Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News

Saturday, November 22, 2025

11/22 Links: The return of the blood libel; Inside the fracturing pro-Palestine movement: Purges, paranoia and a far-left revolt; A Death-Defying Orchestra;

From Ian:

The return of the blood libel

The problem is not only the anti-Semitism that Jewish staff and students face. It is also the failure of many universities to acknowledge, let alone take action, against the perpetrators. It is left to Jewish staff and students to raise concerns time and again, while often being ignored altogether. Jews are the only minority group that is expected to fend for themselves against discrimination, harassment and violence.

The UCL blood-libel lecture was only exposed because a Jewish student attended and recorded the lecture, passed the recording to Stand With Us, an organisation that supports Jewish students on campus. It took concerted efforts from Jewish academics, the Union of Jewish Students and the Union of Jewish Chaplains to bring this matter to the attention of UCL.

We mustn’t allow Maqusi’s alleged remarks to be dismissed as a one-off, an aberration. Over the past two years, in universities across the UK, there have been many similar instances of Jew hatred. Just this week, it emerged that the rector at the University of Glasgow, Ghassan Abu-Sittah, accused Israel of harvesting the organs of dead Palestinians. Last month, Michael Ben-Gad, an Israeli professor of economics, was subjected to a campaign of grotesque anti-Semitic abuse by students at City St George’s, University of London.

British universities usually take proactive steps to protect minorities on campuses. This is not altruistic – indeed, it is their legal duty to do so. But when it comes to Jews they are failing. Failing to provide information, understanding and training on anti-Semitism. Failing to identify and address anti-Semitic speakers or events. Failing to take disciplinary action against anti-Semitic staff and students. And failing to take seriously, or even listen to, concerns and complaints raised about anti-Semitism.

It should not be left to Jewish staff and students alone to combat anti-Semitism in their places of work and study, but in many instances that is what is happening. Without concerted action across the sector, these protesters and agitators may well get their wish for Zionist-free campuses.

Ted Cruz’s Finest Hour

The antisemitic right has been successful at taking people’s words and twisting them on social media to advance the view that anybody who supports Israel is somehow corrupt or disloyal to the United States. Carlson’s confrontational interview with Cruz is a case in point. Carlson has been pushing the lie that the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, which is made up of American citizens who advocate a strong relationship between the U.S. and Israel, is actually a foreign lobby. When Carlson challenged Cruz on support he has received from AIPAC, Cruz lamented that from a pro-Israel perspective, AIPAC hasn’t been particularly effective, and further noted, “I came into Congress 13 years ago with the stated intention of being the leading defender of Israel in the United States Senate.” His obvious point was that he was committed to Israel from the get-go, not as a result of pressure by a lobbying group. Yet this quote still surfaces on social media to smear Cruz as being more interested in serving a foreign country than his own constituents.

“I believe I have been the leading defender of Israel in the Senate,” Cruz says when I ask him about the exchange. “What I did not say, which Tucker and his minions claim I said, is that my No. 1 priority in the Senate is defending Israel. Those are very different statements.” He points out that he’s taken the lead on many issues: “I’ve spent 13 years as the leading defender of securing the border and stopping the invasion of illegal immigrants into this country.” Cruz says that his support for Israel flows from his faith as well as his belief that the U.S.-Israel alliance is in the national security interest of the U.S., which is consistent with his commitments to keep Texans safe. “Israel is by far our strongest ally in a very troubled region of the world,” he says. “Israel is a democracy that respects human rights and that shares our values — and those who hate Israel hate America.”

Cruz believes that as hatred of Jews spreads, it induces people to embrace anti-Americanism and other left-wing ideologies: “The slippery slope that starts with antisemitism and attacking Israel frequently leads straight down that line.” As examples, he notes Carlson’s recent defense of Venezuelan communist dictator Nicolás Maduro, his praise for a guest on his show who said that Winston Churchill was the “chief villain” of World War II and that maybe the U.S. should have sided with Hitler, and Carlson’s own statement that he believes that America should have offered condolences to Osama bin Laden’s family.

Carlson also recently claimed that it was “weird” that Ted Cruz “all of a sudden, out of nowhere” started talking about the persecution of Christians in Nigeria, where as many as 100,000 Christians have been killed since 2009. In a wildly false claim, Carlson said that Cruz had “no track record of being interested in Christians at all.” Cruz took to the Senate floor in 2014 to speak up for Meriam Ibrahim, who was imprisoned in Sudan for being a Christian. That same year, he raised concerns about hundreds of mostly Christian girls who had been kidnapped by the Islamist terrorist group Boko Haram. In 2018, in another speech focusing on the persecution of Christians in Nigeria, he argued that the U.S. military “must be well equipped to target Boko Haram terrorists.” But these facts are inconvenient for Carlson, who wants to portray the senator as a Christian obsessed with Israel and only “suddenly” feigning concern for Nigerian Christians as some sort of cynical cover play.

Cruz agrees with the sentiment that “the best cure for bad speech is more speech.” Given how lies can spread on social media, he says it is imperative that more voices speak out to counter with the truth.

“We need to see conservatives show the leadership to take this on and refute these lies in a way that the Democrats for the past decade have never been willing to do,” he says. “We need to show more willingness to confront this evil in our own party.”

Two Israels that don’t exist: James Lindsay on how the American Right, and Left, get it wrong

Guiding the far Left and Right beyond the narratives they had established about Israel would be difficult, according to Lindsay. For the Left, there is a deeper belief structure that casts Israel as existing to “oppress the poor Palestinians or Muslims in the region.” The radical Right has also made the issue a shibboleth.

Demonstrating in a concrete manner that foreign actors are proliferating the perceptions of the fake Israels, such as sponsoring influencers, would undermine those voices and the narratives they have been building. Americans generally perceive foreign attempts to covertly influence them as hostile, Lindsay explained. At the same time, creating videos with succinct refutations of the talking points that define the false narratives would also be helpful.

“A lot of Americans literally believe that what the United States is doing is writing Israel a check for $4 billion a year, and Israel just can do whatever it wants with it, most of which is start wars with people that it doesn’t need to. So it’d be very, very easy to just kind of put together a short refutation of claims, explaining [that] the vast majority of the foreign aid is actually through military contracts. And so what’s happening is the United States is giving Israel money to buy weapons from America. That’s over 80% of the aid, which turns out to be $4b. a year. That turns into almost $20b. in profit for American companies employing 15,000 Americans to operate in that business environment,” said Lindsay. “And that’s happening specifically to fight terrorists who chant things like ‘Death to America.’ So it’s in our interest in a multitude of ways, but this is not what the average American right-winger believes. They believe we’re cutting a check to Israel for Israel to just go do whatever they want with, and that if American kids were getting that money instead, they’d be able to buy a house.”

Lindsay also advised that others have to see the real Israel that he had seen – conversations with Israelis, their everyday life. Seeing the daily life of young, Gen Z, English-speaking Israel would show the true Israel. Such materials couldn’t be created or sponsored by the government, Lindsay warned, as otherwise it would be propaganda. Such outreach has to be organic.

Israel has the opportunity to position itself as an example of how to create a culture of strong fathers and loving families with religious children, according to Lindsay. Offering to help Americans figure out how to integrate such cultural features into American life would have appeal to young conservatives. There are many American leaders attempting to figure out how to save their younger generations, and anything Israelis could offer in terms of advice, mentorship, or opportunities would be beneficial to that mission.

“I think there’s a huge opportunity, in fact, to showcase how family oriented and yet like masculine and courageous you have in the men of the IDF,” said Lindsay. “I think the connection between family and religion, especially in the more observant and Orthodox sectors of the society, would also be very charming for people to see how it looks in reality. The focus on children and being a good parent, though, I think would really shine through and resonate.”

The author was struck with how Israeli culture is focused on family and life, even in little ways that are often invisible to the fish swimming in the Israeli current. One example shared by Lindsay was how, when introductions were made at every meeting, Israelis would introduce themselves not by their title and achievement, but primarily with details about their family, such as how many children they had. It is a culture of life which Israelis are ready to defend on the borders of Gaza and Lebanon, and come home to have a Shabbat family meal. This “culture of life” was a chief focus during Lindsay’s November 3 New Discourses podcast, titled “Am Yisrael Chai.”

There are still a lot of Americans who support Israel and Jews, said Lindsay. When the goal is to drive a wedge between two countries or peoples, it takes both sides to give up on the relationship. It would require Americans to become skeptical and angry at Jews, explained Lindsay, but would also require Israelis to turn around and surrender America as an ally because of those sentiments. It would be a “terrible mistake if both sides decide to step into that enmity, when the fact is that the majority of conservative Christians in this country [the US] are still strong allies to Israel, still love Israel, still recognize the difference between civilization and terrorism, and to know which side to stand on.”

11/21 Links Pt2: The Democrats’ ominous anti-Zionist turn; The ‘noble lies’ of the BBC; Anonymous site offers $100,000 for execution of Israeli academics

From Ian:

The Democrats’ ominous anti-Zionist turn

AIPAC is clearly a lightning rod in left-wing New England. Jewish Insider reported that Massachusetts Rep. Seth Moulton, previously deemed moderate, “would reject any further donations from AIPAC and would return more than $30,000 from the group” the day after launching his Senate campaign. Jordan Wood, a House candidate in nearby Maine, recently said “he would reject contributions from AIPAC” pointing to Democrats’ distrust over how that money affects “foreign aid to Israel”, Jewish Insider reported. Progressive Maine Senate candidate Graham Platner has made anti-AIPAC messaging central to his campaign.

Even “Midwestern nice” has made room for anti-Zionism. Anti-Israel Zeteo asked Michigan Senate candidate Abdul El-Sayed about “Israel’s right to exist as a Jewish state”. He “sidestepped” the question, Jewish Insider reported. El-Sayed also claimed AIPAC’s bipartisan donors are “MAGA billionaires... try[ing] to dictate the outcome for a Democratic primary”.

Down south, Georgia’s gubernatorial primary includes State Rep. Ruwa Romman, whom the Atlanta Journal-Constitution reported backed the anti-Israel “‘Leave it Blank’ protest vote [campaign] against then-President Joe Biden” last year. Jewish Insider further reported that Romman “called on Democrats to ‘ban AIPAC funding’ in Democratic primaries”, supported a one-state solution, dubbed the Abraham Accords “disastrous” and opposed “a resolution denouncing Hamas and its [American] supporters”, offering solidarity to American Jews, and affirming Israel’s right to self-defence.

New examples keep appearing. Locations vary, but the details follow familiar patterns. Candidates define themselves in opposition to AIPAC and its American membership or elected Democrats they portray as overly pro-Israel. That is, Democratic candidates are increasingly defining themselves in opposition to Jews, the Jewish state, and Israel’s non-Jewish friends.

Jewish Democratic Georgia State Rep. Esther Panitch told me: “This represents a troubling shift where a vocal minority within the Democratic coalition has made anti-Zionism a litmus test for progressive credentials.” Not coincidentally, that litmus test puts many lifelong Jewish Democratic Zionists in a tight spot. Goldstein, for example, spent decades as an active Democrat, including serving as a delegate to three Democratic presidential conventions. He “couldn’t stand” being “attacked and otherized” by anti-Zionist activists and felt pushed to choose “between my party and my Judaism,” which is “inextricably intertwined with Zionism”. Goldstein left the Party in July.

For Panitch, “The question is whether the Democratic Party will allow this extremist fringe to define its position on Israel, or whether the silent majority will finally speak out. People of good conscience need to make clear there’s a bright line between legitimate policy criticism and the antisemitism of denying Jewish self-determination.”

That’s a distinction with a difference. It’s also a distinction voters should understand but won’t be learning from anti-Zionist elected officials. Zionists will have to urgently fill the gap.

The ‘noble lies’ of the BBC

Our overlords have been similarly deceitful over Gaza because they deem Palestinians to be deserving victims who automatically warrant sympathy against Israel, the oppressor. They have propagated falsehoods on the trans issue because this group is also presumed a persecuted minority, and because they feel they have a right to educate the masses in accordance with their ‘compassionate’ vision. In this new counter-factual reality, a man can get pregnant and a woman can rape someone with ‘her penis’. It matters little if this, or any other esoteric truth they take a fancy to, sounds absurd to normal people. Indeed, the more exclusive the ‘luxury belief’, the better.

The elites revel in determining what constitutes knowledge, and making sure everyone knows the righteousness of the truths they dispense. This is why they get so exercised by ‘misinformation’, or have been eager to dictate what ordinary folk say in private through ‘hate speech’ laws, ‘non-crime hate incidents’ or the Online Safety Act. This is why they double down on ‘offensive’ and ‘inappropriate’ language. They don’t like it when words are used without inhibitions and restrictions and when knowledge is diffused without supervision.

This is why they dissemble, mislead and prevaricate over truths that are inconvenient or unpleasant. Hence the cowardice and dishonesty about the rape gangs in the north of England, or their indignation when a newsreader – someone whose job it is to impart facts – rolled her eyes when prompted to read aloud that fraudulent construction: ‘pregnant people’.

The elites say what they like because they like what they say.

Gaza polemic denouncing indifference to Palestinian suffering wins US National Book Award

A provocative essay collection about the West’s response to the Gaza war and a children’s book about young Iranians helping a Jewish refugee in World War II were two of the big winners at the National Book Awards Wednesday evening.

“One Day, Everyone Will Have Always Been Against This,” by Egyptian-Canadian journalist and author Omar El Akkad, won the evening’s nonfiction prize. Based on a viral tweet El Akkad sent soon after the Hamas onslaught of October 7, 2023, which sparked the war in Gaza, the book maligns Western liberalism for, in El Akkad’s telling, turning its back on Palestinian suffering.

“It’s very difficult to think in celebratory terms about a book that was written in response to a genocide,” El Akkad said in his acceptance speech. “It’s difficult to think in celebratory terms when I know my tax money is doing this, and many of my elected representatives happily support it.”

He later continued, “And it is difficult to think in celebratory terms when I have been watching people snatched off the streets by masked agents of the state for daring to suggest that Palestinians might be human beings” — a likely reference to cases like student activist Rumeysa Ozturk. El Akkad thanked what he said were “writers who have spoken out,” as thousands of authors have pressured literary organizations like PEN America to take a harder line against Israel.

El Akkad’s book is one of several conversation-starters that have been published as Israel-critical reflections on the war, a crop that also includes Peter Beinart’s “Being Jewish After the Destruction of Gaza.” The nonfiction judging panel included Jewish journalist Eli Saslow, who has written extensively about the rise of antisemitism and white nationalism. Jewish public radio host Ira Glass, who introduced the category in a prerecorded voiceover, noted that it is among titles that “indict the Western world in the ongoing destruction of Gaza.”

11/21 Links Pt1: ‘Weaponized empathy’: Hamas exploits Western ignorance of war, military expert says; Trump Admin Revokes Visa From SA Official Involved in anti-Israel ICJ Case; Arab Group’s ‘Advocate of the Year’ Organizes Blood Libel Display at DC’s Union Station

From Ian:

Andrew Fox: ‘Weaponized empathy’: Hamas exploits Western ignorance of war, military expert says

Social media has amplified this lack of understanding. Images can reach people’s pockets even as the dust on the ground still settles from an airstrike; and people reach emotional conclusions based on mere seconds of uncorroborated, curated propaganda.

The past two years on social media have been a peculiar mixture of gaslighting and relentless abuse. People deny what I have seen in person, with my own eyes, based on things they themselves have only seen on social media. And because I represent the rational narrative, I am told that I, as with Israel, am uniquely evil – with all the death threats and insults that come as part of that designation.

The bot swarms are also a factor: Mention the rapes of October 7, of which I have seen firsthand evidence, and notifications will swarm with bots denying them. This cumulative effect has one goal: to make it an unpleasant place to defend Israel’s conduct and to deter allies from speaking up.

So why bother? After all, I am neither Jewish nor Israeli. I have no dog in this fight.

However, I do believe, as an academic, that truth has meaning. Simply because social media exemplifies epistemic collapse, this does not mean that the truth loses importance.

I will continue to share what I believe to be true because when the dust settles from Gaza, a just outcome needs the truth in its corner. When this war is over, without the truth there will be no justice and no peace for either Palestinians or Israelis.

Ahmed Fouad Alkhatib: The Palestinian dilemma: Why Hamas continues to fail the Palestinian people

Ideological dissonance
Many in Gaza still promote ideas that reject Israel, denounce peace, and prioritize “resistance” over nation-building. Yet most who hold these views are not seeking war; they want stability and prosperity. What they fail to recognize is that Gaza’s well-being and prosperity depend on peace and coexistence with its neighbors.

This creates a striking dissonance: Many want the pride of “resistance” while expecting prosperity and a high standard of living.

This was evident after the massacre on October 7, 2023, when some who had initially celebrated Hamas’s attack quickly changed their tone as Gaza plunged into its deadliest chapter in modern Palestinian history.

For some, opposition to Hamas is partly motivated by the failure of the terror group to advance its nihilistic project over the past 30 years.

Whether it was the sabotaging of the Oslo process, the militarization of the Second Intifada, the blockade of Gaza, or a host of useless wars – especially after October 7 – Hamas has delivered continued and sustained misery, failure, death, devastation, and regression to the Palestinian cause and people.

Instead of fundamentally shifting course and realizing the futility of the ideological, nationalistic, and religious narratives and manipulations that underpin Hamas and elements of the Palestinian national project, many are only willing to see Hamas as a failure and shun the group for its lack of effectiveness rather than what it stands for.

Trump Admin Revokes Visa From South African Official Who Spearheaded 'Genocide' Case Against Israel

The Trump administration on Thursday revoked the visa of Naledi Pandor, the South African official who spearheaded a genocide case against Israel at the International Court of Justice (ICJ), spoke by phone with former Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh shortly after Oct. 7, 2023, and repeatedly offered support for terrorism, a senior State Department official exclusively confirmed to the Washington Free Beacon.

"Pandor's visa has been revoked," the official said. "Pandor has openly supported terrorism and endorsed violent jihads. Under the Trump administration, the U.S. government will no longer tolerate dangerous foreigners traveling into our country to spread their violent policies."

Pandor, who served as South African foreign minister from 2019 to 2024, just concluded a trip to the United States for the Milwaukee premiere of Muslim Network Television. A senior State Department official told the Free Beacon ahead of Pandor's visit that the department was "aware of this individual's pro-terrorism background" and that the matter was "under review."

The former diplomat, a convert to Islam, has professed her support for terrorism on numerous occasions. She said in September that Muslims "are permitted to engage in jihad when necessary" and told an audience in October that "armed struggle may become a necessity if there is no movement toward fundamental change."

During her time in South African government, Pandor led the country's lawfare campaign against Israel, ultimately filing a formal accusation of genocide against the Jewish state in December 2023. Just 10 days after Hamas attacked Israel, Pandor spoke on the phone with Haniyeh and, according to Hamas, offered her congratulations for the "Al-Aqsa Flood," the terror group's name for its October 7 operation. While Pandor initially claimed the conversation had to do with humanitarian aid, her office eventually admitted that she called to reiterate "South Africa's solidarity and support" for Palestinians.

Jews in Australia want to teach their kids how to proudly defend themselves. The antisemites are furious.

Antisemitism in Australia has been skyrocketing, with incidents quadrupling in the year after October 7, 2023. Attacks have included death threats, physical assaults, firebombings of synagogues and Jewish-owned businesses, and the mass doxxing of hundreds of Jewish artists, academics and professionals.

The Jewish community feels under siege—and the children feel it most of all.

That is why a grassroots Zionist group, Lions of Zion, has stepped into the gap with a simple, powerful slogan: “Unity. Courage. Pride.”

On December 7 they are running a free, family-friendly event in Melbourne called “Lions NERF Heroes – Beepers Operation.”

It features age-appropriate Krav Maga and situational-awareness training, a giant NERF battle, and a short, factual presentation about the Mossad supply-chain operation that simultaneously detonated thousands of Hezbollah pagers in September 2024 — an operation that crippled the terror group’s mid-level command structure with fewer than three dozen fatalities, almost all of them Hezbollah operatives.

Within hours of the event being posted online, anti-Zionist activists began flooding Victoria Police, ASIO, the Premier’s office and the ticketing platform with demands to shut it down. Their claim? That Jewish families are “celebrating blowing up little kids with pagers.”

That is a deliberate lie.

No children were targeted. No civilians were intended to be harmed. Hezbollah itself distributed the rigged pagers to its own fighters. The explosives were calibrated for maximum disruption with minimum lethality — a feat of restraint virtually unheard of in modern warfare. The operation saved countless Israeli and Lebanese lives by shortening a war that Hezbollah started.

Yet the same voices who stayed silent when Hezbollah fired 10,000+ rockets at Israeli civilians are now pretending to be “horrified” that Jewish children might learn about precision, ethics and survival.

Lions of Zion released a statement that every Jewish organization should pin to their wall:

So let us be unmistakably clear:
We will not apologise for defending Jewish life.
We will not apologise for Jewish strength.
We will not apologise for celebrating moral courage in the defence of our people.
…
This gathering does not glorify violence. It honours the extraordinary ethical discipline of the IDF and Mossad …

Some people cannot stand to see Jews strong …

Our children will not bow their heads. They will not inherit confusion. They will not be broken by propaganda.

That statement is perfect. Damn perfect.

For once, a Jewish group refused to play the old game of apologizing, qualifying, and groveling the moment someone yells “but the children!” For once, someone said the quiet part out loud: We have nothing to be ashamed of, and everything to be proud of.

I wish every major Jewish organizations showed half this clarity. Too often they rush to water down language, distance themselves from “controversial” operations, or beg for approval from people who will never grant it.

Lions of Zion just handed the community a spine transplant.

If you’re a Jewish parent in Australia near Caulfield, register your kids today.

If you’re anywhere else, share this article. Leave a supportive review on the booking page. Push the truth to the top of Google and X before the professional outrage machine buries it.

The haters are organized, loud, and already writing to the police to stop the event.

We need to expose their hate.

(h/t Jill)

Buy EoZ's books on Amazon!

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

PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism (February 2022)

11/20 Links Pt2: Trump welcomes freed Israeli hostages to White House; Terrorists & tiaras Miss Palestine’s connection to convicted terrorist leader; The trouble with the Nuremberg Trials, 80 years on

From Ian:

Antizionism: The Reinvention of a Racist Hate Movement

“Tell me what you accuse the Jews of — I’ll tell you what you’re guilty of.”

This 1959 observation by novelist Vasily Grossman, often quoted by writer Douglas Murray, was vividly illustrated at UCLA last week. An ignominious band of university departments including its School of Law sponsored a talk by Rutgers professor Noura Erakat — an activist posing as a scholar — who teaches the gullible that Israel is a settler colonial project. Erakat’s faux lecture, “Revisiting Zionism as a Form of Racism and Racial Discrimination,” was timed to honor the fiftieth anniversary of U.N. General Assembly Resolution 3379 — the since-rescinded-but-never-dead screed that declared Zionism a form of racism.

Judea Pearl, UCLA professor, Turing Prize winner and proud Israel-born Zionist, had had enough. When he learned of the “Zionism is racism” lecture, he issued a call for a countervailing event on campus the same night, Nov. 13. UCLA’s Jewish Faculty Resilience Group swung into gear, and in little over a week about a hundred people gathered at UCLA’s School of Law for a panel discussion called “Is Antizionism Racism?” Peter Savodnik of The Free Press was a thoughtful moderator, and Michael Berenbaum, Yael Lerman and Hindi Stohl Posy gave sobering, alarming, or stirring presentations. Presumably due to the imposing police presence (thank you, UCPD), antizionist protesters mostly stayed away. At least one professor in the audience felt secure enough from the keffiyeh brigade to pull out her knitting.

As Professor Pearl reported the next day on X, the event was a major success. “Two concrete outcomes became immediately evident,” he wrote. “(1) Zionist faculty and students at UCLA will now be asserting their right to a name, a voice and institutional representation on campus. (2) Antizionist faculty and students will now be facing a new, no-nonsense environment in which their rhetoric and ideology are exposed — and named — for what they are: racist.”

Because what else can you call a movement that exists solely to deny the right of self-determination to one nation — the Jewish one? That screams to isolate, boycott or attack Jews, camouflaged as “Zionists”? That champions an organization, Hamas, whose founding charter calls to kill Jews? That celebrates as “resistance” the largest one-day slaughter of Jews since the Holocaust?

Jew-haters invariably ascribe to Jews whatever they find most abhorrent. For the Nazis who obsessed about race purity, Jews were polluters of the Aryan race. Medieval Christians hated Jews as the supposed killers of Christ. For communists, Jews were capitalists; and for reactionaries, Jews were communists. Today, when society overwhelmingly rejects racism, progressives who consider it the worst of all crimes scream “Racist!” at Jews who support the existence of a Jewish state. Meanwhile they support the elimination of that same state, making their claim the epitome of projection.

Nicole Lampert: When Sorry Seems To Be The Hardest Word

Over the last few years, we have increasingly seen the non-apology apology - same concept - especially when it comes to antisemitism. The latest example came yesterday courtesy of Bristol club Strange Brew, which exactly six months earlier cancelled a performance by Oi Va Voi and its Israeli guest singer, Zahara.

The club had come under pressure from the Bristol Palestine Alliance to ban the performance. It knew that it couldn’t simply ban Jews. And that it wasn’t meant to ban Israelis either. Religion, race, ethnicity, and nationality are all protected characteristics under the 2010 Equality Act. (This doesn’t cover Russians who are subject to sanctions from the British state which takes priority).

Instead, the ban was ostensibly because Zohara, a left-wing Israeli with a Palestinian boyfriend, had an album cover featuring her naked at a watermelon farm. ‘We were of the view it could be interpreted as politically offensive, given the ongoing and worsening situation in Gaza and it had already been interpreted as such by the groups who contacted us,’ the club wrote following the cancellation in May. Their statement added that while the band had explained that the album cover was a comment on femininity and nature, ‘We concluded that, regardless of the intended meaning, the use of politically loaded symbolism in this way – by anyone of any background – is ambigious and could therefore come across as politically insensitive and/or offensive to the people of Palestine and by our audiences.’

An ‘ambiguous’ album cover used politically by malign forces does not, it appears, protect anyone from what the Equality Act says. Despite this, a second venue in Brighton also cancelled the band, and for a brief while, it seemed they were musical kryptonite. Dropped. Ironically, one place where they remained hugely popular was Turkey, where they continued to play to some of their biggest audiences.

All of this was at the same time when musical acts were signing mass petitions for Northern Irish band Kneecap – named after an IRA punishment beating – for alleged support of Hamas and Hezbollah. These acts claimed they were for free speech in music. Not one of them came out to support Oi Va Voi. Not one.

As Oi Va Voi said yesterday: ‘The intimidation of the activist groups who wanted Strange Brew to cancel our gig would never be tolerated against any other minority, either in the music industry or elsewhere. Anti-Jewish racism is racism, and racism is injustice, wherever it comes from.

Poll: Majority of British adults are Zionists – but don’t seem to know it

A staggering lack of awareness about the meaning of the word ‘Zionism’ is laid bare by a new poll published today, with five times as many British adults claiming to support the right of Jews to self-determination as identified with the ‘Z’ word.

According to new polling from More in Common, while just 9 per cent of the wider UK population said they were Zionists, 53 per cent said they “support the right of Jewish people to have a nation in Israel”.

Similarly, while 22 per cent identified themselves as having a negative view of Zionists, only 9 per cent specifically had a negative view of “people who support the right of Jewish people to have a nation in Israel”.

In a summary provided by the organisation, which has consistently polled the British public’s attitude towards the conflict over the last two years, “all of this suggests that the public’s perceptions of Zionism have become detached from its literal meaning”.

“People who brand themselves as ‘Zionists’ might mean to be communicating that they simply support the principle of Jewish self-determination, but this is far from what other people may hear when they say this.”

“This disconnect makes it easy for conversations to become heated or accusatory very quickly, because people are often responding to what they think the label implies rather than to the person’s actual position. As a result, the term itself can introduce misunderstanding and tension into discussions that might otherwise reveal more shared ground than disagreement.”

Among those described as “progressive activists”, the numbers are more extreme. More than half – 54 per cent – have a negative view of “Zionists”, with close to a quarter – 23 per cent – having a negative view of “people who support the right of Jewish people to have a nation in Israel”.

General concerns in British society about antisemitism also rose over the last 18 months. In April 2024, about one third of respondents (34 per cent) felt the UK was a mostly or very unsafe place for Jews. That number rose sharply from the summer of 2025, culminating in almost half of respondents (48 per cent) feeling that way in the aftermath of the Heaton Park synagogue terror attack.

Terrorists & tiaras Miss Palestine’s connection to convicted terrorist leader revealed ahead of Miss Universe pageant

The first-ever Miss Palestine contestant in the Miss Universe pageant married the son of Hamas’ most-wanted prisoner, Marwan Barghouti, and even named a child after him, The Post has learned.

Nadeen Ayoub — who claims to be a 27-year-old US and Canadian citizen living in Dubai — is competing this week to represent Palestine, a territory the US and Israel don’t even recognize as a sovereign state.

Strutting through preliminary rounds ahead of the pending pageant, Ayoub has kept most of her personal life under wraps — until now.

Years-old screenshots and social media posts obtained by The Post show she took pains to hide that she was once married to Sharaf Barghouti — son of the infamous Fatah leader serving five life sentences in Israel for orchestrating terror attacks that killed five people in 2001 and 2002.

The convicted murderer’s name resurfaced last month when Hamas demanded his release in hostage-exchange negotiations with Israel — a request the Jewish state flatly refused, citing his participation in the first intifada, leadership in the second, convictions in five terror-related murders and founding of the West Bank’s al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades.

A secret life
Social media posts show Ayoub tied the knot with Sharaf Barghouti in 2016, later welcoming a son named Marwan three years later — seemingly in tribute to the convicted killer.

However, it is unclear if the pair remains married. A family member reached for comment confirmed to The Post that the two had been married, but denied knowledge of their current status.

11/20 Links Pt1: Resolution 2803: A restatement of international law; ‘We need to make them scared’: NYC synagogue protest crosses new red lines; Confessions of a Former Pro-Palestine Activist

From Ian:

Resolution 2803: A restatement of international law

The resolution effectively negates any recognition of a Palestinian state at present or otherwise outside of the terms of the resolution. This includes the misguided efforts to recognize the P.A. as a state by the United Kingdom and France, as well as other U.N. members, such as Canada and Australia, all of whom are bound by the resolution. Interestingly, there is no explicit legal obligation to create a Palestinian state under this resolution; it merely recites the threshold conditions that must be satisfied to have a pathway for self-determination and statehood.

The resolution also does not recognize that there is or ever was any so-called “occupation,” “right of return,” “genocide,” “starvation,” “apartheid” or “justifiable resistance.” Hamas and its cohorts are the wrongdoers and the resolution is directed against them and in support of Israel’s just defensive war. Indeed, the resolution explicitly notes that Gaza threatens the security of neighboring states. It can well be asserted that all the libels against Israel relating to Gaza and the Palestinians have effectively been debunked as a matter of international law by the resolution. The Resolution is effectively a restatement of international law that exonerates Israel and casts Hamas and its cohorts as the wrongdoers.

Hamas has been defeated militarily and politically. The board and ISF have the clean-up job, with Israel there on-site until the job is fully completed. Thereafter, Israel is entitled to remain with a security perimeter presence until Gaza is properly secure from any resurgent terror threat.

Israel fought a just, defensive war against belligerent, vicious, murderous and terrorist Hamas and its cohorts. The UNSC and those supporting the plan recognize this and, by virtue thereof, the resolution is designed to eliminate Hamas and its cohorts—as the wrongdoers—from having any role in the governance of Gaza, as well as to destroy their capacity to do any more harm to Israel and the neighboring countries.

May the blessings of peace prevail.

Jake Wallis Simons: President Trump has made a mockery of Europe's Gaza posturing

That is not all. Resolution 2803 also included language that exposed the UN’s claim of “genocide” in Gaza as unfounded and absurd. The International Stabilisation Force, it said, shall enforce security by “ensuring the process of demilitarising the Gaza Strip, including the destruction and prevention of rebuilding of the military, terror, and offensive infrastructure… until Gaza is properly secure from any resurgent terror threat.”

Shamefully, here was the first official recognition from the Security Council that Israel’s campaign in the Strip did not aim to destroy the Palestinian people but to vanquish those jihadi armies who had spent decades turning their territory into a network of subterranean garrisons protected by more than two million human shields.

This statement – passed with 13 votes in favour, including those of Britain and France, and abstentions from China and Russia – directly contradicted the official ruling by the United Nations commission of inquiry that Israel had conducted a “genocide” in Gaza, released in September as part of the lamentable international drive to force an Israeli defeat. What a difference three months make, eh?

Of course, anybody of sound mind who had bothered to read September’s “genocide” report was bound to conclude that it was a deplorable piece of Israelophobic propaganda in the first place. It brazenly airbrushed Hamas from the conflict almost entirely, showcasing the tragic destruction as evidence of a campaign targeting civilians rather than the jihadis hiding behind them. It was like a biased account of the Second World War in which the Nazis had been conveniently forgotten.

All of which is to say: thank God for President Trump! In many ways, not least his attitude towards Vladimir Putin, I’m no fan of the man. But without his intervention at the UN, which has so rudely jolted the West – and the world – out of its inexplicable infatuation with the jihadi agenda, the collapse of liberal democracy would have been all but assured.

But Trump cannot forever be relied upon to save Britain from itself. Israel may be the first domino, but Ukraine is the second. Sooner or later, we must learn to defend ourselves.

Hamas’ Rejection of Peace and the Media’s Convenient Silence

On Monday, November 17, the UN Security Council passed Resolution 2803, approving the implementation of the 20-point Peace Plan proposed by U.S. President Donald Trump. The resolution outlines how the two parties can advance to the next phase of the ceasefire and begin shifting the focus toward rebuilding the Gaza Strip.

A “Board of Peace,” led by President Trump and authorized by an International Stabilization Force (ISF), would be implemented to disarm terrorist organizations in Gaza and assist in delivering humanitarian aid, among other responsibilities.

Thirteen votes were cast in favor, zero against, and China and Russia both abstained. The Palestinian Authority and Hamas’ patrons Qatar and Turkey also welcomed the resolution.

Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad reacted to the vote with a statement vowing to treat any international force as a “party to the conflict,” meaning more violence. But Hamas’ opposition is hardly surprising given their insistence on portraying themselves as the victors of the war. The dissonance that the media cannot seem to reconcile is that Hamas claims to be the group that represents and governs over the people the plan is meant to help.

Less surprisingly, but certainly more disappointingly, is the international media’s failure to delve into the details of Hamas’ rejection and what it means more broadly for the future of the peace plan.

The New York Times, for instance, spent an entire article discussing the countries – including several Muslim and Arab nations – that welcomed the adoption of the resolution and its implications in the broader context of peace.

But similar to how Hamas stood alone in rejecting the agreement, The New York Times also chose to gloss over that critical fact. While it’s encouraging that the international community wants to see an end to the war, shouldn’t it be headline news that the party actually waging the war has no real interest in ending it? Shouldn’t Hamas’ absolute rejection of any form of peace deserve, at the bare minimum, one paragraph?

After years of Hamas openly declaring its goals, the media continues to conceal this reality, seeking to portray the terrorist organization instead as peacemakers while shifting the blame for the continued conflict onto Israel. But as the saying goes, when someone – or in this case, a terrorist organization – shows you who they are, believe them.

As I've been saying, I've developed a philosophy called Derechology based on Jewish thinking that is an entirely different way of looking at the world than what all of us have learned in the West - and it is much more closely aligned with reality.

The sheer amount of antisemitic lies online is overwhelming. And, as I've seen firsthand over the past two decades of blogging, facts themselves are not enough of a defense. The forces of hate make their arguments more sophisticated over time to obfuscate the facts. The third party observer cannot tell which set of facts is accurate so in the end they choose to trust one side, and very often that side is the one that gives the answers that are attractive, not accurate - seeming solutions that appeal to emotion and to self-interest.

Blaming an entire class of people for one's problems is incredibly attractive.

So I worked with an AI to use my Derechology framework to come up with an audit - a test that anyone can use to determine if an argument they see online is legitimate criticism or just well disguised hate.

We came up with a four part test. All four tests must be passed for the argument to be legitimate. It is not based on fact, but on structure - the haters' argument must use a structure that itself is destructive, while legitimate debaters use a more positive, constructive structure.

Here are the four tests and how they apply to modern antisemitism, but they work for everyone, Right or Left or in between.

The Goal Test:

Legitimate critique aims to improve and build. Critique focuses on correcting flaws to achieve a better outcome, such as greater dignity, life, or justice.

Hate aims to sever and purify: The haters' claims focus on elimination of the target to achieve their aims. The goal is not reform, but removal of their opponent.

Using modern antisemitism as an example, you never hear anti-Zionists say they want to improve Israeli society to fix problems of inequality or helping achieve peace. They position all of Israel as evil. This is the logic of BDS - even the biggest critics of Israel are guilty and must be silenced if they do not share the maximalist goals of the haters.

Focusing on the arguments gives them a victory because their eliminationist goals are considered to be morally equivalent to the side that wants to survive. They are not - they are simply hate, and the structure of their supposed criticism reveals that.

The Process Test:

Legitimate critique uses reasoning that is transparent, falsifiable, and open to change if new evidence contradicts its premise.

Hate's narrative converts all criticism, counter-evidence, or opposition into proof of the enemy's cunning or deceit, thus self-validating the original hatred. No facts will change their position, when confronted they will rely on conspiracy theory. Haters run away from debate that may expose this.

The Diagnosis Test:

Legitimate debaters accept complexity and context. They acknowledges the target is complex, capable of being both positive and negative like everyone else. Real debaters critique actions or policies, not the identity.

The haters enforce a totalizing binary. Their claim structurally defines the target as monolithic evil. They rejects all evidence of complexity because the simplicity of the binary is essential for their philosophy.

You will often find the anti-Zionists say this explicitly and proudly, telling their followers not to accept the idea that the conflict is complex. This is the psychology behind the genocide lie: not just that the facts don't support it, but the accusation itself was chosen to paint the Israelis as cartoon-villain, Nazi-level evil.

The Target Test:

Legitimate critics will only talk about actions and policies. Their language is proportional and focused on behaviors. They never deny the target's inherent dignity and humanity. They separate acts from people.

Haters attack the identity and/or existence of their targets. The language is disproportionate, dehumanizing, and justifies or advocates for relational severance (destruction, elimination, banishment). They deny their target's basic human dignity and claim that their opponents have forfeited having any rights altogether.

As mentioned, failing any one of these tests shows that the argument is not legitimate to begin with, no matter what facts they claim to have. The style itself delegitimizes them because it betrays their true goal are not critique but power.

Indeed, sometimes one comes across a sophisticated hater who skillfully cherry picks absolutely true claims to build their case which is ultimately bigoted. Pointing out their omissions, while necessary, is rarely a winning strategy because the people who are not emotionally invested in the debate will tend to believe the confident side with seemingly lots of facts over the opponents who are forced, always, into a defensive position.

When the arguments are only about the facts, the haters are legitimized. But they cannot change the structure of their arguments, because their goal is never truth but destroying their opponents' legitimacy and humanity. Anti-Zionists cannot claim to only be criticizing Israeli policy, because there is nothing Israel can do to satisfy them. They cannot admit when their facts are wrong - they double down and insist that counterproofs are fabricated. (They still insist there were no rapes October 7.) They cannot admit that Israel might have a legitimate reason to do what it does. They cannot agree to Israel's existence or legitimacy or right to defend itself in any conceivable universe. These aren't factual issues - they are structural in their positions. And that is what shows that they are using the pretense of honest argument to look like they are "just criticizing."

This audit indeed shows that some anti-Palestinian, anti-Muslim arguments have some or all of the same features. And those arguments should be condemned as well. There are plenty of ways to strongly oppose policies, call out immoral actions and expose systemic problems without attacking the dignity of every member of those groups.

This test exposes what Derechology proves: that with the correct structure there are multiple ways to have a moral position, but without a proper structure things can and will go very bad.

Here is a summary of the Structural Integrity Audit:

Test Category	Legitimate Opinion (Structurally Sound)	Structural Hate (Malignant)
1. The Goal Test	Aims to Improve and Build: Critique focuses on correcting flaws in policy, action, or structure to achieve a better outcome (greater Dignity, Life, or Justice).	Aims to Sever and Purify: Claims focus on elimination of the target to achieve "Ontological Closure" (restoring a simplistic binary). The goal is not reform, but removal.
2. The Process Test (Corrigibility)	Is Corrigible: The claim is falsifiable, transparent in its reasoning, and open to change if new evidence contradicts its premise. It admits its own potential for error.	Is Anti-Corrigible (Rigid): The philosophy converts all criticism, counter-evidence, or opposition into proof of the enemy's cunning/deceit, thus self-validating the original hatred.
3. The Diagnosis Test (Complexity vs. Simplicity)	Accepts Complexity and Context: Acknowledges the target entity (e.g., Israel, a political movement) is complex—capable of being both powerful and threatened. It critiques actions or policies, not the identity.	Enforces a Totalizing Binary: The claim structurally defines the target as monolithic evil (e.g., 100% Oppressor). It rejects all evidence of complexity because the simplicity of the binary is load-bearing for the philosophy.
4. The Target Test (Dignity and Proportionality)	Critiques Actions/Policies: The language is proportional and focused on behaviors. It never denies the target's inherent dignity/humanity.	Attacks Identity/Existence: The language is disproportionate, dehumanizing, and justifies or advocates for relational severance (destruction, elimination). It engages in premise smuggling to deny the target's basic human dignity.

Buy EoZ's books on Amazon!

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

PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism (February 2022)

Mustafa Barghouti, General Secretary of the Palestinian National Initiative, is one of the most moderate Palestinians on the scene. he condemned Hamas' murder of Israeli civilians on October 7 (yes, this is a very low bar.) He says that he wants a non-violent intifada. He has been interviewed on Western media.

Yet even he is dead set against saving the lives of Gazans under fire.

In September, before the ceasefire, Barghouti traveled to Indonesia and gave a press conference where he urged the Indonesian government not to "transfer Palestinians," allowing injured or fleeing Gazans to take refuge in Indonesia, calling it an act of participation in "ethnic cleansing."

"Israel will perceive it as participation in the ethnic cleansing of the Palestinian people. You should not allow the Israelis to cheat you by claiming that this is a humanitarian act," Barghouti stated.

This is the Palestinian mentality. If Israel gains, then it is by definition bad - even if Palestinians die because of that policy.

Even if the Gazans themselves want to leave and save their families!

Barghouti holds no government position. He can say that he supports saving Palestinian lives and not get fired by Mahmoud Abbas. But even the thought of allowing Gazans to save their own lives is anathema if it means that Israel is less likely to bomb them while attacking Hamas. Dead Palestinians are an asset, not a liability, for even the most Western oriented, English speaking Palestinian.

It is truly a sick culture.

There is one other thing this supposedly peaceful politician said that is notable.

On the role Arab and Muslim countries, Barghouti said, "I am a realistic person. We do not ask them to send armies to fight Israel, but at least they should send a humanitarian convoy representing the 57 Arab and Muslim countries to break the siege in Gaza."

He didn't say "I am against war." He is saying, "Realistically, they won't start a war, but I would prefer that they do attack Israel."

Of course, Barghouti also is a strong supporter of destroying Israel via the "right of return." he wants Palestinians not to build the Palestinian state but to move to the very Jewish state he claims is genocidal towards them.

This is why peace is impossible. There is simply no partner for peace on the Palestinian side who is willing to accept Israel's existence as a Jewish state. But worse than that, there are no Palestinian leaders who even prioritize the lives of their own people over making things marginally more difficult for Israel.

(h/t Irene)

Western extremist ideologies, whether they come from the Far-Left or the Far-Right, have made antisemitism central to their philosophies.

Read that again. They aren't "philosophies that tolerate antisemitism" or even "philosophies that include antisemitism." They are dependent on antisemitism for the movements to be successful.

They rely on antisemitism in a way that is not incidental but structural. It plays the same role in both cases, even though the surrounding language and theatrics are different. These movements all operate on a single, rigid frame that divides the world into a simple binary. The labels differ – oppressed and oppressor, pure and corrupt, patriot and parasite – but the architecture is the same, and it cannot tolerate complexity. When the real world refuses to fit neatly into their categories, they do not adjust their framework. They look for an external energy source that can sustain the fiction. That source, today, is the Jews.

Hating Jews is a recruitment tool. Antisemitism is a feature, not a bug. Neither the Groypers nor progressive groups can survive without making Jews a defining part of their narratives and the main objects of their hate.

The Jewish people do not fit the prefab slots that these ideologies depend on. They are indigenous to the Middle East but often identified as “white.” They are a global minority but numerically a majority in one small country. They are historically persecuted yet statistically successful. They are religious, cultural, and national all at once. They refuse to sit obediently in anyone’s political taxonomy. For any worldview that insists on reducing history, power, and morality to a tidy binary, this is a serious problem. And instead of rethinking the system, the system redefines the Jews as the very thing the ideology opposes.

To the far-Left, today, Jews are white supremacists. To the far-Right, today, Jews are outsiders who support illegal immigration of people of color. Jews are endlessly malleable Play-Doh to fit whatever the haters need to hate.

The modern Left has a large portfolio of causes, many of them only loosely connected of at all. Climate activists, police abolitionists, anti-capitalists, housing activists, and gender theorists do not share much naturally. Yet when Israel enters the picture, suddenly the various components behave as if they belong to one organism. Anti-Zionism becomes the connective tissue. It provides the emotional intensity and pretense of moral clarity that none of the other issues reliably deliver on their own. Protests about local policy questions are sporadic, but protests about Israel produce an almost guaranteed turnout. The movement’s diffuse parts cohere around a single, simple storyline, and once someone absorbs that storyline, the rest of the package flows to them in short order. The antisemitism is not the conclusion. It is the entry point.

On the Far-Right, the pattern is older but functions similarly. Antisemitism has always existed there, but for a long period it remained socially embarrassing to say out loud. All it took was a bit of political permission and a culture of online performative defiance to turn private bigotry into a public organizing principle. Once the taboo evaporated, people who had previously stayed quiet now treat antisemitic speech as if it were an act of courage. The language of “fighting the elites” or “exposing the truth” gives personal resentment the appearance of moral heroism. The ideology suddenly gains mass not because it has improved or clarified anything, but because it has normalized the one element that insulates it from contradiction. By shifting the blame for every failure, disappointment, or social anxiety onto a small, imagined cabal, the movement protects its worldview from scrutiny and converts old hatreds into new political energy.

Is it not strange that campaigns for local office are obsessed with the candidates' view on Israel? Isn't it odd that both the far-Left and the far-Right claim that the Jews are silencing them? And at the same time both sides also do everything they can to silence and marginalize Jews?

In both cases, there is literally nothing the Jews can do, short of public suicide, that will mollify them. The biggest massacre of Jews in nearly 80 years causes more antisemitism. A ceasefire that they claimed they wanted for two years prompts more antisemitism. Jews as victims, or Jews as wanting peace, is not the narrative they want the world to see; since demonizing Jews is so central to their worldviews they use these situations as springboards for more hate.

And it works. Hating Jews publicly has become not just bravery, but a recruitment tool. The newly indoctrinated antisemites and the publicity that hate receives from social media algorithms form a feedback loop where that the Jews actually do becomes irrelevant - they have become the faceless, evil Other and whatever Jews do is by definition evil.

Jew-hatred is not peripheral nowadays. It is as central to these movements as it was in 1930s Germany, in 1950s Soviet Union. Facts are considered aggression and aggression is recast as justice.

And dismissing these as fringe phenomena, with only 5% or 15% of their movements who really are antisemites, is very shortsighted.

The old brain teaser about the bacteria in the jar is the right analogy: if it doubles every minute and fills the jar in sixty minutes, it will be only half full at minute fifty-nine. At minute fifty-five, it looks nearly empty. That illusion is what makes exponential growth so dangerous.

Antisemitism today feels like minute fifty-five. Yes, the hardcore antisemites are still a minority, but the rate of growth is steep. The normalization is accelerating. The political oxygen is rich. We are watching both the Far-Left and the Far-Right fill the jar rapidly.

This is not the time to relax because “only a small percentage” is openly hateful. It is the time to recognize how fast the cancer is metastasizing. We may have only a few minutes left on the clock before disaster.

Buy EoZ's books on Amazon!

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

PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism (February 2022)

11/19 Links Pt2: Fighting the Post-Oct. 7 Battles; CAIR and the Campus Hamasniks; Hatred of Israel Caused Iran's Water Crisis; The Roots of a Replacement Fantasy

From Ian:

Seth Mandel: Fighting the Post-Oct. 7 Battles

Two recent stories demonstrate how this realization is settling in across the broader Jewish community. One is the recent account of Rahm Emanuel, the former Democratic congressman and Chicago mayor who is contemplating running for the Democratic presidential nomination in 2028, speaking to the Jewish Federations general assembly. Emanuel made the case for adapting to the new political narrative around Israel: “For the generation under 30, the last two years will be as seminal a definition as what the Six-Day War was for those six days for a generation. We have our work cut out for us.” It was an attempt to warn the Jewish American audience that 2028 is going to be, especially on the Democratic side, a parade of anti-Israel rhetoric. But it was also an acknowledgement that we aren’t the naive fools our pursuers think we are.

Another story is in the Times of Israel, and it’s about that erstwhile Diasporic golden land of Canada: “According to a report published by B’nai Brith Canada in April, Canadians experienced 6,219 antisemitic incidents in 2024, or an average of about 17 incidents of harassment, vandalism and violence per day. That was 125% higher than in 2022, and about 7% higher than in 2023, when hatred exploded after October 7.”

Says Noah Shack, the CEO of Canada’s umbrella organization for Jewish federations: “Now, we’re seeing synagogues firebombed, shootings at schools, people assaulted, and discrimination and hate in schools, universities and in the workplace. This isn’t just about our community, it’s about the threat that this extremism poses to the Canadian way of life.”

Solutions are harder to come by than realizations, but the realizations are the essential first steps. As expected, the post-Oct. 7 world is a different place, and navigating that new world requires every Jewish leader and organization to acknowledge what has changed.

We see one example of this playing out right now. The Anti-Defamation League has taken steps to refocus on anti-Semitism after years of sacrificing its founding mission for a chance to be part of the progressive political coalition. ADL launched a “Mamdani Monitor” which consists of an anti-Semitism tipline for New Yorkers and a pledge to scrutinize the Mamdani administration’s actions and appointments. It’s an entirely reasonable, moderate approach, and it could be useful so long as the ADL follows through. The emerging Jewish consensus that bad actors must be held to account is healthy.

But it has inspired anger from, for example, the Nexus Project, a liberal critic of attempts to fight anti-Semitism and, though young, a relic of the pre-Oct. 7 status quo. Jill Jacobs, an activist with another progressive Jewish group, called the ADL “Islamophobic.”

Still, these attempts to conjure the naive and dangerous fantasies that were shattered on Oct. 7 haven’t had much effect; reality is reality, and the Jewish community has been clear-eyed. As Emanuel said, “[I]f we don’t understand the depth of where we are, we’re never going to fix the problem.” The new normal isn’t pretty, but we don’t have to let it become permanent.

Seth Mandel: CAIR and the Campus Hamasniks

CAIR doing its best Nick Fuentes impression is as good an example of the “horseshoe effect” as one will find.

But the real icing on the cake came just a few hours later. According to the New York Post, a new report by the Network Contagion Research Institute and the Intelligent Advocacy Network, two anti-extremism groups, reveals that CAIR has been subsidizing pro-Hamas violence on campus. As the Post reports:

“In California, the largest arm of the CAIR web of nonprofits, affiliates in San Francisco and Los Angeles raised more than $100,000 in donations for campus radicals, while the main group solicited $64,000 in donations, records show.

“The money was then offered as interest free loans in grants of $1,000 to students who lost ‘scholarships, housing or other support because of their advocacy,’ according to CAIR’s website.

“In October 2024, CAIR-CA awarded $20,000 in loans and scholarships to 20 student protestors from the ‘Champions of Justice Fund.’”

Such punishments were so rare, of course, that to qualify for CAIR’s apparent subsidies, one would have had to be among the students causing real harm to those around them.

Anti-Semitism alone has rarely been enough to cost groups like CAIR their political influence. Perhaps now they have finally crossed too many lines.

Watchdog Groups Release Findings of CAIR-California Misuse of $26 Million in Taxpayer Funds

The Council on American-Islamic Relations, California (CAIR-CA) systematically misused millions of dollars in government grants while concealing extensive lobbying activities, according to findings released by the Network Contagion Research Institute (NCRI) and the Intelligent Advocacy Network (IAN).

The organization has received over $26 million in state and federal funding since 2022, even as it now faces investigations by both the Department of Justice’s Executive Office for Immigration Review and the California Fair Political Practices Commission.

Circular Funding Scheme and Accounting Failures
The investigation uncovered what researchers describe as a circular funding scheme: CAIR-CA redirected over $3.7 million back to two of its own offices in Los Angeles and San Diego through subgrants, despite requirements mandating at least $5 million go to independent providers. Public records show these offices are not separate legal entities but operate under the same tax identification number as CAIR-CA, making the transfers effectively self-payments.

Independent auditors conducting CAIR-CA’s 2023 Single Audit identified significant deficiencies that prevented verification of how federal funds were spent. The findings indicate CAIR-CA failed to record grant expenditures in its accounting system and did not retain required reports on service delivery or proof of submission to regulators.

Undisclosed Lobbying Activities
Between 2013 and 2023, CAIR-CA spent over $3.8 million on lobbying expenses while reporting only $672,537 to the IRS—leaving $3.13 million undisclosed, according to the report. The largest spike in undisclosed lobbying coincided with increased federal funding in 2023. Federal law prohibits using federal funds for lobbying activities.

Beginning in late 2023, CAIR-CA’s advocacy became increasingly dominated by anti-Israel political mobilization. The organization’s 2023 annual report prominently featured a “STOP THE GENOCIDE” banner, marking a shift from previous years. Recent lobbying efforts in 2025 include campaigns to influence California legislation on redistricting and school discrimination protections—all conducted while receiving federal funds.

Despite receiving millions in government grants, the findings show CAIR-CA did not properly report them on IRS Form 990 filings, instead obscuring them under general contributions. The organization also failed to disclose subgrants to regional chapters and omitted required related-party transaction disclosures.

11/19 Links Pt1: There's Only One Path to Peace: Eliminating Hamas; PA nearly doubled payments to terrorists in 2025; Kafkaesque smears against Maccabi fans cannot be allowed to rest

From Ian:

Aviva Klompas: Along the Israel-Gaza Border, There's Only One Path to Peace: Eliminating Hamas

When the UN Security Council approved a U.S.-backed resolution Monday to deploy an International Stabilization Force in Gaza, it acknowledged a core truth: The security vacuum that enabled Oct. 7 cannot be allowed to return. Two realities must remain immovable as the world designs Gaza's future: Hamas cannot retain any foothold, and Israel cannot be expected to outsource its security to external actors.

Last week I traveled to Kibbutz Nir Oz, where 117 of its 415 residents were murdered or kidnapped on Oct. 7. I walked around with Irit Lahav, who hid in her home with her daughter for 12 hours as Hamas terrorists tried five separate times to break down her door. She jammed a boat oar beneath the handle and prayed it would hold.

Before the attack, Irit believed deeply in coexistence. She was one of the many Gaza-border Israelis who advocated for Palestinians and regularly drove sick Gazans to Israeli hospitals. "I thought the Palestinians were good people like me who want peace," Irit told me. "Now I understand they really, really hate us - and they think that rape, murder, and kidnapping are legitimate."

Two days later, I stood in Sajaiya in Gaza, a former Hamas stronghold. From Sajaiya, I could see the homes of Nahal Oz, another Israeli border community a five-minute drive away. The distance between a Hamas command complex and the homes of Israeli families is measured in minutes.

What happened in Nir Oz and the other border communities was the predictable result of leaving a heavily armed, ideologically-driven movement embedded minutes from Israeli homes. Two years later, the threat remains. Tunnels still run beneath Gaza, weapons caches remain, and Hamas's ideology is wholly intact. No international plan can succeed while this reality persists.

Military Intelligence: "The Plan to Annihilate Israel Remains Alive and Operational"

Donald Trump once confessed he was "drawn almost pathologically to complex deals, partly because they tend to be more interesting." This approach succeeded spectacularly in securing the release of hostages from Gaza, both living and deceased.

Yet Phase 2 of the Gaza ceasefire agreement has emerged so far as an illusion. Hamas, just like Hizbullah, harbors no dreams of disarmament. It shows absolutely no interest, and its leaders discuss this candidly. Hamas is reconstructing command and control systems, having already redeployed 7,500 operatives across the Gaza territory remaining under its authority.

It has resumed street patrols, salary payments, and tax collection. Its members break arms and legs of anyone questioning their continued rule, restore tunnels, manufacture weapons anew, and settle accounts with armed clans that assisted Israel before the ceasefire.

Gaza isn't simply a minor irritant, it constitutes the core issue because from there was launched October 7's "gospel" and Israel's destruction blueprint, coordinated with Iran and its proxies. A senior military intelligence official recently informed cabinet ministers that "the plan to annihilate Israel remains alive and operational, with October 7 continuing to inspire all Israel's regional enemies."

Trump's America presumes that economic enticements provide the key, and that every problem features a deal awaiting signature once proper incentives materialize. But business principles don't govern everything. The Israeli-Palestinian conflict encompasses identity, religion, security, and national aspiration dimensions, and that Gaza residents and Hamas are essentially identical.

The hatred culture centered on Israel's destruction cannot be eliminated through financial means. Israel and its military possess genuine motivation and capability - now with no living hostages remaining in Gaza - to complete the mission there and strip Hamas of weaponry. Trump's peace vision might potentially materialize only after Hamas's Gaza elimination.

Sa’ar: PA nearly doubled payments to terrorists in 2025

The Palestinian Authority nearly doubled the payments it issued in 2025 to convicted terrorists and to the families of those killed while carrying out attacks, despite its repeated claims to have halted the practice, Israel’s Foreign Ministry revealed Wednesday.

Last year, Ramallah disbursed $144 million in payments rewarding attacks against Israelis. In 2025, it has already committed $214 million, “and the year isn’t even over,” Israeli Foreign Minister Gideon Sa’ar tweeted.

“I call on Europe and the world to hold the P.A. accountable for funding terrorism. Stop Pay-for-Slay NOW!” Jerusalem’s top diplomat added.

Last week, Sa’ar accused Palestinian Authority chief Mahmoud Abbas of attempting to “fool the world” by firing his finance minister, reportedly over “unauthorized payments” to Arab terrorists and their families.

Ramallah’s official Wafa news agency reported that P.A. Minister of Planning and International Cooperation Istifan Salameh would replace Omar Bitar, though it gave no reason for Bitar’s dismissal.

According to local reports, Bitar had transferred funds to terrorists in Israeli prisons through a mechanism Ramallah had ostensibly reformed under pressure from the United States and Europe.

The revamped mechanism Bitar allegedly bypassed rebrands the stipends as “welfare support,” shifting the system from an official ministry to an “independent” foundation controlled by the P.A.

Sa’ar told reporters in Budapest on Oct. 27 that “contrary to the P.A.’s promises in English, they are continuing their pay-for-slay policy.

We’d spent a lovely evening with old family friends — the kind of people who’ve been part of your life for so long that conversation feels natural, no matter how many years have passed. I think we could have talked forever and never run out of things to say. So we talked for hours about our memories from a different time and place, about the people we’d loved and lost, and about what it means to revisit a world that lives now only in the stories we share.

But as we walked back toward our car, I had a sudden flash of inspiration. Up until now, the conversation had been about our shared past, but here beside me was a Reform rabbi in the flesh. I wasn't going to miss the opportunity to learn how Reform Jewry felt about Israel in relation to Gaza and the war.

“How does the Reform community view the war in Gaza? Do they think it’s a genocide?”

He looked down and gave a small, quizzical smile — the kind people get when they’re about to explain something to you. “You have to understand. The Palestinian people are oppressed.”

Somehow, the conversation had shifted. I was told that Israel had withheld aid from Gaza. I asked if he knew that since October 7, Israel has facilitated the delivery of over two million tons of aid, including 1.3 million tons of food. I asked if he knew of any other country that supplies aid to the enemy in wartime.

He was unimpressed. Jews, in his view, are supposed to be different.

It didn’t matter to him that historically, the enemy is never fed in wartime, let alone sent massive amounts of aid. His answer was that we’re supposed to be fighting Hamas, not the Gazan people. “Do you think all of Gaza is Hamas?” he asked.

“Actually, yes,” I told him.

His face lit up. He thought I’d just proven his point. To him, my answer meant I was a hater, that the war was all about hate, and that Israel was punishing the Gazan people for what Hamas did.

But it’s nonsense, of course. The people of Gaza are with Hamas all the way, and the latest poll from the Ramallah-based Palestinian Center for Policy and Survey Research back me up. As the New York Post reported this week, Hamas’ popularity has surged:

— 51% of Gazans now approve of Hamas’ performance, in spite of its violent “crackdowns” that amount to public executions.
— A year ago, Hamas’ approval was just 39%, and Gazans were protesting in the streets, calling on the terrorists to give up power.

There’s no way around it. The trend is clear: support for Hamas is not shrinking — it’s growing.

And let’s not forget: the people of Gaza overwhelmingly voted Hamas into power in democratic elections overseen by the UN. I asked the rabbi if he knew that not everyone who killed, burned, raped, and beheaded Israelis on October 7 was a Hamas operative. Had he seen the footage of the crowds spitting on and kicking the bodies of murdered Jews dragged into Gaza?

“Yes, yes,” he said. “I’ve seen all that.”

The implication being that even so, not all Gazans are Hamas.

But it doesn’t matter if they’ve signed a pledge or worn a uniform. It’s all the same — they drink in Jew-hatred with their mothers’ milk. Little girls sing antisemitic jump-rope rhymes. And the so-called “regular people of Gaza” didn’t just celebrate the massacre on October 7. They took hostages into their homes. They held them, hid them, used them. They made them cook and clean. They helped keep them captive. They gave terrorists cover and stored weapons for them under baby cribs.

One of the things our rabbi friend said to me was that Bibi says one thing in English and another in Hebrew. “I’ve heard him,” he said.

I wasn’t sure what he meant, and I didn’t much care. But the irony was hard to miss: it’s the enemy, people like Abu Mazen who talks about peace in English and killing “Jew dogs” in Arabic.

I asked him where he gets his news. “Everywhere from Al Jazeera to the Jerusalem Post,” he said, as if those two outlets covered the entire gamut of views on Israel and Gaza. I must have smiled, because he quickly expanded his list: “Israel National News.”

I asked him if he’d seen the New York Times article with the skeletal child who turned out not to be starving at all. “I know about that,” he said — he knew it had been a manipulated, false report. So I asked, “But when you first saw it, did you believe it?”

He looked down, a little sheepish. “Sure, there’s some misreporting,” he said. “But it’s undeniable that people in Gaza were starving.”

“Uh huh,” I told him. “That’s because Hamas steals the aid — they even ate it in front of the hostages.”

I asked if he’d scanned the QR code* Bibi wore during his address to the UN.

He said he hadn’t watched the speech.

So I explained that Bibi had worn a badge on his lapel with a QR code, inviting the audience to zoom in with their phones and see the footage and still photos of the October 7 carnage for themselves — to finally understand why we went to war, and why Hamas has to be destroyed.

Within 24 hours, the QR code had been scanned over a million times, with roughly 30 percent of the scans coming from Iran and Gaza.

Our rabbi friend said he wouldn’t have looked at the photos or videos anyway. He doesn’t need see these things to understand what happened, that there would be no value for him in looking at the gruesome images. He knows what happened.

I knew I was blowing up the evening a bit, and I felt bad about that. I’d genuinely wanted to know what the Reform community thinks, not pick a fight with him. I told him so, and I thanked him.

But on the way home I kept thinking: here was a Reform rabbi who is unaware that the Gazan people support Hamas even now and that Israel has sent in massive amounts of aid nonetheless. His concept is that Gazans are oppressed. That Israel withheld allow aid from Gaza. That Bibi says one thing in English and another in Hebrew. And anyone who believes that all of Gaza is aligned with Hamas is, by definition, a hater.

I don’t mind that designation at all, because I hate evil and I especially hate Amalek. Take that as you will.

I left with the sense that the rabbi was trying to sound more reasonable than the people who openly accuse Israel of genocide. And I appreciate that. I know he believes the Gazans are oppressed, and that Israel is oppressing an oppressed people by “withholding” aid — which seemed to be a quiet way of suggesting deliberate starvation. He won’t say the word genocide, but the implication is there. If indeed, this reflects the views of the wider Reform Jewish community, I think it is very sad.

There was a time when American Jews reflexively stood with Israel. Now, too many are eager to criticize Israel. They think this is a virtue, a kind of healthy introspection. And it's obvious they want to blend in with wider society, especially within the progressive movement. But they don’t even have the facts.

*Note that Israelis are blocked from seeing this content, because it’s too difficult for us to bear. Some do it anyway, accessing the website through a VPN. And then they are sorry. I saw the following comment on Facebook from an Israeli who succumbed to the temptation: “I used a VPN...you don't want to see it.”

Buy EoZ's books on Amazon!

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

PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism (February 2022)