Thursday, June 4, 2026

‘Defund the Police’ champ who says police rooted in ‘white supremacy’ may be socialist mayor of DC - Jerry Dunleavy

 

by Jerry Dunleavy

Janeese Lewis George rode to power into the D.C. Council in 2020 on a wave of "Defund the Police" promises and with the backing of the DSA. As their latest poster child, she could be mayor of America's capital city.

 

A longtime “Defund the Police” advocate who could be the next mayor of the nation’s capital has argued that American policing is “rooted in white supremacy” — and she, like NYC Mayor Zohran Mamdani, is also a member of Democratic Socialists of America.

Janeese Lewis George, who won her D.C. City Council seat in 2020 with the backing of the DSA and on a “Defund the Police” platform following the George Floyd protests and riots, is now a leading contender to replace outgoing multi-term Mayor Muriel Bowser. The Democratic mayoral primary will be based on ranked choice voting for the first time this year. Lewis George has a lead in the primary according to a City Cast poll, as well as according to a GBAO Strategies poll sponsored by her own campaign.

Prior to winning the DSA endorsement and the Democratic primary in 2020 and becoming a member of the D.C. City Council, Lewis George had been an assistant attorney general in Philadelphia as well as an assistant attorney general in Washington, D.C.

Lewis George backtracks on defunding the police

Crime is a key issue in the race, where Lewis George’s top opponent, Kenyan McDuffie, has hammered the DSA candidate over her Defund the Police stances. Lewis George now contends that she will not defund the police, but getting DSA’s backing during her original D.C. council run meant vowing to defund the police, and she had a vocal history of promising to do just that.

Mamdani, as mayor of the country’s biggest city, could soon have a fellow DSA member as mayor of the nation’s capital, if Lewis George wins on June 16.

Lewis George’s campaign did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

DSA endorsement and Defund the Police stance are inextricably linked

Lewis George’s endorsement by and membership in the DSA is inextricably linked to her long history of calling to defund the police, because it is a litmus test for DSA support. When she was making her first primary bid for a D.C. council seat in 2019, Lewis George filled out the standard endorsement questionnaire put together by the DSA of Metro D.C.

She said “yes” when asked if she identified as a democratic socialist, writing, “Because democratic socialists believe that our political and economic systems are fundamentally flawed, and that a better system is one that shifts more resources and power into the hands of working families. My campaign is built on this foundation, which is why I’m fighting to decrease the influence of money in politics; raise wages; beat back racism, sexism, and other forms of cultural and gender bias; expand healthcare; and make housing affordable again.”

Lewis George’s timing for joining the DSA and then seeking the DSA endorsement seemed strategic, as she wrote that “I was admittedly late to the game, signing up only in October 2019.” The DSA questionnaire asked whether she supported “efforts to demilitarize and disarm our police departments” and she answered “yes.”

“We’re told the institution of policing is intended to protect all of us from some suspicious menace, but the fact is that crime is a public health problem, not a battle of military opponents,” Lewis George wrote. “The transformation of American police departments, especially the MPD, into military units trained to occupy the very communities promised protection is one of the greatest dangers to the future of urban life.”

She also said “yes” when asked if she recognized “the increased police presence in our schools as the start of a school-to-prison pipeline” and thus supported "removing police officers from schools, instead providing free mental healthcare as an alternative means to provide for the safety of our children.”

“I don’t think we should have guns in our schools no matter who is carrying them,” Lewis George wrote. “We should be expanding funding to ensure mental health services and staff are available in all Ward 4 schools, not just but especially those with a high rate of mental health-related needs.”

She also said “yes” when asked if she was committed to “rejecting any political endorsement by labor groups whose mission is primarily to organize and represent police officers.” The DSA-backed mayoral candidate — who was then running in the Democratic primary to join the D.C. council — tweeted in October 2019 that “I will absolutely divest from MPD and put that money into violence interruption programs” and expounded upon that by saying that “what I mean is that I would redirect some of the $550 million in funding that is currently allocated for policing toward violence prevention and violence interruption programs that are run by agencies other than MPD.”

Lewis George doubled down on this in December 2019, arguing that “I'm tired of throwing failed solutions at this problem. More policing doesn't work, we can't enforce our way to safer communities.”

She won the Democratic nomination for the D.C. City Council seat in Ward 4 in early June 2020.

The Minneapolis City Council announced a few days later that it was in support of disbanding or dismantling the Minneapolis Police Department. ABC News soon reported that Lewis George — now the nominee for D.C. city council — was in favor of that.

"It's no longer sounding like a radical idea. It's sounding like a logical idea for many," Lewis-George reportedly said, adding that “just like the 1968 Civil Rights Act had to be passed in order to see the protests die down, I think this is a moment where our legislators are going to have to do the same thing."

Long list of "soft on crime positions"

Lewis George also took a number of soft-on-crime stances when seeking the DSA endorsement in 2019.

She said “yes” when asked if she supported “eliminating cash bail” and wrote that “cash bail keeps low-income people with limited cash liquidity behind bars.” The candidate also said “yes” that she did “recognize sex work as work” and did “support the decriminalization of sex work.” Lewis George added, “This isn’t complicated. Just because many might find it unsavory does not mean that those employed in the sale of sex should be denied the rights afforded all workers.”

Lewis George also said “yes” when asked if she was in favor of “the decriminalization of all drugs” — including the hardest and most addictive.

“Yes, though probably it'd be most practical to do it in phases,” she told the DSA. “Like most crime, drug use is a public health problem whose solution is a public health approach, not punitive law enforcement and incarceration."

The DSA’s D.C. chapter held a “Fund Care, Not Cops!” rally in mid-June 2020, which Lewis George spoke at.

Lewis George endorsed the “Defund the Police” slogan during the rally. “A lot of people have said to me, ‘oh, don’t use the word defund because it makes a lot of people uncomfortable,’ and I said, ‘were people as uncomfortable when they defunded education?’ What we’re saying to you is that you have had too much of continuing to divest from our communities and to take from our communities and continue to do it and we are tired,” she said according to Street Sense Media.

Lewis George tweeted in June 2020 that “Juneteenth recognizes Black freedom and Black resistance, a powerful opportunity to proclaim in one voice that BLACK LIVES MATTER. To honor our ancestors and create a path toward freedom for future generations.”

The candidate was asked whether, back when she was a prosecutor, she had ever thought to herself that she was working within a racist system.

“Absolutely,” she said. “All the time.”

Introduced the “White Supremacy in Policing Prevention Act”

NPR said that that experience “informed her proposals to divert some of the police budget to community improvements and violence reduction programs.”

“You know, I've seen, you know, how much we just lean on doing the same thing and expecting a different result, which is like — let's just put more officers there, and that'll [solve] the problem, which is not the only solution,” Lewis George said. “You've got to put more resources into the community to do that.”

Once in office, Lewis George quickly continued her critiques of the police, including introducing the “White Supremacy in Policing Prevention Act” in February 2021.

Her office announced that this was “a bill to investigate any ties between members of MPD and hate groups that could prevent fair enforcement of the law, and to recommend preventive and detection safeguards for the Department” and contended that “in the wake of rising extremism, police departments nationwide are grappling with the threat of white supremacist and hate group ties among law enforcement.”

Lewis George said on Instagram at the time that “this legislation is a critical step to ensure that our laws are enforced fairly, improve officer and community safety, and increase public trust in the Department without setting aside additional funding for policing.”

She also introduced legislation in 2021 to restrict police chases in D.C.

The councilwoman appeared on Zoom for a hearing in May 2021 where she praised proposed police reforms which “fundamentally reimagine what the role of policing is in D.C.” She said she was in favor of “decriminalizing poverty and low-level offenses” and wanted to create “police-free schools.”

DSA candidate said Jacob Blake case shows black people “not safe in our own bodies”

Lewis George also suggested that Wisconsin police not being charged for the shooting of Jacob Blake meant that black people are not safe in America.

In August 2020, Kenosha Police Officer Rusten Sheskey shot Jacob Blake in the back and left side seven times after Blake repeatedly managed to evade being detained by the responding officers and as Blake turned toward the officer while holding a knife.

Kenosha County District Attorney Michael Graveley released a January 2021 report saying the facts established that Sheskey and two other responding officers knew Blake had a felony warrant involved with domestic violence and sexual assault charges. The report said they also knew: that Laquisha Booker flagged them down and indicated Blake was trying to take her car while her kids were in it; that Blake physically resisted arrest while armed with a knife; that Sheskey and another officer repeatedly tried to subdue Blake with a taser to no avail; that Blake was walking to the car with a knife; and that Sheskey, another officer, and two citizen witnesses saw Blake turning toward Sheskey with the knife when Sheskey then shot him.

The district attorney concluded: “I do not believe the State could prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Officer Sheskey was not acting lawfully in self-defense or defense of others.”

“Time and time again we see that deescalation, respect for our lives, and accountability for those who shoot us is not a privilege Black people get to have. We are not safe in our own bodies. #JacobBlake,” Lewis-George tweeted the day of this announcement.

The Biden Justice Department announced in October 2021 that the Kenosha police officer who shot and partially paralyzed Blake would not be prosecuted, due to “insufficient evidence.”

The DOJ said “it will not pursue federal criminal civil rights charges” against the officer, saying it had told Blake’s family and that prosecutors made the decision “because the evidence obtained is insufficient to prove that the KPD officer willfully used excessive force.”

Lewis George tries to downplay Defund the Police stance as she runs for mayor

Lewis George’s current mayoral campaign platform makes no mention of her prior repeated pledges to Defund the Police, but instead claims she will support the police.

“Janeese will implement a comprehensive public safety strategy that addresses prevention, intervention, and enforcement. It’s an approach she took as Ward 4 Councilmember when addressing crime on Kennedy Street and in Petworth,” the platform contends. “And it’s the approach she took when she was a prosecutor at the D.C. Office of the Attorney General. As Mayor, the entirety of her government will play a role in public safety, not just one agency.”

Lewis George has attempted to somewhat walk back her prior demands for defunding the police.

The DSA candidate’s current campaign platform further claims that “to make D.C. safer” she will “enforce our laws and support law enforcement agencies” by “strengthening and expanding resources to detectives to aid in solving more crimes” and by “addressing MPD’s vacancy and retention crisis by expanding the police cadet program, reducing forced overtime, renovating aging facilities, and providing child care benefits that make the District competitive with other local and federal police departments.”

The Washington Post noted in May that “the DSA’s platform calls for substantially defunding police departments and ultimately abolishing them.” The outlet said that Lewis George was asked if she agreed with that view, and replied that she “does not always agree with what the DSA does” and argued that the “defund” attacks by her opponents are “cheap shots.”

“I stood up in the moment, just like every generation before me has stood up, and made a loud, resounding call for investment in our community,” Lewis George told the outlet, reportedly “adding that years of police brutality cases that did not result in justice informed her earlier calls” and “that she would hire more police to alleviate overtime burdens straining the department.”

Lewis George has allowed clear indications of her softer-on-crime stances to be made well known during the campaign, including attacking federal law enforcement as well as opposing late-night curfews for juveniles in the wake of youthful and often predominantly black teenaged crowds committing spates of violence in the nation’s capital in recent weeks, including a viral brawl at a Chipotle in a Navy Yard Chipotle in May.

WUSA9 reported in May that the D.C. Council had approved a curfew measure which “would give police the authority to establish curfew zones across the District.” The outlet added that “under the measure, the Metropolitan Police Department would be allowed to designate areas where children and teenagers are prohibited from gathering in groups of eight or more starting at 8 p.m. as a way to prevent teen takeovers in places like the U Street Corridor and Navy Yard that have sometimes become violent.”

The measure was passed by an 8 to 5 vote, with Lewis George as one of the nays.

Lewis George also called the curfew “dangerous” during debates in May.

"Right now, using the curfew as a tool for our young people is dangerous. It is dangerous because we have federal troops who are in our city, masked ICE agents who are in our city, and these are the people enforcing this law and our young people, and these are not individuals who are trained in de-escalation, they are not accountable to D.C. residents,” Lewis George said as reported by Fox News.

"As mayor, I think it's important that we use the right tools, and we don't put the risk of our youth being harmed or killed without the real oversight that's necessary,” the DSA candidate added.

U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia Jeanine Pirro argued in May, "Teen takeovers have disrupted neighborhoods, forced businesses to close temporarily, and diverted valuable law enforcement resources from the residents of the District. These incidents have become increasingly common in areas such as Navy Yard and NoMa and are often accompanied by criminal conduct, including assaults, robberies, fights, and other disorderly behavior."

McDuffie’s campaign put out another new ad in June which went after Lewis George on the issue of crime.

“D.C. is at a crossroads. The next mayor must tackle crime. But Janeese Lewis George will make it worse. She routinely stands in the way of critical safety laws like youth curfews. It’s common sense,” the ad said. “What’s really dangerous for our kids is violence. … Janeese Lewis George is a risk we just can’t take.”

The would-be socialist mayor also laid out the importance of the DSA to her electoral bids — and crowed about the DSA’s growing power.

“I’m running to be the first Democratic Socialist mayor of D.C. I’m a proud democratic socialist. I’m proud of how far we’ve come. … D.C. was one of the first to be building democratic socialism in our country,” Lewis George said. “Our Metro D.C. DSA was the first to say we’re going to build global power here in our cities. And when we decided that in 2020, people were like, it will never happen, you’ll never do it. And we said: watch us do it.” 


Jerry Dunleavy

Source: https://justthenews.com/politics-policy/elections/defund-police-champ-who-says-policing-rooted-white-supremacy-may-be

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Botched ruling on pregnancy 'fairness' law opens floodgates to abortion, pro-life coalition warns - Greg Piper

 

by Greg Piper

Democrats, atheists, Jewish and Christian groups back Catholic bishops' challenge to EEOC regulation, court ruling on Pregnant Workers Fairness Act, saying they obliterate First Amendment rights of religious and pro-life groups.

 

The Biden administration read abortion mandates into federal laws on emergency stabilization of hospital patients and accommodations for pregnant women in the workplace, seeking to override state abortion restrictions and religious employers' objections to facilitating abortions for employees, respectively.

With federal appellate courts reaching opposite conclusions on whether the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act requires any specific procedure and the Supreme Court refusing to get involved in either case – leading Maryland to set its own rules last week — a wide coalition is now fighting to block sweeping abortion access under the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act.

Pro-life Democrats and atheists joined Jews, Seventh-day Adventists, evangelicals, 50 members of Congress, Texas and a conservative think tank to support the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops and Catholic University of America at the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which previously blocked the abortion-friendly reading of EMTALA.

Under the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission's regulation interpreting PWFA to require abortion accommodation, finalized two years ago, "qualifying medical conditions include many that are universal to pregnancy, such as minor hormonal changes," said the Catholic plaintiffs, represented by religious liberty law firm Becket.

A district court "recast" that mandate with "the same severe ramifications for religious objectors, the same lack of support in statutory text, and the same regulatory overreach," their opening brief says.

By ruling that PWFA itself requires accommodations for "abortions stemming from the underlying treatment of a medical condition related to pregnancy," the court set the threshold so low that it implicates Catholic employers in abortions deemed related to even "minor" cases of "anxiety" and other mild health conditions, the brief says.

The brief also refers to "unsuccessful negotiations" last summer with EEOC to "obtain protection during the pendency of the case." The plaintiffs told the 5th Circuit in a July 21 injunction motion that EEOC reiterated that very day "it would not agree to the full requested relief."

The same issue arose in the PWFA case as in Louisiana's challenge to the Food and Drug Administration's repeated relaxation of prescribing rules for the abortion pill mifepristone, which functionally neutered its abortion restrictions: The Trump administration wanted to revisit the regulation by its Democratic predecessors but not tie its hands in court.

The plaintiffs have shown "no harm, let alone the type of imminent, irreparable injury necessary to justify" the injunction pending appeal they were seeking, the EEOC responded July 31. The commission has "never even received any charges" against any employer for failure to accommodate an abortion under PWFA.

The bishops and university emphasized that the administration recently acknowledged, in the Justice Department's Task Force to Eradicate Anti-Christian Bias report, that the abortion-accommodation reading of PWFA "twisted this commonsense statute to reach radical ends infringing on religious liberty."

Law gives women options beyond abortion, not intended to 'muzzle' pro-life groups

Democrats for Life of America and Secular Pro-Life appeared on a friend-of-the-court brief with another nonreligious group, 55-year-old Americans United for Life, and several religious pro-life groups, including the National Association of Evangelicals and Christian Legal Society.

A recent Free Press article on pro-life disillusionment with President Trump quoted DFLA and AUL as calling for a bigger tent for the pro-life movement.

During notice and comment on the EEOC's proposed regulation, DFLA had warned that the abortion-expansive reading will harm its hiring and advocacy, "potentially" forcing it to "support actions by its employees that it actively campaigns against," the joint brief notes.

Secular Pro-Life said it supported PWFA out of hope it would "address unjust employment practices that lead mothers to feel that abortion is their only option," but the regulation ended up censoring its freedom of speech and association under the First Amendment. 

The brief, written by the Christian Legal Society, elaborates on the regulation's chilling effects and the "wide muzzle" it imposes on pro-life organizations through an "anti-coercion" provision that could hold them liable if any staff "counsel their coworkers against an abortion accommodation or criticize the choice of an elective abortion."

"As with media organizations and parades, government cannot compel other expressive organizations to give access to views that contradict their message," the brief says, citing precedents for the Miami Herald and organizers of Boston's St. Patrick's Day parade.

Usurping 'major questions' reserved for Congress by citing different law

Led by Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee Chairman Sens. Bill Cassidy, R-La., and Pro-Life Caucus Co-Chair Chris Smith, R-N.J., 50 federal lawmakers said in a brief that Congress "intentionally withheld" the power to mandate abortion accommodations, "especially upon religious employers," from EEOC in the law, which Cassidy cosponsored.

"The bipartisan PWFA was designed to accomplish a simple, uncontroversial goal: ensuring that pregnant and postpartum women receive the accommodations they need at work," the brief said. "It was not designed to take sides in controversial abortion policy debates."

EEOC relied on three court decisions interpreting the Civil Rights Act, before SCOTUS invalidated federal abortion rights in Dobbs, to conclude that PWFA, a separate law, required abortion accommodations, the brief also says.

The commission trampled the "major questions" SCOTUS doctrine by "interpreting the religious exemption [in the law] narrowly and medical justifications for abortion broadly," part of the Biden administration's campaign to resurrect federal abortion rights invalidated by SCOTUS "by wrongfully reinterpreting federal laws that have nothing to do with abortion."

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, whose Senate fortunes rose with Trump's endorsement as Cassidy lost his seat after Trump's rebuke, drills down on the application of the "religious-organization exemption" in the PWFA in the Lone Star State's brief. 

"The exemption prohibits application of the entirety" of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act and PWFA when a religious organization "acts because of an individual’s religious observance, practice, or beliefs," said Paxton, who will try to keep Cassidy's seat for the GOP in the November elections.  

Title VII "offers a mirror-image set of protections," for religious employees "against discrimination from a nonreligious employer" and for religious employers against "governmental interference" in their employment decisions "animated by religious belief," he also said.

When SCOTUS ruled that Title VII protects transgender employees from discrimination on the basis of sex, it emphasized that the statute preserves constitutional free exercise of religion, the brief says. This "strongly suggests" Title VII's religious-organization exemption "will protect from any claim brought under Title VII."

Narrowly defining church autonomy 'in terms of co-religionists by label alone' 

A joint brief by the Jewish Coalition for Religious Liberty and General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists said the district court's ruling "undermines the critical protections of the church autonomy doctrine," threatening them both in different ways.

While "Judaism includes a long tradition of treating abortion as a profound moral issue implicating the sanctity of life," most American Jews today support the legality of abortion in "many cases," the brief says. 

"A rule that defines the church autonomy doctrine in terms of co-religionists by label alone, without regard to actual beliefs and practices, fails to respect the diversity of sincerely-held religious convictions that exist within broader faith traditions," the groups said, noting U.S. Lutheran denominations also disagree with each other on abortion.

Seventh-day Adventists' requirements for employees are "not incidental personnel preferences" but "integral" to its identity, requiring baptism, tithing, "regular standing" with the denomination and "exemplary commitment" to its teachings, the brief says.

"Questions concerning the sanctity of life, the theological permissibility of abortion, and the obligations of religious witness are quintessentially theological questions beyond the competence and power of civil authorities," the Jews and Christians said.

The Manhattan Institute's brief focuses on the major-questions doctrine and church autonomy as well, saying the former applies to "rules that burden" the latter. 


Greg Piper

Source: https://justthenews.com/politics-policy/abortion/botched-ruling-pregnancy-fairness-law-opens-floodgates-abortion-pro-life

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Wednesday, June 3, 2026

Doctors Without Borders: Promoting Hate Through Medicine - Gerald M. Steinberg

 

by Gerald M. Steinberg

A major new report documents how Doctors Without Borders (Médecins Sans Frontières, MSF) has been transformed from a medical humanitarian organization into one of the most aggressive institutional promoters of anti-Israel messaging, most notably the canard that Israel is committing genocide in Gaza.

 

  • [L]ike other powerful groups in the NGO industry, MSF has become a major platform for political and ideological propaganda campaigns that often accompany wars and terror atrocities.

  • A major new report by the NGO Monitor research institute... documents how MSF has been transformed from a medical humanitarian organization into one of the most aggressive institutional promoters of anti-Israel messaging, most notably the canard that Israel is committing genocide in Gaza.

  • This is far from the only example of MSF's participation in demonization campaigns that are entirely inconsistent with the humanitarian agenda.

  • On October 7, while Hamas terrorists were still murdering and raping civilians in Israel, dragging hostages into Gaza, and live-streaming their "conquests," MSF officials were accusing Israel of war crimes.

  • Dr. Ghassan Abu Sittah, an MSF-affiliated anti-Israel activist, participated in a grotesque press conference organized by the Hamas-controlled Gaza Ministry of Health, to promote the libel.

  • In a massive understatement, the text acknowledged that MSF lacked the legal expertise to determine genocidal intent – the central element of the crime under international law. But that disclaimer did not stop the organization from running with the libel. At least 272 times.

  • In parallel, MSF was deafeningly silent on Hamas' real war crimes: embedding of military (terrorist) infrastructure in hospitals (documented by NGO Monitor), schools, and civilian neighborhoods; the theft of humanitarian aid; and the continued holding of Israeli civilian hostages. Across MSF's international social media feeds, hostages were scarcely mentioned – appearing as the primary subject of only three posts out of hundreds.

  • By embracing false and defamatory accusations, Doctors Without Borders and all who are associated with this NGO have undermined fundamental moral and humanitarian values. They have traded white coats and medical missions for hate slogans and lies.

A major new report documents how Doctors Without Borders (Médecins Sans Frontières, MSF) has been transformed from a medical humanitarian organization into one of the most aggressive institutional promoters of anti-Israel messaging, most notably the canard that Israel is committing genocide in Gaza. Pictured: People walk past an MSF clinic in Gaza City on January 11, 2026. (Photo by Omar Al-Qataa/AFP via Getty Images)

For half a century, Doctors Without Borders enjoyed an enviable reputation. They were known and respected for their work in war zones and disaster areas, where volunteers and employees treated the wounded and sick. Known globally as Médecins Sans Frontières, or MSF, the NGO built its credibility on the principle that doctors are there to save lives, not to wage political campaigns.

That reputation is now largely gone, and like other powerful groups in the NGO industry, MSF has become a major platform for political and ideological propaganda campaigns that often accompany wars and terror atrocities.

A major new report by the NGO Monitor research institute, which I founded and lead, documents how MSF has been transformed from a medical humanitarian organization into one of the most aggressive institutional promoters of anti-Israel messaging, most notably the canard that Israel is committing genocide in Gaza.

Since Hamas' October 7, 2023 massacre, MSF and its regional affiliates have falsely accused Israel of "genocide" at least 272 times on social media. This disturbing fact should speak for itself – genocide is not a minor rhetorical flourish. The term was coined by Polish-Jewish jurist Raphael Lemkin to describe the deliberate destruction of a people in the gas chambers and killing fields of the Holocaust. Genocide carries extraordinary moral weight. Historically, and until recently, responsible institutions and individuals have used the term with great caution.

This is far from the only example of MSF's participation in demonization campaigns that are entirely inconsistent with the humanitarian agenda. On October 7, while Hamas terrorists were still murdering and raping civilians in Israel, dragging hostages into Gaza, and live-streaming their "conquests," MSF officials were accusing Israel of war crimes. This NGO's first statement reduced the largest mass murder of Jews since the Holocaust to a vague "escalation between Israel and Gaza."

That framing defined MSF's activities throughout the conflict and continues to this day, accompanied by blatantly false accusations.

For example, on October 17, 2023, an explosion occurred near Gaza's Al-Ahli Arab Hospital. MSF immediately issued statements describing the incident as a "massacre" and promoted physician Ghassan Abu-Sittah as a key witness blaming Israel. Dr. Ghassan Abu Sittah, an MSF-affiliated anti-Israel activist, participated in a grotesque press conference, organized by the Hamas-controlled Gaza Ministry of Health, to promote the libel.

Assessments by the United States, Canada and France, and an investigation by The New York Times, concluded the damage was caused by a misfired rocket launched by Palestinian Islamic Jihad, but the MSF-led campaign never retracted the lie, spread among millions of cumulative social media followers.

That failure matters because MSF's authority rests on public trust. When doctors on the ground speak, journalists, diplomats, and policymakers listen. And when the organization's statements promote the opposite of the humanitarian principles it purports to support, the consequences extend far beyond a single news cycle.

In Gaza, MSF's role in demonization and false accusations against Israel expanded. In December 2023, MSF's international president Christos Christou accused Israel of "incessant and indiscriminate warfare" and collective punishment. In October 2024, MSF described Israeli operations as "unmitigated slaughter."

These attacks were the prelude to the genocide canard.

In December 2024, MSF published a report titled "Life in a Death Trap," joining the hate-filled chorus alleging that Israel was carrying out ethnic cleansing and genocide. In a massive understatement, the text acknowledged that MSF lacked the legal expertise to determine genocidal intent – the central element of the crime under international law. But that disclaimer did not stop the organization from running with the libel. At least 272 times.

In parallel, MSF was deafeningly silent on Hamas' real war crimes: embedding of military (terrorist) infrastructure in hospitals (documented by NGO Monitor), schools, and civilian neighborhoods; the theft of humanitarian aid; and the continued holding of Israeli civilian hostages. Across MSF's international social media feeds, hostages were scarcely mentioned – appearing as the primary subject of only three posts out of hundreds.

The tragedy is that MSF did not need to choose between treating patients and becoming a partisan actor. Humanitarian groups can deliver aid while maintaining discipline, precision, and moral seriousness. Many do.

MSF chose the opposite path.

By embracing false and defamatory accusations, Doctors Without Borders and all who are associated with this NGO have undermined fundamental moral and humanitarian values. They have traded white coats and medical missions for hate slogans and lies.


Prof. Gerald M. Steinberg is founder and president of NGO Monitor. 

Source: https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/22579/doctors-without-borders-msf

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Explosive Claim: UN Forces Collected Intelligence on IDF Troops for Hezbollah - Hezki Baruch

 

by Hezki Baruch

IDF officials told lawmakers that UNIFIL personnel gathered intelligence on Israeli troops, with information allegedly reaching Hezbollah.

 

UNIFIL forces in Lebanon
UNIFIL forces in Lebanon                                                          Yossi Zeliger/TPS

 

The IDF officially admitted that UN Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL) forces operating in southern Lebanon have been collecting intelligence on IDF soldiers.

Military representatives revealed the disturbing information during a confidential session of the Knesset Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee.

According to the representatives at the committee session, the intelligence collected by the UN forces flows directly to the Hezbollah terrorist organization.

The flow of sensitive information to terrorist entities in Lebanon severely threatens the lives of IDF troops operating in the region.

In recent months, IDF officials have been warning that the forces have been working against the IDF and exceeding their authority on the ground.

In an interview with Ynet several months ago, a senior military official in the Northern Command voiced fierce criticism of UNIFIL's conduct and did not hold back from using strong language against the "peacekeeping" force.

"We find them documenting IDF forces, and not documenting the border and things that are under their authority," the official stated. "We sent blunt and clear messages in protest of their spry and unusual activities. We understand that they are not a helpful force, but a foreign force that does suspicious and unusual things beyond their authority."

It should be noted that UNIFIL numbers approximately 13,000 troops and was first deployed in southern Lebanon in 1978. In August of last year, the United Nations Security Council extended UNIFIL’s mandate in the area through the end of 2026. Under that decision, the UN force is scheduled to withdraw from Lebanon in 2027.


Hezki Baruch

Source: https://www.israelnationalnews.com/news/428069

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

CENTCOM says US forces have defended against new, aggressive Iranian behavior - Misty Severi

 

by Misty Severi

The U.S. military said Iran launched several ballistic missiles toward regional neighbors in the Middle East, which all failed to hit their targets of Bahrain and Kuwait.

 

The United States Central Command said Tuesday night that U.S. forces have successfully defended itself against aggressive Iranian behavior and countered with self-defense strikes on Qeshm Island in the Persian Gulf.

The U.S. military said Iran launched several ballistic missiles toward regional neighbors in the Middle East, which all failed to hit their targets of Bahrain and Kuwait. 

American forces also shot down three one-way attack drones that were launched toward civilian mariners in regional waters and conducted self-defense strikes on an Iranian military ground control station on the island.

"No U.S. personnel were harmed," CENTCOM said in a post on X. "CENTCOM forces remain vigilant and ready to defend against unwarranted Iranian aggression during the ongoing ceasefire."

The attacks come after reports emerged this week that Iran had suspended peace negotiations with the U.S. due to the continued fighting in Lebanon, which Tehran said was included in the ceasefire.

President Donald Trump has denied the reports, stating that negotiations had continued uninterrupted.


Misty Severi
is a news reporter for Just The News. You can follow her on X for more coverage. 

Source: https://justthenews.com/government/security/centcom-says-us-forces-have-defended-against-aggressive-iranian-behavior

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Supreme Court clears Alabama to use GOP-friendly congressional map this fall - John Solomon

 

by John Solomon

The justices overturned a lower court ruling that the redistricting plan approved by the Legislature intentionally discriminates against black voters.

 

The U.S. Supreme Court handed another win to Republicans on Tuesday night, allowing Alabama to use a GOP-friendly congressional map in this fall’s election that will decide control of the Congress.

The justices overturned a lower court ruling that the redistricting plan approved by the Legislature intentionally discriminates against black voters. In so doing, it cleared the way for a map first approved in 2023 that is likely to give Republicans a 6-1 advantage in its congressional delegation.

“At this preliminary stage, the State has shown that it is entitled to interim relief from the District Court’s injunction,” the justices in the majority opinion wrote.

“The State has also made a strong showing of irreparable harm and that the equities and public interest favor it,” they added.” We have repeatedly cautioned that lower federal courts should not ‘alter the election rules on the eve of an election.’”

The court’s three liberal justices all dissented.

The ruling is the latest win for President Trump and Republicans in a redistricting battle both parties have pursued in hopes of gaining an advantage in the November elections.  


John Solomon

Source: https://justthenews.com/politics-policy/elections/supreme-court-clears-alabama-use-gop-friendly-congressional-map-fall

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Red states spark trend in abolishing property taxes amid state budget surpluses - Amanda Head

 

by Amanda Head

As Republican-led states enjoy budget surpluses, a new trend of eliminating property taxes is emerging in red states.

 

As home values skyrocket, taxpayers grow increasingly frustrated with "dinner table issues" such as confidence in a secure financial future and anxiety over "affordability." Republican-led states enjoy budget surpluses, as a new trend of eliminating property taxes is emerging in red states. 

On Tuesday, the Florida State Legislature approved a November ballot measure that would abolish property taxes for most primary homeowners across the sunshine state.  

The vote came after Florida Governor Ron DeSantis called the state legislature to a special session, citing rapidly rising property values, local tax collections surging from $32 billion in 2019 to a projected $60 billion currently (and $83 billion by 2032), and inflation burdens on residents. 

Moves for property tax relief on primary homes becomes more frequent

Several states are already moving toward major property tax relief for primary homeowners, mirroring Florida’s push to raise the homestead exemption to $250,000 and eventually eliminate non-school taxes on homesteaded homes. 

In Texas, Governor Greg Abbott has prioritized eliminating school-district property taxes for homeowners in 2026, using state surpluses to replace lost revenue while capping local spending growth. 

Wyoming lawmakers are debating full elimination of residential property taxes, offset by sales-tax increases, subject to voter approval. 

Indiana’s lieutenant governor has called property-tax repeal a top legislative goal, while Ohio features grassroots campaigns for a constitutional ban and ballot initiatives in Nebraska and Oklahoma target homestead exemptions or outright abolition. 

"70% of voters believe their taxes are too high," poll says

The trend is emerging at a time when historic numbers of Americans are angry about the amount of taxes they pay. 

A Fox News survey in April found a record 70% of voters believe their taxes are too high, up 11 points from the previous year.  Gallup polling similarly shows 59% of Americans saying the amount of federal income tax they pay is too high, a level that has remained elevated since 2023. 

Pew Research indicates 41% are bothered “a lot” by the personal amount they pay, while 60% now feel they contribute more than their fair share relative to government services received—up from 56% in 2023. WalletHub’s March 2026 survey echoes this, with 66% viewing their current tax rate as too high.

If Florida’s plan succeeds at the ballot, it will prove that states can fund core services (police, fire, schools) without treating homeowners as perpetual renters. Success stories might inspire copycat legislation and referendums across the country, pressuring even blue states — so far, addicted to a high tax-and-spend cycle — to follow and redefine true homeownership nationwide.​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​

Budget surplus makes the move less risky

Red-state budget surpluses have provided critical fuel for ambitious property tax relief efforts. Texas stands out with a roughly $24 billion surplus entering the 2026-27 biennium, drawn from strong revenue growth, conservative budgeting, and a healthy Rainy Day Fund. 

Lone Star lawmakers have directed billions of this into school tax compression, homestead exemptions, and rate reductions.

Florida maintains robust reserves as well at $15.7 billion in its FY2025-26 budget, with a stabilized fund at its legal cap, enabling ongoing tax restraint and homeowner protections. 

Other Republican-led states like Wyoming, Indiana, and Ohio have leveraged post-pandemic revenue windfalls and energy/economic growth for similar moves, funding exemptions, credits, and caps while building rainy-day reserves. 

Another reason to flee

Americans are increasingly migrating from blue (Democrat-leaning) states to red (Republican-leaning) ones, voting with their feet amid policy and economic differences. Property taxes, or lack thereof, could exacerbate the trend. 

From 2020–2025, blue states like California, New York, Illinois, New Jersey, and Massachusetts saw massive net domestic out-migration, with these five alone losing nearly 3.7 million people cumulatively. 

In 2024–2025, blue states lost about 478,000 to net internal migration, while red states gained over 399,000. Top destinations include Texas, Florida, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee and Arizona.

One of the most often cited reasons to move to red states is lower taxes, but affordable housing, cost of living, crime, and regulatory environment are frequent reasons as well. 

This shift has already cost blue states congressional seats via decennial reapportionment based on Census data. After the 2020 Census, California lost 1 seat, New York lost 1, and Illinois lost 1 (among others), while Texas gained 2 and Florida gained 1. 

Projections for the 2030 Census suggest further blue-state losses—potentially California losing up to 4, New York and Illinois 1–2 each—shifting power to growing red states like Texas (+4) and Florida (+3–4). 


Amanda Head

Source: https://justthenews.com/politics-policy/red-states-spark-trend-abolishing-property-taxes-amid-budget-surpluses

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

From Anne Frank to anti-Jewish Sanctioning: The Netherlands' Betrayal of Israel - Wim Kortenoeven

 

by Wim Kortenoeven

Post-Holocaust guilt, once a brake on Jew-hatred, has been inverted: many of the descendants of the perpetrators and bystanders now project their unresolved shame onto the surviving Jews and their state. The "oppressed" Palestinian has replaced the oppressed Jew as the object of European moral narcissism. The Europeans, who never forgave the Jews for Auschwitz, are finally free of guilt.

 

  • What was once known as the "Country of Anne Frank," a nation that had learned from its own role in the Holocaust... and quietly delivered critical military aid during the 1973 Yom Kippur War, now leads the charge at the EU in Brussels to punish the Jewish state for the apparent crime of Jewish survival....

  • The Jetten government coalition... has now also taken the lead in pushing sanctions against Israel....

  • The Dutch pro-Israel parties -- Geert Wilders' PVV, BBB, JA21, ChristenUnie, and the Christian-Zionist SGP -- were deliberately excluded from the governing coalition.

  • The Jetten minority government therefore governs on parliamentary life support from the very parties that despise Israel.

  • The Dutch betrayal mirrors a broader European sickness. Mass immigration from Muslim countries has imported a virulent strain of antisemitism that now crosses all political boundaries. Politicians realize only the electoral ramifications: Jewish populations are dwindling and Muslim populations are exploding. Post-Holocaust guilt, once a brake on Jew-hatred, has been inverted: many of the descendants of the perpetrators and bystanders now project their unresolved shame onto the surviving Jews and their state. The "oppressed" Palestinian has replaced the oppressed Jew as the object of European moral narcissism. The Europeans, who never forgave the Jews for Auschwitz, are finally free of guilt.

  • Europe, which cannot, or does not wish to, protect its own Jewish communities from daily harassment and assault, now presumes to dictate to Jews where they may and may not live in the Land of Israel.

  • The hypocrisy and moral rot are bottomless. It was Europeans who exiled the Jews from their heritage and cradle of civilization. It was Europeans who subjected "their" Jews to more than a millennium of discrimination, expulsions, mass deportations, and pogroms, culminating in the Holocaust. It was Europeans as well, who, at the Evian Conference of 1938, refused to open their doors to Jews fleeing Hitler. It was the British who issued the 1939 White Paper without a single protest from the other European democracies, and thereby slamming shut the gates of Palestine as a place of refuge as the extermination of the Jews began. It was Europeans (Polish, British, and Dutch) who devised the "Madagascar Plan" to deport Europe's Jews to a remote and uninhabitable island where they would surely perish.

  • Yet the Jews do not forget where they came from. Jews have lived in the Land of Israel continuously for millennia; and many of the descendants who had been forcibly dispersed, returned.

  • It is precisely this return that triggers such fury. Dutch authorities and many Dutch politicians now eagerly repeat the modern blood libel of "settler violence," -- all while ignoring the unrelenting terrorism committed by Arabs against the Jews of Judea, Samaria and Jerusalem and the rest of the Land of Israel for more than a century until today.

  • Established and thriving Jewish cities, towns, neighborhoods, and infrastructure exist in Judea, Samaria, Jerusalem, and the Golan. These "facts on the ground" will most certainly remain in the future and likely grow into a home for hundreds of thousands of Jews now planning to leave a Europe that is collapsing as we speak. Israel will celebrate its restoration in the Land of Israel long after the Netherlands will have been destroyed by the Muslim and African invasions it invited in, and the remnants of what was once a great and moral country have returned to their natural state: a swamp.

  • [T]he Netherlands -- governed by a conspicuously childless political elite that includes Prime Minister Rob Jetten and Deputy Prime Minister Dilan YeÅŸilgöz (VVD) -- stumbles along... effectively outsourcing its survival to a mass immigration that has apparently not come to Europe just for economic opportunity but to transform it fundamentally into its own image.

  • The Jews have returned home. The Dutch, it appears, are determined to leave theirs up for grabs. History will record the result.

The Dutch government coalition under Prime Minister Rob Jetten leads the charge at the EU in Brussels to punish the Jewish state for the apparent crime of Jewish survival and has taken the lead in pushing sanctions against Israel. The pro-Israel parties -- Geert Wilders' PVV, BBB, JA21, ChristenUnie, and the Christian-Zionist SGP -- were deliberately excluded from the governing coalition. The Jetten minority government therefore governs on parliamentary life support from the very parties that despise Israel. Pictured: Wilders addresses the Netherlands House of Representatives in The Hague on July 3, 2024. (Photo by Robin van Lonkhuijsen/ANP//AFP via Getty Images)

The Dutch government's descent into open hostility toward Israel has recently accelerated further under the minority coalition of Rob Jetten that was sworn in on February 23, 2026. What was once known as the "Country of Anne Frank," a nation that had learned from its own role in the Holocaust[1], that faithfully represented Israel's and Jewish interests in the Soviet Union from 1967 to 1990, and quietly delivered critical military aid during the 1973 Yom Kippur War[2], now leads the charge at the EU in Brussels to punish the Jewish state for the apparent crime of Jewish survival and sovereignty in the Jewish homeland.

This is not policy. This is pathology.

The Jetten government coalition (consisting of the left-leaning liberal and anti-religious Democrats of D66, the Christian Democratic CDA, and the center-right conservative-liberal VVD) has now also taken the lead in pushing sanctions against Israel within the EU-Israel Association Agreement framework. It has championed measures targeting so-called "violent settlers" and their "excessive violence," parroting a narrative that a devastating June 2025 report "False Flags & Real Agendas: 'Settler Violence' — A Modern Blood Libel", by the Israeli group Regavim, dismantles as a fabricated, foreign-funded smear.

This harebrained Dutch obsession with Israel reeks of dark motivations, especially considering that the Netherlands is drowning in an escalating immigration crisis that is fueling civil unrest. In the first quarter of 2026 alone, asylum applications surged by 33% year-on-year, with Palestinian Arabs forming the single largest group at around 1,100 first-time claims, the top nationality for asylum in January and February 2026. This influx comes on top of already strained housing, welfare systems, and social cohesion, amid repeated anti-migration protests that have turned violent in places all over the Netherlands.

Not having been entirely successful on the EU track in punishing the Jewish state, however, the Jetten government recently announced unilateral Dutch sanctions: a trade ban on products from Jewish communities in Judea, Samaria, East Jerusalem, and the Golan Heights. The Jetten government stated:

"The expansion of illegal settlements and excessive violence by settlers are causing an ever-deteriorating situation, in which a two-state solution is moving further and further out of reach." [...] "We want to prevent Dutch society from contributing, through our economic activities, to an unlawful occupation and the maintenance of illegal settlements."

The decision can best be read as "Kauft nicht bei Juden" ("Do not buy from Jews"), and its small print formally even prohibits Dutch passport holders living in Israel from trading with Jews that live in the wrong place -- according to the Dutch government, that is.[3]

This "political sentiment" has rapidly built up since the violent collapse of the already existing "two-state solution" on October 7, 2023, with hatred of the Jewish state and everything that it stands for metastasizing to almost every sector of Dutch society, even uniting ideological arch-enemies. Israeli Ambassador to the Netherlands Zvi Vapni recently captured that moment on X:

"A dangerous coalition formed in the Dutch parliament yesterday between the radical left and the antisemitic extreme right to pass motions against Israel. No moral qualms whatsoever! Shameful!".

The mask is off.

The ultimate logic of this position is to expel Jews. The Dutch government, by labeling every Jewish city, town, and village beyond the 1949 armistice lines "illegal," is demanding that more than 900,000 Jews be forced out of Judea and Samaria -- the cradle of Jewish civilization, where Abraham walked, David ruled, and the prophets spoke -- the Golan Heights, the Old City of Jerusalem, and the adjacent Jewish neighborhoods, and additionally the high ground that protects Israel's densely populated coastal plain from being attacked by long-time bellicose neighbors to its east.

Let that sink in.

Jerusalem was already the political and spiritual capital of the Jewish people for a thousand years when the territory that would become the Netherlands was still a swamp inhabited by nomadic and illiterate semi-Neanderthals. The current Dutch arrogance is not merely political, it is civilizational and existential -- and it reflects what is manifest in most of Europe.

The Netherlands' increasingly hostile government policy did not emerge in a vacuum. It rests on a parliamentary majority that is now structurally anti-Israel. The left -- made up of the Socialist Party, Pro (the GreenLeft-Labor merger), the Animal Party, the pro-EU party Volt, and the Muslim Denk party -- has since October 7, 2023 never missed an opportunity to relentlessly peddle the false accusation that the Jewish state is an "apartheid state" involved in "mass murder", "deliberate starvation", "genocide" and even "infanticide". This is Goebbels' tactic of 'repeat a lie until it becomes ambient noise', updated for the Dutch Parliament (and many Dutch media as willing accomplices). On the right of the political spectrum, the ever-more-fascist and antisemitic Forum voor Democratie (FVD) has boarded the same demonization train. In April 2026, as Ambassador Vapni noted, this unholy alliance passed motions against Israel with no moral hesitation.

The Dutch pro-Israel parties -- Geert Wilders' PVV, BBB, JA21, ChristenUnie, and the Christian-Zionist SGP -- were deliberately excluded from the governing coalition.[4]

The Jetten minority government therefore governs on parliamentary life support from the very parties that despise Israel.[5]

The VVD, once nominally pro-Israel, has proven itself an amoral, cynical power broker willing to sacrifice the Jewish state for coalition arithmetic. The result is guaranteed: an anti-Israel parliamentary majority that rubber-stamps the government's agenda.

The D66 party, largest in Parliament and the true engine of this government, has long specialized in Israel-hatred dressed as "human rights." Its prominent figures have moved seamlessly between parliament, government ministries and anti-Israel NGOs. Sjoerd Sjoerdsma, now Minister of Foreign Trade and Development Cooperation, exemplifies the type: a polished former diplomat who served at the Dutch Representative Office at the PLO/PA in Ramallah, long-time D66 foreign affairs spokesman, and relentless advocate who treats the Jewish state's right to defend itself and to exist in its ancestral heartland as negotiable at best. He has repeatedly pushed for recognition of a Palestinian state -- never mind that it would be committed to Israel's destruction -- settlement import bans, sanctions-style pressure on Israel, and criticism of its military operations, while downplaying or ignoring Hamas's role and the "diversion" of aid".

On May 28, 2026, Sjoerdsma had this to say on X:

"It was good to meet the Palestinian Representative @ammarhijazi1 today. We spoke about the catastrophic humanitarian situation in Gaza, the increasing settler violence and expansions of illegal settlements in the West Bank. I outlined the Dutch humanitarian commitment in Gaza and the ban on trade in goods originating from the illegal Israeli settlements. The Netherlands values its good relationship with the Palestinian Authority and I look forward to continuing it."

And:

I outlined the Dutch humanitarian commitment in Gaza and the ban on trade in goods originating from the illegal Israeli settlements. The Netherlands values its good relationship with the Palestinian Authority and I look forward to continuing it. 2/2

Regavim sent him this reply:

"What a pity you had no time left to discuss the thousands of PA-funded acts of terror against Israelis, the barbarous sexual violence committed by the PA's brothers in Gaza or the Pa's incessant violations of international law that the EU and the Dutch government support."

Other D66 politicians have, for years, populated the same ecosystem of malicious lawfare and delegitimization. One of the most prominent is a former government minister and former UN diplomat, Sigrid Kaag, a staunch anti-Israel activist with intimate ties to the Palestinian cause. Married to Anis al-Qaq, a Palestinian Arab who served as a deputy minister under Yasser Arafat, the couple wed in Jerusalem in 1993, and have been photographed with the terrorist leader as a family. Already in a 1996 interview, Kaag branded Benjamin Netanyahu a racist and Israeli settlers as "illegal colonists on confiscated land" -- never mind that the land was repeatedly promised to the Jews not only by biblical covenants, but also, in modern times, by the Balfour Declaration (1917), the San Remo Resolution (1920), and the League of Nations Mandate for Palestine (1922).

At the UN, as Gaza Humanitarian Coordinator and later Middle East Peace Process chief, Sigrid Kaag relentlessly condemned Israel, demanded open aid flows to Hamas, portrayed the Gaza crisis as Israel's deliberate creation, and pushed hard for Palestinian statehood -- cementing her role as a key figure in the international delegitimization and lawfare campaign against the Jewish state.

The CDA's trajectory is even more grotesque. As a party that still claims a Christian identity, it has abandoned any recognition of the moral and biblical rights of the Jewish people to their ancestral homeland. Former CDA Minister of Justice and Prime Minister Dries van Agt, who committed suicide in 2024, spent his later years building "The Rights Forum," a vehicle for Israel-hatred that attracted other former CDA bigshots to its board. Van Agt's earlier record -- including his attempts to shield Adolf Eichmann's local henchmen from justice in the Netherlands and his repeated antisemitic slurs -- casts a long shadow over any claim of Christian conscience.

The VVD's collapse into expediency completes the picture. A party that once understood the strategic and moral case for Israel has apparently decided that throwing the Jewish state under the bus is a small price for remaining in power.

The Dutch betrayal mirrors a broader European sickness. Mass immigration from Muslim countries has imported a virulent strain of antisemitism that now crosses all political boundaries. Politicians realize only the electoral ramifications: Jewish populations are dwindling and Muslim populations are exploding. Post-Holocaust guilt, once a brake on Jew-hatred, has been inverted: many of the descendants of the perpetrators and bystanders now project their unresolved shame onto the surviving Jews and their state. The "oppressed" Palestinian has replaced the oppressed Jew as the object of European moral narcissism. The Europeans, who never forgave the Jews for Auschwitz, are finally free of guilt.

The European Union's recent sanctions against Israeli organizations and individuals under the banner of "settler violence" -- including the targeting of Regavim itself, the very NGO that exposed the data fraud behind the narrative -- represent the same moral inversion. As one observer put it, Europe is sanctioning the critic of its own documented acts.

Europe, which cannot, or does not wish to, protect its own Jewish communities from daily harassment and assault, now presumes to dictate to Jews where they may and may not live in the Land of Israel.

The hypocrisy and moral rot are bottomless. It was Europeans who exiled the Jews from their heritage and cradle of civilization. It was Europeans who subjected "their" Jews to more than a millennium of discrimination, expulsions, mass deportations, and pogroms, culminating in the Holocaust. It was Europeans as well, who, at the Evian Conference of 1938, refused to open their doors to Jews fleeing Hitler. It was the British who issued the 1939 White Paper without a single protest from the other European democracies, and thereby slamming shut the gates of Palestine as a place of refuge as the extermination of the Jews began. It was Europeans (Polish, British, and Dutch) who devised the "Madagascar Plan" to deport Europe's Jews to a remote and uninhabitable island where they would surely perish.

After the Holocaust, when the surviving Jews -- against all odds -- returned en masse to rebuild their ancestral state, the same Europeans, now sanctimoniously lecturing the Jewish state about "international law," moved to ban them from the very territories that are central to Jewish history, identity and heritage. This campaign of exclusion is reinforced by semantic warfare. The territorial names "Palestine" (an invention of the Roman Empire designed to erase Judea) and "West Bank" (a Jordanian invention following its illegal occupation in 1948 of Judea, Samaria, and eastern Jerusalem) are still deliberate tools to sever the Jewish people from their origin and undermine their claim to their ancestral homeland.

Yet the Jews do not forget where they came from. Jews have lived in the Land of Israel continuously for millennia, and many of the descendants who had been forcibly dispersed, returned.

It is precisely this return that triggers such fury. Dutch authorities and many Dutch politicians now eagerly repeat the modern blood libel of "settler violence," -- all while ignoring the unrelenting terrorism committed by Arabs against the Jews of Judea, Samaria and Jerusalem and the rest of the Land of Israel for more than a century until today.

Even as their own policies and rhetoric actively fuel incitement and violence against the Jews in the Netherlands, they continue to delegitimize the Jews in Judea and Samaria. Jews were chased in the streets of Amsterdam, Jewish students experience exclusion, bullying and intimidation at Dutch universities, Jewish schools and synagogues have been repeatedly attacked, even with explosives. Mayors of major Dutch cities such as Amsterdam and Utrecht have taken to commemorating the "Naqba" with the passion of weeping crocodiles, shamelessly trampling the historical record of the Arab-Israeli conflict and placing the blame for everything but climate change squarely on the Jews. But the very authorities who piously claim to fight antisemitism are in reality among its chief enablers, fueling and participating in the very campaign that produces it.

Amanda Kluveld, a non-Jewish professor in Holocaust studies at the University of Maastricht, wrote:

"Words are offered, but protection is withheld. Definitions are endlessly debated, but violence goes unanswered. Jews are once again left vulnerable, isolated, and demonized -- this time in the heart of a democratic Europe that claims to have learned from its past."

Kluveld is a frequent target of threats, institutional intimidation and concrete violence, because of her brave, consistent, but lonely pro-Israeli and pro-Jewish positioning.

So, we arrive at the final, cynical logic of the current Dutch Israel policy. The government of the country of Anne Frank effectively insists on the expulsion of every last Jew from the heartland of Israel. So will the Dutch authorities one day come to arrest, disown, and deport the Jews of Israel's heartland the way they arrested, disowned, and deported the Jews of Amsterdam and elsewhere in the Netherlands during the Holocaust?[6] Of course not. The (Israeli) Jews have an army now.

Established and thriving Jewish cities, towns, neighborhoods, and infrastructure exist in Judea, Samaria, Jerusalem, and the Golan. These "facts on the ground" will most certainly remain in the future and likely grow into a home for hundreds of thousands of Jews now planning to leave a Europe that is collapsing as we speak. Israel will celebrate its restoration in the Land of Israel long after the Netherlands will have been destroyed by the Muslim and African invasions it invited in, and the remnants of what was once a great and moral country have returned to their natural state: a swamp.

It is the height of irony that the Jewish people of Israel maintain the developed world's highest fertility rate of nearly 3.0 children per woman, thereby securing their demographic future, while the Netherlands -- governed by a conspicuously childless political elite that includes Prime Minister Rob Jetten and Deputy Prime Minister Dilan Yeşilgöz (VVD) -- stumbles along at a catastrophic 1.4, effectively outsourcing its survival to a mass immigration that has apparently not come to Europe just for economic opportunity but to transform it fundamentally into its own image.

The Jews have returned home. The Dutch, it appears, are determined to leave theirs up for grabs. History will record the result.

Wim Kortenoeven, a political scientist, is a former member of the Dutch Parliament.


[1] Approximately 102,000 to 104,000 Dutch Jews were murdered in the Holocaust, out of a pre-war Jewish population of about 140,000 (roughly 73-75%). Dutch authorities and civil institutions showed a high degree of cooperation with the Nazi occupiers during the Holocaust, contributing significantly to the high death toll among Dutch Jews (around 102,000-104,000 out of ~140,000, or ~73-75%).

[2] This was unilaterally and secretly initiated by Minister of Defense Henk Vredeling (a former resistance fighter), who later said that he had once witnessed the Jews being taken away and that he could not let that happen again.

[3] "The decision concerns measures relating to the trade in goods originating from unlawful settlements in the territories occupied by Israel (the Palestinian territories and the Syrian Golan Heights). The decision includes both a customs measure (import ban), various market supervision measures (purchase ban, sales ban, and the prohibition on providing intermediary trade services), as well as a prohibition on circumventing these bans. The measures apply to every natural or legal person located in the Netherlands (including the public bodies of Bonaire, Sint Eustatius and Saba) and to all Dutch natural or legal persons outside the Netherlands."

[4] As of late May 2026, in the Dutch House of Representatives (150 seats total), the pro-Israel caucus consists of the PVV with 19 seats, Groep-Markuszower (led by Gidi Markuszower, which split from the PVV in January 2026) with 7 seats, BBB with 3 seats, JA21 with 9 seats, ChristenUnie (CU) with 3 seats, SGP with 3 seats and Mona Keijzer with one seat, for a combined total of 45 seats. The Pensioner Party 50+ with 2 seats is not counted here, but is not per se anti-Israel.

[5] As of late May 2026, in the Dutch House of Representatives (150 seats total), the anti-Israel caucus consists of the Party for the Animals (PvdD) with 3 seats, the Socialist Party (SP) with 3 seats, GL-PvdA (the GreenLeft–Labor merger, often referred to as Pro) with 20 seats, the Muslim DENK party with 3 seats, Pro-EU party Volt with one seat, and the fascist Forum for Democracy (FVD) with 7 seats, for a combined total of 37 seats.

[6] Dutch police played a major role in arrests, roundups, and guarding Jews. They assisted the Nazis in deportations to transit and detention camps like Westerbork and Amersfoort. While not all police officers were enthusiastic, many complied, and some received bounties for capturing hidden Jews. The Henneicke Column (Dutch bounty hunters) alone delivered thousands. 


Wim Kortenoeven

Source: https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/22581/netherlands-betrayal-of-israel

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter