Today’s update is rather lengthy because it covers two critical and timely issues: the IDF’s report on its findings, mistakes, and failures on October 7th, and the continued surge of antisemitism on college campuses across the country. While there is a lot to unpack here, both topics demand thorough attention, as they have far-reaching implications for understanding the truth, combating misinformation, and addressing rising threats.

Watch

A Bibas family memorial at the University of Michigan was sadly desecrated.

X Post from President Trump:

All Federal Funding will STOP for any College, School, or University that allows illegal protests. Agitators will be imprisoned/or permanently sent back to the country from which they came. American students will be permanently expelled or, depending on on the crime, arrested. NO MASKS! Thank you for your attention to this matter.

Federal review of more than $5 billion in grants to Columbia over Jew-hatred in the Jewish News Syndicate

• Citing “ongoing inaction in the face of relentless harassment of Jewish students,” the federal government is weighing halting $51.4 million in contracts with and conducting a “comprehensive review” of more than $5 billion in promised grants to Columbia University in New York City.
• The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, the Department of Education and the U.S. General Services Administration made the joint announcement on Monday.
• “Institutions that receive federal funds have a responsibility to protect all students from discrimination,” she(Linda McMahon, who was confirmed earlier in the day as the U.S. education secretary) added. “Columbia’s apparent failure to uphold their end of this basic agreement raises very serious questions about the institution’s fitness to continue doing business with the United States government.”
• Link: Federal review of more than $5 billion in grants to Columbia over Jew-hatred

Antisemitism

Member of US-designated Terror Group is also Scholar at Yale University: Helyeh Doutaghi, a member of Samidoun, is also the Deputy Director of the Law and Political Economy Project and an Associate Research Scholar at Yale Law School by The Jewish Onliner

UPDATE: Yale Law Puts Employee On ‘Immediate Administrative Leave’ Less than 24 Hours After Alleged Connections To Pro-Terror Organization Revealed

• Helyeh Doutaghi, the Deputy Director of the Law and Political Economy Project and an Associate Research Scholar at Yale Law School, is also a member of the international Samidoun network. In October 2024, Samidoun was designated as a terrorist organization by the US Treasury Department for operating as a fundraising arm for the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP)—also a designated terror group.
• According to Yale University, “During her doctoral studies, Helyeh taught topics including social justice and international human rights at Carleton University” in Ottowa, Canada. Samidoun is a designated terror group in Canada as well.
• In April 2022, Helyeh participated in a webinar titled “Palestine and Iran – Changing the Global Balance of Power” alongside Khaled Barakat, a PFLP operative officially designated as a terrorist by multiple governments, including the US.
• She was also interviewed by the Iranian state-owned news outlet, Press TV—which has been sanctioned by the US government—accusing Israel of “genocide” and asserting that international law has been “part of the structures that uphold US imperialism.”
• Helyeh’s extremist affiliations extend beyond in-person events—her social media activity further confirms her sympathies for terrorist groups and their leaders. She has since made her X account private and her reposts are no longer visible.
  • She shared a post on X praising the “martyrdom” of former Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah.
  • She shared an image of Nasrallah’s funeral, calling him “one of the great heroes of our time.”
  • She reposted an image of armed militants wearing keffiyehs.
  • She shared a photo of Hamas terrorists parading through Gaza.
• A newly surfaced video on X of Iranian nationals shows Helyeh (identified as a “professor at Yale University”) speaking virtually with Saeed Jalili, the direct representative of Ayatollah Khamenei to the Secretariat of the Supreme National Security Council—Iran’s highest security and strategic decision-making body, overseeing defense, intelligence, and national security policies.
• Link: Member of US-designated Terror Group is also Scholar at Yale University

**Below is an opinion piece written by Laura Ann Rosenbury, President of Barnard College

When Student Protest Goes Too Far in The Chronicle

• Across the country, colleges, and especially small liberal-arts colleges, are being tested. Some question whether we are still fulfilling our central mission and preparing students for a rapidly changing and increasingly polarized world. … Barnard isn’t just a place of learning. Barnard is also our home. We are a community of individuals driven by intellectual curiosity who have chosen to study, teach, and work together.
• On the first day of classes this January, four masked individuals threatened both our educational mission and our community by disrupting a History of Modern Israel course at Columbia … This disruption was not designed to expand thinking or advance civil discourse. Instead, it was a calculated act of intimidation.
• This wasn’t an isolated incident but an escalation of an ongoing threat to our community. Over the last year and a half, an unauthorized group … have exploited the conflict in the Middle East to try to tear our campus community — our Barnard home — apart. … They operate in the shadows, hiding behind masks and Instagram posts with Molotov cocktails aimed at Barnard buildings, antisemitic tropes … and calls for violence and disruption at any cost.
• This group seized the moment when they learned about the expulsions of the two Barnard students who participated in the classroom disruption. … on the afternoon of February 26, they forced their way through a fire exit at Barnard’s Milbank Hall, knocking down a community-safety employee in the process. … They caused $30,000 in damages to a building that houses … the offices that seek to further diversity, equity, and inclusion at Barnard.
• Barnard successfully de-escalated the situation without further violence … By doing so, we ensured that classes could resume in the morning. … Even though all of the disruptors wore masks, we now know the identity of many of them … We will vigorously pursue discipline and other remedies against those who forcibly … violated many policies and rules.
• Expulsion is always an extraordinary measure, but we did what needed to be done, and we will continue to do so. That means removing from our community those who refuse to share our values of respect, inclusion, and academic excellence. … Disrupting classes and defacing buildings to intimidate and divide our community is not academic exploration. It is a betrayal of the goals and sanctity of higher education.
• Link: When Student Protest Goes Too Far

The DOJ Should Prosecute Criminal Anti-Semites by Anita Kinney in City Journal

• After Hamas’s October 7, 2023, terrorist attacks, anti-Israel protesters repeatedly shut down freeways and other key infrastructure across the United States. A month later, demonstrators snarled traffic on San Francisco’s Golden Gate Bridge, causing, among other problems, delayed organ-transplant surgeries. … HLLI has filed a first-of-its-kind civil lawsuit against the protesters on Manhart’s behalf last September and advanced a similar case for Faoro in January.
• These lawsuits are based on a fundamental civil right, guaranteed by the Constitution and common law: freedom of movement. The pro-Hamas blockaders conspired to impede this right. Such activity is explicitly prohibited by Section 241, which the Supreme Court affirmed in United States v. Guest, a case involving interference with individuals’ right of free interstate passage on highway facilities.
• On January 30, President Donald Trump issued an executive order requiring federal departments to report to the White House within 60 days on actions available ‘to combat anti-Semitism.’ … Federal prosecutors, moreover, can use the law to curb anti-Semitic lawlessness and restore law and order in American life.
• Such lawsuits are already underway at the local level. Last July, City Journal covered Chicago’s decision to charge the Manhart defendants … In August, San Francisco’s district attorney followed suit bringing felony conspiracy charges against 26 Golden Gate demonstrators just one week before the DNC.
• The court filings in Faoro and Manhart suggest significant overlap between the activists who spearheaded campus occupations, those who led freeway occupations, and those who congregated in the middle of the night outside Jewish politicians’ homes. … If Attorney General Pam Bondi wants to hold the country’s most notorious anti-Semites accountable, she should take a close look at HLLI’s docket.
• Link: The DOJ Should Prosecute Criminal Anti-Semites

What Concerns U.S. College Students: Rising Antisemitism and Hamas’s War on Israel by Jacob Baine, CEO of Israel on Campus Coalition (ICC)

• This February, Israel on Campus Coalition (ICC), in partnership with Schoen Cooperman Research, surveyed 1,000 U.S. adults, 400 college students, and 250 Jewish college students to find out. What we learned was revealing: overwhelmingly, America’s college students today are deeply concerned with the war Hamas started by invading Israel on October 7, 2023, and with the wave of rising antisemitism on their campuses that began at the same time.
• Among Jewish college students, the feeling was even more pronounced, with the Israel-Hamas issue rating as the top concern for this group by far (40% of them selected it) and with 94% of Jewish college students saying the war was important to them generally.
• 76% of all students were concerned that the Israel-Hamas conflict has led to an increase in antisemitism on their campus
• 76% also now believe that antisemitism is a serious problem on their own campus
• 75% of college students either experienced (25%), witnessed (27%), or heard about (23%) an antisemitic incident on their college campus
• The perception was even more pronounced among the Jewish college students we surveyed.
  • 74% now believe that antisemitism is a serious problem on their college campus
  • an incredible 81% have either experienced (30%), witnessed (29%), or heard about (22%) an antisemitic incident on their campus
• 87% of Jewish college students are specifically concerned that anti-Israel protests and petitions affiliated with Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) lead to hate crimes and violence against Jewish students. The founder of BDS, Omar Barghouti, said that it will fulfill its goals only when Israel no longer exists, and studies have shown that BDS petitions generally lead to increased antisemitism at the universities where they are introduced.
• These results show that Americans are more concerned than ever about the rising specter of antisemitism and recognize that Hamas is an aggressive, brutal, and destabilizing force in today’s world. Just as importantly, they reveal that Hamas’s war on Israel is a top-two concern for today’s college students – and by far the top concern for Jewish college students.
• College students as a whole are almost as concerned about the spiraling antisemitism on their campuses as their Jewish peers.
• Link: Jacob Baime on X: “What Concerns U.S. College Students: Rising Antisemitism and Hamas’s War on Israel”

Deborah Lipstadt: Why I Won’t Teach at Columbia: I was Biden’s antisemitism envoy. I had been considering an academic appointment at the Ivy League institution. Not anymore. By Deborah Lipstadt in The Free Press

• Until last week, I had been seriously considering teaching at Columbia University next year as a visiting professor. But I’m now convinced that to do so would be folly—to serve as a prop or a fig leaf. Moreover, I feel doing so would mean putting myself and my students at risk.
• …I watched—often with horror—as university administrations coddled anti-Israel protesters who broke university regulations, harassed other students, and prevented the normal learning process from proceeding.
• So I was pleased and surprised last week when Barnard, the women’s college of Columbia University, expelled two students who had participated in an assault on a Columbia course on the history of modern Israel in January of this year, on the first day of classes.
• But as Barnard took action, I wondered if the college would stand by its decision.
• I had good reason to wonder. Over the past two years, universities have been overwhelmingly weak in their response to those clearly breaking university rules and even the law. When they have meted out punishments, often they have wound up walking them back, turning their responses into a farce.
• Consider what happened at MIT in November 2023 when MIT student protesters, ignoring specific university instructions, conducted a demonstration that the university described as “disruptive, loud, and sustained” and which was “conducted in defiance” of previously issued warnings. The protest prevented research and learning. MIT “partially suspended” the students. “Partial” meant they could not attend nonacademic events. In other words, they remained enrolled at the school.
• In explaining this “partial” action, MIT’s president said it had not fully suspended them because it had “serious concerns about collateral consequences for the students, such as visa issues.” In other words, the protesters were foreign students and might be thrown out of the United States if they lost their student visas.
• On February 26, a group of protesters—it’s unclear how many were Barnard students—outraged by the expulsions, took over Milbank Hall, which houses both the dean’s office and classrooms, and demanded the reversal of the expulsion and amnesty for all those involved in the protest. They entered the building—masked and screaming—with such ferocity that an employee who confronted them was physically abused and had to be taken to the hospital. Students trying to go to class were locked out by university officials.
• Classes that were to be held in that building were canceled. Consequences? None.
• Finally, after some six hours, the students were told by the dean’s office that “we will not pursue disciplinary action for your presence in the building” if they left by 10:30 p.m. They left. Consequences? None.
• During the Barnard protest, Columbia issued an anodyne statement disclaiming responsibility because the “disruption” was on Barnard’s campus, not Columbia’s, and asserting its commitment “to supporting our Columbia student body and our campus community during this challenging time.” No condemnation.
• On too many university campuses, the inmates—and these may include administrators, student disrupters, and off-campus agitators as well as faculty members—are running the asylum. They are turning universities into parodies of true academic inquiry.
• Link: Why I Won’t Teach at Columbia

Divisive Departments by Samuel J. Abrams with the American Enterprise Institute (AEI)

• My colleagues nationwide are more than capable of teaching in a balanced manner; many professors do just that with their classes preferring to teach and then go home. Yet, a sizable number see themselves as activist scholars. That is, professors who go beyond their teaching duties and professional obligation to promote viewpoint diversity and see their professional role as one that enables them to directly address historical ills and use their positions of “power and privilege” to address past “wrongs” via their teaching and community action.
• At Sarah Lawrence College, my colleagues generally hide their activism behind groups without signing their names.
• These professors publicly preach viewpoint diversity and neutrality but have been extremely effective in privately supporting and influencing students
• So, when I saw a video of Jackie Orr, a faculty member at Barnard College, publicly and proudly supporting students in their recent takeover of a building on their campus and attacking a student for asking her about her views, I wanted to learn more about Orr and her role in Barnard’s Women’s, Gender, and Sexuality Studies Department.
• Professors have an almost sacred role with young minds to be educators, not instigators or inquisitors.
• While other professors cross the professional line as Orr has done, Orr’s “academic” department shocked me for its overt activism rather than its focus on academics. The first piece of text on the department’s page reads that, “we work to hold our College to its pledge to continue to diversify our community equitably” and offers the “WGSS Commitment to Action” stating that “WGSS is dedicated to linking inquiry and action, theory and practice, scholarship and feminism.”
• This is a powerful and clear message about the department’s extreme progressive ideology and expectations. Rarely have I seen such overt politicization of the academy within a so-called academic “department”—their true beliefs are on full display.
• See for yourself (as of late last night, the images are still up): Barnard Women’s, Gender, and Sexuality Studies
• Link: Divisive Departments

The Genocide Libel: How the World Has Charged Israel with Genocide by Norman J.W. Goda with Indiana University Bloomington’s Institute for the Study of Contemporary Antisemitism

• Genocide accusations against Israel are different. First, Israel, unlike other states, has been charged with genocide throughout its existence. Second, the speed and fury with which the accusations exploded after the Hamas massacres of October 7, 2023, are unusual in the annals of lawfare. … Yet regarding Israel’s 2023 war against Hamas in the Gaza Strip, there has been not only a rush to judgment but an effort to redefine genocide itself so that the constitutive elements of the crime itself are lowered.
• When Arab and Muslim leaders spoke about warring on increased Jewish immigration … they spoke in apocalyptic and even proto-genocidal terms. … And yet it was the Zionists whom many Arab leaders viewed as quasi-genocidal, even before the formation of a Jewish state. … The Saudis, ironically, were the first to propose what became the Genocide Convention’s early drafts, likely as part of their campaign against Zionism.
• No state was charged more often with genocide than Israel. Each war fought by the Israelis brought genocide accusations, some long after the fact. … In December the UN General Assembly in Resolution 37/123 D stated that the massacres at Sabra and Shatila were ‘an act of genocide.’ The vote was 123 for, zero against, and 22 abstaining. The resolution … had no legal precision. Genocide as a term, said the historian William Shabas, was ‘obviously … chosen to embarrass Israel.’
• The Cold War is over. … Today’s genocide charges are different thanks to settler colonial theory, which developed in the 1990s and … which ties genocide to a structural process of invasion, mass settlement, and the ‘elimination of the native.’ Wolfe … effectively redefines genocide, making it not so much a single event or even a series of events but a societal structure.
• After Hamas’s October 7, 2023, terrorist attacks, anti-Israel protesters repeatedly shut down freeways. … The ‘slow genocide’ argument, begun in 2007 with the Israeli blockade, rests on inflated definitions of genocide, and the so-called expansions of the concept. … Meanwhile the argument that everything from displacement to destruction of a group’s culture is genocide rehashes Lemkin’s early theories that the UN specifically rejected.
• A fifth, and this is what makes the genocide libel particularly dangerous, is the association of all Jews with the crime. … The genocide libel, fueled by everything from electoral campaigns to public demonstrations to social media, drives rage against Jews throughout the world.
• Link: The Genocide Libel: How the World Has Charged Israel with Genocide

In summarizing Norman J.W. Goda’s piece, Mosaic Magazine explores the history of this accusation, which goes back to the very first days of the Jewish state. Indeed, writes Goda, there have been repeated attempts to redefine genocide so that it would include whatever specific actions Israel was being accused of at any given moment. The real turning point came during the war with Lebanon in the early 1980s:

• Virtually all UN member states condemned the invasion and the shelling of Beirut, and virtually all called for a halt in the fighting and Israeli withdrawal from occupied territories. The specific genocide accusations flowed specifically from delegations from the Communist world, from the Arab states, and from the Movement of Non-Aligned Countries, all of which had adopted a dim view of Israel since 1967 as a racist and colonial state. These states had already in 1975 voted for General Assembly Resolution 3379 condemning Zionism as “a form of racism and racial discrimination.” Now they jumped aboard the genocide accusation.
• It should be noted that the genocide accusation was a form of warfare undertaken out of embarrassing inability to aid the PLO militarily.

But the statements were also laced with anti-Semitic tropes. . . . Mohammed Abulhassan of Kuwait decried “[Menachem] Begin and his bloodthirsty agents.” Jasim Yousif Jamal of Qatar claimed that Israeli soldiers were motivated by “their thirst for Arab blood, be it the blood of a child, a woman, or an old person,” as they were “seeking the so-called security of the ‘chosen people,’ as they so arrogantly state.”

• Such libels have since been bolstered by the works of countless well-credentialed academics, who then cite one another to create a perception of credibility. But perhaps most telling are the comments of the South African jurist John Dugard, who now is helping to bring charges of genocide against Israel at the International Court of Justice.
• After October 7, John Dugard, despite the carnage in southern Israel and in Gaza, was a happy man. “It’s a relief,” he told an interviewer in June 2024, “to say what it is: Israel is committing genocide.”

Israel/Middle East Related Articles

IDF Reports Regarding its Failures on October 7th

[MUST LISTEN: PODCAST] Call Me Back with Dan Senor: On Blindness: The IDF’s 10/7 Probe – with Amos Harel & Nadav Eyal

Israeli journalist Marc Schulman did a great job summarizing the IDF Reports Regarding its Failures on October 7th. Marc writes that the Army provided detailed presentations to military reporters, who then reported what they were told. This means we are all depending on secondary sources rather than direct access to the primary documents.

• Lack of Preparedness: The IDF did not consider the scenario of a broad surprise attack, deeming it unlikely, and was therefore not prepared for it. The surprise stemmed from the attack itself, the large number of Hamas militants, their mobility, and their planned cruelty.
• Intelligence and Conceptual Failures: The intelligence directorate (AMAN) had a widening gap in its understanding of Hamas’ intentions and actual plans. There was a failure to connect the various intelligence signs before the attack. The report also mentions a faulty perception of Hamas, which was seen as deterred and interested in civilian benefits, willing to de-escalate, and that the conflict could be managed.
• Flawed Security Concepts: The IDF relied on incorrect assumptions, such as viewing the Gaza Strip as a secondary threat. There was a sense of intelligence superiority and control over the situation, with full confidence in early warning before any attack.
• Inadequate Force Deployment and Border Security: There was a reliance on insufficient defense components and a low number of soldiers on the border.
• Hamas’s Planning and Deception: Hamas had been planning the attack since 2016 and accelerated these plans in 2022, with multiple postponements for various reasons. Hamas aimed to deceive the enemy (i.e. Israel) into thinking it was interested in de-escalation and economic prosperity.
• Failures in Threat Perception: AMAN’s Research Division had a significant and prolonged gap in understanding Hamas, interpreting Hamas’s avoidance of war as deterrence and failing to recognize the preparations for a broad attack.
• Missed Opportunities and “Warning Signs”: The report identifies several missed “warning signs” that could have corrected the prevailing misconceptions, including the rise of Yahya Sinwar, Hamas’s victory in the 2021 “Guardian of the Walls” operation, and Hamas’s consistent refusal to join the Islamic Jihad in escalations against Israel.
• Systemic Issues in the Intelligence Culture: The report points to a non-skeptical intelligence culture, a research method that wasn’t critical, an illusion of certainty stemming from technological advancement, and a failure to investigate past failures.
• Resource Allocation and Prioritization: The IDF faced decreasing resources amid increasing threats, leading to gaps in security responses. Priority was given to threats from Iran and Hezbollah over Gaza.
• Limited Preparedness for Large-Scale Attacks: The IDF and specifically the Southern Command, were not prepared for a large-scale attack scenario. The Southern Command was prepared to respond to up to 8 different incursion points.
• Failures on the Night Before the Attack: A comprehensive intelligence assessment on the night before the attack concluded that an immediate event was unlikely, with no one challenged this assessment or raised the alert level.
• Inadequate Situation Assessment and Information Sharing: The Operations Directorate and the General Staff (Kiriya) lacked a basic understanding of the combat zones for hours after the attack began, and it was not clear which events were the most severe.
• Air Force and Navy Deficiencies: The Air Force was fully activated upon the outbreak of the attack. The Navy did not fulfill its defense mission, with terrorists infiltrating Israeli territory via the sea. (more on that below)
• Significant Disparity in Forces: During the initial hours of the attack, the number of Hamas militants greatly outnumbered the IDF forces present.

During the initial response to the Hamas attack, several failures occurred, impacting the effectiveness of the defense and the ability to contain the situation.

• Slow Deployment of Forces: Although the IDF activated its standing forces relatively quickly, the actual arrival of these forces to the conflict zones was significantly delayed. Troops needed time to travel from their homes to bases, organize, and then reach the affected areas. In many instances, forces en route were engaged by Hamas militants, further impeding their progress.
• Lack of Situational Awareness: The central command (Kiriya) lacked a basic understanding of the combat zones for hours after the attack began, and it was not clear which events were the most severe. The initial reports of the events did not accurately portray what was happening. For instance, reports concerning “Re’em” referred to multiple locations including a kibbutz, a junction, a parking lot that was the site of the Nova music festival, and the command of the Gaza division. This lack of clarity hindered the ability to allocate resources effectively. The central command also did not have an accurate picture of where Hamas forces were located.
• Inadequate Preparedness of Frontline Units: The (dawn readiness) in the Gaza Division was not different or more prepared than on any regular day. The division did not increase its readiness for an infiltration.
• Communication Issues: There was a problematic operational culture that relied on cellular devices, bypassing standard procedures for situation assessments. Information was disseminated through broad chat groups without confirming receipt.
• Compromised Command Structure: The command structure in the Southern Brigade was severely affected, with the brigade commander killed and many other officers injured. This hampered command and control in a critical sector.

The Israeli Navy experienced critical failures during the Hamas attack on October 7. Despite a swift response from Navy forces that eliminated about half of the Hamas terrorists who attempted to infiltrate by sea, 16 terrorists successfully made it ashore and murdered 17 people at Zikim beach.

Specific failures and shortcomings include:

• Failure to Defend the Coast: The navy did not fulfill its mission of defending Israel from the sea.
• Inadequate Preparation: The Navy was not prepared for such a large-scale surprise attack, but only for a more limited infiltration scenario.
• Insufficiently Lethal Weapons: Navy officers acknowledged that their weapons weren’t lethal enough.
• Restrictive Engagement Rules: A commander hesitated before opening fire on an enemy boat due to restrictive engagement rules in place since 2014’s Operation Protective Edge.
• Delayed Threat Recognition: A Navy lookout took the initiative to call the Zikim security chief, as forces had failed to stop the terrorists.
• Routine Alert Status: On the morning of the attack, the navy was in a state of full routine readiness.
• Delayed Leadership Updates: The commander of the Navy was not updated on the situation during the night, even though his RLS (likely, aide) was informed.
• Limited Impact on Coastal Infiltration: Though the Navy destroyed five of seven Hamas boats, some terrorists still reached the shore. Two boats reached the shore, and the attacks on the combatants had only partial success.
• Subsequent Casualties: 17 Israeli civilians were murdered on Zikim beach.

Despite eliminating several terrorists, the Navy failed to prevent a deadly breach that resulted in civilian casualties.

The sequence of events on October 7, according to the sources, unfolded as follows:

• 6:29AM: Navy surveillance detected hundreds of large Palestinian fishing boats along the coast, under whose cover Hamas naval commandos launched their attack.
• 6:29AM: The first wave of 1,175 Hamas terrorists, mostly from the elite Nukhba forces, infiltrated southern Israel under cover of a 1,400-rocket and mortar barrage. Their initial targets included IDF outposts, the Gaza Division headquarters, an intelligence base near Urim, the Sderot police station, key intersections, and major roads to secure control over the western Negev.
• 6:31AM: The IDF’s supervising command post was activated in the IDF’s underground headquarters in Tel Aviv. At the same time, immediate readiness protocols for the Air Force and elite emergency units were enacted. Also, at this time, a Hamas boat was detected 1,500 meters south of the maritime border and destroyed within 3 minutes.
• 6:33AM: The Ashdod naval base declared a confirmed terror attack from the sea, issuing an alert equivalent to the IDF’s highest-level ground incursion protocol.
• 6:35AM: The Air Force was ordered to deploy additional fighter jet crews beyond its standard readiness level.
• 6:37AM: The Navy requested that Israeli police evacuate Zikim beach and called on the Gaza Division to send infantry forces to secure the shore, in case some of the terrorists managed to breach Israel’s defenses.
• 6:38AM: The Gaza Division activated “Parash Pleshet,” its highest-level infiltration alert, assuming the attack involved around 70 terrorists from four to eight locations. Over the next 14 minutes, the Operations Directorate gradually deployed all available reserve ground forces to the southern region.
• 6:43AM: The Air Force was immediately activated.
• 6:45AM: The first report of a ground incursion from northern Gaza reached IDF headquarters.
• 6:50AM: Up to this time, a total of 2 boats had been destroyed at sea.
• 7:00AM Southern Command was aware of 15 terror incidents occurring simultaneously along the border. The General Staff opened a dedicated attack coordination center to manage airstrikes from the headquarters.
• 7:00-9:00AM A second wave of approximately 600 Nukhba terrorists joined the invasion, under cover of 937 additional rocket and mortar strikes, mostly targeting Israeli communities near the border.
• 7:05AM: The IDF chief of staff’s military secretary sent an internal WhatsApp message to the Operations Directorate group, independently declaring: “We are at war”.
• 7:10AM.: The Air Force declared war.
• 7:13AM: The security coordinator of the Nova music festival reported to the IDF that 90% of attendees had been evacuated.
• 7:14AM: The Air Force conducted its first drone strike against terrorists near Netiv HaAsara.
• 7:15AM: The first aerial attack was carried out by a UAV that attacked militants near Netiv HaAsara.
• 7:26AM An officer updated IDF headquarters: “A breach at the Erez Crossing has resulted in two hostages being taken. There is ongoing combat in Sderot. The division is requesting deployment of every available combat unit to the southern region.” A senior officer at IDF headquarters responded: “Every IDF unit has been ordered to join you. Open routes for them and direct them where needed. We have activated troops from training bases”.
• 7:28AM: Brig. Gen. Shlomi Binder, head of the Operations Division within the Operations Directorate, ordered a full-scale military mobilization. An emergency deployment order was issued to send massive reinforcements to the western Negev.
• 7:30AM: Units from the 80th Division, responsible for the Egyptian border, arrived from the south to assist. Under the command of the Paran Brigade, a team of female tank operators prevented two Nukhba battalions from seizing communities in the Kerem Shalom area. By this time, the regular IDF force was activated and sent to the “Otef” (area around Gaza).
• 7:55AM: The first fighter jet strike targeted a Hamas tunnel near Netiv HaAsara.
• 7:58AM: Hamas military chief Mohammed Deif called on Gaza residents via local media: “Go and storm Israel. There is no border fence.” At that moment, the dramatic decision was made — to be officially executed an hour later — to seal the breached border at all costs using airstrikes.
• 8:00AM: Southern Command chief Maj. Gen. Yaron Finkelman urgently requested additional reinforcements. IDF headquarters decided that two-thirds of the West Bank Division’s security forces would abandon their positions and be rushed south.
• 8:02AM: The first combat helicopter attack was carried out against a group of militants in the Re’im area.
• 8:17AM: The IDF established a command center dedicated to managing the hostage crisis. Also, at this time, the Operations Division directed AMAN to open a command center for prisoners of war and the missing.
• 8:29AM: Investigators later determined that at this stage, only 55% of active terror incidents in the Gaza border communities were being reported to IDF headquarters, further complicating the situational assessment.
• 8:30AM: Southern Command activated “Damocles’ Sword,” an operation targeting Hamas’ command and control centers in Gaza to disrupt the ongoing invasion.
• 8:36AM: The Chief of Staff decided to send senior commanders to take control of the major cities: Sderot, Ashkelon, Netivot, Ofakim and Be’er Sheva.
• 8:40AM: The first evacuation of wounded by air force helicopters took place.
• 8:42AM: The supervising command center ordered the air force to target Hamas headquarters and leadership figures.
• 8:47AM: The first force of fighters was landed by air in the “Otef”.
• 9:03AM: 14 aircraft were in the air over the Gaza Strip.
• 9:23AM: The Gaza Division was effectively overrun as Nukhba forces besieged its main command center near Kibbutz Re’im. The IDF decided to dispatch division and brigade commanders across the region, assigning each to oversee a major town or community that Hamas had seized, including Ofakim, Netivot, Sderot, and Be’er Sheva.
• 9:30AM: A new policy regarding rules of engagement was given to create a separation on the border and to not allow anything to enter Israel from Gaza or cross from Israel to Gaza. Anything attempting to do so was to be attacked.
• 9:40AM: Southern Command and the Air Force ordered an aerial lockdown of the breached border, authorizing fighter jets to kill anyone moving within a kilometer (0.6 miles) of the fence. The bombing began but did not fully halt the infiltration.
• 9:58AM: 24 aircraft were in the air.
• 10:00AM: By this hour, IDF headquarters was receiving reports on 61% of ongoing terror incidents in the southern region.
• 10:30AM: The IDF issued a broad call-up order for 360,000 reserve soldiers.
• 10:40AM: A bottleneck of military forces was identified in Sderot, where troops had gathered after seeing viral footage of terrorists in pickup trucks. The supervising post ordered them to disperse to active combat zones.
• 12:00PM The attack reached its peak as thousands more Hamas terrorists exploited still-open breaches in the border. By this point, approximately 5,500 terrorists had flooded into southern Israel.
• 1:00PM: The Hamas assault was largely halted, and the IDF began establishing a new defensive line. By 5:00 p.m., Southern Command announced that operational control over the western Negev had been restored, roads were secured, and the last remaining terrorist strongholds were encircled. [Although it required another two days to capture or kill all the remaining terrorists]

As part of this report, the IDF published timelines of the events that unfolded in Kfar Aza and Nahal Oz base during the Hamas-led October 7 attacks in southern Israel. Credit to Joe Truzman with FDD for laying this out.

Kfar Aza

• A map detailing the events during the battle at Kibbutz Kfar Aza

• A graphic detailing the number of IDF troops versus the number of enemy forces in the battle at Kibbutz Kfar Aza

• A timeline of the events during the battle at Kibbutz Kfar Aza

Nahal Oz Base

• An illustrated map depicting the enemy’s plan to seize the Nahal Oz Base, as found in the field

• A timeline of the events during the battle at the Nahal Oz Base

Why Israel Must Cut Off Gaza’s Aid: No Obligation, No Justification, No More Excuses by InsideIsraelIntel

• Critics of Israel’s policy often distort international law to falsely claim that Israel is required to supply aid to Gaza. This is a deliberate misrepresentation. As legal expert Avraham Russell Shalev has made clear, international law does not impose an obligation on a nation to provide aid to enemy-controlled territory. The Geneva Conventions establish that a besieging force is required to allow third-party humanitarian organizations to provide aid only if specific conditions are met—conditions that Hamas has flagrantly violated. Hamas steals aid, funds terrorism, and rejects ceasefire negotiations in bad faith.
• The U.S. Department of Defense Law of War Manual states unequivocally that it is lawful to starve an enemy force into submission.
• Time and again, humanitarian aid sent to Gaza has been seized by Hamas and used to fund its war against Israel. According to reports, Hamas has stolen or profited by at least $500 million from humanitarian shipments, selling aid on the black market and using the proceeds to arm and recruit more terrorists.
• Even the Palestinian Authority—no friend of Israel—has acknowledged that Hamas is systematically robbing humanitarian aid meant for Gaza’s civilians.
• The international community’s insistence on flooding Gaza with aid has had devastating consequences for Israel. By maintaining a steady supply of resources to Gaza, world powers have shielded Hamas from the consequences of its own aggression.
• …aid shipments have allowed Hamas to keep fighting rather than accept defeat.
• The idea that humanitarian aid is helping innocent civilians is a dangerous lie—it is sustaining the terrorist organization that massacred Israelis and continues to plot future attacks.
• The United Nations recently suspended humanitarian operations in Yemen after Houthi rebels detained UN staff, yet no one accused the UN of committing “war crimes.” However, when Israel takes necessary action to free its hostages and defend its people, it is viciously condemned.
• Egypt, which also borders Gaza, has blocked aid shipments, yet the international community remains silent.
• Humanitarian aid should only be allowed under strict international oversight—ensuring that it never falls into Hamas’ hands. But as long as Hamas remains in control, that is impossible.
• Link: Why Israel Must Cut Off Gaza’s Aid: No Obligation, No Justification, No More Excuses

International Law Is No Bar to Trump’s Gaza Proposal by Eugene Kontorovich with The Wall Street Journal

• The president is successfully trolling European and United Nations officials, who have insisted the plan would violate international law. They’re wrong. The legal basis for the proposal is straightforward. Gaza is one of the very few pieces of land not under the sovereignty of any nation, a status known as terra nullius in international law. Such situations are rare because in the postwar era local populations can win recognition for a new sovereign state with relative ease. Once established, sovereignty is hard to extinguish. But because of a confluence of circumstances, Gaza has a sovereignty vacuum.
• When Israel retook Gaza in 1967’s Six Day War, it had sovereign claims on it. … But the Jewish state, as an experiment in ‘land for peace,’ withdrew its entire civilian population and military presence in 2005. The completeness of Israel’s evacuation indicates an abandonment of sovereign claims. At least since then, Gaza has been up for grabs. … In 2006 legislative elections Palestinians elected Hamas … The following year Hamas staged a coup in Gaza. No Palestinian state has been created. This isn’t a Trump position, but the longstanding view of the U.S. and most of its Western allies.
• Some have argued that the ‘right of self-determination’ automatically devolves sovereignty onto Gaza residents. … The Palestinian population has categorically rejected sovereignty unless it includes Jerusalem … Mr. Trump’s offer to enable Gazans to leave has also been criticized as ‘ethnic cleansing’ in violation of international law. But he has never suggested a violent or forcible removal. Rather, he seeks to ensure that Gazans are free to leave—which they currently aren’t.
• A poll taken before the war showed 44% of young Gazans are interested in emigrating; the share would likely be larger now. … According to a U.N. report, 80% of the population in Gaza before the war depended on international handouts. They were being paid to stay in Gaza. Mr. Trump correctly posits that Gaza is unviable without continuing outside subvention. … Neither their jobs nor those in Israel are coming back.
• American sovereignty extends to a variety of far-flung places, from Alaska and Hawaii to the Virgin Islands and the Northern Mariana Islands, which became American only in 1986. In time, the American Levant—if not ‘Trump Gaza’—may sound as natural.
• Link: International Law Is No Bar to Trump’s Gaza Proposal

Gaza standoff: Netanyahu and Hamas’ high-stakes cease-fire gamble by Ron Ben-Yishai with YNet

• After Hamas rejected Israel’s demand to extend the first phase of the hostage deal while negotiating the second phase in parallel, a new proposal has emerged: the ‘two major phases’ plan put forward by U.S. envoy Steve Witkoff.
• The proposal calls for a 50-day extension of the temporary cease-fire, allowing continued delivery of humanitarian aid to Gaza until the end of Ramadan and Passover. In exchange, Hamas would release all hostages, both living and deceased, in two stages—one group at the beginning of the cease-fire and the second at the end.
• The plan meets Israel’s demands, ensuring a phased release without prolonging the suffering of hostages and their families while avoiding a formal commitment to a permanent cease-fire under U.S. guarantees. Politically, it benefits Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu by delaying a confrontation with far-right coalition partners Bezalel Smotrich and Itamar Ben Gvir, allowing him to push through the state budget. Without budget approval this month, the government would automatically dissolve, triggering early elections.
• Israel, having officially endorsed the plan, is supporting [U.S. envoy Steve Witkoff’s] efforts with a negotiation strategy that combines tough posturing with tactical flexibility. The approach leverages both threats and incentives for Hamas. … The main threat is the credible risk of an Israeli military operation to reoccupy Gaza. Five IDF divisions are already positioned around the Strip, ready for rapid deployment. … At the same time, Israel is offering incentives, by allowing humanitarian aid and mobile homes into Gaza and facilitating infrastructure repairs to ease civilian suffering.
• First, the military threat looms large … Second, internal pressure within Gaza is mounting as civilians demand relief. … The third and strongest pressure point is U.S. support. President Donald Trump has shown no signs of losing interest in resolving the crisis. On the contrary, his involvement appears to be deepening, with Israeli-American businesswoman Miriam Adelson … playing a significant role.
• Hamas, for now, is playing tough, banking on the assumption that Israel would avoid resuming large-scale military operations for fear of endangering the hostages. … Another threat hanging over Hamas was the upcoming Arab summit in Cairo, where a post-war plan for Gaza—excluding Hamas—was set to be unveiled. This prospect worries Hamas even more than renewed fighting, as it could strip the group of its grip on power.
• At this stage, the outcome remains uncertain. Mediators are working to bring Hamas on board, while Israel has already given its approval. Hostage families continue to suffer, the Israeli public remains on edge, and Hamas is intensifying its psychological warfare, one of the few tools it has left to influence decision-makers in Jerusalem. By the end of the week—or perhaps even later—the picture may finally become clearer.
• Link: Gaza standoff: Netanyahu and Hamas’ high-stakes cease-fire gamble

Palestinians blew their best chance for peace by Stephen Daisley in The Spectator

• The western liberal mind is a captive of the two-state solution ideology, a lethal idealism convinced that Palestinian statehood will bring peace even as every step towards it brings only more violence. At the United Nations and in the foreign ministries of Europe, each Palestinian rejection of an Israeli offer proves that more pressure must be brought to bear on Israel. To cite evidence of the failure and futility of this model is to commit the gravest heresy. The two-state solution isn’t diplomacy, it’s religion.
• Olmert offered Abbas a Palestinian state on 95.1 per cent of the West Bank, 100 percent of Gaza … [Israel] would demolish 78 settlements, expel 88,000 thousand Jews to make way for Palestinians, and build a road or tunnel connecting the two Palestinian territories on either side of Israel. … The Olmert map was the best offer the Palestinians ever received. They will never see another one like it.
• In declining Olmert’s blueprint, [Mahmoud Abbas] condemned his own people to decades of dispossession. He didn’t just deny them a state, he stole the Palestinians’ future. That is not a tragedy, it is treason.
• Perhaps Abba Eban was right. Maybe the Palestinians will behave wisely when they have exhausted all other resources, but their resources are diminishing rapidly. … Israel has shifted rightwards and any appetite for the sort of territorial division proposed by Ehud Olmert is limited to a depleted and moribund left. If the Palestinians ever return to the negotiating table they will find themselves negotiating over much less than before.
• Mahmoud Abbas is another Palestinian leader who chose self-sabotage over self-determination and the Olmert map is a symbol of his inexcusable folly. The Palestinians have more enemies in Ramallah than they will ever have in Jerusalem.
• Link: Palestinians blew their best chance for peace

Hostage Update

According to the Times of Israel, the family of hostage soldier Matan Angrest on Monday published the first photo of him from captivity, from a video received from Hamas. The still photo joined an audio recording released several months back, in which Angrest begged Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to secure his release, in comments likely dictated by his captors. Angrest, 21, was taken from a tank at Nahal Oz during battles there on October 7, 2023.

There are now currently 58 hostages taken on 10/7 currently in captivity in Gaza (there are 59 hostages remaining in total)

• 33 hostages have been released so far in the first phase of the agreement
• 5 hostages are Americans: Meet the Five American Hostages Still Held By Hamas: Edan Alexander is assumed to be alive, Itay Chen is assumed to have been killed on 10/7, and Gadi Haggai, Judi Weinstein Haggai, and Omer Neutra have been confirmed to have been killed.
• 24 hostages will remain in captivity after Phase I and have not been declared dead.
  • 4 are soldiers
  • 7 are residents of the Gaza border communities
  • 11 were abducted from the Nova music festival
  • 2 are foreign workers: Bipin Joshi from Nepal and Pinta Nattapong from Thailand
• Link: These are the hostages to be released (and left behind) in the Israel-Hamas ceasefire deal’s first phase – Jewish Telegraphic Agency

• On October 7^th, a total of 251 Israelis were taken hostage.
  • During the ceasefire deal in November of 2023, 112 hostages were released.
  • 193 hostages in total have been released or rescued
    • The bodies of 40 hostages have been recovered, including 3 mistakenly killed by the military as they tried to escape their captors.
  • 8 hostages have been heroically rescued by troops alive
• Of the 59 hostages still theoretically in Gaza
  • 31 hostages have been confirmed dead and are currently being held in Gaza
  • Thus, at most, 28 living hostages could still be in Gaza.
  • Hamas is now holding the body of 1 IDF soldier who was killed in 2014 (Lt. Hadar Goldin’s body remains held in the Gaza Strip)

Casualties (+1 since Sunday)

1,851 Israelis have been killed including 846 IDF soldiers since October 7th (+1 since Sunday)

Hassan Darwsha, a 62-year old Israeli Arab, was killed and at least four others were wounded in a terrorist attack at a major Haifa transit hub Monday. The attacker, an Israeli Druze citizen, was shot and killed. His family said he suffered from mental illness, but others report that he recently returned from Germany where he may have been radicalized.

• The South: 407 IDF soldiers during the ground operation in Gaza have been killed (no change since Sunday)
• The North: 132 Israelis (84 IDF soldiers) have been killed during the war in Northern Israel (no change since Sunday)
• The West Bank: 63 Israelis (27 IDF and Israeli security forces)
• Additional Information (according to the IDF):
  • 2,582 (no change since Sunday) IDF soldiers have been injured during ground combat in Gaza, including at least 497 (no change since Sunday) who have been severely injured.
  • 5,725 (+1 since Sunday) IDF soldiers have been injured since the beginning of the war, including at least 851 (no change since Sunday) who have been severely injured.

• The Gaza Casualty Count:
  • According to unverified figures from the Hamas-controlled Gaza Health Ministry, 62,614 total deaths have been reported, with a civilian/combatant ratio: 1:1.
  • [MUST READ] Report: Questionable Counting: Analysing the Death Toll from the Hamas-Run Ministry of Health in Gaza by Andrew Fox with The Henry Jackson Society
  • On October 7th, Ohad Hemo with Channel 12 Israel News – the country’s largest news network, a leading expert on Palestinian and Arab affairs, mentioned an estimate from Hamas: around 80% of those killed in Gaza are members of the organization and their families.”
  • Read this well documented piece from Tablet published in March: How the Gaza Ministry of Health Fakes Casualty Numbers
  • The Associated Press, an outlet with a demonstrated anti-Israel bias, conducted an analysis of alleged Gaza death tolls released by the Hamas-controlled “Gaza Health Ministry.” The analysis found that “9,940 of the dead – 29% of its April 30 total – were not listed in the data” and that “an additional 1,699 records in the ministry’s April data were incomplete and 22 were duplicates.”
• The Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs publishes official details on every civilian and IDF casualty.

Regular sources include JINSA, FDD, IDF, AIPAC, The Paul Singer Foundation, The Institute for National Security Studies, the Alma Research and Education Center, Yediot, Jerusalem Post, IDF Casualty Count, the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, Institute for the Study of War, Tablet Magazine, Mosaic Magazine, The Free Press, and the Times of Israel