Wednesday, July 09, 2025

07/09 Links Pt2: Trump admin sanctions Albanese for spewing ‘unabashed antisemitism,’ supporting terrorism; Co-founder of Google, accuses United Nations of antisemitism

From Ian:

Trump admin sanctions Albanese for spewing ‘unabashed antisemitism,’ supporting terrorism

The U.S. State Department announced that it is sanctioning Francesca Albanese, the U.N. special rapporteur on Palestinian territories, under an executive order that states those who engage “directly” with an effort by the International Criminal Court to arrest or probe a “protected person” without the consent of the person’s country are subject to having their property and assets blocked.

“The United States has repeatedly condemned and objected to the biased and malicious activities of Albanese that have long made her unfit for service as a special rapporteur,” Marco Rubio, the U.S. secretary of state, said on Wednesday. “Albanese has spewed unabashed antisemitism, expressed support for terrorism and open contempt for the United States, Israel and the West.”

Albanese’s “bias has been apparent across the span of her career, including recommending that the ICC, without a legitimate basis, issue arrest warrants targeting Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former Defense Minister Yoav Gallant,” he said. (The court, which is based in The Hague, is not part of the United Nations.)

“Albanese has directly engaged with the International Criminal Court in efforts to investigate, arrest, detain or prosecute nationals of the United States or Israel, without the consent of those two countries,” continued Rubio. “Neither the United States nor Israel is party to the Rome Statute, making this action a gross infringement on the sovereignty of both countries.”

Albanese recently “escalated” her efforts by penning “threatening letters to dozens of entities worldwide, including major American companies across finance, technology, defense, energy and hospitality, making extreme and unfounded accusations and recommending the ICC pursue investigations and prosecutions of these companies and their executives,” he explained.

“We will not tolerate these campaigns of political and economic warfare, which threaten our national interests and sovereignty,” he said.

Albanese authored a report, released last week, accusing U.S.-based companies and organizations of being complicit in Israel’s so-called “genocide” in Gaza. One of them, Google, has countered that and pointed fingers at the United Nations of anti-Israel bias and more.

Shalom Francesca: US Sanctions UN’s Francesca Albanese on BDS’s 20th Birthday

Her conduct—particularly efforts to encourage ICC action against Israeli leaders and American companies—has been labeled by U.S. officials as a gross infringement of sovereignty and a dangerous precedent of lawfare masquerading as international justice. The designation includes:
A ban on entry into the United States,
Freeze on any U.S.-controlled assets,
Prohibition on American persons engaging in with her.

This is an UNpresedented action, she is the first UN official or expert to be sanctions by the United States. The final straw came last week when Albanese issued an incendiary report naming over 60 companies—including major U.S. corporations in tech, defense, finance, and energy—alleging complicity in “genocide.” These letters, which she sent directly to corporations around the world, were described by the U.S. government as an attempt to conduct “political and economic warfare” under the guise of human rights advocacy. Albanese’s demand that foreign entities cut ties with Israel mirrored the core strategy of BDS—delegitimize, isolate, and punish the Jewish state through institutional coercion while calling for Israel’s economy to be dismantled.

On July, the United States formally requested the United Nations remove Albanese from her position. In a letter, senior U.S. diplomats urged UN Secretary-General António Guterres to terminate her mandate, citing her long record of bias, antisemitism, and abuse of her role. In 2024, U.S. Ambassador Linda Thomas‑Greenfield publicly labeled her “unfit for her role” at the UN

Albanese has been condemned globally. France denounced her comparisons of Israeli actions to the Holocaust as “scandalous.” Germany labeled her remarks “appalling.” The Netherlands, Argentina, Hungary, and Israel all formally opposed her reappointment in 2025. Watchdog organizations including UN Watch, the World Jewish Congress, and the International Association of Jewish Lawyers and Jurists have repeatedly called for her removal, citing her open hostility toward the Jewish state and her disregard for legal neutrality, specially after it was revealed a pro-Hamas group paid for her trip to Australia. Even Antonio Guterres allegedly said “she is a horrible person”

Her public comments about Israel are always beyond inflammatory, even absurd. Among her more revealing moments was when she declared that the killing of Hamas leader Yahya Sinwar—one of the masterminds of the October 7 massacre—would not constitute “justice.” In another instance, she claimed that the killing of Hamas terrorists was part of the “core strategy” of Israel’s so-called genocide. According to Albanese, targeting mass murderers is proof of genocidal intent—yes, eliminating terrorist operatives, in her legal framework, is genocide. Statements like these reveal ideological bias.

BDS Isn’t 20 Years Old — It’s a Centuries-Old War on Jews, Rebranded for the West

Every July 9th, social media fills with tributes to the so-called “Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions” movement—framed as a peaceful campaign for Palestinian human rights that began in 2005. For many, that’s the entire story: a hashtag, a list of brands to boycott, a protest chant outside Starbucks—all in the name of “human rights.”

But the movement is far older. Much older.

BDS didn’t begin in 2005—or in this century. It’s not a reaction to the Six-Day War, settlements, or borders. It’s the latest phase in a century-old campaign to isolate, punish, and expel Jews—especially those returning to their ancestral homeland.

Long before hashtags or the first kibbutz, Jews faced organized boycotts designed to exclude them socially, economically, and politically. In the 1880s Russian Empire, pogroms combined violence with economic exclusion: Jewish shops were looted, then systematically shunned. Jews were barred from guilds and trade associations under legal restrictions.

In Nazi Germany in 1933, the first act was an economic boycott: Kauft nicht bei Juden—“Don’t buy from Jews.” Hungary followed in 1938, banning Jews from professions. Across Europe, nationalist movements pushed slogans like “Buy Christian only,” especially in Poland, where boycotts were endorsed by political parties and even state authorities.

These weren’t acts of conscience. They were declarations: You do not belong here.

Boycotts were hardly foreign to the Middle East.

In British Mandate Palestine, this strategy took early, brutal root.

Haj Amin al-Husseini, the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, orchestrated organized boycotts against Jewish businesses—and incited violence against Arabs who defied him by trading or coexisting with Jews.

His chilling words were unambiguous:
"We will win through an economic boycott. The boycott in Moslem countries against Jewish industries is tight and daily growing tighter, until the industries will be broken and English friends, moved by pity, will remove the last remaining Jews on their battleships." Grand Mufti Haj Amin al-Husseini September 24, 1929

07/09 Links Pt1: Netanyahu and Trump's meeting: a potential game changer for the Middle East; Why a Ceasefire in Gaza Won’t End Israel’s Nightmare

From Ian:

Netanyahu and Trump's meeting: a potential game changer for the Middle East

So, why is this a potential game changer? Despite being technically at war, Israel and Syria maintained a largely quiet border for over four decades, from the end of the Yom Kippur War in 1973 until Syria’s civil war began in 2011. For generations, Syrians were indoctrinated under the Assad regime to view Israel as their ultimate enemy.

Following the recent rise of Ahmad al-Sharaa (formerly Abu Mohammed al-Julani) and his forces in Syria, after the overthrow of Assad, the Israel Defense Forces took control of areas in the eastern demilitarized zone along the border. The aim was to prevent al-Sharaa’s radical Islamist forces from advancing and threatening Israeli communities in the Golan Heights. The IDF also destroyed dozens of abandoned Syrian military sites to prevent jihadist groups from seizing major weapons.

Now, however, there are signs of a shift. Syria’s new regime has reportedly sent both public and private messages signaling that it does not seek confrontation with Israel and wants a return to the pre-conflict status quo. This includes a possible Israeli withdrawal from the buffer zone and a halt to necessary IDF operations inside Syria.

Meanwhile, Trump, in his historic meeting with al-Sharaa in Riyadh this past May, the first such meeting between leaders of the two countries in 25 years, directly called on Syria to join the Abraham Accords, a point that has been repeated by his Administration, including the President’s Middle East Special Envoy Steve Witkoff.

Significance of the Trump-Netanyahu meeting
So why could the meeting between Trump and Netanyahu now be so significant?
Normalization between Israel and Syria, even a limited one, restoring the previous calm, would be a major breakthrough. Al-Sharaa could present this as a major diplomatic win to his people, on the back of Trump’s Executive Order last week revoking Syrian sanctions, while underscoring his own role as a source of regional stability and moderation. In turn, Israel might agree to a phased withdrawal from at least part of the demilitarized zone, on condition of receiving credible US security guarantees, instead of relying on ineffective UN forces. This would also preserve Israel’s critical right to act against possible emerging jihadist threats on its border.

Additional confidence-building measures, such as the return of the remains of legendary Israeli spy Eli Cohen, could also follow. These steps might eventually lead to broader cooperation, starting with normalization of bilateral relations, reforms in Syria’s education system to root out the previously held incitement, and Israeli support for agricultural development near the border.

If successful, the ripple effects would be profound. With stability restored, countries like Saudi Arabia, Jordan, and the UAE could invest in Syria without fear of conflict, accelerating regional reconstruction and reducing economic risks, while further countries would also join the Abraham Accords.

And as for the United States?

The strategic upside is enormous. Trump, as architect of the Abraham Accords, would solidify his legacy as the ultimate peacemaker and potentially earn that much-deserved Nobel Peace Prize. It would reinforce his “America First” vision by cementing the US as the indispensable power in the Middle East, and further weaken the regional influence of Iran and Russia, while economically, American companies could lead in Syria’s reconstruction, securing lucrative contracts, jobs, and access to new markets. This is more than a diplomatic opportunity. It’s a strategic inflection point - for Israel, Syria, and particularly, for the United States.

Seth Frantzman: Why a Ceasefire in Gaza Won’t End Israel’s Nightmare

Israel’s Prime Minister flew to Washington to meet with US President Donald Trump on July 7. This was an important meeting. It is also the third meeting the two leaders have had since Trump came to office in January. Netanyahu met the American leader in January and again in April.

Each meeting has brought its own twists. The January meeting followed Trump’s envoy, Steve Witkoff, who had secured a ceasefire the day before the inauguration. Trump appeared to support a reconstruction plan for Gaza in January. He also floated relocating Gazans while the Gaza Strip is rebuilt.

By April, things had changed. Trump was pushing tariffs, and Netanyahu ostensibly flew to Washington to make sure Israel was not slapped with heavy tariffs. However, it now appears that the meeting foreshadowed possible Israeli escalation with Iran.

Israel held off on attacking Iran until June, while the US attempted to get a deal with Tehran. When Tehran stalled, Israel carried out a surprise attack in mid-June. Twelve days later, after the US carried out a round of strikes on Iran, Trump secured a ceasefire.

Now it is July, and Trump has spoken about a new Gaza ceasefire. Trump’s doctrine when it comes to these kinds of deals tends to follow a model. Trump will float a deal and then attempt to persuade both sides to agree. However, this time it’s unclear if Israel and Hamas can bridge the gaps between what both sides want. Hamas wants the war to end, and it wants to drag out a deal, holding onto hostages and only releasing them slowly.

Israel’s official position is that the hostages must all be returned. In addition, Hamas’ military and governance capabilities must be defeated. There is increased talk among Israeli officials about removing Hamas from power. “Our intention is that Hamas will no longer rule there. We will do what is necessary to make that happen,” Netanyahu said in Washington. Israeli officials have floated this “no more Hamas” concept since the days after October 7. However, Hamas continues to survive in Gaza.

On July 7, as Netanyahu was in Washington, Hamas placed improvised explosive devices in the Gaza town of Beit Hanoun. They waited for Israeli infantry to pass the area and then detonated the explosives.

Then they ambushed the soldiers, killing five and wounding a dozen. Beit Hanoun is near the border with Israel. It has been cleared by the IDF many times since the beginning of the war. Nevertheless, the terrorists have been able to re-infiltrate.

Richard Kemp: Lammy should be thanking Israel for dealing with the Syrian threat

So is al-Sharaa a pragmatist interested in peace and development in Syria and, as he puts it, a country no longer “a battleground for power struggles or a stage for foreign ambitions”? Or is he an unreformed murderous jihadist who is also a talented actor? Certainly he seems to say whatever any national leader he is talking to wants to hear, although that is not necessarily an unusual trait in politicians and diplomats, especially those in need of legitimacy and recognition.

His repeated breaks and feuds with jihadist groups he had once fought alongside suggests that while it is unlikely he will shed his Islamist doctrines, he is more interested in personal power than ideology. That could go either way for both Syria and the world, but one sign of concrete good faith in both respects would be the expulsion of foreign fighters that continue to rampage the country.

On balance Lammy was right to re-open diplomatic relations with the new regime in Damascus, despite the risks. Western influence is important in this strategically critical country, especially to counter the undoubted ambitions of ill-disposed regimes like Russia, China, Iran, Qatar and Turkey. But what should not be on the agenda is to unduly interfere in Syria’s internal affairs, such as demanding Western-style democracy, an unrealistic proposition for most countries in the Middle East.

Nor should we be pushing for a centralised unitary state which is not the natural condition for a country with multiple powerful ethnic and religious components. But, meanwhile, we should do all we can to ensure that the country most at risk from a potentially hostile Syria, Israel, has complete freedom of action to defend its people, no matter how that might stick in Lammy’s craw.

The watchword should be “distrust, but verify”. And the Foreign Office, not known for its humility, should if necessary be prepared to admit it was wrong and change tack. Before he becomes too enchanted with the new Syrian leader, Lammy should look back into the Foreign Office archives where he will find a telegram dated 20th December 1969 from Glencairn Balfour-Paul, the British ambassador in Baghdad. Balfour-Paul had just had a meeting with the then vice-chairman of the Revolutionary Command Council, one Saddam Hussein.

Like al-Sharaa, he had an “engaging smile” and the ambassador described him as a figure with whom “it would be possible to do business.” Decades later, Balfour-Paul admitted that Saddam “hadn’t presented his true colours”.

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

Youth organizations or organizations actively involved with or concerned with youth. When you hear of them, you think of forces for good. You think of mentors giving guidance, steering kids on the skids back on track.

But today, that’s not necessarily the case.

Too many youth organizations or those actively involved with youth—whose stated missions have nothing to do with politics—global or otherwise, are taking a position on the war in Gaza, and it’s not a position that favors the Jews.

We know this because they’ve issued statements to that effect—statements that appear not to recognize that the war that has decimated Gaza, began on October 7, 2023, when Hamas, the democratically elected government of Gaza, launched the largest massacre of Jews since the Holocaust. “Ordinary” Gazans, too, took part in the slaughter, pouring right through that fence alongside Hamas, to take advantage of the opportunity to rape and kill the yahud.

Jewish suffering continues deep underground in Gaza, as the last 20 hostages still languish in captivity, chained, caged, and starved, almost two years on. In spite of this, youth organizations nowhere near the Middle East—organizations charged with molding young minds—have decided to ignore Jewish suffering in favor of the people who gang-rape Jewish women tied to trees.

They claim to be nonpartisan, these organizations, but their statements say otherwise. Some downplay or omit the horrors of October 7. Others have issued proclamations of “solidarity” with Gaza endorsing antisemitic violence as legitimate “resistance.” Still a third group engages in what I call “both siding” it, pretending that violence is violence no matter who suffers, that all are exactly the same, which is just as bad. If you can’t decry what happened on October 7, and understand why Israel fought back, you should stay out of it, instead of poisoning young peoples’ minds.

One has to wonder: what is the atmosphere like at meetings or events for Jewish participants? How does it feel to belong to a group that seems to regard your people’s suffering as inconvenient or deserved? And what will become of the next generation—shaped by organizations that ask them to champion the cause of people who eviscerate pregnant women and burn babies and small children alive?

Here are a few examples of supposedly nonpartisan organizations that have issued statements on the war in Gaza:

1. National Education Association (NEA)

The NEA is not exactly a youth organization, but as the largest teachers' union in the U.S., it certainly has the potential to influence America’s children. Only yesterday, on July 8, the NEA voted to sever ties with the Anti-Defamation League (ADL).

From the NY Post:

The largest teachers union in America has voted to cut all ties with the Anti-Defamation League — which called the move “profoundly disturbing” as antisemitic attacks in the US are at a record high.

The National Education Association, which is also the US’s largest union with more than 3 million members, approved a proposal Sunday to drop the ADL as an education partner, accusing the New York-based Jewish civil rights group of using the term antisemitism to punish any and all criticisms of Israel. . .

. . . The group has found its relationship waning with the NEA since the start of the war in Gaza on Oct. 7, 2023, when the Jewish state was attacked by Palestinian Hamas terrorists and retaliated in a conflict that is still ongoing.

Tensions between the NEA and ADL came to a head earlier this year when the Jewish group slammed the former president of the Massachusetts Teachers Association (MTA) over a presentation on Islamophobia and attacks against Palestinians.

Merrie Najimy, the former president of the union, was one of four speakers at the controversial presentation, which made headlines and was even discussed in the state’s Special Commission on Combating Antisemitism in February. The Massachusetts Educators Against Antisemitism and American Jewish Committee (AJC) New England ultimately accused the MTA leadership of demonizing Israel and spreading “anti-Zionist propaganda” in the classrooms. . .

. . . Liora Rez, the founder of StopAntisemitism, said, “The most radical fringe has taken over the NEA and they actively promote bigotry against Jews and lies about the Jewish state.

“Rather than trying to educate our children, they want to indoctrinate them to hate each other.”

According to Axios, “The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), the nation's largest Muslim civil rights and advocacy organization, said it welcomed the NEA vote due to concerns over ADL's "anti-Palestinian bias."

2. Save the Children

Save the Children bills itself as “the world’s first and leading independent children’s organisation – transforming lives and the future we share. We’re proud to work with children, their communities, and our partners worldwide, discovering new solutions to help ensure that the world's most vulnerable children survive, learn and are protected,” but apparently that doesn’t include vulnerable Israeli children, such as those slaughtered on October 7.

Save the Children says it reaches tens of millions of children in more than 110 countries through its “life-changing work,” but based on its statement on Gaza, none of those tens of millions of children are Jews. On a slickly designed webpage titled War in Gaza, the (very long) statement makes offhand mention of October 7, neglecting to mention the slaughter of Israeli Jews or the Jewish hostages still in captivity. The statement cites all the exaggerated Hamas death statistics, and of course, in a breathtaking display of what it means to blame the victim, everything that has happened is the fault of Israel:

Children are paying the heaviest price of this war.

In 2024, the occupied Palestinian territory, specifically Gaza, became the deadliest place on earth to be a child.

Since the beginning of the war, over 18,000 children have been killed, while over 14,000 more children are at risk of dying from severe malnutrition in the coming weeks and months if the conditions imposed by the Government of Israel don't drastically improve. After 19 months of war, children's lives continue to hang in the balance.

Since 2 March 2025, absolutely no humanitarian aid or commercial goods have entered Gaza, putting all 1 million of Gaza’s children at risk of famine and creating conditions incompatible with life.

Children will continue to suffer day after day until the bombing stops, the siege ends and meaningful amounts of humanitarian aid are able to enter Gaza again.

Denying humanitarian aid is a crime under international law and a grave violation against children. The international community must not allow the war to continue and the halt on aid must be immediately reversed.

A definitive ceasefire is the only way to save lives in Gaza and end grave violations of children’s rights. There is no alternative.

The lives of Gaza's 1.1 million children depend on it.

Our response.

Amidst extremely challenging conditions, we’ve been working around the clock to find ways to deliver aid to children.

Save the Children has been supporting Palestinian children since 1953 and has maintained a permanent presence in the occupied Palestinian territory (oPt) since 1973. Our response has significantly scaled up since October 2023, leveraging our existing footprint, technical expertise, and partnerships to address the evolving humanitarian crisis.

As of 11th March 2025, Save the Children and its partners have reached more than 1.5 million people across the occupied Palestinian territory, including over 1.4 million people in Gaza.

During the pause in hostilities from the 19th January to the 18th March, we provided essential lifesaving aid to over 51,000 people. This included distributing winter clothing to over 15,000 children in Gaza, and food parcels to over 23,000 people. In February, a total of 1,341 children, were vaccinated in our Primary Healthcare Centre in Deir Al-Balah and Khan Younis as part of the third polio vaccination campaign.

We have also distributed essential items such as mattresses, pillows, blankets and plastic tarps to families that have returned to northern Gaza, while continuing to provide healthcare services at our two primary healthcare centres and mental health support at our child friendly spaces. Despite this, the needs are vast and ever-growing.

Alongside local partners, we’re distributing vital supplies to families across shelters and households – drinking water, food, hygiene products, mattresses, blankets, learning materials, toys, and games.

We are prepared to scale up further in Gaza to respond to the spiralling needs. But the basic conditions to reach families need to be established by the Government of Israel by lifting the siege and facilitating the safe, unobstructed delivery of aid across Gaza.

Since the pause in Gaza collapsed and the Government of Israel re-imposed a total siege on the entry of aid and goods into Gaza, all that has entered Gaza are bombs and bullets. This complete siege is the longest the Israeli Government has blocked all aid and commercial goods from entering Gaza. Instead of much needed food, clothing or tents to help Gaza’s children survive, airstrikes are being launched into Gaza, killing, maiming, and destroying the lives of children and families.

We are by children’s sides in Gaza and we’ll keep calling for a world that respects their right to survive and be protected. But we can’t do it without your support.

They may be by the side of the children in Gaza, but I’m pretty sure they wish the children of Israel would drop off the edge of the earth.

3. Rotary International

Rotary International is not primarily a youth organization, but it does have several programs focused on youth development and leadership. Rotary International actively engages young people through initiatives like Rotary Youth Exchange, Interact clubs, and Rotaract clubs, aiming to foster leadership skills, promote service, and cultivate global citizenship. The organization says it is nonpartisan: “Rotary is a non-political and non-religious organization open to all people regardless of race, colour, religion, gender, or political preference.”

Its statement on Israel and Gaza tries very hard to be fair to all, but ends up not being very fair to Israel, urging “all parties to seek avenues to peace.” Should the rape victim make up with her rapist? Should the Yarden Bibas shake hands with the people who murdered his wife and children, in the name of peace? Should Israel agree that Rotary’s support for upholding international law is a good thing, fair and balanced, when the ICC calls for the arrest of Israel’s leaders?

Israel and Gaza

Recognizing there has been protracted suffering in the long history of conflict between Israel and Palestinians in Gaza, Rotary International urges all parties to seek avenues to peace.

At the same time, we unequivocally condemn the horrific attack by Hamas on Israeli civilians and are appalled at the number of people who have been injured, killed, and kidnapped.

As the war between Israel and Hamas intensifies, we remain deeply concerned about the potential for further escalation as well as the loss of life and the humanitarian crisis that is occurring in Gaza. We denounce the violence against innocent civilians and support upholding international humanitarian law.

Peacebuilding is both a cornerstone of Rotary’s mission and one of our areas of focus. At our core, Rotary is a common ground for people to come together – across nationalities and religions, cultures and histories – and connect around their shared belief in a better tomorrow. That connection is what humanizes us in times of conflict and builds a foundation for lasting peace.

Rotary remains committed to working with our members, partners, and communities to find long-term, sustainable solutions that support peace and development in the region and elsewhere.

All that talk of peace with the people who rape my people makes me totally sick to my stomach. It’s not possible to be balanced on this subject. It’s just not. There’s a good side and an evil side. You wipe out the evil to protect the good. Hamas is evil.

4. United Way of King County

United Way has a strong focus on youth development and opportunity. The organization says it “works to support young people from early childhood through career readiness, aiming to help them succeed in education, build financial stability, and become engaged community members.”

The organization says it is nonpartisan, and “represents a neutral ground where people can join together for the greater good of the community.” But the King County, Washington branch of the organization which includes the city of Seattle, decided to issue a statement on the war in Gaza on October 11, that is so neutral as to exclude the issues of right and wrong, good and evil, terrorism and those who defend against it. With Israel still reeling from the attack, United Way of King County sidelined what actually happened, and more than hints that Israel shouldn’t respond. Sure. As if us Israelis should just leave our hostages there in Gaza, stay home, and lick our wounds. Like Rotary International, in bending over backward to be fair, United Way of King County is fair to no one, and especially not to the Jews who were massacred so brutally on October 7:

United Way of King County’s Response to the Israel-Hamas War

United Way of King County mourns with others around the world the unspeakable violence and loss of life from the Israel-Hamas War.

We work side by side with communities to build an equitable future for everyone. There are far too many examples—locally, nationally, and globally—that demonstrate we are losing sight of that shared humanity and the common needs and dreams we all share.

We join our local community members who are grieving.

5. Boston CASA

Sometimes a gala speaks a thousand words. At its 13th annual gala event, Transforming Lives, Boston CASA, whose mission is to advocate for abused and neglected children, honored infamous antisemite Congresswoman Ayanna Pressley with the 2025 Susan J. Ganz Award. The event announcement called Pressley “an activist, a legislator, a survivor, and the first woman of color elected to Congress from the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. Throughout her career, Congresswoman Pressley has fought to ensure that those closest to the pain or the closest to the power – driving and informing policy making,” whatever that means.

As far as I’m concerned, the only thing Ayanna Pressley has fought for is to demonize Israel. She boycotted Bibi’s address to Congress, speaking of Israel bombing “innocent civilians” with no mention whatsoever of October 7 or Hamas.

She speaks of an ongoing “genocide” when the only genocide is the purposeful antisemitic slaughter that occurred on October 7.

The fact is, that in honoring Ayanna Pressley, this organization that is meant to advocate for Boston children, fails to advocate for the child victims of October 7. And so I return to my original thought: youth organizations—or those entrusted with shaping young minds—are meant to be forces for good. They are meant to protect the vulnerable, guide the impressionable, and foster moral clarity. But today, too many are doing the opposite. They are modeling moral confusion, justifying barbarity, and embracing those who would see the Jewish people wiped from the face of the earth.

If your mission is to shape children into decent human beings, start by telling the truth. Tell them what happened on October 7. Tell them that Hamas didn’t just kill Jews—they butchered them, raped them, beheaded them, burned their children alive. And if you can’t bring yourself to say that much—if your instinct is to “both sides” it or to preach peace with those who take toddlers hostage—then do us all a favor and get out of the business of working with youth.

Because this generation deserves better. And so do the dead.

Buy EoZ's books on Amazon!

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

PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism (February 2022)

One of philosophy's long-standing debates is around universalism vs. particularism. Should moral principles should be universal and context-independent, or should they be sensitive to particular contexts and circumstances?

The moral universalists say that particularism leads to moral relativism and inconsistency. Particularists argue that universalism is too rigid and fails to capture the complexity of moral life.

Some modern philosophers try to find compromises between the two.

As we've been seeing recently, Jewish ethics rejects the premise of the question, one that leads to false binaries.

The Jewish ethical tradition, and the AskHillel framework built upon it, offers a third answer: Ethics is structured and layered. Its foundations are universal, its obligations are relational, and its moral elevation is shaped by community.

This is not a compromise position. It is a design insight – one that resolves the modern moral impasse.

AskHillel operates using a three-tiered system:

Tier 1A: Foundational Values
Truth exists. Human dignity is sacred. Responsibility is real.
Tier 1B: Core Obligations
Protect life. Prevent harm. Repair injustice. Act with integrity.
Tier 2: Moral Amplifiers
Humility (Anavah), going beyond the law (Lifnim Mishurat HaDin), charitable judgment (Dan L’Chaf Zechut), public responsibility (Kiddush Hashem), communal peace (Shalom Bayit), etc.

These values and obligations are open to all people, across all cultures. They do not belong to Jews alone.

But once you enter the system, it does not treat everyone identically — because it recognizes that relationships matter.

The AskHillel system rejects the idea that ethics must flatten all human relationships in the name of fairness. You are not equally obligated to a stranger and to your child. You are not required to give the same attention to every crisis on Earth before tending to your own community’s suffering.

This is not chauvinism or tribalism. It is moral triage based on proximity, responsibility, capacity and agency - a concept we can call "ethical gravity."

The closer someone is to your sphere of influence or covenant, all else being equal, the stronger your obligation. While all people have dignity, not all obligations are the same. Ethical obligations extend outward from the self, to the family, to the community, to the nation, and then to the world. It doesn't mean we ignore the world's problems but we weigh them against the problems closer to home.

This enables universal ethics without universal sameness.

There is another innovation that is possible within this system: as long as communities adhere to the Tier 1 values, they can decide on their own Tier 2 values and relative importance.

For a community to emphasize or reorder Tier 2 values within AskHillel, certain ethical safeguards must be met:

Non-Contradiction: No Tier 2 priority may override or undermine Tier 1 obligations.
Transparency: The elevated value must be clearly taught, justified, and tested.
Uphold Human Dignity: The custom must support, not suppress, dignity and truth.
Corrigibility: The emphasis must be open to critique and revision.

These rules prevent Tier 2 from becoming a Trojan horse for prejudice, domination, or regress. (A future article will address a similar theme, how to avoid moral drift within secular moral systems.)

A community that places child education as a top value can certainly prioritize that, just as another might do with mental health. The system respects both universal standards and pluralism, as long as they do not contradict the Tier 1 values and axioms of the system.

This model answers the universalism/particularism debate with nuance and integrity:

Universalism without erasure: All humans share a moral grammar.
Particularism without tribalism: Communal ethics can elevate without excluding.
Pluralism without relativism: Moral meaning adapts, but is never arbitrary.

The AskHillel framework does not erase difference. It orchestrates it.

It offers a shared moral operating system that respects particular histories, permits elevated mores, and prevents abuse through layered checks and traceability.

In a time when both universal claims and cultural distinctiveness are weaponized, this layered approach offers a profound alternative: a framework that binds without flattening, guides without commanding, and grows through principled diversity.

By Daled Amos

In 2011, during an interview, Bernard Lewis discussed the beginnings of a phenomenon that later blossomed into the Abraham Accords. In response to a question from Dan Diker about the threat of Iran, Professor Lewis responded that Iran's hostility to Israel was a very negative factor, but also a positive factor:

An increasing number of people in the Arab world are coming to the conclusion that their main danger, the main threat to their world is not Israel, but Iran. And that Israel might even be a useful ally in confronting the Iranian danger. I heard this view expressed by people in Egypt and other Arab countries, and that's an encouraging sign. You still have a very limited response, but the fact that it exists at all is quite remarkable...there are more and more people who in private conversation will tell you that they are beginning to see Israel as a positive element in the region, as an example of a smoothly functioning democracy.

Bernard Lewis was proven right when the UAE and Bahrain signed onto the Accords in 2020, followed by Sudan and Morocco. These Arab countries gain strengthened economic ties, enhanced security cooperation, and improved diplomatic relations with Israel and the US. In addition to improved relations with several Arab nations, increased trade, tourism, and diplomatic ties, Israel benefits from enhanced security cooperation and reduced regional tensions.

And then came October 7th, which was intended, in part, to derail the Abraham Accords.

October 7th has been described as the fuse that ignited events leading all the way to the 12-day war between Israel and Iran. But that day may arguably be what raised moderate Arab support for Israel up a notch.

Just one day after the Hamas massacre on October 7th, Haaretz reported, Support for Israel in Arab World No Longer Taboo. The article's subtitle suggested that the attack inspired the beginning of Arab blowback against Hamas in a way that we had not seen before:

Up until Hamas’ surprise invasion, social media in Arab countries justified what they deemed necessary in the fight for Palestinian rights. Dissenting voices are starting to ask what that fight should look like.

Haaretz quotes Arab journalist Jasem Aljuraid. Just a few hours after the attack, he posted on X:

“I am a Kuwaiti and I stand by Israel. Any Kuwaiti who forgets the treachery of the Palestinian leadership is ignorant. My solidarity is with the Palestinian and the Israeli people. We want to uproot Hamas and the PLO.”

Aljuraid continued: “These people have lost the ability to manage the interests of the Palestinians. Poverty is rife there, and their leaders have assets valued in the billions.”

He added

To some degree, the Abraham Accords and the improved Israel-Arab relations have helped pro-Israel advocates in the Arab World make their views heard. Bahraini social activist Shaheen Aljenaid appeared on X on the day of the attack and condemned Hamas in no uncertain terms:

Haaretz also quotes Saudi influencer Amjad Taha, an expert in diplomatic strategy with almost half a million followers. He tweeted in Hebrew: “In the Arab, Muslim, and free world, we support Israel and condemn the Palestinian terror attacks. As you can see in today’s videos, it is a struggle between a civilized nation and barbaric militias.”

Taha addressed Israel directly:

Be strong and respond forcefully. The world has changed, only terrorists stand with these militias. Normalization talks will continue, and other countries will join. These barbarians who are trying to stop it will not succeed.

This response from Arab moderates continued. A year later, in October 2024, MEMRI posted on their website: Arab Media Figures Slam Hamas: It Is The Real Enemy Of The Gazans

Against the backdrop of the ongoing war in Gaza, liberal Arab journalists and media figures have intensified their criticism of Hamas and its leadership on social media. In numerous posts on their personal accounts, they argued that Hamas is a terrorist organization that serves the interests of Iran while taking Gaza back to the Stone Age and bringing a catastrophe and a second Nakba upon the Palestinian people. The writers directed sharp criticism at the movement's leaders, who live in luxury hotels outside Gaza while showing indifference to the suffering of the Gazans and using them as human shields for Hamas' operatives. The writers also expressed outrage at the execution of Israeli hostages in Hamas tunnels and called on Hamas to agree to a prisoner exchange deal in order to end the war. Some of them also called on Arab countries to act against Hamas to put an end to the destruction and the tragedy in Gaza.

Among those quoted are Saudi influencer Abdullah Al‑Tawilaʽi and Palestinian journalist Ayman Khaled.

Even Qatar's Al Jazeera took notice of the condemnation of Hamas coming from the Arab Gulf states, though they made sure to quote Arab condemnations of Israel as well, reporting The Arab position on the aggression on the Gaza Strip... a new low:

[T]he UAE did not hide its anger at Hamas's behavior. Minister of State for International Cooperation Reem Al Hashimy declared to the Security Council on November 24, 2023, in language completely uncommon in Arab literature, that Hamas's attacks on October 7 were "barbaric and heinous." She demanded the immediate release of the "hostages," and described Hamas' actions as "crimes." [translation by Google Translate]

Al Jazeera quotes American diplomat and author Dennis Ross as having spoken with Arab leaders after October 7. Those Arab leaders told him that Hamas in Gaza needed to be destroyed, and warned that if Hamas appeared victorious, it would legitimize their radical ideology.

In the context of the growing condemnations of Hamas in the media, the Haaretz article concludes on a hopeful note:

The condemnations heard in the Arab world suggest that the taboo around the nature of the Palestinian struggle has been cracked. From now on, Arab countries may take part in setting new rules for the conflict, according to which not all forms of resistance are permitted and desired.

This was on October 8, 2023.

Last week, the podcast Our Middle East touched on the issue of Arab media reporting on the growing anger in Gaza against Hamas and whether the Arab media itself was sufficiently vocal in calling for regime change in Gaza. The host of the podcast, Dan Diker, asked Arab journalist Khaled Abu Toameh for his thoughts. Abu Toameh replied:

I do hear many voices, Dan, on social media, on Arab TV networks, that do call for regime change, that are critical of Hamas, but I agree with you. They are not loud enough, they are not wide enough. These are limited voices here and there. And I think the reason is because many Arabs are afraid of being portrayed as being Zionists on the payroll of the Jewish Lobby, or Zionist Arabs, or of being--you know--anti-Palestinian. And you know, where most of the criticism comes from; it comes from Westerners.

If an Arab criticizes Hamas, you have all these Western people criticizing this Arab, calling him a Zionist, a traitor, a collaborator with Israel. I mean, that's the irony--that the attacks come from Westerners, people at university campuses in the US, in Canada, even in Australia. And we haven't even talked about the voices from Europe.

So there are voices. They're not enough, they're not being amplified, and I think this is the role that people like us should play, by bringing this to the attention of the Arab world, of other people. But I do hear these voices that are demanding regime change in Gaza.

Israel's success against Hezbollah, Syria, and Iran may have helped to re-energize the moderates in the Arab world against Hamas. Having the outspoken Donald Trump as the president of the US certainly has not hurt either. That makes the next few weeks and the focus on a cease-fire between Israel and Hamas all the more crucial in giving that voice of the Arab world a needed push.

Buy EoZ's books on Amazon!

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

PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism (February 2022)

One of the incentives I have had in starting my AskHillel project is to combat bad philosophy - philosophy that encourages or allows antisemitism - with good philosophy, a secularized version of millennia of Jewish wisdom.

So I decided to test out how well the AskHillel tool would answer the key question that confront Jews on university campuses, or online: how can one defend Zionism in an intellectually rigorous yet approachable way?

Here was AskHillel's (beta) answer, almost verbatim. I just combined two answers - one general and one specifically to counter modern philosophical arguments.

This is good enough to be referenced by everyone who cares about the Jewish world.

Zionism as a Moral Imperative: A Philosophical Defense

Few ideas have been more distorted in recent years than Zionism. Once understood as the movement for Jewish national liberation, it is now often caricatured as colonialism, racism, or even apartheid. But strip away the slogans and the slurs, and Zionism emerges not as a relic of the past but as a living, principled, and profoundly ethical project. Far from being a scandal, Zionism is one of the most compelling moral and philosophical movements of modernity.

I. The Right to Self-Determination

Zionism begins with a simple truth: the Jewish people are a nation.

Not just a religion, not merely a culture – but a people with a shared language, history, calendar, and homeland. Like the Irish, the Kurds, or the Palestinians, Jews have the right to self-determination. This is not an act of privilege; it is the expression of human dignity. A nation that has survived exile, dispersion, and repeated annihilation deserves, at the very least, the same rights granted to every other nation.

To deny this right uniquely to Jews is not neutrality – it is discrimination.

II. Justice After Exile

For two thousand years, the Jewish people were stateless, scattered, and vulnerable. We prayed “Next year in Jerusalem” not as poetry, but as longing – and as defiance. Pogroms, expulsions, blood libels, and finally the Holocaust made clear what statelessness means: not only a lack of power, but a lack of safety, permanence, and moral agency.

Zionism is not revenge. It is repair. It is the ethical act of taking responsibility for one’s own destiny. It is teshuvah – a return not only to land, but to wholeness, to dignity, and to covenant.

III. Cultural Renaissance, Not Colonial Project

Zionism is not Westerners arriving in foreign lands to plunder resources. It is the indigenous return of a people to the hills, valleys, and cities named in their prayers and scriptures. Jews rebuilt their homeland not by conquest, but by reviving a language, planting trees, draining swamps, and turning desolation into life. That is not colonization. That is resurrection.

Moreover, Zionism was never a project of exclusion. From the start, it envisioned a homeland that was Jewish in identity, but democratic and pluralistic in structure. Israel’s Declaration of Independence guarantees full civil rights to all citizens. That vision has not always been fulfilled perfectly – what vision ever is? – but the aspiration remains real and open to critique, as all ethical nations must be.

IV. Jewish Ethics Demands Sovereignty

Jewish tradition does not idolize power. But it recognizes that without some control over public life – courts, armies, borders – ethics remains an aspiration rather than a reality. The Torah is not only about personal righteousness. It commands us to build societies grounded in tzedek (justice), chesed (compassion), and emet (truth).

Without sovereignty, Jews were dependent on the mercy of others. With sovereignty, Jews are accountable – to their own values, their own prophets, their own God. That is a far higher standard.

Zionism, then, is not a deviation from Jewish ethics. It is its necessary vehicle.

V. Dignity, Safety, and the Obligation to Survive

Philosophically, one of the deepest moral duties is the duty to live – not just biologically, but with purpose and honor. Jewish law calls this pikuach nefesh – the preservation of life. Zionism is the political expression of that value. It says: no more slaughter, no more begging, no more dependency. It says: the Jewish people will live – and we will live as Jews.

That is not supremacism. That is survival.

And survival, when grounded in ethical responsibility and universal concern, is not a selfish act. It is a gift to the world. A living Jewish people, secure in their homeland, can serve others, host refugees, debate morality, innovate technology, and remind the world that ancient values still matter.

Conclusion: A Just Nation Among Nations

Zionism is not a claim to moral perfection. It does not exempt Israel from criticism or Jews from ethical accountability. On the contrary, it demands more of us. It asks us to build a society that reflects our deepest values – to show what a nation can look like when shaped by Torah, by memory, by trauma, and by hope.

It is not enough for Israel to exist. It must be worthy of its own dream.

But the first step – the foundational truth – is that the dream itself is just. Zionism is not a sin to be explained away. It is a moral achievement to be proud of, refined, and fulfilled.

If justice means anything, it must include the right of the Jewish people to be home.

Zionism Under Fire: A Philosophical Response to Its Critics

Zionism, the movement for Jewish national self-determination, is often judged not on its own terms, but through hostile ideological lenses. In some academic and activist circles, it has become fashionable to brand Zionism as colonialist, reactionary, or religiously exclusionary.

These accusations rarely stand up to scrutiny – but they resonate because they borrow the moral authority of powerful modern theories: anti-colonialism, postmodern relativism, and religious universalism. To defend Zionism properly, we must meet those arguments at their roots.

I. Anti-Colonial Theory: A Weapon Turned Against Its Origins

Claim: Zionism is settler colonialism – a foreign population imposed on native people for its own benefit.

Response: Anti-colonialism, rightly understood, is about restoring indigenous peoples to their land, identity, and self-governance. By that definition, Zionism is anti-colonial.

Jews are the indigenous people of the Land of Israel. Archaeology, language, history, liturgy, and genetic studies all confirm continuous ties.
Jews were colonized – first by Romans, then Byzantines, Arabs, Crusaders, Ottomans, and British. Zionism is the reversal of that process.
The return to Zion was not conquest by empire but escape from empire. Jews were not backed by imperial forces – they often had to resist them.

Zionism also differs fundamentally from European colonialism:

It sought not extraction, but home.
It revived a language rather than imposing one.
It planted forests, built cities, and restored local agriculture – not for foreign wealth, but for national renewal.

Those who label Zionism as colonialism typically apply the term in a unique, inverted way: the only national movement in history where an exiled indigenous people returns – is redefined as the invader.

That’s not analysis. It’s defamation.

II. Postmodern Relativism: Against the Double Standard

Claim: Zionism imposes a singular national identity that marginalizes others. In a pluralistic, post-national world, such identity projects are outdated and oppressive.

Response: Postmodern relativism claims to celebrate diversity – yet often makes a selective exception for Jewish particularism.

Why are Kurdish, Palestinian, or Tibetan national aspirations valid, but Jewish ones not? Why is Jewish identity always expected to dissolve into cosmopolitanism, while others are encouraged to resist assimilation?

True pluralism means recognizing that people derive meaning from specific histories, languages, and cultures. Jews are no exception. Zionism is not a rejection of universal values – it’s the realization that universalism without rootedness becomes empty.

Moreover, postmodernism often denies the idea of truth, fixed identity, or moral clarity. But in practice, its application to Zionism is disturbingly rigid:

It questions all nation-states – except when opposing Israel.
It claims to be anti-essentialist – yet essentializes Jews as white Europeans.
It preaches moral humility – while treating Zionism as uniquely evil.

Zionism doesn’t oppose plurality. It insists on the right to be part of that plurality – as Jews, with a homeland, language, and culture intact.

III. Religious Universalism: The False Moral Monopoly

Claim: Zionism is incompatible with the universal moral teachings of religion – particularly Judaism, Christianity, and Islam – which prioritize justice, compassion, and peace over nationalism.

Response: All major religions contain both universal and particular elements. The moral demand to love one’s neighbor is not opposed to the need for national identity – they are complementary.

In Judaism, the covenant with the Jewish people is not universal in scope – but it is universal in purpose. The mission of the Jewish people is not to dominate others, but to build a society grounded in justice (tzedek), dignity (kavod), and truth (emet) – in the land promised to them.

Zionism is not a retreat from religious ethics. It’s an attempt to fulfill them politically:

A people cannot be a “light unto the nations” while stateless, scattered, and persecuted.
Values like areivut (mutual responsibility) and pikuach nefesh (saving life) require sovereignty to be fully enacted.
Prophets like Isaiah and Amos spoke of justice within a national framework – not a utopian cosmopolis.

When Christian or Islamic critics frame Zionism as a betrayal of religious morality, they often do so from within supersessionist frameworks – claiming that Judaism was supposed to fade into spiritual universality, and Zionism is its refusal to die. That’s theology disguised as ethics.

Zionism doesn’t violate religious universalism. It reminds it that universal values must be embodied somewhere – and that no one faith or people holds a monopoly on moral aspiration.

Conclusion: Zionism Is Not the Exception. It Is the Test.

If anti-colonialism means restoring indigenous peoples, Zionism is just.

If pluralism means respecting identity, Zionism is necessary.

If religion means building a world of justice, Zionism is its vessel.

The ferocity with which Zionism is attacked by these philosophies is not evidence of its guilt, but of its uniqueness. Zionism forces modern ideologies to confront their own contradictions: Do you really support indigenous rights, or only when the indigenous aren’t Jews? Do you really believe in pluralism, or only for everyone else?

The Jewish people are not an idea. We are a people – with memory, covenant, pain, and hope.

Zionism does not ask for more than other peoples receive. It simply asks that Jews not be the one exception.

And if your philosophy cannot make room for that, the problem is not with Zionism.

It’s with your philosophy.

Buy EoZ's books on Amazon!

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

PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism (February 2022)

This is even more bizarre than most Arab articles.

At dawn on June 13, 2025, during the ongoing Zionist genocide against our Palestinian people in the Gaza Strip, Zionist forces, aircraft, and intelligence services assassinated Cyrus the Great, the founder of the Persian Empire and one of the most prominent leaders in ancient history, celebrated as a national hero and founder of Iranian identity.

The irony of this barbaric aggression is that the Zionist entity and its fascist leadership killed the liberator of the Jews from the Babylonian captivity in 539 BC. He liberated them and returned them to Jerusalem, freed the slaves and prisoners, and established the first principles, charters, and rules of religious and cultural tolerance. His ideas are still taught in human rights curricula to this day.

The Zionist criminals killed the first to bring back the exiles from the diaspora, whom the Jews considered the Messiah and savior of God, as mentioned in the Book of Isaiah, a symbol of liberation in Jewish heritage. They killed their Messiah and savior in a military operation called "The Rising Lion," a predatory and savage killing of more than 18 scientists, thinkers, academics, and experts in Iran, whom Netanyahu considered more important than destroying the nuclear program and its facilities.

Cyrus the Great, who saved the Jews from the catastrophe after the captivity, did not know that this catastrophe would turn into disasters and tragedies and the birth of a bloody, religious, genocidal, racist fascist model, and a terrorist Torah that continues to grind down people, history, and human civilizations, as is happening in Gaza. Cyrus did not know that Zionism would crucify its Messiah once again in his country, Iran, and turn against the Human Charter, the United Nations, and human rights covenants, as if history and human values were a war game in the hands of those who write it with massacres and blood. These are the ones who appeared in this country with no connection to humanity and its urban and cultural development. They are thugs, haters, and vengeful, to the point that we almost doubt that the one who created them is the Lord of the servants.

Wow.

Iran isn't exactly Cyrus. On the contrary, the Islamic State discriminates against its native Zoroastrian population - and Cyrus was Zoroastrian.

The Islamic conquest of Persia in the 7th century CE actually ended the Sassanid Persian Empire and gradually replaced Zoroastrian Persian culture with Islamic culture and Arabic script.

Cyrus would have cheered Israel bombing the Muslims who destroyed his country.

The obvious antisemitism in the piece ("Zionism would crucify its Messiah once again") is just the cherry on top.

Buy EoZ's books on Amazon!

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

PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism (February 2022)

07/08 Links Pt2: Dinah Project Report Unveils the Sexual Violence of October 7th; ADL Slams Nation's Largest Teachers' Union for Banning Its Materials; On what planet is the BBC pro-Israel?

From Ian:

Andrew Fox: The Dinah Project report

Now, however, the truth is out in a way that can be shared with the world’s general audience. The Dinah Project report provides detailed descriptions and aggregated data that convey the scale and nature of the sexual violence without splashing explicit gore all over social media. It allows us to discuss the facts in a dignified manner, grounded in research and testimony. There is no longer any excuse for journalists, diplomats, or activists to parrot Hamas’s denials. The evidence is meticulously documented by a panel of legal experts and partially funded by the UK government (hardly an Israeli propaganda outfit). This report is the answer to anyone who still sneers “Where’s the evidence?” when confronted with the rapes of 7 October. Here it is, in black and white. Read it and weep (if you have a soul).

This is a personal issue for me, as it should be for anyone with a conscience. I am not Israeli, but as a human being, as a man, as a former soldier and writer about war who stood on that charred ground in the Gaza Periphery and later held back tears talking with survivors and hostage families, I feel an obligation to amplify their truth. We must ensure that the rape and sexual torture of 7 October are recognised globally for what they were: crimes against humanity. The dehumanisation that Hamas practised, in which Jewish civilians were not only to be killed, but degraded most intimately, needs to be utterly condemned by every decent person, no matter their politics on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

Now the question is: what will the world do about it? Acknowledging the truth is the first step. Next must come accountability. No Hamas fighter who took part in the 7 October invasion should escape justice, even if their individual rape victim did not survive to testify against them. The patterns and evidence are enough to indict them as a group for sexual war crimes. The report also pushes for international bodies to step up: it calls on the UN Secretary-General to officially blacklist Hamas as an organisation that uses sexual violence as a weapon of war. (Incredibly, that has not happened yet; a scandal in its own right.) It lays out a roadmap for prosecuting these crimes in forums such as the International Criminal Court. In short, it demands justice.

I am outraged that it took this long and this much effort. I am furious at the chorus of denial that forced survivors to scream into a void for months. I take some solace in knowing that the facts have finally pierced the lies of denial. To those who still want to avert their eyes or peddle conspiracy theories: shame on you. To those who bravely gathered this evidence and spoke out, the Dinah Project team, the survivors who broke their silence, the first responders who testified to what they found: thank you. You have done a service not just to Israel, but to humanity.

In the biblical story, Dinah was a woman who survived a horrific rape, and her brothers sought justice (albeit violently) against the perpetrators. Today, the Dinah Project carries on that legacy in a more enlightened way, through truth and law. Now that the truth is in the open, we must not let it be ignored. The innocents of 7 October deserve to be remembered in full: not only how they died, but how they suffered. We owe it to them to be outraged and to ensure that never again will such barbarity be waved away or denied.

The evidence is here; the world must face it. For the sake of our shared humanity, we must hold the perpetrators of these horrors to account, however long it takes. Anything less would be an unforgivable betrayal of the victims and of truth itself.

October 7 and beyond: Hamas's use of sexual violence was systematic weapon of war, report finds

A new report on the systematic use of sexual violence by Hamas terrorists against Israelis in the Gaza border area on October 7, 2023, offers a framework to approach the legal monstrosity of proving and eventually indicting the perpetrators of such crimes.

The fact that the attacks were carried out by a group driven by a particular ideology is itself enough of a basis for a new evidentiary model, the report suggests, adding that there is legal precedent for this type of model.

This model suggests that when the perpetrators agreed to breach Israel’s borders on that fateful Saturday, they consented to all the crimes that would be carried out. As such, the group as an entity bears responsibility, as do the individuals within, especially given the systematic pattern of sexual violence evidenced on October 7 and by some who did them to captives later on.

The full report can be viewed at www.thedinahproject.org.

The Dinah Project, which authored the report, is comprised of five women, legal and gender experts in their own right, who came together after October 7 to form “the leading resource for recognition and justice for victims of Conflict Related Sexual Violence.”

The report finds that “Hamas used sexual violence as a tactical weapon of war,” a conclusion that carries potentially far-reaching consequences in the international realm. CRSV has been documented in other conflict zones, such as Nigeria and Iraq.

The report, titled “A Quest for Justice: October 7 and Beyond,” was authored by the Dinah Project’s founding members: Prof. Ruth Halperin-Kaddari, Col. (res.) Sharon Zagagi-Pinhas, and retired judge Nava Ben-Or. The team, led by Halperin-Kaddari, analyzed and verified what they could on CRSV from October 7, including incidents of rape, gang rape, torture, and humiliation. Other team members include Eetta Prince-Gibson and Nurit Jacobs-Yinon, the visual editor of the report.

The report documents the widespread and systematic use of sexual violence during the October 7 attacks across at least six different locations: the Nova music festival, Route 232, the Nahal Oz military base, Kibbutz Re’im, Kibbutz Nir Oz, and Kibbutz Kfar Aza.

The main issue that confronted the researchers was gathering the evidence, as “most victims were murdered; survivors and released captives may be too traumatized to come forward and testify against their abusers; and forensic evidence required for criminal convictions is difficult to obtain in crime scenes that remain war zones.”

New Dinah Project Report Unveils the Sexual Violence of October 7th & Beyond

The Dinah Project’s report takes a meticulous approach in documenting the sexual violence committed by Hamas during the October 7 assault. The initiative is named after Dinah, the biblical figure and Patriarch Jacob's only daughter, whose story of the rape she suffered in the Book of Genesis is told without her perspective ever being given a voice. Similarly, the victims of the October 7 massacre remain largely silenced, either through death or by the profound trauma that prevents them from sharing their experiences. The project’s mission is to document, analyze, and seek justice for the gender-based crimes carried out during the Hamas-led invasion of southern Israel. Key Findings

Through comprehensive research and analysis, the report confirms that:
- Sexual violence was rampant and coordinated during the October 7 assault, taking place at minimum 6 different sites, including the Nova music festival, Route 232, Nahal Oz military base, and the Kibbutzim of Re'im, Nir Oz, and Kfar Aza.

- Distinct patterns of sexual abuse emerged, such as victims found partially or fully undressed with their hands bound to trees or poles, gang rapes followed by executions, genital mutilation, and instances of public humiliation.

- Sexual violence persisted during captivity, with several returnees reporting instances of forced nudity, sexual harassment, assaults, and threats of forced marriage.

- Most victims were permanently silenced, killed either during or after the attacks, or remain too traumatized to share their experiences, creating substantial challenges in evidence gathering that necessitate a specialized, context-driven approach to documenting conflict-related sexual violence (CRSV).

Evidence Framework

The report draws on 5 main sources:
- Survivor Testimonies: One survivor of attempted rape on October 7, along with 15 returned hostages, either having experienced or witnessed accounts of sexual violence.

- Eyewitness and Earwitness Accounts: At least 17 individuals have provided testimony regarding over 15+ separate incidents of sexual assault, including, individual rapes, gang rapes and mutilation.

- First Responder Testimonies: 27 first responders reporting dozens of cases of sexual violence across six locations, with clear evidence of assault on the victims.

- Forensic Evidence: Morgue attendants describing bodies showing signs of sexual violence, with photographic documentation supporting these claims.

- Visual and Audio Documentation: Videos, photographs, and intercepted communications provide further evidence of sexual assault and humiliation during the attacks.

Rape. Genital Mutilation.

Hamas used sexual violence as a weapon of war - on October 7 and well after.

This was not random. It was systematic. An intentional tactic of terror. A war crime.

The July 8 Dinah Report demands accountability.

We will not stop fighting for… pic.twitter.com/YXpesuK9aH
— Israel Foreign Ministry (@IsraelMFA) July 8, 2025

A message from Michal:

Six confirmed sites. Dozens of eyewitness accounts. Testimony from 15 courageous returned hostages.

The evidence is undeniable: Hamas terrorists used sexual violence as a systematic weapon of war - on October 7 and beyond.

The Dinah Report published… pic.twitter.com/Ez5QLrL7ku
— יצחק הרצוג Isaac Herzog (@Isaac_Herzog) July 8, 2025

A message from Michal.

I received the harrowing report from Project Dinah, bravely detailing Hamas’s systemic use of gang rape, forced nudity, sexual torture, and unspeakable abuse on October 7 and continuing in captivity.

The report lays out clear legal evidence: Hamas used… pic.twitter.com/DPOhL0j0rL
— יצחק הרצוג Isaac Herzog (@Isaac_Herzog) July 8, 2025