RSS
Qatar Can’t Be Allowed to Get Away With Murder After Oct. 7
Over the past few weeks, Qatar has been in the news as a key player in the crisis that erupted following the heinous terrorist massacre perpetrated by Hamas in southern Israel on Oct. 7. It turns out that Qatar actively funds Hamas, hosts Hamas’ political leaders and headquarters in Doha, and is in regular touch with the Hamas leadership in Gaza — all of which resulted in the Qataris acting as mediators for the hostage release negotiations.
But notwithstanding Qatar’s role in helping to get Israeli and international hostages out of Hamas-ruled Gaza — which, remarkably, has already resulted in Qatar being thanked by US President Joe Biden — the question gaining traction in Washington and around the world is this: How exactly has Qatar been allowed to fund terrorists and support terror for so many years while still maintaining diplomatic, economic, and military ties with the West?
The answer will amaze and horrify you in equal measure. This week marked the first anniversary of the start of the 2022 World Cup in Qatar. The FIFA World Cup’s global appeal is vast, drawing billions of viewers. Held every four years, the tournament attracts extensive media coverage, engaging with a huge international audience which includes people who don’t typically follow soccer.
Aside from the TV audiences, millions of soccer fans fly from all over the world to see their country play “the beautiful game” in huge soccer stadiums, and the 2022 World Cup was no exception. A staggering 3.4 million spectators were there to participate in the tournament, and the 172 goals scored over four weeks of games ensured that Qatar 2022 became the highest scoring FIFA World Cup in history.
But, as was revealed before the tournament — and has also emerged in far greater detail since the tournament ended — the details of Qatar’s outlook and behavior vis-à-vis the World Cup paint a sobering picture of this tiny but powerful country — a picture that is marred by allegations of wanton bribery to ensure they were awarded hosting rights, as well as deliberate deception in environmental commitments once they were confirmed as hosts.
In particular, the stark contrast between Qatar’s proclaimed “carbon-neutral” World Cup and the reality of its execution underscores a narrative of calculated misrepresentation. And yet, by and large Qatar has gotten away with its brazen criminality and deceptions. EU officials were allegedly bribed by Qatar, World Cup host rivals were reportedly targeted by “black ops” and hacking operations, and thousands of slaves – yes, slaves! – died in the construction of the soccer stadium complex in Doha.
But in the end, despite concerns about how Qatar became hosts of this international sports behemoth, and regardless of concerns about how it misled the world regarding the event’s staggering environmental footprint, Qatar’s immense wealth has ensured that this corrupt country has got nothing to worry about and is able to navigate the global stage with impunity.
It really is that simple. Qatar’s vast financial resources play a pivotal role in shaping international perceptions of and responses to this criminal, terrorist-sponsoring state. The country’s infiltration of the global economy and strategic funding of NGOs and elite educational institutions has meant that it virtually controls the narrative on multiple fronts, and always to the advantage of evil. Only now, since Oct. 7, is there is a growing discourse around how Qatar’s substantial economic power has been leveraged to gloss over contentious issues. But so far, nothing has changed. This unacceptable situation raises critical questions about the dynamics of power and money in international relations, especially in contexts where significant global interests and reputations are at stake.
The Qatar World Cup saga is an egregious but somewhat innocuous example of the challenges in holding wealthy and powerful nations accountable. But Qatar’s role in funding Hamas — and therefore the Oct. 7 massacre — has brought the role of this bad actor under the spotlight, resulting in a significant paradigm shift. Finally, policymakers in the Western world are beginning to reexamine how these masters of deception have managed to bamboozle the world for decades, even as their limitless money funds murder, chaos, and mayhem.
Shockingly, the deception goes on. The public face of Qatar as the honorable intermediary between evil Hamas murderers and the aggrieved State of Israel belies the fact that Qatar is ruled with an iron fist by one tiny family of antisemitic thugs — the Al Thani family, one of whose most senior members, Sheikh Hamad bin Jassim bin Jabr Al Thani, told a newspaper, “Imagine oil [was sold] by some Jews … what would be the price of a barrel of oil? It would be the most expensive thing in the world.”
And this week I heard from someone who maintained close ties with the Al Thanis over several years, that they told him, “We are not bigots, except when it comes to Jews — we can’t stand the Jews.” So, are these the “honest brokers” for the current crisis — as was claimed by another member of the Al Thani family, Meshal bin Hamad Al Thani, Qatar’s ambassador to the United States?
It is clear that Qatar, for all its polished sophistication and attempts to bamboozle the West to think its leaders are merely useful intermediaries with the world’s worst undesirables, is in fact as evil as those it funds. Qatar, and in particular the Al Thani family who have presided over this tiny country for decades, cannot claim innocence. Their hands are elbow-deep in the blood of the innocents murdered on Oct. 7. Every hostage still in captivity in Gaza is the direct result of Qatar’s nefarious love affair with the violent brutes who control Gaza.
After Oct. 7 there’s no longer any excuse for anyone to look the other way. Qatar must be sanctioned, its Western assets must be frozen or confiscated, and its leaders must be arrested for aiding and abetting terrorists — and for crimes against humanity. Otherwise, the world will have allowed Qatar’s leaders to get away with murder.
The post Qatar Can’t Be Allowed to Get Away With Murder After Oct. 7 first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
McGill cancels talk with former Hamas insider turned Israel advocate, citing fears of violence
McGill University has canceled an on-campus event planned by Jewish students—and temporarily halted bookings for all extracurricular activities—following threats of violence along with a death threat, as outlined in a […]
The post McGill cancels talk with former Hamas insider turned Israel advocate, citing fears of violence appeared first on The Canadian Jewish News.
RSS
US Lawmakers Introduce Bipartisan Bill to Strip Funding From Universities That Boycott Israel
US Reps. Virginia Foxx (R-NC) and Josh Gottheimer (D-NJ) on Tuesday introduced bipartisan legislation to cut off federal funding from universities that engage in boycotts of Israel.
The legislation, titled “The Protect Economic Freedom Act,” would render universities that participate in the boycott, divestment, and sanctions (BDS) movement against Israel ineligible for federal funding under Title IV of the Higher Education Act, prohibiting them from receiving federal student aid. The bill would also mandate that colleges and universities submit evidence that they are not participating in commercial boycotts against the Jewish state.
“Enough is enough. Appeasing the antisemitic mobs on college campuses threatens the safety of Jewish students and faculty and it undermines the relationship between the US and one of our strongest allies. If an institution is going to capitulate to the BDS movement, there will be consequences — starting with the Protect Economic Freedom Act,” Foxx, chairwoman of the House Committee on Education and the Workforce, said in a statement.
Gottheimer added that the legislation is necessary to thwart the surging tide of antisemitism on college campuses. Although the lawmaker noted that students are allowed to engage in free expression regarding the ongoing war in Gaza, he argued that blanket boycotts against Israel endanger the lives of Jewish students and community members.
“The goal of the antisemitic BDS movement is to annihilate the democratic State of Israel, America’s critical ally in the global fight against terror. While students and faculty are free to speak their minds and disagree on policy issues, we cannot allow antisemitism to run rampant and risk the safety and security of Jewish students, staff, faculty, and guests on college campuses,” Gottheimer said in a statement. “The new bipartisan Protect Economic Freedom Act will give the Department of Education a critical new tool to combat the antisemitic BDS movement on college campuses. Now more than ever, we must take the necessary steps to protect our Jewish community.”
The legislation instructs the US Department of Education to keep a record of universities that refuse to confirm their non-participation in anti-Israel boycotts. The list of universities in non-compliance with the legislation would be made publicly available.
In the year following the Palestinian terrorist group Hamas’s massacre acrosssouthern Israel, universities across the country have found themselves embroiled in controversies regarding campus antisemitism. In the immediate aftermath of the terrorist attacks in Israel, hordes of students and faculty orchestrated protests and demonstrations condemning the Jewish state. Student groups at elite universities such as Harvard and Columbia issued statements blaming Israel for the attacks and expressing support for Hamas.
Several high-profile universities have also shown a significant level of tolerance for anti-Jewish sentiment festering on their campuses. Northwestern University, for example, capitulated to demands of anti-Israel activists to remove Sabra Hummus from campus dining halls because of its connections to Israel. At Stanford University, Jewish students have reported being forced to condemn Israel before being allowed to enter campus parties. Students at the University of Pennsylvania and Brown University launched unsuccessful attempts to convince the university to divest endowment funds from companies tied to Israel.
The post US Lawmakers Introduce Bipartisan Bill to Strip Funding From Universities That Boycott Israel first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Harvard Chaplains Omit Antisemitism From Statement on Antisemitic Incident
Harvard University’s Office of the Chaplain and Religious and Spiritual Life is being criticized by a rising Jewish civil rights activist for omitting any mention of antisemitism from a statement addressing antisemitic behavior.
The sharp words followed the office’s response to a hateful demonstration on campus in which pro-Hamas students stood outside Harvard Hillel and called for it to banned from campus. Such a demand is not new, as it began earlier this semester at the direction of the National Students for Justice in Palestine (NSJP) organization, which coordinates the lion’s share of anti-Zionist activity on college campuses.
As seen in footage of the demonstration, the students chanted “Zionists aren’t welcome here!” and held signs which accused the organization — the largest campus organization for Jewish students in the world — of embracing “war criminals” and genocide.
Addressing the behavior, Harvard Chaplains issued a statement, which is now being pointed to as a symbol of higher education’s indifference to the unique hatred of antisemitism, as well as its permutation as anti-Zionism.
“We have noticed a trend of expression in which entire groups of students are told they ‘are not welcome here’ because of their religious, cultural, ethnic, or political commitments and identities, or are targeted through acts of vandalism,” the office said, seemingly circumventing the matter at hand. “We find this trend disturbing and anathema to the dialogue and connection across lines of difference that must be a central value and practice of a pluralistic institution of higher learning.”
It continued, “Student groups who are singled out in this way experience such language and acts of vandalism as a painful attack that undermines the acceptance and flourishing of religious diversity here at Harvard. Let us all endeavor to care for one another in these divisive times.”
Recent Harvard graduate Shabbos Kestenbaum, who addressed the Republican National Convention in August to discuss the ways which progressive bias in higher education fosters anti-Zionism and anti-Western ideologies, described the statement as a moral failure in a post on X/Twitter on Tuesday.
“Disappointing,” he said. “After Harvard Jews were told by masked students ‘Zionists aren’t welcome here’ outside of the Hillel, the Chaplain Office finally released a statement that did not include the words Jew, Zionism, Israel, or antisemitism. A total abdication of religious responsibility.”
Kestenbaum noted in a later statement that Harvard’s chief diversity and inclusion officer, Sherri Ann Charleston, has so far declined to speak on the issue at all. He charged that when Charleston “isn’t plagiarizing, she and DEI normalize antisemitism,” referring to evidence, first reported by the Washington Free Beacon, that Charleston is a serial plagiarist who climbed the hierarchy of the higher education establishment by pilfering other people’s scholarship.
Harvard University president Alan Garber — installed after former president Claudine Gay resigned following revelations that she is also a serial plagiarist — has, experts have said, been inconsistent in managing the campus’ unrest.
During summer, The Harvard Crimson reported that Harvard downgraded “disciplinary sanctions” it levied against several pro-Hamas protesters it suspended for illegally occupying Harvard Yard for nearly five weeks, a reversal of policy which defied the university’s previous statements regarding the matter. Unrepentant, the students, members of the group Harvard Out of Occupied Palestine (HOOP), celebrated the revocation of the punishments on social media and promised to disrupt the campus again.
Earlier this semester, however, Garber appeared to denounce a pro-Hamas student group which marked the anniversary of Hamas’s Oct. 7 attacks on Israel by praising the brutal invasion as an act of revolutionary justice that should be repeated until the Jewish state is destroyed, despite having earlier announced a new “institutional neutrality” policy which ostensibly prohibits the university from weighing in on contentious political issues. While Garber ultimately has said more than Gay when the same group praised the Oct. 7 massacre last academic year, his administration’s handling of campus antisemitism has been ambiguous, according to observers — and described even by students who benefited from its being so as “caving in.”
The university’s perceived failure to address antisemitism has had legal consequences.
Earlier this month, a lawsuit accusing it of ignoring antisemitism was cleared to proceed to discovery, a phase of the case which may unearth damaging revelations about how college officials discussed and crafted policy responses to anti-Jewish hatred before and after Hamas’s massacre across southern Israel last Oct. 7.
The case, filed by the Louis D. Brandeis Center for Human Rights Under Law, centers on several incidents involving Harvard Kennedy School professor Marshall Ganz during the 2022-2023 academic year.
Ganz allegedly refused to accept a group project submitted by Israeli students for his course, titled “Organizing: People, Power, Change,” because they described Israel as a “liberal Jewish democracy.” He castigated the students over their premise, the Brandeis Center says, accusing them of “white supremacy” and denying them the chance to defend themselves. Later, Ganz allegedly forced the Israeli students to attend “a class exercise on Palestinian solidarity” and the taking of a class photograph in which their classmates and teaching fellows “wore ‘keffiyehs’ as a symbol of Palestinian support.”
During an investigation of the incidents, which Harvard delegated to a third party firm, Ganz admitted that he believed “that the students’ description of Israel as a Jewish democracy … was similar to ‘talking about a white supremacist state.’” The firm went on to determine that Ganz “denigrated” the Israeli students and fostered “a hostile learning environment,” conclusions which Harvard accepted but never acted on.
Follow Dion J. Pierre @DionJPierre.
The post Harvard Chaplains Omit Antisemitism From Statement on Antisemitic Incident first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
You must be logged in to post a comment Login