Tag Archives: Israel

by | January 15, 2026 · 7:51 pm

Iran: Executions and the Threat of Public Death Sentences Against Protesters – A New and Alarming Phase

In the wake of the largest protests against the Iranian regime in decades, the world has witnessed a sharp increase in the use of the death penalty in Iran. According to human rights organizations, at least 1,500 people were executed in 2025—an unprecedented level in the history of the Islamic Republic. Many of these executions followed expedited proceedings and lacked what the regime itself would describe as a thorough and fair trial. The death penalty has increasingly been used as a tool to spread fear and crush opposition.

Reports of arrests, mass killings, and brutal reprisals against protesters have been widespread. In some cases, families have been informed that executions were imminent, with only very short notice.

Erfan Soltani – A Symbol of a New Threat

The 26-year-old Iranian protester Erfan Soltani was arrested during the large-scale demonstrations that began in early January 2026. He was quickly sentenced to death on charges of moharebeh—“enmity against God”—a grave accusation frequently used against political opponents in Iran. His family was reportedly given only ten minutes to say goodbye before his planned hanging, triggering international condemnation and warnings from the United States of possible consequences should the execution be carried out.

Following international pressure, including statements from U.S. political leadership, some sources reported that the planned execution may have been postponed or canceled. However, Iran’s judiciary has claimed that parts of the media coverage were “fabricated” and has denied that a death sentence was definitively issued in the case, as reported by some outlets.

Even though the specific outcome of this case remains contested, it nonetheless illustrates a clear pattern: Iranian authorities have made extensive use of the death penalty for years, and protesters have been sentenced after extremely rapid proceedings that human rights groups describe as inadequate and deeply unjust.

A Pattern of Death Sentences Against Opposition

The use of capital punishment in Iran is not new and has long been a recurring element of how the regime responds to protests and dissent. During the demonstrations following the death of Mahsa Amini in 2022, several protesters were sentenced to death and executed on charges such as moharebeh and efsad-e fel-arz (literally “corruption on earth”).

In 2024, the United Nations and human rights organizations reported that at least hundreds of protesters and others had been executed on such charges, often following rushed and highly questionable judicial processes.

What This Means

These developments signal a new phase in Iran’s response to domestic unrest: not only violent crackdowns and mass arrests, but also the threat of capital punishment as a public instrument of intimidation. While some of the most extreme claims circulating online—such as reports of tens of thousands of death sentences—are unsubstantiated or false, there are documented cases of executions and a genuine fear that the death penalty is being used to silence criticism and suppress protest.

Parallels to Afghanistan: Public Terror as a Tool of Power

Developments in Iran also evoke strong parallels to Afghanistan under Taliban rule. There, the regime has employed public executions, hangings from streetlights, and the display of bodies in public spaces as a deliberate strategy to intimidate the population into submission. This is not merely punishment—it is symbolic terror, where death is made visible to crush resistance throughout society.

Human rights organizations have documented how the Taliban have carried out public hangings, often on charges of “treason,” “immorality,” or collaboration with enemies, without fair trials. The objective is the same as what now appears to be emerging in Iran: to make it unmistakably clear that resistance is not merely dangerous, but fatal.

When Iranian authorities now threaten—or signal—the possibility of public executions of protesters, the country moves toward the same form of tyranny. This is no longer about punishing individuals, but about staging fear. A public execution is meant to be seen, shared, and remembered. It is a warning: This could happen to you.

The difference between Iran and Afghanistan is primarily ideological and historical—not methodological. Both regimes use religious justification, vague charges such as “enmity against God,” and extreme violence to retain power. The result is a society in which the rule of law is sidelined and fear replaces justice.

When Evil Comes Back Around

Jesus said that people can read the signs of the heavens and the earth, yet still misunderstand the times they live in. Today, we see how tyrannies that oppress, torture, and kill believe themselves invincible. But history is clear: the evil you spread to others will eventually return—often in ways that shake even the most powerful.

The Nazis fell, and their leaders were held accountable. Tyrannies in Afghanistan, Iran, and elsewhere carry the same seeds of their own destruction. Karma is not a myth; it is an inexorable law: what you sow, you will reap.

For those who protest, who seek truth and freedom, the danger is real—but their courage writes history. For those who tyrannize their people, punishment is unavoidable—not always immediate, but certain. The universe has a way of restoring balance, and history never forgets.

Fear can keep people down for a time. But justice, truth, and karma are ultimately unstoppable.

When Tyrannies Fall: The Judgment of History

History teaches us one thing with brutal clarity: tyrannies never last forever. They may appear strong, terrifying, and invincible in the moment, but they always carry the seeds of their own destruction. Nazi Germany is among the clearest examples. Built on ideology, fear, propaganda, and systematic violence, it ultimately collapsed under the weight of its own crimes.

After World War II came the Nuremberg Trials. For the first time in history, leaders of a regime were held personally accountable for crimes against humanity. It was not revenge. It was the rule of law’s response to barbarism. A clear message to the world: “Following orders” is no excuse when human rights are trampled.

What many ask today is why contemporary theocratic tyrants—such as the clerical regime in Iran—continue to evade the same historical reckoning. A regime that executes its own people, supports terrorist organizations, oppresses women, silences truth, and weaponizes religion commits crimes not only against its own citizens but against humanity as a whole.

If history is to be more than words in textbooks, it must also serve as a moral compass. Just as the Nazis were brought to trial after the war, today’s oppressors deserve legal accountability—not for the sake of vengeance, but for justice. Not only for the people of Iran, but for all who believe in human dignity, freedom, and responsibility.

History does not forget.
It only waits.

Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are those of the author and may not reflect those of Shinybull.com. The author has made every effort to ensure the accuracy of the information provided; however, neither Shinybull.com nor the author can guarantee the accuracy of this information. This article is strictly for informational purposes only. It is not a solicitation to make any exchange in precious metal products, commodities, securities, or other financial instruments. Shinybull.com and the author of this article do not accept culpability for losses and/ or damages arising from the use of this publication.

Leave a comment

Filed under Politics

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

by | January 13, 2026 · 6:55 pm

Truth, Power, and the Fear of Free Speech

More than two thousand years after Jesus from Israel warned humanity about moral blindness and abused authority, the same struggle continues. Across the world, authoritarian and theocratic regimes still silence their people in the name of righteousness, while democracies wrestle with the price of freedom. From Tehran to Gaza, from social media censorship to satellite internet, the battle over truth, speech, and human dignity remains the defining conflict of our time.

More than two thousand years ago, Jesus from Israel confronted the leaders of his time with a striking observation: “You know how to interpret the appearance of the sky and the earth, but you cannot interpret the present moment.” His warning was not about astronomy or weather—it was about moral clarity. About the danger of power that loses humility, and authority that speaks of God while denying justice, truth, and human dignity.

That tension remains painfully relevant today.

Authoritarian Power and Moral Inversion

Iran presents one of the clearest modern examples of moral inversion. The country is ruled not by its people, but by a theocratic power structure dominated by clerics loyal to the Supreme Leader. This is not a faith community acting in good conscience, but a closed ruling elite that uses religious language to legitimize repression.

Institutions such as the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) function as both internal enforcers and external operators, crushing dissent at home while exporting violence abroad. The regime openly funds and arms groups such as Hezbollah in Lebanon and Hamas in Gaza—organizations that operate outside democratic norms and deliberately target civilians.

The stated goal of this alliance is ideological confrontation, particularly the destruction of Israel. Yet the human cost of this agenda is borne by ordinary people: Israeli civilians living normal lives under constant threat, Palestinians trapped between militant groups and humanitarian collapse, and above all, the Iranian population itself.

Inside Iran, protests are met with internet shutdowns, mass arrests, torture, and executions. Women are beaten or killed for defying dress codes. Journalists disappear. Students are imprisoned. Minorities are silenced. The regime that claims moral authority has shown none toward its own people.

Israel, Self-Defense, and the Collapse of the Narrative

Iran’s clerical leadership routinely labels Israel “the Great Satan.” But when words are weighed against actions, the accusation collapses. Israel, a democratic state, acts primarily in self-defense against groups that openly call for its destruction and have launched decades of rocket attacks, suicide bombings, and kidnappings.

Crucially, Israel is not targeting ordinary Palestinian civilians in Gaza. Its operations are aimed at Hamas and other militant groups responsible for terror attacks. Innocent civilians, while tragically caught in the conflict, are not the objective.

The same principle applies to Iran. If outside powers, such as the United States or Israel, intervene in Iran, their focus would be on the criminal theocratic rulers and their armed networks—the same groups that finance and coordinate terrorist organizations like Hamas and Hezbollah—not the Iranian people themselves, who suffer under the oppressive regime.

Meanwhile, the Iranian regime projects accusations of evil outward while systematically repressing its own citizens, silencing women, journalists, and students, and sponsoring violence abroad. Moral hypocrisy is evident: evil is claimed elsewhere, but practiced at home and through proxies.

Democracy vs. Theocracy

At its core, this is not merely a geopolitical struggle—it is a philosophical one.

Democracy rests on the principle that power flows from the people, that leaders are accountable, and that truth can be debated openly. A theocracy, by contrast, claims divine authority, places rulers beyond question, and treats dissent as heresy. Where democracy depends on free speech and transparency, authoritarian systems survive through censorship, fear, and isolation.

This is why free information is the greatest enemy of such regimes.

Why the Internet Terrifies Tyranny

When the Iranian regime shuts down the internet, it is not a technical decision—it is a political act of survival. Open communication exposes corruption, abuse, and lies. Free speech breaks the illusion of absolute power.

That is why the smuggling of Starlink satellite terminals into Iran matters. Backed by Elon Musk’s satellite network, this technology bypasses state-controlled infrastructure and restores a basic human freedom: connection to the outside world. Information becomes resistance.

Musk’s role here is consistent with his stated philosophy. He bought Twitter to restore what he called a digital public square, reversing bans—including that of a sitting U.S. president—on the grounds that democracy cannot function if political speech is arbitrarily silenced. While social media debates moderation, the Iranian regime cuts off an entire nation from the internet. The contrast could not be clearer. Elon Musk is a freedom champion. So is Trump.

A Timeless Warning

Jesus was not executed for promoting kindness alone. He was killed for challenging power structures that cloaked themselves in divine authority while denying truth and justice. His message threatened those who ruled through fear, hypocrisy, and control.

History keeps repeating the same lesson: regimes that silence truth in the name of righteousness ultimately condemn themselves. Power without humility corrupts. Authority without accountability collapses. And those who fear open speech reveal their own illegitimacy.

Two thousand years later, the struggle continues—but so does the truth.

Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are those of the author and may not reflect those of Shinybull.com. The author has made every effort to ensure the accuracy of the information provided; however, neither Shinybull.com nor the author can guarantee the accuracy of this information. This article is strictly for informational purposes only. It is not a solicitation to make any exchange in precious metal products, commodities, securities, or other financial instruments. Shinybull.com and the author of this article do not accept culpability for losses and/ or damages arising from the use of this publication.

Leave a comment

Filed under Politics

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

by | January 8, 2026 · 10:11 am

Iran’s Bazaar Revolt Points to a Moment of Acute Regime Vulnerability

Iran is entering a period of heightened political risk as economic collapse, environmental stress, and elite defection converge in ways not seen for decades. The latest wave of unrest, which began on December 28 in Tehran’s Grand Bazaar, has spread across more than 100 cities, evolving from local economic protest into a broader challenge to the Islamic Republic’s authority.

While demonstrations are not new in Iran, the participation of the bazaar merchant class marks a potentially decisive shift. In Iran’s modern political history, the withdrawal of support by the bazaaris has tended to occur at moments of acute regime vulnerability and has coincided with major political realignments — most notably in 1978–79.

The Bazaar as a Political Barometer

The Grand Bazaar is the backbone of Iran’s domestic economy. Its dense networks of traders, wholesalers and importers connect supply chains, liquidity and social influence across the country. Historically, bazaar merchants have not functioned as a permanent opposition force. Instead, they have acted as pragmatic political actors, aligning themselves with whichever system appeared capable of guaranteeing stability, access and predictability.

In 1979, they withdrew support from the Shah and aligned with the clerical opposition. For more than four decades thereafter, they formed part of the Islamic Republic’s core economic coalition.

That coalition now appears to be fracturing.

When bazaar merchants close their shops, the impact goes far beyond symbolism. Commercial shutdowns disrupt distribution networks, freeze working capital and send a powerful signal that confidence in the state’s economic management has eroded. In Iran’s political system, such signals matter — not because they immediately bring down governments, but because they indicate that the regime’s traditional mechanisms of consent are weakening.

Economic Breakdown as the Catalyst

The immediate driver of unrest is economic collapse.

Over the past year:

  • The Iranian currency has lost approximately 60 per cent of its value
  • Food prices have risen by around 72 per cent
  • Medicine costs have increased by roughly 50 per cent
  • Inflation is estimated to be near 50 per cent

For many households, life savings have been effectively erased. For merchants dependent on imports, business has become unviable. The government’s decision to abolish subsidised exchange rates, combined with higher taxes, has sharply increased costs while currency volatility has made price-setting nearly impossible.

Compounding the crisis is a breakdown in basic infrastructure. Water reservoirs in several regions are reportedly at critically low levels, electricity supply is unreliable, and public services are deteriorating. The state is increasingly unable to provide core public goods: water, power, food security or employment.

In practical terms, the implicit social contract between state and society has collapsed.

From Economic Stress to Political Exposure

The scale and composition of the protests suggest that this is no longer a narrow economic dispute. Demonstrations now include merchants, workers and middle-class families, while confrontations with security forces have intensified. Dozens have reportedly been killed in clashes with the Revolutionary Guard.

The government’s response has oscillated between repression and improvised economic concessions. One widely reported offer — a small monthly payment to encourage protesters to disperse — was interpreted less as relief than as an admission of fiscal exhaustion.

Externally, the regime also faces heightened geopolitical pressure. Former US president Donald Trump has publicly warned of retaliation should violence against protesters continue. While such statements should be interpreted cautiously, Tehran remains acutely aware of Washington’s capacity to escalate economic and strategic pressure.

Political Realignment and the Search for Alternatives

As confidence in the Islamic Republic erodes, political symbols long considered marginal are resurfacing. Reza Pahlavi, the exiled son of Iran’s last Shah, has declared that the current system is approaching the end of the road and has called 2026 “the year of change”.

There is no clear evidence that monarchist forces are directing the protests. But the re-emergence of such figures reflects a deeper vacuum: a growing search for legitimacy outside the clerical system itself. In moments of systemic stress, Iranian politics has historically gravitated toward realignment rather than reform.

Even within elite circles, unease is evident. Persistent reports of contingency planning by senior figures underscore the perception that the current unrest represents more than a temporary disturbance.

A Regime Under Structural Pressure

The Islamic Republic retains formidable coercive capacity, and regime change is far from inevitable. But the convergence of economic collapse, environmental stress and elite defection suggests that Iran has entered a phase of structural instability.

The withdrawal of bazaar support does not in itself determine political outcomes. Historically, however, it has signalled moments when existing power arrangements were no longer sustainable.

Iran may now be approaching such a moment.

Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are those of the author and may not reflect those of Shinybull.com. The author has made every effort to ensure the accuracy of the information provided; however, neither Shinybull.com nor the author can guarantee the accuracy of this information. This article is strictly for informational purposes only. It is not a solicitation to make any exchange in precious metal products, commodities, securities, or other financial instruments. Shinybull.com and the author of this article do not accept culpability for losses and/ or damages arising from the use of this publication.

Leave a comment

Filed under Politics

Tagged as , , , , , , ,

by | October 16, 2025 · 4:35 pm

Who Is Hamas? The Truth About Gaza’s Rulers

Ordinary people in Gaza hate Hamas and want to get rid of it. But how easy is that when we all know they rule Gaza with an iron fist? If you disagree with them, they will simply silence you. Or kill you. And that’s what’s happening in Gaza right now.

Once Hamas claims to seek peace with Israel, it soon turns its weapons on its own people. Who, then, is Hamas, and what are they really doing?

Origins of Hamas

Hamas (Ḥarakat al-Muqāwamah al-ʾIslāmiyyah — “Islamic Resistance Movement”) was founded in 1987 during the First Intifada. It grew out of the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood, promoting a radical Islamist ideology that rejects Israel’s right to exist.

Its 1988 charter openly called for Israel’s destruction and the creation of an Islamic state over all of historical Palestine. From the beginning, Hamas mixed social welfare with terrorism, using religious faith and nationalism to recruit followers and strengthen control.

Brainwashing and Indoctrination

We can ask ourselves where all this hate comes from. But it’s not hard to understand when you see how Hamas uses propaganda and fear to shape generations.

The Nazis once said that a lie repeated enough times becomes the truth. The same can be said about Hamas.

In schools, mosques, and media, they constantly repeat messages of hatred against Jews and Israel. Children are taught that dying as a “martyr” is the greatest honor. The organization glorifies violence and uses religion as a tool of manipulation. This is how the terrorist organization Hamas is recruiting suicide bombers to attack innocent people in Israel.

The Years of Terror

Before Israel built its security barrier (the wall) along the Gaza border, Hamas repeatedly sent young suicide bombers into Israel, especially during the Second Intifada (2000–2005). Civilians were the main targets. People on buses, in cafés, markets, and restaurants.

Some of the worst attacks included:

  • Jerusalem Sbarro Restaurant bombing (2001): 15 killed, over 100 injured.
  • Dolphinarium disco bombing (2001): 21 young people killed.
  • Hebrew University bombing (2002): 9 killed, including U.S. citizens.

Even before Israel’s withdrawal from Gaza in 2005, militants in Gaza, including Hamas, began firing rockets and mortars into southern Israel. Towns like Sderot and Ashkelon have lived under constant threat ever since.

In 2006, Hamas fighters kidnapped Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit, holding him captive for over five years before finally releasing him in exchange for over 1,000 Palestinian prisoners, many of whom had blood on their hands.

Hamas’s Control Over Gaza

Since taking full control of Gaza in 2007, Hamas has turned the area into both a fortress and a prison. They suppress political opponents, control the media, and punish anyone who dares to speak against them.

Billions in international aid meant for rebuilding homes and hospitals have instead been used to build tunnels, buy rockets, and train new fighters.

Ordinary Gazans are the real victims. Trapped between Hamas’s authoritarian rule and the consequences of its endless wars.

What`s disappointing about this case is the legacy media`s unbalanced reports from the conflict. We often hear from poor civilians in Gaza. They usually lie, and sometimes they say people have no home and that it’s cold in Gaza. The fact is that the weather is hot.

The Hidden Face of Hate: When “Support for Gaza” Becomes Antisemitism

In the weeks and months following every escalation in Gaza, television screens, social media feeds, and newspaper headlines fill with global protests and statements of “solidarity with Gaza.” Many of these come from people who genuinely care about the suffering of civilians, and compassion is vital.
But somewhere along the way, something darker has mixed in: a growing wave of disguised antisemitism, hate hidden beneath the surface of supposed “support.”

From Sympathy to Scapegoating

It begins with empathy. People reacting to images of destruction, mourning the deaths of children, and demanding peace. But in protest slogans and online comments, empathy often turns into something else:

  • “Zionists” becomes a code word for “Jews.”
  • Calls for “Free Palestine” are twisted into chants like “From the river to the sea,” which deny Israel’s right to exist.
  • Jewish students, shops, and synagogues in Europe and the U.S. face vandalism or threats, even though they have nothing to do with the Israeli government.

This isn’t solidarity. It’s scapegoating. The line between political protest and racial or religious hate has blurred.

How Hate Disguises Itself

Modern antisemitism rarely looks like the open hatred of the 1930s. Today, it hides behind political and moral language, calling itself “anti-Zionism,” “human rights activism,” or “decolonization.”
But the pattern is the same: blame all Jews for the actions of a few, question their right to safety, and deny their history.

  • In some university protests, Jewish students have been told to “go back to Poland.”
  • Online, “pro-Gaza” threads are flooded with conspiracy theories about Jews controlling governments or media.
  • In demonstrations, Israeli flags are burned alongside slogans calling for “intifada” or “death to the occupiers.”

These aren’t calls for justice. They’re echoes of history, and they’re dangerous.

A Moral Test for the West

True solidarity with Palestinians means demanding an end to terror and manipulation. Not cheering for those who fire rockets from schoolyards. Genuine peace means condemning antisemitism wherever it appears, even when it hides behind fashionable activism.

The West now faces a moral test:
Can we support innocent people in Gaza without reviving one of humanity’s oldest hatreds?
Can we tell the difference between compassion and hate?

The answer depends on honesty and courage. Because antisemitism doesn’t vanish when it changes its name. It only grows stronger in the shadows.

The Media’s Blind Spot

Mainstream media often amplifies this confusion. In their effort to highlight humanitarian crises, many journalists avoid distinguishing between legitimate criticism of Israeli policy and antisemitic rhetoric.
As a result, the public conversation becomes one-sided: Israeli military actions are headline news, while Hamas’s use of human shields, executions of civilians, and years of rocket attacks barely make the front page.

This selective storytelling doesn’t just distort reality. It feeds resentment. It reinforces the false idea that Jews are “the oppressors” and Palestinians “the victims,” without showing that both societies suffer under extremists like Hamas.

The Echo of Lies: How Hate Survives Through Propaganda

Hate rarely starts as hate. It begins as a whisper — a repeated story, a single narrative told again and again until it becomes a kind of truth. History has shown us this pattern many times before. The Nazis understood it all too well: “Repeat a lie often enough, and it becomes the truth.” That same dark psychology is alive today, in new forms and new places.

We see it in Gaza, where Hamas indoctrinates generations through education, media, and religion. Not to seek peace, but to preserve conflict. From childhood, people are taught not only to distrust but to despise. Over time, these beliefs stop feeling like opinions and start feeling like identity. When that happens, reason and compassion disappear.

But this manipulation doesn’t end there. Across the world, much of what we see in legacy media now echoes a similar distortion — not always intentional, but often biased. The story becomes simplified: one side good, one side evil. Complex truths are ignored because they don’t fit the headline. And beneath this imbalance, something ancient and dangerous grows, a modern form of antisemitism disguised as “support for the oppressed.”

People march in the streets, believing they are standing for justice, yet their chants echo the slogans of those who would destroy, not build. Sympathy for innocent civilians in Gaza, which is both human and necessary, is twisted into hatred toward Jews as a whole. It’s a trap of perception, built by years of selective narratives and emotional manipulation.

Meanwhile, Hamas continues to spend vast sums on weapons and tunnels instead of schools and hospitals. Iran and other foreign actors feed this machine of destruction, funding the tools of war while ordinary people suffer in poverty. And still, the cameras turn, the slogans spread, and the lie grows louder.

Propaganda doesn’t only distort the truth. It divides humanity. It turns empathy into anger, and understanding into fear. To fight it, we must learn to question what we’re told. We must see beyond the headlines, beyond the slogans, beyond the images carefully designed to provoke outrage.

The path forward isn’t found in hate, but in clarity. In seeing the difference between the innocent and the manipulative, between compassion and deception. Because if lies can echo, so can truth.

As Plato warned: “Those who are able to see beyond the shadows and lies of their culture will never be understood, let alone believed, by the masses.” That is why seeking truth is never easy, but it is always necessary.

Conclusion: The Real Enemy of Gaza’s People

Hamas is more than a militant group. They are the ruling power in Gaza with a dual role: political/social authority, and armed resistance. But their priorities often harm the people they claim to represent.

If peace or justice is ever to come, Gaza’s people need rules that protect them, accountability, transparency, and a governing power that places civilian needs above military ambition.

When the world watches the suffering in Gaza, it’s easy to blame Israel. But behind every destroyed building and every tragic image, there’s a more profound truth: Hamas has built its power on the suffering of its own people.

It’s not Israel that keeps Gaza poor and oppressed. It’s Hamas. Until they are gone, peace and freedom will remain out of reach for both Palestinians and Israelis.

Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are those of the author and may not reflect those of Shinybull.com. The author has made every effort to ensure the accuracy of the information provided; however, neither Shinybull.com nor the author can guarantee the accuracy of this information. This article is strictly for informational purposes only. It is not a solicitation to make any exchange in precious metal products, commodities, securities, or other financial instruments. Shinybull.com and the author of this article do not accept culpability for losses and/ or damages arising from the use of this publication.

Leave a comment

Filed under Politics

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

by | October 13, 2025 · 7:17 pm

A Historic Day for the Middle East: Defense, War, and the Challenge of Perspective

It is a very historic day for the Middle East today. A «Long and painful nightmare» is over, Trump says. Trump arrived in Tel Aviv to mark the release of Israeli hostages by the terrorist organization called Hamas.

Trump is very proud of this moment. Maybe the best moment of his life. Trump has done something that nobody before him has achieved. Trump has made peace in the Middle East. He released 20 living hostages. A day that none of their families thought would come.

Trump delivered a speech in which he said America joined its ally in two «everlasting vows»: Never forget, and never again.» He also said that the war is over. A war that was ugly, but Hamas is not alone.

Iran is the leading foreign backer of Hamas, whose attack on Israel on Oct. 7, 2023, saw 1.200 people killed and hundreds taken hostage. Weapons taken out of Libya during the chaotic post-2011 period ended up in many places.

UN and expert reporting show Libyan arsenals were looted and trafficked to many different places. According to author Hanne Nabintu Herland, Norway dropped 588 bombs in Libya, where millions of civilians were killed. Thousands of bombs were given to the terrorist organization Hamas after the war in Libya.

Israel has the right to defend itself, and Israel`s response and the ensuing war have left more than 67.000 Palestinians dead, including thousands of civilians, according to Gaza`s Health Ministry.

Gaza itself has been largely destroyed, with most buildings in ruins. It looks like Hiroshima during World War II. About 80% of Gaza has been destroyed. Is this the right thing to do? People and legacy media have criticized Israel for what they have done in Gaza. Was what Israel has done in Gaza Okay?

Let`s start with Israel. The Israeli-Palestinian conflict is one of the most complex and emotionally charged disputes in modern history. Few elements symbolize this tension more than the wall — or security barrier — that separates Israel from the Palestinian territories.

To understand why this wall exists and why Hamas remains at the heart of the story, we have to look back at what happened before its construction and how events unfolded afterward.

Israel built the wall because the terrorist organization Hamas attacked civilians in Israel. For many Palestinians, Hamas presented itself as a movement of resistance and social welfare — running schools, hospitals, and charity networks, especially in Gaza, where poverty and unemployment were widespread. But for Israel and much of the international community,

Hamas’s violent actions and refusal to recognize Israel’s right to exist made it a terrorist organization, a designation now shared by the United States, the European Union, Canada, and several others. So, the Israeli war was against the terrorists in Gaza. Not civilians in Gaza.

Before the Wall: Years of Violence

The 1990s and early 2000s were some of the bloodiest years in Israeli history, marked by a wave of suicide bombings, shootings, and other attacks carried out by Hamas and other militant groups. The Second Intifada (2000–2005) became a turning point.

Hamas’s attacks were frequent and devastating:

  • Bus bombings in Jerusalem and Tel Aviv targeted civilians commuting to work or school.
  • Restaurants, shopping malls, and markets were attacked, turning ordinary places into sites of tragedy.
  • The Sbarro restaurant bombing (2001) killed 15 people and injured more than 100.
  • The Dolphinarium discotheque bombing (2001) took the lives of 21 teenagers.
  • At the Hebrew University bombing (2002), nine were killed, including American students.

By the early 2000s, hundreds of Israeli civilians had been killed in suicide bombings. For Israelis, daily life became a constant state of alert. Ordinary activities — riding a bus, eating in a café, or sending a child to school — carried real danger.

Hamas justified these attacks as “resistance,” while Israel viewed them as terrorism designed to destroy peace efforts.

The Decision to Build the Wall

In 2002, amid the peak of the Second Intifada, Israel began constructing the security barrier — a combination of concrete walls, fences, and checkpoints — along the West Bank. The stated goal was simple: to stop suicide bombers and other infiltrations from Palestinian territories into Israeli cities.

The wall was — and still is — controversial.
For Israel, it was a defensive necessity that saved lives. After its construction, suicide bombings dropped by more than 90%. For Palestinians, however, it represented occupation and separation, cutting them off from farmland, workplaces, and family on the other side. The wall physically entrenched a psychological divide that had already existed for decades.

The Gaza Factor and Hamas’s Rise to Power

While the wall focused on the West Bank, Gaza was undergoing its own transformation. After years of pressure and violence, Israel withdrew from Gaza in 2005, removing settlements and military presence. The expectation was that Palestinians would take this opportunity to build a functioning, peaceful society.

Instead, political infighting erupted between Hamas and Fatah — the dominant Palestinian political faction led by Mahmoud Abbas. In 2007, Hamas violently seized control of Gaza, expelling Fatah forces and establishing a de facto Islamist government.

From that moment, Gaza’s relationship with Israel changed completely. Hamas began developing rocket capabilities, importing weapons, and digging tunnels under the border to carry out attacks or smuggle goods. The nature of the threat shifted from suicide bombings to indiscriminate rocket fire targeting southern Israel.

Towns like Sderot, Ashkelon, and Be’er Sheva faced years of rocket attacks. Israel responded with airstrikes and, on several occasions, full-scale military operations — each causing widespread destruction in Gaza and significant civilian casualties.

The Human Cost

Both sides have suffered immensely.
For Israelis, the threat from Gaza remains constant — alarms, shelters, and the fear of sudden attacks are part of daily life.
For Palestinians in Gaza, life is defined by poverty, unemployment, and blockades that restrict movement and trade. Thousands of civilians have been killed or displaced in repeated conflicts.

Hamas continues to reject Israel’s right to exist and invests heavily in military infrastructure — rockets, tunnels, and paramilitary forces — while ordinary Gazans struggle to access clean water, electricity, and healthcare.

Israel, for its part, argues that the blockade is a necessary security measure to prevent Hamas from rearming. Critics, including human rights groups, counter that it amounts to collective punishment and fuels further resentment.

A Cycle Without End

The wall did succeed in its primary purpose — it stopped most terrorist infiltrations into Israel. Yet, it also reinforced the sense of division, mistrust, and hopelessness between the two peoples. Hamas’s control over Gaza has created a political stalemate: Israel refuses to negotiate with a group committed to its destruction, while Hamas uses Israel’s restrictions to rally anger and support among Palestinians.

Every few years, the cycle repeats: rocket attacks, Israeli airstrikes, and devastating humanitarian crises. Each side claims victory; neither side wins peace.

Conclusion: Fear and Freedom

The story of Hamas, Israel, and the wall is not simply about terrorism or defense — it is about fear and survival, two emotions that dominate the landscape of the Middle East.
Israel built a wall because it felt it had no other choice. Hamas attacks because it believes violence is the only path to freedom. Between them are millions of people — Israelis and Palestinians — who simply want to live ordinary lives.

In the end, walls may stop bombers, but they cannot build trust. The challenge for both sides remains the same as it was before the first stone was laid: to find a way to balance security and justice, defense and dignity, fear and hope — the hardest balance of all.

So, why do nearly everybody criticize Israel for what they are doing in Gaza?

When Defense Becomes a Crime: A Double Standard in How the World Sees War

Today, it seems nearly every news outlet is focused on criticizing Israel for civilian casualties in Gaza. Headlines scream about women and children killed, often implying moral failure or injustice. And yet, when we look back at modern history, we see a striking pattern: war almost always claims innocent lives, no matter who is involved.

Take the 1999 NATO bombing of Yugoslavia. During 78 days of airstrikes, hundreds of civilians were killed, including children. The death of three-year-old Milica Rakić in her home in Batajnica became emblematic of the human cost of war. Serbia now has memorials, statues, and ceremonies honoring the children who died. Dozens of names are remembered publicly as a symbol of lives lost during the campaign. Cluster munitions, unexploded ordnance, and indiscriminate bombing caused these deaths — the same tragic consequences we lament in other conflicts today.

NATO was acting in what it claimed to be defense and stabilization, yet civilian casualties were inevitable. And yet, when similar actions are taken by other nations in their own defense, the global narrative often shifts. Israel, for example, builds walls and conducts targeted operations against groups like Hamas, whose own record includes attacks on civilians and using human shields. Israel emphasizes its right to protect its citizens from terrorism, just as NATO justified its actions in Serbia and elsewhere. But public opinion and media framing frequently focus only on one side of the equation.

The pattern is not new. History is full of wars where civilians suffered while the aggressors were vilified and the defenders celebrated — or vice versa, depending on perspective. What often changes is the narrative: who tells the story, which victims are remembered, and which are ignored. In Serbia, memorials commemorate the children killed by NATO; in Israel, civilians caught in crossfire are highlighted in international media. Both are real tragedies. Both are consequences of war.

At the heart of this is human nature. When a society or individual is threatened, defense is instinctive. If harm persists, measures escalate. Walls are built. Armies act. Lives are lost. History shows repeatedly that the morality of defense is complicated by the inevitability of collateral damage. Civilian deaths are always tragic, yet they are not always evidence of moral failure — often, they are evidence of the harsh realities of conflict.

The lesson is clear: to truly understand war and peace, we must look honestly at all sides. Criticism must be proportional, and we must remember that war does not spare innocence. Nations act to survive; civilians sometimes pay the price. Recognizing this complexity is not the same as justification — it is acknowledgment of reality.

If the global community wishes to promote peace, it must do so consistently. Selective outrage, when only certain wars or victims are highlighted, distorts understanding and prevents meaningful solutions. Every civilian life lost, whether in Serbia, Gaza, Iraq, or elsewhere, deserves remembrance. Every act of defense, every effort to protect citizens, deserves careful analysis.

War is tragic, complex, and unavoidable in human history. Only by recognizing its patterns, learning from them, and holding ourselves to consistent moral standards can we hope to reduce suffering and approach a more peaceful world.

Leave a comment

Filed under Politics

Tagged as , , , , , ,