Connect with us

RSS

If Israel Ceases, Will Hamas Fire? Remember That a ‘Ceasefire’ Existed on October 6, 2023

An aerial view shows the bodies of victims of an attack following a mass infiltration by Hamas gunmen from the Gaza Strip lying on the ground in Kibbutz Kfar Aza, in southern Israel, Oct. 10, 2023. Photo: REUTERS/Ilan Rosenberg

Over the last few weeks, a pattern has emerged in the media coverage of a possible deal being ironed out to end hostilities between Israel and Hamas. Israel is being frequently condemned as the primary obstacle to a ceasefire being implemented (See here, here, here, here, and here).

But what’s never noted is that, for one thing, the October 7, 2023, Hamas invasion of Israel occurred during a ceasefire.

More broadly, Israel and Hamas have agreed to over a dozen ceasefire agreements in the past. They were all violated by Hamas.

Also missing from the reportage is the fact that Hamas has vowed to carry out similar assaults repeatedly in the future with the goal of eliminating Israel.

Such crucial background information could at least partly explain the Israeli government’s serious reservations about agreeing to yet another ceasefire with Gaza’s iron-fisted rulers.

Yet because most casual news consumers are not being made aware of Hamas’ long history of ceasefire violations, they are likely to think that the side that is pushing for a ceasefire today supports peace (Hamas), while the side that is opposed to a ceasefire is only interested in making war (Israel).

Whitewashing Hamas’ Genocidal Goals

This is a quote from a January 6, 2025, article in The Guardian, titled, “Reports of optimism about Gaza ceasefire and hostage release deal“:

Despite the latest talks, Israel has stepped up airstrikes on the Palestinian territory that killed at least 100 people over the weekend.

This piece and others depicting Israel as ceasefire obstructionists do mention the October 7 attacks, but they don’t describe Hamas’ motivations and goals. Instead, Hamas is regularly depicted as a rational, quasi-political organization that happens to include a military wing, and wants Israel to leave the Gaza Strip for no other reason than to be able to finally establish an independent Palestinian state.

As such, Israel’s perceived intransigence to a negotiated settlement is derided as counterproductive to the cause of peace.

In fact, Hamas has no interest in living side by side with Israel. From its founding, the terrorist outfit has been openly dedicated to the destruction of the Jewish State through jihad. Hamas states outright that it does not accept Israel’s right to exist, and pays lip service to the establishment of a Palestinian state as a mere temporary measure.

And while you’ll never see the words religious, or Jihadist used by top-tier media companies to describe Hamas, the organization’s entire raison d’etre is shaped by a fundamentalist, apocalyptic interpretation of Islam.

The below quote is from the Hamas Charter, or Covenant of the Islamic Resistance Movement:

The Islamic Resistance Movement is a distinguished Palestinian movement, whose allegiance is to Allah, and whose way of life is Islam. It strives to raise the banner of Allah over every inch of Palestine.

Hamas updated its founding charter in 2017 with softer, more conciliatory language.
However, its actions since then — most notably the massacre perpetrated on October 7, 2023 — prove without doubt that Hamas remains committed to two long-term goals: the end of the Jewish State, and the creation of an Islamic state from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea.

Media Memory-holes All Previous Israel-Hamas Ceasefires

It’s nothing short of amazing, considering the widespread coverage of developments related to a prospective ceasefire deal, that no mention is made of the many previous attempts at a cessation of hostilities between Israel and Hamas. That’s because they all failed.

This is why history matters.

There is something appealing about a ceasefire in Gaza — especially in light of the hostage situation and suffering endured by Gazans who just happen to be ruled by a genocidal terrorist group.

But it would be foolhardy to ignore the fact that there is a long history of Hamas breaking ceasefire agreements.

Hamas has used Iranian support to launch several wars against Israel from its base in Gaza. So, to protect millions of Israeli citizens, the Jewish State was forced each time to respond militarily, including 2008’s Operation Cast Lead, 2012’s Operation Pillar of Defense, 2014’s Operation Protective Edge, and 2021’s Operation Guardian of the Walls.

And, of course, by committing the October 7, 2023 attacks, Hamas violated a previous ceasefire with Israel by launching thousands of rockets toward Israeli population centers, infiltrating the country, murdering Israelis, taking hostages, and using their own people as human shields.

Media Stifling Public Debate

One of journalism’s key functions is to help create forums for public debate. By not providing their readers with important background information about previous ceasefire attempts, and Hamas’ oft-stated goals that could be facilitated by another ceasefire, the world’s leading news publications are preventing a robust discourse on the issue from taking place.

Inside of Israel, that debate began on October 7. Reasonable men and women have divergent opinions as to the efficacy of a ceasefire deal. It’s the right of every Israeli citizen living in a democratic society to weigh in on this monumentally important topic.

Because they are well-informed, Israelis who support a ceasefire policy are also aware — from knowing about the previous ceasefires that went wrong — of the heavy price their country may well have to pay.

By not contributing to an honest public debate, news outlets around the world are effectively picking sides. That’s not good for journalism. And that’s not good for any democratic society that relies on an informed citizenry to survive.

Gidon Ben-Zvi, former Jerusalem Correspondent for The Algemeiner, is an accomplished writer who left Hollywood for Jerusalem in 2009. He and his wife are raising their four children to speak fluent English – with an Israeli accent. Ben-Zvi’s work has appeared in The Jerusalem Post, The Times of Israel, The Algemeiner, American Thinker, The Jewish Journal, Israel Hayom, and United with Israel. Ben-Zvi blogs at Jerusalem State of Mind (jsmstateofmind.com).  He is a contributor to HonestReporting, a Jerusalem-based media watchdog with a focus on antisemitism and anti-Israel bias — where a version of this article first appeared.

The post If Israel Ceases, Will Hamas Fire? Remember That a ‘Ceasefire’ Existed on October 6, 2023 first appeared on Algemeiner.com.

Post Views: 404
Related Topics:
Continue Reading

RSS

Charlie Kirk Sought to Encourage Debate — His Murder Must Not Stop It

Charlie Kirk speaking at the inauguration of Donald Trump in January 2025. Photo: Brian Snyder via Reuters Connect

I first became familiar with Charlie Kirk after October 7, 2023, when my TikTok algorithm began showing me videos of him fiercely, and quite effectively, debating students on college campuses, often those in keffiyehs and with purple hair.

Thus began my fascination with what I soon learned was a man who was dedicating his life to debating and promoting what he believed in.

Charlie Kirk was the face of the young Republican movement, respected even by some Democrats. He had a promising future ahead of him. As Ben Shapiro wrote: “That kid is going to be the head of the Republican National Convention one day.”

Kirk dedicated his life to debate. To disagreement. To hearing the other side and persuading with facts and truth. And this, tragically, cost him his life. His assassination represents the meager and devastating state of the West, a state we have slowly, almost willingly, been accepting for years now.

There is a deep intolerance for differences. People do not want to be persuaded. They do not want to consider another perspective. Instead, they condemn what they believe is wrong, clinging to black-and-white narratives, even when an entire gray area holds the broader picture. They turn their heads away from nuance. Kirk aimed to change that. He devoted his life to it, fully aware of the risks.

As Adam Rubenstein wisely wrote for The Free Press: “Kirk was not naïve. In the video after he is shot, you can see a security team of at least half a dozen bodyguards surround him and spirit him away. Like anyone speaking their mind in public these days, he knew there was a risk.”

Kirk’s assassination signifies a low point for this country — and another attack on free speech. It was an assassination of dialogue, of diplomacy, of the ability to disagree without destruction. And perhaps the most bitter irony is that it all happened on a college campus, an environment that should foster growth mindsets and open-mindedness.

This attack was not only an attack on Charlie Kirk. It was an attack on freedom of thought and expression. And while it succeeded in killing the bright and young 31-year-old so many of us admired, I hope that is a rallying call to protect the broader freedom of speech we still enjoy — at least in part — in this country.

Alma Bengio is Chief Growth Officer at The Algemeiner Journal and founder and writer for @lets.talk.conflict

Post Views: 4
Continue Reading

RSS

Jews Are Indigenous to the Land of Israel — and Everyone Should Know It

The Western Wall and Temple Mount in Jerusalem. Photo: Wikimedia Commons.

Few words in modern political discourse carry as much distortion as “Palestine.” Today, the term is wielded not as history but as a weapon — designed to delegitimize the Jewish State and recast Jews as foreign colonizers in their own homeland.

Take away the propaganda, however, and one unshakable truth remains: the Jewish people are the indigenous nation of the Land of Israel. The Arab claim to “Palestinian indigeneity” simply does not line up with history.

The Jewish people trace their roots back over 3,000 years to the patriarchs Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, who lived in the land of Canaan — later Israel. By the time of King David, Jerusalem was the capital of a united monarchy, and Solomon’s Temple stood as the spiritual and political center of Jewish life. Even after the Babylonian exile, Jews returned, rebuilt, and re-established their national life in Judea.

Despite invasions, destruction, and exile, Jews never abandoned their homeland. They remained in Jerusalem, Galilee, Hebron, Safed, and along the coast. Their prayers, rituals, and festivals kept the bond to Zion alive. This is not the story of outsiders — it is the story of the land’s first and most enduring nation.

Rome tried to sever that bond by force. After the Bar Kokhba revolt in the second century, Emperor Hadrian renamed Judea as Syria Palaestina , borrowing the name of the long-vanished Philistines, and turned Jerusalem into Aelia Capitolina. It was an act of erasure, meant to punish the Jews by striking even their name from the map.

But the attempt failed. Jews continued to live, pray, and return to their ancestral soil. A new label could not undo thousands of years of rootedness.

The Arab story is very different; their origins lie in the Arabian Peninsula. The earliest records available to us describe nomadic tribes in Arabia and the Syrian desert. Their cultural centers were Mecca, Medina, Yemen, and Petra. It was only in the 7th century, with the rise of Islam, that Arab armies exploded out of Arabia and conquered the region. By 636 CE, they had invaded Byzantine Judea; within a century they ruled from Spain to Persia. Their presence in Judea was the result of conquest, not continuity.

For over a thousand years, under successive empires — Umayyad, Abbasid, Crusader, Mamluk, Ottoman, and finally British — the local Arab population never called itself “Palestinian.” They identified as Arabs, Muslims, Christians, or by their city and clan. In fact, during the British Mandate, the word Palestinian referred almost exclusively to Jews: the Palestine Post was a Jewish newspaper, the Palestine Symphony Orchestra was Jewish, and the Palestine Brigade that fought in World War II was Jewish.

Many Arabs in the region rejected the label, insisting instead that they were part of greater Syria or the wider Arab nation.

Only in the mid-20th century, particularly under Yasser Arafat and the PLO, did a separate “Palestinian” identity emerge. It was born not from centuries of shared history but from a political need: to create a narrative that could challenge Jewish nationhood and delegitimize Israel. It was, and remains, a tool of war by other means.

This is the historical bottom line: Jews are the only people with an unbroken, 3,000 year bond to the Land of Israel. The name Palestine was a Roman punishment, not an Arab heritage. Arabs arrived in the 7th century as conquerors from Arabia. The idea of a Palestinian people is a modern invention, forged in the 20th century as part of a political campaign against the Jewish State.

Israel is not a colonial project. It is the restoration of an ancient nation to its ancestral homeland. Jews are not foreigners in Judea; they are Judea’s people. By every measure — historical, cultural, and even genetic — the Jewish nation’s claim is authentic, continuous, and undeniable.

Sabine Sterk is the CEO of Time To Stand Up For Israel.

Post Views: 2
Continue Reading

RSS

Israel Attacked Terrorists in Qatar — and the Media Attacked Israel

Vehicles stop at a red traffic light, a day after an Israeli attack on Hamas leaders, in Doha, Qatar, Sept. 10, 2025. Photo: REUTERS/Ibraheem Abu Mustafa

On Tuesday, September 9, Israel targeted those who sought its destruction and planned the barbaric October 7, 2023 massacre.

Israel launched the daring attack on the Hamas leadership in their Qatari safe haven, after their ongoing refusal to agree to a Gaza ceasefire deal and in the aftermath of a deadly terror attack in Jerusalem, which Hamas claimed responsibility for.

But the media still shilled for Hamas by making Israel look like a rogue state attacking a key diplomatic player and destroying any chance for peace.

News outlets used three methods to achieve this goal:

  • Direct accusations
  • Subtle differentiation between a “legitimate” Hamas political wing and its military one
  • The glorification of Qatar as a business hub rather than a terrorist hub

The Independent and The Washington Post shamelessly employed headlines that portrayed Israel as the regional bully and an aggressor randomly attacking other Middle East countries in a bid for regional domination.

Sky News even blamed Israel for a previous attack on Qatar, although the Iranian regime carried it out:

After we publicly highlighted it, Sky quietly rectified its faux pas with no acknowledgment of the correction.

Meanwhile, the Economist was worried that attacking the very terrorists who ordered the mass murder of Jews on Oct. 7 was “a bridge too far” and that Israel had “crossed a line:”

And the BBC’s security correspondent called Israel’s surprising act of self defense “a campaign of score settling:”

NPR and The Wall Street Journal took the subtle approach of creating a false dichotomy between Hamas’ military and political wings — although the entire group is internationally designated as a terror organization.

This naive approach depicted the targeted Hamas leaders as legitimate officials simply because they carried pens and wore suits instead of AK-47s and green headbands.

They may not have got their hands dirty but this does not absolve them from orchestrating numerous bloody terror attacks, including the slaughter and kidnapping of thousands of people in Israel on October 7, 2023.

Finally, many outlets decried the violation of Qatar’s sovereignty, painting it as a peace-seeking state focused on business and regional cooperation, rather than a patron of terrorists.

The New York Times went as far as calling Qatar “a safe haven for business and tourism in a volatile region,” while it was, in fact, a safe haven for the region’s top jihadists.

How can this media distortion be explained? Why is a facade of legitimacy conferred upon terrorists in suits?

There are only two possible answers: Either the media believe the facade the terrorists want to sell, or they are carrying out an anti-Israel agenda.

Both options are detrimental to professional journalism, as well as to basic human ethics.

The author is a contributor to HonestReporting, a Jerusalem-based media watchdog with a focus on antisemitism and anti-Israel bias — where a version of this article first appeared.

Post Views: 5
Continue Reading

Copyright © 2017 - 2023 Jewish Post & News