📌I am now officially a “genocide scholar” as a member of the International Association of Genocide Scholars. I will uphold its mission to advance research & teaching on genocide and its prevention. See next link for my viral article exposing false claims of genocide in Gaza. 1/
I became a member too late to vote against the recent resolution calling Israel's action in Gaza a genocide (only 28% of total members voted yes). See my article below exposing the false claims:
I've been getting to know some of my fellow genocide scholars. Seems that Iraq is a center of knowledge in this field with 80 listed scholars of ~600 (13%). Remarkable, especially the Mahmood family with 5 scholars in the field. I wonder who voted for the Gaza resolution.
I have been asked by other scholars about the necessary credentials to join this esteemed group of "genocide scholars" that generated worldwide headlines because 24% of members voted that Gaza was a genocide. There are 2 key criteria: (1) be alive (2) have a valid credit card.
Looks like the IAGS shut down new membership. They also appear to have removed the member directory from public view, probably realizing that having ~80 members from Iraq and many random non-academics is not a good look.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
➡️Update on my membership to the the International Association of Genocide Scholars (IAGS):
Yesterday I joined the organization as a “genocide scholar,” paid my dues, and quickly realized I had started a trend. It turns out literally anyone can join this body and vote on matters that make international headlines—like the resolution claiming Israel is committing genocide.
A review of the ~600 membership list revealed that large numbers have no scholarly credentials at all. The group openly encourages “activists” and anyone interested to sign up. I found at least 80 members hailing from Iraq. Who voted for the Gaza genocide resolution? We don’t know—the ~100 votes were never disclosed. Could it have been dominated by this bloc? Hard to say.
But what happened next is telling: today the IAGS shut down its new membership page and, more importantly, removed its membership list from public view. Perhaps they no longer want the public to see who is really behind these votes, now that it’s been exposed.
Yes, there are some legitimate academics who are members. But when an organization with no standards, no transparency, and no accountability makes sweeping pronouncements about “genocide,” it isn’t scholarship—it’s politics masquerading as scholarship. And everyone deserves to know the difference. x.com/Aizenberg55/st…
Important article with comments by @DrSaraEBrown on the sham process by the IAGS. The moderator deleted dissenting listserv posts about the fake "Gaza genocide." jewishinsider.com/2025/09/intern…
@DrSaraEBrown Another interesting data point: Pre-10/7 the IAGS only had about 150 members. Suddenly they ballooned to 500+, recall this organization was formed in 1994.
➡️IPC tested 15,700 kids for malnutrition in July and found 12%—below 15% famine threshold
😕Problematic. So what did they do?
➡️Use a smaller incomplete 7,100 sample showing 16%
✅Solved. Now UN can claim famine in Gaza!
Evidence & sources:
IPC used MUAC (Mid-Upper Arm Circumference) of kids to assess starvation where 15%=famine. But instead of using full July dataset they dishonestly used a smaller incomplete sample of 7,127 kids. Table 18 of report shows 16.4% in Gaza Governorate—just enough to declare famine. 2/
On Aug 8, the State of Palestine Nutrition Cluster released a LARGER dataset of 15,749 kids—same Gaza sites, same methods—showing 12% malnutrition, below famine. You don’t need a PhD to know a sample twice the size is more reliable—and that ignoring it is academic fraud. 3/
🧵+972 article claims Israel killed only 8,900 combatants branding all others civilians. But piece admits those are only NAMED fighters. The fact that Israel has identified so many by name is remarkable. Pretending this proves the IDF didn't kill 20,000+ combatants is absurd. 1/
The article of course elevates Hamas data as accurate, ignoring that it includes natural deaths, deaths caused by Hamas, child combatants and numerous other anomalies. It also falsely asserts Israel accepts the Hamas data even though Israel said it officially does not. 2/
As usual for +972, it elevates anonymous and unofficial IDF sources, but buries the official statements from identified sources that contradict their entire thesis. They make much that the first response by the IDF was vague, but then later specifically disputed the data. END
🧵The “200 journalists killed in Gaza” claim is FALSE. So far at least 30 — plus the recently killed Anas Al-Sharif — are confirmed combatants based on open sources & social media. Many more will be exposed. Hamas apologists ignore the evidence. Examples next: 1/
Example 1: Mohammed Nabil Al-Zaq — listed as a “journalist” killed in Nov 23 — was in fact a confirmed combatant with multiple photos showing him in military gear and confirmed terrorist group ties. 2/
Example 2: Yaqoub Al-Barash — listed as a “journalist” killed in Nov 23 — was in fact a confirmed combatant with multiple tributes as a “mujahid” and a poster with a fighter image with the comment “with every hand fighting.” 3/
🧵The credibility of genocide studies has collapsed in its current assessment of Gaza. Fabricated quote snippets to prove intent, dismissal of legal precedent, omission of Hamas, and refusal to analyze the war itself have debased the field. Here’s a debunk of recent articles: 1/
Raz Segal raced to publish the libel on Oct 13, 2023 even as Israeli bodies were still being collected inside Israel. He admits its “very difficult to prove intent” then lies by misstating Herzog, Netanyahu and even Naftali Bennet. See thread. 2/
Prof. Blatman & Goldberg wrote a piece for Haaretz claiming genocide using fabricated quotes. For example they claim Netanyahu said “we must destroy Amalek” but he only said “remember” Amalek. See thread: 3/
🧵Melanie O’Brien is yet another “genocide scholar” who abandons legal standards to accuse Israel of genocide. She contradicts her own scholarship on “special intent,” cites fake quotes, marks 10/7 as an “escalation against Palestinians” and erases Hamas as a factor. Detail: 1/
Some background: In a Feb 2024 lecture O’Brien says proving genocidal intent is extremely difficult, citing ICJ rulings that evidence must “only point” to this intent, the “only inference reasonably drawn.” She now egregiously ignores that standard entirely for Israel. 2/
O’Brien expresses twice in her lecture a “hope” that the ICJ moves away from the requirement that genocide must be the "only inference" that could be reasonably drawn. We know why—she wants Israel to be guilty of genocide but she knows the current standard does not apply. 3/