Remember Daniel Pearl? Why do I start this post with him? He was the first terrorist victim – at least the first I can remember – whose death contained that special element of horrific sadism and psychopathic brutality crossed with modern technology, in that his beheading was videoed and purposely broadcast by the perpetrators. This was way before ISIS, but it foreshadowed the behavior of that group. It was something out of a psychological horror movie, and yet it was real.

Pearl was held hostage first, too. And then before the terrorists killed him he was forced to say things such as, “I am a Jew.” That was very very important to the terrorists, although the US seemed to be their main target for the moment.

Here’s an interesting fact that I never knew before, about Daniel Pearl’s mother, which is that she was an Iraqi Jew who fled that country in the 1940s because of persecution and violence:

Pearl was born Eveline Rejwan on November 11, 1935, in Baghdad, Iraq. Her father, Joseph, was a tailor who ran an import business, and her mother, Victoria (Abada) Rejwan, was a homemaker. … When Pearl was 5, she lived through the Farhud, an outbreak of anti-Jewish violence in Iraq following a failed nationalist coup. She and her family hid in their home for days, protected by their Arab neighbors who told rioters that no Jews lived there.

Her family then moved to a suburb of Baghdad but anti-Jewish attacks persisted and she herself witnessed the bodies of Iraqi Jews hanging from gallows in a square. Her father lost vision in one eye after an assault and he had to bribe a police officer to free his two sons after they were arrested on false charges.

In the late 1940s, Pearl worked with an underground Zionist movement that facilitated the emigration of Jews, then illegal, to British-controlled Mandatory Palestine. At this time, Pearl began using the Hebrew name Ruth. Around 1948, her two older brothers were smuggled into Palestine from Iraq. In 1949, Ruth’s oldest brother was killed fighting for the Israeli army, which she did not learn about until years later as her father had withheld the information from his family. In 1951, Pearl arrived with her family in Israel as part of the mass exodus of Iraqi Jews.

So the horror of Arab anti-Semitism was one of her earliest experiences, long before the nightmare returned in a very personal way.

Pearl’s mother met her husband Judah Pearl in Israel, and they moved to the US in 1950 for graduate studies. Both were scientists. Ruth Pearl died in 2021, but her husband is still alive at 87, and he was born in Tel Aviv in 1936 to Polish-Jewish immigrants who had had the prescience and good fortune to be able to emigrate to Israel.

Daniel Pearl was abducted, held hostage, and murdered by various jihadi groups in 2002, when he was 38 years old. That was over 20 years ago, so you may have forgotten some of the details that perhaps didn’t seem so important at the time. But here are a few:

On February 21, 2002, a video was released titled The Slaughter of the Spy-Journalist, the Jew Daniel Pearl. The video shows Pearl’s mutilated body …

The Jew Daniel Pearl. And of course there was the broadcasting, with great pride, of not just the killing but the mutilation. What seemed so unusual back then stopped being unusual a long time ago, because we’ve seen many such videos over the years. And now, with social media, we have refinements such as this: filming the murder of a young man on his cellphone, and sending the video to his mother.

But back to Pearl and the video of his killing. During the video, Pearl was made to say at the outset:

My name is Daniel Pearl. I’m a Jewish-American from Encino, California, USA. I come from, uh, on my father’s side the family is Zionist. My father’s Jewish, my mother’s Jewish, I’m Jewish. My family follows Judaism. We’ve made numerous family visits to Israel.

Jewish, Jewish, Jewish; Israel, Israel, Israel. That was no mere detail to Pearl’s killers. It’s not that they won’t kill non-Jews; they certainly will, and with relish. But it is Jews they wish to eliminate from the earth first. One can argue about what the Koran says about Jews; it says a lot of contradictory things, many of them not good. But you can’t argue about what hadith Hamas chose to put in its charter as inspiration:

The Day of Judgement will not come about until Muslims fight the Jews, when the Jew will hide behind stones and trees. The stones and trees will say O Muslims, O Abdullah, there is a Jew behind me, come and kill him

So do not be surprised when Palestinians and Palestinian sympathizers in Western countries stand in public squares and celebrate the killing of Jews and scream that they want to kill more. As courageous Ayaan Hirsi Ali writes:

In short, anti-Semites the world over have been emboldened by this crisis, and Jews are once again being blamed for their own massacre. And I am not remotely surprised. In my childhood, I was steeped in the Islamist movement’s noxious anti-Semitism — which has been on such ugly display this week.

Born in Mogadishu, Somalia, I spent my early years escaping political strife after my father was imprisoned for being an anti-government activist. We moved between countries before settling in Kenya.

The worst insult in the Somali community was to be called a ‘Jew’, not that any of us actually knew one. To be called a ‘Jew’ was so abhorrent, some felt justified in killing anyone who so dishonoured them with this ‘slur’.

As a teenager in Nairobi in the 1980s, I joined the Muslim Brotherhood — the strict Sunni Islamist movement, founded in Egypt in 1928, from which Hamas ultimately descends.

I vividly remember sitting with my female fellows in mosques, cursing Israel and praying to Allah to destroy the Jews. We were certainly not interested in a peaceful ‘two-state solution’: we were taught to want to see Israel wiped off the map.

When I was 16, my school’s teacher of religion was Sister Aziza. She read to us the Koran’s lurid descriptions of the everlasting fire that burns flesh and dissolves skin — the place reserved for Jews.

Sister Aziza described Jews as physically monstrous, with horns coming from their heads, out of which flew devils that would corrupt the world. Jews controlled everything, she told us, and it was the duty of Muslims to destroy them.

It was a lot to take in for a teenager who read Western romance novels in secret, but I believed every word. …

[Much later] I abandoned my religion, but I have never lost my clear-sighted understanding, forged in my childhood, of Islamism’s pathological hatred of Jews, as well as Muslims considered as heretics and non-Muslims in general.

The former Egyptian president Mohamed Morsi — a one-time leader of the Muslim Brotherhood — declared that Muslims should ‘nurse our children and our grandchildren on hatred’ of Jews.

One of the most chilling things about the 10/7 terrorist attacks was that for several previous years Hamas pretended to be backing away from violence, and fooled Israel into thinking that actually was true. Now they are bragging about the success of their deception, which caused the Israelis to give them travel permits and also to let down their guard somewhat. According to a Hamas official:

“We made them think Hamas was busy with governing Gaza, and that it wanted to focus on the 2.5 million Palestinians [there] and had abandoned the resistance altogether. All the while, under the table, Hamas was preparing for this big attack.”

And they want this to be a worldwide effort. They’ve been preparing the ground for decades: emigrating to Western nations, using propaganda in the MSM, and enlisting many allies in academia (see this). Perhaps they have overestimated their support and overplayed their hand, causing at least some of their erstwhile allies in the Western Left to recoil in horror. Perhaps. But perhaps not. There is no mistaking their intent anymore, nor the lengths to which they are willing to go to achieve it.

9/11 was a wakeup call for a lot of people. And so is this. The question is whether it will be heeded.

The post Don’t forget the murder of Daniel Pearl, “the Jew” appeared first on The New Neo.

Even before the Arday incident, Cofnas was a figure of controversy for his writing and research on race and intelligence:

He became an early-career research fellow at the University of Cambridge and research associate at Emmanuel College, Cambridge in 2022. Controversy developed after Cofnas published a 2024 blog post saying that black people are, on average, less intelligent than other groups, and that they “would disappear from almost all high-profile positions outside of sports and entertainment” under a meritocratic system. He was dismissed from his position at Emmanuel College as a result.

In 2026, Cofnas secured a position at Ghent University. Following student protest and a petition calling for his dismissal, the university defended his appointment, citing academic freedom. Cofnas attracted further attention after publishing a blog post in which he catalogued multiple examples of alleged plagiarism by University of Cambridge sociologist Jason Arday …

In that Wiki article I just quoted, I don’t see it mentioned that Cofnas says he got these facts from Harvard’s own study on the matter. Cofnas discusses it in the interview I posted, and it’s also mentioned here:

[Cofnas] cites Harvard University data which suggest that were the college to use a colourblind system for academic selection, judging applicants by academic qualifications alone, its proportion of black students would fall dramatically, from around 14 per cent to just 0.7 per cent. When it comes to Harvard faculty, Dr Cofnas added that in a meritocracy they ‘would be recruited from the best of the best students’, meaning ‘the number of black professors would approach 0 per cent’. He adds that black people would ‘disappear from almost all high-profile positions outside of sports and entertainment’ in this society.

Cofnas is labeled a racist, but basing a statement like that on Harvard’s own statistics doesn’t make him one. Whether he is or is not, I don’t know. He definitely is a person unafraid of making waves, which is also evident from the interview in my previous post. Cofnas waded into Arday’s background where others feared to tread. Now, with Arday’s suicide, Cofnas has been suspended from his current post at Ghent University:

Nathan Cofnas, suspended by the rector of Ghent University, Petra De Sutter, in the wake of Jason Arday’s death, notes that De Sutter used ChatGPT for her inaugural address, which included fabricated quotes.

Previous news reports confirm this.https://t.co/xppHNZk3Wo https://t.co/XjaV0P6zZk pic.twitter.com/9gCl3NsjXs

— Benjamin Ryan (@benryanwriter) August 20, 2026

For those lacking access to X:

Nathan Cofnas, suspended by the rector of Ghent University, Petra De Sutter, in the wake of Jason Arday’s death, notes that De Sutter used ChatGPT for her inaugural address, which included fabricated quotes.

To top it all off, Ghent’s rector De Sutter is a gynecologist who was born a man and transitioned around the age of forty, in 2004.

The reason given for Cofnas’ suspension:

Ghent University said it had suspended Cofnas “as a precautionary measure” pending a preliminary disciplinary investigation, but did not go into further detail on the reasons.

It could not comment any further “to safeguard the confidentiality of the personnel file and the disciplinary proceedings,” it said in an emailed statement.

Pretty closed-mouthed, but my guess is that they are afraid of an uproar from students, faculty, and the public if they keep him. He is identified as the mean racist guy who lynched Arday.

Here’s more on the matter from the University of Ghent:

The suspension comes after Ghent said that following Arday’s death it had “received many enquiries” about Cofnas’s appointment.

“We attach great importance to academic freedom and to open academic debate, even when views are controversial. However, that freedom is not unlimited. It goes hand in hand with responsibility and may be restricted in order to protect the rights of others,” Ghent said in its statement.

“For this reason, the university takes the recent public statements made by a postdoctoral researcher at Ghent University regarding this matter very seriously. Ghent University has decided to take appropriate action within its powers and the applicable framework.”

In March, more than 300 staff and students wrote an open letter to the university, questioning the appointment of Cofnas and accusing Ghent of violating its code of conduct.

Ghent defended itself then. But will it defend free speech now, or succumb? A robust defense of free speech doesn’t really exist in Europe anywhere; at least, I’ve never found one.

Cofnas is an American, however, and the Trump administration is sticking up for him:

U.S. Ambassador to Belgium Bill White gets right to the point in the X post below. He calls out the Ghent University rector for “retaliat[ing] against an American scholar [Cofnas] following his accurate whistleblower reporting on academic fraud.”

He notes that the U.S. often funds research projects with foreign universities and that “dishonest, corrupt institutions that engage in, or reward, scapegoating mob behavior are not desirable partners for us.” Therefore, the U.S. plans to review “any relationships we have with Ghent University.”

It will be very interesting to see what ultimately happens to Cofnas. I hope he has a security detail.

NOTE: In doing research for this post, I came across this tweet on X praising the Trump administration for doing the right thing in this instance. But when I looked at the responses to the tweet, there were many that said that Trump only did this because he’s controlled by the Jews and Israel, and Cofnas is Jewish. It was quite the barrage of Tuckeresque contempt, such as (for example):

The Trump administration defended Nathan Cofnas because he’s jewish, and it would have done so regardless of whether it was the right thing to do or not.

The absolute only reason they are defending Confas is because he is aggressively Jewish, and the singular aim of this administration is to serve the Jews.

[Trump] would never do this for a White person

Ok, but Trumps law: ‘everything he does, he does for *them*’ holds true in this instance. No matter how repellently obnoxious the other side is, it’s hard not to notice the consistent pattern. If Confas wasn’t a Zionist Jew it would be very different.

Oh please, let’s not be oblivious here.

Cofnas is Jewish and this administration is controlled by Jews.

You don’t see this “based” administration going to bat for nationalist figures in Europe.

Cofnas is a jew. There have been plenty of times they could have defended this rhetoric, but they aren’t defending the rhetoric they are defending the tribe.

There are plenty more where those came from, but you get the idea. Are they bots? Paid trolls? Muslims in foreign lands? Or real people from the US and Western Europe who are Tucker fans? Probably some mix of all three, but I don’t know the proportions.

Note that they don’t consider Jews “white.” The left, on the other hand, considers Jews extremely privileged whites. This double-edged sword is a really good example of how Jew-hatred works – the Jews are regarded as allied with whatever the Jew-hating group sees as the enemy.

[ADDENDUM:

Cofnas tells his side of it here. An excerpt:

I have been flooded with death threats, smeared in countless newspaper articles, and accused of targeting Arday because I think that, as one commentator put it, “people like Cofnas simply don’t believe that Black people deserve to be professors at all.” Speaker after speaker at the vigil held for Arday in Trafalgar Square on Monday denounced me by name, including a prominent politician. Many have claimed that I fabricated the evidence against Arday, although this is easily refuted.

On Aug. 18, the U.K.’s National Union of Journalists released a “Statement on the Death of Jason Arday.” After “condemn[ing] attacks against individual journalists,” the statement singles out one person for criticism: me. “That one of the highest profile critics of Arday was Nathan Cofnas, a former Cambridge academic and self-described ‘race realist’, is deeply concerning.” Although no one has found so much as a mistaken comma in the article I wrote about Arday, I’m apparently not entitled to protection against attack for telling the truth.

On Thursday afternoon, I received a message from the rector of Ghent University, Petra De Sutter, notifying me that, in the wake of the backlash from the Arday affair, she was suspending me from my position as a postdoctoral researcher. Her letter made it clear that the school has laid the groundwork to fire me.

I’m an easy scapegoat because I hold views about race that are controversial and easily misunderstood. I argue that differences between ancestral populations aren’t entirely due to environmental forces, and that some group disparities stem from natural differences for which no one is to blame. I made a widely quoted statement: “Under a colorblind system that judged applicants only by academic qualifications, blacks would make up 0.7% of Harvard students.” That sentence has been cited repeatedly as evidence that I’m a racist.

Few people are aware that my statement about Harvard admissions was summarizing a finding by Harvard itself. In the course of the Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard lawsuit, Harvard disclosed an internal study conducted in 2013, which found that, if admissions were based only on grades and test scores, the undergraduate population would be 0.7% African-American—a significant reduction from current levels. Racial representation at many American institutions is maintained by Harvard-style affirmative action.

I didn’t quote Harvard’s statistic to celebrate it, or because I believe that black people don’t belong at universities. There are many brilliant black scholars. But it’s a difficult fact to face that in a truly colorblind system that didn’t take race into account, there would be a shocking lack of diversity in certain institutions. As I said in the controversial essay that mentions the Harvard statistic, “when it comes to policymaking in a multiracial society, we might need to make sure that everyone feels they have a voice in determining our collective fate.” To this end, I argued for taking measures to ensure meaningful representation of major demographic groups. But we shouldn’t do this under the banner of DEI, which automatically blames differences in outcome on white racism.

The number of people hearing Cofnas’ side of the story is miniscule compared to the number who think he’s a racist who murdered Arday with malice aforethought.]

The post Ghent suspends Cofnas – the Arday fallout appeared first on The New Neo.

But it’s a topic so important that I need to deal with it more often. Why is it so important, and not just to Jews? It’s an old saying but it’s true that the Jews are the canaries in the coalmine. Jew-hatred is the mark of a society that’s sick. It’s also a sign of evil, if you want to get metaphysical about it. And it’s one of the longest hatreds in the world, perhaps the longest hatred, and so flexible that it can shape-shift endlessly from old reason to new reason and back again.

There’s the envy part and the contempt part, the “Jews secretly rule the world and are trying to destroy the rest of us” part, the “Jews kill little children and use their blood to make matzoh” part and its current manifestation about Jews purposely killing Palestinian children in a genocidal war, there’s the ancient Islamic hatred of Jews and the ancient Christian “they killed Christ” part that sparked murderous pogroms against Jews, there’s the “Jews poisoned the wells” part and the “Jews want to destroy the white race” part and the “Jews are whites and colonist agents of oppression” part. I’m sure I’ve left some parts out, as well, but you get the idea[s]. Israel-hatred and its double standards are often a screen for Jew-hatred, which gives it a special oomph to which no other country is subjected.

But for the purposes of this post I’ll stick to one idea which I’ve seen expressed more and more often online by Jew-haters. It is, in my opinion, the main reason why Holocaust education not only doesn’t work these days to counter Jew-hatred but often actually works to amplify it. There is also the general tendency of today’s young people to say that the history they’re taught is a lie, but I think another very important part goes like this [my emphasis]:

One lesson … is not to indulge the “fantasy … that imparting information about the murder of the Jews of Europe will ensure its never happening again.” Showcasing one’s own weakness does nothing to placate illiberal enemies. To the contrary, what to the West looks like “innocence” appears more like an admission of guilt to those for whom violence is routine. “Something must be wrong with the Jews if they were selected as a target.”

Paul Berman would elaborate upon this point a decade later, analyzing the seemingly paradoxical success of grotesque Palestinian suicide bombings in turning world opinion against Israel. “Each new act of murder and suicide testified to how oppressive were the Israelis,” because the liberal mind could not could not otherwise make sense of such depravity. “Palestinian terror, in this view, was the measure of Israeli guilt.” Politics against the Jews—indeed against the West that abhors depravity—has only become more explicit over the last three years. If Hamas and the Gazans that followed them to rape and pillage could commit such unspeakable acts, Israel’s sins must be even graver than previously thought. American support for the iniquitous regime, moreover, could not be because it sees Israel as a decent nation and democratic ally, but because the United States is controlled by Zionists.

It seems a paradox, but it has its own logic. Among other things, it makes sense of evil – defining Hamas’ acts on 10/7 as not so much evil as motivated and in some sense justified. It makes order out of the chaos of human life. I’m speaking not of those who spread the lies and hatred with full knowledge that they are spreading lies and hatred, but those who accept the lies as truth and believe themselves to be virtuous in doing so. The argument is that if Jews are attacked far and wide, and have been for centuries, they must have deserved it and continue to deserve it.

Even some Jews succumb to the reasoning. It’s something like what happens with certain abused children: rather than believe the world can be so unjust, they believe that they themselves must have done something very very wrong to be treated that way.

The post Why attacks on Jews lead to more Jew-hatred appeared first on The New Neo.

And much of the left in this country is still with them. For example:

Tehran flew in hundreds of foreign social media influencers to participate in the regime’s orchestrated display of anti-Western hate. The Jerusalem Post, citing Iranian state media, reported “that around 400 foreign bloggers and influencers were brought in” by the regime to witness Ayatollah Ali Khamenei’s funeral.

Leading the pack were Jackson Hinkle and Max Blumenthal. Hinkle, who built his fan base by supporting Putin and bashing Israel, took the stage at a gathering in Tehran to lead the chants of “Down with the USA.” Standing on the stage, he waved a reg flag, symbol of jihad and vengeance in Shia Islam. …

Not to be outdone, self-styled journalist Blumenthal was literally seen drumming for the regime, flanked by the flags of the Iranian regime and its terrorist proxy Hezbollah.

By the way, although some on the left try to disown Hinkle and say he’s on the far-right, it’s pretty clear that he’s on the left – if he’s anywhere other than a grifting click-seeker. After all, he’s the founder of something called the American Communist Party and has described himself as an “American Conservative Marxist-Leninist” – that is, socially conservative, and an admirer of Stalin and Bernie Sanders. As for Blumenthal, he’s written for leftist media and is the son of Sidney Blumenthal, a highly Clinton-partisan writer. Son Max is also an extremely anti-Zionist ethnic Jew, not the first and not the last.

What unites Islamists and the left nowadays? It’s really pretty simple, and it’s the same principle it was in Iran in 1979. Back then they wanted to destroy the Shah and take power, and now in the US they want to destroy the 2-party system and the US government as we know it, they want to take power and block the ability of others to take power away from them, and they also want to destroy Israel and anyone who supports it (which would include most Jews, as well as most evangelical Christians and many other Christians as well). Many people sum it all up as the desire to destroy Western Civilization, or at least its basic principles of human rights, liberty, and the pursuit of truth.

The things that divide Islamists and the left are very small potatoes compared to the things that unite them. If they ever were to succeed in their goals, however, one would try to crush the other, as in Iran. Hopefully it won’t get that far. But they are growing more powerful, and the Tuckerite wing of what used to be the right – and now is a sort of hybrid – is in there with them.

Here’s Professor Jacobson on the subject:

This is a unique combination that I’ve never seen before. We know about what’s called the Red-Green Alliance, which is the Marxists and the Islamists coming together to hate Jews and to hate Israel. What people need to understand is that this is not really about Israel and Jews. This is about the United States. This is an attempt to destroy our country from inside.

And we now have a third element that was not seen until recently, which are some podcasters and influencers on the right who are Israel obsessed and spreading all sorts of conspiracy theories.

There is a real unity right now among these people, although they’re not united on every topic. But they’ll gladly work together for their common goals.

The post On the expansion of the red-green alliance appeared first on The New Neo.

The post VDH on how you can tell when “anti-Zionism” is Jew-hatred appeared first on The New Neo.

The story:

New York Mayor Zohran Mamdani won’t be attending the city’s annual Israel Day Parade on Sunday, a break from decades-long tradition, despite attending other events celebrating the city’s diverse cultural landscape.

Since 1964, every mayor in the city has attended the Jewish celebration, which comes amid record levels of antisemitism …

Which his election has aided and abetted.

More:

Mamdani indicated that he would not attend as a matter of political principle. …

Despite his stance against Israel, the mayor has participated in other celebrations, including this year’s St. Patrick’s Day celebration, during which he compared the historic plight of the Irish to the “genocide” in Palestine amid Israel’s war with Hamas.

That’s a very popular stance in Ireland itself – the Orwellian confusion/inversion about who’s really seeking genocide, and about who really is the “colonizer.” It’s classic stuff which has caught on tremendously in recent years, as decades of propaganda launched by the USSR (see this), decades of academic indoctrination, recent increases in Muslim immigration to Western countries, constant lies in the MSM, and post-10/7 internet anti-Semitic smears have all combined to create a perfect storm. This has allowed someone like Mamdani to be elected the mayor of New York in the first place.

Israel-haters claim they’re not anti-Semitic, only anti-Israel. “Can’t we even criticize Israel?” they ask disingenuously, because of course they can. Israelis criticize Israel. But when “criticism” is over-the-top Orwellian lies and reversals of the truth, and when similar logic is applied to no other nation on earth – then anti-Israel sentiment is actually Jew-hatred. Mamdani normalizes it, but why would that be surprising, because it originated on the left in Soviet Russia.

In this 2024 post I quoted this article, and that quote bears repeating now:

The claim that Israel is committing a genocide against Palestinians is among the longest-running lies told about Israel. “Genocide Israeli style”; “Zionist-engineered genocide”; “the ‘final solution’ of the Palestinian question”—these may look like snippets from some recent campus proclamation, but they are not. They appeared in a Soviet pamphlet titled “Zionists Count on Terror.” Published in 1984 by Novosti, a Soviet foreign propaganda arm masquerading as a news agency, this pocket-sized brochure was meant to promote the Soviet view of Israel and Zionism to English-language audiences.

You can read more of the history in this post. Suffice to say the lessons the Soviets taught have been well-learned, and are now rampant among younger Americans and even with some who supposedly used to be on the right (Tucker, I’m talking about you).

Meanwhile, from yesterday:

Jewish New Yorkers, beware.

The same rabid anti-Israel activists who have harassed Jews at synagogues in recent weeks in violent protests, flown the flag of Hamas and Hezbollah and stomped on the Israeli flag are returning to the streets tonight at Time Square in midtown Manhattan to rage-bait Israelis and Jews attending a “Jerusalem Real Estate Expo” at Times Square.

The protest underscores how anti-Israel activist groups are continuing to escalate their pressure campaigns against pro-Israel and Jewish events across the city, despite mounting criticisms of antisemitism. Earlier this week, Jewish and Muslim leaders led a protest at Mayor Zohran Mamdani’s residence at Gracie Mansion, asking that he address the growing antisemitism in the city.

Note that at least some Muslims are against the anti-Jewish anti-Israel harassment. I assume those Muslims will be targeted as well.

More:

Community leaders say these protests put more pressure on Mamdani who joined anti-Israel protests many times before he ran for the mayor’s office. In college, he was a founding member of his school’s chapter of Students for Justice in Palestine, which also seeks “the return” of Palestinians to modern-day Israel and a one-state solution that claims modern-day Israel for Palestinians, essentially destroying the state of Israel.

Exactly.

And in Brooklyn, there’s trouble in yuppie enclave Park Slope [emphasis mine]:

Israeli-made products were ripped from the shelves of the lefty Park Slope Food Coop just hours after being banned in a historic vote — prompting scores of Jewish shoppers to threaten to quit the member-run market in revolt.

Tuesday’s boycott vote — which drew over 7,000 members and passed with an overwhelming 67% in favor — went into effect immediately, with the Israeli products vanishing from the shelves by Wednesday morning. …

The nasty food fight — over about 10 goods like hummus, herbs, matzo and peanut puffs — drew condemnation from even the most liberal residents in the leafy Brooklyn enclave. …

Coop member Ramon Maislen told The Post that an informal survey prior to the vote suggested up to 1,000 members would leave if the ban passed. The market has about 15,000 members total. …

The controversy has been brewing at the Union Street coop for years, with BDS supporters claiming Israel was committing genocide in Gaza and demanding all products from the country be barred.

Sound familiar? It should.

And this ploy should feel familiar, too [emphasis mine]:

And Tuesday’s vote meeting only compounded the controversy, as it was immediately preceded by a successful vote to lower the threshold required to ban coop products from 75% in favor to 51%.

Without that threshold vote, the ban would not have passed — leaving Jewish members feeling cheated, a feeling which was also reinforced by the alleged lack of public discussion ahead of the final vote.

You may think this is a tempest in a teapot. But it’s not. It’s part of the death of a thousand cuts, proceeding apace in many countries.

The post Mamdani won’t deign to attend the Israel parade in New York: the origin and spread of the “genocide” charge appeared first on The New Neo.

The day of the killings, one of the first statements of authorities was that the perps had written “Hate crime” on the weapons they used, and that they were teenagers who had committed suicide afterward in their car. This immediately made me think “Columbine.”

Now, for those who only vaguely remember Columbine – did it have to do with school bullying, as the early reporting (erroneously, it turns out) said? – the connection may seem obscure. But for those who have delved into it more deeply, the connection is obvious. Harris and Kelbold were extremely hate-filled and nihilistic, their hatred went in many directions, they meant to kill a great many more people than they ended up killing, and they were also suicidal. They shot themselves in the school library.

I’ve written a great deal about the Columbine killers; you can find a list of posts here. I have also written about what I call “dark duos,” which is the synergistic effect that sometimes occurs when two people (usually young men) with psychopathic and depressive tendencies get together. Here is a relevant post about dark duos.

The Islamic Center killers seem to have been another dark duo. That was my sense from the start, and nothing I’ve seen so far has convinced me otherwise.

But there are some elements of this crime that make it an updated version of an old story. The two met online in some sort of chatroom or discussion board; that’s a relatively new phenomenon for such killers, as far as I know, but quite appropriate for the current young generation, many of whom seem to live their emotional lives online and get their viewpoints there.

Another thing I noticed immediately – and which is very unusual – is that one of the perpetrators was given the first name “Cain.” That particular spelling of the name, which is the name of the first murderer in the Bible, is very uncommon and to me it would tend to indicate something unusual or tone deaf in a parent. Even if it’s a family surname, it’s very odd to spell it that way as a first name. Names can help shape a person’s identity, and although I think it would be ridiculous to put too much emphasis on this element, it still strikes me as highly negative.

When I read a bit more about the killers, I wrote in my draft notes: “I bet online radicalization of a groyper type.” And that also turns out to have been correct.

For example:

Investigators said they recovered a manifesto, as well as writings outlining religious and racial beliefs “of how the world they envision should look,” according to FBI Special Agent in Charge Mark Remily.

“These subjects did not discriminate in who they hated, and let me be very clear to anyone who thinks they can end the world through violence: They’re sorely mistaken,” Remily said. “The FBI, our law enforcement partners and our community are much stronger than you think.”

Mark Remily of the FBI said during a news conference that authorities have uncovered writings by the suspects. Authorities declined to specify what ideologies or views were expressed by the shooters, only that they met online and shared a “broad hatred” toward different religions and races.

There was no specific threat against the Islamic center, which is the largest mosque in San Diego, but authorities found that the suspects engaged in “generalized hate rhetoric,” [San Diego Police Department Chief Scott] Wahl said.

That’s the way it’s been covered. But it’s not exactly the case. I will get to that in a moment. First, about the suicides, which they apparently livestreamed:

San Diego mosque killer Caleb Vasquez urged his accomplice to shoot him in the head in a twisted exchange captured on a livestream broadcast after the pair murdered three people.

Vasquez, 18, is seen in the passenger seat of the white BMW he and 17-year-old Cain Clark used to flee the Islamic Center of San Diego, in footage captured by a camera the pair placed on the car’s dashcam while the vehicle was stopped.

Vasquez grabs the barrel of Clark’s rifle and brings it to his own forehead at multiple points in the livestream clip. The video, circulating on social media, did not have audio.

Finally, the camera turns to include only Clark — sitting in the driver’s seat — who uses his pistol to shoot Vasquez in the head twice and then turn the gun on himself.

About their manifesto:

The teenage San Diego mosque gunmen appear to have left behind a shocking, hate-filled manifesto, which praised Adolf Hitler and a slew of mass murderers, before the attack, The California Post has learned.

Authorities are investigating whether 17-year-old Cain Clark and 19-year-old Caleb Vasquez wrote the nihilistic missive before killing three people and then each other, according to law enforcement sources.

The document espouses a desire to spark a race war and bring about the end of civilization.

That is very much the Columbine impulse; they wanted a huge conflagration to follow. Also, it is somewhat similar to the Manson “Helter Skelter” motive, which was to spark a race war in a convoluted fantasy of what would follow the Tate and LaBianca murders.

I said that the San Diego Islamic Center killers seemed to hate just about everyone, and this is true. But there was one hatred they placed about all others: Jews. That fact is not being widely reported, as far as I can see. One would think that, because their targets were Muslims, hatred of Muslims would be their paramount motive. But no; it was Jew-hatred.

There’s coverage of that fact in some Jewish publications [emphasis mine]:

The shooters’ deepest resentment seemed reserved for Jewish people.

The manifesto listed previous antisemitic shootings at the Tree of Life synagogue and Chabad of Poway among the teens’ many sources of inspiration, calling the assailant in the latter incident a “saint.” It called the Jews “the children of Satan.” It denied the Holocaust as a “complete fabrication.” Vazquez called Adolf Hitler his hero; in his section, Clark wrote out the Fourteen Words, a neo-Nazi declaration.

“Everyone has their own idea of who is to blame for all the wrong in the world” Vazquez wrote in a section titled “The Universal Enemy.”

He printed his answer to the question four times in a row in all capital letters: “It’s the Jews.” …

Atomwaffen members are part of a network of mostly online extremist groups that subscribe to “accelerationism,” the idea that forcing societal collapse through an all-out race war is the only way to restore white supremacy and save civilization. The idea is propounded by a white nationalist named James Mason, author of a book called Siege that both shooters cited.

“Though officially I was not a part of any groups or organizations there are many I support, I would even go so far as to say I did it for Atomwaffen Division, Terrorgram, The Base, and North Korea,” Vazquez wrote….

Whereas the shooters were unsparing toward Jews in the manifesto, with Vazquez calling them the “most evil creature in the world,” they espoused mixed feelings about Muslims in the document before they killed three. “I don’t hate Muslims, at least not really,” Vazquez wrote. “What I hate is the religion of Islam itself and them invading my country.”

He added that Islam “is completely contradictory to both Western morals and values and Christianity.”

But he wrote only three paragraphs about Islam and Muslims — about one page — before the section ends with the word “unfinished” in brackets.

Clark appeared more committed to the eradication of Islam in his writing. Muslims and Jews, he said, “must be isolated and exterminated.” Yet he, like Vazquez, wrote several pages denigrating Jewish people.

The shooters did not state why they ultimately targeted a mosque. Vazquez wrote their plan was to “cause as much death and destruction” as fast as possible with a “diverse” selection of targets.

Here’s more, from the Times of Israel; they also hated women [my emphasis]:

The writings, some of which were circulating online in the days after the attack, glorified other terrorists and included hateful rhetoric toward Jews, Muslims, LGBT people, African-Americans, and both the political left and right.

They were also vitriolically sexist, asserting that “after the Jew the most evil creature in this world is the woman.” At least one of the shooters identified as an “incel,” a term used by men online to refer to their failure to have sex with women.

In a lengthy manifesto, which police said they believed to be authentic, the shooter declared Jews “the universal enemy,” responsible for war, famine, child abuse and various social ills, and wrote that the only solution is “to just kill them all.”

The document heaped praise on Adolf Hitler, yet denied the Holocaust.

It also bore the trademarks of more recent antisemitic conspiracy theories, claiming that Jeffrey Epstein’s sex crimes were religiously motivated, and fixating on supposed Jewish hatred for “goyim,” or non-Jews. ...

The shooters expressed beliefs that white people are being eliminated, explicitly citing the “Great Replacement” theory that Jews are facilitating mass migration to the West in order to wipe out white people.

Muslims were described as one such “invading” force, who must be “exterminated.”

So they blame the influx of Muslims on – the Jew.

Why have I gone into this in such detail? It’s simple: I see all of that online at many sites, and have for many years. It’s easy to find, not difficult at all, and almost mainstream these days. Fuentes didn’t invent it, nor did Carlson or Owens, but it’s the stuff they and others spew every single day. Of course some people saying this sort of thing are bots, and some are people in countries such as Pakistan. But I am convinced, and have been for quite some time, that many are Americans – especially young ones. There are more men than women, but there are women too (without the incel part).

Jew-hatred is like an entry drug to a whole world of nihilistic hatred. Which comes first, the philosophy or the rage? I don’t know the answer, and maybe it’s a meaningless question. But I think it’s far more widespread in this generation in the West than in previous ones in my lifetime. And that is very very dangerous to all of us.

[NOTE: RIP to the victims.]

The post The San Diego Islamic Center shooters: another dark duo appeared first on The New Neo.

Lastly, I wonder – with zero evidence, so this is truly just a thought – whether the investigation of Kent for leaking (an investigation which started prior to his resignation) has to do with leaking information to Carlson or Owens or both.

Well, consider this new information, courtesy of Ace:

So here’s the story as alleged:

A TPUSA employee named Andrew Kolvet says he wanted to leave no stone unturned in the search for Charlie Kirk’s killer. This was in the early hours after the murder, before police discovered the rifle with Tyler Robinson’s fingerprints on it, and his texts telling his gay furry lover he was going to do something wonderful.

Kolvet knew Joe Kent. He passed to Kent some private DMs of Charlie Kirk — if I have this right — complaining that one Jewish donor had stopped funding TPUSA because he didn’t like the organization platforming confirmed antisemitic monsters Candace Owens and Tucker Carlson. Kovet’s idea — stupid from the start — was apparently that maybe this Jewish donor might have killed Charlie Kirk.

Kolvet claims he never believed this, but that he wanted to make sure every possible avenue of investigation was open. It’s silly, but I’m sure he wasn’t thinking quite straight in the hours after his friend was murdered.

He trusted that Joe Kent would act like a responsible government official in handling the texts in a responsible, official way.

Instead, antisemtic Nazi conspiracy theorist Joe Kent began demanding that Kolvet make the chats public. Kent wasn’t investigating the texts; he was trying to create a podcaster “investigation” and public witch-hunt.

Not long after that, Owens got hold of the texts:

Kovett’s conclusion is — and it seems hard to doubt — that Joe Kent was a determined conspiracy theorist who could not let go of the idea that Jews Killed Charlie Kirk, even after the proof emerged that the killer was a non-Jewish furry-fucker. And after Kolvett repeatedly refused to make the chats public, Kent gave them to Candace Owens (and probably Tucker Carlson too, although Owens could have given them to Carlson).

Note that Joe Kent was a government official and ostensibly a high-ranking counter-terrorism official, but decided to leak private DMs he had been given in his capacity as government official to an extremely unreliable and toxic internet personality.

The texts were the beginning of her “the Jews killed Kirk” smear campaign, which later morphed into all sorts of other accusations. It’s certainly possible that it wasn’t Kent who gave her the texts, but the timing plus intent certainly makes it reasonable to suspect that he was the source.

Oh, and this: the same Andrew Kolvet now says that Kent has “reportedly indicated he is willing to testify on behalf of [Tyler Robinson’s defense], to get Robinson off the hook for an evil he committed.”

This is terrible stuff, if true. You can read much much more at Ace’s.

The post Joe Kent, leaker appeared first on The New Neo.

I feel fairly confident in calling it a terrorist attack rather than “merely” a school shooting because the shooter has been identified as Mohamed Bailor Jalloh, 36. And guess what? He was convicted in 2016 of ISIS ties:

In 2016, he was arrested for attempting to provide material support to ISIS, according to public court documents. He allegedly attempted to help procure weapons intended to be used in what he anticipated was going to be an attack in the U.S., the complaint said at the time. The complaint also alleged that he attempted to provide funds to individuals hoping to join ISIS.

He pleaded guilty to attempting to provide material support to a designated foreign terrorist organization and was sentenced to 11 years in prison. He was released in 2024, according to the Department of Justice.

Although he didn’t serve the full eleven years, it seems he served close to eight years. Even eleven would not have been enough, however – although it’s hard to see how he could have been sentenced to more than that, because it was just an attempt. He is a US citizen; you can find a lot more information here. He apparently was radicalized by listening to recorded sermons of al Qaeda’s Anwar al-Awlaki, and then [emphasis mine]:

Following service in the National Guard, Jalloh traveled to Africa, where he stayed between July 2015 and January 2016. While in Nigeria, according to FBI investigators, Jalloh first established contact with an ISIS operative who later introduced Jalloh to the CHS [Confidential Human Source].* Jalloh told the CHS in April 2016 that he wished to carry out a domestic attack similar to the Fort Hood shootings carried out by Nidal Hasan in 2009.* Jalloh also allegedly spoke about targeting an unidentified person who had organized several “Draw Muhammad” cartoon contests.*

In May 2016, the CHS introduced Jalloh to an undercover FBI agent posing as an ISIS member.* During conversations on an unidentified mobile messaging service, Jalloh allegedly told the agent that it was best to plan an attack during the Islamic holy month of Ramadan. He allegedly believed such violent operations were “100 percent the right thing to do,” and he prayed to Allah to make him a martyr.* Jalloh allegedly gave the agent $500, believing it would reach ISIS’s coffers.*

On July 1, 2016, Jalloh entered the Blue Ridge Arsenal gun store and firing range in Chantilly, Virginia. According to security footage and the store’s owner, Jalloh allegedly tried to purchase a Bushmaster AR-15, but did not have adequate identification.* Jalloh returned the following day and purchased a Stag Arms 5.56 caliber assault rifle.* The FBI arrested him on July 3 and charged him with attempting to provide material support to ISIS. Jalloh pled guilty on October 27, 2016.* He was sentenced to 11 years in prison on February 10, 2017. In a letter to the court, alloh reportedly renounced ISIS and its “superficial and dishonest interpretation of Islam.”*

That renunciation was almost certainly bogus and/or temporary. Note how Jalloh seems to have now followed his original plan: an attack on military people – such as the Fort Hood attacker’s victims – during Ramadan. It’s Ramadan right now. The “military people” part was fulfilled because of this:

The victims have not been identified. Two of them are members of the school’s ROTC program, NBC affiliate WAVY of Portsmouth, Virginia, reported.

“We can confirm that two members of the university ROTC program were shot and were taken to a local hospital to treat their injuries,” the U.S. Army Cadet Command told the station in a statement.

Officials said Jalloh allegedly targeted an ROTC class and was a former member of the Army National Guard.

That’s followed by “a motive in the shooting is unclear.” That seems extremely absurd at this point.

The day’s second attack involved a perp – also now deceased but as yet unidentified – who rammed a car into a synagogue in West Bloomfield Township, Michigan. Fortunately, no one but the perp was killed in this one, mainly because there were security officers on the scene who opened fire. The perp fired back and wounded one guard, and eight first responders are also being treated.

It’s not totally clear whether they killed him, he killed himself, or he died in a car fire.

We await word on his identity. Could be a jihadi, or could be just the usual Jew-hater on left or right. So many possibilities!

I doubt these attacks were coordinated with each other. There’s a lot of chaos and violence as well as incitement these days, all of which act as releasers for those inclined to attack. There’s certainly also the possibility of higher-up organization. However, I’d expect the latter to feature larger attacks.

The post Terrorist attacks in Virginia and Michigan appeared first on The New Neo.

Schools are stepping back from Holocaust Memorial Day. Not because the facts changed. Not because the lesson became unclear. Because it became dangerous. Administrators sense backlash. Teachers fear complaints. Institutions calculate risk and choose quiet. …

The West forgetting the Holocaust does not dissolve Jewish identity. Jews do not require British schools to remain Jews. Jewish memory is internal. …

So why does this matter so much.

Because in Britain, and across the West, the Holocaust is not merely a tragic chapter to teach. It is part of the foundation of the moral identity that replaced religion as a shared anchor after the war. …

It built a rules based order with human rights language, minority protections, and institutional checks meant to prevent the machinery from ever being assembled again. It built education systems that treated remembrance as civic duty, not political option.

That is why the retreat from Holocaust Memorial Day is not a marginal culture war story. It is an indicator light on the dashboard of a weakening civilization. …

… [F]ear of backlash now outranks fear of forgetting. …

This is Britain quietly admitting it is no longer sure who it is.

A country that cannot commemorate the clearest moral lesson in its modern history without fear has already begun the next chapter.

I’m not British and don’t claim to know for sure, but my sense from across the pond is that it’s actually worse than that. There is some fear of backlash, of course. But much of British society – both imported and homegrown – has become more anti-Semitic, and the schools themselves are probably staffed by more and more teachers and administrators who at best don’t care about the Holocaust and at worst wish it had been more successful.

What’s more, as the actual event recedes, there’s an understandable diminution of caring as well as knowledge. Unless a person is especially interested in the topic, and makes an effort to read in depth about what is admittedly a distressing example of evil, it is possible to gain only a very cursory and sometimes flawed understanding of what the Holocaust was, how it worked, and what it meant.

It also becomes easier and easier to have Holocaust fatigue and say to oneself, “Why are we learning about Jews and their sufferings compared to everyone else on earth who has suffered? What self-centered and annoying people Jews are; who cares?”

To some people the Holocaust has become a useful way to make false and cheap analogies against one’s opponents. To take a prime example, we have the abominable Tim Walz:

“We have got children in Minnesota hiding in their houses, afraid to go outside. Many of us grew up reading that story of Anne Frank,” Walz said. “Somebody’s going to write that children’s story about Minnesota.”

Speaking of Anne Frank, her father Otto – a person for whom I have the deepest respect – decided, for understandable reasons at the time, to edit her diary to make it more “universal” and somewhat de-emphasize her references to being Jewish. You can read about it in this article.

[NOTE: Here’s a post I wrote about an oft-quoted and oft-misunderstood quote from Anne Frank’s diary. And here’s one of many posts I’ve written on the Holocaust; two more can be found here and here.]

The post Holocaust remembrance these days appeared first on The New Neo.