Pages

▼

Friday, October 09, 2026

10/09 Links Pt1: Natan Sharansky: Is the Whole World Wrong?; October 8: The war Israel still has not learned to fight; The Nobel Committee Just Made a Mockery of Its Peace Prize, and President Trump Called It Out

From Ian:

Natan Sharansky: Is the Whole World Wrong?
This morning the Norwegian Nobel Committee announced that it has awarded the Nobel Peace Prize for 2026 to South African judge Navanethem “Navi” Pillay, who led the 2025 U.N. commission that found Israel guilty of genocide against the Palestinians. This appears to be the greatest possible legitimization of the now-established consensus about Israel’s war in Gaza.

As Jews around the world react with despair, I am reminded of an excellent article by Ahad Ha’am, written in 1892 and titled “Half Solace.” Observing the renewal of the ancient blood libel in his own time, the great cultural Zionist notes that “philosophers know that there is no lie and no evil that cannot obtain ‘general agreement’ if only the conditions of existence are suitable to it.” Unfortunately, however, “only philosophers know this, and in the eyes of the masses, even now there is no greater authority than ‘consensus.’”

It was a general consensus for hundreds of years that Jews killed Christian children to collect their blood for the Passover Seder. In Russia, for example, in the so-called Velizh affair of 1823, 43 Jews were arrested and interrogated over a period of 12 years on charges of killing a 3-year-old Russian boy. Many spent almost a decade in prison, and some died there. Of course, the accusation was a lie, and those who survived were eventually released without guilt. But what is particularly interesting about this episode is that even the Tsar Nicholas I, who personally signed their release, remarked in a postscript to his signature that he was not fully convinced these men were innocent, because there were so many similar Jewish crimes throughout history. How could all of these reports be wrong, he asked?

Or take another example, from a very intelligent Christian activist whom I met in a Soviet labor camp and who would become my best friend. He told me that while he knew Jews no longer used Christian blood, they must have done so a few hundred years earlier. Otherwise, how could such a widespread belief have come to be?

Ahad Ha’am concludes his essay with the same question. Is it really possible, he asks, that the whole world is wrong and the Jews are right? “It is possible,” he answers, “and the blood libel proves it.” It is therefore precisely here, he says, that Jews can find a useful lesson and some consolation. We can free ourselves from the power of false prejudices and find strength in the conviction of our own moral cause.

As I write, Israelis and Jews around the world are marking the genocidal campaign waged against us on Oct. 7, 2023, and mourning the thousands of innocent lives taken that day. A genocide, according to the legal definition, comprises acts committed with the intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, racial, or religious group. This is exactly what the sadistic terrorists who rampaged our communities, raping, burning, torturing, and murdering everyone they could reach, intended to do that day.

Yet at this very moment, the masses are busy accusing us of genocide against our enemies. On university campuses and in the streets of capital cities, protesters used our day of somber remembrance to amplify the growing consensus that we are the ones committing unspeakable atrocities.
I’ve seen Naza and it’s a nasty piece of propaganda
The horrors of October 7, 2023, are almost impossible to comprehend. Behind the staggering scale of the Hamas massacres are individual stories of unimaginable cruelty and suffering. Stories that must not be forgotten.

Baby Kfir, for example. Or his brother Ariel. Or their mother, Shiri. The two red-haired Israeli boys were just nine months and four years old when terrorists from the Palestinian Hamas abducted them to Gaza. Videos of their kidnapping show the shock and boundless despair in their mother’s eyes as the Islamists, shouting “Allahu Akbar”, violently forced the young family onto a pickup truck and took them to Gaza.

Months later, news spread around the world that the terrorists had murdered the two brothers and their mother with their bare hands. In an act of breathtaking cynicism, Hamas handed over the Israelis’ bodies to the Red Cross. The event was staged as a family celebration, complete with music and cheering. On the boys’ coffins were images of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu depicted as a vampire drinking the blood of the Bibas family. Instead of returning the body of the murdered hostage Shiri Bibas, Hamas handed over the remains of a Palestinian woman.

It is difficult to imagine anything more despicable.

Yarden, the father of Kfir and Ariel and Shiri’s husband, survived 484 days in Hamas captivity. He will never see his children or his wife again. Nothing will ever be right again for Yarden. Nothing. Ever.

Or Vivian Silver. The Israeli peace activist lived in Kibbutz Be’eri, right on the border with Gaza. Throughout her life, the 74-year-old campaigned for the Palestinians in Gaza and for a two-state solution. Every week, she drove to the border to collect children suffering from cancer and take them to Israeli hospitals for treatment.

On October 7, Hamas terrorists stormed her home, opened fire and then threw several hand grenades into the safe room where Vivian Silver had sought refuge. It took weeks to identify her remains. Her teeth were found beneath a pile of ashes.

Or Shani Louk, the radiantly beautiful 22-year-old German-Israeli woman who had gone to the Nova festival to dance and celebrate, only to be beaten, abused and shot by Palestinian terrorists, like so many other Israeli women. Afterwards, as Hamas triumphantly paraded her body before the people of Gaza, a mob of Palestinian civilians beat, spat upon and desecrated her remains.

A reminder: On the morning of October 7, 2023, Hamas breached Israel’s border with a single objective: to kill as many Jews as possible. The genocidal terrorist organisation murdered more than 1,200 Israelis in southern Israel. At the same time, hundreds of rockets were launched at Israel from the Gaza Strip.

The Palestinian terrorists were supported by Hezbollah, the heavily armed militia in Lebanon supplied by Tehran. From Yemen, Iran, Syria, Iraq and the West Bank, Hamas’s allies also sought to destroy the Jewish state and its citizens – precisely as the slogan goes: “From the River to the Sea!”

Israel was surrounded by a Shiite ring of fire. Overnight, it found itself fighting a war on seven fronts. Once again, the country was forced to fight for its very existence.

At the same time, Hamas abducted more than 250 innocent Israeli civilians and took them into Gaza. Accounts have documented how hostages were raped, abused, subjected to horrific torture and starved to the brink of death.

For weeks, Hamas ignored Israel’s offers to secure the hostages’ release. Jerusalem responded to Hamas’s war of aggression, or, more precisely, Israel did what any state in its position would have done. It defended itself, sought to end the relentless rocket fire from Gaza and attempted to bring its kidnapped citizens home alive.

Why this lengthy introduction to a film review?

Because none of this is shown in NAZA (a title derived from the Hebrew word for “collateral damage”). That is the filmmakers’ prerogative. But it is dishonest.

Would a film depicting the Allied attacks on Nazi Germany be credible if it failed to explain why those attacks took place? Would a film be credible if it gave the impression that the Allies had attacked Nazi Germany for no reason whatsoever? Or even suggested that they had done so out of some bloodthirsty impulse to kill other human beings?
October 8: The war Israel still has not learned to fight
On Wednesday, October 7, like many Israelis, my wife and I made the long drive from Jerusalem to the Nova music festival memorial. We wanted to offer support to families whose tears, understandably, have not dried up three years later.

We met the ZAKA commander who led teams recovering human remains from the devastated festival grounds. With extraordinary dignity, he described what his teams encountered and carefully showed us what was appropriate to see.

A crowd gathered. Fighting back tears, he asked everyone to stand together, united as one nation.

On our drive home, his words stayed with me.

Because as Israel approaches another election, we are doing something we do extraordinarily well.

We are fighting among ourselves.

Who knew what exactly, before October 7? What did Netanyahu know? Which agencies and/or intelligence officers failed? Who ignored the warnings? Why are these accusations only appearing now before the elections? Why, three years later, are we still fighting over a credible commission of inquiry?

These questions demand answers. Accountability is essential. But instead of allowing October 7 to strengthen our common purpose, we risk turning its memory into another political battlefield.

Meanwhile, we are overlooking something potentially more consequential.

October 8.

Two dates. Two different wars.

October 7 was a catastrophic failure within a world Israel understands.

Israel knows armies, terrorism, intelligence, deterrence, and military technology. We built an extraordinary defense ecosystem: the IDF, Mossad, Shin Bet (Israel Security Agency), defense industries, reserves, intelligence organizations, and alliances.

That ecosystem failed catastrophically. But we understand how to repair it.

October 7 revealed the failure of an ecosystem Israel already knew it needed since its inception.

October 8 revealed something entirely different.

An ecosystem we had never adequately built.

Before Israel’s military response in Gaza could explain the international reaction, anti-Israel demonstrations and narratives were already spreading.

The vocabulary of colonialism, apartheid and resistance was ready. Campus organizations, activists, influencers and digital networks were prepared to mobilize.

This did not require one giant conspiracy.

It required an ecosystem.

Foreign governments fund academics who produce ideas. Activists translate them. Organizations create campaigns. Influencers generate content. Algorithms amplify it. Demonstrations produce images. Media broadcast them. Politicians respond.

And the cycle accelerates.

Sinwar’s victory beyond the battlefield
Yahya Sinwar did not launch October 7 expecting Israel to remain passive.

He knew Israel would retaliate. He accepted the prospect of devastating consequences for Gaza while seeking a confrontation that could ignite additional fronts.

In effect, he launched a suicidal strategic gamble, sacrificing Hamas’s military position and exposing Gaza’s population to catastrophic consequences in pursuit of a larger objective.

Sinwar and his colleagues were killed. Hamas suffered enormous military losses. But we should not confuse military defeat with defeat on every battlefield.

Sinwar achieved a consequential victory in the battle for international perception.

Whether he anticipated every dimension of the international response is debatable. What is undeniable is that a preexisting pro-Palestinian ecosystem was capable of exploiting the war at extraordinary speed.

And where were we?

Still explaining. Still correcting. Still reacting.

A September 2026 Marquette Law School national poll found that 59% of Americans now view Israel unfavorably, compared with just 29% favorably. Only 18 months earlier, Americans were evenly divided, 43% to 43%.

It is a dramatic deterioration in Israel’s standing among the American public. The consequences are for the political and social environment in which American Jews must live, and for Israel’s ability to manage current American government support.

Not all this change can be attributed to propaganda. Israel’s decisions, the war’s humanitarian consequences, and changing American attitudes matter. But that makes our strategic failure more urgent, not less.

We failed to build a sufficiently competitive ecosystem before the crisis arrived.


Ruthie Blum: A ‘peace prize’ for the vilification of Israel
There are bad decisions and disgraceful ones. And then there’s the awarding of the 2026 Nobel Peace Prize to Navi Pillay.

The choice is hardly out of character for an award whose history has repeatedly shown that its name guarantees nothing about its recipients’ merit. Indeed, this isn’t an aberration for the Norwegian committee. But it’s an especially egregious example of a familiar pattern: an international establishment congratulating itself for advancing peace while rewarding people whose records make a mockery of the concept.

Pillay, who chaired the United Nations Commission of Inquiry that accused Israel of committing genocide in Gaza, has become a symbol of the double standards permeating the global system. The woman now being feted in the name of peace presided over a more aptly dubbed “inquisition” whose whole purpose was to brand the Jewish state with a bloody—blood libelous—stain. Like an irremovable tattoo.

The term “genocide” has a specific legal definition, including the requirement to establish intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a protected national, ethnic, racial or religious group. It’s laughable to suggest that Israel’s behavior even remotely fits that description, as it took great pains to avoid civilian casualties and flooded Gaza with humanitarian aid.

That Hamas kept stealing the food and medicine, and prevented anyone other than its goons from entering the hundreds of miles of tunnels, was never of interest to Pillay and her ilk. Nor did they ever note that the population in Gaza has grown in the past three years. Some genocide.

Though her commission’s report wasn’t a judicial verdict, the force of its accusation was unmistakable, and Pillay was gleefully instrumental in promoting the lie for pernicious purposes. Which we now see has paid off, big-time.
Jake Wallis Simons: Pillay’s Nobel Peace Prize makes a mockery of the award for its embrace of anti-Israel bias
There are moments when the moral pretensions of the international establishment become so grotesque that satire falls short. Today is one of them. The Nobel Peace Prize, the most prestigious humanitarian accolade in the world, has just been awarded to former UN human rights chief Navi Pillay.

If you aren’t already aware of the 85-year-old firebrand, then the words “UN human rights chief” should ring bells of their own. In her case, however, every one of them is rightfully rung, and more so. Pillay’s time in charge of the UN's Commission of Inquiry into Israel was dogged by accusations of bias, a failure to condemn antisemitic tropes and the "genocide" smear, the foremost blood libel of our times.

Born in Durban in 1941, the daughter of a bus driver, she rose through the racial barriers of segregated and then apartheid South Africa to become a lawyer who defended anti-apartheid activists. As a judge on the Rwanda tribunal, she helped deliver the landmark ruling that rape could constitute an act of genocide. She went on to sit on the International Criminal Court. Later in her career, however, she threw her considerable moral weight behind the "genocide" libel.

It all began in July 2022, with an interview given by Miloon Kothari, one of the three members of Pillay's commission, to the website Mondoweiss. Social media, he complained, was "controlled largely by the Jewish lobby". He also wondered aloud why Israel was "even a member of the United Nations".

Deborah Lipstadt, the historian who served as America's special envoy on antisemitism, condemned the comments. Michèle Taylor, the US ambassador to the UN Human Rights Council, said Washington was "outraged". British and Canadian officials spoke out. Yair Lapid, then Israel's prime minister, urged the UN Secretary-General to disband what he called a "tainted" inquiry.

Yet Pillay wrote to Federico Villegas, the president of the Human Rights Council, in her colleague’s defence. Kothari's comments, she said, "seem to have been taken out of context" and had been "deliberately misquoted". Happily, Villegas was not persuaded. Kothari's words, he responded, "could reasonably be interpreted as stigmatisation of the Jewish people". Days later, Kothari himself apologised. It had been "completely wrong", he wrote, to describe social media as "being controlled largely by the Jewish lobby"; his language had been "incorrect, inappropriate, and insensitive".

Pillay was left high and dry on an outcrop of bigotry, ending up more forgiving of the "Jewish lobby" remark than the man who had made it in the first place. Quite how the Nobel Prize committee can have looked at this woman and concluded that she was the best candidate this year is inexplicable. Or rather, it is a phenomenon for which the most obvious explanation is likely the correct one.
The Nobel Committee Just Made a Mockery of Its Peace Prize, and President Trump Called It Out
The Nobel Prize committee continues to showcase just how much of a joke it has become, particularly when handing out prizes in the political sphere.

On Friday, the committee awarded the Nobel Peace Prize to Navanethem “Navi” Pillay for her efforts to promote peace and international law. The South African jurist served as the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights from 2008 to 2014. But the committee’s decision glosses over a record that makes Pillay a questionable choice for a peace prize, to put it generously.

President Trump, who has openly sought the prize for his own efforts in the Middle East, blasted the choice on Friday. He reposted a Truth Social post that challenged Pillay’s credentials and laid out why her record undermines the committee’s case for honoring her.

"Today the Nobel Committee shamed itself beyond repair and demeaned the once great Nobel Peace Prize by giving it to the UN’s Navi Pillay," the reposted statement from the Alabama and Georgia-based Schoen Law Firm said. "Pillay is an unabashed hater of America and Israel. In her position she celebrated terrorists and rewarded Hamas. She conducted a phony 'investigation' claiming to find that Israel committed genocide and urging prosecution. She has no credibility in any normal sphere and has never done a thing to foster peace. Just the opposite. But what could be expected from a committee that previously gave the once coveted peace prize to Yasser Arafat?"

"President Trump gave us the Abraham Accords, which the world said would be impossible and is now expanding them! He brought home the hostages when all seemed hopeless! He is making best efforts to end the Russia/Ukraine war, to stop Iran, the number one sponsor of international terrorism, and he is trying to rebuild Gaza despite the terrorists’ best efforts to control it," the statement added. "The list goes on and on. These are the kinds of things the Nobel Peace Prize was intended to recognize and reward!!!"

Pillay’s record is difficult to reconcile with an award for peace and human rights. According to UN Watch, the former U.N. human rights chief repeatedly handed Chinese representatives the names of dissidents without regard for their families’ safety. The group also accuses her of turning a blind eye during her tenure to human rights abuses in Cuba, North Korea, Eritrea, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, Belarus, Syria, and 27 other countries rated “Not Free” by Freedom House. And when Chinese dissident Liu Xiaobo received the Nobel Peace Prize in 2010, UN Watch says Pillay skipped the ceremony at China’s urging.

In other words, she has spent her time criticizing the freest countries while giving actual human rights abusers a pass.
'An indelible stain on Norway': Trump fumes over Nobel Peace Prize snub
US President Donald Trump sharply attacked the Nobel Committee on Friday night after the 2026 Nobel Peace Prize was awarded to South African jurist Navi Pillay, the former UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, arguing that the prize should have gone to the United States — and effectively to him.

"Despite all of this and all of these unbelievable accomplishments, the Nobel Prize was given out today to a liberal person who works at the United Nations, who nobody has ever heard of. I've never heard of the person," Trump said during a campaign rally in Syracuse, New York.

"I know a lot of people. I've never heard of this particular person, but congratulations anyway."

Pillay was awarded the 2026 Nobel Peace Prize "for her efforts to promote peace and international law," according to the Norwegian Nobel Committee. She previously served as UN High Commissioner for Human Rights and as a judge at the International Criminal Court, and later chaired a UN Commission of Inquiry dealing with Israel and the Palestinian territories, a body that has drawn sharp criticism from Israel.

Trump went on to argue that the United Nations had played no role in the conflicts he says he helped resolve.

"In all of the wars that I have settled, I never spoke to the United Nations. They were of no help to me," Trump said. "The United States of America, represented by me as your president, should have received the Nobel Peace Prize, but didn't."

Trump blasts Norway over Nobel Peace Prize decision
He then directed his anger at Norway, where the Nobel Peace Prize committee is based.

"This is an indelible stain on the country of Norway and those people that made such a disgraceful and embarrassing decision," Trump said.

"The Nobel Peace Prize has been forever discredited by a handful of radical ideologues who are anti-democracy and really enemies of civilization. And we will not forget Norway."

Trump added that the failure to give the prize to the United States was "just another sign of how Norway and all these others are ripping off our country."
B’nai B’rith ‘appalled, dismayed’ Navi Pillay, who has ‘longstanding animus to Jewish state,’ selected for Nobel Prize
Navi Pillay, a former United Nations high commissioner for human rights who “epitomized systemic, singular U.N. bias against and mistreatment of Israel,” has no business receiving a Nobel Peace Prize, according to Robert Spitzer and Evan R. Bernstein, president and CEO, respectively, of B’nai B’rith International.

The nonprofit said that it is “appalled and dismayed” by Pillay’s selection.

“This choice is not only unwarranted but offensive and damaging. It cheapens the world’s leading prize for peacemaking and further reinforces a sense of isolation by Jews facing a surge in global antisemitism,” the duo said. “She had an open record of longstanding animus to the Jewish state—maligning it with the ‘apartheid’ label and endorsing punitive economic measures against it.”

Pillay, who chaired the “current, open-ended ‘commission of inquiry’ on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict” at the global body, “shamelessly defended the outright antisemitism of colleagues and mimicked the outrageous lie of Israeli ‘genocide’ in Gaza,” the B’nai B’rith leaders said.

“She was a defender of the U.N.’s notorious 2001 racism conference in her native Durban, South Africa, and of especially radical U.N. special rapporteur Francesca Albanese, who has repeatedly earned denunciation by major democracies for her bigotry against Israel and the Jewish community,” they stated. “With its senseless and shameful choice, the Norwegian Nobel Committee has done more harm to the peace prize than any similar step in recent history.”


Harvard Celebrates Its Boycott-Israel, Blood Libel Nobel Laureate
Harvard University is cheering a Nobel Peace Prize winner who is being widely denounced elsewhere as a bigot.

The Nobel award to Navi Pillay was met with fury by the prime minister of Israel, Benjamin Netanyahu, who called her "a bigot who built her career around inventing and propagating blood libels against the one and only Jewish state."

"The Nobel Prize committee has lost its moral compass," Netanyahu said. "The misguided members of the Nobel Committee are honoring the woman who propagated this demonization of the Jews."

The executive director of UN Watch, Hillel Neuer, noted that in June 2020, she signed a manifesto calling on governments to "Sanction Apartheid Israel." Subsequently, she accepted a position chairing "a Pakistani-sponsored UN Commission of Inquiry into alleged Israeli crimes," violating the principle of impartiality.

"Navi Pillay deserves the Nobel Peace Prize like the Ayatollah deserved to be elected to the U.N. women’s rights commission," Neuer said.

The Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations strongly condemned the prize, which it called "disgraceful."

"Pillay helped transform the ancient blood libel into a modern accusation of genocide against the Jewish state. Her commission twisted the language of human rights into a weapon of political warfare, trivializing the crime of genocide while demonizing Israel. The Nobel Committee gave the genocide blood libel a Nobel Peace Prize. Rather than reward a peacemaker, it rewarded a purveyor of prejudice," the conference said in a statement.

How did Harvard handle the news? The Harvard Gazette, the university’s owned-and-operated in-house newsletter, sent an email to all students, staff, faculty, and lots of alumni, with a subject line that read in part, "Nobel goes to alum." It links to a gushy profile of Pillay that describes her as "a seasoned advocate and a trailblazer" who "earned a reputation as a tough but fair-minded judge." Also, "in addition to being an adept lawyer, Pillay proved to be a skilled diplomat." Pillay earned an LLM from Harvard Law School in 1982 and an SJD in 1988.


UN Watch: “Complicit in Genocide”: U.N. Whistleblower Denounces Nobel Winner Navi Pillay
U.N. whistleblower Emma Reilly today accused Nobel Peace Prize winner Navi Pillay of being “complicit in the Uyghur genocide,” alleging that under her leadership the U.N. human rights office handed dissidents’ names to China and ignored warnings about the danger to them and their families.

UN Watch condemned the award, recalling that Pillay herself declined to attend the 2010 Nobel ceremony honoring imprisoned Chinese dissident Liu Xiaobo. The organization also cited her silence during Iran’s 2009 crackdown on protesters, her failure to speak out against many of the world’s most repressive regimes, and her record of bias against Israel and defense of antisemitic remarks.

“The Nobel committee owes an explanation to the dissidents whose names were handed to China,” said Hillel Neuer, executive director of UN Watch. “Emma Reilly has raised devastating allegations of complicity in genocide against the woman they have chosen to honor. Where was the scrutiny? Where was the concern for the victims and their families?”

“In 2010, the Nobel committee honored Liu Xiaobo for standing up to China’s dictatorship. Pillay refused to attend his ceremony. Now the committee gives her the same prize. What message does that send to Chinese dissidents risking their lives for freedom?”

“Pillay’s failure to confront powerful dictatorships was a pattern,” Neuer continued. “Our study found silence on abuses in 34 countries rated ‘Not Free,’ including Cuba, North Korea, Saudi Arabia and Sudan. When Iran’s regime beat and arrested protesters in 2009, she took three months to comment. Victims needed a champion willing to challenge their oppressors.”

“The Nobel Peace Prize should reward moral courage. Honoring Pillay while these allegations remain unanswered betrays the people human rights institutions exist to protect. The committee must explain how it reconciles this award with her record, and answer the whistleblower whose warnings the U.N. ignored.”


US sanctions entire International Criminal Court in The Hague
The Trump administration imposed sanctions on the International Criminal Court, an independent judicial body in The Hague, in its entirety on Friday.

The move builds on an executive order that U.S. President Donald Trump signed shortly after the start of his second term, which was previously used to impose sanctions on individual judges and prosecutors of the legal body, which is not part of the United Nations.

U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio accused the ICC of continuing to try to prosecute U.S. citizens and said that the goal of the sanctions was “crippling its ability to operate”

“Our message is clear. The United States and its people are not subject to the jurisdiction of the ICC,” Rubio said. “Either the ICC will end its threats, or we will end the ICC. We expect our allies, many of whom are part of the ICC and that rely on American service members for their defense, to rein in the court.”

“If they do not, the United States will continue its campaign to dismantle the ICC, brick by brick, until Americans are threatened no longer,” he said.

The ICC is an independent legal body created by the 1998 Rome Statute that is intended to prosecute individuals for war crimes, genocide, crimes against humanity and the crime of aggression.

The United States is not a party to the Rome Statute and has long disputed the court’s jurisdiction to investigate or prosecute U.S. citizens for alleged or potential crimes in conflict zones. It has also objected to the ICC’s attempts to prosecute U.S. allies that are not party to the statute, like Israel.

Past administrations have nonetheless cooperated with the court in areas where the United States believes that it has jurisdiction, as when the Biden Administration shared evidence of Russian war crimes in Ukraine in 2023.

The ICC said on Friday that it “strongly rejects” the U.S. sanctions.

“The court will continue to fully discharge its mandate, with independence and impartiality, acting only on the basis of the law and the evidence, for the sake of the countless victims of grave crimes,” stated its president Tomoko Akane.

Canada, Denmark, Germany, France, Italy, Japan, the Netherlands and the United Kingdom also issued a joint statement in support of the court.


Antisemitism in UK ‘not going to get better’ amid systemic Islamism crisis, Suella Braverman says
Islamism is a “systemic” and “deep-rooted” problem in the UK, while antisemitism is “not going to get any better,” former British home secretary Suella Braverman told The Jerusalem Post.

The Post spoke to Braverman, 46, ahead of the publication of her first book, the memoir Patriot: Empire, Betrayal and Hope. Released on October 1, it explores Braverman’s time as a barrister-turned-MP-turned cabinet minister, and her wider views on the issues in the UK, such as Islamism and political weakness. She served as home secretary under the Conservative government, before leaving the party for Reform UK in 2026.

Braverman noted that there are “systemic, profound, deep-rooted, social and cultural and institutional problems with Islamism in the United Kingdom.”

“Whether it’s in our schools, our police force, our political parties, our broader institutions – there’s a crisis. And it’s been caused by cowardice and appeasement by political leaders, most recently conservative political leaders who actually – instead of just failing to stand up to Islamism and extremism – actively engaged with it.”

She cited an example from her book of how former prime minister David Cameron invited the Muslim Brotherhood’s spokesman to lunch at Chequers, the prime minister’s official country residence.

“That’s a group that should be prescribed, not embraced by governments,” she continued.
With anti-Zionist motion, Britain's Green Party shifts the Overton window on antisemitism
Anybody with half a brain can see that the motion passed by the Green Party of England and Wales is disgraceful.

By 1,022 votes to 813, a British political party decided that Zionism – the national liberation movement of the Jewish people – should be “treated as any other form of racism.” It also endorsed one Palestinian state across all the territory on which Israel now stands.

Others far more erudite than I have dismantled the motion’s ignorance and malice. Jonathan Freedland, writing in The Guardian, exposed its central conceit: yet again, non-Jews have decided to tell Jews what Zionism means and which parts of our identity are permissible.

Almost every synagogue movement in Britain has some connection with Zionism. The Greens are therefore placing much of organized Jewish life under suspicion.

Israel’s Foreign Ministry called the decision “a stain on the history of the United Kingdom.” It is. But I want to focus on something even more ominous: a shift of the Overton window.

The Overton window, named after the American policy analyst Joseph Overton, describes the range of ideas considered politically acceptable at any given time. Inside “the window” are opinions that respectable politicians and institutions can advocate without being dismissed as extremists. Outside “the window” are the ideas regarded as beyond the pale – too offensive, absurd, or dangerous to merit serious consideration.

The window moves through argument, crisis, repetition, and institutional endorsement. An idea that begins as unthinkable is aired as radical, discussed as controversial, then accepted as one legitimate view among others.

The public need not embrace it. The crucial change occurs when a mainstream institution says the unsayable and everyone else is required to debate it.

That is what happened in Brighton. “Zionism is racism” did not remain on a placard at the edge of a demonstration or in an anonymous social media post.

A party with elected MPs and serious electoral ambitions debated it, voted on it, and adopted it as official policy. The unthinkable became a conference motion, and the conference motion became party policy. The genie is out of the bottle.
UKLFI: Natasha Hausdorff — Why Green Party’s "Zionism is Racism" Motion is Legally Flawed and Antisemitic
The Green Party of England and Wales has voted to adopt a motion declaring Zionism a racist ideology and supporting a single Palestinian state across what it calls “historic Palestine”. But what does Zionism actually mean, what are the historical and legal foundations of the motion, and could the Green Party now face allegations of unlawful discrimination against its own Jewish members?

In this UKLFI Charitable Trust interview, international lawyer and barrister, Natasha Hausdorff, examines the Green Party’s decision and explains why she considers the motion both legally flawed and antisemitic.

The motion, adopted by 1,022 votes to 813, calls for anti-Zionism to be incorporated into the party’s anti-racism policies. Before the vote, UK Lawyers for Israel warned that the proposal conflicts with the party’s own rules as well as international law and would expose it to legal challenges under the Equality Act 2010.

Natasha begins by explaining Zionism as the movement for Jewish national self-determination in the Jewish people's ancestral homeland. She challenges the motion's portrayal of Zionism as settler colonialism and examines the historical connection between the Jewish people and the land of Israel.

She then considers what the motion's support for a single Palestinian state would mean for Israel's continued existence and the internationally recognised principle of self-determination.

The discussion also examines alleged errors in the legal briefing accompanying the motion, including its treatment of International Court of Justice advisory opinions and the 1975 UN General Assembly resolution equating Zionism with racism, which was revoked in 1991.

Natasha raises a further question about whether the motion was validly adopted under the Green Party's own constitution, arguing that its incompatibility with the party's philosophical basis required a two-thirds majority for its adoption.

The interview also addresses the Equality Act 2010 and potential legal claims by Jewish, Israeli and Zionist members or employees.

Finally, Natasha explains why she believes the motion crosses the line from legitimate political criticism into antisemitism, and expresses concern about the wider acceptance of allegations against Israel that she regards as historically and legally unfounded.

*Topics discussed:*
What Zionism actually means and its historical origins
Jewish self-determination and the Green Party's proposed single Palestinian state
The Green Party's constitution and the two-thirds majority requirement
Alleged inaccuracies concerning international law, the ICJ and the UN
Whether Zionism can qualify as a protected philosophical belief under the Equality Act 2010
The potential consequences for Jewish and Israeli Green Party members
The distinction between legitimate criticism of Israel and antisemitism




‘We reject your assurances – you make us unsafe’: Synagogue delivers furious rebuke to Green council leader
A synagogue has rejected a message from a Green council leader attempting to “reassure” them in the wake of the party’s “Zionism is Racism” vote, telling him that “you may see no connection between the ceaseless vilification of Israel, the blood libels that you and your party regularly trot out, and the hostility to Jews in this country, but we do.”

Councillor Mark Blake, the leader of Haringey council is understood to have written to a number of Synagogues in the borough following the passing of the “Zionism is Racism” vote at Green party conference, saying that “the motion does not change Haringey Council’s policies, priorities or ways of working – we remain committed to fighting antisemitism and working proactively with Jewish communities to prioritise community safety for all.”

At the Green party conference on Sunday, members voted to approve a motion claiming that “Zionism is Racism”, which among other things expresses support for violent “resistance”. Party members present also overwhelmingly voted against an amendment specifically designed to protect Jewish Green party members who attend Synagogues or Jewish community centres.

In his email, Blake also described how he knew that the adoption of the motion “will be a cause of concern for people in our borough, and I want to acknowledge those concerns and would welcome the chance to hear them directly from you.

“As Leader of the Council, I want to reassure you that I will continue to work closely with our community partners to tackle racism in all its forms, listen to the concerns of our communities, and ensure everyone feels safe and respected.”

In response, Highgate United Synagogue told Blake that “we take it from both the tone and the content of your email that you are deeply embarrassed with the decision taken by your party to not only brand Zionism as racism but to call for the eradication by any means necessary including violence, of the only Jewish state, the only practising democracy in the Middle East, and also home to half of the world’s Jewish population.


Former Green leader: ‘Many of us were persuaded not to campaign publicly’ against Zionism is Racism motion
Further questions about the Green Party’s “Zionism is Racism” motion have been raised after one of its former leader released a statement in which she suggested that she and “many of us” had been persuaded “not to campaign publicly” against it.

Sian Berry, the MP for Brighton Pavilion, published a statement on Friday morning in the wake of the Holborn & St Pancras by-election result, in which the Green party leader, Zack Polanski, lost to Labour’s candidate, Sagal Abdi-Wali.

The defeat came a few days after a highly controversial motion, “Zionism is Racism” was passed at Green party conference. Members present also specifically and overwhelmingly voted against an amendment which was designed to protect Jewish Green party members who attend Synagogues or Jewish community centres.

Since then, there has been widespread condemnation of the Green from other UK political parties, as well as criticism from the European Greens international grouping, which said it “unequivocally distance[d]” itself from the motion and said that it would “immediately demand clarity from the leadership and parliamentary group of GPEW [Green Party of England and Wales].”

In her statement on Friday morning, Sian Berry said, regarding the ‘Zionism is Racism’ motion, that “I voted and argued against it because I felt it needed serious amendment, and if not then sending back for more dialogue or voting down. But the clash of conference with an exciting and mobilising by-election campaign meant many of us were persuaded not to campaign publicly for these ends, while proposers were very organised and remained intent upon no changes at all.”

Berry’s statement continued: “I want to take my full share of personal responsibility for the result of all this in the votes at conference. I should have worked harder to persuade more of our leading figures to speak up in a unified way to say that the motion as written was clearly not reflective of our values and policy principles.”

She further went on to say that she “apologise[d] to members and constituents for where we are now as a party, which I know is causing real concern”, urging those thinking of leaving the party to “please stay and let us fix this together.”
New Green party disciplinary panel member said she was ‘naive’ for previously opposing Hamas
A Green member who has just been elected to sit on the party’s disciplinary committee has previously said that she was “naΓ―ve” to oppose Hamas and shared material referring to Israelis as “an army of international thieves and murderers”.

As revealed by the Daily Mail, Halima Brewer, who was elected to the Green Party’s disciplinary committee at its conference last weekend, has previously written on social media that “I used to oppose Hamas because I thought their strategy for freeing Palestine was counterproductive.

“I have dropped that naΓ―ve view and now think the only thing Palestinians have left is violent resistance against the bigger terrorist – the biggest of all now – Israel.”

In another post, Brewer said: “I’m sorry, but it’s just plain hilarious that we’re still expected to hate Hamas after spending two years being shown exactly what it was that Hamas has been fighting.”

Brewer also shared a number of images, including one with a caption reading: “There is no country called ‘Israel’. There is only Palestine, which is currently occupied by an army of international thieves and murderers.”

In a biography on the Green party website, Brewer describes herself as having been “a champion – whenever possible for justice and freedom…for my adult life”. She described her belief that “we face 3 existential threats which are so woven together and intertwined that pulling the strings of one inevitably pulls the other 2. They are climate change, Justice (including Palestine, most urgently) and growing inequality.” She said she wanted to serve on the Green party’s disciplinary committee “because I think that is one way to serve justice and help the goals of the GP with clarity.”

Commenting on the posts, the Board of Deputies told the Mail: “These reported comments that endorse terrorism are deeply concerning and should be looked at by the police.

“They appear to be further evidence of what the antisemitic motion passed on Sunday shows the Greens have become: an extremist party with a platform of anti-Jewish racism.”


OpenAI says Iran-origin operation used AI to plant articles in media outlets
An Iran-origin influence operation used fake Western journalist identities to place nearly 100 articles in online news outlets around the world and repeatedly generated hostile social media responses to Iran International, OpenAI said in a report released on Thursday.

OpenAI said it banned a cluster of ChatGPT accounts originating in Iran that used seven false journalist personas to pitch English-language articles, mostly about the US-Iran conflict, to small and medium-sized publications. Almost 100 articles were published or syndicated across roughly a dozen outlets, giving that part of the operation significantly greater reach than its social media activity.

Fake journalists pitched real news outlets

The operation, which OpenAI dubbed “Bogus Bylines,” used ChatGPT to edit articles, tailor them to publications’ submission requirements and draft emails pitching the stories to editors.

The personas presented themselves as Western journalists, mostly Americans, writing about international politics, human rights and the Middle East. OpenAI assessed the article-placement effort as Category 4 on a six-point scale measuring how far influence operations break out beyond their own networks.

Iran International posts targeted
The operators also used ChatGPT to create batches of English and Persian social media comments about the war, often seeking responses that portrayed the US as the aggressor, Israel as an unreliable ally and Iran as resilient.

OpenAI said the operation generated more than two dozen batches of hostile Persian-language replies to posts by Iran International. Some operators also generated comments praising their own planted articles, apparently seeking to make the stories appear more popular.

But OpenAI said the social media effort achieved little visible traction. Identified replies generally received only single- or double-digit engagement and represented a minority of the authentic comments beneath posts.
Three killed, several wounded following two attacks on Saudi Arabia's King Khalid airport
Thursday's attacks on Riyadh airport killed three people, Saudi authorities said on Friday, as Yemen's Houthi group stepped up missile strikes on the kingdom and tried to shut down its airspace in an escalating war triggered by the US-Iran conflict.

The strikes, which also injured several people, damaged a Saudia Airlines plane and sent smoke billowing over the airport, led many airlines to cancel flights to the Saudi capital days before it is due to host a major meeting of global oil chiefs.

Saudi airstrikes hit Houthi targets in the Yemeni capital Sanaa overnight, Houthi officials and affiliated media said, as part of an intensifying air war against the Iran-allied group aimed at reversing its recent territorial gains, threats to international shipping, and attacks on the kingdom.

A Saudi-led coalition backing government forces in Yemen said it had destroyed three missile launch platforms used by the Houthis and warned it would respond firmly to attacks on civilians.

The Houthis, who have encircled Yemeni government forces in Yemen's third-largest city of Taiz and are trying to defend positions on the Red Sea coast against a Saudi-backed offensive, had already killed three people with strikes on airports in the kingdom earlier this week.

The Saudi civil aviation authority said air traffic at Riyadh airport had returned to normal, and flight tracking site Flightradar24 showed a gradual resumption of flights, including from some Middle Eastern airlines.

Saudia Airlines said one of those killed on Thursday was an employee of theirs.


IDF says Lebanon strike targeted Syrian operative who was plotting attacks on behalf of Iran
Lebanon said an Israeli attack on Friday wounded six people as Israel said it targeted a Syrian terror operative who planned attacks under Iranian instructions.

“The Israeli attack near the town of Hawsh al-Sayyed Ali in the Hermel district led to six wounded, including five Syrian nationals, two of them women, and one Lebanese,” Lebanon’s health ministry said, without specifying if one of the Syrians was the target of the Israeli strike.

Lebanon’s state-run National News Agency (NNA) reported that “an enemy military drone targeted a car” in the town, located close to the Syrian border, an area largely been spared such attacks since an Israel-Hezbollah ceasefire was agreed in June.

Israel’s military named the targeted operative as Yusuf Ali al-Hassoun, who it said “operated under the direction of the Iranian regime and advanced terrorist attacks targeting Israeli civilians and IDF (Israeli army) soldiers operating in southern Syria.”

It did not say whether the suspect was operating as part of a particular terrorist group.

Hassoun allegedly “planned and advanced attacks” against soldiers “that were thwarted, including the launching of explosive drones and rockets toward IDF soldiers in southern Syria.”

The IDF “will continue to operate to eliminate immediate threats on all fronts,” it said, without immediately clarifying whether it believed Hassan was killed in the strike.
Wearable counter‑drone tech enters frontline service across US, Ukraine and IDF units
Autonomous Guard’s Wearable Kit counter-drone system has been used by Ukrainian troops and undergone operational testing with the US Army in Europe and maneuvering forces in Gaza by the IDF, Defense & Tech by The Jerusalem Post.

The system is a compact RF detection and jamming device that can detect hostile drones up to two kilometers away, providing early warning for units on the move. Its jamming capability extends to three kilometers, enabling forces to disrupt drone operations before the aircraft reaches visual range. It provides directional alerts, allowing troops to take cover or reposition before a drone identifies their location.

When interception is required, SkyLock’s RF guns, which are handheld jamming devices that do not require precise aiming, can be used to neutralize incoming drones. The company says this combination of early warning and rapid response is designed to reduce exposure during reconnaissance and targeting cycles.

SkyLock’s Sky Spotter Pro, a wearable system used at higher command levels such as battalion forward command posts, allows operators to preload friendly drone data during mission planning, reducing false alarms and improving identification accuracy. This helps troops distinguish between hostile and friendly platforms.

Sky Spotter Pro can detect drones at ranges of up to five kilometers, or three kilometers in complex terrain. It can also identify the drone operator's location, enabling units to direct fire and close the operational loop more quickly. Additionally, SkyLock provides a wearable module that identifies friendly drones to prevent accidental interception.

Wearable counter‑UAS systems have seen widespread use in the Russia‑Ukraine conflict, where both sides rely heavily on small drones for reconnaissance and targeting. According to Autonomous Guard, interest in wearable systems is increasing among militaries, police forces, border units, and prison services.


Paris cargo workers refuse to load Elbit shipment onto El Al flight bound for Israel
Employees of a French cargo company refused to load an Elbit Systems security shipment onto an El Al aircraft scheduled to fly from Paris to Israel on Saturday evening, N12 News reported on Friday.

Israeli security officials have intervened in an attempt to resolve the issue, according to N12.

The report identified the Paris-based company as "Cargo," with the company's workers' committee organizing a boycott of the loading operation.

The boycott comes as the latest example of Israeli defense companies facing discriminatory issues in France following the October 7 attacks.

Israeli defense booths boarded up at Paris weapons exhibition
In June, fourteen Israeli companies were not allowed to present their systems on the opening day of the Eurostarry weapons exhibition in Paris, while thirty agreed to abide by a discriminatory policy that allowed them to only showcase defensive solutions at the largest international exhibition for the land and air-land defense and security industry.

Elbit was one of the companies allowed to display its platforms.
Two men deny carrying out surveillance for Iran of Israeli embassy in UK
Two Iranian nationals accused of being tasked by Iran to carry out hostile surveillance on the Israeli Embassy in London, Britain’s oldest synagogue and other Israeli or Jewish targets pleaded not guilty on Friday.

Nematollah Shahsavani, 41, and Alireza Farasati, 22, appeared at London’s Old Bailey court and denied a single offense under the National Security Act. They were remanded in custody ahead of their trial, which is due to begin in April.

The pair are among several individuals who have been charged in separate cases with acting on behalf of Iran in Britain.

Britain has recently accused Iran of being behind a suspected plot targeting the US-linked RAF Fairford military base, with seven men arrested and then released on bail.

Iran has denied any involvement in hostile activity in Britain, including the alleged RAF Fairford plot, after which the US removed its B-1 bombers from the base.

Shahsavani, a dual Iranian-British national, and Iranian national Farasati are alleged to have gathered information and undertaken reconnaissance in July and August 2025 on behalf of the Iranian intelligence services.

Their list of alleged targets included the Israeli Embassy, the Israeli Consulate and London’s Bevis Marks Synagogue. Judge Bobbie Cheema-Grubb said one alleged target also included an unnamed individual “of intelligence interest” to Iran.


Confronting the Lie of 'Gaza Genocide'
The world has now observed another chilling anniversary of the October 7, 2023 massacre of Israeli citizens.

What we also mark is the launch of a war by Hamas whose strategic purpose was to destabilize the Middle East — which was edging towards peaceful co-existence — while filming their October 7th atrocities. Their purpose evidently was to remind the world that they are committed to the total destruction of Israel "by any means necessary."

Make no mistake. It is a war. As in any war, unfortunately, civilians will lose their lives.

As Israel was responding with deadly force against Hamas and its allies, Hamas' collaborators around the world hijacked the word "genocide" to charge that the Israelis are engaged in a methodical and calculated program of extermination. It is beyond irony that the people who were subjected to industrial-scale murder as a formal policy by the Third Reich should now be accused of such a crime. In a world where Jew-hatred thrives as a bacillus, such libels exist.

A generation — holding high Palestinian banners that speak of their ignorance of history, of the roots of conflict, and their refusal to acknowledge Israel's right to exist — now marches on college campuses. These protestors may be able to spell "genocide" but their understanding of that word is defined by the agents of Hamas. These protestors are nothing more than dupes, many of whom would be executed by Hamas in Gaza for being infidels and for their progressive self-identity.

The Holocaust tore apart but strengthened the Jewish soul. Never again will Jews allow their enemies to commit acts of murder and unspeakable violence upon their people and not be targeted for retribution. In the war initiated by Hamas, Israel is within its rights to target the agents, soldiers, and commanders of this terrorist organization. Civilians will, unfortunately, be caught in the violence. And Hamas cynically uses those casualties while they deny food, medical assistance and honest governance to the very population they purport to represent.

The Israelis know their history. Self-defense is within the DNA of every Jew who will confront hatred with the steely resolve required in a world where an error in strategic judgment can lead to disaster. "Never again" is not a slogan. It is a sworn oath to posterity and to future generations of Jews.





 


at