The Flag, the Staff, and the Fight for Civilization

Posted on June 20, 2026 by First.One.Through

One of the most enduring images of the American Revolution is not a musket fired at Lexington or a cannon at Yorktown. It is a flag.

*“Spirit of ’76” by Archibald Willard, 1875*

In paintings celebrating the American Revolution, men advance carrying banners while drummer boys beat the cadence beside them. Often these figures are unarmed or lightly armed. To a modern observer, this seems irrational. Why would an army send men into battle carrying flags and drums instead of rifles?

Because they were not there to fight but to remind others why the fight mattered.

The flag represented the regiment, the cause, and the emerging nation. The drum provided rhythm and cohesion amid the chaos of battle. Neither was a weapon. Yet both were indispensable.

While tools like weapons help achieve an objective, symbols give meaning to the objective.

The Declaration of Independence was not a weapon. Neither was the America flag. Yet without them, the American Revolution would have been little more than a military rebellion. The cause and symbols transformed a collection of armed colonists into a people united by a common purpose.

The same lesson appeared thousands of years earlier in the Torah.

Moses’ staff began as an ordinary shepherd’s stick. In Egypt it became a symbol of divine authority. It was present during the plagues, at the splitting of the sea, and throughout Israel’s journey in the wilderness.

Similarly, during the battle against Amalek, Moses stood on a hill overlooking the fighting. When he raised his hands, Israel prevailed.

The rabbis famously ask whether Moses’ hands actually won the battle. Of course not. Joshua and the soldiers were the actual fighters. Like the flag carried by a Revolutionary soldier, the Moses’ raised arms pointed upwards. It reminded the warriors that victory depended not only on military strength but on the faith that united them.

*Moses’ arms raised during fight with Amalek*

Unfortunately, Moses later forgot the important distinction between symbol and tool. In Numbers 20, God instructs Moses to speak to a rock to make it produce water but instead Moses used the staff to hit the rock.

“And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying, Take the tent and gather the congregation together, you and Aaron your brother, and speak to the rock before their eyes, and give them water from it,… And Moses lifted up his hand, and smote the rock with his rod, and there came out abundant water,… And the LORD said unto Moses and unto Aaron, Because ye believed me not, to sanctify me in the sight of the children of Israel, therefore ye shall not bring this congregation into the land which I have given them.”

Had Moses held the staff and spoken to the rock, it would have been clear that Moses was acting as an agent of God. However, by using the staff to hit the rock, the appearance to the congregation was that Moses produced the water through his physical actions. The important symbol was converted into a mere tool.

That temptation remains with every generation.

Today, neither America nor Israel doubts the superiority of its weapons. The United States and Israel possess military capabilities far beyond those of the jihadist movements that seek their destruction.

But this war is not only about weapons and short-term military victory.

The jihadists understand the power of symbols. They flew their flags over burned civilian homes and corpses of families. Their propaganda celebrates martyrdom of their own people. Their movements are built around vile narratives and identity.

So the engagement with the enemies must be beyond tools and include symbols.

The challenge facing America as it approaches its 250th birthday, and Israel as it continues its long war against jihadist movements sworn to its destruction, is not merely maintaining military superiority. It is ensuring that the superiority of their cause is just as visible.

For Israel, that means rebuilding the communities of the Gaza Envelope, returning families to their homes, raising the flag over places terrorists tried to erase, and celebrating Jewish life where jihadists sought death.

For America, it means reclaiming the language of the Declaration of Independence, speaking unapologetically about liberty and human rights, and using international forums not merely to condemn violence in general but to condemn noxious jihadist violence specifically.

The free world must repeatedly denounce genocidal jihadists like Hamas and Hezbollah and pass resolutions that celebrate democracy, defend religious freedom, and affirm the dignity of every human being.

The current fight matters more than military victory. It requires weapons, and also a proud display of enduring Jewish and Democratic values.

Tools win battles. Symbols sustain civilizations. They are both distinct and required at pivotal moments like today.

The UN Secretary-General’s Favorite Headline

Posted on June 16, 2026 by First.One.Through

The United Nations Secretary-General issued a statement yesterday condemning Israeli strikes on Hezbollah targets in Beirut.

That was expected.

What was remarkable was his explanation.

Guterres wrote that the strikes occurred “despite the ceasefire” and at a moment when the United States and Iran were expected to reach an agreement that would “pave the way to a peaceful resolution of this conflict.” He then added that “this conflict is having a devastating impact on the world’s economy.”

The statement raises an obvious question: what do his comments have to do with Israel and Hezbollah?

The negotiations were between the United States and Iran. Israel was not a participant. Israel did not negotiate the terms. Israel did not sign the agreement. American officials themselves stated that Israeli withdrawal from Lebanon was not a condition of the deal.

Yet Guterres presented Israel’s actions as though they were undermining an agreement to which Israel was never a party.

The logic becomes even stranger when he turns to the economy.

The conflict affecting global markets is not the war between Israel and Hezbollah. The economic concern revolves around the American war with Iran which threatens energy supplies and disrupts shipping routes. Markets do not react because Hezbollah fires rockets into northern Israel or because Israel strikes Hezbollah positions in Beirut.

But in the Secretary-General’s telling, Israel is the root cause.

A Hezbollah-Israel clash suddenly becomes a threat to the world economy. A U.S.-Iran negotiation suddenly becomes Israel’s responsibility. An agreement Israel never joined suddenly becomes grounds to condemn Israel.

This is absurd.

But it is a continuation of the farce that is the United Nations.

The UN Secretary General is so obsessed with vilifying Israel and getting the world to join in, that he manufactures reasons that are devoid of any logic.

When an Essay About Lebanon Becomes an Essay About Changing Israel

Posted on June 4, 2026 by First.One.Through

The most revealing part of a recent New York Times essay on Lebanon by Lydia Polgreen is that it eventually stops being about Lebanon.

Readers are taken through a long 3,200-word editorial about an “ancient” country recovering from war. They meet civilians, politicians, intellectuals, and even Hezbollah supporters. They hear about sovereignty, reconstruction, and national renewal.

Picture accompanying 3,200-word article by Lydia Polgreen, placing a person sitting on a rock between a field of flowers and a plane overhead, a metaphor between its “ancient” beautiful land and foreign forces overhead or the temptation of leaving out of fear and disgust.

Then the focus shifts.

What begins as a reflection on Lebanon’s future gradually becomes a discussion of whether Israel should continue to exist in its present form.

That turn reveals the essay’s central assumption.

Lebanon is introduced through the language of continuity. Tyre is an “ancient city.” Villages are “ancestral.” Sectarian divisions are “ancient.” The country is presented as a society with deep roots struggling to reclaim its future.

Israel receives a different vocabulary.

Israel occupies. Israel expands. Israel bombs. Israeli troops hold an “ever-expanding swath” of territory. The Israel is a “foreign military” operating inside another country. Israeli actions are repeatedly interpreted through ideological labels such as a “maximum-war doctrine.”

One nation is described through history and belonging. The other through power and force.

The contrast becomes more striking when the essay turns to sovereignty.

The preferred frame is Israeli intrusion into Lebanese sovereignty. Yet the defining political reality of modern Lebanon is that sovereignty itself remains unresolved.

Hezbollah maintains an independent army outside the authority of Beirut. It receives funding, weapons, and strategic direction from Iran. It launched attacks on Israel after October 7 without authorization from the Lebanese government. For decades, Lebanese governments have struggled to establish a monopoly on force within their own borders.

The central question facing Lebanon is not merely reconstruction. It is sovereignty. Who governs southern Lebanon? Who decides questions of war and peace? Who controls the country’s most powerful armed force?

Those questions sit surprisingly close to the margins of the essay. Polgreen concludes that Hezbollah – even after the demise of its “charismatic leader” Hassan Nasrallah – will endure and be part of a “pluralistic” Lebanese society (“pluralism” and “pluralistic” show up four times in the article).

Readers learn far more about Israeli power than about Lebanese weakness.

Near the end, the essay abandons its own logic.

At one point readers are told that Hezbollah “could not be excised from the body politic.” Political reality, in other words, must be acknowledged. Hezbollah has supporters, influence, institutions, and representation. Lebanon’s future must somehow accommodate that reality.

Yet that principle vanishes when the discussion turns to Israel.

After thousands of words about Lebanon, readers are introduced to arguments for a one-state future that would effectively end Israel as the Jewish nation-state. An “emerging international consensus” suddenly becomes relevant to determining Israel’s future.

The contrast is revealing.

When discussing Lebanon, the essay asks Lebanese people what they want. Readers hear from civilians, intellectuals, politicians, and Hezbollah supporters. Their aspirations become the measure of Lebanon’s future, which we are informed will be pluralistic and peaceful, even when including Hezbollah.

When discussing Israel, Israelis are nowhere to be found. Readers have no context what the average Israeli wants. They are not told that overwhelming majorities support maintaining Israel as a Jewish state. Instead, the relevant question becomes what an international consensus believes should happen.

The people whose “settler-colonial, aggressive, expansionist” state is cast as being temporary are absent from the discussion. Presumably, the readers are being led to the conclusion that international pressure must be placed on Israel to let Lebanon live.

Lebanon’s future belongs to the Lebanese. Israel’s future belongs to everyone else.

By the end, readers know that Lebanon is an ancient nation whose sovereignty deserves restoration. Hezbollah is an enduring political reality that must be accommodated. Israel is a state whose identity should be reshaped by outside opinion.

Hezbollah is never properly labeled a US-designated foreign terrorist organization. Israel is never described as an American ally. Lebanon is not painted as a failed country which cannot control its failed economy or borders or manage a distinct military force outside governmental control.

A country that struggles to control its own territory is granted unquestioned legitimacy. A country with functioning institutions, competitive elections, and one of the region’s strongest economies is presented as a candidate for political reinvention.

The essay asks readers to accept permanence for Hezbollah, self-determination for Lebanon, and international supervision for Israel.

It begins by asking how Lebanon should recover from war. It ends by asking whether Israel should remain Israel.

For an essay about Lebanon, that is an oddly revealing destination.

Israel May Fix What Iran Broke

Posted on April 16, 2026 by First.One.Through

Iran did not remake the Middle East by conquering it. It reshaped sovereignty from within.

Through the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps and its expeditionary arm, the Quds Force, Tehran spent decades cultivating armed movements inside other countries. Groups like Hezbollah, Hamas, and the Houthis operate locally while drawing training, funding, and strategic direction from Iran.

The method repeated. Build armed actors inside weak systems. Arm them. Fund them. Legitimize them. Let them grow until they rival the state itself.

The outcome depends on how far that process runs.

Start with Yemen.

The Houthis moved from insurgency to control, seizing the capital and displacing the recognized government. Authority fractured across multiple centers while regional powers deepened the conflict. The country unraveled into competing zones of control, each backed by different patrons.

Yemen reflects the far end of the spectrum. Sovereignty has fractured, authority is dispersed, and the state exists largely in name while power is contested on the ground.

Lebanon presents a more intricate equilibrium.

The government still operates. Ministries function. The army deploys. Daily life continues within the framework of a state.

Power, however, runs on a parallel track.

Hezbollah has evolved from militia to dominant armed and political actor. It maintains a military force outside state control, exerts significant influence within the political system, and operates along the southern frontier with Israel.

In a system where power sits outside the state, accountability thins out.

The Beirut port explosion laid that reality bare. The blast- largely attributable to Hezbollah stockpiling of weapons – devastated the capital and accelerated economic collapse.

Lebanon endures as a state whose authority is constrained and divided. Institutions remain, while decisive power is shared, contested, and at times displaced.

Gaza and the West Bank reflect an earlier phase of the same pattern.

Here, no single authority controls territory, force, and governance at once. Hamas governs Gaza, while the Palestinian Authority administers parts of the West Bank. Armed groups operate alongside political structures, and internal divisions prevent the emergence of a unified system.

Under these conditions, sovereignty never fully coheres.

Iran’s role reinforces these fractures. Support to armed factions strengthens one side of divided systems and complicates any path toward unified governance.

Three arenas. Three outcomes.

Yemen: the state fractures.
Lebanon: the state is captured from within.
Gaza and the West Bank: the state never coheres.

Systems that weaken the state at home rarely stay contained. They travel.

In Yemen, fragmentation has produced a prolonged humanitarian crisis. In Lebanon, economic collapse and institutional weakness have eroded daily life and public trust. In Gaza, civilians live within a structure where governance and armed control are tightly fused, with recurring cycles of conflict.

*Members of Hamas bring back body of young Israeli woman into Gaza after killing her on October 7, 2023*

These same structures project force outward. Hamas, Hezbollah and the Houthis have all attacked Israel over the past few years. As has Iran.

And these forces are now all degraded, perhaps on their way to being defeated. The regional implication extends beyond Israel’s immediate security.

Weakening these groups can shift the balance inside the countries they inhabit. Space can reopen for state authority—unevenly, imperfectly, and with no guarantee—but space nonetheless.

Israel is acting out of its own security needs. It is very possible that the entire region will benefit once the Iranian proxies are removed.

The Losers’ Echo of the Six Day War

Posted on March 12, 2026 by First.One.Through

When armies lose wars, the battlefield does not always disappear. It often moves to softer targets.

That is what happened after the Six-Day War, when Israel delivered a devastating defeat to the combined armies of Egypt, Jordan, and Syria. In six days, territories changed hands, military reputations collapsed, and the promise that Israel would soon be destroyed evaporated.

The defeat reverberated far beyond the battlefield. It humiliated governments across the Arab world and shattered the image of inevitable victory that had surrounded the campaign against Israel.

But the war did not end. It simply changed form.

In the years that followed, militant organizations such as the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine and the Black September Organization exported the conflict around the world.

The targets were no longer Israeli armies; they were civilians.

Airplanes became battlegrounds. Diplomats became targets. Jewish institutions across the diaspora suddenly found themselves on the front lines of a war being fought thousands of miles away.

The Munich massacre shocked the world when Israeli athletes were murdered at the Olympic Games by Palestinian Arab terrorists. It demonstrated that the battlefield could be moved to the most international stage imaginable.

Another defining moment came with the Entebbe hijacking, when Palestinian terrorists seized an Air France flight and diverted it to Uganda. There, Jewish and Israeli passengers were separated from the others and held hostage in an old airport terminal. The episode ended with a daring Israeli rescue, but the hijacking revealed something chilling: Jews anywhere could be turned into targets for a war militants could not win against Israel itself.

Synagogues and Jewish community centers were attacked in cities far removed from the Middle East battlefield. Rome. Athens. Istanbul. Hezbollah and Iran were often behind the atrocities.

These were not military targets. They were chosen precisely because they were vulnerable.

The message was unmistakable: if Israel could not be defeated in the Middle East, Jews everywhere would become targets.

Today there are worrying signs that the same pattern may be returning.

Iran and its regional network of militias face mounting military pressure from Israel and the United States. When regimes and movements cannot confront stronger armies directly, history shows they often search for targets they can reach more easily.

Recent intelligence chatter has suggested that Iran may have issued signals intended to activate sleeper operatives abroad. Western security services have increased monitoring of potential networks across North America, Europe, and Australia. Whether these warnings prove accurate or not, the concern reflects a familiar strategic logic: when the battlefield is lost in one region, pressure is applied elsewhere.

As the United States becomes the central military opponent of Iran, American Jews may face the threat most acutely.

Extremist movements have repeatedly treated Jewish communities abroad as symbolic stand ins for Israel and its allies. When Israel gains the upper hand militarily, Jews in distant cities have often become the targets that terrorists believe they can reach.

This time the danger may be compounded by a new environment.

Terror no longer requires direct command structures. Groups such as Islamic State pioneered a model of “inspiration terrorism,” where individuals absorb propaganda online and act independently without formal membership or training, such as happened this week in New York City.

At the same time, a troubling ideological convergence has taken shape in parts of Western society. Radical Islamist movements and segments of the revolutionary left increasingly share a political vocabulary built around anti-imperialism, anti-colonialism, and the demonization of Israel. In that narrative, Israel becomes the embodiment of oppression. Jews are portrayed as agents of imperial power rather than a people with a three thousand year connection to their homeland.

When those ideas spread through social media, activist networks, and even parts of the educational system, hostility toward Israel can easily spill over into hostility toward Jews themselves.

The result is combustible.

A generation is growing up hearing that violence against Israel is “resistance,” that Jews represent colonial domination, and that the conflict is part of a global struggle against oppression.

History shows where that logic can lead.

If history is echoing once again, the streets of Western cities may soon remind us of a grim truth: the losers of wars do not always accept defeat.

We are witnessing the next phase of the War on Zionists.

Genocidal Jihadists Come For ‘Soft Targets’ (September 2024)

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

NY Times Blames Israel For Lebanon Being A Failed State

Posted on December 30, 2024 by First.One.Through

Lebanon has been a failed state for years.

It has allowed the Iranian-backed terror group Hezbollah to run a massive distinct army for decades and to sit in its parliament. It’s currency has been in freefall since the COVID pandemic and Hezbollah’s weaponry in the Beirut port exploded in 2020.

It then let Hezbollah launch a war against Israel, together with Hamas on October 7, 2023, further putting strain on its economy, even before Israel retaliated.

*Currency exchange of Lebanon lira to US dollar, with spikes in February 2023 and February 2024*

Yet The New York Times opted to paint the sorry state of Lebanon as a direct cause of Israel’s decimation of Hezbollah.

On December 30, 2024, the Times ran an article with a headline “Lebanon’s Economy Reels From War: ‘We Are Starting From Zero'” with a sub-title that pinned the matter on “the conflict between Israel and Hezbollah.”

Israel is surrounded by failed states with Iranian-backed militant jihadi groups waging war on the Jewish State. Even as Israel tries to live in peace and defend itself from genocidal neighbors, the New York Times falsely describes Israel as causing hardship to those around it.

The Axis Of Nonexistence

Posted on December 7, 2024 by First.One.Through

Iran and its associates have long referred to the United States and Israel as “Great Satan” and “Little Satan”, respectively. The jihadi extremists positioned themselves as the “axis of resistance” against western influence in what they perceive to be a purely Islamic Middle East.

The leading edge of the warmongering jihadists are rapidly fading.

Hamas, the Popular Islamic Palestinian Arab Terrorist Group

Hamas has been listed by the United States as a foreign terrorist group (FTO) since the US began the list in 1997. The Palestinian Arab group which ran Gaza and has a majority position in the Palestinian parliament since 2006, has the most antisemitic foundational charter of any country. It is sworn to the destruction of Israel.

Hamas invaded the Jewish State on October 7, 2023 and slaughtered 1,200 people and took over 250 hostages. In Israel’s response to the assault, it has decimated Hamas’s leadership including Yahya Sinwar, Ismail Haniyeh and Mohammed Deif. Hamas’s arsenal and tunnel infrastructure has virtually been eliminated and thousands of its members are either dead or in Israeli jails.

Hezbollah in Lebanon

Hezbollah, like Hamas, is sponsored by Iran. The Lebanese-based US FTO launched an attack on Israel on October 8, and Israel began responding more aggressively over the past few months. During this time, Israel killed much of Hezbollah’s leadership including Hassan Nasrallah, Ali Karaki, Ibrahim Qubaisi, Fuad Shukr, Ahmed Mahmud Wahbi and Ibrahim Aqil.

After Israel incapacitated much of Hezbollah’s fighting force in southern Lebanon, the group accepted a ceasefire agreement. Israel hopes that the government of Lebanon will assume military control of its territory, expunge Hezbollah from parliament and emerge from decades of being a failed state.

Syria

The Iranian-backed government of Bashar al-Assad has overseen a brutal civil war which has left over 600,000 dead and millions displaced since 2011. Since Hezbollah’s ceasefire, Syrian resistance forces have overtaken many of the large cities of western Syria and are closing in on Damascus. It is possible that Assad’s regime may fall as Russia is too weakened by its war with Ukraine, and Iran is too vulnerable to extend resources to its proxy.

Islamic Republic of Iran

The leading state sponsor of terrorism is fully exposed after Israel launched a massive air strike in late October. While Israel has not followed up with additional attacks to remove the Iranian nuclear weapons program at this time, Iran has pulled back on its attacks against Israel, out of fear of being highly vulnerable.

What began as a massive war of Iran and its proxies to eradicate the Jewish State and prevent its integration with Sunni Arab countries including the UAE and Saudi Arabia, is becoming a rout of the jihadi regimes. The “axis of resistance” is vanishing into the “axis of nonexistence.”

It remains to be seen if the vanquished jihadists will repeat the “three Nos” slogan from 1967, or consider accepting the basic human rights and dignity of the Jewish State. Unlike 57 years ago, the incoming US president and Saudi Arabia will be important factors in shaping the contours of the regional relationships into the future.

Every Picture Tells A Story: There Are No Genocidal Leaders In Iran, Just Fancy Women

Posted on November 13, 2024 by First.One.Through

The New York Times does more than obfuscate the truth in its news stories and editorials; it does it with its pictures as well.

It is a plain fact that the Islamic Republic of Iran is the leading state sponsor of terrorism, as so designated by the U.S. State Department. Iran’s leaders provide material support to U.S. designated terrorist groups including Hamas in Gaza and Hezbollah in Lebanon. Those groups launched a genocidal war on Israel on October 7 and 8, 2023, while Iran put the finishing touches on its nuclear weapons program.

Pretty terrifying stuff.

But the Times doesn’t want you to think about the genocidal jihadists in a negative light. Therefore, the socialist-jihadi propaganda pages portray Iran as a sophisticated peaceful country, and cast Israel as the belligerent party.

On November 11, 2024 the Times headlined that “Iran’s new, more moderate government” might strike a deal with President-elect Donald Trump. Rather than show a picture of the Iranian leadership or its nuclear program, the Times showed a picture of a couple of women sitting quietly in a park reading the news.

This absurdity is repeated over-and-again by the Iranian-apologist paper.

On October 28, 2024, the Times reviewed how the U.S. Biden Administration and the Israeli Netanyahu government were reviewing methods to stop Iran’s evil attacks against Israel. The Times thought that displaying a picture of “Iranian shoppers in Tehran” would be useful for readers to consider the threat posed by the terrorist regime.

The Times did this before the October 7, 2023 massacre of 1,200 people in Israel as well. On February 20, 2021, the Times penned a story about the U.S. trying to negotiate a nuclear deal with Iran. To give readers an appreciation for the seriousness of the matter, the paper included a large photo of two Iranian women in “a bazaar in Tehran.”

It’s reminiscent of when the Times used to offer vacation package “Journeys” to various countries including Iran and Saudi Arabia to make some coin. It marketed the country which executes gays and minors with “Persia. Iran. For 2,500 years, this powerful country has entranced, mystified and beguiled the world. Discover the ancient secrets and modern complexities of this influential land on a 13-day itinerary, visiting some of the world’s oldest archaeological sites and the family home of the religious leader who engineered Iran’s transition to an Islamic republic. Welcome to the once-forbidden land of Iran.“

It was a complete whitewashing of a regime which has more blood on its hands than almost any other country.

Not only does the NY Times not tell its readers that Hamas and Hezbollah are terrorist groups and that Iran is a state sponsor of terror, it deliberately attempts to reorient the story that Israel is a “right-wing” country waging war on peaceful female shoppers.

ACTION ITEM

Write to the Times to stop showing pictures of Iranian women shopping when writing articles about the leading state sponsor of terror building nuclear weapons.

“Which Most of the World Considers Illegal…” (June 2021)

Every Picture Tells a Story: Anti-Semitism (February 2017)

Every Picture Tells a Story: Goodbye Peres (October 2016)

Apostasy (January 2015)

Murderous Governments of the Middle East (August 2014)

The New York Times’ Buried Pictures (July 2014)

Genocidal Jihadists Come For ‘Soft Targets’

Posted on September 29, 2024 by First.One.Through

After Israel’s assassination of much of the political-terrorist group Hezbollah’s leadership, people worry whether the region will be engulfed in a wider war. Hamas has been neutered and Hezbollah is rudderless, making their sponsors in Iran furious. The fear is that the Islamic republic’s ire may get them to aggressively attack Israel and thereby bring the United States into the war.

It is just as likely that the leaderless Hezbollah terrorist group and its anti-Israel supporters around the world will begin to hit ‘soft targets’ globally, much as the U.S.-designated foreign terrorist group has done in the past.

The Henry Jackson Society published a Timeline of Terror in 2012 listing the various attacks committed by Hezbollah. The associate editor at that time was the now famous Douglas Murray. The attacks outside of the region included:

1984 bombing of a restaurant with U.S. servicemen in Spain, killing 18
1984 hijacking of a Kuwait airline, killing 4
1985 hijacking of a TWA flight from Greece, killing 1
1990 killing of Saudi businessman
1992 attack on Israeli embassy in Turkey, killing 1
1992 bombing Israeli embassy in Argentina, killing 29
1993 failed attack on Jewish community in Turkey
1994 bombing of Jewish community center in Argentina, killing 85
1996 bombing US air force residential tower in Saudi Arabia, killing 19
2012 failed bombing of tourist site in Thailand frequented by Israelis
2012 attack on Israeli ambassador in Azerbaijan
2012 attempted killings of Israeli embassy staff in India and Georgia
2012 suicide bomb of tourist bus with Israelis in Bulgaria, killing 7
2014 failed attack on Israeli tourists in Thailand
2015 failed attempt to stockpile bombs in the United Kingdom
2015 failed attempt to stockpile weapons in Cyprus
2023 failed attempt to attack the Jewish community in Brazil

People examine a damaged Israeli embassy car after an explosion in New Delhi, February 13, 2012. REUTERS/Parivartan Sharma

At this moment, as the Iranian proxies get decimated, it is just as likely that they and their supporters such as Within Our Lifetime will truly launch the “Global Intifada” in violent attacks against Jews and Israelis around the world.

*Within Our Lifetime leader Nerdeen Kiswani calls for an “Intifada Revolution” wherever these are Israelis and Israel supporters*

Within Our Lifetime mourns death of Nasarallah by “zionist entity” in a tweet “The martyrdom of such a figure may generate feelings of despair, but **resistance does not rest in one man’s hands** — it is in the hearts of millions who refuse to abandon Palestine. **Thousands will rise from his place** in the earth to challenge this cruel world and carry on our people’s task. The weight of his martyrdom **will crash down on the heads of the settler colony.**“

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

Protecting Synagogues Like Abortion Clinics (July 2024)

UN Secretary General Sides With Hezbollah Over Israel (June 2024)

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

The UN Has Joined The Jihadi Fray (February 2024)

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

United Nations Urges ‘Utmost Restraint’ By Israel In Defending Synagogues On High Holidays (September 2023)

Palestinian Authority “Martyrs Fund” May Soon Fund Killing Jews in the US and UK (August 2023)

Attacking Jews & Zionists: Arabs and Muslims (February 2022)

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

Unequal Tallies and Israel’s Soft Force (May 2021)

Every Picture Tells a Story: Israel Is Scared of Female Iranian Shoppers (February 2021)

Murdered Jews as Political Fodder at Election Season in America and Always in Israel (October 2018)

Pick Your Jihad; Choose Your Infidel (September 2014)

NYTimes Says Nasrallah Was Paragon Of Coexistence

Posted on September 29, 2024 by First.One.Through

Just two months after Israel assassinated one of the leaders of a U.S. foreign terrorist organization in Iran whom The New York Times called a man of peace, the facts repeated.

In July 2023, Israel killed Ismail Haniyeh, one of the heads of Hamas, an organization sworn towards the destruction of Israel, while he visited Iran. In September, Israel took out Hassan Nasrallah, the leader of Hezbollah in Lebanon, also dedicated to destroying the “Zionist entity.” Just as the Times called Haniyeh the key towards peace in the region, it extolled Nasrallah.

The Times called Nasrallah a “towering figure… across the Middle East.” He “was opposed to Israel… and maintained that there should be one Palestine with equality for Muslims, Jews and Christians.”

I kid you not.

The Times painted a fictitious narrative that Hezbollah “opposes” Israel, maybe like dueling political parties. Perhaps the organization disliked Israeli policies on a couple of issues, or maybe simply wanted a “Free Palestine” with equality for all.

That is a disgraceful whitewashing of the genocidal intent of the jihadist group. Hezbollah wants Israel destroyed and to bring shari’a law throughout the Middle East.

As relayed in a number of articles and speeches, Nasrallah’s Hezbollah sought the destruction of the Jewish State:

“our struggle will end only when this entity [Israel] is obliterated. We recognize no treaty with it, no cease fire, and no peace agreements, whether separate or consolidated. We vigorously condemn all plans for negotiation with Israel, and regard all negotiators as enemies, for the reason that such negotiation is nothing but the recognition of the legitimacy of the Zionist occupation of Palestine.” – February 1985
“Our people in Palestine, you have the chance to decide on your own destiny, and you can get your land back. O people of Palestine, your way to Palestine and to liberty is through serious resistance and a real insurrection, not through “The Oslo Accord” or the unfair negotiations held in Stockholm. You should choose insurrection and resistance and never let go of your rights. Do what the Lebanese do: They refuse to keep even a small part of their land occupied.” – May 2000
“[Israel] is an aggressive, illegal and illegitimate entity, which has no future in our land…. It’s destination is manifested in our motto, ‘Death to Israel’.” – 2005
“Hezbollah congratulates the resisting Palestinian people and the heroic fighters of the Palestinian factions, especially our dear brothers in the al Qassam Brigades and the Islamic Resistance Movement, Hamas, for the wide-ranging and divinely supported heroic operation, promising complete victory. This triumphant operation is a decisive response to the ongoing crimes of the occupation and continuous violations against sanctities, honors, and dignities. It is a renewed confirmation that the will of the Palestinian people and the rifle of the resistance is the only choice in confronting aggression and occupation. It sends a message to the Arab and Islamic world, and the international community as a whole, especially those seeking normalization with this enemy, that the Palestinian cause is an everlasting one, alive until victory and liberation.” – after October 7, 2023 massacre by Hamas

Nasrallah repeatedly stated that Hezbollah will never negotiate with the “Zionist entity.” That its goal was converting all Christians in the region to Islam and bringing shari’a law as soon as Islam crossed the majority. As it is not currently in the majority, the jihadi group will not force conversion by the sword and asked the Christians in Lebanon to therefore not use violence against them, even as they run a completely distinct army from the government of Lebanon.

*Part of Hezbollah’s statement of purpose from 1998*

The NY Times description of the removal of leading terrorists who were actively gunning for civilians as an unjust assassination of peace, is designed to mark Israel as blood-thirsty murderers who crave war. Expect the hashtag #HitlerWasRight to accompany reposts to Times’ articles.

The New York Times is deliberately lying to its readership that jihadi terrorist groups which seek the complete destruction of Israel are really seeking coexistence. It is a subtle incitement to antisemitism and hatred of Israel, even in the shadow of the most brutal massacre of Jews since the Holocaust and in the midst of a multi-front war.

ACTION ITEMS

Write to the New York Times to state clearly that Hamas and Hezbollah are terrorist organizations that seek the destruction of Israel, and not benign actors looking for religious coexistence.

Subscribe to the New York Post