RSS
The Question That Reveals the Antisemite
Palestinian supporters protesting outside a Scotland vs. Israel match at the a UEFA Women’s European Qualifiers at Hampden Park, Glasgow, Scotland on May 31, 2024. Photo: Alex Todd/Sportpix/Sipa USA via Reuters Connect
JNS.org – One of the more irritating questions being asked today, as it has been asked for years, is: When does criticism of Israel become antisemitism?
For many of us, this is a question barely deserving of any answer other than: “If you have to ask, you’ll never know.” If you can look upon the masses of frenzied maniacs in the streets and on campus with their shrieking calls for genocide and not understand that they are crossing some kind of line, then you are more or less beyond saving.
Nonetheless, there are times when the question is asked out of simple ignorance. Non-Jews are often genuinely perplexed by the issues of Israel and antisemitism, and there is at least the vague possibility that they are willing to be educated.
I am probably not the person who should undertake this education, given that my opinion on the matter is something of an outlier. I believe that at a time when Jews are being targeted and literally murdered by people who hate Israel, there is no possible way that criticism of Israel is not subjectively or objectively antisemitic. Whether well-intended or utterly scurrilous, such criticism must feed the beast.
I realize that most people—and most Jews—disagree with me. Nonetheless, I think that, for them, the question of when criticism becomes antisemitism is not as difficult to answer as it might seem.
There is, in fact, a fairly simple litmus test for antisemitism. One need only ask of a critic: Are they OK with killing Jews?
This simple litmus test is, ironically, what set me on the path towards Zionism and Israel. In my youth, I was a conformist who adopted the anti-Israel progressive ideology of my surrounding environment to the point that friends accused me of self-hatred (they were right). It was only when the Second Intifada broke out in 2000 that I realized—to my shock and great confusion—that those I considered allies were perfectly fine with killing Jews, and I knew this because they said so. I left the progressive world and never looked back.
This is not just a question of whether someone openly supports killing Jews, however. After all, if they do, there is no question as to their antisemitism. Hence our rage and dismay when shouts of “death to Israel” on university grounds are dismissed as, at worst, overheated rhetoric.
Still, antisemites are not always so forthright. For example, many people will engage in some preliminary throat-clearing by saying things like: “Yes, Oct. 7 was terrible” or “Of course, Israel has a right to defend itself” before they launch into the rant that follows their inevitable “but … ”
What the rant usually amounts to—behind the crocodile tears over civilian casualties, settler-colonialism and other clichés—is a fairly simple if unspoken assertion: When faced with the murder of its citizens, Israel should do absolutely nothing. Moreover, anything Israel does do is by definition a crime.
Despite the fact that the people who make this argument generally consider themselves to be little less than saints, one can only make such an argument by relying on a singular and singularly monstrous principle: Jewish lives are worthless.
That is, the saints are arguing that Jews and the state they created to protect them should forgo all human instinct, morality, dignity and common sense, and just sit there and let themselves be murdered. No one who sees any value whatsoever in the life of a Jew—or, one suspects, any life at all—could possibly believe such a thing, let alone say it out loud. For those who do believe it, “antisemite” is the only viable description.
Sadly, we see saints everywhere these days. They are not just on the campuses or in the classrooms. They are at the United Nations, the International Court of Justice and the International Criminal Court. They have infiltrated innumerable governments around the world, including that of the United States. They are activists and diplomats and journalists. They are professors and philosophers. And they are, sometimes, our friends and neighbors. They profess to a humanistic worship of all life, especially human life, and yet … they are perfectly OK with killing Jews.
Naturally, many of the saints are only dimly aware of their mortal sin. If confronted, they will never admit to it and, quite often, fly into paroxysms of rage at the prospect. Nonetheless, it is not difficult to discern who they are behind the mask of sanctity.
To uncover their true face, we need only demand something rather obvious but also rather radical: actual revulsion, actual horror at the murder of Jews. We must see them repelled by the very thought that it could happen, all over again, in this generation like all the others.
If someone criticizes Israel but still displays such revulsion and horror, then we can at least tentatively assume they are not antisemitic. At the very least, we can grant them the benefit of the doubt. Where we go from there, of course, is what will ultimately decide who is the saint and who is not.
The post The Question That Reveals the Antisemite first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Conservative Pro-Israel Advocate Charlie Kirk Assassinated at University Event in Utah
Charlie Kirk, a conservative activist credited with amassing youth support for the Republican Party, speaking at the inauguration of Donald Trump in January. Photo: Brian Snyder via Reuters Connect
Conservative activist and staunch pro-Israel advocate Charlie Kirk died on Wednesday after being shot during an event at Utah Valley University, according to a statement by US President Donald Trump posted to the Truth Social media platform. He was 31 years old.
“The great, and even Legendary, Charlie Kirk, is dead,” Trump wrote. “No one understood or had the Heart of the Youth in the United States of America better than Charlie. He was loved and admired by ALL, especially me, and now, he is no longer with us. Melania and my Sympathies go out to his beautiful wife Erika, and family.”
He added, “Charlie we love you!”
Kirk — founder of the Turning Point USA nonprofit, which is credited for drawing masses of young people, typically a reliable voting bloc for Democrats, to the Republican Party — was answering audience questions when a gunman fired off the fatal shot which impacted his neck, causing him to become limp and bleed profusely.
Since the advent of his career, Kirk has been a faithful supporter of Israel, taking on activists of both the far left and far right who promoted rising antisemitism and sought to undermine the US-Israel alliance.
“There’s a dark Jew hate out there, and see it, and I see it,” Kirk told a student during a podcast episode which aired earlier this year. “Don’t get yourself involved in that. I’m telling you it will rot your brain. It’s bad for your soul. It’s bad. It’s evil. I think it’s demonic.”
Born on Oct. 14, 1993, in Arlington Heights, Illinois, Kirk formally entered the political arena in 2012, five months before the reelection of former President Barack Obama, to found Turning Point USA (TPUSA) — which served as a bellwether of declining youth support for the progressive consensus on race, free speech, and economics that took hold in American college campuses in the 1960s.
TPUSA grew rapidly, challenging campus primacy of the College Republicans organization and exuding confidence in conservative ideas at a moment when political scientists and other experts speculated that the Republican Party would decline to the point that the Democratic Party would achieve long-standing majorities in local and federal government.
Following news of Kirk’s death, the Jewish community deluged social media with tributes to Kirk and prayers for his family and friends.
“Please stop what you’re doing and pray for our friend Charlie Kirk. Many in the Jewish community are reciting chapters from the Book of Psalms, and I ask you do the same,” Shabbos Kestenbaum, a Jewish civil rights advocate, tweeted. “Something is deeply broken in America. The political violence must END. GOD HELP AMERICA.”
“We have no words,” StopAntisemitism, a Jewish civil rights advocacy group, tweeted.
Meanwhile, Jewish conservative influencer Emily Austin said, “With deep pain and sorrow, we mourn the passing of Charlie Kirk. May he rest in peace, and may God welcome him into His eternal care. This is a profound loss for the world — Charlie was a truly blessed soul whose impact will never be forgotten.”
Kirk is survived by his wife, Erika, and his two young children.
Follow Dion J. Pierre @DionJPierre.
RSS
Lebanon’s Army to Disarm Hezbollah Near Israeli Border Within 3 Months in First Step to Restore State Control
Lebanese President Joseph Aoun, Prime Minister Nawaf Salam, and members of the cabinet stand as they attend a cabinet session to discuss the army’s plan to disarm Hezbollah, at the Presidential Palace in Baabda, Lebanon, Sept. 5, 2025. Photo: REUTERS/Mohamed Azakir
Lebanon’s army plans to fully disarm Hezbollah near the Israeli border within three months, the first step in the Lebanese government’s plan to restore authority and curb the influence of the Iran-backed terror group within the country.
On Tuesday, Lebanon’s Foreign Minister Youssef Raggi confirmed to AFP that the government received a five-stage plan last week from the military to enforce a policy placing all weapons under state control.
The move follows Lebanese authorities’ approval last month of a US-backed initiative to disarm Hezbollah in exchange for a halt to Israeli military operations in the country’s south.
Amid mounting international pressure to disarm the terrorist group, Lebanon’s cabinet tasked the army with developing a strategy to establish a state monopoly on arms.
For years, Israel has demanded that Hezbollah be barred from carrying out activities south of the Litani, located roughly 15 miles from the Israeli border.
However, Hezbollah has pushed back against any government efforts, insisting that negotiations to dismantle its arsenal would be a serious misstep while Israel continues airstrikes in the country’s south.
The terrorist group has even threatened protests and civil unrest if the government tries to enforce control over its weapons.
But as Hezbollah emerged weakened from a yearlong conflict with Israel, calls for the Islamist group’s disarmament have gained new momentum, reshaping a power balance it had long controlled in Lebanon.
Last fall, Israel decimated Hezbollah’s leadership and military capabilities with an air and ground offensive, following the group’s attacks on Jerusalem — which they claimed were a show of solidarity with the Palestinian terrorist organization Hamas amid the war in Gaza.
In November, Lebanon and Israel reached a US-brokered ceasefire agreement that ended a year of fighting between the Jewish state and Hezbollah.
Under the agreement, Israel was given 60 days to withdraw from southern Lebanon, allowing the Lebanese army and UN forces to take over security as Hezbollah disarms and moves away from Israel’s northern border.
However, Israel maintained troops at several posts in southern Lebanon beyond the ceasefire deadline, as its leaders aimed to reassure northern residents that it was safe to return home.
Jerusalem has continued carrying out strikes targeting remaining Hezbollah activity, with Israeli leaders accusing the group of maintaining combat infrastructure, including rocket launchers — calling this “blatant violations of understandings between Israel and Lebanon.”
RSS
Israeli Military Expert: Doha Strike Was Backed by US and Qatar Coup, Will Bring Hostage Deal Closer
A damaged building, following an Israeli attack on Hamas leaders, according to an Israeli official, in Doha, Qatar, Sept. 9, 2025. Photo: REUTERS/Ibraheem Abu Mustafa
Israel’s unprecedented strike on Hamas leaders in Doha this week was not a rogue act of military aggression, but rather the outcome of quiet coordination between Qatar and the US that could bring a hostage deal closer, Israeli intelligence expert Eyal Pinko said on Wednesday.
The strike, which officials have said was planned months ago, came a day after 10 Israelis were killed by Hamas in Gaza and Jerusalem. Four were soldiers who died in an attack on an Israeli tank in northern Gaza. The separate shooting attack in Jerusalem, in which six Israelis were killed and several more wounded, was the “straw that broke the camel’s back,” Pinko, a national security expert who served in Israeli intelligence for more than three decades, said in a press briefing.
Pinko contended that while Qatar publicly condemned the attacks, it also enabled them. “I am sure they were involved and the attack was coordinated with the [Qataris],” Pinko later told The Algemeiner.
The most recent round of negotiations to secure a Gaza ceasefire and hostage-release deal were nothing more than a “deception” by the US and Israel designed to gather Hamas leaders in one place “in order to set the timing to eliminate them,” he said.
Pinko said the strike should also be seen in light of US President Donald Trump’s impatience with the stalled hostage talks, arguing it showed Trump was on board with assassinations of Hamas leaders despite public declarations that he was “very unhappy” with the attack. He also pointed to Trump’s comments from last month, in which the US president predicted the Gaza conflict would reach a “conclusive ending” within two or three weeks.
Qatar, which has long hosted Hamas’s exiled leadership, benefits strategically from replacing the terrorist group’s leaders loyal to Iran with figures it can trust, Pinko maintained. Doha holds billions of dollars belonging to Hamas officials and has no interest in letting Ankara or Tehran displace it as the group’s patron. The timing of the attack is also significant, Pinko said, coming in the wake of Israel’s strikes against Iran’s nuclear program over the summer. “Iran is in a very bad situation. Qatar can easily overcome Iran,” he said.
Pinko further argued that the strike may serve to bring forward the release of the Israeli hostages still being held in Gaza since Hamas itself was no longer a coherent negotiating partner. The terrorist group operating in Gaza had become fragmented, “divided into five families that are fighting each other” and sometimes giving the impression that “they hate each other more than they hate Israel,” Pinko said. Recent talks proved “there was no longer a decisionmaker in Hamas,” and this disarray had allowed Hamas leaders to drag out the process with unrealistic demands. Removing those figures, he argued, would leave room for Qatar to install leaders who could cut a deal. “This will make the negotiation process much faster,” he said.
Pinko’s assessment stands in stark contrast to the fears of some of the families of the remaining 48 hostages held in Gaza, who said in a statement they had “grave fear” the Doha strike could sabotage the chances of bringing their loved ones home.
He placed the operation in a wider context, linking it to the revival of the Abraham Accords and US efforts to build a trade corridor from India through the Gulf to Israel and Europe as a counterweight to China’s trillion-dollar Belt and Road initiative, ending with Gaza as a key trade hub. “Trump is very serious in making the northern part of the Gaza Strip as [having] US autonomy. That will be the end of the American belt and road initiative to compete with the Chinese,” he said.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Wednesday called on Qatar, which “gives safe haven [and] harbors terrorists,” to expel them or bring them to justice, adding that if they don’t, “we will.”
Qatari Prime Minister Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad Al Thani, for his part said his country would retaliate over the strike, and accused Netanyahu of “wasting” Qatar’s time in negotiations and “leading the Middle East to chaos.”
Pinko called out Doha for its “duplicity” in pretending to be a peacemaker on the one hand, while “fueling Hamas and hatred” in the US and Europe, on the other.
“They are against Israel in their DNA. They don’t want Israel to exist,” he said. “So Gaza and Hamas are a very important asset for them.”
Some critics have denounced the Doha strike as a violation of international law, but international law experts note that Article 51 of the UN Charter recognizes a state’s inherent right to self-defense and that this right is not confined by geography if attacks are directed from outside its borders. The so-called “unwilling or unable” doctrine holds that if a host country does not act against militants on its soil, the victim state may use proportionate force.
The US relied on this doctrine when it killed Osama bin Laden in Pakistan in a 2011 operation that was widely hailed by Western governments and the UN, whose then secretary-general Ban Ki-moon said at the time that he was “very much relieved by news that justice has been done” and called it “a watershed moment in our common global fight against terrorism.”