Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News

Monday, July 14, 2025

Zionism isn't Jewish supremacy. It is Jewish equality.

I don't know why this one tweet, from late May by a doctor in England, upset me - but you never know what gets under your skin, do you?

Her premise is wrong and that makes her an antisemitic bigot.

Zionism is not about Jewish supremacy, but Jewish equality - for a people who have been around for 3,500 years, whose ideas have had more influence on the world than any others', who have been more persecuted than any other people, to be given self-determination like any other nation. It is human rights. It is fairness. It is asking for Jews to be treated like every other nation.

But let's do a thought experiment. Let's see if this doctor ever tweeted about Muslim supremacy in Saudi Arabia.

Of course not. Even though non-Muslims in Saudi Arabia cannot practice their religion openly. Even though its Basic Law says that human rights are subordinate to Sharia law. Even though non-Muslims must conform to Saudi dress codes.

Israel has no such laws. Non-Jews can eat non-kosher food, in public, on Yom Kippur. Mosques send out their prayers on loudspeakers at ear-splitting volumes.

So why not dismantle Saudi Arabia?

Oh, no, Doctor Rahmen cannot say that. Because if she says that out loud, she would be putting her life in danger. Antisemitism is not dangerous - but pointing out Muslim supremacy sure is.

Aladwan is part of the now illegal Palestine Action group in the UK, and she has been arrested.

But all you really need to know about her and her faux concern for human rights can be seen in this single tweet:

What kind of trauma doctor cheers rape?

One that should lose her license.

(h/t Jill)

Buy EoZ's books on Amazon!

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

PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism (February 2022)

Modern philosophy, for all its brilliance and rigor, often suffers from a foundational flaw: it tends to treat abstraction as an end in itself. In its pursuit of purity, it frequently drifts into a mode of intellectualism that detaches thought from responsibility, treating moral dilemmas as puzzles, and ethical obligations as thought experiments. In this sense, modern philosophy can be seen as engaged in a quiet but profound flight from responsibility.

Think about philosophy's concept of "mind–body dualism," the idea that the mind and the body are separate entities. This can lead to profoundly unethical results, where actions are divorced from the mind, and responsibility for actions evaporates.

Or the idea of skeptical solipsism - the view that only one's own mind is knowable, casting doubt on the reality of others’ minds or the external world This can be used to avoid any relationships, any interaction with one's community and family, all in the name of philosophy.

But perhaps most of all is philosophy's love of abstraction - of puzzling out questions like "when does a pile of sand become a heap?" Solving theoretical problems is only meaningful when they can be leveraged to solve real problems, but too often philosophy elevates these questions as if finding the answers are themselves moral imperatives.

AskHillel, the secular framework for Jewish ethical reasoning, offers a radical alternative.

It looks at philosophy through the same prism that it looks at every human endeavor to see if it meets the preconditions for any ethical system to be morally trustworthy, what can be called the ethoskeletal axioms.

Corrigibility – Can the idea self-repair or evolve in the face of moral critique? Many philosophical systems treat themselves as closed; AskHillel demands iterative integrity.

Transparency – Can the reasoning process be laid bare, or does it obscure its premises behind jargon? Much of modern philosophy fails to show its scaffolding.

Dignity – Does the idea uphold the innate worth of human beings? Abstract systems like solipsism or utilitarian totalism often erase this.

Override Logic – Can the system resolve value conflict responsibly, or does it collapse into paralysis or binary thinking?

Relational Integrity – Does it account for roles, covenant, and responsibility within relationships? Philosophies of hyper-individualism often fail here.

Epistemic Humility – Does the idea acknowledge the limits of certainty, or does it weaponize doubt or claim moral infallibility?

To be sure, not all philosophies are equal, and each kind will respond differently to this test. But many classic philosophical constructs falter when tested against these axioms. Solipsism fails dignity, relational integrity, and override logic. Mind-body dualism often dodges corrigibility and relational grounding. Infinite regress paralyzes moral clarity under the guise of epistemic rigor. Even elegant thought systems, when left abstract, violate transparency and dignity by refusing to take a stand.

AskHillel challenges the assumption that philosophy must float free of moral gravity. It insists instead that ideas must be lived, not just theorized. Concepts must be inhabited, not merely defined.

The essence of AskHillel's way of looking at the world lies in a simple inversion: abstraction is not dismissed, but grounded. Its test is not whether a concept is internally consistent, but whether it helps sustain a moral structure that holds under pressure. In this sense, AskHillel doesn't just practicalize philosophy; it elevates it. By asking what any given abstraction demands of us ethically, AskHillel performs a kind of secular sanctification, adding meaning to what had been seen as a mind puzzle.

Take, for instance, the Ship of Theseus. This is a famous metaphysical riddle about identity: if every part of a ship is replaced over time, is it still the same ship?

AskHillel doesn't discard the question: it reframes it. When does a person, institution, or nation remain morally accountable despite internal transformation? If a company employed slaves in the past, is it still responsible to fix the harm many decades later after it has changed management, headquarters, employees, its own mission statement? This is no longer a riddle; it's a diagnostic for teshuvah, justice, and communal continuity. Abstract becomes actionable.

Or consider the Sorites paradox which asks when a collection of grains becomes a "heap." AskHillel hears a deeper ethical call: when does small acts of harm accumulate? When does silence become complicity? When does a fetus become a human? Jewish ethics is attuned to continuity as opposed to the discreteness often assumed in philosophy, but sometimes there is a line that is crossed - where exactly is that line? The question of a "heap" becomes a test of Areivut (responsibility) and dignity.

For this article, I created a completely new concept I called "qwertyism, " defined as the irritation felt when someone takes a parking spot you were eyeing. A traditional philosopher might analyze its taxonomy: Is qwertyism the same as seeing someone grab the last bag of chips? Or the elevator doors closing on you? What about when a spot looks open but has a motorcycle? A cone? A hydrant?

When I asked AskHillel how it would deal with the concept, it looked at it from a different perspective:

Does qwertyism expose latent entitlement that undermines gratitude? How should one ethically respond to feelings of minor loss or resentment? Is qwertyism a test of Anavah (humility) or Areivut (shared public goods)? AskHillel elevated what was meant to be a silly thought experiment into a path for how to become a better person.

Where traditional Jewish ethics grounds itself in divine covenant, AskHillel is secular. But it retains the structure of brit through shared axioms: truth exists, dignity matters, responsibility is binding. These values are not commanded; they are engineered into the system because without them, moral life collapses. AskHillel asks not "What is the good?" but "What kind of structure can people live in without their dignity breaking?"

This is the core reversal: modern philosophy often chases coherence. AskHillel chases consequence. Where the former admires ideas, the latter demands that they hold human weight. In this way, AskHillel turns philosophy back toward responsibility, restoring the bridge between reason and moral presence. Just as Judaism teaches that any object or idea can become sacred when used for sacred purposes, AskHillel says any idea can become meaningful when used for moral purposes. The abstract questions are not silly, but we need to reveal their moral core, and endow them with meaning: a secular version of kedushah, holiness.

Philosophy need not be abandoned. But it must be reclaimed. Its flight from responsibility is a major error. AskHillel offers a path for that reclamation.

It is not the end of abstraction. It is its elevation.

Buy EoZ's books on Amazon!

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

PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism (February 2022)

The "non-Zionists" of a century ago would be considered Zionists today

Today's anti-Zionists like to portray Zionism as a fringe movement a century ago, and they claim that they are just following the paths of anti-Zionists of the past.

The argument is knowingly deceptive. The anti-Zionist arguments in the interwar period evaporated after the Holocaust. Opposing Zionism before Israel was reborn was a position against a political idea, opposing Zionism after Israel exists is antisemitism - the opposition to the very existence of the only Jewish majority state.

But there are other nuances to the anti- and non-Zionist stance by Jews in the interwar period.

Something happened a hundred years ago that sounds strange today. After discussions in Zionist conventions in the US and Europe, The Jewish Agency in British Mandate Palestine voted to expand to include non-Zionists.

Here is an article from the Wisconsin Jewish Chronicle from July 1925:

Who were these non-Zionists and why did they want to join what was the most visibly Zionist organization - the Jewish Agency?

The non-Zionists of 1925 supported Jewish immigration to Palestine. They supported Jewish presence and growth in the Holy Land. They supported building up Jewish institutions and Jewish culture there. But they were ambivalent, at the time, about the concept of a Jewish national home as a political entity.

Some were worried about appearing to have dual loyalty. Some were worried that a Jewish state would survive and they just wanted to make Palestine a safe haven for Jews.

Yes, there were some real anti-Zionists among the Orthodox and Jewish socialists. But it is they who were were the fringe, even in 1925.

The non-Zionists of the time - the ones who wanted to be involved in building up a Jewish presence and culture and institutions in Palestine - were much different than the anti-Zionists of today. Unlike the "Jewish Voice for Peace" style haters, they cared deeply about the fate of their fellow Jews in Europe, the Muslim world and Palestine itself.

Today's Jewish "anti-Zionists," like the ones who met in Vienna in the "First Anti-Zionist Congress," last month, have nothing in common with the "non-Zionists" of the past. Those non-Zionists would be the first ones to condemn today's anti-Zionists as enemies of the Jewish people.

Buy EoZ's books on Amazon!

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

PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism (February 2022)

Why isn't mainstream Egyptian antisemitism ever discussed in Western media?

Another day, another antisemitic article, this one in Egypt's Al Ahram, one of its most popular, government-aligned newspapers:

Israel: Present and Destiny... and the Factors of the Nation's Victory
By Abdulmajid Al-Shawadfi

The nation possesses distinguished capabilities, a clear civilization, and a message that is the savior of humanity. Today, this is embodied in the battle for survival that the nation is currently experiencing, after an enemy—along with its Jewish adversaries—was planted in its heart during a period of division, multiple banners, and fragmented states, under the dominance of secular thought. Suddenly, truth stirs souls anew, and the nation moves forward, carrying immense trusts for victory and triumph to rid itself of the Jews. In this context, and based on the historical and analytical study prepared by Dr. Mustafa Hilmi, Professor of Islamic Philosophy, titled “Israel: Between History, Present, and Destiny,” and the factors of victory possessed by the nation:

Hilmi, a distinguished Egyptian scholar and past winmer of the King Faisal Prize for service to Islam, goes on to give strategy on how the Muslim world can defeat the West, specifically the US and Israel, using methods like stopping accepting dollars as the currency for oil. And then quotes Hezbollah's current leader as an architect of this victory, and an ideological ally of Hilmi's.

When Egypt is described by Western media, this sort of anti-American, antisemitic rhetoric that is seen daily in mainstream Egyptian media is simply not mentioned. As a result, the West gets a skewed view of what is normal discourse and opinion in the so-called "moderate" Arab world - Egypt and Jordan in particular.

Without an honest analysis, the West is blind to reality. Political convenience and wishful thinking cannot and must not replace hard reality. Because in the long run, something bad is going to happen and the West will say, "How could we not have seen this coming?"

Buy EoZ's books on Amazon!

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

PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism (February 2022)

07/13 Links: Netanyahu says he’s ‘confident’ hostage deal can be reached; Charter Signed by Hundreds of Muslim Scholars Supports Hamas's Oct 7 Attack; Anti-Semitism ‘normalised in middle-class Britain’

From Ian:

MEMRI: Charter Signed by Hundreds of Muslim Scholars Supports Hamas's October 7 Attack on Israel: It Was Jihad Against the Infidels

On June 27, 2025, hundreds of religious scholars and clerics from across the Muslim world held a conference in Istanbul, Turkey, and issued the "Charter of the Islamic Nation's Religious Scholars" to give religious sanction to Hamas's Oct. 7, 2023, attack on Israel and to reject calls to disarm Hamas. The charter states, similarly to the ideology of the Hamas movement itself, that the conflict with Israel is a religious one between Muslims and infidels, and that Hamas's "resistance" against Israel constitutes "jihad for the sake of Allah."

According to the charter, Palestine "from the river to the sea" - namely all of Israel's territory - is Islamic land, and anyone who gives up any part of it is a traitor. It says the demand to disarm Hamas is "treason against Allah" and it highlights the necessity of educating the younger generation to wage jihad for the sake of Allah. Many of the signatories are senior members of the International Union of Muslim Scholars (IUMS) based in Doha, Qatar, and backed by the Qatari and Turkish regimes.

Red Flags Everywhere: How U.S. Public Opinion Is Tilting toward Palestinians

The view of unbreakable American support for Israel may be a political mantra that may be true now, but a closer look at trends among the American population will show that a conceptual change may be taking place in full view.

A few "red flags" are out there. The most glaring is the precipitous increase in antisemitism. Jewish leaders have called "for the government to take strong and aggressive action to stop the antisemitic murders, attacks, violence, and harassment."

Hillel reports a 700% increase in antisemitic incidents against Jewish students. The recent overt acts of violence resulting in Jewish deaths in Washington and Boulder lend credence to these sentiments.

If people are moving toward having less of a favorable attitude towards Israel, it is only a matter of time before the politicians that represent them do the same.

In repeated polls over the last year and a half, sympathy for Israel over Hamas is indeed significant, but when "Palestinians" is substituted for "Hamas," this support wanes meaningfully. There is also a large swath of the population that is ambivalent on the matter, citing equal support for "both sides." The data we see all point to behaviors that don't support sympathetic attitudes toward Israel.

If the political balance in the U.S. swings over from what we see today, the policy ramifications may be grave. Taking today's America for granted may be understandable, but taking tomorrow's America for granted may be simply foolish.

Confessions of a Reformed Anti-Zionist

I grew up with 16 years of American Jewish day school. At seventeen, I stood on the train tracks of Auschwitz wrapped in an Israeli flag, convinced that Jewish survival deserved any cost. When I arrived at college, my professors taught me that Zionism is a colonial project, depicted Jews as European interlopers, and described Israel's existence as dependent on the continual subjugation of Palestinians.

So I walked away. First from Zionism, then from Judaism itself. At that point, I thought I had liberated my conscience. In truth, I had only hollowed it out. In my mind at the time, rejecting Zionism and recognizing my "privilege" equaled solidarity with the oppressed. Really, though, I was living in a borrowed story - a story written by others, for whom Jewish pain is always suspect, Jewish safety always provisional.

After Oct. 7, while enrolled as a PhD student at Stanford, I experienced firsthand how quickly "political anti-Zionism" slips into irrefutable Jew-hatred. I lived it. I am trained in critical race theory, ethnic studies, and Jewish and Middle Eastern history. Most Stanford classmates measured my solidarity by my willingness to endorse the murder of Jews, the rape of Jewish women, and the immediate dissolution of the Jewish state as necessary for the project of "decolonizing Palestine."

To my classmates (and quite a few professors), to mourn the loss of Jewish lives was invalid - the selfish conspiracy of an oppressor. The same progressive thinkers who demanded I acknowledge complexity in every other struggle refused to grant even a fraction of that nuance to Jewish experience. They interpreted my attempts to humanize Jews as proof of my complicity in empire and racism. My classmates assured me that unless I was in agreement that Jews deserve to be murdered in the fight for "Palestinian liberation," I would never belong in their intellectual community.

Being a Jew has always meant refusing to abandon our inheritance simply because it makes others uncomfortable. I am no longer willing to apologize for being a Jew. I have come back to my community, not because it is flawless, but because it is mine. And I will never again let anyone tell me that loving my people is something I must outgrow.

The secularized Jewish framework I have been working on, AskHillel, may be based on Jewish concepts, but by its very nature it must be different. After all, Jewish ethics is based above all on the covenant between Israel and God, and no one who is not a believer can accept such a system.

However, the reverse is not true: religious people can accept a secular moral system as long as it doesn't contradict their own. So a truly universal system must be secular, by definition.

That is why my goal has been to create an ethical system that stands alone, that leverages the brilliance of the Jewish ethical system and halachic process, but that can appeal to the entire world and the false assumptions that underlie much of Western secular ethics.

Therefore, AskHillel must distinguish itself both from faith-based Jewish ethics and from the traditional secular philosophies since the Enlightenment.

How is AskHillel different from Jewish ethics?

Faith-based Jewish ethics begins with divine brit: a covenant between God and the Jewish people, grounded in revelation, obligation, and sacred history. It draws authority from halacha, midrash, and divine command. It binds the Jew to God through a living system of duties, many of which transcend rational justification.

AskHillel, by contrast, is covenantal without being theistic. It retains the structure of obligation, tiered values, and moral repair - but re-roots them in shared human axioms, not divine will. It transforms the halachic method into a secular design framework: values are upheld not because they are commanded, but because they build ethical worlds that hold.

Where traditional Jewish ethics is received, AskHillel is engineered. Where one is divine fidelity, the other is moral architecture. The two may share tools, instincts, and even many conclusions, but their foundations differ. AskHillel must prove its validity not through revelation, but through coherence, durability, and human flourishing.

AskHillel and the Architecture of Ethics: A Pragmatic Jewish Answer to Western Morality

In modern ethical theory, a silent assumption has governed for centuries: that morality, if it exists, must be a system that can be deduced, proven, and universally applied. Whether it's Kantian duty, utilitarian calculus, or the existentialist cry for authenticity, the goal is the same: to build a moral system that holds up under reason alone.

But what if that assumption is wrong? What if morality isn't something you deduce, but something you build? Not like geometry, but like architecture. Not abstract perfection, but structural integrity.

This is AskHillel's claim. It treats morality as a tested structure, a system of values and obligations engineered to support human dignity, uphold truth, and withstand collapse. It doesn't ask, "What is the good?" It asks, "What kind of moral world won't fall apart?"

The Failure of Abstraction

Western philosophy begins with the isolated thinker. Morality is something you figure out, ideally from first principles. But this approach often collapses under its own weight. The is/ought problem (Hume), regress of justification (Plato), and moral luck (Nagel) all point to a fundamental fragility: moral systems are built in the air, without ground beneath them.

By contrast, Jewish ethics starts from obligation: a binding commitment to uphold certain values, not because they were logically derived, but because without them, life breaks.

Engineering Ethics

AskHillel takes that principle and makes it secular, transparent, and testable. Its structure is built on three pillars:

Foundational Ontology: Truth exists. Dignity is real. Responsibility is binding. These aren't proven; they are chosen because moral life depends on them.
Tiered Ethical System: Not all values are equal. There are axioms, primary obligations, amplifiers, and overrides. This enables the system to handle conflict without collapse.
Moral Integrity Tests: Like stress tests in architecture, AskHillel uses diagnostic triggers (“override logic”) to detect when a structure is bending toward harm, humiliation, or false certainty.

The result is not moral relativism, nor rigid formalism. It's pragmatic ethics: a structure designed to be lived in, not admired from afar.

AskHillel replaces the Western question, "What is the good?" with a more grounded one:

What kind of ethical structure can people live in, together, without their dignity breaking?

This is the same question architects ask about buildings, or physicians ask about bodies. It's not theoretical. It's lived. When a moral world collapses, people get hurt.

This reframing doesn't make ethics easier. It makes it urgent. Every value must prove its worth by how it holds under stress. Every override must prevent collapse. Every obligation must sustain life, dignity, truth, and repair.

Here is a chart that describes the differences between Western moral philosophies, Jewish ethics and the AskHillel ethical framework:

Axis	Western Philosophy	Traditional Jewish	AskHillel (Secular Jewish Ethics)
Starting Question	What is the good?	What is my obligation, now, to whom?	What kind of moral structure will hold — personally, communally?
Method	Abstract reasoning, logical deduction	Textual interpretation, covenantal reasoning	Structured ethical engineering: values (taken from Judaism) tested like blueprints
Moral Source	Rational autonomy or moral feeling	Divine command, brit, national memory	Shared moral axioms confirmed by their durability under stress
Morality As	System of rules and deductions	Journey of fidelity and sanctification	Architecture of obligation — built to withstand pressure
Individual Role	Independent moral calculator	Bound actor in divine covenant	Co-architect of moral structure, judged by what it sustains, in relationship with others
Conflict Resolution	Philosophical balance of competing theories	Tiered resolution within halachic/metaphysical scaffolding	Override triggers + ethical integrity diagnostics
Telos (Goal)	Universal moral rationality	Redemption, sanctity, justice	Empirical moral viability: a world built on dignity that holds
Time Orientation	Ahistorical theory	Brit rooted in past, aiming toward future	Pragmatic evolution — continuity without utopian fantasy
Error Mode	Logical inconsistency or subjective drift	Betrayal of obligation, moral disloyalty	Structural failure — collapse of dignity, responsibility, or trust

Traditional Jewish ethics relied on a divine covenant to structure obligation. AskHillel secularizes this by treating ethics not as obedience, but as design. You enter into obligation because that's how you build something that lasts. The covenant becomes a blueprint.

That shift changes everything. It makes moral systems accountable not to theoretical elegance, but to durability -the kind that produces flourishing, justice, transformation, and resilience.

AskHillel doesn't claim to be perfect. It claims to be coherent, testable, and built to last. In a time of moral confusion, it offers not commandments from heaven, nor theories from the void, but something much harder to dismiss: a structure you can walk into, live inside, and trust not to fall down.

Because in the end, that's the only kind of morality that works.

Buy EoZ's books on Amazon!

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

PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism (February 2022)

From Bladi.net:

A five-month suspended prison sentence was requested by the Paris prosecutor’s office on Thursday, July 10, against Motawassim L. This 21-year-old Moroccan student from the University of Paris-Dauphine appeared before the 13th correctional chamber for the modification of the computer profiles of 18 Jewish students.

The events took place on October 7, 2024. The student, from his home, took advantage of a security flaw in the university’s intranet to replace his classmates’ profile pictures with an image of a Palestinian flag with a clenched fist and the slogan "Free Palestine".

The main debate during the hearing focused on the qualification of the facts. Motawassim L. was prosecuted for "fraudulent modification of data from an automated processing system", as the investigators had not established any anti-Semitic character. The lawyers for the civil parties described this choice as "scandalous" and asked for the addition of the aggravating circumstance of an act committed "on the grounds of belonging to a religion".

At the time of the events, the president of the university, El-Mouhoub Mouhoud, had been alerted by the Union of Jewish Students of Dauphine (UEJD) and had referred the matter to the prosecutor. He had then stated that the intervention of the IT services had "undoubtedly made it possible to limit the manipulation of images" and recalled the position of the institution: "We remain more than ever intransigent against any criminal act or statement that could be likened to racism, anti-Semitism [...]. "

During his trial, the defendant denied any hateful intent, describing an "rather political" action targeting the UEJD. He acknowledged that "there would have been other more peaceful ways to do it", but said he refused "to be accused of anti-Semitism". The maximum penalty provided by law for this offense is five years in prison and a fine of 150,000 euros.

Yes, he specifically targeted members of the Union of Jewish Students of Dauphine - but the prosecutors and court did not consider this to be antisemitism.

Insanity.

Buy EoZ's books on Amazon!

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

PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism (February 2022)

YNet has a fascinating article about an Israeli raid in Syria:

“In the past, if you had asked me whether I’d lead an operation like this, I’d have told you you’re way off,” admitted Lt. Col. (res.) Y., commander of the Alexandroni Reserve Brigade’s 7012nd Battalion.

Just days earlier, he led his troops some 10 kilometers into Syrian territory in a covert overnight raid to arrest members of a terror cell operated by Iran’s Quds Force before they could carry out an attack on Israeli forces along the buffer zone. The operation remained classified until the team safely returned to Israeli territory.

Most of the article concentrates on the unqualified success of this complex raid: an entire Iranian cell arrested in their sleep and taken to Israel for interrogation without a single shot fired.

But more interesting are the small details it mentions, like, "This was the second time in a week that an Iranian-led Syrian force had been captured." And this: "During the 12-day war with Iran...while the aerial battle raged, soldiers on the ground held the line against infiltration attempts and terror cells from Syria.

This isn't a story about how well Israeli forces are doing their jobs. it is a story that even in the new Syria, Iran still controls terror cells that are trying, seemingly daily, to attack Israel.

That is a story we are not hearing about in the news. The impression from the mainstream media is that Iran is quiet again, licking its wounds. But it still has proxies, even in Syria, and it is still trying to attack Israel using that proxy strategy it has used for decades.

Buy EoZ's books on Amazon!

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

PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism (February 2022)

07/12 Links: The Gaza food aid 'massacre': Yet another modern blood libel; Hamas rejects latest cease-fire proposal; Zohran Mamdani’s father a member of group endorsing suicide bombers

From Ian:

‘Dismantle Zionism’: These people aren’t fooling around

No ambiguity there: individuals as well as institutions will be targeted for the “crime,” in their eyes, of Zionism.

If you want to work for Ansari and Magennis, then you will need to be as hate-filled as they are. The first question on the application for the role of “Events, Training and Comms” at their new organization reads as follows: “How will you use the time and space created by this position to deal maximum damage to Zionism?”

What’s striking about these two is that despite their declared focus on the legal process to achieve their ends, their language indicates a proclivity for violence that goes beyond their legal pleas for Hamas and unconditional support for Palestine Action, a fiercely antisemitic grouping that the British government designated as a terrorist organization earlier this month.

Addressing a far-left group last week, Magennis said that the task of the audience when it came to Zionism was to “kick it to death.” On social media, one pictures him frothing as he stabs his keyboard: “Zionism is crumbling. The reckoning is here … Tear down the world that did this to Palestinians. Escalate! Escalate now!” (Amusingly, Magennis—yet another Irishman in thrall to Palestinian eliminationism—suddenly became very sensitive about anti-Irish tropes when a respondent made a joke about him going to bed clutching a bottle of whiskey.) Ansari, meanwhile, continues in a similar vein, hailing the “unique opportunity to do real damage to Zionism” he believes his organization embodies.

“Real damage” means advocating for and implementing the measures I described above, whose impact will be felt primarily by British Jews, not the Israeli government. This is not an accident; in the multifront war launched by Hamas nearly two years ago, the role of its international solidarity movement is to make life as unpleasant as possible for the vast majority of Jews who identify as Zionists. In that regard, the handful of Jewish anti-Zionists in their ranks provides some convenient cover, much as the Jewish section of the Soviet Communist Party did when the Bolsheviks banned Zionist organizations and cracked down on Hebrew and Jewish education.

With the exceptions of the present U.S. administration and the current German government, no other Western government has understood, let alone acted upon, the grave threat these groups and individuals represent. As a first priority, the welcome U.S. sanctions on Albanese—rooted in the same executive order applied to the International Criminal Court in The Hague for its pursuit of American citizens and allies of the United States like Israel—should now be expanded to all groups dedicated to waging lawfare against Israel and Jewish communities outside Israel. We don’t want you here, and you should entertain no illusions: We will defeat you.

Enough is enough: Israel must take Joseph's Tomb back from the Palestinians

Nearly 25 years after the IDF ignominiously pulled out of Joseph’s Tomb in Nablus, Israel may at last be on the verge of correcting that grievous affront to Jewish history and destiny.

According to a report last week in Yediot Aharonot, the Knesset Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee’s Subcommittee on Judea and Samaria, chaired by Religious Zionist Party MK Zvi Sukkot, convened a special session to discuss for the first time the restoration of Israeli sovereignty to the holy site.

IDF officials who participated in the meeting promised to prepare a feasibility study within six weeks, which could pave the way for the renewal of a permanent Jewish presence at the site.

The tomb is the burial place of one of our greatest biblical forebears, and it is one of Israel’s premier sites of religious, historical, and archaeological significance.

Zvi Ilan, one of Israel’s foremost archaeologists, described Joseph’s Tomb as “one of the tombs whose location is known with the utmost degree of certainty and is based on continuous documentation since biblical times” (Tombs of the Righteous in the Land of Israel, p. 365).

According to the Bible, “The bones of Joseph which the Children of Israel brought up from Egypt were buried in Shechem [Nablus] in the portion of the field that had been purchased by Jacob” (Joshua 24:32). The site is also mentioned in the Midrash.

Ancient Christian scholars, Arab geographers, medieval Jewish pilgrims, Samaritan historians, and even 19th-century British cartographers all concur regarding Joseph’s Tomb and its location.

But despite its centrality to our heritage, Joseph’s Tomb was left to the mercy of Palestinian vandals, terrorists, and hoodlums in 2000, who have repeatedly desecrated it ever since.

Who can forget the scenes that were aired worldwide in October 2000 when Palestinians armed with sledgehammers put on display their idea of religious tolerance as they hacked, chopped, and smashed one of the most hallowed sites belonging to the Jewish people?

As a result, the pristine sounds of Jewish prayer that had once filled the skies over Joseph’s Tomb were replaced by plumes of smoke as the invading Arab throng pillaged the compound, setting alight holy books and other sacred religious objects.

Hamas rejects latest cease-fire proposal in Qatar, insists on IDF withdrawal from the Gaza Strip

Hamas rejected the latest 60-day cease-fire proposal with Israel Saturday, stalling talks in Qatar while the terror group continues to push to maintain a larger swath of the Gaza Strip.

Negotiations in Doha this week have centered on a US-backed Qatari proposal that would bring a temporary halt to the nearly three years of bloodshed and a release of some of the remaining hostages. But the hangup has been the terror group’s demands over the extent of Israeli forces’ withdrawal from the enclave, sources said.

Israel has already accepted the proposal, according to the Times of Israel.

“Hamas rejected the Qatari proposal, is creating obstacles, refuses to compromise and accompanies the talks with psychological warfare aimed at sabotaging the negotiations,” a senior official in Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s office told reporters, according to the Jerusalem Post.

“Hamas remains steadfast in its refusal, holding positions that do not allow the mediators to advance an agreement.”

The stalled two-month truce calls for both sides to stop firing at each other to allow for roughly half the hostages to be released, and humanitarian aid to be brought in — while Israeli forces withdraw to a buffer zone in Gaza and negotiations for a permanent cease-fire take place.

Earlier Saturday, a senior Palestinian official told the BBC the cease-fire negotiations were on the verge of collapse.

In the latest offer, first presented Wednesday, Tel Aviv agreed to ease some of Hamas’ demands regarding the redeployment of its troops, following pressure from Washington.

But maps detailing the partial withdrawal of IDF troops from occupying Gaza was not enough to satisfy the terror group, sources said, adding, however, that the indirect talks are still expected to continue through the weekend.

07/11 Links Pt2: Murray: Mamdani just latest mayor wannabe who thinks they can police the world; Erin Molan: A role model and modern Righteous Gentile

From Ian:

Erin Molan: A role model and modern Righteous Gentile

Fatherly influence
Molan’s father, who died in 2023 and was a revered Australian military leader and senator, was and remains her moral beacon. His experiences commanding coalition forces in Iraq, where he prioritized minimizing civilian casualties, taught her the importance of maintaining moral standards in conflict. “If we lower ourselves to who they are, what are we fighting for?” he told her once, a lesson she applies to Israel’s fight against Hamas.

Despite his being labeled a “war criminal” by protesters, her father’s resilience and clarity of purpose inspired and prepared his daughter to face similar vilification. His legacy as a principled leader, coupled with his support for Israel, lives on in her. She vows to ensure that he “never dies twice,” by keeping his name and values alive.

Her father remains such a strong presence in her life, that on that pivotal day, Oct. 7, 2023, when dark was never darker, Molan understood that she needed to broadcast a light of truth to overcome the darkness, just like he did. She instinctively reached for her phone to call him, a testament to his guiding influence.

Molan’s vocal advocacy has come at a cost: death threats, job loss, and personal strain as a mother for the physical safety and the values of the world her daughter will grow up in. Yet, she remains steadfast, driven by her father’s example and her commitment to her daughter’s future.

She recounted a poignant moment in Israel when an IDF soldier gave her an Israeli flag from his uniform, crediting her videos for boosting morale among troops who felt misunderstood and abandoned by the world. That interaction, among others, underscores her impact in providing comfort and clarity to those on the front lines.

Molan closed the conversation passionately, saying, “It’s an honor and a privilege to stand with you and your people, and I will do so for the rest of my life,” she promised. Her journey, marked by personal sacrifice and resilience, positions her as a modern Righteous Gentile, standing boldly for justice and truth for Israel and the Jewish people, despite significant backlash threatening her livelihood, and even her life.

Throughout all her media presence, speaking, and platforms, Erin Molan continues to challenge narratives, inspire action, and amplify a message of moral courage.

Douglas Murray: Mamdani just latest mayor wannabe who thinks they can police the world

So what is Mamdani actually doing with such actions? Two things.

First, he is signaling his own deeply prejudiced worldview.

By taking potshots at a Hindu prime minister and a Jewish prime minister, and singling them out for special treatment, he is showing who he really is. Presumably he is hoping that his supporters either agree with him or do not notice this.

Second, he is doing what failing mayors always do.

The mayor of London, Sadiq Khan, also likes to make pronouncements on the world stage.

Most famously, he has repeatedly scolded the American public for daring to elect Donald Trump as president.

Well, guess what? It doesn’t matter.

The mayor of London doesn’t have a vote in the US elections, and all Khan — like Mamdani — is doing is grandstanding on the world stage because he has failed completely with what he is meant to do. Knife crimes, phone theft, bicycle theft and robberies are an epidemic in London.

But Khan doesn’t care to deal with those things.

It is the same with Mamdani. How will he make New Yorkers safer?

How will he clean up the subway or the streets?

We have yet to hear. Because Mamdani doesn’t know.

Watch for this rule of thumb: Mayors grandstand on goings-on abroad when their home is falling apart.

ADL survey: 1 in 4 Americans believe recent attacks on US Jews are ‘understandable’

While the majority of Americans oppose antisemitism, a quarter believe that the recent string of attacks on Jews in the United States was “understandable,” according to a new report released by the Anti-Defamation League on Friday.

The report comes in the wake of three recent attacks on Jewish targets by people claiming to act on behalf of the Palestinians: the arson attack on Jewish Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro’s house in April; the deadly shooting of two Israeli embassy workers in Washington DC in May; and the firebombing attack on a group demonstrating for the release of the Israeli hostages in Boulder, Colorado, last month.

“As the Jewish community is still reeling from recent antisemitic attacks that killed three people, it’s unacceptable that one-quarter of Americans find this unspeakable violence understandable or justified — an alarming sign of how antisemitic narratives are accepted by the mainstream,” the ADL’s CEO, Jonathan Greenblatt, said in a statement.

The ADL’s Center for Antisemitism Research — a relatively new enterprise — conducted the survey to assess the national mood toward antisemitism following the spate of attacks.

Overall, it found that 60% of Americans at least somewhat agree that antisemitism is a serious problem, and three-quarters of Americans want more government action to combat antisemitism. (Democrats were more likely than Republicans to agree that antisemitism is a serious problem, by 9 percentage points, according to the survey.)

The vast majority of respondents condemned the attacks, with 85% or more saying the attacks were not justified, that the attacks were morally wrong, and that they would not want to work with someone who celebrated the attacks. A slightly lower proportion — 78% — said they believed the attacks were antisemitic. People attend a candlelight vigil at Lafayette Square across from the White House in Washington, on May 22, 2025, for the two Israeli Embassy staffers killed in a shooting at the Capitol Jewish Museum the previous day. (Mandel Ngan/AFP)

But the survey of 1,000 American adults, taken on June 10, also found that some excused or endorsed the violence against Jews. About 24% of respondents said they believed the attacks were “understandable,” and the same percentage said they believed the attacks were staged to gain sympathy for Israel. About half of the respondents who agreed that the attacks were understandable also believed that they were false flag operations, according to the ADL.

During the recent attacks in Boulder and Washington, DC, both suspects reportedly yelled “free Palestine,” and police said the arsonist accused of firebombing Shapiro’s home said he was motivated by “perceived injustices to the people of Palestine.”

About 15% of respondents said that the violence was “necessary” and 13% said it was “justified.” (The question’s structure means that a survey-taker could choose how much they agreed or disagreed with each statement.)

A much larger proportion — 38% — said they believed attacks against US Jews would stop if Israel declared a ceasefire in its war against Hamas in Gaza.

07/11 Links Pt1: How Humanitarians Help Warlords and Prolong Bloodshed; The Media’s War on the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation; Murray: Hamas, Iran, and the Collapse of the Two-State Solution

From Ian:

Seth Mandel: The Media’s War on the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation

Last month, the Washington Post ran a sensational accusation against the Israel Defense Forces, posting on social media that Israeli troops killed over 30 people by shooting into a crowd of Palestinians lining up to get food aid.

The Post had no way to verify this before reporting it. The accusation was worded in a way that obscured that the information came from Hamas, and the wording also indicated that the Post had at least confirmed the report. In fact, what the Post had printed was literal terrorist propaganda disguised as reporting.

This came less than two weeks after a pro-Palestinian activist murdered two young people at the Capital Jewish Museum, an act of violence spurred on by nearly two years of meritless accusations of Israeli crimes.

Two days later, the paper retracted its post drawing attention to the story and admitted that it didn’t know for sure whether the IDF shot anybody. Meanwhile, Hamas continues to maim and murder Palestinians who try to collect aid.

To say the Washington Post’s behavior was unethical and grossly irresponsible is to put it far too generously. Yet rather than serve as a cautionary tale for reporters, the story was an example of the new norm of media coverage of one organization in particular: the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation.

GHF is the America- and Israel-backed humanitarian distribution firm that feeds Gazan civilians but doesn’t funnel its supplies through Hamas. This way, there is no secondhand market that enriches and entrenches Hamas’s rule.

The launch of the GHF should have been treated as a major step toward ending the war and prioritizing the wellbeing of Gazans over that of Hamas. Instead, the fact that GHF excluded Hamas was treated as a drawback.

Even still, the backlash against a humanitarian organization feeding Gazans was deranged—pro-Hamas NGOs and the anti-Israel media went to war against the humanitarians. The Washington Post article was one example. There would be more.

Last week, the Associated Press published a poorly sourced “investigation” into violence at GHF distribution points. It “found”—according to unverified sources—that GHF contractors were shooting at or near crowds of Palestinians approaching aid sites. The AP published this despite the fact that there was no visual evidence of the alleged abuses, even though Palestinians have been videorecording everything they can. The AP used the sound of gunfire on videos as its proof.

GHF reviewed the available footage and found that—surprise!—“at no point were civilians under fire at a GHF distribution site. The gunfire heard in the video was confirmed to have originated from the IDF, who was outside the immediate vicinity of the GHF distribution site. It was not directed at individuals, and no one was shot or injured.”

How Humanitarians Help Warlords and Prolong Bloodshed

As Omari suggests, the hardest part of the task now before Israel is removing Hamas from power. In order to do so, Jerusalem has taken steps to end Hamas’s control over humanitarian aid. These efforts have recently generated much controversy in the international press, within Israel, and even in the Israeli cabinet. Netta Barak-Corren and Jonathan Boxman explain how humanitarian aid became a weapon in Hamas’s arsenal in the first place—part of a phenomenon that Shany Mor calls the “constitution” of Gaza.

From Syria to Somalia, Yemen to Gaza, aid diversion is now routine—and too often enabled by the very institutions tasked with preventing it. UN agencies and the World Food Program (WFP), in particular, have tolerated systematic abuse of aid pipelines. Worse still, they have consistently downplayed or concealed the extent of the problem, even when their own internal reports document extensive diversion, fraud, and abuse.

These are not accidental lapses. They are part of a systemic pattern in which oppressive regimes, armed militias, and terrorist organizations use aid strategically—and are quietly accommodated by humanitarian organizations, rather than confronted.

This reflects a deeper contradiction in the humanitarian model itself. The principle of “humanity”—delivering aid no matter what—often overrides the principles of neutrality, independence, and impartiality. But aid is a resource like any other, and in war zones, resources mean leverage, power, and control. The more desperate the population, the more valuable the aid becomes to local power brokers.

In reality, most humanitarian operations now maintain covert accommodations with these power brokers. The question is no longer whether diversion exists, but whom it benefits. All too often, the answer is: those perpetuating the conflict.

Are moral values real?

It’s one of the most persistent and uncomfortable questions in philosophy. Some argue that morality is objective, like mathematics, something true whether we agree on it or not. Others claim it’s all social convention, a kind of collective delusion that helps us get along but carries no intrinsic truth.

As with the other binaries that philosophers like to dream up, this is a false one.

The Jewish ethics framework I've been developing, built to serve both believers and skeptics, offers a different answer. It doesn’t claim to prove moral truth like a scientific law, and it doesn’t reduce ethics to a matter of taste or tribal custom. Instead, it treats moral values the way we treat medicine: not as absolute, eternal truths, but as structured, tested systems that help us survive and flourish. We don't ask whether medicine is "true" - we ask whether it works. That is how Jewish philosophy works - not based on theoretical questions but on real world practice. As we've said before, it isn't geometry - it is engineering. Just as we don’t trust equations alone to keep our buildings upright - we trust the engineers, the architects, and the building codes - so too we trust ethics that have stood the test of stress, scrutiny, and time.

This approach matters because it answers the skeptic’s challenge without collapsing into relativism. You don’t need to “believe” in germs or viruses to notice what happens to societies that ignore them. Similarly, you don’t need metaphysical certainty to know that truth, justice, and human dignity are not optional if you want to build something that lasts. When regimes deny human dignity, we get gulags. When truth becomes relative, propaganda takes over. When mutual responsibility erodes, communities fall apart. You don’t need a philosopher to tell you values are real. A historian will do.

What’s striking is that this realism isn’t just a modern workaround. It’s embedded in the Torah itself. The foundational stories of Genesis are filled with people making moral decisions without any divine instruction. Noah is called righteous in a corrupt generation, without receiving a single command. Abraham argues with God about justice: not because God taught him the concept, but because he already understands it and expects God to live up to it. Lot, for all his flaws, operates with a warped but sincere moral code, choosing what he sees as pikuach nefesh - his guests’ lives - over his daughters' safety. Pharaoh and Abimelech recoil in horror at the idea that they nearly committed adultery, even though they had no access to Jewish law. These stories aren’t about keeping and violating commandments. They’re about what human beings know, or should know, about right and wrong before Sinai.

The implication is powerful. Ethics, in the Jewish view, doesn’t begin at revelation. It begins with being human. The giving of the Torah didn't create morality. It calibrates it. It takes something instinctive but fragile and makes it transmissible, accountable and communal. Just as early medicine relied on intuition until it was systematized into science, early morality relied on conscience until it was shaped into covenant.

Torah, then, is not a divine mandate of human ethics: it’s a refinement, a reinforcement, a response to the fact that instinct alone is not enough and cannot last for generations.

What this means is that the origin of ethics is not relevant to whether we should practice them today. If you believe in divine revelation or not, the 3,500 year history of a people bound by these ideas that survived centuries of dispersion and persecution is plenty of evidence that the system works.

The AskHillel project doesn’t demand belief in revelation, but it does take seriously the structure that revelation provided. It asks whether values can be traced, whether reasoning can be made transparent, whether disagreement can be handled with dignity rather than collapse. It holds that moral truth doesn’t need to be absolute to be binding. It only needs to be strong enough to hold under stress, and open enough to be refined over time. Just like medicine, ethics doesn’t become invalid because it changes. It becomes more real and relevant as it is refined, and more vital the more it’s tested.

So are values real? Not like gravity. Not like math. But not like fashion either. They are real like oxygen: invisible but you cannot have a meaningful life without them.

AskHillel is built on that principle. It doesn’t offer certainty in ethics - it offers a system that has proven itself under stress. It doesn’t require faith - it requires fidelity. And it insists that the moral structure described in the Torah and refined over generations by rabbis and thinkers is still one of the strongest frameworks we’ve ever had for building a society that works, no matter whether you believe that it came from God or man. That makes it real enough to matter.

Buy EoZ's books on Amazon!

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

PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism (February 2022)

The EU issued this press statement:

Following the Israeli Cabinet’s resolutions and the constructive dialogue between the EU and Israel, significant steps have been agreed by Israel to improve the humanitarian situation in the Gaza Strip.

These measures are or will be implemented in the coming days, with the common understanding that aid at scale must be delivered directly to the population and that measures will continue to be taken to ensure that there is no aid diversion to Hamas.

These steps include, among other things, the substantial increase of daily trucks for food and non- food items to enter Gaza, the opening of several other crossing points in both the northern and southern areas; the reopening of the Jordanian and Egyptian aid routes; enabling the distribution of food supplies through bakeries and public kitchens throughout the Gaza strip; the resumption of fuel deliveries for use by humanitarian facilities, up to an operational level; the protection of aid workers; the repair and facilitation of works on vital infrastructure like the resumption of the power supply to the water desalination facility.

The EU stands ready to coordinate with all relevant humanitarian stakeholders, UN agencies and NGOs on the ground, to ensure swift implementation of those urgent steps.

As with all diplomatic statements, this is heavily crafted to reflect political considerations. As such, we do not know critical information, and the devil really is in the details that are not spelled out. We can make some guesses, though.

First of all, it doesn't mention GHF - but it doesn't exclude GHF. So while NGOs and the EU criticize GHF as an aid mechanism, they are not saying that it will not continue.

It mentions "UN agencies" and NGOs. Israel will not deal with UNRWA, and it is not mentioned. whether UNRWA will be involved in this plan is unknown.

How will security be done - how can the aid reliably be transported to the bakeries and public kitchens without being hijacked by Hamas or armed groups? The NGOs will not accept Israeli security, but in reality the aid corridors will be protected by Israel. Yet the "last mile" to areas where the kitchens and bakeries are is up in the air, and this is Israel's primary concern.

So the question is whether Israel is accepting some risk of aid being diverted in order to keep relations with the EU - and whether the potential amount of such diversions would significantly strengthen Hamas. For example, anecdotal evidence shows that the aid distributed before GHF was not given out for free in many cases - people at GHF seemed astonished that they didn't have to pay, and some said explicitly this was the first time they received free aid in the entire war. This was not well reported, and it means that the endpoints of bakeries and kitchens might be run by even NGOs who tacitly allow Hamas to charge the aid recipients, maybe while waiting in lines outside. Reporters in Gaza simply don't report what Hamas doesn't want them to report.

One other detail in the press release is notable, the phrase "the resumption of fuel deliveries for use by humanitarian facilities, up to an operational level." This seems to imply that the agreement is for fuel to be allowed in as needed day by day or week by week, but not stockpiled where it can be stolen or diverted.

If the aid can be given directly to the people, Israel has no objection - despite the slander of antisemitic NGOs that Israel is using "starvation as a weapon of war." The real question is how this can be done securely in areas that the IDF is not in direct control.

And this statement is silent about that.

Buy EoZ's books on Amazon!

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

PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism (February 2022)

An Israeli airstrike saved US troops from attack during the war

This is an X thread by Lawk Ghafuri late last month.

Iran-backed armed groups in Iraq promised war - but delivered silence.

As Israel & Iran traded blows, militias in Iraq threatened U.S. bases with open escalation. Then suddenly… nothing!

I spoke with two officials in Baghdad. What I learned: one airstrike changed everything.

After the Israel-Iran ceasefire took hold and tensions slowly calmed across the region - I started digging.

A series of quiet conversations with top figures in Baghdad revealed why the loud threats from Iranian-backed groups in Iraq never turned into action.

Despite bold rhetoric from Iranian-backed groups, not a single attack was fired at US bases inside Iraq during the height of the war.

Why?

Two senior Coordination Framework advisors (CF) told me there was a plan. And it nearly went ahead - until one strike changed everything.

It was the evening of June 21. An Israeli airstrike hit near the Iraqi-Iranian border - close to Al-Sheeb crossing in Maysan (Iraq) and Mehran in Ilam (Iran).

The strike didn’t happen on Iraqi soil. It landed on the Iranian side of the border.

4/ But the target was deep in the heart of Iran’s Iraq-based strategy: Haydar al-Mousawi, Head of security for Kataib Sayyid al-Shuhada - a powerful Iranian backed group in Iraq.

He was killed instantly, and confirmed by the group in an official statement.

Mousawi wasn’t alone - Abu Ali Khalil, a close associate of Lebanese Hezbollah and former companion of the slain general-secretary Hassan Nasrallah.

Even Khalil’s son was among the dead.

The fallout was instant. Within hours, panic swept through Iraq’s resistance groups. Coded messages flew between commanders. According to my sources: “Everyone froze. No one wanted to be the next target.”

The groups were warned that attacking the U.S. would bring more Israeli strikes.

On top of that, Baghdad informed the groups: Tehran had already reached a ceasefire with Israel - Baghdad was informed by Qataris, according to both advisors.

The decision - stand down.

Rumors circulated that the real target was Abu Ali Khalil. But both CF advisors were clear with me: that’s false.

The primary target was Haydar al-Mousawi.

Why Mousawi? Because Kataib Sayyid al-Shuhada was already aiming to transfer weapons (mainly Iranian drones) into Iraq to use them to attack the US bases.

Their mission: attack U.S. interests inside Iraq. However, the Israeli strike was a preemptive message: Don’t start.

In the end, the death of one commander killed an entire plan. Every group in Iraq understood that escalation could bring war to their doorstep.

And no one wanted to be the spark that lit that fire.

Buy EoZ's books on Amazon!

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

PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism (February 2022)