Black Antisemitism: The Intersectional Hydra

Antisemitism today is widely reported to come from three main sources: the alt-right; the radical Muslim community; and the far left. What is not covered is Black Antisemitism, which does not fit neatly into one of the standard categories.

And it must be discussed, as Black antisemitism is becoming one of the greatest threats to Jews in America.

Understanding Alt-Left Black Antisemitism:
Racist Gentrification

Gentrification, on its face, is purely an economics matter. The change that comes to a poor neighborhood as wealthier residents move in sometimes upsets the dynamic of the existing residents. Rents slowly inch up for apartments and stores, pushing the residents and businesses out in favor of those that could now afford the higher costs. This is true whether the wealthier newcomers are the same ethnic background as current inhabitants or different.

In Jersey City, NJ, where two black people shot up a kosher store killing a police officer and civilians last week, gentrification has been a vocal issue, and it has focused on race, as much as economics.

In April 2019, the President of the NAACP New Jersey State Conference penned a letter to a local New Jersey media outlet. The article chastised the mayor of Jersey City, Steven Fulop to do something about the gentrification of the city where “lower-income African American and Latino families are being particularly threatened with displacement as investment floods in.” That same month, the Institute of the Black World 21st Century met in Newark, NJ, for a weekend “emergency summit on gentrification.” As covered by Brentin Mock in CityLab:

“The emergency is that too many white people have been moving back from wherever they fled to into inner-city neighborhoods that have been culturally and racially defined as black communities for the past few decades. This white invasion is an “insidious onslaught” to African-American life as we know it, as Daniels spelled out in a blog he penned last November, and so walls must be built, or rather, policies must be built to stop the occupation.”

This opinion is not a matter of economics, but one of racial warfare, and it is a belief held by many people in the black community.

Consider the comments of Joan Terrell Paige, a member of the Jersey City Board of Education after the shooting in the city targeting its Jewish residents for slaughter:

“Where was all this faith and hope when Black homeowners were threatened, intimidated, and harassed by I WANT TO BUY YOUR HOUSE brutes of the jewish community?… If we are going to tell a narrative it should begin with TRUTH not more cover up of the truth. Mr. Anderson and Ms. Graham went directly to the kosher supermarket. I believe they knew they would come out in body bags. What is the message they were sending? Are we brave enough to explore the answer to their message? Are we brave enough to stop the assault on the Black communities in America?

When Terrell Paige was criticized for her antisemitic remarks, people from Al Sharpton’s National Action Network jumped to her defense, sayingHow dare they speak out against someone saying how they feel. She said nothing wrong. Everything she said is the truth. So where is this anti-Semitism coming in? I am not getting it.” While the non-black public was aghast that someone would blame the victim for their own demise, the black community was focused on the perceived threat of a “white invasion” threatening the “Black communities in America.”

The Black community argued that the attack on the kosher supermarket wasn’t about hating Jews per se, it was about defending their communities from an “invasion.” It was a defensive action, not an act of persecution.

This is the identical language that progressives use against Israel. The progressives stand against the “insidious onslaught” of Jews coming into “Arab lands,” and want to “stop the occupation” of communities of color by European colonialists. Do the Arabs shoot the Jews dead? Yes, but it’s not based on antisemitism as much as defending their community of color from “too many white people.” The alt-left logic is that the blacks in New Jersey and the Arabs in Jenin would shoot to kill white invaders if they were Polish or Danish, so the fact that they were Jewish is inconsequential.

Progressives believe that there are particular people who deserve land, community, safety and wealth, and they are not wealthy white people. New York City Mayor Bill De Blasio summed up the thinking of his alt-left comrades well in June 2019 when he saidThere is plenty of money in this world, and there’s plenty of money in this country, it’s just in the wrong hands. Democrats have to fix that.” Progressives aren’t looking for communities of coexistence, they seek a radical transfer of wealth, property, jobs and “justice” to minorities.

The progressive racist approach to gentrification is clear: they want the politicians to take tax dollars from the wealthy white communities and pour the funds into the poor minority urban communities, however, they don’t want those white people moving alongside them. Say no to Amazon’s 25,000 high-paying jobs if it will disrupt the communities of color (thanks AOC). Claim that Jews in the neighborhood are endangering your own black kids because they’re bringing out the haters. If the politicians fail to stop the “white invasion,” then you cannot blame the black community for rising up and shooting a bunch of white Jews shopping.

Tacitly and/or explicitly, the alt-left finds common cause with people of color who gun down white people in defense of their homogeneous minority community, whether in Jersey City or Jerusalem.

Understanding Racist Black Antisemitism:
Hatred of Jews and Judaism

The “alt-right” is often described as being a bunch of “white supremacists” but can be defined more broadly as people who believe in the racial superiority of their own group.

The alt-Right and the alt-Left share a common goal of exclusion. The alt-Right wants to limit immigration to the United States to countries from Europe to keep it a majority white country, while the alt-Left uses the war on racist gentrification to keep white people out of minority communities. The silent separator of the two extremist groups is that the alt-left wraps itself in a shroud of “justice” since it is advocating for minority groups while the alt-right fights to keep its majority status.

Beyond keeping country and community static, the premise of racism and antisemitism is also central to the alt-right vision.

While many of the black people defending the slaughter of Jews in Jersey City could not see their own antisemitism since they believed they were just defending the culture of their neighborhood, many black people have no qualms about voicing their disgust with white people and Jews.

The Nation of Islam is a notorious antisemitic organization which is headed by the black preacher Louis Farrakhan who loudly smears Jews, Judaism and white people to standing ovations in the Black community. Many African Muslim countries also have cultures of Jew-hatred, as Ayaan Hirsi Ali wrote in the Wall Street Journal in July 2019 about Somalia. ADL polls confirm that European Muslims are two to five times more likely to be antisemitic than Christians and that the Muslims from Africa and the Middle East are the most antisemitic people of all.

Black antisemitism is not limited to Muslims.

The two black murderers who killed people in New Jersey belonged to a fringe group called Black Israelites. They believe that blacks and Latinos are the true “chosen people” mentioned in the bible and that today’s Jews are imposters. The black Israelites view themselves as righteous and superior to white people and Jews.

These various racists and antisemites receive protection from the broad black and progressive communities under the guise of intersectionality. Many black Democratic politicians refuse to denounce Louis Farrakhan as he is considered a voice of empowerment to the black community. The leaders of the Women’s March proudly associated with Farrakhan. The racism and antisemitism of the black alt-right gets excused because they are a minority group, so The New York Times and Don Lemon on CNN will report that “the biggest terror threat in this country is white men,” even while the growth in hate crimes today is being driven by violent black hatred.

Jersey City’s Brooklyn Jews

The Jersey City Massacre deserves some backdrop and context.

Over the past decades, the rental prices in Manhattan became prohibitive for many people so they flooded into cheaper neighborhoods in Brooklyn which were long occupied by a diverse group of people including Chasidic Jews, Pakistani Muslims, Puerto Ricans and others. The gentrification of Brooklyn pushed many of these people to seek cheaper rents in nearby communities.

Jersey City, NJ looked much like Brooklyn twenty years ago with its views of and proximity to Manhattan, but with cheaper rents. Long a home for blacks and Latinos, many of the poorer residents of Brooklyn came to Jersey City as a place near Manhattan which was more affordable.

Chasidic Jews are not like every other group of people seeking more affordable places to live. They not only dress differently, they eat different foods not carried by local establishments, send their children to different schools which teach Jewish studies and need to be within walking distance to a Jewish house of worship. This means that it is difficult, perhaps impossible, for one or two Chasidic families to move to a place without Orthodox Jews. They need to enter a community with a minimum of twenty to fifty families to support basic Jewish and kosher infrastructure.

So when Chasidic Jews “got gentrified” out of their own communities in Brooklyn, they could not move to Jersey City as individuals as many in the Latino community did, but came looking for a significant quantity of housing. Their move clearly alarmed the existing minority community which saw a “white invasion” and a Brooklyn-ization of their city. It galvanized the hydra of hatreds from across the spectrum of right-wing and left-wing to protest the Jewish presence in their city and to defend the antisemitic murderers.

EMT cleans the area outside a kosher supermarket on December 11, 2019 (photo: Tariq Zehawi/NorthJersey.com)

Whether motivated by racism, antisemitism or fears of gentrification, black people will be attacking Jews again. And until society, the media and political leaders clearly state that being a minority does not provide absolution for hatred and violence, everyone will be complicit in the heinous crimes against the most persecuted people on earth.

Related First.One.Through articles:

I See Dead People

First the Attackers Were Radical Islamic Extremists

The War Against Israel and Jewish Civilians

Anti-Semitism Is Harder to Recognize Than Racism

Examining Ilhan Omar’s Point About Muslim Antisemitism

For The NY Times, Antisemitism Exists Because the Alt-Right is Racist and Israel is Racist

Subscribe YouTube channel: FirstOneThrough

Join Facebook group: FirstOne Through Israel Analysis

Is Columbia University Promoting Violence Against Israel and Jews?

Columbia University has claimed to be a champion of free speech. It was in that spirit that it invited the noted anti-Semite Malaysian Prime Minster Mahathir Mohamad to speak on campus in September 2019. Mohamad has called Jews “hook-nosed,” said they “rule the world by proxy” and questioned the number of Jews killed in the Holocaust. He has even said he is “glad to be labeled anti-Semitic.”

That same week, seemingly to make the Jewish students on campus feel particularly unwelcome, one of Columbia’s professors, Lis Harris, released her book “In Jerusalem.” The student-run Columbia Spectator magazine reviewed the book in its Winter 2019-20 edition.

The review was shocking in seemingly endorsing the author’s contentions that Israel is an oppressor of Palestinians without adding any facts or context.

The article is set up to inform the reader that the book will have a natural “pro-Israel” tenor, as the author Lis Harris “grew up in a secular Jewish family in the United States fully alert, she says, ‘to the wrongs done to the beleaguered Jews across the ocean,’ but with little sense of the ‘wrongs done to the Palestinian people.’” Ah, if someone with a pro-Israel bias can see how terrible Israel is, it certainly must be true. The birth of a woke anti-Zionist is a cause for a progressive party.

Facts in the review and/or the book were seemingly few in the offering.

We are told that the book tries to look at the conflict through the lens of two families, a Jewish one living in “West Jerusalem” and a Palestinian one “living across the border wall in East Jerusalem.” This is fiction. There is no “border wall” between “West Jerusalem” and “East Jerusalem.” In 1967, Israel tore down the fence that divided the Jerusalem after Jordan illegally attacked Israel, and reunited the holy city. There is no West Jerusalem and East Jerusalem, and the fence which had existed from 1949 to 1967 was explicitly declared to NOT be a border by Israel and Jordan in their Armistice agreement. The “security barrier” which Israel began to erect in 2002 to stop the terrorism of Palestinian Arabs from the West Bank is to the east of unified Jerusalem.

Perhaps the facts make the author’s shuttle diplomacy seem less daring, but it’s a sad intro for a writer “who spent more than ten years gathering research and interviews for the book.” The book established zero credibility from the outset.

The review then moves from the gross inaccuracies to ignoring Jewish history and blessing Arab terrorists.

We are informed that the stories in the book are told by “accomplished women” and intelligent and respected family members who “want peace and a fair solution to the conflict.” The Jewish woman’s aunt escaped Nazi Germany who found asylum in Mandatory Palestine “as a refuge from violence.” There is no mention that Mandatory Palestine was designed to REESTABLISH the Jewish homeland years before Nazis came to power. Jews were not dumped into Mandatory Palestine in a reaction to the Holocaust; the land of Israel has been the Jewish homeland for 3,700 years. Modern Zionism pushed for Jewish sovereignty in that land decades before the State of Israel came into being. That’s why Jerusalem has had a Jewish majority since the 1860’s, all facts not covered in the review and presumably not in the book.

This Jewish aunt “is juxtaposed with the experience of Niveen’s [the Arab’s] aunt. At twenty-one, Rasema Odeh was accused of terrorism, illegally tortured, and served ten years at the Ramla prison… Rasmea’s story is shocking, but the chapter devoted to it is one of the book’s best.” The review made it sound like Odeh was a poor victim, unjustly “accused of terrorism.” It neglected to state that she was convicted of terrorism in which she placed a bomb at a supermarket killing two civilians (her accomplices openly admitted such on Palestinian TV). It failed to state that Odeh lied about the events in getting a visa into the United States in 1994 and was stripped of her citizenship in 2017 and deported. It failed to note that many countries – including Germany in 2019 – banned her from speaking in public and denied her a visa as she calls violence against Israel. The mayor of Berlin said about Odeh that “anti-Israeli and anti-Semitic resentments, wrapped up in liberation rhetoric, have no business here. I am glad that we have found a way to stop this propaganda.

This “juxtaposition” of a Holocaust survivor finding refuge at the expense of Palestinian Arabs seems to take a page out of the book of pathological liar U.S. Representative Rashida Tlaib (D-MI) who claimed she found comfort that her ancestors created a safe haven for Jews when they actually did everything they could to kill the Jews and/or keep them out of Palestine. It is called Seeing the Holocaust Through Nakba Eyes, which turns the Jews from victims to oppressors, and the Palestinians from participants in the Holocaust to victims themselves.

The article continues with more inanity such as “Harris is clear-sighted and firm in her own view that the Israeli government is more oppressor than victim. She does not condemn the Palestinian people fighting to live in their occupied home of East Jerusalem (but neither will she excuse the violence of Hamas).”  No commentary that the Arab population in the eastern part of Jerusalem has grown FOUR TIMES since 1967, a rate that surpasses the population growth of Arabs in any neighboring country. It also neglects to mention that Palestinian Arabs in Jerusalem have the option of becoming Israeli citizens and thousands have opted to do so. Palestinians aren’t “fighting to live;” they are fighting to evict the Jews and destroy the Jewish State.

The Spectator adds that “Harris was able to comment on President Trump’s rash recognition of Jerusalem as the capital of Israel.” Rash? Was President Truman’s recognition of Israel in 1948 also rash? The snide comment didn’t even attempt to hide the reviewer’s bias.

In summation, the review states that “through the people she comes to know in Israel and Palestine, Lis Harris sees hope, and this brave new book ultimately helps us see it too.” Palestine? The United States recognizes no such country. And to the extent that it recognizes “Palestinian Territories,” those are limited to Gaza and Areas A and B, and certainly not “in Jerusalem.”


Columbia University has chapters of anti-Israel hate groups like Students for Justice in Palestine and Jewish Voice for Peace as student-run groups on campus. Their voices seem to have penetrated not only the student-run paper and magazine but the University itself which includes a faculty with anti-Israel authors and promoters of boycotts of Israel, and enabled the invitation of proud anti-Semites like the Prime Minister of Malaysia onto its campus. Beyond the student agitators, maybe the university’s anti-Israel platform was purchased by foreign donors like Saudi Arabia who pumped more than $193 million into Columbia between 2011 and 2017.

In October 2019, a report entitled “A Hotbed for Hate” produced by the Alumni for Campus Fairness listed over 100 anti-Jewish incidents at Columbia and Barnard since the 2016/7 academic year. In addition to the on-campus activities like a swastika painted on a Jewish professor’s office, the report listed numerous faculty members who deny the history of Jews as well as peddle forms of Holocaust denial.

At the very moment when antisemitism is on the rise, the murder of Jews is becoming commonplace and the demonization of Israel is accepted, it is a travesty that New York City’s only Ivy League school gives credibility, honor and an open mic to such vile sentiments.


Related First.One.through articles:

Arabs in Jerusalem

The Jews of Jerusalem In Situ

Ending Apartheid in Jerusalem

The War Against Israel and Jewish Civilians

Students for Justice in Palestine’s Dick Pics

A Response to Rashid Khalidi’s Distortions on the Balfour Declaration

The New York Times All Out Assault on Jewish Jerusalem

The Remarkable Tel Jerusalem

Both Israel and Jerusalem are Beyond Recognition for Muslim Nations

750 Years of Continuous Jewish Jerusalem

Today’s Inverted Chanukah: The Holiday of Rights in Jerusalem and Judea and Samaria

The Arguments over Jerusalem

“East Jerusalem” – the 0.5% Molehill

Jerusalem, and a review of the sad state of divided capitals in the world

When You Understand Israel’s May 1948 Borders, You Understand There is No “Occupation”

First.One.Through videos:

The Green Line (music by The Kinks)

Judea and Samaria (music by Foo Fighters)

The Anthem of Israel is JERUSALEM

Subscribe YouTube channel: FirstOneThrough

Join Facebook group: FirstOne Through Israel Analysis

The New Trend in Hate Crimes: Black Murderers and Jewish Victims

The terrible murders at a kosher supermarket in Jersey City, NJ in December 2019, was a continuation of a number of trends in hate crimes: more murders, more Jewish victims and more Black murderers.

EMT cleans the area outside a kosher supermarket on December 11, 2019 (photo: Tariq Zehawi/NorthJersey.com)

The FBI reports its findings about hate crimes in the United States every November. While Jews have always been the most likely to suffer from hate crimes, the nature of the attacks were often in the form of vandalism, intimidation and assault.

This trend has changed over the past few years.

Murder: The average number of hate crimes from murder was high between the years 2000 and 2003, averaging 13.5 murders per year during those four years. The average number of hate crime murders dropped significantly between 2004 and 2014, to just 6.2 killings per year. However, from 2015 to 2018, the average number of hate crime murders jumped to 16.5 people killed per year, a staggering figure.

Religion: Hate crime murders are typically not based on religious bias, as the murderers are more frequently motivated by hatred against the victim’s race and/or sexual orientation. Between 2000 and 2015, murders targeting religion accounted for an annual average of 10% of the total hate crime murders, but that figure jumped to 19% in the years 20016 to 2018. During the sixteen years 2000 to 2015, one Jew and six Muslims were killed. That has flipped, with eleven Jews and no Muslims killed as a result of hate crimes from 2016 to 2018.

Race of Murderers: While White people have been the majority of the murderers in all hate crimes, it is lower than one would expect based on demographics. There are roughly 5.7 times more White people than Black people in the United States so one would expect a similar rate of hate crimes. However, from 2000 to 2015, White people committed 3.4 times the number of hate crime murders (96 to 28), implying that an average Black person was committing 66% more hate crime murders than an average White Person. From 2016 to 2018 the trend accelerated, when White people committed 1.75 times the number of hate crime murders by Black people (28 to 16), suggesting that Black people were 226% more likely to commit a hate crime murder than White people.


The brutal shooting of innocent Jews by Black anti-Semites last week in New Jersey horrified all decent people but the trendlines over the past three years should make it less surprising. The U.S. is seeing an uptick in hate crime murders, more of them targeting Jews and more of the killings committed by Black people.


Related First.One.Through articles:

Black Hate Crimes of 2018

Mayor De Blasio is Blind to Black Anti-Semitism

What Kind of Hate Kills?

Don Lemon, Here are Some Uncomfortable Facts about Hate Crimes in America

Covering Racism

NY Times Discolors Hate Crimes

Anti-Semitism Is Harder to Recognize Than Racism

First the Attackers Were Radical Islamic Extremists

Muslim Women Debate Anti-Semitism

Rep. Ilhan Omar and The 2001 Durban Racism Conference

Subscribe YouTube channel: FirstOneThrough

Join Facebook group: FirstOne Through Israel Analysis

Sources:

FBI Hate Crimes 2018, 2017, 2016, 2015, 2014, 2013, 2012, 2011, 2010, 2009, 2008, 2007, 2006, 2005, 2004, 2003, 2002, 2001, 2000

Opinions on Facebook

On December 10, 1948, the United Nations General Assembly passed Resolution 217A, known as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The backdrop behind its passage was the Holocaust of European Jewry, in which an entire people was dehumanized, hunted and slaughtered, and the consequent global goal of making sure that it never happens again.

The first two stances in the resolution’s preamble make this clear:

“Whereas recognition of the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family is the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world,

Whereas disregard and contempt for human rights have resulted in barbarous acts which have outraged the conscience of mankind, and the advent of a world in which human beings shall enjoy freedom of speech and belief and freedom from fear and want has been proclaimed as the highest aspiration of the common people,”

All people inherently deserve “freedom, justice and peace” and the common goal of humanity is the enjoyment of “freedom of speech and belief” as well as “freedom from fear and want.”

The resolution goes on to enumerate many ways to achieve such goals, such as banning slavery (Article 4) and torture (Article 5), the ability to marry and divorce (Article 16) and change one’s religion (Article 18). While these seem fundamental rights in the western world, they are unfortunately not present in much of the Middle East and Africa.

But the western world has its own challenges with other items published in the UDHR, that of freedom of speech in the world of social media. Article 19 states:

“Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.”

The notion that people have the right to “impart information… through any media… regardless of frontiers” is specifically being called out in the western world today.

The CEO of Facebook has been called before Congress and people have argued that Facebook must fact-check items before posting them as well as ban political ads.


Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg testifying before Congress

At a speech before the Anti-Defamation League, the actor and comedian Sacha Baron Cohen argued that Facebook, Twitter and Google have created “the greatest propaganda machine in history,” one that would have allowed Hitler to run 30 second ads contributing to fringe ideas “going mainstream.”

But such condemnation should be addressed towards the individual or group posting the vile viewpoints, not the platform itself. Facebook is a megaphone / modern soapbox for ideas. It is not a newspaper with a staff which writes opinions of its own.

We have become enamored with attacking the large social media giants by adopting false progressive notions that: 1) social media is media; 2) any kind of “fear” is real and should be considered; and 3) simply being large and powerful is inherently evil.

Social Media versus Media

Social media enables millions and billions of people to connect with each other. The platforms enable third parties to share ideas and pictures with both friends and family as well as people they’ve never met. The interactions may be cordial or hostile; the content, funny or sad.

The social media companies are distribution companies. This is vastly different than a media company which either writes and produces its own content or pays people to write content for them. As companies like Google begin to hire professionals to produce content on platforms like YouTube, it is only at that point that they become media companies themselves.

These distribution companies decide for themselves whether they wish to publish particular content. If Twitter opts to not publish political ads, that is its choice. If Facebook does not want to be a platform for nudity, it has full discretion to do so.

But it is the content itself which should be the focus of attention and possible derision.

Freedom from Fear

While Article 19 of the UDHR clearly articulates that all opinions should be available on any media, the preamble to the resolution makes clear that people should be able to live with “freedom from fear.” As such, any content which calls for violence against any person or group should be banned from all platforms. No ifs, ands or buts.

But what constitutes “fear?” A perceived insult or slight might trigger “microaggressions” such as using the wrong pronoun for a transgender person. But that cannot truly be the benchmark of what the UDHR had in mind.

Many videos by the conservative Prager U have been banned by YouTube, despite the videos not advocating any violence. Dennis Prager testified before Congress in July 2019 that the social media platforms have been banning conservative voices because the media outlets are run by “coastal liberal latte-sipping politically-correct out-of-touch folks,” as President Obama called them. Prager said that “liberals and conservatives differ on many issues but they have always agreed free speech must be preserved. While the left has never supported free speech, liberals always have.

Prager considered that “the left” has become overly sensitive about a wide range of issues and have used that as an excuse to shut down free speech with which they disagree. The notion of “freedom from fear” is being abused to shut down free speech.

The Powerful Institutions versus the Common Man

These same alt-left progressives have taken to the notion that large institutions like Google, Facebook, Amazon, Goldman Sachs and Walmart are inherently evil. The socialists in Congress have been looking to pass numerous laws to punish them, tax them and break them apart. While Prager sees the social media companies as liberal outlets, the left sees them as corporate thieves who helped defeat Hillary Clinton in the 2016 election.

As such, the left-wing socialists have waved the banner of support for the failing media companies who have peddled their half truths for years, arguing that they are on the front lines of democracy. (If only it were true.) But these media outlets can still write their pieces – and use the social media companies as outlets for distribution.


The big social media companies should NOT be in the fact checking business. However, they can improve upon their core distribution business by allowing people to see the source of the content placed before them and have greater control of the algorithms which tailor the content they see.

Allow people to have “freedom from fear” but not freedom from opinions of which they disagree.


Related First.One.Through articles:

Uncomfortable vs. Dangerous Free Speech

The Noose and the Nipple

Students for Justice in Palestine’s Dick Pics

The Press Are Not Guardians of the Galaxy

New York Times: “Throw the Jew Down the Well”

Ban Ki Moon Defecates on the Universal Declaration of Human Rights

Elie Wiesel on Words

Apostasy

Selective Speech

Subscribe YouTube channel: FirstOneThrough

Join Facebook group: FirstOne Through Israel Analysis

The War Against Israel and Jewish Civilians

Antisemitism has always been a problem around the world. In the United States, an average Jew is three times more likely to suffer a hate crime than an average black person, and twice as likely to be attacked as an average Muslim person. Yet the media often fails to call out the antisemitism (even while it calls out racism and highlights anti-Muslim sentiments). Americans are also much more likely to believe that there is more anti-Muslim bigotry (82%) than anti-Jewish (64%) according to a Pew Report, even though the statistics clearly indicate otherwise regarding actual hate crimes.

There is a real gap between perception and reality in both the general public and media.

Some of this difference may be due to the belief that violence is warranted in some cases and is consequently not based on discrimination.

A Gallup study showed that a society’s inclination towards violence against civilians was most directly correlated towards human development and governance. In particular, it noted a sharp increase in support for killing civilians in places with “social unrest and national instability.” Indeed, according to a Pew Report, the places with the highest support of suicide bombings against civilians are the Palestinian territories at 40% and Afghanistan at 39%. That compared to other Muslim countries of Indonesia and Iraq which are almost uniformly against suicide bombings.

The calls for the destruction of Israel and violence against Jewish civilians among Palestinian supporters are not confined to the streets of Gaza. In November 2019, Muslim protesters screamed in the center of New York’s Times Square that Israel had no right to exist and should be destroyed. They called for an “initifada” and “resistance until the end – until every inch of Palestine is free.” The celebrated “intifadas” are guerrilla wars against soft targets in Israel which have raged on and off since 1987. From 1967 until 1985 much of that guerrilla warfare happened in the international sphere, such as the Palestinian Arab assassination of U.S. Senator Robert Kennedy, the murder of athletes at the Olympics, and the hijacking of airplanes and cruise ships.

The movement to attack Jews around the world based on the solidarity with “Palestinian rights” has been gathering momentum since 2014, when Israel was last engaged in an all out war with Hamas in Gaza. At that time, thousands of people attacked Jews throughout Europe, even as the media refused to label the attacks as anti-Semitic.

In the United States, social unrest brought its own version of crimes against Jews.

Black Americans are attacking Jews in ever greater numbers, with a spike of 58% in Black-on-Jew hate crimes in 2018. Black people might view these attacks as justified and not particularly based on religious hatred, as the leader of the Nation of Islam, Louis Farrakhan said (to a standing ovation) “I’m not an anti-Semite. I’m an anti-termite.” Farrakhan and his followers believe that they are a resistance movement against the tyranny of Jewish power, and not driven by antisemitism.

This is the oxymoronic logic that festers in social unrest.


Louis Farrakhan talking about Jews
(November 2018)

Black people have no monopoly on channeling social unrest to attack Jews. The alt-right has shot Jews in synagogues and marched in the streets because they were worried that Jews were facilitating Muslim immigration into the United States, pushing White people into a minority (they fail to note that Muslims are expected to surpass the number of Jews in the U.S. by 2050, and Muslims are much more likely to be anti-Semitic than Christians according to ADL polls). Perhaps they feel that Jews are masochists.

People who feel wronged cannot recognize their own hatred, and hold their aggrieved status as a bold pardon to lawlessness. The “woke” progressive and alt-right communities demand that Jews give up their land, their wealth, their power, their privilege, their victimhood, their rights and opinions, and anything else that they deem illegal, unearned, undeserved, disproportionate or incorrect as their terms of coexistence.

Social unrest bleaches racism, and always, always comes for the Jews.


Related First.One.Through articles:

First the Attackers Were Radical Islamic Extremists

The New York Times Whitewashes Motivation of Palestinian Assassin of Robert Kennedy

The Crime, Hatred and Motivation. Antisemitism All The Same

Considering Nazis and Radical Islam on the 75th Anniversary of D-Day

Seeing the Holocaust Through Nakba Eyes

Bitter Burnt Ends: Talking to a Farrakhan Fan

Mayor De Blasio is Blind to Black Anti-Semitism

The Palestinians aren’t “Resorting to Violence”; They are Murdering and Waging War

For The NY Times, Antisemitism Exists Because the Alt-Right is Racist and Israel is Racist

Between Right-Wing and Left-Wing Antisemitism

Ramifications of Ignoring American Antisemitism

I See Dead People

The NY Times Will Not Write About the Preferred Violence of Palestinians

Linda Sarsour as Pontius Pilate

What do you Recognize in the Palestinians?

First.One.Through videos:

Palestinian Xenophobia (music by Mr. Rogers)

1001 Years of Jewish Expulsions (music from Schindler’s List)

Jews and US Foreign Policy (music by Vangelis)

Netanyahu Apology to Erdogan (music by Joe Cocker)

The UN Looks to Believe the Palestinians (music by Rod Stewart)

Judea and Samaria (music by Foo Fighters)

Subscribe YouTube channel: FirstOneThrough

Join Facebook group: FirstOne Through Israel Analysis

Jews, Judaism and Israel

There are many debates being waged around the world about whether anti-Zionism is anti-Semitism, how it is possible that some Jews may be against Israel, and why some Jews who do not believe in either God or religion are still considered Jews. This article will not tackle all of those issues but will seek to define, segment and size the nature of Jews, Judaism and Israel to better frame discussions on those topics.

Judaism

Judaism is a religion that takes the source of its teachings from the Five Books of Moses. Biblical scholars over thousands of years have interpreted the various events and commandments found in the Old Testament to frame how a Jewish person should act and live. The approaches changed over the millenia, with some sects like Sadducees, Essens and Karaites fading away while the Pharisees survived with the publication of the Talmud.

Over the last few hundred years, newer religious denominations came about including Conservative, Reform and Reconstructionist Judaism. Each adopted different approaches as to whether the Bible was written by God or was simply divinely-inspired, and how to translate the ancient stories into relevant lessons for today.

Jews

Jews are most often defined by their lineage. Abraham, the father of monotheism, is considered the first Jew in Judaism. His grandchild Jacob became known as Israel and Jacob’s sons were the basis for the twelve tribes and the nation of Israel. Jews consider themselves direct descendants of these biblical characters.

According to the Orthodox and Conservative streams of Judaism, a person’s religion is decided by matrilineal descent (the religion of the mother), while the Reform and Reconstructionist groups have a broader allowance, in that they include patrilineal descent as well. Converts are also welcomed as Jews (although they are not encouraged) and tradition maintains that the new Jews do not only take upon themselves the religion, but the ancestry of Jews as well. A convert’s new Hebrew name will be “______ son of Abraham” or “_____ daughter of Sarah” to show that they are now included as part of the heritage of Jewish peoplehood.

Israel

Judaism is a unique religion in that it has ties to a specific piece of land. The Bible clearly relays to Abraham, Isaac, Jacob and the descendants afterwards that the land of Canaan is their inheritance. The Bible describes specific commandments that can only be kept in Israel, and to this day, every Jew around the world prays facing the Temple Mount in Jerusalem, Israel.

Jews have always lived in the LAND of Israel. Indeed, they were the only religious group to move to the holy land throughout the 19th century and Jews have been a majority in the city of Jerusalem since the 1860’s, BEFORE the push for Jewish sovereignty and advent of Modern Zionism.

Jews, Judaism and Israel

Despite the intersection of Jews, Judaism and Israel, not every Jew follows the religion nor lives in Israel.

Religion and Zionism In Israel

There are roughly 14.2 million Jews alive in the world today. Of that total, roughly 6.7 million live in the Jewish State of Israel. There are another 2.3 million non-Jews that live in Israel, with a population that now exceed 9 million.

  • Religious Jews 3.4 million
  • Secular Jews 3.3 million
  • Non-Jews 2.3 million
    • Total 9.0 million people in Israel

The Pew Forum estimates that Haredi and Orthodox Jews account for 10% and 12% of Israeli Jews, respectively, with Conservatives and Secular Jews accounting for 28% and 49% of the Israeli Jewish population, respectively. Using a Venn diagram, one can plot the 3.3 million Secular Israelis as being Jews connected to the land of Israel (People + Land) but not to the Religion.

Among the religiously-affiliated Israeli Jews, the Haredi Jews are the least Zionistic, while most of the other streams are very passionate about Israel having Jewish sovereignty. The black hat/ Haredi community is less enamored with the Modern Jewish State as it is not based on Orthodox religious law and many believe that such a state should only come into being with the arrival of the Messiah.

Denomination Population% Total Zionist% Total
Haredi 10% 0.7 10%            0.1
Orthodox 12% 0.8 100%            0.8
Conservative 28% 1.9 95%            1.8
Secular 49% 3.3 90%            3.0
Total in millions 6.7 5.7

If one were to assume that only 10% of the Haredi population are Zionists and almost all of the other denominations are Zionists, roughly 1 million Jews in Israel today would not be considered ardent Zionists.

This is not an oxymoron, and goes to the nature of the confusion of different people’s opinions about Zionism. Many Jews living in Israel are against the GOVERNMENT, not the idea of Jews living in the land. Haredi Jews consider themselves anti-Zionist because they think a secular Jewish state has no legitimacy in the Jewish holy land. However, they believe very strongly that the land is the Jewish holy land and they have the right to live Israel. This is in sharp contrast to Muslim anti-Zionism around the world which believes both that the Israeli government should be destroyed and that Jews should be expelled from the land.

Diaspora Jewry on Israel and Judaism

A little more than half of world Jewry lives outside of Israel, roughly 7.5 million people. The vast majority of diaspora Jews live in the United States (over 5 million) with France, Canada and the United Kingdom accounting for over 1 million more.

The United States is a bit of an anomaly compared to Jews around the world, with strong Conservative and Reform movements. In much of the rest of the world, Jews are either Orthodox or secular. In considering the breakdown of Jews in the Venn diagram, assumptions are made for the 5.3 million Jews in the U.S. and then for the rest of the world.

America Population% Total Zionist %  Total 
Orthodox 10% 0.5 50%            0.3
Conservative 18% 1.0 70%            0.7
Reform 35% 1.9 40%            0.7
Unaffiliated 37% 2.0 20%            0.4
Total in millions 5.3 2.1

The Pew Forum estimated the breakdown of Jewish denominations in the United States and the percentages for people who consider themselves Zionists are educated guesses. The Conservative denomination is assumed to be the most pro-Israel, as the Orthodox group includes Anti-Zionist Haredi factions. Using these figures would suggest less than 40% of American Jewry is pro-Israel.

Different percentages are used in making estimates in the rest of the world, below:

ROW Population% Total Zionist %  Total 
Orthodox 25% 0.6 60%            0.3
Conservative 10% 0.2 70%            0.2
Reform 30% 0.7 40%            0.3
Unaffiliated 35% 0.8 40%            0.3
Total in millions 2.2 1.1

The figures for the 2.2 million Jews in the rest of the world are broad estimates. In some countries like France, 60% of the population is Sephardic which almost always considers itself Orthodox, even when not actively practicing Judaism. In general, the unaffiliated/ Reform account for a majority of the population.

Among the diaspora Jews outside of the U.S., Israel holds a more significant role as they suffer more discrimination and are much more likely to emigrate to the Jewish State. Using these figures – which are arguably low – approximately half of the Jews in the rest of the world would be considered active Zionists, 10% more than American Jewry.

Laying out these figures in the Venn diagram above shows that there are about 5.6 million affiliated Jews, of which roughly three-quarters are pro-Israel. This compares to approximately 8.5 million unaffiliated Jews of which only 45% are pro-Israel.

**This breakdown might be viewed by many as unfair. For example, according to Pew, 87% of American Reform Jews consider themselves only Jews through Peoplehood and not religion, while 50% of Unaffiliated Jews felt the same way. This would suggest 4.0 million Affiliated American Jews (both People and Religion) as opposed to the 1.5 million used in the chart above.**

However, the concept remains the same. There are Jews who consider themselves only Jews in the notion of peoplehood, those who consider themselves both Jews by peoplehood and religion, and further, those within each camp who consider themselves tied to Israel (whether they live there or not) and those who do not. The warring factions within the Jewish people of Zionist/anti-Zionist and Jewish anti-Semites often breakdown among these categories.


Jews, Judaism and Israel are all deeply connected yet are distinct at the same time. Before delving into the nuances related to antisemitism and anti-Zionism, it is important to understand the important interrelationship of land-government, people and religion while also acknowledging the varied preferences among Jews in how they define themselves and convey their passions.


Related First.One.Through articles:

For Liberals, It’s Israelis, Palestinians, and Indifference

Heritage, Property and Sovereignty in the Holy Land

The Non-Orthodox Jewish Denominations Fight Israel

Not Remembering, Forgetting and Never Knowing

From Promised Land to Promised Home

In Defense of Foundation Principles

An Orthodox Rabbi at the Capitol

Iran’s New Favorite Jewish Scholars

First.One.Through videos:

God is a Zionist (music by Joan Osborne)

The Green Line (music by The Kinks)

Judea and Samaria (music by Foo Fighters)

The Anthem of Israel is JERUSALEM

Subscribe YouTube channel: FirstOneThrough

Join Facebook group: FirstOne Through Israel Analysis

The Jewish Israeli Rosa Parks

On December 1, 1955, a black seamstress in Montgomery, Alabama refused to give up her seat at the front of the bus for a white man. In those days, segregation, the law that kept races apart, ruled the land. While black people were allowed on public transportation, they had to cede their seats in the front of the bus to white people. On that day 64 years ago, Rosa Parks was defiant and would not cater to the indecent law. Riots ensued, but ultimately, in 1964, the United States passed the Civil Rights Act which desegregated society.

Eight years earlier, on November 29, 1947, the United Nations General Assembly voted to partition the remaining portion of the British Mandate of Palestine (the land east of the Jordan River had previously been handed to the Hashemite Kingdom at the sole discretion of the British), into distinct Jewish and Arab states. While the vote was designed to create peace by separating the two peoples living in the land by establishing two clear majority-societies based on religion and culture, it still sought to allow the minority populations to live, pray and work in the majority-ruled lands. To minimize religious tension, the holy cities of Greater Jerusalem and Greater Bethlehem were voted to be placed under an international regime.

But the Arabs rejected the partition vote as they considered all of the land to be Arab and Muslim, and launched a war to destroy the Jewish State. At war’s end, they evicted all of the Jews from the lands they conquered, including all of the holy sites in Jerusalem, Bethlehem and Hebron. The Arabs forbade any Jew from living, praying or visiting their Jewish holy sites during their period of control from 1949 to 1967.

The Arabs would try to destroy Israel again, with the Jordanian Arabs (and Palestinian Arabs whom had been granted Jordanian citizenship) attacking Israel in 1967, losing their illegally seized lands. Under Jewish control, Israel opened up the holy sites in Jerusalem, Bethlehem and Hebron and enabled everyone – even Jews! – to visit, but they opted to maintain the ban on Jewish prayer at Judaism’s holiest locations, the Temple Mount, hoping to placate the broader Muslim and Arab worlds.

It did not.

The Arab and Muslim countries dug in deeper and turned the United Nations into a complete circus of antisemitic hate. While Palestinians began hijacking planes over the following decade, the other Arab nations advanced the political theory that Zionism was racism on November 10, 1975. After the United States finally led its repeal in December 1991, the Arab world advanced the same premise at the 2001 Durban Conference Against Racism, pushing the notion that not only should Jews be barred from living in parts of the holy land, but their refusal to acquiesce to antisemitic edicts was itself racist.

The September 2000 visit by Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon to the Temple Mount coincided with Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat’s destruction of the Oslo Accords and launch of the Second Intifada which killed thousands. Rabbi Yehuda Glick’s advocacy for Jewish prayer on the Temple Mount in October 2014 also brought Palestinian terrorist to shoot him and launch a “stabbing intifada.” As the antisemitic Hamas Charter says, “Israel, Judaism and Jews challenge Islam and the Moslem people.” The presence of Jews in Muslim lands and holy sites is considered appalling.

The United Nations joined the chorus penned by over 50 Arab and Muslim nations that Israeli Jews should not be permitted to pray on the Temple Mount, nor live east of the 1949 Armistice Lines in the Old City of Jerusalem and in the “West Bank,” the lands which the Jordanians had seized. In December 2016, the UN Security Council, with the tacit approval of the United States’ Obama administration, passed Resolution 2334 which said that banning (not even segregating!) Israeli Jews is legal, and that such people have no rights to live and work in their holy land.


Today, there are hundreds of thousands of Israeli Jewish Rosa Parks who defy the notion that laws banning Jews from natural activities which others enjoy is in any way immoral or illegal. These Jews live in Judea and Samaria, in the Old City of Jerusalem and Hebron and fight for open access and prayer at their holy sites on the Temple Mount of Jerusalem and throughout the Cave of the Jewish Patriarchs and Matriarchs in Hebron. Perhaps it is time to erect a monument for these “settlers” at the UN Plaza, much as Rosa Parks got a statue in Montgomery, AL.


Jerusalem on Sukkot, a full Kotel Plaza,
but no Jews on the Temple Mount


Related First.One.Through articles:

Tolerance at the Temple Mount

I’m Offended, You’re Dead

Active and Reactive Provocations: Charlie Hebdo and the Temple Mount

When You Understand Israel’s May 1948 Borders, You Understand There is No “Occupation”

A Native American, An African American and a Hispanic American walk into Israel…

Joint Prayer: The Cave of the Patriarchs and the Temple Mount

It is Time to Insert “Jewish” into the Names of the Holy Sites

The United Nations and Holy Sites in the Holy Land

Visitor Rights on the Temple Mount

Taking the Active Steps Towards Salvation

Israel Has Much Higher Claims to The West Bank Than Golan Heights

The EU’s Choice of Labels: “Made in West Bank” and “Anti-Semite”

Considering Carter’s 1978 Letter Claiming Settlements Are Illegal

First.One.Through videos:

The Green Line (music by The Kinks)

Judea and Samaria (music by Foo Fighters)

10 Ignored Facts about Moslem and Jewish Population in Israel (music by Seal)

Israel Provokes the Palestinians (music by The Clash)

The Anthem of Israel is JERUSALEM

Subscribe YouTube channel: FirstOneThrough

Join Facebook group: FirstOne Through Israel Analysis

The Anti-Israel Community in a Jewish House of Worship

On November 26, 2019, a progressive Reform Temple in Westchester County, New York brought together a collection of people from the far-left and anti-Israel community to talk about the situation in “Israel/Palestine.” The discussion was civil and disappointing.

The Israel Action Committee of the Temple Israel of New Rochelle put together the event with “Friends of Mossawa,” an organization based in Tarrytown, NY which claims to fight for equality in Israel, and the United Nations, an organization which claims to be a unifying agency for people all over the world. As the evening demonstrated, what unites these parties is their strong distaste for Israel.

The speakers included Laura Wharton, a left-wing, anti-Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu member of Jerusalem’s City Council; Rana Abu Farha, a host on the Palestinian run Ma’an 24 news show; and Hanan Al Sanah, a representative of an NGO in the Negev which advocates for Bedouin women. It was moderated by Paul Warhit, President of the Westchester Jewish Council.

Hanan Al Sanah, Rana Abu Farha, Laura Wharton and Paul Warhit at TINR
November 26, 2019
From the outset, the tone of the two hour evening discussion was clearly not going to follow the script as laid out in the invitationThe Lived Reality in Israel and the Palestinian Territory: Current Political Developments and the Prospects for a Peaceful Settlement of the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict.” The members of the TINR clergy and Israel Action Committee who welcomed the fifty-person audience repeatedly referred to “Israel/Palestine,” and not the “Palestinian Territory,” upgrading the PA-ruled lands to an actual country. They also noted that one of the evenings invited speakers, Ali Ghaith, an “activist and freelance journalist” was not able to attend as he had recently written a negative piece about Netanyahu and was therefore not able to get a travel visa from Israel. Various people in the audience booed Israel’s actions.

The Left-Wing Israeli Politician

Wharton began the discussion stating that she has “complete solidarity with the Palestinian people” and would state later that she is both pro-Israel and pro-Palestine. Her comments during the evening really only proved the latter.

Even though she serves as a member of the Jerusalem’s City Council, she was woefully ignorant of the city’s composition stating that only about 2,000 Jews live in “East Jerusalem,” even though the actual number is over 200,000 in the eastern part of the city.

Wharton was particularly worried about mixed Arab-Jewish neighborhoods in Jerusalem. She said that it was “worrisome that more Israelis are moving into Palestinian neighborhoods,” especially right-wing Israelis. She said that Jerusalem will ultimately need to be divided as part of a peace agreement and the Jewish presence among the Palestinians made that separation harder. She voiced her belief that the Jewish Quarter and the Western Wall should remain in Israeli hands, but the balance of East Jerusalem should be part of Palestine, with Christian holy places under the jurisdiction of the United Nations.

Wharton believed that the problems in Jerusalem paled relative to the West Bank. She commented that the settlements are illegal by international law and many are also illegal under Israeli law. She believed that all of the settlements complicated matters significantly by placing Jewish towns alongside Arab towns. Neither she nor the moderator chose to mention how Jews and Arabs get along just fine in Haifa, the headquarters of Mossawa.

Wharton ended her remarks by stating that she supported the B.D.S. movement of Israeli goods made in the West Bank but urged people in the audience to not boycott Israel in its entirety, as it silenced the voices of the dovish Israelis like herself and gave ammunition to the right-wing.

The Anti-Israel Palestinian Newscaster

Rana made Laura’s pro-B.D.S. comments look tame.

She decried the “occupation” throughout her remarks, stating that the over 130 Israeli settlements consisting of 1 million Jews pushed 2.5 million Palestinians to live in “ghettos.” (The actual number of Jews in the West Bank is half that number). She said that Netanyahu went to war in Gaza the other week because he feared he was losing the election so thought it would help to kill Arab civilians to excite the Israeli public. She added that the entire notion that Israel is democratic is a joke, and that it just holds election as a marketing ploy to the western world that it shares democratic ideals when it is really just a racist colonial occupier. The moderator chose not to push back aggressively on these libels.

The Palestinian newscaster went on that she thought that every single settler must leave the West Bank and that all 6 million Palestinian refugees (there are actually 5.5 million registered with UNRWA) should be allowed to move to Israel. When asked by Warhit how Israel could possibly allow 6 million Arabs into the country to overwhelm the Jews, she simply stated that “it’s their land so it’s their choice.” The members of the UN and Friends of Mossawa who sat in the audience grunted their approval. Warhit could only summon that he appreciated her position about getting rid of the settlements but could not imagine Israel allowing 6 million Arabs into the country. The TINR organizer of the event admonished Warhit to not share his opinion and just get the panel talking.

The Bedouin Arab

Compared to the other people on stage, Hanan was actually quite good, even while her English was the weakest. She said that she considered herself an Israeli but was frustrated by the country’s lack of investment in the Bedouin community and Israel’s refusal to allow them to live in their traditional lifestyle. At the same time, she acknowledged that she was also frustrated by her own Bedouin traditional lifestyle that kept women illiterate and as second-class citizens. She was advocating for change in the Bedouin culture to empower women, but for more of the traditional status quo from the Israelis to not force them to move into conventional cities.

End Points

The Q&A at the end of the panel discussion was mostly a repeat of prior comments. When asked about the Palestinian and left-wing Israeli poll in the summer of 2018 that showed that almost all Israeli Arabs were in favor of capping the number of refugees coming to Israel and in favor of Israel’s Nation State Law, the denials began to flow.

The questioner was first directed by the panelists to call Israeli Arabs as “Palestinian Citizens of Israel” and told that the poll figures must be wrong. Both Laura and Rana mentioned the huge protests in the streets after the Knesset passed the law which undermined the poll’s statistics. Wharton considered the poll’s point of Israeli Arabs wanting to cap refugees as perhaps stemming from Palestinian Arab viewpoint of Israeli Arabs as collaborators with Israel while they suffered in refugee camps. Rana effectively ignored the question and repeated that all of the Palestinians have a natural right to return to their homes (or more accurately, grandparents’ homes).

At program’s end, when Rana was asked how many Jews she thought could live in a Palestinian State, she repeated that every settlement had to be removed. Pushed further if she would accept a situation in which every Israeli soldier left the land, and every Jewish civilian in the West Bank opted to become a Palestinian citizen, she reiterated her stance that no settlers could remain. When challenged as to why she would take such an antisemitic stance to forbid any Jew from living in a Palestinian State, the organizer of the event from TINR jumped in and said “don’t put words in her mouth” and then tried to escort her out of the room.


Temple Israel of New Rochelle is proud of its progressive bona fides. Its rabbi serves on the board of J Street (a left-wing Israel advocacy group), Planned Parenthood, and Rabbis for Human Rights. It was therefore not surprising to see such a progressive organization give a warm welcome to people advocating for a boycott of Jews in the West Bank, expulsion of all the Jews living there, and changing Israel into a bi-national state. Such is the state of progressive views about Israel today.


Related First.One.Through articles:

A Disservice to Jewish Community

Rick Jacobs’ Particular Reform Judaism

Unity – not Unanimity – in the Pro-Israel Tent

There are Standards for Unity

Arabs in Jerusalem

The Fault in Our Tent: The Limit of Acceptable Speech

The Reform Movement’s Rick Jacobs Has no Understanding of Tolerance

J Street is Only Considered “Pro-Israel” in Progressive Circles

On Heretics and Slanderers

The Non-Orthodox Jewish Denominations Fight Israel

Fake Definitions: Pluralism and Progressive / Liberalism

In Defense of Foundation Principles

J Street is a Partisan Left-Wing Group, NOT an Alternative to AIPAC

J Street: Going Bigger and Bolder than BDS

First.One.Through videos:

The Green Line (music by The Kinks)

Judea and Samaria (music by Foo Fighters)

10 Ignored Facts about Moslem and Jewish Population in Israel (music by Seal)

Israel Provokes the Palestinians (music by The Clash)

The Anthem of Israel is JERUSALEM

Subscribe YouTube channel: FirstOneThrough

Join Facebook group: FirstOne Through Israel Analysis

Vaping Bernie Sanders

Vaping has become the latest craze. Its popularity has skyrocketed, particularly among young people. Studies show that Americans aged 30 to 64 were four times as likely to vape as those aged 18 to 29, and that group was four times as likely to vape as the oldest Americans over 65. Polls highlight that the younger generations do not believe that vaping is harmful, and its appeal continues to rise despite all of the evidence which shows how terrible the activity is for a person’s physical well-being.

In a very similar vein, Senator Bernie Sanders has wide appeal among younger people than older Americans. Sanders’ loyal base draws mostly on uneducated and low income people. Not surprisingly, the millions of younger, poorer people love Sanders’ formula for redistributing money from wealthier Americans. Unfortunately, these recipients cannot fathom how terrible Sanders’ socialism is for the overall economic health of the United States.

Meanwhile, the federal government has been considering a range of laws to ban or limit vaping, including the marketing of flavors that appeal to younger people. However, the more systemic risk to the nation posed by the exposure to the radical socialist ideas of Bernie Sanders has not garnered such attention. Is it time ban Bernie ads and pull him from the Democratic debates?


Senator Bernie Sanders at J Street conference


Related First.One.Through articles:

Bernie Sanders is Less Sophisticated Than Forrest Gump

#NeverGillibrand #NeverSanders #NeverHarris #NeverDeBlasio

An Open Letter to Non-Anti-Semitic Sanders Supporters

From “You Didn’t Build That” to “You Don’t Own That”

The Democratic Socialists Tell Lies and Half Truths About Lobbyists

Please Don’t Vote for a Democratic Socialist

Fake Definitions: Pluralism and Progressive / Liberalism

Liberal Hypocrisy on Foreign Government Intervention

Black Lives Matter Joins the anti-Israel “Progressives” Fighting Zionism

Subscribe YouTube channel: FirstOneThrough

Join Facebook group: FirstOne Through Israel Analysis

The Fourth ‘No’ of the Khartoum Resolution: No Return of Palestinian Refugees

In the aftermath of the Arabs humiliating defeat in the June 1967 war with Israel, the leaders of eight Arab countries assembled in Khartoum, Sudan to proclaim their unity with each other and the cause against Israel which had just taken the Sinai from Egypt, the West Bank from Jordan, and the Golan Heights from Syria. They published the Khartoum Resolution which, among other matters, proclaimed the infamous ‘three No’s’ regarding Israel:

“3. The Arab Heads of State have agreed to unite their political efforts at the international and diplomatic level to eliminate the effects of the aggression and to ensure the withdrawal of the aggressive Israeli forces from the Arab lands which have been occupied since the aggression of June 5. This will be done within the framework of the main principles by which the Arab States abide, namely, no peace with Israel, no recognition of Israel, no negotiations with it, and insistence on the rights of the Palestinian people in their own country.”

The comedy of classic clowns might be lost on the listeners of later generations, but the Arab heads of state made the subject of Palestinians having their “own country” a new priority, after 18 years of occupying the West Bank and Gaza between 1949 and 1967, and making no effort whatsoever to create an independent Palestinian state.

What’s more, the no peace/ recognition/ negotiations with Israel not only prevented any pathway to peace for all the Arab actors with Israel, it slammed the door shut on Palestinian refugees having any chance of returning to homes in Israel.

As stated in the 1948 UN General Assembly Resolution 194, item 11, “refugees wishing to return to their homes and live at peace with their neighbours should be permitted to do so at the earliest practicable date, and that compensation should be paid for the property of those choosing not to return and for loss of or damage to property.” The 1967 Khartoum Resolution made clear that there would be no peace with Israel, and consequently, no return for any refugees.

This was not a new or novel issue for the Arab world.

In October 1950, not long after the end of Israel’s War of Independence, the United Nations sought a method of handling the displaced Arabs who had left Israel. The UN Conciliation Commission for Palestine noted the opinion of Israel’s first Prime Minister David Ben Gurion about the status of the Arab refugees:

“Mr. Ben Gurion’s view this passage [Resolution 194] made the possibility of a return of the refugees to their homes contingent, so to speak, on the establishment of peace: so long as the Arab States refused to make peace with the State of Israel, it was evident that Israel could not fully rely upon the declaration that Arab refugees might make concerning their intention to live at peace with their neighbours. Mr. Ben Gurion did not exclude the possibility of acceptance for repatriation of a limited number of Arab refugees, but he made it clear that the Government of Israel considered that a real solution of the major part of the refugee question lay in the resettlement of the refugees in Arab States. On the other hand, Mr. Ben Gurion fully recognized the humanitarian aspect of the problem and on several occasions declared that, when the time came, the Government of Israel would be ready to take part in the efforts necessary for its solution and that it would do this in a sincere spirit of co-operation. Mr. Ben Gurion told the Commission, however, that the Government of Israel considered the refugee question as one of those which should be examined and solved during the general negotiations for the establishment of peace in Palestine.”

Arab states rejected the existence of the Jewish State at its founding in 1948 and dug in deeper after the loss of territory that belonged to THEM (as opposed to local Palestinians) in 1967. While Egypt and Jordan did sign peace agreements with Israel in 1979 and 1994, respectively, the remainder of the Arab world still has not. Thirty Arab and Muslim states still refuse to acknowledge the basic existence of Israel.

So while the number of Palestinian “refugees” stood at roughly 1 million in 1967, that number ballooned to over 5.5 million in 2019. Bringing that many Arabs into Israel would completely alter the demographic composition and character of Israel, a point which the United Nations abhors when it comes to Jews living in the West Bank as it stated in the 2016 UNSC Resolution 2334: “Condemning all measures aimed at altering the demographic composition, character and status of the Palestinian Territory occupied since 1967, including East Jerusalem.” If the desired Arab state cannot handle a 5% Jewish population, how can anyone possibly consider that the Jewish State, which already has a 20% Arab population, take in an additional 5 million Arabs?


Arab women entering the Western Wall Plaza in Jerusalem, Israel
(photo: First.One.Through)

The Arab world declared three No’s to Israel in 1967, and also effectively sealed the fate of Palestinian refugees, that they would never move to houses in Israel.


Related First One Through articles:

Stabbing the Palestinian “Right of Return”

Removing the Next Issue – The Return of 20,000 Palestinian Arabs

The “Great Myth of Return”

When the Democrats Opposed the Palestinian “Right of Return”

Time to Dissolve Key Principles of the “Inalienable Rights of Palestinians”

Losing Rights

What’s Wrong with UNRWA

First.One.Through videos:

The Green Line (music by The Kinks)

Israel Provokes the Palestinians (music by The Clash)

Who are the Palestinians (music by The Who)

Subscribe YouTube channel: FirstOneThrough

Join Facebook group: FirstOne Through Israel Analysis