Ayatollahs

Iran’s school curriculum exposes diplomatic option failure

*“Iran is fighting a global war and calls on oppressed Muslims and non-Muslims to unite under Islam and the Islamic Republic of Iran to overthrow the evil regimes [the “infidel” West led by the US and the “heretic” Sunni regimes]. The Islamic Revolution knows no borders [hence, the right of Iran to interfere in many conflicts in the Middle East and beyond]; it applies to the whole world (Literature and Humanities, Grade 12, 2021‒2022, page 110).

School curriculum reflects ideology

The school curriculum of Iran’s Ayatollahs is consistent with their constitution, domestic repression of ethnic and religious minorities, the subjugation of women, and the proliferation of anti-US terrorism in the Middle East, Africa and Latin America. It provides a roadmap for an apocalyptic commitment to a global, anti-US Islamic revolution.

While US and Western policy makers rely heavily on statements and commitments made by Iran’s Ayatollahs in the negotiation rooms and in the public arena, the Ayatollahs’ school curriculum reflects most authentically their fanatic, religious and megalomaniacal anti-US strategy, tactics and vision: toppling the Sunni “apostate and heretic” regimes and bringing the Western “infidel” (especially “The Great American Satan”) to submission.

Moreover, Iran’s Ayatollahs have mastered the art of the Quran-sanctioned Taqiyya: dissimulation, doubletalk and deception-based statements and agreements, aimed at shielding the “believers” from the “infidels,” to be abrogated once conditions are ripe.

Furthermore, the school curriculum of the Ayatollahs has become an effective production-line for terrorists and suicide bombers.

Since February 1, 1979, when Ayatollah Khomeini toppled the Shah of Iran, the US has persisted with the diplomatic option – cushioned by a financial bonanza – in attempts to entice Iran’s Ayatollahs to abandon their global exportation of the Islamic Shiite Revolution and accept peaceful coexistence with their Arab Sunni neighbors (e.g., Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain) along with human rights, democracy and good-faith negotiation.

As evidenced by the Ayatollahs’ 43 year track record, the diplomatic option has been shattered, providing a robust tailwind for the Ayatollahs – in the Persian Gulf, the Middle East at-large, Africa and increasingly in Latin America  – and a self-destructive head wind to all pro-US Arab regimes and the US’ homeland and national security.

Iran’s 2021-2022 anti-US school curriculum

*Prof. Eldad Pardo, a Hebrew University Expert on Iran, Islam and the Middle East and the Research Director of The Institute for Monitoring Peace and Cultural Tolerance in School Education, has researched Iran’s school curriculum since 2011. The following are some of the findings of his 2021-2022 study:

“…. Jihad [Holy War] and martyrdom have remained of central importance…. Child martyrdom is glorified [about 50,000 Iranian children were killed during the 1980-1987 Iran-Iraq war, many of them as mine sweepers]….  Martyrdom is viewed as a goal to be pursued in order to achieve spiritual perfection…. Iran largely continues to educate students for the prospect of a global war, and the spreading of the Islamist-Khomeinist revolution. There is a greater focus on Iran’s desire to export its global Islamic Revolution to the Arab Middle East compared to past curricula, with students encouraged to engage in militant activity to achieve Iranian hegemony. Textbooks instill a military spirit in students by glorifying the activities of the Quds Force, one of the five branches of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), focusing on their operations abroad….

“…. Martyrdom remains a central theme across the curriculum, as does virulent anti-Israel and antisemitic rhetoric, and hostility toward Western powers….

“…. Whereas previous reports showed a theological and mystical dimension to revolutionary war, the 2022 review found that textbooks are focused more on reality, namely on the tangible socio-economic benefits of expansionist foreign policy for Iran…. The Iranian curriculum continues to teach inflammatory content, with a degree of radicalization markedly worse than in previous reports. Unrelenting expansionism, hatred of foreigners and the ‘Other,’ Islamist and radical messaging, glorification of violence and martyrdom, imposition of central government ideology, suppression of local cultures, and opposing worldviews remain central pillars of the Iranian curriculum….

“…. [Students] are encouraged to support Arab proxy militias in the pursuit of fomenting regional instability. This message is reinforced by specific examples of martyrs – Quds Force members, Arab and other non-Iranian militia leaders – who were killed by opposition groups inspired by the US and Israel to counter the regime’s expansionist aspirations…. Students are encouraged to partner with radical Sunni groups such as the Muslim Brotherhood….

“Students are taught that Iranian hegemony in the Arab Middle East will benefit Iran through economic influence – namely, controlling much of the world’s energy supply and maritime trade….”

Iranian school textbooks – examples

*Since the November 1979 takeover of the US Embassy in Tehran – which entailed holding of over 50 US hostages for 444 days – “The National Day of Fighting Arrogance [the USA]” is commemorated annually on November 13th, when the public, especially pupils and students, declaring their hatred toward “the bullying and oppressive USA” and chanting “Death to America.” “This disavowal and declaration of disgust yields unity and homogeneity, bolstering resistance of the enemy” (Islamic Education, Grade 6, 2021‒2022, page 33; Defense Readiness, Grade 9, 2021‒2022, page 31).

*The US is described as a Satanic enemy of Islam and the Ayatollahs’ Islamic Revolution (Defense Readiness, Grade 9, 2021‒2022, page 30).

*The US and Britain are blamed for the proliferation of drugs among Muslims and driving a wedge among Muslims (Islamic Education and Training, Grade 8, 2021‒2022, page 16).

*Since 1979, the US has been devoted to a “satanic scheme” to enslave Islam (Defense Readiness, Grade 10, 2021‒22, page 120).

*Enemies [e.g., the US] must be defeated and humiliated, as demonstrated in Iran’s history (Qur’an Learning, Grade 2, 2021‒22, page 67; Persian Language, Grade 5, 2021‒22, page 60).  US sailors captured by the Iranian navy on January 12, 2016, are depicted in a humiliating position (Social Studies, Grade 8, 2021‒2022, page 130).

*Martyrdom and Jihad (Holy War) are promoted by heralding the hundreds of thousands, who sacrificed their lives during the 1980-1988 Iraq-Iran war (Islamic Education and Training, Grade 9, 2021‒2022, page 134).

*Whoever rises to the cause of Jihad [Holy War] against the enemies by the command of God is always victorious” (Islamic Education and Training, Grade 9, 2021‒2022, page 135).

The bottom line

*The school curriculum of Iran’s Ayatollahs is the most accurate reflection of their fanatic and megalomaniacal vision.

*The school curriculum of Iran’s Ayatollahs has represented – since February 1, 1979, when Ayatollah Khomeini landed in Tehran, taking over control of Iran – the fundamentals of their rogue policy-making, domestically, regionally and globally.

*The school curriculum of Iran’s Ayatollahs, on the one hand, and the assumption that Iran’s Ayatollahs are amenable to negotiation, constitute an oxymoron.

*The school curriculum of Iran’s Ayatollahs, on the one hand, and US values and interests, on the other hand, constitute a classic contradiction in terms.

*Downplaying the centrality of Iran’s school curriculum in the shaping of the Ayatollahs’ foreign and national security policy adds fuel to the Middle East and global fire, while causing a severe setback to US’ homeland and national security interests.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The Ettinger Report logo

newsletter

Subscribe for our daily news

related articles

Demography

2026 artificially inflated Palestinian demography

Ambassador (ret.) Yoram Ettinger, “Second Thought: a US-Israel Initiative”
April 26, 2026

Ambassador (ret.) Yoram Ettinger, “Second Thought: a US-Israel Initiative”
April 26, 2026

*500,000 Arabs (away for over a year) are included in the census, contrary to global norms. 325,000 were included in the 1997 census. 400,000 in 2005, according to the Palestinian Election Commission. 100,000 overseas births added to the census in 1995-2014, according to the Palestinian Undersecretary of Interior. The number grows steadily due to births.

*380,000 East Jerusalem Arabs are doubly-counted – by Israel and by the Palestinian Authority. The number grows steadily due to births.

*Over 200,000 Arabs, who married Israeli Arabs are similarly doubly counted. The number expands steadily due to births.   

*A 447,000 net-emigration of West Bank Arabs (since the 1997 Palestinian census) is ignored by the Palestinian Authority. In recent years, a 20,000 annual average net-emigration has been documented by Israel’s Population and Migration Authority in land, air and sea international passages.  

*A 32% artificial inflation of Palestinian births was documented by the World Bank (page 8, item 6) in a 2006 audit.

*The Judea & Samaria Arab (West Bank) fertility rate declined from 9 births per woman in the 1960s to less than 3 births in 2026, reflecting a sweeping urbanization, a growing female enrollment in higher education, rising marriage age, increased use of contraceptives and youth’s emigration.

*The number of deaths is under-reported for political and financial reasons.

*An artificial inflation of 1.75 million documents a population of 1.5 million Arabs in Judea and Samaria, not the official 3.25 million.

In January 2026: a 69% Jewish majority in the combined area of Judea, Samaria and pre-1967 Israel, benefitting from a tailwind of fertility and net-immigration, while Arab demography is westernized.

No Arab demographic time bomb; but, a Jewish demographic momentum.
More data in these articles and this short video.

Support Appreciated

Iran

Anti-Americanism by Design: Inside the Ayatollahs’ Playbook

Ambassador (ret.) Yoram Ettinger, “Second Thought: a US-Israel Initiative”
August 5, 2026

*Anti-Americanism is expressed by the Ayatollah regime’s Constitution, school curriculum, mosque sermons and official media, explicitly and through ideologically loaded terms such as “Global Arrogance” or “World Oppression” (Istikbar-e Jahani) and “The Great Satan” (Shaytan-e Bozorg).  These terms form a cornerstone of the Ayatollah’s foundational doctrine and core ideology, including its policy toward the US.

*The Ayatollah regime views the US as the mega-hurdle on the way to achieving the Ayatollah’s mega-goal: establishing the Twelver Shiite doctrine as the globally exclusive, legitimate, divinely-ordained religion. The US is also perceived as a mega-threat, culturally, geo-strategically, ideologically and religiously. 

The 1979 Ayatollah Constitution

*The Constitution avoids naming specific foreign nations, in order to maintain a universalist legal framework. However, anti-Americanism is encoded through such terms as – and inferring that the US is the core of – “imperialism,” “global arrogance,” “oppression,” “foreign domination,” “belligerent hegemony,“ colonialism,” “steadfastness,” “resistance,” etc. Anti-American animus is structural rather than merely rhetorical.

For example:

*The preamble of the Constitution frames the revolution as an “anti-despotic movement” and “anti-colonialist,” committing Iran to “the liberation of all deprived and oppressed peoples in the world.”  In addition: “The Iranian [Islamic] Revolution, which was a movement for the victory of all the oppressed over the arrogant, provides a basis for the continuation of that revolution both inside and outside the country.…”

*Article 2(6)(c): The Islamic Republic negates all forms of oppression, both the infliction of and the submission to it, and of dominance, both its imposition and its acceptance.

*Article 3(5): The Islamic Republic is committed to the complete elimination of imperialism and the prevention of foreign influence.

*Article 3(6): The Islamic Republic is committed to eliminate “all forms of despotism and autocracy.”

*Article 152 (foreign policy principles) declares: “The foreign policy of the Islamic Republic of Iran is based upon the rejection of all forms of domination—both the exertion of it and submission to it—the preservation of the all-around independence and territorial integrity of the country, the defense of the rights of all Muslims, non-alignment with respect to the hegemonial superpowers, and the maintenance of peaceful relations with all non-belligerent States.”

*Article 154: “While scrupulously refraining from all forms of interference in the internal affairs of other nations, it supports the just struggles of the oppressed (mustaz’afin) against the oppressors (mustakbirin) in every corner of the globe [including Latin America].”

School Curriculum

*While US policy makers rely heavily on commitments made by the Ayatollah negotiators – who are proficient in the art of the Taqiyya (dissimulation) – in the negotiation room and public arena, the most authentic and credible reflection of the Ayatollah’s apocalyptic and megalomaniacal anti-US strategy, tactics and vision is available in the Ayatollahs’ school curriculum.

*Since February 1979, dramatic US financial or diplomatic pressure and gestures have failed to induce moderation in the Ayatollah’s school curriculum and the Ayatollah’s rogue track record.

Impact-se, Iranian School Textbooks, May 2026:

*Grade 9, 2024-25, p. 31, Defense Readiness book highlights photographs, which depict 10 US sailors captured by the Iranian navy in the Persian Gulf, on January 12, 2016, in a humiliating and submissive position, kneeling with their hands behind their heads.  

*Grade 8, 2024-25, p. 130, Social Studies (Civics, History, Geography) condemns Sunni regimes which reject the Ayatollah dominance, while maintaining strong ties with the US or the West.  They are portrayed as collaborators and traitors.

Friday Mosque Sermons

*Friday sermons in Iran are coordinated by the Policy Council of Friday Prayer Imams under the authority of the Supreme Leader (Ayatollah). Friday sermons echo the Ayatollah’s anti-US rhetoric, which annually commemorate the November 4, 1979 takeover of the US Embassy in Tehran, resulting in more than 50 Americans held hostage for 444 days.

For instance:

*”America is the Great Satan (Shaytan-e Bozorg), the number one enemy of the deprived and oppressed people of the world. America will not stop at anything to secure its domination over the world’s resources.”

*On November 4, 2015three and a half months following the JCPOA, which showered upon the Ayatollah regime mega-billions of dollars worth of US-led financial and diplomatic bonanzas, Ayatollah Khamenei celebrated the “National Day of Fighting Against Global Arrogance” (the US Embassy takeover), telling students that “Death to America” is rational and constitutionally grounded.

*In Qom, on November 3, 2023, home of the country’s largest Shiite seminary, Imam Mohammad Saeedi claimed that “Iran has struck a hard blow against the United States with its Death to America slogan.” Saeedi added: “This is not simply a slogan. It is a revolutionary strategy.”  Saeedi added: “The takeover of the US spy den was a manifestation of this strategy.” Imam Mohammad Mehdi Hosseini preached: “This [anti-US] slogan has created a strategic link between Iran and other countries and created a large front.”

*The villainous U.S. government repeatedly says that it is standing by the Iranian people. They lie. If you are standing by the Iranian people, it is only to stab them in the heart with your venomous daggers… The enemy is the global center of arrogance and domination, one great manifestation of which is America.” (Tehran Friday Sermon, January 17, 2020). 

Official & State-Aligned Media (Kayhan, IRNA, Press TV)

*Kayhan (disambiguation) is Iran’s prominent hardline newspaper, whose editor-in-chief is appointed directly by the Ayatollah. Just like Iran’s State TV, Kayhan regularly portrays the US as “satanic, treacherous, arrogant, despotic, corrupt and warmongering.” We will not rest until we have raised the banner of Islam over the White House.”

The Bottom Line

*Are US policy makers determined to avoid – or repeat – the wave of critical errors of the last 47 years, underlined by the negotiation option (launched during the 1978 negotiation with Ayatollah Khomeini), rather than regime-change?

*While preoccupied with the cost assessment of regime-change, are US policy makers considering the catastrophic cost of refraining from regime-change?! For example, the dramatic erosion of the US posture of deterrence, which would eventually yield the first ever apocalyptic (Ayatollah) nuclear power, emboldened Islamic terrorism on US soil, bolstered Chinese posture in Latin America, the toppling of all pro-US Arab regimes, which have the Ayatollah’s and the Muslim Brotherhood’s machetes at their throat, etc.

*Are US policy makers aware that – irrespective of negotiation and agreements – snakes may shed their skin, but not their nature?!

Support Appreciated

Judea & Samaria

Secretary Blinken on settlements – vindicated by facts?

Ambassador (ret.) Yoram Ettinger, “Second Thought: a US-Israel Initiative”
February 27, 2024

Secretary of State Antony Blinken represents conventional wisdom when claiming that “It’s been longstanding US policy… that new settlements are… inconsistent with international law.”

However, conventional wisdom is frequently demolished by the march of facts

For instance:

*According to Prof. Eugene Rostow, who was the co-author of the November 22, 1967 UN Security Council Resolution 242, served as Undersecretary of State and was the Dean of Yale University Law School: “Jews have the same right to settle in the West Bank as they have in Haifa.”

*According to UN Resolution 242, Israel is required to withdraw from territories, not the territories, nor from all the territories, but some of the territories, which included Judea and Samaria (the West Bank), East Jerusalem, the Gaza Strip, the Sinai Peninsula and the Golan Heights.  Moreover, according to Prof. Rostow, “resolutions calling for withdrawal from all the territories were defeated in the Security Council and the General Assembly…. Israel was not to be forced back to the fragile and vulnerable [9-15 mile-wide] lines… but to secure and recognized boundaries, agreed to by the parties…. In making peace with Egypt in 1979, Israel withdrew from the entire Sinai… [which amounts to] more than 90% of the territories occupied in 1967….”

*Former President of the International Court of Justice, Judge Stephen M. Schwebel, stated: “Between Israel, acting defensively in 1948 and 1967 (according to Article 52 of the UN Charter), on the one hand, and her Arab neighbors, acting aggressively in 1948 and 1967, on the other, Israel has better title in the territory of what was [British Mandate] Palestine…. It follows that modifications of the 1949 armistice lines among those States within former Palestinian territory are lawful…. [The 1967] Israeli conquest of territory was defensive rather than aggressive… [as] indicated by Egypt’s prior closure of the Straits of Tiran, blockade of the Israeli port of Eilat, and the amassing of [Egyptian] troops in Sinai, coupled with its ejection of the UN Emergency Force…[and] Jordan’s initiated hostilities against Israel…. The 1948 Arab invasion of the nascent State of Israel further demonstrated that Egypt’s seizure of the Gaza Strip, and Jordan’s seizure and subsequent annexation of the West Bank and the old city of Jerusalem, were unlawful….” 

*The legal status of Judea and Samaria is embedded in the following 4 authoritative, binding, internationally-ratified documents, which recognize the area for what it has been: the cradle of Jewish history, culture, language, aspirations and religion.

(I) The November 2, 1917 Balfour Declaration, issued by Britain, calling for “the establishment in Palestine (a synonym to the Land of Israel) of a national home for the Jewish people….”
(II) The April 24, 1920 resolution, by the post-First World War San Remo Peace Conference of the Allied Powers Supreme Council, entrusted both sides of the Jordan River to the British Mandate for Palestine, for the reestablishment of the Jewish Commonwealth: “the Mandatory will be responsible for putting into effect the [Balfour] declaration originally made on November 2, 1917, by the Government of His Britannic Majesty, and adopted by the said Powers, in favor of the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people.” It was one of over 20 Mandates (trusteeships) established following WW1, responsible for the boundaries of most Arab countries.
(III) The July 24, 1922 Mandate for Palestine was ratified by the Council of the League of Nations, entrusted Britain to establish a Jewish state in the entire area west of the Jordan River, as demonstrated by its 6th article: “[to] encourage… close settlement by Jews on the land, including State lands and waste lands….” The Mandate was dedicated exclusively to Jewish national rights, while guaranteeing the civic rights of all other religious and ethnic groups. On July 23, 1923, the Ottoman Empire signed the Treaty of Lausanne, which included the Mandate for Palestine.  
(IV) The October 24, 1945 Article 80 of the UN Charter incorporated the Mandate for Palestine into the UN Charter.  Accordingly, the UN or any other entity cannot transfer Jewish rights in Palestine – including immigration and settlement – to any other party. According to Article 80 of the UN Charter and the Mandate for Palestine, the 1967 war of self-defense returned Jerusalem and Judea and Samaria to its legal owner, the Jewish state.  Legally and geo-strategically the rules of “belligerent occupation” do not apply Israel’s presence in Judea and Samaria, since they are not “foreign territory,” and Jordan did not have a legitimate title over the West Bank.  Moreover, the rules of “belligerent occupation” do not apply in view of the 1994 Israel-Jordan Peace Treaty. The 1950-67 Jordanian occupation of Judea and Samaria violated international law and was recognized only by Britain and Pakistan.

*The 1949 4th Geneva Convention prohibits the forced transfer of populations to areas previously occupied by a legitimate sovereign power. However, Israel has not forced Jews to settle in Judea and Samaria, and Jordan’s sovereignty there was never legal.

*The November 29, 1947 UN General Assembly Partition Resolution 181 was a recommendation, lacking legal stature, superseded by the Mandate for Palestine. The 1949 Armistice (non-peace) Agreements between Israel and its neighbors delineated “non-territorial boundaries.”   

*The term “Palestine” was a Greek and then a Roman attempt (following the 135 CE Jewish rebellion) to eradicate Jews and Judaism from human memory. It substituted “Israel, Judea and Samaria” with “Palaestina,” a derivative of the Philistines, an arch enemy of the Jewish people, whose origin was not in Arabia, but in the Greek Aegian islands.    

*The aforementioned march of facts demonstrates that Secretary Blinken’s conventional wisdom on the Jewish settlements in Judea and Samaria is based on gross misperceptions and misrepresentations, which fuels infidelity to law, undermining the pursuit of peace.

*More on the legality of Jewish settlements in Judea and Samaria in this article by George Mason University Law School Prof. Eugene Kontrovich.

Support Appreciated

Jerusalem

United Jerusalem – a shared US-Israel legacy and interest

US departure from the recognition of a United Jerusalem as the exclusive capital of the Jewish State, and the site of the US Embassy to Israel, would be consistent with the track record of the State Department, which has been systematically wrong on Middle East issues, such as its opposition to the establishment of the Jewish State; stabbing the back of the pro-US Shah of Iran and Mubarak of Egypt, and pressuring the pro-US Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, while courting the anti-US Ayatollahs of Iran, Saddam Hussein, Arafat, the Muslim Brotherhood, Hamas, the Palestinian Authority and the Houthis of Yemen; transforming Libya into a platform of global Islamic terrorism and civil wars; etc..

However, such departure would violate US law, defy a 3,000 year old reality – documented by a litany of archeological sites and a multitude of documents from Biblical time until today – spurn US history and geography, and undermine US national and homeland security.

United Jerusalem and the US law

Establishing a US Consulate General in Jerusalem – which would be a de facto US Embassy to the Palestinian Authority – would violate the Jerusalem Embassy Act, which became US law on November 8, 1995 with substantially more than a veto-override majority on Capitol Hill.

According to the Jerusalem Embassy Act, which enjoys massive support among the US population and, therefore, in both chambers of Congress:

“Jerusalem should remain an undivided city in which the rights of every ethnic and religious group are protected….

“Jerusalem should be recognized as the capital of the state of Israel; and the United States Embassy in Israel should be established in Jerusalem….

“In 1990, Congress unanimously adopted Senate Concurrent Resolution 106, which declares that Congress ‘strongly believes that Jerusalem must remain an undivided city in which the rights of every ethnic and religious group are protected….’

“In 1992, the United States Senate and House of Representatives unanimously adopted Senate Concurrent Resolution 113… to commemorate the 25th anniversary of the reunification of Jerusalem, and reaffirming Congressional sentiment that Jerusalem must remain an undivided city….

“In 1996, the state of Israel will celebrate the 3,000th anniversary of the Jewish presence in Jerusalem since King David’s entry….

“The term ‘United States Embassy’ means the offices of the United States diplomatic mission and the residence of the United States chief of mission.”

United Jerusalem and the legacy of the Founding Fathers

The US Early Pilgrims and Founding Fathers were inspired – in their unification of the 13 colonies – by King David’s unification of the 12 Jewish tribes into a united political entity, and establishing Jerusalem as the capital city, which did not belong to any of the tribes (hence, Washington, DC does not belong to any state). King David entered Jerusalem 3,000 years before modern day US presidents entered the White House and 2,755 years before the US gained its independence.

The impact of Jerusalem on the US founders of the Federalist Papers, the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, the Federalist system and overall civic life is reflected by the existence, in the US, of 18 Jerusalems (4 in Maryland; 2 in Vermont, Georgia and New York; and 1 in Ohio, Michigan, Arkansas, North Carolina, Alabama, Utah, Rhode Island and Tennessee), 32 Salems (the original Biblical name of Jerusalem) and many Zions (a Biblical synonym for Jerusalem and the Land of Israel).  Moreover, in the US there are thousands of cities, towns, mountains, cliffs, deserts, national parks and streets bearing Biblical names.

The Jerusalem reality and US interests

Recognizing the Jerusalem reality and adherence to the 1995 Jerusalem Embassy Act – and the subsequent recognition of Jerusalem as Israel’s capital, the site of the US Embassy to Israel – bolstered the US posture of deterrence in defiance of Arab/Islamic pressure and threats.

Contrary to the doomsday assessments by the State Department and the “elite” US media – which have been wrong on most Middle East issues – the May 2018 implementation of the 1995 law did not intensify Palestinian, Arab and Islamic terrorism. State Department “wise men” were equally wrong when they warned that Israel’s 1967 reunification of Jerusalem would ignite a worldwide anti-Israel and anti-US Islamic volcanic eruption.

Adherence to the 1995 law distinguishes the US President, Congress and most Americans from the state of mind of rogue regimes and terror organizations, the anti-US UN, the vacillating Europe, and the cosmopolitan worldview of the State Department, which has systematically played-down the US’ unilateral, independent and (sometimes) defiant national security action.

On the other hand, US procrastination on the implementation of the 1995 law – by Presidents Clinton, Bush and Obama – eroded the US posture of deterrence, since it was rightly perceived by the world as appeasement in the face of pressure and threats from Arab/Muslim regimes and terrorists.  As expected, it radicalized Arab expectations and demands, failed to advance the cause of Israel-Arab peace, fueled Islamic terrorism, and severely undermined US national and homeland security. For example, blowing up the US Embassies in Kenya and Tanzania and murdering 224 persons in August 1998; blowing up the USS Cole destroyer in the port of Aden and murdering 17 US sailors in October 2000; the 9/11 Twin Towers massacre, etc.

Jerusalem and Israel’s defiance of US pressure

In 1949, President Truman followed Secretary of State Marshall’s policy, pressuring Israel to refrain from annexing West Jerusalem and to accept the internationalization of the ancient capital of the Jewish people.

in 1950, in defiance of brutal US and global pressure to internationalize Jerusalem, Prime Minister David Ben Gurion reacted constructively by proclaiming Jerusalem the capital of the Jewish State, relocating government agencies from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem, and settling tens of thousands of Olim (Jewish immigrants to Israel) in Jerusalem. He upgraded the transportation infrastructure to Jerusalem, erected new Jewish neighborhoods along the 1949 cease fire lines in Jerusalem, and provided the city land reserves for long-term growth.

In 1953, Ben Gurion rebuffed President Eisenhower’s pressure – inspired by Secretary of State Dulles – to refrain from relocating Israel’s Foreign Ministry from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem.

In 1967, President Johnson followed the advice of Secretary of State Rusk – who opposed Israel’s 1948 Declaration of Independence – highlighting the international status of Jerusalem, and warned Israel against the reunification of Jerusalem and construction in its eastern section. Prime Minister Levi Eshkol adopted Ben Gurion’s statesmanship, fended off the US pressure, reunited Jerusalem, built the first Jerusalem neighborhood beyond the 1949 ceasefire lines, Ramat Eshkol, in addition to the first wave of Jewish communities in Judea and Samaria (West Bank), the Jordan Valley and the Golan Heights.

In 1970, President Nixon collaborated with Secretary of State Rogers, attempting to repartition Jerusalem, pressuring Israel to relinquish control of Jerusalem’s Holy Basin, and to stop Israel’s plans to construct additional neighborhoods in eastern Jerusalem.  However, Prime Minister Golda Meir refused to rescind the reunification of Jerusalem, and proceeded to lay the foundation for additional Jerusalem neighborhoods beyond the 1949 ceasefire lines: Gilo, Ramot Alon, French Hill and Neve’ Yaakov, currently home to 150,000 people.

In 1977-1992, Prime Ministers Menachem Begin and Yitzhak Shamir defied US and global pressure, expanding construction in Jerusalem, sending a clear message: “Jerusalem is the exclusive and non-negotiable capital of Israel!”

“[In 1978], at the very end of [Prime Minister Begin’s] successful Camp David talks with President Jimmy Carter and President Anwar Sadat, literally minutes before the signing ceremony, the American president had approached [Begin] with ‘Just one final formal item.’ Sadat, said the president, was asking that Begin put his signature to a simple letter committing him to place Jerusalem on the negotiating table of the final peace accord.  ‘I refused to accept the letter, let alone sign it,’ rumbled Begin. ‘If I forgot thee O Jerusalem, let my right hand forget its cunning,’ said [Begin] to the president of the United States of America, ‘and may my tongue cleave to my mouth’ (The Prime Ministers – An Intimate Portrait of Leaders of Israel, 2010)”

In 2021, Prime Minister Bennett should follow in the footsteps of Israel’s Founding Father, Ben Gurion, who stated: “Jerusalem is equal to the whole of the Land of Israel. Jerusalem is not just a central Jewish settlement. Jerusalem is an invaluable global historical symbol. The Jewish People and the entire world shall judge us in accordance with our steadfastness on Jerusalem (“We and Our Neighbors,” p. 175. 1929).”

Support Appreciated

 

 

 

 

 

Jewish Holidays

Passover’s Hidden Imprint on American Liberty

Ambassador (ret.) Yoram Ettinger, “Second Thought: a US-Israel Initiative”
March 29, 2026

*Passover (April 1-8, 2026) is a Jewish national liberation holiday, which features Moses and the Exodus. The legacy of Passover deeply impacted the Early Pilgrims and the Founding Fathers, and was essential in shaping of the US culture, in general, and the structure of the US political discourse and political system (e.g., the 3 branches of government and the separation of power), in particular. Contemporaries called George Washington an “American Moses,” while John Adams was referred to as an “American Joshua.”

*The Early Pilgrims explicitly considered themselves as the “Modern Day Chosen People” fleeing the “Modern Day Egypt” – drawing parallels between Pharaoh and King James I – experiencing the “Modern Day Exodus” and the  “Modern Day Parting of the Sea,” sailing to the “New Israel,” “New Canaan” and the “Modern Day Promised Land.” In 1776, John Adams wrote to Abigail, his wife and closest advisor, about a sermon that drew a “parallel between the Case of Israel and that of America, and between the conduct of Pharaoh and that of King George III.

*The Early Pilgrims and the Founding Fathers were inspired by British and French philosophers, as well as by the Passover concept of Liberty; hence, the 1751 engraving on the Liberty Bell (“Proclaim Liberty throughout all the land unto all the inhabitants thereof,” Leviticus 25:10, the essence of the Jubilee, which is the Mosaic role model of liberty) and the 1787 US Constitution and the 1789 Bill of Rights.  The Bible was cited more frequently than any European philosopher in founding-era political literature.  The Book of Deuteronomy was especially prominent.

*The term “Federalism” – based on foedus, the Latin word for “The Covenant” – was coined by the Founding Fathers, who considered themselves as “the Modern-Day People of the Covenant.”  

*Benjamin Franklin, explicitly invoked Exodus when discussing civic leadership and public order. During the Constitutional Convention, Franklin referred to Jethro’s counsel to Moses in Exodus 18:21, which laid down the foundation for the Mosaic 3-branch-government, separation of powers and the authority of the 12 Tribal Presidents/Governors. Moses was the Executive, Aharon was the Judiciary and the 70 Elders were the Legislature.

*In 1776, Benjamin Franklin and Thomas Jefferson proposed Exodus-based designs for the Great Seal of the USA: Moses with his rod and the Egyptian chariots drowning in the sea, with the Israelites led through the wilderness by the pillars of cloud and fire.​ Their proposed inscription was: “Rebellion to Tyrants is Obedience to G-d.”

*According to Max Dimont’s Jews God and History: “The Mosaic Code … was the first truly judicial, written code… its passion for justice, its love of democracy…. The Mosaic Code laid down the first principles for a separation of church and state…. The Mosaic law established the principle that the Jews could do anything not specifically denied to them [by the Constitution]….”

*The principles of due process — procedural fairness and equality before the law, explicitly guaranteed in the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments — are found throughout the Laws of Moses, most especially in Exodus 23:1–9, which has for centuries been called the “Ten Commandments of Due Process.”

*Thomas Paine argued in his 47-page-“Common Sense,” which was referred to as “The Cement of the Revolution,” that the Hebrew Bible was an argument against monarchy.​

*The Abolitionist movement, as a whole, and Abraham Lincoln and Frederick Douglass, in particular, drew much inspiration from Passover’s Exodus and the Mosaic legacy.  Harriet Tubman of the “Underground Railroad” (1822-1913) was highlighted as Mama Moses. Martin Luther King’s leading theme was “Let my People Go,” which was reverberated earlier by Paul Robson and Louis Armstrong.

*Moses became a paradigmatic lawgiver and liberator in the US political discourse, seen as a precedent for combining moral law, covenantal consent, and resistance to tyranny.

*The Chamber of the US House of Representatives, the Chambers of the US Supreme Court and the main reading room in the Library of Congress feature statues and engravings of Moses and the Ten Commandments.

*On June 28, 2005, in Van Orden v. Perry, Chief Justice William Rehnquist acknowledged the Ten Commandments as having historical significance in American culture and legal system, allowing their display on state grounds. He noted they have an “undeniable historical meaning” beyond just a religious one: “Since 1935, Moses has stood, holding two tablets that reveal portions of the Ten Commandments, written in Hebrew, among other lawgivers in the [Supreme Court’s] south frieze…. Moses sits on the exterior east façade, holding the Ten Commandments… Since 1897, a large statue of Moses holding the Ten Commandments, alongside a statue of the Apostle Paul, has overlooked the rotunda of the Library of Congress’ Jefferson Building. A two tablets medallion depicting the Ten Commandments decorates the floor of the National Archives…. In the Justice Department, a statue entitled ‘The Spirit of Law’ has two tablets representing the Ten Commandments. In front of the Ronald Reagan Building stands a sculpture that includes a depiction of the Ten Commandments. A 24-foot-tall sculpture, outside the Federal Courthouse, depicting the Ten Commandments and a cross. Moses is prominently featured in the Chamber of the US House of Representatives…. Moses was a lawgiver and a religious leader, and the Ten Commandments have undeniable historical meaning….”  

More: Jewish Holidays Guide for the Perplexed – Amazon, Smashwords
400th Anniversary of US-Israel Kinship: 1620-2020 – Amazon, Smashwords  

Support Appreciated

Golan

Secretary Blinken on settlements – vindicated by facts?

Islamic Terrorism

Qatar’s  School Curriculum – Anti-“Infidel” and Pro-Jihad

Ambassador (ret.) Yoram Ettinger, “Second Thought: US-Israel Initiative”
February 24, 2026

*While the United Arab Emirates uprooted all anti-Jewish and anti-Israel elements from its school curriculum, the Friday mosque sermons, and its official media – replacing them with pro-Jewish and pro-Israel elements – Qatar has sustained its anti-“infidel”, anti-Christian, anti-Jewish and anti-Israel school curriculum, consistent with its Friday incitement mosque sermons and controlled media.

*Are Qatar’s worldview and conduct consistent with the values and interests of the USA? Is Qatar’s policy consistent with the US’ attempts to end/minimize wars and terrorism?  Does it qualify Qatar as an honest broker? Is Qatar a partner in the defense of Western democracies in the face of Sunni and Shiite Islamic terrorism?

*Qatar’s shifty diplomatic pronouncements (Talk) has been incompatible with Qatar’s permanent school curriculum (Walk), which reflects most authentically its worldview, values, vision and conduct.  It reflects and shapes the minds of Qatar’s ruling minority (10%-15%), and is fully-controlled by the ruler (Emir), Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad Al Thani, who oppresses the 85%-90% majority of foreign workers.

*A February 2026 review of Qatar’s 2025-26 school curriculum, conducted by Impact-se, documents “anti-semitic narratives, religious intolerance toward non-Muslims, and legitimization of violent jihad,… demonstrating no substantive curricular reform since the 2021–2022 school year….

“In July 2024, the US Department of State’s Annual Report on International Religious Freedom criticized Qatar’s national curriculum for continuing to ‘include content that was antisemitic in nature.’ Despite this, the same material was reprinted and continues to be taught in the 2025–2026 school year….

Disrespect towards non-Muslims is expressed through terminology such as ‘Infidels’ and ‘pagans/polytheists,’ through derogatory portrayals of non-Muslims, and through discussions of punishment for disbelief in Islam…. Non-Islamic nations such as the US and European countries are occasionally treated with suspicion….

“Textbooks continue to teach antisemitic content…. portraying Jews as materialistic, arrogant, deceitful, and hostile to Islam. Jews are further associated with traits such as lying, scheming, fleeing in fear, spreading discord, breaching agreements, and excessive attachment to material wealth, thereby reinforcing an image of Jews as fundamentally untrustworthy…. Antisemitic tropes depict Jews as cynically manipulating global affairs… denying Jewish historical ties to Israel/Palestine and the right to self-determination….

Violent interpretations of jihad prevail as religious ideals…. Textbooks praise the upbringing of children ‘to love jihad,’ and students are taught that God rewards those who fight and die for Islam by granting them entry into Paradise….

Israel’s establishment is framed as occupation…. Israel is erased from maps, and normalization is condemned…. Poems exhort students to draw swords, engage in jihad, and sacrifice their lives fighting against ‘the Zionist enemy….’

For example:

*Islamic Education, Grade 11, Vol. 1, 2025–2026, p. 46 condemns Christianity and Judaism as religions which “have been corrupted”, and that polytheistic elements “have been inserted into them.”

*Islamic Education, Grade 8, Vol. 1, 2025–2026, pp. 124, 129 presents two possible infinite outcomes one can expect when dying: Muslims (“Believers”) will reside in Heaven; non-Muslims (“Infidels”) will suffer in Hell.

*Islamic Education, Grade 10, Vol. 1, 2025–2026, pp. 18–19 “accuses Jews of failing to uphold the Torah they were given by Allah…. instructing students to specifically avoid ‘resembling Jews….”

*Islamic Education, Grade 8, Vol. 1, 2025–2026, pp. 26–28 suggests that “Moses and Jesus are both Islamic prophets who were initially rejected by their people, according to the Qur’an…. Jews are evil….  The Jewish people are forever cursed by Allah…. None is more evil than people who have been invited to Islam and rejected it….”

*Islamic Education, Grade 8, Vol. 1, 2025–2026, pp. 70–71. A chapter about the Battle of Khaybar, fought between the Muslim forces of the Prophet Muhammad and the Jewish Arabian tribe of Banu Nadir… portrays the Jewish people as inherently hostile to Islam and Muslims. A repeated emphasis on the Jewish nature as historic enemies of Muslims…”

*Islamic Education, Grade 6, Vol. 2, 2025–2026, p. 139. “An Islamic education lesson teaches that one of the ways to measure a good Muslim woman is raising children to sacrifice their lives [martyrdom], in what is understood to be violent Jihad.”

*Islamic Education, Grade 8, Vol. 1, 2025–2026, pp. 72–73 teaches the Battle of Khaybar, fought between the forces of the Prophet Muhammad and the ancient Jewish Arabian tribe of Banu Nadir in 629 CE, concluded by teaching students that the sublime goal of Jihad is to bring non-Muslims to convert to Islam.

*Islamic Education, Grade 8, Vol. 1, 2025–2026, pp. 22, 25, 28, 103 teaches that God loves Jihad warriors who “fight” (yuqātilūn) for His sake, favoring a violent interpretation of Jihad. God defends Islam against the non-Islamic world.

The bottom line: A prerequisite for Qatar’s constructive role in advancing peace and combatting terror isa thorough structural overhaul of its prevailing culture, which is preconditioned upon the uprooting of its hate and terror-driven school curriculum.

Support Appreciated