#Israel does not intend for peace

[xyriath]

but seriously if you are at all blogging about the i/p conflict you NEED to read that standing together article from that post i just reblogged. please. please please please please please. these are the people who are actually doing something about freeing palestine and have been for years. And here's the thing:

IF YOU WANT PEACE IN ISRAEL, IN PALESTINE, THESE ARE THE PEOPLE IT'S GOING TO COME FROM.

Because yeah. The way this site is spreading around uncritical posts is a huge issue (and a reason I haven't been around since October). Standing Together is doing a hell of a lot more than blogging about it. They're on the ground putting in the work. Nine days before the October 7 attack, they were in Tel Aviv publicly protesting about the systematic oppression of Arabs (not just Palestinians) in Israel.

"The global left has to be synced with what we need." Trust me, the right is. Boy HOWDY is the right synced. I have gotten more support about my Judaism from the far right than the left and it's??? kinda fucked up??? Someone who worked for Pat Robertson should not feel safer than someone dedicated to activism, but here we are. I can feel how easy it would be to be radicalized towards the right, and I'm actively fighting against it. Now imagine that multiplied by millions of people, plenty of whom don't have the same desire to do so, or feel like they don't have the luxury of safety to do so.

Seeing Hamas being portrayed as sympathetic and talked about like they had a right to commit all of the atrocities that they have is making me lose my MIND. They're a group run by corrupt billionaires who actively started this conflict with the intent of silencing the Palestinian people who have been protesting their tyranny. They have been siphoning money from Palestinians for years and this entire attack is them deliberately throwing Palestinians into the path of slaughter to distract from that fact, the same way that Netanyahu absolutely took advantage of the threat and tragedy to try and get himself off the hook for his own corruption.

Also check out the google doc linked in the article. It's not just a good way to learn how to communicate, but a very good resource for finding out if something you're sharing is worthwhile. In fact, it does a really god job of breaking down why I've felt so uncomfortable about a bunch of the posts on my dash. Some excerpts:

This got way longer than I had intended, but hopefully does its job. Go read the article and, yes, if you need to, reevaluate your activism. Because if it's not what people involved actually want or need, then it's just for you. And that's kinda fucked up.

[weemietime]

Go ahead and tell me that Hamas isn't genocidal. Just because they lack the ability doesn't mean they lack the intent. Hamas is not a legitimate resistance group.

They are a terrorist group who exist with the sole purpose of destroying Israel. Palestinians could have had a state three times over. They instead kicked off two intifadas, a coup in Jordan, and constant terrorism and war crimes.

Hamas does not want peace and has never wanted peace. They executed six hostages claiming it was retaliation for Haniyeh. Haniyeh (not Sinwar, sorry) is a valid military target as the leader of a belligerent organization intending to commit genocide. Civilian hostages are not.

[girlactionfigure]

NOVEMBER 4, 2024

WHAT HAPPENED?

A Palestinian-owned café in Oakland, California kicked out a Jewish customer for wearing a blue hat with a Star of David on it, claiming that the symbol was “violent.”

This is a clear violation of Title II of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and California’s Unruh Civil Rights Act. Note that this applies even if the Jewish customer went to the café expecting that something like this would happen (in other words, “he tricked us into discriminating against him!” is not a legitimate defense).

 It’s also worth noting this café has menu items titled “Sweet Sinwar” and “iced in tea fada” and its menu is decorated with the Hamas inverted red triangle. The café also openly expresses support for the October 7 massacre.

JVP TO THE RESCUE

What do you do when under fire for antisemitism? You tokenize (Not So) “Jewish” Voice for “Peace,” which openly supports terrorism against Jews and has even glorified Nazis in the past. For more, see my posts “Stop Sharing JVP” and “Time To Talk About JVP…Again.”

For those of us familiar with Jewish history and the history of antisemitism, this is par for the course. In the 1920s, the Soviet Jewish “Yevsektsiya” made it its mission to destroy “traditional Jewish life, the Zionist movement, and Hebrew culture.” The fact that the Yevsektsiya was “Jewish” was central to its purpose. After all, the Soviet regime couldn’t be accused of antisemitism when those shutting down all Jewish cultural and spiritual life were Jews themselves.

WE HAVE SEEN THIS BEFORE

Historically there have been, arguably, two kinds of antisemitism: (1) Nazi antisemitism, in which Jews are physically exterminated, and (2) Hanukkah antisemitism, in which the antisemite does not necessarily intend to take our lives, but rather, seeks to strip Jews of all the elements which make us...well, Jews.

Under the Soviet regime, for example, Jews suffered from “Hanukkah antisemitism.” The Soviets heavily suppressed Jewish cultural and spiritual life, stripping many Jewish families of thousands of years’ worth of history. Speaking or studying Hebrew was punishable by law. So was participating in Jewish religious traditions. At the same time, Jews were unable to assimilate into Soviet society due to their ethnic background. Jews were often imprisoned under false pretenses, accused of vague “Zionist crimes.” People with Jewish last names were subject to highly restrictive university quotas or banned from performing certain jobs.

Maybe you’ve noticed a pattern over the past year. First, it was only “Zionism,” not Judaism, that was a problem, despite the fact that the Jewish connection to -- and desire for sovereignty in -- the Land of Israel is inextricable from 3000 years of Jewish tradition. Then, they started denying our extensively recorded history and origins in Israel. At anti-Zionist Jewish events, now praying in Hebrew is considered “too triggering,” so it’s best to pray in colonial languages, like Arabic or English. Now, the Magen David is a “racist, genocidal symbol,” to quote Palestinian activist Mohammed El-Kurd.

Do you not see what’s happening? This is no longer about the State of Israel, the Israeli government, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, or this current war. This is a thinly-veiled effort to methodically legitimize the discrimination of Jews -- and anything Jewish.

THE STAR OF DAVID

The Star of David, also known as the Magen David or the Seal of Solomon, is mentioned in Jewish texts as early as the first century. In fact, it’s found in coins from the period of the Bar Kokhba Revolt against the Romans (132-135 CE). It was also used as a decorative motif in the Khirbet Shura synagogue in the Galilee in the third century. Though initially merely used as an ornament, the Magen David was ascribed deeper spiritual meanings since the 11th century. It has since been associated with Kabbalah, or Jewish mysticism.  

In the 17th century, the Jewish community of Prague was ascribed the Magen David as its official symbol. Shortly thereafter, the Jewish community in Vienna also adopted it as a marker. By the 19th century, the Star of David was the distinctive Jewish emblem.

More than anything, perhaps, the Star of David is a symbol of Jewish resilience and survival. For centuries, Jews in Europe and the Islamic world had been forced to wear distinguishing clothes marking them as Jews. After the Nazis invaded Poland in 1939, Jews in Poland and in other Axis-occupied territories were forced to wear a Star of David, most often seen in the form of a yellow badge with the word “Jude” (Jew) or a similar variation. Therefore, for many Jews, the act of wearing Star of David jewelry or clothing is a reclamation of our ancient symbol that was once weaponized to oppress us.

A DOUBLE STANDARD

Hundreds of millions of people have been slaughtered under the banner of Christianity and Islam each. The Crusades alone took about 1.7 million lives. The Spanish Inquisition? Up to 300,000 lives. In the “New World,” some 56 million Indigenous people were killed in the name of Christianity. These are just a few examples. It’s estimated Islam’s conquests alone left some 270 million people dead. 

During the First Jewish Revolt, the Romans crucified some 500 Jews a day. Yet I would never dream of denying someone service at a coffee shop because they’re wearing a crucifix. 

When Jihadists carry out terrorist attacks, they shout “Allahu Akbar” — the same phrase used by the 1.8 billion Muslims around the world in their daily prayers. Muslims recite the Shahada prayer daily, the same prayer that is inscribed in the ISIS, Hamas, and Al Qaeda flags. And yet, I would never dream of denying someone service at a coffee shop because they’re a Muslim who says “Allahu Akbar” or recites the Shahada prayer.

Under Islamist regimes, such as the Islamic Republic in Iran, women are beat to death for not wearing hijab or wearing hijab “improperly.” But I think you would agree that denying a woman in hijab service at a coffee shop on account of the Islamic Republic’s crimes is plain bigotry.

You may be triggered by crosses, hijabs, or the Star of David, and your triggers may be rooted in valid trauma. But your triggers are no one’s responsibility to deal with but your own, and they are no excuse to lash out in bigotry.

Even if Israel’s actions were equivalent to those of Nazi Germany, equating the Star of David with the Nazi hakenkreuz (commonly misidentified as the “swastika”) is an inherently problematic analogy.

Unlike the Star of David and the Jewish people, the swastika has zero spiritual or cultural significance in German culture beyond Nazism.Within the German context, the Nazi hakenkreuz means one thing and one thing only.

On the other hand, the Sanskrit swastika and other similar symbols, such as the whirling log, have long, rich traditions in their respective cultures. While some Native American tribes have decided to retire the whirling log, others continue to use it. The Sanskrit swastika is commonplace in countries such as India and Nepal. 

Sure, if someone with zero cultural connection to the swastika or the whirling log decides to “reclaim” the symbol, I’d probably do a double take and consider it an antisemitic dogwhistle. But when I went to India, I saw the swastika everywhere, and because I am capable of critical thinking, I was easily able to recognize that the symbol has an entirely different connotation in this particular cultural context, despite my personal and family trauma.

A NOTE ON HOLOCAUST INVERSION

Holocaust inversion is a rhetorical tool used to portray Jews as morally equivalent — or worse — than Nazis. It’s often employed in discussions about Israel-Palestine and is frequently used by anti-Zionists.

 To understand why Holocaust inversion is unquestionably antisemitic, we must first understand what Holocaust denial actually is. Holocaust denial is not just an outright denial that the events of the Holocaust happened, but more often than not, it’s a denial of well-established facts about the Holocaust. For example, someone who says the Holocaust didn’t happen at all is as much a Holocaust denier as someone who claims the Holocaust did happen, but only one million Jews were killed.  

Therefore, Holocaust inversion is always Holocaust denial, because: 

(1) it relies on the minimization of established facts about the Holocaust. However harrowing the humanitarian crisis in Gaza — and it is — it’s just in no way equivalent in scale, scope, and methods to the atrocities committed during the Holocaust. This is a historical fact, and denying it is denying the Holocaust.

(2) characterizing Jews — Zionist or not — as Nazis is a denial of the well-established fact about the Holocaust that the predominant force in Nazi ideology was genocidal Jew-hatred. Jews cannot be the inheritors of Nazism simply because the Nazis wanted all Jews exterminated. A denial of this basic fact is Holocaust denial.

For a full bibliography of my sources, please head over to my Instagram and  Patreon. 

rootsmetals

I sincerely don’t understand how there’s still Jews out there who still make excuses for these people, who don’t see what’s happening. Learn your history. Have some self-respect.

[sayruq]

This is all due to Hezbollah's operations at the border which they've helpfully summarised for us

According to the group, they've barely used 5% of their capabilities but it's still proving to be too much for Israel. The northern settlements have evacuated. They have lost billions of dollars in military equipment, installations, and bases (Hezbollah even destroyed an entire base before the temporary truce). Every attempt to try and rebuild its security along the border always ends the same way for Israel, ie a precision guided missile.

If war does break out, it wouldn't be surprising at all to Hezbollah. According to Nasrallah, the general secretary, they're engaging in a strategy called escalation ladder where one end of the ladder is peace and the other end is open war. Every day, Hezbollah's operations increase in intensity. The same goes for Israel who recently destroyed an entire southern Lebanese village, killing countless of civilians. Netanyahu has been publicly threatening war for a while now but that was just him bluffing. His war cabinet, as well as his coalition, seem far more eager. To put it simply, each side will escalate until they're truly at war.

Most of Israel's Brigades are in Gaza right now, 22 of them to be exact. It will be very difficult and costly to bring some of them to the border for war. It might be possible that Israel intends to end the war on Gaza to focus on Hezbollah. They've been forced back to the negotiating table after storming off on the 2nd. Hamas has made it clear that they won't exchange any prisoners without a comprehensive ceasefire, aka no more temporary truces.

A war with Lebanon will be disastrous for Israel. They lost the 2000 and 2006 wars against a much weaker, less armed Hezbollah. Hell, they didn't even win against the Resistance in Gaza in 2014 and they're actively losing today. It's clear that the army of conscripts are under trained and not battle ready. Besides desertion, the Israeli army has to deal with soldiers that flee from the fighters instead of holding their positions and fighting back (Here's a Al Qassam Brigades video where the Palestinians ambush a tent full of Israel soldiers, only for 9 out of the 10 to flee).

If 500,000 Israelis fled the country because of Oct 7th and the war in Gaza, how many more would flee if war breaks out between Hezbollah and Israel? Not to mention, how many more would be internally displaced? This is a war that might end up lasting years. Even 6 months of war might prove too much for a country that is more fragile than we realised before Oct 7th.

Oh and this is Israel's FDI in the first quarter of 2023

It has definitely tanked even lower since then. That's just one aspect of the economy, imagine all the others especially with hundreds of thousands of workers conscripted, displaced, or have fled the country.

A war with Hezbollah will effectively bring about Israel's collapse. It will no longer be happening 'within our lifetime,' it will be happening within the next ten years.

[scribeforchrist-blog]

Jealousy is of the Flesh 

MEMORY VERSE OF THE WEEK

=======================

+ John 17:17 Sanctify them in the truth; your word is truth.

=======================

VERSE OF THE DAY 

======================

+ Job 28:28  And this is what he says to all humanity: ‘The fear of the Lord is true wisdom;   to forsake evil is real understanding.’”

=======================

** SAY THIS BEFORE YOU READ; HERE’S SOME CHRISTIAN TRUTHS **

I AM NOT JEALOUS 

I AM FILLED WITH JOY

I AM WALKING IN GOD 

I AM IN THE LIGHT 

======================

READ TIME:7 Minutes & 37 Seconds

======================

THOUGHTS:

======================

     What does it mean to forsake? To abandon, leave, or quit  is hard to quit something that we are used to doing; it's hard to quit something we love to do; that’s what it means to leave evil; what is evil? It is things of the flesh, the desire of the eyes the lust of the flesh, hateful intentions, King Saul had jealousy towards David because he knew David was going to take over the kingdom, he knew the people loved him more to, King Saul could have abandon his feelings and emotions but he didn’t 

  1 Samuel 18:6-7 When the victorious Israelite army was returning home after David had killed the Philistine, women from all the towns of Israel came out to meet King Saul. They sang and danced for joy with tambourines and cymbals.7 This was their song: “Saul has killed his thousands, and David his ten thousand!”

 

* Verse 10-11 The very next day, a tormenting spirit from God overwhelmed Saul, and he began to rave in his house like a madman. David was playing the harp, as he did each day. But Saul had a spear in his hand, 11, and he hurled it at David, intending to pin him to the wall. But David escaped him twice.

* Verse 14-15 David continued to succeed in everything he did, for the Lord was with him. 15 When Saul recognized this, he became even more afraid of him. 

  See, Saul could’ve very well let go of what he was feeling, but he couldn’t because he allowed his evil actions and ways stay because he had lost control, control over his life, control over his ways, he lost control in every way because he no longer was allowing God to be in control over him. And he knew that God was with him because he accomplished so much; when we have God on our side, we can accomplish so much. It doesn’t matter what anyone has planned for you. When you have God on your side, you can go wrong. All we must do is keep our hand in his hand, 

  James 3:15-16 For jealousy and selfishness are not God’s kind of wisdom. Such things are earthly, unspiritual, and demonic. 16 For wherever there is jealousy and selfish ambition, there you will find disorder and evil of every kind.

  It tells us here that jealousy and selfishness are not of God and are of the earth, and it even goes on to tell us when we have those things; we will find disorder and evil in any way; when we find these things in our heart we must go to God in repentance and ask him to help us overcome, and this kind of spirit needs to be set loose by fasting and praying, anytime the lord tells me something that I am doing that’s wrong I immediately fast and prays I don’t want to have anything in my heart that’s against God’s law, 

  Psalm 34:14 Turn away from evil and do good; seek peace and pursue it.

  We must pursue peace and do good. What is the Lord telling you today? What is God asking you to change? Is it your way? Is it the way you handle your fellow man? What is God saying to change your life?

  Jealously is something some of us experience, and it’s from the lack of being accepted for where we are; a lot of us want to be accepted, and we think that other people aren’t accepting us because we think it’s someone better than us, and this could be true. Still, we have to start accepting ourselves, and people will accept us; we all need to grow, and we all grow in our way, and how I grow will be different than how you grow; that’s life, but to be jealous about where I am or where anyone is at in there life that shouldn’t be we have to learn to deal with jealousy at the root of the issue, it’s not satisfied. 

   Ask God to help you to be satisfied with yourself! Ask God to help you love yourself in a satisfying way to the lord. When we feel these emotions of jealousy, anger, and bitterness, we need to ask God to show us the root so he can deal with it, and then we must be willing to allow him to deal with it. 

  Galatians 5:19-20 When you follow the desires of your sinful nature, the results are very clear: sexual immorality, impurity, lustful pleasures, 20 idolatry, sorcery, hostility, quarreling, jealousy, outbursts of anger, selfish ambition, dissension, division,

   Do you see this, friends, when we are jealous, this is from the sinful nature; the word says this is clear to know this isn’t from anything good, my friends, this is the work of the flesh, and when we have the works of the flesh, we are no longer walking in the light we are walking the ways of the enemy. Still, we have a weapon to combat this if we want to, which is fasting. Fasting helps us release what we can’t carry, and that’s why it’s such a burden when we carry it. It’s not meant for us to carry these fleshly things. What is God saying to you today? Let go of the jealousy and anything else that’s not of him.

   ***Today, we learned about jealousy; the word of God says when we have this type of spirit, it’s the works of the flesh, and we must do away with it; we do this by fasting, which makes the flesh submit unto God. Jealousy has a lot of root issues, and when we fast and pray, we can ask God what is causing us to be jealous of our fellow man.

  James 3:16 - For where jealousy and selfish ambition exist, there will be disorder and every vile practice.

   Where there is jealousy, there is every vile practice, which means other issues can be found. Anger, malice, strife, all these things and more can be found when someone is jealous; bitterness can stem from jealousy, and anger can too, and we must be careful with what we do and how we handle our emotions; that’s why when we feel theses spirits start to arise, we must place them immediately before God. What are the works of the flesh you are dealing with, lust, pride, anger, bitterness, or whatever? Ask God to help you release these strongholds from over your life. ©Seer~ Prophetess Lee

======================

PRAYER

=====================

Heavenly Father, thank you so much; we ask you to give us peace and strength, lord, if we are dealing with anything, we give it to you, lord we desire to love with our whole heart, but something is blocking us, lord we give you our life we ask you to show us the root issues ,lord free us from the things that are keeping us bond, lord we love you so much and we praise you for what you’re going to do in our life in Jesus Name Amen 

======================

REFERENCES 

======================

+ 1 Corinthians 13:4-5 - Love is patient and kind; love does not envy or boast; it is not arrogant or rude. It does not insist on its way; it is not irritable or resentful;

 

+ Song of Solomon 8:6 - Set me as a seal upon your heart, as a seal upon your arm, for love is strong as death, jealousy is fierce as the grave. Its flashes are flashes of fire, the very flame of the Lord.

 

+ Proverbs 27:4 - Wrath is cruel, anger is overwhelming, but who can stand before jealousy?

======================

FURTHER READINGS 

======================

Proverbs 7

Job 28

Ecclesiastes 8

Revelation 19

1 Timothy 4

======================

[wild-aspen]

Intent is required for genocide.

Does intent erase effect? No, absolutely not. And sometimes, the effect is so heinous that the intent does not justify what happened.

There are in fact things that have happened so far during the I/P war where the intent does not justify the action or the effects it caused. One example is that Israel very much did temporarily cease delivering aid to Gaza earlier this year in an attempt to force Hamas to surrender.

Link to source (NPR)

This, in my opinion, was not a justified action. The intent was to force Hamas to surrender. The effect was starving civilians. Even if this had resulted in Hamas surrendering (which it did not) it STILL would not have been justified.

Is starving civilians in an attempt to force your enemy to surrender genocide? I consider it borderline, because technically influencing the military is your goal, but you’re doing that by intentionally causing harm to civilians. I think it is a sign they are more than willing to cause needless civilian deaths among Palestinians, and that points to them considering Palestinians as less human. That is a step towards genocidal intent. It’s a big red flag that the far-right government coalition of Israel is capable of more heinous things.

Now, as far as intent behind the war goes, it is very clear the intent is shifting. I think at the start of the war the intent was to rescue the hostages, deal a blow to Hamas, and get out. That was certainly the intent and hopes of Israeli civilians and families whose loved ones were being held hostage.

As the war dragged on, the right-wing branch of the government pushed for the total destruction of Hamas, and refused many peace talks where the disarmament of Hamas was not included. Netanyahu now says he intends for a prolonged occupation of Gaza. That is a change.

Is occupation genocide? No. But it would make genocide or ethnic cleaning easier. It is a red flag.

And in the West Bank, Netanyahu is encouraging Israeli civilians to steal more land from Palestinians. The goal of the far-right in Israel is to completely occupy and annex the West Bank and make it part of Israel.

Is annexing another country genocide? No, unless your next step is to kill all the natives. If they force Palestinians out without killing them, that’s the definition of ethnic cleansing, and there are absolutely calls for that to happen. Again, red flag.

Overall, is the government of Israel handling this war and their relationship with Palestine well? Absolutely not. The far-right coalition in power is Islamophobic and racist towards Palestinians and very much wants them out of the way — and I think they’re coming up on “by any means possible”. Which could include ethnic cleansing and yes, genocide.

[saintmeghanmarkle]

Meghan has a degree in International Studies and "interned" at an embassy... but can't manage basic diplomacy with a charity. by u/namguro

Meghan has a degree in International Studies and "interned" at an embassy... but can't manage basic diplomacy with a charity. It really is something that Meghan can't put together a basic middle-way statement on the Israel/Palestine conflict, especially given Meghan's education at university was a double major, one of which was in International Studies at the Northwestern School of friggin' Communication!My point isn't to express any personal views here on the conflict and I don't intend to start a debate on the topic. But it’s baffling to see their PR blow up again because she can't manage even a basic bit of political triangulation. Makes you wonder what she actually studied at uni.Triangulation is Politics and Diplomacy 101 and involves adopting ideas from both the left and right to carve out a middle-ground position. It does require boldness, but given their advocacy is entirely vapid, it is no surprise that they are trying to duck the conflict entirely to avoid any criticism, which hilariously is having the entirely opposite effect. Forget the Streisand Effect, this is the Meghan Effect.Harry meanwhile sees himself as Diana's true heir, but he has shown his true colours with the Sentebale debacle: like Meghan all he wants is a Red Carpet and applause. I honestly think Diana would have the boldness to recognise the common humanity on both sides; in any conflict with entrenched sides, that alone can rankle people. Recognising common humanity doesn't involve endorsing the political leadership of any side in a conflict.Any casual observer of current affairs knows that intractable conflicts breed deep hatreds—but with visionary leadership, solutions can be found.Just look at Bosnia, South Africa—places where peace once seemed impossible, but progress was made.That’s the line Amal Clooney has walked. Yes, she’s taken some flak for it, but integrity acts as a shield and earns respect—something that’s always in short supply with this duo.Unlike Amal, nobody is expecting them to draft anything at the ICJ, nor a peace plan. But it is ridiculous to see how they want to be some sort of Global Ambassadors for humanity but frantically duck any difficult issue. post link: https://ift.tt/6Ffne5T author: namguro submitted: April 18, 2025 at 09:15PM via SaintMeghanMarkle on Reddit disclaimer: all views + opinions expressed by the author of this post, as well as any comments and reblogs, are solely the author's own; they do not necessarily reflect the views of the administrator of this Tumblr blog. For entertainment only.

[eye-of-mordor]

SAURON THE SAVIOR

This is an analysis that was intended to feature a three-minute video, but the file size was too large to upload to Tumblr. Please click the link in the title above to be redirected to the post for the video on my Instagram.

In The Rings of Power, Sauron’s character is depicted as a savior figure several times, such as Jesus. In the first episode of the second season, he is brought before Adar when he goes to Mordor. He requests that Adar let his people go, which is also analogous to yet another savior figure: the biblical Moses who sought to liberate the Hebrews from slavery under Pharaoh, ruler of Egypt. It is that iconic phrase, “let my people go,” which resounds this imagery. Moses also warns Pharaoh that if he does not do this, then Egypt will be met with many horrors of his God’s doing. Sauron also warns Adar that if he does not let his people go, then his people will die. In both stories, this ominous warning came true – Egypt and Adar were ultimately punished.

In the same scene where Sauron is presented before Adar, he utters other things that parallel some of Jesus’ words. He says, “you can’t kill me.” Adar responds, “in time, you will beg me to.” This is like the biblical event where Jesus was captured by his enemies and brought to trial to be judged for blasphemy, claiming to be of divine origin. At the time, the Roman overseer of this region of Israel was Pontius Pilate, who questioned him, “are you a king?” Similarly, Adar and his men mock Sauron for acting like he is King of Mordor. Pilate had him flogged – also like how Adar had Sauron tortured. But neither Jesus nor Sauron begged for a merciful death.

When Sauron is forced by Adar to bow at his feet and swear fealty to the lord of Mordor, Sauron swears the oath – but truly to himself, leaving Adar’s name out of the vow. This is also like how Jesus believed he was serving himself, in that he would become the central figure of a future religion that would emerge long after he was gone. It was with his crucifixion that the symbol of the cross was immortalized – another analogy to Sauron’s plan to make the Eye of Mordor his future symbol.

Also with the biblical narrative of how the Roman soldiers crafted a crown of thorns and placed it atop Jesus’ head, mockingly hailing him as King of the Jews, this is also seen with how Waldreg and the others mocked Sauron by sneeringly calling him ‘your majesty’ whilst beating him. This is also parallel to when Jesus was violently flogged by the Roman soldiers who relished in nearly tearing his body to shreds.

Today, Jesus is lauded as a crusader of peace. While not inaccurate, many have overlooked one important parable of his that speaks of how he did not come to bring peace, but a sword. It is in Matthew 10:32-42. The rest of the passage explains how he wanted everyone to accept him as their personal savior, and he would not care if it cost dividing people against each other, families against their own under their own roof. Indeed, this has been a prophecy that came true thousands of years later. It is also similar to how Sauron divided the peoples of Middle-Earth who refused to bow to him as their savior-king.

At first, all this might illustrate Sauron as a false Christ, an antichrist figure. It might come off as profound blasphemy on my part in having created this piece of media that compares Christ with a Satanic figure such as Sauron. However, when the reality of Sauron’s character comes into question, compared with a certain ancient deity, this is when the facts become murky. You see, in ancient days long before Christianity ever emerged, the planet Saturn was worshipped as a very important deity – as father, teacher, civilizer, judge of souls, spiritual guide, among many other things. For reasons that are too long to dive into here, of which I shall summarize by saying this: Saturn was basically what the modern Satan became conflated with.

A few hundred years after Jesus departed this world, Rome converted to Christianity. With this change came the syncretism of Rome’s archaic solar worship of Sol Invictus with Christianity. Because of this merging, early Christians were heavily associated with religious solar imagery and thus with solar cults which were more entrenched with the materialistic world, which was anathema to the focus on the immaterial/spiritual world of the Saturnian cults. It just so happens that Jesus was also a spiritual guide, and that the devil Satan is heavily associated with mastery over spiritual powers. The planet Saturn was historically associated with spiritual healing, a theme consistent with serpent symbolism over thousands of years, which just happens to be yet another theme found in Jesus’ ministry when he compared himself to a healing serpent. Likewise, Sauron is frequently said to have strove to heal Middle-Earth, and was able to shapeshift into a serpent.

There is much more to go into concerning these parallels, as well as the true spirit of Saturn as understood in ancient times. But it is far too long to do so here. However, I have been working on a book for the last several years that has parts which cover the true nature of Saturn as was believed by ancient Saturnian cults. Part of it will be released very soon this year, so if anyone is interested in learning more about it, stay tuned. A free PDF will be available for everyone. Consider it a gift.

All Hail the Eye!

[laineystein]

I want to talk about something. Often times the other side of an argument will post something that is posited as a statistic and we immediately write it off because we don’t want to believe that facts exist on the other side. But sometimes the facts are accurate. But what they’re insinuating is inaccurate. And it requires education and understanding and critical thinking to realize that.

Someone on tumblr posted a screenshot from an article saying more UN members have been killed in Gaza than Hamas commanders. The post had over 4,000 notes. This insinuates that Israel is only killing innocent people and our goal of eradicating Hamas is not successful. But let’s break this down with actual facts:

Most Hamas commanders do not live in Gaza. So the chances of them dying during warfare is extremely uncommon considering they do not live where this war is being fought.

Does everyone think that it was Hamas commanders that stormed into Israel and massacred 1400+ people? No. Terrorists are, and were in this case, “normal civilians”. They were shopkeepers and mechanics and laborers. Do people think that eradicating Hamas means just eliminating commanders? Do people think Hamas goes away when we kill commanders and that these other people will just return to their lives and be peaceful?

There is proof that NGOs like the UN, like the Red Cross, have been complicit in Hamas’ war crimes. So if someone from the UN helped to harbor hostages or if someone from the Red Cross turned a blind eye to Hamas’ use of Al Shifa, etc. they are complicit and have now made themselves targets of war by associating with literal terrorists.

So by this logic, if even one member of the UN dies and no Hamas commanders die, yes that is a fact that more UN members have died than Hamas commanders. Does that mean that Israel’s campaign in Gaza is not successful? Does it mean we’re killing innocent civilians? Does it mean that we’re not rooting out the problem? No.

Think for yourselves. Do your own research. Don’t immediately believe things you read - or believe them but give them a second glance and realize that the point they’re trying to make is meaningless and doesn’t actually support the claim the publication was intending.

[jewish-sideblog]

i have a question. i don’t mean this horribly!! but per this post you reblogged: https://www.tumblr.com/jewish-sideblog/744967243590434816, you believe to call what’s going on in palestine a genocide is antisemitic. can you elaborate on that, please?

I don't want to get in the habit of addressing things other people have said in posts I reblog, because those aren't my words and a reblog isn't a blanket endorsement of everything other people have said. But this topic is really important, so I'll weigh in just this once.

The primary concern I have with the use of the term genocide is Holocaust Inversion. Most people don't have a conception of genocide outside of the holocaust, so the usage of the word genocide is often an obvious ploy to weaponize Jewish suffering against Jewish people. Its sole purpose is to equate Israelis to Nazis and Jewish government to fascism.

Yet, there is a lot of death in Gaza right now. Horrible death, needless death. I think any erasure of that is as horrible as Oct. 7th denial. To outright deny that a genocide is happening exclusively because of the historical reality of the Holocaust isn't just or beneficial. So we have to look at it objectively. As I said earlier today, I'm not an international relations expert, so the following is my understanding and should be taken with large grains of salt.

"Genocide" as a war crime is extremely similar to murder as an individual crime. The key component (besides death) is intention. If you kill someone on accident in most English-speaking countries, you'll likely be charged with manslaughter, not murder. Similarly, genocide requires the intentional destruction of a population of people, well beyond the necessary realities of civilian casualty in active war zones. Death itself, even in large numbers, does not a genocide make. Civilians will always die on the battlefield. Always.

The International Criminal Court says that Israel has to meet standards of care in Gaza to ensure that genocide does not occur, meaning they don't think one has already occurred. There's some dispute on whether or not those standards are being met-- Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International say that Israel is failing to allow humanitarian aid into Gaza, while the Israeli government issued sealed documents to the Hague last month detailing their compliance measures. It'll take a while to hear back on those. Personally, I think starving Gaza is an obvious measure of intention to destroy Palestinian civilians.

Anybody is obviously welcome to disagree with the highest court of international law in the world. But the fact that the experts seem hesitant to make that determination gives me pause. Why are so many people keen to bring Israel to the Hague, not Russia for their indiscriminate killing of Ukrainians or the Houthis for manufacturing a humanitarian crisis in Yemen? Hamas, one of the governments of internationally-recognized Palestine, fully admits to intending to destroy the Jewish people in part. They say they'll do it again if they get half the chance. Why is only the Jewish state called out as a unique, genocidal evil? Must we label Palestinian deaths as a genocide in order to mourn them effectively? Aren't hundreds dead a day reason enough to mourn and to push for peace?

Again, I don't want to deny the allegations of genocide any more than I want to accept them. I'm following the experts on this one. And so far, the experts say "maybe". As long as they say "maybe", anybody who insists on definitely and absolutely labelling it as a genocide creeps at least suspiciously close to Holocaust Inversion in my eyes.

[thisisabernieblog]

International Court of Justice Rules That Israel Must Stop Killing Palestinians

World BEYOND War

The International Court of Justice has ruled that Israel must cease its warmaking in Gaza — cease committing and inciting genocidal acts — and that the case charging Israel with genocide must proceed.

DETAILS OF THE RULING:

By 15-2: Israel shall take all measures within its power to prevent all acts within the scope of Genocide Convention article 2

15-2: Israel must immediately ensure that its military does not commit acts within the scope of GC.2

16-1: Direct and punish all members of the public who engage in the incitement of genocide against Palestinians

16-1: Ensure provision of urgently needed basic services, humanitarian aid

15-2: Prevent the destruction of and ensure the preservation of evidence to allegation of acts of GC.2

15-2: Israel will submit report as to how they’re adhering to these orders to the ICJ within 1 month

This is Article 2 of the Genocide Convention:

In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:

(a) Killing members of the group;

(b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;

(c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;

(d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;

(e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.

Therefore, Israel must cease killing Palestinians.

This was a make or break moment for international law, or rather a break or make-a-first-step moment. There is hope for the idea and reality of international law, but this is only a beginning.

The president of the International Court of Justice, who read the ruling, is Judge Joan Donoghue, former top legal advisor under Hillary Clinton at the U.S. State Department during the Obama Administration. She previously was the lawyer for the United States in its unsuccessful defense before the ICJ against charges by Nicaragua of minining its harbor.

The court voted for portions of this decision by 15-2 and 16-1. The “No” votes came from Judge Julia Sebutinde of Uganda and Ad Hoc Judge Aharon Barak of Israel.

The case presented by South Africa was overwhelming (read it or watch a key part of it), and Israel’s defense paper-thin. And the case just grew more overwhelming during the bizarre delay (yes, courts are slow, but this genocide is swift).

People all over the world built the pressure to move South Africa to act and other nations to add their support. Over 1,500 organizations signed a statement. Individuals signed a petition by CODEPINK, and sent almost 500,000 emails to key governments’ United Nations consulates through World BEYOND War and RootsAction.org. Click those links because more emails are needed now. While several nations have made public statements in support of South Africa’s case, we need them to file papers officially with the International Court of Justice. To reach out to additional national governments, go here.

Governments that have made statement in support of the case against genocide include Malaysia, Turkey, Jordan, Bolivia, the 57 nations of the Organization of Islamic Countries, Nicaragua, Venezuela, Maldives, Namibia, and Pakistan, Colombia, Brazil, and Cuba.

Germany has backed Israel’s defense against the charge of genocide, which has been denounced by Namibia, victimn of a German genocide. Prominent Jews have denounced Germany’s shameful action.

Mass demonstrations in the streets of the world have continued in support of peace and justice, and to a far greater extent than major media outlets have reported.

Here’s a discussion of this campaign for justice with Sam Husseini on Talk World Radio.

Prior to today’s ruling from the International Court of Justice, the U.S. government pointedly refused to say whether it would comply with ruling, despite insisting that other nations comply with rulings by the ICJ.

Hamas said that it would cease fire if Israel does, and release all prisoners if Israel does

Germany, to its credit, reportedly said that it would comply.

Arming a genocide is complicity in genocide. While Israel gets most of its weapons from the United States, other weaponry comes from Germany, Italy, the UK, and Canada — at least some of which nations also provide parts to U.S. weaponsmakers that provide weapons to Israel. Italian opposition demanded an end to it. And then the Foreign Minister claimed Italy had stopped shipments on Oct 7. Meanwhile, Canada is coming under pressure to cease shipments and prevarications. In Canada, Members of Parliament are among over 250 people hunger striking for an arms embargo on Israel.

People in the United States can tell Congress to stop arming Israel here or here.

President Joe Biden already faces a lawsuit for aiding and abetting genocide in Gaza. In November 2023, Palestinian human rights organizations, along with Gaza- and U.S.-based Palestinians, filed suit in a U.S. federal court seeking declaratory and injunctive relief against the Biden Administration for failing to prevent genocide, and for aiding and abetting genocide. The plaintiffs seek an order to end U.S. military and diplomatic support to Israel. A hearing to address the government’s motion to dismiss will be held at 9 a.m. PT / 12 noon ET today, Friday. The hearing will be webstreamed to the public. You are encouraged to tune in and witness the U.S. government’s attempts at avoiding accountability and justify its support for the genocide that is happening in Gaza.

Handed down on Invasion Day (26th Jan in Australia)

How fitting ❤️ 🇵🇸 ❤️ 🇵🇸 ❤️

[eretzyisrael]

by Benny Morris

The drift of the Times article is that the innocent Arabs of Palestine just sat back and watched, as suffering victims, as the Zionists, Israel, and some international actors, principally Great Britain, did their worst.

This is pure nonsense.

Throughout the 1920s, ’30s, and ’40s, Palestine’s Arabs consistently rejected all proposals for a political compromise and flatly demanded all of Palestine, “from the river to the sea.” And they did not restrict their activities to roundtable discussions. In April 1920, May 1921, and August 1929, Arab mobs, whose passions had been whipped up by religious and political leaders, attacked their Jewish neighbours and passers-by in Jerusalem, Jaffa, Hebron, and Safad, killing dozens in what amounted to a succession of pogroms. (The New York Times studiously avoids this word, referring to them only as “assaults.”)

Emily Bazelon informs readers that the first bout of violence took place when the 1920 Muslim Nebi Musa festivities in Jerusalem “turned into a deadly riot,” in which “five Jews and four Arabs [were] killed.” Neither she nor any of the panellists mention that an Arab mob attacked, murdered, and wounded Jews or that the crowd of perpetrators chanted “nashrab dam al-yahud” (‘we will drink the blood of the Jews’). Nor does she tell us that the crowd shouted, “Muhammad’s religion was born with the sword,” according to eyewitness Khalil al Sakakini, a Christian Arab educator. After three days of rampage and despoliation, British mandate security forces finally restored order, killing all or most of the four Arabs Bazelon mentions in the process. The findings of the subsequent British investigation are included in the July 1920 Palin Report, which states: “All the evidence goes to show that these [Arab] attacks were of a cowardly and treacherous description, mostly against old men, women and children—frequently in the back.”

During the May 1921 pogroms, which encompassed Jaffa, Hadera, Rehovot, and Petah Tikva, dozens of Jews were killed, and women were raped. In the efforts to restore peace, British security forces killed dozens of the attackers. Leading contemporary Zionist journalist Itamar Ben-Avi wrote: “The Islamic wave and stormy seas will eventually break loose and if we don’t set a dike … they will flood us with their wrath … Tel Aviv, in all her splendour … will be wiped out.” 

The August 1929 riots were deliberately incited by the mufti of Jerusalem, the country’s senior Muslim cleric, Haj Muhammad Amin al Husseini, who was soon to emerge as the leader of the Palestine Arab national movement. He and his aides told the Arab masses that the Jews intended to destroy Al Aksa Mosque on the Temple Mount and build a (third) Jewish temple on the site, and that they had “violated the honour of Islam and raped the women and murdered widows and babies.” The resultant riots started in Jerusalem and quickly spread throughout Palestine. Dozens of Jews were massacred, and many Jewish women were raped, in the area around Jerusalem, and in Hebron and Safad. The British High Commissioner, John Chancellor, condemned “the atrocious acts committed by bodies of ruthless and bloodthirsty evildoers … upon defenceless members of the Jewish population [with] … acts of unspeakable savagery.” The British Shaw Commission, which investigated the multiple pogroms, concurred.Israel’s Perilous Moment, Then and NowHerf tells the complicated and often surprising story of the internal political struggles in Western capitals, as well as in the halls of the United Nations, that erupted at the end of the Second World War.QuilletteSol Stern

Bazelon comments that in 1929 the “Palestinians rebelled” against the British and “violence first broke out over control of the holy sites in Jerusalem.” (Throughout the New York Times piece, Bazelon uses the phrase “violence broke out,” instead of explicitly stating that the Arabs assaulted the Jews, though she does concede that in 1929 Jews were massacred in Hebron and Safad). The Canadian Derek Penslar of Harvard University, one of the three Jewish panellists, explains that “Muslims thought … that the Jews were planning to take over the Temple Mount” and recommends to readers Israeli historian Hillel Cohen’s book Year Zero of the Arab–Israeli Conflict: 1929, which argues that the Jews and the Arabs were equally to blame for the violence of that year. Indeed, Cohen writes that Jews—not Arabs—initiated the cycle of murders in Jerusalem that set off the countrywide violence. Penslar’s sympathies seem clear here and elsewhere—as when he remarks that “Many Zionists wanted to believe that they represented progress,” the implication being that he thinks otherwise.

[girlactionfigure]

Yasser Arafat allegedly stole over $3 billion from the ‘Palestinian Fund’, which he stashed in over 200 overseas bank accounts under false names. He gave his wife Suha over $200,000 a month in ‘housekeeping money.’ Between July 2002 and July 2003 alone, over $10 million was transferred from a Swiss account into 2 Paris-based accounts in her name (Arab Bank & BNP). Ismail Haniyeh bought vast tracts of land on the Gazan coast and spent many millions building homes for his 13 children. Khaled Mashal and his cohort Mousa Abu Marzuk are said to have ‘misappropriated’ around $2.6 billion each, money intended for Gazan homes, schools and hospitals. Mashal went on to live an opulent life in Qatar. Mahmoud Abbas spent $17 million building a mansion in Ramallah, $50 million on a private jet and is said to have paid many millions in ‘salaries’ to family, friends and those loyal to him ( in addition to the hundreds of millions paid to convicted terrorists and their families). ‘Palestinian’ business has always been big business for these so-called leaders. The last thing any of them ever wanted was peace, for as long as there was conflict, as long as the media could be fed pictures of ‘disillusioned’ Gazans ‘living in poverty’ and as long as Israel could be blamed, the money would keep rolling in - and still does to this day.

Likud Herut UK

[sunshinexlollipops]

BOYCOTT. BOYCOTT. BOYCOTT.

with black Friday coming up tomorrow, PLEASE DO YOUR DUE DILIGENCE ABOUT THE BOYCOTTS.

🚨 this pause is not for peace, but for Israel to maliciously crowdfund their genocide of Palestinians from your holiday shopping. 🚨

there is a reason Israel "agreed" to a 3-day pause, esp when we are about to start the biggest major retail event of the year that can help fund the businesses that pay them.

consumption under capitalism does sometimes mean your hands are tied or can't be entirely void of issues, but brands like puma that are under consumer boycotts and organic boycotts like Starbucks and McDonald's are where you should turn your focus.

also, do not believe this pause is an act of grace or "kindness."

expect Israel to not honor this agreement (they have violated them before). Israel already delayed it, making it 3 days instead of the 4 they first announced. they will escalate in violence prior to and after this "pause."

calling it a ceasefire is an intentional mislabel. they are not intending to cease shit, but it only matters if you believe they are.

[jewfrogs]

from a jewish person: what do you think is the single biggest fact that jews uniquely must learn or accept in order to unlearn the zionism they've been raised with?

picking out something specific is difficult because zionist myths form sort of a tangled web, but maybe the most insidious to me is the idea that the state of israel keeps us safe and is the only thing that can keep us safe (a sentiment i have heard from jews who do not live in the state of israel and do not ever intend to, as if simply its presence on earth as this miraculous “safe haven” provides them any protection while they are thousands of miles away, which is some marvelous magical thinking). i wish all jews would come to accept these things:

one, that even if the state of israel could ensure our safety and our survival, the palestinian people are not an acceptable sacrifice or a stepping-stone to reach that imaginary aim. safety purchased with palestinian blood is not a worthwhile pursuit, and an eternity of shame on everyone who claims otherwise.

and two, that the state of israel specifically cannot ensure our safety and our survival. as long as there is a state of israel (which, be’ezrat hashem, will not be much longer), there will never be any measure of peace, for that part of the world or for our people. there will only be immeasurable harm done by our people (a stain on our name and on our soul) and to our people: generations of jews inheriting and handing down abhorrent racist hatred; white supremacist structures that discriminate and commit atrocities against jews of color; rich centuries-old diasporic jewish cultures denied, repressed, eradicated, as people are forced to flee their homelands for a country that does not value their traditions.

what is that worth? what benefit is there in this form of safety? why can we not conceive of better for ourselves and for everyone else?

[mariacallous]

The fundamental problem for American presidents who have attempted to work with Benjamin Netanyahu is that Benjamin Netanyahu does not care what American presidents think. An exceptional English orator who was raised in Philadelphia, Netanyahu believes that he can outmaneuver and outlast American politicians on their own turf. “I know America,” he said in a private 2001 conversation that later leaked. “America is something that can easily be moved.” This attitude constituted a sharp break; in the past, even hard-line politicians like the maverick general turned premier Ariel Sharon responded to pressure from American presidents.

But during Bill Clinton’s presidency and again during Barack Obama’s, Netanyahu changed the equation. He repeatedly blew off American entreaties on issues including the peace process and Iran, and turned his willingness to stand up to U.S. presidents into an electoral selling point with his base. Faced with this unprecedented recalcitrance, different Democratic administrations tried different tactics for wrangling Bibi. Some attempted to compel his compliance with hard public pressure, only to have Netanyahu wait out a U.S.-imposed settlement freeze, then agitate against the Iran nuclear deal in Congress and the American media. Others attempted to settle disputes privately with Netanyahu, on the assumption that the Israeli leader would respond better if not openly antagonized.

None of this worked and none of it arrested Netanyahu’s drift further to the right. As both vice president and chair of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Joe Biden had a front-row seat to these failures. So did his close-knit foreign-policy team, including longtime staffers such as Secretary of State Antony Blinken and National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan. Recognizing the errors of the past, they have charted a different course aimed at outmaneuvering Netanyahu, seeking to succeed where their predecessors did not. This approach predates the current Gaza conflict, but has reached full expression in the past months. It explains why Biden has full-throatedly supported Israel against Hamas while simultaneously assailing the country’s hard-right governing coalition. And it offers a glimpse at the administration’s intended endgame for the war—and for Netanyahu himself.

In 2015, I visited another country with an ascendant right-wing populist leader: Hungary. Today, the country is essentially aligned with Russia against America and its allies. At the time, its prime minister, Viktor Orbán, was escalating his rhetoric against the European Union and the West. As part of the trip, my group met with officials at the American embassy, who explained their impossible predicament: Whenever Western countries would publicly pressure Orbán on his policies, he would refashion that pressure into electoral support, leaving his critics with no good options. Stay silent and he would win; speak up and he would also win.

Right-wing populists such as Orbán and Netanyahu thrive on posturing against outside antagonists, using external criticism to bolster their bona fides as strongmen who can stand up to the international community. This insight has shaped Biden’s approach to Netanyahu—not by preventing the president from publicly fighting with the prime minister, but by influencing which fights he picks. Simply put, Biden has opted to challenge Netanyahu on issues that splinter his support rather than consolidate it. In practice, this means strategically targeting policies where Netanyahu is on the wrong side of Israeli public opinion and forcing him to choose between his hard-right partners and the rest of the country.

Netanyahu’s disastrous attempt to overhaul the Israeli judiciary offers a case in point. The proposed legislation was drafted by right-wing hard-liners with no opposition input and would have subordinated Israel’s courts to its parliament. The attempted power grab provoked the largest sustained protest movement in Israeli history. Polls repeatedly showed that most Israelis opposed the overhaul and wanted lawmakers to come up with new compromise reforms conceived by consensus. And so that’s precisely what the Biden administration began calling for.

“Hopefully, the prime minister will act in a way that he is going to try to work out some genuine compromise,” Biden told reporters in March. “But that remains to be seen.” In July, he repeated the same point to Netanyahu, then reiterated it to the press: “The focus should be on pulling people together and finding consensus.” As the State Department emphasized at the time, “We believe that fundamental changes should be pursued with the broadest possible base of support.” By placing himself firmly on the side of the Israeli majority, Biden was able to prevent Netanyahu from turning his criticism into an electoral asset. After all, it’s hard to paint someone as anti-Israel, as Netanyahu once did with Obama, when they are expressing the opinion of most Israelis.

Biden understands that Netanyahu’s position is a precarious one. His governing coalition received just 48.4 percent of the vote, and took power only because of a quirk of the Israeli electoral system. The coalition relies on an alliance of unpopular far-right parties to stay afloat, whom Netanyahu must appease to remain in office. Biden has exploited this weakness and repeatedly poked at it. Rather than directly confronting Netanyahu, he has called out his extremist partners and in this way heightened the contradictions within Netanyahu’s coalition, undermining its stability and gradually eroding its support in the polls.

In July, Biden told CNN’s Fareed Zakaria that Netanyahu’s government has “the most extremist members of cabinets that I’ve seen” in Israel, noting that “I go all the way back to Golda Meir.” This past week, at a campaign event hosted by a former chair of AIPAC, the pro-Israel lobbying group, Biden went even further, singling out a far-right minister by name. “This is the most conservative government in Israel’s history,” the president said. Itamar “Ben-Gvir and company and the new folks, they don’t want anything remotely approaching a two-state solution.” This was Biden’s approach in action: criticizing Israel during wartime in front of a pro-Israel crowd, and doing so in a way that nonetheless denied Netanyahu any opening. As long as it’s Biden versus Ben-Gvir, rather than Biden versus Bibi, the president holds the upper hand.

Biden has brought the same strategy to bear on the issue of settler violence against Palestinians in the West Bank, which has accelerated under the cover of Israel’s campaign in Gaza. Netanyahu’s coalition is unable to clamp down on these extremists and their terrorism because it is beholden to these extremists. But most Israelis have no desire to mortgage the security of Israel and its indispensable relationship to the United States in favor of some far-flung hilltop settlers in West Bank regions that few Israelis could locate on a map.

Knowing this, Biden has begun unrolling a series of unilateral measures intended to raise the price of settler violence and pit Netanyahu and his allies against the Israeli public. Earlier this month, the administration announced visa bans on those implicated in settler violence, spurring similar actions by the EU, Britain, and France. “We have underscored to the Israeli government the need to do more to hold accountable extremist settlers who have committed violent attacks against Palestinians in the West Bank,” Blinken said. “As President Biden has repeatedly said, those attacks are unacceptable.” This past week, the U.S. froze the sale of more than 20,000 M16 rifles to Israel over concerns that they might find their way into the hands of violent settlers.

Hamas’s October 7 slaughter has put Biden’s approach to the ultimate test. Like most Israelis, he wants to see Hamas vanquished. And like most Israelis, he does not trust Netanyahu and his far-right allies to do it. This has left the president with few appealing options. Publicly denying Israel support during what it sees as an existential war wouldn’t just go against Biden’s personal values. It would collapse all the credibility he has accrued with the Israeli public through his careful diplomacy during his presidency. And it would give Netanyahu the American antagonist he desperately craves, providing the floundering premier with a lifeline he would use to reunite the right behind him.

To avoid this outcome, Biden has backed Israel’s military campaign, but worked nonstop to shape its contours and limit its fallout on civilians and the rest of the region, tapping into the reservoir of goodwill he has built with the Israeli public. The president has also upped the pressure on Netanyahu by assailing his coalition partners and explicitly calling for a new, more moderate Israeli government. U.S. officials have leaked that they think Netanyahu will not last, and Biden has told the Israeli leader to think about what lessons he’d impart to his successor.

In other words, Biden has once again placed himself on the side of the Israeli majority, in order to undermine Netanyahu and shape the political future of the entire country. It’s one of the biggest bets of his presidency, and when the guns finally fall silent, it could determine the fate of the broader Middle East.