How many generations should someone be called a “refugee?” Two? Ten? My parents were refugees and I consider myself the son of refugees. But not a refugee. To do so would be a mockery of millions of people fleeing homes to faraway lands where they have no family, infrastructure or knowledge of the local language.
Alas, while every year the world adds and removes refugees from the global tally, there is a permanent exception.
There are roughly 122 million displaced people worldwide (68 million internally displaced, 38 million refugees and millions of others seeking protection), and the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) is tasked with helping them. Its mission is clear: assist people fleeing conflict or persecution to either return home when it’s safe, or resettle in a new country where they can rebuild their lives and become citizens. Refugee status, according to UNHCR, is meant to be temporary. A tragic but manageable step toward normalcy.
But for one group of people, the rules were rewritten.
In 1949, the United Nations created a separate agency: the United Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA). Its job was not to help all refugees, but a specific set—Arabs who left or were displaced from what became the State of Israel during the 1948 war.
Unlike the UNHCR, UNRWA never intended to help these refugees resettle or gain citizenship elsewhere. In fact, when Jordan annexed the to be named “West Bank” in 1950 and granted full Jordanian citizenship to the Arabs living there in 1954 (Jews were specifically excluded from Jordanian citizenship) —including the so-called refugees—UNRWA still kept them on its refugee rolls. Why? They were no longer stateless, no longer displaced from their community, and in most cases, were living just miles from where they or their families once resided.
No other refugee population in the world is treated this way.
The Palestinians under UNRWA are not counted based on where they live or whether they’ve rebuilt their lives. They’re counted based on ancestry—any descendant of someone who lived in Mandatory Palestine in 1946 and left during the war is considered a “refugee.” That includes people who are now citizens of Jordan who have never set foot in Israel, and those who live under Palestinian rule in the West Bank and Gaza.
This isn’t about resettlement. It isn’t about a “two-state solution.” It’s about return. Not return to a country they fled—but to homes where their grandparents once lived, in a country that has since fought multiple wars for its survival and established itself as a sovereign nation.
This has locked the Middle East into a perpetual state of conflict. UNRWA doesn’t just preserve the status of Palestinian refugees—it amplifies it, funds it, and builds an international bureaucracy around it. It has denied Israel’s right to control its own immigration, and basic principle of sovereignty.
Worse, the UN’s actions have turned a situation normally considered a humanitarian issue into a real estate dispute. By insisting that people return to a house—not a country, as outlined in international human rights law—the global political body has exceeded its own mandate. This isn’t a question of national self-determination, but one of personal property claims. UNRWA isn’t so much a champion of the creation of a state beside Israel; it champions individual return to specific homes, decades abandoned or destroyed, now occupied by others in a sovereign country.
Meanwhile, the descendants of every other refugee group in the world—from Sudan to Ukraine—are helped by the UN to find a path forward. Only the Palestinians are encouraged to walk backward, into the houses of their grandparents.
UNHCR helps refugees stop being refugees. UNRWA helps them stay that way.
Every year, new wars create new displaced people. But only one group stays on the list year after year, generation after generation.
For Palestinian Arabs, the 1948 war is still being fought. Generations of people haven’t been birthed into refugee status as much as the region is in a 100 years war. While the world may use political terminology of an UNRWA ward who has never been to Israel as a descendant of a “refugee,” Palestinians simply see a permanent property right which will never be forfeited. The UN simply provides cover under the “refugee” monicker.
America is now home to a deadly literary genre: the antisemitic manifesto. Each one is a twisted cocktail of conspiracy, borrowed slogans, and rage—crafted by individuals from vastly different backgrounds but united by one target: Jews. The authors shoot in synagogues, storm kosher markets, take hostages, and justify it all in screeds that dress up genocidal hatred as “resistance.”
These murderers come from various corners, dressed as isolated incidents. But the actors aren’t truly lone wolves when they borrow from a common playbook, one that has now become widespread and familiar to everyone.
White in Pittsburgh: “All Jews Must Die”
In 2018, a white supremacist stormed the Tree of Life synagogue in Pittsburgh during Shabbat services and gunned down eleven worshipers. His manifesto was steeped in the “Great Replacement theory” accusing Jews of orchestrating a “white genocide” by bringing immigrants into the U.S. through humanitarian organizations like HIAS. His worldview was that Jews are global saboteurs, aiding an invasion. His solution was simple: exterminate them.
Memorial outside Tree of Life synagogue in Pittsburgh, PA
Black in Jersey City 2019: Killing the “Infiltrators”
A year later, in 2019, two Black extremists of the Black Hebrew Israelite ideology shot up a kosher grocery store in Jersey City, NJ killing three people. They believed that Jews were economic infiltrators and exploiters, encroaching on Black communities. In their eyes, a Jewish storefront was a symbol of oppression and they turned it into a morgue.
Islamist in Colleyville 2022: Jews As Power Brokers
In 2022, a British Islamist traveled to Texas and held four Jews hostage inside a synagogue. He wanted the release of Aafia Siddiqui, a convicted al-Qaeda operative being held in prison. Siddiqui believed that Jews control the government, the banks, the courts. So if you want America to listen, best to grab some Jews. This wasn’t about a local grievance. It was international antisemitism dressed up as activism.
Leftist in Washington, D.C. 2025: Killing International “Genocide” Enablers
In 2025, another Jewish cultural center was targeted. Two people believed to be Jews (one was a Christian Israeli) were murdered by a man whose manifesto was saturated with the language of international NGOs. He wrote of Israeli “genocide,” and declared himself a soldier for Palestinian justice. Except he didn’t go to Gaza. He went to Washington. And he didn’t shoot soldiers. He shot civilians under the framework that “the perpetrators and abettors have forfeited their humanity.”
Two people killed outside Jewish event in Washington DC, May 2025 (photo: Rod Lamkey, AP)
Their Common Delusion: Jews as the Evil Power Behind Everything
Here’s the uncomfortable truth: every single one of these killers thought they were acting in defense. Of their race. Of their people. Of the oppressed. And in each case, they believed that Jews were behind their suffering. The puppet masters. The infiltrators. The warmongers. The colonizers. The landlords. The cabal. It’s the oldest lie in the world—crafted for modern rage packed in a holster.
Our Common Delusion: They are not Identical. Some of Them Are Right
These attackers may look like lone wolves, but they aren’t howling alone. They are members of ecosystems—8chan threads, Telegram groups, Reddit subs, Twitter/X echo chambers. They are fed a steady diet of Holocaust inversion, “Zionist” conspiracies, blood libels, and genocidal memes. And increasingly, they’re finding validation from public-facing NGOs and international institutions whose language about Israel normalizes antisemitic tropes.
PBS did in depth documentaries about “White Supremacy” groups and their echo chambers on Telegram. When a killer shot a synagogue in Poway, CA in 2019 killing someone, the media reviewed his White supremacy manifesto, as it did when a shooter in Texas in 2023 killed eight people, covering the shooter’s extensive “antisemitism, misogyny and White Supremacy” rants on social media.
But one couldn’t find such analyses or scathing rebukes of non-White Supremacy groups. Black Israelites were pardoned by the Southern Poverty Law Center as merely having a few bad apples. Islamists and leftists were criticized – but rationalized – as being upset about the bleak situation of Muslims around the world.
The media had two principle reasons for the soft coverage of non-White killers: protecting those racial and ethnic groups, and agreeing with the underlying grievance. In the first, the SPLC and other liberal groups make the argument that highlighting violence from minority groups leads to their being over-policed and ultimately police violence against them. In the second, the media are the disseminators of the anti-Jewish and anti-Jewish State narrative so why self-incriminate.
Internationally Approved Manifestos
White supremacist “lone wolves” crafted manifestos and called out fellow “martyrs” designed to inspire followers and provoke copycat attacks, like Brenton Tarrant, Anders Breivik, Dylann Roof and Patrick Crusius. Non governmental groups like Amnesty International and the United Nations publish their own scathing reports (more official sounding than “manifesto”) to initiate action against Israel.
The non-White supremacist antisemites worship from these third party bibles. They can read The New York Times that tells them about the “Powerful” Jew and listen to liberal politicians list reasons why Jews don’t deserve to be defended. They can cite the International Criminal Court about Israel committing a “genocide” of Gazans, or Amnesty’s report on Israel practicing “ethnic cleansing.” These antisemites are spared the slog of penning a long manifesto like the Poway shooter about the “tyrannical and genocidal Jew.”
The antisemitic forgery “Protocols Of the Elders Of Zion” is no longer only being quoted in the Hamas Charter and sold at shadowy flea markets. It is retold in officially approved manuscripts quoted on global platforms with the same conclusion about Jews.
Jew Hate into the Vernacular
The steady diet of Jew bashing has become fully normalized. Rep. Rashida Tlaib calling out global Jewry “from Gaza to Detroit… [operating] behind the curtain… to profit off of racism,” could have been lifted from Adolf Hitler’s Mein Kampf. Yet it got no pushback. It did not take long for Kanye West to publish a song called “Heil Hitler.”
The hatred that was once peddled in the shadows of 8chan and Telegram to hundreds of people is now in the open to millions. Their conspiracy theories and Jew hatred remain the same but the taboo of enlisting in the pogrom has been lifted.
Antisemitism isn’t coming from one direction anymore. It’s everywhere. The right, the left, Islamist circles, anti-colonial extremists. They may appear different but they end up with the same conclusion: Jews are causing a genocide of my favorite group. They must die.
Their manifestos, colorful as they may be, all write the same sentence in the end.
In political and ideological debates, few words carry as much quiet weight as “counterproductive.” It is a term that cloaks deep moral issues in the language of strategy, substituting ethical clarity with tactical calculus.
Recent uses of the word by political figures and organizations—such as Cenk Uygur’s response to the murder of two Israeli diplomats in Washington, D.C., and J Street’s condemnation of the student takeover of Columbia University’s Butler Library—highlight the way moral outrage is increasingly filtered through the lens of utility.
Alt-left commentator Cenk Uygur comments about the murder of a young couple from Israel on the streets of Washington, DC by a man yelling “Free Palestine”
The Language of Outcomes
When Cenk Uygur called the murder of the diplomats “counterproductive” and “stupid,” he minimized his “obviously immoral” charge. He reframed the cold-blooded murder of two young Israelis at a Jewish event through a critique that the violence would “harm the Palestinian cause.” Similarly, J Street’s reaction to the Butler Library takeover focused not on the pain caused to students studying for finals but on the effectiveness of the mass action.
J Street commentary on violent takeover of Columbia University library during study week
Both statements imply a worldview where the ends can justify the means IF the means produce desired outcomes. Violence and disruptions aren’t inherently wrong, full stop; they’re wrong if they don’t work.
This mode of thinking belongs to a form of strategic utilitarianism—actions are weighed not on whether they are ethically sound, but whether they are instrumentally successful. Murder isn’t condemned for its cruelty or injustice, but for its inefficiency. Protest isn’t wrong because it defies norms, but because it alienates potential allies or invites political backlash as in: it “provide[s] the Trump Administration with ammunition…” and “it allows people to frame the whole peace movement as violent.”
The Profound Delusion
How is the October 7 massacre of 1,200 people and mass rape of women and butchering of babies a “peace movement?” a sane person would ask. How is the killing of a young couple in Washington – thousands of miles from Gaza – an issue of “framing” for the masses (read “potential allies”)?
The idea that victims’ deaths were simply “counterproductive” is chilling. It suggests they were not wronged, but miscalculated. Their humanity becomes a variable in someone else’s flawed strategy. The moral frame disappears; only the tactical one remains.
There is a profound gap between calculated language and moral reality. For the political commentators, everything is a chessboard; for the people on the ground, it is their lives.
Question If The Entire Movement Is Unjustified And Immoral
Uygur and J Street – different parts of the socialists-jihadi alliance – use of “counterproductive” is an attempt to separate the actions of the violent offenders in the United States from the Hamas-led war in Israel. It seeks to sanitize the Gazan war to “Free Palestine” as a noble goal, while the tactics of some people – including possibly the October 7 massacre itself – are flawed.
Lost on those absorbing this insidious narrative of “Free Palestine” is that the movement is immoral. The chants of an “ongoing Nakba” are not cries for peace but a desire of SAPs and their supporters to destroy Israel and ethnically cleanse the Jewish Promised Land of Jews, marketed under the banner of human rights. Yes, local Arabs deserve self-determination which can be achieved in multiple ways. No, they don’t have an “inalienable right” to their own country nor to move into houses where grandparents once lived.
The only way of achieving their stated desired goal of ending Israel is via violence, both there and here. The murder of two Israelis outside a Jewish event in America’s capital city isn’t “counterproductive” but an unspoken essential component of the global jihad. It is the definition of “by any means necessary.”
Conclusion
Language shapes how we see the world. When murder is called “counterproductive” – whether of two Israelis in Washington or 1,200 people in Israel – the victims’ moral worth is sidelined in favor of strategic impact. Worse, the soft wording obfuscates not only the evil of the immediate killings but that the entire “Free Palestine” mission is about the mass murder of Jews.
The issue isn’t optics. There is a reason the hordes are yelling “we are all Hamas,” “gas the Jews” and “Heil Hitler,” and it isn’t coexistence. The alt-left’s shielding of violent antisemites has made them complicit in both the violence against Jews and the ongoing trauma the Jewish community is enduring.
The world sees Gaza through the lens of curated sympathy – smoke trails from missile strikes, wounded children, crumbled buildings – rendered by the media and United Nations. The headlines scream “siege” and “occupation,” and the images are carefully framed to elicit tears, not questions. For them, Gaza is a tragedy.
But Israelis? They see something very different.
They see a terrorist enclave. A society ruled by Hamas – not just tolerated but elected – with a charter calling for genocide against Jews. They see neighbors who have fired over 30,000 rockets at them since Israel left Gaza in 2005, and who used humanitarian aid to dig terror tunnels and stockpile weapons.
Israelis are haunted by October 7, 2023 – the day when 1,200 of their people were butchered. Burned alive. Shot in their homes. Raped in front of their families. And they remember what came next: polls showing 75% of Gazans supported the massacre. The popularity of other Palestinian Arab terrorist groups skyrocketed as well, including Islamic Jihad, al Aqsa Brigade and al Qassam. This wasn’t some fringe radical cell that commited the vile pogrom – this was public approval for mass murder. It was the fulfillment of their long-standing desire to attack Jewish civilians inside of Israel since 2000.
They also see something deeper: three-quarters of Gazans consider themselves “refugees” living in temporary homes. Not because of displacement from this war but because they believe they’re entitled to homes inside Israel. They don’t see Gaza as their future – they see Tel Aviv.
To the United Nations, Gaza is a moral play where Israel is always cast as the villain. They see Gaza not as a failure of Palestinian leadership, not as a society hijacked by jihad, but as a tragedy authored entirely by Israel. Why? Because Israel won’t allow these “refugees” to move into the homes of Israeli Jews – the very homes where grandparents fled in 1948 after five Arab armies attacked the new Jewish state.
The world has condemned Israel for responding “disproportionately” to the October 7 massacre. The UN saw Israeli counterstrikes as war crimes, not defense. They ignored the slaughter of Israeli children and focused on fuel shortages in Gaza. They accused Israel of starvation, ignoring the trucks of aid Israel itself let in, even while its soldiers were under fire. They paid scant lip service to Israeli hostages kept in tunnels by Hamas, viewing them as collateral to Israel’s ongoing “Nakba”.
The Arab and Muslim world is not fooled but is not helping. They don’t see Gazans as brothers and sisters in need of refuge. They see them as Palestinians – a distinct, useful political weapon. If Gazans were Syrians, they would’ve been taken in by now. But they’re not. They’re left to fester – a long-term tool to weaken and delegitimize the Jewish state.
Even in America, Gaza has become a kind of geopolitical Rorschach test. Leaders like Donald Trump and Jared Kushner see opportunity: beachfront real estate with the potential to be the Singapore of the Middle East. A future riviera. But that future depends on changing a mentality – one that for decades has been more obsessed with destroying Israel than building Gaza.
Because this is the reality: Gaza could have been Dubai. It had the backing of the international community, billions in aid, and a chance to chart its own path. Instead, it chose jihad. It chose hate. It chose martyrdom over medicine, tunnels over technology, indoctrination over innovation.
The world sees rubble. Death. Tragedy. Not on both sides; for Palestinians.
They can’t see the Israeli hostages through their clouded moral lenses. They don’t see the Jewish parents still waiting for their children. They don’t see the decades of restraint Israel exercised before finally saying “enough”. They are caught in an empathy swamp and have mentally baptised Gazans as martyrs instead of genocidal jihadists.
The Global South sees Gaza not just as another flashpoint – but as a pawn in a bigger game. The narrative is not just about “liberation” but “redistribution.” From peace talks to class war. Israel, to them, is just the first domino in toppling the Western-led world order.
Gaza isn’t just a local issue anymore. It’s global. It’s ideological. And for Israelis, the stakes couldn’t be higher.
In this backdrop of viewpoints, an international conference at the U.N. headquarters in New York will take place from June 17 to 20 co-chaired by France and Saudi Arabia. The Global North will join the Global South in trying to find near-term and longer-term solutions to the 100-year Arab-Israeli conflict.
In this Coliseum, the General Assembly serves as the unruly crowd seeking the torture of the Jewish State, while the Security Council acts as caesar empowered with the pen to draft international law. Will the United States protect Israel in such forum on the heels of Trump’s visit to the Gulf? Will Trump seek to trade an unwinding of U.N. Security Council Resolution 2334 to get Israel to agree to short-term and longer term movements towards a permanent divorce between local Jews and Arabs?
Israel was blind to the October 7 attack. Does it see what the world sees in Gaza now and the positions being orchestrated for the June U.N. conference? Will the modern blind Samson bring down the house if it only hears calls for its demise and cannot see a path to live in peace?
Across Western cities, “Nakba” protests fill the streets in May, marking what Stateless Arabs from Palestine (SAPs) call the “catastrophe” of Israel’s founding. Protesters chant slogans of “liberation,” wave Palestinian flags, and brandish large symbolic keys—representing homes lost in the Arab-Israeli 1948 War, and a longed-for return.
In London, British actor Khalid Abdalla holds a key symbolising the supposed Palestinian “right of return” (photo: Middle East Eye)
To the casual observer, these demonstrations appear to be non-violent expressions of secular nationalism: a displaced people demanding justice and return. The rhetoric is packaged in the language of “anti-colonialism,” a phrase from the Global South marketed at western universities.
The terminology is secular and political but the facts on the ground tell a different story.
The actual war against Israel is not being led by nationalists. It is driven by radical Islamist groups including Hamas and Islamic Jihad. The attack launched on October 7, 2023, was not called the “Nakba Response” or “Operation Liberation.” It was named “Al-Aqsa Flood”—a title soaked in religious meaning, not national aspiration. It invoked Islam’s third-holiest site which sits atop Judaism’s holiest site.
The strategic use of “Nakba” language in western cities is a deliberate effort to mask a religious war in secular terms. It is designed to resonate with Western leftists who are comfortable championing national self-determination but uneasy with theocratic zeal. It reframes an Islamic holy war as a freedom struggle, making it seem modern, rational, and even “progressive.”
But the religious reality will not remain buried forever.
Because just as SAPs speak of return, so do Jews. If Jews are forced to lose their sovereignty, perhaps diluted in a binational state, it will likely not lead to secular coexistence—it may unleash something far older and deeper: the demand for rebuilding the Third Jewish Temple.
Today, the Temple Mount is controlled administratively by the Jordanian Waqf, which bans Jewish prayer. Since the Second Temple was destroyed in 70AD, Jews have dreamed of rebuilding it, and while that has remained marginal in the modern secular Jewish state, it may surge forward in a post-Zionist situation in which Jews are compelled to relinquish so much.
If Israel is converted to a binational state in which everyone has equal rights, Jews would obviously insist on the same rights as Muslims enjoy today, to pray openly by the thousands on the Temple Mount. The demand to rebuild the Jewish Temple could move from the fringe to the center. The so-called “liberation” of Palestine would be matched by calls to liberate the Mount—from Islamic control.
In that light, the pro-Palestinian protest chants of “liberation” are a double-edged sword. They echo with reciprocal cries: not just the return of SAPs to Jaffa but the return of Jews to the Temple Mount. The religious war launched by Gazans wrapped in secular “Nakba” terminology in the west would be laid bare for what it is.
Muslims and Jews hold keys for places that don’t exist in the holy land anymore – for homes and a Temple. Should one side pursue a “right of return” to create a future-past, the mirrored key will do no less.
On Friday, May 14, 1948, Israel declared its independence—one day before the British ended their Palestine Mandate and left the region. The timing wasn’t accidental. Israel’s founding leaders wanted the moment to be marked with reverence, not paperwork, so the declaration was made in advance of the Jewish Sabbath, allowing the entire Jewish people to enter its rebirth with dignity and joy.
The joy wasn’t shared. Within hours, neighboring Arab armies invaded the nascent state, launching a war to crush Jews in the shadow of the European Holocaust. That contempt hasn’t faded. It echoes today in the halls of foreign governments, NGOs, and the mouths of extremist politicians thousands of miles from the region.
To “commemorate” Israel’s 77th birthday, the United Nations hosted a session dedicated not to peace or coexistence—but to “the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People.” One speaker after another vilified Israel, slandering its conduct in defending itself in a war it never wanted. Accusations of “racism,” “genocide” and “ethnic cleansing” flowed freely—from China, South Africa, Guyana, and others eager to hijack human rights rhetoric for anti-Israel theater.
Not to be outdone, U.S. Congresswoman Rashida Tlaib (D-MI) introduced a resolution to formally mark Israel’s independence as Nakba Day—”the catastrophe.” The language mirrored the UN’s smear campaign, ignoring context, facts, and Israel’s right to exist as a sovereign nation. The resolution outrageously called on Israel to accept seven million Arab descendants of refugees and internally displaced people—almost all of whom have never set foot in Israel—negating a fundamental right of statehood by erasing Israel’s right to control its own borders. It called for the United States to withhold all diplomatic and military support from Israel as it defends itself in the midst of a multi-front war, to facilitate a genocide of Jews.
As Israel marked its 75th year in 2023, Jewish civilians were massacred by genocidal jihadi Arab terror groups on the Sabbath and Simchat Torah, a holiday celebrating the Jewish Bible. Rockets, kidnappings, and slaughter were launched from Gaza, with terrorists using Palestinians as human shields and Jewish hostages as bargaining chips—while cheering voices thousands of miles away offered rhetorical cover.
Today’s political war against Israel is led by the unholy alliance of far-left ideologues and Islamist extremists. They’ve inherited the mantle of the Arab armies defeated in 1948—and continue their campaign, not for coexistence, but for the erasure of the Jewish homeland. This is a Global Intifada dressed in human rights language but aimed at ethnic cleansing. In 1948, the horde successfully removed all Jews from eastern Jerusalem, the “West Bank” and Gaza. They strive to finish the job.
For them, Jewish sovereignty in the ancestral Jewish homeland remains a “catastrophe,” and Israel’s Independence Day is a day for revolutionaries to perpetuate the war. Not just for the 30 countries which continue to refuse to recognize Israel—but for shrill voices in the U.S. Congress who speak as if the past 77 years never happened.
After Arab armies failed to destroy Israel in 1967, the Arab League produced its “Three No’s“: no peace with Israel; no negotiations with Israel; and no recognition of Israel. It has an underlying three principles which continue to drive Jew haters: Jews have too much; Jews enjoying fundamental human rights is a provocation; and Jewish joy is triggering.
The trifecta of Israel’s Independence Day is too rich for global antisemites to ignore.
Qatar has been buying its way into the heart of American power. Not metaphorically—literally. The small Gulf state has dumped billions of dollars into American universities, co-opted think tanks, and inserted itself into political circles on both sides of the aisle. It’s not just about soft power anymore. This is strategic infiltration.
According to Middle East Forum, Qatar pumped “$33.4 billion into businesses and real estate; $6.25 billion to universities; $72 million to lobbyists. Qatar purchases access to our corridors of power while simultaneously funding Hamas terrorists who seek our destruction. The pattern is clear: Qatar targets critical infrastructure, including our energy grid. It bankrolls academic departments that foment campus unrest, buys Manhattan skyscrapers, and infiltrates Silicon Valley. Its capital flows to Washington insiders who shape Middle East policy.”
And now, in the latest display of quiet power, Qatar gifted the President of the United States a brand-new plane.
This isn’t a gift. It’s a transaction. And we don’t know what was sold.
Experts Sound The Alarm
Jonathan Conricus, a former Israel Defense Forces spokesperson and now senior fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies (FDD), has made it clear that Qatar is not neutral. He describes the Gulf emirate as an “active nefarious actor,” using its wealth to export ideological influence and to shield organizations like Hamas. He’s seen what this money funds—from underground terror tunnels in Gaza to misinformation and antisemitic narratives in the West.
Others, like Michael Doran of the Hudson Institute, argue Qatar is just playing defense—just a tiny monarchy with a population of 300,000 surrounded by giants like Saudi Arabia and Iran. But here’s the flaw: Qatar already hosts the largest U.S. military base in the Middle East, the Al Udeid Air Base, just outside Doha. With thousands of American troops stationed there, Qatar doesn’t need more protection. What it IS doing is leveraging that partnership as cover for its far-reaching agenda.
Buying The American Narrative And Minds Of The Youth
Qatar’s influence isn’t just in think tanks and campuses—it’s also in your living room.
In 2013, Qatar’s state media arm Al Jazeera bought Al Gore’s cable network, Current TV, for a staggering $500 million. The rebranded Al Jazeera America failed commercially, but its goal wasn’t ratings. It was presence in 40 million American households.
The acquisition gave Qatar the ability to market propaganda under the guise of serious journalism. It continues to do so under the AJ+ brand on social media, pushing anti-Israel, anti-Western, and often antisemitic narratives to audiences across the globe. It doesn’t aim to inform—it aims to manipulate.
The monarchy’s influence extends into elementary public schools.The Qatar Foundation provides materials for New York City’s “Arab Culture Arts” program which has a map of the Middle East with Israel removed. Tova Plaut, a New York City public school instructional coordinator for pre-K through fifth grade classrooms, said “It’s not just that we’re experiencing Jewish hate in NYC public schools, we’re actually experiencing Jewish erasure.”
A report by the Institute for the Study of Global Antisemitism and Policy (ISGAP) uncovered extensive foreign influence and anti-Israel bias infiltrating as many as 8,000 K-12 classrooms, reaching one million students. Qatar is mentioned 48 times in the report.
Congressional Sleepwalking
Disgracefully, few members of Congress have called out Qatar for their support of Hamas and fueling antisemitism in American schools.
Rep. Carol Miller (R-WV) did so in November 2023 noting “the influence of foreign governments on tax-exempt college campuses, [specifically] Qatari funding for Northwestern University. It is no coincidence that it now has a campus in the Gulf country and has become a pipeline for reporters for the Qatari state-owned media Al Jazeera and their youth-focused subsidiary, AJ+.”
Rep. Ann Wagner (R-MO), Vice Chair of the House Foreign Affairs Committee said in May 2024, “It’s simple: if Qatar can’t pressure Hamas to make a deal with Israel, they must expel these terrorists so they can be brought to justice and punished for their horrific crimes against humanity. If they won’t do either, then the United States should seriously examine whether Qatar still deserves the privileges of its status as a major non-NATO ally.”
Yet it’s taken the public gift of an airplane to President Trump to finally make everyone in Congress wake up to the evils of Qatari influence.
Conclusion: Start The Audit And Pressure Campaign
President Trump has no qualms bankrupting Iran’s oil business if it continues to pursue a nuclear weapons program. It is time to threaten the Qatari regime to reverse its nefarious connections to state sponsors of terrorism and vicious antisemitism, or face actions similar to those inflicted on the Islamic Republic of Iran.
Congress should use the airplane gift as an opportunity to open a wide ranging probe into Qatari influence everywhere in the USA.
Anti-Zionism—the rejection of the legitimacy of a Jewish state in the ancestral homeland of the Jewish people—has existed since the dawn of modern Zionism. However, in 2025 it feels radically different from the 1975 United Nations incarnation. The rhetoric may sound similar, but the ideology, tactics, and alliances behind anti-Zionism have undergone a seismic shift. What once masqueraded as anti-colonial nationalism on the global stage has mutated into global terrorism fused with religious fanaticism. What was once a geopolitical power play of 6.4 billion people from the Global South has transformed into mob lynchings in the streets of Western capitals.
The 1975 Moment: Terrorism Wrapped in Nationalist Language
In 1975, while the United Nations was led by a former Nazi, Kurt Waldheim, the UN General Assembly passed Resolution 3379, equating Zionism with racism—a resolution so grotesque and politically motivated that it was ultimately revoked in 1991 through the efforts of the United States. But that year also saw another dangerous precedent set: UNGA Resolution 3376 which declared that the Palestinian people have an “inalienable right” to statehood AND “to return to their homes and property.” This declaration, unprecedented in international law, granted Palestinian Arabs a right that is not afforded to any other specific ethnic group—no such resolution exists affirming an “inalienable” right to statehood for the Kurds, Tibetans, Basques, or countless others seeking independence, and no refugees anywhere have a right to “return to homes.”
This special treatment of the Palestinian cause, even while terrorism was a central strategy of their campaign, reveals a deep double standard in international institutions. Groups like the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), whose operatives hijacked planes and massacred Israeli athletes at the 1972 Munich Olympics, were welcomed at the UN with open arms. Their leaders were treated as statesmen rather than terrorists. The PLO’s largest faction, Fatah, founded by Yasser Arafat, waged a war not just on Israeli soldiers but on civilians worldwide—from airline terminals in Rome and Vienna to school buses and synagogues.
Yet, the PLO and other Palestinian factions successfully cloaked their violence in the language of anti-colonialism. They painted the Jewish State of Israel—a country with deep historical, religious, and legal claims to the land—as a European settler colony, despite the fact that Jews are indigenous to that specific land. In the bipolar Cold War world, the Palestinian cause was adopted by the Soviet bloc (which pretended it never had colonies despite the entire bloc being colonies) as a weapon against the West, and Israel became a convenient scapegoat for third-world grievances.
Today’s Anti-Zionism: From Nationalism to Jihad
The anti-Zionist movement in 2025 is no longer pretending to be about secular nationalism. Gone are the olive-drab uniforms and revolutionary manifestos of Arafat’s PLO. In their place are the colorful flags of Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad—groups whose founding documents do not mention two states, borders, or peace but rather the annihilation of Israel, vile Jewish conspiracy plots, subjugation of Jews and the imposition of Islamic rule.
Palestinian Arabs wave Palestinian and Islamic terrorist group flags in front of the Dome of the Rock atop the Jewish Temple Mount in Jerusalem, following the last Friday prayers of Ramadan, on April 29, 2022. (Photo by Ahmad GHARABLI / AFP)
This is not political “resistance”—it is Islamic terrorism, pure and simple. Hamas, recognized as a terrorist organization by the US, EU, and much of the democratic world, deliberately targets civilians with rockets, suicide bombings, and, most recently, the atrocities of October 7, 2023. That day saw the cold-blooded murder of over 1,200 Israelis—men, women, children, and the elderly—in a coordinated attack that included rape, torture, and hostage-taking. It was not a liberation struggle but a heinous pogrom.
The shift from secular nationalism to radical Islamism has had profound consequences. Today’s anti-Zionist actors no longer make appeals to human rights, self-determination, or even statehood. Their aim is not a Palestinian state alongside Israel but a caliphate instead of it. Hamas’ charter explicitly rejects any peaceful resolution and defines the conflict in religious, not political, terms.
This ideological transformation aligns Palestinian terrorism with broader jihadist movements including al-Qaeda, ISIS and the Taliban. Their ideological DNA is strikingly similar: the use of violence as a religious duty, hatred of Jews as a theological imperative, and contempt for the liberal values of democracy, pluralism, and gender equality.
The Reverse Flow: From Global South to Global North
In 1975, anti-Zionism was projected from the Global South outward, as newly independent states sought to reshape the international order. Israel was falsely cast as a proxy of colonialism. But today, the direction has reversed. Anti-Zionism now festers not only in Middle Eastern regimes and terror groups, but in the heart of the West including Paris, Berlin, London, and New York City.
Anti-Israel protests in front of Columbia University in New York City
This shift is in part the result of demographic and ideological changes in the aftermath of the Arab Spring. Starting in 2010, the wave of uprisings which once promised liberal reform, instead ushered in chaos, civil war, and Islamist resurgence. Millions fled failed states and collapsing economies, many ending up in Europe and North America. While many migrants seek peace and prosperity in their new homes, a shrill cohort brought the radical ideologies of their home countries—including deep-seated antisemitism and hostility toward Israel.
The result is that anti-Zionist marches in Western cities increasingly showcase imported hatred. Protests ostensibly about Gaza often devolve into anti-Jewish rhetoric, violence, and the open glorification of terrorism. In some cases, demonstrators chant slogans borrowed directly from Hamas propaganda. Far too many on the political left—who once stood for secularism, women’s rights, and LGBTQ+ protections—have aligned themselves with Islamist movements that stand for the exact opposite.
Anti-Israel protestors in front of New York City exhibit about those murdered at the Nova Music Festival in Israel on October 7, 2023
In 1975, college Marxists may have read the United Nations’ “Zionism is racism” resolution as simply a tool used by a group seeking national independence. In 2025, the kaffiyeh-clad protestors are shouting for an “intifada revolution” with the religious zeal of Hamas affinity groups. They have been baptized by the current conflict and converted to winner-take-all jihadists.
All Noisy on the Western Front
Palestinian terrorist groups cannot defeat the Israeli army on their own. To defeat Israel, local Arab leadership relies on two principal supporting actors: Islamist countries and groups on the military front, and stripping Israel’s defensive support from the west.
The Islamists countries of Iran and Turkey (both not Arab) and the jihadi groups of Hezbollah and the Houthis provide weaponry, training and funds to fight Israel militarily. Palestinian Arabs hoped for greater success in killing Jews, but appreciated those waging war on Israel.
Hamas continues to count on jihadists – old and new converts – in western cities to wage its bloody antisemitic war. Members of the Global South now residing in the Global North and their allies are an essential front to end support for the Jewish State. Actively removing defenses may appear to pass legal scrutiny by western laws compared to calling for violence, but the desired antisemitic goal is identical: the demise of half of global Jewry who live in their ancestral homeland.
Conclusion
Anti-Zionism in 2025 feels different than it did in 1975 because it IS different. Then, it was driven by secular radicals speaking the language of national liberation—even as they committed acts of terror. Today, it is led by Islamist extremists who openly seek genocide and global jihad. Then, it was framed as the Global South fighting colonialism. Today, it is the Global South bringing its biases into the heart of the Global North.
The “radical left” always carried the notion of anti-capitalism and anti-imperialism but over the last fifty years, it has adopted new comrades and approaches. As the far-left is loathe to call out the antisemitic, anti-gay, anti-feminist zealot allies – lest they appear insensitive to different cultures – they have absorbed new philosophies. Such is the war of “by any means necessary,” a Jew-hunt which is becoming localized by the socialist-jihadi alliance.
Anti-Israel protestors march in the streets in front of Columbia University
The movie “All Quiet On The Western Front” was about the brutality of trench warfare in World War I, and the impact on soldiers’ mental and physical well-being. People use the phrase as an expression of things outwardly appearing normal and unchanging while huge terrifying tectonic shifts occur beneath the surface.
Whether a secular nationalist bursts into a synagogue shooting worshippers or a jihadi fanatic does so, makes little difference to the Jewish dead. However, progressives’ abandonment of their own fundamental tenets when it comes to Jews – and doing so proudly and publicly – is a five-bell alarm about crumbling democratic norms.
After a few months of not being able to conduct a poll of Arabs in Gaza and the “West Bank,” the Palestinian Center for Policy and Survey Research released its latest findings on May 6, 2025. As summarized by PCPSR, “favorability of the October 7 attack, the belief that Hamas will win the war, and support for Hamas continue to decline, but the overwhelming majority is opposed to Hamas disarmament and does not believe that release of the hostages will bring an end to the war. Nonetheless, about half of Gazans support the anti-Hamas demonstrations and almost half want to leave the Gaza Strip if they could.”
Unpacking the May 2025 findings when the Hamas military is almost wiped out and the surviving members spend their time boobytrapping buildings and stealing food and aid from Gazans, Palestinians:
support the October 7 massacre;
do not want Hamas to disarm;
prefer the Hamas over Fatah
Figure 1 in the poll shows that support for the barbaric attack of October 7 has declined more in Gaza, from 71% in March 2024 to 37%, while support in the West Bank only declined from 71% to 59% over the same time. As of May 2025, half of all Palestinian Arabs still believe that the attack was “correct”, down from three-quarters right after the massacre.
The pollsters speculate that “most of the public continue to believe the attack and the following war have placed the Palestinian issue at the center of global attention. Unlike previous polls, today’s findings show that the majority of the public does not believe Hamas will win the current war. Still, a plurality of the public believes that Hamas will continue to control the Gaza Strip after the war.”
Despite virtually the entire command structure of Hamas being killed, 57% of Palestinian Arabs are satisfied with Hamas’s performance, with 67% believing as much in the West Bank, a much higher figure than the 39% in Gaza. For those who believe that Gazans are reluctant to express negative opinions about Hamas because of threats from the ruling party in Gaza, the high figure from the West Bank where Hamas holds no power tells a different story. Palestinians like Hamas.
Further, “when asked whether it supports or opposes the disarmament of Hamas in the Gaza Strip in order to stop the war on the Gaza Strip, an overwhelming majority (85% in the West Bank and 64% in the Gaza Strip) said it is opposed to that; only 18% support it.” Palestinian Arabs would rather fight until the last bullet, rather than end the war with a surrender.
Overall, the opinion of Gazans about Hamas has barely changed from before the war until today. In September 2023, Gazans supported Hamas over Fatah by 38% to 25%, compared to 37% to 25% in May 2025. West Bank Arabs have generally become more supportive of Hamas since 20 months ago, but the favorability has been declining, as shown in Figure 13 of the May poll. Third parties are becoming a bigger factor in Gaza.
Overall, “40% (compared to 43% seven months ago) believe that Hamas is the most deserving of representing and leading the Palestinian people today while 19% (compared to 19% seven months ago) believe that Fatah led by president Abbas is the most deserving,” a two-to-one ratio, despite Hamas leading to the destruction of Gaza and becoming a shell organization.
While Gazan support for two states has remained relatively constant since before the war, West Bank support has increased from 30% in September 2023 to 45% today. Overall, 57% oppose a “two state solution.”
But the Stateless Arabs from Palestine (SAPs) still think the best way to GET Israel to end the “occupation” is via war, albeit now less than half of the population (41%).
Some other notable findings in the poll:
“While the majority says it does not want to leave the Gaza Strip after the war ends, a large minority wants to do that. Similarly, about half of Gazans are willing to apply to Israel to help them emigrate to other countries via Israeli ports and airports”
Among “satisfaction with Arab/regional actors, the highest satisfaction rate went to Houthis in Yemen, as we found in our previous polls, today at 74% (84% in the West Bank and 61% in the Gaza Strip), followed by Qatar (45%), Hezbollah (43%), and Iran (31%).”
“Al Jazeera is the most watched TV station in Palestine”
Vast “majority (87%) said it [Hamas] did not commit such atrocities [on October 7], and only 9% said it did.”
What can account for these statistics? Nazi Germany ultimately surrendered after it was pummeled in the war, so why do the local Arabs still support the war and want Hamas to continue to fight on, much like the Houthis in Yemen where over 250,000 have died over the last decade of war?
An interesting question was added to this poll which may provide a clue. “A majority of 57% (70% in the West Bank and only 38% in the Gaza Strip) believes that the steadfastness of the residents of the Gaza Strip despite heavy human losses and massive destruction is due to their deep belief in God, fate and destiny while 25% (40% in the Gaza Strip and 15% in the West Bank) believe they have no other option, and 15% (22% in the Gaza Strip and 11% in the West Bank) believe it is due to their belief in their Palestinian national identity.” A majority of SAPs are holding on to the war because of religious conviction, not because of nationalist aspirations. It is a belief held more widely OUTSIDE of the Gaza Strip (70% to 15% in the West Bank) where people are not facing the consequences, then inside (38% to 40% in Gaza). It may also be that Gazans know better than West Bank Arabs that they committed vile sexual assaults and brutal torture of children and the elderly.
Such observation may add clarity as to why 9 out of 10 local Arabs do not believe Hamas committed the atrocities of October 7 despite the video and forensic evidence: because they believe that members of Hamas are deeply religious warriors. Perhaps the antidote would therefore be for the U.S. to pressure Qatar’s Al Jazeera to showcase the evidence.
The other takeaway from the poll is that Palestinian Arabs know that they cannot beat Israel militarily on their own. They need other actors joining the fighting (like the Houthis) and “global attention” to apply pressure on the small Jewish State.
While the world bemoans the destruction of Gaza, the local Arabs remain supportive of launching the war and for Hamas. Western empathy for radical jihadism may stop when the victims are no longer Jews, but at that point, it will be too late to stop the scourge.
ACTION ITEMS
Contact the White House to 1) get Qatar’s Al Jazeera to make clear that Hamas committed heinous crimes against humanity on October 7, including raping women and burning children alive; 2) insist that whichever entity assumes control of Gaza (if not Israel) must disarm Hamas; 3) facilitate Gazans leaving the strip to other countries; and 4) condemn the socialist-jihadi alliance attacking Israel and democratic values.
The title of this article will likely throw off readers who are familiar with the articles on First One Through, a pro-Jewish, pro-Israel, pro- American and pro-fact site. Ending the World Zionist Congress (WZC) would appear at first blush to to be a call from anti-Zionists who want to end the Jewish State, whether groups like Jewish Voice for Peace, or left-wing journalists like Peter Beinart.
There are a number of reasons that the WZC should end which I will review here, a mixed bag of positive and negative realities.
Background of WZC
The WZC began in 1897 in Basel, Switzerland, with Theodore Herzl presiding. He called on Jews around the world – and a few Christian Zionists like Henri Dunant, the winner of the first Nobel Peace Prize – to assemble to develop a plan to solve the problem of global antisemitism. He called for Jews to return to their homeland in the land of Palestine, then a province in the Ottoman Empire, and gain self-determination there.
Every five years or so since that time, the WZC has held elections for Jews around the world, even post-1948, after the establishment of the modern State of Israel. At the time, the nascent country was surrounded by enemy forces and struggling to survive. Israel desperately needed Jews and support from around the world and used the WZC to entice people to move to the reestablished Jewish State.
The latest WZC election ran from March 10 to May 4, 2025. In the United States, 22 slates were vying for votes among American Jews who subscribed to the “Jerusalem Program.” The U.S. was allocated 152 seats of the 525 seats at the congress (29%), even though it makes up over 40% of global Jewry. Israel gets 38% of the seats and the rest of the world gets one-third, even though many countries with Jews didn’t have elections.
The pitch to get people to vote is to have an influence on how Israel allocates over $1 billion a year. Slates from the religious left and right, as well as the political left and right lobby members of their communities about how their participation in the elections will shape the future of Israel over the next five years.
Voting was open to all Jews over 18 years old who subscribe to the “Jerusalem Program.” It is a series of points that many members of the Israeli parliament don’t even believe, but it is meant as a guiding principle to include global Jewry in making decisions that BENEFIT Israel. For example, people who subscribe to the BDS (boycott, divestment and sanction) of Israel are not invited to participate in the elections.
The turnout in the United States this year was great. Over 211,000 people voted, with results not yet finalized as of now while mail in ballots are being counted. This was the largest turnout in the United States ever, amidst the war from Gaza, and terrible spike in global antisemitism.
Shouldn’t that point to the tremendous NEED for the WZC? Jews in Israel make up a plurality of world Jewry and global antisemitism is at a level not seen since World War II. In the aftermath of the worst massacre of Jews since the Holocaust, people turned out in droves to this WZC election, with Israel and antisemitism at the center of people’s consciousness.
So what are the arguments for this to be the final World Zionist Congress?
At its core, Zionism was an ideology while Israel is a reality. When Herzl assembled the first WZC, he was looking to pitch a solution to global antisemitism. That solution was realized in 1948 with the establishment of modern Israel. It reached the next level of success when Israel became the country with the greatest number of Jews in 2008. Israel will likely surpass the 50% threshold of global Jewry over the next decade.
Zionism was successful. It is time to retire the word.
The pro-Israel community – those who subscribe to the “Jerusalem Program” – do not appreciate that “Zionism” is a living and dangerous word among a great many people. Anti-Israel people see its continued use as an expression of the ongoing desire for “greater Israel,” to take more land and push out local Arabs. They see global Jewry playing an active part in those efforts under the banner of “Zionism,” rather than supporting a country fighting a just defensive war or wanting to see the Jewish State thrive. Influential left-wing Jewish journalists like Peter Beinart are marketing that “Zionism” means “Jewish Supremacy.” Rather than fight the stupid notion, we should lock its definition in the past, and not let it morph into new twisted interpretations.
The retirement of the word “Zionism” into an important slice of history is critical, like “New Amsterdam,” “Continentals” or Essenes. A company has an IPO and becomes public; it does not stay in active IPO status. Similarly, the name WZC is dated and reflects the goals of a different time which have become realized.
But more than its name must change; the congress should be retired.
All Jews Are Not Israelis
Israel has matured into a country which is a leader in technology, economy, the sciences and culture. It should be treated as an independent sovereign country, especially as it relates to local decisions and its budget.
Yet the WZC explicitly is about influencing the direction of monies INSIDE OF ISRAEL. Consider statements from various WZC slates about the election like Mizrachi: “development of border and peripheral Israeli communities in the Golan, Galilee, Negev, Judea and Samaria,” Reform: “curb funding for and prevent de facto/de jure annexation of the West Bank or the resettlement of Gaza” and ShirAmi worried about the right gaining power to “Advance policies that weaken democracy and the Israeli judicial system,” which are policies for the government of Israel to make, not Jews in Hendon.
I can appreciate the WZC spending money on programs in the Jewish Diaspora. Israel education and sending shinshinim to Jewish communities and schools helps establish strong bonds between Israel and Diaspora Jewry. But why should Diaspora Jewry make decisions impacting Israeli policy, like whether ultra- Orthodox Jews should serve in the army or building new communities east of the 1949 Armistice Lines (E49AL/ West Bank)? These are matters for the citizens of Israel to decide – Israeli Jews and non-Jews – not Diaspora Jews.
Antisemitism
Antisemitism around the world was still raging in the aftermath of the Holocaust. Jews migrated to new countries including the United States, Canada and France from Europe and the Arab world from which they were routed. Israel successfully made the case for it to be the destination for Jews: at its founding, there were 590,000 Jews in Israel, or 5% of global Jewry, and today there are roughly 7.7 million, about 48% of global Jewry.
The nature of antisemitism has changed dramatically over this time. While Diaspora Jews still suffer from discrimination because they are Jews, Israeli policies have become the leading cause for antisemitism.
One may agree or disagree with how Israel is carrying out its war against genocidal jihadists from Gaza. The plain fact is that global Jewry is paying a steep price for Israeli actions for which they play absolutely no part.
While the WZC was launched over a century ago to solve global antisemitism with Jewish self-determination in its homeland, today, Israel is the leading cause of antisemitism around the world. The WZC cannot seriously be viewed as a continuation of the fight against global Jew-hatred when its actions indirectly promote global Jew-hatred.
At its most fundamental, Israel is a conflicted actor in the current fight against antisemitism. While it may have the means to help Jews around the world, it is a biased and conflicted participant. Like a woman deciding whether to terminate a pregnancy, Israel has the agency to make a decision while the fetus does not. Israeli actions may be good policy for Israel but terrible for Diaspora Jewry.
Pro Israel Is Different Than Israeli
I am and encourage others to be pro-Israel. The country is a remarkable achievement in the midst of a tumultuous Middle East.
That has nothing to do with sunsetting the World Zionist Congress.
I like the New York Mets baseball team and you might like the Brazilian soccer team. We cheer them on and hope they win but we don’t expect to influence the budget or hiring of players. We’re not owners or coaches who run and manage operations. We’re fans.
We should acknowledge and internalize that even while we are welcome to move to Israel and become citizens, we are not. Diaspora Jews – and everyone – should not have undue influence on the budget or policy of an established sovereign country for which they are not citizens.
Global Jewish Congress
There is a benefit for global Jewry to assemble to address common concerns like kosher meat which is under assault in many countries, including in “liberal” Scandinavia. There are issues of Jewish education, writing torahs and many other matters – including Israel – which should encompass Jews everywhere. The continuation of shinshinim, making the process of aliyah streamlined and similar matters between Israel and the Diaspora must continue to be addressed but under a new framework.
The headquarters of the new Global Jewish Congress should be in the capital of the Jewish Diaspora, New York City. The United States accounts for roughly three-quarters of the Jewish Diaspora, is Israel’s largest trading partner and has a permanent seat at the United Nations Security Council. The GJC should interface with the government of Israel as a complementary pillar of world Jewry, and not an assembly operating under the wing of the government of Israel like the WZC.
It is time to recognize and adapt to the significant changes that have happened in Israel and global Jew hatred, to sunset the World Zionist Congress and launch the Global Jewish Congress with a new mission for new realities.
First One Through 