Recently, CNN labeled a leader of the Hamas terrorist organization “a senior official.” This begs the question: When is a terrorist not a terrorist according to mainstream media?

Far too often, news outlets like CNN apply titles and adjectives to terrorists or mention their profession as if these are the things that matter, rather than the fact that they belong to a group pledged to commit murder.

This proclivity is not abstract or theoretical. It plays out in real time, in real headlines, from some of the most influential news organizations in the world.

CNN’s article was titled “Hamas willing to discuss ‘freezing or storing’ weapons, senior official says, amid concerns over ceasefire.” The word “official” connotes legitimacy that in no way should be bestowed upon leaders of an organization that led the terrorist invasion of Israel with its mass kidnappings, atrocities, and sexual violence.

That phrasing is far from incidental. The word “official” is not neutral; it confers legitimacy, authority, and a sense of normalcy—qualities that should never be associated with leaders of a designated terrorist organization.

What’s more is that the “senior official” CNN is touting is Bassem Naim, a member of Hamas’s political bureau, who has for years used the fact that he is a physician as legitimacy.

The problem becomes even clearer when one examines who this so-called “senior official” actually is. The media fell for Naim’s doublespeak back in 2018 in the aftermath of the shooting murders of 11 Jewish worshippers in the Tree of Life synagogue in Pittsburgh. Headlines blared: “Hamas official condemns Pittsburgh attack,” but what Naim was really saying was that terrorists aren’t only Muslims.

His verbatim comments were abhorrent: “As Palestinians and as victims of the Israeli terror of occupation, we know the meaning of terror and its horrific outcomes,” and “This heinous attack, especially against a place of worship, proves that terror has no religion or nation.”

But this was not a rejection of terrorism. It was a reframing of it—one that shifted blame and relativized violence rather than condemning it outright.

In November, Naim’s son, Mohammad, was arrested by police in the United Kingdom for receiving weapons he later transported to Vienna. “Globalize the intifada” must run the family. This context matters because terrorism is rarely an accident of circumstance. It is sustained by ideology, networks and environments, including families, which normalize or excuse violence.

Getting back to Naim’s profession, it is past time to understand that “education” does not stop terrorism. Which brings us to a persistent and dangerous assumption: that education, professional success or intellectual achievement serves as an antidote to terror. History repeatedly disproves this belief.

Many of the leaders of the most bloodthirsty Palestinian Arab terrorist groups have been highly educated.

George Habash, the founder of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, was a physician. Another PFLP leader, Wadie Haddad, was also a medical doctor and founded the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine-External Operations (PFLP-EO).

Hanan Ashrawi, a current member of the PLO’s so-called “Executive Committee” and a leader of the Intifada Political Committee in the 1980s, has a Ph.D. in Medieval and Comparative Literature from the University of Virginia.

Abu Nidal was a Fatah terrorist who later formed what was widely known as the Abu Nidal Organization and studied engineering at Cairo University.

Ahmad al-Shugairi, the first chairman of the PLO, earned a law degree at the Institute of Law in Jerusalem.

Yasser Arafat had a degree in engineering from King Fuad I University (now Cairo University) in Egypt, where he was born.

Mahmoud Abbas, current chairman of both the PLO and Fatah, completed a law degree at the University of Damascus.

These examples are not anomalies. They demonstrate that ideology, not ignorance, is the driving force behind terrorist movements.

If the Allies had merely rebuilt Germany after World War II without completely changing German society, it would have been only a matter of time before the Nazis rose up and again threatened the free world. That’s why the United States insisted on complete denazification of postwar Germany.

Ideology is the engine of terrorism. Defeating it requires more than reconstruction or economic investment—it requires cultural and institutional transformation.

If U.S. President Donald Trump’s vision for Gaza is ever to have a chance, then we know what needs to be done by looking at history: Change the schools by eliminating Jew-hatred from textbooks and curricula, ban the terrorists, and eradicate the symbols of terrorism. Such a complete transformation is the only hope for Gaza.

**This article was originally published on JNS.org and shared with us by the author for publicaition