Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News

Tuesday, November 19, 2024

Iranian VP Zarif's video aimed at American Jews is hilariously opposite of the truth

Iran's Deputy President for Strategic Affairs Mohammad Javad Zarif issued an English language video that is filled with so many risible lies that it almost seems like a parody.

Here's the video and transcript:

Salaam/ Shalom

Peace to those – of any faith, language, or ethnicity – who cherish freedom, and justice. Greetings to the followers of all religions, and all children of Abraham, regardless of their creed, ethnicity, or language. Shalom to my fellow Iranians of Jewish faith and all followers of Prophet Moses across the globe.

Ask the women of Iran about how much they enjoy freedom and justice.

I begin in the name of our one Compassionate and Merciful God, to remind us, all, of the urgency of preventing the spread of war, bloodshed, plunder, and oppression.

Ask the people of Yemen how much Iran tries to prevent the spread of war, bloodshed, plunder and oppression.

I speak to you, Jewish people across the world, as a citizen of an ancient nation with a rich history of tolerance and humanity. For over two thousand years, my nation has been a symbol of peaceful coexistence among various religions, cultures, languages, dialects, races and ethnicities. Supporting the oppressed, the displaced, and those seeking refuge from genocide, has always been a trait of my nation in its long and proud history:
• Liberating the Jews suffering under the Babylonians over 2,600 years ago
• Receiving Jews displaced by the Nazis and fascists during World War II
• Opening its arms to millions of Afghans fleeing foreign occupation
• Assisting Palestinians, Lebanese, and Syrians displaced by aggression and apartheid.

Iran since the 1979 revolution has nothing in common with historic Persia. It is in most ways the antithesis of Persian traditions. Iran pre-1979 was mostly a tolerant and peaceful place for its citizens, although it was hardly a liberal democracy.

A few years ago, I had the honor of contributing to a unique achievement of multilateral diplomacy to end the manufactured crisis over Iran’s peaceful nuclear program. Yet, Netanyahu – who himself had contributed to the manufacturing of this crisis – made it his “historic mission” to obstruct and kill the nuclear deal: an agreement that would have ensured that the “wolf” this habitual liar was always “crying” about, would never come to town.

That agreement could have been the foundation of a new era of peace, tranquility, regional cooperation, and freedom from threats, conflicts, and escalating tensions.

However, before too long, Netanyahu and his Zionist and extremist cohorts succeeded in their satanic effort to rob the region and the world of this historic opportunity, standing on the wrong side of history.

Before Trump withdrew from the JCPOA, Iran was developing advanced centrifuges, violated the agreement on stockpiling heavy water, engaged in secret nuclear weapons development, banned the IAEA from inspecting military nuclear facilities, worked on building ballistic missiles to be a delivery system for nuclear bombs. Even after the withdrawal, the United Kingdom, France, Germany, Russia, and China pledged to continue to adhere to the agreement while Iran blatantly violated all its major provisions.

Standing on the wrong side of history again, Netanyahu and his regime, along with Israel’s Western enablers, have unleashed the machinery of death and destruction in the region, causing carnage and crimes against humanity in a genocidal campaign that has murdered over 50,000 civilians, including over 10,000 children.

But resistance to occupation will not die by killing children or even its leaders.

50,000 civilians and not one Hamas member. That's impressive!

Dear friends, sisters, and brothers,
Aggressive Zionism is nothing but an expansionist secular movement, deceitfully using Judaism to advance its colonial and racist agenda.

It's always nice when anti-Zionists define Zionism.

It abuses the memories and blood of Jewish victims of the Holocaust who perished during World War II, while Zionism itself is nothing but racism, chauvinism, militarism, terrorism, expansionism, apartheid, and hatred against other nations and religions.

Funny that the Baha'i religion is persecuted in peaceful and tolerant Iran while its beautiful headqarters is in the hateful, apartheid Zionist state.

Iran has been behind attacks on Jewish religious centers and prominent Jews in the UK, Germany, France, Canada, Argentina and the US, for starters.

It deceitfully claims to be the representative and protector of Jewish people worldwide, while in practice, it is the greatest threat to the dignity and security of the Jewish people.

Of course, the weapons Iran gives to Hamas, Islamic Jihad, Hezbollah, Iraqi Shiites and the Houthis don't threaten Jews at all.• Sacrifices Jews and Gentiles at the altar of Zionism;

• Uses the name of the Lord in vain to justify genocide;

I'm stumped on this one. I've never heard a Zionist pronounce the Tetragrammaton.

You are not just horrified by the Zionist crimes committed against others; you too are victims of Zionist assault on your faith and identity. Continue to stand – as you have done in the streets of Western capitals – with all the innocent victims of Zionism in Palestine, and elsewhere. Continue to support those at the forefront of this resistance who defend human dignity. Save the Divine Abrahamic Jewish faith from Zionist forgeries, marred by aggression, apartheid, and genocide.

Literally everything he accuses Israel of doing is happening in Iran and in Iranian-controlled areas of the "Axis of resistance." And none of them are happening in Israel.

Notice that Zarif doesn't mention the other progressive things about Iran, like executing gays.

If Zarif wants "shalom," Iran should stop arming terrorist organizations, stop illicit nuclear development, keep its international obligations and promises, and stop inciting antisemitism.

Any Western Jew who actually believes this claptrap is an ignoramus. Unfortunately, there are no shortage of Jewishly illiterate morons.

Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism today at Amazon!

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424.

Read all about it here!

11/18 Links Pt2: How identity politics makes excuses for anti-Semitism; Chilling new report reveals just how widespread antisemitism is at US colleges

From Ian:

How identity politics makes excuses for anti-Semitism

Rachel Shabi’s aim in her new book, Off-White: The Truth About Anti-Semitism, seems to be to reassure those on what passes for the left these days that they are not anti-Semitic – and that accusations that they are anti-Semitic are just, as she puts it, ‘a stick with which the right clobbers the left’. Little wonder, perhaps, that Off-White has already won praise from various leftist luminaries.

Shabi herself is a self-avowed ‘progressive’ and a veteran Israeli-born British journalist of Iraqi Jewish origin. In Off-White, she seeks to apply contemporary ‘frames of analysis’ common on the left to the subject of anti-Semitism. In practice, this means reconceiving anti-Semitism in terms of the core ideas of the identitarian left.

Many of Shabi’s starting assumptions are conventional. She sees anti-Semitism as an ‘ancient hatred’. She also talks about how anti-Semitism is a conspiracy theory that often involves scapegoating Jews for the perceived ills of society. Few would take issue with any of this.

From there on, however, she offers up a strikingly instrumentalist history of anti-Semitism. In her view, anti-Semitism is a ‘tool’ used by ruling elites throughout history ‘to maintain their power’. Christian church leaders once needed to vilify Judaism ‘in order to ensure [Christianity’s] own spread and eventual dominance’, she says. Likewise, 19th- and 20th-century Western ruling elites needed to vilify Judaism to maintain and deepen their dominance – as evidenced by the Dreyfus Affair in France and the British government’s Aliens Act in 1905.

As Shabi sees it, there’s little difference, then, between these instances of historical anti-Semitism and other forms of racism and discrimination, such as today’s far-right targeting of refugees from Africa and the Middle East. These are all simply instances of instrumental, trans-historical prejudice.

But while anti-Semitism is presented here as one racism among many, Shabi also argues that the position of Jews has changed radically over time. After the Second World War and the Holocaust, Western elites’ view of Jews underwent a dramatic transformation, she says: ‘Jews in the West were by and large absorbed into whiteness and its corresponding power structures.’ Persisting with the jargon of critical race theory, she claims that Jews were used to ‘maintain [white privilege] as a social construct’.

Jewish group seeks six-month ‘emergency’ to fight Jew-hate in EU

A prominent rabbi from Brussels on Monday called on the European Union to declare a six-month emergency period for fighting antisemitism at anti-Israel protests and beyond. He warned that Jews would leave Europe in the absence of such action.

Rabbi Menachem Margolin, director of the Brussels-based European Jewish Association, issued the call in a speech he made in Krakow, Poland, to about 100 participants of a conference commemorating the 80th anniversary of the liberation of the nearby Auschwitz German death camp.

“The European Jewish Association calls on the European Union and its member states to declare a six-month emergency period to combat period, with high-level protection for Jewish communities but also special measures at public events,” said Margolin.

Such events have become “a fanfare where anything goes and anything can be said and done,” he said.

Organizers of protests under the plan would need to “sign an obligation” against speech that incites violence and face rigorous monitoring for such conduct and heavy punishments, said Margolin.

“If our call today won’t be answered, we will start to see an exodus of Jews from Europe and the end of Jewish life on this continent, and Europe will lose an important part of its history and rich culture,” he said.

David Collier: An open letter to the police and CPS

To the police and CPS.

With reference to complaints made by Gabriel Kanter-Webber about Rupert Nathan. I understand that the matter has now been referred by the police to the CPS. Given Webber is from Brighton I imagine the original complaint would have been received by Sussex Police but cannot be certain.

I have known about this complaint for some time – and was shocked from the outset when I learnt that the police had turned up early in the morning at Rupert Nathan’s home, arresting him in front of his child. This created unnecessary trauma. Webber (and remember we are talking about someone who – progressive or not – qualified to be a Rabbi), also reported the incident to Rupert Nathan’s professional body – the Chartered Institute of Securities & Investment [CISI]. Thankfully, they chose to take no further action. But we have every right to question the ethical position of a man (Rabbi or not) who would knowingly attempt to damage someone’s career over a single personal comment made on social media.

The reason I am writing this is because I believe I possess relevant information. On December 4 2023 (long before the incident you acted upon), and because of his behaviour, I felt compelled to write this in an email to Gabriel Webber:

“Please stop commenting on my website. You are deliberately goading people as part of your ongoing harassment. I have work to do and am not there to police deliberately provocative behaviour – and the responses to it.”

Despite my written request Gabriel Webber continued to post comments on my site – and I felt forced to disable his ability to post freely in my comment spaces.

11/18 Links Pt1: Biden threatened to leave Israel defenceless; Iranian plot to murder Irwin Cotler; Large Gaza food convoy violently looted, UNRWA says

From Ian:

Ruthie Blum: Elise Stefanik’s UN debut can’t come soon enough

Whether the Biden administration is planning a last hurrah for the Jewish state at the United Nations—a lame-duck good riddance, à la Barack Obama, in the form of an abstention in a hostile Security Council vote—remains to be seen. The updated draft of a resolution relating to the war in Gaza and Lebanon is no better, if not worse, than its first anti-Israel version.

No surprise there. The only question is how Washington’s current dubious “ironclad commitment” to its key Mideast ally will stand up to scrutiny where the international vipers’ nest in Midtown Manhattan is concerned.

What’s certain is that President-elect Donald Trump’s nominee to replace U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Linda Thomas-Greenfield can’t come soon enough.

To grasp the difference between Thomas-Greenfield and her soon-to-be-successor, Elise Stefanik, one need only compare their statements about Israel and the Iran-backed enemies bent on its annihilation.

Thomas-Greenfield opened her address last week to the UNSC by issuing a harsh rebuke. Not to Hamas, of course. No, instead, she began her Nov. 12 tirade by citing remarks by acting U.N. under-secretary-general for humanitarian affairs and relief coordinator Joyce Msuya.

“There is no need to mince words here,” Thomas-Greenfield stated at the outset. “As we heard from our briefers, the situation in northern Gaza is dire. Catastrophic, as we heard from Ms. Msuya. An unconscionable number of Palestinian civilians, many women and children, have been killed.”

She proceeded to invoke a false Integrated Food Security Phase Classification report, according to which “nearly every civilian in Gaza is without adequate food, medication, clean drinking water or housing,” adding, “They simply cannot be left to suffer indefinitely.”

Paraphrasing Secretary of State Antony Blinken, she continued: “We need to end the armed conflict, bring the hostages home, including the seven Americans held by Hamas, and chart a path forward in the post-conflict period that provides governance, security and reconstruction in Gaza.”

Not a syllable about the monsters who make such a task impossible. Never mind, though, Thomas-Greenfield, like her boss Blinken and the rest of the outgoing administration, has been focused on currying favor with the world’s malign actors.

Bassam Tawil: UNRWA Hires Palestinian Terrorists, Glorifies Violence And Terrorism

According to Israeli intelligence, more than 450 terrorists belonging to terrorist organizations in Gaza, mainly Hamas, are also employed by UNRWA.

"By not firing them, the UN Secretary-General and UNRWA's Commissioner General are brazenly demonstrating their determination to continue employing members of Hamas and Islamic Jihad even after having been presented with incriminating evidence to this effect. It is time for donor governments to wake up and stop funneling their taxpayers' money to members of designated terrorist organizations." – www.idf.il, August 5, 2024

UNRWA chief Philippe Lazzarini recently told the UN General Assembly that his agency provides tolerant, respectful and anti-extremist education in Gaza. However, IMPACT-se's new report unveils institutional teaching material taught in five UNRWA schools in Gaza, where Hamas commanders have been exposed masquerading as school principals.

A poem taught to seventh-graders... calls on knights, symbolizing Arab leaders, to liberate the Al-Aqsa Mosque in Jerusalem "from the fist of unbelief, from Satan's aides – revenge to the Jews."

What is disturbing is that the UN chief and other donor countries refuse to see what many Palestinians already see, namely that UNRWA has long been playing a significant role in inciting hatred against Israel and raising another generation of Palestinian children on the glorification of violence and terrorism. It is time for this agency, as well as the entire UN, to be dismantled and removed, or at least, as suggested years ago, to have nations pay only for what they want and to get what they pay for.

It is also time for the Palestinian "refugees" to move on with their lives and stop relying on Western taxpayers' money.

Canada foils Iranian plot to murder Irwin Cotler

Canadian security forces last month foiled an Iranian assassination plot against Irwin Cotler, the Jewish former politician and human rights advocate, the country’s The Globe and Mail newspaper reported on Monday.

A source told the daily that the Royal Canadian Mounted Police warned the former Liberal justice minister on Oct. 26 that he was the target of an “imminent threat of assassination within 48 hours from Iranian agents.”

The source said authorities knew of two suspects in the plot, but it is unknown whether they were arrested or fled the country. The RCMP did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

The source claimed to The Globe and Mail that Cotler was informed last week that the threat level against him had been significantly lowered.

Cotler, 84, has reportedly been under 24/7 RCMP protection since the Oct. 7, 2023, Hamas-led cross-border massacre in Israel’s northwestern Negev.

The protection provided to Cotler by Canadian authorities was said to include bulletproof vehicles, armed bodyguards and other measures.

“After Oct. 7, my wife and I attended the March for Israel in Washington, D.C. When we flew back to Montreal, security asked us not to leave the airport. Security personnel spoke to me and informed me of what has been characterized as imminent and lethal threats, without going into further details,” Cotler said in an interview with JNS earlier this year.

The international legal scholar noted at the time that “the community of democracies including Canada does not understand the threat of Iran.”

Cotler, who served as Canada’s justice minister and attorney general between 2003 and 2006, has been on the Islamic Republic’s radar for his calls to list the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps as a terrorist entity.

The Jewish jurist has also represented Iranian political prisoners and is a strong supporter of Israel. He was Canada’s special envoy on Holocaust remembrance and combatting antisemitism from 2020 to 2023.

This was the BBC headline last week: "Nearly 70% of Gaza war dead are women and children, UN says."

The BBC is lying, and the UN is twisting numbers.

The UN is only counting what they call "verified" deaths, which is only 8,119 Gazans - not the 40,000+ that the health ministry claims. They are saying that among those "verified" deaths, 70% are women and children.

That's far higher than even the Gaza health ministry claims.

The latest Gaza health ministry count as of October 7 showed that women and children were 50.5% of the total that they counted. That already indicates that the UN is not counting a representative sample of Gaza deaths - only ones that are more likely to include women and children. It is a difference of 8,000 women and children that the UN is implying are dead compared to reality.

When you dig into the UN methodology, you can begin to see the problem.

It says:

[T]he number of killings verified by OHCHR by 2 September 2024 standing at 8,119 Palestinians in Gaza, including 2,036 women and 3,588 children (1,865 boys and 1,723 girls). Of these verified figures, 7,607 were killed in residential buildings or similar housing, out of which 44 per cent were children, 26 per cent women and 30 per cent men.

The footnote describes the methodology used:

That a large proportion of the fatalities verified by OHCHR were killed in residential buildings or similar housing is also partly explained by OHCHR’s verification methodology, which requires at least three independent sources, and the challenges in collecting and verifying information of killings in other circumstances.

The UN is only counting deaths that they can verify with three independent sources. The vast majority of Hamas members killed will not be verified by three sources, because Hamas is hiding its casualties. So the remainder that are far less likely to be Hamas are counted as if they represent all of Gaza!

And this is the reason that such a high percentage of those counted by the UN were killed in residential buildings. Those areas are public and Hamas cannot block people from witnessing the deaths, as opposed to in urban areas already cleared of civilians and tunnels, which is where most of the fighting is happening.

But, the UN asks, why are such a high percentage of people killed in buildings women and children? And the answer is because most of them are human shields!

We know that Israel warns residents before bombing their buildings - when they can. But if the target is a high ranking terrorist, they cannot issue a warning because then the terrorist will get away.

During the 2014 war, I counted 108 children who were killed while in the proximity of 24 known terrorists who were killed along with them. B'Tselem would usually (but not always) mention when women and children were killed along with terrorists who were the actual targets.

One major example was the Abu Jame family, 24 members of whom were killed because a top Hamas commander in Khan Younis named Ahmad Sahmoud was using them as human shields.

In other cases, it was a family member who was the Hamas terrorist.

The point is that when Israel has to go after major terrorists hiding in residential areas, while it has to perform a proportionality calculation, chances are there will be multiple innocent deaths along with the terrorist. Those situations would make the percentage of women and children killed look far higher than in most of the fighting. The UN methodology overcounts those relatively rare scenarios - 8,000 out of 40,000 deaths counted by the MoH. In the case of these 108 children killed in 2014, the UN would say that over 80% of those killed in those incidents were women and children. It is true - and the entire reason is because of Hamas war crimes of using human shields.

But the people quoting this report, like EU foreign policy head Josep Borrell, don't look past the headline. They, like the BBC, simply parrot the lie that 70% of those killed in Gaza are women and children, ignoring the evidence from Hamas itself that these numbers are nowhere close to true.

That eagerness to inflate Gaza casualty figures and the reticence to look beyond those numbers is simply another form of antisemitism.

(h/t Mark Zlochin)

Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism today at Amazon!

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424.

Read all about it here!

By Forest Rain

Sirens throughout the day, but not here. It was a beautiful Saturday (November 16th) and we were trying to enjoy the wonderful weather, lovely people, interesting things – although we knew that others were not.

I was hearing the sirens and interceptions in the distance. Israelis closer to the border with Lebanon were hearing sirens and rockets exploding. Huddled, waiting to see if the rockets would hit them. Or the shrapnel. Waiting for the bombing to end.

I was waiting for the bombing to begin. Eventually, it would come to Haifa too.

And in the evening, it came. Sirens. Down to the shelter.
Explosions, so loud they shook the house.
Not just interceptions. Impact too.
But where?

We got videos of the impact site on our phones. Something was on fire. A different neighborhood in Haifa, about a 10 minute drive away.

A cousin lives there. We called to ask if he was ok – he wasn’t at home but was worried about his dog. Neighbors had called him to say that his house was damaged. We promised to go to see what had happened until he could arrive.

Getting into our car, we could smell the fire.

When we got to the neighborhood the police had already closed off the section of the street where the missile hit. It smashed the beautiful Templar-period building used as the neighborhood synagogue – directly across the street from his house.

Firefighters were there, dealing with the fire. Ambulances were evacuating people. I hoped that no one was injured too badly. The Electric Company was there too. I didn’t know if the darkness was because the trees that had fallen in the blast pulled down lines or because the electricity needed to be turned off to keep people safe. Or both.

Instead of going through the crowd – people who lived there, rescue workers, media both foreign and local, and the curious – we approached the apartment from the back.

We walked through the darkness, the only lights from the rescue teams. Glass from the windows that had blown out of the houses crunching on under our feet. The sound of water pouring down from the roofs. Water tanks had been destroyed by the explosion… thank goodness the electricity was off for the area.

We got to our cousin’s house a moment before the Home Front Command rescue workers broke down his door. Their job is to go door to door, make sure no one is trapped inside, and help evacuate people. If they knock and there is no answer and they can’t contact the owner, they break down the door.

We told them that he wasn’t home and no one else was inside, that he was on the way. They marked the apartment as cleared and went on to check the rest of the building.

Neighbors who had been out came to check their apartment. As they surveyed the damage one of them broke down from the shock, crying, “Everything is broken. The walls, my paintings, my piano, I don’t have anything left.”

The blast broke the windows of their apartments and flung large pieces of shrapnel inside. There were holes in the walls, even in the piano. It was hard to see the full extent of the damage in the dark. Everything was covered in dust, smelled of the fire outside, and felt like the end of the world.

Objectively, not everything was damaged. A lot of cleaning up needed to be done. Windows and holes need to be fixed. Original artwork cannot be replaced but we told him over and over until he could breathe again: “It’s just property damage. Thank God you weren’t home when it happened.”

He nodded in understanding but still had a hard time shaking the hysteria. There’s something deeply shattering in having your sanctuary smashed. You have to pull yourself together, grit your teeth, and begin an uphill battle to put the pieces of your life back together. It’s hard to even know where to start…

Our cousin arrived. We were all relieved to see that the dog had taken shelter under the bed so she wasn’t hurt when the windows blew out. She came out shaking but wagging her tail.

We made a quick survey of the damage and helped him pack some things. It would take at least a few days to make the place livable again.

As we left the building, we saw others leaving. An exodus of people carrying small bags with some things, their cats and dogs.

In the morning it would be possible to come back, understand the true extent of the damage, and begin repairs. Thank God it was “just” property damage.

Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism today at Amazon!

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424.

Read all about it here!

Reuters reports:

The European Union's top diplomat on Monday confirmed he would suggest to members of the bloc that the EU pauses its political dialogue with Israel, citing the country's conduct of the war in Gaza.

"Many people tried to stop the war in Gaza... this has not happened yet. And I don't see a hope for this to happen. That's why we have to put pressure on the Israeli government, and also, obviously on the Hamas side," Josep Borrell told journalists ahead of an EU meeting.

The European Union's foreign policy chief last week proposed that the bloc suspend its political dialogue with Israel, citing possible human rights violations in the war in Gaza, according to four diplomats and a letter seen by Reuters.

He also falsely claimed that 70% of those killed in Gaza were women and children, a ridiculous assertion that even Gaza's health ministry has shown is not close to true.

Since the EU must "obviously" pressure Hamas, what has Borrell and the EU done in that area since October 7 2023?

I can find only one specific and meaningless move: Months after the October attack, the EU added Yahya Sinwar, Mohammed Deif and Marwan Issa to its terrorist list.

It is astonishing that they weren't on the list beforehand.

I can find nothing else. No moves specifically to sanction Iran or even politically pressure it for arming Hamas and Hezbollah (although there are sanctions against Iran for arming Russia) . No effort to ensure EU aid to Gaza doesn't go to Hamas. No declaring Iran's IRGC to be a terrorist group, as the US and Canada (and Lithuania) have done.

The hypocrisy becomes crystal clear when you realize that while Borrell wants to isolate Israel diplomatically, he and the EU has been increasing efforts to diplomatically engage with Iran.

In April, Borrell spoke to Iranian foreign minister Hossein Amirabdollahian and cringingly told hi exactly what Iran wants to hear from the EU. Borrell told him that the EU condemned Israel's airstrike on Iranian and Hezbollah terrorists in Syria, claiming (falsely) that they violated the Vienna Convention because it was inside a compound that included the Iranian embassy - even though it was being used to plan more attacks on Israel.

Following that meeting, Borrell told reporters that "the EU needs to have the best possible relations with Iran."

So Borrell simultaneously supports engagement with Iran, pressuring and isolating Israel and merely pretending to pressure Hamas.

As one EU parliament member said ahead of Borrell's end of term on December 1, “We won’t miss you, Mr. Borrell, but I’m sure the mullahs will.”

Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism today at Amazon!

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424.

Read all about it here!

Jews were treated horribly in Morocco by Muslims in the 19th century - before Zionism

Ten years ago, I discussed a book by a European traveler to northern Africa and the Middle East, using the pseudonym Ali Bey al Abbasi, about what he saw in Morocco in 1895.

THE Jews in Morocco are in the most abject state of slavery; but at Tangier it is remarkable that they live intermingled with the Moors, without having any separate quarter, which is the case in all other places where the Mahometan religion prevails. This distinction occasions perpetual disagreements; it excites disputes, in which, if the Jew is wrong, the Moor takes his own satisfaction; and if the Jew is right, he lodges a complaint with the judge, who always decides in favour of the Mussulman. This shocking partiality in the dispensation of justice between individuals of different sects begins from the cradle; so that a Mussulman child will insult and strike a Jew, whatever be his age and infirmities, without his being allowed to complain, or even to defend himself. This inequality prevails even among the children of these different religions; so that I have seen the Mahometan children amuse themselves with beating little Jews, without these daring to defend themselves.
...
When they meet a Mussulman of high rank they are obliged to turn away hastily to a certain distance on the left of the road, to leave their sandals on the ground several paces off, and to put themselves into a most humble posture, their body intirely bent forward, till the Mussulman has passed to a great distance; if they hesitate to do this, or to dismount from their horse when they meet a Mahometan, they are severely punished. I have often been obliged to restrain my soldiers or servants from beating these poor wretches, when they were not active enough in placing themselves in the humble attitude prescribed on them by the Mahometan tyranny.

It turns out that newspapers in the 19th century had a number of articles from multiple sources that showed that, if anything, Ali Bey was soft-pedaling the problem.

His reporting was confirmed and expanded upon in 1859, by a British diplomat based in Rabat. His letter was published in The American Israelite, December 30 1859-January 6 1860.

The Jewish Advance, July 9, 1880, describes earlier attempts to help Jews in Morocco have a modicum of human rights, but previous efforts had failed - and Jews were being murdered.

The article continued on the subsequent edition of the newspaper with more details of the history of Jewish persecution there:

The observer than adds a sarcastic addition:

The topic even reached the mainstream newspapers in 1888. A widely spread article said:

The Jews of Morocco are to my mind at once the most interesting and most trying race of people, says a writer in the Boston Transcript.....Among the anomalies connected with them is that they are hated and despised by the Moors, subject to every insult and degradation that can be imagined, yet they are recognized as such necessary members of society that there is a law which is actively enforced, forbidding Jews to leave the country under any circumstances. The Jews, outside of one or two coast towns, are treated worse than the meanest and lowest animals

... Moor thinks no more of killing a Jew, if he can do It quietly, then of killing a rat. The Jews are not allowed to carry arms of any kind, nor to ride upon a horse, mule or donkey, or bullock, but he must make all journeys on foot; neither are they allowed to wear any foot covering outside of their own quarter, where they are herded together like animals, their dresses being regulated and restricted so they may always be known from the believers at a glance and they are forbidden to build any places of worship or to hold religious services of any kind-which command is religiously disregarded, services being held regularly in their houses, with, in some cities, a guard posted to inform of the approach of strangers.

If there is any nasty work to be done, as for instance the embalming of heads of executed rebels 80 that they may bang the longer at the traitor's gate, the Jews are pressed. into service; if the sultan or one of his officers wishes a few thousand dollars to meet a sudden demand, some wealthy Jew who has paid the least for protection, is seized without notice and thrown into a dungeon until he has been squeezed out of a proper sum..

Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism today at Amazon!

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424.

Read all about it here!

11/17 Links: Why Jared Kushner’s return matters ; Yasser Arafat’s legacy: The death of Palestinian statehood; Senior Hamas officials in Turkey after leaving Qatar

From Ian:

JPost Editorial: Trump’s pro-Israel appointments: Dream team or a tightrope for Jerusalem?

One of the main missions of Trump’s team, and particularly his Middle East envoy, will be to expand the historic Abraham Accords that his first administration mediated, and bring Saudi Arabia into the fold to make it the most powerful bloc of nations in the region against the “Axis of Resistance.”

It is also likely to resuscitate the “Deal of the Century,” authored by a team headed by Trump’s senior adviser and Jewish son-in-law, Jared Kushner.

While Trump’s new team might go as far as supporting Israeli sovereignty in Judea and Samaria and what former US ambassador David Friedman calls “One Jewish State” in his new book, it could also revert to the annexation of settlements combined with the establishment of a Palestinian state envisioned in the 2020 peace plan.

In April, the Biden administration signed $14.3 billion in emergency security assistance for Israel, and in September, approved an $8.7 billion aid package, including $3.5 billion for wartime procurement and $5.2 billion for defense systems such as Iron Dome and David’s Sling.

While Trump might maintain such a high level of security aid provided by the US to Israel, he could also cut it or use it as a way to pressure the Jewish state. This might become an issue for Israel in 2026, when the 10-year Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) signed by former president Barack Obama expires.

Perhaps most important of all will be the Trump administration’s policy on Iran. High-level sources told The Wall Street Journal that the president-elect intends to reinstate his “maximum pressure” campaign against Tehran, under the leadership of its original architect, Brian Hook.

At the heart of Trump’s foreign policy is the aspiration to end wars and expand peace initiatives in conflict zones, including the Middle East, a policy endorsed by supporters of an isolationist “America First” policy such as JD Vance, who will be vice president.

The bottom line is that while Israel can allow itself to be pleased with the make-up of the new Trump team, it should also be cautious.

Why Jared Kushner’s return matters for Jews, Arabs, and Muslims alike

Kushner’s familiarity with regional stakeholders and proven track record align with this goal, positioning him as a bridge between America’s interests and the needs of the Middle East. Today, the need for hope and healing is greater than ever.

The horrific terrorist attack of October 7 and the ongoing conflict have deepened mistrust between Jews, Arabs, and Muslims. Too many innocent lives have been lost on all sides, and the wounds from terror and violence will not heal quickly. But even amid this pain, there remains an opportunity to restore what has been destroyed.

In a world increasingly connected through technology, there are avenues for people to communicate, trade, and cooperate in unprecedented ways. Kushner’s return to diplomacy could capitalize on these opportunities, using technology and economic partnerships to break down barriers of fear and rebuild trust.

His experience in creating the Abraham Accords shows he has both the vision and commitment to make peace achievable again, despite entrenched skepticism on all sides. For peace to truly take root, someone is needed who understands the nuances, respects the complexities, and believes in the region’s potential.

Kushner is uniquely positioned to play that role. His approach—focused on investment, partnerships, and realistic goals—offers a path to a future where cooperation replaces conflict and prosperity unites rather than divides. As new challenges emerge, his guidance could help stabilize the fragile gains made in recent years.

The Middle East is at a crossroads, and the future depends on leaders who can foster hope and progress across communities. Now, more than ever, we need someone who can bridge the divides and build a lasting foundation of trust and shared purpose.

Jared Kushner has proven he can be that bridge.

Mark Dubowitz and Eugene Kontorovich: Lame-duck Biden ramps up sanctions on Israelis — and eases up on terrorists

Last week, 88 congressional Democrats wrote a letter demanding that the Biden administration go out swinging, sanctioning Israeli government members as well as a mainstream Israeli NGO that reports on illegal Palestinian activities.

These members of Congress want Israelis sanctioned for their political views and activism; their suggested targets are not alleged to have committed any violent or illegal acts.

Once he takes office, President-elect Trump can quickly rescind these sanctions or let them expire — but in the meantime, a new precedent has been set: The US government is mainstreaming the goals of the anti-Israel left’s Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions campaign.

Meanwhile, US allies including Canada and Britain have already imitated the Biden administration, imposing even more far-reaching sanctions on Jews in the West Bank.

State Department progressives may hope these countries will keep the fire burning — including through another UN Security Council Resolution in the coming months punishing Israel — while Democrats are out of power.

US citizens have filed a federal lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of Biden’s sanctions. Trump’s Justice Department should quickly move to settle the suit, and to direct the government to stop basing sanctions on unreliable information from highly politicized NGOs.

For its part, Congress should investigate the process behind the sanctions.

Finally, Trump should warn the lame-duck administration that expanding the sanctions program could spur him to keep Biden’s executive order in place — and use it instead against progressive groups with connections to the Palestinian terrorists who are destabilizing the West Bank.

After all, turnabout is fair play.

Trump said to lift all military restrictions on Israel on 1st day in office according to reports

Amid escalating tensions between Hezbollah and Israel, President-elect Donald Trump has promised to lift all restrictions and delays on the supply of military equipment and ammunition to Israel immediately after his inauguration, Israeli Channel 12 News reports.

The assurance from Trump’s team came as Israel is considering a 60-day cease-fire with Hezbollah, which would provide a window until Trump takes office and implements the promised changes.

Sources indicate that this commitment from Trump’s administration clarifies Israel’s willingness to temporarily halt military actions, with the understanding that support will resume without delay once Trump is in office.

Unnamed Israeli officials have confirmed the reports from Israeli media to Fox News Digital.

Currently, U.S. restrictions include an embargo on a certain weapons shipment and limitations on various combat-related equipment, even if they do not involve explosive ordnance. This embargo has impacted Israel’s defense capabilities, especially as the military now contends with active fronts in both Lebanon and Gaza, requiring strict control over ammunition and supply use.

This pledge to lift all military supply restrictions, starting from Trump’s first day in office, would allow Israel to replenish its stockpiles and alleviate current constraints. With the 60-day cease-fire, Israel aims to temporarily suspend hostilities until the new administration takes office, enabling a resumption of full military operations if necessary, without the existing limitations.

On Thursday, the U.S. ambassador to Lebanon submitted a draft truce proposal to Lebanon's Speaker of Parliament Nabih Berri to halt fighting between armed group Hezbollah and Israel, two political sources told Reuters, without revealing details.

Hezbollah calls a synagogue it bombed in Haifa a "military base"

This is what the Avot U'Banim synagogue in Haifa looked like before yesterday.

Here is a screenshot from a video published by Hezbollah showing the damage to a "military base in Haifa" from a barrage of rockets yesterday:

Hezbollah named five supposed targets of their rockets, all of them "military bases," including a gas station that they say is owned by the IDF.

In the video, the people clearly talk about the synagogue burning. Hezbollah knows that a synagogue was hit, but they do not admit it, and neither has Lebanese media.

The missiles hit the synagogue and its adjacent beit midrash only an hour after Saturday night prayers.

“This is divine providence,” Haifa Mayor Yona Yahav told Israel Hayom.

“There were no people in the synagogue, but in the surrounding buildings there were people who experienced a significant blast,” he said. “But as I said, most of the damage is not physical. There’s damage in many apartments, mainly windows. Some vehicles were also burned.”

Haifa residents are happy there were no injuries.

Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism today at Amazon!

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424.

Read all about it here!

The Genocide Convention defines genocide as "intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group."

"Intent" is a high bar. No one can read minds; unless the accused party specifically says that they intend to wipe out another people, all we have are actions that must be interpreted.

The only way for anyone to determine that Israel's intent in the current war is genocidal is if they already hate Jews.

By definition, if there are a preponderance of actions and statements that contradict the thesis that Israel intends to destroy all Palestinians or all Gazans, then the charge of genocide is false.

I will not get into all the counter-evidence - anyone can research that Israeli leaders have consistently said that their targets are Hamas and not Gaza civilians, that Israel has facilitated tens of thousands of truckloads of aid, that Israel has been careful to avoid civilian casualties, that Hamas deliberately places its military targets within and underneath apartments, schools, mosques and hospitals making avoiding all civilian casualties literally impossible and that many military experts have praised Israel for its efforts to avoid civilian casualties despite the unique challenges of fighting an enemy that depends on civilians to limit attacks.

However, the people tossing the word "genocide" around discount and ignore all the counterevidence that refutes the charge. They grab onto isolated, out of context statements and incidents and try to build them into an edifice of proof.

I'll give just one example.

A recently released UN report accuses Israel of using methods "consistent with genocide." The very first quote they use from an Israeli official as evidence is:

On 9 October, the Minister of Defence of Israel announced a “complete siege” of the Strip with no electricity, no food, no fuel and removed every restriction on Israeli forces so they could “eliminate everything.”

The implication is that Gallant ordered troops to eliminate everything in Gaza and starvation was one of the methods.

These were two different statements.

Israel has been facilitating aid into Gaza since October 21, 2023 - the entire war except for two weeks. Statements made within hours or days after the horrific attacks on October 7 demanding a siege were never meant to be long term policy, and those who pretend that they are are knowingly lying.

The second statement to "eliminate everything" refers only to Hamas and other terrorists. It comes from a YouTube video of Yoav Gallant speaking to troops on October 9. His full statement is,

Take off the gloves kill everyone who fights us, even if it is one terrorist. From the air from the land, with tanks and bulldozers all means. There are no compromises. It won't be the same again. And Hamas will not be. Eliminate everything, it will take time, it won't take a day, it won't take a week, it will take weeks and maybe months.

Gallant is specifically talking about terrorists, not Gaza.

And this is the very first example given by the UN as proof. It is clear that the UN is consciously twisting the truth to reach its predetermined "genocide" conclusion, and it is trying to obfuscate its sources by referring not to the original statement but laundering it through other documents - in this case, the ICJ accusations by South Africa - that twisted the original statement.

The only reason for people like the authors of this UN report to ignore the massive amounts of counterevidence is if they start off their thinking with the assumption that Jews are liars. To them, every piece of counterevidence is either a lie or a coverup by Israeli Jews. They do not spend nearly as much time soberly looking at all the facts as they do at attempting to rebut the facts that disagree with their antisemitic assumptions. Their inherent, preconceived bias does not admit anything but the conclusion that Israeli Jews are evil, corrupt, lying murderers.

Indeed, is not a conclusion - it is the basis for choosing what "evidence" they will highlight and which they will ignore or judge to be lies.

Only people who already believe Jews are inherently bad people - people who are antisemites - believe the genocide slander while discounting or even belittling all the evidence against it.

Which brings up the other part of the slander that proves its purveyors are antisemitic.

The word "genocide" has been only rarely applied since World War II, for good reason: because the bar for proof is so high.

The prototypical case that all agree on is the Holocaust, since it is undeniable. Gas chambers and crematoria and mountains of shoes and hair are hard to argue with.

No one used the term for the Syrian civil war that included chemical weapons attacks on civilians - up to half a million civilians killed. It wasn't used against Russia for killing over a million civilians in Afghanistan in the 1980s. It was not used for the estimated million civilians killed in the Iran-Iraq war which included targeting cities and also use of chemical weapons.

Those who accuse Israel of genocide, while never using the term for virtually any other war, revel in the deliciousness of accusing Jews of being on the same moral level as the Nazis. To them, victimhood is righteousness, and taking away the idea that Jews can be victims is a huge part of the slander.

It is not new - Israel has been accused of being like Nazi Germany since its rebirth. In 1949, the Saudi representative to the UN argued that Israel should not be admitted as a member state by saying the Zionists " committed atrocities not unlike those perpetrated by the Nazis."

Now, the word "genocide "is being repeated in a Nazi-like "big lie" fashion to turn the falsehood into a reality. Applying the word "genocide" to Israeli military actions when the term was never used for nearly all of the many other wars with many more civilian casualties since 1945 is pure antisemitism.

The "genocide" terms is being used deliberately to equate Jews with Nazis. There is no other reason. it is a form not only of Holocaust inversion but also Holocaust minimization.

It is pure Jew-hatred.

Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism today at Amazon!

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424.

Read all about it here!

This is a 1971 Chinese propaganda poster that says on the left "LONG LIVE MARXISM, LENINISM & MAO ZEDONG THOUGHT" and on the right "Proletariat of the world, unite!"

It is also the profile picture of UC-Berkeley graduate student Christián González Reyes.

Reyes is the co-creator of a class that was scheduled for this coming spring called "Leninism and Anarchism: A Theoretical Approach to Literature and Film." its course description, since removed, said:

With the US-backed and -funded genocide being carried out against Indigenous Palestinians by the Israeli Occupying Force, many have found it difficult to envision a reality beyond the one we are living in today. At the same time, we have also seen a rise in global socialist (and in particular Leninist) movements that are actively combating this destructive imperial agenda. From the Hamas revolutionary resistance forces combating settler-colonialism to a continuous anti-imperialist politic by Cuba, Vietnam, Venezuela, China, DPRK, and various Indigenous and First-Nation peoples across the Americas, there continues to be a commitment to anti- imperialism and anti-capitalism in what has been termed the Global South ...

This is not a politics course. It is a comparative literature course. Yet that doesn't stop the instructor from engaging in spreading antisemitic and anti-Western ideologies.

Berkeley responded to criticism:

In response to a query from Ynet, Berkeley said, "The matter is being addressed. The original course description was changed.” A university official added, " While we can’t, as a matter of law comment on personnel issues, generally speaking we take our policies that prohibit using the classroom for political advocacy very seriously. If/when there is reason to suspect those policies are being violated we respond quickly." When pressed on specific actions taken, the university cited privacy laws as a reason for withholding further details.

Someone had placed this course description on Berkeley's website. There is no way graduate students could put u course material descriptions without the literature department signing off on it. It isn't like Reyes posted it on his personal Facebook page - this went through some vetting before being published.

What UCB takes very seriously is the threat of bad PR, not the issue of classes that are clearly meant for political indoctrination.

Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism today at Amazon!

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424.

Read all about it here!

11/16 Links: Israel Is Fighting a Different War Now; Trump 2.0 means the end of ambivalence about Israel; Yoseph Haddad: Taking pride in being Arab Israeli

From Ian:

Safety Is a Choice

So where does this leave American Jews who want to make themselves safer? They need to focus on reinforcing the most important potential choice: the option to be a public Zionist in America. It’s that simple. And this requires demanding and forcing the chessboard back into position.

Jews will be choiceless as long as they can be demonized and harassed while a top-down anti-Semitic establishment gives cover to “anti-Zionists” to renounce dialogue, reason, and civility. And this, for many Jews, will mean, ultimately, being deprived of the choice of safely wearing a Jewish star or yarmulke while walking through campus or strolling past a protest. Ultimately, this condition means living with a physical threat that’s always present, just below the surface.

This work has to be a Jewish grassroots endeavor because it is often hard for even well-intentioned non-Jews to recognize this aspect of Jewish safety. As a former NYPD detective admits, for many cops and campus-security officers, the attitude is: “Who gives a shit if someone is yelling ‘river to the sea,’ or if they’re saying you’re a baby killer when you’re not.”

Sidestepping useless institutional leadership, Mike mentioned some successful work by an international group called Students Supporting Israel. He described how its members recently helped Columbia students organize an event at which two IDF reservists came to campus, sat at a table, and chatted with whomever wanted to engage. It mostly went well. “Chances are somebody got in their face,” Mike observes, “but [the IDF soldiers] don’t give a f—k. They feel they are fighting for Western civilization.”

All the steps Jews are taking to feel and be safer are worthwhile. But whether it’s through displaying symbols of Zionism, or reporting anti-Zionist incidents of anti-Semitism, or lobbying institutions and governmental bodies to codify anti-Zionism as anti-Semitism, Jews of all stripes and political orientations should put pressure, time, and capital toward ensuring that Zionism is incorporated into institutional, governmental, and legal definitions of anti-Semitism. And they should call out the intellectual bankruptcy and cowardice of refusing to engage on the topic of Israel, naming and pressuring leaders who enable this silencing of dialogue.

Because identity itself is not a choice. And if Jews don’t demand the space to defend their core Zionist identity in public discourse, we will find that choice has been made for us.

Just after Kristallnacht, Gandhi said Jews should die with joy. What would he say now?

Zionism and the struggle to defend the Jewish State
Kallenbach, however, did try to convert Gandhi — to Zionism.

After witnessing with horror the Nazi rise to power, Kallenbach had become a devout Zionist and was even enlisted by the leaders of the Zionist movement in an unsuccessful attempt to convince Gandhi to follow suit. In fact, Gandhi’s opposition to Zionism had a longstanding impact, with India not adopting a warm stance toward Israel until as late as the 1990s.

The precise reasons for his opposition to Zionism remain a subject of debate. Some have pointed to the practical reasons why Gandhi — a champion of Indian inter-religious unity and independence — would certainly not have helped his cause by championing one so maligned by many of the world’s Muslims, including, of course, those in his homeland. Dr. Gangeya Mukherji, author of ‘Gandhi and Tagore: Politics, Truth and Conscience.’ (Courtesy)

“Gandhi recognized that as long as India remained unified and the Muslim League was part of its political landscape, it would be impossible for the country to take any position opposed to the Palestinians,” says Devji. “Yet, the Muslim League had itself advised Palestinians to accept the partition of the country that was proposed by the UN, which was after all what they wanted for India as well. In this sense, India’s Muslims, as a minority population like Jews, identified with the latter in many ways even as they supported the Palestinians.”

Mukherji, however, dismisses any connection outright. “Hindu-Muslim unity had no bearing on the question of Zionism,” he says. “This linkage of Gandhi’s position on the Zionist question to that of Hindu-Muslim unity is a more recent phenomenon, emerging from the notion of Gandhi’s ‘appeasement’ of Muslims. It is similar to the Arab denial of the terrible vastness of the Holocaust by describing it as an act of anti-German sentiment.”

Rajmohan Gandhi, himself deeply involved in decades-long reconciliation efforts, thinks that his grandfather’s “lifelong desire and effort for friendship and partnership between India’s Hindus and Muslims would surely have influenced his views on the Jewish-Arab question,” yet does not think that “his opposition to Zionism was strongly influenced by the desire for Hindu-Muslim friendship” but rather “intimately linked to his problem with colonialism.”

“He said that as long as the Zionists relied on British power to stake a claim on Palestine he could not sympathize with them, for he saw the same thing happening in India with the Muslim League in place of the Zionists,” says Devji. “He thought that only by appealing to and convincing the Palestinians to share the land would Zionism become a legitimate movement. India and Palestine thus mirrored each other in his eyes.”

Even if Gandhi was never converted to Zionism, it seems clear that he would have abhorred the terror onslaught of October 7, 2023, which saw thousands of Hamas-led terrorists invade southern Israel, killing 1,200 men, women, and children and kidnapping 251 to the Gaza Strip.

Yet what would he have suggested Israel’s response be?
“He would certainly not have approved a military response, but he would have equally condemned the [Hamas] attacks,” says Mukherji, elaborating that “he would not have supported the policy of Israel to expand, fortify, and settle areas in quest of safeguarding its sovereignty.”

While agreeing that Gandhi would certainly have deplored the violence from all sides, Devji thinks that the Indian leader would indeed have supported Israel forcefully driving out the terrorists, after which he “might have seen the October 7 attacks as an opportunity for Israel to take the moral high ground… declaring a unilateral peace process to resolve the conflict.” Mahatma Gandhi, center, confers with leaders of the All-India Congress Party, August 1942, location unknown. With him are Maulana Aboul Kalan Azad, right, the party’s president, and J.B. Kripalani, general secretary. This picture is from the film ‘India At War.’ (AP Photo)

“He was a great believer in the spectacle of moral action, and the attack offered Israel just such an opportunity to completely change the tenor of political debate globally and to its eternal credit,” Devji says. “But of course, elected politicians don’t always have the luxury to make such statements, depending as they do not only on their constituents but partners as well. In this case, the very weakness of a coalition government seems to have pushed it into a very predictable response.”

Citing his grandfather’s support of dispatching armed soldiers to counter Pakistani-aided militants in Kashmir in 1947, Rajhmohan Gandhi emphatically agrees that the father of modern India “would surely have mobilized and mounted resistance to the attacks.”

“At times a practitioner of nonviolence, at some other times he was a professor or teacher of nonviolence but a supporter of violent resistance. This is what actual history says,” Rajhmohan Gandhi says. “No matter what form Gandhi’s resistance to October 7 would have taken, it would have definitely involved Israel’s Arabs as well. A starting premise with Gandhi would be that Jews and Arabs share the land as siblings, have to live next to one another together no matter the past, no matter who ‘started’ which conflict, or who merely ‘reacted.’”

Gates of Hell

Review of 'The Gates of Gaza' by Amir Tibon by Michael M. Rosen
Terrorists hunted down Roi Rutberg, a 21-year-old farmer in Nahal Oz, an Israeli kibbutz on the Gaza frontier. They carefully planned their assault, crossed the border into Israel, advanced through an agricultural field, brutally murder-ed Roi, and dragged his corpse to Gaza, where frenetic crowds mutilated it.

October 7, 2023? No. The Rutberg slaying took place in April 1956. But as Amir Tibon observes in his new book, The Gates of Gaza, it presaged Hamas’s barbarous attack and reflects how profoundly and persistently intractable the enclave has been. Gaza is truly a problem from hell.

A diplomatic correspondent for Haaretz, Tibon provides a propulsive and poignant recounting of his own ordeal in Nahal Oz, where he, his wife, and their two young daughters sheltered for 10 hours in their safe room as Islamist terrorists rampaged across their community.

Seamlessly blending a history of Gaza with the harrowing events of October 7, Tibon highlights how, for more than 100 years, the Strip has destabilized the region and warped both Israeli and Palestinian society.

Long before any Israeli “occupation” of Gaza, Arab terrorists called fedayeen used it as a launching pad to infiltrate Israel and slaughter Jews. “The newly created Israel-Gaza border,” Tibon writes, of the period following the Jewish state’s establishment in 1948, “knew very few days of peace.”

Following Rutberg’s murder, the Israeli general Moshe Dayan visited the kibbutz, where he delivered a dark but realistic pronouncement. “Beyond the furrow of the border,” he intoned, “a sea of hatred and desire for revenge is swelling, awaiting the day when serenity will dull our path.” Decades of low-grade violence emanated from the enclave.

Even so, vibrant communities developed in the so-called Gaza Envelope, and the vast majority of them harbored hopes for peace with their Arab neighbors, even ferrying them to Israeli hospitals. Dani Rachamim arrived at Nahal Oz in 1975, eight years after Israel had taken the strip from Egypt, and developed close enough friendships with Palestinians across the border to invite them to his wedding on the kibbutz. “It felt totally natural for them to be there and dance with us,” he tells Tibon. “We were neighbors.” The community even hosted a Festival of Peace in 1994, amid the early euphoria of the Oslo Accords, welcoming dozens of Palestinian families. “Peace with the people of Gaza was now within reach,” Rachamim and his fellow kibbutzniks thought.

But that euphoria quickly gave way to despair, as Yasir Arafat’s Palestine Liberation Organization rejected further peace proposals and went on to arm Palestinian groups—including a newly formed Islamist faction called Hamas, whose establishment Israel tacitly blessed as a counterweight to the PLO—that launched a campaign of violent attacks, most prominently including suicide bombings that claimed the lives of hundreds of Israeli innocents. By the early 2000s, Gazan terrorists had begun developing the mortars and rockets that would figure prominently in the 10/7 onslaught.

Israel Is Fighting a Different War Now

Israel is now fighting a different kind of war, which has elicited a different Israeli mindset. “We’re no longer afraid of casualties,” a hard-bitten colonel told me. “I lost 10 guys, and nothing stopped. We don’t go to the funerals; we’ll visit after the war.” This is a fundamental change from the Israel of October 6, 2023. Israel is girding itself for the daunting prospect of a long war against Iran, even as its immediate conflicts with Hamas and Hezbollah cannot be swiftly and decisively wrapped up, no matter what American and European leaders might wish.

The IDF has always been a military focused on short-term fixes, on tactical and technical innovation, on agility and adaptability. As an Israeli strategic planner ruefully put it, “We only talk about strategy in English.” That will be a problem in the next phase of this war. Israel does not wish to put Gaza under military government during its reconstruction—but it has also failed to devise any plausible alternative, despite floating ideas such as an international police force or a return of the Palestinian Authority to Gaza. Lots of humanitarian aid goes into Gaza—I saw the long lines of trucks—but much of it is immediately hijacked by Hamas gunmen, who control the distribution of relief, and with it the population. Hezbollah is still reeling from its hammering over the past two months, but it survives in the shape of small cells. Israeli and American hopes that the Lebanese armed forces can contain it have always proved to be pipe dreams. The long-range strikes by Iran against Israel will surely continue.

The Israelis will persevere, and things may break their way—if, for example, Iran’s internal politics are shaken up by the passing of the supreme leader, by ferocious American sanctions, or by overt and covert punishment for the attempted assassination of President-elect Donald Trump. In any event, the Israelis grimly believe, and with reason, that they have no choice but to continue fighting.

Yet the changes in Israeli society are noticeable. The reserve army that has fought these wars is tired. Many soldiers and airmen have spent most of the past year in battle, and their families have felt the strain. The national-religious component of Israeli society—what would translate in American terms into modern Orthodox Jews—has particularly borne the load. Because of Israel’s reserve system, many of the fallen are middle-aged men, and many leave behind fatherless children. “Ten dead. Fifty-six orphans,” one friend bitterly remarked. The national-religious disproportionately volunteer for frontline combat units. Their antipathy toward the ultra-Orthodox, who are draft-exempt and have been draining government budgets at the expense of subsidies for soldiers whose families and careers have been upended by war, is fierce. “Cowards,” spat out one mild-mannered friend, who now despises a population whose behavior she might once have excused.

As ever, Israel is a complicated and changing place. Yossi Klein Halevi, one of Israel’s shrewdest observers, once said, “Everything you can say about Israel is true. So is the opposite.” And thus it remains. Israel includes alienated secularists and patriotic Arab citizens (increasing numbers of whom quietly join the military); it has liberals and reactionaries, men and women of all skin colors, gay-pride marches and obscurantist religious seminaries. But one thing is certain: It is engaged in an existential war of a kind that most of us in the West cannot appreciate unless we go there, observe, and listen.

Israel is now fighting a different kind of war, which has elicited a different Israeli mindset. “We’re no longer afraid of casualties,” a hard-bitten colonel told me. “I lost 10 guys, and nothing stopped. We don’t go to the funerals; we’ll visit after the war.” This is a fundamental change from the Israel of October 6, 2023. Israel is girding itself for the daunting prospect of a long war against Iran, even as its immediate conflicts with Hamas and Hezbollah cannot be swiftly and decisively wrapped up, no matter what American and European leaders might wish.

The IDF has always been a military focused on short-term fixes, on tactical and technical innovation, on agility and adaptability. As an Israeli strategic planner ruefully put it, “We only talk about strategy in English.” That will be a problem in the next phase of this war. Israel does not wish to put Gaza under military government during its reconstruction—but it has also failed to devise any plausible alternative, despite floating ideas such as an international police force or a return of the Palestinian Authority to Gaza. Lots of humanitarian aid goes into Gaza—I saw the long lines of trucks—but much of it is immediately hijacked by Hamas gunmen, who control the distribution of relief, and with it the population. Hezbollah is still reeling from its hammering over the past two months, but it survives in the shape of small cells. Israeli and American hopes that the Lebanese armed forces can contain it have always proved to be pipe dreams. The long-range strikes by Iran against Israel will surely continue.

The Israelis will persevere, and things may break their way—if, for example, Iran’s internal politics are shaken up by the passing of the supreme leader, by ferocious American sanctions, or by overt and covert punishment for the attempted assassination of President-elect Donald Trump. In any event, the Israelis grimly believe, and with reason, that they have no choice but to continue fighting.

Yet the changes in Israeli society are noticeable. The reserve army that has fought these wars is tired. Many soldiers and airmen have spent most of the past year in battle, and their families have felt the strain. The national-religious component of Israeli society—what would translate in American terms into modern Orthodox Jews—has particularly borne the load. Because of Israel’s reserve system, many of the fallen are middle-aged men, and many leave behind fatherless children. “Ten dead. Fifty-six orphans,” one friend bitterly remarked. The national-religious disproportionately volunteer for frontline combat units. Their antipathy toward the ultra-Orthodox, who are draft-exempt and have been draining government budgets at the expense of subsidies for soldiers whose families and careers have been upended by war, is fierce. “Cowards,” spat out one mild-mannered friend, who now despises a population whose behavior she might once have excused.

As ever, Israel is a complicated and changing place. Yossi Klein Halevi, one of Israel’s shrewdest observers, once said, “Everything you can say about Israel is true. So is the opposite.” And thus it remains. Israel includes alienated secularists and patriotic Arab citizens (increasing numbers of whom quietly join the military); it has liberals and reactionaries, men and women of all skin colors, gay-pride marches and obscurantist religious seminaries. But one thing is certain: It is engaged in an existential war of a kind that most of us in the West cannot appreciate unless we go there, observe, and listen.