Netanyahu: ‘Hamas are the new Nazis’. "The core of new antisemitism is the attempt to ... undermine [Israel's] right to self-defense," Foreign Minister Gideon Sa'ar said.

JNS ^ | 1.27.25

[Words Matter]

Netanyahu: ‘Hamas are the new Nazis’. "The core of new antisemitism is the attempt to ... undermine [Israel's] right to self-defense," Foreign Minister Gideon Sa'ar said.

JNS Staff. (Jan. 27, 2025 / JNS).

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Monday called on the “civilized” world to up its effort to combat Jew-hatred, while labeling the Hamas terror group the “new Nazis.”

“On International Holocaust Remembrance Day, I call on all civilized nations to confront antisemitism wherever it appears—on college campuses, city streets or international forums like the [International Criminal Court],” Netanyahu tweeted.

“Founded in the shadow of the Holocaust, the ICC has disgraced itself with antisemitic attacks on Israel. Hamas are the new Nazis, and we are committed to defeating them once and for all. The Jewish state will always stand as a safe haven for Jews worldwide. #NeverAgainIsNow.”

In November, the ICC issued arrest warrants for Netanyahu and former Israeli Defense Minister Yoav Gallant over their roles in prosecuting the war against Hamas in the Gaza Strip.

The ICC does not have jurisdiction over Israel. However, the court’s chief prosecutor Karim Khan, who is under investigation for sexual misconduct, insisted that he has jurisdiction over the country.

Israeli Foreign Minister Gideon Sa’ar similarly weighed in on Monday, tweeting: “Today we mark International Holocaust Remembrance Day, in memory of the six million Jews who were murdered in the Holocaust. Throughout 2,000 years of exile, including during the Holocaust, the Jewish people did not have the means to protect themselves.

“The Zionist revolution restored the Jewish people the ability to protect themselves,” continued Jerusalem’s top diplomat. “The core of new antisemitism is the attempt to delegitimize the Jewish state’s right to exist and to undermine its right to self-defense.

“The purpose of the different proceedings in the ‘international legal institutions’ is an attempt to remove Israel’s basic right to self-defense. We will never relinquish our right and ability to defend ourselves! Never again is now!”

[Words Matter]

Comment: PA ("palestinian" Authority) isn't much better.

[PGalt]

The “nazis” are gone. The proxies of Islam carry on. Jihad continues apace. The anti-truth, anti-freedom, anti-individual, anti-life collective was here before the “nazis”, and continues to exist long after the “nazis”. Civilization v barbarian alert. 2025.

[Worldtraveler once upon a time]

---- "The proxies of Islam carry on. Jihad continues apace. The anti-truth, anti-freedom, anti-individual, anti-life collective was here before the “nazis”, and continues to exist long after the “nazis”. Civilization v barbarian alert. 2025."

Second the motion.

A small point -- Mein Kampf and Jihad express the same notion and the same associations. And, it turns out those Ba'ath parties in the Middle East were "socialist" in their verbiage to the West. So " Civilization v barbarian" seems very accurate.

[logi_cal869]

“Netanyahu: ‘Hamas are the new Nazis’.”

---

And you made a deal with the devil, violating your own edicts on Gaza.

I ask, since apparently no one else will:

“Why???”

Some of us know the answer and believe that Israel should have been subject to the same freeze as the rest of them to pressure the leftists there.

[Netz]

PALEOstinians under the flag of the PLO (A.K.A. “Moderates”) were/are a terrorist organization hell bent on “Liberating” all of Israel (read: conquer and kill all the Jews there) from 1962-present). They were rebuilt during the Oslo Accords under the banner of “Palestinian Authority”. Their official term for killing and terror is called “Resistance” to the so-called “Occupation”. They remain secular murderers of their own people and Israeli Jews.

PALEOstinians under the flag of HAMAS (A.K.A. the “Militants”)
were/are a terrorist organization hell bent on “Liberating” all of Israel (read: conquer and kill all the Jews there) from 1986-present). They were THE ENEMY of the PLO and killed their brothers in Gaza after “elections” where they won a majority.
Their official term for killing and terror is called “Resistance” to the so-called “Occupation”.

THE ONLY DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THESE TWO WARRING PARTIES IS ON WHAT TIMESACLE TO KILL ALL THE JEWS OF ISRAEL. The PLO is patient while HAMAS wants to kill now. The end result and goal for these two blood thirsty organizations is MDJ (More Dead Jews).
Both organizations have proven records of deceit and murder. It is also stated in both their charters.

How anybody can be fooled into thinking these two bodies want peace or justice is beyond any normal comprehension or understanding.

[SunkenCiv]

• Is it time to withhold VISAs from foreign students unless the sign agreement not to protest in US? Seems like no legislation required to do this [01/27/2025]
• Islamophobia Is The Cover-Up For The Crime [01/27/2025]
• Auschwitz survivor who came face to face with Nazi 'Angel of Death' but escaped being sent to the gas chambers after lying about his age tells how he found love with fellow Holocaust victim, 89, following wife's death [01/27/2025]

[Cronos]

Mein Kampf and Jihad express the same notion and the same associations

No they don't.

The Mein Kampf is neo-Darwinism with its "race theory" and "survival of the fittest race"

Islam does not have that - if a J were to convert, that would be fine by Iz

[ROCKLOBSTER]

Hamas are the new Nazis

Moslems are the new Nazis, AND the old Nazis.

[Worldtraveler once upon a time]

--- "The Mein Kampf is neo-Darwinism with its 'race theory' and 'survival of the fittest race' Islam does not have that - if a J were to convert, that would be fine by Iz

That is a particularly interesting assertion. Excepting that that "J" -- as you abbreviate Jew -- would not be a Jew, under the "reversion" theology of Islam. Hitler's mania was about Jewish influence over the entire world, a parallel to the Protocols of the Elders of Zion fake provided by our Bolshevik friends -- whom Hitler also hated.

Wiki offers:

Social Darwinism was predominantly found in laissez-faire societies where the prevailing view was that of an individualist order to society. A different form of social Darwinism was part of the ideological foundations of Nazism and other fascist movements. This form did not envision survival of the fittest within an individualist order of society, but rather advocated a type of racial and national struggle where the state directed human breeding through eugenics.

What remains fascinating is that reading Darwin without the addition of the inane "social Darwinists" reveals, as best I find, no "race theory."

But as to historic photos and the suggestion of linkage....

Seems rather clear.

[Cronos]

It's not my own thoughts - the book below elaborates and gives a great amount of detail on H's neo-Darwinis<

"Hitler's mania was about Jewish influence over the entire world, a parallel to the Protocols of the Elders of Zion fake provided by our Bolshevik friends -- whom Hitler also hated."

--> note that

1. The protocols are of Tsarist origin, not Bolshevik. The Bolsheviks were initially accepting of Jews (think Trotsky) and many Jews flocked to them. The reason for the protocols is the Russian shock when they suddenly got 60% of world Jewry when they dismembered the Polish-Lithuanian commonwealth in 1791
   
   
2. Hitler took that "they are conquering the world - Rotschild and Trotsky" and added in Darwinian ideas about "survival of the fittest"

   Darwin himself says nothing about "race theory" - I don't think Darwin was racist at all. But in the 1800s many people took his ideas and applied it to "race" - which is why the English considered the Irish a lower "race" and depicted them as apes. The Nutzis did that to the Jews etc. etc

   The theology of Islam is a combination of Ebionite Christianity and Judaism - it could be said that it STARTED out as a Judaising heresy of Christianity

   

   Think of Judaism's "chosen people" with strict monotheism, merged with the Christian urge to spread the faith and you have Islam

   Islam originated only in the 8th century - 150 years AFTER the Arab "conquests"

   I am increasingly of the opinion, based on the archaeological evidence, that there was no Arab conquest but the Arab warlords who were working for the ROmans and Sassanid Persians just decided to stop pledging allegiance and take over on their own - just like the Germanic warlords had done in western Europe

   There is no mention of Muhammad in the first 100 to 150 years of the "Arab empire" - and the dome of the rock, which contains the first ever "Quranic inscription" gets the Islamic proclamation of faith "La illah allah, muhammad al rasurillah, shadwan al rasurillah" WRONG - which should be anathema.

   Islam was initially a religion just for Arabs - like Judaism for Jews - they didn't encourage converts. Only after the 720s when they got a huge chunk of Aramaic, Persian etc. converts did they create "Islam" as we know and love /sarc today

[Words Matter]

Mufti’s followers never stopped...

[Worldtraveler once upon a time]

Happily accept the correction. "The protocols are of Tsarist origin, not Bolshevik." The text lives on today, when one reads some online screeds.

I am less convinced of the "theology of Islam is a combination of Ebionite Christianity and Judaism." However one reads the silly text, which I have in two translations of course, the narrative foundation has the first appearance in a cave by a man afflicted with fits of some sort, and then encouraged by his older wife of that time. So the tale starts, argumentatively, there. Of course, there are no existing fragments courtesy of Uthman, and there is no doubt -- except among Muzzies -- that the text is "inviolate," no matter its scholarly critiques. It's funny that the Cairo text starts out ( paraphrase ) with "according to , which is according to B, which is according to C, according to D" and traversing its way back to prove authenticity by assertion. Are parts stolen from early Christianity? Without a doubt. And the Jew-hatred ( "behind a tree" sorts of things ) are definitely not early Christian, as best I read. What strikes me is the Islamic "breaking of the cross" theology, explaining much.

Thanks for the correction. Tsarist era, indeed.

[JimRed]

Undermine Israel’s right to self defense? More like “right to exist”!

[Libloather]

DNC’s Hamas wing hardest hit.

[Cronos]

Note - you pointed out “the silly text” and I assume you meant the Quran.

Well, it is silly, with chapters arranged by length, not chronology and at the same time having “abrogation”.

However:
1. in the Quran the word Muhammad is used just 4 times - and each time as a Title. It IS a title meaning “praiseworthy one”.

Al-Imram (3:144) Muhammad is only a messenger: many Were the messenger that passed away before him. If he died or were slain, will ye then Turn back on your heels? If any did turn back on his heels, not the least harm will he do to Allah; but Allah (on the other hand) will swiftly reward those who (serve Him) with gratitude

Al-Ahzab 33:40 Muhammad is not the father of any of your men, but (he is) the Messenger of Allah and the Seal of the Prophets: and Allah has full knowledge of all thing

47:2 But those who believe and work deeds of righteousness, and believe in the (Revelation) sent down to Muhammad - for it is the Truth from their Lord,- He will remove from them their ills and improve their condition

Al-Fath 48:29 Muhammad is the messenger of Allah; and those who are with him are strong against Unbelievers, (but) compassionate amongst each other. Thou wilt see them bow and prostrate themselves (in prayer), seeking Grace from Allah and (His) Good Pleasure.

This is clearly a title, not a name. We read practically nothing about him. Moses and Jesus have far more references.

The story of Mohammad is from the Sirah - his “biography” - but written 250 years AFTER he allegedly died. in that we ahve the stories of the cave etc.

And to the “Cairo text starts out” —> this is typical Hadith “science” - namely chinese whispers.

---

I am firmly of the opinion that Muhammad as we read him in the Sirah did not exist - no more than Robin Hood existed as we know him.

My opinion is that the Quran’s “praiseworthy one” is that of a Judaic-Christian “Jesus” - maybe merged with Gnostic ideas.

The Hadiths and Sirah on the other hand merge together ideas of different Arabian warlords into the character of Mo

[Menes]

That is an utterly fascinating debate to these humble eyes.

However, if I am allowed to make a little annotation, I would say that Nazism as an ideology is even more deleterious than Islamism.

Why? Because once you convert to Islam, you are accepted „within the fold of the believers“ - and no Muslim is supposed to persecute you any more.

To Nazism, a conversion was not possible. You were either born „Aryan“ or you would forever remain an outsider, an enemy of the „Aryan race“ (the term „master race“, by the way, was used far more in the works of Frank Capra and Rex Stout than in Nazi texts, where it is hardly mentioned. Nazi writers preferred the term „Aryan“).

It seems unthinkable that an orthodox Nazi would have had any esteem for any Jewish person, or any of his deeds or words, no matter how good of character. None of them would ever have said to his faithful Jewish friend (if that had really existed), who even might have saved the Nazi’s life or family, something like: „You’re a better man than I am, Gunga Dinsky“.

I would, however, say that orthodox Nazis share this utter hatred of „the other“ with their Islamist and leftist counterparts: all three of them scorn everything which their respective enemies have ever done, been, or created.

The destruction of Jewish or non-Muslim places of worship or places of education speaks for itself, just as similar destructions wrought by leftists upon non-leftist persons and institutions. As Mao said „Words and deeds without socialism are evil words and deeds“ (cultural revolution, anybody? 😞).

At least you could convert to Islam, but never to Nazism if your heritage happened to be the „wrong“ one. I don’t know about leftism, but it seems that some of them would accept „converts“ to their cause, while others would not (China in the cultural revolution and Cambodia under Pol Pot come to mind).

[Cronos]

Menes -

firstly, there is no such thing as “IslamISM” - Islamic fundamentalism. Islam considers the Quran as the Word of Al - so it cannot be interpreted or considered in any way.

secondly “accepted within the fold of believers” - that isn’t the case where even among Sunni madhabs/schools, the Salafi persecutes other schools.

[Menes]

Oh. I see…but I have heard of the Salafists, still I never would have believed that they are that extreme.

Furthermore, I had, more or less, tried to show that the three totalitarian mindsets of Nazism, Islam and leftism have uncanny resemblances - although they would all do their best to deny that.

[Worldtraveler once upon a time]

--- "My opinion is that the Quran’s 'praiseworthy one' is that of a Judaic-Christian 'Jesus' - maybe merged with Gnostic ideas. The Hadiths and Sirah on the other hand merge together ideas of different Arabian warlords into the character of Mo'."

All the textual critique of these last centuries of the West's contact with Islam and, as you say, you opinion, has amounted to precious little leverage over a "world" religion of schisms which have often murdered each other, as non-Muslims. The notion that, once in the fold is some sort of protection against the murderous urges of Islam's various schools, is simply not borne out by facts. Shia versus Sunni brought that 10-year war between Iran and Iraq, as one example of many.

Islam is a schismatic mess, and its doctrine of them versus us -- Dar al Harb against Dar al Islam -- is not going to be dulled by literary criticism. Evangelizing of Muslims by Christianity as by the secular world are eroding it, Christianity seeming to be the more deeply influential in the long run. We'll see.

[Cronos]

I didn’t say that “, once in the fold is some sort of protection against the murderous urges of Islam’s various schools,”

that was menes