Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News

Thursday, October 26, 2023

10/26 Links Pt2: The Nazi case for Hamas; BHL: The Protests of Fools; My Old Friend Is Ripping Down Posters of Kidnapped Children

From Ian:

Martin Kramer: The Nazi case for Hamas

Nuremberg enforced a fundamental distinction. All civilian lives are equal, but not so all ways of taking them. The deliberate and purposeful killing of civilians is a crime; not so the taking of civilian lives that is undesired, unintended, but unavoidable. The errors made by a bomber squadron cannot be deducted from the murders committed by a death squad. It’s a difference compounded many times over when those civilian men, women, and children are subjected to torture, rape, and mutilation before their murder. To borrow Khalidi’s phrase, “in the last analysis,” this distinction is what separates modern civilization from its predecessors.

More disturbing is the thought that it separates the contemporary West from its peers. Otto Ohlendorf and the regime he served did all they could to conceal their deeds from Western eyes. Nazi Germany still operated in a West founded on Enlightenment values. So massive a violation of a shared patrimony needed to be hidden from view.

In contrast, Hamas initially sought to publicize its deeds, assuming they would win applause, admiration, or at least tacit acceptance in the Arab and Muslim worlds. Here they succeeded beyond their expectations. The many millions who don’t share the West’s patrimony, and who know next to nothing about the Holocaust or Nuremberg, do see things as Khalidi says they see them. (So, too, does a sliver of alienated opinion in the West, where such views are cultivated and celebrated.)

Finally, and still more disturbing, is the fact that Ohlendorf’s defense has been revived to frame the massacre of Jews. Let’s be clear: this isn’t a world war. October 7 isn’t the Holocaust continued: in three months of 1942 alone, on average, the Nazis killed more than ten times the amount of Jews killed on October 7, every single day (Operation Reinhard). And Gaza is not Dresden, Hamburg, Pforzheim, Kassel, or any of the other German cities bombed so intensively that they literally burst into flames. The Israel-Hamas war is a skirmish by comparison.

But the Ohlendorf and Hamas defenses are the same, and so is the identity of their victims. That’s why it’s important that Israel take some of the Hamas masterminds alive, and place them on trial, Nuremberg-style. Israel owes it to the dead and wounded, their families, all Israelis, and all Jews. But it’s the Arabs and Muslims who most need to see the evidence, hear the testimonies, and weigh the arguments. No part of the world is further from drawing the line drawn at Nuremberg. October 7 is the place to start.

Israel, Hamas & International Law: A Guide

The Principle of Proportionality: Is Israel’s Response Disproportionate?

With over 1,400 Israelis killed during the Hamas atrocities and subsequent rocket attacks, and over 6,000 Palestinians allegedly killed in Israeli retaliatory strikes according to the Hamas-run Ministry of Health, some commentators and activists have claimed that Israel’s response is disproportionate.

However, this stems from a fundamental misunderstanding of what proportionality means within international law.

In brief, the principle of proportionality dictates that civilian casualties (both killed and injured) cannot be excessive in relation to the military advantage that would be gained directly from an attack.

For every strike that Israel undertakes against Hamas, it calculates the potential harm to civilians against the weight of the military advantage to be gained from the attack and determines whether the attack is proportionate.

Even when Hamas is cynically using Palestinian civilians as unwitting human shields, those civilians are included in the IDF’s assessment of the attack’s proportionality.

According to Pnina Sharvit Baruch, the former head of the international law division of the IDF’s Military Advocate General (MAG), the concept of “military advantage” is also dependent on the circumstances of each war and the nature of the enemy.

Thus, in this war, due to the exceptional brutality of the Hamas attack, which proved the Palestinian terror group to be much more dangerous and impervious to the fate of civilians than previously thought, the military advantage may be given more weight than in other military operations that Israel has undertaken against Hamas.

As well, David French notes that proportionality also does not require the military to respond with the “same degree of force” that was used by the enemy. Thus, the Israeli response to Hamas rifle fire with fire from a tank or to Hamas rocket fire with a targeted airstrike is allowed under international law and is not considered to be a disproportionate response.

It should also be noted that according to Dr. Aurel Sari, an assistant professor of international law at the University of Exeter, the assessment of whether an attack was proportional can only be determined based on the intelligence that the military had on hand at the time of the attack and cannot be based on hindsight.

A fake law of war will hurt Israel now and America in the future

This argument stretches the law to its breaking point. Forcible transfers are generally prohibited, but integral to all “forcible” transfers is — well, force. Unlike Hamas, the Israeli military has not gone door-to-door and removed civilians from their homes using or threatening to use force. Moreover, Israel’s “orders” are literally unenforceable in Gaza. Instead, they are tantamount to a warning of an impending attack, a practice which the International Committee of the Red Cross says reflects “a long-standing rule of customary international law” and which is enshrined in both the Hague Regulations and Article 57(2)(c) of Additional Protocol I.

Quite the opposite of a “forcible transfer,” Israel’s warnings are an effort to remove civilians from the vicinity of military objectives — something U.S. policy not only permits, but actually describes as “appropriate” and “advisable” in some cases. Similar warnings were given by the U.S. and its allies to civilians in the Korean War, in the conflict in the former Yugoslavia, in Afghanistan and in Iraq — much to the international community’s acclaim.

But where are residents of northern Gaza to go? Where will they stay? How will their basic human needs be met? These questions are important, but they are ultimately an exercise in goalpost-shifting. Israel is not legally bound to provide for the human needs of those fleeing the battlefield. This is particularly true if, as mounting evidence shows, such humanitarian assistance is at risk of ending up in the hands of Hamas militants.

Other examples abound. The Israeli military has been lambasted, for example, for using white phosphorus — an incendiary weapon that, according to Human Rights Watch, “violates the international humanitarian law prohibition on putting civilians at unnecessary risk.” But white phosphorus is not prohibited under the law of armed conflict. U.S. policy explicitly states white phosphorus “may be used as an antipersonnel weapon” as long as such use complies with “the general rules for the conduct of hostilities, including the principles of discrimination and proportionality,” and “feasible precautions” are taken “to reduce the risk of harm to civilians.” In fact, white phosphorus was credited as “an effective and versatile munition” in the Second Battle of Fallujah, and has been used by the U.S. in Iraq as recently as 2017.

Indeed, Israel’s critics have put forth an extreme position — one as much at odds with common sense as the law. Israel suffered an armed attack by the de facto governing body of the Gaza Strip. It is entitled to exercise its inherent right to self-defense under Article 51 of the UN Charter and use every lawful means at its disposal to effectuate that right. Most importantly, however, it is allowed to succeed in exercising that right.

For its own interests, the United States must preserve today the legal means necessary to secure victory on whatever battlefield it may be forced to fight tomorrow. At this hour in history, that means protecting Israel’s power to do the same.

Thomas Wheatley is an assistant professor in the Department of Law at the U.S. Military Academy at West Point. The views expressed herein belong solely to the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of the United States Military Academy, the United States Army or the Department of Defense.

Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism today at Amazon!

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424.

Read all about it here!

Israel Destroyed Our High-Rises - Where Will We Throw Gays Off The Roof From Now? (PreOccupied Territory)

Our weekly column from the humor site PreOccupied Territory.

Check out their Facebook page.

Israel Destroyed Our High-Rises - Where Will We Throw Gays Off The Roof From Now?

by Amr Safa

Khan Yunis, October 26 - The wasteland that the brutal Zionists have wrought in Palestine can never be forgiven. The horrendous loss of life, the rubble where homes once stood, the tall buildings from which we once pushed homosexuals, but alas, can no longer, because the Zionist bombs have demolished them.

A heinous crime! The international community must ensure that the Zionists are punished for this outrage!

Obviously not by throwing them from the roof of a tall building, but we can think of other ways, as you might surmise.

Please dispense with any suggestions that we can make use of shorter buildings, with lower rooftops, for the same purpose as we once used the high-rises. We have tried it, and the results were consistently disappointing. Even bound and unable to position themselves to minimize damage, the gays only sometimes died from the fall itself. We frequently had to take further measures to move the process along, such as beating them the rest of the way to death, or tying them to motorcycles and dragging them in the street until they completely expired, and then continued driving for a while because that's what homosexuality deserves. But the Zionists leave us no other option now.

How does anyone expect us to maintain morality with no tall buildings off of which to throw homosexuals? The depravity of the Zionists and their western backers occurs not in a vacuum of military brutality, which is bad enough, but represents a calculated campaign to undermine the morals of Islamic society, including Palestine, by preventing us from treating moral abominations with the disgust and demonstrativeness they deserve. They would even have us not beat our wives and not burn our sisters to death for conversing with men without our approval!

We vow now: we will rebuild. We always have. Granted, first Hamas has to get its cut, then all the necessary bribes, and skimming off the top by everyone whose hands the money even briefly touches, but we will rebuild. The global donors will always side with Palestine. They love us, which is why they close their gates when some of us might otherwise think of fleeing the Zionist genocide. We are so grateful! Please, send more money that can be turned into rubble in the next war. This is what your money is for! We still have gays to execute in the traditional manner.

Please support our work through Patreon.
Buy In The Biblical Sense: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0B92QYWSL

Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism today at Amazon!

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424.

Read all about it here!

10/26 Links Pt1: UN is rationalizing slaughter of Jews; USC Shoah Foundation to Collect Testimony from Survivors, Witnesses of Hamas Terror Attack

From Ian:

Jonathan Tobin: UN is rationalizing slaughter of Jews

The rise of intersectionality and critical race theory (CRT), which promote the division of the world into two immutable warring racial camps of victims and oppressors, has resulted in the acceptance of mainstream discussions about Israel being a state of “white privilege” and guilty of mistreating Palestinian “people of color.” Such distinctions are irrelevant to the Middle East, where Jews are as likely to be “people of color since the majority of Israeli Jews trace their origins to the Middle East or North Africa as Arabs. Moreover, it is the Jews who are the “indigenous” people of the country.

In the moral panic that followed the death of George Floyd in May 2020, even legacy Jewish organizations like the Anti-Defamation League (whose job is to oppose antisemitism) endorsed the Black Lives Matter movement that was itself steeped in anti-Jewish thinking. Desperate to remain in sync with their left-wing allies and fashionable opinion, such groups ignored the consequences that the widespread acceptance that these toxic theories received was bound to create.

Once a movement and ideology that accepted the specious notion that the Palestinian war to destroy Israel was in some way connected to the struggle for civil rights in the United States became accepted by liberal opinion as valid, the next step was inevitable. It was only a matter of time before a considerable portion of elite American opinion was going to start treating Hamas terrorism as nothing more than the Jews getting their comeuppance.

More than three years later, it’s both sad and easy to see how lies about Israel have become so commonplace that no one need wonder why so many, especially young people, take it as a given that the war launched against Israel is in some way its own fault.

Yet the ability of the intersectional left to smear Israel and have its accusations considered credible can also be traced back to the way that the United Nations has legitimized these lies on the international stage.

Both it and the so-called “human rights” organizations it has spawned are the source material for the smearing of Israel by intersectional advocates dating back to the 2001 Durban Conference on Racism when, only days before the Sept. 11 attacks in the United States, the event in South Africa became ground zero for international antisemitism.

The United Nations, its misnamed Human Rights Council that targets Israel and its kangaroo court Commission of Inquiry (COI) devoted to demonizing the Jewish state and ignoring Palestinian terrorism have provided an otherwise obscure toxic set of beliefs with the sort of official imprimatur that has allowed it to spread and essentially go unchallenged in mainstream venues. In particular, the COI and its South African leader, Navi Pillay, have become a constant source of antisemitic invective and discrimination against Israel.

At the root of this moral rot that has been on display since Oct. 7 is the way the international community has validated antisemitic lies about Israel. It’s time to stop ignoring the role that the United Nations plays in fomenting and legitimizing not just antisemitism but indifference to Jewish suffering. Both the way its agencies and American leftist ideologues have mainstreamed false assumptions about Zionism being a form of racism rather than the liberation movement of the Jewish people can no longer be ignored. It is directly connected to the ability of critical race theory advocates to gain credibility for their toxic ideas about Israel and the Jews.

So what to do now? The vast majority of Americans who reject these lies must demand that Congress defund the United Nations and its agencies, which have provided the foundation not just for antisemitism but support for the mass slaughter of Jews in 2023.

Arsen Ostrovsky: Israel is acting proportionately against a terrorist enemy

There is, perhaps, no principle in international law that’s as reflexively thrown around to castigate Israel and charge it with war crimes than that of “proportionality.”

But we need to throw away the notion that proportionality is measured by some kind of perverse equivalence in civilian deaths. It is not.

Under International Humanitarian Law, also referred to as the Laws of War, the doctrine of proportionality requires that in the event that there should be any loss of civilian life, it mustn’t exceed the potential military advantage to be gained from such a strike or action.

In relation to Israel’s current military operation, the goal is clear and stated — eliminating Hamas, a genocidal terrorist group following the unprecedented and wanton massacre of civilians. To state the obvious, saving the lives of millions of your citizens from an attempted genocide is an entirely legitimate, legal and just military purpose by any measurement.

And in the fog of war against such an implacable enemy, as regrettable as it is, the loss of civilian life is almost always inevitable. However, in this case, the fault lies entirely with Hamas. As British Prime Minister Rishi Sunak noted, “the terrorists murder Israeli children, then run and hide behind Palestinian children.”

Hamas even sought to block the evacuation of Palestinians in Gaza by setting up roadblocks and confiscating car keys. This is how perverse it is, and the West’s failure to call the organization out only emboldens it further.

Notwithstanding, the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) have been going to extraordinary lengths, not seen in the history of modern warfare, to avoid civilian casualties, even at risk to their own soldiers.

Col Kemp: Israel can win a war on three fronts

Israeli military and intelligence have been working flat out to find the 220 hostages Hamas is holding, dispersed around the Gaza Strip. Rescuing them is a primary objective and locating them takes time, a process that might further delay a ground offensive. Hamas’s uncharacteristic release of four hostages so far shows their leaders’ desperation in the face of an IDF assault of unexpected ferocity that threatens to annihilate them. Now they are attempting to dangle the prospects of hostage release over Israel’s head to prevent an IDF incursion altogether. Israel cannot allow that to happen: although getting the hostages back is a core focus, it will not take precedence over the need to create security for Israel’s entire population.

The IDF, in short, is prepared to deal with a multi-front war. But the labyrinthine military equation confronting the war cabinet is complicated even further by international opinion. Today, the UN Secretary General came close to accusing Israel of breaking international law in its operations inside Gaza. That is an accusation that Israelis are used to, despite their scrupulous adherence to the laws of war.

But as memories of 7 October fade, casualties mount and the humanitarian situation deteriorates, such accusations will proliferate and pressures on Israel to cease its attacks will mount, including from the US. The Israeli war cabinet will have to withstand such inevitable coercion. The last thing this region and the free world can afford is the defeat of another US ally, and that is what failure to crush Hamas would mean.

Israel Declares Global War on Hamas

Expert Analysis
“It was clear from the outset that if Israel is serious about dealing with Hamas, uprooting the group in Gaza would not suffice. Its foreign command, funding, and logistical network in places like Turkey, Lebanon, Syria, and Qatar also demands attention. The Hamas terrorists arrayed abroad would already have known that they can no longer sleep easy. Netanyahu has now given their hosts — especially NATO-power Turkey and Qatar, which is designated a major non-NATO ally of the United States — notice to turn them away.” — Mark Dubowitz, FDD CEO

“Israel is taking its time on launching a ground invasion of Gaza, knowing that this favors its forces in terms of training and preparation while disadvantaging Hamas, which must hunker down under withering fire and husband dwindling resources. Now, the Israelis have added psychological pressure, designed to make Hamas leaders wonder to what extent their military secrets are secure and whether Palestinians sick of their harsh rule will turn against them.” — Joe Truzman, Research Analyst at FDD’s Long War Journal

Intensified Airstrikes on Gaza
On October 25, the IDF stepped up efforts to destroy Hamas’ tunnel and bunker network from the air, unleashing an intensive bombardment of Gaza City. Separately, the Israeli government published contact information and promises of a cash reward and personal safety to Gazans who provide intelligence on Hamas.

Unmasking Hamas’ Spokesman
Lt. Col. Avichay Adraee, the IDF’s spokesperson to Arabic media, published a video on X showing the face of Hamas’ longtime spokesman, Abu Obeida, who usually masks himself with a keffiyeh. The IDF first revealed during Operation Protective Edge in 2014 that Abu Obeida’s real name is Hudhaifa Kahlout.

“He and other Hamas-ISIS leaders like to hide inside tunnels and behind women and children, as well as behind masks and shadows,” Adraee said. “It is time to drop the cover.”

For the first day after the Hamas slaughter of civilians on October 7, Arabic media were ecstatic about the attack and while it was framed as mostly a military operation they didn't try to hide that it was an attack on civilians as well.

But since then they have changed the story and the sadistic attacks on women, children and the elderly have been erased from Arab media. The narrative now is all about Hamas heroism in a military attack and Gazans as victims.

A most extreme example is the Arabic Wikipedia page for "Operation Al Aqsa Flood" which is essentially a press release for Hamas.

Operation Al-Aqsa Flood...is an extended military operation launched by the Palestinian resistance factions in the Gaza Strip, led by the Hamas movement through its military arm, the Martyr Izz al-Din al-Qassam Brigades. In the early morning hours of Saturday (October 7 , 2023 AD) corresponding to (22 Rabi’ al-Awwal 1445 AH), the Commander-in-Chief of the Brigades, Muhammad al-Deif , announced the start of the operation in response to “the Israeli violations in the courtyards of the Blessed Al-Aqsa Mosque and the Israeli settlers’ assault on Palestinian citizens in Jerusalem , the West Bank, and the occupied interior.”

Operation Al-Aqsa Flood began with a large-scale missile attack launched by the resistance factions. Thousands of missiles were directed at various Israeli settlements from Dimona in the south to Hod Hasharon in the north and Jerusalem in the east. The launching of these missiles coincided with a ground incursion by the resistance factions using four-wheel drive vehicles, motorcycles and aircraft. ...They took control of a number of military sites, especially in Sderot , and they reached Ofakim , and stormed Netivot, and fought violent clashes in the three settlements and in other settlements. They also captured a number of soldiers and took them to Gaza, in addition to Seizing a group of Israeli military vehicles.

Every "settlement" is described as a military base. Even when it admits that terrorists entered homes it says they were engaged in battles with the IDF.

They are literally erasing history.

It indicates that there is at least a little embarrassment over the slaughter of civilians, which is incompatible with the message of brave mujahadeen standing up to the mighty IDF, but more than that it shows that any crumb of sympathy for Israeli victims must be swept away - there can only be victims on one side, and the Palestinians zealously guard their exclusive victimhood status.

Which is exactly why we see the "kidnapped" posters being ripped down in so many American and European cities. The very idea that Jews could be victims of terror and kidnapping is judged as taking away from Palestinian victimhood when you are playing a zero-sum game, so history itself must be changed to fit the Palestinian narrative.

This is similar to the reasons for Palestinian Holocaust denial - Jews must not be seen as victims. When the explicit Holocaust denial itself became a source of shame as it was criticized in the West, they morphed the story to claim that Jews themselves were responsible for their own deaths.

I have yet to see any Arab in Arabic upset over this mass whitewashing of terror. Because, as Yasir Arafat is rumored to have said, "I kill for my cause - why wouldn't I lie for it?"

Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism today at Amazon!

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424.

Read all about it here!

NYT casts doubt on Israel's definition of "military target"

The New York Times describes the intensity of Israeli airstrikes:

Israel’s 19-day bombing campaign in Gaza has become one of the most intense of the 21st century, prompting growing global scrutiny of its scale, purpose and cost to human life.

Since terrorists from Gaza raided Israel on Oct. 7, killing roughly 1,400 people according to the Israeli government, the Israeli military says it has struck more than 7,000 targets inside Gaza. That is a higher number than in any previous Israeli military campaign in the territory, a narrow enclave less than half the size of New York City. It also outstrips the most intense month of the United States-led bombing campaign against ISIS, according to Airwars, a British conflict monitor.

7,000 is indeed a high number. But in the same time period, Gaza groups have shot some 7,500 rockets at Israel - an even higher number.

The story doesn't mention that.

On the contrary; it tries to minimize the rocket threat:

The strikes appear to have successfully curbed the groups’ rocket-firing abilities. The Israeli military has not released exact numbers, but there were fewer than 20 air raid sirens across Israel on Wednesday, compared with hundreds during the first days of the war.

No big deal. Rockets towards Eilat, Tel Aviv and Haifa in the past day? It was less than 20! Just because a million people had to run to shelter on that day, so what? Sounds pretty tolerable!

But this part of the article is worse:

Even as Israel has used precision weapons, it has maintained a broad definition of what constitutes a military target. Fighter jets wrecked the Islamic University in Gaza because Israel said the campus had been used to train intelligence operatives. They have targeted mosques that Israel says served as weapons depots and operation centers. And they have targeted Hamas commanders in their homes.

This is not a broad definition. This is part of the definition.

Although Israel has not signed this protocol, it accepts the definition under Article 52(2) Additional Protocol I of the Geneva Conventions, which says:

Insofar as objects are concerned, military objectives are limited to those objects which, by their nature, location, purpose or use make an effective contribution to military action and whose total or partial destruction, capture or neutralization, in the circumstances ruling at the time, offers a definite military advantage.

Hamas has used the Islamic University of Gaza not only for military training but also for weapons development and production, as Israel said at the time of the airstrike: "The university was being used as a Hamas training camp for military intelligence operatives, as well as for the development and production of weapons." That makes it unambiguously a military target. (And the university is known for being a Hamas stronghold: it was used for storing weapons, for holding hostages, for planning attacks and for acting as a safehouse for terrorists as well as for weapons development.)

Weapons depots and operations centers are also military targets by any definition of the term, whether they are in a mosque or a medical clinic or a school. They lose all civilian protections.

Military leaders are still legitimate targets, even if they are using their own families as human shields.

Using civilian areas for military purposes is a war crime. That isn't mentioned in the NYT - on the contrary, it casts aspersions on whether Israel can really attack military objects disguised as civilian.

It is an advertisement for using human shields.

Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism today at Amazon!

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424.

Read all about it here!

Jerash camp in Jordan, built for Gazans who fled in 1967

The only way to protect Gaza civilians is to let them flee, during the duration of the war, to Egypt, Jordan or other Arab countries, if they so choose.

Egypt told the West, "No way!" Jordan told the world, "No way!" And the world answers, "oh, well, if you feel so strongly about it....I guess we should either let them die or handcuff Israel so it cannot really destroy Hamas and allow the pogromists another chance, maybe when Iran delivers them nukes."

Now, I understand that no country wants another million refugees. Makes sense. But Egypt didn't say "NO!" to Syrian and Sudanese refugees. Jordan didn't say "NO!" to Syrian refugees. Syria didn't say "NO!" to Iraqi refugees. Even Lebanon, with hardly any resources, took in hundreds of thousands of Arab refugees from Syria.

Somehow, they were able to accept and accommodate lots of refugees. The UNHCR and NGOs helped. Syrians and others were protected from being killed.

The Arab world has always allowed other Arabs to take refuge in their countries, by the millions. Nearly all of them either become integrated or they move back, or elsewhere. Like all refugees, they eventually find a home.

With one exception: Palestinians.

When it comes to Palestinians, suddenly, the would-be hosts become very adamant at not allowing any of them to come.

It's pretty obvious bigotry against Palestinians. But the West and the rest of the world doesn't push back.

We have heard three statements from world leaders:

(A) Israel has every right to defend itself from the savages and destroy Hamas.

(B) Israel must keep civilian casualties to a minimum.

The problem is that each one contradicts the other two. You can only pick two out of three.

Israel cannot and will not allow Hamas to exist. It is not negotiable. Israel is not going to compromise on that. This is an existential threat that must be eradicated. Which leaves only two choices - let Gazans be killed when Israel destroys the tunnels under them, or force Arab nations to do what they do all the time in every other war - take in the refugees.

The Egyptian/Jordanian demand not to save a single Palestinian is not nearly as important as the imperatives of A and B. In fact, the demand is highly immoral. But for some reason, everyone shrugs and says "well, we tried - I guess either thousands of Palestinians will die or Hamas will be allowed to murder thousands more."

If you value human life, there is only one choice: pressure Egypt and Jordan to take care of their fellow Arabs.

The world should be offering carrots and sticks to Egypt, Jordan and other countries to allow Gazans to flee, the way other Arabs have fled to the very same countries. Pay them a few billion dollars to house and feed them. Those same billions will be spent in Gaza anyway.

And ask exactly why these Arabs who swear that they support Palestinians are so eager to let them die.

Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism today at Amazon!

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424.

Read all about it here!

10/25 Links Pt2: The "humanitarian" fallacy; UN chief doubles down on Hamas remarks; Qatar’s War for Young American Minds

From Ian:

Douglas Murray: Was Hamas’ brutal raid on Israel the day liberals realised their delusions about Islamic extremism were dead?

And reality hit the people of Israel very hard indeed on October 7.

Many of the people massacred in their homes by Hamas were themselves “peaceniks”, people who worked towards greater harmony and cooperation with the people of Gaza.

The hundreds of young people gunned down at the music festival near the Israeli side of the Gaza border were attending a “peace rave”.

Did it matter to their killers, rapists and abductors that many of them would have been liberals? Not at all. All that the monsters of Hamas cared was that they were Jews and Infidels.

That, now, is for the people of Israel to address.

But what has been alarming for so many people here at home is the attitude that has been allowed to grow in our society. The sheer cruelty and callousness of so many people.

The cruelty of the BBC moving straight on from the actual massacre to parroting Hamas propaganda that an Israeli rocket hit a Gaza hospital.

According to US and UK intelligence, the hospital car park was in fact hit by a Palestinian rocket misfire.

But it is in the cruelty on the streets that so many liberal dreams are being shattered.

Smears and lies
It has been in watching the young Muslim women in London tear down posters put up to draw attention to the Israeli children who have been kidnapped.

Of people claiming they are “queer” aligning themselves with people who support the ethnic cleansing of Jews in their historic homeland.

In the smears and lies pumped out by MPs such as Jeremy Corbyn and his old ally Chris Williamson.

In the students at Cambridge University who have failed to condemn the Hamas massacre but instead called for a “mass uprising” to destroy the Jewish state.

I’m sure this has all come as a shock to a lot of old liberals. They dreamed impossible dreams. They did indeed turn out to be delusions.

At least there are a few more people who now see things as they are. Perhaps they can now join decent people of all political types in not just facing up to these horrors — but in defeating them.

Anne Bayefsky: Stand up to the terrorists at the United Nations

These remarks were delivered outside the United Nations building in New York City on Oct. 24, 2023.

Israel is fighting an existential war. People and nations of good will recognize that Israel’s fight is their fight. A fight of good against evil. Of light against darkness. Of decency against barbarity.

But across the street at the United Nations, the forces of evil, of darkness and of barbarism are in control. Across the street, the Palestinian Authority is the willing diplomatic representative of Hamas and other Palestinian terrorist organizations. Across the street, Islamic nations have prevented the U.N. from even adopting a definition of terrorism, because they insist on an exemption clause for killing Israeli Jews.

Why does the U.N. matter in Israel’s hour of need? Because the institution and its major actors from the secretary-general on down are at this very moment attempting to tie Israel’s hands behind its back—to deny the Jewish state (a full and equal member of the U.N.) its right of self-defense under the U.N. Charter. What Hamas did to Jews in their homes, cars and beds, the U.N. is trying to do to Israel in the corridors of power and in the global media apparatus literally embedded in its halls

Make no mistake: This is a two-front war. On the battlefield and at the U.N. The U.N. is where terrorists come for excuses, justifications, whataboutism, inverting victim and perpetrator, and a green light for killing Israelis. This is where humanity’s moral compass is smashed and human rights become human wrongs.

It is an obscenity that the U.N. Security Council—created specifically to protect international peace and security—has never condemned Hamas. Never. That as recently as this morning, the Council remains unable and unwilling to affirm Israel’s right to defend itself against attempted genocide.

It is an obscenity that, instead of moral clarity in the face of mass murder, U.N. Secretary-General Antonio Guterres doesn’t know the difference between Palestinian terrorists who target civilians and an Israeli military that targets terrorists. This is not a cycle of violence, not what the secretary-general called—as early as Oct. 9!—a “vicious circle of bloodshed, hatred.” This is the familiar cycle of terrorists opposed to a Jewish state, steeped in antisemitism, finding the U.N. has their back.

Saudi crown prince indicates Israel normalization can resume after war – White House

US President Joe Biden and Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman agreed to eventually “build on” the US-brokered negotiations that had been underway to normalize ties between Israel and Saudi Arabia before the outbreak of the Gaza war, the White House said after the two leaders spoke on Tuesday.

Biden and bin Salman “affirmed the importance of working toward a sustainable peace between Israelis and Palestinians as soon as the crisis subsides, building on the work that was already underway between Saudi Arabia and the United States over recent months,” said a readout from the White House.

Biden administration officials have acknowledged that the normalization effort is no longer the most immediate priority for the US and Israel, as they work to respond to the October 7 Hamas onslaught. However, the White House insists that it is still committed to the goal and has suggested that one of the reasons for the Hamas massacre was to try and thwart the effort.

Biden, but more notably bin Salman as well, “welcomed ongoing efforts to secure the release of hostages held by Hamas and called for their immediate release,” according to the readout.

The two leaders also welcomed the recent delivery of humanitarian aid into Gaza while recognizing the need for additional assistance.

Biden hailed “the Gulf Cooperation Council’s contribution of $100 million to support these humanitarian efforts, and discussed the disbursement of $100 million from the United States to support the response.”

“The two leaders agreed on pursuing broader diplomatic efforts to maintain stability across the region and prevent the conflict from expanding,” the White House said, adding that Biden had affirmed US support for the defense of its allies in the region from terror attacks.

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

On or around September 7, President Biden unfroze $6b in Iranian revenues. One month later, there was a massacre in Israel, sponsored by Iran. No less than a Hamas spokesman affirmed that Iran lent its assistance to Hamas as its proxy to murder Jews.

Was Biden’s generosity to Iran in September responsible for the war crimes committed by Hamas in October? While White House officials say that none of the $6b went to Hamas, they have yet to relate to accusations that Biden’s munificence served as a green light to Iran to do what it always says it will do: murder Jews.

US Secretary of State Anthony Blinken, speaking from Tel Aviv, pretended that money was not fungible. The money, he said, had been sent from South Korea to a Qatari bank, and Iran hadn’t even had a chance to touch it, yet. “None of the funds that have gone to Qatar have actually been spent or accessed in any way,” said Blinken to Netanyahu during his diplomatic blitz of the Middle East in the wake of the atrocities.

Yes, dummy. We know that. But when there’s money in your future, you can take money from elsewhere to fund what you like. Iran likes to kill Jews. Tony Blinken knows this, because in reality, Blinken is no dummy. He is, however, a Biden hack.

Look (as Biden likes to say), it’s called “robbing Peter to pay Paul.” While Iran could not give the $6b straight into the hands of Hamas, there’s always a workaround. It’s called creative accounting. You take money away from a hospital or a school, whatever, and send it to Hamas. Wherever Iran took the money from, it used it to fund the massacre, secure in the knowledge that there would be $6b to cover the difference.

This really is not complicated, yet we can expect Blinken will continue to deliver the same unsatisfactory message each time he is called upon to answer for the October 7th war crimes. These were acts of war against Israel, against America and others, with various nationals among the hostages. What is now happening was brought to us by Iran, directly after they received a windfall from Joe.

Yes, we know the $6b is not a gift. We know that the money technically belongs to Iran. This is, however, an irrelevant factoid. Funds have been freed, released to madmen. Whether the money is a gift or just a case of restoring it to its rightful owner “in good faith,” matters not. The end result is the same: money in the pocket to buy weapons and pay savages to kill Jews.

One could write off the $6b as a miscalculation, a mistake by the Biden Administration. But not really. Joe Biden has been around a long time (cough). He has an equally lengthy history of browbeating and bullying Israel’s leaders, in spite of his intimate knowledge of the relevant actors in the region. President Biden knows that Iran and Hamas are evil. And he knows that Israel is not.

Israel is Joe Biden’s sacrificial lamb. Perhaps Biden reasons that everyone would like the Jews to be gone. Whatever his excuse, it is Joe Biden who strengthened the hand that fed us tragedy, in his final coup de grâce to the Jews.

We may never know all the ways in which Biden tied Israel’s hands to keep the Jewish State from defending itself. We don’t know what went on between Biden and Netanyahu behind the scenes. Rest assured, however, that Joe is using everything at his disposal to stall Israel as long as he can, from launching its inevitable ground incursion into Gaza. In so doing, Biden continues to strengthen the hand of the enemy. Each day that passes without the ground incursion gives the enemies of Israel that much more time to prepare, more time to get ready to slaughter the Jews (they will be sorry they tried).

We can see some of what Biden is doing against Israel, for example, forcing Israel to allow aid to go through to the “innocent people of Gaza,” unimpeded. Joe Biden himself is providing $100m to Gaza for humanitarian aid.

What does it mean to give $100m to “Gaza?” It means to give $100m to Hamas, the rulers of Gaza. The humanitarian aid, as well, is the opposite of that. Sure, the hundred mil is ostensibly to be used only for things like water, food, and electricity, but that will never happen. Thanks to yet more “creative accounting,” the money will not go to civilians. The $100m is right now literally funding Hamas, funding murder and inciting the world to war—whether we can see the actual transactions, or not.

Here too, a Biden hack offers an irrelevant response to criticism of Biden for sending aid and comfort to the enemy. This time it is Matthew Miller, the State Department spokesman who pretends that money is not fungible. "Not a penny has been spent, and when it is, it can only go for humanitarian needs like food and medicine," says Miller.

Habibi, you are not fooling us. The hundred mil can only go to Hamas, the government of Gaza. And even if this filthy lucre is channeled through UNRWA, it will still go to Hamas. One way or another, wherever it lands in Gaza, that $100m will be lining the pockets of Hamas’ worst, the dutiful proxies of Iran.

Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism today at Amazon!

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424.

Read all about it here!

You are probably familiar with the Islamic hadith, quoted in the Hamas charter:

The Day of Judgement will not come about until Moslems fight the Jews (killing the Jews), when the Jew will hide behind stones and trees. The stones and trees will say O Moslems, O Abdulla, there is a Jew behind me, come and kill him. Only the Gharqad tree would not do that because it is one of the trees of the Jews.

The Muhtawayat website is meant to be a reference site for Arabic readers where questions can be answered authoritatively. As there has been a lot of interest in Jews in Arabic media for the past couple of weeks, the site tackled the question, "Why does the Gharqad tree protect the Jews?"

Note how the question pre-supposes the magical properties of the gharqad tree as fact.

It is a purely Islamic legend, but that doesn't stop Muslims from assuming its truth. The article even says,

The Gharqad tree has cultural and religious importance for Jews, as in Jewish culture it is believed that the Gharqad tree represents a symbol of protection and shelter, and therefore they respect and preserve it as part of their cultural and religious heritage....

This article, and plenty of others, as well as videos, state as fact that Israeli Jews have planted thousands of gharqad trees because we believe they protect us.

It says that Yediot Aharonot reported in 2014 that Israel was planting gharqads as a temporary measure to protect a rail line that was exposed to rocket fire. (Israel did indeed plant trees, but no one said they were gharqads. )

In fact, no one quite knows what kind of tree it is (most people think it is the boxthorn.)

The thing is, this absurd legend is accepted as truth in the Muslim world. Even though the "proof" that Jews plant gharqads is not from Jewish sources but from Islamic sources, not one Muslim bothers to ask a Jew to verify the story about what Jews believe. (Just as Muslims believe that Jews worshipped Ezra the Scribe as the son of god, something against every tenet of Judaism, because the Quran says so.)

And these kinds of lies are the backbone of Arab and Muslim beliefs about Israel and Jews. Palestinians swear today that an Israeli airstrike hit the Al Ahli hospital, killing 500. They are 100% certain that Israel is waging genocide - even though, according to their own fictional numbers, fewer people have died than bombs dropped, a pretty inefficient genocide. They are absolutely convinced that the Temples never existed and Jews have never found any proof for them. They have written books "proving" that.

Any evidence that disprove the lies are themselves automatically assumed to be manufactured and forged by Jews. The world is one big conspiracy theory. The side that actually cares about accuracy is accused of being the liars; the side that actually is the victim of a campaign of attempted genocide is accused of genocide when defending themselves.

It's easy to laugh about the gharqad tree myth. But it is not so easy to laugh when you realize that myths like that are considered absolute truth by tens of millions, or hundreds of millions, of people. Fighting lies with truth sounds good in theory, but when you are dealing with people who are emotionally invested in the lies, one cannot win.

Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism today at Amazon!

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424.

Read all about it here!

10/25 Links Pt1: America Needs a Decisive Israeli Victory; I Watched Hamas Unleash Hell; Jordan's Queen says 'no evidence' of Hamas atrocities

From Ian:

America Needs a Decisive Israeli Victory

Israel’s conflict with Hezbollah is inevitable. This Iranian proxy has been preparing itself to commit mass murder inside our country since Israel’s withdrawal from Lebanon in 2000, and in a more sophisticated way since the Second Lebanon War in 2006. Its vast missile arsenal has been built for one reason only, and that is to kill thousands or tens of thousands of Israelis. It waits only for the right moment.

What Hamas was able to do last week is mild compared to what Hezbollah has been preparing to do since 2006. The question is not whether this conflict happens. It is simply whether we will allow Hezbollah to initiate the conflict on its terms and on its timeline, or if we will make the decision that this current war will not end without the destruction of the Hezbollah threat, on Israel’s terms and on Israel’s timeline.

But make no mistake, our fight is finally not only with Hamas or Hezbollah. It is with Iran. The Persians play chess, and in the regional power game, Hamas is a pawn, Hezbollah is a rook, and Iran is queen. Iran is the regional actor calling the shots, and Iran is the actor who must finish this war having suffered a clear strategic loss to its regional position and assets. Otherwise, Iran and its patrons and allies win, and the U.S. and Israel lose.

The strategic goal of the Islamic Republic is to establish itself as the dominant power from Tehran to Tel Aviv, and from Mashhad to Mecca; to establish the “Shiite crescent” and ultimately to wrest the holy cities of Islam from Saudi-Sunni control. Israel has been the central force standing in the way of this vision, and Israel’s very existence has been the target of Iran’s genocidal ambitions since the 1979 revolution.

In the broader regional context, an Iranian-dominated Middle East means a Russian-and-Chinese-dominated Middle East. Iran has had complex relations with both Russia and China for many years. However, in the past few years, complexity has given way to clarity. Despite Chinese and Russian hesitations over Iran’s Islamist worldview, both countries have strengthened their strategic ties with the Islamic Republic. A win for Tehran in the Middle East is therefore a win for Moscow and Beijing on the global chess board.

It is therefore a strategic imperative for both Washington and Jerusalem that the Gaza war ends with a blow to Iran’s positions. Hezbollah is the Iranian front line, but the IRGC forces in Syria and Iraq are the most obvious direct targets. An attack on Iran’s nuclear facilities, so long planned for, should be on the table as soon as Hezbollah has been neutralized. Devastating Hamas and Hezbollah and exacting a major price from Iran for the behavior of its proxies will come at a tremendous cost to Israel, but an even greater cost to its enemies. It is the only sufficient end to this war that can turn around what is currently a strategic disaster that threatens both America and Israel.

I Watched Hamas Unleash Hell

IDF spokesman Daniel Agari steps up to deliver some preliminary remarks. “We want people to understand what we are fighting for,” he says. “This is something else. Something has happened to Israel. This is not about rage or righteousness but the sense that this is a crime versus humanity. This is good versus bad. Death versus life. These [terrorists] will do anything. And it’s nothing to do with Islam,” he adds. It is a refrain I hear through the event. Clearly the word has come down to make a clear separation between Hamas, the wider Palestinians, and above all, with Islam.

What is also clear is the emotion. Agari is technically a media mouthpiece, but he veers into rhetoric. “Why did they strap GoPros to themselves? Why do they call the family of who they murdered? Because they are proud of what they did.”

He continues. “Rape—where is Islam? Burn—where is Islam? Behead—where is Islam?. . . . They killed babies, old people, sick people. . . we won’t allow the world to forget who we are fighting. Hamas wants dead Gazans. You don’t take human shields; you don’t burrow under hospitals otherwise. This is Hamas, not Palestinians.”

He steps off the stage. The footage starts: we see several Hamas terrorists sitting on the back of a truck as it enters Israel. They whoop and cheer. They fan into the street, shooting at cars. They drag blood-drenched corpses out of vehicles, onto the street. A female body is thrown onto the road. “Allahu Akbar! Allahu Akbar!” they cry.

Terrorists fan into streets and across a roundabout. They have the run of the place. The security failures here are monumental. Some men enter a kibbutz. An Israeli civilian car pulls up and the driver leans left to speak to the guard he assumes is sitting in the checkpoint. A terrorist emerges from his right and shoots. Blood spatters the inside of the car. It smears the windshield.

The screen cuts to inside the kibbutz. The view is from a GoPro strapped to the body of a terrorist. His automatic rifle juts out just like they do on the screen in Call of Duty. This is deliberate; ISIS did the same thing. It is the gamification of terror.

A dog appears, running eagerly toward him. He lowers the rifle and shoots at the animal. It crumples to the ground. Strangely, of all the killings we see on-screen over the course of that morning—and we see slaughter after slaughter—this gets the loudest gasp of revulsion.

I am, I realize, watching a montage of atrocity. And it gets worse. A terrified Israeli man in his underpants, and his two young children, also in underclothes, run screaming. Thugs clamber down from a truck and throw a grenade into the cubbyhole where they have taken refuge. The father’s body, covered in blood, falls onto the ground. Terrorists take the two children—covered in their father’s blood—into a room. “Daddy’s dead,” one screams to his brother. “It’s not a prank. He’s really dead. I wish I was dead! I wish I was dead!” Even within the litany of horror I’ve witnessed in my career, this is horrifically unsettling.

Dennis Prager: The Hamas Slaughter Confirmed Everything I Have Believed

Since the 1970s, when I was a graduate student at the Middle East Institute of Columbia’s School of International Affairs, I knew what the Middle East conflict was about: Muslim rejection of a Jewish state in the middle of the Muslim world. To the best of my recollection, my professors — most of them fluent in Arabic and all experts on the Middle East — had it wrong. Being secular themselves and usually having a sympathetic view of the Arab world, they believed and taught that the issue was about land.

They were wrong. It was always about Muslim rejection of a Jewish state in their midst and a religious desire to destroy it.

In 2014, I presented a video for PragerU titled “The Middle East Problem.” It explains the Middle East problem in five minutes.

This is how It begins:
“When I did my graduate studies at the Middle East Institute at Columbia University… semester after semester, we studied the Middle East conflict as if it was the most complex conflict in the world when, in fact, it is probably the easiest conflict in the world to explain. It may be the hardest to solve, but it is the easiest to explain.

“In a nutshell, it’s this: One side wants the other side dead.”

Fifty years ago, I knew it. Muslims know it. Israel’s Jews know it. And now, unless you are a leftist, you know it.

I ended the video with another truism:

“Finally, think about these two questions: If, tomorrow, Israel laid down its arms and announced, ‘We will fight no more,’ what would happen? And if the Arab countries around Israel laid down their arms and announced, ‘We will fight no more,’ what would happen?

“In the first case, there would be an immediate destruction of the state of Israel and the mass murder of its Jewish population. In the second case, there would be peace the next day.”

As of Oct. 7, you know that too.

Evidence Emerging on Gazan Women, Children Who Participated in 10/7 Massacre

Ynet reporter Ofir Hauzman started posting on this phenomenon on Monday: “I talk to mothers from the Gaza envelope who survived the inferno and they tell me that among the terrorists who broke into their homes, there were also children and women,” she tweeted. “One says that the terrorist who was in her house managed to unfold a table, and they all sat down to eat while she (the survivor – DI) put her hand over her little daughter’s mouth so she wouldn’t make any sound. Yes, like in the Holocaust. Another says that they stole all her underwear and clothes, and another says that they defecated on her in the living room (“There was also someone who went into the bathroom, and I remember thinking to myself: ‘Wow, what a polite terrorist.'”). They shot someone else’s dogs, tied some of them with a rope to a motorcycle, and dragged them while driving toward the Strip. Not humans. It’s scary, very scary!”

The problem with making the above report and others like it stick is the absence of video evidence so far. This reporter has been told that the notorious 43-minute video presented to select members of the media includes shots of women rioters taken from security cameras. I expect these will eventually come out.

Hauzman commented on this point: “And those who write: put up videos, otherwise we don’t believe you – [expletive] yourselves. I don’t intend to waste energy on you, not now and not ever!”

Understandable, but the problem in the absence of this direct evidence is obvious.

There is one piece of evidence that emerged on Tuesday: a phone conversation between an Arab teenager and his parents back in Gaza on 10/7, in which the lad boasts of killing 10 Jews and mommy and daddy lavish their praise on him. Not for the faint of heart:

User Rod Lior tweeted that women and children from Gaza who participated in the pogrom were documented in Nir Oz, and cited an acquaintance who saw the IDF video: “You know what I saw? At some point, Palestinian women with small children arrive in Nir Oz. And they walk around the kibbutz with red hands [from blood] and point for the terrorists where people are hiding inside homes, so they can kill them. So help me, I saw one of them running up to a terrorist, points, and he starts running. You know, one Palestinian woman entered the home of a kibbutz member and switched her Netflix to Arabic. The kibbutz member was hiding in her fortified space and realized this was a Palestinian woman because she heard her singing in her living room. And then she picked clothes from her wardrobe.”

Another user tweeted that young Arab children were encouraged to shoot Israelis who had been captured at the music concert. The children closed their eyes and fired.

By Daled Amos

At the time, it was supposed to be the first step in stemming the tide of antisemitism on campus.

A lawsuit filed in 2017 by the Lawfare Project described that matters were set in motion at San Francisco State University by:

the alleged complicity of senior university administrators and police officers in the disruption of an April, 2016, speech by the Mayor of Jerusalem, Nir Barkat. At that event organized by SF Hillel, Jewish students and audience members were subjected to genocidal and offensive chants and expletives by a raging mob that used bullhorns to intimidate and drown out the Mayor’s speech and physically threaten and intimidate members of the mostly-Jewish audience. At the same time, campus police – including the chief – stood by, on order from senior university administrators who instructed the police to “stand down” despite direct and implicit threats and violations of university codes governing campus conduct.

The California State University public university system settled in 2019 and agreed, among other things, to a public statement. It seemed like a major victory because that statement was not some mealy-mouthed apology. Instead, it was a statement affirming that San Francisco State University "understands that, for many Jews, Zionism is an important part of their identity."

And in 2021 you had An Open Letter to the Leadership of USC, in which more than 65 faculty members at USC took a stand that Zionism was a part of Jewish identity:

Jewish, Zionist, and Israeli students, as well as those who support the right of the State of Israel to exist need to hear from our leaders that they are welcome on our campus. Such a statement would not infringe on free speech or take sides in political dispute. It is a call for character and dignity. It is overdue. [emphasis added]

These kinds of statements were an unprecedented recognition of the importance of Zionism to Jewish identity. These were accomplishments that could be built upon in protecting Jewish students on campus and implemented in other campuses across the US.

Or so we thought.

In response to the backlash against two SFSU faculty members inviting terrorist Leila Khaled to participate virtually in a class discussion, the SFSU president, Lynne Mahoney, recognized the required statement while neatly side-stepping its implications:

Let me be clear: I condemn the glorification of terrorism and use of violence against unarmed civilians. I strongly condemn antisemitism and other hateful ideologies that marginalize people based on their identities, origins or beliefs.

At the same time, I represent a public university, which is committed to academic freedom and the ability of faculty to conduct their teaching and scholarship without censorship.

While defending the right of faculty to invite a terrorist, Mahoney made sure to utter the magic words as required by the agreement:

I understand that Zionism is an important part of the identity of many of our Jewish students. The university welcomes Jewish faculty and students expressing their beliefs and worldviews in the classroom and on the quad, through formal and informal programming.

So at the same time that Jews can express "their beliefs and worldviews," terrorists are free to express their views because of the "academic freedom" of the teachers who invite them. Worse, there was no follow-up by other universities openly recognizing Zionism as an expression of Jewish identity.

And now, following the Hamas massacre of Jewish civilians, students feel free to publicly defend the Hamas atrocities and blame Israel for them.

This strategy did not work, but in reaction to campuses supporting the October 7 Hamas massacres of Israeli civilians, there is a different strategy. Earlier this month, 34 student groups in Harvard signed a letter blaming Israel alone for the then-1,200 Israelis murdered:

The backlash against the letter caused some of the groups that signed it to back out. Contributing to the pressure is Accuracy In Media, which is attacking this aggressive metathesis of antisemitism head-on.

AIM started by driving around Harvard showing names, photos of students who blamed Israel for Hamas attacks.

They set up a web page entitled Harvard Hates Jews. It encourages people to send a message to Harvard's board of trustees:

As an overseer at Harvard, you have a moral obligation to take a stand against the antisemites on campus who issued a statement in support of Hamas.

If no action is taken against these hateful individuals, we will assume that you support them.

Expel these students and kick their organizations off campus immediately. Their actions are a stain on the reputation of Harvard.

And they are not stopping there. Adam Guillette, president of Accuracy In Media, tweeted on Monday:

This is bringing "name and shame" to a whole new level.

But is that the right, or only, approach?

Professor William Jacobson, of Legal Insurrection, has a longer range plan for dealing with the problem. In an interview Prof. Jacobson explains the slow process by which the radical left was able to dominate the universities:

“I look at the people I graduated law school with in 1984, and the most radical students went into academia. The rest of us went and got a real job,” he said. “We woke up 30, 40 years later, and it’s, holy cow, they’re controlling everything.”

“They’ve only hired their own for two generations. That’s how we got here,” Jacobson affirmed. “We got here slowly, but I’d say – certainly in the last decade, but particularly the last four to five years – we’re in a collapse phase, and people are just waking up to that.”

“They all understood that education was where they could have the biggest impact, because they get to shape young minds,” the professor said. “They understood that that was a weakness of society and a place where they could essentially be activists.”

A long-term strategy like that cannot be undone overnight. Neither will shaming or cancelling do the job. The professor suggested an approach in the context of Cornell professor Russell Rickford, who declared he was “exhilarated” by the Hamas terrorist attack against Jews in Israel.

So I think the remedy for this professor who was exhilarated by the Hamas attack, I think the answer is not to fire him, the answer is to educate the entire campus as to why he’s wrong. The answer is to invite Israelis to speak on campus. The answer is to expand cooperation with Israel.

What Prof. Jacobson is suggesting is an uphill fight. He does not give much detail. Nor does he address the fact that attempts have been made over the years to help Jewish students at universities learn more about their Jewish identity and invite Israeli speakers. Over and over we have read about attempts -- successful attempts -- to disrupt Israeli and pro-Israel speakers.

Why should these attempts be any more successful now? Can we expect universities to suddenly grow a spine and stand up for free speech when it comes to the needs of their Jewish students?

Following the Holocaust, the world seemed to sober up from the darkest levels of hate and apathy for the dangers Jews faced.

But look at the reaction to the Hamas massacre of 1,400 Israeli civilians and the desecration of bodies. There is a level of justification that would have been unthinkable before October 7. Even the most successful retaliation by Israel and most complete eradication of Hamas terrorists will not erase the mindless venom that has been revealed and given public validation in formerly respected areas of government, academia and media.

Is there really a path back to normalcy and sanity?

Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism today at Amazon!

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424.

Read all about it here!