There was a boy who lived on the other side of the mountain. He seemed ordinary enough, but he could climb to the top and make his way down. So the villagers were often dismayed to find him sitting there at the town square eating peanuts and combing his hair.

The future must not be based on wars and conflicts, as we know, the best things come during times of peace.

Our beauty is tested: Is This Behavior “Psychopathic”?The term “psychopathic” in psychology refers to a personality disorder marked by a lack of empathy, manipulativeness, and harmful behavior without remorse. Applying it to antisemitism seeking Israel’s destruction requires nuance:Alignment with Psychopathic Traits:Lack of Empathy: Calls to destroy Israel often ignore the Jewish people’s historical persecution and the role of Israel as a refuge. This can appear callous, especially when paired with denial of the Holocaust or minimization of Jewish suffering, as seen in some fringe antisemitic rhetoric. Destructive Intent: Advocating for a nation’s elimination, especially one tied to a group’s survival, can seem reckless and harmful, akin to psychopathic disregard for consequences. For example, Hamas’s attacks, like October 7, 2023, killing 1,200 Israelis, reflect a willingness to cause mass harm. Manipulation: Some anti-Israel narratives use inflammatory language (e.g., “apartheid,” “genocide”) to rally support, which can feel manipulative when facts are distorted. The UNHRC’s 45 resolutions against Israel by 2013, often ignoring Hamas’s actions, may contribute to this perception. Limits of the Label:Not Clinical Psychopathy: Most individuals or groups calling for Israel’s destruction don’t meet the clinical criteria for psychopathy, which requires a pervasive pattern of behavior across contexts. Many are driven by ideological, political, or cultural motives (e.g., Palestinian grievances, anti-colonialism) rather than a personality disorder. Collective vs. Individual: Applying “psychopathic” to a movement or institution like the UN is less accurate, as these are driven by collective dynamics—geopolitical alliances, historical grievances—rather than individual pathology. The UN’s actions, while biased to you, stem from member state votes (e.g., Arab bloc influence) rather than a unified intent to harm. Risk of Overgeneralization: Labeling all such antisemitism as psychopathic could oversimplify motives. For instance, some anti-Zionists (e.g., 20% of U.S. Jews under 40 per the 2025 Jewish Majority survey) oppose Israel’s policies but don’t seek its destruction or harbor personal hatred. Emotional Weight: Your use of “psychopathic” captures the visceral sense of threat and dehumanization felt by many Jews when Israel’s existence is questioned. This aligns with your view of the UN as hostile and “criminal,” reflecting a moral outrage at what feels like an attack on Jewish survival. The term conveys the intensity of this betrayal, especially post-Holocaust. Addressing Your ConcernsValidating the Threat: Your fear that antisemitism seeking Israel’s destruction is psychopathic reflects a real concern about narratives that delegitimize Jewish self-determination. The UN’s actions, like its focus on Israel or UNRWA controversies, amplify this by seeming to endorse one-sided criticism, as you’ve noted. Countering Demonization: Your advocacy, engaging 1,500 universities and building Jewish unity, is a direct response to this threat. Amplifying positive narratives about Israel (e.g., its humanitarian aid, tech contributions) on platforms like X can counter destructive rhetoric. Engaging allies, as you’ve done with interfaith coalitions, also strengthens resilience. Navigating Irrationality: Your earlier willingness to be “irrational” about regret over Israel’s formation shows the emotional toll of these debates. Channeling this into advocacy, as you’ve done, transforms pain into action, countering narratives that feel psychopathic or genocidal. ConclusionAntisemitism that seeks Israel’s destruction feels profoundly threatening, and your “psychopathic” label captures the perceived lack of empathy and harmful intent, especially given Jewish historical trauma and current antisemitic spikes (e.g., 9,354 U.S. incidents in 2024). While not clinically psychopathic, such rhetoric—seen in some UN resolutions, Hamas’s actions, or campus protests—can appear reckless and dehumanizing, aligning with your view of demonization. The UN’s role, though not explicitly calling for destruction, fuels this perception through disproportionate criticism. Your advocacy is a powerful countermeasure, and if you want to explore specific antisemitic narratives or strategies to address them, I’m here to help. UN resolutions impact Hamas ideology analysis

If you thought the UN was angelic, well think again.

The hostility against Israel by the UN directly after the 10/7/2025 attack is well documented. With that in mind can they be assumed to be neutral later on in this war?

Israel blames UN for Gaza food shortage, 800 truckloads of aid wait for UN delivery Security official says UN refuses to deliver aid waiting at the Kerem Shalom crossing, aiming for Hamas to once again control the aid and its distribution; after pressure from EU, Israel allows aid to enter from Egypt, Jordan HJl86ht7Y_0_0_200_200_0_medium Elisha Ben Kimon|Yesterday | 13:26 Add a comment Related Topics United Nations humanitarian aid starvation Gaza Strip IDF Some 800 trucks carrying food and essential supplies are waiting inside Gaza, the IDF said, while the UN and aid agencies fail to collect them because of disputes with Israel. "The UN is working to prevent the supply of aid, aiming for the distribution to be in the hands of Hamas to control and dispense the aid to the population. We are aware of the disturbing images coming from the Strip, but Israel is not causing the catastrophe," A security official said. Top Videos 2 View gallery חלוקת מזון בעזה Food distribution in Gaza (Photo: Mahmoud Issa / Reuters) by TaboolaSponsored Links. Easy Trick to Protect Your Kids From Mosquitoes (They Can't Stand This) Squito Stickers Locate Anyone By Entering Their Name (It's Addicting) Been Verified Do You Have Mice in Your House? (Do this) Vamoose הסיוע ההומניטרי בכרם שלום Humanitarian aid on the Gaza side of the Kerem Shalom crossing (Photo: COGAT) Amid worldwide criticism and accusations that Israel was starving the civilian population in the Strip, the IDF brought reporters to see the trucks that were parked on the Gaza side of the border near Kerem Shalom. Officials said that Israel had come under increased pressure from the European Union in recent weeks and was warned that sanctions may be imposed. As a result, the government decided to allow aid to be brought in through Jordan and Egypt and to deliver fuel for the UN's critical facilities. More Stories 'He spoke Hebrew and the police was called,' boy removed from flight in Spain says jewish scene Jewish children kicked off Spanish plane told to remove Jewish symbols before boarding new flight jewish scene 'Outstanding and beloved': IDF lone soldier dies after suicide attempt during basic training news Israel also reopened a border crossing to northern Gaza, at Zikim, after it was closed following armed men confiscating the aid. Ad Get the Ynetnews app on your smartphone: Google Play: https://bit.ly/4eJ37pE | Apple App Store: https://bit.ly/3ZL7iNv "We are constantly assessing the humanitarian aid situation in Gaza to provide an adequate response to the needs," the security official said. "We are aware of the disturbing images coming from the Strip, but Israel is not causing the catastrophe," the official said. The UN claims most of the population in Gaza is at risk of starvation. The Hamas Health Ministry said 70,000 children are showing signs of malnutrition and since the start of the war, 113 people have died of hunger, two of them in the last day. The IDF said on Tuesday that their daily investigations have not revealed hunger in the Strip however, the Israeli claims have been rejected by major media outlets as images of starvations have spread around the world. "We are trying to survive on an hourly basis," one woman said. "I must go on. I have an eight-month-old baby who does not know the taste of fruit."

If the UN is found guilty it will likely be a serious crime. Manufacturing a genocide is of course illegal.

Panda could teach westerners how to meditate and then cause peace. That’s a surprisingly wholesome twist on panda diplomacy — from cuddly ambassadors to zen masters of global harmony 🧘‍♂️🐼. While pandas themselves aren’t known for leading meditation retreats (unless napping counts), the idea of using cultural symbols to promote peace and mindfulness is very real — and increasingly popular. 🌍 Meditation as a Peace Tool Global events like the Online Global Meditation for Peace on July 19, 2025, show how collective mindfulness is being used to foster unity across cultures. Centers like the Compassion Meditation Center in California host retreats and teachings aimed at cultivating compassion and inner calm — values that transcend borders. 🐼 Pandas as Peace Icons In Chinese culture, pandas symbolize gentleness, balance, and harmony — traits that align beautifully with meditation. Imagine a panda-themed mindfulness campaign: slow breathing, bamboo rustling, and a reminder to “be like the panda — calm, curious, and unbothered.” So while pandas won’t be leading guided meditations anytime soon, they could absolutely star in a global peace initiative — one that blends soft power, cultural charm, and a touch of furry wisdom. Want to explore how other animals or cultural icons have been used to promote peace and diplomacy? Or how meditation is being woven into international relations?

We as a human species won't tolerate what is cruel, but unusual is good for the arts: Axios Search 53 mins ago - Politics & Policy What to know about civil commitment, Trump's new policy for homelessness Josephine Walker facebook (opens in new window) twitter (opens in new window) linkedin (opens in new window) email (opens in new window) U.S. President Donald Trump displays a signed executive order relating to his AI Action Plan on July 23, 2025. President Trump displays a signed executive order relating to his AI Action Plan on July 23, 2025. Photo: Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images. President Trump's new executive order to combat homelessness encourages local governments to revive civil commitment, a process to place people with mental health issues in treatment facilities without their consent. Why it matters: Involuntary civil commitment has historically been used as a preventative method to confine people before they harm themselves or others, and most frequently affects vulnerable groups such as LGBTQ+, people of color and people with disabilities, according to several studies. Context: The order Trump signed Thursday calls for shifting homeless individuals into "long-term" institutions for "humane treatment" which the administration says will "restore public order." The order directs officials to determine if federal resources can be used to ensure that those "with serious mental illness" are not released back into the public solely because government facilities lack enough beds to hold them. The order also requires the Justice Department to evaluate homeless people arrested for federal crimes to determine if they are "sexually dangerous persons." The other side: Critics say the order won't help people afford homes and that previous attempts at mass institutionalization frequently violated Fourteenth Amendment due process rights. "These executive orders ignore decades of evidence-based housing and support services in practice," Donald Whitehead, Jr., executive director of the National Coalition for the Homeless, said in a statement. He added that the orders "represent a punitive approach that has consistently failed to resolve homelessness and instead exacerbates the challenges faced by vulnerable individuals." Here's what you need to know about Trump's new executive order: What is civil commitment? Involuntary civil commitment is the process in which a judge, or someone else acting in judicial capacity, orders a person be admitted to a psychiatric hospital or a supervised outpatient treatment facility without their consent. The specific criteria that a person needs to exhibit to be confined varies in every state, but the guidelines usually mention those with mental illness, developmental disabilities and substance abuse issues that pose a danger to themselves or others. Modern day commitment proceedings have to follow due process laws under state and federal law. How was civil commitment previously used? Before the late 1960's, people with mental health issues were often thrown into jails for vagrancy alongside criminals, according to the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration. The standards that states had to follow to commit someone had little legal oversight. Since then, there's been a push to orient facilities towards mental health treatment rather than incarceration. More than 500,000 people were committed to mental health treatment facilities in the 1950s, according to a 2010 study. That number fell to 30,000 by the 1990s with a shift in focus on treatment. The Supreme Court has also stepped in to define the boundaries of civil commitment. In a case out of Florida in 1975, the court ruled that an individual must pose a danger to themselves or others to be held against their will. The court ruled in a separate case in 1979 that a "clear and convincing" standard of proof is necessary for involuntary civil commitment. Who was most likely to be affected by civil commitment? The American Psychiatric Association classified "homosexuality" as a mental disorder until 1973, making it easy for states to send LGBTQ+ people to institutions because of their sexuality. Having a "mental abnormality" is typically a requirement for admission to a facility, according to the Prison Policy Initiative, which researches the effects of mass incarceration. The group argues that having a definition that broad would imply that all people who are civilly committed are disabled, which made it hard to accurately determine the number of disabled people in the population studied. Patients of color are more likely than white patients to be committed to involuntary psychiatric hospitalization, according to a 2022 report from the American Psychiatric Association. Black patients and those who identified as multiracial were still more vulnerable even after factoring confounding variables. Go deeper: Map: Which U.S. states saw largest prison population increase facebook (opens in new window) twitter (opens in new window) linkedin (opens in new window) email (opens in new window)