Thursday, September 17, 2026

Our weekly column from the humor site PreOccupied Territory.

Check out their Facebook  and  Substack pages.



Judean Desert, September 17 - Throngs of area residents streamed toward a jagged cliffside east of Jerusalem today, to cheer on the rending limb from limb of a body thrown from a nearby promontory, only to discover, to their chagrin, that the body in question belonged to an animal symbolically carrying the sins of the Jews, and not, as they had eagerly anticipated, to an actual Jew.

A disorderly mass of motor vehicles jammed the roads leading back to Ramallah and local villages, as well as to various Bedouin encampments, as disappointed Palestinians expressed the letdown inherent in expecting Jew-dismemberment but coming away not only without any organs or limbs as souvenirs, but without even any photos or video footage of such a festive occasion.

"We last had the opportunity around here more than twenty-five years ago," recalled Ramallah resident Mustafa Massikr, 55. "I remember when those two Israelis were taken to the police station, tortured, killed, cut open, and then thrown into the crowd. The atmosphere was electric. We tasted victory."

"This... this is crushing," he lamented.

The Yom Kippur service, described in the Biblical book of Leviticus, involves the "sending away" of a Billy goat over which the High Priest has recited a confession on behalf of the nation. The Mishnah, elaborating on the rite centuries later, describes how a man escorts the goat from Jerusalem's Temple Mount to a spot in the Judean Desert with a severe drop, and pushes the animal over the edge. The Mishnah asserts that the terrain would dismember the goat entirely before it came to a stop.

That technical detail had been enough to fill the wadis with spectators. Men stood on hoods. Boys held up phones. A few had brought bags, the same practical instinct that once sent people into the street below the Ramallah police station in October 2000, and that later sent people hunting through houses and a festival ground on October 7, 2023. Munich in 1972 had offered no cliff and no souvenir limbs either, only dead Jews and a story worth repeating. Today offered a cliff and, it turned out, a goat.

When the animal hit and came apart, the sound was correct. The object was not. A murmur moved through the crowd as someone shouted that it was the Azazel goat — the sins of Israel in livestock form, not an Israeli. Phones lowered. The bags stayed empty. No one rushed the rocks to claim a hoof or a length of hide. The difference, once named, was decisive. A Jew would have been an event. A goat was an errand.

Massikr watched the traffic begin to turn around. “In 2000 we had two,” he said. “On October 7 they had hundreds. What is there to take home?”

Several Palestinians nevertheless stayed behind to pick through the carcass, in case enough of the animal remained to copulate with.




 



The names of the alleged controllers keep changing. The underlying idea is very old — and social media may be its perfect delivery system.

Everyone knows about The Protocols of the Elders of Zion, the notorious 1903 Russian forgery purporting to reveal the minutes of secret Jewish leaders plotting to control governments, finance, the press and ultimately the world. (At least, I hope so — no one would understand the irony of my blog name otherwise.) 

But the Protocols did not invent the idea that visible events were secretly being controlled by Jews. It collected, modernized and systematized an idea that was already many centuries old. The US Holocaust Memorial Museum itself notes that the Protocols pulled together longstanding accusations that Jews secretly fomented wars and revolutions, spread epidemics and controlled politics and economics.

In fact, one version of the hidden-Jewish-hand myth appears more than a thousand years before the Protocols. Medieval Christian writers sometimes explained the actions of non-Jewish rulers by placing a Jew behind them. David Freidenreich has documented Christian accounts from the early Middle Ages in which Muslim rulers were supposedly manipulated by Jews into attacking Christianity. The visible ruler made the decision; the Jew supplied the hidden malevolent agency. The Jew is the puppet-master. 

Sound familiar? 

By the twelfth century the idea became much more ambitious. Thomas of Monmouth, whose account of the supposed ritual murder of William of Norwich helped establish the European blood libel, described an alleged international Jewish conspiracy. According to his story, Jewish leaders from different countries supposedly gathered at Narbonne and selected by lot the place where a Christian would be murdered that year. Johannes Heil has compared this imagined gathering to the much later Protocols: an international Jewish elite, secret communication across borders, coordination among apparently separate Jewish communities and a concealed program directed against Christian society. The Protocols' “Elders” had ancestors centuries before anyone had heard of Zionism.

The pattern expanded further during the medieval accusations that Jews poisoned wells. When plague and mass death struck Europe, the obvious explanations were inadequate for people searching for intentional causes. The conspiracy theory was not simply that local Jews poisoned wells. it was that the local Jews supposedly received poison from rabbis or other Jewish leaders and spread it through water supplies via a hidden Jewish network.

That is why the Protocols should be understood as a consolidation point, not an invention. By the nineteenth century the old religious accusations had been secularized. Jews could now supposedly control banks, newspapers, revolutionary movements, Freemasons, political parties and governments. An 1806 letter sent to the French conspiracy theorist Augustin Barruel claimed that Jews secretly controlled other secret societies. Hermann Goedsche's 1868 novel Biarritz imagined Jewish leaders meeting secretly to coordinate world domination; parts of it later helped inspire the mythology surrounding the Protocols. The Protocols then assembled all of these pieces into a single universal theory: if something consequential happens in public, perhaps the people visibly making the decisions are not really making them at all.

There are really three related accusations here. The first is the hidden adviser: the ruler appears to decide, but Jews secretly cause the decision. The second is the secret network: Jewish organizations that appear independent are actually coordinated parts of one collective project. The third is the hidden causal agent: an event with an ordinary apparent explanation — war, revolution, assassination, economic collapse, epidemic — actually has Jews behind it. Stack all three together and you get the mature conspiracy theory: Jews form a hidden network, the network controls visible leaders, and those leaders produce events that secretly serve Jewish interests.

This is why the exposure of the Protocols as a forgery did not affect its influence. The pieces were already in place for decades, some for centuries, and accepted in the back of people's minds. The Protocols put it all together so even when it was exposed, it still appeared to explain the larger truth of Jewish control. 

This way the ideas that Jews were behind capitalism and communism, nationalism and internationalism, working secretly and in public, all could thrive even if the particular delivery system was found to be flawed.  The conclusion remained stable while the premise changed.

And it remains today, with the cosmetic replacement of "Zionists" for "Jews." Blaming Jews for all problems is so backward; but blaming Zionists is trendy. The need for a simple explanation of a complicated world remains, and Israel provides the excuse. .

“Congress supports Israel” is a fact requiring political explanation. “Israel controls Congress” is a theory about hidden agency.

“The United States and Israel share strategic interests” can be debated. “Zionists dragged America into the war” assigns the visible American decision-makers a secondary role and moves the true causal agency somewhere else.

“Mossad has assassinated people” is a historical fact. “Mossad probably killed X” because the event is mysterious and Israel might benefit from it is the old hidden-causation template.

This is why conspiracy theories involving Israel so easily spread far beyond disputes about Israeli policy. Israel supposedly knew about 9/11 in advance, arranged 9/11, created ISIS, controls Western governments, owns the media, manipulates American elections, starts wars and even engineers antisemitic attacks to create sympathy for itself. A 2005 Syrian edition of the Protocols, officially authorized by the Syrian Ministry of Information, simply updated the ancient script by claiming that the “Elders of Zion” had coordinated the September 11 attacks. The Protocols had become modular: insert the newest catastrophe and the explanation still works.

What has changed most dramatically is not the conspiracy theory but the technology that distributes it.

This week David Frum discussed Warren Kinsella's new book The Hidden Hand: The Information War and the Rise of Antisemitic Propaganda. Kinsella's argument, as Frum describes it, is that the extraordinary explosion of antisemitic and anti-Israel material on social media is not entirely organic. Political actors deliberately seed propaganda, but the social-media environment then does something previous propagandists could only dream of. Algorithms select for material that generates engagement, and fear, anger, disgust and conspiracy generate plenty of engagement.

That means the transmission of antisemitism no longer requires someone to read the Protocols. A person does not have to study medieval Christian theology, Nazi propaganda or Soviet “anti-Zionism.” He doesn't even need to know where the idea came from. The Internet can deliver the finished product stripped of its historical packaging.

This helps explain something that otherwise looks strange: antisemitic ideas now jump effortlessly between political camps that despise each other. A white nationalist, an Islamist, a Marxist activist and an America First isolationist may disagree about nearly everything, yet all four can find a version of the proposition that hidden Zionist power explains what is wrong with the world. Historically those traditions had separate transmission routes. Today they share memes, screenshots, videos, influencers and algorithms.

Antisemitism increasingly operates like an open-source codebase. Christianity contributed some modules; medieval Europe contributed others; nineteenth-century racial and economic antisemitism added more; the Protocols packaged the conspiracy modules particularly effectively; Nazi, Soviet, Arab nationalist and Islamist propagandists translated them into their own ideological languages. Today anyone can download a module without adopting the ideology that originally produced it.

And social media adds something genuinely new. For most of history, somebody had to transmit the accusation. A priest preached it, an author printed it, a government broadcast it, a political movement distributed it. Now the information system itself helps select which versions spread. The historical antisemitic library supplies the material and all are welcome to visit the library. Propagandists seed it; the algorithm rewards the most emotionally effective versions.

The media becomes a critical part of the spread. A new study by Jeremy Mushigi documents how news stories about Israel are produced way out of proportion to the actual importance of the stories. 

Israel is a country of 10 million people. It holds 0.12% of humanity on a territory smaller than New Jersey. And in 9 of the last 10 years, it has been the subject of more international news coverage per capita than any other country on Earth — double to quadruple the rate of any Western democracy, 7 - 16x more than Canada, 50 - 137x more than Brazil, 200 - 600x more than India. In 2024, 1 out of every 50 news articles published anywhere on the planet, by outlets outside Israel, was primarily about Israel — and in absolute terms only the United States, a country 34x its size and the world's hegemon, was the subject of more.

Why does a country the size of a mid-tier metropolis city command a fixed, permanent, disproportionate share of the entire world's attention, decade after decade, mostly in a negative register — while catastrophes 10 and 100 times larger pass in silence? The size of the spotlight, its persistence, and its tone are facts. They can be measured. And once you measure them, only one class of explanation survives: the spotlight is not a response to events. The spotlight is the operation — aimed at making Israel the thing you think about. The thing that infuriates you.

Conspiracy theories do not require a conspiracy to spread. Once culturally available, they can propagate through ordinary human psychology, political opportunism and now automated recommendation systems. It has become self-replicating; so many people talk about Israel because so many people talk about Israel. And while there is no central media conspiracy to maintain focus on Israel, that focus allows the next round of conspiracy theories about Jews and Israel to thrive, because the most attractive explanation for a confusing world is a simple one: the one in the headlines every day. 

The media, academia, NGOs and international institutions don't need to endorse conspiracy theories to help create the environment in which they flourish. By making Israel an extraordinarily salient subject—producing a constant stream of accusations, controversies, reports and explanations—they furnish the raw material from which conspiratorial minds can construct their next hidden-hand theory.

That may be why the hidden Jewish hand has proved so extraordinarily durable. It supplies something conspiracy thinking desperately wants: a single intentional agent behind a confusing world. Wars, economic changes, elections, migrations and cultural transformations are enormously complicated. “The Jews did it” is simple.

But we still need to understand - why the Jews in particular?

We'll tackle that next. 

(h/t Scott S)

 


Wednesday, September 16, 2026

  • Wednesday, September 16, 2026
  • Elder of Ziyon

I will try to put a few links here in no particular order as Ian is not feeling well. 

The creators of the recent documentary dealing with the topic of "Naza" (a Hebrew military acronym for Nezek Agavi - collateral damage) did not have to work too hard to discover the truth. 
They could have simply interviewed me.

Israel News Pulse:  NAZA Fact Checked: The Explosive Claims the Documentary Cannot Prove

Jonathan Tobin: The AI apocalypse and the ‘NAZA’ blood libels against Israel







Lawfare: "A growing number of convicted terrorists are soon to be released from prison. There’s no plan to address potential recidivism."

Washington Examiner: Queen Esther saved her people. Michigan’s attorney general just threw them under the bus


Jewish Review of Books: How to “Other” an Israeli

PMW: “Massive Palestinian intifada” promoted by official Palestinian Authority daily









This month's Commentary cover:







Buy EoZ's books  on Amazon!

Reclaiming the Covenant on America's 250th (May 2026)

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

PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism (February 2022)

   

 

 





Buy EoZ's books  on Amazon!

Reclaiming the Covenant on America's 250th (May 2026)

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

PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism (February 2022)

   

 

 

  • Wednesday, September 16, 2026
  • Elder of Ziyon
I received this from an email list, and it is way too important to not spread far and wide.



The creators of the recent documentary dealing with the topic of "Naza" (a Hebrew military acronym for Nezek Agavi - collateral damage) did not have to work too hard to discover the truth. 
They could have simply interviewed me. I would have stood in front of the camera, without hiding my identity, on the roof of my house located nine kilometers from Lebanon, after we absorbed endless barrages of rockets here, and explained the reality on the ground to them.
A little less than 20 years ago, I was one of the founders of the field within the IDF that deals with warning populations on the other side of enemy lines and preserving the lives of their civilians. 
We built the work processes that define how to call upon the population to evacuate, and how to track that evacuation. I was personally involved in formulating the target approval processes and operational discussions.
If they had spoken with me, I would have explained to them that the chart shown at the beginning of the film is not a chart for conducting killings, but rather a planning chart for a target identified as being used by Hamas. 
Its purpose is to determine whether to strike a target at all, who in the command echelon is authorized to approve it, with what munitions, and under what conditions. In stark contrast to what is stated in the film, when the words "Naza 500 – collateral damage estimated at 500" appear in the approval process, the meaning is that action must be taken to reduce the collateral damage. 
There are a variety of ways to do this, such as a call for evacuation, precision munitions, or canceling the strike entirely (what is known as an unapproved target). Noting the collateral damage on the target sheet does not signify an intention to carry out the killing of civilians or a "genocide"; it is intended, first and foremost, to prevent it.
Our enemies, both Hamas and Hezbollah, deliberately plant their rockets and headquarters in the heart of the civilian population, in tunnels under Beirut or in high-rise residential buildings in southern Lebanon. Hamas in Gaza did the same, using children as human shields. They do this based on the working assumption that if Israel strikes without warning, 500 civilians will be killed. That is exactly their goal. But Israel chooses differently: there are at least hundreds of soldiers and officers in the IDF whose entire role is the protection of the enemy's population. That is what they think about when they wake up in the morning. This is what the IDF pays them a salary for.
If the editors of the film had wanted to conduct serious research, they could have interviewed former (like me) and present IDF soldiers and officers, who would tell them the truth about collateral damage. But they chose not to do so.

The promo for the film claims that the IDF "never checks the number of civilians killed." 
The truth is that checking the exact number of casualties in enemy territory in real-time is a complex and nearly impossible task. This is exactly why the collateral damage assessment process was created in advance, to consider the size of the structure and the routine number of civilians in its vicinity. 
The IDF has invested and continues to invest massive resources - intelligence personnel, legal experts, operational personnel from the air and ground forces, and technological experts - to develop command and control systems that accurately reflect where civilians are present and where they are not. I was personally involved in developing these tools during my military service in the Northern Command and during my subsequent reserve service.
From my experience, I can testify that a whole world of intelligence stands behind this effort. In the Intelligence Directorate, there are several desks whose exclusive role is tracking the evacuation percentages of the population from rural and urban areas after the IDF has published warnings. If a high percentage of the population has evacuated following the warnings, the collateral damage assessment drops, and only then is a strike on the terror infrastructure permitted.
But unfortunately, it is precisely the IDF's efforts to preserve the lives of the enemy's population, namely, the evacuation warnings and tracking of the evacuation status, that have been interpreted as "ethnic cleansing" in international media, while ignoring the scope of the terror infrastructure exposed inside and beneath the villages in both Lebanon and Gaza, in every house.
I have been asked several times by reporters why we evacuate such extensive areas. Here is my answer: when Hamas or Hezbollah dig a tunnel network under villages, it is impossible to destroy them without harming the dozens of houses above them. A targeted evacuation of a specific house during a tunnel explosion will result in harm to civilians.
Despite the extensive intelligence efforts invested to ensure that the target is clear of civilians, this is a world where uncertainty is exceedingly high. Intelligence will always be partial and insufficient. There have been many recorded cases where there was no information about the presence of civilians in the terror infrastructure or near the terrorist, and they were killed as a result. This grim outcome cannot erase the fact that efforts to prevent collateral damage are indeed made.
Decision-making on the battlefield is complex, the dilemmas are immense, and the nature of the battlefield is that mistakes are sometimes made. But the difference between us and the enemy is enormous. In contrast to the radical Islamic ideology of Hamas and Hezbollah, who publicly declare that their goal is to kill Israeli civilians (and act accordingly), we state clearly that we have no intention whatsoever of killing civilians in enemy territory, and we even allow the entry of humanitarian aid into the combat zone, despite the fact that this harms our operational achievement in the fight against terrorism. 
As parents of soldiers, this is how we educate our children - civilians are not a target. And these children grow up to become the soldiers and officers who serve in the IDF.

It is unfortunate that the filmmakers chose not to conduct real research. Contrary to what is required by journalistic ethics, they even refrained from sending the report to the IDF for comment, so it is impossible to know what roles the interviewees held within the system, and whether their point of view, assuming it is authentic, is even relevant to understanding the chain of approvals and actions taken prior to striking a target. 
The filmmakers preferred to tell a story from a very narrow angle, to interview anonymous sources whose level of involvement, rank, and understanding of the process is unclear, and to completely ignore the experts who built these systems with one goal: preserving human life. There are such experts. I was one of them.

 


Sarit Zehavi
Your eyes and ears on the northern border, 
Alma Research and Education Center



Buy EoZ's books  on Amazon!

Reclaiming the Covenant on America's 250th (May 2026)

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

PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism (February 2022)

   

 

 

  • Wednesday, September 16, 2026
  • Elder of Ziyon

A forthcoming book from De Gruyter Brill and University of California Press advances an amazingly ambitious thesis. Hanine Shehadeh’s The Thousand-Year Crusade for Palestine: Zionist Christianity and the Settler Jew argues that Europe’s conversion to Christianity created a civilizational fixation on Palestine that eventually shaped European sovereignty, nationalism, race, colonialism and modernity itself. The publisher summarizes her argument bluntly: this “Zionist Christian formation is the foundation of Western modernity.”

The book is not yet published, so I cannot judge its evidence. But the amount of evidence for such an extraordinary claim must be equally extraordinary.  A Palestinian scholar has written a history in which the European Christian lust for conquering Palestine becomes the great hidden force shaping the entire modern world.

The chain is sweeping. Europe converts to Christianity; Christianity focuses Europe on Palestine; the Crusades follow; Protestantism inherits the fixation; French nationalism carries it forward; European ideas of race and sovereignty develop through it; Jewish Zionism then absorbs this supposedly colonial-racist structure. Israel finally emerges as, in the publisher’s phrase, “not a refuge from European history but its most durable export.”

Postcolonial scholarship has spent decades criticizing Europeans for writing history as though Europe were the center of the world. It is a fair critique. But shouldn't that apply to anyone who finds a grand unifying theory centered on a single geographic location? This appears to perform much the same maneuver with a different center. Palestine becomes so historically important that the Crusades, Reformation, nationalism, empire, race, Zionism and Western modernity itself can all be organized around it. 

This is not de-centering history. It is re-centering it.

Of course Palestine mattered enormously to Christianity, and Jerusalem occupied a unique place in the Christian imagination. But there is a vast difference between saying that Palestine repeatedly mattered to European religious and imperial history and saying that a Palestine-centered “Zionist Christian formation” became “the foundation of Western modernity.” Western modernity also had something to do with the printing press, capitalism, the scientific revolution, the Enlightenment, industrialization, Atlantic slavery, the conquest of the Americas, bureaucratic states and centuries of European wars that had nothing to do with Jerusalem.

The framework becomes even more revealing when it reaches Jewish Zionism:

It is from within this history of Zionist Christian formation, not against it, that Jewish Zionism emerges at the close of the nineteenth century. Reading the French Revolution alongside Napoleon’s campaign to conquer Palestine, Shehadeh argues that Jewish Zionism absorbed the colonial-racist terms of European modernity—accepting the diasporic Jew’s alleged degeneracy and proposing redemption through empire in Palestine. The State of Israel emerges, in this light, not as a refuge from European history but as its most durable export.


Jewish Zionism, according to the description, does not primarily emerge from Jewish history, Jewish persecution or Jewish attachment to the Land of Israel.  Forget thousands of years of prayers to restore Zion - we have a much better explanation of Jewish Zionism as being rooted in racism against indigenous Arabs (who themselves are invaders to the land after Christians held it for centuries, but let's not quibble over historic details - the book wants to start European history in Palestine with the Crusades, not the Romans or the Byzantines.)

If Jews remain in Europe, they are victims of European antisemitism. If they leave Europe and seek sovereignty, they have absorbed European colonialism/racism. If Zionists criticize Jewish powerlessness in exile, they have internalized European racism. If they seek support from imperial powers, they become agents of empire. Even an attempt to escape the European condition becomes another expression of European ideology.

And this requires leaving out a fairly important fact: Christianity did not invent Zion. It inherited Zion, Jerusalem, exile, return, covenant and redemption from Judaism. Jewish attachment to the Land of Israel did not require medieval Crusaders, Protestant restorationists or Napoleon to bring it into existence.

That does not mean modern Zionism developed outside European political history. Of course it didn't. But saying Zionism borrowed from nineteenth-century nationalism is very different from making it the end product of a thousand-year Christian-colonial fixation on Palestine.

Notice the subtitle of the book: "Zionist Christianity and the Settler Jew." All Jews who want to return to their ancestral home have been labeled as "settlers." Such an interesting term. It almost seems like an Arab is looking at European history through an Arab lens and cannot see anything outside her own point of view. Of course the Jew is a settler. The only virtuous Jews are the ones who prefer to stay in Europe to be slaughtered, or to stay in Arab countries where they must thank their hosts for their second class, dhimmi, "protected" status.

Can Shehadeh's model recognize a Jewish historical subject that is neither Europe's victim nor Europe's colonial proxy? It appears not.

A Palestinian-centered grand theory is not automatically less parochial than a European-centered one. But it requires a lot more logical leaps. 




Buy EoZ's books  on Amazon!

Reclaiming the Covenant on America's 250th (May 2026)

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

PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism (February 2022)

   

 

 

From Ian:

‘Never Again’ means ‘now,’ Florida Jewish Dem says in new ad
In a new campaign ad, Rep. Jared Moskowitz (D-Fla.) focuses on fighting Jew-hatred and says that “‘Never Again’ is now.”

The Jewish congressman is running a newly drawn district against Scott Singer, a Republican and mayor of Boca Raton.

“My grandmother escaped the Nazis as part of the Kindertransport out of Berlin as a child,” Moskowitz told JNS. “My grandfather escaped the pogroms. Most of their family members were killed.”

Moskowitz currently represents Florida’s 23rd Congressional District. He is running in the 25th Congressional District, where an estimated 25% of residents are Jewish. He beat democratic socialist Oliver Larkin in the primary.

“Jews in this district and around the country see the significant rise of antisemitism and are worried that their kids and grandkids will not grow up in the same America that we did,” Moskowitz told JNS. “Now is the time for action.”

In the 30-second ad, Moskowitz quotes from the Passover Hagaddah: “In every generation, they rise against us.” He also talks about his great-grandparents, who were murdered at Auschwitz.

The Democratic congressman points to contemporary Jew-hatred, including a school shooter who carved Nazi swastikas into a gun.

“That’s why I’ve fought antisemitism, leading bipartisan laws to increase security at synagogues and Jewish nonprofits and expanding education so we can stop hate crimes before they happen,” he says in the ad. “Because ‘Never Again’ is now.”
Jonathan Sacerdoti: The firework attack on my Maida Vale synagogue is horrifying but not surprising
So: am I surprised? Why would I be? How could I be? Surprise needs a first time, and we are long past ours. We stopped being surprised somewhere between the marches and the ambulances and the Green party and Tucker Carlson and Zohran Mamdani and the people hiding who they are in NHS hospitals. What replaced it is sense: the thing you feel in the stomach before you let it into the head, because the head has been trained to say: don’t exaggerate.

And that is the loop in every one of our minds. Are we exaggerating? Jumping to conclusions? Safe, or in danger? A firework, or a warning? Each nudge pushes us to the next dot, the next quiet conversation about what we should do, and when. Wouldn’t we be stupid not to?

Because something got out on 7 October, and it has not gone back in. The murderers filmed themselves, and a part of the world watched and felt not revulsion but appetite. Jews had been made to look weak again: people who could be slaughtered in their beds. And weakness, in a certain kind of mind, is not pitiable. It is exciting. It suggests the job might be finishable. That excitement reaches a hooded teenager in Maida Vale as surely as it reached a man with a knife in Crumpsall. It is the oldest trap we know: look weak and you whet the appetite; look strong and you are punished for spoiling it. Israel is being punished this month for strength. My synagogue was attacked for looking weak. If I must be, I know which I would rather be punished for.

Edward Miliband stood up in the Commons this month, as a ‘proud British Jew’, to announce £250 million for Jewish security, as if that would distract us from the ‘reset’ he instigated on our country’s relations with the Jewish nation. The money had already been announced in July, and it felt even more useless the second time it was thrust at us as a deflection from our very real concerns for our safety. Imagine paying for more fire hoses as you throw accelerant on the flames, feigning bafflement or blindness as the heat keeps rising. Perhaps Miliband was the Jew his friend had once thought of when he said we don’t understand British irony.

Jew-hatred has always been useful: it lets a country avoid looking at itself too hard. A government with a by-election to lose finds it far easier to talk about far-off settlements than about a growing climate of furious conspiracy and aggression aimed at its own Jewish citizens. Or about immigrants from places where they hate us lot, and hate Britain, too. This is one climate change Miliband and Burnham don’t care to try to halt. If we Jews feel things getting hotter, they’ll just promise us more fans.

How did I come to be away this year, I wondered? Who knows. Consciously, I had travelled to be with my in-laws, and for work. But I couldn’t help but notice that unconsciously I had chosen to be in a place designed for my safety, even if it cannot always guarantee it. Maybe Israel’s founders hoped a state would make the hatred fade. It changed its clothes instead. But the state changed something else: what Jews can do about it. Nobody there has to ask a minister, politely, to care.

In an email trying to keep itself calm, my community told us there was no reason to change our plans. We will be back in the pews this Shabbat, and again on Yom Kippur. We have sensed exactly what is going on, but will be there anyway.

Real human evaluation comes in our actions and behaviour, not our thoughts and hopes. That goes for governments too. We feel it. We sense it. Then we act: some by staying, some by going, all of us by no longer pretending. Joining the dots and looking behind us to trace the picture is not hysteria. It is the minimum intelligence required to stay alive.
Two fireworks launched at London synagogue by gang of youths on Rosh Hashanah
A gang of hooded youths launched fireworks at a west London synagogue on Sunday, the second day of Rosh Hashanah, according to the local Jewish community.

Five teens waited outside the Lauderdale Road Synagogue in Maida Vale before two of them launched two fireworks toward the building at 3:23 p.m., startling a family walking by, according to a statement by the community and security footage cited by The Telegraph.

The Spanish and Portuguese Sephardi Community, which runs the synagogue, informed members of the incident and said the building was empty and no injuries or damage were caused by the “rocket fireworks.”

The incident was reported to Police and the Community Security Trust, the UK Jewish community’s security organization.

“Jewish families should be able to come together to celebrate Rosh Hashanah safely, openly and without fear,” said Rabbi Amir Ellituv, of the synagogue, which was built in 1896, vowing not to allow such incidents to “deter us from coming together as a community.”

A CST spokesman told The Telegraph that it was “aware of the incident,” saying despite the absence of injuries or damage, it was “nonetheless a serious incident that will undoubtedly cause concern.” Police officers patrol the high street after two people were stabbed in Golders Green neighborhood, that has a large Jewish community, in London, April 29, 2026. (AP Photo/Kin Cheung)

“CST attended the scene and is in contact with the synagogue, and is working closely with the police to establish the full circumstances,” the spokesman added.

Antisemitic incidents in the UK have risen sharply since the war against Hamas in Gaza began in 2023, with the Community Security Trust, a Jewish community watchdog, saying in August that such incidents rose 21 percent in the first six months of 2026 compared to the same period last year, reaching the second-highest total on record for the first half of a year.
From Ian:

The ICJ's Pernicious Plan to Redefine Genocide
The Trump administration is working to dismantle the International Criminal Court. But a different tribunal, the International Court of Justice, could become a greater threat to the security of the U.S. and its allies. The ICJ is deciding a case, Gambia vs. Myanmar, that could drastically lower the legal threshold for genocide. This would pave the way for a genocide finding in South Africa's pending case against Israel. The lower threshold would also unleash genocide claims against the U.S.

The Genocide Convention requires proof of "intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group as such." The ICJ is being urged to replace that clear, high standard with a vague, politically malleable one: a range of "facts and circumstances" assessed "comprehensively and holistically." Adopting a standard inconsistent with the Genocide Convention would transform the ICJ into a legislative body rewriting the treaty.

Lowering the threshold is unnecessary to find Myanmar committed genocide. Myanmar's forces reportedly perpetrated repeated mass executions of Rohingya civilians, including dozens of children, lining them up and shooting or hacking them to death. In this case, genocidal intent is the only reasonable inference.

This differs factually and legally from civilian deaths incidentally caused by Israeli strikes targeting Hamas fighters, particularly given Israel's precautions and Hamas's documented use of human shields.
WSJ Editorial: If the International Court of Justice Lowers the Threshold for Genocide to Smear Israel, It Will Backfire
While the International Criminal Court (ICC) prosecutes individuals, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) adjudicates disputes between states. For each court, the temptation has been to expand its authority to pile on Israel. The ICJ is looking to use the case of Myanmar's attacks on the Rohingya minority to redefine genocide in preparation for South Africa v. Israel.

In Gaza, where Hamas built 400 miles of tunnels beneath cities, taxed and stole aid, and did everything to endanger its own civilians, genocide is far from the only reasonable inference from the war's casualties. The more reasonable inference is that Israel fought a defensive war against Hamas in the most difficult urban conditions ever seen, a war it stopped when Hamas released the hostages.

"Lowering the genocide threshold would transform genocide from a narrowly defined legal crime into an expansive vehicle for litigating the conduct of states at war," said Andres Munoz-Mosquera, chief legal adviser to the NATO Supreme Allied Commander, 2014-25. "A new and malleable standard could become a precedent through which virtually any military campaign involving substantial civilian casualties is recast as a genocide claim." He sees it being used by dictatorships and rogue states to handcuff Western democracies.
Holocaust Studies Professor Rips Apart Genocide Charge
There are too many excellent points to note in University of Florida Professor of Holocaust Studies Norman JW Goda’s masterful essay in The Telegraph, “How ‘genocide’ lost all its meaning.” But the central arguments are:

“Genocide” has been stripped of its precise legal meaning in the Gaza debate. Historically, genocide requires proof of specific intent to destroy a protected group, not simply mass casualties, destruction or even serious violations of the laws of war.

He says the genocide charge against Israel has become a political tool rather than a rigorously proven legal conclusion. He accuses activists, NGOs and some scholars of cherry-picking evidence, redefining genocide through ideological frameworks and using the accusation to delegitimize Israel and invert the historical legacy of the Holocaust.

Here are some excerpts:
Yet there is a new and notable self-assurance with which Israel is accused today of genocide, and has been since 2023. It comes from ceaseless allegations – at teach-ins, on talk shows and social media – which echo the carefully constructed illusion of authority that “genocide experts”, many of whom are not experts at all, are in consensus on the matter. In fact, the “consensus”, though noisy, never existed. The intensity also comes from a misrepresentation of Israeli military operations together with a deliberate untethering of genocide from its legal definition to one created by the academic obsession with settler colonial theory – a social-justice-driven understanding of European settlement that ostensibly creates a long-term, white-supremacist genocidal structure which steadily eliminates indigenous peoples. As Francesca Albanese, the UN special rapporteur for the occupied Palestinian territories and the troubadour of genocide accusations against Israel, puts it: “The current genocide is part of a century-long project of eliminatory settler-colonialism in Palestine.”

Albanese’s harangues show that anyone can allege anything. Indeed, one of the chief advantages of endlessly repeating accusations while leaning on the slender reeds of settler-colonial theory is that facts can be displaced by righteous rhetoric. In Israel’s case, allegations of Western settler colonialism erase Jewish indigeneity to the region, ignore that the descendants of Middle Eastern Jewish people who fled Arab countries after 1948 comprise up to half of Israel’s population, and delete that Zionist leaders accepted the 1947 UN partition resolution (and other peace initiatives) while Arab leaders rejected them.



It is possible to cobble together a more legalistic genocide accusation in similar bad faith. One can ignore that Hamas fights among the Palestinian civilian population and that it uses mosques, schools, and hospitals for everything from arms depots to headquarters. One can dismiss Israeli efforts at civilian harm mitigation. One can imagine, as a reenactment of medieval blood libels, that Israel targets children (and even embryos) rather than armed fighters. One can maintain that the destruction of buildings in Gaza has nothing to do with the fortified tunnels beneath them or the booby-traps within them. One can insist that Israel somehow intended to cause a famine by allowing 2,174,489 tons of aid into Gaza between October 2023 and today. And one can imagine that Israeli efforts to spare civilians are all part of a vast scheme called “humanitarian camouflage”, by which Israel commits genocide beneath a faux canopy of lawfulness. Or one can simply pretend that Gaza is the Warsaw Ghetto.

The problem with all this is that genocide is defined not by proclamation, but by international statute and that ultimately, proof is required to render accusations into adjudicated crimes. The text of the 1948 UN Genocide Convention took two years to write. It received a unanimous affirmative vote in the UN General Assembly, and it has been ratified by 154 states, all of whom presumably read the text before signing. Briefly put, genocide is defined by one or more of five defined acts, headed by killing, “committed with intent to destroy” an ethnic, national, or religious group in whole or in part. The criterion is physical and biological destruction. UN debates between 1946 and 1948 reveal awareness that the definition was imperfect. There were concerns, legitimate as it turned out, that a looser definition could open the door to politically inspired accusations.

Tuesday, September 15, 2026

  • Tuesday, September 15, 2026
  • Elder of Ziyon

In 2021, University of Memphis undergraduate Balqiss Alattiyat wrote a philosophy paper accusing Israel of “cultural genocide” and “cultural gaslighting.”

It reads less like a serious piece of research than the sort of polemic one sees all the time in anti-Israel activist circles. Israel is simply assumed to be a white-supremacist settler-colonial state. Palestinians are simply assumed to be the Indigenous people and Zionists the colonizers. Jewish claims of indigeneity are dismissed because most Jews are assumed to have originated in Europe and nowhere earlier. Judaism supposedly cannot support a claim to nationhood because people can convert to it. Discrimination against non-Ashkenazi Jews from the 1950s somehow becomes evidence that Zionism itself is white supremacist.

From those assumptions, the paper builds an increasingly elaborate catalog of accusations. Israelis enjoying hummus becomes evidence of cultural theft. Replacing recent Arab place names with their original Biblical place names become “memoricide.” Tatreez and the Jaffa orange become evidence of appropriation. The falsely reported Ethiopian contraception controversy becomes evidence of a eugenics project. “Cultural genocide” is treated as an established fact rather than a highly contested concept, and “cultural gaslighting,” a framework published only the previous year, is imported almost wholesale and applied to Israel. The paper eventually announces, without serious citations or evidence, that Palestinian cultural genocide proceeds in four stages: “Memoricide, Renaming, Appropriation, and a move to Innocence.”

Even the most basic premise is never really established. The author speaks repeatedly of Israel erasing a preexisting “Palestinian culture,” but never seriously establishes what constituted a distinct Palestinian national culture before Zionism, when it emerged as such, or how it differed from the broader Arab, Levantine, Ottoman, Muslim, Christian, village and urban cultures of the area. A quick search for the term "Palestinian Culture" in the years before 1948 indicate pre-Biblical Levantine culture, biblical and post-biblical Jewish culture, and Zionist Jewish culture in Ottoman and British Mandate times. 

That does not mean there is no such thing as Palestinian culture today. Judging from a Google Ngram, the terms "Palestinian Culture" is used far more after it has suffered this supposed "genocide" than beforehand. It appears to exist as a result of the "nakba," not a casualty of it. 





There's lots more: A serious treatment of “cultural genocide” would at least acknowledge that the concept has been debated since Raphael Lemkin and was not incorporated as a separate crime into the final Genocide Convention. A serious paper arguing that Israel systematically erases the cultural past would have to address abundant counterexamples of Israeli archaeologists excavating, documenting and preserving Islamic, Christian, Byzantine, Ottoman and other non-Jewish remains. A serious philosophy paper might even ask what evidence would falsify the theory. This one does not.

Normally, I wouldn't waste my time writing about a dopey undergraduate paper that does not fulfill basic requirements for argumentation or fact-checking. But this is not an ordinary paper written by an overeager student. 

This paper was awarded first place for the 2021 Seshat Prize , given out by the University of Memphis Philosophy Department'.

The prize rules say that their first criterion was “Credible Case”: “Does the essay make a substantive and persuasive case for its conclusions?” The second was “Validity”: “Do the arguments and evidence support the essay’s conclusions?”

Those are exactly the areas where this paper is weakest.

There was something about this poorly argued paper that made the philosophy department's referees think it was the best undergraduate philosophy paper of the year. 

I have no idea what the other submissions looked like. I do not know who the referees were, and I certainly cannot prove that they preferred this essay because it attacked Israel. Perhaps they did; perhaps they did not.

But that is not necessary to make the result disturbing.

I recently wrote about the epistemic environment that has been built around Israel: an environment in which accusations that once would have required proof increasingly arrive as established background knowledge. Israel is “settler colonial.” Israel practices “apartheid.” Palestinians are undergoing “ethnic cleansing.” Israel is committing “genocide.” Each conclusion then becomes a premise for the next argument. As I put it there, “The verdict came first.”

The result is a kind of intellectual ratchet. A weak accusation gets repeated by academics or NGOs. It acquires institutional authority. The next scholar cites that authority rather than reexamining the original claim. Eventually a proposition that was never well established no longer feels like a proposition at all. It becomes part of the scenery.

This undergraduate paper looks like a miniature version of exactly that process.

The author does not really have to prove that Zionism is settler colonialism, that Israel is white supremacist, that Palestinians possess an ancient and clearly bounded national culture, or that Israel is engaged in cultural genocide. Those propositions largely arrive pre-approved. The entire department lives in an epistemic environment where these are not arguments, but accepted facts. The intellectual work begins using them as obviously true.

Then everything starts reinforcing everything else. Israel is a settler-colonial state, so Israeli actions are interpreted through settler-colonial theory. Those actions are labeled appropriation, memoricide or cultural gaslighting. Their appearance then becomes evidence that Israel is carrying out settler-colonial cultural genocide.

The conclusion is buried in the premises.

Which raises a possibility that is perhaps more troubling than saying that the referees are anti-Israel. Maybe the assumptions that built the paper's argument were not recognized as assumptions to begin with, but as facts. 

If “Israel is settler colonial,” “Zionism is white supremacy” and “Palestinians are victims of cultural genocide” have become accepted parts of the academic environment, then a student no longer needs to establish them. She can simply start there, pile theory on top, add citations and receive credit for the sophistication of the structure she has built.

At that point, academic quality control stops doing its job. The framework determines which claims require evidence and which ones can simply be assumed.

We have seen versions of this dynamic repeatedly used in academic, media, NGO and political environments.  Definitions stretch, contrary evidence disappears, assertions become citations, citations become consensus, and consensus becomes the premise for the next accusation.

A philosophy department explicitly said it would reward a paper for making a credible case and for demonstrating that its arguments and evidence support its conclusions.

Then it gave first prize to a paper whose most important conclusions rest on assumptions it never seriously establishes.

The undergraduate is not really the story. The university is. 




Buy EoZ's books  on Amazon!

Reclaiming the Covenant on America's 250th (May 2026)

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

PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism (February 2022)

   

 

 

From Ian: Federal Court Holds North Korea Liable for Terror Support Behind October 7 Attack
On September 8, a federal court held Iran and North Korea jointly and severally liable to American plaintiffs over seven terrorist attacks, including Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad’s October 7, 2023 assault on Israel, in a ruling that details a largely overlooked North Korean role involving training, weapons and underground-warfare assistance.

In a memorandum opinion, U.S. District Judge Leonie Brinkema granted default judgment on liability in a case brought by 47 U.S. nationals, including people killed or injured in seven terrorist attacks between 2019 and 2023 and immediate family members of the victims. The court concluded that the plaintiffs had established Iran and North Korea’s liability under the terrorism exception to the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act.

The October 7 portion of the ruling is particularly striking. Brinkema wrote that Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad jointly carried out the attack that severely wounded American plaintiffs Bernadette and Nir Brauner. According to the court, Iran provided funds, weapons, recruitment assistance and incentive payments to operatives involved in the attack. North Korea, the opinion states, provided training to Hezbollah, Hamas and PIJ operatives involved in the attack, as well as weapons or weapon components and “tunnel-building assistance.”

The underlying complaint is even more explicit. It alleges that North Korea aided the October 7 attack by providing training to operatives from Hezbollah, Hamas and PIJ, supplying weapons including rocket-propelled grenade launchers, and providing assistance related to tunnel construction. Because Iran and North Korea did not answer the lawsuit, those allegations were uncontested. The court nevertheless found that the plaintiffs had presented an adequate legal and factual basis to establish liability and held the two governments jointly and severally liable for the plaintiffs’ injuries and deaths.

A Decades-Old North Korean Pipeline
North Korea’s ties to Middle Eastern militant movements predate Hamas itself, while its military relationship with Iran stretches back to the early 1980s.

The complaint, summarized by Brinkema, describes Pyongyang as Iran’s “most powerful nation-state partner” and traces decades of cooperation involving missile development, weapons, military training and assistance to Iran, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps and Hezbollah.

The opinion recounts allegations that North Korean military personnel were dispatched to southern Lebanon in the early 2000s, where they used Pyongyang’s expertise to help develop underground military installations and an extensive network of tunnels. It also describes North Korean training provided to the IRGC and Hezbollah that allegedly flowed through Iran’s broader network of proxies.

That history has previously reached American courts. In a 2014 federal decision involving Hezbollah’s 2006 war against Israel, a U.S. district court found by “clear and convincing evidence” that North Korea had materially supported Hezbollah. The court identified weapons, military training and assistance constructing underground military infrastructure among the support supplied by Pyongyang.

A Congressional Research Service report similarly documented reports that North Korean trainers were sent to southern Lebanon to instruct Hezbollah personnel in constructing underground military facilities. The report also detailed longstanding North Korean weapons relationships with Iran and Syria and reported on the movement of North Korean arms believed to be destined for Hezbollah and Hamas.
Eugene Kontorovich: Houses of Worship Deserve Protection from Disruption
Many conservatives have a bad taste in their mouths from any mention of “buffer zone” laws because of their widespread use in restricting protests and counseling activities outside of abortion clinics. But buffer zone laws are uncontroversially in force to protect the sanctity of places like cemeteries and funerals.

Congress has, in fact, protected houses of worship since 1994, but only as a secondary provision of the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances (FACE) Act, a statute to address a different problem and built around that problem’s assumptions. FACE reaches only force, threats of force, and physical obstruction — but not other kinds of conduct that can in practice disrupt or seriously interfere with religious services.

The free exercise of religion is a core First Amendment right. Thus, it is important to protect churches and synagogues with a free-standing statute. Because the Right to Worship Act protects against interference in religious exercise by private parties, it does not protect the constitutional right per se, which addresses governmental interference. But constitutional protection for worship does demonstrate its safeguarding to be a compelling government interest.

At the same time, it does not sweep nearly as far as abortion clinic access laws, some of which the Supreme Court has struck down on First Amendment grounds. For example, McCullen v. Coakley (2014) struck down a law that in effect barred any kind of speech, including one-on-one conversations within the buffer zone around a clinic. The Court found that while the state had a valid interest in “preventing harassment and intimidation,” a de facto no–speech zone swept too far. But that is exactly what the Right to Worship Act doesn’t do.

The federal bill only restricts particularly disruptive activities, which falls well within the constitutional allowance for time, place, and manner restrictions and is in line with McCullen. One person’s exercise of their rights cannot come at the expense of another — and thus the statute only “buffers” “conduct that meaningfully interferes with the ability of people to participate” in a scheduled religious service, or that “unreasonably hinders or deters” entrance.

It is also quite clear that many local authorities — like New York City’s mayor, who has cheered on synagogue demonstrations — will never enforce available local nuisance laws that could be used against such disturbances.

We recognize that disturbances around houses of worship are, in a sense, matters of local law and order which under a well-functioning system of federalism should not be within the purview of the federal government.

Yet 100 years of expansive Commerce Clause jurisprudence means that as a matter of current constitutional doctrine, it clearly is within federal power. The FACE Act, for example, lacks any statutory requirement connecting the conduct to interstate commerce, a gap the Supreme Court has yet to address.

The Right to Worship bill, by contrast, makes a “substantial effect on interstate commerce” an element of the offense — which means it can only be used in cases that truly do cross state lines. This language was borrowed from the Church Arson Prevention Act of 1996, not widely thought of as massive government overreach.

Thus, the Right to Worship Act doesn’t change the federalism landscape. Moreover, there is no need for conservatives to deny themselves, and themselves alone, the protections of existing constitutional law, while working to change it based on conservative principles.

At a time when religious values are under attack, it is more important than ever to safeguard the sanctuary itself. The Right to Worship Act is modest, bipartisan, and well within what the Constitution allows, at least as currently interpreted by the Supreme Court.
Man arrested for allegedly making Jew-hatred threats against Ben Shapiro
Korby Aaren Strube, 29, of Horton, Kan., was arrested in Florida for allegedly posting threats to kill political commentator Ben Shapiro, referencing the Daily Wire co-founder’s Jewish faith.

Strube was arrested on Sept. 12 and faces 23 counts related to written or electronic threats to kill or cause bodily harm, as well as two counts related to using a two-way communications device to facilitate a felony, according to court records and the Palm Beach County Sheriff’s Office.

According to an affidavit obtained by JNS from the Clerk of the Circuit Court and Comptroller of Palm Beach County, Strube allegedly made threats against Shapiro in social media posts on July 31, Aug. 1 and Aug. 2. The posts said he would be “giving the world a boost by killing Ben Shapiro for being Jewish” and that he was “killing this stupid Jew,” according to the affidavit.

“He invoked antisemitic conspiratorial themes as justification for the intended killing, attributing violence to ‘semites,’ to ‘Tel Aviv’ and to ‘a foreign government,’” the affidavit stated.

The Aug. 1 and Aug. 2 posts also included countdowns of 52 and 51 days, respectively, to the intended killing. The countdown pointed to Sept. 21-22, the dates of Yom Kippur this year, according to the affidavit.

The investigation began Aug. 4 after a private security firm providing protection for Shapiro alerted authorities to the posts, according to the sheriff’s office. Investigators subsequently determined that Strube was behind the social media account from which the threats were posted. Shapiro told investigators that he believed the threats were motivated by his Jewish faith and wanted to pursue charges.


AddToAny

Printfriendly

EoZTV Podcast

Podcast URL

Subscribe in podnovaSubscribe with FeedlyAdd to netvibes
addtomyyahoo4Subscribe with SubToMe

search eoz

comments

Speaking

translate

E-Book

For $18 donation








Sample Text

EoZ's Most Popular Posts in recent years

Search2

Hasbys!

Elder of Ziyon - حـكـيـم صـهـيـون



This blog may be a labor of love for me, but it takes a lot of effort, time and money. For 20 years and 40,000 articles I have been providing accurate, original news that would have remained unnoticed. I've written hundreds of scoops and sometimes my reporting ends up making a real difference. I appreciate any donations you can give to keep this blog going.

Donate!

Donate to fight for Israel!

Monthly subscription:
Payment options


One time donation:

Follow EoZ on Twitter!

Interesting Blogs

Blog Archive