Is Washington reapplying Chamberlain's Munich-Playbook in the Middle East?

🪖 "How the Trump-Witkoff Gulf investment-strategy mirrors Chamberlain’s 1938 appeasement—with Israel now cornered against Iran and Hamas."

---

🛮️ 1. D-Day's Cost of Delay

On this 81st anniversary of D-Day, we recall the blood price exacted by World War II's delayed justice. The Allies had once hoped that diplomacy—the 1938 Munich Agreement—would contain Hitler. Instead, it gave him five years to build a war machine, forcing the free world to fight a more powerful enemy at greater cost.

The question confronting the U.S. and Israel today is this: are we repeating the same mistake by letting Hamas, Hezbollah, and the Iranian regime fester under the illusion of restraint and “deals”? 

Iran is negotiating nuclear weapons terms with this White House that are considered worse than Obama's JCPOA in 2015 - referenced by this NY Times ad placed that summer by Rabbi Shmuley Boteach

🧊 2. The Trump–Witkoff–Qatar Modus Vivendi

In 2025, President Donald Trump returned to office with a more personalized and transactional style of diplomacy. His appointment of real estate magnate Steve Witkoff as Middle East envoy has raised eyebrows, not just because of Witkoff’s lack of formal diplomatic experience, but due to his extensive business ties in the Gulf.

Trump’s strategy appears focused not on defeating Islamism outright, but managing its optics. This includes:

• Allowing Qatar to host Hamas leadership while mediating ceasefires
• Refraining from dismantling Hezbollah outright
• Quietly accepting Qatari and Saudi incentives, including:
  • $2 trillion in Gulf investment pledges in U.S. infrastructure, defense, and tech
  • Real estate partnerships, airline and leisure deals involving the Trump Organization or its allies

🔫 3. Weaponizing Hamas as Proxy Theater

Qatar bankrolls Hamas while posing as a peacemaker. By maintaining Hamas and tolerating Hezbollah’s posture, Doha:

• Appeases pan-Islamist sentiment at home
• Makes itself indispensable to Israel and Washington
• Secures capital leverage and diplomatic protection

Meanwhile, Saudi Arabia, while warming toward Israel in public, still benefits from having Iran and Hamas absorb Islamist fervor that might otherwise challenge the Kingdom directly.

⚖️ 4. The Strategic Trap for Israel

Israel is strategically cornered. It faces:

• An Iran growing closer to nuclear breakout
• A Hezbollah that, though weakened, retains missile and drone capacity
• A U.S. partner unwilling to commit to full dismantling of terror proxies

The Netanyahu government must weigh existential risk against economic, diplomatic, and military constraints imposed by its strongest ally—now tethered to Gulf financial flows.

🔥 5. The Cost of Avoiding “War” May Be War Later

Like 1938–1944, appeasement today may set the stage for a deadlier confrontation tomorrow:

• Iran may be emboldened to cross the nuclear threshold
• Hamas may regroup for another Oct. 7-scale attack
• The U.S. military remains overstretched and unprepared for multitheater conflict

📌 6. The Moral Crossroads

To act decisively now is costly. But to wait may be worse. Just as the Allies ultimately had to storm Europe after years of delay, Israel and the West may be forced to wage a broader regional war, under worse conditions, due to today’s short-term expedience.

🧮 7. Investment Leverage and the Munich Bind

One reason today’s leaders may ignore the lessons of Munich is that strategic clarity now comes at a steep economic cost.

The Trump administration has secured over $3 trillion in Gulf investments into U.S. businesses, infrastructure, defense, and tech. While presented as economic triumphs, they create a shadow incentive structure where foreign powers can indirectly influence U.S. and Israeli restraint.

↺ The Apparent Cycle:

1. Gulf nations pledge long-term capital flows.
2. These same nations host and protect regional Islamist actors.
3. Quietly, U.S. officials are expected not to crush those actors.
4. In doing so, Washington suppresses the impulse to apply the 1938 lesson.

Trump envoy Steve Witkoff, with active family and business ties to Gulf state developments, is a central figure in this diplomatic-economic tangle. The more intertwined the U.S. economy becomes with Qatar or the UAE, the less political will exists to challenge their Islamist clients.

📸 Eric Trump and the Qatar Diorama

Eric Trump beside the diorama for the Trump International Golf Club & Villas in Doha. (Image: Reuters/Bassam Masoud via Economic Times)

This photograph highlights Eric Trump's direct role in promoting the Qatar resort deal—standing beside a detailed diorama of the planned luxury development. It's a powerful symbol of the transactional alliances linking Gulf money, the Trump Organization, and U.S. diplomatic posture.

⚠️ Appeasement by Design

This isn’t appeasement from cowardice. It’s appeasement from commercial entanglement. While Neville Chamberlain hoped for peace, today's leaders calculate that temporary quiet and economic deals outweigh decisive action.

By letting Qatari investments shape restraint toward Hamas and Iranian militancy, Washington risks enabling its enemies’ buildup—and leaving Israel isolated on the frontlines.

“Diplomacy that defers confrontation doesn’t prevent war—it ensures it happens later, on the enemy’s terms.”

"The Media IS Hamas" by Daniel Greenfield

The massacre hoax and attacks on aid to Gaza expose the media’s true agenda.  Jihad Watch.org June 4, 2025.

⚫️ CLEARED FOR PUBLICATION - Phone call from Gaza: “The people who fired were Hamas terrorists. They don’t want the people to receive aid, they want to foil the plan so that the aid will go to them, allowing them to steal it. They've gone completely bankrupt."

The IDF and COGAT have revealed recordings in which Gazan residents tell an IDF officer about Hamas’ attempts to obstruct the distribution of humanitarian aid to the residents of Gaza. Hamas is a brutal and murderous terrorist organization who is starving the residents of Gaza. It is doing everything in its power to sabotage the successful distribution of food in Gaza.… (Plays Video) pic.twitter.com/Tn7M4mYhLI

— Israel Defense Forces (@IDF) June 5, 2025

When Israel kills Hamas terrorists, that’s “controversial.” When Israel insists on existing, that’s not only controversial, it’s very nearly provocative, and even when Israel hands out food to its worst enemies who raped and murdered its citizens, and held its children hostage, that’s also… “controversial.”

“Controversial” is the word that the United Nations, the political establishments of multiple countries and the media would like the public to associate with Israel bringing aid into Gaza.

After UN lies about a famine in Gaza no matter how much food came in, Israel and the United States decided to take control of the corrupt UN aid system being used to benefit Hamas.

The media immediately began calling it “controversial.”

What’s controversial about delivering aid to the people the media had told us were starving to death? Two weeks ago, CNN claimed that “1 in 5 people in Gaza face starvation.” (People in Gaza are always “on the edge”, “facing” or “threatened” by starvation, but they never actually starve to death.) Now feeding those same supposed starvation victims is controversial.

But yet here was CNN trying  to get the word “controversial” into every headline about the new Gaza Humanitarian Foundation. You might think that only CNN could manage to make Israel feeding hungry people “controversial”, but the AP, whose personnel on the ground have a long ‘controversial’ relationship with Hamas, began its stories by making “controversial” the first word in its headlines lest anyone miss the point that feeding hungry people is very “controversial.”

“Controversial new U.S. and Israel-backed Gaza aid effort gets off to a slow, tumultuous start”, the AP blared. “Controversial US and Israel-backed aid group starts operations in Gaza,” Sky News agitated and there were even fake explainers like, “Here’s what to know about the controversial new aid program in Gaza” from the Washington Post. And what everyone needed to know was that feeding the people that the Post earlier this month claimed “face critical famine risk” (they’re always facing famine, never actually famished) was very deeply “controversial”.

The media’s agenda was very blatant even before it allied with Hamas to fake a massacre.

This time the headlines screamed about a tank massacre. “Israeli troops kill over 30 near U.S. aid site in Gaza,” Washington Post. “Dozens feared killed after Israeli tank fires on crowd waiting for aid in Gaza, witnesses say,” NBC News. “At least 31 Palestinians killed after Israeli forces open fire near Gaza aid distribution center, Palestinian officials say,” CNN.

A BBC report falsely claimed that “Israeli tanks opened fire” and that “the injuries are all gunshot wounds.”  Video released by the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation shows nothing of the sort. The “officials” being quoted by the media are Hamas. The tank massacre of civilians was invented by Hamas which gets much of its money from reselling aid delivered by the UN. The media, determined to keep Hamas alive, promoted this lie to sabotage the “controversial” plan to deliver aid directly to those who need it, rather than delivering it to Islamic terrorists to resell to them.

Massacres are more “controversial” than feeding hungry people. The media’s “controversial” headlines had failed to stir up enough controversy. It switched to headlines describing the aid distribution as both “controversial” and in the throes of “chaos.” (“Chaos” is currently a favorite media term for discrediting operations that it opposes” which is why it’s used for Trump.) But when “controversial” and “chaos” weren’t enough, Hamas and the media escalated to a massacre. The massacre never happened, but neither did the famine or the tens of thousands of dead children, and much of the population of the civilized world believes in both.

This is certainly not the first time that the media pushed a fake Hamas massacre. It’s not even the twentieth time. And every time Hamas terrorists built hideouts in UN compounds, schools and hospitals, the media dutifully reported that Israel was bombing schools and hospitals.

The public story of the October 7 war is a tale of the media broadcasting and normalizing fake Hamas casualty numbers to the point that everyone quotes them. What the majority of the public knows about the war comes from the media and what comes from the media is Hamas propaganda. The media was even caught rewriting Hamas press releases, while leaving in telltale lines about “martyrs”, and publishing those as breaking news out of Gaza.

But what is particularly revealing about the collusion in this case is that the media, NGOs and Islamic terrorists appeared to coordinate an information warfare campaign against something completely benign, aid distribution, for no other reason than to help the terrorists. Unlike opposition to the broader war, the media cannot hide its propaganda campaign behind general leftist sentiments against fighting wars rather than specifically supporting Hamas.

The only reason to sabotage U.S. and Israeli aid distribution in Gaza is to help Hamas.

When the media promoted the famine hoax, the excuse might have been that CNN, the AP and assorted other outlets wanted to make sure that food was coming in, but once they took a stance against food coming in, they could no longer hide behind concern about aid.

The media’s positions and agendas are identical to those of Hamas. The attacks on the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation show that it’s not about the war or about getting aid in, it’s about a Hamas victory. Anything that does not serve Hamas is immediately attacked as “controversial” even if it’s handing out food to the people that the media told us last week were starving.

Hamas is not fooling the media. It’s not even a case of the media pushing Hamas propaganda because it shares a parallel agenda of ending the war and bringing relief to Arab Muslims in Gaza, as most people think, the media is undermining aid to Gaza in order to help Hamas.

The media doesn’t have a parallel agenda with Hamas. It has a single, common agenda.

The only possible takeaway from the media’s disinformation campaign against the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation is that what we call the news media wants Hamas to win!

After a year of lies about famine in Gaza, the media took to sabotaging aid distribution because it did not go through Hamas. The media never cared whether anyone in Gaza was hungry. What it wanted (and what the UN and other NGOs wanted as well) was for the aid to finance Hamas.

If the aid was going to people, not to Hamas, then the media didn’t want it entering Gaza.

Why does the media want Hamas to win? Because the  Left has come to be so closely aligned with Hamas that it seeks a victory for the terrorists. It’s not just the campus radicals, whom the media plays defense for, who cheer for Hamas and want to see Israel destroyed. It’s the media.

The media was always biased against Israel, but in 2024, it turned into Hamas war propaganda. The broader realignment of the Left around support, not just for a terrorist ‘Palestinian’ state, but for Hamas, has made the media into the communications arm of an Islamic terrorist group.

When it benefits Hamas, the media claims that Gaza is starving. And, when it benefits Hamas, the media denounces sending aid to Gaza as “controversial.” Then it fakes a massacre.

Israeli-Americans Rise Above Scapegoaters, Reviving History of Independence through Songs

Sam Firstenberg teaches about Jewish life in Gaza in
1946. Kfar Darom remembered in song, uprooted in 2005

Inside the guarded walls of Congregation Beth Jacob in Beverly Hills, over 100 Israeli-Americans gathered on Yom Ha'atzmaut (Israeli Independence Day) 2024 - not just to celebrate, but to reaffirm a history increasingly under attack. The traditional public celebrations were absent this year, replaced by this more private gathering where participants sang the soundtrack of Israel's legitimate birth and development—songs they know not from textbooks but from lived experience.

In the hostile climate that has emerged since October 8th, 2023, following Hamas's attack on Israel, these aging pioneers of the Israeli state find themselves in an unimaginable position: having to defend the very legitimacy of their history against a coordinated Islamo-Marxist campaign that has successfully rewritten the narrative in much of the public consciousness.

Sing-alongs (shira b'tzibur) have long been a part of the
culture of Jewish Palestine. These musicians entertained
during the Palmach defenders era in the early 1940's

These Hebrew songs—ranging from pre-statehood anthems to ballads commemorating the development of cities, infrastructure, and social cohesion—form a cultural archive that directly contradicts the portrayal of Israel as a colonial project. The elderly participants singing these songs are not reading history—they lived it. They cleared malarial swamps, built irrigation systems, established democratic institutions, developed arts and sciences, and created a thriving multicultural society, all with international legal recognition.

Singers: Cantor Arik Wollheim, Dr. Judea Pearl, Ms. Anat Sadan, pianist Amit Sternberg. (Helpers not pictured: Orly Lavi-Travish, Vered Hopenstand, Nirit Brand, and Ilana Green). Watch and hear the sing-along in the video playlist at the end of this article.

Living Witnesses to Contested History: Dr. Judea Pearl

Helping leading the singing (especially helpful with the songs of early Israel) was Dr. Judea Pearl, Professor Emeritus of Computer Science at UCLA, who was born in Tel Aviv in 1936 during the British Mandate for Palestine— a living witness to pre-state Jewish life in the region and Israel's legitimate founding.

"Most of us here are Israeli-Americans. Most of us speak Hebrew. Most of us were born in Israel. Some of us like me are old enough to remember 1948 and the songs that preceded it,"

explains Dr. Pearl. For him and many others present, these songs aren't merely nostalgic—they are documentary evidence of a history now being systematically erased in public discourse.

The cruel irony isn't lost on those familiar with Pearl's story. His son Daniel, a journalist for the Wall Street Journal, was murdered in 2002 by terrorists partly because of his Jewish identity. Now, on the very campus where Dr. Pearl taught his entire career, Islamo-Marxist encampments and protests have created an environment where Jewish students and supporters of Israel's right to exist face harassment and intimidation.

When asked if he ever imagined having to explain the legitimacy of Israel 76 years after its UN ratification, Dr. Pearl reflected:

"Yes and no, because for 20 years now I see the erosion of legitimacy going on increasing, and I warned against it, but we didn't take care of it at the time, and now we have to carry the consequences."

Cultural Resistance Through Song: Anat Sadan

Ms. Anat Sadan, who has organized these sing-along events for 14 years, explains how what began as community-building has transformed into cultural resistance.

[]

"After October 7th, we felt that we cannot sing anymore. We were deeply disturbed and sad," Sadan explains. "But we decided that it's such an important time to bring the community together because the songs tell the story of the establishment of Israel and the history of Israel."

As a Holocaust educator and docent at the Holocaust Museum Los Angeles, Sadan draws disturbing parallels between historical patterns and current events.

"We've seen the Islamo-Left reviving the techniques of the Communists and German National Socialists - vilifying the Jews through propagandized media reporting - but the liberal press hasn't pointed it out - and social-media makes for more malicious  propagandizing."

The Israeli participants' intimate knowledge of these songs—their ability to recall lyrics that detail specific historical moments in Israel's development—stands as powerful testimony against revisionist narratives that portray Israel's founding as an act of colonization rather than the legitimate return and nation-building that these seniors personally witnessed and participated in. 

Preserving an Embattled Truth: Sam Firstenberg

Hollywood filmmaker Sam Firstenberg, who selects the songs and prepares the multimedia presentation, sees his role as not just preserving culture but safeguarding historical truth.

[ ]

"We are people who preserve the nostalgic culture and taste and sound of Israel,"

Firstenberg explains. But in today's political climate, this preservation work has taken on greater urgency. Each song in the carefully curated program serves as a time marker in the legitimate development of the state—from pre-1948 compositions through the various struggles, wars, and aspirations for peace.

Firstenberg guides the audience through a chronological journey of Israel's history, projecting photographs and historical context that directly challenge the false narratives that have gained traction in media, academia, and activist circles. These aren't abstract talking points for the attendees—they are the soundtrack of their youth, their military service, their nation-building efforts.

"Jews lived in Palestine of course in the Biblical times and but even after the Diaspora after the destruction of the Second Temple there were still here and there Jews in the land of Israel... mainly in Jerusalem in Safed, in Tiberius in Hebron in the holy cities ..."

explains Mr. Firstenberg, countering the revisionist claim that Jewish presence in the region is a modern European transplant.

"The Qatari - Led World Order" by Seth Mandel

by Seth Mandel  

Let it never be said that the president is a cheap date. May 12, 2025 in Commentary Magazine

On the heels of reports that Donald Trump—sorry, the “United States Air Force”—will be gifted a new presidential airplane from the Qataris, American-born Edan Alexander was released from his captivity in a Hamas dungeon funded and enabled by Qatar. All of this coincides with Trump’s visit this week to the Gulf, the goal of which is “to return home with $1 trillion worth of deals and investment pledges,” according to Axios.

Doha has expanded its portfolio far beyond European soccer teams.

Pres. Trump greeted by Qatar's emir, Sheikh al-Thani
(photo courtesy: The Guardian) 

Qatar is expected to ink deals worth hundreds of millions of dollars in U.S. investments while also buying military hardware totaling $2 billion. The Saudis are joining the party, too: In Trump’s own words, he told the Saudis: “I will go [to Riyadh] if you pay $1 trillion to American companies over four years.” And voila, off he goes.

Let’s not lose sight of the excellent news about Edan Alexander. He deserves his freedom and his parents deserve to have their son home, and his return is something to celebrate.

But Hamas did not publicly parade Alexander before jeering crowds in Gaza, as it has done with other hostages, because Qatar has asked for the privilege of hosting that humiliation instead. “Edan Alexander’s family told [Israel’s Channel 12] that the plan is for Edan to fly to Qatar and meet with Trump and the Emir of Qatar on Wednesday or Thursday,” reported Amit Segal. The family later clarified that such a trip would depend on Alexander’s condition, and that he would ultimately make the choice.

The backlash to the Qatar trip was swift. It was not directed at the family, of course, but at Trump, who reportedly wants it. That means the Qataris requested it. That way they can try to humiliate an Israeli hostage and the president of the United States in one fell swoop.

It’s important to remember here the genesis of Qatar’s financial relationship with Steve Witkoff, the president’s special envoy and main hostage negotiator. In 2018, Qatar essentially bailed Witkoff out of a real-estate deal that was quickly going sour. Witkoff and a partner were seeking to convert Manhattan’s Park Lane hotel into condos, but the business partner found himself in legal hot water and Witkoff needed a replacement investor or a way to offload the property. Qatar gave him $623 million to take the problem off his hands.

It’s either a real-estate deal or a bailout, depending on how you’d like to spin it. But it was reportedly part of what attracted Trump to hiring Witkoff as a senior adviser, though the two go back further.

So genuflecting to the Qataris has been good for Witkoff’s career. His son, Alex, visited a Qatari government real-estate forum on the eve of the 2024 election. Alex is CEO of the family real-estate company and was appointed by Trump to the board of the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum. Eric Trump, the president’s son, was also recently in Qatar—this time to finalize a Trump Organization deal to build a golf course and villa complex there.

Once upon a time Trump had not-so-nice things to say about his new friends the Qataris. They have, he correctly noted in 2017, “historically been a funder of terrorism at a very high level.” This was during Trump’s first term as president, and he backed a plan by regional Gulf allies to impose a blockade on Qatar. “I decided, along with secretary of state Rex Tillerson, our great generals and military people, the time had come to call on Qatar to end its funding, they have to end that funding and its extremist ideology.”

A mere ten months later, however, the Qatari emir was in the Oval Office with the president for a friendly chat and some smiley photos. “You’ve now become a very big advocate” of stopping terrorism financing, Trump told the emir, “and we appreciate that.”

Of course, Edan Alexander’s case offers a reality check. Qatar’s support for Hamas has been crucial to the terror group’s survival. Israeli (and American) officials were under the impression that Qatari cash to Hamas would at least have the effect of keeping a lid on Hamas’s terror activity. But that was a ruse, and Hamas used its cash and clout to plan and carry out Oct. 7.

It was at that moment that Qatar had an obligation to intervene and either get the hostages home or cut Hamas loose. Instead, if floundered and dragged its feet.

Edan Alexander is free. But as the scheme to drag him to Qatar for a photo op with the emir and Trump shows, he isn’t yet free of Qatar’s malign influence. And neither, apparently, is the United States.

Beleaguered Los Angelenos find solace in Holocaust commemoration - courtesy of Cedars-Sinai Medical Center

For longer than 500 days since Hamas massacred Israelis and abducted hostages, Jewish Los Angelenos have been plagued by anti-Zionist antagonists, amplified by mainstream media. For the Jews (and gentiles) of Los Angeles seeking to mourn the genocide which affected our people (and the entire civilized world) the most prominent public ceremony for Yom ha Shoah ("Catastrophe Day") during the business day of April 24th was presented, of all places, by Cedars-Sinai Medical Center in West Los Angeles. 

This has been a tradition which began 41-years ago, according to Dr. Leo Gordon of Surgery Group L.A.  In 1933, Jewish physicians, he explained, were among the first professions to be excluded from professional life by Germany National Socialist government. In some areas, like Munich, Jewish doctors were prohibited from treating non-Jewish patients.   

L.A.'s Cedars-Sinai Medical Center presented a Holocaust Remembrance Day commemoration on April 24, 2025

These restrictions were part of a broader wave of over 400 anti-Jewish laws and decrees between 1933 and 1939, which progressively isolated people with Jewish bloodlines from public and professional life. The Nuremberg Laws of 1935 further entrenched these exclusions, but the 1933 laws specifically targeted civil servants, lawyers, and doctors as the first occupations to be restricted.

The educational and cultural ceremony was
officiated by Rabbi Jason Weiner, executive
director of the Spiritual Care Department
 

Nazis worked and starved Jews and
other inmates to death, as revealed
in documentary film of liberation
of Bergen-Belsen Nazi Camp

Rabbi Jason Weiner, executive director of the Spiritual Care Department, provides contextual overview of this year's ceremony:

Robert Spencer discussed new "Antisemitism" book at David Horowitz Freedom Center - Watch it here now or on C-Span Sat 3rd May 9am ET

Renowned author and scholar Robert Spencer recently spoke about his latest book, Anti-Semitism: History and Myth, at an event recorded on March 27th by JooTube and C-Span (whom, for living room viewing of this chronicle below, you might share news about for others to record their telecast tomorrow, May 3rd at 9am ET / 6am PT).

Robert Spencer addresses new book
"Antisemitism:History & Myth"at
David Horowitz Freedom Center event

The book, Mr. Spencer's 29th publication, explores the deep-rooted causes of anti-Semitism and its resurgence, particularly after the October 7th Hamas attack on Israel. Spencer, director of Jihad Watch and a prolific writer on terrorism and Islamic extremism, discussed how anti-Semitic narratives persist due to societal conformity and historical misconceptions. He emphasized that Jewish identity, rooted in religious and cultural distinction, has often made Jewish communities targets of persecution. Highlighting historical Christian anti-Semitism, Spencer noted its contradictions with core Christian theology. He pointed out that modern Christian leaders, including the Pope and Orthodox patriarchs, have repudiated such views.

Mr. Spencer also addressed growing hostility towards pro-Israel voices in academia, citing the cancellation of his scheduled talk at UCLA due to campus opposition. Despite facing threats and criticism, he remains committed to exposing anti-Semitic rhetoric and advocating for historical accuracy. His new book seeks to counter misinformation and provide a factual basis for understanding anti-Semitism’s historical and ideological origins. Spencer’s work continues to challenge mainstream narratives and offer insights into contemporary global conflicts. Spencer further examined the historical and ideological underpinnings of anti-Semitism within Islam, highlighting the Quranic depiction of Jews as enemies of Muslims. He pointed out that Islamic texts and traditions have long fostered hostility toward Jews, refuting claims that anti-Semitism in the Muslim world only emerged due to Nazi influence.

Additionally, Mr. Spencer detailed the role of National Socialism - and International Socialism - in perpetuating anti-Semitism. He noted that both ideologies—despite their differences—framed Jews as an obstacle to their political visions, whether through racial or economic narratives. National Socialism targeted Jews as an "impure race," while Marxist doctrines associated them with capitalism, demanding their assimilation or elimination.

Philo-semitic, Christian scholar of Islamic and Christian bigotry, Robert Spencer, addresses an audience of David Horowitz' Freedom Center in Los Angeles.

 

Mr. Spencer warned that all four forms of anti-Semitism—Christian, Islamic, National Socialist, and Marxist—are resurging today. He cited the rising influence of anti-Semitic voices across social and political spectrums, including Orthodox Christian circles, Islamist protests, neo-Nazi rhetoric, and leftist movements that conflate Jewish identity with political agendas.

Ultimately, Spencer's book underscores that anti-Semitism is not merely a historical phenomenon but an enduring ideological force that continues to threaten Jewish communities worldwide. He emphasizes the need to confront these narratives head-on and recognize the broader societal dangers they pose. 

The Blood Libel's Last Gasp: Why "The Passion" Still Hurts

Mel Gibson on the set of The Passion of the Christ,
with Christ (AA Film Archive / Alamy)

In Roman history scholar, Prof. Nathanael Andrade's recent article, (adapted in JTA), rightly challenges the enduring myth of Jewish culpability in the death of Jesus. The scholar dismantles the historical inaccuracies and biased interpretations that have fueled centuries of antisemitism. It's a crucial intervention, yet the persistence of this libel, particularly in popular culture, demands constant vigilance. One need only look at Mel Gibson's "The Passion of the Christ" to see how these ancient prejudices continue to fester.

Gibson's film, released to both critical acclaim and fervent condemnation, purported to offer a historically accurate depiction of Jesus' final hours. However, its blatant manipulation of scripture, its graphic violence, and, most insidiously, its portrayal of Jews as bloodthirsty antagonists, served only to reinforce the very narratives that Dr. Andrade so effectively debunks.

The film leans heavily on extra-biblical traditions and embellishments, often presented as historical fact. The Sanhedrin is depicted as a monolithic entity, driven solely by malice towards Jesus. Individual Jews are shown sneering and demanding his crucifixion. This is a far cry from the complex socio-political landscape of Roman-occupied Judea. The Gospels themselves offer varying accounts, and even within those accounts, blame is far from universally assigned to the Jewish people.

But "The Passion's" most egregious offense lies in its perpetuation of the deicide charge – the accusation that the Jewish people are collectively responsible for the death of God. This charge has been the cornerstone of antisemitism for millennia, justifying persecution, pogroms, and even the Holocaust. To visually reinforce this accusation on the silver screen, with all the power of cinematic storytelling, is not just irresponsible, it's dangerous.

Moreover, the film conveniently omits or minimizes the role of the Roman authorities. Pontius Pilate, the Roman governor, is presented as a reluctant participant, almost sympathetic to Jesus' plight. This glosses over the brutal reality of Roman rule and the empire's history of crushing dissent. It's crucial to remember that Jesus was executed by the Romans, for what they perceived as sedition – a direct threat to their authority.

Fortunately, voices have emerged to challenge this harmful narrative. Scholars Jeremy Cohen and Andrade's work is vital, but so too are visual resources that offer alternative interpretations. Here are a few examples that challenge the Church's historical narrative:

• Antisemitism Uncovered Video: Myth of Deicide: Many YouTube channels offer theological and historical analyses that dismantle the deicide charge, highlighting the Roman role and the complexities of the Gospel accounts. Search for videos addressing "deicide myth" or "who killed Jesus."

• The Passion of the Christ - (Renegade Cut): Several film critics and theologians have produced video essays analyzing the antisemitic tropes present in Mel Gibson's film. Search for "The Passion of the Christ anti-Semitism" on YouTube or Vimeo.

• Jews & Christians: A Journey of Faith | Abrahamic Religions Documentary: Documentaries exploring the historical relationship between Judaism and Christianity can offer valuable context and challenge prejudiced assumptions.

It is our responsibility, as Jews, to actively combat the persistent myth of Jewish culpability in the death of Jesus. By engaging with scholarly work, critically analyzing popular culture, and promoting alternative narratives, we can help to dismantle the structures of antisemitism and build a more just and equitable world. "The Passion" may be a film, but its legacy of hate lingers on, and we must be vigilant in confronting it.

"Here There Are Blueberries" Holocaust-themed drama at The Wallis in L.A. impresses Television Academy Governor, Kim Estes

Mr. Kim Estes, actors' Governor, TV Academy

While covering the Santa Monica Film Festival on March 15th, Nikki Carbonetta, the festival's Creative Director introduced me to Mr. Kim Estes. In addition to his career as an actor, Mr. Estes also serves (with Kate Linder) as a co-representative of the Television Academy's Board of Governors to the Performers (i.e., Actors) Members.

Mr. Estes related how impressed he was having just attended the play "Here There Are Blueberries," performed at the Wallis Annenberg Theater in Beverly Hills which plays until March 30th. Mr. Estes described the performance as spectacular and deeply poignant. 

"Here There Are Blueberries" stage
performance scene, May 2023

Mr. Estes says that this L.A. production addresses the Holocaust and Auschwitz through previously unseen photographs found by an individual in a trash can in Germany. These photographs depicted the lives of German officers, prompting a moral dilemma for the Holocaust Museum about whether to accept and showcase them. 

The narrative also includes a story about a woman who, after being cared for by an ex-Nazi officer, discovered more photographs of prisoners and officers, which she kept for 60 years before feeling compelled to share their history. 

Here, There Are Blueberries" is noted for its contemporary setting and the heavy, yet enlightening exploration of these historical moments, ultimately revealing the complexity of the human experience during such a harrowing time.  

Ought entertainment award ceremonies tolerate the exploiting of acceptance speeches for recipients' political causes?

Vanessa Redgrave redux: In view of the politicized acceptance speech given by directors of "No Other Land," (Oscar for Best Documentary 2025) we republish our article produced on the topic of exploiting the telecast in 2017.

Marlon Brando boycotted the 1973 Oscars to draw attention to Hollywood's depiction of American Indians and Wounded Knee. In 1978, Vanessa Redgrave danced with a PLO Kalashnikov rifle in her anti-Israel documentary, "The Palestinian." In her acceptance speech for her Oscar for "Julia," she made a political statement, calling opponents of her award "Zionist hoodlums" which drew audible disapproval from the audience. 

Meryl Streep exploited her microphone at the 2017 Golden Globe Awards telecast to condemn conservatism, Pres. Trump's vetting of immigrants from troublesome Islamist countries, and to praise multiculturalism.

Should opinion-leader actors and singers exploit the live award-shows' telecast spotlight to preach their politics to a global audience? Is Hollywood's esteemed diversity extended to political views? Would liberals tolerate it from conservatives? Does it needlessly risk alienating half of an artists' fans? Or does virtue-signaling grow an artist's popularity enough to compensate for it?

We took our camera to the red-carpet at Norby Walters' 2017 "Night of 100 Stars" $1000-per-plate, Oscar viewing-party at the Beverly Hilton to investigate the celebrities' perspectives. How has Hollywood become too political? Do Liberals discriminate professionally against those of alternate views? How much politics (if at all) is it appropriate to foist on an entertainment awards-ceremony TV audience?

We spoke to actors and singers of varying ages and genres: Jon Voight, Richard Lewis,  Ed Asner, Lou Gossett Jr., Richard Grieco, Frankie Valli, Charles Martin-Smith, Tanya Tucker, Trace Adkins, Courtney Stodden, (non-entertainer and anti-Trump operative) Gloria Allred, Wink and Sandy Martindale, Shadoe Stevens, Yakov Smirnfoff,  Tia Carrere, (HBO's Mike Tyson star) Michael Jai White and wife Gillian, Hollywood stylist Daniel DeCriscio. 

In most cases, those who endorsed political speeches were liberals and those opposed it were conservatives. Former Los Angeles County Supervisor Mike Antonovich tied it all together. "(I think) it's not healthy... We want to have everybody enjoy the arts, because the arts are for everyone, regardless of race, color, creed, or political persuasion. ... I'd like to see that restored, once again, as it had been in the past." 

Antonovich agreed there has been some discrimination against non-liberals in Hollywood. "If we're going to support diversity, we need to respect different points of view- and still respect one another and work with one another. ... Respect is what's important."

How Oscar docu, 'No Other Land' is a false, Palestinian propaganda

“This is a propaganda film that serves the false Palestinian narrative, and seeks to undermine the legitimacy of the State of Israel.”

According to Kassy Akiva's "The Truth About The Oscar-Winning Anti-Israel Documentary ‘No Other Land’ published in The Daily Wire March 3rd '25 

According to Israeli NGO Regavim, the documentary No Other Land relies on a “concoction of misrepresentations and outright fabrications.”

“This is a propaganda film that serves the false Palestinian narrative, and seeks to undermine the legitimacy of the State of Israel in the international arena in order to cause boycotts and sanctions of IDF fighters,” Meir Deutsch, director-general of Regavim, said in a statement.

Throughout the film, Palestinian co-Director, Basel Adra, documents his struggle to stop the Israeli Defense Forces from demolishing what are described as “ancient villages” in an area called Masafer Yatta, which is east of the Palestinian Authority town of Yatta. In reality, Regavim points out, all of the so-called villages of Masafer Yatta did not exist when Israel declared the area an IDF training zone for live-fire exercises in the early 1980s.

According to Naomi Kahn, the director of the international division of Regavim, the Palestinian Authority encourages and supports the illegal construction as a way of taking over Area C.

“Since the announcement by the Prime Minister of the Palestinian Authority in 2009 that the Oslo framework was no longer binding, the Palestinian Authority has poured all of its resources into de facto annexation of Area C.”

Kahn stresses that more than 60% of Areas A and B — the territory already under Palestinian Authority control — is empty and available for construction and development.

“They are putting facts on the ground in strategic points, forming the map of a Palestinian state in the entirety of Judea and Samaria — without the bother of negotiation or compromise with Israel.”

Aerial photographs dating as far back as 1945 — some of which the Arabs submitted themselves to the Israeli Supreme Court — show no signs of a residential presence before the 1980s. Not until the 2000s does the area have signs of habitation in the images.

According to a thread of posts by Tweeter: @GazaWood1 (who exposes Palestinian, fabricated scenes and imagery created as propaganda) on X.com "The Film 'No Other Land' Sparked Significant Controversy. "

In reality, the film is based on a complete Palestinian falsehood known as “Masafer Yatta.” Let’s talk about it for a bit.
🧵🔎 

1️⃣ First of all, the film tells the story of an area in the Disputed Territories the Muslims named Masafer Yatta. 
The film attempts to convey the narrative that Palestinians have lived there for hundreds of years and that Israel suddenly decided to evict them.
In reality, this was abandoned land that nomadic Bedouins occasionally used for grazing and sometimes took shelter in the caves there. 

2️⃣ In fact, Palestinian construction in the area only began in the 1990s.
Before that, there were caves that Bedouins used as seasonal dwellings. 

3️⃣ The most important point: Until 1993, the Israeli Air Force conducted attack training in the area.
These were full-scale military exercises—of the kind that made permanent residence impossible. This fact alone proves that no permanent settlement existed there.
ynet.co.il/news/article/r…Only in 1999 did Palestinians file a petition with the court. The simple reason? Until then, the area was of no importance to them, and no one lived there permanently.
It’s also worth noting that even afterward, they never presented any ownership documents.

Summary:
Palestinians have never provided evidence that the area belonged to them. Even more striking, it was only many years after the military had been active there that they began constructing homes.

4️⃣ Attached is a screenshot of the court ruling, with an English translation:
ynet.co.il/news/article/r…

בג"ץ: אפשר לפנות מאות פלסטינים המתגוררים בשטח אש בדרום הר חברוןבתום מחלוקת ארוכת שנים, דחה בג"ץ שתי עתירות של פלסטינים החיים בשטח שנמצא בשליטת צה"ל. השופט מינץ קבע כי "ערב ההכרזה על שטח אש לא היו מגורים קבועים בגבולותיו", אך הוסיף כי העותרים יוכלו להיכנס לאזור לצ…https://www.ynet.co.il/news/article/ryxs6swuq

5️⃣ The judge rebuked the petitioners for exploiting the legal battle to continue illegal construction,
even though the court had conditioned its injunctions against demolition on a halt to further illegal building.

🔴 In other words: All the demolition footage was staged.
They built in a prohibited area precisely so that the IDF would demolish their homes, allowing them to document and publicize it. 

6️⃣ A side note relevant to the previous point:
At 11:15 in the film, they explicitly discuss their strategy to prevent what they fear most:
🗣️ "I think we can stop the eviction. It will happen if we document and work on the ground."

It’s astounding how openly Palestinians reveal their well-worn tactic that Israel has been blind to for years: provoking a confrontation, standing by with cameras, and capturing the perfect moment.

This is textbook Pallywood.  Anyone familiar with Palestinian tactics— not Westerners unfamiliar with their methods— knows that this means: "Let’s stir up trouble, capture the perfect moment, edit around it, and publish."

This is the same trick they’ve used thousands of times: A soldier turns his rifle, they freeze the frame the moment it’s aimed at a civilian, and they frame it as if he is targeting an innocent bystander.

7️⃣ By the way, the Arabic word ‘Masafer’ means ‘nothing.’
Many believed the area was worthless. 

8️⃣ What bothered me personally the most was the use of children.
And it’s a shame Hollywood enables this. 
The same way they arm their children and encourage them to commit acts of terror,
The same way Hamas builds tunnels under schools,
The same way they always send their children—whom they love less than they hate us—into the line of fire, hoping they’ll get hurt so they can parade them in front of cameras,
That’s exactly how children were used in this film.
Why use children and force them to live in a conflict zone solely for political purposes? 

9️⃣ Did you know they even stole the film’s title from the Jews?
See here:

🔟 Summary: Why are Palestinians trying to seize Masafer Yatta?

The Palestinian push to take over Masafer Yatta is not coincidental and not simply a ‘survival struggle’ as international media portrays it.  This is a well-planned strategy motivated by demographic, political, and territorial considerations in the battle for control of the West Bank.

🔹 1️⃣ Creating ‘facts on the ground’ as part of the fight for Area C

📌 Masafer Yatta is in Area C—territory under full Israeli control according to the Oslo Accords.
📌 The Palestinian Authority knows it has no official authority there, so it promotes illegal construction to establish footholds and turn them into permanent settlements.
📌 The goal? International pressure leading to de facto recognition of Palestinian control over the land.

🔹 2️⃣ Establishing Palestinian territorial continuity and breaking Jewish settlement

📌 Masafer Yatta lies between southern Hebron and the Negev—a strategic area linking West Bank Palestinian communities with Bedouin populations in the Negev.
📌 Palestinian control there isolates Jewish settlements, preventing Jewish territorial continuity between the Negev and the Hebron region.

🔹 3️⃣ European Union & international support

📌 The EU directly funds illegal Palestinian construction in the area, despite it being a designated military firing zone.
📌 Palestinians receive financial and logistical aid from European left-wing NGOs looking to push an anti-Israel narrative by manufacturing a "forced eviction crisis."

🔹 4️⃣ Exploiting legal and media platforms

📌 Palestinians use courts and media to frame the issue as “forced displacement of traditional residents,” even though the area was historically used only for grazing, not for permanent settlement.
📌 Branding the conflict as a ‘human rights project’ recruits global support and hinders Israeli sovereignty enforcement.

🔴 Conclusion: This is a strategic battle, not a defense of ‘ancient villages.’

📌 The Masafer Yatta narrative as “historical villages” is not backed by facts—permanent settlement began only in the 1990s.
📌 The real goal is political: To create Palestinian territorial continuity, isolate Jewish communities, and weaken Israeli control over Area C.

📌 The use of media and courts is a calculated move to generate international pressure and solidify Palestinian presence as an irreversible reality.

❌ This isn’t about "another Israeli injustice"—it’s a deliberate strategic operation backed by European funding and a manipulated narrative.