Palestinian Authority News Agency Hides Terror Attack, and Says All of Israel Is Occupied ‘Territory’

Ephraim D. Tepler and Itamar Marcus

Palestinian Authority (PA) President Mahmoud Abbas attends a virtual meeting, in the West Bank city of Ramallah, Sept. 3, 2020. Photo: Alaa Badarneh / Pool / File photo via Reuters.

In one article, the official Palestinian Authority (PA) news agency, WAFA, did three things at once: It hid a Palestinian knife attack, denied Israel’s existence by calling Lod part of the “1948 territories,” and exploited Arab-sector crime statistics to incriminate Israel for violence it did not commit.

Headline: “Israeli police kill young man in Lod”

“A young Palestinian man, identified as Sami Ahmed Ja’sous, in his twenties, was killed on Wednesday after being shot by Israeli police in the city of Lod inside the territories of 1948 [i.e., PA euphemism for Israel].

This marks the sixth person killed by police in the city since the beginning of the year.

The killing comes amid increasing reports of excessive force by Israeli police in Arab towns inside the 1948 territories, with repeated calls for transparent and independent investigations into such incidents.

Arab communities inside Israel have also witnessed a rise in violence and homicide cases in recent years, including shootings and stabbings. Earlier on Wednesday, two separate incidents in Basma and Shfaram left two more young men dead, bringing the total number of killings since the beginning of the year to 139.”

[WAFA, official PA news agency, English edition, July 1, 2026]

WAFA reported that “Israeli police kill young man in Lod,” presenting the incident entirely as a case of police violence against Arabs in Israel.

WAFA, however, omitted the central fact that Sami Ahmed Ja’sous was carrying a knife, ignored police orders to stop, ran toward officers, and attempted to stab them before he was shot.

This also followed a woman’s call to the police emergency line to report that Ja’sous was holding a knife near the Lod municipality area.

By completely omitting anything about the knife and attempted stabbing, WAFA transformed a violent attack on officers into a story of an innocent “young Palestinian man” killed by Israel.

This is a frequent PA libel technique: remove the Palestinian violence, preserve only the Israeli response, and then present Israel as the aggressor.

WAFA also twice described Lod as being “inside the territories of 1948,” which is Palestinian terminology used to avoid saying “Israel,” thereby denying Israel’s legitimacy within any borders.

Lod is an Israeli city inside the internationally recognized State of Israel, but WAFA’s wording presents all of Israel as “occupied” Palestinian land from 1948, the year of modern Israel’s establishment.

Finally, WAFA misleadingly connected the police shooting to the broader crisis of violence in Arab towns, citing shootings and stabbings in Basma and Shfar’am and the reported total of 139 killings since the beginning of the year.

However, those figures refer not to police shootings but to internal Arab-sector violence, primarily between gangs, as well as to interfamily feuds — some of which have been going on for decades, and even to so-called honor killings. By placing Arab-on-Arab crime immediately after the Lod incident, the PA news agency insinuated Israeli responsibility for unrelated criminal violence within Arab communities.

Palestinian Media Watch reported just a month ago that the PA regularly portrays Arab-sector murders as an Israeli “conspiracy” and even “directed” by Israel.

This WAFA article follows the same script and goes even further, again showing how the PA has made a policy of pinning the blame on Israel for every internal Palestinian and Israeli-Arab problem.

Ephraim D. Tepler is a contributor to Palestinian Media Watch (PMW). Itamar Marcus is the Founder and Director of PMW, where a version of this article first appeared.

Zawartość publikowanych artykułów i materiałów nie reprezentuje poglądów ani opinii Reunion’68,
ani też webmastera Blogu Reunion’68, chyba ze jest to wyraźnie zaznaczone.
Twoje uwagi, linki, własne artykuły lub wiadomości prześlij na adres:
webmaster@reunion68.com

China Launches ICBM, Sanders Proposes Disarmament

Jul14

China Launches ICBM, Sanders Proposes Disarmament

Gordon G. Chang

China’s military activities have become far more brazen. Some Americans, unfortunately, have not noticed. For instance, Senators Edward Markey and Bernie Sanders introduced the Smarter Approach to Nuclear Expenditures Act last September.
Richard Fisher of the International Assessment and Strategy Center looks at the rapid increase in delivery platforms, such as missiles and submarines, and believes China will have 7,000 [nuclear warheads].
[I]f the United States is to possess a deterrent, it will have to carry through with existing plans to simultaneously modernize all three legs of its nuclear “triad”: missiles housed in land-based silos, weapons launched from submarines, and nukes carried by bombers and fighters.
The U.S. does not need to match the number of China’s and Russia’s nukes or delivery systems, but it does need to maintain a credible deterrent. Markey proposes to reduce “deployed strategic warheads from approximately 1,500 to 1,000.”
Markey’s proposal would create an imbalance that might tempt a bold or desperate aggressor to think it could, by making threats to launch, intimidate the U.S. into not defending an ally or friend. Russian President Vladimir Putin made such threats both before and after the start of his ongoing “special military operation” against Ukraine.
More ominously, the test told the world of Chinese plans. Various publications have said that the test showed China’s second-strike — retaliatory — ability, but it also demonstrated something else. “This test clearly indicates China’s intent to obtain a first-strike capability,” said James Fanell, a former U.S. Navy captain who served as director of Intelligence and Information Operations for the U.S. Pacific Fleet, to this publication.
What will deter our enemies from launching nuclear first-strikes? Perhaps a sea-launched nuclear-armed cruise missile, a Golden Dome missile-defense system, or “any number of new technologies and strategies,” Peter Huessy of the National Institute for Deterrence Studies wrote shortly before China’s missile launch.
One thing Huessy knows will not work: “unilateral restraint that does not take such threats seriously in the first place.”

China’s military activities have become far more brazen. On July 6, a Chinese Navy submarine launched either a JL-2 or JL-3 nuclear-capable, intercontinental ballistic missile, the first known Chinese submarine-launched missile test since 1982. Pictured: JL-3 missiles are displayed at a military parade in Beijing’s Tiananmen Square on September 3, 2025. (Photo by Pedro Pardo/AFP via Getty Images)

On July 6, a Chinese Navy submarine launched either a JL-2 or JL-3 nuclear-capable, intercontinental ballistic missile.

The missile, traveling in a southeasterly direction and carrying a mock warhead, landed in the Pacific Ocean, in the South Pacific Nuclear Free Zone.

The launch was the first known Chinese submarine-launched missile test since 1982 and the first ever from a Chinese nuclear-powered sub.

“China’s long-range ballistic missile launch wasn’t just a routine drill,” the House Select Committee on China posted on X on July 6. “It was yet another act of CCP aggression toward our allies and like-minded partners in the Indo-Pacific.”

“Beijing is testing global patience to its absolute limit with an alarming nuclear-capable escalation directly in the Pacific,” commented the UnveiledChina site on X.

The official Xinhua News Agency called the launch “a routine arrangement of the annual training of the PLA Navy” and declared it was “not directed at any specific country or target.”

Whether targeting any specific country or not, China’s military activities have become far more brazen. Some Americans, unfortunately, have not noticed. For instance, Senators Edward Markey and Bernie Sanders introduced the Smarter Approach to Nuclear Expenditures Act last September.

The SANE Act, as they call it, “would reduce wasteful nuclear weapons programs and generate tens of billions of dollars in cost savings.”

“It is time to halt the proliferation of wasteful nuclear weapons programs and create a future that is safe from the dangers of nuclear conflict,” Markey stated. “Under Trump, the United States is inviting a new nuclear arms race that will endanger the lives of Americans as well as all those around the world.”

The United States is “inviting a new nuclear arms race”? The number of deployed warheads of China, Russia, and North Korea — perhaps 6,100 — outstrips that of the U.S., Britain, and France by about 460.

China, for one, is on a tear. It could possess far more than the 620 warheads as currently estimated.

The current number, however, is not the issue. “I don’t think I’ve seen anything more disturbing in my career than the Chinese ongoing expansion of their nuclear force,” said Frank Kendall when he was secretary of the Air Force in House testimony in March 2023.

“We are witnessing a strategic breakout by China,” Admiral Charles Richard, then commander of U.S. Strategic Command in 2021, said.

The Pentagon, in a November 2022 report, forecast that China would quadruple warheads from about 400 then to 1,500 by 2035.

That is an underestimation. James Howe, the noted nuclear analyst, predicts China will have between 3,390 and 3,740 weapons by that year. Richard Fisher of the International Assessment and Strategy Center looks at the rapid increase in delivery platforms, such as missiles and submarines, and believes China will have 7,000.

Whatever estimate turns out to be correct, it is simply wrong to think, as Markey does, that the United States is to blame for an arms race. In fact, America has not been looking to increase the number of warheads.

America does plan to spend substantial sums on its arsenal. Markey reports “approximately $1 trillion over the next decade.” But if the United States is to possess a deterrent, it will have to carry through with existing plans to simultaneously modernize all three legs of its nuclear “triad”: missiles housed in land-based silos, weapons launched from submarines, and nukes carried by bombers and fighters.

All three legs of the U.S. nuclear deterrent are aging; in many cases delivery systems are already beyond useful lives. Parts of the arsenal now cost more to sustain than to replace.

The big spend is not “wasteful,” and it is not driven by Washington. It is driven by Beijing.

There are now no more bilateral arms agreements with Russia. The last one, known as “New START,” expired in February. The U.S. did not renew it because of blatant Russian violations and China’s refusal to engage in arms-control talks. With Russia and China cooperating militarily, the U.S. is outnumbered.

The U.S. does not need to match the number of China’s and Russia’s nukes or delivery systems, but it does need to maintain a credible deterrent. Markey proposes to reduce “deployed strategic warheads from approximately 1,500 to 1,000.”

Markey’s proposal would create an imbalance that might tempt a bold or desperate aggressor to think it could, by making threats to launch, intimidate the U.S. into not defending an ally or friend. Russian President Vladimir Putin made such threats both before and after the start of his ongoing “special military operation” against Ukraine.

Is China also thinking of making threats of this sort? Beijing could have tested this missile anywhere, but its choice says much about its intentions. As the Lexington Institute’s Rebecca Grant told Gatestone, “Beijing could not have picked a more obnoxious flight path.”

The missile, for instance, overflew what the Chinese call the First Island and Second Island Chains and was aimed in the general direction of Fiji, which on the same day signed a landmark defense pact with Australia. The agreement had angered Beijing.

More ominously, the test told the world of Chinese plans. Various publications have said that the test showed China’s second-strike — retaliatory — ability, but it also demonstrated something else. “This test clearly indicates China’s intent to obtain a first-strike capability,” said James Fanell, a former U.S. Navy captain who served as director of Intelligence and Information Operations for the U.S. Pacific Fleet, to this publication.

What will deter our enemies from launching nuke first-strikes? Perhaps a sea-launched nuclear-armed cruise missile, a Golden Dome missile-defense system, or “any number of new technologies and strategies,” Peter Huessy of the National Institute for Deterrence Studies wrote shortly before China’s missile launch.

One thing Huessy knows will not work: “unilateral restraint that does not take such threats seriously in the first place.”

Gordon G. Chang is the author of Plan Red: China’s Project to Destroy America, a Gatestone Institute distinguished senior fellow, and a member of its Advisory Board.

Follow Gordon G. Chang on X (formerly Twitter)

Ameryka ponownie uderza w Iran. Irańczycy zamykają cieśninę Ormuz

Jul13

Statek z ropą w Zatoce Perskiej szykuje się do przepłynięcia przez Cieśninę Ormuz. (Fot. REUTERS/Mohammed Aty)

Ameryka ponownie uderza w Iran. Irańczycy zamykają cieśninę Ormuz

Marta Urzędowska

Amerykanie zaatakowali cele w Iranie, po tym jak Irańczycy ostrzelali kontenerowiec w cieśninie Ormuz. Teheran ponownie zamyka kluczowy przesmyk, a kraje arabskie regionu potwierdzają: Pociski lecą też na nas.

Amerykańskie dowództwo na Bliskim Wschodzie potwierdza – w sobotę Amerykanie przeprowadzili serię uderzeń na irańskim terytorium po tym, jak Irańczycy ostrzelali pływający pod cypryjską banderą kontenerowiec MV GFS Galaxy w kluczowej dla transportu ropy cieśninie Ormuz. Amerykańskie ataki trwały cztery godziny, zaatakowano ponad 140 celów, wśród nich miejsca, skąd odpalane są pociski i drony.

Waszyngton: Irańczycy źle wybrali. Zapłacą nam za to

Irańskie media państwowe podały, że w kilku miastach południowego wybrzeża kraju doszło do eksplozji. W niektórych znajdują się ważne obiekty energetyczne i wojskowe. Irańska telewizja podaje też, że Amerykanie uderzyli w koszary w Buszehr i bazę wojskową w Dejr.

Irańczycy przekonują, że ostrzelali statek, bo „kilka jednostek próbowało płynąć niezatwierdzoną trasą” przez cieśninę. Władze Iranu domagają się, by wszystkie statki pływały przez irańskie wody terytorialne, by mogły ściśle je kontrolować. Amerykanie odpowiadają, że cały przesmyk ma być swobodnie dostępny do żeglugi, bez wytyczania konkretnych tras. Irańczycy twierdzą, że ostrzelali jednostkę, kiedy nie odpowiedziała na serię ostrzeżeń i strzały ostrzegawcze.

Atakując statek, Teheran odrzucił amerykańskie ultimatum – w ostatni piątek Waszyngton zagroził, że – jeśli Irańczycy nie przestaną atakować jednostek w kluczowej dla transportu ropy cieśninie Ormuz – Ameryka odpowie kolejnymi atakami.

W sobotę, kiedy Irańczycy ostrzelali statek, sekretarz obrony USA Pete Hegseth potwierdził, że tym samym złamali ultimatum.

– Iran wybrał źle i teraz za to zapłaci

– skwitował.

Iran: Ostrzegaliśmy. Dziś puka rzeczywistość

Na tym nie koniec spirali odwetu, bo również Irańczycy nie czekali z odpowiedzią na amerykańskie sobotnie ataki. W niedzielę rano irańska Gwardia Rewolucyjna, czyli najważniejsza w kraju formacja, która prowadzi obecną wojnę, ogłosiła, że właśnie uderzyła w amerykańskie interesy na Bliskim Wschodzie.

Zjednoczone Emiraty Arabskie, Kuwejt, Bahrajn i Katar potwierdziły, że przechwyciły lecące w ich stronę pociski, choć nie uściśliły, skąd zostały wysłane. Również władze Jordanii informują o kilku pociskach, które spadły na jordańskie terytorium. Iran potwierdza, że zaatakował miejscową bazę lotniczą, niszcząc m.i. n. hangar, gdzie trzymane są drony. W Katarze spadające odłamki raniły kilka osób, wśród nich – dziecko. Irańskie drony poleciały też na omańskie regiony Musandam i Al-Batina. W niedzielę omańskie MSZ wezwało na dywanik irańskiego ambasadora, by wręczyć mu notę protestacyjną w tej sprawie. „Omańskie władze wyraziły niezadowolenie sułtanatu Omanu z powodu tych nieodpowiedzialnych działań i wezwały do poszanowania zasad suwerenności państwowej, dobrosąsiedztwa, nie mieszania się w wewnętrzne sprawy i szanowania zwyczajów i wartości wiążących oba kraje i ich narody” – brzmi oświadczenie omańskiego resortu.

Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, główny negocjator Iranu w rozejmowych rozmowach, stwierdził w oświadczeniu opublikowanym w serwisach społecznościowych, że „era jednostronnych umów się skończyła”.

W niedzielę także Mohsen Rezae, doradca najwyższego przywódcy, wydał oświadczenie cytowane w państwowych mediach. „Strategiczny przesmyk jest ważniejszy niż dziesiątki bomb atomowych, a Islamska Republika Iranu będzie go chronić”.

Amerykanie nie tracą rezonu. Dowództwo US Army na Bliskim Wschodzie zapewniło w niedzielę, że jest w stanie zapewnić wolność żeglugi w cieśninie Ormuz. „Przesmyk jest otwarty dla wszystkich jednostek chcących zgodnie z prawem przepłynąć międzynarodowymi wodami” – przekonuje w oświadczeniu.

„Mówiliśmy wam: Dotrzymajcie słowa albo zapłacicie. Dziś rzeczywistość puka do waszych drzwi” – skwitował, pokazując fragment ostatniego porozumienia, określający, którymi trasami będą pływać jednostki żeglujące cieśniną Ormuz. Już w ubiegłym tygodniu Irańczycy ostrzelali trzy jednostki, próbujące przepłynąć przesmykiem przez wody terytorialne Omanu, nie Iranu.

Rozejm na włosku. Trump: Nasze porozumienie jest skończone

Konflikt, który dziś ponownie eskaluje, rozpoczął się pod koniec lutego, kiedy Amerykanie i Izraelczycy rozpoczęli ataki na Iran. Przez sześć tygodni trwało bombardowanie irańskich celów i zabijanie irańskich liderów wojskowych i politycznych, w odpowiedzi Irańczycy ostrzeliwali Izrael i kraje arabskie rejonu Zatoki Perskiej. To właśnie w ramach odwetu na izraelsko-amerykańską agresję Teheran zablokował otwartą wcześniej cieśninę Ormuz, co wywindowało ceny ropy na całym świecie. Dodatkowo Izrael prowadzi wojnę w Libanie, skąd atakuje go sojusznik Teheranu, libański Hezbollah.

W kwietniu udało się wypracować pierwszy rozejm, który w czerwcu został przedłużony o kolejne dwa miesiące. Na mocy porozumienia Irańczycy mieli odblokować cieśninę Ormuz, a Amerykanie wstępnie znieść sankcje na Iran. Pozostałe kwestie sporne, jak rezygnacja Irańczyków z programu nuklearnego i balistycznego, miały zostać wypracowane w czasie dalszych rozmów.

Te nie zdążyły się na dobre rozpocząć, bo w ostatnich tygodniach co rusz dochodzi do mniejszych albo większych naruszeń rozejmu, o które obie strony wzajemnie się oskarżają. Kilka dni temu, kiedy Irańczycy również zaatakowali statki w cieśninie Ormuz, a ceny ropy ponownie skoczyły, Donald Trump przyznał, że umowa z czerwca jest „skończona”, a on nie będzie więcej rozmawiał z Irańczykami, bo to „szuje”.

Iran rozmawia z Omanem o cieśninie. Kraje regionu próbują ratować rozejm

Z kolei irański najwyższy przywódca Modżtaba Chamenei, który zastąpił na tym stanowisku zabitego w amerykańsko-izraelskich atakach ojca, wydał oświadczenie, w którym

grozi Ameryce zemstą za zabicie poprzedniego lidera i innych jego krewnych.

Jego ojciec, Ali Chamenei, choć zginął w pierwszych dniach wojny, został pochowany dopiero w ostatni piątek, po trwających tydzień uroczystościach.

Nie jest jasne, jak bardzo publiczne pogróżki przekładają się na przebieg zakulisowych rozmów, które Katarczycy i Pakistańczycy nadal próbują uratować i czy ostatnie ataki oznaczają faktycznie koniec rozejmu.

Jeszcze w sobotę szef irańskiej dyplomacji Abbas Aragczi spotkał się z negocjatorami w Omanie, który też leży nad cieśniną Ormuz, by dyskutować o szczegółach otwarcia przesmyku i trasach, którymi będą pływać statki. Jednak po spotkaniu nie wydał żadnego oświadczenia, po czym ruszyła seria wzajemnych ataków.

Progressives Push For Anti-Israel Platner Replacement, Spread Conspiracies About Exit

Jul13

Progressives Push For Anti-Israel Platner Replacement, Spread Conspiracies About Exit

Corey Walker

Former MSNBC host Joy Reid.

Popular progressive pundits are ramping up pressure on party leaders to ensure that any replacement for former Maine Senate nominee Graham Platner is not supportive of Israel or aligned with the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), warning that a strongly pro-Israel nominee could deepen divisions within the Democratic coalition.

Voices calling for an anti-Israel replacement include former cable news host Joy Reid, Majority Report host Emma Vigeland, DropSite founder Ryan Grim, and The Young Turks host Cenk Uygur.

“The people of Maine said we want a progressive. They did not say we want an AIPAC moderate,” Reid said on a Wednesday episode of The Joy Reid Show. “If the DNC shoves an AIPAC candidate down your throat, you have my permission to not vote for them,” she continued, adding that “sometimes you need to lose in order to learn.”

Reid — a former MS Now host who has rebranded from an establishment liberal pundit to an anti-Israel polemicist since her firing from the cable outlet — has previously pushed conspiracies that AIPAC schemed to undermine insurgent progressive campaigns. She said that if Democrats install “another AIPAC sell out moderate” instead of someone who shares Platner’s ideology, Maine voters “have my permission to stay our a— home.”

Vigeland posted a video urging Democrats to replace Platner with a nominee who won’t support American “complicity” in what she called a “genocide” in Gaza, arguing Platner’s Israel views were central to his appeal and that establishment figures want to “foreclose” left-wing debate on the issue.

Grim, whose outlet DropSite has drawn criticism for an editorial bias favoring Hamas — referring to the group that killed roughly 1,200 people on Oct. 7 as a “resistance” movement, and employing a contributor who has justified a synagogue attack and said Israelis should be “wiped off the planet” — questioned why Troy Jackson, the progressive Maine lawmaker who launched his candidacy Wednesday, left “the Gaza genocide” out of his announcement.

“Troy Jackson put out a statement announcing that he is running for office on a platform of Medicare for all, taking on corporate power, standing up for working people. Conspicuously absent was the Gaza genocide, right? Or an anti-war message,” Grim said.

Uygur, meanwhile, alleged without evidence that pro-Israel donors were working to sink Platner. “Guess who the biggest donors to the Maine Democratic Party are? Israel First and corporate donors. They have been gunning for Graham Platner from day one,” he wrote on X. Uygur and co-host Ana Kasparian have increasingly centered their show on Israel since Oct. 7, at times accusing Israel of unrelated conspiracies.

The pressure campaign follows Platner’s exit from the race Wednesday night after a former partner accused him of sexually assaulting her in 2021 — an allegation he has denied as “troubling, serious, and false.” Sens. Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren were among those who had called on him to withdraw. Even before he dropped out, activists were already lobbying against potential successors seen as friendlier to Israel. Troy Jackson, Secretary of State Shenna Bellows and former COVID response director Nirav Shah have emerged as the leading contenders.

Progressives argue that replacing Platner with an AIPAC-aligned Democrat would sideline the positions that energized his supporters, including a more critical posture toward Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s government and opposition to unconditional military aid. Pro-Israel Democrats counter that support for Israel remains mainstream within the party and warn that nominating a candidate seen as hostile to the U.S.-Israel alliance could cost Democrats moderate and independent voters against incumbent Republican Sen. Susan Collins.

The fight is the latest sign of how the Gaza war has become a defining fault line in Democratic primaries, pitting elected officials who back Israel’s right to defend itself against increasingly vocal progressive activists demanding a policy shift.

Maine Democrats have said they will move quickly to set up a “fair” and “transparent” process to pick a new nominee before a July 27 deadline. No process or replacement has been finalized, but several top contenders are seen as ideologically aligned with Platner on Israel.

“Auschwitz” and nursing uniforms in Palestine demonstration

Jul13

“Auschwitz” and nursing uniforms in Palestine demonstration

Ofer Maimon

Both “Netanyahu” and “Itamar Ben Gvir” were seen in the demonstration. Photo: Faksimil X

Pro-Palestinian activists staged a high-profile demonstration in central Stockholm on Saturday, using a replica of the Auschwitz entrance gate with the word “Gaza” instead of the infamous phrase “Arbeit macht frei.”

The demonstration, organized by the group Palestine Demonstration Stockholm, featured a theatrical performance in which Gazan mothers and babies were pursued by a man dressed in a red Netanyahu mask, as well as a leather coat of the type worn by the Gestapo, and with an armband with a Star of David where the Gestapo instead wore swastikas on the armbands. “Netanyahu” was also seen waving a wad of banknotes.

Several of the placards read “Doctors are not targets; stop killing our doctors.” The activists demanded the immediate release of Abu Safiya, who has been held in Israeli custody since September 2024, as well as the release of Marwan Barghouti and better protection for medical personnel in Gaza. Marwan Barghouti is a Fatah leader who was sentenced in 2004 to five life sentences plus 45 years for incitement and involvement in murder.
Medical and nursing uniforms

“Netanyahu” then led the demonstration march, followed by people in medical and nursing uniforms of the same type that caused debate after two doctors from the healthcare company Meliva and other healthcare personnel appeared in them at a demonstration on July 2 that blocked the entrance to Karolinska University Hospital.

These healthcare workers wore the modified “Auschwitz gate” and in the demonstration march, in addition to images of Marwan Barghouti, also a person with a mask that was supposed to represent Israel’s Security Minister Itamar Ben Gvir, dressed as a butcher, who in the organizer’s videos of the demonstration lunges with something that is supposed to represent a butcher’s knife.

The same organizer behind yesterday’s demonstration also organized the demonstration outside Karolinska, but it has not yet been confirmed whether the people dressed in healthcare uniforms in Saturday’s demonstration were the same people, or even if they are employed in healthcare.
“A tasteless trivialization of the Holocaust”

The protest has provoked strong reactions from Swedish Jewish representatives. Aron Verständig, lawyer and chairman of the Central Jewish Council in Sweden, strongly condemns the incident.

“Belittling the Holocaust in the way that happened at yesterday’s demonstration in Stockholm is incredibly distasteful and disgusting. As with other similar events, no one intervened, which is why the borders are constantly shifting,” he writes on X.

Political scientist Daniel Schatz is also very critical of the demonstration and how it has been handled, writing on X:

“According to the IHRA’s working definition of anti-Semitism, which Sweden has adopted, this relativization and trivialization of the Holocaust is a clear example of anti-Semitism.

What is particularly remarkable is that this is happening openly on Swedish streets, right in front of the police, without any visible objections.

How long will these insanity be normalized before responsible authorities and politicians pull the emergency brake?”

The Bulletin is seeking a comment from the demonstration’s organizer.

Pro-palestinska aktivister genomförde på lördagen en uppmärksammad demonstration i centrala Stockholm där de använde en replika av Auschwitz entrégrind med ordet ”Gaza” istället för den ökända frasen ”Arbeit macht frei”.

Demonstrationen, som organiserades av gruppen Palestina Demonstration Stockholm, bjöd på en teaterföreställning där Gazamödrar och spädbarn förföljdes av en man utstyrd i en röd Netanyahu-mask, liksom en skinnrock av den typ Gestapo bar, och med en armbindel med en davidsstjärna där Gestapo istället bar hakkors på armbindlarna. “Netanyahu” sågs även vifta med en sedelbunt.

På flera av plakaten stod texten ”Läkarna är inte mål; sluta döda våra läkare” att läsa. Aktivisterna krävde omedelbar frigivning av Abu Safiya, som har hållits i israeliskt förvar sedan september 2024, samt frigivning av Marwan Barghouti och bättre skydd för sjukvårdspersonal i Gaza. Marwan Barghouti är en Fatah-ledare som 2004 dömdes till fem livstidsstraff plus 45 år för anstiftan och inblandning i mord.

Vård- och läkaruniformer

“Netanyahu” ledde sedan demonstrationståget följd av personer i vård- och läkaruniformer av samma typ som vållat debatt efter att två läkare från vårdbolaget Meliva och annan vårdpersonal uppträtt i dem vid en demonstration 2 juli som blockerade entrén till Karolinska Universitetssjukhuset.

Dessa vårdarbetarklädda bar på den modifierade “Auschwitz-grinden” och i demonstrationståget syntes, utöver bilder av Marwan Barghouti, även en person med en mask som skulle föreställa Israels säkerhetsminister Itamar Ben Gvir, utklädd till slaktare, som på arrangörens videor av demonstrationen gör utfall med något som ska föreställa en slaktarkniv.

Det är samma arrangör som låg bakom gårdagens demonstration som också arrangerade demonstrationen utanför Karolinska, men det har ännu inte kunnat bekräftas om de vårdyrkesklädda i lördagens demonstration var samma personer, eller ens om de är anställda i vården.

”En smaklös trivialisering av Förintelsen”

Protesten har väckt starka reaktioner från svenska judiska företrädare. Aron Verständig, advokat och ordförande för Judiska Centralrådet i Sverige, fördömer händelsen kraftfullt.

“Att förringa Förintelsen på det vis som skedde vid gårdagens demonstration i Stockholm är otroligt osmakligt och vidrigt. Som vid andra liknande händelser ingrep ingen varför gränserna ständigt fortsätter att förskjutas”, skriver han på X.

Statsvetaren Daniel Schatz är även han mycket kritisk till demonstrationen och hur den har hanterats och skriver på X:

“Enligt IHRA:s arbetsdefinition av antisemitism, som Sverige har antagit, utgör denna relativisering och trivialisering av Förintelsen ett tydligt exempel på antisemitism.

Särskilt anmärkningsvärt är att detta sker öppet på svenska gator, mitt framför ögonen på polisen, utan några synliga invändningar.

Hur länge ska dessa galenskaper normaliseras innan ansvariga myndigheter och politiker drar i nödbromsen?”

Bulletin söker demonstrationens arrangör för en kommentar.

Reunion 68

Oficjalny Blog Reunion 68

Palestinian Authority News Agency Hides Terror Attack, and Says All of Israel Is Occupied ‘Territory’