The Beautiful and Bad Images in Barcelona

The museum housing the works of the 20th century painter Joan Miro (1893-1983) is found in Barcelona, Spain sitting high in the hills of Montjuic, or “the Jewish Mountain,” so named for the historic Jewish presence there in medieval times, before the Spanish Inquisition and expulsion of the Jews in the 15th century. The museum contains many beautiful works by Miro including paintings, sculptures and tapestries.

The Beautiful

Many of the abstract paintings have no titles, but one beautiful painting does, called “The Gold of the Azure,” painted in 1967.

The painting shows the planet Earth as a large blue oval surrounded by a white halo. It is set against a gold sky along with other planets as smaller black blobs, a distant red smear of a sun, and large but faint black stars represented by four intersecting lines. Across the middle of the painting is a soft black line, the sole element that cuts against the dominant blue image of the painting.

Despite the dominance of the blue orb, the painting is balanced like a mobile by one of Miro’s contemporary artists, Alexander Calder (1898-1976). However, unlike Calder’s physical mobiles that needed to operate in gravity, Miro’s painting of the solar system needed no practical constraints. The thin black line is wavy and did not attach to any objects as opposed to Calder’s taut black wires connecting the objects of the art. Miro’s connective element floated against the gold sky just like the 4-lined stars. The work presents harmony of suspended disparate elements in the universe as visualized by a man who despised the fascism that dominated his country from the Spanish Civil War (1936-9) through the Nationalist government led by Francisco Franco (1939-1975).

The Bad

Adjacent to The Joan Miro Museum is a small tranquil park called Jardines de Laribal. The pretty garden is a quiet place for a nice short stroll.

The garden has just a few entrances, each flanked by two columns. On a sunny day in February 2019, one of the columns to enter the park contained a large black swastika.

Entrance to Jardines de Laribal
(photo: FirstOneThrough February 28, 2019)

The crude image on the right column was balanced by a large green map on the left welcoming visitors to the garden. A harmony of hatred for those pleased that the garden was built atop Jewish cemeteries. Spain, happily Jew-free since 1492.

The symbol of Nazism, fascism and racism may bear passing resemblance to the simple stars in the paintings of Joan Miro located a hundred meters away, but the message could not be more different. In the art inside the museum, the faint images of the smaller and different bodies coexist peacefully with the dominant orbs. But outside the museum, in the real world built atop the graves of Jews, European racism and antisemitism still demands a purely Catholic order.


Related First.One,Through articles:

Watching Jewish Ghosts

Your Father’s Anti-Semitism

“Tinge” Two. Idioms for Idiots

Delivery of the Fictional Palestinian Keys

Subscribe YouTube channel: FirstOneThrough

Join Facebook group: FirstOne Through Israel Analysis and FirstOneThrough

 

Christiane Amanpour is More Anti-Semitic Than Ilhan Omar

On January 17, 2019, CNN’s Christiane Amanpour interviewed the new Democratic member of the House of Representatives, Ilhan Omar. Amanpour asked Omar to comment on a tweet she made in 2012 when she accused the government of Israel of being evil and “hypnotizing the world” regarding the Hamas-Israel war in Gaza, a statement which many people viewed as anti-Semitic.


CNN’s Christiane Amanpour interviews Ilhan Omar January 17, 2019

The lead-in by Amanpour was arguably more anti-Semitic than Omar’s tweet (which Omar claimed was simply about her anger about military actions of the Israeli government):

“Can I move on to something that is generally sort of a right of passage for politicians in the United States and that is sort of to profess sort of fealty, or at least pay homage, to AIPAC, the pro-Israel PAC that is very, very prominent.”

To be clear, the expression “professing fealty” is defined in the Merriam Webster dictionary as “the fidelity of a vassal or feudal tenant to his lord.”

Amanpour’s introductory statement was that all US politicians are vassals of (slaves to) the pro-Israel lobby. She made this anti-Israel canard as a casual observance of fact, not a concocted claim of outrageous fiction. She gave the CNN audience the impression that the US-Israel relationship is not based on MUTUAL values and benefits, but one of sinister puppet-masters controlling the US government.

Omar made a disgraceful statement about the Jewish State several years ago, but at least it was born from an anger related to military activity. However, Amanpour used a vile anti-Semitic charge against all Zionists at all times.

It was right and proper for CNN to terminate Marc Lamont Hill for his calls to destroy Israel. It is even more appropriate for the media group to fire Christiane Amanpour for going beyond terrible accusations of dual-loyalty against Americans who support Israel, to actually charging them with abusing the entirety of American politics with selfish Zionist schemes.


Related First.One.Through articles:

CNN Makes Clear the Attackers and Victims in Gaza-Israel Fight

CNN Will Not Report Islamic Terrorism

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

Social Media’s “Fake News” and Mainstream Media’s Half-Truths

CNN’s Embrace of Hamas

Stopping the Purveyors of Hateful Propaganda

Real and Imagined Laws of Living in Silwan

Related First.One.Through video:

Jews and US Foreign Policy (music by Vangelis)

Subscribe YouTube channel: FirstOneThrough

Join Facebook group: FirstOne Through Israel Analysis and FirstOneThrough

Bitter Burnt Ends: Talking to a Farrakhan Fan

A true story, plus

A True Story

The flight from New York to Denver was on a narrow-body plane, so first class wasn’t all that roomy. The person sitting next to me didn’t seem to mind the proximity of our seats, and leaned in – all the way. By the expression on his face, it looked like I was in for a long flight of listening.

We were similarly dressed in business casual attire. He was a light-skinned handsome black man, clean shaven with very short hair on his head. I looked like a hippy in comparison. But I guess my pleasant disposition encouraged him to prattle on and on and on.

I admit, I do not really remember what he said. I just remember laughing to myself – about an hour into his monologue – about his comment that people had suggested that he host a TV talk show. I laughed because the man never paused a moment to ask anything about me in an hour, so how could he imagine that he had any talent for interviewing people?

The conversation took a sharp turn when the food service began.

When the flight attendant brought me my kosher meal, the man looked astonished. I was not wearing a kippah on my head during the business trip so he did not entertain my being Jewish, and opted not to venture into any religious topics up until that moment. The kosher food gave him a new line of talking points.

As I began to eat, the man began to tell me how much he admired Louis Farrakhan who headed the Nation of Islam. He said that he understood that Farrakhan said some disparaging things about Jews, but overall, he did so much important work for black men that the good outweighed the bad. Black men needed real healing and to find a source of pride and power, and Farrakhan gave thousands of black men just that.

The food soured in my mouth.

I put down my fork and asked the man to my right if he really understood the things that Farrakhan said. That he didn’t simply say something non-politically correct once, but over-and-again. His anti-Semitic comments were not an aside, but a core part of his message; he empowered blacks by denigrating whites and Jews.

My fellow passenger nodded but dissented; none of what I said was revelatory. While he didn’t agree with Farrkhan’s comments as it related to denigrating Jews, in the end, he felt the message was powerful. Poor black men saw another black man showing no fear, talking in a loud unambiguous voice to the power structure. The leader of the NOI’s voice and message were effective at empowering black men.

I tried once more to make him see my side: did he understand that Farrakhan’s message was not only about pulling black people up but tearing others down? Did he not comprehend that Farrkhan was a voice of hate, not one of pride? That a movement built on a foundation of racism and antisemitism was both brittle and vile?

His smile disappeared. The voice grew cold.

He objected strongly to my classification that the NOI was built on racism and antisemitism. He raised his voice and said that there was much much more to Farrakhan’s lectures, specifically, his demand that black men hold themselves to a higher standard and be more accountable for their own actions. My objections were based on a very narrow viewpoint, and clearly I wasn’t all that concerned about poor black men when I took a few inappropriate comments that related to my religion and blew them out of proportion. Such a selfish approach revealed my own racism, that a rich Jew sitting in first class couldn’t absorb a small insult when thousands of black men were clearly benefiting from the preacher’s words.

I opened a book and looked down for the rest of my flight.

Plus

It’s been over ten years since I took that flight. Louis Farrakhan has continued to demonstrate his racism and antisemitism in vivid fashion, and many people continue to come to his defense.

Powerful black people are not only his defenders, but actively court Farrakhan in spite of (because of?) his vile antisemitism and racism. They include Democratic politicians Keith Ellison, Maxine Waters, Danny Davis, Andre Carson and Al Green. They include TV personalities like Marc Lamont Hill and university professors like Cornel West. Women’s March organizers including Linda Sarsour (non-black Muslim) and Melissa Harris-Perry.

Current CNN anchor Don Lemon (who looks very much like my flight companion of fifteen years ago) interviewed Farrakhan back in 2007 when the NOI leader defended his comments about Jews and Lemon opted to not challenge the antisemitism. With Lemon’s current podium, he has picked up Farrakhan’s tone and suggested that it was time to lock up white men.

Louis Farrakhan and Don Lemon in 2007
(photo: Ashahed M. Mohamed)
The hateful messages have worked their way into society at large. On visiting Cal Berekely in San Francisco last year, I was greeted by a black woman wearing a shirt that read “White Man Bow Down.” Nice.

The theme of black and feminist extremists no longer resembles anything liberals once recognized. The calls are not about raising living standards for those doing poorly, but attacking those whom are perceived to be in a better situation. It is not about “believing women” as much as about disbelieving men. It’s a call to tear down the “patriarchy,” the institutions and white men in power, by any means possible.

The means are irrelevant. The end result is all that matters.

It is easy for BlackLivesMatter and Palestinian-American Linda Sarsour to find common cause in this world of intersectionality. The leaders of the “moderate” Palestinian Fatah party loudly proclaim that killing Israelis is legal and rational. Any means justify a just end. Literally, anything.

From my perspective, I am both appalled and outraged. I am appalled that calls for violence are not met with calls for arrest of those who promote such actions. I am astonished that racists and antisemites are not denounced. And I am outraged that in this upside down world of alt-left extremism, that I am called the racist for pointing out the obvious.

The means do not justify the ends. The slaughter of the Jewish Fogel family in Israel by two Palestinian men was not a “natural response to the (Israeli) occupation.” The racist and antisemitic chants from Farrakhan are not “important” and celebrities should not whitewash Farrakhan’s blatant Jew-baiting with ridiculous comments that “I do not know if he is an anti-Semite.” Farrakhan’s words came out of the mouth of the man who gunned down Jews in a Pittsburgh synagogue.

There are methods being deployed and defended that are beyond comprehension, let alone beyond justification. Similarly, there are people like Farrakhan who are being courted and protected who deserve neither respect nor adulation.

Disgraceful words and deeds deserve nothing more than bitter burnt ends.


Related First.One.Through articles:

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

The Democratic Party is Tacking to the Far Left-Wing Anti-Semitic Fringe

Older White Men are the Most Politically Balanced Demographic By Far

Between Right-Wing and Left-Wing Antisemitism

Subscribe YouTube channel: FirstOneThrough

Join Facebook group: FirstOne Through Israel Analysis

Existing While Jewish

The racism prevalent in Palestinian Arab society sometimes seems to have no limits.

It is one thing to read a poll which describes almost every single Palestinian man, woman and child as hating Jews, and that Palestinians are the most anti-Semitic people on the planet. It is another to hear the stories of how that Arab hatred manifests itself.

  • Waiting for a bus while being Jewish. Seven Jews were shot while they stood at a bus stop near the town of Ofra in the Israeli Territory of Area C in December 2018. A Palestinian rode his car and sprayed the civilians – including a pregnant woman – who were just standing there with gunfire.
  • Going to work while being Jewish. Jewish workers were shot and killed in the Barkan Industrial Zone, designed to be an area of coexistence, in October 2018. The Palestinian Arab had internalized that Jews should really not be working there.
  • Standing next to a store while being Jewish. Ari Fuld was just standing outside a store when a Palestinian Arab teenager stabbed him in the back and killed him in September 2018. Why should Palestinians have to see Jews shopping?
  • Riding a bus while being Jewish. Jews were riding a bus in Jerusalem in April 2016. Appalling. A Palestinian Arab teenager blew up the bus.
  • Looking like a tourist who might be Jewish. A Palestinian ran through Tel Aviv stabbing people, including an American named Taylor Force in March 2016. How outrageous to see people visiting the Jewish State!
  • Riding a car while being Jewish. A Jewish couple drove with their kids on the road and were shot and killed by a Palestinian terrorist, who thought Jews should really not be driving anywhere near him in October 2015.
  • Praying in a synagogue while being Jewish. Jews were in synagogue reciting their prayers when Palestinian Arabs entered with an axe and meat cleaver, slaughtering four of them in November 2014. Jews praying in Jerusalem is about as outrageous a thing as any Palestinian Arab can imagine.

  • Sleeping while being Jewish. Five members of the Fogel family were stabbed to death – including a three month old – while asleep in their beds in the town of Itamar in March 2011. How could Jews be sleeping in their homes so close to Arab villages? Who do they think they are?
  • Having a Passover Seder while being Jewish. Dozens of seniors were having a quiet Passover seder at a hotel in Netayna in March 2002. Outrageous. A Palestinian Arab walked into the room and blew the place up.
  • Having pizza while being Jewish. Mothers and children were enjoying pizza on a hot afternoon of August 2001. Clearly too much for a Palestinian Arab man who blew the place up, murdering 15 and wounding over 100.

How should Jews feel when when every simple action makes Palestinian Arabs so enraged that they want to kill them?

How maddening is it for Jews to live with the constant anxiety of having their presence, their innocence, and their existence, questioned?

When antisemitism is so deeply instilled into Palestinian society, how can coexistence ever be possible?


Related First.One.Through articles:

Palestinians are “Desperate” for…

What do you Recognize in the Palestinians?

Extreme and Mainstream. Germany 1933; West Bank & Gaza Today

Related First.One.Through videos:

The 2011 Massacre of the Fogels (Gorecki)

The 2002 Massacres of Netanya and Jenin (Gorecki)

1001 Years of Expulsions (Schindler’s List)

Subscribe YouTube channel: FirstOneThrough

Join Facebook group: FirstOne Through Israel Analysis

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

In the immediate aftermath of the antisemitic massacre of Jews in Pittsburgh in October 2018, CNN went through an effort to explain to its audience the nature of hatred. In truth, it just revealed the nature of its own biases.

Don Lemon, a ubiquitous talking head for CNN made the following comment in an exchange with Chris Cuomo, another anchor:

“So, we have to stop demonizing people and realize the biggest terror threat in this country is white men, most of them radicalized to the right, and we have to start doing something about them. There is no travel ban on them. There is no ban on — you know, they had the Muslim ban. There is no white guy ban”

Let’s put aside the racist comment on its face for a moment, something that could have emerged from the mouth of Louis Farrakhan. Let’s simply examine the data as compiled every year by the FBI regarding hate crimes in the USA.

Factual Review

The FBI tracks who commits crimes by race and ethnicity, and white people did commit more crimes than any other racial group in 2016. But there are also many more white people than other racial groups, so the absolute comparison needs context. As there are roughly 5.7 times more white people than black people, one would expect 5.7 times more black offenders as well.

Hate Crimes Against a Person, 2016

 Population  Offender Frequency
White   248,484,663       2,197     113,102
Black     42,975,891       1,117        38,474
Hispanic     57,516,606          214     268,769

According to the FBI, 2,197 white people in America committed a hate crime and 1,117 black people committed a hate crime, almost twice the number of attacks. However, when accounting for the size of each group, the numbers conclude that an average black person was three times more likely to commit a hateful attack against a person than a white person (one hate crime attack for every 38,000 black people and one attack for every 113,000 white people).

Overall, violent crime in the United States has been in a decline for over a decade according to the FBI. The exceptions were spikes in violent crime in 2012, 2015 and 2016. This would seemingly undermine the accusation that Donald Trump is the reason for more violence in America, as violent crime actually declined in 2017.

Change in Number of Violent Crimes

Years  Change 
2016/17 -0.8%
2015/16 5.3%
2014/15 1.7%
2013/14 -4.6%
2012/13 -5.4%
2011/12 1.9%
2010/11 -6.4%
2009/10 -6.2%
2008/09 -4.4%
2007/08 -3.5%

As it relates, to Jews, many of the alt-left progressive wing have charged that Jews are part of the white privileged class. The likes of Linda Sarsour and Melissa Harris-Perry defend Louis Farrakhan’s antisemitism because they don’t believe that Farrakhan has any power or influence so his comments are therefore innocuous against a privileged group of Jews.

But the facts tell a different story.

Hate Crimes Against Different Groups, 2016

 Population  Victims Frequency
White   248,484,663          909     273,360
Black     42,975,891       2,220        19,359
Hispanic     57,516,606          483     119,082
Jewish       5,300,000          862          6,148
Muslim       3,450,000          388          8,892
LGBT     10,000,000       1,386          7,215

An average Jew is the most likely to experience a hate crime than any other group – more than blacks, Muslims or the LGBT community. Even more telling, an average Jew is 45 times more likely to experience a hate crime than an average white person.

Jews are clearly not experiencing America like most white Americans.

Coming back to the initial charge of Don Lemon about white men being terrorists on the back of the antisemitic massacre in Pittsburgh, it is useful to look at the perpetrators of antisemitic crimes through the years.

Antisemitic Attacks by Race of Attacker

Year Incidents White Black White Black
2016 834 389 118 47% 14%
2015 695 121 31 17% 4%
2014 635 87 20 14% 3%
2013 689 143 35 21% 5%
2012 696 101 20 15% 3%
2011 820 139 16 17% 2%
2010 922 134 25 15% 3%
2009
2008 1055 176 20 17% 2%

The table above is compiled from several FBI reports about hate crimes through the years. A few trends are important to review:

  1. Crimes against Jews are increasing since 2015. After many years of seeing a decline in the number of antisemitic crimes (no data was released in 2009), attacks inched up in 2015 and spiked much higher in 2016. (2017 data is not yet published by the FBI).
  2. An average black person has become much more likely to be the attacker against a Jew. Until 2012, the ratio of antisemitic attacks from whites and blacks were roughly what would be expected. That began to change in 2013 when black assailants began to overtake whites at a statistically significant level. In 2016, the proportion of black attackers spiked again by almost double.
  3. More antisemitic attacks against persons. Through 2015, roughly 30% of attacks against Jews were against their person, while 70% were against property. In 2016, the percentage jumped to 37% of personal attacks. As there were more personal attacks, the identity of the attacker became apparent.

To summarize, the number of antisemitic attacks has indeed been increasing, but more and more of the attacks are coming from blacks, not whites. That is also true generally about all hate attacks, that black people are much more likely to be the assailant. Lastly, violent crimes against Jews have definitely spiked since 2015, (perhaps correlated with Donald Trump’s run for the presidency), but overall, hate crimes have not.

Opinion Review

The progressive media has been hiring greater numbers of minorities who harbor anti-white attitudes. Don Lemon’s comments are not unique.

The New York Times hired a noted racist Sarah Jeong who has proudly posted tweets “White men are bullshit,” “#CancelWhitePeople,” “white people marking up the internet with their opinions like dogs pissing on fire hydrants” and “Oh man it’s kind of sick how much joy I get out of being cruel to old white men.” The New York Times was unperturbed. It claimed she was just mimicking the attacks against her and she apologized.

Marc Lamont Hill, another commentator on CNN often makes disparaging comments about Israel (saying that the country has no right to exist). Hill, Lemon, Sarsour and others are all part of a left-wing movement which believes that racism can only exist when it is coupled with institutional power. Therefore, any minority – especially those that are under-represented in positions of power like blacks and Muslims in the United States – cannot be considered racist. As the minority, they stand in the position of the oppressed. Any violent actions which they commit are simply “punching up,” trying to level the unfair playing field, which is a primary goal of progressives.

The pairing of the argument that no black person can be racist, is that all white people benefit from white privilege and inherently take advantage of a racist American society. For blacks and Muslims which view Jews as whites – and very powerful ones at that, controlling the banks and media – Jews can never be truly seen as victims.

So Jews are murdered. Again. The neo-Nazis are taking aim at Jews. Again.

And now, for the first time, blacks in America are broadly taking aim at Jews as well, with the smug support of alt-left progressives.


Related First.One.Through articles:

Between Right-Wing and Left-Wing Antisemitism

Farrakhan’s Democrats

Covering Racism

What Kind of Hate Kills?

CNN’s Politicization of Antisemitic Murder

NY Times, NY Times, What Do You See? It Sees Rich White Males

Where’s the March Against Anti-Semitism?

Politicians React to Vile and Vulgar Palestinian Hatred

Fact Check Your Assumptions on American Racism

New York Times Finds Racism When it Wants

Abbas Knows Racism

When Only Republicans Trust the Police

Racist Calls of Apes and Pigs? Forget Rosanne. Let’s Talk Islam

In the Shadow of the Holocaust, The New York Times Fails to Flag Muslim Anti-Semitism

Black People are Homophobic

If a Black Muslim Cop Kills a White Woman, Does it Make a Sound?

 

Subscribe YouTube channel: FirstOneThrough

 

 

Between Right-Wing and Left-Wing Antisemitism

The world has always had people with a wide variety of opinions, and indeed, a wide variety of hatreds. Antisemitism, the oldest of human hatreds, is no different, and has taken on new forms in modern times.

Right-Wing Antisemitism

For thousands of years, Jews were persecuted as “the Other.” They were viewed suspiciously as foreigners by lay-people and demonized for not believing in the preferred prophets by religious leaders. Some countries simply took advantage of the small, weak status of Jews, and engaged in “practical antisemitism” for financial reasons – either to seize their property or to get out of debt which was owed to Jews.

The historic antisemitism was shepherded by popes and kings, local townspeople and crusaders. The manifestation of the hatred was murder and expulsion.

The slaughter of Jews was common in Europe and Russia for hundreds of years, and often rationalized by manufactured excuses (such as blood libels) and effected via torture. The expulsion and “ghetto-ization” of Jews was another means to rid communities of these unwanted Jews.


“The Street of Jews” in Old Strasbourg, France
(photo: First.One.Through)

This was – and continues to be – the nature of right-wing antisemitism: the hatred for the foreigner/ the Other. It continues to exist as people and governments do not internalized that their Jewish neighbors are indeed, their neighbors, and entitled to every protection and rights of citizenship like everyone else.

Left-Wing Antisemitism

Left-wing antisemitism is a newer phenomenon. As part of the liberal camp, the alt-left began with a broad humanistic view of the world. People of all races and religions were welcomed and embraced. Humankind bound all of us together. It was a world vision encapsulated in John Lennon’s song “Imagine,” in which divisions and borders – literal and figurative – ceased to exist. The common collective would live in global harmony.

Such a vision would naturally lead one to conclude that antisemitism is antithetical to such construct. A “brotherhood of man” cannot hate anyone. But time has proven the premise untrue.

The far left-wing of the liberal camp believes that everyone must adhere to their philosophy. ALL national borders, ALL religions, ALL differences based on money or class must be eradicated. Society must be re-imagined and flattened. Man-made artificial differences must be stripped away, so we can embrace our God-given differences such as race and gender. The far left has a quest and insistence on an imagined universal natural order and the shunning of any particular human order.

And so begets left-wing antisemitism.

  • While right-wing anti-Semites hate Jews for not believing in Jesus, the left-wing anti-Semites hate Jews for believing in religion.
  • While right-wing anti-Semites will pass laws banning circumcision and ritual slaughter of animals to get rid of Jews, the left-wing will implement the same policies out of secular, humanistic concerns.
  • While right-wing anti-Semites don’t want Jews to live in their country, the left-wing anti-Semites don’t want Jews to have a country (Israel).
  • While right-wing anti-Semites will actively murder Jews, the left-wing anti-Semites refuse to protect Jews (read article about how left-wing gay activists fight against providing police protection for Jewish day schools).

The alt-left dislikes Jews for holding on to their particular identity and hates Zionists for holding on to their particular history and heritage. Only a Jew that embraces the universal and sheds the particular (like non-Orthodox Jewish liberals) have a place in their left-wing fringe world.

The Silent Majority?

Today, Jews are caught between two growing and angry mobs on the extremes. They know the history of what the right-wing will do if it obtains power, and are intelligent enough to see the how the left-wing will strip their identities completely.

When liberals attacked President Trump for saying that there were good people on both sides of the Charlottesville, VA neo-Nazi march and protest in August 2017, they were correct in remonstrating him that there is no good in people who shout “Jews will not replace us.” But the alt-left was wrong in thinking that using violence as appropriate. Jews seek a peaceful place to pursue life, liberty and happiness. They do not want any violence and will not embrace the vision of either the alt-right or alt-left. One side vilifying the other wins no Jewish converts; Jews are wary of both extremist sides.

How can people reverse the trend and bring people back to the silent – and peaceful – middle? What can stop the Democratic Party from being hijacked by liberals who are becoming more and more extremist? How can the Republican Party – already shrinking – stop from sliding to the alt-right?

There are a number of ideas which have bandied about beyond the scope of this article, which include changing the electoral primary system which tends to feed the extremist base, to firmly establishing and protecting laws to protect individual liberties.

In the day-to-day, it is challenging to live as an open and proud Jew and Zionist in much of the world, for fear of being attacked by both the far-right and the far-left. For people who care about antisemitism, fight the extremists on BOTH sides. Never vote for fringe candidates and do not give them forums.

And do not follow the footsteps of either the alt-left or alt-right: Respect every particular and shun the enforced universal.


Related First.One.Through articles:

Ramifications of Ignoring American Antisemitism

Your Father’s Anti-Semitism

Fact Check Your Assumptions on American Racism

When Hate Returns

Unity – not Uniformity – in the Pro-Israel Tent

The Happy and Smug Bigots of Denmark

The Non-Orthodox Jewish Denominations Fight Israel

Related First.One.Through video:

1001 Years of Expulsions (Schindler’s List)

Subscribe YouTube channel: FirstOneThrough

CNN’s Politicization of Antisemitic Murder

The heinous slaughter of Jews praying quietly in synagogue on their Sabbath is an abomination in every way. It is not just appalling because innocent people were killed, but that the murderer’s rationale was based on the hatred of Jews.

It is right and proper for society to prosecute the killer and explore ways to keep such crimes from happening again. What is not Okay is for politicians and the media to turn the tragedy into political points.

But politics has become a “win-by-any-means” endeavor these days, for the politicians AND the media.

CNN posted an article on October 29, 2018 called “The Pittsburgh killings targeted Jews — and America’s soul.” The important sentiment of the title hides the contents of the article which could have a sub-header “Republicans are the reason for hatred and murder in America.” It was an article specifically drafted to place the blame for the murder, and antisemitism in America generally, at the foot of the Republican party.

Some quotes from the piece:

  • “It is an increasingly urgent question whether President Donald Trump’s deliberately divisive politics may be giving license to extremists.”
  • “[Trump] has consciously stoked national divides, adopting a brand of politics that uses racial, nationalist rhetoric, rails against immigrants and refugees and equivocates about extremism — including after violence in Charlottesville, Virginia, in which white supremacist marchers chanted anti-Jewish slogans and a woman protesting their presence was killed.”
  • “[Trump] has used tropes and language known to appeal to a tiny minority of extremists who might contemplate violence. Trump has recently taken to proclaiming he is a “nationalist” and berated “globalists” — two designations that have innocent connotations in some contexts but are also recognized as code words by anti-Semites.”
  • “Recent years have seen a rise in anti-Semitic incidents across the country and the use of coded anti-Semitic imagery in material by right-wing politicians, including some prominent members of the Republican Party.”
  • “In 2016, a closing Trump campaign advertisement blasting a global establishment elite portrayed three people as villains alongside Hillary Clinton: billionaire liberal financier George Soros, former Federal Reserve Chair Janet Yellen and Lloyd Blankfein, the chairman of Goldman Sachs. All are Jewish.”
  • “Hints of anti-Semitism are also evident in some other GOP messaging.”
  • “Republican House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy this week deleted a tweet accusing Soros,former New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg, and Tom Steyer of trying to buy the midterm elections for Democrats, after a bomb was mailed by a Trump supporter to Soros. All three men are Jewish or of Jewish descent.”
  • “Iowa GOP Rep. Steve King recently endorsed Faith Goldy, a nationalist running for mayor in Toronto, who claims Canada is facing a “white genocide” and who has promoted anti-Jewish material.”

CNN posted an impressive list of Republicans giving space for antisemitism. While none of the people actually said anything about Jews or Judaism, CNN suggested that calling out people who were Jewish or activity which could be interpreted as Jewish, was giving space for antisemitism.

Picture alongside CNN’s article on anti-Semitic mass murder showing a smirking
President Trump with a caption “Related Article: How Trump’s nationalism
has already changed the world“
Not a single Democrat was included in CNN’s list.

If it cared to be balanced and actually address the issue of antisemitism in political discourse, CNN could have listed any of the following:

Democratic Antisemitism

  • D.C. Council member Trayon White Sr. (D-Ward 8) said that the Jews control the weather so they can get rich: “D.C. keep talking about, ‘We a resilient city.’ And that’s a model based off the Rothschilds controlling the climate to create natural disasters they can pay for to own the cities, man. Be careful.”
  • New York City Democrat Thomas Lopez Pierre went on a tirade against “Jewish landlords engaged in ethnic cleansing” in a promotional video.
  • There is a long list of Democratic members of Congress who have embraced notorious anti-Semite, Louis Farrakhan, including Keith Ellison (MN) and Maxine Waters (CA).

Democratic Anti-Zionism

Many current and recent Democratic officials and those Democrats running for office have platforms that are against or vilify the only Jewish country:

  • Democratic former Secretary of State John Kerry said that Israel risks becoming an “apartheid state” if it doesn’t get to a peace deal with Palestinian Arabs. He said nothing of the Palestinian Authority’s open demand of a country free of any Jews.
  • New York Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand praised anti-Zionist Linda Sarsour without qualification.
  • New York Democratic candidate Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez has said that Israel occupies Palestinian land, “massacres” Palestinian protesters, and is aligned with a movement that calls for boycotting Israel
  • Detroit candidate Rashida Tlaib is a proud supporter of the boycott, divestment and sanctions against Israel campaign.
  • Minnesota candidate Ilhan Omar has called Israel an “apartheid regime.“
  • In Virginia, Leslie Cockburn is running for Congress. She wrote a book that claims Israel controls America’s foreign policy – a particular strain of antisemitism that foments hatred in wide sections of America
  • In Pennsylvania, Democrat Scott Wallace’s charity gave $300,000 to pro-Israel boycott organizations
  • There were 58 members of Congress who walked out on Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s address to Congress in 2015. Every one was a Democrat.
  • Left wing group MoveOn.org and several Democratic members of Congress condemned President Trump recognition of the fact that Jerusalem is the capital of Israel, essentially calling it an act of war.
  • 2016 Democratic nominee for president and current Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders aligned himself with Cornel West, a loud critic of Israel
  • The Democratic party gutted its 2012 platform about Israel, getting rid of prior platform statements which: called Hamas a terrorist group; said that Palestinian refugees would be settled in Palestine, not Israel; specifically said that borders would NOT be on the 1967 lines; and that Jerusalem would remain the capital of Israel.

CNN opted to remain silent on every one of these Democrat’s comments.

CNN was clearly not looking to have a discussion about politicians fomenting antisemitism; it’s aim was to place the blame for antisemitism solely on the Republican party.

Perhaps CNN should look at itself, and its own reporters like Marc Lamont Hill, whom it describes as “one of the leading intellectual voices in the country.” Here is Hill’s video about his visit to Nazareth in Israel – not the West Bank or Gaza, but unquestionably Israel according to everyone except for rabid anti-Zionists. He refused to recognize the existence of Israel an called it “Palestine,” “a land stolen by greed and destroyed by hate… we stand by the people who courageously struggle and resist the occupation.”

CNN has become a mouthpiece for radical left-wing anti-Zionists, and it now lambasts Republicans as anti-Semites in a moment of Jewish grief. It is beyond pathetic. It is reprehensible.


Related First.One.Through articles:

What Kind of Hate Kills?

CNN Makes Clear the Attackers and Victims in Gaza-Israel Fight

CNN Will Not Report Islamic Terrorism

CNN’s Embrace of Hamas

Names and Narrative: CNN’s Temple Mount/ Al Aqsa Complex Inversion

Leading Gay Activists Hate Religious Children

This July 4, I am Leaving the Democratic Party that Left Me Long Ago

First.One.Through video:

CNN Calls out a Massacre in Jenin, even though it is Israelis who are killed (music by Gorecki) What is really proportionate?

Subscribe YouTube channel: FirstOneThrough

What Kind of Hate Kills?

Hate is in America in October 2018, and it seems intent and killing.

A series of pipe bombs were sent a number of prominent Democrats including sitting senators. According to the New York Times, the mayhem and attempt to harm was born of Trump fever.


Front page of The New York Times, October 27, 2018

The lead article on October 27 made clear that “A Fervent Backer of Trump is Seized in Pipe Bomb Spree.” The news painted the rationale in a clear and unambiguous manner as it began the article “An outspoken supporter of President Trump from South Florida was charged on Friday with sending explosive packages to at least a dozen of the president’s critics,” the paper continued, “a federal criminal complaint spells out his contempt for this week’s many bomb targets, noting that Mr. Sayoc’s van was slathered with images and slogans found on fringe right-wing social media accounts.” The paper highlighted that the hatred was from a right-wing backer of President Trump.

Fortunately, no one was injured in the hate-filled mailers.

The situation was much more grave at a synagogue in Pittsburgh, PA, where eleven Jews were gunned down during Sabbath prayers while many people in America were reading the news about the arrest of the pipe bomber.

The opening of the Times’ report stated “Armed with an AR-15-style assault rifle and at least three handguns, a man shouting anti-Semitic slurs opened fire inside a crowded Pittsburgh synagogue Saturday morning, killing at least 11 congregants and wounding four police officers and two others, the authorities said.” The source of the violence stemmed from hatred of Jews (or was it guns?)… at least at the beginning of the Times report. Unfortunately the Times would lead readers into a bit of a misdirection a few paragraphs on:

“The assault on the synagogue unfolded on a quiet, drizzly morning, and came amid a bitter, vitriolic midterm election season and against the backdrop of what appears to be a surge in hate-related speech and crimes across America. It also took place in the wake of the arrest Friday morning of a man who the authorities said sent more than a dozen pipe bombs to critics of Mr. Trump, including several high-profile Democrats….The anguish of Saturday’s massacre heightened a sense of national unease over increasingly hostile political rhetoric. Critics of President Trump have argued that he is partly to blame for recent acts of violence because he has been stirring the pot of nationalism, on Twitter and at his rallies, charges that Mr. Trump has denied.“

A reader of the article could conclude that this anti-Semite who slaughtered eleven innocent people was a “fervent backer of Trump,” just like the pipe bomber and had political motives. However, the murderer was anti-Trump, a point never mentioned in the Times’ 2200-word article. However, the Times website did make sure to include a 2-minute video about “AR-15: The Gun Behind So Many Mass Shootings.” Please don’t suggest that the Times itself is caught in the “bitter, vitriolic midterm election season,” and using the slaughter of innocent Jews to serve its liberal mission.

The Times coverage stood in sharp contrast to other news sites like Reuters, which clearly laid out the evil antisemitism in the murderer and wrote that the killer was anti-Trump.

Reading other new sources would further educate readers about the nature of the “hate-related speech across America” that the Times mentioned but did not discuss. The gunman said that “jews are the children of satan,” and that the US was suffering from a “k*** infestation.” Those were not the utterances of President Trump, but of the leader of the Nation of Islam, Louis Farrakhan, a rabid antisemite that the New York Times refuses to denounce:

  • On October 17, 2018, Farrakhan compared Jews to “termites” in a video and tweet he proudly broadcast
  • On March 9, 2018 the NOI posted a public letter to Gregory Meeks and Barbara Lee who condemned Farrakhan’s antisemitic remarks by saying that they were working on behalf of “Satanic Jews.”

The Times never reported on any of Farrakhan’s hate-filled speeches.


There is a vile stench of hatred in the world and it must be called out repeatedly. It is disgraceful that media outlets like the New York Times will misdirect readers to think that the problem of racism and antisemitism come solely from white Trump supporters, when the problem is widespread and deep within the Muslim community.

We mourn the innocent victims of the horrible event in Pittsburgh and condemn hatred and those that both foment such hatred (like Farrakhan) and those that disguise it and use for their own political purposes (like The New York Times).


Related First.One.Through articles:

In The Margins

Farrakhan’s Democrats

NY Times Discolors Hate Crimes

Covering Racism

Farrakhan’s Democrats

Louis Farrakhan is a vile person.

His long history of vilifying Jews and Judaism have long cemented his position as an anti-Semite. His recent comments referring to Jews as “termites” is not new.


Farrakhan’s Twitter post October 2018

The media has long been silent about Farrakhan’s repulsive attitudes and expressions. Despite the fact that his “Nation of Islam” group has tens of thousands of followers, and his marches have drawn hundreds of thousands of people, the liberal press thought that it would be better to focus their attention on a few dozen or hundred white racists than black and Muslim racists. Only CNN’s Jake Tapper commented “The difference between Farrakhan and some members of the alt-reich whose heinous bigotry has received a lot of attention this past year: Farrakhan has a much larger following and elected officials meet with him openly.”

The “elected officials” that Tapper referred to were all Democrats in Congress.

  • Keith Ellison, Democratic Representative from Minnesota and Deputy Chair of the Democratic National Committee has a long history with Farrakhan and has refused to condemn the evil in the man.
  • Maxine Waters, Democratic Representative from California warmly embraces Farrakhan.

The Republican Jewish Coalition called for these two congresspeople, as well as Gregory Meeks (D-NY), Barbara Lee (D-CA), Danny Davis (D-IL), Andre Carson (D-IN) and Al Green (D-TX) to resign because of their close ties to Farrakhan. Meeks and Lee opted to make clear their denouncement of Farrakhan after the RJC prompting, while the others did not. In response, the Nation of Islam called Meeks and Lee “modern-day Uncle Toms” who were doing the bidding of “Satanic Jews.”

Nice.

Overall, the Democratic leadership continues to be mum on Farrakhan, as they fear losing Black and Muslim voters, while they have no fear of ever losing the support of Jewish liberals.

Into the void rode the seasoned “non-politician” Chelsea Clinton who condemned Farrakhan on October 17, 2018 and called on fellow  Democrats to stop being selective in condemning antisemitism:

“Comparing Jews to termites is anti-Semitic, wrong and dangerous. The responsive laughter makes my skin crawl. For everyone who rightly condemned President Trump’s rhetoric when he spoke about immigrants “infesting our country,” this rhetoric should be equally unacceptable to you.”

How embarrassing for seasoned Democrats to be called out on something so blatantly obvious by a veteran newbie.

Think of New York Governor Andrew Cuomo, a state with more Jews than any other, failing to comment on Farrakhan’s hatred. He preferred to call out a political opponent as “silent on the rise of anti-Semitism,” a false charge, even while he is guilty himself. Perhaps he learned the successful approach of Democrats in Westchester County who successfully tarred their opponents as “Nazis” without any ramifications.

Liberals have been arguing that someone can be against Israeli policies without being anti-Semitic. While arguably true, a unique focus on only Israel’s policies and not any Arab or Muslim country’s policies makes the argument flimsy. It falls apart completely when black and Muslim anti-Semites like Farrakhan are given a complete pass while white racists are loudly called out.

Keith Ellison, Maxine Waters, Danny Davis: We’re talking about you.

Oh, in case you were wondering, J Street endorsed and raised money for them.


Related First.One.Through articles:

Politicians React to Vile and Vulgar Palestinian Hatred

Covering Racism

NY Times Discolors Hate Crimes

Where’s the March Against Anti-Semitism?

This July 4, I am Leaving the Democratic Party that Left Me Long Ago

The Democratic Party is Tacking to the Far Left-Wing Anti-Semitic Fringe

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

Ramifications of Ignoring American Antisemitism

Subscribe YouTube channel: FirstOneThrough

 

Deciphering the 2018 Basic Law in Israel – The Nation State of the Jewish People

On July 19, 2018, Israel signed a new Basic Law called “The Nation-State of the Jewish People.” It has been called controversial by many liberal media outlets in what it purports to do with minority rights.

The notion that there is a major curtailment of Israeli Arabs’ rights is a gross exaggeration. However, what should be discussed is the novel stance whereby Israel has now assumed the responsibility for the security and the “cultural, historical and religious legacy” of Jews in the diaspora.

Below is the text of the latest Basic Law in Israel, with a review below each point.

  1. The State of Israel
    a) Israel is the historical homeland of the Jewish people in which the state of Israel was established.
    b) The state of Israel is the nation-state of the Jewish people, in which it actualizes its natural, religious, and historical right for self-determination.
    c) The actualization of the right of national self-determination in the state of Israel is unique to the Jewish people.

Review:

The comments in parts 1a and 1b are actually found in international law, in both the San Remo Conference Resolution of 1920 and the 1922 Mandate of Palestine. Specifically, international law acknowledged the historic ties of the Jewish people to the land of Israel and the goal to reconstitute such national home:

  • “in favor of the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people”
  • “recognition has thereby been given to the historical connection of the Jewish people with Palestine and to the grounds for reconstituting their national home in that country”

It’s an established fact that Jews have a long history in the land of Israel going back thousands of years. For over 100 years, Jews and the international community have been working to re-actualize the Jewish right to self-determination in that homeland. Sections 1a and 1b are seemingly innocuous and superfluous.

However, section 1c went a step further. It states that the national right of self-determination is ONLY for Jews. While the clause does not limit the INDIVIDUAL rights of non-Jews to live openly and freely in Israel, the intention of the clause is seemingly that non-Jews have no NATIONAL right of self-determination. Non-Jews in Israel have personal rights of self-determination as citizens of the state, while Jews have an added right as a people.

Why:

The State of Israel has very few Basic Laws. As such, why would the country opt to state the obvious points of 1a and 1b in a new Basic Law, and add the additional point of the uniqueness of Jewish self-determination in section 1c?

For the past several years, Palestinian Arab leaders have voiced their belief that Jews are not native to Israel and that only Palestinian Arabs are indigenous to the region. They have turned a blind eye to history and have been effective in getting various United Nations’ bodies to similarly cut off the deep historic and religious ties between Jews and their holy land. They have gotten the UN to decry that Jews are eliminating the natural and historic “Arab character” of Judaism’s holiest city and capital of Jerusalem where Jews have been a majority for over 150 years.

Further, Arabs contend that Jews are not even a people and therefore cannot have a claim of national self-determination. Jews are simply people that believe in a religion – Judaism – and are a diverse mix of cultures and nationalities from around the world, who descended on Palestine as tools of global powers to insert a foreign democracy in the heart of the Arab world. The Arabs have promoted the notion that these Israeli Jews are simply foreign interlopers, who are negating the Palestinian Arab right of self-determination. The acting-President of the Palestinian Authority Mahmoud Abbas gave a long lecture to this effect in April 2018.

If the rants of these wild fools would have been given no ear, perhaps this Basic Law would not have been drafted as is. But the mean and angry words have no longer just been echoed in the Muslim and Arab world, but are repeated in European capitals and at the United Nations. Consequently, Israel felt compelled to declare that the land of Israel has always been the homeland of the Jewish people and that the country of Israel is uniquely the nation-state of the Jewish people.

That the liberal press would be shocked at this section of the Basic Law is particularly surprising, noting how much they championed the idea of “two states for two people: one for Jews and one for Arabs,” for so many years.

  1. National symbols of the State of Israel
    a) The name of the state is Israel.
    b) The flag of the state is white, two blue stripes near the edges, and a blue Star of David in the center.
    c) The symbol of the state is the Menorah with seven branches, olive leaves on each side, and the word Israel at the bottom.
    d) The national anthem of the state is “Hatikvah”
    e) [Further] details concerning the issue of state symbols will be determined by law.

Review:

None of the items listed in section 2 is news to anyone that has ever been to Israel or knows anything about the country. These are all established facts.

Yet, it is curious that nowhere in this section is there a specific reference to Jews or Judaism. The symbols that are highlighted – Israel (Jews are known as the Children of Israel in the Bible); Star of David (King David was a leading unifying king in Jewish history); the Menorah (a symbol of religious Judaism from the Temple); the “Hatikvah” (a song of modern Jewish longing for a return to self-determination in the Jewish holy land) – are all based on Judaism and Jewish history, yet “Jews” and “Judaism” are absent in this section.

Why:

While section 1 underscored historical facts and repudiated the Arab narrative about Jews in Israel, section 2 put forward some modern manifestations of the Jewish State. As symbols, each item is simply a marker and note of Jewish pride. Each item does nothing to impact the day-to-day lives of Jew or non-Jew living in Israel.

Perhaps section 2e leaves open the idea that new state symbols might include items that are not inherently Jewish, such as a state bird.

  1. [The] unified and complete [city of] Jerusalem is the capital of Israel.

Review:

Jerusalem has always been the capital of Israel, and Israel enshrined this fact in the 1980 Basic Law about Jerusalem that was issued solely for such purpose. This section is seemingly wholly redundant.

Why:

While much of the world has not recognized Israel’s annexation of the eastern part of Jerusalem, the United Nations took additional steps against part of Israel’s capital in December 2017. UN Security Council Resolution 2334 declared that all lands that Israel won in its defensive war against Jordan in 1967 were illegally obtained, including the eastern part of Jerusalem.

It would appear that Israel opted to repeat its claim on the entirety of Jerusalem because of the recent action of the United Nations. If there were broader goals such as declaring the city as the holiest site for Jews, the statement would have been broader and discussed the holy sites in the city. Perhaps the drafters of the Law decided that they did not want to provoke the Muslim world, despite the Arabs’ constant belittling of Jewish sites and rights in Jerusalem.

  1. The Language of the State of Israel
    a) Hebrew is the language of the state.
    b) The Arabic language has a special status in the state; the regulation of the Arab language in state institutions or when facing them will be regulated by law.
    c) This clause does not change the status given to the Arabic language before the basic law was created.

Review:

Since the Mandate of Palestine of 1922, English, Arabic and Hebrew have been the official languages in Palestine (Article 22). When Israel declared itself a state in 1948, it continued to give preference to the Arabic language. This Basic law’s section 4b is seemingly a demotion of Arabic as an “official” language, but section 4c seems to ensure that there is no practical impact of such demotion, as Arabic will continue to be used in all governmental items such as monies, stamps and signage.

Why:

Section 4 can best be viewed through the same lens as section 2 – a symbolic note that has no practical impact on day-to-day life. Only the Hebrew language was called out with pride by David Ben Gurion in the country’s Declaration of Independence in May 1948. This section is seemingly another marker of the Jewishness of the State of Israel, even while it makes accommodations for people who speak Arabic.

  1. The state will be open to Jewish immigration and to the gathering of the exiled.

Review:

This statement is seemingly WEAKER than international law laid out in the Mandate of Palestine. In Article 6, that document specifically sought to “facilitate Jewish immigration under suitable conditions and shall encourage, in co-operation with the Jewish agency referred to in Article 4, close settlement by Jews on the land, including State lands and waste lands not required for public purposes.” The word “facilitate” is an active verb compared to simply being “open” to Jewish immigration.

More specifically, section 5 is completely redundant with the country’s Declaration of Independence which stated “THE STATE OF ISRAEL will be open for Jewish immigration and for the Ingathering of the Exiles.”

Why:

Once again, this Basic Law is seemingly redundant with international law and the country’s foundation document. Which might give a clue as to why the country’s lawmakers decided to issue such clauses in a rare new Basic Law.

The United Nations acted against its own international laws as it related to Jews and the Jewish homeland. The Mandate of Palestine clearly stated that no person could be excluded from living anywhere in the Mandate because of their religion (Article 15), but the British promptly separated half of the Mandate region into the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan and allowed the country to become Jew-free. When Jordan attacked Israel in 1948 and subsequently banned all Jews from the west bank of the Jordan River, including eastern Jerusalem, and then gave citizenship only to Arabs – specifically excluding Jews – the United Nations said nothing. The UN continues to declare that the vast majority of the Mandate – Jordan, the “West Bank” and Gaza – should be Jew-free today.

Israel clearly felt the need to state in its own laws that it is going to welcome the Jewish exiles from around the world, as it has for years, and not rely on the neutered international laws from 1922, nor its own foundation document.

  1. The Diaspora
    a) The state will labor to ensure the safety of sons of the Jewish people and its citizens who are in trouble and captivity due to their Jewishness or their citizenship.
    b) The state will act to preservethe cultural, historical and religious legacy of the Jewish people among the Jewish diaspora.

Review:

Of the eleven sections in the 2018 Basic Law on The Nation State of the Jewish People, this is the only one that is truly new. It is not found in international law (1920 and 1922) nor in Israel’s Declaration of Independence (1948). It has no appearance in any of the country’s prior Basic Laws. It is extraordinary in every facet.

That a sovereign country would extend its safety net to a select group of non-citizens around the world is remarkable. It is without parallel.

The second underlying rationale of this new Basic Law becomes clear in this section. It is not only about echoing facts and laws that the world has chosen to ignore, but establishing this new one. The notion of a nation-state is a two-way street: Israel is the Jewish State, and the Jewish State is there for all Jews around the world.

This language stands against the carefully worded text of the Balfour Declaration of 1917 that specifically did not bias the Jewish communities outside of Palestine, that “nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights… or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country.”

While Jews are not in jeopardy of losing their “political status” as citizens of countries around the world, they now seemingly have a foreign country protecting them and their culture.

Why:

The 2014 War from Gaza unleashed waves of antisemitism around the world, particularly in Europe. Jews were attacked and killed in capital cities and small towns. It reached such a point that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu went to Paris in early 2015 and asked the Jewish community whether it was time to leave France and move to Israel. It was an outrageous act, but also effective: the number of people from France making Aliya (moving to Israel) tripled after the events and Netanyahu’s visit.

Many people in France were angry at Netanyahu’s statement. The government of France appealed to its Jews that France would be considered a failure if it could not protect its Jewish population, but in fact, the Jewish community in France was broadly resentful that France was no longer a secure home for them.

Netanyahu came to Europe to state that times are different: the 1939 British White Paper which prevented Jews from fleeing the Holocaust to come to Israel was no more. Israel was a reality and ready to welcome anyone fleeing persecution as the nation-state for all Jews around the world.

It perhaps comes at a moment of security and smugness that Israel now offers its help to world Jewry, after decades of calling on world Jewry to help the nascent state. As Ben Gurion said on that fateful day in May 1948, “WE APPEAL to the Jewish people throughout the Diaspora to rally round the Jews of Eretz-Israel in the tasks of immigration and upbuilding and to stand by them in the great struggle for the realization of the age-old dream – the redemption of Israel.” Israel has now turned the table and is assuming the role of the guardian for world Jewry as opposed to the other way around.

But Jewish memory extends beyond the 1940s.

In 1917, British Jews made sure that the Balfour Declaration did not ensnare Jews outside of Palestine. However in 2018, Israel did not consult with world Jewry when it extended its sheltering tabernacle over their homes in the diaspora.

A very awkward step for a government that stated it had the interests of world Jewry in mind.

 

  1. The state views Jewish settlement as a national value and will labor to encourage and promote its establishment and development.

Review:

Section 7 is a repeat of international law as mentioned above in Article 6 of the Mandate of Palestine.

Why:

Settling the land has always been a priority of Zionists. It was true in the 1890s and remains true in the 21st century. The tie between the Jewish people and the Jewish holy land has been true for thousands of years, and no law that sought to connect the nation-state of Jews and Israel could possibly ignore the land of Israel. The Jewish ties to the Jewish holy land existed before the Modern State of Israel, and the government of Israel would be failing its basic mission of self-determination if it did not wholeheartedly promote the development of the land itself.

  1. The Hebrew calendar is the official calendar of the state and alongside it the secular calendar will serve as an official calendar. The usage of the Hebrew calendar and of the secular calendar will be determined by law.

Review:

Not news for anyone living in, or doing business in Israel.

Why:

As with the other items in this Basic Law, it seeks to affirm particular Jewishness of how the state operates. Like many of the sections, it does nothing to harm not-Jewish citizens, any more than some countries declaring Christmas a national holiday harms non-Christians.

  1. National Holidays
    a) Independence Day is the official holiday of the state.
    b) The Memorial Day for those who fell in the wars of Israel and the Memorial Day for the Holocaust and heroism are official memorial days of the state.

Review:

Beyond stating that the holidays and calendar of Judaism will be officially recognized in Israel’s calendar (sections 8 and 10), section 9 ascribes important moments in Israel’s history as national holidays in a typical fashion of any country, but adds a new dimension. Placing a historic event that occurred OUTSIDE of the country’s borders, which impacted a subset of its citizens is highly unusual. The Holocaust did not just have minimal impact on the non-Jews in Israel, but it had little direct impact on the majority Mizrachi Jews from countries including Iraq, Yemen, Egypt and Morocco.

But the Holocaust stands apart from the terrible persecutions suffered by Jews in Arab lands. The Holocaust was so evil and heinous, that it forced the world to create the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Even the United Nations marks the day and encourages all member nations to remember the Nazi atrocities.

Of course the Jewish State would be one of those countries to recognize Holocaust Remembrance Day.

  1. Saturday and the Jewish Holidays are the official days of rest in the state. Those who are not Jewish have the right to honor their days of rest and their holidays. Details concerning these matters will be determined by law.

Review:

See section 8 above.

  1. This Basic Law may not be altered except by a Basic Law that gained the approval of the majority of the Knesset members.

Review:

Self explanatory.


The 2018 Basic Law is seemingly a reaction to world events since early 2014. While Israel has had to contend with an Arab world that rejects coexistence in favor of terrorism for decades, it has been the world’s more recent embrace of fake history and vile antisemitism that necessitated the Basic Law of the Nation State of the Jewish People at this time.

That the Basic Law would include language that Israel will act to protect Jews around the world, gives some insight of how Israel expects antisemitism to play out in the years ahead.


Related First.One.Through articles:

The Jewish Holy Land

The Left-Wing’s Two State Solution: 1.5 States for Arabs, 0.5 for Jews

Heritage, Property and Sovereignty in the Holy Land

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

750 Years of Continuous Jewish Jerusalem

Related First.One.Through videos:

Ethiopian Jews Come Home (Phillip Phillips)

The Anthem of Israel is JERUSALEM

Subscribe YouTube channel: FirstOneThrough

Join Facebook group: FirstOne Through Israel Analysis