Friday, April 10, 2026

Confronting Both Zionism and the Antisemitism It Welcomes

April 10, 2026

Image by Levi Meir Clancy.

There is no more room left to mince words in the name of political correctness or anything else, for that matter. Israel has become a menace of downright international proportions, and the world must come together to confront and destroy it without conditions. Part of this proclamation has always been true. Israel has always been a menace, a hyper-colonialist killing machine founded on the principles of racial supremacy. It is only the international part of my opening statement that I might have rolled my eyes at until relatively recently.

As despicable as the Zionist cause has been from the very beginning, I have always found the notion of Israel pulling all the levers of a globalist power structure to be silly and at times downright offensive. The United States, in conjunction with a rapidly disintegrating British Empire, created Israel to be a beachhead for Atlantist Pax-American expansion into the Middle East. Israel may have built itself a formidable and influential lobby within the United States, but the notion of a quisling calling the shots has long been patently absurd.

That is, until the American Empire crossed the Rubicon into mid-century England-grade decline during the last decade. Just look at the White House if you don’t believe me. The last three presidential administrations have been helmed by two barely sentient syphilitic sexual predators, men that no healthy empire would ever sponsor to run a bingo, let alone serve as the face for a global imperial hegemon.

Meanwhile, Israel has been rapidly expanding its theater of influence to include most of the Middle East and in the process committing the most brazen and well-publicized genocide against their hostages in the Gaza Strip with total impunity not to mention gorging itself on larger and larger swaths of its neighbor’s territory, and manipulating Donald Trump into embracing a politically suicidal war with Iran that is quickly unraveling into an international disaster likely to irreparably destroy America’s imperial reputation with its allies in both Europe and the Persian Gulf.

Long story short: America is crashing while Israel is rising, and what was once a welfare scrounging Wall Street colony looks poised to become a major power broker in what very much appears to be an increasingly post-American world order. This cannot be allowed to stand. Not Again. Much like the now collapsing American behemoth, Israel is a European colony designed explicitly for genocide, and their epic slaughter-thon bears a rather uncanny resemblance to the Manifest Destiny that made Jamestown the new Rome.

The Zionist State celebrated its independence in 1948 with the slaughter of 15,000 Palestinians, most of them civilians, and then forced the removal of another 750,000 to glorified Indian reservations in the desert, under the threat of genocide. Much like its American cousin, the Nakba never stopped (about 134,000 Palestinians were slaughtered between 1948 and 2022), but it is currently expanding and accelerating at a terrifying pace.

Using the easily preventable attacks on October 7th as an excuse, Israel, under the helm of the increasingly despotic Benjamin Netanyahu, has effectively conquered the Gaza Strip, killing at least 75,000 while forcing over a million more into crowded camps with barely enough food and water to survive. All while Donald Trump’s heinously titled Board of Peace draws up plans to Disneyfy the rubble with the full support and cooperation of every other nation in the region, who all seem to value their cut of the spoils over their hollow bromides to Arab solidarity.

This happened while the entire world watched, while even westerners in unprecedented numbers demanded their leaders put an end to a bloodbath that smartphones and social media made impossible to sanitize. And now, Netanyahu is doing it again, the exact same thing, in South Lebanon, as we speak. His regime has openly announced its intentions to conquer Lebanon up to the Litani River and completely empty the region of its primarily Shia population in order to create what they refer to as a buffer zone. Or in other words, the gangsters have taken the Sudetenland, and now they want Poland too.

This is not a nation that deserves to exist. In fact, this is not a nation we, as a species, can even afford to allow to exist. These psychopaths have picked a fight with the entire neighborhood and used the pedo honeypot they established with Jeffrey Epstein to convince Donald Trump to throw away what’s left of America’s influence just to hold Iran back while they do it again. If it works, Israel just keeps on killing like the UK and the US before it. If it fails, Israel commits nuclear suicide with its illegal stash as instructed by the Samson Option, possibly taking down the entire planet with it.

So, I will say it again, once more with feeling, this is not a nation the world can afford to allow to exist. A single state(less) solution is the only solution. The planet simply cannot endure a third Cromwell Dynasty in an era of hydrogen bombs and hypersonic missiles.

For this observation and many others, I will undoubtedly be roundly condemned as an antisemite; however, this couldn’t be farther from the truth. In fact, I am actually quite terrified that Israel’s very necessary collapse might come at the expense of a wave of genocidal antisemitism that could easily put the Third Reich to shame, and I do not believe this to be a coincidence. I have come to believe that Israel knowingly invokes the antisemitic menace by committing such well-publicized atrocities in the name of all Jewish people as a sick kind of blackmail against the Chosen. Call it a second Samson Option.

And signs of an international backlash, while grossly exaggerated and exploited, are also growing and expanding day by day. We are seeing acts of rage provoked by Israeli war crimes being committed against innocent Jewish civilians in places as far-flung as West Bloomfield, Michigan, and Sydney’s Bondi Beach. We are also seeing hugely popular voices within the MAGA movement itself, like Tucker Carlson and Candace Owens, openly toying with brazenly antisemitic rhetoric and only becoming more influential in the process.

We must all confront Israel, but we must also confront this toxic runoff along with it, and we must confront them both simultaneously with the weapon of history. The Jews are not the problem here; Zionism is, and Zionism has absolutely nothing to do with Judaism or the Semitic people. In fact, Zionism is really just another malignant cell of white supremacy, and it has long disdained both Judaism and most people of Semitic descent.

Zionism emerged from central and eastern Europe during the mid-19th century as a distinctly secular strain of the same European national swamp that would fester into fascism and national socialism, and it caried many of the same characteristics too; devotion to such toxically contrived notions as ‘blood and soil’ and scientific racism, not to mention a pronounced disdain for the east, including the Jews who once closely identified with it.

This is made very clear by some of the movement’s ideological architects, like Ze’ev Jabotinsky, who once proudly proclaimed that “We are going to Palestine first for our national convenience, (second) to sweep out thoroughly all trace of the Oriental soul.” A point reiterated by Israel’s own founding father, David Ben-Gurion, when he stated, “We do not want the Israelis to become Arabs. It is incumbent upon us to struggle against the spirit of the Levant, which corrupts individuals and societies.”

It is precisely this kind of pompously garish line of thinking that led to most Jews in the 19th and early 20th centuries to view Zionists as whack jobs and heretics. In fact, many Orthodox Jewish leaders of the time viewed Judaism to be a fundamentally spiritual tradition and rejected any attempt to transform it into a political nationality as an attempt to replace Jehovah with the state.

Even most secular Jews of this era rejected Zionism, often in favor of movements like Bundism and Yidism, which promoted a kind of radical Jewish cultural autonomy within Europe with a school of largely stateless nationalism much closer to Malcolm X than Menachem Begin.

The tide only shifted after the collective trauma of the Holocaust and the various Red Terrors, when the Zionists managed to leverage the horrors of the bloodlands to stifle any voice of reason that attempted to remind the Jews that these were the very same Ashkenazi supremacists who had in fact quite openly collaborated with the regimes of Hitler and Stalin in reckless attempts to achieve their shared goal of removing the Jews from Europe and using them to Europeanize the Middle East.

This is why German Zionist organizations were the only Jewish orders not banished by the Nazi’s 1933 Nuremberg Laws, and this is why those same Zionists collaborated with the Third Reich on the Haavara Agreement, which brazenly broke the international boycott on Hitler’s regime in exchange for the Nazis compensating German Jews to emigrate to Palestine. A Faustian bargain that saw 60% of all foreign capital invested in Jewish Palestine between 1933 and 1939 coming directly from the Third Reich.

The Zionists continued in this spirit long after their Nazi pals stabbed them in the back to the tune of 7 million Jews and built a distinctly white supremacist colony in Israel made for the Ashkenazi elite by the Ashkenazi elite. In fact, they only invited the Arab Jews, still quite happily strewn across Africa and the Middle East, because the European colonialists lacked the numbers necessary to expel the indigenous Palestinian population alone.

However, they invited these Jews with bombs, launching false flag attacks against synagogues belonging to the regions oldest continuous Jewish population in Iraq in order to stampede terrified Arab Jews into a state that unceremoniously labeled them Mizrahim or “Eastern Dwellers” before stripping them of their diverse cultures through a variety of so-called “national projects” which included involuntary detention in “absorption camps” and removing newborn babies from the arms of their Arab Jewish mothers.

Perhaps the sickest irony of this often-overlooked chapter of history, though, is that those so-called Mizrahi Jews likely have far more in common with the Palestinians they were corralled to wipe out than they do with their paler tribesmen. Many Israeli historians and geneticists now believe that today’s Palestinians were actually the original Jews of Biblical times before converting to Islam or Christianity, and that the sainted Ashkenazi were in fact merely European converts originating from the Kazar Empire of the Caucasus region.

Tragically, Israel succeeded in making the Mizrahim white the same way America did the Irish, by siccing them on their own in a genocidal contest for survival. Netanyahu’s Likud built its rise to power on the backs of the Mizrahim by promising them land and fortune in the illegal settlements of the West Bank. Within decades, these Jews who David Ben-Gurion once referred to as “rabble” had become the shock troops of Greater Israel, clearing the desert plains for the not-so-Semitic Ashkenazi elite.

However, outside the gates, the influence of the fumes produced by generations of Zionist indoctrination wanes among the faithful. Young Jews are once again forming the backbone of the western flank of the anti-Zionist movement, with organizations like Jewish Voice for Peace picking up where the Bundists left off. This is way more than just pissed-off kids rebelling against Hebrew school. This is a reawakening of the true spirit of the Jewish people. One defined by anti-authoritarian resistance and egalitarianism. One defined by proud Jewish fire breathers like Emma Goldman, Abbie Hoffman, and Murray Rothbard.

These people are not our enemies. They are our hope, and any attempt to tar them with the same brush as the usurpers they righteously rail against must be confronted not just as bigotry but as downright counterrevolutionary.

We must all confront both Zionism and antisemitism, and we must confront them both at the same time for the same reason. They are both tools of the Anglo-Saxon Atlantist global order, and they are both being exploited by a burgeoning Zionist empire looking to hijack this sinking ship. We must ensure that this ship finally does indeed go down, and we must ensure that Israel isn’t allowed to take all Twelve Tribes down with them.

Nicky Reid is an agoraphobic anarcho-genderqueer gonzo blogger from Central Pennsylvania and assistant editor for Attack the System. You can find her online at Exile in Happy Valley.

Tehran Peace Museum Urges Global Action, Calls Iran War “Unlawful and Unprovoked”

April 10, 2026

The Tehran Peace Museum has called on the global community to raise awareness, demand accountability, and act to stop ongoing Iran War, warning that civilian lives are being lost while international institutions fail to respond effectively.

On March 31, Tehran museum leadership wrote that “it has now been more than a month since the onset of this unlawful and unprovoked war against Iran.” The statement was shared with the International Network of Museums for Peace members and signed by Shahriar Khateri MD, PhD and Mona Badamchizaedh. In email correspondence, Dr. Khateri gave permission for the letter to be quoted and highlighted the Instagram account of the Iranian Red Crescent.

In their letter, Badamchizaedh and Khateri wrote that the “scale and nature of the violence demand[ed] urgent and sustained international attention.” They wrote that “Civilian infrastructure—including schools, medical centers, residential areas, public service facilities, and sites of cultural heritage—has been systematically and deliberately targeted, day and night. At the same time, leaders of the aggressor countries continue to issue threats to destroy Iran’s infrastructure, including power plants and the oil industry.”

On April 2, the human rights organization HRA reported 3,530 deaths in Iran, and of the 2,819 identified casualties, 57% (1,606) were civilians, including 244 children. The same day, over 100 U.S. experts in international law published an open letter critical of the U.S. government: “The initiation of the campaign was a clear violation of the United Nations Charter, and the conduct of United States forces…raise serious concerns about violations of international human rights law and international humanitarian law, including potential war crimes.” Published in the U.S.-based Just Security, the letter focuses “on the conduct of the U.S. government”.

Both the open letter and Tehran museum statement drew attention to the tragic bombing of Shajareh Tayyebeh Primary School in Minab, Iran. Over 170 children were killed in the attack that Bellingcat and other news organizations showed was done using a U.S. Tomahawk missile strike.

The Tehran Peace Museum’s letter notes the “broad recognition” of illegal aggression and asks who will take responsibility to stop it; “What is the role and responsibility of civil society?”

Badamchizaedh and Khateri called on activists and academics to raise awareness, to share verified information, to challenge “misinformation and war propaganda”, and to demand justice and accountability.

Chris Houston is the President of the Canadian Peace Museum non-profit organization and a columnist for The Bancroft Times.

A War Against Children Cannot be a Christian War


 April 10, 2026

Image by Unsplash.

There are moments when political language begins to sound like something older than politics.

A prayer inside the Pentagon recently asked God to bless the “overwhelming violence of action” and to ensure that “every round find its mark.” Scripture was woven into the cadence of military speech, as though divine presence could be made to converge with operational precision.

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, speaking within a worship context tied to military life, drew from the Psalms: “I pursued my enemies and overtook them, and did not turn back till they were consumed.” In that setting, the words do not remain safely in the past. They are re-entered as invocation, carried from ancient text into the present tense of state power.

Days later, amid escalating tensions and reported threats on infrastructure in Iran—including bridges, power grids, and a train station—President Donald Trump warned that a “whole civilization will die tonight” if demands were not met.

Taken together, these moments disclose a familiar grammar in American political speech: violence rendered not as tragedy to be constrained, but as necessity to be affirmed. The enemy becomes total, and destruction begins to take on the tone of moral clarity.

This is not without precedent. The Hebrew Bible, as Hegseth made clear, contains narratives in which warfare is narrated in sweeping and uncompromising terms, where divine authorization and collective judgment sit uncomfortably close together. These are not marginal texts. They are part of the scriptural inheritance that has shaped Jewish and Christian moral imagination alike.

Biblical scholar Phyllis Trible once named such passages “texts of terror,” not to dismiss them, but to acknowledge their enduring capacity to unsettle. Read honestly, scripture does not resolve its own tensions. It preserves them.

The question, then, is not whether scripture contains violent imagery. It is what happens when such imagery is carried into the liturgical and political life of the state without sustained theological interpretation.

It is important to recognize that this is not a new problem, nor one Christianity has ever settled. Across its history, the church has developed divergent ways of relating scripture to political authority. In the Constantinian tradition, state power could be understood as participating, however imperfectly, in divine ordering. In the peace churches, by contrast, any such alignment is viewed as a distortion of the gospel’s center.

That disagreement is not peripheral. It is constitutive of Christian political theology.

Hegseth is associated with the Communion of Reformed Evangelical Churches, a global Reformed denomination with churches across multiple continents. Its co-founder, Doug Wilson, has appeared in Pentagon worship contexts. The denomination emphasizes the comprehensive lordship of Christ over public life, while also drawing scrutiny for its conservative moral positions and its proximity to forms of Christian nationalist political theology.

At stake is not simply the presence of scripture in public life, but the interpretive frameworks that authorize its meaning.

The claim that Christ exercises lordship over all of life, including politics and statecraft, is a serious and intellectually coherent Christian position, particularly within Reformed thought. It insists that no sphere is morally neutral, and that even state violence is subject to divine judgment. Yet within that same claim lies a tension: whether appeals to divine sovereignty can meaningfully restrain violence in practice, or whether they risk providing it with a sacral vocabulary in moments of political urgency.

For Christians, these questions inevitably return to Jesus.

In my own formation in a First Baptist church in upstate New York, the moral center of the faith was articulated simply: Jesus as teacher of peace. Even within a conservative theological setting, we were taught to distinguish between the violence narrated in ancient texts and the ethical trajectory of the New Testament, where mercy, enemy-love, and non-retaliation come into focus.

That orientation deepened for me in later theological study at Colgate Rochester Crozer Divinity School and Emory University’s Candler School of Theology. Across traditions, Jesus remains a decisive figure for moral interpretation, though not in a way that eliminates disagreement.

A reader formed in Orthodox, sacramental, or political-theology traditions would resist reducing Christ to ethical nonviolence. Christ is not reducible to moral injunctions alone. Kingdom ethics does not stand alone. It exists alongside claims about order, protection, covenant, and the tragic burdens of governance in a fallen world.

Even here, however, there is a line that does not move.

In the New Testament, children are not incidental. They are placed at the center. “Let the little children come to me,” Jesus says, refusing the logic of exclusion. More than this, he issues a warning that reverberates across all Christian traditions: “Whoever causes one of these little ones to stumble, it would be better for them to have a great millstone fastened around their neck and to be drowned in the depth of the sea.”

This is not metaphor softened by time. It is moral clarity in its most severe form.

Whatever disagreements persist among Christians about the use of force, about just war, about sovereignty and restraint, there is no tradition within Christianity that affirms the targeting or instrumentalization of children. The protection of the child is not a peripheral ethic. It is a boundary condition of any claim to Christian moral reasoning.

Once children are absorbed into strategy, once their lives are rendered collateral or invisible, the argument is over.

International humanitarian law attempts to preserve this distinction in its own language, drawing lines between combatant and civilian, proportionality and excess. But law depends on moral vision. And moral vision depends, in part, on what cannot be justified.

A war that destroys the conditions of life for children, through bombing infrastructure, collapsing healthcare systems, or rendering entire populations vulnerable to starvation and displacement, cannot be reconciled with the moral universe of the New Testament.

It is not simply a violation of law. It is a contradiction of witness.

A war against children cannot be a Christian war.

And any political theology that cannot say this, without qualification, has already conceded too much.

George Cassidy Payne, syndicated by PeaceVoice, is a Rochester-based writer whose work sits at the intersection of politics, ethics, and lived experience. A poet, philosopher, and 988 crisis counselor, he covers issues of democracy, justice, and community resilience.