Our Friday News Analysis | What the World Reads Now!

Jonah had compassion for the whale — but what about Nineveh? Photo by iStock by Getty Images/rudall30

EDITORIAL | Think (Part 18)?

Click here for Part 1
Click here for Part 2
Click here for Part 3
Click here for Part 4
Click here for Part 5
Click here for Part 6
Click here for Part 7
Click here for Part 8
Click here for Part 9
Click here for Part 10
Click here for Part 11
Click here for Part 12
Click here for Part 13
Click here for Part 14
Click here for Part 15
Click here for Part 16
Click here for Part 17

By Abraham A. van Kempen
3 October 2025

THINK! Will Israeli Belligerence Against Its 436 Million Neighbors and Most of the Eight Billion People on Earth Last? For How Long?

NOT LONG!

Contributing Columnist, Sruli Fruchter, wrote in the celebrated Jewish publication, Forward:

“Have you ever wondered why we read the Book of Jonah on Yom Kippur? It's a meaningful tradition that offers us valuable lessons and reflections during this holy day.

A key reason is that the book cautions against dehumanizing others while striving for our own redemption.

This year, the biblical text, usually read as the haftarah during afternoon services, urges us to feel compassion for Palestinians genuinely. It also prompts us to reflect on why so many of us have been reluctant to do so during the two years of war.”

Please continue reading …

Think about it—how much more can Israel shoot itself in both feet before it has no feet left? Reflect on the consequences—how much further can Israel harm itself before reaching its limit? It's worth reflecting on the future and the possibilities that lie ahead.

I was born a refugee in first class aboard a British ship in the Red Sea, located between Africa, Asia, and Europe. My birthplace was at the outskirts of Israel and Palestine. Because I was born on a British vessel to Dutch parents, I hold both British and Dutch nationalities, making me more European than most—though I look Kamaāina, Hawaiian; that’s a longer story. To add complexity, I was born Jewish, as my mother was Jewish, in Israel-Palestine. From the start, I’ve led a borderless life.

Historically, the region is known as Palestine, home to various nation-states. After spending 400 years in Egypt, the twelve tribes of Jacob—later renamed ‘Israel’ by God in the Hebrew Bible—migrated from Egypt to Palestine. Each tribe of Israel established its own territory, often naming it after itself; for instance, Judah’s tribe was called Judea. ‘Israel’ has traditionally functioned as a family name. It was not designated as the name of a specific and unique geographic nation-state until the year 1948.

Today, the modern state of Israel remains situated within the boundaries of Palestine. Israel-Palestine is my home. I maintain a profound connection to its vibrant colors, shades, and diverse populace. I intuitively understand why neither the indigenous Palestinians nor the immigrants who presently identify as Israelis will ever want to leave.

My story reflects the story of many Jews. We are blessed with diversity. While some view us as a single, immortal tribe descended from Abraham—a spiritual truth—physically and genetically, this is improbable and often mythologized. Many indigenous Palestinians are more connected to the Ancient Israelites than many European Jews who migrated to the region seeking refuge from centuries of persecution, especially after WWII. Historically, many Jews in the Diaspora descend from pagan converts.

Will a shared identity encourage the ‘cousins’ to share the land? Will the neighbors ever greet each other with “Welcome Home?”

They Should All Go Back To Zion.

In the Hebrew Bible, Zion is identified as Jerusalem, designated as ‘the City of God.’ The Hebrews called Jerusalem both the City of God and the ‘City of David,’ emphasizing its special importance. For many Christians, Zion represents God’s Kingdom both on earth and in heaven.

In religious, cultural, and spiritual contexts, Zion frequently symbolizes a utopian ideal or a spiritual homeland. It may also refer to a heavenly or perfect place of peace and unity. For Jews, Christians, and Muslims, Zion carries particular importance. In Christian tradition, Zion is often a metaphor for the heavenly city or the Kingdom of God. Additionally, Zion is commonly referred to as the Promised Land.

What is ‘Zionism?’

Zionism means to ‘return to God,’ to God’s Promised Land, not to the state of Israel.

Where is the Promised Land? Wherever God is.

The Promised Land is not Israel.

The term ‘Zionism,’ as redefined by the modern state of Israel, rules and dominates the Israeli zeitgeist, beguiling and chaining many Jews into believing in something they are not meant to be.

A Dark Side of Judaism

This aberration torments and imprisons the indigenous Palestinians in concentrated encampments to live a hell on earth. If not officially, certainly subliminally and often dared in the glare of world television, religious radical-nationalists fused with the secular ultranationalists waving the banner of holy goodness, elicit the worst human instincts. These heathen Zionists intend to build a glorious, divinely ordained Greater Israel for Jews only over an obliterated Palestinian society and, to directly or indirectly, drive out the Palestinian populations.

Zionist leaders from David Ben Gurion to Benjamin Netanyahu have, according to world public opinion, taken many wrong turns in their territorial obsessions. Their rage and blind ambitions to expand their Lebensraum involved coveting the land devoid of the indigenous people. Instead of triumphing in peaceful harmony, they have capitulated to tribal warfare on a collision course against their Judaic conscience.

Zionism, meant to be a light in the world, has become a prayer without end. Nothing is more anti-Semitic than present-day Zionism. It’s time for genuine Zionism—fulfilling God’s work with God’s people helping to create a heaven on earth; ordinary individuals performing extraordinary deeds, setting an example in every way, and shining as the Light Among Nations.

Enjoy your weekend.

Abraham A. van Kempen
Senior Editor

Building the Bridge Foundation, The Hague
A Way to Get to Know Each Other and the Other

WE ESCAPED TO A GREEK NUDIST PARADISE, ONLY TO DISCOVER THAT ISRAELIS ARE HATED THERE, TOO

I initially thought that visiting a remote, enchanted Greek island where most people walk naked would help me forget the horrors of Israel and Gaza. However, when I saw graffiti like 'A vacation from genocide –

Not here,' I realized I was mistaken.

Scenes from Samothrace. Credit: Georgios Tsichlis/Shutterstock

By Dani Bar On
Haaretz Israel News
18 September 2025

It was a hot summer day on Samothrace, a remote Greek island. We hiked with my two small children along a cool, flowing stream. A young couple behind us on the narrow trail, which should have taken an hour, ended up taking almost a whole day.

I asked the children to pass, and they complied. Just before he disappeared around a bend, the man looked back at us, his expression conveying: This is all I can do against you, murderer. He raised his fist to the blue sky and shouted: "Free Palestine!" Out of shock, I weakly responded: "Okay..." They had already left by then.

When we saw them again, minutes later, they were sprawled on a hot boulder beside a waterfall with a calm pool, naked. Their age, expressions, and features, such as her shaved temples, his unruly hair, and nose earring, all screamed "woke." They squinted and snarled, ignoring us.

I didn't attempt to speak to them. What would I say? That I protest weekly against the government? Should they draw a map of the river, sea, and 1947 UN Partition Plan borders? Why protest here against me instead of in front of the Israeli embassy in Athens? Maybe I shouldn't be here, but I’m in Israel demonstrating.

Two weeks later, while still on the island, Israel's B'Tselem and Physicians for Human Rights called the IDF's Gaza operations genocide. I asked my wife, "What are we doing here? There's a genocide in Gaza, and we're here, looking for the perfect taverna?"

Samothrace was intended to be our main stop during a two-month escape from the chaos in Israel, as we traveled from eastern Greece to western Italy via Albania. I was exhausted after two and a half years of rallies, marches, relentless news, and writing articles that didn't make a difference. I hoped to blend in and be absorbed by the island's vast natural beauty, which features more goats than people, lush vegetation, streams, springs, and more nudity than I'd ever seen.

Samothrace. I wished to merge into the island's vast natural surroundings, where goats far outnumber humans and there's an abundance of startling nudity I've never encountered before. Credit: Dorel Mintzer

Related Articles

• Even while vacationing abroad, Israelis can't escape the horrors of the Gaza war, Ofri Ilany.
• Too anxious about visiting Europe as an Israeli? Judea and Samaria are calling you! Yasmin Levy
• 'They told me: You're murdering people by day, serving tomatoes by night' Gali Volotsky.

Due to historical and topographical factors, along with lax supervision, the charming Samothrace—only 178 km², smaller than Mount Carmel near Haifa—has become a hippie pilgrimage site. They gather on beaches, trails, pools, and hot springs, often with iPhones in hand, despising capitalism. They hitchhike around the island, thumbs out, trying to catch rides. When I, an Israeli, picked them up and we talked, silence often followed.

The nudity on this island is a peculiar yet common occurrence. Greece has many nude beaches, and nudism is allowed in resorts and on beaches. I’ve never seen it so natural—people undress on hiking trails, beaches, and streams, though not everywhere. Initially, it was odd to see men and women naked, ignoring you, reading, or walking with only a backpack and sandals. It took time to learn not to stare or get uncomfortable, especially with kids. Eventually, it felt routine—more enjoyable to bathe outdoors without clothes. You need to accept that others also enjoy skinny dipping, just like you.

Anti-Israel graffiti on the island. On this trip, for the first time in my life, I even felt a bit like I wanted to go back to Israel already, where they hate me because I'm a leftist, not because I'm Israeli. Credit: Eva

Please Continue Reading …

What is the Side of the Story that is Not Yet Decisive? Edited and annotated by Abraham A. van Kempen

MAX BLUMENTHAL: IRAN IS FULLY PREPARED

Judge Napolitano’s conversation with Gray Zone investigative journalist Max Blumenthal explores the decreasing backing for Israel among young conservatives in the U.S.

• It underscores the social media and propaganda initiatives spearheaded by Netanyahu and key allies to influence public opinion.
• The narrative details the ineffectiveness of these campaigns and the backlash encountered by journalists covering these tactics, including threats and criticism from within conservative circles.
• The discussion concludes with the uncertain status of a Gaza ceasefire agreement, the associated political risks, and the significance of the United States’ influence in shaping the outcome, highlighting the ongoing challenges in the region.

Watch the Video Here (25 minutes, 38 seconds)

Host: Judge Andrew Napolitano
Judging Freedom
25 September 2025

Judging Freedom: Interview with Max Blumenthal on the Gaza Peace Plan and Middle East Dynamics

On Monday, September 29th, 2015, Judge Andrew Napolitano hosted an episode of "Judging Freedom" featuring Max Blumenthal. The discussion centered on the recent press conference between President Trump and Prime Minister Netanyahu, the proposed Gaza peace plan, and broader developments in the Middle East. Blumenthal provided insights into the situation, its impact on Israeli politics, and the influence campaigns supporting Israel in the U.S.

The 21-Point Gaza Pacification Plan

During the interview, Trump and Netanyahu were discussing a new agreement related to Gaza. Although the full details were still being worked out, Blumenthal referred to it as a "21-point pacification plan," expressing concerns about its integrity. The plan proposes creating a Gaza International Board of Peace, with Trump leading the effort. Supporting him would be Palestinian and Arab experts, and Tony Blair was expected to oversee the temporary authority, similar to his role in Iraq under Paul Bremer.

Notably, the plan would allow Hamas members to pass safely, effectively giving them a chance to leave Gaza. This brings up questions about who exactly qualifies as a "Hamas member," since the group had won the Palestinian legislative elections in 2006. That means anyone who voted for Hamas might be viewed as eligible for voluntary migration.

Despite these political maneuvers, Gaza City continued to experience significant destruction, with Mr. Trump asserting that should Hamas decline the agreement, Israel would possess full authority to eradicate them. The plan also included an Israeli withdrawal; however, Mr. Blumenthal expressed skepticism about Mr. Trump's ability to enforce this measure. Arab and Muslim nations, including Egypt, would be responsible for managing Hamas, potentially resulting in increased hostilities.

Netanyahu's Political Position and Coalition Dynamics

Blumenthal observed that Netanyahu seemed disappointed and politically diminished by the recent developments. There were circulating rumors that Trump regarded Netanyahu as losing influence. The possibility of a ceasefire extending for sixty days or more could threaten Netanyahu's coalition, with prominent political figures such as Smotrich and Ben-Gvir already condemning the agreement. Ben-Gvir criticized Netanyahu for issuing an apology to Qatar following a recent attack, which was reportedly included in the terms of the deal.

Netanyahu's stance was further challenged by the religious nationalist settler camp, which pushed for new settlements in Gaza. Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich described the "final solution" for Gaza as a real estate deal benefiting only Jews. Consequently, Netanyahu's government risked collapse if the plan failed to meet the expectations of the settler bloc.

Trump’s remarks about Iran possibly joining the Abraham Accords were also mentioned. Still, Blumenthal noted that this would only be possible after a regime change in Iran, which is highly unlikely.

Hamas and the Hostage Exchange

Hamas reportedly consented to the plan, proposing to return all hostages if certain conditions were met. Blumenthal pointed out that Hamas had demonstrated notable flexibility, particularly given Netanyahu's efforts to eliminate its negotiating team in Qatar.

Meeting with Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian

The discussion transitioned to a recent assembly attended by Max Blumenthal, Judge Andrew Napolitano, Scott Ritter, Prof. Jeffrey Sachs, and additional participants, including Iran’s President Masoud Pezeshkian. This gathering, characterized as a press conference featuring anti-war representatives, provided President Pezeshkian with an opportunity for direct communication with the American public. He cautioned that war was impending and that Iran was prepared for various contingencies, including scenarios involving the removal of its own president, President Masoud Pezeshkian.

Blumenthal observed that snapback sanctions by European countries were seen as a potential trigger for war. Sergey Lavrov, Russia’s foreign minister, indicated that Israel could be preparing for a clash with Iran, possibly to disrupt the Gaza peace plan and bolster Netanyahu’s coalition. At the same time, Iranian society, even among critics of the Islamic Republic, reportedly showed unified resistance to Israeli actions, strengthening Iran’s position in anticipation of a likely conflict.

Israeli Bombing of Iranian Prison

A notably contentious action discussed was Israel’s bombing of Evin prison in Iran. Blumenthal clarified that the objective was to demonstrate support for Iranian dissidents and incite unrest; however, the attack caused the deaths of prisoners, guards, social workers, and visitors, ultimately misfiring and eliciting condemnation from regime change advocates inside Iran. The incident exemplified the flawed strategic considerations underlying Israel’s approach to Iran.

Blumenthal anticipated that any future conflict would likely entangle the United States further, potentially resulting in global economic disruptions, such as the closure of the Strait of Hormuz.

Influence Operations and American Support for Israel

The conversation then focused on efforts to influence American public opinion, particularly among conservatives. Blumenthal described a covert influencer meeting in East Hampton, Long Island, where Charlie Kirk experienced and rejected pressure from pro-Israel activists and influencers. He mentioned reporting on these influence campaigns, including Netanyahu’s interactions with young American influencers and initiatives to address increasing opposition to Israel among conservative and evangelical groups.

Blumenthal highlighted the diminishing support for Israel among young Republicans, evangelicals, and Mormon communities. Polls indicated that a significant number of individuals under the age of 35 now oppose Israel’s policies, citing concerns such as pro-Israeli foreign ownership of U.S. media and the humanitarian repercussions of the conflict in Gaza.

Social Media and Propaganda Campaigns

Netanyahu's strategy involved enlisting influencers and seeking to acquire ownership of social media platforms such as TikTok and media corporations like Paramount. Prominent individuals in these endeavors included Oracle billionaire Larry Ellison and Ben Horowitz. The objective was to promote pro-Israel narratives and counter opposition among young people in the US and the Collective West.

Blumenthal mentioned that the videos made by these influencers didn't seem to resonate well with wider audiences. Instead, they sometimes even sparked adverse reactions, even from conservatives who aren't usually critical of Israel. The Israeli Foreign Ministry had set aside $150 million for these campaigns, aiming to reach both conservative and left-leaning individuals.

Backlash and Threats to Journalism

Blumenthal recounted the backlash faced by himself and The Grayzone for reporting on these influence operations, noting that Candace Owens, Charlie Kirk’s former communications director, had become a prominent critic of Israeli policy. He expressed concern about escalating threats to investigative journalists, drawing parallels to the targeting of journalists in Gaza, where the Israeli army killed several before military operations.

Current Status of the Gaza Agreement

Upon the conclusion of the interview, CNN reported that President Trump indicated that no agreement had yet been finalized, although negotiations were nearing completion. Netanyahu’s apology to Qatar was regarded as a politically risky decision. The majority of Israelis were believed to support a ceasefire, despite holding firm opinions. Blumenthal emphasized that the outcome would depend on President Trump’s readiness to utilize U.S. influence, warning that failure to do so could lead to additional loss of life and a subsequent political setback.

Conclusion

Judge Napolitano conveyed his appreciation for Blumenthal’s profound knowledge and analytical insights. The episode concluded with a preview of Professor Jeffrey Sachs participating in the program, accompanied by a reminder of the persistent complexities associated with the Gaza peace initiative and the broader Middle East conflict.

TRUMP PROMISES ARAB, MUSLIM LEADERS HE WON’T LET ISRAEL ANNEX THE WEST BANK

The president’s pledge came in a closed-door meeting at the UN.

President Donald Trump attends a meeting with leaders of Qatar, Jordan, Turkey, Pakistan, Indonesia, Egypt, the United Arab Emirates, and Saudi Arabia, during the United Nations General Assembly in New York. | Evan Vucci/AP

Politico

By Felicia Schwartz, Eli Stokols, Nicholas Vinocur and Hans von der Burchard

September 26, 2025

UNITED NATIONS — President Donald Trump promised Arab and Muslim leaders during a meeting Tuesday that he would not allow Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to annex the West Bank, according to six people familiar with the discussion.

Two of those people said that Trump was firm on the topic and that the president promised that Israel would not be allowed to absorb the West Bank, which the Palestinian Authority, not Hamas, governs.

Another one of the people familiar with the talks noted that, despite Trump’s assurance, a ceasefire to end Israel’s nearly two-year war against Hamas was nowhere close to fruition. Two others familiar with the matter said Trump and his team presented a white paper outlining the administration’s plan to end the war, including the annexation promise and other details such as governance and postwar security.

Special envoy for peace missions Steve Witkoff provided some details on the proposal on Wednesday. “We presented what we call the Trump 21-point plan for peace in the Mideast in Gaza,” he said at the Concordia summit in New York. “I think it addresses Israeli concerns, as well as the concerns of all the neighbors in the region.” Witkoff did not mention any comments about the West Bank.

Trump told reporters ahead of his sit-down with representatives from eight Arab and Muslim countries at the United Nations headquarters that it was his “most important” meeting of the day. However, he left without speaking to reporters, and the participants have yet to issue an official readout about the substance of their conversation.

Please continue reading...

SCOTT RITTER: THE PAPER TIGER CLOSES IN

Judge Napolitano discusses Israel's waning support in the U.S. with Scott Ritter, highlighting changing priorities among American evangelical Christian Zionists and the political consequences for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

The conversation includes:

• Controversial actions by U.S. politicians
• Debates about annexing the West Bank
• Doubts about Tony Blair's potential role as Gaza governor.

It also examines a) military obedience, b) the legality of orders, and c) the risk of war crimes charges for senior officials who lack proper legal grounds.

Watch the Video Here (24 minutes, 14 seconds)

Host: Judge Andrew Napolitano
Judging Freedom
29 September 2025

Judging Freedom: Interview with Scott Ritter

The episode commences with Judge Andrew Napolitano extending a welcome to viewers of "Judging Freedom” on Monday, September 29, 2025. He announces that Mr. Scott Ritter will join the program for a discussion entitled "The Paper Tiger Closes In."

Israel's Diminishing Support in the United States

Judge Napolitano questions Scott Ritter about Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's worries over Israel's declining support in the U.S.

Ritter clarifies that the main pro-Israel lobby in America consists of evangelical Christian Zionists, beyond groups like AIPAC or the American Jewish Congress. He mentions how politicians like Ted Cruz have publicly emphasized serving Israel's interests. Ritter also points out Congressman Brian Mast, who has worn an Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) uniform on the House floor and questions the legality and focus of such actions.

Mast, a former U.S. Army explosive ordnance disposal soldier who lost both legs in Afghanistan, later worked for the IDF for a year. Ritter criticizes this transition, pointing out that Americans are becoming increasingly aware that some aspects of U.S. sovereignty have been compromised for the benefit of a foreign country, especially while domestic issues remain unresolved.

He observes that the MAGA base, which once balanced "America First" with support for Israel, is now feeling conflicted as they sense that Israel is being prioritized over America. The ongoing violence in Gaza and the widespread denial of Israeli forces' crimes have led many Americans to reevaluate their support.

Ritter emphasizes that if Netanyahu loses the backing of evangelical Christian Zionists, Israel could face a decline in its influence within the U.S., since the Jewish pro-Israel community alone can't sustain such power. Netanyahu's continued denials about the murder of Charlie Kirk are seen as signs of his worry about losing this vital support.

Annexation of the West Bank

The discussion shifts to President Trump's declaration that he would not permit Israel to annex the West Bank.

Ritter contends that, in practice, a significant portion of the West Bank has already been annexed through land theft, with Israeli military and police authorities turning a blind eye.

He advocates that substantive measures would entail making land seizures illegal and pursuing retroactive prosecution of individuals responsible for such acts, including American citizens who travel to Israel to engage in land theft.

Ritter emphasizes that the United States should criminalize these actions and detain those individuals upon their return to the country.

Tony Blair as Proposed Governor of Gaza

Judge Napolitano inquires about reports suggesting Trump might nominate former British Prime Minister Tony Blair as the governor general of the Gaza Strip. Ritter replies that Blair, often viewed as a sellout with little legitimacy in the Middle East, is favored by the global Zionist movement but despised by Palestinians. He notes that the plan to appoint Blair excludes Hamas, the only Palestinian group with substantial support, making success unlikely. Ritter adds that if Blair were to run against Hamas's leader, he would garner no votes, as Hamas remains the dominant political entity in the region.

Military Obedience and War Crimes

The interview features General Kellogg asserting that the military is obliged to follow the president's directives. Ritter addresses the difficult situation where troops are ordered to carry out deadly actions, such as attacking a speedboat at sea. He clarifies that soldiers are required to obey lawful commands and depend on their commanders to verify their legality. If authorities confirm a target's legitimacy, soldiers must proceed; if not, they should seek additional clarification. Ritter highlights that those giving unlawful orders are responsible for war crimes, not the soldiers executing them.

He also points out that there has been no Department of Justice memo regarding the legal authority for the recent military action. This raises concerns that the senior chain of command could be at risk of being involved in war crimes if decisions were based on political motives rather than solid evidence.

Tomahawk Missiles and Escalation Risks

The discussion shifts to whether the U.S. might supply Tomahawk missiles to Ukraine.

Ritter cautions that if Ukraine were to receive and use Tomahawks to attack Moscow, it could provoke an immediate Russian nuclear retaliation, risking global catastrophe.

He notes that the ground-launched Tomahawk is an intermediate-range missile capable of nuclear use, and supplying it would breach international treaties and U.S. non-proliferation commitments. Ritter also emphasizes that Tomahawks require American personnel to operate and cannot simply be handed over.

He concludes that the U.S. will not supply Tomahawk missiles to Ukraine, given the disastrous possible outcomes.

Ritter critically examines figures such as General Kellogg, Sebastian Gorka, and Lindsey Graham for endorsing this narrative to coerce Russia into negotiations, highlighting that such pressure is ill-advised and perilous.

British Involvement and Russian Response

Ritter depicts the British as playing a key role in supporting Ukraine and sustaining the idea of an upcoming Ukrainian victory. He explains that Ukrainian counteroffensives are failing and Russian troops are regaining territory. As Ukraine advances further into Russian-controlled areas using drones supplied by Germany and Britain, with intelligence from the U.S., Ritter cautions that Russia might run out of strategic patience and escalate its actions, possibly targeting Western support personnel and deploying sophisticated weaponry.

Ukraine's Prospects and Leadership

Judge Napolitano questions whether Ukrainian leaders are aware that victory may be unachievable. Ritter suggests they have been led to believe by Western allies that exerting pressure on Russia will lead to negotiations. Nonetheless, he warns that Russia will never accept Ukraine as a NATO proxy, and Ukrainian leaders have gained personally from foreign aid, including securing retirement homes overseas. He foresees that once Russia calls Ukraine's bluff, these leaders will likely abandon their positions rather than confront the fallout.

Conclusion

The episode concludes with Judge Napolitano extending his gratitude to Scott Ritter and offering details about forthcoming guests, including Max Blumenthal and Professor Jeffrey Sachs.

ALASTAIR CROOKE: ISRAEL LOSING US SUPPORT FAST

Judge Napolitano’s discussion with British diplomat Alastair Crooke covers Israel's complex security and media approaches, noting Prime Minister Netanyahu's recognition of ongoing conflicts and new challenges posed by alternative media in the U.S.

It highlights worries over changing U.S. public opinion, ongoing settlement building in the West Bank, and increasing tensions with Iran, with both sides preparing for possible conflict.

The summary also mentions Netanyahu’s recent UN speech, which focused on military strength and regional strategies, as well as shifting relations with Hezbollah amid ongoing Israeli military operations and internal limitations.

Watch the Video Here (28 minutes, 35 seconds)

Host: Judge Andrew Napolitano
Judging Freedom
29 September 2025

Geopolitical Tensions: Ukraine, the Middle East, and the Shifting Balance of Power

On Monday, September 29th, 2025, Judge Andrew Napolitano engaged in a detailed discussion with Alastair Crooke about the current geopolitical situation. The conversation centered on Prime Minister Netanyahu and the Israeli government's actions and intentions, along with the broader impact of U.S. and European roles in ongoing global conflicts.

The Ukraine Conflict and U.S. Strategic Priorities

Alastair Crooke argued that heightened tensions with Russia mainly aim to keep Russia busy, thereby diverting focus from what he sees as President Trump's primary concern: the impending conflict with Iran and the competition over Middle Eastern oil and gas resources. When combined with the enormous energy reserves in Venezuela and Argentina, this strategy is viewed as a way to strengthen the American financial position and address the national debt. In this view, Ukraine acts as a secondary battleground, kept at a low level of conflict to prevent escalation while ensuring Russia remains occupied.

Crooke describes Trump's strategy as having a dual nature: publicly praising Ukraine's achievements while privately wanting to prevent more escalation. By blaming the Europeans—who, according to Crooke, lack sufficient resources—for the Ukraine conflict, Trump keeps the U.S. focused on its main strategic goals in the Middle East and South America. The primary objective is to utilize these global energy resources to address the U.S. debt issue.

European Stability and Involvement

Crooke observed that Europe, especially France, is experiencing considerable internal turmoil. Although Trump's comments publicly praise France's condition, Crooke pointed out that the country is close to a revolutionary situation. This unrest decreases the chances of Europe effectively intervening in Ukraine or other international crises.

U.S. Policy on Ukraine and Russia

The discussion shifted to General Kellogg's remarks about authorizing long-range Ukrainian attacks into Russia. Crooke noted that Kellogg's responses were evasive, avoiding explicit confirmation or denial of presidential approval for these strikes. This ambiguity aligns with Trump's larger approach of keeping the Russian conflict unresolved, balancing public support for Ukraine with a desire to prevent direct escalation with Russia.

The Iran Question and Geopolitical Calculations

The Trump administration's primary concern, as Crooke states, is to prevent Russian or Chinese interference in the event of an attack on Iran. Excluding Russia from Middle Eastern affairs is considered crucial for maintaining U.S. dominance in the region. Both Russia and China have challenged the legitimacy of sanctions and asserted that the JCPOA (Iran nuclear deal) remains in effect until it expires in mid-October. Consequently, the timing of any potential conflict with Iran is closely linked to the situation in Ukraine; as long as Russia remains engaged there, the U.S. sees an opportunity to act against Iran with limited external interference.

The broader strategy includes Venezuela, aiming to control global energy resources to counter U.S. financial vulnerabilities. Recent statements from financial leaders highlight the fragility of the U.S. bond market and underscore the need to maintain economic stability through external resource allocation.

Israel’s Multi-Front Strategy

The discussion turned to Prime Minister Netanyahu's recognition of Israel's involvement in seven ongoing wars, while an eighth front appears to be forming within the United States. This new front involves efforts to counter alternative media and influencers who challenge the mainstream pro-Israel narrative. Crooke stated that Israel has already gained control of mainstream media but is encountering increasing resistance from younger Americans and online groups, which is viewed as a potential existential threat to Israel’s sustained support from the U.S.

The Israeli government is highly focused on managing the impact of alternative media and preventing a decline in support from younger populations. They are investing substantial resources to acquire and influence digital platforms, to maintain influence over public opinion, and address shifting perspectives among young Americans.

Settlement Expansion and the West Bank

Crooke argued that, despite President Trump’s public promises, the annexation of the West Bank is progressing in a fragmented and administrative manner. New settlements, especially near Jerusalem, keep emerging, breaking up Palestinian lands and reducing the chances for a unified Palestinian state. This slow erosion is seen as an unstoppable process that Trump cannot or will not stop.

Iranian Preparedness and Israeli Perceptions

Recent contacts with Iranian officials indicate they strongly expect an imminent Israeli attack, with the US likely backing it. Iran is ready to respond massively and destructively if attacked. Crooke noted that, although some in Israel acknowledge the threat, many tend to believe their own propaganda, downplaying Iran's resilience and unity. Israeli experts caution that these misjudgments could lead to serious consequences, as Iran now remains more prepared and united than ever.

Netanyahu’s UN Speech and Strategic Objectives

Prime Minister Netanyahu's recent UN speech was marked by a lack of empathy and a focus on Israel’s military strength. Crooke suggests that Netanyahu’s real goal is to coordinate a potential conflict with Iran, seeking to strengthen U.S. and Israeli influence over Middle Eastern energy supplies. This strategy could undermine competitors like China and Russia while bolstering American economic and strategic dominance.

Hezbollah and Regional Military Dynamics

Since Hezbollah’s longtime leader was assassinated, the group has taken a cautious approach, concentrating on rebuilding and readiness for potential conflict. Although Israeli strikes in Lebanon continue, political restrictions and international pressure have so far limited significant escalation. Nevertheless, Israel is said to be contemplating a large-scale military operation to disable Hezbollah’s remaining strengths. However, doubts persist regarding the practicality of such an effort due to current military limitations and personnel shortages in the Israeli armed forces.

Conclusion

The discussion ended with an acknowledgment of the complexity and interconnectedness of today's global crises, spanning from Venezuela to Gaza, and their significant impact on Ukraine, the Middle East, and the international order as a whole.

AS ISRAEL WAGES WAR ON THE WHOLE REGION, THE ARABS ARE FINALLY TURNING

Israel is clearly embarked on an expansion by brute force. Only the combined diplomatic, economic, and military force of the region is capable of stopping it.

A demonstrator holds a poster labelling Benjamin Netanyahu as a criminal during a protest against Israel’s Gaza genocide, Paris, on 6 September 2025

Jews for Justice for Palestinians
By David Hearst

24 September 2025

Before embarking on a suicide attack targeting Israeli soldiers on the Allenby Bridge, the primary crossing between Israel and Jordan, Abdul-Muttalib al-Qaisi penned a will.

In the statement, he asked, “Oh sons of my Umma, how long will we remain silent about those occupying our lands? Will we stay silent until they reach our territory and violate its sanctities?” Al-Qaisi, along with Mahir al-Jazi—another Jordanian who attacked Israeli forces at the border crossing last year—are not Palestinians; they are from the East Bank.

His message was directed to “the honorable free people everywhere, especially our brothers in the Arab clans in Al-Sham: Jordan, Palestine, Syria, and Lebanon.”

This is what it all boils down to: the events in Gaza will likely occur in other Arab countries. Our silence amounts to complicity. If we do nothing, Greater Israel will extend to us.

If this message reflects, as it does, a mood that reaches well beyond the outskirts of Amman where it was composed, then Israel is making a significant historical misjudgment.

Please continue reading...

PROF. JEFFREY SACHS - NETANYAHU’S VULGAR LIES AT THE UN

Judge Napolitano and Prof. Jeffrey Sachs explore the complexities of U.S. policy in the Middle East, focusing on American complicity with Israel and its impact on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. It highlights:

• International recognition of Palestine
• Critiques the influence of the Israel lobby on U.S. decision-making
• The prioritization of military action over diplomacy

The dialogue concludes with a call for the United States to shift toward peaceful solutions and greater recognition of Palestinian rights, emphasizing the moral and political responsibilities of global actors.

Watch the Video Here (24 minutes, 13 seconds)

Host: Judge Andrew Napolitano
Judging Freedom
26 September 2025

Analysis of Prime Minister Netanyahu's UN Speech: Implications and Reactions

On Friday, September 26th, 2025, Prime Minister Netanyahu delivered a speech to a nearly empty UN General Assembly chamber. Judge Andrew Napolitano and Professor Jeffrey Sachs discussed the speech and its significance, highlighting the controversial statements and the broader implications for the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and international relations.

Reaction to Netanyahu's Speech

Professor Sachs condemned the speech, highlighting the empty seats in the General Assembly as a sign of worldwide disapproval. He pointed out that Netanyahu’s speech was notably vulgar and placed Israel in direct opposition to much of the global community. The address explicitly stated that, in Netanyahu's view, a Palestinian state would never be established under any circumstances—a position that was known but frequently denied by some.

Key Themes of the Speech

• Rejection of a Palestinian State: Netanyahu categorically denied the possibility of a two-state solution, asserting that this stance reflects the collective will of the Israeli government, the Knesset, and the people of Israel.

• Endless Conflict: Sachs claimed that Israel lacks a clear path to peace, instead perpetually engaging in conflict, with Netanyahu pulling the United States into multiple wars. Netanyahu emphasized that Israel is currently involved in seven wars and desires U.S. participation in each.
• Claims and Controversies: The speech reiterated disputed and discredited assertions about October 7th, including allegations against Hamas. Sachs called these statements false, pointing out inconsistencies in casualty reports and the description of victims in Gaza.
• Humanitarian Crisis: Netanyahu outlined measures implemented to notify Gazans before bombings; however, Sachs countered that the widespread displacement and destruction have left the population without safe refuge, thereby rendering such warnings ineffective and misleading.

Political and Human Rights Implications

Sachs emphasized that the main political message of the speech was a rejection of Palestinian statehood, which drives continued resistance and repression. He pointed out that Israel’s strategy leads to the removal of governments that support the Palestinian cause and sustains violence and instability in the region.

Netanyahu’s speech was seen as a declaration of Israel’s aim to retain control over all Palestinian territories by force, given his history of boasting about participation in wars throughout the Middle East, including Iraq, Syria, and Yemen.

International Response and U.S. Policy

Despite the pressure from the United States, over 150 nations have recognized the state of Palestine, aligning with international law and moral principles. Sachs questioned whether U.S. policymakers fully understand their role in perpetuating the violence, highlighting the country's significant support for Israel through military aid, financial backing, and diplomatic protection at the United Nations.

President Trump publicly stated that the United States would block Israel from annexing the West Bank, highlighting American influence over Israeli policies. Sachs argued that the U.S. also has the power to prevent further humanitarian crises in Gaza if it chooses to exercise that authority.

Influence of the Israel Lobby and U.S. Decision Making

Sachs expressed concerns about the influence of the Israel lobby in the United States, suggesting that it could impact presidential decisions. He highlighted that the United States is the principal supporter of Israel and asserted that American foreign policy ought to prioritize national interests over perpetual engagement in Middle Eastern conflicts.

Diplomatic Challenges and the Path Forward

The discussion shifted to the prospects for peace, highlighting Iran’s expressed desire for diplomatic resolutions and preservation of a non-nuclear status, contrasted with the preferences of the United States and Israel for military intervention. Sachs criticized the absence of sincere diplomatic efforts and the tendency to respond to diplomatic overtures with force.

Netanyahu’s speech, characterized by bravado regarding assassinations and military operations, appeared to be an effort to incite more conflict, especially with Iran. Sachs expressed concern about how a small nation influences US foreign policy and the deployment of American military strength for contentious aims.

Conclusion

In conclusion, Professor Sachs and Judge Napolitano reflected on the critical condition of American Middle East policy, the isolation of Israel aside from U.S. support, and the pressing necessity for a transition toward peace and acknowledgment of Palestinian rights. The discussion highlighted the moral and political complexities inherent in the ongoing crisis and underscored the responsibilities of international stakeholders in shaping its resolution.

BUILDING THE BRIDGE! | A WAY TO GET TO KNOW THE OTHER AND ONE ANOTHER

Making a Difference – The Means, Methods, and Mechanisms for Many to Move Mountains

Photo Credit: Abraham A. van Kempen, our home away from home on the Dead Sea

By Abraham A. van Kempen
Senior Editor
Updated 19 January 2024

Those who commit to 'healing our broken humanity' build intercultural bridges to learn to know and understand one another and others. Readers who thumb through the Building the Bridge (BTB) pages are not mindless sheep following other mindless sheep. They THINK. They want to be at the forefront of making a difference. They're in search of the bigger picture to expand their horizons. They don't need BTB or anyone else to confirm their biases.

Making a Difference – The Means, Methods, and Mechanisms for Many to Move Mountains

Accurate knowledge fosters understanding, dispels prejudice, and sparks a desire to learn more about the subject. Words have an extraordinary power to bring people together, divide them, forge bonds of friendship, or provoke hostility. Modern technology offers unprecedented possibilities for good, fostering harmony and reconciliation. Yet, its misuse can cause untold harm, leading to misunderstandings, prejudices, and conflicts.

Continue reading

A Free Trial for Life – SUBSCRIBE NOW!

• It's quick and straightforward.

• We won’t ask for your credit card number.

• Just enter your e-mail address to receive your complimentary free-for-life subscription to our newsletter.

• Please include your First and Last Name.

• We won’t share or sell your e-mail address.

_________________________

Related Articles Recently Posted on www.buildingthebridgefoundation.com:

OUR FRIDAY NEWS ANALYSIS

OUR WEDNESDAY NEWS ANALYSIS

OUR MONDAY EDITION

________________________

The views expressed are solely those of the author and may or may not reflect those of the Building the Bridge Foundation