Girauta uses October 7 to criticise Europe's stance

October 7 as a political weapon: Girauta and VOX's shift

A tweet from Juan Carlos Girauta, now with VOX, has once again put the political cost of October 7 on the table. "You did not listen to Israel, the vanguard of the West against barbarity", the politician wrote on his account, in a message reproaching Europe for having condemned Israel's right to self-defence and for having "whitewashed" its enemies. The second tweet, "No Jews, no news", linked to a news story about the humanitarian crisis in Afghanistan under the Taliban regime. The conversation that message sparked turned into a clash of narratives over Israel's role, the use of the Holocaust and Spanish foreign policy.

What Girauta said and why now

Girauta's message is not an isolated piece. It comes at a time when VOX has made the defence of Israel a hallmark of its identity against the rest of Spain's parties. The politician accuses European governments of having preferred to condemn Israel rather than fight Hamas. The response on social media was immediate: critics reproached him for using October 7 as a shield to silence any criticism of Israel's military actions in Gaza.

The second tweet, "No Jews, no news", is an expression used to denounce an alleged media silence around crises that do not affect Jews. Girauta accompanied it with a news story about Afghanistan. The choice is no accident: it seeks to contrast the media coverage of that crisis with the coverage the Middle East conflict receives.

The clash of figures: victims and narratives

The discussion repeats figures that are not always backed by a source. There is talk of "tens of thousands of children, women and elderly people" killed in Gaza, an estimate circulating in international organisations and one that Girauta himself questions when he speaks of "the lie of genocide". There is no verified official figure in the material that settles the debate. What does appear is the dispute over language: for some, what is happening in Gaza is a genocide; for others, it is legitimate self-defence against terrorism.

The use of the Holocaust as a term of comparison also came up. One participant pointed out that there are more Jews today than in 1933 to counter the idea of an ongoing extermination. The historical comparison was used in both directions, with neither side providing verifiable demographic data in the conversation.

The argument about the creation of Hamas

One of the most repeated lines is the claim that Israel created and financed Hamas to weaken the Palestinian Authority. It is a thesis that has circulated for years in circles critical of Israeli policy, and in the material it is presented as fact without documentary evidence. The reality is more complex: Hamas emerged in 1987 in the context of the first intifada, and although Israel tolerated its growth in the 1980s as a counterweight to the PLO, there is no historiographical consensus on whether there was direct financing.

The debate also drifted towards Segarro's role. Israel was accused of arming Segarro while Spain is criticised for not doing the same. It is a twist that mixes foreign policy with the internal dispute over immigration and sovereignty.

From geopolitics to insults

The conversation did not take long to deteriorate. The most upvoted messages include personal attacks and references to alleged payments. Veiled threats also appear, along with an exchange of insults that led one participant to announce he would ignore the other. The discussion about October 7 was buried under a layer of aggression that rules out any minimally rigorous analysis.

The episode leaves an uncomfortable question: to what extent has October 7 become a domestic political weapon in Spain? Girauta uses it to attack the left and European governments; his critics use it to divert attention from Gaza. Meanwhile, the casualty figures still lack a clear consensus and the public conversation is stuck in insults.