| An analysis of Ken Roth's tweets prove his anti-Israel obsession and lack of credibility as a human rights expertnoreply@blogger.com (Unknown), 08 Ja | | On Thursday I wrote about The Nation article claiming that Ken Roth, formerly head of Human Rights Watch, was unfairly passed over for a position at Harvard Kennedy School because of powerful Jews who didn't like his being a critic of Israel.
The argument, as I showed then, was absurd. Even according to the article, "Roth's tweets on Israel were of particular concern."
Since then, the "progressive" crowd has been amplifying The Nation story - and its subtle antisemitic trope of rich Jews who try to control free speech - with no skepticism. Roth has also been tweeting the story.
So while I had looked previously at Roth's anti-Israel tweets many times and identified lots of bias and lies, I decided to do a survey of his tweets in...Read More |
From Ian: Seth Frantzman: How can Israel win the Palestinian conflict? Historian explains Do the Abraham Accords and the focus on Ukraine and China change things? Not really. The Abraham Accords are great, both in of themselves and because they got Netanyahu in 2020 to abandon his plan to annex parts of the West Bank. Ukraine and China reduce the spotlight on the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, always a good thing. But Israel's thriving relations with the UAE and other states barely diminishes the Palestinian campaign of delegitimization. And whenever the Palestinian Authority or Hamas wishes the spotlight to return, it will do so, instantly. How should Israel handle the international spotlight?
By recognizing it as a fact of life and finding ways to deal with it. When Hamas decides to launch missiles into Israel, it knows it will get clobbered militarily but will gain international political support. Likewise, Israel knows it will get clobbered internationally, so it should take advantage of the crisis to send a very strong message to the Gazan population that it has lost the war. Ultimately, media coverage matters less than winning on the ground. Practically speaking, how does Israel win?
I prefer to posit Israel victory as a policy goal, without going into detailed strategy and tactics. First, it's premature to get into specifics. Second, delving into these topics distracts from establishing the policy...Read More |
From Ian: Melanie Phillips: The Israeli canary in the west's cultural mine This perverse behaviour by western liberals, aided by Israeli leftists who fan the flames by even more hysterically promoting these lies and appeasement, hugely incentivises further Palestinian rejectionism and violence. It also actively emboldens Israel's existential foes among the world's tyrannies and kleptocracies who use United Nations resolutions and "lawfare" to try to bring Israel down. Just imagine if America said that these Palestinian lies and incitement have to stop, that Israel has law and history on its side, and that the only aggressors in this war are the Palestinian Arabs who want to destroy the Jews' right to their country and historic identity. The Palestinians' strategy of extermination would collapse overnight — because the main reason this war never ends is the west's support for their cause. The result is the unique and insane situation in which Israel is forced to fund people who continue to build an infrastructure of genocidal warfare that they periodically unleash against Israeli civilians; in which so-called allies prevent Israel from taking measures essential to defend its people against mass murder; and in which the same so-called allies now have the gall to tell Israel that the composition of its government doesn't meet with their approval. Israel, however, is not the only example...Read More |
Al Ahed News (Lebanon) reports that Shiite Sheikh Muhammad Sanqour, the Friday preacher at the Imam al-Sadiq Mosque in Diraz, Bahrain, today called on the government to ban all sales of real estate to Jews.
He claimed that "usurping Jews" are making handsome financial offers for Bahraini real estate, and called on the government of Bahrain "to reassure people by issuing a law that categorically prohibits owners from selling any of their property and assets to Jews, individuals or entities, directly or through an intermediary." Sanquor added, "Selling something of real estate, even if it is easy for the likes of these usurpers, is tantamount to selling the homeland." He continued, "These people do not coexist with anyone. The first of their victims is the one who did them a favor." And then: "We call for the state to have the right to annul any contract that was concluded or is to be concluded if one of its parties was Jewish." Sounds like Jew-hatred to me. In September, another Shiite cleric in Bahrain, Ayatollah Qassem, made a similar demand: Dear people of Bahrain,
Do not hand over to the Jews even a small piece of land or a small house; By this, you are selling to them your religion, your history, your homeland, your present and your future. Be aware that you are committing suicide – materially and morally. Today, Bahrain is an Islamic country
Tomorrow, according to the plan of Judaisation, it will become a country...Read More |
From Ian: Debunking the Arab Narrative The facts are otherwise. Jews have lived in the land continuously for at least 3000 years. The San Remo Resolution in 1920, gave the Jewish people legal title to the land and the Palestine Mandate of 1922 gave them the right to settle the land. After the '67 War, the United Nations Security Council passed Res 242. It made no mention of the "Palestinian people", because there was no such people. "1. Affirms that the fulfilment of Charter principles requires the establishment of a just and lasting peace in the Middle East which should include the application of both the following principles: "i) "Withdrawal of Israel armed forces from territories occupied in the recent conflict; "(ii) Termination of all claims or states of belligerency and respect for and acknowledgement of the sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence of every State in the area and their right to live in peace within secure and recognized boundaries free from threats or acts of force;" Thus the Security Council; gave Israel the right to stay in possession of "territories occupied in the recent conflict" until she had a peace agreement with all states in the area which provided for "secure and recognized boundaries free from threats or acts of force". It did not require Israel to withdraw from "all territories" and allowed Israel to keep some of the land which it required for security. So...Read More |
Haaretz headlines over the past month keep trying to top themselves in derangement. Here's one from today: Yes, Netanyahu is an anti-Zionist!
But wait: in 2018, Haaretz had other op-eds on Netanyahu: These articles comes right up to the line of accusing Bibi of antisemitism because he criticizes George Soros.
So this is great news:
Even Haaretz admits that anti-Zionists are antisemites!
But there's more, from today's Haaretz. If you want to be anti-Israel, you should abandon Judaism! Judaism is Zionism and anti-Zionism is antisemitism. Haaretz said so, and no religious Zionist could have said it better. * * * * * * Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism today at Amazon! Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424. Read all about it here! ...Read More |
Earlier this week, after Itamar Ben Gvir visited the Temple Mount without incident, there was a very telling exchange at the daily State Department briefings: QUESTION: Just to cut to the chase on this, you talk about how you're opposed to any unilateral actions and that you support – or oppose any effort to change the status quo. So do you believe that this visit alters the status quo in any way? MR PRICE: Look, Matt — QUESTION: And do you not support it? Do you think that it was a bad idea? Would you prefer that it had not happened? MR PRICE: This visit has the potential to exacerbate tensions and to provoke violence. As we've said, we're deeply concerned by any unilateral actions that have the potential to do that. So yes, we're deeply concerned by this visit. Now, when it comes to the historic status quo, it's not for me to define from here what the historic status quo is; it's not for the United States to prescribe what the historic status quo is. That's a question of history. It's a question for — QUESTION: Certainly you know what the historic status quo is? MR PRICE: It's a question for the parties themselves, including the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan, whose role as the custodian of Jerusalem's holy sites, again, we deeply appreciate. The United States position is that the status quo must not be violated, but it doesn't know what the status quo is...Read More |
| | | |
אין תגובות:
הוסף רשומת תגובה