The New Israel Fund is Bad News NGO Monitor

Editor’s note: In 1990 AFSI was the first to expose the New Israel Fund in our pamphlet The New Israel Fund: A New Fund for Israel’s Enemies by Joseph Puder. Calling itself “non-partisan” and “non-political” the New Israel Fund, the pamphlet noted, “embraced a startling variety of extremist crusades” for which Puder provided chapter and verse. The Fund has only grown more deceptive since, collecting much more money (over $30 million a year) much of which it siphons to ever more blatantly anti-Israel NGOs within Israel—while claiming its objective is only “to strengthen and expand the pro-democracy, progressive forces in Israel.”

That there are Jews in Israel who have created and staff NGOs whose aim is to defile and destroy their state is a disgrace to Jews and Israel; that there are wealthy American Jews who allow themselves to be taken in by the phony claims of the New Israel Fund to support Israel is equally appalling.

The following are excerpts from NGO Monitor’s recent report on the Fund.

The New Israel Fund (NIF) is headquartered in New York, and maintains offices throughout the U.S. as well as in Canada, the UK, Switzerland, and Germany. Since its founding in 1979, NIF has provided over $300 million to more than 900 Israeli organizations.

Shatil is the Israel-based “operating arm” of the NIF,” that creates and nurtures coalitions of NGOs, attempts to influence laws and bills in Israel, and holds workshops for staffers of NIF-funded NGOs.

Approximately 20% of grants go to 25 advocacy NGOs active in political campaigns that involve, to different degrees, demonization of Israel, including BDS and lawfare, under the headings of “Civil & Human Rights;” “Religious Freedom;” “Social & Economic Justice.”

The NIF claims that it “will not fund global BDS activities against Israel nor support organizations that have global BDS programs.” The NIF claims that it “firmly opposes attempts to prosecute Israeli officials in foreign courts [so-called lawfare.]

In practice, NIF continues to fund NGOs such as Adalah, Breaking the Silence, +972 Magazine, and Physicians for Human Rights-Israel that are primarily active in campaigns that contribute to BDS and [Israel’s] delegitimization.

On June 29-30, 2015, Adalah co-sponsored and participated in two side events at the UN Human Rights Council along with pro-BDS and lawfare NGOs. Two of Adalah’s co-sponsors, Badil and Medical Aid for Palestinians, in addition to extreme demonization of Israel, have also engaged in overt antisemitism.

During the wave of terrorism that began in October 2015, NIF grantees Adalah and Physicians for Human Rights-Israel (PHR-I) released statements criticizing Israeli policy and actions without even noting the attacks against Israeli civilians.

Adalah’s rejection of the legitimacy of the Jewish State and its attempt to portray Israel as racist are integral components of the Durban Strategy that it helped formulate. Consistent with its political goal of eliminating Israel’s Jewish character, in 2007 Adalah drafted a “Democratic Constitution” that called for replacing the Jewish foundation of Israel with a “democratic, bilingual, and multicultural” framework.

NIF grantee Breaking the Silence makes repeated allegations of [Israeli] “war crimes” and “violations of international law.” Despite claiming to address Israeli society, BtS’ lobbying and media advocacy focus on international audiences, including appearances in Europe and the United States.

Full Story »

Hatikvah by Ruth King

In 1897, at the First Zionist Congress in Basel, delegates sang a song called “Hatikvah,” set to the music of Bedrick Smetana’s “The Moldau.” Smetana was a Czech composer closely identified with his nation’s aspirations to sovereignty. It was fitting music for the poem entitled “Tikvatenu” (“Our Hope”) written two decades earlier, in 1878, by Naftali Hertz Imber, who was inspired by fellow Zionist dreamers in Romania.

The delegates could not, in their wildest imagination, have guessed that the song would in subsequent years be sung by Jews from Bulawayo, Rhodesia to Melbourne, Australia, to Buenos Aires, Argentina—indeed wherever Jews congregated in schools, conferences, organizations in the Diaspora. They might have been equally surprised that given the huge impact of the song, it would take over fifty years after the state of Israel was established for Hatikvah to be formally designated the national anthem in 2004.

Why did the song take so long to be recognized as the national anthem? Herein hangs a dramatic tale of intrigue, infighting and politics.

First, there was the controversial character of the author, Naftali Imber, who settled in Palestine in 1882. He was a wanderer, eccentric, a mystic, and an alcoholic. He left Palestine in 1888 to dabble in hopeless ventures in England, Boston and New York. That left Samuel Cohen, the composer who had blended Imber’s poem to the music derived from the Moldau, to promote Hatikvah in Palestine.

The secular Zionists of Palestine liked the song because it was not religious. But not all Zionists were so enchanted. In fact, Theodore Herzl despised Imber and offered contests in hopes of coming up with a better anthem.

Religious Zionists faulted the song for the absence of God in the lyrics. Rabbi Abraham Isaac Kook, the chief rabbi of British Mandatory Palestine, submitted a substitute poem “Ha-Emunah” which included faith, return and God. The secularists swiftly rejected it for being “messianic.”

Other Zionists objected to the music as unoriginal and inspired by a Christian nationalist composer. Another contest was organized, this time for composers and musicians to submit different melodies. Again, none were successful.

The Zionist Congress in 1933 adopted Hatikvah as its anthem. But the rancorous debates continued even after statehood.

Full Story »



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

Full Story »

Crime and Punishment by William Mehlman

In the hands of the nine justices of the U.S. Supreme Court may rest the present and future ability of Israel to drive a spike into the circulatory system of a network of terror that has shadowed virtually every moment of its existence over the last 70 years.

With little wiggle room, the robed eminences are being called upon to put their imprint on two burning questions: First, do diplomatic considerations, however allegedly “sensitive,” preclude execution of a $655.5 million liability judgment against the PLO and its Palestinian Authority affiliate by a duly sworn Southern District of New York jury? Within the framework of Sokolow v. the Palestine Liberation Organization, the case in question, the Court will be tasked with defining the “civil remedies” parameters of the 1992 “Anti-Terrorism Act,” which allows any U.S. national afflicted in “his or her person, property or business by reason of an act of international terrorism, or his or her survivors or heirs, to sue to recover threefold damages in any appropriate district court of the United States.”

Burning question No.2, to which the justices will have to provide an answer as they weigh the oral arguments they heard last month in Jesner v. Arab Bank, plc, is whether corporations can be sued under international law for human rights violations and terrorism. Arab Bank, the corporation under scrutiny, headquartered in Jordan and with a branch network that stretches to New York, is one of the Arab world’s elite financial institutions. The answer to the liability question devolves on the High Court’s interpretation of a law as old as the U.S. Constitution, the 1789 “Alien Tort Statute,” which allows federal district courts to hear “any civil action by an alien for a ‘tort’ (a civil wrong for which the injured party is entitled to compensation) committed in violation of the Law of Nations or a treaty of the United States.” Relatively undisturbed for the better part of two centuries ATS was brought out of hibernation by 1960s “human rights” groups looking for a peg on which to hang lawsuits seeking relief for abuses beyond U.S. borders. The only restriction on its application is that the people or entities sued must have a “real connection to the United States.”

On that criterion both Sokolow v. the PLO and Jesner v. Arab Bank can be credited with perfect three-point landings. Sokolow pivots on seven terror attacks perpetrated by the PLO between 2000 and 2004, the bloodiest years of the “second intifada.” That long list included, inter alia, the actions of a 17 year-old boy who blew himself and several bystanders up at a crowded bus stop in Jerusalem’s French Hill neighborhood; a bomb detonated by an operative for Hamas (then still part of the PLO) that killed five in a Hebrew University cafeteria; a shooting spree in a crowded Jaffa mall by a man identified as a “Palestinian security officer,” and the wounding of Mark Sokolow, his wife and two daughters in a Jan. 2002 Jerusalem suicide bombing.

Full Story »

From the Editor Rael Jean Isaac

Corrupting Academic Associations: The Mechanics

Ever wonder how they did it? How BDS activists managed to persuade academic associations with zero connection to the Middle East to pass boycott resolutions against Israel? The answer is provided by a lawsuit focused on the American Studies Association [ASA] against ten of those activists resulting in the release of over 17,000 documents turned over by current and former ASA leaders. The suit charges that the activists, five of them members of the U.S. Campaign for the Academic and Cultural Boycott of Israel [USACBI] (the faculty arm of BDS), engaged in a successful campaign (in 2013) to “covertly” take over the ASA and use it to support the BDS movement in violation of specific ASA bylaws.

The lawsuit identifies Rutgers assistant professor of women’s studies Jasbir Puar (who has repeated libels that Israel harvests the organs of young Palestinian men for scientific research) as chief strategist. The suit charges that emails between the defendants show how Puar packed the ASA leadership with BDS advocates. One advocate wrote: “In my conversations with Jasbir it’s clear that the intent of her nominations was to bring more people who do work in, and are politically committed to…the question of Palestine.” Emails between the activists also show that they agree not to include their goal of advancing BDS in their pitches to the membership for election to the ASA National Council. The one candidate who disclosed his support lost—those who kept it secret were elected. Once elected they manipulated ASA procedures to ensure the membership would not vote down the Council’s decisions by artificially freezing the cutoff date for dues payments. Even then, the lawsuit claims, the BDS activists never obtained the number of votes necessary for a boycott but imposed one anyway!

In the case of other academic associations, the BDS activists employed a variety of ingenious devices—for example, holding the boycott vote at the end of the meeting when all but the BDSers had gone home.

Blood Libels at Rutgers

Mazen Adi

Rutgers has the distinction of having not one (Jasbir Puar) but two faculty members who have accused Israel of trafficking in human organs. Rutgers has appointed as adjunct professor of Political Science Mazen Adi, who worked for Syria’s foreign ministry (most recently as legal adviser at the Syrian Mission to the UN) for 16 years. While he was defending a boss who was actually guilty of gassing and starving Syrian citizens, including children, he was libeling Israel with a modern version of the blood libel–claiming it was harvesting the organs of Palestinian children. For the Rutgers administration Adi’s evil calumnies are obviously no barrier to his appointment. Indeed its spokesman has responded to protests with self-righteous declarations that Rutgers supports the faculty’s right to free speech. Now there’s a laugh. To cite one example, in 2014 Condoleeza Rice, a black woman, a former Secretary of State, herself an academic by trade, an unexceptionable choice as Rutgers commencement speaker, was forced to bow out when a bunch of rowdy students decided she was not progressive enough for their taste. There was no speaking out by the administration on her right to free speech; it scurried for cover.

Full Story »

Another Anniversary by Rael Jean Isaac

The hundredth anniversary of the Balfour Declaration has passed to mixed reactions. It has been celebrated, as it deserves to be—the achievements of the Jewish state that emerged from it are breathtaking—but also attacked and denigrated.

Some of the attacks are unsurprising. The “Foreign Minister” of the “State of Palestine” Riyad Malki said it was bringing legal proceedings against the British government in British and international courts, in his words, to “compel the British government to apologize and make reasonable reparations to make up for that tragedy [the Balfour Declaration] including recognizing the State of Palestine.” The UN is using the occasion to set aside $1.3 billion to fund Palestinian legal campaigns against Israel and to support creation of an independent Palestinian state.

Emily Thornberry

More unsettling are some British reactions. Melanie Phillips reports that Labor Party leader Jeremy Corbyn refused to attend the dinner celebrating the centenary of the Balfour Declaration, a dinner attended by Prime Minister Netanyahu as the guest of Britain’s Prime Minister Theresa May. In his place he sent the Labor shadow foreign secretary Emily Thornberry who made no secret that she saw nothing to celebrate. In an interview with the Middle East Eye news site, Thornberry said: ”I don’t think we celebrate the Balfour Declaration but I think we have to mark it…and I think probably the most important way of marking it is to recognize Palestine.” Even more unsettling are the reactions of some hitherto respectable Jewish organizations. For example, the American Jewish Historical Society has clearly gone over to the dark side with its plan (only withdrawn under pressure) to “commemorate” Balfour with speeches by two anti-Israel activists, partnering with the viciously anti-Israel Jewish Voice for Peace.

Which brings us to the importance of another anniversary that went totally unremarked: the 24th year anniversary this September of the signing of the Oslo accords in Washington. There is a direct connection between the rampant, ever-growing hostility to Israel and the so-called “peace” agreement Rabin signed with Arafat. Until then, Arafat had been a terror chieftain whose fortunes were in sharp decline. Whatever the failures of Israel’s 1982 campaign in Lebanon, it had one major success, forcing the PLO, which had sowed havoc in both Jordan and Lebanon, to find refuge in Tunisia, a backwater where it remained weak and constrained. With Oslo Israel bestowed vigorous new life on the PLO—and on the worldwide assault on her own legitimacy.

Full Story »

In Memoriam Man on a Mission: Dr. Steven Carol (1942-2017) by David Isaac

On Oct. 21, 2017, historical truth lost a great advocate. Dr. Steven Carol passed away of heart troubles. He was 75. He leaves behind a wife and two children. To Phoenix, Arizona residents Dr. Carol was best known for his radio guest appearances on KKNT 960 AM’s “The Middle East Radio Forum,” a weekly show where he served as Associate Producer and Official Historian.

Dr. Carol authored four books, including Middle East Rules of Thumb, Encyclopedia of Days: Start the Day With History, From Jerusalem to the Lion of Judah and Beyond: Israel’s Foreign Policy in East Africa since 1948, and his last book, which was also his masterwork, Understanding the Volatile and Dangerous Middle East, which we reviewed in these pages last year. The magisterial 1,000-page tome covers virtually every aspect of the Middle East and includes maps and charts Dr. Carol drew himself (he had attended Brooklyn Tech and could have easily become an engineer if not for his passion for history). Something from Brooklyn Tech must have rubbed off. Dr. Carol brought an engineer-like exactness to his chosen profession.

Steven Carol

What few know is that Dr. Carol’s major accomplishments all came in the last 15 years of his life. He had been a high school teacher. (In 1987, New York State named Dr. Carol “Outstanding Teacher.”) But he had to give it up. The reason is a dramatic one. In 2002, Dr. Carol underwent surgery for an aortic root aneurysm. His wife, Hadara, is convinced that her husband, who suffered high blood pressure, was pushed over the edge by the demand from a principal to raise the grade of a failing student, who also happened to be a star athlete, so that he would be eligible to play. Every teacher had agreed to do it. Only Dr. Carol refused.

The surgery involved cutting a 12-inch incision from his heart down to his belly. His wife recalls her astonishment when the surgeons informed her they weren’t sure that they had correctly reconnected him. (Over 100 connections were involved.) Dr. Carol lay unresponsive in the ICU for 60 days. The doctors finally told his wife to pull the plug. Although she and her husband had agreed to such a recourse ahead of time, she struggled with the decision and found herself unable to do it. Though not a devout woman, she prayed to God: “Don’t keep him here for me. Don’t keep him here for the children. Keep him here for his work.” Dr. Carol woke shortly afterward. His first words: “Where the hell am I?”

Full Story »

Palestinian State – Enhancing or Eroding U.S. National Security? by Yoram Ettinger

The choice of business and social partners should be based–objectively–on a proven track record, not–subjectively–on unproven hopes and speculation.

Similarly, the assessment of the potential impact of the proposed Palestinian state on U.S. national security should be based–objectively–on documented, systematic, consistent Palestinian walk (track record) since the 1930s, not–subjectively–on Palestinian talk and speculative scenarios.

Furthermore, an appraisal of the Arab attitude toward a proposed Palestinian state should be based–objectively–on the documented, systematic and consistent Arab walk since the mid-1950s, not– subjectively–on the Arab talk.

Since the 1993 Oslo Accord, the documented track record of the Palestinian political, religious and media establishment has featured K-12 hate-education and religious incitement. This constitutes the most authoritative reflection of the worldview, state-of-mind and strategic goals of the proposed Palestinian state.

Moreover, since the 1930s, the Palestinian track record has highlighted close ties with the enemies and adversaries of the U.S. and the Free World.

For example, the Palestinian Grand Mufti, Haj Amin al-Husseini, whose memory and legacy are revered by the Palestinian Authority, embraced Nazi Germany, urging Muslims to join the Nazi military during World War II. Moreover, in 2017, Hitler is still glorified by Palestinian officials and media, and Hitler’s Mein Kampf is a best-seller in the Palestinian Authority.

Full Story »

Jabotinsky’s Children: Polish Jews and the Rise of Right-Wing Zionism by Daniel Kupfert Heller Reviewed by David Isaac

Jabotinsky’s Children is a hatchet job, cloaked in a tone of historical objectivity. The “children” are Betar, the youth movement founded by Zionist leader Vladimir “Ze’ev” Jabotinsky, which boasted some 65,000 members in the 1930s, most of them in Poland. The book’s thesis is that Betar youth, whom the author says Jabotinsky originally viewed with “a mix of pity, disdain and suspicion,” ultimately shaped his world view, making him open to fascist ideas. The author, Daniel Kupfert Heller, an assistant professor of Jewish Studies at McGill University, further asserts that Jabotinsky deliberately wrote “provocative and ambiguous prose” to allow “Betar activists to interpret their leader’s writings as they saw fit,” in line with what the author views as their own authoritarian and violence-prone ideology.

The first hundred pages are devoted to a tedious setup describing Jabotinsky’s growing interest in Poland’s Jewish youth and an overly detailed examination of the various existing Jewish groups that would eventually coalesce to form Betar. That the book originated as a Ph.D. thesis probably explains the minutia of this section. Although the author attempts to explain why Jews were attracted to Polish leader Jozef Pilsudski’s right-wing government (not hard to understand as the situation of Jews under his regime was better than either before or after), he doesn’t adequately convey the daunting challenges facing Polish Jews—given the growth of anti-Semitic hatred, the escalating economic hardships, and the progressive closing off by Britain of Jewish immigration to Palestine, one of their few avenues of escape. Neither will the reader learn what the Revisionist movement was about or even what issues preoccupied the Zionist leaders of the day.

That some Betar members flirted with fascist ideas is not in doubt. The question is: So what? It is not surprising that youth movements would be influenced by the politics of the day. Early on, Italian leader Benito Mussolini was not considered anti-Semitic which is why as late as 1934, Zionist leader Dr. Chaim Weizmann, the very face of establishment Zionism, could visit Mussolini as part of a diplomatic initiative without raising eyebrows. Heller admits that in the 1920s and part of the 1930s, fascism was not a dirty word. In the 1920s, Churchill himself wrote that Italian fascism had “rendered a service to the whole world.” As late as 1933, Roosevelt expressed his admiration for Mussolini.

Full Story »

The Rise of the Israeli Right: From Odessa to Hebron by Colin Shindler Reviewed by Moshe Dann

The purpose of this book, like several others by Colin Shindler, emeritus professor in Israel Studies at SOAS University of London, is to show how “right wing” governments have misled Israel and prevented peace with its neighbors. Readers seeking an explanation for this on-going phenomenon, however, will be disappointed.

Shindler never explains how the “far Right” is distinguished from “the Right,” or even what “the Right” means. Although used around the world to describe a socio-economic philosophy and agenda, Shindler’s analysis of “the Right” focuses on a single issue: the settlements. Shindler refers only once in passing (on p.325), to “market forces,” “collectivism” (kibbutz socialism), “Labor’s anti-religious ethos and patronizing attitude,” and “Mizrachi voters” (Sephardim) – all of which are critical in understanding Israeli politics and society.

Nowhere does Shindler discuss the role of Israeli’s media, tightly controlled by the Left, including state-sponsored TV and radio, or the role of left-wing academic and literary elites, or the Left-dominated judicial system, or its concentrated economic structure dominated by a handful of families. Shindler misses the point: despite these obstacles, Israeli Jews support a pro-settlement, “Right-wing” government.

One problem in Israeli politics is its electoral system. Citizens do not vote for specific candidates, but for a party. Once in power, the Prime Minister of the victorious party can do whatever he wants, regardless of what he or other party leaders have promised or voters may have intended. This means there is no way for voters to influence policy or ensure accountability. Israeli political parties do not issue political platforms or make policy commitments.

Without an analysis of socio-economic forces driving Israel and the settlement movement Shindler fails to understand why “the Right,” or more accurately, the Likud Party continues to attract Right-wing voters – even when it does not fulfill its promises. Israel’s last election made this point clear. Although the Left-wing Zionist Union/Labor party was predicted to win, PM Netanyahu’s last-minute appeal to voters carried Likud to an astounding victory.

Rather than provide an explanation for why Israeli Jews vote increasingly for “right-wing” parties, he opines: “There has been a drifting away from a belief in the moral norms of liberal states — a decline in the belief in democracy and an increase in the sense of particularist Jewishness.” (p.361)

Shindler does not discuss Palestinian terrorism and PA incitement and its effects on Israeli politics. Hamas “bombings” are noted in passing; Hezbollah not at all.

Full Story »
Page 3 of 77«12345»102030...Last »


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 web site:

March 2018
« Jan