From the Editor by Rael Jean Isaac

Bensoussan: The Verdict

Last month we reported on the trial of Georges Bensoussan, the Jewish Moroccan born historian brought to trial in a French court on the charge of “incitement of racial hatred” for having paraphrased the words of Smain Laacher, an Algerian Moslem sociologist. The sociologist had said that Moslems were taught by their parents from a very young age to despise Jews; Bensoussan, in a TV debate, quoted Laacher as saying they sucked in anti-Jewish prejudice “with mother’s milk.”

That a Moslem outfit would bring suit on the grounds Benoussan was claiming anti-Israel hatred was genetic in Moslems, while absurd, goes with the territory. What made us draw attention to the case was that all France’s avowed “anti-racist” organizations joined in the lawsuit against Bensoussan, including—and this is worthy of being included in Ripley’s Believe It or Not– the Jewish International League Against Racism and Anti-Semitism (LICRA). (Incidentally, the fact that Bensoussan is a leftist, a member of J Call, a movement promoting “creation of a viable Palestinian state” did not protect him from the “anti-racist” pack.)

On March 7 the court ruled to acquit Bensoussan. Although the wording differed, the judges said, “the idea expressed by Smain Laacher is almost the same, or even identical to that expressed by Georges Bensoussan.” It’s a mark of the ridiculous lengths to which protection of Moslem sensitivities have gone that the ruling is considered a key moment for freedom of speech in France.

The Islamist Collective Against Islamaphobia (CCIF) has vowed to appeal. It remains to be seen if LICRA will sink to yet more shameful depths by joining that appeal.

Et Tu, Canada

The same insanity pervading France is apparent in our northern neighbor.

On the website TruthRevolt M.J. Randolph reports that a group of Canadians took signs and banners to a mosque in downtown Toronto to protest what the imam within was preaching: namely the desire that Jews be killed one by one. The police reaction? To announce they were investigating the protestors. Constable Allyson Douglas-Cook explained to the Canadian Broadcasting Company Toronto that the police wondered if the protesters had perpetrated a hate crime.

This venture into the other side of the looking glass fell flat when it turned out someone inside the mosque had filmed the proceedings including the injunction: “Spare not one of them.” The police decided not to pursue the protesters. No word, Randolph notes, about investigating the people inside the mosque (although advocating genocide is a criminal code offense in Canada).

A Soft Boycott

In this space we often provide examples of Israeli medical achievements from Michael Ordman’s blog Amazing Israel. A revolutionary treatment for prostate cancer called Tookad (activated by light), the result of over fifteen years of research by Avigdor Scherz and Yoram Salomon at the Weizmann Institute of Science in Rehovoth, has now made news around the world. It uses lasers and a drug made from deep sea bacteria to eliminate tumors without causing severe side effects. Trials on 413 men, published in The Lancet Oncology, showed nearly half had no remaining trace of cancer.

Scherz and Salomon

But as Stephen Pollard reports in The Jewish Chronicle, while the BBC made much of the discovery, there was something missing in the story—where the research was done. He calls it “the soft-boycott strategy.” It’s a step below the BDS movement, with its nakedly anti-Semitic singling out the Jewish homeland alone in the world for boycott; instead it ignores anything remotely positive about Israel. Writes Pollard: “So the huge and entirely disproportionate number of Israeli scientific breakthroughs are reported as if they have simply happened by magic, with their Israeli origins ignored.” The Weizmann Institute only managed an understated complaint to The Jewish Chronicle. “We were naturally disappointed that the media coverage of game-changing treatment for prostate cancer managed to avoid any reference to Israeli scientists’ fundamental role in this breakthrough treatment.”

A Christian Voice from Nazareth

The only Middle Eastern state in which the Christian population is growing is Israel. You’d never guess this from the loudest Christian voices coming from the Middle East, which are venomously anti-Israel. That includes the Sabeel Ecumenical Liberation Theology Center, which plays a central theological role for pro-Palestinian campaigns in churches worldwide and the Bethlehem Bible College, whose biennial conferences “Christ at the Checkpoint” are devoted to demonizing Israel.

Which makes it all the more refreshing when someone rejects the miasma of self-destructive hatred to speak up simply and honestly. Father Gabriel Naddaf of Nazareth, speaking at the annual Proclaiming Justice to the Nations International Prayer and Dinner event for Israel at the World Center in Orlando, Florida, declared: “As one of the few surviving Christians in the Middle East, I praise God daily for the blessing of being able to call myself an Israeli.”

Full Story »

Two Netanyahus Meet Two Trumps by Rael Jean Isaac

One of the most widely accepted misconceptions concerning the Arab-Israel conflict (a subject awash in misconceptions) is that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is a “hard-core right winger.” There is nothing in his behavior as Prime Minister during his first years in that role (1997-99) or in his more recent period in office, beginning in 2009, to support this belief. On the contrary, like his predecessors, he has made repeated dramatic territorial and other concessions, including acceptance of the so-called “two state solution.”

In Jan. 1997, still in the first year of his first term, he signed the Hebron Protocol with the Palestine Authority, turning over most of Hebron, after Jerusalem the most important city in Jewish history, to the PA. Netanyahu did so little to change Labor’s disastrous post-Oslo policy that erstwhile supporter Benny Begin (Menachem’s son) derided him at a Likud Party meeting in March of that year. “Arafat releases terrorists and so does Israel. Arafat smuggles in weapons and we give him assault rifles to round off his stores….We have government offices in Jerusalem [supposedly the unified capital of Israel] and so do they.” The following year, under President Clinton’s prodding, Netanyahu signed the Wye River Memorandum in which he promised to turn over 40% of Judea and Samaria to Arafat, a safe corridor between these areas and Gaza, even an airport in Gaza. It is true Wye was not implemented, but that’s only because (predictably) Arafat promptly reneged on his commitments under the agreement.

That same year Netanyahu embarked on secret negotiations with Syria in which he offered to return the Golan Heights. Was Netanyahu prepared to go back to the 1967 border (which Clinton and Dennis Ross assert in their respective memoirs) or did Netanyahu, according to other reports, hold out for several kilometers beyond the international border line? Although Assad backed out, according to widespread reports in the Israeli press, in 2010 Netanyahu tried again, this time with Bashar Assad, offering to return to the June 4, 1967 lines. Fortunately the negotiations collapsed with the onset of the rebellion against the Syrian ruler. (One shudders to think what “success” would have meant for Israel, with Hezbollah and/or ISIS embedded on the shores of the Sea of Galilee.)

That near miss with disaster has not prevented Netanyahu from continuing to offer major concessions. In the wake of Obama’s Cairo speech, Netanyahu agreed to adopt the “two state solution” as his government’s policy. Moreover, retired Brigadier General Michael Herzog (brother of Israeli Labor Party head Yitzhak Herzog), who has participated in almost all Israel’s peace negotiations since Oslo in 1993, writes in The American Interest that Netanyahu in the Obama years offered such large withdrawals that he could not admit their scale to the Israeli public or his coalition partners.

And contrary to the widespread perception, fostered by the media, that Netanyahu has peppered the landscape of Judea and Samaria with Jewish settlements, Israel has not built a new settlement in 25 years. The much publicized on and off settlement freezes to which Netanyahu has agreed applied to existing communities, the “freezes” meaning there was no building even to accommodate natural population growth within them.

Full Story »

Why a “Regional Peace Process” Will Fail by Khaled Abu Toameh

Here is a fundamental misapprehension: Arab countries can help achieve peace in the Middle East by persuading, or rather pressuring, the Palestinians to make concessions to Israel.

This misapprehension is both misleading and baseless.

Recently, officials in Israel and Washington started talking about a “regional approach” to solving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. In this view, as many Arab countries as possible would be directly involved in the effort to achieve a lasting and comprehensive peace agreement between Israel and the Palestinians. Advocates of the “regional approach” believe that Arab countries such as Jordan, Egypt, Lebanon, Qatar and Saudi Arabia have enough leverage with the Palestinians to compel them to accept a peace agreement with Israel.

The Palestinians, however, were quick to dismiss the idea as yet another American-Israeli-Arab “conspiracy” to “liquidate” their cause and force them to make unacceptable concessions. Chief among these “unacceptable concessions” are recognizing Israel as a Jewish state and giving up the demand for a “right of return” for millions of Palestinian refugees into Israel.

What the recent Washington-Israeli notion misses is that Palestinians simply do not trust their Arab brothers. The Palestinians consider most of the Arab leaders and regimes as “puppets” in the hands of the U.S. and its “Zionist” allies. Worse, Many Palestinians sometimes refer to Arab leaders and regimes as the “real enemies” of the Palestinians. They would rather have France, Sweden, Norway and Belgium oversee a peace process with Israel than any of the Arab countries.

In general, Palestinians have more confidence in Western countries than they do in their Arab brothers. That is why the Palestinian Authority (PA) headed by Mahmoud Abbas continues to insist on an international conference as its preferred method for achieving peace in the region and not a “regional approach” that would give Arab countries a major role in solving the conflict. Arab involvement in a peace process with Israel is, in fact, the last thing Abbas and other Palestinians want.

Hani al-Masri, a prominent Palestinian political analyst, echoed this skepticism concerning a potential role for Arab countries in the Middle East peace process. He, in fact, believes the Arabs want to help Israel “liquidate” the Palestinian cause.

Full Story »

False Torah and History by Alex Grobman

What are American Jews thinking?

The American-Jewish response to the [temporary immigration ban against six Muslim countries] seems to be out of sync with both the facts and experience. According to Charles Jacobs, president of Americans for Peace and Tolerance, virtually every prospective Syrian immigrant to the U.S. has been educated in institutions that portray “Jews as morally corrupt,” pit “all Muslims everywhere against non-Muslims anywhere,” and mandate violence against apostates “ as a religious duty.”

Nevertheless, American Jews who identify with the political left favor allowing as many Muslim immigrants into the country as possible, leading many other Americans, Jews and Gentiles, to wonder why the left-wing American Jews would want to admit individuals who are known to despise them and either want them killed or relegated to second-class status, dhimmitude, according to Shari’a law.

The left-wing Jews who favor mass Muslim immigration into the U.S. do not express moral outrage when Jewish Israelis are prohibited from entering most Muslim-dominated countries, including Algeria, Bangladesh, Brunei, Kuwait, Lebanon, Malaysia, Oman, Pakistan, Sudan, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Syria, Iran, Iraq, Yemen, and Libya. They do not question if it is acceptable for six of the seven countries listed by President Trump in his original executive order to ban entry to holders of Israeli passports. The liberal-Jewish community has not responded as to why this double standard is tolerated.

Leaders of the Reform Movement in the U.S. justify their opposition to Mr. Trump’s executive order on immigration based on the conviction that Jews “know the impact that xenophobia and religious profiling have on all people whose lives are endangered by exclusionary laws.”

To bolster their argument, the Reform leaders cite a passage from Vayikra (Leviticus) 19:33: “We have not forgotten our charge: When a stranger resides with you in your land, you shall not wrong him. The stranger who resides with you shall be to you as one of your citizens; you shall love him as yourself, for you were strangers in the land of Egypt.”

First, this is a misstatement of the Scripture which refers to those “strangers” already residing in the midst of the Israelites. It does not refer to unknown prospective enemies. Furthermore, attempting to compare the “stranger” in the Torah to Muslims seeking refuge in the U.S. is simply an inexcusable distortion of the Biblical text. The “stranger” is a halachically converted Jew, living in the land of Israel, who has renounced idol worship and is now focused on Torah study. The Torah warns against disparaging converts in any way, but, rather, demands that they be embraced with love and treated as valued members of the Jewish community.

Full Story »

France’s Death Spiral by Guy Millière

February 2, 2017: A “no-go zone” in the eastern suburbs of Paris. Police on patrol hear screams. They decide to check. While there, a young man insults them. They decide to arrest him. He hits them. A fight starts. He accuses a policeman of having raped him with a police baton. A police investigation quickly establishes that the young man was not raped. But it is too late; a toxic process has begun.

Riots continue for more than two weeks. They affect more than twenty cities throughout France. They spread to the heart of Paris. Dozens of cars are torched. Shops and restaurants are looted. Official buildings and police stations are attacked.

The police are ordered not to intervene. They do what they are told to do. Few arrests take place.

France is a country at the mercy of large-scale uprisings. They can explode anytime, anyplace. French leaders know it, and find refuge in cowardice.

What is happening is the result of a corrosive development initiated five decades ago. In the 1960s, after the war in Algeria, President Charles de Gaulle directed the country toward closer relations with Arab and Muslim states.

Migratory flows of “guest workers” from Algeria, Morocco and Tunisia, which had started a few years earlier, sharply increased. The economy was dynamic, with strong job creation. It seemed there would be no problems.

Twenty years later, serious difficulties became obvious. The immigrants now numbered millions. People from sub-Saharan Africa joined those coming from Arab nations. Neighborhoods made up of just Arabs and Africans were formed. The economy had slowed down and mass unemployment settled in. But the jobless immigrants did not go back home, instead relying on social benefits. Integration still did not exist. Although many of these new arrivals had become French citizens, they often sounded resentful of France and the West. Political agitators started teaching them to detest Western civilization. Violent gangs of young Arabs and Africans began to form. Clashes with police were common.

The situation grew difficult to control. But nothing was done to fix it; quite the opposite.

Full Story »

The Curse of Repairing the World by Ruth King

Examples abound of the way seemingly noble ideals are perverted to promote bias, libel and hatred.

The Quakers come to mind. In 1917, the American Friends Service Committee (AFSC) was founded on the Quaker principles of peace and justice and members of all faiths were invited to join its humanitarian efforts. In 1947 along with its companion British Friends Service Council, the AFSC won the Nobel Peace Prize in recognition of Quaker efforts to heal rifts and oppose war for 300 years. In 1947 the Quakers richly deserved that prize for they had been helping Jews throughout the Hitler years and in the war’s aftermath, survivors of the concentration camps.

But in recent decades, the Quakers, and most especially the AFSC, have strayed far from their original mandate. The AFSC was the pioneer in the onslaught on Israel and in promoting the terrorist PLO. As far back as 1979 AFSI published a monograph by David Kirk (who had become a Quaker and married a birthright Quaker) with a wonderful title that summed up what had transpired: “The Friendly Perversion, Quakers as Reconcilers: Good People and Dirty Work.”

Nothing has changed since as the AFSC has woven ever more tightly an alliance with hard-left Western agitators on a myriad of issues. As recently as March 2017 in Middle East Forum Asaf Romirowsky wrote: “The Quakers have cultivated their image as peaceful and supremely benign. Few suspect, much less know, that one of their central missions is promoting the BDS movement that opposes Israel’s existence.”

Environmentalism is another example of the effort to repair the world gone awry. Who could fault the desire to protect flora and fauna, mountains, and lakes and rivers from pollution or endangered species from extinction? But the carbon crazed anti-development, anti-industry and anti-capitalist fanatics have taken over, promulgating junk science to promote their agenda. With their crusades against insecticides which had eradicated malaria and their opposition to genetically modified food production, they have caused indescribable damage in Africa. In America, they have insisted on regulations which stall or cancel infrastructure creation and repairs, increase costs astronomically and kill jobs, all in the name of “healing the planet.”

The welcoming of massive numbers of Muslims to the United States is another example of a counterproductive effort to repair the world. Again, who could fault a desire to help refugees living in war torn areas where Arabs are killing, maiming and dislocating other Arabs? Instead of providing local shelters and safe zones or demanding that other Arab nations provide succor, “progressives” demand they be brought here. These “repairers of the world” refuse to learn from the plight of Western Europe where Germany, France and Sweden are overrun with Muslim immigrants who refuse to assimilate and among whom are too many criminals and terrorists. Jews are especially prominent among those demanding unfettered immigration, promoting the false perverse argument that the situation of these immigrants is no different from that of Jews trapped in genocidal Europe during World War 11. It merits noting that Jewish refugees harbored no intention of imposing their religion and values on their host and have contributed to American science, industry, labor unions, and culture in outsize numbers.

Full Story »

MARCH 2017 MIDEAST OUTPOST

Outpost

Editor: Rael Jean Isaac

Editorial Board: Ruth King, Rita Kramer

Outpost is distributed free to Members of Americans for a Safe Israel Annual membership: $100.

Americans for a Safe Israel

1751 Second Ave. (at 91st Street)

New York, NY 10128

Tel (212) 828-2424 / fax (212) 828-1717

Zionism101

Chaim Weizmann Part 2: Setbacks” is now available. You can see it via the following link:

http://zionism101.org/NewestVideoVimeo.aspx

Or log in at www.zionism101.org.

“Chaim Weizmann Part 2: Setbacks” depicts the difficulties Weizmann faces as Britain retreats from its commitments to the Jews in order to appease the Arabs. Overcoming challenges to his leadership from within a disappointed Zionist movement he rides high after establishing the expanded Jewish Agency in 1929.

If you haven’t already, please watch our completed video courses.

Full Story »

BDS’s EU Benefactor by William Mehlman

The European Union’s record of dealing from the bottom of the deck in respect to the funding of Israel’s enemies would have reddened the cheeks of a Mississippi riverboat card-sharp. Its flippant justification of its actions has given sophistry a new meaning.

In virtually a single breath – a single press release, in this case – Federica Mogherini, its foreign policy chief, reaffirmed both the EU’s “opposition to the BDS (Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions) campaign as an attempt to isolate Israel” and the EU’s condonation of a parallel attempt by its individual national constituents to blacklist the Jewish state under the rubric of “freedom of expression and association.” Admittedly, Mogherini’s foggy attempt to erect a policy stance out of a grab-bag of ill-fitting political and moral components came in response to a “gotcha” question foisted on her in the European Parliament by Sinn Fein politico and Israel hyper-critic Martina Anderson. Anderson, who heads the EP’s “Delegation for Relations with Palestine,” was fishing for a commitment under the EU’s name to the “protected free speech right” of its “citizens” to boycott Israel, rebuffing claims by Jerusalem that any such privilege would nullify the EU’s official ban on anti-Semitic activity.

As most of that activity is pursued through a network of anti-Israel NGOs, the “free speech” nod Mogherini accorded its BDS fans only further weakens the EU’s long-held contention that its funding of specific projects – economic, social, artistic – mounted by an NGO is distinct from any commitment to the NGO as a whole, regardless of its involvement in BDS. “In other words,” as Tamar Kogman, a researcher on NGO-Monitor’s European desk observed, “what happens outside of ‘project hours’ is none of the EU’s concern.” So the debate here is not whether the EU should uphold the assumed right of its “citizens” to participate in BDS campaigns, but rather, as Kogman sees it, “whether the EU should be handing out taxpayers’ money to NGOs that support a policy in direct contravention of stated EU policy.”

The question appears to have been definitively answered in “EU Funding to NGOs Active in Anti-Israel BDS Campaigns,” a study released in late January by the Jerusalem-based NGO Monitor. Its findings are nothing less than eye-opening. From its pages the European Union emerges as the single largest financial supporter of NGOs involved in the Arab-Israel conflict, accounting for NIS 28 million between 2012 and 2014. Forty two NGOs out of 180 EU grantees were found by the study to be in full support of BDS “through participation in its activities and events, the signing of petitions and initiatives and/or membership in specific BDS platforms.” Twenty nine out of 100 EU grants, amounting to 16.7 million Euros, roughly 25 percent of the EU’s entire “projects budget” were funneled to the recipient BDS-involved NGOs through a pipeline of country-based EU funder satellites. Additional EU pro-BDS funding, unaccounted for by the study, is even more indirect. For example, it notes, the fact that “the EU may fund to a church or humanitarian aid group and the funds are then transferred to a political NGO,” makes a full accounting of the proportion and extent of EU money going to pro-BDS beneficiaries anybody’s guess.

Given the fact that money is fungible, the EU’s boilerplate claim to financing only pre-vetted NGO projects and not NGOs as a whole, becomes utterly irrelevant. There’s no guarantee that the money or portions of it granted for an ostensibly laudable project isn’t being diverted to cover the recipient NGO’s staffing, equipment, publicity campaigns, travel and other expenses unrelated to the project. EU funding has been found by the study to comprise upwards of 50-75 percent of some NGOs’ entire annual budgets. To make matters worse, the researchers discovered that many grantees, including those in the pro-BDS camp, have featured the EU symbol on their publications and websites, bolstering their legitimacy and linking the EU with their overall activities.

Even putting aside the fungibility of money, “How does one determine exactly what falls under ‘project activities?’” Kogman asks. “Does calling for the cultural and academic isolation of Israel count as a ‘pathway toward self-expression,’“ as one passionately pro-BDS NGO insists? “Or is this just another ‘unrelated activity’ for which the EU cannot be held responsible?”

The small random sampling below of the EU’s largesse to those carrying the torch for BDS should put “paid” to any notion of its being an “unrelated activity.” It’s the elephant in the living room. The grant givers named here are all European Union country-based satellites. The recipient NGOs are all prominent BDS supporters:

Full Story »

From the Editor: Rael Jean Isaac

French Jewish Dhimmis

Incredibly, the French Jewish defense organization LICRA (International League against Racism and anti-Semitism) has joined the Islamist CCIF (Collective against Islamophobia) in a lawsuit against well-known Jewish historian Georges Bensoussan, an expert on the history of Jews in Arab countries. They’ve been joined in the suit by other so-called “anti-racist” organizations including the venerable French Human Rights League.

The absurd grounds for Bensoussan’s prosecution? In a radio debate he praised an Algerian sociologist, Smain Laacher, for his courage in saying in a documentary on France’s Channel 3 that, while no one was willing to say it openly, among Arab families in France anti-Semitism “is sucked with mother’s milk.” It turned out this was actually a paraphrase of what Laacher had said—he had spoken of the way Muslim children from a very young age were taught by their parents to despise Jews. The phrase “sucked with mother’s milk” was clearly another way of saying the same thing but the “anti-racist” fraternity chose to interpret it, as French journalist Yves Mamou reports, not as “a metaphor for cultural anti-Semitism transmitted through education” but as a “genetic” accusation, i.e. Muslims literally inherit anti-Semitism. Ergo Bensoussan is tried for “racism.”

What a difference a year makes. Mamou points out that in 2016 Alain Jakubowitz, president of LICRA, had denounced the phony anti-racist wars, saying: “Today, CCIF is the leading anti-racist organization. This is terrifying. [They are] not against anti-Semitism, because they do not care. This is not the question for them.”

Unbelievably, a year later a dhimmified LICRA was sitting in court side by side with CCIF for this nonsensical show trial. Mamou reports that philosopher Alain Finkielkraut has resigned from LICRA in protest. Appearing in court in defense of Bensoussan Finkielkraut declared: “A rogue anti-racism makes you criminalize a concern instead of fighting the cause of this concern. If the court [finds against the defendant] it will be a moral and an intellectual catastrophe.” Judgment will be rendered March 7.

“I Am a Muslim Too”

There are an abundance of Jews in the United States who manifest an equally boundless stupidity. Some of them showed up for an “I Am a Muslim Too” demonstration at Times Square on Feb. 19 protesting President Trump’s effort to ban temporarily Muslims from seven failed states (except Iran, we should be so lucky). It was under the auspices of something called Foundation for Ethnic Understanding headed by Rabbi Marc Schneier, whose mission is apparently to outdo his father Rabbi Arthur Schneier in feel-good interfaith pursuits. Schneier proclaimed to those assembled: “We must join together at the most famous crossroads in the world to make a collective statement that wherever my Muslim brothers and sisters are vilified, discriminated against or victimized by hate crimes and violence ‘Today I am a Muslim too.’”

The title may turn out to be prophetic. Bring enough Muslims to this country and the only way Jews will survive here is if they in fact become “Muslims too.”

London’s Hypocrite-Mayor

London’s Muslim mayor Sadiq Khan is so virtuously indignant over President Trump’s travel ban that he demanded the government rescind Prime Minister Theresa May’s invitation to him. Mere hours after making this demand he welcomed dignitaries from 11 Muslim countries to a reception at City Hall, despite the fact that all of them refuse admission to holders of Israeli passports. It took the outspoken Nigel Farage to tell Khan off: “You want Trump banned from UK but are happy with anti-Israeli discrimination. You are a hypocrite.”

A Good Use for Security Council Resolution 2334

Kenneth Levin points out that the appalling Security Council Resolution that the U.S. permitted to pass in Obama’s final onslaught against Israel has a lever that Israel could use to its benefit. Pretending to uphold “balance” Secretary of State Kerry had insisted that the resolution also call for refraining from “incitement and inflammatory rhetoric.”

Levin notes that what was intended as a fig leaf can be put to good purpose. Under terms of the resolution the Secretary General is to report to the Council every three months on progress in its implementation. The intent of course was just to focus on Israeli settlements. But, as Levin writes, “the quarterly reports called for in 2334 can be used by America’s newly appointed United Nations ambassador Nikki Haley and her staff to important effect. They can insist on the reports’ inclusion of a comprehensive catalogue of Palestinian incitement, provocation and promotion of and support for terror—a catalogue that can be measured against information gleaned from monitoring sources such as Palestinian Media Watch. They can in this way use their UN platform to bring into focus, finally teachable truths that for far too long have been ignored and gone unlearned, thereby potentially helping address the major obstacle to genuine peace.”

If Haley follows through on this excellent advice—and she has had an outstanding debut in denouncing the UN’s anti-Israel obsessions—the Arabs may soon decide to bury Resolution 2234 along with innumerable other forgotten UN resolutions.

Haley’s Comet

That’s the term a New York Sun editorial uses to describe U.S. Ambassador Nikki Haley’s first dazzling press briefing. Emerging from her first regular monthly Security Council meeting on Middle East issues she described it as “a bit strange.” The meeting did not discuss Hezbollah’s illegal buildup of rockets in Lebanon, it was not about Iran’s providing money and weapons to terrorists, it was not concerned with defeating ISIS, it was not about holding Bashar al-Assad accountable for massive civilian deaths. “No,” said Haley, “instead the meeting focused on criticizing Israel, the one true democracy in the Middle East. I am new around here, but I understand that’s how the Council has operated month after month for decades. I am here to say the United States will not turn a blind eye to this anymore.” “The double standards,” declared Ambassador Haley, “are breathtaking.”

Swedish Policeman Erupts on Facebook

Peter Springare

It’s so unthinkable it’s being called the “Swedish spring,” a wave of support for a cop who blew the whistle on the devastating effects mass immigration has had on Sweden. So writes Paul Joseph Watson on a British website. On his Facebook page veteran Swedish police officer Peter Springare warned “Our pensioners are on their knees, schools are in chaos, health care is an inferno, police have been completely destroyed.” Acknowledging his post was not politically correct, Springare used a crude expression to say he could not care less. The crimes he was processing, rape, assault, violence against police, drug trafficking and murder, were almost exclusively committed by someone named “Mohammed” or a variant of that name.

Watson reports Springare is backed up by another courageous cop, Gothenburg police officer Tomas Asenlov, who revealed that cops are told to implement Code 291 rules to hide “all information about the immigration-related crime.”

Not surprisingly, when his Facebook posting received media attention (after it won 130,000 “likes” in the space of a week) Springare was hit with an internal police investigation for “racial agitation.”

The groundswell of support for Springare suggests the mood in Sweden may be changing. On Tucker Carlson’s program on Fox News, filmmaker Ami Horowitz (who barely escaped with his life after being assaulted by a gang of Muslim men while filming in Stockholm) declared that the majority of Swedes still backed the government’s policy of welcoming Muslim immigrants and bestowing upon them generous benefits.

The ultimate comment on Sweden today (reported by Watson) is that some Somali immigrants are considering returning home, saying that areas of some Swedish cities are more dangerous than their notorious homeland!

Michael Ordman on Amazing Israel

Israeli biotech company ARTSaVIT is developing a treatment based on the research of Dr. Sarit Larisch of Haifa University who discovered a protein missing in tumors that regulate cell death.

In the latest trials the NeuroAD cranical device from Israel’s Neuronix slowed the progression of Alzheimers in 85% of patients in the early stages of the disease. The treatment is now being used commercially in Britain.

Former British police officer Nicki Donnelly, paralyzed in 2009, can walk again thanks to a ReWalk exoskeleton.

Scientists at the Hebrew University have discovered some surprising characteristics of bacteria. When phage-resistant bacteria are in close contact with phage-sensitive bacteria the resistant bacteria lose their resistance. This discovery can help research into antibiotic resistance.

Full Story »

Scandinavia: The West’s Citadel of Anti-Semitism by Giulio Meotti

Editor’s Note: What is it that makes today’s pretenders to being the most virtuous among the nations—Sweden dubs itself a humanitarian superpower—in reality moral monsters? As the King was wont to say in Anna and the King of Siam “It’s a puzzlement.” The gap between pretension and reality goes beyond Israel. Bruce Bawer in “Sweden’s Fatuous Feminists” points out that Sweden’s current government, with a cabinet equally divided between men and women, has proclaimed itself “the world’s first feminist government.” Yet on a recent trip to Teheran to ink a trade deal, photos show the eleven women in the Swedish delegation, led by Trade Minister Ann Linde, wearing hijabs, dark pants and long shapeless coats for modesty. Linde herself is shown bowing to an Iranian official. The “world’s first feminist government”, Bawer writes, “effectively communicated to Iran—and the entire Muslim world—a message of submission that could hardly have been improved upon.” Bawer notes that the biggest victims of Sweden’s pretensions are its own elderly citizens who “are now being forced to live in re-purposed shipping containers while newly arrived Muslim families are handed the keys to sprawling houses.” Geriatric Swedes, according to the moral lunacy of the country’s elites, must do their bit to help change the world.

On January 12, the Norwegian newspaper Aftenposten published an article about Jared Kushner, U.S. President Donald Trump’s son-in-law and his senior adviser: “The Jew Kushner reportedly pushed for David M. Friedman as the new ambassador to Israel”, Aftenposten wrote. The newspaper had later to apologize for calling Kushner “the Jew”.

A few weeks earlier, the city council of Trondheim, Norway’s third-largest city, passed a motion calling on its residents to boycott Israeli goods — a city aspiring to be “Israel-free”. Then it was the turn of another Norwegian city, Tromso, population 72,000, whose city council approved a similar motion. More than 40% of Norwegians are already boycotting Israeli products or are in favor of doing so, according to a poll.

What hell is happening in Scandinavia, whose countries, Norway and Sweden, are bastions of political correctness, champions of multiculturalism and, according to the Global Peace Index, the most “peaceful” countries in the world? “The most successful society the world has ever known”, however, as The Guardian labelled Sweden, has a dark side: Israel-slandering and anti-Semitism.

Sweden and Norway are manipulating public opinion in the way immortalized by George Orwell in his novel 1984 as the “Two Minutes Hate”. These countries have seen the creation of a public opinion according to which Israel is a merciless enemy of humanity that ought to be dismantled forthwith.

A year ago, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu presented at the Knesset an updated map of Israel’s friends and enemies. Only five countries are openly at war with the Jewish State: Iran, Iraq, Syria, Afghanistan and North Korea. Then there are the friendly countries, including many non-Muslim African countries that once had no diplomatic relations with Jerusalem. But the map also included a European country that for the first time moved into the “non-friends” camp: Sweden.

Hate for Israel has become a real obsession in Scandinavia, which revived the glorious partnership between the liberal “useful idiots” — the ones concerned about equality and minorities — and Islamists, the ones concerned about submission and killing “infidels”.

Despite the fact that Jews in Norway are only 0.003 percent of the total population, Oslo is now world’s capital of European anti-Semitism. Recently, the Norwegian National Theater opened its Festival in Oslo with a dramatic video clip. The video urged a boycott of the National Theater of Israel, Habima, in Tel Aviv. Funded by the government and aired at the festival, the clip shows an actress posing as a spokesman for the National Theater and calling for a boycott of the Israeli theater. Pia Maria Roll labelled Israel a state “based on ethnic cleansing, racism, occupation and apartheid”. Israel’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs responded saying that the seven-minute video recalls “the Norwegian collaborationist Vidkun Quisling and Knut Hamson” (a Nobel laureate for Literature who sympathized with Hitler).

It is not the first time. A festival in Oslo also rejected a documentary, The Other Dreamers, about the lives of disabled children, simply because it was Israeli. “We support the academic and cultural boycott of Israel,” wrote Ketil Magnussen, the founder of the festival.

Norway is the European country most engaged in the campaigns against Israel. All Norwegian universities refused to host Alan Dershowitz for a speaking tour about the Middle East. A proposal for an official academic boycott against Israel was promoted by Norway’s University of Trondheim. If approved, the boycott would have been the first of its kind in a European university since the Nazi boycott of Jewish professors.

The Norwegian Ministry of Finance has excluded Israeli companies, such as Africa Israel Investments and Danya Cebus, from its Global Pension Fund, a fund that invests the national wealth in foreign stocks and bonds, and which holds more than one percent of all global stocks. The Norwegian trade union EL & IT, which represents workers from the energy and telecommunications sectors, has boycotted the Histadrut, Israel’s national labor union.

Full Story »
Page 3 of 70«12345»102030...Last »

Outpost

Editor: Rael Jean Isaac
Editorial Board: Herbert Zweibon, Ruth King

Outpost is distributed free to
Members of Americans For a Safe Israel
Annual membership: $50.

Americans For a Safe Israel
1751 Second Ave. (at 91st St.)
New York, NY 10128
tel (212) 828-2424 / fax (212) 828-1717
E-mail: afsi @rcn.com web site: http://www.afsi.org

June 2017
M T W T F S S
« May    
 1234
567891011
12131415161718
19202122232425
2627282930