It is not "Hanta-virus" that is dangerous, but the "cancer" of Anti-Semitism & Islam

In Hebrew, Hanta (חַנְטָה) is a slang term often used to mean "scam," "fake," "fraud," or "nonsense," frequently describing someone or something as "full of crap". It can also refer to the "Hantavirus".

Key Aspects of "Hanta" in Hebrew:

Definition: It represents a slang expression for a hoax, nonsense, or untruthful information.

Usage: Often used in a dismissive manner, similar to saying "that's a lie" or "what a scam."

Of course all the mainstream media & Web searches are quick to state that this is a coincidence.

A long time ago I stopped believing in Santa Claus, so also in coincidence.

Anti-Semitism is just a nice word for Jew-Hatred & it started in Sinai, where the Lord set them apart. But that does not mean that we should not do anything. If we don't speak out we are guilty by default: tolerating evil. And that is what our useless, incompetant & wicked government does on the moment.

The Royal Commission into Antisemitism and Social Cohesion formally opened last week.

Over recent days, I’ve sat watching the lived experience testimonies and they are harrowing and resonate deeply.

For more than two years, Jewish Australians have carried the grief of October 7 while watching tens of thousands of Australians march in the streets celebrating it.

Public figures championed it, defended it, all while branding Jews with the slur of genocide.

The 21st Century blood libel, deployed against Israel and the Jewish Diaspora at the very moment of grief… After two and a half years, I am done with the debate. I want outcomes.

The Commission was told that one of the key drivers of Antisemitism in Australia is the growing conflation of hostility towards Israel with Jewish Australians. For what it’s worth, I have no problem being conflated with Israel. Israel is fighting a war of self-defence against barbarian tactics. What I do have a problem with is lies and what passes for criticism of Israel is predominantly Antizionist lies.

On day one, it was stated that a central task of the inquiry is to identify when Antizionism crosses the line into Antisemitism. I’ll save the Commission the trouble. It doesn’t cross a line. If Antizionism and Antisemitism were a Venn diagram of anti-Jewish bigotry, it is my opinion that in every documented instance, you would see a single circle.

Antizionism is not a proxy for anti-Jewish bigotry. It is anti-Jewish bigotry.

What makes Antizionism uniquely insidious is it takes a people’s liberation movement and reframes it as the bigotry itself.

Zionism – Jewish self-determination – has been recast as racism. And the movement that seeks to eliminate the Jewish state dresses its language up as liberation. The slogans confirm this. ‘Intifada’ is not a human rights slogan. ‘From the river to the sea’ in its original Arabic means ‘From water to water, Palestine will be Arab’. This is an ethno-nationalist eliminationist demand, not a civil rights one. And the dissolution of Israel is the ethnic cleansing of seven million Jews.

The problem we keep skirting around is that Antizionism palms itself off as political criticism when it is in fact ideology and slogans borne of a communist-Islamist fusion. Its basis is the dissolution of Israel and it falsely claims Israel is an illegitimate state. Just as Antisemitism dressed hatred in the language of science – racial biology, eugenics, pseudo-academic frameworks – Antizionism dresses hatred in the language of politics. And just as the law once accepted Antisemitism as legitimate political discourse, it is largely accepting Antizionism on the same terms today.

The courts reveal the limits of prosecuting Antizionism’s harmful and hateful expressions.

In November 2023, Islamic speeches were given at a mosque and published online. Three breached the Racial Discrimination Act 1975 18C. The court identified 25 racist imputations: that Jews are conspiratorial, treacherous, wicked, vile, that they control the media and the banks, that they are descended from apes and pigs. But two speeches were dismissed. These contained claims that ‘certain media outlets owned by the Zionist entities are trying to sway public perception’, that ‘right wing politicians have stepped into backing Israel because Israel holds their leash’, and that Israel is ‘the terrorist state of Israel and its mass murdering machine, the IDF’.

Sound familiar? Jews control the media. Jews control the government. And the Jewish state is a uniquely evil force in the world holding foreign governments and politicians by a leash. These are not criticisms of a state.

The charge that Jews – sorry, Zionists – control the media and the banks and control foreign governments comes straight from the Protocols of the Elders of Zion.

The charge that the Jewish state commits uniquely monstrous violence against children is the blood libel – the medieval fabrication that Jews murder children for ritual purposes.

When we say Antisemitism is a virus, it’s because this is how it works. It mutates with the language of the time. And this language is promulgated across the board by mosques, churches, political figures, influencers and the media. As stated, it has become almost fashionable.

How are anti-Jewish tropes avoiding condemnation?

It comes down to the idea that the ‘ordinary reasonable listener would understand that not all Jews are Zionists’ and that ‘disparagement of Zionism constitutes disparagement of a philosophy or ideology and not a race or ethnic group’.

That is the gap. That is exactly the gap. And it is the gap this Commission must close.

Here’s a sample of why:

On one occasion, protesters blockaded a private Jewish function screaming, ‘All Zionists are terrorists!’ and ‘Intifada, Intifada!’ It is alleged protestors coordinated on social media, told others to block the entrances and exits, and to make ‘Zios’ as uncomfortable as possible inside the venue.

On another, a club listed Zionism alongside racism, sexism, transphobia, and homophobia in its house rules.

We have seen people associated with political groups displaying signs equating ‘Zionist Israel’ with ‘Nazi Germany’ with captions such as ‘Equally as evil or worse?’ and ‘Zionism has hijacked Judaism’. In my opinion, that’s Holocaust inversion and according to the Commission – is Antisemitism.

In 2025, we witnessed across the Palestinian protest movement signage illustrating the Prime Minister of Israel as the ‘Fuhrer’, ‘Zionism is a death cult’, and the appropriation of ‘Never Again’ – the phrase primarily associated with the Holocaust.

In 2026, weeks after 15 Jewish Australians were murdered at a Chanukah celebration at Bondi Beach allegedly by ISIS-inspired attackers, protesters gathered across Australia. Their signs did not mourn the Bondi dead. The signs they carried read: ‘Zionism is Terrorism!’, ‘Zionism is a Death Cult!’, ‘Death to America, Australia, and the Zionist Entity!’, and ‘Globalise the Intifada…’

Socialist magazines distributed at one protest had a sidebar describing the Bondi massacre as ‘How Israel’s war crimes brand terrorism’. This is the Antizionist movement.

And how did we get here?

Because on October 9 2023, protesters freely gathered outside the iconic Sydney Opera House chanting, ‘Where’s the Jews?’ and ‘F**k the Jews!’ while burning an Israeli flag. Police advised Jewish Australians to avoid the CBD as if that made it okay. At the same protest, one of the organisers endorsed Hamas’ ‘right to resist’ – meaning shooting up kids at a music festival is, apparently, a-okay for this organiser – and instructed the crowd to use the word ‘Zionist’ rather than ‘Jew.’

No one across two and a half years has faced significant consequences for any of it – especially not the current government. The zeitgeist in Australia is Antizionist, and the result is that the floodgates for neo-Nazi white supremacism, for classical Antisemites, for anti-Judaists, and every form of anti-Jewish bigotry we thought we had pushed to the fringes are opened. So the single most important question is how do we make Antizionism’s harmful expressions prosecutable? How do we get back to some kind of normal?

Commissioner Bell reaffirmed her commitment to the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) definition of Antisemitism and the Commission is right to apply it, but the IHRA definition remains anchored in post-Holocaust language. It is not designed to capture Antizionism as a distinct ideology, and its adoption has not amended a single law. Subsequent legislation has followed: a ban on the Nazi salute, the Criminal Code Amendment (Hate Crimes) Act 2025, but none of it reaches Antizionism directly.

There has been one isolated advancement. In Vorchheimer v Tayeh [2026] VCAT case 134, the Judge found that Tayeh, by initiating the chant ‘all Zionists are terrorists’ at a rally in March 2025, contravened sections of the Racial and Religious Tolerance Act 2001. The tribunal found a very strong association between the word ‘Zionist’ and Jewish identity, and that the word ‘all’ carried the spectre of de-individuation – a hallmark of racism.

But this is one tribunal, one chant, one respondent. Victoria Police are separately prosecuting Tayeh in the criminal court, where the question is not whether the chant is Antisemitic but whether the words were grossly offensive. This is, in my view, entirely the wrong question. It doesn’t matter whether calling Jews terrorists is offensive. I am more than happy to be offended.

What matters is the environment it creates and who is the target.

If Jews are publicly branded as terrorists – or Nazis – the public is morally licensed to exclude, harass, and harm them. The violence that follows is not random. It is logical. It flows directly from the premise. That is why the harm of Antizionism is not a feelings question. It is a safety question. And until the law catches up to that, we are prosecuting the symptom and ignoring the disease.

Queensland has gone a step further and banned specific chants such as ‘From the river to the sea’ and ‘Globalise the Intifada’ when used to menace, harass, or offend. But as I’ve written before, banning specific phrases is a game of whack-a-mole. The ridiculous Johnny Farnham pro-Palestinian cosplay from a month ago is a case in point. Here was the Brisbane pro-Palestinian movement dressed in 1980s outfits, mullets and all, waving Palestinian flags and singing ‘Like a River to the Sea’. If you missed it, imagine the reverse. Jews donning mullets and dancing in 1943 to convince the Nazis to stop the genocide of Jews. This is how we know this is not a serious movement (and there is no genocide). Bottom line, the phrases will continue to change but the ideology doesn’t.

There are three legislative options as I see them if we are to truly bring safety back to Jewish Australians.

First, amend 18C to explicitly include political ideologies that function as vehicles for ethnic vilification – the test being whether the ideology, in practice, targets a specific ethnic group. Antizionism clearly does. It targets Jews.

Second, name Antizionism explicitly, but this is the weakest option. Legislators will resist naming a political position as illegal, despite Antizionism masquerading as political critique.

Third, strengthen the incitement threshold. Antizionism doesn’t need to be illegal, but when it functions to mark Jews for violence, harassment, or discrimination, that conduct becomes prosecutable. We didn’t outlaw racism. We made its specific expressions prosecutable. That is the point.

We pushed Antisemitism to the fringes once before. We disproved its pseudoscience. We criminalised its expressions. So too will we do the same for Antizionism. We will disprove its pseudo-critique. We will criminalise its expressions. I simply pray it will not be after more mass murder.

𝐀𝐑𝐈 𝐅𝐋𝐄𝐈𝐒𝐂𝐇𝐄𝐑 𝐉𝐔𝐒𝐓 𝐖𝐀𝐋𝐊𝐄𝐃 𝐓𝐇𝐑𝐎𝐔𝐆𝐇 𝟖𝟎𝟎 𝐘𝐄𝐀𝐑𝐒 𝐎𝐅 𝐀𝐍𝐓𝐈-𝐉𝐄𝐖𝐈𝐒𝐇 𝐏𝐎𝐆𝐑𝐎𝐌𝐒 — 𝐀𝐋𝐋 𝐁𝐄𝐅𝐎𝐑𝐄 𝐓𝐇𝐄 𝐒𝐓𝐀𝐓𝐄 𝐎𝐅 𝐈𝐒𝐑𝐀𝐄𝐋 𝐄𝐗𝐈𝐒𝐓𝐄𝐃 — 𝐀𝐅𝐓𝐄𝐑 𝐀𝐍𝐎𝐓𝐇𝐄𝐑 𝐑𝐈𝐎𝐓 𝐎𝐔𝐓𝐒𝐈𝐃𝐄 𝐀 𝐍𝐄𝐖 𝐘𝐎𝐑𝐊 𝐒𝐘𝐍𝐀𝐆𝐎𝐆𝐔𝐄.

Fleischer, on camera, with the actual history:

‘𝘊𝘳𝘪𝘵𝘪𝘤𝘪𝘴𝘮 𝘰𝘧 𝘐𝘴𝘳𝘢𝘦𝘭 𝘪𝘴 𝘭𝘦𝘨𝘪𝘵𝘪𝘮𝘢𝘵𝘦. 𝘈𝘯𝘺𝘣𝘰𝘥𝘺 𝘩𝘢𝘴 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘳𝘪𝘨𝘩𝘵 𝘵𝘰 𝘤𝘳𝘪𝘵𝘪𝘤𝘪𝘻𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘴𝘰𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘦𝘪𝘨𝘯 𝘴𝘵𝘢𝘵𝘦 𝘰𝘧 𝘐𝘴𝘳𝘢𝘦𝘭. 𝘛𝘢𝘳𝘨𝘦𝘵𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘑𝘦𝘸𝘴 𝘧𝘰𝘳 𝘪𝘵 𝘪𝘴 𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘪𝘳𝘦𝘭𝘺 𝘥𝘪𝘧𝘧𝘦𝘳𝘦𝘯𝘵. 𝘌𝘯𝘨𝘭𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘪𝘯 𝘵𝘩𝘦 1200𝘴 𝘵𝘩𝘳𝘦𝘸 𝘰𝘶𝘵 𝘢𝘭𝘭 𝘪𝘵𝘴 𝘑𝘦𝘸𝘴. 𝘍𝘳𝘢𝘯𝘤𝘦 𝘪𝘯 𝘵𝘩𝘦 1300𝘴 𝘵𝘩𝘳𝘦𝘸 𝘰𝘶𝘵 𝘢𝘭𝘭 𝘪𝘵𝘴 𝘑𝘦𝘸𝘴. 𝘚𝘱𝘢𝘪𝘯 𝘪𝘯 𝘵𝘩𝘦 1400𝘴 𝘵𝘩𝘳𝘦𝘸 𝘰𝘶𝘵 𝘢𝘭𝘭 𝘪𝘵𝘴 𝘑𝘦𝘸𝘴. 𝘊𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘳𝘢𝘭 𝘌𝘶𝘳𝘰𝘱𝘦, 𝘌𝘢𝘴𝘵𝘦𝘳𝘯 𝘌𝘶𝘳𝘰𝘱𝘦, 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘙𝘶𝘴𝘴𝘪𝘢 𝘵𝘩𝘳𝘰𝘶𝘨𝘩𝘰𝘶𝘵 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘳𝘦𝘴𝘵 𝘰𝘧 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘮𝘪𝘭𝘭𝘦𝘯𝘯𝘪𝘶𝘮 𝘵𝘩𝘳𝘦𝘸 𝘰𝘶𝘵 𝘪𝘵𝘴 𝘑𝘦𝘸𝘴, 𝘦𝘯𝘨𝘢𝘨𝘦𝘥 𝘪𝘯 𝘱𝘰𝘨𝘳𝘰𝘮𝘴 𝘢𝘯𝘥, 𝘰𝘧 𝘤𝘰𝘶𝘳𝘴𝘦, 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘏𝘰𝘭𝘰𝘤𝘢𝘶𝘴𝘵.”

‘𝘈𝘭𝘭 𝘰𝘧 𝘵𝘩𝘰𝘴𝘦 𝘢𝘯𝘵𝘪-𝘑𝘦𝘸𝘪𝘴𝘩 𝘢𝘤𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯𝘴 𝘵𝘰𝘰𝘬 𝘱𝘭𝘢𝘤𝘦 𝘣𝘦𝘧𝘰𝘳𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘴𝘵𝘢𝘵𝘦 𝘰𝘧 𝘐𝘴𝘳𝘢𝘦𝘭 𝘦𝘷𝘦𝘯 𝘦𝘹𝘪𝘴𝘵𝘦𝘥. 𝘚𝘰 𝘥𝘰𝘯’𝘵 𝘵𝘦𝘭𝘭 𝘮𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘴 𝘪𝘴 𝘢𝘭𝘭 𝘢𝘣𝘰𝘶𝘵 𝘐𝘴𝘳𝘢𝘦𝘭. 𝘐𝘵 𝘪𝘴 𝘢 𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘵𝘪𝘯𝘶𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘰𝘧 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘢𝘯𝘵𝘪-𝘑𝘦𝘸𝘪𝘴𝘩 𝘴𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘪𝘮𝘦𝘯𝘵. 𝘛𝘩𝘦𝘴𝘦 𝘱𝘦𝘰𝘱𝘭𝘦 𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘵𝘦𝘴𝘵𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘢𝘵 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘴𝘺𝘯𝘢𝘨𝘰𝘨𝘶𝘦 𝘪𝘯 𝘕𝘦𝘸 𝘠𝘰𝘳𝘬, 𝘪𝘧 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘺 𝘤𝘰𝘶𝘭𝘥, 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘺 𝘸𝘰𝘶𝘭𝘥 𝘵𝘩𝘳𝘰𝘸 𝘰𝘶𝘵 𝘢𝘭𝘭 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘑𝘦𝘸𝘴 𝘧𝘳𝘰𝘮 𝘕𝘦𝘸 𝘠𝘰𝘳𝘬 𝘊𝘪𝘵𝘺.”

The pattern documented across eight centuries of Western history: England 1290, France 1394, Spain 1492, Portugal 1497, Russian pogroms 1881-1921, the Holocaust 1933-1945. Every expulsion 𝐩𝐫𝐞𝐝𝐚𝐭𝐞𝐝 𝟏𝟗𝟒𝟖 𝐛𝐲 𝐝𝐞𝐜𝐚𝐝𝐞𝐬 𝐨𝐫 𝐜𝐞𝐧𝐭𝐮𝐫𝐢𝐞𝐬. Targeting Jews has never required the existence of Israel.

𝐖𝐇𝐄𝐍 𝐓𝐇𝐄 𝐏𝐑𝐎𝐓𝐄𝐒𝐓𝐄𝐑𝐒 𝐎𝐔𝐓𝐒𝐈𝐃𝐄 𝐓𝐇𝐄 𝐁𝐑𝐎𝐎𝐊𝐋𝐘𝐍 𝐒𝐘𝐍𝐀𝐆𝐎𝐆𝐔𝐄 𝐖𝐄𝐑𝐄 𝐁𝐎𝐑𝐍 𝐀𝐅𝐓𝐄𝐑 𝟏𝟗𝟒𝟖 𝐁𝐔𝐓 𝐓𝐇𝐄 𝐄𝐗𝐏𝐔𝐋𝐒𝐈𝐎𝐍 𝐏𝐀𝐓𝐓𝐄𝐑𝐍 𝐏𝐑𝐄𝐃𝐀𝐓𝐄𝐒 𝐓𝐇𝐄𝐌 𝐁𝐘 𝐄𝐈𝐆𝐇𝐓 𝐇𝐔𝐍𝐃𝐑𝐄𝐃 𝐘𝐄𝐀𝐑𝐒, 𝐓𝐇𝐄 𝐅𝐋𝐀𝐆 𝐎𝐍 𝐓𝐇𝐄 𝐒𝐓𝐑𝐄𝐄𝐓 𝐈𝐒 𝐍𝐎𝐓 𝐓𝐇𝐄 𝐆𝐑𝐈𝐄𝐕𝐀𝐍𝐂𝐄 — 𝐈𝐓 𝐈𝐒 𝐓𝐇𝐄 𝐄𝐗𝐂𝐔𝐒𝐄.

https://www.facebook.com/reel/1700997914586151

Another day. Another protest.

Are you sick of them yet?

I can see that hate speech laws are really working.......towards those who oppose Islam & this kind of hate & do not want the conflicts of this world on Australian soil: The are called bigots & racists.