Jewish Ethics: The Enemy of Every Broken Philosophy

(This is the latest chapter in my series on a unified theory for antisemitism, and it is turning into so much more than that. I am truly excited about where this is going. )

___________________

Most of us don't actively think about our ethical framework. We absorb it by osmosis from our parents, our teachers, our friends, media and online. By the time we enter college, most of us have only a fuzzy idea of what seems to be right and wrong.

This needs to change. 

We have identified a number of philosophies so far from the perspective of how they look at what used to be called "The Jewish Question." They have all  come up short. Implicitly or explicitly, the frameworks we looked at so far - traditional Christian, Muslim, Marxist, progressive, social justice, white supremacism - all allow antisemitism to flourish without contradicting their tenets.

The idea that Jews must disappear, as a religion or as a people or as a nation, is inherently immoral. Any philosophy or framework that insists or allows such an idea is, by definition, an immoral philosophy. 

Yet this is what many, if not most, students are exposed to when they enter university, or when they browse social media. Most do not have a well thought out competing framework that they can use to look critically at these philosophies. Who can be against supporting the oppressed or resisting  injustice? Most high school students (or adults, for that matter) do not have the tools to realize when they are being manipulated, when moral sounding concepts are twisted into grotesque parodies of morality. Yet this is what they are being exposed to in most universities.

It is essential that everyone understands propaganda methods, how brainwashing and advertising work, how our emotions can be manipulated by a skilled writer or video producer. In addition, people need to be taught how to fact check what they are exposed to. These should not be esoteric skills - they should be taught as part of the curriculum, and if not, there should be online resources to show how lies can sound reasonable.

The challenge with dealing with popular yet immoral philosophies is much deeper. To even know if we are being manipulated by a false ethical framework, we need to have a decent knowledge both of the advantages of better philosophies and the flaws of the worse ones.

We've examined the major streams of antisemitism today. There are others but for our purposes, this covers the vast majority. Here is a summary:

Antisemitic Group	Ethical Facade	Accusation against  Jews/Israel	What they fear/hate about Jews/Israel	Their goals for Jews/Israel
Christian Supersessionism	Love thy neighbor	Deicide; Usurpation	Disproving Scripture	Erase Judaism and convert Jews
Islamic Supersessionism	Mercy and justice	Treachery; Colonialism	Religious authenticity, shame at losing wars	Subjugate Jews and destroy Israel
Black Supersessionism	Racial justice	Collusion w/ White Power	Comparison with subjugated group that succeeded	Replace and demonize Jews
Social Justice Eliminationism	Equity and inclusion	Privilege/Racism	A real moral code	Erase Judaism and Jews as distinct
Palestinian Eliminationism	Self-determination	Colonialism/Occupation	Shame	Destroy Israel
Progressive Eliminationism	Universal equality	Nationalism/Xenophobia	Religion/faith, particularism	Erase Jewish particularism
Marxist Eliminationism	Class justice	Capitalism/Elitism	Disproves worker/bourgeois theory	Erase Jewish economic influence
Nazi Annihilationism	Racial purity/Blood and Soil	Racial Impurity	Morality	Exterminate Jews
Iranian Annihilationism	Divine order	Aggression/Genocide	Obstacle to regional dominance	Destroy Israel and marginalize Jews
Far-Right Eliminationism	National purity	Conspiracy/Control	Cultural subversion	Expel or neutralize Jews and Israel
UN/NGO Eliminationism	Human Rights	Genocide/Occupation	Successful nationalism	Delegitimize and dismantle Israel

You can argue with my very abbreviated summaries but you cannot argue that there are a lot of very disparate types of anti-Jewish hate out there. Their philosophies, accusations, fear and goals are all different, showing at a glance that there is no single cause or explanation for antisemitism. Too often we see ideas on fighting antisemitism that don't actually identify the different types and assume a one-size-fits-all solution based on false assumptions about the breadth of the problem ("More Holocaust education!") 

Yet they also have some things in common. All of these philosophies include a passionate loathing for the perceived Jewish or Israeli enemy. In all of these cases, that loathing translates into a desire to eliminate the source of their discomfort. An argument can be made that all of them have an inferiority complex compared to the original Jewish source of traditional Western ethical values, which many of these groups are also adamantly opposed to.

The falsity of the philosophies we've discussed can be proven in a number of ways. 

One is by showing that they are inconsistent, that they treat different ethical issues or interpret international law differently for Jews and for other people. A legitimate moral code does not change with the times or the circumstances.

For example, the progressives say that they oppose the State of Israel because they are against all nationalisms - but they support Palestinian nationalism  (which is meant to destroy Israel.) They say they support freedom of expression, but advocate boycotting Israeli universities. They say they support indigenous rights, but Jews are indigenous to Israel and and regarded as colonialists.

Human Rights Watch said that militants moving among civilians in Yemen are guilty of using human shields, but when Hamas does the same thing they make up a new definition, saying that it is not human shielding unless they force the civilians to stay where they are. It is beyond belief that a  human rights organization waters down the definition of human shields - which endangers Palestinian lives - because of their obsessive hate of Israel. 

When the US invaded Iraq, Amnesty International defined "occupation" as only existing as long as troops are physically in the territory. When it comes to Gaza, it makes up a new international law that claims that controlling (most of!) the borders and airspace is enough to be considered occupation.

The UK branch of Black Lives Matter issued a statement against boycotts of Black-owned businesses,  yet it openly allies with groups that boycott Israel. (As a reminder, even up to the 1970s Arab League members would boycott Western companies with Jews in upper management. There is a direct line from antisemitism to anti-Zionism, no matter how much the "anti-Zionists" insist otherwise.)

The UN Special Rapporteur on Violence Against Women has issued reports on Palestinian men beating their wives, but blamed the Israeli "occupation" as the major factor for this abuse. The net result is that the very organization meant to protect women's rights makes it more likely for spousal abuse to continue.

The very idea of "Queers for Palestine" is a joke that writes itself, given the extreme homophobia and anti-LGBTQ laws for Palestinians. 

Many examples of human rights issues are not about only one side having human rights that are being violated by the other, but about two sets of competing human rights. Israelis have the human right not to be blown up, stabbed, raped, kidnapped and burned to death. When parties consistently interpret these cases of competing values against Israelis or Jews, it is not a principled stand. Sometimes the pretense of morality is used to mask immorality. 

In 2024, the European Court of Human Rights unanimously ruled that banning kosher slaughter in certain Belgian provinces does not violate the European Convention on Human Rights, saying that the ban was "the protection of animal welfare as an element of 'public morals.'" The ruling makes it difficult for religious Jews to live in those areas. Yet in those same provinces, game hunting is allowed and restaurants serve, as delicacies, meat from animals that were shot or killed with a bow and arrow. 

Sometimes these philosophies will even throw away their own tenets to partner with others who normally would be their bitter enemies for the sole purpose of attacking Jews and Israel.

White supremacists like David Duke have suddenly become advocates of the decidedly non-white Palestinians. In 2024 Duke endorsed Green Party candidate Jill Stein for president, citing her anti-war stance and criticism of Israel as aligning with his views. Neo-Nazi websites will liberally quote the most left-wing critics of Israel, and people derided as liars suddenly become authorities.

It sounds astounding, but the Nazis were proud of their moral codes. Nazi Germany was the first country to mandate medical students take courses in medical ethics. These "ethics" included sterilization, eugenics and euthanasia, not to mention teaching that Aryan lives are much more valuable than others. Equally sickening was that the Nazis enforced policies for the humane transport of cattle in cattle cars - but not for millions of Jews jammed into cattle cars en route to slavery or extermination. 

We should not be surprised that if the genocide of Jews can be justified as a moral imperative, so can Hamas murdering, raping and kidnapping Jews.  If your ethics code allows for Hamas depravity to be admired as "resistance,", it is not a moral code. It is truly frightening that framing a genocidal Islamist death cult as a "progressive force," as Judith Butler and Columbia University students claim, is becoming acceptable discourse - and tomorrow's leaders cannot see anything wrong with it. 

We need the counter these depraved, immoral mindsets with something better. We need to not just play defense but offer a better alternative that can attract the next generation. We need to present a moral ethical code that is flexible, thorough, and can stand the test of time. 

What can fit this bill?

The fact that all of these immoral philosophies are so opposed to Jewish ethics indicates that any moral ethical system must be compatible with core Jewish core ethical values. 

When these hypocritical systems say that Jewish ethics is a mortal danger to themselves, believe it. To combat them, the world need more Jewish ethics, not less.

In the next chapter, we will look at what such an ethics code might look like. It won't surprise you much - because to a large extent, it is also the moral code of Western civilization. 

---

---

Buy EoZ's books  on Amazon! "He's an Anti-Zionist Too!" cartoon book (December 2024) PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism (February 2022)

 

Read More

NYT pretty much says we should let the Houthis win

Here's another case where the media does the minimum possible to adhere to journalistic ethics while subtly allowing its own editorializing to dominate a news story.

The New York Times says that the renewed attacks on Houthi infrastructure and leaders are just so darned expensive:

U.S. Strikes in Yemen Burning Through Munitions With Limited Success

In just three weeks, the Pentagon has used $200 million worth of munitions in Operation Rough Rider against the Houthi militia, officials said.

In closed briefings in recent days, Pentagon officials have acknowledged that there has been only limited success in destroying the Houthis’ vast, largely underground arsenal of missiles, drones and launchers, according to congressional aides and allies.

The officials briefed on confidential damage assessments say the bombing is consistently heavier than strikes conducted by the Biden administration, and much bigger than what the Defense Department has publicly described.

But Houthi fighters, known for their resiliency, have reinforced many of their bunkers and other targeted sites, frustrating the Americans’ ability to disrupt the militia’s missile attacks against commercial ships in the Red Sea, according to three congressional and allied officials, speaking on the condition of anonymity to discuss operational matters.

In just three weeks, the Pentagon has used $200 million worth of munitions, in addition to the immense operational and personnel costs to deploy two aircraft carriers, additional B-2 bombers and fighter jets, as well as Patriot and THAAD air defenses to the Middle East, the officials said.

The total cost could be well over $1 billion by next week, and the Pentagon might soon need to request supplemental funds from Congress, one U.S. official said.

So many precision munitions are being used, especially advanced long-range ones, that some Pentagon contingency planners are growing concerned about overall Navy stocks and implications for any situation in which the United States would have to ward off an attempted invasion of Taiwan by China.

War is just so hard! 

To be sure, they raise legitimate points - expenses are a factor in war. But they are rarely the major factor. Achieving military goals are the primary issue - and that part of the story is buried far down.

A senior Pentagon official late Thursday pushed back on the assessments described by the congressional and allied officials.

The senior official, also speaking on the condition of anonymity to discuss operational matters, said the airstrikes had exceeded their goal in the campaign’s initial phase, disrupting senior Houthi leaders’ ability to communicate, limiting the group’s response to a handful of ineffective counter strikes, and setting the conditions for subsequent phases, which he declined to discuss. “We’re on track,” the official said.

U.S. officials said the strikes had damaged the Houthis’ command and control structure. Tulsi Gabbard, the director of national intelligence, said in a statement that the strikes had been “effective” in killing top Houthi leaders, whom she did not identify, and said the operation was reopening Red Sea shipping.

This shows that the NYT has no idea what the US strategy or goals are and is in no position to judge how well (or how badly) the US is doing.

Not to mention that the Times doesn't give any alternative. OK, military action takes resources and time. What else would be a better use of US resources, today, when a rogue country is disrupting trade worldwide with impunity? DEI?

Clearly the Biden approach did not achieve a single thing to deter the wonderfully resilient Houthis. So we should...give up? 

The subtext of the article is that if the New York Times  reporters cannot figure out what is going on, it must not be worth it.

As we've seen during the Gaza war, the amount of information publicly available is perhaps 10% of what is going on. Without any hard information, the media confidently states how effective or ineffective military actions are. They don't know the basics of the  strategy or even what the military objectives are. The NYT is making completely wild guesses to fill in the gaps.

But based on lots of other NYT articles, we can guess what the NYT wants to see. It wants Trump to fail. It wants Israel to stop destroying Hamas because that is the excuse the Houthis are using for threatening global shipping. 

The Times may not know the US or Israeli military goals, but it does know what its own goals are. This article is aligned with the New York Times geopolitical strategy, not that of the US government.

---

---

Buy EoZ's books  on Amazon! "He's an Anti-Zionist Too!" cartoon book (December 2024) PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism (February 2022)

 

Read More

Why isn't Lebanon condemning Hamas militias operating inside the country?

Israel Hayom reports:

The IDF eliminated a senior Hamas commander in Lebanon early Friday morning in a targeted airstrike on an apartment in the city of Sidon.

Hassan Farhat, a commander in the terror organization, was killed alongside family members in the aerial strike. Farhat previously operated within Jamaat Islamiya, a group affiliated with the Muslim Brotherhood in Lebanon that was later integrated into Hamas's Lebanon branch.

An IDF spokesperson provided details of the operation, "The IDF attacked during the night and eliminated the terrorist Hassan Farhat, commander of the western sector of the Hamas terror organization in Lebanon.

"During the war, Farhat orchestrated numerous terrorist plots against IDF forces and Israeli citizens. He was directly responsible for the rocket fire at Safed that killed Staff Sergeant Omar Sara Benjo and wounded several other soldiers on February 14, 2024.

The terrorist continued advancing terror plots against the state of Israel in recent months, and his activities posed a significant threat to Israel and its citizens."

Hamas' Al Qassam Brigades issued a statement mourning the killing of  Farhat, along with his son Hamza and daughter Junan, who "were martyred in a treacherous Zionist airstrike that targeted their home in Saida, southern Lebanon, early this Friday morning."  

Lebanese media is highlighting Israel's violation of Lebanon's airspace as well as the death of his children. 

No one seems to be asking: what is Hamas doing in Lebanon in the first place?

At least there is finally public debate in Lebanon about Hezbollah's role in the country, about its absurd claim that its "resistance" against Israel is necessary for Lebanon's security. (How's that working out for ya, Beirut?)

But how has the Lebanese army allowed Hamas to act as an independent militia within its borders?  

How does a foreign terrorist group embed itself in another sovereign state, establish a military infrastructure, and conduct international attacks from Lebanese territory—without anyone taking responsibility?

Where are the Lebanese politicians or journalists asking what authority Hamas has to operate in Sidon, Tyre, or the Bekaa Valley?

Where is the outcry about Lebanon’s sovereignty being eroded not by Israel—but by Hamas and other Palestinian armed groups like Islamic Jihad?

Hassan Farhat wasn’t just a rogue militant. He had a command structure, a regional portfolio, and lethal capabilities. These capabilities don't spring up  overnight.  And it poses an existential question for Lebanon:

Who really runs your country?

Until Lebanon reckons with the armed groups operating freely within its borders, every strike, every death, and every escalation will remain part of a war not only against Israel—but against Lebanese sovereignty itself.

---

---

Buy EoZ's books  on Amazon! "He's an Anti-Zionist Too!" cartoon book (December 2024) PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism (February 2022)

 

Read More

04/03 Links Pt2: Seth Mandel: Rules for Jews; We see what you’re doing, Sadiq Khan; Six Lessons from the Holocaust According to Menachem Begin

From Ian:

Seth Mandel: Rules for Jews

Unlike most voters, American Jews apparently do not get to choose which policies or government actions they support based on political principles. There’s a list, you see, of Special Obligations. Jews must do this or that, because as Jews we have a special obligation to everyone except ourselves.

This Law of Special Obligations is on full display in a New York Times article on the pro-Hamas crackdowns on college campuses.

The Times article itself was inevitable. Any time a politician or government does something ostensibly “for the Jews,” the Times will assign a reporter to write a story on how “the Jewish community is divided” over that thing. If kosher Chinese food were to fall like manna from the heavens, the New York Times would write a story titled “U.S. Jews Are Divided Over Free Chinese Food.” If the Times were around during the Exodus from ancient Egypt, it would publish an article titled “Schism Within Jewish Community Over Freedom From Slavery.” If the Purim story were to happen today, we’d get “How Haman’s Humiliation Has Become Fraught For Many Jews.”

The current version is “Trump’s Fight Against Antisemitism Has Become Fraught for Many Jews,” though another Times article about this topic used the “schism” framing, and a third used “divide” in the headline.

The point is not that it’s unusual for Jews to have varying opinions on the same issue—that’s the norm. Instead, what jumps out from the Times piece and others like it is the idea that Jews don’t get to choose. Like Hebrew National hot dogs, we answer to a higher authority apparently. Unlike Hebrew National hot dogs, the higher authority being referenced isn’t God.

It turns out that, like Judaism itself, Jewish political opinion-forming entails many rules. As far as I can tell, here are the main ones.

From the Times: “‘Find me a moment in history when Jews anywhere benefited from a mix of rampant nationalism and repression,’ wrote the journalist Matt Bai in a Washington Post opinion piece on Tuesday. ‘You’ll be looking awhile.’”

You’ve heard, no doubt, the refrain that “Jews are the canary in the coalmine.” It’s true: When Jews are systematically mistreated, others will likely be in for some pain in the near future. But here we have the inverse: Jews are not the canaries but the miners who are saved by the selfless sacrifice of the precious yellow birds.

Hence we have a new rule: Jews are the coalminers in the coalmine. (How’s that for an image.) If something is happening to someone else, that thing will also happen to the Jews. It’s the corollary of: If something is happening to the Jews, that thing will also happen to others. (Sensing a pattern here.)

On to the next rule. The Times writes: “‘Anytime you put Jews in the middle on an issue, it’s not good for the Jews,’ said Jonathan Jacoby of the Nexus Project, a progressive Jewish group that has been searching for a way to combat antisemitism without suppressing political debate. ‘That’s a classic antisemitic position that antisemites like to put Jews. So they can be scapegoated.’”

Schama: Toxic spread of antisemitism in popular culture is weaponising hate

The British historian Sir Simon Schama has spoken out about the “toxic” spread of antisemitism in popular culture since 7 October 2023.

He said that the rise of anti-Jewish hatred was “extremely upsetting” before the events of that day, but that the hatred had now spread like an “infection”.

Sir Simon described the “trivialisation and debasement” of Holocaust memory by controversial public figures with vast social media followings.

He singled out disgraced rapper Ye, formerly known as Kanye West, for the design of his latest album which he said was “nothing more than an enormous swastika”; and the billionaire Elon Musk for doing the “heil salute twice in a public setting”.

The remarks were part of a keynote lecture that Sir Simon delivered at the Contemporary Antisemitism London 2025 conference at the JW3 centre this week. It came days before the screening of his latest film, Simon Schama: The Road to Auschwitz, which airs on BBC2 on 7 April.

Despite having written extensively about Jewish history and the holocaust, Sir Simon — who was born two weeks after the liberation of Auschwitz — had never previously visited the Nazi death camp.

“It’s when you see this really horrifying transfusion of this toxin into popular culture, when it’s coupled with data from the Anti-Defamation League and the Claims Conference that it’s the younger generation … who are least likely to be familiar with the Holocaust and are most likely to dismiss its magnitude, that really if you happen to be in a position to get to make the kind of film that I have, that you want to grab that opportunity,” he said.

The documentary sees Sir Simon travel to mass killing sites in Lithuania, the home of his mother’s family, and to the Netherlands — a nation famed for its long history of tolerance — to reveal how deep-rooted prejudice was weaponised across the continent to turn people against their Jewish neighbours.

Speaking at JW3, he said that he feels the Holocaust memory “has, in a way, been reduced to Anne Frank on the one hand and Auschwitz on the other”. He explained this by saying he believes the memory of the Holocaust has been de-Judaised and made more palatable for a broad audience.

His film, he said, was an attempt to “reanimate Jewish presence” and “resist the temptation to dilute, to moderate, to universalise”.

Uri Kurlianchik: Six Lessons from the Holocaust According to Menachem Begin

In 1978, former Israeli Prime Minister Begin wrote down what he considered were the most important lessons of the Holocaust. These lessons are as important today as they were 45 years ago.

First, if the enemy of the Jews says that he has in his heart, in his blood, an ambition to destroy the Jews - do not underestimate him, do not mock him. Do not doubt him. Take his ambition seriously, treat his words with all the severity inherent in them. Deprive him of the power to destroy you. Prepare every day for the day. Never again say: it is not serious.

Second, never again ask: what will the world say? Know this: the world will never have mercy for slaughtered Jews but the world will always have respect for fighting Jews.

Third, keep a weapon. Study it and sanctify it wherever you dwell. It is the weapon of holiness. A weapon of life, honor, freedom. Never abandon it and never throw it away. We believe in the vision of the end of days, yes, but who knows when it will come? Meanwhile, as long as there is a weapon in the hands of even one enemy of the Jews, a people that has been slaughtered and butchered throughout the generations… keep your weapons.

Fourth, the Torah, in order to preserve it, demands that safeguards be placed around it. The same is true for the people of the Torah. The first safeguard is Jewish dignity. The seeds of Jewish destruction lie in passively enabling the enemy to humiliate us. Only when the enemy succeeds in turning the spirit of the Jew into dust and ashes in life, can he turn the Jew into dust and ashes in death. During the Holocaust it was after the enemy had humiliated the Jews, trampled them, divided them, deceived them, afflicted them, drove brother against brother, only then could he lead them to the gates of Auschwitz. Therefore, at all times and whatever the cost, safeguard the dignity and honor of the Jewish people.

Read More

04/03 Links Pt1: The Gazan revolt; On Dresden and Gaza; SA accused of prior knowledge in Hamas attack; DEBUNKED: "More Journalists Died in Gaza Than WW2"

From Ian:

Melanie Phillips: The Gazan revolt

People in the West refuse to accept the implacable nature of Palestinian Arab rejectionism, and the murderous hatred of Israel and the Jews.

This is partly a refusal to face up to the reality of Islamic holy war. Partly, it’s due to widespread ignorance of the Middle East, Jewish history in the land and the spurious nature of Palestinian peoplehood—the fictitious identity that was cooked up in the 1960s to play the credulous West for the suckers they’ve turned out to be.

But what you hear over and over again in Western countries is that “something has to be done with all those Palestinians”—and what else could be done with them other than to give them their own state, which sounds so very reasonable?

This is a very strange attitude. There’s never been another conflict like this, where people who set out to exterminate another people and its homeland but lose that war then become the focus of global sympathy and can dictate the policies of the world.

In other conflicts, if aggressors lose the war of conquest they have waged, they are in no position to dictate to anyone. They may have to move or disperse. They may find themselves ruled in the same place by others. As aggressors, they have forfeited the right to have any say over their future.

Yet despite the fact that the Palestinian Arabs have waged a campaign of extermination against the Jewish homeland for the best part of a century, they’ve been treated with kid gloves and have dictated the global agenda.

Even more extraordinary, they’ve been treated as a discrete people on the basis of an utterly spurious designation as refugees that uniquely was passed down from generation to generation—a formula devised solely to turn them into a weapon against Israel’s existence.

They are indeed victims—not of Israel but of the lies with which their own Arab world has enslaved them to a cult of death and destruction.

We don’t know what the day after this war will look like on the ground. We hear reports that the Trump administration, Israel and Saudi Arabia are trying to broker a permanent settlement of the war against the Jewish state. We don’t know whether this is intended to result in a canton-style formula for the Palestinian Arabs in the disputed territories, their relocation to Egypt or Jordan, or some other kind of arrangement.

Whatever the outcome, however, if there is ever to be peace and justice in the Middle East, then it must be understood that the idea that there is such a thing as a Palestinian people and that they should have their own state of Palestine—the unthinking and unchallengeable orthodoxy in the West—is now over.

On Dresden and Gaza

Barely mentioned is that in sharp contrast to the historic events described above, the Israeli Defense Forces has gone out of its way to minimize civilian casualties while attempting to eliminate enemy positions from where rockets were being launched. These sites were mostly schools, hospitals and apartment buildings, making avoiding civilians impossible. Long before the bombings, the IDF made warning telephone calls directly to Palestinian homes notifying them to leave. They also dropped printed messages by airplane, advising people which buildings to evacuate, and even often dropped “cold bombs” as the last warning. Moreover, wounded Palestinian terrorists who were caught by the IDF were treated in Israeli medical facilities.

Israel has also erected special medical facilities at its northern border with Syria, where they treat Syrians wounded by their own government. Such efforts to protect civilians are unheard of in the history of wars of other nations. There were certainly no warnings for the residents of Hiroshima or Nagasaki.

Although this is all well-documented, what has the world’s response been? False accusations of genocide with barely any attention to the IDF’s behavior as compared to other militaries in recent history.

The Biden administration declared that Israel “should have taken all feasible precautions to prevent civilian casualties.” The United Nations condemned the Israeli response to Hamas’s missiles and mass murder of Israeli civilians as a “moral outrage” and a “criminal act.” Various European and American politicians have repeatedly criticized the IDF, with barely any attention paid to the atrocities of Hamas. The charge was even made that airstrikes against Gaza were “collective punishment.” Collective punishment for the people of Gaza is what can be charged against Hamas.

One might ask: What is the meaning of proportional response to the terrorist murderers who use their population as cover? What have we heard about the U.N. documentation of the deaths of more than 350,000 Syrians killed by their government, including using poisonous gas? Have there been widespread voices of rage from governments, local or national organizations—the very ones that go out of their way to condemn Israel?

The current civil war in Sudan has killed 150,000 people and forced more than 11 million from their homes, prompting the U.S. government to declare a genocide—this one perpetrated by the ethnic Arab militia known as the Rapid Support Forces against non-Arab Sudanese. Nevertheless, organizations and groups focused on the alleged wrongs of Israel have been conspicuously silent. Even the pope, who has been outspoken about the Gaza conflict, has remained fairly quiet regarding the brutal persecution of Christians and Uyghurs in China.

Perhaps, what I have described can be best explained by the words of two European diplomats. In 2013, then-Dutch Foreign Minister Frans Timmermans, who, obviously forgetting about Dresden and the long history of European atrocities against Jews, said: “Even if Europeans do not say so, they judge Israel by different standards than they would judge other (Arab) countries in this area. Why? Because deep down, Europeans see Israel as a European country. So, they judge Israel in the same way they would judge other European countries … It means you are part of a community of values, whether you like it or not.”

Similarly, Jesper Vahr, the former Danish Ambassador to Israel, had the temerity to advocate a European double standard applied to Israel when judging its actions against Palestinian terrorists. As he said, “I think you have the right to insist that we apply double standards and put you to the same standards as all the rest of the countries in the European context. … You are one of us.” Keeping in mind Nazi atrocities, Russian pogroms against Jews, the bombings of Dresden and Hiroshima, and Western countries’ campaigns against civilians in Africa and elsewhere, it is difficult to come up with greater duplicity.

One wonders if it has occurred to these two hypocritical gentlemen and their likes in Europe and the United States that after observing the “lofty” standards demonstrated by Western nations in Dresden, Hamburg, Hiroshima, Tokyo, Serbia and elsewhere around the world, Israelis lack the enthusiasm to become “one of them” or to rise to their “standards.” We might argue that Israelis—and Jews, in general—are better off sticking to the values of their ancient Bible.

The European Union’s unfair and unequal treatment of Israel

The European Union spent more than a billion dollars on the Palestinians from 2021 to 2024, and millions have gone to organizations that support the BDS movement against Israel.

BDS seeks to isolate Israel economically and politically, a goal that directly conflicts with the European Union’s claims of fairness. If the European Union continues funding organizations with clear political agendas, it cannot claim to be an impartial force for good.

The European Union has also used economic pressure to hurt Israel’s economy. In 2022, it enforced a rule requiring products from Israeli areas in Judea and Samaria to be labeled as being from an “Israeli settlement.”

As a result, exports from these areas dropped by as much as 20%, harming businesses and workers. Instead of promoting cooperation and peace, these actions created more division. When an institution that claims to support fairness enacts policies that harm a nation’s economy, its credibility is severely damaged.

The European Union’s selective criticism is not limited to economics. It also affects international politics. It condemns Israel for defending its land and people, but the organization stays quiet about far greater violations elsewhere. If the European Union were committed to justice, then it would hold all nations to the same standards. Its failure to do so weakens its position as a fair and neutral global actor. To be seen as fair and responsible, it must change its approach and start treating all nations equally.

This debate is not just about Israel. When an institution repeatedly ignores certain injustices while exaggerating others, its credibility is in serious danger. Like any sovereign nation, Israel has the right to protect its people, defend its land and grow its economy. Yet the European Union’s unfair economic and political pressure makes these tasks harder. If it continues its biased policies, the European Union risks losing the trust of people who believe in true justice.

Read More

Seven Jewish Children and Seven Arab Children

The antisemitic play "Seven Jewish Children" by Caryl Churchill has been turned into a movie.

When it first came out, I wrote a response in a similar fashion. So now is a good time to revisit the original play with all its deceptions and innuendoes, and my response that happens to be accurate.

First, Seven Jewish Children:

SEVEN JEWISH CHILDREN

a play for Gaza

Caryl Churchill

No children appear in the play. The speakers are adults, the parents and if you

like other relations of the children. The lines can be shared out in any way you

like among those characters. The characters are different in each small scene as

the time and child are different. They may be played by any number of actors.

1

Tell her it’s a game

Tell her it’s serious

But don’t frighten her

Don’t tell her they’ll kill her

Tell her it’s important to be quiet

Tell her she’ll have cake if she’s good

Tell her to curl up as if she’s in bed

But not to sing.

Tell her not to come out

Tell her not to come out even if she hears shouting

Don’t frighten her

Tell her not to come out even if she hears nothing for a long time

Tell her we’ll come and find her

Tell her we’ll be here all the time.

Tell her something about the men

Tell her they’re bad in the game

Tell her it’s a story

Tell her they’ll go away

Tell her she can make them go away if she keeps still

By magic

But not to sing.

2

Tell her this is a photograph of her grandmother, her uncles and me

Tell her her uncles died

Don’t tell her they were killed

Tell her they were killed

Don’t frighten her.

Tell her her grandmother was clever

Don’t tell her what they did

Tell her she was brave

Tell her she taught me how to make cakes

Don’t tell her what they did

Tell her something

Tell her more when she’s older.

Tell her there were people who hated Jews

Don’t tell her

Tell her it’s over now

Tell her there are still people who hate Jews

Tell her there are people who love Jews

Don’t tell her to think Jews or not Jews

Tell her more when she’s older

Tell her how many when she’s older

Tell her it was before she was born and she’s not in danger

Don’t tell her there’s any question of danger.

Tell her we love her

Tell her dead or alive her family all love her

Tell her her grandmother would be proud of her.

3

Don’t tell her we’re going for ever

Tell her she can write to her friends, tell her her friends can maybe come and visit

Tell her it’s sunny there

Tell her we’re going home

Tell her it’s the land God gave us

Don’t tell her religion

Tell her her great great great great lots of greats grandad lived there

Don’t tell her he was driven out

Tell her, of course tell her, tell her everyone was driven out and the country is waiting for us to come home

Don’t tell her she doesn’t belong here

Tell her of course she likes it here but she’ll like it there even more.

Tell her it’s an adventure

Tell her no one will tease her

Tell her she’ll have new friends

Tell her she can take her toys

Don’t tell her she can take all her toys

Tell her she’s a special girl

Tell her about Jerusalem.

4

Don’t tell her who they are

Tell her something

Tell her they’re Bedouin, they travel about

Tell her about camels in the desert and dates

Tell her they live in tents

Tell her this wasn’t their home

Don’t tell her home, not home, tell her they’re going away

Don’t tell her they don’t like her

Tell her to be careful.

Don’t tell her who used to live in this house

No but don’t tell her her great great grandfather used to live in this house

No but don’t tell her Arabs used to sleep in her bedroom.

Tell her not to be rude to them

Tell her not to be frightened

Don’t tell her she can’t play with the children

Don’t tell her she can have them in the house.

Tell her they have plenty of friends and family

Tell her for miles and miles all round they have lands of their own

Tell her again this is our promised land.

Don’t tell her they said it was a land without people

Don’t tell her I wouldn’t have come if I’d known.

Tell her maybe we can share.

Don’t tell her that.

5

Tell her we won

Tell her her brother’s a hero

Tell her how big their armies are

Tell her we turned them back

Tell her we’re fighters

Tell her we’ve got new land.

6

Don’t tell her

Don’t tell her the trouble about the swimming pool

Tell her it’s our water, we have the right

Tell her it’s not the water for their fields

Don’t tell her anything about water.

Don’t tell her about the bulldozer

Don’t tell her not to look at the bulldozer

Don’t tell her it was knocking the house down

Tell her it’s a building site

Don’t tell her anything about bulldozers.

Don’t tell her about the queues at the checkpoint

Tell her we’ll be there in no time

Don’t tell her anything she doesn’t ask

Don’t tell her the boy was shot

Don’t tell her anything.

Tell her we’re making new farms in the desert

Don’t tell her about the olive trees

Tell her we’re building new towns in the wilderness.

Don’t tell her they throw stones

Tell her they’re not much good against tanks

Don’t tell her that.

Don’t tell her they set off bombs in cafés

Tell her, tell her they set off bombs in cafés

Tell her to be careful

Don’t frighten her.

Tell her we need the wall to keep us safe

Tell her they want to drive us into the sea

Tell her they don’t

Tell her they want to drive us into the sea.

Tell her we kill far more of them

Don’t tell her that

Tell her that

Tell her we’re stronger

Tell her we’re entitled

Tell her they don’t understand anything except violence

Tell her we want peace

Tell her we’re going swimming.

7

Tell her she can’t watch the news

Tell her she can watch cartoons

Tell her she can stay up late and watch Friends.

Tell her they’re attacking with rockets

Don’t frighten her

Tell her only a few of us have been killed

Tell her the army has come to our defence

Don’t tell her her cousin refused to serve in the army.

Don’t tell her how many of them have been killed

Tell her the Hamas fighters have been killed

Tell her they’re terrorists

Tell her they’re filth

Don’t

Don’t tell her about the family of dead girls

Tell her you can’t believe what you see on television

Tell her we killed the babies by mistake

Don’t tell her anything about the army

Tell her, tell her about the army, tell her to be proud of the army.

Tell her about the family of dead girls, tell her their names why not, tell her the whole world knows why shouldn’t she know? tell her there’s dead babies, did she see babies? tell her she’s got nothing to be ashamed of. Tell her they did it to themselves. Tell her they want their children killed to make people sorry for them, tell her I’m not sorry for them, tell her not to be sorry for them, tell her we’re the ones to be sorry for, tell her they can’t talk suffering to us. Tell her we’re the iron fist now, tell her it’s the fog

of war, tell her we won’t stop killing them till we’re safe, tell her I laughed when I saw the dead policemen, tell her they’re animals living in rubble now, tell her I wouldn’t care if we wiped them out,

the world would hate us is the only thing, tell her I don’t care if the world hates us, tell her we’re better haters, tell her we’re chosen people, tell her I look at one of their children covered in blood and what do I feel? tell her all I feel is happy it’s not her.

Don’t tell her that.

Tell her we love her.

Don’t frighten her.

Here's my response:

Seven Arab Children
A play about Palestine

1.
Tell him that we are one big Arab nation
Tell him that we invented algebra
Tell him that we always lived here
Tell him that others can only live here if they agree to be dhimmis
Don't tell him about the Jews who used to live here
Tell him that we live in southern Syria
and that we will never be divided from our brethren
Tell him that all Arabs look out for reach other

2.
Tell him we hate the Jews because they are weak
Tell him that they they started it first
Tell him that Jews shouldn't live in Hebron
Don't tell him that they were there for millennia
Tell him that they attacked Arabs at their Wall
Tell him they wanted to kill all the Arabs
Tell him that he will be rewarded for killing them.

3.
Tell him we are on strike
Don't tell him that Arabs are killing more Arabs than Jews or British
Tell him that the British are pro-Jewish
Don't tell him about the "collaborators"
Tell him that the Mufti will lead us to a state
Don't tell him about the feuds between the clans
Tell him that the hundreds of dead Arabs are the Jews' fault
Tell him that we will never accept compromise

4.
Don't tell him that we ran away
Don't tell him that some Arabs stayed and are not in camps
Tell him that we will still throw the Jews into the sea
Tell him not to forget that he is an Arab
Tell him that we were massacred
Tell him that over and over again
Tell him he must hate the Jews
Don't tell him that our Arab brethren keep us in camps
Don't tell him that they told us to flee
Don't blame them for our troubles
We need to live with them

5.
Tell him that we are "Palestinian"
Tell him not to say "Jews" in English, only "Zionists"
Tell him that the Arabs will help us push the Jews into the sea this time
Tell him we are united
Tell him that we still have a key to our home
Don't tell him to go to Kuwait to find a job
Tell him the UN will take care of us forever
Don't tell him to blame the Arabs for our being stateless for decades
Tell him it is needed for "unity"

6.
Tell him it is not terrorism
Tell him that the martyrs are heroes
Tell him we hate the Jews because they are strong
Don't tell him that we still cannot become citizens
of the Arab nations we were born in
Don't tell him that our brethren kicked us out of Jordan
Tell him Jews massacred us in Lebanon, not Arab Christians
Tell him about Paradise
Don't tell him about Arabs in Knesset

7.
Tell him to become a Shahid
Tell him that we will never compromise
Tell him that the "peace process" is just another means to conquer land
Tell him not to say that out loud
Tell him that a child-killer is a hero for all Arabs
Don't tell him that we killed hundreds of each other in Gaza
Don't tell him we used to have jobs and work together with the Jews
Don't tell him that the intifada was a failure
Tell him to cry on top of rubble if a reporter comes by
Tell him we won all our wars with the Jews
Don't tell him why we still live in camps in Gaza
Tell him we'll be proud of him when he becomes a shahid
Tell him that his family will be taken care of after he dies
Tell him to take as many Jews as he can
Tell him he will be a hero
and we are so proud of him 

This can easily be updated, and I don't know if the movie adds more lies about how Jews supposedly think and how sadistic and unfeeling and hypocritical Jews are.

The words in my play are based on things I read in mainstream Palestinian and Arab media. 

Since 2009, we have examples of how Palestinians celebrated terror attacks including October 7. This makes the contrast between how Jews raise their children and how Palestinians raise theirs far starker.  

But staging a play like mine would be Islamophobic or "anti-Palestinian racism" or something. It could never happen. Truth is not as important as narrative. 

---

---

Buy EoZ's books  on Amazon! "He's an Anti-Zionist Too!" cartoon book (December 2024) PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism (February 2022)

 

Read More

The UN’s War on Jewish Success

(This is a continuation of my "Unified Field Theory of Antisemitism" series.)

Jews have been accused of the worst crimes of each era: killing God, poisoning wells, controlling governments, staging world wars. 

Today the accusations are just as ludicrous, but they are mounted faster than ever. Perhaps the most visible source of antisemitism today is the international community and non-governmental organizations.

Since the United Nations was created, the world has gone through phases of condemning highly publicized crimes - and sooner or later, Israel gets accused of the same crimes. 

Colonialism changed from acceptable to criminal in the years after World War II. The Arab nations accused Israel of colonialism before Israel even existed.  Abdul Rahman Hassan Azzam, the chairman of the Arab League, said to the Anglo American Commission in 1946, "The Zionist, the new Jew, wants to dominate and he pretends that he has got a particular civilizing mission with which he returns to a backward, degenerate race in order to put the elements of progress into an area which wants no progress. Well, that has been the pretension of every power that wanted to colonize and aimed at domination."

Racism became the new evil in the 1960s, with the civil rights era. By 1975, UN passed a resolution declaring Zionism a form of racism.

In the 1980s, states began sanctions against South Africa for its apartheid policies. The 2001 Durban conference, organized during the 1990s, accused Israel of apartheid

More recently, the number of accusations against Israel have turned into a tsunami: if white supremacism is bad, then Israel must be guilty of "Jewish supremacism." If genocide is the ultimate evil, then Israel must be guilty of that heinous crime. 

It was not only UN resolutions that have been hijacked just to be used as ammunition against Israel. International law itself has been changed just for Israel and Israel alone. The Rome Statute changed language from the Geneva Conventions to apply specifically to Israeli settlements - and in doing so it elevated the status of Jews building homes on their ancestral homeland, the most anti-colonial act one can imagine, into a war crime.

The UN Commission on Human Rights became increasingly anti-Israel year after year. From the 1970s through 2002, fully one third of its country-specific resolutions were directed at Israel, while it ignored the worst violators of human rights. In 2002, during the height of the spree of terror attacks that was murdering hundreds of Israelis, it passed a resolution not to condemn Palestinian suicide bombers but to affirm the "legitimate right of the Palestinian people to resist the Israeli occupation." The world's human rights body all but legitimized terror.

The UNCHR was disbanded in 2006, not because of its anti-Israel focus but because it consistently elected members of the worst human rights violators, including Sudan during its  ethnic cleansing in Darfur. The two are related, though: when anti-Israel and pro-terror policies become normalized by international bodies, it never ends there.

The UNCHR's replacement, the  United Nations Human Rights Council, is even worse. Beyond its massively disproportionate obsession with Israel in its resolutions, it also has a standing item on its agenda, item 7, dedicated to criticizing Israel. No other nation has such an item. Moreover, in 2021 the UNHRC established a permanent Commission of Inquiry (COI) against Israel that is the first and only such COI that has no time limit. Millions of dollars are spent every year by this commission alone. 

The UN works closely with non governmental organizations. Human rights organizations like Amnesty and Human Rights Watch share the UN's obsession with Israel, dedicating more and larger reports accusing Israel of more crimes than any other nation over time. Amnesty's report on mass murders, rapes and displacements of civilians in Darfur in 2016 was only slightly longer than their report condemning Airbnb for allowing listings of Jewish-owned homes in Judea and Samaria in 2019. Their priorities are immoral. 

There is literally no aspect of human existence that is not weaponized against Israel. The Palestinians have signed international treaties that they admit they have no interest in upholding but their meetings are ideal places to attack Israel for its supposed violations of environmental rights, women's rights, children's rights, preserving the oceans. The world soccer federation FIFA is forced by their rules to debate Israel's membership endlessly at the behest of Israel's enemies. 

Institutions like the UN and major NGOs promote  a universalist vision of global norms that are meant to override and supersede traditional notions of national sovereignty. They say that they must to this to enforce minimal human rights standards, but the examples of major human rights violators that can force their own agendas on world bodies prove that politics trumps the honesty, fairness and equality they claim to be fighting for.

Their disproportionate focus on Israel reveal more than this, though. Once you look past their distortions and lies, it becomes clear that Israel is a shining success story of human rights and of liberal ideals. It is especially impressive given the constant war footing forced on the Jewish state. Israel's ability to maintain its security in the face of international laws that are applied to it alone; its ability to provide equal rights to its Arab minority, its heroic attempts to minimize civilian casualties among its enemies under the most difficult wartime circumstances any Western nation ever faced, shows that it isn't Israel's failings that cause such unbridled hate - but Israeli success. 

The UN and NGOs have utterly failed to change the attitudes and activities of the worst human rights violators. The are not merely impotent in the face of the crimes against humanity - they tacitly accept them. 

Meanwhile, a particularist Jewish state succeeds where even the most admired countries fail. This Jewish and Israeli success is a threat to their philosophy. 

Nearly every nation in the Middle East declare themselves to be Arab and/or Muslim states without any concern from the UN and NGOs. They consider the Jewish state, however, to be a violation of their ideals. The reason isn't because of Israel's self-definition but because of Israel's success at building a society of equal rights for all its citizens - something that these self-declared moral arbiters cannot accept. 

---

---

Buy EoZ's books  on Amazon! "He's an Anti-Zionist Too!" cartoon book (December 2024) PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism (February 2022)

 

Read More

Lebanese Sunni MP calls for normalization with Israel, upsetting a lot of people

A Sunni member of the Lebanese parliament has said that he supports normalization with Israel under certain circumstances, causing his colleagues to scramble to dissociate themselves from him.

Baarini wrote on X:

Normalization cannot be resolved through outbidding and bravado. Yes to normalization if it protects us from aggression. Yes to normalization if it reclaims our land and ensures it is not occupied. Yes to normalization if it grants Lebanon the peace and prosperity we have lacked for years. Yes to normalization and no to obstinacy toward Arab paths, especially the one led by Saudi Arabia.

The statement appeared to be a response to Hezbollah's anti-normalization stance. Hezbollah MP Mohammad Raad  expressed on "Quds Day" last Friday the "commitment of the resistance to countering its policies and attempts to drag Lebanon towards normalization."

Baarini's statement caused a backlash from his fellow Sunni MPs.

“This is strictly a personal opinion that does not represent our bloc,” said Sajih Attieh, a member of the bloc. He emphasized that Baarini had not discussed his stance with his colleagues.

As a result, key Sunni figures washed their hands of their colleague’s comments. “Normalization should not be discussed until a just peace based on a two-state solution has been achieved,” Nabil Badr, a Sunni MP for Beirut, told L’Orient-Le Jour. 

“I think Baarini worded it poorly. He should have said that he is in favor of the Beirut Arab initiative,” said another Sunni MP on condition of anonymity. “I think he expressed a personal position,” he added, stressing that the Sunni community is not in favor of this initiative at this stage, while being in favor of Hezbollah’s disarmament. 

Meanwhile, Israeli officials continue to call for normalization with Lebanon. 

"We want to normalize our relations with Lebanon," Israeli Foreign Minister Gideon Saar said after meeting in Paris with his French counterpart, Jean-Noël Barrot, at a press conference reported by the French daily Le Monde. He also announced the start of negotiations "on certain issues. "

"We have a team negotiating on ... border disputes," he added.

Saar also stated that his country wanted stability in Lebanon, but that it would not allow Hezbollah to "rearm."

Isn't it strange that the only country that consistently seeks peace since 1948  is the one that is constantly framed as the aggressor?

---

---

Buy EoZ's books  on Amazon! "He's an Anti-Zionist Too!" cartoon book (December 2024) PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism (February 2022)

 

Read More

Muslim nations condemn Ben Gvir "storming Al Aqsa Mosque." Their incitement is the real violation of international law.

Turkey's Anadolu Agency reports:

Far-right Israeli National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir forced his way, along with illegal settlers, into the Al-Aqsa Mosque complex in occupied East Jerusalem on Wednesday, marking a new provocation amid the ongoing war on Gaza.

Arab News reported:

Saudi Arabia condemned the storming of the Al-Aqsa Mosque in occupied Jerusalem on Wednesday by Israel’s far-right National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir.

The Saudi Ministry of Foreign Affairs said it strongly condemns “the storming of the Al-Aqsa Mosque by the Israeli national security minister under the protection of occupation police.”

 Jordan's Foreign Ministry stated:

The Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Expatriates condemned, in the strongest terms, the storming of Al-Aqsa Mosque/Al-Haram Al-Sharif by extremist Israeli National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir today, under the protection of the occupation police. 

The Ministry's spokesperson, Ambassador Dr. Sufyan Al-Qudah, affirmed the Kingdom's absolute rejection and strong condemnation of the storming of Al-Aqsa Mosque/Al-Haram Al-Sharif by an extremist Israeli minister, in a flagrant violation of international law and the obligations of Israel, the occupying power in occupied Jerusalem, and an attempt to impose temporal and spatial division. He stressed that Israel has no sovereignty over the occupied city of Jerusalem and its Islamic and Christian holy sites. 

Here's a photo of this "storming"  the "mosque:"

This is strolling, not "storming." He entered no mosque.

There is nothing illegal about his visit. Israel's agreement with Jordan did not give the Jordanian Waqf control over the site. On the contrary, banning Jews from the Temple Mount and other areas of Jerusalem - the holiest site in Judaism, which Jordan did when it controlled the area - is the real violation of international law. 

The  International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), ratified by Jordan, says that 

Any advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence shall be prohibited by law.

Jordan, by strongly condemning the peaceful visit of any Jew to the most sacred spot in Judaism, is indeed inciting religious hatred, let alone discrimination. 

I myself have had the privilege of "storming" the Temple Mount twice. 

This is incitement. But it isn't the kind of incitement that anyone in the international community will ever say a word against. 

---

---

Buy EoZ's books  on Amazon! "He's an Anti-Zionist Too!" cartoon book (December 2024) PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism (February 2022)

 

Read More

Israel’s Hostages in Gaza and the Rabbi Who Wouldn’t Be Ransomed (Judean Rose)

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

Imagine a Jewish sage, Rabbi Meir of Rothenberg, locked in a 13th-century dungeon. The Holy Roman Emperor demands a ransom—a fortune the Jewish community is desperate to pay to redeem their captive sage. Rabbi Meir, meanwhile, will not permit his flock to pay his ransom.

Why? Because the Maharam of Rothenberg knew that this would set a precedent. Pay the ransom and Jewish leaders would always be targets for kidnapping.

Rabbi Meir endures seven years in captivity, then dies in prison. And still he is not free, not even in death. The corpse of the Maharam is held captive for a further 14 years; the final, lengthy indignity done to a true holy man. As distinct from his evil “Holy Roman” captor.

Rabbi Meir of Rothenberg’s refusal to be ransomed is the story of a selfless, godly man who sacrificed one person, himself, to protect his people long-term. In their desire to redeem their sage, the Jewish community was heedless of the wider implications for the Jewish nation, as a whole. What Rabbi Meir did was beautiful and selfless. He stepped up for his people.

Now it is 2025, and Hamas is playing the same cruel stunt pulled so long ago by King Rudolf I, holding as bargaining chips an estimated 20-24 live hostages and 35 hostage corpses. The hostage families whatever the status of their loved ones, yearn for closure. Some of the hostage families already know their loved ones are dead in Gaza. They ache to bury them. Others pray their loved ones still cling to life. The not knowing is a torment. Rabbi Meir of Rothenberg would tell us not to blink—giving in only emboldens the enemy. But we blinked.

We blinked when we inked the Shalit deal. Then we set a precedent for now when we swapped over 1,000 murderers for Gilad Shalit, including Yahya Sinwar, the devious, truly evil mastermind of October 7.

It must be said: many of us were against the Shalit deal, despite the biased polls trumpeted by the biased MSM. We were way more than the measly 14% they cited. In fact, I knew very few people in favor of the Shalit deal. Why would anyone be in favor of releasing from prison a satanic monster like Ahlam al-Tamimi—someone who is gleeful to know that Jewish children died as a result of her evil machinations. Won’t she just want to do it some more? Now imagine her times one thousand.

Before we released Yahya Sinwar from prison, in that same Shalit deal, we saved his life on Israel’s dime. Fine Israeli surgeons removed his brain tumor in a world class hospital, and gave him another shot at destroying the Jewish people in a way the world would never forget. This should be a stark lesson for the Jews. Every terrorist we don’t shoot on sight, will try to do it again.

Happily, Sinwar can no longer be said to be living proof of this, because he is no longer among the living. The Jews finally did the right thing and ended him for good.

Rabbi Meir of Rothenberg did not die only because of a principle. He died to stop a vicious loop. Which is where we are right now. Hamas thrives on our concessions—just think! The Shalit deal gave them Sinwar. The Witkoff deal has already given them many Sinwars.

It must be faced. Israel has shown it will release terrorists, many of them, for a single hostage. Then it all becomes a game of how many terrorists they can get for 50 Jews, most of them dead. It’s true they prefer the live ones, but a live Jew will pay a lot for a dead Jew, too. And in fact, Israel has now released many, many terrorists from Israeli prisons—terrorists with a recidivism rate of 82%.

The Israeli dilemma, of course, is brutal: negotiate and maybe save some hostages and retrieve the bodies of the others, or fight to crush Hamas, and risk an endless round of October 7s.

If only we had someone with the Maharam’s wisdom today. Someone who could advise us what to do now that we’ve effed messed up and set the precedent. One that can only lead to great bloodshed. There can be no other outcome.

Each negotiation leads to a jackpot of thousands of terrorists. So why should Hamas let go the last of their bargaining chips, dead Jews and maybe two dozen live Jews. They are surely worth thousands of terrorists, many Sinwars let loose.

***
This must read from Elder speaks of a more contemporary rabbi’s take trading terrorists for hostages: The Lubavitcher Rebbe's view of hostage deals

---

---

Buy EoZ's books  on Amazon! "He's an Anti-Zionist Too!" cartoon book (December 2024) PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism (February 2022)

 

Read More