Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News

Tuesday, August 22, 2017

NYT says Kurds aren't ready for independence - but Palestinians are

Today's New York Times has an editorial about the Kurdish non-binding referendum on independence, and it urges that the Kurds should be much more patient than they already have been:

After yearning for independence for generations, Kurds in Iraq are scheduled to take a major step in that direction with a nonbinding referendum set for Sept. 25. The vote, expected to endorse a separate state, would be a mistake, increasing turmoil in a part of the world roiled by the fight against the Islamic State and further threatening Iraq’s territorial integrity. Postponement makes better sense.

What are the reasons? Among them:

Two families, the Barzanis and the Talabanis, control politics; corruption is widespread. Because of political infighting, Kurdistan’s parliament has not met since October 2015; the region’s president, Masoud Barzani, remains in office four years after his term ended. Declining oil prices and disputes with Iraq’s central government have left the Kurdistan government in debt. Kurdish authorities are accused of discriminating against minorities. Could Kurdistan make it as an independent state if Iraq and neighboring states stayed hostile to the idea?

...The referendum would heighten tensions, make it harder to stabilize Iraq and divert attention as the United States, Iraq and their partners work to defeat ISIS and rebuild Iraqi communities.

...[L]eaders in Turkey and Iran see a greater Kurdistan as a territorial threat. Turkey’s deputy prime minister recently warned that the Iraq vote would “contribute to instability.” Iraq’s prime minister said the vote would be “illegal” because it conflicts with Kurdistan’s constitutional commitments as part of Iraq’s federal government.

...A Kurdish breakaway is risky; without sufficient preparation, it would further marginalize Iraq’s Sunni minority, already disenfranchised by the Shiite majority and prey to Sunni extremists like ISIS.

Self-determination is an understandable goal. But just voting for independence is no guarantee that whatever state emerges will govern fairly or well. It does the Kurdish people little good if their leaders do not make a strong effort to first ensure that Kurdistan’s democratic institutions are functioning, the economy is strong and they have support from Iraq and other countries before striking out alone.

So the reasons to stop a non-binding referendum are:

* Corruption in the Kurdish government
* Infighting in the Kurdish government
* Kurdish president in office long after his term ended
* Kurdish authorities discriminate against minorities
* Neighboring states are hostile to the idea
* Tensions would be heightened. Neighbors say such a state would "contribute to instability."
* Such a decision needs much more preparation
* An independent Kurdistan may not govern fairly or well.
* First, Kurds need to ensure democratic institutions are functioning, the economy is strong and they have support from their stronger neighbors.

Every single one of these reasons to be against an independent Kurdish state applies, to a far greater degree, to a Palestinian state.

But the New York Times for years has fully supported an independent Palestinian state, with its corrupt leaders, its political infighting, its terrible record at building democratic institutions, its disregard for human rights. Oh, and also its explicit support for terrorists and terrorism.

The New York Times cheered every step of the way for Palestinian independence, even through the second intifada and the Hamas/Fatah split. It never told Palestinians that they weren't ready, or to wait some more until things get more peaceful, or anything like that. It never gave Israel veto power over a Palestinian state the way it gives Iraq and Turkey that power over Kurdistan.

And by any sane measure, the Kurds deserve a state more than Palestinians do.

Hypocricy doesn't even begin to describe this editorial.

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.

Arutz-7 reports that a group of Jews who ascended to Judaism's holiest spot and saw, as is often the case, Muslims playing soccer.

This time they asked the police to stop this desecration of the sacred site - and they did.

If this goes viral, I want to see the Muslims explain why their soccer is sacred by Jews respectfully visiting the site is a "desecration."

A couple of years ago when police started a previous crackdown on soccer paying, one Palestinian newspaper reported it this way:

The game of football by the children of occupied Jerusalem inside the squares of the Al-Aqsa Mosque is one of the new Palestinian weapons in the face of the settlers' intrusions into the Al-Aqsa Mosque almost permanently.

Ah, so kids playing soccer isn't worship - it is even more important.

It is jihad.

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.

08/21 Links Pt2: Israel-Bashers Target Jews on Their Holidays; Al Jazeera echoes terrorism

From Ian:

Ben Shapiro: If You Condemn Antifa, Are You Excusing Neo-Nazism?

There are two measures we must examine in terms of any moral comparison between Antifa and neo-Nazis. First, there’s the ideological. Then, there’s behavior.
Let’s begin with the ideological. Antifa has no clear-cut ideology, but they seem to be a mashup of communists and anarchists. Neo-Nazis are white supremacists who believe in the innate inferiority of non-Caucasians, and therefore believe that they have the right to oppress other groups. It’s fair to say that Nazism is a uniquely evil philosophy, more evil than the communist philosophy, even though the communist philosophy of Antifa was responsible for tens of millions of deaths globally. So if we were to say that communism is as evil as Nazism, we’d be wrong. By the same token, if we were to whitewash communism, we’d be even more wrong.
Then there’s the question of violence. When conservatives condemn Antifa, they’re pointing out that use of violence in response to peaceful protest by evil people is more dangerous than peaceful protest by evil people. Those who initiate violence in a free society are a bigger problem than those who preach evil; the whole point of civilization, as Max Weber stated, was to give the state a monopoly on the legitimate use of force other than in self-defense. Breaking that compact and equating speech with violence is a serious threat to a civilized country. Condemning Antifa for their violent tactics in Boston, for example, should be required of all decent citizens in the same way that condemning Nazi ideology should be.
But this whole argument is a fraud anyway. Very few Americans stand in favor of Nazism, and the Left’s game of broadening out the label “Nazi sympathizer” is merely a political ploy. Antifa is evil. So is Nazism. Two things can be evil at the same time. Anyone who doesn’t believe that should do a little historical research on Stalin and Hitler.
But there are far more Americans condemning Nazism in the last two weeks than Americans who seem willing to condemn the breakdown of law and order. In fact, many mainstream Leftists are now defending Antifa. And that may make Antifa and its attendant violence a serious threat to the social fabric.

Anti-Israel Leaders Hosted at State Dept. Seeking to Drive Wedge in U.S.-Israel Alliance

A State Department official confirmed the meeting took place, but would not specify who the American Muslim leaders met with and what exactly was discussed.
"The Department regularly hosts groups representing different constituencies in America to explain USG policy and hear their perspective," the official told the Free Beacon. "The group was interested in U.S. policy on Jerusalem given events on the Temple Mount/Haram al Sharif last month, and met a cross-section of working
level officials from different offices in the Department."
Asked if administration officials were aware of the group's anti-Israel views and ties to Hamas, the official said that State Department views Hamas as a terror organization and opposes boycotts of the Jewish state.
Noah Pollak, a political consultant who works with a range of pro-Israel organizations, criticized the State Department for hosting what he described as extremists who reject Israel's right to exist and openly endorse terrorist groups.
"AMP is a front for jihadists, and doesn't try very hard to hide it. Some of its founders were involved with the Holy Land Foundation, a Hamas fundraising front that was the biggest terror finance case in U.S. history," Pollak said. "Its founder called for an ‘intifada' here in America. Maybe next time there's a flare-up of Palestinian violence the State Department can cut out the middle man and just meet directly with Hamas."
Other pro-Israel insiders expressed concern over the meeting, but cautioned against putting too much stock in efforts by these Muslim American groups to drive a wedge into the U.S.-Israel relationship.

Mohamed Fahmy: Qatar’s Al Jazeera echoes terrorism

When I accepted a job as Cairo bureau chief for the Qatari-owned Al Jazeera English television news channel in September 2013 I demanded and was assured that my team would remain independent from the network’s Arabic channels.
Those assurances went out the window as management breached its contract, dubbing our English material into Arabic reports behind our backs and rebroadcasting them on the network’s Arabic Mubasher – a channel that an Egyptian court had shut for its “national security threat and bias to the Muslim Brotherhood,” a group once banned as a terrorist organization.
Unknown to our team at the time, Qatar – the tiny Arab state backed by the world’s third-largest natural gas reserves and oil treasuries – also later breached the secret Riyadh Agreement, which required that Qatar stop supporting the Muslim Brotherhood.
That accord was reached two months after our team started working out of the Al Jazeera English makeshift office at the Cairo Marriott Hotel.
According to the recent CNN exclusive release of the unpublished handwritten accords, Qatari ruler Sheikh Tamim Al Thani joined the United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia and Bahrain – the same nations that since June 5 have spearheaded a boycott of his country – in vowing not to support the Brotherhood terrorist franchise in the region and “antagonistic media.” The latter is a clear reference to Al Jazeera, which was accused during the negotiations on the Riyadh Agreement of becoming a voice for the Brotherhood and radicals such as Yusuf al-Qaradawi, an Egyptian preacher convicted of terrorism while residing in Qatar – a man who encouraged suicide bombings and the slaying of Jews and Christians on his weekly show on Al Jazeera, once watched by 60 million people.

Latest nutty Arab rumor: Qatar offering citizenship, scholarships for Israelis

From Al Khaleej (Gulf):

Qatar grants free citizenship to Israelis and 220 scholarships to Jewish students

According to media sources from within Qatar, "the government granted Qatari citizenship free of charge to Israelis, opened its universities to its students, gave them scholarships and allowed them to travel to Israel for the weekend."

"Due to the low number of local students, Qatar seeks to attract foreign students, including the Israelis, through scholarships worth $ 35,000 per student, awarded by the Qatar Foundation for Education, Science and Community Development," said a Georgetown University faculty member in Doha.

Yeah, this sounds perfectly accurate.

The Gulf states are not yet so accepting of Israel that they are past using hate of Israel and Jews to demonize their enemies, and Qatar is now the enemy.

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.

I finally learned how to be woke (Petra Marquardt-Bigman)

By Petra Marquardt-Bigman

Women’s March identity politics 101

This will be only a very short post – I’m busy learning identity politics from the Women’s March. I mean, it’s clear that without a proper understanding of identity politics, one can’t be really woke, right?

Admittedly, since I’ve never had the privilege of holding hands with Louis Farrakhan, I’m not sure how woke I can ever be.

But I’m trying. So last week, the Women’s March issued a really inspiring #SignOfResistance “from the white women of WM.” Linda Sarsour re-tweeted it, so I’m sure it’s really very very woke!!!

So impressive!!! It got me thinking: clearly, that means that also Muslim silence = Muslim consent, right? To get a bit creative, maybe it could be presented like this – what do you think???

Now, related to identity politics, there was a bit of confusion because after Al Jazeera decided a few days ago to feature Manal Tamimi as a “Palestinian supermom,” Elder tweeted a screenshot of one of her super-duper tweets.

Some people wondered if Al Jazeera’s Palestinian supermom really meant to compare the Palestinians to the Nazi figure in the image. As I explained when I wrote about Manal Tamimi’s remarkable Twitter output, an obviously well-meaning Twitter user warned her in Arabic that she had posted “a picture of Nazism” even though “the Palestinians are more honorable than the Nazis, they are defending their land and their freedom.” But Manal Tamimi wasn’t fazed and declared confidently: “The important thing is the idea, we the Palestinians are the ones who are going to teach Israel a lesson, we are going to hurt them and we will achieve victory over them as well.”

Now, I’m pretty sure that identity politics requires that everyone must respect the fact that Manal Tamimi self-identifies with the Nazis because she hopes to emulate how they “hurt” the Jews and achieved “victory over them.” Really, how could anyone dare to dictate (mansplain??? Whitesplain??????) to a proud Palestinian supermom what she aspires to??? And last but by no means least: let’s remember that Linda Sarsour often emphasizes that she’s “unapologetically Muslim and Palestinian,” and “Palestinian supermom” Manal Tamimi is clearly someone she’d admire – after all, Tamimi sends her kids to throw stones at Israeli soldiers, which is, according to Sarsour, “the definition of courage.”

Now excuse me, I have to make a list of all the things Muslims and Palestinians have advocated while Linda Sarsour remained silent and thus gave her consent…

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.

08/21 Links Pt1: What Europe can learn from Israel; Palestinians: When Suicide Attacks Are Bad

From Ian:

Khaled Abu Toameh: Palestinians: When Suicide Attacks Are Bad

The emergence of ISIS-inspired groups in the Gaza Strip has long been an open known secret. This is the inconvenient truth that Hamas has been working hard to conceal for the past few years.
Obstinately holding on to an imaginary dream, some political analysts and journalists have misinterpreted the Hamas document as a sign of "moderation" and "pragmatism," and argued falsely that the Islamist movement is ready to join a peace process with Israel. Nothing could be further from the truth. Hamas leader Mahmoud Zahar could not be clearer on this point.
Hamas, as we all know, is hardly opposed to suicide bombings. Yet when the boomerang returns, suddenly the attacks become "cowardly terror" actions perpetrated by "outlaws" and "intellectually and religiously and morally deviant" terrorists. Hamas, Islamic Jihad and ISIS may disagree on many issues, but targeting Jews and "infidels" is not one of them. On that point, they are in savage agreement.

Col Kemp: What Europe can learn from Israel in its war against vehicle attacks and lone wolf terror

In Israel, you will find there is heavy presence of security, both uniformed and not, at major sites, as well as concrete reinforced barriers at key landmarks and bus stops, to prevent vehicular rammings.
As unpalatable as it may be to European sensitivities, they must begin to apply profiling risk assessment as a measure of precaution and prevention. The stark reality is that a Caucasian mother does not fit your profile of a typical terrorist in this scenario, with all terrorists in the car rammings so far being male Islamic jihadists between roughly the ages of 20 and 40.
However, for profiling to be successful, Europe would do well to again follow the lead of Israel in this case, which does not apply a blanket profiling of entire ethnic groups; instead, security personnel are trained to observe body language, physical signs and other clues to erratic behavior. The curtailing of some personal freedoms will be a small price to pay for the lives of many.
There are other steps European leaders ought to consider as part of their overall strategy to prevent lone-wolf attacks, including refusing re-entry to those who have gone to Syria, Iraq and elsewhere to fight for Isis and stripping citizenship of dual nationals caught committing acts of terror on European soil.
As difficult as it may be to accept, the dream of Schengen open borders cannot continue in its current form, with unfettered borders and lax security checks, where terrorists can freely move from one country to the other without so much as a glance from authorities.
Europe also cannot be serious about fighting terror on the one hand and embracing Iran on the other. Iran continues to be the foremost global state sponsor of terror. Their support of Assad regime is a primary cause of the Syrian refugee crisis and the spread of Isis, as well as of Hezbollah operatives roaming freely across Europe. Tehran is not a partner in the war on terror, it is one of the primary instigators of global terror.
Preventing ‘lone wolf’ attacks 100 per cent of the time is simply not feasible, but greater steps can be taken to minimise the threat.
This will require bold leadership and a recognition that whether it is in Barcelona, Nice, London, Berlin, Stockholm or Jerusalem, terror is terror and the West must stand united, in unwavering solidarity and commitment, if we are to defeat this global evil.

Combating 21st century terror: What Europe can learn from Israel

Intelligence is the first level at which terror must be fought. But the war is now also on the streets. Urban centres are the new battleground. As an Israeli counter-terrorism official (who cannot be named due to the sensitivity of his work) told me: ‘simple things, like placing bollards and barriers at strategic points in major centres can almost eliminate the possibility of vehicle rammings’.
But the most important changes must come at the level of education. A principle problem with terror is that it forces us into ever more intrusive legislation. An educated public can relieve the burden. As the counterterrorism official explains: ‘In the 21st century we have witnessed the new phenomenon of the lone wolf: Someone not part of a cell, someone who doesn’t buy guns or explosives and is therefore much harder to track.’
If someone can now be radicalised just by going on the internet, what can be done? Well, for a start, in Israel, the police have a dedicated Facebook page where people can report terrorist content they find posted on social media, and, critically, all of which is checked. It has saved lives.
Combating the threat of the lone wolf – and avoiding more draconian anti-terror legislation – comes with greater public awareness.
‘If, for example, you see your neighbour going out at 3am every night or see him or her buying a lot of knives, or carrying a suspicious backpack. Look at Anders Breivik,’ the counterterrorism official concludes, ‘all the red flags were there before and no one did anything. People need the courage to speak up. Every tip can lead the authorities to something much bigger.’

There are two historical lenses that can be applied to the recent horrific events in Charlottesville and their aftermath.

The first would be what I’ll call the Cable Street analysis, which considers the violent clashes between outright Nazis and their supporters and violent counter-demonstrators as an extension or repetition of what happened in 1936 when Oswald Mosley – leader of the British Union of Fascists (BUF) – opted for a show of strength by marching thousands of his supporters through the East End of London.

To counter that protest, an opposition of tens of thousands (largely made up of Jewish and Leftist opponents of the Fascists) showed up and met Mosley’s marchers with sticks, rocks, eggs and dung. Even with police trying to protect the marchers and keep the peace, the inevitable violence led to riots and an ultimate disbursal of the Nazis.

This show of force demonstrated that, unlike in Germany and Italy, the Fascists could not count on finding a critical mass of support among the British public. Whether because of this failure, or because Britain was at war with Europe’s Fascists three years later, Mosley and his Black Shirts ended up a humiliated rump vs. the nucleus of leadership for a Fascist Britain.

The Battle of Cable Street, while large and fierce, was just one of many violent battles between proponents of rival Right and Left-wing ideologies fighting for supremacy on the Continent between the two World Wars, fights that provide a different lens to think about our present situation.

For while “Reds” and “Black Shirts” in Europe claimed to be in violent opposition to one another, one can also view their fight as competition for the same souls: those ready to abandon Liberalism and the Enlightenment for ideologies promising a new messianic future: whether that of a worker’s paradise or blood-and-soil nationalist empire.

Unlike Britain, where the Liberal order protected and asserted itself, taking advantage of Fascism’s proven weakness, but not falling for the illusion that opposition to Nazism translated into political virtue, the continent became divided between rival ideological empires responsible for history’s most costly World War (which took the likes of 50 million) and most costly social experiment (Marxism – which cost the lives of an additional 100+ million).

So are today’s clashes an attempt to halt a genuine Nazi advance a la Cable Street, or a new front on the age-old battle between civilization and ruthlessness?

One way to tell is by analyzing the relationship between the actual threat and the level and nature of the response to that threat. While I’ll admit to getting a certain thrill in seeing torch-wielding Nazis flee in panic when faced with an outraged mob (much like the visceral pleasure of seeing Nazis gunned down in the movies), I can’t quite convince myself that the nation or the world faces a resurgent Fascist movement ready to try again to take over the planet.

Certainly our nation is broken into ideological camps that, for a variety of reasons, neither talk to nor understand each other. But we have a choice between following this trend further into extremes (where every political battle is cast as one between Commies and Nazis), or stopping to catch our breath to determine if this is the direction we want to travel in as a nation.

As we consider our options, the Jewish condition (which again is being thrust upon us) can serve as a valuable means to measure political health. Regarding the latest Nazi slogan “You Will Not Replace Us,” the “You,” after all refers, to the Jews. So might those tearing signs bearing those words out of the hands of their opponents stop for a moment to consider similar phrases (such as “The Jews are our Dogs”) as part of the same problem? If so, that’s a step in the right direction.

But if current opponents of today’s self-styled Nazis instead try to lump the villains of Charlottesville, Donald Trump and Israel into a single package that will be the target of their attacks over the coming months and years, we may learn the truth behind a saying frequently attributed (inaccurately) to Winston Churchill and Huey Long: that if fascism comes to America, it will be called “Anti-Fascism.”

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.

In Hebrew, they are terror attacks. In Arabic, they are "operations."

Today there was another car ramming attack in Marseille, although police are not calling it a terror attack.

There is as of yet no universal English phrase for these types of attacks. "Vehicle attacks," "vehicular attacks," "ramming attacks" - all are dependent on the still evolving style guides of different news agencies.

But there are well-accepted phrases describig vehicle attacks in Hebrew and in Arabic.

In Hebrew, there is a specific term for these kinds of attacks as well: פיגוע דריסה, "pigua drisa" meaning "ramming attack." But in Hebrew the word "pigua" specifically refers to terror attacks.

I saw the story reported in Arabic but the Google Translate phrase for the type of attack was not accurate. Google Translate has not yet caught up with common usage. In Arabic, the consistent term for vehicle ramming attacks is عملية دهس, "eamaliat dahs" which literally means "ramming operation."

In Arabic, these are akin to military operations. In Hebrew, they are terror attacks.

The reason, of course, is that Palestinians were the ones who innovated these kinds of attacks, and they were reported in Arabic media in terms of being heroic military operations against Israelis. The phrase stuck even when reporting on Nice or Barcelona, since the shorthand that implicitly finds these attacks to be heroic remains as part of modern Arabic.

The first vehicle attack I am aware of was indeed Palestinian. It was in 2001 when an Arab bus driver aimed his bus at a group of soldiers at the Azor junction, killing seven soldiers and one civilian and injuring 26.

It was the first "heroic ramming operation." It occurred some nine years before Al Qaeda first recommended that tactic in its "Inspire" magazine.

Every time that the media reports on these types of attacks and pretends that they are a new European phenomenon, they are purposefully obscuring the fact that these attacks are yet another gift that Palestinian terrorists have given the world.

(h/t Ibn Boutros)

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.

Along with the Egyptian siege and the Gulf Arab siege comes the siege by the Palestinian Authority itself:

Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas reportedly threatened Sunday to cut off all financial support to the Gaza Strip, unless the Hamas terror group which controls the coastal enclave works together with Abbas’s Fatah party.

The comments came during a meeting with Israeli lawmakers, during which the Palestinian leader also said the Trump administration was in chaos and not moving forward on peace efforts.

According to Israel’s Channel 2, when MK Zahava Galon, of the dovish Meretz party, chided Abbas for having cut payments for Israeli electricity earlier this year, Abbas responded that he might not stop there.

“We transfer $1.5 billion a year, but after Hamas declared its own government, we discontinued 25 percent of our support to Gaza,” Abbas said, according to the report.

“We fear that if there is no change soon, that will gradually reach 100%,” he said.

Earlier this year, Abbas said he would stop transferring some money to Israel to pay for electricity in the Strip. Israel refused to make up the difference, leading to fears of a looming humanitarian crisis in the impoverished enclave already beset by problems providing drinking water and treating sewage.

Yes, the head of the Palestinian Authority is threatening nearly half of its population with a complete loss of electricity, medicine, and funding for teachers and other critical infrastructure.

The Egyptians have essentially shut down their border to Gaza, except for some Hajj pilgrims, for four months now.

The Gulf Arab states have declared Gaza's de facto rulers to be terrorists and (with the exception of Qatar) have stopped providing funds for the Gaza Strip.

The only people who actually seem to be trying to help the citizens of Gaza from sickness and starvation are - Israeli Jews.

Galon had told Abbas she disapproved of steps taken by the Palestinian leader to isolate the Gaza Strip as a means of pressuring Hamas, the de facto ruler of the enclave.

Israel's left-wing parties are more pro-Palestinian than Palestinians are.

The only country that Amnesty and Human Rights Watch and the UN single out for Gaza's problems is the country that has been sending electricity and fuel and aid to Gaza and that has been treating its patients. All while most fellow Arabs have told Gaza's citizens to drop dead.

The irony is almost too perfect, and yet invisible to the world's NGOs and media.

(h/t Yoel)

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.

Sheikh Raed Salah, terror supporter, complains that Jewish prisoners are abusing him

Awwww...

From Al Rai:

The head of the Islamic Movement inside the occupied Palestinian territory, Sheikh Raed Salah, was subjected to verbal and physical abuse inside the Israeli prison.

A member of the defense of the President of the Islamic Movement inside the 1948 Palestine, lawyer Khaled Zbarqa, told Al Rai about the fear and anxiety for the life of Sheikh Salah and his safety as he was attacked and threatened by Jewish prisoners inside the prison, and this is indicative of the fact that the inflammatory rhetoric that the Sheikh has been exposed to by Netanyahu personally and his ministers in his government, created a hostile atmosphere to the sheikh through threats and abuse. He confirmed that the attack included verbal and physical beatings by Jewish prisoners inside the prison.

The guy whose entire life is built around inciting Arabs to kill Jews is complaining about Israelis inciting to kill him.

Of course, Raed Salah has no evidence of incitement by Netanyahu, and the amount of evidence of his incitement could fill volumes. And here is a nice cartoon he posted on Facebook just last month:

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.

08/20 Links: Why Anti-Zionism Is Anti-Semitism; When Feminists Join Islamist Terrorists;

From Ian:

Dr. Mordechai Kedar: The Hajj and the struggle for Islamic leadership

What can we look forward to this year when the Hajj to Mecca approaches? I do not know, but I will not be surprised if the political tension between the Saudis and Iran, particularly after the Sunni ISIS defeats, Shiite Hezbollah victories and Iran's moving into Iraq, Syria and Lebanon, finds an outlet during the Hajj. It could be in the form of a Shiite boycott of Mecca or Saudi violence against any Shiites who attempt the pilgrimage to Mecca.
In June, Jerusalem became the site of the struggle ("Ribat") between Islam, the religion that expects to take the place of Judaism and Christianity, and Judaism, which is in the midst of a return to its former status as a living, worthy religion. The background of the struggle is the renewal of Jewish sovereignty on the Temple Mount. During the short period of Muslim demonstrations for the right to enter the Al Aqsa Mosque without "Jewish" security checks, Saudi Arabia's voice was conspicuously absent.
The reason for the Saudi silence was the fear that the Muslim Brotherhood and those over whom they hold sway would raise the Al Aqsa Mosque to a level of importance that could contest the centrality of Mecca in Islam.
This plan was heard in Muslim Brotherhood media pronouncements. In 2012, for example, Safwat Higazi, the Muslim Brotherhood's chief spokesman in Egypt, said that the capital of the Islamic Caliphate that can unite all the Arab nations "is not Mecca, not Medina, not Cairo, but Jerusalem. (h/t Elder of Lobby)

Why Anti-Zionism Is Anti-Semitism

One in Three British Jews Consider Leaving UK, Majority Thinks Labour Party Harbours Anti-Semites

In interviews with thousands of British Jews, almost a third of them said they have considered leaving the United Kingdom over the past two years due to antisemitism.
The findings are part of a report published Sunday by the Campaign Against Antisemitism watchdog group, which conducted since 2015 interviews with more than 10,000 British Jews together with the YouGov market research company.
In interviews conducted in 2016 and 2017 with a combined sample population of 7,156 respondents, 37 percent of them said they have been concealing in public signs that would indicate that they are Jewish.
Only 59 percent of the respondents since 2015 said they feel welcome in the United Kingdom and 17 percent said they feel unwelcome.
Only 39 percent of respondents from 2015 onward said they trust justice authorities to prosecute perpetrators of antisemitic hate crimes.
Three-quarters of the people interviewed said they feel that recent political events have resulted in increased hostility towards Jews. Since 2015, 80 percent of respondents said they believe that the Labour Party is harboring antisemites in its ranks.
In 2015, Jeremy Corbyn, a far-left politician who in 2009 called Hezbollah and Hamas his “friends,” was elected to lead Labour. Corbyn said last year that he regrets calling the terrorists his friends but Jewish groups in the United Kingdom and beyond have accused him of whitewashing antisemitism and allowing it to grow among the many thousands of supporters who joined Labour in support of his policies.

2015: JC poll reveals 88 per cent of British Jews have not considered leaving UK

The vast majority of Britain’s Jews have no intention of packing their bags despite rising concern about safety after the Paris attacks, according to an authoritative new poll for the JC.
Almost nine out of 10 – 88 per cent - say that they have not considered quitting the UK since last week’s atrocities, compared to just 11 per cent who have thought of leaving.
Among 18-34 year olds, however, the percentage of those who say they have considered leaving jumps to over 17 per cent.
Considering overall safety in the wake of the murders in Paris, nearly a third report feeling “much more concerned”.
When asked about their personal safety, three-quarters still feel secure – over three times more than those who do not.
Seventeen per cent feel “very safe and 58 per cent “quite safe”, compared to 19 per cent who feel “quite unsafe” and only three per cent “very unsafe”. The remaining three per cent are undecided.

According to Palestinian media, a man who moved from Gaza to Sweden was murdered yesterday.

Reports say that Mohammed al-Bazem, 28, was shot in the head and neck as he opened his door yesterday.

Original reports said that he was a former prisoner in Israeli prisons, but his father denies that. He says that he moved to Sweden in 2008 after his brother was killed in the first Gaza War (which seems unlikely since that war ended in 2009 and chances are Israel didn't allow anyone to emigrate during the war).

According to his father, al-Bazem complained about a loud party that was happening on the apartment above his about an hour before his death. The father, seemingly knowing lots of details from thousands of miles away, says that the party featured alcohol and drug abuse.

And one of the residents in that apartment is a Jew.

What more evidence do you need?

Ma'an is now reporting as fact "A Jewish man shot Mohammed from close range, killing him with two bullets in the head and neck" even though its headline says that there is still ambiguity surrounding the case.

Police in are saying nothing beyond that a young man was shot to death in his apartment.

UPDATE: Palestine Today say it was two Jews who killed him.

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.