Wednesday, January 14, 2026

From Ian:

How the Islamic Republic terrorised Iran – and the world
For all the phoney ‘anti-imperialists’ who have occasionally simped for the Islamic Republic, seeing it as some exotic bulwark against Western hegemony, it has long pursued its own Islamist imperialism across the Middle East. Hezbollah was founded by the Iranian Revolutionary Guard following Israel’s incursion into Lebanon in 1982, and has been charged with menacing the Jewish State ever since. In the late-1980s, Iran courted Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad in Gaza. Their full genocidal ambitions burst into the open on 7 October 2023, when they raped and murdered their way through southern Israel, to the rapturous approval of Tehran. Shia militias in Iraq and the Houthis in Yemen complete Iran’s so-called Axis of Resistance, pitted against America and the Jews – now brought low by Israeli and American bombs during the Gaza War, and by the ousting of Bashar al-Assad in Syria, who had hosted its militants.

Beyond Tehran’s direct sponsorship of terror – which has extended into the West, too – the success of the Iranian Revolution became a symbol that the future belonged to political Islam. That another, barbaric world was possible. The Islamic Republic may have been a Shiite state, but insurgent Sunni groups took much inspiration from it, too. Ten months after the revolution, Sunni Islamists occupied the Grand Mosque of Mecca, hoping to unseat a Saudi monarchy they saw as corrupted by the West and a Saudi clergy they saw as quietist and insufficiently Islamic. In turn, as Ali Ansari and Kasra Aarabi have noted, Khomeini’s efforts to spread the revolution, to stake a claim as the leader of a new global, Islamic vanguard, accelerated Saudi efforts to export its own Wahhabi ideology, ‘nurtur[ing] the rise of Sunni fundamentalism from Africa to the Far East’. We can also credit the ayatollah with effectively globalising anti-blasphemy violence, when he issued his fatwa against Salman Rushdie on Valentine’s Day 1989, calling on Muslims the world over to murder the offending author.

Over five decades of infamy, the Islamic Republic has been a menace to life, limb and liberty far beyond Iran’s borders. What a moment for the world it would be if it were to fall.
Seth Mandel: Anti-America, Anti-Israel, and Anti-Knowledge
Jewish Insider has a fun scoop today that illustrates one of the iron laws of Western debate over the Middle East: The more knowledgeable one is on the subject, the more supportive of a strong U.S.-Israel relationship one is likely to be.

For example, U.S. aid to Israel is actually an economic stimulus program for American domestic manufacturers in defense-related industries. As a bonus, some hardware gets field tested in scenarios in which all of the risk is borne by Israel.

As a result, some of the maintenance of the U..S-led world order is offloaded to a capable ally while creating jobs here at home and keeping research and development humming along.

You can support this or you can oppose it, but this is what is meant by “U.S. aid to Israel.”

Yet opponents of U.S. military aid to Israel usually say things like “Americans are poor because the Zionist Occupied Government is sending their money to Jews abroad” rather than discuss the merits of actual policy, which is the opposite of sending Americans’ money away.

But because the arrangement is so beneficial to America, President Trump was shocked by the suggestion that U.S. policy would be influenced by these idiots. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is seeking to base defense manufacturing in Israel so as to defang the “aid” talking point among pundits who are far more influential in this debate than their range of knowledge would suggest they should be.

“When Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu proposed winding down U.S. military aid late last year,” Jewish Insider reports, “President Donald Trump was bewildered and did not immediately support the move.”

The president’s attitude seems to be: If a bunch of so-called America-first illiterates want to sabotage American defense manufacturing, they should just be ignored. To wit: “Trump could not understand why Netanyahu would propose ending American military aid to Israel and disagrees that the move would improve U.S. public opinion on the Jewish state, one source familiar with the president’s perspective told JI. He is skeptical that the plan would benefit either country, but is also not dismissing it out of hand, they said.”
From aid to alliance: Why Israeli leaders say ending US military assistance is long overdue
The Heritage plan calls for a 19-year phaseout, but Flesch said he wasn’t surprised to learn of the 10-year timeframe proposed by Netanyahu. “There were people on the Israeli side who were saying, ‘You’re being much too generous. Let’s end it sooner,” he said.

Partly driving the timing of the push are changing attitudes among Americans, including conservatives, regarding Israel. Harvard-Harris and Pew Research Center Polls show declining support for the Jewish state among younger Americans.

“We did this largely recognizing that on the U.S. side of the ledger, there were issues with U.S. support toward Israel, largely on the Democratic side, but obviously a little bit on the Republican side,” said Flesch. “Our assessment was it is time now with the renegotiation on the MOU to take into account these shifting domestic political dynamics and concerns.”

Despite supporting an end to military aid, Gideon Israel, of the Jerusalem-Washington Center, stressed that the growing American opposition to aid, including among young conservatives, can only be described as a “colossal Israeli public relations failure.”

“The fact that in America it’s seen as a charity is a failure by multiple prime ministers to explain that this is a great deal for America. All they’ve done is say, ‘Thank you,’ reinforcing the impression that it’s a handout,” he said. “And so we shouldn’t be surprised by a situation where everybody thinks it’s a waste of money and that Israel is a parasite.”

He described Israel as both a marketing and R&D department for American weaponry, boosting U.S. arms sales globally while also improving them. When Israel buys and successfully uses advanced U.S. weapons, such as the F-35, and takes out Russian and Chinese-made equipment, it proves their superiority, prompting other countries to buy them, he said.

“What they call ‘aid’ is pumped back into the America economy many times over,” he continued. “Yet, the only one who over the years has really talked about the benefits the U.S. received was Yoram Ettinger. He was an island in the sea.”

Ettinger said, “It’s true that I don’t hear anyone among Israel’s top policy makers or top diplomats in the U.S. educating Americans on the fact that this is the best-ever investment made by the United States, with a return on investment well over 1,000% year in and year out.”

When Israel first received the F-35 in 2018, it was a troubled aircraft with technical deficiencies, he noted. Israel quickly resolved those issues, “not because we are so smart, but because of the challenges facing Israel, which force us to upgrade any system which we receive from the United States.” Israeli F-35I Adir jets fly in formation. Photo by 1st Lt. Erik D. Anthony/U.S. Air Force.

It is well documented that Israel’s version of the F-35, called the “Adir,” includes extended range and significantly upgraded capabilities, including electronic warfare systems to counter Russian and Iranian air defense systems, which Israel has shared with the United States.

According to Defense.Info, in its June 14, 2025 issue: “Pentagon officials have acknowledged that Israel’s experience provides valuable insights into sustaining F-35 operations during high-intensity conflict.”

On Jan. 7, Lockheed Martin reported a record-breaking year for the F-35 program, delivering 191 F-35s, beating the previous delivery record of 142.
  • Wednesday, January 14, 2026
  • Elder of Ziyon
In December, Jewish Federation’s Community Relations Director Rabbi Asher Lopatin led an academic and cultural mission to Syria, with the goal of solidifying and deepening relations with the University of Damascus and the Damascus National Museum and American universities. ...

After a warm VIP welcome at the airport, the group visited the well- kept Al-Franje synagogue and were honored to light Chanukah candles there to celebrate the eighth day of Chanukah. They continued to the Jewish cemetery to help with bringing the marker of   Rabbi Chayim Vital’s wife – currently strewn upside down in a faraway place in the cemetery – to the chapel housing Rabbi Chayim Vital’s stone. Another Chanukah Menorah was lit at the new five-star Semiramis Hotel, where the owner treated the group to a fully kosher meal – including new dishes and silverware purchased just for kosher customers and meat brought in from America. The chefs proudly and graciously showed the group the fully kosher kitchen and preparation space.  

RT Arabic reports about why the luxury hotel owner decided to make kosher food available:
Munther Nuzha, the owner of the Semiramis Hotel, explained that the idea began about two or three months ago, when the hotel hosted an American Jewish delegation that was touring Syria. He met them at the hotel for dinner, and among them was an American rabbi, but he was unable to eat any of the food provided.

He added that the rabbi explained to him that he couldn't eat because the food wasn't kosher, prompting him to ask what could be offered. The response was that only cut fruit was available. He noted his surprise, wondering how a religious Jew could attend a dinner invitation without suitable food being provided. The rabbi replied that the solution was to find a restaurant that served kosher food.

He added that the idea seemed good to him, and he expressed his support to the rabbi, believing that the availability of kosher food would encourage Jews to visit Syria and feel welcome. After the rabbi returned to the United States, he contacted him later and informed him of the desire of a delegation of American Jewish academics to eat kosher food at the hotel.

The hotel owner confirmed that he had no objection, stressing that the hotel staff also welcomed the idea. He said that Syria today welcomes all visitors, especially Jews, to show that there is no personal animosity towards them, recalling that Syria historically had a large number of Syrian Jews, and that it is a country where different sects have coexisted without problems.
The times they are a-changing.




Buy EoZ's books  on Amazon!

"He's an Anti-Zionist Too!" cartoon book (December 2024)

PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism (February 2022)

   
 

 


Disclaimer: the views expressed here are the sole responsibility of the author, weekly Judean Rose columnist Varda Meyers Epstein.


President Trump keeps touting the peace he brought to the Middle East. But if this is peace, I’d hate to see war. Though actually, I’ve seen war and I’m still seeing war—because we still have war. Since the ceasefire took effect on October 10, there have been 78 Hamas violations of the ceasefire.

Below are the president’s own “peace” claims—grouped by date—asserting or clearly implying that peace now exists in the Middle East.

  • *October 13, 2025 (remarks released October 14): “At long last, we have peace in the Middle East. And now we’re there.” In the same remarks, Trump also declared, “After years of suffering and bloodshed, the war in Gaza is over.”
  • *October 16, 2025 (Truth Social): Trump described what he called a “Great Accomplishment of Peace in the Middle East.”
  • *October 25, 2025 (Truth Social and Air Force One press gaggle): “We have a very strong PEACE in the Middle East,” Trump wrote, adding that it had a good chance of being “EVERLASTING.” Speaking to reporters later that day, he said, “We have peace in the Middle East. That’s what we have. Great peace in the Middle East,” and insisted, “This is real peace.”
  • *November 10, 2025 (Truth Social): Trump referred to “PEACE in the Middle East” and described it as “the Great Miracle that is taking place in the Middle East.”
  • *December 1, 2025 (Truth Social): He claimed “SUCCESS, already attained, for PEACE IN THE MIDDLE EAST!”
  • *December 11–12, 2025 (White House remarks): Trump stated, “We actually do have a real peace in the Middle East.”
  • *December 16, 2025 (White House remarks): He said the administration’s goal was to ensure that there “remains … peace in the Middle East.”
  • *December 18, 2025 (national address): In a national address, Trump said the Gaza truce had “brought peace to the Middle East for the first time in 3,000 years.”

You’d never know the reality on the ground if you tried to Google “Hamas ceasefire violations.” What you get instead is page after page of propaganda about Israel’s supposed violations—Israel’s “pretend” violations—while Hamas malfeasance disappears into a black hole. Seventy-eight instances of such malfeasance, ignored or downplayed, because the media (and apparently Google) are more comfortable amplifying accusations against Israel than confronting what Hamas actually does. They love anyone who murders, rapes, beheads, and burns Jews. Including babies.




So they cover up the truth and peddle lies. That we expect. What is galling is DJT’s continued claims that we have peace. But actually, this too is to be expected. The president wants to have accomplished peace—and yes, he’s a braggart—so he calls it peace even when it isn’t. Boy, would he like to earn that Nobel Peace Prize. Maybe he thinks if he says it enough—peace, peace, peace—the world will be convinced and he’ll get that prize. And if he doesn’t get that prize—which almost assuredly he will not—he’ll say that only because he’s Donald Trump, they won’t give him credit for bringing peace to the Middle East—which he assuredly did not.



Don’t get me wrong—Donald Trump got all but one of our remaining hostages out. For that, the Israeli people are hugely grateful. But this is not peace, and IDF soldiers have still been killed. For their families, there is no peace—also for the rest of Israel. We all know we’re still at war.



For anyone who wants specifics, below is what that “peace” has consisted of since October 10: 78 separate ceasefire violations and hostile incidents, in chronological order:

  1. Oct 13 — Arrow Unit killed 32 Gazans accused of collaborating with Israel (incl. Doghmush clan members).
  2. Oct 14 — Hamas failed to return over half the remaining slain hostages within the required 72 hours (hostage-return breach).
  3. Oct 14 — “Suspects” crossed the Yellow Line (Incident A); IDF opened fire; Gaza health ministry claimed fatalities.
  4. Oct 14 — “Suspects” crossed the Yellow Line (Incident B); IDF opened fire; Gaza health ministry claimed fatalities.
  5. Oct 15 — Hamas returned a body that did not match any hostage (forensics mismatch).
  6. Oct 15 — Hamas publicly executed 8 captives (incl. Doghmush clan members).
  7. Oct 18 — “Suspicious vehicle” crossed the Yellow Line and approached troops; IDF fire; Hamas claimed 11 family members killed.
  8. Oct 19 — Tunnel ambush in Rafah: 2 IDF killed, 3 wounded (Israel called blatant ceasefire violation; Hamas denied responsibility).
  9. Oct 27 — Hamas returned partial remains of a hostage already recovered by IDF (Netanyahu office: “clear violation”).
  10. Oct 28 — Sniper/RPG attack killed 1 IDF soldier in Rafah area (Hamas denied responsibility).
  11. Nov 1 — Hamas handed over 3 bodies claimed as hostages; Israel said none matched any hostage.
  12. Nov 2 — Terrorist crossed Yellow Line and approached troops (north Gaza); IAF struck.
  13. Nov 3 — Multiple individuals crossed Yellow Line and advanced toward troops (south Gaza); troops fired.
  14. Nov 3 — Israel assessed ~200 Hamas fighters remained in tunnels within Israeli-controlled southern Gaza (non-withdrawal breach).
  15. Nov 4 — Terrorist crossed Yellow Line and approached troops; eliminated.
  16. Nov 5 — Two terrorists crossed Yellow Line and advanced toward troops (central Gaza) (Incident A); eliminated.
  17. Nov 5 — Two terrorists crossed Yellow Line and advanced toward troops (central Gaza) (Incident B); eliminated.
  18. Nov 8 — Two terrorists crossed/approached troops (north Gaza); one eliminated.
  19. Nov 8 — Additional terrorist crossed/approached troops; eliminated.
  20. Nov 10 — Two terrorists crossed/approached troops (south Gaza); eliminated.
  21. Nov 11 — Terrorist crossed/approached troops (south Gaza); eliminated.
  22. Nov 12 — Four terrorists identified east of Yellow Line (Rafah); 3 killed.
  23. Nov 12 — Terrorist crossed Yellow Line and approached troops (Khan Younis area); eliminated.
  24. Nov 16 — Terrorist crossed Yellow Line and approached troops (north Gaza); eliminated.
  25. Nov 17 — Several crossed Yellow Line and buried suspicious objects near IDF forces; one eliminated, others retreated.
  26. Nov 17 — Individual crossed Yellow Line and approached troops; eliminated.
  27. Nov 18 — Two terrorists crossed/approached forces (south Gaza); both eliminated.
  28. Nov 19 — Several terrorists crossed Yellow Line and approached forces (north Gaza); at least one eliminated.
  29. Nov 19 — Terrorists opened fire toward IDF in Khan Younis; IDF called it a ceasefire violation.
  30. Nov 20 — Two terrorists crossed/approached troops (south Gaza); “hit identified,” outcome unspecified.
  31. Nov 21~15 terrorists emerged from underground infrastructure east of Yellow Line in eastern Rafah; later 6 killed, 5 apprehended.
  32. Nov 22 — Armed terrorist fired from a humanitarian access road (IDF video); attacker eliminated.
  33. Nov 22 — IDF said it eliminated 3 terrorists likely linked to prior Rafah tunnel escape attempt.
  34. Nov 22 — IDF said 2 other militants were eliminated in a separate strike (total in that episode reported as five).
  35. Nov 22 — IDF: 2 terrorists crossed Yellow Line and advanced toward troops; eliminated.
  36. Nov 24 — Terrorist crossed Yellow Line and approached IDF in Khan Younis; struck by IAF.
  37. Nov 24Two terrorists crossed Yellow Line and approached IDF near Khan Younis; struck by IAF.
  38. Nov 24 — Several terrorists crossed Yellow Line and approached troops (north Gaza); threatened forces.
  39. Nov 24 — Additional terrorists attempted to approach troops in same area; IDF said 2 eliminated total across both Nov 24 northern incidents.
  40. Nov 25 — PIJ delay in transfer of hostage remains (Netanyahu: “additional violation”); body later returned and identified as Dror Or.
  41. Nov 25 — Terrorist crossed Yellow Line and approached forces (north Strip); eliminated.
  42. Nov 25 — Nahal Brigade: 5 armed individuals emerged from tunnels in “Rafah Pocket”; eliminated.
  43. Nov 266 terrorists emerged from tunnels in Rafah; 2 captured, 4 eliminated.
  44. Nov 26 — IDF struck Hamas operative planning an imminent sniper plot in northern Gaza.
  45. Nov 26 — PIJ member approached IDF in southern Gaza (immediate threat); eliminated.
  46. Nov 26 — Individual crossed Yellow Line and approached IDF; eliminated.
  47. Nov 28 — Terrorist approached troops near Yellow Line (south Gaza); eliminated by IAF.
  48. Nov 29 — Two suspects crossed Yellow Line, did “suspicious activities,” and approached troops (south Gaza); eliminated by IAF.
  49. Nov 29 — Terrorist crossed Yellow Line and approached troops later same day; eliminated.
  50. Dec 1 — Two terrorists crossed Yellow Line (north Gaza) (Incident A); eliminated.
  51. Dec 1 — Two terrorists crossed Yellow Line (north Gaza) (Incident B); eliminated.
  52. Dec 1 — Terrorist crossed Yellow Line and approached forces (central Gaza); eliminated with air support.
  53. Dec 3 — Tunnel ambush in eastern Rafah: Sayeret Golani engaged attackers; 4 IDF injured.
  54. Dec 4 — Terrorist crossed Yellow Line and approached IDF (south Gaza); hit/eliminated per IDF.
  55. Dec 5 — Two terrorists with suspicious items approached IDF (north Gaza); struck by IAF; one confirmed eliminated.
  56. Dec 6 — Multiple terrorists crossed Yellow Line (Incident A); IDF reported eliminations (part of three total across day).
  57. Dec 6 — Multiple terrorists crossed Yellow Line (Incident B); IDF reported eliminations (part of three total across day).
  58. Dec 7 — Terrorist crossed Yellow Line and approached forces (south Gaza); eliminated.
  59. Dec 10 — Two terrorists crossed Yellow Line and approached forces (north Gaza); one eliminated.
  60. Dec 11 — Two terrorists crossed Yellow Line and approached forces (south Gaza); one eliminated.
  61. Dec 13 — Terrorist crossed Yellow Line and approached forces (north Gaza); eliminated.
  62. Dec 14 — Terrorist crossed Yellow Line and approached forces (north Gaza); eliminated.
  63. Dec 15 — Terrorist crossed Yellow Line and approached forces; eliminated.
  64. Dec 16 — Terrorist crossed Yellow Line carrying a suspicious object; eliminated.
  65. Dec 18 — Terrorist crossed Yellow Line and approached forces; eliminated by IAF.
  66. Dec 19 — Terrorist crossed Yellow Line and approached forces (central Gaza); eliminated by IAF.
  67. Dec 20 — Two terrorists crossed Yellow Line and approached forces (north Gaza); killed by IAF.
  68. Dec 21 — Suspects gathered near Yellow Line; warning fire; 3 crossed and approached forces; IAF struck (outcome unclear).
  69. Dec 21 — Two terrorists crossed Yellow Line and approached forces (Incident A); IAF struck (outcome unclear).
  70. Dec 21 — Two terrorists crossed Yellow Line and approached forces (Incident B); IAF struck (outcome unclear).
  71. Dec 24 — Charge detonated on armored vehicle during Rafah clearing; 1 IDF soldier lightly wounded.
  72. Dec 25 — Terrorist crossed Yellow Line and approached forces (north Gaza); eliminated.
  73. Dec 25 — Two terrorists crossed Yellow Line and approached forces (south Gaza); eliminated by IAF.
  74. Jan 2 — Terrorist crossed Yellow Line and approached forces (south Gaza); killed.
  75. Jan 3 — IDF destroyed shaft with loaded rocket launcher ready to fire at southern Israel, deployed after ceasefire (explicit violation).
  76. Jan 5 — Terrorist crossed Yellow Line and approached forces (south Gaza); eliminated by IAF.
  77. Jan 7 — Hamas fired into an area where IDF forces were operating (north Gaza); IDF called it a blatant violation.
  78. Jan 8 — Failed launch from Gaza City toward Israel; projectile fell near a hospital; IDF struck launch point.

All ceasefire violations listed above are drawn from reporting by the Foundation for Defense of Democracies’ Long War Journal (longwarjournal.org), which has provided detailed, day-by-day tracking of militant activity in Gaza since the ceasefire.

I’m not surprised at the president’s braggadocio in the least, but I wish he would be honest about what is actually happening in Gaza. About the fact that not only has Hamas violated the ceasefire 78 times as of this writing, but that the war is not over. I wish the president would admit that Hamas is reorganizing, rearming, repairing and reopening tunnels, and reasserting its full control over the parts of Gaza still under its authority.

Since the U.S.-mediated ceasefire in October 2025, Hamas has used the lull to regroup: reconstituting command and policing structures, replenishing weapons stocks, restoring damaged tunnel routes, and tightening its grip over the parts of western Gaza it controls.

Much of this has unfolded out of the Western spotlight. The tunnels did not vanish; they went back underground—literally and politically—while Gaza’s civilians were pushed into ever tighter spaces above them. In that crowded terrain, Hamas can rebuild with more cover and less room for anyone to separate fighters from families. Israeli assessments say the group is returning to a familiar method: tucking command posts, weapons caches, and staging areas into the seams of civilian life—near hospitals, UN-linked compounds, and schools—locations Israel argues have repeatedly been used as shields for military activity.

Meanwhile, the president keeps saying that Hamas will disarm the easy way or the hard way, but it never ever happens. He doesn’t push it. Instead, he’s trying to shove Qatar and Turkey down our throats as if they were good actors, for his Board of Peace (of which there is not).

We deserve safety and peace. But this is not peace and Israel and the Israeli people are not safe. This is not what we bargained for when we agreed to this ceasefire. Or maybe we did. The more things change, the more they stay the same. We are told again and again that Trump is the most pro-Israel president ever, and we are actually giving him the Israel Prize, but unfortunately, the peace that’s breaking out all over, is not peace, and is not breaking out all over.



Buy EoZ's books  on Amazon!

"He's an Anti-Zionist Too!" cartoon book (December 2024)

PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism (February 2022)

   
 

 

  • Wednesday, January 14, 2026
  • Elder of Ziyon


A conference will take place next month at Boston University, the "Conference on the Jewish Left." It will host many anti-Zionist voices, Jewish and non-Jewish, from Peter Beinart to Yousef Munayyer. 

It is already telling that the organizers treat anti-Zionism as the default meaning of “the Jewish left.” David Ben-Gurion and Golda Meir were part of the Jewish left, yet no one associated with this conference would regard them as ideological ancestors. The term has been quietly redefined to exclude the very people who once embodied it.

But what interests me most is not the guest list. It is the slogan under which the conference is being held, a phrase we have all heard countless times: “None of us are free unless all of us are free.” Is this an authentically Jewish idea? Is it even a coherent one?

As a description of reality, it collapses almost immediately. There has never been a moment in human history when all people were free, and there never will be. Freedom is always partial, uneven, contested, and fragile. To claim that no one is free unless everyone is free is to define freedom out of existence. It means that until North Korea falls, until China has a different regime, until the Arab world grants equal rights to Jews and gays, until every prisoner everywhere is released, no one is free. Impossibility becomes the moral standard.

Ethical systems that render all incremental good meaningless tend to end either in paralysis or in performance. Why bother improving conditions in one place if the rest of the world remains broken? If none of us are free anyway, moral action becomes symbolic rather than substantive.

Judaism rests on the opposite premise. Moral action matters precisely because the world is broken. Saving one life matters even if others cannot be saved. Reducing suffering here matters even if suffering persists elsewhere. Obligation does not wait for universal resolution.

The slogan also smuggles in a false moral symmetry. It implies that all unfreedoms bind all people equally at all times. No one actually lives this way. The phrase is never applied universally. It is invoked selectively, aimed at particular causes, and quietly ignored everywhere else. No one believes their own freedom is negated by the existence of political prisoners in every dictatorship on earth. The slogan sounds absolute only because it is never meant to be enforced as such.

One can say that it is “just a slogan,” but slogans are not neutral. This one is used as a weapon. It pretends to be universal while being applied only to causes that happen to align with the anti-Zionist left. If the conference is to be taken seriously, its ethical commitments have to be taken seriously as well, and this slogan does not survive even cursory examination.

This is where Jewish ethics parts company most sharply with the sentiment. Jewish moral reasoning is structured rather than flattened. Responsibility radiates outward in concentric circles. You are more responsible for those closest to you, not because distant suffering is unimportant, but because moral obligation without prioritization becomes incoherent. Ethics requires triage. It requires proximity. It requires acknowledging limits. 

Choosing to chant “free Palestine” while ignoring “free Iran” when you live nowhere near either is not a moral stance. It is political selectivity. 

Jews claiming to care deeply about Palestinians while dismissing fellow Jews who live under the threat of Palestinian terror is not universal ethics. It is antisemitism, thinly veiled in the language of Jewish values.

The slogan is not a guide to moral action. It is a credential.

(UPDATE: The registration page indicated that the conference was on Saturday February 28, and I had originally written a more expansive article about how the organizers didn’t care about Shabbat. I regret the error.)



Buy EoZ's books  on Amazon!

"He's an Anti-Zionist Too!" cartoon book (December 2024)

PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism (February 2022)

   
 

 


There is a brand new book, published January 2026, by Dafna Hirsch, called the The Israeli Career of Hummus: Colonial Appropriation, Authenticity, and Distinction. It is an entire book that argues that Israel culturally appropriated hummus from Palestinian Arabs. 
 
An entire book.

The summary says "Hirsch shows how the Arab identity of hummus functions as a semiotic resource, which is sometimes suppressed and at other times leveraged to lend authenticity to hummus―and thus to its consumers."

This means that if Israelis downplay the Arab origins of hummus, that is proof of erasure, appropriation, cultural colonization. But if Israelis acknowledge and emphasize the Arab origins, that is proof  of exploitation, orientalist authenticity-mining, symbolic domination.

No matter what Israelis do, it reaffirms their guilt.

The book is thick with the kind of pseudo-intellectual jargon that has become the hallmark of postcolonial academic orthodoxy. Terms like “Peircean qualisign,” “semiotic ideologies,” and “authenticity-conferring consumption” are deployed to mask what is, at its core, an ideologically rigid thesis: that everything Israelis touch—yes, even hummus—is evidence of settler-colonial theft.

But what’s missing is basic logic.

The entire book assumes as obvious that Israelis adopting hummus as Israeli is part of their settler-colonial nature. 

But what are "American" foods? Hot dogs, hamburgers, apple pie - all of them originated in Germany! Was that cultural appropriation - or simply that Americans fell in love with those foods and adopted them as their own? Why, with Israel, is the starting point of the analysis that Israelis are evil, and all the following conclusions are based on that bigoted premise? Why is it not possible that Israelis just went crazy over falafel in pita and hummus, sabich and shawarma, Israeli couscous and shakshuka, not particularly caring if their origins are Arab or Mizrahi or Israeli? The only people who refer to foods as "masculine" or "feminine" are the academics who apply their own biases on their subjects, because normal people don't think of most foods as gendered. 

Hirsch tells a story about how she grew up in Jaffa and was not aware of excellent Arab hummus stores near her house, and assumes that all Israelis are equally ignorant of their Arab neighbors. Maybe - or maybe she grew up as a left-wing, secular Ashkenazi who didn't know any Mizrahi Jews either - the types of people who would know the Arab shops (if they didn't keep kosher)? 

This book isn’t about understanding; it’s about indicting.

The premise is fixed: Israel is guilty. Every chapter, every citation, every theoretical flourish exists to reinforce that assumption.

This is what much of academia has become today: Not a place for discovery, but for ideological confirmation.

And here’s the kicker:
This anti-Israel book was funded by the Israel Science Foundation—that is, by the Israeli taxpayer.

So if there’s any true “cultural crime” here, it’s not the hummus.

It’s the fact that Israelis are subsidizing the production of literature that pathologizes their existence.



Buy EoZ's books  on Amazon!

"He's an Anti-Zionist Too!" cartoon book (December 2024)

PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism (February 2022)

   
 

 

Tuesday, January 13, 2026

From Ian:

Pierre Rehov: Why the West Is Split Over Political Islam
Trump's executive order represents the most serious American effort in decades to confront Islamist political networks that, in Washington, had long been considered merely political differences rather than lethal security threats.

Across the Atlantic... in the European Union and many of its major capitals, political Islam — often embodied by Muslim Brotherhood-linked organizations — remains part of an approach for a larger "dialogue with Islamists". Can you imagine a "dialogue with Bolsheviks" or a "dialogue with the Third Reich"?

[T]he European Union has taken a far more cautious, at times permissive, approach, apparently preferring to regard Islamic extremists as potential voters.

The West ends up assimilating into Islam, rather than the other way around.

Rather than confronting liberal democratic values, these "entryist" actors advocate for "reinterpretations" that often blur the lines between religious freedom and political Islam.

Many Muslims in the West, of course, just want an opportunity for a better life, but they are not the ones in the engine room, driving the extremist Muslim train. The agenda, according to Islam itself, consists of sharing Allah's precious gift of Islam (Dar Al Islam, the "Abode of Islam") with the rest of the world (the Dar al Harb, the "Abode of War," those who have yet to submit to Islam) -- either by infiltration or force. Finally – when everyone in the world has submitted to Islam, whether they wanted to or not -- then there will be "peace." That, evidently, is when the world will enjoy "the Religion of Peace."

The result is a West that now follows two opposite paths. On one path, the United States under the Trump administration is moving toward clarity and confrontation, willing to codify ideological enemies and remove them from the political landscape. On the other path, Europe continues its policy of engagement, accommodation and submission, risk-balancing between wished-for civic inclusion and ideological risk. This split only serves to impede counterterrorism and jeopardize the West.
Who radicalized the Mississippi synagogue arsonist?
Hate found its way to Mississippi’s largest Jewish house of worship, Congregation Beth Israel, when an arsonist intentionally set fire to the synagogue at about 3 a.m. Saturday, damaging the only synagogue in Jackson.

The alleged suspect’s name, Stephen Spencer Pittman, was released late Monday. According to the FBI, he faces charges of maliciously damaging or destroying a building by fire or an explosive.

Russ Latino, a native Mississippian and founder of the Jackson-based Magnolia Tribune Institute, said an affidavit filed in U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi alleges Pittman admitted to law enforcement that he set the fire at Beth Israel because of its “Jewish ties.” Latino added that Pittman referred to the synagogue as the “Synagogue of Satan” and detailed the steps he took leading up to the arson.

Latino noted that “Synagogue of Satan” is an antisemitic phrase that both Nick Fuentes and Candace Owens have used in recent years. “Nothing in his personal profile points out anything political. There is no Trump or Biden or Harris. There are just a lot of bible verses,” he said, adding, “But ‘Synagogue of Satan’ well, that is a pretty specific alliteration and the same phraseology used by Fuentes and Owens,” he said.

His social media presence on X shows a young man posting about his Christian faith and baseball, where he was a standout player in both high school and college.

Latino said the entire Jackson community has rallied around the Beth Israel congregants. “Many different faith organizations had reached out and offered their houses of worship for the Beth Israel members so they can practice their faith,” he said.
Pro-Palestine protesters plotted to spy on Maccabi players
Pro-Palestine protesters plotted to spy on Maccabi Tel Aviv players after West Midlands Police “ignored” the threat to the Israeli football team.

The Telegraph has seen a message in a group chat that discusses trying to “obstruct” the visiting players from taking part in a fixture against Aston Villa on Nov 6.

Members of the West Midlands Palestine Solidarity Campaign were asked to scour hotel lobbies in Birmingham for Maccabi players, in an attempt to stop the match from going ahead.

Craig Guildford, Chief Constable of West Midlands Police, is facing mounting pressure to resign for banning Maccabi fans last year.

Critics argue his decision was politically motivated rather than based on genuine safety concerns, and that Mr Guildford has misled Parliament with his version of events. The force has also been accused of ignoring threats to the Israeli players and their fans.

The Telegraph can reveal attempts by pro-Gaza activists to track down Maccabi players the night before the match.

An unidentified campaigner said the group could “still cancel this match if we obstruct team Maccabi from attending” and called for volunteers for “MISSION CRITICAL search actions”.

Activists were tasked with searching “hotel lobbies and dining areas” on the night before the game, looking for faces in a lineup of Maccabi players on the team’s website in an attempt to cancel the match.

They were also asked to work as “spotters” at the stadium, to be “watching the Villa Park entrances for the team coach”.

“We can then mount a quick response, to protest them, or the spotters can follow them back to their hotels to find out where their [sic] staying, and mobilise a protest at the hotel.”

The message suggests there was an organised attempt to target the Israeli players ahead of the match, despite West Midlands Police’s insistence that it was Maccabi fans who were likely to cause violence or intimidation.
From Ian:

Bernard-Henri Lévy: Iran’s Revolution
I tremble as I write these lines.

For Iran—brave and heroic Iran—trembles on the edge of a horrific bloodbath.

And I have no doubt that the fascist regime of the mullahs will take, if it can, a terrible revenge on the civilians who are defying it.

But the reality is clear.

What has been happening for the past eight days in the cities of ancient Persia is not a revolt. It is a revolution. The difference? Both tiny and immense. A revolt—Iranians have known at least five revolts in the past 15 years—demands reform, the mitigation of misery, negotiation. A revolution expects none of that and does not accommodate, at all, the hated order of things; it does not seek the adjustment of the regime, but its replacement.

Tocqueville: A revolution begins when people cease to imagine the future as an anamorphosis of the past.

Hannah Arendt: An insurrection challenges power; a revolution rejects its very principle and foundation.

This kind of event is rare in human history. But this is where the Iranians now stand. When they say, “Death to Khamenei,” they have crossed that threshold and entered this new era of both hope and tragedy.

Of course, the uprising may still be crushed. Of course, we are speaking of thousands of women and men executed in the secrecy of the electronic night that has fallen over the country. And, of course, we know of revolutions that ended drowned in blood.

But what has been has been. The Iranian women and men who have shouted at the top of their lungs that they want to live, but are ready to die for that, will not turn back. They will no longer accept the offers of negotiations made by cornered ayatollahs.

Those who fail to understand this are grotesque.

To those who still dare to reduce this conflagration to some so-called American Zionist plot—shame on them.

They are already and forever in the dustbins of History.
Trump Admin Designates Three Muslim Brotherhood Branches as Terrorist Organizations
The Trump administration on Tuesday designated three of the Muslim Brotherhood's largest branches in the Middle East as terrorist groups, unveiling long-awaited sanctions aimed at financially crippling the global Islamist organization responsible for fomenting violence against the United States and its allies.

The joint action from the State and Treasury Departments targets the Muslim Brotherhood's sects in Egypt, Jordan, and Lebanon in the first step "of an ongoing, sustained effort to thwart Muslim Brotherhood violence and destabilization wherever it occurs," according to the Treasury Department. The department noted in its release announcing the move that "additional terrorist designations" may occur as the Trump administration examines "all available tools to deprive these Muslim Brotherhood chapters of the resources to engage in or support terrorism."

"The Muslim Brotherhood has inspired, nurtured, and funded terrorist groups like Hamas that are direct threats to the safety and security of the American people and our allies," Undersecretary of the Treasury for Terrorism and Financial Intelligence John K. Hurley said in a statement. "Despite their peaceful public façade, both the Egyptian and Jordanian Muslim brotherhood branches have conspired to support Hamas’s terrorism and undermine the sovereignty of their own national governments."

Congressional Republicans have argued that the United States should designate the Muslim Brotherhood as a terrorist organization since at least 2015, but legislation doing so never reached the president's desk. After President Donald Trump took office for a second time and expressed an interest in targeting the Muslim Brotherhood through executive actions, Sen. Ted Cruz (R., Texas) introduced a bill featuring a "new modernized strategy" to systematically sanction the groups' branches around the world rather than the brotherhood as a whole. The administration's announcement on Tuesday indicates that it is using Cruz's approach, going after individual Muslim Brotherhood sects across the Middle East.

The Treasury Department's Office of Foreign Assets Control went after the Muslim Brotherhood's Jordanian and Egyptian branches, both of which provide material support for Hamas, while the State Department targeted the Lebanese Muslim Brotherhood. The Lebanese branch, known as al-Jamaa al-Islamiyah, received both the Foreign Terrorist Organization and Specially Designated Global Terrorist labels from Foggy Bottom, freezing its assets and preventing it from doing business with Western financial institutions.
‘Israel saved us from genocide’: Interview with Syrian Druze leader
‘We are paying a heavy price, but we struggle to remain steadfast and preserve our identity with dignity and pride,’ says Sheikh Hikmat al-Hijri, the spiritual leader of Syria’s Druze community.

According to him, the threat does not stem solely from the current rulers but from a continuous ideological current. ‘The previous regime also acted against us, but the current one is the most brutal. They do not want to eliminate only the Druze, but any minority that is not like them.’

Six months after one of the deadliest massacres the Druze community has suffered in generations, Sheikh al-Hijri speaks with rare openness about an open wound, a reality of siege and a clear aspiration to establish an independent Druze entity in Sweida province.

"The only crime for which we were murdered was being Druze", he says in a special interview with ynet. "This is an ISIS-style government, established as a direct continuation of al-Qaeda."

The massacre that took place last July, in which more than 2,000 Druze were killed, included executions, rape, abuse and the burning of people alive, women, children and infants, he says. "This was a decision by Syria’s dark regime and by all the terrorist groups operating from Damascus. It was genocide", he states.

‘The heavy price was not in vain’
Al-Hijri, 60, was born in Venezuela, where his father emigrated along with a large Druze community. Today, around 150,000 Druze live in Venezuela, making it the fourth-largest Druze population worldwide. He later returned to Syria and studied law at Damascus University.

In 2012, he replaced his brother as the spiritual leader of the Druze community following his brother’s death in a car accident that was never fully explained and was widely suspected to involve the Assad regime. Leadership of the community has remained with the al-Hijri family since the 19th century.

"The latest massacre proved that we cannot rely on anyone else to protect our community", he says. "The price was extremely heavy, but it will not be in vain. We are seeking a future in which the Druze are no longer victims."

"Since July 2025, we have been living in a state of full mobilization," he says. "Young and old alike are enlisted to defend our homes and our very existence. They wanted to annihilate us."
  • Tuesday, January 13, 2026
  • Elder of Ziyon
"German students march against the un-German spirit." Book burning in Berlin, Germany, May 10, 1933.

Today's "anti-Zionist" academic environment increasingly resembles the anti-Jewish academic world in Germany in the 1920s and 1930s. I am not saying this as rhetoric - I am saying that the parallels are essentially exact. 

German academia’s descent into antisemitism began before the Nazis took  power. In the early 1920s, during the Weimar Republic, Jewish professors were already being singled out as carriers of something alien and corrosive. Nationalist student groups disrupted lectures, boycotted Jewish faculty, and circulated petitions demanding limits on Jewish influence in universities. This was justified not in racial terms at first, but in intellectual ones. Jewish scholars were accused of promoting abstract, cosmopolitan, un-German modes of thought that allegedly undermined the nation.

In the 1920s, the concept of “Jewish science” emerged. It was not initially shouted by thugs. It was articulated by credentialed academics. Nobel laureates like Philipp Lenard and Johannes Stark argued that modern physics, especially Einstein’s relativity, was not merely wrong but Jewish in character - overly abstract, detached from reality, ideologically corrosive. The claim was not that Jews should be excluded because they were Jews, but that their ideas were incompatible with German values. Identity was converted into an epistemic defect.

By the late 1920s, this rhetoric had saturated campus culture. Jewish scholars were heckled, isolated, and treated as moral and intellectual threats. Lists of Jewish academics circulated. Entire disciplines were scrutinized for “Jewish influence.” 

When Hitler became chancellor in January 1933, the intellectual case had already been made. When the Law for the Restoration of the Professional Civil Service was enacted in April 1933, purging Jews from universities, it did not feel like a rupture. It felt like a logical next step. Expulsions overlapped with intensified rhetoric. Book burnings followed. By the late 1930s, Jewish intellectual life had been eradicated from German universities. The state merely finished what academia had already prepared.

This is not ancient history. It is happening now.

This month, the Journal of Emerging Sport Studies published a paper arguing that the considerable contributions of Muska Mosston to the field should be stigmatized because he fought in the 1948 War of Independence, years before he moved to the US and created his theories. From the abstract:

Decanonise the ‘forefather’

Situating Muska Mosston’s Contributions to Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy within the Context of Zionist Settler Colonization of Palestine

Muska Mosston, renowned as a forefather of pedagogical innovation in the field of physical education and sport pedagogy, is celebrated for his Spectrum of Teaching Styles, which has permeated the field for decades. However, an examination of his biography reveals problematic ties to Zionist settler colonialism, including active participation in the dispossession and erasure of Palestinian communities. Using a decolonial lens, this paper critically interrogates the legacy of Mosston, challenging the normalisation of settler-colonial ideologies within academic discourse. In exploring Mosston's legacy through a decolonial lens, we are also compelled to reflect: How do we engage with the work of scholars whose lives and ideologies are deeply intertwined with systems of oppression? Can we separate the value of their contributions from the oppressive systems they may have been a part of? Furthermore, we urge professional organizations and academic institutions to reflect on their complicity in idolatrizing and therefore normalizing such legacies; we suggest instead that they employ practices that uphold truth-telling, advance healing, embrace ethics and actively reduce violence. By foregrounding these self-and institutional-reflective questions, we seek to advance a more equitable, ethical and axiologically reflexive scholarly practice in physical education and the sport pedagogy community more broadly.

Mosston's teaching framework reshaped how physical education is taught worldwide, moving away from rigid command-based instruction toward more adaptive, student-centered models. His work became foundational in the field and was developed entirely after he left Israel (not that this matters.) It had no political content. It had nothing to do with nationalism, war, or ideology.

Yet the reader is told that his military service, and his Zionism, is disqualifying for his theories built in the decades afterwards. It wants to retroactively erase his legacy in the name of morals. 

Orwell himself would be astonished at the idea that marginalizing an entire field of study because of a strained conception of guilt by association is "ethical."

There is no real information of what Mosston's role in the 1948 war was. But this is irrelevant to the modern antisemites who want to cancel him. He was a soldier - that is enough to tar him. Jews who fought to defend their land in an explicitly genocidal  war started by their Arab neighbors are heroes, not evil colonists, but that fact is hidden behind several layers of lies that are accepted as gospel by a wide swath of today's academics: 

1) Zionism is racist.
2) Zionism is settler colonialist, apartheid and genocidal.
3) Anyone who ever joined the Israeli army is a participant in ethnic cleansing and is therefore a war criminal.
4) Anything they have done since then is tainted by the fact they are war criminals.
5) They must be erased, canceled, and their contributions to society should be minimized or dismissed.

These are not even debatable in today's academic environment. They are assumed true as starting positions in going even further. 

This is Nazi logic, not academic ethics. This is exactly how “Jewish science” was treated in Germany. No individual wrongdoing was required. No specific acts needed to be proven. Jewishness itself was enough to cast doubt on one’s intellectual legitimacy, just as Israeliness or Zionism is today.. Once that move was normalized, exclusion followed naturally.

We are already seeing the modern equivalent of the 1920s stage. Campus disruptions, boycotts, and protests targeting Jewish or Zionist professors mirror the tactics of nationalist student groups in Weimar Germany. Lectures are shouted down. Speakers are disinvited. Hiring and funding are contested based on ideological purity tests. The justification is always "moral." Zionism is framed as uniquely illegitimate, as a stain that disqualifies participation in intellectual life.

But this article takes things to a new level. A seeming minor piece in a sports studies journal is literally encouraging the erasure of an entire field based on the identity - not beliefs, not history, but Israeli Jewish identity - of one of its founders. 

The modern antisemites knowingly target peripheral academic fields as testing grounds to see how far they can push their ideologies in areas that are not sensitive to antisemitism. I've seen anti-Zionist articles in poetry journals, communications studies, gender studies, child studies, environmental studies: the list goes on. 

But they have a model they are following, consciously or not: the precedent of antisemitic German students and academics between the world wars and during the rise of Hitler.





Buy EoZ's books  on Amazon!

"He's an Anti-Zionist Too!" cartoon book (December 2024)

PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism (February 2022)

   
 

 

  • Tuesday, January 13, 2026
  • Elder of Ziyon
The New York Times reports:
Last wee, members of the Pasadena Jewish Temple and Center gathered to remember the devastating wildfire that burned down the synagogue’s campus and much of the surrounding community of Altadena one year ago.

On Sunday, they felt another kind of grief when a member of the congregation drove by the site and discovered anti-Zionist graffiti scrawled on an exterior wall, synagogue leaders said Monday.

In addition to denouncing Zionism, the graffiti said, “RIP Renee,” which Rabbi Ratner took as a reference to Renee Good, the woman who was shot and killed by a federal agent in Minneapolis last week. Rabbi Ratner said that he had mentioned Ms. Good, whose death he described as a tragedy, in the congregation’s recent prayer for the dead.

Photos of the graffiti viewed by The New York Times showed that the message was written in large letters across several feet of a white exterior wall of the campus, which is otherwise surrounded by a chain-link fence covered with green hedges.  Congregation members said that there is no signage identifying the site as a synagogue or other Jewish community center.

In an email to temple members, Rabbi Ratner described the graffiti as “hateful and antisemitic.” He said that the temple was working with law enforcement agencies and Jewish organizations to investigate the episode and ensure the community’s safety.
It is nice that the story was covered, but there are no photos of the graffiti so we can determine exactly what it said. Merely calling it "anti-Zionist" is a cop-out, especially when the rabbi calls it "hateful and antisemitic." Did it compare Israel to Nazis? Did it say "we disagree with the Likud"? This all makes a difference, but the NYT is almost certainly sanitizing what it actually said, because it probably mirrored sentiments that have been published in that newspaper over the past two years.

Based on the description in the article, it appears that the graffiti was scrawled on the low white wall at the former location of the synagogue.


The houses across the street appear untouched by the fire. Those residents would have seen the graffiti but it was only reported by a congregation member who drove by the location. 

The far-Left are attacking synagogues as much as the far-Right are.  Yet the outrage for the former is certainly more muted. 



Buy EoZ's books  on Amazon!

"He's an Anti-Zionist Too!" cartoon book (December 2024)

PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism (February 2022)

   
 

 

  • Tuesday, January 13, 2026
  • Elder of Ziyon
On October 10, 2023, three days after the murderous Hamas pogrom, a transgender professor at University of California - David named Jemma DeCristo posted this:


Notice the knife, hatchet and blood drop emojis.

It sure sounds like a threat, doesn't it?

The university committee  censured DeCristo but recommended against suspension; the chancellor went further and briefly suspended DeCristo without pay, which seems like the minimum that the university should do. 

But what is fascinating is DeCristo's defense. According to The Chronicle of Higher Education, DeCristo claimed that the post was satire and that they wouldn't apologize:

The panel felt she hadn’t intended to cause harm and had already experienced “terrible real-world consequences.”

In justifying a harsher punishment, which the university’s vice provost for academic affairs, Philip H. Kass, had initially suggested, May pointed out in his letter of discipline that both the investigators and the hearing panel found that DeCristo “failed to acknowledge the deep pain and significant disruption” she’d caused, which he said was “in direct conflict with” her “obligation to protect and preserve conditions hospitable to student learning.” He added that she had “failed to offer clarification or apology that could have mitigated the impacts” of her actions.
Asked by investigators whether she would consider issuing an apology or clarification, DeCristo said doing so would “just fuel the right-wing media that was harassing her.”
So this professor is unapologetic, and claims that it was all a joke. Hilarious!

This is interesting because this is the usual defense of neo-Nazis when they are called out for hate speech that crosses the line into incitement. They were only doing it for the lulz, they say. I had never seen a left-winger make that same claim.

But it is just another way that the antisemites on the Left and Right are learning from each other. 



Buy EoZ's books  on Amazon!

"He's an Anti-Zionist Too!" cartoon book (December 2024)

PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism (February 2022)

   
 

 

Monday, January 12, 2026

From Ian:

History is Not Whispering
Anti-Semitism is never the end of the story. It is the warning flare.

It does not appear when societies are strongest, but when they are losing the ability to tolerate complexity, disagreement, and pluralism. Jews are the first test of that collapse—not because they are uniquely fragile, but because they have always stood at the center of pluralistic systems that extremism cannot tolerate.

This pattern is not subtle. It is not ambiguous. And it is not new.

When Jews are told their equality is conditional, that their safety depends on silence, that their collective existence is illegitimate, societies have already crossed a line. When violence against Jews is explained rather than condemned, escalation is no longer a question of if, but when. When elected officials refuse to name and shame anti-Semitism because doing so would alienate part of their base, the base has already been chosen.

The closing of the horseshoe is not a metaphor. It is a diagnosis.

On the left, anti-Zionism reframes Jews as uniquely undeserving of national rights. On the right, post-liberal populism recycles the language of elites, global manipulators, and disloyal insiders. The vocabularies differ. But the structure is identical. Both reject liberal universalism. Both treat Jews as conditional citizens. Both abandon the same guardrails—and arrive at the same destination.

History does not forgive this convergence. It records it.

Those who imagine they can harness anti-Semitism without being consumed by it misunderstand how extremism works. The societies that tolerated it did not stabilize. They radicalized. Jews were never the last target—only the most reliable early prey.

We are not watching this unfold blindly. We have the documents. We have the precedents. We have the bodies.

This time, ignorance is not an excuse. Silence is not neutrality. Euphemism is not moderation.

We know exactly what is happening.

The only question left is whether we choose to stop it—or whether we allow history to resume its course, once again, at full speed.
Israel Won the Information War By Abe Greenwald
Via Commentary Newsletter, sign up here.
Those who fret about the issue believe that Israel needed to continually explain the reasons for its military actions: It should have been more forceful in demonstrating that Hamas hides behind civilians and operates from civilian structures. It should have debunked Hamas casualty figures in real time, proved that there was no famine, explained the unparalleled effort the IDF makes to spare civilian lives, and so on.

But that’s not the story Israel needed to tell. There’s little point in the Jewish state trying to prove that it’s innocent of all the calumnious charges against it. Why? Because if Israel’s devoted critics could be persuaded that it’s a good and just country under continuous assault by barbaric fanatics, they would have been convinced by the decades of evidence—culminating in October 7—showing just that.

The vital information that Israel needed to disseminate, rather, was this: We will not perish. We are fiercer in battle than you could ever imagine, more accomplished in intelligence and operational execution than any nation in history, peerless in the art of war, and unapologetic in our commitment to survival. We don’t bend to public opinion; we stop at nothing to defend our existence.

And that message came across loud and clear.

Too many American Jews, on the other hand, spent two-plus years swallowing Hamas propaganda and publicly agonizing over Israel’s actions to varying degrees. Their story was: We’re just so sorry for all this ugliness.

And while they explained and apologized, they also bent over backwards to give the Jew-haters the benefit of the doubt. Some went so far as to kasher the mob.

We know exactly how that’s worked out. It’s long past time for Diaspora Jews to tell a different story of their own—one of bravery rooted in reverence for the Jewish tradition. But first they must believe it themselves. The Israelis do, and the world found that out.
No place for Jew-haters in GOP, Trump says
U.S. President Donald Trump said there is no room in the Republican Party for those with antisemitic views and that the GOP should condemn those espousing them.

“From my own personal standpoint, absolutely, because I condemn,” Trump told The New York Times in a two-hour interview last week that was published on Monday.

“I have a daughter who’s married to a Jewish person,” he told the newspaper. “My daughter happens to be Jewish, and the beautiful three grandchildren are Jewish. I’m very proud of them.”

The president also touted his support of Israel and his efforts to obtain a ceasefire in the war between Hamas and Israel.

“There has been no better president in the history of the world as we know it that has been stronger or better and less antisemitic, certainly, than Donald Trump,” he said in the interview. “I have been the best president of the United States in the history of this country toward Israel, and that’s, by the way, acknowledged by everybody, including the fact that we have peace in the Middle East, and that’s going to hold.”

Trump’s comments came as several prominent Republicans, including former Fox News host Tucker Carlson, have faced criticism from several prominent party members for providing platforms to antisemites and Holocaust deniers, most notably Nick Fuentes. Carlson, a podcaster, was photographed in official images of a meeting that Trump held at the White House recently with oil executives.

At the Republican Jewish Coalition’s annual legislative conference in October, Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas), Rep. Randy Fine (R-Fla.) and others went after Carlson for his friendly interview with Fuentes.

Speakers at the conference also aimed brickbats at the Heritage Foundation, whose president, Kevin Roberts, defended Carlson and said the pro-Trump conservative research group was not in the business of “canceling our own people.”

The president earlier passed up opportunities to criticize Carlson, who had a prime-time speaking slot at the 2024 Republican National Convention. “You can’t tell him who to interview,” Trump told reporters in November.

But this time, he went after the antisemites in his own party.

“I think we don’t need them. I think we don’t like them,” he told the Times.
British Jewish veterans who fought for Churchill in WWII say the level of antisemitism in modern times feels like 'the whole world is against us'
They proudly fought for Britain to free the world from the clutches of Hitler's fascism.

But 80 years on, three Jewish veterans say they are increasingly alarmed by surging levels of antisemitism in the UK - and fear 'the whole world is against us now'.

Joe Slyper, 106, Don Breslaw, 102 and Solly Ohayon, 99, still remain largely positive about Britain, but believe anti-Jewish hatred today is at levels they themselves did not experience when they were younger.

Their views come in the wake of fellow veteran Alec Penstone, 100, who in November stunned the presenters of ITV's Good Morning Britain by declaring the sacrifice of the lost men of his generation 'wasn't worth' it.

He told Adil Ray and Kate Garraway: 'What we fought for was our freedom, but now it's a darn sight worse than when I fought for it.'

While the trio are not so forceful in their opinion of today's Britain, they acknowledge the Second World War brought an end to Nazism - but not racially motivated hatred.

Don, who was just 19 when he was conscripted into the army, has come to sombrely conclude 'we've always been different - and when people are different, people tend to find cause to dislike us.'

The three spoke to Daily Mail as part of wide-ranging interviews on their wartime experience and how Britain compares today to before 1939.

AddToAny

Printfriendly

EoZTV Podcast

Podcast URL

Subscribe in podnovaSubscribe with FeedlyAdd to netvibes
addtomyyahoo4Subscribe with SubToMe

search eoz

comments

Speaking

translate

E-Book

For $18 donation








Sample Text

EoZ's Most Popular Posts in recent years

Search2

Hasbys!

Elder of Ziyon - حـكـيـم صـهـيـون



This blog may be a labor of love for me, but it takes a lot of effort, time and money. For 20 years and 40,000 articles I have been providing accurate, original news that would have remained unnoticed. I've written hundreds of scoops and sometimes my reporting ends up making a real difference. I appreciate any donations you can give to keep this blog going.

Donate!

Donate to fight for Israel!

Monthly subscription:
Payment options


One time donation:

Follow EoZ on Twitter!

Interesting Blogs

Blog Archive