Israel sent 25 athletes to the 2020 Paralympics held in Tokyo from August 24 to September 5, 2021. Some of the athletes were accompanied by their guide dogs.
Israeli athletes enter the Tokyo paralympics with seeing guide dogs during the parade of nations.
One of the athletes is Roni Ohayon, who is competing in a sport that is unique to the Paralympics called Goalball. It is similar to soccer, specifically designed for players with visual blindness by playing with a ball with bells inside. All players wear blindfolds as part of the game.
Israeli athletes competing in goalball. Roni Ohayon with her guide dog, Rudy.
Team Israel won the silver medal in goalball at the European Championship held in Germany in 2019. The schedule for the team in Tokyo can be found here.
Roni’s dog Rudy was trained at the Israel Guide Dog Center for the Blind. It is the only accredited guide dog center in the entire Middle East. Each year, the center provides roughly 35 Guide dogs for the visually-impaired and 35 Companion dogs for Israelis suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder, PTSD.
Many of the athletes trained for competition at the Israel Sports Center for the Disabled. Founded in 1960, the ISCD is a home away from home to around 2,500 Israelis of all ages, where the unique merits of sports are utilized to strengthen body, spirit and mind.
Paralympian Nadav Levi, born with cerebral palsy competing in boccia. Caroline Tabib, playing wheelchair table tennis at the Olympics for the second time, training with Baruch Hagai, the head coach of the ISCD.
The Paralympics were founded by Dr. Ludwig Guttmann (1899-1980), a Jewish doctor who escaped Nazi Germany to England. He revolutionized the research and treatment of spinal cord injuries including rehabilitation. “It occurred to me that it would have been a serious omission not to include sport in the rehabilitation of handicapped people,” he said, as his efforts began small alongside the Olympics that were held in London in 1948. In 1960, the games went international, and since the 1988 Summer Olympics in Seoul and 1992 Winter games in France, the Paralympics have been held in the same city as the Olympics.
The 2020/1 Tokyo Olympics gathered the worst television ratings ever but hopefully people around the world will tune in to watch the incredible athletes (and dogs) of the Paralympics.
On August 24, 1929, Palestinian Arabs incited a riot throughout the Jewish holy land with rumors that Jews were attempting to seize and destroy the Al Aqsa Mosque in Jerusalem. In Hebron, sixty-nine Jews were brutally slaughtered and hundreds were maimed and injured. The catastrophe was so horrific, that the British who were ruling the land under international mandate, felt compelled to evacuate all of the Jews from the city as they did not feel it would be safe for any Jew to remain among the majority Arab population, ethnically-cleansing the Jewish victims from their holy city.
On the 92nd anniversary of the Arab massacre of Jews, The New York Times wrote an article about Jews praying on the Temple Mount. It characterized the Jews as having a history of aggressively pushing onto a Muslim holy site inciting riots.
New York Times article on page A4 of August 24, 2021 edition, about how quiet Jewish prayer provokes angry Muslim reaction and death.
The article began with stating that Israel forbids Jews from praying on the Temple Mount, which is true, but it did not state that Israel was maintaining the anti-Semitic policy instituted by Jordan of banning Jewish prayer when it illegally ruled the city. The omission was minor in comparison to the paper’s recap of history.
The paper noted that Israel is in charge of security and the Jordanian waqf is responsible for administrative matters on the Temple Mount, but “when the balance of power has teetered,” bad events happen. The Times listed the visit of Prime Minister Ariel Sharon in 2000 setting off the “Second Intifada“; Israel installing metal detectors in 2017 that led to riots; and Israeli police “raid[ing] the compound several times last spring” provoking an 11-day war with Hamas. In each situation, Israeli actions were attributed as the provocation which led to deaths and destruction.
Misleading its readership, the Times did not write that the “Second Intifada” which began in 2000 was the result of Yasser Arafat, the head of the Palestinian Authority, rejecting the Israeli peace offer capping the Oslo Accords, which would have given Palestinians roughly 98% of their demands, and instead opting for a multi-year war. The Times did not describe Arabs shooting police officers on the Temple Mount in 2017 which led to the decision to install metal detectors. The paper omitted the Arab riots over the evictions of squatters in homes in Sheikh Jarrah neighborhood next to the Old City and the Palestinian Authority cancelling elections which made HAMAS launch hundreds of missiles at Israeli towns.
The Times inverted every story, and recast the Arab attackers as victims.
Obviously, the paper left out the massacre of 69 Jews in Hebron as it revealed that Arabs murder Jews for perceived threats, not actual force.
The New York Times is attempting to rewrite history that Jews are responsible for war, a smear promoted in the infamous forgery ‘Protocols of the Elders of Zion’ and in the HAMAS Charter. It is a vile tactic which anti-Semites have used for a long time. That the Times would specifically do it on the anniversary of the 1929 Hebron Massacre marks its editors as cruel sadists as well.
The Palestinian Liberation Organization declared an independent State of Palestine in 1988. Only Arab and Muslim countries recognized it, while about a decade ago, countries in Latin America also chose to recognize it. The United States and much of the western world has refused to recognize such entity, in the hopes that the contours of such state will be negotiated between Israel and the Palestinian Authority.
But The New York Times is not waiting for the U.S. government, and has now recognized the entity as a state throughout the paper.
On August 23, 2021, Will Shortz, long-time editor of the crossword puzzle, added a clue which specifically called Palestine an actual country.
August 23, 2021 New York Times crossword puzzle claiming there is a “Palestinian State.”
This is part of an ongoing initiative of the paper. On April 24, 2021, the Times wrote about “Palestinian East Jerusalem,” which compounded multiple layers of fiction: there hasn’t been an entity called “East Jerusalem” since 1967 and it certainly isn’t part of a State of Palestine.
The New York Times deliberately does not call HAMAS, a U.S. designated foreign terrorist organization, with such designation as it tries to sanitize the genocidal anti-Semitism of the group. The paper is now further breaking with official U.S. foreign policy in recognizing a Palestinian State as it attempts to mainstream the Palestinian narrative to its far-left readership.
The United Nations has many subcommittees. Most are designed to handle global or regional issues. Some are unique and deal with a specific issue, such as UNRWA, which is a UN agency dedicated for descendants of Palestinian refugees from wars in 1948 and 1967 who remain stateless, while every other refugee in the world has one under-staffed agency called UNHCR.
One of the organizations/people specifically tasked (theoretically) with helping to solve a regional issue is UNSCO, the United Nations Special Coordinator for the Middle East Peace Process. One would imagine that such individual was there to actually help and facilitate “the Middle East Peace Process” as the title conveys.
A review of the comments made in 2018 by the special coordinator, Nickolay Mladenov, reveals a different story.
The UNSCO website lists 29 statements made by Mladenov over 2018. Most of them were addresses to the UN Security Council, in which he provided an update of the situation on the ground. Sometimes there were recommended actions to be taken to advance the Peace Process.
Oftentimes, there was finger-pointing.
Consider the statement made on January 25, 2018. Mladenov said that there was a clear and unambiguous end result for the peace process: two states. “We must also reaffirm the international consensus that the two-State solution remains the only viable option for a just and sustainable end to the conflict. We must be unwavering in this position.” Absent such solution, the Palestinians would suffer a “worsening reality of occupation and humiliation.” Little concern was noted for Israeli security. No mention that Hamas is a terrorist organization and that its existence and governance undermines the basic principles of a Peace Process. Instead, he offered an appeal for UNRWA to subsidize Palestinians and declared that Jewish houses living in Area C in Judea and Samaria are threats to peace. The message was clear: terrorism is not a threat to the Peace Process; Jewish homes are the obstacle.
A few weeks later, on February 20, 2018, Mladenov made the following comment:
“For a decade two million people have lived under the full control of Hamas with crippling Israeli closures and movement and access restrictions. Throughout this period the international community has provided aid and humanitarian assistance to alleviate the suffering and to rebuild what was destroyed in three devastating conflicts.
“It is time to break this cycle. It is time to return Gaza back to the control of the legitimate Palestinian Authority, for there can be no Palestinian state without Palestinian unity.
“Those who stand in the way of reconciliation hurt the Palestinian national cause and the price will be paid by generations of ordinary people.”
Mladenov could not have been clearer: he wants to have the terrorist group Hamas to be part of the ruling Palestinian Authority and chastised anyone opposed. The coordinator for a peaceful settlement between the Stateless Arabs from Palestine (“SAPs“) with the Jewish State called for a vehemently noxious anti-Semitic organization to be part of a governing coalition which would somehow make peace with its Jewish neighbor. That’s akin to a judge recommending that a couple conclude a divorce on peaceful terms by having the gun-toting spousal abuser live next door to his ex.
The comments on March 26 to the UN Security Council finally had more balance and called out Palestinian incitement to terror, including:
“Fatah’s official social media pages continued to feature posts glorifying perpetrators of past violence against Israeli civilians, including terror attacks that killed civilians and children. In addition, Palestinian officials continued to make statements denying the historical and religious connection of Jews to Jerusalem and its holy sites. One senior religious leader falsely claimed Jews had lived in historical Jerusalem for only 70 or 80 years. Others continue to describe Israel as “a colonial project.”
“I urge the Palestinian leadership to continue to speak against violence in general, and to condemn specific attacks against civilians.”
Regrettably, Mladenov once again failed to call out Hamas explicitly. Instead, he called for reconciliation between the two parties and demanded that Hamas civil servants start getting their salaries paid by the PA.
The following month, on April 26, Mladenov spoke to the Security Council again. His primary focus continued to be on Gaza, while speaking gently about Hamas:
“People should not be destined to spend their lives surrounded by borders they are forbidden to cross, or waters they are forbidden to navigate. They should not be destined to live under the control of Hamas, which invests in military activities at the expense of the population.”
Somehow, Mladenov ignored every Palestinian poll in which the Palestinians PREFER Hamas over the more moderate Fatah party. Almost no Palestinian places the blame for the dire situation in Gaza on Hamas itself.
A few days later on April 30, Mladenov was back to celebrating the efforts at Palestinian unity:
“Unity is essential to furthering the Palestinian national aspirations for statehood and sovereignty. That is why the Government of National Consensus should be enabled to take up its responsibilities in Gaza and bring immediate relief and change to the population. No one should stand in their way.”
It would seem that Mladenov finally understood the meaning of Palestinian unity a few days later: Hamas and Fatah would agree on anti-Semitism as Abbas leaned in to his hatred. Mladenov chastised Abbas on May 2nd after the PA president launched a long anti-Semitic tirade:
“Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas chose to use his speech at the opening of the Palestinian National Council to repeat some of the most contemptuous anti-Semitic slurs, including the suggestion that the social behavior of Jews was the cause for the Holocaust.
Such statements are unacceptable, deeply disturbing and do not serve the interests of the Palestinian people or peace in the Middle East.
Denying the historic and religious connection of the Jewish people to the land and their holy sites in Jerusalem stands in contrast to reality.
The Holocaust did not occur in a vacuum, it was the result of thousands of years of persecution. This is why attempts to rewrite, downplay or deny it are dangerous.
Leaders have an obligation to confront anti-Semitism everywhere and always, not perpetuate the conspiracy theories that fuel it.”
Mladenov was right to chastise Abbas for his anti-Semitic speech but it must have caught Abbas off guard as he never heard Mladenov lambast Hamas for their anti-Semitic genocidal charter. Further, Abbas sees a world community beginning to embrace his call for a boycott of Israel, referring to Israel by his preferred terms of a “colonial settler project” that engages in “apartheid.” Abbas thinks he’s winning the “Zionism is Racism” branding campaign and considers it only a matter of time when countries stop criticizing him for paying salaries to the murderers of Israeli Jews.
It is true that Israel must have a single negotiating party who has control of all Palestinian territories that can deliver upon a peace agreement. But Arab unity is being forged on the basis of Jew-hatred, which will never be able to accept the Jewish State. So the UN is pivoting to a different peace model as advocated by Palestinian Arabs: a purely Arab anti-Semitic Palestinian State and a bi-national Israel, as it is the only model which can meet the parameters of Muslim “dignity” and unify the Palestinian factions.
The Hebrew month of Elul is the last month of the year and traditionally marks the beginning period of repentance in the Jewish calendar. It is on the first day of the month that the prophet Moses ascended Mount Sinai 3,300 years ago, and forty days later, on Yom Kippur, when he descended and broke the tablets when he saw the Children of Israel worshipping beside a statue of a golden calf.
To mark the period of repentance, rabbis instituted a tradition of reciting Psalm 27 at the end of morning and evening prayers. It is a call for God to protect Jews from their enemies.
As we approach the twentieth anniversary of UN Durban Conference and the attacks of 9/11 which both occurred during Elul, and how governments and people choose to commemorate those events, two sentences in the psalm deserve deeper exploration. Sentences 11 & 12:
ה֤וֹרֵ֥נִי יְהֹוָ֗ה דַּ֫רְכֶּ֥ךָ וּ֭נְחֵנִי בְּאֹ֣רַח מִישׁ֑וֹר לְ֝מַ֗עַן שֽׁוֹרְרָֽי׃ Show me Your way, O LORD, and lead me on a level path because of my watchful foes.
אַֽל־תִּ֭תְּנֵנִי בְּנֶ֣פֶשׁ צָרָ֑י כִּ֥י קָמוּ־בִ֥י עֵדֵי־שֶׁ֝֗קֶר וִיפֵ֥חַ חָמָֽס׃ Do not subject me to the will of my foes, for false witnesses and unjust accusers have appeared against me.
While the Psalm is set up to seek God’s protection from armies (verse 3), the lines above highlight that enemies include those who wish to undermine Jews with slander. The “watchful foes” scrutinize every action and then bear “false witness” with accusations that seek to seriously harm Jews as they enter the high holidays.
The United Nations, a body conceived of to promote peace and reduce bloodshed, has become a platform for “false witnesses and unjust accusers” which lambast Israel. UN Watch noted that in 2020, the UN General Assembly passed 17 resolutions condemning Israel, while passing a total of six against the rest of the world.
Hillel Neuer, executive director of UN Watch, said that the “farce at the General Assembly underscores a simple fact: the UN’s automatic majority has no interest in truly helping Palestinians, nor in protecting anyone’s human rights; the goal of these ritual, one-sided condemnations is to scapegoat Israel.“
United States Secretary of State Colin Powell said much the same as he withdrew from the World Conference Against Racism held in Durban, South Africa on September 3, 2001:
“Today I have instructed our representatives at the World Conference Against Racism to return home. I have taken this decision with regret, because of the importance of the international fight against racism and the contribution that the Conference could have made to it. But, following discussions today by our team in Durban and others who are working for a successful conference, I am convinced that will not be possible. I know that you do not combat racism by conferences that produce declarations containing hateful language, some of which is a throwback to the days of “Zionism equals racism;” or supports the idea that we have made too much of the Holocaust; or suggests that apartheid exists in Israel; or that singles out only one country in the world–Israel–for censure and abuse.“
Flyer at 2001 World Conference Against Racism with a picture of Adolf Hitler with caption “What if I had won?” and continued that there would be no Israel nor bloodshed of Palestinians (source UN Watch)
The United Nations has promoted and given legitimacy to the “watchful foes” of Jews – both around the world and in the United States, at governmental levels, among lay leaders and ordinary citizens – to promote vicious slander against Israel and the Jewish people. As those lies are becoming mainstreamed, it is time to stop reciting Psalm 27 quietly but “with shouts of joy, singing and chanting,” (verse 6), for God to cause these evil people and organizations to “stumble and fall” (verse 2).
According to the Jerusalem Post, the Palestinian political-terrorist group HAMAS congratulated the Taliban in Afghanistan for defeating the United States. The Twitter account for HAMAS noted that the Taliban “faced America and its agents, refusing half-solutions with them. The Taliban was not deceived by the slogans of democracy and elections and fake promises. This is a lesson for all oppressed people.” #WePrayMeToo
The leaders of the Taliban and HAMAS before a picture of Jerusalem, as posted in a congratulatory note from HAMAS to the Taliban after taking over Afghanistan.
The Taliban victory represents the HAMAS ideal: the oppression of women; the murder and wiping out of non-Muslim infidels; the violent over-through of a secular liberal society and the installation of sharia law and jihadi culture.
Oppression of Women
The Taliban doesn’t allow women to travel outside without a male escort, receive an education or marry outside of family-approved unions. The penalty for breaking Taliban law ranges from whipping to being put to death.
Girl in Afghanistan
Afghanistan has around 150 ‘honor killings’ every year, whereby family members kill a sister/mother/daughter for bringing shame to family honor because they dressed inappropriately or refused to marry a designated mate. After HAMAS took over Gaza, the number of honor killings jumped dramatically. In 2011, 2012 and 2013 the numbers jumped from 5 to 13 to 27, respectively. It was projected to jump again in 2014 when news reports silenced publishing the statistics because it hurt public perception of the terrorist group. On a proportionate basis, Gaza had more honor killings than Afghanistan.
Sometimes the family doesn’t take to killing the woman but the “aggrieved” male who was “hurt” by the woman’s rejection, disfigures the woman on his own by pouring acid on her face or cutting off her nose and ears. Roughly 1,500 women each year suffer this fate in Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Cambodia, India and Pakistan. The practice hasn’t been exported to other jihadi societies like Gaza. Yet.
Fragile Beauty in the Far East (music by Bon Jovi)
Destroying the Infidelsand Installing Sharia Law
While ISIS gained more infamy for destroying pieces of history in Iraq’s museums, the Taliban was already destroying human history in blowing up ‘idols’ before the terrorist attacks of 9/11.
Buddhist statue from the 6th century destroyed by the Taliban in March 2001
Palestinians have been destroying archeological treasures for a long time. Whether ancient cities in Gaza, biblical treasures from the time of Joshua, or even Joseph’s tomb. On Judaism’s holiest site, the Temple Mount in Jerusalem, Arabs have been excavating underground to create new mosques, destroying Jewish history.
It is not a surprise as the Palestinians have tried to deny Jewish history in Israel repeatedly and outrageously state that Israel is trying to “Judaize” Jerusalem, as if there wasn’t 3,000-years of Jewish history and Jews weren’t the majority of the city since the 1860’s.
HAMAS’s charter makes clear that they want a purely Islamic society that wipes out the Jews.
“Our struggle against the Jews is very great and very serious.”
“Israel, Judaism and Jews challenge Islam and the Moslem people.”
“In face of the Jews’ usurpation of Palestine, it is compulsory that the banner of Jihad be raised“
“Moslems were able to retrieve the land only when they stood under the wing of their religious banner… This is the only way to liberate Palestine“
World Response
Some countries may not be all that upset by the rise of the Taliban and HAMAS as they adopt some worst practices.
Consider the United Kingdom which ignored and enabled Pakistani ‘grooming gangs’ to rape and beat thousands of young women over the past decade. An estimated 1,400 girls in Rotherham were abused and 700 in Newcastle. The press talked about it for a day and then – complete silence.
This is the same England which had the head of the Labour Party, Jeremy Corbyn, refer to the terrorist groups HAMAS and Hezbollah as “friends.” These highbrow oppressors of women and Jews enjoy their tea as they watch their friendly jihadists on the ‘tele’.
There’s a creeping jihad in England which is slowly killing democracy like boiling a lobster.
The world must decide on the appropriate response to the new reality of Taliban’s Afghanistan. Will it send money to “rebuild” the way it does to HAMAS’s Gaza? Will it give it succor by recognizing the government with embassies and foreign relations as the countries in Latin America have done for ‘Palestine’? Will it refuse to call out terrorism if the Taliban keeps it local, the way it absolves the crimes against humanity perpetrated regularly by HAMAS?
There may be limits to our ability to combat extremists but there is no excuse for empowering them.
The Taliban once again took control of the government of Afghanistan in August 2021. Many people felt that it was only a matter of time for the group to prevail, despite the massive military and political will directed against the group for two decades. Now that the group has returned to power, the critical question is how it will impact the people of Afghanistan and the rest of the world.
After the terrorist attacks against the United States on September 11, 2001, the U.S. responded with actions of military attacks of its own against the attackers and their backers. The United Nations supported the right of the U.S. to the principle of self-defense to wage war in Afghanistan. The results seemingly came quick: on November 13, 2001, U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan welcomed the fall of the Taliban from power.
The U.N. Security Council backed those attacks against the Taliban. UNSC 1390 of January 16, 2002 condemned “the Taliban for allowing Afghanistan to be used as a base for terrorists training and activities, including the export of terrorism by the Al-Qaida network and other terrorist groups as well as for using foreign mercenaries in hostile actions in the territory of Afghanistan.“
Twenty years later, the Taliban is back. Will Afghanistan become a breeding ground for international terrorist groups once again?
In 2001, the world rallied to the side of the United States to fight the scourge of terrorism, but that will is seemingly in decline, even within the U.S.
The United Nations allowed Syria, which has committed war crimes against its own people, to join a U.N. Human Rights committee in February 2021. China still sits on the U.N. Security Council, despite its treatment of the Uyghur minority. The United States enabled Iran, the leading state sponsor of terrorism, to have a legal pathway to nuclear weapons in 2015. The Democratic Socialists in the U.S. Congress condemn western countries as colonial-terrorist groups in an inversion of the War on Terror.
Does the U.N. stand for principles or is it a forum for the ugly spectrum of mankind? Has the United States concluded that it has no better moral standing than any other country?
In less than one month, on September 14, the 75th United Nations General Assembly will convene in New York City. Will members of the Taliban represent the people of Afghanistan? Will the United States allow their representatives into the country?
In 1973, the UNGA refused to grant credentials to the government of South Africa because of its policy of apartheid, which had been deemed a “crime against humanity” in 1966. Will the United Nations need to coin a new apartheid-like term for the persecution and denial of rights for women and girls who suffered under the Taliban, to deny the Taliban any standing?
Taliban fighters take control of Afghan presidential palace after the Afghan President Ashraf Ghani fled the country, in Kabul, Afghanistan, Sunday, Aug. 15, 2021. (AP Photo/Zabi Karimi)
A security guard looking at damaged desks and debris inside the Sher Ali Khan girls’ school in Naw Deh. (photo: Najim Rahim/The New York Times)
While the civilized world is undoubtedly concerned about the fate of women and girls in Afghanistan under the Taliban, they are even more concerned about the spread of global terrorism.
Twenty years ago, the United Nations Secretary General welcomed the common fight and fall of “the oppressive and intolerant Taliban regime” as the United States sought both revenge and security for itself. It remains to be seen how the world will react to the Taliban’s return.
Palestine declared itself as an independent state in 1988 to the joy of the Muslim and Arab world. Algeria, Libya, Iraq and dozens of other countries rushed to recognize the country. They believed that this was the fair thing to do, even as they refused to recognize the Jewish State of Israel.
Much of the western world refuses to recognize a Palestinian state as they wait for Israel and the Palestinian Authority to negotiate a peace agreement. However, the Palestinian Authority has aggressively pushed for broader recognition and effectively broke through to many South American countries in the 2009 to 2011 time frame.
After multiple wars and terrorist attacks launched from Gaza, it is time for those South American countries to rescind their recognition.
On May 17, 2021, the Organization of American States (OAS), stated unequivocally that Hamas is a terrorist group that targets civilians:
“Hamas’s terrorist aggression is unlimited and always seeks civilian victims, seeks to escalate conflict dynamics and armed actions, as well as sowing terror among innocent populations, be they Israeli or Palestinian.
“The immoral and unworthy use of children and women as human shields, as well as the militarization of residential areas, constitute in themselves acts that deserve the most absolute repudiation and condemnation.”
These are plain facts but the OAS has not reflected on its own statement.
Hamas is not an outlier terrorist group but the leading political party in Palestinian parliament, having won 58% of the seats the last time elections were held. It controls the entirety of the Gaza Strip. It is predicted to win the presidency according to Palestinian polls if elections are held again.
As such, recognizing a State of Palestine today is to legitimize terrorism. It is not only immoral to do so but stands against the Inter-American Convention Against Terrorism, adopted by the OAS in 2002, which affirmed “the need to adopt effective steps in the inter-American system to prevent, punish, and eliminate terrorism through the broadest cooperation.“
Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez pictured in 2009, when he abolished term limits, took over the banks, severed relations with Israel and recognized a State of Palestine.Things have only gotten worse.
It is time for the countries of Latin America to sever ties with “Palestine.”
There have been a slew of cases of sexual harassment in the news. The latest culprit is New York Governor Andrew Cuomo, who joins a list from the entertainment and business worlds. The various incidents ranged from inappropriate behavior to outright crimes.
And all of the perpetrators were men.
While everyone was appalled at the most egregious behavior of these famous men, left-wing feminists took to vilifying all males with a bevy of hashtags including #BelieveWomen and #MeToo. Somehow, even though almost all men do not harass women, because almost all of the perpetrators were men, the essence of manliness was seemingly to blame.
It was sharp departure from the alt-left’s defense of terrorists, where the vast majority of terrorists are Muslim, even though those terrorists make up a small percentage of the global Muslim population. In those cases, liberals defend Islam as a religion of peace, but decry the abuse of the religion by some extremists.
Liberals adopted the opposite approach regarding men. They have vilified all men, and question how they can talk to their daughters about being friends with boys when they are inherently perverts. They do not attribute the bad behavior to outliers.
Consider how some liberal forums suggest that the pathway to raising a new generation of men to be more respectful of women, a basic idea, with foolish suggestions. They suggest encouraging boys to wear pink, do dress-up and play with dollhouses. I kid you not.
Newspapers published guides for how to raise boys to be feminists with ideas ranging for promoting non-stereotypical boy toys, and discouraging those traditionally associated with boys (no more trucks or erector sets). Here’s a selection from The New York Times:
“Even as adult gender roles have merged, children’s products have become more divided by gender than they were 50 years ago, research has found: pink princesses and blue trucks, not just in the toy aisle but on cups and toothbrushes. It’s no wonder that children’s interests end up aligning that way.”
“Offer open-ended activities, like playing with blocks or clay, and encourage boys to try activities likedress-up or art class, even if they don’t seek them out, social scientists say. Call out stereotypes. (“It’s too bad that toy box shows all girls because I know boys also like to play with dollhouses.”) It could also improve the status of women. Researchers say the reason parents encourage daughters to play soccer or become doctors, but not sons to take ballet or become nurses, is that “feminine” equals lower status.”
““Teach our sons to cook, clean and look after themselves — to be equally competent in the home as we would expect our daughters to be in the office,” said Anne-Marie Slaughter, chief executive of New America, a think tank.”
This is ridiculous. The pathway to combatting sexual harassment according to these feminists, is to attack the entire notion of “manliness.” If they could get boys to take estrogen, I am sure that they would promote it. Would this cohort ever attack core Islamic teachings as an underlying reason why so many terrorists are Muslims? Never. They would focus on the nature of the violence, and the terrible break in otherwise normal behavior. The Koran inspires many Muslims to be kind and peaceful just as playing with blocks and trucks guides men to become productive members of society.
The problem of sexual harassment isn’t about men; it’s about violence. The solution is not neutering and de-programming boys. It is about teaching boundaries.
Here are two appropriate examples for society that could help curb the incidents of harassments:
Know and respect boundaries. Almost every incident of sexual harassment would have been okay if the actions were consensual. It was the nature of men not knowing appropriate boundaries and taking advantage of their situation that made the incidents wrong.
When kids are young, let them break up their toys into two groups: those that are personal – that they needn’t share with anyone if they do not want – and those that are public and available for general use. When they engage with siblings or friends, they must offer up the public toys, but have complete discretion on sharing those that they decided to keep private. They will learn the power of “no” – by saying it and hearing it.
Stop making women passive. Why do men ask women out on dates? Why do they pay for the activities? Society has put men in the position of taking the assertive role and women as stationary. As described in “The Misogyny of Treating Women like Victims,“ we are not helping women by treating them as passive. Protecting them at all times ultimately undermines and hurts them.
Sexual harassment is a subset of violence, not sex. Sex is a good thing if fully consensual and “manliness” is not a disease. Stop the attacks on testosterone as billions of men manage it without ever abusing women.
Men can be gun-totting, football watching, sarcastic CEOs, and never harass a woman. If Andrew Cuomo had worn pink he would still have taken advantage of women. If Matt Lauer had played with more dollhouses, he would still have sexually assaulted people. How stupid are these feminist writers, and how stupid do they think their readership is?
I am confident that if liberal rags wrote articles about verses in the Koran that encourage violence, there would be an uproar. If they would suggest that more Muslim boys should take ballet, there would be a lawsuit and people would be fired.
But for the feminist extremists, the “patriarchy” is the rightful target, and sexual harassment is just a tool to redistribute wealth and power.
Palestinian supporters who hate Israel use a variety of terms to whitewash the crimes and intentions of Palestinian Arabs. Below is a sampling with a review of the misdirection.
“Intifada”
The term “Intifada” means “Uprising.” It gives the sense that the movement is one of empowering the disenfranchised as a matter of protest rather than the reality of genocidal terrorism.
The “Second Intifada” which raged from roughly September 2000 to September 2004 witnessed Palestinian Arabs blowing up ice cream parlors full of children, school lunchrooms and buses. Over 1,000 innocent Israeli civilians were killed in the mayhem because the leadership of the Palestinians refused to accept anything less than 100% of their demands.
Intifada means war. It means terrorism. The call for an intifada is not a protest chant but an incitement to violence.
A pro-Palestinian rally in New York City on July 31 featured protestors chanting “globalize the Intifada” and other anti-Israel chants.
“Martyr”
The Palestinian murderers of Israeli civilians are described as “martyrs” by Palestinians. They are held up as idols for Palestinian children when schools, soccer tournaments and public squares are named for the terrorists. The mothers and fathers of the killers are showcased on television telling the Arab public how proud they are of the killer’s sacrifice. The Palestinian Authority pays the families of the terrorists monthly stipends for their “contribution” of killing the enemy.
For clarity, the term “martyr” actually means “a person who is killed because of their religious beliefs.” Using the term for Palestinian terrorists turns Israel into racist murderers rather than victims of jihadi genocidal maniacs.
“Slain attackers”
Much like the term “martyrs,” pro-Palestinian press prefers to call Palestinian terrorists killed while committing murder as “slain attackers.” The word “slain” is defined as “to kill violently, wantonly, or in great numbers.” In other words, according to anti-Zionist rags like The New York Times, it is Palestinian Arab “attackers” who are killed violently and wantonly by Israelis. Not only are Israelis racists (see “martyrs” above) but also mass murderers.
“Resistance”
The political-terrorist group Hamas calls itself a “resistance force.” It is a designated terrorist group by dozens of western countries because of the hundreds of attacks it has perpetrated on civilians around the world. Its foundational charter is an anti-Semitic screed which calls for the murder of Jews and destruction of Israel. The people of Gaza continue to support killing Israeli civilians in every poll.
The Palestinian “resistance” is to the mere presence of Jews which they have made clear in 100 years of riots and wars, even though Palestinian supporters will portray the Arabs as only protesting “Israel’s treatment of Palestinians.“
“Desperate”
Palestinian apologists claim that Palestinians are “desperate” which is why they take such vicious actions against Israeli civilians. That’s outrageous. Desperate people gladly take whatever they can; entitled people refuse to take anything less than full demands.
Palestinians have refused every offer for peace for generations. They demand a country without a single Jew living in it. They categorically refuse to acknowledge that Israel is a Jewish State as part of a final settlement. A desperate people clinging for a chance at self-determination would never deny such things, unless their actual goal is to deny Jews of their own homes and country.
“Resorting to violence”
Anti-Israel opinion rags like The New York Times sometimes go beyond painting Palestinians as “desperate” people “resisting” Israeli occupation. It states that the political-terrorist group Hamas (which it never calls a terrorist group) has “resorted to violence.” The feeble-minded gray lady writes this despite the Hamas making its genocidal intentions public for the whole world to see.
“Impatient”
Doubling-down on a twisted portrayal of Hamas, The Times excuses violent flare-ups from Gaza as “localized expression of Palestinian impatience,” as it wrote on the front page of its May 6, 2019 paper. According to the anti-Israel paper, Israelis get shot because Gazans are impatient, not because they are the most anti-Semitic people in the world who are in favor of killing Israelis.
“Free Palestine”
Chants of “Free Palestine,” “From the River to the Sea, Palestine will be free,” and “we don’t want two states, we want all of it” are spun as simply a desire for equality in the holy land for Jews and Arabs. It is nothing of the sort but a call for the destruction of the Jewish State of Israel.
Liberal media inverts the “from the river to the sea” as actually the chant of Jewish extremists who want to annex the West Bank, an area that was part-and-parcel of the British Mandate which called for the reestablishment of a Jewish homeland there.
“Arab Land”
Sorry, but Israel is not part of the Arabian Peninsula. It’s also not part of the League of Arab States. It’s also not European nor African. It’s a little swatch of land connecting many continents.
Are the people who use this expression arguing that land itself has the DNA of a particular people? Would the same people say that Europe is “White Land” or Africa is “Black Land?” If someone were to argue that some lands truly are part and parcel of a specialized group of people, they would have to admit that the Land of Israel is “Jewish Land,” as Judaism is the only religion with a tie to specific land.
The term “Arab Land” is deliberately designed to sever the thousands of years of history that Jews have in the land. It is an example of the fictitious narrative that “Jesus was a Palestinian” and not a Jew, in an attempt to not just evict the current Jewish presence in the land but to expunge the entirety of Jewish history.
“Dignity”
Politicians state over and again that Israel deserves “security” while Palestinians deserve “dignity.” It seems like such a simple ask of Israel, to afford the Palestinians some semblance of dignity.
But if the parameters of Palestinian dignity is that Jews cannot have sovereignty, cannot live in the West Bank, cannot pray on the Temple Mount, cannot buy land from an Arab and demands the denial of Jewish history, why should that sort of “dignity” be endorsed, let alone entertained?
“Refugees”
Palestinian supporters have used and abused the term “refugees” for Palestinian Arabs in ways that have no bearing on the word, and in doing so, harm over 30 million actual refugees fleeing war zones today.
The Palestinian Arabs cared for by UNRWA are not refugees but stateless. They deserve to become citizens of either a new country or an existing country but that doesn’t make a child whose grandparents left a town five miles away during a war a “refugee.” Yet, these Palestinian “refugees” are taking billions of dollars of support when such monies can be used for children actually fleeing for their lives to foreign lands where they don’t speak the language and have no family support or infrastructure.
A “Viable” State
Anti-Zionist supporters of the Palestinians argue that there are certain minimum standards that a new country of Palestine must have in order to be viable.
As discussed above, “viability” means that there can be no Jews. “Settlers” undermine the foundation of the country for some reason. While Arabs can live in Israel without destroying the state, seemingly a Jewish presence in Palestine undermines the very viability of the country.
Similarly, a Palestinian state would need to be much wider than Israel is today. If Israel were to annex land up to the town of Maale Adumim west of Jerusalem, critics warn that Palestine would be cut in two and non-viable with a country only 15km wide at one point. Meanwhile Israel is that wide along its main population centers without the cry to widen Israel.
“1967 Borders”
People use the term “1967 Borders” even though the 1949 armistice agreements struck between Israel and Jordan as well as between Israel and Egypt specifically stated that those lines have no meaning and do not function as borders.
“Palestinian Citizens of Israel“
Israel afforded all Arabs the opportunity to be citizens when it declared statehood in 1948 and affords all Arabs in Jerusalem to become Israeli citizens today. Over 20% of Israel’s population is Arab.
Pro-Palestinians don’t like the notion of “Israeli Arabs” as they think it somehow acknowledges the liberalism of Israel being an open society. Instead, they opt for the very wordy “Palestinian Citizens of Israel” to market the proposition that their tie to the land of Palestine is permanent as is their identity which are distinct from Israel. Should a new state of Palestine ever be created, there is no question that these same Palestinian propaganda promoters would call the Jews in the country “Palestinian Jews,” (G-d forbid, if they are allowed to live there), not “Israeli citizens of Palestine.”
“Palestinian East Jerusalem”
The anti-Zionist media will have you believe that “East Jerusalem” exists today even though it only existed as an artifice of war for 19 years that ceased to be over fifty years ago. To extend the fiction, they will promote that it is a Palestinian city, even though there is no recognized country of Palestine and no part of the city was ever conceived to be Arab in the 1947 UN Partition Plan.
The anti-Zionist lexicon is not only attacking the Jewish state but sanitizing Palestinian Arabs of their anti-Semitism and terrorism in an attempt to wish a State of Palestine into being. Everyone should readily recognize the abuse of language that has become mainstreamed by anti-Israel voices.
First One Through 