Witkoff Expressed Condolences to Hamas Leader

Peloni:  As we return to the days of shuttle diplomacy last witnessed during the Biden administration when a gaggle of US delegates tried to strong arm Israel into capitulating to Hamas, we now see a new gaggle of US delegates arriving in Israel to most likely coerce Israel on this same path towards certain folly.  The choice of two Qatari allied negotiators (Kushner/Witkoff) to act in place of any fair arbiter was very telling, something which was reinforced by the fact that these negotiators themselves don’t see their conflict of interest as anything but a strength – a description which should lead us to believe that they in no way tried to self correct for this bias.  With this in mind, we should grasp the import upon which this duo chose to impose upon Israel, not only that Israel have no right to secure a final victory over the Qatari aligned Hamas, but that Israel also have a responsibility to deal with the needs of the population in Gaza, even as Hamas is being left to reassert its victimization of that same population.  The lack of interest or sympathy by Kushner/Witkoff for the Palestinian Arabs in Gaza being returned to the unkind rule of the Qatari aligned Hamas parallels the lack of interest or sympathy for the Israelis who are now being tasked with having to deal with a cone of protection which has been placed over Hamas during this ‘temporary’ period of Hamas rule, a period which has no end in sight.  In fact, the Qatari influence over Kushner and Witkoff, something which these two managers continue to represent as a strength, seems to have received the best aspect of this deal.  At best, Hamas will either survive this war and at worst they have been given the means by which to return to battle in a better position, regrouped, re-armed, and with the Israelis being designated by Trump’s own negotiators as having been responsible for the needs of the Palestinian Arabs going forward.  This insipid, anti-American, anti-Western and antisemitic Qatari influence scam must be removed from Washington, but it seems the opposite is what has been decided instead.

“You have to find a way to help the Palestinian people thrive and do better”

by Daniel Greenfield | Oct 20, 2025

Screengrab via Youtube

Despite the recent settlement, Steven Witkoff and Jared Kushner, both of whom have significant financial interests involving Qatar, the state sponsor of Hamas, went on 60 Minutes. They did it because they knew they would find a friendly audience to bash Israel.

Witkoff and Kushner, understandably, condemned Israel for striking Hamas assets in Qatar since that is where their capital is.

Anyone still holding out for the notion that Kushner was friendly, got to listen to him declare that, “The biggest message that we’ve tried to convey to the Israeli leadership now is that, now that the war is over, if you want to integrate Israel with the broader Middle East, you have to find a way to help the Palestinian people thrive and do better.” Because shoving endless billions at them and maintaining their infrastructure just wasn’t doing it. It’s Israel’s job to make the Islamic terrorists trying to destroy it thrive.

Witkoff, pulling out his dead son shtick as often as Biden, spoke of commiserating with Khalil al-Hayya, a Hamas leader, about his dead son. “We expressed our condolences to him for the loss of his son. He mentioned it. And I told him that I had lost a son, and that we were both members of a really bad club, parents who have buried children.”

In 1945, Germany lost its leader and in 1963, America lost its leader, and you would have to be a real Witkoff to equate the two.

But Jared Kushner thought this was just great.

Not mentioned is that Khalil al-Hayya had hailed the Oct 7 massacres as “a source of pride for our people… to be passed down from generation to generation” and vowed to destroy Israel.

Witkoff tried the Biden son routine out on the Israelis and got nowhere, and then whined that they were “playing the victim”.

Things got worse when Kushner insisted that the search for the bodies of the hostages was being conducted by Hamas in good faith. And then claimed that there is “a very intense effort on behalf of our joint center with Israel and with the mediators in order to convey whatever information Israel has on the whereabouts of the bodies to the mediators and to Hamas– in order to retrieve them.”

We know at this point that there is no deal. J.D. Vance has said that there’s no infrastructure in place to disarm Hamas and hopes that at some point, Muslim countries will get around to creating one. For now, Witkoff and Co. are pressuring Israel not to respond to Hamas attacks which means we’re right back to where things were under Clinton, Bush, Obama and Biden with calls for Israel not to respond or to respond.

This state of affairs can only last for so long.

October 21, 2025 | 5 Comments »

Leave a Reply

5 Comments / 5 Comments

  5. AI Overview
    +9
    As Irish Taoiseach (Prime Minister) and Minister for External Affairs, Eamon de Valera offered condolences upon the death of both U.S. President Franklin D. Roosevelt and German leader Adolf Hitler in 1945. He did so in an effort to maintain a strict adherence to Ireland’s wartime neutrality, even though the two diplomatic actions were vastly different in their public reception and historical context.
    Condolences for Franklin D. Roosevelt
    Action: On April 13, 1945, after President Roosevelt’s death, de Valera sent a message to the U.S., expressing sorrow on behalf of the Irish government and people.
    Reasoning: This was standard diplomatic protocol and a sincere expression of grief for the loss of a close allied nation’s leader.
    Reception: While appreciated by the American people, de Valera’s action was noted with some cynicism by the US envoy to Ireland, David Gray, who was frustrated with Ireland’s neutrality.
    Condolences for Adolf Hitler
    Action: On May 2, 1945, two days after Hitler’s suicide, de Valera visited the German legation in Dublin to offer condolences to the German envoy, Eduard Hempel.
    Reasoning: De Valera’s rationale was that since Ireland had remained neutral and maintained diplomatic relations with Germany throughout the war, it would have been a diplomatic slight to single out Hitler for poor treatment. He claimed he was merely observing diplomatic protocol and showing courtesy to the German nation, not endorsing Hitler or Nazism.
    Reception: The visit drew international condemnation and fury, especially from the Allied nations and Jewish communities. Critics, including many Irish Americans, saw it as a deeply misguided act that damaged Ireland’s reputation. At home, it caused less public outcry, though many private citizens condemned the move. The decision remained controversial and damaged Ireland’s standing in the immediate postwar era.
    Justification and criticism
    De Valera defended his visit to the German legation, arguing that to do otherwise would have been an act of “unpardonable discourtesy”. However, his justification has been widely criticized:
    Inconsistent with neutrality: As critics noted, the courtesy visit was not universally necessary for neutral nations, and de Valera’s claim that he was merely following protocol rings hollow in the face of the international outrage.
    Timing and context: The timing of the visit, which came as the world learned the full horrors of the Nazi regime, was seen as particularly insensitive.
    Motivation: Some historians suggest that the move was an act of extreme diplomatic rigorism, while others claim it was a deliberate assertion of Irish independence from Britain.
    In summary, while de Valera’s condolences for Roosevelt were a routine diplomatic gesture, his condolences for Hitler, offered to maintain Ireland’s strict, albeit controversial, neutrality, became an infamous diplomatic blunder.