Cauldron of Terror Hamas, Israel and the World - Five Hundred Days in Gaza Podcast

           You’ve likely heard former Chancellor Merkel’s moniker “Wir schaffen das,” or “We can do it!” This goes back more than 10 years, when Merkel opened Germany’s gates to absorb more than a million mostly Muslim migrants. She clarified, “We Germans can successfully integrate these migrants into our societies.” Was this claim borne out? The answer depends on whom you ask. The optimistic, multicultural, and left-leaning set will likely say this is a national work in progress. Given the killings and social stressors, it would not be convincing to say we have done it. By that, I mean the general argument that migrants have been successfully integrated into the mainstream of German society. Too many Muslims rely on regional and federal benefits, and many remain siloed in Muslim neighborhoods. Attitudinal surveys do not indicate broad acceptance of Western values among Muslim immigrants or their children. To support my claim, I would like to give some examples.
            The first was the early August 2026 car attack at the Christopher Street Day gay pride celebration in Berlin. A German-born Muslim man, whose mother came from Lebanon, plowed a van into the celebrants. He then hit a tree, scrambled out of the van, and chased revelers with a machete. He murdered one woman and injured 29 people. The assailant, Abdul Ballout, was known to Berlin police. Earlier, he attempted to join ISIS and was placed in a deradicalization program. Well, it apparently didn’t work. Could his attack have been prevented? Many people say yes, though it is not clear how he could have been deported, given that a parent was naturalized and that he was born in Germany. Some said he could have worn an ankle-tracking device. OK, but how would that have stopped him? Also, Ballout was one of nearly 29,000 Islamofascists under surveillance by German authorities. 

OK. Let’s start with the invasion. You likely read about it in the papers. But was it really an invasion? When I think about invasions, I think of Germans thrusting into Russia in 1941 or the Allies storming the beaches of Normandy three years later. Invasions are generally contested. They are often coordinated military operations that meet spirited resistance on the shores. Did this happen in Spain last month? Hardly. Let’s take a look by first listening to the Prime Minister of Spain, Pedro Sanchez. Here he is:
“I’m the Prime Minister of Spain. This Is Why the West Needs Migrants. Imagine you’re the leader of a nation, and you face a dilemma. Half a million or so people who are crucial to everyone’s daily lives inhabit your country.” And his solution? To legalize 500,000 migrants. It was not difficult to do this.” So, that is what he said, and the legal system allowed him to do it. The Spanish Supreme Court ruled that migrants entering by sea could need to have their asylum claims reviewed before they could be deported. This could take years. When the word went out, thousands of Arab Muslims responded by entering Ceuta, a Spanish city in North Africa that shares a border with Morocco.
And poor Ceuta, which has a population of 85,000 covering 7 square miles, was promptly swamped. And this is not the first time tiny Ceuta became inundated with a population it could not possibly absorb. At the time, PM Sánchez assured his countrymen that many newly arrived would be returned to Morocco. Some were, but many were not. They were, in the terms of the Spanish government, “regularized.”
Did Spain benefit from this regularization? Migrants, Sánchez claimed, had given Spain a booming economy and urged Americans and Europeans to accept mass migration. He continued, “What is working for us can work for others. The time has come for leaders to speak clearly to their citizens about the dilemma we all face. We, as Western nations, must choose between becoming closed and impoverished societies or open and prosperous ones… Governments can buy into the far-right’s zero-sum thinking and retreat into isolation, scarcity, selfishness, and decline.”
Well, this is quite a claim. Yes? Sanchez offers Western nations a binary choice. Become, in his words, “closed and impoverished” or “open and free.” Governments that choose the former sink into “isolation, scarcity, selfishness and decline.” Really? Does he offer evidence to support this? Has Britain become more open, free, and prosperous as a result of the half-century of Third World immigration? Are Britons getting better jobs? Are they happier? Is the standard of living better? A few months ago, a credible report estimated that Great Britain was poorer than Mississippi. So Britain is now poorer than the most impoverished state in the Union. Is this a consequence of immigration? Perhaps not all of it, but did it contribute? You decide.
Sanchez has his detractors. Nabil Bissada, a popular blogger, opined, “Of course you are the Prime Minister of Spain. Your loyalty must be to Spain and to the citizens of Spain. If the West needs migrants, they must choose the correct ones. Not those who have already committed murder, rape, beheading, theft, destroyed churches, and kidnapped, and who live on welfare. Their target is to Islamize the West. If you are accepting more Muslims as migrants, it means you agree with and support all the crimes they are committing daily against your citizens.” Well, Bissada may have overstated this, but many Europeans would agree with the gist of it.
By August 2, Moroccans had swarmed into Spain at the repeated invitation of Spanish authorities. The invitations were both active and passive. Spanish leaders toasted the benefits of their newly naturalized countrymen in speeches, on television, and on social media. They also encouraged greater migration through passivity. Not all is perfect, of course. There are problems. But whom do Spanish leaders blame for the problems? Who is the default villain? Israel, of course. Let me explain. This is from the Algemeiner. Spanish Transportation Minister Óscar Puente issued a sharp rebuke that appeared to suggest Israel was behind the crisis, promoting claims that Jerusalem was attempting to undermine Spain. “Things are starting to become quite clear,” the Spanish official wrote in a post on X. Things are becoming clear? Well….its not clear to me. And the evidence for this? There is none because Israel had nothing to do with this situation. So, why the accusations? And why would Israel do this?
Well, I have several ideas. First, the leftist government in Madrid despises Israel and, to some extent, the Trump administration. I have repeatedly discussed the Green-Red Alliance of leftists and Muslims. This alliance is particularly strong in several European countries, including Spain. The Spanish press is fiercely anti-Israel. In an Instagram post, Spanish political commentator Carolina Alonso accused Israel of collaborating with Western right-wing forces to undermine Spain through immigration. These accusations also divert attention and blame from Spaniards towards the all-powerful hidden hand of Israel. Then, there is rank anti-Semitism, which has reached a fever pitch. Last week, French Jewish tourists were harassed as they left a synagogue in Barcelona. It is often dangerous for Jews to walk the streets in identifiable Jewish clothing in Spain.
And for Spain’s future? Well, Pedro Sanchez sees blue skies and sunlit uplands. How do we know? He told us so. In fact, he told us so repeatedly. Others are not so sanguine. They point to strains on Spanish society resulting from absorbing roughly one million migrants. What will happen to Spain’s hospitals and medical clinics, residential housing, education, and security?
Let’s take a look at what Florida Governor Ron DeSantis posted about Spain: “It doesn’t take Sherlock Holmes either to recognize that leftist policies are destroying the West. Yet many populations continue to vote in hard leftists. The self-hating mentality of leftists, who hold personal values that do not align with those of any Muslim country, is sinking the West, as those same leftists oversee the inundation of Western countries with millions of Muslim migrants.”
Finally, let’s leave Spain by acknowledging the death of a young woman who died by suicide after being gang-raped by migrants and traumatized to the point of attempting suicide. Noelia Castillo of Barcelona died by lethal procedure at an assisted living facility in Spain. Castillo has been confined to a wheelchair since 2022, when she attempted suicide by jumping from a fifth-floor building after being left traumatized by a horrific gang rape. She wanted to die, explaining, “I want to go now and stop suffering, period. None of my family is in favor of euthanasia. But what about all the pain I’ve suffered during all these years?” Were the migrants who raped her Muslims? I don’t know. Do you? Despite searching the Internet, I could not confirm their countries of origin. Some stories referred to them as North African. So, we can only guess.
 

This is the third week in August 2026. Let’s take a look at Jihad Watch and see what stories are posted. First, let’s go to Germany to examine the migrant situation. This is a recurring theme in my podcasts. Years ago, then-Chancellor Merkel promised her countrymen that “We can do it.” She meant that native Germans could assimilate the “New Germans.” So…how is it going? Well, let's look at a few examples. First, there is a municipal swimming pool in Berlin. What can be controversial about a public pool? A drowning perhaps? No, nothing like that. Maybe it was those burkinis. The combination of a burka and a bikini. You may have seen them. Imagine a wet, swimming mummy in a pool, and you will get the idea. But that is not it. No, this harkens back to the Nuremberg Laws of the 1930s. It is a sick story of rank racial discrimination….AGAIN! 

Hello from Kensington Security Consulting, where we bring education to national security. This episode is called Ramming – Muslims, Cars, Pedestrians, and Europe. Last week, I discussed the rampant and random stabbing attacks. I offered you the term “getting stabby,” a play on words. In England, it means getting irritable and getting skewered on the street generally by a knife-wielding Muslim in the name of Allah. Well, this applies to running people over as well as impaling them. I don’t have any gallows humor or punny phrase for vehicle killings. Is there an equivalent for “getting stabby?” I don’t know of any. Let me know if you do. But let's get right to the stories.
Well, you likely heard about yet another car-ramming incident in Europe. More specifically, a 21-year-old named Abdul Ballout. Following the terror attack during the Christopher Street Day event in Berlin, a car struck several people in the Tiergarten area. One woman died in the attack and over 16 were wounded. According to the German magazine Bild, he was a German citizen of Lebanese descent. If you are curious about Christopher Street, it is a famous street in Manhattan that attracted many gays before the Stonewall Riot of 1968.
Back to Berlin … well, Ballout had a past, not a clean one. In fact, he has a long criminal record. But why would a repeat offender plow a car into a group of peaceful gays celebrating an annual festival? Why kill his fellow countrymen? What gives? Well, the answer lies in Islamofascism. Last week, I shared an episode called “Getting Stabby.” I quoted Robert Spencer, and I will do so again. The Islamic State issued this call back in September 2014. Here it is -“So O muwahhid, do not let this battle pass you by wherever you may be. You must strike the soldiers, patrons, and troops. Strike their police, security, and intelligence members, as well as their treacherous agents. Destroy their beds. Embitter their lives for them and busy them with themselves.” It continues, “If you are not able to find an IED or a bullet, then single out the disbelieving American, Frenchman, or any of their allies. Smash his head with a rock, or slaughter him with a knife, or run him over with your car, or throw him down from a high place, or choke him, or poison him….” Sound familiar? It should be, because this sentiment is often repeated by Muslim clerics.
Notice that the demand is to kill by any means possible, with a bullet, bomb, poison, rock, knife, or car. Use whatever you have. And Islamofascists do just that. According to Bild, Ballout was long part of the Islamofascist scene in Berlin. German Chancellor Friedrich Merz declared, “We will not allow this poison of terrorism to spread further in our society.” That was tough talk indeed, but what are the chances he will purge the “poison of terrorism” from Germany? And notice that Chancellor Merz did not mention Islam, let alone Islamofascism. I have discussed this ad nauseam. Western leaders avoid, at almost all costs, the ideology that drives the attacks. And that ideology is Islamofascism. European leaders are not alone. Several gay activists openly stated this. Before Ballout’s identity was known, they hoped the perp was a Christian, white person. And this is the mindset of intersectionality, which is part of the Green-Red alliance. I have discussed this repeatedly.
            Was Ballout the only Islamofascist to bowl over Europeans like tenpins? Hardly. In February of last year, Farhad N. carried out an Islamofascist vehicular rampage in Germany. He killed several infidels but did not die in the attack. The prosecutor in his case said, “He acted out of religious motivation.” Well, yes. So what was that religion? Was he a Lutheran? Lots of Lutherans in Germany, and Catholics, too. Jews? Probably not. Most are long gone. Hmmmm. Buddhists or Hindus? Maybe, I suppose. Hmmm. Well, somebody in the prosecutor's office added: “He believed he was obliged to attack and kill randomly selected people in Germany in response to the suffering of Muslims in Islamic countries.” Let’s examine the logic here. He drives into a crowd of Germans because Muslims abroad suffer. Did Germans cause the suffering? Yes? How? And were the Germans at this German rally directly responsible for the suffering of Muslims abroad? Yes? I don’t see how. Well, if this makes sense to you, please explain it to me.  
            Let’s turn to another ramming in Germany. This time, it is a combination of ramming, burning, and slashing in an Islamofascist attack. In September 2024, a 41-year-old Syrian national wounded 31 people, including two children who were left in critical condition, in arson attacks in Essen. He, like the killer of Christopher Street, was well known to police. This attack was planned. This Islamofascist set several residential buildings aflame, randomly slashed kaffirs with a machete, and ran his car into several storefronts. He carried a Palestinian flag as he attacked.
Let’s go to Norway and examine the case of a woman who plowed into pedestrians. An Islamofascist woman deliberately ran her sports utility vehicle into a man who had just burned a Koran. But you would not know this from the AFP headlines. On January 27, 2024, Robert Spencer points out the AFP headlines, which read, “Woman jailed over car-chase with Norway anti-Islam activist.” Well, yes. This is true, I guess. She is a woman. It was a car chase. The victim was certainly opposed to Islamofascism, and I assume he had little time for Islam in general. But I think the headline was intentionally misleading. First, what kind of woman was she? Christian? Pagan? Quaker? Don’t you think it matters? Well, I do. She attacked her victim because she was a Muslim, in the name of Islam, to avenge a slur against Islam, and the victim was a critic of Islam. I see a lot of Islamic issues in this woman.
Let’s go to the “car chase.” Maybe it is me, but I think of a car chase as Bonnie-and-Clyde types of things. Or the scene in the French Connection, a great movie. Better yet, Steve McQueen scouring the streets of San Francisco with his 68 Mustang in Bullitt. But is running somebody over a car chase?  What do you think?
            Now we move to the last part of the headline, which is the characterization of the victim as a critic of Islam. This is true…yes…sure.  But he was also a free speech activist. He was also a defender of Western civilizations and norms. He was a Norwegian patriot. So, I suggest we conjure up some alternative headlines. These are a few:
            “Female Islamofascist Tries to Kill Norwegian Patriot.” Here is another one, “Rampaging Muslim woman Berserker.” I could go on, and yes, I am being sarcastic. I’ll stop. But I think you get my point. And this is about it for this episode. Thanks for listening. Nothing in this podcast represents the official position of the United States government. I am very excited about the publication of my latest book, Cauldron of Terror – Hamas, Israel and the World – 500 Days in Gaza. On behalf of Kensington Security Consulting, until next time, out here.

Hello. This is Mark Silinsky from Kensington Security Consulting, where we bring education to national security. Welcome to the Kensington Weekly, a program that explores the relationship between Islam and the world, week by week. This is the second week in August 2026.
            Let's begin with an article by Hugh Fitzgerald at Jihad Watch that tells a compelling and tragic German story. What happened? Marius Dick, a young German, was killed by an Afghan who stabbed him. Dick was walking home after shopping when Afghan asylum seeker Sajad M, 22, sprang from a hedge and plunged a kitchen knife into his heart. The two had never met. Why did Sajad M kill a random pedestrian? According to a public health officer, he was mentally ill. This surprised some who knew him, who described him as a good neighbor and fellow worker.

October 7, 2023 changed the Middle East and the world. It was a slaughter unlike anything the Jewish world had experienced since the Nazis. You know that. Well, let me offer you a take on the attack and its aftereffects that I discuss in the book. But I want to emphasize two elements that I think are of great interest to this audience. First, I will discuss the counterterrorism strategy and how effectively it was applied to Hamas. Second, I will address how Hamas is defined. I and others suggest that Hamas is what it is, not what we want it to be. Third, I will examine the global response to the attack. I think it shocked most of us. Almost immediately, Israel, the victim, became the genocidal victimizer.

Greetings from the Kensington Weekly, where we examine events related to Muslim-Western relations. This is the first week of August 2026, and plenty happened in Europe last week. First, let’s look at Spain. Was it an invasion or an invitation? I’m referring to the flood of Moroccans into Spain. And who, really, are they? Yes, we know they are Moroccans, but do we know more? Aren’t they largely orphans? Poor kiddies, they are mostly under 16 and near starvation. Right. Well, some may be, but many are not.
            Findings showed that “70% of tested ‘unaccompanied minor’ immigrants are actually adults.”  The findings, as reported by Spanish outlet El Debate, underscore a growing “farce” in the handling of unaccompanied minor claims across the country. Over in France, when 500 African “minors” invaded, 80% proved to be adults. Do you need DNA to find out? Yes, sometimes you do. But there are other clues such as stubble beards and receding hairlines. That should tell you something.
            Well, how to get to Spain from Morocco? They usually swim to a nearby Spanish island.  Reichman University lecturer Henrique Cymerman explained: “There are fences in certain areas, and each time young people try to jump over them, they have two and a half minutes. That’s the amount of time they have before the Spanish police arrive and may send them back to Morocco. They run to the refugee center, and if they manage to make it there within those few minutes, and some of them do, they are no longer returned to Morocco. They’ve made it. From there, within a few months, they can move on to Europe and fulfill their dream.”
 

This episode is called Getting Stabby – Muslims, Knives, and the West. An interesting title? Brace yourself for an unconventional talk. Muslim stabbing frenzies are much in the news these days. Britain has long been a stabbing center in Europe. It was there that the term “getting stabby” was coined. Well, this has two meanings: becoming irritable, and unwanted knife activity. And there is plenty of unwanted slashing and plunging stainless steel activity in London.  In May, a jihadist group suspected of links to Iran claimed responsibility for the stabbings of two Jewish men.  All this and more is in Getting Stabby.

         Hello and welcome to Cauldron of Terror, a podcast that explores the effects of Islamic terrorism on the West. The book, Cauldron of Terror – Hamas, Israel, and the World, will be available sometime next month, as planned. I am Mark Silinsky, president of Kensington Security Consulting, where we bring education to national security. In this episode, we will drill down on Britain. In Cauldron, I discuss in some detail how the partnership between Islam and leftism drives British Middle East policy and shapes domestic opinion and activism.
            Daniel Pipes has coined the term the six Ps. These are (what I call the 6Ps – police, politicians, press, priests, professors, and prosecutors) that enable the expansion and entrenchment of Islamic law in Europe.  Let’s look at the police in a story featured in the Middle East Forum, which was written by Jules Gomes. I have argued many times that a neglected front in the West’s war against Islamic law, or Sharia, is the battle for ideas. This war has been well underway in Britain for decades. To control words about Islam is to control the debate about Islam. To control the debate about Islam is to allow the insertion of Sharia into Britain without a fight. Often, this insulation of Sharia comes stealthily and without widespread public notice.  I have offered a number of podcasts of Britons being arrested for making cavalier comments about Islam and Muslims. Upon arrest, they protested that they didn’t know it was illegal to criticize Islam.
Well,  one of Britain’s police forces has been grappling with this war of words for decades. Now, Britain’s official representative body for Muslim police officers has officially demanded that a policy paper published on its website propose scrapping terms like “Islamist” and “jihadist” to label “terrorists with Islamic affiliations.” As of July 2026, this policy paper has been shelved. So why bring it up? It is an example of the unrelenting demands that Muslim society makes on European states. The general strategy is to cast themselves as victims of Islamophobia and demand that host states bow to their demands to eliminate any word, image, policy, or law to which they object.
This was the case with the National Association of Muslim Police (NAMP), which first posted and then removed the 39-page paper titled “From Past Prejudices to Present Policies: Confronting anti-Muslim hatred and Promoting Human Rights.” This paper also casts Zionism as “one of the manifestations of anti-Muslim hatred.” It describes  Zionism “a narrow, nationalist, and colonialist viewpoint that fosters anti-Muslim hatred.”  It was drafted by Khaldoun Kabbani, former vice president of the NAMP, and promulgated last year.  So, what did the paper demand?
First, the paper concludes with proposals “to remove the direct association of terrorism with Islam” and instead use terms like “Irhabi/Irhabism/Irhabist”— words derived from the Arabic word for “fear” or “dread” and used to refer to terrorism and terrorists in modern Arabic —as well as “anti-Western Terrorism” and “right-wing terrorism.” Now, there would be no Islamic terrorism. It would be Irhabism. What would this achieve? It would rhetorically decouple Islam from terrorism. But then what is Irhabism? Well, it doesn’t contain the word Islam.
A second goal of the paper is to criminalize Zionism. Kabbani, who struggles to obscure the connection between Islamism and political violence, is, however, quick to demonize Zionism, which he claims strips Muslims of their humanity and portrays them as “human animals,” “monsters,” and “Amalekites.”
This is my take on the paper. First, though the NAMP pulled the paper from its website, it did not renounce it or toss it in the electronic trash can. So, I  do not see it as a loss for NAMP. It was likely a part of a pattern of prodding and testing. The NAMP met resistance and backed off a bit. Did it back down? By that, I mean, did it acknowledge that it was defeated?  Probably not. It will regroup and wait a few years until the political climate is more receptive.
As for the screed against Israel, this is now embedded in the Islamofascist playbook. Islamophobia at home and Zionism abroad are twin evils. OK. But what does this do with law enforcement in Britain? Many British Muslims support Hamas and cheered the October 7 slaughter fest. Yeah, we know that. But NAMP is a British police organization. Why should it have a foreign policy?
When the pressure became too much, NAMP issued the following, often-proffered bromide -  “We understand that the publication of this document has affected several communities, and we regret any concern, discomfort, or misunderstanding it may have caused.” It continued, the “NAMP categorically does not ‘defend’ Hamas or any other proscribed organization,” the statement noted. Nevertheless, it insisted that its “longstanding position has been to highlight the risks of linking religion with terrorism and the use of terms such as ‘Islamist terrorism,’ which can contribute to the stigmatization of Muslim communities and fuel hostility towards Muslims.”
Hardly a full-throated apology. The NAMP apologized for any concern, discomfort, or misunderstandings. Sure. They had to say something. Did they say, “We are concerned about coupling Islam with terrorism. But, as police officers, we certainly acknowledge the disproportionate use of political violence by Muslims. We clean up the blood and occasionally pick up the severed heads. We have to warn Jews not to dress as Jews in Muslim areas. All this does not address the Pakistani rape gangs.” Did they say anything like that? Bet you know the answer.
Let’s move to another P. The first story was about the police. This is about the pastors. Well, sort of. It is about the alpha-male pastor of England, the king, who is the defender of the Church of England. Well, he was until yesterday. On June 27, 2026, Ben McCaffrey of GB News announced that his title had changed. He is no longer the “defender of the faith.” His revised mission statement declared that “The King will protect the space for Faith within the multi-faith nation,” thereby redefining his official role. Perhaps this is a promotion. Now, he protects not only the Church of England but all faiths in multi-cultural Britain.
But this is my take. This is hardly a promotion. It is a concession. The King’s titles date back to the reign of King Henry VIII, after he was granted the title “Defender of the Faith” in 1521 by Pope Leo X. Britain evolved into a multi-religious society over the centuries without the King’s defense. It was British laws that gave Catholics and Jews protection. Soon, Jews will need no protection in Britain because there will be so few Jews who brave the streets of large cities wearing identifiable religious clothing. Jews are increasingly hiding their religion by leaving the country. Soon, Britons of other religions will follow. And now the King will face the challenge of defending the Church of England and the Sharia, the legal code of Islam. Now, the problem is whether Islam and Christianity are compatible. But they are now. So, I certainly wish King Charles good luck with this one. I see this as yet another step in the Islamification of Britain.   I sure hope I am wrong.

Hello and welcome to Cauldron of Terror, a podcast that explores the effects of Islamic terrorism on the West. The book, Cauldron of Terror – Hamas, Israel, and the World, will be available in summer 2026. I am Mark Silinsky, president of Kensington Security Consulting, where we bring education to national security. In this episode, we will bring education to education. By that, I mean we will look at a prominent and very influential student group that, among other things, advances HAMAS.
First, what is Students for Justice in Palestine? According to its website, “we promote an agenda grounded in freedom, solidarity, equality, safety, and historical justice, and we seek to elevate the student movement to a higher level of political engagement.” I am not exactly sure what that means. I see it as a thread of leftist cliques. Freedom, solidarity, equality, and similar terms tell me very little.
So, let’s drill down on one proclamation on the website. It condemns universities for, in the SJP’s words, “The reproduction of capitalist, imperialist, and settler colonial power, situating campus organizing for Palestine within the context of previous divestment movements and struggles against empire.” Notice, once again, the terminology – capitalist, imperialist, and colonial babble. This is clearly the rhetoric of the hard left. I have made podcasts about the Green-Red alliance. The green is for Islam, and the red is for the left. This is intersectionality. It builds a bridge between groups deemed oppressed in a white, patriarchal, capitalist West.
So this is the general statement of principles. And here is an interesting point. “Building on the legacy and impact of previous student movements on occupied Turtle Island (so-called US and Canada), National SJP seeks to empower, unify, and support the Student Movement for Palestinian liberation. We aim to build a connected, disciplined movement equipped with the tools to contribute to the fight for Palestinian liberation.”
If you know what Turtle Island is, you have one on me. According to Wikipedia, Turtle Island" is a name used by some Indigenous peoples of the Americas to refer to Earth[1] or North America.” So, the United States is “so-called.” The North American landmass is really Turtle Island.
Now, these claims and objectives seem outrageous to most of us. When SJP was created in 1992, it was dismissed as a campus outlier of Islamic extremism. It began at UC Berkeley with a small table and a handful of students handing out boycott leaflets. Interestingly, at the time, SJP's rhetoric was far more civil. As a spokesman described in 1995, “We believe in peace coupled with justice,” the unnamed student added. “We oppose illegal settlements, not the peace process.” It quickly gained traction and grew emboldened. It took off and established branches on 350 campuses.
The SJP expanded into a vast network of campus chapters that advance anti-Israel, anti-Semitic, anti-capitalist, and anti-American agendas. At least four of its chapters have been suspended since the Oct. 7 terror attack on Israel. Many SJP leaders celebrated the attacks as, in their words, “a historic win for the Palestinian resistance.” Soon after the attack, the SJP began to attack Israel’s response as genocide.  
The group’s chapters across the U.S. and Canada, not all of which are active at any given time, are loosely connected by a coordinating body called National SJP. I couldn’t find evidence of a  professional staff or national headquarters. This, along with its opaque funding.
Some SJP alumni have helped organize mass demonstrations, including those that shut down bridges and public transit in New York City and other major cities in the weeks after the war began. However, those protests were primarily organized by other organizations, such as Within Our Lifetime and Jewish Voice for Peace. SJP chapters remain focused on campus, where even a relatively small number of students can draw national attention.
CAIR 
The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) has provided legal support to the SJP. We’ve mentioned CAIR several times. CAIR is an unindicted co-conspirator in the Holy Land Foundation trial, the largest Islamic terror trial in American history. CAIR remains active, and in April 2025, it tried to block Columbia University from turning over records to Congress regarding SJP’s on-campus activities. The Senate asked Columbia to hand over records related to SJP’s activities, finances, links to Hamas and other terrorist groups, and overall “threats to campus safety.” Attorneys with CAIR’s legal defense fund argued that releasing the documents could implicate students. Yes, I imagine it would implicate students, and I’d be damn curious to know which ones and what they did. CAIR and the SJP received significant support from Columbia’s faculty, many of whom sided with the SJP.
Within our Lifetime and Jewish Voice for Peace
The SJP also has support from small far-left Jewish groups, particularly Within Our Lifetime and Jewish Voice for Peace, which bills itself as “the world’s largest Jewish organization supporting Palestine.” The JVP offers this: “If you’re looking for a political home for Jews on the left, if you’re looking for justice….” Then you belong here. Notice the reference to justice. In my view, the SJP and the JVP sound familiar. One observer of these groups, A.J. Caschetta, notes that there are only two telltale signs that a message comes from JVP rather than SJP – how each group refers to Israel and to itself. JVP generally refers to the Jewish state as Israel, whereas SJP uses "the Zionist entity." Other than that, the two groups have strikingly similar positions on Israel and the Palestinians.
The chapter at George Washington University, for example, was suspended after a few members used a projector to display pro-Palestinian slogans on the side of the campus library. Rutgers University suspended its chapter last week for what administrators called “disrupting campus life,” and two chapters at public universities in Florida are in limbo, with the American Civil Liberties Union suing to block the governor’s attempt to shut them down. Some critics, including Gov. Ron DeSantis of Florida, have suggested that SJP is providing “material support” to Hamas, which would be illegal under federal law. Gerald Steinberg, president of NGO Monitor, which tracks groups critical of Israel, speculated that SJP might receive funding from Qatar.
This comes from Jihad Watch. Daniel Greenfield of The David Horowitz Freedom Center has repeatedly said that Students for Justice in Palestine is a terrorist group.  Now, federal authorities are taking action, and 8 students associated with the radical movement are under indictment. A federal grand jury indicted eight people associated with the University of Michigan for allegedly conspiring to threaten university leaders, law enforcement officials, and businesses. According to the government, members of the group lived, worked, and/or attended school locally and targeted victims through social media platforms linked to UM student groups, including the former Students Allied for Freedom and Equality (the University of Michigan’s chapter of “Justice in Palestine”) and the pro-divestment Tahrir Coalition.
The U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of Michigan said the actions under investigation included threats against the Jewish Federation of Metropolitan Detroit. The investigation involved authorities in Michigan, Illinois, and Wisconsin.
They also discussed methods to harm the targets and their families, including poison, bombs, and psychological torture. For example, on May 21, 2024, two of the suspects, Feyock and Korkaya, then a medical student,  agreed to “kill,” “torment,” and “terrorize” their targets and their families. Referring to one victim, Korkaya stated that his  victim’s“entire family” was on his “hit list.” Feyock added that they should “get” the “kids” of two victims. Korkaya, referring to another victim, stated, “I’m gonna be the dirtiest f——- doctor ever / I’m gonna be [victim’s] doctor / poison her a– slowly.” Feyock agreed, “We need people following [victim] / get into that house then burn it down. So much for Students for Justice in Palestine.
Thank you for listening to this episode of Cauldron of Terror – Hamas, Israel, and the World. The book will be available for purchase later this summer. Nothing in this episode reflects the official position of the United States government. Until next time, thanks from Kensington Security Consulting. Out here.