Israel’s war on Gaza has revealed a chilling evolution in the use of artificial intelligence in warfare. Behind the devastation lies a network of military algorithms, chief among them ‘Lavender’ and ‘Gospel’, developed by Israel’s elite cyber-intelligence arm, Unit 8200. These systems, known as a are invisible, fast, and built for mass-scale targeting.

I…

Read more

For decades, Israel has maintained the narrative that occupation was temporary. That the West Bank was disputed territory to be negotiated, and that Gaza was a problem to be solved. But in recent weeks, that fiction has been stripped away. Through new statements, leaked plans, and military movements, the Israeli government has made one thing clear: the …

Read more

The Hannibal Directive is one of the most controversial and closely guarded policies in Israel’s military doctrine. Designed by the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) in 1986, the directive authorizes Israeli forces to use overwhelming, even lethal, force to prevent the capture of soldiers by enemy combatants, regardless of the risk to the captured soldier or surrounding civilians.

Though the directive remained classified for decades, recent investigations have confirmed what critics long suspected: it amounts to a kill order. A policy that permits the IDF to fire on their own, if it means denying an enemy the leverage of a live hostage.

The Hannibal Directive was created in the aftermath of several high-profile kidnappings of Israeli soldiers, most notably during the First Lebanon War. These abductions often resulted in protracted and politically costly prisoner swaps. Military officials saw this as a strategic vulnerability, one that could be exploited by groups like Hezbollah or Hamas.

The directive, never formally published, was transmitted verbally or in tightly controlled documents within the military. Its purpose was clear: eliminate the possibility of capture, even if that meant endangering the lives of the captives.

October 7, 2023: When Hannibal Was Activated Again

After years of ambiguous enforcement and denials, the directive re-entered the public spotlight following Hamas’s surprise attack on southern Israel on October 7, 2023. According to reporting by Haaretz, the IDF invoked the Hannibal Directive in at least three locations.

The order: stop any vehicle suspected of carrying Israeli hostages into Gaza, by any means necessary. That meant airstrikes on moving cars, gunfire on fleeing convoys, and a general rule of engagement that left no room for hesitation.

The result: dozens of civilians and soldiers, many of whom were likely captives, were killed by Israeli forces in an attempt to prevent their abduction. The IDF has not denied these actions. Instead, officials have defended them as necessary to prevent long-term national security risks.

The directive has been heavily criticized by human rights organizations and legal scholars. It runs counter to the Geneva Conventions, which prioritize the protection of captives and prohibit targeting non-combatants. The very notion of a military openly killing its own personnel, or civilians, to avoid political embarrassment or prisoner trades has sparked outrage.

Domestically, the policy has long been controversial. Some Israeli families of soldiers have vocally opposed it, demanding the government do more to protect captured troops, not authorize their deaths.

Internationally, the directive raises questions about proportionality, military ethics, and accountability. No other Western-aligned military maintains a doctrine so explicitly permissive of fratricide in hostage scenarios.

A Doctrine Without Oversight

Part of what makes the Hannibal Directive so dangerous is its opacity. There is no law codifying it. There is no democratic oversight. It exists in the shadows of military doctrine, invoked in crisis and denied in peacetime.

When asked about the directive, IDF spokespeople often deflect. The Israeli government has never released the full text. And though some military commanders have acknowledged its existence, none have been held accountable for its consequences.

The October 7 incident may change that. With investigations mounting and international pressure growing, calls for transparency are increasing. But whether the policy will be repealed, revised, or simply renamed remains to be seen.

The Hannibal Directive forces a brutal question: is it ever acceptable to kill your own citizens to deny the enemy a propaganda victory? For decades, Israel answered that question in silence. Now, the world is beginning to demand an answer.

You saw the photo, didn’t you? The one of the kid buried in dust, clutching someone who might’ve been their mother five minutes before the building came down. Or maybe it was the video, the one with the man shouting for help with both arms gone. You saw it. You probably lingered for a second. Felt something. Maybe even shared it. And then? You kept scro…

Read more

In 1943, the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising stood as a symbol of human resistance against absolute tyranny. Surrounded by walls, deprived of food, and subject to systematic extermination, Jews in the Warsaw Ghetto rose up with homemade weapons and burning conviction. They fought not for victory, but for dignity in the face of annihilation.

Today, a different peo…

Read more

On October 7, 2023, the world was thrust into chaos after a coordinated assault by Hamas on Israeli territory, triggering one of the most volatile flashpoints in the region in decades. In the fog of war, mainstream media outlets rushed to fill the information void,often with incomplete, exaggerated, or outright false reports. These inaccuracies shaped public opinion, influenced international policy, and provided cover for disproportionate military retaliation. This article examines seven of the most egregious and misleading claims amplified by major media organizations in the aftermath of the attack.

1. "Hamas Beheaded 40 Babies"

Perhaps the most horrific and viral claim, the story that Hamas fighters beheaded 40 babies was uncritically shared by major outlets including CNN, Fox News, and the New York Post. The source? Unverified testimonies from IDF soldiers and emergency response volunteers. No photos or forensic evidence were ever presented. Even Israeli officials later admitted that they could not confirm this claim. Despite the lack of verification, the story dominated headlines for days, fueling global outrage and justifying an aggressive military response.

In what will become a common theme throughout this list, Israel has beheaded more babies in the midst of their bombing campaign, than the number that we can find on October 7, which is zero.

2. "Mass Rapes Committed by Hamas"

Reports of systematic sexual violence were presented as fact before any credible investigation could take place. This included horrifying tales such as the mutilation of pregnant women, which were later walked back by initial sources like ZAKA. Human Rights Watch and other watchdogs have since noted that while some accounts are under investigation, the evidence does not yet support the sweeping, systematic nature of the allegations as initially reported.

This was one we debated on including in the list, as there were indeed some instances of rape on October 7. The issue is that the claim was a systematic policy of rape, which has not been found. In contrast, sexual assault from IDF soldiers on Palestinians seems to be far more widespread as a military tactic, with some human rights groups citing that it is a "method of war" for the country.

3. "Hamas Burned Children Alive"

Claims that children were burned alive quickly spread across social media and were picked up by major news organizations. These stories were emotionally powerful but largely unverified. Forensic analyses by Haaretz and Al Jazeera later revealed that several of the deaths attributed to Hamas may have been caused by fire during gun battles,some potentially started by Israeli tank fire or airstrikes. Nonetheless, these images were used to justify brutal reprisals in Gaza.

Meanwhile, Israel has burned a couple of people a week, since October 7. The stories of fire bombs, carpet bombs and invasions, targeting tents of fleeing refugees have become so common that we are now numb to them. In every instance of one of these attacks, social media is awash with the images of burning bodies, be they children, doctors or patients.

4. "Hamas Used Civilians as Human Shields"

While there have been instances in past conflicts where fighters used civilian areas for cover, the blanket claim that Hamas systematically used human shields on October 7 lacks firm evidence. Reports from Human Rights Watch show isolated cases, but the narrative was weaponized to delegitimize Palestinian civilian suffering and downplay the high number of casualties from Israeli airstrikes.

In the case of Israel, they have a policy of using human shields. Many instances of Palestinians being tied to the front of military vehicles, using children to send messages to civilians trapped, and beyond simply being shields, hundreds of children have been killed by direct sniper fire.

5. "The Hostages are the Main Priority"

Initial reports implied that hostages taken during the attack were summarily executed by Hamas. However, follow-up investigations revealed that several hostages may have been killed during chaotic Israeli attempts to retake control, including through tank shelling and helicopter gunfire. The oversimplified narrative stripped away the nuance and complexity of the real battlefield conditions.

One of the most repeated assertions in the early hours and weeks after October 7 was that rescuing hostages was Israel’s top priority. The media parroted this claim without scrutiny, despite clear signals from Israeli leadership that contradicted it. Defense Minister Yoav Gallant declared, “We are shifting to a full offense,” and “We are not negotiating.” Prime Minister Netanyahu’s messaging prioritized retaliation over reconciliation, and hostage families were left pleading for their loved ones’ lives in the face of political disinterest. The Israeli military’s approach made clear that military dominance—not hostage safety—was the driving strategy.

More disturbingly, Israel has a documented history of killing its own hostages in high-risk situations. Reports emerged that some hostages on October 7 may have died not at the hands of Hamas, but during Israeli counter-assaults. This isn’t new: past hostage rescue attempts, including the infamous Sabena flight and more recent operations in Gaza, have seen hostages killed by IDF fire. Yet mainstream outlets continued to present Israel as the protector, erasing the track record of lethal 'rescues' that prioritized optics over lives.

6. "Hamas Militants Were Solely Responsible for Civilian Deaths"

Mainstream coverage overwhelmingly placed the blame for civilian deaths solely on Hamas. But footage, reports, and eyewitness accounts have since pointed to several incidents of friendly fire and Israeli misidentifications. In some areas, Israeli forces shot civilians trying to flee, mistaking them for militants. These 'inconvenient truths' were still a lie however, as it turned out, the deaths of Israelis was part of the defense tactic.

Initially thought to be the accidents of a panicking military, it turned out that the order to kill Israelis on October 7, came from the top. Using a military doctrine called the 'Hannibal Directive', where the IDF chooses to murder their own citizens, rather than allow them to be taken hostage.

7. "The Attack Was Unprovoked"

Framing October 7 as an act of irrational violence stripped it from its political and historical context. Decades of occupation, siege, and repeated military operations in Gaza were conveniently erased. Analysts like Peter Beinart and organizations like B’Tselem have long warned that failing to address the systemic oppression of Palestinians is a recipe for escalation. Ignoring that context allowed the media to paint a picture of unmotivated savagery rather than a violent reaction to violent conditions.

The media’s role in shaping public consciousness cannot be overstated, especially during moments of crisis. By failing to verify information, relying on official sources without scrutiny, and reinforcing simplistic narratives, mainstream outlets contributed to the fog of war rather than dispelling it. These lies didn’t just mislead,they justified collective punishment, enabled war crimes, and silenced Palestinian voices. Accountability in journalism is not optional. When the stakes are lives, accuracy is a moral imperative.

In 1948, a state was declared not on the basis of divine will, democratic consent, or international justice. It was declared by force, justified by myth, and sanctified by trauma. Israel, the so-called 'Jewish state,' claimed to be a resurrection of an ancient people returning to their land after 3,000 years of exile. But beneath that slogan lies a truth far more complicated and far more painful – especially for those of us who know that Judaism and Zionism are not the same. In fact, they are opposites.

To be a Jew is to live with history, not to rewrite it. To be a Jew is to cherish the exile, to wrestle with God, to seek peace, and to remember that the Messiah has not yet come. Zionism is a rebellion against all of that. It is a political ideology born in 19th-century Europe, not Mount Sinai. It was built not by prophets or priests, but by atheists and nationalists who sought to transform a religion into a race and a people into a nation-state.

For many Jews, especially those who held fast to the Torah and the teachings of the rabbis, Zionism was a betrayal. Not just of the world, but of God. And it is time we said that out loud.

The Heresy of Zionism

In the late 1800s, as nationalism swept across Europe, Jews were caught between assimilation and exclusion. Theodor Herzl, an assimilated Austrian journalist with no religious education and barely any connection to Jewish tradition, proposed a solution: a Jewish state. Not a spiritual home, not a return to mitzvot or Torah, but a physical, political entity. He called it Zionism.

But from the beginning, the rabbis saw the danger. In 1935, Rabbi Elchonon Wasserman declared that "Zionism is worse than assimilation" because it uses the language of Judaism to destroy it from within. Rabbi Amram Blau of Neturei Karta famously said, "Zionism has no connection with Judaism." And perhaps most powerfully, Rabbi Joel Teitelbaum, author of "Vayoel Moshe," warned that the founding of a Jewish state before the coming of the Messiah was not only forbidden, it was an act of war against Heaven.

These rabbis were not fringe. They represented a current of Jewish thought that goes back to the Talmud itself, which teaches that the Jewish people were bound by three oaths: not to ascend to the Land of Israel by force, not to rebel against the nations, and not to hasten the end.

Zionism violated all three.

From Europe to the Levant: A Colonial Journey

The early Zionists were European settlers, not indigenous returnees. They spoke German, Polish, and Yiddish, not Hebrew or Arabic. They brought with them the same colonial mindset that drove other Europeans to Africa and Asia. They did not ask the people of the land for permission to settle. They declared that Palestine was empty or undeveloped. They called the Arabs primitive. They called the land theirs.

But Palestine was not empty. It was full of people: Arab Muslims, Arab Christians, Druze, Armenians, Jews – and many of those Jews opposed the Zionist project. Ashkenazi settlers ignored them.

In this way, Zionism became a classic settler-colonial project. It used ancient myth to justify modern conquest. It framed Palestinians as invaders and Jews from Poland as natives. It rewrote history not to honor it, but to erase it.

The Fabrication of a Biblical Claim

Zionism claims to be the rebirth of an ancient people in their homeland. But that claim falls apart under scrutiny.

First, there is no continuous ethnic or genetic link between ancient Israelites and modern Ashkenazi Jews. The Jewish diaspora is diverse, and many communities, including Ashkenazim, descend from converts and mixed populations. There is more genetic and cultural continuity between Palestinians and the ancient peoples of Canaan than between most European Jews and those same peoples.

Second, the Bible is not a land deed. It is a sacred text, filled with allegory, contradiction, and moral instruction. It was never meant to serve as the foundation for ethnic nationalism. Using it as such is not only bad theology, it is a desecration.

Third, the idea of an unbroken 3,000-year yearning for return is simply false. For most of Jewish history, Jews lived contentedly in diaspora. Spain, Baghdad, Ethiopia, Yemen, and yes—even Palestine—were homes to vibrant Jewish communities that had no political ambitions. The yearning was spiritual, not territorial.

Palestine Before 1948

Before Zionism arrived, Palestine was not a barren wasteland. It was a multi-religious, multi-ethnic society with a deep-rooted Arab identity. Its people farmed the land, spoke Arabic, built homes and mosques and churches and synagogues. They preserved the heritage of the region not in museum displays, but in lived experience.

Many Palestinian families can trace their ancestry back centuries, often with more documentation than the European settlers who arrived with Zionist dreams. Their dialects, foods, and customs are intertwined with the history of the land in a way that no nationalist ideology can replicate.

And yet, in 1948, they were expelled. Entire villages were razed. Hundreds of thousands were made refugees. And all of it was justified with the slogan: "We are returning home."

The Theft of History

Perhaps the most insidious part of the Zionist project is not just the theft of land, but the theft of history.

Zionism claims the prophets, the psalms, the temples – but only when it is convenient. It ignores the rabbinic tradition that cautions against statehood. It ignores the spiritual value of exile. It ignores that Judaism survived 2,000 years without a nation, a flag, or an army.

At the same time, it erases the deep connections Palestinians have to the land. It bulldozes villages and builds malls over them. It names parks after generals who led massacres. It fills school textbooks with myths about empty lands and miracle blooms.

And worst of all, it brands any Jewish opposition to this project as "self-hatred" or betrayal. But we are not betraying Judaism. We are defending it.

Being Jewish Without Zionism

To be a Jew is not to support Israel. To be a Jew is to question power, to stand with the oppressed, to fight for justice even when it is uncomfortable.

Many Jews reject Zionism not despite being Jewish, but because they are Jewish. They believe in the dignity of all people. They believe that no one should be expelled from their home. They believe that God does not need tanks or tear gas.

Diaspora is not exile. It is home. And for the millions of Jews who live outside Israel, who worship, love, and build communities all over the world, that truth is sacred. The idea that all Jews belong in one militarized state is not only dangerous. It is a lie.

A Future Beyond Myth

The truth is that Israel did not begin 3,000 years ago. It began in 1948, with violence, displacement, and myth-making. It began with a gun, a flag, and a European dream of supremacy wrapped in Jewish symbols.

But we can end the lie. We can separate our faith from their ideology. We can listen to Palestinians who have been screaming for decades that this land is theirs, that their history matters, that their pain is not theoretical.

We can honor the Jewish tradition by opposing apartheid. We can remember that being the Chosen People never meant chosen to oppress.

Zionism is not Judaism. It is a distortion. A betrayal. A heresy dressed in the garb of prophets. And while it may control the land today, it cannot control the truth.

The truth is that a 3,000-year history did not begin in 1948. But a lie did. And it’s time we buried that lie so that justice, real justice, can rise in its place.

Because no matter how much history Zionism tries to erase, there will always be those who remember it differently. And as Jews, it is not only our right to remember. It is our obligation.

As of April 2025, Gaza is enduring a manufactured water catastrophe. Israel has destroyed over 85% of water and sanitation infrastructure in the territory, including the main pipeline supplying Gaza City. Desalination plants, previously responsible for delivering minimal clean water to civilians, have been shut down due to fuel restrictions imposed by t…

Read more

The phrase “Greater Israel” evokes different reactions depending on who hears it. To many on the Israeli far-right, it’s a vision of biblical redemption—a modern state reasserting ancient borders, one settlement at a time. To Palestinians, it’s the slow erasure of their homeland. And to legal experts and international observers, it’s a dangerous fantasy whose pursuit has translated into decades of occupation, apartheid, and what increasingly fits the definition of ethnic cleansing.

This is the story of a project—decades in the making—that has transformed state policy, driven the rise of militant settler movements, and pushed Israel into a legal and moral crisis. From the Nakba to Netanyahu, from the Golan Heights to Masafer Yatta, it is the story of how land is seized, populations displaced, and silence enforced. It is the story of Greater Israel—and the lives erased to make it possible.

From Partition to Expansion: A History of Unfinished Maps

The idea of Greater Israel is not new. Zionist leaders as early as 1919 proposed borders that far exceeded the UN’s 1947 partition plan. These visions included southern Lebanon, the Golan Heights, and territory stretching to the Jordan River and beyond. For some, these were spiritual claims. For others, strategic. But the outcome was always the same: expansion at the expense of the Arab population.

In 1948, Israel expanded beyond its UN-sanctioned borders during the Arab-Israeli War, capturing 78% of historical Palestine and displacing over 750,000 Palestinians. Hundreds of villages were destroyed or depopulated. The act of founding Israel became inseparable from the act of erasing Palestine. This was not a tragedy of war—it was policy. And it set a precedent that expansion could be framed as security, even as entire communities vanished.

Then came 1967, when Israel successfully repelled an attack from it’s neighbors, reversing the tide of the conflict to take land in return. In six days, Israel seized the West Bank, Gaza, East Jerusalem, the Golan Heights, and the Sinai Peninsula. For the Greater Israel movement, it was vindication. The “biblical heartland” was under Jewish control again. The occupation was supposed to be temporary, pending peace talks. But by the 1970s, settlements had begun dotting the West Bank, often led by ideological groups like Gush Emunim. The state didn’t just look away—it built the roads.

The Settler Engine

Today, over 700,000 Israeli settlers live in the West Bank and East Jerusalem. Many are driven by religious nationalism, others by economic incentives. All are part of a system that has made Palestinian displacement a permanent feature of life in the occupied territories. Outposts built without permits are legalized retroactively. Land is confiscated “for security.” Olive groves are burned. Families are evicted based on pre-1948 Jewish property claims. The Palestinians evicted from those homes are given no such right of return.

The Israeli military plays its part. Checkpoints, demolitions, night raids, and administrative detention enforce a regime of fear and instability. Settler violence—once condemned as fringe—is now often state-sanctioned or escorted by soldiers. The dual legal system—Israeli civil law for settlers, martial law for Palestinians—codifies apartheid in daily life.

Following the October 2023 uprising, this violence intensified. Entire Palestinian communities in the West Bank were emptied through coordinated attacks by settler militias and the army. The UN reported over 40,000 displaced by early 2025. A campaign of ethnic cleansing was underway, covered by the dust of war in Gaza.

Netanyahu’s Long Game

No Israeli politician has done more to normalize the Greater Israel agenda than Benjamin Netanyahu. His decades in power have seen a strategic shift: from rhetorical support for a two-state solution to a de facto one-state reality with permanent occupation. Under his leadership, annexation moved from the margins to the mainstream.

In coalition with far-right ministers like Bezalel Smotrich and Itamar Ben-Gvir, Netanyahu’s government transferred key powers over the West Bank from the military to civilian hands—effectively annexing large parts of the territory. Settlements expanded. Outposts were legalized. East Jerusalem became a crucible for demographic engineering.

In 2020, the Trump administration gave Netanyahu a green light with the so-called “Peace to Prosperity” plan, which allowed for formal annexation of 30% of the West Bank. The move was only paused under pressure from the UAE’s normalization deal. But it was never abandoned. In Netanyahu’s words, the plan remains “on the table.”

Ethnic Cleansing by Any Other Name

International law is unambiguous: settlements in occupied territory are illegal. Forcible transfer of populations is a war crime. And yet, the machinery of Israeli expansion continues. The Geneva Conventions, UN resolutions, and the Rome Statute all offer frameworks that Israel routinely violates—with impunity.

The term “ethnic cleansing” is controversial, but it fits. From Sheikh Jarrah evictions to the razing of Masafer Yatta, the pattern is clear: remove Palestinians, repurpose the land, and rewrite the narrative. As former Israeli Defense Minister Moshe Ya’alon warned in 2024, Israel is already “cleansing.” When a state builds policy on the displacement of an ethnic group, when it creates legal and physical frameworks to erase their presence, there’s no other word that fits.

A Global Silence

Why does it continue? Because the world lets it. The U.S. shields Israel at the UN. Europe condemns but trades. Arab states normalize. And the ICC’s investigations stall under political pressure. Meanwhile, Palestinian voices are silenced, fragmented, or labeled as threats.

The 2023 war in Gaza shocked the world, but it also distracted it. While attention focused on ceasefires and hostages, the West Bank burned. Settlers surged. Homes were razed. Water was cut. Aid was blocked. It was, as one Ramallah activist said, “a bait and switch.”

Conclusion: A Map Drawn in Blood

Greater Israel is not a map on a wall—it’s a policy on the ground. It lives in the concrete walls of the separation barrier, in the rubble of demolished villages, and in the silence of those who watch and say nothing. It is built not only with bulldozers and guns, but with laws, narratives, and diplomacy.

Whether it succeeds is no longer a question of maps—it is a question of will. The will of the Israeli government to continue. The will of the international community to intervene. And the will of the Palestinian people to endure.

Until that will is tested, the project of Greater Israel will continue. And the cleansing will go on.

Testimony from an Israeli soldier and reports from multiple human rights groups confirm that the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) have deliberately transformed large swaths of the Gaza Strip into so-called “kill zones” — areas where any person, regardless of age or affiliation, is considered a legitimate target.

According to an investigation by The Guardian, …

Read more