The Right To Destroy Jewish History

[Sixties Fan]

The Palestinian Authority instructs Palestinian children never to acknowledge Israel's ‎right to exist. In a recent TV program, children were taught that Israel's entire coast is ‎part of “Palestine” and its “gateway to the world.” Israeli ports Haifa, Acre, Jaffa, ‎Ashdod, and Ashkelon were listed as part of the “Palestinian coastal plain” that has ‎been “under Israeli occupation since 1948”: ‎

(full article online)

PA to children: Israel's entire coast is really âPalestine,â âunder occupation since ââ1948ââ | PMW Analysis

The Palestinian Authority instructs Palestinian children never to acknowledge Israel's ‎right to exist.

palwatch.org

 

[Sixties Fan]

Palestinian children who were born decades after Israel’s establishment in 1948 and decades after the Oslo Accords peace agreement are being educated by the PA to envision themselves as residents of the cities “stolen by the Jews,” and as “refugees” temporarily living in the Palestinian territories. They are brought up to believe that in the future they will “liberate Palestine” and live in a world with no Israel.

This was made clear on a children’s program named A Child and a Refugee Camp on official PA TV. Palestinian kids were taught, through the words of a 12-year-old boy, to see themselves as suffering victims of “the Jews” - not “the Israelis” who were not mentioned at all. However, the children were taught that this is a state of temporary suffering only, because their “return” to “Palestine”- meaning all of Israel - is assured.

The 12-year-old boy was interviewed about his “yearning” for Lod – an Israeli city. He told the TV host that he dreams about the airport which was “Judaized and called Ben Gurion [Airport],” by what he calls “the occupation” - the Palestinian term for the entire State of Israel. Finally, the 12-year-old expressed his hope and confidence that “tomorrow” the Palestinians “will return and liberate Palestine”:

(full article online)

Palestinian kids taught to identify as ârefugeesâ about to âreturnâ to Israeli cities | PMW Analysis

Palestinian children who were born decades after Israel’s establishment in 1948 and decades after the Oslo Accords peace agreement are being educated by the PA to envision themselves as residents of the cities “stolen by the Jews,” and as “refugees” temporarily living in the Palestinian territories.

palwatch.org

 

[Sixties Fan]

One of the people credited with having produced that report — Quique Kierszenbaum — is not a BBC employee but an “independent documentary photographer and videographer based in Jerusalem.”

Two years ago, he collaborated with the foreign-funded political NGO “Breaking the Silence” to produce an overtly political photo exhibition in Tel Aviv.

Next, here’s the August 12th BBC Radio 4 program, “Crossing Continents”:
--
Similar points were echoed by an August 13th written item on the BBC News website: “The murderous crime wave sweeping Israel’s Arabs.”

A recurring theme promoted in all three stories is the claim that Israel’s police force does not do enough to tackle crime within the Arab sector.

In the audio versions of this story, listeners hear an interviewee — political activist Maisam Jaljuli — claim that:
--
None of Knell’s reports provides a comprehensive view of the investments made by previous Israeli governments in the Arab sector. And in her reports, that subject is inaccurately presented as though it were something novel.
----
Listeners to the audio versions of the report are told by MK Aida Touma-Sliman of the Joint List that organized crime moved into “our villages and towns” after “ten or fifteen years ago Israeli police managed to oppress Israeli organized crime in Jewish cities.”



The notion that organized crime in the Arab sector — particularly in the form of protection rackets and extortion — is at most a decade and a half old is of course not supported by the historical record.

Additionally, none of Knell’s reports discuss other relevant topics such as the high numbers of illegal firearms in Arab communities, or the prevalence of violence against women or issues such as “honor” and “extended family” (hamoula).

Knell’s audio reports do, however, repeatedly seek to create linkage between crime in the Arab sector and Israel’s creation:
-------
(full article online)

Analysis: Media Uses False Narrative About Arab Israelis to Slander the Jewish State | United with Israel

Rather than digging deeply into violence blighting Arab-Israeli communities, BBC News promotes a jaded political narrative blaming Israel for discrimination.

unitedwithisrael.org

 

[Sixties Fan]

The director of the mosque at the Cave of the Patriarchs in Hebron, Sheikh Hefzy Abu Sneina, now claims that his mosque is the fourth holiest mosque in Islam after the Al-Haram in Mecca, the Al-Nabawi mosque in Medina and the Al-Aqsa mosque in Jerusalem. He says that it contains Islamic sanctities and the tombs of their prophets, "which proves the right of Palestinians and Muslims to it and denies any Israeli claims of their rights in it. "

Even though the prophets buried there have nothing to do with Islam, with the exception of Abraham, but everything to do with Judaism.

The Jewish ties to Hebron have given the Ibrahimi Mosque some holiness inflation, it seems.

I have not seen the Hebron mosque listed as the fourth holiest in any other source.
https://guardian.ng/life/7-holiest-sites-in-islam/
This article in The Guardian says that #4 is Imam Ali in Iraq, #5 is the Dome of the Rock, #6 is Great Mosque of Djenne in Mali and #7 is the Quba Mosque in Medina. Hebron isn't mentioned.

This site lists the Quba mosque as #4.

Wikipedia gives three sources saying that the Umayyad Mosque in Damascus is the fourth holiest site in Islam.

So how did the mosque in Hebron rocket to the top of the charts? (No one will argue about 1,2 or 3, although Shiite Muslims used to rate Al Aqsa as #5, behind Najaf and Karbala.)

It seems that the holier Jews consider a site, the more Muslims want to take it away from Jews. It happens in Jerusalem, in Hebron, in Bethlehem, in Shechem (Nablus.)

(full article online)

Muslims upgrade Hebron site to "fourth holiest mosque in Islam" to keep Jews away

Blogging about Israel and the Arab world since, oh, forever.

elderofziyon.blogspot.com

 

[Mindful]

Afghanistan is the last place you’d expect to find any trace of a Jewish past, especially given the Islamization of most of the country over the past two decades by the ruthless Taliban. Yet, up until the assassination of King Nadir Shah in 1933, the country had been remarkably tolerant towards Jews for over a thousand years. Major Afghan cities such as Herat and Kabul were once safe-havens for Jews fleeing persecution in other lands. The Jews of Afghanistan once numbered in the thousands and enjoyed peace and prosperity.

Today there is only one Jew left in Afghanistan. His name is Zablon Simintov and he lives in Kabul. His story has made the rounds in the international media and it is at once tragic and inspiring. Simintov, born in Turkmenistan, lives in the capital city of Kabul on the top floor of Afghanistan’s last functioning shul on Flower Street. He rents out the bottom floor to several businesses including his own, the Balkh Bastan cafe. He used to deal in carpets and antiquities until government officials confiscated his merchandise.

Simintov’s family have all emigrated to Israel and he lives alone in the shul. The shul’s Torah scroll was stolen years ago by the Taliban and the shul is in disrepair. Simintov gets along quite well with his neighbors, all of whom who treat him respectfully.

When asked why he doesn’t want to move to Israel, Simintov responded “Go to Israel? What business do I have there? I won’t let Jewish history die in Afghanistan.”

The Jewish History of Afghanistan - Aish.com

A long lost chapter of Jews in the Diaspora.

www.aish.com

 

[Sixties Fan]

First, responding to the anchorperson’s question regarding an alleged “act of intrusion into al-Aqsa Mosque,” correspondent Layla Odeh used the same false language, fallaciously charging that “settlers” entered the mosque, thereby sparking clashes between Israeli security forces and Muslim protesters. But as CNN’s corrected Arabic report made clear, the Jewish visitors to the Temple Mount did not enter a single building; none of them “intruded” anywhere. In addition, their place of residence is unknown (and altogether irrelevant to what had happened), and therefore the pejorative label of “settlers” is unfounded.

Moreover, Odeh absurdly claimed that the Jews’ visit was the sole instance of violence that day. In fact, the Jews’ visit to the compound was non-violent, while the Muslims’ response to the visit — stone-throwing — was clearly violent. She further whitewashed the Muslim violence by referring to the stone-throwers as “Jerusalemites practicing Ribat” (1:36). This Islamic term referring to a voluntary act of self-defense protecting an outpost against non-Muslims is regularly used in Arab media to dress up violence as a religious act, especially in Jerusalem.

Finally, Odeh referred to Israeli Arabs protesters as “Palestinians from the 1948 territories.” This terminology, used by France 24 Arabic not for the first time, delegitimizes the State of Israel in its entirety, even within boundaries recognized by the international community, France included.

(full article online)

In Arabic, France 24's Jerusalem Coverage Is Abysmal

Correspondent Layla Odeh falsely charges that 'settlers' entered the Al-Aqsa mosque, miscasts a peaceful Jewish visit to the Temple Mount as violent, and ignores

www.camera.org

 

[Sixties Fan]

In the 1920s, the notoriously antisemitic Mufti of Jerusalem - appointed by the British - built his power base by raising money in the Arab world for restoration of the Al Aqsa Mosque and Dome of the Rock, which had fallen into disrepair under 400 years of Ottoman Muslim rule.

Part of his sales pitch was that the Jews intended to destroy the mosque to build a third Temple. He would take statements by rabbinic leaders in Palestine about the Messianic era and pretend that Jews were planning to demolish the structures on the Temple Mount.

This was a powerful message that the antisemitic Arab world eagerly accepted. It was the lie that was at the root of the deadly 1929 massacres of Jews.

The 1931 Muslim Congress in Jerusalem, led by the Mufti, neatly tied together his lie about the "Jewish designs" on Al Aqsa and his antisemitism, as he banned any Jewish reporters from covering the conference.

Every August 21, the lie reaches a fever pitch on the anniversary of the attack on Al Aqsa by mentally ill Australian Christian named Denis Michael Rohan.

Palestinian Arab media usually flatly lies and says that Rohan was Jewish and that this arson was part of a Zionist plot to destroy Al Aqsa.

This lie is a reliable means to inflame Arab passions, fueled by Arab antisemitism. It is especially useful when Palestinian leaders want to divert attention from their own failures and their own people's problems, by using their Jew-hatred as a political tool - just as the Mufti did a century ago.

Hamas will hold a mass rally at the Gaza fence tomorrow, using this anniversary as an excuse to fire up Gazans with hate. The Hamas Youth Department issued a statement:

------
The narrative is that Palestinian "steadfastness" is what has kept the Jews from destroying the buildings so far, so the antisemitism must be stoked to "defend" Al Aqsa from an imaginary threat.

The entire history of the lie is tied to Jew-hatred.

(full article online)

For 100 years, Arabs have lied that Jews are about to demolish Al Aqsa

Blogging about Israel and the Arab world since, oh, forever.

elderofziyon.blogspot.com

(full article online)

For 100 years, Arabs have lied that Jews are about to demolish Al Aqsa

Blogging about Israel and the Arab world since, oh, forever.

elderofziyon.blogspot.com

 

[Sixties Fan]

BBC campaigning on the topic of neighbourhoods in what it terms “East Jerusalem” continued on August 16th with the appearance on the BBC News website’s ‘Middle East’ page of a filmed report by Anastassia Zlatopolskaititled “Why is Israel demolishing homes in East Jerusalem?”.

“The demolition of houses built without planning permission in East Jerusalem is seen by some Palestinians as an attempt to drive them out – but Israel says it is trying to keep the city in order.”

Most of that 3:10 minute film features one woman who is presented to audiences as “Amani Mousa Odeh, resident of Silwan, East Jerusalem”. Viewers are not informed that Odeh is active in an organisation called ‘Save Silwan Campaign’ and another called the ‘Neighborhood Defense Committee’ and that she frequently promotes the messaging of those political campaign groups in English language media.

The film opens with a backdrop of images of a demolished structure.

BBC: “This is all that’s left of Amani’s cousin’s house. It was recently demolished by the Israeli government for being built without a permit. And Amani fears her own house could be next.”

Odeh: “Everyone thinks that one day he will be in the shoes of the owner of the house. This land was inherited from his grandfather and [great] grandfather. And when he go to the municipality in order to have permission for the building, they refused to give him [it].”

BBC: “Her cousin’s house was demolished on 10 August this year. East Jerusalem has been under Israeli occupation since 1967. Demolitions and forced evictions are illegal under international law.”

As ever, the BBC makes no effort to inform audiences of the fact that “East Jerusalem” was illegally occupied by Jordan between 1948-1967 or of its inclusion in the territory assigned by the League of Nations to the creation of a Jewish homeland. Following on from BBC’s partial portrayal of that area as being “under Israeli occupation” – rather than disputed – is an equally one-sided portrayal of “international law”, with no attempt whatsoever made to inform viewers of alternative legal opinions on the issue.

BBC: “Building permits are very difficult to get in East Jerusalem and Palestinians say it’s almost impossible for them to get them. Amani built a house despite multiple failed applications and like many in the Silwan neighbourhood now faces losing it.”

No effort is made to remind viewers that in many countries around the world a person who built a house without planning permission would similarly be served with what is known in the UK as an enforcement notice and would ‘face losing it’.

(full article online)

Another chapter in BBC campaigning on Silwan

Just six days after previous reports on the topic, the BBC produced another superficial campaign piece on illegal construction in Silwan.

camera-uk.org

 

[Sixties Fan]

(No, there are no blood Jews left around the world. All who live in the Americas, Europe, Asia, Australia, anywhere in the world......are all newly converted Jews.
If Christians and Muslims say so, it must be so.

Except, that they have only been saying it since Jews acquired the legal right to reinstate, recreate, reconstruct their Nation on their ancient homeland, and there are Jews from ALL over the world, who had moved to all of those points of the world centuries and thousands of years ago from their ancient land of Israel.

But for all "Zionist" effects, although it was only Jews returning home from Europe who at first were not called "real Jews" it is more than clear now that the intention is to call all Jews "Zionists" stop that ALL JEWS will become targets of the faux anger targeted towards Israel for having "stolen" "Palestinian land", when history more than betrays this notion. Arabs themselves, before WWI, have always knows that they were living on the Jewish homeland, and never thought of themselves as "Palestinians" until Arafat and the KGB coined that nationality in 1964 in order to use it to destroy Israel.

Muslims think that they have the "Right" to destroy Jewish history, and all Jews with it. )

 

[Sixties Fan]

Anyone who only watched the “Jerusalem” series, and knew nothing about history, would come away with the notion that little of significance to Jerusalem occurred in the 1920s and 30s. The narrative created for the period is simply that the Palestinians were leaderless as the British repressed Palestinian Arab nationalism. Viewers would likewise conclude the only relevance of Jerusalem to Jews at the time was that some were fleeing from Nazi Germany, as opposed to the fact that Jews actually constituted a majority in the city.

They would have no idea who the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem was, his role as a leader of Palestinian Arab nationalism, and his incitement of repeated rounds of deadly, anti-Jewish violence which defined the 1920s and 30s in Jerusalem and Mandate Palestine as a whole.

These problematic omissions are best shown in a few quotes from Part 5 of the series:

• “But the British were more heavy-handed against [the] Palestinian population, and definitely against Palestinian leaders, who occasionally, they would arrest and exile. All in order to disrupt any possible creation of political leadership among the Palestinians [emphasis added].” (Suleiman Mourad)
• “By the early 1940s, Britain has either arrested or driven the Palestinian Arab leadership into exile.” (Narrator)
• “So the Palestinians had no formal leadership on the ground…” (Amaney Jamal)

These repeated assertions omit the leadership role the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, Hajj Amin al-Husseini, would play in fomenting bloodshed in the years ahead.

Assassinations​

While laying blame solely on the British for a lack of Arab leadership – all while ignoring the leadership role of the Grand Mufti – CNN also ignored al-Husseini’s campaign of assassinations against the rest of the Palestinian Arab leadership during that period. As historian Simon Sebag Montefiore relates, during the Arab Revolt, al-Husseini was “seemingly more interested in murdering his Palestinian rivals than the British or Jews… [H]e ordered assassinations that in two years of fratricide wiped out many of his most decent and moderate compatriots.”[9] One of the most prominent examples was the assassination of Fakhri Nashashibi, the pre-eminent Nashashibi clan member who was known for creating the “peace squads” to reduce violence and calm tensions.[10]

It wasn’t until 1937 that al-Husseini, and much of the AHC leadership, would be exiled after the assassination of a British district commissioner. Even this did not stop al-Husseini, though, as he “continued to direct the Palestine insurgency” from his exile in Beirut.[11] The violence of the Arab Revolt succeeded in prompting the British to issue a “White Paper” in 1939 that rejected the idea of partition and severely limited Jewish immigration and land purchases. The measure came at the direst of times for Jews facing extermination by the Nazi regime, dooming to death untold numbers who could not reach safety Palestine. In seeking to improve relations with the Arab population, the British even offered al-Husseini amnesty in exchange for his acquiescence to the White Paper.[12]

When the series finally gets to the United Nations partition vote in 1947, it repeatedly claims that:

• “There [was] no Palestinian representative at the UN. There was no formal leadership. You had Arab leaders speaking on behalf of Palestinians, but not necessarily speaking from within the Palestinian communities themselves.” (Amaney Jamal)
• “From the Palestinian perspective, they were not responsible for the Holocaust. They were not in Europe. They have to, sort of, pay the price for what the world stood by and watched in terms of this horrendous massacre of an entire race. And nobody is really speaking on their behalf.” (Amaney Jamal)
• “Operating without Palestinian Arab input, the other Arab leaders reject the United Nations [partition] resolution.” (narrator).

Once again, Palestinian Jewry is virtually nonexistent in CNN’s narrative, which even manages to make the Holocaust about the Palestinians and their alleged voicelessness.

The claims of a lack of representation are, at best, a half-truth. Palestinian Arabs had as much of a voice at the UN as Palestinian Jewry did, but with the important advantage of numerous allied Arab states that wielded voting power. In advancing the claim, CNN recasts Palestinian Arab intransigence, in the form of absolutist rejection of compromise, as one of victimhood and exclusion. In reality, the Palestinian Arabs often intentionally excluded themselves from the conversation.

-------
While it is acknowledged in the “Jerusalem” series that there were, at the time, numerous Arab member states with voting power in the UN, CNN downplays this by suggesting they “did not take [Palestinian Arab] interests at heart.” It’s never explained why that would matter, since both the AHC and the voting Arab member states espoused the exact same position.

The AHC had all along made clear that it was only willing to accept an “independent unitary [Arab] state.” AHC vice-president Jamal al-Husseini explicitly stated to the UN the opposition of AHC to anything but a single Arab state. This exact position was what the Arab member states advanced. Every single one voted against the UNSCOP partition plan.

------
The bizarre downplaying of the support the Palestinian Arabs received from Arab member states at the UN looks even worse when juxtaposed with the complete absence of any discussion so far in the CNN series on the challenges Palestinian Jewry had in making their case to the UN. While the Jewish Agency was afforded the same opportunities as the AHC at the UN, they were at a distinct disadvantage. The Jewish Agency did not have a bloc of voting Jewish states – as none existed – to rely on for support like the AHC did with the Arab League.

(full article online)

CNN Mangles Jerusalem's History

Beginning on July 18, CNN has been airing each Sunday a new, six-part series entitled “Jerusalem: City of Faith and Fury.” As of this

www.camera.org

 

[Sixties Fan]

Stating definitively that Israel’s founding was the result of the Holocaust is a fallacy even though the extermination of 6 million Jews by Nazi Germany during WWII did, in fact, cause many people to sympathize with the millennia-long plight of the Jewish people. But the notion that this was the primary catalyst for the international community’s step-wise process towards establishing a Jewish state confuses correlation with causation.

First of all, the Jewish connection to the Land of Israel dates back at least 3,000 years. This is not Biblical conjecture, but rather confirmed by a myriad of archeological findings.

Fast forward to the late 19th century, when the first organized wave of Jewish migration to what is present-day Israel began. By the 1880s, Jews were already laying the foundations of a future sovereign state. During World War I, in the waning days of the Ottoman Empire, which had for 400 years ruled much of the Middle East – including the territory encompassing modern-day Israel – the Zionist cause was embraced by the British government.

Around the same time that Adolph Hitler served as a lance corporal in the Bavarian Army, then-British prime minister David Lloyd George expressed public support for Zionism. On November 2, 1917, the Balfour Declaration, produced by British Foreign Secretary Arthur Balfour, formalized London’s policy and explicitly called for the creation of a Jewish homeland.

There were a multitude of geopolitical considerations that influenced this historic decision, including the British government’s hope that such a declaration would help gain Jewish support for the Allies in neutral countries during World War I. Additionally, the region that just years later would constitute British-ruled Mandatory Palestine was coveted by 10 Downing Street as it would act as land bridge between the British-governed territories of India and Egypt.

Nevertheless, the belief in the righteousness of the Zionist cause held by Lloyd George and many other leaders was genuine.

The confluence of the Jewish people’s ancient connection to the Land of Israel, the Zionist movement’s monumental efforts to re-establish a Jewish state and a complex array of geopolitical factors are responsible for Israel’s creation. And this was likely to happen had the Holocaust never been perpetrated.

By failing to explain this reality, Associated Press, whose work is republished by more than 1,300 newspapers and broadcasters across the globe, has, inadvertently or not, framed the near-miraculous actualization through perseverance and hard work of the Jewish people’s 2000-years-longing into a sort of “consolation prize”- gifted by a world that turned a blind eye to the horrors of the Holocaust.

(full article online)

Israel Was Not Created Because of Holocaust, Rather Ancient Jewish Roots & Modern Determination | Honest Reporting

An August 16 Associated Press article by Vanessa Gera titled, Poland keeps ambassador at home amid dispute with Israel, describes the diplomatic dustup

honestreporting.com

 

[Sixties Fan]

(Vide others online)

 

[Sixties Fan]

 

[Sixties Fan]

I debunked this claim in 2016, but here is some more proof.

The Survey of Western Palestine, Special Papers on Topography, Archaeology, Manners and Customs, Etc · Volume 4, By Palestine Exploration Fund · 1881, quotes a 7th century observer of large pine forests in the center of the land of Israel:



From Underground Jerusalem: An Account of Some of the Principal Difficulties Encountered in Its Exploration and the Results Obtained. With a Narrative of an Expedition Through the Jordan Valley and a Visit to the Samaritans, by Sir Charles Warren, 1876:



In The Trees and Plants Mentioned in the Bible by William Howse Grosser, 1895, we learn that the Aleppo (Jerusalem) pine was the most popular tree in Palestine:



The people who claim that the pine tree is a recent import also tend to think that Jews themselves were only recently introduced to the region. They are equally wrong in both assertions.

(full article online)

The pine tree is indigenous to Israel - it is not a Western implant - and has been there for millennia

Blogging about Israel and the Arab world since, oh, forever.

elderofziyon.blogspot.com

 

[Mindful]

---

“We came from Herat in Afghanistan," explains Ahoova Gol Zeffren, a Hebrew and Judaic studies teacher who currently lives in Los Angeles. In a recent Aish.com interview, Ahoova discussed her family’s illustrious Jewish Afghan heritage.

Herat was a major Jewish center for close to 300 years. Ahoova traces her family roots to the nearby Iranian city of Mashhad. Home to a sizeable Jewish community in the 1700s and 1800s, local officials in Mashhad began persecuting Jews violently and forced Jews to convert to Islam. Many of Mashhad's Jews fled to Herat where they built a thriving Jewish community.

Ahoova's family in their sukkah in Herat, Afghanistan. She is the baby held by her mother.

There were four large Jewish populations in Afghanistan, Ahoova explains: Herat, Kandahar, Balkh, and Kabul, the capital. The Jewish community was “very orthodox,” she says. “There were lots of synagogues and yeshivas."
“For ten generations my father’s family were chief rabbis,” Ahoova says. One of her most famous forbearers was Rabbi Chacham Mula Matitya Gargi (1845-1917), who wrote a famous commentary on the Talmud called Oneg L’Shabbat. He served as Chief Rabbi of Herat. He was so revered that his leadership extended as far afield as the Jewish communities of Uzbekistan and Tashkent.

Reflections of an Afghan Jew - Aish.com

Born in the Afghan city of Herat, Ahoova Gol Zeffren is a descendant of an Afghan rabbinic dynasty.

www.aish.com

 

[Sixties Fan]

 

[Sixties Fan]

India for Indians. Russia for Russians. Mongolia for Mongolians—some outer, some inner. Austria for Austrians. Guatemala for Guatemalans. Cuba for Cubans. Sounds right.
Somewhere along the litany it would make sense to say: Yehuda for Yehudim—i.e., Judea for Jews. Even antisemites would find it hard to get behind slogans such as “Ban Jews from Judea! Jews Never Lived in Judea!” The Jews (Yehudim in Hebrew) of the tribe of Judah (Yehudah) gave the land of Yehudah its name: Judea, as transliterated in the King James Version of the Bible.

It has always been preposterous to call Judea and Samaria the “West Bank.” Think of the most famous locations in the Bible: Jerusalem, Hebron, Bethlehem, Nazareth, Beth El, Jericho, Shiloh, Shechem (Nablus), Galilee, Tekoa—all the places where the Jewish patriarchs and matriarchs, the kings and prophets walked and lived. Jesus and the Apostles, too. Their lives all centered in Judea and in Samaria. Those terms are all over the Bible, with more than 100 mentions just of “Samaria” in the Tanakh (Hebrew Bible) and in the Christian Gospels.

Visit virtually any of the 140 Jewish communities where 800,000 Jews now reside in Judea and Samaria, and you will not see any river banks. It is not like Jersey City, New Jersey, which is on the west bank of the Hudson River. No one calls Jersey City “the West Bank.” Why not? Too much history there? Too many biblical memories of Moses and Aaron buying shoes at Journal Square or using the PATH trains at the Grove Street station?

The Arab world and their allies have no problem calling every other location in the Middle East by their biblical names: Beersheva, Galilee, Jordan River, Gaza, Damascus, Lebanon, Tyre, Sidon and of course Jerusalem, Hebron, Bethlehem and Nazareth. Even Americans comfortably employ biblical names for so many of their cities: Hebron, Maryland; the Jericho Turnpike, New York; Bethel, Indiana; the Battle of Shiloh, Tennessee; Manassas (Menashe), Virginia.

Judea and Samaria—Yehuda and Shomron—should be called by their real names and not by the ersatz term that seeks to divest 800,000 Jews now living there of their heritage and of their land. When a newborn child is due to arrive, think of the hours, the contemplating, even the inter-family wrangling and negotiating that often precede naming the newcomer. Names have great power and meaning. That is why Israel’s enemies call Judea and Samaria “The West Bank.”

And why we should call it Judea and Samaria.

(full article online)

Why Rename Judea and Samaria? - Algemeiner.com

There is good reason that the Arab world and the anti-Israel left insist on using the mendacious and geographically inaccurate term “West Bank” when they refer to Judea and Samaria. Think about it: Imagine a human-rights movement built around the slogan: Ban Arabs from Arabia! Such a slogan and...

www.algemeiner.com

 

[Sixties Fan]

 

[Sixties Fan]

One Jewish UNC student I interviewed trembled on the phone as she talked about widespread hostility on campus. The student will not allow me to publicly share her story, even anonymously, because she fears the backlash and anger she would face on campus.

Evyatar Marienberg, a faculty member at UNC’s Carolina Center for Jewish Studies, responded to me, via email, noting Broderick’s “extreme biases” and described people like Broderick as having “the disease of misrepresenting realities” and “simple old antisemitism.”

This current teaching scandal is unfolding as UNC is still reeling from a 2019 scandal when the university hosted and co-sponsored the “Conflict Over Gaza” conference, which made international news for featuring a rapper’s blatantly antisemitic performance.

In response to an antisemitism complaint filed with the US Department of Education stemming from this conference, UNC entered into a Resolution Agreement with the department’s Office of Civil Rights, requiring UNC “to ensure that students enrolled in the University are not subjected to a hostile environment.”

Kylie Broderick publicly dismissed this Resolution Agreement in a local paper, calling it an “attack by the federal government.” Yet UNC still stands by her.

On May 19, 2021, the same three UNC departments that are sponsoring Broderick’s Israel/Palestine course, co-sponsored an anti-Israel Zoom event with Jadaliyya, a pro-Palestinian advocacy organization and publishing outlet.

Broderick is managing editor at Jadaliyya. Broderick and Sarah Shields – the currentand recent Israel/Palestine UNC course instructors – moderated the event.

During one of the event’s anti-Israel rants, a speaker accused Israel of “settler colonialism”and “persistent ethnic cleansing,” spoke of an “Israeli war machine,” and said “hurling rocks” at Israelis should not be considered terrorism, but rather rational behavior. The speaker also promoted the BDS boycott movement, and called Israel an “apartheid” state.

The chancellor and other senior UNC administrators are obligated by the Resolution Agreement “to ensure that students enrolled in the University are not subjected to a hostile environment.” Having a known Israel-hater — who tweets about “Zionist dirtbags” and promotes the view that Israel should not exist — teach a course on Israel is indeed a hostile environment.

(full article online)

UNC Violates Government Agreement by Promoting Antisemitism In Classroom - Algemeiner.com

The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (UNC) has decided that graduate student Kylie Broderick will be allowed to teach the Fall course, “The Conflict Over Israel/Palestine,” despite her long public history of attacking Israel. Classes began on August 18. Broderick recently tweeted the...

www.algemeiner.com

 

[Sixties Fan]

The inclusion of this statement was curiously absent from an op-ed on the row published in the Guardian by FA, (“Our art deals with real injustices, some in Palestine: no wonder we faced opposition”, Aug. 20th).

After spending the first few paragraphs of their Guardian op-ed attacking UK Lawyers for Israel*, a highly reputable mainstream Jewish group which fights BDS and other efforts to undermine Israel’s right to exist, and detailing some of their other projects, the op-ed eventually pivots the the matter at hand:

In May, as we worked on the [Manchester] exhibition, the latest round of Israeli attacks on Gaza began.

As you can see, the group isn’t even trying to be factual or objective, omitting the fact that the “Israeli attacks on Gaza” only began after Hamas decided to launch an unprovoked volley of rockets on Jerusalem. In fact, the word “Hamas” doesn’t appear anywhere in the op-ed.

It continues:

Attacks extended also to art institutions: our close friend the Palestinian artist Emily Jacir sent us videos of Israeli forces raiding Dar Jacir, a vital independent artist-run space in Bethlehem.

The FA writer(s) fail to acknowledge that the, in response to inquiries from The New York Times in July, IDF officials “denied any knowledge of a raid or seizure of equipment.”

The lies continue:

Our statement, whose inclusion in the exhibition had been approved during its planning stages by the Whitworth’s curators, was written as these attacks were happening. We used terms such as “ethnic cleansing” and “apartheid” to describe the policies of the Israeli government in Palestine, because such characterisations describe the reality of Palestinian life and are in keeping with the language of major Israeli and international human rights organisations…

Though you can read CAMERA’s in-depth rebuttal of Human Rights Watch’s apartheid lie, contrary to the op-ed’s suggestion, the reports alluded to, by Human Rights Watch and B’tselem, did NOT accuse Israel of “ethnic cleansing”, or even use the term.

Moreover, whether they’re referring to Palestinians in east Jerusalem, the West Bank or Gaza (or Arab citizens of Israel), the charge of “ethnic cleansing” against Israel is counter-factual, ahistorical and completely propagandistic. It’s also clearly contradicted by population statistics demonstrating consistent increases in Palestinian residents in these geographic areas.

They also make the following charge, defending their charge that Israel is a “settler colonial” state:

(full article online)

The Guardian again promotes Forensic Architecture's anti-Israel vitriol

The University of Manchester on Wednesday reversed a decision to remove a statement of solidarity with Palestine’s “liberation struggle” from an exhibitio

camera-uk.org