Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News

Monday, September 01, 2025

EoZ cartoons (12-day war edition)

Buy EoZ's books on Amazon!

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

PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism (February 2022)

Journalistic ethics officially died today, September 1, 2025, thanks to @IFJGlobal

From the International Federation of Journalists:

In an unprecedented global action, almost 200 media outlets from 50 countries will simultaneously disrupt their front pages, homepages, and broadcasts to demand an end to the killing of journalists in Gaza and to call for international press access to the enclave.

For the first time in modern history, newsrooms across every continent will coordinate a large-scale editorial protest. The action - coordinated by Reporters Without Borders (RSF), the global campaigning movement Avaaz and the International Federation of Journalists (IFJ) - will take place on Monday, September 1. Print newspapers will run blacked-out front pages carrying a stark message. Broadcasters and radio stations will pause programming with a joint statement. Online outlets will black out their homepages or banners in solidarity. Editors, reporters and other journalists are also taking part too.

We are seeing newspapers putting this protest advertisement as a front page story with the identical graphic.

This is profoundly unethical.

The front page of a newspaper is assumed to be where the top news stories are. In rare circumstances, a newspaper can put an op-ed as its top story. But this is not an op-ed - it is coordinated activism, using the newspapers as a medium.

Any other activists would have to purchase advertising space in newspapers to get such a message across. Here, journalists are taking advantage of their own medium to be used for something that goes against all journalistic ethics - taking up room normally used for legitimate news or editorial opinion with a coordinated activist campaign.

If they were ethical, they would purchase full page ads like any other group. Using precious news space for an activist campaign is perverting the very medium they work for.

By its nature, editorials are the opinion of the news source itself. People want to read which candidates their local papers endorse, for example. But in this case, the opinions are coming from a central activist framework. A newspaper that signs on has no independence in this matter.

This is problematic, because the message says that Israel is targeting journalists as journalists, which is a lie.

But the worst part is that this activist push it being promoted by the IFJ, which supposedly enforces journalistic ethics. This coordinated campaign goes against the ethics of the organization that created the standard on ethics.

The campaign violates a number of sections in the IFJ Global Charter of Ethics for Journalists, like avoiding distortion of facts and unfounded accusations. But the most egregious part being violated on is Article 13:

[The journalist] will avoid any confusion between his activity and that of advertising or propaganda.

This campaign meant to deliberately do exactly what their ethics prohibits. No matter how sympathetic one may be towards journalists concerned over the safety of their colleagues, it does not justify changing a news site into a megaphone for propaganda. Journalism must not favor journalists.

We know that in recent decades the journalism profession has been blurring the lines between news, opinion and activism. But journalists always at least maintained the pretense of holding up ethical standards. When the IFJ itself promotes activism on the news pages, and hundreds of media outlets sign up for it, that means that even the pretext of journalistic ethics has been shredded.

I once created a reference architecture for what journalistic ethics rules should look like. It goes way beyond any existing standards, and this campaign would violate it in a number of ways. Importantly, no self respecting journalist can argue that my code is wrong - it respects journalism even more than the IFJ ethics charter does by demanding excellence and clear boundaries.

This is not about Israel or bias or journalists blurring lines. This is about the collapse of the entire journalism industry, promoted by the very people who should be defending it the most. And that should frighten you.

Buy EoZ's books on Amazon!

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

PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism (February 2022)

NYT very disappointed in Israel's attack on Yemen

Yesterday I highlighted how incredible the Israeli raid on Yemen last week was.

The New York times was not impressed. It sniffed:

The Houthi militia of Yemen has vowed to strike back after an Israeli attack killed senior members of the group’s government but appeared to leave its military leadership largely untouched.

See? It was no big deal!

In fact, the only possible thing Israel accomplished was radicalizing the Houthis further: As their "expert" Farea al-Muslimi, a Yemeni research fellow at Chatham House, said:

The death of the Yemeni officials, among them pragmatists tied to Yemen’s former leadership rather than Houthi ideologues, could result in more hawkishness and extremism going forward, Mr. al-Muslimi said.

Hmmm. The Houthi flag already says "Death to Israel" and "Curse the Jews."

How, exactly, are they going to get more "hawkish"?

Another "expert" told us something completely new:

“Abdul-Malik found his match in Netanyahu,” said Mohammed al-Basha, a U.S.-based analyst focused on Yemen. “They’re both stubborn. They both have religious fervor and ideology that’s very strong.”

Yes, Netanyahu has religious fervor. Who knew?

The New York Times sure knows how to pick their experts.

Buy EoZ's books on Amazon!

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

PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism (February 2022)

08/31 Links: Trumping a ‘conjectural Palestinian state’ at the UNGA; 150 Media Outlets to Stage Anti-Israel Campaign Coordinated by NGOs; Zohran Mamdani’s mom was bankrolled by Qatar

From Ian:

Ruthie Blum: Trumping a ‘conjectural Palestinian state’ at the UNGA

Had Kamala Harris won the U.S. presidential election in November, the United States may have jumped on this bandwagon, as well. Though more symbolic than concrete, it’s significant in terms of how Israel and the P.A. continue to be perceived and treated.

By nixing the entry of the latter into America for the UNGA, President Donald Trump is conveying just as much of a powerful message to the gang of Western terrorism apologists who’d planned on hailing Abbas in the halls of the United Nations as to those denied the visas.

The State Department’s Office of the Spokesperson worded the warning, in part, as follows: “The Trump Administration has been clear: It is in our national security interests to hold the PLO and P.A. accountable for not complying with their commitments, and for undermining the prospects for peace. Before [they] can be considered partners for peace, they must consistently repudiate terrorism—including the Oct. 7 massacre—and end incitement to terrorism in education, as required by U.S. law and as promised by the PLO.”

In addition, the statement went on, “The P.A. must … end its attempts to bypass negotiations through international lawfare campaigns, including appeals to the ICC [International Criminal Court] and ICJ [International Court of Justice], and efforts to secure the unilateral recognition of a conjectural Palestinian state. Both steps materially contributed to Hamas’s refusal to release its hostages, and to the breakdown of the Gaza ceasefire talks.” [Emphasis added.]

However, it concluded, signaling a way forward the likelihood of which is nil, “The United States remains open to re-engagement that is consistent with our laws, should the P.A./PLO meet their obligations and demonstrably take concrete steps to return to a constructive path of compromise and peaceful coexistence with the State of Israel.”

It remains to be seen whether some U.N. maneuver will override the administration’s decree. But the outcry it evoked in anti-Israel circles indicates how brilliant and crucial a move it was.

Trump mulls ‘GREAT’ plan to pay Palestinians to leave Gaza during post-war rebuild: report

The White House is reportedly considering a plan to pay Palestinians $5,000 to relocate for 10 years while the Gaza Strip is transformed into the “Riviera of the Middle East” envisioned by President Trump.

The Gaza Reconstitution, Economic Acceleration and Transformation (GREAT) proposal would establish a trusteeship for control of the 25-mile-long strip of land that would be administered by the US for at least 10 years, while reconstruction – financed by billions of dollars in public and private-sector investments – takes place, according to the Washington Post.

Gaza’s entire 2 million population would need to be temporarily relocated for the project to take shape. The plan relies on “voluntary” departures from Gazans, either to another country or secured zones within the strip.

To encourage relocation, Palestinians opting to leave would receive $5,000 cash, four years of free rent elsewhere, and a year’s supply of food.

The trust would also offer digital tokens to Gazan land owners – good for a 1,800-square-foot apartment in one of six-to-eight new “AI-powered, smart cities” the trust plans to build from the ground up – in exchange for handing over their property rights.

The plan values each new apartment at $75,000, and the trust would save $23,000 for each departure from Gaza, compared with the cost of providing temporary shelter and “life support” services inside the enclave for those who refuse to leave, according to financial estimates included in the plan.

The first steps of reconstruction, as outlined in the document, would involve clearing mountains of debris, removing unexploded ordnance and rebuilding Gaza’s utilities and electrical grid.

Planners tout that 30% of land in Gaza is already “publicly” owned, and would immediately belong to the trust and serve as collateral for initial costs.

“Mega-projects,” including new highways, ports, airports, desalination plants and solar arrays would be funded by investors.

A new perimeter road around Gaza, dubbed “MBS Highway,” is touted in the prospectus, which suggests if the plan moves forward, the trust would seek substantial investments from Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman. There is no indication that Saudi Arabia would support such an effort.

Under the proposal, the center of the enclave would serve as Gaza’s residential area for returning residents – complete with new apartment buildings, business districts, schools and hospitals, mixed in with “green areas, including agricultural land, parks and golf courses.”

Hamas terrorist who held Emily Damari hostage said killed in IDF strike

Israel recently killed one of the Hamas terrorists who held British-Israeli hostage Emily Damari captive in Gaza, according to a Sunday report.

Channel 12 named the terrorist as Hazem Naim, but did not provide further details, including when the strike was carried out.

Damari said she shouted “screams of joy” when she heard the news.

“He was responsible for me and [fellow freed captive] Romi [Gonen] for around eight months,” Damari told the Channel 12 news network. “He was the commander of our captors, a very, very evil person.”

Thanking the IDF for its tireless efforts, Damari added: “People will never understand what that monster was to me and to Romi.” She noted that, at the same time, she was “scared to death” for her friends who are still held hostage, including twins Ziv and Gali Berman.

In July, the Israel Defense Forces announced that the previous month, it killed a different Hamas terrorist who held Damari in his home.

Nasr Ali Quneita, who was targeted in Gaza City on June 19, was said by the IDF to be a member of Hamas’s military intelligence unit in the Sheikh Radwan Battalion, known in the IDF as the al-Furqan Battalion, and that he invaded Israel on October 7, 2023, and held Damari hostage in his home at the start of the war.

At the time, Damari responded to her captor’s death, writing on social media: “This is what the face of evil looks like. A face I will never forget. I’m so glad he is no longer [in] our world.”

Damari was kidnapped from Kibbutz Kfar Aza during the Hamas onslaught of October 7, 2023. She was abducted alongside Ziv Berman, her neighbor, who rushed over to her home to make sure she was safe. Invading terrorists shot Damari in her left hand, and another bullet was lodged in her right leg after fatally hitting her dog Choocha in the head.

In July 2023, the journal Frontiers in Public Health published a paper by Bram Wispelwey, Osama Tanous, Yara Asi, Weeam Hammoudeh and David Mills titled "Because its power remains naturalized: introducing the settler colonial determinants of health."

They claim that in Israel and elsewhere, the "colonized" have poorer health because of the supposed "settler colonialism" they suffer under.

This is not the only study that blames poorer Arab health compared to Jews in the region on nebulous factors like racism or colonialism. A series of recent papers (many of whom share some of the same authors) have been pushing this narrative:

Smith J, Kwong EJL, Hanbali L, Hafez S, Neilson A, Khoury R. Violence in Palestine demands immediate resolution of its settler colonial root causes. BMJ Glob Health 2023;8:e014269. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjgh-2023-014269.

Tanous O. On settler colonialism, environment, and health. Jerusalem Quarterly 2023;95:112–15.

Asi YM, Hammoudeh W, Mills D, Tanous O, Wispelwey B. Reassembling the pieces: settler colonialism and the reconception of Palestinian health. Health Hum Rights 2022;24:229–35. PMID: PMC9790940.

Asi YM, Sharif MZ, Wispelwey B, Abuelezam NN, Ahmed AK, Samari G. Racism as a threat to Palestinian health equity. Health Equity 2024;8:371–5. https://doi.org/10.1089/heq.2024.0027.

It does not take long to not only debunk this theory, but to advance an alternative theory that is much stronger to explain why Arab Israelis and Palestinian Arabs have a lower life expectancy than Israeli Jews.

Let's ignore the fact that Israel is not a settler-colonialist state, since Jews are indigenous to the region.

If settler colonial determinants of health (SCDH) were real, then one would expect that Arabs under Israeli rule or "occupation" have worse health than their neighbors in Jordan, Lebanon, Egypt and Syria, who do not live under such circumstances.

Yet the life expectancy of Palestinian and Israeli Arabs is 76, while their neighbors average about 74.5.

That is a negative correlation.

Yet Israeli Arabs do have lower life expectancy than Israeli Jews, which is 83 years. That is certainly a significant difference. If "settler colonialism" is not the major reason, what is?

Modern medicine loves to look at social factors as underlying health determinants - things like poverty or marginalization. Of course, "poverty" does not cause health problems any more than "settler colonialism" does - the use of the word "determinants" in SCDH is knowingly deceptive. There may be correlations, but nothing about poverty causes poor health - it is at best a second-order factor, because perhaps poverty indicates less access to health facilities, or more stress. But social factors, by themselves, are never determinants.

Let's look at poverty. There is no doubt that Arab Israelis have lower incomes and higher poverty rates than Israeli Jews do, so a superficial glance at only those two factors would seem to indicate some correlation.

However, there is another well-defined group in Israeli society that has high poverty rates: religious Haredi Jews. And if you look at their life expectancy you can see that it is higher than that of non-Haredi Jews in Israel! The Haredi population has a life expectancy of 84.5 years, a full year and a half over other Israeli Jews.

So what accounts for these seemingly contradictory results? If it isn't settler colonialism, and it isn't poverty, then what is it that is the major factor for determining life expectancy?

If you had to choose one dominant health factor, the answer is simple: smoking.

If you compare life expectancy with smoking rates, among Haredi, non-Haredi Jewish Israeli , Israeli Arab and Palestinian men and women, the negative correlation between smoking and life expectancy is a very high -0.934.

This is a much stronger correlation than other first-order health factors like obesity or diabetes.

When academic health papers are biased like these, and ignore easily obtained statistics and methodologies that undermine their theories, that is no longer just bias or antisemitism. It is a threat to the entire health industry. Public health must be guided by evidence, not activism. When empirically measurable factors like smoking rates show a near-perfect inverse correlation with life expectancy, ignoring them in favor of untestable theories is not only unscientific - it's unethical.

This is not the only problem with the SCDH theory. But it is enough to show that within some health circles, activism is trumping science. That should concern everyone, no matter what your position is on Israel.

One shudders to think that these health professionals are spending more effort to slander Israel in the name of Arab health than to promote anti-smoking initiatives among Palestinians and Arab Israelis - an idea that Israeli health officials would gladly embrace.

(h/t Andrew P)

Buy EoZ's books on Amazon!

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

PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism (February 2022)

EU High Representative Kaja Kallas gave a briefing after meeting with foreign ministers yesterday, where she said, "On Gaza, Israel's announcement that Gaza City is now a combat zone threatens to worsen the humanitarian situation. If a military solution was possible, the war would already be over. Gaza needs less war, not more war. "

This is an astonishing statement from a political leader.

Kallas is saying that Hamas cannot be defeated militarily. She is no military expert, of course, but she represents the EU position.

What logically follows is that she is telling Israel that they must live with Hamas. They must withdraw from Gaza with no plan to stop the next October 7 except to wait and hope they can foil the next terror plot.

The EU has not given any substantive proposal on how to rid Gaza of Hamas, except for wishful thinking that a weak, corrupt and also terror-supporting Palestinian Authority takes over Gaza by some magical method. They ignore that all Palestinians - including those in the West Bank - prefer Hamas to Mahmoud Abbas' Fatah party.

So they have no plan. But they do know that Israel destroying Hamas is unacceptable. The official EU position is that Hamas' human shield strategy, which is its entire defense doctrine, is valid and should be rewarded.

This is not a principled position. This is an immoral position. No one disagrees that Israel should do everything it can to minimize civilian casualties, least of all Israel itself - it has strong disincentive to hurt innocents. But it has a stronger moral imperative - to end Hamas' rule in Gaza.

No one - not the EU, not the "social justice warriors," not the Arab states, not the Democratic Party - has come up with a non-military solution.

Which means that the official position of these supposed anti-violence people is that Hamas' continued survival is more important than the Israeli lives Hamas is sworn to snuff out when it gets a chance.

(h/t Irene)

Buy EoZ's books on Amazon!

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

PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism (February 2022)

JPost reports:

Houthi Prime Minister Ghalib al-Rahawi and several other ministers were killed in the IAF strike in Sanaa on Thursday, the news agency run by the terror group said on Saturday, citing a statement by the head of the Houthi Supreme Political Council, Mahdi al-Mashat.

The Houthis further announced that several other ministers who were present were seriously or moderately injured in the strike and are receiving medical treatment.

According to Army Radio, citing Israeli security sources, eight others killed in the attack were the Houthis’ political bureau director, the prime minister’s chief of staff, the group’s cabinet secretary, and its justice minister, economy and trade minister, foreign minister, agriculture minister, and public relations minister.

Al-Hadath reported that the IAF targeted homes where senior Houthi officials were hiding in Yemen’s capital.

This is extraordinarily impressive.

Unlike Lebanon, Gaza or Iran, Israel has not had years to grow a mature human intelligence (HUMINT) network in Yemen, and the Houthis are famously insular which would make such penetration difficult under the best of circumstances. Chances are that Israel leaned heavily on signals intelligence (SIGINT) to track their targets.

But even so, the Israelis knew where multiple officials would be hours ahead of time - it takes time to organize such an attack and fly 1,800 kilometers. And they appeared to have been able to monitor where they were in real time.

From reports, Israel didn't just hit one gathering of Houthi leaders, but several places that they were, hitting them close to simultaneously. That is logistically difficult.

No one has said anything about collateral damage, further indicating precise intel. Otherwise Israel could have justified flattening entire buildings to reach high value targets. But they didn't.

The Sanaa strike is a remarkable achievement for Israel, showcasing its ability to conduct a long-distance, intelligence-driven operation against a secretive adversary in a challenging environment. The real-time intelligence and the coordination of simultaneous strikes highlight Israel’s technological and operational capabilities. It was a strong message not only to the Houthis but to Iran as well and any others who are considering attacking Israel.

Buy EoZ's books on Amazon!

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

PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism (February 2022)

08/30 Links: IDF Plan to Takeover Gaza City Sends Hamas Into Hysteria; Houthi PM and 8 ministers killed in Israeli airstrike; Gaza's 'journalists' are Hamas operatives, not press heroes

From Ian:

IDF Plan to Takeover Gaza City Sends Hamas Into Hysteria

While there’s no shortage of doom and gloom predictions over Israel’s war in Gaza, there’s one group in particular that is dreading the IDF’s planned takeover of Gaza City: Hamas. How could this impact hostage release negotiations? And is it also connected somehow to the Gulf states? I explored this in my Shabbat column for Israel Hayom, an excerpt of which is below.

It’s a shame Israelis don’t hear what senior Hamas officials have been saying in recent days. If they did, they might feel a bit more encouraged and argue a bit less. The organization is in complete hysteria over Israel’s threats to enter Gaza City. The euphoria following the “Al-Aqsa Flood” has evaporated, and the effectiveness of the starvation campaign has ended. In fact, they no longer even speak of October 7 as a victory that brought huge achievements and returned the Palestinian issue to the center of global attention.

This week, Belgium distanced itself from Palestinian recognition, while the United States once again made clear, through Steve Witkoff, that Hamas must leave Gaza quickly.

Within Hamas, the entry into Gaza City is being called “the final battle.” In their view, every country has abandoned them except Yemen. Iran has stopped its support, and even the Qatari money that stirs debate in Israel is, from their perspective, proof that Doha too has abandoned them.

That is the reason for Hamas’ lowered demands, for their support of a partial deal. Entry into Gaza City, as Hamas sees it, could seal their fate entirely. Total surrender and the return of all hostages, however, is not on the table, since for them that would be the final nail in the coffin of Yahya Sinwar’s vision. After all, he ordered the October 7 massacre in an attempt to prevent Israeli normalization with Saudi Arabia. An Israeli victory in Gaza, however, would also bring along Syria, Lebanon, and other states.

But Benjamin Netanyahu is unwilling to accept a partial deal. This leads to two related questions: First, is it better to wave around the threat of entering Gaza City than to actually carry it out? Perhaps the threat of conquering the city is more effective than the slow, costly reality, in terms of both human lives and international legitimacy. Second, could this be an Israeli deception tactic? Maybe it’s a sophisticated way to force Hamas’ hand. What happens if, fearing an IDF takeover of the city, Hamas agrees to release more hostages in a partial deal?

Six European foreign ministers condemn Israel's planned Gaza City operation

Foreign ministers from Iceland, Ireland, Luxembourg, Norway, Slovenia, and Spain condemned Israel's planned takeover of Gaza City in a joint statement published on their respective government websites on Friday.

In the statement, the ministers said that they "condemn the most recent Israeli offensive launched in the Strip and the announcement to establish a permanent presence in Gaza City.

"We reiterate that the intensification of military operations will endanger the lives of hostages who cruelly remain in the hands of Hamas and will lead to the intolerable deaths of innocent Palestinian civilians, including women, children, and elderly people."

The joint statement continued to describe the IDF's planned operations in the Palestinian city as "opening a new phase of uncertainty and intolerable suffering for both sides." The ministers urged the Israeli government to halt its planned operations and reconsider.

The ministers then referenced the Integrated Food Security Phase Classification (IPC), which declared there is a famine in the Strip, stating that it's imperative that UN agencies and NGOs operate in the area "to alleviate the humanitarian catastrophe."

Israel's Foreign Ministry and Prime Minister's Office condemned the IPC report, with the former saying it's a "tailor-made fabricated report to fit Hamas’s fake campaign,” and the latter saying, "Israel has a policy of preventing starvation." Days later, Israel asked a global hunger monitor to retract the IPC assessment.

Explaining Israel's actions in Gaza is pointless - this is why

Confront: Israel and its supporters are outnumbered and out-financed, but there is enough energy in the Jewish world to make sure not a single anti-Israel demonstration goes unchallenged - even if it’s 10 demonstrators facing 10,000. Antisocial media, like TV, is a close-up medium. A small, quirky group can get as much coverage as a large, conventional one - maybe more. Israel needs to learn how to be small and quirky.

Confronting anti-Israel groups also means tracking them online and harassing them within the limits of the law. (I had to say that.) They should start worrying about their cybersecurity. The Jewish world is full of young experts who could take this idea and run with it - if only Jewish leadership, in Israel and abroad, would adopt the policy. If that means fewer self-congratulatory dinners and awards for Jewish leaders in New York, so be it.

Word: This is as close to traditional hasbara as we should get. A single billboard in New York’s Times Square can be worth its weight in gold if it carries the right message. With hundreds of thousands of billboards worldwide, why not a contest offering free trips to Israel? Or fun video games with a message? Once free of the old “just tell the truth and it’ll be fine” mindset, the possibilities are endless.

But, like hasbara, none of this will work if Israel’s actions are indefensible.

Not wrong, mind you - indefensible. That means if Israel’s 21st-century wars are fought according to 20th-century rules, Israel loses.

Most of what Israel has done since the Hamas pogrom of Oct. 7, 2023 - when Gazan terrorists breached the border, murdered, raped, and burned more than 1,000 Israelis, and took 250 hostages - can be legally and morally justified. In the post-truth world of antisocial media, that doesn’t matter.

Selling a war that lasts nearly two years in an impoverished territory where society glorifies victimhood was never possible. There is too much raw material for distortion, lies, and fabrications - too much to counter or explain. In a world of short attention spans and narrative-driven “truth,” Israel needed to end this war in weeks, not months, certainly not years - pull out, and prepare for the next round. After two years of combat, that outcome looks likely anyway.

Allowing nonstop anti-Israel propaganda to flood the world for two years, engulfing allies and threatening to turn Israel into a pariah state, is the greatest failure of the Gaza war. And that’s saying something, considering the monumental failure that marked its beginning.

The conclusion: By reordering its priorities and focusing on methods that bring results, Israel can turn back the tide of antisemitic propaganda, even if it takes years.

But none of this will succeed unless Israel’s leadership makes strategic decisions with the world in mind - not just domestic politics.

That, too, goes far beyond hasbara.

08/29 Links Pt2: IDF recovers body of murdered hostage Ilan Weiss in Gaza; Why the promise of a two-state solution empowers terrorism; Tehran’s unofficial embassy at Yale

From Ian:

Why the promise of a two-state solution empowers terrorism

Looking at the world in which we find ourselves, we Jews experience a sense of panic at the virulent mass-attended anti-Israel marches taking place in too many major cities globally. “From the river to the sea, Palestine shall be free,” shout the participants.

And how do the West’s governments react? Australia, France, and New Zealand have committed to recognizing Palestine at the forthcoming United Nations General Assembly, days away, in September. Canada and the United Kingdom have announced that they, too, are ready to recognize a state of Palestine if the war has not ended by the time the UNGA commences.

What a gift this is for Hamas, which has now been informed that to ensure that the UK and Canada recognize Palestine, the war must continue. Certainly, this is no incentive for Hamas to end the war or return the hostages held in captivity for almost two years.

True enemies of the two-state solution
Can it be that those consistently calling for a two-state solution have not understood – or choose not to understand – who is against this concept and has been since the UN voted for the partition of Palestine in 1947?

Israel accepted the small part it was allocated, but the Arabs rejected outright the opportunity to have their own state. Instead, they chose to be part of five Arab countries that attacked Israel the moment David Ben-Gurion declared the coming into being of the State of Israel in 1948.

Are the millions calling for the recognition of Palestine today unaware that “From the river to the sea, Palestine shall be free” translates into the reality that Israel will be eliminated?

Both the Palestinian Authority and Hamas have consistently refused to accept a Jewish state.

Hamas’s charter calls for the total annihilation of Israel.

The PA conceived a different route by which to abolish the one Jewish state. They insist that any future peace negotiations with Israel must ensure that those Arabs who in 1948 became “refugees” in other lands must be allowed to return to Israel together with their successive generations. A figure of seven million returnees is quoted. It does not take a mathematician to recognize that this would translate into the end of the one Jewish state.

Consistently saying no
Before, during, and following the 1948 War of Independence, some 750,000 Arabs fled the newly created State of Israel with encouragement from their leaders, who promised their safe return together with the commitment to ensure the imminent destruction of Israel.

At the same time, some 850,000 Jews were expelled from Arab countries where Jews had lived continuously for 2,500 years. The newly created State of Israel accepted and integrated these Jewish refugees, many arriving with only the clothes on their backs.

Conversely, the United Nations founded UNRWA specifically to ensure that those Arabs who left Israel would retain refugee status, irrespective of which country they relocated to in 1948.

Exactly 58 years ago, on August 29, 1967, eight Arab heads of state participated in a four-day conference in Khartoum, Sudan. The conference called for the continued struggle against Israel. It adopted the dictum of no peace with Israel, no recognition of Israel, and no negotiations with Israel. Unsurprisingly, the conference became known as “The Three Noes Conference.”

July 2000 saw the Camp David Summit, initiated by then-US president Bill Clinton with the participation of prime minister Ehud Barak and PA chairman Yasser Arafat. It ended with Arafat walking away and then initiating the Second Intifada, resulting in the barbaric murder of some 1,000 Israelis – primarily civilians – with women and children being the prime targets.

Between 2006 and 2008, prime minister Ehud Olmert held no less than 36 negotiating sessions with PA President Mahmoud Abbas in an unprecedented endeavor to reach a peace agreement. Olmert’s plan included ceding some 94% of the West Bank to the PA. The overall offer was incredibly generous to the Palestinians; but once again they walked away, much to the dismay of Olmert, whose proposal far exceeded anything hitherto.

Tehran’s unofficial embassy at Yale

The excitement I once felt arriving at Yale University from Tehran in 2023 for my studies quickly turned into concerns about my safety as an anti-regime Iranian. At school, I witnessed the unchallenged authority of Islamic Republic sympathizers in American universities. Faculty tied to the regime have long presented themselves as presumptive Iranian voices, normalizing the regime’s illegitimate rule by erasing the realities of Iranians living in Iran.

Yale’s fall 2025 course catalogue, for instance, features a class by now-disgraced U.S. diplomat Robert Malley, who led negotiations for the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), also known as the Iran nuclear deal, under former President Barack Obama.

Malley’s class will “examine the past in order to better appreciate the two governments’ worldviews” and place students “in the shoes of U.S. and Iranian decision-makers.”

Course assignments for “Adversaries by Design: Deconstructing the Iran-U.S. Relationship” have students cosplaying as diplomats for the regime, as if this is some benign Model U.N.-like exercise rather than a calculated attempt to humanize the theocratic, colonizing dictatorship responsible for the majority of crimes against humanity in the region since 1979.

The course revolves around defending Malley’s failed magnum opus, the JCPOA, and his syllabus mentions having guest lecturers such as Ali Vaez, Hossein Mousavian and Mohammad Javad Zarif, all of whom have acted on behalf of the regime at one time or another. Malley purports to offer “Iranian perspectives,” but the class will likely only feature Islamic Republic officials and supporters.

One might wonder how it’s possible for a former U.S. government official who lost his security clearance and had close contact with Islamic Republic agents to lecture at an elite American university. But fear not! This is Yale, a Western institution where enabling the ideologies of designated terrorist groups is appropriate under the pretense of academia. And this isn’t an isolated incident for Yale.

Stephen Pollard: Britain is no longer an ally of Israel

What more is it going to take to bury the notion that the UK remains an ally of Israel? It’s been revealed today that the Government has banned Israeli officials from attending DSEI, the international defence conference and exhibition which is due to take place in London between 9 and 12 September. Although Israeli companies are still being allowed to come, all Israeli officials – political, defence or administrative – have been told to stay away.

The message could not be clearer or more consistent. From its first days in office, Labour has been ever more zealous in its treatment of Israel as an enemy, rather than a key strategic ally.

Within weeks it had restored funding to Unrwa, the UN agency, despite allegations that it employed some of the terrorists behind the October 7 2023 massacre; had banned the export of some arms to Israel; and had backed the International Criminal Court’s arrest warrants against Netanyahu and former Israeli defence minister Yoav Gallant.

Then it imposed sanctions on two members of the Israeli government: Itamar Ben-Gvir and Bezalel Smotrich. These are awful men with disgusting views. But the sanctions took hypocrisy to new levels, given that we do not sanction Qatar, which funds and houses Hamas; we prostrate ourselves before its moneymen begging them to invest.

All of those decisions were symbolic of the Government’s stance – a stance driven more by crude domestic UK political calculations than anything else, as I have written here before. But they were little more than symbols with little real impact.

All the obligations demanded by the Prime Minister have been placed on Israel, as some sort of recalcitrant state which needs to be brought to heel. How much clearer could Starmer, Lammy and the rest of them be that they seem to regard Israel as the enemy whose government needs to be defeated by outside pressure, and that the UK must support Israel’s enemies in their demands?

08/29 Links Pt1: Netanyahu releases footage of Hamas atrocities; Trump Admin Revokes Visas for Pal Officials for UN Meeting, Citing ‘Incitement to Terrorism’

From Ian:

Israel’s ceasefire dilemma: Hamas hostages, and the price of delay

From the local Palestinian point of view it should be emphasised that no serious country would invest in Gaza’s reconstruction while Hamas rules it, and Israel would likely block pro-Hamas states like Turkey or Qatar from doing so. Thus, a withdrawal leaving Hamas in power would condemn Gazans to miserable lives under a ruined land and cruel terrorist rulers.

Israel has, meanwhile, publicly set conditions for ending the war: Hamas’s disarmament, the demilitarisation of Gaza, the exile of its remaining leadership, and the installation of a third-party (not the Palestinian Authority) to manage Gaza’s civilian life and reconstruction. Crucially, Israel insists on retaining security authority, meaning IDF operations against terrorists would be permitted even after a withdrawal, similar to how Israel operates in the West Bank. The IDF would also establish a security perimeter inside Gaza to prevent infiltration to the border’s fence. If Hamas were to accept these terms, the war would end and Israel would withdraw.

But realistically, even after months of negotiations, Hamas is very unlikely to agree to such terms. Thus, if Israel agreed to the phased hostage Hamas now offered, by November, at the end of the 60 days of talks, Jerusalem would find itself facing an excruciating choice: launch a months-long war to conquer Gaza City and the central camps, or abandon its conditions and allow Hamas to retain control of the Gaza Strip.

The pressure inside Israel to fight will be enormous, but it will face an even louder and stronger anti-Israel coalition worldwide. Worse, Hamas would use the 60 days to prepare defences, plant explosives, and fortify its positions, and the IDF would need to retake ground it had already vacated. Any resumed war would then cost the IDF far more casualties.

At the heart of the dilemma is thus the fate of the hostages: should Israel agree to a partial deal now, rescuing half of them but leaving 10 in Hamas’s hands, and then fight later under far worse conditions? Or is it wiser to fight now – when military and diplomatic conditions are more favourable – but with double the number of hostages still held by Hamas, whose lives would be in grave danger?

Some argue that once Israel enters a ceasefire process, it may never be able to resume fighting – due to external pressures (Washington’s policy shifts, European sanctions) or internal ones (government collapse, elections). According to this view, Israel must fight now while it has strong U.S. backing, or risk losing its last chance to destroy Hamas.

Others claim that if Israel does accept a ceasefire, and Hamas then refuses its terms, Israel will regain international legitimacy for a renewed offensive, having proven its willingness to compromise. But this is wishful thinking. Experience shows that Israel’s “goodwill” is met with cynicism, especially in Europe. Even US support may not survive another two years of grinding war, no matter how Israel justifies it. This question must be raised directly with US officials, to clarify where they would stand if Israel chose the ceasefire path.

In short: on the long and difficult road to freeing Gaza from Hamas, dismantling its military, and rescuing the hostages, Israel now faces two options:

Delay war to secure the release of half the hostages now, but fight later under far harsher conditions, or perhaps lose the chance to fight altogether.

Fight now, under more favourable military and diplomatic conditions, but at the probable cost of more hostages’ lives.

Seth Mandel: The End of the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon

Upon the news that the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon will be ending its mandate, I will refrain from saying “good riddance.” It would be insufficient, after all. In fact, I wish UNIFIL only the greatest riddance in the world, a riddance the likes of which few have ever seen. A riddance that would be the envy of all the riddances that came before it.

Any time I mention some of UNIFIL’s old scandals, I hear from readers who are truly shocked. For UNIFIL stood out among the various agencies of the United Nations as the one that never tried to disguise its alliance with Israel’s genocidal enemies. Even UNRWA, the agency that became an adjunct of Hamas in Gaza, went through the motions of attempting to establish plausible deniability.

As I wrote recently, in 2006 UNIFIL stood accused of broadcasting sensitive Israeli troop movements during the war in Lebanon with Hezbollah. I picked up the phone and called the office of the UN secretary general to ask for confirmation. The office gave me the personal mobile number of a senior UNIFIL official on the ground in Lebanon. I called him and asked him about the allegations. He nonchalantly admitted on the record that yes, the allegations were correct.

But we don’t have to go back to 2006—or all the way to 2000, when UNIFIL withheld video proof of Israelis being kidnapped by Hezbollah—to understand why we should just give UNIFIL the gold watch and wave them off into the sunset. As I am writing this, proof of UNIFIL’s purposeful futility is all around us.

Israel and Lebanon, with the help of the United States, are engaged in negotiations over the disarming of Hezbollah. Almost 20 years ago, the Second Lebanon War ended with a UN Security Council resolution requiring Hezbollah to disarm. So why are we still negotiating over something that has been required for two decades by previous negotiations? Because the UN is useless, that’s why. And the consequences are visible all around the Mideast.

So this week, the U.S. decided it would only agree to the renewing of UNIFIL’s mandate if it would be the last such renewal. That way, UNIFIL could start preparing for the end. After 2026, it’ll pack up and go, ending nearly a half-century of thumb-twiddling.

NGOs and UN Agencies Demand Blind Acceptance, Now the "Halo Effect" Is Crumbling

For decades, there has been an unspoken rule: never question what the UN or major NGOs say. Reports are taken at face value. Their press releases become headlines, their statistics are repeated without scrutiny, and their conclusions are treated as objective truth. What NGO Monitor has long called the “Halo Effect”—the aura of credibility surrounding these organizations—meant that their findings were virtually immune to fact-checking and often amplified by the media.

How NGO information flows to media in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict
October 7th changed something fundamental in this dynamic. For the first time, a broad spectrum of people—journalists, researchers, technologists, and ordinary citizens—began scrutinizing these organizations with a critical eye. Watchdogs had been doing this work for years in limited ways, but now thousands of independent voices from diverse backgrounds and political leanings are dissecting UN and NGO claims. Using open-source intelligence, statistical analysis, and investigative methods, they are exposing uncomfortable truths that can no longer be hidden. The “halo effect” is cracking. They are exposing: who wrote the reports, how the data was gathered, exposing contradicting evidence, what assumptions were made, and—most importantly—what agendas are being pushed.

The most recent is the famine declaration in Gaza City. The IPC (Integrated Food Security Phase Classification) released a report declaring famine in Gaza City. On paper, the IPC has strict criteria: mortality, acute malnutrition, and lack of food access must all be verified to declare famine. All requiring very strict methodologies. Yet the Gaza report sidestepped these standards. Instead, it relied on selective data, and questionable assumptions and methodologies. Since its release, data analysts have identified glaring flaws, while independent journalist Eitan Fischberger uncovered bias among one of its key authors—including open support for terrorist groups targeting Israeli civilians.

UN Watch Director Hillel Neuer revealed how Andrew J. Seal, co-author of IPC report on Gaza, often posts IRGC propaganda from Press TV & Iranian regime foreign ministry spokesman Abbas Araghchi, such as anti-US “false flag” conspiracy theories. He normalized IRGC's killing of 176 civilians on Ukrainian flight PS752. Calling him a “nutcase who backs the Houthis & Iran's regime.”

Even the U.S. envoy to the UN, speaking at the latest Security Council session, warned:
“We can only solve problems with credibility and integrity. Unfortunately, the recent report from the IPC doesn’t pass the test on either. One of the report's key authors has a lengthy record of bias against Israel, including openly justifying the Houthis' terrorist attacks against Israeli civilian targets.”

Two days ago, MFA Director General Eden Bar Tal sent a formal letter to the IPC demanding it retract its forged Gaza report. The evidence is clear: the IPC hid contradictory data, cherry-picked results, and manipulated figures—producing a fabricated report for political purposes. At his press conference, Bar Tal was even more direct:
“The IPC report is forged for political purposes. No doubt the IPC manipulated and ignored data, broke its own rules and hid contradictory evidence. That report was fabricated for a purpose—to support Hamas’ fake starvation campaign.”

This is where the Halo Effect comes full circle. The IPC could only publish such a document because it assumed nobody would question it. That is the power of the UN/NGO halo: the ability to present selective, distorted, or even fabricated findings as “science,” shielded by institutional prestige. But once the halo slips, the report looks less like a neutral study and more like a propaganda tool dressed in technical jargon. The expectation could not be clearer: forget definitions, ignore evidence, stop asking questions. Just accept our conclusions as holy gospel and sacred fact, including redefining “genocide.”

The crowdfunding site GiveButter has this story:

Sahar is a Palestinian trans woman currently displaced in Gaza. Since losing her home to IOF aggression, Sahar has been living in a tent with her 6 sisters, hardly able to afford basic survival needs.

With the brutality continuing to escalate, Sahar has made the difficult but critical decision to attempt to leave the Gaza strip. To do so, she turning to the international community for support.

Sahar is seeking to raise $35,000 to finance her move out of Gaza and into safety.

Read below to hear from Sahar in her own words,

“I am not used to asking for help and this is the first time in my life that I ask for help in order to save my life and the lives of my family. This war touches the feelings of people around the world. It is a very difficult decision to leave Gaza, but we have no other choice to save our lives and save the lives of our children … It's an expensive process, but together we can achieve it.

The war on Gaza has injured us [with] psychological trauma and extreme terror as a result of the continuous bombing, the killing of children, the destruction of homes and displacement. The Gaza Strip has become foodless, and the water is polluted. The occupation destroyed all health and industrial facilities in the Gaza Strip, making it uninhabitable.

I am alive, but my friends and neighbors who were killed in Gaza are still under the rubble of their homes. No one can save them because of the continuous bombing of the occupation of houses in Gaza. With the destruction of all of us, we have no choice but to leave Gaza, our lives are precious to us… [we] in Gaza are not just numbers. We are human beings who love life and want to live freely, peacefully and safely.”

Read Sahar’s story today + share it widely to help her gain the support she needs. In closing, Sahar writes:

“Thank you for your sympathy, generosity and solidarity with us. We can make a difference and help my family find the safety and protection they urgently need. Together we can achieve the goal.”

This is such an obvious scam that I cannot believe that GiveButter allow this.

For starters, there are no trans women in Gaza. How would it work? Some guy has an operation in Gaza? Or he leaves Gaza to a Western country for surgery, and then returns as a woman and the family is fine with this and the neighbors don't care?

The person's life expectancy after the surgery would be measured in hours.

Secondly, no one is leaving Gaza no matter how much money they have. Egypt is not taking anyone butt medical cases (and Israel has to approve.) So the appeal to raise money to leave Gaza is obviously a lie.

Thirdly, "Sahar"'s letter was not the voice of a Gazan. It is an anti-Israel activist pretending to channel a Gazan."It's an expensive process, but together we can achieve it."? Those are the words of a fundraiser, not a Gazan.

So far idiots have donated at least $4,600 for this scam.

(h/t Rabbi Poupko)

Buy EoZ's books on Amazon!

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

PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism (February 2022)

Why "Anti-Zionist" Jews don't want you to listen to the Torah tomorrow

By far, the favorite Torah verse of anti-Zionists is "Tzedek, Tzedek Tirdof" - "Justice, Justice shalt thou pursue." They quote it all the time to justify their anti-Israel actions in the name of "justice."

Who defines justice? Why, they do!

They love that verse and that word so much that the first officially anti-Zionist "synagogue"- which is virtually all on-line - is called "Tzedek Chicago."

At the same tie that they create prayers saying "I promise to view each new day as another opportunity to learn how to be kinder, more loving, more hopeful, and to better enact justice" they call the vast majority of Jews who support Israel "genocidal."

Tomorrow we will read that verse they love so much. But it has a second half: