Once upon a time, in the exile, the Jews would decide every major step by the proposition: What will the Gentiles say? Then they created Israel, where Jews would be sovereign and free.... Laugh not, but rather weep for generations.
Jerusalem. Where the Palestinian [sic] autonomy and eventual state is being built. Jerusalem, which mirrors so much of the other desecration's that fills the land.
Some of you may have seen this tweet by former State Department spokescritter Marie Harf, and the underlying article from the Washington Post, last week.
There's one small problem: Harf and the Washington Post lied .
Maariv's headline blared, "Final Judgment: U.S. Citizens May Not Register 'Jerusalem' as Place of Birth." The news portal Walla! headlined its story, "Supreme Court in U.S. Ruled: Someone Born in Jerusalem Cannot Be Registered as Israeli."
These Israeli headlines successfully captured the mood of an Israeli public bewildered by U.S. hostility to Israeli rights in Jerusalem but unable to understand the complexity of the latest developments in the story.
Contrary to the impression conveyed by the Israeli media, the U.S. Supreme Court did not issue any ruling about the status of Jerusalem.
The Supreme Court's ruling in Zivotofsky v. Kerry was the final judgment in a 13-year court battle by the Zivotofsky family to have their son Menachem Binyamin Zivotofsky's birthplace recorded as "Jerusalem, Israel" as was their choice, according to the 2002 Foreign Relations Authorization Act.
Another day, another UN Human Rights Council report condemning Israel. This document, produced for an organization notorious for aiming half of its nation-based resolutions at the Jewish state [actually its more than half —ed], accused Israel of violating international law during the 2014 war in the Gaza Strip.
It is notable that the Obama administration, which has a frosty relationship with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, couldn't gloss over this latest bit of Israelphobia from a United Nations agency infamous for jihad against the Jewish state. A spokesman for the State Department cited "bias against Israel" as the reason that the United States wouldn't support any further action on the report.
Next month, the U.N.-sponsored Hate-Israel Festival known as Durban III takes place. Under the heading "Anti-Racism," the great bulk of the conference, like its Durban I and II predecessors, consists of condemning Israel for racism and equating it with an apartheid state.
Of the world's many great lies, this is among the greatest.
How do we know it is a lie? Because when South Africa was an apartheid state, no one accused Israel of being one. Even the U.N. would have regarded the accusation as absurd.
"Lasting security for a Jewish and democratic Israel will not be possible without a viable and democratic Palestinian state," German Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier said in a speech to Israel's citizens in honor of the 50th anniversary of diplomatic relations between Israel and Germany.
Unfortunately, this sentence points to arrogance — once again, a German thinks he knows better than the Jews what is good for them — but also to a blatant intervention in our national affairs.
A push to "boycott, divest and sanction" (BDS) Israeli companies has limited impact on the credit profile of Israel, yet it directly harms its intended beneficiaries, the Palestinians [sic]. The BDS movement, including universities, pension funds, and leaders of some Christian denominations (to the chagrin of many congregants), ignores economic data. And it coincides with a disturbing rise of violent anti-Semitism across Europe .
"The impact of BDS is more psychological than real so far and has had no discernible impact on Israeli trade or the broader economy," Kristin Lindow, senior vice president at Moody's Investors Service and Moody's lead analyst for Israel (in full disclosure, [author is] a former Moody's colleague) told Forbes. "That said, the sanctions do run the risk of hurting the Palestinian economy, which is much smaller and poorer than that of Israel, as seen in the case of SodaStream."
Over the course of 50 days in the summer of 2014, the Israeli Defense Forces conducted a high-intensity air and ground campaign against Hamas in the Gaza strip. Sparked by the murder of three Israeli teenagers by Hamas militants, this short but violent conflict resulted in over 2,100 killed on the Palestinian side, as well as widespread destruction and damage to civilian infrastructure. Israel suffered roughly 70 casualties during the operation, including IDF [Israel Defense Force] soldiers killed in battle and Israeli civilians struck by Hamas' indiscriminate rocket attacks against Israeli population centers, which also took a large psychological toll on terrorized Israeli civilians. This latest chapter in the long saga of conflict between Israel and Hamas provides another salient lesson in the horrors of war, but also a new opportunity to examine the operation of the law of armed conflict principles in practice.
Palestinian Authority (PA) President Mahmoud Abbas has said he has rejected a United Nations' brokered deal with Israel to allow Palestinian [sic] refugees living in Syria to resettle in the West Bank [sic] and Gaza.
Speaking to a group of journalists in Cairo, Abbas told them that in December he reached out to UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon to contact Israel on his behalf to resolve the status of Palestinians caught in the Syrian civil war.
Jerusalem Councilman and Israel Land Fund (ILF) Director Arieh King warned on Monday morning that Jerusalem Mayor Nir Barkat is on the verge of passing a new plan, which will whitewash illegal Arab construction in the capital and threaten the fragile demographic balance of the city.
King, who has long warned against Barkat's policies that he says constitute a de facto divide of Jerusalem, noted Barkat on Monday morning is "trying to put another nail in the coffin of Jerusalem as a unified city under Israeli sovereignty."