04/06 Links Pt1: Myths of the Iran War; 5 Men Now Running Iran; Iran rejects Pakistan-mediated truce deal; Russia provided Iran with list of Israeli energy targets

From Ian:

Myths of the Iran War

One myth related to the war is that if enriched uranium remains in Iran, the war has failed. The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) reported that Iran possesses 441 kg. of uranium enriched up to 60%. Israel and the U.S. never intended to deploy thousands of troops deep inside Iran to seize nuclear facilities. Absent a comprehensive agreement to remove the uranium as part of a deal, the approach is to monitor suspected sites and, if necessary, act against them from the air.

In any case, Iran's enrichment facilities have been completely disabled, and it is doubtful they can be restored to operation anytime soon. Moreover, Iran has yet to achieve a breakthrough that would allow it to build an actual weapon system. Over the past year, many of the senior scientists involved in these efforts have been killed. Without the ability to develop a weapon, the uranium Iran possesses has no practical significance.

The claim that Trump was misled by Israel reflects a misunderstanding of U.S. decision-making culture. American presidents formulate policy based solely on their country's interests. The decisive consideration guiding the White House is what serves the American people. The notion that a U.S. president makes critical national security decisions based on assessments presented by Israeli leaders or Mossad officials runs counter to longstanding American practice.

Another myth is that it is possible to decisively defeat Hamas, Iran, Hizbullah or the Houthis once and for all. There is no way to guarantee that even a clear military defeat will end an adversary's motivation to pursue its objectives, recognizing that capabilities can be rebuilt. Phrases such as "once and for all" amount to speculation.

Even after Israel's decisive victory in the 1967 Six-Day War, when its military defeated the armies of Egypt, Syria and Jordan, within a few years, Egypt launched the War of Attrition and in 1973, together with Syria, carried out a large-scale surprise attack against Israel. So victories may have an expiration date. As we repeated at the Passover Seder, in every generation there are those who rise up to destroy us.

Winners and Losers in the Iran War

Iran, Israel, and the U.S. have not achieved the goals they set for themselves in their current war. On the Iranian side, the late Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, had hoped that by adopting the "Samson option," he would provoke a brief regional war with limited damage to his Islamic Republic because he would step in and offer another of his "heroic flexibility" tricks before things got out of hand. His "heroic flexibility" was designed to come after the first wave of attacks by Israeli and American bombers targeting part of Iran's military infrastructure.

However, as he wasn't there to do his part, Israel and the U.S. had to go for a second wave of bombings and then a third - this time targeting Iran's industrial infrastructure on a scale not known since World War II. Its weapons industry has been decimated, and its vast nuclear project put back by years if not decades.

Worse still, Iran's unprovoked ballistic missile and drone attacks on neighboring countries in no way involved in this war may have done lasting damage to the largely tolerant, not to say benevolent, attitude that many of them had of Iran even under the mullahs.

The outside world has been divided between those who, because they hate Trump or Netanyahu or even America and Israel as a whole, designate the mullahs as victors, and those who, translating their hatred of the Iranian regime into a wish for Iran's destruction as a nation-state, declare Trump and Netanyahu as winners.

Anti-U.S. and anti-Israel circles exaggerate the effect of Tehran's tactic of inflicting economic pain on the world by playing fast and loose with oil exports via the Strait of Hormuz and disrupting overall trade in a chunk of the region. That in turn intensifies the effects of the mullahs' mischief-making.

The U.S. and Israel may lose the Iranian people as one of the few nations known for their positive view of both countries. The theme of "you came and destroyed our industrial, economic and scientific infrastructure, but left our torturers in place" is gaining currency among Iranians both at home and abroad.

There is little doubt that although the Khomeinist regime is badly mauled, the biggest loser in this war will be the Iranian people. The war has destroyed thousands of jobs in Iran. A people facing mass unemployment and shortages of food, water and medicine would not be immediately ready for another attempt at regime change.

Telegraph Editorial: Iran Is Not a War of Choice

The U.S. and its enemies have learned from the last two decades that nuclear deterrence works. The ability of the West to intervene in the defense of Ukraine has been hampered by the existence of Russia's nuclear arsenal.

North Korea watched Libyan dictator Muammar Gaddafi disassemble his nuclear and chemical weapons programs in 2003, subsequently allowing NATO aircraft to topple his regime as the people he had tormented rose up against him. North Korean state media stated that "powerful nuclear deterrence serves as the strongest treasured sword for frustrating outsiders' aggression."

This same logic has underlaid Israel's approach to regional proliferation for decades. The Begin doctrine laid out after Israel's 1981 airstrike on Iraq's Osirak nuclear reactor set out precisely why Israel would strike the al-Kibar site in Syria in 2007; it also explained why it struck Iranian nuclear facilities in 2025.

By achieving the full suite of capabilities necessary for a functioning nuclear deterrent - capabilities that it seemed well on the road to attaining - the Iranian regime hoped to build a nuclear shield. A regime built on a fundamentalist belief system devoted to the destruction of the West was not pursuing these weapons as a pathway to moderation.

Instead, a nation sponsoring terrorist militias, launching drone and missile strikes at its neighbors, attempting to hold the global economy to ransom by shutting the flow of trade through the Strait of Hormuz, was seeking to become effectively untouchable militarily.

While the 2025 airstrikes set back Tehran's nuclear program, it was clear early this year that efforts to rebuild its capabilities were well underway. The history of Iran's nuclear ambitions is of diplomacy, time and again, falling short. Faced with the necessity of putting a permanent end to them, it is hard to argue that Israel or America had any other choice.

Read More

04/04 Links: Trump: Tehran has 48 hours to open the Strait of Hormuz; USAF rescue missing F-15E crew member; Francesca Albanese and the Perversion of Academia; ICC votes to discipline Karim Khan

From Ian:

Douglas Murray: World leaders should be grateful the US is doing what’s necessary in Iran

This is their war even more than it is the United States’ war. Iranian missiles threaten British interests even more than they threaten the US. And Iran’s terrorist proxies are even more active in Europe and the UK than they have been in America.

It’s just that the UK, Europeans and others don’t have the military power or the political will to do anything against that threat. They hoped that one day the US would take this problem off their hands. Because otherwise they’d have sat on those same hands as the ayatollah got ever-closer to the bomb.

Critics of President Trump at home point to the rising price of gas. And that is certainly a concern. But the price will come down as America’s objectives are achieved. And while a month of high gas prices is a concern it is much less of a concern than the price of gas if the Revolutionary Islamic Government in Iran started throwing nuclear weapons around.

Consider how they lashed out at every single one of their Arab neighbors after America’s first strikes on Tehran. This is how they behaved with missiles and drones. Imagine how they would react if they were nuclear.

Meantime some critics of American policy have pointed out how North Korea was allowed to develop nuclear weapons. But that program is a signal lesson to the civilized world as much as it is to dictators. North Korea was able to develop its nuclear program because they were constantly threatening South Korea with an attack by conventional weapons if their unconventional capability was attacked. So they got away with it.

The Iranians hoped they could pull off the same trick. But after the destruction of their armies in Gaza, Lebanon and Syria there was a window — this past month — to stop similar blackmail from Iran.

Of course the Iranian regime has lashed out — aiming missiles at Qatari energy facilities and Saudi airports. They have also — interestingly for an “Islamic” regime — sent missiles that have nearly hit the Dome of the Rock in Jerusalem. It would be quite an epitaph for the radical Mullahs if they struck that.

Yet the region has managed to suffer through this. All in the knowledge that American and Israeli pilots are stopping a much greater threat ever emanating from Iran.

And that will be the end of the war.

This war does not need to end up with anyone being bogged down. It doesn’t need the dreaded “boots on the ground” that Western powers seem to have become so fearful of.

Another couple of weeks and the Iranian regime will not be able to threaten anyone again for the foreseeable future. Perhaps a little further along the road the regime itself will fall. That will be in the hands of the Iranian people.

But for the time being the pilots of the US Air Force are doing noble work on behalf of the whole world. And not just for this generation but for the generations to come. We should be proud of them.

John Spencer: What Would Sun Tzu Say About War with Iran?

Throughout the war, Sun Tzu would have returned to a simple measure of success, not only what was destroyed, but what was achieved. If the enemy’s decisions change, the strategy has worked. If they do not, then tactical success may prove insufficient.

That is why The Art of War endures. It is not a guide to battle. It is a framework for thinking about war as a contest of wills, shaped by political purpose, constrained by cost, and decided not by destruction, but by decisions.

Sun Tzu would also have recognized the political constraints that shape the use of force and the importance of perception beyond the battlefield. He warned that “there is no instance of a nation benefiting from prolonged warfare” and that the use of the military must remain tied to the interests of the state, not drift into objectives that expand beyond what was originally intended. He placed extraordinary importance on information, writing that foreknowledge must be obtained and used to shape outcomes, a principle that today extends to the information domain and the perceptions of both enemy leadership and the population.

Sun Tzu also understood the role of threat, not as a matter of rhetoric, but as a function of perception and pressure. “The supreme art of war is to subdue the enemy without fighting,” and that requires shaping the enemy’s understanding of what continued fighting will bring. But he also warned against excess. “When you surround an army, leave an outlet free. Do not press a desperate foe too hard.” The purpose of pressure is not to eliminate all options, but to shape them, and to shape how they are understood. In this context, that means applying enough force to influence decision-making while preserving a path toward a political outcome aligned with stated objectives.

That matters in this context. If the regime were to collapse as a result of the war, the outcomes associated with regime change could occur, but that would be distinct from making regime change the stated political objective. If the objective shifts, or is perceived to shift, from forcing a change in behavior to regime change requiring large-scale ground forces, it risks repeating patterns seen in past wars, where limited objectives expanded into nation building and protracted counterinsurgency campaigns against enemies able to adapt, disperse, and find sanctuary. Those conditions favor the defender, extend time, and erode political cohesion.

Sun Tzu’s warning is clear. Strategy must remain aligned to political purpose, and that purpose must remain disciplined, or the advantages gained early in a campaign can be lost over time.

IDF commando KIA in Southern Lebanon, another critically wounded

An Israel Defense Forces soldier was killed overnight Friday in southeastern Lebanon, the Israeli military said.

He was named as Sgt. Maj. Guy Ludar, 21, a member of the Maglan reconnaissance unit of the IDF Commando Brigade, from Yuvalim in the Lower Galilee.

Another commando from the Maglan unit was critically wounded, the IDF said.

Their families were notified.

According to Ynet, Ludar was killed by “friendly” fire during a nighttime operation to arrest a Hezbollah helper in the village of Shebaa, north of Mount Hermon.

An IDF soldier from another force believed he detected two terrorists and opened fire.

The report noted that the building where the suspect was believed to be was not detonated in advance because Shebaa is predominantly a Sunni village, whose residents are not typically affiliated with the Iranian-backed Shi’ite terrorist group.

The IDF opened a probe into the incident.

Read More

04/01 Links Pt2: Do not look away from the rising fires of Jew hatred; Three arrested inc. Pakistani teenager over Golders Green firebomb attack; Herzog: ‘Spirit of our people’ has always prevailed

From Ian:

Do not look away from the rising fires of Jew hatred

Can we all agree this is madness? How can it be that, as a child here, it almost never crossed my mind not to be openly and fearlessly Jewish, and yet I now wait in trepidation for the day one of my young children returns home from school or an outing, asking me to explain Jew hatred?

In just the past few weeks, a branch of Gail’s bakery in Archway was vandalised because it was founded by an Israeli Jew (who is no longer involved in the business), and then the incident was belittled in the Guardian. A report into campus anti-Semitism revealed that one in five students would refuse to live with a Jewish peer. An inquiry had to be launched into anti-Semitism in schools. Meanwhile, down in Margate, an art exhibition titled ‘Drawings Against Genocide’ depicts Israelis and Israel Defence Forces soldiers as demons, murderers and baby-eaters. Artist Matthew Collings claims the work is not anti-Semitic, merely ‘anti-Zionist’. Thank goodness he cleared that up!

This is what we’re up against. Anti-Semitism has had a rebrand and, honestly, activists have done a fantastic PR job. Say whatever you like about the Jews and carry out as many petty acts of anti-Semitism as you please – as long as you take care to use today’s euphemisms of ‘anti-Zionism’ or ‘Israel criticism’, you’ll get away with it.

Despite all of this, I still believe that the vast majority of Britons are not anti-Semites, and that growing numbers are sickened by what they see. Unfortunately, too many of our non-Jewish neighbours are looking away when they should be staring into the flames, as we are forced to do.

The Jewish community does not have the privilege of looking away. While I can shield myself from terrifying video footage of anti-Semitic murder and destruction, I cannot avoid reckoning with the daily reality of life for Jews in Britain today.

This week, Jews celebrate the festival of Passover, when we recall how Moses led us to freedom from slavery in Egypt. It is one of our most important festivals. It celebrates the privilege of not just freedom itself, but also the ability to live freely as Jews. It is a message that has always resonated strongly with me. But this year I find myself asking: when does living with unease become living in fear? In the past, I always believed myself to be truly free, as a person, as a Jew. Today, I’m not so sure.

Seth Mandel: How the Jewish Community Can Fight Tokenism Without Self-Destructing

Since October 7, anti-Zionist politicians and political institutions have relied more than ever on a specific tactic to deflect accusations of anti-Semitism: putting liberal and leftist Jews front and center and using them, essentially, as human shields.

This puts the global Jewish community in a bind. How do we call out this rank tokenism without allowing the debate to descend into an intra-Jewish fight that leaves the politicians unscathed but the Jews further fragmented?

The answer is to focus most of our ire on those responsible for pitting the Jews against each other. Obviously, Jews who allow themselves to be used in this manner are not without agency and therefore their actions can and should be criticized—just without losing sight of the way political systems historically take advantage of Jewish infighting.

Sometimes, the institutions that deserve to come under withering rhetorical fire aren’t political in the classic sense. Take the media. A couple of months ago, I noticed something reading the stories about Israeli President Isaac Herzog’s trip to Australia after the Bondi Beach Hanukkah massacre.

The Guardian headlined its story: “Isaac Herzog’s four days in Australia left him ‘energised’. For the Jewish community, some saw solidarity while others felt ‘serious angst’.”

The article claimed the trip brought “significant disquiet within Australia’s Jewish community.”

Commenting in favor of Herzog’s visit were the Executive Council of Australian Jewry and the New South Wales Jewish Board of Deputies. The ECAJ is the umbrella organization of Australian Jewry that represents over 200 Jewish organizations. The NSW Jewish Board of Deputies, which is listed as a territorial body of the ECAJ, oversees 55 such Jewish organizations.

The quotes from officers of these two organizations, therefore, can be reasonably said to represent Australian Jewry.

On the other side, being quoted against Herzog’s visit was… something called Jewish Voices of Inner Sydney. The leftist organization does not have much of a footprint and appears to have launched in 2024. Judging by its occasional forays into the public discourse, I can say with some confidence that it has a membership of at least 25 people. As of this writing, it has a whopping 126 followers on Facebook. It is a complete nonentity.

To say that it was unethical of the Guardian to frame its story this way based on some As-a-Jew garage band is to understate the point. The one person from this group the Guardian quotes hardly seems worth spending much time and energy on. The Guardian, on the other hand, is an influential tool of anti-Zionist agitation and ought to be subjected to heaps of scrutiny before anything it writes about Jews and Judaism are to be treated with a grain of seriousness or credibility.

The Guardian uses liberal Jews as human shields, and until it can prove that this has changed, it should be branded as such. Make the paper the primary target.

NYPost Editorial: This is a Democratic Party push to expel Jews from public life

The Democratic Party’s growing antisemitic wing is out to blacklist support for Israel, or at least the nation’s main pro-Israel lobbying and political action group, AIPAC.

Never mind that the American Israel Public Affairs Committee spends far less than other interest groups: Climate-obsessed California billionaire Tom Steyer, a prime AIPAC-denouncer, has spent much more on campaign donations all by himself these last few years.

But such is the power of Democrats’ hard left that delegates to the Democratic National Committee’s April meeting will debate a resolution that first condemns “the growing influence of dark money and corporate-backed independent expenditures in Democratic elections” but then singles out only AIPAC as “undermining public trust in democratic institutions.”

But AIPAC isn’t “corporate-backed” or “dark money”: its SuperPAC donors, all successful American individuals, are completely open about who they are and what they support.

The same cannot be said about the real dark money spent on American politics, most of which — about $1.2 billion — supported Democrat candidates and issues in the last election cycle.

Read More

03/27 Links Pt1: Israel is crafting a powerful new anti-Iran axis; Iranian missile strike US airbase in Saudi Arabia, 12 soldiers wounded

From Ian:

‘Experts’ hate Trump’s war on Iran. They’re making seven fatal errors

What is wrong with the West’s expert class? Do they really believe, as they keep telling us, that the war against Iran is a disaster, the end of days, the final humiliation for Donald Trump? Such defeatism, such catastrophism are not warranted. It is far too soon to conclude how this war will end, regardless of what Iranian propagandists and other appeasers would have us believe.

I can count seven principal errors clouding “expert” judgments in the West.

Error 1
The first is the European establishment’s inability to accept the scale of Iran’s defeats since the Oct 7, 2023 pogroms against Israel, one of the greatest military miscalculations in modern history.

The regime’s decades-long plan for regional domination lies in tatters. It has wasted tens of billions of dollars, its proxies have been defanged, its economy plunged into depression, its mainland ravaged with close to 20,000 targets bombed, its navy sunk, its air defences crippled, its missile stock and launchers decimated, its military-industrial complex blown up, its nuclear capacity curtailed – but apart from that, all is well in Tehran. It is a strange kind of victory which has seen Iran fail to shoot down a single US or Israeli manned plane or sink a single ship.

The reality is that Iran has been downgraded from regional superpower to a pirate terror state, able only to shoot a few missiles and drones at civilian targets, to threaten crimes against humanity, and to blackmail the shipping industry.

Yes, this residual power matters greatly: controlling the Strait of Hormuz and threatening Gulf oil and gas facilities is a potent form of asymmetric warfare that is inflicting devastating damage. But it hardly amounts to US defeat, or certainly not yet.

I don’t know how this war will end. Trump’s negotiations may fail. He may botch an invasion, or he may launch a successful airborne raid. What is certain is that he must reopen the Strait and will be judged on the outcome.

Error 2
The second myth is that Trump is somehow struggling because he supposedly failed to plan for the obvious. In fact, many US assumptions were either right or too pessimistic. It proved remarkably easy to kill Ali Khamenei. Iran failed to overwhelm US and Israeli defence systems.

Critics warned that stockpiles of allied interceptors would run out almost immediately; that was false. The Gulf states turned out to be more resilient than anticipated; instead of turning to China or hoisting the white flag, they shot down missiles, and the Saudis and UAE are moving closer to Washington. US combat losses have been smaller than expected.

Not everything has gone better than planned. Trump may have hoped that Iran’s ability to deploy missiles and drones would have diminished further. The low-probability possibility of an immediate implosion of the regime hasn’t materialised. It may well be that the US underpriced the chances of attacks on Qatari energy assets.

But the idea that Iran would move to block the Straits of Hormuz was the best-rehearsed risk in geopolitics. Trump probably accepted it as a necessary trade-off, an inevitable hit. It may well be that Trump didn’t expect Iran to move so fast. It might have been a blunder not to dispatch more demining resources to the Gulf ahead of time. We shall soon find out; the stakes are enormous.

History’s Pro Tips on Iran

Nothing in human experience compares to the wars of the last 120 years. Their scope has grown as the world has shrunk. The international laws governing conduct in war have too often failed. Technology advances, and along with it war’s lethality and devastation. So war is bad. No one wants another war. Or rather, almost no one. More on that shortly. In the meantime, the question before us is whether the current U.S. and Israeli operations against Iran qualify as just. It’s a debatable matter. I believe they are. I understand the opposite view. But I also find it unpersuasive. Here’s why.

The United States and Israel didn’t start the current conflict. It’s merely the latest phase in a war that began in earnest forty-seven years ago; a methodical war of aggression pursued by Iran to erase Israel as a nation and defeat the United States as the world’s “Great Satan.” The Tehran regime now supports a global network of terrorist violence. In the process, since the 1979 Islamic Revolution, the same regime has murdered or sponsored the murder of scores of thousands of people, including many of its own citizens, the vast majority innocent of any wrongdoing.

It would be easy but inadequate to excuse today’s Iranian policies as vengeance for the 1953 Mossadegh Affair. In that year, at the height of the Cold War, Britain’s MI6 and the American CIA overthrew Iran’s democratically elected prime minister, Mohammed Mossadegh. In his place, they secured the pro-Western Reza Shah Pahlavi in power. For Britain, the goal was maintaining its control over Iranian oil. For the United States, the coup sought to prevent any Iranian drift toward the Soviet Union and any internal threat from Iran’s Tudeh (communist) Party. In the end, Mossadegh was imprisoned for three years and then held under house arrest for the remainder of his life. Several hundred pro- and anti-Mossadegh rioters died in the ensuing street violence.

So much for the past. The hatred animating today’s Islamic regime is far more intense, systematic, and expansive than mere revenge for an event more than seventy years ago. Mossadegh died in 1967. The 1979 revolution sidelined and repressed Mossadegh’s secular, nationalist allies, and his memory is treated with deep ambivalence. In practice, Tehran reviles anything non-Muslim. Its “tolerance” for internal, legally recognized minorities, including Catholics and other Christians, is little more than theater. It amounts to a kind of slow strangulation with distrust and oppressive constraints. The regime especially loathes what it sees as a godless West with its arrogance, licentious comforts, and obscene wealth. It has the same brutal zealotry, the same puritanical extremism, the same easy use of deceit, as the homicidal ideologies that preceded it in the last century.

Tehran has repeatedly lied in negotiations about its nuclear program. It continues to pursue nuclear weapons. This, despite years of pleading and pressure from the international community. It ignores both sanctions and financial enticements. It’s built an immense missile and drone capability, putting Europe and eventually the United States within range. It uses cluster weapons—banned by international law—against civilian populations. And if current military efforts against Iran prove anything, it’s the impressive scope and depth of the regime’s war preparations, the dispersal and hardening of key infrastructure, and the survival of many leadership cadres despite massive damage. A reasonable peace assuring mutual security has never been, and is not even now, on Tehran’s agenda. One doesn’t “make a deal,” a deal that’s sincere and lasting, with psychotics. Religious and political fanatics don’t stop. They won’t, because they can’t. Thus, the best one can hope for when dealing with mentally diseased zealots is preventing them from hurting others.

Hamas Confirms: Gaza Airstrikes That Hit Homes & Tents Actually Killed Terrorists — 10 Examples

A common narrative of the Gaza war is that Israel conducted indiscriminate bombing, striking civilian homes, shelters, and tents in humanitarian zones without military justification. Some observers have alleged that AI and automated systems were used to target single junior operatives or persons with no real affiliation to Hamas or other militant groups. Yet no clear, affirmative evidence has been produced showing the IDF deliberately targeted a civilian site absent a military objective.

This narrative nevertheless became central to accusations of war crimes and genocide. It gained traction in part because Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ) systematically operate in civilian dress and embed within homes, mosques, hospitals, and humanitarian zones as part of their human shield strategy. Under these conditions, strikes on legitimate military targets can appear indistinguishable from attacks on civilians, especially in initial reporting. Early accounts, often provided by Hamas operatives posing as journalists , were frequently accepted and amplified before additional information emerged.

Even when the IDF identified targets and provided operational details, these explanations were often dismissed. However, that posture is becoming difficult to maintain. Recent disclosures by Hamas and PIJ, through official statements, affiliated Telegram channels, and martyr notices, have identified dozens of their own operatives killed in incidents widely reported as attacks on civilians. PIJ alone has acknowledged more than 140 members of its command structure killed during the war.

When these admissions are cross-referenced with specific strike reports and contemporaneous local reporting that initially presented the individuals as civilians but now confirms them as combatants, a consistent pattern emerges. Many incidents described as unlawful attacks on homes, shelters, or tents in humanitarian zones were in fact strikes targeting embedded fighters. As more of these cases come to light, the narrative of indiscriminate or blind AI directed airstrikes on civilian targets is exposed as false by the accumulating evidence.

The following ten cases, drawn from recent Hamas and PIJ martyr notices, demonstrate the pattern using the groups’ own admissions.

Read More

03/26 Links Pt2: Melanie Phillips Issues WAKE UP Call To Jews In The West; Green Party Moves to Declare Jewish Self-Determination “Racist”; Tariq Ramadan sentenced to 18-year jail term for rape

From Ian:

Maureen Lipman: Does the world have any idea of how tired the people of Israel are?

As Blanche du Bois bravely states as she is dragged off to a mental home in the last scene of Tennessee Williams’ play A Streetcar Named Desire: “I have always depended on the kindness of strangers.” The Jewish communities of the world are back on that same streetcar, reliant on the whims of tyrants and the gullibility of their moronic followers. The appalling ambulance arson attack is the result of genuinely sick minds.

David unearthed a 1994 copy of this very paper and honestly, save for the design differences, it could have been today’s edition.

A suicide car bomb had exploded during the Middle East Peace talks, killing eight people and injuring 50 civilians. Even before the bombing, a poll revealed that one-third of Israelis thought that the demands of peace could cause civil war. Thirty-two years of existential battles later, does the world have any idea of how tired the people of Israel are?

The BBC and reporters worldwide do not go into the shelters where children are trained to lie on the floor when the sirens go off. A dear friend told me that his grandchildren have needed to enter their safe room more than 200 times since the current battle began.

Neither do they report on the closure of schools. Most Israeli kids have missed some school every day since Covid. Are the media even aware of the fear of the elderly in Israel? “I am alone,” said one, “I spend the nights scared of the bombings. If anything happens to me will anyone notice?”

In the same 1994 edition, there is a review of a biography of Roald Dahl, citing him as a coming from the Goebbels school of propaganda. In an interview in the Independent, he said of the bombing of Beirut during the first invasion of Lebanon: “It was hushed up in the newspapers because they are primarily Jewish-owned.” This drivel coming from an avowed antisemite and blatant self-publicist, with unhampered access to the media. When the JC phoned him for a quote on his Independent diatribe, he said:

“I’m an old hand at dealing with you buggers. No comment.”

We had form Dahl and I. He once was so insulting to me, as in “You people…” on a chat show, that I was struck dumb. Years later in a Sydney hotel he was in the lift as I got in with my small children. I had always vowed that if I ever met him I would confront him. Except once again my courage failed and I think I mumbled, “Good morning.” I met his wife once on a cruise. She was a beautiful woman and a great actress. Dahl, in fairness, nursed her back to health after a severe stroke. Then he left her for a younger woman to live on higher moral ground.

Page seven of the newspaper is of particular interest with an NUS conference calling for measures to be brought in against militant Muslim students distributing leaflets calling for the death of Jews. Plus ça change… except the NUS may not be quite so philosemitic these days.

David Collier: Green Party Moves to Declare Jewish Self-Determination “Racist”

This weekend, at their spring conference, UK Green Party members are preparing to debate a motion titled simply: “Zionism is Racism.”

Motion A105 does not merely criticise Israeli government policy. It attempts to rewrite Jewish identity and Jewish history in order to deny the Jewish people the same right afforded to every other nation: the right to self determination. At the same time, it undermines the very anti-racist safeguards developed to protect Jewish communities in the Diaspora.

The incoherent, self-contradictory, and ahistorical mess that forms the text of this “anti-Zionist” motion is the resurrection of a discredited ideological campaign whose origins lie in Soviet propaganda – an effort designed to isolate and demonise the Jewish national movement.

Rather than become lost rebutting every distortion and fabrication line by line, it is more useful to focus on the core pillars upon which the motion rests. Examining them exposes the true nature of what the Green Party is proposing.

Denying the Jewish right to self-determination
The motion begins by redefining Zionism itself:
“Zionism is a political ideology which called for the creation… of an ethnonationalist Jewish State… to the exclusion and/or domination of the non-Jewish population.”

This is a false accusation, not a definition of Zionism. Zionism emerged as a national liberation movement of a stateless people. It was the conclusion reached after centuries of failed integration, persecution and expulsion. Israel is a nation built by refugees. Families of people who learned the hard way that their safety could never be entrusted to others. To label that project racist is as absurd as calling a refuge for abused women sexist. Both evolved as a means of protection, not domination.

Zionist is a Jewish label
Zionism is the national movement of the Jewish people, rooted in their history, their vulnerability, and their need for collective security.

One of the frequently repeated defences is to present Zionism as a political ideology, detached from Jewish identity.

Technically, there are non-Jews who identify as Zionists, and there are Jews who do not. But this framing conceals something important.

A non-Jewish person living safely in the West who declares themselves a Zionist is not personally exercising Jewish self-determination. They are expressing support for the right of Jews to exercise theirs.

There is a distinction, and it matters. A Londoner who supports Scottish nationalism is not considered a Scottish nationalist in any meaningful national sense. He remains a Londoner expressing an opinion about another people’s national aspirations.

Zionism is not about its supporters abroad. It is about the national existence of the people who live it, and the aspirations of others who want to join them.

When the Green Party declare Zionism to be racism, they are not condemning a theoretical idea held by distant sympathisers. They are condemning the national legitimacy of millions of Jews whose identity, security, and future are bound up in that state.

Tony Blair (paywalled): Why the West Fails to Stop Antisemitism

Read More

03/18 Links Pt1: ‘Get Him Before God Does’; Iran Strikes Qatar's refinery, Prompting Doha to Expel Iranian Diplomats; Iranian missile struck WB town, killing 3 Palestinian women

From Ian:

Jonathan S. Tobin: Stopping Tehran's Apocalyptic Goals Is Important

Two weeks after the start of the U.S.-Israeli offensive against Iran, naysayers about the wisdom of the operation remain pervasive and loud. Yet, Iran was steadily rebuilding its nuclear program with an imminent option to race to a bomb, expanding missile production, and continuing to orchestrate an "axis of resistance" dedicated to fomenting chaos and war.

That's more than enough to justify the risks that are an inevitable part of all wars. Even now it's obvious that continuing a policy of kicking the can down the road that Trump's predecessors chose would have been as colossal a mistake as even the costliest military blunder.

The first purpose of the campaign is the eradication of Iran's nuclear and ballistic-missile programs, in addition to its support and active participation in international terrorism. Washington and Jerusalem have also stated that they favor regime change in Iran. That's something Israel believes is absolutely necessary to achieve. The Trump administration would like it to happen, but could live without it, as long as the ayatollahs were stripped of their nukes and missiles, and had their terrorist option foreclosed.

While the success of the U.S.-Israeli offensive won't be able to be fully evaluated until after the conflict is over, it's clear that both militaries have systematically eliminated Iran's military capabilities, hunted down its missile-launchers, and done more damage to its nuclear program.

The fact that a country as large as Iran is not completely defeated in two weeks is not a reason to believe the war has so far been a failure. If the armed forces of the two allies are allowed to continue their military efforts, the already devastating results for Iran will likely become even more impressive. There is no reason to believe that the war is already a "quagmire."

The arguments that say the U.S. would have been better off delaying action or even appeasing Iran ring false. The policy of enriching and empowering Tehran that was the consequence of the 2015 nuclear deal led to a stronger and more aggressive Islamist regime. Letting Iran get a nuclear weapon became an increasingly likely scenario in the last year and would have done far more damage to U.S. interests than even a permanent hike in gas prices.

Letting a tyrannical regime ruled by religious fanatics bent on imposing their version of fanatical Islam on the Middle East and the rest of the world get a nuclear weapon would be a nightmare. And that would have been the inevitable result if the U.S. hadn't prepared to act at some point in the near future.

Seth Mandel: ‘Get Him Before God Does’

There is a line in an Israeli spy movie, Walk on Water, that sums up this idea quite nicely. As the Mossad director gives his employee an important assassination assignment, he says to the younger man: “Get him before God does.”

The assignment is to eliminate an old Nazi war criminal. But the aging German will die of old age sooner than later, so why go through all the trouble now? The answer is that Nazi war criminals should stop feeling hunted only when they shuffle off this mortal coil. Eliminating the Nazi official means delivering justice to his victims and to those who will never be his victims now. It doesn’t have to be more complicated than that.

Israel does so much that benefits the rest of the world that sometimes people seem to forget that it is its own country with its own interests. Hence the increasing absurdity of the discourse around Israel’s objectively-successful military campaigns. Will killing Ali Larijani solve global warming? Will taking out Hassan Nasrallah end world poverty? Will any one action by the IDF end all wars forever? If not, the media doesn’t see a reason to do it.

But Israel is defending its citizens and dispensing justice, and that is reason enough. “Someone else will just replace Larijani” entirely misses the point. Because by this logic, putting a mob boss in prison will only cause someone else to take over the family, continuing a cycle of crime and retribution without eliminating the existence of organized crime itself.

As a matter of course, we punish criminals for the crimes they commit. Only when it comes to Israel do we suddenly agonize over the point of it all.

But Israel doesn’t agonize over the point of it all. Israel was reconstituted as a modern state during an era when Jews were being killed in the most horrible ways imaginable with no recourse. Those days are over.

Truth is, that section of the Times story about the history of Israel’s retaliatory missions is a fair guide to the near future as well. A lot of bad people and groups were involved in starting this war. The fact that Israel’s retaliatory campaign is so protracted should not be a criticism of Israel but a reminder of just how destructive and shattering October 7 was, and how widely the culpability for it is spread. The victims of that terrible day are no less deserving of justice just because there are so many of them.

Israel Is Hunting Down Iranian Regime Members in Their Hideouts

Ali Larijani, Iran's top security official, strolled confidently Friday through a rally of regime loyalists in central Tehran. Early Tuesday, Israel's intelligence services found Larijani with other officials at a hideout on the outskirts of Tehran and killed him with a missile strike.

The same night, Israel got a tip from ordinary Iranians that the leader of the Basij militia, Gholamreza Soleimani, was holed up with his deputies in a tent in a wooded area in Tehran. He, too, was struck and killed. The killings were made possible by a growing harvest of intelligence about possible targets.

With thousands of regime members killed, Iranians are reporting that a sense of disorder is starting to take hold. Security forces are under stress and on the run. Israel is chasing security forces from their headquarters to muster points, then on to hide-outs under bridges. The advanced technology deployed by Israel and the penetration of Iranian society by its agents are creating the greatest threat yet to the regime.

Israeli intelligence learned that Iran had a fallback plan for its internal security forces in the event their facilities were destroyed - mustering at local sports complexes. Israel watched the sites fill up and then hit them, killing hundreds of members of the security services and military, the vast majority at Azadi Stadium, a large venue for soccer games.

Israeli intelligence officials began placing calls to individual commanders, threatening them and their families by name if they didn't stand aside in the event of an uprising. In one call between a senior Iranian police commander and an agent of the Mossad, Israel's foreign-intelligence service, the agent said in Farsi, "I called to warn you in advance that you should stand with your people's side, and if you will not do that, your destiny will be as your leader." The commander responded, "Brother, I swear on the Quran, I'm not your enemy. I'm a dead man already. Just please come help us."

Israel's air force began operating fleets of loitering drones above Tehran and other areas. Their attacks were in many cases guided by tips sent by ordinary Iranians, Israeli security officials said. On Sunday night, Israeli forces conducted a targeted hunt for Basij checkpoints, hitting 11. Residents said many security officers are hiding in residential buildings. When they move in, the neighbors evacuate, fearing a strike.

Israel's security establishment believes Iran's crumbling economy and popular anger have put the regime on an irreversible path to collapse, whether it happens during the war or down the road.

Read More

03/17 Links Pt1: Pres. Herzog: Europe Should Back Effort to Eradicate Hizbullah; Ali Larijani’s elimination signals a turning point in Iran; Iranian attack kills man and woman in Ramat Gan; Joe Kent Was a Problem of Trump’s Own Making

This summary is not available. Please click here to view the post.

Read More

03/11 Links Pt1: Iran’s threats of military destruction have proven utterly hollow; Iran’s missile fire rate has collapsed by 92%

From Ian:

Jake Wallis Simons: Iran’s threats of military destruction have proven utterly hollow

When it comes to the rest of the regime’s performance, the kindest interpretation is that they are focussing on attritional endurance rather than decisive retaliation, hoping that political and economic pressure, combined with the structural resilience that the regime has developed since the 12-day war last June, will force the American president to curtail the war with the new leader still standing. The most likely interpretation, however, is that amid the shock and awe of the American-Israeli campaign, they have been reduced to reacting defensively rather than strategically. Panicking, in other words.

Of the 2,000 Iranian drones and more than 500 ballistic and cruise missiles fired into neighbouring countries since the start of the war, the overwhelming majority have been intercepted. The few that sneaked through have caused a handful of deaths and injuries and destroyed some military equipment, but no major base has been disabled. In recent days, the launch cadence has dropped by as much as 90 per cent, suggesting a collapse in stockpiles, launchers and command and control. And as for the second pillar of Iranian belligerence, its foreign proxies, they have been equally unimpressive.

After a hesitant start, the most important of these, Hezbollah, has in recent days swung into action, raining hundreds of missiles into Israel’s north (some of which have fallen short). But Jerusalem’s response has been aggressive; the lesson of the aftermath of October 7, which saw hundreds of thousands of Israelis displaced within their own country as a result of Hezbollah fire, has been well learnt. Today, the IDF’s doctrine is simple: attack us and you will be the one forced to flee, not us.

The Israeli incursion into Lebanon, which has so far cost the lives of a small number of soldiers, should be seen in this context. Analysts believe that Hezbollah may be rationing its rockets to avoid a suicidal total war and preserve its options for the future. But after the pager operation and subsequent battering it sustained in September 2024, the fanatical militia is also in a degree of disarray.

The other big question mark hangs over Iran’s nuclear programme, much of which lay in ruins even before this war began. Buried deep underground near the city of Isfahan, 270 miles south of Tehran, lies the regime’s bloody crown jewels, about 400kg of uranium that has been enriched to 60 per cent. This material, which in certain contexts could be weaponised in a matter of weeks, is the regime’s buried treasure; if allied boots do hit the ground during this war, they will likely belong to commandos sent to secure the site, excavate the uranium and spirit it safely out of the country.

The overwhelming likelihood is that defeat, and not just a cosmetic one, lies ahead for the worst regime on the planet. If I was a betting man, I would not give much for Ali Larijani’s chances of surviving the month, or indeed for those of the regime’s new leader. Nobody knows what kind of a country will emerge after the dust has settled. Nobody knows if we will see chaos or peace. But given Trump’s resolute posture and the vast firepower at his disposal, the president will likely be having his shoes polished in the Oval Office long after Larijani is dead.

Bernard-Henri Levy: Netanyahu Is Pulling Trump's Strings? Antisemites Will Believe Anything

Some experts say the U.S. war with Iran was inspired by Israel and imposed by Israel, and that the U.S. is merely the executor of "Israel's war." I don't deny that the two countries have converging interests, or that their military and intelligence agencies are operating in close coordination. But that is called an alliance.

Would anyone have said that Franklin D. Roosevelt was being manipulated by Charles de Gaulle? Or that Winston Churchill - who in 1919 said Bolshevism should be strangled in its cradle - became Stalin's puppet 22 years later?

In this case, Israel has one concern: neutralizing a threat that it rightly considers existential. The U.S. has its own concerns: defending its allies (Arab countries as well as Israel), weakening a strategic axis that runs from Tehran to Moscow and Beijing, and washing away the humiliation that has remained for 47 years - the invasion of the U.S. Embassy in 1979 and holding of American hostages for more than a year.

To believe that a country the size of New Jersey could twist the arm of a country of 350 million, equipped with the most powerful military and the most sophisticated network of bases in history, and governed by a president of unrivaled egotism? To imagine that Donald Trump would have given any foreign prime minister the gift of a war of this magnitude? It is simply grotesque.

But the more serious problem is that this fable revives a very old and toxic lie. This is how people thought in the 1930s - those who saw in "the Jews" a community of conspirators pushing nations toward war, pulling the strings of catastrophe, and scheming to provoke conflicts from which they expected to profit.

The Forgotten 444 Days in Tehran

In 1979 Iranians held 52 Americans hostage for more than a year. From 1979 to 1981, the captives seized from the American Embassy were humiliated, paraded around blindfolded for cameras and jeering crowds and threatened.

Diplomatic immunity is a concept that goes back to ancient times. It evolved over centuries to an accepted standard between governments. Even Adolf Hitler respected diplomatic immunity.

The Iranians used diplomatic immunity when it was in their murderous interest. They used diplomatic immunity to bring in the bomb material used in the car bomb detonated outside a Jewish center in Buenos Aires on July 18, 1994, killing 85 and wounding another 300.

Tens of thousands of human beings would be alive today, and the entire Middle East wouldn't have been destabilized for half a century, had the Iranian theocracy been stopped at the start.

Dr. Houman David Hammati: On Iran, We Stand with Israel and America

47 years ago, I stood at a window in Tehran as a 3-year-old boy, smelling burning tires and hearing the chants that would steal my country. I do not celebrate war. No decent person does. What I celebrate - what millions of Iranians inside the country and in the diaspora have prayed for in secret for decades - is the possibility that a regime which has no right to exist may finally be forced to go.

This is the same regime that armed and cheered the Oct. 7 massacre against Israel for no reason other than pure genocidal hatred; murdered tens of thousands of its own sons and daughters who dared to walk peacefully in the streets demanding the most basic freedoms; gouges out the eyes of young women for the "crime" of wearing makeup; hangs teenagers from cranes for posting a tweet; exports terror, poverty, and darkness to every corner it can reach including the U.S.

No nation, no people, should have to live under that. Not Israelis. Not Americans. And certainly not Iranians. I am a son of Iran who has spent his life mourning a stolen homeland. What we are witnessing is not aggression - it is necessary surgery to remove a tumor that has metastasized for 47 years. The tumor is the Islamic Republic that has hijacked Iran.

To the brave pilots of the Israel Air Force and the men and women of the U.S. military now carrying out this mission: You are not invaders. You are the answer to the prayers of millions who have whispered "enough" in the dark since 1979. Thank you, Israel. Thank you, America. The Iranian people - the real Iran - will never forget.

Read More

03/05 Links Pt2: Hamas's Oct. 7 Attack Launched a Historic Reordering in the Middle East; Trump kicks Tucker Carlson out of MAGA movement; Israel’s Unfinished Business in Lebanon

From Ian:

Palestine’s draft constitution is a manifesto for permanent war

In a sane world, human-rights organisations would be incandescent. A constitution that makes Sharia a primary legislative source, sidelines women’s genuine equality, erases gay rights and rewards terrorism ought to trigger every alarm bell. But these NGOs have long ago abandoned moral principles in favour of a hierarchy of oppression. To them, Palestinians are sacred victims and Israel is the eternal villain. They are blind to the authoritarianism and festering anti-Semitism of Palestinian society, reserving their outrage instead for the Jewish State, which dares to defend itself against this. Peace and human dignity come secondary to the goal of seeing the Middle East’s only democracy dismantled.

Put simply, the PA’s constitution is a manifesto for permanent war. By codifying the total rejection of Israeli legitimacy, it has ensured that a peace deal based on mutual recognition is an impossibility. For any future Palestinian leader, recognising Israel would now be, quite literally, a violation of the state’s supreme law.

The silence from the British government following the release of this document is a tacit endorsement of its principles. If Starmer is so determined to recognise Palestine, he should at least have the courage to tell the public what kind of state he is backing. Why is he prepared to endorse a framework that prioritises Sharia over secular rights, canonises martyrdom, erases Jewish history and perpetuates the conflict by legal means? Is this really the ‘better future’ he was hoping for in the Middle East?

If Britain continues to recognise Palestinian statehood without demanding fundamental constitutional change, it can no longer do so under the pretence of advancing peace. The PA does not care about peace. For the UK to endorse it is not diplomacy, but a moral abdication.

Hamas's Oct. 7 Attack Launched a Historic Reordering in the Middle East

In 2023, from a tunnel beneath Gaza, Yahya Sinwar gave an order that sent thousands of Hamas fighters through the fence separating the territory from Israel. That green light has reordered the Middle East on a scale comparable to the Arab Spring or the carving up of the Ottoman Empire in the early 20th century - but not remotely in the ways Sinwar had in mind. 29 months later, the Middle East is almost unrecognizable. Israel stands indisputably as the military hegemon, its enemies demolished or decapitated. Sinwar is dead and the network he hoped would ride to his rescue is in ruins.

Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei was blown up in a joint U.S.-Israeli airstrike on Saturday. The regime that bankrolled and armed the "axis of resistance" for four decades is on the edge of collapse - perhaps taking with it Hamas, Hizbullah and the Houthis. Tehran is making enemies of the entire region - firing drones and missiles haphazardly, and often including civilian targets.

On Oct. 6, 2023, it was all different. Iran's proxy network was at the peak of its power. Hamas governed Gaza. Hizbullah held Lebanon hostage with 100,000 rockets. Assad sat in Damascus, reintegrating into the Arab League after years of isolation. The Houthis controlled the Yemeni coast and menaced shipping lanes with near-impunity.

Behind them all stood Iran, with a nuclear program viewed as an imminent threat in Jerusalem and the West, backed by a missile arsenal regarded as a strong deterrent against direct Israeli or American attack. Gulf nations were quietly reestablishing ties with the Islamic republic. "Two years later, none of those pillars are standing, and the Islamic republic is never going to be the same," said Ali Vaez, director of the Iran Project at the International Crisis Group.

What Sinwar set off was an unraveling of everything he and his sponsors yearned for - a defeated Israel, Palestinian hopes for statehood, a Middle East rid of Western influence. "Talk about a colossal miscalculation leading to catastrophic consequences," said Bilal Saab, a Chatham House fellow and former Pentagon official. "That cataclysmic event single-handedly changed the face of the Middle East."

Since Oct. 7, 2023, Israel has neutralized every major threat on its borders. A former senior Israel Defense Forces official said, "There is still war, but I can tell you that no one but the biggest dreamers ever thought we would be in the position we are in now. Israel is not untouchable, but we have made it very expensive to touch us."

AIJAC welcomes decision to list Hizb ut-Tahrir as a prohibited hate group

The Australia/Israel & Jewish Affairs Council (AIJAC) welcomes the decision to list Hizb ut-Tahrir as a prohibited hate group under the new legislation introduced following the Bondi terror attack. AIJAC has long called for Hizb ut-Tahrir to be formally proscribed, given its well-documented record of extreme Islamist ideology, antisemitic incitement and hostility to Australia’s democratic values.

This designation, the first of its kind under the new hate group legislation, is an important and necessary step in confronting the spread of extremist ideology that threatens social cohesion, public safety and the fundamental values of Australian society. Under the listing, individuals who are members of Hizb ut-Tahrir, recruit for it, or provide training, funding or material support to the organisation, will now be in breach of the law.

By formally designating Hizb ut-Tahrir as a prohibited hate group, authorities are sending a clear message that organisations which promote intolerance, division and extremism have no place in Australia.

AIJAC commends the Government and law-enforcement authorities for taking this important step and urges continued vigilance to ensure that extremist groups and those who support them are held fully accountable under the law.

Actress asks 'where are the college campuses' protesting Iranian regime

British Iranian actress Nazanin Boniadi called out progressive activists for their lack of outrage over the regime's human rights violations before President Donald Trump conducted military strikes against the nation.

The "Rings of Power" actress appeared on CNN's "The Lead with Jake Tapper" Wednesday to discuss the ongoing war against Iran and concerns over the vacuum of leadership in the nation after the U.S. eliminated its leaders.

She agreed with concerns that an ISIS-level threat could take over the country but noted that several human rights activists and organizations did not acknowledge civilian deaths until after the U.S. targeted Iran.

"For people who care about international law as I do, I'm getting plenty of messages from colleagues in entertainment and saying, ‘I’m so sorry in this moment, what's happening to your people.' Thank you, but where were you a few weeks ago, when tens of thousands of Iranians were being killed by their own regime?" Boniadi asked. "This is a regime that has been violating international law for decades."

Tapper remarked that he also hadn't "really heard a ton" from international progressive activists regarding Iran's human rights violations, even after the nation launched hundreds of missile and drone strikes against other Muslim-majority countries in retaliation.

"I mean, if any other country did that, I think there'd be a huge hue and cry and huge marches in the streets. Iran does it, and there really isn't that result in the progressive community. What do you make of that?" Tapper asked.

"Look, in 1979, progressives world over, including in Iran, were all too willing to sacrifice women‘s rights, LGBTQ+ rights and every other basic human rights at the altar of anti-imperialism. Are we going to do the same in this moment? Are we really caring more about whose hands are on the trigger, or are we going to care about human lives, civilian lives?" Boniadi answered.

"This is a regime that has violated human rights," she continued. "International law has wreaked havoc on the region, domestic oppression, transnational repression, hostage diplomacy, destabilizing the region. And now, it's killing fellow Muslims in neighboring countries. Where is your outrage? Where are the college campuses?"

Boniadi, whose family fled Tehran for England following the 1979 Islamic Revolution, has been a longtime supporter of Iranian protesters and has previously used her career to highlight atrocities conducted by the Iranian regime.

Read More

02/25 Links Pt1: The UN’s ‘Never Again’ is becoming ‘Never Mind’; PA paid $160 Mil to terrorists in pay-for-slay scheme; Will Trump cement his place in history as a redeemer – or legitimise Iran’s regime?

From Ian:

The UN’s ‘Never Again’ is becoming ‘Never Mind’

Institutions do not collapse overnight. They erode. They lose authority step by step, each time they tolerate what they were established to prevent.

Meanwhile, antisemitic incidents are rising worldwide, on university campuses, in major cities, and outside synagogues. Jewish communities are on edge. In that climate, a UN official labeling the Jewish state as “humanity’s enemy” is not an abstract flourish. It reinforces a narrative that treats Jewish self-determination as uniquely illegitimate.

Supporters will say this is passionate advocacy. They will argue that it reflects frustration or moral urgency.

But human rights language carries force because it is meant to be principled and universal. Once it becomes a tool for branding one nation as the embodiment of evil, it stops protecting the vulnerable and starts isolating them.

Germany, France, and Italy have spoken. That is a start. But if condemnation is the end of the story, the message is clear. The guardrails are optional. The standards are flexible. The slogan remains, but the substance fades.

“Never Again” was supposed to mean that no people would be placed outside the circle of protection. If the UN cannot recognize the danger in calling the Jewish state “the common enemy of humanity,” then the promise forged in 1945 is being hollowed out from within.

Silence is not neutrality. At some point, condemnation without action becomes complicity.

The question is straightforward. Will the United Nations enforce its own standards, or will it continue to let them dissolve, one incendiary phrase at a time?

Three months after it shuttered, what was the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation?

The first executive director of the foundation, Jake Wood, resigned days later, saying that he agreed with the criticism from the United Nations and international aid groups that “it is not possible to implement this plan while also strictly adhering to the humanitarian principles of humanity, neutrality, impartiality and independence.”

“The day GHF was launched, the U.N. went after the founding CEO. He resigned,” Moore told JNS. “It’s just the worst, and I don’t judge him after the attacks I received from the U.N. I lived under 24/7 protection for months this summer.” His house was graffitied, he added.

“I don’t judge him for resigning, but when he did resign, I got a call from the State Department asking if I would do it,” Moore said. “I said, ‘Of course, I’ll do it.’ How can I not do it? And so I stepped into the role.”

The foundation named Moore its executive chairman on June 3.

Moore was frequently criticized during his tenure for lacking the experience of executives of incumbent aid groups like the Red Cross and UNRWA, a charge that he denied.

“I’ve done stuff in 100 countries,” Moore said, citing his work as an advocate for persecuted minorities around the world with a focus on Christians in the Middle East.

“I’ve met with all the heads of state in the region on multiple occasions,” he told JNS. “I know my way around the Middle East.”

GHF too was criticized for not having a track record of delivering humanitarian aid and for not “abiding by humanitarian principles,” criticism that Moore said ignored what the foundation was actually doing.

“The whole system was designed by veterans of the humanitarian community,” he said. “The guy who ran it on the ground was a 30-year veteran of USAID and other agencies. The veterans on the ground spent time in every single war zone for the last 25 years. These are incredibly, incredibly experienced people.”

“It was all designed from the ground up to comply with these standards, but these other organizations were the ones that were not neutral,” he said. “They were the ones that were partial, and they were politicizing everything.”

The scale of the problems at the United Nations and at UNRWA, which Israel has accused of employing members of Hamas, was revealed to Moore when U.N. Secretary-General António Guterres refused to condemn Hamas’s killing of Palestinian GHF aid workers in June.

“Where my naïveté crashed was that day early on, when Hamas killed 12 of our local Gazans,” Moore told JNS. “These were Gazan volunteers that were helping us feed their own people, and Hamas killed 12 of them and piled them out of the Nasser Hospital, controlled by the World Health Organization and Doctors Without Borders, and doctors didn’t even try to help them.”

“I wrote a letter to the secretary-general of the United Nations, and I asked the secretary-general if he would condemn Hamas for killing our 12 Gazan aid workers, and the secretary-general of the United Nations refused to do it,” Moore said.

“That was the moment when I realized all of these organizations say they exist for one purpose, but they’re actually politicians under a different name,” he said. “I realized this is something between a mafia and a system corrupt on a scale that was just incomprehensible, and then they tried to shut us down.”

PA paid half a billion shekels to terrorists in pay-for-slay scheme, sources reveal -exclusive

The Palestinian Authority transferred approximately half a billion shekels to terrorists in 2025 under its “pay-for-slay” mechanism, which provides payments to imprisoned terrorists and to the families of attackers, The Jerusalem Post learned on Wednesday.

The information was disclosed during a cabinet meeting convened on Sunday. Of the total amount, NIS 395 million was paid to terrorists currently in prison, while NIS 92 million was transferred to the families of terrorists killed while carrying out attacks.

Ministers were also informed that terrorists released as part of the most recent hostage deals received a “special grant” from the Palestinian Authority.

Since October 7, international criticism has intensified over the Palestinian Authority’s continued payments to terrorists and their families.

PA continues pay-for-slay scheme despite Israeli, US measures to stop it
The Trump administration reportedly threatened last year to impose sanctions on the Chairman of the Palestinian Authority and other senior PA officials if the payments continued.

In an apparent effort to avert such measures, Mahmoud Abbas (Abu Mazen) dismissed the Palestinian finance minister who had signed off on the transfers. However, it was revealed during the cabinet meeting that the newly appointed finance minister has continued to authorize payments to terrorists.

“All the Palestinian Authority’s theatrics will not help, Abu Mazen himself has said that the Authority will continue paying terrorists’ families down to the last shekel," Minister Avi Dichter said during the meeting.

“Just as Mordechai exposed Haman as a foe and enemy before Ahasuerus, and the great challenge was convincing Ahasuerus, Netanyahu must convince President Trump that Abu Mazen is a foe and enemy," Minister Orit Strock said.

Senior security officials further told ministers that in recent months, salaries of Palestinian Authority employees, including teachers, doctors, and nurses, have been reduced to ensure that payments to terrorists remain unaffected.

Read More

02/22 Links: Trump's Board of Peace Must Deradicalize Gaza; Bondi hero: ‘I just ran to stop him killing innocent people’; Mike Huckabee handles Tucker Carlson’s ‘Gish Gallop’ with grace

From Ian:

Trump's Board of Peace Must Deradicalize Gaza

President Trump convened his Board of Peace on Thursday, announcing new commitments to fund Gaza's reconstruction and provide troops for a Gaza stabilization force. But so far, everyone's avoided an essential question: How will future generations of Palestinian children be raised and educated - and will they again be indoctrinated with radical hatred of Jews and Israel? If so, then the president's vision of Gaza as a "deradicalized, terror-free zone that does not pose a threat to its neighbors" will remain a pipe dream.

Many of the Hamas terrorists who stormed into Israel on Oct. 7, 2023, were raised on a steady diet of hatred. As children, they watched a Hamas-produced TV show hosted by a Mickey Mouse knockoff named Farfour, who preached jihad and urged the killing of Jews. Surrounded by smiling children, Farfour vowed to "liberate Jerusalem from the criminal Zionists," repeatedly exhorting: "Kill! Kill! Kill!" A talking bee named Nahoul ranted about "the filth of the criminal Jews." That reality helps explain why hundreds of Gaza civilians joined the rampage on Oct. 7, and many more celebrated in the streets.

The urgent question now is whether the machinery of radicalization that produced Hamas will finally be dismantled. If it is not, a return to war is inevitable. As long as Hamas remains embedded in Gaza's institutions, Palestinian children will continue to be indoctrinated to hate and kill Jews - in schools, on screens and at home. If Trump wants peace in Gaza to endure, he should establish a Deradicalization Commission through the Board of Peace, charged with dismantling the entire infrastructure of hate.

Pierre Rehov: Erdogan's Sunni Noose: Turkey's Bid to Encircle Israel

Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan has launched an ambitious diplomatic offensive aimed at unifying the Sunni world under Ankara's leadership. The objective is not merely reconciliation with former rivals. It is the construction of a Sunni diplomatic and strategic "wall," or "noose," around Israel, replacing the Iranian "Shi'ite crescent" with a new configuration of Sunni power.

The Turkish-Saudi reconciliation is particularly significant. Following years of tension after the 2018 murder of journalist Jamal Khashoggi in Istanbul, Ankara and Riyadh have now moved decisively toward strategic cooperation.

Turkish and Saudi officials increasingly frame Israel as a destabilizing actor in these theaters. The emerging partnership is not merely economic; it reflects coordinated positioning against perceived external threats, with Israel explicitly cited.

Turkey and Egypt have now signed a $350 million military framework agreement covering joint weapons production, intelligence sharing, and military exercises. Turkish air defense systems and munitions are slated for delivery, and bilateral trade is projected to reach $15 billion.

As the guardian of the Suez Canal and a dominant actor in North Africa, Egypt provides logistical leverage capable of influencing maritime routes critical to Israel's economy.

On February 9, 2026, the foreign ministers of Turkey, Egypt, Indonesia, Jordan, Pakistan, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates issued a joint communiqué condemning what they called "Israeli expansionist policies in occupied territories" and calling for Islamic unity.

Some analysts describe an emerging "Sunni axis," or noose, influenced by Muslim Brotherhood ideology; backed by Turkish military power, financed by Qatar and Saudi Arabia, and designed, by expanding into Gaza, to encircle and finish off Israel.

The UAE, under the impressive leadership of Sheikh Mohamed ben Zayed al Nahyan, pursues a technocratic, anti-political Islam agenda that diverges sharply from Erdogan's ideological sympathies.... Still, the coalition's ultimate aim, apart from the UAE, unmistakably seems to be "containing" Israel.

Recently, Saudi media have featured openly anti-Israel and antisemitic headlines not seen in years. The kingdom appears to be totally aligning itself with anti-Israel countries such as Qatar and Turkey, while "tensions with the UAE explode."

Egypt, Israel's chilly peace partner since 1979, has reportedly expanded military infrastructure in the Sinai Peninsula in ways that should, under the supposed peace treaty, raise serious questions.

Turkish and Egyptian intelligence services are reportedly coordinating efforts to counter rival influences and restrict Israel's strategic access.

Israeli analysts increasingly describe it as the replacement of Iran's Shiite axis with a Sunni bloc influenced by the Muslim Brotherhood.

The coalition presents itself as promoting regional peace. Yet "peace" may translate into the vaporization of Israel, especially should a future Israeli government prove more pliable.

Erdogan's participation in "stabilization" efforts would significantly expand Turkish influence within the emerging Sunni crescent. Ankara's well-documented support for Muslim Brotherhood networks — which are Hamas's patrons, ideologically and financially – should raise obvious concerns.

Netanyahu's insistence that Israel determine which international actors, if any, operate in Gaza, serves multiple strategic purposes. It prevents Turkish entrenchment in Gaza, maintains Israeli control over post-war arrangements, and signals to Washington that Israel views Turkish expansionism as a long-term threat transcending personal or political relationships.

Whatever the obstacles, Erdogan's direction seems clear: a militarily and economically anchored Sunni alignment to constrict Israel's strategic space.

Ruthie Blum: Mike Huckabee handles Tucker Carlson’s ‘Gish Gallop’ with grace

By anchoring the exchange in Islamist conduct, Huckabee stripped the argument to its essentials. For instance, asked by Carlson what it cost the United States to “move the fleet off Iran into the Persian Gulf,” the ambassador replied, “A lot less than it would to bury a lot of Americans if [the ayatollahs] ever got a long-range ballistic missile. A lot less.”

He also pointed out that if Carlson cares so much about America, he should be concerned that Iran’s proxies are already “deeply embedded” in the Western Hemisphere.

This back-and-forth was among many fronts in the rhetorical battlefield of Carlson’s crazed conspiracy-theory arena, however. It might even have been the sanest section of the Q&A.

The looniest was his casting of aspersions on the authenticity of Netanyahu’s Jewish roots, since the prime minister’s family hails from Eastern Europe, and his sneering suggestion that Israelis might need DNA tests to prove their biblical connection to the land.

Other jibes were just as jaw-dropping, beginning with his impugning of a brief meeting Huckabee had with Jonathan Pollard after the death of the latter’s wife; declaring that Jeffrey Epstein was known to be connected with the Mossad (adding a lie about Israeli President Isaac Herzog having been a guest on the pedophile’s island—for which he later apologized but may still be sued); citing fabricated statistics about Israel’s persecution of Christians; and besmirching Israel Defense Forces behavior in Gaza. Oh, and insisting that Israel provide free abortions courtesy of U.S. aid.

It’s no wonder, then, that Carlson, who’s built a following among Israel-bashing antisemites, remains a groyper favorite.

It has to be said, though, that Huckabee knew what he was in for with Carlson. The pair had been sparring publicly on social media, which led to Huckabee’s challenging his former Fox News colleague to “come talk to me, instead of about me.”

Because of Huckabee’s naturally cheerful demeanor and impeccable manners, the interview concluded on a cordial note, with his extending an invitation to Carlson to return to Israel and attend his church. It was a magnanimous gesture, to be sure.

But the rest of us would prefer that Tucker Carlson never darken our doorstep—or VIP lounge—again.

Read More

02/21 Links: Emerging Sunni coalition is a strategic threat to Israel; Huckabee calmly, brilliantly confronts Carlson’s barrage of anti-Israel, anti-Christian lies; Jeremy Bowen’s bias is visible from space

From Ian:

Far Left protest planned against Buchenwald Memorial on Liberation Day

A planned far-left protest against the Buchenwald concentration camp memorial on the anniversary of its liberation has sparked outrage across Germany, with officials denouncing the move as an affront to the memory of Holocaust victims.

According to a report in the German Bild, citing Switzerland's Neue Zürcher Zeitung, radical organizations are calling for demonstrations on April 11, the day the camp was liberated in 1945. The groups accuse the memorial's management of "spreading Israeli propaganda" and of not being "hostile enough toward Israel."

The protest is being organized under the slogan "Keffiyehs in Buchenwald." Among those involved are the student wing of Germany's Left Party (Die Linke), the anti-Israel group Jewish Voice for a Just Peace in the Middle East and the German Communist Party (DKP).

In statements published by the organizers, the Buchenwald memorial site is accused of promoting "historical revisionism and genocide denial" and of serving as a vehicle for advancing an alleged "Israeli narrative."

The controversy follows an incident last year in which a woman seeking to stage a protest at the site while wearing a keffiyeh, a scarf widely associated with Palestinian nationalism, was denied entry. A German court later upheld the decision. The protest organizers claim the memorial's management is effectively criminalizing pro-Palestinian activists.

According to the report, one of the leading activists behind the campaign belongs to a communist organization that previously expressed public support for the October 7 massacre carried out by Hamas. In a statement issued after the attack, the group described it as a "legitimate uprising by all means necessary."

The remarks triggered widespread public anger in Germany, particularly given Buchenwald's central place in the country's culture of remembrance. Tens of thousands of Jews were murdered at the camp during the Holocaust, making it one of the most significant symbols of Nazi atrocities.

Felix Klein, the German government's commissioner for combating antisemitism, sharply condemned the initiative, calling it "a new low in the reversal of roles between victim and perpetrator." He described the planned demonstration as "a frontal assault on the dignity of commemoration and on the memory of the victims of the Holocaust."

Daniel Finkelstein: Britain is still our country as well – and we will not be driven out

I understand those people who wish to make aliyah. I respect that decision and understand the emotional pull. But as a move to enhance family safety? I don’t think so.

Until the last five years I might have answered “America” if considering a safe refuge for Jews. But now? I note only that the worst antisemitic abuse I receive originates in that country. And that every extreme trend is worse and more violent there. It seems like a society constantly on the edge.

And nowhere else in Europe is it tempting, either. Or the Middle East. Or Africa for that matter. Jews are a small minority in almost every country we live in and that is inevitably perilous. But I don’t think we are finished here unless someone has a better idea, and I don’t think someone does have a better idea.

But I do have a more positive reason for believing in the future for Jews in Britain. It has become harder for Jews everywhere, we all feel less safe, but a sense of proportion is required. This remains one of the greatest times to be alive as a Jew, and Britain is one of the greatest places.

When I read the story of both sets of my grandparents before they were engulfed by the disasters of the 1930s and 1940s, I could see the warning signs. Absolutely I could. The growth of open antisemitism, the slow rise of violence, the breakdown of taboos. All the things we worry about now did indeed precede the catastrophe.

Yet the difference in extent is as striking as the similarly in nature. The extent of violence and hatred was of an entirely different scale. And Germany, in particular, was a much more unstable country. British democracy and rule of law certainly has its challenges but remains, by comparison, vastly stronger.

When I wrote recently in The Times about my experience of antisemitic abuse I was flooded with kind messages from readers. We certainly have enemies but we also have many allies. There are millions of decent people in Britain who realise that their own safety and liberty is bound up in ours.

Besides, over hundreds of years we have built our own culture and community in this country. It’s not something to give up lightly. I don’t think complacency is warranted. Sadly, it is not warranted at all. But a little defiance is. This is certainly still the place for me.

Jeremy Bowen’s bias is visible from space

It will be of little surprise that Bowen has consistently misrepresented, downplayed or even tried to excuse, Hamas’s use of Palestinian civilians as human shields. Against Israel, Hamas has little choice but ‘to leverage the things that they can leverage in terms of trying to get an edge’, Bowen said in a 2023 podcast episode. In 2014, he claimed to have seen ‘no evidence during my week in Gaza of Israel’s accusation that Hamas uses Palestinians as human shields’. This is despite extensively documented evidence to the contrary, showing that Hamas launches rockets from civilian areas and commandeers civilian infrastructure for military ends, including hospitals and schools.

In fact, you can find examples of Bowen’s bias as far back as 2009, when the BBC Trust found him in breach of impartiality guidelines for a 2007 BBC News article on the 40th anniversary of the Arab-Israeli Six-Day War.

According to monitoring by the Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting and Analysis (CAMERA), Bowen has spent decades perfecting a narrative of Israeli aggression while airbrushing the extent of the threats Israel faces. He has repeatedly platformed voices that dehumanise Israelis while failing to challenge the anti-Semitic ideology that drives Hamas. That isn’t journalism: it’s a curated perspective that treats Jewish security concerns with a shrug of indifference.

The BBC is the most popular news source in the UK, reaching a staggering 94 per cent of adults. When its most senior editors trade in skewed narratives, they shape political discourse, social attitudes and the temperature of national debate. And the price of this is borne by British Jews.

Since 7 October 2023, the UK has endured record levels of anti-Semitic incidents. This has included a lethal terror attack and several foiled terror plots. When coverage of serious conflicts consistently falls short, it exacerbates real-world harms for a minority community already under pressure. The BBC’s tendency to amplify unverified Hamas claims – such as wrongly blaming the infamous al-Ahli hospital blast on Israel without evidence, or quoting Hamas casualty figures without qualification – has fuelled hostility towards Jewish communities.

Perhaps most breathtaking is the arrogance with which Bowen continues to showcase his bias with total impunity. The BBC’s internal accountability mechanisms are essentially a closed loop. The broadcaster is, quite literally, marking its own homework. Apologies and corrections are only issued long after the damage has been done and without significant consequences for repeated breaches.

This brings us to the government’s BBC Charter Review, which is exploring the BBC’s governance, public obligations and funding before a new 10-year charter is granted. The way the BBC works now, where senior figures like Bowen are immune to external scrutiny, is a betrayal of public trust. We need a fundamental reset of the BBC’s culture, including tying the renewal of the charter to demonstrable improvements in impartiality and accuracy.

We ought to remember that the BBC belongs to the public – not to the egos of its editors and correspondents.

Read More