.comment-link {margin-left:.6em;}

Emet m'Tsiyon

Sunday, March 27, 2022

Is the Biden Gang Preparing the Way for a Renewed Azerbaijani Attack on Armenia?

 To answer the question in the  title above, Armenian-American organizations seem to think so.

Here is some what they are saying. They also mention US military aid to Azerbaijan:

ANCA pressures President Biden to stop arming Azerbaijan as Artsakh gas crisis continues

WASHINGTON, DC – The Armenian National Committee of America (ANCA) has once again issued a national call to action urging President Joe Biden to enforce Section 907 restrictions and block all US arms and aid to Azerbaijan, as the Aliyev regime continues to choke off gas supplies to Artsakh’s Armenian population. The campaign also calls for $50 million in US aid to Artsakh to help families rebuild their lives and resettle in safety upon their indigenous Armenian homeland following the 2020 Turkey/Azerbaijan attacks.

Thousands of pro-Artsakh advocates have already contacted President Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris through the ANCA’s online portal sharing, “We remain deeply troubled that you have waived Section 907 sanctions against Azerbaijan and call on you today to immediately end any and all US military or security aid to this oil-rich and openly racist regime.” They go on to urge the White House to condemn Azerbaijan’s aggression, hold its leaders accountable for war crimes and call upon all Americans to support the national and democratic aspirations of the Armenian people. Advocates are also calling the White House comment line – (202) 456-1111; this line is open Tuesdays to Thursdays from 11:00am to 3:00pm EST..

Note that the Biden administration is disregarding congressionally mandated sanctions against Azerbaijan by waiving enforcement of the relevant statutes of US law. At the same time, the Biden State Department is offering cash grants to organizations that will uncover alleged Israeli "human rights abuses." More than half the states in the world are guilty of human rights abuses. But only alleged abuses by Israel are of concern to the State Department. Azeri violations of the human and national rights of ethnic Armenians are of no concern.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

See the press reports on the renewed Azeri attacks: here & here

Labels: , , , ,

Thursday, March 24, 2022

Bloody Western Hypocrisy Once Again [including Uncle Sham]

Wars usually bring out a goodly share of hypocrisy, and the Russian invasion of Ukraine is no exception. Here and now we see tremendous upset and concern in Europe, North America and elsewhere over the horrors and injustice of the war and invasion. But there have been many  other fairly recent cases of invasion, occupation, mass slaughter, population expulsion or displacement that do not seem to get much attention or rouse much concern at all. 

In 2020 we saw the Armenia-Azerbaidjan war/ Thousands were killed and parts of historic Armenia were conquered by the Azeris. Ancient and  medieval Armenian buildings were damaged in the war and afterwards by the Azeri forces.

In 1974, Turkey occupied about 35% if the island of Cyprus. Neither the Europeans --inside and outside of the EU-- nor the Americans make much of a fuss over the continued occupation and the expulsion in that year of an estimated 200,000 ethnic Greek Cypriots from their homes plus the Turkish vandalism to age-old Greek buildings/monuments in the occupation zone in northern Cyprus. 

Then there is the Syrian civil war, going on since 2011. In the course of this civil war, an estimated 600,000 Syrians have been killed [Syrian Observatory for Human Rights]. Moreover, millions of Syrians have fled or been driven from their country by their own government or the jihadi Sunni mlitias, now mainly sponsored by Turkey or by ISIL [DA'ESH] or other forces on the ground. With more than four million Syrian refugees estimated in Turkey plus a million or so in Lebanon and another million in Jordan, the number of refugees is only exceeded by the number from the war in Ukraine. 

Now some may note that a great deal of world attention is focussed on the Palestinian Arabs. This, just parenthetically, reminds us of a rule of the "international community": Arab lives do not matter -- unless somehow the blame for the Arabs' deaths or refugee status or other plight can somehow be attributed to Israel and Jews, with some plausible degree of honesty, however minor, or without any grain of truth at all. Compare the media treatment of the Syrian Arab victims of the Syrian civil war [as well as Palestinian Arabs living in Syria] with media treatment and coverage of the Palestinian Arabs in areas under Israeli jurisdiction -- often fashionably depicted as somehow a separate nation or people but somehow connected to the Arabs in general, and as perennial victims, even as a collective Jesus in much journalistic blather.

Then we have the massacres of Kurds in Syria by Turkish-sponsored Sunni Arab militias and by the Turkish airforce, plus de facto expulsion of hundreds of thousands of Kurds from areas controlled by Turkey and those militias in northern Syria. That Kurdish suffering has not gotten much attention in the media.

All of the above is part of the general hypocrisy.

However, the USA has shown its own unique and special hypocrisy. Back in late 2013-early 2014, the USA encouraged "right-wing" or "neo-nazi" Ukrainian parties --Right Sektor & Svoboda -- to revolt against the pro-Russian Yanukovich government.  Eventually Yanukovich fled and the new rulers, the extreme nationalist parties named above, made declarations that were felt as highly threatening to the ethnic Russian and Russian-speaking population in eastern Ukraine, such as honoring Stepan Bandera, who had led a German-sponsored Ukrainian militia during WW2, which slaughtered Jews and ethnic Russians in the Ukraine. These provocative declarations gave Russia's leader, Vladimir Putin, the pretext that he needed for invading eastern Ukraine and annexing the Crimea [which truth be told, had been a part of the Russian republic in the USSR but was transferred to Ukraine by the post-Stalin Khrushchov govt in 1954 although its population was overwhelmingly non-Ukrainian ethnically]. 

Now after the Russian government showed its hand after the overthrow of Yanukovich, the Obama administration refused to sell or give the Ukraine weapons needed for its self-defense against Russia. And this after the State Dept's Victoria Nuland had gone to Kyiw [pronounced Keef]  to  encourage the rebels. Trump and his administration were the first to supply real weapons to the post-Yanukovich govts. 

Then there was Joe Biden's shakedown of the Ukrainian leadership [Poroshenko & Yatseniuk] by threatening to withhold needed loan guarantees if a state prosecutor looking into the Burisma company that had placed Biden's son Hunter on its board, were not dismissed. The prosecutor was fired, as Joe boasted later on.

After Trump, the ill-fated Biden presidency resumed the Obama Ukraine policy. Biden & Co. have been stingy about sending weapons to Ukraine. Maybe if Washington had sent the needed weapons [such as Javelins & Stingers] when Russia began its military build up on the borders of Ukraine in the first half of 2021. Maybe it would thus have dissuaded and deterred a Russian invasion. Even when the invasion began it took some time for Joe B & Co. to decide to send needed weapons.  But then how do we explain that on the third day of the war when the Ukrainian resistance was holding up, the Biden national insecurity crowd [Susie R, Brian D, Tony B, Jake S] offered President Zelensky of Ukraine sanctuary outside of the Ukraine? Did they not understand that if the leader ran away the resistance was likely to collapse? Was this offer of sanctuary not hypocrisy? Was it not an effort to undermine the Ukrainian struggle against Russia?

Indeed we may wonder whether Biden's foreign affairs gang were keeping Ukraine relatively weak and lacking the most important self-defense weapons in order to lure the Russians into invading Ukraine [which Putin had apparently long wanted to do]. Does this sound too bizarre, too far-fetched, too unreasonable? Yes, it would -- if we did not know that a major theoretician of US foreign policy, Zbigniew Brzezinski, Jimmy Carter's advisor for national insecurity, had not boasted of luring the Soviet Union into making war in Afghanistan around 1978. Now Brzezinski was Barack Obama's mentor in foreign policy matters and Obama was planning to make him his own national insecurity advisor, as Carter had done. Indeed Brzezinski was the favorite foreign policy advisor of the Democratic Party. Now, when a big donor to the Democratic Party, Penny Pritzker, told Obama that she would not donate and  manage fund-raising for his campaign if Zbig were to be made national security advisor [Alan  Dershowitz, then a prominent Democrat, also opposed a role for Zbig in an Obama presidency], Susan Rice was brought in as a replacement. We may assume that Susan Rice's views on foreign policy, on issues of war and peace, etc, were not and are not far from Zbig's views and theories and understandings and desires. Now since Biden's foreign policy team are retreads from Obama's administration, we may assume that they all [Tony, Susie, Jake etc] share Zbig's basic proclivity for warmongering. Hence if the Ukraine were left weak and lacking needed defensive weapons, it may have been by design in order to lure the Russians into an invasion. As Zbig did in Afghanistan.

Labels: , , ,

Friday, March 11, 2022

The P5+1 Powers Are Pushing for a Newer, Weaker Nuke Deal with Iran

Although the war in the Ukraine monopolizes the world's attention as the cold winter of 2022 drags toward its end  on March 21, what seems to be the quiet push towards a new and worse Nuclear Deal with Iran is now going on as most of the world is distracted by the war.

Me'ir ben Shabbat, former head of Israel's National Security Council, warns that 

"the old-new accord that the USA is now marching towards will pave a sure path for Iran towards a nuclear weapon. after expiration of the limitations [sunset clause]. It has no tools that will force it [Iran] to sit in on discussions for 'a longer and stronger agreement,' And there is no reason to believe that it [Iran] will volunteer to do that on its own initiative. The ayatollahs' regime . . . will maximize what is possible for it to obtain through the agreement and it will do what it is capable of doing -- even against the agreement. [Yisrael HaYom 4 March 2022]

After all, the new accord shaping up has a weak inspection regime which fact seems to be frustrating Raffaele Grossi, head of the IAEA [international atomic energy agency], but he can do nothing without the support of the major powers who make  up the P5+1 group. The major sunset on the limitations supposedly imposed by the accord on Iran will take place in just a few years. If and when the accord is signed, Iran will get lots of dollars and other benefits with which it can finance its terrorist militias in several Middle Eastern countries which regularly cause havoc and suffering in countries where they are hosted, willingly or unwillingly, by the host state. To get some idea of the havoc and suffering consider Lebanon where Hizbullah --an Iranian cats paw-- has a chokehold on the state and most Lebanese are suffering for it.

It is hard not to conclude that the USA and perhaps some of the other powers WANT Iran to have The Bomb.

 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

ADDED 6-23-2022


Caroline Glick on Iran's nuke project, Qatar etc

Labels: , , , ,

Sunday, February 27, 2022

Behind the Fog of War in Ukraine, Biden & Co. Prepare the Way for Iran to Get The Bomb

 David Weinberg agrees that war in the Ukraine is a very important issue. But he sees the upcoming agreement of the P5+1 powers with Iran, a "deal" allowing the ayatollahs to pursue their nuke bomb program, an ever greater danger to world peace and stability.

See below:

SO, YES, UKRAINE is a big story, and Putin is a menace to Western stability. But I will argue here that allowing Iran to march merrily forward with its nuclear bomb and ballistic missile programs and its hegemonic regional ambitions is an even worse threat to world security, and certainly to Israel’s security.

The about-to-be signed nuclear deal with Iran is “shorter and weaker” than president Barack Obama’s bad 2015 deal with the ayatollahs. The old/new deal maintains soon-coming sunset clauses; does not guarantee IAEA supervision of Iranian nuclear installations “anywhere and anytime”; and does not give global powers the actual ability to activate the “snapback mechanism,” which allowed president Donald Trump to reimpose sanctions.

It will whitewash all of Iran’s nuclear program violations to date (like enriching uranium to the 60% level) and allow Iran to keep its advanced centrifuges. It will pave a certain path for Iran to acquire a nuclear bomb in the coming years.

Reportedly, the just-round-the-corner agreement also lacks any mechanisms that will force Iran to engage in additional negotiations over a “longer and stronger” deal before the old/new deal expires – something the Biden administration had promised to Israel and the American public when it set out its goals.

Chillingly, the deal also will grant Iran hundreds of billions of dollars in sanctions relief, allowing Tehran to rehabilitate its economy and continue funding its terrorist proxies and hegemonic aggressions. Instead of reimposing maximum economic pressure and building a credible military threat against Iran, Biden is surrendering to Iran.

See more of this article in the Jerusalem Post of 24 February 2022.

Labels: , , , , ,

Friday, February 11, 2022

Why to Not Reconcile with Erdogan? Why in the first place?

Erdogan is an enemy of Israel. Will playing up to him and making concessions to him make him less of an enemy? Obviously not. So why does the present Israeli government seem ready to accept his command/invitation that President Herzog of Israel come to Turkey to meet him? Given all that Erdogan's Turkey has done to undermine Israeli control of our capital Jerusalem and to harm Israel in world public opinion [Mavi Marmara, for example], a visit by Herzog to Ankara would be humiliating for Herzog and for Israel as a state and for Israelis. It weaken Israel in the eyes of our friends in Greece, Cyprus, and the Gulf, etc.

Seth Frantzman explains the reasons not to let Herzog go to Ankara here

"Turkey’s pitch regarding Israel relations is rooted in a 1950s outlook. In this analysis, Turkey believes Israel is completely isolated in the region and therefore needs it. Turkey can thus benefit from Israel’s isolation while reaping profit. In essence, in all the discussions with Ankara or claims of reconciliation, the only narrative that comes out is that Turkey profits and Israel gets nothing.

"For instance, Turkey hosts Hamas, which murders Israelis, and it has backed Hamas extremism. Turkey’s religious authorities increasingly incite against Israel, vowing to “liberate” Jerusalem. When it reconsecrated the Church of Hagia Sophia as a mosque, its leadership compared this to helping Palestinians take over Jerusalem." [read the rest]

It might be good to send an ambassador back to Ankara, whereas now Israel is  represented there by lower level diplomats. But even in that case, we need to demand expulsion of all Hamas personnel from Turkey and end to demonizing Israel in the state-controlled Turkish press/media.

And much more.

Of course, Turkey has been a protege of Western diplomacy since  1922 [Smyrna Affair]. And Washington may be behind Erdogan's efforts to pretend to make nice with Israel --as well as behind our government's failure to dismiss Erdogan's commands out of hand.

For more on his issue, read Frantzman's articles in the JPost: here.

Labels: , , ,

Wednesday, October 27, 2021

Syria's Assad Regime Goes Humanistic -- Everybody Is a Humanitarian Nowadays

 The quote below has to be the quote of the month -- or near the top in the most astounding quote contest. It appeared in The Economist for 16 October 2021 in a report on the current Expo in Dubai:

    "We believe that every human being is part of the collective conscience."

Doesn't that sound great? How humane and how humanist? The Economist goes on about this statement: 

    ". . . a message on the walls of the Syrian pavilion . . . Why the Syrian government has spent         years dropping bombs on many of those humans is not explained."

Who knew that The Economist or its journos had a sense of humor?

Anyhow, not even The Economist asks why the Syrian regime has been accusing Jews throughout history of bizarre and horrid crimes.

Labels: , ,

Wednesday, September 15, 2021

Obama-Biden's Wretched Foreign Policy Legacy -- Does Biden's Supervisory Team Want to Give Us More?

addition 10-10-2010 at bottom

Obama-Biden's worst foreign policy aggression against the world was the so-called Iran Nuke Deal, officially denominated the JCPOA.  In eight years of sanctimonious hypocrisy and bloodthirsty Realpolitik in foreign affairs, the JCPOA was the poisoned cherry at the crown of the cake. We could point to other Obama-Biden offenses: the encouragement of the Muslim Brotherhood [an Islamic supremacy movement notorious for massacres of native Christian Copts in Egypt inter alia], the racist demand on Israel to stop letting Jews make their homes in Judea-Samaria beyond the Green Line [parts of the Jewish National Home erected under international law by the San Remo Conference and the League of Nations], encouraging the aggressive Turkish Islamist dictator, Recep Tayip Erdogan [who tirelessly threatens war and incites war against Israel and other eastern Mediterranean and Caucasian neighbors, etc], and so forth and so on. But all in all, the Iran Nuke Deal that allowed Iran to keep working towards a bomb because the JCPOA lacked an effectivinspection regime, plus it had a "sunset" clause that would let Iran openly continue to work for a bomb or increase its numbers of nuke bombs after eight years, plus a gift for Iran's insincere agreement to the Deal of a mere $150 billion [including a billion or so in cash, allowing Iran to surreptitiously fund its terrorist cats paws in Lebanon, Iraq, Syria and Yemen], seems the most dangerous for the world. 

Biden took willing, perhaps eager, part in these destructive, warmongering policies. It was Biden who came to Jerusalem to promote the policy of apartheid against Jews in Judea-Samaria ["West Bank"], while Zbigniew Brzezinski --Jimmy Carter's national insecurity advisor-- traveled to Damascus during the 2008 presidential election campaign to let the bloody Bashar Assad know that if Obama were elected, he would have a friend in the White House. So Biden too was morally responsible for the Obama-Biden administration's foreign policy aggressions, while Biden's foreign policy [or "national security" staff] openly boast of going back to the JCPOA from which President Trump had withdrawn. Despite their planned Afghanistan fiasco in August 2021, the Biden foreign policy team still want to make it easier for Iran to achieve its longed for Bomb. They and their supporters claim that somehow a new agreement with Iran to stop working for a nuke Bomb will stop Iran from getting that nuclear bomb. But treaties do not enforce themselves and Iran has already violated the JCPOA in letter and spirit. 

We also know that in the 1990s, the USA under Bill Clinton negotiated a nuclear bomb freeze with North Korea. The Communist dictatorhip of North Korea was supposed to not make a nuclear bomb, according to that agreement with Clinton's administration. But guess what!! North Korea now has a nuclear bomb. The agreement with Clinton and his team did not in fact prevent North Korea from getting the Bomb. Even worse for the JCPOA, some of Clinton's team when he made the acccord with North Korea are now back and working on nuke negotiations with Iran [such as Wendy Sherman] as part of Biden's team. Only a fool could believe that either a new and improved JCPOA or a wholly new agreement wth Iran would actually prevent the fanatics in Teheran from getting The Bomb.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Addition 10-10-2021 --- Michael Singh, Wall Street Journal (30 December 2015). A summary of Obama administration failures abroad in 2015

The Obama administration frequently cites the Iran nuclear deal as a marquee accomplishment. Achieving U.S. objectives through diplomacy would have been laudable, but the nuclear deal was possible precisely because the U.S. laid aside its objectives. Iran made concessions but also largely achieved its strategic aims: retaining its nuclear weapons capability and resisting demands for a broader “strategic shift” in its support for terrorism and regional policies. Iran also received sanctions relief that is broader in practice than on paper, all in exchange for temporary limits on its nuclear fuel-cycle activities.

Secretary of State John Kerry has said that “diplomacy is the art of the possible.” Yet administration officials fail to comprehend how U.S. action, or inaction, can shape what is possible. This was clear in Afghanistan, where President Barack Obama was forced to face the consequences of prematurely announcing a U.S. withdrawal. It is increasingly clear in Syria, where the White House, despite foreseeing the dangers posed by the conflict, is shifting objectives in response to others’ actmangingions rather than taking the initiative.                                      Michael Singh was at that time the managing director if the Washington Institute for Near East PolicyFrom 2005 to 2008, he worked on Middle East issues at the National Security Council.

Labels: , , , , ,

Thursday, August 26, 2021

Where Did Zbig Brzezinski & Susan Rice Disappear To?

 The past couple of weeks the TV news programs and the printed press have been full of stories about the tragedy enfolding in Afghanistan, about thousands and thousands of terrified people, Westerners and Afghans, trying to leave the country just lately delivered into the hands of the jihadi Taliban by courtesy of Joe Biden's administration. But in all the jabber and hand-wringing about that country located between China, Iran, Pakistan and a few Central Asian countries, I have not heard or seen --in all the TV, radio and print press that I have consumed-- a single mention of the man who started the ball rolling for more than forty years of bloodshed and mayhem in that country nor of the woman who kept it going during Obama's unhappy eight years in office as US president [years unhappy for most others affected, if not for Obama himself].

Zbig actually boasted about his cynical deception which led to the Afghan-Russian war in the late 1970s and eventually to the wars and Afghanistan-based terrorist attacks that we look back on with dread. Up till this very moment. Zbig was a mentor of Barak Hussein Obama and was quite willing to continue his career of war contriver into Obama's administration, Indeed he was slated for a high foreign policy-making post under Obama. However, as luck would have it, one of the Democratic partys' big donors, threatened to withhold her support if Zbig were given another role in government, another chance to cook up wars and massacres, large and small, across the globe.

Nevertheless, Zbig's spirit did take up residence in Obama's regime in the unexpected form of a young woman, Susan Rice. She was designated to become Obama's national insecurity advisor. During the 2008 presidential election campaign, she advocated that the USA get of Iraq. That was the wrong war, that was Republican George W Bush's war. So many folk may have seen her as a peacemonger. She wanted to get America out of Iraq, right? But she declared that there was a right war, a good war that America and its allies ought to send more troops to. That war was the one in Afghanistan. During Obama's miserable eight years in office, with Joe Biden as vice president and Sue Rice as national insecurity advisor, I do not recall talk of getting out of Afghanistan, although maybe there was, but if so, it was rather quiet.

As we all know to our sorrow, Joe is now president and commander-in-chief and Sue is Director of the Domestic Policy Council. True, her role is now "domestic," not foreign policy. But does anyone really believe that she no longer has a foreign policy role, whereas foreign policy is her area of expertise?

In any event, throughout this tragedy unfolding in Kabul, I have not heard or read any mention of either Susan Rice or Zbigniew Brzezinski. Why not? Are the media covering up for them?

Tuesday, May 11, 2021

International Media Falsify the Housing Dispute in Jerusalem's Shimon haTsadiq Quarter

One of the chief ways in which international media, such as BBC, France24 or even Foxnews and i24, falsify the situation and the issues involved is by wrongly calling  the area Sheikh Jarrah. Traditionally, the area or large plot of real estate was called the Shimon haTsadiq Quarter. That is how it appears, for instance, in Dan Bahat's historical atlas of Jerusalem, and  in the Palestine Post before Israeli independence.

Simon the Just [Shimon haTsadiq] was an ancient Jewish high priest and his tomb is believed traditionally to be found on this site in Jerusalem, along with several other ancient Jewish cave tombs on the site. For that reason, the real estate around the Tomb --considered a holy place-- was bought jointly by Ashkenazi and Sefardi leaders in 1878. Besides enhancing the physical aspect of Simon's tomb, houses were built for poor Jews on part of the lot while part of it, including the location of the houses now at issue, was left undeveloped. 

Jews were driven out of the Shimon haTsadiq Quarter in December 1947-January 1948. They were the first refugees in the war who could not go home after it, since Jewish refugees from south Tel Aviv, for example, could go home after the war. Just by the way, the first refugees in the war were Jews, probably those from south Tel Aviv which was subject for months to sniper fire from the minaret of the Manshiyyah Mosque in nearby Jaffa/Yafo.

The Jewish homes on the plot were occupied by Arabs in 1948 or after. The houses now at issue were built in 1954-55 on Jewish-owned land by Jordan. 

When the whole city returned to Jewish control in 1967, Arabs living around the tomb of Simon were allowed to stay. However, Israeli courts recognized the Jewish ownership through committees of the old Ashkenazi and Sefardi religious communities in the city. Eventually Arab residents in the houses at issue were told to pay  rent to the rightful, legal owners. They could stay and not be evicted if they paid rent, which would be low because of Jerusalem's tenant protection law. Some took money offered to them to move out while eventually others, directed by the Palestinian Authority, refused to pay rent and were taken to court. In these court cases they claimed ownership supposedly granted to them by Jordan. But the courts found against them and the owners added the condition that they not only pay rent but recognize that they were not the legal owners. At this point we should say that it was very clever on the part of Abu Mazen's Palestinian Authority to direct these people not to pay rent or to acknowledge that they had to pay rent to Jewish owners. In this way, the PA created a deceptive issue or narrative: Supposedly poor Arabs, called "Palestinians," were being evicted by cruel Jews, who were labeled with the pejorative term "settlers" who wanted to sadistically take over Arab homes for their nefarious purposes when in reality, it was Jews who were driven from their homes by Arabs in 1947-1948. As said, the first refugees in the war who could not go home after it were the Jews of Shimon haTsadiq Quarter. Yet various news outlets are collaborating in justifying the Arab imperialist conquest and ethnic cleansing of the Shimon haTsadiq Quarter in 1947-48.

Media coverage of the situation in and around Shimon haTsadiq Quarter is generally characterized by ignorance, lack of historical context or false history by insinuation or assertion, as well as moral obtuseness. For instance, the Foxnews journo in Jerusalem said that the "settlers" were taking over the houses and evicting the Arabs ["Palestinians"] by an "obscure law." Nothing obscure. The courts just recognized the rightful owners. Of course it is never mentioned that the area's Jews were driven out in 12/1947 and 1/1948. 

Something else never mentioned is that the traditional tomb of Simon the Just is located on the same lot. That would acknowledge a Jewish presence there in antiquity. And one must not do that in the age of frequent distortion of history and widespread Israelophobia, the latest version of traditional Judeophobia.

Now Simon's tomb used to be considered an ideal destination for Jewish pilgrimages on Lag B'Omer, like Meron. The site appears on the list of Jewish holy places in the Rhodes armistice accords of 1949. Jordan [then Transjordan] was supposed to allow Jews access to their holy places but Jordan always violated that part of those accords, as you would expect.

The ethnic cleansing of the Shimon haTsadiq Quarter in 1947-48 is now forgotten by ignorant or deceitful journalists and presumed news outlets.

- - - - - - - - - SOURCES

Yits'haq Levi [Levitsa], Tish'a Qabin [Hebrew]

Palestine Post [forerunner of the Jerusalem Post] for 30 November 1947 through 31 January 1948

Zeev Vilna'i, Encyclopedia of Jerusalem [Hebrew]

[here] [here] [here

Friedrich Ebert Stiftung in Jerusalem, a neighbor of Shimon ha Tsadiq Quarter [here]

Jewish property in Jerusalem seized by Arabs & Jewish property taken by Arab governments [here]

Thursday, November 12, 2020

Is It Legitimate for Biden to Become President?


Before examining political, diplomatic and foreign affairs issues affecting Biden's legitimacy, let's deal first with the more personal and moral issues.

The man is now in 2020 a shell of a man, a manikin, an empty suit guided and manipulated by others. His gaffes are the stuff of legend, like: We choose truth over facts; You're a dogfaced pony soldier [said to a young woman who had asked a friendly question that, it seems, did not agree with Biden], etc. For those who thought he would get progressively worse, his stable if uninspiring performance in the first debate indicates that he may be heavily medicated to stop the advance of his dementia or alzheimer's. Earlier in 2020, the eminent, respected American journalist, Britt Hume, had described Biden as "evidently senile." However, in that first debate his acceptable if pedestrian performance was not without another gaffe, perhaps one not as blatant as earlier ones and thus not noticed. He said during that debate: The polls should stay open until all the votes are counted. Now it seems that this gaffe was overlooked. In any case, the votes are supposed to be counted after the polling places are closed. Further, Biden's physical appearance does not look healthy. Hence, on physical and mental grounds he is not fit to be president. 

Of course, the moral reasons why he is unfit to be president are equally compelling. As vice president under Barack Obama, he ran an influence-peddling racket, using principally his son Hunter Biden but in which other family members such as his brother James were involved. The influence-peddling took place in far flung parts of the world where his duties as vice president took him. Indeed, Obama made him his "point man" or liaison for relations with the Ukraine. This particular fact was fateful for Israel since Obama used Biden to "persuade" or "convince" Ukraine not to abstain from the Security Council vote on UN SC resolution 2334, a very hostile anti-Israel resolution which US diplomats were promoting behind the scenes but which the US [= Obama and his team] was itself planning to abstain on. Obama wanted a uniform anti-Israel vote in the Security Council,  with all countries but the USA voting in favor, in order to show Israel that it had no friends but for the USA and that even the USA wanted Israel to capitulate to PLO/PA demands for anti-Jewish apartheid in what diplomats and journalists customarily call The West Bank. Biden was used by Obama to bring the Ukrainians into line, because their original decision on the UN SC vote was to abstain. Obama wanted only the US to abstain.

Besides Ukraine, Biden ran his racket in China, Rumania, Russia, and other countries, customarily traveling on Air Force 2, the official plane designated for the vice president [Hunter Biden traveled to China with Dad on Air Force 2 at least once]. Now, the truth be told, many persons in lands outside the USA were eager to pay money into Biden's racket, thereby purchasing influence. This paid off for Burisma, a Ukrainian energy company, which offered Joe's son, Hunter, a seat on its board of directors, at a generous salary for someone who knew little about the energy industry and did not know the languages commonly spoken in the Ukraine, Ukrainian and Russian. When the Ukrainian state prosecutor, Viktor Shokin, was going to investigate Burisma, Joe arrived in Kiev [pronounced Keef], the Ukrainian capital, and threatened the top Ukrainian leaders, Poroshenko the president and Yatsenyuk the prime minister, that he would withhold one billion dollars in badly needed US loan guarantees if that prosecutor --a corrupt man according to Biden-- were not dismissed in six hours. Biden told the Ukrainians that Obama supported him in this matter, and  if they thought he was lying then they could call Obama. Biden boasted of this extortion in his talk before the Council on Foreign Relations in New York in January 2018. 

Biden's worldwide influence peddling, also involving his family, led  Rudy Giuliani, former US Attorney for the Southern District of New York, who had prosecuted Mafia gangs as a senior Federal prosecutor, to speak of "The Biden Crime Family" as one might speak of the Genovese Crime Family. 

At this point, some background about US-Ukraine relations in the Obama and Trump periods might be helpful. After the fall of Communism in 1989-1990, many of the states emerging from the long Soviet and Communist winter found themselves burdened with corrupt governments where the new leaders were out to enrich themselves, as just coincidentally, Joe was too. In 2013-14 US govt officials, such as Victoria Nuland of the State Depatment, encouraged and aided a sometimes violent protest movement led by two neo-fascist parties, Right Sektor and Svoboda. After Washington had secured the fall of pro-Russian president Viktor Yanukovich through these Ukrainian allies, the new government found itself at war with Russian proxy forces in the east of the country, partly due to their own nationalistic arrogance and political ineptitude. Nevertheless, despite these Ukrainian allies having helped the USA achieve the foreign policy goal of eliminating and/or reducing Russian influence in the Ukraine, Obama's administration --which had encouraged them against the pro-Russian Yanukovich-- refused to give them major or lethal weapons in the war which followed Yanukovich's fall. Instead, Obama and his administration were pleased to supply the Ukraine with blankets and such like minor help. It was the Trump administration which first supplied lethal, major weapons to the Ukraine. This meant in particular the Javelin anti-tank missile that the Ukraine had been asking for for several years [Le Monde, 23 December 2017, updated 12-26-2017online]. This fact among others indicates that the widespread claim  by leading Democrats and its media allies that Trump was a cats-paw for Russia, for Putin, was simply vile political slander, a hoax, since Trump was sending weapons to a country with which Russia was at war, the Ukraine. Biden was part of this slander since he took part in a White House strategy meeting in early January 2017 [before Trump's inauguration] at which Biden suggested charging Trump with violating the Logan Act, a law from the late 18th century forbidding private US citizens from negotiating with foreign powers. However, in the much more complicated international politico-military-diplomatic situation of the 20th century, it became customary for foreign policy officials of incoming administrations to meet foreign counterparts and representatives in order to find out what was important and less important to both sides, etc. Yet General Flynn, Trump's candidate for National Security Advisor, was persecuted by the FBI and Federal prosecutors for meeting the Russian ambassador to the US in the interim between the 2016 election and Trump's inauguration.

Another place where Trump acted counter to presumed Russian interests was in Syria where Trump gave orders to bomb Syrian military targets to deter future Syrian gas and chemical weapons attacks on Syrian civilians, as at Douma on 7 April 2018 [Le Monde, 14 April 2018]. Russia objected to this bombing of Syrian targets at the Security Council. Obama broke his own promise, his own "red line" when he decided not to attack Syria after all for a poison gas attack against civilians in Syria several years before. And Biden too promoted this Russia Collusion Hoax.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

QUESTION of the day: Does anybody remember Tara Reade? Is it true that she had a "relationship" with Senator Joseph Biden? And why has she been so soon forgotten?

Labels: , ,

Monday, November 09, 2020

Is Joe Biden a Legal or Legitimate President?

Is it legal for Biden to be president? First of all, his widely alleged majority of electoral votes is due to vote cheating by his supporters, that is, the Democratic Party machines of several big cities: Philadelphia, Detroit, Las Vegas (Clark County, Nevada), Atlanta, Milwaukee, etc. The vote counting in those places, particularly Philadelphia and Detroit, was not transparent and supervised by representatives of both parties. In Philadelphia, local Democratic election officials refused to obey a court order to allow Republican representatives   close enough access to observe the counting where and while  it was going on. They were kept far away. There are many instances of the lack of proper observation or inspection of vote counting by both parties. Rudy Giuliani led the legal fight of the pro-Trump forces, especially in Philadelphia. Giuliani is a former US Attorney for the Southern District of New York and later mayor of New York. He is not some irresponsible, uneducated demagogue. He discusses methods of cheating by Democrats, and not just in Philadelphia. Giuliani also pointed out that the cheating methods --including those meant to prevent Republican inspection of the counting process-- were remarkably similar in various parts of the USA, in several cities. The vote fraud to come must have been planned months in advance.

On another legal point, Biden is prima facie involved in crimes involving using his power, influence and authority as vice president for personal purposes, including personal gain, including in foreign affairs. He appears to have committed felony crimes. However, he has not been convicted, indicted or even officially investigated [although it seems that his son Hunter is under FBI investigation]. Biden openly boasted of his ability to extort a foreign government, that of the Ukraine, to dismiss a prosecutor preparing to investigate a Ukrainian company on the board of which his son Hunter was sitting for a generous monetary consideration. According to emails found on a laptop computer belonging to Hunter Biden which were seen by the New York Post, his father Joe got a large share of the younger Biden's takings from the Ukrainian company, Burisma, as well as from Chinese sources, etc. Now since no legal action has been taken in these several cases involving Biden influence peddling, it may be legal on those grounds that Biden become president. However, the large-scale and widespread vote fraud against Trump by Democratic party officials makes Biden's "votes" illegal.                                                                  

Of course, Biden supporters in the media make claims of "no evidence" of vote fraud or "unsubstantiated allegations." This reminds me of the repeated denials of the Armenian genocide by the Turkish government, including by the sinister tyrant, Erdogan. "No evidence" is claimed by the Turks too. Or the genocide was only the usual mass killings taking place during a war. And so on and so forth.                        

Further, the phenomenon of vote fraud has a long history in the United States. Chicago used to be notorious for "voting the cemeteries" and also for the slogan "vote early and often." In recent years Philadelphia has become notorious for the same thing. But it did not start there just in 2020.

So much for the legality of Biden becoming president of the USA. In the next blog post, we will take up the illegitimacy of the election of Biden. Illegitimate means something wrong, not right, or unjust that may not necessarily be illegal.

Labels: ,

Friday, October 30, 2020

Biden's Crookedness in the Ukraine Is Also Linked to His Anti-Israel Mission for Obama

 So much new info has lately come out about Joe Biden's corruption, which also involved his son, Hunter, and his brother James, that there is little left to prove directly. Of course the Democratic Party and its media allies claim that everything is Russian disinformation. The New York Times and other major media outlets have totally or almost totally ignored the new revelations about Joe's corrupt doings. Yet the NYT is an old recidivist perpetrator when it comes to overlooking or omitting facts that do not fit the narrative that the NYT wants to support. Hence, you cannot trust the NYT to bring you all of the important and significant news. It might not fit. 

It has been a rival New York newspaper, the New York Post [go into the Post web site for several articles], that has brought to light extensive new information about Biden's corruption, although some of what the NY Post has revealed could have been and should have been inferred years ago. After all, in his speech to the Council on Foreign Relations in New York in January 2018, he openly boasted about getting the top officials of the Ukrainian govt to fire a prosecutor. He told them, blackmailing them, that he was giving them six hours [at that point in the speech he pointed at his watch] to fire this prosecutor or he would withhold a billion dollars in American loan guarantees that the Ukraine desperately needed.  That sounds like extortion to me. And sounds like something that US judicial authorities ought to be investigating. It sounds like something improper. Why would a US vice president want a prosecutor dismissed in a foreign land? Was Biden using his power and influence as vice president for personal gain? Were Biden and his son Hunter doing influence peddling? The questions seem obvious but Biden's very open and overt and public speech did not lead to any investigation of him. And when President Trump asked President Zelensky of the Ukraine about this matter, Trump was accused of improper activity and eventually impeached whereas it was Biden who was in the wrong!!!

So here is what I wrote a year ago on Biden's pressuring the Ukrainian govt on the matter of the prosecutor --who stated that he was preparing to investigate a Ukrainian company, Burisma, which had invited Hunter Biden to sit on its board of directors for a generous monthly salary. Although Hunter knew little about the company's field of activity, energy and natural gas, and did not know the Russian or Ukrainian languages. See the video of his speech of boastful admission in the speech to the Council on Foreign Relations in January 2018.

So the question remains: Just why did Biden want that particular prosecutor removed? Of course, he is telling the CFR in his talk that the prosecutor [indeed, the prosecutor-general of Ukraine] was corrupt. But most Ukrainian voters apparently thought that Pres. Poroshenko and PM Yatseniuk were corrupt. That is why they elected in 2019 a non-politician, a Jewish actor who had played in a TV drama about corruption in Ukrainian politics to be their next president. So if Biden were truly concerned about corruption in that country, why did he not go after Poroshenko and Yatseniuk who were considered corrupt in their country, instead of the prosecutor-general? So was Joe Biden trying to protect the object of that prosecutor's planned investigation [his name was Viktor Shokin], Burisma, on the board of which sat his own son Hunter Biden? If so, was Biden then using the power and  influence of the USA to benefit his own son's company, Burisma? All in the name of anti-corruption? Biden's display of arrogance towards the officials of another country is shocking as is his boasting about his successful extortion in front of the CFR.

And here is what I wrote about Biden pressuring the Ukraine in December 2016 to vote in favor of the racist anti-Jewish Security Council resolution 2334. Also see this Elder of Ziyyon: here

Labels: , ,

Thursday, October 29, 2020

The Problem of Joe Biden & the Jews & Israel

  LINK ADDED 11-17-2020 

To give full disclosure, I have disliked Joe Biden since 1975. I heard him at a dinner in the city where I lived at that time speaking to a pro-Israel organization and --I assume-- he was getting a generous speaking fee. At first I was inclined to be sympathetic because everyone knew at the time that he had lost his wife and one of their children in a traffic accident. Yet his speech to the group broadcast a nasty anti-Israel undertone. He made several snide anti-Israel insinuations, nothing too overt or specific. At the end of course he urged the audience to offer monetary support to this organization. So I suppose he, as  a US senator, had earned his fee for this organization. And I like others contributed what I could afford, although his answer to my question was somewhat irritating. I disliked him afterwards although I thought that he was basically OK as long as he voted right on issues that mattered to Jews.

Years later, I came to dislike him even more. That was when he came to Jerusalem representing Obama. But first let's go forward seven years from 1975 to 1982. In that year, when Prime Minister Begin spoke before the US Senate Foreign Relations Committee:

Back [in] 1982, Senator Biden (D-Delaware) threatened to cut off aid to Israel. In subsequent years he hotly denied this but Prime Minister Menachem Begin’s late right-hand man Yechiel Kadisha’i unequivocally confirmed Biden’s bullying in many conversations we held [Sarah HonigJerusalem Post 30 April 2015]

 Begin responded to Biden's threat:

“Don’t threaten us with cutting off your aid. It will not work. I am not a Jew with trembling knees. I am a proud Jew with 3,700 years of civilized history. Nobody came to our aid when we were dying in the gas chambers and ovens. Nobody came to our aid when we were striving to create our country. We paid for it. We fought for it. We died for it. We will stand by our principles. We will defend them. And, when necessary, we will die for them again, with or without your aid.” [ibid. Jpost]

By the year 2010, Biden had risen to the level of his incompetence as Barack Hussein Obama's vice president. He came to Jerusalem on Obama's behalf  and promoted the Obama administration's policy of enforcing apartheid against Jews in Judea & Samaria, expressing support for Mahmoud Abbas' demand that Israel stop any activity enabling Jews to take up residence in the heart of the ancient Jewish homeland, called Judea [IVDAEA] by the Roman Empire. On the day that Biden arrived the Interior Ministry announced plans for 1600 new homes for Jews in an already existing Jewish neighborhood in Jerusalem that happened to be north of the 1949 armistice line [called "East Jerusalem" in the media, to be sure]. Both the palestinian Arab leader Abbas and the American VP Biden expressed hostility to homes being built for Jews who were often living in crowded conditions in older areas of the Holy City. And this was in a city that had had a Jewish majority since 1853, if not before. Biden stated:

“It is incumbent on both parties to build an atmosphere of support for negotiations and not to complicate them,” Biden said in a media statement alongside Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas in the West Bank city of Ramallah. “Yesterday the decision by the Israeli government to advance planning for new housing units in East Jerusalem undermines that very trust, the trust that we need right now in order to begin ... profitable negotiations,” Biden said. [Reuters, 10 March 2010: "Biden Scolds Israel over Settlement Plan"]

 There is so much more to say against Biden and against his anti-Israel actions and positions over the years that I will stop here for now, only promising to continue tomorrow with his support for Obama's dangerous Iran nuke deal, that did not stop Iran's move towards a nuke bomb for even one day, endangering both Israel and most Sunni Arab states. I will also cover Biden's work for Obama to force the Ukraine to vote in favor of the anti-Israel UN Security Council resolution 2334 of December 2016 which exemplifies the pro-apartheid [against Jews] anti-Jewish, anti-Israel policy of Obama and much of the old US foreign policy elite. And other matters.

- - - - - - - - - -                                                                                                                                                  LINK ADDED 11-17-2020

Biden's Anti-Israel Escapade in Ukraine:  here  by Elder of Ziyyon

Labels: , ,

Sunday, October 18, 2020

Do Jews Owe Anything to the US Democratic Party? -- Part 2

We have shown that Roosevelt [Saint FDR, in the bon mot of Lawrence Lipton in the LA Free Press circa 1963] was a silent partner in the Shoah. Of course young people may think that that was a long time ago. But the Democrats still honor Roosevelt with yearly memorial dinners and such. 

Nevertheless,  do we have more recent evidence that the Democratic Party is hostile to Jews, maybe to the point of collaborating in  a future Holoaust? Just two years ago, the Party nominated Ilhan Omar and Rashida Tlaib to the House of Representatives. And these two Muslim women were both elected. Of the two, Omar, a Somali immigrant to the USA, was the more blatantly Judeophobic, although Tlaib was of palestinian Arab background. 

Omar had written a few years years before that, in 2012: "Israel hypnotized the world. May Allah awaken the people and help them see the evil doings of Israel.

This is not only a specimen of traditional anti-Jewish bigotry but an expression of magical thinking. Omar showed that she had a loose grip on reality. She also expressed Muslim loyalty and Muslim beliefs including the several and sundry prejudices against other religions and  nations that abound in the Quran and the Hadiths and so on. Hence, one would  think that when committee assignments were given out by the Democratic Party leadership in the House of Representatives, care would be taken to place Omar on a committee where she could do little harm. Yet instead, Omar was assigned to the highly prestigious House Foreign Affairs Committee which actually does influence the foreign relations of the United States, a committee to which first-term congressmen are not ordinarily assigned. Maybe she could have been assigned instead to the committee in charge of national parks and/or fisheries or education. Or perhaps the committee in charge of  Housing and Urban Development where maybe --not necessarily-- she might have been able to make a contribution. Instead she is dealing with issues of war and peace, or which foreign countries to befriend and which to harm or be indifferent to.

While a member of the House, Rashida Tlaib put forth a more hypocritical, subtler expression of Judeophobia. She expressed sorrow over the Shoah while claiming that the Palestinian Arabs were victims of the Shoah, whereas their leaders were among the perpetrators of the crime of genocide against the Jews.

In early 2019 when Omar and Tlaib took their seats in Congress, their views gained attention and angry criticism. After she was already a member of the House, this Islamic supremacist [she voted merely "present" on a resolution recognizing the Armenian genocide, perhaps fulfilling a commitment she had made when she met with Turkish tyrant Erdogan before entering Congress] came out with another hypocritical assault on Jews:

Ms. Omar said that pro-Israel activists were pushing “for allegiance to a foreign country” — a remark that critics in both parties said played into the anti-Semitic trope of “dual loyalty.” [NY Times 7 March 2019]

These Judeophobic remarks did elicit public unease and criticism. The Democrats running the House did prepare a resolution condemning antisemitism.  But then . . .

It started as a resolution condemning anti-Semitism. Then, anti-Muslim bias was added in. After that came white supremacy. And by the end, it cited “African-Americans, Native Americans, and other people of color, Jews, Muslims, Hindus, Sikhs, immigrants and others” victimized by bigotry.  [NY Times, 7 March 2019]
So a resolution originally meant to condemn Judeophobia was watered down to become a general statement against bigotry of all sorts. The message against antisemitism was lost and no acknowledgement was made that at least one of the groups that the resolution spread its protective wings over was a group, Muslims, that has been long imbued with Judeophobia, going back to the Quran, the hadiths and other medieval Islamic writings. Nor was either Rep. Omar or Rep. Tlaib mentioned by name. Thus the resolution defeated its ostensible original purpose. 

The refusal of the Democratic Party to clearly and unequivocally condemn Judeophobia/antisemitism, instead substituting a much watered down, nearly meaningless resolution, without naming its own who were complicit in promoting Judeophobia, shows that the US Democratic Party is now home to antisemites and is complicit in their doings. American Jews should not trust this morally corrupt and hypocritical party.





Labels: , , , , ,

Sunday, October 04, 2020

Do Jews Owe Anything to the Democratic Party? Any thanks or gratitude?

expanded on 27 October 2020

Of course, we owe the Democratic Party nothing. We can look at Roosevel's shameful treatment of Jews persecuted in Europe and North Africa before and during the Shoah. Then there was Jimmy Carter's hostility for Israel in the 1970s. And another low point was reached in the presidency of Barak Hussein Obama which saw support for Israel's Islamist enemies and saw the     US undermining Israel at the UN Security Council  [for example, SC Res 2334 of December 2016], in which the Obama gang worked, as it did in various venues for eight years, in favor of apartheid against Jews in the Land of Israel.

Perhaps most damning is the complicity of the revered Democratic president, Franklin Delano Roosevelt, in the Shoah. Despite the liberal and humanitarian rhetoric that poured out of FDR, his administration did not work to stop the German nazi mass murder machine nor did they do more than token acts to help Jews escape from the Nazi-fascist domain in Europe. This was true in the 1930s before the Shoah actually got started but Hitler and his gang were already persecuting Jews. It was also true during the years when the Shoah was working at high speed. 

Rabbi Eliezer Berkovits concluded in his book, Faith After the Holocaust, that Roosevelt and his government wanted the Jews to die. It certainly seems that way. 

Even in the 1930s, when German Jews wanted to leave Germany because of the persecutions, FDR's officials imposed obstacles in their way to coming to the United States. It is important to know that at that time immigration to the United States was governed by quotas for different countries. Germany had one of the biggest quotas. Yet this large quota was not filled in the years after Hitler took power [30 January 1933]. Officials of FDR's State Department put up obstacles [on this episode see books and articles by David Wyman, a non-Jew, by the way]. 

During the war, American warplanes could and did reach the area of Poland where the Auschwitz camp was located starting in August 1943 when Sicily was liberated. US  bombers then bombed industrial plants in the area of Auschwitz but not the death camps. When in 1944 Jewish leaders implored the Allies to bomb the railroad tracks that led to Auschwitz and other camps, Roosevelt and Churchill refused, makiing the usual excuses. Jewish-American Democratic politicians were of little help in pushing FDR to help save Jews.

And Roosevelt, sometimes called Saint FDR by detractors, was a Democrat, a hero to the party, and most damning about the Democratic Party is that it still holds annual celebrations to honor and commemorate Roosevelt and his ill legacy.

In subsequent posts, we will look at anti-Israel policies by Democratic presidents Carter and Obama. Recall that both were mentored by the sinister Zbigniew Brzezinski. 

Democratic Party candidate for president, Joe Biden, was a willing partner in Obama administration schemes to harass and discriminate against Jews. I had a personal encounter with Biden in 1975 and I have disliked him ever since. God willing, he will not become the president of the USA.

- - - - - - - - - - - - 

References among others:

Josiah E Dubois, Jr, The Devil's Chemists (Boston: Beacon Press 1952). Dubois was a US Treasury official who studied what the US Govt was doing to help Jews under German-Nazi control during the war, Jews who slated for mass murder by the German Nazis. Dubois issued a report under the broad sponsorship of Treasury Secretary Morgenthau entitled: "The Acquiescence of this Government in the Murder of the Jews." After the war, Dubois served as a prosecutor at the Nuremberg Trials foccusing on the case of the German chemical giant, I G Farben.

- - - - - - -about Dubois, see Rafael Medoff, Blowing the Whistle on Genocide - Josiah E. DuBois, Jr. and the Struggle for a U.S. Response to the Holocaust (Purdue U Press 2009). 

Jan Karski, The Story of a Secret State (1944). Karski was the messenger sent by the Polish national underground to the West to tell about events in German-occupied Poland, including the mass murder of Jews that he witnessed first hand. After meeting with Anthony Eden and other British leaders he went to Washington and met with President Roosevelt, among others. He spoke to FDR about various matters, the events in Poland, the starving people, the oppression, etc, he came to the situation of the Jews. He tried to tell FDR about the horrible conditions that the Jews were living under in the Warsaw Ghetto and the Belzec concentration camp [where he had visited]. But Roosevelt did not want to hear about the Jews' suffering and changed the subject.

Arthur D Morse, While Six Million Died (1968)

David Wyman, The Abandonment of the Jews (1984)

Rafael Medoff, The Jews Should Keep Quiet: Franklin D. Roosevelt, Rabbi Stephen S. Wise, and the Holocaust (2020)  here

Labels: , , ,

Wednesday, July 22, 2020

British Fake Experts Falsify Jewish Population in Israel before the State in 1948

Everyone should know by now that we cannot always trust experts or authorities. That includes respected "newspapers of record" like the NY Times, and all sorts of "newsweeklies" and commentators on TV and supposedly scientific public opinion polls, not to mention professors of the Humanities and Social Sciences. As to the news media, they can lie or falsify in several ways. One is an outright, direct lie, an explicit lie. Another way is by omission. The NY Times has used this technique, sometimes hinting at a truth but minimizing its importance or pretending that it is just a rumor whispered in the corridors whereas the fact had been openly proclaimed, even boasted of by an official of a government guilty of a contemptible atrocity. Another way to falsify is to use insinuations through the skillful use of adjectives, adverbs, verbs and nouns, etc.

In English speaking lands, especially the United States. media cover ups and falsifications both subtle and blatant  are aided by the general ignorance of languages other than English. I have often found a totally different picture of an event or phenomenon which took place outside the United States when reading the newspapers in French or Hebrew or Italian, etc, than I got from American English- language media. Such as the NYT. This ignorance induced the Times to think it could get away with falsifying a statement by no less a personage than the Pope. The Times reported falsely that the pope had called Abu Mazen [Mahmoud Abbas] an "angel of peace" on his visit to the Vatican. When I checked how the Italian press had reported the Pope's statement, I found that he had told Abbas that he "could be an angel of peace [= Lei possa essere un angelo della pace]," if only he made peace with Israel. Not quite the same.

Of course, reference books and dictionaries, encyclopedias and lexicons. can also falsify. This brings me to A Dictionary of Politics published by the respected British  Penguin Books (F Elliott & M Summerskill, eds, 1961), as an aid to understanding current international affairs. It should come as no surprise that a blatant lie in the book concerns Israel, Jews and Zionism.
On  page 267 under the rubric "Palestine" we find this:
. . . . the population of which [of "Palestine"] had in 1919 been almost entirely Arab.

This is a gross lie. The Jewish population before WW One has been variously estimated at between 12% and 14% of the total population. The absolute number of Jews in the Land of Israel [not a distinct political/administrative entity under the Ottoman Empire] was estimated between 75,000 and 90,000. Since the whole country had a total estimated population of 650,000 to 750,000, then even the low estimate of 75,000 Jews in the Land was no small, insignificant number. Unfortunately many Jews fled the country during the war or were expelled on account of being citizens or subjects of enemy countries to the Ottoman Empire in WW One. These enemy states included Russia, France and Britain. The French Jewish citizens likely included Jews from Algeria and Tunisia. 
Hence, the Jewish population of the country was less in 1918 than in 1914, going down from 85,000 to 56,000,  according to Michael J Cohen. The causes were expulsion, flight, starvation and disease. The expelled Jews included not only enemy aliens but Jews expelled from the new city of Tel Aviv in 1917 and forced to wander the roads of the country. To be sure, the starvation also affected the Arab population due to Ottoman confiscations of food for the army from the civilian population. This significantly lowered the numbers of the population generally.

The historian Yehoshua Kaniel cites the overall population figures of 300,000 for the beginning of the 19th century, 400,000 for the 1870s and 700,000 for the eve of WW One. These numbers refer to the territory west of the Jordan River. The number of Jews in that same period, according to Kaniel, was about 5,000 at the start of the century, about 10,000 around 1850 and 85,000 on the eve of WW One. There are other estimates but they are not especially dissimilar. See below for other authorities and for bibiographic data. Now if Jews were 85,000 on the eve of WW I, making up about 12% of the total population, then at that time, the Land west or the Jordan was hardly "almost entirely Arab," not to mention other nationalities living there, such as Bosnian and Circassian Muslims, Greeks, Armenians, and Europeans and Americans belonging to various religious communities, some of them churchmen, some diplomats, some civilian residents like the German Templars who later mostly became pro-Nazi and therefore aided the Arab Revolt of the mid-1930s, politically led by Haj Amin el-Husseini and supported materially by Nazi Germany. Much of the  money and weapons supplied by Germany went through the Templars to the Arab forces led by Husseini. [To be sure, the Revolt was called a "revolt by leave," an uprising by permission of the British ruling authorities, according to some Jewish observers].

Long before 1914, Jews were already a majority in Jerusalem. This majority status goes back to the year 1853 in the middle of the 19th century, if not earlier. The numbers were cited  by none other than Karl Marx in an article for the New York Tribune on 15 April 1854. Marx took the numbers from a book by the French diplomat and historian Cesar Famin  published in 1853. In that year, Jews also lived elsewhere in the country, in Hebron, Safed, Tiberias, Gaza and in several villages and towns. 

- - - - - - - - - -
Michael J Cohen, "The Mandatory Period", in Israel: People, Land, State (edited by Avigdor Shinan; Jerusalem: Yad Izhak Ben Zvi 2005),  p 275.
Yehoshua Kaniel, "The Late Ottoman Period (1775-1917," in Shinan, ed., Israel: People, Land, State; pp 257-258.
Yehuda Slutsky, "Ottoman Period," in History from 1880 (Israel Pocket Library; Jerusalem: Keter 1973), p 24.  The Israel Pocket Library collection is taken from the Encyclopedia Judaica.

        Slutsky's figures are approx. 90,000 for 1914. He writes that 11,300 Jews left the country during the war and this number represented "over an eighth" of the pre-war Jewish population. I have simply multiplied 11,300 by eight. Slutsky does not give numbers of Jews dying of starvation or disease during the war.

Sunday, June 28, 2020

Applying Israeli Sovereignty to Judea-Samaria Will Help the Cause of Justice & Peace

People the world over are looking at Israel, at Jerusalem, to see if and how Israel will apply its sovereignty to parts of Judea & Samaria. These areas are part of the Jewish National Home juridically erected by the international community at San Remo in 1920 & at the League of Nations in 1922. No subsequent piece of legislation in any international forum did or could have vitiated that part of international law.

Yet it is precisely on these grounds, the grounds of international law, that much of the criticism and/or hostile opposition to Israel's expected move is focussed. The expected hypocritical criticism has come from the European Union and the Arab states, with some voices in Europe, both governmental and among the public, being even more vituperative, if possible, than most Arab states. As to hypocrisy, neither the EU nor the Arabs have much to say about Turkey's occupation of northern Cyprus, going on since 1974, although Cyprus is itself a member of the EU!!!
Another source of hypocritical and/or historically ignorant criticism or vituperation comes from the so-called "Liberals" or "progressives" in the United States who mostly revolve politically around the Democratic Party. The Dem critics usually go off about Israel violating international law or Israel preventing peace by making a "two-state solution" more difficult or impossible to achieve, so forth and so on. Some Dems are worse.

Leading Democratic politicians, including the Dems' presumed presidential candidate, Joe Biden, have publicly opposed what they call Israel's "annexation" of territory assigned to the Jews on the grounds of historical right as part of the aforementioned Jewish National Home. Moreover, the Dems shamelessly or ignorantly overlook their own party's role in furthering the Nazi Holocaust, the Shoah. Indeed, every year they honor President Franklin Delano Roosevelt --a Democrat-- with a dinner and former president, Barak Hussein Obama, once said that FDR was his "role model". Yet FDR was a silent partner in the Shoah. The Dems have not yet agreed to acknowledge that. Let those who disagree with me about FDR and the Shoah produce some historical evidence that he tried to rescue or even allowed the rescue of more than a token number of Jews threatened by the German Nazis. How about evidence that FDR used his air power to destroy the gas chambers and the railroad tracks that led up to the death camps?

Now in view of the fact that much of the criticism of Israel's application of sovereignty claims to rest on international law, one of the major tasks of the Israeli government in moving toward the application of sovereignty and Israeli law to land that belongs to Israel lawfully is to explain and elaborate why the move is in consonance with international law and that it is just on historical and political grounds. Indeed the League of Nations mandate for Palestine writes in its Preamble:
Whereas recognition has thereby been given to the historical connexion of the Jewish people with Palestine and to the grounds for reconstituting their national home in that country . . .

But  this and previous governments of Israel have been remiss in not emphasizing to the world our rights to the Land under international law. The web site The Israeli Settlement Blog is a good source of information not only on settlements but on the legal issues involved. Its section on the legality of settlements is especially helpful as it contains a large groups of informed articles on the legality of the settlements as well as of Israel ownership of the Judea-Samaria territory. See at link below:

Wednesday, March 11, 2020

Benito Gantz Talks & Acts like a Dictator -- Israel's Democracy in Danger

Fraud is a common feature of politics, Who would deny it? A blatant contemporary example is the so-called Blue-White Party in Israel. Blue and white are the national colors of Israel, appearing on the flag. Hence, the Blue-White Party wants to be seen as patriotic. It pretends to be nationalist, often called "right-wing" in Israel although that term is often misleading. To further the ambition of Benny Gantz to dominate Israel's government, it was necessary for his party to pretend to be national or "right-wing." This is because  the "left-wing" Labor Party had led Israel into the disastrous Oslo Accords, which multiplied the number of Israelis being murdered in terrorist attacks. And was thus discredited. So "left-wing" became an ugly, threatening term to most Israelis. Therefore, a party had to seem non-"left" or "right-wing" or national in order to win enough votes to form a govt with other  parties in a coalition.

Staying with the Israel Labor Party, although one would think that a labor party would automatically be considered "leftist," the Israel Labor Party pretended to be "rightist" or national in the 1992 elections. In fact, some journalists complained in 1992 that the party was "Likud B." In other words, the party was too close to the Likud in its election rhetoric. It was imitating Likud. Yits'haq Rabin who was at the top of the party's list, and therefore would become prime minister if the party succeeded in forming a government, promised repeatedly that he and his party would not negotiate with the  PLO. We now know that the party, perhaps through Shimon Peres, was negotiating before the 1992 elections with Arab parties, such as Hadash, which was the Israel Communist party but with a chiefly Arab voting base and with Arab nationalist policies and rhetoric. After the election, Yossi Beilin was sent by foreign minister Peres to negotiate with the PLO and these ill-starred negotiations took place in Oslo, Norway, as part of the Norwegian contribution to world terrorism, which the Norwegian govt of the time would have called helping  the "peace process." Perhaps Rabin was sincere in his promise not to negotiate with the PLO. But Peres was able to work around him. It seems that Rabin did not not know about the secret Peres-Beilin-PLO talks in Oslo and was then presented with a fait accompli by Peres. Rabin had previously called Peres "a tireless subverter" [חתרן בלתי נלאה] and he had called Beilin "Peres' poodle." As prime minister, Rabin should have known better than to trust Peres.

This history of the Oslo Accords is very relevant for what is now going on in Israeli politics. Gantz and other party members of Blue-White claimed over and over that they would not try to form a minority govt supported from outside the government by the frankly anti-Israel group of parties in the Joint Arab List.
Just before last week’s election, Yair Lapid, the No. 2 in Benny Gantz’s Kahol Lavan, wrote on Facebook that his party could have formed a government after the previous election in September with the support of the Joint List of Arab parties. But it decided not to. “We won’t form a government with the Joint List. Period, exclamation mark. Whatever you choose.” [Anshel Pfeffer, Haaretz, 10 March 2020]
Gantz even went so far as to call prime minister Netanyahu a "liar" for forecasting that that is what he would do after the election. Now, after the election on 2 March, last week, it turns out that Netanyahu was right and that Gantz was unjustly calling him a "liar" for his accurate forecasting. Gantz is hardly one to heed the will of the people if just one week after the election he is already breaking an important promise to his voters. Gantz is not democratic and is a habitual liar himself. We will get to that later.

First, the Israeli system needs explanation. There are 120 members of the parliament, the Knesset. They are elected by proportional representation. That is, the total vote is counted and parties that get more than the necessary threshold of vote percentage [3.25%] will get seats divided up by the percentage of votes for each qualifying party or party list. If a party list gets approximately 10% of the votes, it will get10% of the seats, that is, 12 out of 120. Since a party never gets half or more of the seats [61], it has to form a coalition. In the last three elections, neither major party [neither Likud nor Blue-White] has gotten enough seats among the Jewish parties [most of which have some Arab or Druze voters] to form a govt even in coalition. The Arab parties (including the Communist Hadash), being anti-Israel and Arab nationalist in rhetoric and policies, have never been part of a coalition [alhough the Communist Party in 1948 signed the Israeli Declaration of Independence]. So there is good reason not to include them in a coalition --as opposed to individual Arab politicians considered loyal to the state who have been in the government.

As Benito Gantz has been speaking in favor of forming a minority government supported from outside the govt by the Joint Arab List to provide a 62 seat majority, two members of Blue-White, considered "right-wing," have spoken out publicly against the very idea. Gantz naturally became angry with them, although they were only insisting that the party hold to Gantz' own promises to the voters rejecting the very notion of a govt based on the Joint List [including Communists and Islamists]. What Gantz said to these two members of his own party elected on the Blue-White list to the Knesset is very interesting and instructive. He did not merely tell them why he thought they were wrong and he was right, he put it this way:
Gantz however issued a statement saying “In Blue and White there can be a variety of opinions, but there is only one position and one decision - that of the chairman of the party. Not that of senior officials or associates.” [Jerusalem Post, 10 March 2020]
Benny Gantz issued this statement. But it could just as well have been issued by another Ben, Benito Mussolini. Or Stalin, for that matter. The party leader is called by Gantz the "chairman" as in Communist countries where the top dictator was the chairman of the Communist Party. Is there any doubt that this Benito is a danger to Israel's democracy and a danger to the Jews?

Just to add a little extra sweetness to our portrait of Benito, let's look at what he said last Saturday night. Netanyahu gave a speech to members of Likud in which he severely criticized Gantz. Gantz responded with a speech of his own in which he threatened civil war. Of course, he charged Netanyahu with threatening or working towards a civil war due to Netanyahu's alleged "incitement." But the charge of incitement has been used all too often here in Israel in order to silence political opponents. In fact, Gantz and some of his Blue White comrades have been inciting against Netanyahu by gross lies [here]. Here are beauties from Gantz' speech on Saturday night:
"The Right in recent in weeks are [sic! should be "have"] left no room for no [sic!! This second no does not belong here] doubt, Netanyahu is threatening a civil war with his call of incitement. I stand here in front of you in the name of many people on the Right and Left and say: it's time to heal Israeli society from the plague of hatred," [i24news]
In fact, Gantz has been smearing Netanyahu since his first major political speech in February 2019 [here].
Gantz is far from being a true military hero. He was a mediocre general at best. In Yiddish we can call him Ah gantser gornisht [ א גאנצער גארנישט], a total nothing!! On the other hand, Netanyahu served in the elite Sayeret Matkal commando unit. He took part in various missions, such as rescuing the passengers on a Sabena [Belgian] airline who were hijacked to the Lod airport here in Israel by terrorists.
Now for the good news. It seems that Orly Levy Abecassis has served as the Queen Esther of our times --on Purim appropriately-- and rescued us from the nightmare of a minority government dependent on the hostile Arab parties who had already warned that they demand a high price be paid for supporting Gantz' would-be govt from outside. For instance, they ruled out any future major military action against the Hamas jihadi terrorists in the Gaza Strip.
Orly Levy, daughter of a Likud foreign minister, joined with Zvi Hauser and Yoaz Hendel in refusing to back Gantz in his endeavor to form a minority govt supported from outside by hostile Arab parties.
Whereas Hauser and Hendel belong to Blue-White and were elected on its list, Levy Abecassis was elected on a joint list of her party, Gesher, along with Labor and Meretz.

Labels: , , ,