It’s Time to Study Jihadi Hate

Posted on by
Reply

Universities have spent decades developing sophisticated tools for understanding hatred.

Researchers study antisemitism, Islamophobia, racism, white supremacy and neo-Nazism. They examine how people come to view another group as inferior or threatening, how prejudice spreads through institutions and communities, how propaganda turns stereotypes into dehumanization, and when hatred crosses into violence.

Other scholars have spent decades studying terrorism. START at the University of Maryland, West Point’s Combating Terrorism Center, George Washington University’s Program on Extremism, King’s College London’s International Centre for the Study of Radicalisation, RAND, CSIS and the International Centre for Counter-Terrorism have examined jihadist organizations, recruitment, radicalization, propaganda and violence in extraordinary detail.

Cover of CTC Sentinel, July 2020, featuring an article on the Islamic State and al-Qaeda in West Africa, with an image of armed individuals in a desert landscape.
West Point’s Combating Terrorism Center (CTC)

Put the two disciplines in the same room.

Give them ISIS propaganda and ask the questions hate scholars routinely ask about neo-Nazis: Who is inferior? Who is dangerous? Who belongs? Who must submit or leave? Who may be killed? What ideology makes those conclusions seem morally permissible?

“under the wing of Islam followers of all religions can coexist in security and safety where their lives, possessions and rights are concerned. In the absence of Islam, strife will be rife, oppression spreads, evil prevails and schisms and wars will break out.” – Hamas foundational charter, Article 6

“Under the wing of Islam, it is possible for the followers of the three religions – Islam, Christianity and Judaism – to coexist in peace and quiet with each other. Peace and quiet would not be possible except under the wing of Islam.” – Hamas foundational charter, Article 31

The resulting field would not study Islam. It would study jihadi hate.

The Missing Research Question

Consider what researchers already know.

ISIS classified Yazidis as polytheists, Shiites as apostates and Christians as a subordinate religious population. Al-Qaeda invoked “Jews and Crusaders.” ISIS murdered Coptic Christians while explicitly identifying them by religion. Boko Haram has attacked churches and Christian communities while also slaughtering Muslims who reject its ideology.

Infographic detailing mass-casualty terrorist attacks since 2001, ordered by number of victims, with statistics on various attacks globally.

The United States Holocaust Memorial Museum concluded that ISIS committed atrocities “in accordance with its extremist religious ideology,” deliberately targeting groups according to identity.

That is terrorism. But it is also something else.

When neo-Nazis create a hierarchy of human beings, researchers study supremacism. When Jews are characterized collectively as dangerous, researchers study antisemitism. When Muslims are demonized because they are Muslim, researchers study Islamophobia.

So study the jihadist hierarchy with the same intellectual tools.

What Would Jihadi Hate Studies Examine?

The field should begin with primary sources rather than assumptions about Islam.

A group of children sitting in a line on the ground, focused on reading books. One child in the foreground holds an open book, reciting, while others around him are also engaged in reading.
Somalia has few children attending school. Those that do often attend jihadi schools of hatred until age 15 when they are sent to military training to combat “infidels”

Researchers could build a database of jihadist sermons, manifestos, videos, school materials, recruitment literature and governing documents from ISIS, al-Qaeda, Boko Haram, al-Shabaab and other organizations. CTC has begun to compile jihadi materials against “the Jewish-Crusaders alliance” regarding “Palestine.” Each could be coded for how it describes Christians, Jews, Yazidis, Hindus, Shiites, secular Muslims, atheists and alleged apostates.

Then ask measurable questions.

How frequently are particular populations portrayed as enemies? When does theological disagreement become dehumanization? How is takfir used to turn another Muslim into a legitimate target? Which doctrines justify unequal treatment rather than violence? Which arguments make the leap from discrimination to expulsion, enslavement or murder?

Most importantly: Which ideas actually predict violence?

Two Islamists slit the throat of an 86-year old priest in France in 2016

Compare Supremacisms Without Equating Them

Researchers should also compare jihadist propaganda with other supremacist ideologies—not because neo-Nazism and jihadism are identical, but because comparison is how scholarship discovers recurring mechanisms.

Take a neo-Nazi manifesto and an ISIS publication and ask identical questions.

Who supposedly corrupted society? Who caused the community’s humiliation? Who is portrayed as secretly powerful? Who contaminates the ideal society? What glorious past must be restored? What future order is promised? When does collective blame become permission for violence?

Jihadists kill people around Spain

The answers will differ enormously. The mechanisms may not. That could tell us something important about hatred itself.

What This Field Must Not Become

This study should not be about Islam but a particular strain of Islamic extremism. It should study an identifiable phenomenon: the process by which particular extremist interpretations construct religious hierarchies, turn out-groups into enemies and authorize violence against them.

And Muslims should be central to the research because jihadist hatred is frequently directed at Muslims themselves. Fondapol found that almost 89 percent of Islamist-terrorism deaths occurred in Muslim-majority countries. Shiites, alleged apostates, insufficiently observant Muslims and Muslims who resist jihadist organizations have all been targets.

A group of people performing in a dramatic reenactment, with one individual on the ground appearing to be in distress, while others express emotions of sorrow and anger in a public setting.
Muslim woman killed by fellow Muslims in Afghanistan after people claimed she had torn a Koran

Studying jihadi hate would therefore not be a project against Muslims. Much of it would be a project about understanding the ideologies killing them.

Where Should This Research Live?

The logical home is a university, jointly situated between existing terrorism and hate-studies programs.

START already possesses terrorism data and expertise. George Washington studies global jihadism and antisemitism. UCLA has built an Initiative to Study Hate. Other universities maintain centers studying genocide, religious persecution and radicalization.

“86 events (12.3%) in the school-based violence T2V data were also categorized as terrorism or premeditated hate crime, indicating they were
ideologically motivated.” – START Plots Targeting Schools

The expertise already exists. What is missing is the bridge.

Bring together terrorism researchers, historians, psychologists, quantitative social scientists, genocide scholars and specialists in Islamic theology and languages. Muslim scholars could be indispensable – not as political cover, but because distinguishing mainstream Islamic traditions from jihadist interpretations requires serious theological and linguistic expertise.

Funding should likewise be diversified and transparent, avoiding dependence upon any government, religious community or advocacy constituency with an obvious stake in the findings.

Then publish data rather than slogans.

Phone call from Gazan to parents gleefully telling them how he killed Jews with his bare hands

The Test for Hate Studies

If scholars have developed tools that explain how white supremacists turn racial hierarchy into violence, those tools should at least be tested against a movement that turns religious hierarchy into violence.

Perhaps they will reveal profound differences. Perhaps they will uncover common mechanisms: humiliation, collective guilt, conspiracy, purity, dehumanization and dreams of restoring a lost social order.

Either result would advance knowledge, and with it, possible remedies.

We do not need another institution to tell us that jihadists kill people. We need scholarship explaining how an evil ideology teaches people whom they are obligated to hate – and when that hatred becomes permission to kill.

Seeing Good and Taking It: From Eden to the Flood

Posted on by
Reply

God, Eve, and the corrupt rulers of Noah’s generation all do the same thing. They see something good and take it. One act establishes paradise. Another brings expulsion. The third precedes the destruction of humanity. How can the same sequence of actions produce such different judgments?

The Hebrew repeats a striking pattern: va’yar (saw), tov (good), and va’yikach (took). The words recur across the opening chapters of Genesis, but the morality of taking changes dramatically.

God surveys His creation and sees that it is tov me’od, very good (Genesis 1:31). He then takes Adam and places him in the Garden of Eden (2:15), providing him with a home, sustenance, and responsibility. Rashi (1040-1105), citing the Midrash, explains that God took Adam with pleasant words, persuading him to enter. The Creator uses His authority over what He made to benefit another.

Eve follows the same linguistic pattern, this time within a single verse. She sees that the tree is tov, good for food, and takes its fruit (3:6). Eve did not create the tree but was a beneficiary of God’s extraordinary generosity, permitted to eat from virtually every tree in Eden. The one she chose was expressly forbidden.

The third instance appears just before the Flood. The Bnei HaElohim see that the daughters of man are tovot, beautiful, and take wives from whomever they choose (6:2). Rashi identifies these men as rulers and judges, while Ramban (1194-1270) describes their taking as coercive. Men entrusted with authority use their power to seize women they neither created nor had any inherent right to possess.

The progression is from creator to recipient to appropriator. God sees goodness in what He created. Eve sees goodness in what she was given to enjoy, subject to a boundary. The rulers see goodness in other human beings and treat their desires as sufficient authority to possess them.

The contrast between God’s taking and that of the rulers is especially revealing. God, while possessing ultimate authority, persuades Adam with pleasant words. Men with limited authority, compel. They exercise the prerogatives of a creator over people they did not create.

Aristotle (384-322 BCE) understood that desire is natural, while virtue requires knowing when and how to satisfy it. Immanuel Kant (1724-1804) insisted that human beings must never be treated merely as instruments for another’s desires. Wanting something good is neither inherently virtuous nor sinful. The moral question is whether we have the right to take it, whether permission has been granted or withheld, and what our taking means for others.

God grants humanity dominion over creation in Genesis 1:28. By Genesis 6, powerful men have effectively extended that dominion to other human beings. What began as stewardship of creation has become domination of people. The earth is filled with hamas, violence and injustice, and the Flood follows.

A white marble sculpture depicting a male figure with wings embracing a female figure, both in a dynamic pose suggesting movement and passion.
The Sons of God Saw the Daughters of Men That They Were Fair, by Daniel Chester French (1850-1931), modeled by 1918, carved 1923

God sees goodness in what He created and takes to give. Eve sees goodness in what she was given and takes what was forbidden. The rulers see goodness in other human beings and take whomever they please.

Va’yar. Tov. Va’yikach. Saw. Good. Took.

The Hebrew remains nearly identical. The morality changes completely.

The road from Eden to the Flood begins when people confuse the goodness of what they see with their entitlement to take it for themselves.

The Countries Paying for Palestinian Children Aren’t Having Their Own

Posted on by
Reply

For decades, the world has been told that Palestinians live under conditions of extraordinary deprivation. Yet before October 7, 2023, several important demographic and social indicators told a very different story.

In 2022, the West Bank and Gaza had a fertility rate of approximately 3.4 children per woman. Among countries with fertility rates above three, the Palestinian territories also reported relatively high life expectancy, low infant mortality and exceptionally high adult literacy.

Uniquely among its Arab peers. Only Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan (neither Arab) among high fertility countries, have quality of life statistics remotely close to Palestinian Arabs.

A colorful table ranking high-fertility countries by life expectancy in 2022, displaying columns for country name, fertility rate, infant mortality, life expectancy, adult literacy rate, and highlighting values with color coding.

Palestinian Arab adult literacy was 98%. Infant mortality was far below that of many other high-fertility populations. Reported life expectancy was in the mid-70s, although estimates vary by source.

These were meaningful achievements, particularly in a region marked by conflict, poverty and political instability. They reflected billions of dollars of investment in education, extensive public health and educational services.

These incredible quality of life statistics came principally from the charity of western countries. The United States, Germany, the United Kingdom, France, Japan, Norway, Ireland and other countries have provided extensive financial assistance to Palestinian Arabs, both directly and through international institutions such as UNRWA.

Yet these charitable countries face an entirely different demographic reality.

In 2022, fertility in Norway was approximately 1.4 children per woman. Ireland and Germany were around 1.5. Japan approximately 1.3, and the United States around 1.7. All were below the roughly 2.1 births per woman associated with long-term population replacement in low-mortality societies.

The Palestinian territories, meanwhile, averaged approximately 3.4.

So the countries financing Palestinian schools, hospitals and social services were experiencing declining birth rates and aging populations at home. And their taxpayers were helping support a population having roughly twice as many children per woman as their own societies.

And despite the western generosity and much better quality of life than surrounding Arabs, these same Palestinians decided to launch a genocidal war against Israel and destroy the world that Europeans and Americans financed.

A person in military attire holding a firearm while walking on a path surrounded by trees and buildings.
Member of Gazan terrorist group during massacre of Israelis on October 7, 2023

The uncomfortable question for international donors is whether charity to a people who prioritize destroying their neighbor over building a society is logical. Or moral.

Norway, Ireland, Germany and Japan cannot purchase peace simply by financing another generation’s schools and hospitals.

A society’s children deserve more than the opportunity to survive infancy, learn to read and live long lives. They deserve leaders who will not gamble away those achievements in war, and an ideology that values coexistence with a Jewish State.

Related:

“Deformity in Palestinian Culture” Is A Permanent Feature (August 2023)

J Street’s Blindness to Hamas Is Moral Cowardice

Posted on by
Reply

J Street calls itself “pro-Israel and pro-peace.” Apparently, that requires pretending Hamas has no agency nor role in the conflict.

In a Facebook post marking the anniversary of the Gaza ceasefire, J Street laments displaced Palestinians, continuing deaths, stalled reconstruction and the absence of a new Palestinian government. It then delivers its indictment:

“We cannot claim to stand for Israel’s future while looking away as its government denies Palestinians the possibility of one.”

A social media post from J Street discussing the ongoing struggles of Israelis and Palestinians, emphasizing unfulfilled hopes for peace and the plight of displaced families in Gaza.

Notice who is missing from this account of Gaza’s future: Hamas.

Hamas launched the October 7 massacre. Hamas continues to maintain an armed organization. Hamas has resisted surrendering its weapons and relinquishing military control. Yet in J Street’s telling, the obstacle to peace is Israel’s government.

Hamas becomes a passive spectator to its own war. Palestinians become people without political leadership or responsibility. Israel alone possesses agency, and therefore Israel alone receives blame.

J Street knows better. Its own policy analyses acknowledge Hamas’s continued armed presence and the necessity of disarmament. Yet when communicating with its Facebook audience, those inconvenient facts disappear.

J Street claims to be pro-Israel and pro-peace while treating Hamas as an innocent bystander and Israel as the sole villain. That is more than intellectual dishonesty. It is moral cowardice masquerading as moral clarity.

HISTORICAL ECHO

We have seen this in Jewish history before – those in leadership positions enabling the mob rather than confronting depravity.

In the wilderness, Aaron fashioned a Golden Calf rather than confront a crowd demanding an idol. Today, condemning Israel has become a new Golden Calf, an act of public devotion that substitutes fashionable outrage for moral judgment. J Street, which claims to speak for Jewish values and Israel’s future, should recognize the biblical warning. Instead, it leads and joins the worshippers, sacrificing moral clarity on the altar of popular approval.

A dramatic historical painting depicting a crowd worshipping a golden calf, with individuals in ancient attire engaging in fervent celebration. The scene includes a central figure presenting offerings to the calf, surrounded by onlookers expressing various emotions.

Israel is a Palestinian Arab Child MAKER

Posted on by
Reply

Before the October 7, 2023 Gazan massacre of Israelis and the subsequent war in Gaza, Palestinian Arabs enjoyed one of the most favorable combinations of high fertility and low childhood mortality in the surrounding Arab world.

Typically, wealthy countries like Saudi Arabia and Kuwait have few children and lower infant mortality, defined as a child dying before five years old. Poorer countries and those in conflict have more children and higher infant mortality, like Yemen, Iraq and Syria.

Yet in 2022, Palestinian women had approximately 3.6 children each, while the under-five mortality rate in the West Bank and Gaza was roughly 14 deaths per 1,000 live births.

Compare that with Syria, where approximately 21 children per 1,000 died before their fifth birthday. In Iraq, the figure was 23. In Yemen, 41. The difference was enormous. West Bank and Gaza Arabs were much closer to the exceptional high fertility and low infant mortality rates of Israel.

A chart illustrating under-five mortality rates relative to fertility rates for various countries near Israel in 2022, highlighting Israel and the West Bank and Gaza's lower-than-expected child mortality despite higher fertility.

If one were to expand the regional focus to Sudan, Eritrea, Ethiopia and Djibouti, one would see an even more dramatic gap – Sudan (4.38; 51.7), Ethiopia (4.2; 46.5), Eritrea (3.79; 36.6) and Djibouti (2.7; 51.9). On the other extreme for wealthy Gulf states are UAE (1.15; 5.3) and Qatar (1.74; 6.1).

Applying Syria’s childhood mortality rate to approximately 144,000 Palestinian births in 2022 would imply roughly 950 additional deaths before age five. Iraq’s rate would imply another 1,300 deaths compared with the Palestinian rate. Yemen’s would imply nearly 3,900 additional deaths.

Extend those differences illustratively across 20 annual birth cohorts, assuming similar numbers of births and mortality differences, and the results are striking: approximately 19,000 additional Palestinian childhood survivors compared with Syria’s rate, 26,500 compared with Iraq’s, and 78,000 compared with Yemen’s. Using the same methodology for Sudan or Djibouti would result in nearly 110,000 Palestinian Arabs childhood deaths.

The Palestinian territories benefited from robust vaccination programs, maternal healthcare, hospitals, and medical services developed over decades, including services provided through United Nations and Palestinian institutions, international organizations, and cooperation with Israel.

Despite the incremental 19,000 to 110,000 young Palestinian Arabs alive today because of healthcare investment and coordination with Israel, anti-Israel organizations have been accusing Israel of pursuing a “genocide” and the destruction of the Palestinian population. These figures illustrate the precise opposite. Israel is a Palestinian Arab child MAKER.

The demographic record deserves to be confronted: Palestinian Arabs were raising large families, with child survival outcomes that compared extremely favorably with much of the neighboring Arab world.

Ramifications: A World of Muslims and “Non-Muslims”

Posted on by
Reply

The parade of international dignitaries has left New York City. The various leaders from the free and non-free world came to speak at the United Nations General Assembly as they do every September.

They left behind the smell of an organism rotting.

The global agency has long had a history of inept bureaucracy. That is, and likely will always be, a defining characteristic of thousands of politicians and diplomats from so many cultures and philosophies convening together. Arguably, its inability to do anything should be viewed as a protective relief, not failure.

The problem I see is well beyond the simmering war between the Global South and the Global North, where regions are competing for a greater share of economic and political power. That is politics on a grand scale.

The rot is stemming from an institution that is increasingly dividing the world between Muslims and “non-Muslims.”

  • Azerbaijan has Muslim and “non-Muslim” communities
  • The UN presses whether Kuwait is “abolishing all legal provisions that discriminate against non-Muslim women”
  • Iraq law states clearly that “No Muslim woman may marry a non-Muslim man.”
  • The UN notes how Malaysia has different laws for non-Muslims
  • The UN asked the Maldives whether it has repealed laws preventing non-Muslims from becoming citizens
  • Pakistan sets laws for non-Muslims
  • The UN questions whether Qatar continues to have different laws for non-Muslims
  • UN report on Somalia: “Non-Muslims report that they cannot practise their religions openly.”
  • United Arab Emirates has a federal law “regulating places of worship for non-Muslims”

The list goes on.

Farkhunda Malikzada (actually a Muslim woman) was beaten and lynched in Afghanistan in 2015, falsely accused of burning a Koran. In the aftermath of Malikzada’s lynching, a number of Muslim clerics and Afghan government officials stated that she had desecrated Islam in order to gain American citizenship.

Leaders of the United Nations agencies similarly use the divide:

No other religion has such frequent use at the United Nations. Try to find “non-Christian”, “non-Hindu” or any other division of people and law and you will find barely a handful.

Priyantha Kumara, a Sri Lankan Buddhist living in Pakistan, was accused of blasphemy and a mob beat him to death and set his body on fire in 2021

RAMIFICATIONS

The prevalence of the term “non-Muslims” does several things at once. It places Muslims at the center of the religious world, elevates Islam as the dominant religious reference point, and erases everyone else into a single category of “other.” Christians, Baha’is, Hindus, Jews, Buddhists and countless other religious communities lose their distinct identities, histories and belief systems. They become defined solely by what they are not: Muslim.

This linguistic centering of Islam is a subtle form of Islamic supremacy. The steady repetition of “non-Muslim” is a form of colonizing the mind, conditioning people to see Islam as the standard against which all other faiths are measured. Language shapes assumptions, and repetition makes those assumptions seem natural. Eventually, a religious hierarchy becomes so embedded in everyday vocabulary that people cease to notice it.

The distance between the polite bureaucratic term “non-Muslim” and the radical Islamist characterization of others as “infidels” is smaller than it first appears. The words carry different meanings and implications, but both can frame humanity around a single religious dividing line: those who belong to Islam and those who do not. For radicals who seek Islamic domination, that division is foundational.

The United Nations was established to recognize the equal dignity of all peoples. Yet its own vocabulary repeatedly places one religion at the center and relegates the rest of humanity to the margins.

The United Nations is subtly surrendering the world’s religions to Islam. Right in front of us.

The Jihadists Are Here. They Are Looking for the Opening.

Posted on by
1

Islamist terrorists are targeting Jews across the West. The FBI is disrupting plots while the protections around Jewish communities face growing scrutiny and political pressure.

This week, an 18-year-old ISIS supporter allegedly planned to murder 30 to 60 people at Minnesota’s Mall of America. He selected the shopping center because he believed it was Jewish-owned and considered attacking during a Hmong cultural celebration, when thousands would be gathered.

Sheikhdoon Abdullahi Mohamud had considered traveling to Somalia – the training ground for children in jihad – to join jihadists before deciding to bring jihad to Minnesota. The FBI had been investigating him since December 2024.

Sheikhdoon Abdullahi Mohamud

He was hardly alone.

In Pennsylvania, Jonathan Hunter Kramer allegedly discussed poisoning food at synagogues while professing allegiance to ISIS. He had previously attracted FBI attention in 2023.

Muhammad Shahzeb Khan pleaded guilty in 2026 to plotting an ISIS-inspired massacre at a Brooklyn Jewish religious center. He selected New York for its large Jewish population and wanted to murder as many Jews as possible.

Federal prosecutors charged Mohammad al-Saadi, an alleged Iranian-backed terrorist operative, in connection with attacks against Jewish institutions in Europe and alleged plans targeting synagogues in New York, Los Angeles and Scottsdale.

In Manchester, British authorities charged two Iranian nationals with preparing an attack against the city’s Jewish community, including alleged surveillance of a synagogue and Jewish museum.

Radical Islamists in UK

The targets were synagogues, community centers, a museum and a shopping mall. The intended victims’ citizenship, political views and relationship to Israel were irrelevant. Jewish identity was enough.

The danger has already been demonstrated in blood. In December 2025, ISIS-inspired terrorists murdered 15 people at a Hanukkah celebration at Australia’s Bondi Beach. Two months earlier, an ISIS-inspired attacker killed two Jewish worshippers outside Manchester’s Heaton Park synagogue. Security personnel prevented him from entering the building, where more worshippers had gathered.

The difference between a massacre and an even greater massacre was a locked door and the people guarding it.

Attack at Michigan school and synagogue by radical Islamist

New York’s Jewish institutions have repeatedly appeared in terrorist investigations. Police Commissioner Jessica Tisch has described NYPD operations that disrupted plots against a Manhattan synagogue and a Brooklyn Jewish center. Jews, roughly one-tenth of the city’s population, accounted for more than half its confirmed hate-crime victims this year.

Therefore Within Our Lifetime and other anti-Zionist activists like the Democratic Socialist of America have demanded that Mayor Zohran Mamdani dismiss Tisch. Defending Jews is an impeachable offense to jihadists.

Meanwhile, the FBI’s methods are also under attack.

In March, HBO’s John Oliver devoted a segment to FBI terrorism stings, questioning whether undercover agents were stopping terrorists or manufacturing them. Really? Investigators in Minnesota had followed Mohamud who allegedly discussed mass murder before supplying him with a disabled rifle.

What would have been gained by waiting until he obtained a functioning weapon?

Members of Students for Justice in Palestine tweet about killing Jews

A successful counterterrorism investigation produces no funerals, no photographs of murdered children and no devastated families. The absence of casualties can make the threat seem imaginary.

Jewish communities understand the danger. Intelligence officers investigate plots. Police patrol synagogues. Schools employ armed guards. Community centers install barriers. Religious celebrations require security plans.

Each layer stands between a terrorist’s intentions and his intended victims.

The attacker needs only one opening: an unguarded entrance, an overlooked warning, an intelligence failure or a crowded celebration without adequate protection.

Almost every antisemitic attack in the western world the past few years has come from radical Islamists

The jihadists are already here. They are looking for that opening. The next massacre will begin wherever the defenses fail.

Related:

Jews Ask for Protection. America Responds With Skepticism (May 2026)

CAIR Thinks Protecting Synagogues Is A Political Stunt And Waste Of Taxpayers Money (September 2024)

Politicians In Their Own Words: Why We Don’t Support Defending Jews (January 2022)

The UN Has a Day Against Islamophobia. Why Not Against Jihadism?

Posted on by
2

After 51 Muslims were murdered in Christchurch, the UN established an international day against Islamophobia. Jihadists have murdered thousands more, including Muslims, yet there is no equivalent day dedicated to combating jihadism.

On March 15, 2019, a white supremacist murdered 51 Muslims praying at two mosques in Christchurch, New Zealand. Three years later, the United Nations General Assembly designated March 15 the International Day to Combat Islamophobia. Pakistan introduced the resolution on behalf of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation, and the General Assembly adopted it by consensus.

Consider the terrorist atrocities of recent decades:

  • On September 11, 2001, al-Qaeda murdered 2,977 people in the United States.
  • Jemaah Islamiyah murdered 202 in Bali in 2002.
  • Islamist terrorists killed 193 commuters aboard Madrid trains in 2004.
  • Lashkar-e-Taiba murdered 166 people in Mumbai in 2008, including six Jews at the Chabad House.
  • In 2014, ISIS massacred approximately 1,700 Iraqi military cadets at Camp Speicher.
  • That same year, the Pakistani Taliban murdered 149 people, including 132 schoolchildren, at a school in Peshawar.
  • In 2015, al-Shabaab murdered 148 people at Kenya’s Garissa University, separating Christian students from Muslims before killing them.
  • Months later, ISIS murdered 130 people across Paris.
  • In 2019, Islamist suicide bombers murdered approximately 269 people at churches and hotels in Sri Lanka on Easter Sunday.
  • On October 7, 2023, Hamas-led terrorists murdered approximately 1,200 people in Israel, including families in their homes and young people attending a music festival.

These were different countries and different jihadist movements. The victims included Muslims, Christians, Jews and of other backgrounds. Every attack killed more people than Christchurch, sometimes by orders of magnitude.

The United Nations has established annual observances for victims of terrorism generally, on August 21, and victims of religious violence, on August 22. None of these massacres has its own comparable UN international day tied to its anniversary.

Yet Christchurch received something these other massacres did not: a permanent place on the UN calendar dedicated to combating the hatred behind the attack.

The contrast is especially striking because jihadists have slaughtered so many fellow Muslims. The victims at Camp Speicher and Peshawar were overwhelmingly Muslim. ISIS, al-Qaeda, the Taliban and their ideological counterparts have terrorized Muslim populations for decades, murdering those who resisted their demands for religious submission.

The UN created an International Day to Combat Islamophobia. It is long past time for an International Day to Combat Jihadism. Its victims include the very Muslims the UN claims to protect.

Ramifications: Teaching Antisemitism and Whitewashing Antisemitism

Posted on by
1

This is going to be part of a new series of articles under the header “Ramifications.” We often see and hear the news but we don’t often consider the underlying consequences of the information, as well as the lack of it.

The News:

Guangtian Ha earned his doctorate at Columbia University and spent eight years teaching religion at Haverford College, the elite Pennsylvania liberal arts institution. His courses included Introduction to Islam, Blackness in Islam, Gender and Sexuality in Islamic Texts and Practices, and studies of Islamic culture in China.

On October 6, 2026, federal authorities arrested Ha on charges of cyberstalking a Jewish colleague. Prosecutors allege he operated at least four anonymous social media accounts, sending approximately 50 threatening messages between October 2025 and May 2026. The messages invoked Hitler, the Holocaust, the extermination of Jews and the victim’s children.

The indictment describes a campaign of terror directed at a Jewish family. Ha allegedly published photographs of the colleague’s mailbox, identified his home and referenced his children by name. The colleague’s wife and three children fled their home twice. The children were prevented from playing in their front yard or waiting outside for the school bus.

The messages attributed to Ha included:

  • “Jew, get the fuck out of my country.”
  • “Lower Merion will be cleansed of the jew filth.”
  • “If jews are so special then they should also be placed in special camps.”
  • “Eliminate the jewish cockroaches.”
  • “Give it another 10 years, and you shall see a true Holocaust.”
  • “The jews are angry because the world has woken up and realized Hitler was right all along.”
  • “the end of American Jews is close.”
  • To Sen. Ted Cruz “You are a slave to the rapist, bloodsucking jews,”
  • In a post directed at Jewish Columbia professor Shai Davidai, Ha allegedly asked what flavor of gas he would prefer.
  • Another post directed at Jewish congressman Randy Fine invoked making candles from his body fat.

Clearly horrible. Clearly anti-Jewish and not anti-Israel.

But what you didn’t see or hear is worse.

Ramification: Teaching Antisemitism

Over eight years, potentially hundreds of students passed through his classrooms, learning about religion, race, culture and society from a professor whom Haverford granted tenure in February 2024. Jewish students were aghast as Ha had long promoted a hateful and divisive environment on campus and filed a lawsuit against the university in May 2024.

In June 2025, the House Education and Workforce Committee specifically asked Haverford president Wendy Raymond whether the college had investigated Ha’s statements equating Zionists with Nazis and advocating their exclusion. Eventually, the college settled the students’ lawsuit in August 2026.

Consider that this vile antisemite wasn’t an irrelevant lunatic ranting on the streets of Times Square.

  • He is a Columbia-trained professor.
  • He was hired at a leading liberal arts school.
  • He taught religion.
  • He was granted tenure.

His students relied on him to explain unfamiliar histories, cultures and beliefs. And he used his credentials, his tenure and his position to teach his rabid antisemitism to over a thousand students over his teaching career. Ha taught that Jews are “filth” as fact, not noxious opinion.

And like all students know, to get a good grade, they needed to parrot the poisonous professor.

CONCERN: Extremist ideas circulate through American academic institutions under the authority of scholarship, tenure and “political expression.” Your tax dollars go to support this student indoctrination in Jew-hatred to poison society.

Ramification: Whitewashing Antisemitism

The New York Times covered the story – and minimized the vicious Jew-hatred.

In the three Ha quotes the Times decided to showcase, none said the word “Jew.” None described his deep hatred – instead they pointed to making the targeted person feel unwelcome with language of “Get out of my country,” “you scums have had it too easy” and “Run. Flee. Leave.” Note that according to court filings, the end of the second post was “Goyim are taking America back, blood-guzzling demons,” which the Times omitted.

To further confuse the Times readers, the article said the targeted “person is a Jewish faculty member, according to three people who know the person.” A reader had to INFER that the get-out-of-town comments were about the person being Jewish – or maybe Ha just had a general beef with this other faculty member.

Were the “jew filth”, “jewish cockroaches” and “rapist, bloodsucking jews” comments too clear that this professor is a vile antisemite?

The New York Times has twisted itself for years to say that hating the Jewish State doesn’t mean hating Jews. Is it also trying to whitewash plain Jew-hatred into a squabble between two faculty members in which one of them could be Jewish according to people who know him?

CONCERN: If even clear and blatant broadcast Jew-hatred cannot be called out clearly and explicitly in leading mainstream media (perhaps because the Jew-hating professor is a minority teaching Islam), there is no chance that more subtle forms of antisemitism will be reported.

RAMIFICATIONS

Americans are being educated in their colleges and in left-wing media that hating Jews is appropriate, and if Jews complain – especially if the actions come from so-called minority groups – they are overly sensitive and should make room for victims of preference. That is a movement of systematic exclusion and expulsion of Jews from the American promise, a much bigger story than a “professor being accused of harassing a colleague.”

ACTION ITEMS

Haverford College. Please read the statement by President Wendy Raymond. She is upset that a professor was harassed. By what about the Jewish students on campus? What about the thousand students who were taught by this evil person? Demand a full audit and review of all class materials that the professor used over his time at the university, and interview the students who took his classes to learn more about how antisemitism might have infused his lectures. president@haverford.edu (610) 896-1021

The New York Times. Demand the paper be more explicit that Jew-hatred is Jew-hatred. corrections@nytimes.com letters@nytimes.com

Will Western Governments Rescind Recognition of Palestine

Posted on by
Reply

Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas has once again postponed Palestinian elections, this time from November 2026 until September 2027. It is a familiar routine for the 90-year-old leader, who was elected in 2005 to a four-year term and has remained in power for 21 years. Palestinians last elected a legislature in 2006, when Hamas defeated Abbas’s Fatah party. Since then, Abbas has repeatedly promised elections, postponed them and continued governing by decree, knowing that he will be trounced in elections.

This latest postponement for the authoritarian leader has consequences far beyond Palestinian politics. In September 2025, Canada, France, Britain and Australia recognized a Palestinian state, citing commitments by Abbas to democratic elections and governance reform. Just over a year later, those promises have been broken.

Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney explicitly predicated recognition on Abbas’s commitment to fundamental governance reform, elections in 2026 excluding Hamas, and demilitarization. Australia’s Anthony Albanese similarly cited Palestinian commitments to elections, reform and demilitarization.

French President Emmanuel Macron secured written assurances from Abbas to hold presidential and legislative elections under international supervision. Britain’s Keir Starmer endorsed Abbas’s commitment to elections within a year of a ceasefire. Belgium tied further diplomatic implementation to elections and Hamas’s disarmament.

These Western governments knew Abbas’s record when they accepted his promises. He had already postponed national elections in 2021.

Meanwhile, only 32% of Palestinian Arabs are in favor of a two-state solution with a majority opposed according to an October 2026 Gallup poll. So what Palestinian state are western governments trying to recognize anyway?

The implications are straightforward. Western governments should announce that they are standing by their words and not going to recognize a Palestinian State headed by an authoritarian corrupt Holocaust denier, nor one with a genocidal jihadi legislature.

The Stateless Arabs from Palestine (SAPs) do not want a state to coexist next to a Jewish State; they want to control every inch of the holy land. Perhaps it is time for western governments to recognize what these regional Arabs have been saying consistently for a century.

Related:

Jews “In Any Part Of Palestine” (July 2025)