The Fawning Media Attention Provided to Anthony Fauci Brings to Mind Daniel Boorstin's Brilliant Book "The Image"

In "How the Media Fame Machine Created 'Anthony Fauci,'" Joseph C. Sternberg describes how Fauci's diary from during the height of the COVID-19 pandemic reveals "a scandalous divergence between what Dr. Fauci thought in private about the origins of the virus and what he told the public--and continues to insist in public today."

Sternberg notes another "public-vs.-private distinction": in public, "Dr. Fauci presented himself as a technocratic voice of reason in contrast to a bumbling, out-of-his-depth politician. It remains part of Dr. Fauci's appeal on the political left to this day." However, "the private Dr. Fauci had a different attitude. The overall tone toward Mr. Trump in the early days of the pandemic can best be described as starstruck."

Sternberg observes, "Dr. Fauci gloats to himself about his working relationship with Mr. Trump until late in the spring." Fauci's March 31, 2020 diary entry breathlessly states, "Trump continues to become more and more enamored of me." In April 2020, Fauci's tone shifts, and Sternberg comments, "A rupture between the two may have been inevitable, given that they both demonstrate insufferable self-regard. But the Fauci diaries point to another factor: the media. Much has been made of Dr. Fauci's obsession with his own press clippings. Did this change his approach to the pandemic and to his boss, the president?"

Fauci's April 15, 2020 diary entry proudly states, "Multiple editorials (print news, Washington Post, etc.) and opinion pieces (Newsweek) written about me. Cannot keep up or even read all of them. Country needs someone to look up to in the face of Trump presidency. Interesting psychodynamics."

Sternberg concludes, "Dr. Fauci was predisposed to revel in media attention. Now he knew what he needed to do to get more of it. By amping up his antagonism to the president, the TV bookings continued and he found himself in position to befriend prominent media personalities and be courted by literary agents eager to represent a future memoir...A more reflective press corps might ask whether they merely reported the Fauci news, or created it." 

In The Image: A Guide to Pseudo-Events in America," Daniel J. Boorstin describes "our arts of self-deception, how we hide reality from ourselves. One need not be a doctor to know he is sick, nor a shoemaker to feel the shoe pinch. I do not know what 'reality' really is. But somehow I do know an illusion when I see one." Boorstin asserts that the original primary role for media outlets was to report news--meaning events that have actually happened--but that with the advent of round-the-clock coverage the emphasis for media members shifted dramatically: "If he cannot find a story, then he must make one--by the questions he asks of public figures, by the surprising human interest he unfolds from some commonplace event, or by 'the news behind the news.'" Boorstin explains, "Demanding more than the world can give us, we require that something be fabricated to make up for the world's deficiency." Boorstin terms such fabrications "pseudo-events," a neologism based on the Greek word "pseudo," which means false.  

During the COVID-19 pandemic, I criticized the media's agenda-driven coverage: 

Reporters are supposed to do research and ask questions designed to discover facts, and then report those facts. A reporter's job is not to persuade, but to inform. A commentator's job is to utilize facts to persuade the audience that a given policy or viewpoint is more logical than the opposing policy or viewpoint.

It is unfortunate that far too many reporters and commentators either do not understand the above job descriptions and/or refuse to do their jobs appropriately...

Reporters would be well advised to cultivate humility in general, and also to cultivate humility specifically regarding the many specialized fields of inquiry for which they have little to no training or expertise. After Dr. Robert Goddard wrote that it would be possible to launch a rocket that could travel to the moon, The New York Times sneered in 1920 that Dr. Goddard failed to understand "the knowledge ladled out daily in high schools." A mere 49 years later, the newspaper published a retraction: "Further investigation and experimentation have confirmed the findings of Isaac Newton in the 17th century, and it is now definitely established that a rocket can function in a vacuum as well as in an atmosphere. The Times regrets the error."

False media reporting about scientific issues can have disastrous consequences. Outraged by the mocking media coverage of his research, Dr. Goddard spent much of his career avoiding the press. He just filed his patents and he did his rocket launches. While the mainstream American media scoffed at Dr. Goddard, others actually studied Dr. Goddard's patent filings; after a captured Nazi scientist was asked about the origins of the Nazis' deadly V-2 rockets, the scientist replied, "Why don't you ask your own Dr. Goddard? He knows better than any of us." 

It has become a popular mantra to say "Follow the science," but science is properly understood as a method of inquiry, not an infallible source for one indisputable truth; it has become evident that often when a media member says "Follow the science" the reader is meant to understand this to mean "Have faith in the higher truth I am bestowing upon you." Einstein's Theory of Relativity is perhaps the most successful scientific theory of all-time, but scientists still do experiments to test its limits, so the notion that there is one scientific truth about the COVID-19 pandemic would be laughable if that notion were not so potentially threatening not only to our lives but also to the spirit of scientific inquiry.

When any media outlet tries to convince you that there is just one absolute scientific truth about a given issue--particularly if that issue is highly politicized--remember how the media treated Dr. Goddard. We would all be better off if people who do not know what they are talking about kept their minds open and their mouths shut.

In 2023, I looked back at the COVID-19 pandemic and discussed what could be learned by Following the Science, Resisting the Propaganda:

The COVID-19 pandemic has provided fascinating case studies in science, propaganda, governmental overreach, and more...

...the hypocrisy of many media outlets is blatant and disgusting. If you buy the premise that the first 500,000 U.S. COVID-19 deaths are President Trump's fault, then you also have to buy the premise that the next 600,000 (and counting) U.S. COVID-19 deaths are President Biden's fault. Media outlets that just blame one President while absolving another President are not only shamelessly engaging in partisan propaganda, but they are failing to investigate the real culprit(s): it is undisputed that COVID-19 began in the Wuhan province of China, and it would be interesting to find out if it originated from a lab leak, from improper safety protocols in open markets, from gain of function research gone wrong, or from a deliberate release of a bio-weapon. It would also be interesting to find out what Fauci knew, when he knew it, and how much he profited financially by covering up our government's support of gain of function research.  

Unfortunately, President Biden's blanket pardon of Fauci followed by the spectacle of Fauci invoking his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination over 100 times when being questioned by members of Congress make it unlikely that we will find out what Fauci knew, when he knew it, and how much he profited by his actions while over 1,000,000 Americans died on his watch during the COVID-19 pandemic. 

The way that many media outlets portrayed Fauci is, as Sternberg suggests, an example of creating news instead of reporting it. Media outlets depicted Fauci as the face of a resistance movement to President Trump that they hoped to create and empower, as opposed to objectively reporting the known information about COVID-19's origins and about the most effective public policies to deal with the COVID-19 pandemic to protect our most vulnerable members of society (the elderly and the immunocompromised) while causing minimal disruptions to the lives of our children, to our economy, and to the overall functioning of our society. 

Fauci and his media sycophants failed to perform their duties morally--if not legally as well--and they owe an apology to those who suffered (and in many cases died) as a consequence of prioritizing the lionization of Fauci over determining which policies would provide the most benefit to the public with the least risk. Also, as a society we must demand a full investigation of what caused COVID-19 and the extent to which containment efforts failed (or could be improved)--and the results of that investigation must be made public not only to ensure that those who were negligent (or worse) are brought to justice but also to ensure that the next time a pandemic or large public health crisis occurs we can learn from the mistakes that were made in 2020.

Celebrating America's Greatness

"Fellow-citizens, we cannot escape history. We of this Congress and this administration, will be remembered in spite of ourselves. No personal significance, or insignificance, can spare one or another of us. The fiery trial through which we pass, will light us down, in honor or dishonor, to the latest generation. We say we are for the Union. The world will not forget that we say this. We know how to save the Union. The world knows we do know how to save it. We -- even we here -- hold the power, and bear the responsibility. In giving freedom to the slave, we assure freedom to the free -- honorable alike in what we give, and what we preserve. We shall nobly save, or meanly lose, the last best hope of earth. Other means may succeed; this could not fail. The way is plain, peaceful, generous, just -- a way which, if followed, the world will forever applaud, and God must forever bless." Abraham Lincoln, December 1, 1862 

We hear far too much about why the United States of America is not perfect, but we do not hear enough about why the United States of America is great. President Abraham Lincoln understood and eloquently articulated the essence of American greatness: the American project is "the last best hope of earth" to ensure that people can be free and can live without fear of oppression.

Boxing promoter Don King used to proclaim, "Only in America!" Even though King was the king of hyperbole, that statement is far from hyperbolic. In the United States, it is possible for a person to rise from humble beginnings to achieve great things. Abraham Lincoln grew up in a log cabin and became perhaps the greatest U.S. President. LeBron James was raised by a poor teenage single mother in Akron, and became the first active NBA player to achieve billionaire status. 

The American Dream is founded on principles of equality, democracy and freedom: all people should have equal rights (which does not necessarily result in equitable outcomes), all people should have the opportunity to participate in the democratic process, and all people should have the freedom to pursue happiness as long as their pursuit of happiness does not interfere with the rights of other people. 

We fought a bitter Civil War to get our house in order, and ensure that all Americans would be free. Later, we defended freedom around the globe as the driving force for Allied victories in World War I and World War II. Without the courage and ingenuity of the United States of America, the world would be a much worse place--and it is important to remember that, particularly when some people focus intently on real or perceived shortcomings of the United States of America without acknowledging how much good the United States of America has done around the world.

Winston Churchill declared, "Democracy is the worst form of government, apart from all the others that have been tried." Democracy is flawed because humans are flawed, but other systems of government are much worse because other systems of government deny equality and freedom to entire classes of people based on religion, race, and/or ethnicity. 

It is chic to criticize capitalism, but an economy based on capitalism is--much like a government based on democracy--the worst form of an economy apart from all the others that have been tried. As I noted almost a year ago, the embrace of socialism by an increasing number of people highlights the difference between being educated and being informed: 

There is a significant difference between being educated and being informed. To become educated, one merely has to fulfill the requirements of a specific degree-granting institution; upon doing so, one receives a doctoral degree--but it is a dangerous fallacy to confuse being educated with being informed, because education far too often involves being indoctrinated with false narratives. In contrast, being informed means thinking with an open mind, consuming information from objective sources while considering information from subjective sources with skepticism, and then synthesizing the acquired information to base opinions on facts and logic.

Our politics, our schools, and our media outlets have far too many educated people and far too few informed people. Educated people often spew ideas that Vladimir Nabokov would correctly dismiss as "poshlost." One such idea is that socialism is good. 

It is most likely that I would not be alive today without the United States. Members from both sides of my family immigrated to the United States more than 100 years ago from areas that Nazi Germany later occupied. During the Holocaust, the Nazis and their enthusiastic collaborators murdered six million of Europe's 9.5 million Jews, including the vast majority of Jews from where my family used to live. My maternal grandmother came to the United States from Kobryn (a small city then located in Russia, and now located in Belarus) in the early 1900s. Kobryn's Jewish population on the eve of World War II was around 6500, and the number of Jews from Kobryn who survived the Holocaust can be counted on one hand. My maternal grandfather and his family fled to the United States from Bialystok, Poland in the early 1900s; one of my relatives was among the 70 Jews killed in the 1906 Bialystok Pogrom. The Nazis murdered most of the 50,000 Jews remaining in Bialystok in the early 1940s.

My father's side of the family trekked from Kosice (then in the Austro-Hungarian Empire, now in Slovakia) to Germany and then to the United States in the early 1900s. Not every member of my father's family chose to leave Europe or was able to leave Europe before the ascent of the Nazis, and it is horrifying to think about the fate of family members who stayed in Europe and were in countries occupied by the Nazis. A railway went directly from Kosice to Auschwitz.

Without the United States of America--and without my family's brave decision to start over in a new country--I would not be here to write these words. It would be worse than ungrateful for me to slander the United States of America, or to be silent while others slander the United States of America.

Happy 250th Birthday, United States of America! 

Syllogism Saturday, Iran Edition

Leftists claim to support voting rights, women's rights, freedom of speech, and minority rights. They claim to oppose Donald Trump because they assert that he poses a threat to voting rights, women's rights, freedom of speech, and minority rights.

In the United States today, we have elections, women's rights are protected de jure and de facto, we have freedom of speech, and minority rights are protected de jure and de facto. In the past 20 years, at various times the Democratic Party has controlled the White House and/or Congress and at other times the Republican Party has controlled the White House and/or Congress. It is evident statistically that approximately 40% of voters vote Democratic in each election, approximately 40% of voters vote Republican in each election, and approximately 20% of voters swing back and forth between the parties. 

In short, the United States has a healthy, thriving democracy; partisans from each side claim that electing the other side to power will mean the end of democracy, but we managed to survive power switching back and forth without losing our freedoms and without the country collapsing.

After the Islamists--supported by Leftists--seized power in Iran in 1979, Iranians have had no voting rights, no women's rights, no freedom of speech, and no minority rights.  

Logically, anyone who supports voting rights, women's rights, freedom of speech, and minority rights would not support any person, entity or country that threatens voting rights, women's rights, freedom of speech, and minority rights--yet, after President Trump took military action against an Iranian regime that has slaughtered thousands of dissidents while opening calling for "Death to America," Leftists who were silent about Iranian repression are now quite vocal about opposing U.S. military action against Iran.

A syllogism demonstrates that Leftists are either lying about supporting human rights or are being hypocritical by being silent about Iran while attacking President Trump: 

1) Leftists claim to support human rights (including voting rights, women's rights, freedom of speech, and minority rights).

2) Iran represses human rights (including voting rights, women's rights, freedom of speech, and minority rights). 

3) If Leftists truly support human rights then they must oppose Iran's repression of human rights. 

Iran's regime has been trampling human rights for nearly 50 years. President Trump's opponents accuse him of threatening human rights, but the reality is that in the United States today citizens have human rights--including the right to publicly criticize President Trump.

The fact that Leftists are focused on attacking President Trump while ignoring Iran's repression of human rights forces one to conclude that Leftists do not really support human rights, because if Leftists support human rights then they would focus their energies toward confronting an Iranian regime that represses human rights instead of focusing their energies on confronting a President who is providing Iranians with a golden opportunity to overthrow a regime that has oppressed them for nearly 50 years. 

Acknowledging that President Trump is right to confront Iran does not require liking President Trump or agreeing with any of his other policies--but failing to acknowledge that President Trump is right to confront Iran exposes Leftist self-proclaimed human rights activists for being more focused on partisan politics than on protecting human rights. 

Exploring the Roots of the Transgender Alliance With Anti-Zionists

Anti-Zionism and antisemitism are two sides of the same evil coin, and antisemitism is primarily based on a combination of abhorrence of the Jewish values/moral code presented in the Torah with fear of individual and collective Jewish success against all odds during nearly two millennia of exile, and continuing since the modern rebirth of Israel.  

The alliance of transgender protest groups with anti-Zionist groups is irrational; the only place in the Mideast where transgender rights are protected is Israel, while Israel's enemies consist of tyrannical regimes that do not protect any of the rights taken for granted in the West, including but not limited to free speech, voting rights, women's rights, and the right to practice any religion other than Islam.

An important distinction must be made between individual rights--which should be afforded to all people--and rights being sought on a group level that interfere with other groups' rights. A person can "identify" as anything that the person wants to "identify"; that does not mean that a group of people who are not biologically women but who "identify" as women should be permitted to compete in sports against biological women, because permitting this puts the biological women at an inherent disadvantage. 

Israel's enemies do not acknowledge individual rights, nor do they acknowledge the special rights being sought by specific groups, and this is why many Leftist Jews are so upset and disillusioned by the way that transgender protest groups (and queer protest groups) have embraced anti-Zionism with such enthusiasm and venom. Leftist Jews naively assumed that by partnering with other Leftists to advocate for various group rights they would be protected from antisemitism, but antisemitism is irrational and antisemites do not think rationally about Jews (or much else).

The irrationality of the alliance of transgender protest groups with anti-Zionist groups can be explained by the larger irrationality that has consumed the Left, as Stephen Pollard eloquently points out in "The Israel-Trans Protest Nexis" (June 2025 Commentary): 

At the most basic level, both trans ideology and the pro-Palestine obsession are the result of developments that have been in the making for decades: the supremacy of postmodern thought on campus and the rise of moral relativism. Postmodernism reject the very idea of universal truths and objective reality. If there is no such thing as good or bad, only different and equally valid, then science too is not objective fact but rather a product of social, cultural, and political factors, including gender. Sex is therefore not a biological statement of fact but an assertion of gender, power, and social structure. The rise of Palestinian activism has similar origins. Terrorism is not terrorism; it is resistance. October 7 was not a massacre; it was an uprising. To assert this is not to fall victim to an ideological fad but to be in possession of both superior intelligence and superior understanding--and to be on the right side of history. 

Pollard notes that one of the major methods for mass dissemination of these postmodernist views is connected with "the Russian and Chinese strategy of destabilizing the West through academia." Postmodernist views are not just tolerated in academia; they are fully endorsed, and because a high percentage of media members are products of academia the mainstream media outlets amplify these postmodernist views to a large audience beyond academia. Similar amplification is happening on social media. Pollard quotes Scott Galloway (a professor of marketing at New York University) stating that Tik Tok's widespread influence is equivalent to the Chinese Communist Party having "implanted a neural jack into every under-30."

The impact of postmodernist views is that their adherents seek to undermine--in the words of Richard Delgado and Jean Stefancic describing the pernicious influence of Critical Race Theory--"the liberal order...legal reasoning...and neutral principles of constitutional law," and replace those bedrock foundations of the West with a Marxist world view that spread misery and disaster when implemented in the former Soviet Union, China, Cuba, Cambodia, and many other countries.

A society that abandons the liberal order, legal reasoning, and neutral principles of constitutional law not only poses grave danger to Jews; such a society, if it does not reverse course, will collapse into a morass of tyranny and suffering.  

Releasing Murderers to Free Hostages is as Immoral as it is Shortsighted

In Israel, Hamas, and the Islamic Concepts Dar al-Islam Versus Dar al-harb, I explained why ceasefires, "two state solutions," and any step short of the total defeat of the Islamists will be disastrous for Israel and the West: 

Hamas' surprise attack on Israel is a brutal demonstration of a reality that many people have refused to accept, and that some people--despite of all of the evidence--will still refuse to accept: there is no "two state" solution that will resolve the war between Israel and her enemies because this war has nothing to do with helping Palestinian Arabs and everything to do with killing as many Jews as possible. The barbarism at the core of radical Islam will not be cured by any concession made by Israel short of complete dissolution of the Jewish State--and even if that tragic outcome happened, radical Islam would not be placated but would instead turn its full attention toward the United States and other democratic countries that are part of the Dar al-harb--the portions of the world that radical Muslims have yet to conquer, with the emphasis on "yet": they believe that such conquest is promised to them by Allah, and they will not rest until they achieve such conquest, transforming all of the world into Dar al-Islam (territory governed in strict accordance with Islamic law, which means--among other things--no freedom of speech, no freedom of religion, no freedom of the press, no independent judiciary, and very limited rights for women and any other minority group not favored under Islamic law). 

While Hamas' October 7, 2023 mass casualty terrorist attack was still taking place, I made several predictions about what would happen next, and I am sad to report that all of my predictions came true (albeit on a more extended timeline than I expected, because I never imagined that Israel would let this war drag out for more than two years before declaring victory upon retreating): 

Unfortunately, Israel will achieve--at best--a pyrrhic victory over Hamas, and that victory will be accompanied by a wave of international condemnation of Israel followed by calls for Israel to trade more land for peace.

The broad outline of events for the next few weeks is sadly predictable:

1) For the next 24-48 hours, America and many Western countries will express sympathy for Israel.

2) After 48 hours at most, attention will shift to Israel's allegedly "disproportionate" response, and both sides--but mostly Israel--will be urged to "act with restraint."

3) Most media outlets will present false narratives about alleged "legitimate Palestinian grievances" that supposedly justify Hamas' attacks. Few people will have the courage to publicly state the truth: 

There has never been a sovereign country called Palestine, nor is there a distinct Palestinian people. If you don't believe me, then consider the words of Zuheir Mohsen, who was a high-ranking PLO leader in the 1970s. In a March 1977 interview with the Dutch newspaper Trouw, Mohsen declared:

The Palestinian people does not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel for our Arab unity. In reality today there is no difference between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. Only for political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people, since Arab national interests demand that we posit the existence of a distinct Palestinian people to oppose Zionism.

For tactical reasons, Jordan, which is a sovereign state with defined borders, cannot raise claims to Haifa and Jaffa, while as a Palestinian, I can undoubtedly demand Haifa, Jaffa, Beer-Sheva and Jerusalem. However, the moment we reclaim our right to all of Palestine, we will not wait even a minute to unite Palestine and Jordan.

The word Palestine has nothing to do with Arab or Islamic history, but it dates back to the Latin name that the Romans gave to Judea (the second Jewish Commonwealth) after conquering and subjugating the Jewish people (and the Latin name is derived from a Greek word). After destroying the Jewish Temple in Jerusalem, the Romans renamed the city Aelia Capitolina, and they proudly printed coins bearing the words "Judea Capta." The Roman Empire was long ago consigned to history's dustbin, but the Jewish people are still here and the Jewish people have reestablished their historical state in their historical land. We know when the first Jewish Commonwealth was founded (roughly 3000 years ago), we know its approximate and fluctuating borders, we know that Jerusalem was its political capital and main religious center, we know when that state was conquered by the Babylonians (roughly 2500 years ago), we know when the Maccabees established a second Jewish Commonwealth (roughly 2200 years ago), we know when the second Jewish Commonwealth was conquered by the Roman Empire (roughly 2100 years ago), and we know when the final Jewish revolt against Rome was defeated (less than 2000 years ago). We know that the people in the first and second Jewish Commonwealths spoke Hebrew. 

In contrast, the notion of a distinct Palestinian Arab nation is quite recent, and has no historical basis. The PLO (Palestine Liberation Organization) was founded in Cairo, Egypt in 1964, with funding and support provided by the Soviet Union. What exactly was the PLO founded to "liberate"? In 1964, Egypt controlled Gaza, while Jordan controlled Judea and Samaria plus the eastern portion of Jerusalem. If the PLO had been truly interested in creating a Palestinian national state in Gaza plus the West Bank then why was the PLO conducting terrorist attacks against Israel, a nation that had no control over the areas that the PLO supposedly wanted to "liberate"? Of course, the reality is that the Soviet Union helped create the PLO to destabilize Israel and thus increase the Soviet Union's influence and power in the region. This was all about oil and about expanding Communism's reach, and had nothing to do with helping "Palestinians" or creating a "Palestinian" nation. That is why the PLO and other Arab/Islamic terrorist groups are still waging war against Israel decades after Israel gave up control of Gaza and of portions of the so-called West Bank: the goal is not creating a "Palestinian" state but rather destroying the Jewish State. The PLO has not even attempted to create a functioning government in Gaza, because the PLO was not created to govern, does not know how to govern, and has no interest in governing. 

This is a tragedy not only for Israel, but also for the innocent Arabs who are not terrorists and who just want to live in peace; being placed under the control of the PLO was the worst thing that happened to those Arabs, but many media outlets would rather blame Israel than examine and explain historical truths.

Until the nations of the world, the U.N., and major media outlets speak truth to power about both Israel and about the Palestine myth, there will never be Mideast peace.

4) In three to six weeks, Israel will declare victory. That victory will result in some form of limited ceasefire or Israel ending major military operations--but Gaza will still be governed by Hamas, and large portions of Judea and Samaria will still be governed by the terrorist organization that calls itself the Palestinian Authority, even though there is no such country as Palestine and the only "authority" that this terrorist organization exercises is waging war against Israel.

As I predicted, the world turned against Israel and placed unreasonable demands on Israel while justifying Hamas' crimes against humanity; as I predicted, Israel declared victory without winning the war, and accepted a ceasefire that did not dismantle Hamas or the kleptocratic Palestinian Authority that rules parts of Judea and Samaria that Israel foolishly conceded as part of the Oslo Accords.

After Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu agreed to release 2000 terrorists in exchange for Hamas releasing 20 live hostages and 28 bodies of hostages, Israel's National Security Minister Itamar Ben Gvir spoke truth to power when addressing American envoys Jared Kusher and Steve Witkoff: "Would you make peace with Hitler? Hamas is Hitler. They want to kill us." 

Just a glance at the list of terrorists released by Israel is as heartbreaking as it is infuriating:

The list includes several terrorists involved in the Ramallah lynching in 2000, one of the most severe events in the history of Palestinian Arab terrorism. Among those to be released is Baher Dar, sentenced to 11 life sentences for his role in the Tzrifin suicide bombing in 2004 and other attacks in Tel Aviv.

A terrorist previously released in the Shalit deal, who was later re-arrested at Shifa Hospital in Gaza after returning to terrorist activities, will also be released.

Ibrahim Alikem — the murderer of Ita Tzur and her 12-year-old son Efrayim in an ambush near Ramallah in 1996 — will be released after serving a life sentence and being re-imprisoned a decade after his first arrest.

Fares Ghanem, sentenced to nine life sentences for eight murders, will be released. Along with him, the kidnapper and murderer of Yuri Gushchin, as well as Atiyah Abu Samhadga, who raped and murdered a Jewish woman, will be freed.

Among those to be released are also Jafar Al-Zaatari, a senior Hamas operative responsible for several suicide bombings; the murderer of Dalia Lemkus; Iyem Kammamji, arrested in 2006 for involvement in the kidnapping and murder of Eliyahu Asheri and one of the escapees from Gilboa Prison in 2021; and Hussein Jawadrah, who murdered soldier Eden Attias at the age of 16.

Riyad Al-Amour, a senior member of the Tanzim terrorist organization, will also be released. He was convicted for his role in the deaths of nine Israeli civilians and IDF officers, including Brigadier-General Yehuda Edri, as well as for the murder of three Palestinian Arabs suspected of collaboration with Israel.

Additionally, Nabil Abu Hadir, who murdered his sister, and the head of Tanzim in Tulkarm, who participated in dozens of shooting and bombing attacks, will be released.

The perpetrator of the 2002 Neve Yaakov attack, in which policewoman Galit Arviv was killed and eight police officers and civilians were injured, is also expected to be released.

The murderers of Shin Bet coordinator Haim Nachmani, the handlers of the suicide bomber responsible for the Carmel Market attack, and the head of the Islamic Jihad military wing in Jenin, Iyad Abu Al-Rub, will also be included in the deal.

Among the released will be Israeli terrorists, including the perpetrator of the murder of 11 Israelis in a Line 20 Jerusalem bus attack in 2002. Also included are Emad Shahada, who raped and murdered a teen; Arafat Zeer, who orchestrated the At-Taniel suicide bombing; and Iman Kurd, who stabbed two police officers in 2016 and was sentenced to 35 years in prison.

Other releases include Ahmad Mahmoud Ali Ka’abna, who murdered Hagit Zavitzky and Liat Kastiel; Hamdallah Ali, a senior Hamas figure in Judea and Samaria, released in the Shalit deal and later re-arrested at Shifa Hospital; and Hazam Awad, a senior Fatah operative behind a series of deadly attacks.

Taleb Mahamrah, a senior Fatah member who murdered five Israelis and other Palestinian Arabs, as well as Ismail Hamdan and the head of Tanzim in Bethlehem, Adnan Abi'at, will also be released. In addition, Musa Safen, who murdered his mother for marrying a Jew, and the murderer of Chief Sergeant Moshe Dayan, are included.

Among the released is Nader Abu Turki, previously freed in the Shalit deal, who recruited a suicide bomber and carried out a shooting attack. After his release, he became a key liaison between Hamas in Turkey and Hamas in Judea and Samaria; he will not be deported. Ahmad Siyag, who stabbed a female soldier four years ago, and Zaid Ghanidi, head of a terror cell in Hebron recently thwarted by Shin Bet, will also be released.

In Raw deal, Rabbi Steven Pruzansky, Esq. laments Israel's decision to set free terrorists:

The Entebbe rescue was the last time that Israel could present itself to the world as a nation that does not kowtow to terrorists, and that was almost fifty years ago. Since then, we have become one of the most courageous fighters and at the same time, one of the most craven appeasers of terror in the world. We know it, the enemy knows it, and the enemy knows it so well that he will repeat this tactic when it suits him and then repeat it again.

It is good that Nazi sympathizers were unaware of this in the early 1960’s or they would have simply kidnapped one hundred Jews and demanded the release of Adolf Eichmann in return...

What is wrong with us? We console ourselves that this weakness shows our compassion and concern for life but true compassion and concern for life also demands deterring future murders and kidnappings. Instead, we are encouraging it, even incentivizing it. We can pat ourselves on the back that we are not releasing "that guy," whoever he is, or Nukhba this or that, but eventually we will. We know it, and certainly they know it, so who are we fooling, and why are we inciting our enemy to do whatever it takes to free Barghouti and other assorted terrorists, rapists, murderers, and kidnappers, in the next round? Why play that macabre game when we know we will lose?

We have repeatedly announced to the world that Jewish blood is cheap. We are among those who cheapen it, if this is the best strategy we have. PM Netanyahu has successes on his ledger, but among his most compelling failures is being the prime minister who negotiated the Sinwar deal (freeing 1200 terrorists including the October 7 mastermind in exchange for one soldier) and then freeing thousands more in the deals of the last two years. The Arabs will kidnap and murder again; it is not a question of if, but when. The only real question is how many and, of course, who?

Who will be the next Jewish victims of Arab terror and kidnapping?

If Netanyahu once (1987) authored a book entitled, "Terrorism: How the West Can Win," he could now write the sequel, "Terrorism: How it got the better of Israel." For that alone - the failure to deter this tactic and instead habituate the world to expect this Israeli capitulation to terror - he should be driven from political life. This does not come from any anti-Netanyahu bias; I respect what he has achieved as I can criticize what he has failed to achieve.

Note that the Midrash (Breisheet Raba 55:8) teaches that just as hatred distorts a person's view of reality, so does love. Those who hate whatever Netanyahu does simply because he does it are psychologically similar to those who love whatever Netanyahu does simply because he does it. Neither are thinking that much...

We see today that in a war between the civilized and the savage, the civilized can never win. They can at most stalemate because at a certain point - sometimes earlier, sometimes later - the denizens of the civilized society turn against the war, preferring the soothing fantasies of peaceniks to the harsh facts of real life. Similarly, in negotiations between the civilized and the savage, the savage will always win because he is unencumbered by any moral notions.

Witness this oddity, a first in history: those who claim to be victims of "genocide" have stridently and consistently opposed an end to that "genocide," and instead are driving a very hard bargain against the alleged perpetrators of the genocide. That is unprecedented; all prior victims of genocide just wanted it to stop, and quickly. It makes one wonder… 

No one should forget that after Netanyahu surrendered the Hebron Hills to the PLO, a terrorist sniper murdered 10 month old Shalhavet Pass; her blood--and the blood of all Jews murdered by terrorists after Netanyahu gave up land and/or set free terrorists--is on his hands, as will be the blood of those murdered by the terrorists Netanyahu is setting free now.

Israel has a pathetic history of turning imminent victory into humiliating defeat by releasing terrorists instead of defeating her enemies, and Israel's Gaza policy has been eyeless, clueless, and senseless for decades because that policy has focused on "mowing the lawn" instead of winning the war.

The sad, brutal reality of human nature is that violence is often necessary for survival, because non-violence when faced with an enemy that has genocidal intent is equivalent to suicide. In Understanding the Full Dimensions of Hamas' October 7, 2023 Mass Casualty Attack in Israel, I described how Israel's war in Gaza should end: 

The facts documented above point to several important conclusions/action items:

1) In order to survive, Israel must destroy Hamas, because Hamas has demonstrated the ability and inclination to inflict mass destruction on Israel.

2) Any ceasefire in Gaza helps Hamas to regroup, and is therefore an existential threat to Israel.

3) In light of the significant support and collaboration that Hamas receives from the civilian population in Gaza, Israel must strongly consider what is the most humanitarian way to relocate most or all of that civilian population elsewhere; most wars involve population transfers to protect the innocent and minimize the likelihood of more warfare, and there is no reason that this war would be an exception. After World War II, population transfers of millions of people took place, and something similar happened in the Indian subcontinent after India, Pakistan, and Bangladesh became independent countries. Humanitarian population transfer is the best way to not only protect Israel but to also remove Gazans from the current war zone so that Israel can destroy Hamas with as few civilian casualties as possible.

In this context, it should also be remembered that--as I previously documented--after the creation of the modern State of Israel the Arab/Islamic countries expelled almost 1,000,000 Jews. Those Jews have never been compensated for their suffering or for their lost property. In essence, the Arab/Islamic countries already did an involuntary population transfer affecting Jews, and the population transfer process can now be completed--in an orderly, humane fashion--regarding Gaza (and this should be seriously considered for the hotbeds of Arab/Islamic terrorism in Judea/Samaria as well).

4) Israel faces a significant human and financial cost to rebuild everything that Hamas destroyed. Therefore, the Arab/Muslim world must foot the bill to pay whatever it costs to help Gaza's civilians now, and to relocate them to new homes out of Gaza at the earliest opportunity. The extensive sponsorship that Saudi Arabia and the Gulf States provide for sports--including but not limited to auto racing, chess, and golf--demonstrate that those nations have more than sufficient funds to pay for this. Those states depend on American military muscle to survive, so it should not be difficult for America to persuade those states to do their part: the simple message is "Pay your share to fix a problem created by terrorists who you have funded and sheltered, or we will withdraw all military support and leave you to your own devices vis a vis Iran." By the way, delivery of that same message would provide sufficient incentive for Qatar--which sponsors Hamas and shelters many of Hamas' leaders--to pressure Hamas to unconditionally free all of the hostages that Hamas is holding in Gaza.

The tears of joy accompanying today's release of the remaining 20 living hostages in Gaza will inevitably be followed by tears of lamentation after the terrorists that Netanyahu set loose rape, abduct, and slaughter more victims. Who will have the necessary courage and power to hold Netanyahu and Trump accountable when that dreaded day happens?

Thoughts About Shalom Freedman's "Life as Creation" and About the Root Causes of Antisemitism

Shalom Freedman's 1993 book Life as Creation: A Jewish Way of Thinking About the World presents 780 aphorisms divided into six sections, with each section containing 10 chapters of 13 aphorisms each. The sections are "Mankind in Creation," "Jewish Creation," "God and Creation," "Creation and Everyday Moral Life," "Creation and the Life of the Mind," and "Literary Creation." In "An Additional Word to the Reader" (p. xv), Freedman explains, "The reader can begin anywhere, with any subject or entry that is of interest. But a line of argument does run through the work, and therefore the reader is advised to attempt a consecutive reading. Wisdom literature of this type does not lead itself to swift-paced, once-over-lightly reading. This is the kind of work that challenges the reader to interpretation and rereading."

The "line of argument" is that God created humans to emulate Him by creating freely. Humans can create in several ways, including partnering with God in realizing "the divine plan for the world," creating in the moral realm by "doing justice and mercy," and producing great creative works in philosophy, literature, science, and other fields. Part of the divine plan requires believing that "present evil is transient and that, of all evils that have been, there will come a compensation in greater redemption for the injured innocent" (p. 4).

It is inspiring to believe that we humans can partner with God both by "doing justice and mercy" and by using our individual gifts to create works of enduring value, but it is disturbing and puzzling that evil is so prevalent, even if we believe (or merely hope) that evil is "transient."

"Transient" means something much different to God--who by definition exists outside the boundaries of time and space--than it does to humans. Antisemitism is an evil that has existed for millennia, and has become more prevalent in recent years. The virulent persistence of antisemitism is as disturbing as the survival of the Jewish people against long odds is remarkable; antisemitism does not seem transient in Auschwitz' gas chambers, nor does it seem transient to those who narrowly escaped such a fate but mourn the loss of family members and friends. 

In chapter 17 of the "Jewish Creation" section, Freedman provides 13 aphorisms under the heading "Jewish Creation and Hatred of the Jews":

1 God chose the Jews even though He knew this would make them the most hated people in the history of mankind. No people wants to know that it is less valued, less loved, than another.

2 Jewish physical weakness, combined with spiritual greatness and later intellectual distinction, created the conditions by which evil hatred could lead to repeated efforts at the Jews' physical destruction.

3 The hatred and resentment the Jews experienced from other peoples helped them to create mechanisms of survival and adaptability that frequently worked. But there was no way to use these devices to escape from the systematic destruction devised for them by the European people, which prided itself on being supreme in all things--and was surely supreme in one--the doing of evil.

4 Christianity and Islam each has its own separate tradition of repaying with evil those who provided them with their first understanding of God.

5 The price the Jews have had to pay for being loved so strongly by God has been being hated so strongly by humanity.

6 It is natural to resent those who are more successful than us, those who do better than us. But the wish to destroy them comes only when we sense they are depriving us of our own world. Thus, the closer the Jews came to being at the center of creation in various European societies, the more strongly they were hated.

7 The Christian son accuses the Jewish father of having tried to murder him so he can justify his own desire to be rid of the father's conscience.

8 Not only do other peoples envy the Jews, the Jews also envy other peoples. This has played a part in Jewish creation, in the Jewish learning to take upon themselves the character of other peoples. Time and again the Jews have known how to imitate and become the others in the effort to belong to worlds they eventually discovered were not their own.

9 Most peoples consider themselves chosen at some point in their history. How difficult it must be for a people to relate to a prior claim of chosenness, especially one based not on position or power but on closeness to God.

10 The Christians envied the Jews for what no people in antiquity would have thought to envy: their suffering.

11 Envy of the Jews appears to be a constant theme of human history that will not disappear until the messianic age when all know God is One.

12 The projection of one's own forbidden impulses upon the scapegoat is the simple psychological device of much hatred of the Jews. The Jews are frequently accused of everything the others inwardly know is wrong with themselves.

13 The effects of others' hatred of the Jews is also expressed in desperate efforts on the part of Jews to re-create themselves as others. In other words, hatred of the Jews also leads to that cowardly kind of Jewish response known as assimilation, the sacrifice of one's true self for a promised self that will never be completely real.  

It must be emphasized that the Jewish belief in being the "Chosen People"--which is referenced in Freedman's first aphorism--is a very misunderstood and misrepresented concept; this has nothing to do with Jews believing themselves to be superior or believing non-Jews to be inferior: it is a core Jewish belief that the Jewish people were chosen by God to have additional responsibilities involving not only the observance of 613 Biblical commandments (non-Jews are only bound by the seven Noahide laws) but also being a "light unto the nations" (in the words of the prophet Isaiah).

Freedman's first aphorism does not explain antisemitism other than suggesting that antisemitism's existence is somehow part of the divine plan, without indicating why antisemitism is a necessary part of the divine plan. 

It is true, as suggested by the second aphorism, that the combination of collective Jewish physical weakness and significant spiritual and intellectual achievements by Jews created the necessary preconditions for antisemitism to develop and spread. 

Freedman's third aphorism is correct that during nearly 2000 years of exile the Jewish people developed many different collective and individual survival techniques; it is a cruel paradox that the very techniques that were at least somewhat successful for so many centuries were woefully inadequate--and, in fact, counterproductive--in the face of the Nazis' overwhelming technological power paired with genocidal intent. Enemies of the Jewish people prior to the Nazis did not possess the technological means to kill every Jew, and most of those enemies preferred to degrade and terrorize Jews as opposed to annihilating the Jewish people. Negotiation, ransom paying, and acceptance of discriminatory laws without overt rebellion enabled the Jewish people to survive two millennia of Christian antisemitism rooted in the notion that the Jews should suffer "perpetual servitude" but not total annihilation--but the only way to survive the Nazis was to escape or fight, because any form of accommodation merely delayed the inexorable genocide.

Freedman's fourth aphorism highlights the sad reality that Christianity and Islam--two religions with deep Jewish roots--both have long histories of virulent antisemitism (and those histories have not ended, particularly regarding Muslims but also regarding significant numbers of Christians as well).

The fifth aphorism rephrases the first aphorism.

The sixth aphorism addresses the heart of the matter: a major root cause of antisemitism is envy.

The seventh aphorism speaks a blunt truth that is painful for Christians of good conscience to hear, but it must be stated: organized Christianity (in varied forms, including but not limited to the Catholic Church and various Protestant denominations) promoted (and, in many instances, still promotes) antisemitism based on the Christ-killer slander. The historical reality is that the Jew known as Jesus of Nazareth was executed by Roman authorities, not by the Jewish people who were occupied and oppressed by the Romans. Jews could not order Romans to execute or not execute someone in the Roman Empire, just like Jews could not order Nazis to execute or not execute someone; to suggest otherwise is bizarre and ahistorical.

The eighth aphorism delves into the psychology of Jewish people responding to antisemitism by trying to be more like non-Jewish people, without realizing that antisemites will never let Jews assimilate; some of the worst outbreaks of antisemitic violence take place against Jewish communities with high rates of assimilation/secularization. Nazi Germany is the most obvious example, but it should also be noted that a large number of the victims of Hamas' October 7, 2023 mass casualty terrorist attack were Leftist, assimilated Jews.

The ninth aphorism alludes to envy of the Jewish people because of the Jewish people's perceived or actual closeness to God, echoing and amplifying the sixth aphorism; one of the root causes of antisemitism is the belief/fear that Jews are special.

The 10th and 11th aphorisms discuss suffering and envy. Christianity focuses a lot on suffering--starting with Jesus' agonizing death on the cross--and it is not surprising that collectively Christians envy Jewish suffering, because Jesus is supposed to be the supreme example of suffering but history shows that the Jewish people have suffered (and continue to suffer) immensely. 

We often see examples of the 12th aphorism in both traditional media outlets and social media platforms, as Israel's enemies who attempt genocide against the Jewish people falsely accuse Israel of committing genocide. 

The 13th aphorism reinforces the eighth aphorism and summarizes the psychological impact of antisemitism: many Jews respond to relentless hatred by suppressing or denying their identity.

Much has been written and said about the underlying causes of antisemitism. Freedman's aphorisms attribute antisemitism to a combination of collective Jewish physical weakness, envy, and projection of one's own forbidden impulses. Antisemitism is often described as a puzzling or even mystical phenomenon, but antisemitism can be understood in simple terms: antisemitism is rooted in a combination of fear and shame. Antisemites simultaneously reject Jewish values and feel shame after rejecting those values, as I explained in The Fear and Shame at the Heart of Antisemitism and Anti-Zionism:

Freud once wrote that Jews are not really hated because of the Christian accusation that the Jews killed God but rather because the Jews created the concept of God by giving humanity the monotheistic idea. Freud argued that, subconsciously, people prefer to live like cave dwellers--without any strictly defined moral code--and thus people do not want to hear about a God who admonishes that you shall not kill, you shall not steal, you shall not covet. Freud believed that Jews are hated for being the messengers of God's moral code.

Adolf Hitler's private conversations with associates, as reported in Hermann Rauschning's book The Voice of Destruction and quoted in Adam A. Winston's article "Criteria for the Distribution of Unclaimed Assets" (published in the September/October 1999 issue of Midstream), support and amplify the viewpoint of antisemitism functioning as a rejection of Jewish values. Hitler is quoted is saying the following:

"Conscience is a Jewish invention. It is a blemish, like circumcision."

"Providence has ordained that I should be the greatest liberator of humanity. I am freeing men from the restraints of an intelligence that has taken charge: from the dirty and degraded self-mortifications called conscience and morality, and from the demands of a freedom and personal independence, which only a few can bear."

"Thou shalt not steal? Wrong! All life is theft."

"Against the so-called Ten Commandments, against them we are fighting."

It is worth noting in this context that even when Nazi Germany was losing on the battlefield to the Allies, Hitler refused to divert the resources being used to exterminate the Jews to bolster the war effort; for Hitler, killing as many Jews as possible was more important than winning the war on the battlefield. 

This is an example of why the scapegoat theory does not adequately explain the persistence and virulence of antisemitism. Yes, the Jewish people are often used as scapegoats for a host of ills, but that is a result of antisemitism and not the root cause of antisemitism. As Dennis Prager and Joseph Telushkin put it in their book Why the Jews?, "Antisemitism was not a vehicle for the Nazis; Nazism was a vehicle for antisemitism" (p. 74).

The fear aspect of antisemitism stems from the fact that the Jewish people and Jewish history are not normal. The Jewish people have not merely survived in the face of overwhelming obstacles; they have thrived, making significant contributions to art, literature, science, and many other human endeavors. How is it possible for a tiny, persecuted minority to not only produce so many successful individuals but also to rebuild their homeland nearly two millennia after being exiled? The powerful Roman Empire destroyed the Second Jewish Commonwealth, but today the State of Israel lives long after the Roman Empire disappeared--and, unlike the rebirth of Jewish nationhood, the Roman Empire will never rise again. 

The Leftist version of history that has conquered large swathes of academia--thanks in no small part to Qatari funding--classifies individuals and nations as either "oppressors/victimizers" or as "oppressed/victims," with those categories strictly defined, usually by race; the Jewish people do not fit neatly into this paradigm, and Israel's rebirth in the 20th century refutes the notion that it is impossible for oppressed people to overcome their dire circumstances, forcing the Left to either reject their preferred narratives or else classify Jews as "oppressors/victimizers." Tragically--for both Jews and for those who are really being oppressed but are ignored as the Left relentlessly slanders Jews and Israel--the Left has chosen to classify Jews and Israel as "oppressors." I discussed this in The Fear and Shame at the Heart of Antisemitism and Anti-Zionism: 

Israel has accomplished so much in just a few decades despite being surrounded by large, hostile neighbors who have repeatedly attacked Israel with the stated goal of destroying Israel--and several of the countries in the region still actively finance and foment terrorist attacks against Israel and against Jews around the world. 

Why has Israel been so spectacularly successful while so many other former British colonies are mired in poverty and ruled by totalitarian regimes? Israel's neighbors--and developing countries around the world--too often do not look at Israel as a role model, but rather as a success story that they fear, and that makes them feel ashamed at their own failures. As a result, many have decided to demonize Israel and to discount Israel as an illegitimate country whose successes are not the product of hard work and ingenuity. Israel has become the personification of the Jew in the world. The irrational fears that many people have about the disproportionate success of individual Jews have now also been directed against the disproportionate success of the Jewish State. 

In the February 1988 issue of Commentary, Hilton Kramer noted that deep-seated hostility toward Israel often emanates from "the political culture of the international Left. It is based on, among other things, that lethal combination of guilt, fear, cynicism, and sentimentality toward the Third World that is now one of the most destructive and disabling issues in world affairs--destructive and disabling, that is, to the democracies (It is a boon, of course, to totalitarianism.). As a model of post-colonial democratic government, Israel is a standing reproach to the ongoing political debacle of the Third World. That isn't the only reason Israel has become a target of the international Left, but it is one of the primary reasons."

It is not a coincidence that antisemitism and anti-Zionism are connected to anti-American sentiments, because those who hate America are often jealous of America in much the same fashion that those who hate Jews and/or Israel are jealous of Jews and/or Israel: "Jealousy is a powerful human emotion. Hatred is a tremendous emotional release. Blame is cathartic. At this time in history, the United States is humane, free, and powerful. The Arab Islamic world is just the opposite. Our success is infuriating to people who value their own culture, who love their traditions even though they no longer work, and who look at our enormous success with inchoate envy...In the future, we'll get around to recognizing the neuroses, if not psychoses, that are far too prevalent within the Arabian heartland of the Islamic world...The transition from women as property to women as full participants in society has been the greatest revolution in human history, and its reverberations will be felt for centuries. Repressive cultures are horrified by it because it calls into question their most fundamental biological, sociological, and religious ideas. However, the oppression of women anywhere is not only a human rights violation, it's a suicide pact with the future" (Ralph Peters, "The Shah Always Falls," interviewed by Fredric Smoler in the February/March 2003 issue of American Heritage).

It has become fashionable for antisemites to assert that they only hate Zionists, not Jews, but, as I noted in Anti-Zionism is Antisemitism, "It is important to emphasize that Anti-Zionism is Indistinguishable From Antisemitism Because Israel is the Jewish Homeland. It is absurd to assert that a person can hate Israel and deny Israel's right to exist but not hate Jews. Further, the denial of a nation's right to exist is a unique form of hatred directed only at the Jewish State and not at any other nation no matter how heinous that nation's actions."

Antisemitism threatens not only Jews but it also threatens the stability of the nations that foment such hatred. Nations that welcome Jews tend to be free and prosperous, but nations that persecute Jews tend to be tyrannical and unsuccessful (or heading in those directions, away from freedom and prosperity, as their persecution of Jews increases); it is not pleasant for anyone to live in Nazi Germany, the Soviet Union, or any nation shackled by the harsh dictates of Sharia. 

Therefore, antisemitism is not merely a Jewish problem; it is a problem for humanity--perhaps humanity's ultimate problem if one considers that disproportionate energy fueling antisemitism at the United Nations, in academia, in media outlets, and in the streets. This hateful, wasted energy could be channeled toward addressing suffering around the world that is ignored or minimized because it does not fit the convenient narrative of "If it's Jews, it's news." If I were a Nigerian Christian or a Uyghur Muslim in China, I would be very disheartened that my real suffering is ignored while false genocide accusations are hurled at Israel.