Finding the Good in Anti-Semites
Critics of Israel like to claim that Zionists can’t tolerate criticism of Israel. Supporters of the Jewish state, the argument goes, dismiss any condemnation of Israeli policy as anti-Semitic. In truth, a dark inversion of this charge is becoming the norm: Critics of Israel can’t denounce anti-Semites.
The most recent example comes from the New York Times’ Michelle Goldberg, who wrote a column on Friday headlined “Anti-Zionism Isn’t the Same as Anti-Semitism.” She defends the pro-Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) positions of incoming Democratic Reps. Rashida Tlaib of Michigan and Ilhan Omar of Minnesota. The BDS movement, of course, singles out Israel for total economic isolation in the hopes of bringing the Jewish State to its knees. “Conservatives in the United States—though not only conservatives—have denounced Tlaib and Omar’s stance as anti-Semitic,” Goldberg writes. “It is not.”
Tlaib, a Palestinian American and the first Muslim woman elected to Congress, has tweeted and retweeted her enthusiasm for terrorists such as Rasmea Odeh, who murdered two American students in a Jerusalem supermarket in 1969. If Tlaib’s anti-Zionism is of the Jew-loving kind, she has a funny way of showing it.
Ilhan Omar, for her part, once tweeted, “Israel has hypnotized the world, may Allah awaken the people and help them see the evil doings of Israel.” And wouldn’t you know it, just because she believes that Zionist hypnotists have cast global spells masking Israeli evil, some people think she’s anti-Semitic. Go figure.
You’ll find none of this in Goldberg’s column. To her, “the conflation of anti-Zionism with anti-Semitism is a bit of rhetorical sleight-of-hand that depends on treating Israel as the embodiment of the Jewish people everywhere.” Goldberg spends the bulk of her column trying very hard to uncouple American Jewishness from Israel.
To do that, she enumerates Israel’s sins, as she sees them. These are chiefly the country’s relationships with far-right European movements (that support Israel), the impasse on the two-state solution (which Palestinian leaders have rejected again and again), and Israel’s warming relationship with Saudi Arabia. This last bit is telling. The left used to blame Israel for the hostility it garnered among Arabs in the region; now it blames Israel for the concord and mutual respect it enjoys with the most important Arab country in the world.
In 2016, the UN Human Rights Council (UNHRC) formally instructed the high commissioner for human rights, who oversees the council’s attendant bureaucracy, to compile a database of businesses that have “directly and indirectly enabled, facilitated, and profited from the construction and growth of the settlements”—by which are meant Jewish communities in the West Bank. The list, which has not yet been made public, includes some 206 businesses, most of which are based in Israel. In a detailed report, the Kohelet Policy Forum explains why this project is nothing but an attempt to aid those who wish to boycott Israel:
The clear goal of the UNHRC . . . is to create negative reputational consequences for the listed companies, and ultimately to trigger sanctions against targeted companies through subsequent action by the Security Council or national governments. [Moreover], the current “research” program is focused only on companies with links to Israel, and particularly areas of the West Bank under the Oslo Accords under full Israeli civil administration.
But . . . business activity in what the UN regards as occupied territories is a worldwide phenomenon. Every situation of prolonged belligerent occupation in the world involves widespread “settlement” activity—a non-technical term to refer generally to the migration of civilians from the occupying power into the territory. In all of these occupations, business enterprises, including third-country firms, play a major economic role. Many of these settlement enterprises have resulted in the large-scale ethnic cleansing or displacement of the occupied population or subjected it to widespread and massive human-rights violations that have been amply documented, [but these cases are not subjects of UNHRC’s concern]. . . .
The UNHRC’s database will focus on “business activities and related issues that raise particular human-rights violations concerns,” [a scope so broad as to include] any kind of activity under Israeli auspices—from providing “construction equipment,” to “banking and financial operations,” to the “use of natural resources,” all in the vague context of “maintain[ing]” settlements. To be clear, no physical link to Jewish civilian communities is required for inclusion in the list, . . . a standard vague enough to sweep in much of Israeli industry. This definition is legally baseless. . . .
Europe has become the epicenter of the new war against Israel and the Jews. Europe fights the Jewish State in the political arenas, in the corridors of power in Brussels, in various Western European capitals and the United Nations, inside Israel with the NGOs it funds, the media and the diplomacy. So that those responsible for the massacre of Jews in the pizzeria Sbarro di Gerusalemme, of the massacre of Jewish kids at the Dolphinarium discotheque in Tel Aviv, of the carnage of entire Jewish families during the Passover dinner at the Park Hotel of Netanya, are not termed “terrorists” in Europe, but “militants”.
Europe is a bystander no more. It has become deliberately responsible for the abominable crime of cultural genocide: wiping out the past existence of a people – the Jews – to eliminate their current political legitimacy and its human, religious, cultural and historical rights. That is why Europe voted along with the Islamic regimes at the recent UN resolutions denying the Jewish history of Jerusalem.
Europe’s lights are fading under the pressure of different phenomena. First of all, Islamism that it is submerging Europe under the darkness in many of its territories and which it degrades severely. The mass arrival of migrants coming from the Middle East, from the Maghreb and from Africa that Europe can not integrate, nor help return to their countries of origin and are left shamefully to stagnate in precariousness, are the source of great evils. Erosion, decadence, and powerlessness.
But they are also the source of the development of this violent anti-Semitism with the permanent denigration of Israel.
We are at the point that many Jews prefer to leave Europe to live in Israel. What a step back, the Jews flee again from Europe to seek peace and security in a country that has only enemies around it, those who as a single entity cultivate the will to find the way to destroy Israel and throw its corpse into the sea.
“Israel is a vital component of this emerging order as the paradigm nation-state totally committed to its defense and survival” Melanie Phillips just wrote. The order of operations is that made of Trump’s America, Brexit, Eastern Europe and the Jewish State.
That new order is the Western last chance for cultural survival. That is why anti-Semitism has become a major engine of the Western chaos.
During the earlier years of my childhood, I grew up in the more integrated neighborhoods in Stockholm that had a rich array of backgrounds among inhabitants — Swedish, Finnish, Middle Eastern, and Latino being among the most prevalent. The political bent in such neighborhoods was and remains distinctly left-of-center. On immigration and economic policies, the message is inclusion in society for all, especially the less fortunate. But when talking about injustice around the world, while suppression of basic democratic rights of ethnic groups and women receives attention, the majority of debate tends to center on the plight of Palestinians at the hands of Israel. An anti-Semitic bent is clearly present in both conversations that touch on influence in business and conflicts and also in conspiracy theories. It’s not difficult to see the connection.
Many of the Swedes I came across weren’t even aware that the rhetoric they so passionately spewed was anti-Semitic. I have been in conversations where acquaintances proudly talk about the anti-racist demonstrations and initiatives they have been active in, only to turn the conversation to how Jews control the world through a wide-reaching conspiracy.
It is no wonder Jews around Europe are often afraid to openly identify as Jewish. But Europe is not alone. In recent years, we have seen an increase in anti-Semitism across the United States.
There have been a greater number of hate crimes perpetrated against Jews, such as the ruthless murder of 11 people at the Tree of Life synagogue in Pittsburgh in October. Swastikas have been spray-painted on the campuses of Columbia University and Cornell University. Furthermore, anti-Semitism can also be found in left-leaning circles. This anti-Semitism, as I’ve found to be true in Sweden and as Bari Weiss correctly puts it, “comes cloaked in the language of progressive values.”
University of Michigan professor Juan Cole has been out promoting his new book, Muhammad: Prophet of Peace Amid the Clash of Empires, and with it, his revisionist view of early Islam as pacifistic and its prophet Muhammad as akin to Martin Luther King Jr. engaging in “nonviolent noncooperation.” Campus Watch Fellow Andrew Harrod’s report on Cole’s recent talk at Georgetown University appears at the American Spectator.
As Georgetown professor and ACMCU founder John Esposito moderated, Cole discussed his findings on “peace in the Quran and early Islam.” “I am swimming against the stream here,” he said, “as that isn’t the word that comes to mind for most people with regard to Islam.” Yet his elaborated revisionist history was unconvincing.
Cole explained his dubious thesis that any violent characteristics in Islam involved an ex post facto recasting of Islam’s supposedly peaceful seventh-century prophet Muhammad. During the Abbasid caliphate (750-1258), “when the classical Arabic-Muslim corpus of work about Islam was formulated,” Muhammad’s biographers “wrote down his biography in such a way as to militarize it.” “It is very stark, if you follow the Quran itself as your primary source, how different it is from these later times,” Cole stated.
What is so strange about our political moment, is that we often ban speech because some in the audience may consider it offensive, and hurt feelings are perceived as violence, and yet the actual content of speech is glossed over. It’s all words, and words about words, and the feeling they perhaps produce in some sensitive individuals.
One hundred years ago we’ve elevated offensive speech to the status of an art form when Marcel Duchamp installed urinals in an art gallery to offend. Working in the same vein, 1970’s London Punks wore swastikas with the explicit intention to offend, especially to offend the World War Two veterans. Arguably, some of the Wisconsin high school students who gave Nazi salute in a prom picture probably wanted to offend (I’m sure it’s a deeper problem for at least some of them, and don’t blame the hicks in the Midwest, we have the same problem in San Francisco Bay Area).
So, we’ve been hang up on the idea of offensive speech for a while. Yet to say that Hill’s words were merely offensive is to minimize their significance. And in fact, whatever I feel when I hear them, I don’t feel offended. The real problem with calling for elimination of the world’s only Jewish state is ethnic cleansing.
It’s not that I need to trim my ego, nurse my wounded pride, and make space for Duchamps of the 21st century, it’s that Hills words call for very concrete actions, and I will work very hard to make sure that everyone understands what Hill proposes, and that it never happens.
Hill’s apology was offensive because it merely insulted my intelligence. Hill’s original from river to the sea opus was pure evil. It was evil because it’s tied to objective reality which is evil. Hill’s domain is that of words, words about words, and feelings they might produce. He is a demagogue.
At the end of each year, lawmakers jockey to attach their long-stalled bills onto annual spending legislation that must pass for the government to function. And this season is no exception.
With only ten days left in session, Congress is debating whether to link funding for US President Donald Trump’s push for the border wall, bipartisan criminal justice reform and protection for Special Counsel Robert Mueller with the critical spending measure.
Slightly lower on the totem pole of priorities, they are also considering whether to attach the Israel Anti-Boycott Act – a bill that has drawn some controversy on the left – to the package, as well.
Groups across the political spectrum are pressing Republican House leadership to do so, with few days left before the 115th Congress takes a recess and makes way for new leadership under the Democratic Party.
The House will pass the bill first, and therefore can include House language of the anti-boycott act that has not been negotiated in conference with the Senate – the typical process for a bill that passes on its own.
Most Republican lawmakers support the anti-boycott act, introduced by Ben Cardin (D-MD) and Rob Portman (R-OH) in the Senate and Juan Vargas (D-CA) and Peter Roskam (R-IL) in the House. The bill targets US companies participating in international boycotts against the Jewish state.
But, while several Democrats have sponsored the bill, several have distanced themselves from legislation that critics say impedes on constitutional free speech protections.
Cory needs to know that if you’re a United States senator from New Jersey, with a huge Jewish constituency, and the Iranians are threatening to kill all the Jews, you have to speak out. You have to condemn their antisemitism. You have a perch at the United States Senate. You have to go to the podium and say, “Look, whether or not I support the Iran nuclear deal is beside the point. I condemn in the strongest possible terms Iran describing the Jews as a cancer that must be eradicated.” And now that “moderate” Iranian President Rouhani has also called Israel a cancer – just like Ahmadinejad before him – it’s not too late for Cory to live up to his own words and condemn such wretched antisemitism.
And when Louis Farrakhan gets up and says that Jews are termites – and we all know what you do with termites – then Cory needs to know that “it’s not enough to sit back and watch and be a bystander…. It’s not enough to say ‘I’m not racist.’ You must be anti-antisemitism…. We must stand up for each other and say that bigotry has no place, that antisemitism has no place.”
So why didn’t Cory condemn Farrakhan?
And since Cory was saying all this at the ADL – the premier antisemitism fighting organization in America, which CEO Jonathan Greenblatt has brought to new heights – why didn’t he practice what he preaches right there and then?
We Jews are sick of being demonized. But we’re all sick of those who say that the demonization must end, but then refuse to condemn the antisemites lest they pay a political price.
This week 70 years ago, the U.N. General Assembly adopted the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. One of its most important points is that humanitarian aid is to be granted on a politically neutral basis. But not surprisingly, when it comes to Israel, things appear somewhat different.
The U.N. Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) coordinates emergency responses worldwide. Local U.N. offices transfer government money to various U.N. agencies and human rights NGOs.
The office operates in some 30 nations where humanitarian aid is required, including Syria, Libya, Iraq, Somalia, and Sudan. In Afghanistan, its goal is defined as “saving life”; in Cameroon, it is to ensure that people in a crisis situation survive; and in Yemen and Somalia it’s “providing lifesaving aid.”
But the definition of humanitarian aid is different when it pertains to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. In 2002, OCHA established a branch in east Jerusalem, where its mission was defined as ensuring that the “rights of the Palestinians living under occupation” are upheld in accordance with international human rights law and international humanitarian law.
Since then, local and international NGOs have received hefty funding, most of which comes directly from governments, for initiatives that fall under the definition of humanitarian aid to the Palestinians. Since 2003, nearly $5 billion has been raised. The total amount of money that various groups are requesting for their projects for 2018-2020, per person destined to benefit, is higher than in Somalia, Iraq, and Afghanistan. This is true despite the European Commission Civil Protection and Humanitarian Aid Operations having identified the need for humanitarian aid in the West Bank as “low” and the need in the Gaza Strip as “moderate.”
The UK Pink Floyd Experience, a Pink Floyd tribute band, recently announced that it will not perform its three scheduled shows in Israel. This announcement follows the oh-so-usual approach by BDS-poster boy Roger Waters, former front man for the original Pink Floyd band, who urged the tribute band not to play in Israel.
However, the hubris that led Waters to publish a Facebook post about this apparent BDS success seems to have exploded right in his face. Waters announces that he is “very happy that they have canceled their shows in Israel,” and he is “glad to welcome them into the BDS fold.” Yet this happiness seems to be rather one-sided, according to the reply from David Power, front man and director of the UK tribute band. Rather than sacrifice the Israeli tour dates and embrace the mass media exposure emanating from this incident – as many artists do – Power chose to reply to Waters, setting the record straight and explaining the reason for the cancelation:
Roger, as I pointed out to you, my concern was for my colleagues and the abuse and threats they were receiving as a result of your initial post. This remains the main reason for issuing the cancelation post. We do not support either side in this. We were simply hoping to bring music to the people.
So it is neither ideological conviction nor support for the Palestinian cause that prompted this cancelation. It was fear, brought on by a frontal assault of abuse and threats, an assault ordered by Roger Waters. Power makes a direct connection between this assault and the cancelation, leaving no room for doubt or a hijacking of the agenda: The cancelation was due to the threat of violence – brought on by Waters.
Power seems displeased with Waters welcoming him into the BDS fold. When asked by an Israeli fan to clarify where he stands regarding the BDS movement, Power answered bluntly that he “is not in BDS, nor are any members of my show. Achieving peace should be the goal through communication.”
It would be almost natural for a tribute band, dedicated solely to performing Pink Floyd songs – many of them written by Waters – would fall in line with their idol’s wishes. On this same post, Ricky Howard of The Australian Pink Floyd tribute band accepted the limitations laid down by Waters, announcing that, “as a member of the Australian Pink Floyd show, I can assure you we did not play any gigs in Israel last year, nor do we have plans to do so. I hope this clears up any misunderstandings! All the best.” (This tribute band has performed in Israel in the past.)
Singer Nick Cave recently began a website The Red Hand Files, where he answers “questions or comments, observations or inspirations” by fans.
In his latest post, he answers What are your thoughts on Brian Eno’s stance on Israel? by including his actual response to Brian Eno’s imploring him to boycott Israel.
Clearly the decision for The Bad Seeds to play in Israel is contentious for some people. But to be clear on this: I do not support the current government in Israel, yet do not accept that my decision to play in the country is any kind of tacit support for that government’s policies. Nor do I condone the atrocities that you have described; nor am I ignorant of them. I am aware of the injustices suffered by the Palestinian population, and wish, with all people of good conscience, that their suffering is ended via a comprehensive and just solution, one that involves enormous political will on both sides of the equation. As you know, I have done a considerable amount of work for Palestine through the Hoping Foundation, raising personally around £150,000 for the children of Palestine, so in a sense, I have already played the other side.
But I also do not support the Boycott, Divestments and Sanctions movement, as you know. I think the cultural boycott of Israel is cowardly and shameful. In fact, this is partly the reason I am playing Israel – not as support for any particular political entity but as a principled stand against those who wish to bully, shame and silence musicians. I don’t intend to engage in a detailed discussion as to how the boycott of Israel can be seen to be anti-Semitic at heart and, furthermore, does not work (rather, it risks further entrenching positions in Israel in opposition to those you support), but even the estimable Noam Chomsky considers the BDS as lacking legitimacy and inherently hypocritical. What we actually have here is a fundamental difference of opinion as to what the purpose of music is.
It struck me while writing this how much more powerful a statement you could make if you were to go to Israel and tell the press and the Israeli people how you feel about their current regime, then do a concert on the understanding that the purpose of your music was to speak to the Israeli people’s better angels. That would have a much greater effect than a boycott. Now imagine if the 1,200 UK artists who signed your list did the same thing. Perhaps the Israelis would respond in a wholly different way than they would to just yet more age-old rejectionism. Ultimately, whatever the rights and wrongs of official Israeli action in the disputed territories, Israel is a real, vibrant, functioning democracy – yes, with Arab members of parliament – and so engaging with Israelis, who vote, may be more helpful than scaring off artists or shutting down means of engagement.
I have to admit there are parts of Nick’s answer I find unpalatable: the sweeping statements about the government, acknowledging “the atrocities that [Eno] described,” and describing Israel hater Noam Chomsky as “estimable.”
But you have to love his stunning rebuke of BDS, which he sees as “anti-Semitic at heart” and a “cowardly and shameful” way of “weaponising music and using it to punish ordinary Israeli citizens.” And he clearly respects Israelis, who he sees as part of “a real, vibrant, functioning democracy” and not deserving to be treated “with the necessary contempt to do Brian Eno’s bidding.”
Also note his use of the phrase “disputed territories” and NOT “occupied territories.”
Not that we didn’t already know how much he loves and respects his Israeli fans. I’m just glad knowing this latest post is likely to cause Roger Waters to experience even more sorrow, rage and disbelief. Oh, and no doubt more whining from him.
Anti-Israel group Jewish Voice for Peace (JVP) have once again co-opted a Jewish holiday – this time Hanukkah – to pursue their decidedly not-Jewish agenda of bashing Israel, the Jewish state and indigenous home of the Jewish people.
Come light the People’s Menorah!
Let’s count the number of things wrong with this – besides the abject Israel hate, of course
This event was held well after Hanukkah was already over – there is no ninth day of Hanukkah
On Hanukah, Jews do not light a Menorah. We light a Hanukiah
Hanukkah celebrates the rededication of the Jewish Temple in Jerusalem. Were the events of Hanukah taking place today, JVP would be at the forefront of decrying them (actually, Jews in groups like JVP are very much like the Hellenists of that time).
This reminds me of the so-called “liberation seders” of fellow anti-Israel group IfNotNow – co-opting Hanukkah, like Passover, is one of the most ridiculous things they could do, given the significance and symbolism of these holidays.
The only fitting thing about this sham of an event was its location – a church! Which sums up just how Jewish they really are.
Anti-Israel organization If Not Now decided in their infinite wisdom to take on pro-Israel organization Stand With Us, asking on Twitter for people to pick sides.
Yeah, that did not go so well. Almost all of the 101 responses to this question as of the time of this post have responded “Stand With Us.”
I guess most people are not huge fans of saying kaddish for Hamas terrorists who murder men, women and children. Go figure.
This was a secret ballot vote and before we go any further, let me just say that I really don’t understand secret ballot votes. You’re electing student senators to represent you and your interests. If you don’t know how these senators voted — particularly on such a contentious topic as Israel — how will you hold them accountable?
NYU’s Black Student Union supported the resolution, suggesting that both Palestinians and American blacks fight against white supremacy. The group said “we continue to see a linkage between the Palestinian oppression and the struggle for Black liberation. Israel’s pervasive use of detention and imprisonment centers evokes similarities to police violence and the carceral state in the U.S. that targets and criminalizes Black communities.”
Notice the disingenuous framing of law enforcement as an institution that punishes people not for crime, but for the color of their skin. Anyway, remember George Mason University professor Noura Erakat? You know, the one who takes issue with people calling Palestinians a “mob” but doesn’t seem to have a problem with the term being used to describe Israelis? Well, she praised the passing of the resolution as part of a building of a “path for human rights,” but it doesn’t look like any of this even matters because NYU’s administration controls the cash flow and ISN’T a huge fan of the resolution.
An NYU spokesman said: “The University opposes this proposal….It is at odds with the Trustees’ well understood position that the endowment should not be used for making political statements.”
The New York Times has a new favorite talking point about Israel.
The talking point has cropped up recently in almost identical terms in two places.
A December 7 opinion piece by Times columnist Michelle Goldberg, headlined “Anti-Zionism Isn’t the Same as Anti-Semitism; American Jews have nothing to fear from the new congressional critics of Israel,” includes the claim that “Now, however, Israel has foreclosed the possibility of two states, relentlessly expanding into the West Bank and signaling to the world that the Palestinians will never have a capital in East Jerusalem.”
A news article in New York Times print editions of December 7 includes the same claim, contending, “Palestinian officials were incensed by Mr. Trump’s decision last year to move the American Embassy in Israel from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem, a move they feared could undermine their efforts to establish East Jerusalem as the capital of a future Palestinian state.”
The Goldberg piece is problematic for reasons I hope to get into some other time, but, for now, let’s stick with the nonsense about how turning “East Jerusalem” into “the capital of a future Palestinian state” was totally plausible until either Prime Minister Netanyahu or President Trump or the combination thereof supposedly scuttled the idea.
This is nonsense for at least four reasons.
First, nothing about putting an American embassy to Israel in western Jerusalem necessarily forecloses the idea of an eventual capital of a Palestinian state in eastern Jerusalem. As President Trump said, “We are not taking a position of any final status issues, including the specific boundaries of the Israeli sovereignty in Jerusalem.”
We’ve posted repeatedly about the egregious distortions and outright lies about Israel peddled by Robert Fisk, the Independent’s veteran Middle East correspondent, and, before pivoting to his latest piece, here’s a very brief summary of his ‘greatest hits’:
- He claimed that Israel dragged the West into the Syrian Civil War.
- He claimed the Obama administration’s impending 2013 attack on Syria – later aborted – following a chemical attack on civilians was not motivated by the desire to dissuade Assad from further such attacks, but, rather, was an operation based solely on Israeli interests.
- He somehow managed to blame Israel in part for the torture and abuse of Iraqi prisoners by US forces.
- He falsely claimed that former Israeli prime minister Menachem Begin characterised Palestinians as “two-legged animals”.
- He suggested the British government should be just as worried about British Jews who fought in the IDF and then returned to the UK as they are about returning ISIS terrorists.
- He characterised Shimon Peres – arguably the Israeli most associated with the quest for peace – shortly after his passing as a man of “blood” and “slaughter”.
- He peddled the antisemitic ‘dual loyalty’ card by suggesting that President Clinton’s Mid-East peace advisers (such as Dennis Ross and Aaron David Miller) couldn’t be trusted to act in the best interest of the US because they were Jewish.
- He personally apologised to Palestinians for the Balfour Declaration.
His latest Indy column makes use of another anti-Israel trick in his arsenal – selective omissions which serve to advance the desired pro-Palestinian narrative. The piece focuses on Time magazine’s person of the year front award going to Jamal Khashoggi and the other journalist “guardians” who have “taken great risks in pursuit of greater truths”.
Fisk drags Israel into the story by the fourth paragraph:
Of course, I did look at Time’s list of names to see if Yasser Murtaja, the brave Palestinian cameraman shot dead by an Israeli sniper in April, made it to their hall of honour. He was hailed by The Nation magazine. Like Khashoggi, he gave his life for telling – or in his case, filming – the truth, the Palestinian protests at the Gaza border. But maybe he wasn’t filming a truth which Americans or Time magazine are ready to accept, or to talk too much about without becoming “controversial”: the oppression of the people of Gaza.
Whilst Fisk’s suggestion that the MSM is reluctant to report on ‘the oppression of the people of Gaza’ is patently absurd, even more troubling is his failure to even acknowledge questions raised concerning whether Murtaja was truly a journalist.
Among the attacks which did not receive any BBC coverage were a shooting attack on a bus near Beit El on November 7th in which two civilians were injured, a stabbing attack in Jerusalem on November 14th in which four border policemen were injured, a stabbing attack near Beit Jala on November 20th in which one man was injured, a vehicular attack on November 26th in which three soldiers were injured and an attack in Eilat on November 30th in which two civilians were injured.
If we take the BBC’s reporting of the rocket and mortar attacks launched between November 11th and 13th as having covered all the 506 incidents (although the number used in BBC reports at the time was 460) it is possible to say that the BBC News website reported 79.8% of the terror attacks that took place during November.
Since the beginning of 2018 the BBC has reported 31.67% of the terror attacks that have actually taken place and 91.7% of the resulting fatalities.
A former teacher at a Catholic high school in Montvale, New Jersey, alleged in a lawsuit last week that he was wrongly terminated after sustaining antisemitic abuse.
In a complaint filed in federal court, Jacob Rabinowitz said he experienced a “litany of antisemitic and other discriminatory behavior” while working as a pre-calculus teacher during the 2017-2018 school year at St. Joseph Regional High School.
Both the private, all-boys school and the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Newark, which oversees it, are listed as defendants in the case.
Rabinowitz said that he found a swastika carved into the blackboard in his classroom on his first day, claiming in the lawsuit that it was “unmistakable and could not have gone unnoticed” by administrators or other teachers who shared the space.
He recalled that for several weeks, students “threw coins at him whenever his back was turned in an obvious reference to Jewish stereotypes.” The pupils’ desks were also “frequently adorned with swastikas and anti-Jewish language,” Rabinowitz alleged — with one featuring the German sentence, “Sechs millionen waren nur der anfang,” which translates to, “Six million was just the beginning.”
He recounted one incident when a student announced to the class that his favorite scene in the Holocaust film Schindler’s List involved the gruesome murder of a Jewish woman, and then proceeded to act out the murder.
Some Jewish residents in Canberra say they are afraid to go out in public or wear their religious clothing for fear of anti-Semitic attacks, which a Rabbi said had already driven one person out of the national capital.
Rabbi Shmueli Feldman said this year alone, metal bars, rocks, meat and eggs had been hurled at a synagogue and homes — with the Rabbi’s young children targeted in one attack.
A federal public servant told the ABC he had found bacon in his office mug on several occasions, while CCTV footage showed a teenager smashing the window of a synagogue in Canberra’s north and ripping off a security camera.
It has also been revealed ACT Policing last year attended a Canberra private school after a teenage student posted “vile” anti-Jewish hate comments on Facebook.
Rabbi Feldman said these were just some examples of recent abuse that had frightened the Jewish community.
He stressed a recently-released report from the Executive Council of Australian Jewry — that found there were 13 attacks on Canberra’s Jewish community in the past year — did not reflect the full scale of the problem.
“Every few weeks or so there’s another instance of vandalism, harassment or anti-Semitic behaviour towards my family or others in the community,” he said.
It’s not every day that TIME magazine calls you a genius.
“They’re not calling me a genius,” Elad Walach protests. “They’re referring to the company!”
Walach is the 30-year-old CEO of Aidoc, a two-year-old Tel Aviv-based startup that is saving lives through medical imaging.
Aidoc applies proprietary artificial intelligence to the millions of images generated every year by CT scans in order to catch serious issues before a human radiologist even has a chance to review the results.
Aidoc has already received US and European approval to assess scans of brain hemorrhages and spinal fractures.
TIME included the startup on its list of “50 Genius Companies of 2018,” a prestigious cohort that includes well-known names such as Amazon, Airbnb and Apple (and that’s just the As).
Aidoc’s always-on AI software reviews CT results as soon as they come out of the machine. If an abnormality is detected, an alert appears on the radiologist’s screen immediately.
“The radiologist doesn’t have to click anything for this to happen; that’s why it’s being used on a daily basis,” Walach tells ISRAEL21c.
Tel Aviv-based startup Alpha Tau Medical claims it has developed a technology that can cure tumors by injecting them with radioactive material that attacks and destroys the cancer cells. The procedure takes two hours or less and can be performed anywhere, the company says.
In the treatment, called Diffusing Alpha-emitters Radiation Therapy (DaRT), a needle containing radium-224, a radioactive isotope, is inserted into the location of the tumor. Once positioned, it emits alpha particles that have the capacity to exterminate the cancer cells. These particles are known to have the ability to cause irreparable breaks in the DNA of these cells.
The problem with using alpha cells in cancer treatment is that they decay and lose effectiveness very quickly. So the Israeli firm came up with a system that uses a needle armed with radium-224. This needle is injected into the tumor, where it releases the radium. As the radium decays, after about four days, it releases “daughter atoms” that spread within the tumor and emit high-energy alpha particles, which target the cancer cells.
“This is the first time in the world that you can treat solid tumors,” which are the most common, with alpha radiation, CEO Uzi Sofer told The Times of Israel in the lounge of a Jerusalem hotel. The treatment itself can be conducted anywhere, “even here,” he exclaimed, pointing to his surroundings, where waiters bustled about, ferrying drinks to and fro. “It is like going to the dentist,” he said.
If you are currently planning your next visit to Israel, you would be wise to check out Tel Aviv’s LINK Hotel & Hub – a boutique hotel and homage to local street art, which is now earning international acclaim.
The hotel, located on King Saul Avenue, has been selected as one of the “100 most incredible hotels in the world” and one of the leading five in the Middle East by expert tourism publisher Fodor’s. The LINK, which opened in July, is the only Israeli representative on the prestigious list.
Dubai’s traditionally-designed Al Seef Hotel and luxurious Burj Al Arab Jumeirah, Oman’s remote Alila Jabal Akhdar, and Petra’s classical Hyatt Zaman make up the remainder of the Middle East’s best hotels.
The LINK, a new concept launched by the Dan Hotels chain, aims to appeal to a new generation of millennial tourists and businessmen. Curated by Cannes Film Festival lifetime achievement and award-winning photographer Daniel Siboni, each of the hotel’s eight floors is assigned to a different contemporary Tel Aviv street artist.
After more than 30 years of conservation work, a massive Crusader fortress in central Israel will soon be open to the public, the Nature and Parks Authority announced this week.
The Parks Authority celebrated the end to decades of on-again, off-again conservation work at the Crusader fortress in the Migdal Tzedek Park, next to Rosh Haayin in central Israel, on Tuesday.
The imposing stone fortress sits alone on a hill and boasts panoramic views from Jaffa to the Samaria hills. The spot was a strategically important battleground for warriors from Alexander the Great to Salah-al-Din because of its prominent location along the Yarkon River, and archaeologists have found remnants of battlements there dating back over 2,000 years.
Jewish-Roman chronicler Josephus Flavius mentioned the fortress in his writings from the first century.
For years, the inside of the fortress has been fenced off to the public amid safety concerns that large stones could break off or ceilings could collapse. The rolling hills that surround the fortress are a popular weekend picnic spot as well as an important ecological corridor for wild animals including hyenas and gazelles.
The Ottomans had occupied Palestine for 400 years before their defeat by Allenby, which paved the way for the eventual re-establishment of the Jewish State in their eternal homeland in 1948. 18,000 British Empire troops were killed in this campaign. pic.twitter.com/AIqzTLFLFH
— Rɪᴄʜᴀʀᴅ Kᴇᴍᴘ ⋁ (@COLRICHARDKEMP) December 11, 2018
We have lots of ideas, but we need more resources to be even more effective. Please donate today to help get the message out and to help defend Israel.