Israel sadly has become an inconvenient part of Rogen's and Maron's Jewish identities. The pair of comedians unleashed an error-ridden segment on Judaism, trashing American-Jewish education, making ignorant and intolerant comments about worshippers of other faiths, and joining in the all-too-fashionable Israel-bashing that one has come to expect from anti-Semitic, but not Jewishly educated, public figures.
Rogen claims that he was fed "a huge amount of lies about Israel my entire life," and declares that "every young Jewish person" is never informed that there "were people living there."

  Follow Israel Hayom on Facebook and Twitter 

Rogen clearly ignores that the Hebrews, the Israelites, the Jews that lived in their ancient lands until they were expelled. The destruction of the Temples occurred ages ago. But comedians, more taken with themselves than with their heritage, find it easy to make fun of everyone, and even easier to say things that are designed to attract attention for their own purposes.

Rogen is starring in a Jewish film. Perhaps this was his dip in controversy to drum up interest in his art form. Shame on him.

No one denies that when the United Nations adopted the Partition Resolution in 1947 – setting the stage for the establishment of a Jewish state and an Arab state, with special status for Jerusalem – people of various religions, beliefs, and history lived in what were Ottoman Empire lands that then came under the British Mandate.

So, who are Rogen and Maron kidding, except themselves?

I do not know what education they received growing up, perhaps a lousy one, as we see them again blaming their mothers when they should be thanking them.

I was raised to be proud of being Jewish, proud of our heritage, proud of our ability to overcome the repeated persecutions and, yes, proud of our state and eternal homeland – the Jewish State of Israel; the land that our ancestors fought and died for generation after generation, and in exile from which we have perished by the millions.

Today, Israel's enemies have made a point of targeting its image in Western academia, media, and progressive circles, achieving some success in making it uncomfortable for young American Jews to support the Jewish state – too uncomfortable for Rogen and Maron, apparently, who should have been leaders in speaking up, not validating the hate by capitulating to it.

In explaining why he is opposed to all Jews living in one place, Rogen is arguing against something nobody is asserting. Current numbers approximate that about half of all Jewish people live outside of Israel. Those of us in the Diaspora should be thanking – not bashing – the half that lives in the Jewish homeland, enduring the volatility, and thanking the State of Israel that works to protect the rights of all Jewish people around the world, including in the United States, not only those who live in Israel.

And, notwithstanding the hateful rhetoric spewed towards Israel, the only true democracy in the Middle East, it also works to protect the rights, health, and well-being of all peoples in the region and elsewhere.

In the aftermath of the Holocaust – when 6 million Jews and millions of other people were murdered, gassed, burned, worked, and walked to death – fortunately, the establishment of the State of Israel in 1948 provided a safe haven for the Jewish refugees from Europe.

Rogen now wishes that never happened, but where exactly does he think the survivors should have gone?

An unconscionable volume of Jewish property was confiscated just a couple generations prior, most of which never has and never will be returned to its rightful heirs, many of whom remain destitute today.

For a moment, the pair of Jewish joke-makers acknowledge that pretty much every Jewish person's grandparent came to this country fleeing murder somewhere, but later in the podcast they seem to forget this fact, as they treat the teaching of Jewish history with the pogroms and the Holocaust as some sort of nefarious indoctrination that they are now ashamed to have taken seriously in the past.

Shame on these clowns for diminishing the Jewish history of suffering and calling it a propaganda tool. They are now the new face of the school of Jewish self-haters who validate the intolerant beliefs of Holocaust-deniers everywhere.

In their case against Israel, they bring up "the Christian apocalyptic prophesy," arguing that we should "maybe live somewhere that the Christians don't think we all have to die."

Subscribe to Israel Hayom's daily newsletter and never miss our top stories!

When people interpret Jewish religious texts to paint Jews as terrible people, we call that anti-Semitism.

In this case, Rogen is instilling false religious beliefs into the minds of hundreds of millions of good American people. Of the many thousands of Christians whom I have met in my lifetime, exactly zero have ever suggested that I move to Israel, or even politely asked if I ever planned to do so. This includes Evangelical pastors whom I know personally and are aware of my love and appreciation for the very existence of the modern State of Israel.

Did it ever dawn on Rogen and Maron that maybe Christians who support a Jewish Israel do so because it is our destiny that is described in our own ancient religious texts, to which they also ascribe? Or that Israel is the safest place in the Middle East for Christian people and all religious minorities to practice their faith? Is it not possible that some Christians are simply proud Americans, and see in Israel a country with shared values that in countless ways aims to make a positive difference in the world?

Rogen has denigrated not only the Jewish people, but himself. His ignorance is clear: His lack of appreciation for the rich history and contributions of the Jewish people is profound, and his use of his pulpit to promote hatred toward Jews and Israel is disgusting.

Rogen's publicity stunt has backfired. Against his movie career, we should all make clear that he does not speak for the proud American-Jewish population and say #ShameOnSethRogen.

Reprinted with permission from JNS.org.

The post Who is Rogen kidding, except himself? appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.

However, generations of Palestinian leaders have made no overtures, while their pattern of encouraging violence after rejecting each of Israel's peace offers inspires little confidence. As the violence compels Israel to enhance security in ways that necessarily and demonstrably complicate Palestinian life, the long-standing, Arab League-initiated anti-normalization boycott and propaganda cartel applies impressive and intense diplomatic pressure against Israel.

 Follow Israel Hayom on Facebook and Twitter

The Trump administration's "Peace to Prosperity" plan introduces a better way. Instead of waiting for peace, the plan takes proactive measures to address the misalignment between the ambitions of the Palestinian leadership and the needs of the Palestinian people. Along with creating hefty economic incentives to align Israeli, Palestinian and regional humanitarian interests, the plan humanely resolves contentious, cartel-generated externalities like the "right of return" and levies diplomatic pressure against the Palestinians to counter that applied through global channels against Israel. This counterweight comes in the form of a temporary settlement freeze that expires before the end of the next presidential term if peace is not achieved.

So, with Israel ostensibly committing to hold open for four years and offer to resolve the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, all Israelis, Palestinians, and Americans should put aside their political inclinations and invest their time and intelligence to familiarize themselves with the details of the proposals and brush up on the historical obstacles to peace. They should also listen to and consider any proposed alternatives that might emerge.

Notably, numerous representatives of Arab countries joined Israel at the White House rollout of the peace plan, even though the Palestinians had already boycotted the event and rejected the proposals "a thousand times" out of hand. With growing calls for irreconcilable one-state solutions from both sides, the Trump administration sought to advance what it knew Israel would quickly bless with a vision towards creating a secure and prosperous Middle East for all.

The overture was swiftly rejected not only by the Palestinians but also by more than 100 Democratic members of the House of Representatives, who in a letter effectively threatened to withdraw support for Israel.

Expressing deep concern that the proposal was developed "without consulting Palestinians and that no Palestinian leadership could plausibly accept" its terms, the signatories put all of their faith in a non-state regime that has caused the death and injury of many American citizens. Meanwhile, with the party having enjoyed Jewish Americans' unwavering and intensely vocal support for over a century, the signing Democrats showed no confidence that Jewish Israelis of shared history, values and acumen would have the incentive, desire and ability to peacefully collaborate with Israel's closest neighbors for the benefit of all.

Much of the phrasing that the Democratic representatives use in the letter either intentionally or ignorantly adopted the work product resulting from the anti-normalization boycott and propaganda cartel, which was launched by the Arab League in the 1940s and extended to the United Nations in the 1970s, always geared towards pressuring the Jewish state into non-existence.

Trump has been the first president to consistently acknowledge and look beyond numerous manifestations of this propaganda and stand by what is known by most Jewish people to be right. At the same time, Trump has shown the ability to simultaneously engage leaders of key Arab states and Israel on working together with the United States to undo the damage collectively caused.

Trump's plan incentivizes a military and economic alliance between Israel and Arab states like Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Oman, and others through a $50 billion endowment, an amount larger than the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. Through a groundswell of support among Arab leaders, the plan aims to help relieve the pressures that burden Israeli, Palestinian and other Arab people alike and unnecessarily complicate the path to peace.

Among those pressures is the Palestinian "right of return," one of the many absolute deal-breakers asserted by the Palestinian negotiators as a universal and reasonable human right afforded to all Earth's inhabitants. But in fact, it is a diplomatic exception to the rule that has only produced inhumane results for all people affected.

Creating this right at the United Nations has been one of the Arab League cartel's most effective pressure tactics in that it has made their non-recognition of Israeli statehood seem excusable to many. Palestinian claims are based upon the UN-adopted definition of Palestinian refugees, which uniquely includes any person who descends from Arab men that left the territory of the British Mandate of Palestine between June 1, 1946, and May 14, 1948.

The 1940s were a tough time for many across the Eastern Hemisphere, so why does no other self-determination movement arise from something so arbitrary as a two-year migration pattern?

Consider the question of where the Palestinian refugees who return will settle.

If within Israel, what protects her Jewish democracy? The Arab League cartel's long-standing objections to the very existence of Israel prompted the effort to flood the region with Arabs and prevent the very existence of Israel as a Jewish-majority state.

If within Palestine, in what ways do the Palestinians benefit and how does that compare to how they are harmed?

Continuing to maintain the Arab Palestinians' refugee status seems to condemn them to a perpetual existence without dignity and in economic squalor where they are indoctrinated with hate from a very young age and are then incentivized to murder innocent men, women, and children.

The Palestinian refugees that wish to live in other countries will remain in refugee camps held separate from the rest of the population and limited in what professions they may pursue. Meanwhile, the Palestinians who live on the West Bank of the Jordan River, or in Gaza, instead of being lifted from poverty would have to contend with millions of other impoverished Arabs flooding their limited borders.

At the expense of perhaps sounding patronizing, a plan that focuses on what the Palestinians need instead of what they think they want serves their best interests and the interest of peace.

Instead of waiting for Israel and the Palestinians to negotiate between bad outcomes, the Peace to Prosperity plan does away with the so-called right and instead creates various funding structures to help Palestinian refugee families living in Lebanon, Jordan, and Syria achieve citizenship where they reside.

It is axiomatic that any infusion of capital and enhanced access to property rights will immediately improve an individual's quality of life. Similarly, the Palestinians residing in Gaza, Judea and Samaria would avoid the added pressure that a mass influx of impoverished Arabs would otherwise impose on their local economies.

Palestine, of course, will be free to maintain records and reassess its immigration policy once stable.

As eliminating the inefficiency of the Palestinian refugee exception also secures the Jewish state, this seemly "pro-Israel" aspect of the plan ultimately does no harm to any side while improving conditions on all sides and optimizing the prospects of true and lasting peace.

The more Israelis, Arab nationals and Americans unify around the Peace to Prosperity framework, the more it assures that whoever signs such an agreement to bring peace, statehood and prosperity to and on behalf of the Palestinians will be enshrined in Palestinian history.

Civilization has not come as far as it has by believing that the shortcomings of today are doomed to endure.

If we believe that peace and prosperity for the Muslim, Christian and Jewish people of the Middle East is important, and we do, it is incumbent upon all of us to read the "Peace to Prosperity" plan, listen to any alternatives proposed by other candidates and think long and hard about the civilization we want to create for our children and future generations.

The long-delayed path to peace has endured many obstacles, taken lives and cost opportunities for both Israelis and the Arab-Palestinians. Upon us is a moment of change. It needs leaders from all walks of life to think creatively, to act boldly and to help chart a path for a better future.

Reprinted with permission from JNS.org.

The post Why wait for Mideast peace? appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.

Testifying before the USCIRF panel in Washington, DC, the United Nations Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Religion or Belief, Ahmed Shaheed, acknowledged on the record that parts of the United Nations are indeed anti-Semitic.

For decades, a group of UN ambassadors representing the world's most oppressive governments have colluded to delegitimize Israel's right to exist as the eternal Jewish homeland. This scheme started with the passage of a 1975 resolution equating Zionism with racism, continued at UN human-rights conferences-turned Israel hate-fests and manifests today with the Jewish state being targeted by more resolutions and condemnation than all other UN members combined.

Follow Israel Hayom on Facebook and Twitter

At the Capitol Hill hearing, titled "Global Efforts to Counter Anti-Semitism," Shaheed stated that the UN Human Rights Council's (UNHRC) permanent Agenda Item Seven is a "problem" in that it is "used to vilify Israel," conceding that it has proven "counterproductive in many ways."

Contrary to what its name implies, the UNHRC is comprised of some of the world's worst human-rights violators, with Libya, Sudan and Venezuela being among the 14 countries most recently appointed to it. Item Seven puts Israel under the microscope at UNHRC sessions, while the remaining 192 countries are collectively considered under a different item.

Thus we see the United Nations, international legal fora and Western academia condemning the neighborhoods and cities built by Jews living in Judea while ignoring Iran's widespread sponsorship of terror and violent oppression of its own citizens. This manufactured stigma attached to the Jewish state has substantially contributed to the rising global anti-Semitism that exists today.

While the UNHRC appointed Shaheed to his role, the Maldivian Muslim diplomat made clear that the decision to report on anti-Semitism was his alone.

He noted that his predecessors had "failed … to look at issues affecting Jewish communities" – a trend he described as a scandal – even though the United Nation's mandate to study religious intolerance originated in response to the anti-Semitic 1959 Swastika Epidemic.

"Somehow, the UN forgot about anti-Semitism and went forward," said Shaheed. "For me, this is bringing it all back home, to where it all began."

While his report did not address the UN's well-documented anti-Israel bias, Shaheed offered recommendations for combating it at the USCIRF hearing, proposing a "nuanced approach." The United Nation "is composed of many parts, differently configured, where different states have different levels of influence," he said, adding that some parts can be used to advantage in the fight against anti-Semitism.

Several UN bodies have been created to support the Palestinian population in ways that are uniquely harmful to Israel. The UN Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA) was purportedly created to provide humanitarian aid to Palestinians, but it serves primarily to perpetuate the Arab-Israeli conflict by extending the definition of Arab-Palestinian refugees to include their descendants, which is not the case for any other group of refugees in the world. The resulting exponential growth in those claiming a "right of return" to Israel threatens her continued existence as a Jewish state.

The United Nations is also home to several bodies – including the Division for Palestinian Rights of the Secretariat and the Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People – that produce substantial anti-Israel propaganda. The UN Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) has passed resolutions rejecting Israel's sovereignty over its capital city of Jerusalem, which ultimately led to Israel and the United States withdrawing from the body at the start of last year.

Interestingly, Shaheed identified UNESCO as one of the better of the UN organs as far as anti-Semitism is concerned. This may have been attributed to UNESCO's recent decision to remove an annual carnival in Aalst, Belgium, from its List of the Intangible Cultural Heritage of Humanity for its inclusion of anti-Semitic displays. Last March, the parade included a float featuring cartoonish characters in Jewish religious garb with large noses, bags of money and a rat on one of the character's shoulders.

Progress can actually be seen at the General Assembly, which although it last December again passed an outsized flurry of anti-Israel resolutions actually showed heightened support for the Jewish state compared to years past, as the vote tallies show. For example, the resolution to fund the Division for Palestinian Rights saw support drop a from 10:1 yes-no vote ratio in 2017 to under 4:1 in 2019.

Even with such signs of progress, anti-Semitism continues to run rampant at the United Nations and around the world.

Shaheed urged the Secretary-General to designate a senior-level focal point in his office to be responsible for engaging with Jewish communities worldwide, monitoring anti-Semitism and reporting on its "overall context" at the United Nations.

"The UN must step up more in making sure it speaks up for the Jewish communities worldwide," he concluded.

The winds of change may very well be blowing at the United Nations with respect to Israel, and a continued sustained quasi-diplomatic effort to build off this momentum could produce a newer and truer narrative around the Jewish state and the Jewish people that might bring more equality for Israel at the UN, with benefits for generations to come.

Reprinted with permission from JNS.org.

The post The UN and anti-Semitism: Is change finally here? appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.