Friday, November 10, 2023

New US Army Ad Smells of Desperation and Cynical Manipulation but Will It Work?


streiff reporting for RedState 

In the face of a looming recruiting Chernobyl, the US Army is rolling out a new series of ads. This will be the second flight of ads in the rebooted "Be All You Can Be" campaign. The first ad flight, which was built around celebrity endorsers, came to a shambolic end when Jonathan Majors, the on-screen narrator, was arrested for domestic violence.



READ: New Army Advertising Campaign Won't Succeed Because It Aims at a Young America That Does Not Exist.

The new ad campaign is called "First Steps," and they are structured to hit a perceived thirst of Generation Z for "authenticity." “Those are wildly popular because I think they’re looking for authenticity,” Deputy Secretary of Defense Kathleen Hicks said. 

The first three ads are out. In “First Arrival,” Army recruits are shown as they leave home and arrive at basic training. “First Patch shows family members placing unit patches on soldiers graduating from initial entry training. The third spot, “First Target,” shows a new tank loader engaging a live fire target for the first time.







When contrasted to the previous woke atrocities the Army has used to pretend to recruit, they aren't bad. When I say "pretend,, I'm not joking; the GAO has questioned if the Army even cares about recruiting; GAO Finds Military Has No Plan for Ongoing Recruiting Crisis, the Real Question Is Do They Care? I mean, who can forget the disastrous "Calling" campaign featuring the Heather Has Two Mommies segment?





The new ad features about 20 paratroopers preparing to jump from a CH-47. I have to admit the title "First Jump" is sort of puzzling, unless they are referring to the first jump after reporting to a unit because Airborne School jumps, as far as I can tell, are still conducted from C-130 or C-17 aircraft...or, in my case, a museum-eligible Georgia Air Guard C-123.

What's notable is the group is all male and nearly all white. Some of them may very well be homosexual, but you can't tell from the video. In fairness, some claim there is a single black woman behind the "YOU," but I'm not convinced that's correct.

This is a marked retreat from Army ads of at least the past decade. As someone on X, the social media platform formerly known as Prince Twitter, said, "White guys in an Army ad. The shit just got real."

Though the masculine nature of this ad got the attention of everyone, what is noticeable is how much this ad reflects a logical progression from the previous three. In "First Arrival," you have a group of generic teens/early twenties. No piercings, no tattoos, no magenta hair. The kids are all coming from small towns or the suburbs. The only thing out of the ordinary is at 0:20; you can't tell if it is a daughter giving her Mom a tearful goodbye hug or if it is a parting of lesbian lovers (NTTAWWT). 

In "First Patch," all the troops are male. None appear to be anything but straight males of various races and ethnicities.

The new loader in "First Target" is a black male and the only visible character in the spot. The tank commander is male. The gunner could be a female or a guy wearing an overly tight thong (again, NTTAWWT). But the only visible character is male.

I don't know if these ads will succeed...and I have doubts that they will...because 45 days into Fiscal Year 2024, the Army predicts it will miss its recruiting target by 10,000 contracts.

I don't know if the ads will work, and I have a lot of doubts that mere ads can turn the Army's problems around, but they are a sign that lights are beginning to come on somewhere. You can't build an army, particularly an expeditionary army with potential global commitments, out of women and sexual minorities. You can't retain men in uniform when they are constantly bombarded by messages that label them racists, political extremists, homophobes, misogynists, and sexual predators who are only promoted when no one more deserving is left. Like it or not, the US Army and Marines, particularly the combat arms in those services, have always been heavily populated by rural white males.


In my opinion, these ads are aimed as much at the veteran influencer community that has washed its hands of the woke Army and stopped encouraging their sons and other young men to join the Army. The Army hopes to convince this underappreciated keystone of Army Recruiting that things are not as bad as we've been told. For my part, I'm not all that sure I believe them.



And we Know, On the Fringe, and more- November 10

 




Macron calls on Israel to stop killing Gaza's women and babies

 

Israel must stop killing babies and women in Gaza, French President Emmanuel Macron has told the BBC.

In an exclusive interview at the Élysée Palace, he said there was "no justification" for the bombing, saying a ceasefire would benefit Israel.

While recognising Israel's right to protect itself, "we do urge them to stop this bombing" in Gaza.

But he also stressed that France "clearly condemns" the "terrorist" actions of Hamas.

France - like Israel, the US, the UK, and other Western nations - considers Hamas a terrorist organisation.

When asked if he wanted other leaders - including in the US and the UK - to join his calls for a ceasefire, he replied: "I hope they will."

Speaking the day after a humanitarian aid conference in Paris about the war in Gaza, Mr Macron said the "clear conclusion" of all governments and agencies present at that summit was "that there is no other solution than first a humanitarian pause, going to a ceasefire, which will allow [us] to protect... all civilians having nothing to do with terrorists".

"De facto - today, civilians are bombed - de facto. These babies, these ladies, these old people are bombed and killed. So there is no reason for that and no legitimacy. So we do urge Israel to stop."

He said it was not his role to judge whether international law had been broken.

In a wide-ranging interview at the end of the first day of an annual Paris Peace Forum, the French president also discussed:  



  • Fears of violence spilling over from the Middle East into France, urging citizens of all faiths to be "united against antisemitism"
  • Russia's invasion of Ukraine, saying it was France's "duty" to help Ukraine - but suggesting there may come a time for "fair and good negotiations" with Moscow
  • Extremism online, saying Facebook's parent company Meta and Google "just don't deliver" on moderation
  • And the dangers of climate change, saying it was pushing people around the world toward "terrorism".

Starting by discussing Gaza, Mr Macron said France "clearly condemns" Hamas's attacks on Israel on 7 October which sparked the war. Hamas gunmen killed about 1,200 people and took 240 others hostage in its unprecedented cross-border assault it launched that day.

"We do share [Israel's] pain. And we do share their willingness to get rid of terrorism. We know what terrorism means in France." But he said there was "no justification" for the ongoing bombing of civilians in Gaza.

"It's extremely important for all of us because of our principles, because we are democracies. It's important for the mid-to-long run as well for the security of Israel itself, to recognise that all lives matter."  


When asked, he refused to say that Israel had broken international law in Gaza. "I'm not a judge. I'm a head of state," he said, adding it would not be right to criticise Israel in this way - "a partner and a friend" - just a month after it was attacked.

But Mr Macron said he disagreed that the best way for Israel to "protect [itself] is having a large bombing of Gaza", saying it was creating "resentment and bad feelings" in the region that would prolong the conflict.

After a month of Israeli bombardment and nearly two weeks after Israel launched a major ground offensive into the territory, Gaza's Hamas-run health ministry said on Friday that 11,078 people had been killed, while 1.5 million had fled their homes.

Israel has said it will start daily four-hour military pauses in parts of northern Gaza as it continues its offensive. Its defence minister however stressed the pauses would be "localised" and would "not detract from the war fighting".

Ahead of a march against antisemitism on Sunday which a large section of France's political class will attend, President Macron called on all French citizens to condemn antisemitic acts "without ambiguity".

He said France had probably Europe's biggest Muslim community and a big Jewish community too, and with France and the rest of Europe seeing a big rise in antisemitism, all French citizens had to be united against antisemitism, and had to "share the pain or the compassion of Palestinians".  


Mr Macron then moved on to other global issues, including Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine.

He said if Russia were allowed to win its war, "you will have a new imperial power" in Europe, that could threaten other former Soviet states like Georgia and Kazakhstan, as well as the whole continent.

"Because, definitely, it's imperialism and colonialism that Russia is doing [in Ukraine]," he said.

The French president said it was the "duty" of his country and all countries to support Ukraine in its defence. But he also said the next month would be critical, as it struggles to retake lost land in counteroffensive operations.

He said it was "not yet" time for Ukraine to come to the table, and stressed the decision to negotiate was Kyiv's alone. But he added there may come a time to "have fair and good negotiations, and to come back to the table and find a solution with Russia".

Mr Macron also discussed online extremism - a key topic at the Paris Peace Forum. He singled out Facebook's parent company Meta and Google, saying the companies "simply don't deliver" on promises they made to moderate hate speech on their platforms.

He said many online platforms lacked sufficient moderators for French language content, calling it a "shame", and promising to "push them" on the issue - although he said TikTok had improved the number of moderators for its French language content.  


And he said that climate change was causing terrorism in parts of the world, specifically mentioning the effects of global warming in lower water levels at Lake Chad in West Africa.

"As a consequence of climate change, a lot of families living as fishermen [suffered]... A lot of species just disappeared. And it created politics [that] pushed a lot of people to terrorism."

But when asked if he ever felt depressed by the sheer number of issues facing the world, Mr Macron said he saw it as "a chance and an honour to have responsibilities [as head of state]".

"We need international cooperation [to tackle global issues]... This is a unique chance."  


https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-67356581  



Mr Macron gave the exclusive interview to the BBC at the Élysée Palace  





Gaza After the War: Biden Needs a Reality Check


As Israel continues its systematic assault on Hamas deep inside Gaza, closing in on high-ranking targets and putting the jihadist outfit's sprawling subterranean tunnel network squarely in its crosshairs, the conversation has already begun to shift away from the warfare on the ground. True, much painful fighting likely remains; true as well, no one can predict the extent to which Hezbollah or the Iranian regime itself might escalate, thereby risking a full-fledged regional conflagration.

But the war will, at some point, end. And a gap has already emerged between the positions of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and President Joe Biden when it comes to what happens in Gaza the day after Israel deems that the cancerous Hamas tumor has been sufficiently eradicated.

On the one hand, Netanyahu avowed this week that Israel "will for an indefinite period have security responsibility" in Gaza after the war. On the other hand, U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken, speaking on behalf of a deeply unpopular president who faces a difficult reelection next year and has endured declining Muslim-American support over the past month, stated this week that "it is clear that Israel cannot occupy Gaza" after the war.

Something has to give.

The Biden administration's specific position on Gaza after the war is downstream of its broader obstinance when it comes to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. In a speech in Tel Aviv on Nov. 3, Blinken reiterated the Biden administration's continued support for a so-called "two-state solution" to the conflict. "Two states for two peoples," Blinken intoned -- presumably based, as it was for the Obama administration before it, on the absurd "1967 borders," which would pinch the Jewish state to 9 miles wide at its narrowest point and which former Israeli Deputy Foreign Minister Zeev Elkin once lambasted as "Auschwitz borders."

The Biden administration, in other words, is of the opinion that the Hamas Holocaust of Oct. 7 was not a paradigm-shifting geopolitical event. Biden, Blinken and the rest of the Democratic foreign policy establishment are of the belief that the single biggest slaughter of Jews since Hitler was not a game-changer -- the sort of event that causes one to revise underlying assumptions and reassess a situation from the ground up. They believe that nothing fundamentally has actually changed; after Israel is satisfied with its work in Gaza, it will get right back to more conciliation and territorial concessions.

It is more plausible that the tooth fairy exists than the "two-state solution," as presently conceived, ever becomes reality. Indeed, the original proposed "two-state solution," following the European powers' post-World War I carving up of the Middle East, would have made all of "Mandatory Palestine" -- encompassing the entirety of the Land of Israel, "from the river to the sea" as it is now said -- a Jewish state, and would have made the Emirate of Transjordan (today, the kingdom of Jordan) a so-called "Palestinian" state. But the modern "two-state solution," which would have Gaza and the biblical heartland of Judea and Samaria form the basis for an independent "Palestinian" state, is a fantasy that should have died after Yasser Arafat's Second Intifada -- and definitely should have died after the pogrom of Oct. 7, 2023.

To continue to believe -- after all the unspeakable horrors of Oct. 7, after the reality that "Palestinian self-determination" in Gaza following Israel's unilateral disengagement in 2005 resulted in the barbaric and genocidal (but democratically elected!) rule of an Islamist reich -- in a "two-state solution" is to reveal oneself to be entirely out-of-touch to anything smacking of empirical reality. It is to reveal one's worldview as so deeply ideological, so wholly based on fanciful academic theorizing, and so completely divorced from facts on the ground, that one will have inadvertently outed himself as a complete and utter fool.

There is an alternative explanation for those still stubbornly peddling a "two-state solution." It is a darker explanation than mere incompetence or mental deficiency: a desire to simply see more Oct. 7 pogroms and more dead Jews. Indeed, many on university campuses are barely concealing their desire for precisely this.

After Oct. 7, it is clear that the 2005 disengagement from Gaza will go down as one of Israel's all-time historical mistakes, along with ceding the Temple Mount to the Jordanian waqf after the Six-Day War, the disastrous lack of preemptive action before the Yom Kippur War, and the Oslo Accords with Arafat. The world has seen what leaving Gaza to "Palestinian self-determination" results in: a jihadist entity that indiscriminately fires rockets at Israeli civilians and commits Nazi-like war crimes. The very least Israel must do is reassert operational control of Gaza's borders and security; ideally, a military occupation or formal re-annexation would be on the table.

Biden is understandably concerned about his reelection prospects next fall. There is only so much in the way of Muslim-American support he can afford to lose. Like a true cynic, he has apparently chosen to shore up that support to the exclusion of our close ally's existential security.




Trump’s Attorneys Just Broke Down 4 Reasons Chutkan’s J6 Gag Order Is Unconstitutional



Former President Donald Trump’s attorneys are appealing a D.C. judge’s gag order that prohibits the Republican frontrunner from criticizing the special counsel who, at the behest of the Biden Justice Department, is running a political prosecution against him.

In the appeal filed Wednesday, Trump’s defense counsel protested the gag order handed down last month by D.C. District Court Judge Tanya Chutkan, who is presiding over the former president’s case related to his speech on the day of the Capitol riot on Jan. 6, 2021.

“This is not about whether I like the language Mr. Trump uses,” Judge Chutkan reportedly said when she handed down the order. “This is about language that presents a danger to the administration of justice.”

Chutkan, despite being an activist judge with a record of unusually harsh sentences for pro-Trump demonstrators, refused to recuse herself from the politically charged case in September. In their Wednesday filing, Trump’s attorneys argued the gag order was both unprecedented and unconstitutional.

1. Gag Order Is Unprecedented

Trump’s attorneys noted the former president made history as the first presidential frontrunner to face a gag order heading into the next election.

“The Supreme Court has ‘never allowed the government to prohibit candidates from communicating relevant information to voters during an election,'” they wrote, citing the 2002 Supreme Court case Republican Party of Minnesota v. White. “Accordingly, no court has ever imposed a gag order on the political speech of a candidate for public office, let alone the leading candidate for President of the United States — until now.”

2. Gag Order Is Election Interference

With a more than 44-point lead in the RealClear aggregate of GOP primary presidential surveys, Trump has maintained overwhelming support over his Republican rivals throughout the entire race. Trump’s chief opponent for a second term in the White House is President Joe Biden along with his weaponized Justice Department and Democrat prosecutors in state and local offices, who have targeted Trump with a combined 91 charges.

In court, Trump’s attorneys wrote Chutkan’s gag order “restricts President Trump from making public statements about key aspects of his prosecution at the hands of the Administration he is seeking to replace — issues that are central to, and inextricably entwined with, the 2024 Presidential campaign.”

The Department of Justice, which is run by a handpicked Biden nominee and has a history of running cover for the Biden family, has successfully muzzled the administration’s top political opponent.

3. Gag Order Violates The First Amendment

Trump’s attorneys argued the gag order violated not only Trump’s right to free speech, but also the public’s.

“The Gag Order violates President Trump’s most fundamental First Amendment rights,” they wrote. “Even worse, it gives no consideration to the First Amendment rights of President Trump’s audience, the American public, to receive and listen to his speech.”

4. Gag Order Relies On A ‘Heckler’s Veto’

Trump’s attorneys also argued that Chutkan’s order relies on the “heckler’s veto,” or the court’s speculative assumption that supporters of the former president would harass prosecutors in response to the defendant’s statements.

“The First Amendment forbids this heckler’s veto, and even if it were legally viable — which it is not — no convincing evidence supports it,” they wrote. “President Trump has made many public statements about this case in the three months since his indictment, and yet the Department of Justice (‘the prosecution’) submitted no evidence of any ‘threats’ or ‘harassment’ to prosecutors, witnesses, or court staff during that time.”

“Instead,” Trump’s lawyers added, “the prosecution admitted, ‘of course this prejudice is speculative.'”



4 Huge Issues The Pentagon Should Tackle Instead Of Financing Service Member Abortions

There are much bigger issues implicating U.S. national security than forcing American taxpayers to bankroll abortions.



The American military is tasked with overseeing the protection of the U.S. homeland from both external and internal threats. So why is its leadership obsessed with forcing U.S. taxpayers to subsidize abortion?

In recent months, Pentagon leaders, congressional Democrats, and establishment Republicans have been attacking Sen. Tommy Tuberville, R-Ala., over the latter’s protest of the Defense Department’s abortion policy, which uses taxpayer dollars to pay for service members’ travel expenses to obtain abortions. Rather than allow the Senate Armed Services Committee to confirm Biden’s military nominees en mass, Tuberville has forced the committee to vote on them one at a time.

The Alabama Republican has pledged to continue his protest until the Pentagon revokes the policy.

Tuberville’s critics have often — and baselessly — claimed that his stand is harming U.S. “national security” and “military readiness.” If that were true, then why aren’t they calling on the Defense Department to abandon its abortion policy, which, according to unofficial reports obtained by Tuberville’s office, show that only 12 service members have used it to date?

In case it wasn’t obvious to the leftists in the upper echelons of the Pentagon, there are much bigger issues implicating U.S. national security than forcing American taxpayers to bankroll abortions. Here are just a few of the things they should be focusing their time and energy on.

1. Protecting U.S. Troops Stationed Abroad

Following Hamas’ Oct. 7 massacre of Israelis, U.S. forces stationed throughout the Middle East have been under constant bombardment from Iranian-backed proxies. Earlier this week, DOD officials announced that nearly 50 U.S. service members across Syria and Iraq have been “injured by drone or rocket attacks” from Oct. 17 to Oct. 26.

Thirty-two of the injuries came from al-Tanf in southern Syria while 13 are from al Asad Air Base in western Iraq. Roughly half have been classified as “traumatic brain injuries,” according to the Pentagon.

2. Fixing the Military’s Recruiting Crisis

Between President Biden’s foreign policy failures and the Pentagon “pride” parties, it’s not surprising that almost every branch of the U.S. armed forces missed their respective FY2023 recruiting goals.

Last month, Navy Recruiting Command announced that America’s maritime force fell more than 7,000 active-duty sailors short of its 2023 goal. As The Federalist reported, the Navy “also missed its targets for new active-duty officers and reserve officers by 452 and 773 enlistees, respectively.” Meanwhile, the Army fell about 10,000 troops short of its 2023 targets.

To compensate for its recruiting shortfalls, the military has taken several actions in recent years that lower entrance standards for new members. These policies include scrapping basic education qualifications and accepting those who perform poorly on entrance exams.

3. Providing Basic Needs to U.S. Troops

If U.S. troops are willing to sacrifice basic freedoms to serve their country, the least the military could do is provide these members with the basic necessities they were promised.

In September, the Government Accountability Office published a bombshell report detailing the horrific conditions of several of America’s military installations. In addition to reports of bedbug and roach infestations, the analysis also listed poor water quality, inoperable air conditioning units, mold, and inadequate waste disposal as common problems across bases.

Other recent reports have detailed how the military has failed to provide thousands of U.S. National Guardsmen with “bonuses they were promised for signing up” to serve, with some payments having “been missing for years.” These findings came weeks before the Pentagon was set to slash overseas service members’ cost-of-living allowances for the second time this year.

4. Deterring Red China

Led by the iron fist of dictator Xi Jinping, the Chinese Communist Party is increasingly becoming more aggressive toward the United States and its allies.

In the South China Sea, tensions have become white-hot between China and the Philippines, the latter of which disputes the CCP’s territorial claims to the region. Last month, several Chinese vessels rammed two Filipino ships “off a contested shoal in the South China Sea,” where Beijing has spent years developing manmade militarized islands. According to the Associated Press, the incident occurred after China’s coast guard “formed a blockade … to prevent two Philippine coast guard ships and two boats from delivering food and other supplies to Filipino forces stationed at Second Thomas Shoal aboard a marooned navy ship.”

Beijing’s actions in the South China Sea come on top of their increasingly aggressive behavior toward Taiwan, the island nation located roughly 100 miles off China’s eastern coast that the CCP claims as its own. On what appears to be a daily basis, the PLA conducts air and naval exercises throughout Taiwan’s air defense identification zone and surrounding waters, forcing Taiwan’s military to deploy its own military craft in response.

The CCP has regularly threatened to take the sovereign nation by force if Taipei continues to defy China’s calls for so-called “reunification” with the mainland.



There Is No More Excuse for 'Pro-Palestine' Protesters to Not Be Considered 'Pro-Hamas'


Right now, on the front page of RedState, there are a slew of articles exposing the hatred and brutality of "pro-Palestinian" protesters. This includes a recent attack on Israel supporters right in front of the Museum of Tolerance in Los Angeles, California. 

The infuriating and unforgivable cheering on of blatant antisemitism and the promotion of genocide is usually not exactly a rare occurrence. Not only are these anti-Israel protests happening in the streets, they're occurring on university campuses and with large numbers in attendance. 

This has led to the defense of many of these protesters as simply being ignorant of what they were supporting and that they should be given some kind of forgiveness for their lack of knowledge about what's actually happening. To be fair, I might have agreed with this...initially. 

The thing is, since the October 7 attack, Hamas has repeatedly made it clearwhat the goal of this war is. They're not shy about advocating for the genocide and destruction of an entire people and their country. Moreover, many of the protesters outside the Gaza Strip haven't been shy about their desires for Jewish people to meet grisly ends either.  

These pro-Hamas protesters murdered a Jewish man in cold blood

There is a brutal honesty to these "protesters," and they've exposed themselves too many times for things not to be apparent at this point. The excuse for not knowing what you're siding with when you chant "from the river to the sea" has gone. 

This point was made very well by author and journalist Douglas Murray who got into a short debate with Piers Morgan over this very topic. Morgan made the argument that not every pro-Palestine protester is for the genocide of the Jewish people, to which Murray made an argument so compelling that he seemingly changed Morgan's mind right then and there. 

"Here's a challenge, Piers," began Murray. "If you decided to go on some kind of march and in week one you discovered that you had the BNP (Bangladesh Nationalist Party) along your side calling, for instance, for the murder of all black people. Would you not wonder whether or not you should go on week two, and would you not drop out by about week three?"

The answer left Morgan stunned yet admitting that this is a very good point. 


And it is a good point. 

These are unabashed, self-admitted racists who are openly suggesting that the entirety of the Jewish population in Israel and everywhere else should be hunted down and eliminated. They have taken many of the same exact positions that the Nazis did in Germany starting in the 1920s. 

At this point, there isn't an excuse. They either disapprove of genocide or they approve of it and the people in these protests need to decide which side they sit on because there is no riding this fence. 

Either their antisemites or they abhor the idea, and if they do disapprove, then they need to leave these protests and stop lending their voice to such an evil enterprise. There is no in-between. 



The newest US strategic bomber B-21 has made its first flight early this morning

 

The US B-21 Raider Has Flown For The First Time.

The United States has begun flight testing of the newest strategic bomber B-21 Raider, the Pentagon reported

On Friday, November 10, at just after dawn, the B-21 Raider took to the skies over Palmdale’s Plant 42, marking its first flight.

The world’s second stealth bomber has taken to the air. A video taken from outside the Air Force’s storied Plant 42 in Palmdale, California, early this morning, showed the B-21, with its landing gear down, accompanied by an F-16 chase plane  


“The B-21 Raider is in flight testing. Flight testing is a critical step in the test campaign managed by the Air Force Test Center and 412th Test Wing’s B-21 Combined Test Force to provide survivable, long-range, penetrating strike capabilities to deter aggression and strategic attacks against the United States, allies, and partners.” an Air Force spokesperson, told The War Zone.  


https://airlive.net/military/2023/11/10/the-newest-us-strategic-bomber-b-21-has-made-its-first-flight-early-this-morning-here-is-the-video/   





This Is Why Pro-Hamas Protesters Tried to Use Violence to Disrupt Film Exposing October 7 Atrocities


Jeff Charles reporting for RedState 

Over the duration of the war between Israel and Hamas, it has been apparent that there are many Americans who claim to be concerned about the well-being of Palestinian civilians when, in reality, they just hate Israel and the Jews who live there.

It is not difficult to discern between those who might have legitimate concerns about the civilians in Gaza and the West Bank and those who just hate Israel. The recent brawl that took place at a screening of the film “Bearing Witness” is a prime example.

The screening of the film, an event put together by Israeli actress Gal Gadot, took place at the Museum of Tolerance in Los Angeles. It didn’t take long for things to get rowdy, as RedState’s Bob Hoge reported.

The altercations were in response to Israeli actress Gal Gadot's screening of the film “Bearing Witness,” which shows Israel Defense Forces footage of the Hamas terror attack atrocities of October 7. Many media reactions to the screenings were negative, with headlines like, "‘Don’t let her get away with this’: Gal Gadot under fire for organizing Hamas footage screening in US." But all she is doing is showing exactly what Hamas did—this is what scares them so much, the truth?

Basically, supporters of Hamas were trying to use violence to stop people from seeing a film highlighting the evil of the terrorist organization they support. Apparently, they are just as authoritarian as Hamas is when it comes to allowing people to do as they please.

Left-wing members of the chattering class have tried to dissuade people from viewing the film, accusing Gadot of provocation for daring to show such content in America. Nevertheless, the “Wonder Woman” actress has remained firm in her commitment to exposing the truth behind Hamas and its assault on southern Israel.

It is clear that members of the left-wing intelligentsia and the anti-Israel lobby did not want this film to be seen. The last thing they wanted was for average Americans who might not know much about the Israeli/Palestinian conflict to see the vicious, evil, and disgusting brutality that Hamas inflicted on Israeli civilians on October 7.

Unfortunately, this is not the only case in which violence was employed by the anti-Israel crowd. RedState’s Jennifer Van Laar has been reporting extensively on an incident that occurred in Thousand Oaks, California, in which a pro-Hamas protester allegedly murdered a Jewish man participating in a pro-Israel rally.

As I’ve argued previously, if one is truly concerned about the plight of Palestinian civilians, they would never defend or support Hamas. The terrorist group has been responsible for some of the worst human rights abuses against the population of Gaza ever since it took power in 2007. On top of their direct abuses of civilians, their constant fighting against Israel has only invited more trouble in the form of airstrikes like what we are seeing today. By prodding Israel into acting in self-defense and deliberately hiding among civilians, Hamas is only oppressing these people even more.

Unfortunately, it is clear that too many anti-Israel activists despise the nation more than they love Palestinian civilians, who have been mere pawns in this entire conflict.