Tuesday, June 30, 2026

06/29 Links Pt2: Turkey’s Hypocrisy Exposed by Israeli Recognition of Armenian Genocide; Haaretz’s ideological mission: Dismantling the Jewish state; What Mamdani Assumes About Judaism

From Ian:

Mark Goldfeder and John Spencer: Without Evidence The U.N. Accuses Israel Of Genocide – Another Day That Ends In ‘Y’
Its working rule is even simpler: any target Hamas hides among civilians becomes untouchable, and any civilian who dies beside it becomes proof of murder. The deeper Hamas burrows into homes and schools and hospitals, the safer it gets and the guiltier Israel looks, which inverts the very law that forbids using civilians as shields. The West Bank makes the inversion even plainer: the Commission counts 213 dead minors, tells readers that 206 were boys, and from that ratio divines a “policy of targeting boys” as “future terrorists.” A war on children does not kill boys at 97%. That statistic instead raises the obvious question: many of those “boys” were actively participating in hostilities.

Of course, the Commission never asks the question. Under U.N. definitions, every person under 18 is counted as a child, whether a 10-year-old in a classroom or a 17-year-old carrying an assault rifle. Hamas, meanwhile, has long recruited, trained, and used minors, including teenagers and younger children, a practice the Commission acknowledges has been reported but expressly declines to investigate. By collapsing all persons under 18 into a single category while omitting the role of child soldiers, the report invites readers to equate every “child” casualty with a civilian who was not participating in hostilities. That omission is central to its narrative.

This is how a libel becomes a fact. The body counts originate with the Hamas-run health ministry and are relayed to the world under a U.N. logo. Human rights groups, several funded by the anti-Israel governments that demanded the inquiry, refer to it as settled. Reporters cite the groups without reading the report; policymakers cite the resulting “consensus”; and within 48 hours, the media print “deliberately targeted” as if it is an established fact. It is the same machine that once blamed Israel for the Al-Ahli hospital blast that American, British, and Canadian intelligence traced to a misfired Palestinian rocket. Anti-Israel bias does not need evidence, only an audience that has already convicted Israel.

The messenger does matter, and here it is the Human Rights Council’s only open-ended commission of inquiry, aimed permanently at a single country, on a council where roughly half of all country-specific condemnations name Israel. The world still calls it the Pillay Commission, after the previous chair who famously pronounced Israel guilty of war crimes before she was appointed to judge it. When Washington, D.C., sanctioned the council’s Palestinian rapporteur last year, the commissioners themselves resigned and promised to “reconstitute.” They did not, however, reform it, so the remedy is simple.

A bipartisan group in Congress already drafted the Commission of Inquiry Elimination Act, which would cut U.S. dollars from a permanent mandate that runs on $4 million a year and has dropped even the pretense of fairness or due process. The United States already refuses to fund discriminatory U.N. conduct, and this qualifies by any measure. The Commission titled its report “The essence of childhood has been destroyed,” but it chose the wrong noun. What this report destroys is the essence of evidence, the rule that an accusation of murder must be proven and not merely felt. After 94 pages, it still identifies no soldier, no order, no forensic proof, no battlefield investigation establishing intent, and no evidence capable of sustaining the accusation it makes.

The proper response is not to treat this report as a serious finding. You cannot defend against insanity. But we can and should stop funding it.
Turkey’s Hypocrisy Exposed by Israeli Recognition of Armenian Genocide
Israel’s recognition of the Armenian Genocide affirms an essential historical truth. Acknowledging one of the twentieth century’s first genocides reinforces the principle that mass atrocities must be remembered honestly, regardless of political convenience.

Turkey’s genocide accusations against Israel are undermined by its own century-long denial of the Armenian Genocide. While insisting the destruction of over 1.5 million Armenians was merely a wartime tragedy without genocidal intent, Ankara simultaneously labels Israel’s war against Hamas a genocide.

History demonstrates that genocide denial carries consequences. Hitler’s infamous question, “Who, after all, speaks today of the annihilation of the Armenians?” serves as a reminder that erasing past atrocities can embolden future perpetrators.

Yesterday, the Israeli cabinet voted unanimously to recognize the Armenian Genocide. Announcing the decision in Hebrew, Foreign Minister Gideon Sa’ar declared: “It is never too late to do the right thing.”
Gadi Taub: Haaretz’s ideological mission: Dismantling the Jewish state
Less than three weeks before the Oct. 7 massacre, the Israeli daily Haaretz announced its break with the Zionist creed. Its editor-in-chief, Aluf Benn, penned a piece just before Yom Kippur eve, titled “Jewish and Democratic? It’s Time to Erase the Word Jewish.”

The paper’s regular Hebrew readers were probably not all that surprised. After all, many variations on this theme have appeared in the periodical’s opinion pages, and its aversion to nationalism and religion, as well as its infatuation with the local version of globalist ideology—the idea of a non-national, so-called “state of all its citizens”—were well known. But never before had the editor himself announced the paper’s desire to dismantle the Jewish state and put an end to the Zionist enterprise.

The editorial board must have thought that an international audience was not yet ready for the revelation, and so the English edition softened the title, cloaking Benn’s declaration in some warm Yiddishkeit. It read: “On Yom Kippur, Facing the Question: Where Is Israel Headed?”

Still, the confession in Hebrew was, in fact, long overdue. The paper has been working consistently and diligently to undermine Zionism’s moral legitimacy for many years, without admitting that this was what it was doing. It has disseminated some of the worst blood libels against settlers and Israel Defense Forces soldiers and given respectability to pundits who used its pages to argue that Israel is inherently evil.

This was never just an editorial insistence on high moral standards or constructive criticism designed to rectify wrongs. As media scholar Eli Avraham noted in his recently published book, From David to Goliath: Coverage of Israel in the International Media, Haaretz in general, and its English-language edition in particular, is not merely critical of this or that Israeli government or this or that Israeli policy. It is, rather, bent on demonizing the Jewish state as such and on legitimizing political parties, academics and organizations—both Israeli and foreign—which see Israel as “the epitome of world evil.” The paper also worked, Avraham pointed out, to erode Israeli solidarity by attacking every “positive and unifying myth.”

But it seems as though the paper also previously believed that declaring its anti-Zionist mission would be tactically unwise: that it would undermine its reputation for professional, balanced reporting and limit its ability to influence its largest target audience—liberals and especially liberal Zionists. It thus opted for an audacious strategy: It declared its supposed allegiance to Zionism. It also kept pretending to practice a form of “tough love” aimed at urging Israel to realize the so-called “two-state solution.”

For this purpose, it mostly took care to preserve for itself the possibility of plausible deniability: anti-Zionist writers, though ubiquitous in all sections of the paper—news, opinion, culture and leisure—were simply expressing their personal views. And when pushed, Haaretz could always portray its rejection of Zionism as no more than an objection to “the occupation,” to specific forms of discrimination or to the problem of church-and-state separation.


Anthony Albanese, Tony Burke and Penny Wong 'should be called' to Royal Commission into antisemitism: Jewish leaders
Jewish leaders are urging the antisemitism Royal Commission to call senior Labor ministers to give evidence on major policy failings in the lead-up to the Bondi terror attack.

The Royal Commission into antisemitism recommenced hearings on Monday, focussing on the "dissemination of antisemitic content" through traditional media as well as online.

But after hearing from security experts, behind closed doors, and Jewish Australians on their lived experiences of antisemitism, the Royal Commission is being urged to call senior Labor ministers.

This has sparked questions on whether the government should be let off the hook from being grilled publicly on its failings.

Former Australian Jewish Association president David Adler said the Labor government should answer for policy decisions which “significantly incited antisemitism and emboldened activists”.

“It has done this by a whole series of major anti-Israel policy shifts and making decisions which put the Jewish community at heightened risk,” Mr Adler told SkyNews.com.au.

Mr Adler said Prime Minister Anthony Albanese, Foreign Minister Penny Wong and Home Affairs Minister Tony Burke were the “most responsible” government officials for the rise in antisemitism in Australia.

“All three should be called before the Royal Commission to answer questions on the radical shift of Australia's formerly bipartisan policy,” he said.

It is unknown whether ministers have already given evidence behind closed doors, however calls are growing for public hearings.

Shadow education minister Julian Leeser said the Prime Minister and Home Affairs Minister “should absolutely appear” before the Royal Commission if asked.

“There are real questions to be asked about the state of our terrorism preparedness, levels of counter-terrorism funding and who knew what and when prior to Bondi which only they can answer,” he told SkyNews.com.au.


Royal Commission uncovers ‘sickening’ role of media in Jew hatred
Sky News host Chris Kenny details how the Bondi Royal Commission is uncovering the role media and social platforms played in fuelling antisemitism before and after the Bondi massacre.

“The Bondi Royal Commission was back in session today, and it was finally focusing on the role of some of the media in spreading antisemitism, in promoting Jew hatred in the lead up to the Bondi massacre and even afterwards,” Mr Kenny said.

“Australia has let down Jewish migrants and Jewish Australians like it has never let down any group of people in our history. Social media has played a sickening role in misinforming people and in fuelling hatred.

“No wonder Albo didn't want this Royal Commission; it is a daily uncovering of an intolerable and ongoing national disaster that he's done next to nothing to fix.”


Israeli attorney recounts online harassment after surviving Bondi Beach massacre
Bondi Beach terror attack survivor and human rights attorney Arsen Ostrovsky gave an account on Monday of his experience in the aftermath of the shooting before Australia’s royal commission, which convened for its third round of hearing since its formation in January.

The Royal Commission on Antisemitism and Social Cohesion listened throughout the day to witnesses who experienced antisemitic incidents, in a session focused on the spread of hate speech online and in traditional media sources, according to ABC News, a subsidiary of the Australian Broadcasting Corporation.

The Israeli attorney related that an image of his injury shared on social media about two hours after the attack was altered for mockery purposes and the spread of conspiracies, the report read.

The offensive comments and manipulation of his image spread “like wildfire,” he said.

Some of these labeled him a “trauma tourist” and an actor in a “false flag attack,” while others claimed the blood depicted in the original photo was fake.

The manipulated images depicted Ostrovsky holding an Oscar statue and others a ketchup bottle, while his face is covered in blood.

“It was surreal to be in the state that I was in hospital and seeing this material at the same time. This was happening as I was literally being prepped to go into surgery,” ABC News quoted him as telling the commission.

The survivor branded the online abuse as “overwhelming,” “dehumanizing” and “vicious.”


I visited the 'Nakba' exhibit, and it is every bit as anti-Jewish as feared
Throughout the gallery, Arab and Palestinian agency is largely stripped away. Political decisions, rejected compromises, internal repression, and acts of violence become secondary, encouraging visitors to interpret tragedies inflicted on both peoples as chapters in a single continuing story that conveniently begins in 1948 and remains fundamentally attributable to Israel.

So, the initial framing determines the conclusion, which collapses more than a century of complex and often unrelated developments into a single interpretive chain of causation.

None of this comes as a surprise. As extensively reported by National Post, controversy surrounded not only the exhibit’s content but the process that produced it. Jewish organizations repeatedly raised concerns over the museum’s opaque consultation process, the composition of its advisory council, the decision to retain an advisor despite past anti-Jewish remarks, and what they viewed as the exhibit’s fundamentally one-sided presentation, all of which apparently fell on deaf ears.

This exemplifies the hollowness of the “Nakba narrative.” It cannot fully explain Palestinian history because too much of it contradicts its central premise. The decades Palestinians spent trapped, oppressed, and murdered in refugee camps throughout the Arab world, the corruption and repression of the Palestinian Authority, Hamas’s brutality toward Gazans, and generations raised to believe that liberation would come not through building a society but through destroying another, all become secondary, if they appear at all.

Not only does this unjustly demonize millions of Jews, it does a profound disservice to Palestinians. It suggests to them, and to all Canadians, that Palestinian suffering will end once Jewish Israelis are depowered or gone. Worse still, it carries the implicit promise that once that objective is achieved, Palestinians will no longer merit the same concern, because the source of their suffering will supposedly have been eliminated.

The irony of the exhibit is difficult to ignore. The Museum stands as one of Canada’s great cultural institutions, founded by a proud Canadian Jewish Zionist who believed deeply in democracy, pluralism, and the pursuit of truth. This federally funded institution should represent the best of Canada’s civic values instead of legitimizing ideologues who cynically invoke Palestinian suffering not to improve Palestinian lives, but to imply that the world’s only Jewish state is inherently illegitimate.

The measure of a democratic society is not whether it avoids difficult histories, but whether our leaders have the courage to tell them honestly.

When a government teaches that story through one of its national institutions, it is no longer merely tolerating a political narrative. It is endorsing it. Canadians should expect far more from institutions entrusted with preserving historical truth. They should be especially skeptical whenever history is presented by governments as simple, morally absolute, or beyond debate.

History is rarely served by such selectivity. Propaganda, however, often is.
What Mamdani Assumes About Judaism
The most revealing moment in Zohran Mamdani’s recent interview to ABC was not what he said about Israel. It was what he assumed about Judaism.

Asked whether he supported Israel as a Jewish state, Mamdani replied:

“I support the state of Israel as a state with equal rights.”

“But as a Jewish state is the question,” the interviewer pressed.

“I think any state that privileges one religion over the other is one that I can’t tell you I support, whether it be Israel or Saudi Arabia or anywhere else.”

The exchange came only after Mamdani had effectively declined to endorse the traditional Democratic Party position of two states for two peoples.

His answer was based on a premise: that Judaism is merely a religion. If that is true, then describing Israel as a “Jewish state” necessarily means describing it as a state that privileges one religion over others. From there, Mamdani adopts the posture of universal principle: he opposes any state that grants one religion a preferred status.

The premise itself is false.

First, according to a 2017 Pew Research Center study, more than one-fifth of the world’s countries maintain an official or preferred religion. Many of them are prosperous liberal democracies, including Denmark and the United Kingdom.

The issue is not whether established religions are compatible with democracy. The real issue is that Mamdani’s argument assumes that Judaism is only a religion.

That leaves only two possibilities. Either he knows very little about Judaism — an astonishing level of ignorance for the mayor of New York —or his hostility toward Israel has blinded him to one of the most elementary historical facts about the Jewish people.

Judaism is both a religion and a nation. For thousands of years, Jews have understood themselves as a people with a shared history, a common language, collective institutions, diverse religious traditions, and — crucially — a homeland from which they originated. Long before modern nationalism, the Jewish people built communities, preserved a civilization, and maintained an identity that survived without sovereignty.

This distinction matters because reducing Judaism to a religion strips Jews of collective rights.

If Jews are only adherents of a faith, then they possess no greater claim to national self-determination than Buddhists or Methodists. The legitimacy of Jewish nationhood disappears by definition. This is why redefining Judaism as only a religion has so often accompanied efforts to deny the legitimacy of Jewish national existence.
DCCC chair sidesteps antisemitism concerns following DSA wins in NYC
Rep. Suzan DelBene (D-WA), the chair of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, responsible for electing House Democrats, downplayed concerns about the party’s response to antisemitism in the wake of New York City elections that elevated several far-left candidates.

Asked repeatedly about Jewish Democrats’ concerns in an interview with former NBC News anchor Chuck Todd, DelBene repeatedly brushed those concerns aside. She said that Democratic leaders’ condemnation of and efforts to defeat openly antisemitic candidate Maureen Galindo in Texas show that the party has been strong in response to rising antisemitism.

But the response from Democratic leadership to New York congressional candidate Darializa Avila Chevalier — who attended an anti-Israel rally a day after the Oct. 7, 2023, Hamas attacks on Israel, shared a post rejecting the existence of Israel and was an organizer of anti-Israel encampments at Columbia University — has been muted.

DelBene avoided commenting on Chevalier, who defeated incumbent Rep. Adriano Espaillat (D-NY), directly. “If you look across the board and talk to individual candidates, that’s not representative of where other candidates land.”

“I think folks have been very forceful across the board. I think there always is a focus on what any one individual said, but I think if you look collectively at what people have said and stood for across the country, I think people have been very clear on many issues on where they stand.”

DelBene dismissed the New York City results as unrepresentative of the rest of the country.

Asked broadly if democratic socialists are welcome in the Democratic Party, DelBene said, “We’re a big tent. I want to make sure that our big tent is a tent that is in the majority and that we have the gavels.”
Attack on Scott Wiener shows you can’t, and shouldn’t, appease the Jew-hating left
It’s been a rough weekend for Scott Wiener.

The California state senator, who is hoping to replace the retiring Nancy Pelosi in Congress later this year, was heading over to San Francisco’s Trans March last Friday when he was circled by a gaggle of radicals, some sporting keffiyehs and covering their faces.

Yelling invectives and giving Wiener the finger, they accused the uber-progressive lawmaker — himself a gay man and one of the state’s most effective legislators on LGBTQ issues — of being “terrible on Gaza.” At some point, one of the thugs taunted Wiener, who is Jewish, about having “Israeli handlers.”

A video of the ambush shows Wiener looking stunned, and eventually hurrying out of the park without attending the march.

“When opposition and disagreement transition to harassment,” he said later that day in a statement, “including cornering me, touching me, or trying to physically bully me out of a public event, that crosses a line. We’re living in a time when violence is all too often threatened or used against people in public life. In San Francisco, we’re better than that.”

Except that, as the video of the assault so clearly shows, San Francisco isn’t better than that, and neither, sadly, are the rest of us.

Because more, maybe, than any other scuffle in recent memory, the assault on Wiener showed just how truly all-around broken our political culture has become.

Let’s begin with the thugs themselves.

“You stopped being queer the moment you started supporting Israel, you piece of s–t,” shrieked one assailant, giving us the clearest peek we’ve had yet into the minds of the so-called “pro-Palestine” crowd.


The Queering of the Purge By Abe Greenwald Via Commentary Newsletter, sign up here.
As the clip opens, Yakoushkin begins by telling Wiener how much he admires the latter’s stance on trans issues. And then he gives voice to his deepest self, yelling that Wiener is “terrible on Gaza” and does “not belong here.” An aggressive crowd—including one individual in keffiyeh and gold hotpants—steadily gathers and contributes to the abuse. They call Wiener a “genocidal piece of shit” who’s under the control of “Zionist handlers,” and so on. Within a minute, Wiener—and by extension Israel—has become the focus of the gathering.

“Scott, I want to support someone who’s so positive on trans rights,” Yakoushkin pleads toward the clip’s end. “But you’re a piece of shit on Gaza. How could you do that? How could you do that? How could you betray queers?” Another sees Wiener off with this: “You stopped being queer the moment you started supporting Israel, you piece of shit.”

We’re long past pointing out that gay and trans anti-Israel activists would be killed on the spot were they to sashay around Gaza in gold lamé shorts—keffiyehs notwithstanding. And I doubt that the “Hakomi Method” would be much of a hit there either. What we’re dealing with here is the queer Klan. Their Jew-hatred has swallowed up all other activist concerns.

In this, they’re representative of the larger left. Socialists are now more committed to boycotting Israel than they are to equity and expanding public goods. Environmentalists hop aboard flotillas to Gaza. And anti-colonialists have narrowed down their target list to one (non-colonialist) country.

The clip captures the last three years of the left and condenses it into two minutes. What starts out as a single voice condemning Israel turns into a maniacal hatefest. And there’s the Jewish leftist, glum and defeated, trying to navigate a path through the enemies he’s gathered around him.


Commentary Podcast: Impurity Tests
Today we discuss the ongoing fallout from DSA candidate victories in NY primary elections and the shifting lines of acceptability in political discourse, the video of Scott Wiener being harassed at a pride event in San Francisco and the rise of the all-obliterating omnicause. Plus, putting to bed the leftist fantasy about the impending end of Israel, and John recommends Darcy O'Brien's A Way of Life, Like Any Other.


Middle East panel: Jonathan Sacerdoti speaks at the ARC conference, 2026
Jonathan Sacerdoti speaks at ARC 2026’s dinner event, The Future of the Middle East: Pathways to Peace and Stability, held at the Royal Horseguards Hotel in London.

In these selected sections, Jonathan draws on his experience as a journalist reporting extensively from the Middle East, including from inside Gaza since October 7th. He reflects on what this pivotal moment reveals about the prospects for peace and stability across the region, the West’s response to the conflict, the defence of shared values, and the sources of hope he sees in Israel’s resilience, the Abraham Accords, and the ability of free societies to stand together.

The evening brought together leading voices on the Middle East to explore what pathways to peace, stability and shared prosperity might look like, and how the momentum created by the Abraham Accords can be built upon in the years ahead.

About the panel:
John Anderson
The Hon. John Anderson AC FTSE served as Deputy Prime Minister of Australia for six years between 1999 and 2005 alongside The Hon. John Howard OM AC SSI. He now serves in a wide range of civic and community roles and hosts one of Australia’s leading politico-cultural video podcasts.

Amjad Taha
Amjad Taha is a political strategist, author and analyst from the UAE. His work in Western and Arab media offers perspectives on regional dynamics, and he is known for advocating peace, normalisation and dialogue between cultures.

Bishop Robert Stearns
Bishop Robert Stearns is a global influencer, thought leader, mobiliser and commentator on the Middle East. He has led the international Day of Prayer for the Peace of Jerusalem for more than twenty years and has worked with leaders in religion, government and public life around the world.

Jonathan Sacerdoti
Jonathan Sacerdoti is a journalist, commentator and analyst specialising in the Middle East, free speech, Jewish communities and Western values. As UK and Europe Correspondent for i24News for over a decade, he has reported from terror attacks across Europe and from inside Gaza since October 7th. He is a columnist for The Spectator, The Jewish Chronicle and The Algemeiner, and regularly contributes to Fox News, Sky News and the BBC.


Jonathan Sacerdoti: Which is safer – Dubai at 4am or London at 8pm? Emiratis reveal what Britain is getting wrong
Britain has been infiltrated, the Muslim Brotherhood's quiet takeover is already underway, and the West is listening to the wrong Muslims.

Rauda Altenaiji and Ahmed Sharif Al Ameri are part of a new wave of Emirati voices speaking out, proudly and publicly, in defence of the Abraham Accords and the world's only Jewish state. They feel safer walking through Dubai at 4am than London at 8pm, and their leadership has stopped sending students to British universities for fear they'll be radicalised.

But beneath the warning are harder questions. The UAE enforces its famous tolerance through some of the world's harshest laws — including execution. Is that a model the West could ever, or should ever, follow? Is their picture of coexistence too perfect to be true? And when two polished young influencers appear defending Israel and the Accords, who exactly is behind them — and why?

In this conversation, recorded live at the ARC 2026 conference, Jonathan Sacerdoti speaks with Rauda Altenaiji and Ahmed Sharif Al Ameri — Emirati commentators and social-media political voices — about the Abraham Accords, Islamist extremism in Britain, the Muslim Brotherhood, antisemitism, migrant workers' rights, the death penalty, and why they believe London is losing its identity while the Gulf thrives.

👁️‍🗨️ Watch if you want to understand how two Emiratis see Britain's extremism problem — and why they believe the West is listening to the wrong Muslims.

🎙️ We Discuss:
🔴 Why two Emiratis publicly defend Israel and the Abraham Accords — and what it cost them
🕌 The Muslim Brotherhood "invasion" of the West, and why they say it now works through PR, not conquest
🇬🇧 Why the UAE will no longer send its students to study in the UK
⚖️ How the UAE treats antisemitism as terrorism — and the one case that ended in execution
🏙️ Why they'd walk through Dubai at 4am but not London after 8pm
👷 The truth about the UAE: the uncomfortable questions on migrant workers, labour laws and 87.9% of the population
💀 Tolerance enforced by the death penalty — model or warning?
📖 The idea of a "civilisational jihad"
🎓 How a Muslim woman was branded Islamophobic by a white British university professor
🤔 "Is this engineered?" — answering the suspicion that these influencers came from nowhere
🌍 How to spread coexistence to the rest of the Arab world


Timothy accuses Burnham of ‘lacking courage’ to reject Israel ‘Gaza genocide’ claims
Shadow Justice Secretary Nick Timothy has accused Andy Burnham, the likely next Labour Prime Minister, of being among political leaders who “lack the courage” to reject the claim that Israel has committed genocide in Gaza.

Delivering the keynote speech at the Conservative Friends of Israel annual fundraising lunch, Timothy also accused outgoing Prime Minister Keir Starmer of “continuing” the policies of Jeremy Corbyn in his stance on Israel.

In a speech introduced by party leader Kemi Badenoch, which received a standing ovation from those in attendance, Timothy said: “Starmer will be gone soon, but his successor is no better.

“When asked if Israel had committed a genocide, Andy Burnham said: ‘I can’t judge.'”

Timothy continued: “Well, I can. The war in Gaza is no genocide, and to use that language is deliberate, offensive, and a provocation to Israel, to Jews, and to people who really did suffer that terrible crime against humanity.

“Those who make that appalling and baseless claim, and those who lack the courage to reject it, are cowards… Their actions reveal something bigger, something terrible, tearing the country apart.”

Speaking to a packed hall—including over 400 attendees, more than 100 Conservative parliamentarians, and Chief Rabbi Ephraim Mirvis—Timothy added: “The Labour Party got rid of Jeremy Corbyn but continued his policies toward Israel.”

The shadow minister also reflected on the key role he and others played in exposing the ban by West Midlands Police on Israeli fans attending the Aston Villa–Maccabi Tel Aviv football match in November 2025. He reflected,”The frog boiled and the police found themselves outsourcing their decisions to ‘community leaders’, making themselves the willing tools of antisemites … and lying to Parliament about doing so.”

“Justice was replaced by injustice,” added Timothy. “Equality before the law was lost to ethnic favouritism.”

He called for government action on the Muslim Brotherhood and the IRGC, and urged banning the weekly protests that “intimidate Jews.”

Earlier Timothy was praised by Badenoch who said she appointed him because he was “never afraid to speak uncomfortable truths.”
Young Greens to vote on plan saying support for ‘right to resist occupation’ is not antisemitic
Young members of the Green Party are set to vote on proposals stating that support for a “right to resist occupation” should not be considered antisemitic, prompting concern from Jewish organisations.

The proposals will be debated at the Young Greens’ annual conference in London on 18 and 19 July. They also say that anti-Zionism and support for boycotting Israeli goods should not automatically be treated as antisemitic.

According to the Telegraph, which first reported the proposals, the draft guidance makes no distinction between peaceful and violent forms of resistance.

A document circulated to members says the aim is to protect both Jewish members and freedom of political expression on issues relating to Israel and the Palestinians.

It states: “A robust antisemitism framework must be both genuinely protective of Jewish members and genuinely protective of free political expression including Palestinian solidarity, criticism of Israeli state policy, and anti-Zionist political analysis.

“(Current guidance) is unfit for purpose and should not be reinstated: it cites politically loaded authorities as neutral scholars and frames anti-Zionism as presumptively suspicious.”

The proposals would replace guidance that currently refers to both the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) working definition of antisemitism and the Jerusalem Declaration on Antisemitism.

The IHRA definition, which has been adopted by the Labour, Conservative and Liberal Democrat parties, says that, depending on the context, denying the Jewish people’s right to self-determination, applying double standards to Israel or comparing Israel with Nazi Germany can amount to antisemitism.

The Jerusalem Declaration, developed as an alternative framework, argues that anti-Zionism is not, by itself, antisemitic.

Jewish organisations said the proposed changes risk making the party less welcoming for young Jewish members.

The Campaign Against Antisemitism said: “Once again, a faction in UK politics is trying to redefine antisemitism to suit its views.

“Young Greens should actually consult a representative of the mainstream Jewish community.


Unite claims it erroneously erased Jews from its Cable Street anniversary event
One of the UK's largest trade unions has claimed it erroneously organised its 90th anniversary event to commemorate the Battle of Cable Street to take place on Shabbat – and without mentioning the Jewish community.

A page on Unite the Union’s website promoting the event on Saturday, October 3, prompted widespread outrage, including among several descendants of Jews who were on the front line of fighting fascists on the streets of the East End in 1936.

The page stated that Sir Oswald Mosley's fascists were chased off the streets by a “strong, organised working class who knew that the politics of hate and division offers no solutions.

“We are bringing together trade unionists, historians, musicians, artists and authors to make this a celebration of working class pride.”

The original Battle of Cable Street took place on October 4, 1936, when Mosley's British Union of Fascists (BUF), known as the Blackshirts, planned a march through London's East End, home to a large Jewish population.

Around 3,000 fascists were due to march, protected by 6,000 police officers, mounted and on foot.

In response, local Jews, joined by Irish dockworkers, communists, socialists and trade unionists, mobilised in numbers estimated to be between 100,000 and 250,000, blocking the route.

Unable to clear a path through the crowds, police called off the march, forcing the Blackshirts to abandon their plans. The confrontation has since been viewed as a defining victory against fascism in Britain.
Inflated Allegations, Selective Context, and Minimization of Israeli Response_ A Critical Refutation of the Rossing Center’s 2025 Report on Christians in Israel and East Jerusalem
The Rossing Center’s Attacks on Christians in Israel and East Jerusalem: Annual Report 2025 presents itself as an evidence-based account of harassment and violence directed at Christian communities in Israel and East Jerusalem. The report claims to document 155 incidents in 2025, including physical attacks, attacks on church property, harassment, and defacement of public Christian signs. It then places those incidents within a broader narrative about religious nationalism, political polarization, minority insecurity, and the alleged erosion of Christian presence in the Holy Land.

The report should not be accepted at face value. While every genuine act of harassment, vandalism, or violence against Christians should be condemned, the Rossing Center’s report greatly exaggerates the scale and meaning of the problem. It combines serious criminal acts with lesser misconduct, verified cases with reported allegations, physical violence with offensive gestures, and criminal conduct with non-criminal behavior. Its categories are so broad that the final incident count creates a more alarming impression than the underlying evidence supports.

Most importantly, the report minimizes the seriousness with which Israeli authorities have responded. This is not a secondary issue. It is one of the central flaws in the report. In cases CAMERA has examined on this subject, Israeli authorities took these incidents seriously, and perpetrators were arrested and prosecuted. CAMERA’s previous work has addressed this issue directly, noting that documented cases of vandalism against Christian sites were met with arrests, charges, police statements, and official condemnations, not indifference.

The central issue is not whether Christians deserve protection. They do. Nor is the issue whether anti-Christian harassment should be condemned. It should be. The issue is whether concern for Christians is being used to advance a selective and misleading indictment of Israel. In the Rossing Center’s 2025 report, that is precisely the problem.

The report is misleading in two connected ways. First, it exaggerates allegations by grouping incidents of vastly different severity into one broad narrative of anti-Christian hostility. Second, it downplays Israeli responsiveness by failing to give proper weight to the response of Israeli authorities, including arrests, prosecutions, official condemnations, and legal protections for religious sites and communities.

A fair account would condemn anti-Christian harassment while also acknowledging that Israel does not tolerate such behavior as policy or practice. The Rossing Center does the opposite. It amplifies the allegation and diminishes the response.
Portland State professor sues university after being put on leave over ‘I am Hamas’ remark
Yasmeen Hanoosh, a tenured Arabic professor at Portland State University, sued the Oregon public university after it placed her on administrative leave over a video in which she said, “I am Hamas, we are all Hamas.”

According to the lawsuit, which was transferred from Oregon state court to the U.S. District Court for the District of Oregon on June 24, Hanoosh stated that she made the remark sarcastically during an off-campus exchange with pro-Israel demonstrators following a June 2025 Beaverton School Board meeting. She alleges that the video circulated online was selectively edited and stripped her comments of their context.

Portland State President Ann Cudd publicly denounced the remarks as “reprehensible” and “absolutely unacceptable,” linking them to antisemitism and support for terrorism, according to the court filing.

The university subsequently placed Hanoosh on administrative leave and opened an investigation. According to the complaint, Portland State ultimately found she had not violated university policy but had damaged her reputation.

Hanoosh is seeking $7 million in damages.
Does The Times Know the Facts
On June 15, 2026, The New York Times published a report by Ronen Bergman and David Halbfinger, titled “Israel Counts the Ways That Netanyahu’s Iran Strategy Failed.” Discussing the woes of the Israeli Prime Minister in the wake of the Iran-U.S. Memorandum of Understanding, the authors mention “the perception that Israel had dragged the United States” into the war with Iran.

More than mere semantics, the word “perception” is extremely important: it implies The Times’ is changing course on one of its most significant reports on the U.S.-Israel war with Iran. The Times is probably one important reason why the perception that Israel dragged the U.S. to war exists in the first place: a Times report from Mar. 2 – coauthored by several Times’ journalists including Bergman (but not Halbfinger) – pointed at Netanyahu as playing a sizable role in instigating Trump’s decision to attack Iran.

In other words, Bergman and his colleagues argued as fact that Israel did play a major role in getting the U.S. into the war, a claim they made in different ways in various places in the article. But as the term “perception” suggests, the June 15 report no longer ascribes a factual status to that claim.

Within three and a half months, the facts seem to have changed. Why? And no less important, does The Times know the facts when it reports on such important events?

Sourcing might provide a part of the answer. The Times has repeatedly relied on anonymous sources in its reporting on major events and decisions related to the U.S.-Israel war with Iran. In the June 15 report, anonymous sources provide only a part of the evidence, alongside statements by Israeli and American politicians as well as analysts’ insights. However, the Mar. 2 report relies on anonymous sources to a far greater extent.

Relaying on anonymous sources is common journalistic practice. But as The Times’ own guidelines acknowledge, it is regarded as a last resort measure and carries the risk of parroting political agendas or “spins” under the guise of factual reporting. The difference between the March and June reports begs the question: was The Times able to keep politics from tainting what it presents as facts?
A Failing Grade for PBS’ Report on Gaza Schoolchildren
Ali Rogin’s June 12, 2026, PBS News Hour segment, “Gaza’s students strive to learn despite shattered schools,” had all the building blocks of an emotive narrative: children sitting on the ground in a makeshift tent-classroom, an 11-year-old using a solar-charged light to study at night in a shelter after her home was destroyed in an Israeli air strike, and heads of school lamenting they cannot accommodate all of the children in Gaza who wish to learn.

But if comprehensive reporting on the issue of Gazan students and schools was a test, PBS failed. It even flunked “show-and-tell” by cherry-picking what it shared with viewers, failing to disclose Hamas’ abuse of schools before, during and after the Israel-Hamas war.

Following host Amna Nawaz’s brief introduction, Rogin mentioned Hamas exactly once, citing the “ruinous war” that followed “the Hamas attack in October 2023.” The reference was so bare that she explained neither the attack’s location in Israel, nor that Hamas killed more than 1,200, mostly civilians, and kidnapped 251 (including many children). By contrast, PBS referenced Israeli strikes or attacks five times in the six-minute segment.


Board of Peace finalizing plans for Gaza, but implementation timeline up in the air
Representatives from the various US-led Board of Peace bodies involved in the postwar management of Gaza are meeting this week in Cyprus, as they seek to prepare a committee of Palestinian technocrats for entering the Strip in order to replace Hamas as governors of the war-ravaged enclave.

While an Arab diplomat from one of the mediating countries and a Palestinian official familiar with the matter characterized the Cyprus gathering as an opportunity to “recalibrate” the initiative after a rocky first six months, a Board of Peace official insisted last week that the meeting would be routine and that the process is largely moving along according to plan.

Indeed, the Board of Peace held a previously unreported additional workshop last week at the Egyptian coastal town of Ain Sokhna, which was attended by the entire panel of Palestinian technocrats, formally known as the National Committee for the Administration of Gaza (NCAG).

The NCAG was unveiled in January — along with several other Board of Peace bodies — and its dozen-plus members subsequently moved from Gaza and the West Bank to a hotel in Cairo, where they have been readying plans for replacing Hamas. The terror group led the October 7, 2023, invasion and massacre in southern Israel, sparking two years of war.

While no date was ever announced for when the NCAG would enter Gaza, one member of the panel acknowledged mounting frustration, saying that they did not expect the transition to be as lengthy as it has been.

The NCAG member spoke on condition of anonymity, as the US-controlled Board of Peace has barred members from speaking to the media. NCAG chief commissioner Ali Shaath did a small number of interviews shortly after his appointment, but since then has largely avoided the public eye.
Why did the June 26 protest movement in Gaza falter?
The failure of the June 26 protest movement cannot be explained by fear of Hamas alone. Fear certainly existed, but it was not the decisive factor. Gaza has witnessed repeated protests against Hamas over the years.

Between 2017 and the period before October 7, residents confronted Hamas security forces on several occasions. Even during the war, spontaneous demonstrations broke out demanding food, water, electricity, and simply the right to live. This suggests that fear alone does not explain why the June 26 movement failed to gain momentum.

In my view, the first major factor was the absence of genuine political support for the demands of Gaza’s residents. Many people in Gaza feel they have become peripheral to the priorities of the Palestinian Authority in Ramallah.

Their suffering has increasingly been treated as a political file rather than the daily reality of more than two million people searching for dignity and normal lives. As a result, protesters found no credible political institution willing to embrace their demands or transform them into a national political project. Offering a serious vision for Gaza

A second factor was the emergence of groups and personalities presenting themselves as alternatives to Hamas without convincing the public that they offered a serious vision for Gaza’s future. Much of their activity appeared focused on media visibility rather than demonstrating effective governance, public services, or a practical plan that could earn the confidence of ordinary citizens. For many Gazans, media attention is not a substitute for leadership.

At the same time, I do not believe Israel was the primary reason the movement failed. From a political perspective, Israel had an interest in highlighting public dissatisfaction with Hamas rather than suppressing it. Ultimately, however, the success or failure of any protest movement depends far more on its internal organization, leadership, and credibility than on external actors.

Even these factors, however, do not fully explain what happened. The deeper problem was the absence of a clear political vision for what would come after the protests. There was no unified leadership inside Gaza, no agreed political program, no organizational structure capable of sustaining momentum, protecting demonstrators, or transforming public frustration into a coherent political movement.

Some activists believed social media could create a political leadership. In reality, it created a media moment, not a political one. After years of war and destruction, Gazans are not looking for viral videos or symbolic gestures. They are looking for leaders who live among them, share their hardships, and are willing to accept responsibility for difficult decisions.


German Catholic Church under fire for hosting Gaza exhibit by antisemites
The Diocese of Rottenburg-Stuttgart is facing allegations of normalizing antisemitism in the state of Baden-Württemberg by hosting a Gaza photography exhibit organized by two well-known anti-Israel activists.

The exhibition "In Between. Gaza – Before and After" opened on June 23 and runs until July 22 at the House of the Catholic Church in Stuttgart, the capital of Baden-Württemberg. Alarm bells are ringing over the exhibit amid a sharp rise in antisemitism in Stuttgart, including reports of no-go zones for Jews. Pro-Hamas mobs have taken over parts of the city, according to a previous i24NEWS report.

The Simon Wiesenthal Center, a prominent Jewish human rights organization, has accused photographer Mohammed al-Hajjar — whose work is featured in the exhibition — of antisemitism. Al-Hajjar has repeatedly accused Israel of committing “genocide” in Gaza in the anti-Israel outlet Middle East Eye.

The main organizer of the exhibit, Ursula Mindermann, is vice-president of the German-Palestinian Society (DPG), an anti-Israel group that supports the elimination of the Jewish state. In 2020, Mindermann displayed her exhibition The Wall – Photographs from Palestine at Café Immergrün in Jena. At the time, the socialist youth group “Falcons Jena” criticized the show for promoting antisemitism by featuring the slogan “From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free.”

Rabbi Abraham Cooper, associate dean of the Los Angeles-based Simon Wiesenthal Center, told i24NEWS that featuring an artist “on record as accusing Israel of genocide is disqualifying.” He added: “If the Catholic institution was not aware of this fact, it is not too late to remove the presentation.”

Cooper continued: “Labeling Israel as guilty of genocide is a blood libel, especially when one looks at daily videos from Gaza showing obese men and children enjoying their summer. The accusations that Israel is starving the population, committing genocide, and deliberately targeting journalists and children have all been thoroughly debunked.”

Cooper, who has testified before the US Congress on the surge in antisemitism since October 7, said: “When Jews and supporters of Israel are facing wave after wave of antisemitic attacks, it is unacceptable that a Catholic institution in Germany should provide a platform for these libels. It would be very helpful to hear from the CDU-Green coalition government in Baden-Württemberg, which has recently made important commitments to combat antisemitism.”
Germany tries two men over alleged Iran plot targeting Jews
The trial in the Hamburg Higher Regional Court began on Friday of two men who were arrested last year for allegedly participating in an Iranian-backed plot to murder the head of the country’s largest Jewish organization and three other targets.

One suspect, identified only as Ali S. under German privacy laws, was arrested in Denmark in June 2025. An alleged accomplice, Afghan national Tawab M., was arrested in Denmark in November. Prosecutors filed indictments against both men in Hamburg state court on May 7.

Ali S. was charged with acting as an agent for a foreign intelligence service, engaging in sabotage-related espionage and attempted participation in murder and arson. Tawab M. was charged with attempted complicity in murder.

According to prosecutors, Ali S. worked for the intelligence arm of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps and maintained close contact with the IRGC’s Quds Force, which oversees overseas operations. Investigators said he was tasked in early 2025 with gathering intelligence on Josef Schuster, president of the Central Council of Jews in Germany; Volker Beck, president of the German-Israeli Society and a former Bundestag member from the left-wing Green Party; and two Jewish grocers in Berlin.

Ali S. was under around-the-clock surveillance by officers of the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution, the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung reported on Friday, citing reports that came up during the suspects’ first court appearance.

In their surveillance report, the officers noted that in early June, Ali S. set off in his Nissan Qashqai toward the headquarters of the German-Israeli Society, using an “aggressive driving style,” running red lights. Once there, he allegedly took pictures of the German-Israeli Society’s building with his cell phone.

“All this served for the preparation of assassination and arson attacks in Germany,” prosecutors said.
Synagogue attack thwarted: Russia's FSB arrests man allegedly planning arson attack on Jewish site
Russia’s Federal Security Service (FSB) prevented an arson attack on a synagogue in Yaroslavl and arrested a suspected member of an international terrorist organization, Russian state news agency TASS reported on Monday, citing the FSB.

The suspect, a Russian national who was allegedly obeying instructions from a handler in Syria, purchased components and chemicals used to manufacture incendiary devices, according to the FSB.

Incendiary devices and communication devices containing instructions from the handler were discovered in the suspect’s home, TASS cited the FSB as saying.

The suspect intended to use one such device in a synagogue in Yaroslavl, going so far as to conduct reconnaissance of the area and photograph the building, but was identified and arrested, the FSB said.

In a video released by the FSB, the suspect admitted that he wanted to set the synagogue on fire.


Viewers warned latest episodes of new ‘Fauda’ season are disturbingly real
In a first for the Israeli action drama “Fauda,” producers have informed viewers that episodes 7 and 8 of the current season are based on the Hamas terrorist onslaught of October 7, 2023, and include content that may be difficult to watch.

“We want to say clearly: These episodes return to that terrible day and stand on their own,” production studio Yes wrote on social media. “If watching them is too difficult, it is also fine to skip them and reconnect with the season’s plot, which will continue in the episode airing next week.”

In recognition of their public significance, the two episodes have been made available free of charge to everyone in Israel on the Yes website.

Season 5 of “Fauda” premiered several weeks ago in Israel on Yes and is expected to be the show’s final season. A date hasn’t yet been set for screening on the streaming platform Netflix.

“Fauda” creators Lior Raz and Avi Issacharoff had to rewrite the latest season after October 7, amid the reality of the ongoing war between Israel and Hamas in the Gaza Strip, and what the cast and crew underwent themselves.

Actor Idan Amedi, who appeared in seasons 2, 3 and 4 of “Fauda,” and was slated to appear in the original version of Season 5, was seriously injured in an explosion while serving in the Combat Engineering Corps reserves in Gaza in January 2024.

Amedi has recovered, but doesn’t appear in the new season.
Freed hostage Maxim Herkin reveals why his mother stayed silent throughout his 738 days in Hamas captivity
Former hostage Maxim Herkin has revealed that his mother made the agonising decision to keep his name largely out of the public eye throughout his 738 days in Hamas captivity because she believed speaking out could have cost him his life.

Speaking at a sold-out event at JW3 in London last week, in conversation with Danyelle Neuman, Chief Development Officer at the Jewish Agency for Israel, Herkin said he was the only living Israel Defence Forces (IDF) reserve officer taken hostage on 7 October 2023. Fearing Hamas would discover his military role, his family chose not to campaign publicly in the way many other hostage families did.

Herkin explained that, moments before he was captured at the Nova music festival, he threw away documents identifying him as an IDF officer, hoping they would instead help investigators establish what had happened to him if he was killed.

Two weeks later, after he had been listed as missing, those documents were shown to his mother, who immediately understood the message he had been trying to leave.

Neuman told the audience that Herkin’s mother had received criticism from other hostage families because she had not publicly campaigned for his release.

“My mother got a lot of criticism from the other hostage parents, because she wasn’t speaking up loudly, and she wasn’t one of these people putting his picture everywhere,” she said, explaining the family’s strategy.

“She was so afraid that anything she said that would contradict his story would result in his death.”

Herkin added: “It was that silence that worked.”
Emily Damari, Gali and Ziv Berman get a kick out of the World Cup in New York
Former hostages Emily Damari and best friends Gali and Ziv Berman have been celebrating England’s latest World Cup victory in New York City in scenes that would have once been beyond the wildest dreams of their supporters.

Damari, held captive by Hamas in Gaza for fifteen months, is a passionate Tottenham Hotspur fan, whilst the twin brothers are huge supporters of Liverpool FC.

The England vs. Panama match was part of a fou-day visit to the US.

A family friend told Jewish News: “The England game was a dream for them. This is a real symbol of resilience and freedom seeing the three of them celebrating England in USA at the World Cup. It’s inspirational.”

The trio were kidnapped together in Damari’s car on 7 October 2023 from their homes in Kibbutz Kfar Aza.

Emily Damari was released after 471 days in captivity in the first phase of a hostage release-ceasefire deal on January 19, 2025. After 738 days, the twins were freed on October 13, 2025, amongst a group of 20 surviving hostages released as part of the third hostage-release deal negotiated between Israel and Hamas.

Against a backdrop of Elton John’s ‘I’m still standing’ and roars of ‘She’s one of our own’, Damari received a hero’s welcome from more than 200 Spurs fans when she finally visited White Hart Lane on May 11th 2025.





Buy EoZ's books  on Amazon!

Reclaiming the Covenant on America's 250th (May 2026)

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

PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism (February 2022)

    

 

 



AddToAny

Printfriendly

EoZTV Podcast

Podcast URL

Subscribe in podnovaSubscribe with FeedlyAdd to netvibes
addtomyyahoo4Subscribe with SubToMe

search eoz

comments

Speaking

Speaking

translate

E-Book

For $18 donation








Sample Text

EoZ's Most Popular Posts in recent years

Search2

Hasbys!

Hasbys!

2019 Nobel Peace Prize nominee

Elder of Ziyon - حـكـيـم صـهـيـون



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

Donate!

Donate to fight for Israel!

Monthly subscription:
Payment options


One time donation:

Follow EoZ on Twitter!

Interesting Blogs

Show All

Blog Archive

Copyright © Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News | Powered by Blogger
Blogger Templates