In times of crisis, true leadership is tested. It is expected that leaders rise above personal ambitions and prioritize the welfare of their nation. Unfortunately, Israeli Knesset Member Benny Gantz’s recent call for new elections amidst the ongoing conflict in Gaza exhibits a severe lack of foresight, responsibility, and patriotism.
Israel is currently embroiled in a harrowing conflict, facing threats both internally and externally. The nation is grappling with the devastating consequences of a war for its existential survival that was launched by Hamas on October 7th. As Israel and Jews around the world mourned the brutal massacre of 1200 Israelis and the capture of 250 people as hostages, the Jewish nation coalesced into a country united under the proven leadership of Israel’s longest serving Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu.
In the aftermath of the utter devastation of October 7th, Israel responded to the precious lives that were snuffed out by the sadistic Iranian proxy army and the communities that were torn apart by entering into a war in Gaza. In such dire circumstances, the last thing Israel needs is the destabilizing distraction of a political power struggle.
Gantz’s decision to push for new elections at this critical juncture reeks of political opportunism. Instead of focusing on uniting the country and addressing the pressing issues at hand, Gantz appears to be more concerned with advancing his own agenda. By calling for elections, he is effectively diverting attention and resources away from the urgent task of safeguarding Israel’s security and ensuring the well-being of its citizens.
Furthermore, the timing of Gantz’s move raises serious questions about his motivations. It is not lost on observers that his actions coincide with collaboration with the White House for regime change in Israel. This alignment with external forces seeking to influence Israel’s internal affairs is deeply troubling and raises doubts about Gantz’s commitment to the nation’s sovereignty and independence.
In times of crisis, unity and stability are paramount. Gantz’s call for new elections undermines these essential pillars, creating unnecessary chaos and uncertainty when the country can least afford it. Rather than pursuing personal political gains, Gantz should be demonstrating leadership by rallying behind the current government and working towards a swift victory in Gaza through the total elimination of Hamas.
Israel deserves leaders who prioritize the national interest above all else, especially during times of crisis. Gantz’s reckless pursuit of political advantage at the expense of his country’s stability and security is not only disappointing but also deeply irresponsible. It is incumbent upon him to reconsider his actions and prioritize the well-being of Israel and its citizens above his own ambitions.
Tension seems are building between the Biden Administration and the Netanyahu coalition government in Israel. They seek to topple the democratically elected Israeli government and depose of its Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu who promised to destroy Hamas, so that it cannot repeat the atrocities it committed on October 7, 2023. While President Biden initially supported the same, the pro-Hamas, anti-Israel, anti-Semitic faction of the Democratic party pressure influenced him to change his mind.
So, Biden now demands that:
1) Israel curtails its fighting against the Hamas death cult in Gaza where most of the population still supports the terrorists.
2) Increase distribution of aid to Gaza, though its’ evident that most supplies are stolen by Hamas, which then charge exuberant amounts of money for them, and refurbish their war chests.
3) An Israeli government commitment to a “two-state solution,” even though the Arabs under the Palestinian Authority (PA) have consistently rejected this concept, and traumatized Israeli citizens are refusing to put their lives in danger by agreeing to establish an on their vulnerable, easily penetrable border an Islamic terrorist state and an Iranian proxy dedicated to kill all Israelis and eradicate the Jewish State.
4) Regime change of the democratically elected Netanyahu government.
None of these demands are in Israel’s national security interest, or in America’s national security interests. So, why is America acting against its own interests and against the security and safety interests of its ally, Israel?
Several factors appear to be involved:
1) The Administration’s senior policy makers and staff seem to be acting against US interests. Re: the disastrous and unnecessary withdrawal from Afghanistan, gifting the radical Islamic Taliban, more than $80 billion worth of sophisticated American weapons.
2)The Administration is riddled with Iranian and Muslim Brotherhood agents, eager to defeat both Israel and America.
3) The Administration’s political advisors think that pressuring Israel to surrender to its enemies Biden and the Democratic Party would gain the votes of the 25% of American Muslims who support radical Islamic death cults, while ignoring the possibility that such policies are likely to turn off many Democratic voters, longtime supporters of Israel.
4) The Administration is anti-Semitic.
We have identified the following signs of anti-Semitism, all of which are endorsed by the Biden the Administration:
1) Suggestions that Israel stop fighting for its survival and agreeing for a deceptive “cease-fire” which Hamas will violate, as it has done all along.
2) Advocating a two-state solution.
3) Advocating a new Iranian nuclear deal, and/or opposing to devastate the Iranian death cult.
4) Advocating for the Illegal Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions bill against Israel, America’s only reliable ally in the Middle East.
The Biden Administration’s senior policy advisors and staff are riddled with anti-Semitic ideologies that undermine America’s national security interests. That is why the Biden Administration is inexcusably seeking regime change of its ally Israel, but not of its enemies, namely Iran, Qatar, China, Russia, North Korea, and Venezuela.
On March 18 Jake Sullivan, the United States National Security Advisor, said “The president told the prime minister again today that we share the goal of defeating Hamas.” And the very next day, on March 19, Matthew Miller, Spokesperson for the United States Department of State, said “every step must be taken to degrade Hamas so such an event like October 7th can’t be repeated.” [Source: https://www.state.gov/briefings/department-press-briefing-march-19-2024]
Is the State Department now saying that the Biden Administration policy is to see Hamas degraded and not destroyed? If the defeat of Hamas remains “the goal” why hasn’t the State Department corrected its March 19 statement?
Is the delivery of conflicting signals intentional?
Destroying Hamas is the right thing to do. And it is necessary.
Let’s remember the words of columnist Cal Thomas from January 2009 “Hamas, a group designated as a terrorist organization by the U.S. State Department, are the Nazis of modern times. Israel is right to pound military targets inside Gaza.”
The State Department is wrong to speak about a goal to “degrade Hamas.” If U.S. policy states that Israel cannot destroy the terrorist organizations that attempt every single day to kill Israelis, then on what grounds does America have the right to target the terror
Sincerely, Moshe Phillips Pennsylvania
Israel is Fighting “Our War”
Dear Editor:
Hamas must be vanquished. The klepto/terrorists have ruined the lives of the people in their charge.
In 2005, Israel, in a mistaken fit of generosity, removed every Jew from Gaza. The plan was to give the Arabs the opportunity to develop a unique society, without any interference or excuses. They were left greenhouses to start businesses. Large buildings remained intact. Donors were prepared to finance Gaza’s development.
The Gazans blew it. They destroyed everything the Jews left them. Then the PA and Hamas began squabbling and by 2007, PA loyalists and Bedouin were driven out.
Hamas terrorists, aided by UNRWA, relentlessly crushed the people, blaming their plight on Israel. The billions of dollars contributed for their sustenance was diverted into war materials and tunnels, and not invested in homes, schools and hospitals.
Despite Egypt and Israel’s weapons embargo, Hamas manage to fire thousands of rockets at Israeli civilians (a war crime) while hiding behind Palestinian civilians (another war crime.)
On a regular basis, Hamas lunged at Israel. For how long could Israel let this happen?
Oct. 7, 2023 was the last straw.
Hamas must now be destroyed. Islamic terrorism, whether Hamas, Hezbollah, al Qaida or ISIS will not disappear, any more than Nazism has, but they must be rendered ineffective for the West to survive.
Israel is the ‘Small Satan’. America is the ‘Great Satan’. Israel is fighting our war.
Sincerely Len Bennett Ottawa, CANADA
US Stabs Israel in the Back
Dear Editor:
I remember when Chuck Schumer came out against the deadly Iran deal only at the very last moment, when it was too late to influence any other senators. Now he has betrayed Israel, obviously for the sake of narrow political advantage. I voted for him before, but I will never vote for him again.
The fact of the matter is that more and more Democrats are coming out against Israel and that is beyond disheartening. I recall that at one time, not too long ago, Israel enjoyed bi-partisan support in Congress but sadly that no longer holds true. No doubt that the insidious woke, progressive movement had a great deal to do with this dangerous shift against Israel.
Yesterday, I was shocked beyond belief when I heard that the Biden administration had told their representative at the United Nations to abstain on a security council resolution calling for an immediate ceasefire. In essence, this vote for a gift to Hamas, a way for the US to say “we are behind you.” I also think that Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu had every right to cancel the planned delegation he assembled to travel to Washington to discuss plans for an assault of Rafah with administration officials.
In the end, as always, Israel and Jews everywhere stand alone as the entire world has turned their collective backs on us. The message here is that we only have Hashem to rely on and it is our mission to come close to Him and to know without a shadow of a doubt that it is He who is the rock of our salvation.
Sincerely, Nina Noonstein Brooklyn
Regime Change in Israel???
Dear Editor:
It was truly frightening to read in your March 12 issue that Biden administration officials are hoping and expecting that there will be street protests in Israel that will force Israel’s prime minister to resign. Can you imagine if Israeli government officials were saying such things about America’s president? Wouldn’t that be considered outrageous interference in another country’s affairs? But somehow when the target is Israel, it seems to be acceptable.
Sincerely, Sender Lumbraw Boro Park
Israel Always Has to Be the “Nice Guy”
Dear Editor:
Why is it that Israel always has to be the nice guy and play by the rules? When Hamas first took all those Israelis hostages, the Israeli should have rounded up all the relatives of Hamas members who are living in Israel—and there are plenty of them, including the sister of Sinwar, the Hamas leader, who has been getting free medical treatment in Israel. The Hamas relatives should have been held hostage, just like the Israelis, and that’s who they should trade for the Israeli hostages, instead of letting convinced Palestinian terrorists out of prison, who will just murder even more Israelis.
The Biden administration is following Obama’s failed playbook of appeasing terrorism
By: Shoshana Bryen
It appears that, at least for now, American pressure on Israel has thwarted Israel’s militarily achievable goals in Gaza: the defeat of Hamas as a military and governing force; the protection of Israel’s borders; and citizens, and the return of the hostages.
The Biden administration seems to have decided that these goals are incompatible with its interests: a long-term ceasefire, humanitarian aid, no large-scale IDF operation in Rafah, and then negotiations for the hostages and the emergence of a Palestinian state.
There are those who explain this policy as based on the administration’s domestic political interests. Namely, keeping the anti-Israel left happy and playing to the largely pro-Hamas Arab/Muslim population of Michigan. That’s a good story, but it’s not the real story.
Back in 2013, Joe Biden was vice president, and a large number of Biden administration staff and think-tank pundits were in office as well.
I wrote in July 2013 of Afghanistan and President Barack Obama’s “peace process”: “For eighteen months, Doha (Qatar) has been the scene of sometimes secret, sometimes leaked U.S. talks with the Taliban — and without the Afghan government.”
“But this week, Taliban representatives inaugurated a large and ornate building, complete with a flag and a banner proclaiming the diplomatic office of ‘The Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan.’ The ‘Islamic Emirate’ also released a statement that said, inter alia, that it ‘never wants to pose harms (sic) to other countries from its soil, nor will it allow anyone to cause a threat to the security of countries from the soil of Afghanistan,’ an apparent overture to the United States. There was an announcement then that the Obama administration would open ‘peace and reconciliation’ talks with the enemy of our presumed ally, Hamid Karzai.
“In a huff, the Karzai government broke off security talks with the U.S. and denounced the Obama administration for violating what it called ‘written assurances’ that the Taliban would not be considered a diplomatic entity, and its offices would not resemble an embassy.
“Without confirming the assurances (although The New York Times reported that an administration official acknowledged there was a letter from Obama to Karzai), the administration retreated quickly. State Department spokesperson Jennifer Psaki said there were no U.S.-Taliban talks scheduled; Secretary of State [John] Kerry said Karzai was ‘justifiably upset’ over the ‘Islamic Emirate’ sign; and the Taliban was induced to remove it.”
To Kerry, it was the sign—not the betrayal—that was the problem.
“The Taliban, understanding that it is winning the political battle, followed last week’s suicide attack that killed 17 Afghans in an attack on the Supreme Court in Kabul with one that killed four American soldiers at Bagram Air Base,” I noted. “Then it dangled trade-bait in the form of captured U.S. Marine Bowe Bergdahl for five high-level Gitmo detainees.”
The Taliban had to wait through the Trump administration, but in August 2021, the final chapter of American involvement in Afghanistan was written in disgrace.
I also wrote in 2013: “The United States, for its part, has evidently been choosing to ignore open warfare by Hamas against Israel, and insisting instead that the ‘solution’ to the Palestinian problem will be found between Ramallah and Jerusalem (or Tel Aviv, as the administration insists). This view, if nothing else, explains a senior American official claiming to be ‘shocked’ by the latest discovery of Hamas tunnels burrowed into Israel.
“Why would the United States be shocked by the discovery of a mile-long tunnel 60 feet underground, running 1,500 feet into Israel, and complete with lights and a trolley track? Did the U.S not think Hamas would find a military use for the concrete building slabs Israel was harangued into providing for ‘civilian’ housing in Gaza by Western ‘humanitarian’ organizations? Does the U.S. believe that Hamas only built tunnels to import cigarettes and cooking oil to offset the Israel-Egypt blockade?
“Surely the State Department knows that even at the height of the Hamas rocket war, Israel did not permit hunger in Gaza, and that the blockade by Israel off the coast of Gaza existed to protect itself against arms smuggling. The American government could not have thought Hamas had given up trying to capture the next Gilad Shalit for murder or mayhem; Hamas publicly announced its intention to kidnap more Israeli soldiers and the number of attempts rose in 2013. The ransom Israel paid for Shalit only made the next IDF soldier an even more tempting target.
“Ignoring the war is foolish: it continues apace.”
Eleven years later, the new iteration of the Obama administration has learned nothing. It intends, as Secretary of State Antony Blinken has said, to install the Palestinian Authority as the government of an independent Palestinian state on both sides of Israel.
There may be a reason yet to be announced for Israel to remove troops from southern Gaza. It is unlikely that the ultimate goals have changed. It is more likely that American pressure forced a change in tactics. This is unlikely to end well for Israel or the Palestinian people, both of whom would benefit from the elimination of Hamas.
After months of biased news coverage and open anti-Semitism, friends of the Jewish state need to take back the streets and tell Biden that he should worry about them.
By: Jonathan S. Tobin
The debate going on in the United States about Israel’s war against Hamas took a new and disturbing turn in the last week. But there was one thing missing from the discussion. Many of the Jewish state’s enemies talk a lot about the mythical power of the “Israel lobby” and supposedly nefarious Jewish influence over Washington, which betrays the anti-Semitism that runs through much of their discourse. But mobs chanting for Israel’s destruction and terrorism against Jews in the streets of American cities and on college campuses have become commonplace. And those advocating for a ceasefire in the war that will let the perpetrators of the Oct. 7 massacres get away with mass murder also seem to have enormous, even decisive influence with the Biden administration.
But there seems little indication that the legacy Jewish organizations that claim to speak for American Jewry are using much or any of their vaunted influence to halt the momentum of those working to destroy the U.S.-Israel alliance. Nor is there much sign that the organizers who helped turn out 300,000 people for a “March for Israel” in November have seriously contemplated what it means for the Jews and other pro-Israel Americans to concede the streets and campuses to extremist Jew-haters as has largely happened in recent months as a surge of anti-Semitism continues to grow.
After months of slowly moving away from its initial position of strong support for Israel, the Biden administration took a crucial step towards pleasing its left-wing critics. So-called “progressives” have been calling for President Joe Biden to put the screws on the Jewish state to make it stop the war against Hamas. As a result, the president has abandoned his previous positions on Hamas and is now clearly more worried about losing left-wing voters in his campaign for re-election—particularly in the state of Michigan, which has the highest Arab population in the United States—than he is about eliminating the perpetrators of the Oct. 7 massacres or the influence of Iran.
Who does Biden fear?
It’s not just that he is in thrall to a vocal ideologically woke anti-Israel protest movement that commands the support of most of the activist wing of the Democratic Party and the liberal corporate media. Biden also seems to think that he will pay no political price for abandoning Israel.
That was the context for Biden’s phone conversation this week with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Though supposedly a response to the accidental killing of seven aid workers in Gaza, Biden’s threats and demands seemed to make it clear that he was prepared to do as leftist allies bid him.
That means that if Israel continues its necessary campaign to eradicate Hamas and seeks to finish off the last terrorist strongholds in Rafah in the southernmost part of the Strip, as well as failing to make even more dangerous concessions in the hostage ransom talks which Hamas has been emboldened to stonewall, Biden appears ready to punish it with a cutoff of military aid. On the other hand, if Netanyahu—buffeted by criticism from home and abroad, and worried about whether his nation can stand alone—bows to these demands, then he will essentially be conceding defeat in the war begun by Hamas on Oct. 7 with the largest mass slaughter of Jews since the Holocaust. And that is a decision that would guarantee even more horrors in the future from Israel’s array of regional enemies.
It’s hard to imagine any Israeli government, no matter who led it, being willing to let Hamas win in this manner. Israelis elected Netanyahu in November 2022 but are deeply divided about his continued hold on power. Nevertheless, they overwhelmingly support the war on Hamas and want their government to finish off the terrorists in Gaza, and then neutralize the threat from Hezbollah in Lebanon to the north by one means or another. But should the United States join the growing movement to isolate the Jewish state, it would be foolish to think that the consequences would be anything but dire.
This would seem to be the cue for the pro-Israel community to find its voice again. Yet outside of the usual staunch voices like that of the Zionist Organization of America, Jewish leadership is largely silent. Mainstream entities can be counted on to denounce anti-Semitism, as is their job; however, their leaders and likely many of their main politically liberal donors are too invested in support for Biden’s re-election campaign to be willing to speak out against the administration’s pivot away from its initial post-Oct. 7 positions.
Many Jewish liberals—always inclined to be critical, if not outright hostile to both Israel and Netanyahu—have gone silent in the face of the deluge of biased coverage of the war from the corporate media. They either believe the claims that falsely depict Israel’s war efforts as “genocide,” accepting bogus Hamas claims about civilian casualties and the plight of those in Gaza, or they are too fearful of going against the political fashion of the day to challenge these lies. Or they are afraid to face increasingly violent groups of demonstrators.
Still others, like the leftist Forward newspaper, have joined those demanding that the war stop, even if that means that Hamas wins and the 100-plus Israeli hostages who are still in their hands continue to undergo torment.
Under the circumstances, a repeat of the mass turnout for another Washington rally seems unlikely, if not impossible. By the time of the Nov. 14 rally—already six weeks after the slaughter in southern Israel—much of the media had already flipped the narrative about the conflict from one about the Oct. 7 pogroms and the orgy of murder, rape, torture, kidnapping and wanton destruction that began the war to one about a “disproportionate” Israeli response. But things are worse today, with outlets like The New York Times, The Washington Post and MSNBC already mainstreamed anti-Semitic advocacy for Israel’s destruction, added to the chattering classes and popular culture embracing the idea that the only real victims of the war are the Palestinians who themselves cheered the Oct. 7 crimes when they happened and still support them.
The need for supporters of Israel not merely to speak up but to do so in as loud and public a way as possible is now far greater. Jews and their allies in the Christian community must return to the streets.
Fearful of confrontations
It is understandable that Jewish groups want to avoid confrontations with their opponents out of fear of potential violence and because they believe that their influence is best employed in the corridors of power. But by effectively abandoning the public square to anti-Semites, the Jewish community has not only encouraged those screaming for violence against Jews, especially Israelis but has also created a dynamic whereby it seems as if there is only one side to the argument about whether a war against a genocidal terrorist group is justified.
Equally important, the lack of public clamor on behalf of Israel and against the pro-Hamas ceasefire advocates has sent the message to the administration that there is only one side in the debate about the war that they should listen to or fear.
This was made abundantly clear early in the Democratic primaries when Biden showed that he was far more interested in appeasing pro-Hamas voters in Dearborn, Mich., than those who advocate for Israel. In the last two months, even after Biden secured the Democratic presidential nomination, he has continued to go out of his way to avoid antagonizing Israel-haters.
Perhaps he’s right to believe that Jewish Democrats dislike former President Donald Trump too much to consider defecting from their party. Or that they are more concerned about abortion than about defending the Jewish state. But at a time when anti-Semitism—and the demonization of Israel and its supporters—is escalating, perhaps it’s time for even those who intend to vote for Biden to start showing up at his rallies and speak up about the administration’s abandoning Israel. Jewish Democrats need to say that they expect Biden to stand by Israel in its just war, not to threaten it.
If Biden was made to see, as he should, that there are more votes to be lost in the political center from Americans who back Israel and don’t believe the blood libels being thrown at it, then he might understand that there is a greater political price to be paid for kowtowing to anti-Semites than for keeping faith with the Jewish state.
Beyond that, Jewish groups around the nation also need to understand that their mission must also include efforts to reclaim the streets.
Teaneck shows the way
A great example of a community that understood what was at stake was on display this past week in Teaneck, N.J. A month ago, an Israel real estate fair at a synagogue in that New York suburb was threatened by an anti-Semitic mob, egged on by Internet lies about the event. But when another pro-Israel event at a synagogue—this time honoring ZAKA volunteers charged with the gruesome task of handling corpses from the Hamas pogroms—was similarly threatened, the Jews didn’t simply depend on law enforcement to protect them. Neither did they, as sometimes happens elsewhere, cancel the event due to justified fears of violence. Instead, they organized a counterprotest that outnumbered those who were bussed into that town to vent their hatred.
The effort reflected a consensus in that community that, in the words of a spokesman for the Rabbinical Council of Bergen County, “these attacks on our synagogues have to end. Full stop.”
This example needs to be emulated everywhere. Synagogues and other Jewish institutions have been targeted by vandals and anti-Semitic protests from those seeking to eradicate Israel “from the river to the sea,” falsely accusing Israel of “genocide” while ignoring or even denying Hamas crimes. Yet ever fearful of what a confrontation might lead to, Jewish groups don’t turn out to demonstrate that the streets don’t belong to the hatemongers and their allies. And that needs to change.
Beset by doubts about their place in a society that has embraced woke intersectional myths that marginalize Jews and browbeaten into thinking that the cause of Israel is too controversial to be compatible with a comfortable American life, too many leaders have gone silent at a moment of crisis when they need to speak up loudly that they will not be intimidated or taken for granted by politicians like Biden. They need to understand that even though support for Israel can seem a very lonely, unfashionable position, most Americans stand behind the Jewish state.
Jews need to stop cowering and start protesting. If they don’t, they’ll soon see that the anti-Semites will only grow bolder in their affronts to Jewish sensibilities—and political leaders will continue to believe that they need not fear losing their support.
The resurgence of anti-Semitic crimes in New York City has raised concerns among residents and authorities alike, with recent statistics revealing a troubling spike in incidents targeting the Jewish community. According to a report on Thursday in the New York Jewish Week, the month of March witnessed a significant increase in anti-Jewish incidents, reversing a trend of month-by-month declines recorded by the NYPD, as was reported by Israel National News.
In March alone, there were 43 reported anti-Semitic incidents across the five boroughs of New York City, more than double the 17 incidents reported in February, according to the INN report. This surge in anti-Jewish crimes marks a concerning escalation, especially considering the gradual decrease observed in the months prior.
The rise in anti-Semitic incidents in New York City can be traced back to the aftermath of the October 7th Hamas attack on Israel, which served as a catalyst for heightened tensions and a surge in hate crimes targeting the Jewish community. In October, there were 69 reported incidents of anti-Semitism, followed by 62 in November. However, INN also reported that the rate of such crimes appeared to taper off in the subsequent months, with 31 incidents reported in both December and January, and a further decline to 17 incidents in February. March’s tally, however, stands out as the highest recorded so far this year, signaling a troubling resurgence of anti-Semitic sentiment.
Recent incidents of anti-Semitism in New York City have included alarming attacks on Jewish establishments, with two separate assaults targeting a kosher restaurant within a span of just four days, as was noted in the INN report.
In a particularly egregious case from December, a man was indicted on multiple hate crimes charges after allegedly assaulting an Israeli tourist in Times Square. The INN report said that the assailant reportedly made anti-Semitic remarks, including a chilling statement advocating for violence against Jewish individuals, stating, “Hamas should kill more of you.”
Moreover, anti-Israel protesters have seized the city’s thoroughfares, causing chaos and disruption in their fervent demonstrations against Israel’s actions, the report on INN asserted. Recent incidents have highlighted the intensity of the protests, with actions ranging from road blockades to disruptions at major landmarks.
At John F. Kennedy International Airport, anti-Israel protesters brought traffic to a standstill as they blocked the Belt Parkway, a critical route for vehicles traveling to the airport, INN reported. The incident resulted in significant delays and added frustration for travelers navigating their way to the terminals.
Pro-Hamas protesters also made their presence felt by shutting down the entrance to the World Trade Center in New York City, a symbol of resilience and unity in the aftermath of the September 11th attacks, as was stated in the INN report.
The intensity of the protests reached a crescendo outside Radio City Music Hall, where President Joe Biden was scheduled to attend a campaign fundraiser last week. Hundreds of anti-Israel demonstrators descended upon the iconic venue, chanting slogans and brandishing signs condemning Biden’s stance on the conflict.
The clashes between pro-Israel and pro-Hamas factions on the streets of one of the world’s most prominent cities reflect the deeply entrenched divisions that persist in the ongoing conflict.
The legacy of William F. Buckley Jr., often regarded as the patriarch of modern conservatism, is a complex tapestry of intellectual prowess, political controversy, and unwavering conviction. According to a recently published report in the New York Times, his contributions to conservative thought are undeniable, yet his defense of contentious figures and actions has left a lasting debate over his ideological alignment and his potential stance on contemporary issues, particularly in light of the rise of Donald Trump and his fervent supporters.
Throughout his career, Buckley was known for his unyielding defense of conservative principles, often pushing the boundaries of political discourse through his influential platform as the founder of the National Review and as a prominent commentator, as was noted in the NYT report. However, his defense of figures like Joseph McCarthy and his controversial remarks regarding civil rights demonstrations in Alabama raise questions about his moral compass and the extent of his commitment to conservative values.
The release of the “American Masters” documentary, “The Incomparable Mr. Buckley,” on PBS and streaming platforms has reignited discussions surrounding Buckley’s legacy and his hypothetical stance on Donald Trump and the current state of the Republican Party. The NYT report suggested that given Buckley’s reputation for intellectual rigor and disdain for what he deemed as “boorish thinking and behavior,” many wonder how he would view the rise of Trumpism and the shifting dynamics within the conservative movement.
In the documentary, Buckley’s son, Christopher Buckley, offers a cryptic assessment of his father’s potential reaction to Trump, suggesting that he might humorously demand a recount, echoing a jest his father made during his failed mayoral bid in 1965, the NYT report pointed out. However, in a recent video interview, Christopher Buckley provides a more direct insight into his father’s hypothetical response.
The question of how William F. Buckley Jr. would navigate the current political landscape remains open to interpretation, with some speculating that he would vehemently denounce Trump and his brand of populism, while others believe he would seek to reconcile Trumpism with his vision of conservatism.
As the new documentary “The Incomparable Mr. Buckley” attempts to capture the essence of Buckley’s multifaceted persona, it confronts the challenge of portraying a figure revered by some and reviled by others, whose influence on American politics reverberated throughout the latter half of the 20th century.
Beverly Gage, a history professor at Yale University and author of the Pulitzer Prize-winning biography “G-Man,” offered her perspective on how Buckley might have viewed Trump, as was indicated in the NYT report. Drawing parallels between Trump and the controversial figure of Joseph McCarthy, Gage suggests that Buckley would have seen Trump as a manifestation of themes and constituencies he championed. Despite the differences in their personas and political contexts, Trump’s appeal to certain conservative principles and constituencies might have resonated with Buckley, according to Gage’s analysis.
However, others argue that the relationship between Buckley and Trump is not so straightforward. Some, like Christopher Buckley, express relief that Buckley and Ronald Reagan are not alive to witness the transformation of the GOP and the national discourse under Trumpism, the NYT report said. This sentiment reflects a divergence of opinion regarding whether Buckley would have embraced or rejected Trump’s brand of politics.
The documentary grapples with the complexity of Buckley’s upbringing and intellectual evolution. Born into a wealthy family with ties to Mexico’s oil industry, Buckley received a rigorous homeschooling before attending Yale University. According to the NYT report, it was at Yale where he began to formulate his anti-establishment conservative ideology, famously critiquing the university’s liberal leanings in his seminal work “God and Man at Yale.” Subsequently, Buckley’s defense of McCarthyism in “McCarthy and His Enemies” solidified his reputation as a leading conservative voice, laying the foundation for his influential role as the founder of National Review and his leadership in conservative circles such as Young Americans for Freedom.
As highlighted by filmmaker Barak Goodman, whose portfolio includes documentaries on subjects ranging from the Scottsboro Boys to the Oklahoma City bombing, Buckley’s role in galvanizing conservative movements was unparalleled, as was observed in the NYT report.
Before Buckley’s ascent, there existed various critiques of liberalism, the dominant political philosophy of the time, but lacked a unifying figure to coalesce these disparate factions into a cohesive movement. However, the NYT report explained that Buckley’s charisma, talent, energy, and, most importantly, his visionary intellect, enabled him to bridge these divides and construct a coherent conservative ideology that resonated with a broad spectrum of individuals.
Buckley’s intellectual prowess and strategic acumen were instrumental in consolidating conservative thought and mobilizing support behind a unified cause. His founding of the National Review in 1955 provided a platform for conservative voices and served as a rallying point for like-minded individuals, as was detailed in the NYT report.
However, Buckley’s legacy is not without controversy, particularly regarding some of his more extreme views. His 1957 National Review editorial, “Why the South Must Prevail,” which essentially endorsed racial segregation, remains a stain on his record. Despite later softening his public stance on race, his comments praising the patience of police officers during the Selma protests in 1965 sparked widespread criticism, according to the NYT report. Buckley’s belief in a ruling “remnant,” an elite class naturally inclined to lead, further underscored his elitist and controversial worldview.
Despite his flaws, Buckley’s charismatic persona and sharp intellect made him a formidable figure in American politics, particularly through his PBS debate series, “Firing Line,” which debuted in 1966, the NYT report remarked. Rick Perlstein, a historian and author renowned for his studies on the conservative movement, notes that Buckley played a crucial role in rendering authoritarian ideas more acceptable to cultured audiences who might otherwise have dismissed them.
Buckley’s renowned public debates, captured in works such as Nicholas Buccola’s “The Fire Is Upon Us,” shed light on his confrontations with prominent figures like James Baldwin and Gore Vidal. According to the information provided in the NYT report, Buccola’s book delves into Buckley’s 1965 debate with Baldwin at the Cambridge Union Society, where they discussed whether “The American Dream Is at the Expense of the American Negro.” Despite Baldwin winning the vote by a landslide, Buckley maintained his stance, showcasing his unwavering conviction in his beliefs.
Another notable example of Buckley’s prowess in debate is showcased in the documentary “Best of Enemies: Buckley vs. Vidal,” which explores the televised debates between Buckley and Vidal during the 1968 political conventions. The NYT reported that these debates, chosen by ABC to represent their respective parties, captured the attention of the nation and underscored Buckley’s ability to articulate conservative principles in the public sphere.
Vidal, openly gay and unapologetically liberal, seized the opportunity to needle Buckley, referring to him as a “crypto-Nazi” and mocking his war record as the discussion turned to the confrontation between protesters and police at the Democratic National Convention, recalls the NYT in their report. In response, Buckley, visibly rattled, retaliated by calling Vidal a “queer” and threatened physical violence, an uncharacteristic departure from his usual composed demeanor.
The raw intensity of the exchange, captured on live television, offered viewers a glimpse of Buckley’s unvarnished persona, shedding light on a rarely seen aspect of his character, the NYT report opined. Barak Goodman, the director of the documentary, notes that this moment revealed Buckley’s “street brawler side,” a departure from the polished facade he typically presented on his television show, “Firing Line.”
The debates between Buckley and Vidal serve as a microcosm of the broader ideological divisions and political tensions of their era. Their confrontations, while contentious and at times explosive, encapsulate the fervor and polarization that characterized American politics during the late 1960s.
The portrayal of William F. Buckley Jr. in the new film is met with approval by his son, Christopher Buckley. In his assessment, the film provides a fair and balanced depiction of his father’s life and legacy, evoking a sense of pride and admiration. The younger Buckley’s endorsement of the film’s portrayal underscores its fidelity to capturing the essence of William F. Buckley Jr.’s character, values, and contributions to American conservatism.
Throughout his life, William F. Buckley Jr. remained a stalwart advocate for conservative principles and ideals, leaving an indelible mark on American politics and society. From his early forays into political campaigns to his pivotal role in championing Ronald Reagan’s ascent to the presidency, Buckley’s legacy endures as a testament to
It’s well known that truckers are accustomed to very long journeys, but what about a line of 30,000 vehicles waiting for months on end to pass inspections and cross a border? If that sounds like beyond the realm of reason, it’s because it is. Unless, of course, you are a National Public Radio journalist prone to believing whatever anti-Israel tall tell comes your way no matter how far-fetched.
And, thus it came to pass that NPR’s Jane Arraf, who earlier this year blamed non-existent “Israeli attacks on the Al-Aqsa mosque” for Iraqi militias targeting U.S. troops, repeated without any challenge a Jordanian official’s fantastical vehicular fib.
In her March 27 “Morning Edition” broadcast, Arraf neglected to carry out any proper due diligence, reporting:
A Jordanian official says 30,000 trucks are backed up at the main border crossing with Egypt, waiting for Israeli approval to enter. He says some of Jordan’s own aid trucks have been waiting in line for two months there.
The assertion garnered widespread ridicule. The New York Times’ Nicholas Kristof deleted his X post citing Arraf’s report about the supposed line up of 30,000 trucks after he was widely mocked for parroting the impossible number. As many critics rightly noted, such a gargantuan line would appear on satellite images and would extend hundreds of kilometers long. Where are those images? In addition, an unprecedented jam of that nature would require massive infrastructure – the drivers would need to eat for instance – and yet we couldn’t find a published word anywhere about this phenomenon.
30,000 trucks? LOL. People with an anti-Israel mindset will believe anything. Where are all these truck drivers sleeping? Who is feeding them? Where are the satellite photos of these trucks? Why hasn’t this huge line of trucks at the border received any attention before now? I… https://t.co/fLe7TQmvwm
— David Bernstein (@ProfDBernstein) March 28, 2024
Notably, NBC reported March 30 that “hundreds” of aid trucks “sat idle on the roads heading into Gaza recently.” Did more than 29,000 trucks magically get through in the three days between NPR’s report of 30,000 and NBC’s subsequent article citing hundreds? If so, that truly amazing feat would be a global headline, and yet it’s only Arraf who reported the line of 30,000 trucks, nevermind its miraculous diminishment in just days. NBC did publish a satellite image of the waiting trucks, and while it’s questionable as to whether the image shows “hundreds” of trucks, in no way does it show thousands, much less 30,000 trucks.
Given that the crux of Arraf’s story is that Gaza’s reportedly dire hunger situation is singularly due to supposedly Israeli-imposed restrictions, the inflated backup is hardly a marginal point.
Moreover, Arraf’s reporting gives no indication that other factors are creating difficulties obtaining food in the parts of the Gaza Strip. While she cites States Department Matthew Miller saying the U.S. is “encouraging Israel to allow in more trucks,” she ignores the other points he made in the very same briefing:
So this is not a simple, one-faceted problem. There was a lot of aid going into Gaza before October 7th, before Hamas launched this war that has had such a dramatic impact on the Palestinian people. So anyone that says Hamas doesn’t also bear some responsibility in the tragic situation and in the inability of aid to get into Israel is ignoring the reality on the ground and ignoring the fact that it was Hamas that launched this war in the first place, and it is Hamas that has at times prevented aid from actually getting to the people it needed to inside Gaza.
Significantly, Arraf neglected to report what the State Department identified as the primary obstacle to aid distribution. As Reuters reported:
The State Department official said one of the biggest issues limiting aid distribution was a scarcity of trucks inside Gaza and that Washington would work to help acquire or help the U.N. acquire additional trucks.
“They’re just about at the limit right now. There aren’t additional trucks in Gaza to be loaded from Kerem Shalom or Rafah or Gate 96 with food,” the official said, referring to various border crossings into the enclave.
Moreover, Reuters coverage, unlike NPR’s lopsided reporting, includes the following information from Israel on the causes of food access problems:
Israeli officials say they have increased aid access to Gaza, are not responsible for delays and that the aid delivery inside Gaza is the responsibility of the U.N. and humanitarian agencies. Israel has also accused Hamas of stealing aid.
NBC, like Reuters (and unlike NPR), also includes the following information from Israel:
Israeli officials have repeatedly denied obstructing aid from entering Gaza, and instead blame the U.N. for acute shortages of lifesaving supplies in the strip – particularly in the north. . . .
The Israeli government agency responsible for allowing aid into Gaza, Coordination of Government Activities in the Territories, or COGAT, told NBC News that 995 of the aid trucks are approved after being screened.
COGAT has said it places “no limit” on the amount of aid entering Gaza but subjects some items to higher security scrutiny. . . .
Israeli officials have also blamed the U.N.’s Palestinian refugee agency (UNRWA) for failure to distribute aid. According to COGAT, UNRWA has not requested convoys north for six weeks.
Notably, Arraf does mention UNRWA, saying that Israel, “further limiting” aid, “recently told the U.N. agency for refugees it’s banning it from bringing food to the north of Gaza, where there’s the most urgent need.” Yet, she doesn’t share Israel’s complaints about UNRWA’s failures regarding aid distribution. Why is that?
Finally, in her eagerness to attribute any food shortfalls to Israel, Arraf falsely reports that “Israel, with Egypt’s cooperation, controls Gaza’s main border crossing.” Israel does not have any control of the Rafah border crossing with Egypt. Egypt, together with Hamas, run that crossing. Other media outlets which have previously corrected after wrongly reporting that Israel controls Gaza’s crossing with Egypt include The Washington Post, The Guardian, and Haaretz.
There is a unique, almost intoxicating quality about the Hamas-controlled Gaza Strip prompting reporters to suspend their journalistic skepticism along with all reason and to accept as fact the most implausible scenarios: whether it’s that there are no MRI machines in the coastal territory, that the release of (non-existent) dams in southern Israel caused massive flooding in Gaza, that a mountain of toxic discarded batteries reached 50 meters high, that there are no swimming pools in the territory, or that the local population requires half a ton of flour per person daily.
On this growing list of dubious distinction, NPR’s Jane Arraf makes her mark with 30,000 waiting trucks. And that’s one long load of exhaust and mirrors.
CAMERA has contacted NPR to request clarifications regarding the 30,000 trucks and control of the Gaza-Egypt crossing. Stay tuned for any updates.
The Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting and Analysis (CAMERA) is an international media-monitoring and educational organization founded in 1982 to promote accurate and unbiased coverage of Israel and the Middle East. CAMERA is a non-profit, tax-exempt, and non-partisan organization under section 501 (c)(3) of the United States Internal Revenue Code. To learn more or receive our newsletters please visit CAMERA.org.
United Press International boasts “a history of reliable reporting dating back to 1907,” and praises itself as “a credible source for the most important stories of the day.” But last week’s coverage demonizing Israeli settlers with falsely reported United Nations figures indicates that the operative word in this self-congratulatory celebration of reliability and credibility is “history.”
Instead of supplying reliable and credible reporting bringing the most important stories of the day, UPI last week debased its once venerable operation with a fabrication propping up a modern day blood libel.
Thus, in his March 24 article, UPI’s Adam Schrader falsely stated that according to United Nations data, Israeli settlers are responsible for most of the 199 Palestinians killed in the West Bank from Jan. 1, 2023 until Hamas started a brutal war against Israel on Oct. 7, 2023 (“German Foreign Ministry Condemns Illegal Israeli settlements”). He fabricated: “Before the war broke out in October, 199 Palestinians were killed in the West Bank throughout 2023 – largely at the hands of illegal Israeli settlers, data from the United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs shows.” [Emphasis added.]
In fact, the U.N.’s own data says no such thing. Schrader’s assertion about OCHA’s casualty data, available here, is absolutely false. After selecting the dates of Jan. 1, 2023 through Oct. 6, 2023 (before the start of the war on Oct. 7), along with the West Bank region, and filtering perpetrator as “Israeli civilian settler,” OCHA’s data reveals that seven fatalities out of a total of 199 – or 3.5 percent of West Bank Palestinian fatalities – were killed by Israeli civilian settlers. Does UPI consider 3.5 percent “largely”?
Moreover, virtually all of the West Bank Palestinians killed by Israeli civilians were killed as they attempted to carry out attacks against Israeli civilians. Thus, such deaths underscore Palestinian – and not Israeli settler – violence. Significantly, OCHA’s definitions underneath the data chart acknowledge:
Incidents involving Israeli settlers: includes attacks and alleged attacks by Israeli settlers, as well as incidents involving access prevention, and clashes following the entry of Israeli settlers into Palestinian communities. It also includes Palestinians killed or injured during attacks or alleged attacks they perpetrated against Israeli settlers. [Bold added.]
Lacking transparency, OCHA does not publicly share the details of each incident, making it impossible to verify the circumstances of each of the reported deaths. Nevertheless, B’Tselem, an Israeli NGO adamantly opposed to settlements, does provide identifying details. Of the eight West Bank Palestinians B’Tselem names as killed by Israeli civilians in 2023 prior to the war, six were carrying out attacks – some of them fatal – against Israelis when they were killed.
According to B’Tselem, Muhmannad Falah ‘Abdallah Shihadah, was “[f]atally shot by an Israeli civilian after he and another Hamas military wing operative shot and wounded the settlement security guard, and then fired at Israeli civilians, killing four, including two minors, and wounding three others.” Reuters details Shihadah’s murderous June 20 attack outside a hummus restaurant (“Palestinian gunmen kill 4 Israelis in West Bank”).
Then there was ‘Alaa Khalil ‘Al Qeisiyah, “Fatally shot by an Israeli settler after entering the settlement’s limits and, according to the military, approaching settlers holding a knife” (“Palestinian Armed With Knife Shot Dead at Israeli Settlement in West Bank, IDF Says.”).
B’Tselem also lists that ‘Abd al-Karim Badi’a ‘Abd al-Karim Sheikh was “[f]atally shot by an Israeli settler after, according to the military, he entered the settlement armed with knives and explosive devices.” Times of Israel reported that Sheikh hurled two IEDs, one of which exploded, before he was shot dead (“Palestinian shot dead after allegedly entering West Bank farm with knives, IEDs”).
Similarly, B’Tselem find that Karam ‘Al Ahmad Salman was “Fatally shot by settlement security guards when, according to the guards, he tried to enter the settlement.” Times of Israel reported he was armed with a gun (“Armed Palestinian shot dead by guard near West Bank settlement, IDF says”).
B’Tselem also notes that Tareq ‘Odeh Yusef M’aali tried to stab an Israeli, and Sanad Muhammad ‘Othman Samamrah managed to do so, moderately wounding his victim.
In a separate error, Schrader mistakenly cited “borders for Israeli and Palestine established in 1967.” Presumably, he was referring to the armistice lines (not borders) which were in place from 1949 to 1967, separating Israel from the Jordanian-controlled West Bank and the Egyptian-controlled Gaza Strip.
There have never been what Schrader calls “borders for Israel and Palestine.” Israel gained control of the West Bank from Jordan and the Gaza Strip from Egypt in 1967 as a result of the Six Day War which was imposed upon it. Those territories remained under Israeli control from 1967 until the Jewish state withdrew from areas of the West Bank as part of the Oslo Accords in the 1990s, giving Palestinians authority over parts of the West Bank for the very first time in history. Later, in 2005, Israel withdrew entirely and unilaterally from the Gaza Strip, and Palestinians gained control of the coastal territory for the very first time then as well.
UPI’s woeful blood libel, completely detached both from reality and its own source, appears in multiple McClatchy newspapers including Miami Herald, The Telegraph (Macon), The Bellingham Herald, Tacoma News Tribune, The Sun News, The Bradenton Herald, The Modesto Bee, Fort Worth Star-Telegram, Idaho Statesmen, San Luis Opisbo Tribune, The Island Packet, The Herald-Sun (Durham) and The Wichita Eagle.
Several days ago, CAMERA contacted senior leadership at both UPI and McClatchy about Schrader’s fabrication of U.N. data and the false charges of killings carried out by settlers. Neither media outlet has taken any steps to correct the record.
“UP has, likewise, stood at the cutting edge of newsgathering practices,” recounts about the news organization’s century-old history. “UP established new rules of style and method.”
The news agency’s 2007 centennial anniversary post adds: “Today, side by side with many of the oldest and emerging media giants, UPI faces a new technological frontier with a passion to preserve the best of journalistic practices while engaging a citizenry of lay reporters, photographers, and videographers, and a plethora of sources to publish and receive information.”
More than a dozen years later, UPI has failed to preserve ethical journalistic practices, introducing a novel newsgathering method: lying about its sources to support a predetermined narrative vilifying Jews and Israel. (CAMERA.org)
Update – April 1–Following the publication of this post, UPI revised its wording to reflect the fact that the United Nations has found that seven Palestinians were killed in incidents involving settlers, and not nearly 200 as Adam Schatz had previously reported. But the amended wording is itself a gross fabrication, falsely claiming that the U.N. found that at least seven were “murdered” by Israeli settlers, as if assailants killed while carrying out attacks are “murdered.” The new fallacious language is: “Before the war broke out in October, 199 Palestinians were killed by Israelis in the West Bank throughout 2023 — including at least seven murdered by illegal Israeli settlers, data from the United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs shows.”
The United Nations made no assertion about murders, and qualified, without providing any breakdown, that the incidents include “Palestinians killed or injured during attacks or alleged attacks they perpetrated against Israeli settlers.” Instead of coming clean, the UPI buries itself into a deeper pit of embarrassing unprofessionalism and partisanship. E.W. Scripps, the editor who founded the United Press Association in 1907, and who practiced journalism according to the motto “Give light and the people will find their own way,” would surely not recognize UPI were he to see the depths to which it has sunk today.
Passover is just a few weeks away; there are signs of it everywhere. Kosher-for-Passover products are prominently displayed in major supermarkets. This year, especially, traditional dishes can be flavored and spiked with never-before-available kosher-for-Passover dried spices and herbs. Many of them, such as za’atar, shawarma and hawaij, are combination spices—three or more in one. Although labels may state soup seasoning or meatball spice, these combos add zing to other dishes. While the hawaij label states soup seasoning, it’s a blend of cumin, coriander, turmeric and cardamom. Besides soups, use it as a rub for chicken or in stews and fish dishes, even sprinkled over roasted vegetables.
On the eve of April 22 (the 14th day of the Hebrew month of Nissan), Jews all over the world will gather for the first seder. On this Jewish festival of freedom, it’s estimated that more than 80% of Jews, no matter how observant, will travel near and far to attend a Passover seder, the focal point of the eight-day holiday (seven days in Israel). With Ukrainian Jews again on collective minds this year, freedom for the oppressed makes Passover even more meaningful.
Besides reading the Haggadah, which retells the story of the Exodus from Egypt; singing songs and searching for the afikomen, the festive meal is the highlight of the evening’s proceedings. The entire eight-day celebration in the Jewish Diaspora revolves around the prohibition of chametz, leavened foods. Originally, in the Ashkenazi community in Eastern Europe, only five grains were considered chametz: wheat, barley, spelt, rye and oats. Post-Talmudic authorities added rice and legumes, such as peas and beans. But for Sephardim living in Spain, Portugal and North Africa, the main foods available were rice and legumes, so contemporary Sephardic Jews eat both during Passover. In the Hofman house, the first seder is traditional Ashkenazi. The second, a Sephardic meal, is lightened with fruits, vegetables and an array of different spices.
Charoset, essential on the seder plate, is symbolic of the mortar the Jews worked with during their seemingly endless years of slavery. Ashkenazi-style, the mixture is mainly apples and nuts. For Sephardim, there’s nary an apple in sight. Ingredients are exotic, using fruits and spices that grew abundantly in the Mediterranean area and Africa (recipe below). Sephardic eggs are slow-cooked so that whites become a creamy brown color. Besides the traditional brisket, serve fish (in this case, easily available flounder) seasoned with za’atar and lemon, and then baked on a bed of cherry tomatoes, celery and onions. Roasted vegetables are drizzled with date tahini and a sesame paste to become mellower. For a light dessert, poached pears are best made ahead of time and chilled. And there’s sure to be at least one vegan in the gathering, so I had my niece test the Chocolate Whip, and it was a winner.
All ingredients are kosher for Passover. Chag Pesach Sameach!
Menu
Sephardic Eggs
Moroccan Charoset Truffles
Flounder Roll-Ups on Braised Vegetables
Golden Veggie Kugel
Roasted Broccoli and Squash with Date Tahini
Pale Poached Pears
Vegan Chocolate Whip
Sephardic Eggs (Pareve)
Makes 12
Cook’s Tips:
*May use a crockpot. Cover the eggs with at least 2 inches of water. Eggs are pasteurized by cooking at 140 degrees for 30 minutes starting off at high. After 1 hour, reduce heat to low. Cook 4 hours longer.
*After the eggs have been cooking for 3 hours, gently tap the shells with a spoon to show the marbling color on the egg whites.
Ingredients:
brown skins of 2-3 onions
12 eggs in shells
1 tsp. instant coffee
2 tsp. turmeric
Directions:
Spread the onion skins over the bottom of a large pot. Gently place eggs on top.
Moroccan Charoset Truffles (Pareve)
Makes 12-15
Cook’s Tips:
*Substitute allspice—a combination of cinnamon, cloves and nutmeg—for Moroccan spice.
*Substitute dried cranberries for expensive dried cherries.
*Place each truffle in paper candy cups.
Ingredients:
14 pitted dates
1 cup dried apricots, halved
½ cup pitted dried cherries
¼ cup walnuts
1 seedless mandarin orange, peeled and cut into chunks
1 tsp. Moroccan spice
2 Tbsp. sweet wine
2 Tbsp. honey or to taste
⅓ cup ground almonds
Directions:
In a food processor, place the dates, apricots, cherries, walnuts, orange and Moroccan spice. Pulse to chop coarsely.
Add wine and honey. Pulse to process to a coarse paste. Chill for 1 to 2 hours.
Roll into small balls, about 1 inch in diameter. Roll in ground almonds. Serve chilled or at room temperature.
Sprinkle the coffee and turmeric over top.
Pour enough lukewarm water over to cover eggs by at least 2 inches. Bring water to a boil.
Cover and reduce heat to a slow boil. Cook for 1 hour. Reduce heat to simmer. Cook for at least 3 hours. (The water may evaporate, so add more warm water as needed.)
Serve at room temperature, arranged on drained onion skins.
Flounder Roll-Ups on Braised Vegetables (Pareve)
Serves 6
Cook’s Tips:
*Tilapia fillets or other flat white fish may be used.
*Za’atar is a mixture of herbs that includes toasted sesame seeds and sumac.
Ingredients:
3 Tbsp. olive oil, divided
3 ribs celery, sliced about ¼ inch thick
1 medium onion, sliced thinly
2 pints cherry tomatoes
1½ tsp. cumin
3 (about 2½ lbs.) flounder fillets
za’atar to sprinkle
salt and freshly ground pepper
6 thin lemon wedges
olive oil
dried parsley
Directions:
Preheat oven to 400 degrees.
Heat 2 tablespoons of olive oil over medium heat in a large skillet or pot. Add the celery, onion and tomatoes. Cook over medium heat, stirring often, until tomatoes are beginning to soften, 4 to 5 minutes.
Transfer to a large (9×13 inch) baking dish. Sprinkle with cumin. Set aside.
Cut flounder fillets in half lengthwise. Lightly sprinkle each half with za’atar, salt and pepper. Top with a lemon wedge. Roll up beginning at the thin end. Place on top of the tomato mixture. Brush with olive oil and sprinkle with parsley.
Bake in preheated oven for 20 minutes until the flounder begins to brown and has lost its opaque appearance.
Serve hot.
Golden Veggie Kugel (Pareve)
Serves 8-10
Cook’s Tips:
*Use store-bought grated carrots in a bag.
*Chop apples and potatoes in a food processor.
Ingredients:
½ cup matzah meal
scant ½ cup sugar
1 tsp. nutmeg
1 tsp. cinnamon
1 tsp. ginger
½ tsp. salt
½ tsp. red-pepper flakes
2 large apples, unpeeled, coarsely chopped
2 medium sweet potatoes, peeled and coarsely chopped
1 large baking potato, peeled and coarsely chopped
½ cup grated carrots
1 cup golden raisins
2 Tbsp. frozen orange-juice concentrate, thawed
grated zest and juice of 1 large lemon
1 stick (8 oz.) margarine, melted
Directions:
Preheat oven to 350 degrees.
Spray a 9×13-inch baking dish with nonstick vegetable baking spray.
In a large bowl, combine matzo meal, sugar, nutmeg, cinnamon, ginger, salt and red-pepper flakes.
Add the remaining ingredients. Mix well. Transfer to the prepared baking dish.
Bake in preheated oven until firm and nicely browned, about 1 to 1¼ hours.
If browning too quickly, cover loosely with foil. Cool slightly, cut into squares and serve warm.
Roasted Broccoli and Squash Drizzled with Date Tahini (Pareve)
Serves 6-8
Cook’s Tips:
*Use store-bought broccoli florets and cubed squash.
*Roast broccoli and squash separately to tenderize.
*Heat through in microwave before serving if needed.
Ingredients:
For the Date Tahini:
4 pitted dates
hot water to cover
¼ cup tahini
1 tsp. sumac
water as needed
1 bag (12-14 oz.) broccoli florets
2 boxes (12 oz. each) of cubed squash
3 tablespoons olive oil, divided
salt and freshly ground pepper
Directions:
Prepare the Date Tahini.
Place dates in a cup and cover with hot water. Let stand at room temperature for 30 minutes to soften. Transfer the date and water mixture to a blender or food processor. Add tahini, sumac and ¼ cup water. Pulse 3 to 4 times to chop dates finely. Pour into a bowl. Add enough water to make a pouring consistency. Set aside.
Preheat oven to 400 degrees.
Toss the broccoli with olive oil, salt and pepper. Spread on a baking sheet.
Roast in preheated oven for 20 minutes or until beginning to brown. Set aside.
Repeat with squash. Roast in preheated oven for 20 minutes or until beginning to brown and tender when pierced with a sharp knife.
Arrange broccoli and squash in a serving dish. Drizzle with date tahini and serve.
So you’ve been invited to share a Seder—the ritual-rich evening that is the highlight of Passover, the Festival of Freedom—with an observant family.
You might be familiar with some of the highlights of the Seder: the Four Questions that the children sing; the Seder plate, laden with ceremonial foods; the four cups of wine; the matzah and bitter herbs; all in some way related to the story of how a small group of slaves escaped Egypt’s borders to become the Nation of Israel… Or it might all be totally new to you.
In either case, don’t worry. Firstly, your hosts will guide you and tell you anything you need to know. Secondly, at the Seder you will receive a small book, called the Haggadah, that contains the instructions and text for all 15 steps of the Seder, and you will have plenty of time to peruse it as the night progresses.
If you are curious or you’d like to be better informed before you come, you will find our Passover section helpful, but you certainly do not need to study up before attending.
That said, here are a few insider tips that will allow you to better allow you to enjoy the night ahead:
Tip #1: Expect a late night
The Seder will not start until everyone has returned home from the evening prayer service, which itself will not have started until after sunset. By the time the Seder itself commences it might be in the neighborhood of 9 p.m. or later, depending on what time sunset was that day. The Seder can continue till well after midnight in some families.
Tip #2: Don’t come too hungry…
Aside from a few cups of wine or grape juice (and a piece of onion or potato dipped in salt water), no food will be served till pretty late in the game. The word seder means “order,” and central to this evening is a very exact schedule of steps. The step of reading and discussing the story of the Exodus, which takes up the bulk of the Haggadah, comes before the steps of eating matzah and bitter herbs (maror), and it is only after eating these ritual foods that participants enjoy a free-style feast. Your hosts WILL feed you… just not right away!
Tip #3: Be ready for a text-based evening
The Seder is a very text-centric night, as participants keep a Haggadah close at hand throughout. Many books are printed with an English translation, but there is still likely to be a lot of Hebrew buzzing around you. Some families will get more gung-ho with discussing the text free-style, while others may at times choose to recite parts of the text with little discussion. Some families will enter into the singing of songs with gusto, while in others the singing may be a sideline… In any case, relax. No one is expecting you to suddenly know another language. (A little secret… those little kids reading the Hebrew words so fast? They might not know what all the words mean either.)
The core of the Seder text is the asking of questions and the answering of answers. Try to follow as best you can, but if it is difficult, feel free to read along at your own pace and consider the meaning of what you are reading. Any questions you have, feel free to ask. That is truly what the Seder is about.
And don’t worry. Anything you really need to know—like if it’s time to get up and head to the kitchen to wash your hands yet again, but this time with a blessing, or to drink another cup of wine—your hosts will tell you.
Tip #4: …but be ready to eat
When it is time to eat matzah or maror, you might see everyone digging into what seems like hefty servings of these foods. That is because Jewish law provides pretty exact guidelines for how much matzah and maror should be eaten on this night, and it’s more than a nibble.
You might also find that everyone falls uncharacteristically silent while this ritual eating is going on. That’s not because they’re rude. It’s because they just said blessings thanking G‑d for the mitzvah of eating these specific foods, and they want as little separation as possible between the blessing and the eating. Your hosts will probably try to tell you everything you need to know before launching into these steps, but it’s fair to expect a certain amount of hand motion communication during this part of the Seder. You can engage in it yourself as well.
Tip #5: Dress code?
Be slightly dressed up but also ready for a long evening… Men will feel most comfortable in a suit or blazer and kippah, and women in a modest dress or modest top and skirt. If your dress or top has short sleeves or is sleeveless, a cardigan is a good idea.
Tip #6: Bring a Gift?
It is not expected for you to bring a gift. That said, if you really want to give your hosts something, discuss it with them in advance—both what you’d like to bring and when you would like to bring it (possibly before the holiday starts).
Whatever you do, don’t bring a surprise gift of food on Passover. Different families observe the rules of avoiding even traces of leaven on Pesach with varying degrees of stringency, and it is probably safest to avoid giving food altogether. Many Orthodox families who are otherwise close friends will not give food to each other during this week, just to avoid potentially awkward situations.
Tip #7: Special rules
You might already be aware that many (though not all) of the same rules that govern the behavior of observant Jews on Shabbat are in effect during the first two days of Passover, when the Seders are conducted, as well. Most notably, just like on Shabbat, observant Jews won’t operate electric switches during these days.
Some practical tips associated with the special rules of Yom Tov:
Make sure you have good directions to the house beforehand, as your hosts will not be answering their phones once Passover begins.
When you come, don’t ring the doorbell. Knock instead.
Don’t take pictures, or use your phone.
Don’t turn off any lights, as there will be no holiday-permissible way to turn them back on.
When using the bathroom, avail yourself of the tissues or pre-torn toilet paper rather than tearing toilet paper. Don’t worry, there is no problem at all with flushing the toilet.
Tip #8: Enjoy
At the end of the day, people are people and families are families. Passover has an exceptional focus on children. The Four Questions are questions that children are taught to ask their parents, and the rest of the Haggadah is the explanation that the parents give. If any holiday is all about interacting with children, enjoying their curious minds and cute little voices, it is this one. So whether you speak Hebrew or don’t, whether you learned the Four Questions yourself as a child or didn’t, it doesn’t really matter… This is the time to gather together and enjoy being what we are—a family. The family of Jews, descended from the original Egypt escapees. Enjoy!
Pesach. A night of recalling the miracles of our past, and recognizing the miracles in our lives today.
The words “b’chol dor vodor, in every generation and generation” appear twice in the Haggadah, reminding us that while we may be experiencing times of darkness, the miracles continue. HaShem is with us.
“B’chol dor vodor, In every generation and generation, “omdim aleinu l’chaloseinu, they rise against us to annihilate us, v’HaKodosh Boruch Hu matzileinu me’yadam, HaShem rescues us from their hands.”
Later in the Haggadah, we are also told to feel as if we, ourselves left Mitzrayim, “B’chol dor vodor chayav odom lir’os ess atzmo k’ilu hu yotzo me’Mitzrayim”. Miracles past and present, merge into one.
Each one of us, in our own way, has a Mitzrayim. A challenge, a difficulty. But know that HaShem is there, helping us, then and now.
Seder night is a night of sharing our miraculous, magical history. “V’higgadeta l’vincha, And you shall tell it to your children.” A time for family to sit around the table. It is a night to cherish the children. A night when parent and child together share stories, divrei Torah, and the melodious songs of the Haggadah. A night to continue the chain, link by link.
The very name of the yom tov, “Pesach”, alludes to that. Peh, meaning mouth, sach, meaning to speak. Pesach is about finding our mouth, our voice and learning how to truly speak about our nation’s history. To transmit the story of our people from Egypt to Sinai, from cruel slavery to sweet freedom, culminating with HaShem’s gift of our eternal Torah.
The Seder table has room for the Arba Banim, the Four Sons. Each one different, yet, each one has his own place, each one has his own question, and each one is given an answer. In this spirit, I think of the little ones at the Seder, and the flavor they add to the table. Songs they learned in pre-school… “Frogs here, frogs there, frogs jumping everywhere.” Another favorite is “Pharaoh in pajamas in the middle of the night”. A song depicting Pharaoh, running through the streets of Mitzrayim, calling out “Moshe, Moshe, you can go now”.
Even while Mitzrayim was suffering from the makkos, Pharoah put on pajamas. He got into bed. He went to sleep. Only when the situation became intolerable, did he get up and seek out Moshe, “Vayokom Pharaoh lailah, and Pharaoh rose in the middle of the night.” (Shemos 12:30). Rashi comments “me’mitoso, from his bed”. We may ask, from where else does one rise in the middle of the might? Rashi is bringing out an important point. Pharaoh had no qualms about going to sleep as his country was burning. As the pasuk tells us, “Ain bayis asher ain shom meis, there was not a house that was free from death.”
I think of the Chofetz Chaim, who during World War II did not rest in his bed. I think of my own grandmother, my father’s mother, Chaya Sora HY”D, after whom I am named. When her son, Yosef Dov HY”D, was forced into the Hungarian army, she wouldn’t get into her bed, but would sit on her chair, night after night, reciting Tehillim and crying over the devastation befalling Am Yisroel at that time. My father would plead with her to go sleep, but to no avail. She would say, “How can I sleep, how can I get into a bed, when my Yosef Dov is not here.”
Today, we must ask ourselves that very same question. How can we rest, how can we go to sleep, when the Jewish world is on fire. A war in Eretz Yisroel, Anti-Semitic attacks all around us, threats to our physical existence that we have not seen since the Holocaust.
Unlike Pharaoh, we are not a nation that gets comfortable in bed, while our brothers and sisters are in pain. Everyone, each one of us, in our own way, is in “miluim”, reserves. Each one of us is doing what we can. From those on the frontlines, to those taking on extra Torah learning, increased concentration in tefilla, being more meticulous in the observance of mitzvos, doing more chesed and giving more tzedaka. All for the sake of Am Yisroel.
Each of the plagues came with a message to Pharaoh and the Egyptians. Messages they chose to ignore.
Dom – blood. The Egyptians shed the blood of Bnei Yisroel… the Egyptians’ water turned to blood.
Tz’fardaya – frogs. The Egyptian taskmasters croaked orders to Bnei Yisroel… now, they heard frogs croaking.
Kinim – lice. Bnei Yisroel were subjected to deplorable living conditions, bringing on lice, vermin, etc.… the Egyptians were treated to a lice infestation of their own.
Orov – wild beasts. Bnei Yisroel were forced to collect wild animals for the Egyptian circuses… now wild animals filled the streets, roaming and attacking Egyptians at will.
Dever – pestilence. Egyptians stole sheep and cattle from Bnei Yisroel… now, their cattle became ill and perished.
Sh’chin – boils. Bnei Yisroel were forced to collect and heat water for Egyptian bathhouses… the Egyptians became covered with boils, wounds that made it painful to bathe.
Borod – hailstones. Egyptians threw stones at the Jewish people… now, hailstones rained down upon them.
Arbeh – locusts. Bnei Yisroel were forced to scrounge for their own food in the field… a swarm of locusts attacked the Egyptian fields.
Choshech – darkness. As slaves, Bnei Yisroel were confined, deprived of the liberty to move about as they pleased… during the plague of darkness, the Egyptians were locked in place.
Makas B’choros – plague of the firstborn. Pharaoh ordered all newborn baby boys to be cast into the river… now a plague causing the death of the firstborn sons of Egypt.
Defying all logic, Pharaoh chose time and time again to ignore these messages. Not only when he was warned, but even when they actually happened. Today, let’s look at messages HaShem is sending us. Just think, a war that started on Shabbos, perhaps a message to elevate our Shabbos, to appreciate this special gift from HaShem. A tragedy that occurred on Simchas Torah. Perhaps a message to increase our Torah study, to find fulfillment in observance of mitzvos.
In that z’chus, may it be this year, when we open the door for Eliyahu Hanavi, we should hear news of the geula, the final redemption. May we see the realization of L’Shana Haba’ah B’Yerushalayim, Next Year in Yerushalayim.
This article was written L’zecher Nishmas/In Memory Of HaRav Meshulem ben HaRav Osher Anshil HaLevi, zt”l and Rebbetzin Esther bas HaRav Avraham HaLevi, zt”l
One of the mitzvot in this week’s parashah is Brit Milah / circumcision. In the additional Harachaman prayers recited in Birkat Hamazon following a circumcision, we ask G-d to send us “His anointed one who walks with wholeness.” This is a reference to mashiach. We then ask Hashem to send “the righteous priest who was taken to concealment.” This is a reference to Eliyahu Hanavi.
This requires explanation. Is not Eliyahu supposed to come before mashiach? Why, then, is the order of the supplications reversed?
R’ Moshe Zvi Neriyah z”l explains: Eliyahu will indeed appear before mashiach, but the Ikvita D’meshicha / footfalls of mashiach will be felt before Eliyahu comes. Specifically, the beginning of the material aspects of the redemption, the building of the land and its agricultural development, will appear before the spiritual awakening heralded by Eliyahu is felt.
This sequence of redemption is alluded to in the verse (Tehilim 28:9 — the well-known 10-word pasuk used to count Jews), “Save Your people and bless Your heritage, tend them and carry them forever.” First, “tend” to their material needs in a rich pasture; afterwards, “carry them” – raise them and elevate them spiritually. (Mo’adei Hare’iyah)
“Speak to Bnei Yisrael saying, `When a woman conceives and gives birth to a male…’” (12:2)
Rashi quotes a midrash: “Rabbi Simlai said, `Just as the formation of man took place after that of every cattle, beast and fowl when the world was created, so the law regarding man is set forth after the law regarding cattle, beast and fowl,” i.e., after the laws of kashrut which are found in last week’s parashah.
R’ Simcha Zissel Broide z”l (Rosh Hayeshiva of the Chevron Yeshiva in Yerushalayim; died 2000) observes: The midrash is not merely telling us about a “cute” parallelism in the verses. The Zohar teaches: “G-d looked in the Torah and created the world.” The world was built from a blueprint – the Torah – no differently than the way buildings are constructed. It necessarily follows that the formation of man took place after that of every cattle, beast and fowl just as the law regarding man is set forth after the law regarding cattle, beast and fowl. (Sahm Derech)
A related thought:
R’ Chaim Yaakov Goldvicht z”l (founder and Rosh Hayeshiva of Yeshivat Kerem B’Yavneh) writes: We are used to thinking that some mitzvot are logical and we would observe them even if the Torah had not commanded us to do so, while other mitzvot are kept only because G-d has so commanded. (Examples of the former are the prohibitions on theft and murder.) But this is not so! Rather, the Torah is the blueprint of creation. Society abhors theft and murder because that is Hashem’s Will.
We read in Pirkei Avot (Ch. 2): “Make His Will your will… Nullify your will before His Will…” Asks R’ Goldvicht: Aren’t these two statements redundant? He explains: “Make His Will your will” instructs us that we should have no desires other than to do what Hashem wants (and not to do what He doesn’t want).
However, I still would not know what my motivation in observing the mitzvot should be – perhaps it is sufficient if I do not steal or murder because such acts are abhorrent to civilized man. Thus the mishnah teaches us: “Nullify your will before His Will.” Whatever you may think are logical reasons for the commandments, set those reasons aside and keep the mitzvot solely because that is Hashem’s Will. (Asufut Ma’arachot: Vayikra p. 222)
“`When a woman conceives and gives birth…” (12:2)
What is added by mentioning that a woman conceives before she gives birth? asks R’ Mordechai Ze’ev Margulies z”l (died 1893). This is obvious!
The Midrash Tanchuma states: “After G-d created the animals, birds, reptiles and insects, He created man. Similarly, as long as a baby is in the womb, G-d teaches him and tells him, `Eat this; don’t eat that. This is pure; that is not, etc . . .’” The message of the midrash, and of our verse, R’ Margulies explains, is that G-d’s involvement with man begins in the womb, at the time of conception, long before birth. Just as G-d took six days to create the animals, birds, reptiles, insects and everything else that man needs in his environment, so He takes nine months to prepare the baby for entry into the world. (Kol Haramaz)
“If a person shall have on the skin of his flesh a s’eit, a sapachat or a baheret…” (13:2)
There are three kinds of tzara’at wounds mentioned in this verse: s’eit, sapachat and baheret. R’ Moshe Sternbuch shlita writes that these allude to three types of people who speak lashon hara (the sin for which tzara’at comes).
S’eit is related to the Hebrew word for “uplift.” This refers to people who put down others in order to uplift themselves and increase their own importance.
Sapachat is related to the Hebrew word for “attach.” This refers to people who speak lashon hara as a result of keeping bad company.
Finally, baheret is related to the Hebrew word for “clear.” This refers to people who think they know everything.
The common denominator among these three types of people is that the Torah calls them tamei / impure. (Ta’am Vada’at)
“The kohen shall look at it and declare him contaminated.” (13:3)
A person is not considered to have tzara’at until a kohen declares that he is “tamei.” If the kohen declares, “tahor,” then the person, by definition, does not have tzara’at. Why? R’ Aharon Lopiansky shlita (Yeshiva of Greater Washington) explained: Tzara’at is a punishment for speaking lashon hara. Whether you see bad in another person and thus come to speak lashon hara is dependent on how you look at that person. You can look at him in a good light and give him the benefit of the doubt, or you can look at him badly.
The Torah drives this message home through the tzara’at- examination process. The fate of the lashon hara speaker is placed in the hands of someone (the kohen) who must look at him and must make a decision about him. [Literally a hairsbreadth separates a lesion which is tzara’at from one which is not.] (Heard from R’ Lopiansky)
Chazal teach that “lashon hara” is worse than murder, adultery, and idolatry. Why, asks R’ Shimon Schwab z”l, is it so terrible?
Imagine, he says, that you have witnessed another Jew sinning, and that he knows that you saw him. If this person later regrets his act and wishes to repent, he will be hindered by his knowledge that somebody saw him sin and will surely relate it to others. Knowing what he has done, he is convinced that everyone who observes him (after his repentance) will think that he is a phony. Thus the yetzer hara tells him, “You are lost! Nobody will believe that you have repented, so why bother?”
On the other hand, if this hypothetical sinner could be absolutely certain that word of his transgression will never cross the witness’ lips, the sinner will then feel more secure. Thus he will be able to repent.
What will happen if his fear causes him not to repent? Feeling that he is lost, he will stray from Judaism, and, within a generation or two, his children will be completely lost to our nation. On the final day of reckoning, the person who spoke lashon hara will be held accountable for all those children and grandchildren who were estranged from Judaism because of his gossip. On the other hand, again, if the sinner does repent because he knows that his secret is safe, all those children and grandchildren who do grow up as Jews will be credited to the witness who held his tongue. (Selected Speeches p.90) –
In letter sent to Columbia University Apartheid Divest members, school pledged to discipline attendees
By: Jessica Costescu
Columbia University administrators on Tuesday informed members of anti-Israel student group Columbia University Apartheid Divest that their upcoming “All Out for Al-Shifa” rally was unsanctioned, promising to discipline those who attended. Two days later, the group went forward with the protest anyway, testing the will of the university to follow through on its threats as the school’s president prepares for a congressional hearing on her response to campus anti-Semitism.
The group’s members—many of whom wore masks, hoods, and keffiyehs to mask their identities—flooded the Columbia sundial, a campus landmark, around 4:30 p.m. Thursday, video of the rally obtained by the Washington Free Beacon shows.
Administrators shut down campus ahead of the rally, according to a student who observed the event, requiring attendees who were not already on campus to scan their ID badges and enter through a single entry point. One attendee held a sign reading, “Dykes for Divestment.” Another sign read, “From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free.”
Just hours earlier, Columbia University Apartheid Divest sent a newsletter to its members informing them that administrators deemed the rally “unauthorized,” meaning attendees risked facing “disciplinary action.” The group nonetheless pledged to hold the event and “take back the university.” It also advised its members to avoid detection by wearing all black, using masks and keffiyehs to conceal their identities, and arriving on campus early to “avoid swiping” their ID badges, the school’s “primary method of positive identification.”
Those suggestions came in response to a warning Columbia administrators sent the group’s leaders on Tuesday. The letter, which was obtained by the Free Beacon, said the university did not receive adequate notice of the rally. “Thus your promotion, advertisement, and/or participation in an unregistered event will result in disciplinary action,” wrote Columbia’s chief operating officer, Cas Holloway.
It is unclear whether or how the university will follow through with that pledge. The school’s response is likely to be scrutinized during an April 17 congressional hearing on campus anti-Semitism at which Columbia’s president, Minouche Shafik, is slated to appear.
A similar hearing held in December contributed to the ousting of two other Ivy League presidents, Harvard University’s Claudine Gay and the University of Pennsylvania’s Liz Magill.
Columbia University Apartheid Divest, which did not respond to a request for comment, tied the school’s “crack down on pro-Palestine events” to the impending hearing.
“The timing of this email is no mistake,” the group wrote in its newsletter, referencing Columbia’s disciplinary threat. “Minouche Shafik and leaders of the Board of Trustees will be testifying at a congressional hearing in front of the House Committee on Education and the Workforce on April 17th.”
“Columbia administrators and the Board of Trustees are trying to frighten us and our organizations into remaining silent,” the group continued. “We must not let them divide us.”
Columbia referred the Free Beacon to a statement from Holloway, which said that “organizers and participants” of the Thursday rally “will be subject to disciplinary action if they proceed.”
Roughly one week before the rally, Columbia University Apartheid Divest held another unsanctioned event—its now-infamous “Palestinian Resistance 101” teach-in. The event, which the Free Beacon attended virtually, featured a number of terror-tied speakers who advocated for violence against Jews.
Charlotte Kates, a member of the Israeli-designated terror group Samidoun, said Hamas’s Oct. 7 terror attack “changed the world” and showed “the potential of a future for Palestine liberated from Zionism.” Her husband, Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine activist Khaled Barakat, told attendees that the terrorist airplane hijackings of the 1960s and ’70s were “one of the most important tactics that the Palestinian resistance have engaged in.”
The event was scheduled to take place at Columbia’s Barnard College, the university’s all-female undergraduate school, according to Columbia University Apartheid Divest. At the start of the event, student organizers said they were forced to “change rooms” at the last moment after a Ph.D. student lodged a complaint to the university. The event was moved to Columbia’s “Q House,” an “LGBTQ+ special interest community at Columbia University,” according to an internal email obtained by the Free Beacon and addressed to “comrades.”
Columbia responded by opening an investigation into the event, which Columbia University Apartheid Divest urged its members to ignore in its Wednesday night newsletter. Those who do not cooperate with the investigation will face disciplinary action, a Columbia spokesperson told the Free Beacon.
Four students tied to the event face suspensions, according to a Columbia Spectator piece published Thursday night, roughly 24 hours after Columbia University Apartheid Divest sent its newsletter to members.
“If you, as a student group member, have received a personal email about a follow-up conversation … Do not respond to the University’s email. Do not communicate any sensitive information over email,” the group wrote.
A Rutgers University town hall descended into anarchy Thursday evening as anti-Israel students chanted demands to “globalize the intifada,” hurled anti-Semitic insults at Jewish students, and forced the school’s president to end the event early, according to videos of the event and attendees who spoke to the Washington Free Beacon.
One video obtained by the Free Beacon shows the school’s president, Jonathan Holloway, escorted out by police after cutting short the event.
“Globalize the intifada. Long live the intifada. Long live resistance. Resistance is justified when people are occupied,” chanted the protesters. “We don’t want two states. We want 48. Displacing lives since ’48. There’s nothing here to celebrate,” they declared in another chant.
Rutgers University did not respond to a request for comment.
Thursday night’s disruption was caused primarily by two student groups, the Endowment Justice Collective—a “coalition of Rutgers organizations advocating for an endowment fund that ISN’T invested in Israeli apartheid”—and Students for Justice in Palestine at Rutgers-New Brunswick. The latter is carrying out a one-year probation period following an investigation into several violations of university policy.
Joe Gindi, a Syrian Jew and sophomore at Rutgers University who spoke to the Free Beacon, said that Jewish students wanted to hear what the university’s president had to say. Gindi said that after talking to police, Jewish students were told they could leave through the emergency exits. Nearly all of them did.
“I’m not going to let this mob take over my university. I’m not going to be told that we should leave through the emergency exits I refuse to. I refuse to be bullied by these people,” said Gindi.
Gindi also commended Holloway for his support and refusal to end Rutgers’s partnership with Tel Aviv University.
“I and many other members of the Jewish community really appreciate President Holloway for standing up against this mob and not cowering to the calls to join in a boycott of Israel,” Gindi said. “I really respect that.”
Approximately 40 Jewish students—who also had to be escorted out—and 250 protesters were in attendance, Gindi told the Free Beacon.
Another Jewish student who spoke to the Free Beacon and asked to remain anonymous said that Jewish students came to the town hall to learn what the school would do to address campus anti-Semitism, but instead they were left “shaking” and terrified.
“Jewish students came to the town hall to learn what President Holloway and Rutgers would do to address antisemitism at Rutgers,” said the student. “Instead of getting our answers, we were left shaking from another antisemitic incident. It was terrifying.”
In another video captured by a student, protesters shouted at Rutgers Jewish students to “go back home.” Protesters also told attendees that Jerusalem is their capital, not Israel’s, and that Birthright Israel—a program offered through the school’s Hillel chapter for young adults of Jewish descent to visit Israel—is not welcome on campus. Rutgers Hillel did not have a comment.
“Settlers, settlers, go back home. Palestine is ours alone,” the protesters chanted. “Jerusalem’s our capital. From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free. Rutgers, Rutgers, you will see, Palestine will be free. … Rutgers, Rutgers, you will learn, Palestinians will return.”
Harvard University invited a Hamas apologist, who has described the Oct. 7 Hamas terror attack as “anti-colonial violence” that was “inevitable” and motivated by “oppression,” to speak on its campus.
The event, slated to take place on April 18, is hosted by Harvard’s Center for Middle Eastern Studies and will feature Tareq Baconi, a Hamas scholar and the president of the board of Al-Shabaka, a Palestinian think tank. Baconi is the author of Hamas Contained: The Rise and Pacification of Palestinian Resistance, in which he claims that Hamas is not “a terrorist group” but instead “a multifaceted liberation organization.”
Just three days after Hamas murdered 1,200 Israelis and abducted hundreds more, Baconi argued that Hamas’s Oct. 7 attack, which he calls “the Al-Aqsa Flood operation,” wasn’t “driven by hatred and bloodlust” but rather brought upon by Israel’s “regime of oppression.”
A month later, in November, he labeled Hamas’s Oct. 7 attack “an unprecedented display of anti-colonial violence” and wrote that “the Al-Aqsa Flood operation was an inevitable response to Israel’s relentless and interminable provocation.”
“What is clear is that Western leaders are willfully refusing to acknowledge Hamas’s attack for what it was: an unprecedented display of anti-colonial violence,” wrote Baconi. “The Al-Aqsa Flood operation was an inevitable response to Israel’s relentless and interminable provocation through land theft, military occupation, blockage and siege, and the denial of the fundamental right to return to one’s homeland for more than 75 years.”
Harvard’s decision to host Baconi comes as the Ivy League institution faces criticism over its response to campus anti-Semitism. The university risks losing more than half a billion dollars in federal funding as it obstructs a congressional investigation into widespread anti-Semitism, according to the top lawmaker handling the probe.
Baconi’s Apr. 18 talk is titled “Gaza as Epicenter: An Alternative Reading” and is open only to Harvard ID holders. Baconi and Harvard did not respond to requests for comment.
In a Monday op-ed in the New York Times, Baconi argued that “the two-state solution is an unjust, impossible fantasy” that has “normalized the daily violence meted out against Palestinians by Israel’s regime of apartheid.” Instead, he argued for a single state “from the river to the sea” but offered no solution that included the existence of Israel.
“All policymakers should heed the lesson of Oct. 7: There will be neither peace nor justice while Palestinians are subjugated behind walls and under Israeli domination,” Baconi wrote. “A single state from the river to the sea might appear unrealistic or fantastical or a recipe for further bloodshed. But it is the only state that exists in the real world—not in the fantasies of policymakers.”
At a November teach-in on “Palestinian Resistance” at the City University of New York, Baconi argued that calls to destroy Hamas are calls to genocide and that “Jews, Israeli Jews, [can’t] feel safe while apartheid persists.” During the event, he encouraged attendees to support “the resistance that’s happening in Palestine.”
“This is why the resistance that happens here is just as important,” Baconi said. “This becomes a front for liberation that’s just as important as what’s happening on the ground.”
He was joined by Charlotte Kates, a member of the Israeli-designated terror group Samidoun, who has praised Hamas’s Oct. 7 attack, and Within Our Lifetime founder Nerdeen Kiswani, who has called for Israel to be “wiped off the map.”