Pages

▼

Thursday, June 05, 2025

06/05 Links Pt1: Israel returns bodies of two hostages from Gaza; “Not This” Isn’t Strategy—It’s Surrender to Hamas’s Propaganda War; How the Media Manufactured a ‘Genocide’

From Ian:

Prof. Efraim Inbar: Illusions of "The Day After"
The ability of Israel - or even global superpowers - to politically engineer states in the Middle East is extremely limited. Israel's war in Gaza may succeed in eliminating most of Hamas's military capabilities and expelling its leadership from Gaza - as it did with the PLO in Lebanon in 1982 - but Israeli military power cannot temper the deep-rooted hostility of the Palestinian national movement toward Zionism.

The religious fervor of the Islamist Hamas has instilled in the hearts of young Gazans a desire to take revenge on their hated enemies. Without a reformed Palestinian education system, terrorism against Israel will persist wherever there are Palestinians.

Many Arab states have failed to establish a monopoly on the use of force within their borders. Syria, Lebanon, Iraq, Yemen, Libya, and Sudan all suffer from civil wars or armed militias that do not obey the central government. This has also been the fate of the two Palestinian entities: the Palestinian Authority (PA) and Hamas-controlled Gaza.

In the PA, various armed groups pursue their own agenda. And even in Gaza, Islamic Jihad and armed clans exist alongside Hamas. There is no reason to assume that "the day after" in Gaza will be much different or that the territory will be demilitarized. Only sustained Israeli military activity can enforce demilitarization.
John Spencer: “Not This” Isn’t Strategy—It’s Surrender to Hamas’s Propaganda War
“Not this” has become the lazy refrain of those too uninformed—or too afraid—to confront the actual nature of modern war. It’s the moral shrug of commentators unwilling to grapple with facts, history, or the operational realities of Gaza. “Not this” doesn’t reflect legal analysis, strategic insight, or lived combat experience. It’s a performance. A rejection of responsibility dressed up as moral clarity.

Piers Morgan is just the latest public figure to offer this empty diagnosis. He recently declared that “Israel’s current strategy is failing.” But what does that mean? Failing by what metric? Based on whose objectives?

Wars are not judged by feelings. They are judged by facts—by the political and military objectives of each side and the extent to which they are achieved. On those terms, it is Hamas—not Israel—that is failing catastrophically.

Hamas began this war with three supporting objectives:
1. Survive the war and be celebrated as the terror group that conducted the October 7 massacre and endured Israel’s response.
2. Maintain military capability to continue its stated mission: destroy Israel and kill Jews worldwide.
3. Retain governing power over Gaza, subjugating Palestinians while siphoning billions in international aid to support objective #2.

Hamas is failing on all three counts. It has lost the ability to fight as an organized military force. Its five brigades, 24 battalions, and 30,000–40,000 trained fighters—armed with over 20,000 rockets and extensive control of terrain—have been decimated. Fewer than three original commanders from Hamas’s military or political leadership in Gaza remain. From top leaders like Yahya Sinwar, Mohammad Deif, and Marwan Issa, to nearly every brigade and battalion commander, the senior command structure has been eliminated. That level of leadership, experience, and ideological fanaticism cannot be replaced. What remains is a fragmented guerrilla force made up mostly of radicalized youths, with little training, no real command structure, and declining access to weapons. The average Hamas replacement fighter is now in their teens.

Hamas has also lost political ground. Gazans are increasingly protesting and speaking out against them. Their control over food distribution—once a key lever of power—has been eroded by U.S.-Israeli humanitarian mechanisms, including the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation, which bypass Hamas entirely. Their senior military and political leaders are being systematically eliminated. The group’s grip on the population is slipping.

By contrast, Israel’s goals are clear:
1. Return the hostages.
2. Destroy Hamas as a military force and governing body.
3. Ensure that no force in Gaza can ever again threaten Israeli citizens.


Norman J.W. Goda and Jeffrey Herf: Why It's Wrong to Call Israel's War in Gaza a "Genocide"
Recent weeks have brought a flood of new genocide accusations against Israel. Many insist that it is morally required that we use the word "genocide" to describe Israel's war in Gaza. Why this insistence? Efforts to delegitimize Israel as colonial and racist began before the state was declared in 1948.

Is genocide really the correct way to describe the war? According to the internationally accepted legal definition of genocide ensconced in the UN Genocide Convention of 1948, physical destruction of a group based on ethnicity, religion or nationality is the heart of the crime. The definition excludes other actions, such as the movement of civilians from their homes.

There have been efforts to stretch the definition since the 1960s. In 1967, the Russell Tribunal, an unofficial court of intellectuals and activists, found the United States guilty of genocide for its war in Vietnam.

From 2020 to 2024, Kenyan human rights advocate Alice Wairimu Nderitu was the UN special adviser on the prevention of genocide. After Israel began its response to the Oct. 7 attack, Nderitu would not say that it was committing genocide. Such a determination, she insisted, was legally and factually complex; it demanded detailed examination by a competent court with proper jurisdiction. Nderitu was pressured and received threats. Her mandate was not renewed.

From the beginning of the conflict, Israeli leaders made it very clear that their war is against Hamas, not the people of Gaza. On Dec. 29, 2023, Israel's legal representative Tal Becker told the International Court of Justice that Hamas was pursuing "a reprehensible strategy of seeking to maximize civilian harm to both Israelis and Palestinians, even as Israel seeks to minimize it."

"If there have been acts that may be characterized as genocidal, then they have been perpetrated against Israel. If there is a concern about the obligations of States under the Genocide Convention, then it is in relation to their responsibilities to act against Hamas's proudly declared agenda of annihilation, which is not a secret, and is not in doubt." Becker said the genocide accusation made from the earliest days of the war was an effort to force Israel to end "operations against the ongoing attacks of an organization that pursues an actual genocidal agenda." Those accusing Israel of genocide fail to point to the responsibility of the aggressor, Hamas, for starting and continuing this war.
How the Media Manufactured a ‘Genocide’
The digitalization of news media is undoubtedly a contributing factor to this new ideologically driven role. As became clear during the rise of Black Lives Matter and the broader Great Awokening, emotionally charged and often graphic content now spreads rapidly across social media—frequently stripped of context or lacking verification—amplifying visceral reactions and shaping siloed public sentiment in real time. In these moments, the role of news media is understood by practitioners not as fact-checking or sense-making, but as amplifying and validating slogans and propaganda lines presented by the virtuous parties. The job of the media is not to separate fact from fiction: Rather, it is to draw halos on the virtuous parties and then mobilize the public on their behalf and against their oppressors.

This dynamic stands in sharp contrast to earlier cases of genocide like Darfur or Rwanda, which unfolded largely in the pre-smartphone, pre-social media era, when the speed, reach, and emotional immediacy of conflict-related imagery were far more limited. In contrast, today’s digital ecosystem, in which traditional media operates symbiotically with social media, places mounting pressure on mainstream outlets to engage and respond, often reinforcing moralized framings that resonate with viral narratives more than with legal precision or empirical balance.

Digital engagement powerfully influences which frame dominates the global discourse, with consequences far beyond rhetoric: shaping historical memory and, most immediately, weaponizing the framing to enact policy targeting Israel, looking to destabilize its government and pressure it to concede to Hamas.

Domestically, the genocide framing solidifies political organization, primarily on the Democratic side, but increasingly in a faction of the right looking to shape Donald Trump’s policy in the Middle East. Consistent with this top-down mobilization, a March 2025 Pew survey found that unfavorable views of Israel among Americans rose sharply over just three years—from 42 percent in 2022 to 53 percent in 2025. The increase was especially pronounced among Democrats, with unfavorable views jumping from 53 to 69 percent, compared to a more modest rise from 27 to 37 percent among Republicans. Gallup data echo this trend: The share of Americans whose sympathies lie more with the Israelis than with the Palestinians fell from 54 percent in 2023 to a record low of 46 percent in 2025. Among Democrats, the drop was steep—from 38 percent siding with Israelis in 2023 to 21 percent in 2025, while support for Palestinians rose to a record 59 percent. Republican attitudes shifted less dramatically, with pro-Israel sympathies dipping slightly from 78 to 75 percent and support for Palestinians hovering around 10 percent.

In short, media coverage does not dictate public opinion, but it helps set the tone and frame the moral stakes. Moreover, similar to the BLM riots, the mainstreaming of the genocide frame provides political top cover for an activist vanguard, such as the pro-Palestinian movement, which began on college campuses and has grown increasingly violent. A similar tactic has emerged among so-called influencers on the right, which similarly has attached itself to the frames of genocide, starvation, and killing Christians, to promote an anti-Israel and even anti-Jewish line. The unprecedented volume of atrocity rhetoric attached to Israel in mainstream outlets is not merely a mirror of preexisting outrage; it is a megaphone, broadcasting the idea that Jews are collectively and unambiguously guilty of the darkest of crimes. It is unsurprising that assertions of collective guilt on the part of “Israelis” and “Zionists” bleed into even broader attitudes toward Jews, resulting most recently in two back-to-back deadly attacks, which took the lives of a young couple and torched an 88-year-old Holocaust survivor.

We need our moral language to retain its clarity and gravity, not to mention its anchoring in legal and historical reality. Once terms like genocide and ethnic cleansing become routine descriptors for controversial wars or asymmetric conflicts, they lose their power to name the world’s most unspeakable crimes. That erosion weakens our ability to recognize and respond to real genocides when they occur—and distorts our understanding of those that already have, while diminishing the agency and true horror of genocidal actions.


Why Hamas Won’t Accept a Cease-Fire Deal
After the now-familiar flood of contradictory reports about negotiations to free the remaining Israeli hostages in Gaza, it became clear that Hamas had rejected the latest proposal brought to it by the American envoy Steve Witkoff. Jonathan Spyer explains why Hamas rejected an offer that included the exchange of ten hostages for 1,236 Palestinian prisoners and a 60-day respite from the fighting.

The Gaza Islamist movement is determined to secure a situation in which Israeli forces withdraw from the territory and in which Hamas can begin the process of replenishing and reorganizing its own forces and capacities. Any agreement which threatens to reduce the main asset Hamas holds to prevent Israel from executing a full push towards its destruction—namely, the remaining Israeli hostages—while failing to guarantee that no such push will take place, must automatically be rejected.

The problem for Hamas is that having now negotiated away and returned the majority of hostages, it is in danger of finding itself in a situation where it no longer has the assets to hold Israel off with, but has not yet reached an agreement to end the war. Witkoff’s proposal threatened to bring about this situation.

For these reasons, Hamas’s decision to reject the proposal is unsurprising. The terror group is trying to buy time, perhaps in the belief that international and U.S. pressure may eventually force Israel to abandon its effort to destroy the organization in Gaza. Such a belief would not be without merit, and has precedent. In 2006 and in 1973, Israeli military campaigns stopped short because of external diplomatic pressure.

A permanent cease-fire and Israeli withdrawal, with Hamas still on its feet as Israel pulls back, would . . . legitimately be presented by the movement as victory. This achievement would then help recruitment and provide inspiration both for Hamas itself and for other Islamist and jihadist movements in the region and beyond it.
Macron weighs sanctions on Israel amid Gaza war criticism
French President Emmanuel Macron signaled that France may soon toughen its stance on Israel, citing ongoing concerns over the war in Gaza, i24NEWS reported on Thursday.

Speaking alongside Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva at the Élysée Palace, Macron said France would decide “in the coming days” whether to escalate its response and implement “concrete measures” against Israel.

The comments come amid rising diplomatic tensions between France and Israel. Macron’s increasingly vocal criticism of Israel’s military operations has drawn strong rebuke from Jerusalem, which accuses the French president of siding with Hamas and spreading falsehoods about humanitarian conditions in Gaza.

Lula, currently on a state visit to France, went further, accusing Israel of carrying out “a premeditated genocide” and describing international recognition of a Palestinian state as both a “moral and human duty.”

Brazil officially recognized Palestinian statehood in 2010 and has called for renewed international pressure to achieve a two-state solution.

The joint appearance in Paris comes ahead of a United Nations-backed conference co-hosted by France and Saudi Arabia, scheduled to begin on June 17 in New York. The summit aims to lay the groundwork for Palestinian statehood and revitalize diplomatic efforts around a two-state framework.

Macron previously suggested that France could use the occasion to officially recognize a Palestinian state, a step that would make it the first major Western power to do so.
Israel ‘fighting our battle,’ Dutch right-wing leader Geert Wilders declares
“If Jerusalem falls, Athens, Paris or Amsterdam are next,” Dutch right-wing leader Geert Wilders declared on Wednesday, speaking during a parliament session following the fall of his coalition government.

The Israel Defense Forces is “fighting our battle,” Wilders snapped at opposition leader Frans Timmermans (Labor Party/GreenLeft), who had accused him of cozying up to the “far right” Israeli government.

“The fact that our mothers in the West can sleep peacefully is because the mothers of Israeli soldiers lie awake, wondering whether their child will come home alive from a battle fought in the name of freedom,” said the politician. “Israel is the only democracy in the Middle East, and it has to fight the terror of Iran, Hezbollah, Hamas and Islamic Jihad.”

Wilders slammed the left-wing opposition leader as a “stain” on the House of Representatives of the Netherlands for what he said were “statements that are almost antisemitic, about a country that is fighting for its existence.”

“Right now, there are terrorists in Gaza who hold power there—whether they were elected or took control—who have one goal: to destroy Israel and the Jewish people, to wipe them off the map. Of course you have to defend yourself in that case,” explained the senior Dutch lawmaker.

“Naturally, in war, there are casualties. I regret every death, I regret every child, every mother, every innocent civilian who dies in conflict. But I still believe—and I am proud of this—that Israel must fight,” he said.


Israel returns bodies of two hostages from Gaza
The bodies of two Israeli hostages have been recovered from the Gaza Strip in a special operation, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu announced on Thursday.

Judy Weinstein-Haggai and Gadi Haggai, from Kibbutz Nir Oz, were named as the two deceased captives. The married couple—who were dual Israeli and American citizens—were murdered during the Hamas-led invasion on Oct. 7, 2023, and their bodies were taken to Gaza.

The Israel Defense Forces confirmed their deaths in December.

“Together with all the citizens of Israel, my wife and I extend our heartfelt condolences to the dear families. Our hearts ache over this most terrible loss. May their memory be a blessing,” the premier said in a statement.

“I wish to thank and express my appreciation to the soldiers and commanders for their determined and successful operation. We will not rest and we will not be silent until we bring all our hostages home—both the living and the fallen,” Netanyahu continued.

Israeli President Isaac Herzog called the recovery of their bodies “a moment of deep pain, but also one of solace and the resolution of uncertainty.” He pledged to continue “to do everything in our power to bring our sisters and brothers back from hell— the living, for healing and rehabilitation, and the fallen, to be laid to rest in dignity. Every last one of them!”


Seth Frantzman: What is the Mujahideen group that held Judith Weinstein, Gadi Haggai?
The IDF on Thursday said it had retrieved the bodies of Judith Weinstein Haggai and her husband, Gadi Haggai, from Khan Yunis. They were murdered and their bodies were taken from Kibbutz Nir Oz during the October 7 massacre.

Their bodies were held in Gaza for almost 20 months. Judith was 70 and Gadi was 72 when they were murdered. They had Israeli and US citizenship.

Terrorists from the Palestinian Mujahideen Movement murdered them, the IDF said.

This is the same terrorist group that is believed to have also kidnapped and murdered Shiri Bibas and her two children, Ariel and Kfir. Yarden Bibas, Shiri’s husband and the children’s father, was released on February 1, 2025.

They were kidnapped from Nir Oz on October 7, when the kibbutz was overrun by terrorists.

Nir Oz is a community of 420 residents, including 386 who were there on October 7. Forty-seven people were killed at Nir Oz on October 7, according to an IDF investigation.

The IDF did not reach Nir Oz until the terrorists had left the kibbutz. Terrorists attacked the kibbutz at about 6:50 a.m. and held it until around noon, when they began to leave.

Several terrorist groups were involved in taking over the community and in the massacre and kidnappings.

What is known about the Mujahideen group? First of all, it is worth knowing a bit about the crimes of the group and the other terrorists on October 7.

According to the IDF investigation, 76 people were kidnapped from the community, including 67 who were alive. Thirteen of those 67 living hostages were killed in Gaza.

By March 2025, a total of five hostages presumed to be alive were still held in Gaza, and nine deceased hostages were held. Today, with the return of the bodies of Gadi and Judith, it would appear that seven deceased hostages are believed to be held in Gaza from the community, along with the living hostages.


Family of Gaza captive marks son’s 23rd birthday in hope
The Hostage Families Forum Headquarters shared a message from the family of Yonatan Samerano on Thursday, on what should have been his 23rd birthday.

It has been “18 months since our Yonti was shot and kidnapped,” and since then, “his fate became shrouded in uncertainty,” the family reflected.

Despite the pain, they emphasized, “we are not giving up, and today we mark his 23rd birthday.” They chose to honor him “as Yonatan would have wanted—by spreading love, through dancing, and with shared hope.”


Jonathan Sacerdoti: Jews in America Are Under Attack
In Boulder, Colorado, elderly Jews were torched alive in a park. They wore red T-shirts bearing the names of hostages seized by Palestinian terrorists over 600 days earlier. Some carried Israeli flags. They were attacked with a flamethrower and firebombs - the third targeted attack on American Jews in three months.

At a shooting range in South Florida, I met Jews who on October 7, 2023, chose to arm themselves for the first time - a story I heard over and over as I met with members of the Jewish community, from lawyers to PR men to mums and dads. They're training. Securing homes, temples, and schools as if a war has already begun. Because this week, we learned it has.

But even as Jews in America are being attacked with increasing regularity, we have not seen the birth of a "Jewish Lives Matter" campaign. No nationwide reckoning. No marches filling the streets. The continued targeting and killing of Jews does not appear to summon the same political urgency or cultural solidarity as other forms of hate. That silence is only broken by the continued death chant of "Free Palestine."

Just hours before the Boulder attack, major media outlets rushed to report that Israeli tanks had opened fire on starving Palestinians at an aid distribution site in Rafah. The claims were unchecked. There were no videos. No evidence. Hours later, drone footage emerged showing a very different reality: quiet crowds, no gunfire, no chaos. Yet the tale of Israeli cruelty had already circled the globe.

Increasingly, the slogan "Free Palestine" is declared while slaughtering Jews. It is shouted outside temples and adorns placards. Like "Allahu Akbar" before it, it has become the cry beneath which Jews are murdered in the street. There is no vision of coexistence behind the chant. It points toward yet another theocratic terror state.

American Jews are learning what their coreligionists in Europe and in Israel have known for some time: that hatred of Jews is never defeated, never rational, and never far away.
Jews Are Afraid Right Now
Since the Hamas attacks of Oct. 7, the conditions in the U.S. for deadly antisemitic acts have grown. At rallies and on campuses, in coalition rooms and online spaces, slogans sometimes directly drawn from Hamas's terrorist manifesto have been chanted and painted on placards.

When antisemitism emerges within progressive spaces, cloaked in the language of justice, too often it is met with silence and discomfort, creating echo chambers where dangerous ideas are amplified rather than confronted. I have watched progressive silence meet Jewish pain since this war began with Hamas's brutal attack on Israel.

When reports emerged that Hamas had used sexual violence as a weapon of war on Oct. 7, feminist groups, globally, largely remained quiet. Movements that champion bodily autonomy - in reproductive justice and LGBTQ organizations - refused again and again to acknowledge that both Palestinians and Israelis are entitled to safety, dignity and freedom from violence. I have watched the morphing of the word "Zionist" - the basic belief in Jewish self-determination - into a slur.

Jewish organizations like the one I lead, National Council of Jewish Women, have long sounded the alarm about rising antisemitism. In response, we have been ignored and told that our fear is overblown, our outrage unjustified. We have seen antisemitism dismissed as not bad enough to matter, our grief met with cynicism, our safety treated as optional.

Before the attacks of the past two weeks, when we spoke out, we were told we were overreacting, not focusing on the most vulnerable populations, or even that we deserved condemnation because we supported Israel's right to exist. Our position on this war, or on Israel, does not affect how extremists perceive us. To them, we are all Jews, and that alone makes us targets for hate and violence.

We need people who understand that standing against hate means standing with Jews. If you only show up for Jews in the wake of violence and not in every instance of antisemitism, you are not standing against hate. You are standing by.
Hen Mazzig: Amid ongoing attacks, Jewish people are afraid. Is anyone listening?
Not long ago, we were told to “believe all victims.” But today, Jewish victims are asked to justify their pain. Were you wearing an Israeli flag? Were you near a protest? Are you a Zionist? Are you a European colonizer? As if our humanity is conditional. As if the firebomb wasn’t about us – we just happened to be standing in the way.

I come from the political left. My parents were Iraqi and North African Jewish refugees. My relatives were murdered, raped and tortured. From that pain, I learned not to hate, but to seek peace. I’ve stood for coexistence. I’ve criticized Israeli leaders when they fail our Jewish values. But today, that’s not enough. Because if you are Jewish and visible, you are a target. And if you’re attacked, you’re met with silence – or worse, moral gymnastics. In case you missed it: Ye's antisemitic rant, that $20 swastika shirt and why we need to talk about it

Mainstream media repeated Hamas’ invented casualty statistics with barely a pause. Days later, the numbers were quietly revised. But those burned by the flamethrower will attest: It was a blood libel.

Moreover, words matter.

“Globalize the intifada.”

“End Zionists.”

“By any means necessary.”

These are not abstract ideas. They are instructions. They are adrenaline for the unstable. They justify horrific violence.

What’s most painful isn’t just the attacks – it’s the shrug. The way the Colorado firebomb wasn’t covered until hours later. The way Jewish blood doesn’t trend. The way those who claim to fight hate won’t name this one.

We’re told: this isn’t antisemitism; it’s anti-Zionism. And yet, somehow, the flames always find the flesh of Jews.

Why is it never OK to target people for a government’s actions unless the people are Jewish?

Does the 88-year-old Holocaust survivor lying in agony in a hospital bed deserve it? Does anyone? What world are we in where I have to explain that setting people on fire is evil and does no good?

The truth is, we are afraid. Not in a viral-post kind of way, but in the quiet way you hesitate before entering a synagogue. The way you scan a crowd before speaking Hebrew. The way you wonder if your accent or your name might be the thing that puts you in someone’s crosshairs.

And what we’re asking is simple: to be seen. Fully. Not as a proxy. Not as a debate. But as human beings – hurting, vulnerable and real.

The shooting in D.C., the firebomb in Colorado – these weren’t the beginning. They were the result. And if we still can’t name what led us here, we’ll be even less prepared for what’s coming next.
"The Attacker Wanted Us to Burn." Victims Recount Terror of Colorado Firebombing
The first Molotov cocktail landed moments after the Run for Their Lives leader told the group they should feel safe to walk peacefully through the streets of Boulder, Colo. The group was advocating for the release of Israeli hostages held by Hamas.

Dmitriy Reznik, 57, felt sudden and intense heat from the fire but it took him a while to understand what was happening. His wife, Natalya Reznik, 52, was keeled over and screaming. She stood in a puddle with flames rising up until Dmitriy pulled her out and laid her down on a grassy patch nearby. "Her skin was peeling and she was thirsty," Dmitriy said. Natalya remains hospitalized with second-degree burns. The Jewish couple are both Russian immigrants who met at the University of Colorado, Boulder in 1996.

Group co-leader Omer Shachar, 34, took note of the suspect, who was dressed as a gardener in an orange vest. "I remember thinking, a gardener on Sunday? I thought something was strange." When Shachar scrambled to pull victims from the flames, he caught his second glimpse of the attacker, who he said was stripping off his gardener disguise after accidentally setting himself on fire. "That is why he was shirtless, because his vest caught fire," Shachar said.

15 people, aged 25 to 88, were injured in the attack, the police said Wednesday. Three people were still hospitalized.


US sanctions four judges at International Criminal Court
The U.S. State Department announced on Thursday that it imposed sanctions on four judges at the International Criminal Court in The Hague, marking the first time that the United States has used that punitive tool against justices at the independent tribunal.

The department stated that judges Luz del Carmen Ibáñez Carranza of Peru, Solomy Balungi Bossa of Uganda, Reine Alapini-Gansou of Benin and Beti Hohler of Slovenia would be sanctioned for their role in investigating Israel and the United States.

“As ICC judges, these four individuals have actively engaged in the ICC’s illegitimate and baseless actions targeting America or our close ally, Israel,” Marco Rubio, the U.S. secretary of state, stated. “The ICC is politicized and falsely claims unfettered discretion to investigate, charge and prosecute nationals of the United States and our allies.”

“This dangerous assertion and abuse of power infringes upon the sovereignty and national security of the United States and our allies, including Israel,” Rubio stated. “The United States will take whatever actions we deem necessary to protect our sovereignty, that of Israel and any other U.S. ally from illegitimate actions by the ICC.”

According to the State Department, Bossa and Ibáñez Carranza ruled to authorize the ICC’s investigation into the conduct of U.S. personnel in Afghanistan, while Alapini-Gansou and Hohler ruled to authorize ICC arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Yoav Gallant, then the defense minister.

The ICC told JNS that it “deplores” the sanctions and stands fully behind its personnel.

“These measures are a clear attempt to undermine the independence of an international judicial institution which operates under the mandate from 125 states parties from all corners of the globe,” the court stated. “Targeting those working for accountability does nothing to help civilians trapped in conflict. It only emboldens those who believe they can act with impunity.”


Secretary of State Marco Rubio: U.S.: "We Will Not Support any Measure that Fails to Call for Hamas to Disarm and Leave Gaza"
The United States sent a strong message by vetoing a counterproductive UN Security Council resolution on Gaza targeting Israel. We will not support any measure that fails to condemn Hamas, does not call for Hamas to disarm and leave Gaza, draws a false equivalence between Israel and Hamas, or disregards Israel's right to defend itself.

Performative efforts like this resolution undermine diplomatic efforts to reach a ceasefire. This resolution would have only empowered Hamas to continue stealing aid and threatening civilians. We will continue supporting the delivery of aid to Gaza, without Hamas's interference, and ensure that Hamas and other terrorists have no future in Gaza. The United States will continue to stand with Israel at the UN.
U.S.: "We Cannot Allow the Security Council to Reward Hamas's Intransigence"
U.S. Amb. Dorothy Shea told the UN Security Council on Wednesday: "U.S. opposition to this resolution should come as no surprise....We would not support any measure that fails to condemn Hamas and does not call for Hamas to disarm and leave Gaza. In recent months, Hamas has rejected numerous ceasefire proposals, including one over the weekend that would provide a pathway to end this conflict and release the remaining 58 hostages. We cannot allow the Security Council to reward Hamas's intransigence."

"It is Hamas that continues to threaten Israelis and puts Palestinian civilians in Gaza in harm's way every day, using them as human shields. They have brutally suppressed those brave enough to challenge its despotic rule."

"It is inexplicable that many members of this Council still refuse to acknowledge that Hamas could end this conflict tomorrow by surrendering and laying down its arms. It is unconscionable that the UN still has not labeled and sanctioned Hamas as a terrorist organization....Israel has a right to defend itself, which includes defeating Hamas and ensuring they are never again in a position to threaten Israel."


How Did Israeli Weapons Perform in the India-Pakistan Conflict?
Israeli weapons played an important role in the May 7-10, 2025, conflict between India and Pakistan, highlighting the flourishing India-Israel defense partnership.

The accuracy of India's Israeli-made weapons contrasted with the ineffectiveness of Pakistan's Turkish-made drones, which appear to have done little damage to Indian targets.

Nitin Gokhale, a prominent Indian national-security analyst, said Israeli drones, including the precision-guided Palm 400, Harop suicide drone and radar-destroying Harpy, performed well during the conflict.

Israel became a major arms supplier to India by developing a reputation for dependability in a crunch. Many Israeli weapons are on the cutting edge of technology.

While India didn't establish full diplomatic relations with Israel until 1992, New Delhi sought - and received - weapons from Israel during wars with Pakistan in 1965 and 1971.

The turning point for India-Israel defense cooperation came during the 1999 Kargil conflict when India was caught unprepared by Pakistani infiltration in Jammu and Kashmir. Israel quickly stepped up to arm India with laser-guided missiles, surveillance drones, mortars and ammunition.
Rising Hamas drone activity sparks concern among IDF reservists
There has been a recent uptick in drone usage by Hamas within the Gaza Strip, the IDF said Thursday. Earlier in the day, a soldier was moderately wounded and another was lightly wounded in northern Gaza in a drone attack.

A Hamas terrorist cell operated a drone over Israeli forces in the area and dropped a grenade on a unit positioned near buildings, the IDF said. The soldiers were hospitalized, and their families were notified.

Reservist soldiers reported the rise in drone threats in recent weeks, with Hamas using drones to gather intelligence on IDF movements and to carry out attacks.

“The working assumption is that they are gathering intelligence on us 24/7, using remote observation posts, binoculars, and drones,” a reservist soldier in Gaza said. “We report whenever we see drones in the area. We try to determine whether they are ours or belong to Hamas.

“This is a scenario that happened at the beginning of the war, disappeared for a while, and has now returned. There are ways to deal with it, but it’s concerning.

“We were told they managed to smuggle drones during the ceasefire, when 600 trucks a day were coming in. It might also have happened via aerial smuggling. If they can smuggle cellphones, drugs, and cigarettes, why not drones?”

A reservist officer in Gaza said: “Hamas is back to using drones. That means they feel comfortable enough to do so amid operations. They’re not under constant military pressure.
Hamas PANICS! Israel's HIDDEN strategy they didn’t see coming w/Amiad Cohen
IDF Spokesperson (Res.) Doron Spielman is joined by Major Amiad Cohen, Senior Director of the Herut Center and a reservist who just returned from Israel’s northern border. Together, they expose how Israel’s new military and humanitarian tactics are splitting the Gazan population from Hamas, destabilizing the terror regime’s power base and reshaping the battlefield. Backed by tribal militias fed up with Hamas rule, and no longer relying on international NGOs that Hamas exploits, Israel is asserting direct control of aid distribution—delivering over 1 million meals in one week alone.

This discussion covers why Hamas profited billions from stolen humanitarian aid, the calculated risk of arming tribal militias and how the IDF’s evolving ground strategy is minimizing troop losses and reclaiming territory. The conversation also pivots to Iran: will Israel, with or without U.S. support, strike Iran’s nuclear program? Cohen lays out the high-stakes political calculations behind Netanyahu’s next moves—and why this moment could redefine Israel’s regional posture for a generation.

Chapters
00:00 The Changing Dynamics in Gaza
07:05 The Role of the Younger Generation in Israel
13:51 Humanitarian Aid and Its Complications
20:58 Shifting Strategies in the Gaza Conflict
28:01 The Future of U.S.-Israel Relations and Iran




Netanyahu secretly approves giving guns to members of anti-Hamas militia in Gaza
Israel is providing weapons to an armed militia opposing Hamas, a defense source confirmed on Thursday.

Following reports in recent weeks that Israel was working with a gang led by Yasser Abu Shabab based in Rafah in southern Gaza, Avigdor Liberman, the former defense minister and current opposition lawmaker, said on Kan radio that “Israel provided assault rifles and light arms to crime families in Gaza, on [Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin] Netanyahu’s orders … These are the equivalent of ISIS in Gaza.”

Liberman said Israel’s security cabinet was not involved in or informed of the decision to give the Al Shabab clan guns, but the Shin Bet was aware of it.

“No one can ensure that these weapons will not be turned against Israel,” he added. “We have no way of supervising or following [where they go].”

Netanyahu’s office did not deny the allegation and responded that “Israel is acting to defeat Hamas in various ways upon the recommendation of the heads of the security establishment.”

Israel is providing the Al Shabab gang with Kalashnikov rifles, some of which were confiscated from Hamas during fighting in the past 20 months.

Liberman compared giving the Al Shabab militia guns to Netanyahu allowing Qatar to send aid to Gaza, based on an idea that keeping Palestinians divided is better for Israel.


Israel should provide Gazans with the freedom to choose emigration
The world has witnessed the horrors that can unfold when poverty, oppression, and terrorism converge in a closed and hopeless environment. Indeed, the people of Gaza have lived for years in unrelenting misery, devoid of any real prospect for a better future.

Out of this abyss, a rare and historic opportunity has emerged, perhaps the most consequential since the founding of the State of Israel. This is a humanitarian, strategic, and diplomatic initiative to enable the voluntary emigration of up to one million Palestinians from Gaza to countries across the globe.

This initiative is neither naive nor detached from reality. It is grounded in empirical data. According to public opinion surveys conducted by Palestinian pollster Dr. Khalil Shikaki, approximately 49% of Gazans wish to emigrate. Among educated youth, this exceeds 54%. Many are even willing to leave without official documents, driven by profound despair and a genuine yearning for a better future.

Israel’s role is to provide the practical framework that enables these individuals to exercise their right to choose – to choose a life beyond endless conflict and stagnation, to exit the status of perpetual refugees, and to enter a future of dignity and opportunity. The plan rests on five core pillars: freedom, rehabilitation, partnership, legitimacy, and discretion.

This is not just a humanitarian gesture; it is a strategic maneuver with far-reaching implications. The departure of hundreds of thousands from Gaza will significantly ease overpopulation, diminish the recruitment base for terror organizations, strip the Arab world of its long-standing “refugee card” against Israel, and challenge the two-state solution, which long has rested on an unviable status quo.
Israel secretly diverted Gaza aid funds to 'security establishment' - report
The Israeli government transferred hundreds of millions of shekels earmarked for the distribution of humanitarian aid in Gaza to the "security establishment," Israeli public broadcaster KAN reported on Wednesday.

The government reportedly approved the transfer of the funds in early May without specifying the intended purposes of the money and processed the transaction "under the radar," in order to hide it from the public, sources told KAN.

The description of the recipient of the funds was written only as "security establishment," when such transactions usually are required to include the details of the specific ministry and purpose of the funds, as alleged by KAN.

The source of the funding is an across-the-board government cut, including civilian services, which was implemented in May. Denial from PMO, Finance Minister's office

The Prime Minister's Office and the Finance Ministry denied KAN's report, stating, "Even this evening, the State of Israel is not funding humanitarian aid to Gaza."

Both offices have previously denied financing the distribution of aid in the enclave.


Hamas fired on Gazans collecting aid in Rafah, Palestinian tells IDF
The Israel Defense Forces shared an audio recording on Thursday of a Gazan accusing Hamas terrorists of opening fire on Palestinian civilians seeking to collect humanitarian aid in the southernmost city of Rafah.

“I swear to you—no, it’s a lie, nothing happened,” the anonymous Arab said in conversation with an employee of the Israeli Defense Ministry’s Coordinator of Government Activities in the Territories (COGAT) unit, responding to claims the IDF killed dozens of Palestinians in Rafah.

“There were injured people, yes, maybe seven, eight dead,” according to the Palestinian source. “The army responded after mortars were fired at it, but the people who fired were Hamas terrorists. They don’t want the people to receive aid and want to foil the plan. They live off theft.”

The source told COGAT that he sent the Israeli military “a photo of the young man who was blamed for shooting” at the Palestinian civilians.

Pressed by COGAT about the claim Hamas opened fire, he responded, “Yes, of course, this is not the first time. They want to foil the plan so the aid will go to them, allowing them to steal it. They live off the aid. Deals, sales, money, food and drink, all for their own men and Hamas leaders.”

The Palestinian stressed that Hamas “has gone completely bankrupt.” The terrorist group wants “aid to come in through the United Nations and international organizations so they can steal it,” he also claimed.

“I swear to you, they’re criminals, truly criminals like ISIS. I swear to God, they’re human beasts. Not humans. Not humans at all,” he said, adding: “They have no compassion whatsoever for their own people.”


BBCSudan conflict: Five killed after UN aid trucks attacked en route to el-Fasher
Five aid workers were killed in an attack on a convoy in Sudan, preventing food deliveries to families who face starvation in the war-torn Darfur region, UN agencies said on Tuesday.

The attack on the 15-truck convoy happened Monday night near the Rapid Support Forces (RSF)-controlled town of Koma in North Darfur province.

"Five members of the convoy were killed and several more people were injured. Multiple trucks were burned, and critical humanitarian supplies were damaged," UNICEF and the World Food Programme (WFP) said in a joint statement.

Both agencies called for an investigation into the attack, which they said was a violation of international humanitarian law.

"It is devastating that the supplies have not reached the vulnerable children and families they were intended to," the statement added.

The agencies did not specify who was behind the attack. The UN said those killed and injured were Sudanese contractors working for WFP and UNICEF.


IDF declares imminent attack on Hezbollah drone site in southern Beirut
The Israel Defense Forces announced on Thursday evening that it planned to strike a Hezbollah drone manufacturing plant built “in the heart of the civilian population in the Dahiya neighborhood of Beirut.”

“Despite the [ceasefire] understandings between Israel and Lebanon, the IDF has identified that the aerial unit [Unit 127] of the Hezbollah terror group is working to produce thousands of UAVs under the direction and funding of Iranian terror elements,” the IDF said.

“After Hezbollah made the extensive use of UAVs a central component of its attacks on the State of Israel, the terrorist organization is working to strengthen its UAV production industry in preparation for the next war with Israel,” according to Thursday’s military statement in Hebrew.

“This activity constitutes a blatant violation of the understandings between Israel and Lebanon,” it noted. “The IDF will act to eliminate any threat to the State of Israel and its citizens and will prevent any attempt by the Hezbollah terrorist group to rebuild its capabilities.”

Lt. Col. Avichay Adraee, head of the Arab Media Branch in the military’s Spokesperson’s Unit, issued evacuation warnings to the residents of four buildings, urging them to move away by at least 300 meters (328 yards).

The Israeli military reportedly also warned noncombatants in the area through “knock on the roof” non-lethal attacks and mass phone calls.


Is the U.S.-Israel relationship heading for trouble? w/Ambassador Michael Oren | Think Twice
Can Israel afford to say “no” to the president who has been its best friend since the founding of the modern Jewish state? According to JNS editor-in-chief Jonathan Tobin, that’s a question that may have to be answered by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu if President Donald Trump’s optimism about his negotiations with the Iranian regime is vindicated by events.

Joining him on this week’s episode of Think Twice is historian and former Israeli ambassador to the United States Michael Oren. He believes that the alliance between the two nations is not “in trouble yet,” but, “may be heading to trouble.”

Oren states that the two things that the two pillars of the relationship are, “no daylight” and “no surprises.” While it’s not clear yet if the appearance of daylight on Iran policy and the negotiations with Hamas will turn into reality. But he says there have been a lot of surprises for Jerusalem from the Trump administration.

A nuclear deal with Iran of any kind that is likely would be bad for the United States but disastrous for Israel. But while its government has the sovereign right to reject any American policy, doing so now, while it is so isolated and essentially with “no friends” abroad creates a perilous dilemma for Netanyahu.

The former ambassador believes these developments, as well as events during the Biden administration, make it all the more essential for Israel to become less dependent on the United States. Oren is a longtime opponent of continued U.S. aid to Israel, which he asserts, sends, “the wrong message to our neighbors.”

Oren grew up and taught in the United States. He said that the post-Oct. 7, 2023 surge of antisemitism is both shocking and a sign that the old paradigm of combatting this scourge by the Jewish establishment is finished. The Jews have been returned to their situation in the past in which antisemitism was both open and mainstream. The battle on college campuses is, he said, “fundamentally about America” and not antisemitism. The universities are, he said, “creating a culture that is inimical to the American idea.”

In response, Oren believes, Jews must “fight them in the Churchillian sense. You can fight them in the classroom. can fight them in the courtroom. You can fight them in the media. You can fight them.”

Chapters
00:00 The State of US-Israel Relations
02:55 Iran's Influence and Nuclear Negotiations
06:24 Trump's Approach to Iran and Israel's Dilemma
11:39 Israel's Military Options and Dependence on the US
15:01 Israel's Isolation and the Need for Independence
17:08 The Dilemma of Hostages vs. Hamas
21:09 The Moral and Strategic Implications of Hostage Situations
22:59 Leadership and Communication in Israel
27:30 The Future of Netanyahu and Israeli Politics
30:50 The Golan Heights and Regional Dynamics
32:28 Antisemitism in America: A Historical Perspective
36:07 The Role of Academia in Shaping Attitudes
43:40 Future Projects and Advocacy for Israel


Europe’s elite are lost at sea (but the people aren’t...yet) | Straight Up
As European cities burn, is public opinion shifting towards supporting Israel?

Veteran Israeli journalist Eldad Beck joins host Danny Seaman—former senior official at the Israeli Prime Minister’s Office—for a deep dive into Europe’s evolving stance on Israel, antisemitism and the legacy of the Holocaust.

Currently based in Austria and reporting for The Jerusalem Post, Eldad Beck brings decades of firsthand experience covering Europe’s political and cultural climate. Together, Seaman and Beck discuss the growing disconnect between Western European governments and their increasingly sympathetic publics, seen in surprising moments like Israel's Eurovision success. They contrast this with the rising support for Israel among Central and Eastern European nations like Hungary and Czechia—countries that view EU policy as a new form of ideological coercion.

Beck also explains how mass Middle Eastern immigration has shifted European perceptions of the Israeli-Arab conflict, and how sovereigntist political movements are aligning with Israel’s right to defend itself. The conversation explores French President Macron’s leftward turn, the collapse of European moral clarity and the myth of international legitimacy in wartime. Beck argues that Israel must stop seeking global approval and instead prioritize fear and respect over affection—because, as he puts it, "nations act on interests, not emotions."

Chapters
00:00 Introduction to Eldad Beck and His Work
05:57 Media Influence on Public Opinion and Politics
11:29 The Eurovision Contest as a Reflection of Public Sentiment
16:58 Future Prospects for Israel and International Relations


How Israel can WIN the war of words w/Yisrael Medad | Judeacation
The world mostly gets Judea and Samaria wrong - but supporters of Israel can fight back. In this episode of “Judeacation,” JNS Middle East correspondent Josh Hasten sits down with Israeli activist and media spokesman Yisrael “Winky” Medad for a powerful discussion on reclaiming Israel's narrative.

Broadcast from the JNS Media Hub in Jerusalem, the episode traces Medad’s decades of advocacy for the Jewish resettlement enterprise in Judea and Samaria. As a veteran voice confronting hostile foreign media, Medad reveals the tactics that have helped shift the conversation, including how subtle word choices can force even outlets like the BBC to adopt more accurate language. He also shares insights from meetings with skeptical international politicians and journalists, offering a masterclass in pro-Israel messaging.

Hasten and Medad tackle why Israel’s government has failed to create a unified communications strategy and explore the lost legacy of Menachem Begin and the Revisionist Zionist movement. They also delve into Temple Mount activism, failed Jewish education in the diaspora, the dangers of diaspora Jewish disloyalty and Medad’s prolific writing across JNS and other platforms.

Chapters
00:00 Introduction to Yisrael Medad and His Work
02:59 Communicating the Truth about Judea and Samaria
05:57 Challenges in Government Support and Messaging
09:02 Menachem Begin's Legacy and Political Insights
11:47 Experiences in the Knesset and Political Dynamics
16:47 Activism for the Temple Mount and Jewish Rights
19:56 Writing and Advocacy in the Jewish Community
22:58 Reflections on the Current State of Israel
26:01 The Origin of the Nickname 'Winky'


Piers Morgan is ‘part of the problem of disinformation’ on the Gaza war, says Natasha Hausdorff
Natasha Hausdorff has said that Piers Morgan is “a significant part of the problem of disinformation” on the Israel-Hamas war.

Hausdorff’s statement comes just days after her appearance on Morgan’s YouTube show Piers Morgan Uncensored, during which the host was highly combative, repeatedly shouting her down and even accusing her of lying.

Writing in The Spectator, Hausdorff – a UK-based barrister and legal director of UK Lawyers for Israel (UKLFI) – asks: “Why can’t Piers Morgan handle to truth about Israel?”, before going on to say that Morgan’s behaviour showed “a refusal, perhaps even a fear, to hear the reality, the facts and the law when it comes to the war against Hamas.”

Talking about the problem of disinformation surrounding the conflict – and Morgan’s role in it – Hausdorff argues: “Morgan should be well aware that there have been repeated stories emerging from Gaza which have subsequently been debunked only after they spread around the world.

“The predictable result has been the poisoning of many minds against Israel, on the basis of fabrications and blood libels.”

Since their fiery exchange on Tuesday, both Morgan and Hausdorff have taken to social media to continue to argue their respective cases.

Writing on X, Hausdorff said: “Piers Morgan asks for the truth but refuses to hear it,” to which Morgan responded: “It certainly wasn’t coming out of your disingenuous mouth…”

Later, responding to a video of the debate, edited to show Morgan interrupting Hausdorff 60 times, the presenter wrote: “Perhaps that gives you some idea of how many times she was spewing bullsh*t…”

Many pro-Israel viewers have criticised Morgan’s treatment of Hausdorff during the debate, comparing his combative style against her to his more submissive approach towards pro-Palestinian guests.

One such example was his interview with General Secretary of the Palestinian National Initiative, Mustafa Barghouti, who referred to the hostages being held in Gaza as prisoners, claiming they were all soldiers, with very little pushback.
Natasha Hausdorff | Weaponizing International Law Against Israel
Natasha Hausdorff talked at a event in Oslo organized by Med Israel for fred (With Israel for peace). Here she talked about how different actors are (mis)using International Law against Israel in a campaign to demonize them.


BBC shows ‘inexcusable gullibility’ over fact-checking White House versus Hamas
Sky News host Chris Kenny highlights the BBC’s “inexcusable gullibility” when it comes to fact-checking the White House and Hamas in Gaza.

“I want to follow up on the media lies and propaganda when it comes to Gaza, Hamas and Israel,” Mr Kenny said.

“Let’s ensure people verify their facts but the obvious point is this the BBC has just then shown more scepticism and gone to more trouble forensically examining the facts in an attempt to defend itself against the White House than it ever does when it should be testing horrific claims of slaughter and war crimes made by Hamas terrorists against Israel.”




Israel Advocacy Movement: Muslims SPEECHLESS When Jew Recites Zionist Quran Verse



At NYC mayor primary debate, Cuomo says he’d visit Israel, which Mamdani won’t say is ‘Jewish state’
With five minutes to spare in the two-hour New York City Democratic mayoral primary debate, which NBC carried on Wednesday night, the candidates were asked what their first foreign trip would be as mayor.

“Given the hostility and the antisemitism that has been shown in New York, I would go to Israel,” said Andrew Cuomo, the former New York governor who is trying to make a comeback and who recently scored the Far Rockaway Jewish Alliance’s endorsement.

Zohran Mamdani, an anti-Israel New York state representative who just received the endorsement of far-left, progressive “Squad” member Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.), said that he would stay in the city. “My plans are to address New Yorkers across the five boroughs,” he said.

“Can I just jump in?” a moderator said. “Would you visit Israel as mayor?”

“I’ll be standing up for Jewish New Yorkers, and I’ll be meeting them wherever they are across the five boroughs—whether that’s in their synagogues and temples or at their homes or at the subway platform, because ultimately we need to focus on delivering on their concerns,” he said.

“Yes or no?” the moderator asked. “Do you believe in a Jewish state of Israel?”

“I believe Israel has the right to exist,” Mamdani said.

Pressed if he believes it should exist “as a Jewish state,” Mamdani said it ought to “as a state with equal rights.”

“His answer was no, he won’t visit Israel,” Cuomo said. “That’s what he was trying to say.”

“I believe every state should be a state of equal rights,” Mamdani said.




Buy EoZ's books  on Amazon!

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

PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism (February 2022)

    
 

 

at