The late comedian George Carlin had a famous routine about “the seven words you can’t say on television.” It was funny because everyone knew the words, and everyone knew the absurdity of pretending they didn’t exist. Then came cable television — HBO, Showtime, and the rest — and suddenly those words were everywhere. What once felt taboo became common, even boring.
So it is with the language used against Israel.
In 1991, after intense U.S. diplomatic pressure, the United Nations revoked its infamous “Zionism is racism” resolution. For a moment, it seemed like the libel had been buried. There was hope that the relentless delegitimization campaign against Israel would fade, that the language of hate would finally be retired.
But in 2001, just days before the jihadist terror attacks of September 11, the Durban Conference in South Africa blew the doors wide open again. A coalition of NGOs issued a statement accusing Israel of no fewer than five of the gravest crimes known to humanity:
Apartheid
Genocide
Ethnic cleansing
Racism
Crimes against humanity
This wasn’t fringe rhetoric. It was delivered under the UN umbrella, with global media present. Durban made it “respectable” to say the unsayable — and to say it loudly.
Since then, those accusations have seeped into mainstream discourse. Palestinian “human rights” groups echo the smears repeatedly. They are repeated on college campuses, in international tribunals, in op-eds from major newspapers, and by activists on social media. What was once a shocking smear has become routine — as casual as an f-bomb on late-night cable TV.
Graffiti that Israel is committing “Genocide” in Venice, August 2025
Durban didn’t just make it acceptable to slander Israel — it made it obligatory for the “serious” activist class. To not accuse Israel of apartheid or genocide – and now especially after Israel’s defensive war against Gaza – is to risk being called naive, a sellout, or worse. The same way edgy comics feel compelled to swear to prove they’re authentic, self-styled “human rights defenders” now compete over who can level the most outrageous accusation against the Jewish state.
The world has gone from debating Israel’s policies to cheering on its demonization. The libels have become cultural wallpaper — so constant that people stop noticing they’re lies. Durban didn’t merely open the floodgates. It built a sewer main, hooked it up to the global conversation, and has been pumping raw hate through it ever since — with the United Nations playing plumber, making sure the pipes never run dry.
The medieval accusation of Jews poisoning wells has been updated: now the “poison” is alleged genocide, apartheid, and crimes against humanity — and once again, the world is drinking it without question.
Israel is the most liberal country in the entire Middle East by leaps and bounds. It has freedoms of religion, assembly and press which are not found amongst its neighbors. It has a diverse population and laws which protect minorities. The country’s western values make it an anomaly in the illiberal region.
Yet despite being a very liberal state, the Israeli people voted for a conservative and religious government to lead them, seemingly at odds with the pluralistic nation’s values. It begs the question as to what drives the disconnection.
Israel Is A Country At War
Israel is not like the United States with only two neighboring countries, each of which recognizes the USA. Israel is surrounded by hostile countries.
Israel is not like Norway which has been at peace for decades. Israel’s neighbors have repeatedly gone to war to destroy the country.
Israel is not like Slovenia, devoid of terrorist groups surrounding it. Israel is surrounded on all sides by terrorist groups and their sponsors.
Israel has been in a constant state of war with its neighbors since its founding, and still has dozens of terrorist groups alongside it sworn to the country’s destruction.
Israel Is Under Assault At The United Nations
Israel is not like Turkey with no standing resolutions at the U.N. about its occupation of Cyprus. There is a standing resolution against only one country: Israel.
Israel is not like Pakistan without a unique U.N. agency dedicated to descendants living in a neighboring land labeled “refugees” who are being pushed to move back. The UN created and maintains UNRWA, a unique refugee agency apart from the global refugee agency, which pushes to have all those descendants move into Israel.
Israel is not like the Vatican which allows full and open prayer for Catholics in the holy city. The U.N. has an official policy of denying Israeli Jews the right to pray at their holiest location on the Temple Mount.
Israel is not like Argentina which has no edicts about Argentinians living in disputed places like the Falkland Islands. Yet Israel has U.N. resolutions to ban Israeli Jews (but not Israeli Muslims) from living in disputed lands.
Israel is not like Cyprus whose capital Nicosia is deemed a united city under its control. Israel’s capital city of Jerusalem is not officially recognized by the global body, and it wishes to divide the city in two as it was during war.
Israel is not like India or the United States which labels products made in territories as made in the country. Yet the U.N. and European Union demand that products made in the Israeli territory of Area C in the West Bank be labeled distinctly, if produced by Jews.
United Nations “refugee” camp with a key on top to tell descendants of Arabs who left Israel while they waited for the Jewish State to be destroyed, that the U.N. is the portal to reclaim old homes inside of Israel.
Israel is perpetually treated as an offensive guest at the United Nations, and not a member state like other countries.
Israel Is On Active Defense
Israel is a liberal democracy at war with illiberal jihadi entities, and consequently elects right-wing governmental officials whom it believes will protect the country and its people, even though the populace strongly desires to elect new leadership.
American media that berates Israel’s right-wing government without simultaneously vilifying the antisemitic Palestinian jihadists, are effectively parroting hateful Hamas propaganda.
American politicians that boycott Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s address to a joint session of Congress are essentially supporting the Islamic Republic of Iran’s mission to isolate and destroy the Jewish State.
We know how America, France and other liberal democracies address jihadi terrorism which has no existential threat to the survival of the country. We know how those countries’ liberal citizens vote in elections when their basic safety and human rights are compromised.
People demand safety first and foremost from their governments, and will elect leaders who provide such security, especially when under brutal attack. Demonizing those elected leaders for doing what their liberal citizens require for survival is a reward to terrorists. In Israel, such prize goes to the genocidal Palestinian maniacs who wish to ethnically cleanse the holy land of its Jews.
ACTION ITEM
Write Sen. Chuck Schumer and Rep. Jerry Nadler to stop condemning the Israeli government for fighting to protect its citizens from genocidal Palestinian Arabs.
On January 29, 2021, the United Nations General Assembly published document A/75/729 which provided an update about Al Qaeda and ISIS, seemingly the only groups which the world agrees are terrorist groups. It contained a section called “Increasing support for the victims of terrorism,” which noted the importance of “healing” for victims and the need to be sensitive to events which might be “triggering or adding to their trauma.“
It was an interesting document for the UN, as two weeks earlier on January 16, 2021, UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres welcomed the news that the Palestinians would be holding elections, which he said would give “renewed legitimacy to national institutions, including a democratically elected Parliament and Government in Palestine.” It is baffling and alarming that the head of the United Nations would want to give “legitimacy” to an election which included the deeply anti-Semitic terrorist group, Hamas.
Guterres added that the election would “contribute to restarting a process towards a negotiated two-State solution based on the pre-1967 lines, and in accordance with relevant UN resolutions, bilateral agreements and international law.” Perhaps he never read Hamas’ foundational charter which is vociferously opposed to the basic existence of Israel and a peace process, “There is no solution for the Palestinian question except through Jihad. Initiatives, proposals and international conferences are all a waste of time.” (Article 13)
Now, three years after the leader of the United Nations called for Hamas to be part of the Palestinian political process while also calling for support for terrorist victims’ trauma, we are witnessing countries calls for Palestinian unity in the aftermath of the Palestinian armies of Hamas and PIJ butchering 1,200 innocent Israelis.
Last week, Palestinian Prime Minister Mohammad Shtayyeh resigned from office in light of the current war saying “I see that the next stage and its challenges require new governmental and political arrangements that take into account the new reality in Gaza and the need for a Palestinian-Palestinian consensus based on Palestinian unity and the extension of unity of authority over the land of Palestine.“
Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov welcomed the move towards Palestinian unity offering “Jesus Christ was born in Palestine. One of his sayings is: ‘A house divided against itself will not stand.’ Christ is honoured by both Muslims and Christians. I think that quote reflects the challenge of restoring Palestinian unity.” Leave aside that Jesus was a Jew and born in the land of Israel, the gist of Lavrov’s desires are understood.
United States Secretary of State Antony Blinken echoed a call for Palestinian rule over both the West Bank and Gaza while being unclear whether he supported a unified Palestinian government as he has denounced Hamas’s rule in Gaza. He shared in November 2023, “we need to see and get to, in effect, unity of governance when it comes to Gaza and the West Bank, and ultimately to a Palestinian state.”
Senior Hamas official Ghazi Hamad speaks in an interview with Lebanese channel LBC on October 24, 2023 calling for more butchering of Israelis. (Screenshot: X; used in accordance with Clause 27a of the Copyright Law)
A Palestinian government that is peaceful and demilitarized which governs all Palestinian territory can theoretically make peace with Israel, however, the majority of Palestinian Arabs approve of Hamas and its aims of destroying Israel and ethnically cleansing the land of Jews. Therefore, one can either have a “legitimate” Palestinian government which speaks for local Arabs which is at war with Israel, or an illegitimate Palestinian government which does not truly represent Palestinian Arabs making a peace agreement with Israel.
The United States seems to be pushing for the latter – a peace agreement over enduring peace – hoping that Israelis will ignore the leadership farce and that the Palestinian street will grow to accept the Jewish State over time.
Coupled with such approach, the United States will be demanding that the Israeli victims of terror and the entire country, ignore their profound trauma.
The current smear against Israel being popularized by anti-Zionist organizations and people is that the country practices a form of apartheid. Specifically, they consider that Israel discriminates against and segregates its non-Jewish population.
Not only is the charge absurd, but it is a deliberate attempt to deflect the anti-Semitism and xenophobia of the Palestinian Arab population.
Ban on citizenship
At inception, Israel granted all of the people who lived in the land citizenship, and as the country annexed additional territory such as the eastern section of Jerusalem, it afforded all residents there to apply for citizenship as well, regardless of religion. Today, roughly 74% of the country is Jewish, with over one quarter belonging to other faiths. It stands as a uniquely diverse country in the entire Middle East and North Africa (MENA) region.
This is in sharp contrast to the Palestinian Authority (PA). The president of the PA, Mahmoud Abbas, declared that “we will not see the presence of a single Israeli (read Jew) – civilian or soldier -on our land.” Indeed, in the lands administered by the PA – Gaza and Areas A and B – the demographics is 100% Arab. Not a single Jew can be found, per the PA’s anti-Semitic stated mission.
Ban minorities buying land
Israel allows everyone to purchase homes or apartments. In Jerusalem, the Israeli government greatly expanded the number of homes for non-Jews which resulted in a +188% growth in units for Arabs between 1990 and 2019, compared to only +64% for Jews.
This is in sharp contrast to the PA which has kept in place a Jordanian law which bans the sale of land to non-Jews. The penalty for doing so can be hard labor or even death. It has produced a terrible scheme where Arabs who want to sell land to Jews are forced to use middlemen and shell companies to avoid being killed by either the government of fellow Arabs’ vigilante anti-Semitic violence.
Ban minorities voting and being in parliament
All Israeli citizens can vote and run for the parliament. There are a few Israeli Arab parties in the country’s multi-party system. In 2022, an Arab party sits in the governing coalition and can collapse the government should it decide to do so.
As the Palestinian Authority has no Jews, it is not surprising that there are no Jews in parliament.
Ban minorities being prime minister
Israel has no religion litmus test as to who can become prime minister. That is compared to surrounding Arab countries like Syria where the PM must be a Muslim.
Ban minorities being judges
Israel allows all of its citizens to be part of the legal system including being lawyers, judges and using the courts. The Jewish State has an Arab sitting on its Supreme Court.
The PA has no place for Jews. Anywhere.
Ban minorities being in army
Israel has a draft system which calls on its citizens to serve in the army at age 18. However, the country does not enforce the law for Arabs and Ultra-Orthodox Jews, but it welcomes them joining.
The PA has no place for Jews.
Ban on religious houses of worship
Israel allows all of the various religions to practice their faiths openly. There is no ban on minarets on mosques (as exists in Switzerland), no ban on halal meat (as exists in Iceland), no ban on burkas or hijabs (as exists in Turkey). The Bahai faith has major houses of worship and the Israeli government actually helped Mormons build their church in Jerusalem.
The PA is only oriented around Arab Muslims and Christians. In Jordan – which is majority Palestinian – the Bahai faith is outlawed and Jews carrying religious articles are turned away at the border.
Ban minorities visiting holy places
Israel allows people of all religions to access their holy places. The Israeli government reversed the Muslim ban on Jews visiting the Old City of Jerusalem and the Temple Mount, as well as the Cave of the Jewish Matriarchs and Patriarchs in Hebron when it took the city back from Jordanian Arabs in 1967.
Palestinian Arabs (who were Jordanians from 1954 to 1967) had banned Jews from their holy sites. The PA and Jordan continue to try to limit Jews from visiting Judaism’s holiest site to this day. Palestinian Arabs have also ransacked Jewish holy sites under their control, such as the Tomb of Joseph in Nablus.
Ban minorities praying at holy places
When Israel reunified Jerusalem in 1967 after Jordan attacked it, it nevertheless allowed the Jordanian waqf to administer the Jewish Temple Mount. That decision has caused Jews to continue to be banned from praying at its site while hundreds of thousands of Muslims are able to do so multiple times a day.
When Jews visit their holy sites in or adjacent to PA-ruled territories, they must have security details or be lynched by Arabs.
Ban minorities from universities
Israel’s leading universities such as Hebrew University and Tel Aviv University have large populations of non-Jews. In sharp contrast, no Jews attend Palestinian universities, and some have a history of banning Jews – even anti-Zionist ones – from even stepping foot on campus.
Ban or limit free speech and assembly for minorities
All Israeli citizens have freedom of speech, assembly and press. Israeli Arabs often launch demonstrations against the government, as do other minorities. In Gaza, only one opinion is allowed to be expressed – that sanctioned by the Islamist regime of Hamas.
Denial of minority history and culture
The Israeli government acknowledges the backgrounds, cultures and history of its diverse citizens. It teaches various histories in its schools and posts official signs in Hebrew, Arabic and English. Meanwhile the PA only uses Arabic in all official communications and actively denies the history of Jews in their holy land, including that their holy temples were in Jerusalem.
Government inciting violence against minorities
Israel is a pluralistic society with Jews and non-Jews participating in each part of society. However, the PA is effectively at war with Jews and the Jewish State and calls on Arabs to attack Jews.
Government reward murderers of minorities
Israel prosecutes criminals that commit crimes – past presidents and prime ministers have gone to jail.
The PA actually rewards criminal activity, especially violence committed against Jews. It calls the terrorists “martyrs” and names schools and squares after them, while paying their families thousands of dollars.
Major political parties’ xenophobia
The Israeli declaration of independence welcomed all people and to this day. The major Israeli political parties including Likud, Yesh Atid, and Blue and White all have charters and position papers that advance a just society for all citizens.
The Palestinian constitution is written for Arabs, with Islam as the official religion. Hamas, a designated terrorist organization by many countries, has a charter full of anti-Semitic smears and conspiracy theories. It calls for a war between Jews and Muslims.
Xenophobia and racism of population
Palestinian Arabs voted the anti-Semitic Hamas political-terrorist party to 58% of the parliament the last time elections were held, and polls show that Hamas would win presidential elections, if held today. The Anti-Defamation League did a poll in 2014 that showed that Palestinian Arabs were the most anti-Semitic in the world, with 93% holding anti-Semitic beliefs.
Israel has created a liberal democracy in the heart of the xenophobic and anti-Semitic Middle East. Those calling the country an apartheid state are not merely engaging in anti-Semitic lies, but doing so in the hope of drawing attention away from the deeply anti-Semitic and xenophobic beliefs of Palestinian Arabs.
Summary: The new leaderships at the UN and US have joined to take a forceful approach to anti-Israel rhetoric, in a sharp break from the prior regimes. Alas, the New York Times still does little to report on it and educate its remaining readership.
“Apartheid”
On March 14, 2017, a United Nations commission issued a report that called Israel’s treatment of Palestinian Arabs equivalent to “apartheid.” It’s findings came as a result of a study
“whether Israel has established an apartheid regime that oppresses and dominates the Palestinian people as a whole.”
The new Trump administration’s ambassador to the UN, Nikki Haley, pounced on the report and pressured the new UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres to have it withdrawn. Not only did he have the report removed from the UN website, one of the authors of the report resigned.
US Ambassador to the United Nations, Nikki Haley
This is in sharp contrast to the reactions of the prior regimes of US President Barack Obama and UNSG Ban Ki Moon who applied no such pressure to even worse false accusations.
“Genocide”
One of the authors of the March 2017 UN report, Richard Falk, is a notorious anti-Semite. In December 2013, he said that Israel’s “criminal intention [toward Palestinians] is genocidal.” Canada quickly called on the UN to fire Falk. The US and UN distanced themselves from Falk’s comments but would take no aggressive action for his removal.
The tolerance for anti-Semitism from the Obama and Ban regimes was neither new nor surprising. It was pervasive.
While the UN condemned the use of the term “Muslim extremists,” it freely called out “Jewish extremists“
Ban Ki Moon never commented on acting President of the Palestinian Authority Mahmoud Abbas statements that Israel carried out “ethnic cleansing” against Arabs, but condemned Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s use of the term for the Palestinian Authority’s treatment of Jews
Obama was reluctant to use US pressure on the world body. He believed that everybody was entitled to a point of view and that he would rather sit at a table and listen to the anti-Semitism than take aggressive action to stop it.
Consequently, people like Mahmoud Abbas felt no compunction in taking the podium at the UN General Assembly to make absurd comments that Israel was carrying out a “genocide.”
Under-Reporting Anti-Semitism
The New York Times wrote about the latest brouhaha at the UN in an article “Tempest at U.N. Over Report Saying Israel Practices Apartheid.” In a story without any depth, the article noted that one of the authors of the UN report had been accused of being anti-Israel.
“One of the authors of the report was Richard Falk, an American law professor and former United Nations human rights investigator whom critics regard as an anti-Israel extremist. He has been refused entry to Israel for what Israeli leaders have described as his hostile point of view.”
This was the first mention of Falk in the NYT for almost a decade. As detailed in FirstOneThrough’s article “The New York Times and Richard Falk,” the paper never discussed this “human rights investigator” who touted conspiracy theories about the attacks on 9/11, and that the US deserved the Boston Marathon bombing because of its foreign policy. It also never mentioned Falk’s outrageous claim that Israel carries out a genocide against Arabs.
Further, the paper has never opted to give a basic education to its readers:
that the number of Arabs in Israel and the territories has grown faster than anywhere else in the Middle East;
In 1991, New York City Mayor David Dinkins let anti-Semitic riots run rampant in the Crown Heights section of Brooklyn. His successor, Rudy Giuliani, opted to take a tough stand on crime and was able to transform New York City into the safe city that people recognize today.
The civilized world can only hope to see a similar outcome in the transition from Obama/Power to Trump/Haley and from Ban to Guterres: that the mayhem and hatred that has been tolerated for way too long will be aggressively combatted.
The International Apartheid Week began its thirteenth annual hate-fest of lying propaganda this week. It’s aim is to circle the globe with calls on college campuses to end the Jewish State.
Israel Apartheid Week at Columbia University
The basic call of IAW is to mischaracterize various foundational elements about Israel and urge today’s youth to destroy the “illegal” country. As stated on its website:
“The coming year (2017) will mark 100 years of Palestinian resistance against settler colonialism, since the inception of the Balfour Declaration. IAW will be an opportunity to reflect on this resistance and further advance BDS campaigns for the continued growth and impact of the movement.”
Note that the group claims that the “settler colonialism” began in 1917, when the British recognized in the Balfour Declaration – followed by the international community in 1920 (San Remo Agreement) and 1922 (Mandate of Palestine) – the historic rights of Jews to live in their homeland. For the IAW, the “apartheid” did not happen in 1967 after the Jordanians attacked Israel and lost the land east of the Green Line (EGL)/West Bank, but when international community made the following statement:
“His Majesty’s Government view with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, and will use their best endeavours to facilitate the achievement of this object, it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country.”
A national home for the Jewish people – regardless of such borders – is an anathema to the IAW. As such, it seeks to undermine Israel and to destroy this democratic country by any means possible.
The lies and incitement to purge undesirables are not new ideas.
In Nazi Germany, Joseph Goebbels used anti-Semitic propaganda to enlist Europe to eradicate its Jewish population in World War II. In Asia today, ISIS uses online videos to recruit more jihadists to rid “non-believers” from its desired caliphate.
And on college campuses, IAW is using its propaganda to destroy the Jewish State.
Your Role
The Department of Homeland Security has trademarked a phrase “If you see something, say something.” The goal is to engage all Americans to be active in fighting terrorism. Similarly, the United Nations has a Counterterrorism Strategy which includes a goal to “prohibit by law incitement to commit a terrorist act or acts and prevent such conduct.”
As IAW comes onto college campuses with a mission of destroying a democratic member of the United Nations, it is incumbent on every person to video every person that takes part in IAW – ideally getting their names – and reporting to law enforcement any calls to destroy the Jewish State.
NYT April 28, 2014 Said that Kerry took step to apologize for saying Israel could become apartheid state:
1. NYT article starts that Kerry made “an unusual statement Monday evening expressing his support for Israel“. Hey NYT idiots- he often praises Israel. why do you lead with something that makes it sound completely opposite of his feelings and the position of the United States? Oh- because the NYT has those feelings.
2. NYT language of “politically charged phrase he used in a private appearance” makes it sound like Republicans were blowing something out of proportion for a private aside. Did the NYT use similar language that the NBA blew LA Clippers’ Don Sterling’s private comment out of proportion? No- the Times used dozens of quotes from around the league to show that the language was offensive to all
3. The article continues that “Republicans” were critical of the apartheid reference, reiterating the claim that this is totally political. Why not mention Democrat Senator Barbara Boxer who called Kerry’s comment “nonsensical and ridiculous” and Democrat Senator Mark Begich “I am disappointed with Secretary Kerry’s reported remarks”
4. Language that “Mr. Kerry has repeatedly warned that Israel” makes it sound that the apartheid comment is not news, and that Israel just continues to ignore Kerry and reality
5. The phrase “Israel did not negotiate an agreement” makes it sound like it is all up to Israel and the blame only rests with them as opposed to the fact that the PA partner didn’t take any steps towards compromise and doesn’t even have an elected leader
6. Hamas is referred to as a “Islamic militant group” and not a terrorist organization (considered by the US, EU and other countries)
7. J Street is referred to as a “pro peace Jewish organization” and not a left-wing group (a phrase which the NYT only reserves for “right-wing” groups). They are quoted as a defender of Kerry to make it sound that Jews in favor of peace also are not in favor of calling out Kerry over his apartheid remark
8. In using quotes to show ‘balance’, the NYT did not use quotes from around the country to show disgust with the Kerry remark (other than from Republicans above), but instead only used analyst quotes stating the comment was “unproductive” and “ill timed, ill advised and unwise“- again, leaving the reader to take away that the apartheid comment was appropriate and just being used for political fodder.
First One Through 