At the moment, the mass anti-Israel mob events that polluted American cities at the start of the Israel-Hamas war appear to have wound down or at least gone into hibernation. Perhaps the extremely limited attention span of today’s society has led to boredom or distraction, resulting in a lack of enthusiasm among pro-Hamas activists. Perhaps there has been a general acknowledgment that the open racism of the events was alienating rather than persuading people. Or perhaps the fiends are simply storing up their energy for the future.
All of these are possible, but I think another scenario ought to be at least entertained. I do not care for conspiracy theories myself, but it is difficult not to think that there is at least the possibility that an order came down.
That is to say, whoever was in charge of the mobs realized that they were counterproductive politically and socially, that calling for another Holocaust was probably not a good look, and it was best to tamp things down. After all, given that the Anti-Israel Axis rules academia and the activism industry, they can probably do far more damage through those institutions than by taking to the streets in support of mass murder.
Another reason for such suspicions is that there is no possible way the mob events happened spontaneously. Holding such “protests” requires logistical support, activist groups to incite and direct the mobs, and most of all, enormous amounts of money. You cannot fill Times Square without substantial organized and expensive efforts beforehand.
To go a bit further down the rabbit hole—and I emphasize that this is pure speculation—given the speed and intensity with which the mob events occurred, literally hours after news of the Oct. 7 massacre broke, it is not impossible that the financiers and organizers of the “protests” knew in advance that the massacre was about to take place. At the very least, they may have known that something very big was in the offing, that it would take place in early October, and that the mobs had to be mobilized to serve as the activist arm of the perpetrators.
Whether this is true or not, what is certainly true is that someone is in charge. Or, at the very least, there is a small elite that is financing and leading the mob, largely behind the scenes.
The question, then, is who they might be. The most obvious way of finding out is to follow the money. Public demonstrations leave evidence behind them. There must be publicly available documentation of who was paying the bills. The same is true of the logistical organizers. Someone got the permits, printed the placards, and gave the mob the proper chants and slogans.
My guess is that the financing came from a small group of individuals. The logistical support, however, likely came from the network of pro-Hamas Muslim and progressive groups that led the mobs themselves.
The best way to deal with the mob, then, is to expose the fifth column that stands behind them. The Jewish community should demand both law enforcement and congressional investigations into this issue, followed by penalties for those individuals and groups involved in racist incitement and acts of violence. If nothing else, this may deter the mob next time.
As you likely know, I’ve been on a bit of Kissinger kick lately, and I’ve just finished his remarkable book Leadership. It’s a series of short portraits of important 20th-century political leaders, and perhaps the most interesting dealt with the late Egyptian president Anwar Sadat, who defied the rest of the Arab world by forging Egypt’s 1978 peace treaty with Israel.
What I did not know before reading the book was that the UN General Assembly condemned Sadat’s peace efforts. Given that the UN advertises itself as an organization dedicated to promoting peace and preventing war, this is a stunning judgment on the UN’s moral integrity. In the name of hating Israel at all costs, the UN rendered itself an institution dedicated to nothing but the most redolent hypocrisy.
Israel has long lived under a regime of racist apartheid at the UN, from which the US has generally tried to defend it. But given the UN’s clear support for the war to destroy Israel, both in the 1970s and today, it may be time to consider whether the organization is worthy of survival at all. Certainly, the US ought to revisit its reflexive political and financial support for the UN. Perhaps it should cut off the substantial funding it contributes to the organization and expel the UN from its headquarters in New York City. That alone would significantly curtail the organization’s capacity to monger war and impede the cause of peace.
It’s always unpleasant to get a taste of your own medicine, as the terrorist Iranian regime just discovered, with an attack on a police station by Baluch militants. It was a minor incident, it seems, but may portend further unrest among Iran’s substantial ethnic minorities. Israel should take notice and perhaps consider whether exploiting this vulnerability is worth exploring.
I recently saw Martin Scorsese’s much-acclaimed new film Killers of the Flower Moon. I’ve always been a huge Scorsese fan and thought his last picture The Irishman was one of his greatest.
Moreover, given that American cinema hardly exists anymore, it’s heartening to see a genuine artist still managing to make films despite Hollywood’s decision to make nothing but Marvel movies and knockoffs of Marvel movies.
It’s also very rare to see late works in cinema. They’re common in literature and music, but because filmmaking is so physically demanding and financiers so obsessed with the youth audience, directors are often forced into involuntary retirement long before they’ve exhausted their powers. Yet some truly extraordinary films are late works, such as Kurosawa’s Ran, Welles’ The Other Side of the Wind, Kubrick’s Eyes Wide Shut, Huston’s The Man Who Would Be King, and The Irishman itself.
Unfortunately, I felt Killers of the Flower Moon was a disappointment. Length is by no means a bad thing, and some of the greatest films run well over three hours, but Killers of the Flower Moon was at least an hour too long and its slow pacing only exacerbated the sense of exhaustion. Slowness in cinema is no vice, but in this case, it worked very much to the film’s detriment.
I will say that lead actress Lily Gladstone’s performance was excellent and this may be the first time that Leonardo DiCaprio has played a character with more or less no redeeming features whatsoever, which was somewhat courageous on his part. In addition, Scorsese has never made a Western, and it was interesting to see his take on the genre. Beyond that, I regret to say, it was a wash.
It’s very possible, however, that Scorsese has at least one more great film in him, and we should hope that he finds a financier with the courage to take a chance on age rather than the cheap thrills of the young.
Yep. All those matching signs on Oct 8. On the signs, in smaller print, the names and websites of the organizations.
Shocking unity of slogan and design, and instantly deployed.
If people knew in advance of the Oct 7 massacre, and they were busy downloading sign templates and finding cardboard to glue the printouts to , that makes them accessories to murder. IMO.
The Free Press has a good story abou the rich people behind one of the main anti-Israel groups. I forget the name but the story does name names.
I have also wondered a bit about the rallies. How many of those people had Palestinian flags just lying around? There seemed to be an awful lot of them. I followed a couple of local (Victoria) Reddit threads, people wondering a) when the next rally was and b) where to get a keffiyeh. The posters seemed to me to be both very young and very uninformed.
Re. Iran, I watched an interesting conversation between Harris Sultan and Armin Navabi (ex-Muslim Iranian living here), much of it about how much support there apparently is for Israel in Iran (not the govt, obv). Navabi also thinks the regime will fall fairly soon. I have no idea if he's right, of course, but it's a nice thought.