Stop Antisemitism

The controversy arose after the South African Union of Jewish Students (SAUJS), initiated a fundraiser, which was approved and authorized by the university’s Student Representative Council (SRC), to provide financial aid to impoverished students on their campus.
Instead of being met with gratitude or cooperation, however, SAUJS was met with statements of condemnation from multiple student groups on campus in a blatantly antisemitic campaign led by the campus BDS group.

"Jewish students raised blood money"​

The claims of the PSCUP, as well statements from other campus organizations, charged that the funds raised by Jewish students were “blood money” and argued that the money had come from those responsible for the killing of Palestinians — despite the fact all funds were raised locally from both Jewish and non-Jewish donors.


(full article online)


 
Pro-Israel and Jewish students and faculty at the Borough of Manhattan Community College were appalled by a “horrifying, antisemitic, campus-sponsored display” featuring antisemitic, anti-Israel propaganda, including support for terrorism.

S.A.F.E. CUNY, a non-governmental and nonprofit organization that “advocates for Zionist Jews systemically discriminated against and excluded” at CUNY, announced Thursday morning on social media and in a press release that “yesterday, we were tipped off to a horrifying, antisemitic, campus-sponsored display at Borough of Manhattan Community College (BMCC-CUNY).”

“In addition to sympathizing with Intifada (a call to murder Israeli Jews), among the falsehoods and tropes leveled at Jews and Israel are that Israel ‘targeted’ journalist Shireen Abu Akleh for murder, that Israel is guilty of ‘ethnic cleansing’ and that Israel is a settler-colonial state, and more,” the announcement read.

The display claims to document a “timeline of occupied Palestinian land” but is riddled with falsehoods and antisemitic tropes,” the organization said.

-------
“The ‘other side’ (i.e. Jewish and Israeli and even non-Jewish Zionist students and faculty) are not given any platform to ‘defend themselves’. The libels and even praises of ‘the armed resistance’ are presented as an obvious fact, which cannot be doubted or discussed.

(full article online)


 
Following a CAMERA exposé which revealed the antisemitic social media posts of four FRANCE 24 employees, the French state-owned network has fired journalist Joelle Maroun and reprimanded three of its Arabic-language correspondents.

“We commend FRANCE 24 for investigating the four journalists but are dismayed at their decision to continue employing three of them,” said Andrea Levin, CAMERA’s executive director. “Maroun was the worst of them, but the other journalists’ antisemitism and unethical, partisan reporting makes them unfit to report objectively on anything to do with Jews and Israel.”

CAMERA’s research into the social media content of the three correspondents – Laila Odeh, Sharif Bibi and Dina Abi-Saab – revealed that they enthusiastically supported violence, antisemitism, and/or political extremism.

For example, FRANCE 24’s Jerusalem correspondent, Laila Odeh, extolled a man who planted a bomb on a Tel Aviv bus, boasting that he “ascended to the highest heavens”; she lionized terrorists as “martyrs”; she claimed Israel has become a “version of Hitler”; and she publicly requested that Arab countries arm her personally to attack Israel.

And yet FRANCE 24 has nevertheless concluded that Odeh remains fit to serve as the network’s correspondent in Jerusalem.

“How are these three journalists acceptable at a serious news outlet?” Levin asked. “They report like opinion pundits on fringe hate sites — which is where, in fact, their bigoted views belong.”

Levin pointed out that FRANCE 24’s audit upheld the truth of CAMERA’s initial exposé, which prompted the network’s investigation into the journalists’ hate-filled social media posts.

“If our report had turned out to be factually inaccurate, FRANCE 24 would have been justified to continue their employment,” Levin said. “But FRANCE 24’s press release states that their own audit ‘authenticated’ what we found.”

FRANCE 24’s investigation concluded that the three journalists failed to meet the network’s standards of impartiality and warned them that their employment is contingent on their adherence to these standards.

“We seriously doubt such a warning is enough,” Levin said. “French taxpayers deserve honorable journalists, of whom there are many the network could hire. Until then, French news consumers should be deeply skeptical of FRANCE 24’s reporting on Israel and should closely watch to see if the pattern of unprofessional bias continues.”



 
[ Ali Velshi and others at MSNBC need to educated about the issues they are talking about. But apparently they are getting their education only from the Palestinian side. The same with New York Times, and many others. How can that be changed? ]


The endless vilification of Israel at MSNBCcontinues, and on March 11, 2023, the network’s Ali Velshi turned to one of the media’s worst faith commentators to carry on the demonization machine.

Illustrating MSNBC’s recent level of commitment to accuracy in covering the Jewish state, Velshi brought on former Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) adviser Diana Buttu, who is notorious for her record of outlandish lies about Israel.

Buttu has, for example, repeatedly claimed that the rockets fired by Palestinian terrorist groups “don’t have an explosive head” (they do). She has falsely claimed on MSNBC that Israel’s security fence along the Gaza border is “electrified” (it isn’t). She even has a record of lying about fiction, having claimed to the New Yorker that the Israeli hit television show Fauda never uses the word “occupation” (it does) and never shows Israeli checkpoints (it does).

It is thus no surprise that on Saturday, Buttu once again reverted to peddling falsehoods to attack the Jewish state.

During the interview, Buttu claimed, “It’s impossible to have a two-state solution. You can’t have two states when there are three-quarters of a million settlers that are living on approximately 60% of the West Bank land.”

It’s an intentionally misleading and dishonest claim.

Buttu is referencing “Area C,” one of the geographical areas created under the Oslo Accords – a series of agreements between the State of Israel and the Palestine Liberation Organization creating an interim arrangement pending a final peace deal – which comprises approximately 60% of the territory known either as the West Bank or as Judea and Samaria. Under the Oslo Accords, while the Palestinian Authority has substantial autonomy in Areas A and B, Israel retains full administrative and security authority over Area C where the Israeli settlements are mostly located. (Note: While Buttu’s interviewer, Ali Velshi, has previously claimed that the “map of the Palestinian Authority…has been carved up by Israel over the past century,” it is worth noting that the Palestinian Authority did not exist until the Oslo Accords created it 29 years ago and gave Palestinian Arabs a level of self-rule for the first time in history.)

However, contrary to Buttu’s misleading statement, Israeli settlers are not “living on approximately 60% of the West Bank land.”

For one, there are also approximately 400,000 Palestinians living in Area C, too.

But more significantly, Area C is, in fact, sparsely populated. While Areas A & B include those lands populated by Palestinians, Area C includes not just Israeli settlements, but also swathes of unpopulated and unused lands.

-----------
Buttu’s claims are even undermined by the admission of another former PLO actor, Saeb Erakat. Reflecting on a later peace offer by Olmert in 2008, Erakat told Al Jazeera TV:

Olmert, who talked today about his proposal to [Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas], offered the 1967 borders, but said: ‘We will take 6.5% of the West Bank, and give in return 5.8% from the 1948 lands, and the 0.7% will constitute the safe passage [between the West Bank and the Gaza Strip], and East Jerusalem will be the capital, but there is a problem with the Haram and with what they called the Holy Basin.’ [Abbas] too answered with defiance, saying: ‘I am not in a marketplace or a bazaar. I came to demarcate the borders of Palestine – the June 4, 1967 borders – without detracting a single inch, and without detracting a single stone from Jerusalem, or from the holy Christian and Muslim places.’ This is why the Palestinian negotiators did not sign.
In other words, the problem was not that Israelis are “living on approximately 60% of the West Bank land” as Buttu claims, or even just the 4-6% making up the settlement blocs; it’s Jews living on any land in the West Bank.


A map depicting a peace proposal by then Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert.
In this regard, it’s worth noting that while earlier in the interview Buttu accused Israel of engaging in an “ethnic cleansing process,” it’s the Palestinian Authority that has actually made ethnic cleansing its goal. Not only did its leader reject any land swaps in pursuit of peace and a two-state solution, but Abbas made clear several years later, “In a final resolution, we would not see the presence of a single Israeli, civilian or soldier, on our lands.”


(full article online)


 
As I've been reporting, ever since the Abraham Accords were announced, some Arab commentators have sounded the alarm, saying that this is the beginning of a new "Abrahamic" religion meant by Jews to destroy Islam.

Those fears were multiplied by the opening of the multifaith Abrahamic Family House in Dubai.

Now the head of the Egyptian Islamist Nour party is putting all the pieces together:



Sameh Bassiouni, head of the Supreme Committee of the Nour Party, said that the world order is now promoting the model of the so-called “Abrahamic House.” It is not a call for peaceful coexistence, as the supporters claim, or the deceived repeat. It is a tactical phased step to domesticate future generations through multiple and disparate devotional rituals in one complex under the deception of the unified Abrahamic creed.

In an article published by Al-Fath on its website, Bassiouni stressed that the deception of the Abrahamic religion is a prelude to dissolving the concept of Islamic faith and identity in Arab-Islamic countries, and then pushing for a federation of the alleged Abrahamic states in the region. This will dissolve the concepts of the unity and cohesion of the homeland.
Then the door opens wide to achieve the fixed strategic Zionist plans to implement the Talmudic dream of a Jewish state "from the Nile to the Euphrates" without objection from future generations in the Arab Islamic countries.

It is all so clear now!

I wish that Israel was half as strategic as the Arabs think it is.



 




Earlier this month I reported on an antisemitic Arabic article published on MSN, Microsoft's news network. It said that Israel is inflicting a "Holocaust" on Palestinians.

It is hardly the only example.

Just today, MSN published one article saying that modern Jews have no relationship with the Jews of Biblical times (while accusing modern Jews of racism, naturally), and another from a Jordanian who writes Israel is "an entire entity of murderous terrorists, who have pursued policies of apartheid and genocide against Palestinians and Arabs for nearly a century" and then concludes that Palestine is all Jordanian.

MSN gets many of its Arabic articles from a company called SyndiGate, which strikes deals with Arab and other international media companies to syndicate their content.

SyndiGate is owned by the Jordanian Albawaba Group. (Albawaba means "the gate" in Arabic.)

While Albawaba's news site is not nearly as antisemitic as much of Jordanian media, it publishes its share. Here, for example, is an English language article about how Jordanians protested a preacher attending a seminar in Abu Dhabi with a non-Israeli rabbi, with no mention that this was a classic example of pure antisemitism. They have pushed thediscredited antisemitic Khazar theory as well. Last year they claimed, with no fact checking, that Jews in Hebron burned a Quran - which is pure incitement to violence among Muslims.

SyndiGate's editorial standards for republishing Arabic content are even lower than Albawaba's. They appear to blindly re-copy anything from their own content providers, with little regard for what they actually say. After all, that's their business model - content equates to cash from their client like MSN.

And just as SyndiGate blindly grabs content from its sources, Microsoft blindly publishes the SyndiGate content. It does it with other content providers as well - last year republishing a number of obvious hoax articles without even the pretense of editing.

MSN is the default page for new tabs in Microsoft browsers, and their articles show up by default on all computers with Windows. MSN gets nearly a billion views a month. By any definition, it is a media giant even if it has little original content.

Microsoft is complicit with spreading hate to a large global audience.




 
In the wake of the July 7, 2005 London terrorist attacks, the United Kingdom developed Prevent, a set of programs that aim to discourage young people from joining “extremist” groups and to “deradicalize” those already in their clutches. Recently, William Shawross published his findings after conducting an extensive independent review of the program at the government’s behest. He found numerous troubling patterns, including a disproportionate and wrongheaded focus on right-wing extremists, with the result that reading the works of John Locke or C.S. Lewis is taken as a sign of incipient white supremacism, but reading the works of Sayid Qutb—founder of Islamism and the Muslim Brotherhood—is not considered a sign of anything. Then there is the problem that Prevent gives money to Islamist preachers and organizations in the hope that they will exert a moderating influence.

Kyle Orton comments on Shawcross’s findings:

First, and in the most direct sense, there are signs of deep confusion about what Islamism is, which is perhaps not that surprising when the use of the very word is still being contested. . . . Prevent’s tendency has been to secularize jihadists, [which] means that instead of experts on jihadist ideology, the program “frequently seeks guidance from academics or psychologists with a clinical or theoretical background.” . . . It has been a popular understanding in such circles that extremism is like a virus people can catch by watching the wrong YouTube video.
Some of the most severe problems are specific to Channel, a division of Prevent that intervenes with people flagged by the program’s other branches:

Shawcross found an extraordinary prevalence of anti-Semitism in the Channel system. Anti-Semitism “spanned across the full range of Channel cases we observed, regardless of the nature of the ideology. . . . [Anti-Semitism] unites both Islamists and [the] extreme right wing, as well as the extreme left, in a kind of modern-day Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact,” Shawcross writes. Individuals not only openly expressed their belief in anti-Semitic, Protocols of the Elders of Zion-type conspiracy theories, but their wish to blow up synagogues, admitted to having done hostile surveillance to enable same, and their desire to do violence against Jewish people, either collectively or individually.
Shawcross does not point this out, but the scale of the targeting of British Jews in hate crimes is staggering: seven times the rate of attacks on Muslims, and nearly one-quarter of all hate crimes, despite [Jews] being less than 0.5 percent of the population.


(full article online)


 

Forum List

Back
Top