1) Don’t Tell People Israel Is Why They Don’t Have Medicare
I see where you're coming from. But I had to watch the woman I loved die a little more each day over years as health insurance denied lifesaving care. I called all my congresspeople begging for help and never even got a single callback. At the exact same time, every one of them approved infinite funds to bomb children in Gaza. The message I got from my politicians loud and clear was: "your dead partner for 10 dead Palestinian children is such a good deal, you'd have to be antisemitic to object--and don't you dare protest or we'll get you fired and you'll lose health insurance."
It cannot be overstated how infuriating that was. That was the message my own politicians were broadcasting.
2) Don’t Call the Iran War “Israel’s War”
It's true that US presidents and the US military-industrial has agency. That's why we can't blame Netanyahu all that heavily for Iraq, even though he maliciously attempted to pull us into that war. But Netanyahu keeps sabotaging the peace agreements. If that continues, after a certain point this will be Israel's war. I'm not sure we're at that threshold yet, but it seems inevitable at this rate.
3) “My greatest concern right now is that the State of Israel is losing support across the political spectrum"
Strongly disagree this is a good framing. Because it shows signs of the same disease that's been infecting American politics: framing sympathies around backlash against the aggressor. Israel is doing monstruous things right now. Child death tolls are well into the hundreds of thousands. Ben Gvir just tried to put crocodiles in one of his torture camps--it was blocked by Israeli PETA on animal rights objections, no concern about human rights. Ben Gvir helped drive through a Palestinian-only execution law and celebrated his birthday with a noose-themed cake. In response to the leak about prison guards raping and seriously injuring a prisoner, the government called the rapists heroes and celebrated the right to rape rally. Settler-terrorists are escalating their efforts in the West Bank and even Syria.
At the current rate if left unchecked, I think it's painfully likely the history books will talk about Israel the same way they talk about Imperial Japan and Nazi Germany. The government is blatantly playing into the Greater Israel extremism, an expansion which would cause Holocaust levels of death and destruction on civilian populations. The goal with Iran was to turn a country of 93 million into a failed state, which would've come with an unfathomable death toll.
Imagine how horrifying an equivalent statement would be: "my greatest concern right now is that the state of Imperial Japan/Nazi Germany is losing support across the political spectrum". And yet this is the constant framing we see all the time from our politicians and from the media.
I've been thinking about this "crossing the line" argument and I'm beginning to believe it's as self-defeating as the two-state argument. Obviously the benefits Israel receives, if diminished, wouldn't make much of a difference to school improvements and boosting other underfunded programs in, say, Michigan. But a defense based on "crossing the line" or "approaches an anti-Jewish trope" ignores the reality that all US taxpayer money that goes to Israel makes all Americans, including diaspora Jews, complicit in the current Israeli government's war crimes against the Palestinian population within its borders. More important, the policies and actions of the Netanyahu government are actually drivers of anti-Semitism worldwide, something we see and experience every day here in the US. Our current president is a big fan of "America First" and his government has pulled back enormously from funding programs the benefit foreign countries and even threatened to decrease support of NATO. If Al-Sayed is elected, his obligation will be to his constituents; he will be within his rights to focus on complicity and appropriate uses of taxpayer funds. Clucking about how reductions might be OK for other countries, including our longterm friends and allies but a no-no as to Israel because "it approaches an anti-Jewish trope" is unlikely to be a winning hand.
...? The average age of Gaza before 10/7 was 19. Meaning roughly half its population were children.
There's been a years-long starvation campaign and medical facilities have been systematically targeted. Even a year ago, all the credible death estimates were 200k or higher. And it's only gotten worse. And half the population is/was children.
At this point, anyone citing that ridiculously low, frozen for years figure is revealing they're either utterly uninformed or a bad actor. Because that ~70k figure is ridiculously conservative and is almost certainly a drastic undercount of just bombing/sniping fatalities. It doesn't even get into the starvation & lack of medical care deaths.
This was from years ago. But they noted: "In recent conflicts, such indirect deaths range from three to 15 times the number of direct deaths. Applying a conservative estimate of four indirect deaths per one direct death to the 37 396 deaths reported, it is not implausible to estimate that up to 186 000 or even more deaths could be attributable to the current conflict in Gaza."
The number of direct deaths has risen dramatically. The ratio only gets more horrifying.
This breaks down the number of people in starvation conditions and what that means. 641,000 expected to face IPC Phase 5 by September 2025--and things have only gotten worse over time. IPC Phase 5 is marked by "Deaths of two people or four children for every 10,000 each day."
The list goes on and on. You do know how that 73k death figure is sourced, right? It only counts bodies of those who've died from direct violence recovered and brought to a hospital or morgue. Israel has been targeting the facilities that could even count casualties. That number doesn't include any of what's under the rubble. It doesn't count people who die in tents from famine, disease, unsafe water, etc.
The death count is well into the hundreds of thousands. And the whole world is just standing by and letting hundreds of thousands die in one of the most grotesque horror shows that the world has seen in generations.
"I see where you're coming from. But I had to watch the woman I loved die a little more each day over years as health insurance denied lifesaving care. I called all my congresspeople begging for help and never even got a single callback. At the exact same time, every one of them approved infinite funds to bomb children in Gaza. The message I got from my politicians loud and clear was: "your dead partner for 10 dead Palestinian children is such a good deal, you'd have to be antisemitic to object--and don't you dare protest or we'll get you fired and you'll lose health insurance."
This is no way proves the point you're trying to make. I don't even know what you're talking about.
The moral of his story is: some congresspeople respond to people who *paid* for them to be elected, but *not* their constituents.
Almost all members of Congress have accepted money from AIPAC in order to get elected. Once elected, they openly voice their support for Israel and vote for every bill which supports Israel.
There's a hall of shame regarding the congressmen or women who've received the most money from AIPAC.
American tax dollars should be spent on the American people. If Congress decides to spend money on defense--which it should--that money should be spent on the defense of Americans and the US homeland. Not Israel.
Israel is the largest cumulative recipient of U.S. foreign aid since World War II.
When adjusted for inflation, the US has provided Israel with more than $300 B in total economic and military assistance since its founding in 1948.
While other nations may receive more funding in a specific single year due to active conflicts or humanitarian crises, Israel remains the highest total recipient over time.
This isn't counting the cost of the current war against Iran (over $100B) and the daily cost of monitoring the Strait of Hormuz ($2B)--all for defense of Israel.
Well, mine and Ben Gvir's + Bibi's. Greater Israel encompasses the West Bank, Jordan, Lebanon, and a chunk of Iraq, Kuwait, Syria, Egypt, and Saudi Arabia. There are already settlers in Syria claiming government support. State policy seems essentially to take over the West Bank with 0 pretense of law and order anymore. The buffer zone in Lebanon keeps creeping, and they've declared 0 intent to leave.
Now check the population of these areas. And the civilian deathrate under areas Israel has occupied. And read more Israeli media--complete dehumanization has occurred. There are recent polls showing...what was it, ~40% of the Israeli population wants to outright kill all the inhabitants of any conquered cities.
That's the thing about ethnosupremacist expansionist states. If not stopped, they keep going. And Israel has only been rewarded for its behavior. If unchecked and if it continues, we'll eventually be looking at Holocaust levels of civilian death and wondering how on Earth we got there.
Well, what you wrote sounds very interesting, but further confirms my point about your observations and statements being representative of someone who is unstable. Only an emotionally, unstable person, would cherry pick unrelated “facts“ (without any context), uses inductive logic and connects the dots to reach a preordained verdict, that, in this case, Israel must somehow be stopped in its expansionist endeavors or …
There wasn’t any encroachment on Gaza or Lebanon on October 6 of 2023. The fact that you are unable to comprehend WHY Israel is occupying parts of Lebanon and Gaza other than “expansion” demonstrates a shocking lack of critical thinking (or lying) on your part. As for Egypt, Iraq, Kuwait and Saudi Arabia, I have no idea what you’re talking about since Israel occupies no territory in SA, K, or I, and voluntarily gave Egypt back a significant amount of territory for peace.
Concerning dead civilians, you seem to conflate the fact that civilians in war zones (between Israel and Jihadist organizations Hamas & Hezbollah) somehow proves Israel’s immoral, expansionist, intent? Never mind the acts of hamas and hezbollah. Nothing there right.?
I agree with your first point. Both you and Ben Givir are unstable.
There 100% was encroachment on Gaza before 10/7. They were essentially blockaded and besieged in a giant open air prison. Israel routinely went in to kill and kidnap people. On 10/6, there were more illegally kidnapped Palestinian and Gazan (hard to know split between WB and Gaza) hostages in Israeli torture camps and military tribunal prisons. There were almost as many Palestinian children in illegal military tribunals alone as the total # of Israelis captured on 10/7--and that doesn't count the children in other kinds of Israeli prisons.
Netanyahu had been helping to prop up Hamas for decades explicitly because Hamas was known for executing dissidents and would prevent the emergence of more legitimate political forces.
And if you don't know what I'm talking about regarding Greater Israel, it sounds like I follow Israeli politics and the Israeli government closer than you do.
You're also willfully missing the point on civilians. Israel is conducting ethnic cleansing. Their own government is bragging about it at this point. Every single person in a targeted expansion zone is in serious danger at the current rate. You were wondering how we hit millions of child deaths? That's how.
I'm going to block/stop replying to you, because I think I made my point very clear and you're just reaching for anything you can throw at the argument. You very clearly have an agenda here, and I don't think it's a good-faith one.
Kf course I’m biased. We all are. The point is, seeking compromise and accommodation requires a foundation of reality. You don’t get this by promoting slanderous positions. Weapon words like “apartheid“ genocide“ colonialism“ ethnic cleansing“ are meant to obscure complicated nature of the IP conflict
You're citing the Jewish Chronicle, an org infamous for maliciously misleading pieces on Gaza. May as well be citing a Klan daily newspaper on how lynchings aren't a problem at all. Come on, don't be a Goebbels wannabe.
Netanyahu did NOT "maliciously attempt to pull us into that war (Iraq)". He was not even prime minister at that time and he has always been very focused on the Iranian regime as the biggest threat to Israel snd Western democracies.... His record is clear on that.
OK I stand corrected on that testimony... wasn't aware of it. But he was still 7 years away from being elected again as PM. He was not PM and not in charge of Israeli policy at that time
Yours is a thoughtful analysis and I agree with most of it but it is nevertheless a fact that Israel, via AIPAC and wealthy American Zionists has very much "deeply penetrated the American government". While it may not control U.S. foreign policy, it certainly exerts a very strong influence and consequently does impact spending decisions. And it now is able to exert even more influence because it can bribe the eagerly complicit Trump regime.
Israel opened the doors to "opinions that are dangerous" because the Zionists decided to form a Jewish ethno-state in the center of the Arab world.
Theodor Herzl thought up this "brilliant" idea in 1896. It took many decades for Zionist organizations to bring about his dream of a Jewish state. They did this by gathering together Jews from many regions of the world, but mainly from Eastern Europe and Russia. The population of Jews gradually rose from 5 per cent in the 1880s to 30 per cent in the 1940s. At that point there was open conflict with the people they had moved in with, the Arab Muslims and Christians. After going to the UN to attempt to solve the problem, only one side agreed (the Zionists) because the UN proposed a two-state solution with the minority population receiving the majority of the land. The Zionists simply waited for the Mandate to expire and then seized all of it, chasing out the majority population, both Muslim and Christian.
The high price Israel is paying today is because of the way they formed their state. A lot of ethnic cleansing took place, and continues to take place to this day.
You’re right only the formation of Israel involved any conflict or violence. Everywhere else, especially muslim countries, followed a peaceful process compliant with international law. Excuse me while I go burst out laughing.
Edit: lol my comment was blocked but people claiming ethnic cleansing meets your standards. Make sense.
The Zionists knew beforehand that *none* of their immediate neighbors approved of a Jewish ethno-state being formed in their midst. ALL of the neighboring states voted against the proposed state at the UN General Assembly vote held on Resolution 181.
What did they think would happen?
The Zionists went ahead with their vanity project anyway--to the detriment of every Arab Muslim and Arab Christian living in Palestine and to the harm of Jewish people everywhere, not to mention the 30k Jewish lives which have been extinguished in defense of the ethno-state.
Haha keep living in your revisionist fantasy. Israel isn’t going anywhere and is more powerful than every muslim state combined while having comparatively minuscule resources. It must be painful living in that reality so makes sense why people like you turn to fantasy, I can understand the anger too. Maybe use that energy to improve your society instead of trying to tear down others.
Haha very well actually iran is a walking corpse and everything they spent so much time and money on for past 20 years is buried under a mountain or turned to ash. Their leaders dead and humiliated. Their desperate actions attacking ships ensures the world will look to avoid hormuz and their single economic lifeline will perish. They are very low iq.
Absolutely agree that not all criticism of Israel is not antisemitism. And no one serious says it is. (It's one of those "Strawman arguments" Israel's critics use to to try and stifle criticism or ignore critics.) And I personally avoid almost always getting into whether someone is or is not an Antisemite...
Most supporters of Israel can and do distinguish between criticism of Israel whether they agree it or not- and antisemitism. (And that's without the whether Anti-Zionism is per se antisemitism)
The trouble is some of Israel's critics either are Antisemites or are prepared to engage in antisemitic slurs and inuendos.
When you say the Mossad Killed JFK or was responsible for 9/11 or some of the other bizarre allegations; well...!
When you say that Israel controls America - Well...
Anyway as you say "Progressive leaders also have a responsibility when their allies and supporters cross into rhetoric that blames Jews collectively or justifies violence against Israelis..." And I think that is something J Street can and should do more of - even as I appreciate the difficulties it might cause you in some areas. (Just one example: When Senator Chris Van Hollen criticizes Israel; I may not agree. But it's legitimate for him to do - even if I think he may not be a "Friend of Israel." But when Van Hollen said - at J Street's Conference that AIPAC was not Pro-American. That was an outrage. And he should have been called out on it by J Street. If not at the Conference; then after
Jstreet cannot call out antisemitism and not bash Israel in the process that literally their entire fanbase I mean look at the hidden comment THAT'S the type of people they jstreet are trying to get to support them blatant jew haters
Jstreet cannot call out antisemitism and not bash Israel in the process that literally their entire fanbase I mean look at the hidden comment THAT'S the type of people they jstreet are trying to get to support them blatant jew haters
Jstreet cannot call out antisemitism and not bash Israel in the process that literally their entire fanbase I mean look at the hidden comment THAT'S the type of people they jstreet are trying to get to support them blatant jew haters
Antisemitism and anti-Zionism, the first is wrong, the second is perfectly acceptable and in the US, the land of liberty and justice for all, to be expected of all Americans because we pledge allegiance to LJ4A, the antithesis of ethnic cleansing that is Israel.
What would be best to make the distinction? Israel should end calling itself "The Jewish State", a hijacking of the religion for nationalism, and making claims that it represents all Jews the world over. It does not. It is The Zionist State that protects itself with the cover of Judaism. This is very clear when I ask someone if they support Israel and if they do, they will almost by rote respond, "I support a state for the Jewish people" as if this were a good thing beyond question. They never say, as they should, "I support the right of the Jewish people to kill, destroy, evict and take by force the land of others to create a state for the Jewish people". This truth was what the slaughter and leveling of Gaza made clear ripping aside the Star of David as a protective shield.
Far from antisemitism being a problem in America, the problem is American fear of Zionism in its ability to get people thrown out of jobs or the incredible power to snuff out support for Palestine on campuses, not just one but across the country at the nation's most prestigious universities. Wealth can do as it wishes as seen in Zionist Larry Ellison with his son and Bari Weiss taking over CBS with the intent to present the news with a Zionist filter. This is frightening.
But let me get specific and borrow your title of "Word on the Street". I know this truth I am expressing from two years of demonstrating on the street against US support of Israel. Countless times have I heard "be safe", "be careful", "watch out", "you are brave", "you are a real man", "you are courageous" and just yesterday someone after telling me I am brave said that I should carry a gun! I have been assaulted twice and threatened with death for exercising my freedom of speech in America as I speak openly against a foreign country. Harm is threatened and most definitely hatred is expressed to me by Jews who are Americans. Can you understand why I find it odd that antisemitism is a problem, that dual citizenship cannot be questioned, that a Jewish student on campus must not have to endure seeing a Palestinian protest?
Zionism has intimidated Americans into silence and calling out criticism of Israel as antisemitism is a primary means of doing so. I get "fucking antisemite", "Nazi" shouted from car windows almost every day. I call the charge of antisemitism the spear of Zionism having had it thrown at me countless times. I have not seen one other person doing what I am doing. They are afraid.
As you know, I disagree with you that a good face can be put on Israel. Israel is heart and soul ethnic cleansing with the twist that it is an effort by Jews. The Palestinians have been considered beneath notice for 78 years now, even at one time being denied existence. Why can't they understand Israel is a worthy, moral thing and simply leave without as Golda said, "forcing us to kill their children"? None are so blind as those that will not see.
Zionism is a mass pathology that claims history for legitimacy, deliberately passed to each new generation. Ethnic cleansing can never be justified, not by Hitler, not by any group victimized by Hitler. the inhumanity of the destruction of one people by another, is always wrong. One pathology has created another. There is no good in this.
I agree with Keith. I find myself walking this nuanced tightrope. As the widow of a Mexican American, a daughter and granddaughters who are Mexican American, through the years I witnessed racism against my husband both at stores and my own family. So I do struggle with finding ways to express my anger with Israel without becoming antisemitic. I am angry at Netanyahu and his government, and with the soldiers who are killing Palestenians for reasons I cannot support. I admit I stopped supporting any candidate in America who accepts money from AIPAC for this election, even within my own party. I have my reasons. I do not believe those reasons are antisemitic, as I no longer support any candidate who receives any type of PAC money unless it becomes a choice between a Democrat or Republican. I am progressive. I believe all people are created equal, and I live this belief with all my heart. Any type of racism, in my mind, is wrong and only hurts America. But I cannot support what is happening in Israel, and I do find it difficult to send money to a country which is committing genocide. If Netanyahu and his government were finally voted out of office, and the genocide stopped cold, I have no problem sending money to Israel. I cannot believe this makes me antisemitic.
They’re not committing genocide, and therefore conditioning aid on them stopping it makes no sense. That said, there are real reasons to stop aid conditional on other changes in Israeli policy.
No, they are committing genocide. You can deny it, it's absolutely your right. I will not back down. How else do you describe the deaths in Gaza? How else do you describe bombing hospitals, mosques, apartment buildings, and indiscriminate murders, rapes, tortures of Palestinians by Israeli soldiers? Many Jewish people in America believe the same. I have a lot of respect for all who do, knowing it must be a difficult decision. I'm well informed, and I absolutely do not follow "regular" news. I read reputable work by many I respect, right here on Substack. And I always check to see if what I am reading is considered true or false. I know what I see and read.
I describe bombing of those structures by the extremely extensive and well documented use of them for military purposes. https://mrandrewfox.substack.com/p/collapse-of-the-blood-libels. The rest of the crimes you mention, if they are substantiated, are war crimes. Israel has sent more aid to an enemy adversary than any party in armed conflict in human history, even vaccinating children for polio. You have to be entirely unfamiliar with the history of war to call it a genocide. In any case, ending "genocide" leaves totally undefined what actually is supposed to change: which is unchecked settler violence and expanding settlements that preclude the possibility of a two state solution. I have little respect for Jews who call it a genocide any more than I do those who "admit" to deicide or Judeo-Bolshevism, the past centuries libels and defamations.
Israel bombed under rules that allowed it to kill anywhere from 20 up to hundreds of civilians to get one Hamas member. And part of the targeting system was called “ Where’s Daddy”; referring to their willingness to wipe out entire families to kill even a lowly Hamas fighter in his home.
It's not their right to deny facts. Prior can disagree on opinions, not on facts. Every expert in the field of genocide and the ICJ have said it's a genocide.
Excellent, intelligent column. Thank you for taking on this complicated problem. I just wish you could boil it down to a few simple catchphrases for the complexity-hating major media.
I am a progressive but as a Jew am finding it impossible to accept the scapegoating of Israel as the price of belongings. Projecting American values, ideals, and context on to Israel is a way to be "moral" without confronting America's rush to fascism.
It's probably been pointed out elsewhere, but the term "Zionism" properly refers to the establishment of the state of Israel. So the term "anti-Zionist" can be interpreted to mean opposition to Israel's existence. So unless that's what you really mean, choose another term.
The term "Zionism" refers to the political movement invented by Theodor Herzl in 1896. He wrote a pamphlet called "The Jewish State" which was published that year. Immediately afterwards he founded the Zionist Organization in order to bring about his dream of a Jewish ethno-state filled with Jews from around the world. The pamphlet is available free online at the Gutenberg Project. https://www.gutenberg.org/files/25282/25282-h/25282-h.htm
Of course you’re gonna block what you don’t want to hear. Good for you. You stay in your fantasy bubble. Yes Gaza the only “open air prison” with a 12 mile border with Egypt!
You can’t deal with the fact that israel pulled out of Gaza and gave Gazan’s the opportunity to create a country. Look what they did. They built a sophisticated military compound using their civilians overhead as cannon fodder. You want to pretend that civilian deaths in Gaza were a tragedy of israel’s doing. The Reality that you won’t deal with is the fact that the civilian casualties was Hamas’s strategy. Go away fraudster.
Sometimes, Ilan, (may I use your first name even though we have not been formally introduced?), I don't agree with everything you say since I find some of your opinions can sometimes be more establishment-oriented than my own, but this article is a home-run in my humble opinion. I agree almost 100% with it (the only exception being that I think Palestinians do have a right to violent resistance against occupying soldiers in the IDF: you said violence against innocent civlians is never justified which I agree with, but you omitted, perhaps unintentionally, any reference to when violence is justified as in against occupying soldiers or their Settler-proxies at the time and place of the action that may justify a violent act of resistance) but outside of that issue, I agree with every other point in your article.
I include many talking heads in my digital newspaper, my twice-weekly compendium, some of whom do cross over into anti-Semitic expressions which I highly disapprove of, however, they often say many other things that are also worthwhile on other topics so I tend to include them in my compendiums regardless. They too have a human right to Free Speech as human beings. Even haters and bigots have a human right to Free Speech. But I am glad that people like you, and I like to think that myself included, try to call this out thus ensuring our voices are heard too and ideally drown those other voices out or at least draw attention to the issue of anti-Semitism which is also very important. It is very important that we constantly emphasize nuance and remind people of the typical complexity that color human relations which simple narratives often evade, thus contributing to bigotry. So thank you for calling that out in your article.
That is precisely what we need-----more speech that is grounded in rationality, reason, complexity and nuance.
“The remedy for speech that is false is speech that is true. This is the ordinary course in a free society. The response to the unreasoned is the rational; to the uninformed, the enlightened; to the straight-out lie, the simple truth … If there be time to expose through discussion the falsehood and fallacies, to avert the evil by the processes of education, the remedy to be applied is more speech, not enforced silence. The theory of our Constitution is that the best test of truth is the power of the thought to get itself accepted in the competition of the market . . . The First Amendment itself ensures the right to respond to speech we do not like, and for good reason. Freedom of speech and thought flows not from the beneficence of the state but from the inalienable rights of the person … Society has the right and civic duty to engage in open, dynamic, rational discourse.”
– U.S. Supreme Court decision, United States v. Alvarez, 567 U.S. 709, 724 (2012).
1) Don’t Tell People Israel Is Why They Don’t Have Medicare
I see where you're coming from. But I had to watch the woman I loved die a little more each day over years as health insurance denied lifesaving care. I called all my congresspeople begging for help and never even got a single callback. At the exact same time, every one of them approved infinite funds to bomb children in Gaza. The message I got from my politicians loud and clear was: "your dead partner for 10 dead Palestinian children is such a good deal, you'd have to be antisemitic to object--and don't you dare protest or we'll get you fired and you'll lose health insurance."
It cannot be overstated how infuriating that was. That was the message my own politicians were broadcasting.
2) Don’t Call the Iran War “Israel’s War”
It's true that US presidents and the US military-industrial has agency. That's why we can't blame Netanyahu all that heavily for Iraq, even though he maliciously attempted to pull us into that war. But Netanyahu keeps sabotaging the peace agreements. If that continues, after a certain point this will be Israel's war. I'm not sure we're at that threshold yet, but it seems inevitable at this rate.
3) “My greatest concern right now is that the State of Israel is losing support across the political spectrum"
Strongly disagree this is a good framing. Because it shows signs of the same disease that's been infecting American politics: framing sympathies around backlash against the aggressor. Israel is doing monstruous things right now. Child death tolls are well into the hundreds of thousands. Ben Gvir just tried to put crocodiles in one of his torture camps--it was blocked by Israeli PETA on animal rights objections, no concern about human rights. Ben Gvir helped drive through a Palestinian-only execution law and celebrated his birthday with a noose-themed cake. In response to the leak about prison guards raping and seriously injuring a prisoner, the government called the rapists heroes and celebrated the right to rape rally. Settler-terrorists are escalating their efforts in the West Bank and even Syria.
At the current rate if left unchecked, I think it's painfully likely the history books will talk about Israel the same way they talk about Imperial Japan and Nazi Germany. The government is blatantly playing into the Greater Israel extremism, an expansion which would cause Holocaust levels of death and destruction on civilian populations. The goal with Iran was to turn a country of 93 million into a failed state, which would've come with an unfathomable death toll.
Imagine how horrifying an equivalent statement would be: "my greatest concern right now is that the state of Imperial Japan/Nazi Germany is losing support across the political spectrum". And yet this is the constant framing we see all the time from our politicians and from the media.
I've been thinking about this "crossing the line" argument and I'm beginning to believe it's as self-defeating as the two-state argument. Obviously the benefits Israel receives, if diminished, wouldn't make much of a difference to school improvements and boosting other underfunded programs in, say, Michigan. But a defense based on "crossing the line" or "approaches an anti-Jewish trope" ignores the reality that all US taxpayer money that goes to Israel makes all Americans, including diaspora Jews, complicit in the current Israeli government's war crimes against the Palestinian population within its borders. More important, the policies and actions of the Netanyahu government are actually drivers of anti-Semitism worldwide, something we see and experience every day here in the US. Our current president is a big fan of "America First" and his government has pulled back enormously from funding programs the benefit foreign countries and even threatened to decrease support of NATO. If Al-Sayed is elected, his obligation will be to his constituents; he will be within his rights to focus on complicity and appropriate uses of taxpayer funds. Clucking about how reductions might be OK for other countries, including our longterm friends and allies but a no-no as to Israel because "it approaches an anti-Jewish trope" is unlikely to be a winning hand.
“Child death tolls are well into the hundreds of thousands”
God, I hope you are not typical among Jews in support of J Street!
...? The average age of Gaza before 10/7 was 19. Meaning roughly half its population were children.
There's been a years-long starvation campaign and medical facilities have been systematically targeted. Even a year ago, all the credible death estimates were 200k or higher. And it's only gotten worse. And half the population is/was children.
At this point, anyone citing that ridiculously low, frozen for years figure is revealing they're either utterly uninformed or a bad actor. Because that ~70k figure is ridiculously conservative and is almost certainly a drastic undercount of just bombing/sniping fatalities. It doesn't even get into the starvation & lack of medical care deaths.
Sources? Because they gazen population is about the same as is was years ago
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(24)01169-3/fulltext
This was from years ago. But they noted: "In recent conflicts, such indirect deaths range from three to 15 times the number of direct deaths. Applying a conservative estimate of four indirect deaths per one direct death to the 37 396 deaths reported, it is not implausible to estimate that up to 186 000 or even more deaths could be attributable to the current conflict in Gaza."
The number of direct deaths has risen dramatically. The ratio only gets more horrifying.
https://gaza-projections.org/#:~:text=For%20our%20second%20report%20(published%20on%205,Gaza%20A%20preview%20of%20the%20report's%20cover.
Projections for disease deathrates in this one were terrifying.
https://civil-protection-humanitarian-aid.ec.europa.eu/system/files/2025-08/IPC_Gaza_Strip_Acute_Food_Insecurity_Malnutrition_July_Sept2025_Special_Snapshot.pdf#:~:text=Between%20mid%2DAugust%20and%20the%20end%20of%20September,worsening%20rapidly.%20Through%20June%202026%2C%20at%20least.
This breaks down the number of people in starvation conditions and what that means. 641,000 expected to face IPC Phase 5 by September 2025--and things have only gotten worse over time. IPC Phase 5 is marked by "Deaths of two people or four children for every 10,000 each day."
The list goes on and on. You do know how that 73k death figure is sourced, right? It only counts bodies of those who've died from direct violence recovered and brought to a hospital or morgue. Israel has been targeting the facilities that could even count casualties. That number doesn't include any of what's under the rubble. It doesn't count people who die in tents from famine, disease, unsafe water, etc.
The death count is well into the hundreds of thousands. And the whole world is just standing by and letting hundreds of thousands die in one of the most grotesque horror shows that the world has seen in generations.
Thank you for the accurate response!
Not accurate at all! Total propaganda is proven by the most recent UN audit, which totally contradicts the claims of starvation.
Just because someone uses biased sources to further slander israel, that doesn’t make it accurate. Read for yourself…
https://www.thejc.com/opinion/analysis/how-a-united-nations-study-shatters-the-gaza-starvation-narrative-v0lzthdp
"I see where you're coming from. But I had to watch the woman I loved die a little more each day over years as health insurance denied lifesaving care. I called all my congresspeople begging for help and never even got a single callback. At the exact same time, every one of them approved infinite funds to bomb children in Gaza. The message I got from my politicians loud and clear was: "your dead partner for 10 dead Palestinian children is such a good deal, you'd have to be antisemitic to object--and don't you dare protest or we'll get you fired and you'll lose health insurance."
This is no way proves the point you're trying to make. I don't even know what you're talking about.
The moral of his story is: some congresspeople respond to people who *paid* for them to be elected, but *not* their constituents.
Almost all members of Congress have accepted money from AIPAC in order to get elected. Once elected, they openly voice their support for Israel and vote for every bill which supports Israel.
There's a hall of shame regarding the congressmen or women who've received the most money from AIPAC.
https://www.trackaipac.com/shame
I suppose you are also tracking other groups that support the opposite candidates?
American tax dollars should be spent on the American people. If Congress decides to spend money on defense--which it should--that money should be spent on the defense of Americans and the US homeland. Not Israel.
A meaningless statement- US spends billions annually funding programs around the world, including Israel, for the defense of this country.
Israel is the largest cumulative recipient of U.S. foreign aid since World War II.
When adjusted for inflation, the US has provided Israel with more than $300 B in total economic and military assistance since its founding in 1948.
While other nations may receive more funding in a specific single year due to active conflicts or humanitarian crises, Israel remains the highest total recipient over time.
This isn't counting the cost of the current war against Iran (over $100B) and the daily cost of monitoring the Strait of Hormuz ($2B)--all for defense of Israel.
Just say millions of “children” have died. It sounds even better!!!
Not yet. At the current rate, it will happen though.
Only in your highly unstable mind.
Well, mine and Ben Gvir's + Bibi's. Greater Israel encompasses the West Bank, Jordan, Lebanon, and a chunk of Iraq, Kuwait, Syria, Egypt, and Saudi Arabia. There are already settlers in Syria claiming government support. State policy seems essentially to take over the West Bank with 0 pretense of law and order anymore. The buffer zone in Lebanon keeps creeping, and they've declared 0 intent to leave.
Now check the population of these areas. And the civilian deathrate under areas Israel has occupied. And read more Israeli media--complete dehumanization has occurred. There are recent polls showing...what was it, ~40% of the Israeli population wants to outright kill all the inhabitants of any conquered cities.
That's the thing about ethnosupremacist expansionist states. If not stopped, they keep going. And Israel has only been rewarded for its behavior. If unchecked and if it continues, we'll eventually be looking at Holocaust levels of civilian death and wondering how on Earth we got there.
Well, what you wrote sounds very interesting, but further confirms my point about your observations and statements being representative of someone who is unstable. Only an emotionally, unstable person, would cherry pick unrelated “facts“ (without any context), uses inductive logic and connects the dots to reach a preordained verdict, that, in this case, Israel must somehow be stopped in its expansionist endeavors or …
There wasn’t any encroachment on Gaza or Lebanon on October 6 of 2023. The fact that you are unable to comprehend WHY Israel is occupying parts of Lebanon and Gaza other than “expansion” demonstrates a shocking lack of critical thinking (or lying) on your part. As for Egypt, Iraq, Kuwait and Saudi Arabia, I have no idea what you’re talking about since Israel occupies no territory in SA, K, or I, and voluntarily gave Egypt back a significant amount of territory for peace.
Concerning dead civilians, you seem to conflate the fact that civilians in war zones (between Israel and Jihadist organizations Hamas & Hezbollah) somehow proves Israel’s immoral, expansionist, intent? Never mind the acts of hamas and hezbollah. Nothing there right.?
I agree with your first point. Both you and Ben Givir are unstable.
There 100% was encroachment on Gaza before 10/7. They were essentially blockaded and besieged in a giant open air prison. Israel routinely went in to kill and kidnap people. On 10/6, there were more illegally kidnapped Palestinian and Gazan (hard to know split between WB and Gaza) hostages in Israeli torture camps and military tribunal prisons. There were almost as many Palestinian children in illegal military tribunals alone as the total # of Israelis captured on 10/7--and that doesn't count the children in other kinds of Israeli prisons.
Netanyahu had been helping to prop up Hamas for decades explicitly because Hamas was known for executing dissidents and would prevent the emergence of more legitimate political forces.
And if you don't know what I'm talking about regarding Greater Israel, it sounds like I follow Israeli politics and the Israeli government closer than you do.
You're also willfully missing the point on civilians. Israel is conducting ethnic cleansing. Their own government is bragging about it at this point. Every single person in a targeted expansion zone is in serious danger at the current rate. You were wondering how we hit millions of child deaths? That's how.
I'm going to block/stop replying to you, because I think I made my point very clear and you're just reaching for anything you can throw at the argument. You very clearly have an agenda here, and I don't think it's a good-faith one.
Funny how you don’t attack the UN‘s own report which proved there was no starvation then or now. Total deflection.
Kf course I’m biased. We all are. The point is, seeking compromise and accommodation requires a foundation of reality. You don’t get this by promoting slanderous positions. Weapon words like “apartheid“ genocide“ colonialism“ ethnic cleansing“ are meant to obscure complicated nature of the IP conflict
You're citing the Jewish Chronicle, an org infamous for maliciously misleading pieces on Gaza. May as well be citing a Klan daily newspaper on how lynchings aren't a problem at all. Come on, don't be a Goebbels wannabe.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/sep/14/crisis-at-jewish-chronicle-as-stories-are-withdrawn
Netanyahu did NOT "maliciously attempt to pull us into that war (Iraq)". He was not even prime minister at that time and he has always been very focused on the Iranian regime as the biggest threat to Israel snd Western democracies.... His record is clear on that.
https://www.c-span.org/clip/house-committee/user-clip-netanyahu-says-no-question-saddam-working-on-nuclear-weapons/4927483
Soooo, about that... He literally testified before Congress.
OK I stand corrected on that testimony... wasn't aware of it. But he was still 7 years away from being elected again as PM. He was not PM and not in charge of Israeli policy at that time
Yours is a thoughtful analysis and I agree with most of it but it is nevertheless a fact that Israel, via AIPAC and wealthy American Zionists has very much "deeply penetrated the American government". While it may not control U.S. foreign policy, it certainly exerts a very strong influence and consequently does impact spending decisions. And it now is able to exert even more influence because it can bribe the eagerly complicit Trump regime.
Israel opened the doors to "opinions that are dangerous" because the Zionists decided to form a Jewish ethno-state in the center of the Arab world.
Theodor Herzl thought up this "brilliant" idea in 1896. It took many decades for Zionist organizations to bring about his dream of a Jewish state. They did this by gathering together Jews from many regions of the world, but mainly from Eastern Europe and Russia. The population of Jews gradually rose from 5 per cent in the 1880s to 30 per cent in the 1940s. At that point there was open conflict with the people they had moved in with, the Arab Muslims and Christians. After going to the UN to attempt to solve the problem, only one side agreed (the Zionists) because the UN proposed a two-state solution with the minority population receiving the majority of the land. The Zionists simply waited for the Mandate to expire and then seized all of it, chasing out the majority population, both Muslim and Christian.
The high price Israel is paying today is because of the way they formed their state. A lot of ethnic cleansing took place, and continues to take place to this day.
You’re right only the formation of Israel involved any conflict or violence. Everywhere else, especially muslim countries, followed a peaceful process compliant with international law. Excuse me while I go burst out laughing.
Edit: lol my comment was blocked but people claiming ethnic cleansing meets your standards. Make sense.
The would changed after WW2. We got the Geneva convention and the UN and international law.
The Zionists knew beforehand that *none* of their immediate neighbors approved of a Jewish ethno-state being formed in their midst. ALL of the neighboring states voted against the proposed state at the UN General Assembly vote held on Resolution 181.
What did they think would happen?
The Zionists went ahead with their vanity project anyway--to the detriment of every Arab Muslim and Arab Christian living in Palestine and to the harm of Jewish people everywhere, not to mention the 30k Jewish lives which have been extinguished in defense of the ethno-state.
And that is not the same as saying they didn't want to live with Jews. They had already been doing that for centuries.
Haha keep living in your revisionist fantasy. Israel isn’t going anywhere and is more powerful than every muslim state combined while having comparatively minuscule resources. It must be painful living in that reality so makes sense why people like you turn to fantasy, I can understand the anger too. Maybe use that energy to improve your society instead of trying to tear down others.
How’s that war against Iran going, Dmitri? Is Israel winning?
Haha very well actually iran is a walking corpse and everything they spent so much time and money on for past 20 years is buried under a mountain or turned to ash. Their leaders dead and humiliated. Their desperate actions attacking ships ensures the world will look to avoid hormuz and their single economic lifeline will perish. They are very low iq.
The "walking corpse" is now completing a deal with Oman regarding re-opening the Strait of Hormuz.
They're boss of the Gulf now.
Absolutely agree that not all criticism of Israel is not antisemitism. And no one serious says it is. (It's one of those "Strawman arguments" Israel's critics use to to try and stifle criticism or ignore critics.) And I personally avoid almost always getting into whether someone is or is not an Antisemite...
Most supporters of Israel can and do distinguish between criticism of Israel whether they agree it or not- and antisemitism. (And that's without the whether Anti-Zionism is per se antisemitism)
The trouble is some of Israel's critics either are Antisemites or are prepared to engage in antisemitic slurs and inuendos.
When you say the Mossad Killed JFK or was responsible for 9/11 or some of the other bizarre allegations; well...!
When you say that Israel controls America - Well...
Anyway as you say "Progressive leaders also have a responsibility when their allies and supporters cross into rhetoric that blames Jews collectively or justifies violence against Israelis..." And I think that is something J Street can and should do more of - even as I appreciate the difficulties it might cause you in some areas. (Just one example: When Senator Chris Van Hollen criticizes Israel; I may not agree. But it's legitimate for him to do - even if I think he may not be a "Friend of Israel." But when Van Hollen said - at J Street's Conference that AIPAC was not Pro-American. That was an outrage. And he should have been called out on it by J Street. If not at the Conference; then after
Jstreet cannot call out antisemitism and not bash Israel in the process that literally their entire fanbase I mean look at the hidden comment THAT'S the type of people they jstreet are trying to get to support them blatant jew haters
Jstreet cannot call out antisemitism and not bash Israel in the process that literally their entire fanbase I mean look at the hidden comment THAT'S the type of people they jstreet are trying to get to support them blatant jew haters
Jstreet cannot call out antisemitism and not bash Israel in the process that literally their entire fanbase I mean look at the hidden comment THAT'S the type of people they jstreet are trying to get to support them blatant jew haters
Antisemitism and anti-Zionism, the first is wrong, the second is perfectly acceptable and in the US, the land of liberty and justice for all, to be expected of all Americans because we pledge allegiance to LJ4A, the antithesis of ethnic cleansing that is Israel.
What would be best to make the distinction? Israel should end calling itself "The Jewish State", a hijacking of the religion for nationalism, and making claims that it represents all Jews the world over. It does not. It is The Zionist State that protects itself with the cover of Judaism. This is very clear when I ask someone if they support Israel and if they do, they will almost by rote respond, "I support a state for the Jewish people" as if this were a good thing beyond question. They never say, as they should, "I support the right of the Jewish people to kill, destroy, evict and take by force the land of others to create a state for the Jewish people". This truth was what the slaughter and leveling of Gaza made clear ripping aside the Star of David as a protective shield.
Far from antisemitism being a problem in America, the problem is American fear of Zionism in its ability to get people thrown out of jobs or the incredible power to snuff out support for Palestine on campuses, not just one but across the country at the nation's most prestigious universities. Wealth can do as it wishes as seen in Zionist Larry Ellison with his son and Bari Weiss taking over CBS with the intent to present the news with a Zionist filter. This is frightening.
But let me get specific and borrow your title of "Word on the Street". I know this truth I am expressing from two years of demonstrating on the street against US support of Israel. Countless times have I heard "be safe", "be careful", "watch out", "you are brave", "you are a real man", "you are courageous" and just yesterday someone after telling me I am brave said that I should carry a gun! I have been assaulted twice and threatened with death for exercising my freedom of speech in America as I speak openly against a foreign country. Harm is threatened and most definitely hatred is expressed to me by Jews who are Americans. Can you understand why I find it odd that antisemitism is a problem, that dual citizenship cannot be questioned, that a Jewish student on campus must not have to endure seeing a Palestinian protest?
Zionism has intimidated Americans into silence and calling out criticism of Israel as antisemitism is a primary means of doing so. I get "fucking antisemite", "Nazi" shouted from car windows almost every day. I call the charge of antisemitism the spear of Zionism having had it thrown at me countless times. I have not seen one other person doing what I am doing. They are afraid.
As you know, I disagree with you that a good face can be put on Israel. Israel is heart and soul ethnic cleansing with the twist that it is an effort by Jews. The Palestinians have been considered beneath notice for 78 years now, even at one time being denied existence. Why can't they understand Israel is a worthy, moral thing and simply leave without as Golda said, "forcing us to kill their children"? None are so blind as those that will not see.
Zionism is a mass pathology that claims history for legitimacy, deliberately passed to each new generation. Ethnic cleansing can never be justified, not by Hitler, not by any group victimized by Hitler. the inhumanity of the destruction of one people by another, is always wrong. One pathology has created another. There is no good in this.
Israel In Palestine: Jewish Rejection of Zionism by Yakov Rabkin is an excellent book on this subject.
Thanks for the recommendation. I ordered it.
Great piece Ilan!
I agree with Keith. I find myself walking this nuanced tightrope. As the widow of a Mexican American, a daughter and granddaughters who are Mexican American, through the years I witnessed racism against my husband both at stores and my own family. So I do struggle with finding ways to express my anger with Israel without becoming antisemitic. I am angry at Netanyahu and his government, and with the soldiers who are killing Palestenians for reasons I cannot support. I admit I stopped supporting any candidate in America who accepts money from AIPAC for this election, even within my own party. I have my reasons. I do not believe those reasons are antisemitic, as I no longer support any candidate who receives any type of PAC money unless it becomes a choice between a Democrat or Republican. I am progressive. I believe all people are created equal, and I live this belief with all my heart. Any type of racism, in my mind, is wrong and only hurts America. But I cannot support what is happening in Israel, and I do find it difficult to send money to a country which is committing genocide. If Netanyahu and his government were finally voted out of office, and the genocide stopped cold, I have no problem sending money to Israel. I cannot believe this makes me antisemitic.
They’re not committing genocide, and therefore conditioning aid on them stopping it makes no sense. That said, there are real reasons to stop aid conditional on other changes in Israeli policy.
No, they are committing genocide. You can deny it, it's absolutely your right. I will not back down. How else do you describe the deaths in Gaza? How else do you describe bombing hospitals, mosques, apartment buildings, and indiscriminate murders, rapes, tortures of Palestinians by Israeli soldiers? Many Jewish people in America believe the same. I have a lot of respect for all who do, knowing it must be a difficult decision. I'm well informed, and I absolutely do not follow "regular" news. I read reputable work by many I respect, right here on Substack. And I always check to see if what I am reading is considered true or false. I know what I see and read.
I describe bombing of those structures by the extremely extensive and well documented use of them for military purposes. https://mrandrewfox.substack.com/p/collapse-of-the-blood-libels. The rest of the crimes you mention, if they are substantiated, are war crimes. Israel has sent more aid to an enemy adversary than any party in armed conflict in human history, even vaccinating children for polio. You have to be entirely unfamiliar with the history of war to call it a genocide. In any case, ending "genocide" leaves totally undefined what actually is supposed to change: which is unchecked settler violence and expanding settlements that preclude the possibility of a two state solution. I have little respect for Jews who call it a genocide any more than I do those who "admit" to deicide or Judeo-Bolshevism, the past centuries libels and defamations.
Israel bombed under rules that allowed it to kill anywhere from 20 up to hundreds of civilians to get one Hamas member. And part of the targeting system was called “ Where’s Daddy”; referring to their willingness to wipe out entire families to kill even a lowly Hamas fighter in his home.
https://www.972mag.com/israel-gaza-lavender-ai-human-agency/
That name suggests they thought this was funny.
It's not their right to deny facts. Prior can disagree on opinions, not on facts. Every expert in the field of genocide and the ICJ have said it's a genocide.
Every expert in the field says they are. You don't get to have an opinion on facts
Thanks Ilan! I talk about this conflict a lot, and found this guide helpful!
Excellent, intelligent column. Thank you for taking on this complicated problem. I just wish you could boil it down to a few simple catchphrases for the complexity-hating major media.
I am a progressive but as a Jew am finding it impossible to accept the scapegoating of Israel as the price of belongings. Projecting American values, ideals, and context on to Israel is a way to be "moral" without confronting America's rush to fascism.
It's probably been pointed out elsewhere, but the term "Zionism" properly refers to the establishment of the state of Israel. So the term "anti-Zionist" can be interpreted to mean opposition to Israel's existence. So unless that's what you really mean, choose another term.
Words matter.
The term "Zionism" refers to the political movement invented by Theodor Herzl in 1896. He wrote a pamphlet called "The Jewish State" which was published that year. Immediately afterwards he founded the Zionist Organization in order to bring about his dream of a Jewish ethno-state filled with Jews from around the world. The pamphlet is available free online at the Gutenberg Project. https://www.gutenberg.org/files/25282/25282-h/25282-h.htm
Of course you’re gonna block what you don’t want to hear. Good for you. You stay in your fantasy bubble. Yes Gaza the only “open air prison” with a 12 mile border with Egypt!
You can’t deal with the fact that israel pulled out of Gaza and gave Gazan’s the opportunity to create a country. Look what they did. They built a sophisticated military compound using their civilians overhead as cannon fodder. You want to pretend that civilian deaths in Gaza were a tragedy of israel’s doing. The Reality that you won’t deal with is the fact that the civilian casualties was Hamas’s strategy. Go away fraudster.
Sometimes, Ilan, (may I use your first name even though we have not been formally introduced?), I don't agree with everything you say since I find some of your opinions can sometimes be more establishment-oriented than my own, but this article is a home-run in my humble opinion. I agree almost 100% with it (the only exception being that I think Palestinians do have a right to violent resistance against occupying soldiers in the IDF: you said violence against innocent civlians is never justified which I agree with, but you omitted, perhaps unintentionally, any reference to when violence is justified as in against occupying soldiers or their Settler-proxies at the time and place of the action that may justify a violent act of resistance) but outside of that issue, I agree with every other point in your article.
I include many talking heads in my digital newspaper, my twice-weekly compendium, some of whom do cross over into anti-Semitic expressions which I highly disapprove of, however, they often say many other things that are also worthwhile on other topics so I tend to include them in my compendiums regardless. They too have a human right to Free Speech as human beings. Even haters and bigots have a human right to Free Speech. But I am glad that people like you, and I like to think that myself included, try to call this out thus ensuring our voices are heard too and ideally drown those other voices out or at least draw attention to the issue of anti-Semitism which is also very important. It is very important that we constantly emphasize nuance and remind people of the typical complexity that color human relations which simple narratives often evade, thus contributing to bigotry. So thank you for calling that out in your article.
That is precisely what we need-----more speech that is grounded in rationality, reason, complexity and nuance.
“The remedy for speech that is false is speech that is true. This is the ordinary course in a free society. The response to the unreasoned is the rational; to the uninformed, the enlightened; to the straight-out lie, the simple truth … If there be time to expose through discussion the falsehood and fallacies, to avert the evil by the processes of education, the remedy to be applied is more speech, not enforced silence. The theory of our Constitution is that the best test of truth is the power of the thought to get itself accepted in the competition of the market . . . The First Amendment itself ensures the right to respond to speech we do not like, and for good reason. Freedom of speech and thought flows not from the beneficence of the state but from the inalienable rights of the person … Society has the right and civic duty to engage in open, dynamic, rational discourse.”
– U.S. Supreme Court decision, United States v. Alvarez, 567 U.S. 709, 724 (2012).
The arsonist is surprised the blaze he helped nurture is getting a bit too hot?
Thank you so much for this. I really think this is spot on.
The house Jeremy (J Street) helped build …
https://rabbistevenabraham.substack.com/p/tonight-we-will-see-the-house-jeremy?r=7cprxw&utm_medium=ios