Who is guilty? Who is a perpetrator? Who is an accessory? Are both equally culpable? Is a prime minister as guilty as the political Opposition? Clearly a general is. But is a private who is following orders? Is a government minister? Or a diplomat?
You can see where this is going. As I wrote in my last post, armed resistance is legitimate and has been repeatedly endorsed by UN General Assembly resolutions. However, international law falls short in one significant way: the only designated legitimate targets are armed combatants.
The laws of war never conceived of modern genocide. Slaughter on an industrial scale abetted by the most advanced technology, permitting efficiency on a scale the Nazis would have admired. Not only killing with impunity, but eradicating both a people and its territory. Even during the Holocaust, the Nazis did not eradicate Jewish shtetls or ghettos. Israel’s goal, according to its Judeo-Nazi ministers is to eradicate every physical evidence of Palestinian existence.
The rules governing armed resistance have not contemplated Israel’s genocide; in which the crime is committed not just by political leaders and the army, but by the entire government apparatus. Even the so-called civilian sector heartily endorses the slaughter (see below). 
All have varying degrees of guilt. None have faced consequences. None have been held accountable. Possibly none ever will.
I’m nauseated by liberal Zionists who spout bromides like “violence is never the answer,” etc. Let their son or daughter burn to death in a tent in Gaza. Let them find the limbs and flesh of husbands or wives caught in an Israeli missile strike. Let them experience real violence that kills, dismemebers, burns; then they can talk about non-violence.
In such circumstance it is morally repugnant to deny the victims the right to defend themselves and resist the murderers. No one can say that in the face of mass indiscriminate slaughter, the victims must restrict their targets to soldiers in uniform. Not when the murderers and their accomplices wear suits and sit in government offices and embassies. Elias Rodriguez’ attack on two Israeli diplomats was such an act.
Israel has never shied from targeting diplomats and diplomatic facilities. ItIt assassinated Ismail Haniyeh while he attended Iran’s president’s funeral. It destroyed the Iranian embassy in Damascus. It also murdered a Palestinian in the Palestinian embassy in Bulgaria. The world sheds tears for Israelis, but none for its victims.
Let’s try a thought experiment. For those who reject the DC attack: would it have been legitimate for Jewish partisans to assassinate the Nazi foreign minister, Von Ribbentrop? Was it legitmate for Herschel Grynzspan to assassinate the Nazi SS chief in Paris before WWII? What about murdering the Ottoman foreign minister during the Armenian genocide? The answer is clearly Yes. But apparently not for the pro-Palestine movement. To paraphrase the Haggadah: why is this genocide different from all other genocides?
I really hate that word, but it is what it is: FAFO pic.twitter.com/Vws8bUcxDl
— B.M. (@ireallyhateyou) May 22, 2025
Contrary to the narrative of the AJC Netanyahu and the media, they were not innocent lovebirds targeted in an anti Semitic hate crime. Lischinsky was a diplomatic warrior on behalf of Israeli genocide who, among other things, reveled in the genocidal rhetoric favored by Israel’s Judeo-Nazi ministers. He also used all sorts of euphemisms to conceal the reality in Gaza.
Everyone makes choices, including career choices. These are moral, as much as practical choices. Lischinsky’s choice was to throw in his lot with a state engaged in crimes against humanity. Anyone participating in such criminality has a choice to stop doing so, as numerous State Department officials have done since 10/7. If you become a rabid supporter of state terror, you are guilty of its crimes.
In fact, Yaron Lischinsky was an adherent of Jews for Jesus, a messianic sect seeking to convert Jews before the Second Coming. And of course, he was an evangelical Christian. Further, he had a social media presence that offered standard talking points defending Israeli genocide in Gaza. He was essentially, a hasbara operative in the guise of a diplomat. In my review of his timeline, I found no content offering support for any specific Israeli humanitarian aid initiative in Gaza. The AJC claimed that its diplomatic dog and pony show highlighted this issue. But not Lischinsky, who claimed in a tweet that there was no humanitarian crisis there.
The group’s memorial statement offered this account of Lischinsky’s role in the embassy:
AJC ACCESS, AJC’s young professional division…empowers Jewish leaders to advocate on behalf of critical domestic and global issues facing the Jewish community. This annual reception brings together Jewish…diplomats from around the world. At this year’s event, attendees heard from members of the Multifaith Alliance and IsraAID on humanitarian diplomacy and how a coalition of organizations – from the region and for the region – are working together in response to humanitarian crises throughout the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) region.
This conceals more than it reveals. But it isn’t hard to decipher what’s missing. Neither the AJC nor this particular group advocate on behalf of “the Jewish community.” The AJC, in large part, stopped doing that decades ago. Instead, it is a member in good standing of the Israel Lobby and the lion’s share of its work involves advocacy on behalf of Israel.
Israid, an Israeli group touting its “humanitarian aid” agenda, offers its own statement, which is equally disingenuous:
We…gathered in the interest of finding practical solutions to the humanitarian crisis in Gaza, and showing that working together is the only way forward for all the people in the region…
IsraAID has played a key role in bringing relevant actors to the table throughout the conflict – Israelis, Palestinians and NGOs – with the aim of averting a humanitarian catastrophe in Gaza…We have worked day-and-night with partners to facilitate and support bringing essential aid and medical support to crisis-affected people in Gaza…
IsraAID remains committed to the pursuit of a future where communities living through crisis have the strength, support, and opportunities they need to build a more resilient tomorrow – regardless of race, nationality, or creed.
Everything about this is a fraud. The group cannot have done any “humanitarian” work in or for Gaza for the past four months, since its own government and army have laid siege to the enclave. Not a drop of aid has reached Gazans. How is Israid finding practical solutions there? What is it actually doing? What aid has it actually delivered? With whom is it “working together?” Certainly, no Gazan would work with Israid in any capacity. Who are the “relevant actors it has brought to the table?” Who are its “partners” there?
Israel uses such aid-washing as a weapon in promoting its interests. It has to work hard to coneal its crimes, and providing disaster relief in crisis zones is an excellent cover. Whenever there is an earthquake or other natural disaster you will invariably read of an Israeli medical team sent to provide assistance. They leave, of course, as soon as the cameras are turned off. Israel has no USAID (neither does the US, unfortunately). It maintains no ongoing foreign relief programs. Because they do not provide any long-term hasbara benefit.
“Building a resilient tomorrow”–what does that mean? What resilience is it offering to starving Gazans? Undoubtedly, this organization will be a key partner in the fake humanitarian aid initiative promoted by a shadowy group of Israelis, which would offer aid to Palestinians screened by the IDF in areas controlled by the IDF. The project would be funded by unknown donors and the American overseeing the the distribution is ex-CIA officer (update: Jonathan Wood resigned yesterday) who’ve created so-called non-profit “foundations” with opaque governance and funding. The campaign is not really an aid initiative. It is a political project designed to destroy and replace Hamas and its role in providing social welfare to Gazans. It is yet another method of control; and part of a future in which Israel will maintain key functions for those remaining after mass expulsion. I have asked Israid whether it is participating in this venture.
Returning to Lischinsky, he cheered the assassination of Hassan Nasrallah and threatened the Houthi leader he would be next. He celebrated the murder of Hamas leader, Yahya Sinwar. He denied children are starving. As a diplomat in a foreign ministry whose responsibility is promoting Israel’s Gaza narrative, he is not an innocent . He is a willing accessory to the crime. Only one small step from being a perpetrator.
He was a student at the Argaman Institute, the intellectual inspiration for the anti-democracy coup. It was founded by the Judeo-fascist “political philosopher,” Ronen Shoval. Shoval is a key figure in the Tikvah Fund, a US libertarian group supporting the Kohelet Policy Forum, another think tank crucial to the legislative campaign to crush Israeli democracy. He also founded Im Tirzu, whose mission was to “purify” Israeli academia of “non-Zionist” curricula. If that sounds familiar, it should. The Nazis did the same to German justice and academia. Trump is attempting the same in the US.
Lischinsky’s far-right politics mirror those of the majority of Israeli Jews. A recent Penn State poll found that 93% felt the Biblical account of the genocide against Amalek was relevant to today. 82% support the expulsion of all Palestinians from Gaza. 53% support the mass starvation of Gaza (i.e prohibiting entry of all aid). 56% wish to expel Israel’s 1-million Palestinian citizens.
The pollsters explained the results:
“…The [10/7] massacre only seems to have unleashed demons that have been nurtured over decades in the media and in the legal and educational systems.”
Lischinsky–though not a native Israeli nor nurtured by Israel’s educational system–had absorbed all of the hatreds as if he was. I shed no tears for him or for the regime he championed.
My favorite quote from a philosopher is the following one from Nietzsche, which cannot be repeated often enough:
“He who fights with monsters may see to it that he does not become a monster in the process. And if you stare into an abyss for a long time, the abyss will stare into you.”
Ultimately, you want to eliminate a certain unscrupulous and immoral action but you don’t eliminate this action if you kill the people who practice this action, because by doing so you yourself have become unscrupulous and immoral, only the actors are changed.
But I am not a pacifist! I consider self-defense to be legitimate, but I personally consider this attack on embassy staff to be immoral and counterproductive. These fascist types, like Netanyahu, want violence, so an attack like this is just right to initiate a new escalation and keep the deadly fire burning.
@Josh: That goes to the question regarding Herschel Grynzpan’s assassination of Ernst von Rath. Some call it a legitimate act of resistance. Others decry it for bringing about Kristallnacht. I would maintain that Kristallnacht or some form of it would have happened regardless of the murder. So the killing was a legitimate act of armed resistance to impending genocide.
The profound immorality of genocide whether the Holocaust, Gaza, Rwanda, Myanmar, etc. make all acts of armed resistance legitimate. Israeli diplomats, like von Rath, facilitate genocide even if they don’t take up a gun to do it.
One could say that it can all be boiled down to a simple question.
Would it have been wrong to assassinate Goebbels?
Of course, ‘simple questions’ are usually unfair.
Worlds so far apart …
Eliminated: Yarón Lischinsky
The forward: ’A Mensch’
link to forward.com
Peace doesn’t come from the barrel of a gun: The Jewish State 1948-2025
Merz … utterly despicable.
link to dw.com
Thank you so much, I have felt quite ill over the maudlin carry on over this piece of trash being eliminated while the Israel’s are cheering and laughing and looting and bombing and murdering 9 children of a worn out doctor with their usual justifications and lies.