Iran’s massive missile and drone attack over the weekend will not “deter Israel,” Israeli Defense Minister Yoav Gallant (Likud) told IDF troops Tuesday. Credit: GPO
‘Any enemy that fights us will be hit, no matter where they are,’ says Defense Minister Yoav Gallant.
By: World Israel News Staff & JNS
Iran’s massive missile and drone attack over the weekend will not “deter Israel,” Israeli Defense Minister Yoav Gallant (Likud) told IDF troops Tuesday, lauding the highly successful efforts of the Israeli military and a coalition of Western powers and moderate Arab states in intercepting incoming projectiles.
Gallant visited Israel’s northern border Tuesday, where he held an operational situation assessment together with senior IDF officials and troops operating in the area of the Western Galilee.
During his visit, Gallant held a discussion with IDF commanders about efforts to drive Hezbollah forces away from the Israeli border, and commended soldiers for their performance.
The Defense Minister also discussed the Iranian attack on Israel over the weekend, emphasizing that Iran will fail to deter Israel and to prevent Israel from acting against Iranian attempts to strengthen its capabilities across the Middle East.
Gallant noted that less than 1% of the incoming missiles and drones managed to reach their targets inside Israel, despite a massive barrage of over 500 projectiles.
“The Iranians attacked us aggressively using over 500 weapons, [yet] not a single cruise missile or UAV reached Israel, and out of 100 ballistic missiles, four fell in Israel. This is the result of our preparations with our international partners, as well as the IDF’s capabilities,” Gallant told IDF soldiers.
“The Iranians will not be able to establish a new status of deterrence against the State of Israel. IAF aircraft operate everywhere – the skies of the Middle East are ‘open,’ and any enemy that fights us will be hit, no matter where they may be.”
“The tasks at hand are serious. I see what you [referring to the troops] are doing, and I am convinced that we will reach the stage when our citizens will be able to return to their homes safely – we will achieve this either via military action or via an agreement. It is always better to [reach] an agreement, but we are preparing for all possibilities.”
In other developments, JNS reported that attack drones launched by Hezbollah from Southern Lebanon lightly injured three people in the area of Moshav Beit Hillel in Israel’s Eastern Galilee on Tuesday afternoon, Army Radio reported.
“Two explosive drones crossed from Lebanese territory towards Israeli territory and exploded in the area of Beit Hillel. The incident is under investigation,” the Israel Defense Forces confirmed in an X post.
In a statement, Hezbollah claimed it hit an Iron Dome missile defense battery near Beit Hillel and that soldiers were killed and wounded.
The Hezbollah-affiliated Al Akhbar newspaper claimed that an Israeli UAV struck a vehicle near Tyre in Southern Lebanon in response.
Tehran’s terror proxy in Lebanon has been engaged in near-daily attacks on Israel’s evacuated border region since joining the war in support of Hamas a day after the Oct. 7 invasion of the northwestern Negev.
In response, the Israeli Air Force has carried out a series of retaliatory strikes, including targeted killings of Hezbollah commanders.
Overnight Saturday, Hezbollah fired more than 100 rockets into the Upper Galilee as part of Iran’s unprecedented multi-pronged attack on the Jewish state. Air defenses intercepted most of the projectiles.
On Sunday night, four IDF soldiers were wounded, including one seriously, in an explosion during operational activity in the border area.
Ultra-Orthodox (Haredi) lawmakers have agreed in preliminary discussions with fellow lawmakers that a quarter of Ultra-Orthodox yeshiva students reaching draft age should be inducted into the army, Israel Hayom reported Tuesday.
Moreover, in coming years, that number could be increased to 50%, which would mean some 6,000 additional annual recruits to the IDF.
While the general outline for an agreement has been laid out, there are many details which would have to be settled for the plan to be adopted, the report noted.
Not least among them is whether the numbers could be anchored in a new draft law to replace the previous law, which was struck down by the Supreme Court in 2017.
Just as it has in the past, the courts could strike it down by saying that this threshold does not meet the requirements of a universal draft, meaning that the burden of army service is still shouldered unequally by the secular and national-religious populations.
If it is just passed in a government decision, however, it could be easily overturned when a new coalition takes power.
In addition, Defense Minister Yoav Gallant has conditioned his approval of a new Draft Law on the agreement of War Cabinet Minister Benny Gantz.
However, Gantz, the report said, “does not intend to agree” to the idea.
Gantz had presented a proposal in February whereby most haredim would be either drafted or do national service in dozens of new alternate tracks in “recognized security, emergency and charity organizations.” An “elite” would continue studying Torah full-time, and “many” would be able to “serve at the same time as studying.”
The report emphasized that the fact that the haredi politicians admitted that it would be possible to draft thousands of yeshiva students was unprecedented.
It “puts on the table,” the report said, “what is known to everyone as well as to the ultra-Orthodox – there are masses … who do not really study around the clock.”
The Hebrew daily cited “data from ultra-Orthodox sources” that more than a thousand students who receive exemptions do not attend their institutions.
“Many more,” it added, go to “yeshivas for dropouts” but do not learn.
According to IDF figures, 540 males from the haredi sector voluntarily enlisted after October 7th, instead of continuing to use their annual deferments as full-time Torah students.
Dozens completed a shortened basic training course that included how to respond to Arab infiltrations and using weapons in a civilian setting. They were sent this month to guard ultra-Orthodox towns in Judea and Samaria.
In other developments, World Israel News also reported on Tuesday, that a senior Israeli official indicated that Hamas, after rejecting previous hostage release proposals, now says it will free only 20 hostages to Israel in exchange for hundreds of convicted Palestinian terrorists.
The offer comes after Hamas repeatedly rejected proposals for a phased ceasefire proposal beginning with a 6-week pause in fighting, the release of 40 women, children, and wounded hostages, and the release of hundreds of Palestinian terrorists from Israeli jails.
According to a source within Hamas, the reason for the revision of the number of released hostages downward is that there may not be more than 20 alive, and the terror group may not be aware of the location of others.
There is speculation that Hamas may be saying that no more than 20 hostages are alive to wage psychological warfare, force concessions, and extend the conflict with Israel.
People block the entrance to Ashdod Port during a protest against aid entering the Gaza Strip, Feb. 1, 2024. Photo by Chaim Goldberg/Flash90
“We are dealing with a terror organization that does not value life,” a spokeswoman for the Tzav 9 movement says.
By: Amelie Botbol
Demonstrators converged on the Israeli side of the Allenby Bridge near Jericho on Monday, the only official crossing between Jordan and Judea and Samaria, to prevent aid supplies destined for Gaza from entering.
The Tzav 9 (Order 9) grassroots movement organized the protest. Tzav 9 is a reference to the Tzav 8 emergency mobilization notices received by Israel Defense Forces reservists on Oct. 7.
“We are losing patience,” Rachel Touitou, a spokesperson for Tzav 9, told JNS on Tuesday. “We see the negotiations at a standstill. Our hostages haven’t returned home, we don’t even get the bodies of the deceased back.
“We are dealing with a terror organization that does not value life. Not only do they seize humanitarian aid to feed terrorists, but they also resell some of it,” she said.
While Israel has shown flexibility in the hopes of arriving at a hostage deal, Hamas has impeded an agreement, Matthew Miller, the U.S. State Department spokesman, said on Monday.
“Israel moved a significant way in submitting that proposal,” Miller said. “There was a deal on the table that would achieve much of what Hamas claims it wants to achieve, and they have not taken that deal.”
In response to Israel’s most generous offer yet, Hamas reportedly dropped the number of hostages it is willing to release from 40 to 20. The terrorist organization also demanded the release of more hardened terrorists and a ratio of more jailed Palestinian terrorists released per Israeli hostage freed. It also appeared to reject a phased deal, instead demanding an immediate withdrawal of all IDF units from the Gaza Strip along with international guarantees.
The Israeli protesters at Allenby Crossing on Monday included relatives of hostages held by Hamas in Gaza.
“We heard that trucks were coming in from Jordan and decided to prevent it from passing. [The authorities] did it at night because they thought it would deter us,” Touitou said.
“It was a successful protest. Right afterward, they designated the area a [closed] military zone and they decided to send this same shipment through Kerem Shalom today. That’s why we came this morning,” she added.
On Tuesday, Tzav 9 converged on Kibbutz Gvulot, near the Kerem Shalom crossing. Touitou stressed that for as long as the hostages remain in Gaza, activists would continue protesting.
“The Gazans are being sent aid while 133 Israelis are held against their will. We don’t know what their medical condition is, we get no sign of life, they haven’t received any medication or a visit from humanitarian organizations,” Touitou said.
“We can’t let the [Hamas] terror organization, which uses international law and humanitarian aid to its own benefit, walk all over us,” she continued.
On Monday, the United States confirmed that the quantity of humanitarian aid entering the Gaza Strip had substantially increased over the past few days.
Israel recently ramped up efforts to facilitate deliveries, with the opening of a new land crossing to the Gaza Strip designed primarily to facilitate the entry of foreign aid.
The crossing, located between Kibbutz Zikim and the Gazan village of As-Siafa, will reduce travel time for trucks entering the Strip after picking up shipments at the Port of Ashdod some 25 miles away, Israeli Defense Minister Yoav Gallant said last week. The goal, according to Gallant, is to have at least 500 trucks a day entering the Strip.
Near-daily protests took place following Israel’s Security Cabinet decision on Dec. 15 to approve the opening of the Kerem Shalom crossing for the transfer of aid into the southern Strip after intense U.S. and international pressure.
All the Israeli crossings to Gaza had been shuttered after Hamas’s Oct. 7 invasion, with only Egypt’s Rafah crossing from Sinai remaining open.
In late December and early January, protesters attempted to block trucks at Kerem Shalom, leading to clashes with security personnel. In early February, after two border crossings were declared closed military zones, activists moved their operations to Ashdod Port, where they blocked trucks destined for the Strip.
Last week, protesters from Tzav 9 succeeded in blocking aid at the Nitzana crossing between Israel and Egypt before security forces forcibly removed them a few hours later.
Touitou recounted that when Tzav 9 began its action months ago, Gazans started protesting against Hamas. Now that humanitarian aid goes in, she said Hamas isn’t encountering any resistance from the population.
“We are not only speaking about food, there is fuel as well. This is a problem for us and this is a problem for our soldiers,” said Touitou.
“Which country in the world would feed their enemy? Hamas gets whatever it needs and wants. It refuses to close a deal because there are no incentives to do so,” she added.
David’s Sling, named metaphorically to evoke the Biblical story of David and Goliath, is primarily designed to counter medium- to long-range missiles and rockets, including drones, cruise missiles, and more advanced ballistic missiles. Credit: Wikipedia.org
Edited by: Fern Sidman
In a dramatic display of defense prowess, Israel showcased its formidable air defense capabilities by intercepting a staggering 99% of the 300 deadly suicide drones and missiles launched by Iran towards the Jewish state on Saturday night, as was reported by The New York Post. Employing the advanced air defense system known as David’s Sling, along with a comprehensive array of anti-missile technologies, Israel successfully neutralized the overwhelming majority of the incoming threats.
David’s Sling, named metaphorically to evoke the Biblical story of David and Goliath, is primarily designed to counter medium- to long-range missiles and rockets, including drones, cruise missiles, and more advanced ballistic missiles. On the night of the attack, alongside other systems such as the renowned Iron Dome, David’s Sling was pivotal in thwarting the aerial onslaught. The system intercepted a diverse array of threats—120 ballistic missiles, approximately 30 cruise missiles, and around 170 explosive drones, as reported by Israeli military sources.
Amidst this onslaught, Israel received crucial assistance from allies such as the United States, the United Kingdom, and even an unexpected Arab partner. This collaborative effort called attention to the global recognition of the severity of the threat posed by Iran’s aggressive actions.
Remarkably, despite facing a direct attack from Iran for the first time in modern history, Israel emerged relatively unscathed. According to the information provided in the Post, minimal damage was sustained, with only one casualty confirmed thus far—a tragic incident involving a 7-year-old Bedouin girl. Indicated in the Post report was that Israeli military spokesperson Lt. Col. (R) Peter Lerner provided insight into the scale of the assault, citing approximately 120 ballistic missiles, 30 cruise missiles, and 170 explosive drones launched by Iran and its proxies.
Additionally, around 40 rockets were fired into Israel from Hezbollah based in Lebanon, further escalating tensions in the region. These attacks shine a spotlight on the proliferation of advanced munitions among terror organizations, posing a significant threat not only to Israel but also to regional stability.
While Israel’s renowned Iron Dome air defense system has historically been effective against rocket attacks from Hezbollah and Hamas terrorists, the magnitude of Iran’s assault necessitated the deployment of more sophisticated anti-missile systems, as per the information contained in the Post report. David’s Sling, alongside other advanced defense mechanisms, played a crucial role in intercepting the formidable barrage unleashed by Iran, thwarting what could have been a devastating strike on Israeli territory.
According to reports from the Jerusalem Post, the intercepted threats were neutralized through various means, including fighter aircraft equipped with air-to-air missiles, the David’s Sling air defense system, and the Arrow 2 and Arrow 3 missiles, designed specifically to counter ballistic missiles, as was noted in the Post report.
Footage shared by the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) showcased the intensity of the attacks, with fiery missiles being intercepted mid-flight, highlighting the effectiveness of Israel’s defense mechanisms. As the Post report explained, the interception efforts commenced around midnight, as cruise missiles were launched from Iran toward Israeli territory. Simultaneously, the United States reportedly engaged in intercepting drones over Iraq and Syria, demonstrating a coordinated response to the multifaceted threat, the report added.
The IDF also released images capturing the deployment of an F-35I stealth fighter, which was scrambled to safeguard Israeli airspace. Detailed in the Post report was that the F-35I, a fifth-generation fighter jet designed in the United States, boasts advanced capabilities, including the ability to fire air-to-air missiles from a considerable distance, beyond the visual range of the pilot. This deployment illustrated Israel’s readiness to defend its airspace using cutting-edge technology and strategic maneuvers.
Furthermore, the collaborative efforts of the United States and other allies played a pivotal role in bolstering Israel’s defense against the onslaught of explosive drones and missiles. President Biden reaffirmed America’s unwavering commitment to Israel’s security, emphasizing the ironclad nature of the alliance between the two nations.
According to statements from National Security spokesman John Kirby to CNN, the United States intercepted “several dozen” missiles and drones launched by Iran, utilizing a range of defense systems and military capabilities. Notably, the report said that Patriot missile batteries deployed in northern Iraq and the USS Eisenhower aircraft carrier group stationed in the Red Sea played crucial roles in providing protection to American troops and intercepting hostile projectiles.
The deployment of two additional destroyers, specialized in intercepting incoming missiles and aircraft, further bolstered the defensive posture in the region, as reported by The Wall Street Journal. These naval assets, strategically positioned in key areas, contributed to the interception of Iranian ballistic missiles over Israel, demonstrating the efficacy of coordinated defense efforts.
Moreover, US warplanes were engaged in intercepting targets, underscoring the multifaceted approach adopted to neutralize potential threats. The report in the Post also mentioned that the involvement of allies such as the United Kingdom and France, who confirmed the utilization of their military assets to shoot down Iranian projectiles, calls attention to the collaborative nature of the response to Iran’s aggression.
In a remarkable display of cooperation, Jordan, a former adversary of Israel now aligned with the United States, also played a significant role in the interception efforts. The Post reported that the Royal Jordanian Air Force deployed US-made F-16 fighter jets to intercept incoming Iranian drones, showcasing the commitment of regional partners to confront common security challenges.
Jordan found itself drawn into the conflict when it was accused of assisting Israel in defending its airspace against threats posed by Iran. However, Jordan quickly denied these accusations, asserting that its actions were solely aimed at protecting its own citizens from potential harm.
President Biden engaged in discussions with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu following the attack orchestrated by Iran. In a statement released after their conversation, Biden emphasized America’s steadfast support for Israel’s security. The report affirmed that he praised Israel’s ability to repel the attack, showing its remarkable defense capabilities that thwarted unprecedented assaults. Biden’s words aimed to send a clear message to Israel’s adversaries, asserting that attempts to undermine Israel’s security would not succeed.
Moreover, President Biden assured Netanyahu that the United States would not partake in any offensive operations against Iran. This stance speaks volumes about the Biden administration’s commitment to diplomacy and de-escalation in the region. Biden’s communication with Netanyahu sought to reinforce Israel’s position and provide assurance of continued support from the United States.
Despite diplomatic efforts, the situation remained volatile. Hezbollah launched a fresh barrage of rockets from Lebanon towards northern Israel, adding to the already tense atmosphere. The Post reported that this retaliatory attack was purportedly in response to Israeli strikes on southern Lebanese towns earlier that night. Although the rockets caused property damage in Katzrin, fortunately, there were no reported injuries.
Iran unleashed an onslaught of attack drones, cruise missiles, and ballistic missiles against Israel over the weekend. Photo Credit: YouTube.com
The recent onslaught of attack drones, cruise missiles, and ballistic missiles launched by Iran against Israel over the weekend could have resulted in unimaginable devastation. However, thanks to the swift and decisive actions of Israel, supported by its allies, the vast majority of the 300-plus projectiles were successfully intercepted, marking a stunning victory for the Israeli defense forces.
This achievement is a testament to Israel’s unwavering commitment to its security and the safety of its citizens. Despite facing an unprecedented threat, Israel’s defense systems proved their effectiveness, neutralizing 99% of the incoming attacks. This resounding success is not only a triumph for Israel but also a demonstration of the strength and resilience of the Israeli people in the face of adversity.
Furthermore, the collaborative efforts of President Biden, along with leaders from France, Britain, and Jordan, deserve commendation for their role in assisting Israel during this critical moment. Their swift action and support helped to repel the outrageous strike and prevent further escalation of the conflict.
It is essential to recognize the immense challenges faced by the people of Israel during this ordeal. The constant threat of missile attacks forced civilians to seek refuge in shelters, uncertain of what the next moment would bring. While the majority of the projectiles were intercepted, there were casualties, including a young Bedouin child who was tragically injured.
However, it is crucial to acknowledge the root cause of this aggression: Iran’s belligerent actions and its vow to retaliate against Israel. The Iranian regime’s provocative behavior, including its support for such terrorist organizations as Hamas, Hezbollah, the Houthis in Yemen as well as other hostile activities in the region, cannot go unanswered. The Israeli airstrike on an Iranian consulate in Damascus was a necessary response to protect Israel’s security and deter further aggression.
In light of these developments, it is imperative that the Biden administration fully supports Israel’s right to defend itself against threats to its sovereignty and security. Any attempts to undermine or thwart Israel’s response to Iranian aggression would be misguided and counterproductive. Israel has the right to defend itself, and the international community must stand in solidarity with Israel in the face of external threats.
The recent escalation of tensions between Israel and Iran has once again brought to light the dangerous repercussions of weak foreign policy. Iran’s aggressive actions, culminating in a barrage of attacks against Israel, stem from a misguided belief that they can act with impunity, emboldened by the lack of strong response from the White House.
The key figure at the center of this conflict, Mohammad Reza Zahedi, was not merely a low-level operative but a high-ranking official overseeing operations by Hezbollah and coordinating with other terror groups. His involvement in orchestrating attacks against both Israelis and US soldiers is well-documented, making him a legitimate target for Israeli countermeasures.
Contrary to the narrative pushed by the media, Iran’s strike against Israel cannot be labeled as “retaliation.” It was, in fact, Israel’s preemptive strike against Zahedi that sought to thwart further attacks and protect its citizens. The notion that Iran’s actions were a justified response is a gross misrepresentation of the facts.
Moreover, Iran’s decision to directly launch attacks from its own soil marks a dangerous escalation in the conflict. This brazen act of aggression, unprecedented in its directness and scale, highlights Iran’s growing audacity in the face of perceived weakness from the international community.
The question arises: where did Tehran’s leaders derive the confidence to carry out such provocative actions? The answer lies, in part, with the lackluster response from the White House and Democratic critics like Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer. Their failure to condemn Iran’s aggression and hold them accountable only serves to embolden further acts of hostility.
President Biden’s admonishment of Israel’s efforts to combat Hamas in Gaza sounds like a troubling message of appeasement. By prioritizing diplomatic niceties over decisive action, the administration has effectively undermined Israel’s right to self-defense and emboldened Iran’s aggressive agenda.
Furthermore, the efforts to prevent Israel from targeting the Hamas infrastructure in Gaza illustrate a dangerous disregard for the security of the region. By prioritizing the hypothetical risk to civilians over the tangible threat posed by the Hamas terrorist organization, the Biden administration has once again demonstrated a lack of understanding of the complex realities on the ground.
Iran’s calculus in launching attacks against Israel is deeply influenced by its perception of Washington’s stance. With the Biden administration showing signs of distancing itself from Jerusalem, Tehran sees an opportunity to act with impunity, confident that it will not face consequences for its actions. This dangerous miscalculation is compounded by Team Biden’s apparent eagerness to appease Iran in a misguided attempt to bolster ties and potentially reform the regime.
The Obama administration’s disastrous nuclear deal with Iran, which provided billions of dollars in sanctions relief in exchange for hollow promises of nuclear restraint, is a cautionary tale that should not be forgotten. President Trump rightly discarded this agreement, recognizing its inherent flaws and the dangers it posed to regional stability. However, President Biden’s attempts to revive the deal only serve to embolden Iran and undermine the security of the region.
The Biden administration’s lax approach to enforcing sanctions on Iran and its willingness to turn a blind eye to the regime’s illicit activities have further empowered Tehran’s hostile actions. By allowing Iran to violate sanctions and reap billions in oil sales without repercussions, President Biden is effectively enabling Iran’s destabilizing behavior. Moreover, the decision to allow UN sanctions on Iran’s missile and drone programs to lapse only serves to enhance Iran’s military capabilities and embolden its quest for world domination.
Most troubling of all is President Biden’s failure to respond decisively to attacks and provocations by Iran’s proxies. Despite repeated warnings, Iran’s proxies, including Hezbollah, the Houthis, and Iranian-backed militias, have continued to launch attacks on Israeli and Western targets with impunity. President Biden’s tepid warnings have done little to deter Iran’s proxies, allowing them to operate unchecked and further escalate tensions in the region.
Israel, as a sovereign nation, has the right to defend itself against threats to its security. As such, Israel has the right and moral responsibility to launch an counter-offensive against the Iranian regime. If that translates into an Israeli attack on Iran’s nuclear facility, then so be it. Ultimately, such an attack will send a clear message to Iran that their uranium enrichment program has come to a screeching halt and that Israel and the world will no longer accept the nuclear threat that this regime represents.
President Biden must unequivocally stand with Israel and back their decision to launch a counter-offensive if they deem it in their best interest. The Biden administration should provide the necessary support to Israel to ensure its ability to deter and respond to Iranian aggression effectively. Failure to do so not only undermines Israel’s security but also risks further destabilizing an already volatile region.
What is wrong with President Biden? I do not get involved in politics. I don’t care if Biden, Trump or Kennedy is the next president. The American people will pick the leader they prefer. They are a democracy. But… what is wrong with Biden?
Israel is America’s most important ally. They provide America with the most bang for the buck. In a world where the Muslim Brotherhood is pledged to replace the West with a Caliphate, Israel is our first line of defense.
Obama turned away from Israel and flooded Iran with billions of dollars, with which the mullahs funded, trained and armed Israel’s and America’s enemies, why is Biden repeating Obama’s mistakes. We know Obama’s Islamists are entrenched in this administration, but surely some advisors who love America can point out the taqiyya Islamic fundamentalists are pouring into his head.
Obama interfered in Israel’s and Canada’s elections. It was none of his business, and it’s none of any president’s affair who a democratic sovereign state elects.
Israel is not an American protectorate.
It is the 10th most important country in the world and the 5th happiest. See the NY Stock Exchange and Nasdaq for evidence.
And while you’re looking at evidence, check Article 80 of the UN Charter. It solidifies that what was promised the Jews by the League of Nations in 1922, that is, all of the British Mandate for Palestine, cannot be abrogated. This clause is sometimes known as the Jewish peoples’ clause. It gives Jews the legal right to live anywhere in Jerusalem, Judea & Samaria and Gaza.
Islamic radicals celebrated 9/11 and Oct. 7 with dancing, candies and cakes and firing their guns into the air.
On Oct. 7th, Israel was brutalized in a manner America never experienced in its long history.
Israel is waging an existential battle. It is fighting for Western freedom as well. For Israelis, it’s the right to live in their ancestral homeland. For Islamists, it is a religious war. Jews and Christians are Dhimmi. They are to be dominated and belittled.
So, what is Biden ranting about? Why is he outraged, when civilians are killed in numbers far fewer than in wars America fought? How many innocent civilians died in Europe, Japan, Korea, Viet Nam, Iraq and Afghanistan, not to mention the Central and South American dust-ups we got into?
So, Joe, pick a side. You can’t support both. Either Israel will vanquish Hamas, giving the region the chance to live in peace, or Hamas will remain intact and terrorize Israel at will. Our enemies already know America is a paper tiger and our allies question our reliability.
Sincerely Len Bennett, Author of ‘Unfinished Work’ Ottawa, Canada
Celebrating Earth Day
Dear Editor:
Why not Celebrate Earth Day April 22nd, 2024 every day. Besides recycling newspapers, magazines, glass, plastics, old medicines, paints and cleaning materials, consider other actions which will contribute to a cleaner environment. Leave your car at home. For local trips in the neighborhood, walk or ride a bike. For longer travels, consider public transportation. Long Island Rail Road, MTA NYC Transit subway, bus and Staten Island Railway, MTA Bus and NYC Economic Development Corporation Private Ferry operator program I offer various options funded with your tax dollars. They use less fuel and move more people than cars. Many employers offer transit checks to help subsidize costs. Utilize your investments and reap the benefits. You’ll be supporting a cleaner environment and be less stressed upon arrival at your destination.
Many employers allow employees to telecommute. Others use alternative work schedules, avoiding rush hour gridlock. This saves travel time and can improve gas mileage. Join a car or van pool to share commuting costs.
Use a hand powered lawn mower instead of a gasoline or electric one. Rake your leaves instead of using gasoline powered leaf blowers.
A cleaner environment starts with everyone.
Sincerely, Larry Penner
Schumer’s Betrayal Will Not Be Forgotten
Dear Editor:
It’s a shame that Senator Chuck Schumer isn’t up for re-election for another four years. But we Jews have long memories. We will remember that he stabbed Israel in the back when Israel is desperately fighting against Hamas murderers and rapists. And we will respond at the ballot box.
Sincerely, Moshe Berman Brooklyn
Street Protests 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
Iran’s Attack on Israel Spells Bad News
Dear Editor:
Concerning Iran’s unprecedented attack on Israel, I can only say that we saw this coming as an inevitable consequence of the disastrous Obama nuke deal that he initiated, lobbied for and oversaw. The fact that President Biden has made the revivification of this inherently dangerous deal a chief foreign policy objective is beyond reckless.
The Iranian regime has made it abundantly clear that their mission is to vanquish both the “little satan” and the “big satan” and we know that that means both Israel and the United States.
Now that Iran is perilously close to completing their uranium enrichment program, there is little doubt that very soon they will be in possession of a nuclear weapon and soon thereafter, it would not be at all surprising to learn that they have created an entire nuclear arsenal.
Too bad that the US financed this nefarious plot by unfreezing Iranian assets and waiving sanctions. Our only salvation is with the Master of the Universe and we had best learn that we have no one else to count on.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu speaks with U.S. President Joe Biden about the Iranian attack on April 14, 2024.
Credit: Prime Minister’s Spokesperson.
Biden’s efforts to prevent a strike on Iran are—like his demands intended to save Hamas from defeat—rooted in U.S. politics, not U.S. interests.
By: Jonathan S. Tobin
In the view of the Biden administration, restraint, like virtue, is its own reward. Having helped Israel fend off an unprecedented Iranian missile and drone attack on Saturday night, President Joe Biden reportedly told Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu that he should consider the successful interdiction of almost every one of the projectiles hurled at the Jewish state to be enough of a victory to satisfy his country and made it clear that Israel should refrain from ordering a retaliatory strike on the Islamist regime. Those calls were echoed by America’s European allies and others in the region.
t’s also not true that Jerusalem escalated the conflict with its recent successful attack on the Iranian embassy in Damascus that supposedly precipitated Tehran’s firing of all those missiles. Iran has been attacking Israel continuously by one means or another for years. (AP Photo/Omar Sanadiki)
Much like the world’s reaction to the atrocities perpetrated by Hamas in southern Israel on Oct. 7—Iran’s terrorist proxy in the Gaza Strip—the international community firmly believes that the best thing for Israel to do is exercise restraint.
There are reasonable arguments to be made for Israel to think carefully about the kind of response to Iran’s decision to escalate the ongoing conflict between the two countries. But the notion that Israeli security is best served by doing nothing or as little as possible—always Washington’s advice whenever Israel is attacked—is not as reasonable as both Biden’s apologists and Netanyahu’s critics seem to think.
More importantly, the assumption that needs to be rethought is that the most serious issue facing Israel and the United States in the Middle East right now is the danger of escalating the conflict with Iran. The relief felt by Israelis and those who care about the Jewish state the day after the Iranian attacks should not obscure the real problem behind this incident, as well as the ongoing war against Hamas in Gaza. It’s not that Israel has been too aggressive in seeking to force Iran to scale back its support for its terrorist allies and auxiliaries. It’s that years of Biden administration appeasement of Iran have led that rogue regime to believe that it can act with relative impunity. Requiring Israel to stand down merely grants an unearned and dangerous victory to Tehran.
Biden’s attempt to revive former President Barack Obama’s misguided diplomatic efforts to effect a rapprochement with Iran has, like the disastrous 2015 nuclear deal, enriched and empowered Iran. They also convinced many in the region that Tehran is the “strong horse,” rather than the alliance of Israel, the United States and allied Arab states like Saudi Arabia. Photo Credit: AP
Perceiving American weakness
Biden’s weakness and the clear evidence of the growing distance between Israel and the United States encouraged Iran and its allies to believe that attacks on the Jewish state—whether Hamas’s cross-border attacks on Oct. 7 or the weekend missile launches—would not merely be tolerated but also further expose Washington’s fecklessness.
Biden’s attempt to revive former President Barack Obama’s misguided diplomatic efforts to effect a rapprochement with Iran has, like the disastrous 2015 nuclear deal, enriched and empowered Iran. They also convinced many in the region that Tehran is the “strong horse,” rather than the alliance of Israel, the United States and allied Arab states like Saudi Arabia. Having gone a long way towards achieving its long-term goal of regional hegemony by exercising decisive influence, if not control, over Iraq, Syria and Lebanon along with its Hamas client in Gaza, Iran has engaged in a pattern of consistently aggressive behavior. That has not only strengthened its hold on these countries but also helped it deal with a restive population at home that longs to overthrow the abusive and corrupt theocratic regime.
There is a kernel of truth in the spin that some who want to downplay the Iranian attacks on Israel have been putting out since they failed to do any real damage or cause massive Israeli casualties. It’s not true that Iran hoped that they would fail. Iran remains the leading state sponsor of terrorism in the world, and as such, aims to intimidate and kill its opponents—be they Israelis, Jews, Americans, Europeans or Arabs.
But it is true that the regime’s Hezbollah auxiliaries in Lebanon—with a massive arsenal of missiles and rockets pointed at Israel—pose a far greater threat to the Jewish state than anything that could be launched from Iranian soil. The sheer volume of Hezbollah’s weaponry would overwhelm Israel’s air defense, causing grievous casualties and damage.
Sirens and explosions could be heard in Jerusalem on Sunday after Iran fired drones and missiles towards Israel. Photo Credit: AP
Iran’s decision not to give the orders to their Lebanese henchmen to open fire on Israel—both after Oct. 7 and now—is not a sign of goodwill or an attempt to de-escalate the conflict. Rather, it is more evidence that Tehran’s leaders regard Hezbollah as their last recourse of defense against an Israeli or American attack on their country or nuclear facilities. Their reasoning is if such an arsenal is used against Israel now, then they won’t be able to employ it if and when the survival of their tyrannical regime is at stake.
It’s also not true that Jerusalem escalated the conflict with its recent successful attack on the Iranian embassy in Damascus that supposedly precipitated Tehran’s firing of all those missiles. Iran has been attacking Israel continuously by one means or another for years, especially since its intervention in the Syrian civil war to save the Bashar Assad regime that was enabled by Obama backing down on his “red line” threat to the barbarous leader.
And since Oct. 7, Iran’s Hezbollah terrorists have been firing at northern Israel, rendering communities on the border uninhabitable and adding to the number of Jews who have been made refugees in their own country since the war with Hamas began. That is a problem that was created by Biden’s insistence on appeasing Iran—and by forcing the Israeli government led by Naftali Bennett and Yair Lapid to cede some of its natural-gas fields in the Mediterranean to Lebanon. Washington has also been seeking to prevent Israel from doing much to alleviate the threat from the north so as to avoid annoying Tehran.
Don’t expect sympathy
But even if there are strong reasons for Israel to avoid another exchange with the Islamic Republic while still fighting Hamas in Gaza, there are two widely prevalent misconceptions about this subject that need to be unwrapped.
The first is the belief that Israel gains diplomatically when it doesn’t strike back at its foes after it has been attacked.
Many on the Israeli left and elsewhere are now claiming that the current priority is to take advantage of the sympathy Israel is getting from being the intended victim of the Iranian attack. They believe that striking back will cost the Jewish state vital political support it would otherwise receive in the coming months from Americans and Europeans, who have been reminded about the dangerous neighborhood that surrounds it. By placidly standing down and closing this chapter, it will, we are told, earn Biden’s gratitude and regain some of the international goodwill it has lost because of the war against Hamas and the ensuing hardships caused to Palestinians in Gaza.
It is a mistake to think that Israel gains anything by allowing itself to play the victim or the role of the pliant American client state. To the contrary, any perception of Israeli weakness or a belief on the part of its foes that it can be held in check by American advice or threats is merely an invitation to up the ante and increase attacks, whether by terrorist forces or other means. The sight of dead Israelis and Jews inflames anti-Semitism rather than marginalizes it.
Israelis are grateful for the help that they received from the United States and other nations in defeating the Iranian attacks. However, the foreign assistance it got was not an act of philanthropy. Successful Iranian strikes on Israel endanger the entire region and make it even harder to achieve Biden’s goal of engaging with Tehran.
Hamas’s cross-border attacks on Oct. 7
Nor should anyone believe that Iranian attacks will increase sympathy for Israel in its war in Gaza. If the Hamas Oct. 7 massacre—the worst mass slaughter of Jews since the Holocaust—did nothing to make Israel more loved around the world, then Iranian missile strikes weren’t going to change anyone’s opinion. In the aftermath of those unspeakable acts, the media and anti-Israel activists were already condemning the Jewish state even before it began its counteroffensive against the terrorists. International opinion may mourn dead Jews, whether in the Holocaust or today, but it doesn’t have much sympathy for live ones, especially when they are armed and can defend themselves. While other wars, such as Iran’s in Syria, were ignored or tolerated, Israeli efforts at self-defense are called disproportionate or wrong no matter how justified.
Israel won’t gain a single friend for not sending a strong message to Iran that the price of harming Jews will be more than it wants to pay. On the flip side, the spectacle of Israel meekly obeying American orders and holding its fire will only encourage Tehran to continue provoking the Israelis and undermining the strategic interests of the West in the region.
Biden’s political interests
Equally obvious is that American calls for restraint have far more to do with Biden’s political interests than U.S. security.
The president is convinced that the main obstacle to his re-election this year stems from anger in the left wing of the Democratic Party about his initial support for Israel after Oct. 7. He believes that intersectional activists, as well as Arab-American or Muslim voters, will abandon him if he doesn’t prevent Israel from completing the job of destroying Hamas. That’s a mistake since his problems stem from the widespread perception of his weakness and failed open border policies that have encouraged massive illegal immigration and inflation.
As a result, the administration is determined to end the war against Hamas, even if it means a genocidal terrorist group allied with Iran is allowed to get away with mass murder. And those who agree with the false premise that Israel is at fault in the war or the big lie that it is committing genocide won’t like its leadership more if it doesn’t punish Iran. Biden’s eagerness to appease Iran is only matched by his desperate efforts to bend the knee to the extremists in his own party. That’s why he wants no further military action.
It is a mistake to think that Israel gains anything by allowing itself to play the victim or the role of the pliant American client state. To the contrary, any perception of Israeli weakness or a belief on the part of its foes that it can be held in check by American advice or threats is merely an invitation to up the ante and increase attacks, whether by terrorist forces or other means. The sight of dead Israelis and Jews inflames anti-Semitism rather than marginalizes it.
A president serious about deterring an enemy and halting global terrorism wouldn’t be counseling restraint. It would be actively seeking to aid Israeli efforts to combat Iran and its allies, including supporting the eradication of Hamas. Biden should be ramping up sanctions on Tehran to force its economy to its knees, rather than continuing to try to seduce it with bribes, like the $10 billion in frozen funds it recently freed up for them.
Instead, Biden is—as he has done since taking office—continuing to send mixed messages that have only encouraged Iranian adventurism in the region. Israel should do what it needs to do in its own way and at a time of its choosing to make Iran back down. But the more we hear talk of American pressure for Jerusalem to exercise restraint, the more certain it is that the long-term result will only be more bloodshed and Iranian-backed terror.
NPR’s newly appointed CEO, Katherine Maher finds herself embroiled in controversy over past tweets and accusations of journalistic bias. Photo Credit: Wikipedia.org
In a recent turn of events at NPR, the radio network’s newly appointed CEO, Katherine Maher, finds herself embroiled in controversy over past tweets and accusations of journalistic bias, as was reported by the New York Post. The emergence of Maher’s social media activity, coupled with veteran editor Uri Berliner’s scathing critique of NPR’s clearly left-leaning slant, has reignited debates about journalistic integrity and objectivity within the organization.
Maher’s ascent to the helm of NPR was met with both anticipation and scrutiny. However, her past social media engagement has resurfaced to haunt her, particularly tweets characterized by staunch anti-Trump sentiments and unapologetic alignment with progressive ideologies. Indicated in the Post report was that among these tweets, one from 2018 bluntly stating “Donald Trump is a racist” stands out, exemplifying Maher’s unabashed partisanship. Although the tweet has since been removed from the platform, its preservation on Archive.Today raises questions about the timing and motivations behind its deletion, especially in light of Maher’s new leadership role.
In response to Berliner’s damning essay in The Free Press, wherein he highlighted NPR’s alleged far left wing ideology and criticized Maher’s leadership, the CEO penned a letter to staff members. According to the information in the Post report, in her letter, Maher expressed dismay over Berliner’s portrayal, labeling it as “profoundly disrespectful, hurtful, and demeaning.” However, her response notably sidestepped addressing the substantive evidence presented by Berliner regarding NPR’s leftist slant, the report added. Instead, Maher emphasized NPR’s commitment to diversity and its role in representing the complexity of American society.
Veteran editor Uri Berliner’s scathing critique of NPR’s clearly left-leaning slant, has reignited debates about journalistic integrity and objectivity within the organization. Photo Credit: X.com
The juxtaposition between Maher’s public statements and NPR’s journalistic principles underscores the challenges facing the organization in navigating political polarization and maintaining credibility. As per the report in the Post, Maher’s past tweets, including attempts to rationalize the looting during the George Floyd riots as retribution for historical injustices, raise concerns about her ability to uphold journalistic impartiality and objectivity.
In one tweet, she remarked on looting, acknowledging its counterproductivity but contextualizing it within the broader framework of systemic oppression. The Post report said that Maher’s assertion that it’s difficult to prioritize private property over the historical injustices endured by marginalized communities reflects a perspective steeped in social justice activism.
The following day, Maher addressed her followers on the issue of “white silence,” condemning it as complicity in perpetuating racial injustice. She urged white individuals to initiate conversations within their communities, emphasizing the importance of ally ship and solidarity in the fight against systemic racism.
Moreover, Berliner’s critique sheds light on deeper institutional issues within NPR, prompting introspection regarding editorial practices and ideological influences.The Post report said that as a renowned business editor, Berliner’s perspective carries weight and demands attention from both NPR leadership and the broader journalistic community.
These remarks have sparked debate over Maher’s ability to lead NPR impartially, especially given her lack of prior experience in journalism or media. Detailed in the Post report was that before assuming her role at NPR, Maher served as the CEO of the Wikimedia Foundation, a nonprofit organization known for hosting Wikipedia. Her background includes communications roles at prominent institutions such as HSBC, UNICEF, and the World Bank. The Post report added that Maher holds a bachelor’s degree in Middle Eastern and Islamic studies from New York University and hails from Wilton, Connecticut, where her mother, Ceci Maher, serves as a Democratic state senator.
Maher’s social media activity has raised concerns about her objectivity and the potential impact on NPR’s editorial direction. While her advocacy for social justice issues may resonate with some audiences, others question whether it compromises NPR’s reputation for impartial reporting, as was pointed out in the Post report. As a public media organization funded by taxpayer dollars, NPR is expected to uphold principles of fairness, accuracy, and balance in its coverage.
In his essay, published on Tuesday, Berliner didn’t mince words, criticizing NPR for its handling of the Hunter Biden laptop scandal in 2020. He alleged that NPR deliberately ignored the story, fearing it could sway the presidential election in favor of Donald Trump. According to the information contained in the Post report, Berliner’s critique goes beyond specific incidents, painting a broader picture of NPR as an “openly polemical news outlet” catering to a niche audience rather than adhering to principles of impartiality and balance.
One of Berliner’s key grievances was NPR’s coverage of the Russia collusion saga, which he described as biased and sensationalized. As was revealed in the Post report, he accused NPR of aligning itself too closely with Trump’s political adversaries, particularly Rep. Adam Schiff, without critically examining the evidence or providing balanced perspectives.
To understand NPR’s editorial decisions, Berliner conducted his own investigation into the political affiliations of its staff. His findings were striking: in NPR’s Washington, D.C. headquarters, he found 87 registered Democrats in editorial positions and zero Republicans, as was affirmed by the Post. This revelation raises questions about the diversity of viewpoints within NPR’s newsroom and its potential impact on editorial decision-making.
Despite Berliner’s damning accusations, NPR’s response has been limited. The Post also reported that Maher’s letter to staff on Friday did not address Berliner’s findings or refute any of his claims of bias. The broadcaster’s silence on the matter has only fueled speculation and intensified scrutiny over its editorial practices.
NPR’s reluctance to engage with these allegations underscores the challenges facing media organizations in an era of heightened polarization and mistrust. As public trust in the media continues to erode, outlets like NPR are under increasing pressure to demonstrate transparency, accountability, and a commitment to journalistic integrity.
A logo is displayed at the PEN America Literary Awards on Thursday, March 2, 2023, in New York. Several authors have turned down awards and awards nominations from PEN America for this year’s ceremony, citing unhappiness with the literary and free expression organization’s stance on the war in Gaza. (Photo by Evan Agostini/Invision/AP, File)
By: Hillel Italie
Several authors have turned down awards and awards nominations from PEN America, citing unhappiness with the literary and free expression organization’s stance on the war in Gaza.
This week, PEN announced its long lists in categories ranging from the $75,000 Jean Stein Award for best book to the $10,000 PEN/Hemingway award for first novel. Authors who have asked for their names to be withdrawn include Jean Stein nominee Camonghne Felix, poetry finalist Eugenia Leigh and short story nominee Ghassan Zeineddine.
“I decided to decline this recognition and asked to be removed from the long list in solidarity with the ongoing protest of PEN’s continued normalization and denial of genocide,” Felix, author of the memoir “Dyscalculia,” wrote on X.
The awards are scheduled to be handed out during an April 29 ceremony in Manhattan, hosted by writer-comedian Jena Friedman. A PEN spokesperson said that nine out of 60 nominated authors had asked for their names to be withdrawn. PEN also confirmed that Esther Allen had declined the PEN/Ralph Manheim Award for translation and added that it would soon announce a new winner.
On Friday, PEN announced that playwright-screenwriter Tony Kushner was this year’s winner of the PEN/Mike Nichols Writing for Performance Award, previously given to Tina Fey, Kenneth Lonergan and Elaine May among others. Credit: pen.org
“We respect their decision and we will celebrate these writers in other ways,” said Clarisse Rosaz Shariyf, who oversees PEN’s literary programming.
PEN’s response to Israel’s invasion of Gaza, following the deadly Oct. 7 attack by Hamas, has been widely criticized by writers who believe the organization has failed to fully condemn the war that has left tens of thousands of Palestinians dead, including hundreds of writers, academics and journalists.
An open letter published in March and signed by Naomi Klein, Lorrie Moore and dozens of others contends that PEN had not “launched any substantial coordinated support” for Palestinians and was not upholding its mission to “dispel all hatreds and to champion the ideal of one humanity living in peace and equality in one world.” The letter’s endorsers contrasted PEN’s forceful protests against the Russian invasion of Ukraine and alleged that PEN had done little to “mobilize” members against the Gaza war.
“Palestine’s poets, scholars, novelists and journalists and essayists have risked everything, including their lives and the lives of their families, to share their words with the world,” the letter reads in part. “Yet PEN America appears unwilling to stand with them firmly against the powers that have oppressed and dispossessed them for the last 75 years.”
A PEN spokesperson noted that the organization has issued numerous statements calling for a ceasefire and mourning the destruction of museums, libraries and mosques in Gaza, and has helped set up a $100,000 emergency fund for Palestinian writers. PEN America CEO Suzanne Nossel said in a statement that PEN shared with many the “sorrow and anguish at the horrific costs of the Israel-Hamas war, including for writers, poets, artists and journalists.
“We approach every conflict — Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan, Ukraine, Gaza — on its own terms, mindful of complexities, what we can contribute, our constituencies, our partners and our principles,” she added. “When we take positions, we do not align with states, armies or political groups but with freedom of expression and the preconditions to enable it.”
The criticisms come before PEN’s high-profile spring events, including the PEN literary awards and a key May 16 fund-raising gala at the American Museum of Natural History in Manhattan. Klein and the letter’s other signers have said they will be boycotting PEN’s “World Voices” festival next month in Los Angeles and New York, an international gathering featuring panel discussions and lectures.
PEN does continue to attract high-profile guests, including opponents of the war,
On Friday, PEN announced that playwright-screenwriter Tony Kushner was this year’s winner of the PEN/Mike Nichols Writing for Performance Award, previously given to Tina Fey, Kenneth Lonergan and Elaine May among others. Marcia Gay Harden, who starred in the 1993-94 Broadway production of Kushner’s Pulitzer Prize-winning “Angels in America,” and Rachel Zegler, a Golden Globe winner for her performance as Maria in the 2021 Kushner-Steven Spielberg adaptation of “West Side Story,” will present the Nichols award during the April 29 event.
Nichols, who died in 2014, directed the acclaimed HBO “Angels in America” miniseries that was released in 2003.
“It’s intimidating enough that this honor is named after Mike Nichols, no one ever understood better than him the ways words can be made to perform. But then there’s the list of past recipients, each and every one a writer I adore,” Kushner said in a statement. “To say I feel unworthy is not to say I’m not gleefully accepting! I loved working with Mike; he was a magnificent artist and a dear friend.
“I’m always pleased to be associated with PEN, whose work promoting and protecting writers is even more vitally important in turbulent, troubled times like ours.”
Kushner, who is Jewish, has long criticized Israel’s treatment of the Palestinians and recently told the Israeli newspaper Haaretz that the country’s invasion of Gaza “looks like ethnic cleansing to me.” He added that the history of Jewish suffering should not be used “as an excuse for a project of dehumanizing or slaughtering other people.”
Tensions over the Gaza war have extended throughout the arts community. Kushner was among the defenders of last month’s Oscar acceptance speech by “Zone of Interest” director Jonathan Glazer, who warned against “dehumanization” — as depicted in his Holocaust drama, winner for best international film — and stated, “Whether the victims of October the 7th in Israel, or the ongoing attack on Gaza, all the victims, this dehumanization, how do we resist?”
Hundreds of Jews working in Hollywood condemned Glazer, writing in an open letter that “We refute our Jewishness being hijacked for the purpose of drawing a moral equivalence between a Nazi regime that sought to exterminate a race of people, and an Israeli nation that seeks to avert its own extermination.”
Kushner will not be the only war critic at the awards ceremony. PEN/Jean Stein finalist Aaliyah Bilal, who last fall as a National Book Awards nominee read a letter from the stage calling for an end to the war, said she will be attending the PEN event. The author of the debut story collection “Temple Folk” told The Associated Press that while she respected the decisions of those who dropped out, she was at odds with the central PEN America leadership and not those managing the awards.
The story of O.J. Simpson’s life was inherently cinematic — what started as fodder for a triumphant sports biopic abruptly became something much darker and complex as Simpson slid from fame to infamy following the killings of Nicole Brown Simpson and Ronald Goldman. Credit: AP
By: Mallika Sen
The story of O.J. Simpson’s life was inherently cinematic — what started as fodder for a triumphant sports biopic abruptly became something much darker and complex as Simpson slid from fame to infamy following the killings of Nicole Brown Simpson and Ronald Goldman.
It’s little wonder then that Simpson’s many-chaptered life — his football career, acting forays, murder trial, acquittal, civil liability judgment, sports memorabilia robbery conviction and finally, his death Wednesday — has spawned a whole ecosystem of media.
Much of it rests firmly in the dubious realm of the lurid and sensational, from the widely panned horror movie that posits Brown Simpson was murdered by a serial killer to Simpson’s own hypothetical confessional book, “If I Did It.” The Simpson case is ubiquitous in pop culture, too, with direct portrayals in countless TV shows like “The Simpsons” (no relation), a name-check in Jay-Z’s “The Story of O.J.” and a direct throughline to the Kardashians’ reality television and business empires. Norman Mailer, the Pulitzer Prize winner convicted of stabbing his own wife, even adapted the case into a television movie, “American Tragedy.”
You won’t find any of those on this list. Here, instead, The Associated Press has collected 10 documentaries, television shows, books and podcasts exploring Simpson’s life and influence with key insights.
“O.J.: Made in America”
This list isn’t ordered, but if you only have the appetite for one piece of media, set aside roughly eight hours for this definitive documentary. Directed by Ezra Edelman for ESPN Films, the five-part project that aired on ABC and ESPN covers the so-called trial of the century in explicit detail, but it takes three parts just to get there. “O.J.: Made in America” contextualizes Simpson’s life, career and notoriety with race relations in the U.S. It became the longest movie to win an Oscar when it won best documentary in 2017, where Edelman dedicated his statuette to Brown Simpson, Goldman, their families and the victims of police brutality.
“O.J.: Made in America” is streaming on ESPN+ and is available for purchase on other online platforms.
“June 17th, 1994”
Another installment of ESPN Films’ “30 for 30,” the Brett Morgen-directed 2010 documentary clocks in much shorter, at less than an hour. The documentary takes its title from the date of the slow-speed Ford Bronco chase, but it doesn’t rehash it. Instead, “June 17th, 1994” captures that day through the lens of the other sports events happening that day, including Arnold Palmer’s final U.S. Open round and the start of the World Cup. In ranking it as the best “30 for 30” in 2014, Rolling Stone magazine said it shows “how viewers process television, and how the media struggles to make sense of events that have no clear outcome.”
“June 17th, 1994” is streaming on ESPN+.
“O.J. Simpson: Juice on the Loose”
Directed by George Romero — yes, he of the “Night of the Living Dead” films and a zombie movie godfather — this 1974 documentary follows Simpson as an up-and-coming Buffalo Bills running back. As the only entry on this list produced before Simpson’s descent into notoriety, it’s an untainted glimpse into Simpson’s early life and early fame.
“O.J. Simpson: Juice on the Loose” isn’t available to stream on traditional platforms, but can be found on the Internet Archive.
The World Central Kitchen vehicle mistakenly hit by the IDF in Deir al Balah, Gaza Strip, April 2nd, 2024. Photo credit: AP Photo/Ismael Abu Dayyah
By: Karen Bekker
“The Jews wanted war, and now they have it. … Every Jew is our enemy in this historic struggle,” Joseph Goebbels wrote on November 16, 1941. One recent antisemitic slur didn’t sound so different: “This doesn’t seem [to be] a war against terror, this doesn’t seem anymore a war about defending Israel, this really at this point seems it’s a war against humanity itself,” Chef José Andrés told Martha Raddatz last Sunday, April 7. Not only did Raddatz have no pushback, ABC quoted the dehumanizing trope for its print headline.
As John-Paul Pagano explained in a 2018 article in Tablet, this portrayal of Jews as anti-human is a hallmark of the kind of conspiratorial thinking that underlies the most lethal forms of anti-Semitism:
Most forms of racism today depict their victims as subhuman—an “other” that is something less than “us.” But as with all conspiracy theories, the anti-Semite regards his object of obsession—the Jews—as an “other” that is both inhuman and anti-human. Meaning that Jews are so hideous and evil they revel in abominable practices no society could tolerate while, at the same time, exerting a supernatural control over the society that is forced to suffer them.
Anti-Semitism doesn’t stop at segregation or exploitation. The Jews are a kind of cosmic oppressor who must be resisted and destroyed.
More specifically, as a recent study showed, the portrayal of Jews as people with exceptional capacity for malevolence became a focus of Nazi propaganda after July of 1941, when the Holocaust began.
That this type of rhetoric, claiming that Israel is at “war against humanity itself,” is now finding its way into the mainstream of American dialogue on ABC’s This Week with George Stephanopoulos, should concern everyone.
Andrés must have been unaware that military expert John Spencer, Chair of Urban Warfare Studies at the Modern War Institute (MWI) at West Point, has explained that Israel “has implemented more measures to prevent civilian casualties than any other military in history,” and that military expert Brigadier General (Ret) Mark Kimmitt, former Assistant Secretary of State for Political-Military Affairs, said that Israel uses “extensive procedures … to enforce tough standards aimed at minimizing civilian deaths and protecting infrastructure.” Nor does he seem to know that White House National Security Council Spokesperson John Kirby has said of the steps Israel takes to avoid civilian casualties, “there are very few modern militaries in the world that would do that. I don’t know that we would do that.” Nor did Raddatz point these things out to Andrés or to her audience.
Andrés didn’t have a bad word to say about the Hamas operative who allegedly boarded one of World Central Kitchen’s vehicles and fired into the air before the tragic April 1 incident in which seven workers from his NGO were killed. When Raddatz asked Andrés about the IDF’s finding that a Hamas operative had fired from an aid truck, Andres replied, “Every time something happens, we cannot just be bringing Hamas into the question.” Nevermind, I guess, that Hamas started this war and uses civilians as human shields. Let’s not bring them into this.
The International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance definition of antisemitism includes applying a double standard to Israel among its examples. On August 29, 2021, a US drone strike in Kabul killed ten civilians, including seven children, as the US attempted to leave Afghanistan. It was deemed a mistake, and no US troops were punished. On December 12, 2013, a US drone strike hit a wedding party in Yemen, killing twelve people and injuring 24. The US refused to acknowledge these civilian deaths. On April 7, 2011, a NATO “friendly fire” strike in Libya killed five fighters, and a week earlier another NATO strike killed 13 people including ambulance workers.
And on October 3, 2015, the US hit a Doctors Without Borders hospital, killing 42 people. A US aircraft, “fired 211 shells at the hospital compound over 29 minutes before commanders realized the mistake and ordered a halt.” The incident was deemed a mistake, and while 16 members of the military were disciplined, none faced criminal charges or court-martial.
As Brendon O’Neill wrote in the Spectator, “We make mistakes, they [Israelis] commit crimes. We err, they murder. We should be forgiven, they should not.”
But Andrés doesn’t just unconsciously apply a double standard to Israel – he openly embraces doing so: “If somebody knows suffering that’s the people of Israel. If somebody really understands the meaning of suffering, if somebody should be holding the highest standards of humanity, I will say that’s also the people of Israel.” In other words, according to Andrés’s warped logic, because Jews have been persecuted and slaughtered in the past, they should allow themselves to be slaughtered in the present without fighting back. ABC and Raddatz had no problems with this.
Unsurprisingly, Rolling Stone, which, with Noah Shachtman’s departure, is back under the leadership of Sean Woods, saw fit to amplify this Nazi-esq slur with its own headline. When Woods was last at the helm of the music magazine, in 2021, he ran six biased stories about Israel in the eleven days between May 17 and May 27, while Israel was fighting a war in which Hamas indiscriminately launched over 4000 rockets at Israeli civilians. (Woods is also the editor responsible for Rolling Stone’s now-retracted reporting on the University of Virginia rape story.)
The deaths of the workers from World Central Kitchen are tragic and Andrés is entitled to his grief over the incident. But that grief does not give license to the types of comments that he made to Raddatz on Sunday.
Karen Bekker is the Assistant Director of CAMERA’s Media Response Team. Prior to joining CAMERA, she practiced law for nine years as a commercial litigator.
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.
The bottom line is this: Tucker Carlson’s interview with Munther Isaac was, among other things, a manipulative attempt to shame American officials and Christian leaders – Evangelicals in particular. Credit: FoxNews.com
By: Tricia Miller
Under the guise of advocating for Palestinian Christians, Tucker Carlson launched a two-pronged assault on Israel and American political and Christian support for the Jewish State. To provide legitimacy for his campaign, he enlisted the help of Rev. Dr. Munther Isaac, pastor of the Evangelical Lutheran Christmas Church in Bethlehem and notorious propagandist for the Palestinian anti-Israel narrative. Carlson’s interview with Isaac aired on April 9, 2024, on “Tucker Carlson on X,” receiving tens of thousands of likes and shares.
Munther Isaac has a long history of promoting falsehoods about Israel and the Arab-Israeli conflict in his roles as pastor, academic dean of Bethlehem Bible College (a self-identified Evangelical university that promotes a Palestinian Christian theology), and director of Christ at the Checkpoint conferences (the infamous venue where anti-Israel libels are proclaimed in the name of Christian love, justice and peace).
For many years, CAMERA has exposed the deceptiveness in Isaac’s teaching, as well as the fallacious theological and historical foundation of the narrative promoted by Bethlehem Bible College and Christ at the Checkpoint. Examples of that documentation can be seen here, here, and here. In light of the blatantly anti-Jewish activism of Isaac and these institutions, it is appalling that Carlson would provide a platform for such thinly-veiled hatred.
Carlson’s conversation with Isaac promoted multiple false claims including the alleged mistreatment of Christians by Israel, the cause of the significantly diminished Christian population of Bethlehem, and reasons behind the current suffering of Gazan civilians. The obvious agenda behind Carlson’s line of questions and Isaac’s libelous answers was the demonization of Israel and all elected officials and Christians who dare to support the Jewish State.
Thanks to Carlson, anti-Israel Christian Palestinians have found a new outlet through which to propagate their deceptive propaganda, rooted in theological, historical and geo-political error. It is irresponsible, and in fact dangerous, for Carlson to facilitate the presentation of blatant lies and anti-Semitic libels when there is an unprecedented rise in Jew-hatred worldwide and Israel is in the midst of an existential war initiated by terrorists who seek its annihilation.
The bottom line is this: Tucker Carlson’s interview with Munther Isaac was, among other things, a manipulative attempt to shame American officials and Christian leaders – Evangelicals in particular – for their support of Israel in the hope of turning that support away from the Jewish State when it is needed now more than ever.
Tricia Miller is the Director of CAMERA’s Partnership of Christians and Jews She monitors Christian organizations and media activity related to the Arab-Israeli conflict. Her articles have appeared in numerous publications, including First Things, The Algemeiner, New English Review, Charisma News, Breaking Israel News, Times of Israel, JNS, and the Jerusalem Post’s Christian Edition. She is the author of two books, “Three Versions of Esther” (2014) and “Jews and Anti-Judaism in Esther and the Church” (2015) about the relationship of Esther to current Christian anti-Judaism and anti-Zionism.
The End of Race Politics: Arguments for a Colorblind America’ by Coleman Hughes. Photo Credit: Amazon.com
By: David Lewis Schaefer
Between the end of the Civil War and the enactment of the Civil Rights Act (1964) and Voting Rights Act (1965), the goal of nearly all advocates of racial equality in the United States could be summed up as “colorblindness.”
As African-American journalist Coleman Hughes reminds us in The End of Race Politics, that aim—the “dream” Martin Luther King Jr. expressed in his speech at the Lincoln Memorial of a society where Americans would be judged “not by the color of their skin but by the content of their character”—was shared by the abolitionist/civil rights advocates Wendell Phillips and Frederick Douglass, black union leader A. Philip Randolph, the NAACP, and many others. It was also the expression used by Supreme Court justice John Marshall Harlan in his dissenting opinion in Plessy v. Ferguson (1896), in which he denied the constitutionality of Louisiana’s law mandating racial segregation in passenger trains: “Our Constitution is color-blind, and neither knows nor tolerates classes among citizens. In respect of civil rights, all citizens are equal before the law.”
By “colorblindness,” Hughes of course doesn’t mean literal blindness to the fact that human beings have different shades of skin coloration. Rather, the “colorblind” attitude he espouses is “an ethical principle: … We should treat people without regard to race, both in our public policy and in our private lives.” In other words, people’s skin color should be no more relevant to the way we view our fellows, both legally and individually, than other characteristics like their height or the length of their noses.
Since the triumphs of the civil rights movement in the Supreme Court’s Brown v. Board of Education decision in 1955 outlawing public-school segregation, and the civil rights legislation of the 1960s, polls have exhibited a remarkable transformation in white people’s attitudes toward their black fellow citizens—as witnessed, for instance, in the rapid acceptance of interracial marriage. Not only because of any legal compulsions, but out of a genuine concern to promote equal rights, corporations as well as government agencies have endeavored to “diversify” the race of their employees, including in the executive ranks.
Yet ironically, lamentably, the decline in anti-black racism and the opening of opportunities for advancement to black people has not led to a decline in the overall level of race-consciousness in our society. Instead, as Hughes demonstrates, it has been supplanted by an attitude he labels “neoracism”: one championed by professional “antiracists” like Ta-Nehisi Coates, Boston University professor Ibram X. Kendi, and (white) author/lecturer Robin DiAngelo, which holds that “whiteness” as such is an “oppressive” category, and demands that public policy explicitly favor black people over whites, either on the ground of the latter’s inherent inferiority, or as a way of making amends for the heritage of slavery and discrimination previously suffered by blacks.
In a series of clear and pithy chapters, Hughes demolishes both the principles and the policies of the neoracist movement—despite the growing influence they have achieved on mainstream media, academia, and government. One common error, for instance (dissected at greater length by economist Thomas Sowell) is the equation of any disparities in the way that members of different races are treated, even when there is a clear nonracist explanation of the difference, and when policies aimed to eliminate the disparities actually harm black people.
Hence, since the George Floyd riots, cities have been urged to “defund” their police departments, since black people tend to be arrested at a higher ratio than whites or Asians. This neglects the fact that crime rates tend (for whatever reason) to be higher among blacks, and that a 2020 Gallup poll showed that 81 percent of black Americans wanted either the same, or greater, police presence in their neighborhoods (since blacks also tend disproportionately to be crime victims).
Another neoracist trick is to misuse the term “affirmative action.” Like a majority of Americans, Hughes favors affirmative action in its original sense—making a concerted effort to locate well-qualified black candidates for college admissions or executive positions who might not have been aware of the availability of these openings. (In the late 1960s, the college where I taught recruited black students from rural Georgia who might never have thought of attending a Catholic school in New England; a number of those they admitted, including Justice Clarence Thomas, went on to outstanding careers in fields like law and literature.)
For several decades, however, the term “affirmative action” has been a euphemism for favoring black applicants over white ones, for no other reason than their skin color. This policy of outright discrimination meant that, according to one study of elite colleges, “when other factors were held equal, Asians and whites had to score 450 and 310 points higher than black applicants, respectively, to have the same odds of being admitted.” Imagine people’s reaction, Hughes asks, “if every college rejection letter” included the explanation that the applicant would have been admitted “if you had been black rather than Asian.” (While Hughes’s book was published before the Court struck down such practices in its Fair Admissions decision, administrators at elite colleges, and public-education officials supervising competitive-admissions high schools, have already schemed to evade the decision.)
Not only are such race-based policies a recipe for racial strife rather than harmony; echoing the findings of Richard Sander and Stuart Taylor in their book Mismatch: How Affirmative Action Hurts Students It’s Intended to Help, and Why Universities Won’t Admit It, Hughes observes that they are detrimental to the interests of black students themselves: When admitted to colleges for which they lack the necessary qualifications, blacks often either wind up dropping out, or else switch from demanding majors (in the sciences, or pre-med) to easier ones (like sociology)—whereas they would have been more likely to succeed in difficult majors at schools for which they were better qualified. (And when it is widely known that the qualifications blacks must demonstrate for college or professional schools are lower than those for whites, clients or patients may be less inclined to employ their services as doctors or lawyers.)
Hughes is cutting in his refutation of another neoracist demand: that black people deserve tangible “reparations” for slavery. As he notes, “much has been done” by government and in our culture in the spirit of reparations, with both houses of Congress having formally apologized for slavery in 2008-09, federal holidays commemorating Martin Luther King and Juneteenth, the annual observance of Black History Month, and a Smithsonian museum devoted to African-American history.
But as Hughes adds, “Americans, and white Westerners broadly, may be the only population on Earth that feels any noteworthy amount of guilt” for its past enslavement of other people—noting the absence of regret expressed, for instance, by Muslim Arabs for having enslaved some 14 million Africans, or by West Africans for the capture and enslavement of other Africans for sale to Western slave traders.
In any event, Hughes refutes the myths propagated by neoracists that contemporary black Americans, whatever their station in life, suffer from the “inherited trauma” of slavery, and hence are bound to experience victimhood. Aside from the fact that many present-day white and black people are descended from immigrants who arrived in this country well after Emancipation (or from Northerners who fought to achieve it in the Civil War), promoting a sense of victimization is the opposite of “what a wise therapist” would do for victims of trauma, “promot[ing] a mindset that treats hardship as something that people are powerless to overcome,” rather than encouraging a sense of “autonomy and agency” in them. Worst of all, some neoracists patronize black people by claiming that attributes like “hard work, self-reliance, and the nuclear family” are characteristics of “white dominant culture” and thus merit rejection.
I can mention only briefly a couple of other excellent elements in Hughes’s book. One is his dissection of the flawed “doll test” on which the Court grounded its Brown decision, in place of a constitutional analysis (like Harlan’s) that would have explained the unacceptability, in principle, of racial segregation in public schools. Another is his espousal of expanded charter schools as a means of providing black kids with an alternative to the miserable, unionized public schools they often must otherwise attend. (He cites research of Harvard professor Roland Fryer that refutes the claim that charter schools’ success is just due to student self-selection—a finding, I would add, buttressed by the work of Sowell in Charter Schools and Their Enemies and Harvard political scientist Paul Peterson.)
I wish that every American could be induced to read this persuasive, sensible, and very accessible book.
Along with our prayers for the hostages and our valiant soldiers, we are praying for peace and tranquility for all of Israel. This year may we all say, with complete intention and sincerity, “Next Year in Jerusalem!”
By: Rabbi Leo Dee
A number of friends from around the world have asked me what they should focus on this year during their Seder. It seems clear to me that the most important thing to discuss with all our closest friends and family around the table this year is our plans for Aliyah. Let me explain.
My Rosh Yeshiva, Rabbi Shlomo Riskin, asks a fascinating question about why the story of Rabbi Eliezer, Rabbi Yehoshua, Rabbi Elazar ben Azariah, Rabbi Akiva and Rabbi Tarfon is told at the beginning of the Haggadah. They are talking all night about “leaving Egypt” and then their students come to tell them that it is time to say the Shema.
The whole premise of this story is bizarre, because Shema is said at sunrise, so how could they not have noticed the time? If the whole point of the story is that they were so engrossed in their discussion that they did not notice, then what is the message? That the Biblical mitzvah of saying the Shema is less important than the Seder? Additionally, Rabbi Eliezer states elsewhere in the Talmud that one must spend festivals with one’s family, in which case, what was he doing spending Seder night with Rabbi Akiva and his colleagues in Bnei Brak?
Rabbi Riskin explains that this was the year of the Bar Kochba Revolt and that “leaving Egypt” is actually a codeword for returning to Jerusalem and building the 3rd Temple. When the Haggadah was (re)written during the years of exile, the Rabbis intended Seder night to be the time to gather and plan our return to Zion. Because were nervous about the response of the Gentiles in whose countries we were living, they encoded this message in a way that only Jews would understand it.
We know that the four cups, the four questions and the four sons are connected to the four expressions of redemption: “I will take you out,” “I will save you,” I will redeem you,” and “I will take you.” (Shemot 6:6-7). That seems very symmetrical. However, there are actually five expressions of redemption in the Torah, the fifth being “I will bring you to the land” (Shemot 6:8). So, of course, there are actually five cups of wine on Seder night, the fifth being the cup of Elijah that is left undrunk until we return to Zion (Rabbi Riskin and others drink this cup of wine at the Seder every year, to celebrate our return to Zion).
Similarly, there is a fifth question mentioned in the Talmud: “Why is the meat eaten roasted?” This refers to the Paschal Lamb (Pesach) symbolized on our Seder plate by the shank-bone, but representing all the sacrifices brought in the Temple, when it is rebuilt.
The Lubavitch Rebbe explained that there are actually five sons; the fifth is so detached from his heritage that he is not even present at the Seder, but he too will be redeemed in the end.
Let’s face it, if the topic of the Seder was actually the Exodus from Egypt, then we would just need to read the relevant Torah portions–Vaeira, Bo and Beshalach–which narrate the story of the ten plagues and the crossing of the Red Sea, and then we could get down to the real business of eating a delicious meal! Instead, the main text of the Haggadah is the declaration over the first fruits that the farmers say in Sefer Devarim (26:5-8), which describes the suffering we went through in Egypt and how God took us out.
In fact, the Haggadah stops short by one verse–Devarim 26:9–missing out the end of the story: “And He brought us to this place, and He gave us this land, a land flowing with milk and honey.” Interestingly, the Rambam recommends that we do read to the end of the section, because presumably he wishes us to include this finale.
Of course, the real theme of Seder night becomes clear when we reach the final line of the Haggadah: “Next year in Jerusalem!”
So, with all this in mind, there could be no better activity during Seder night this year than to have a serious discussion with all one’s loved ones assembled around the table. If we were to make Aliyah this year (or next), where would we choose to live? How many housing units would we need? How would we accommodate our grandparents, college-aged kids, high-schoolers and infants? What jobs would we look for?
October 7th changed everything for Jews in Israel and around the world. It became clearer than ever that life in exile is not what it was cracked up to be. Antisemitism is again overt and dangerous.
Please G-d, the war against Hamas will be won quickly and decisively, and peace will return to our borders. The “land flowing with milk and honey” will again be much more attractive than the “land whose streets are paved with gold”. While academia is teaching the next generation of Western leaders that anti-Semitism has a legitimate context, our children should consider which society they want to be a part of. While the world is confused about right and wrong, and seemingly doomed by its lack of moral education, there is one place that will always be a center for sanity and Jewish values.
Along with our prayers for the hostages and our valiant soldiers, we are praying for peace and tranquility for all of Israel. This year may we all say, with complete intention and sincerity, “Next Year in Jerusalem!”
Rabbi Leo Dee is an educator living in Efrat. His book “Transforming the World: The Jewish Impact on Modernity” has been republished in English and Hebrew in memory of his wife Lucy and daughters Maia and Rina, who were murdered by terrorists in April 2023.
Following the tragedy and carnage, the venerable Rabbi Akiva gazed upon the desolation of the Temple Mount and Jerusalem and envisioned the actualization the visions of the prophets for the future. His colleagues heard his words and replied, “Akiva, you have comforted us.” Credit: Chabad.org
By: Larry Domnitch
The redemption from Egypt occurred within the confines of one day, but the events which lead to the redemption occurred over the course of generations.
The Torah states, “And it was on this very day that all the legions of Hashem left Egypt,” (Shemot 12:41).
Pharaoh ordered Israel to leave and they eagerly departed Egypt. They sought to leave Egypt which was steeped in depravity and immorality. Unlike the prior months during the plagues when many Israelites had desired to remain in Egypt as their persecution ended, this time they departed and hastily.
However, just ten sentences later, the words seem to imply that Israel did not leave willingly. The Torah states, “And it happened on that very day: Hashem took the Children of Israel out of the land of Egypt in their legions.” (Exodus 12:51)
Did they leave or where they taken out?
Actually both scenarios occurred. On that day the Torah does not record any miracles on the day of the exodus, but without the many wonders performed which preceded the exodus, it would not have taken place. Hence, this time Israel departed from Egypt willingly but Hashem’s miracles had taken them out.
In 1948, when Israel was declared an independent state, many of its six hundred thousand were survivors of the Nazi Holocaust. Others had fled persecution in Europe and other lands, over decades prior to World War Two. The new born state of less than 600,000 was a small fraction of the Jewish world which comprised 12,000,000. Photo Credit: YadVaShem.org
Then, after a prolonged existence in their land, the Judeans were exiled at the time of the destruction of the first Temple by the Babylonian empire. Prophets of Israel offered solace foretelling that the Jews will someday return. As waves of exiles were forced out, the thought of return must have seemed so distant. The prophet Jeremiah had reassured them, “And there is hope for your future. And your children shall return from their borders.” (31:17) These words echoed those of Hashem to Abraham, “To your descendants I have given this land.” (Genesis 15:18)
Babylon soon fell and Cyrus of Persia offered the Jews the opportunity to return to Judea. Some Jews returned and rebuilt the Temple, but once again, this time, six hundred years later in the year 70 CE, the Roman occupiers of Judea set the Temple aflame. Following the tragedy and carnage, the venerable Rabbi Akiva gazed upon the desolation of the Temple Mount and Jerusalem and envisioned the actualization the visions of the prophets for the future. His colleagues heard his words and replied, “Akiva, you have comforted us.”
When Rabbi Akiva was executed by the Romans following the Bar Kochba revolt (132-135 CE) for violating Roman rules which forbid publicly teaching the Torah, his last words reciting the Shema were etched upon the memory of the Jews for the next two thousand years.
At the time, the eventual return of the Jews seemed even more improbable as the land was laid waste and the Roman emperor Hadrian embarked upon a campaign to eliminate Judaism and Jewish practices. Judea had become barren, and a prolonged exile awaited the Jews.
After two millennia, while other empires and nations, many far larger than the Jews became archeological relics, vanquished by time, the Jews survived their many tribulations of exile; persecutions, expulsions, inquisitions, humiliations, wars, pogroms, holocausts, assimilation and so on. Many individual Jews were lost but the nation as a whole survived, since an everlasting covenant was forged between Hashem and the Jewish people. Through it all, they did not forget about returning to Zion.
And when the window of return opened in the late 19th/early 20th centuries, with the first waves of Aliyah, it was not accompanied by open miracles. However it did follow the miraculous survival of the Jews, which was the necessary prelude for the return to Zion.
In 1948, when Israel was declared an independent state, many of its six hundred thousand were survivors of the Nazi Holocaust. Others had fled persecution in Europe and other lands, over decades prior to World War Two. The new born state of less than 600,000 was a small fraction of the Jewish world which comprised 12,000,000. Over the next seventy years, the remnants of Israel over the past 2,000 year exile have arrived from Arab Lands, Eastern Europe, the former USSR, Ethiopia, Sephardic lands, Western Europe, Asia, and the Americas. Today, the demographics have seen dramatic transformations as over half of world Jewry resides within their homeland. Despite wars with neighboring countries, the scourge of terrorism, the damage of economic boycotts, and isolation by its detractors, Israel continues to thrive, and beat the odds. It is the realization of the visions foretold long ago.
Like the time of the exodus from Egypt, they left out of a sense of destiny, and were also taken out by Hashem as the survivors of a very difficult, challenging and prolonged exile, guided by Divine intervention and the promise to Abraham, echoed by the prophets. That too is miraculous.
It was my mother who taught me how to beat egg whites into “stiff peaks” for baking holiday sponge cakes.
By: Naomi Ross
Folding chairs lined the hallway wall like dutiful soldiers in expectation of arriving guests. Unfamiliar, dusty boxes of pots and china were stacked high, their contents waiting to make their annual appearance on the dining room table. As a child, the anticipation during those momentous days leading up to Passover was palpable. I couldn’t help but sense the urgency—something big was imminent, and I wanted to be a part of it. Fortunately for me, my mother was adept at putting me to work, getting me involved in the preparations and effectively igniting a spark in her daughter to experience the excitement of the holiday.
As a parent, I’ve realized the mitzvah (“commandment”) of educating your children about the story of the Exodus from Egypt begins earlier—not at the seder, but before, in the kitchen.
Naomi Ross. Credit: Courtesy.
Kids learn experientially (so do adults). They need to engage all of their senses to internalize a concept or lesson. That’s why we hold up the shank bone, the matzah and the bitter herbs; our seders come complete with props and visual aids.
So, how do we pass on our traditions in a way that is meaningfully relevant to the next generation? It happens first by inviting them to take part in the preparations and the cooking, fostering a feeling of being invested in the holiday experience. That is what makes Passover real for them. The door to meaningful conversations is opened there in the kitchen while peeling apples or rolling matzah balls.
Many jobs are perfect for this purpose and appropriate for a wide range of ages. Here are a few suggestions:
Making charoset: As a child, I thought that making charoset was an all-day process. Peeling, coring and chopping the apples took forever. Chopping nuts in our little manual glass-jar chopper was such hard work for a little one that by the time I finished, I felt as though I were enslaved in Egypt, too! Truth be told, it was the perfect job; it kept me busy for a long time and I felt very accomplished afterward. Come seder night, I was incredibly proud to pass around the charoset I made myself. (Safety Tip: For younger children for whom sharp knives are inappropriate, an old-fashioned hand-held chopper and a large chopping bowl are the way to go.)
Peeling hard-boiled eggs: All kids think this is fun. I have no idea why, but they do. So teach them how and let them at it.
Setting the table: There are many more things to prepare on the seder table than for a regular meal: assembling Haggadahs, pillows for reclining, salt water, and preparing the seder plate all take time. If your children are creative, they can create pretty folded napkins or handmade place cards. Both are fantastic craft projects for artistic kids.
Cooking and baking: For older kids who are able to follow a recipe (or interested in learning), this is a great opportunity to teach your kids basic lessons in cooking and baking. I still remember being called over to help taste and season a simmering dish. And it was in my mother’s kitchen that I learned how to beat egg whites into “stiff peaks” for baking Passover sponge cakes.
No matter how you enlist your children, the real secret to getting them involved is by showing your own interest and excitement. When your kids see you enjoying yourself and getting into the spirit, then they will follow suit and reflect that joy into your home.
Both recipes included here are gluten-free and Passover-friendly.
Hash Brown Cups (Dairy or Pareve)
Hash Brown Cups. Photo from the recently published “The Giving Table” by Naomi Ross.
Makes 10 to 12 cups
Prep Time: 15 to 25 minutes
Cook Time: 35 to 40 minutes
These are the perfect do-ahead hash browns for a brunch, and they can be filled and baked with several variations below. They’re also good as an alternative to fried potato latkes (no frying mess with these) and are perfect for topping. Get creative and vary your toppings—sautéed peppers, smoked salmon, sour cream, etc. *These can be made a day ahead. Refresh uncovered in a hot oven to re-crisp the cups.
Ingredients:
3 medium potatoes (about 1½ pounds), scrubbed
3 Tbsp. butter or margarine, melted
1 tsp. kosher salt
freshly ground black pepper
Directions:
Preheat oven to 450 degrees. Grease a 12-cup muffin pan liberally with cooking spray.
Bake or microwave potatoes (pierce with a fork first) until mostly cooked through, but still somewhat firm with a bite (about 45 minutes in a 350-degree oven or 5 to 6 minutes in the microwave). They should not be mushy.
Peel the skin off the potatoes. Working over a large mixing bowl, coarsely grate potatoes (a box grater is fine for this). Toss with butter, salt, and pepper.
Carefully line each muffin cup with about 3 to 4 tablespoons of the potatoes, pressing against and up the sides of each cup into an even layer.
Bake for about 20 to 25 minutes, until the potatoes are golden and the edges are crisped. Remove from the oven and allow to cool.
If making one of the variations, continue with the directions below; otherwise, use an offset spatula to carefully remove cups from pan, fill with desired toppings and serve.
Egg-in-a-Nest Variation:
½ cup packed grated cheddar cheese
1 dozen eggs
Directions:
Reduce oven temperature to 425 degrees.
Divide the shredded cheese and place it in each hash brown cup.
Crack each egg and pour it carefully into each cup. Season with salt and pepper.
Bake for about 12 to 15 minutes or until the eggs are just set. Remove from oven.
Cool slightly; use an offset spatula to carefully remove from the pan.
Broccoli Quiche Variation:
½ cup packed grated cheddar cheese
1 cup frozen chopped broccoli, defrosted and drained
3 eggs
⅓ cup milk
Directions:
Reduce oven temperature to 425 degrees. Divide the shredded cheese among the hash brown cups.
Place a few teaspoons of broccoli in each cup (over the cheese).
Beat eggs and milk together; season with salt and pepper. Pour slowly into each cup, being careful to not overfill.
Bake for about 15 minutes or until set. Remove from oven. Cool slightly; use an offset spatula to carefully remove cups from the pan.
Short on Time? While I like to use real potatoes for the freshest taste, frozen hash browns can be used instead for a quick shortcut. Simply thaw and press them into the muffin cups.
Espresso Meringue Cookies (Pareve)
Espresso Meringue Cookies. Photo from the recently published “The Giving Table” by Naomi Ross.
Makes 18 to 24 cookies
Prep Time: 10 to 15 minutes
Cook Time: 1 hour, plus 1 hour cooling time
The perfect meringue is crispy on the outside, slightly chewy on the inside. For best results, use fresh, room-temperature egg whites. The proteins in old egg whites may not dry out properly in the oven. To protect the integrity of the meringue, make sure your bowl and beaters are clean and dry. *Use a star tip to pipe decoratively into mounds.
Ingredients:
4 large egg whites
¼ tsp. salt
1 cup sugar
1½ Tbsp. instant espresso powder or instant coffee
1 tsp. pure vanilla extract
coffee beans (optional)
cocoa for dusting
Directions:
Preheat oven to 250 degrees. Line two baking sheets with parchment paper; set aside.
In a large, clean, dry mixing bowl, beat the egg whites and salt with an electric mixer (fitted with the balloon whisk attachment) on medium speed until the whites are foamy. Increase speed to high, beating until soft peaks form.
Slowly add in the sugar, adding about 2 tablespoons at a time, beating for 15 to 30 seconds after each addition. Add the espresso and vanilla, and continue to beat until the meringue forms very stiff, pillowy, glossy peaks (the mixture should be able to hold a peak up when the beaters are raised).
Working quickly, drop the mixture by large spoonfuls onto the prepared baking sheets, spacing them 1 to 2 inches apart. Top each meringue with an optional coffee bean and dust with cocoa.
Bake for 1 hour or until the surfaces of the meringues feel dry and you can pick one off the parchment without any sticking.
Turn off the oven, prop the door open slightly with the handle of a wooden spoon and allow meringues to cool gently in the oven for 1 hour. Transfer to a serving platter.
