Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News

Sunday, January 19, 2025

Book review: "Young Zionist Voices"

Young Zionist Voices: A New Generation Speaks Out is a collection of 31 essays that make one hopeful for the future.

Similar to his previous book, Jewish Priorities: Sixty-Five Proposals for the Future of Our People, David Hazony found a diverse group of writers to each write about a specific topic, in this case Zionism.

While the writers have different colors, nationalities, politics and opinions, they all share a love of Israel and they are all unapologetically and proudly Zionist.

This is not a book that makes the case for Zionism. It is a book that shows the passion and challenges that young people today - all seemingly under 30 - have in living in a world where antisemitism and its twin anti-Zionism have become mainstream. Virtually all of them have chosen to respond to the recent tsunami of hate, especially after October 7, by leaning in to their love of Israel.

The essays are all smart and forceful. A few of the writers go beyond intelligence into wisdom.

They also make me feel old. I started my Israel advocacy when I was already more than a decade older than every one of these writers, and the ones who were born after I started this site were not yet in first grade. I am ashamed to say that I was not familiar with most of them and I need to expand the circle of people I follow on social media to include many of them.

To be sure, there are occasional passages that show that a few of the thinkers do not have the experience or historical knowledge to properly put today's events in context of the past two millennia of Jew hatred. That's okay - they will learn, and they are eager to learn.

The target audience seems to be people who are already committed Zionists, to make use feel better about the future. That's fine - we all need chizuk. However, I think that there is another audience that really needs to read this: the young Jewish adults just entering college or those who find themselves confused by seeing their friends turn against their spiritual homeland.

I recently wrote about "permission structures," the concept behind J-Street and JVP to allow Jews to become anti-Israel while pretending to remain committed to Judaism. If Jews see their fellow Jews turn against Israel it gives them "permission" to do the same.

Young Zionist Voices can and should be used to give a permission structure for young Jews to become proud Zionists. The modern "permission structure" gives a false pretense of "human rights" to smear their people, parents and ancestors. Young Zionist Voices gives a permission structure to be proud of who they are and to stand up for their own people. It shows that the most admirable Jews are the ones who fully and unapologetically support their own.

Young Zionist Voices represents the Jewish and Zionist leaders of tomorrow, and the future is a lot brighter than we thought.

Buy EoZ's books on Amazon!

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

PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism (February 2022)

Reminder: @UNRWA teachers in Gaza celebrate terror - and Hitler

International organizations are rallying to pressure Israel not to shut down UNRWA in its territory. The World Food Programme, for example, last week wrote in a report, "WFP can send around 1,600 trucks of food (30,200 tons) each month to facilitate distributions for over 1 million people. In order to reach everyone in need, UNRWA’s support is critical. WFP is committed to bolstering UNRWA’s food assistance delivery efforts. "

I was just browsing around some UN documents and I came across a submission by an Israeli NGO Amuta called "Palestinian Exploitation of Children as Weapons of War."

One footnote references a post I wrote on this site in 2015, which is quite relevant today as the international community wants to shore up UNRWA as a legitimate organization.

I had found a Facebook group of Gaza UNRWA teachers. Among the things the teachers posted were photos of their students pretending to be jihadists:

Here is a "prescription" for shooting rockets to Israel.

Name of patient: Ben Gurion Age: 78 years old Male

1 M75 (Hamas rocket) twice a day, a rocket in the morning and a rocket in the evening at 6 o'clock, before eating, together with a warning siren

And here is a (false) Hitler quote:

"I could have killed all the Jews of the world but I left some of them (alive) so that the world knows why I am killing them" - Hitler

UNRWA never acknowledged this. They silently removed the group without apology. They never, as far as I know, disciplined the teachers and employees who proudly posted antisemitism and support for terror in their group.

There is no reason whatsoever to think that those teachers are not still teaching hate in Gaza.

This is only one reason why UNRWA should not exist.

Buy EoZ's books on Amazon!

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

PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism (February 2022)

On Friday, the UN issued a press release:

Under-Secretary-General Miguel Ángel Moratinos, High Representative for the United Nations Alliance of Civilizations (UNAOC), will hold a hybrid press briefing to announce the launch of the United Nations Action Plan to Enhance Monitoring and Response to Antisemitism.

The United Nations has long worked on addressing antisemitism. The Action Plan, which is focused on the United Nations system, is developed by UNAOC. Building on the numerous efforts undertaken by the UN over past decades, this Action Plan aims to ensure an even more coordinated and effective response to counter antisemitism.

In particular, the Action provides detailed recommended actions for enhancing the United Nations Monitoring and Response to Antisemitism. These action points include:

Establish a United Nations Monitoring and Evaluation Working Group to monitor and evaluate the impact of policies and measures to address antisemitism
Enhance awareness and understanding of antisemitism among United Nations personnel
Promote implementation of the Action Plan on the UN’s monitoring and countering antisemitism

Yes, the world's most prominent organization that justifies antisemitism claims to be an authority in fighting antisemitism.

The document itself doesn't say anything directly objectionable. Indirectly, it does, by refusing to accept the IHRA definition of antisemitism even though it knows that is the only one accepted by any country.

The ability to understand and identify antisemitism is crucial to global efforts to combat hatred and prejudice, and to uphold human rights and human dignity. While a shared understanding can serve not only the work of the United Nations, but of all nations striving to create effective policies and programmes to combat this form of hate, the absence of a universally accepted definition cannot affect decisive action aimed to root out antisemitism.

As of December 2024, 45 United Nations Member States have adopted or endorsed the IHRA version as a non-legally binding working definition of antisemitism, and many use it for training law enforcement agencies and educators. While there is a diversity of views and other definitions have been developed , unlike the IHRA definition, none of them have been adopted by any United Nations Member State. Nonetheless, the United Nations Secretariat does not endorse any definition on antisemitism.

It is important to note that any definition of antisemitism should be applied taking into account the guidance provided in the Human Rights Committee general comment No. 34 on freedoms of opinion and expression (2011), in the Rabat Plan of Action (2012), and in the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination general recommendation No. 35 on combating racist hate speech (2013). In this regard, the Special Rapporteur on freedom of religion and belief noted in 2019 that criticism of the Government of Israel is not per se antisemitic, , unless it is accompanied by manifestations of hatred towards Jews in general or by expressions that build on traditional antisemitic stereotypes.

This is their way of saying that the IHRA definition calls normal criticism of the Government of Israel antisemitic - when it says the opposite. What the UN is really saying is that no criticism of Israel can be considered antisemitic unless it explicitly mentions Jews or says things like "Zionists control the world financial system."

Holocaust inversion, for example, is not antisemitic according to the UN.

Saying that Jewish nationalism is racist while other nationalisms are not is not antisemitic according to the UN.

The announcement is a study in hypocrisy.

After all, when UN representatives say antisemitic things, the UN doesn't say a word of protest.

Francesca Albanese, UN Special Rapporteur on the Occupied Palestinian Territories agreed with a social media post that compared Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to Adolf Hitler. She has compared the Gaza war started by Hamas with the Holocaust several times. In February 2024, Albanese stated that the victims of the October 7 Hamas attacks were killed "not because of their Judaism, but in response to Israeli oppression," a remark that was condemned by France and Germany as antisemitic.

Miloon Kothari, a member of the UN Human Rights Council’s Commission of Inquiry on the Situation in Israel and the West Bank and Gaza made comments in July 2022 referring to the "Jewish lobby," echoing age-old antisemitic tropes.

Richard A. Falk, when he was UN Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the Palestinian territories, posted a cartoon in 2011 depicting a dog with a Jewish head-covering urinating on Lady Justice while devouring bloody human bones. Only when people complained did he apologize.

In all cases, the UN did nothing.

But that only scratches the surface, because the UN's double standards and obsession with Israel - so many anti-Israel resolutions both in the General Assembly and the Human Rights Council while all but ignoring human rights violations by the rest of the world - makes the UN one of the top causes and purveyors of antisemitism today.

And now we are going to believe the UN when they claim they are going to combat antisemitism?

Fire Albanese to begin with. Publicly accept the IHRA definition of antisemitism that says that double standards for Israel is not acceptable. Then maybe we can discuss whether the UN does anything concrete to combat antisemitism.

Buy EoZ's books on Amazon!

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

PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism (February 2022)

Ari Fuld's murderer is getting released. A rapist is getting released. Major terror leaders are getting released. This is SO BAD.

I really want to find a silver lining in the hostage deal, but every day it seems worse.

Hillel Fuld tweeted that the person who stabbed his hero brother Ari Fuld to death is on the list of terrorists to be released.

This was not a terror attack from 20 years ago during the second intifada. Ari was murdered in 2018, and he managed to shoot his murderer and save other lives before succumbing.

Other people being released include leaders of terror organizations, not just low level operatives. Most of them have already been in prison for over two decades. But when I see a name like Mahmoud Atallah, I am enraged. Atallah was indicted in September for raping a female prison guard at Gilboa Prison but he has been accused of having female guards under a reign of sexual terror at the prison, a scandal that also involves guards turning a blind eye.

How could such a monster be released?

Studies have been done showing that the number of people killed by released prisoners is far higher than the number who have been saved in swaps. More Israelis will be killed by these murderers in coming years, without question. It is irresponsible to release them knowing that the lives saved today will be far outstripped tomorrow.

It is the highest duty of a nation to protect its citizens. That doesn't only mean today but also in the future.

I want to see the hostages released safely to their families as much as anyone, but this puts the entire nation of Israel at further risk.

Buy EoZ's books on Amazon!

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

PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism (February 2022)

01/18 Links: Shoah Revisionism After Gaza; Israel’s Prisoner’s Dilemma; Israel-Hamas truce to begin Sunday at 8:30 am; 70+ arrests at anti-Israel London protest

From Ian:

Dr. Dave Rich: Shoah Revisionism After Gaza

Still, any misleading equivalences or flawed comparisons made by supporters of Israel are as nothing compared to the unrelenting avalanche of bad faith, malign and ignorant distortions and abuse of the Holocaust that have become entirely normalized within anti-Israel discourse. Every anti-Israel demonstration features countless placards comparing Israel to Nazi Germany, Israeli politicians to Hitler, and Gaza to Auschwitz. You’ll hear it on radio phone-ins and TV debates, while #GazaHolocaust trends repeatedly online. Even Holocaust museums and archives have been targeted: “Gaza” was daubed on the sign of Lon- don’s Wiener Holocaust Library in November 2023, and a pro-Palestinian demonstration was called outside the Holocaust Memorial Museum in Washington DC, although that was subsequently cancelled after an outcry. You find it at the highest levels of Palestinian politics: Mahmoud Abbas blamed Israel for “fifty Holocausts” in 2022, and the following year in a speech at the United Nations he compared Israel to Nazi propa- ganda chief Joseph Goebbels. The Hamas charter accuses Israel of “Nazi treatment” of Palestinians. It is difficult to convey just how ubiquitous this is, and how much it goes unchallenged in anti-Israel circles. It would be banal were it not so grotesque.[5]

There are lots of reasons why people do this. Some of it reflects a well- meaning, if perhaps naïve, effort to use the idea of “Never Again” as a rallying cry for peace and humanity in today’s world. However, this is the exception rather than the rule. Most of the time when people invoke the Holocaust to criticize Israel, they do not have such admirable motives. For some, it is an exercise in finger-wagging at the Jewish people, as if they failed to learn the right lessons from their own near miss with exter- mination. For others, there is gleeful relief that they no longer need to listen to Jews going on about the Holocaust, because now those same Jews are behaving just like the Nazis did. There’s a sense of bringing the Jews down a rung or two on the hierarchy of competitive victimhood, allied to a belief that any political or societal benefits derived from this will transfer on to other, more deserving, groups. Then there is the sheer taboo-busting pleasure of doing something so monumentally offensive in the name of anti-racism and human rights. The one place a person of the left can wave a swastika around without worrying about losing their progressive status is, with no irony at all, on a march against the world’s only Jewish state. It’s how self-identifying anti-racists get to experience the transgressive thrill of pretending to be Nazis for a day.

There is a much less vulgar version of the widespread accusation that Israel is committing a genocide in Gaza. This has, of course, reached the status of a formal case at the International Court of Justice, which will presumably follow due process in adjudicating on that case. In that respect, it is worth noting that talk of a genocide in Gaza began within just a few days of the October 7 attack, and often came from people who had already been arguing for some years that the Palestinians were being subjected to a ‘slow genocide’ by Israel. The alacrity with which so many of these anti-Israel voices began to proclaim a genocide in Gaza so soon after October 7 almost gave the impression of a ghoulish anticipation that events seemed to be catching up with the discourse, rather than the discourse following and describing events.

Buried within this world of Nazi comparisons and genocide allegations lies an intellectual effort to construct an argument that Israel’s sins are so egregious, the Jewish people—or at least, those Jews who have been seduced by Zionism—have lost the moral standing to continue as the guardians of Holocaust memory. Perhaps the most serious and thoughtful example of this came in a 7,500-word essay in the London Review of Books in March 2024, written by the author Pankaj Mishra, titled “The Shoah after Gaza.”6 Drawing on the writings of Holocaust survivors such as Primo Levi and, especially, Jean Améry, as well as Israeli intellectuals and writers including Boaz Evron and Yeshayahu Leibowitz, Mishra sketched a portrait of an Israel in thrall to paranoid victimhood and “a pitiless national ethos” that is replicating the darkest episodes of human history. According to Mishra, Israel has “turned the murder of six million Jews into an intense national preoccupation.” He quotes Leibowitz accusing Israel of “Nazification” and Evron warning that Israel is displaying “racist Nazi attitudes,” and Mishra himself con- demns “the liquidation of Gaza”—a form of words that seems to mimic the Nazi liquidation of Jewish ghettos during the Holocaust. At the same time, Mishra argues, diaspora Jewry since the 1960s, especially but not only in the United States, has willingly gone along with the instrumen- talization of Holocaust memory in the service not only of Zionism but of the Western post-war political order.

Matti Friedman: Israel’s Prisoner’s Dilemma

Facing the hostage dilemma in 1985, some figures in government had to publicly, and embarrassingly, reverse earlier positions. Seven years before, for example, Yitzhak Rabin, had criticized a deal to free one Israeli soldier for 76 prisoners: By releasing terrorists guilty of killing Israelis, he raged, the government had “crossed the red line.” But at the time of that statement, Rabin was in the political opposition. When the Jibril deal came up for a vote in 1985, he was in power, and he said yes. One of the prisoners released was Ahmed Yassin, who later became the spiritual leader of Hamas.

Having leaders say one thing when in opposition, and another when in power, would become familiar to Israelis confronting the hostage dilemma in subsequent decades—and indeed this week. One outspoken critic of the Jibril deal, as it happens, was the young politician Benjamin Netanyahu. The future prime minister positioned himself as an expert on counterterrorism with books like A Place Among the Nations, from 1993, where he castigated the deal as a fatal blow to Israel’s efforts to forge an international front against terrorism. (The lone fatality of the heroic Entebbe raid that freed the hijacked hostages was Netanyahu’s brother Yoni, who led the rescue mission.) Netanyahu wrote that the Palestinian uprising known as the First Intifada, which began two years later, in 1987, was due in part to the irresponsible release of more than 1,000 prisoners by Israel’s leaders.

Just a year after the trauma of the Jibril deal, however, Israelis were presented with a tragedy that illustrated the opposite danger—that of failing to make a deal. In 1986 an air force navigator, Ron Arad, had to abandon his fighter jet after a technical malfunction over south Lebanon, and was captured by Lebanese Shia fighters. Arad was alive, and his captors named their price, but public opinion was still stinging from the previous year’s asymmetrical bargain. Attempts to win Arad’s release through military means failed, talks dragged on, and by 1988 the navigator had vanished, never to be found. To this day, the name Ron Arad is familiar to most Israelis, including millions who weren’t even born when he was taken prisoner. It’s one you hear frequently right now: Many Israelis say they fear that some of today’s hostages will become “Ron Arads,” the worst fate of all—people whose fates are never known.

Several decades and hostage swaps later, in 2011, Netanyahu was prime minister, and found himself facing the same dilemma he had written about with such assurance as a younger man. A tank crewman, Gilad Shalit, had been captured by Palestinian fighters on the Gaza border five years earlier. Nothing Israel had done brought him any closer to release, and his captors wouldn’t budge on the price. Public sympathy grew for the soldier and his parents, who conducted an effective campaign in favor of a deal with the backing of most of the Israeli press. Netanyahu found, as others did before, that it’s easier to stand on principle when you’re not facing public opinion or fainting mothers—and also understood that the majority of citizens, then and now, want to see their captives home even if the price seems reckless. With the support of most Israelis (though not all), Netanyahu made a deal that freed 1,000 Palestinian prisoners for the crewman—an exchange even more lopsided than the 1985 deal he had opposed.

Among the dangerous prisoners freed in Netanyahu’s deal was Yahya Sinwar. Sinwar went on to mastermind the October 7 attack, including the taking of the current hostages. He led Hamas in Gaza until, a year later, he was killed by Israeli troops amid the carnage of the war he started.

The first stage of the current deal, slated to last 42 days, is meant to release 33 hostages—although “release” is the right word only for the ones who are alive, and not all are. According to reports, Israel will release upwards of 1,000 Palestinian prisoners. The rest of the hostages are to be returned in a planned second and third stage, accompanied by Israeli withdrawals from Gaza and ultimately by the end of the war, but skepticism about these later stages is in order. Much can and will happen before then.

Israelis face the current deal with hope that at least some of the familiar faces from the hostage posters will finally return to their families after 15 months of horror, and also with relief at a pause in the Gaza fighting, which seems to be sinking into a war of attrition, exhausting our military reserves and delivering high Israeli casualties with diminishing returns. But the regional war that began on October 7, 2023 isn’t over, and neither is the terrible dilemma that faces Israel every time hostages fall into enemy hands. Yahya Sinwar might be dead, but the tactic that freed him, and which will now free his comrades, lives on.

Jake Wallis Simons: The Gaza cease-fires is the first win for Trump’s ‘big stick’ dimplomacy

The suffering borne by Palestinian civilians and Israeli families as the war has ground gruesomely on has been immeasurable. The end to all that is welcome. But it’s a coin toss whether this marks an end to Hamas or simply removes the boot from their necks.

The jihadi gang has certainly been dismantled as a coherent military force. It has lost 80% of its men and 90% of its fighting capacity at the hands of the IDF. But as Israeli opposition leader Benny Gantz remarked last March, there’s no point extinguishing 80% of a fire.

This week, US Secretary of State Antony Blinken claimed that Hamas has been coming back hard. Its new recruits may be untrained and underage, but in the continued absence of a plan for the postwar Gaza governance, they will help Hamas retain its grip.

If Hamas keeps quiet and awaits the reconstruction phase, could it build back for another October 7? Perhaps. This time, however, things are different. Hezbollah is castrated in Lebanon, Assad is history and the Ayatollah of Tehran is mourning the smoking ruins of his air defenses, awaiting the coup de grace – which Trump may well deliver – to his nuclear program.

Which brings us to Biden. If this deal had been struck in May, as he had intended, Israel’s Gaza success would have been far more modest.

Rafah would still be a Hamas garrison town, Hamas leaders Yahya Sinwar and Ismail Haniyeh still alive, and the smuggling tunnels from Egypt still ferrying armaments, personnel, and cash into the Strip.

Hezbollah’s leader, Hassan Nasrallah, would not be dead, his pagers and walkie-talkies would not have exploded, Tehran would not have lost its S-300 air defenses and Assad may not have been deposed. This war would have ended with a bruised but belligerent Hamas ready to strike again.

So it was hard to take Biden seriously as he faltered through his statement at the White House.

“It’s America’s support for Israel that helped them badly weaken Hamas . . . and create the conditions for this deal,” he bragged.

American weapons shipments were welcome, but Kamala Harris and Blinken had tried to block these Israeli achievements every step of the way.

It’s not that Biden gave off small-stick energy. It’s that he often had no stick at all. His administration’s craven addiction to the status quo — which presented “de-escalation” as the only legitimate response to every bad guy everywhere — led the world into its most dangerous state since the end of the Second World War.

What began with the shameful Afghan withdrawal ended with missiles on Tel Aviv. Along the way, Biden eased Trump’s “maximum pressure” policy on Venezuela and Iran — look how well that went — and war returned to Europe. Then Trump was elected. And he began to swing that stick.

01/17 Links Pt2: ‘Back to Normal’ After the Gaza War?; Melanie Phillips: 10 Steps the West Must Take In Order to Survive; JVP is a shield for hate, not a voice for peace

From Ian:

Seth Mandel: ‘Back to Normal’ After the Gaza War?

If the Israel-Hamas ceasefire agreement really does herald the end of this war, then combined with the transfer of power in Washington, the political world will largely move on from its yearlong fixation with the Mideast. But we’ve learned some important things about American politics that should inform any attempt to go “back to normal.”

The Israel-Hamas war exposed, for example, the hypocrisy of the #MeToo movement. The more that evidence of Hamas’s use of mass rape and sexual torture mounted—including detailed and graphic admissions by Hamas terrorists who carried out these monstrous acts—the more progressive voices denied it.

We also learned the hard way that “speech is violence” contains some important caveats. The truth, we now know, is that as far as campus activists and Squad-affiliated members of Congress are concerned, Jewish speech is violence—and anti-Jewish violence is speech.

The struggle against racism is noble, which is why it must be continued without the participation of people who fill the streets chanting for the Houthis, a slave-driving and institutionally racist arm of Iranian expansionism, and without white kids from Brooklyn who scream “white imperialist” at a woman from Ethiopia because she wears a Star of David around her neck.

The fight for artistic freedom and freedom of speech will be an uphill battle. The publishing industry has gone to great lengths to suppress Jewish voices; the same is true of the music industry and Jewish performers. The banishing of Jewish authors from bookstores and films with Israeli characters won’t make it any easier, nor will the violent hounding of Jewish and Israeli speakers from campuses.

Speaking of which, reclaiming academic freedom might be the longest of the long shots, as loyalty oaths have come roaring back in America’s institutions of higher learning. Nor does the anti-disinformation campaign have much hope, led as it is by those who post only disinformation and blood libels.

I could go on, but the point is made. Of all the hypocrisies facing the Jewish community post-ceasefire, however, surely none stings more than the one regarding the concept of ceasefires itself.

House Republicans urge Trump to immediately nominate an Abraham Accords ambassador

A group of 47 House Republicans led by Rep. Mike Lawler (R-NY) urged President-elect Donald Trump to immediately nominate an ambassador-rank special envoy for the Abraham Accords, a position that has been left empty since it was created by Congress in late 2023.

Lawler and Rep. Ritchie Torres (D-NY) introduced legislation in 2023 to create a new ambassador-level position for the Abraham Accords, Negev Forum and Middle East regional normalization, which was incorporated into and passed into law through the 2024 National Defense Authorization Act in December 2023.

But the position was left empty as normalization efforts became a secondary priority in the wake of the Oct. 7, 2023 Hamas attack on Israel.

In a letter to Trump on Thursday, the lawmakers said that they’re confident Trump will “prioritize” expanding normalization agreements between Israel and the Arab world in his second administration, and said that having a dedicated official leading those efforts would be “key to a cohesive, effective, and long-lasting normalization effort.”

The lawmakers said that the Biden administration’s failure to fill the slot — in spite of bipartisan pressure to do so — showed “clear indifference to the Abraham Accords,” which they described as “incomprehensible, bad policy, and after the NDAA’s passage in 2023, unlawful.”

“In light of President Biden’s shortcomings, we urge you to make this nomination an immediate priority,” the lawmakers continued. “We know expanding the Abraham Accords remains a key priority for your Administration and having a Presidential Envoy will be a key player in spearheading these efforts. We look forward to working with both you and the Presidential Envoy in the future to strengthen Israel’s role in the Middle East and reach long-lasting stability in the region.”

Ilya Shapiro’s new book ‘Lawless’ calls out dysfunction in higher education

Legal scholar Ilya Shapiro had a personal run-in with cancel culture in 2022, when a tweet he later admitted was poorly worded sparked an online uproar and allegations of racism, leading to an official investigation by Georgetown University Law Center, where he had been hired to lead the university’s Center for the Constitution.

Months later, the university closed its investigation and cleared Shapiro’s name. But too much damage had been done, Shapiro said, and he resigned just days after formally taking the helm of the center.

Now, three years after he posted the ill-fated tweet that criticized President Joe Biden for promising to name a Black woman to the Supreme Court, Shapiro has many more allies in his criticism of the “illiberal takeover” of higher education and legal education in particular, a problem he describes in his new book, Lawless: The Miseducation of America’s Elite.

The aftermath of the Oct. 7, 2023, Hamas attacks in Israel and the rise in antisemitism that followed at many top American universities proved to be a tipping point, Shapiro argued.

“It raised the issue of the dysfunction and pathologies in our institutions of higher education to a national level,” Shapiro, a senior fellow and director of constitutional studies at the Manhattan Institute, told Jewish Insider in an interview on Thursday.

Shapiro, whose career has been spent in libertarian and conservative institutions, asserts that his critique of legal education today is not about the fact that most law school faculty at the nation’s top universities lean to the left politically. In other words, he insists that his concerns are not just the grievances of someone whose views place him firmly in the minority in the legal sphere.

“I want to emphasize that this is not the decades-long complaint that conservatives have with the hippie takeover of the faculty lounge, if you will,” said Shapiro.

Instead, Shapiro is sounding the alarm about what he fears is the corrupting of the legal profession, a field that is crucial to so many facets of American life, by a culture of silence and groupthink.

01/17 Links Pt1: Melanie Phillips: Dealing with the devil Schrödinger’s Ceasefire; Antisemitic vandals target home once owned by high-profile Jewish leader

From Ian:

Melanie Phillips: Dealing with the devil

Taking the Israeli hostages was an evil masterstroke by Hamas. However, America is largely responsible for abandoning them to their fate and allowing Hamas to continue to deploy these innocents as an infernal weapon of blackmail and extortion.

The “hell” of which both Trump and Cotton have spoken should have been threatened on Oct. 8, 2023, against Hamas’s sponsor and protector, Qatar. If the Biden administration had told Qatar that unless the hostages were released within five days the United States would end every arrangement with it on which the Gulf state depends, the hostages would have been freed.

Not only did the Biden administration not do this, but it has continued to this day to treat Qatar as a legitimate interlocutor—while undermining Israel’s desperate attempt to defend itself.

The United States threatened and blackmailed Israel into admitting into Gaza aid supplies most of which were stolen by Hamas, enabling it to make millions of dollars to reinforce its own genocidal war machine. The Bidenites repeatedly instructed Israel to reduce attacks on Iran or its proxies, forcing it to fight its war of survival with its hands tied behind its back in a way that America wouldn’t have dreamed of behaving had it been targeted itself in this way for annihilation.

In part, the Bidenites’ attitude toward Israel—in many respects a continuation of former President Barack Obama’s profound animus against the Jewish state—has been driven by malice. But it’s also infused with the belief that Israel can never win its battle against the Palestinian Arabs and therefore must compromise with them.

That, in turn, is rooted in the liberal belief that all conflict is soluble through negotiation and compromise. But when the conflict is between those committed to genocide and their intended victims—as is the case between the Iran/Palestinian Arab axis and Israel’s Jews—any compromise by Israel is tantamount to offering its throat to be slit.

Trump doesn’t subscribe to this liberal delusion. And his commitment to Israel is genuine and deep. However, Trump is famously transactional. He appears to believe that all conflict is soluble through a deal—provided that he, the supreme practitioner of “the art of the deal,” is directing it.

And so, alarmingly, he has apparently reached out to Iran to begin negotiations over its nuclear program and other nefarious activities. But any negotiation with people who have a non-negotiable agenda strengthens them and weakens their victims.

Trump doesn’t want a war on his watch. He has virtually promised the American people that he will bring an end to war. But sometimes an enemy arises with whom any agreement is a deal with the devil.

If Netanyahu is seen to have been forced to agree to Israel’s defeat in Gaza, he will be finished. As for Trump, the fear is that his transactionalism will mean he ends up playing the same role as the Biden administration in empowering evil.

We can only hold our breath.

Douglas Murray: A real cease-fire deal must ensure the destruction of Hamas

“Bring them home” has been the slogan of the hostage families in Israel since October 7, 2023.

But when Hamas murdered 1,200 people, including 46 Americans, and when it took 254 people hostage, including 12 Americans, there should have been a different slogan: “Give them back. Now.”

Since that day, so many opportunities have been missed.

On October 8, Joe Biden could have called up the governments in Qatar, Iran and other rogue states and told them to get their friends in Hamas to hand over the hostages now.

Or else.

With the leverage the US has in the Middle East, a hardball approach against the Qataris, Iranians and Turks could have solved this mess 15 months ago.

Instead it has taken the pressure of the incoming Trump administration to get a deal agreed to.

It is still a bittersweet moment.

On the one hand, everyone except Hamas and its goons in the West must feel their hearts lift at the idea of the remaining hostages being released.

These are men, women and babies who did nothing wrong but have spent 15 months in the hell of Hamas captivity.

On the other hand, the deal includes the release of Palestinian prisoners, including murderers.

In the first round of releases, nine ill and wounded hostages will be exchanged for 110 Palestinian prisoners who are serving life sentences.

Just think about that.

An Israeli baby could be released in exchange for a dozen grown murderers.

This is very difficult for the Israeli public to stomach, not least because the last time a similar deal was done, Israel released Yahya Sinwar, who went on to mastermind October 7.

Biden has tried to make matters worse by claiming this deal is exactly the same as one he had put in place last May.

What he misses is the work that the IDF has managed to do in the last eight months.

Seth Mandel: Schrödinger’s Ceasefire

Secretary of State Antony Blinken was confident enough to make his farewell speech all about implementing a plan for postwar Gaza: “For many months, we’ve been working intensively with our partners to develop a detailed post-conflict plan that would allow Israel to fully withdraw from Gaza, prevent Hamas from filling back in, and provide for Gaza’s governance, security, and reconstruction… We will hand it off to the Trump administration to carry forward.”

But now that another full day has gone by without a signed agreement, a familiar feeling that comes when covering the Middle East is overtaking the media. The New York Times currently has the following two headlines next to each other on its website: “Hamas After Cease-Fire: Weakened, Isolated but Still Standing” followed immediately by “Deadly strikes in Gaza continue despite the announcement of a cease-fire deal.”

Indeed, according to the IDF, “Muhammad Hasham Zahedi Abu Al-Rus, a Nukhba terrorist who infiltrated Israel on Oct. 7, 2023, and participated in the massacre at the Nova Music Festival, was eliminated overnight in an intelligence-based strike. Additionally, the IAF conducted strikes on approx. 50 terrorist targets across Gaza over the last day, including Hamas and Islamic Jihad terrorists, military compounds, weapons storage facilities, launch posts, weapons manufacturing sites, and observation posts.”

Meanwhile, the Washington Post’s headline writers must think they’re being pranked, as they ping-pong from “Gazans eye ceasefire with mixed feelings: ‘What do we have left?’” to “Ceasefire deal delayed as Netanyahu bargains with far-right allies” and back to “Israel-Hamas ceasefire deal brings hope for devastated northern Gaza”—again, one right after the other.

It’s Schrödinger’s ceasefire!

The real lesson, however, is that there is no such thing as a permanent ceasefire so long as Hamas is in power. After all, there was a ceasefire in place on Oct. 6, 2023. And the trove of reporting in the wake of the attacks made clear that Hamas never had any intention of upholding that ceasefire: its restraint was a key part of its Oct. 7 strategy to lull Israel (and the world) into thinking it was becoming a responsible party in Mideast politics.

Yes, this particular deal is unique because of the circumstances, namely Israel’s hopes of getting back its captives—not because it is going to bring about a permanent truce.

The Middle East you’ll find in Western newspapers doesn’t exist. The reality for those who live in Israel is that, as its enemies say every day, there is one conflict: the attempt to eradicate the Jewish state. Does a boxing match end permanently between rounds? In football does the score go back to 0-0 after halftime?

There’s nothing wrong with diplomats touting a deal they helped negotiate. But the triumphalism from every corner except Israel ought to tell you that one party isn’t expecting a reprieve.

Richard Kemp: Hamas must be eradicated. If it isn’t, this Gaza ceasefire is a failure

Hamas is now isolated and to crown it all Donald Trump is entering the White House next week. They fear that will unshackle Israel from the constraints of Joe Biden who tried his best to prevent Netanyahu’s “total victory”. They also fear that Trump will do what Biden failed to do: force Qatar to expel their political leadership and also reduce the international pressure on Israel on which Hamas depends. There is every likelihood Trump will sanction the International Criminal Court and at the same time put the boot into the Israel haters at the UN.

All that is why Hamas has now accepted Israel’s red line: the IDF will maintain military forces in key strategic areas in Gaza and Israel retains the right to resume the war when the ceasefire ends. The terrorist organisation will meanwhile be planning to utilise its international backers to pressure Israel not to resume hostilities – including the useful idiots who parade on our streets and university campuses every week.

But while any hostages are retained in Gaza and while Hamas continues to represent a threat to its people, Israel can and should go back on the attack. For that they will have Trump’s backing. His nomination for National Security Advisor, Mike Waltz, told Fox News: “I’d like to make something very clear to the Israelis, if you need to go back in, we are with you. We are 100 per cent committed to destroying Hamas as a military organisation”.

Meanwhile the focus of the war is likely to shift to the head of the jihadist octopus, Iran. Netanyahu and Trump have almost certainly already agreed on that, and this deal should be seen as one element of their joint strategy. Eliminating the ayatollahs’ nuclear programme and further undermining their regional proxy network is vital. Isolating Iran and strengthening Israel’s security is not a military project alone. Trump is also likely to return to the Abraham Accords, bringing Saudi Arabia into the fold. The prospect of that alarmed Iran so much that it triggered Hamas’s murderous atrocities on 7th October.

Nevertheless, those who are horrified by this deal are right to highlight its grave risks. It seems to involve release of more than a thousand Palestinian terrorists in exchange for 33 Israeli hostages. And a cessation will give Hamas some opportunity to regroup and rebuild its capabilities. Above all it leaves Hamas in a position to maintain its stranglehold on Gaza’s population. That would certainly be disastrous and the eventual eradication or survival of Hamas will be the true measure of the success or otherwise of this ceasefire.

The worst part of the hostage deal

Perhaps the worst part of the hostage deal is that it was made without Israel knowing which hostages are still alive. That information should have been a prerequisite for even negotiating to begin with, not a detail to find out after Hamas gains anything.

In February 2006, Hassan Nasrallah announced in Hezbollah media that he planned to get Samir Kuntar released from Israeli prison that year. Kuntar was the most loathsome terrorist in Israeli custody, having murdered a father in front of his 4-year old daughter and then smashing her head, killing her too. (It gets worse. Gruesome details here)

In July Hezbollah ambushed IDF soldiers on the border, kidnapping two and killing three - and killing five more during a frantic attempt to get the soldiers back. Immediately Nasrallah announced he wanted Kuntar released in exchange for the two soldiers, Eldad Regev and Ehud Goldwasser.

Israel refused and went to war instead. But in the end, Israel agreed to the deal Nasrallah launched the war to get.

During the negotiations for the exchange two years later, Hezbollah did not reveal whether Regev and Goldwasser were still alive. Hezbollah never let the Red Cross visit them. The entire country was kept in agony during the negotiations, hoping they were still alive.

No one knew for sure until the actual deal occurred and all Israel receive was two coffins in exchange for Kuntar, several other Hezbollah militants and 200 bodies.

Hezbollah achieved all of its war aims and Israel achieved none. The only thing Israel seemed to gain was UNSC 1701, which by the time of the exchange was clearly never going to be implemented by Lebanon. The deal is what made Hezbollah the unquestioned victor of the 2006 war.

All of this feels like déjà vu now. This nightmare is being repeated. Getting thousands of prisoners released was one of Hamas' primary aims in the October 7 attacks. Israel learned nothing from the deal they made in 2008.

The worst part is that we do not know the fate of a single hostage. Even those that made videos may, God forbid, no longer be alive. Hamas already claimed that one female hostage was killed by an Israeli airstrike this week - psychological torture fo rwhich it pays no price.

Like 2008, Israel is trading living terrorists for what may be only corpses. It is important to retrieve bodies, of course, but not nearly as important as saving the living. The price being paid is way too steep without knowing how many are alive.

Israel is bound by international law to treat its prisoners humanely. Hamas has no such concerns. I personally would have no moral qualms about killing every single Palestinian terrorist with blood on their hands and then telling Hamas as their bodies are returned, "oops, they must have been killed by your rocket attacks." Unfortunately, Israel cannot do that, and the next Yahya Sinwar could be freed in this deal.

But after the Kuntar deal, how could Israel make an agreement without knowing ahead of time which hostages are alive and which aren't?

(From a tweet early this morning. I couldn't go back to sleep until I wrote it.)

Buy EoZ's books on Amazon!

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

PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism (February 2022)

The Arab inability to recognize defeat, and what it means for the future

Yasmine Mohammed tweets:

Victory parades for defeats. Catastrophic losses recast as glorious wins. This is the Islamic propaganda machine in full force.

From Egypt’s 6th of October War to Saddam Hussein’s “Mother of All Battles” to Hezbollah’s boasts of “divine victories,” the pattern is clear: when the reality is defeat, the narrative becomes celebration. Roads, bridges, and entire holidays are dedicated to battles that ended in retreat, humiliation, or worse. Textbooks have rewritten incontestable historic fact, poisoning children’s minds and revving them up about “armed resistance” and martyrdom.

It would be hilarious if the consequences weren’t so tragic.

A number of people are responding with their own experiences of seeing Arabs and Muslims who have celebrated their losses as victories.

There are two counter-examples which are worth examining: 1948 and 1967.

One was the 1948 war. The Arab world was deeply humiliated by a military defeat by weak, dhimmi Jews. There was a little attempt to brag about tiny victories - Jordan gaining the West Bank and Egypt staying in Gaza as a foothold in "Palestine." But the people, the leadership and the media looked for reasons that they could be so humiliated - people blaming their leadership, and conspiracy theories about the US or the UN helping Israel.

The humiliation was quickly replaced by a desire for vengeance. And that was the prominent theme in speeches and articles in the subsequent 19 years, to turn the anger into finally wiping out Israel.

The 1956 Sinai campaign, even though it highlighted Egyptian military weakness, was indeed celebrated in Egypt and the Arab world as a political victory when the US and Soviet Union forced Israel, Britain and France to withdraw. It was spun as a heroic Nasser standing up to major powers and bringing pride back to the Arab world.

The Six Day War could not be spun. At that time, there were no Arab celebrations. The war was so one-sided, so fast, and lost so much ground that there was nothing that could possibly be seen as a silver lining to the defeated Arabs. However, the name that they gave to the defeat was "naksa," chosen to rhyme with the "nakba" of 1948. Nakba means "catastrophe" but naksa means "setback." The implication is that even though the Arab armies were thoroughly beaten, it was only a temporary setback, and they would come back again and again.

As with everything in the Arab world, it must be looked at through the prism of craving honor and avoiding shame. 1948 and 1967 were shameful and humiliating, so the best that could be done is to promise that they will be victorious next time. In the other wars they lost, they could compare them to 1967 and say that Israel could not duplicate that feat (we saw lots of that in Lebanon and previous Gaza wars, saying that the Palestinians held out longer than the combined Arab world did in '67.)

I admire Daniel Pipes and his book "Israel Victory" promotes the idea that peace is only possible when Palestinians admit they have lost. (I haven't read the book.) Looking at this history I am skeptical whether this is even psychologically possible. Overwhelming, undeniable defeats are followed with vows to get rid of Israel next time.

Even peace with Egypt and Jordan has not made their citizens any more tolerant of Israel. The peace agreements are seen as a temporary emergency measure. Unlike Israel, Egypt does not celebrate the anniversary of the peace agreement. Also, remember that officially Israel is at "peace" with the Palestinian Authority.

Detente is the best possible scenario. To be sure, the normalization with the UAE, Morocco and Bahrain are better, and Saudi Arabia is a possibility, but these were never direct enemies of Israel and therefore not humiliated. Arabs who are directly humiliated can never truly accept Israel's existence, and each peace agreement with them is viewed as a hudna, not a permanent peace.

In the end, the only constant is Jew-hatred. Everything else Israel does, unfortunately, must be geared towards minimizing harm to Israeli citizens and Jews worldwide. "Total victory" requires the other side accepting defeat, and as we see, that will never happen.

Buy EoZ's books on Amazon!

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

PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism (February 2022)

Human Rights Watch issued a press release condemning Israeli airstrikes on Houthi targets in Yemen.

Everything you need to know about how biased they are is in these paragraphs.

The Israeli military said it had struck military targets. The Hodeidah and Ras Issa ports, however, are critical for delivering food and other necessities to the Yemeni population, who depend on imports. About 70 percent of Yemen’s commercial imports and 80 percent of its humanitarian assistance passes through Hodeidah, Ras Issa, and Salif ports, which United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) Resident Representative Auke Lootsma said are “absolutely crucial to commercial and humanitarian activities.” Rosemary DiCarlo, under-secretary-general for the UN Department of Political and Peacebuilding Affairs, described the ports as a “lifeline for millions of people” that should be “open and operating.”

The Hezyaz power station is the central power station of Sanaa, providing electricity to the city’s population. After the attack, power across the city was cut for one to two days, and has been cutting in and out since according to three people who spoke to Human Rights Watch.

Deliberate attacks on objects indispensable to survival are war crimes.

This is not the first time Israeli forces have attacked critical infrastructure in Yemen. ....

The Houthis’ drone strikes and missile attacks on Israel, if deliberately or indiscriminately attacking civilians or civilian objects, may also amount to war crimes.

HRW is quite deliberately twisting and ignoring international law.

The entire text doesn't admit that Israel's targets are critical for Houthi military activity and therefore valid military objectives. That means that attacking them is certainly not a war crime - it is absolutely allowed under international law.

For example, the Eritrea-Ethiopia Claims Commission wrote about an Ethiopian attack on an Eritrean power plant:

On May 28, 2000, two Ethiopian jet aircraft dropped seven bombs that hit and seriously damaged the Hirgigo Power Station, which is located about ten kilometers from the port city of Massawa. .... Eritrea asserted that the bombing of the plant was unlawful because the plant was not a legitimate military objective, and it requested that the Commission hold Ethiopia liable to compensate Eritrea for the damage caused to Eritrea by that violation of international humanitarian law. ....The Commission, by a majority, has no doubt that the port and naval base at Massawa were military objectives. It follows that the generating facilities providing the electric power needed to operate them were objects that made an effective contribution to military action.

International law goes beyond that case to even attack economic targets beyond power plants.

Australia’s Defence Force Manual includes as military objectives "power stations [and] industry which support military operations " but also adds that “economic targets that indirectly but effectively support operations are also military objectives if an attack will gain a definite military advantage”.

Belgium’s Law of War Manual says "resistance also depends on the economic power of the adversary (its war industry, its production capacity, its sources of supply, etc.); in short, its economic potential. The breaking up of this economic potential has of course a direct influence on the armed forces’ capacity to resist, so that this economic potential also becomes a war objective."

Germany’s Military Manual provides that military objectives include, in particular, “economic objectives which make an effective contribution to military action."

Sweden IHL Manual states, "How and to what extent a given object can effectively contribute to the adversary’s military operations must be decided by the commander. This need not imply that the property in question is being used by the adversary for a given operation . . . It may even be a question of . . . energy resources or factories that indirectly contribute to the adversary’s military operations."

The US Naval Handbook says "Proper economic targets for naval attack include enemy lines of communication, rail yards, bridges, rolling stock, barges, lighters, industrial installations producing war-fighting products, and power generation plants. Economic targets of the enemy that indirectly but effectively support and sustain the enemy’s war-fighting capability may also be attacked.."

Ports and power plants, along with industrial buildings, roads, bridges and anything else the military uses are valid objects for attack as long as the attacks respect proportionality. HRW is knowingly lying when it flatly accuses Israel of war crimes. HRW is twisting international law to only condemn Israel.

Furthermore, HRW claims that mentions that the Hezyaz power station is "indispensable to survival" while admitting that Yemen civilians were only without power for a day or two. It makes up a new definition of "indispensable" just to be able to accuse Israel of war crimes. (This would be part of a proportionality calculation, and attacks that are not intended to hurt civilians are not war crimes even if disproportionate, which this attack wasn't.)

It brings no evidence that humanitarian aid to Yemen was affected by the attacks on the ports.

To add insult to injury, after declaring Israel 100% guilty of war crimes, HRW offhandedly mentions that the hundreds of Houthi drones and missiles shot at Israeli civilian areas - with deadly results - only "may be" war crimes.

HRW never wrote an article solely on Houthi attacks on Israel. The only times it mentions those attacks are to add a sentence of faux objectivity to reports falsely condemning Israel.

This is not a major HRW report. But it proves that, like Amnesty, Human Rights Watch is obsessively anti-Israel to the extent that it will knowingly misrepresent international law just to damn Israel.

Buy EoZ's books on Amazon!

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

PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism (February 2022)

Hamas issued a series of instructions to Gazans Tuesday ahead of the anticipated cease-fire.

Two of them are:

*Beware of bombed and demolished homes:* We call upon citizens to stay away from destroyed or bombed buildings, as there may be sudden collapses or falling pieces and rubble from bombed and destroyed buildings, which pose a direct threat to their lives.

*Beware of unexploded weapons:* We call upon our honorable Palestinian people to beware of the remains of bombs, missiles and unexploded ordnance, which pose a grave danger to your lives. You should not approach or touch them, and immediately report them to the competent authorities to avoid accidents that may harm you or your loved ones.

We know that Hamas set up booby-traps in virtually every house in areas of combat. As the Jerusalem Post reported two weeks ago:

As its fighters attempt to flee northern Gaza and those that are remaining struggle to maneuver in the area, Hamas has pivoted it combat strategy to booby-trapping almost every structure that remains standing.

This is typically done by hiding explosives inside closets or other furniture to harm troops conducting searches. Additionally, the buildings are stocked with weapons, including rifles, anti-tank launchers, and grenades.

The IDF discovered a Hamas video documenting the placement of explosives in a house.

Hamas themselves published a number of videos of houses that they proudly booby-trapped and they claim to have exploded them with IDF troops inside, and many soldiers did fall from booby traps.

Everyone admits that Hamas secretly wired up thousands of Gaza homes with explosives. (It's a war crime, of course, but human rights groups and the UN are quite uninterested in that.) What happens when the owners return to rebuild or retrieve their stuff? It will be very embarrassing for Hamas for the world to see their own explosives killing Gazans. Their booby traps can also kill aid workers who want to help.

We will soon be seeing more evidence of Hamas killing its own people. Hamas didn't care about them until the shooting stops - and once that happens, it makes it harder for Hamas to blame all those deaths on Israel.

No doubt Hamas will claim that they are killed by leftover ordnance from the IDF. Much of the world will believe the lie.

Buy EoZ's books on Amazon!

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

PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism (February 2022)

01/16 Links Pt2: Where are the righteous of Gaza?; UN’s anti-Israel biases can’t hide facts of terror; The Top 100 People Positively Influencing Jewish Life, 2024

From Ian:

Where are the righteous of Gaza?

During the Holocaust, even in areas where Nazi propaganda was dominant, there emerged righteous individuals who saved Jewish lives. Israel’s major Holocaust museum and education centre is Yad Vashem in Jerusalem. It records and honours 28,217 individuals with the title of Righteous Amongst the Nations. So where are the righteous in Gaza?

There have been reports of hostages being moved through various facilities and held by different militia groups and Gazan civilians. Freed hostages report being held in the homes of a doctor and a teacher employed by Unrwa. On three occasions Israel has conducted hostage rescue raids on residential premises.

There could be many hundreds or possibly thousands of Gazans who have some knowledge of the whereabouts of hostages.

To incentivise people in Gaza to assist, Israel has offered US$5 million per hostage and safe passage for resettlement. As hostages have been held in small groups, a successful release might mean multiple rewards. To most in Gaza this would be a truly massive fortune. But there have been no takers, none.

Perhaps the reaction to the conflict by nearby Arab Muslim countries assists in understanding what’s going on. Egypt, like Israel, has a border with Gaza. It is usual practice that a neighbouring country will take refugees during times of conflict. Poland, which shares a border with Ukraine , has over 1.5 million Ukrainian refugees. But Egypt has reinforced its border with Gaza and refuses to accept refugees.

Indeed, no other Arab Muslim country in the Middle East will accept their brethren in Gaza as refugees. There is no shortage of space and some are very wealthy but no refugee program for Gazans is entertained. Saudi Arabia has facilities to accommodate over 2 million for the annual Hajj pilgrimage but is assisting no one from Gaza.

There is an interesting biblical story which occurred not far away, namely the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah. God told Abraham of the forthcoming destruction and that his nephew Lot who lived in Sodom would be saved. Abraham bargained with God for the cities to be saved if righteous men could be found. The bargaining began at 50 and cascaded down to 10. Alas, righteous men could not be found.

Israel has said the war could end with the release of the hostages and the surrender of Hamas. If there were righteous in Gaza to facilitate the release of the hostages, that would be enormously positive not only from a humanitarian perspective but in neutralising Hamas’ only major strategic lever.

The Australian Labor government takes a different view to the Arab Muslim world and thinks it is a good idea to bring in thousands from Gaza with minimal screening and to actively support the creation of a state of Palestine.

Gaza has been a de facto Palestinian state since 2005 and has proved to be a massively destructive failure. Historically, there has never been a sovereign state of Palestine. Never was, and post 7 October 2023, never will be.

Two-state solution all but dismissed by Trump confidant

A senior figure within US President-elect Donald Trump's innermost circle has recently said that the establishment of a Palestinian state was not under consideration. The source, who belongs to Trump's and his family's closest orbit of confidants and has carried numerous crucial assignments for him previously, made these comments during recent private conversations at Trump's Mar-a-Lago estate in Florida. The senior Trump-world persona offered no explanation for this position, simply stating that "it's clear this won't happen."

Notably, Trump in December spoke about what kind of Mideast peace he would back. "I support whatever solution we can do to get peace. There are other ideas other than two-state, but I support whatever is necessary to get not just peace, [but] a lasting peace. It can't go on where every five years you end up in tragedy. There are other alternatives," he said at the time.

On Tuesday, Mar-a-Lago hosted a Jerusalem Prayer Breakfast conference, bringing together Christian and Jewish participants as part of the effort to bolster Israel-US relations. American and Israeli speakers uniformly expressed firm opposition to both the establishment of a Palestinian state and any Israeli withdrawal from Judea and Samaria. They emphasized that both religious and security considerations make it imperative for Israel to maintain its presence in these territories.

In a related development, Foreign Minister Gideon Sa'ar, during his visit to Italy on Monday, addressed the ongoing discussion about a "Palestinian state," stating that "the two-state solution is a slogan and an illusion. A 'Palestinian state' in the heart of our country would be a Hamas terror state that would undermine stability in the entire region and severely harm Israel's security."

Jonathan Tobin: The pathetic finish to Joe Biden’s failed presidency

Gaslighting, censorship and antisemitism
His subsequent farewell address to the nation from the Oval Office was in some ways even more troubling. Sounding themes that were standard Democratic campaign rhetoric these past four years, he claimed that Trump and the Republicans were threatening democracy and instituting an “oligarchy” where the wealthy ruled and took away the rights of everyone else.

This was as ironic as it was untrue since it had been during his four years in office that the Democrats had completed their journey from its old stance as the party of the working people to one that is now solely aimed at protecting the interests of the credentialed elites.

Yet in the same speech, he lamented the end of “fact-checking” on Facebook, which was supposedly aimed at stopping “misinformation” but was really a censorship regime. Indeed, in his announcement and subsequent interviews about the decision, Meta founder Mark Zuckerberg confessed that it was a scheme largely driven by politics and used by the Biden administration to silence views on a wide range of issues that dissented from their policies.

As he had for four years, Biden was gaslighting the country. He claimed that his foes were against democracy. But it was his Department of Justice that prosecuted Trump, his chief political opponent. It treated Americans who differed from liberal orthodoxy on gender ideology, critical race theory or abortion as if they were domestic terrorists while largely ignoring the very real threat of Islamist terror.

Biden was no ideologue; he was an unprincipled politician who always followed his party’s fashion of the day, whether it tilted right, as it did in the 1990s, or hard left, as it has in recent years. Elected as a moderate who would restore normalcy to the nation, he took his cues from left-wingers on most domestic issues. That’s why he became a supporter of the woke catechism of diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) and imposition of it throughout the government.

His policies not only enabled the same leftist ideology that fueled the unprecedented post-Oct. 7 surge of Jew-hatred that happened on his watch. His inability to unreservedly condemn those who engaged in antisemitic agitation on college campuses and elsewhere was motivated by a futile effort to rally support from his party’s intersectional left wing that he previously done so much to appease.

Biden proved that having a half-century of experience in government is no guarantee of wisdom, political or ethical principles or an ability to learn from the past. He also showed what happens when weakness is treated as a virtue rather than a liability.

He leaves office as a forgotten man who, regardless of one’s opinion of Trump, was largely overshadowed by him even when his opponent was out of office. Though historians will likely treat him as an accidental president better remembered for his decline in office than any achievements, his mistakes must be remembered. As pathetic as his exit from the White House has been, the record of failure he leaves behind is his true legacy.