The Other Side

‘So many Times in the human history has the majority been wrong on crucial life and death issues. Winston Churchill was the lonely voice of warning in the 1930s when Germany rearmed.”[Rabbi Berel Wein]

“The true civilization is where every man gives to every other every right that he claims for himself” [Robert Green Ingersall.]

No region in the world is as volatile, as strategically important—and as potentially dangerous—as the Middle East. It sheds light on the persistent press enthusiasm for the enthusiasm “Palestinian” and Midwestern dictators. It is a powerful indictment of recent media miscoverage of Israel—a needed eye-opener for journalists, readers and viewers.

The role of the media in covering the Hamas-Israel conflict has been consistently biased and a regular feature. Of course, it is far from a new phenomenon, it being a manifestation of the past Arab-Israeli conflicts. For years, we labored under headlines as “Israel’s Iron fist”, “Jewish settler kills an Arab Amidst Continuing Disorder”, “Zionism is Racism”, “Israel has no future or past and her existence is temporary”, “The two nations [the Jordanian and the Palestinian] are, in fact, one”; and then we had the New York Times Friedman who in his 1984 article, “The Power of Fanatics” equated the 1982 Syrian army massacre of 20-30,000 Syrian civilians in Hama to Rabbi Meir Kahane’s advocacy of expelling Arabs for Israel.

Freidman’s agenda allows for only one set of rational actors—the “Palestinians” who riot and kill for the “just” cause of national liberation—an all too familiar refrain heard on behalf of many national liberation—an all too familiar refrain heard on behalf of many liberation groups. He virtually denies the centrality of the long-standing Arab refusal to concede any land for a Jewish state.

An extraordinary investigation, under the name of “Unbias the News” by Belle de Jong on “Why journalists are speaking out against media bias in reporting on Israel-Palestine” seeks to answer the subject topic. In fact the title is totally misleading, the truth being the absolute opposite of the author’s intent.

On to cotempory times. To begin with, this writer contends that the manner in which the recent debate was conducted is absolutely fallacious. Edward Alexander and Paul Bogdanor’s,”The Jewish Divide Over Israel: Accusers and Defenders” is invaluable in explaining how to conduct an impartial event.

The given authors assembled 18 essays that strip away the prophetic robes of Israel’s Jewish detractors. Jews who hate Israel and compete with unabashed anti-Semites in the savagery and unscrupulousness of their attacks on the Jewish state are the “accusers” in the subtitle of the given book; Israel’s “defenders” are its writers.

After their catastrophic defeat in 1967, Arabs hastened to overcome inferiority on the battlefield with superiority in the war of ideas. Their [English-language] propaganda stopped trumpeting their desire to eradicate Israel. Instead, they redefined their war of aggression against the Jews as a struggle for the liberation of downtrodden “Palestinian” Arabs. Hence, they created an appeal to liberals and radicals.

Israel’s Jewish accusers have played a crucial and disproportionate role in the upsurge of anti-Semitism precisely because they speak as Jews; since most of them are indifferent to religion and tradition and tradition, anti-Zionism is precisely what—or so they think—makes them Jews.

The book’s essayists are Cynthia Ozick, Alvin Rozenfeld, Efraim Karsh, Benjamin Balint, Assaf Sagiv, Menachem Kellner, Alan Mittleman, Martin Krossel, David Roskies, Rael Jean Isaac, Jacob Neusner, and Irving Louis Horowitz.

Diverse in their approaches, they share the conviction that the foundation of Israel in 1948 was one of the few redeeming events in a century of blood and shame.

Returning to the present day debate, it lacked impersonality. The moderators should not have been politicians, but rather seasoned intellectuals.

Mark Reed Levin [born September 21,, 1957] is a brilliant and well known American broadcast news analyst, columnist, lawyer, political commentator, radio personality, and writer. He describes NY Times bestseller, “The Case for Trump” “a brilliant and bracing analysis of Donald Trump, his presidency, and his vision of America’s future –now updated for 2024.

The book authored by Professor Victor Davis Hanson, himself an award-winning historian and political commentator, explains how a celebrity businessman with no political or military experience triumphed over 16 well-qualified republican rivals, a Democrat with a quarter-billion-dollar war chest, and a hostile media and Washington establishment to become an extremely successful president.

Trump alone saw a political opportunity in defending the working people of America’s interior whom the coastal elite of both parties had come to scorn, Hanson argues. And Trump alone had the instincts and energy to pursue this opening to victory, dismantle a corrupt old order, and bring long-overdue policy changes at home and abroad. After decades of drift, America needed the outsider Trump to do what normal politicians would not and could not do.

Now updated for the 2024 election with a comprehensive new introduction, this is the essential book on what Donald Trump means for America.

David Rubin’s, “Trump and the Jews” was published in 2018, and remains relevant. Christopher Ruddy, CEO of Newsman Media, “David Rubin’s “Trump and the Jews” are a powerful and true account of President Trump’s transformation of America’s relationship with Israel, creating a new opportunity for peace. A great read.”

“David Rubin is a voice that needs to be heard. His “Trump and the Jews” is a timely, perhaps urgent, assessment of where we stand politically between America and Israel in the age of Trump. This is an important book, even a wake-up call whichever way one leans politically. Agree or disagree, it’s a riveting read.”

Douglas Altabef, Chairman of the Board of Im Tirtzu, writes on the complex relationship between Kamala Hariss and American Jews. “With some viewing Kamala Hariss as supportive and others skeptical of her alignment with the increasingly Left-leaning Democratic Party, it is essential to consider deeper issues at play.”

“The range of Jewish attitudes toward presidential candidate Vice President Kamala Harris is mesmerizing.”The choice of her liaison to the Jewish community, foreign policy and defense expert Ilan Goldenberg, should provide no comfort to those seeking signals of support for Israel and Jews that would belie the sentiments of the Left.

“Goldenberg managed to oppose the move of the United States Embassy to Jerusalem to Jerusalem.” He supported the JCPOA nuclear negotiations with Iran in 2015 and a strong condemnation of Israel’s settlements in Judea and Samaria.

With his behavior he most certainly qualifies as a self-hating Jew or as defined by Dennis Prager a Non-Jewish Jew and a non-American American.

Trevor Loudon is an author, filmmaker, and public speaker from New Zealand. For more than 30 years, he has researched radical Left, Marxist, and terrorist movements and their covert influence on mainstream politics. He is best known for his book “Enemies Within: Communists, Socialists and Progressives in the US Congress” and his similarly themed documentary film, “Enemies Within.”

Loudan offers a detailed history of Kamala Harris and the Communists who hate us—Audio and transcript. His “Trevor Loudon on Kamala Hariss is considered one of the most detailed and informative descriptions seen. In his conclusion, he says “She is a hardcore Leftist who has worked with Maoist Communists her entire life, her entire political career.

His ultimate essay is titled, “Why is No One [Except the President] Calling out Kamala Hariss Ties?

As for the debate, the decision of the two ABC News moderators—David Muir and Linsey Davis—to blatantly take her side throughout the two-hour slog didn’t just call into question the fairness of the disputation. It was also a confirmation of the bias of the two journalists and their network.

Following the debate, a return to the outstanding issues will be addressed. One of these has to do with the conclusion of the war e.g. “Why the ’Palestinian’ Authority is no Better than Hamas.” By Bassam Tawil. [JVS]

The summarized conclusion. If the dreamers believe that the PA, as part of a “revitalization” process, will cease its endless glorification of terrorists and systematically rewarding them with monthly stipends for murdering Israelis, it is in for a rude awakening.

As all doubtless knows, replacing Hamas with the PA will change nothing in the Gaza Strip.