The media game: ‘Demonize Israel’. It’s easy to follow

Surely you’ve noticed that news media play a game. It’s called, ‘Demonize Israel’.

Actually, the media play two separate games: the ‘headline game’ and the ‘story game’. You can follow their games this way: look for news about Israel; find a headline (or a complete story) that puts Israel into a bad light; read it; then count how many reader comments bash the ‘Joos’.

Sometimes, the game gets complex. A news item can play both the 'headline' game and the 'story' game simultaneously.

Here are two stories which illustrate how this game works. The first item highlights the ‘headline game’. The second illustrates the ‘story game’.

Recently the Washington Post played both the headline and the story game (Ruth Eglash, “How did 8 Chinese tourists end up paying $4,390 at an Israeli hummus joint?”, washingtonpost, September 11, 2016). For this particular metaphoric knife-stab into Israel, the headline announced  that Chinese tourists in Israel supposedly got ‘ripped-off’ by an Israeli restaurant. The story itself tried to elaborate.

What does the headline word ‘Israeli’ tell you? It tells you, ‘Jews!’

This headline-story combination attempted to demonize a restaurant incident where eight Chinese tourists in Israel spent more than $4,000USD for a meal. The meal was at an Israeli hummus ‘joint’ (buying hummus isn’t like buying caviar; it’s cheap stuff). 

It’s not until the story’s fourth paragraph that you learn that the restaurant owner’s name is Jawdat Ibrahim. He’s not Jewish.

Mr Ibrahim (an Arab) owns a restaurant in an Israeli Arab town. The tourists in this story hadn’t eaten in a Jewish town. They ate in an Arab town in an Arab hummus joint. The word, ‘joint’ suggests a greasy eatery that may not even know what the word, ‘silverware’ means. This joint charged them $4,390USD.

There’s just one problem. This Arab eatery isn’t a ‘greasy spoon’. It isn’t a ‘joint’. It’s a famous restaurant (Wolfgang Georg Arlt, “No, Chinese Tourists Weren't Ripped Off In Israel”, forbes, September 14, 2016).

You also have to read past the third paragraph to learn that, when this story first aired, Israel’s Foreign Ministry immediately was so concerned that something outrageous had occurred that it launched a search for the Chinese tourists—to find out why they had paid so much for this meal. How’s that for tourist treatment in Israel?

 Second, the Arab who owned the restaurant told reporters that his prices for that meal were fair, given what the tourists ordered. He even provided the bill and added that, if the tourists had felt ripped off, why did they add a ten percent tip when they paid?

Was this really about an Israeli rip-off? Supposedly—but it wasn’t a Jewish Israeli rip-off; and it may not even have been a rip-off at all.

The headline and the part of story content most people would read before moving on (the first three paragraphs) just tried to make it look that way.

That's how many of these stories are written. You don't begin to get the true picture of what happened until deep enough into the story that most 'cruising' readers would miss.

For this story, Jewbashing reader comments were outnumbered by comments about the story’s author, Ruth Eglash. The best comment: “The sneering reference to this restaurant as a "hummus joint" is a pathetic attempt to once again turn something great about Israel into a negative by Ruthi Eglash, using the well-honed axe she keeps for her reporting from Israel…I have eaten at this restaurant, and one thin (sic) it certainly is not is "a hummus joint"…It is a top scale restaurant, with excellent food...and excellent service” (reader comment, Eglash, ibid). 

The second news story showed how the ‘story game’ alone works to demonize Israel. This story was by Imran Khan: “The politics of an accident in the Occupied Palestinian Territories”, aljazeera, September 11, 2016.

In this essay, a tragic incident was hijacked to bash Israel. In a ‘Palestinian’ town south of Bethlehem, a 6-year old girl was killed in the street in front of her house by a car driven by a ‘settler’—a Jew. Both Israeli and ‘Palestinian’ authorities said this was an accident (ibid). When the accident happened, the driver of the car stopped, got out and cried, ‘What did I do! What did I do’ (ibid). The family of the child said that a Jew—either the driver or another ‘settler’—was the person who called for medical help (ibid).

After stating these facts, the writer added that Jewish ‘settlements’ are [supposedly] illegal, Palestinians are ‘subject to [Israeli] military law’ and Israeli soldiers stood ‘a short distance’ from the house of the deceased child when the writer visited the family. He didn’t explain why any of this added information was relevant to the accident. He wrote only one additional item directly linked to the tragedy: the Jewish driver of the car will not ‘be brought to justice and will not face prosecution’.

But this wasn’t true. Israeli authorities are still investigating the incident, to see if prosecution is appropriate (ibid).

It didn't matter. The writer simply concluded that this lack of prosecution (against the driver) was “yet another example of life under occupation”.  

Wait a minute. Do we expect every driver involved in a fatal accident always to face prosecution? Is there ‘justice’ in such an accident only when a driver is prosecuted? More important for Israel, in this case above, was the lack of prosecution of the Jewish driver understandable only when it stands as a typical example of (harsh) life under Israeli ‘occupation’?

The answer to all three questions is, no. First, a driver involved in a fatal accident will not always face prosecution, especially when he acted responsibly immediately after the accident. A fatal accident does not, by definition, create a ‘prosecutable event’. Second, justice isn’t simply about arrest/prosecution. It’s primarily about finding the truth about what’s happened—and then applying applicable law fairly. Third, this story did nothing to explain how death-by-accident is ‘yet another example’ of harsh living under ‘occupation’.  

But the story did put Israel in a bad light—and that’s what counts in the ‘Demonize Israel’ game.

There were 292 comments on this story on the day I found it online. I didn’t read them all. But I’d say Jewbashers lost this one, too. Sample comments:

-I feel sorry for the little girl. But apparently al Jazeera is running out of Israel bashing articles if they made a whole article trying to demonize Israelis over a car accident.

- Articles like these intend to bring the anti-Semitic racists out for a chat.  Nowhere is there any indication the driver was at fault.  Good job Aljazeera.

- Hey…I surely will call an ambulance after ACCIDENTALLY hitting you. These settlers are EASTERN EUROPEAN savages, as if YOU did not know that.

--

Try your own hand at this game. See if you can spot the ‘headline Demonizers’ and the ’story Demonizers’. The exercise will add to your reading pleasure.

Abbas chutspa at the UN. One Jew's response

On September 22, 2016, the leader of the Palestinian Authority, Mahmoud Abbas, spoke to the United Nations General Assembly. He spoke because, he said, he wanted peace ("Palestinian Authority leader Mahmoud Abbas' speech to the UN General Assembly: full text", jewishpress, September 22, 2016).

He mentioned the word, 'peace' no fewer than ten times.

But instead of peace, he spoke of Israel's aggression (three times), Israel's atrocities (twice) and oppression (twice) (ibid). Six times, he linked the word, 'illegal' to Israel. 

Instead of talking about how peace could become a reality, he declared that Israel causes his people much pain and suffering (ibid).  Israel has behaved with disrespect and contempt (ibid). Israel has committed and continues to commit atrocities against the Palestinian people (ibid). 

These are not words of peace or reconciliation. They are words of condemnation. They are words which say, 'I've nothing good to say about peace with Israel'.

He accused Israel of committing racial discrimination against the Palestinian people on a daily basis (ibid). He accused Israel of continuing to commit 'aggressions' against Muslim and Christian holy sites. 

This is how he seeks peace? 

He announced that Israel sabotages peace (ibid). It evades peace (ibid). It plays with fire (ibid).

This is talk of peace? It's more verbal posturing than peace. It's how the schoolyard bully works himself up emotionally so as to feel justified to attack.   

For peace, Abbas demanded that Israel "must cease all of its settlement colonization activities and aggressions against our cities, villages and refugee camps. It must cease its policies of collective punishment and its demolition of Palestinian homes. It must cease its extrajudicial executions and cease the arrest of our people, and must release the thousands of our prisoners and detainees. It must cease its aggression and provocations against the Holy Al-Aqsa Mosque" (Abbas UN speech, ibid). 

He presents accusations ('extrajudicial executions' 'settler terror', 'aggressions against Islamic holy sites') as fact. They are not fact. On any lie-r-meter, they'd fall somewhere between distortion and outright lie.

Nevertheless, Abbas says he seeks peace. To achieve this peace, he claimed Israel must confront the Nakba (the so-called Arab disaster which occurred in 1948 when the Arab-initiated attack on the new-born Israel failed to destroy Israel). He declared, Israel must acknowledge its responsibility for that Nakba (ibid).

What? Arabs started a genocidal war against the Jews, lost that war and now blame that loss on the Jews?

This last demand may set a new standard for the definition of 'chutzpa' (commonly defined as 'outrageous gall'): Abbas wants the leader of the Jewish state to acknowledge responsibility for the Arab failure to destroy the Jewish state.

How peaceful and reconciling is that? 

This speech wasn't about peace. It was about defaming Israel. It was about demanding a Jewish apology for Arab Jew-hate. It was about completely ignoring Arab culpability for the lack of peace. 

How would you respond to such 'chutspa'? Would you know where to begin a response?

I don't know how you'd choose to respond. But I have found one possible Jewish response. It's quite simple. Page down:

















                             from: israelvideonetwork, retrieved September 25, 2016

Redemption--and Israel at the United Nations

On Thursday, September 22, 2016, Israel Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu spoke before the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA). He had some choice words to say about the UN.

As perhaps you know, the UN has had a neurotic fixation with the world's only Jewish state (Joseph Puder, "New research confirms UN obsession with Israel", frontpagemag, September 19, 2016). 

Here is some of the evidence for this diagnosis. The UN has condemned/blamed Israel:

-for occupying Muslim Holy sites in Jerusalem (Gregory Tomlim, "UN body condemns Israel for illrgal occupation in Jerusalem of Muslim Holy Sites", christianexaminer, April 18, 2016).

-for being the world's worst health violator (unwatch, May 25, 2016).

-for being the world's worst human rights violator (Ann Bayefsky, "UN says Israel, not Iran, North Korea or Syria worst violator of human rights", foxnews, March 29, 2015) 

-for creating an impediment to peace ("UN condemns Israeli settlement plan as impediment to peace", alray, July 30, 2015).

-for committing war crimes (The UN's Israel Inquisition", wallstreetjournal, June 24, 2015). 

-for violating children's rights ("UN blames Israel for committing violations against Palestinian children", americansunitedwithIsrael, August 3, 2016).

-for degrading women (Daniel Harper, "UN to condemn Israel over treatment of women, ignore Syria", theweeklystandard, March 8, 2012).

-for, apparently, being the only nation in the world to violate women's rights ("UN condemns Israel for women's rights violations", lockerdome, March, 2015) Note: according to a 2014 World Economic Forum Report, Israel ranked 57th of 137 nations for 'female political empowerment'; the US ranked 54th; Saudi Arabia ranked 117th (ibid). 

-for being the world's worst violator of women's rights (Elad Benari, "UN finds greatest violator of women's rights--Israel, of course", arutzsheva, March 20, 2015).

-for being responsible for 'Palestinian' economic troubles ("UN blames Israel for sagging Palestinian economy", youtube, September 7, 2016). 

-for being the cause of Gaza and Palestinian Authority incompetence ("UN on failed Gaza, Palestinian governments: it's all Israel's fault", breakingisraelnews, September 6, 2016).

-for being the reason 'Palestinian' men beat their wives ("UN blames Israel for Palestinian men who beat their wives", elderofzyion, March 9, 2016).

-for causing phone problems in Hamas anti-Israel terror tunnels ("UN blames Israel for lousy mobile reception in Hamas tunnels", jewishpress, June 22, 2016).



The UN even holds what might be a world record for Israel-bashing. On November 26, 2013, it condemned Israel six times in one day ("UN condemns Israel six times in one day", abundanthope, December 5, 2013).

The UN's hateful neurosis has become so extreme it has even condemned Israel for occupying a country far away from the Middle East--Nepal (Roger Pumper, "UN condemns Israel for occupation of Nepal", middeleastbeast, march 23-4, 2016).

On September 22, 2016, Israel Prime Minister Nentayahu stepped into this insanely anti-Israel environment. He gave a a speech to the UN General Assembly.

How does a Jewish leader of the world's most vilified nation speak in such a place? What can a Jewish leader say?

Here's a video excerpt from that speech. It's worth your time to listen to this leader of the Jewish nation.

This video is 4:06 long. It's dated September 22, 2016. It was uploaded to washingtonfreebeacon by Jack Heretik. Listen carefully to what he says, how he says it--and how this excerpt begins:

For me, Netanyahu's words refer to more than Israel's future political place at the UN. His words echo a Jewish dream.

Many of us who wait for the Final Redemption of the Jewish nation to begin believe that Netanyahu is correct. There is about to be a great change in this world. 

Consciously or not, Benjamin Netanyahu refers to a change that goes far beyond the United Nations. Those of us who wait for Redemption know that, when Redemption comes, everything (as Netanyahu said in that speech) will change. The entire world will know about it. The United Nations General Assembly will know about it. 

On more than one level, Netanyahu is correct. The change that is coming will begin to unfold sooner than we think. 

Yes, Netanyahu is definitely correct. Israel is becoming the Beacon that guides the world. It is destined to become the Light that changes the world. 

Stay tuned. 

Shabbat shalom.

Why the world helps ‘Palestinians’ slime Israel

This is the last of three essays on the sliming of Israel. The other two essays are immediately below.

The first essay argued that the sliming of Israel is serious business. The second essay explored why ‘Palestinians’ want to slime Israel. This essay explores why the world helps ‘Palestinians’ do that.

In 1947-8, the UN authorized the creation of modern Israel. As a consequence of that authorization, armies from five Arab countries attacked the new-born Jewish state.

Israel became a hero. It didn't just survive being attacked by those Arab armies. It beat those armies.

That 1948 Israel seemed the re-incarnation of the Biblical David. That new Israel-David had accomplished the impossible. It had beaten the Arab Goliath.

Today, Israel is no longer admired. It’s no longer a hero. Instead, it’s arguably the most reviled country in the world (James Kirchick, “The Jew of Nations: The Global Demonization of Israel”, worldaffairsjournal, November/December, 2014). 

How did Israel go from plucky hero to ‘most reviled’?

There are many answers this question. Here’s one answer: the United Nations has destroyed Israel’s reputation.

The UN has supported anti-Israelism since modern Israel’s inception. In 1948, when Israel was attacked by Arab armies, the UN had the perfect opportunity to validate the words of its Charter, which promised “to take effective collective measures for the prevention and removal of threats to the peace, and for the suppression of acts of aggression or other breaches of the peace” (Article 1).  The 1948 Arab-Israel war gave the UN an opportunity to show the world it meant business as a force for peace. But when Israel was attacked, the UN took no action. 

That failure to act sent a message: the UN would not protect Jews from annihilation, even after the then-recent horrors of the Holocaust.

That early anti-Israel passivity helped to initiate the anti-Israel ground-work necessary for the 1975 ‘Zionism is racism’ vote. By 1997, anti-Israelism had given way to demonization. For example, in 1997, a ‘Palestinian’ representative at the UN demonized Israel with an outrageous lie (Jenifer Rubin, “The Obama administration enables anti-Semitism at the United Nations”, washingtonpost, February 16, 2016): s/he accused the Israeli Government of injecting 300 ‘Palestinian’ children with the HIV virus (ibid). This lie was a modern Blood Libel (ibid). It incited to delegitimize Israel’s right to exist.

The UN did nothing about it (ibid). It still does nothing about such slander.  

By 2006, the UN formed its United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC). This body is the greatest stage for demonizing Israel the world has ever seen. It has condemned Israel more than all other nations combined.

Think about the UN in these terms: without the UN, nations which harbour anti-Semitism would limit their hate, for the most part, to their own media—their own sovereign environment. But through the UN, these Jew-hating nations now have an international stage. They use that stage to its fullest advantage—against Israel.

The UN provides Jew-hate the spotlight it needs to grow more virulent. It acts much like a petri dish serves to grow life-threatening bacteria.

The UN is supposed to be the world’s Moral compass. It’s supposed to be the Sinai of Secular Morality. But it isn’t. It doesn’t use its Moral ‘bully pulpit’ to protect the Middle East’s only democracy (Israel). It uses its bully pulpit to bully that democracy.

No nation which suffers such bullying can remain a hero for long. Israel’s status as ‘most admired’ has been transformed by the UN into ‘most reviled’.

If someone stood up to cry, ‘foul’, the demonization of Israel would probably wither for lack of oxygen. But no one stands up for Israel. 

Christian Churches don’t. They join the slander. Islamic clerics don’t. They lead the slander. The UN doesn’t. It organizes the slander. ‘Palestinians’ don’t. They demand the slander.

Israel is alone in the world--and demonized--for good reason. Both Christianity and Islam each teach that Judaism will be replaced by their own, ‘better’ religion.  They compete to be that replacement.

The establishment of the state of Israel is a religious problem. It contradicts that replacement belief. Israel’s existence potentially invalidates a foundational element of those religions. The destruction of Israel reaffirms that foundation.

Therefore, the destruction of Israel serves the world’s largest Religions. There are more than 3 billion Christians and Muslims on this planet. There are less than 15 million Jews. The Jewish population is no bigger than a speck of dust.

When billions of people have been raised by their religions to believe that the disappearance of the Jewish Israel is a key to their salvation, where does that leave Israel? It leaves Israel with a target on its back. 

 

Because of that reality, the UN should protect the world’s Jewish minority. It doesn’t. Instead, it supports the ‘Palestinian Cause’. It nutures all who would destroy Israel.  

‘Palestinians’, meanwhile, have united the UN’s Members. They’ve done this through the lowest of common denominators—Jew-hate.

‘Palestinian’ propaganda has sold Jew-hate as the gateway to world peace (Tuvia Brodie, “Why ‘Palestinians’ slime Israel”, tuviavbrodieblog, September 19, 2016). They’ve gotten billions of people to cheer their war against Israel. They’ve made it honourable—even desirable--to hate the Jewish Israel.

The ‘Palestinian’ plan is simple. It gives to a world hungry for ‘peace’ the easiest recipe for peace: for world peace, destroy Israel (ibid). For religious reasons, this recipe resonates with billions of people.

For these reasons, the UN should protect Israel. It doesn’t. It helps the ‘Palestinians’ to slime Israel because the world already believes Israel is Hell on earth.

                                                     From: raokness.blogspot

The UN sings of peace. It longs for peace. It supports the ‘Palestinian’ path to peace.

This is the reason the world helps ‘Palestinians’ slime Israel: for peace. It’s the reason the UN helps the ‘Palestinians’.

                                                       From: evilzionistisrael.wordpress

Judging from the UN’s decades-long behaviour towards Israel, the UN appears to promote the destruction of Israel (“Report: UN-backed groups promote ‘destruction of Israel’, terrorism”, worldtribune, September 2, 2016). This is no surprise. The UN operates in a world that marinates in Jew-hate. The UN nurtures that hate. That hate, and the spotlight the UN gives it, has destroyed Israel’s reputation.

Apparently, the UN believes its treatment of Israel will lead to peace. It won’t.

To find out where it will lead, study your Tanach. It’s all there. All you have to do is look for it.

I

Why 'Palestinians' slime Israel

Yesterday, you read about how Israel gets 'slimed' ("The sliming of Israel", September 18, 2016, below). You read about the definition of 'sliming' Israel: to smear Israel with such foul defamation that Israel becomes repulsive to you (I've updated yesterday's essay).

Yesterday, you read about the purpose of sliming Israel: to prepare you to accept the removal of Israel from the family of nations. Or, that purpose may be to prepare you to cheer for the 'unnationing' of Israel. 

Yesterday, you read about why Israel is so viciously slimed: to help the Palestinians. But there are two issues you didn't read about yesterday: (1) why would Palestinians want to slime; and (2) why would the world be so eager to help?

Today, you'll get a chance to consider why Palestinians want to slime Israel. In a couple of days, you'll get the opportunity to consider why the world would be so eager to help them do that.

Briefly stated, the 'Palestinians' want to slime Israel because that behavior is perfectly consistent with the 'Palestinian' goal for Israel: to demonize, then isolate, then destroy the Jewish state. We know this is their goal because they tell us it's their goal.

Read the Hamas Charter. It's Hamas' founding document. It informs on every Israel-related decision Hamas makes. 

The Hamas Charter is very clear: it's goal is to destroy the Jewish State. The only solution to what the Hamas Charter terms, 'the Palestinian problem' is Jihad--holy Islamic war against Israel. That's not a plan for peace. It's a plan for a war of extermination.

Don't forget the PLO Charter. The PLO/Fatah goal is no different from Hamas' goal: to remove the 'Zionist entity' from the Middle East. The 'Zionist entity' is the Jewish entity--Israel. The PLO Charter declares there will only be peace in the Middle East when the Zionist entity is gone.

What does that tell you? It tells you Israel is unique:

from: israelvideonetwork

If your goal is to make Israel disappear, sliming Israel makes sense. Sliming Israel helps to convince the convinceable that the disappearance of Israel is a good thing.  

Sliming Israel sells the idea that Israel is evil (see Brother Nathanael, "Why Israel is a threat to world peace", realjewnews, 2012) . That's important to the goal of destroying Israel because everybody stands against evil. Everybody hates evil. Everyone wants to destroy evil.

Every nation agrees that removing evil from the world is good. Therefore, if Israel is evil, destroying it is good for mankind, right? 

from: evilzionistisrael.wordpress

Yes, this is what slime gives to mankind--the way to world peace (Peter Wexler, "For world peace, Israel must be destroyed", wexblog.prwexler, July 6, 2015).  

from: ukmediawatch

That's the underlying message of Israel-sliming: there can never be peace so long as evil exists; Israel is the living epitome of evil; therefore, to get peace you must destroy the evil incarnate, Israel.

Fortunately for Israel, as this sliming rages, objective observers of the Arab-Israel conflict become increasingly skeptical of the slime. The heavier the slime, the greater the skepticism.

These observers know Israel isn't 'evil'. They've been to Israel too many times. They've studied Israel.

They know Israel is the only democracy in the Middle East. They know Israel is the only free country in the Middle East. 


Below, I present you with a video. This video comes from the website, gatestoneinistitute. It's a brief presentation by Col Richard Kemp (ret) of the UK. He's a former commander of British forces in Afghanistan. He knows about terrorism, terror attacks and civilian casualties in wars against terror. He's studied Israel's army at war.  

This video is titled. "Israel and the Palestinians: what the media won't report". It's dated May 28, 2016. 

I offer this video to you because I believe it focuses squarely on the question, why do Palestinians want to slime Israel? 

The video is 7:57 in length. 

Take a look:

The sliming of Israel

(Last updated: September 19, 2016)

When you ‘slime’ someone, you insult that person. But you aren’t just hurling an insult. Sliming means you insult with a purpose: to make your victim disgusting to others.

When you ‘slime’, you seek to cover your victim with a noxious, foul ‘filth’ of some kind. For example, in this year’s upcoming US Presidential election, if someone wanted to the ‘slime’ one of the candidates, one might use surrogates to call that candidate insane, delusional, boorish, stupid, a liar, etc. The goal is to portray that candidate as so obviously unqualified that s/he becomes disgusting to the voters. 

One possible origin for this word is the Latin, ‘linere’. This word suggests an attempt to ‘smear’. Some say the Latin also suggests, ‘to erase’ (“Word Origin and History for slime”, dictionary.com, no date).

The anti-Israel industry slimes Israel. It smears Israel with foul, offensive slanders. It tries to turn Israel into something disgusting. It aims to convince you to accept an eventual ‘erasure’ of Israel from the family of nations.

Why would anyone want to erase Israel from the family of nations? The answer lies in the word, 'sliming'. 

You see, the word, ‘sliming’ is related to ‘vilify’. When you vilify someone, you spread nasty stories about them, whether true or not (vocabulary.com). The word ‘vilify’ derives from ‘vile’, which is related to ‘villain’. To be a villain, you must do bad things (Merriam-Webster). 

A villain is criminal. A villain is outside the law. Ultimately, a villain becomes evil. 

This is exactly how the slime-Israel industry portrays Israel. Look at these headlines:

(1) Israel is apartheid:

-Saree Makdisi, “Does the term 'apartheid' fit Israel? Of course it does”. latimes,  May 17, 2014;

-“Noam Chomsky: Israeli Apartheid ‘Much Worse’ Than South Africa”, mintpressnews, August 25, 2015;

-“Obama’s ex-pastor: Israel is apartheid state, Jesus was a Palestinian”, timesofisrael, October 12, 2015;

-“Black Lives Matter Endorses BDS: Israel Is Apartheid State”, haaretz, August 4, 2016.

(2) Israel harvests living organs from Palestinians:

-Robert Spencer, “Swedish blood libel: Jews stealing organs from Palestinian children and selling them”, jihadwatch, August 18, 2009;

-Alison Weir, “Israeli Organ Harvesting “, radioislam, August28-30, 2009;

-Joachim Hagoplan, “Israel is the organ harvesting and human trafficking global ringleader, with complicit help from US and Turkey”, sott. net, May 14, 2016;

-Richard Millett, “At London College, Speakers Spread ‘Rumors’ That Israel Harvests Organs of Palestinians”, algemeiner, February 25, 2016;

-“German University's course claims Israel harvests Palestinian organs”, antisemitism.org, July 25, 2016.

(3) Israel is evil:

-Gideon Levy, “Stop Living in Denial, Israel Is an Evil State”, haaretz, July 31, 2016;

-Amos Schocken, “Israel ‘Definitely’ an Evil Country”, washingtonfreeebeacon, July 29, 2016;

-Reuven Ben-Shalom, “Good Palestinians, evil Israelis”, jerusalempost, January 22, 2016;

-Daniel Greenfield, “Obama’s source for Israel says country run by evil ‘elders of Zion’”,  frontpagemag, February 1, 2016);

-“UN: The most evil country in the world today is Israel”, investmentwatchblog, March 29, 2016;

--Stephen Lendman, “Israel: A Force of Pure Evil”, thepeoplesvoice, April 9, 2015;

-“Gaza refuses to surrender to Israel’s Evil G-d”, rehmat1.com, July 24, 2014.

These are only some of the headlines that slime Israel. There’s more: 

-Israel commits genocide (“Europeans: Israel committing genocide against Palestinians”, middleeastmonitor, January 26, 2016).

-Israel is the world's unique ‘occupier’ (“At the UN, only Israel is considered an occupier”, anneinpt.wordpress, September 15, 2016).

Israel is a brutal occupier (Antony Loewenstein, “Five decades later, Israel’s brutal occupation is stronger than ever”, thenational.ae, September 15, 2016).

Israel is a ruthless killer (Mo Rajabally, Kelona, “Occupier, ruthless killer is Israel, not Hamas”, pressreader, July 31, 2014).  

Israel commits war crimes (“Israel’s war crimes against Palestinians”, seamac.org/warcrime, 2014).

Israel is a rogue nation (Karl Schwarz, “Israel is a war nation of criminals”, rense.com, October 23, 2009).

These slandering headlines are the tip of an ugly man-made iceberg designed to sink Israel. Because of how the world has reacted to this constant, non-stop slander, it’s now become entirely reasonable to believe that, someday quite soon, the United Nations may attempt to delegitimize Israel in some official way. The UN could soon say, “Come, let us cut Israel off from its nationhood, so Israel’s name will not be remembered any more” (Psalms 83: 5).

Given how the UN joins the sliming of Israel these days, it's no longer outrageous to suggest  that the UN might consider ejecting Israel from the UN. It's no longer absurd to think that the UN might one day entertain the idea of replacing Israel with 'Palestine'. 

The hate-Israel industry understands the effect of this slandering. It's become energized by its successes against Israel. That's why you see so many anti-Israel slime attacks: success breeds more-of-the-same. 

Why do so many slime Israel? They do it for the 'Palestinians'.

Why do they slime Israel for the 'Palestinians'? We’ll start to look at that question tomorrow by answering first a different question.

Stay tuned. 

Social justice narrative, BLM, Palestinians and chaos

This essay is about a love triangle between Social Justice, Black Lives Matter (BLM) and the ‘Palestinian Cause’. If you know anything about a menage a trois (three-way love triangle), you might suspect this affair isn’t going to end well.

You’d be right--but not for the obvious reasons.

Black Lives Matter (BLM) is a self-styled national ‘movement’ (Homepage, blacklivesmatter). It aims to resist state violence against the powerless (ibid). It fights against racism. It’s against “extrajudicial killings of Black people by police and vigilantes” (ibid). It defends the oppressed (Blacks) against the crimes of the oppressor (the police). It fights genocide against Blacks (ibid).

The ‘Palestinian Cause’ also calls itself a national movement. Like BLM, it, resists [Israeli] state violence against the powerless—the ‘Palestinian people’. It, too, struggles for justice (“Homepage, Overview”, bds; “Homepage, About Us, Guiding Principles, Restorative Justice”, blacklivesmatter; “Homepage, About Us, Vision, nationalsjp. org). It, too, strives for liberation (Homepage, bds; Homepage, blacklivesmatter). It, too, see genocide against its group (Daniel Mael, “On Many Campuses, Hate is Spelled SJP”, thetower. org, issue 19, October, 2014).

Both BLM and the ‘Palestinian Cause’ embrace an ‘ideology of the underdog’. Both see their constituencies as innocent ‘underdogs‘ oppressed by a brutal ‘overdog’—an entity more powerful than they (Homepages for blacklivesmatters; bds; nationalsjp.org). Both seek equality (ibid). Both are linked to violence.

They embrace each other (“Black Lives Matter voices solidarity with Palestinians”, presstv, August 12, 2016). They embrace because, they say, their struggles are similar (ibid). Both stand for freedom against racism and oppression (ibid).  Both “fight against imperialism, capitalism, militarism and white supremacy” (from the BLM platform, as quoted by Audrey Bomse, “Furore (sic) over Black Lives' support of Palestine reveals movement's true allies” middleeasteye, August 11, 2016). 

BLM and the ‘Palestinian Cause’ also share something else: they promote their ‘ideology of the underdog’ by means of a ‘Social Justice narrative’.

Social Justice has three components, ‘social/societal’, ‘justice’ and ‘narrative’. Social justice is a good idea—in theory. It’s a dream for a better society. It achieves ‘justice’ by correcting what’s wrong and oppressive in society. In theory, it focuses on equal rights, equal opportunity, equal housing, etc.  

The social justice ‘narrative’ is the vehicle that propels the ‘movement’. It’s the medium for the movement message.

It contains three main principles: (1) The narrative is more important than fact. (2) The narrative is never wrong. (3) The narrative must be endlessly repeated.

Through these principles, BLM and the ‘Palestinian Cause’ never go off-topic. Their individual message never gets side-tracked by law, fact or reality (se below).

With both BLM and the ‘Palestinian Cause’, facts are irrelevant. For example, when a 16-year old Arab teen attacks police with a knife and is killed doing that, the narrative says, ‘IDF kills boy’. That keeps alive the narrative of evil Israelis brutalizing innocent ‘Palestinians’. But didn’t the boy die trying to commit murder? That’s irrelevant. Didn’t the police shoot in self defense? That’s irrelevant.

Narrative trumps fact. What matters is, the racist overdog (Jew) has again killed the underdog (‘innocent’ ‘Palestinian’).

In America, six police officers in Baltimore, Maryland were charged with either murder or manslaughter for the death of a Black man (in 2015) who died while in police custody. BLM charged white police racism (Paul Sperry, “Judges and juries keep acquitting the cops whom Black Lives Matter calls racist”, newyorkpost, July 19, 2016).  Three of the officers charged were Black. That wasn’t relevant. They were cops. Therefore, they were white racists (Mike McDaniel, “Freddie Gray case, Update 35.7”, statelymcdanielmanor, June 24, 2016).

Facts are irrelevant. What matters is, the racist overdog (police) has again killed the underdog (‘innocent’ black man).

The same ‘evil-white-racist-kills-innocent-black’ story happened in Florida (Bob Burnett, “Racism in America: the killing of Trayvon Martin”, huffingtonpost, July 19, 2013). It happened in Ferguson, Missouri (Jon Swaine, “Michael Brown shooting: 'They killed another young black man in America'”, guardian, August 12, 2014). It happened in Minneapolis, Minnesota (Glen Ford, “Philando Castile Was Killed Because He Was Black, Not Because He Had A Gun”, therealnetworknews, July 12, 2016).

In each of these incidents, aggressive behaviour by the supposed ‘victim’ was irrelevant. Social justice isn’t about law (McDaniel, ibid). It’s about underdogs being killed by racist overdogs (the police in America; security forces in Israel). What matters is that the underdog’s death must be avenged: that vengeance is the justice. Law is irrelevant.

Social justice narratives are destructive. They’re the antimatter to the rule of law’s matter (“Freddie Gray case, Update 36.5”, statelymcdanielmanor, July 15, 2016). The prosecution in the Baltimore police trials rejected the rules of law and evidence to seek a social justice (vengeance) outcome. Every advocate for the ‘Palestinian Cause’ does the same thing (Chloe Valdary, “To the Students for Justice in Palestine, a letter from an angry Black woman”, tablet, July 28, 2014).  

When you read the details of the Gray trials, you see the prosecution abandoning the rule of law and embracing social justice, which called for the blood of the police officers. Evidence? Fact? None of that mattered (“Freddie Gray case, Update 36.5”, statelymcdanielmanor, July 15, 2016).

It’s the same with the Arab-Israel conflict. When Hamas or ‘Palestinians’ attack Israel and Israel responds, the UN condemns Israel. Fact? Evidence? What actually happened? 

None of that matters.

What matters is the Social Justice Narrative. In America, that means each and every officer in the Gray trials should have been found guilty on all counts and jailed. That would have been justice. In the Arab-Israel conflict, it means each and every IDF soldier and Israeli leader should be charged with war crimes and jailed. That’s justice.

-Social justice says that the police are systemically racist (Ben Shapiro, “Some Black Lives Matter Activists Want To Abolish The Police. Here’s What Would Happen Next”, thedailywire, July 12, 2016).

-Israel is systemically racist (“Black Lives Matter Has No F***S Left For Israel: You Are A Racist State”, usuncut, August 4, 2016).

-The police are an ‘occupying force’ (Shapiro, ibid).

-Israel is an ‘occupying force’ (Adam Kredo, “[Hilary] Clinton Accuses Israel of Being Occupying Force”, washingtonfreebeacon, June 10, 2014).

The only solution is to end ‘the occupation’ (Shapiro, ibid). Therefore, for Justice, get rid of the police (Shapiro, ibid). For Justice, get rid of Israel (“Op-ed in PA daily anticipates Israel’s end: “The occupation of Palestine… will end with the return of the occupiers to the place from where they came”, Source: Official PA daily, Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, Apr. 26, 2016; from Palestinian Media Watch).

That’s the social justice version of reality. All crimes against the underdog—real, imagined and manufactured--must be avenged. Otherwise, there’s no justice.

In the social justice universe, law is useless. Under rules of law, the underdog always remains underdog. The only way to get justice is to make the underdog the overdog. This is what every anti-police and anti-Israel protest is about: the overdog is evil; he must be removed for justice’s sake.

In the social justice universe, you must abandon the rule of law. Justice occurs only when the underdog replaces the overdog. That’s what BLM wants. It’s what the ‘Palestinian Cause’ wants.

This grotesque demand that the underdog replace the overdog has the power to destroy Western civilization. The joining together of BLM, the ‘Palestinian Cause’ and Social Justice will not bring justice to the world. It will bring chaos and tyranny.

It’s a love triangle that will not end well.