Who Is Teaching Western Students That 9/11 and October 7 Were Justified?

There are people in the West teaching students to view political violence through a disturbing moral framework.

Terrorism becomes “resistance.” Armed attacks become “decolonization.” Terrorists become “martyrs.” Civilians become “settlers.” And responsibility for an attack shifts from the people carrying it out to the society being attacked.

After September 11, versions of this argument appeared among academics who portrayed the attacks as the consequence of American power and foreign policy.

After October 7, the same basic framework appeared across university campuses, activist organizations, faculty groups and even educational material prepared for schoolchildren.

An Israel News Pulse review of organizational documents, teaching materials, public statements, financial records and court documents reveals how these ideas move through an overlapping ecosystem of activist organizations, campus groups, academics and educational networks.

The Toolkit Distributed After October 7

One of the clearest examples appeared immediately after the Hamas attack.

On October 8, 2023, National Students for Justice in Palestine distributed a “Day of Resistance Toolkit” for organizing activities at American and Canadian universities.

It encouraged demonstrations, disruptions and teach ins and told campus chapters to ensure students were “armed with a framework which advances national liberation.”

Then it went further:

“Resistance comes in all forms: armed struggle, general strikes, and popular demonstrations. All of it is legitimate, and all of it is necessary.”

The document was distributed one day after Hamas terrorists crossed into Israel, murdered civilians and took hostages.

National SJP also told activists that liberation required confrontation “by any means necessary” and encouraged chapters to spread its framework through teach ins and campus organizing.

This was not simply an academic discussion about why terrorism occurs.

Students were being given an ideological framework in which “armed struggle” was explicitly described as legitimate and necessary.

Who Supports SJP?

American Muslims for Palestine has publicly described its support for Students for Justice in Palestine.

AMP stated that it acts as a resource for SJP chapters by providing “information, materials, speakers, trainings and financial support.”

AMP was cofounded by Hatem Bazian, who has also been associated with the creation of the original SJP chapter at the University of California, Berkeley.

Another AMP cofounder, Osama Abuirshaid, previously worked with the Islamic Association for Palestine and the United Association for Studies and Research.

National SJP has also used WESPAC Foundation as a fiscal sponsor, providing infrastructure through which tax deductible contributions could be administered.

These relationships help explain how campus activism is supported by organizations operating beyond individual universities.

The Historical Islamist Network

The longer organizational history leads to the Holy Land Foundation terrorism financing case.

Federal prosecutors introduced internal records concerning a US Muslim Brotherhood Palestine Committee created to support Hamas.

The Holy Land Foundation and five officers were convicted of providing material support to Hamas.

CAIR also appeared in records examined during the litigation.

In a 2009 order, a federal district court said the government had produced “ample evidence” associating CAIR with the Holy Land Foundation, Islamic Association for Palestine and Hamas.

The historical records included personnel and organizational relationships involving several groups active in Palestinian advocacy in the United States.

Years later, another relevant connection appeared publicly.

In November 2023, CAIR executive director Nihad Awad spoke at American Muslims for Palestine's annual convention.

Discussing October 7, Awad said:

“I was happy to see people breaking the siege.”

He portrayed Palestinians crossing the border as people throwing off their shackles and argued that Palestinians possessed a right to self defense.

Awad subsequently said attacks on civilians are never justified.

Professors Who Celebrated the Moment

Some of the most striking rhetoric after October 7 came from university professors.

Cornell history professor Russell Rickford told a rally that Hamas had punctured Israel's image of invincibility and shifted the balance of power.

Then he described his reaction:

“It was exhilarating, it was energizing...I was exhilarated.”

Rickford later apologized, calling his language “reprehensible” and “reckless.”

At Columbia University, professor Joseph Massad published an article on October 8 describing scenes from the Palestinian offensive as “astounding” and “awesome” and discussing whether it represented the beginning of a Palestinian war of liberation.

These were professors at major American universities describing the significance of an attack that had just killed civilians and resulted in hostages being dragged into Gaza.

When October 7 Becomes “Resistance”

At Columbia and Barnard, 144 faculty members reportedly signed a letter defending a student statement titled “Oppression Breeds Resistance.”

The faculty letter suggested October 7 could be understood as a “military response” by people subjected to state violence or as “an occupied people exercising a right to resist.”

At Harvard, more than 30 student organizations initially endorsed a statement declaring Israel “entirely responsible for all unfolding violence.”

“The apartheid regime is the only one to blame,” it said.

Several organizations subsequently withdrew their names.

The language reveals a recurring mechanism.

The attack itself becomes secondary.

The political system surrounding the victims becomes the explanation, and eventually the justification, for the violence inflicted upon them.

“Settlers Are Not Civilians”

Another important part of this ideology involves redefining who qualifies as a civilian.

Yale professor Zareena Grewal reportedly wrote that Palestinians have a right to “resist through armed struggle.”

She also wrote:

“Settlers are not civilians.”

At George Washington University, an SJP statement reportedly declared:

“Every Palestinian is a civilian even if they hold arms.”

At the same time, Israeli residents were characterized as aggressors and occupiers.

This distinction has enormous consequences.

Once civilian status depends on nationality, residence or political identity, an entire population can be transformed from civilians into legitimate targets.

The language does much of the ideological work before a weapon is ever picked up.

Then It Reached K 12 Education

Universities involve adults.

Oakland involved children.

In December 2023, an activist caucus of educators associated with the Oakland Education Association organized an unauthorized Palestine teach in for K 12 schools.

Approximately 75 to 100 teachers reportedly participated.

Resources were prepared for ages ranging from transitional kindergarten through high school.

Among them was a high school worksheet describing Hamas as a “resistance movement to Israeli occupation.”

Material for younger students included “P Is for Palestine,” containing “I is for Intifada,” while another resource depicted Zionists as bullies who had taken land by force.

A teach in presentation described Hamas as “an Islamist political group focused on Palestinian liberation” and presented Hamas's explanation of October 7 through occupation, blockade, imprisonment and Israeli violence.

Oakland Unified School District had not authorized the teach in. Superintendent Kyla Johnson Trammell described circulated material as harmful and divisive and objected to political claims being promoted as factual.

This is where a debate usually associated with universities entered a far more sensitive environment: classrooms containing children.

The Revolutionary Left Reaches the Same Destination

The ideology does not come exclusively from Islamist organizations.

There is another pathway through the revolutionary left.

The Party for Socialism and Liberation described the actions of Palestinian “resistance” on October 7 as a “morally and legally legitimate response to occupation.”

Other activists and academics used the vocabulary of settler colonialism, anti imperialism and decolonization.

Islamism and revolutionary socialism have very different ideological origins.

But on Israel, parts of these movements can converge around the same concept: political violence against an allegedly colonial or oppressive society becomes “resistance.”

One movement may speak about religious struggle.

The other speaks about revolutionary liberation and decolonization.

The vocabulary changes.

The moral destination can look remarkably similar.

We Have Heard This Argument Before

After September 11, 2001, University of Colorado professor Ward Churchill published an essay titled “Some People Push Back: On the Justice of Roosting Chickens.”

Churchill described some World Trade Center victims as “little Eichmanns” and referred to the attackers' “gallant sacrifices.”

His argument portrayed 9/11 as the consequence of American military and economic power and treated many civilians working inside the World Trade Center as participants in that system.

That same moral structure reappeared after October 7.

The violence is placed inside a larger political grievance.

The victims become representatives of an oppressive system.

The perpetrators become people pushing back.

And terrorism becomes resistance.

How Radicalization Becomes Normal

Radicalization does not always arrive through a secret recruiter or an extremist website.

Sometimes it happens through language.

Terrorists become resistance fighters.

Murdered civilians become settlers.

An attack becomes decolonization.

The people carrying out violence become martyrs.

Responsibility moves from the person holding the weapon to the society of the person being attacked.

And “armed struggle” becomes another legitimate form of political action.

The organizational relationships documented here show how these ideas can travel.

AMP has publicly acknowledged providing SJP chapters with materials, speakers, training and financial support.

National SJP distributed an organizing toolkit explicitly describing armed struggle as legitimate and necessary.

Professors at major universities supplied intellectual and political arguments framing October 7 through resistance, liberation and anti colonial struggle.

Activist educators brought related material into a K 12 teaching initiative.

Different organizations and ideological movements play different roles.

But the result is an ecosystem in which ideas once recognizable as extremist can be repackaged in the language of liberation, resistance and social justice and presented to young people as legitimate political thought.

After 9/11, Americans asked how people become radicalized enough to justify terrorism.

After October 7, perhaps the more uncomfortable question is how much of that justification is now happening openly, in institutions entrusted with educating the next generation.