Andrew Bolt's withering two word response to Jewish commentator's call for the Albanese Government to admit 'it's on the same side of Hamas'
The Prime Minister announced on Monday that Australia would recognise Palestinian statehood at the United Nations next month, following other Western allies.
Albanese's declaration was welcomed by Sheikh Hassan Yousef, a co-founder of Hamas and one of the terror group's most senior figures in the West Bank.
Eylon Levy, the former spokesman for Israel, joined Andrew Bolt on Sky News to slam Albanese.
'Australia is rewarding Hamas for the October 7 massacre and encouraging more terrorism, more barbaric atrocities against Israeli civilians,' he said.
'I hope the Australian Government is holding some serious crisis talks to discuss how on earth they ended up on the same side as a globally-prescribed, terrorist, Jihadi organisation.'
Mr Levy then suggested the praise from Yousef gave Albanese an opportunity to reconsider his decision
'Hamas is giving Australia, the Australian government, a ladder to climb down from this tree,' he said. 'There's no shame in saying: 'We made a mistake. We were wrong. We don't want to be on the same side of Hamas. We're on the same side as our democratic ally, Israel'.'
Bolt then issued the two-word rebuttal: 'Dream on.'
The presenter then raised Albanese's claim from Monday that he had ensured commitments from the Palestinian Authority's Mahmoud Abbas.
Among them, Abbas had said Hamas will play no future role in the Palestinian state, free elections will be held and that he will demilitarise.
Abbas, who has not faced election since 2005 in the notoriously corrupt West Bank, has also promised to end 'pay to slay' rewards for terrorists and their families.
'It's like taking the word of a teenager to clean his bedroom when it hasn't been cleaned in 20 years and he doesn't even have a broom,' Mr Levy said.
'Mahmoud Abbas says he's going to stop Hamas taking over a Palestinian state. Hamas is by far the most popular Palestinian party.
'The only thing now that is stopping Hamas from taking over the West Bank is the Israeli security presence there.'
Mr Levy served as an Israeli government spokesman and was a globally recognised voice of the country following Hamas' October 7 attack in 2023 in which terrorists stormed the Nova music festival in Israel, killing 1,200 people.
He previously served as the international media advisor for President Isaac Herzog after a career as a TV news anchor.
Prior to the end of his time in government, Mr Levy was suspended until further notice after the British Foreign Office complained about him, The Times of Israel reports.
The furore is understood to have been about one of his tweets, which responded to comments by Foreign Secretary Lord David Cameron about aid access in Gaza.
He told the publication last year it was 'difficult to believe' his suspension was 'really about the tweet to David Cameron because I tweeted government policy and facts'.
Mr Levy had written a now-deleted post on X responding to another one from Lord Cameron that urged Israel 'to allow more [aid] trucks into Gaza', the BBC reported.
'I hope you are also aware there are NO limits on the entry of food, water, medicine, or shelter equipment into Gaza, and in fact the crossings have EXCESS capacity,' Mr Levy said.
'Test us. Send another 100 trucks a day to Kerem Shalom and we'll get them in.'
More than two million Palestinians face severe food insecurity, based on United Nations projections.
Israel has denied responsibility for the lack of food in the Gaza Strip, accusing Hamas of stealing aid shipments.
It has also denied there is starvation among the population, although it has restricted the flow of food to Gaza for months, according to international human rights groups.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
12 minutes ago
- The Independent
Tens of thousands gather in Israel to demand hostage return deal
Hundreds of thousands of Israeli protesters demonstrated across the country on Sunday, demanding a deal to free hostages held in Gaza. The protests were fuelled by frustration over government plans for a new military offensive in Gaza, which many fear could further endanger the remaining 20 hostages believed to be alive. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said that ending the war without defeating Hamas would delay the release of any hostages, while his finance minister criticised the demonstrations as harmful. Protesters blocked major highways, lit bonfires, and gathered outside official buildings, leading to 38 arrests by police. The demonstrations occurred amid reports of Israeli forces killing aid-seekers in Gaza and warnings from the UN about severe starvation levels due to insufficient aid.
New Statesman
42 minutes ago
- New Statesman
Journalists in Gaza are accepting a death sentence
Photo by Abed Zagout/Anadolu via Getty Images On 24 March, Hossam Shabat, a 23 year-old Al Jazeera journalist, was killed in a targeted airstrike on his car in Beit Lahiya, Gaza, on his way to a live broadcast. He was the 208th Palestinian journalist killed by Israel since 7 October 2023, but there was no global outcry. No world leader had anything to say about his death. The next day, the Israeli military issued a statement confirming it had assassinated Shabat. It claimed he had 'participated in terrorist activities against IDF forces and citizens of the State of Israel… further proof of the employment of Hamas terrorists by the Al Jazeera media network'. The proof was a blurry Excel spreadsheet listing the members of a Hamas battalion in Beit Hanoun, in which Shabat was marked as a sniper. On 10 August, nearly five months later, Al Jazeera correspondent Anas al-Sharif was killed in a targeted drone strike on a media tent outside Shifa hospital alongside four of his colleagues. Again, the Israel military confirmed the assassination, accusing Al-Sharif of being a Hamas fighter. It presented its evidence: the same fuzzy spreadsheet on which the correspondent is listed as a commander in a rocket-launching squad. The Foreign Press Association said there is 'no credible evidence' that this is true. The BBC said they 'cannot independently verify' the claims. Israel offered no justification for killing the four other journalists. The Israeli government has not allowed foreign media into Gaza to report on this war. The world has relied instead on the Palestinian journalists trapped there to tell us what's happening, as we watch Israel systematically eliminate them. Al-Sharif's assassination takes the total number killed to 269. Al-Sharif was well-loved. He had become an icon of passive resistance and resilience. A clip of him breaking down in tears after a woman collapsed from hunger in front of him became an international news story. His assassination marked a shift in global opinion, the stirrings of outrage. Keir Starmer finally made a statement, issued through a spokesperson, expressing 'grave concern' at Israel's systematic extermination of Gazan media, pointing out that journalists in conflict zones are protected by international law. But by the time the Prime Minister got round to making this point, it was moot. There are now very few journalists left in Gaza to protect: most of those who couldn't leave are dead. As a foreign correspondent in Gaza in the 2010s, I never once feared for my life. I relied on several excellent local journalists and fixers to arrange my stories and my security and to translate for me. At the time, there was a larger concentration of international media in Jerusalem than almost anywhere on Earth, and we reassured ourselves that the wars sporadically erupting in Gaza were safer for us to report than almost any other. When I covered the 2012 war, Israeli military spokespeople called me most days, checking my movements, making sure I was safe. I noticed the groups of curious children who huddled around the media at any bomb site and considered how much safer I was than them, despite our proximity. Not because of my flak jacket and helmet but because of the very serious consequences for the Israeli government if their military killed a British journalist rather than a local journalist, or another Palestinian child. Subscribe to The New Statesman today from only £8.99 per month Subscribe This impossible realisation was one of the many I had about Palestine that could not be explained in news stories. In 2015, when I'd left the region, I started to write a novel about an ambitious reporter who causes mayhem and destruction trying to make a name for herself in a war in Gaza. By the time Vulture was published this summer, there was nothing left of the places it describes. I found a way to communicate my feelings of horror and impotence through fiction; Palestinian journalists are forced to persist with facts. Shabat was aware of Israel's accusations that he was a terrorist; they were first presented last October. Shabat recognised the threat and warned his millions of followers on social media that he was being hunted. But if the world was listening, it did nothing to protect him. In November 2024, he was injured in an airstrike that struck a home just as he entered it: 'The civil defence members were all torn to pieces, parts of the house fell on us.' In his last interview, Shabat describes being fired at on a daily basis while attempting to report. He had been shot three times and survived before he was killed. A video circulated on social media after his death. In it, Shabat is sat in a car, perhaps the same one he was killed in, speaking with a young girl through his open window. She's cheerily congratulating him on not being dead, despite rumours to the contrary. 'We were crying for you man!' she tells him. She wants to be a journalist, just like him, but how can he expect her to be one if he's going to get himself killed? 'It's okay to be martyred,' he soothes. More than 50,000 children have reportedly been killed or injured in the Gaza Strip since October 7th. 'We will make a journalist out of you,' he promises. For journalists in Gaza, continuing to work has meant accepting a death sentence. Shabat had the eery calm of a man who had accepted this fate. Like Al-Sharif, he had written a statement to be published in the likely event of his death: 'When this all began, I was only 21 years old – a college student with dreams like anyone else. For the past 18 months, I have dedicated every moment of my life to my people… determined to show the world the truth they tried to bury.' The investigative magazine +972 has uncovered the existence of a special Israeli military unit – the 'Legitimisation Cell' – tasked with identifying journalists in Gaza it can portray as terrorists. Its purpose is to blunt global outrage. Given Al-Sharif was killed just days after the security cabinet voted to annex the Gaza Strip, its journalists are among those who suggest his death was timed to allow a media black out ahead of plans to capture Gaza City. Michael Fakhri, the United Nations Special Rapporteur on the Right to Food recently repeated his finding that Israel is tactically starving Gaza, frustrated that he hasn't been able to prompt world leaders to act: 'It's genocide. It's a crime against humanity. It's a war crime. I have been repeating it and repeating it and repeating it, I feel like Cassandra.' The Greek mythological prophet was cursed that her warnings and predictions would be disbelieved, but the staggering number of dead Palestinian journalists have suffered a worse fate. They showed and showed, warned and warned, and are being killed over and over again. The world didn't disbelieve what they were saying – that Gaza is being starved and erased – for some inexplicable reason, it watched, listened and decided to let it happen. By the time we work out why, the chance to do something will have long gone. What will endure, whatever our leaders allow to happen to Gaza next, is the heroism of those Palestinian journalists like Hossam Shabat and Anas al-Sharif who insisted on telling us their tragedy, and knowing nothing was being done to stop it. [See also: Palestine's cycle of despair] Related
Spectator
2 hours ago
- Spectator
Hamas is using Israel's protests as a weapon of war
Israel is caught in a tragic paradox: the finest qualities that define its national character – its compassion, solidarity, and moral responsibility – are exploited by adversaries who recognise in these virtues not strength, but vulnerability. As over half a million Israelis joined a nationwide strike yesterday, demanding a ceasefire and the return of hostages from Gaza, it was impossible not to be moved by the depth of feeling, the urgency of the appeals, and the sheer moral weight of the demand. Yet what moves one side to tears hardens the heart of the other, moving them to ruthless calculation. The protests are genuine, justified, and born of unbearable grief, but to Hamas they are confirmation that its strategy is working. For nearly 700 days, hostages have languished in tunnels beneath Gaza, held by a group that has no humanitarian interest in their fate. The Israeli families who protest for their return are not protesting because they are weak, but because they care. That is the unbearable truth of the dilemma: love, in the hands of a cynical enemy, becomes a lever. And over and over again, when Israel shows signs of internal dissent, Hamas hardens its position. In November 2023, May 2024, and again in early 2025, the group escalated its demands or walked away from negotiations whenever it sensed either international pressure on Israel or domestic fracture within it. Each protest, each demonstration, is interpreted not as a plea to save the hostages but as a signal to Hamas that it need not concede. The more Israelis protest, the more its enemies are taught to take hostages in future. That this distortion exists is not a reason to suppress protest, but it is a reason to understand its consequences. In a different world, the moral clarity of the protesters would move international actors to increase pressure on Hamas. In our world, the images feed into a narrative of Israeli weakness, not Hamas culpability. The tragic result is that a natural democratic process becomes, in enemy hands, a psychological weapon. That is not the fault of the protesters. But it is a risk to be managed. The Israeli government, meanwhile, has failed to manage that risk. Rather than embracing hostage families with empathy and unity, key ministers chose alienation and suspicion. Netanyahu accused them of helping Hamas. Finance Minister Smotrich claimed they were 'burying hostages in tunnels'. The rhetoric has been vicious, contemptuous, and politically self-destructive. By treating desperate families as political enemies, the government abandoned its most basic duty: to bind the nation together in a time of war. In doing so, it squandered the moral high ground without gaining any strategic advantage. And yet, the government is not wrong about Hamas. Hamas has no intention of returning the hostages simply out of pity or moral appeal. It never did. Its entire logic is predicated on holding leverage, preserving its arsenal, and remaining in power. That is why the core dilemma remains unresolved: Hamas will not release the hostages unless it can claim victory. But releasing them on such terms would strengthen Hamas, vindicate 7 October, and endanger Israel's future. This is the trap. And it is a trap with no obvious exit. The government cannot simply acquiesce to protesters' demands, not because it is heartless, but because no act of goodwill or political will can unilaterally extract hostages from Hamas tunnels. Even the most far-reaching Israeli concessions would not guarantee the return of all those still held. At best, they would secure partial releases under conditions amounting to a political defeat. At worst, they would signal capitulation while yielding nothing. Everyone understands this, including, deep down, the protesters. The demonstrations are not naïve demands for the impossible. They are desperate expressions of anguish from a people that has no other way to cry out in public. To some extent, then, the protests are performative. Not in the sense of being disingenuous, but in the older sense of ritual: an enactment of grief, of outrage, of helpless love. They are how a free society resists despair. But they are also how it exposes itself. Protest in Israel is sacred. It is also, in this war, a signal, seen by the enemy not as a cry for justice, but as a confirmation of weakness. What is read internally as moral courage is interpreted externally as operational restraint. What is, domestically, a sign of vitality becomes, in the eyes of Hamas and its sympathisers, evidence of vulnerability. This dissonance is not a theoretical concern. Throughout the war, Arab media outlets, foremost among them Al Jazeera, have framed internal Israeli protests as proof that Hamas is winning. For them, every sign of dissent in Israel is not an indictment of Hamas's cruelty but a validation of its strategy. A democratic protest is presented as a referendum on defeat. Israel's soul-searching becomes, in translation, self-destruction. The tragedy is not that Israelis protest, but that their most authentic expressions of democratic anguish are perceived by their enemies as weapons of psychological warfare. And in that perception, those expressions do become weapons, though not the ones the protesters intend. That is why, amid the cries for release, a different voice has also emerged. The Tikvah Families Forum, a group of hostage families aligned more closely with the government, issued an open letter calling for national resilience, denouncing those who, in their view, weakened Israel's posture during war. Their message was not a dismissal of grief but a warning against its misdirection. In their eyes, strength lies not in protest but in perseverance. Their stance reflects a genuine moral and strategic fear: that the country's emotional power might become its strategic undoing. What remains is a performance of loyalty, anger, and love, enacted in the full knowledge that it may change little on the ground, but affirms something essential about who they are. But that affirmation comes at a cost. Hamas is watching. And the more it sees Israel in torment, the more it believes it can outlast, outmanoeuvre, and outbleed its enemy. To resist this requires not silence but awareness. Israel alone may not be able to escape this trap. The international community, so quick to find fault with Israel, should redirect its moral clarity toward those who hold civilians underground while demanding immunity above. Israel fights with its heart exposed. That is its glory – and its danger.
