Formerly Pro-Israel country votes in favor of ‘Palestinian sovereignty’ at UN

Australia voted with 158 other countries in favor of permanent Palestinian sovereignty in territories such as East Jerusalem.

This is the first time Australia has voted to support Palestinian sovereignty since the resolution was introduced around twenty years ago.

The resolution recognizes the “permanent sovereignty of the Palestinian people in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, and of the Arab population in the occupied Syrian Golan over their natural resources.”

A spokesman for Australia’s Foreign Minister, Penny Wong, said that the vote reflected concern about “ongoing settlement activity, land dispossession, demolitions and settler violence against Palestinians”.

“We have been clear that such acts undermine stability and prospects for a two-state solution,” the spokesperson said.

“This resolution recalls UN security council resolutions that reaffirm the importance of a two-state solution that has had bipartisan support.”

  US official suggests Trump will revive 2020 Israel-Palestinian peace plan

In another draft resolution, Australia demanded that Israel compensate Lebanon for its role in a 2006 oil spill.

In May, Australia’s Parliament rejected by a margin of 80-5 a Greens Party proposal to recognize a “state of Palestine.”

, opponents of the proposal argued that a Palestinian state that isn’t committed to renouncing terror will promote peace in the region.

Assistant Foreign Affairs Minister Tim Watts said, “simplistic wedge motions in the house do nothing to advance the cause of peace.”

He continued, “A Palestinian state cannot be a threat to Israel’s security. We want to see a reformed Palestinian governing authority committed to peace, renouncing violence.”

Opponents cited Denmark whose government also voted against unilateral recognition of a Palestinian State.

“We cannot recognize an independent Palestinian state for the sole reason that the preconditions are not really there,” Danish Foreign Minister Lars Lokke Rasmussen said in April.

Israel-Basher Picked to Speak on Israel

A prominent institute for the study of antisemitism has once again chosen a professor who is hostile to Israel and Zionists to deliver a lecture about Israel and Zionists.

The Birkbeck Institute for the Study of Antisemitism, based at the University of London, has announced a December 3 online program about “Aliya, Antisemitism, and U.S. Zionism in the World,” featuring Doug Rossinow, a professor in Minnesota who has been harshly attacking Israel for more than twenty years.

In July 2002, Palestinian Arab terrorists massacred nine Israeli civilians on a bus near the town of Immanuel. Days later, Rossinow and fellow-extremists signed a large advertisement in the New York Times declaring that “both the Israeli and Palestinian peoples have suffered great wrongs at the hands of the other.”

Rossinow and his friends demanded in their advertisement that Israel return to the indefensible, nine-miles-wide pre-1967 lines, and they called for the mass “evacuation” (expulsion) of all Jews from the areas beyond those lines—meaning Judea, Samaria, the Old City of Jerusalem, and the Golan Heights.

Rossinow’s group also urged the U.S. government to use “our massive economic and military support” as “leverage” to force Israel to agree to those demands. They even asserted that “foreign troops may well be required to enforce [the terms], and they must be prepared to accept casualties.” Demanding that American and other soldiers give their lives in order to force Israel to its knees is a remarkable position to take, to put it mildly.

Over the years, Rossinow has participated in a number of public attacks on Israel.

In 2014, when Israel struck back at Hamas terrorists in Gaza, Rossinow joined an open letter denouncing Israel for “the ongoing carnage in Gaza” and “killing and wounding so many Palestinian children.” Rossinow and company also called for halting U.S. military aid to Israel.

In 2016, Rossinow signed a petition to the American Historical Association, falsely accusing Israel of “impeding instruction at Palestinian institutions of higher learning.” (They were referring to the fact that Israel has security checkpoints through which potential suicide bombers have to pass on their way to campus. So inconvenient!)

Rossinow seems to have some kind of obsession with AIPAC, which is noteworthy since his talk for the Birkbeck Institute on December 3 will be dealing with American Zionists.

In two articles that he authored in 2018, Rossinow denigrated the “swaggering” AIPAC, declaring it was “born of violence and conflict” and “born in awful knowledge.” He wrote that AIPAC was “formed to spin positive PR after Israeli atrocities” and “to deny, obscure, or downplay the piercing impact” of Israeli actions. And he added this vicious comment: “Violence by the Israeli state against Palestinians…lies like a hard stone gnarled in the roots of the Israel lobby.”

Rossinow’s upcoming talk isn’t the first time that the Birkbeck Institute has turned to a harsh critic of Israel to lecture about Israel. Last June, it organized a seminar by Harvard professor Derek Penslar, who has publicly accused Israel of “ethnic cleansing,” “apartheid,” and “Jewish supremacism.” Penslar was the person Birkbeck decided would be most qualified to lecture on Israel’s 1948 War of Independence.

The Birkbeck Institute’s mission statement says that its work “contributes to public debate on antisemitism” and provides “expertise and advice to a wide range of institutions.”

I don’t see how hosting Israel-bashers constitutes a contribution to meaningful public discussion of antisemitism. And I can’t imagine how what Rossinow has to say can be regarded as “expertise” on the subject of Israel or Zionism. Having a radical opinion, and expressing it in extreme language again and again, does not make one an “expert.”

Whenever anybody criticizes Israel-bashing academics, inevitably he or she is accused of “censorship.” So let me be very clear: I am not proposing that Doug Rossinow or other attackers of Israel be censored. I am saying that institutions which sponsor such individuals to speak about Israel or Zionism should be honest about whom they are inviting. It’s the old principle of truth in advertising.

The leaders of the Birkbeck Institute should not pretend that someone who regularly denounces Israel, such as Rossinow, is an objective scholar who can speak about Israel or Zionism in a non-partisan way. Rossinow’s record shows that he is an extreme partisan, with deeply-held views that are consistently unfriendly toward Israel.

I’m sure the directors of the Birkbeck Institute would be very interested to hear what the Jewish public thinks about this latest development. Those who care to share their opinions can reach them at: bisa@bbk.ac.uk

Deal which only stops Hezbollah from adding weapons recipe for disaster

Deal which only stops Hezbollah from getting more weapons recipe for disaster
Dr. Aaron Lerner 11 November 2024

While UNSCR 1701 requires that Hezbollah be completely disarmed (see below), reports of the “deal” only describe measures to prevent Hezbollah from getting MORE weapons.

Under the deal, Hezbollah holds onto, among other things, the long-range and mid-range missiles it has today.

We are assured “yihyeh b’seder” (it will be ok) because 80% of Hezbollah’s missiles have been destroyed.

So if we accept this deal we will find ourselves participating in a debating society in the future as to whether a particular missile that Hezbollah has in its possession was added to its inventory after the ceasefire.

And we are going to have the Russian apparently as a participant in the debating society.

Anyone who thinks that this debating society arrangement is going to work simply has no business engaging in policy making.

United Nations Security Council Resolution 1701 (2006)
Adopted by the Security Council at its 5511th meeting, on 11 August 2006
“The Security Council,
… 8. Calls for Israel and Lebanon to support …full implementation of the relevant provisions of the Taif Accords, and of resolutions 1559 (2004) and 1680 (2006), that require the disarmament of all armed groups in Lebanon, so that, pursuant to the Lebanese cabinet decision of 27 July 2006, there will be no weapons or authority in Lebanon other than that of the Lebanese State;”

Dangerous Precedent – Inaugural Gift of Bad Lebanon Deal

Reports indicate that Prime Minister Netanyahu is pushing hard for a “Lebanon deal” as an inaugural gift to President-elect Trump.

We cannot afford to rush into a deal that relies on shortcuts, implicit understandings, and bilateral agreements that might only be viable as long as someone like Mr. Trump occupies the White House.

Israel needs an agreement with contours and details that address our security and strategic needs not only for today but for many years to come, regardless of who may sit in the Oval Office in the future.

Any compromises, shortcuts, or disregard for legitimate concerns raised within Israel in a hasty attempt to prepare this “inaugural gift” will set a dangerous precedent. It will also establish expectations about what Israel might be willing to concede on critical issues such as the Gaza Strip, the Palestinian Authority, gestures to the Saudis, Iran, and more.

Venom unleashed

A vitriolic tsunami has been unleashed following the stunning election results in the USA which well and truly trumped all progressive woke commentators, Hollywood stars and their acolytes.

A sight to behold is the spectacle of entire swathes of Kamala groupies breaking down on TV, tearfully seizing up with uncontrollable grief and blaming everyone but themselves for the debacle.

Universities, including Ivy League institutions, have witnessed frantic faculty and manic management declare a halt to lectures so that witless and hysterical students can engage in therapeutic counselling.

One wonders how the next university-educated generation will impact America as grief-stricken youngsters bewail the fact that a majority of voters had rejected their false idols.

The shameful silence of administrators in the face of poisonous hate faced by Jewish faculty and students is a stark contrast to their concerned responses to distraught and disappointed Harris supporters.

We were confidently assured by polling “experts” and media mavens that all signs pointed to the closest election in recent US history. Trump, these prognosticators assured all and sundry, would be deserted by a majority of voters. They maintained that his uncouth behaviour and unpredictability, guaranteed that the vast majority of voters would “see the light” and cast their ballots for the dream team of Harris and Walz. After all, Biden had claimed, Republican supporters were “garbage” which implied that only those not trashed were worthy of Democratic loyalty and respect.

Even the media and Hollywood stars who were, it seems, paid exorbitant amounts of money to make an appearance and endorse Kamala couldn’t sway the majority of ordinary Americans. How devastating this now must appear to those who live in a make believe bubble world where stardom automatically endows one with infallible political wisdom.

The inevitable blame game is well and truly under way now that the extent of the Democratic Party rout has been revealed.

Rather than serious soul searching, those suffering from “Trump derangement syndrome” are lashing out at those they perceive responsible for rejecting a clearly unsuitable Presidential and Vice Presidential choice. It’s not just the unsuitability of the Harris/Walz duo but also the elitist, far-left progressive policies of the party that turned off a majority of voters from various sectors. Like a lover-scorned, embittered Democrats are busy casting around for scapegoats, of which there are many to choose.

The latest demented suggestions from shattered Harris groupies are that Biden should resign and appoint Kamala as President thus no doubt proving that the plebs and ignoramuses got it all wrong. The other unhinged idea is that a Supreme Court justice should resign so that Harris can take her place.

In the face of this demonstration of denial, the next question that needs to be asked is how the Jewish voters performed and what possible repercussions are likely to ensue.

Any analysis of the voting details is clouded by the political orientation of the organization doing the research. That is why the conclusions vary and reflect the biases of those producing the data. Taking these factors into account, however, there are still clear indications of what transpired.

First and foremost is the undeniable fact that once again American Jewish voters, almost alone among various ethnicities, stuck with the Democrat Party. The inability to sever a genetic umbilical connection is astounding given the stark reality that this time around the party had drifted clearly to the leftist fringes of woke political craziness,

Even more amazing is an unbelievable inability to acknowledge that the Harris/Walz team was clearly not “up to the job.” Despite word salads, inarticulate outbursts of joyful nonsense and a clear lack of commitment in standing by Israel, the majority of Jews stuck with the Democrats.

It is this last point which highlights a disturbing trend.

In a survey taken prior to the elections respondents were asked about their level of support for Israel.

68% of Democrat supporters replied that support for Israel was “too strong.”

81% of Republican supporters replied that support for Israel was “not strong enough.”

Given the lopsided support of American Jews for the Democratic Party, it is obvious that its increasingly anti-Israel drift does not deter them. This corroborates much data which shows that the weaker an attachment to Judaism becomes and the greater assimilation grows the more likelihood there will be of Jews siding with those who delegitimize Israel. One can see this already happening as groups claiming to be Jewish mangle and misappropriate Judaism in order to distance themselves from support for the idea of a restored Jewish homeland.

Interestingly, New York and Pennsylvania were two places where Jewish voters made a meaningful switch from a lifelong love affair with the Democrats.

The other major difference was that US Jewish Israelis who were entitled to vote did so overwhelmingly for Trump and the Republicans. Obviously, those facing daily rocket barrages and terror threats have lost faith in an Administration that threatens arms embargos. They also reject those who demonize Jews living in places where Jewish sovereignty predates the American Revolution.

What aftershocks are likely to occur once the dust settles?

Obviously, President-elect Trump is not beholden to American Jews for his stunning election result. One can only hope that meaningful support for Israel’s lone fight against jihadist terror will not suffer as a consequence. The rising spectre of vitriolic Jew hate combined with anti-Zionist mania needs a firm response. Will the triumphant Republicans rise to the challenge and will the defeated Democrats finally repudiate their increasingly Jew/Zionist hostile base?

We have plenty to worry about during the next four years.

Meanwhile, on the continent of Europe, the virus of Jew hate erupted with full force. In Amsterdam, where not so long ago Dutch Nazi collaborators betrayed Anne Frank and her family, the streets of that city once again rang out with cries of “murder the Jews.”  Scenes not witnessed since the German occupation when Jews were hunted down and assaulted took place in the full glare of the media. Despite plans to attack Jews having been circulated on social media prior to the soccer match subsequent media reports attempted to lay the blame for the violence on “Israeli soccer hooligans.”

Eyewitness accounts from those assaults revealed that the police were slow to react, and when they did, their efforts were ineffective. The vast majority who were detained have been released. In the words of an injured Israeli “they (the police) seemed unable and reluctant to deal with the situation.”

A month or so ago, there was a report that some Dutch police had refused to guard Jewish buildings, including Synagogues and the Amsterdam Holocaust Museum, because “they had moral objections.” At the time, police authorities admitted that those objecting were not forced to guard Jewish buildings. A clearer example of kowtowing to a jihadist agenda would be hard to find.

It epitomizes the stark reality that as far as Holland and other countries in Europe and Scandinavia are concerned there is no longer any future for Jewish communities. Similar scenes of physical violence against Jews have already occurred on the streets of Berlin and Paris as well as London.

The Dutch King and Prime Minister have admitted that just as they “failed the Jews during the German occupation” so they have done again today.

Will Jews get the message or will they, like their American brethren remain stuck in a futile effort to rearrange the deck chairs as the “ship goes down”?

Trump should defund, end UNRWA once and for all

It is clear from President-elect Donald Trump’s choices for his new administration, from the chief of staff to border czar to U.S. ambassadors to the U.N. and Israel, that he means to hit the ground running on Inauguration Day.

We hope that when it comes to the U.N. Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees, Mr. Trump will immediately defund an agency that serves as an ATM for Hamas teachers whose facilities above and below ground have been used as jumping-off points to murder and maim innocents and whose pedagogical raison d’etre is to brainwash Palestinian children to seek Israel’s destruction.

But this time, Mr. Trump, your secretary of state should urge the 60 other donor nations to join the U.S. and demand an end to UNRWA once and for all. It would be a disaster to treat UNRWA as a bulwark of hope the day after the IsraelHamas war is over when it has actually played a key role in keeping alive the dream of a Jew-free Holy Land.

Akeidat Yitzchak

Avraham’s journey towards the Akeida takes 3 long days. During this time, he is deliberating, debating, experiencing an extended inner struggle as depicted in the Midrash describing his meeting with an old man (his conscience) who makes him confront that which he is about to do. Where are you going? the man asks. Why do you carry a knife? The nature of Avraham’s internal dilemma has been described as the “teleological suspension of the ethical”, meaning that Avraham’s understanding of G-d as being all good, is not compatible with Avraham’s being commanded to sacrifice his beloved son. Alternatively, Avraham must confront the total contradiction between having been promised “Ki v’Yitzchak Yikarei L’cha Zara” (in Isaac shall thy seed be called – Bereishit 21:12) and being told to bring Isaac to the Akeida (Rashi on 22:12).

These conflicting messages are seemingly irreconcilable. They are like two parallel lines that can never meet. And, yet, in the Almighty, in the Ein Sof, at infinity, they do meet and can be reconciled.

Many Olim, and potential Olim, may easily identify with Avraham, as they spend days, months and even years deliberating their Aliyah. Often the commandment to Live in the Land seems to be irreconcilable with the financial realities of buying a home and supporting the family on an Israeli salary. Likewise, for many, there exists the stark dichotomy between the Land being ours and the political reality of not having control over Har HaBayit and having to travel to Chevron and Beit Lechem in armored buses. These, too, are like parallel lines that seemingly can never meet!

Yet, here in the Land of Israel, that which may seem impossible is not only possible, but doable.

Coming on Aliyah is a real Nisayon, a true test. But so was the Akeida. And yet, we believe G-d only presents the Nisayon to those who He knows can rise to the challenge (Bereishit Rabba, No’ach 32:3)

The die is cast, we have only to cross the “Rubicon” (or is it the Atlantic?) and enter into Eretz Yisrael.

RABBI YERACHMIEL RONESS was born and raised in Montreal, Canada. After serving as a congregational Rabbi and as a Hillel Director in New York City, he made Aliyah in 1983 with his wife Dina and their five young children.

Ever since, Rabbi Roness has dedicated his life to promoting Aliyah. First, as Rabbi of the Jewish Agency’s Absorption Centers, and subsequently as the executive director of the Aloh-Naaleh organization.

This article was taken from Rabbi Roness’s new book: Aloh Na’aleh – Eretz Yisrael and Aliyah in the Weekly Parshah.  The book is for sale on Amazon.

 

The sorry symbolism of a pro-Israel rally that flopped

A participant at the “We Stand Together” rally for Jewish unity and Israel at the Nationals Park baseball stadium in Washington, D.C., on Nov. 10, 2024. Photo by Abby Greenawalt.

Only a couple of thousand people were in Nationals Park in Washington, D.C., on Nov. 10 for an event billed as “Stand Together: An Event of Unity, Strength and Resilience.” And maybe as many as half of that number were associated with the organizations sponsoring the gathering rather than rank-and-file members of the Jewish community who responded to the appeal. So, as photos of the much-ballyhooed rally illustrated, it might be said that most of those who attended it came disguised as empty seats.

The largely vacant stadium was more than a measure of the disappointing turnout for a pro-Israel gathering a year after some 290,000 people showed up for a previous unity rally held on the National Mall a year ago on Nov. 14, 2023. It was an apt metaphor for the equally disappointing response of both American Jewry and the leading organizations that purport to represent them during a genuine crisis.

Some hoped that the horrors of Oct. 7 might galvanize American Jewry in the way that both the 1967 Six-Day War and the 1973 Yom Kippur War did more than a half-century ago. The initial response to the massacre in southern Israel carried out by Hamas terrorists and other Palestinians was promising in terms of fundraising and public actions like the unity rally on the Mall. But what followed in the ensuing months—even as the surge of antisemitism in the United States steadily grew in the streets of major cities and on college campuses—demonstrated that the Jewish community was far too divided by politics to stand together against a deadly threat to not just Israel but to their own security and that of their children.

A year of crisis

The current war on Israel continues into its second year, with Hamas terrorists seeking to retake parts of the Gaza Strip in the south, coupled with the launching of rockets and missiles into the Jewish state from Hezbollah-controlled Lebanon to the north. Their paymasters in Iran also still present a deadly threat. But most American Jews spent this year far more focused on domestic partisan politics and debating whether Israel deserved their support than rallying to aid it.

Just as depressing has been the response of the Jewish world to a surge of antisemitism here in the United States. The takeover of numerous college campuses by pro-Hamas demonstrators advocating for Israel’s destruction has had a devastating impact on many Jewish students. But again, the reaction from the organized Jewish world has been largely low-key, and more importantly, mostly ineffective in demonstrating a willingness to fight back against open antisemitism or even to force change at institutions that were unable or unwilling to defend Jewish students.

It’s true that the organizers of the event at Nationals Park were not seeking to rival last year’s rally in terms of attendance. Instead, they apparently just wanted to have something that would serve as a pep rally for those who were attending the annual General Assembly of the JFNA. Yet by choosing a venue that can accommodate up to 41,000 people and deliberately hyping it as a major event, they set themselves up for both failure and ridicule at a moment in time when that is the last thing the pro-Israel community needed.

To be fair, anyone who thought American Jewry could duplicate or even come close to the responses to crises in 1967 and 1973 was dreaming.

Changes in the community since then made that impossible.

American Jews have changed

In the 1960s and 1970s, memories of the Holocaust were still fresh. Israel’s vulnerability and the possibility of its Arab foes making good on their pledges to create another Shoah by destroying the Jewish state was very much on the minds of American Jews, who didn’t just speak up with one voice in response to those wars but also raised astounding amounts of money to aid it.

But the American Jewish world of that era is gone.

Part of it is generational, as many of the Jews who came of age since then think of Israel as a regional superpower rather than an embattled and besieged nation. The most common expressions of Jewish identity in the first decades after World War II were about remembrance of the Holocaust and support for Israel. But that has been largely discarded. Jewish peoplehood can only be instilled in young people through education and a positive vision of Judaism. That doesn’t involve solely recalling a tragic past or living vicariously through the deeds of Israelis, who are built up as larger-than-life heroes, such as those in Leon Uris novels that were once influential in America but are now ignored.

More troubling is the fact that more Americans have been subjected to decades of media bias against Israel as well as the indoctrination in woke ideologies that falsely label it an “apartheid” or “white” oppressor state in educational settings.

Demography is the problem

Criticism of Israeli policies and settlements—and, of course, of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu—has been blamed for a decline in interest and even support for the Jewish state among the majority of American Jews who are neither Orthodox nor politically conservative.

Yet the real problem is demographic, not political.

The American Jewish population has become increasingly assimilated. That’s due to reasons such as widespread intermarriage, and the fact that more and more Jews are unaffiliated with synagogues, organizations and causes. Many now define themselves as “just Jews,” or as the demographers put it, “Jews of no religion.” The ties of those who fit in this category to other Jews, let alone Israel, have been frayed to the point of disintegration. That is the price of liberty as Jews are free in contemporary America to leave the community and disappear into the rest of the population.

Yet despite that, the initial response to Oct. 7 was encouraging.

The success of last year’s rally was remarkable, even if the tone of the gathering was deliberately kept as politically neutral as possible to allow the participation of groups and religious denominations that have been critical of Israel.

The Jewish Federations of North America, which along with the Conference of Presidents of Major Jewish Organizations were the principal co-sponsors of this year’s disastrous rally, must also get credit for stepping up and prioritizing Israel in their fundraising efforts. The $850 million raised for JFNA’s Israel Emergency Fund was impressive, given the general decline in giving to federations in recent years, indicating that their core donors were capable of understanding the threat to Jewish life and acting on it.

But whatever enthusiasm for Israel’s cause that existed a year ago has been diminished by the events of the last 12 months during which the Jewish state has been falsely accused of “genocide” of Palestinians during its counter-offensive against Hamas in Gaza. The on-and-off again support for Israel of the Biden administration, which at times was exemplary and at other times sought to derail efforts to defeat the terrorists, was a good indicator of how much leverage its intersectional left wing had over the Democratic Party and its presumably more centrist leadership.

Liberal Jews, who remain dedicated partisans, were caught in the same crossfire as they were often unwilling to express clear-throated support for Israel’s war while also being appalled by the thuggish antisemitism of those who voiced the “from the river to the sea” and “globalize the intifada” chants on college campuses and the streets of America’s cities.

Paralyzed by consensus

Rather than being able to mount a strong response to the takeover of so many college campuses by pro-Hamas mobs, the organized Jewish community found itself unable to speak with one voice on the issue. Just as Jewish students were sometimes told to “shelter in place” rather than vocally confront the Jew-haters, so were all too many in the Jewish establishment. Groups such as the Anti-Defamation League, which should have been at the ramparts challenging haters of Israel, were hampered by their past endorsement of the same toxic woke ideas that have been fueling the surge in Jew-hatred.

Perhaps the real problem for those seeking to mobilize American Jewry is that they remain hampered by an institutional need for consensus that allows those least interested in a robust expression of support for Israel’s war against Iranian-backed Islamist terrorists to have a veto over the message that is being sent to the administration and the world.

This is a terrible mistake—not just because it undermines Israel at a moment when it needs its foreign friends and the Jewish community to speak up against the smears and blood libels that the left is hurling at it. It’s wrong because it misunderstands the current dilemma facing American Jewry.

All too many leading Jewish groups are still stuck in the mindset of supporters of a Middle East peace process begun in Oslo in 1993 that was literally blown up by the Palestinian terrorism in the Second Intifada from 2000 to 2005, and whose death was further confirmed by what happened in Gaza after Israel withdrew every soldier, settler and settlement from it in the summer of 2005.

Obsolete debates

The atrocities of Oct. 7 were the final confirmation for anyone who is paying attention that the old arguments about settlements, borders and a two-state solution that divided Israelis and American Jews for decades are officially obsolete. The only argument about Israel that matters is the one about whether one Jewish state on the planet is one too many or if the plans of Israel’s foes for Jewish genocide (for which Oct. 7 was only the trailer) will be allowed to be fulfilled.

Yet instead of focusing on the debate over the legitimacy of Israel and its right of self-defense, the Jewish community seems more worried about being labeled as accomplices to Netanyahu and the lies about “genocide” in Gaza. Rather than taking a bold stand in favor of the justice of the Zionist cause, some are on the sidelines judging the Jewish state’s life-and-death battle against enemies that want to slaughter all Jews and defeat the West.

Just as bad is the fact that many in the community are more worried about virtue-signaling their opposition to the incoming second Trump administration. That’s a stand that is all the more mistaken given the clear pro-Israel tilt of all of Trump’s choices for his foreign-policy team.

A failure of leadership

The result of all these factors is an American Jewish community that has demonstrated an inability to stand up for itself against an unprecedented attack from antisemites and Israel-haters that threaten its own security more than that of Israel.

Institutions that fail to lead in a crisis have lost their credibility and reason to exist. If the organized Jewish world and its establishment can’t shed their consensus-ridden inability to act decisively in defense of both Israel and American Jewry, then they won’t have to wait for their critics to topple them. They will have destroyed themselves.

If an empty ballpark is an apt metaphor for the failure of American Jewry, then it is the fault of those who have been tasked with leading the community. That’s a tragedy since American Jews currently have neither the time nor the resources to build new institutions to represent them. In the coming year, it’s up to the Jewish establishment to prove that it is worth saving. We can only pray that they succeed; however, given the evidence of the last 12 months and so much else that has happened in recent years, it’s hard to be optimistic about their future.

Jonathan S. Tobin is editor-in-chief of JNS (Jewish News Syndicate). Follow him @jonathans_tobin.

New Film Shows Hamas-UNRWA Connection in Plans for Terror Attack from Bethlehem Refugee Camps

Bethlehem, the birthplace of David and Jesus, could possibly be where the next war breaks out. A new film called “UNRWA at War” indicates Hamas would be involved, with the United Nations even playing a role. When Israel entered Gaza after October 7th, soldiers found evidence that Hamas had used the United Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA) facilities for training and weapons storage and that a number of UN workers were also active Hamas members. In the film, produced by the Nahum Bedein Center for Near East Policy Research and Israel Behind the News, Hamas Minister of Religion Ismail Radwan discusses the terror group’s connections to the U.N. agency.

 

The global intifada heats up: a war on Jews is a war on civilization

On the night of November 7, curiously only two days shy of the 86th anniversary of Kristallnacht, Europe was the scene of a fresh pogrom in which hundreds of antisemites targeted Jews for pre-meditated, coordinated violence in the streets of Amsterdam.

Groups of attackers – many of them masked, carrying Palestinian flags, and shouting pro-Palestinian slogans – emerged from hiding in alleys and train stations and hotels to ambush Israelis who were leaving a soccer match between the local Ajax team and Maccabi Tel Aviv. Shocking video footage – some taken by the perpetrators themselves – shows Israeli and Dutch Jews being chased and assaulted with knives, bats, boots, and in at least one instance, an automobile committing hit-and-run.

This was no garden-variety soccer hooliganism, as it was initially described by some disingenuous media outlets. The attacks reportedly were orchestrated in advance and carried out by members of the Dutch Moroccan and Dutch Turkish community. De Telegraaf reported that perpetrators used the messaging app Telegram to announce a “Jew hunt” ahead of the attacks, prompting some to travel from far outside Amsterdam to take part. Muslim cab drivers throughout the city reportedly helped coordinate the assaults.

“They knew everything,” said 30-year-old Shachar Bitton, a Maccabi fan. “They knew exactly where we stayed. They knew exactly which hotels, which street we were going to take. It was all well-organized, well-prepared.”

The Network Contagion Research Institute (NCRI) subsequently published an exposé highlighting the involvement of an organization called the Palestinian Community in the Netherlands (PGNL in Dutch). PGNL, which uses instant messaging apps to organize activism in the country, is connected to the Palestinian terror group Hamas. It is led by Syrian-born activist Ayman Nejmeh, a self-described former teacher with the United Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA). UNRWA members in Gaza have been exposed for aiding and abetting Hamas terrorists.