The Internet is abuzz today over a lawsuit filed against several anti-Semitic organizations. The suit alleges, with a fair amount of evidence, that these groups aren’t merely pro-Hamas in outlook but that they coordinate their messaging and actions with Hamas and other terror groups.
The complaint is thorough and damning, and can be read in full here. But this is yet another case in which the legal implications serve to highlight the absolute depravity, and in some cases, inherently evil character of these so-called pro-Palestinian organizations. The defendants and their supporters will argue that these groups’ actions are permitted under the law. But there is no legitimate argument that these groups possess a single morally redeemable attribute.
Let’s start with the basics. In 1988, the complaint notes, Hamas and its parent, the Muslim Brotherhood, created the Palestine Committee to be its American support network. One of the groups in that committee was the Islamic Association for Palestine (IAP), founded by Hamas political leader Khaled Meshaal. After an IAP affiliate was found liable for Hamas fundraising, it dissolved and its core formed American Muslims for Palestine (AMP). Students for Justice in Palestine and its post-university counterpart Within Our Lifetime grew out of that effort, as did the organization currently at the center of several anti-Semitism scandals: Columbia University Apartheid Divest.
This background is important to establish the following: The groups conducting anti-Zionist marches, riots, and encampments all grew from the original initiative of the terrorist organization that massacred 1,200 innocents on 10/7, took hundreds hostage, and subjected 10/7 victims and captives to sexual torture.
The complaint itself includes several eyebrow-raising allegations that should make apologists for these groups stop in their tracks.
First up: “Three minutes before Hamas began its attack on October 7, Columbia SJP posted on Instagram ‘We are back!!’ and announced its first meeting of the semester would be announced and that viewers should ‘Stay tuned.’ Before the post, Columbia SJP’s account had been dormant for months.”
Groups named in the suit also echoed Hamas’s public pronouncements. For example, they echoed Hamas’s call for a Day of Rage (though one of the groups used the phrase Day of Resistance) on the same day. “The advertisements for these events included clear references to many materials produced and provided by AMP/NSJP and even Hamas itself.” The days of rage on behalf of Hamas caused the closure of Jewish schools and other institutions in New York as well as Columbia’s campus, all out of security concerns. “Jewish students at Columbia University and Barnard College were advised to lock their doors and remain inside for their own safety.”
These marches took place in the immediate aftermath of Oct. 7, 2023, well before Israel’s counteroffensive ground incursion in Gaza began. Columbia’s march prominently featured Mahmoud Khalil, the Syrian-born U.S. permanent resident that the Trump administration is trying to deport for omitting certain past affiliations on his official application. At that point, not even a week had passed since the Hamas attacks. These organizations—again, which grew out of a coalition founded by a current Hamas leader—were essentially gloating in lockstep with Hamas.
After that, the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, a designated terrorist organization that took part in 10/7, got directly involved with some of the protests. The PFLP had earlier pledged full allegiance to Hamas in the 10/7 attacks and the ensuing conflict.
Last spring, CUAD, Within Our Lifetime, and Samidoun—a now-designated terror front for PFLP—hosted an event called “Resistance 101.” According to the complaint, “Though Columbia barred the event from taking place, CUAD and Within Our Lifetime proceeded with it anyway. The speakers included (i) Khaled Bakarat, a PFLP terrorist; (ii) Charlotte Kates, Barakat’s wife and a leader of Samidoun; and (iii) Sean Eren, a member of the NSJP Steering Committee.”
The tentifada encampments, meanwhile, earned the praise of Hezbollah’s (since-deceased) leader Hassan Nasrallah as well as a PFLP deputy secretary-general and other high-ranking terrorist figures. A Hamas-aligned Telegram account, the Resistance News Network, linked to a post that crowed: “Inspired by the example Columbia University students set with their Gaza Solidarity Encampment beginning April 17, campus organizations across the world have followed suit.”
At one CUAD “resistance” event this past fall, attendees were handed unfiltered Hamas propaganda. One read: “This booklet is part of a coordinated and intentional effort to uphold the principles of the Thawabit and the Palestinian Resistance movement overall. By transmitting the words of the Resistance [Hamas] directly, this material aims to build popular support for the Palestinian war of national liberation, a war which is waged
through armed struggle.”
The complaint adds: “Lest there be any confusion, the booklet included messages from Hamas and PFLP leaders, including a quote from Hamas’ Al-Aqsa Martyrs’ Brigades, stating that ‘We will emerge upon you from where you least expect it.’”
A Within Our Lifetime event included its leader Nerdeen Kiswani’s “performance of Yahya Sinwar’s last will and testament”—Sinwar being the Hamas leader and mastermind of the 10/7 rapes and massacres who has since been eliminated by Israel. CUAD published a “tribute” to Sinwar. In a separate post, CUAD called to “bring the war home” underneath an infamous photo of the second intifada in which a man who has killed and mutilated the body of a Jewish civilian holds up his bloodstained hands to the cheers of the Palestinian crowd outside.
The examples are endless, and the material-support claims will be adjudicated in court. But consider for a moment how these groups and people are described in mainstream reporting on the issue. CUAD, according to the New York Times, is part of a “pro-Palestinian student movement.” To the Washington Post, it’s “the main protest group.”
When the Times profiled Kiswani, the piece included this bit of he-said-she-said nonsense: “Ms. Kiswani insists she is not antisemitic. Instead, she says she opposes Zionists, those who believe Israel should exist as a Jewish state in its ancient homeland.”
Whatever happens in the courtroom, this lawsuit should be required reading for all the reporters, pundits, activists, and politicians who have so shamelessly whitewashed anti-Semitism in America since Oct. 7. The groups named in the complaint are evil organizations led by terrible people. They are unequivocally pro-Hamas and should always be identified as such. But now this lawsuit raises serious questions as to whether they are even fully independent of Gaza’s terrorist butchers.
