#islamic resistance movement

[thererisesaredstar]

Anthem for martyred Hamas leader Yahya Sinwar, performed by the Ansarallah band (2024)

[void-voyage]

"What Does Hamas ACTUALLY Want?"

Historical summary of Hamas with Mohammad Alsaafin and Tareq Baconi, author of the book "Hamas contained".

[bibleblender]

New article has been published on https://www.bibleblender.com/2023/biblical-lessons/modern-day-lessons/christians-respond-to-islam-moderate-muslims-dont-speak-out-against-radical-islamic-attacks

How should Christians respond to Islam when “moderate Muslims” don't speak out against radical Islamic attacks?

Christian reactions to radical Muslim attacks Hurt hearts are hardened It’s human nature. Hearts harden…

[workersolidarity]

🇵🇸⚔️🇮🇱 🚀🚀 🚨

MUJAHIDEEN BRIGADES TARGET ZIONIST ARMY WITH MISSILE SALVO

📹 Scenes from the mujahideen of the Mujahideen Brigades, belonging to the Palestinian Mujahideen Movement, target the command and control center for the Israeli occupation army along the so-called Netzarim axis, south of Gaza City, with a missile salvo.

#source

@WorkerSolidarityNews

[if-you-fan-a-fire]

"Two years after Malcolm X successfully petitioned to be transferred from the Concord Reformatory in Massachusetts to Norfolk to take advantage of its educational opportunities, he and three other Muslims there captured public attention and were transferred back to Charleston for refusing typhoid inoculations. They grew out their beards, refused to eat pork, and demanded cells facing east toward Mecca, threatening to contact the Egyptian consul if that right were denied. They even secured transfer from the foundry after complaining that it was too loud for meditation. The warden at Charlestown "had absolutely no idea who or what converted the quartet but pooh-poohed" reports that they were being granted extra religious privileges, noting that the cells facing east were "just regular cells." As one newspaper article concluded, "The four new Moslems enjoyed complete religious freedom-and constant surveillance."

This contradiction of freedom and surveillance came to define the relationship between incarcerated Muslims and prison officials over the next several decades. As Malcolm remarked just days after leaving Norfolk, "All of the opposition was, after all, helpful toward the spread of Islam there, because the opposition made Islam heard of by many who otherwise wouldn't have paid it the second thought." The dialectical relationship between prison repression and prisoner resistance grew from the demands of the four men at Norfolk into the vanguard of the prisoners' rights movement a decade later. As Malcolm wrote to his brother, "The more the devil openly opposed it, the more it spread.""

- Garrett Felber, Those Who Know Don’t Say: The Nation of Islam, the Black Freedom Movement, and the Carceral State. Chapel Hill: The University of North Carolina Press, 2020. p. 30.

[kanon-kun]

you know it's very funny to me that when people hear "free palestine" they jump to "so you support the harming of civilians?"

no? we are quite literally protesting the harming of civilians. why do you think people call for the freedom of palestine, if not for that? did you think palestinians wanted to be free just for funsies? did it not occur to you that they are civilians who have been deliberately, brutally erased for decades?

[sylvia-on-the-run]

"We vow to the days that you shall not be defeated… for victory grows where blood waters the soil."

The Abu Ali Mustafa Brigades announces the martyrdom of the great national leader and combatant, martyr Yahya Ibrahim Hassan Al-Sinwar.

With great pride and honor, the Martyr Abu Ali Mustafa Brigades, the military wing of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, announces the martyrdom of the great national leader and combatant, the head of the political bureau of the Islamic Resistance Movement, Hamas, and the architect of Al-Aqsa Flood battle, and one of the most prominent symbols of Palestinian struggle, the heroic martyr Yahya Ibrahim Hassan Al-Sinwar.

He was martyred while bearing his weapon and ammunition, advancing the front lines among his comrades and our fighters, engaging in combat with the treacherous zionist gangs on the sacred ground of Rafah, the city of heroism and sacrifice. With his blood, he wrote the most noble meanings of sacrifice, standing as a fierce defender of our Palestinian people, the Arab nation, and the downtrodden, and fighting against the continuous zionist aggression targeting our existence and our right to liberate Palestine from the river to the sea and all occupied Arab lands.

The great leader "Abu Ibrahim" was a model of a national, unifying, and resisting leader—one who would never compromise and who stood at the forefront of the confrontation. Despite the deep sorrow over the loss of this great leader, who never ceased his resistance, we affirm that this loss will only increase our determination and steadfastness to continue along the path of the martyrs in struggle and combat until the last drop of blood is shed for the complete liberation and expulsion of the occupation from all our national Palestinian soil. We will reclaim all the rights stolen from our people and recover the occupied Arab lands in Lebanon and Syria, avenging the blood of our martyrs and leaders.

To the masses of our people, our nation, and the free people of the world: Our war is a war of existence. No matter how deep the wounds, we fight with absolute and unwavering faith in our inevitable victory, not just with morale. This is our eternal message to our steadfast people and to all who believe in resistance as the path to liberation and victory.

In conclusion, we, the Martyr Abu Ali Mustafa Brigades, extend our greetings to the Arab nation and all the free people of the world, and especially to our comrades and brothers in blood and struggle, and in the unity of fate—the Islamic Resistance Movement - Hamas, and its military wing the Martyr Izz El-Din Al-Qassam Brigades, leadership, cadres, and fighters. We salute the spirit of the great leader Yahya Al-Sinwar and the souls of those who have lit the path to freedom and independence with their blood, on the noble path to Al-Quds. We also salute the hands still pressing on the trigger until freedom is achieved and the occupation is expelled.

Our vow is an eternal revenge that shall not fade. Glory to the martyrs, freedom to the prisoners, and healing to the wounded.

Tomorrow, the fog will lift from the hills… and we shall surely be victorious.

Martyr Abu Ali Mustafa Brigades The Military Wing of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine 18 October, 2024

[fuckyeahmarxismleninism]

By Palestine Chronicle Staff

The Lebanese movement Hezbollah confirmed in a statement on Saturday the killing of its Secretary-General, Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah, in an Israeli airstrike in a southern suburb of Beirut on Friday.

“His Eminence Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah, Secretary General of Hezbollah, joined his great and immortal martyrs, whose journey he led for nearly thirty years,” the statement read.

Hezbollah praised Nasrallah, stating that over the last three decades, “he led them from victory to victory, succeeding the master of the martyrs of the Islamic Resistance in 1992 until the liberation of Lebanon in 2000 and until the divine, sustaining victory in 2006 “.

If anyone still had doubts that the U.S. and Israel are determined to start World War III, this should settle the question. - redguard

[phobic-human]

very ehhh of you to support Hamas, which are theocrats who aren't that supported in Gaza

that being said pflp are pretty based

No I wouldn't say it's very "ehhh" of me to support Hamas, I think it is an absolute necessity to support all Palestinian resistance, regardless of ideological difference. To exclude and condemn one movement but idolize another one is blind idealism. It just so happens that Hamas has been better at organizing and constructing a resistance movement than any other faction, and that has subsequently placed them at the forefront of armed resistance against israel.

We must remember Hamas are not these spooky islamist extremists akin to the Islamic State, Hamas allows Palestinians to follow other religions like Christianity in Gaza, it has destroyed no churches in Gaza unlike israel and isis. Hamas is also allied with Hezbollah and Iran, both Shia, despite being largely Sunni. Hamas fights along side both the PFLP and DFLP under the Joint Operations Room, if Hamas was so bad than why would the Marxist-Leninist groups be allied with them? Because they are all united in a common struggle against one enemy and cannot afford to be divided. Theocrat often rings out like a snarl word, Islam is an integral part of Palestinian culture and identity.

Supporting the Palestinian resistance without Hamas, is not supporting the Palestinian resistance at all. We are in the midst of a genocide and we can't just cherry pick which groups to support. When we condemn Hamas we are dangerously aligning with both israel and anti-Palestinian groups because that is exactly what they want, sowing division and shattering unity. I highly recommend reading The Thorn And The Carnation by Yahya Sinwar because it helps explain the rise of the Islamist current in Palestine at a time when the secular/nationalist current was negotiating with israel and selling out, meanwhile the leftist current had isolated itself because it was far too busy engaging in intellectual debate rather than reality.

So yes, I support Hamas and stand with them, because I can look beyond ideological lenses and see that they are at the center of the resistance. They continue to fight heroically in defense of their people, and their contributions to the armed struggle cannot be overstated. Like it or not Hamas is not going anywhere and we cannot fully support Palestine without them.

[tamamita]

remember that time they compared hamas to isis?

The average lib and their understanding of geopolitics is insane, because Hamas is not in any way affiliated with DAESH.

DAESH does takfir (excommunication) on Hamas, because of their insistance on national liberation. Whereas Hamas does not seek to establish a global caliphate or an Islamic state for that matter.

Hamas is a national liberation movement, it does not carry out attacks against any other foreign entity. DAESH does

DAESH is a Wahabist group that promotes a strictly traditionalist perspective on Sunni Islamic jurisprudence. It disavowes the idea of emulating a school of thought for Sunni Islamic jurisprudence and religious opinions.

Hamas and most Palestinian Muslims follow the Shafi'i school of thought for Sunni Islamic jurisprudence. Their interpretations clash with the Wahhabists.

Both DAESH and the Zionists see Hezbollah and the wider Shi'a resistance movement as their primary enemies; Hamas are allied with the resistance. At one point, DAESH misfired at the Settler colony and have subsequently apologized.

The settler state has largely been supportive of the Salafist rebel factions in the SCW against Assad and the Axis of resistance, and did not actively try to repel DAESH despite being at the borders of the Golan Heights

DAESH wants to see the total and complete extermination of Shi'as, Alevis, Alewites, Druzes as well as Sunnis who do not pledge their allegience to them. Christians and Jews would be allowed to live on the condition they pay the Jizya (poll tax).

DAESH is not concerned with the abolishment of the colonial state entity, Hamas is.

[opencommunion]

"The Armed Forces of Yemen’s Sanaa government, aligned with the Ansarallah resistance movement, announced on 14 July an operation against an Israeli ship in the Gulf of Aden and an attack targeting Israel’s southern port city of Eilat, known in Arabic as Umm al-Rashrash. 

Sanaa’s forces said the operations were a 'response to the Al-Mawasi massacre in Khan Yunis, which was committed by the Israeli enemy [on Saturday].' At least 90 Palestinian civilians were killed in the massacre in southern Gaza. 

... Sanaa also confirmed 'full readiness to carry out joint military operations with any Arab or Islamic party that supports the oppressed Palestinian people.' The Yemeni army has carried out several joint operations with the Islamic Resistance in Iraq (IRI) recently. The Yemeni statement came after renewed US–UK airstrikes on Yemen on 14 July. 

... Washington and London have recently increased their illegal attacks on Yemen, as Sanaa’s forces remain undeterred and continue their blockade on Israeli shipping. US and UK warplanes launched several airstrikes on Hodeidah International Airport in western Yemen on 12 July. ... 57 people have been killed and 87 wounded in 570 airstrikes carried out by the US and UK against Yemen since the start of the western campaign.

The Yemeni army has vowed not to stop its operations until the war in Gaza comes to an end. The western campaign has done nothing to deter the Yemenis. US and EU maritime task forces have failed to progress in preventing attacks on ships, which have strained both the Israeli economy and international shipping as a whole.

Commander Benjamin Orloff, a Navy pilot who recently returned home from deployment, described the experience of intercepting Yemeni missiles and drones as 'traumatizing' in an interview on 13 July. Late last month, a US navy commander said the threat posed by Yemen’s forces in the Red Sea and elsewhere poses a threat unseen by Washington since the Second World War."

[bibleblender]

New article has been published on https://www.bibleblender.com/2023/christian-news/hamas-covenant-islamic-resistance-movement-who-is-hamas

The official "Hamas Covenant" clearly tells us who the Hamas are and lays out their hateful objective to annihilate Israel and all Jews.

It’s no secret what the Hamas want. They clearly lay out their objectives in a document called The Hamas Covenant. They want the creation of an Islamic state in Palestine and the obliteration or dissolution of Israel and all Jews.

[workersolidarity]

🇵🇸⚔️🇮🇱 🚀🚀🚀 🚨

RESISTANCE FORCES TARGET OCCUPIED PALESTINE WITH MISSILE BARRAGE

📹 Scenes from Resistance: the Mujahideen of the Al-Quds Brigades, belonging to Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ), in cooperation with the Al-Ansar Brigades belonging to the Palestinian Freedom Movement, preparing for, and then launching, a missile barrage targeting the Israeli-occupied Palestinian territories.

#source

@WorkerSolidarityNews

[if-you-fan-a-fire]

The Courts

"When Thomas Bratcher asked Malcolm X to testify as an expert witness in the case of SaMarion v. McGinnis, he articulated the relationship between incarcerated Muslims and those outside through the metaphor of war: "The fighting man cannot win a war without the moral support of the home front." Black prisoners saw the courts as a breach in the walls, which allowed them to express their claims before the world outside. Jacobs wrote that "it is as if the courts had become a battlefield where prisoners and prison administrators, led by their respective legal champions, engage in mortal combat." Prisoners used testimony as part of what Berger has called "a strategy of visibility" to make their struggles known. Sostre later described the court as "an arena. It is a battlefield - one of the best. We will use these same torture chambers, these same kangaroo courts, to expose them." Testifying has its political roots in slavery and is central to the Black feminist tradition. As Danielle McGuire argues regarding the struggle against sexual violence in the civil rights movement, "testimony must be seen as a form of direct action and radical protest." Prisoners were fighting on the front lines, with courts as their battlefield, supported by a home front of Muslims on the outside. Writ writing and testimony were what Sostre called their "most essential weapons."

When Commissioner McGinnis took the stand as a defendant before U.S. district court judge John Henderson in October 1962, SaMarion was the only plaintiff from the earlier case of Pierce v. LaVallee. The trial differed in several significant ways from the one that had emerged from Clinton two years earlier. The Pierce ruling had not brought about the changes the NOI [Nation of Islam] had hoped for. Judge Brennan constantly berated NOI attorney Edward Jacko for trying to expand the case beyond the initial complaint regarding denial of access to the Quran, at one point even admonishing him to be a "good little boy." As Brennan saw it, the case had been resolved before it came to trial. He told Jacko "You are asking to purchase the Koran. Now, the Warden says you can have the Koran. Well, what is there left for me to litigate?" Jacko concluded with dismay. "I think that is the crux of the case." However the plaintiffs sought weekly congregational services conducted by Buffalo's Robert X Williams, correspondence with and visitation from ministers and access to prayer books and the Messenger magazine. They meticulously documented their losses of good time credit and years in solitary confinement in order to demonstrate religious discrimination.

The Pince case demonstrated the steep challenge for prisoners during the era when the courts followed a hands-off policy. Judge Brennan did not believe the judicial branch should be involved in matters of prison discipline to begin with. He opined:

This Court didn't put these men in jail. This Court didn't commit the crime for which they were convicted. This Court didn't try them. This Court didn't sentence them. This Court didn't control them, so that you must turn somewhere else to settle those other things.

He argued that naming the warden of Clinton had little bearing, since he is "hot free to run his prison as he likes," and suggested that if the plaintiffs "wanted something, to get a decision that would bind them, No. 1, you would have to bring in the Department of Correction." Perhaps heeding this advice, the men added Commissioner McGinnis to the SaMarion suit.

The state defense attorneys raised the ante by claiming that members of the Nation of Islam were not in fact "true members of the religion of Islam." Calling the tenets of the NOI "preachments of hate [and] race prejudice," Deputy Attorney General Robert Bresinhan outlined what would become the standard argument of the state against the practice of Islam in prisons: that the NOI was a political group acting in the guise of religion and posed clear and present danger to the prison as an institution. He told the court:

It is our position that every activity in a prison must be supervised and it is our position that religion, the guise of religion, does not give a prisoner or anyone else the right to come in and violate those security rules.

As court-appointed attorney Richard Griffin later recalled, since religious orthodoxy was taking center stage, it was "clear that I needed an expert witness and I decided to contact Malcolm X to see if he would testify."

Bratcher wrote Malcom X optimistically before the trial that

This trial promises to be the last one in the Muslims fight for Religious Freedom. This writ is taken out on behalf of the 60 Muslims in Attica Prison. This writ covers all grievances. We have compounded so much evidence - over a period of two years. - against the defendants - Paul D. McGinnis and Walter H. Wilkins-that under its magnitude, these two tyrants must fall.

In its breadth, testimony, and implications for future policy, SaMarion surpassed previous cases in its capacity to decide the future of the Nation of Islam in prisons.

Bratcher correctly anticipated the state's defense in his letter to Malcolm X a year before the trial:

From the Attorney General's answer to my writ, I can see that his main argument is going to be in the presenting of certain publications out of Books, magazines, and papers about the Muslims.... He is going to try and justify the warden's violation of our constitutional rights by submitting these published reports to the court saying that we are preaching hare and we are a fanatical group not recognized by the rest of Muslim World.

As the state began to outline its defense that the NOI was an illegitimate religious group that threatened prison security, Bresinhan's questioning of key witnesses revealed its central strategy: to delegitimize the Nation of Islam's religious standing. Recognizing that "this is the only loophole (Bresinhan] has," Bratcher told Malcolm: "I plan to close this hole up forever. The 'Key' wittness [sic] I am depending on you to 'seal' our victory Minister Malcolm X.

This decision set the stage for a four-day showdown between Malcolm and the state's witness, Columbia University professor Joseph Franz Schacht. While Malcolm admitted openly in court that he had an eighth grade education, had no formal theological training, and could not speak Arabic, Schacht had a "masterly knowledge" of the language, and his book Origins of Muhammadan Jurisprudence - which discussed the historical development and sociological implications of Islamic law-was considered a seminal text in the Western study of Islam.  Yet Malcolm weaved around the state's probing questions regarding his expertise. When asked if he had a degree in theology, he replied that if

my understanding of the word 'theological" is correct, the study of God, the science that deals with religion and the study of God, I studied theology in that sense under the Honorable Elijah Muhammad about our God.

When pressed on the length of his education, he replied, "I am still studying." When interrogated on whether or not he was ordained or had a written certificate permitting him to proselytize, he reminded the court that "Jesus sent his disciples forth with no written certificate or anything but his approval." Malcolm's testimony was so convincing that when Schacht took the stand and listed his memberships in the Royal Netherlands Academy and the Arabic Academy in Damascus, and his honorary degree in law from the University of Algiers, the judge responded, "I don't think it is quite thoroughly clear at this time to qualify him as an expert."

After establishing his religious credentials, Malcolm used the courtroom as a stage to articulate his political views. Almost a year before delivering his most widely remembered speech, "Message to the Grassroots," Malcolm explained the difference between a "House Negro" and a "Field Negro" to a federal judge. The former, he emphasized, had no support from the Black community. "He is a leader in public relations, but when it comes to actual following among Negroes, he has no following. That is how you can tell him." When asked about the Nation of Islam's opposition to integration Malcolm pivoted to the difference between racial separation and racial segregation. "Segregation means to regulate or control," he explained. "A segregated community is that forced upon inferiors by superiors. A separate community is done voluntarily by two equals."

The deputy attorney general tried to return to the point that the NOI taught violence and fomented an unsafe environment in prisons, adducing confiscated material that said "To combat the Negro, convert him or annihilate him is the holiest task of the faithful." This statement, Bresinhan reasoned, was clear evidence of the violent aims of the Nation of Islam. Yet again, Malcolm thwarted the cross-examiner. To destroy the "Negro," he explained, "is to destroy the stigma that makes this Negro a Negro. By converting him you annihilate, annihilate the ignorance and lethargy and immorality and things that sort." No Black person calls himself a Negro except those in America he continued. "The white man respects the Black man, he disrespects the Negro." Malcolm and the Nation of Islam sought to destroy a denigrated notion of Blackness defined by white society as "Negro" and replace it with an exalted, self-determined definition signified as "Black."

Malcolm's rhetorical sleight of hand was not evasive but didactic. Judge Henderson addressed Malcolm specifically at one point, remarking his changed understanding of the term "Negro":

I was taught in my early life that the word 'Negro' is a mark of respect to the Black man. I learned yesterday for the first time that there is a preferred name, the Black man, I take it. I am not used to that and when I refer to the Negro in my discussions to you, I am not doing it with a mark of any disrespect. I was always taught and I thought of it as a mark of respect. I want you to understand that.

While Henderson had, in effect, apologized for and excused his racism in the same remark, his high regard for Malcolm's opinion shifted the tenor of the trial. As Griffin recalled, Henderson was "impressed by Malcolm and his testimony" and "respected Malcolm for his clear statements and responses." Bresinhan, likely attempting to curry favor with the judge, then began adopting the phrase "the American Black Man'' in his questioning. Malcolm's testimony, which lasted for three days and constituted over 20 percent of the trial transcript, persuaded the judge to rule that the Nation of Islam was a religious organization. Even more importantly, Malcolm's expression of his political views took center stage and fundamentally altered the discourse and scope of the case.

Malcolm's testimony radically expanded the case beyond the issues of religious counsel, correspondence, and access to literature. It articulated the NOI's critique of civil rights leadership and questions of self-determination, citizenship, and racial identity. In Malcolm's own intellectual development, his trial testimonies played a central role in developing his political ideas and rhetoric. Before the October 1962 trial, he frequently used "Uncle Toms" to deride civil rights spokespeople such as Martin Luther King, Jr., Bayard Rustin, and Roy Wilkins. After the trial, he developed the contrast between the "House" and "Field Negro," which drew parallels between slavery and the present in an incisive but more historically rooted analysis.  The courtroom served as a space where the NOI articulated its views and developed its broader critiques of the civil rights movement, the prison system, and American racial liberalism. As Malcolm X's three days on the witness stand demonstrated, prison litigation should not be measured in legal victories alone but should be seen as part of a wider arsenal of political strategies, ranging from fighting for constitutional rights through the law to engaging in direct-action protests such as sit-ins, hunger strikes, and takeovers of solitary confinement, which widened the Black freedom struggle during the 1960s.

- Garrett Felber, Those Who Know Don’t Say: The Nation of Islam, the Black Freedom Movement, and the Carceral State. Chapel Hill: The University of North Carolina Press, 2020. p. 77-80

[eretzyisrael]

by POTKIN AZARMEHR

‘Pro-Palestine’ protests have become a near-weekly occurrence across Britain. Since Hamas’s 7 October massacre, regular marches have been drawing in a growing number of young people, marked by passionate advocacy and fervent slogans. Yet despite their zeal, many of these protesters lack a fundamental understanding of the conflict they are so vociferously decrying.

In the past six months, I have attended many of these marches. Having engaged with numerous protesters, I have noticed a startling disconnect between their strong opinions on the Gaza conflict and their shaky grasp of basic facts about it. Among the most perplexing are the LGBT and feminist groups (the ‘Queers for Palestine’ types) who flirt with justifying Hamas’s atrocities. This is a bewildering alliance, given that Hamas’s Islamist ideology is clearly antithetical to the rights and values these groups claim to champion. Its reactionary agenda is profoundly hostile to women’s rights and LGBT individuals.

Protesters seem eager to make excuses for Hamas, but are conspicuously uninformed about exactly what or who this terrorist group represents. On 18 May, during a protest at Piccadilly Circus in London, I spoke to demonstrators who firmly believed that Hamas represents all Palestinians. When I questioned a well-educated participant about the last Palestinian election, she was unaware that none had occurred since 2006, when Hamas gained power in Gaza.

It wasn’t just young people who were uninformed. An older woman with an American accent, seemingly a veteran protester, admitted she knew that Hamas was linked to the Muslim Brotherhood, but had no deeper knowledge of its ideology or history. Others, such as members of revolutionary socialist groups, displayed similar gaps in understanding, unaware of critical events like the 1979 Iranian Revolution.

That revolution gave birth to the Islamic Republic of Iran, a theocratic regime that brutally oppresses its own citizens. It also sponsors Islamist groups like Hamas. I left Iran for the UK not long after that regime began and have spent years resisting its religious extremism and ruthless political intolerance. Protesters were not only unaware of these facts about the Iranian regime, but also ill-informed about the struggle against it, such as the ‘Woman, Life, Freedom’ protests against the government that began in 2022.

One particularly telling conversation involved a man advocating for a ‘Global Intifada’ to replace capitalism with socialism. When asked about successful socialist models, he was unfamiliar with the Israeli kibbutzim, one of history’s few successful egalitarian experiments. His ignorance of these communal settlements in Israel, built by socialist Jewish immigrants, was all too typical.

Perhaps the most telling moment was captured by commentator Konstantin Kisin earlier this year, when he encountered a young man holding a ‘Socialist Intifada’ placard. The protester admitted he had no idea what this meant and that he had taken the sign simply because it was handed to him.

Reflecting on past movements, such as the American anti-Vietnam War protests of the 1960s and the British Anti-Apartheid Movement of the 1980s, one can’t help but note a stark contrast. Protesters then were generally well-informed about their causes. Today’s pro-Palestine protests, however, seem to be driven more by unthinking fervour than by an understanding of the issues at hand.

Throughout all these protests, I am yet to encounter a single participant who condemns Hamas or carries a placard denouncing its terrorism. This not only undermines the protesters’ cause, but also risks aligning them with groups whose values fundamentally oppose the very rights and freedoms they claim to support. It appears that today’s young protesters are high on ideology, but woefully thin on facts.

Potkin Azarmehr is an Iranian activist and journalist who left Iran for the UK after the revolution of 1979.