Western governments do fund Israel's neighbors. This includes Egypt (one of the largest recipients of US foreign aid), Jordan, Lebanon (including indirectly through UNIFIL and UNRWA), Syria, and Iraq if they count as a neighbor.
Patrons don't necessarily apply any standard evenly.
> "Hitler did not kill the Jews because of their religion; he killed them because they were Jews. And we must remember that, because there are those who would do the same today if they could."
— Benjamin Netanyahu, speaking at the World Holocaust Forum in 2020.
> "Hitler was not only a mass murderer, he was a master of deception. He deceived the world about his true intentions, and ultimately, his goal was to exterminate the Jewish people."
— Benjamin Netanyahu, during a speech at Yad Vashem in 2012.
> "For many, Auschwitz is the ultimate symbol of evil. It is certainly that. The tattooed arms of those who passed under its infamous gates, the piles of shoes and eyeglasses seized from the dispossessed in their final moments, the gas chambers and crematoria that turned millions of people into ash, all these bear witness to the horrific depths to which humanity can sink."
- Benjamin Netanyahu's speech at the 5th World Holocaust Forum in 2020
I hope every Hitler-apologist and Holocaust-denier says and believes things like that.
Compare that to al-Husseini, a key figure worth learning about. He was an Arab leader that stoked anti-Jewish sentiment with religious propaganda about Al-Aqsa Mosque (still going today perpetuated by Hamas), possibly to distract from his corrupt management of religious endowments. Al-Husseini led anti-British and anti-Jewish violence for years. He contributed to what is a key turning point or escalation of the conflict, the Hebron Massacre in 1929.
A rumor that Jews planned to take control of the Al-Aqsa Mosque resulted in a violent pogrom against a Jewish community with continuously presence for thousands of years. By the end the mob killed 67 Jews. The rioters attacked homes, horrifically tortured and killed entire families, mutilated, raped, stabbed children, and enacted mass destruction on the Jewish quarter. In many ways it was eerily similar to October 7th. I was shocked when I read about it.
There were some noble people that saved lives from the hundreds. One Arab man literally rode in on a white horse to protect some defenseless people.
What did al-Husseni say about the riot?
> "The massacre in Hebron was the result of a natural and justified reaction to the growing presence of Jews in Palestine. The Jews were responsible for the violence that broke out."
He blamed the victims.
> "Palestine is the land of the Arabs, and it will remain so. The Zionist movement is an illegal act and must be opposed by all means, including violence."
He advocated for violence.
> "The Jews have no place in Palestine and should leave."
al-Husseini had very close ties with Nazis. He broadcast Nazi propaganda over Arab radio from Berlin, urged Muslim and Arab populations to support Nazi efforts, and echoed their antisemitic ideology. He openly called for the destruction of Jewish communities in the Middle East. He helped recruit Muslim soldiers for the Waffen-SS, which is considered among the worst of the Nazi forces in terms of atrocities and war crimes.
And Abbas? An actual Holocaust denier and revisionist?
> "The Zionist movement cooperated with the Nazis in persecuting the Jews, and this is a well-known fact.”
— Mahmood Abbas, 1982 in his PhD thesis "The Other Side: The Secret Relationship Between Nazism and Zionism."
> "The number of Jews killed during the Holocaust is exaggerated."
— Mahmood Abbas, 2018
These are some examples of what Holocaust denial and revisionism typically sound like.
I see the recognition, where are the hard conditionality or the security guardrails? If the PA doesn't cooperate, what leverage exists?
This move alone could have accomplished a lot of reforms. So far all I've seen is:
1) the PA supposedly end "pay for slay" where Palestinians that commit terrorist attacks or their family gets more money for more dead and injured victims or for longer prison terms (this program may have actually ended, it's just really hard to tell because of mixed signals),
2) Abbas condemn October 7th once in a letter to France and Saudi Arabia in June 2025 (for the first time and a little under 2 years after October 7th happened), and
3) the arrest of a person that committed a terrorist attack in France in the 1982.
I really hope there was a lot more behind the scenes, because those seem pretty small.
Having elections they should have had for many years now wouldn't be that impressive either.
Why not condition recognition on 1) releasing the hostages and 2) Hamas / Palestinian Islamic Jihad / Al-Qassam / etc disarming? Those 2 things could end the current war.
It's good you recognize the need of a re-education program and regime change. Once one side gets re-education and the right leadership, the conflict can be solved peacefully and both sides can coexist productively. You seem to have concluded the wrong party needs those things.
Some have spent 2x more money than Israel. Israel is 10th. I haven't heard anybody around me mention Liberia or the Marshall Islands, maybe a handful of times in my life.
These are the top 10 Foreign Principals from 2016 - 2024.
Foreign Principal Total Spending
1. Government of Liberia $350,486,671
2. Government of the Marshall Islands $283,901,646
3. Government of China $277,692,350
4. Japan External Trade Organization $277,638,402
5. Government of Saudi Arabia $238,415,218
6. Government of Bermuda $192,046,623
7. Barzan Holdings $155,775,778
8. ANO TV-Novosti $147,069,172
9. Government of the Bahamas $136,148,426
10 Government of Ireland $132,165,695
No Israeli principal in the top 10. It's obfuscated but Russia is in there (ANO TV-Novosti) and Qatar (Barzan Holdings).
Also, in the link you shared of "Industries", Israel is 7th in single issue. Some of the issues 1-6 have 10x levels of money spent. I wish it were broken down even more. I'm most interested in what makes up "miscellaneous issues".
How little do you know about the experience of Jews in Nazi Germany?
> And much like the useless British-colonial state that governed Israel then, the vestigial British state in India which is as internet upon Anglo-American triumph today, can't and will do jack shit for them.
Are you saying that Indian people wouldn't be allowed to immigrate to India?
Minutes of research say current Indian law allows people of Indian descent but not citizens to get Overseas Citizenship of India (OCI) — a special immigration status for foreign nationals of Indian origin.
You're eligible if you are:
1. A former Indian citizen (who gave up Indian citizenship, e.g., to get U.S. or UK citizenship), or
2. A descendant (up to great-grandparent level) of an Indian citizen, or
3. The spouse of an Indian citizen or an OCI cardholder (subject to conditions)
With OCI, you can have:
1. Unlimited stay in India
2. Right to work, own property, and open bank accounts.
India could change it's laws, keep all the non-citizens out (or even citizens, what can't we imagine in this fantasy story). India could deny OCI to most every person that applies for its green card like status. But under current laws in your unlikely story, they seem like they'll do something.
I'd expect they'd fly as many Indian people as they could out of the US like many countries do in times of war. Not that this scenario will ever come to pass.
Plenty of people criticize Israel and are not antisemites. This is true of most Israelis. They generally criticize Israel in non-antisemitic ways. It is quite easy to do so.
Roger Waters is an antisemite.
Do people who have known Roger Waters his entire life think he is an antisemite because of his obsessive criticism of Israel, or because of all the other anti Jewish things he has said and done AND his singular obsession with Israel?
>In the 2023 documentary The Dark Side of Roger Waters, the
>saxophonist Norbert Stachel recounts Waters refusing to eat >vegetarian >dishes in Lebanon, calling them “Jew food”. When >the musician explained >that most of his relatives had been >killed in the Holocaust, the singer did >a crude and offensive >impersonation of a Polish peasant woman, and said, >“Oh, I can >help you feel like you’re meeting your long-lost relatives. I >can introduce you to your dead grandmother.”
>
>Tellingly, Stachel also claimed to overhear Waters telling a >girlfriend that Judaism was not a race, saying, “They’re >white European men that grow beards and they practise the >religion Judaism, but they’re no different than me; they have >no difference in their background or their history or their >culture or anything.”
He did write the forward to Shahak's Jewish History, Jewish Religion: The Weight of Three Thousand Years. The book is framed as an attack on Jewish fundamentalism.
Werner Cohn, Professor Emeritus at the University of British Colombia, writes: “He [Shahak] says (pp. 23-4) that "Jewish children are actually taught" to utter a ritual curse when passing a non-Jewish cemetery.[b] He also tells us (p. 34) that "both before and after a meal, a pious Jew ritually washes his hands....On one of these two occasions he is worshiping God... but on the other he is worshiping Satan..." I did take the trouble to question my orthodox rabbi nephew to find what might be behind such tall tales. He had no clue. If orthodox Jews were actually taught such hateful things, surely someone would have heard. Whom is Dr. Shahak kidding?”
Edward Said wrote the foreward to the second edition, calling Shahak “one of the most remarkable individuals in the contemporary Middle East.” Said writes that the book is “nothing less than a concise history of classic and modern Judaism, insofar as these are relevant to the understanding of modern Israel.”
At best Said endorses antisemites.
Tucker Carlson hosted Darryl Cooper, a podcaster known for promoting Holocaust revisionism and making historically inaccurate claims about World War II. He labeled Winston Churchill as the "chief villain" of the conflict. They perpetuated downplayed Nazi atrocities.
I hadn't heard of them either so I checked online. I usually check Media Bias / Fact Check and AllSides when I encounter a news source with which I'm not familiar.
1. Media Bias / Fact Check:
Funded by / Ownership
The Cradle lacks transparency as it does not disclose who owns it. Revenue is generated through donations.
Analysis / Bias
The Cradle’s content frequently opposes Israeli policies and Western geopolitical stances, particularly focusing on West Asian politics. Articles often critique far-right Israeli politicians and highlight regional issues from a perspective that challenges mainstream Western narratives. Articles and headlines often use loaded emotional language in opposition to Israeli policy like this Cracks deepen in Israel as opposition head issues ‘ultimatum’ to Netanyahu. This story is correctly sourced from the Times of Israel and Haaretz.
Editorially, The Cradle consistently frames Israel negatively with stories such as this On Israel and rape. While this article is sourced properly from credible sources, it is entirely one-sided in focusing on Israel. When reporting on the United States, they often report negatively on President Joe Biden like this ‘Biden has the blood of innocent people on his hands’: Former US official.
The Cradle Rated Lean Left in January 2024 Independent Review
An independent AllSides reviewer opted to give The Cradle an initial rating of Lean Left.
While it demonstrated a clear opposition to Israel and the West, The Cradle did not appear to weigh in on other topics relevant to right-left U.S. politics. Site searches for "liberal," "conservative," "right-wing," and "left-wing" yielded few results.
Who is your customer? Why should they use your product over alternatives to solve their problem / improve their life?
This is the realm of product management and product marketing as much as general "marketing".
Read The Mom Test. Follow what it says to do practical user research, so that you can effectively target your niche within time management / productivity tools.
After that, here's a good video from a YC person about launches, and why you should think of them as things to do over and over as opposed to just once:
From what I have seen and observed, I wouldn't be surprised if things aren't that different in Europe from the US, just somewhat worse on the whole. That is, antisemitism is found on all sides of the political spectrum including in the center. Also, that antisemitism is most common, and often most overt, on the right / far right. Share any studies you have supporting or refuting that though.
This covers many countries, and does have multiple years in many of them, but it doesn't distinguish by political views. Just gender, age, and religious affiliation by country.
> While antisemitism in the U.S. is often written about through a “both sides” lens, our evidence — the first of its kind in testing hypotheses through experiments on a large repre- sentative sample — suggests the problem of antisemitism is much more serious on the right than the left. This evidence confirms that the antisemitism that has been on prominent display in white nationalist protests is not merely confined to a tiny group of extremists; antisemitic attitudes appear quite common among young conservatives, and much more so than among older conservatives or among liberals of any age.
This view isn't supported by studies in this area. They do find antisemitism on the left and the center of the US political spectrum - just more on the right.
> While antisemitism in the U.S. is often written about through a “both sides” lens, our evidence — the first of its kind in testing hypotheses through experiments on a large repre-
sentative sample — suggests the problem of antisemitism is much more serious on the right than the left. This evidence confirms that the antisemitism that has been on prominent display in white nationalist protests is not merely confined to a tiny group of extremists; antisemitic attitudes appear quite common among young conservatives, and much more so than among older conservatives or among liberals of any age.
> Anything to do with Israel/Palestine/West Bank is unreliable [and in favor of Israel]
This is the claim that needs substantiation, not that a key Wikipedia person supports Zionism or identifies as a Zionist, or that various employees or volunteers support Israel. Those other claims don't seem significant.
The opposite is also true - that various volunteers are antagonistic towards Israel. It's also likely that some employees are antagonistic towards Israel. You can find plenty of people's experiences discussing the same pattern you describe but with different political views - some antagonistic admin coming along and declaring that you lost the dispute.
Various "bosses" at Wikipedia have different views, ideologies and identities. Given that, what on Wikipedia can be trusted, and what can't be? What's special about views towards Israel?
Evidence is useful, but when viewing people as "adversaries", and if trying to "defeat" them in general, the game is already diminished or lost - for most everyone involved. Little productive conversation can occur.
> This is an issue that people on both sides are strongly emotionally engaged in.
Yes. But that is true of many issues in the world.
> I find it interesting that your way of proving anti-Zionist sentiment is to demonstrate that there are quantifiably more leftist editors on Wikipedia. That does not demonstrate your thesis of anti-Israeli bias. Plenty of people who at least claim to be leftists are profuse in their support of Israel.
It’s not definitive proof of anti-Israel bias - it is, however, evidence. As opposed to the unsubstantiated assertion I responded to.
Evidence of what? A leftward slant in Wikipedia, if you believe the conclusion of these studies (or the summaries of them - I haven’t read them all). And it's easy to see that such a slant would broadly coincide with somewhat less support - though far from zero support - for Israel in 2022 and the past couple decades.
I’m not sure how leftward the slant is. It could be slight. It could also not be relevant in specific areas (such as the Israeli-Palestinian conflict). I didn’t exhaustively research the topic (nor did I believe Wikipedia had any specific leftward slant before today.) If you find anything useful, please share your findings - happy to read!
“Quantifiably more leftist editors on Wikipedia” isn’t a good summary of the headlines of those 5 studies.
To your other point, number of editors matter - and the Israel-antagonists presumably outnumber the Israel-supporters - but it’s far from the only thing that matters. To name a few more things that make an editor more or less influential: the number of edits made, the prominence of their edits (for example if it is in the introduction vs elsewhere in an article), the degree to which the edits are neutral vs slanted, and the relative power they have as editors.
Patrons don't necessarily apply any standard evenly.