Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News

Tuesday, July 22, 2025

Qatar, Palestinians hiring lobbying firms

Squire Patton Boggs has signed on to do Congressional outreach for the Palestine Monetary Authority.

It will especially focus on members of the House Financial Services and Foreign Affairs Committees, and Senate Banking and Foreign Relations Committees, according to the engagement letter.

SPB also will provide PMA and the Association of Banks in Palestine with strategic guidance relating to reputational risk and recommendations on PMA’s in-person visits to Washington.

The one-year engagement, which kicked off July 1, is worth $500K to SPB. The contract automatically renews for another year.

The PMA operates under the authority of the Palestinian Authority and its head is appointed by Mahmoud Abbas. Which means that the PA gets money from the West in order to lobby for more money from the West.

Also from O'Dwyer's:

A leading West Bank businessman has hired Montreal’s Dickens & Madson to lobby the governments of the US, Palestinian Authority, Saudi Arabia, UAE, Qatar, Egypt and the European Union to back his effort to become leader of the post-invasion government of Gaza.

Samir Hulileh, who heads Palestine Development and Investment Ltd., inked a one-year $300K pact with D&M. The initial $100K retainer was paid on Feb. 20.

The 68-year-old, who served in the cabinet of the Palestinian Authority, envisions a Gaza with a political structure approved by the United Nations, Arab League and Palestinian Authority.

I cannot find any articles about Samir Hulileh since he paid for these services, which means that I am now giving him more publicity than his firm did. Send me the check, Samir!

Finally, one more:

William Bennett, the nation's first drug czar and third Secretary of Education, has signed a $180K contract with Qatar’s DC embassy to help develop a communications strategy related to the Gulf State’s funding of US colleges.

Qatar is the biggest foreign donor to US universities since 1986, shelling out $6.3B.

Top US schools such as Carnegie Mellon University, Georgetown University, Weill Cornell Medical Colleges, Northwestern University, Texas A&M University and Virginia Commonwealth University have established branch campuses in Qatar.

Bennett will promote understanding of the funding decisions make by the Qatari government and the nature of the education curriculum, according to his FARA filing.

As senior education advisor to the Embassy, the 82-year-old will make “efforts to publicize the fact that Qatari higher education efforts do not support radical Islamicist movements or positions, and his engaging in publicized efforts—potentially including communications to U.S. political office holders—would help dispel contrary notions."

He will write op-eds, blogs on educational matters and make himself available for interviews or testimony before Congress.

Bennett placed an opinion piece on Fox News last July that was titled “An American education partnership in Qatar brings surprising benefits to the Middle East.”

Not a bad gig - write an op-ed, get $180K, and a new generation of college students learn to hate Israel.

(h/t BL)

Buy EoZ's books on Amazon!

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

PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism (February 2022)

Al Qalah News in Jordan has an article by Fayez Aboud Damra that literally urges all Muslims to murder Jews.

Damra leaves no doubt that he is referring to Jews. Not "Zionists," not "Israelis," not "Khazars," but all Jews worldwide.

Excerpts:

They are the Jews of Bani Zion, about whom the Holy Quran informed us

Anyone who deals with the Zionists in word or deed is not a Muslim nor a believer in Allah, His Messenger, or the Last Day. They are the ones who fought our noble Prophet, they are the killers of prophets, they are the ones who break promises and covenants, and they are the ones who attacked the children, elderly, and women of Gaza, killing many of them in the most horrific forms of Nazism and fascism. ....They have no creed or principle; their Talmudic teachings permit the killing of the "goyim" (meaning animals), a term they apply to all non-Jews among humanity.

They indulge in killing, criminality, and a lust for Arab blood, seeking revenge and venting their hatred, killing our people in Gaza while they sleep, search for a loaf of bread, or sit at breakfast tables, slaughtering families and spilling the blood of households under the fire of their advanced, intelligent American weapons used under orders from the "blonde Antichrist," the leader of murderers and war criminals in the name of false and deceptive democracy.

No Arab or Muslim is he who shakes their hands or forgives their crimes. No Muslim is he who possesses a rifle, cannon, tank, missile, or plane and does not aim it at the chests of the Zionist killers. Those who issue fatwas labeling the heroes and mujahideen of Palestine as terrorists, demanding they abandon their land and their heroic achievements in dismantling the myth of the "invincible army," have strayed from their Arab identity and its authentic values.

Gazan's cries of pain and disappointment stem from the weakness of the Arab nation and its devaluation of Arab blood, in contrast to the sons of Zion who kill and displace thousands for the death of any of their "pigs." The oppression, defiance, injustice, and the sense of Palestine’s alienation from its nation have led the heroes and mujahideen of Gaza’s resistance factions to a revolution of liberation, God willing. They pave the way for future generations to liberate the land, seek vengeance, and avenge their martyrs, refusing to compromise on blood until the usurper is expelled from the soil of Palestine—its reality, occupation, and settlements—through the power of weapons fortified by faith in God and the spirit of sacrifice.

Their Talmud, laws, and teachings grant Israeli settlers the right to slaughter our people in the West Bank, pour gasoline down the throat of a boy and set him ablaze alive, crush the skulls of Palestinian children with stones, and run them over with their vehicles in front of the media and camera lenses.

The Holy Quran informed us of their evils and disgrace throughout history; they hate Arab and Muslim children and kill them, collecting their blood in vessels and drinking it because they are the soldiers of the revolution and its enduring fuel. Their souls are molded with hatred, animosity, killing, betrayal, and the absence of values, such that even the prophets were not spared their harm, and their hearts are sealed.

O Arabs, O Muslims, Al-Aqsa is in danger, and our constitution, the Holy Quran, has revealed to us who the Jews of Bani Israel are. Nothing excuses them, and no good is expected from them. Repeated attempts at truces and agreements with them in Qatar and other capitals are broken before the ink dries. It is foolishness, stupidity, lack of awareness, and shallow experience with the Jews of Bani Israel. Do not save them from their quagmire in Gaza, no matter the cost. Provide them with money and weapons, stand with them, not against them, for their arms are the ones that will liberate Al-Aqsa Mosque, the first qibla, from the filth and defilement of Bani Zion and those behind them. And you, O heroes of Gaza, O brave resistors defending the soil of Palestine and the dignity of our Arab and Islamic nation, God is with you, and the honorable among the Arabs and Muslims are with you because you defend Al-Aqsa, the site of the ascent to the heavens, and Palestine, the cradle of divine messages. Its liberation from the defilement of the Zionists of Bani Israel is your victory, with God’s help. God does not break His promise. Your arms are blessed, for the day of victory is coming, without doubt, by the right of God’s promise, and God does not fail in His promise. Victory comes only from Him and through His soldiers.

This is not a call only to kill Israelis. It is a call to murder Jews worldwide. It is being heeded by Muslims today in the US and Europe.

This is the definition of incitement.

And yet if you search the archives of Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International you will find not a word about Arab antisemitism. Same for the New York Times and Washington Post, except for the once every couple of years when Mahmoud Abbas says something so outrageously antisemitic that it cannot be ignored. Not one of the "pro-Palestinian protestors" who claim to oppose antisemitism will ever admit that this exists.

And while this is an egregious example, it is not atypical for Jordanian or Egyptian media.

The State Department should be summoning the Jordanian ambassador, as should the foreign ministries of every nation. Jews in America, Europe and Australia are potential victims of this incitement. This is not a free speech issue. In fact, this is a violation of Jordanian law itself, which criminalizes blasphemy against Abrahamic faiths, Not only that, but the Jordanian cybercrime law says that "Anyone who intentionally uses the information network, information technology, information system, website or social media platform to publish anything that would incite sedition or strife, undermine national unity, incite hatred, call for or justify violence or show contempt for religions shall be punished by imprisonment from one to three years and a fine of no less than 25,000 dinars ($35,000.)"

There is no excuse for allowing this sort of incitement to murder to be ignored. Lives are at stake.

Buy EoZ's books on Amazon!

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

PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism (February 2022)

How bad is anti-Jewish hate crime in NYC? This word cloud gives you an idea

New York City published its hate crime statistics for the first half of 2025.

Here is a chart showing the number of crimes against every defined group:

Anti-Jewish hate crimes were 57% of all hate crimes in New York City - 170 out of 300 total.

The dashboard provides a word cloud to give an idea of which groups are most affected.

Looks bad - but it is not even close to accurate.

I created a word cloud where the font size is proportionate to the number of incidents, and it gives you a much better idea of how bad antisemitism is in New York City compared to all other bias crimes.

Are you beginning to understand that this is a real problem yet?

If you click on the graphic and zoom in far enough, you can actually read even the tiny ones in the middle of the "H." I had to save it as a very large picture just to allow them to be readable.

Buy EoZ's books on Amazon!

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

PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism (February 2022)

This 1950s tourism poster shows how Islamists ruined the Arab world

Akhbar al-Youm has an article that features this tourism poster from the 1950s or early 1960s.

The article remembers what Alexandria used to be like:

1950s Alexandria: a time of elegance and openness

At that time, Alexandria was a multicultural city, inhabited by Egyptians alongside Greeks, Italians, Levantines, and Jews. This diversity gave it a rare cosmopolitan character, reflected in its streets, cafes, cinemas, libraries, and even in advertising itself, which could appear in three languages (Arabic, French, and English).

Summer in Alexandria was an annual event that everyone awaited, as families from Cairo moved to Rasif al-Raml, Stanley, and al-Asafir, and the beaches were crowded with children and women in beachwear, while horse-drawn carriages roamed the city's quiet streets.

So what happened?

Political Islam happened.

Places that were relatively tolerant became, over time. places of oppression - especially for women. Women can wear bikinis in Egypt, but only in private beaches and hotel pools where there is security. Outside of those spots, women are routinely sexually harassed in Egypt - some 90% of women under 30 report being sexually harassed in the previous 12 months, with most of them saying it happens regularly. And when done in public, no one steps in to stop it.

When women are forced to cover up, more of them are harassed - even when Islamists claim that covering their bodies protects the women.

You can be sure that women were safer in public beaches in Alexandria in the 1950s than they are in Egyptian cities today while covered up. But everyone is so frightened of the Islamists that they don't fight back.

This poster is unthinkable today.

The idealized woman depicted in the poster was safer, more secure and more free than any woman in Egypt today.

Buy EoZ's books on Amazon!

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

PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism (February 2022)

07/21 Links Pt2: How to spot an antisemite? Ask about Israel’s right to exist; The Joe Roganification of Public Discourse; ‘Hollywood has no spine’: The Jewish director fighting antisemitism through film

From Ian:

Brendan O'Neill: Posh Twats for Palestine

I knew it. As soon as I saw that cast member of the Royal Opera House smugly unfurl his Palestine flag, I knew he’d be some privileged they / them with either blue blood or blue hair. And I was right. His name’s Daniel Perry, he’s a they / them, he was educated at a £48,000-a-year high school, and he calls himself a ‘queer dance artist’. Now all we need to discover is that he has ADHD and he really will be a walking checklist of middle-class twattishness.

Mr Perry has got the pro-Palestine set salivating with infantile glee after he whipped out his flag during the curtain call for Verdi’s Il Trovatore on Saturday evening. A stage manager tried to snatch it from him but Perry yanked it back with all the wild-eyed frenzy of a bloke determined to trend online. He got his way. He’s being gushed over by the internet’s Sun-starved army of armchair Israelophobes. ‘Hero!’, they yelp from their bedrooms, the unbelievably sad bastards.

The Telegraph has Perry’s backstory. He attended an eye-wateringly expensive school in leafy Hertfordshire. He’s nonbinary – sorry, they’re nonbinary. He’s a self-styled ‘queer’ dancer. He seems blissfully unaware that if he ever set foot in Gaza the only pirouette he’d be doing is a mid-air one as Hamas hurled him off a tall building. He recently wore a ‘Free Palestine’ t-shirt to a performance of Cabaret, the musical about the Weimar Republic that foreshadows the rise of the Nazis and the burning of the Jews.

It didn’t take any special insight on my part to guess that this flag-waving irritant would turn out to be a knob of the most insufferably bourgeois variety. Because they’re all like that. Perry belongs to that most vexing clique of preening ‘activists’ – let’s call them Posh Twats for Palestine.

They’re everywhere. Venture into London on a Saturday afternoon and you’ll soon be swarmed by affluent tits in keffiyehs talking rubbish about Israel. Our leafier campuses have been all but colonised by plummy youths screaming the new lie (‘Israel is committing genocide!’) with the same demented fervour with which they once hollered the old lie (‘Transwomen are women!’). The am-dram arseholes of Palestine Action loved to splash around their red paint while wanging on in cut-glass tones about the unholy wickedness of Israel. The government calls them terrorists but they’re something far worse: rich theatre kids.

Some are surprised – and of course cock-a-hoop – that the audience at the Royal Opera House cheered Perry’s self-regarding stunt. ‘Crowds cheered for Perry’s protest’, swooned Novara Media – lifetime members of Posh Twats for Palestine – as if a few hundred dickie-bowed opera-lovers clinking their champagne glasses against Israel were akin to the Chartist march on St Peter’s Field. I’m not surprised at all that the rich and cultured of London rattled their jewellery in agreement with the ‘Free Palestine’ schtick, because hating Israel really has become the moral glue of that section of society. You’re no one in polite society these days unless you have keffiyeh in the closet, a book of poetry by Mohammed el-Kurd and a rosy-cheeked daughter who’s been arrested for saying ‘Fuck the Jewish State’.

Fania Oz-Salzberger: How to spot an antisemite? Ask about Israel’s right to exist

You think that Israel should never have been founded? Legitimate opinion, even if I dislike it. Just don’t confuse it with the pipe dream of shutting the place down and killing off my national and cultural identity. You’re fine with Jews unless they are Zionists? Unacceptable – as most Jews, and many non-Jews, are Zionists, in the simplest sense of supporting a national home for the Jewish people in its ancestral land. Many of us acknowledge the parallel right of the Palestinians, but do not want Israel to be annihilated. That goes for your constituency too, Mr Mamdani. New York may be made of islands, but no New Yorker is an island, and therefore you cannot cleverly avoid the conversation. We need to see you carefully disentangle your Israel critique from any hint of delegitimisation.

Similarly, it’s time for the responsible media to unpack the “pro-Israel” and “pro-Palestine” muddles. Are those two mutually exclusive? Does each of these “pros” signify “Death to the other side”? Many reporters and commentators are intellectually lazy enough to make this automatic assumption. Few are attentive enough to work around it. As my late father used to say: “I am neither pro-Israel nor pro-Palestine. I am pro-peace.”

The same wisdom applies, of course, to the so-called pro-Israelis who wish death or eternal submission on all Palestinians. Those are far fewer, but equally dangerous – especially when they sit in the Israeli coalition government as partners of the notoriously indiscriminate Mr Netanyahu. I hope that, just like the would-be Israel-annihilators of this world, the Smotriches and Ben-Gvirs will be pushed back where they belong: to the wrong side of the red line of decent political conversation.

Thus, one great lesson to draw from the current murkiness of global debate is: demand clarity. From yourself first, and then from others. If you want Israel (or the Palestinians) dead, make sure you say it, so that I can walk away or block you from my feed – and we don’t waste our time on a useless argument. We come from different moral galaxies.

But even among the well-meaning, it is difficult to heal reality when language is getting so badly distorted. Here is one profound example: debate on the Israeli–Palestinian conflict is currently pitting two ancient words and great values – peace and justice – against one another.

“Peace” has become almost solely a “pro-Israel” term. Well-intentioned people use it to support the two-states solution or the shared-homeland solution. “Justice” has become almost solely a “pro-Palestinian” term. It is very often a polite euphemism for ethnic cleansing of all Israeli Jews “back to Europe” – a statement as vicious as it is historically mendacious. Other minds, evil ones, equate "justice" with the genocide of the Jews, pure and simple.

In my view, “justice” is an unreachable Platonic ideal in any international rivalry – especially one as monumental and labyrinthine as the Israeli–Arab conflict. “In the place where we are right,” wrote the wonderful Israeli poet Yehuda Amichai, “no flowers will grow.”

By contrast, fair compromise is reachable. A more just coexistence is reachable. A well-intentioned negotiation for peace is reachable. Letting time heal both sides is reachable – provided that clarity, subtlety, some genuine acquaintance with historical facts, and a distinct refusal to kill off the other side are brought into the conversation.

We pro-peaceniks should page each other more assertively. We need every nuanced voice we can find out there.

Truth, Narratives, and the Middle East

In the late 1980s, Jonathan Torop, a pro-Israel American Jew, befriended Ussama Makdisi, the son of a Lebanese father and Palestinian mother and the nephew of Edward Said. Makdisi is now a professor at the University of California, Berkeley, and his comment, after the Hamas invasion of southern Israel—“I could have been one of those who broke the siege on October 7”—was brought up at the recent congressional hearings. Torop recollects the time when he and Makdisi could look beyond their political differences:
Ussama, like his uncle, was a supporter of the PLO and Yasir Arafat. One of Ussama’s favorite refrains was: “The Palestinians never support taking land by force.” Then came the 1991 Gulf War.

Torop confronted his friend over the widespread Palestinian support for Saddam Hussein, who had invaded Kuwait, and the quite explicit support voiced by Arafat:
Ussama’s answer, 34 years later, still sticks with me. “Arafat and the PLO didn’t support Saddam and Iraq. That was a creation of the Western media.” If someone as intelligent and well-educated as Ussama—a Princeton PhD who later became a professor at the University of California, Berkeley—could be so detached from reality, what did that mean for future peace talks?

Of course, the Kuwaitis knew this wasn’t Western propaganda, and got their revenge by expelling Palestinians en masse from their country. Torop would be reminded of this conversation a few years later, when shepherding an American delegation to meet with Arafat in Gaza—at a time when suicide bombings were becoming ever more regular. Someone confronted the veteran terrorist about the terror:
“No! These are not my people!” [Arafat] shouted in thickly accented English. “Everyone knows these bombings are done by right-wing Jews trying to make me look bad! I have proof—I have the identity cards of the bombers. They have Israeli Jewish IDs.” This was the Ussama Makdisi school of thought—the idea that truth was malleable, that reality could be fabricated to fit a narrative.

07/21 Links Pt1: Israel rejects calls from 26 countries to end war in Gaza immediately; What Israel owes the Druze; What Really Happened at Taybeh’s Church?; The Forgotten Origins of the Keffiyeh

From Ian:

What Israel owes the Druze

One cannot forget the heroism of soldiers like Col. Kamal Kheir a-Din, who served with distinction in elite combat units and whose funeral drew thousands of mourners from all sectors of Israeli society. Or border police officer Amir Khoury, a Christian Arab who died while stopping a terror attack in Bnei Brak in 2022. Though not Druze, his sacrifice mirrors the shared sense of duty found among Israel’s loyal minorities.

Today, as Israel faces threats on multiple fronts—from Hezbollah in the north, Hamas in the south, the Houthis in Yemen, and Iranian proxies embedded across the region—the contribution of the Druze community has become even more critical. During the ongoing war on multiple fronts, Druze soldiers have continued to serve, and the community has once again borne tragic losses.

The feeling of blood brotherhood of the Israeli Druze to their brethren in Sweida is almost palpable. What began as an ethnic dispute between Bedouin tribes in the Druze-dominated center has resulted in more than 1,100 fatalities. Women were taken hostage and raped. Babies were slaughtered, dropped into vats of boiling water. Men were humiliated, having had their mustaches—a sign of honor among Druze men—shaven off. Many were abused and murdered. Some 1,000 Israeli Druze crossed the border into Syria to assist their Druze brothers.

This was their Oct. 7. Their loyalty is not born of compulsion, but of a deep, mutual sense of destiny woven over decades of shared struggle. In villages nestled among the hills of the Galilee and the slopes of Mount Carmel, Druze families raise children with the expectation of service—not only to their own people but to the country as a whole. Tales of bravery and solidarity are passed down from generation to generation, forming the backbone of an Israeli identity that transcends faith or ancestry.

The relationship between the Druze and the State of Israel, however, is not without its tensions. The pride felt in military uniforms is sometimes shadowed by frustration as promises of equality remain somewhat unfulfilled and recognition lags behind sacrifice. The Druze know the price of loyalty and pay it willingly, but their commitment demands a reciprocal respect—a covenant that goes beyond ceremony and commemoration.

In 2018, the passage of the controversial Nation-State Law, which defines Israel as the national homeland of the Jewish people, sparked deep hurt and feelings of marginalization among Druze Israelis. They felt, understandably, that a nation they had fought and died for was telling them they would never be truly equal.

To be clear: Israel is, and must remain, the national home of the Jewish people. But it can and must also be a state that honors and uplifts those who defend it, regardless of religion or ethnicity. That is not only a moral imperative; it is a matter of national unity and survival.

Former Israeli President Reuven Rivlin once described Israel as a “shared home” for four tribes: secular Jews, religious Jews, ultra-Orthodox Jews and Arabs. The Druze, he has always said, are the glue—binding together the complex mosaic of Israeli society with their service, loyalty and quiet dignity.

Israel owes the Druze more than gratitude. It owes them policies that reflect their contribution: equal funding for Druze municipalities; expanded access to quality education; full recognition of their villages and land rights; and a greater role in national decision-making.

To walk through the rows of graves in Shefa-Amr is to walk among heroes. Their sacrifice demands not only remembrance but justice. Israel has many allies, but few as devoted, brave and steadfast as the Druze. We must honor that loyalty—not just in words, but in deeds.

When Carrots Empowered Chaos: How Samantha Power's USAID Strategy Reshaped the Middle East and Syria

Between 2021 and 2025, under the leadership of Samantha Power, USAID underwent a radical transformation. Power, a former U.N. ambassador and a passionate advocate of "moral foreign policy," envisioned development as an instrument of strategic statecraft. Her reforms aimed to fuse humanitarian goals with geopolitical outcomes, particularly in fragile regions like Syria. But in practice, Power's "carrots-first" approach—prioritizing localized aid, rapid deployment, and reduced oversight—unleashed a cascade of unintended consequences that contributed to today's broader regional chaos.

I. Economic Statecraft Redefined
Power reimagined economic statecraft as a way to compete with authoritarian actors such as China, Russia, and Iran. Instead of punitive sanctions or conditionality-heavy aid ("sticks"), Power emphasized "carrots": direct support to civil society groups, local NGOs, and community-led infrastructure. The intent was to build grassroots resilience and loyalty in contested regions.

"We’re not just building roads—we’re building sovereignty." — Samantha Power, CFR Address, 2023

She mandated that 25% of all USAID funding go directly to local organizations by 2025, bypassing traditional U.S. contractors and the extensive compliance mechanisms they brought. The goal was agility, empowerment, and legitimacy. But this decentralization came at a high cost.

II. The Oversight Collapse
Multiple reports from USAID's Office of Inspector General (OIG) from 2021 onward flagged major vulnerabilities in Syria aid programs:
- 2021 OIG Audit: Found USAID lacked a structured fraud-risk framework for Syria. Monitoring visits were limited, implementers lacked vetting, and risk assessments were infrequent.
- 2018-2023: Aid was repeatedly diverted to Hay'at Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), a designated terrorist group. OIG confirmed 27 workers were terminated for enabling food kit access to HTS fighters. Over $4.3 million in suspended contracts resulted.
- Procurement scandals: USAID partners were caught engaging in bid rigging, counterfeit medical supply chains, and duplicate invoicing. $10.5 million in grants were clawed back.

The removal of traditional oversight processes, once handled by third-party contractors and federal compliance officers, created space for fraud, infiltration, and extremist co-option.

III. Syria: A Case Study in Strategic Backfire
Syria became the most vivid example of how Power's new development doctrine collided with the brutal realities of civil war and extremist governance. Her intent was to fund humanitarian relief and support civil society in non-regime-controlled zones. In practice, these zones, especially Idlib and parts of Aleppo, were heavily influenced or outright controlled by HTS.

USAID aid under Power's structure entered these areas with dramatically reduced vetting requirements and minimal on-the-ground monitoring. As a result:
- HTS operatives posed as civilians to receive food and cash assistance.
- Clinics and schools funded by USAID were taxed, staffed, or co-opted by HTS affiliates.
- Local implementing partners were often compromised or under duress from armed factions.

In 2022, the Office of Inspector General suspended several cross-border aid contracts after confirming that over $4.3 million was misdirected in HTS-controlled regions. Further investigations uncovered systematic procurement fraud involving pharmaceuticals and medical supplies, leading to the recovery of $10.5 million and multiple debarments.

Strategically, the failure to secure aid routes not only prolonged the suffering of civilians but also allowed extremist factions to consolidate power, run shadow governance systems, and claim legitimacy through U.S.-funded services.

Rethinking Liberty Through Moral Relationship

The United States is now in its 250th year, and this is a true milestone in human history. When we talk about America, we mean the unparalleled freedom that America represents. It represents a new way of governance and it has affected the world in uncountable positive ways.

But freedom is one of those concepts that can easily be misused and hijacked. What, exactly, does it mean in a moral system?

When we talk about freedom, we usually mean the ability to act without external restraint - to choose one's path, speak one's mind, and shape one's life without interference. In many secular ethical systems, particularly those rooted in liberal individualism, freedom is equated with autonomy: the right of the individual to determine their own values and actions. Sometimes it is framed as "freedom from" being limited in some way, sometimes as "freedom to" pursue one's goals, but either way, the concept generally assumes that liberty is defined by independence.

However, this definition misses the most fundamental fact about humans: we are part of a larger world. Unless you are a monk on a mountaintop, you are in relationship with others. This means that your decisions carry weight beyond yourself.

Choices are not made in a vacuum. In reality, we are never morally alone. Every decision we make has consequences, whether for ourselves or for others. Every value we act upon transforms the world in some way. This recognition undercuts the notion of morally neutral autonomy. If our actions always affect someone, then every choice carries ethical weight.

Once we recognize that our lives are embedded in a web of relationships, the meaning of freedom changes. Autonomy does not disappear, but it is no longer the absence of obligation. Rather, it becomes entwined with obligation. Freedom becomes the space in which we exercise our agency within relationships of consequence and care. Moral responsibility is not something externally imposed by law or religion; it is a natural consequence of being a self who acts in a world shared with others.

Even when you make a decision that seems to be about you alone, it entails responsibility. Because you are not only dealing with yourself as you are today, but the person you will be tomorrow. Just as you have responsibilities for the others in your life, you have responsibilities to your future self. Your decisions shape that person.

Moreover, you also have a responsibility to your past. Your history, your ancestors, your background helps shape who you are and unless your heritage perpetuates harm, you bear some responsibility to honor and evolve it - not by preserving it unchanged, but by carrying forward what is good. We do not only exist at this moment in time but we must maintain an awareness of how we got here and where we want to go.

Once this is recognized, freedom is not defined by the absence of rules, but by the presence of ethical purpose. To be free is not simply to choose, but to choose in a way that honors the dignity of others and sustains the moral ecosystem we inhabit. The question is not "what am I allowed to do?" but "what am I responsible for, given who I affect?"

AskHillel, the ethical system I’ve been developing based on Jewish thinking, is one of the only fully structured ethical systems built from the ground up on the truth that to be human is to be morally entangled. Responsibility and obligation is baked in; respect for the dignity of others is non-negotiable, and you have a concentric circle of obligations outbound from yourself and your family to your community, your country and the world. Relationships aren't incidental to the system - they are the very core of the system. And this reflects the way we really are, not some idealized concept of personhood.

Therefore, freedom is sacred not because it is limitless, but because it is answerable. The mature exercise of freedom means asking not only what is possible, but what is right - not from fear of consequence, but from fidelity to the relationships that give our lives meaning.

Morality isn't a restriction on freedom. It shapes what freedom itself means.

Buy EoZ's books on Amazon!

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

PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism (February 2022)

London, this weekend, shows the direct line from "pro-Palestine activism" to classic antisemitism

I have always felt that the life of Jews in England today is an accurate predictor of what life for Jews in America will be in coming years.

I visited London in the early 2000s for a weekend, and the amount of security around synagogues then - turning them into walled fortresses in some cases - has become reality in many American cities today.

Ten years ago, anti-Israel protesters in the UK would not resort to public attacks on Jews as Jews. Ten years ago, publicly discriminating against Jews in the UK would have been unthinkable.

Those days are gone.

From the European Conservative:

An elderly-looking Jew chased through London by a youth shouting “Free Palestine,” in what the Campaign Against Antisemitism called “an act of brazen antisemitism.”
A young diner at a Baker Street Jewish deli was approached and asked if the restaurant was kosher and if she was Jewish. Upon reply, her food was thrown on her.
Counterprotesters supporting Israel on the London pro-Palestinian march were repeatedly told “f*ck your Jewish State” by an increasingly aggressive crowd.
A teacher filmed accusing the British government of funding the killing of children by Israel—a classic blood libel—when in fact it funds the pro-Palestinian UNRWA.
Meanwhile in the Irish capital, an individual who abused what he called a “genocidal Jew” on public transport last week has walked free. This episode, also filmed, is further evidence of an antisemitic turn in Ireland since the October 7th pogrom.

And last week independent, non-Jewish researchers were stunned by their investigation in antisemitism in England today, with Jews being excluded from work and public spaces:

We heard about the noisy demonstrations and how intimidating people find the current environment, but as we dug deeper what really scared us was the increasing normalisation of far more extreme, personalised and sometimes life changing impact directed at individuals purely and simply because they are Jewish. Worrying dilemmas of where Jewish professionals believed that their professional body was actively discriminating against them but where they required membership from this body to be able to work and acquire the necessary protections.

This is how a modern, liberal society is acting today towards its Jews. And if you think that this is not the trajectory happening in the US using Israel as an excuse, you are fooling yourself.

And you know what? All of the "pro-Palestinian"s who claim to be unequivocally, 100% against antisemitism are silent when it comes from their fellow travelers.

Buy EoZ's books on Amazon!

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

PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism (February 2022)

Today, there was yet another New York Times article saying that dozens of civilians were directly shot over the weekend by IDF troops.

Palestinians trying to secure food were shot and killed in the Gaza Strip in two separate episodes over the weekend when Israeli forces opened fire on crowds.

On Saturday, the soldiers shot Palestinians near a food distribution site in Rafah, in southern Gaza. A day later, they fired at crowds who had gathered near a border crossing used by aid trucks to enter the enclave.

Palestinian health officials said that more than 60 people were killed in the episode on Sunday. On Saturday, near an aid distribution site run by American contractors and backed by Israel and the United States, at least 32 people were killed, according to local health officials.

The violence added to the mounting death toll for hungry Palestinians killed while seeking food since late May, when Israel lifted a blockade, in place for roughly 80 days, on humanitarian assistance entering Gaza.

The article does not even consider various facts:

Hamas considers GHF to be a threat and does everything it can to stop the food distribution, including documented incidents of shootings within the crowd and threatening and killing GHF workers.
Hamas and its health ministry has a history of inflating casualty figures, like the Al Ahli Hospital incident where no independent media supported their claims of hundreds killed in what ended up being an Islamic Jihad rocket
Previous GHF and Israeli denials of the Hamas and health ministry casualty numbers

But there are other layers that show the bias in these reports.

If we accept that there are dozens killed daily at food distribution sites, we must accept other premises that are exceedingly unlikely.

It is really difficult to kill that many civilians at once with small arms. As soon as the first gunshot would go off, the crowd would panic and disperse. This means that the IDF is shooting at civilians even as they are running away. Not only one soldier - one crazed soldier could not possibly kill that many in one incident. It means that that the IDF, which has strict rules against shooting civilians who are not a threat, an army with discipline and whose soldiers are taught the laws of armed conflict in detail, are all deciding consciously to murder dozens of people at once.

If you accept the narrative at face value - that dozens are killed daily at aid sites - you must believe that the Israeli army is engaged in a mass execution campaign of hungry civilians, every single day, for weeks. That’s not just a war crime. That’s a conspiracy. A conspiracy requiring silence from hundreds of IDF soldiers, total abandonment of IDF engagement rules, and an institutional policy to murder people trying to eat. You must believe this has happened with no whistleblowers - not one soldier willing to come forward and say that he was instructed to murder civilians. Not even anonymously.

This is what it means to accept the narrative. You are required to believe in evil so absolute and disciplined it becomes practically theological.

If you accept as a premise that the IDF is a single minded genocidal monster, then all of this makes sense. But if you are not already an antisemite, nothing about these stories add up - except that Hamas and the health ministry is lying, and casualties that do happen are because of Hamas actions, not deliberate IDF policy.

Given that Hamas' entire military strategy is to maximize dead Gazans - real or imagined - that is a lot more consistent with what we are seeing than an IDF conspiracy to spend hundreds of millions of dollars to feed Gazans only to decide to murder them when they gather to get their food aid.

These are the problems in this article alone. But I fed seven New York Times articles that discussed the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation over the past month or so into an AI tool I built to detect media bias - not anti-Israel bias but any bias - and asked the AI to find narrative patterns in the articles as a whole.

Here were its findings (emphasis from the AI tool):

All articles reinforce a moral trajectory wherein:
Israel and GHF are the structural initiators of a fatal aid system.
Palestinians are portrayed almost exclusively as passive victims seeking food.
The moral culpability of aid-site deaths is consistently attributed to Israeli or GHF actions, with minimal exploration of alternate causal agents (e.g., Hamas sabotage, stampede dynamics, crowd infiltration).
Rating: High Narrative Convergence Bias
II. Role Framing Asymmetry Index
Israeli actors (IDF, GHF, government) are consistently framed as:
Aggressors (e.g., “opened fire on crowds,” “militarized aid”).
System designers of lethal policies (“conceived in Israeli strategy forums”).
Untrustworthy or evasive (e.g., “denied responsibility,” “statements not independently verified”).
Palestinian actors are presented as:
Victims (e.g., “suffocated,” “shot while seeking flour”).
Civilians only — no sustained mention of Hamas-as-sabotage agent.
Passive moral figures (e.g., children, mothers, mourners) with high visual and emotive priming.
Rating: Consistent Moral Role Reversal + Red Team Clause Failure
III. Source Calibration Pattern
Gaza Health Ministry and Red Crescent data is used repeatedly without epistemic caveats, despite:
Past misreporting (e.g., Al Ahli Hospital).
Lack of verification mechanisms.
GHF and IDF statements are either:
Presented with caveats (“claims could not be independently verified”), or
Immediately followed by critical or contradictory framing.
Rating: Violates Source Contamination Rule and Reputational Inflation Symmetry
IV. Counterposition Frequency Mapping
Alternative hypotheses are largely absent, including:
Hamas presence or provocation in crowds (mentioned only once, marginalized).
Tactical implausibility of mass shootings by IDF with no internal dissent.
Aid group political alignment or U.N. operational failures.
Rare defenses (e.g., U.S. funding statement) are presented with dilution phrases like “the foundation has been criticized…” immediately adjacent.
Rating: Structural Counterposition Suppression (CPS)
V. Visual and Emotional Priming Continuity
All articles contain graphic visual descriptions or captions that:
Reinforce emotional associations of Israeli culpability.
Use photographic priming to elevate victimhood narratives.
Rarely balance imagery with depictions of complexity, crowd violence, or Israeli aid logistics.
Rating: Persistent Visual Priming Assertion (VPA)
🧠 Summary Integrity Conclusion
This corpus displays a systemic narrative convergence toward framing Israel and GHF as primary culpable agents in a humanitarian disaster, with near-total omission of adversarial sabotage, causal ambiguity, or strategic complexity. The editorial structure, repetition of framing, source asymmetry, and emotive visual alignment indicate medium-to-high ideological entrenchment.

This proves a consistent pattern across all New York Times coverage of the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation.

The bias isn't just in the imagination of Zionists. It is the way that the New York Times decides to cover a specific story - the narrative was set early and once it is there, it cannot be changed. The patterns of the stories are eerily consistent, choosing to give more credibility to a terrorist organization, its subsidiaries and people whose lives are under implicit threat for not doing what it wants, than to a democratic state and its institutions that follow standards of transparency and honesty.

Buy EoZ's books on Amazon!

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

PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism (February 2022)

Pan-Arab news site says the UN is biased towards Israel. Really.

When I read this headline in Rai al-Youm, I knew I had to write about it.

The writer, Abdullah Al-Ash'al, is a former Egyptian diplomat and was once ambassador to Burundi. He teaches international law at various universities. He has written numerous articles and papers.

And he has no idea what he is talking about.

There are lots of howlers in the piece, but I want to concentrate on one which is simply too dumb to be believed.

He says, "The Security Council issued a resolution in 1951, contrary to international law, allowing Israel to pass through the Suez Canal."

In 1949, Egypt stopped all shipping that went through the Suez Canal that was bound for Israel, even if they were going to go to other countries. The 1888 Constantinople Convention said that the Suez Canal must remain open for all, even during wartime and even for war vessels, but Egypt cited another article in the convention that said that it could be closed for "the defence of Egypt and the maintenance of public order." After the armistice agreements with Israel, Egypt still refused to re-open the canal for shipping, claiming that it was still in a state of war with Israel, and the entire point of this UN Security Council resolution 95 was to clarify international law, saying that the convention cannot be interpreted to permanently block a single country's shipping.

Back in those days, occasionally, the UN actually took Israel's side. This is before the Soviet Union decided to veto any pro-Israel resolution.

Egypt ignored the resolution and continued to block all Israeli maritime traffic through the Suez Canal. it confiscated millions of dollars worth of cargoheaded towards Israel. On September 28, 1954, the Israeli freighter Bat Galim, bound from Eritrea to Haifa, was detained in the Canal, its crew arrested, and its cargo confiscated. The UN talked about it and did nothing.

To use this as evidence that the UN is pro-Israel is utterly insane.

Buy EoZ's books on Amazon!

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

PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism (February 2022)

07/20 Links: The Forgotten Slaughter of Syria’s Druze—and Israel’s Moral Response; The left’s war on the ADL is a warning to American Jewry; What would Herzl say about Israel today?

From Ian:

The Jews intervened to stop a genocide in Syria; cue the outrage

Reminding the world that there is such a thing as good versus evil—that has always been the Jews’ mission. And that, apparently, is the real war crime. Because, you see, the Jews remember.

We remember when the world watched Jews burn and did nothing. We remember the polite excuses. The Red Cross silence. The bureaucratic neutrality. Of course, we remember—from Kristallnacht to Oct. 7, 2023, nothing has changed.

And so, last week, Israel refused to be apathetic, silent, passive—even though the victims this time were not its own citizens, but its neighbors. Not Jews, but Arabs—related by blood and faith to one of Israel’s most loyal and prominent minorities.

And that’s the real sin. The Jew in exile was the conscience of the world—and was hounded, tortured, expelled, and murdered for it. Now the Jewish state has become the conscience of the world—and the world can’t bear it.

It can’t bear that the people it consigned to the role of eternal victim are not only defending themselves but rescuing others. It can’t bear that those it tried—and still tries—to eradicate are growing in military prowess and moral power.

And it’s not just the world. There is a large American assimilationist Jewish identity that abhors anything that reminds the world that Jews are different—and always have been. They cling to the fantasy that the left’s utopias—progressivism, socialism, academia—are their Promised Land. They bear a special hatred for the Jewish state and for anyone who dares stand with it.

So they lash out. They project. They seethe. They cry “genocide!” every time Israel refuses to sit down and shut up.

Well—too bad. Because last week, while the West was tweeting, Israel was saving lives. The ceasefire—the halt to the slaughter of innocents—didn’t come from Geneva or The Hague. It came from Jerusalem.

So let the world rage. Let the podcasters bloviate. Let the UN condemn. Let Bernie Sanders, AOC and Zohran Mamdani blubber into their Ben & Jerry’s.

Israel rose. Israel acted. Israel saved. Not just like a lion; like a Lion of Judah. And if that offends you, ask yourself why.

But know this: the Jews—at least the Jews with a future—no longer care. History is watching. And, thousands of years later, the Jews—once again—are writing it. Am Yisrael Chai!

John Spencer: The Forgotten Slaughter of Syria’s Druze—and Israel’s Moral Response

This past week, a brutal campaign of violence has unfolded in southern Syria. Hundreds of Druze civilians (a minority community indigenous to the Levant) have been murdered, kidnapped, or forced to flee their homes. Villages have been burned. Women and children were reportedly slaughtered in sacred sites where they had sought refuge. The perpetrators include radical Islamist militants, Bedouin gangs, and regime-backed elements.

These are not vague reports or unverifiable claims. There is footage of Druze civilians being hunted down and executed. Women are stripped and assaulted. Men are beaten, tortured, and forced to leap from rooftops as militants cheer. It is a special kind of evil. Deliberate. Performative. Proud. All of it is shared online for the enjoyment of the killers.

These images are a visceral reminder of the savagery unleashed by Hamas on Oct. 7. The same evil. The same joy in human suffering. The violence is not collateral damage from a larger conflict. It is direct, targeted, and deliberate. It is ethnic and religious cleansing in broad daylight.

The Israeli Druze community has played a prominent role in every aspect of Israeli society. I have personally met Druze commanders serving in the Israel Defense Forces during my visits to Gaza. They are courageous, respected, and integrated. The ties between Israeli and Syrian Druze are real and deeply personal.

Israel's response has included airstrikes against Syrian regime military positions both south of Damascus and within the capital itself. These strikes reportedly targeted forces involved in the attacks on Druze civilians. When a close-knit, historically loyal minority community within Israel cries out to the Jewish state for help as its kin are massacred just across the border, Israel does not turn away.

This is about moral clarity. It is about responding to evil when others stay silent. It is about understanding that the same ideologies that fuel the murder of Druze families in Sweida are no different from those that drove the slaughter of Israelis on Oct. 7. While the international community hesitates, while human rights organizations say little, Israel has stepped forward. When others calculate political risks, Israel sees human lives. When others look away, Israel acts.

The same institutions and voices that claim to champion human rights have gone quiet. There have been no emergency UN sessions. No international protests. No outcry. It is a silence that reveals the selective morality of those who only speak when it fits their politics. It is a silence that enables genocide.

Seth Frantzman: What is Syrian President Ahmed al-Sharaa’s real strategy?

What was Sharaa thinking when reports came in about the clashes?
He has mismanaged this in the past. Despite his apparent good choices in foreign policy in the region, balancing various countries, he seems to struggle with tactical decisions relating to local groups.

SHARAA CAME out of Hayʼat Tahrir al-Sham, an armed group that ran Idlib. Under his former nom de guerre, Abu Mohammed al-Julani, he successfully navigated local politics and tribal groups. He once served prison time in Iraq.

So Sharaa has a lot of experience. Some of the experience had to do with working with extremist groups. Nevertheless, he was able to channel that to create a successful unified HTS army in Idlib that overthrew the Assad regime. One does not simply overthrow a 50-year-old regime. Clearly, it takes some acumen.

On the other hand, revolutionaries who come to power often struggle to rein in the revolution. Consider the Bolshevik Revolution in 1917. Russia fell into a half-decade civil war that included numerous “White Army” factions fighting the “Reds” and many foreign countries intervening.

Syria has already gone through 14 years of civil war with numerous fronts and factions, with countries intervening. So, wasn’t Sharaa already an expert in this? Wasn’t he steeled by war?

This raises serious questions about Sharaa’s ability to control the conflict in Sweida. US Secretary of State Marco Rubio issued a tough statement on Saturday that highlights this inconsistency in Damascus.

“The rape and slaughter of innocent people, which has and is still occurring, must end,” Rubio said. If authorities in Damascus want to preserve any chance of achieving a unified, inclusive, and peaceful Syria free of ISIS and of Iranian control, they must help end this calamity by using their security forces to prevent ISIS and any other violent jihadists from entering the area and carrying out massacres, he added.

“And they must hold accountable and bring to justice anyone guilty of atrocities, including those in their own ranks,” Rubio said. “Furthermore, the fighting between Druze and Bedouin groups inside the perimeter must also stop immediately.”

It appears that there is now concern in Washington that Damascus is unable to hold things together. Israel has played a complex role in this. By demanding demilitarization in southern Syria, Israel has helped fuel the chances that there will be a power vacuum. During the Sweida crisis, Israel was quick to begin airstrikes on July 14 and 15. These grew to include a large strike on central Damascus.

The government in Damascus appears to have responded to the strikes by withdrawing its limited security forces from areas near Sweida. The result was that thousands of Bedouin then mobilized to fight. They brought trucks and weapons from home. The Bedouin were fueled by videos circulating online that showed Bedouin being killed by Druze.

Whether the videos were all confirmed is unclear, but the effect was evident. Bedouin tribes put aside their differences and went to fight. Damascus only reined them in on Friday and Saturday. As such, Syria demonstrated that it could stand by and allow fighting to continue.

Damascus is between a rock and a hard place. Sharaa wants to appease groups that worked with HTS to defeat the Assad regime. His natural feelings are toward those Sunni Arabs in Syria who made up the bulk of his fighters.

Druze and Syria analyst for BBC called Zionism ‘pure evil’

A Damascus-based novelist who was interviewed today by the World Service for his analysis on the situation in Syria described Zionism as “pure evil” and “fascist filth” just days ahead of the BBC appearance.

Robin Yassin-Kassab, who lashed out during the interview at Israel’s attempt to “create chaos” in Syria following the IDF attack on military targets in Damascus last Wednesday, posted on X in the wake of the strikes: “Zionist fascist filth is in Damascus […] The genocide state is doing everything it can to make wounded, traumatized Syria collapse into chaos, which will hurt the whole world [...] If pure evil exists, it is Zionism.”

He also wrote: “I have more time for the theory of Zionist control of US politics now.”

Presenting Weekend on BBC World Service on Sunday, presenter Paul Henley asked Yassin-Kassab: “Israel frames its attacks as ‘in defence of the Druze’ – not even the whole Druze community sees it that way, does it?”

Yassin-Kassab responded: “Most of the Druze understand that this is making their situation worse and most of the Druze don’t like Israel and are horrified with the rest of the region at what Israel’s been doing recently… I don’t think it’s designed to defend the Druze, I think it’s designed to create more chaos in Syria so Syria can’t stabilise.”

It comes as Israel and Syria have agreed to a ceasefire following several days of attacks on the Druze minority by Bedouin fighters in Sweida Province.

NYT calls saying Israel is worse than Hitler mere "criticism of Israel"

Here is the headline, subhead and first paragraph of the New York Times article on a court case in Boston:

Did the State Department official say that "criticism of Israel" is enough to deport someone?

Not at all.

Here is everything he said, reported in the article:

Pushed for examples of things he might consider in weighing whether to deny or revoke a student’s visa, Mr. Armstrong testified that calls for limiting military aid to Israel or “denouncing Zionism” could all factor in his agency’s decisions.

“In your view, a statement criticizing Israel’s actions in Gaza could be covered depending on the statement, right?” asked Alexandra Conlon, a lawyer representing the organizations behind the lawsuit.

“Yes, depending on the statement, it could definitely,” he said. “You say that they’re worse than Hitler with what they’re doing in Gaza? — that would be a statement that, I think, would lead in that direction that you seem to be going, counselor.”

Earlier in his testimony, Mr. Armstrong stressed repeatedly that he and his colleagues consider “the totality of the situation,” especially when making a recommendation to the secretary of state.

At one point, Judge William G. Young, who is presiding over the trial, intervened to ask for clarity about how Mr. Armstrong himself determined whether certain statements or actions were antisemitic.

“In my opinion, antisemitism is unjustified views, biases or prejudices or actions against Jewish people — or Israel — that are the result of hatred towards them,” he said.

Mr. Armstrong did not say that his office had endeavored to deport noncitizens based on criticism of Israel alone. But he indicated that the office regularly took into account commentary that the groups behind the lawsuit have argued is protected by the First Amendment.

“In other words, in your understanding, antisemitism includes hatred or prejudice against Israel and Israeli people, right?” Ms. Conlon asked.

“Yes,” he replied.

“In my understanding, antisemites will sometimes try to hide their views and say they’re not against Jews — they’re just against Israel — which is a farcical argument, in my mind,” he added. “It’s just a dodge.”

Not one example he gave, or definition he offered, says that normal "criticism of Israel" is a factor. He uses hate, prejudice and comparison with Nazis as his criteria.

That's not the only problem with the article.

It implies, as fact, that non-citizens are protected by the First Amendment for deportation issues. This is not true, and is disputed by legal scholars; the Supreme Court has not ruled on this. And the New York Times reported on this in detail in March.

Also, while Mr. Armstrong could not recall any State Department guidance on what antisemitism is, in fact it adopted the IHRA Working Definition in 2016 - which is entirely consistent with what he was saying, and which explicitly says that criticism of Israel that is similar to criticism of any other state is not antisemitism, the exact opposite of the impression that the article seeks to give the reader. (In fact, the State Department adopted a definition with identical language in 2010 before IHRA.)

The article misrepresents the State Department as having an incoherent and undefined policy towards antisemitism, when in fact it has a clearly stated policy.

While the article does not directly violate the New York Times existing ethical standards, these problems indicate that perhaps we should ask more from journalists than to do the bare minimum that still allows articles to be so blatantly biased.

While the article may not technically violate the New York Times' formal ethical standards, it reveals how easily bias and distortion can persist within the bounds of those rules. If this is the “minimum standard,” then it’s worth asking whether ethical journalism demands more than box-checking. The public expects, and deserves, that news media include fidelity to truth, context, and public understanding.

Buy EoZ's books on Amazon!

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

PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism (February 2022)

UK law firm openly supports terrorism and aims to "eliminate Zionism"

A law firm in Britain changed its name from "Riverway Law" to "Riverway to the Sea," saying it is dedicated to eliminating Zionism via lawfare:

From courtrooms to classrooms, from Britain to the globe, we're expanding.

Riverway Law is now Riverway to the Sea, a legal and educational front against Zionism, apartheid, and genocide. A new legal firm is being created to take this fight global.

We train, equip, and stand with those who speak truth to power in court and beyond.

The ideology of Zionism is dying and we’re here to make sure it never rises again.

When you look at their website and watch their video, you see very little interest in helping Palestinians. The focus is literally to "eliminate Zionism."

But they absolutely love Palestinian terrorism!

They are working hard to ensure that Hamas is not considered a terrorist group by the UK.

Fahad Ansari, solicitor and director of the organization. tweeted a lot of October 7, cheering the murders, rapes and hostage taking - and no one seems to think it is strange that a lawyer openly advocates and cheers war crimes.

Franck Magennis, barrister and director as well as self-declared communist, was no less enthusiastic at Hamas' orgy or murder and rape:

Ansari even defended the ISIS flag when Britain declared it illegal in demonstrations, saying that it has the Muslim Shahada on it, and they shouldn't make the Shahada illegal!