by Sammy Stein (March 2026)
Over the past few years I have become instinctively wary of headlines that rely on the familiar formulation “experts say.” Experience has taught me that this phrase is often used not to enlighten the reader, but to shut down scrutiny. Who are these experts? What qualifies them as such? And do their conclusions withstand even the most basic examination?
These questions became particularly relevant a few months ago when the International Association of Genocide Scholars (IAGS) adopted a resolution accusing Israel of committing genocide in its war against Hamas. As expected, much of the mainstream media reported the story with uncritical enthusiasm, repeatedly describing the IAGS as “the world’s leading association of genocide scholars,” as if that description alone settled the matter.
The reality, however, was far less definitive. The resolution was passed despite the fact that approximately three quarters of the Association’s roughly 500 members did not vote on it at all. Nevertheless, the Association’s president, Melanie O’Brien, claimed that the resolution represented “a definitive statement from experts in the field of genocide studies that what is happening on the ground in Gaza is genocide.”
That claim does not survive even minimal scrutiny. The IAGS announced that 86 percent of its members had concluded that Israel was committing genocide in Gaza. What it failed to emphasise was that only 28 percent of the membership actually voted on the resolution, and that just 20 percent of the total membership voted in favour of it. To present this outcome as an authoritative consensus is, at best, misleading.
More troubling still was the resolution’s treatment of the crime of genocide itself. Genocide is not a moral descriptor or a political slogan; it is a specific crime in international law. It is defined as acts committed with the intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, racial, or religious group, as such. Without the establishment of specific intent, genocide cannot be said to have occurred.
The IAGS resolution did not even attempt to establish such intent. Instead, it relied on selective statements from third parties and on extrapolations drawn from the conclusions of other organisations. In legal terms, this approach is wholly inadequate. A finding of genocide requires a fully conclusive determination that no reasonable alternative explanation exists for the events in question other than genocidal intent. In the case of Gaza, multiple alternative explanations for civilian casualties plainly exist, yet the resolution made no serious effort to engage with them.
Most notably, it ignored the role of Hamas altogether. This omission alone renders any serious legal analysis impossible.
It is now widely acknowledged that Hamas systematically embedded itself within civilian and humanitarian infrastructure during the conflict. This strategy deliberately exposed Palestinian civilians to harm and constituted a clear violation of the Fourth Geneva Convention. Under international law, when a hospital or other protected site is used as a base for military operations, it loses the protections that would otherwise apply to it once warnings have been issued. Such sites may then become legitimate military targets. International law also recognises that hostile forces may be attacked even when civilians are present, and it explicitly prohibits the use of human shields—a practice Hamas repeatedly employed by operating from within civilian areas.
These are not marginal or controversial points. Any genuine expert in genocide or international humanitarian law would be well aware of them. Yet the IAGS chose to exclude these factors from its deliberations. By doing so, it ensured that its analysis was neither objective nor legally sound.
The resolution further misrepresented the position of the International Court of Justice (ICJ), claiming that the Court had determined Israel to be plausibly committing genocide in Gaza. This assertion was false. The ICJ ruled that Palestinians have plausible rights under the Genocide Convention that must be protected, not that Israel is committing genocide. The distinction is fundamental, yet the IAGS collapsed it entirely.
This raises an obvious question: how did a body presenting itself as a group of genocide experts arrive at a conclusion so disconnected from legal reality?
Part of the answer lies in the composition of the Association itself. The IAGS includes not only established scholars, but also students, artists, and individuals with no demonstrable expertise in genocide studies. All were permitted to vote on the resolution. The vote was conducted in secret, meaning there is no way to determine whether any recognised experts supported it at all. Authority was asserted, not demonstrated.
Like many others, I wish the war in Gaza had never taken place, and I am relieved that it now appears to be drawing to a close. There is widespread agreement that far too many innocent people have been killed on both sides. But civilian suffering, however tragic, is not evidence of genocide. History demonstrates that the concept of genocide was intentionally defined narrowly, precisely to prevent its use as a catch-all accusation in politically charged conflicts.
Israel made extensive efforts to minimise civilian casualties, often at significant military cost. Warnings, evacuations, and pauses in fighting were implemented despite Hamas’s attempts to prevent civilians from leaving combat zones. These actions are fundamentally incompatible with intent to destroy a protected group and should have featured prominently in any serious assessment of the conflict.
The implications for genocide scholarship are profound. When the charge of genocide is applied carelessly or ideologically, it loses analytical power and moral force. Worse still, it risks transforming a legal concept designed to identify the gravest of crimes into a tool of political advocacy. Scholars who engage in this practice do not advance understanding and they corrode the standards of their own discipline.
It is therefore both necessary and justified to describe the IAGS resolution as immoral and reprehensible. By deliberately mislabelling a complex armed conflict as genocide, the Association has not only undermined its own credibility but has also damaged public trust in genocide scholarship more broadly. Institutions that claim expertise must be held to higher standards, not exempted from accountability.
We have seen how accusations of genocide are now deployed by states, organisations and activists as a means of demonising Israeli Jews and by extension, Jews more generally. Yet Israel’s war against Hamas, an internationally proscribed terrorist organisation, was an act of self-defence, not genocide.
Hamas fighters do not constitute a protected group under the Genocide Convention and cannot be framed as victims of genocide. By ignoring Hamas’s deliberate endangerment of Palestinian civilians, the IAGS effectively legitimised the tactic of embedding military operations within civilian populations, granting terrorists moral cover while further degrading the meaning of genocide itself.
What are the chances that the leadership of the International Association of Genocide Scholars will acknowledge these failures, retract their deeply biased resolution and accept responsibility for the damage they have done to both their organisation and their field?
Almost none.
Table of Contents
Sammy Stein was born a Jewish Palestinian, a description that causes much confusion with people. In 1948, he and all other Jewish Palestinians living in Palestine became Israeli citizens. He now lives in Glasgow and has two daughters, two grandchildren, and is married to Vicci. Sammy is Chair of Glasgow Friends of Israel, which celebrated its tenth anniversary in May 2025.
Follow NER on Twitter @NERIconoclast
6 Responses
So the IAGS genocide mavens are actualy sapiencidists
Hooda thunk it?
Debating against stupid people gives one practice in debating stupid people. They think the same about you.
The Premeditated Horror at Temple Israel: A Wake-Up Call Against Genocidal Radical Islamist Terror
In the heart of America, on March 12, 2026, a chilling act of premeditated terror unfolded at Temple Israel in West Bloomfield Township, Michigan—a Reform synagogue that doubles as a sanctuary for Jewish worship and an early childhood center for innocent toddlers and preschoolers. Ayman Mohamad Ghazali, a 41-year-old Arab, naturalized U.S. citizen from Lebanon living in Dearborn Heights, didn’t just snap in a moment of grief. No, this was cold, calculated evil: he spent over $2,000 on commercial fireworks and possibly other flammables just two days prior, chatting casually with store staff as if picking up party supplies. Surveillance footage shows him smiling, unhurried, loading up on items with ominous names like “Military Demolitions” and “Da Bomb.” Then, he parked his gray Ford F-150 outside the temple for more than two hours, waiting patiently until the building filled with about 140 vulnerable children—as young as 1 year old—and their caregivers.
This wasn’t a crime of passion or a random outburst. Ghazali rammed his explosives-laden truck through the doors, straight toward the hallway near the preschool, exchanging gunfire with armed security guards before turning the gun on himself in a self-inflicted head wound. Thanks to the quick actions of those guards—one of whom was knocked unconscious but is recovering—and the grace of God, no children or staff were killed, though many first responders needed treatment for smoke inhalation. The FBI is treating this as a targeted attack on the Jewish community, with potential terrorism links, and they’ve since raided Ghazali’s home as part of the ongoing probe.
But let’s call it what it is: an act of radical Islamist fascism, rooted in the same hateful ideology that fuels groups like Hezbollah. Reports indicate Ghazali’s two brothers, a niece, and a nephew (ages 4 and 7) were killed in an Israeli airstrike on their home in Mashgharah, Lebanon, around March 5—during ongoing conflicts where Israel targeted Hezbollah operatives. Some sources suggest his brothers were part of a Hezbollah rocket unit, tying this directly to the terrorist organization’s web. Personal loss is tragic, but it doesn’t excuse or justify attempting to slaughter American children in their place of learning. This is the poison of jihadist ideology at work—targeting the most innocent to spread fear and advance a genocidal agenda against Jews and the West.
This incident exposes the glaring failures of our immigration and national security policies. Ghazali immigrated from Lebanon 15 years ago and became a citizen in 2016. How did someone with potential ties to Hezbollah slip through? Areas like Dearborn Heights have become hotbeds for anti-American sentiment, where rallies chant “Death to Israel” and praise Hezbollah leaders like the late Hassan Nasrallah. We’ve imported this hatred, allowing it to fester under the guise of multiculturalism, while radical elements exploit our freedoms to plot against us. It’s time to prioritize American safety: vet immigrants rigorously, deport those with terrorist affiliations, and secure our borders against ideologies that seek our destruction.
Meanwhile, the mainstream media’s response has been predictably shameful. Outlets like CNN and The New York Times rushed to highlight Ghazali’s family tragedy as if it mitigates the horror, often burying or omitting the Hezbollah connections in early reports. For hours, they peddled narratives of “revenge” without condemning the underlying radicalism, effectively humanizing a would-be child killer. This isn’t journalism; it’s apologetics for evil. Conservative voices, thankfully, are calling it out—reminding us that all lives matter, but excusing terror only invites more.
This attack is a stark reminder: radical Islam isn’t a fringe issue—it’s a clear and present danger. We must stand unapologetically with Israel, support our Jewish communities with robust security, and reject the leftist policies that weaken our defenses. America first means protecting our people from imported jihad. If we don’t wake up, the next attempt might not be thwarted.
_____
NOTES:
Temple Israel attack: Video shows gunman’s $2K purchases of fireworks in preparation.
FOX 5 Detroit. March 13, 2026.
https://www.fox2detroit.com/news/temple-israel-attack-video-shows-gunmans-2k-purchases-fireworks-preparation
Sheriff alerted Michigan synagogue to potential rise in threats 2 days before attack.
By Georgia Worrell and David Propper.
NY Post. March 13, 2026.
https://nypost.com/2026/03/13/us-news/sheriff-alerted-michigan-synagogue-to-potential-rise-in-threats-2-days-before-attack/
Temple Israel attacker killed himself after terrifying two-hour standoff inside Michigan synagogue.
The Mirror. Falyn Stempler
Fri, March 13, 2026.
Runyan revealed that Ghazali waited inside his gray Ford F-150 truck at the West Bloomfield Township synagogue for more than two hours before driving through Door 5 in the southeast corner of the building, causing a fire at the synagogue.
https://www.themirror.com/news/us-news/temple-israel-attacker-killed-himself-1736927
Gov. Whitmer condemns antisemitism, calls for everyone to ‘turn down the rhetoric’ in wake of Temple Israel attack.
By WWJ Newsroom, WWJ Newsradio 950.
WWJ Newsradio 950.
March 13, 2026.
Given the diversity of Metro Detroit — home to hundreds of thousands of people of Middle Eastern decent — Whitmer was asked what message she could share to help lower the temperature.
“I am trying to deliver that message right now: That we are Michiganders, this was a school. These are zero to 5-year-olds that were targeted yesterday,” the governor said.
While no children or teachers were hurt, Whitmer noted that this could have gone a different way, looking “a lot more like Sandy Hook.”
Whitmer was referencing a tragic 2012 mass shooting in Newtown, Connecticut, where 26 people — including 20 first-graders and six educators — were killed.
“Let’s not lose sight of that,” the governor said. “This is not a political moment; this is not a political debate. This is targeting babies who are Jewish! That’s antisemitism at its absolute worst. And that’s why we cannot lose sight of that — the importance of keeping everyone in Michigan safe by being responsible in how we talk about issues and how we treat one another.”
https://www.audacy.com/wwjnewsradio/news/local/mi-gov-whitmer-asks-all-to-turn-down-rhetoric-after-temple-israel-attack
More on Pallyweid (fake “apartheid/genocide” buzzwords echo-chamber malicious campaign).
While the IAGS has been exposed as ‘non-experts only $30 membership requirement…’ and their membership rose by Muslims including from Gaza, post genocidal Hamas Oct 7 atrocities..
___
More than 500 experts sign demand that genocide ‘scholars’ group retract accusation against Israel
By Luke Tress. ToI.
9 Sep 2025.
A letter demanding the International Association of Genocide Scholars (IAGS) rescind an accusation against Israel is finalized with 537 signatories.
The signees include experts in the field of law, antisemitism, history, the Holocaust and genocide, as well as former prosecutors and government officials.
The IAGS has a membership of around 500, although only 129 voted on the genocide resolution, most of those in favor.
The IAGS also has an open-door policy for members, with no qualifications needed to join, and did not release the names of those who voted to accuse Israel of genocide.
The list finalized today includes the name and affiliation of the signatories.
They include Eli Rosenbaum, a former US Department of Justice war crimes prosecutor; Jeffrey Mausner, a former Nazi war crimes prosecutor for the US; Bruce Einhorn, a former US federal judge; Irwin Cotler, a former Canadian minister of justice; and prominent lawyer Alan Dershowitz.
Other signatories include faculty at universities across the US, the Holocaust Museum of South Florida and the Vermont Holocaust Memorial.
The campaign was organized in large part by the Academic Engagement Network, a Jewish advocacy group for university faculty.
“Scholarship must be guided by rigorous standards of empirical accuracy and academic integrity, not distorted for ideological ends,” said the group’s director, Miriam Elman.
https://www.timesofisrael.com/liveblog_entry/more-than-500-experts-sign-demand-that-genocide-scholars-group-retract-accusation-against-israel/
Some of noted Zionists:
* John Quincy Adams (1767–1848): Advocated for the “rebuilding of Judea as an independent nation”.
* Arthur Balfour (1848–1930).
As British Foreign Secretary, he authored the 1917 Balfour Declaration, which promised British support for a “national home for the Jewish people in Palestine”.
* David Lloyd George (1863–1945) Britains Prime Minister (1916-1922) during the Balfour Declaration, known to be a staunch supporter of the Zionist project due to a combination of Christian Zionist beliefs and geopolitical strategy.
* Warren G. Harding (1865–1923): Signed the Lodge-Fish Resolution, which supported a Jewish home in Mandatory Palestine.
* Winston Churchill (1874-1965).
Described himself as a “Zionist” and supported the creation of a Jewish state to act as a loyal ally in the Middle East.
* Hamilton Fish, III (1881–1991).
* Woodrow Wilson (1913–1921).
Supported Zionist goals in the years leading up to the British mandate, stating in 1919 that the Allied nations agreed on the foundation of a Jewish commonwealth in “Palestine.”
* Harry S. Truman (1945–1953).
Often cited as the first world leader to recognize Israel, 11 minutes after its declaration of independence. He was sympathetic to Zionism due to his evangelical upbringing, though he held complex views on the resulting conflict.
* Albert Einstein (1879–1955).
* Orde Charles Wingate (1903–1944).
* Ronald Reagan (1911–2004). (1984 speech)
* John F. Kennedy (1917–1963).
Addressed the Zionists of America Convention in 1960. Kennedy praised Zionism’s “dreams” and “acts of statesmanship”.
* Robert F. Kennedy (1925-1968).
* Martin Luther King (1929-1968).
* Bill Clinton (b. 1946):
“Well, I got news for them, they (the Jews) were there first before there their faith existed. They were there in the time of King David, in the southern most tribes, Judea and Samaria. (Nov 2024).
* Joe Biden (b. 1942). (Openly declared he is)
* Justin Trudeau (b.1971). (Openly declared he is).
* Karel Schwarzenberg (1937–2023). (EU president Czech FM).
* Miloš Zeman (b. 1944).
Former President of the Czech Republic, known for his strong pro-Israel stance and advocacy for recognizing Jerusalem as Israel’s capital.
* Ursula von der Leyen (b. 1958). (EU Commission President).
* Javier Milei (b. 1970).
* Santiago Peña (b. 1978). Paraguay’s President since 2023.
* Sarah Idan (b. 1990). Former Miss Iraq and ardent Zionist.
* Charlie Kirk (1993–2025).
Will they disarm? The Racist, Genocidal Gaza Government (GGG) Regime in Gaza — whose sole raison d’être is the destruction of the Jews [in Israel] and detroying its people along the way.
Hamas is not a legitimate “government” but a jihadist terrorist organization rooted in explicit antisemitic hatred and genocidal intent. Its 1988 founding charter openly declares that “Israel will exist and will continue to exist until Islam will obliterate it,” framing the conflict not as territorial but as a religious war to eradicate the non-Arab, non-Muslim “Zionist entity” from the river to the sea.
This ideology is inherently racist and eliminationist: Hamas does not seek peace, coexistence, or even a two-state solution. Its purpose is the total destruction of Israel—the only Jewish state and the sole non-Arab democracy in the Middle East—along with the murder or subjugation of Jews. Leaders and spokesmen have repeatedly vowed to repeat atrocities like the October 7 massacre “time and again until Israel is annihilated,” openly admitting they view Palestinian deaths as useful “martyrs” in the propaganda war against the Jewish state.
Hamas ruthlessly oppresses its own population to maintain power. It executes or tortures political opponents, suspected collaborators, protesters, and anyone deviating from its Islamist line. Far from protecting Gazans, Hamas deliberately uses them as human shields and cannon fodder: embedding rocket launchers, tunnels, and command centers in schools, hospitals, and residential areas; discouraging or preventing civilians from evacuating targeted zones; and prioritizing military infrastructure over bomb shelters for its people. This cynical strategy is designed to maximize Palestinian casualties, generate global outrage, and defame Israel—while Hamas’s leaders hide in luxury or underground bunkers funded by Iranian money and international aid diverted from civilian needs.
In stark contrast, Israel—a vibrant democracy fighting for its survival—goes to unprecedented lengths to minimize civilian harm, issuing warnings via calls, texts, and “roof-knocking” before strikes, even as it faces an enemy that glorifies death and weaponizes its own civilians. The true tragedy of Gaza stems not from Israeli self-defense, but from Hamas’s genocidal obsession: sacrificing Arab lives on the altar of Jewish destruction.