Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News

Tuesday, February 04, 2025

75 year old lie gets resurrected in Egypt: "Israel sentenced Umm Kulthum to death"

Monday was the 50th anniversary of the death of Egypt's, and the Arab world's most famous singer, Umm Kulthum.

El Masrawy and other Egyptian newspapers reported:

During his program "On My Responsibility" broadcast on "Sada El Balad" channel, media figure Ahmed Moussa praised the late artist, considering her an example of patriotism and sacrifice for Egypt.

Musa pointed out that the Zionist entity sentenced Umm Kulthum to death, which is something that many people do not know.

He explained that the Zionist enemy saw Umm Kulthum as a threat because of her ability to inspire soldiers and people through her patriotic songs, which made her a target.

Kulthum remains a popular singer in Israel, and there are even streets named after her, despite her anti-Israel politics.

So where did this story come from?

It turns out that this is a much older rumor than I expected. Egyptian newspaper Al Balagh reported this on July 6, 1949, without any source.

Death sentence for Umm Kulthum!

For three weeks, the Israeli radio station has been broadcasting every day the text of the sentence issued by the Zionist authorities against Umm Kulthum, Mrs. Salima Pasha, and Mrs. Suham Rafqi!!

This sentence calls for the execution of the three Arab singers on charges of inciting the masses in the Arab countries against the 'peaceful Zionists!'

The story about her "death sentence" is of course an Arab fantasy.

Buy EoZ's books on Amazon!

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

PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism (February 2022)

02/03 Links Pt2: Hamas’s ‘kinocide’: A new crime against humanity revealed; Israel is bracing for an unimaginable requiem; Remembering Marion Wiesel

From Ian:

Hamas a threat to all of a Western civilization, Aristotle Foundation president says

The central Jewish thinker Maimonides was influenced extensively by Aristotle, so it makes sense that a new pro-Israel, Canadian think tank bears the name of the ancient Greek philosopher.

Mark Milke, a Canadian political scientist and writer, founded the Calgary-based Aristotle Foundation for Public Policy in 2023 “to renew common-sense discourse in Canada,” per the charity’s site.

Though Milke is not Jewish, he and the think tank have focused often on defending Jews and Israel. “When the board, staff and I set up the Aristotle Foundation to champion reason, democracy and civilization, we never thought we’d have to address antisemitic mob behaviour on Canadian streets and campuses,” he wrote two days before the anniversary of Hamas’s Oct. 7, 2023, terror attacks.

“You often hear the excuse that the demonstrations across Canada are not antisemitic or anti-Jew but anti-Israel and its policies. If that were true, the only protests in the past year would have been at the Israeli embassy,” he added. “Instead, antisemitic protests have occurred in front of Jewish coffee shops, synagogues, hospitals and seniors’ centers and demonstrations have taken place at university grounds.”

The native of Kelowna, British Columbia told JNS that his family goes back to Prussia on his mother’s side. His great-great-grandfather fought for the North in the U.S. Civil War before settling in Saskatchewan.

His paternal grandmother fled Ukraine in the 1920s, escaping the tumultuous political climate that would soon engulf Eastern Europe. His Polish-born grandfather arrived in Canada in 1929 and settled in Edmonton. Both grandparents narrowly avoided the devastation of Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union, instilling in them a deep appreciation for their new home and a strong aversion to extremist ideologies.

“I never heard a smidgen of antisemitism,” he said, of his parents and family. “Quite the opposite. Growing up, they just understood what was right and what was wrong, and so they had no sympathy for the Nazis. They certainly didn’t like communism.”

“I hate bullies. I always have,” he told JNS. “I’m aware of bullies in history. That’s what tyrants are.”

Milke developed an early fascination with history and politics. He read encyclopedias voraciously as a child, and learned about historical figures and events that shaped his later worldview and career path.

“When I was a kid, I asked myself, ‘How did Adolf Hitler rise to power?’” he told JNS. “The core problem with Hitler was that we gave in and gave in because nobody wanted another war. You had to recognize the evil that was in front of you eventually, but it was far too late.”

Netanyahu’s 'Iran first' strategy ignores the real enemy

And that is the real enemy—not just of Israel but of the entire world. Yet, the leaders who adhere to the old conception are missing this crucial point. The enemy is not a state, an army, or an organization—it is religious ideology. Wherever it takes root, it fosters both social and military organizations.

Even when these organizations are dismantled, they regenerate time and time again. They will always reemerge because the fuel of the revolution is not military strength—it is spirit. And that is what we must break in order to achieve victory.

"The primary axis—Allah." This should have been the security establishment's realization after October 7. This understanding has dramatic implications for Israel’s and the West’s strategy, as well as for intelligence assessments and operational planning. The first conclusion from this realization is: Gaza first! Not Iran first.

Why? Because the October 7 war is the ultimate litmus test of how a Western state fares against radical Islamic ideology. If Hamas' ideology emerges victorious, as has been the case so far, this lesson will be learned in every arena—from London to Tehran, from Damascus to Berlin. The conclusion will be that the postmodern West, despite its overwhelming military and economic advantage, does not know how to defeat radical Islam.

1. The West struggles to target imams and mosques due to a distorted discourse on religious freedom—even though they are the Muslim equivalent of Goebbels’ propaganda machine.

2. The West fails to understand that victory is defined by control over land, because the enemy’s ideology is driven by a totalitarian aspiration to conquer the entire world as a religious imperative.

3. The West is incapable of subjugating enemy populations and imposing human values on them, because deep down, it justifies their struggle as that of the oppressed proletariat.

This is why Gaza is the test of the West. If we cannot even secure victory in Gaza, we will fail everywhere else.

Moreover, the immediate regional threat around us is far greater than Iran because the enemy’s goal is the conquest and destruction of Israel. Missiles from Iran would be met with missiles from Israel, and on Judgment Day, with even more strategic weaponry.

But what the jihadist fighters did in Gaza could just as easily be done by the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt and Jordan, or in Lebanon and Syria. Against this threat, Israel needs an army with a strong ground force—one with the capability and willingness to seize land, establish control, and subdue the population, just as the free world did with Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan. This is why victory against Iran—or anywhere else—begins and ends between Gaza and Rafah.

Tragically, our military and political leadership has already folded and retreated from Gaza two weeks ago. This week, the Netanyahu-Trump meeting will likely continue the "Head of the Snake" doctrine, focusing primarily on two topics: Saudi Arabia and Iran, Iran and Saudi Arabia. The ultimate enemy, and with it the possibility of total victory, will not even be on the table.

I’m not Jewish, but October 7th 2023 changed my life.

It wasn’t the events that took place that day, horrific though they were, that catalysed this change. While the atrocities committed by Hamas are hard to top, it was the horrific events that happened afterwards which have affected me so deeply. The events which started a mere day later. The events which have only worsened as the 18-month anniversary approaches. October 7th changed my life because it was the impetus for me to discover a generations-old campaign of hate and propaganda, a campaign so successful it has even captured prominent members of the group it’s aimed against.

I refer of course to the campaign against Israel and the Jews.

I’m embarrassed to admit that I’d fallen for it at one point. I recall saying to myself many years ago, after reading a Wikipedia article on the number of United Nations resolutions against Israel, “This has to be the evillest country on Earth.” In my defence, one can be forgiven for thinking the UN holds no agenda against the only democracy in the region, an idea that seemed utterly uncontroversial to me at the time. Thankfully, I never shared my views.

It was seeing how the world reacted to the October 7th massacre that made me start looking into Israel, the war and the wider region. Two days after the attack, protests erupted against Israel in Sydney. It sounded like “Gas the Jews” was chanted alongside the burning of an Israeli flag. This chant was interpreted by a police expert as the no-less-disturbing “where’s the Jews”, but despite the mob also chanting the unambiguously hateful “fuck the Jews”, the ABC focused an article about the protests on the fact that the chant wasn’t as bad as people had first thought. The article also featured a Palestinian rally organiser complaining about a smear campaign against Palestinians – he was photographed, but no Jews were. I wondered at this interpretation of “fair and balanced” reporting in light of explicit antisemitism. Later on, I wondered why our national broadcaster decided to include an outraged quote from the Russian Deputy Foreign Minister in a future article about the assassination of Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh. Since when is the offense of a brutal dictatorship at the assassination of a brutal terrorist leader an appropriate way for Australia’s state-run media to frame the news?

The more I read articles, listened to podcasts, studied the history and watched interviews and documentaries, the more I noticed such oddities in the response to the Gaza war. The death toll being quoted by pretty well everybody comes directly from the Gaza Health Ministry. Hamas, who spent almost 20 years building tunnels beneath the Palestinian population and turning schools, mosques and hospitals into military bases, runs that institution – and one might suspect they have a motive in inflating the numbers. The Hamas-Gaza Health Ministry connection was referenced less and less over time by the media and even the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, Volker Türk, omits it from an official statement. Türk also neglects to mention that the death toll includes upwards of 10,000 Hamas combatants, plus anyone who has died in Gaza for any reason since the war began.

I noticed more and more such omissions in reporting. Israel is bombing schools and hospitals, yet there’s often no mention of Hamas’s military bases within. Hamas are resisting “occupation”, yet Israel’s complete withdrawal from Gaza in 2005, including the forced expulsion of almost ten thousand Israeli citizens, isn’t noted. Israel invades Lebanon, yet the thousands of rockets shot by Hezbollah, the resultant tens of thousands of Israeli refugees, and the complete failure of UNIFIL to fulfil their mandate of keeping Hezbollah north of the Litani River is ignored. In fact, despite studying the topic daily, it took me many months to discover that Hezbollah had even been firing rockets at Israeli civilians – every day since October 8th, before Israel had even retaliated against Hamas, no less. These rockets have killed civilians yet this fact is rarely reported, or it’s reported in utterly repugnant ways such as BBC’s stunning headline “Israel hits Hezbollah targets after football pitch attack”, published when 12 Israeli Druze children were hit by Hezbollah rockets and killed.

It was becoming clearer and clearer that an agenda is afoot. Every day I read about Israel’s brutality, yet John Spencer, the world’s leading academic specialising in urban warfare, is almost never quoted despite (or likely thanks to) his belief that Israel is doing “harm mitigation at a level that nobody’s ever tried.” Rarely is it mentioned that civilians are routinely notified, by Israel, of military actions before they take place. Even rarer is the blame for the civilian casualties, all of which could be stopped in a day if Hamas returned all of the hostages and disarmed, placed on the group which started the war. Instead, Hamas are often painted as freedom fighters or a resistance group even though their charter openly outlines their core aims of Jihad and the ethnic cleansing of Jews.

02/03 Links Pt1: How Western governments are funding the persecution of Jews; Trump to watch October 7 film; Trump withdraws from UNHRC, defunds UNRWA and closes USAID

From Ian:

To Save Itself from International Isolation, Israel Must Hold On to the West Bank

Yet, as Elliott Abrams argued in Mosaic a decade ago, the rhetoric of unsustainability is misguided: a regional realignment is taking place in the Middle East, and that realignment was made possible by the supposedly unsustainable status quo that benefitted Israel over the past few decades. Abrams’s points are even more valid today, after the “unsustainable” situation in the West Bank has endured another ten years, than at the time of his essay’s publication. But an important point must be added.

Talk of political “unsustainability” implies that there is a different equilibrium that would be “sustainable.” For how long? Critics of the status quo rarely ask this question, because they implicitly assume that while the status quo that they criticize cannot last forever, their proposed way of replacing the status quo could. Not only two-statists assume this, but right-wing critics of the status quo as well, for example the journalist Caroline Glick and the former U.S. ambassador to Israel David Friedman, who both wrote book-length defenses of their vision of “one Jewish state” that would include all of Judea and Samaria and (for Glick) the Gaza Strip as well.

The assumption that just because the status quo cannot last forever there must be something else that will, is itself flawed: it exemplifies what I elsewhere called “end of history” thinking. In reality, history never ends. Political arrangements come and go, and nothing about the status quo makes it inherently less stable than any of the proposed political solutions to the Israel-Palestinian conflict. That the status quo will have to end one day is true but trivial: Baathist rule in Syria also ended one day, and so will the mullahs’ rule in Iran, as well as oil dominance in the energy sector and the resulting importance of most Gulf states. But in the foreseeable future, there is no reason to build policy on these forecasts.

An unsentimental view of Israel’s regional realities should force us to replace the impossible mission of ending history in the Middle East with a more down-to-earth principle, one articulated by Hippocrates: first, do no harm. The directive to avoid harm doesn’t mean that Israel shouldn’t strive for incremental improvements in the everyday life of all residents between the river and the sea, which the Israeli writer Micah Goodman describes as “shrinking the conflict.” But competent conflict management must take precedence over utopianism, be it the left’s two-state solution or the hard right’s dream of Jewish sovereignty over all of the land. Israeli policymakers must instead focus on securing a better future for our children and grandchildren. For the foreseeable future, nobody has suggested anything better than the status quo.

The implications of this essay’s argument for Israel’s Western supporters, especially in the U.S., are also clear. Israel’s Western friends who would like to see Israel withdraw from further territories, let alone agree to a two-state solution with the Palestinians, must completely change their attitude to Israel’s wars. They need to abandon the language of “de-escalation” and clearly and unambiguously state that in any war between Israel and its adversaries, the goal should be not cease-fire for cease-fire’s sake, but total and unquestionable Israeli victory. They need to stop talking about “Israel’s right to defend itself,” a phrase that has become empty of content over the years, since in practice it often means little more than Israel’s right to intercept rockets in the air. Instead, they should emphasize Israel’s right to do what it must to defeat its regional adversaries, and to finish wars on its own terms and according to its own timing, not under American pressure. They should stop demanding that American assistance to Israel be conditioned on any of the great many constraints that U.S. administrations routinely want to impose on Israel’s war efforts; and they should view arms embargos as an absolute taboo.

Coming from an Israeli, this might sound self-serving and all too convenient, but it’s based on a rational understanding of incentive structures. Any friend of Israel who wants to encourage Israel’s withdrawal from parts of the West Bank should want to avoid a situation in which Israel finds the diplomatic cost of withdrawing even steeper than the diplomatic cost of not withdrawing. Lukewarm, hesitant, and unreliable support during a defensive war against an enemy whose base is territory from which Israel previously withdrew (as is the case of Israel’s current war against Hamas) sends Israel the message that heeding the call to withdraw isn’t merely dangerous but could even lead to the very outcome that the withdrawal was supposed to stave off: diplomatic isolation. Thus, anyone who wants to convince Israelis that withdrawal is in their interest should be steadfastly and unconditionally supportive of Israel when it finds itself at war.

Of course, we know that this is not how things work in reality. In practice, politicians and opinionmakers who see the greatest urgency in Israel’s relinquishment of additional territory also tend to be the people who are the most critical of Israel’s war effort, and indeed their criticism of the war is much harsher and much more vocal than their criticism of Israel’s management of the Israel-Palestinian conflict during quieter times. This means, however, that in view of its self-declared allies’ and partners’ easily observable revealed preferences, Israel has no incentive to make further territorial concessions. Quite the contrary: if Israel is truly concerned about potential diplomatic isolation in the future, it must resist the idea of territorial concessions with all its might.

Lyn Julius: Palestinian resettlement would complete the 1948 exchange

President Donald Trump’s proposal that 1.5 million Palestinians in the Gaza Strip be transferred to Egypt and Jordan has been met with outright rejection by said countries, in addition to howls of outrage and accusations of “ethnic cleansing.”

The refugee problem needs to be considered in its historical context. Trump has focused attention on the Gazans by effectively suggesting the completion of an exchange of refugee populations that began in 1948 with the first Arab-Israel war. Arab refugees fled from Israel to Gaza, and the areas of Judea and Samaria, while thousands of others left for Lebanon and Syria.

It is often forgotten that Jewish refugees—persecuted in Arab countries, where they had been established for millennia—fled in the opposite direction. The numbers of refugees who swapped places were 711,000 Arabs (according to U.N. figures) vs. 650,000 Jews—roughly equal. (Another 200,000 Jewish refugees fled to the West).

The Jews were granted citizenship in Israel and the West. They were quickly resettled and are no longer refugees. But the Palestinian Arabs remained stateless, many shunted into camps. Not only were they not resettled but weaponized into a tool of permanent conflict with Israel.

They were actively prevented from resettling by two factors.

The Arab League passed, in 1959, Resolution No. 1457, which forbids the countries from offering citizenship to the refugees “in order to prevent their assimilation into their host countries.”

The other gatekeeper of statelessness has been the U.N. Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees (UNRWA) set up exclusively for Palestinians. The agency not only provides health, food and education in the refugee camps but allows the Palestinians to pass on their refugee status to succeeding generations ad infinitum.

Population exchanges have been the norm after most conflicts in the 20th century. Indeed, the principle of population exchange and, therefore, of resettlement has been accepted in international law as in the Treaty of Neuilly (1919) and the Lausanne Convention (1923). More than a million Greeks from Asia Minor and the Caucasus swapped places with 400,000 Muslims from Greece.

A vast population exchange took place following the partition of the Indian subcontinent into India and Pakistan. In that case, 8.5 million Hindus left Pakistan for India, and 6.5 million Muslims fled Pakistan. Millions of Germans and Russians were forced from their homes during World War II, never to return.

Approx. 80% of Israelis support Trump's plan to relocate Gazans

A large majority of Israeli Jews support US President Donald Trump’s proposal to relocate Gaza’s population to other countries, a Jewish People Policy Institute Israel Index survey revealed Monday.

The survey, which was published ahead of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s meeting with Trump in Washington, found that approximately eight out of 10 Jewish Israelis support Trump’s suggestion that “Arabs from Gaza should relocate to another country,” while most Arab Israelis oppose the proposal.

According to the findings, 43% of all Israelis believe Trump’s plan is “practical” and should be pursued, while an additional 30% of Jewish Israelis responded that the plan is “not practical, but desirable,” meaning they support the idea but do not see it as realistically feasible.

However, 13% of Israelis believe Trump’s proposal is “immoral.” This group includes 54% of Arab respondents and only 3% of Jewish Israelis.

The JPPI study also found differences in opinion in political views, with 81% of right-wing respondents saying the plan is both desirable and practical, compared to 31% of those in the Center and 27% of left-wing Jewish respondents.

Results found that a majority of Likud voters say they believe the relocation plan is both desirable and practical, with half of National Unity Party voters agreeing it is desirable but not practical. Furthermore, 62% of those who associated themselves with the Labor Party consider the plan either a “distraction” or “immoral.”

Change in views
According to the JPPI, the idea of significantly relocating Gaza’s Palestinian population – once considered illegitimate by many Israelis – now sees support among Jewish Israelis. When there is opposition, it is typically based on practicality, with some dismissing the plan as “a distraction” rather than on moral grounds.

Surveys conducted in the 1990s and mid-2000s on the transfer of Palestinians from the West Bank generally found support levels of 40%–50% among Jewish Israelis.

More proof of Hamas casualty lies

About a week before the ceasefire, Hamas said that there were 11,200 missing people in Gaza buried under the rubble.

On the day of the ceasefire, Hamas updated that figure to the very authoritative sounding 14,222 missing people in Gaza presumed dead under the rubble.

Since the fighting has stopped and there are no impediments to recovering bodies, we should be seeing hundreds of bodies arriving in hospitals every day, right?

The first days after the ceasefire, dozens of bodies were reported recovered by the Ministry of Health. Since then, the number of bodies has been going steadily down.

That is 457 bodies recovered so far, half of which were recovered in the first three days. (They didn't issue reports on three days.)

Based on these trends, the total number of bodies expected to be recovered is probably less than a thousand, certainly not 14,000 or the 10,000 that NGOs parroted from Hamas for months.

Hamas lied. And no media outlet noticed.

Also, the MoH counts 17 "martyrs" who succumbed to their injuries since January 20 and 22 "new martyrs" that they claim Israel is still somehow killing, that the media hasn't managed to find out about. (There are occasional articles in Palestinian media claiming Israel is still killing Gazans. The Institute for the Study of War has consistently stated in their daily reports that it "has recorded no verifiable reports of kinetic activity in the Gaza Strip or attacks from the Gaza Strip into Israel" in every daily report since then, meaning Israel is holding to the ceasefire.)

So who is the ministry counting? People who are dying of natural causes? The people being executed by Hamas?

Or are they just making this up, like they have been the past 15 months?

Buy EoZ's books on Amazon!

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

PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism (February 2022)

From Anadolu:

Algerian President Abdelmadjid Tebboune has confirmed that his country will not normalize relations with Israel before the establishment of a Palestinian state.

The statement came in an interview with the French daily Le Point on Sunday and it was featured in Monday's edition.

In response to a question about Algeria's readiness to normalize its relations with Israel if a Palestinian state were established, Tebboune said: "Of course, on the day that happens."

"Our priority is the establishment of a Palestinian state,” he said.

A Moroccan writer mocks Tebboune.

The promotion of the idea that Israel might be interested in normalizing its relations with Algeria reflects an intellectual alienation confined to outdated narratives...The reality is that Algeria, from the perspective of Israeli interests and from the angle of the global Jewish strategic vision, represents nothing but a dark historical case, as the state that committed one of the largest mass expulsions and ethnic cleansing of Jews in modern times, confiscated their property, annihilated their cultural presence, and practiced against them a policy of systematic institutional exclusion.
The Jewish presence in Algeria was not marginal, but rather a structural part of the social and economic fabric of the region, extending over many centuries, from the Roman era to the Ottoman Empire and then the French colonial era.
But with the outbreak of the War of Independence and the rise of Algerian nationalism in its radical form, the Jewish community became a victim of an exclusionary system that did not differentiate between Jews and French, and considered everyone an extension of colonialism. After the independence phase, the Algerian state embarked on a process of systematic eradication of Algerian Jews, by looting their property, nationalizing their places of worship, and completely dismantling their social existence, in a blatant and profound violation of all legal principles and international norms related to the rights of minorities and indigenous peoples.
...The Algerian state is required to offer an official apology to the Jews of Algeria, review the legislation that legalized the seizure of their property, and open real channels of communication with representatives of the Jewish community abroad, within a serious conciliatory approach based on the foundations of historical justice and not on empty diplomatic maneuvers.
As for Israeli interests, Algeria does not constitute an influential player in the normalization equation, nor does it have any strategic value that could make its relations with Tel Aviv a priority. So, from a geopolitical perspective, Algeria lacks weight in the regional system, so it remains an isolated state, withdrawn into itself, unable to produce a rational and balanced foreign policy.
From an economic perspective, the Algerian economy suffers from structural fragility resulting from an eroded rentier model, which relies on hydrocarbon revenues without any ability to diversify its resources or develop its productive sectors. From a military perspective, the Algerian regime is bound by an outdated security doctrine, based on mechanical hostility to Israel without possessing any real ability to exert any influence on regional deterrence equations.
....The Arab countries that have engaged in the process of normalization with Israel did not do so in compliance with external dictates, as the Algerian discourse claims, but rather out of a strategic vision that realizes that engaging in the Israeli technological, economic, and security system represents a rational choice that is consistent with the facts of reality. As for Algeria, which is still a prisoner of the mentality of the sixties, it continues to close itself off, insisting on remaining outside the context of history, governed by a regime that suffers from intellectual poverty and a fragile vision, and relies on a wooden discourse that no longer has an echo even within local public opinion.
It goes without saying that the world is not waiting for Algeria, and Israel does not need relations with a political regime that lacks internal legitimacy and relies on empty slogans to cover up its inability to achieve development and stability.
If the Algerian president believes that he can bargain over the normalization card as a pressure tool or diplomatic gain, he is delusional, because Israel only recognizes real interests, not political outbidding that has no basis in reality.

Even taking into account Morocco's contentious relationship with Algeria, it is rare to find an Arabic article that so clearly - and accurately - describes the benefits of normalization with Israel and folly of those who are wedded to the old Arab mentality of the 1960s. And note also that the Moroccan writer understands, in a way that most Westerners don't, the strong connection between Israel and world Jewry.

Buy EoZ's books on Amazon!

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

PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism (February 2022)

There is a great deal of discussion and angst about the current Trump administration's freezing of most foreign aid. Typical is this Washington Post editorial:

Foreign assistance is one of the more misunderstood items in the federal budget. In creates an enormous bang for a relatively small buck. American aid supports thousands of programs across 204 countries. It provides lifesaving drugs for millions of people afflicted with HIV/AIDS and malaria. It purifies drinking water, helps rid former war zones of leftover land mines, and trains local police to combat human trafficking and the illegal wildlife trade.

For many people around the world, aid is also the most visible symbol of U.S. power — soft power — and a tangible demonstration of America’s decency. Amounting to $68 billion in fiscal 2023, foreign aid is only about 1 percent of the federal budget. Yet it has long been in the crosshairs of some fiscal conservatives and other critics who deem it a waste of taxpayer dollars that could be better spent at home.

One could argue about the bang for the buck of foreign aid. For example, a significant part of Jordan's GDP - more than 2.5% - comes directly from US aid. Does this prompt Jordan to vote with the US in the UN? Does it promote Jordanian respect for human rights? Does it promote a warmer peace with Israel than it would have otherwise?

US foreign aid should be closer tied to US interests. This furtherance of US interests can of course be indirect but the programs should be monitored to see how effective they are, and not become self-sustaining programs that run only on inertia. Similarly, programs to fight disease and epidemics help the the entire world, including the US, in the long run, and should continue to be funded while they are effective.

The funding freeze had several exceptions:

On President Donald Trump’s first day back in office, he signed an executive order suspending all foreign aid for 90 days, pending a review, saying the “foreign aid industry and bureaucracy are not aligned with American interests and in many cases antithetical to American values.” Secretary of State Marco Rubio followed up with a cable on Jan. 24 to all U.S. diplomatic outposts stopping work on most foreign aid programs during the review period, which is supposed to be completed by the time the freeze expires. Initially, exemptions were made only for emergency food aid and military assistance to Israel and Egypt — and conspicuously not for aid to Ukraine or Taiwan. Then on Tuesday, perhaps bowing to global outrage and criticism, Rubio issued an additional waiver for lifesaving humanitarian assistance.

Military aid to Israel is recognized by all fair minded observers as a great investment in US security. The technological advances that Israel achieves, its battlefield methodologies, its intelligence, all help the US defend itself and save billions of dollars. I recently linked to an article at National Defense about Israel's use of directed energy weapons, and it said:

As the report, “Directed Energy Weapon Supply Chains” published by the National Defense Industrial Association’s Emerging Technologies Institute in January 2024 pointed out, the United States has no established laser weapon industrial base to speak of — no supply chain, no factories, no cadre of workers. The U.S. military has fewer than 20 laser weapon systems, all of them built in laboratories, according to a list provided by the Pentagon’s Joint Directed Energy Transition Office.

In a briefing with reporters in early December at the headquarters of Rafael Advanced Defense Systems, company chairman Yuval Steinitz did little to mask his pride, calling the Iron Beam a scientific and technological breakthrough and emphasizing that Israel had accomplished what so many others could not.

Israel is a laboratory for defense research that the US benefits from mightily.

But why should Egypt be an exception?

Certainly the massive US aid to Egypt has come about to encourage it to keep the peace treaty with Israel. But Egypt benefits from that treaty anyway - primarily by saving the immense military expense of defending its border with Israel.

But recently, Egypt has been using the US aid to build a military capability whose purpose, to put it generously, is unclear.

Israeli envoy to the UN Danny Danon raised concerns about Egypt’s military expansion, questioning its necessity in the absence of threats.

“They spend hundreds of millions of dollars on modern military equipment every year, yet they have no threats on their borders,” Danon said recently during a Kol BaRama radio interview. “Why do they need all these submarines and tanks? After October 7, this should raise alarm bells. We have learned our lesson. We must monitor Egypt closely and prepare for every scenario.”

Speaking to journalist Mendi Rizel on News of the Week, Danon pointed to Washington’s role in supplying Egypt’s military and urged a reevaluation of the issue.

For example, Egypt recently signed made a $4.7 million deal with the US for the refurbishment and upgrade of 555 M1A1 Abrams tanks. Military Africa reports, "This refurbishment program is expected to enhance Egypt’s main battle tank fleet, enabling it to address modern threats and align its capabilities with U.S. and allied forces. " The link to the phrase "modern threats" points to Egypt deploying tanks in Rafah to underscore how they want to stop any Palestinians from Gaza crossing the border.

Which means that Egypt is using US military equipment to do the opposite of what the US wants Egypt to do, which is to allow Gazans to flee to Egypt.

To be sure, Egypt does need tanks to defend itself from any potential threats from Libya and Sudan, but it has a large military edge over those threats already; the need to upgrade to the most modern tanks can only be seen as a means to fight Israel. This is clearly not in the interests of the US.

Israel's peace with all Arab countries aligns with their own interests, with or without US aid. If they only maintain peace with Israel because of US "soft power" then there is no peace to begin with. Every country acts primarily for self interest, and the US should be no exception.

The question is, how does supplying Egypt with advanced weapons that the US does not provide to other countries help US interests? And if it doesn't, why continue to spend that money?

(h/t Irene)

Buy EoZ's books on Amazon!

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

PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism (February 2022)

Yesterday, we mentioned the reports that Jordan asked Hamas to find a country willing to accept Sbarro bombing terrorist Ahlam Tamimi or have her face extradition to the US.

Jordanian Parliament Speaker Ahmad al-Safadi was asked about this topic from a member of the first chamber of the parliament.

Al-Safadi said: “We followed that topic, and the news is inaccurate, and it is better not to open (the subject).”

If Jordan supported keeping Tamimi this would not be the expected response.

Tamimi has become a liability for Jordan, but having her face justice is not their priority. Even the idea that they would ask Hamas to give her a lifeline shows how pro-terror the Jordanian government is. They clearly don't want Tamimi to be extradited or they would have done it already.

As we mentioned, Qatar is the obvious choice for Tamimi to flee to, and chances are quite high that she is already there or on her way there. This would perfectly align with the parliament speaker's remarks.

Buy EoZ's books on Amazon!

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

PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism (February 2022)

Report: Jordan asks Sbarro terrorist Ahlam Tamimi to leave the country immediately or else they would extradite her to the US

From Times of Israel:

The Qatari Al-Araby Al-Jadeed news outlet corroborates an earlier report from Hamas’s Al-Aqsa TV channel that Jordan is seeking to deport Sbarro pizzeria bomber Ahlam Tamimi.

According to the outlet, Jordanian intelligence authorities informed Hamas earlier today that the terror group must either find a country willing to take in Tamimi by the end of the day, or she will be extradited to the United States, where she is wanted by the FBI for the murder of two US civilians in the 2001 Jerusalem pizzeria bombing.

Tamimi was sentenced to 16 life sentences by Israel for orchestrating the August 9, 2001, Sbarro pizzeria bombing, but was released in 2011 as part of a deal with Hamas for the release of captive IDF soldier Gilad Shalit.

The family of Israeli-American victim Malki Roth has been battling ever since, seeking Tamimi’s extradition to the US.

During US President Donald Trump’s first term in office, his administration said it was considering withholding aid to Jordan until it agreed to extradite Tamimi, but ultimately no action was taken.

It is unclear what triggered Jordan’s reported ultimatum to Hamas, but it comes on the heels of an invitation for King Abdullah II to visit Trump in the White House later this month.

This is huge news if true.

The US asked Jordan to extradite Tamimi in 2017 but Jordan's court ruled that they cannot, even though Jordan has an extradition agreement with the US and has extradited other terrorists.

In 2020, I interviewed Arnold Roth, whose daughter Malki was murdered by Tamimi along with 15 others in the pizza shop. He has spent the past 14 years seeking justice since Tamimi was released in the Shalit deal.

As of this writing, when it is Monday in Jordan, I cannot find any updates of any country willing to take Tamimi. However, In October 2020, Jordan deported her husband, also a murderer of Jews, to Qatar. If she goes anywhere, that is probably where she would end up. But let's hope she gets extradited to the US to stand trial and get put behind bars for life.

It seems likely that this sudden about face by Jordan after years of protecting the proud terrorist is due to US pressure under the new administration. Trump has shown an eagerness to have a more muscular foreign policy and a threat to withhold US aid to Jordan is almost certainly what would prompt this change in policy, if true.

Buy EoZ's books on Amazon!

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

PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism (February 2022)

02/02 Links: Trump’s Second Shot at Peace in the Middle East; BHL: The Imperative Remains: Destroy Hamas; Jordan seeking to deport 2001 Sbarro bomber

From Ian:

Jonathan Schanzer: Trump’s Second Shot at Peace in the Middle East

With Donald Trump’s return to the White House, Washington is bracing for a reprise of the president’s now-famous unpredictable and mercurial approach to governance. But if there was one area of Trump’s presidency that was more-or-less consistent last time around, it was the Middle East.

Trump’s support for Israel was unwavering. His "Peace Through Prosperity" plan promoted a performance-based path to statehood for the Palestinians. The Abraham Accords cemented normalization between Israel and several Arab states. The maximum pressure sanctions policy on the Islamic Republic of Iran squeezed the regime financially. Trump’s hard-nosed approach to the regime in Tehran was punctuated by the January 3, 2020, killing of IRGC Quds Force chief Qassem Soleimani.

Just before Trump’s return to Washington, two of his top Middle East foreign policy advisers released new books. And they may provide a hint of the president’s policies on Israel.

David Friedman, the president’s former attorney who then became America’s ambassador to Israel, encourages Israelis to "begin a national conversation regarding the future of Judea and Samaria"—the disputed territory also known as "the West Bank" inhabited by both Jews and Arabs who lay claim to it. In his book, One Jewish State, Friedman describes this sought-after real estate as "Israel’s biblical heartland," which must be preserved by Jews and Christians, alike. He asserts that "Palestinians would be receptive to life under Israeli sovereignty if accompanied by the opportunity for better health, education, and prosperity and the assurance of human dignity."

Friedman throws shade upon the "peace process" that has consistently failed to serve American interests for more than three decades. He notes that consecutive presidents, Democrat and Republican alike, have failed to achieve the two-state solution, primarily because of Palestinian rejectionism. Friedman believes that the Palestinians are simply not willing to make the compromises necessary for such a diplomatic outcome. And it is for this reason that he proposes a completely different paradigm—one that will be viewed by traditional Palestinian nationalists with disdain.

Friedman writes that the United States should embrace the Puerto Rico model for Middle East peace. He notes that Puerto Rico (Spanish for "wealthy port") is an alternative standard for Palestinian autonomy. He notes, "the residents of Puerto Rico do not vote in U.S. national elections. They do, however, benefit from well-recognized human rights and elect their civilian leaders. While not a perfect analogy to Israel, Puerto Rico ensures the human dignity of its citizens while forgoing collective national rights." Under Friedman’s vision, "Palestinians will be free to enact their own governing documents, as long as they are not inconsistent with those of Israel."

Friedman’s book suggests a wholesale change in the diplomatic paradigm that would certainly provoke controversy. By contrast, Victoria Coates proposes a series of more modest steps that would merely mark a return to sensible previous Trump policies. The final chapter of The Battle for the Jewish State enumerates these policies, most of which were conceived when Coates was deputy national security adviser for the Middle East and North Africa on the Trump National Security Council.

JPost Editorial: Israel must seize the momentum to prevent Hamas's return

Objectively, it is a bad deal – Israel is releasing prisoners who rightfully earned their cell spot, some with blood on their hands. But it is a deal that must continue to the end because we don’t leave our people behind.

Since taking office, as well as for some time before, Trump’s messaging was loud and clear: These images of war, this active conflict, must end. He has, so far, held up that pressure.

The problem is the conflict between the goals of the two sides in this war – Israel and Hamas. Israel would be willing to end the war if Hamas ceased to exist as a military, civilian, and political power – effectively volunteering to cease to exist.

Hamas’s stated goal is exactly the opposite: Israel withdraws from Gaza while Hamas retains control. These conflicting goals are going to bubble up and may challenge the endurance of the deal because the war won’t be over if Hamas is still in charge.

Trump doesn’t want to see Hamas leading Gaza any more than Jerusalem does. Netanyahu must use all the tools at his disposal to convince the president that the conflicting goals of Israel and Hamas can’t coexist. This would mean even more support for Israel should it eventually return to active fighting in the enclave.

As breathtaking and moving as the scenes are of families reunited, we must remember that in the last week of the first phase, Israel is set to receive the bodies of hostages killed on October 7 or in captivity.

This whole process is and will be marred with tragedy, which only adds more layers and nuances.

On Saturday, the Bibas family said, “Yarden is home. There are no words to describe the relief we feel to hold him, hug him, and hear his voice. Yarden is back, but the home is lacking. He is a father who left his safe room to protect his family, bravely survived captivity, and returned to an incomprehensibly difficult reality.” His wife, Shiri, and their two boys, Ariel and Kfir, remain in captivity.

Trump says he wants peace; Israel must leverage that momentum while it is alive and push for the next best stages of the deal it can achieve so that Hamas has no chance, ever again, of posing a terror threat to the Jewish state, like it once did.

Bernard-Henri Levy: The Imperative Remains: Destroy Hamas

The Jewish people respect the imperative to redeem captives. I know no one in Israel who could watch, without immense emotion, the images of the four young IDF women soldiers reuniting with their families.

But there was another image that preceded the magnificent moment of reunion. It was the image of the small stage on which the four were forced to stand, wearing strained smiles, waving at - whom? The Palestinian crowd perched across from them on rubble? Their jailers? Then they were handed over to the Red Cross, the same Red Cross that did not visit one hostage over the past 481 days.

This second image was chilling because of the childlike smiles of the petrified prisoners, knowing that everything could still go wrong. Chilling because of the black-clad, masked men surrounding them - some pressed close. Chilling because of what the scene signified to the crowds who watched it live, from Jabalia to Rafah, from Jericho to Ramallah, from Cairo to Amman. An army of criminals, wounded but not sunk, weakened but not defeated. An army that often returns only the remains of its captives.

It is vital to remember that Israel has always pursued two objectives in this war. The first is the release of the hostages. The second is the total defeat of the last pogromist squads, which would otherwise emerge from this disaster cloaked in a dark aura that would again inspire those tempted, in Israel and elsewhere, by jihad.

Nothing would be more dangerous than leaving behind, as Machiavelli put it, a wounded prince. As long as Hamas retains even a fraction of its capacity to strike - or to govern - Israel can tolerate neither a "durable ceasefire," a "peace of compromise" nor a "political solution." Hamas must be destroyed. Israel didn't seek this war, but it must decisively win.

Hamas forced hostage Keith Siegel to write a letter thanking his terrorist guards

In a cynical move showing its evil, today Hamas released a letter written by released hostage Keith Siegel that supposedly thanks the terrorists.

To Al-Qassam fighters…

My name is Keith Siegel and I am from Kfar Aza. I was a captive in Gaza from 7.10.23 until 1/2025.

The fighters guarding me during this period made sure to meet all my needs, including food, drink, medicine, vitamins, eye drops, blood pressure monitor, and more. They also brought me a doctor when I felt unwell for a long time.

The guards were responsive to my requests regarding food, food problems, etc.

They also made sure to bring food that was suitable for my health condition, vegetarian food and without oil.

The guards treated me well.

I believe that the Israeli government did not do what was required of it to reach a deal to return the prisoners and end the war, which led to many victims and additional damage to both sides.

I hope peace will come soon.

To the fighters who watched me during this period I give thanks.

Keith Siegel

The Siegel family released a statement: “The Hamas terrorists who held Keith forced him to write a detailed letter of thanks. This is just one of many examples of their cruel and cynical tactics.”

Buy EoZ's books on Amazon!

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

PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism (February 2022)

Last week, Israel's Rafael Systems announced that the Iron Beam directed energy system will be deployed this year as an additional tool to combat missiles, rockets and drones aimed at Israel. It will truly be a game changer in countering threats from short range missiles.

National Defense adds details about the system that do not seem to have been previously reported.

Rafael chairman Yuval Steinitz said Iron Beam is a groundbreaking technological achievement, solving a challenge that had long hindered laser weapon development—atmospheric dispersion. Traditional high-energy lasers lose effectiveness as air density scatters their beams, but Iron Beam overcomes this by firing hundreds of small, coin-sized beams instead of a single large one. While individually weak, these beams collectively focus on a target, using a telescopic feedback system to lock onto a vulnerable spot and continuously increase energy until the target is disabled. Integrated with Iron Dome’s advanced algorithms, this system ensures precise targeting at the speed of light. Already tested at ranges of tens of kilometers, Iron Beam is expected to improve further, offering a highly effective defense against missiles and drones.

I haven't seen anyone discuss this, but why not use a similar system to defend against ground-based threats?

If Iron Beam can be programmed to identify and hit missiles flying at 5,000 kilometers an hour, it should be relatively simple to adapt it to stop any Hamas or Hezbollah attempts to infiltrate Israel above ground. Tracking, hitting and disabling people or SUVs is much easier than for a rocket - they are moving far slower. Also, the amount of energy needed to disable people or Jeeps would be much less, which should make it possible to stop threats from longer distances than the 10 or so kilometer range of Iron Beam for rockets. The systems would just need to be deployed on an elevated platform to be able to destroy threats from kilometers away at the speed of light.

The potential uses for a directed energy system don't end at Hamas or Hezbollah Radwan forces style attacks. Iron Beam can be used to disable - and potentially destroy - tanks as well.

Tanks have weak spots. Their optics and sensor systems can be targeted to blind the crew's ability to see where they are going. The tracks could be hit to immobilize the tank. And if the tank's rear is exposed, the ammunition and fuel tanks there are usually lightly protected and a hit can explode it and destroy the tank altogether.

A beam moves at the speed of light and is far more accurate than any projectile could possibly be, so even the smallest weak spot of a tank could be aimed at and hit accurately, even in the better protected front. One obvious target would be the gun barrel itself, which is not as well protected as most of the tank, and it just needs to be heated up enough to be deformed, which would make the tank ineffective as a weapon. (In extreme cases, a tank round that is meant to be fired could explode within the warped barrel itself, which could injure or kill the crew.)

Perhaps Iron Beam could also be modified to add the ability to fire at other light frequencies as well, such as microwaves, which could fry electronics systems and disable any modern threat from miles away.

Other issues would need to be addressed, not least that a ground-to-ground Iron Beam itself would be a target for attacks and need to be defended and deployed appropriately. It would need a reliable and permanent power supply. It has weak spots, too. But I see no reason directed energy weapons cannot be adapted, in a few years time, to defend Israel's borders more effectively and with lower cost that ever before.

Buy EoZ's books on Amazon!

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

PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism (February 2022)

All of Israel and the Jewish world is wrenched with simultaneous grief and elation at the tortuous trickle of release of hostages in this first phase of the hostage deal. We all fervently pray for the safe return of every hostage.

I cannot get past the fact that the price appears to be too high.

The Gilad Shalit deal in 2011 was the release of 1,027 prisoners for the abducted soldier. One of them was Yahya Sinwar, the architect of October 7. In retrospect, was the Shalit deal worth it, knowing that 1,200 Israelis would be killed through the efforts of one of the released terrorists? Not to mention the soldiers who have fallen in the war.

There are lots of halachic opinions on prisoner swaps, and they run the gamut from permissive to very restrictive. When the Air France airliner was hijacked in 1977 to Uganda, the Israeli government asked all of the prominent leading rabbinical figures in Israel (including R' Ovadia Yosef, R' Shlomo Auerbach and R' Elyashiv) and for an opinion on whether they can negotiate with the terrorists and potentially release murderers to save the lives of the passengers. The rabbis answered in the affirmative, telling Yitzchak Rabin: “Although it is clear that releasing terrorists carries with it grave dangers, nonetheless, being that the Jewish hostages are found in a state of immediate danger, according to Jewish law they therefore override the danger of releasing the terrorists and therefore it is obligatory for the government of Israel to enter negotiations with the terrorists and do everything they can to save the captives from the danger that hovers over their lives.”

R' Ovadia Yosef reiterated this opinion in support of the Shalit deal, but we cannot know if the late rabbi would have reconsidered in light of October 7.

IDF soldier Avraham Amram was captured on April 5, 1978, in a clash with Palestinian PFLP-GC forces near Rashidieh camp in South Lebanon. He was exchanged in 1979 for 76 convicted Palestinian prisoners held in Israeli jails. It was the first time Israel negotiated directly with a terrorist organization. The Lubavitcher Rebbe strongly opposed this deal, saying that the price paid should not be higher than what other countries typically use in their prisoner swaps, citing a contemporary swap between the US and Soviet Union of two prisoners for five. But he went beyond that, saying that this crossed the red line of negotiating with terrorists who openly said they would continue their terrorism. Furthermore, said the Rebbe, putting terrorists in prison to begin with, rather than executing them, was a major mistake, since it encourages future kidnappings and invites pressure to release them at some point.

One of the prisoners released in that deal was Hafez Dalkamoni, who was the leader of a PFLP-GC cell in West Germany that was responsible for the bomb that brought down Pan Am flight 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland, in 1988, killing 270.

Similarly, the founder of Hamas, Ahmed Yassin, was freed in a 1985 hostage deal. He was responsible for countless murders.

I am in no position to argue with the eminent rabbinical authorities who permit hostage deals. But today we have more information than in the past. One major justification of hostage deals is that definitely saving lives now is a higher priority than being concerned about potential loss of lives in the future. That calculus may have changed.

About 80 percent of those released in the West Bank for Gilad Shalit resumed their terror activities,. This makes it not merely a potential concern about those being released now ending the lives of people in the future but as close to a certainty as is statistically possible.

If we assume each has an 80% chance of staying a terrorist, and each of them has a 1% chance of successfully mounting a fatal attack, that means that for 1,900 released prisoners there is a 96% chance of 10 successful terror attacks from that group and a near certainty of 5 successful terror attacks. This is of course an oversimplification but it shows how definite future terror attacks are from this group.

Actually, this is worse. Looking at the examples of Sinwar, Yassin and Dalkamoni, we can estimate that perhaps 0.1% of released prisoners are uber-terrorists who can be assumed to mastermind attacks that will murder hundreds of people themselves in the future, not just one or two. Israel is releasing about 1,900 terrorists in the first phase but about 4,000 if all the phases are carried out. That means that 3 or 4 of those released will have the ability to mount major attacks with high casualties - much higher than the number of hostages being released.

The question is not if people will be murdered in the future but how many. This may turn it from a question of pidyon shevuyim (ransoming prisoners) to a variant of the trolley problem, where doing an action to save some lives would definitely result in the deaths of others, very probably more, although it is not exactly the same since the deaths will not happen immediately and the action saving the lives is not the action that will kill the others. Rabbis have debated the trolley problem for decades before philosophers first articulated it.

The entire situation is heartbreaking. But Israel should be doing everything possible to ensure that it doesn't happen in the future, and if that means the death penalty for terrorists, so be it. Releasing these terrorists today is a virtual guarantee of many more people being killed tomorrow.

Buy EoZ's books on Amazon!

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

PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism (February 2022)

02/01 Links: Yarden Bibas, Ofer Kalderon, Keith Siegel free after 484 days in Gaza; Trump reiterates that Egypt, Jordan will take in Palestinians

From Ian:

Yarden Bibas, Ofer Kalderon, Keith Siegel free after 484 days in Gaza

Yarden Bibas, Ofer Kalderon and Keith Siegel were freed on Saturday after 484 days in Hamas captivity in the Gaza Strip.

Palestinian terrorists handed over Bibas and Kalderon to the Red Cross in Khan Yunis, in the Strip’s south, while Siegel was released in Gaza City.

“The government of Israel is committed to returning all of the hostages and the missing,” Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said in a statement issued by his office.

The statement concluded with a quote from the Bible: “I will save you from the hands of the wicked and deliver you from the grasp of the cruel” (Jeremiah 15:21).

The Hostage and Missing Families Forum issued a statement saying: “Their release today brings a ray of light in the darkness, offering hope and demonstrating the triumph of the human spirit. Yet their return also reminds us that 79 hostages remain in Gaza, still waiting to be saved. We will not rest until every phase of this deal is completed and every hostage is returned—the living to reunite with their loved ones, and the deceased for proper burial with dignity.”

In exchange, Jerusalem on Saturday was set to free 183 Palestinian terrorists—18 serving life sentence, 54 serving lengthy terms and 111 arrested since Hamas’s Oct. 7, 2023, massacre. Freed hostage Yarden Bibas meets IDF troops, Feb. 1, 2025. Credit: Israel Defense Forces.

Bibas’s wife, Shiri, 33, and their two sons, Ariel, 5, and Kfir, 2, are on the list of the 33 hostages to be released in the first phase of the ceasefire agreement. Hamas, however, has claimed that Shiri and the children have been killed.

Kalderon, 54, a dual Israeli-French citizen, was abducted from Kibbutz Nir Oz on Oct. 7, 2023, along with his son Erez, 12, and daughter, Sahar, 16. The children were among the 105 captives freed in November 2023 as part of a ceasefire-for-terrorists agreement.

Siegel, 65, a dual Israeli-American citizen, was taken from his home in Kibbutz Kfar Aza during the Oct. 7 massacre. His wife, Aviva, was among those who returned as part of the November 2023 swap with Hamas.

Hostages’ stories: Gadi Mozes paced 7km a day in tiny cell, soldiers rationed grains of rice

Gadi Mozes, isolated, paced 7 kilometers a day in his two-square-meter room; female surveillance soldiers counted grains of rice to fairly divide the scant food they had between them; one hostage convinced her captors to film a propaganda video of her, hoping to offer her family a sign of life.

These are some of the stories emerging as newly freed hostages begin to recount to their families the hellish 15 months they spent as captives of Gaza terrorists, stripped of their autonomy, enduring abysmal conditions and uncertain of their fate as hour after hour ticked excruciatingly by, over the course of more than 470 days.

Channel 12 news reported Friday night on some of those harrowing experiences and the hardships, struggles and moments of bravery they entailed.

Mozes, 80, who was freed on Thursday from Hamas captivity, told family members that throughout 15 months he was never with other hostages. The first Israeli he met was 29-year-old Arbel Yehoud, as they were brought together a few days ago ahead of their joint release.

For some 70 days of his captivity, Mozes was in complete isolation, locked alone in a dark room, he said. He was moved between several apartments over the course of the war, and was not held in tunnels.

Mozes knew his longtime partner Efrat Katz had been murdered during the attack, and mourned her. But he did not know what had happened to his daughter Moran until being freed (Moran survived and met him Thursday upon his return).

For much of his time in captivity, the octogenarian was held in a two-square-meter (2.4-square-yard) room, in which he regularly paced some 7 kilometers (over 4 miles) every day, counting the tiles on the room floor and solving math problems to pass the time and keep his mind sharp.

His glasses were broken during the kidnapping, but after two months he managed to get new ones from his captors and was able to read two books.

At a certain point, Mozes said he decided to live one day at a time, and not think of release. Freed hostage Gadi Mozes reunites with his children (from left) Oded, Moran and Yair at an IDF facility near Re’im on January 30, 2025. (IDF)

Once every five days or so Mozes was given a bowl of tepid water to shower with, using a cup to pour the water over his head. He insisted on shaving himself, despite it being a messy and painful affair, as it was important to him not to neglect himself. Mozes lost some 15 kilograms in captivity, according to the network.

At some points, he feared he would be executed. In one instance, he was held in a hot pickup truck for 12 hours under Red Cross offices in the Gaza Strip, he said. Though he hoped he was being released, he was only being moved between hiding spots.

What medical condition are the Thai nationals released from Hamas captivity

Following the arrival of the Thai national hostages from Hamas captivity on Thursday to the Shamir Medical Center, its director, Dr. Osnat Levzion-Korach, disclosed the details of their condition.

Regarding the condition of the released hostages, Dr. Levzion-Korach stated it was surprising to find that while the hostages "endured unimaginable horrors and harsh conditions, it appeared that those who have been released so far were relatively well cared for."

Dr. Levzion-Korach then elaborated on what is now to be expected for the released Thai hostages as they stay in the hospital for their recovery.

"The Thai citizens who arrived at our hospital are currently in good and stable condition, but we will continue to conduct comprehensive medical examinations alongside extensive psychological treatments as needed," she said.

"Over the next week, they [the Thai hosategs] are expected to stay here and recuperate. In addition to medical care, they will have sessions with psychologists and social workers," Dr. Levzion-Korach added.

She also emphasized, "It is important to remember that despite their good physical condition, they survived nearly 500 days of a horrific ordeal and will require long-term rehabilitation. Moving forward, we will assist them according to the guidelines we receive from the Thai embassy and the families of the hostages as they prepare to return to Thailand."

Dr. Levzion-Korach noted while there has been considerably "less focus" on the Thai hostages, the medical team at the Shamir Medical Center did not "neglect them for a moment."

"In the previous hospitalization [of the released hostages in November 2023], we provided dedicated care to 24 foreigners, including 23 Thai hostages and one Filipino. They received a great deal of respect and warmth from us, and we will once again ensure they receive comprehensive care and attention," she explained.