Loading video...

Video Failed to Load

There was a problem loading this video. This could be due to a temporary network issue or the video might be unavailable.

“Globalize the intifada.” Most people shouting it would probably call it resistance or liberation. For the families of the 16 people murdered 25 years ago today in a Jerusalem pizzeria, the definition is written in blood. The intifada isn’t a metaphor. It is unforgivable violence.

HonestReporting

128,502 subscribers

16,612 views • 25 days ago •via X (Twitter)

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 Comments

No comments available

Comments from the original post will appear here

Related Videos

Professional talkers dismissed chants to “globalize the intifada” as a metaphor and not what it always was: a demand for open season on Jewish people worldwide. @BariWeiss for The Free Press.

Professional talkers dismissed chants to “globalize the intifada” as a metaphor and not what it always was: a demand for open season on Jewish people worldwide. @BariWeiss for The Free Press.

The Free Press

202,634 views • 1 year ago

IT IS WRITTEN A line in the Declaration of Independence that deserves careful attention. It is not a call for chaos or violence. It is a safeguard. Power is borrowed. Authority is conditional. Sovereignty resides with the people.

IT IS WRITTEN A line in the Declaration of Independence that deserves careful attention. It is not a call for chaos or violence. It is a safeguard. Power is borrowed. Authority is conditional. Sovereignty resides with the people.

DeepFakeQuotes

137,057 views • 8 months ago

"What defines a state is that it has a monopoly on violence," says Ali Abunimah. When it cannot defend its people or sovereignty, that monopoly is lost and the people gain the right to resist, as is the case in Palestine and Lebanon.

"What defines a state is that it has a monopoly on violence," says Ali Abunimah. When it cannot defend its people or sovereignty, that monopoly is lost and the people gain the right to resist, as is the case in Palestine and Lebanon.

Electronic Intifada

14,476 views • 9 months ago

“Tel Aviv isn’t the sixth borough of NYC.” Neither is Uganda. “Zohran Mamdani doesn’t hate Jews.” He actually hates Jews, Hindus, white people, and America. “Globalize the intifada isn’t a call to violence.” Really? Calling for bus bombings and stabbings seems violent.

“Tel Aviv isn’t the sixth borough of NYC.” Neither is Uganda. “Zohran Mamdani doesn’t hate Jews.” He actually hates Jews, Hindus, white people, and America. “Globalize the intifada isn’t a call to violence.” Really? Calling for bus bombings and stabbings seems violent.

Eyal Yakoby

123,998 views • 1 year ago

The attack in Sydney is exactly what it means to “globalize the Intifada.” What we witnessed in Australia was the real-world application of that call to violence. Some of my remarks today in the aftermath of a horrific antisemitic terror attack in Australia, carried out as Jews were celebrating Hanukkah:

The attack in Sydney is exactly what it means to “globalize the Intifada.” What we witnessed in Australia was the real-world application of that call to violence. Some of my remarks today in the aftermath of a horrific antisemitic terror attack in Australia, carried out as Jews were celebrating Hanukkah:

Eric Adams

98,297 views • 8 months ago

🚨 25 YEARS AGO TODAY: THE “LIBERATION OF PALESTINE” BLOWING UP IN A J'LEM PIZZERIA On August 9, 2001, a Hamas suicide bomber walked into the crowded Sbarro pizza restaurant in Jerusalem and detonated an explosive packed with nails, nuts and bolts. Sixteen civilians were killed, including seven children and a pregnant woman. More than 100 were wounded. Men. Women. Children. Families eating lunch. This was the Second Intifada’s version of “resistance” and “liberation”: walk into a family restaurant and deliberately slaughter civilians. Twenty-five years later, when you hear people romanticize the “intifada,” remember what that word looked like in practice.

🚨 25 YEARS AGO TODAY: THE “LIBERATION OF PALESTINE” BLOWING UP IN A J'LEM PIZZERIA On August 9, 2001, a Hamas suicide bomber walked into the crowded Sbarro pizza restaurant in Jerusalem and detonated an explosive packed with nails, nuts and bolts. Sixteen civilians were killed, including seven children and a pregnant woman. More than 100 were wounded. Men. Women. Children. Families eating lunch. This was the Second Intifada’s version of “resistance” and “liberation”: walk into a family restaurant and deliberately slaughter civilians. Twenty-five years later, when you hear people romanticize the “intifada,” remember what that word looked like in practice.

Mossad Commentary

33,489 views • 26 days ago

Reacting to Bondi Beach attack, Mayor Eric Adams says: “That attack in Sydney is exactly what it means to ‘globalize the Intifada.’ We saw the actual application of the globalization of the intifada in Sydney...”

Reacting to Bondi Beach attack, Mayor Eric Adams says: “That attack in Sydney is exactly what it means to ‘globalize the Intifada.’ We saw the actual application of the globalization of the intifada in Sydney...”

Jacob N. Kornbluh

498,988 views • 8 months ago

Brown University has long supported terror and to globalize the intifada. There’s a clear correlation between acts of violence and words of violence. They stand with terror in Gaza and support terror. They wanted the intifada globalized and got it

Brown University has long supported terror and to globalize the intifada. There’s a clear correlation between acts of violence and words of violence. They stand with terror in Gaza and support terror. They wanted the intifada globalized and got it

Jabotinsky Jews

101,298 views • 8 months ago

NBC’s Kristen Welker pressed NYC mayoral candidate Zohran Mamdani three times today to condemn the slogan “Globalize the Intifada.” He declined. Welker: ➤ “Do you condemn that phrase, Globalize the Intifada?” ➤ “But do you actually condemn it… which a lot of people hear as a call to violence against Jews?” ➤ “For the people who feel really concerned by that phrase, why not just condemn it?” Mamdani did not condemn the phrase—and he has explicitly rejected any incitement to violence. As he told The Bulwark: “I’ve been clear that any incitement to violence is something that I’m in opposition to.” Intifada—Arabic for “uprising” or “shaking off”—has historically referred to a wide spectrum of resistance. The First Intifada (1987–1993) was driven by mass boycotts, general strikes, student protests, and civil disobedience. It was largely nonviolent in its early stages. Many supporters of the slogan say “Globalize the Intifada” draws from that legacy: a call for international solidarity through protest, divestment, and organized resistance to apartheid, occupation, and genocide—not violence. Below are some common claims made against using the phrase, and the context they ignore: ❌ Claim 1: “Intifada” refers to violent Palestinian uprisings, so invoking it globally implies promoting violence against Jews. Supporters argue this reduces the term to its most militant associations and erases its broader meaning. The First Intifada began as a largely nonviolent, community-led uprising—characterized by strikes, protests, and boycotts. To “globalize” that tradition is to extend a call for collective resistance to injustice, not armed struggle. ❌ Claim 2: The phrase glorifies past violence. Liberation movements are often framed this way. The same was said of anti-apartheid slogans in South Africa—and of “By Any Means Necessary” during the U.S. Black liberation struggle, a phrase made famous by Malcolm X and later embraced by radical groups like the Black Panthers. Critics called it militant, but supporters saw it as a refusal to accept injustice on anyone else’s terms. Likewise, supporters of “Globalize the Intifada” say the slogan is not about glorifying violence—it’s about rejecting silence in the face of ongoing atrocity. ❌ Claim 3: It’s provocative—and therefore threatening. It is provocative—because it challenges power. So did “Black Power,” “No Justice, No Peace,” and “Land Back.” Political slogans are meant to confront injustice, not make it comfortable. Arabic political speech is often racialized in the West, seen as inherently violent or threatening—regardless of content. That helps explain the reaction to “intifada.” But even if the phrase were “Globalize Resistance,” it likely wouldn’t be accepted either. Supporters argue the real discomfort isn’t with the wording—it’s with the demand itself, and who’s making it. ❌ Claim 4: Even if not intended as such, it may incite violence. This is guilt by association. Every protest movement risks being misrepresented. But “Globalize the Intifada” has been overwhelmingly used in nonviolent student protests, cultural actions, and anti-genocide campaigns. Its targets are systems—occupation, apartheid, blockade—not civilians. A misreading by individuals doesn’t make the slogan itself violent. ❌ Claim 5: The phrase is dangerous because it could be co-opted by extremists. If that standard were applied universally, many mainstream political slogans would be disqualified. “Israel has a right to defend itself” has been repeatedly used to justify the genocide of the Palestinian people, including mass killing and forced displacement. “Am Yisrael Chai” (“The Nation of Israel Lives”) is chanted in settler marches that have ended in pogroms against Palestinian villages. Yet these slogans are judged by their context and usage—not banned outright. Supporters argue “Globalize the Intifada” should be held to the same standard.

NBC’s Kristen Welker pressed NYC mayoral candidate Zohran Mamdani three times today to condemn the slogan “Globalize the Intifada.” He declined. Welker: ➤ “Do you condemn that phrase, Globalize the Intifada?” ➤ “But do you actually condemn it… which a lot of people hear as a call to violence against Jews?” ➤ “For the people who feel really concerned by that phrase, why not just condemn it?” Mamdani did not condemn the phrase—and he has explicitly rejected any incitement to violence. As he told The Bulwark: “I’ve been clear that any incitement to violence is something that I’m in opposition to.” Intifada—Arabic for “uprising” or “shaking off”—has historically referred to a wide spectrum of resistance. The First Intifada (1987–1993) was driven by mass boycotts, general strikes, student protests, and civil disobedience. It was largely nonviolent in its early stages. Many supporters of the slogan say “Globalize the Intifada” draws from that legacy: a call for international solidarity through protest, divestment, and organized resistance to apartheid, occupation, and genocide—not violence. Below are some common claims made against using the phrase, and the context they ignore: ❌ Claim 1: “Intifada” refers to violent Palestinian uprisings, so invoking it globally implies promoting violence against Jews. Supporters argue this reduces the term to its most militant associations and erases its broader meaning. The First Intifada began as a largely nonviolent, community-led uprising—characterized by strikes, protests, and boycotts. To “globalize” that tradition is to extend a call for collective resistance to injustice, not armed struggle. ❌ Claim 2: The phrase glorifies past violence. Liberation movements are often framed this way. The same was said of anti-apartheid slogans in South Africa—and of “By Any Means Necessary” during the U.S. Black liberation struggle, a phrase made famous by Malcolm X and later embraced by radical groups like the Black Panthers. Critics called it militant, but supporters saw it as a refusal to accept injustice on anyone else’s terms. Likewise, supporters of “Globalize the Intifada” say the slogan is not about glorifying violence—it’s about rejecting silence in the face of ongoing atrocity. ❌ Claim 3: It’s provocative—and therefore threatening. It is provocative—because it challenges power. So did “Black Power,” “No Justice, No Peace,” and “Land Back.” Political slogans are meant to confront injustice, not make it comfortable. Arabic political speech is often racialized in the West, seen as inherently violent or threatening—regardless of content. That helps explain the reaction to “intifada.” But even if the phrase were “Globalize Resistance,” it likely wouldn’t be accepted either. Supporters argue the real discomfort isn’t with the wording—it’s with the demand itself, and who’s making it. ❌ Claim 4: Even if not intended as such, it may incite violence. This is guilt by association. Every protest movement risks being misrepresented. But “Globalize the Intifada” has been overwhelmingly used in nonviolent student protests, cultural actions, and anti-genocide campaigns. Its targets are systems—occupation, apartheid, blockade—not civilians. A misreading by individuals doesn’t make the slogan itself violent. ❌ Claim 5: The phrase is dangerous because it could be co-opted by extremists. If that standard were applied universally, many mainstream political slogans would be disqualified. “Israel has a right to defend itself” has been repeatedly used to justify the genocide of the Palestinian people, including mass killing and forced displacement. “Am Yisrael Chai” (“The Nation of Israel Lives”) is chanted in settler marches that have ended in pogroms against Palestinian villages. Yet these slogans are judged by their context and usage—not banned outright. Supporters argue “Globalize the Intifada” should be held to the same standard.

Drop Site

70,852 views • 1 year ago

.Kristen Welker to Mamdani: Do you condemn that phrase, Globalize the Intifada? But do you actually condemn it..which a lot of people hear as a call to violence against Jews? For the people who .. feel really concerned by that phrase, why not just condemn it? Mamdani’s reply ⬇️

.Kristen Welker to Mamdani: Do you condemn that phrase, Globalize the Intifada? But do you actually condemn it..which a lot of people hear as a call to violence against Jews? For the people who .. feel really concerned by that phrase, why not just condemn it? Mamdani’s reply ⬇️

Jacob N. Kornbluh

786,863 views • 1 year ago

“Don’t let them get away with it.” NYC mayoral candidate Zohran Mamdani claimed that “globalize the Intifada” is a call for Palestinian rights—and even compared it to the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising. In this 2021 video, one man delivers the perfect response to Mamdani and anyone trying to normalize the word Intifada.

“Don’t let them get away with it.” NYC mayoral candidate Zohran Mamdani claimed that “globalize the Intifada” is a call for Palestinian rights—and even compared it to the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising. In this 2021 video, one man delivers the perfect response to Mamdani and anyone trying to normalize the word Intifada.

Canary Mission

199,210 views • 1 year ago

AUSTRALIA: “GLOBALIZE THE INTIFADA” DECLARED HATE SPEECH Chris Minns Chris Minns, Premier of New South Wales, has defended his government’s crackdown on protests, including formally designating the chant “globalise the intifada” as hate speech. Minns recalled parliament to fast-track changes to protest laws following the terror attack at a Hanukkah festival at Bondi Beach, which killed 15 people. When asked to define the term “intifada,” Minns said he recognizes its historical meaning tied to periods of Palestinian resistance marked by significant violence, but stressed that its current use in demonstrations in NSW and worldwide is a call for a global intifada. “That is what it means,” he said. Source: SBS Australia News Stay connected, follow Mossad Commentary.

AUSTRALIA: “GLOBALIZE THE INTIFADA” DECLARED HATE SPEECH Chris Minns Chris Minns, Premier of New South Wales, has defended his government’s crackdown on protests, including formally designating the chant “globalise the intifada” as hate speech. Minns recalled parliament to fast-track changes to protest laws following the terror attack at a Hanukkah festival at Bondi Beach, which killed 15 people. When asked to define the term “intifada,” Minns said he recognizes its historical meaning tied to periods of Palestinian resistance marked by significant violence, but stressed that its current use in demonstrations in NSW and worldwide is a call for a global intifada. “That is what it means,” he said. Source: SBS Australia News Stay connected, follow Mossad Commentary.

Mossad Commentary

14,975 views • 8 months ago

You asked for it,chanted for it & last night in DC you got the Globalization of the Intifada. Congratulations!!! Normalizing violence towards Jews. Is it EXHILARATING?

You asked for it,chanted for it & last night in DC you got the Globalization of the Intifada. Congratulations!!! Normalizing violence towards Jews. Is it EXHILARATING?

MichaelRapaport

139,946 views • 1 year ago

'globalise the intifada' is not a call for the murder of Jews. Its a call for global activism in support of Palestinian resistance against Israeli occupation People living under occupation have the right under intl law to resist their occupiers & that includes armed resistance

'globalise the intifada' is not a call for the murder of Jews. Its a call for global activism in support of Palestinian resistance against Israeli occupation People living under occupation have the right under intl law to resist their occupiers & that includes armed resistance

Saul Staniforth

88,981 views • 11 months ago

YES!! “Make no mistake, every single one of you who screamed globalize the intifada, marching in the streets disguising hate as activism.” “The blood spilled at Bondi Beach is on your hands!” “You normalized it. You encouraged it. You cheered it on!” “This is what you called for. Own it!” When people show you who they really are, believe them!

YES!! “Make no mistake, every single one of you who screamed globalize the intifada, marching in the streets disguising hate as activism.” “The blood spilled at Bondi Beach is on your hands!” “You normalized it. You encouraged it. You cheered it on!” “This is what you called for. Own it!” When people show you who they really are, believe them!

AmericanPapaBear™

37,223 views • 8 months ago

When they shout “Globalise the intifada”, this is what it means: Jews, dead, in pools of blood, at a synagogue. People called for intifada tonight in London and Manchester. Nobody did a thing about it. Even now. So we all look to Downing Street and ask: what are you going to DO?

When they shout “Globalise the intifada”, this is what it means: Jews, dead, in pools of blood, at a synagogue. People called for intifada tonight in London and Manchester. Nobody did a thing about it. Even now. So we all look to Downing Street and ask: what are you going to DO?

Gideon Falter

190,950 views • 11 months ago