Ciężar dowodu spoczywa na Żydzie – Standardy dowodowe są zawsze inne

Broń Hamasu znaleziona w szpitalu Al Shifa w Gazie.


Ciężar dowodu spoczywa na Żydzie – Standardy dowodowe są zawsze inne

Elder of Ziyon


W maju 2026 roku brytyjski rabin Yoni Birnbaum zarezerwował letni dom wakacyjny we wschodniej Francji dla swojej rodziny. Cała procedura przebiegała rutynowo: wymieniono e-maile, rezerwacja została przyjęta, wpłacono pięćdziesięcioprocentowy zadatek. Miesiąc później właściciele ponownie się odezwali. Zainteresowała ich tożsamość gościa, ponieważ w jego adresie e-mail znajdowało się słowo „rabbi” („rabin”), i zażądali od Birnbauma wyjaśnienia jego poglądów politycznych. Czy należał do ruchu potępiającego działania Izraela w Strefie Gazy, na Zachodnim Brzegu i w Libanie? Czy nie aprobował „nieludzkiego i zbrodniczego” postępowania izraelskiej armii? Jeśli nie, z przykrością odwołają rezerwację i zwrócą zadatek, ponieważ ugoszczenie go byłoby zbyt sprzeczne z ich zasadami.

Gdyby jego adres e-mail nie zawierał słowa „rabbi”, kwestia Gazy nigdy by się nie pojawiła. Rezerwacja została zaakceptowana, a pieniądze przyjęto od klienta, którego uznano za zwyczajną brytyjską rodzinę. Dopiero gdy odkryto, że jest Żydem, wprowadzono warunek, którego nie stawiano żadnemu innemu gościowi: przejdź test ideologicznej „czystości” albo stracisz rezerwację.

Dwa stulecia wcześniej rewolucja francuska przyznała Żydom obywatelstwo – Żydom sefardyjskim w styczniu 1790 roku, a aszkenazyjskim we wrześniu 1791 roku. Było to pełne, równe i prawnie zagwarantowane obywatelstwo, takie samo jak każdego innego Francuza. Przynajmniej do czasu.

W 1806 roku Napoleon zwołał Zgromadzenie Żydowskich Notabli, liczące 111 rabinów i świeckich przywódców, i zadał im dwanaście pytań. Czy Żydzi urodzeni we Francji uważają Francję za swoją ojczyznę? Czy są zobowiązani jej bronić i przestrzegać jej prawa cywilnego? Czy prawo żydowskie pozwala im traktować Francuzów jak braci? Nie zadowoliło go pozostawienie im czasu na naradę i przedstawienie odpowiedzi. Z góry wskazał, jakich odpowiedzi oczekuje, a następnie zwołał Wielki Sanhedryn, aby nadać tym odpowiedziom moc wiążących postanowień.

Kościół katolicki uregulował swoje relacje z państwem francuskim poprzez konkordat, protestanci – w drodze negocjacji. Nie zwoływano zgromadzenia księży, by składali przysięgę, że katolicy uważają Francję za swoją ojczyznę, zanim uznano ich za godnych obywatelstwa. Tego rodzaju wymóg zarezerwowano wyłącznie dla Żydów – siedemnaście lat po tym, jak formalnie stali się pełnoprawnymi obywatelami. Jak ujął to historyk Simon Schwarzfuchs, rozwiązanie to było równoznaczne z ogłoszeniem, że Żydzi pozostaną na okresie próbnym, dopóki nie udowodnią, że zasługują na obywatelstwo, które już posiadali.

Podobnie jak w przypadku tego francuskiego właściciela domu: prawo zostało najpierw przyznane. Warunek dodano później, ponieważ mieli do czynienia z Żydami.

Ten schemat jest jednak znacznie szerszy.

W listopadzie 2023 roku Siły Obronne Izraela (IDF) pokazały dziennikarzom broń, którą – jak twierdziły – odnaleziono w szpitalu Al-Szifa w Strefie Gazy. CNN poinformowała, że na późniejszych nagraniach widać więcej uzbrojenia niż na pierwszym filmie udostępnionym przez IDF, „co wskazuje, że broń mogła zostać przeniesiona lub umieszczona tam przed przybyciem ekip medialnych”. Wyraźna sugestia była taka, że dowody mogły zostać sfabrykowane.

Ta sama stacja relacjonuje jednak przejęcia broni w innych okolicznościach w zupełnie inny sposób. Gdy włoska policja skonfiskowała arsenał należący do skrajnie prawicowej komórki, CNN opublikowała zdjęcia zabezpieczonej broni. Tak samo postąpiła, gdy policja prezentowała broń przejętą po ucieczce z więzienia czy arsenał znaleziony w Virginia Beach. W każdym z tych przypadków funkcjonariusze oczywiście ułożyli broń do zdjęć – rozłożyli ją na stołach i odpowiednio zaaranżowali. Nikt jednak nie pisał, że taki sposób prezentacji „wskazuje, iż broń mogła zostać tam umieszczona”. Wszyscy rozumieją, że przygotowanie ekspozycji prawdziwie zabezpieczonej broni na potrzeby mediów nie jest tym samym co sfabrykowanie samego przejęcia. Wszyscy to rozumieją – dopóki stroną dokonującą przejęcia nie jest państwo żydowskie.

Ta asymetria działa zresztą w obu kierunkach jednocześnie. Twierdzenia IDF spotykają się z domyślnym założeniem, że zostały upozorowane. Natomiast dane o liczbie ofiar publikowane przez ministerstwo kontrolowane przez Hamas oraz relacje świadków żyjących pod rządami Hamasu są przedstawiane bez porównywalnego poziomu weryfikacji – często bez jakiejkolwiek weryfikacji. Jedna strona jest z góry traktowana z podejrzliwością. Drugiej z góry się wierzy. O tym, która z nich podlega któremu standardowi, nie decydują dowody. Decyduje tożsamość.

Istnieje określenie na odwrócenie zasady prawnej, z którym mamy tu do czynienia. Jest to zasada, którą odruchowo przyznajemy mordercom, złodziejom i terrorystom. Nie rozciągamy jej jednak na Żydów…


Link do oryginału:

Elder’s Substack
The Burden of Proof Is on the Jew
In May 2026, a British rabbi named Yoni Birnbaum booked a summer rental in eastern France for his family. The correspondence was routine: emails exchanged, booking accepted, fifty percent deposit paid. Then, a month later, the owners wrote again. They had grown curious about a guest whose email address contained the word “rabbi,” and they needed Birnbaum to…
Read more

Zawartość publikowanych artykułów i materiałów nie reprezentuje poglądów ani opinii Reunion’68,
ani też webmastera Blogu Reunion’68, chyba ze jest to wyraźnie zaznaczone.
Twoje uwagi, linki, własne artykuły lub wiadomości prześlij na adres:
webmaster@reunion68.com


From the Editor: Don’t Forget the Iranian People


From the Editor: Don’t Forget the Iranian People

Aaron Kliegman


People attend the funeral of the security forces who were killed in the protests that erupted over the collapse of the currency’s value in Tehran, Iran, Jan. 14, 2026. Photo: Majid Asgaripour/WANA (West Asia News Agency) via REUTERS

There are betrayals, and there are betrayals. When it comes to the long-oppressed Iranian people, Donald Trump is guilty of the latter, an act of abandonment so egregious that it’s not only morally shameful but also strategically damaging. Indeed, a broken US presidential promise would have been hard to stomach; the added loss of global credibility and strategic leverage is another story — one that could taint Trump’s legacy.

The US-Iran memorandum of understanding (MOU) has been scrutinized from all angles over the past week, but there has been little mention of the Iranian people, who in many ways are the most important factor to this whole conflict. Nearly every journalist and analyst who commented on the war since Feb. 28, when the US and Israel began striking Iran, has acknowledged that the mobilization — or lack thereof — of ordinary Iranians would ultimately determine the country’s future, regardless of how effective the military campaign turned out to be.

But the MOU states in the second paragraph the following: “The United States of America and the Islamic Republic of Iran undertake to respect each other’s sovereignty and territorial integrity, and to refrain from interfering in each other’s internal affairs.”

No call for ending political executions. No demand to stop systemic sexual violence against prisoners. No insistence that the regime must stop preventing families from retrieving the bodies of slain protesters. Instead, the US-backed document says no support for the Iranian people and, depending on one’s interpretation, not even any criticism of the regime’s human rights abuses.

On an unrelated note, the Iranian government has, under cover of the ceasefire, continued to ramp up its executions of people arrested on political charges, such as spreading propaganda and espionage. The regime’s message is clear: We are in charge and will not tolerate dissent.

Here it’s worth recalling how this conflict began. Demonstrations erupted in Iran on Dec. 28 over economic hardships. These quickly escalated into large-scale, nationwide protests calling for the downfall of the country’s theocratic, authoritarian system.

The Islamist regime responded with a vicious crackdown, arresting and murdering tens of thousands of demonstrators in the dark after imposing an internet blackout. The onslaught was one of the deadliest, most ferocious incidents of government violence in modern history, with much of the carnage taking place over just two days.

But this regime doesn’t just slaughter protesters. It’s security forces brutally rape and torture nurses who try and treat the wounded and then force their families to pay money to have their loved ones released — either dead or alive.

The point of such excessive cruelty is humiliation and intimidation, to break the will of a restless population so full of potential and ready for a better life if not for the regime’s incompetent governance and ruthless will to stay in power.

Amid the darkness of January, however, there was a bit of hope.

Before the mass slaughter of Jan. 8-9, Trump promised to come to the Iranian people’s “rescue” and “hit” the regime “very hard” if there was a violent crackdown. In the days that followed, he promised that “help is on the way” for the Iranian protesters being slaughtered by their own government, calling on the demonstrators to “keep protesting” and “take over your institutions.” Trump repeatedly issued such statements in interviews and social media posts.

For weeks nothing happened, but this was the context in which Trump built up US forces near Iran. While it was clear that the US and Israel were discussing war plans and addressing the Iranian threat more broadly, it’s not at all clear that Trump would have deployed military assets as he did without the impetus of the protests, which led him to begin issuing public threats to Tehran.

Then he struck. Of course, Trump chose to attack not as a humanitarian but for a variety of strategic reasons, such as preventing a regime hellbent on fulfilling its slogan of “death to America, death to Israel” from building up its nuclear and ballistic-missile programs to a point of virtual invulnerability.

However, Trump made clear in his remarks announcing Operation Epic Fury that he had the Iranian people very much in mind.

“To the great proud people of Iran, I say tonight that the hour of your freedom is at hand,” he said. “Stay sheltered. Don’t leave your home. It’s very dangerous outside. Bombs will be dropping everywhere. When we are finished, take over your government. It will be yours to take. This will be probably your only chance for generations.”

Trump continued, “For many years, you have asked for America’s help, but you never got it. No president was willing to do what I am willing to do tonight. Now you have a president who is giving you what you want, so let’s see how you respond. America is backing you with overwhelming strength and devastating force. Now is the time to seize control of your destiny, and to unleash the prosperous and glorious future that is close within your reach. This is the moment for action. Do not let it pass.”

You know what happened next: decimation, Hormuz, ceasefire, MOU. And here we are.

Under the MOU, the regime will get billions of dollars it otherwise wouldn’t have received. Iran’s economy will remain in shambles, but the government will be able to avert a total economic collapse. Security forces may not get paid in full, but they will get more than before the deal was signed. Same for Iran’s terrorist proxies. And some of the funds will surely go toward rebuilding the nuclear and missile programs — slowly, quietly, in ways that won’t immediately raise alarm bells in Washington. The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), which controls huge swathes of the Iranian economy, will benefit.

Ordinary impoverished Iranians will get nothing. And those foot soldiers in the security apparatus will notice, recognizing the best-case alternative to oppressing their countrymen is destitution. The incentives for them to defect have been reversed, at least for now.

The regime cares about staying in power above all else and therefore fears its own people far more than US or Israeli bombs. As The Algemeiner has reported, Iranians overwhelmingly hate their regime but have increasingly lost hope in change.

The Mossad is no doubt working on new plans to foster revolution inside Iran, and hopefully the CIA is too. But despite all of Trump’s threats throughout this year, the Iranian people are now on their own to face the regime. After January’s massacre, they likely won’t come out into the streets without more organization — organization that the regime is making nearly impossible with its ability to shut off the internet and patrol the streets at night warning people not to protest.

Trump had a rare opportunity to help free a great and ancient civilization, cementing his place as a world historical figure regardless of his politics. It wouldn’t just be destroying a tyrannical death cult but allowing an especially capable people in a large, strategically located country to flourish and unleash their potential. The Middle East would be transformed, and the world would benefit. To use an economic term, the world’s opportunity cost of the Iranian people being stymied by the Islamic Republic is incalculable.

Trump still has time. This MOU may prove to be nothing more than a long pause to get past the US midterm elections, allowing Trump then to ramp up the pressure once again.

Maybe. I’m certainly hoping. More likely, however, is what my eyes and ears are telling me: The Trump administration caved, lacking the will to out-escalate Iran.

Either way, Trump has lost enough credibility over his repeated, unfulfilled promises to the Iranian people and threats to bomb Iran’s infrastructure that too few people believe what he says now.

Like Trump, the US officials currently leading the negotiations — JD Vance, Jared Kushner, and Steve Witkoff — don’t recognize the importance of ideology and seem to think they can find the key to unlock Tehran’s recalcitrance, if only they can figure out Iran’s “interests.”

But this is a regime that rapes and tortures nurses to the point of needing their intestines or uterus removed just for trying to help fellow Iranians who were shot while protesting. And many, though not all, of the leaders of this regime who oversee such horror do so with the confidence that the god of Islam is on their side.

The US administration has left the Iranian people at the mercy of this evil. Even if they and much of the media forget what is happening inside Iran, we certainly won’t.


Aaron Kliegman is the executive editor of The Algemeiner.


Zawartość publikowanych artykułów i materiałów nie reprezentuje poglądów ani opinii Reunion’68,
ani też webmastera Blogu Reunion’68, chyba ze jest to wyraźnie zaznaczone.
Twoje uwagi, linki, własne artykuły lub wiadomości prześlij na adres:
webmaster@reunion68.com


On His Way Out, UNRWA Chief Faces Calls for Criminal Probe Into Hamas Infiltration


On His Way Out, UNRWA Chief Faces Calls for Criminal Probe Into Hamas Infiltration

Corey Walker


United Nations Secretary-General Antonio Guterres speaks during a news conference with Austrian Chancellor Karl Nehammer (not seen) and Foreign Minister Alexander Schallenberg (not seen) in Vienna, Austria May 11, 2022. REUTERS/Lisa Leutner

UN Watch, a prominent watchdog organization critical of the United Nations, has called on Secretary-General António Guterres to waive the legal immunity of outgoing UNRWA Commissioner-General Philippe Lazzarini, arguing that the longtime UN official should face criminal investigation over allegations that he enabled an agency increasingly infiltrated by Hamas.

The request, submitted Tuesday by UN Watch, comes as Lazzarini concludes his tenure leading the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees (UNRWA), a controversial humanitarian organization that has faced mounting scrutiny since Hamas’ Oct. 7, 2023 attack on Israel.

In a formal legal letter invoking Section 20 of the Convention on the Privileges and Immunities of the United Nations, UN Watch argues that immunity exists to protect the interests of the UN rather than individual officials and should be waived when it could obstruct justice.

“For years, we repeatedly warned Mr. Lazzarini that Hamas had deeply infiltrated UNRWA,” UN Watch Executive Director Hillel Neuer said in a statement. The organization said it provided UN officials with documentation alleging that numerous UNRWA employees — including teachers, school administrators and labor union leaders — maintained ties to Hamas, which the US, EU and other Western governments designate as a terrorist organization.

UN Watch alleges that despite those warnings, Lazzarini continued to oversee an agency whose personnel and facilities were exploited by Hamas and other militant groups operating in Gaza. The organization contends that these actions warrant investigation for possible complicity in terrorism, war crimes and crimes against humanity, while emphasizing that any determination of criminal liability would ultimately be made by competent judicial authorities.

“We provided detailed evidence identifying Hamas-affiliated teachers, school principals, union leaders, and other employees,” Neuer said. “We documented repeated meetings between senior UNRWA officials — including Mr. Lazzarini himself — and leaders of Hamas and other terrorist organizations. Yet he continued to assure governments that UNRWA’s neutrality mechanisms were effective while overseeing an agency whose personnel, facilities, and resources were being exploited by terrorist groups.”

The allegations add to a broader debate over UNRWA’s role in Gaza. Since the Oct. 7 attacks, Israeli officials have repeatedly argued that Hamas embedded itself within the agency’s infrastructure, accusing some employees of participating directly in the assault and others of maintaining longstanding affiliations with the militant group. Israel has also said Hamas used facilities associated with UNRWA for military purposes, allegations that have intensified calls within Israel and among some Western lawmakers for major reforms or the agency’s replacement.

UNRWA has consistently rejected accusations that it knowingly cooperated with Hamas, saying it acts swiftly when credible evidence of staff misconduct emerges and that it operates under exceptionally difficult conditions inside Gaza. The agency has argued that the overwhelming majority of its more than 30,000 employees carry out humanitarian work providing food, education and medical care to Palestinian civilians.

The dispute comes amid continuing international scrutiny of UNRWA. Multiple donor countries, including the US, temporarily suspended funding in 2024 after allegations surfaced that a number of employees participated in the Oct. 7 attack, though many later resumed contributions following reviews and additional oversight measures. Debate has nevertheless continued over whether Hamas exercised deeper influence over the agency than previously acknowledged.

Last month, the inspector general’s office for the US Agency for International Development (USAID) revealed that it found evidence showing 101 current and former UNRWA employees also operated as Hamas terrorists, including within the group’s military apparatus. 

“Among the individuals referred were UNRWA school principals, teachers, security personnel, attendants, psychosocial counselors, and medical professionals,” the USAID inspector general’s office noted.

UN Watch argues that waiving Lazzarini’s immunity would demonstrate that senior UN officials are not beyond legal accountability.

“The credibility of the United Nations depends on demonstrating that immunity is not a shield for impunity,” Neuer said.

The United Nations has not publicly indicated whether Guterres intends to consider the request. Under the Convention on the Privileges and Immunities of the United Nations, the secretary-general has the authority to waive immunity when he determines doing so would not prejudice the interests of the organization and when immunity would otherwise impede the course of justice.


Zawartość publikowanych artykułów i materiałów nie reprezentuje poglądów ani opinii Reunion’68,
ani też webmastera Blogu Reunion’68, chyba ze jest to wyraźnie zaznaczone.
Twoje uwagi, linki, własne artykuły lub wiadomości prześlij na adres:
webmaster@reunion68.com


Izrael poderwał myśliwce. Załoga samolotu z Warszawy zgłosiła “stan zagrożenia

Airbus linii Electra Airlines (Sg1959 – Own work, CC BY-SA 4.0, commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=194158028)


Izrael poderwał myśliwce. Załoga samolotu z Warszawy zgłosiła “stan zagrożenia

Marcin Kozłowski


Wtrakcie lotu z Warszawy do Tel Awiwu załoga zgłosiła “stan zagrożenia” i utracono kontakt z samolotem. W odpowiedzi izraelskie wojsko poderwały dwa myśliwce. Zgłoszenie od pilota mogło być jednak przypadkowe.

Samolot wystartował po godz. 11.30 z Lotniska Chopina w Warszawie. “Podczas rejsu LO155 z Warszawy do Tel Awiwu, wykonywanego samolotem Airbus A320 bułgarskich linii Electra Airways, załoga zgłosiła stan zagrożenia. Zgłoszenie zostało wycofane w trakcie dalszej korespondencji z kontrolą ruchu lotniczego” – przekazały w krótkim komunikacie wydanym we wtorek po godz. 16 Polskie Linie Lotnicze LOT.

Jak dodano, “ze względu na ograniczenia wynikające z dopuszczalnego czasu pracy załogi podjęto decyzję o skierowaniu samolotu na lotnisko bazowe Electra Airways w Burgas”. Maszyna wylądowała tam po godz. 16. 

“Stan zagrożenia” na pokładzie

Portal “The Times of Israel” informuje, że zostały poderwane dwa myśliwce izraelskich sił powietrznych po tym, gdy stwierdzono “brak kontaktu z samolotem”. Później jednak doszło do przywrócenia kontaktu z załogą. 

Według portalu Ynetnews.com nad turecką przestrzenią powietrzną “pilot nacisnął przycisk alarmujący o porwaniu”. “Następnie przeleciał nad Cyprem i zawrócił po tym, jak odmówiono mu pozwolenia na lądowanie” – wskazano. Z ustaleń portalu wynika, że nie jest wykluczone, że pilot zaalarmował o porwaniu zupełnie przez przypadek. Będzie to jedna z wersji analizowana w ramach postępowania wyjaśniającego.

PLL LOT podaje na swojej stronie internetowej, że “loty do Tel Awiwu obsługuje samolot Airbus A320 Electra Airways”. “Samolot zabiera na pokład 180 pasażerów w dwóch klasach podróży. (…) Serwis pokładowy na rejsach obsługiwanych przez Electra Airways pozostaje taki sam jak na wszystkich lotach krótkodystansowych LOT-u” – czytamy. 

We wtorek po południu zwróciliśmy się do biura prasowego PLL LOT z prośbą o dodatkowe, szczegółowe informacje na temat przebiegu zdarzenia. Poproszono nas o przesłanie pytań mailem. Czekamy na odpowiedź.  


Zawartość publikowanych artykułów i materiałów nie reprezentuje poglądów ani opinii Reunion’68,
ani też webmastera Blogu Reunion’68, chyba ze jest to wyraźnie zaznaczone.
Twoje uwagi, linki, własne artykuły lub wiadomości prześlij na adres:
webmaster@reunion68.com


The Israel they hate is imaginary


The Israel they hate is imaginary

Jonathan S. Tobin


The younger generation’s opposition to a “genocidal” Jewish state has become one of the organizing principles of U.S. politics. But these toxic beliefs have nothing to do with the actual place.

People surf on a sand dune in the Western Negev Desert in southern Israel, April 22, 2022. Photo by Noam Revkin Fenton/Flash90.

For those who visit Israel regularly, the love affair with the country can take on many forms. Some are entranced by the somberness and spirituality of Jerusalem; others love the hustle and bustle of Tel Aviv. There are deserts and mountaintops, swaths of farmland and the dramatic hills of Judea, the Galilee and the Golan. Most visitors are entranced by all these different geographical areas—so much differentiation in one small place.

And throughout all of it are the Israeli people—a wonderful, welcoming, brusque, emotional, infuriating and complex collection of Jews, in addition to Christian, Arab, Druze and Bedouin minorities who each play their own sometimes contradictory roles in a vibrant and democratic society.

Israel, for those who come to know it, is a complicated place. It’s not the idealized fantasy of novels like Exodus or other classics of Zionist cheerleading. Bringing together Jews from different cultures and traditions from the world over is a wild and often difficult ongoing experiment that is still only eight decades old. Clashes between religious and secular, Ashkenazi and the Mizrachi, as well as adherents of right and left-wing political factions, remain a messy business and adds stress to everyday life. Not to mention the ongoing struggle against an entrenched government bureaucracy and the efforts of liberal elites to hold onto power, despite their diminishing share of the population.

It can be a place of anger, inveterate political squabbling and endless arguments.

But the main takeaway from the experience of being in Israel after arriving back in the United States is that, whatever its great strengths and shortcomings, it’s nothing like the place described in the U.S. and international media.

Belief in a fictional ‘genocide’

One of the most extraordinary developments of recent history is the way opinions about Israel have become one of the organizing principles of American politics. Opposition to the Jewish state and its supposed policies of “genocide” and “apartheid” have become ubiquitous not just in the liberal media that has long treated it unfairly and judged it by double standards not applied to any other democracy, let alone one fighting for its life. But the drumbeat of incitement against Israel and its supporters—Jewish and non-Jewish—has now become an ever-present topic not merely of debate but of political allegiance.

As seen in the last year, candidates throughout the United States—so-called “progressives” and others who unashamedly label themselves as “socialists”—have embraced the cause of what some called “Palestinianism” and others more accurately label as antisemitism.

Some in the left wing of the Democratic Party do talk a good deal about affordability: housing and health costs, transportation, and rising food and gas prices. They advocate for a version of economics that hinges on the absurd and often disproved notion that society can prosper by impeding the creation of wealth and by offering people free stuff that isn’t really free.

The issues providing the energy for these left-wing insurgents who have defeated incumbents and party stalwarts—and continue to scare the Democratic establishment—are largely driven by hostility to Israel and ICE agents. Since almost all of the support for the left comes from credentialled elites and other college-educated people, the talk about affordability is largely a case of the privileged classes pretending to care about the lives of the working class when, in fact, they couldn’t care less.

That’s illustrated by the fact that their campaigns consist almost entirely of a fashionable opposition to borders and the enforcement of immigration laws that holds little appeal outside of the left. Most Americans (the anti-ICE coverage in the liberal media notwithstanding) understand that the invasion of millions of illegal migrants during the Biden administration was a disaster for the country in general, and for working-class Americans and their communities in particular.

But the Israel-bashing has become the centerpiece of the progressive effort to transform politics in the United States. And it has its echo on the right with podcasters like former Fox News host Tucker Carlson, far-right political commentator Candace Owens and the neo-Nazi, Holocaust-denier Nick Fuentes, aided and abetted by apologists like media celebrities Megyn Kelly, who are similarly obsessed with Israel.

The facts don’t matter

Much of the rhetoric from both the left and the right hinges on their unfounded assumption that the defensive war being waged by Israelis against Hamas and Hezbollah terrorists is “genocide.” That is a blood libel with no foundation in truth.

As has been proven over and over again by military experts like retired U.S. Army officer John Spencer and British Col. Richard Kemp, the Israel Defense Forces have taken more care to avoid civilian casualties than any other modern military, with the number of non-combatants killed in urban warfare a historic low.

That’s especially true considering that both Hamas in Gaza and Hezbollah in Lebanon go out of their way to endanger civilians, using them as human shields. In Gaza, where the Islamist group used international aid to build a tunnel system as extensive as the New York City subway system, civilians, including women and children, are denied entry into them for safety or any other reasons. In Gaza, as in Lebanon, and in stark contrast to the practice in Israel, bomb shelters are for the bombs and the terrorists. Civilians are deliberately put in harm’s way to boost casualty numbers, which are reported in statistics that vastly exaggerate the actual toll of war.

At this point, it’s become painfully clear that pointing out the facts to those who routinely fling the “genocide” accusation against Israel is an utter waste of time. The lie has been repeated so many times that it has become an article of faith for those who oppose Israel, alongside other fictional crimes, such as “apartheid” and “fascism,” to describe the activities of the Jewish state.

To listen to the way the tiny nation surrounded by enemies is described in public discourse is to take a trip back into the Jewish past. The resentment against it is increasingly disconnected even from the familiar critiques of Israel-bashers about settlements or distortions about “settler violence.” Such rhetoric is a combination of vast exaggerations of actual incidents and mischaracterizations of Jews defending themselves against daily Arab terror or merely having the chutzpah to visit places like Jerusalem’s Temple Mount, the holiest place for Jews.

Imagery of demonization

Listening to podcasts, and reading social media and the comments left on YouTube videos, one encounters the traditional tropes of hatred in which the Jews and Israel are treated as the source of all the world’s ills. Everything from political corruption, the Jeffrey Epstein sex scandal, economic setbacks and the outcomes of wars is blamed on them. The Jewish state is spoken of as not merely a source of irritation to the Arab and Muslim world, which regards its existence as an affront to their honor. Instead, it is, as Owens believes (stating so on Carlson’s program), the “demon” that is the driving force of global evil, as well as the main factor corrupting American politics and foreign policy.

Nor is such imagery confined to the far right. Democratic Socialists like New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani speak of AIPAC and pro-Israel supporters as “monsters.” In the philosophy of the intersectional left, the destruction of Israel—an event that could only be made possible by the genocide of half of the Jews on earth who live there—is linked to the undoing of all oppression on earth.

All of this is a throwback to the same sort of conspiratorial thinking that dominated medieval demonization of Jews, the tsarist forgery The Protocols of the Elders of Zion, as well as Nazi propaganda. These are also ideas that are echoed in the propaganda spread around the Muslim world by Iran and its terror proxies. While the modern version of these maniacal ideas is often cloaked in the language of human rights, it is still hate speech untethered from the truth.

The popularity of anti-Zionist and anti-Jewish canards can be explained in a variety of ways. But the main reason is that it offers, as it always has throughout history, the dissatisfied a scapegoat that can be blamed for their troubles. And it gives people a permission slip to engage in the oldest of hatreds while still being able to pretend that they are decent persons.

That’s why the transition from time spent in the real as opposed to the fictional Israel back to immersion in popular discourse about it in the United States is enough to give you whiplash.

The truth about hopes for peace

It’s always been a given that visits from the Diaspora have, to some extent, been impacted by the long siege inflicted by its enemies. The impact of wars and nonstop terror has brought endless tragedy and grief to the Israeli people. And the conflict has, at times, fractured its society over the years.

The evidence of the impact of the war started by the barbaric Palestinian-Arab atrocities committed on Oct. 7, 2023, can be seen in the ruins of the communities in the south attacked on that awful day. It’s also seen in the nearly empty towns of the north that have been made unlivable by constant rocket fire from Hezbollah terrorists in Lebanon.

Israelis disagree about a great many things and air their frustrations with each other with the kind of venom that is often hard to stomach. But life in the Jewish state, even at its most divisive and worst, bears no resemblance to its largely fictional portrayal in the Western press and on social media.

What those who are subjected to relentless propaganda about genocide, especially young people who not only haven’t been to Israel but who get their world news dictated by the algorithms of their TikTok feeds, know nothing of life in this part of the Middle East.

A dream palace of hate

If they were to walk its streets and talk to its people, they’d see no evidence of genocidal culture or apartheid. Instead, they would come to understand that life in the one Jewish state on the planet is lively and democratic—and anything but fascistic, let alone dedicated to the indiscriminate killing of Arab children. If they were to speak, as I have, to soldiers going into battle in Gaza and Lebanon, as well as those who have just left it, they would be acquainted with the fact that decent people are fighting to defend their homes and families against forces actively trying to achieve the genocide of the Jewish people.

And if they took a deep dive into the culture of the Palestinians, they’d realize that these much-lauded victims don’t wish for two separate states or the chance to live in peace with their Jewish neighbors. Instead, they would discover that the national identity of these darlings of the international press is inextricably tied to their goal of eradicating the Jewish presence in the ancient homeland of the Jews.

The war to destroy Israel has become the “dream palace,” as the late Lebanese scholar Fouad Ajami called it, of Arab and Muslim fantasies in which the Jews are the scapegoats for their problems. It now plays the same role for disgruntled Westerners who mindlessly mouth the anti-Zionism propaganda cooked up by Soviet disinformation specialists in the 1960s and ’70s without knowing its source.

These lies have not only been mainstreamed by much of the corporate media. They are also part of the indoctrination of students in an education system dominated by progressives whose toxic theories about race falsely define Israelis and Jews as “white” oppressors. That is a tragedy. And because of that, Israel and its friends need to be more focused on this threat and to get smarter in the ways they combat these falsehoods in places where young Americans pick them up.

Still, the starting point for any honest discussion is that the living, breathing country that is Israel is a place that in no way resembles the evil state that is the subject of so much rhetoric and political exploitation in the United States. We can debate endlessly about how best to make this point in the press and on social-media platforms. But it is best understood by spending some time in the actual Jewish state. It’s a shame that more people, including leftist Jews, don’t climb out of their dream palaces and explore the reality on the ground that is Israel.


Jonathan S. Tobin is editor-in-chief of the Jewish News Syndicate, a senior contributor for The Federalist, a columnist for Newsweek and a contributor to many other publications. He covers the American political scene, foreign policy, the U.S.-Israel relationship, Middle East diplomacy, the Jewish world and the arts. He hosts the JNS “Think Twice” podcast, both the weekly video program and the “Jonathan Tobin Daily” program, which are available on all major audio platforms and YouTube. Previously, he was executive editor, then senior online editor and chief political blogger, for Commentary magazine. Before that, he was editor-in-chief of The Jewish Exponent in Philadelphia and editor of the Connecticut Jewish Ledger. He has won more than 60 awards for commentary, art criticism and other writing. He appears regularly on television, commenting on politics and foreign policy. Born in New York City, he studied history at Columbia University.


Zawartość publikowanych artykułów i materiałów nie reprezentuje poglądów ani opinii Reunion’68,
ani też webmastera Blogu Reunion’68, chyba ze jest to wyraźnie zaznaczone.
Twoje uwagi, linki, własne artykuły lub wiadomości prześlij na adres:
webmaster@reunion68.com