Czech
French
German
Hebrew
Noruegan
Russian
Spanish
Swedish
Polish
Portuguese
The video includes the following speakers in English:
Attorney Larry Dub
Rabbi Pesach Lerner
Jonathan Pollard
Esther Pollard’s Funeral Jan 31, 2022
Hill 24 Does Not Answer
This movie portrays Israel’s war of Independence like no other movie
Produced in 1953 by Jack Padwa, then a Tel Aviv businessman. Won the Cannes Film Festival award in 1955,
Full disclosure. Jack Padwa , who died in 2010 at the age of 94,. acted as a mentor to yours truly,
Why did Jack produce the movie?
Jack told to me that David Ben Gurion, israel’s first prime minister met with Jack Padwar in 1950,
As a British citizen who had arrived in Palestine in 1940. Jack Padwa joined the underground war to overthrow the British mandate in Palestine and managed to infiltrate British intelligence,
However, Ben Gurion confided in Jack Padwa that his 1950 visit in the US had been a disaster, and that few people understood what the nascent state of israel was all about
Jack Padwa turned to Ben Gurion and said that “What you need is a book and a movie”:
With the backing of David Ben Gurion, Jack Padwa brought writer Leon Uris to Israel, who wrote the book Exodus.
And with the backing of David Ben Gurion, Jack Padwa produced HILL 24 DOES NOT ANSWER
At time when the debate rages as to help present Israel in the public domain, please watch this film
Respectfully Posted by David Bedein
Knesset lobby convenes to discuss antisemitism by BDS, Palestinians
The Knesset lobby to combat antisemitism spread by the Boycott, Divestments and Sanctions (BDS) movement and the Palestinian Authority held a discussion on antisemitism to mark the International Holocaust Remembrance Day on Wednesday.
The Center for Near East Policy Research’s Dr. Arnon Gross and CEO David Bedein were invited to take part in the discussion, initiated by lobby head MK Amichai Chikli and members, MKs Ofir Akunis, Gadi Yevarkan and Sharren Haskel.
In the Knesset discussion, Dr. Gross and Bedein showed a presentation containing research and details on a new, “modern” antisemitism “led by the Palestinian Authority and the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA).”
“Along with the classic form of antisemitism defined by the Nazi movement, the West is now defined by a well-oiled education system rife with incitement, such as UNRWA’s education system which is prevalent throughout the Middle East,” Bedein stated in the Knesset.
Bedein cited a number of textbooks used in Palestinian schools across Gaza and the West Bank as proof due to the hateful and sometimes antisemitic content in the books written for schoolchildren.
The PA, who initially had an agreement with the European Union to revise its academic curriculums in 2021, reneged on that agreement and has instead promoted new academic materials that feature hateful language and violent imagery, according to an IMPACT-se report.
“UNRWA’s ideology promotes antisemitism within its culture,” Bedein claimed. “On its website, UNRWA prides itself on its activities while leading the incitement while giving legitimacy to murderers and terrorists.”
The Knesset lobby, officially named the lobby for combatting antisemitism and the delegitimation of the State of Israel, is chaired by Chikli and includes MKs from both the coalition and the opposition, such as Idit Silman, Moshe Gafni, Ofir Sofer and Yomtob Kalfon.
Premature euphoria
The recent passing of a resolution at the United Nations General Assembly sponsored by Israel (and others) has caused much jubilation.
A closer analysis of the situation however reveals more disturbing aspects which should give those rejoicing a cause to pause, reflect and then wake up to reality.
Unfortunately, we have become so used to being abused, condemned and sanctioned that even the slightest gesture of sanity evokes an outburst of euphoric gratitude by those who have been the victims of past behaviour.
Instead of pointing out the hypocrisy and double standards far too many grovel at even the most meagre crumbs of common decency which occasionally are thrown our way.
This current exercise at the UN is a classic example.
Two dates this month resonate with stark and dark memories as far as Jews are concerned.
20 January 1942 is the 80th anniversary of the infamous Wannsee conference where the murder of all Jews under German occupation was finalized.
27 January is International Holocaust Remembrance Day which was designated by the UN. It was chosen because it is the date on which Auschwitz – Birkenau concentration camps were liberated.
With the upsurge in Judeophobia and Holocaust revisionist activity worldwide, these anniversaries assume greater relevance than ever before. Commemorations vary from country to country but the general pattern is for some sort of ceremony attended by a VIP and representatives of other faiths. With each passing year and the alarming rise again of hate and incitement the slogan “never again” and the rote rhetoric annunciated by various representatives sounds more and more irrelevant, especially when it is not backed up by firm and determined action.
In recent times it has become fashionable for Israel haters to equate Israel with the heinous crimes of the Nazis and in fact denying the legitimacy of the Jewish State is now a standard hallmark of all those propagating these lies.
It was therefore to combat these slanders that the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance published its definitions of antisemitism and invited countries and other groups to join the declaration, thus affirming their willingness to fight such delegitimization.
For those not familiar with the IHRA criteria of what constitutes Jew-hate here are the details:
- Calling for, aiding, or justifying the killing or harming of Jews in the name of a radical ideology or an extremist view of religion.
- Making mendacious, dehumanizing, demonizing, or stereotypical allegations about Jews as such or the power of Jews as collective — such as, especially but not exclusively, the myth about a world Jewish conspiracy or of Jews controlling the media, economy, government or other societal institutions.
- Accusing Jews as a people of being responsible for real or imagined wrongdoing committed by a single Jewish person or group, or even for acts committed by non-Jews.
- Denying the fact, scope, mechanisms (e.g. gas chambers) or intentionality of the genocide of the Jewish people at the hands of National Socialist Germany and its supporters and accomplices during World War II (the Holocaust).
- Accusing the Jews as a people, or Israel as a state, of inventing or exaggerating the Holocaust.
- Accusing Jewish citizens of being more loyal to Israel, or to the alleged priorities of Jews worldwide, than to the interests of their own nations.
- Denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination, e.g., by claiming that the existence of a State of Israel is a racist endeavour.
- Applying double standards by requiring of it a behaviour not expected or demanded of any other democratic nation.
- Using the symbols and images associated with classic antisemitism (e.g., claims of Jews killing Jesus or blood libel) to characterize Israel or Israelis.
- Drawing comparisons of contemporary Israeli policy to that of the Nazis.
- Holding Jews collectively responsible for the actions of the state of Israel.
- In an effort to focus the world’s attention, Israel’s representative at the UN decided to sponsor a resolution affirming the international community’s determination to combat this rising menace.
This is where it gets interesting especially when one carefully looks behind the overblown speeches.
Germany requested to be a co-sponsor of the resolution and this was subsequently followed by 114 member countries also adding their names. At first glance, this would seem to be a positive move but like everything else associated with the UN a careful look at the real situation reveals a more sordid scene. There are 193 UN members so that means far from being unanimously co-sponsored, seventy-nine nations refused to be associated with fighting Jew-hate. It is important to note that this resolution was NOT voted on but passed by “consensus.” Presumably, this procedure was used to avoid the embarrassing situation of negative votes or abstentions.
Politicians and communal spokespersons were quick to proclaim that this was the second time since 1948 that an Israeli initiated resolution had been “passed” at the UN General Assembly. What every one of them omitted to acknowledge was the travesty of hundreds of resolutions passed since 1948 condemning Israel. It is this deliberate amnesia which fuels further such outrageous acts.
I have been unable to ascertain whether New Zealand was a co-sponsor but assuming that on this occasion it was shamed into doing so there are some questions which need answering.
If, as Government representatives never tire of repeating, NZ abhors acts of hate and incitement against Jews, why is Holocaust studies still not a compulsory part of high school curricula? The whole burden of Shoah education falls on the shoulders of the Jewish community which with all the best efforts only exposes a tiny minority to the facts. The continued refusal to include it in the educational system makes a mockery of NZ’s co-sponsoring of the resolution which demands Governments do more.
The UN resolution also calls for the adoption of the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance declaration. So far only a smattering of nations has done so and to its credit Australia is one of these. Unsurprisingly New Zealand has not done so and every indication seems to demonstrate that it has no intention of doing so in the future.
The question that needs to be asked is why not? What is it in the declaration (as detailed above) that precludes NZ from adopting it? It can’t be the fight against prejudice, hate and incitement against Jews surely. It must be something else.
I think I may have stumbled across a clue.
In February 2020 the Wellington Jewish Council which represents the Jews of the Capital City requested the City Council to adopt the IHRA declaration. Other municipalities in various countries have taken this step in addition to national Governments. As soon as this request was made public the not unexpected furore erupted. Two self styled Jewish “progressives” together with the usual knee jerk anti-Israel groups leapt into action and bitterly denounced the idea. Their motive was clear. They were purportedly, heaven forbid, not against the discrimination of Jews. After all no doubt most of their friends were actually Jewish. NO, their violently verbal opposition was directed at the provisions in the declaration which defined antisemitism among other criteria as holding Israel to be guilty of things which no other country was condemned for.
The upshot was that the Jewish representatives ran for cover as fast as possible and amidst much media publicity withdrew their request because (in their words) “of the controversy it was causing.”
This was a test case in which everyone involved, except the haters, failed miserably. The City Council was let off the hook from making a principled decision and the Jews surrendered at the first sign of opposition. In other words defending the Jewish State from the torrent of false claims made against it has become so “controversial” that surrender to such modern-day blood libels is the only recourse.
Even worse, in my opinion, the legislators in Parliament no doubt took note and this probably confirmed to them that adoption of the declaration was too “controversial” to be proceeded with especially as the official representatives of the Jewish Communities had deemed it so.
Study the provisions relating to Israel and then you will understand why New Zealand which votes against Israel every time at the UN will never adopt the IHRA. Nothing in the declaration of antisemitism precludes genuine criticism of Israel. It only defines one-sided, selective and factually flawed denunciations, applicable only to Israel and no other country.
This makes NZ’s co-sponsorship of the UN resolution a farce. It is no better than well known human rights abusers and real illegal occupying countries which also acquiesced to the resolution and who also vote against Israel at the UN at every available opportunity.
These are the hard truths which communal spokespersons should be highlighting and tackling the politicians with.
False euphoria in the face of hypocrisy and double standards is no longer a viable option seventy-seven years after the Shoah.
Open Letter to Yaakov Katz, editor of the Jerusalem Post
In your column on January 28, 2022 you identify masked rioters in and around Arab villages as Jewish residents of Judea and Samaria.
https://www.jpost.com/podcast/yaakov-and-lahav/article-694766
Has the correspondent for the Jerusalem Post who covers Judea and Samaria ever provided names of the rioters or documented he names of the communities where these masked rioters live?.
Have you noticed that the riots of masked settlers often take place in the presence of security forces, who supply pictures of masked rioters to the media, to foreign diplomats and to NGOS’ that are funded by the New Israel Fund, always with the caption: “masked settlers”.
Bitselem and Haaretz regularly distribute pictures of these masked rioters who commit violent crimes in the presence of israel security forces.
Because of the proximity of the rioters to security forces, I have used my press credentials as a journalist for 35 years to ask Israel police intelligence why they they do not arrest these masked rioters when he police and the IDF witness the act of violence, to which they have no response.
Have you ever asked the IDF and the GSS to explain why these masked men are not arrested?
Full disclosure: Have covered ISM,the International Solidarity Movement for Markor Rishon and other newspapers.
ISM is a well organized anarchist group who use clever infiltration such as such as wearing Tzitzit- prayer shawls- flowing from their shirts to gain entry and access to Jewish communities in Judea and Samaria, while befriending pro Arab NGOs .
Have you ever asked anyone in the police or GSS about whether some or all of the the masked rioters are indeed members of The ISM or any other anarchist group?
Free Speech is Sacrosanct, But Who Will Protect the Faithful When Demonization Leads to Terror? | Opinion
Every Saturday morning, the congregants of Beth Israel synagogue in Ann Arbor, Mich. are met by antisemitic protesters. Against the backdrop of history, it is almost beyond belief that lawyers have to go to the U.S. Supreme Court in a last-ditch attempt to gain relief and enforce safety at the entrance of their house of worship.
Anti-Jewish violence at synagogues began in Germany, not on the infamous Kristallnacht night of Nov. 8, 1938, but in 1930, with the rise of Adolf Hitler. For a while, its significance was minimized by Jews. But as history unfolded, abusing Jews by word, as well as deed, at their synagogues was the beginning of the road to genocide.
Jew-haters over the decades, foreign and domestic, took their cues from Nazi Germany. They have understood that the best way to strike a powerful blow against Jews was by attacking their houses of prayer.
In the 1980s, grenade throwing machine-gunning Palestinian terrorists murdered a 2-year-old boy and wounded other Jews during Sabbath services inside Rome’s historic synagogue, which stands less than a mile from the Vatican. Two years earlier, Paris’ Rue Copernic Synagogue was the target of terrorists—leaving four dead and 46 wounded. The murderous list—too long to enumerate—spanning decades, stretches from Istanbul to Mumbai, from Djerba, Tunisia to Pittsburgh, Pa. from Halle, Germany to Poway, Calif.
Years ago, while attending the Frankfurt Book Fair, I asked the concierge at my hotel for walking directions to the synagogue. “Of course, it’s easy,” he said. “Make a right, make a left at the second traffic light, walk straight and when you see the armored personnel carrier, you have arrived.”
For our neighbors here in America, perhaps we haven’t made a big deal over it, but over the last three decades, we have had to spend hundreds of millions of dollars to first secure, then harden our synagogues, schools and Jewish community centers from a diverse array of antisemites, including but not limited to: Neo-Nazis, white supremacists, Islamists and lone wolf terrorists.
That’s why the attack on a small group of Jews praying in a synagogue in a suburb of Fort Worth, Texas, didn’t shock Jews—but the statements made in its aftermath did: Why in G-d’s name did the FBI state definitively that attack had no connection to the Jewish community? The FBI knew that was not true on its face. After all, it wasn’t a McDonald’s where the hostage drama played out. Without the grace of G-d and a phenomenal FBI team, more Jews would have been dead.
After all, a simple Google search would have confirmed that the Al-Qaeda criminal whose release the terrorist was demanding was and is a raving Jew-hater, who demanded that jurors at her trial be given a DNA test, less one of them might be a Jew! And intercepted phone calls from the terrorist were replete with rants about “f—ing Jews.”
We wrote Attorney General Merrick Garland, urging the Justice Department to adopt the internationally recognized definition of antisemitism and make its content part of training of all its personnel. Hate is hate and woe to an America that deflects from dealing with an attack on one community because Jew-hating talking heads from self-anointed civil rights groups might be upset.
We all know the arguments for free speech. In the case of Beth Israel synagogue, Judge Jeffrey Sutton even rejected a proposed remedy—”a 1,000-foot (305-meter) buffer and limits on signs—would likely violate the First Amendment.”
“The key obstacle is the robust protections that the First Amendment affords to nonviolent protests on matters of public concern,” the judge said.
The American Civil Liberties Union filed a brief in support of the protesters who they lectured “are entitled to protection even if offensive, upsetting and distasteful.”
Don’t the faithful of any religion have a First Amendment right to worship free from intimidation or harassment?
How else to characterize weekly vilification every Sabbath from 2003, at exactly the time that services are held, close to the entrance of the synagogue? Speech or harassment and intimidation? How about civil rights laws that promise Jews no less protection that are afforded racial minorities?
Unfortunately, a federal court of appeals recently rejected the worshippers’ legal claim unanimously. The case is being taken to the Supreme Court by a synagogue member as a last resort to get relief from harassment. Will the recent attack in Texas make a difference? We can only pray and hope.
This Jan. 27, many people around the U.S. and overseas will join the U.N. in commemorating International Holocaust Memorial Day. In their moments of silence to honor 6 million dead Jews, we need them to ponder how to help live Jews.
Rabbi Abraham Cooper is associate dean and director of global social action for the Simon Wiesenthal Center, a leading Jewish human rights organization with more than 400,000 members.
The views expressed in this article are the writer’s own.
Behind the scene with David Bedein – January 27, 2022
Behind the scene with David Bedein – January 27, 2022
Biden State Department faces lawsuit over records about funding Palestinian Authority
The Biden State Department is facing a federal lawsuit after so far failing to comply with a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request for documents on aid given to the Palestinian Authority.
Watchdog group Protect the Public’s Trust (PPT) announced the lawsuit Monday, stating, “Despite repeated efforts at outreach by PPT… State [Department] refuses to indicate when it will begin producing records.”
The watchdog is specifically seeking records of meetings “related to the decision to re-initiate funding to the Palestinian Authority either directly or through the UNRWA,” also known as United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East. The group also requested internal and external communications related to the funding.
The Trump Administration “ended many sources of foreign aid that benefited the Palestinian Authority,” PPT writes. The Biden administration reinstated the funding. The new funding may be in violation of the 2018 Taylor Force Act, also known as the Anti-Terrorism Clarification Act.
PPT reached out to the State Department three times about the FOIA. The agency responded that the estimated FOIA response date would be Dec. 16, 2022, but ultimately the State Department did not complete the request at that time, citing a FOIA backlog and COVID-19.
“The American public depends on transparency, never more so when matters of law and the lives of their countrymen and allies abroad may be at stake,” PPT Director Michael Chamberlain said. “Sitting on timely information, while millions of additional taxpayer dollars possibly flow to activities prohibited under the law, flies in the face of the commitment government agencies owe to those they serve. Protect the Public’s Trust will continue our work to ensure agencies live up to their legal obligations and this starts with greater transparency.”
Sen. Tom Cotton, R-Ark., added to the Taylor Force Act by introducing the Taylor Force Martyr Payment Prevention Act in December 2021. The bill’s goal is to stop “martyr payments” from the Palestinian government.
“Radical Islamic terrorists shouldn’t be rewarded for killing innocent people, and banks should be held responsible for processing any sort of ‘martyr payments,'” Cotton said in December. “Our bill will build upon the Taylor Force Act to ensure Palestinian terrorists don’t benefit financially for committing these senseless murders.”
Biden is delaying US’s donation to UNRWA so as not to Support Terrorism, while working towards Unfreezing Money for Iran
The US government in Washington is withholding a $150 million donation to the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestinian Refugees in the Near East until UNRWA can prove that it honored the agreement they signed that they would ensure that the money would not go towards support for terror activities. At the same time the US government is trying to encourage Iran to cover its international debts, but at what cost?
The US is withholding a multi-million dollar donation to the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestinian Refugees in the Near East – UNRWA. This is until the intermittent report comes in from the organization’s administrators, where they need to detail how they fulfilled their commitments in accordance to the agreements they signed with the government in Washington in July, 2021.
After former president, Donald Trump stopped the funding to UNRWA in Gaza, President Biden reinstated the funding while adding an asterisk: The transfer of money from the American government to UNRWA in Gaza now needs to go through a trustees account where the money will be deposited and from there transferred to UNRWA in installments – providing that the Agency has fulfilled its obligations.
Among the obligations – prevention of terror activity within the agency’s facilities or by refugees supported by it, supervision and inspection of the Agency’s school system and school books, so as to guarantee they do not consist of any incitement to terror and violence, etc.
The agreement, signed by the head of UNRWA, Phillippe Lazzarini drew strong criticism from the Palestinian organizations who demanded that the US government withdraw from their demands.
“UNRWA’s Aim is to Perpetuate its Refuge Status”
Over the past few months, there has been an ongoing demonstration over the weekends in front of the Agency’s offices in the Gaza Strip, protesting that the restricted conditions contradict U.N.’s principles.
In an interview with Baker Abu Safia, one of the seniors of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine in Gaza, to the Al Jazzera News Agency, he revealed the real purpose of UNRWA as he sees it. According to Abu Safia, “UNRWA’s real purpose is to preserve the permanent status of the refugees along with their rights and goals.”
In other words, not to provide health, education and welfare services for the Palestinian refugees but to preserve their status as refugees. These words reinforce the claims against UNRWA and against the use the terror organizations in Gaza make of the Agency, that it does nothing to bring about the end of the refuge status of the Palestinians and improvement of their situation, preserving their refugee status while those primarily effected are naturally the everlasting refugees in Gaza.
Until Trump’s withdrawal of funding, the US was the Agency’s main donator and financed about a third of its expenses, which in 2017 came to $1.1 billion annually. In a formal statement issued by the American State Department in 2018, it was stated that the financial aid activity for the refugees is a flawed procedure from the core. Aside from the budget hole itself and the failure in fairly dividing up the partnership load in an appropriate and seemly manner, UNRWA’s basic business model and financial performance – which is based upon a group entitled to assistance and endlessly growing with increasing speed – are simply not sustainable and has been in a state of crisis over a period of many years.”
With Biden as president, the financial aid has gradually been reinstated. In July 2021, it has been stated that financial aid to UNRWA was pledged for the sum of $150 million for the Agency, an additional $70 million earmarked for initiatives in the Labor and Welfare Department and last month an additional $100 million. Except that, as stated above, a significant amount of this money is being withheld at the moment. The State Department explains that the reason for this is due to the close inspection of the Agency’s activities in accordance to the agreement that was signed between them.
David Bedein, an activist and investigative journalist who has been following UNRWA’s activities for years, supports the US’s handling of this matter: “Biden’s government is the one working through an in depth inquiry”, says Bedein. This is due in part to pressure that senators who are friends of Israel have been putting upon the government. The US government has included a list of conditions in the agreement with UNRWA so as to guarantee that there are no terror support activities within the Agency. ”
In 2021 the US has returned once again as UNRWA’s main supporter with $320 million, Germany gives $176 million and the European Union gives $117.
Meanwhile the US Frees up Money for Teheran
The messages conveyed by the US, Europe and Iran itself indicate that Iran’s return to the nuclear program agreement is getting closer. It is not clear how this is happening while Iran continues to enrich uranium. What is clear is Iran’s increased interest to return to the agreement. Iran’s new president Rayis looks at his country. Iran’s economy is at an all-time low, average wages are down while prices rise because of the removal of subsidies and the government is not capable in dealing with nature disasters such as drought in the summer and flooding in the winter. A report published by the Ministry of Labor and Social Affairs in Teheran, states that every month in the past year, 350,000 Iranians fell below the poverty level, and that altogether there are approximately 30 million Iranians – more than a third of the population, who live below the poverty level.
In a trust building measure of sorts, The US released $65 million of Iran’s money in exchange for oil that was frozen in South Korea. One of the conditions for freeing up the money was that the money would be used to pay off some of Iran’s international debts. One of the creditors is the United Nations. Iran owes the United Nations over $60 million and last month they lost their voting privileges at the UN Council because of this debt.
The amount that the US has freed up could have covered this debt but this week the UN reported that Iran only paid part of its debt – $16 million of it. One can easily guess why. This amount was enough to reinstate voting privileges to Iran.
According to estimates, the total amount of Iran’s frozen money due to US sanctions amount to tens of billions of dollars. Removing the sanctions would bring about the increase of Iran’s income to more than 50 billion dollars a year. Israel’s fear is that by freeing up the money through Iran’s return to the nuclear program agreement will serve to increase Iran’s support of terror organizations in the Mideast and accelerate its military plans against Israel.
The author of this piece is Danny Zaken, Correspondent, Globes. The israel Economics Newspaper.
Original article ran in Hebrew on January 13, 2022
