Showing posts with label Varda Opinion. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Varda Opinion. Show all posts

Wednesday, February 11, 2026




Disclaimer: the views expressed here are the sole responsibility of the author, weekly Judean Rose columnist Varda Meyers Epstein.

“We’re not experts in Islamic law — but we’re pretty sure scamming the American people for a living violates every religion,” declared Republican National Committee Press Secretary Kiersten Pels.

She said it with that familiar Western confidence—the kind that assumes every faith, deep down, plays by roughly the same moral rules we do. In this case, the remark came as people were asking hard questions about Rep. Ilhan Omar’s husband, Tim Mynett, whose wine venture eStCru allegedly defrauded an investor out of $300,000 (settled in court), stiffed winemakers, and limped to its grave with just $650 left in the bank. Mynett converted to Islam to marry Omar. Yet he built a business selling bottles named “The Devil’s Lie” and “Blockchain.” Alcohol. Straight-up haram. Forbidden.

Somehow these details get hand-waved away while the financial sleight-of-hand is the thing that raises eyebrows.

And this is the crux of the problem.

Too many in the West look at something like Omar and Mynett’s improprieties and think, Dishonesty is wrong in every religion, right? As if Islam were just Christianity or Judaism with different holidays. As if the moral grammar is identical.

It’s nothing new. We’ve heard the soothing bromides about Islam coming out of Westerners’ mouths since forever.

George W. Bush, for example, called Islam a faith that inspires “honesty, and justice, and compassion,” insisting that we all share the same beliefs regarding God’s justice and human responsibility. Barack Obama stood in Cairo and spoke of justice, compassion, and tolerance, as if these were universal values—as if Muslims see these things the same way as Jews or Christians.

Some bigwigs, notably Pope Benedict XVI and Kofi Annan spoke of the overlapping commitments of the three major religions, to dignity, charity, and basic human goodness. Assumptions that are demonstrably untrue and that lull Westerners into complacency, dangerously unprepared for the wall they keep slamming into. Repeatedly. Without learning anything about Islam in the process.

American policymakers consistently misread Middle Eastern dynamics shaped by Islamic history, tribal loyalties, honor culture, grievance narratives, and religious doctrine. Western negotiators prioritize signed agreements, institutional trust, and reciprocal transparency. Regional actors often prioritize long-term positioning, tactical ambiguity, and fluid alliances built on immediate interests rather than enduring value alignment. Sunni Hamas cooperates with Shi’ite Iran despite doctrinal hostility. Iranian negotiations repeatedly coincide with continued proxy warfare and nuclear advancement. Statements frequently serve strategic positioning rather than candid moral declaration.

The negotiations with Hamas are illustrative of the West’s misunderstanding of the Islamic mindset. Donald Trump has been pushing hard on his 20-point peace plan for Gaza that began with a ceasefire that isn’t. There are daily Hamas breaches targeting IDF soldiers. Yet Trump continues to express total confidence that Hamas will disarm in Phase 2.

In Davos last month, Trump warned that Hamas must hand over weapons and hostage remains “within weeks” or be “blown away very quickly.” His team, including Jared Kushner, assured us that “Hamas signed a deal to demilitarize; that is what we are going to enforce.” Trump even floated a two-month ultimatum, seeing disarmament as the “linchpin” for peace—assuming compliance based on initial agreements and mediator optimism—an assumption that was wildly overoptimistic.

Just this week, in fact, senior Hamas leader Khaled Mashaal rejected Trump’s demand for disarmament outright. Mashaal called disarmament “an attempt to turn our people into victims, to make their elimination easier and to facilitate their destruction at the hands of the Israeli side.”

Mashaal framed the concept of disarmament as victimization. “Questions about the resistance’s weapons are being raised forcefully. Some want to place it in the context that whoever carried out Oct. 7 must be cornered and made to pay the price... As those who participated in the resistance, we must not accept this.”

And he tied it all to deeper roots: “Protecting the resistance project and its weapons is the right of our people to defend themselves. The resistance and its weapons are the ummah’s [Islamic nation’s] honor and pride.” Senior Hamas official Musa Abu Marzouk jumped on the bandwagon, saying “Not for a single moment did we talk about surrendering weapons”—insisting the issue was never even raised in negotiations.

That flat-out denial exposes the gap between the West and the Middle East: Trump’s banking on an “agreement” that Hamas leaders say doesn’t exist, leaving the president chasing a fantasy of compliance that would never be realized.

The divide runs deeper still. Sharia law is built on a historical memory of expansion as glory, a division of the world into realms of Islam and realms of war, and—in certain contexts—religious justifications for violence against those outside the fold. In many Muslim-majority countries, large numbers say they want Sharia as the law of the land. Integration challenges, no-go zones, blasphemy riots, persecution of Christians and other minorities are not poverty or political grievances—they’re more closely related to religious ideas the West has trained itself not to name.

Even when the West gets a glimmer of the truth, it chooses appeasement over censure. In January, for example, President Trump designated key chapters of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, Jordan, and Lebanon as terrorist organizations. This is because the Muslim Brotherhood is a political-Islam network with ties to Hamas and an agenda of gradual supremacy. Europe, however, keeps inviting them to conferences, funding their organizations, treating their violent proclamations as just another voice in the world community.

The West needs to stop imagining that Middle Eastern moral and strategic frameworks line up neatly with its own, to stop assuming that “every religion” rejects dishonesty or violence in the same way. Else, we all pay a terrible price: botched policies, eroded security, societies overtaken by immigrants who do not share their values. And of course, cruelty and horrific violence, such as we saw on October 7. Such as we see now with Iran’s treatment of those who protest against Khamenei’s “vision” of what an Islamic republic should be.

The West needs to stop leaning on comforting platitudes about shared Abrahamic values. Instead of assuming that all people, everywhere, are the same, the West needs the courage to look straight at where Islam diverges from Judaism and Christianity—on alcohol, on “resistance,” on diplomacy and deception, on supremacy, on the status of non-Muslims—and deal with reality as it is, not as it wishes it were.

Western values are rooted in goodness. Take Americans—they’re nice. They want to be kind and open-minded about Islam, while in reality they are only being naïve and reckless at their own peril. The cost of Western blindness to Islamic values continues to climb as Western leaders rack up missed warnings and policy failures—as they fail to make peace while claiming they already did, and taking credit for something that never happened. The future looks grim, because misunderstanding Islam, tends to lead to violent reprisals.



Buy EoZ's books  on Amazon!

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

PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism (February 2022)

   
 

 





Wednesday, February 04, 2026



Disclaimer: the views expressed here are the sole responsibility of the author, weekly Judean Rose columnist Varda Meyers Epstein.


At the Grammys, Billie Eilish announced that “no one is illegal on stolen land.” Her proclamation was received with applause, reverence, and the familiar assumption that a complicated moral question had just been settled by a pop star wearing a weird, tux-like garment.

Her “No one is illegal on stolen land” proclamation was offered as a foregone conclusion, requiring no explanation. The line worked precisely because it sounded finished, as though nothing more needed to be said. After all, it was Eilish saying this, and Eilish is famous. That, apparently, was enough to give authority to a statement that makes no sense whatsoever.


Taken seriously, the logic becomes absurd. Imagine a burglar breaking into your home and explaining that nothing illegal has occurred, because the house sits on land once taken from someone else. The theft of the land, under this reasoning, somehow nullifies every theft that follows.


Israel, after all, is routinely described as “stolen land.” Its presence is labeled “illegal occupation.” Jewish communities are not merely contested but criminalized. Entire legal, academic, and activist industries are devoted to arguing that Jewish sovereignty itself is unlawful.


It is a shame the International Court of Justice has spent years laboring over Israel’s supposed crimes. Under the principle that no one is illegal on stolen land, the allegation itself would defeat the charge. A claim of theft would eliminate the possibility of illegality altogether. There could be no crime, no unlawful presence, and no verdict to render.


Jews, of course, reject the premise of illegal occupation entirely. Because it makes no sense. The charge that Israel is “stolen land” collapses under even casual historical scrutiny. The Jewish connection to the land is documented and continuous, embedded in Jewish history, language, and practice.


The Jewish relationship to the land of Israel is one of symbiosis. Jewish prayer tracks its rain, Jewish law depends on its soil, Jewish time follows its seasons. Exile is experienced as dysfunction rather than displacement.


None of this figures into celebrity activism, which treats land as interchangeable scenery—something that can be stolen, reassigned, and morally laundered with a sentence. The idea that a people’s law, language, and obligations might be inseparable from a specific place does not fit neatly on a placard.


Ironically, the most grounded response to Eilish’s comment came not from pundits or performers, but from the Tongva people, whose ancestral land includes much of present-day Los Angeles.


Rather than attack the celebrity, the Tongva acknowledged their history and thanked Eilish for the visibility. They asked—politely—that the tribe be explicitly named when discussing its ancestral land. They made no accusations and didn’t call for eviction. No one said anything about the moral side of what happened, or what the law had to say. And no one said boo.


In fact, people were really impressed by the way the Tongva handled Eilish’s idiotic land acknowledgement. They asked that we say their name when we talk about their ancestral land. It all makes a sharp contrast to the way Jews are perceived, when they own their history and plainly state that Israel is Jewish land. The world basically explodes with hate whenever we say, “Israel is ours—it belongs to the Jews.” But when Tongva do it, no one concludes that Los Angeles must cease to exist, or that its residents are therefore illegitimate.


That conclusion is reserved almost exclusively for Israel, where historical claims are treated not as context, but as a mandate for reversal.


Eilish’s comments drew applause from some and ridicule from others, much of it focused on her wealth and lifestyle. That debate, however, never touched the actual claim she made. Once treated as anything more than a momentary expression, it produces conclusions that even its defenders seem unwilling to follow—especially where Israel is concerned.




Buy EoZ's books  on Amazon!

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

PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism (February 2022)

   
 

 



Wednesday, January 28, 2026



Disclaimer: the views expressed here are the sole responsibility of the author, weekly Judean Rose columnist Varda Meyers Epstein.

I used to read antisemitic comments online with a sort of grim detachment. The ugliness was real, but it felt like something I could observe from a distance—how people swallow stupid lies, how hatred hardens into certainty, how mobs form without ever meeting the people they condemn.

Since October 7, that distance has narrowed. Sometimes the hatred is no longer “interesting.” It hurts.

It hurts because Jews were butchered and raped—and the global reaction was not what any reasonable person would expect in relation to such atrocities. Victims became villains. Murderers and rapists were recast as “resistance.” And when the Jews defended themselves, they called it “genocide.” We were even told we were “occupiers,” as if an indigenous people can be said to “occupy” its own land. The moral inversion is sickening to anyone in command of the facts of October 7, and what has since transpired.

But it’s not all bad. When the haters peddle awful lies about the Jews, the rare thing that steadies you is a friend who speaks plainly—someone willing to describe reality without euphemism, and to risk doing so, even at a high cost.

Sometimes that friendship shows itself in a single gesture. Senator John Kennedy posted a brief message acknowledging the suffering of the Israeli hostages and their families, and congratulating Israel on the return of the last hostage from Gaza, Ran Gvili. At the same time, he acknowledged the suffering of the Israeli hostages and their families. The replies were a familiar torrent of moral inversion and cruelty. The contrast said more than the post itself ever could about the overwhelming hatred toward a people that were tortured, murdered, abused, and held captive—a people whose babies were burned alive.


The truth is, aside from my favorite senator, Israel has too few true friends today. One of them is Michele Bachmann. Bachmann served in the U.S. House of Representatives for Minnesota’s 6th District from 2007 to 2015 and was a candidate for the Republican presidential nomination in 2012. She previously served in the Minnesota Senate and is currently dean of the Robertson School of Government at Regent University.

When I heard an excerpt of Michele Bachmann’s remarks at the Pray Vote Stand Summit, I was touched, filled with gratitude for her honest, plain talk. Bachmann got it when so many do not. She saw everything that was bad about putting terrorists and businessmen with regional interests in charge of negotiations, and she was unafraid to say so.

Dean Bachmann asked the right questions. There was no sign that she cared about the risks of speaking the truth. Just a forthright laying out of the facts—trying, and at times failing—to restrain her passion for the subject of how the negotiations were going.

Keep in mind that the summit was held in October. So much has happened since then. Though some things remain unchanged. We still have two non-cabinet figures—Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner—selling an imaginary peace that threatens Israel’s survival (she didn’t say it in those words—that was all me).

“We have a Secretary of State named Marco Rubio,” Bachmann said. “Why wasn’t he involved in these negotiations?”

She turned to Qatar, explaining something that everyone should know, but too many do not:

“Qatar is the number-one funder of terrorism in the world,” Bachmann said, painting a picture of a wealthy engine of political Islam and a patron of Hamas. She warned about the way money and access can shape foreign policy decisions, especially when those decisions concern Israel. That having Qatar shape the atmosphere around the talks could not be a good thing.

Trump’s chosen interlocutors, Witkoff and Kushner, do business with Qatar and Saudi Arabia. Yet they were put in charge of negotiations that come with direct consequences for Israel’s security and the safety of its people.

After watching an excerpt of her remarks, I reached out with some questions. I was honored when Michele Bachmann, graciously consented to answer my questions. It’s obvious that Michele Bachmann is a busy lady—someone with a full plate—yet always ready to take on more. It’s the reason I reached out to her.

Varda Epstein: In your remarks at the Pray Vote Stand Summit, you expressed concern about President Trump’s decision to involve Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner in negotiations with Qatar, despite their business ties and Qatar’s role as a major sponsor of Hamas. More recently, Israel’s security cabinet has reportedly blamed Jared Kushner  for the composition of the Executive Board for the proposed Board of Peace, which includes (rabidly anti-Israel) Turkish and Qatari representation and was, according to Prime Minister Netanyahu, "not coordinated with Israel and runs contrary to its policy."

Why do you think the president continues to rely on Witkoff and Kushner? Who stands to gain from this approach, and what risks does it pose for Israel?

Michele Bachmann: The President has full confidence in his envoys, Jared Kushner and Steve Witkoff. Their diplomatic portfolios have enlarged in the last year since they were dispatched at the President’s direction during his second term.

Neither envoy appears to be employees of the federal government. They are volunteers, according to press accounts.

Concerns have been raised over past and ongoing business relationships between Mr. Witkoff and Qatar, and Mr. Kushner and Qatar and Saudi Arabia. Mr. Witkoff was a former business partner with Qatar. Mr. Kushner’s investment company was in business, and remains in business, with Saudi Arabia and other Arab investors, all while Witkoff and Kushner are currently conducting U.S. foreign policy with these business partners.

The questions of conflicts of interest are obvious and concerning.

One question concerning these relationships, regards the level of Qatari and Saudi influence on American foreign policy decision making, in particular regarding Israel’s security.

Varda Epstein: In recent months, a number of prominent conservatives—including Heritage Foundation president Kevin Roberts and commentator Megyn Kelly—have publicly defended Tucker Carlson, even after his interview with white nationalist Nick Fuentes. Why do you think this shift is happening, and what does it signal about the direction of the Republican Party?

Michele Bachmann: Tucker Carlson and other high-profile commentators have made controversial statements this year. These statements are vocal, intentional, and are dividing the pro-Israel Republican base. Grounded by pro-Israel evangelicals, the Republican Party historically supported strong support for Israel.

Tragically, the Democratic Party moved from an often pro-Israel party to holding a decidedly anti-Israel posture.

The anti-Israel embrace of the Democratic Party is now attempting to similarly turn, or at least divide pro-Israel support from within the Republican Party.

The Republican Party is pro-Israel and will remain that way unless it is taken over by an anti-Israel Presidential candidate. An event like that would certainly terminate a Republican candidate’s chances for electoral victory.

Varda Epstein: Given J.D. Vance’s isolationist worldview and his close relationship with Tucker Carlson—including employing Carlson’s son as a senior aide—what do you believe a Vance presidency would mean for Israel?

Michele Bachmann: A Republican Presidential candidate who does not value the importance of the U.S.-Israel relationship to vital national security interests, will likely lose a general Presidential election. Pro-Israel support is a foundational value of the Republican Party.

If Israel is not America’s greatest ally, then which nation is? Which nation has served as America’s greatest partner advancing peace in the Middle East?

What other nation has offered more to America by way of intelligence assets? Weapons development? Innovation and technology development? 

What other nation demonstrates similar moral clarity and commitment to advancing civilization and human rights than Israel? No other nation on earth compares to a demonstration of moral clarity more than Israel.

People need to consider where the United States would be without our partnership with Israel. As Prime Minister Netanyahu said, “Israel is what is right with the world.”

Varda Epstein: After watching your Summit address, many of my colleagues and readers remarked how much they miss your voice in government and your staunch support for Israel. How do you see your own role in public or political life going forward?

Michele Bachmann: I use my mind to learn all I can about our world and how humankind benefits from following the truths and precepts of the Bible.

History, Sociology, Economics, Astronomy, Anthropology, Archeology, Biology, Physics, etc., all reflect and demonstrate the truths given to us from the pen of Moses, David, Solomon, and the Prophets.

We, finite humankind, live in a world created by the infinite God. My job is to know Him more, obey Him more, and communicate His love and truth to others.

***

In her Summit remarks, Bachmann argued that Israel was nearing decisive victory against Hamas when diplomacy intervened and stopped it cold. Israelis well recognize this pattern. A war Israel did not choose becomes a war Israel is not allowed to win. The hostages are used as leverage. And a terror organization is encouraged to negotiate.

When Israelis speak about friendship, they are not being sentimental. Friendship means clarity under pressure. It means refusing to sanitize those who finance terror because they also broker lucrative deals. It means understanding that Israel cannot outsource its security to assurances offered far from its borders.

That is why Bachmann’s voice is important. She speaks as someone who understands that Israel is an ally. Not a problem to be managed, but an ally whose survival is nonnegotiable.

Israel has too few friends right now. And Michele Bachmann is indeed a friendone who understands the wider implications of negotiating with terrorists, not just for Israel, but for the entire world. 



Buy EoZ's books  on Amazon!

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

PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism (February 2022)

   
 

 



Wednesday, January 21, 2026


Disclaimer: the views expressed here are the sole responsibility of the author, weekly Judean Rose columnist Varda Meyers Epstein.

President Trump chose an odd venue as the platform for his bout of historical revisionism.
Standing at the World Economic Forum in Davos, he told the assembled global elite that Israel’s Iron Dome was not really Israel’s achievement at all.

“That’s our technology, that’s our stuff,” he said, recounting a conversation in which he claimed to have told Prime Minister Netanyahu to stop taking credit for it.


It was a striking claim—and it was untrue. The Iron Dome was conceived, designed, and engineered by Israeli companies—Rafael, Israel Aerospace Industries, and mPrest—and first deployed at Israeli air bases in southern Israel in response to Israeli civilians being shelled by Hamas, Hezbollah, and other terrorist entities in Gaza and Lebanon. No American president invented it. No American laboratory designed it. No American general figured out how to intercept rockets fired at Jewish homes, schools, and kindergartens.

But here is the part Trump was almost certainly leaning on in making his boastful claim: while the United States did not invent Iron Dome, it did provide a great deal of the funding for it, beginning under President Obama.

That funding was critical. It expanded the number of Iron Dome batteries, ensured a steady supply of interceptors, and later tied production to American contractors. American funding was framed as an act of alliance. The expectations attached to that funding constrained Israel’s ability to respond to attacks.

I was angry at the time—more specifically, angry at President Obama. His administration would fund the Iron Dome, but it would not allow Israel to stop the missiles at their source. Israel could intercept, absorb, and endure—but no more than that.

We were given the umbrella and told to crouch beneath it, intercepting rockets while Arab terrorists were allowed to continue firing at Jews. Terrorists were permitted to keep shooting at Jewish civilians, while Israel was denied the right, as a sovereign nation, to put an end to it. But we did not create a Jewish state so Jews could cower under American protection.

Israel was founded to be a sovereign nation, capable of determining its own responses to threats. It was meant to be a safe haven for Jews in a world that has never needed much encouragement to hate them.

Iron Dome saved lives. That is beyond dispute. But it was never a clean or consequence-free solution. Interceptions send debris and shrapnel raining down, often over populated areas.

A friend’s son learned this the hard way. He was driving on a highway when the missile alert sounded. He did exactly what Israelis are instructed to do: pulled over, got out of the car, lay flat on the road with his hands over his head. An interception occurred overhead. Shrapnel came down. He was hit badly enough to require hospitalization.

This risk is well known, but people don’t much talk about it. Iron Dome has taken on an almost sacred status, making it easier to celebrate the miracle than to confront the cost—especially when that cost is borne quietly by civilians already living under fire.

Which brings us back to Trump.

Trump’s claim in Davos echoed an assumption long embedded in Washington: that Israel exists with American permission, and that its power is something to be supervised. Obama and Trump both like to assume the role of savior. They put on different performances, driven by the same vanity—the belief that Israel lives or dies because they say so, and that they deserve all the credit for Israel’s survival and success.

Israel may be protected. Israel may intercept. But Israel does not fully control the terms under which it ends threats to its citizens.

When Jewish self-defense is treated as something granted rather than owned, it becomes conditional. And once it is conditional, it can be reclaimed, rebranded, or spoken of—as Trump did in Davos—as someone else’s “stuff.”

That should trouble anyone who understands why a Jewish state exists in the first place. 



Buy EoZ's books  on Amazon!

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

PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism (February 2022)

   
 

 

Wednesday, January 14, 2026


Disclaimer: the views expressed here are the sole responsibility of the author, weekly Judean Rose columnist Varda Meyers Epstein.


President Trump keeps touting the peace he brought to the Middle East. But if this is peace, I’d hate to see war. Though actually, I’ve seen war and I’m still seeing war—because we still have war. Since the ceasefire took effect on October 10, there have been 78 Hamas violations of the ceasefire.

Below are the president’s own “peace” claims—grouped by date—asserting or clearly implying that peace now exists in the Middle East.

  • *October 13, 2025 (remarks released October 14): “At long last, we have peace in the Middle East. And now we’re there.” In the same remarks, Trump also declared, “After years of suffering and bloodshed, the war in Gaza is over.”
  • *October 16, 2025 (Truth Social): Trump described what he called a “Great Accomplishment of Peace in the Middle East.”
  • *October 25, 2025 (Truth Social and Air Force One press gaggle): “We have a very strong PEACE in the Middle East,” Trump wrote, adding that it had a good chance of being “EVERLASTING.” Speaking to reporters later that day, he said, “We have peace in the Middle East. That’s what we have. Great peace in the Middle East,” and insisted, “This is real peace.”
  • *November 10, 2025 (Truth Social): Trump referred to “PEACE in the Middle East” and described it as “the Great Miracle that is taking place in the Middle East.”
  • *December 1, 2025 (Truth Social): He claimed “SUCCESS, already attained, for PEACE IN THE MIDDLE EAST!”
  • *December 11–12, 2025 (White House remarks): Trump stated, “We actually do have a real peace in the Middle East.”
  • *December 16, 2025 (White House remarks): He said the administration’s goal was to ensure that there “remains … peace in the Middle East.”
  • *December 18, 2025 (national address): In a national address, Trump said the Gaza truce had “brought peace to the Middle East for the first time in 3,000 years.”

You’d never know the reality on the ground if you tried to Google “Hamas ceasefire violations.” What you get instead is page after page of propaganda about Israel’s supposed violations—Israel’s “pretend” violations—while Hamas malfeasance disappears into a black hole. Seventy-eight instances of such malfeasance, ignored or downplayed, because the media (and apparently Google) are more comfortable amplifying accusations against Israel than confronting what Hamas actually does. They love anyone who murders, rapes, beheads, and burns Jews. Including babies.




So they cover up the truth and peddle lies. That we expect. What is galling is DJT’s continued claims that we have peace. But actually, this too is to be expected. The president wants to have accomplished peace—and yes, he’s a braggart—so he calls it peace even when it isn’t. Boy, would he like to earn that Nobel Peace Prize. Maybe he thinks if he says it enough—peace, peace, peace—the world will be convinced and he’ll get that prize. And if he doesn’t get that prize—which almost assuredly he will not—he’ll say that only because he’s Donald Trump, they won’t give him credit for bringing peace to the Middle East—which he assuredly did not.



Don’t get me wrong—Donald Trump got all but one of our remaining hostages out. For that, the Israeli people are hugely grateful. But this is not peace, and IDF soldiers have still been killed. For their families, there is no peace—also for the rest of Israel. We all know we’re still at war.



For anyone who wants specifics, below is what that “peace” has consisted of since October 10: 78 separate ceasefire violations and hostile incidents, in chronological order:

  1. Oct 13 — Arrow Unit killed 32 Gazans accused of collaborating with Israel (incl. Doghmush clan members).
  2. Oct 14 — Hamas failed to return over half the remaining slain hostages within the required 72 hours (hostage-return breach).
  3. Oct 14 — “Suspects” crossed the Yellow Line (Incident A); IDF opened fire; Gaza health ministry claimed fatalities.
  4. Oct 14 — “Suspects” crossed the Yellow Line (Incident B); IDF opened fire; Gaza health ministry claimed fatalities.
  5. Oct 15 — Hamas returned a body that did not match any hostage (forensics mismatch).
  6. Oct 15 — Hamas publicly executed 8 captives (incl. Doghmush clan members).
  7. Oct 18 — “Suspicious vehicle” crossed the Yellow Line and approached troops; IDF fire; Hamas claimed 11 family members killed.
  8. Oct 19 — Tunnel ambush in Rafah: 2 IDF killed, 3 wounded (Israel called blatant ceasefire violation; Hamas denied responsibility).
  9. Oct 27 — Hamas returned partial remains of a hostage already recovered by IDF (Netanyahu office: “clear violation”).
  10. Oct 28 — Sniper/RPG attack killed 1 IDF soldier in Rafah area (Hamas denied responsibility).
  11. Nov 1 — Hamas handed over 3 bodies claimed as hostages; Israel said none matched any hostage.
  12. Nov 2 — Terrorist crossed Yellow Line and approached troops (north Gaza); IAF struck.
  13. Nov 3 — Multiple individuals crossed Yellow Line and advanced toward troops (south Gaza); troops fired.
  14. Nov 3 — Israel assessed ~200 Hamas fighters remained in tunnels within Israeli-controlled southern Gaza (non-withdrawal breach).
  15. Nov 4 — Terrorist crossed Yellow Line and approached troops; eliminated.
  16. Nov 5 — Two terrorists crossed Yellow Line and advanced toward troops (central Gaza) (Incident A); eliminated.
  17. Nov 5 — Two terrorists crossed Yellow Line and advanced toward troops (central Gaza) (Incident B); eliminated.
  18. Nov 8 — Two terrorists crossed/approached troops (north Gaza); one eliminated.
  19. Nov 8 — Additional terrorist crossed/approached troops; eliminated.
  20. Nov 10 — Two terrorists crossed/approached troops (south Gaza); eliminated.
  21. Nov 11 — Terrorist crossed/approached troops (south Gaza); eliminated.
  22. Nov 12 — Four terrorists identified east of Yellow Line (Rafah); 3 killed.
  23. Nov 12 — Terrorist crossed Yellow Line and approached troops (Khan Younis area); eliminated.
  24. Nov 16 — Terrorist crossed Yellow Line and approached troops (north Gaza); eliminated.
  25. Nov 17 — Several crossed Yellow Line and buried suspicious objects near IDF forces; one eliminated, others retreated.
  26. Nov 17 — Individual crossed Yellow Line and approached troops; eliminated.
  27. Nov 18 — Two terrorists crossed/approached forces (south Gaza); both eliminated.
  28. Nov 19 — Several terrorists crossed Yellow Line and approached forces (north Gaza); at least one eliminated.
  29. Nov 19 — Terrorists opened fire toward IDF in Khan Younis; IDF called it a ceasefire violation.
  30. Nov 20 — Two terrorists crossed/approached troops (south Gaza); “hit identified,” outcome unspecified.
  31. Nov 21~15 terrorists emerged from underground infrastructure east of Yellow Line in eastern Rafah; later 6 killed, 5 apprehended.
  32. Nov 22 — Armed terrorist fired from a humanitarian access road (IDF video); attacker eliminated.
  33. Nov 22 — IDF said it eliminated 3 terrorists likely linked to prior Rafah tunnel escape attempt.
  34. Nov 22 — IDF said 2 other militants were eliminated in a separate strike (total in that episode reported as five).
  35. Nov 22 — IDF: 2 terrorists crossed Yellow Line and advanced toward troops; eliminated.
  36. Nov 24 — Terrorist crossed Yellow Line and approached IDF in Khan Younis; struck by IAF.
  37. Nov 24Two terrorists crossed Yellow Line and approached IDF near Khan Younis; struck by IAF.
  38. Nov 24 — Several terrorists crossed Yellow Line and approached troops (north Gaza); threatened forces.
  39. Nov 24 — Additional terrorists attempted to approach troops in same area; IDF said 2 eliminated total across both Nov 24 northern incidents.
  40. Nov 25 — PIJ delay in transfer of hostage remains (Netanyahu: “additional violation”); body later returned and identified as Dror Or.
  41. Nov 25 — Terrorist crossed Yellow Line and approached forces (north Strip); eliminated.
  42. Nov 25 — Nahal Brigade: 5 armed individuals emerged from tunnels in “Rafah Pocket”; eliminated.
  43. Nov 266 terrorists emerged from tunnels in Rafah; 2 captured, 4 eliminated.
  44. Nov 26 — IDF struck Hamas operative planning an imminent sniper plot in northern Gaza.
  45. Nov 26 — PIJ member approached IDF in southern Gaza (immediate threat); eliminated.
  46. Nov 26 — Individual crossed Yellow Line and approached IDF; eliminated.
  47. Nov 28 — Terrorist approached troops near Yellow Line (south Gaza); eliminated by IAF.
  48. Nov 29 — Two suspects crossed Yellow Line, did “suspicious activities,” and approached troops (south Gaza); eliminated by IAF.
  49. Nov 29 — Terrorist crossed Yellow Line and approached troops later same day; eliminated.
  50. Dec 1 — Two terrorists crossed Yellow Line (north Gaza) (Incident A); eliminated.
  51. Dec 1 — Two terrorists crossed Yellow Line (north Gaza) (Incident B); eliminated.
  52. Dec 1 — Terrorist crossed Yellow Line and approached forces (central Gaza); eliminated with air support.
  53. Dec 3 — Tunnel ambush in eastern Rafah: Sayeret Golani engaged attackers; 4 IDF injured.
  54. Dec 4 — Terrorist crossed Yellow Line and approached IDF (south Gaza); hit/eliminated per IDF.
  55. Dec 5 — Two terrorists with suspicious items approached IDF (north Gaza); struck by IAF; one confirmed eliminated.
  56. Dec 6 — Multiple terrorists crossed Yellow Line (Incident A); IDF reported eliminations (part of three total across day).
  57. Dec 6 — Multiple terrorists crossed Yellow Line (Incident B); IDF reported eliminations (part of three total across day).
  58. Dec 7 — Terrorist crossed Yellow Line and approached forces (south Gaza); eliminated.
  59. Dec 10 — Two terrorists crossed Yellow Line and approached forces (north Gaza); one eliminated.
  60. Dec 11 — Two terrorists crossed Yellow Line and approached forces (south Gaza); one eliminated.
  61. Dec 13 — Terrorist crossed Yellow Line and approached forces (north Gaza); eliminated.
  62. Dec 14 — Terrorist crossed Yellow Line and approached forces (north Gaza); eliminated.
  63. Dec 15 — Terrorist crossed Yellow Line and approached forces; eliminated.
  64. Dec 16 — Terrorist crossed Yellow Line carrying a suspicious object; eliminated.
  65. Dec 18 — Terrorist crossed Yellow Line and approached forces; eliminated by IAF.
  66. Dec 19 — Terrorist crossed Yellow Line and approached forces (central Gaza); eliminated by IAF.
  67. Dec 20 — Two terrorists crossed Yellow Line and approached forces (north Gaza); killed by IAF.
  68. Dec 21 — Suspects gathered near Yellow Line; warning fire; 3 crossed and approached forces; IAF struck (outcome unclear).
  69. Dec 21 — Two terrorists crossed Yellow Line and approached forces (Incident A); IAF struck (outcome unclear).
  70. Dec 21 — Two terrorists crossed Yellow Line and approached forces (Incident B); IAF struck (outcome unclear).
  71. Dec 24 — Charge detonated on armored vehicle during Rafah clearing; 1 IDF soldier lightly wounded.
  72. Dec 25 — Terrorist crossed Yellow Line and approached forces (north Gaza); eliminated.
  73. Dec 25 — Two terrorists crossed Yellow Line and approached forces (south Gaza); eliminated by IAF.
  74. Jan 2 — Terrorist crossed Yellow Line and approached forces (south Gaza); killed.
  75. Jan 3 — IDF destroyed shaft with loaded rocket launcher ready to fire at southern Israel, deployed after ceasefire (explicit violation).
  76. Jan 5 — Terrorist crossed Yellow Line and approached forces (south Gaza); eliminated by IAF.
  77. Jan 7 — Hamas fired into an area where IDF forces were operating (north Gaza); IDF called it a blatant violation.
  78. Jan 8 — Failed launch from Gaza City toward Israel; projectile fell near a hospital; IDF struck launch point.

All ceasefire violations listed above are drawn from reporting by the Foundation for Defense of Democracies’ Long War Journal (longwarjournal.org), which has provided detailed, day-by-day tracking of militant activity in Gaza since the ceasefire.

I’m not surprised at the president’s braggadocio in the least, but I wish he would be honest about what is actually happening in Gaza. About the fact that not only has Hamas violated the ceasefire 78 times as of this writing, but that the war is not over. I wish the president would admit that Hamas is reorganizing, rearming, repairing and reopening tunnels, and reasserting its full control over the parts of Gaza still under its authority.

Since the U.S.-mediated ceasefire in October 2025, Hamas has used the lull to regroup: reconstituting command and policing structures, replenishing weapons stocks, restoring damaged tunnel routes, and tightening its grip over the parts of western Gaza it controls.

Much of this has unfolded out of the Western spotlight. The tunnels did not vanish; they went back underground—literally and politically—while Gaza’s civilians were pushed into ever tighter spaces above them. In that crowded terrain, Hamas can rebuild with more cover and less room for anyone to separate fighters from families. Israeli assessments say the group is returning to a familiar method: tucking command posts, weapons caches, and staging areas into the seams of civilian life—near hospitals, UN-linked compounds, and schools—locations Israel argues have repeatedly been used as shields for military activity.

Meanwhile, the president keeps saying that Hamas will disarm the easy way or the hard way, but it never ever happens. He doesn’t push it. Instead, he’s trying to shove Qatar and Turkey down our throats as if they were good actors, for his Board of Peace (of which there is not).

We deserve safety and peace. But this is not peace and Israel and the Israeli people are not safe. This is not what we bargained for when we agreed to this ceasefire. Or maybe we did. The more things change, the more they stay the same. We are told again and again that Trump is the most pro-Israel president ever, and we are actually giving him the Israel Prize, but unfortunately, the peace that’s breaking out all over, is not peace, and is not breaking out all over.



Buy EoZ's books  on Amazon!

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

PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism (February 2022)

   
 

 

Wednesday, January 07, 2026


Disclaimer: the views expressed here are solely the responsibility of the author, weekly Judean Rose columnist Varda Meyers Epstein.

Back in November 2023 — only weeks after October 7 — Angelina Jolie accused Israel of bombing “a trapped population who have nowhere to flee.” She wrote: “Gaza has been an open-air prison for nearly two decades.”

Fast forward to January 2026. Jolie visits the Egyptian side of the Rafah crossing into Gaza, ostensibly to check on injured Gazans and the flow of aid. And there she is: standing on the border with Gaza — in Egypt.

So here is the question that should be unavoidable now, even for celebrities who don’t do geography:

Did Jolie not know where she was standing?

Because there are two land borders with Gaza. One is with Israel. The other, with Egypt. If Gazans have “nowhere to flee,” it’s because of Egypt. Because Egypt has a border too — and refused to open it to the fleeing Gazan masses, most of whom are their cousins.

But Jolie does know where she is standing. She is standing on the border she ignored. She would have been well aware of it all along, because she served as a Special Envoy for UNHCR, the UN Refugee Agency. Surely she had at least a nodding acquaintance with borders and crossings.

Now, it is no longer possible for her to claim ignorance of this second border. Her inability to look at a map. Because she has stood at Rafah, on the Egyptian side of the border. Jolie should apologize for demonizing Israel. That she has failed to do so, proves what we already know: Angelina Jolie is an antisemite. She hates Jews.

There is no other explanation — she hates us too much to even contemplate an apology to the Israeli people, even at the expense of her integrity.

And still, there is no apology on her lips. Not a peep. No: “I’m sorry. I know it wasn’t Israel trapping the people of Gaza. That Egypt could have let the fleeing Gazan refugees in and given them safe harbor, but refused. Israel deserves my humblest apologies.”

But of course, there will be no such apology. Humble or otherwise. There never is.

Two borders, one ignored.

Because acknowledging the other would make Egypt the guilty party, the bad guy. And they want the bad guy to be Israel. They want to make Israel the bad guy for not letting them in after October 7— they want to blame the Jews, and increase hatred against them. Then come the protests that turn into riots, the riots that morph into bodily assault, and finally spiral into murder. A Jewish museum affords that opportunity. As does the home of a Jewish governor and his family, set on fire at night while they were asleep. 

It's all the same. Two borders, one ignored — and finally erased. 

Even as one stands right there on the border with Gaza. Even as the Angelina Jolies of the world lose their integrity, one by one:

Two borders, one ignored.

It's a lie that betrays a deep and evil hatred of Jews.

The people who will never disappear. 

**
Please note that Jolie's father, Jon Voight, has been a staunch friend to Israel and the Jewish people. From Arutz 7:

Jolie’s criticism of Israel was met with a sharp response from her father, actor Jon Voight, who said his daughter “has no understanding of God's honor, God's truths" and added, “The Israeli army must protect thy soil, thy people. This is war. It's not going to be what the left thinks. It can't be ‘civil’ now. Israel was attacked by inhuman terror on innocent babies, mothers, fathers, [and] grandparents."



Buy EoZ's books  on Amazon!

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

PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism (February 2022)

   
 

 

AddToAny

Printfriendly

EoZTV Podcast

Podcast URL

Subscribe in podnovaSubscribe with FeedlyAdd to netvibes
addtomyyahoo4Subscribe with SubToMe

search eoz

comments

Speaking

translate

E-Book

For $18 donation








Sample Text

EoZ's Most Popular Posts in recent years

Search2

Hasbys!

Elder of Ziyon - حـكـيـم صـهـيـون



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

Donate!

Donate to fight for Israel!

Monthly subscription:
Payment options


One time donation:

Follow EoZ on Twitter!

Interesting Blogs

Blog Archive