When Walid Met Manal (video)

That Jews can be identified by a characteristic unpleasant odour was an integral part of medieval antisemitism, mentioned, for example, in historian Joshua Trachtenberg's The Devil and the Jews (1943).

But who knew that it's still believed in modern Tunisia in 2019?

Tunisian actress Manal Abdul Qawi evidently didn't, until Israelphobic Tunisian actor Walid Nahdi attempted to set her straight:

To quote the translator and uploader, Memri.org:

'Tunisian actor Walid Nahdi said in an April 4, 2019 broadcast on Radio Med (Tunisia) that he would not go to Israel if given an opportunity to do so, and that he cannot tolerate the Jews and their "distinct odor".

 He said that he also does not feel comfortable around and cannot stand homosexuals. Tunisian actress Manal Abdul Qawi, who was also on the show, rebuked Nahdi and defended Jews, saying that Tunisian Jews love Tunisia more than many non-Jews do.

 She also said that homosexuality is a private matter. Abdul Qawi added that she accepts all races and religions and that she values personal freedom.

Yamina Thabet, the head of the Tunisian Association for Support of Minorities (see MEMRI TV Clip No. 7063), has filed a legal complaint against Walid Nahdi following his comments.

 This excerpt was not posted by Radio Med to their social media accounts; rather, it was uploaded to the Internet by other Tunisian accounts.' 

(https://www.youtube.com/watch?&v=7hGcYmm9HK8)

David Singer: Hashemite Rule in Jordan on Collision Course with Trump and Israel

Here's the latest article by Sydney lawyer and international affairs analyst David Singer.

He writes:

King Abdullah seems increasingly hell-bent on ending 99 years of Hashemite-dynasty rule in Jordan.

This possibility is emerging as Abdullah is:

• Seemingly refusing to commit to negotiating with Israel on President Trump’s soon-to-be-released deal of the century to end the Jewish-Arab conflict and
• Taking active steps to place the Jordan-Israel Peace Treaty in jeopardy.

Transjordan (renamed Jordan in 1950) has always been the key to resolving competing territorial claims by both Arabs and Jews in former Palestine.

Transjordan comprised 78 per cent of the territory placed under the League of Nations Mandate for Palestine after being wrested from 400 years of Ottoman Empire sovereignty during World War One.

Mandatory Palestine was designated in April 1920 by the Principal Allied Powers at the San Remo Conference and in August 1920 by article 95 of the Treaty of Sevres as the location for reconstitution of the ancient and biblical homeland of the Jewish people.

Transjordan’s first Hashemite ruler – Abdullah I – arrived there in November 1920.

Abdullah was en route by train from Hijaz to Syria with armed forces to assist his brother Feisal in his struggle with France to retain power in Syria. Winston Churchill – at France’s request – offered Abdullah an Emirate in Transjordan – which Abdullah gratefully accepted on 11 April 1921.

Feisal was removed from Syria by the French and installed as ruler of Iraq under the Anglo-Iraqi Treaty dated 10 October 1922.  France became the Mandatory for the territory comprised in the Mandate for Syria and Lebanon.

These British-Franco machinations cost the Jewish people dearly, when the Mandate for Palestine – adopted unanimously by all 51 members of the League of Nations on 24 July 1922 – denied the Jewish people the right to reconstitute the Jewish National Home in any part of Transjordan (Eastern Palestine) and restricted that right to the remaining 22 percent (Western Palestine).

The Jews reluctantly accepted this decision. The Arabs didn’t.

In 1946 Transjordan was granted independence by Great Britain.

In 1948 – immediately after the Mandate ended and Jews declared the State of Israel – Transjordan invaded Western Palestine, conquering Judea, Samaria and East Jerusalem (comprising 4 per cent of Mandatory Palestine) – and unified these areas with Transjordan to form a new territorial entity – Jordan – encompassing 82 per cent of Mandatory Palestine completely devoid of Jews.

The founding Palestine Liberation Organisation (PLO) Charter in 1964 specifically excluded any PLO claim to sovereignty in Judea and Samaria.

In the 1967 Six Day War Israel captured Judea and Samaria from Jordan. The PLO – claiming Jordan and Israel to be one indivisible territorial unit – removed its non-claim to sovereignty from the revised 1968 Charter.

In September 1970 the PLO unsuccessfully tried to overthrow Jordan’s Hashemite ruler King Hussein. Israel helped save Hussein.

Israel and Jordan signed a peace treaty 1994 (Peace Treaty) – which has withstood many events that could have seen its termination.

That Treaty is again under threat – as Jordan has:

• indicated it is not prepared to renew an expired 25-year lease of Jordanian sovereign territory farmed by Israelis and
• given the PLO 40% representation on the body charged with administering the Moslem Holy Sites in Jerusalem – breaching the Washington Declaration and the Peace Treaty.

Jordan’s resistance to negotiating with Israel on Trump’s plan could see Trump shelving it and abruptly ending the 2018 five years $1.275 billion America–Jordan Memorandum of Understanding underpinning Jordan’s security and stability.

The PLO – as in 1970 – is waiting in the wings as current ongoing unrest in Jordan is destabilizing continuing Hashemite rule there.

Abdullah might find that spurning Trump and Israel could see him facing the PLO on his own.

The Naive Fool of "Romiyyah"

Last year Raymond Ibrahim, the distinguished American scholar of Islam, who's of Egyptian background, published the book pictured left, based on primary sources in Arabic and Greek.  It's 

'A sweeping history of the often-violent conflict between Islam and the West, shedding a revealing light on current hostilities The West and Islam--the sword and scimitar--have clashed since the mid-seventh century, when, according to Muslim tradition, the Roman emperor rejected Prophet Muhammad's order to abandon Christianity and convert to Islam, unleashing a centuries-long jihad on Christendom. 

 [It] chronicles the decisive battles that arose from this ages-old Islamic jihad, beginning with the first major Islamic attack on Christian territory in 636, through the Muslim occupation of nearly three-quarters of Christendom, which prompted the Crusades, followed by renewed Muslim conquests by Turks and Tatars, to the European colonization of the Muslim world in the 1800s, when Islam largely went on the retreat--until its reemergence in recent times....

[T]oday, as the West faces a resurgence of this enduring Islamic jihad, Sword and Scimitar provides the needed historical context to understand the current relationship between the West and the Islamic world--and why the Islamic State is merely the latest chapter of an old history.'

Recently, Ibrahim pointed out the absurd and dangerous attitude of Pope Francis regarding the Islamic threat to Western civilisation.  His must-read article (just one of numerous must-read articles by the dynamic young scholar over the years) began:

'"I appeal not to create walls but to build bridges" has long been Pope Francis's mantra.

Most recently, when asked last Sunday "a question about migration in general and about U.S. President Donald Trump's threat to shut down the southern border with Mexico," the pope pontificated in platitudes: "Builders of walls," he said, "be they made of razor wire or bricks, will end up becoming prisoners of the walls they build.... With fear, we will not move forward, with walls, we will remain closed within these walls." Less than a week earlier, Pope Francis lectured the mayor of Rome about the need to be more welcoming to Muslim migrants. "Rome," he declared, "a hospitable city, is called to face this epochal challenge [Muslim migrants demanding entry] in the wake of its noble history; to use its energies to welcome and integrate, to transform tensions and problems into opportunities for meeting and growth."

"Rome," he exulted, "city of bridges, never walls!"The grand irony of all this is that Pope Francis lives in the only state to be surrounded by walls—Vatican City—and most of these bastions were erected to ward off centuries of Islamic invasions....' [Emphasis added]

And concluded:

'Today, many Muslims, not just of the ISIS-variety, continue to boast that Islam will conquer Rome, the only of five apostolic sees never to have been subjugated by jihad (unlike Antioch, Alexandria, Jerusalem, and Constantinople). Similarly, Muslims all throughout Europe continue exhibiting the same hostility and contempt for all things and persons non-Islamic, whether by vandalizing churches and breaking crosses, or by raping "infidel" women as theirs by right. As for Italy, click here, here, and/or here for an idea of how Muslim migrants behave.

And that is the point Pope Francis misses: walls should only go down and bridges should only be extended when both parties are willing to live in amicable peace—as opposed to making the destructive work of those who have been trying to subjugate Europe in the name of Islam that much easier.'

To read Giulio Meotti's full article click HERE

Cardinal Robert Sarah of Guinea realises clearly what the end result of Francis's foolishness would be:

"I would like to explain why I, a son of Africa, allow myself to address the West. The Church is the guardian of civilization. I am convinced that western civilization is passing at present through a mortal crisis. It has reached the extreme of self-destructive hate.... 

 How could I not emphasize the threat posed by Islamism?  Muslims despise the atheistic West....  A West that denies its faith, its history, its roots, and its identity is destined for contempt, for death, and disappearance."

Indeed,

'"It is a false exegesis to use the Word of God to promote migration. God never wanted these rifts," Cardinal Sarah told French publication Valeurs Actuelles before going on to blast bishops who "say fuzzy things, vague, imprecise, to escape criticism, and they marry the stupid evolution of the world."

Sarah, head of the Vatican liturgy office, minced no words in his denunciation of the prevailing viewpoint among liberal Catholics, which states that the faithful betray Christ by wanting stricter immigration policies, especially from Islamic countries. Liberal Catholics often speak of migration in romantic terms, but Sarah notes there is nothing romantic about people leaving their cultures and homes behind, saying they would best be helped in their culture of origin.

"All migrants who arrive in Europe are penniless, without work, without dignity. ... This is what the Church wants?" he said. "The Church cannot cooperate with this new form of slavery that has become mass migration. If the West continues in this fatal way, there is a great risk that, due to a lack of births, it will disappear, invaded by foreigners, just as Rome has been invaded by barbarians."

Sarah made it clear that he speaks from personal experience. "My country is predominantly Muslim," he said. "I think I know what reality I'm talking about."

Cardinal Sarah warned that if Europe were to fall, Islam would prevail as the world religion, altering the course of history and culture as we know it. "If Europe disappears, and with it the priceless values of the Old Continent, Islam will invade the world and we will completely change culture, anthropology, and moral vision," he warned.' [Emphasis added]

 Similar warnings, but from a secular/ Jewish perspective:

'There is no mental contortion too extreme for European liberals when it comes to covering up the crimes and misconduct of the members of the immigrant Muslim population. The latest example comes from Germany, where a state-funded study concluded that growing anti-semitism among Muslims was in fact a result of “Islamophobia” in the country....'

David Singer: Trump Exposes United Nations as World’s Epicentre for Jew-Hatred

Here's the latest article by Sydney lawyer and international affairs analyst David Singer.

He writes:

President Trump’s Proclamation recognising Israel’s sovereignty in the Golan Heights – and the condemnation issued by the United Nations Security Council in response – has exposed the United Nations (UN) as the world’s epicentre for rabid Jew-hatred.

Jews do have ancient, historic and legal claims to sovereignty in the Golan Heights that cannot simply continue to be dismissed by a UN media release headed “Security Council Members Regret Decision by United States to Recognize Israel’s Sovereignty over Occupied Syrian Golan”.
The “Occupied Syrian Golan” is UN diplomatic doublespeak contrived after Israel:

• Captured the Golan Heights in the 1967 Six Day War from Syria,
• Passed an Act in 1981 declaring that the law, jurisdiction and administration of Israel applied to the Golan Heights – which was immediately rejected by Security Council Resolution 497.

Circumstances have since changed as Israel now faces Syria and its “invitees” Russia, Iran and Hezbollah across this very strategic piece of territory – whilst the UN remains powerless to end the carnage and displacement of Syria’s citizens by its ruler Bashir Assad during the past eight years.
38 years of unbroken UN refusal to recognise Jewish sovereignty in the 1150 square kilometres Golan Heights has finally been called out and trashed by Trump.

The UN’s continuing anti-Israel and pro-Syrian bias in 2019 is the product of a structured regional-representation system which has seen decisions of its 193 member states impacted for decades by:

1. 16 member States that have never recognised Israel
2. 11 member States that have had no diplomatic relations with Israel for decades
3. 30 member States (in addition to those in 1 and 2) that are members of the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) – hardly a Jewish fan club
4. 77 member States that fraternise and associate with the above 57 Jew-hating States in a 134 member voting bloc at the UN called the G77 – guaranteeing an automatic majority for any resolution in the UN General Assembly – no matter how dismissive or contemptuous of Jewish rights and claims.

The Security Council’s current 10 non-permanent members include 3 OIC members – 2 of whom – Indonesia and Kuwait – have never recognised Israel.

The Commission on the Status of Women currently includes among its 45 members: 6 that have never recognised Israel – Algeria, Iran, Iraq, Kuwait, Qatar, and Saudi Arabia.

The current 49 members of the Human Rights Council include: 9 States that do not recognise Israel – Afghanistan, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Iraq, Pakistan, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Somalia and Tunisia –
and another 19 who are both OIC and G77 members or only G77 members.

These States regularly denigrate and delegitimise the Jewish people under the guise of civilised debate and constructive discussion on solving the worlds’ problems – most of which are remarkably sheeted home to the actions of the Jewish State of Israel and its Jewish majority population.

This toxic hate-filled potpourri has created a climate of unbridled UN-sponsored Jew-hatred that has permeated through other UN agencies including UNESCO and UNRWA.

A UN Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian Peopleexists– but no similar UN Committee for the Jewish People.

UN Jew-hatred will be re-ignited when Trump inevitably focuses his attention on Judea and Samaria – the UN’s falsely-designated “Occupied Palestinian Territories”– where the UN still misleadingly claims that Jews have no vested legal rights to reconstitute their biblical and ancient national home there as recognised by:

• Article 6 of the League of Nations Mandate for Palestine and
• Article 80 of the United Nations own Charter.

Endemic Jew-hatred throughout the UN must be eradicated if the UN is to regain any credibility or relevance.

Author’s note: The cartoon — commissioned exclusively for this article — is by Yaakov Kirschen aka “Dry Bones”- one of Israel’s foremost political and social commentators — whose cartoons have graced the columns of Israeli and international media publications for decades. His cartoons can be viewed at Drybonesblog

Outside the UK Israeli Embassy, Ugly Smears, Ugly Chants from Corbynistas

"When I say Free you say Palestine ... Yes, yes BDS"

"O Jeremy Corbyn!"

On 30 March, outside the Israeli Embassy in London (with a bunch of those Shabbat-breaking "authentic Jews" the Neturei Karta lending the support of their presence) anti-Zionist ferals marking the first anniversary of the "Great March of Return", scream and cheer a succession of leftist speakers claming Netanyahu and "Apartheid Israel" and advocating the "Right of Return".

Speakers include Jewish flotilla alumnus Glyn Secker, Amos Trust director Chris Rose, and Stop the War Coalition's Lindsey German, and Joyce Hurndall.

 

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GMPMja0Wgp4

More odious sentiments, from, among others, a trade union representative, from a member of the truly egregious  Jewish Voice for Labour, and a pro-BDS song from a choir of elderly dames, as well as a talk by the PSC's Hugh Lanning:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZzVzui7X-rg

And yet more vile bile, including notice of another demo planned for 11 May:

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B9ivCgMFHM8

(MrAlexSeymour videos)

Hijab Hypocrisy: "Not Just a Piece of Cloth"

https://mobile.twitter.com/hashtag/NoHijabDay?src=hashtag_click

In the wake of the Christchurch atrocity, New Zealand's female (and feminist!) prime minister, along with the female mayor of Christchurch, covered their heads with hijabs out of "respect" for their Muslim fellow-citizens, and numerous of their non-Muslim countrywomen followed their example, including a policewoman and several news anchors.

Aussie columnist and Sky News host Rita Panahi, American-born of Iranian parentage, knows a thing or two about the oppression of women that the hijab represents, as pointed out here and here and here,

'Sky News host Rita Panahi says World Hijab Day, celebrated on February 1, is a betrayal of the most oppressed women in the world. Ms Panahi says a woman celebrating modesty culture like the hijab, ‘is like a slave celebrating their chains’ and it shows how regressive modern feminism has become. She says celebrating the hijab and burqa ‘is utterly perverse and has no place in a civilised society that values equality’.....

 Women in New Zealand are being encouraged to wear hijabs to show solidarity to the Muslim community after the Christchurch massacre.... [T]he hijab is being forced on millions of oppressed women across the world and was invented by men to be imposed on women to ‘control, separate and subjugate’ and that the NZ campaign is 'misguided and counterproductive'.... [T]he garment is 'imbued with deep symbolism' and represents a pernicious 'modesty culture.'....

 New Zealand women who donned the hijab following the Christchurch massacre were "well-intended, but ill-considered and ignorant".... {W]omen in some Muslim nations are being beaten and locked up for fighting against the hijab and "we have a responsibility as free women in the West to stand by our subjugated sisters rather than give comfort to their oppressors".  [T]he hijab is "not just a piece of cloth", but rather "imbued with deep meaning" and "at the centre of a fight for equality and human rights".

Ruchika Sharma, a doctoral student at the Jawaharlal Nehru University, is also aghast at the New Zealanders' actions, and in this article she explains the misogynistic reasoning behind the hijab (lit. "curtain") and its imposition on Muslim women.  Her article concludes:

"The oppressive origins of hijab, have made it an active a tool to subjugate Muslim women. In countries such as Iran and Saudi Arabia forced veiling is practiced that has led to scores of protests by women in these countries. The lawyer Nasrin Sotoudeh has only recently been sentenced to 38 years in prison, and 148 lashes, for representing women who defied Iran’s hijab laws.

As if the upholding of an oppressive symbol was not damaging enough, New Zealand’s Scarves in Solidarity movement also stereotypes Muslim women, many of whom do not wear the headscarf. It presupposes, in the most orientalist manner, that hijab-clad women are the norm in the Muslim community.

Considering the hijab as a synonym for the Muslims not only disadvantages women actively fighting against its enforcement but also has a deleterious effect on womanhood in general. It marginalizes women as merely a property of the community.

Proponents of New Zealand’s Scarves in Solidarity regards hijab as a neutral symbol of Muslim identity. Yet, if symbols of oppression could be purged of their exploitative histories in a day, feminism would have already triumphed. Associated with the hijab is centuries of suppression and body policing. Using it to show solidarity is to marginalize the women actively fighting against its enforcement and yearning to break free."

David Singer: Trump Could Replicate Golan Heights Decision in Judea and Samaria

Here's the latest article by Sydney lawyer and international affairs analyst David Singer.

He writes:

 President Trump’s Proclamation on Recognizing the Golan Heights as Part of the State of Israel (Proclamation) could have important implications for America’s future policy regarding territorial claims by the Jewish people in Judea and Samaria (West Bank).

Trump first signalled America was voting against the United Nations long-held position on the Golan Heights – when US Ambassador to the United Nation Nikki Haley declared on 15 November 2018:

“The annual United Nations resolution entitled “The Occupied Syrian Golan” is scheduled for a vote on Friday, November 16. In previous years, the United States has abstained from voting on this resolution. However, given the resolution’s anti-Israel bias, as well as the militarization of the Syrian Golan border, and a worsening humanitarian crisis, this year the United States has decided to vote no on the resolution.
“The United States will no longer abstain when the United Nations engages in its useless annual vote on the Golan Heights. If this resolution ever made sense, it surely does not today. The resolution is plainly biased against Israel. Further, the atrocities the Syrian regime continues to commit prove its lack of fitness to govern anyone. The destructive influence of the Iranian regime inside Syria presents major threats to international security. ISIS and other terrorist groups remain in Syria. And this resolution does nothing to bring any parties closer to a peace agreement. The United States will vote no.”

The United Nations' designation of the Golan Heights as “The Occupied Syrian Golan” clearly signalled the UN’s total rejection of any Jewish biblical, historic and legal claims in the Golan Heights.

Part of the Golan Heights had been originally included in the territory of the Mandate for Palestine in the 1920 “Franco-British Convention on Certain Points Connected with the Mandates for Syria and the Lebanon, Palestine and Mesopotamia”.

This Convention established a joint commission to settle the precise details of the border and mark it on the ground. The Commission submitted its final report on 3 February 1922 – reducing the area of Palestine by placing all of the Golan Heights within the Mandate for Syria and Lebanon. The 1923 Paulet–Newcombe Agreement was subsequently signed by the British and French Governments confirming this and other boundary adjustments.

Trump could well turn his attention now to recognising the legal right of Jews to live in Judea and Samaria.

The United Nations'

• designation of Judea and Samaria as “The Occupied Palestinian Territories”and
• retention of the term “West Bank” – first used in 1950 – rather than “Judea and Samaria” -used since biblical times

has similarly signalled the UN’s rejection of the Jewish peoples’ right to “close settlement” in Judea and Samaria  – expressly recognised in article 6 of the League of Nations Mandate for Palestine and preserved until today by article 80 of the United Nations Charter.

Another Trump proclamation acknowledging the legal right of Jews to live in Judea and Samaria could happen at any time – irrespective of whether Israel has passed any law similar to that passed on 14 December 1981 declaring that ”the law, jurisdiction and administration of the state shall apply to the Golan Heights.”

Such a Trump proclamation would blunt the rising tide of rabid Jew-hatred within the United Nations, UNESCO, the United Nations Human Rights Council and the European Union resulting from these institutions having failed to acknowledge such vested Jewish rights under international law.

The Jewish people worldwide owe President Trump a huge debt of gratitude for championing and defending their right to reconstitute the Jewish National Home in the Golan Heights – and hopefully soon – in Judea and Samaria.

Author’s note: The cartoon — commissioned exclusively for this article — is by Yaakov Kirschen aka “Dry Bones”- one of Israel’s foremost political and social commentators — whose cartoons have graced the columns of Israeli and international media publications for decades. His cartoons can be viewed at Drybonesblog