RSS
John Oliver Misses the Mark on Israel and Hamas
More than a month into Israel’s defensive war against Hamas, British comedian John Oliver recently dedicated a significant amount of his weekly HBO show Last Week Tonight to discussing current events in both Israel and Gaza.
However, while Oliver’s analysis is presented as balanced and insightful, it falls short in several areas.
In particular, Oliver’s depiction of Hamas, his portrayal of Israeli actions in Gaza both before and during the war, and his characterization of the discourse surrounding a ceasefire are all lacking in both context and nuance.
John Oliver’s Misunderstanding of Hamas
From the depiction of Hamas throughout his monologue, it is clear that John Oliver and the writers at Last Week Tonight have a very shallow understanding of what the Palestinian terror group is and what it stands for.
Not once during the 32-minute-long segment does Oliver mention the contents of Hamas’ 1988 founding charter or the terror group’s explicitly stated raison d’etre: The ultimate destruction of the Jewish state.
The farthest that Oliver will go is to inform his audience that Hamas was opposed to the Oslo peace process and tried to derail it through bus bombings. However, he never identifies the genocidal ideology that underpinned Hamas’ “resistance” to Israel.
Instead, Oliver claims that historically and prior to the 2006 Palestinian election (where Hamas ultimately won a majority of seats), Hamas ran on an anti-corruption platform and that it had gone “out of its way to present itself as more moderate back then.”
A narrative is thus created of Hamas as something that started out as a moderate anti-corruption political party, as opposed to the internationally-recognized terror group that it truly is.
Oliver’s source for asserting Hamas moderation? None other than an old English-language interview with Hamas leader Ghazi Hamad, where he claims that Hamas is a moderate and open-minded organization that believes in democracy and “political pluralization.”
As any analyst will tell you, Hamas has a history of moderating its tone in English while simultaneously engaging in extremist rhetoric in Arabic. All a researcher at HBO had to do was search for a Hamas election rally in 2005/2006 (such as this one, where Ismail Haniyeh says no to recognizing Israel or negotiating with it) to know that, to Palestinian voters, Hamas did not moderate its tone in the lead up to the 2006 election.
By presenting Hamas through Western framing, Oliver makes such outrageous statements as implicitly comparing Hamas to the current Israeli government (and regardless of one’s political beliefs, there is no comparison between the Palestinian terror group and the current coalition under Benjamin Netanyahu), and by claiming that “as prospects for peace collapsed, Hamas seems to be vindicated in its messaging.”
John Oliver’s Lop-Sided Look at Israel’s Activities in Gaza
Another area where John Oliver’s analysis misses the mark is in his depiction of Israel’s activities in Gaza both before and during the war.
Throughout the piece, Oliver describes Israel’s defensive war against Hamas as “the relentless bombings of civilians,” “collective punishment” (which he deems to be a “war crime”), and “horrifying.”
He even goes so far as to describe Israel’s deliberate targeting of Hamas infrastructure as “a barrage of Israeli rockets,” implicitly comparing it to Hamas’ indiscriminate bombing of Israeli civilian areas.
While Oliver is openly critical of Israel’s conduct of the war in Gaza, he is conspicuously silent about Hamas’ embedding of its terror infrastructure within densely populated civilian areas, about Israel’s opening of a humanitarian corridor to the south for Palestinians fleeing the fighting, and about the foreign aid that Israel has allowed to enter the embattled strip as it continues to uproot Hamas.
John Oliver’s portrayal of Israel’s relationship with Gaza prior to the war also lacks proper context and nuance.
Oliver claims that “Israel’s approach to Gaza has been truly punishing. Fencing people in, limiting exits, and trapping them inside what has been called ‘an open-air prison’ by many human rights organizations. Life under a blockade there has been hard for a long time even when there aren’t bombs flying.”
He then goes on to show a clip of a 2019 PBS report that discusses water accessibility, public hygiene, electricity, and how many Gazans allegedly have “a sense of having little to lose.”
However, once again, this is not the full picture of Israel’s relationship to Gaza.
Oliver conveniently disregards the following salient facts:
Both Israel and Egypt enacted a blockade of Gaza in order to impede Hamas’ importation of weaponry.
Hamas misused foreign aid money earmarked for Gaza’s infrastructure in order to develop its terror infrastructure.
Hamas negligence led to the majority of Gaza’s water being non-drinkable.
Israel provided Gaza with almost 10% of its water needs and 50% of its electricity needs before October 7.
Prior to October 7, Israel had granted work permits to over 15,000 Gazans.
John Oliver Calls for a Ceasefire
Near the end of this piece, John Oliver calls for a ceasefire, saying that it is the “first step” to a solution for “peace in the Middle East.”
Oliver concedes that there is the danger of Hamas using a ceasefire to regroup but he claims that danger will exist whenever the war ends and the continuation of the war will only create more extremists in Gaza.
However, Oliver’s analysis falls short in that it places the onus entirely on Israel for implementing a ceasefire, it calls for a ceasefire without preconditions (such as the release of the hostages); takes for granted that Hamas will continue to rule after the war (as opposed to Israel’s stated goal of uprooting Hamas); and doesn’t take into account that extremists do not always arise out of the dust of an intense bombardment (such as the destruction of the Nazi regime and the uprooting of Imperial Japan).
Further, in supporting his call for a ceasefire, Oliver references the numerous ceasefire rallies that have taken place around the world.
However, these rallies are hardly the moral and humanitarian voices that Oliver portrays them as. Many of these protests have made little to no mention of Hamas’ continual attacks against Israel, have placed the entire onus for the conflict on Israel’s shoulders, have been marred by antisemitism and violence, and have even been attended by those blatantly supporting Hamas.
As Within Our Lifetime, one of the groups organizing these rallies, expressed in a recent advertisement, it starts with a ceasefire and ends with “cease Zionism,” effectively calling for the dismantling of the Jewish state.
The post John Oliver Misses the Mark on Israel and Hamas first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
As Gaza War Continues, Hamas Calls for Global Protests While Israel Marks Breakthroughs in Medical Innovation
A pro-Hamas march in London, United Kingdom, Feb. 17, 2024. Photo: Chrissa Giannakoudi via Reuters Connect
As the Palestinian terrorist group Hamas calls for global protests amid stalled Gaza ceasefire talks, Israel has broken new ground despite the ongoing conflict, achieving a major medical breakthrough in synthetic human kidney development.
The contrast illustrates a stark contrast between the priorities of Hamas, an international designated terrorist group that has ruled Gaza for nearly two decades, and Israel, the lone democracy in the Middle East that has long been a leader in tech and medical innovation.
On Wednesday, Hamas urged worldwide protests in support of Palestinians, calling on the international community “to denounce Israel’s genocidal war and starvation policy in Gaza.”
“We call for continuing and escalating the popular pressure in all cities and squares on Friday, Saturday, and Sunday … through rallies, demonstrations and sit-ins outside the embassies of the Israeli regime and its allies, particularly in the US,” the statement read.
The Palestinian terrorist group also called to expose what it described as “the terrorism of the Zio-Nazi occupation against defenseless civilians.”
Hamas’s latest move against Israel comes amid stalled indirect negotiations over a proposed 60-day ceasefire and hostage release deal, which collapsed last month after the group vowed it would not disarm unless an independent Palestinian state is established — rejecting a key Israeli demand to end the war in Gaza.
In its statement, Hamas demanded the opening of all border crossings to allow immediate aid into the war-torn enclave and urged a global condemnation of “the international community’s inaction on the Israeli crimes.”
Amid mounting international pressure to address the humanitarian crisis in Gaza, Israel announced new measures to facilitate the delivery of aid, including temporary pauses in fighting in certain areas and the creation of protected routes for aid convoys.
Israeli officials have previously accused Hamas of diverting aid for terrorist activities and selling supplies at inflated prices to civilians, while also blaming the United Nations and other foreign organizations for enabling this diversion.
Hamas’s statement also emphasized that the “global resistance movement must continue until Israeli aggression on Gaza ends and the siege on the coastal strip is lifted.”
Meanwhile, as Israel faces escalating hostilities and the heavy toll of war, the Jewish state continues to push the boundaries of innovation and resilience, achieving new medical breakthroughs while confronting ongoing challenges.
In a major medical breakthrough, scientists at Sheba Medical Center and Tel Aviv University have successfully grown a synthetic 3D miniature human kidney in a lab using specialized stem cells derived from kidney tissue — one of the most promising advances in regenerative medicine.
Dr. Dror Harats, chairman of Sheba’s Research Authority, described this achievement as a reflection of Israel’s leading role in global medical innovation.
“Despite growing efforts to isolate Israel from international science, breakthroughs like this prove our impact is both lasting and essential,” he said.
In a landmark study, a team from Sheba’s Safra Children’s Hospital and Tel Aviv University’s Sagol Center for Regenerative Medicine created synthetic kidney organs that matured and remained stable for 34 weeks — the longest-lasting and most refined kidney organoids developed to date.
Nearly a decade ago, the research team became the first to successfully isolate human kidney tissue stem cells — the cells responsible for the organ’s development and growth.
Previous attempts to grow kidneys in a lab using general-purpose stem cells were short-lived, typically lasting only a few weeks and often producing unwanted cell types that compromised research accuracy.
However, this Israeli research team used stem cells taken directly from kidney tissue — cells that naturally develop into kidney parts — allowing them to create a much purer and more stable model with key features found in real kidneys.
This medical breakthrough could have far-reaching implications, redefining the current understanding of kidney diseases and advancing the development of innovative treatments.
Researchers believe the model could help assess how medications impact fetal kidneys during pregnancy and move science closer to repairing or replacing damaged kidney tissue with lab-grown cells.
The discovery came days after researchers from Hebrew University of Jerusalem and international partners discovered a way to boost the immune system’s cancer-fighting ability by reprogramming how T cells, which are white blood cells critical to the immune system, produce energy.
The researchers explained in a study published in the peer-reviewed Nature Communications that disabling a protein known as Ant2 in T cells greatly enhances their effectiveness against tumors.
“By disabling Ant2, we triggered a complete shift in how T cells produce and use energy,” Prof. Michael Berger of Hebrew University’s Faculty of Medicine, who co-led the study with doctorate student Omri Yosef, told the Tazpit Press Service. “This reprogramming made them significantly better at recognizing and killing cancer cells.”
RSS
Netherlands to Push EU to Suspend Israel Trade Deal but Won’t Recognize Palestinian State ‘At This Time’
Netherlands Foreign Affairs Minister Caspar Veldkamp addresses a press conference, in New Delhi on April 1, 2025. Photo: ANI Photo/Sanjay Sharma via Reuters Connect
The Netherlands is spearheading efforts to suspend the European Union-Israel trade agreement amid rising EU criticism of Israel’s actions in Gaza, while simultaneously refusing to recognize a Palestinian state, contrasting with other member states as international pressure mounts.
On Thursday, Dutch Foreign Minister Caspar Veldkamp announced that the Netherlands will push the EU to suspend the trade component of the EU-Israel Association Agreement — a pact governing the EU’s political and economic ties with the Jewish state.
This latest anti-Israel initiative follows a recent EU-commissioned report accusing Israel of committing “indiscriminate attacks … starvation … torture … [and] apartheid” against Palestinians in Gaza during its military campaign against Hamas, an internationally designated terrorist group.
Following calls from a majority of EU member states for a formal investigation, this report built on Belgium’s recent decision to review Israel’s compliance with the trade agreement, a process initiated by the Netherlands and led by EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy Kaja Kallas.
According to the report, “there are indications that Israel would be in breach of its human rights obligations” under the 25-year-old EU-Israel Association Agreement.
While the document acknowledges the reality of violence by Hamas, it states that this issue lies outside its scope — failing to address the Palestinian terrorist group’s role in sparking the current war with its bloody rampage across southern Israel on Oct. 7, 2023.
Israeli officials have slammed the report as factually incorrect and morally flawed, noting that Hamas embeds its military infrastructure within civilian targets and Israel’s army takes extensive precautions to try and avoid civilian casualties.
In a Dutch parliamentary debate on Gaza on Thursday, Veldkamp also announced that the government would not recognize a Palestinian state for now — a position that stands in sharp contrast to the recent moves by several other EU member states to extend recognition.
“The Netherlands is not planning to recognize a Palestinian state at this time,” the Dutch diplomat said.
“This war has ceased to be a just war and is now leading to the erosion of Israel’s own security and identity,” he continued.
This latest decision goes against the position of several EU member states, including France, which has committed to recognizing Palestinian statehood in September.
The United Kingdom has likewise indicated it will do so unless Israel acts to ease the humanitarian crisis in Gaza and agrees to a ceasefire.
For its part, Germany said it was not planning to recognize a Palestinian state in the short term, and Italy argued that recognition must occur simultaneously with the recognition of Israel by the new entity.
Spain, Norway, Ireland, and Slovenia all recognized a Palestinian state last year.
Israel has been facing growing pressure from several EU member states seeking to undermine its defensive campaign against the Palestinian terrorist group Hamas in Gaza.
On Thursday, European Commission Vice President Teresa Ribera strongly condemned Israel’s actions in the war-torn enclave, describing the situation as a “grave violation of human dignity.”
“What we are seeing is a concrete population being targeted, killed and condemned to starve to death,” Ribera told Politico. “If it is not genocide, it looks very much like the definition used to express its meaning.”
Until now, the European Commission has refrained from accusing Israel of genocide, but Ribera’s comments mark one of the strongest European condemnations since the outbreak of the war in Gaza.
She also called on the EU to take decisive action by considering the suspension of its trade agreement with Israel and the implementation of sanctions, while emphasizing that such measures would require unanimous approval from all member states.
RSS
Graduate Student Unions Promoting Antisemitism, Reform Group Says
Students listen to a speech at a protest encampment at Stanford University in Stanford, California US, on April 26, 2024. Photo: Carlos Barria via Reuters Connect.
Higher-education-based unions controlled by United Electrical, Radio, and Machine Workers of America (UE) are rife with antisemitism and anti-Zionist discrimination, according to a new letter imploring the US Congress’s House Committee on Education and the Workforce to address the matter.
“Tracing its roots to communism in the 1930s, the UE is a radical, pro-Hamas labor union that has a long history of antisemitism,” the National Right to Work Foundation (NRTW), one of the US’s leading labor reform groups, wrote on July 30 in a message obtained by The Algemeiner. “The UE openly supports the boycott, divestment, and sanctions (BDS) movement, which is designed to cripple and destroy Israel economically. Today, the UE furthers its antisemitic agenda by unionizing graduate students on college campuses and using its exclusive representation powers to create a hostile environment for Jewish students. The hostile environment includes demanding compulsory dues to fund the UE’s abhorrent activities.”
NRTW went on to describe a litany of alleged injustices to which UE members subject Jewish student-employees in the US’s most prestigious institutions of higher education, from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) to Cornell University. At MIT, the letter said, “union officers” aided a riotous group which illegally occupied a section of campus with a “Gaza Solidarity Encampment,” participating in the demonstration and even denying access to campus buildings. UE members at Stanford University, meanwhile, allegedly denied religious accommodations to Jewish students who requested exemption from union dues over that branch’s supporting the BDS movement. And Cornell University UE was accused of denying religious exemptions in several cases as well and followed up the rejection with an intrusive “questionnaire” which probed Jewish students for “legally-irrelevant information.”
The situation requires federal oversight and intervention, NRTW said, including Congress’s possibly clarifying that student-employees are not traditional employees and are therefore afforded protections under sections of the Civil Rights Act which apply to the campus.
“These continuing patterns of antisemitism are illegal, immoral, and must be stopped,” the letter continued. “We encourage you to do all that is in your power to investigate and help bring an end to the UE and its affiliates’ nonstop harassment and intimidation of Jewish students … The Trump administration can also use tools available to it under Title VI and Title VI of the Civil Rights Act against colleges who work with unions to create a hostile environment for Jewish students.”
July’s letter is not the first time NRTW has publicized alleged antisemitic abuse in unions representing higher education employees.
In 2024, it represented a group of six City University of New York (CUNY) professors, five of whom are Jewish, who sued to be “freed” from CUNY’s Professional Staff Congress (PSC-CUNY) over its passing a resolution during Israel’s May 2021 war with Hamas which declared solidarity with Palestinians and accused the Jewish state of ethnic cleansing, apartheid, and crimes against humanity. The group contested New York State’s “Taylor Law,” which it said chained the professors to the union’s “bargaining unit” and denied their right to freedom of speech and association by forcing them to be represented in negotiations by an organization they claim holds antisemitic views.
That same year, NRTW prevailed in a discrimination suit filed to exempt another cohort of Jewish MIT students from paying dues to the Graduate Student Union (GSU). The students had attempted to resist financially supporting GSU’s anti-Zionism, but the union bosses attempted to coerce their compliance, telling them that “no principles, teachings, or tenets of Judaism prohibit membership in or the payment of dues or fees” to the union.
“All Americans should have a right to protect their money from going to union bosses they don’t support, whether those objections are based on religion, politics, or any other reason,” NRTW said at the time.
Follow Dion J. Pierre @DionJPierre.