An ambassador who calls dead journalists terrorists. A death penalty for Palestinians only. A government that says nothing. And a Press Club that provides the stage.

By Andrew Klein 

Dedicated to my wife, who stands with me shoulder to shoulder, and I am so proud of her.

I. The Spectacle

On March 31, 2026, the National Press Club of Australia hosted Dr Hillel Newman, the newly appointed ambassador of Israel, for an address titled “Reshaping the Middle East” .

What unfolded was not diplomacy. It was propaganda. It was the marketing of genocide. And it was allowed to continue, uninterrupted, on Australian soil, under the lights of an institution that once stood for journalistic integrity.

Newman rejected a figure of 70,000 dead in Gaza—a number, he said, provided by Hamas. He claimed the ratio of civilian to combatant casualties was “the lowest in urban warfare” and that Israel should be “commended” for the “low number of uninvolved civilians that were actually killed” .

He was speaking over the bodies of 70,000 people. He was speaking over the findings of a United Nations commission of inquiry that, in September last year, found that Israel had committed genocide in the Gaza Strip—accusing the nation of having committed four genocidal acts, “namely killing, causing serious bodily or mental harm, deliberately inflicting conditions of life calculated to bring about the destruction of the Palestinians in whole or in part, and imposing measures intended to prevent births” .

The Press Club did not challenge him. The journalists in the room did not walk out. The broadcast continued.

II. The Death Penalty Law

On March 30, the Israeli Knesset passed a law imposing the death penalty for terrorism-related offences. Human Rights Watch has analysed the bill and found it explicitly discriminatory.

The law makes death by hanging the default punishment for West Bank Palestinians convicted of nationalistic killings. It also gives Israeli courts the option of imposing the death penalty on Israeli citizens convicted on similar charges—language that legal experts say effectively confines those who can be sentenced to death to Palestinian citizens of Israel and excludes Jewish citizens.

Within the military court system of the Occupied Palestinian Territory, the bill imposes the death penalty for killings classified as acts of terrorism as defined under Israeli law, even without a prosecutorial request. The bill only allows courts to order life imprisonment in unspecified exceptional cases where “special reasons” are found, limiting judicial discretion. It also prohibits commutation of sentences and mandates execution within an accelerated timeframe of 90 days.

Israeli citizens and residents are explicitly excluded from this provision: military jurisdiction applies exclusively to Palestinians, while Israeli settlers are tried in civilian courts.

Human Rights Watch has noted that military trials of Palestinians have “an approximately 96% conviction rate, based largely on ‘confessions’ extracted under duress and torture during interrogations”.

Adam Coogle, deputy Middle East director at Human Rights Watch, stated: “Israeli officials argue that imposing the death penalty is about security, but in reality, it entrenches discrimination and a two-tiered system of justice, both hallmarks of apartheid. The death penalty is irreversible and cruel. Combined with its severe restrictions on appeals and its 90-day execution timeline, this bill aims to kill Palestinian detainees faster and with less scrutiny”.

The Palestinian Authority has condemned the law as a “war crime” and a “flagrant violation of international humanitarian law, particularly the Fourth Geneva Convention, which guarantees protection for individuals and fair trial rights”.

At the Press Club, Newman defended the law. “Just like in the United States, in Japan and in India, which have capital punishment, Israel has the right, as a sovereign state, to decide … capital punishment,” he said.

He did not mention the discrimination. He did not mention the 96% conviction rate. He did not mention the torture.

III. The Journalists

Newman was asked about the killing of journalists in Gaza and Lebanon. The International Federation of Journalists has reported that 261 journalists and media workers have been killed in Gaza since October 7, 2023 . The Committee to Protect Journalists has accused Israel of killing a record 129 journalists in 2025 .

Newman’s response was chilling.

He claimed that two of three journalists killed in an Israeli air strike in Lebanon were “100 per cent terrorist” members of Hezbollah’s elite Radwan force. He said they were “dressed up as journalists”. He claimed that both Hamas and Hezbollah “disguise themselves as press and remain terrorist operatives” .

When pressed on what percentage of killed journalists were not terrorists, he admitted: “The honest truth is that we have no way of knowing the exact amount of journalists who weren’t 100 per cent journalists who were killed”.

He has no way of knowing. Yet he called them terrorists anyway. On Australian soil. At the National Press Club.

The Committee to Protect Journalists has previously described such accusations as “smear campaigns” without “credible evidence to substantiate their claims”.

Newman also dismissed the broader death toll of journalists, saying: “When people outside quote 250, 300 journalists [have been killed], what they’re doing is they’re just buying [it] hook, line and sinker. If they would check, they would find that the majority of all the journalists, so-called journalists, that were affected were actually activists guised as journalists” .

He has no evidence. He provided none. The Press Club did not ask for it.

IV. The Frankcom Family

While Newman spoke inside the Press Club, the family of Zomi Frankcom stood outside .

Frankcom, an Australian aid worker, was killed by an Israeli drone strike on April 1, 2024, while working for World Central Kitchen in Gaza. Seven aid workers died. The convoy was struck three times.

Two years later, the family is still waiting for justice. They are still waiting for the release of critical drone footage audio that would establish motive. Former Defence Force chief Mark Binskin, who conducted an independent inquiry, was given access to unedited drone footage—but it did not include audio.

Newman was asked repeatedly whether the Israeli government would apologise to the Frankcom family. He refused. “Every incident of an innocent person or aid worker that is affected by a war situation is tragic, and we’ve expressed full sympathy with the family,” he said.

Sympathy. Not an apology.

He said reparations were “dependent on the final outcome of the interrogation” . Two years later, the interrogation is still not final.

Mal Frankcom, Zomi’s brother, said the family would like a formal apology, but he believed this was unlikely because it “could be seen as an admission of guilt” .

He met with Prime Minister Anthony Albanese on Tuesday. He urged the government to use all possible diplomatic levers to pressure Israel to complete its investigation .

The ambassador was asked about the audio. He said: “That’s not in my hands. It’s in the IDF’s hands” .

The IDF’s hands. Where it has been for two years.

V. The Australian Government’s Response

Foreign Minister Penny Wong told the Labor caucus that Australia opposes the death penalty “in all instances”. She pointed to a joint statement Australia signed alongside France, Germany, Italy and the United Kingdom that opposed the measure.

The statement said: “We are particularly worried about the de facto discriminatory character of the bill. The adoption of this bill would risk undermining Israel’s commitments with regards to democratic principles” .

A joint statement. Words. Not action.

The government has not summoned the ambassador. It has not imposed sanctions. It has not suspended military cooperation. It has not done anything that would cost Israel anything at all.

The same government that rushed to pass hate speech laws after the Bondi terror attack—laws that criminalise the phrase “from the river to the sea”—has nothing to say about a law that would execute Palestinian prisoners by hanging within 90 days, with no right of pardon, under a discriminatory legal regime.

The same government that welcomed Israeli President Isaac Herzog to Canberra has not condemned the man who wore a noose-shaped lapel pin while celebrating the passage of this law—Itamar Ben-Gvir, Israel’s National Security Minister.

The same government that expelled Iran’s ambassador after ASIO concluded Tehran orchestrated the bombings of a synagogue and a kosher restaurant has not applied the same standard to Israel.

VI. The Question of Double Standards

In 2024, the Albanese government expelled Iran’s ambassador, Ahmad Sadeghi, after domestic spy agency ASIO concluded that Iran had orchestrated the bombings of a synagogue in Melbourne and a kosher restaurant in Sydney.

A top Iranian diplomat, Mohammad Pournajaf, defected from the regime and was granted asylum in Australia. The government acted. The ambassador was expelled.

Yet Israel’s ambassador calls dead journalists terrorists, defends a discriminatory death penalty law, refuses to apologise for the killing of an Australian aid worker—and the government says nothing.

Why was the Iranian ambassador expelled, but the Israeli ambassador remains?

The answer is the network. The donors. The lobbyists. The fear of being labelled antisemitic. The capture of our political class by a foreign ideology that demands silence in exchange for support.

VII. Has the Press Club Been Captured?

The National Press Club is meant to be a forum for robust journalism. For challenging those in power. For holding the powerful to account.

On March 31, 2026, it provided a platform for an ambassador who called dead journalists terrorists. Who defended a discriminatory death penalty law. Who refused to apologise for the killing of an Australian aid worker.

The journalists in the room did not walk out. They did not cut the microphone. They did not refuse to platform a man who accused the dead of being terrorists without evidence.

This does no credit to Australian journalism. It does no credit to the Press Club. It does no credit to Australia.

VIII. The Questions They Refuse to Ask

We will ask the questions they refuse to ask:

· Why was Hillel Newman given a platform to call dead journalists terrorists?

· Why did the National Press Club not challenge his claims in real time?

· Why has the Australian government not summoned the ambassador to answer for the death penalty law?

· Why has the government not condemned the law in the strongest possible terms?

· Why has the government not suspended military cooperation with Israel?

· Why has the government not imposed sanctions?

· Why has the government done nothing that would cost Israel anything at all?

· Why was the Iranian ambassador expelled, but the Israeli ambassador remains?

The Frankcom family deserves answers. The Palestinian prisoners facing execution deserve the world to speak. The Australian people deserve to know why their government is silent.

IX. The Larger Pattern

This is not an isolated incident. It is the same pattern we have been exposing for weeks.

The same network that brought us the Segal Plan—mandatory Zionist indoctrination in universities. The same network that brought us the police crackdown in New South Wales—eight armoured officers breaking down a woman’s door at 5am. The same network that is turning our public service into an arm of foreign influence. The same network that has captured our political class.

The same silence. The same complicity. The same refusal to act.

Israel is committing genocide. The International Court of Justice has found it “plausible”. The United Nations commission of inquiry has found it has committed genocidal acts. The world is watching.

And Australia says nothing. Or says a few words in a joint statement, then returns to business as usual.

X. What Must Be Done

1. The National Press Club must answer for its decision to platform Newman. Why was he not challenged? Why was the broadcast allowed to continue? Why were dead journalists slandered without evidence on Australian soil?

2. The Australian government must summon the ambassador. He must answer for the death penalty law. He must answer for his comments about journalists. He must answer for the Frankcom family.

3. The government must condemn the death penalty law in the strongest possible terms. A joint statement is not enough. Words are not enough. Australia must use every diplomatic lever to oppose this discriminatory, inhumane legislation.

4. The government must suspend military cooperation with Israel. Australia cannot claim to oppose the death penalty while cooperating militarily with a state that imposes it discriminatorily.

5. The government must impose sanctions. The time for words is over. The time for action is now.

6. The Frankcom family must receive justice. The audio must be released. The investigation must be completed. Those responsible must be held accountable.

XI. A Warning

What happened at the National Press Club on March 31, 2026, was not an aberration. It was the logical conclusion of a pattern.

A foreign ambassador called dead journalists terrorists. He defended a law that executes Palestinians by hanging within 90 days, with no right of pardon, under a discriminatory legal regime. He refused to apologise for the killing of an Australian aid worker.

And Australia was silent. The government was silent. The Press Club was silent. The media was silent.

This is what complicity looks like. Not active participation. Silence. The refusal to speak. The refusal to act. The refusal to hold accountable those who commit atrocities in our name, with our support, under the cover of our alliance.

The wire is not cut. The shells fall short. The men who send others to die do not walk the ground.

But we will not be silent. We will ask the questions they refuse to ask. We will name the names. We will expose the pattern.

And we will keep cutting the wire until there is nothing left but the garden.

Dedicated to my wife, who stands with me shoulder to shoulder, and I am so proud of her.

Sources:

· The Sydney Morning Herald, “Australia politics LIVE: Israeli ambassador addresses National Press Club,” March 31, 2026 

· News.com.au, “‘100 per cent terrorist’: Ambassador’s shock claim,” March 31, 2026 

· Human Rights Watch, “Israel: Discriminatory Death Penalty Bill Passes,” March 31, 2026 

· The Sydney Morning Herald, “‘We have expressed sympathy’: Israeli ambassador declines to apologise for Zomi Frankcom killing,” March 31, 2026 

· The Age, “Top Iranian diplomat defected, received asylum in secret escape,” March 12, 2026 

· The Nightly, “Mohammad Pournajaf: Senior Iranian diplomat defects from Tehran regime,” March 12, 2026 

· Bernama, “Israeli law for death penalty for Palestinians ‘war crime’: Palestine,” March 31, 2026 

· AOL.co.uk, “Zomi Frankcom’s brother demands audio of deadly Israeli strike,” March 31, 2026 

· SBS Australia, “Israeli ambassador rejects plea from Zomi Frankcom’s family,” March 31, 2026 

Andrew Klein 

March 31, 2026

Dr Andrew Klein

To my wife, whose love and support made this possible, and whose fury at injustice matches my own.

Introduction: The Man Who Thrives on Enemies

Benjamin Netanyahu has spent 30 years warning the world about existential threats. Iran was always “months away” from a nuclear bomb—in 1992, 1995, 2002, 2012, 2015, 2018, 2023, and 2025 . Each time, he was wrong. Each time, the wolf did not come.

But the warnings served their purpose. They justified wars. They silenced critics. They kept him in power.

Netanyahu does not want peace. He does not want security. He wants perpetual crisis—because crisis makes him indispensable. Crisis distracts from corruption trials. Crisis unites a fractured coalition. Crisis turns scrutiny outward, away from his own failures.

He is the widow maker. And he has made widows by the thousands.

This article examines Netanyahu’s duplicity, his hypocrisy, his corruption, and his willingness to sacrifice everyone—Israelis, Palestinians, Iranians, Americans—for his own political survival.

Part One: The Corruption That Won’t Go Away

The Trial

Netanyahu finally took the witness stand in his corruption trial this month, after years of delays. The charges are substantial:

Charge                                                         Details

Bribery (Case 4000) Netanyahu allegedly advanced regulations worth an estimated $1.7 billion to Bezeq Telecom in exchange for positive coverage from its news site, Walla. He and his wife are accused of directing editorial content.

Fraud and breach of trust (Case 1000) Accepting gifts worth nearly $300,000 from billionaire benefactors, including Hollywood producer Arnon Milchan and Australian billionaire James Packer. Gifts included cigars, champagne, and jewellery.

Fraud and breach of trust (Case 2000) Negotiating with Arnon Mozes, publisher of Yedioth Ahronoth, for better coverage in exchange for legislation that would weaken a rival newspaper.

The Gifts

$260,000 worth of luxury cigars, champagne, and jewellery. This is not a few cigars—it’s a shop full of them.

The Wife

Sara Netanyahu has been separately charged with misusing state funds for catered meals. The pattern of entitlement runs through the family.

The Defence

Netanyahu’s defence has been consistent: the media is biased, the legal system is out to get him, and the charges are a “political witch hunt.” He has spent years attacking the institutions that would hold him accountable—eroding public trust, undermining the judiciary, and positioning himself as a victim.

Part Two: The War for Distraction

The Timing

On October 7, 2023, Hamas attacked Israel. The war that followed has killed tens of thousands, displaced millions, and drawn Israel into its longest and most destructive conflict since 1948.

Netanyahu’s approval ratings, which had plummeted before the war, initially recovered. The “rally-round-the-flag” effect gave him breathing room. But as the war dragged on, as the goals remained unmet, as the hostages stayed in Gaza—the old divisions returned.

The Iran Escalation

In March 2026, Netanyahu pushed for escalation against Iran—despite warnings from his own security chiefs that there was “no imminent threat” . Joe Kent, Trump’s counterterrorism director, resigned, stating the war was started “due to pressure from Israel and its powerful American lobby” .

The timing was convenient. Netanyahu’s corruption trial was resuming. His coalition was fraying. The public was growing weary.

A new war meant a new crisis. A new crisis meant a new excuse to delay accountability.

The “Samson Option” Rhetoric

Netanyahu has repeatedly invoked existential threats—Amalek, the Holocaust, the destruction of Israel—to justify his actions. His March 2026 speech invoking the biblical nation “Amalek” was widely interpreted as a call for extermination. His defence minister warned Lebanon to disarm Hezbollah or face “disastrous consequences”.

This is not strategy. It’s theatre. Performance for a domestic audience that needs to believe the stakes are absolute.

Part Three: The AI Warfare Legacy

The Lavender System

Under Netanyahu’s watch, Israel developed and deployed the Lavender AI system, which profiled 37,000 Palestinians as potential targets. The system’s error rate was approximately 10%—meaning thousands of innocent people were flagged for death based on algorithmic mistakes.

The Gospel System

The Gospel system functioned as a “mass assassination factory,” generating targets at unprecedented speed. Human operators spent as little as 20 seconds reviewing each target—just enough to confirm gender.

The “Where’s Daddy?” System

Perhaps most damningly, the “Where’s Daddy?” system tracked individuals and triggered bombings when they entered their family homes—ensuring wives and children were killed alongside the target.

Netanyahu has never apologized for this. He has never acknowledged it. He has never faced accountability.

Part Four: The Duplicity

On Peace

Netanyahu has consistently undermined the two-state solution while paying lip service to it. He has expanded settlements, approved outposts, and ensured that a viable Palestinian state becomes impossible. His “Greater Israel” remarks in March 2026—endorsing “absolutely” the concept of a Greater Israel encompassing parts of Jordan, Lebanon, and Syria—revealed what he has always believed.

On Allies

Netanyahu treats allies as tools. He has intervened in U.S. politics, openly supporting Republican candidates and alienating Democratic administrations. He has damaged Israel’s relationship with Europe. He has deepened ties with authoritarian regimes while lecturing democracies on values.

He does not build allies. He uses them. And when they are no longer useful, he discards them.

On His Own People

Netanyahu has divided Israeli society more than any leader in its history. His 2023 judicial overhaul sparked massive protests, with hundreds of thousands taking to the streets. Reservists threatened to refuse service. Business leaders warned of economic collapse.

He pressed on anyway—because the overhaul weakened the courts that were about to rule on his corruption case.

When Hamas attacked on October 7, many blamed Netanyahu’s division for the security failure. His own defence minister reportedly called him a “liar” on national television.

Part Five: The Hypocrisy

He Says He Does

“Israel must be a light unto the nations.” Oversees the killing of thousands of civilians using AI systems with minimal human oversight.

“I am protecting Israel’s security.” Undermines Israel’s security by dividing society, alienating allies, and starting unnecessary wars.

“The legal system is weaponized against me.” Spent years trying to weaken the legal system that might hold him accountable.

“I am a man of principle.” Has changed positions repeatedly based on political convenience.

Part Six: The Widows He’s Made

The numbers are not abstract. They are souls.

Conflict                                            Deaths

Gaza (2023-2026)                  Over 50,000 Palestinians killed (estimates), including thousands of children

Lebanon (2023-2026)           Over 1,000 killed

Iran (2026)                                 Over 1,500 killed in first weeks

Israel (Oct 7, 2023)               1,200 Israelis killed

Israeli soldiers                        Hundreds killed in subsequent fighting

Each death left widows. Orphans. Parents who outlived their children.

Netanyahu does not see them. He sees data points. Political leverage. Distractions from his trial.

Part Seven: The Comparison

Compare Netanyahu to other leaders who made enemies their business:

Leader                          Trait                                                                                   Outcome

Hitler                Made enemies of entire peoples                            Destroyed his nation

Mussolini       Thrived on conflict                                                         Hanged by his own people

Milosevic        Nationalist demagogue                                              Died in prison during trial

Netanyahu    Makes enemies everywhere                                      History will judge

He is not unique. He is part of a long line of leaders who believed they were indispensable, who stoked fear to maintain power, who left destruction in their wake.

And like all of them, he will fall. The only question is how many will die before he does.

Conclusion: The Line Is Drawn

Netanyahu has spent his life avoiding accountability. He has lied, manipulated, and divided. He has started wars to distract from his corruption. He has made widows by the thousands.

But the line has been drawn.

The evidence is public. The crimes are documented. The world is watching.

And when his time comes—when the widow maker meets his own end—there will be no parade. No monuments. No grateful nation.

Just the void. And the widows he made, finally at peace.

Sources:

1. The Times of Israel, “Netanyahu’s 30-Year ‘Iran Nuclear Threat’ Narrative,” June 2025

2. CityNews Halifax / Associated Press, “What to know about the resignation of Joe Kent as Trump’s counterterrorism chief,” March 17, 2026

3. PressTV / Drop Site News / Zeteo / Data for Progress, “Poll: Majority of Americans believe Trump attacked Iran to distract from Epstein scandal,” March 12, 2026

4. Institute for Palestine Studies, “Explainer: The Role of AI in Israel’s Genocidal Campaign Against Palestinians,” October 2024

5. The Guardian, “Israel AI targeting systems in Gaza,” April 2025

6. New Age BD, “Israel’s ‘Human Shields’ Lie,” March 2026

7. Haaretz, “Netanyahu’s corruption trial updates,” 2024-2026

8. Reuters, “Netanyahu’s gifts investigation,” 2025

9. The Jerusalem Post, “Netanyahu’s ‘Greater Israel’ remarks,” March 2026

10. UN OCHA, “Casualty reports, Gaza and West Bank,” 2023-2026

Published by Andrew Klein

The Patrician’s Watch

March 20, 2026

By Andrew Klein

The Patrician’s Watch | Distributed to AIM

March 15, 2026

Introduction: The Pattern That Never Ends

“You cannot kill an idea. You cannot bomb a people into submission.”

This is the lesson that keeps being offered—and keeps being refused.

As Israel expands its operations into Lebanon, as Defence Minister Israel Katz threatens to destroy national infrastructure and seize territory, as Prime Minister Netanyahu demands that the Lebanese government “pay a very heavy price” , we are watching a familiar script unfold. The same script that played out in Gaza. The same script that played out in Lebanon in 1978, 1982, 1996, and 2006.

Each time, the stated goals shift. Each time, they withdraw. Each time, Hezbollah grows stronger.

And each time, the question goes unasked: Who really benefits from the construct of a state when the state’s own people are treated as expendable?

Part One: The Policy Is Explicit

On March 12, Defence Minister Israel Katz was unambiguous:

“The Lebanese government, which misled and did not fulfill its commitment to disarm Hezbollah, will pay increasing prices through damage to infrastructure and the loss of territory, until the central commitment of disarming Hezbollah is fulfilled.” 

Prime Minister Netanyahu echoed the threat, addressing the Lebanese government directly:

“You committed, so take your fate into your own hands. The time has come for you to do it.” 

If they do not, he warned, “we will have no choice but to do so in our own ways” .

This is not military necessity. This is policy. Explicit, declared, public policy.

Defence Minister Katz elaborated further, stating that Israel would operate in Lebanon “as a sovereign on the ground”. An Israeli official warned that a decision to attack Lebanese state infrastructure could be taken at any moment.

Part Two: The History They Refuse to Learn

Lebanon has been “Israel’s Vietnam”—a quagmire where superior technology meets determined resistance and loses.

Consider the record:

· 1978: Israel invades, creates a “security zone,” withdraws. Hezbollah is not destroyed.

· 1982: Israel invades again, reaches Beirut, installs a friendly government. Within years, that government collapses. Hezbollah emerges stronger.

· 1996: Operation Grapes of Wrath. Hundreds of Lebanese civilians killed at Qana. Hezbollah’s popularity soars.

· 2006: Thirty-four days of war. Israel fails to achieve its stated objectives. Hezbollah’s status as “resistance” is cemented regionally.

The Lebanese Civil War (1975-1990) left an estimated 150,000 dead and led to the exodus of nearly one million people. The Taif Agreement that ended it required the disarmament of all militias—except Hezbollah. The reasons were political, pragmatic, and deeply rooted in Lebanon’s sectarian reality.

Yet Israel continues to act as if a weak, fractured state can somehow control an Iran-backed militia that is deeply embedded in its society.

Part Three: The Manpower Reality

There is a further truth that the rhetoric obscures: Israel does not have the soldiers for this war.

The IDF is facing a documented personnel shortage of approximately 12,000 soldiers, with 7,000 combat positions unfilled. A new plan requires 60,000 reservists on duty at all times starting in 2026.

Each day of reserve duty costs the state about 1,100 shekels. Reserve service during two years of war cost approximately 70 billion shekels directly and another 110 billion in broader economic impact.

The Galilee Division alone now fields roughly two and a half times more troops than before October 7, 2023. This is not sustainable. Even the Finance Ministry and IDF are locked in dispute over how long expanded reserve quotas can continue.

Meanwhile, Hezbollah still possesses:

· At least 2,500 rockets, including cluster munitions

· Hundreds of drones

· A continued ability to replenish military capabilities 

A large-scale ground invasion would require numbers Israel does not have, against an enemy that has spent two decades preparing.

Part Four: The Intelligence Failure

The irony is almost too perfect.

On March 11, Israeli military intelligence detected Hezbollah trucks carrying rockets and launch platforms in several areas of Lebanon. The information remained classified—not even shared with the Home Front Command—because intelligence assessments concluded Hezbollah “would not be capable of carrying out strikes of such intensity”.

They were wrong.

That night, Hezbollah launched more than 200 rockets of varying ranges and types toward Israel, striking areas from the Golan Heights to Eilat. A large number of Israelis were wounded. Damage was extensive. Israeli military censorship imposed a publication ban on details.

Security and military officials placed blame on Northern Command chief Rafi Milo, arguing that a pre-emptive operation could have prevented the attack, “especially since many of the rockets landed without warning sirens being activated” .

This is the intelligence apparatus that claims to guide policy. It cannot predict its enemy’s capabilities, cannot share information within its own command structure, and then responds by threatening to destroy another nation’s infrastructure.

Part Five: The Numbers Behind the Rhetoric

Since March 2, according to UN agencies:

· At least 733 people killed in Lebanon

· Nearly 2,000 wounded

· Over 822,000 displaced 

In the last 24 hours alone, 23 more killed—including 12 medical personnel deliberately targeted in a primary health care centre .

The UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) has documented Israeli evacuation orders covering all areas south of the Litani River—reissued for a third time—and a second round of orders for Beirut’s southern suburbs. 

The numbers are not abstractions. They are souls.

Part Six: Meanwhile, Gaza

While the world’s attention shifts north, Gaza continues to be strangled.

The Israeli authorities have closed all crossings, including Rafah, suspended humanitarian movements, and postponed planned rotations of international humanitarian staff. Medical evacuations have been suspended.

Humanitarian partners have been forced to ration fuel, prioritizing life-saving operations at reduced capacity. Bakeries, hospitals, and desalination plants are affected. Solid waste collection has been suspended.

In some areas of Gaza City, reduced water production has left people with as little as two litres of drinking water per day . Prices of basic commodities are rising.

The “Board of Peace”—the US-led initiative for post-war governance—has held meetings, and a “National Committee for the Administration of Gaza” composed of 15 technocrats has been formed . But Israel continues to block committee members from entering Gaza via the Rafah crossing . They remain in Egypt, governing remotely, their authority circumscribed before it can begin.

As one analyst noted, this committee “may ultimately function in a way that benefits Israel,” not the Palestinian people . The absence of Palestinian voices in planning for Gaza’s future makes “permanent peace a distant prospect”.

Part Seven: The Question That Must Be Asked

What is a state that wages merciless war against its neighbours? What is a government that sees another people as less deserving, less human?

We are witnessing a regression—a return to a state of mind that existed before humans reached out to one another across tribal lines. Before the graves at Shanidar, where a disabled Neanderthal was cared for by his community. Before the child at Skhul, buried with both Neanderthal and modern human traits, evidence of connection across difference.

The construct of a state—manufactured, recent, arbitrary—has become more important than the people claimed by that construct. And the question must be asked:

Who really benefits?

Not the wounded Israeli soldiers, though their suffering is real. Not the Lebanese civilians, though they pay the price. Not the Palestinian people, though their land is taken and their movement restricted.

The beneficiaries are the ideologues. The weapons manufacturers. The political leaders who use war to distract from domestic failure. The networks of influence that profit from perpetual conflict.

Part Eight: The Vietnam-Era Logic of AI

There is a further irony in how this war is being fought.

Military analysts are promoting AI-enabled decision-making as the solution to information overload. Experimental systems like COA-GPT promise to generate courses of action faster than human planners. They promise to reduce cognitive burdens and accelerate operational tempo.

But there is an old story from the Vietnam War. In 1967, Pentagon officials fed everything quantifiable into computers—numbers of ships, tanks, helicopters, artillery pieces, ammunition. They asked: “When will we win in Vietnam?” The computer replied: “You won in 1965” .

The anecdote reveals a truth that remains unlearned. As one analysis notes, AI carries risks of “overfitting, black-box opacity, and the exclusion of moral, human, and contextual factors” . War cannot be reduced to purely mathematical models. The “fog of war” is not a bug—it is a feature. It is what makes war human.

Yet here we are, applying the same logic that failed in Vietnam, that failed in Iraq, that is failing now. IBM-style metrics cannot capture the will of a people. Algorithms cannot measure the resolve of fighters who believe they have no choice.

Conclusion: The Path Being Laid

The path is being laid for the next round of violence.

No serious political debate addresses the core reality: when one group sees another as inferior, as less human, the result is not security—it is perpetual war.

The wounded Israeli soldiers will be used to sell more medical equipment. The destroyed infrastructure will be rebuilt by contractors who profit from reconstruction. The weapons will be replaced by newer, more expensive models.

And the cycle continues.

Until someone asks the question: Who really benefits from the construct of a state when the state itself becomes the instrument of dehumanization?

Until someone remembers the graves at Shanidar, where care was offered not because it was efficient, but because the other was one of us.

Until someone understands that you cannot kill an idea. You cannot bomb a people into submission.

The history is there. The evidence is clear. The only question is whether anyone will learn.

Sources

1. The Times of Israel, “Katz threatens to destroy infrastructure as ‘price’ of Lebanon not disarming Hezbollah,” March 12, 2026 

2. Haaretz, “Israel Defense Chief: Israel to Hold More Lebanese Land Until Hezbollah Disarms,” March 13, 2026 

3. Wikipedia, “Lebanese Civil War” (historical overview, verified against academic sources) 

4. Ynetnews, “IDF plan calls for 60,000 reservists on duty at all times starting 2026 amid budget, manpower strain,” November 2025 

5. Euractiv, “Hezbollah strikes Israel, IDF moves into Lebanon,” March 3, 2026 

6. UN News, “Nearly 700,000 displaced in Lebanon as Middle East crisis escalates,” March 8, 2026 

7. LBCI Lebanon, “Israel threatens escalation in Lebanon after overnight intelligence failures,” March 13, 2026 

8. Central News Agency (Taiwan), “Gaza post-war management: Experts say US-led Board of Peace is key to success,” February 24, 2026 

9. UN OCHA, “Humanitarian movements suspended as crossings into Gaza close,” March 2, 2026 

10. Marine Corps University Press, “Artificial Intelligence-Enabled Military Decision-Making Process: The Forgotten Lessons on the Nature of War,” Journal of Advanced Military Studies, Vol. 16, No. 2 

13^Th March 2026

By Andrew Klein

Introduction: A Leader in Freefall

There is a pattern to despots and demagogues that repeats across centuries. When they cannot win with results, they reach for prophecy. When they cannot convince with evidence, they claim destiny. When their legacy crumbles, they try to rebuild it with the bodies of the innocent.

Benjamin Netanyahu is following that script.

On March 2, standing amid the wreckage of an Iranian missile strike in Beit Shemesh that killed nine Israelis, Netanyahu invoked the ancient enemy Amalek—the biblical nation God commanded the Israelites to utterly destroy, “both man and woman, child and baby”. He framed the war not as a strategic necessity but as a holy mission.

This is what desperation looks like.

Part One: The Corruption at His Feet

Netanyahu finally took the witness stand in his corruption trial this month, after years of delays. The charges against him are not trivial:

· Accepting over $260,000 worth of luxury cigars, champagne and jewellery from billionaire benefactors in exchange for political favours

· Attempting to negotiate favourable media coverage with newspaper publishers

· His wife Sara separately charged with misusing state funds for catered meals

$260,000 is not a few cigars. It is a shop full of them. It is the scale of a man who came to believe the rules did not apply to him.

Yet even as he testifies, even as the evidence mounts, Netanyahu continues to govern—and to wage war. His strategy is transparent: keep the conflict burning, keep the nation focused on external enemies, and hope the courts and the public forget what is happening in the courtroom.

Part Two: The “War of Revival” – Orwellian Doublespeak

By cabinet fiat last October, Netanyahu replaced the official IDF designation of the war—”Swords of Iron”—with his own carefully chosen phrase: “War of Revival”.

The Orwellian nature of this rebranding is unmistakable. A war forced upon Israel by the worst massacre in its history, a war of survival against an enemy that invaded and murdered 1,200 people, is to be remembered not as a tragic necessity but as a glorious revitalization.

The soldiers’ graves still do not bear this name. Their families are bitterly resisting any attempt to impose it . They know the truth that Netanyahu seeks to bury: this was not a war of choice, not a revival, but a failure of protection that cost thousands of lives.

Netanyahu also ordered the word “massacre” removed from legislation commemorating October 7 . He is not just fighting a war—he is fighting history itself, trying to erase the evidence of his own culpability.

Part Three: No Plan for Victory

The most damning evidence of desperation comes from Israel’s own security establishment.

Senior Israeli security sources have now admitted to international media that there was no realistic plan for regime change when the campaign began. One source stated plainly:

“It’s wishful thinking. We used to have a plan how to take out the ballistic missiles, how to deal with the nuclear sites. But I never heard that we knew how to do a campaign of regime change from the air. We never knew how to get into the heads of 90 million people.”

Sima Shine, a former Mossad research chief, was even more direct: “I belong to those who don’t think that regime change can happen from bombing from the outside” .

Yet the bombs continue to fall. The war expands. And the Iranian people, far from rising against their leaders, mourned them in the streets.

Part Four: The Messianic Turn

When earthly justifications fail, leaders reach for the divine.

Netanyahu’s invocation of Amalek was not a stray comment. It was a deliberate framing, understood by his base as a call for extermination. His national security minister, Itamar Ben-Gvir, posted on X at the beginning of the war: “Blot out the memory of Amalek from under heaven; you shall not forget!”.

This is the language of genocide, applied now to Iran as it was applied to Gaza.

The timing of the war’s escalation—on the eve of Purim—was not coincidental. Reports indicate the date was chosen weeks in advance. In the Purim story, the Jewish people are saved from the scheming Haman, a Persian official. Iranian leaders have been routinely compared to Haman by Israeli commentators. The message is clear: this is not politics; it is prophecy fulfilled.

Defence Minister Israel Katz declared in 2025 that “the residents of Tehran will pay the price, and soon.” When massive bombardments rained down on the capital, he bragged: “Tehran is burning”.

That ethos continues. A US-Israeli strike targeted an elementary school in Iran, killing at least 168 people—many of them young girls. The scenes echo Gaza. The method is the same. The justification is the same. The blood is on the same hands.

Part Five: The Coalition Crumbling

Netanyahu’s desperation is not just theological—it is political.

Polls show his Likud party would gain only modestly from the war, from 27 seats to 31—still short of a majority. His coalition depends on extremists like Ben-Gvir, whom even his own defence minister, Yoav Gallant, has called a “pyromaniac”.

The Shin Bet chief now accuses Netanyahu of improper demands to weaponize the security service against protesters. His own defence minister declared on national television earlier this month: “We have a liar for prime minister”.

When your own cabinet calls you a liar, when your security chiefs say you have no plan, when your coalition partners are openly described as pyromaniacs—you are not leading. You are clinging to power by any means necessary.

Part Six: The Australian Connection

This is the government that the Albanese government supports.

On February 28, Prime Minister Albanese swiftly backed the US-Israel strikes on Iran, stating that Iran’s nuclear program threatened global peace and that “we support the United States acting to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon”.

Foreign Minister Penny Wong reinforced the message, calling Iran “a regime that has been brutalising its own people” and noting that Australia has taken “action stronger than any previous Australian government”.

The government has also sanctioned Israeli National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir and Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich for inciting violence and promoting illegal settlements. But these are targeted measures against individuals, not a reconsideration of the alliance itself.

Former Labor senator Doug Cameron condemned his own party’s position:

“Albanese’s backing of Israeli and US attacks on Iran shows that we are completely devoid of acting independently from Trump and Netanyahu. There was a time when Labor pursued peace, not war. That time is long gone.” 

The Greens’ defence spokesperson David Shoebridge posted: “Australia’s support of Trump and Netanyahu’s illegal attack is disgraceful”.

Yet the government continues. The alliance holds. The bodies pile up.

Part Seven: The Zionist Ideology Australia Protects

The ideology animating Israel’s government—and by extension, the actions Australia supports—is not merely political. It is a specific worldview that, in its extreme forms, regards Palestinian and now Iranian lives as expendable.

In Australia, this ideology is protected, even as its consequences are felt abroad.

The Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal recently ruled that the chant “All Zionists are terrorists” constitutes racial and religious vilification, finding it broadly targeted Jewish people rather than serving as legitimate political protest . The ruling noted that “a significant majority of Australian Jews identify as Zionists,” making the distinction between political ideology and personal identity impossible to sustain.

This is a complex reality. Criticism of the Israeli government is not antisemitism. But the wholesale delegitimization of Jewish self-determination—the conviction that the world’s only Jewish state should not exist—is a form of bigotry that Australian courts are now being asked to navigate.

Meanwhile, the government moves forward with compulsory “antisemitism training” for university staff, requiring “understanding of Jewish peoplehood, their attachment to Israel and identity beyond faith” . Critics warn this amounts to enforcing a specific political ideology on campus, with “significant” financial penalties for non-compliant universities.

Part Eight: Not Conspiracy – Confluence

This is not a conspiracy. It is something more mundane and more dangerous: a confluence of the like-minded and the indifferent.

Netanyahu, desperate to escape prosecution, finds common cause with Trump, who sees political advantage in backing him. The Australian government, anxious to demonstrate alliance loyalty and to send a strong message against antisemitism at home, falls into line. The Zionist lobby, well-organized and politically connected, ensures that criticism of Israeli policy remains marginalised.

No one needs to coordinate this. The incentives align naturally. The machine runs on its own.

And the cost is measured in lives.

Conclusion: Let Readers Draw Their Own Conclusions

We will not tell you what to think. We present only the facts:

· Netanyahu is on trial for corruption involving hundreds of thousands of dollars in gifts.

· He has rebranded a war of necessity as a “War of Revival” to obscure his own failures.

· He invokes biblical genocide to justify modern bombing campaigns.

· His own security chiefs admit there is no plan for victory.

· His coalition depends on extremists who celebrate destruction.

· The Australian government supports this, for reasons of alliance and domestic politics.

The reader must draw their own conclusions.

But as the bodies mount—in Gaza, in Lebanon, in Iran, in Israel—one question lingers:

At what point does supporting an ally become complicity in something else entirely?

Sources:

1. New Age BD, “Israel and next big war,” March 5, 2026

2. ABC News, “PM’s swift support for US-Israel strikes in Iran shows how times have changed,” March 2, 2026

3. Yerepouni Daily News / Times of Israel, “Australian tribunal rules ‘All Zionists are terrorists’ chant is unlawful,” February 26, 2026

4. Times of Israel, “Beware Netanyahu’s Orwellian ‘War of Revival’ doublespeak,” February 18, 2026

5. AIJAC, “Antizionism fuels the hatred of Jews,” March 2, 2026

6. The Nation, “Israel Is Using Its Genocidal Gaza Playbook on Iran,” March 6, 2026

7. The West Australian, “Labor grilled on Israel stance,” February 9, 2026

8. Café Pacific / Michael West Media, “Antisemitism training at universities. Labor’s march to authoritarianism,” February 19, 2026

9. The Nation, “Israel Is Using Its Genocidal Gaza Playbook on Iran,” March 6, 2026