Category Archives: Israel

Genocidal War Versus Ethnic Cleansing War

Posted on by
Reply

There are two wars taking place in Gaza: one is a textbook definition of a genocidal war while the other is a reluctant war of ethnic cleansing.

While critics of the Jewish State hurl the term “genocide” as a weapon, a blood libel designed to strip Israel of its legitimacy, it is an inversion: it is Hamas and only Hamas that is engaged in a genocide.

Hamas’s 1988 foundational charter is not a vague political platform. It is an open call to murder Jews. Article 7 quotes an Islamic hadith that urges Muslims to kill Jews wherever they find them. Article 13 states that “initiatives and so-called peaceful solutions and international conferences are in contradiction to the principles of the Islamic Resistance Movement.” Peace is forbidden. Coexistence is a crime.

And the Palestinian people did not reject this vision; they embraced it. In 2005, they elected Mahmoud Abbas as president — a man who wrote his doctoral thesis denying the Holocaust. In 2006, they voted Hamas into power, giving the genocidal group 58% of the parliament. These were not fringe votes. These were popular, democratic choices made in full view of Hamas’s open ideology.

Then came October 7, 2023.

In the worst massacre of Jews since the Holocaust, Hamas — the ruling government of Gaza — unleashed its long-promised war of annihilation. They murdered 1,200 people, from babies in cribs to elderly women in wheelchairs. They burned families alive, filmed their atrocities, and broadcast their bloodlust to the world. The Palestinian street erupted in celebration. Polls showed 75% of Palestinian Arabs supporting the massacre of Jews.

This was not a surprise. This was fulfillment. A generation raised on genocidal propaganda in schools, mosques, and television carried out what they had been taught. They were not rebelling against Hamas — they were Hamas. Thousands of Gazans participated in the October 7 slaughter.

Polls from Palestinian Center for Policy and Survey Research

Israel, faced with an existential threat, responded. It had tried the diplomatic route. It had withdrawn from Gaza in 2005. It had allowed billions of dollars in humanitarian aid to flow into the Strip. It had mostly tolerated rocket fire and bus bombings and flaming kites with modest responses. But after October 7, there was no possibility of a tepid response with a group with an increasing capacity to carry out its genocidal intent.

Israel launched a war of necessity — a war to end the Hamas threat once and for all. The goal was not genocide, but defense. Not extermination, but eradication of a terrorist force.

But the nature of this war is highly complex. Hamas does not engage Israel’s army on an open battlefield but underneath hospitals, mosques and homes. It warehouses missiles in schools and launches them from playgrounds. There is no ability to eliminate the terrorists without severe destruction to dual-use civilian-military infrastructure and significant collateral damage.

And that looks a lot like ethnic cleansing.

Gaza ruins

Ethnic cleansing refers to the forced removal of an ethnic or religious group from a territory. And yes, it is possible that the outcome of Israel’s war will be a Gaza without many Palestinian Arabs. Gaza cannot be rebuilt atop terrorist tunnels and booby traps. The terrorist enclave that Gazans built since 2007 cannot remain nor be replicated.

It has long been a sign of instilled antisemitism that the United Nations has accused Israel of genocide, at least as far back as 2013, as a mask for Palestinian Arabs genocidal intentions. It is a classic form of the adage “the best defense is a good offense,” accusing Israel of the crimes of Palestinian Arabs, forcing Israel into a defensive posture, both militarily and politically.

But it is another level of tragic irony that in this defensive war, Israel is open to the accusation of ethnic cleansing.

No nation on earth has faced the choices Israel faces. No other country is expected to coexist with a neighbor whose elected leaders seek its annihilation. No one wants to see civilian suffering but Israel has tried every alternative — and the price has always been paid in Jewish blood.

The world is watching a premeditated war of genocide – which it enabled and encouraged through the United Nations’ statements and actions – be defeated by a small, determined country. The contours of that victory may appear to the casual viewer as ethnic cleansing, and will certainly be marketed as such by Israel haters, as a cruel collective punishment against civilians and so-called “refugees.”

The Global North will consider “ethnic cleansing” as the lesser charge relative to the smear of “genocide” long advanced by the Global South. Will the resulting actions encourage and enable the next genocidal war against the Jewish State remains to be seen.

Related:

There Is No ‘Genocide’ Against Infrastructure (January 2024)

Palestinian Mothers Engage In Grotesque Prostitution Of Their Children (August 2023)

Antisemitism at CUNY, UC Berkeley, and Georgetown

Posted on by
1

The October 7 Hamas-led massacre by thousands of Gazans did not spark antisemitism on American campuses. It merely exposed how deeply embedded it already was. At CUNY, UC Berkeley, and Georgetown, students and professors came out to celebrate the torture and murder of Israeli victims of terror — with institutional protection, foreign funding, and a growing network of terror-affiliated faculty and student activists.

UC Berkeley protestors come for Jews

Organizations like Canary Mission have tracked and documented the alarming volume of antisemitic activity from students and professors — revealing how extremism isn’t on the fringe anymore. The Brandeis Center for Human Rights Under Law and StandWithUs have brought lawsuits against the universities. Now, the House Education & Workforce Committee is bringing the presidents of these three universities to Washington, D.C. on July 9.

CUNY: A Campus Captured by Hate

Canary Mission has documented dozens of CUNY students and professors who:

  • Featured speakers from U.S-designated foreign terrorist groups like Samidoun
  • Praised Hamas and Islamic Jihad
  • Supported Intifada
  • Called for the extermination of Zionists and Israelis
  • Calls Zionists “White Supremacists”

One notable example is Nerdeen Kiswani, a CUNY law graduate and founder of Within Our Lifetime (WOL), a group which openly calls for “globalizing the intifada” and “confront Zionists” wherever they are, including their homes and workplaces. Despite – or because of – this, she was chosen as the keynote speaker for the 2022 CUNY Law commencement — a decision defended by the law school.

Professors at CUNY have supported Hamas terrorism and protect antisemitic groups like Students for Justice in Palestine. They include Saadia Toor, Eve Tuck, Danny Shaw and Lucien Baskin. They have:

  • Called Israelis “Nazis”
  • Called to “Globalize the intifada”
  • Posted on social media the desire for destruction of Israel

They proudly teach this in their classrooms in departments that include “Center for the Humanities,” rebranding their noxious antisemitism as a component in the fight for human rights. This isn’t just tucked into a comment during a class; there are literally classes on globalizing the intifada.

UC Berkeley: The Legalization of Hate

Influence Watch has tracked Faculty for Justice in Palestine (FLP) which was founded in the 2023-4 school year. It is a network of professors which is associated with the U.S. Campaign for the Academic and Cultural Boycott of Israel (USACBI) and “advocates that universities end study abroad programs with Israeli universities, and advocates that universities end disciplinary action against students involved in pro-Palestinian campus protests.” There are chapters at UC Berkeley and Georgetown, among others.

Professors and students at Berkeley have:

In December 2022 – before the October 7, 2023 massacre – the Office of Civil Rights for the U.S. Department of Education (OCR) launched a formal investigation into UC Berkeley Law School over a controversial anti-Zionist bylaw adopted by several student groups in August. The groups sought to ban Zionists – individuals and groups – from campus.

Professors like Hatem Bazian are affiliated with several antisemitic and anti-Israel groups. He regularly calls out Jews and pro-Israel advocates as the leading spreaders of “Islamophobia” who are evil manipulators of Congress. He teaches courses at Berkeley on “Islam in America: Communities and Institutions” and “De-Constructing Islamophobia and Othering of Islam.” He addresses audiences and asks why there hasn’t been an intifada in the United States.

The school has been sued over its “unchecked antisemitism.”

Georgetown: Foreign Funds, Foreign Values

Georgetown – located in the nation’s capital of Washington, D.C. – is one of the most bought universities in America. It has received roughly $1.3 billion from foreign actors, with over $1 billion coming from Qatar, one of the leading sponsors of the U.S.-designated terrorist group Hamas.

Robert Groves, the interim president of Georgetown, is a regular in Qatar. Georgetown opened a campus in the sheikhdom and Groves interacts regularly with the royal family, seemingly as a conduit for influence in the nation’s capital.

Though Georgetown has a more diplomatic tone, Canary Mission has documented:

  • Students and guest speakers who supported Hamas and BDS
  • Faculty like Jonathan Brown, who have repeatedly called Israel practicing “apartheid” and “ethnic cleansing.” He said Jews and Christians view the Middle East through an anti-Muslim lens but Muslims do not think of the conflict as stemming from antisemitism. It’s a remarkable dynamic considering Brown is a director of the Prince Alwaleed bin Talal Center for Muslim-Christian Understanding in the School of Foreign Service and the Department of Arabic and Islamic Studies in the College of Arts & Sciences. The prince is a Saudi billionaire.

Georgetown has hosted a number of people with links to jihadi terrorism:

Georgetown professor Badar Khan Suri with Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh as covered by CAMERA

Unsurprisingly, Georgetown students have rallied to the terrorist group Hamas and its supporters in the aftermath of October 7, joining in the Global Intifada against Jews.

The Middle East Forum did a 30 minute video about Georgetown’s ties to Hamas sympathizers. It is worth watching:

Conclusion: Universities Incubate And Spread Antisemitism

The picture is clear. Professors promote terror. Students celebrate slaughter. Hostile governments fund it, and administrations on the take allow it to fester.

If these universities continue to protect hate under the banner of “academic freedom,” they will soon graduate leaders who believe murder is resistance, and Jewish life is expendable.

“We are going to have an intifada on every college campus! We are going to shut down all the Zionist events!”

  • Husam Kaid, YouTube, Nov 15 2019
People from CUNY in Times Square in 2019 calling for an intifada in every classroom and the destruction of Israel

This is not a free speech issue. It’s a moral emergency.

ACTION ITEM

Call Rep. Tim Walberg’s office at (202) 225-6276 to thank him for holding the session on campus antisemitism.

Call your senator to support the DETERRENT Act and call Sen. Thom Tillis’s office at (202) 224-6342 to thank him for sponsoring it.

Related:

Preview of July 9, 2025 House Education Committee Session On University Antisemitism: Foreign Funding (July 2025)

Global South’s Beachhead On American Universities (March 2025)

CUNY’s New Anti-Education Professor Of Intimidation (February 2025)

Hamas At Hunter College (May 2024)

Considering Campus Antisemitism (November 2023)

Jews “In Any Part Of Palestine”

Posted on by
5

On February 18, 1947, senior members of the British Kingdom’s government assembled to discuss the Palestine Mandate. By this point, the British had already separated the area east of the Jordan River and handed it to the small Hashemite tribe who created the Kingdom of Trans-Jordan. The people assembled at this meeting were at an impasse of how to handle the remaining portion of Palestine in regards to the roughly 1,200,000 Arabs and 600,000 Jews.

It is worth reading the discussion in full, but I will only highlight a few points here.

By way of background, the British had assumed the Palestine Mandate as well as for Iraq in 1922, while France had mandates for Syria and Lebanon. Due to Arab revolts in Palestine which started in 1936, the British – contrary to their mandate – limited Jewish immigration to Palestine to only 75,000 during the European Holocaust; they placed no limits on Arab migration into Palestine, allowing the Arab population to grow rapidly (more than doubling from 1918, whereas Syria only grew by 50% over the period).

An interesting observation is that the word “Palestinian” appears nowhere in the discussion, as the current notion that it only means Arabs would not be concocted for decades. At this point in time, the idea of a possible “Palestinian State” would incorporate both Palestinian Arabs and Palestinian Jews, a term without meaning today.

Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, Ernest Bevin (1881-1951) led the discussion about the difficulty squaring the demands of both the Arabs and Jews. He was against the establishment of a Jewish State and even sent the Jewish refugee ship Exodus back to Germany. He had mocked the United States proposal to allow 100,000 Jews into Palestine immediately “because they do not want too many of them [Jews] in New York.” As a member of Winston Churchill’s war cabinet, he had prioritized friendly relations with the Arab world and with Muslims worldwide, as the UK still controlled India.

In discussing the desire of the local Arab population in Palestine, Bevin said that the Arabs were “unwilling to contemplate further Jewish immigration into Palestine,” even when survivors of the European Holocaust were desperate to come to the Jewish homeland. He added that the Arabs “are equally opposed to the creation of a Jewish State in any part of Palestine.“

Remarks by FM Ernest Bevin on February 18, 1947 about the Palestine Mandate

Bevin would go on to state the position of Zionists who wanted an independent state, in line with the mandate which called for Jews “reconstituting their national home in that country.”

Again, he made the position clear that “for the Arabs, the essential point of principle is to resist to the last the establishment of Jewish sovereignty in any part of Palestine.” He saw “no prospect of resolving this conflict by [negotiated] settlement,” consequentially leading to persistent violence. The competing demands of the Arabs and Jews made the situation “irreconcilable.”

Remarks by FM Ernest Bevin on February 18, 1947 about the Palestine Mandate

Willie Gallacher (1881-1965), a communist who had opposed Britain’s involvement in WWII asked during the back-and-forth whether the UK’s “Balfour Declaration is recognised to be utterly unrealistic,” giving priority to Arab claims. He failed to comprehend that the declaration served as the very basis for which Britain had been handed the mandate for Palestine. The members therefore concluded that the matter should go to the United Nations General Assembly to decide how to reconcile the irreconcilable.

The discussion proved prophetic. Even today (“to the last”), the majority of the Stateless Arabs from Palestine (SAPs) refuse to accept a Jewish State “in any part of Palestine.” They continue to fight it by any means at their disposal, including war, terrorism and boycotts. Their actions do not only make life difficult for Jews in Israel but for Americans. The US embassy in Israel issued “travel advisories” suggesting people reconsider travel to Israel and the West Bank and to not go to Gaza because of the activities of various Palestinian Arab terrorist groups.

US embassy in Israel travel advisory of July 1, 2025

The SAPs are fighting Jews on two fronts, via the Palestinian Authority (PA) and Hamas. The PA is fighting for a Palestinian State without a single Jew living in it. It has the United Nations endorsement, with the passing of UN Security Council Resolution 2334 in December 2016. Hamas and other terrorist groups are fighting to ensure no Jewish State exists “in any part of Palestine.”

Other jihadists – countries and groups – also rallied to fight a Jewish State “in any part of Palestine.” From 1948 to the 1970s, the Arab world routed 850,000 Jews from their nations. Most still refuse to recognize Israel. Many boycott Israel and do not allow Israelis to enter their country. Islamic countries which are not Arab – foremost Iran and Turkey – actively support Hamas. Turkish President Recep Erdogan said right after the October 7 massacre that “Hamas is not a terrorist organization, it is a liberation group, ‘mujahideen’ waging a battle to protect its lands and people.”

Jihadi groups like al Qaeda rally radical Muslims to attack “Americans and Jews” around the world because of Israel, and attack tourists and fellow Muslims in Egypt and Jordan because those countries struck peace agreements with the Jewish State. The presence of Jewish sovereignty in Palestine has generated a call to history of 1,000 years ago, with the “World Islamic Front for the Jihad Against Jews and Crusaders.“

The conflict is cast in western circles as a local conflict over land between Jews and Arabs which can find compromise, but radical Islamists see it as a global religious matter between Muslims and Jews. The violent extremists cannot accept Jewish sovereignty “in any part of Palestine” as an “essential point of principle.” Current efforts to “Globalize the Intifada” is their rallying call to end the Jewish State in its entirety, with Jews and Christians (“Crusaders”) fair marks for attack.

Related:

Globalize The Intifada With Socialists (May 2024)

The Normalization Deformity: No To Zionism and Peace; Yes To Massacres and Terrorism In a Global Intifada (January 2024)

Hamas’s Willing Executioners (July 2021)

Losing Rights (October 2017)

The Original Nakba: The Division of “TransJordan” (August 2017)

Names and Narrative: “Two State Solution” Versus “Question of SAPs”

Posted on by
1

For decades, diplomats, academics, and international institutions have spoken in rote terms about a “two-state solution” to the Israeli-Palestinian Arab conflict. The problem is that such framing is intellectually dishonest and dangerously outdated.

There already is a state—Israel. It is not a hypothetical solution; it is a living reality. A sovereign nation with a vibrant democracy, a powerful military, a thriving economy, and a diverse citizenry, including over two million Arab citizens. Israel has fought for its survival, defended its borders, absorbed Jewish refugees from around the world, and became the most advanced and liberal society in the Middle East.

It is not a concept to be debated—it is a geopolitical fact.

Framing Israel as one part of a “two-state solution,” as if it were an idea or obstacle fundamentally misrepresents the situation. It inherently delegitimizes the struggle of millions of Israelis who sacrificed to build their nation since 1948 and casts their future into uncertainty.

We are not in 1947.

So let’s reframe the question. The only real debate is about the SAPs—the stateless Arab from Palestine. What is the just, secure, and realistic political future for them?

That opens multiple options—not a binary choice between creating “Palestine” or “occupation,” but a nuanced discussion based on facts on the ground and historical behavior. It reorients the discussion to the SAPs who seek an answer and thereby considers THEIR statements, sentiments, and actions rather than placing the scrutiny and opprobrium on Israel, which inherently strips SAPs of agency and responsibility.

Should the SAPs get a full sovereign state even after the dominant political party engaged in genocidal acts? Can SAPs be trusted with statehood and a military while state media glorifies terrorism and denies both Jewish history and Israel’s right to exist, and tramples on human rights?

Now, under the misguided focus on Israel as part of the “two-state solution,” the United Nations Human Rights Council has a standing item (Agenda 7) focused only on Israel. Similarly, UN Security Council passed Resolution 2334, which only reviews the actions of Israel. Nowhere does the UN focus on the actions and statements of SAPs and their leadership to consider the best course for their future. It’s a fatal flaw, one of many self-inflicted tragedies that the UN has instilled into the region.

The UN fails to comment and address:

  • The Palestinian Authority (PA) priority on paying salaries to the families of terrorists.
  • The barbaric attack of Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad on October 7, 2023, and overwhelming support it had amongst SAPs.
  • The vile antisemitic Hamas foundational charter which brought the party to 58% of parliament.
  • The ongoing failure of Palestinian parties to reconcile under a single governing entity.
  • The deeply corrupt and unpopular PA.
  • A deformity in local culture in which the majority of SAPs have always wanted to kill Jewish Israeli civilians.
  • A PA media and school system that promotes antisemitism and incites hatred.
  • A society with various armed groups which refuse to disarm that are more popular than the PA.

Instead, the UN focuses on misdirection towards Israel and masquerades the reality of SAPs. It gives the PA seats at UN panels and committees even though it has no power, support or authority, parading a fake caricature of the situation. This does nothing to help SAPs address the failure of its society nor hold it accountable for its actions.

For the UN, the answer to the question of SAPs is the creation of a new state for local Arabs which should be Jew-free. Remarkably, the global body cannot ponder that such goal is deeply antisemitic. Equally as pathetic, the failure to consider any other solution to statehood grants SAPs a free hand to commit any sort of atrocity.

The Question of SAPs must not have a forgone conclusion. That approach has failed for years at the price of thousands of lives.

Maybe SAPs can have a state-minus—something akin to post-WWII Japan: self-governance, civil services, education, cultural autonomy—but demilitarized, with security handled by an external guarantor to prevent further war and terror.

Or perhaps certain areas of the West Bank could be confederated with Jordan, whose population is majority SAPs already. Maybe Jordan itself should be divided whereby a section would be part of a Palestinian State together with parts of the West Bank.

The area east of the 1949 Armistice Lines (E49AL) might remain under Israeli sovereignty with SAPs having semi-autonomous status—akin to Native American reservations in the U.S., which have self-rule in many areas but rely on the larger state for defense, currency, and diplomacy. Or the areas get annexed and the residents get Israeli citizenship.

These are serious, legitimate proposals worthy of debate.

Buildings on both sides of Security barrier in Jerusalem (photo: First One Through)

But let’s be clear: any outcome is about solving the question of what to do with the SAPs. It is not about creating two states. Israel is already there.

The time has come to retire the “two-state solution” slogan. Not because peace is impossible—but because clarity and focus are essential.

Related:

The Distant Fantasy Of Two States Living Side By Side In Today’s Reality (August 2024)

The Three “Two-State Solution”s (December 2023)

“Two States For Two People” And An Arab “Right Of Return” Are Mutually Exclusive (September 2023)

Abbas Pivots from Insults to Flattery in a Bid for Trump’s Favor

Posted on by
1

For years, Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas spared no insult for U.S. President Donald Trump and his administration. He called Trump’s peace plan the “slap of the century.” He labeled U.S. Ambassador to Israel David Friedman a “son of a dog.” Abbas publicly refused to meet with any Trump envoy after the U.S. recognized Jerusalem as Israel’s capital in 2017, cutting off nearly all formal ties with Washington. He refused to stop paying salaries to the families of terrorists despite Trump’s demand that he do so.

PA President Abbas issues prayer that President Trump’s “house be destroyed” in 2018

But now, in a stunning reversal, Abbas is praising Trump following America’s attacks on Iran’s nuclear facilities, hoping to reengage with the man he once vilified. The about-face reveals not only Abbas’s desperation but also a familiar tactic in Middle Eastern politics: appealing to the ego of strongmen to gain leverage in diplomacy.

June 25, 2025 article in official Palestinian Authority media, Wafa, relaying Abbas’s appreciation for Trump reaching a ceasefire between Israel and Iran

Attempted Falsification of Division From Enemies

Just two weeks ago, Abbas condemned Hamas’s October 7 attack on Israel, in a letter to French President Emmanuel Macron and Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman. Abbas had never done so before. He is seemingly attempting to distance himself from the dominant Palestinian political party which is struggling to stay alive.

Somehow, Abbas wants to bury reality and history. Just one year before the October 7, 2023 massacre, Palestinian factions agreed to a reconciliation in Algiers, Tunisia. Hamas, Fatah (Abbas’s political party), the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine and eleven other movements signed an agreement to “get rid of this [political] split and cancer that has entered the Palestinian body.” This move was an attempt to unify the Palestinian people under new elections with a single unified government representing all groups. The United Nations celebrated the integration of Hamas and PFLP – which the U.S. designates as terrorist groups – into a unity government.

A total of 14 Palestinian factions signed reconciliation agreement in Algiers to end their 15-year-long division. (photo: Xinhua)

But Abbas now recognizes the endgame of the current battle: Iran, Hezbollah, Houthis and Hamas have failed in their attempt to destroy the Jewish State. Abbas would have welcomed such outcome, so stayed quiet for over 600 days. Now, while his decimated fellow Muslims sort through the rubble, Abbas is attempting to distance himself from the losing side, of which he was a silently cheering member.

Appealing to Trump’s Vanity

As he throws Hamas under the bus, the nearly-90 year old unpopular Abbas is looking for a lifeboat. Imagine his dismay to realize that even after Hamas led Gaza to a war of destruction, Palestinian polls still show Hamas to be more popular than his Fatah party, and over 80% of Palestinians want Abbas to resign.

In Abbas’s worldview, perhaps aligning himself with a winner will salvage some dignity and allow a few more years of relevancy. Despite spitting on Trump’s Abraham Accords and vilifying Trump & Co., Abbas is replacing his vitriol with flattery.

This is not just a change in tone; it’s a strategic pivot. Abbas’s flattery is designed to appeal directly to Trump’s vanity. Trump craves recognition and praise, particularly when it comes from those who previously doubted him. Abbas is betting that Trump, flattered by the turnabout, might seek to craft a renewed deal between Israel and the Palestinians, this one closer to the Arab Initiative crafted by Saudi Arabia in 2002, rather than Trump’s “deal of the century.”

The logic is simple: Trump, the dealmaker, might relish the chance to win the Nobel Peace Prize by securing an Israeli-Palestinian Peace Agreement, alongside a broad opening of the Abraham Accords with Saudi Arabia and other nations whom would likely follow.

There is little indication that Abbas has changed his position on any of the core issues — recognition of Israel as a Jewish state and the so-called “right of return” principal among them. His newfound praise for Trump is not based on ideological alignment or shared values but on the simple belief that stroking Trump’s ego might yield results.

Israel’s View

From Israel’s perspective, Abbas’s pivot will likely be met with skepticism. Israeli officials have long regarded the Palestinian Authority as duplicitous — speaking the language of peace in English while praising and funding terrorists in Arabic. Abbas’s credibility is further diminished by years of internal repression, a stagnant economy, and a populace which despises him.

Still, Israeli leaders will watch closely. If Trump signals willingness to broker another deal — one perhaps based on regional normalization and security guarantees rather than the moribund Oslo framework — Abbas’s outreach could become a diplomatic variable worth tracking.

Conclusion: Desperation Dressed as Diplomacy

Mahmoud Abbas’s pivot from name-calling to praise is more than political theater. It’s a sign of deep weakness — a recognition that time, allies, and leverage are all slipping away. By appealing to Trump’s vanity, Abbas is hoping for a personal reprieve and a political lifeline.

But Trump will likely recall the years of insults and rejection. Whether he’s willing to forgive and forget — and whether Abbas is willing to concede more than just compliments — remains to be seen.

What is clear is that Abbas, who once derided Trump as a destroyer of peace, now sees him as his best hope to remain relevant.

Related:

Abbas Pays Tribute To Murderers Of Jews Before The United Nations General Assembly, To Applause (September 2023)

Abbas Declares All of Israel is a “Painful Settlement” (June 2021)

Abbas Failed To Capitalize on Trump’s Gift (December 2020)

Abbas’s Speech and the Window into Antisemitism and Anti-Zionism (May 2018)

There Is No Place For Jews At Columbia University

Posted on by
Reply

On June 18, 2025, Columbia University announced that it had produced its third report on antisemitism. One would imagine that it would give people hope that the administration was seriously tackling Jew hatred on campus.

Alas.

The “Task Force On Antisemitism” did not focus on Jew hatred at Columbia; it did a poll of ALL students about how they felt about the anti-Israel encampments on campus during the 2023-2024 school year. The “antisemitism” task force wanted to understand everyone’s feelings. It was as though the Black Lives Matter movement put out a research paper that ALL Lives Matter. Not incorrect, just deaf, dumb and blind to the mission.

The report was called “Student Belonging and Exclusion Survey Report,” and polled 9,000 undergraduate and graduate students at the university in the summer of 2024. The responses were broken down between Jewish, Muslim, Christian, None and Other religious groups.

Jews fared the worst on each question.

Whether the question was about “a sense of belonging at Columbia” where only 34% of Jewish students felt welcome (compared to 41%, 54%, 51% and 49% for each of the other religious categories), or don’t feel accepted because of one’s religion where 62% of Jews felt unwelcome (compared to 53%, 13%, 3% and 11%), Jews were outliers, with Muslims trailing.

Jews were the most likely to have felt discrimination (53% versus 43%, 6%, 1% and 7%) and were uncomfortable sharing their beliefs (87% versus 82%, 64%, 58% and 58%). The fact that the majority of Columbia students were uncomfortable expressing their beliefs – including atheists – is a damning finding about university culture, beyond antisemitism.

Jews lost the most friends because of the encampments and campus environment (29% versus 16%, 7%, 6% and 9%) and had strained relationships (53% versus 30%, 27%, 22% and 20%). That is a sad state that extends to the personal student level, passed the administration and faculty.

And while Jews felt the most stress over the period, they are learning the least. The campus protest barely taught them anything about the regional dynamic. But Christian and other faiths learned a lot – of pro-Palestinian narrative.

How does one know that students have only been absorbing a pro-Palestinian narrative from a year of encampments? While half of the student body participated or supported the protests, virtually none supported Israel. The pro-Israel protests were almost exclusively Jewish. While 21% of Jews sided with the Stateless Arabs from Palestine (SAPs), a mere 1% of Christians, atheists and other faiths supported Israel. No Muslims supported the Jewish State.

Israel is a pariah at Columbia University. It is only supported by a number of Jews.

How can an institution that claims to champion an open exchange of ideas have a majority of students afraid to express their beliefs? How is it that only Jews support Israel on campus?

It is obvious why nearly two-thirds of Jews at Columbia feel unwelcome on campus. It is unclear why any Jew continues to attend.

Banner hung at Columbia University’s Hamilton Hall supporting “intifada,” violence against Jewish civilians

Related:

Columbia University Sets New Standards For Free Speech (December 2024)

Ignoring Columbia’s – And The Education Industry’s – Systemic Antisemitism (July 2024)

Columbia University Completely Fails Mission. And Jews (October 2023)

Is Columbia University Promoting Violence Against Israel and Jews? (December 2019)

Netanyahu Soils Obama/Kerry’s Chicken Coop Mat

Posted on by
Reply

In 2014, as Iran’s nuclear ambitions were racing ahead and its terror proxies were destabilizing the region, the Obama administration was more focused on insulting allies than confronting adversaries. A senior official in the White House dismissed Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu as a “chickenshit,” claiming he lacked the guts to take military action against Iran. At the time, President Obama and Secretary of State John Kerry were furiously trying to finalize a nuclear deal with the Islamic Republic—one they claimed would block Iran’s path to a bomb.

They couldn’t have been more wrong.

The 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) did not dismantle Iran’s nuclear infrastructure. It left the centrifuges spinning, allowed weapons research to continue under the radar, and set an expiration date that kicked the can just long enough to get Obama through his second term. Worse, the deal pumped billions into Iran’s economy, fueling the world’s leading state sponsor of terrorism—from Hezbollah in Lebanon to militias in Yemen and Syria, and of course Hamas in Gaza.

Today, a decade later, Iran is sitting on enough enriched uranium for multiple nuclear weapons and is acquiring advanced missile technology from China. The nuclear threshold Obama promised to prevent has not only been crossed—it’s being fortified.

At the same time in 2014-5, Kerry was floundering with the Palestinians. He insisted in 2016 that “there will be no separate peace between Israel and the Arab world.” That statement aged poorly. Under President Trump, the Abraham Accords blew apart that diplomatic orthodoxy, normalizing relations between Israel and multiple Arab nations—without Palestinian involvement. It turns out peace was possible, just not with failed ideas and appeasement-driven diplomacy.

Netanyahu, meanwhile, never wavered in identifying Iran as the central threat. In a 2021 interview, he reflected on the Jewish people’s tragic history of failing to recognize danger in time. He saw what others refused to acknowledge—and acted.

Benjamin Netanyahu in interview with Gadi Taub

The legacy of Obama and Kerry is one of missed opportunities, emboldened enemies, and childish fantasies. The consequences are now unavoidable—and the man they mocked is the one who understood the moment all along.

Obama/Kerry doormat for terrorists

Related:

Denied No More (September 2020)

John Kerry: The Declaration and Observations of a Failure (December 2016)

Half Standards: Gun Control and the Iranian Nuclear Weapons Deal (September 2015)

The Joys of Iranian Pistachios and Caviar (July 2015)

France Hates “Foreign Interference” in France, Loves It For Israel

Posted on by
Reply

In November 2023, the French Parliamentary Delegation for Intelligence (DPR) identified Russia, China, Turkey and Iran as the primary countries involved in “omnipresent and lasting threat[s]” of foreign interference in France and Europe. The committee pointed to “fake news is a weapon of war against the West,” and noted that China has about 250,000 agents on the ground.

The DPR report chastised French society for not doing more, noting “the first vulnerability is naivety, which stems from a lack of awareness of the danger. This concerns public decision-makers (elected representatives and senior civil servants) as well as businesses and academic circles…. These foreign powers are also taking advantage of a form of naivety and denial that has long prevailed in Europe.”

The threat is more than “fake news.” Russia was accused of paying three Serbian nationals of anti-Jewish vandalism in France last week. This is similar to the October 2023 situation of Russians accused of paying Moldovan nationals of antisemitic vandalism.

The French government has not been unaware. In January 2023, France forced Russian-owned media RT to shut down to curtail its negative influence on French society. In October 2020, President Emmanuel Macron announced plans to deport 231 foreigners who held radical Islamic beliefs, two days after a Russian-born Islamist beheaded a teacher in France. The country has continued the policy, expelling a Tunisian imam in February 2024 who had “backward, intolerant, and violent conception of Islam, likely to encourage behaviors contrary to the values of the Republic, discrimination against women, identity retreat, tensions with the Jewish community, and jihadist radicalization.”

Macron announced plans to fight radical Islamism after beheading of a teacher who showed a picture of the Islamic prophet Mohammed, a year after calling Islam a “religion in crisis.”

In May 2025, the French government declassified a report titled “The Muslim Brotherhood and Political Islam in France.” The 73-page document describes how the organization is destabilizing French society through schools, mosques and community centers. The group is funded by foreign governments and has an estimated 100,000 members in France (about 0.15% of the population).

The French government knows of the dangers of radical Islam outside of the country as well. Hamas, the Palestinian arm of the Muslim Brotherhood, is a designated terrorist group by the European Union, and France stated in December 2023 that it would work with the EU to dry up the terrorist group’s funding. Yet France encourages “inter-Palestinian reconciliation” which would include Hamas in the Palestinian Authority government. France also backs UNRWA, the agency that seeks to move millions of Stateless Arabs from Palestine (SAPs) into Israel, despite them seeking the end of the Jewish State.

So despite France fighting the dangers of radical Islam and foreign influence inside France (which make up a miniscule percentage of the population), it seeks to use the June 2025 United Nations conference it will co-chair, to have several nations pressure Israel to embed radical jihadism inside the Jewish State.

According to Jewish Insider, French conservative intellectual Michel Gurfinkiel said that “the main point of the [French Muslim Brotherhood] report is not what it says about the Muslim Brotherhood. The real point is the conclusion that the French government should make efforts to bring French Muslims into the French fold, and that means … to recognize a state of Palestine. There is a kind of interplay here: the interior minister wanted to publish the report in order to give legitimacy to his own policy against Islamism in France. But it was published with the approval of President Macron … and obviously, the real goal of the president was to tell everybody, ‘I must recognize a State of Palestine because it is the only way for us to fight the Muslim Brotherhood.‘”

French President Emmanuel Macron and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu strained relationship over the Hamas war

Macron’s “France First” policy will attempt to sacrifice Israel to radical Islamism in an effort to buy a few years of peace with the small but growing Muslim Brotherhood in France. He may believe that such move will curtail attacks against the 450,000 Jews in the country as well, despite such maneuvers forcing Israel to continue to battle Hamas, yielding more global attacks against Jews.

There are constructive things that France can do with Saudi Arabia to fight foreign influence and radical jihadism, and it is not to recognize a Palestinian state:

  • France and Saudi Arabia should clearly state that they define all aspects of Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood to be terrorist organizations. It would be banned and a criminal offense for anyone to voice or express support or solidarity with those entities. Consequently, any Palestinian government that included Hamas would be isolated and not receive any funding or support. Both countries will encourage other countries to do the same.
  • The SAPs so-called “Right of Return” to homes where grandparents lived will only be settled via financial mechanisms, and no SAPs will have an “inalienable right” to move to Israel. Israel will be the sole party which decides who enters its borders, as every sovereign nation does.

These two steps lay the groundwork for SAPs to reorient their culture from the destruction of Israel towards building a new country. It would be the correct and consistent path for France to combat foreign influence and extremist Islamism, both in France and in Israel.

Related articles:

What Will France’s “Concrete” Steps Be To Advance A “Two State Solution”? (May 2025)

Does the UN Only Grant Inalienable Rights to Palestinians? (May 2021)

France’s Hypocrisy Expelling Radical Extremist Non-Citizens (November 2020)

The New Salman Abedi High School for Boys in England and the Mohamed Lahouaiej Bouhlel Soccer Tournament in France (May 2017)

Double Standards: Reporters Without Borders (RSF)

Posted on by
1

Over twenty years ago, Jewish Russian-Israeli Natan Sharansky coined the “3D Test of Anti-Semitism: Demonization, Double Standards, Delegitimization.” Each one comes for Jews in their own unique way: demonization actively incites hatred; delegitimization undermines support structures over time; and double standards drips slowly into society, barely noticed and acknowledged.

Consider the assassination of noted terrorist Osama Bin Laden by the United States. World leaders applauded the American attack, thousands of miles from its shores, as justice served. Yet when Israel eliminated the terrorist Sheik Ahmed Yassin, the founder of Hamas, the world lined up to condemn Israel. Hypocrisy masked by time, place and protagonists concealed the rank Jew-hatred.

It happens to Israel frequently.

Reporters Without Borders (RSF) is a non-governmental organization (NGO) based in France which attempts to get information out to the world regardless of frontiers, and to protect journalists. Its tagline does not clarify that it does this selectively, such as toeing the line with the French government, and persistently coming for Israel.

For years, RSF pushed to get Russia Today (RT) off the air and internet in France. RSF claimed RT was “Russia’s war propaganda machine,” and successfully got Channel One Russia off the air which it labeled “an important part of the state’s disinformation arsenal in Russia, where TV continues to be a very influential medium.”

RSF worked to ban media outlet RT because it claimed it is a disinformation outlet

Yet when Israel banned Qatar-owned Al Jazeera from Israel in May 2024, which had long served as an open propaganda outlet for the political-terrorist group Hamas, RSF went nuts. The group’s Middle East leader said “The Israeli parliament’s vote to censor Al Jazeera, and Benjamin Netanyahu’s defamatory remarks about its journalists are unacceptable. RSF demands that the Israeli authorities end their aggressive harassment of Al Jazeera. Such censorship legislation, under the guise of democratic regulation, implicitly targeting a specific media outlet, creates a precedent fraught with dangers for journalism in Israel.”

RSF didn’t only object to Israel’s ban of Hamas’s propaganda arm of Al Jazeera but accused Israel of “persecution”

RSF did not only defend the Hamas mouthpiece headquartered in Qatar, its entire framework of the Gaza war completely sides with Hamas. Examples of Hamas simply being annoying while Israel is the source of violence include: “Journalists suspected of collaborating with Israel are hampered in their work by Hamas and the Islamic Jihad, while also enduring the violence of the Israeli blockade on the territory,” and blaming Israel for starting the latest war with “Press freedom, media plurality and editorial independence have been increasingly restricted in Israel since the start of the war in Gaza, launched by Israel on 7 October 2023 following the deadly Hamas attack,” which would be like blaming the U.S.A. for starting a war with Japan after the Pearl Harbor attack.

In January 2025, the Palestinian Authority also shut down Al Jazeera in the parts of the West Bank it controls, stating the company’s websites have “inciting material and reports that were deceiving and stirring strife.” Israel went further and accused several Al Jazeera journalists of participating in the October 7 massacre. Whether causing “strife” or participating in lynchings, the media outlet has been blamed by both sides in fueling the war.

The double standards of Reporters Without Borders attempting to protect the Hamas propaganda outlet of Al Jazeera during the terrorist group’s horrific war but pushing to ban Russian media in Europe is appalling. It also raises questions about the NGO’s biases.

This isn’t a defense of censorship but a demand for consistency. If Al Jazeera’s ability to operate is sacred, then so is Russia Today’s. If RT can be banned for spreading propaganda and fueling war, then so can Al Jazeera. RSF’s double standard is damning.

The reality of today is there is no neutral and completely fact-based press. Government-owned media like Russia Today and Al Jazeera should fall under a single bucket of treatment. Ban them or air them with wrappers that identify them as foreign propaganda outlets so viewers understand the nature of the content.

Freedom of the press is not a weapon to be wielded selectively. But for groups like Reporters Without Borders, it increasingly is. And that should concern everyone who actually believes in a free and honest media.

Related articles:

Banning Qatar’s Al Jazeera Is Only News Sometimes (December 2024)

US Hypocrisy On Terrorist Media (April 2024)

The Scary Growth of Terrorist Propaganda (November 2021)

Nexus of Terrorism Hypocrisy: UN, Qatar and Hamas (June 2021)

Al Jazeera’s Lies Call for Jihad Against the Jewish State (November 2017)

Journalists Killed in 2016 #AlternativeFacts (January 2017)

Liberal Hypocrisy on Foreign Government Intervention (October 2016)

An Easy Boycott: Al Jazeera (Qatar) (April 2015)

Hold CAIR Accountable for Antisemitic Violence

Posted on by
Reply

Over the past several years, the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) has attempted to build a public image as a civil rights organization. In reality, it has become a hub for dangerous rhetoric, particularly against Israel, Jews and their supporters — rhetoric that is no longer just hateful speech but contributing to real-world violence.

A Track Record of Hate

CAIR’s leaders have spent the last several years referring to Zionists as “enemies,” dismissed Israel’s right to self-defense, and objected to Jewish synagogues being protected. The Anti-Defamation League (ADL) has tracked dozens of examples where the leadership of CAIR representatives used inflammatory and dehumanizing language to describe Israel and those who support it.

These aren’t just policy critiques. This is language that paints Jews, Israelis, and their supporters as existential threats — language that demonizes Jews and encourages acts of extremism. When you call someone a colonizer, an oppressor, a baby-killer, or genocide supporter, you invite violence against them.

And now, we’re seeing the consequences.

From Words to Violence

In recent weeks, two Israelis were shot and killed in Washington, D.C. outside a Jewish cultural event, in what’s being investigated as a targeted hate crime. A few days ago, an Egyptian man firebombed Jewish civilians walking peacefully in Boulder, CO in support of hostages taken by Gazans from Israel.

CAIR was quick to issue a press release condemning the Boulder attack. But make no mistake: the climate that led to these incidents didn’t appear out of nowhere. It was built brick by brick, tweet by tweet, speech by speech — by organizations like CAIR that have spent years demonizing Israel and portraying supporters of Israel as evil, illegitimate, and dangerous.

The Debate And Inversion About Material Support For Genocide

Legally speaking, genocide requires intent to destroy a group “in whole or in part.” Hamas, the political-terrorist group which leads Gaza, is the very definition of a genocidal group. Hamas’s incredible support in Gaza and the West Bank and for the barbaric massacre it conducted in Israel on October 7, 2023, is a condemnation of the gross deformity in Palestinian culture today.

The Stateless Arabs from Palestine (SAPs) are providing material support to Hamas. They elected it to 58% of parliament in 2006, stand as sentries over their terrorist tunnels in Gaza and continue to want Hamas to survive to destroy Israel, even after being pummeled in the war it initiated over 600 days ago.

SAP support for the October 7 “offensive” has declined to 50% in May 2025 from 72% in December 2023 according to PCPSR polls, remaining popular

CAIR’s support for the SAPs and their war to destroy Israel has been unwavering. It supported the October 7 attacks while Hamas was still burning families alive, making then President Biden remove CAIR from the taskforce to combat antisemitism. CAIR continues to support SAPs in the war, and calls Gazans’ failure to commit a genocide of Jews, a genocide perpetrated by Israel, in an attempted absolution via inversion.

Leader of CAIR on October 7, 2023 supporting Palestinians massacre of civilians in Israel

CAIR has been careful to avoid direct financial support for Hamas, and has seemingly kept its activities on a vocal level. It had been caught in the past being linked to the terrorist group Holy Land Foundation, which provided material support to Hamas, and is attempting to avoid becoming a banned entity.

To all appearances, to make up for its inability to materially back the antisemitic horde in Gaza, CAIR has ratcheted the language it uses for Israel and its supporters. In doing so, it has created a toxic swamp of Jew hatred in the United States.

Leader of CAIR San Francisco speaking at American Muslims For Palestine event November 2021

Has CAIR provided material support of a genocide of Jews in Israel? It has probably avoided that in a court of law. But abetting a genocide of Jews in the United States? It seems clear that it is doing so, despite the veneer of its condemnation of the Boulder attack. Sanctifying the burning of Jews alive in Israel endorses the burning of Jews in Boulder, despite the wink to the press.

Home of Israeli family burned by Gazans during October 7, 2023 massacre

Just a few months before Gazans launched its war of extermination, United Nations Secretary General Antonio Guterres delivered remarks for the anniversary of the 1994 Rwanda genocide against the Tutsi. He flagged hate speech as the “key indicator of the risk of genocide.”

How easily hate speech — a key indicator of the risk of genocide — turns to hate crime.  How complacency in the face of atrocity is complicity.  And how no place, and no time is immune to danger — including our own.

UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres

CAIR’s vilification of Jewish groups caught the attention of The Investigative Project on Terrorism back in December 2021. The vitriol from the CAIR has only increased since the October 7 attack.

Why This Matters for America

The attacks in Boulder and Washington aren’t isolated incidents — they’re part of a pattern. Jewish Americans are the most targeted group for hate crimes per capita in the United States – far above Blacks or members of the LGBT community. Yet groups like CAIR continue to push rhetoric that fuels that fire while pretending to stand for peace.

Enough is enough.

We can — and must — defend free speech. But we must also hold public figures and organizations accountable for the real-world consequences of their words. That starts by demanding that CAIR and others stop using anti-Zionism as a cover for antisemitism, stop dehumanizing Israelis and their supporters, and start owning up to the damage they’ve done. Their Diaspora Intifada is killing Jews here in America.

Jews have every right to safety and dignity. If CAIR can’t accept that, then maybe it’s time the rest of us stop accepting CAIR as a legitimate voice in our public discourse.

Related articles:

Colorful Antisemitic Manifestos Are At Your Lips (May 2025)

The Diaspora Intifada (September 2024)

Hamas, CAIR, DSA, Within Our Lifetime, SJP Are All Gunning For Jews (May 2024)

CAIR On October 7 Sadistic Massacre (December 2023)