Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News

Thursday, July 31, 2025

07/31 Links Pt2: Anti-Israel virtue-signaling on Gaza is immoral; Zohran's Father Wrote of 'Moral Equivalence' Between 9/11 and US War on Terror; DiCaprio moves forward with eco-hotel at Herzliya Marina

From Ian:

Jonathan Tobin: Anti-Israel virtue-signaling on Gaza is immoral

As has been the case for decades, those who criticize or condemn Israel act as if the Palestinians have no moral agency for their conduct or fate.

Instead, Israel-bashers and the “more in sorrow than anger” critics who lament its alleged betrayal of Jewish traditions seem to think that the Palestinians have no responsibility for what has happened and must be saved from the consequences of their actions, no matter how often they reject peace or even just a cessation of hostilities. They don’t care that Israel has fought this war with greater morality and concern for the safety of civilians than in any prior instance of urban combat. Instead, they demand something unique in history: that an aggrieved combatant in a war forced upon them assume complete responsibility for the enemy population even before their opponents surrender.

Israel has gone a long way toward doing just that by allowing aid into Gaza throughout the current conflict. Even that unprecedented gesture has not been enough to silence critics.

Israel isn’t perfect, and neither is Netanyahu. But the prime minister’s resolve in pursuing his country’s war goals in the face of overwhelming American pressure prior to Trump returning to office in January and the drumbeat of unfair international opprobrium since Oct. 8 has enhanced his country’s security immeasurably. Treating the continuation of the war until victory as merely a cynical political ploy on his part or a hateful desire for revenge on the Palestinians is unfair. It also does real damage to Israel’s ability to defend itself against enemies that are still seeking to shed Jewish blood.

That’s why it’s vital to understand that the Jewish virtue-signaling about Gaza is more than just misguided moral posturing.

By taking sides against Israel and joining the chorus of those who seek to delegitimize its self-defense and force an end to the war in a way that clearly grants a triumph to Hamas, these “as a Jew” critics, like Stewart or Patinkin, are giving aid and comfort to genocidal Islamists that is as real as the suffering of the Palestinians. The same is true of many in the Reform movement who have allowed their progressive politics to get in the way of the religious denomination’s moral compass.

It’s also important to point out that those who make these criticisms have no answers as to how Israel can defend itself in a way that will not harm Palestinian civilians, while at the same time, Hamas is determined to maximize their suffering. Anguish about the situation of the Palestinians won’t make things better for them. On the contrary, by lending their voices to the information war against Israel, they ensure that they remain under the thumb of Hamas and others who are similarly committed to the destruction of the Jewish state.

Joining the mob
Though those who speak for Israel and the IDF can always do better, the information war against Israel that is being conducted in bad faith won’t be won by better communication strategies. The only way through is for Jerusalem to stick to its justified demands for an end to Hamas rule in Gaza and for those who care about the Jewish state to give it their backing, despite the temptation to join the mobs smearing it.

Virtue-signaling about Gaza starvation isn’t a reflection of Jewish values. It is a gift to the enemies of the Jewish people, whose goal is the shedding of more Jewish blood.

War remains, as it has always been: sheer hell. The only moral way to end this one is with Hamas’s surrender of control of every inch of Gaza and freedom for all of the hostages. Those who deviate from those demands are doing great harm to both sides in this war to feel good about themselves and to stay in sync with liberal political fashion. And that’s not merely wrong, but deeply, deeply immoral.

Kurt Schlichter: Reject the Moral Blackmail of the Marxist/Jihadi Axis

Our enemies have no moral standing. Everything they say is a lie. We cannot let them morally browbeat us into choosing suicide. The ugly truth is that Jews can’t die in enough numbers for their enemies to stop hating them. But that also applies to those of us who are not Jewish. Our Marxist/jihadi enemies would not break stride if they made their Holocaust II fantasy come true (their perverse fantasy of “from the river to the sea, Palestine will be free” means free of breathing Jews) and would immediately get onto killing the rest of us. That’s why I’m going to side with civilization and continue to advocate for the total destruction of the Marxist/jihadist enemy.

The Gazans are enduring hardships, but this is not a bug. It is a feature. Bad things should happen to people who start wars, particularly with grotesque rape and murder sprees. This tends to discourage future wars, but understand that the Marxist/jihadi doesn’t want to discourage future wars. The Marxist/jihadi wants to win future wars and intends to do so by morally hamstringing those fighting against it.

Israel should have cut off all food, water, and power to Gaza on October 7. That’s how sieges work. It should have attacked with unrestrained fury until the enemy was completely annihilated. That’s how wars are fought, with the objective being victory. It’s how they’ve always been fought throughout history. When did it suddenly become the duty of the side winning a war to start taking care of the enemy’s logistical needs during the war? I find it bizarre that not only would some people expect the forces of civilization to fight in a manner unknown to human beings before last week – somehow the righteous besieger is now responsible for the logistic support of those resisting the siege – but that people within the scope of civilization would accept this concept.

We are under no moral obligation to allow the enemies of civilization to survive. That means finish Hamas. If their families suffer as a result of their conduct, they are free to relieve that suffering by total and unconditional surrender. Enemies of humanity must be defeated. Anybody who is a friend of the swamp of human waste known as Hamas is an enemy of humanity.

The only way we can lose the war against the semi-human savages of Marxist/jihadi barbarism is to choose to be defeated. That choice manifests as refusing to win the war in the way that human beings have won wars for 5,000 years. The choice to embrace brand-new rules and norms that have never existed within the history of conflict, which somehow shield the aggressor from righteous retribution, is a suicidal one, and we must have no part of it.

Remember, the Marxist/jihadi axis and their pathetic, morally illiterate American and other Western allies would gleefully cheer as you are actively exterminated. If we submit to their moral blackmail, they will have the chance to exterminate you actively, and they will do it. The only way they can defeat you is if you are both weak and stupid enough to submit. Reject the aptly named David French and his fellow submissives.

The answer to the Gaza problem is to annihilate Hamas and anybody helping it. It is to inflict righteous retribution such that no one dares start another war. This is what history teaches. This is the way.

Seth Mandel: Democrats, anti-Zionism, and the Worst Interview of All Time

The truly soul-crushing part of Sen. Elissa Slotkin’s interview on Breaking Points yesterday comes when she tells the progressive host about running in an election while the Israel-Gaza conflict was raging:
“There was no issue that was more difficult for me in this last, I would say six years but certainly in this last election, other than this issue, because it’s personal.”

Slotkin is Jewish. She came to office, first as a member of the House, as a moderate Democrat with a background in national security. But in office, she has steadily become a vocal critic of Israel and gone noticeably quiet on the issue of anti-Semitism. The worse the domestic situation for Jews became, the greater her indifference to it seemed to be.

So when she went on a show known for its anti-Zionist conspiracy theories (the first question to Slotkin yesterday was about whether Jeffrey Epstein was an intelligence asset, perhaps run by Israel) and its overt reliance on Hamas propaganda for its broadcasts, it could have been a “Sister Souljah moment” for Slotkin, an opportunity to push back on the hate.

Then she said “it’s personal,” and I thought we’d get a statement of pride in her Jewish faith. Instead, Slotkin said this:

“There was no issue that was more difficult for me in this last, I would say six years but certainly in this last election, other than this issue, because it’s personal: I’m a Middle East analyst by training.”

The genocidal war against the Jews and the explosion of anti-Semitism in her state and beyond is personal to this Jewish senator, because she’s… a Middle East analyst by training.

I’ve rewatched the clip several times, each time hoping I was hallucinating. But, like the old joke about the guy who watches reruns of the evening news, it always ended the same way.

The interview itself is not an especially easy watch. It’s as if the Hindenburg and Chernobyl had coincided. At one point hostess Krystal Ball asked Slotkin why she even agreed to appear on their show. It was the only good question she or her cohost asked Slotkin.

07/31 Links Pt1: The West Rewards Terrorism. The Arab World Gets It Right; Starmer’s spineless pandering to the Gaza vote is coming at a terrible cost; Islamic Jihad airs video of hostage Rom Braslavski

From Ian:

The West Rewards Terrorism. The Arab World Gets It Right

So what happens if the West unilaterally recognizes a Palestinian state now? It would create a failed state overnight. One without borders, leadership, or rule of law. It would be a disaster for both Israelis and Palestinians — and a gift to Hamas, who can then claim: “Our strategy worked. Violence delivered what diplomacy never could.” And Since Israel won’t budget under such blunt-forth threats, the only country whose recognition of Palestine is relevant anyways, this certainly doesn’t help the Palestinian cause.

And yet, for the first time, the Arab world — including Qatar, Hamas’ longtime patron — is finally pushing for the terror group’s removal. This should have been the strategy on October 8. It could have saved tens of thousands of lives and spared Gaza from ruin.

If the Arab states can now publicly call for Hamas to disarm, step down, and go into exile — it’s time the West caught up. This is the paradigm shift we’ve needed.

Everyone wants the war to end — except Hamas. Most of the world wants Israel out of Gaza. But under what conditions? And whose demands? Pressuring Israel through premature recognition of a Palestinian state isn’t the way. It emboldens Hamas, weakens the Palestinian Authority, and undermines future peace efforts.

Here’s the correct sequence: First, Hamas goes. Then peace talks begin. And they must include real reform, deradicalization disarmament and demilitarization.

France, the UK, and Canada may mean well, they might be pandering to their own extremists but they’ve mixed up the order. And in doing so, they risk prolonging the war, empowering extremists, and sabotaging the very peace they claim to support.

For once, the Arab world has it right. Let’s not let Western virtue-signaling blow the opportunity.

Ahmed Fouad Alkhatib: Hamas Wants Gaza to Starve

Hamas actually wants a famine in Gaza. Producing mass death from hunger is the group’s final play, its last hope for ending the war in a way that advances its goals. Hamas has benefited from Israel’s decision to use food as a lever against the terror group, because the catastrophic conditions for civilians have generated an international outcry, which is worsening Israel’s global standing and forcing it to reverse course.

Online supporters of the terror group have consistently attacked any efforts to alleviate the crisis. In posts and videos, they have dismissed efforts to send in food by convoys of trucks from Egypt and Jordan, pointing to the chaotic scenes as desperate Gazans scramble for aid. They have likewise attacked the airdrops that are now under way and called for them to be stopped immediately.

Hamas’s evident desire to extend and deepen the crisis of hunger helps explain the recent breakdown of cease-fire negotiations, even as Gazans are needlessly dying. The group’s intransigence led both Israel and Trump’s envoy, Steve Witkoff, to walk away from the talks. If the hunger crisis and humanitarian issues are addressed, Hamas can no longer use the suffering of Gazans to generate an international outcry or use the resultant leverage to end the war on its own terms.

But the two-state-solution conference convened by France and Saudi Arabia at the United Nations shows the way forward. In a remarkable statement, endorsed by the European Union and the Arab League, the participants condemned the October 7 attacks and the taking of hostages, and declared that “Hamas must end its rule in Gaza and hand over its weapons to the Palestinian Authority.” The conference envisions the end of hostilities, the establishment of an international mission in Gaza, and the ultimate return of the Palestinian Authority to govern the Strip.

Many Arab states have been reluctant to call out Hamas publicly, even though they do so privately on a regular basis, for fear of upsetting their own populations. But now they have recognized the importance of openly and transparently calling for Hamas to give up control of Gaza and disarm. Both Israel and the international community should capitalize on this shift, to isolate the terrorist organization and give hope for a better trajectory for Gaza’s future.

If Hamas believes that the suffering of Gazans bolsters its cause, Israeli decision makers should take that to heart. They should abandon their misguided and inhumane policies and cease their efforts to pressure the population as a means of pressuring the terror group. The best way to undermine Hamas’s position is to instead flood Gaza with food, and to alleviate the suffering of its people.

JPost Editorial: Why is Europe rewarding Hamas terror with a Palestinian state?

What does Europe not understand about the Israel-Hamas War?
Yet this is exactly what the UK has done, and exactly what many have tried to explain to them. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, US President Donald Trump, Israeli Ambassador to the UN Danny Danon, Combat Against Antisemitism, the British Board of Deputies, and the Hostage Families Forum have all expressed their disbelief at the concept that terror is rewarded simply because Hamas is now losing the war, and as is usually the case, innocent Gazans are suffering.

Perhaps Sir Keir or his Foreign Minister, David Lammy, have once again inherently failed to understand what has been taking place in this part of the world in the past few months.

Hamas has rejected opportunity after opportunity to sit down, sign a ceasefire deal, and release the hostages. In April. In May. In June. In July.

Just four days ago, Trump himself said, “Hamas doesn’t really want to make a deal.”

Yet, and for the umpteenth time, nations have placed the onus on Israel to “make a deal.”

Asked about criticism of the UK’s intentions on Wednesday, British Transport Minister Heidi Alexander said “reward” was not the right way to characterize Britain’s plan.

“This is not a reward for Hamas. Hamas is a vile terrorist organization that has committed appalling atrocities. This is about the Palestinian people. It’s about those children that we see in Gaza who are starving to death.”

There is a striking historical irony here for those calling on Israel to make peace. The Irish Republican Army spent 30 years trying to force the British out of Northern Ireland. The IRA did not receive statehood as a reward for its bombing campaigns. In Algeria, France’s bloody withdrawal followed decades of war, not unilateral recognition. And the Taliban, for all the West’s engagement, was never rewarded with statehood – they simply succeeded in driving the Americans out. Why then is Hamas, which burned babies alive and paraded women through Gaza’s streets, being granted political dividends?

And supposing all that the UK wishes comes to fruition: the war ends, a ceasefire is signed, hostages are released, and the Palestinians are given their own state. Will Hamas not simply come back onto the political stage under the guise of a different name? Will its supporters, of which there are plenty still in Gaza and the West Bank, not continue the struggle against Israel, as they have stated many times post October 7?

It is incomprehensible that foreign politicians can be so ignorant as to assume that because they demand that Hamas cease to exist, they will comply.

“October 7 didn’t happen because Palestinians were denied a state; it happened because they were given one,” Mosab Hassan Yousef, more famously known as Son of Hamas, wrote on social media Wednesday morning. Perhaps he has a point. Gaza has been Israeli-free (barring hostages) for nearly 20 years, and all it led to was war after war culminating in October 7.

If the world wants peace, there is a path. Pressure Hamas to surrender, release all hostages, disarm, and allow international and Palestinian moderates to rebuild. But instead, the West is once more leaning on Israel, urging restraint while offering incentives to the aggressors.

Sydney Sweeney's Boobs A Mossad Plot (PreOccupied Territory)

Our weekly column from the humor site PreOccupied Territory.

Check out their Facebook and Substack pages.

New York, July 31 - Media furor surrounding the denim attire and the absolute gazongas on an actress who modeled for a prominent fashion label in a campaign launched last week has focused on the alleged white supremacist coding of the imagery - an attractive blonde in jeans and a matching top - instead of what online experts contend is its true function: to render Americans so obsessed with the model's ample bosom that they fail to notice the creeping, sinister takeover of America by Jewish interests.

Renowned users on social media platforms such as X struggled over the last week to maintain awareness that Sydney Sweeney's boobs are a Mossad plot, even as those users found themselves drowned out by apoplectic progressives insisting her ample jugs and low-melanin hair signal racism on the part of American Eagle Outfitters, the company whose ads now feature Ms. Sweeney.

The loudest Mossad-aware voices in social media expressed frustration with these developments. "Just when we thought we were getting somewhere with the 'Gaza is starving' narrative," complained Nick Fuentes, "the Mossad comes in with hooters. And people eat it up! Who needs hooters? I mean, I love cans! I'm not gay. I'm not!"

Pro-Palestine figures sounded a similar note. "This is must be an attempt to distract the American public from the atrocities in Gaza," charged Alonso Gurmedi. "Why, just today, the occupation forces killed another eight hundred thousand Palestinian children! Did I say eight hundred thousand? I meant eight hundred million. And yet the Western brains focus only on the ta-tas. Leave it to the Mossad to know exactly how to exploit your weaknesses."

"That rack, though," he conceded.

Activists fear that any forty-eight-hour period in which Palestinian victimhood is not front-page and leading-item news is a failure, explained media analyst Tim Walz. "Personally, I don't get the appeal of the campaign," he noted. "Not my thing. A woman of color, or of size, you know, maybe that wouldn't have been as tone-deaf. Or perhaps a man! Yes. A man. Anyway, what were we talking about? Right. Those poor Palestinians! We can't let the world's attention focus on anything else! Not even sweater puppies. Ooh! Puppies!"

"Silly me, getting distracted. Free Palestine!"

Israeli officials declined to comment on the veracity of the accusations. They did, however, refer a reporter to a trove of resources containing images of IDF women in tight uniforms and in various combat and non-combat poses.

Buy EoZ's books on Amazon!

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

PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism (February 2022)

AP reported last week:

More than 1,000 Palestinians have been killed by Israeli forces since May while trying to get food in the Gaza Strip, mostly near aid sites run by an American contractor, the U.N. human rights office said Tuesday.

Of the 1,054 people killed while trying to get food since late May, 766 were killed while heading to sites run by the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation, according to the U.N. human rights office. The others were killed when gunfire erupted around U.N. convoys or aid sites.

Thameen al-Kheetan, a spokesperson for the U.N. rights office, says its figures come from "multiple reliable sources on the ground," including medics, humanitarian and human rights organizations. He said the numbers were still being verified according to the office's strict methodology.

All the OCHA reports I have seen are very careful not to directly blame Israel for deaths, so I wanted to find the original statement. It comes from a UN News article on July 22:

[T]he UN human rights office, OHCHR, announced on Tuesday that more than 1,000 Palestinians have now been killed by the Israeli military while trying to get food in the Strip since the so-called Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF) started operating on 27 May.
“As of 21 July, we have recorded 1,054 people killed in Gaza while trying to get food,” said OHCHR spokesperson Thameen Al-Kheetan. “766 of them were killed in the vicinity of GHF sites and 288 near UN and other humanitarian organizations’ aid convoys.”
Mr. Al-Kheetan noted that the finding came from “multiple reliable sources on the ground, including medical teams, humanitarian and human rights organizations. It is still being verified in line with our strict methodology.”

Al Kheetan did not say the were killed b y the IDF. He was as careful in his statement as OCHA normally is. But UN News assumed that they were all killed by Israel in its reporting.

UN News articles are not official UN statements, they are news articles filtered through the reporters employed by the UN. AP took the UN News article and didn't distinguish between what OCHA said and what the reporter added.

The OCHA report from the next day emphasizes the normal caution in their reporting:

According to the Ministry of Health (MoH) in Gaza, between 16 and 23 July, 646 Palestinians were killed, and 3,438 were injured. Between 7 October 2023 and 23 July 2025, the MoH in Gaza reported that at least 59,219 Palestinians were killed, and 143,045 Palestinians were injured. This includes 8,363 people killed and 31,004 injured since the re-escalation of hostilities on 18 March 2025, according to MoH. The MoH further noted that the number of casualties among people trying to access food supplies has increased to 1,060 fatalities and more than 7,207 injuries since 27 May 2025.

It properly attributes the casualty numbers to the MoH and it carefully does not directly blame Israel.

The UN News reporter editorialized by assuming both the casualty figures are accurate and that there are no other possible reasons for the civilian deaths than Israel. The AP reporter did not distinguish between the actual OCHA statement and the UN News editorializing.

What other explanation is there for casualties? Haaretz reports today:

At least 48 Palestinians were killed and dozens were wounded Wednesday while waiting for food at a crossing in the Gaza Strip, according to a hospital that received the casualties.

The IDF said on Thursday that a preliminary probe found no wrongdoing or IDF-related casualties in the incident, but confirmed soldiers opened non-lethal fire as a crowd control measure. Al-Shifa Hospital in Gaza City said the dead and wounded were among crowds massed at Zikim Crossing, the main entry point for humanitarian aid to northern Gaza.

"The forces fired dispersal shots in the area, not at the gathering, in response to a perceived threat," the IDF's statement read. "Initial investigation shows that no casualties were reported as a result of IDF fire; the details of the incident are still being investigated."

An anonymous source in the defense establishment added that "during the gathering, gunshots were heard from within the crowd, and internal friction among Gazans within the gathering. This is in addition to several cases of being run over by aid trucks."

This is not the first time we have seen reports of gunfire within crowds. The idea that a professional army trained not to fire on civilians would kill 48 in a single incident is not reasonable. It is possible that some of the warning shots could have killed one or two accidentally, but 48 is only possible with direct orders to shoot at the crowd, and not only would no IDF commander make such an order, but the soldiers themselves would refuse it - and run to the media to whistle-blow it if they were given such an order without imminent risk to themselves.

But would Hamas put people in the crowds to shoot or stab them and cause chaos that would benefit them by delegitimizing Israel securing aid shipments? Yes, they would, and they have.

The relentless anti-Israel propaganda is based on a combination of ignorance of how a professional army works, willingness to believe and spread anti-Israel propaganda, and old fashioned antisemitism in assuming that Jews are shifty liars. But multiply these factors by thousands of NGO workers and reporters and politicians and the truth is the first casualty.

Buy EoZ's books on Amazon!

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

PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism (February 2022)

The UN confirms: 85% of Gaza aid gets stolen!

The UN Office for Project Services has a dashboard of aid to Gaza to different NGOs which shows that the vast majority of aid to Gaza - 85% -gets intercepted between the time it is collected at the crossing points and the time it gets to the people.

85%.

When you look at the details, you see that over 89% of the food meant for the World Food Programme gets intercepted before reaching its destination, and 78.5% of the food meant for the World Central Kitchen never arrives.

UNOPS says that the aid is intercepted "either peacefully by hungry people or forcefully by armed actors, during transit in Gaza."

Even worse, UNOPS admits that of all the food shipped to Gaza, 31% never gets picked up at the border to begin with.

So out of 40,012 tons of food aid sent to Gaza for the UN between May 19 and today, only 4,111 tons got distributed - which is only 10% of the aid.

For months, while the UN blamed Israel for starving Gazans, it knew and tracked day by day the number of trucks that arrived in Gaza, the number that were stolen and the number that reached their destinations - and did not bother to tell the world these facts, instead blaming Israel for the Gazans not getting enough food.

How much of this stolen food goes to Hamas? We have no idea. But it is a fair bet that Hamas gets more food aid than Gazans themselves do.

Not only is this a scandal on gross problems in aid distribution. It is a scandal that the UN knows all of this information and chooses not to tell the world that lots of food is indeed entering Gaza even during the supposedly Israeli restrictions and only 10% reaches their intended destination.

The World Food Programme and World Central Kitchen and UNICEF knows how little of the food they bring in reaches their destination - but not one of their many press conferences mentioned this fact.

This also indicates that as chaotic the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation mechanism has been - endlessly dissected by the media - the UN-run system for bringing food into Gaza is far worse in getting food into the hands of those who need it.

How will the media spin it this time?

(h/t Open Source Intel)

Buy EoZ's books on Amazon!

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

PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism (February 2022)

The sheer ridiculousness of Arab antisemitism is something to behold.

This week, a famous Egyptian actor named Lotfy Labib died at the age of 77. He had played hundreds of roles over his career.

But in his obituary, they only wanted to talk about one of them:

Lotfy Labib was one of the most prominent figures in Egyptian drama and cinema, leaving a clear artistic imprint over many years through a variety of roles beloved by the public and associated with them. His most notable role was in the national epic series "Raafat Al-Hagan."

In a previous TV interview with journalist Amr El-Leithy, the late actor spoke about the reason for his name's absence from the series' credits, explaining that he played a small role as a Jewish character who had lived in Egypt before the migration, but he wasn't comfortable with the role.

Lotfy Labib confirmed, saying: “Mr. Yahya Al-Alami told me, ‘You are with me and you played the role of one of the Jews who were in Egypt before the migration.’ I told him, ‘I am not happy and I wish you would not write my name in the credits.’ Therefore, my name is not in the credits at all.”

Here's the interview where he says he did not want to be associated with playing a Jew.

Note that he doesn't say it was an Israeli character, but an Egyptian Jew. And the TV series aired starting in 1988, well after Israel's peace treaty with Egypt.

But don't call them antisemitic. They only hate Israel. That's what we hear all the time when they are speaking in English, so it must be true.

Buy EoZ's books on Amazon!

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

PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism (February 2022)

07/30 Links Pt2: Gaza Starvation Photos Tell a Thousand Lies; The BBC's pyramid of propaganda; Arrests over Adass Israel synagogue firebombing; Palo Alto buys Israeli firm CyberArk for $25B

From Ian:

Eitan Fischberger: Gaza Starvation Photos Tell a Thousand Lies

Mohammed’s isn’t the only recent case of babies afflicted with terrible illnesses being exploited to promote a false narrative that Israel is intentionally starving Gazan children. Cogat, the Israeli military unit that coordinates humanitarian aid in the Palestinian territories, tweeted Monday about a viral photo of a different child, Osama al-Raqab. Like Mohammed, Osama looked emaciated, and critics claimed that he too was starving due to Israel’s actions. These critics include Dr. Muneer Alboursh, director of the Hamas-run Gaza Ministry of Health, who tweeted that Israel was trying to “mislead public opinion by claiming that he was suffering from other illnesses, not hunger” and that “what is happening is not propaganda, but a real famine.”

Yet according to Cogat—and previously confirmed by the boy’s mother to the Associated Press—Osama actually suffers from cystic fibrosis. On June 12, Israel coordinated his evacuation to Italy, along with his mother and brother, so he could receive medical treatment. “Tragic images rightfully stir strong emotions,” the Cogat post said. “But when they’re misused to fuel hatred and lies, they do more harm than good.”

That harm was clear to me in Gaza, where I stood surrounded by nearly 600 trucks worth of food, water and diapers, all ready to be delivered. The U.N. refused to do the job, saying it couldn’t operate safely with Israeli protection. Instead it asked that security be provided by the “Gaza Blue Police”—a euphemism for Hamas’s internal security forces. This is the same group the U.N. has repeatedly accused of stealing aid, including in October 2023, only weeks after the Hamas-led massacre.

In addition to rejecting IDF protection, the U.N. has declined to cooperate with the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation, despite its backing by the U.S. The result is that food meant for children like Mohammed is left to rot. Put simply, the U.N. would rather work with Hamas than the Israelis or the Americans.

Since Oct. 7, 2023, Israel has coordinated and facilitated the entry into Gaza of more than 1.86 million tons of humanitarian assistance, more than 78% of which has been food. The population of Gaza is about 2.1 million. The only comparable effort in modern history is the Berlin Airlift of 1948-49, during which the Allies delivered 2.3 million tons of supplies to 2.5 million West Berliners over 15 months. Even then, the aid was going to an allied population. “There is no historical precedent for a military providing the level of direct aid to an enemy population that Israel has provided to Gaza,” writes John Spencer of the Modern War Institute at West Point.

But these facts rarely break through the noise. Instead, the world sees a photo of a suffering child, assumes what news editors want them to assume, and then shares it without asking questions. The context is stripped away. There is real suffering in Gaza. But when that suffering is exploited for propaganda, and when humanitarian systems are paralyzed by politics and ideology, it is the most vulnerable—like young Mohammed al-Mutawaaq—who pay the price.

The Desperation of Jew-Haters By Abe Greenwald

Via Commentary Newsletter, sign up here. It is their desperation that gives the liars away and reveals the full sweep of their Jew-hatred. The very fact that the New York Times and other major news outlets are taking sick kids and claiming them as victims of a Jewish starvation plot is precisely what confirms that there is no starvation plot.

Think about how eager the Times must be to obtain a legitimate image of a single Gazan who’s been irrefutably starved by Israel. If there were one such image available on the planet, the paper would pay any amount to any party to have it. It would literally be the easiest image in the world to get universally broadcast. This is how we know none exists.

So the Times et al., in their desperate hatred of Israel, committed an unprecedented breach of journalistic ethics. Having no legitimate photograph of starved Gazans, they decided to use photographs of children with wasting and deforming diseases and write about them as if they were being starved by Israel.

If such a transgression were committed in service of any cause other than the demonization of the Jewish state, those responsible would be fired and never work in journalism again. But when media organizations are exposed for lying about Israel, they just tweak the lie and move on.

The Times was busted for misrepresenting a sick child as a starvation victim, so it issued the following statement about the boy in question: “We have since learned new information, including from the hospital that treated him and his medical records, and have updated our story to add context about his pre-existing health problems. This additional detail gives readers a greater understanding of his situation.”

The paper doesn’t identify the “pre-existing health problem” because it would probably explain the boy’s seemingly malnourished condition without any need to bring fake starvation into the story. So the Times is continuing to lie by omission.

Before October 7, 2023, staged and misleading images of supposedly suffering Gazans were commonplace on “pro-Palestinian” social media and in some Middle Eastern news organizations. What we used to laugh off as “Pallywood” is now just the news.

We must now wonder what further schemes the West’s desperate Jew-haters will import next.

Why the New York Times Gaza correction fell short and why it matters

The Times knows this principle. In its own handbook the paper states that “we must be forthright and timely in acknowledging our errors.” Timely the paper was; forthright it was not. Hiding the fix on a niche corporate account suggests an internal calculation that public contrition can be performed in half-measures without harming brand prestige. Readers are expected to accept that a buried note absolves the original sin, yet most will never encounter the update and therefore will never adjust their understanding of the story.

Why does this matter? Because modern conflicts are fought as fiercely on the battlefield of public opinion as on any physical front. Images and captions shape policy debates, affect humanitarian fund-raising, and influence diplomatic negotiations. One photo of an apparently starving child can become a moral cudgel yielding headlines, sound-bites and even votes in international forums. When that image is later revealed to be only half the story, the damage is already entrenched.

Critics of Western media often accuse legacy outlets of carrying innate biases against Israel. I prefer to judge case by case, yet the Times handed its detractors a gift. By omitting critical medical context in the first place and then opting for a low-profile correction, the newspaper reinforced suspicions that it privileges narratives of Israeli culpability and is reluctant to broadcast any fact that complicates that frame. At minimum it signalled that accuracy can take second place to virality.

The lesson is stark. In the age of instant amplification any news organization that wishes to retain public trust must match the scale of its corrections to the scale of its initial reach. That means posting revisions on every platform where the original appeared, pinning them prominently, and explaining in clear language how the mistake occurred. Anything less looks like damage control instead of accountability.

The New York Times insists that truth matters. I agree. Truth, however, does not merely require acknowledgement; it demands amplification equal to the falsehood it replaces. Until the paper is willing to raise its voice for corrections as loudly as it does for dramatic headlines, its credibility will remain under justified scrutiny.

07/30 Links Pt1: France and Britain Thought the Jews Would Be Pushovers; Canada will recognize a Palestinian state; Stop Blaming Israel for Starvation in Gaza; The Real Culprit is the UN

From Ian:

Seth Mandel: France and Britain Thought the Jews Would Be Pushovers

Voices from within the mainstream Jewish world have similarly been important in getting this message across.

UK Chief Rabbi Ephraim Mirvis noted that Starmer’s plan treats Israel more harshly than it does Hamas: “So many in the Jewish community are viewing this as a profound betrayal of Israel’s quest to live free of terror on its borders. And as is often the case, when the Jewish state appears more vulnerable, extremists at home and abroad are emboldened, and Jewish people are more vulnerable as a result.”

It was also gratifying to see the response from the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations, the umbrella organization for U.S. Jewish groups. After Emmanuel Macron made his Palestine announcement, his foreign minister reached out to the Conference to offer to meet with them in New York about it.

Again, this was after Macron went public.

“We are disappointed that our organizations were invited to discuss a policy that appears to already have been finalized rather than being consulted beforehand as partners committed to sustainable peace,” the Conference and six of its member organizations—the Anti-Defamation League, the American Jewish Committee, the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, B’nai B’rith International, UJA-Federation of New York and the World Jewish Congress—said in a statement. For good measure, they added that France’s move “not only emboldens extremists, but risks the security of the Jewish people around the globe.”

Their refusal to meet with the French minister sends an important message, as do the reactions around the Jewish world. I’ll let Conference of Presidents head William Daroff, who gave a statement to eJewishPhilanthropy, have the last word and hope his point comes through loud and clear:

“The decision here by these organizations acting jointly and unanimously, I believe, is indicative of a new wind that has been blowing since Oct. 7, where Jewish organizations are not fighting amongst themselves, not elbowing each other, but are working more in concert and focus together on the best interest of American Jewry. And so I’m proud that we’ve come together, all the organizations that were invited, to say, ‘Non, merci.’”

Arsen Ostrovsky: Stop Blaming Israel for Starvation in Gaza; The Real Culprit is the UN

Standing at the Gaza side of Kerem Shalom, surrounded by mountains of aid left idle, the contrast could not be clearer. While Israel was facilitating aid, the UN had effectively abandoned the children and people of Gaza.

Where is the outrage?

Where are all the human rights champions, the activists and NGOs who scream ‘famine’ and ‘starvation’, while blindly condemning Israel? Why are they not demanding the UN do its job, collect the aid and distribute to those who need it so urgently?

The truth is, too many in the international community would rather weaponize hunger to vilify Israel than take real steps to help Gazans.

It’s about keeping Israel as the forever scapegoat and undermining the U.S.-led Gaza Humanitarian Foundation, a game changer, which has at last bypassed Hamas, to deliver aid directly to the people of Gaza.

This isn’t just negligence. It’s moral bankruptcy. And it’s putting Palestinian lives, including children, at dire risk. It is simply unforgivable, that baby formula is going to waste, while the UN is engaging in petty politics.

If the world truly wants to help the people of Gaza, then stop lying about Israel. Stop peddling Hamas propaganda. And start holding the real culprits, Hamas and the UN, accountable.

But as long as the world continues to defame Israel, the one party actually trying to help, with baseless accusations of starvation, while enabling those who weaponize suffering, then the people of Gaza will continue to pay the price, not because of Israeli policy, but because of international cowardice.

I went to Kerem Shalom to see the truth for myself.

Now it’s time the world does the same.

Netanyahu discussed partial Gaza annexation if hostage talks stall, source tells 'Post'

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu discussed partial annexation of the Gaza Strip as a potential course of action if hostage deal talks fail, during a Monday small cabinet meeting – an Israeli source confirmed to The Jerusalem Post on Tuesday.

“It was raised as a serious matter and was debated,” the source said.

This comes after a source told the Post on Monday that Israel will have “no choice” but to expand its military operation in some capacity if hostage talks stall.

In addition, IDF sources confirmed to the Post that senior military officials were kept out of the meetings and were not consulted.

The IDF Spokesperson’s Office added that it would not comment on internal cabinet discussions.

The Post contacted multiple sources within the Justice Ministry with authority related to the issue, but has not received a response.

According to an Israeli source, the prime minister is currently waiting for two things: the possibility that Hamas may still show flexibility in the hostage negotiations and the upcoming meetings in Washington – where Strategic Affairs Minister Ron Dermer and National Security Advisor Tzachi Hanegbi are expected to hold talks with senior Trump administration officials about the war in Gaza.

The official added that he expects the security cabinet to convene this week to further discuss the situation.

How the media breathed new life into Hamas’s war effort

On July 21, Hamas was broke.

The Washington Post reported that it could not pay its fighters or pay “death benefits” to families of slain terrorists. It was in ceasefire talks. A week later, Israel has been forced to create a “humanitarian pause,” that is a ceasefire, with Hamas giving up nothing in exchange.

How did we get from there to here? This is another story of advocacy masquerading as journalism.

On July 20, The Jerusalem Post reported, “Israel, the U.S., Qatar and Egypt are still waiting for Hamas’s response to the proposed hostage and ceasefire deal presented by mediators last week.” A source reportedly told N12 news that “Hamas’s foot-dragging, even if it believes it serves its interests, may ultimately work against it.”

And according to The Washington Post report, “Hamas is facing its worst financial and administrative crisis in its four-decade history, facing stiff challenges in mustering the resources it would need to continue to fight Israel and rule Gaza.”

The article made clear, according to multiple sources in Gaza, that the seizure of humanitarian aid had been a key source of revenue for the terror group. As laid out in the piece: “Hamas profited ‘especially off the aid that had cost them nothing but whose prices they hike up,’ said a contractor who has worked at Gaza’s border crossings during the war.

“Over nearly two years, he said, he saw Hamas routinely collect 20,000 shekels (about $6,000) from local merchants, threatening to confiscate their trucks if they did not pay. He recalled that civil servants for the Hamas-led government said several times that they would kill him or call him a collaborator with Israel if he did not cooperate with their demands to divert aid. He said he refused. But he added that he knew at least two aid truck drivers who he said were killed by Hamas for refusing to pay.”

The Washington Post also quoted sources explaining that the reason Hamas wanted a return to the old methods of aid distribution, before the creation of the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation, was that it needed that revenue. In other words, at this point, Hamas was over a barrel. Based on that article, it certainly seemed that if Hamas could be prevented from resuming aid theft, the group would not be able to hang on for much longer.

But the very same day that The Washington Post report appeared, 28 world leaders stepped in to put pressure—not on the side that started the war with a brutal and savage attack and that continues, nearly two years later, to hold hostages, but on Israel. These countries made a statement saying the war in Gaza “must end now.” And the following day, July 22, Hamas rejected the ceasefire proposal that was on the table, adding new demands, including that the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation cease operations.

At this point, the international media stepped up, as if in concert, with a cacophony of headlines and photographs on starvation in the Gaza Strip, designed to put pressure on Israel to give Hamas exactly what it wanted—the ability to live another day.

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

Imagine you’re a 14-year-old girl, still floating from the final night of Jewish sleepaway camp. You barely slept—you were too busy singing camp songs, exchanging weepy hugs, and saying heartfelt goodbyes. Still, you managed to pack your duffel bag, lug it through security, and board the flight home from Valencia to Paris with your fellow campers.

You’re tired, but your heart is full. Someone calls out “Lilmod!”—the beginning of a silly chant your bunk invented—and without even thinking, you shout back: “Mashiach!”

And that’s when everything changes.

Because two Hebrew words were spoken, airline staff suddenly see you and your friends not as teenagers but as Jews and as it turns out, they really, really hate Jews. Things get ugly. Flight attendants are yelling. Spanish police are called. And you and your friends are forced off the plane, grabbed by the arms, manhandled. Your phone is confiscated. All your camp videos—all your selfies—deleted.” Your camp director, a young woman trying to protect her campers, is beaten, handcuffed, and bloodied in front of your eyes.

All because two Hebrew words were spoken aloud on a plane.

“She still had bloody marks, red, bright red, on her wrists, because of the handcuffs. It was horrible… It’s the worst experience of my whole life.”
— one of the campers, in a viral video explaining the incident.

Jewish Childhood Interrupted

The 44 children from Camp Kineret, ages 10 to 15, had done nothing wrong. Vueling Airlines claimed they were “disruptive” and tampered with emergency equipment—but provided no proof. Meanwhile, a passenger on the flight who had no connection to the camp said the kids were “calm.” The real crime? Hebrew words. Kippahs. A visible Jewish identity.

In the aftermath, Israel’s Diaspora Affairs Minister Amichai Chikli reported that airline staff shouted, “Israel is a terrorist state!” Spain’s Transport Minister referred to the children as “Israeli brats.”

They were not Israeli. They were French. And they were Children.

"Hide Who You Are"

Another video—less viral but just as haunting—shows a young male counselor on a bus speaking to Jewish campers before they reach the airport. He speaks with authority, but you can tell he’s scared too: “Take off your kippahs. Hide your tzitzit. Pack away your Stars of David and anything else Jewish.”

“Don’t give these antisemites a reason to kick us off the plane,” he pleads.

One small voice responds: “I have a kippah in my bag… What do I do?”

That shouldn’t sit right with anyone. But it did—and it will again. Because it always does.

What Does Antisemitism Do to a Child?

We know what antisemitism looks like: smashed windows, spray-painted swastikas, or the battered body of a handcuffed Jewish camp director left bleeding on the enclosed walkway leading from the plane to the terminal.

But what about the damage you can’t see?

According to a 2024 Stanford University study, nearly half of Jewish teens in the U.S. reported high stress or fear linked to antisemitism in the wake of October 7. Many said they’d stopped wearing Jewish symbols in public. Some avoided speaking Hebrew. A few even considered changing their last names—just to feel safe.

In the UK, a national survey found that 23% of Jewish schoolchildren had experienced antisemitism either at school or on their commute. These weren’t one-off slurs—they included physical threats, vandalism, and group harassment.

In Australia, researchers interviewed Jewish children who said they’d been called “dirty Jews,” been excluded from class projects, or watched teachers ignore antisemitic jokes. Nearly every single child interviewed had a story.

The research is clear: antisemitism doesn’t just affect Jewish children emotionally—it shapes how they see themselves, how safely they move through the world, and how much of their identity they’re willing to show.

Imagine being that young and afraid that your last name is “too Jewish.”

It’s Not Only France

The French campers aren’t alone.

In Staten Island, a seventh-grade Jewish boy walked into school just two weeks after the worst massacre of Jews since the Holocaust. A group of students surrounded him. They pushed him to the ground, kicked him in the leg and the face, and shouted, “F*** Israel.” No teachers intervened. No one asked what happened. He never went back to that school.

In London, a bus full of Jewish schoolchildren from the Jewish Free School was ambushed by a gang of ten teens. The attackers hurled large rocks at the vehicle while screaming “F*** Israel.” The younger kids screamed in terror. No one came to help. No arrests were made.

In Rome, an eight-year-old Jewish boy wearing a yarmulke went shopping with his mother. An Egyptian asylum seeker spotted his kippah and attacked him. When the shopkeeper tried to intervene, the man stabbed him in the face with a shard of broken glass. The boy survived. The storekeeper was left disfigured.

In Milan, a six-year-old French Jewish boy, his twelve-year-old brother, and their father were surrounded at a rest stop by twenty men. The mob targeted them for wearing kippahs. They stomped on the father, kicked him in the stomach and legs, and screamed “Free Palestine.” When police finally arrived, they didn’t arrest the attackers. Instead, they told the injured father to “tell Netanyahu to stop bombing Gaza.”

Physically assaulting Jews in Italy!
A father and his six year old son, both wearing yarmulkes, were shouted at "free Palestine" and "murderers, go home!" in a restaurant in the Milan area. pic.twitter.com/dQ1hJY2HCj
— Hamas Atrocities (@HamasAtrocities) July 28, 2025

No child walks away from such moments unchanged.

A Soul Marked Forever

These are not isolated events. This is a wave. A sickness. A shadow falling on Jewish childhood.

One moment, you’re proud of who you are—your Hebrew, your songs, your symbols. The next, an adult tells you to hide that Jewish star necklace under your shirt, to tuck away your tzitzit, and pray no one sees you.

And the worst part?

They do notice.

You’re a child. But to them, the religion you were born into is reason enough to hate you.

Because They Were Jewish

This was no misunderstanding. It was not a noisy group of children on a plane. It wasn’t even a schoolyard squabble.

It was plain old antisemitism—ugly, familiar, and completely unbothered by the fact that it was aimed at children.

But the kids will remember. They’ll remember the bruises, the shouting, the violence—
and the silence of the bystanders who watched it happen.

And they’ll remember that the reason no one seemed to care…
was because they were Jewish.

The Children Remember

One of the French campers ended her now-famous video by saying it was “the worst experience of my whole life.”

But she’s wrong.

The worst part will come later—when she realizes that even after being humiliated, even after her director bled on the airport floor, even after she hid her identity and was still thrown off the plane…

The world looked away. Because once you see Jews as less than human—and more like vermin, as Hitler did—their age doesn’t matter. Even a baby cockroach, after all, is still a cockroach. And cockroaches grow up.

And if that’s how you see them—what difference does it make if they’re six, or sixteen, or sixty?

They can’t see Jewish children as children. Only as the next wave of Jews.
And once you see them that way, you don’t have to feel bad when they bleed.

So they’ll remember.
And they’ll grow up knowing what it means to be hated for simply being Jewish.
But they’ll also grow up knowing what it means to belong—to one another, to something older than hate, and stronger.
Not all of them will hold on to it. Many will walk away.
But some won’t.
And that will be enough to keep us going.

Buy EoZ's books on Amazon!

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

PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism (February 2022)

The more I work on the AskHillel ethical framework, the better it gets.

After my last essay on how rights are a subset of values, I was wondering if we can better define the relationship between values and obligations.

How are moral obligations determined?

This seemingly simple question has long troubled philosophers, leading to often unsatisfying answers. Some traditions emphasize universal duties owed to all humanity, regardless of relationship or circumstance. Others narrow the scope of responsibility to only those within immediate proximity or with whom a direct contract exists. Both extremes, however, fail to capture the nuanced, dynamic reality of human moral life, leaving individuals and institutions having no guidance when confronted with complex ethical demands.

The AskHillel framework offers a precise and comprehensive answer to this enduring dilemma through a newly articulated ethical formula: Capacity + Proximity + Covenant = Obligation. This formula says that moral duties are not static nor universally uniform, but rather emerge from a dynamic interplay of three core conditions. It refines and extends AskHillel's foundational principles of Areivut (mutual responsibility) and Lo Ta'amod al Dam Re'echa (do not stand idly by), providing a robust mechanism for assigning duties that is both rigorous and realistic.

We've already discussed relational proximity as the concentric circles of responsibility that everyone has - first to themselves, then their families, their community, their nation and then the world. This provides a way to prioritize one's responsibilities, when many universalistic ethical systems imply that all people must be treated equally. They all deserve respect and their lives all have infinite value, but from the individual perspective, those closest get priority. This is instinctively true and in fact how most people act.

Functional capacity is another factor that is obvious once you say it out loud, but is rarely mentioned in moral philosophy. This says that moral duties increase not only with relational proximity but also with an individual's or entity's unique ability, resources, knowledge, power, or positional authority. This is a concept deeply embedded in Jewish thought, where gifts and strengths are understood as responsibilities. Here are some examples of how this plays out:

Individual Level: A doctor has a moral obligation to render aid in an emergency that a non-medical bystander does not, precisely because of their specialized knowledge and skill. A person with significant wealth holds a greater duty to provide tzedakah (righteous giving) to the needy, as their resources grant them a unique capacity to alleviate suffering. A scholar or leader has a heightened responsibility to guide and teach, due to their knowledge and influence.
Organizational Level: A corporation with unique technological capabilities (e.g., in AI or pharmaceuticals) has a greater obligation to ensure the ethical development and responsible deployment of those technologies, given their disproportionate impact. An organization with vast financial resources bears a heavier duty to ensure ethical supply chains and fair labor practices throughout its operations.
National Level: A nation possessing advanced scientific knowledge (e.g., in pandemic response or climate solutions) has a greater obligation to share that expertise for global benefit. A militarily powerful nation bears a heavier burden to contribute to global stability and prevent atrocities, in line with the principle of Lo Ta'amod al Dam Re'echa on an international scale, given its unique ability to intervene or deter.

This corrects our previous idea that responsibility is solely a matter of relationship. Power, knowledge, and ability are not merely privileges but come with commensurate moral burdens, regardless of direct personal connection.

But just as crucially as the responsibilities are the guardrails to make sure that limited resources are used wisely. That's where covenantal integrity comes into play.

Covenantal integrity ensures that obligations, while serious, are never absolute or self-destructive. An obligation is binding only if its fulfillment does not violate the core moral duties of the individual, organization, or nation, or undermine the very values that define its derech (path).

Self-Preservation: An individual is not obligated to sacrifice their own life to save a stranger if there is no reasonable chance of success, as Pikuach Nefesh (saving a life) applies to oneself as well. This principle ensures that the duty to others does not negate the fundamental duty to one's own existence and well-being.
National Dignity/Security: A nation is not obligated to intervene in every global crisis if doing so would fundamentally destabilize its own internal justice, national security, or the well-being of its citizens. The pursuit of external good must be balanced with the preservation of the nation's own covenantal responsibilities and the welfare of its people.
Internal Coherence: A company is not obligated to pursue a course of action that would cause its collapse, if that collapse would lead to greater harm (e.g., mass unemployment, loss of vital services), provided its pursuit of profit is bounded by higher-tier values. This acknowledges the value of organizational sustainability as a prerequisite for fulfilling its broader ethical and societal roles.

Covenantal integrity introduces a critical layer of moral realism and sustainability, preventing the framework from falling into the trap of demanding unlimited, self-sacrificing, or ultimately unsustainable duties.

This comprehensive ethical formula—Capacity + Proximity + Covenant = Obligation—provides a powerful tool for navigating the moral complexities of today. It elegantly resolves the tension between rights and duties by showing how "rights" are values that generate specific obligations depending on these three conditions.

It corrects the "libertarian error" of limiting duty to only direct consent or immediate proximity, by integrating the impact of capacity. It simultaneously refutes the "utopian/progressive error" of assuming boundless, undifferentiated duties for everyone, by introducing the necessary boundary of covenantal integrity.

It also leads to clarity in action. When faced with a moral dilemma, AskHillel doesn't just ask "What are the values at stake?" but also "Who is proximate? Who has the capacity to act? And what are the inviolable core duties that must be preserved?" This leads to precise, traceable, and fair assignments of responsibility.

Finally, this formula fosters a more mature form of moral agency. It empowers individuals and institutions to understand not just what is right in principle, but what is theirs to do in practice, given their unique position in the moral ecosystem.

This ethical formula, based in Jewish ethics, offers a robust, dynamic, and realistic framework. It transforms the perplexing question of "where do obligations come from?" into a structured, auditable process, providing a clear path for individuals, organizations, and nations to act with integrity, purpose, and genuine responsibility.

Buy EoZ's books on Amazon!

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

PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism (February 2022)