-wing racists who persecute Muslims. The implication is therefore that the leftists and Muslims were protesters against racism, rather than anti-Semites themselves.

Fourteen paragraphs about Israelis being racists. Not Muslims.

  • The Times decided to not print the ADL polls which show that Muslims are three to five times more antisemitic than Christians in Europe.
  • The Times decided to not point out how millions of dollars from the Arab world has poured into American universities to fund Arab Studies programs and anti-Israel activities.
  • The Times ignored the leaders of the “Women’s March” attacking Jews and Israel.
  • The Times would not print Louis Farrakhan’s vile comments or that his audience dwarfed the crowd of neo-Nazis in Charlottesville.
  • The Times ignored the long history of Muslims killing Jews around the world long before the 2014 War From Gaza, including the Iranians blowing up the Jewish Center in Argentina in 1994 or the mass shooting of a Turkish synagogue in 1986.

The Times refuses to portray fanatical Muslims as deeply anti-Semitic just as it refuses to acknowledge the evolving deep hatred from the alt-left (NY liberal politicians refused to allow Jewish schools to have police protection!) Every violent action Muslims and the alt-left take are protests, not antisemitism.

Further, the Times spins a narrative that the alt-left and radical Muslims are in the right to protest Israel, because Israel is supposedly a racist colonial oppressor of indigenous Arabs. The paper argues that it is the treatment of Palestinian Arabs which upsets the left-wing, as oppose to the very existence of Israel. The phrase “treatment of Palestinians” has become commonplace in the paper as the source of the protests. The paper will almost never mention the virulently antisemitic Hamas Charter which calls for the death of Jews, or note that Palestinians voted Hamas to 58% of parliament with such charter. It will not call Hamas a terrorist group even though it has been designated as such by the United States and many other countries.

For the Times, antisemitism is ancient but the the bias has different origins. The alt-right is evil, your father’s antisemitism, easy to recognize by the white nationalists which should be condemned. But the newer antisemitism isn’t really evil at all, as it’s a legitimate form of protest by Muslims and progressives against racist Zionists.

The fact that all three groups want Jews dead and the Jewish State destroyed is a coincidence of conclusion. Please don’t besmirch progressives and Muslims or we’ll have to label you as alt-right racists too.


Related First.One.Through articles:

Between Right-Wing and Left-Wing Antisemitism

Abbas’s Speech and the Window into Antisemitism and Anti-Zionism

A Review of the The New York Times Anti-Israel Bias

CNN Will Not Report Islamic Terrorism

The Many Lies of Jimmy Carter

Ramifications of Ignoring American Antisemitism

What do you Recognize in the Palestinians?

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

Subscribe YouTube channel: FirstOneThrough

Join Facebook group: FirstOne Through Israel Analysis and FirstOneThrough

Jerusalem’s Old City Is a Religious War for Muslim Arabs

The acting-President of the Palestinian Authority Mahmoud Abbas warned the Israelis to not turn their long political fight into a religious war after Palestinian Arabs murdered Jews praying in a Jerusalem synagogue in November 2014. Remarkably sensitive words of consolation (?!) from a head of state.

Just a few months later, Abbas and the Jordanians submitted a 33-page report to UNESCO outlining that the battle for Jerusalem and the Temple Mount was specifically about religion.

The situation is completely farcical from the outset. Jordan, which had attacked the nascent state of Israel in 1948 and illegally seized and annexed the “West Bank” and eastern Jerusalem in a move not recognized by any country in the world, submitted the Old City of Jerusalem to UNESCO in 1981, a year after Israel declared the city its unified capital. How does a country with no standing submit a city in a foreign land for consideration to UNESCO? Who knows?! Perhaps Turkey should submit some sites in northern Cyprus to UNESCO as well. Or better yet, Russia should submit East Berlin, a city divided in war that no longer has a distinct separated entity anymore and is no longer occupied by foreign forces.

To add insult to injury and absurdity, the March 2015 Jordanian/Palestinian document was not a review of the current condition of the Old City of Jerusalem, a matter which might interest UNESCO as part of its officially stated mission. Instead, it was an attack on Jews and the Jewish State, exactly the opposite of what Abbas asked from Israel.

The report mentioned the word Jews and Jewish 44 times (and not favorably). It also introduced a bizarre set of words such as “Judaize” and “Judaization” which it used 22 times. Here’s a meaty example:

“They all reassure their rejection of the attempts to Judaize Al-Aqsa Mosque or any of its components by the Israeli Occupation Authorities, its various organs and the extreme Jewish organizations, which attempt interfering with its administration, preventing and disrupting Muslim worshippers from entering and praying, hampering its maintenance/renovation/repair, and attempts to befog the religious historic Muslim exclusive right and identification by forced use of un-Islamic names such as “The Temple Mount” as part of the Judaization policy enforced by the Israeli Occupation Power of the Occupied West Bank, including East Jerusalem.”

Wow! Now I’m really befogged!

In case you wondered, “Al-Aqsa” is mentioned 109 times compared to only three for the “Temple Mount,” and, as you might have guessed, those three were not positive. In this quote, the Jordanians and Palestinians dismiss the historical existence of the two Jewish Temples:

“… as 2010 approached, the Davidson Center was constructed and the site was turned into an active museum of the so-called “First Temple and Second Temple.

For the Jordanians and Palestinians, the issue isn’t as much about the sovereignty of the land of eastern Jerusalem as much as it is about enforcing a “Muslim exclusive right” to the Old City and the Temple Mount.


Judaism’s holiest site

When the United Nations adopts Muslim anti-Semitic propaganda and says nothing about stripping Jews of their holiest site, no one should be surprised when religious Christians and Jews and decent people everywhere say enough is enough.


Related First.One.Through articles:

The Palestinian’s Three Denials

Jordan’s Deceit and Hunger for Control of Jerusalem

Would You Rather Have Sovereignty or Control

Dignity for Israel: Jewish Prayer on the Temple Mount

The Waqf and the Temple Mount

Tolerance at the Temple Mount

Abbas’s Harmful East Jerusalem Fantasy

Ending Apartheid in Jerusalem

Time for King Abdullah of Jordan to Denounce the Mourabitoun

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

Subscribe YouTube channel: FirstOneThrough

Join Facebook group: FirstOne Through Israel Analysis and FirstOneThrough

Purim 2019, The Progressive Megillah

Roughly 2,500 years ago where the patriarchy reigned,
Jewish history was made in a failed coup, bloodstained.

Far from the destroyed Temple, in the Persian vicinity
A ruffian named Haman was imbued with toxic masculinity.

He used his privileged status to easily befriend the king,
And set in motion a plan to set the palace right wing.

Haman targeted the snowflakes and anything intersectional
And demanded that every Jew position themselves genuflectional.

Yet the Jew Mordechai would not bow or quake
And later mansplained to his niece Esther the actions to take.

But Esther was already woke to Haman’s weaponized speech
And with Mordechai hatched a plan to have Haman impeached.

She asked the Jews in the kingdom to start fasting in the morning
In the first biblical example of a community trigger warning.

She burst into the king’s party, uninvited and quite disheveled
‘Attempted mass murder!’ through clenched teeth, at Haman she leveled.

The microaggression forced the king to seek a safe space in the garden.
When he returned to see Haman toppled on Esther, Haman lost his chance for a pardon.

Haman screamed in anguish in a curse filled with misogyny
And soon hanged from a tree with all ten of his male progeny.

The tables had turned and the streets were turned red
As the Jews attacked their enemies with 75,000 dead.

The Jews were not vanquished on Purim, aligned with the elites
Capped with handing money to the poor and giving each other treats.

Today’s alt-left progressives might find this ending bittersweet
And reject the story’s conclusion or find religion obsolete.

But antisemitism’s continuing roar from the extreme right and the left
Shouldn’t leave our whole community with a wide sickening cleft.

Hand your blue friends some red treats, and the conservative something blue.
Be joyous and celebrate wholeheartedly with each and every Jew.

Criticizing Muslim Antisemitism is Not Islamophobia

On March 15, 2019, a horrific massacre happened in New Zealand, as a racist burst into two mosques and slaughtered innocent people. The actions were rightly condemned broadly throughout the civilized world.

However, the following day, the outspoken Palestinian-American, anti-Zionist Linda Sarsour chose not to attack the racism and racist actions of the madman, but instead criticized people who were angered by Muslim antisemitism, as if they deserved part of the blame:

“I am triggered by those who piled on Representative Ilhan Omar and incited a hate mob against her until she got assassination threats now giving condolences to our community. What we need you to do is reflect on how you contribute to islamophobia and stop doing that.”

Sarsour has often said that criticizing the policies of the government of Israel is not anti-Semitic, so it is therefore interesting how she can somehow not appreciate that condemning specific actions and comments – Muslim antisemitism – is not a call to hate all Muslims, nor is it Islamophobia.

As reviewed in these pages, Muslim antisemitism is widespread throughout the world and more prevalent over the past decades than antisemitism from other religious groups. That is a fact which all well-meaning people wish was not true. The condemnation of Ilhan Omar’s antisemitic comments were made in the hopes that she would not make such comments again. Similarly, the aim of writing about Muslim antisemitism is to work to eradicate the noxious hatred, not Islam itself. The ultimate goal is to see all religions – including Islam, Judaism and Christianity – living together peacefully in all corners of the world.

A proud American can criticize US policies and a proud Israeli can criticize Israeli policies, and a pro-Zionist American might also criticize some Israeli policies. Pointing out particular flaws in some of Israel’s policies does not label a person antisemitic, just as pointing to a flaw prevalent in Muslim society, which have been repeatedly spewed from the mouth of an elected Muslim American Congresswoman, is not Islamophobic.

However, Sarsour is not trying to change a particular Israeli policy; she is attempting to destroy the Jewish State. Her comments like “There’s nothing creepier than Zionism,” and people should not “humanize” Israelis, as well as her repeated calls to boycott Israel make it clear that her goals are not simply to soften Israel’s blockade of the terrorist-controlled enclave of Gaza, or to expel all Jews from the West Bank, arguably antisemitic desires in their own. But her incessant comments make clear that she wants to see the destruction of the Jewish State which does make her an anti-Semite.


Linda Sarsour says don’t “humanize” Israelis

I hope for a world in which Muslims live in peace alongside people of all faiths: that Jews and Muslims can each pray on the Jewish Temple Mount; that Jews, Muslims and Christians can each live and work throughout the “West Bank,” Israel and Gaza; where antisemitic terrorist groups like Hamas are banned outright; where the Jewish State has embassies in the entire Muslim world and all of those countries similarly locate their embassies in Israel’s capital of Jerusalem. It is a goal of coexistence with peace-loving people.

The act of denouncing Muslim antisemitism instead of continuing the global policy of  ignoring and encouraging it, is to facilitate such a peaceful world. If only the demonizers of Israel had such lofty goals, instead of the antisemitic desire to destroy the only Jewish state.


Related First.One.Through articles:

Where’s the March Against Anti-Semitism?

Dignity for Israel: Jewish Prayer on the Temple Mount

Bitter Burnt Ends: Talking to a Farrakhan Fan

“Protocols of the Elders of Zion – The Musical”

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

Rep. Ilhan Omar and The 2001 Durban Racism Conference

The Three Camps of Ethnic Cleansing in the BDS Movement

What’s “Left” for The New York Times?

Pray for a Lack of “Proportionately” in Numbers. There will never be an Equivalence of Intent.

Subscribe YouTube channel: FirstOneThrough

Join Facebook group: FirstOne Through Israel Analysis and FirstOneThrough

 

Examining Ilhan Omar’s Point About Muslim Antisemitism

Rep. Ilhan Omar made several comments which were widely viewed as antisemitic in her first weeks in office. As part of her defense, she offered the following:

“what I am fearful of is that because [Rep.] Rashida [Tlaib] and I are Muslim, that a lot of Jewish colleagues, a lot of our Jewish constituents, a lot of our allies, go to thinking that everything we say about Israel, to be anti-Semitic, because we are Muslim.”

Omar claimed that people – Jews in particular – think that she is more inclined to be anti-Semitic because she is Muslim. Why would she make that accusation? Are Jews particularly paranoid about Muslims?

The New York Times decided to write a large article about AIPAC because of Omar’s comments attacking the pro-Israel lobby in an article called “Ilhan Omar’s Criticism Raises the Question: Is AIPAC Too Powerful?” on March 4, 2019. Perhaps the Times will soon do a follow up article asking whether Jews really know how to ‘hypnotize‘ the world the way that Omar also claimed.

As The New York Times goes through great lengths to not label Muslims or Palestinian Arabs as anti-Semites (only Israelis are racists), the paper will likely never examine this other charge made by Omar. So it is worth doing such analysis here to see if either of Omar’s assumption are correct: that Muslims are particularly anti-Semitic or that Jews unfairly think that Muslims are anti-Semitic.

Muslim Anti-Zionism

Before investigating Muslim antisemitism, let’s consider whether there is a poisonous Muslim anti-Zionism that is more acute than Christian, Hindu or other religions approach to the Jewish State, since Omar claimed that the essence of her attacks were really against Israel, not Jews.

  • Attacking Israel in many wars. From the very beginning of the modern state of Israel, EVERY WAR Israel has fought has been against Muslim countries which have attacked it, including Egypt; Jordan; Syria; Lebanon; and Iraq
  • Not recognizing Israel. Ever. There are 30 Muslim countries that still do not recognize the basic existence of Israel. This has been a consistent theme from before the 1967 war, going all of the way back to 1948.
  • Labeling “Zionism is Racism.” The Organization of Islamic Corporation (OIC) is a bloc of 57 Muslim-majority countries. These countries routinely press for resolutions at the United Nations against Israel. They were behind the infamous “Zionism is Racism” resolution passed at the UN in 1973.
  • Promoting BDS, including for athletes and academia. Muslim countries routinely bar Israelis from attending international sporting events and academic symposiums. When Israelis do compete, the Muslim host countries often do not display the Israeli flag or play the Israeli national anthem when Israelis win. Oftentimes, athletes from Muslim countries refuse to compete against Israelis.

Muslim nations have attacked Israel physically and economically since the re-establishment of the Jewish State in 1948. The Muslim-majority countries also attempt to dismantle Israel diplomatically at the United Nations and lobby Israel’s major sponsor, the United States, to abandon the cause of the Jewish State. The Muslim country assaults are in shark contrast to non-Muslim nations which almost all have diplomatic relations and are active trading partners with Israel.

CHECK. Muslims are much more anti-Zionist than non-Muslims.

Muslim Antisemitism

Beyond the Muslim attacks against the Jewish State, how have Muslims treated Jews over the past century?

  • Muslim and Arab countries routed their Jewish populations after 1948. After the founding of the modern Jewish State, Muslim countries actively persecuted their Jewish – not Israeli – but Jewish citizens. One million Jews were forced to leave Muslim countries from Morocco to Iran from 1948 to the 1970’s.
  • Muslim-majority countries most anti-Semitic (2014 ADL poll). The Anti-Defamation League conducted a global poll of antisemitism in 2014 and 2015. People in Muslim majority countries held much more anti-Jewish views than other countries. The worst were Palestinian Arabs at 93% hating Jews, followed by Iraq, Yemen, Libya, Algeria and Tunisia with scores of 92%, 88%, 87%, 87% and 86%, respectively. By way of comparison, Christian majority countries like Ireland (which has many anti-Israel laws) scored 20%, Denmark 9% and Australia 14%.
  • Muslims more antisemitic where they are minority (2015 ADL poll). The ADL refined their study the following year and broke down the people by their religion inside Christian-majority countries. In every instance, whether for France, Italy or Germany, Muslims were two to five times more likely to harbor anti-Jewish attitudes than non-Muslims.
  • Imams in Europe calling for death to Jews. Islamic religious leaders in Europe have called for attacks against Jews
  • Islamic radicals target Jews in Europe. While Muslim terrorists had a terrible reason for killing people working at the Charlie Hebdo magazine in France, they had only one reason – antisemitism – to go out of their way to kill people at a small kosher supermarket. Other targeted actions include a Muslim terrorist shooting up a Jewish museum in Belgium, and the murder of elderly Jews by Muslims in France.
  • Jews joining alt-right parties in Europe to stem Muslim tide. The persistent Muslim antisemitism has caused Jews to begin joining alt-Right parties – in Germany of all places. The immediate danger for Jews is clearly believed to be from Muslims, not racist Christians.
  • Pakistan-India terrorists went out of way to attack Chabad (2008). The Muslim antisemitism is not confined to MENA or Europe. When Muslim terrorists launched an enormous attack in Mumbai India in 2008, they went out of their way to a small Jewish Chabad house just to torture and kill the few Jews who lived in the city.
  • American Muslim antisemitism. The radical Islamic Jew hatred is found in the United States as well. The leader of the Nation of Islam, Louis Farrakhan, has repeatedly slandered Jews and Judaism.
  • “Sons of Apes and Pigs” in the Koran. Unfortunately, many of these Islamic radicals who harbor deep antisemitism look to the Koran to defend their screed. They point to passages in their holy scriptures that call Jews names and demand that they be killed.

Antisemitism is prevalent in both Muslim majority countries and among Muslims who live in Christians countries.

CHECK. Muslims are much more antisemitic than non-Muslims around the world.

Palestinian Antisemitism

Some people who attack Israel do so because they feel that Israel mistreats Palestinians. They have argued that the Israel-Palestinian Conflict is simply one about land and has nothing to do with a clash of religions. Or to be more clear, they believe Palestinian Arabs don’t hate Jews, just the group of foreigners who took over their land.

Below is a review whether Palestinians hate the Jewish State, hate Jews and Judaism, or simply want to have independence and sovereignty, with no hatred at all (perhaps just frustration).

  • Ottoman, British, Egyptian and Jordanian versus Israeli control. If one chooses to adopt the Palestinian narrative, that the Arabs of Palestine have always been a distinct people and nation which were just “occupied” throughout their history by Ottomans for 500 years (Muslims, not Arabs), then British for a few decades, then by Egypt in Gaza (1949-67) and by Jordan in the “West Bank” (1949-67), why did the Palestinians NEVER revolt and attack any of those Muslim occupiers? Why did they suddenly take up arms against Jews?
  • Palestinian Law forbids the sale of land to Jews. Palestinian law – still on the books – calls for a death sentence for any Palestinian who sells land to a Jew. Not an Israeli Arab- just Jews, Israeli or otherwise.
  • The founding Hamas Charter is the most anti-Semitic political document ever written. The Islamic terrorist group Hamas combined the most vile parts of the infamous forgery Protocols of the Elders of Zion and the worst possible reading of the Koran to establish its mantra to kill the Jews of the world who foment global anarchy. With that antisemitic platform, Palestinians elected Hamas to 58% of their parliament. The head of Hamas would win an election for president if held today according to polls.
  • The president of the Palestinian authority is a Holocaust Denier. The current head of the PA, Mahmoud Abbas, wrote his doctoral thesis on a particularly noxious form of Holocaust denial which says that Zionists conspired with the Nazis to make things horrible for the Jews in Europe so they would move to Palestine. (The Jewish Zionists instigated the Holocaust of their fellow Jews – just imagine how inhumane they would treat non-Jews!)
  • Abbas denies many elements of Jewish history in the holy land. Abbas enjoys making speeches before journalists and the United Nations General Assembly denying the connection of Jews to their holy land:
    • He denies that Jews have lived in Israel for thousands of years
    • He denies that the two Jewish Temples sat on the Temple Mount in the Old City of Jerusalem
    • He denies that Jews have been the majority of the population of Jerusalem since the 1860’s
    • He claims that Jesus was a Palestinian, rather than a Jew
    • He claims that Palestinians are descendants of Canaanites in an attempt to pre-date Jewish claims to the land, even though the descendants of the Canaanites are Lebanese (the historic holy land included southern Lebanon and Syria)
  • Abbas said that Great Britain promoted the Balfour Declaration to get rid of its Jews.  Adding yet more insult to injury, Abbas said that not only do the Jews lack any history and rights to Israel, the only reason that the Balfour Declaration was made was that the English hated their Jews and were looking to get rid of them. (it’s not just us, they’re bad people!)
  • Palestinians deny Jewish rights to worship. Muslims – including Ottomans, Jordanians and Palestinians – have routinely tried to obliterate Jewish history and deny Jewish rights to pray:
    • For centuries, the Ottomans (then Jordanians) denied Jews the right to pray at Judaism’s second holiest location, the Cave of the Jewish Patriarchs in Hebron
    • Similarly, Jews continue to be forbidden to pray at their holiest location, the Jewish Temple Mount
    • Palestinians tried to take over Joseph’s Tomb and turn it into a mosque, just as they did to Rachel’s Tomb in Bethlehem
  • Palestinians demand a country free of Jews. What could possibly be more antisemitic than demanding a country completely free of Jews? Even Iran doesn’t go that far.

These are not competing claims over land, This is an evil, raging rant of antisemitism that has never been defeated or kept in check. Unlike American racism including the horrible lynchings and attacks on blacks in the American South which were finally countered with marches and changes in law, and the evil of Nazi Germany’s antisemitism which was vanquished in a war defeating their army and wicked worldview, Muslim antisemitism has metastasized. It has been ignored, excused, encouraged and empowered for the past 100 years.

Ilhan Omar asked a question about why Jews think that Muslims are anti-Semitic, and the alt-left has run to her side with fig leaves. While the left-wing media has sought to examine her charges of the powerful Jew, it refuses to report on the rampant Muslim antisemitism in Muslim countries, around the world, in the United States and Israel itself.

Ilhan Omar – and much more importantly, everybody else – here is the answer to your question about whether Jews unfairly criticize Muslims or whether Muslims really are anti-Semitic.


Related First.One.Through articles:

Abbas’s Speech and the Window into Antisemitism and Anti-Zionism

What do you Recognize in the Palestinians?

Rep. Ilhan Omar and The 2001 Durban Racism Conference

In the Shadow of the Holocaust, The New York Times Fails to Flag Muslim Anti-Semitism

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

The Real “Symbol of the Conflict” is Neta Sorek

A Review of the The New York Times Anti-Israel Bias

Covering Racism

Abbas’ European Audience for His Rantings

A Response to Rashid Khalidi’s Distortions on the Balfour Declaration

Will Israel Also Remove an Umbrella from the Western Wall Plaza?

The New Salman Abedi High School for Boys in England and the Mohamed Lahouaiej Bouhlel Soccer Tournament in France

The Democratic Party is Tacking to the Far Left-Wing Anti-Semitic Fringe

Your Father’s Anti-Semitism

The Cancer in the Arab-Israeli Conflict

The Only Religious Extremists for the United Nations are “Jewish Extremists”

New York Times Lies about the Gentleness of Zionism

The Long History of Dictating Where Jews Can Live Continues

My Terrorism

Eyes Wide Shut

Related First.One.Through videos:

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

Jews and US Foreign Policy (music by Vangelis)

Subscribe YouTube channel: FirstOneThrough

Join Facebook group: FirstOne Through Israel Analysis and FirstOneThrough

Inclusion versus Attention, and The Failure of American Leadership

The United States of America was founded on the principles of liberty and equality for all. In its early days, it came up short of those ideals, most notably in its treatment of African Americans who were kept as slaves, and of women who were denied the right to vote. Over the course of many years, the discriminatory laws fell and all people were understood to have a right to participate in every part of the public forum.

Some of the restrictions which were impediments to sections of society were marked in law while others were inherently physical. If the communal forum could be described as a public park, the American migration towards inclusion did not only remove the “No Jews Allowed” signs and the separate entrance for African-Americans, but removed the large flight of steps from the entrance, to enable all people to navigate into and throughout the park. The goals and actions of inclusions targeted both the intentional historic biases as well as the manifest material barriers which prevented all people from enjoying our collective world.

There are times when America falls short. As a society, we may not have removed all of the obstructions to enable everyone to join activities or we may have actually facilitated de facto hurdles which prevent certain segments of the community from engaging. Those are critical moments which need our attention, not a repetition of society’s aims.

As a continuation of the park example above, if a physically challenged person fell down stairs at the park, the appropriate action is to address the injury (perhaps with ice) and to fix the problem (build a ramp or smooth walkway). The immediate action should NOT be to pass out ice packs to everyone at the park nor to make pronouncements that the park is a space for all. Inclusion is a mission for our society, but it is not a salve to be uttered when things or people need attention. At those moments, required actions are the appropriate course.

Ilhan Omar Waves the Ice

In the winter of 2019, a new Democratic member of the House of Representatives, Ilhan Omar, seemingly could not stop attacking Americans who supported Israel. She accused Americans of bribing government officials to get them to support Israel, and she said that those pro-Zionists had misplaced and dangerous loyalties to foreign governments. After past comments in which she called Israel an “apartheid” state, “evil,” and a demonic institution that “hypnotized the world,” Omar was widely labeled an anti-Semite.

Many Americans – Republicans and Democrats – called on Omar to be censured from the House floor. They demanded a clear call to denounce antisemitism, the most prevalent type of bigotry in the United States, which has only grown more prevalent in recent years.

But the Democratic leadership under House Speaker Nancy Pelosi opted not to do that. She did not strip Omar of her committee assignment (on Foreign Affairs, no less!) nor did she unambiguously rebuke Omar’s antisemitic words. Instead, Pelosi simply offered a general denunciation of all forms of bigotry. It was as if someone was singled out in the public park for injury, and Pelosi handed out ice packs to everyone she could see.

The insult to Jews would remarkably get worse, as Omar used the opportunity to wave her Pelosi ice pack in front of teary Jewish eyes as they remained on the ground in pain. She said:

“Today is historic on many fronts. It’s the first time we have ever voted on a resolution condemning Anti-Muslim bigotry in our nation’s history. Anti-Muslim crimes have increased 99% from 2014-2016 and are still on the rise.”

It is not as though the statement on its own is problematic. However, a call of inclusion at a moment that requires attention is misplaced and is hurtful. The Democratic leadership acted just like the United Nations, which calls for inclusion for “all” people when Jews are victims, but specifically gives attention to Palestinian Arabs when they are victims. It is a disgraceful tacit blessing of antisemitism by those in power in the face of Jews who just suffered from bigotry.

Donald Trump’s “Many Sides”

The Democratic leadership is not alone in missing the boat on focused attention in moments of stress.

In August 2017 a group of white nationalists took to the street of Charlottesville, VA shouting racist and antisemitic slogans and killed a woman counter-protester. Republican President Donald Trump condemned the bigotry – but broadly – on “on many sides, on many sides.” A person was run over in a racist riot and the citizens of the country needed attention at such a fragile moment, not equivocation.

The stain on Trump has not gone away, and the United Nations remains an antisemitic cesspool. Will Nancy Pelosi suffer the same consequences from her failure to clearly and unambiguously call out antisemitism and instead reward the instigator?


Related First.One.Through articles:

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

“Protocols of the Elders of Zion – The Musical”

In Defense of Foundation Principles

“Jews as a Class”

NY Times Discolors Hate Crimes

The Invisible Anti-Semitism in Obama’s 2016 State of the Union

Between Right-Wing and Left-Wing Antisemitism

Fact Check Your Assumptions on American Racism

Subscribe YouTube channel: FirstOneThrough

Join Facebook group: FirstOne Through Israel Analysis and FirstOneThrough

 

NY Times’ Sarah Jeong Guides Rep Ilhan Omar Tweets

A satire.

Rep. Ilhan Omar is under the microscope for some poorly worded tweets and comments she made about Israel supporters over the past few weeks, so Sarah Jeong, a member of The New York Times editorial board has tried to come to her rescue.

Jeong assumed she would be a natural to help Omar since she got into hot water for tweets she made, but came out unscathed. Some of Jeong’s famous tweets included:

  • Are white people genetically predisposed to burn faster in the sun, thus logically being only fit to live underground like groveling goblins”
  • “white people marking up the internet with their opinions like dogs pissing on fire hydrants”
  • “Oh man it’s kind of sick how much joy I get out of being cruel to old white men.”

Jeong reached out to Omar to council her on bashing Zionists effectively. “You got to own it, girl,” she reportedly said. “The problem is that you didn’t lean in all the way. Bash those mother-f***ing white Jews and stare them in the face while you do it. With a smile, of course.

Jeong worked with Omar in scripting some choice tweets to be unveiled at choice times during the rest of the year. Some of their current lines include:

  • “Jews took my comments about ‘Benjamins’ the wrong way; I love Jewish money. I doodle yamulkes on the bills atop all of the white presidents.”
  • “That whole ‘hypnotize’ comment was after I watched Israeli mentalist Lior Suchard. Blame him.”
  • “When I said I was against lobbying for foreign entities, I meant I didn’t want Israeli food carts in front of the building. I’m allergic to Hummus.”

Linda Sarsour thought the tweets were too clever and funny. She worked with Omar on a different set:

  • “I truly enjoy when rich white Jewish men complain to a black immigrant woman that their feelings are hurt.”
  • “Did Bibi [Netanyahu] get his nickname from wearing a beanie as a kid or from shooting BB guns at Arabs?”
  • “if it were up to [Nita] Lowey and [Eliot] Engel, they would swap out the stars in the US flag to six pointed Jew stars.”
  • “Have you noticed how prickly Jews get when you talk about money – whether taxes, or BDS, or aid to Israel? It gives me a sublime high”
  • “How many times am I am going to listen to 6 million dead grandparents? I lived through hell in Somalia and I didn’t complain as much”
  • “I never suggested that American Jews have dual loyalty. I don’t think they have any loyalty to America at all.”
  • “If I can get both David Duke and Louis Farrakhan supporting what I’m saying, not only am I clearly right, I should win the Nobel Peace Prize for bringing these two together.”

There were several tweets up in the air like “Sieg Heil,” because Jeong wasn’t sure people would get the context, especially since they weren’t sure when they would post it. The new hashtag #AntiSemitesLivesMatter was deemed too copycat of #BlackLivesMatter, and the line “I love reverse racism when it’s in the negative and not directed at me,” was considered too complicated and not re-tweetable.

Marc Lamont Hill gave his seal of approval on both sets of tweets and previewed that Omar’s draft of upcoming tweets were not anti-Semitic on Al Jazeera, AJ+, and several media outlets run by Arab and Muslim countries. “As a man of color, I can clearly tell you what is and what is not racism and hate speech. Everyone watching should feel completely comfortable re-tweeting and using the same words in public with pride.”

Meanwhile, Jeong is very busy trying to get Lamont Hill onto the New York Times editorial board.


Related First.One.Through articles:

“Protocols of the Elders of Zion – The Musical”

Ben & Jerry’s New Flavor: Milano Zio

Charlie Hebdo Will No Longer Sell Magazines to 20 Islamic Terrorist Groups

Palestinian Job Fair for Peace

Subscribe YouTube channel: FirstOneThrough

Join Facebook group: FirstOne Through Israel Analysis and FirstOneThrough