05/31 Links: Rachel's Life in Pieces; Einat Wilf: What the Arab World Knew All Along & How Israel Lost the Information War; Netanyahu hails capture of Lebanon’s Beaufort Castle

From Ian:

Rachel's Life in Pieces

REVIEW: 'When We See You Again' by Rachel Goldberg-Polin
"Once upon a time, I was meandering down the road of life with my husband, Jon. It was a regular and beige life, and it worked. It was a warm beige. We felt, and were, blessed and lucky. Normal.

"Suddenly, one day, while walking along our way, a metaphorical 18-wheeler semitruck hit us from behind and broke every bone in our bodies. All 412 of our combined bones were fractured, our spirits were mangled, and our hearts were stolen. Our life was stolen.

"That day was October 7th, 2023."

So begins the soul-searing memoir by Rachel Goldberg-Polin, the Chicago-born American-Israeli whose globe-trotting efforts to free her son Hersh from Hamas captivity ended when he was murdered in a tunnel in Gaza 330 days after his kidnapping.

When We See You Again is a book no parent should ever have to write but every American should read. That every Israeli will read it I take as given, considering the prominence of Hersh in the country's national consciousness and the fact that posters pleading for his release still cling stubbornly to street signs across the world's only Jewish state.

The book is an attempt by a bereaved mother, beloved by the millions of people across the globe who read and watched her and her husband's efforts on behalf of their only son, to capture Hersh's personality beyond the headlines and psychologically work through her unimaginable grief. "Since my heart is shattered into tiny pieces," she writes, "it is easier to share than when it was one mighty, solid, and strong heart. So please take a shard. Be careful, they are sharp." Its brilliance lies in the author's weaving of unending loss and boundless frustration alongside attempts to find measures of comfort through Jewish teachings (by profession, she is an educator). Additionally wise is her avoidance of distracting the reader with partisan politics. No political figure in America or Israel is mentioned by name and she does not take a side on the debate that roiled the global Jewish community as to whether imprisoned terrorists should be freed in exchange for civilian hostages.

The reader is reminded of Hamas's brutality, often absent from daily headlines about Middle East negotiations and by those who would seek a Palestinian state. Describing how Israeli authorities found the bodies of Hersh and his fellow murdered captives, she unsparingly and clinically notes, "They were all skeletal, filthy (the coroner estimated they had not bathed in months), bearing scars of torture, and riddled with close-range bullet wounds. Hersh had six. And his hair was covered in gunpowder." She details how Chaim Peri, an 80-year-old peace activist, was kidnapped and murdered after 100 days of captivity. While Goldberg-Polin doesn't dwell on every horrific detail, it's worth reminding readers that on the 7th, Hamas also killed Holocaust survivors, burned Jews alive in their homes, sexually abused both living and dead victims, and livestreamed the murder of grandmothers on Facebook. Forty-six Americans had their lives snuffed out that day.

Jake Wallis Simons: The anti-Zionism mob is showing its true insidious colours

On the surface, the anti-Zionist cover story is quite convincing. They simply long for the evil state of Israel to be replaced by a single, democratic country with equal rights for all. The Zionist project was a historic mistake and should be humanely dismantled. Pretty reasonable, no?

Not so fast. For one thing, if you’re going to start dismantling every country with a history of injustice, best of luck to America, Australia, Canada, Turkey, Pakistan and India, all the Latin American states founded through Spanish and Portuguese conquest, all the European states built through centuries of feudal warfare and empire, and much of Africa and the Middle East.

Secondly, any practical thoughts on that single state for Jews and Palestinian Arabs? Here’s a clue: think October 7 and multiply it. So what’s the solution? Send the Jews back to the countries from which they most recently fled, like Poland, Russia, Syria, Iraq, Yemen, Egypt and Libya? What about the racists in those countries who persist in their demands that the Jews go “back to Israel”?

They must know all this, just as they must know that “Death to the IDF” would mean a second Holocaust. Regardless, celebrities like Gary Lineker and Juliet Stevenson craft the anti-Israel narrative, while progressive Jews like Miriam Margolyes and Zack Polanski provide the alibi. “Respect” is awarded. Then the shock troops go in.

Here’s another flavour of the idiocy of the scene. Molly Crabapple, an anti-Zionist writer, recently published a book about Bundism. This was an Eastern European Jewish socialist movement of the 20th century which opposed the Zionist dream of returning to the land of Israel. Instead, Bundism promoted “doikayt”, a Yiddish word meaning “hereness”, insisting that Jews should fight for dignity where they already lived. According to The Economist, this could inspire modern Jews who “want to celebrate their heritage without tying themselves to Israel”.

Thanks for that. Here’s the problem: the Bundists were slaughtered in the Holocaust. This, then, is a vignette with a warning. To prevent the rhyming of history, we need immunity to spin. Insidious ideas must be given their true names, regardless of the nomenclature shrilly demanded by their proponents.

British Museum evacuated after ‘suspicious device’ found days after Jewish event postponed

The British Museum was evacuated on Saturday after staff discovered a suspicious device in a visitor toilet and received what it described as “malicious communications”, just days after the institution faced criticism for postponing a Jewish Culture Month lecture on ancient Israel over security concerns.

Police were called to the museum at around 2.50pm and between 12,000 and 16,000 visitors were evacuated as a precaution.

The Metropolitan Police later confirmed that the package was found to be non-suspicious and that there was no ongoing threat. The museum reopened shortly before 4pm.

In a statement, the museum said: “Earlier today, the British Museum was evacuated as a precaution after a suspicious device was discovered in a visitor toilet. At the same time, the museum received malicious communications, which were treated seriously and reported to the relevant authorities.

“As this remains a police matter, we will not be providing further comment on the nature of the communications received.”

The incident comes less than a week after the museum postponed a lecture on the kingdoms of ancient Israel and Judah, which had been scheduled as part of Jewish Culture Month.

The lecture, due to be delivered by Paul Collins, Keeper of the Department of the Middle East, was postponed after concerns that activists planned to disrupt the event. Museum officials said intelligence suggested a significant proportion of those registered to attend intended to prevent the lecture from proceeding.

The decision sparked widespread criticism, with politicians, historians and public figures accusing the museum of capitulating to threats of disruption.

David Collier: Antisemitism and Ignorance on Display at Cambridge Market Square

Last week someone showed me a photograph of a pro-Palestine stall in Cambridge Market Square. What I saw was not angry students or hardened activists, but four elderly women – probably in their seventies – who had chosen to spend their day urging strangers to boycott Israel.

The image stayed with me – and I decided that I wanted a closer look at what was actually taking place. So yesterday I went up to Cambridge to listen to what they were saying. Selling a Fictional Palestine

When I arrived, the stall was slightly larger than the one I had seen in the photograph, with perhaps six people gathered around it. The women from the original image were there, now accompanied by a couple of younger men. For a while I simply stood nearby, looked through the maps and leaflets laid out on the table, and listened to the conversations taking place with members of the public who had stopped to engage.

At one point, one of the Cambridge Palestine Solidarity Campaign activists was speaking to three young people, probably in their early twenties. The discussion turned to the word “Palestine” – and it quickly became clear that none of those involved had any real grounding in the history they were attempting to discuss.

For much of the last two millennia, “Palestine” was primarily a geographic term used by successive imperial and colonial powers in reference to the Holy Land. It was not part of the traditional identity of the local Arab population. Yet the subject has become so politically charged that many pro-Palestinian campaigners now tie themselves in ahistorical knots trying to pretend otherwise.

Which was exactly what I encountered.

After the group moved on, and noticing my interest in the stall, one of the women approached me. I deliberately chose not to challenge her or present myself as informed. I wanted to test the depth of her knowledge, so rather than appearing as an adversary, I presented myself as someone open to being educated.

We spoke for around twenty minutes, and almost everything she told me was either misleading, historically confused, or simply false.

Here are a few examples:
Invading armies
I was told that while the Arab armies did invade in 1948, they only entered the areas allocated to the proposed Arab state and did not enter the Jewish enclave. This is simply false. Egyptian, Syrian, Jordanian and Lebanese armies all entered areas allocated to the Jewish state. Jordanian forces also captured the Jewish areas within the international zone around Jerusalem and ethnically cleansed them of their Jewish population. At one stage, the Egyptian army was just twenty miles from Tel Aviv.

The woman was not merely mistaken. She was dramatically rewriting the nature, ambition and scope of the invasion.

Read More

05/30 Links: Mamdani just offered NY's Jews a 234-year-old bargain; Ireland Can't Stop Thinking About Israel; Hezbollah targets Israeli home front with series of rocket, drone attacks

From Ian:

Hen Mazzig: Giant

I went into Giant braced for a hit job, and I was wrong about that. Mark Rosenblatt does not put Roald Dahl in the dock and read out the charges against him. He gives him wit, a beautiful house in the country, a fiancée who adores him, and a new children’s book about to ship... And then he lets Dahl talk. John Lithgow plays him as charming, the kind of man you would want at your table. By the end you understand that the charm and prestige were doing the work the whole time. It was how the cruelty traveled.

Liccy, his fiancée, catches the contradiction before anyone else in the room. You keep telling me the Jews in Israel are violent monsters, she says, and yet you tell me the Jews here are weak. She cannot make the two fit together. She is not meant to. The Jew who is too powerful and the Jew who is too cowardly are the same invented Jew, convicted in both directions at once. The charges against him have never needed to agree with one another.

Then there is Tom, Dahl’s British publisher, who is Jewish and wants no part of any of it. “I’m British!” he proclaims. This has nothing to do with me. Yes, I was rolling my eyes too. Later he exclaimed that when his people do something good he feels a flicker of pride, or maybe not pride, maybe just relief at not having to be ashamed for once. When they do something bad, he is ashamed. It is the diaspora bargain, the hope that enough distance from Israel will buy you a pass. It does not. Dahl turns on him anyway and calls him a house Jew. A house Jew? The man who worked hardest to be left out of it gets the ugliest name in the room.

Dahl saves a stranger argument for Jessie Stone, the executive his American publisher sent to manage him. His real quarrel, he tells her, is with Ashkenazi Jews like her. Europeans, with no claim to the Middle East, unlike the “Arab Jews and the Ethiopian Jews.” The flattery is a weapon. It makes some Jews native so the rest can be called foreign. I hear the identical argument now, usually from people who have never read a line of Dahl. The Israeli becomes the white colonizer and the Mizrahi the real thing, and none of it is meant to honor anyone. It is a way to decide which Jews are allowed to belong where they already live. Dahl got there in 1983. The sorting is a pose, and it does not survive the afternoon. By the end he stops pretending any of them are the real ones. He hates all of us.

The play is funniest right before it is at its worst. Stone presses Dahl on Israel fighting a defensive war and asks what Britain would do if its own cities were bombed. We would never be as barbaric as you are to the Palestinians, he says. She gives him two words back. Dresden. Nagasaki.

Later, cornered, he turns to his cook and asks whether she would ever visit Israel, whether she would boycott an Israeli avocado. Does the avocado know that it’s Israeli, she asks, and the house laughed. The laugh matters. The whole logic of the boycott comes apart the moment a real piece of fruit is in your hand.

What lifts Giant above a period piece is that Dahl wrote the ending himself, in life, and Rosenblatt understood that.

No, ambassador: Israel's anger with France is not 'staged,' it is earned

The ambassador defends France’s stance on Lebanon, but he ignores the rhetoric that accompanied it. To hear Macron accuse Israel of “spreading barbarism in the region” as it fought to stop Hezbollah’s relentless rocket fire was a breaking point. It felt less like a strategic critique and more like a defense of France’s historical raison d’être in Lebanon at the expense of Israeli lives. To use the word “barbarism” against the victims of October 7 while they fight an Iranian proxy is an inversion of reality that no “friend” should utter.

Then came the diplomatic sucker punch: the announcement of an upcoming, unconditional recognition of a Palestinian state. By moving toward recognition then, without a negotiated settlement or the release of our brothers and sisters still rotting in Hamas tunnels, France effectively rewarded the October 7 massacre. This move did not advance peace; it actively derailed the delicate negotiations to free our hostages by signaling to Hamas that it need only wait for the West to hand it a victory.

To add insult to injury, France then moved to boycott Israeli defense companies at major exhibitions. How can a nation claim to support our “right to self-defense” while simultaneously banning the very tools we need to exercise that right? A diplomatic double standard

Ambassador Journès, you claim there is a “double standard” being applied to France. On the contrary, we are simply applying the same standard to you that you apply to us. We see the consistency with which France treats Israeli security as a secondary concern to its own Mediterranean grandstanding.

I am not a fan of the current Israeli government. I protest its policies and worry for our democracy. But being a critic of my government does not make me suicidal for my country. Loving France does not mean I must accept its gaslighting.

We don’t need “smooth conversations,” Mr. Ambassador. We need an ally that doesn’t treat our survival as a bargaining chip for its own regional relevance.

Our anger isn’t “staged.” It is the natural response of a people that expected more from the patrie of Liberty, Equality, and Fraternity.

Author Theo Baker says he feels more Jewish as a result of antisemitism at Stanford

Theo Baker describes himself as “an accidental journalist.” But at just 21, his writing has already sent shockwaves through the academic world.

As a freshman at Stanford University in 2022, he exposed then-President Marc Tessier-Lavigne’s decades-long pattern of manipulated data and research in scientific papers he co-authored or supervised, ultimately leading to his resignation. Baker, the son of New York Times reporter Peter Baker and New Yorker columnist Susan Glasser, became the youngest recipient of the George Polk Award for his reporting on Tessier-Lavigne.

During his sophomore year, Baker published a much-discussed essay in The Atlantic called “The War at Stanford,” exploring campus culture following the Oct. 7, 2023, terrorist attacks in Israel. He called college “a factory of unreason” and argued that anti-Israel demonstrations and rhetoric had created a pervasive climate of fear, accusing Stanford of failing to adequately condemn the attacks or protect Jewish students, all while training the next generation of tech and industry leaders.

Baker reflects on his turbulent college years in his new memoir and exposé, How to Rule the World: An Education in Power at Stanford University, published earlier this month. The book lays bare an elite university corrupted by Silicon Valley’s pursuit of power, all while Stanford saw a historic rise of antisemitism.

Whether it was navigating the release of ChatGPT or grappling with the impact of the Oct. 7 attacks, Baker said every year of his experience at the elite Palo Alto, Calif., university presented a unique challenge. Weeks away from graduation, Baker spoke with Jewish Insider about his past four years on campus, the role that technology plays in rising antisemitism — and what the future might hold for universities.

Jewish Insider: You’ve described yourself as coming from a home with “just a tiny bit of cultural Judaism.” How has covering antisemitism changed your Jewish identity? What about your relationship with Israel?

Theo Baker: In fall 2022, I went home for Thanksgiving and said, “There’s so much antisemitism at Stanford.” I was shocked by that. It’s not something I really countered growing up. As soon as I arrived at Stanford — even in the first week — someone asked me, “why are all Jews so rich?”

By the end of that year — and this is before Oct. 7 —- someone in my dorm, a kid who was Jewish, talked about being Jewish for the first time and someone put a bunch of swastikas and an image of Hitler on his door later that day.

So Jewishness is an identity and not one I would have placed much investment in prior to coming to college. It was something that I knew about myself but was not particularly salient. Certainly, I, like many college students in the last few years, have been made to feel more Jewish just by the circumstances around us. It was certainly interesting to be here on campus as a reporter when the biggest story happening was something that also intersected with my own background.

I have not taken trips to Israel [in college] but I lived in Israel briefly when my dad was the Jerusalem correspondent for The New York Times. I’ve tried to center my reporting on the things I have expertise on. Stanford is 7,000 miles away from Israel. It’s so fascinating that it became such an important issue for people, and then disappeared seemingly so quickly from the public conversation.

Read More

05/29 Links Pt2: The Joy of Hating Jews; The CliffsNotes Guide to Anti-Zionist Brainwashing; Mamdani endorses former Columbia encampment organizer for Congress

From Ian:

The Joy of Hating Jews

Nazi Germany understood this with terrifying sophistication. Some of the most disturbing footage from the period is disturbing precisely because people appear cheerful. Crowds smiled during boycotts of Jewish stores and later acts of public humiliation and degradation. Book burnings resembled university festivals. Torchlit parades became raucous public celebrations. Looting, gathering, and watching flames together transformed hatred into public theater in which ordinary people could participate.

Today’s digital culture has monetized these pleasures. Online platforms are engineered to maximize engagement by maximizing emotional reward. Antisemitism is extraordinarily well suited to such systems. Platforms amplify the thrill of forbidden knowledge, insider language, memes, and collective outrage while making them instantly accessible and endlessly repeatable. The digital dogpile—coordinated mass attack on a single Jewish target—is the mob made digital. Like the analogue mobs that preceded them, these too are often gleeful and public. But unlike earlier forms, participation no longer requires gathering in the street or much physical effort at all. The mob no longer needs to gather, it simply needs to log on.

Flooding Jewish journalists’ social media feeds with Holocaust jokes and “oven” memes; defacing synagogues, menorahs, or Jewish community centers with swastikas—often timed to holidays; filming antisemitic taunts of visibly Jewish people and posting them online for laughs; turning classic antisemitic tropes into viral “ironic” content or remix videos—none of these are coherent responses to a supposedly sophisticated international cabal controlling the world’s economy, politics, media, migration, and satellites. They are rituals of humiliation. The point is not resistance. The point is pleasure.

Revelation, belonging, and moral framing explain much of antisemitism’s appeal and durability. They are pleasures that can disguise themselves as insight, solidarity, and justice. Each has a cover story. Together, they remove the ordinary societal restraints on cruelty. Once hatred feels righteous and collective, Jewish suffering itself becomes the pleasure. The sadism—pleasure in Jewish pain, fear, and humiliation for its own sake—has no disguise. The suffering itself is the reward.

One of the most difficult realities confronting Jews about antisemitism is that their outrage is part of the reward structure. It is part of the fun.

Antisemitism is rarely content merely to express itself. It seeks reaction. The shock, anger, fear, and public anguish it provokes are psychologically and socially rewarding to the antisemite. It heightens the drama. This helps explain why even wildly implausible accusations persist despite their absurdity. The accusations are not simply designed to persuade—they are meant to scandalize, provoke, and energize. Their very absurdity is part of the thrill. Jews have been accused of using Christian children’s blood to make matzo, of controlling the weather, of harvesting organs from Palestinian children, of training and deploying dogs as instruments of sexual assault, of operating secret space lasers. The accusations need not be coherent. They need only be energetic. The more absurd the allegation, the more satisfying the reaction it provokes.

This creates a peculiar bind. Antisemitism cannot be ignored. History punishes indifference again and again. But public Jewish distress feeds the very reward system sustaining it. Condemnation does not deter, it deliver the pleasure the antisemite wants.

If Jews protest loudly, it will be cast as Jews having something to hide. If Jewish organizations demand collective condemnation, it will be cast as Jews having the power to suppress criticism. If Jews stay silent, it will be cast as indifference, arrogance, or worse—tacit agreement. Confront the accusation publicly and Jews feed the spectacle. Ignore it and normalization spreads. Explain it carefully and with nuance and lose ground faster. Complexity will always be outrun by emotional simplicity and the vocabulary of moral crusade. In short, Jews become unwilling performers in someone else’s theater. The antisemite wins either way.

This is part of the exhaustion Jewish communities experience in the wake of antisemitic waves that followed Oct. 7 and have not abated. It is not only fear. It is the demoralizing recognition that every available response is both necessary and compromised.

Antisemitism is not a burden its adherents bear—it is a pleasure they seek. Antisemitic narratives are not the cause of antisemitism—they are its cover stories. Spectacle is not a byproduct of antisemitism—it is often the product. Sadism is not a side effect—it is what revelation, belonging, and moral righteousness make possible. Jewish outrage is not a deterrent—it is a reward. And all of this is because, while the antisemite often claims to be outraged by Jews, history shows he is—far more often than not—thrilled by them.

Seth Mandel: The CliffsNotes Guide to Anti-Zionist Brainwashing

The story of Taryn Thomas’s recovery from the intellectual isolation of pro-Palestinian activism provides a handy guide for anyone interested. Her quotes in her Telegraph profile are perfect as a CliffsNotes-style outline of the anti-Zionist movement in the West:

“People I know, whether it was activists or people I look up to, were already posting their thoughts.” This is Thomas reflecting on her social circle at Stanford after the massacres of October 7 but before Israel’s ground incursion in response. She didn’t know much about the conflict, but those around her had talking points ready to go to defend Hamas and indict Israel as soon as the attack happened. This is key to anti-Zionist activism: It isn’t grassroots or organic; it is pre-packaged and distributed to an army of propagandists.

“I never really understood why, but we were told that in order for us to be free, Palestine has to be free.” Thomas, who is black, was introduced to the pro-Palestinian cause at Black Lives Matter events. This is classic anti-Zionist media strategy: Co-opt someone else’s oppression and tell them that they are the victim of the Jews. Immediately making it about someone other than the Palestinians also frees one from the burden of the Palestinian share of blame for the state of the conflict.

“It seemed like everyone was a lot more educated than me and very certain and sure of themselves that this is a genocide. The only safe position was the more radical one in the encampment.” Once inside the activist wing of the mission, one quickly finds that the lazy river flows only in one direction. If you float along, you drift into increasingly more extreme territory; it is staying in one place or exploring moderate positions that require effort.

Seth Mandel: Heed This Rabbi’s Words

Rabbi Ammiel Hirsch, the senior rabbi at the Stephen Wise Free Synagogue in New York, gave a speech yesterday at a Reform Judaism conference that I predict will be studied, remembered, and referenced for the foreseeable future by his fellow rabbis.

The address should be watched, because Hirsch knows how to deliver a speech. And because often when there’s something you really need to hear, you need to literally hear it. The speech was a rousing call for Reform Judaism to wear its Zionism on its sleeve, to proudly embrace Jewish particularism, and to hold firmer than ever to its belief in Jewish peoplehood.

Because it is no surprise that I support Hirsch’s unapologetic love of Zion, I will comment on one specific aspect of the speech that I believe made it so profound. In organized American Jewry, just as in politics, an idea has taken hold: Because young people are wishy-washy on Zionism and Israel, institutions must either adapt to welcome their ideas or watch their membership crumble.

I won’t mince words: This is weaselly behavior. Which is why I’m not shocked to see it in politics, even as I find the self-debasement cringeworthy. But I have no patience at all for it in Judaism for one reason: Our clergy are our teachers.

Teaching, leadership, education—these are what saved Judaism after the destruction of the Second Temple and the ensuing exile. We argue endlessly about what our rabbis say and do and mean, but it is largely thanks to this system that we have something to argue about at all.

So if young people are straying from Jewish peoplehood, is it our responsibility to join them? Or to teach them?

One of the repeated explanations one hears from liberal Jews is that so many young people have never known a not-right-wing Israeli government. In political circles, this can make Israel advocacy difficult for Democratic officials.

Hirsch also shares this sentiment. He has many disagreements with the current Israeli government, and he does not shy from saying so. But he does not use this as an excuse:

“Given the growing hostility to Israel, especially in our circles, liberal and progressive spaces, it is not enough for us to proclaim our Zionist bona fides every now and again, often expressed defensively, and with so many qualifications, stipulations, and modifications that our enthusiasm for Zionism is buried under an avalanche of provisos. It is not enough to issue occasional press releases, or tweets, that we are a Zionist movement. We are the leaders. We must lead.”

Read More

05/29 Links Pt1: How Benjamin Netanyahu transformed Israeli politics in 30 years; Every US ally is under attack from the UN; The ICC’s illegitimate pursuit of Israeli leaders is political warfare

From Ian:

How Benjamin Netanyahu transformed Israeli politics in 30 years

Shimon Peres, the world-renowned statesman who had served in multiple governments for an aggregate 24 years, was dethroned by a political novice nearly three decades his junior, the woefully inexperienced Benjamin Netanyahu, who had not been a minister for one day.

The electoral upset was explained by circumstances – a wave of terror attacks that followed, and mocked Peres’s peace promises. No one understood that a new era in the history of the Jewish state had just begun: the Bibi era, an epoch that has his name written all over it, and our future teetering under its weight.

What was this era about, what were its benefits, what were its costs, and what should follow its steadily approaching end?

Netanyahu’s finest hour came not during his aggregate 18 years as prime minister, but in between them, as Ariel Sharon’s finance minister.

With his first premiership having ended in a ringing defeat, Netanyahu set out to prove he could not only talk, but also do. What he thus did – massive cuts in social spending, sharp tax cuts, a set of privatizations, and a package of financial reforms – helped lead the Israeli economy to international stardom. It also showed that Netanyahu, unlike most politicians, had convictions.

Then again, that achievement was not the Bibi era’s main feature. His economic reforms accelerated, but did not launch, Israel’s journey from socialism to capitalism. That transition had been triggered by the 1985 Stabilization Plan. In fact, reforms mostly starred in Netanyahu’s rhetoric, but not in his deeds.

As prime minister, he delivered some infrastructure development – most notably the Jerusalem-Tel Aviv fast train – but when it came to complex structural problems, he avoided ambitious action. Yes, his open-skies policy cut flight prices, but more urgent issues, like the quality of the school system, the shortage of hospitals and doctors, the political system’s deformities, and the crime crisis in the Arab sector, were accepted fatalistically as fixtures of Israeli life.

As this column claimed already 15 years ago, by the time he returned to the premiership, Netanyahu had “lost his own reformist drive” (“Bibi the third’s failed premiership,” July 1, 2011).

Johnathan Tobin: Who should speak for Israel? The case for Caroline Glick

As far as Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s leftist critics are concerned, the last thing Israel needs is someone representing the country abroad who enthusiastically supports his policies, and is ready to do intellectual and verbal combat with the government’s opponents. If that doesn’t make sense, then welcome to Israeli politics.

That basic conundrum explains the firestorm that has greeted the floating of the idea that Netanyahu might name veteran journalist and current adviser Caroline Glick to the post of consul general in New York City. Glick was a senior contributing editor at JNS and hosted “The Caroline Glick” show on JNS TV before being named as Netanyahu’s international affairs adviser in February 2025.

In many ways, she is an ideal candidate for such a post. She was born, raised and educated (at Columbia and Harvard universities) in the United States. As a result, she speaks unaccented idiomatic American English, unlike most of Israel’s diplomats.

After making aliyah, she served in the Israel Defense Forces, where she worked as coordinator of negotiations with the Palestinian Authority during the period of the Oslo Accords. After becoming a journalist, she was embedded with the U.S. Army during the invasion of Iraq and worked as a frontline war correspondent. Since then—and outside of a brief stint running for the Knesset in 2019—she’s been covering and commenting on the issues that are at the forefront of Israeli public policy and diplomacy.

Moreover, as someone who worked with Netanyahu for a while in the 1990s and then again in the last year, she understands the prime minister’s views as well as anyone.

October 7 exposed the West’s dangerous illusion about Iran - opinion

October 7 was not merely a security breach; it was a fundamental turning point that shattered a global delusion. To understand why Israel was so catastrophically blindsided, we must examine the fact that for decades, the West and Israel operated under the comfortable delusion that money, prosperity, and the responsibilities of governance could “tame” an ideological movement.

This catastrophic error in Gaza, the belief that Hamas could be “bought,” was not just an Israeli failure. It is the exact same flaw currently poisoning the international approach to the Islamic Republic of Iran, particularly regarding its nuclear program.

The illusion of prosperity
Prior to October 7, Israel and the United States – operating under the assumption that economic prosperity could tame radicalism – approved the flow of vast amounts of capital into the Gaza Strip.

High-paying work permits were issued for Gazans to work in Israel, and the Strip saw the rise of modern shopping centres and palm-fringed boulevards.

The assumption was simple: If we give them a middle-class life, they won’t want to lose it. We believed that Hamas, burdened by the duties of statecraft and the management of a growing economy, would choose the survival of its “mini-state” over the bloody pursuit of its charter. We assumed they knew that a major attack would mean their total destruction, and that they feared that destruction.

The reality of the death cult
We were wrong. October 7 proved that jihadist forces do not view the world through the lens of material profit and loss. For them, this world is an “abode of passage,” a temporary and hollow stage. Prosperity is not a goal; it is a tactical lull used for “Taqiyya” (strategic deception) while they prepare for the only world that matters: the afterlife – as they see it.

In this ideology, life is not something to be protected; it is a currency to be spent.

When a movement views its own children as future martyrs, uses its civilians as human shields to gain divine and political merit, and values a glorious death over a comfortable life, traditional economic leverage is useless. You cannot deter those who perceive their own annihilation as a shortcut to paradise.

Read More

05/28 Links Pt2: VDH: Haters’ selective outrage exposes the hypocrisy of their Israel lies; Yad Vashem to open first Holocaust education center outside Israel in Munich

From Ian:

Victor Davis Hanson: Haters’ selective outrage exposes the hypocrisy of their Israel lies

Since Oct. 7, 2023, we have been lectured nonstop about the supposedly singular sins of Israel.

The campuses, the left-wing media and Democratic Socialist officials, following the cue of student activists and leftist professors, have painted Israel and its Jewish supporters as Nazis, fascists and among the worst murderers in today’s bloody world.

This is nonsensical.

The medieval-style massacre of 1,200 Jews in their homes on Oct. 7, during a time of peace, should have increased awareness of the existential dangers Israel faced.

Instead, it spawned a storm of antisemitism.

The libels of genocide and ethnic cleansing being cast at the Jewish state apply far more accurately to a host of other nations.

Over the decades, we have sold arms and given billions of dollars in military aid to Turkey — yet between 1915 and 1920, the Turkish government conducted a genocidal policy of ethnic cleansing against their Armenian population, for which it has never apologized and which it continues to deny.

None of the current critics of Israel seems worried that Turkey invaded Cyprus in 1974 and ethnically cleansed Northern Cyprus of its Greek inhabitants.

There are no demonstrations anywhere in America on behalf of the far more recent “Nakba” of the Cypriot Greeks.

Did Columbia University activist Mahmoud Khalil ever rally his armies of idealists to damn the Islamic-driven ethnic cleansing of the ancient population of Christian Armenians, or to call for the United States to sever its joint arms deals with Turkey?

Before the 1967 war, nearly 1 million Jews were living in the Arab and Muslim Middle East, descendants of those who had been there for centuries.

But during the serial Arab-Israeli wars of the 20th century, they were almost entirely pushed out of those countries.

None appear today before television cameras, shaking the keys of their confiscated homes in Algiers, Amman, Baghdad or Cairo.

Of course, no one dares to say Arabs “ethnically cleansed” almost all their Jewish citizens.

Between 1987 and 1989, the Somali Marxist dictator Mohamed Siad Barre began slaughtering entire rival Somali clans. The eventual death toll may have reached nearly 200,000.

When Barre’s murderous regime finally imploded, thousands of Somali refugees who had either supported Barre or belonged to his clan fled to the once-despised West, especially the United States and Europe.

Among those pro-Barre refugees were apparently members of Rep. Ilhan Omar’s family, including her father, a colonel and regimental commander in Barre’s army.

It’s a bitter irony that Omar is now such a sharp critic of Israel and the United States, given that America granted refuge to her family.

Yet we are not aware that any Somalis today are now being accosted by strangers — as Jews are — and lectured about what their former leader’s regime did to those thousands of innocent civilians.

Ruth S. King: As Antisemitism Rages, Jewish Organizations Have Sidelined Themselves They did so by embracing partisan politics, rather than focusing on their core mission—protecting Jews around the world, including America and Israel.

Conor Cruise O’Brien, the Irish politician, writer, historian, and academic, once said, “Antisemitism is a light sleeper.” The phrase is often invoked to explain sudden, violent resurgences of antisemitic sentiment in modern times. It has now awakened with gale-force winds, and Jewish political clout and influence have disappeared.

Many Jewish organizations, some of which are political powerhouses ostensibly created to protect Jews and provide bipartisan support for Israel, have allied themselves with the “progressive” left. This is odd, as I searched all the Psalms and the “shalt not” commandments, and there is absolutely nothing about abortion rights, global warming, or transgender ideology. Furthermore, “woke” is a verb, not a Jewish mandate.

This is not the first time a single-issue political organization has picked a side in America and lost all its clout. An excellent example from the past is the old “China Lobby,” which went to the extreme right—and embraced antisemitism.

When John F. Kennedy was running for president in 1960, he had to contend with a hegemonic institution: the powerful “China Lobby,” an influential bipartisan coalition of voters who adamantly advocated for U.S. recognition and protection of Chiang Kai-shek’s Nationalist government in Taiwan, and fiercely opposed diplomatic recognition of the People’s Republic of China.

The lobby successfully influenced foreign policy, securing the U.S. commitment to defend Taiwan through legislation like the Formosa Resolution of 1955.

To say the lobby was a political powerhouse is an understatement. The group forced the cancellation of Ross Y. Koen’s The China Lobby in American Politics. Macmillan had already started printing copies, but the book was withdrawn from publication in response to the political pressure. Only a few copies survived.

What happened to the China Lobby, which originated as a focused bipartisan group?

The group moved sharply to the right, collaborating with far-right isolationist and anti-communist coalitions, including early ties to militant grassroots organizations such as the John Birch Society. Among its protagonists were Senators William Knowland and Joseph McCarthy, alongside publisher Henry Luce and academic organizations like the Committee of One Million, a political pressure group that operated from 1953 to 1971.

The lobby actively allied with militant right-wing politicians to push an aggressive, pro-Nationalist foreign policy, attacking moderate U.S. diplomats and attempting to purge government officials who were deemed “soft on communism.”

Influential conservatives like J.B. Stoner advocated for radical antisemitism and segregation.

This was not the premise of the original lobby, which was concerned only with protecting Taiwan’s international status. Because it became embroiled in other political issues, it effectively came to be seen as a conservative fringe group and lost members, influence, and political clout.

For the past many years, Jewish organizations have made the same mistake. They were once political powerhouses ostensibly created to protect Jews and provide bipartisan support for Israel. Now, though, they’ve allied themselves with the “progressive” left. (Not all have done this, thankfully. Two outstanding organizations that continue to support Jews and Israel are the ZOA (Zionist Organization of America) and AFSI (Americans for a Safe Israel).)

Zionism, After the Fact By Abe Greenwald

Via Commentary Newsletter, sign up here. A number of Israel-supporters have noted that the terms “Zionism” and “Zionist” are, from a present-day perspective, confusing or even insulting. As Zionism refers to a belief and a movement that sought to establish a modern Jewish homeland, does it make sense still to speak of Zionists when that homeland has existed for more than 75 years?

Coleman Hughes remarked in a recent episode of his podcast that it makes as much sense to declare oneself a Zionist today as it would to self-describe as an abolitionist. The State of Israel is a long-established fact, and American slavery has long been abolished. In this reading, perhaps the term Zionism is an anachronism that’s intended to cast a shadow of impermanence or erasure over the Jewish state.

I think Hughes makes a powerful point in comparing the relevance of Zionism and abolitionism. But it’s equally illuminating to contrast the two.

There is, after all, a reason that self-proclaimed abolitionists no longer exist while Zionists do: While there is no active anti-abolition movement, there’s a massive, coordinated, and armed anti-Zionist campaign looking to undo history and destroy Israel.

Now, let’s keep the contrast going with a little thought experiment. What if a modern anti-abolitionist movement suddenly arose? How would elite opinion respond to those actively fighting to repeal the 13th Amendment and reinstate slavery?

With fury, of course. Western liberals would be disgusted and outraged by the political organization of retrograde racists.

Read More

05/28 Links Pt1: UN envoy slams ‘political decision’ to blacklist Israel; US Probe of UNRWA: 1,500 Staffers Suspected of Hamas Ties; IRGC plotted to assassinate Ivanka Trump

From Ian:

Seth Mandel: Thank You For the Hezbollah View

Twenty years ago, the great White House Press Secretary Tony Snow gave the world a memorable moment at the podium. Helen Thomas, the senior White House correspondent and anti-Semite—she told Jews to “get the hell out of Palestine” and go back to Poland and Germany—was ranting and raving about Israel’s actions in Lebanon during a war Hezbollah had started a week earlier.

“We have gone for collective punishment against all of Lebanon and Palestine,” she said, blaming the U.S. for not forcing Israel to stand down in the face of relentless attacks against its civilians.

To which Snow responded: “Well thank you for the Hezbollah view.”

I thought of this when I saw that Alex Crawford of Sky News had once again carpet-bombed the internet with her arsenal of ignorance.

After repeating Hezbollah talking points as if she were reporting the news, critics pointed out that the reason for Israel’s counteroffensive was to stop Hezbollah from firing into its northern towns. Crawford responded: “Israel was bombing and invading Lebanon long before Hezbollah existed.”

Now, this is technically true. Israel had reason to go into Lebanon before Iran planted its proxy force there. Crawford says this is “a point repeatedly brought up by Hez[bollah] supporters.” This is also correct: The reason Hezbollah repeats this talking point is to claim that the group itself is some kind of organic response to Israeli occupation.

Thus Crawford was demonstrating a common complaint against her: that she uncritically serves up Hezbollah propaganda. Israel did not cause Hezbollah’s rise: It had, with the diplomatic support of the Reagan administration, uprooted the Palestinian state-within-a-state occupying South Lebanon.

Iran's New 'Nuclear' Weapon: What Happens If the U.S. Declines to Fight for the Strait of Hormuz

Donald Trump appears on the cusp of an agreement to demilitarize, at least temporarily, the Hormuz Strait. Ancillary to this may be certain Iranian nuclear promises and U.S. sanctions relief. Whatever the actual details of this accord are, no matter whether it later, in part or entirely, falls apart, this agreement flows directly from Tehran dueling Washington to a standstill.

An indisputable truth: A massive bombing campaign by Israel and the United States has allowed Tehran to see the incomparable utility of the Strait of Hormuz as a weapon against the global economy and its primary enemies. A reanimated Islamist regime-and we don't doubt that senior commanders in the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps now think they are winning-might even refuse a generous nuclear deal because it's having so much fun humbling its foes.

If the Islamic Republic can hold Hormuz hostage, Tehran will severely wound America's self-confidence, reputation, and capacity. Even if some arrangement can be made to allow commercial traffic to pass without paying tolls, once most of the U.S. armada returns home, the odds of the warships returning aren't good. The odds of the Islamic Republic demanding tolls later are a near certainty.

The American and Israeli killings of Iran's leaders precipitated a shift within the regime, elevating those who had grown weary of what they regarded as Ali Khamenei's nuclear timidity in the face of mounting danger. A series of articles in Javan, a mouthpiece of the Revolutionary Guards, introduced a new doctrine dubbed "offensive deterrence." The series began by taking a swipe at the martyred supreme leader: "Iran's previous doctrine was defined in controlling tensions below the level of war, but the 40-day war was the starting point for deterrence through expanding the geography of crisis."

The new Iranian leaders highlighted the geographical weapon that the regime had always boasted about in its propaganda but never attempted to use: the Strait of Hormuz. The world economy's critical dependence on this route makes this source of income absolutely unsanctionable and transforms the structure of Iran's political economy from crude oil sales to sustainable transit income." Ali Nikzad, the deputy speaker of Parliament, went so far as to declare, "The Strait of Hormuz is Iran's atomic bomb."

Unless the United States is leaving the Middle East with its tail between its legs, a bloody struggle with the Islamic Republic will continue. Iran's revolutionary elite knows that. Do we?

Eugene Kontrovich: Trump Can Close Hamas's Front Office

Twenty-five U.S. senators and more than 90 representatives have urged President Trump to "take decisive action to fully dismantle UNRWA." The United Nations Relief and Works Agency has supported Palestinian radicalism for many decades, in the process becoming Hamas's front office.

Mr. Trump cut UNRWA's funding in 2018 and again in 2025, citing revelations that a dozen employees participated in the Hamas invasion of Israel on Oct. 7, 2023. But U.N. agencies, and UNRWA especially, are designed to be insulated from accountability. UNRWA was created by the General Assembly in 1949 as a temporary mechanism to assist Arabs displaced during Israel's War of Independence. While it can be closed only by the General Assembly, strategically applied pressure from the U.S. could go a long way.

UNRWA pays its Gaza staff in U.S. dollars wired from a New York bank account. Those dollars need to be converted into Israeli shekels, Gaza's de facto currency. Hamas takes a substantial cut on every money exchange, turning UNRWA's payroll into a revenue stream. The U.S. Treasury can block the dollar transfers under existing sanction authorities.

Read More

05/27 Links Pt2: Dara Horn: The answer to the Jewish question; The unforgivable betrayal of the Nova Festival victims; Dem congressional candidate volunteered with Al-Qaida-tied group in Bosnia

From Ian:

Seth Mandel: A Plea to Jews: Don’t Do the Anti-Semites’ Dirty Work for Them

The erasure of Jews from the public square since October 7 has been extensively chronicled and documented here at COMMENTARY and elsewhere. But it has reached a new and poisonous stage.

In the recent past, the erasure was carried out by the erasers, not by those being erased. But the purpose of an all-consuming culture of fear and suspicion is to get to the point at which people erase themselves.

I don’t blame many of the people seeking to stay out of the limelight. But this is a much worse state of affairs than one in which the anti-Semite is forced to do his own dirty work, both for Jews and for wider society.

For Jews, the reason is obvious: As history shows, no one can make us disappear. The enemy’s only hope is that we withdraw of our own free will.

Speaking of which: Internalizing fear means forfeiting freedom. As Jews, we are the world’s foremost ambassadors of liberty. We have a responsibility to act like it.

As for what this does to society: If people can pretend that what’s happening isn’t actually happening, they don’t have to look themselves in the mirror. The best hope of waking a society from a nightmare is to ensure the anti-Semites see exactly what they’ve become.

Seth Mandel: What Platner Has Done to the Democratic Party

Yet even two high-powered progressives on the outs can come together for a certain cause: Graham Platner and his Nazi tattoo.

Chakrabarti declared war on Platner’s congressional critics: “Auchincloss should be primaried.” In other words, there is room either for people sporting Nazi tattoos or people who object to them, but not both, in the preferred Democratic Party of AOC’s former chief of staff. (Ocasio-Cortez’s own embrace of anti-Semitic conspiracy theories only got worse after Chakrabarti left her office, so we know she didn’t object to that part of Chakrabarti’s political persona.)

Chakrabarti and others claimed that this was Auchincloss’s way of endorsing the Republican in the race, Susan Collins. Auchincloss clarified that no, he was simply saying Nazis are bad: “Susan Collins is a rubber stamp for the worst admin in history. Claims that I would endorse her, implicitly or otherwise, ignore my track record supporting Democrats to take back both chambers. As I said months ago, I find Platner’s Nazi tattoo and his commentary about it personally disqualifying. If it were me I’d vote for someone else in the Maine Democratic primary.”

But Auchincloss’s nuance fell on deaf ears. Back the Nazi tattoo guy or you might as well be a Republican.

Between Chakrabarti and Auchincloss, there is no question who has taken the more heterodox position on Nazis. After all, Democratic Senate leader Chuck Schumer is also backing Platner’s campaign, as is the party’s relevant campaign committee.

Hasan Piker, the Jew-baiting anti-American influencer popular among progressive Democratic candidates, also chimed in against Auchincloss, calling him part of the “straight up israel first democrats.”

But of course, Auchincloss didn’t mention Israel in that statement. He said Nazis are bad. Piker was, by the way, not the only left-winger to bring up Israel in response to Auchincloss. It was a telling moment: Somehow, suddenly influential progressives openly associate anti-Nazism with disloyalty to America.

Enjoy your new friends, Chuck Schumer.

Taryn Thomas was a committed member of the pro-Palestine movement. Then she went to Israel

Her post opened the floodgates. In November 2025 she then posted a video online talking about how her views had shifted. “By the end of the month, the video had reached millions of views. As it spread, my social world began shrinking. Classmates steadily cut me off, people blocked me, and I became the target of online exposure campaigns and cyberbullying.

“I lost every single friend,” she says. Classmates “posted really disgusting things”, including labelling her a “genocidal apologist”. Thomas says she received death threats and racist abuse – and that her family was also targeted. “It was like a crusade and felt like being stoned publicly.”

The weight of it all left her “deeply depressed”.

“Then my therapist came across the video and decided to end our professional relationship, asking me to find a new provider after learning about my views as a Zionist.”

She now takes a dim view of the encampment atmosphere. “It completely insulates you in this echo chamber and indoctrinates you. If you had any questions, you’d lose your social belonging – the last thing you wanted to be called was a Zionist.”

She adds that the protesters’ “attention turned into this hatred” and there were constant calls for the “normalisation of violence”. Some activists, for example, celebrated the assassinations of Charlie Kirk, the Right-wing political activist, and Brian Thompson, the UnitedHealthcare chief executive, she says.

The mental toll had become so heavy on Thomas that she stepped away from her studies late last year. What helped get her through this tough period was the new friendships she has formed, including some with Jewish students.

“They knew I came from the encampments and they engaged with me, intellectually argued with me, disagreed with me, but we still broke bread on Shabbat,” she says. “I learnt from my [now] best friend that she was doxxed because of people within our movement. I know I have to repair some of those damages.”

‘Open your heart and put down those megaphones’
Thomas says her family are not politically engaged in the issue of Israel and Gaza, and she has faced questions from her mother about her involvement. “She was just like, ‘Why are you doing this? It isn’t your burden to shoulder.’ She just wants her family to be safe and protected.”

But Thomas hopes that by sharing her story it will encourage others to experience the Nova exhibition. “I hope the people who are protesting will come – I just want them to go inside,” she says. “None of this is political. Just look and learn the stories – you don’t have to agree. Come in with an open heart and an open mind and put down those megaphones.”

As for Thomas, she hopes to return to university in September, but in the meantime, she is determined to do what she can to increase cross-community understanding. “A lot of us on the pro-Palestine side were recruited through empathy, so I think we can be reached through it, too. Because of this unique perspective I have of what changed my heart, I think I can hopefully change other people’s.

“I’m not Jewish; I’m an African American woman. But a lot of our struggles are parallel,” she says. “We’re seeing an increase in anti-Semitism, we’re seeing an increase in extremism and political violence. There’s just no way that I can now sit back, kick my feet up and call it a day.”

Read More

05/27 Links Pt1: Trump suggests he may not sign Iran deal without Abraham Accords commitments from Gulf countries; Somaliland’s president: ‘Anyone who doesn’t like our alliance with Israel can mind their own business!’

From Ian:

House lawmakers urge Trump to dismantle UNRWA over alleged ties to Hamas

More than 90 House members, led by Rep. Mike Lawler (R-N.Y.), urged U.S. President Donald Trump to dismantle the U.N. Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East, citing longstanding allegations tying the agency to Hamas and other terrorist groups.

“Rather than resolving the refugee crisis, UNRWA has perpetuated and expanded the problem through its unprecedented policy of conferring refugee status across generations—transforming what was once a finite humanitarian issue into a permanent and growing political challenge,” the lawmakers wrote in a letter sent to the president. Most of the signatories were Republicans.

Established by the U.N. General Assembly in 1949, UNRWA provides education, healthcare and social services to Palestinians in Gaza, Judea and Samaria, Jordan, Lebanon and Syria. Unlike the U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees, which generally limits refugee status to those directly displaced, UNRWA extends eligibility to Palestinian refugees from the 1948 and 1967 wars as well as their descendants.

The lawmakers argued that the agency’s structure has entrenched Palestinian dependency while discouraging host governments from pursuing long-term solutions.

“By fulfilling these needs, UNRWA has reduced incentives for host governments to pursue long-term solutions, leaving millions dependent on the agency and prolonging the refugee crisis,” the letter states. “Additionally, UNRWA has faced longstanding concerns about its educational curriculum, which has been found to promote antisemitism and glorify terrorism.”

“This has raised serious questions about the agency’s role in radicalizing Palestinian youth,” the letter adds.

The United States and several other countries suspended funding to UNRWA after Israel uncovered documentation alleging that staff members participated in the Hamas-led terrorist attacks in southern Israel on Oct. 7, 2023.

The lawmakers said the allegations following Oct. 7 reinforced broader concerns about the agency’s operations and neutrality.

Former BBC pundit who ranted about ‘chosen people’ was in Iran negotiating team

A former BBC commentator who ranted about the “chosen people” believing they “have exceptional rights to the whole region” on Radio Four’s Today programme was part of Iran’s delegation during negotiations with the US in Pakistan, the JC can reveal.

Sayed Mohammad Marandi was seen alongside senior Iranian regime officials including chief negotiator Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf and Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi during the talks last month.

Marandi appeared on multiple BBC programmes between 2017 and 2024, and on other UK broadcasters’ news shows.

He has used his platform to promote Hezbollah, a proscribed terrorist group – which he described as “heroes” in a Channel 4 interview – and made extreme statements about Israel, which he has accused of carrying out a “Holocaust” in BBC and Sky interviews.

Now the shadow culture secretary is calling for greater scrutiny of pundits on British television.

Tory MP Nigel Huddleston described his repeated appearances as “deeply concerning” and said broadcasters must improve due diligence over contributors’ positions.

“Public service broadcasters have a responsibility to deliver impartial news. The BBC is guilty of breaking its own rules if they present people as objective commentators when they may, in fact, have an agenda and bias, as appears in this alarming case.

“We expect and require our national broadcaster to have rigorous due diligence processes regarding who they put on air and to be transparent when someone has a clear agenda,” he said.

During one interview on BBC HARDtalk, presenter Stephen Sackur described the pro-regime figure as “an experienced Iranian academic and sometime adviser to his government during international nuclear negotiations”, as well as “a consistently loyal defender of the government in Iran”.

Amin Abu Rashid acquitted by Dutch court of financing Hamas, convicted of sanction evasion

Alleged Hamas financier Amin Abu Rashid was acquitted of providing funds to the Palestinian terrorist organization, according to a Wednesday ruling by the Rotterdam Court, but was convicted of evading sanctions and continued management of a prohibited organization.

Abu Rashid was sentenced to a suspended sentence of six months, with a one-year probationary period, a far cry from the three-year prison sentence sought by the Netherlands Public Prosecution Service (PPS).

There was not enough evidence that the 58-year-old Leidschendam transferred approximately €8 million to Hamas between 2010 and 2023, according to the court. While prosecutors argued that the organizations that Abu Rashid worked with were affiliated with Hamas, the court wasn't convinced of the ties to the terrorist group.

While there was no disagreement that the funds were funneled into Gaza, the court said that it wasn't proven beyond a reasonable doubt that Hamas specifically benefited over general Gazan recipients. The evidentiary threshold was also not met for proving that Abu Rashid knew that the funding destination was under the control of Hamas.

The court viewed an expert's testimony on the matter as insufficient, and having been based on news articles and reports by the US and Israel. The court also expressed concern that the expert held a bias against the defendant.

Abu Rashid was convicted of continuing the operation of the al-Aqsa Foundation through the Israa Foundation, the former of which was sanctioned by the European Union until 2014. The removal of the al-Aqsa Foundation was done as the organization ostensibly dissolved, but it did not follow through with that measure. According to the court, the defendant remained the de facto manager of the Israa Foundation, continuing the banned group's operations.

Read More

05/26 Links Pt2: Republicans are fighting a battle for their souls Democrats already lost; Bondi inquiry condemns online abuse of Jewish witnesses

From Ian:

Jonathan Tobin: Republicans are fighting a battle for their souls Democrats already lost

Democrats embrace anti-Zionists
The situation is different among Democrats.

To take just one example of how Democratic primary voters are trending, the nominally pro-Israel Rep. Dan Goldman (D-N.Y.), whose anti-Trump credentials could not be better (he was one of the attorneys for the dubious effort to impeach the president in 2019), is seen as an almost-certain loser in his effort to hold his seat.

He is opposed by Brad Lander, the former Controller of New York City, whose tenure in that office was widely deemed a disaster. But Lander, who, like Goldman, is Jewish, is endorsed by Mamdani and is a rabid Israel-basher. He even recited a Quranic verse in an appearance at a mosque that attacked Christianity while also repeating the familiar blood libels about Israel committing “genocide” and “apartheid.”

Yet according to the latest polls, Landers leads the incumbent in the deep-blue district with a significant Jewish population by an astonishing 57% to 23% margin.

Across the nation, similar results can be seen. Indeed, the antisemitic Platner is coasting to his party’s Maine Senate nomination, because his lead in the polls scared Gov. Janet Mills (who had been recruited by the party establishment to oppose him) out of the race.

It’s possible to imagine a future in which younger GOP voters hold onto their antagonism for Israel and the Jews, as well as tolerance for antisemites, and wind up being the dominant force in a post-Trump party. Yet even Vance has to know that holding onto his friendship with Carlson will be a problem in the 2028 presidential primaries against an opponent who will be able to appeal to the GOP’s evangelical pro-Israel base.

On the other side of the aisle, pro-Israel candidates face a base that has been marinating in the intersectional ideology that falsely identifies Jews and the Jewish state as “white” oppressors. And they will be operating in an environment in which liberal media, like the Times, will not only be legitimizing Jew-hatred but openly celebrating it.

The persistent appeal of people like Carlson and other Jew-haters for many on the right means that a battle for the soul of the Republican Party will be waged in the coming years, and the outcome is far from certain. But the awful truth is that the same battle has already played out among Democrats in recent years. And condemnations of outliers like Galindo notwithstanding, it has already been lost.

JPost Editorial: Belgium's ban on ritual circumcision is the same as making Jews second-class citizens

Jews have lived continuously in Belgium for 800 years, and an estimated 30,000 live there today. They are no longer being made to feel welcome.

How can we say this? Because the country is going ahead with the prosecution of two mohels, those who perform ritual circumcision, a Jewish rite mandated by the Torah and performed since the time of Abraham.

You can’t want Jews in your country and outlaw ritual circumcision. The two are mutually exclusive.

Circumcision is not some obscure or optional ritual in Judaism. It is among the oldest and most defining commandments in Jewish life, a covenantal act performed for millennia under empires, kingdoms, dictatorships, and democracies alike.

A country that effectively criminalizes that practice is not merely regulating medicine; it is placing itself in direct conflict with the continued flourishing of Jewish communal life.

Add to that statistics from one of the Anti-Defamation League’s Belgian partners showing that antisemitic incidents in the country rose by 80% in 2025, that Belgium remains one of the few EU countries without a dedicated national action plan to combat antisemitism, and that it is consistently among the harshest critics of Israel in Europe, and a picture emerges of a country not exactly eager to make Jews feel at home.

This is especially troubling given Belgium’s history. According to Yad Vashem, some 66,000 Jews lived in Belgium when the Nazis occupied the country in May 1940, and approximately 28,000 were murdered in the Holocaust. One would think that history alone would make Belgian authorities especially sensitive to measures perceived by Jews as an assault on their religious identity.

Earlier this month, Antwerp’s Public Prosecutor’s Office ordered the prosecution of two mohels on charges of intentional assault and battery with malice aforethought against minors and the unlawful practice of medicine.

Non-medical circumcision is not outlawed in Belgium, but it must be carried out with the involvement of a doctor. Mohels, trained in the ritual, are not necessarily doctors. A judge is set to decide on June 18 whether the two men will stand trial.

Read More

05/26 Links Pt1: What Democrats and ‘America First’ Influencers Don’t Get About the Israeli Consensus on Iran; UN Watch bombshell report: UN envoys accused of foreign funding and ethical breaches

From Ian:

Seth Mandel: What Democrats and ‘America First’ Influencers Don’t Get About the Israeli Consensus on Iran

Moreover, they’re warning that should the general shape of affairs remain as they are now, the Israeli opposition intends to inaugurate a more hawkish foreign policy and one that is less compliant with American demands.

To i24 News, Yair Lapid, the left-most of Bibi’s main rivals, “insisted that Israel must preserve its freedom of military action, regardless of American decisions. ‘Israel is a sovereign state, not an American protectorate,’ he declared, calling on Netanyahu to make it clear to Donald Trump that Israel would not be bound by any agreement that jeopardizes its security.”

Regarding the idea that any cease-fire deal with Iran would also apply to Hezbollah in Lebanon, Avigdor Lieberman fretted that “our soldiers simply have their hands tied in Lebanon.” Even Benny Gantz, who was Netanyahu’s rival in past elections but has expressed openness to working with him again, said simply that until Hezbollah drones stop attacking Israel, “no plane should take off from Beirut.”

The lesson here isn’t that Bibi is really a dove or that Yair Lapid is really a hawk. It’s that those terms aren’t useful in this debate because Israeli public opinion maintains something close to a mainstream consensus on the country’s basic security needs. Netanyahu and his rivals may have different ways of dealing with their American would-be counterparts, but they all pledge to uphold that consensus.

Almost as if on cue, Netanyahu had the IDF hit Hezbollah positions in Lebanon hard. For his part, Trump seems to want to prevent the appearance of public discord with Israel. When initial reports of the deal’s outlines were coupled with stories of the Arab states’ influence over the timing and terms of the deal, Trump demanded that those Arab states also join the Abraham Accords and sign normalization agreements with Israel. The message: We’re all on the same team, aren’t we? If you really want peace in the Middle East, prove it.

We learn two things from this. One is that when politicians claim to have a problem only with Netanyahu and not the Israeli mainstream, such a claim is completely untenable, at least regarding the Iranian threat specifically. Two, that if Netanyahu’s rivals put more daylight between themselves and Trump, it won’t necessarily be due to the lobbying of Democrats or the weirdly pro-Iran “America First” crowd.

You can rearrange the pieces all you want, but in the end Israelis are going to support taking out the threats they face. That means resolution, not cease-fire, in both Lebanon and Iran. If you want to be seen as solving the problem, you’ll have to actually solve the problem. Israelis won’t be fooled by anything less, no matter who is president and who is prime minister.

Khaled Abu Toameh: The Gaza Roadmap: A Diplomatic Fantasy That Keeps Hamas in Power

Hamas remains armed, organized, and committed to its declared goal of destroying Israel through jihad (holy war). Yet instead of confronting this reality, international diplomats continue to indulge in dangerous fantasies about negotiating Hamas out of existence.

[Nickolay] Mladenov [former United Nations Special Coordinator for the Middle East Peace Process] added that the biggest obstacle to full implementation of the ceasefire remains "Hamas's refusal to accept a verified decommissioning, relinquishing coercive control, and permit a genuine civilian transition in Gaza."

That Mladenov is appealing to the UN Security Council to pressure Hamas reveals the core flaw of the entire approach: the "Board of Peace" and its international sponsors continue to view Hamas as a rational political actor rather than what it actually is: a jihadist terror group.

Mladenov's roadmap repeatedly speaks about "reciprocity," "verification," "implementation mechanisms," and "phased decommissioning."

Hamas's charter states that "Israel will continue to exist until Islam will obliterate it," and mandates jihad as a religious and individual duty for all Muslims to "liberate Palestine."

Hamas [in the "roadmap"] is even being allowed to remain armed and influential during the early stages of the transition process....

This is unacceptable and contradicts the very spirit of the UN Security Council Resolution 2803, on which the roadmap claims to be based. The resolution authorizes a temporary International Stabilization Force and requires the complete demilitarization of the Gaza Strip, including the full disarmament of Hamas and the destruction of all its military infrastructure.

The message being sent to Hamas is unambiguous: continue holding your weapons, continue ruling the Gaza Strip through intimidation and terror, and the international community will keep negotiating with you.

The latest roadmap explicitly states that the proposal "does not call for immediate surrender or unilateral disarmament." Instead, it outlines a "phased, Palestinian-led internationally verified process."

Hamas... has already made clear that it rejects the proposal altogether.

Hamas is again telling the world openly that it has no intention of disarming. It wants to remain in power so it can continue pursuing, with the help of the Iranian regime, its jihad against Israel.

Hamas also seems to understand something that many Western diplomats and officials refuse to acknowledge: armed Islamist groups are not removed through conferences, committees, or UN resolutions. They are removed through force. The only countries capable of removing Hamas militarily are Israel and the US.

While diplomats hold meetings in Cairo, New York, Doha, and Ankara, Hamas uses time to entrench itself, rearm, regroup, recruit, and tighten its control over the Gaza Strip's population.

Republicans press Trump to permanently dismantle UNRWA

Republicans in both chambers of Congress are urging the Trump administration to move to permanently dismantle the United Nations Relief and Works Agency, with a new letter from House Republicans calling for a reworking of Palestinian refugee programs in the region.

In a letter sent to President Donald Trump on Tuesday, more than 90 House Republicans, led by Rep. Mike Lawler (R-NY), called for a “broader view of the agency’s operations — not only in Gaza, but across the West Bank, Jordan, Lebanon, and Syria” and for the administration to ensure that the U.S. does not “continue to rely on failed systems that have further entrenched the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.”

The U.S. stopped funding UNRWA in early 2024, after revelations that several UNRWA employees participated in the Oct. 7, 2023, Hamas attacks on Israel, and Congress has continued to impose statutory bans on such funding since then, in spite of efforts by Democrats to reinstate funding for the aid agency.

“Ultimately, UNRWA has not been a force for stability but has instead perpetuated the refugee crisis and reinforced the conditions that have allowed terrorism to persist,” the lawmakers wrote. “We strongly urge your administration to take decisive action to fully dismantle UNRWA and transition its functions to more credible and trusted partners that are demonstrably free of ties to terrorism and committed to transparency, accountability, and peace.”

The letter suggests transferring funding for Palestinian refugee programs to their host countries directly or to other non-governmental organizations.

The letter states that UNRWA has “perpetuated and expanded” the Palestinian refugee crisis by conferring heritable refugee status across generations, “transforming what was once a finite humanitarian issue into a permanent and growing political challenge.”

Read More

05/25 Links Pt2: The Enormous Blast Radius of the NYT’s Dog-Rape Debacle; Retired police officer awarded for bravery during Tree of Life shooting

From Ian:

Seth Mandel: The Enormous Blast Radius of the NYT’s Dog-Rape Debacle

Kristof relies on such NGOs as well. One of them is the Committee to Protect Journalists. That organization has, as we have detailed here at COMMENTARY, kept a running list of supposed “journalists” killed by Israel during the war, many of whom are later revealed to have been terrorist operatives for Hamas or Palestinian Islamic Jihad all along. Those revelations come from the “martyrdom” notices of the terror groups themselves, as the researcher Salo Aizenberg has persistently pointed out. When that happens, CPJ tends to delete the terrorist’s name from its list of “journalists.”

The Washington Free Beacon argues, persuasively, that this process deeply undercuts CPJ’s credibility as a source and as a gatekeeper of sources for folks like Kristof. I agree. As I wrote two weeks ago: “The problem is that it’s easy for an organization like CPJ to quietly delete someone’s page from a false list well after the fighting stops and the hoax has outlived its usefulness. So that’s what they do.”

Others have focused on the fact that Kristof also relied on information from Euro-Med, an organization with ties to terrorist figures and which has perpetuated all sorts of weird science-fiction anti-Israel hoaxes. Because of that history, I tend not to think of Euro-Med as an NGO at all, though technically it is. Euro-Med is despised even by many Palestinians who see it as nothing but a shield for Hamas and therefore an enemy of human rights. But perhaps the point of the story is that more established NGOs have become just as corrupted as organizations like Euro-Med, and that they do belong in the same category after all.

In fact, CPJ’s impact could plausibly be considered more deleterious to democracy and human rights than Euro-Med’s precisely because it carries a sheen of legitimacy that Euro-Med never has and never will.

I would go a step further and suggest that the behavior of groups like CPJ incentivize the establishment of other groups that exist solely to feed journalists bad information. CPJ’s fall from grace is a major story all its own. That it enables the creation of bad actors that never had any grace to lose is just part of that story. The same is true of the Times.

This is not merely a story of one journalist behaving unconscionably. It’s a story of Western institutional collapse and the dreary remnants that rise from the rubble to perpetuate all the evil things its predecessors got away with.

Germany supported Hamas-linked organization for years without tracking funds, audit finds

Until 2019, the German foreign office supported an aid organization with close ties to Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood without knowing how the funds were actually being used.

This information appears in a newly released confidential audit by Germany’s Federal Court of Auditors, which the Institute for Secular Law (Institut für Weltanschauungsrecht or IFW) has been trying to obtain for five years.

Until now, unsuccessfully.

The audit concerns state funding for the organization Islamic Relief, purported to have ties to Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood.

The now-public documents reveal, according to ifw advisory board member Seyran Ateş, “a shocking naivety on the part of the Foreign Office.”

Islamic Relief Germany (IRD) had long been regarded in Germany as a respected Muslim charity organization. Several consecutive German governments, including former chancellor Angela Merkel’s second, third, and fourth cabinets, provided IRD with millions of euros in funding.

IRD was a member of the German aid alliance Aktion Deutschland Hilft, and gained prominent supporters for its “Meals for Orphans” campaign, including former President Christian Wulff and his successor Frank-Walter Steinmeier.

However, in 2019, the Foreign Ministry stopped funding the organization, and, in 2020, IRD’s membership in Aktion Deutschland Hilft was suspended.

Foreign Office funded Islamic Relief largely 'blindly'
On April 15, 2019, the German government noted that both Islamic Relief Germany and its parent organization, Islamic Relief Worldwide, had “significant personnel connections to the Muslim Brotherhood or organizations close to it.”

The government also admitted that since 2014 it had known that “Islamic Relief Worldwide,” including its German branch IRD, was banned in Israel, regarded as “part of the financial system of Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood movement,” and therefore classified as a “terrorist organization.”

It is worth noting that the IRW is also banned in the UAE, due to its ties to the Muslim Brotherhood.

The German government refused to provide detailed information on how public funds given to Islamic Relief had been used, instead referring to an ongoing audit by the Federal Court of Auditors.

The audit report was nevertheless classified as confidential.

Young German anti-Zionists can no longer hide from their families’ Nazi past Story by Daniel Johnson

“Was my father/grandfather/great-grandfather a Nazi?” This variation on the question “Daddy, what did you do in the war?” has suddenly become urgent for millions of Germans, thanks to a decision by the US National Archive to make some 11 million Nazi party membership cards available online. The German weekly paper Die Zeit has made the full archive easily searchable for anyone with a subscription.

Hitherto, many Germans kept their family history during the Third Reich a closely guarded secret. Covering one’s tracks was made easier by the Federal Republic’s strict data protection laws, underpinned by a culture of denial and evasion that was already emerging even as Hitler committed suicide in 1945.

Allied investigators working in defeated and occupied Germany were struck by how a ruling party that had numbered over 10 million members appeared to have vanished overnight. Even decades later few Germans would willingly admit to having been a Nazi.

Now a younger generation has the opportunity to discover the truth about their forebears simply by accessing the newly released online party records, without having to go through a complex and deliberately obstructive process to obtain such information.

For more than 80 years, the gatekeepers of the German Federal Archives tried to shield individuals and their families from contamination by the nation’s putrid past. Now these self-appointed censors are under pressure to follow the American example and publish all official files for the Nazi period.

This new debate about the release of information is, though, only one aspect of the bigger question of how postwar generations of Germans should deal with a uniquely heinous past that is ever more temporally remote. Eight decades on, righteous anger at the ancestors who brought about the German catastrophe has been eclipsed by resentment at the perception that the sins of the grandfathers are still being visited upon their descendants.

Read More

05/25 Links Pt1: Trump: Iran agreement will be ‘great and meaningful’ or ‘there will be no deal’; Flotidiot: Engaging with IDF was main goal, not humanitarian aid

From Ian:

Trump: Iran agreement will be ‘great and meaningful’ or ‘there will be no deal’

U.S. President Donald Trump pushed back on Monday against critics of the potential agreement being negotiated with Iran, writing on his Truth Social account that any such accord “will either be a great and meaningful one, or there will be no deal.”

Trump continued, “It will be the exact opposite of the [2015] JCPOA disaster negotiated by the failed Obama Administration, which was a direct and open path to a Nuclear Weapon for Iran. No, I don’t do deals like that!”

The White House said in a social media post on Sunday that negotiations with Tehran are progressing smoothly. The statement followed an announcement on Friday by Trump that Iran and “various other countries” had “largely negotiated” an agreement to end hostilities.

“The negotiations are proceeding in an orderly and constructive manner, and I have informed my representatives not to rush into a deal in that time is on our side. ... Both sides must take their time and get it right. There can be no mistakes!” the White House posted, quoting Trump.

The post included an attached statement from the president saying that the relationship between the United States and the Iranians was becoming much more “professional” and “productive.

“They must understand, however, that they cannot develop or procure a nuclear weapon or bomb,” Trump said.

Reportedly, the proposed deal with Iran includes reopening the Strait of Hormuz and easing sanctions to allow Tehran to resume oil exports. In return, Iran reportedly committed not to advance its nuclear program.

Trump defended the potential deal in a Truth Social post on Sunday, saying that if an agreement is reached, “it will be a good and proper one, not like the one made by Obama, which gave Iran massive amounts of CASH, and a clear and open path to a Nuclear Weapon.”

The president continued: “Our deal is the exact opposite, but nobody has seen it, or knows what it is. It isn’t even fully negotiated yet. So don’t listen to the losers, who are critical about something they know nothing about. Unlike those before me who should have solved this problem many years ago, I don’t make bad deals! President DJT.”

Iran will play Trump, and he will get his revenge, US evangelical leader predicts

The Islamic Republic of Iran is likely to “double-cross” U.S. President Donald Trump in any agreement it reaches with Washington, and he will eventually retaliate, American evangelical leader Mike Evans said on Monday.

The remarks by Evans, founder of Jerusalem’s Friends of Zion Museum, come amid high-stakes negotiations aimed at ending the war and addressing Iran’s nuclear ambitions.

“If Iran double-crosses Trump and makes a fool out of him—and I believe they will—he will get his revenge and he will finish the job,” Evans told JNS in an interview in Jerusalem during a visit to Israel. “Donald Trump plays the long game; while they are playing checkers, he is playing chess.”

Evans predicted that another round of fighting could break out next year following the U.S. midterm elections and said that by 2028, the Islamic Republic, which has ruled Iran for nearly half a century, would have fallen.

Evans said Trump’s weekend call for Arab states, led by Saudi Arabia, to join the landmark 2020 Abraham Accords was “extremely realistic” and could be achieved by next year.

He attributed Trump’s steadfast support for Israel to his evangelical Christian base and downplayed recent public opinion polls showing declining support for Israel in some sectors of American society.

“Most of it came from Gaza, which fed and fueled the narrative,” Evans said. “Once there is calm, there will be healing. It will take some time to re-educate.”

He acknowledged the PR challenges Israel faces after more than two and a half years of war on multiple fronts.

“You are draining a swamp filled with alligators and hoping the alligators don’t bite, so there will be some setbacks amid the successes,” he said. “You can’t gauge moral clarity by public opinion.”

Filing submitted against Hamas at ICC on behalf of Palestinian from Gaza

A filing has been submitted to the International Criminal Court (ICC) on behalf of a Palestinian from Gaza calling for 14 Hamas leaders to be investigated for war crimes committed against the Palestinian people, an American lawyer said last week.

The legal move, which was made in December, has gone unanswered even as ICC prosecutors have reportedly requested a warrant for the arrest of Israel’s finance minister, Bezalel Smotrich.

The filing, the first such against the terror organization on behalf of a Palestinian, was made for a Gazan who lost his spouse, children, a parent, nieces and nephews during the two-year war sparked by the Oct. 7, 2023, Hamas-led attack on southern Israel, according to his legal team.

“The atrocity crimes perpetrated by Hamas against [REDACTED] family members, and against substantially all of the Palestinian civilian inhabitants of Gaza, constitute grave breaches of international criminal law,” the filing reads. “Yet to this day, there has never been a disclosed OTP [Office of the Prosecutor] investigation or request for issuance of warrants for any of the Hamas leaders ... complicit in war crimes and crimes against humanity that they committed against the civilian Gazan population.”

The submission lists an array of war crimes that Hamas is alleged to have committed against Palestinians in Gaza including: utilizing the presence of civilians or other protected persons as human shields; attacking civilians; intentionally directing attacks against civilian objects; willfully causing great suffering; destruction and appropriation of property; excessive incidental death, injury, or damage; attacking protected objects; committing outrages upon personal dignity; using, conscripting, or enlisting children; sentencing or execution without due process.

“We don’t stop seeking justice because the court does not want to respond,” attorney Elliot Malin of Reno, Nevada, told JNS last week. “We will continue kicking on the door until they deliver justice for the victims.”

Read More