The State Department has reported to Congress that the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) and Palestinian Authority (PA) are not in compliance with their commitments under the PLO Commitments Compliance Act of 1989 (PLOCCA) and the Middle East Peace Commitments Act of 2002 (MEPCA), including by initiating and supporting actions at international organizations that undermine and contradict prior commitments in support of Security Council Resolution 242 and 338, taking actions to internationalize its conflict with Israel such as through the International Criminal Court (ICC) and International Court of Justice (ICJ), continuing to support terrorism including incitement and glorification of violence (especially in textbooks), and providing payments and benefits in support of terrorism to Palestinian terrorists and their families. The United States is imposing sanctions that deny visas to PLO members and PA officials in accordance with section 604(a)(1) of the MEPCA. It is in our national security interests to impose consequences and hold the PLO and PA accountable for not complying with their commitments and undermining the prospects for peace.
Oct. 25, 1971 | People’s Republic of China In, Taiwan Out, at U.N.
On Oct. 25, 1971, the United Nations General Assembly voted to admit the People’s Republic of China (mainland China) and to expel the Republic of China (Taiwan). The Communist P.R.C. therefore assumed the R.O.C.’s place in the General Assembly as well as its place as one of the five permanent members of the U.N. Security Council.
The New York Times, in the Oct. 27 edition, described the reaction at the United Nations: “After the tension and drama of last night, today was spent in efforts at reconciliation and in political introspection and analysis.” It also noted, “Secretary General Thant appealed to all members to ‘endorse the tremendous step forward’ represented by Peking’s admission and to set aside suspicion and bitterness.”
The Republic of China had been a member of the United Nations from the organization’s formation in 1945, at which time it still governed all of China. However, in 1949, the R.O.C. government was expelled from the mainland by the Communist Party, the founders of the People’s Republic of China.
Though the R.O.C. only continued to control the island of Taiwan after its expulsion from the mainland, it still considered itself the one true government of China. This view was supported by the Western powers in allowing the R.O.C. to remain China’s representative in the United Nations. Their main motive? They wanted to prevent another Communist government from gaining a place in the Security Council.
By 1971, however, the People’s Republic had gained enough international support for the U.N. General Assembly to pass the resolution declaring that it, and not the R.O.C., was the rightful representative of China. The resolution specified that it was a “restoration of the lawful rights” to the P.R.C., indicating that the country had been denied its rightful seat since 1949.
The United States, the most significant opponent of the resolution, then argued for the P.R.C. to be admitted separately from the R.O.C., which would have allowed the R.O.C. to retain its spot. The proposal was defeated.
Connect to Today:
The Republic of China, which has largely relinquished its claim to mainland China, has continued to fight for a place in the United Nations. Over the years, it has applied to the U.N. under the name “The Republic of China (Taiwan)” and “The Republic of China on Taiwan,” but the applications have been denied. The U.S. supports a “one China” policy, which maintains that, though the People’s Republic does not hold sovereignty over Taiwan, there is only one China that includes both the mainland and Taiwan. It has not supported Taiwan’s applications for membership, objecting to what it perceives as “an effort to change the fragile status quo that has governed relations among the three.”
What are your thoughts on the Republic of China’s attempts to be recognized as an autonomous political entity? Do you believe that Taiwan should be admitted to the U.N.? Why or why not?
A Petrifying Prediction from Hillel Fuld
I’m gonna make a prediction right now. Actually, I’m going to make another prediction.
On October 5th, 2023, I predicted that something big was about to happen and Israel would be at the center of it. How did I know? Am I a prophet? No. But I pay close attention to geopolitics and the state of the world. Things were reaching a boiling point and it was clear things were about to explode.
And now I want to make another prediction. It’s not a good one. Not at all. It’s a terrible one.
Antisemitism has reached a point of no return. Hundreds of thousands of Jew haters marching through the streets of western countries disguising themselves as human rights activists who care about Gaza is a daily occurrence. Mass propaganda across social and legacy media convincing millions of ignorant people that Jews are literally the new Nazis has become the new normal. They’re being told we’re assassinating babies with snipers, intentionally starving children, and dropping bombs on people trying to get aid.
Jews are being assaulted on the streets of NY, London, LA, Sydney, Montreal, and the list just goes on and on. I don’t care what anyone says, what we are seeing now is Germany 1935 level antisemitism and it’s getting worse by the day. Jews in Gaza are being tortured and forced to dig their own grave and the world is silent.
The rapists of 10/7 are literally being rewarded for murdering Jews. Western countries rewarding them with a stage.
So far, that’s not a prediction. That’s reality.
Now think… If you were some random person in the west who can’t point to Israel on a map and you’re being told day in, day out that Israel is doing the things mentioned above…
Imagine you’re being told that Jews did 9/11 and that Jews control your life. Imagine you’re being told that Netanyahu is Hitler and he is the leader of the Jews. Just watch one episode of Candace Owens, which millions of people watch. Pure Jew hatred.
Imagine being told that random musicians and artists are being canceled because of the Jews.
Imagine being told that Jews are hurting children and that Jeffrey Epstein did what he did because he was Jewish. So did Harvey Weinstein.
What would you do if those things were hammered into your brain all day every day?
Well, for starters, I’d do whatever I can politically and diplomatically to restrain the Jews. Like, for example, I’d elect a mayor in a city where there are many Jews who despises Jews.
He’s gonna win. He will.
I’d do whatever I can to make sure that all the Jewish organizations out there will be outlawed because they are bringing chaos to the streets of America.
I’d outlaw AIPAC.
I’d stop letting Jews into positions of power whether in the political world, the sports world (Did you hear what happened to Deni Avdija last week? Google it), the entertainment world or any other world in which the Jews can seize more control.
But I wouldn’t stop there.
If I was told over and over that Jews in 2025 are the new Nazis and we are taking over the world, I’d stop it at all costs.
Here’s my prediction.
A very VERY large scale attack on Jews is about to happen.
I don’t know if it’ll happen in Europe, Australia, or in the United States (If I had to guess, I’d guess that it’ll happen in the US) but there are literally millions of brainwashed people walking the planet thinking that Jews are the manifestation of evil in the world.
All it takes is one.
I am telling you right now, I think it’ll happen in less than a month from now.
I’m not talking about some Jew being harassed or assaulted. I’m also not talking about a synagogue being vandalized. I am talking about a large scale, well coordinated terrorist attack on a very central Jewish location, somewhere where lots of Jews gather.
I hope I’m wrong but sadly I don’t think I am.
This attack will be the straw that breaks the camel’s back and a huge number of Jews will make Aliyah.
This attack won’t be an isolated event. It’ll open the gates of hell for Jews outside Israel.
Jewish homes will be marked. Jewish businesses shut down. Jewish professionals fired from their jobs. All of that at scale!
After this attack, antisemitism will become all but institutionalized. The Democratic Party will fight hard to boycott Israel and they’ll have support from countless countries around the world, which will empower them to make Jew hatred a real policy of the party.
Jews will absolutely no longer be able to leave their house safely.
Some Jews will still convince themselves that they’re safe and that there’s nothing to worry about. Those Jews will sadly learn the hard way how much they are hated.
Many Jews, I don’t know if it’s hundreds of thousands or millions, will come to Israel out of fear. They will start a new life here.
The fact is, antisemitism has reached levels we have not seen since the Holocaust. I’m not referring only to Hamas. I’m talking about Jew hatred in the western world. It’s getting very scary.
Jew hatred is literally making otherwise smart people dumb. They believe things no normal person would believe. Things that are incredibly easy to debunk but they don’t bother.
The whole “I’m anti Zionist not antisemitic” lie is no longer necessary. Podcasters are openly praising Hitler and no one cares. So are artists. It’s widespread and it’s mainstream.
Like I said, I truly hope I’m wrong but I don’t think I am.
All I can say to my brothers and sisters around the world, look around you at all times. Pay close attention to your surroundings and if you notice something off, report it immediately.
It is not an exaggeration to say that there are now millions of people around the world who want to see a Holocaust 2.0.
Sorry to be an alarmist but I feel this in my bones. The Jew hatred around the world is about to lead to disaster.
All we can do is pay attention and pray. That’s what I’ll do, pray.
God, I hope I’m wrong.
This photo was taken today.

Not in Gaza. Not in Syria. Not in Iran.
In Sydney, Australia.
I give it one month.
Recognising Palestinian state would destabilise international law, Starmer told
Sir Keir Starmer has been warned that recognising a Palestinian state would “destabilise” the international legal order.
Malcolm Shaw KC, a leading lawyer, said that the recognition plan “would create a troublesome precedent and could well challenge and ultimately destabilise an international system founded upon a common understanding of what it is to be a state”.
The fresh legal opinion, seen by The Telegraph, was circulated to the Prime Minister, Lord Hermer, the Attorney General, and dozens of influential Labour MPs.
It was commissioned by Lord Mendelsohn, the Labour peer, in response to Sir Keir’s decision to recognise a State of Palestine in September unless Israel meets certain conditions.
The warning comes after Hamas made it clear it will not disarm unless an independent Palestinian state is established.
The militant group took the step of issuing a statement “in response to media reports quoting US envoy Steve Witkoff, claiming [Hamas] has shown willingness to disarm”.
It said: “We reaffirm that resistance and its arms are a legitimate national and legal right as long as the occupation continues.
“This right is recognised by international laws and norms, and it cannot be relinquished except through the full restoration of our national rights – first and foremost, the establishment of an independent, fully sovereign Palestinian state with Jerusalem as its capital.”
Hamas added that Mr Witkoff’s trip on Friday to a Gaza aid distribution site was “designed to mislead public opinion, polish the image of the occupation, and provide it with political cover for its starvation campaign and continued systematic killing of defenceless children and civilians in the Gaza Strip”.
Mr Shaw’s legal opinion says the Prime Minister’s plan to recognise the state of Palestine is “premature and may have unintended consequences” and that it “confuses and distorts” any attempt at a peaceful two-state solution.
‘A prize for precipitating war’
He describes Sir Keir’s decision to make statehood dependent on the behaviour of Israel, a “third country”, as “remarkable”.
“This is exceptional and, frankly, not in keeping with the tenor of the relevant international principles,” he wrote.
“Recognition at the current time will be seen as a prize for precipitating the war on Oct 7 2023 with its attendant rapes and massacres.”
Mr Shaw also argues that the Palestinian territories “do not currently satisfy” the criteria for a state.
Some 40 peers warned this week that recognising Palestine in the process set out by the Prime Minister would be illegal. They included Lord Pannick KC and Lady Deech, both respected lawyers and patrons of UK Lawyers for Israel, an association of British lawyers who are supportive of Israel.
Lord Hermer is understood to have disagreed with their arguments and dismissed their claim.
But Mr Shaw’s opinion could pile further pressure on the Government to reconsider its legal position with regards to recognition.
He further argues that since both Israel and the Palestinian territories are still bound by the Oslo Accords, the agreement that remains the legal framework that governs the relationship between Israel and the Palestinians, proper recognition at this time is not possible.
Mr Shaw, who is the author of a standard legal textbook on international law, is currently representing Israel in its International Court of Justice (ICJ) case against South Africa, which argued that Israeli forces had committed genocidal acts in Gaza.
While Sir Keir has always agreed to the principle of recognising a Palestinian state at some point, he was reluctant to do so until his surprise announcement this week.
The Prime Minister appears to have been influenced by a number of factors, including the worsening starvation crisis in Gaza, pressure from international allies such as Emmanuel Macron, and increasingly vocal calls for immediate recognition from his own MPs.
The setting up of a rival Left-wing political party under Jeremy Corbyn, which calls for an independent Palestinian state, may have also put pressure on Sir Keir to act.
On Saturday, protesters from the activist group Youth Demand blocked roads in the Holland Park and King’s Cross areas of London as they called for an immediate British trade embargo on Israel.
On Thursday, Labour MPs supportive of Israel reportedly clashed with Jonathan Powell, Sir Keir’s national security adviser, in a meeting about the recognition announcement.
10 dilemmas posed by a proposed Palestinian state : 10 questions which journalists can ask.
- Encirclement: Would a proposed state of Palestine not swallow up Jordan, most of whose population is Palestinian, leaving Israel with a hostile state from the Iraqi border to the Mediterranean Sea, with a corridor across the Negev between Gaza to Hebron?
- Israeli Arabs: Would the Arabs of the Galilee and the Negev not sue to join the Palestinian Arab state and then demand the fulfillment of UN Resolution 181 – an Israeli withdrawal to the 1947 borders (evacuation of Nahariya, Acre, Nazareth, Jaffa, Ashdod, Ashkelon, Kiryat Gat, and Beersheba)?
- Terror: Would a new Palestinian Arab entity disband terrorist organizations? We asked this question before the Oslo process imported the PLO in 1993, which has never renounced terrorism or violence as a means to liberate all of Palestine
- Armament: Why would there be any expectation that a sovereign Palestine be demilitarized, since all nation states maintain an armed force as an integral aspect of their new nation?
- Refugees: How would Israel deal with expectations of the Arab countries and UNRWA residents who continue to demand that Israel must absorb descendants of Arab refugees and thereby displace thousands of Israelis from places like Haifa, Safed, and Jaffa, and 80 kibbutzim which rest on the property of Arab villages where Arabs left in 1948?
- Air space: Would the Israeli Air Force be forbidden to fly over a new Palestinian Arab state?
- Alliances: What would prevent a Palestinian state from making military deals with countries still at war with Israel?
- Water: Would a sovereign Palestine not carry out pirate drilling, and threaten the mountain aquifer of Judea and Samaria?
- Jewish sovereignty: Would the momentum for a Palestinian Arab state not erase the momentum of the right of the Jews to the Land of Israel in international consciousness?
- Loss of independence: Would Israel not become a subject to the sponsors of a Palestinian Arab state – today, known as the Quartet – the US, EU, UN, and Russia?
All this leads to questions that Middle East policymakers should ask about a proposed Palestinian state:
- Will you ask the Palestinians to clearly recognize the Jewish state of Israel?
- Will you demand that the Palestinians finally ratify the Declaration of Principles for Peace signed at the White House in 1993?
- Will you demand that the Palestinians cancel the PLO charter from 1964 that calls for the extermination of the Jewish state?
- Will you demand that the Palestinians cancel their unprecedented law from 2015 which assures a salary for life for anyone who murders a Jew?
- Will you demand cancellation of the new PA and UNRWA school curriculum, based on jihad, martyrdom, and “right of return by force of arms”?
- Will you demand the removal of weapons from PA and UNRWA schools?
- Will you insist that UNRWA dismiss employees affiliated with Hamas, Islamic Jihad, or Fatah terror organizations?
- Will you introduce UNHCR standards to advance resettlement of fourth- and fifth-generation refugees from the 1948 war who have spent seven decades relegated to refugee status? Current UNRWA policy is that any Arab refugee resettlement would interfere with a purported “right of return” to pre-1948 Arab localities.
- Will you demand an audit of donor funds that emanate from 68 nations for the PA and UNRWA, with little transparency?
- Given the active participation of the Palestine Security Services (PSS) in the current war, will you demand that the US cease its support of the PSS?
Qatar’s Financial Influence on U.S. Higher Education Sparks Concern Over Islamist and Anti-Israel Agendas
A comprehensive report released by the Foundation for Defense of Democracies (FDD) has intensified scrutiny over Qatar’s pervasive financial footprint in American higher education, raising alarms about the extent to which the Gulf state is leveraging its wealth to promote extremist, Islamist, and anti-Israel ideologies within U.S. academic institutions. The findings, which have been prominently highlighted in a report that appeared at VIN News on Monday shine a spotlight on growing concerns among lawmakers, education experts, and national security analysts regarding the long-term implications of foreign funding on American campuses.
Natalie Ecanow, a senior research analyst at FDD, testified before the Committee for Homeland Affairs, Public Safety, and Veteran’s Affairs, warning that Qatar’s financial reach into American colleges and universities has placed it at the top tier of foreign donors—outpacing even global heavyweights such as China and Saudi Arabia. According to the information provided in the VIN News report, Ecanow described Qatar’s influence as part of a “spending spree” designed not merely for prestige, but as a strategic effort to inject hostile ideologies into American academic discourse and even influence K-12 curricula.
Citing federal disclosure data, VIN News reported that Qatar has funneled approximately $6.25 billion into American higher education institutions since 2001. However, experts like Ecanow believe the true figure is likely much higher due to widespread underreporting by recipient institutions — a finding corroborated by investigations launched during the previous Trump administration. These investigations uncovered some $6.5 billion in previously undisclosed foreign funds, a significant portion of which came from Qatar.
The challenge, according to the VIN News report, is twofold. First, universities accepting large sums from foreign donors often fail to comply with federal reporting requirements, leading to an incomplete public record of foreign influence. Second, Qatar has actively sought to conceal its financial dealings, going so far as to file a lawsuit to block the state of Texas from releasing funding records related to Texas A&M University. A Texas judge ultimately mandated the disclosure of these documents, revealing nearly half a billion dollars in grants and contracts awarded by Qatar to the institution.
Qatar’s ability to wield soft power through its immense financial resources stems from its global gas wealth, derived from controlling approximately 11 percent of the world’s natural gas reserves. Despite having a native population of just 330,000, Qatar has positioned itself as a major player on the world stage, using its economic leverage to enhance its image abroad while simultaneously advancing ideological agendas. This dual strategy allows Qatar to maintain strong bilateral ties with the United States while covertly supporting extremist organizations, including Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood — entities with well-documented histories of anti-Israel and anti-Western rhetoric.
Further highlighting the ideological reach of Qatari influence, VIN News reported on a 2024 conference hosted at Georgetown University’s Doha campus, a direct beneficiary of Qatari funding. The event, titled “The Future of Gaza,” featured a former Al Jazeera executive notorious for publicly applauding Hamas’s brutal October 7 massacre of Israeli civilians. The speaker had previously delivered a laudatory eulogy for Yusuf al-Qaradawi, a Muslim Brotherhood-aligned cleric infamous for endorsing suicide bombings against Israelis. Such incidents exemplify the type of extremist narratives that Qatari-funded institutions may amplify, either directly or by offering platforms to individuals with deeply controversial views.
Qatar’s influence has a broader institutional impact as well. Universities that receive substantial financial support from foreign governments such as Qatar are increasingly less reliant on traditional alumni donor bases. This shift reduces their accountability to alumni networks and potentially diminishes the influence of stakeholders who might otherwise advocate against rising antisemitism on campus. The implications are particularly concerning given Qatar’s public positions on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Doha has consistently placed blame solely on Israel for the Gaza conflict, refused to hold Hamas accountable for its terrorist activities, and backed Islamist factions opposed to Western democratic values.
According to the information in the VIN News report, these dynamics are not merely theoretical concerns but are already manifesting in tangible ways on U.S. campuses. By embedding itself within the financial fabric of American higher education, Qatar gains a subtle yet significant foothold in shaping academic discourse, faculty research priorities, and institutional policies—especially regarding Middle East studies and Israel-related topics.
Moreover, as the VIN News report pointed out, Qatar’s global influence operation extends beyond higher education. The Gulf state owns Al Jazeera, a media outlet widely criticized for broadcasting anti-Israel propaganda and providing sympathetic coverage of Islamist movements. By aligning its media and educational outreach, Qatar effectively amplifies its ideological messages across multiple platforms, a strategy that the VIN News report described as both sophisticated and deeply concerning for proponents of academic freedom and democratic values.
The scrutiny brought to light by the FDD report has sparked calls among policymakers for stricter oversight of foreign donations to U.S. educational institutions. Critics argue that lax enforcement of disclosure requirements, coupled with universities’ willingness to accept large sums from questionable sources, creates an environment ripe for foreign influence. The revelations about Qatar’s funding activities are expected to fuel legislative discussions about tightening transparency laws and imposing penalties for noncompliance.
While Qatar publicly maintains a cooperative relationship with the United States, its financial support for extremist organizations and its promotion of Islamist ideologies stand in stark contrast to the values espoused by American democratic institutions. As VIN News has reported, the dichotomy between Qatar’s official diplomatic posture and its behind-the-scenes activities illustrates the complexity of its international engagements.
The findings of the FDD report serve as a critical reminder of the importance of vigilance in protecting American academic institutions from covert ideological influence. The case of Qatar’s involvement in U.S. higher education highlights the urgent need for greater transparency, stricter regulatory oversight, and a renewed commitment to safeguarding the integrity of American educational and cultural institutions.
Perfidious
This one word encompasses several meanings applicable to the situation being faced today by Israel and Jews worldwide.
Michael Kuttner
Synonyms include treacherous, duplicitous, deceitful, false, untrue, dishonest, and two-faced.
Take your pick because any one of them more than adequately describes politicians, social influencers and the media and their orchestrated orgy of hate and disinformation.
There has not been such a fetid frenzy since the heady days of the pre-Shoah era. Today’s eruption of vile bile is eerily reminiscent of the blood-curdling libels of the Middle Ages when temporal rulers and ecclesiastical authorities combined to accuse the Jews of deicide and child murders.
It has always been a puzzle for good people to understand how the most outrageous accusations against Jews could gain such traction among supposedly educated and cultured sectors of society.
The answer, in fact, is very simple.
A relentless and constant torrent of poisonous lies and accusations is the most effective means to influence the masses. When the targets are Jews, the noxious seeds of hate germinate spontaneously.
I remember my mother and other German refugees recounting their experiences during the years leading up to the Shoah. They remembered how school friends with whom they had socialised for years suddenly wanted to have nothing to do with them. In 1933, Jewish children found that those they had imagined were lifelong friends had cut off all contact. From one day to the next, they were ostracised, vilified and abused. Called “dirty Jews”, German schoolchildren faced a bewildering reality.
The trauma these children suffered was shared by their parents. Many considered themselves loyal Germans and well integrated into German society. They had little understanding of how years of delegitimisation caused this catastrophic situation.
Today, we should know better, but have the lessons of the recent past been truly learnt?
Last week in Melbourne, students from Mount Scopus College visited a museum. They were confronted there by older pupils from a non-Jewish school who verbally abused them with the same “dirty Jew” slurs, among other unmentionable phrases.
What precipitated this onslaught from students who, in most cases, had most probably never had a Jewish friend and do not have the slightest idea what Judaism is all about?
The answer, of course, is very simple.
Thanks to a relentless campaign against Israel in the media, these students have absorbed a negative and toxic understanding of Jews. As has been proven, it does not take very much for this incitement to morph into hate for Jews. Social media and peer pressure contribute equally to brainwashing receptive minds.
Several troubling questions must be asked.
What did these non-Jewish abusers learn at their school about Jews and Israel?
Did the teachers accompanying those pupils make any real effort to stop and condemn this outbreak of intolerance?
How many of these abusive pupils picked up their shameful attitudes from their parents or home environment?
Apart from horrified shock, what steps are being taken to hold those responsible accountable?
Politicians, groups and the media who disseminate the most outrageous lies about Israel cannot hide from the inevitable fallout of their rhetoric and reporting.
Jewish students must be provided with sufficient knowledge and the ability to counter and cope with the tsunami of disinformation now flooding social outlets.
Those adults who still live in denial and believe the situation is all overblown and exaggerated need to take a long hard look at the past and wake up to the realization that inaction leads to disaster.
The warping of young minds is already well underway.
In a recent survey in the United Kingdom, 21% of young Britons say that Israel does not have the right to exist.
This comes hard on the heels of a US survey which revealed that half of young Americans support Hamas.
How many of them were part of the 20% of Jews who voted for the Democratic anti-Israel candidate for the forthcoming New York mayoral elections?
A recent American podcast illustrates the extent to which ignorance and the drip feed of lies can produce the most outrageous outbursts about Jews. The eight young participants claimed that “Jewish people caused the Holocaust and therefore they should themselves be eliminated.” This assertion was followed by accusations of Jewish conspiracies as the reason for problems in the USA.
The moderator did nothing to shut them down or challenge them in any way. If this example of the up-and-coming generation of Americans is anything to go by, then the future for Jews in that country is indeed bleak.
One has only to witness the chaos at US universities and the uncontrolled torrents of anti-Israel/Zionist bile to realise that a lava flow of Jew hate is waiting to erupt. The spectacle of Jewish Democratic politicians embracing and tolerating these manifestations is indicative of a deep malaise in the American Jewish community.
Jewish celebrities who suddenly discover their hitherto latent ethnicity and condemn Israel from the supposed safety of Hollywood and London are embraced by a media salivating at the prospect of disaffected “stars.” This week, Miriam Margolyes compared Israel and Israelis to Nazis, and the journalists were euphoric.
Politicians distort historical facts with gay abandon, and many communal spokespersons let them get away with it.
Australian PM Albanese stated that his country was proud to support the establishment of Israel in 1948 and two States. Presumably, he was referring to the 1947 UN partition plan. Glaringly omitted, of course, was the fact that the Arab representatives (Palestinian fake nationality not yet having been invented) rejected the very notion of a two-state solution. Albanese and his supporters deliberately erase this inconvenient truth and gloss over the 80 years of terrorism against the Jewish State.
The perfidious British, in direct contradiction to the Mandate provisions and the San Remo agreement, handed the territory intended for Jewish settlement to their Hashemite friends. Starmer, Macron, Albanese and others want to hand over the remaining strategic heartland of Israel to a terror-supporting entity.
Shamefully, some communal groups endorse this lethal plan. They equivocate by saying the time is not right, thus, in effect, giving a wink and a nod to its implementation.
What they do not comprehend is that the same jihadists who are waiting in the wings to murder and annihilate Jewish sovereignty are also rapidly entrenching themselves in democratic countries.
The recent horrific massacres of Syrian Druze by local jihadists highlight the fate that Israeli Jews would face if “Palestine” were ever established in Judea and Samaria. Israel was the only country that came to the aid of the beleaguered Druze minority, and even then, it was condemned for doing so. The international community, showing that it has learnt nothing from its shameful silence during the Shoah, remained conspicuous by its indifference.
University mobs and the usual “useful idiots” were nowhere to be seen or heard. Most media outlets contributed to a mass amnesia and instead concentrated their venom against the only nation that tried to defend the Syrian Druze from complete annihilation.
These daily doses of lies, slander, delegitimisation and hate are producing a harvest of poisonous fruit.
Dismissing and minimising these looming threats is a failure.
The only strategy is to stand up, speak up, demolish untruths and strengthen Jewish knowledge and identity.
As we commemorate Tisha B’Av and all the calamitous events which have occurred over the millennia, we should resolve to never again be at the mercy of those who prefer to appease Jew haters.
Israel, Jews and Peace in Schoolbooks and Teachers’ Guides Used in UNRWA Schools in Judea, Samaria, East Jerusalem and the Gaza Strip
Dr. Arnon Groiss has submitted a paper from our agency for publication by the Meir Amit intelligence and terrorism information center which documents that the Palestinian Authority, which now refers to itself as the State of Palestine, which has established a new school system which negates the very idea of a peaceful resolution of the conflict. Rather, it calls for a violent struggle for the liberation of Palestine – including Israel’s pre-1967 territories – with insinuated genocidal intentions. Therefore, any illusion that the forthcoming UN conference on Palestine addresses a two state solution represents any semblance of a two state solution represents the great lie of the 21st century.
is there an academic ready to welcome Dr. Gross to present his objective research in a well publicized public forum?
UK: Natasha Hausdorff discusses proposed UK recognition of a Palestinian State on Talk TV
Natasha Hausdorff, UKLFI Charitable Trust Legal Director, discusses the validity and consequences of proposed UK recognition of a Palestinian State on Talk TV, interviewed by Ian Collins.
Senior Hamas official: We were surprised by Israel’s decision to abandon negotiations

Masked Hamas militants hold weapons during a protest against Israel's attacks on the Gaza Strip, in Gaza City, Monday, March 3, 2008. In the early hours of Monday, Palestinians counted nine separate Israeli airstrikes on weapons manufacturing and storage facilities, a Hamas headquarters and groups of gunmen, all over Gaza. Five Palestinians were killed in the strikes, all of them Hamas militants, Hamas said. (AP Photo/Khalil Hamra) *** Local Caption *** ??? ??????
Ghazi Hamad, a member of Hamas’s political bureau and a participant in its negotiation team, criticized US President Donald Trump following his accusations that Hamas is obstructing a hostage release deal and his public support for the organization’s elimination.
In an interview with Al-Araby, Hamad claimed Hamas presented a “positive and realistic” position during the Doha talks, expressing readiness for an agreement that would include humanitarian aid and guarantees for continued negotiations following a 60-day ceasefire. He said Trump’s remarks were “baseless” and even surprised mediators from Qatar and Egypt.
Hamad accused Israel of attempting to impose terms it failed to secure militarily, particularly control over aid distribution in Gaza. He said Hamas insisted that aid be managed by neutral international bodies, such as the UN, the Palestinian Red Crescent, and other organizations active in Gaza prior to March.
According to Hamad, Israel demanded control over roughly 40% of the Gaza Strip, including the humanitarian city and the Morag Corridor – territories he claimed would allow Israel to resume fighting at a later stage. He said Hamas, in contrast, sought assurances to prevent renewed hostilities, the withdrawal of IDF forces, and the removal of aid distribution centers.
Hamad also revealed that Hamas presented “keys” for a prisoner exchange deal involving the release of Israeli hostages in return for Palestinian Arab prisoners, likely including those connected to the October 7 terror attacks.












