Uncategorized
‘Eichmann With a Kippah’? The Immorality Behind the Genocide Libel
Students accusing Israel of genocide at Harvard University in Cambridge, Massachusetts, US, Nov. 16, 2023. Photo: REUTERS/Brian Snyder
For the past few weeks, I’ve been regularly receiving hate messages calling me “Eichmann with a kippah.” The phrase appears in angry screeds from anonymous accounts — often by people apparently pretending to be Jewish women “ashamed” of me for defending Israel. The script never changes: Israel is Nazi Germany, Zionists are fascists, and the IDF is committing “genocide.”
The vocabulary may sound new. The hatred is not. This moral inversion — turning descendants of refugees and survivors of pogroms and genocides into the heirs of their murderers — is one of antisemitism’s oldest tricks, refitted for modern politics.
The “Genocide” Libel Long Predates Oct. 7
The claim that Israel is committing “genocide” didn’t arise after Oct. 7, 2023. Nor did it begin during the Gaza wars of 2008 or 2014. It’s decades old — part of a propaganda campaign that long preceded the current war.
Within hours of Hamas’ Oct. 7 massacre, and before Israel fired a single retaliatory shot, protesters from London to Los Angeles were already chanting “genocide.” The accusation was preloaded, not provoked — waiting to be forced into whatever followed.
Its roots trace back to the 1970s, when Soviet and Arab League propaganda began branding Israel “the new Nazis.” State-controlled media in Moscow, Cairo, and Damascus weaponized Holocaust imagery against the Jewish State, reframing Jewish survival as Jewish supremacy.
By the 1980s, “Zionist genocide” was a standard slogan — even as the Palestinian population in Gaza and Judea and Samaria grew faster than almost any on Earth.
The population growth numbers alone should have ended the claim. But this was never about demography or evidence. It was about demonology — portraying Jewish sovereignty itself as a moral offense.
Why “Israel = Nazis” Is Antisemitic
The International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) working definition of antisemitism explicitly lists “drawing comparisons between contemporary Israeli policy and that of the Nazis” as antisemitic. That’s not censorship — it’s moral lucidity.
Equating Israel with Nazi Germany desecrates Jewish memory while denying Jewish self-defense. It turns the Holocaust into a political weapon, stripping Jews of moral legitimacy and redefining their sovereignty and survival as crimes.
That’s why these comparisons surge whenever Israel fights back. They aren’t moral critiques but psychological projections — attempts to turn collective Jewish self-defense into the personification of evil.
The “Appeal to Authority” Fallacy
When challenged, those spreading the “genocide” libel typically resort to what Aristotle first called the appeal to authority fallacy. They list various academics and NGOs — the International Association of Genocide Scholars, UN commissions, and other self-declared arbiters — as if citation equals truth.
None of these are credible judicial bodies. Many are activist-driven and politically biased. The UN Human Rights Council has condemned Israel more than all other nations combined, including Iran, China, and North Korea. Even the highly politicized International Court of Justice has made no finding of genocide — only procedural rulings allowing South Africa’s case to proceed.
And even those arguments collapse under scrutiny. Before Oct. 7, the “genocide” claim was absurd: Israel had withdrawn from Gaza in 2005, leaving it under Palestinian rule, even as Gaza’s population doubled.
After Oct. 7, the same activists rebranded Hamas’ war — launched with barbaric mass murder and hostage-taking — as “Israeli genocide.” They ignored the central element of genocide: intent.
Israel’s actions show the opposite intent — an intent to avoid civilian casualties. It issues evacuation warnings, opens humanitarian corridors, coordinates aid deliveries, and risks soldiers’ lives in ground operations to spare noncombatants. No nation in history accused of genocide has ever done those things.
The Ethical Reality
If genocide requires intent to destroy a people, Hamas and its patron, Iran, fit that definition far better than Israel ever could.
Hamas’ charter calls for the extermination of Jews everywhere. Its leaders boasted that Oct. 7 was “only the beginning” and vowed to “repeat it again and again.”
Iran’s Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Khamenei, has long declared that Israel must be “wiped off the map” while arming Hamas, Hezbollah, and the Houthis — all sworn to Israel’s annihilation.
In Gaza, Hamas hides in hospitals and schools, fires rockets from residential areas, and turns its own civilians into human shields. It even has uniforms for parades but not for combat — deliberately fighting in civilian clothes to endanger its own population. Hamas has built more than 700 kilometers of tunnels, not to protect civilians, but to shelter its commanders and stockpile weapons. When Gazans try to flee to Israeli-designated safe zones, Hamas often blocks or attacks them to increase civilian death tolls.
This is not a liberation movement. It is a fascist death cult that thrives on civilian suffering. Every Palestinian death becomes Hamas propaganda.
Israel, by contrast, spends billions on defense — bomb shelters, Iron Dome, and precision weaponry — yet is condemned as genocidal for refusing to surrender to the openly genocidal forces Iran has armed and financed around it.
If the genocide label were applied honestly, it would have been used for Syria, where over half a million non-Alawites were slaughtered, or in Yemen, Sudan, and Ethiopia, where famine and ethnic killings reach truly genocidal levels. But the same NGOs and academics most vocal about “Israel’s genocide” are largely silent in the face of those atrocities. Their outrage isn’t proportional to suffering — it’s proportional to Jewish sovereignty.
The Psychological Comfort of the Lie
The “genocide” accusation persists because it serves two needs.
First, it comforts those who crave moral simplicity. Admitting that Hamas and Iran are fascist aggressors would mean acknowledging that evil exists outside the West — and that Jews are its target once again.
Second, it soothes those who resent Israel’s existence — who hate that Jews took “Never Again” seriously and built a thriving democratic state to ensure it. The libel restores the moral hierarchy they prefer: Jews as either evil or as victims, but never as defenders.
Calling Israel “Nazi-like” lets these moral poseurs feel righteous without learning anything. It turns ignorance into empathy and hashtags into heroism.
The Continuity of Antisemitic Tropes
From “Christ-killers” to “baby-killers,” from “poisoners of wells” to “genocide perpetrators,” the accusation never truly changes — only the vocabulary does.
Now a new smear circulates alongside “genocide”: “denier.” Anyone who defends Israel or questions Hamas’ death tolls is labeled a “genocide denier,” as if doubting Hamas propaganda were equivalent to denying the Holocaust. This isn’t moral reasoning. It’s moral sadism.
What we’re witnessing isn’t a policy debate but a war over moral reality. One side believes Jewish sovereignty and self-defense are rights; the other believes their crimes.
The Hatred That Never Dies
Those accusing Israel of “genocide” aren’t defending human rights. They’re heirs to a long tradition of antisemitic inversion — from medieval blood libels to Soviet propaganda — now repackaged as “justice.”
It should go without saying: Israel is not Nazi Germany. It is the living refutation of Nazi Germany — a pluralistic democracy where Jews, Muslims, Christians, and Druze, men and women alike, share full civil rights, and whose army does more to prevent civilian casualties than any military in history.
The “genocide” libel says less about Israel than about those who need to believe it. Because to accept the truth — that Jewish self-defense and sovereignty are not crimes — would mean confronting an ancient hatred they can’t let go of.
And that hatred, history shows, never dies. It just changes its vocabulary.
Micha Danzig is an attorney, former IDF soldier, and former NYPD officer. He writes widely on Israel, antisemitism, and Jewish history and serves on the board of Herut North America.
Uncategorized
Spanish PM Sanchez Says US Invasion of Greenland ‘Would Make Putin Happiest Man on Earth’
Russian President Vladimir Putin welcomes US President Donald Trump’s envoy Steve Witkoff during a meeting in Moscow, Russia, Aug. 6, 2025. Photo: Sputnik/Gavriil Grigorov/Pool via REUTERS
Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez said a US invasion of Greenland “would make Putin the happiest man on earth” in a newspaper interview published on Sunday.
Sanchez said any military action by the US against Denmark’s vast Arctic island would damage NATO and legitimize the invasion of Ukraine by Russia.
“If we focus on Greenland, I have to say that a US invasion of that territory would make Vladimir Putin the happiest man in the world. Why? Because it would legitimize his attempted invasion of Ukraine,” he said in an interview in La Vanguardia newspaper.
“If the United States were to use force, it would be the death knell for NATO. Putin would be doubly happy.”
President Donald Trump on Saturday appeared to change tack over Greenland by vowing to implement a wave of increasing tariffs on European allies until the United States is allowed to buy Greenland.
In a post on Truth Social, Trump said additional 10 percent import tariffs would take effect on February 1 on goods from Denmark, Norway, Sweden, France, Germany, the Netherlands, Finland and Great Britain — all already subject to tariffs imposed by Trump.
Those tariffs would increase to 25 percent on June 1 and would continue until a deal was reached for the US to purchase Greenland, Trump wrote.
Trump has repeatedly insisted he will settle for nothing less than ownership of Greenland, an autonomous territory of Denmark. Leaders of both Denmark and Greenland have insisted the island is not for sale and does not want to be part of the United States.
Uncategorized
Damascus and Kurdish Forces Agree to Immediate Ceasefire
Syria’s interim President Ahmed al-Sharaa speaks during a Ministerial formation of the government of the Syrian Arab Republic, in Damascus, Syria, March 29, 2025. Photo: REUTERS/Khalil Ashawi
i24 News – Syrian state media reported on Sunday that the Syrian government and the US-backed Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) have reached an immediate ceasefire after days of clashes in Kurdish-held areas of the northeast.
The agreement, announced electronically by Damascus, marks a major shift in Syria’s ongoing efforts to reassert control over its Kurdish-majority regions.
According to the Syrian presidency, the deal, signed by President Ahmed al-Sharaa and SDF commander Mazloum Abdi, calls for a full halt to combat operations on all fronts, the withdrawal of SDF-affiliated forces to the east of the Euphrates, and the integration of SDF fighters into Syria’s defense and interior ministries on an individual basis.
The agreement also stipulates that the Syrian government will assume military and administrative control over Deir al-Zor and Raqqa, take over all oil and gas fields, and assume responsibility for prisons and camps holding ISIS members and their families. The SDF has committed to evacuating all non-Syrian PKK-affiliated personnel from the country.
“All lingering files with the SDF will be resolved,” Sharaa said, adding that he is scheduled to meet Abdi on Monday to continue discussions. The ceasefire is intended to open safe corridors for civilians to return to their areas and allow state institutions to resume their duties.
US Special Envoy Tom Barrack praised the agreement, describing it as a “pivotal inflection point” that brings former adversaries together and advances Syria toward national unity. Barrack noted that the deal facilitates the continued fight against ISIS while integrating Kurdish forces into the broader Syrian state.
The ceasefire comes after days of heavy fighting in northeastern Syria, highlighting both the fragility and potential of Damascus’ reconciliation efforts with Kurdish forces.
Uncategorized
World Markets Jolted, Euro Softens, as Trump Vows Tariffs on Europe over Greenland
A person walks along a street on the day of the meeting between top US officials and the foreign ministers of Denmark and Greenland, in Nuuk, Greenland, January 14, 2026. Photo: REUTERS/Marko Djurica/File Photo
Global markets are facing volatility after President Donald Trump vowed to slap tariffs on eight European nations until the US is allowed to buy Greenland, news that pushed the euro to a seven-week low in late Sunday trading.
Trump said he would impose an additional 10 percent import tariff from February 1 on goods from Denmark, Norway, Sweden, France, Germany, the Netherlands, Finland and Britain, which will rise to 25 percent on June 1 if no deal is reached.
Major European Union states decried the tariff threats over Greenland as blackmail on Sunday. France proposed responding with a range of previously untested economic countermeasures.
As early trade kicked off in Asia-Pacific, the euro fell 0.2 percent to around $1.1572, its lowest since November. Sterling also dipped, while the yen firmed against the dollar.
“Hopes that the tariff situation has calmed down for this year have been dashed for now – and we find ourselves in the same situation as last spring,” said Berenberg chief economist Holger Schmieding.
Trump‘s sweeping “Liberation Day” tariffs in April 2025 sent shockwaves through markets. Investors then largely looked past US trade threats in the second half of the year, viewing them as noise and responding with relief as Trump made deals with Britain, the EU and others.
While that lull might be over, market moves on Monday could be dampened by the experience that investor sentiment had been more resilient than expected in 2025 and global economic growth stayed on track.
US markets are closed on Monday for Martin Luther King Jr. Day, which means a delayed reaction on Wall Street.
The implications for the dollar were less clear. It remains a safe haven, but could also feel the impact of Washington being at the center of geopolitical ruptures, as it did last April.
Bitcoin, a liquid proxy for risk that is open to trade at the weekend, was steady, last trading at $95,330.
Capital Economics said countries most exposed to increased U.S. tariffs were the UK and Germany, estimating that a 10 percent tariff could reduce GDP in those economies by around 0.1 percent, while a 25 percent tariff could knock 0.2–0.3 percent off output.
European stocks are near record highs. Germany’s DAX and London’s FTSE index are up more than 3 percent this month, outperforming the S&P 500, which is up 1.3 percent.
European defense shares will likely continue to benefit from geopolitical tensions. Defense stocks have jumped almost 15 percent this month, as the US seizure of Venezuela’s Nicolas Maduro fueled concerns about Greenland.
Denmark’s closely managed crown will also likely be in focus. It has weakened, but rate differentials are a major factor and it remains close to the central rate at which it is pegged to the euro, and not far from six-year lows.
“The US-EU trade war is back on,” said Tina Fordham, geopolitical strategist and founder of Fordham Global Foresight.
Trump‘s latest move came as top officials from the EU and South American bloc Mercosur signed a free trade agreement.
HOT SPOTS EVERYWHERE
The dispute over Greenland is just one hot spot.
Trump has also weighed intervening in unrest in Iran, while a threat to indict Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell has reignited concerns about the US central bank’s independence.
Against this backdrop, safe-haven gold remained near record highs.
Given Trump’s recent Fed attacks, an escalation with Europe could pile pressure on the dollar if it adds to worries that US policy credibility is becoming critically impaired, said Peel Hunt chief economist Kallum Pickering.
“(This) could be amplified by a desire, especially among Europeans, to repatriate capital and shun US assets, which may also pose downside risks to lofty US tech valuations,” he added.
The World Economic Forum’s annual risk perception survey, released before its annual meeting in Davos next week, which will be attended by Trump, identified economic confrontation between nations as the number one concern replacing armed conflict.
A source close to French President Emmanuel Macron said he was pushing for activation of the “Anti-Coercion Instrument,” which could limit access to public tenders, investments or banking activity or restrict trade in services, in which the US has a surplus with the bloc, including digital services.
“With the US net international investment position at record negative extremes, the mutual inter-dependence of European-US financial markets has never been higher,” said Deutsche Bank’s global head of FX research George Saravelos in a note.
“It is a weaponization of capital rather than trade flows that would by far be the most disruptive to markets.”
