After the massacre at a Buffalo supermarket that left ten dead and three others injured, much attention has been paid to the perpetrator’s repugnant ideas about race and immigration. But, although the shooter deliberately sought to murder African Americans, his manifesto makes clear that he sees Jews as the sinister force behind the world’s evils. The commentator known by the pseudonym Elder of Ziyon, examining the 180-page document, notes the ways that it combines anti-Semitic ideas from both far-right and far-left sources—and that often it’s difficult to tell the difference:

His chapter on Jews in the first section . . . copies both text and graphics from far-right websites. However, there is a bit of cross-pollination between the far-left and the far-right in how they regard Jews. One can see that his sources [on the right] take materials from the far-left anti-Semites and that leftist anti-Semites take materials from the same far-right materials that he quotes. His document includes talking points taken directly from the “anti-Zionist” left. . . . He also takes talking points from the Nation of Islam.

Indeed, Elder to Ziyon points to a graphic, pasted into the manifesto, that contains all the standard accusations of “apartheid,” “illegal occupation,” and the like, next to a picture of Israel with a Jewish star on top of it.

Like the anti-Semitic left, [the shooter] argues that he doesn’t hate all Jews: “When referring to ‘the Jews’ I don’t mean all ethnic or religious Jews. Some can be actually decent, and make significant progress [sic] to humanity. However many of them are not.” Is there any difference between what he says and the anti-Semitic left saying that its obsessive hate of Israel has nothing to do with hating Jews, since they think there are “good Jews” as well?

The far left and the far right might say they hate Jews for different reasons, but neither of them have a problem with using the arguments and methods of the other side.

Israel will likely respond directly against Iran after yesterday’s attack, and has made known that it will calibrate its retaliation based not on the extent of the damage, but on the scale of the attack. The specifics are anyone’s guess, but Edward Luttwak has a suggestion, put forth in an article published just hours before the missile barrage: cut off Tehran’s ability to send money and arms to Shiite Arab militias.

In practice, most of this cash comes from a single source: oil. . . . In other words, the flow of dollars that sustains Israel’s enemies, and which has caused so much trouble to Western interests from the Syrian desert to the Red Sea, emanates almost entirely from the oil loaded onto tankers at the export terminal on Khark Island, a speck of land about 25 kilometers off Iran’s southern coast. Benjamin Netanyahu warned in his recent speech to the UN General Assembly that Israel’s “long arm” can reach them too. Indeed, Khark’s location in the Persian Gulf is relatively close. At 1,516 kilometers from Israel’s main airbase, it’s far closer than the Houthis’ main oil import terminal at Hodeida in Yemen—a place that was destroyed by Israeli jets in July, and attacked again [on Sunday].