Follow us on social

google cta
Hillary doubles down: Young people don't know why they criticize Israel

Hillary doubles down: Young people don't know why they criticize Israel

The former Secretary of State told Doha audience that Americans just don't have 'context' for what they see plainly with their own eyes in Gaza.

Analysis | QiOSK
google cta
google cta

Hillary Clinton doubled down on her claims that young people get most of their news from social media and therefore are succumbing to anti-Israel propaganda regarding the killing of civilians, the starvation of the population, and destruction of Gaza Strip.

Speaking with Foreign Policy’s Ravi Argawal at the Doha Forum in Qatar Sunday, Clinton repeated what she said at a news conference event sponsored by the far-right Israel Hayom magazine, which is published by Israeli-American GOP megadonor Miriam Adelson. She told the audience then that she has encountered college students who are falling for “pure propaganda” relating to Israel in Gaza and that is why they are protesting genocide.

Argawal pressed her, knowing how much backlash the former first lady has received from her comments in the last several days, as she appeared to be saying that people across the world were duped, that they could not believe with their own eyes what has happened in Gaza for the last two years. "If Americans are shifting in their views about Israel .. that is based on some information they're not just getting from social media but from very reputable sources in the media, including Palestinian journalists in Gaza, why is that …not accurate?" Argawal asked.

"I'm not saying it is inaccurate," she said. "What I am saying … I've had many many conversations with many smart young people … in talking with them about their views — they were certainly entitled to those views base on the information they had — but they did not always know why they said they said."

"We are not going to implement the 20-point plan or any other peace plan unless people come with some sense of historical perspective and empathy of how we are going to move people toward what I believe is the only realistic outcome, a two-state solution, and we won’t get there if they say 'from the river to the sea' and you ask them what that is and they know and that has personally happened in conversations (I've had)."

"This is a larger issue of history ," she added. "We're not giving young people the context they need to be decision makers."

Ironically, Adelson, as reported by my colleague Eli Clifton in these pages, has funneled tens of millions into the Maccabee Task Force, a campaign that promotes pro-Israel propaganda and cracks down on Israel criticism on college campuses. It was behind a 2024 social media campaign against activist Mahmoud Khalil at Columbia University, where Clinton teaches.


google cta
Analysis | QiOSK
Did the US only attack Iran because of Israel?
Top image credit: President Donald J. Trump holds a joint news conference at the White House with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Feb. 4, 2025. (Shutterstock/ Joshua Sukoff)

Did the US only attack Iran because of Israel?

QiOSK

In the months that led up to the Iraq War, the Bush administration went to extraordinary lengths to convince the world of the need to oust Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein. Leading officials laid out their case in public, sharing what they claimed was evidence that Iraq was moving rapidly toward the deployment of chemical, biological and nuclear weapons. When U.S. tanks rolled across the border, everyone knew the justification: the U.S. was determined to thwart Iraq’s development of weapons of mass destruction, however fictitious that threat would later prove to be.

In the months that led up to the Iran War, the Trump administration took a different tack. President Trump spoke only occasionally of Iran, offering a smattering of justifications for growing U.S. tensions with the country. He claimed without evidence that Iran was rebuilding its nuclear program after the U.S.-Israeli attack last June and even developing missiles that could strike the United States. But he insisted that Tehran could make a deal with seven magic words: “we will never have a nuclear weapon.”

keep readingShow less
Iran says ‘no ship is allowed to pass’ Strait of Hormuz: Reports
Top image credit: A large oil tanker transits the Strait of Hormuz. (Shutterstock/ Clare Louise Jackson)

Iran says ‘no ship is allowed to pass’ Strait of Hormuz: Reports

QiOSK

Hours after the U.S. and Israel launched a campaign of airstrikes across Iran, the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps is warning vessels in the Persian Gulf via radio that “no ship is allowed to pass the Strait of Hormuz,” according to a report from Reuters.

The news suggests that Iran is ready to pull out all the stops in its response to the U.S.-Israeli barrage, which President Donald Trump says is aimed at toppling the Iranian regime. A full shutdown of the Strait of Hormuz would cause an international crisis given that 20% of the world’s oil passes through the narrow channel. Financial analysts estimate that even one day of a full blockade could cause global oil prices to double from $66 per barrel to more than $120.

keep readingShow less
What Pakistan's 'open war' on Taliban in Afghanistan really means
Top image credit: FILE PHOTO: Afghan Taliban fighters patrol near the Afghanistan-Pakistan border in Spin Boldak, Kandahar Province, following exchanges of fire between Pakistani and Afghan forces in Afghanistan, October 15, 2025. REUTERS/Stringer

What Pakistan's 'open war' on Taliban in Afghanistan really means

QiOSK

Pakistan’s airstrikes on Kabul and Kandahar over the last 24 hours are nothing new. Islamabad has carried out strikes inside Afghanistan several times since the Taliban’s return to power. Pakistan claimed that the Afghan Taliban used drones to conduct strikes in Pakistan.

What distinguishes this latest episode is the rhetorical escalation, with Pakistani officials openly referring to the action as “open war.” While the language grabbed international headlines, it is best understood as part of a managed escalation designed to signal resolve without crossing red lines that would make de-escalation impossible.

keep readingShow less
google cta
Want more of our stories on Google?
Click here to make us a Preferred Source.

LATEST

QIOSK

Newsletter

Subscribe now to our weekly round-up and don't miss a beat with your favorite RS contributors and reporters, as well as staff analysis, opinion, and news promoting a positive, non-partisan vision of U.S. foreign policy.