Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News

Wednesday, July 30, 2025

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

From Ian:

Eitan Fischberger: Gaza Starvation Photos Tell a Thousand Lies

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

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

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

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

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

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

The Desperation of Jew-Haters By Abe Greenwald

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

From Ian:

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

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

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

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

Again, this was after Macron went public.

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

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

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

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

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

Where is the outrage?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Now it’s time the world does the same.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

On July 21, Hamas was broke.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

And that’s when everything changes.

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

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

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

Jewish Childhood Interrupted

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

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

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

"Hide Who You Are"

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

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

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

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

What Does Antisemitism Do to a Child?

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

But what about the damage you can’t see?

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

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

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

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

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

It’s Not Only France

The French campers aren’t alone.

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

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

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

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

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

No child walks away from such moments unchanged.

A Soul Marked Forever

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

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

And the worst part?

They do notice.

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

Because They Were Jewish

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

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

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

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

The Children Remember

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

But she’s wrong.

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

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

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

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

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

Buy EoZ's books on Amazon!

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

PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism (February 2022)

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

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

How are moral obligations determined?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Buy EoZ's books on Amazon!

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

PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism (February 2022)

Al Bilad is the oldest Saudi newspaper, over 80 years old.

This week it had an op-ed that recommended that the world kick Jews out of any group.

"No Jews Allowed"
Khaled Abdul Rahman Al-Awadh

Amid the blatant crimes currently being committed by the Zionist enemy and the war of extermination and starvation it is perpetrating in Gaza, Zionists are living in complete isolation among the nations of the world, both East and West....

A clear example of this widespread rejection is what happened this week to two Jewish artists whose performances at the Edinburgh Festival 2025 in Scotland were canceled two weeks before the event. Perhaps the phrase "No Jews Allowed" is the best advice for any Western gathering or public festival, as public outrage against the Zionist entity grows day by day as its army continues its presence on Arab land.

What inspires hope in the existence of some humanity among certain Western peoples, such as in Scotland and Ireland, is the reason given by festival organizers for expelling these two Zionists: the actors had previously performed a "solidarity gesture" for the Zionist army. The two Zionist actors protested, claiming their performances were not political but merely addressed the theme of motherhood with a Jewish cultural flavor! Another performance in a different venue in Scotland was also canceled for the same reason, out of fear of public anger, which would not tolerate the presence of an actor who supports the Zionist entity on social media.

The claims of "anti-Semitism" that the ambassador once loudly proclaimed no longer serve to improve the image of this rejected entity. The media now faces clear facts: the Palestinians will not cease resisting this cancerous entity, sent by Europe to Arab land, despite having no connection to the land or the people who inhabit it.

No matter how much "anti-Zionists" insist they aren't antisemitic, everyone knows the truth. The justifications for modern antisemitism will soon reach any Jew who prays several times a day for the rebuilding of Jerusalem, any Jew who attends a synagogue with an Israeli flag, any Jew who ever visited Israel, any Jew who has relatives in Israel, any Jew who speaks out against Palestinian terrorism.

The hate is becoming normalized at astonishing speeds.

Buy EoZ's books on Amazon!

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

PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism (February 2022)

You may have read about this last week:

Jewish comedians have had their Edinburgh Fringe shows cancelled because of staff “safety concerns”, it has been claimed.

Rachel Creeger and Philip Simon were booked to perform at the Whistlebinkies venue during the festival.
Ms Creeger was set to perform her show Ultimate Jewish Mother, while Mr Simon was due to host a Jew-O-Rama of Jewish comedic talents.

However, the acts claimed they were informed that their gigs would be cancelled after bar staff at the venue expressed fears of feeling “unsafe”.

The information and news since then is much worse.

First of all the "safety" concern was not the initial complaint. The original notice that they had been canceled was based on a lie:

‘They initially said that they believed we’d held a vigil for an IDF soldier, a fallen soldier, which is a thing that just hadn’t ever happened in either of our shows,’ [Creeger] said. ‘The shows are not political; we’re not political performers, and the IDF is not a relevant subject in either show.

Organisers ‘later withdrew [that allegation] and said they understood that that didn’t actually happen’, and previously told the Jewish comics that their bar was a ‘safe space’ for them.

‘So it came as something of a shock to suddenly be told last Friday that we were no longer welcome on the site.’

After that, the venue claimed that last year there was both anti-Israel and Zionist graffiti on site surrounding the shows, which they brought no proof for (and the Zionist graffiti seems suspect to me.)

Then, after Whistlebinkies canceled their show, a different venue canceled another of Philip Simon's planned performances - because of online posts supporting victims of October 7.

A Jewish comedian has been cancelled by an Edinburgh Fringe venue after attending a vigil for victims of the Oct 7 attacks.
Philip Simon was barred from the Banshee Labyrinth pub because of alleged “rhetoric and symbology” linked to Israel.
One reason cited by the venue for cancelling his show, Shall I Compere Thee in a Funny Way?, was his attendance at a vigil held for people killed in the 2023 Hamas terror attacks.
In a message to Simon, Banshee Labyrinth said: “Our management had a duty of care to our customers and staff members to review the political statements and opinions expressed by the performer.
“We feel it is inappropriate for us to provide a platform for performers whose views and actions align with the rhetoric and symbology of groups associated with humanitarian violations.”

And what were those offensive posts?

Banshee Labyrinth told The Telegraph that it arrived at its decision after scouring Simon’s social media pages.
It said: “We routinely screen bands and performers for affiliations to, and statements that advocate for, discriminatory groups.
The alleged concerns identified by Banshee Labyrinth include Simon sharing pictures from a vigil commemorating 100 days since the attack on Israel; a message on his X account saying that it was powerful to “stand strong against terror”; and a post warning that Oct 7 rape victims were being forgotten.
Several others messages that the venue objected to were variations on calls to “bring home the hostages”, while others made fun of Greta Thunberg’s short-lived effort to travel by flotilla to Gaza.

Opposing a murderous, rapist terror group and supporting its victims is politically incorrect in today's England.

There has been no shortage of controversial acts at Fringe that brought protests. In 2023, for example, a comedian whose views on transgender issues made the staff of a club uncomfortable and forced a cancellation - but then the club reversed its position, admitting the decision was "unfair and constituted unlawful discrimination " against the performer.

There were drag shows that brought protests and required extra security, but the performers were allowed to perform and were protected.

But in one way, the worst part of this story is in what didn't happen.

The festival has over 3,000 acts at over 250 venues. But there are hundreds of other bars and clubs in the area, many of which have back rooms or other spaces that could accommodate a performer, a sound system and a small audience.

While it is obvious that the Whistlebinkies and Banshee Labyrinth were making up reasons after the fact to justify their exclusion of proud Jewish comedians, no other venues have stepped up to make a statement against antisemitism and for free speech.

If a Black performer had been canceled for obviously racist reasons, no matter how late the date or how difficult the logistics, clubs would have fought for the privilege of hosting that comedian.

Let's face it. The crowd and venues at Edinburgh might swear up and down that they hate antisemitism and love free speech, but not one of them chose to act on those principles.

Not one.

Buy EoZ's books on Amazon!

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

PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism (February 2022)

The size and placement of NYT picture of "Gaza starving child" was virtually unprecedented

This was the (top part of) front page of the New York Times on July 25 featuring what appears to be a starving, emaciated Gaza child.

I just went through the front pages of the New York Times for the past 365 days. Not once has it positioned a photo in this extraordinary way.

Usually the NYT will feature a photo that is four columns wide, and that photo is always wider than it is tall (landscape). For example, here is the front page from yesterday, illustrating the mass shooting in Manhattan.

Once every couple of months it has a feature photo that is five columns wide, also in landscape orientation.

The largest photo of the past year was for Trump's inauguration, and this one was unusual in that it was in a portrait orientation, not landscape.

But I could not find a single example of a four column photo in portrait orientation on the right side of the page, where the top story headline normally is.

Also I could not find any other photos that featured a suffering child above the fold on the front page over the year. No starving children in Somalia or Sudan where hundreds die every day.

The editors made a decision that this single picture was perhaps the most important photo of the year, placing it where even casual reader would subconsciously recognize that this is a huge story.

Yesterday, the NYT published an editor's note about the child in that picture at the bottom of the online article:

Editors’ Note: July 29, 2025
This article has been updated to include information about Mohammed Zakaria al-Mutawaq, a child in Gaza suffering from severe malnutrition. After publication of the article, The Times learned from his doctor that Mohammed also had pre-existing health problems.

This photo, featured and highlighted in a way that is rarely seen in the newspaper, was misrepresented as if it is the way Gaza is. And now they add an "oops!" - not an apology, not a retraction, but a small note saying, "You know that huge photo that we shoved in your faces? Well, it had a slight problem. But no worries - our anti-Israel propaganda was fully successful. Mission accomplished. This note that practically no one will see lets us claim that we are responsible journalists."

Here's the editor's note in context of the entire online article - the small red box on the bottom.

The New York Times checked all the boxes of published journalistic ethics. Yet when you look at the entire story, you see that the entire episode from photo placement, to photo size, to lack of awareness that nearly all similar photos over the past year were of previously sick children, to the note that is not a correction and non-apology, is a far cry from ethical.

Buy EoZ's books on Amazon!

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

PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism (February 2022)

Sweden decides hanging effigies of Jews is not antisemitic

Recently, there was an anti-Israel demonstration in the Swedish city of Umeå that featured a display depicting hanged mannequins dressed in striped concentration camp uniforms, complete with yellow stars and prisoner numbers, behind a depiction of a Palestinian woman holding a baby.

The sign says "A genocide is a genocide is a genocide."

People complained that this was incitement and a hate crime. But on Tuesday, the Swedish Prosecutor's Office decided that it was perfectly fine.

"I interpret the message as meaning that the authors believe that what is happening in the Gaza Strip is a genocide just as much as the Holocaust was. The fact that one seems to compare the Holocaust with the conflict in the Gaza Strip does not, in my opinion, mean that one denies, excuses or obviously belittles the genocide of the Jews," said senior prosecutor Irene Falk.

Sweden was one of the original countries to adopt the IHRA Working Definition of Antisemitism, which includes in its examples, "Drawing comparisons of contemporary Israeli policy to that of the Nazis."

If this isn't trivializing and inverting the Holocaust, nothing is.

In 2017, the Jewish Association in Umeå shut down following constant threats by neo-Nazis in that town.

Two years before that, the Jews of Umeå were not invited to a march marking Kristallnacht out of fear that pro-Palestinian demonstrators would attack them after the event was watered down into a general "anti-racism" march.

This is why my clear, easy to use definition of antisemitism is so important. It is not ambiguous: it describes exactly what antisemitism is and what it isn't.

Buy EoZ's books on Amazon!

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

PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism (February 2022)

07/29 Links Pt2: Leaked email blows apart BBC’s impartiality claims over Gaza; Australia’s Jews have been abandoned; Regina Spektor: ‘You’re just yelling at a Jew’

From Ian:

Jonathan Sacerdoti: The leaked email that blows apart the BBC’s impartiality claims over Gaza

Most egregious is the email’s declaration that it is ‘indisputable’ that Israel is the occupying power in Gaza and therefore legally responsible for preventing hunger. This claim is presented without qualification, despite the fact that the status of Gaza under international law is disputed. Israel disengaged from Gaza in 2005, removing all settlers and military presence. It argues, with some legal backing, that it does not meet the criteria of occupation, since it neither governs Gaza nor maintains a permanent presence. Even under post-October 7 operations, Israel maintains that its actions constitute temporary military engagement, not sovereign control.

International legal opinion may be divided on this. The BBC’s own editorial guidelines insist that politically contested labels such as ‘occupation’ should be attributed and contextualised, not asserted. That rule has been disregarded. The internal memo presumes a singular legal reality, eliding complexity in favour of moral indictment.

The BBC memo mirrors the line taken by BBC presenters, including Nick Robinson, who recently interviewed the Israeli government spokesman David Mencer. It sounded like institutional ventriloquism, from the body which insists it won’t call Hamas terrorists, but has no room for debate over whether Gaza is ‘occupied’.

In asserting the infallibility of its chosen narrative, the BBC omits basic journalistic standards: to interrogate all sides, to distinguish between fact and allegation, and to treat political and legal claims with appropriate scrutiny. Instead, it has opted to police language internally, enforce ideological conformity, and condemn without due diligence.

When the Corporation insists that only one party bears responsibility, and instructs its reporters accordingly, it is no longer informing the public. It is persuading them.

Why is it our national broadcaster seems so desperate to attack the one non-Israeli body which is doing the most to undermine the Hamas stranglehold over Gaza and its people? The closer the GHF and Israeli army get to finally defeating the terrorists, the more shrill the BBC’s insistence that the Jewish state is deliberately starving children. They have trouble believing a self-declared Islamic jihadist dictatorship might have designed this level of suffering and torture, but none in believing the Jewish democratic state did so.

The BBC is publicly funded and legally obligated to remain impartial. This latest leaked email suggests it is failing in that duty. As ever, there is virtually no chance the organisation will admit, redress or be penalised for this failing. They never are.

Australia’s Jews have been abandoned – we’re through the looking glass now

From day one, communal leaders warn the state and federal governments that unless they crack down, the situation will deteriorate and end in violence.

Twenty-two months on, one synagogue has been burnt to the ground, a second narrowly escaped the same fate earlier this month on the same night an Israeli restaurant was trashed, cars have been torched, graffiti is rife, and, just last week, young Jewish school kids on a trip to the Melbourne Museum were harangued by far older students from a non-Jewish school, whose teachers reportedly shrugged off the incident. This weekend, meanwhile, the National Gallery of Victoria was forced into lockdown as protestors rallied outside, demonstrating against the support it receives from a philanthropic Jewish family.

And the response from our nation’s leaders? Furrowed brows and the same empty words over and over again. “There’s no place for antisemitism in Australia.”

Except there is. To such an extent that a) it’s in the news here virtually every week; b) it’s making international headlines; c) there’s a palpable sense of fear in the community, with members literally saying they feel they have no future in Australia; and d) possibly most shocking of all, friends and family in Israel, who are in the middle of wars on all fronts and constantly running to bomb shelters, are ringing us up to find out if we’re okay because they’ve heard how terrible things are Down Under.

We’re through the looking glass here, people.

I say the governments have failed to act. That’s not strictly true. The federal government did appoint an Antisemitism Envoy some months ago, who last week delivered a series of recommendations.

Is the government taking them up? Well, as one minister said, underlining where it’s all going wrong – they’d wait to receive a report from the Islamophobia Envoy before making any decisions. Yes, even though the two are quite distinct and even though the number of incidents targeting the Muslim community is a fraction of the number targeting the Jewish community, the government has sacrificed its moral compass on the altar of political expediency.

By failing to crack down on anti-Zionism—which attacks on synagogues and school kids clearly demonstrate is simply antisemitism through the backdoor—they have allowed antisemitism to fester.

For a country that prides itself on multiculturalism, there’s only one explanation: we’re through the looking glass here, people.

Khaled Abu Toameh: The Muslim Brotherhood: A Terrorist Organization That the US Must Designate as One

Recently, Jordan joined the list of countries that have banned the Muslim Brotherhood: Egypt, United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, and Austria. The move came after Jordanian authorities announced that they had arrested 16 people suspected of planning attacks aimed at "targeting national security, sowing chaos and sabotage."

The Muslim Brotherhood, in addition, has served as an inspiration for Islamist terror groups Islamic State (ISIS) and Al-Qaeda. According to the Counter Extremism Project, a nonprofit international policy organization working to combat the growing threat exposed by extremist ideologies: "Before ascending to the highest positions of ISIS and Al-Qaeda, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, Osama bin Laden, and Ayman Zawahiri belonged to a common ideological precursor, the Muslim Brotherhood."

The Muslim Brotherhood has been able to fool many Westerners by pretending that most of its work is based on charity and humanitarian aid. The Muslim Brotherhood's Mujama al-Islami (Islamic Center) in the Gaza Strip started as a charity and was even licensed by Israel.

"Since the 1970s, the Muslim Brotherhood has been aggressively whitewashing its image. By doing charitable work, the Brotherhood pretends to be a humanitarian agency. The charitable work, however, is camouflage for the Brotherhood's real mission — undermining Western society, promoting Sharia law, and pursuing global domination.... The Brotherhood will use any tactic, including subversion and violence, to dismantle Western societies." — Pastor Michael Youssef, Daily Wire, June 24, 2025.

Designating the Muslim Brotherhood as a Foreign Terrorist Organization would give US law enforcement and intelligence agencies the legal tools they need to protect Americans. It would allow them to:
• Freeze financial assets used to fund radical networks;
• Block the travel of known Brotherhood operatives;
• Investigate and prosecute U.S.-based affiliates;
• Expose front groups that serve as recruitment pipelines;
• And cut off the flow of resources from foreign governments and donors.

Designating the Muslim Brotherhood a Foreign Terrorist Organization is vital not only for the national security of the United States, but also for combating Islamist terrorism around the world. If America's Arab allies have reached the conclusion that the Muslim Brotherhood is a dangerous Islamist terror organization, there is no reason why the US and other Western countries should continue to pretend that it is all about charitable and humanitarian work.

07/29 Links Pt1: Starmer Wants to Create a New State to Punish an Existing State; One week later NYTs corrects blood libel photo; Hamas's Dream: Turning Palestinians Into a 'Nation of Martyrs'

From Ian:

Seth Mandel: Keir Starmer Wants to Create a New State to Punish an Existing State

So Starmer and his merry band of Eurocrats chased Hamas away from the negotiating table and want to punish Israel for it. Since Starmer helped sabotage cease-fire talks, it sure looks like he just wants an excuse to recognize the “state of Palestine” in September, following France’s lead.

But unlike France, Starmer is making his framing of a Palestinian state explicit: He views it as bad for Israel and therefore only to be done if the Israelis really deserve to be punished.

Is that how we create nation-states? Is it merely an exercise in negative reinforcement? A sibling of mine has a dog that chews socks. Should I tell her to try recognizing Palestine, so the ’doodle knows she’s serious?

“Recognizing Palestine” has indeed become some sort of standing threat, which I assume bothers Palestinians greatly. We’ll give you self-government, but only if the Jews make us so angry we don’t know what else to do.

Does the reverse work as well? Will Sir Keir welcome Israeli annexation of the West Bank if the Palestinians bother him enough?

Generally speaking, true statesmanship treats the world as it is. “Recognizing” something that doesn’t exist is usually evidence of a high fever, not strategic foresight.

And that just goes to show how imaginary all this is to some of the world’s most important policymakers. It’s a game. It’s a prop bet. Emmanuel Macron double-dog-dared Keir Starmer to recognize Palestine, so off we go.

The conditions for statehood are met by the polity seeking to declare statehood. Starmer knows that in this particular case, those conditions haven’t been met—otherwise there would be a state already! Since the Palestinians have not met the conditions for statehood, Starmer understands that recognizing such statehood would simply create another problem. He doesn’t care because he thinks it’ll be Israel’s problem.

Recognizing Palestinian statehood isn’t technically a “bad idea,” because it isn’t an idea at all. It’s a visceral reflex. It’s what happens when a European head of government loses his temper.

If Gaza descends into misery, hunger, and anarchy, Starmer will make it a state. If things level out a bit, he’ll put it back in his pocket—no reason to reward stability. If you can think of a less serious approach to statecraft, please don’t say it out loud. I don’t want Keir Starmer to get any ideas.

Brendan O'Neill: Keir Starmer’s blackmailing of Israel is a depraved new low

The imperial arrogance is off the scale. Maybe Starmer thinks it’s the 1920s and there’s still a British Mandate for Palestine that lets London boss around the Jews and Arabs of the Middle East. To make such haughty demands of any ally at war would be bad enough – to make them of an ally that is fighting a brutal battle against an army of anti-Semites that hates the West as much as it does Jews is flat-out psychotic.

Like President Macron before him – who announced last week that France would recognise Palestine in September – Starmer has clearly not thought through his imperious actions. Where would this State of Palestine be? Who would govern it: the corrupt Palestinian Authority or the demented Jew-killers of Hamas? Starmer paid lip service to the need to disarm Hamas, but he cannot escape the sick fact that he is rewarding terrorism. That he is gifting the Palestinian territories with statehood less than two years after a neo-fascist army from those territories launched a barbarous assault on the Jews of southern Israel.

Hamas won’t hear Starmer’s criticism of its actions or his demand that it release the remaining hostages. It will only hear that killing Jews has benefits. It will only hear that its pogrom of 7 October 2023 – the worst mass murder of Jews since the Holocaust – did more to bring about a Palestinian state than anything else over the past four decades. Starmer and Macron are truly playing with fire. They are witlessly signalling to Islamists that if you rape and murder Jews, you might just get a nation.

In fact, what Starmer has done is worse than what Macron did. Using the recognition of Palestine as a stick with which to beat Israel into submission, to force it to call off its war against Hamas, is geopolitics at its most cynical and cowardly. It will isolate the Jewish State and embolden Hamas. Hamas now knows that Israel is on the backfoot. That even its old friends are refusing to stand by it. ‘One more push and Israel will be fucked and Palestine will be a state’ – that’s what these Jew-killers will glean from Starmer’s depraved blackmailing of their enemy.

And why is he doing this? To appease his backbenchers. To try to stave off a rebellion by his MPs. To hush the Israelophobic left. He is sacrificing an ally at the altar of narrow self-interest. He is heaping pressure on the Jewish State as it fights for its life against an army of anti-Semites in order that he might enjoy an easier ride in parliament. These are Chamberlain levels of spinelessness. Starmer has just announced to the world that Britain is an unreliable ally. Even if you’re invaded by an army of racists and your people are held hostage, we will turn on you eventually. For shame, Sir Keir.

Europe's Embrace of a Phantom State Is Fueling Antisemitism

French President Emmanuel Macron is leading a diplomatic charge to recognize a Palestinian state, rallying the usual bloc of Norway, Spain, Ireland, and Slovenia. 34 former Italian ambassadors have urged Italy's Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni to follow suit. This isn't diplomacy. It's performance politics - an ideologically driven campaign to punish Israel - pandering to a postmodern public square that sees Jewish sovereignty as an affront.

For years, both Hamas and the Palestinian Authority have rejected every reasonable peace offer. Neither faction has shown interest in democracy or coexistence. Yet their Western backers demand nothing in return - no condemnation of terror, no commitment to peace, no pretense of democratic reform. The goal is not statehood. It's to wound Israel.

Macron and his allies offer recognition not to help Palestinians build a viable future, but to appease anti-Israel sentiment disguised as virtue. They've normalized antisemitism and rebranded it as "human rights." The Italian ambassadors who demanded that Israel be punished for defending itself in Gaza are not champions of peace - they are enabling extremism.

They say the recognition of Palestine is an "urgent political priority." But there is no urgency for Palestinian reform. No questions asked about the aid stolen by Hamas. No mention of the hostages still held in Gaza. No call for condemning the Oct. 7 atrocities.