Uncategorized
The historian who uncovered the ADL’s secret plot against the far-right John Birch Society
(JTA) — A historian leafing through files in an archive discovered how a Jewish organization helped bring down an influential far-right extremist movement in the United States in the 1960s and ’70s by going undercover and acting as self-appointed spies.
The discovery of the Anti-Defamation League’s covert operation targeting the John Birch Society is the basis of a chapter in a new book by political historian Matthew Dallek of George Washington University. Published in March, “Birchers: How the John Birch Society Radicalized the American Right” is Dallek’s fourth book. It examines the roots of today’s emboldened conservative movement in the United States.
“Birchers” is a history of a group that at its height numbered as many as 100,000 members and “mobilized a loyal army of activists” in a campaign against what it saw as a vast communist conspiracy. He also examines how the Birchers’ mission to defend Christianity and capitalism morphed into a radical anti-civil rights agenda that groups like the ADL saw as an existential threat.
Dallek, who grew up in a Reform Jewish household in Los Angeles, recently sat with the Jewish Telegraphic Agency to discuss the rise of the Birchers, how the ADL infiltrated their ranks and whether such tactics are justified in the name of fighting extremism.
The conversation has been edited for clarity and brevity.
JTA: Before we get into the Jewish aspect of the book, meaning the chapter on the Anti-Defamation League’s relationship with the John Birch Society, let’s take a step back. Who are so-called Birchers? Why do they matter?
Mathew Dallek: The John Birch Society was a household name in the 1960s, becoming the emblem of far-right extremism. It didn’t have huge numbers, but it did penetrate the culture and the national consciousness. Its leader, Robert Welch, had argued at one point that President Dwight Eisenhower was a dedicated agent of a communist conspiracy taking over the United States. Welch formed the John Birch Society to educate the American people about the nature of the communist threat.
In its heyday, the group had about 60,000 to 100,000 members, organized into small chapters. They sent out literature trying to give members roadmaps or ideas for what they could do. They believed a mass education of the public was needed because traditional two-party politics was not going to be very effective at exposing the communist threat. They would form front groups such as Impeach Earl Warren [the Supreme Court’s chief justice] or Support Your Local Police. They tried to ban certain books that they viewed as socialistic from being used in schools. Some Birchers ran for school board seats and protested at libraries.
Critics feared that the Birchers were a growing fascist or authoritarian group and that if they were not sidelined politically and culturally then the country could be overrun. The Nation magazine wrote that Birchers essentially had given their followers an invitation to engage in civil war, guerrilla-style. Those fears sparked a big debate about democracy. How does one sustain democracy and, at the height of the Cold War and in the shadow of World War II, Nazi fascist Germany, and the Holocaust?
As you were researching, you came across a trove of historical internal documents from the ADL in the archives of the American Jewish Historical Society in New York. Why did you devote a chapter to what you found in those documents? What did those files reveal to you about the John Birch Society?
These papers are a goldmine. They’re this incredible and often detailed window into the far-right and, in particular, the John Birch Society. They show the ADL had an extensive, multi-dimensional counterintelligence operation that they were running against the Birch Society.
People knew at the time that the ADL was attending events where Birchers were speaking. But the ADL also had undercover agents with code names, who were able to infiltrate the society’s headquarters in Belmont, Massachusetts, and various chapter officers. They dug up financial and employment information about individual Birchers. And they not only used the material for their own newsletters and press releases, but they also fed information to the media.
Another layer is about a debate that’s been going on: Were the Birchers racist and antisemitic? The Birch Society always insisted that they did not tolerate white supremacy and didn’t want any KKK members. They said they accepted people of all faiths and races. And it’s true that they did have a handful of Jewish and Black members.
But what the ADL found was that a lot of hate was bubbling up from the grassroots and also leaking out from the top. The ADL was able to document this in a systematic way.
Some critics of the ADL today say the organization has strayed from its mission by focusing not just on antisemitism but on a wider array of causes. But from reading your work, it sounds like the ADL even then took an expansive view of its role, examining not just direct attacks on Jews but also how the political environment can jeopardize Jews. Am I getting that right, and why did the ADL devote so many resources to a group like the John Birch Society?
So, a few things: It’s the late ’50s and ’60s, and a civil rights coalition is emerging. Benjamin Epstein, the national director of the ADL, was friendly with Thurgood Marshall, the Supreme Court justice, and Martin Luther King. John F. Kennedy went to an ADL event and praised the ADL for speaking out very strongly in defense of democracy and pushing for the equal treatment of all Americans.
Isadore Zack, who helped lead the spy operation, at one point wrote to his colleagues that it was only in a democracy that the Jewish community has been allowed to flourish and so, if you want to defend Jewish Americans, you also have to defend democracy.
There certainly were other threats at the time, but the Birch Society was seen by liberal critics, including the ADL, as a very secretive group that promoted conspiracy theories about communists who often became conflated with Jews.
Would you consider the ADL successful in its campaign against the Birchers?
They were successful. They used surreptitious and in some cases underhanded means to expose the antisemitism and the racism and also interest in violence or the violent rhetoric of the Birch Society in the 1960s.
The ADL was at the tip of the spear of a liberal coalition that included the White House, sometimes the Department of Justice, depending on the issue, the NAACP, Americans for Democratic Action, labor unions, the union-backed Group Research Inc., which was tracking the far-right as well. The ADL was one of the most, if not the most effective at constraining and discrediting the society.
Clearly, however, the Birchers’ ideas never died. They lived on and made a comeback.
It’s somewhat ironic that you reveal the existence of this spying apparatus devoted to targeting an extremist and antisemitic group in the 1960s given the infamy the ADL would earn in a later era, the 1990s, for allegations that they colluded with police agencies in San Francisco to spy on and harass political activists. They eventually settled with the Arab American, Black and American Indian groups that brought a federal civil suit. I know you didn’t study these revelations, which are outside the scope of your book, but could you perhaps reflect on why undercover tactics were seen as necessary or justified?
It’s important to remember that in the mid-20th century, law enforcement in the United States was often led by antisemites or people who were much more concerned with alleged internal communist threats — the threat from the left.
From the ADL’s vantage point, one could not rely on the government entities that were by law and by design supposed to protect Jewish Americans. There was a sense that this work had to be done, at least in part, outside of the parameters of the government.
When I first discovered the ADL’s spying, I didn’t quite know what to make of it. But I realized they weren’t just spying to spy, they exposed a lot of scary things, with echoes in our own times — like easy access to firearms, a hatred of the government, a denigration and defamation of minority groups. And this was all happening in the shadow of the Holocaust and World War II. I became much more sympathetic; they were very effective, and they had a vision of equality of treatment for all Americans.
It’s obviously controversial. I try not to shy away from it. But they had a lot of good reasons to fight back right and to fight back in this nonviolent way.
That last thought brings to mind another, right-wing Jewish group that existed in this era of taking things into our own hands, that did use violence, explosives even.
You mean the Jewish Defense League, led by Meir Kahane.
Yes, exactly.
He was a Bircher. Toward the end of my book, I mention that he was a member for a while, under his alias Michael King.
Antisemitism is on the rise, and lots of initiatives are being organized to address it, both by existing groups like the ADL and new ones. The ADL’s budget has almost doubled over the past seven years. I am seeing Jews talk of fighting back and taking things into their own hands. And we are in this politically precarious movement in American history, all of which suggests parallels to the era you examined. What kind of wisdom can we glean from examining the ADL’s secret and public fight against the John Birch Society as people who care about the issues affecting Jews today?
A lot of liberals in the 1960s and a lot of the leadership at the ADL grasped the axiom that things can always get worse.
In 2015-2016, you’ll recall, there was Trump’s demonization of Mexican immigrants, and the so-called “alt-right” around him and his campaign and expressions of vitriol by people like Steve Bannon.
There was an assumption among a lot of Americans and among a lot of Jewish Americans that the fringe right — the antisemites, the explicit racists, the white supremacists — that there’s not a majority for them and they can never achieve power.
If you go back and you look at Trump’s closing 2016 campaign ad, it’s textbook antisemitism. He flashes on screen these wealthy Jewish international bankers, and he argues that basically, there’s a conspiracy of these global elites who are stealing the wealth of honest Americans. There’s also 2017, the white supremacists in Charlottesville, who said “Jews will not replace us” and Trump saying there are fine people on both sides.
The sense that democracy is incredibly fragile is not just a theory or a concept: It’s an actuality, the sense as well, that the United States has only been a multiracial democracy for not very long and a haven for Jews for not that long either.
The work that the ADL and the NAACP and other groups did to try to constrain and discredit as fringe and extremist still goes on today. It’s harder to do for all sorts of reasons today including social media and the loss of faith in institutions. But it still goes on. You see the importance of institutional guardrails including the Department of Justice that is prosecuting 1,000 Jan. 6 insurrectionists.
The last thing I’ll say is that one of the admirable things in the 1960s about the ADL and the liberal coalition it belonged to is that it built support for landmark legislation like the Immigration Act of 1965, the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and the Voting Rights Act of ’65. And a coalition eventually fell apart, but it was powerful, reminding us why Jewish American groups should care about or focus on issues that don’t directly affect Jewish people.
—
The post The historian who uncovered the ADL’s secret plot against the far-right John Birch Society appeared first on Jewish Telegraphic Agency.
Uncategorized
A ‘Yiddish Vokh’ for nerds — but without the families
דעם 9טן ביזן 16טן פֿעברואַר איז אין קלויזנבורג, רומעניע פֿאָרגעקומען די ערשטע אינטענסיווע ייִדישע ווינטער־פּראָגראַם געווידמעט דער טעמע ייִדיש אין געוועזענעם מיזרח־בלאָק, ד״ה אין ראַטן־פֿאַרבאַנד, פּוילן, און רומעניע אין דער קאָמוניסטישער תּקופֿה. אַן אינטענסיווע ייִדיש־פּראָגראַם מיט אַזאַ טעמע, וווּ מע לערנט סאָוועטיש ייִדיש און אָרטאָגראַפֿיע, איז נאָך קיין מאָל נישט געווען, אויף וויפֿל איך ווייס — לכל־הפּחות נישט זײַט דער ראַטן־פֿאַרבאַנד האָט צוגעמאַכט דאָס געשעפֿט אין 1991.
איבער 70 ייִדישיסטן, ייִדיש־פֿאָרשערס און אַוואַנסירטע סטודענטן האָבן זיך פֿאַרזאַמלט אויפֿן קאַמפּוס פֿון באַבש־באָלײַ־אוניווערסיטעט, וואָס איז דער גרעסטער אין רומעניע און דער איינציקער, וווּ מע לערנט ייִדיש. די פּראָגראַם איז באַשטאַנען פֿון לעקציעס, וואַרשטאַטן, קאָנצערטן, וויזיטן אין מוזייען און בתּי־כּנסיות, אַ נסיעה קיין סאַטמאַר און שאַמלוי, ווי אויך אַן אַקאַדעמישע קאָנפֿערענץ מיט 12 רעפֿעראַטן — אַלץ אין גאַנצן אויף ייִדיש.
מע קען זאָגן, אַז די אונטערנעמונג איז געווען אַ מין „ייִדיש־וואָך“ פֿאַר נערדס — אָבער אָן די משפּחות.
די באַטייליקטע זענען געקומען פֿון אַ סך אייראָפּעיִשע לענדער, צפֿון־אַמעריקע און ישׂראל. דער פּוילישער קאָנטינגענט איז געווען ספּעציעל אָנזעעוודיק (כּן ירבו!). איך האָב באַמערקט, אַז אַפֿילו צווישן די אַמעריקאַנער און ישׂראלים האָבן אַ סך מענטשן געהאַט אַ „סאָוועטישן“ הינטערגרונט, ווײַל זייערע טאַטע־מאַמע זענען געקומען פֿון דאָרט. אין אַ געוויסער מאָס איז די פּראָגראַם געווען אַ סאָרט צוזאַמענטרעף פֿון לאַנדסלײַט.
ווי אַזוי האָט מען צוגעצויגן איבער 70 ייִדישיסטן קיין קלויזנבורג, רומעניע? קודם־כּל, איז די פּראָגראַם געווען כּמעט בחינם. מע האָט באַצאָלט בלויז $10 אַ האָטעל־צימער און זייער ווייניק פֿאַר אַן עקסקורסיע און אַנדערע קלייניקייטן, אָבער בעצם איז עס געווען פֿרײַ, אַ דאַנק די צוויי אוניווערסיטעטן, וואָס האָבן אָרגאַניזירט די פּראָגראַם בשותּפֿות: בר־אילן אוניווערסיטעט אין ישׂראל און באַבש־באָלײַ־אוניווערסיטעט אין רומעניע.
זיי האָבן, למשל, געדעקט כּמעט אַלע הוצאָות און באַזאָרגט די באַטייליקטע מיט קאַווע און כּיבוד אין די הפֿסקות. בכלל קאָסט דאָס לעבן אין רומעניע ווייניקער ווי אין מערבֿ־אייראָפּע אָדער אין ישׂראל. האָבן די אָנטייל־נעמער געלעבט אַזוי ווי אינעם באַקאַנטן ליד „רומעניע“ פֿון אַהרן לעבעדעוו: „פֿון קיין דאגות ווייסט מען ניט…“
דעם פּלאַן פֿאַר דער בשותּפֿותדיקער פּראָגראַם האָט בער קאָטלערמאַן אויסגעאַרבעט צוזאַמען מיט אַוגוסטאַ קאָסטיוק ראַדאָסטאַוו. געהאָלפֿן אָרגאַניזירן האָבן אויך ענת אַדרת און חנה גינזבורג־פּאַלעי, ווי אויך פֿיליפּ שוואַרץ. אין דער פּראָגראַם האָבן אויך געלערנט דאַשאַ וואַכרושאָוואַ, מיכאל לוקין, סאַשאַ פּאָליאַן, קאַראָלינע שימאַניאַק און אַני הקטן.
ס׳איז געווען צו באַוווּנדערן, אַז די גאַנצע פּראָגראַם איז פֿאָרגעקומען אין גאַנצן אויף ייִדיש, אַפֿילו לעקציעס וועגן שווערע ליטעראַרישע און היסטאָרישע טעמעס. דאָס איז בלויז געווען מעגלעך דערפֿאַר, ווײַל די פּראָגראַם איז געווען געצילט, דער עיקר, אויף אַוואַנסירטע ייִדיש־קענערס. מע האָט אויך אַרײַנגענומען מיטעלע סטודענטן, אָבער נישט קיין אָנהייבערס. דאָס האָט אַלעמען באַפֿרײַט פֿון דער געוויינטלעכער טירחה פֿון באַפֿרידיקן די אָנהייבערס מיט ענגליש־שפּראַכיקע לעקציעס, אונטערנעמונגען, און דערקלערונגען. מע האָט יאָ פֿון צײַט צו צײַט געהערט גוייִשע שפּראַכן, ווי למשל ווען מענטשן פֿון דעם זעלבן לאַנד האָבן גערעדט צווישן זיך. אָבער בדרך־כּלל האָבן אַלע פּראָבירט צו רעדן בלויז ייִדיש.
פֿון די 1920ער ביז די 1940ער יאָרן האָבן ייִדישע קאָמוניסטן געשאַפֿן אַ וויכטיקן חלק פֿון דער ייִדישער קולטור און ליטעראַטור. אַ סך פֿון די בעסטע ייִדישע שרײַבערס זענען געווען קאָמוניסטן, אָדער האָבן לכל־הפּחות סימפּאַטיזירט מיט זיי און געשריבן פֿאַר „לינקע“ פּובליקאַציעס. עס איז אַן אומיושר, וואָס דער הײַנטיקער עולם פֿאַרקוקט די קינסטלערישע אויפֿטוען פֿון די קאָמוניסטן בלויז דערפֿאַר וואָס זיי זענען געווען שטאַרק נאַיִוו און זענען אַרײַנגעפֿאַלן אין אַ פּאַסטקע. די טראַגעדיע פֿונעם 12טן אויגוסט 1952, ווען דער רעזשים האָט דערמאָרדעט וויכטיקע סאָוועטשע שרײַבערס און קולטור־טוערס, האָט געוואָרפֿן אַ שאָטן אויף דער גאַנצער תּקופֿה — אָבער די ייִדישע שרײַבער האָבן דאָס נישט פֿאַרדינט.
איין פּראָבלעם מיט דער קאָנפֿערענץ איז געווען וואָס געוויסע אַקאַדעמישע לעקציעס האָבן געדויערט 90 מינוט. דאָס איז געווען ניט גרינג אַפֿילו פֿאַר אַוואַנסירטע סטודענטן. צוריקגערעדט, וואָס איז דאָ ייִדיש ערגער פון אַנדערע שפּראַכן, אויף וועלכע מע האַלט אַקאַדעמישע לעקציעס?
אַ טשיקאַווער צוגאָב צו דער פּראָגראַם איז געווען אַ קורצער פֿילם אויף ייִדיש געשאַפֿן פֿון עטל ניבאָרסקי, פֿאַרבונדן מיט די סאָוועטיש־ייִדישע שרײַבערס. עס איז אַ שיין ראָמאַנטיש בילד — אָבער איך וויל נישט אויסזאָגן קיין סודות, ווײַל יעדער איינער דאַרף זען דעם פֿילם פֿאַר זיך אַליין.
בײַ די מערסטע באַטייליקטע איז דאָס געווען דאָס ערשטע מאָל וואָס זיי זענען געקומען קיין קלויזנבורג. זי איז אַ שיינע אַלטע שטאָט מיט אַ סך פּרעכטיקע גאַסן און הײַזער פֿון די עסטרײַך־אונגערישע צײַטן. ס׳איז די צווייט־גרעסטע שטאָט אין רומעניע און האָט אַ סך גוטע רעסטאָראַנען און קאַווע־הײַזער, וווּ מע קען פֿאַרברענגען די איבעריקע שעהען.
כאָטש רומעניע האָט פֿאַר דער צווייטער וועלט־מלחמה זיך נישט גערעכנט פֿאַר קיין גרויסן ייִדיש־צענטער, זעען מיר הײַנט אײַן, אַז זי האָט געהאַט אַ חשובֿ אָרט. ערשטנס, האָבן מער ייִדן איבערגעלעבט די מלחמה אין רומעניע ווי אין פּוילן, ליטע אָדער אונגערן, ווײַל רומעניע האָט נישט דעפּאָרטירט אירע ייִדן קיין אוישוויץ. (אין קלויזנבורג האָט מען זיי יאָ דעפּאָרטירט, ווײַל די שטאָט האָט ווידער געהערט צו אונגערן צווישן 1940 און 1944.)
אַ סך ייִדן איבער דער וועלט שטאַמען פֿון רומעניע, אַרײַנגערעכנט באַקאַנטע חסידישע הויפֿן, ווי סאַטמאַר, וויזשניץ, קלויזנבורג, סקולען, ספּינקע און קרעטשניף. אַ טייל פֿון די חסידים האַלטן זיך פֿאַר „אונגערישע“ ווײַל אַ מאָל איז דאָס געווען אונגערן, אָבער לויט דער הײַנטיקער מאַפּע זענען זיי רומענישע. דער אונטערלענדישער דיאַלעקט, וואָס מע האָט גערעדט אין מערבֿ־רומעניע, איז דער יסוד פֿונעם חסידישן ייִדיש וואָס מע רעדט הײַנט.
דעם פֿאַרלעצטן טאָג האָט מען געמאַכט אַן עקסקורסיע קיין סאַטמאַר (Satu Mare), וואָס געפֿינט זיך נאָענט צו דער אונגערישער גרענעץ. איין באַטייליקטער, אַסף קירשנער, האָט באַמערקט: „דער בעסטער אופֿן זיך אויסצולערנען ייִדיש איז צו זיצן דרײַ שעה אין אַן אויטאָבוס קיין סאַטמאַר צוזאַמען מיט ייִדישיסטן, וואָס הערן נישט אויף צו רעדן.“ אין דער גרויסער שול פֿון סאַטמאַר האָבן מיר באַגעגנט אַ גרופּע סאַטמאַרער חסידים, געקומענע פֿון לאָנדאָן, וואָס האָבן געהאַלטן אין דאַווענען שחרית. פֿאַר די חסידים איז געווען אַ חידוש צו זען אַ גרופּע פֿון זיבעציק מענטשן, מענער און פֿרויען אָנגעטאָן ווי גויים, וואָס רעדן אַלע ייִדיש.
די איינציקע צרה איז געווען אַן ענין מיט דער באַהייצונג. דער עולם האָט געהערט עטלעכע לעקציעס אינעם אָרטיקן בית־מדרש, וואָס איז נישט געווען באַהייצט. האָבן אַלע שוין געטראָגן די מאַנטלען די גאַנצע צײַט.
מיר האָבן געזען די שטאָט סאַטמאַר מערסטנס דורכן פֿענצטער פֿון אויטאָבוס, ווײַל עס האָט די גאַנצע צײַט גערעגנט. אָבער דאָס באַגעגעניש מיט די סאַטמאַרער חסידים האָט זייער שיין אילוסטרירט אונדזער פּראָגראַם: אַ וואָך אין דער סאָוועטיש־ייִדישער אוטאָפּיע. (דאָס איז סײַ איראָניש געמיינט, סײַ נישט איראָניש.)
„דאָס איז געװען אַן אויסערגעװיינטלעכע אָקאַזיע צו פֿאַרברענגען מיט מענטשן פֿון דער גאָרער ייִדישער װעלט,“ האָט אַ באַטייליקטער, בנימין לערמאַן, פֿון בערקלי, קאַליפֿאָרניע, צוזאַמען מיט זײַן ברודער, עריק, מיר געשריבן אין אַ בליצבריוו. „כאָטש איך בין נישט קיין אַקאַדעמיקער און האָב פֿריִער נישט געהאַט קיין ספּעציעלן אינטערעס צו סאָװעטישע ענינים, איז דער אינהאַלט געװען אינטערעסאַנט און האָט אין מיר אָנגעצונדן אַ חשק װײַטער צו לייענען די סאָװעטישע שרײַבער.“
„מע האָט זיך אױפֿגעכאַפּט מיט ייִדיש, זיך געלייגט שלאָפֿן מיט ייִדיש, אַפֿילו געחלומט אױף ייִדיש,“ האָט געזאָגט אַ צווייטער באַטייליקטער, טאָמעק מײַטשאַק, פֿון וואַדאָוויצע, פּוילן. און תּפֿארת פֿרומקין, פֿון ירושלים, האָט אַפֿילו געזאָגט, אַז אויף דער פּראָגראַם איז זי געווען אַזוי אײַנגעטונקען אין ייִדיש, אַז נאָך דעם, אויפֿן פֿליפֿעלד, האָבן אַלע פֿרעמדע שפּראַכן איר געקלונגען ווי ייִדיש.
The post A ‘Yiddish Vokh’ for nerds — but without the families appeared first on The Forward.
Uncategorized
Trump’s Board of Peace convenes on Gaza as prospect of U.S. war with Iran surges
(JTA) — The Board of Peace convened by President Donald Trump to administer Gaza’s reconstruction is meeting for the first time in Washington, D.C., on Thursday.
At the same time, signs are mounting that Trump could launch a long-threatened war on Iran imminently, which would throw the Middle East back into turmoil. U.S. warships are amassing in the region, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu canceled a planned trip to the United States this week and Trump met Wednesday with his top Iran advisors.
Trump surprised Israel by opening direct negotiations with Iran last year to limit its nuclear program. The ongoing talks, including this week, have reportedly left a wide gap in the two sides’ positions.
“There are many arguments one can make in favor of a strike against Iran,” White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said on Wednesday while maintaining that Trump would still like to make a deal.
Israeli media is reporting that a war could begin as soon as this weekend; Axios is reporting that U.S. officials view the end of the month as a significant deadline before making a final decision.
Iranian officials have said they would consider all Israeli and U.S. positions as legitimate targets as they respond to any U.S. attack, meaning that Israelis could soon find themselves once again racing to bomb shelters with Iranian missiles incoming.
Unlike after last year’s U.S. strike on Iranian nuclear sites that brought to an end a 10-day war between Israel and Iran, any U.S. campaign against Iran now could last months, according to reports.
Trump and Vice President JD Vance are scheduled to address the Board of Peace directly. Netanyahu joined the board only reluctantly, citing misgivings about sharing membership with Qatari and Turkish leaders who have supported Hamas in Gaza.
The post Trump’s Board of Peace convenes on Gaza as prospect of U.S. war with Iran surges appeared first on The Forward.
Uncategorized
Tucker Carlson draws scorn for claiming he was ‘detained’ at Israeli airport after Mike Huckabee interview
(JTA) — Tucker Carlson had just barely wrapped his interview with U.S. Ambassador to Israel Mike Huckabee before the two were already disagreeing on a basic fact.
Carlson, the influential conservative commentator, flew to Tel Aviv on Wednesday to conduct the interview with Huckabee at Ben Gurion Airport, departing hours later without leaving the airport. But before leaving, he told the British tabloid Daily Mail, Israeli authorities confiscated his passport, dragged his executive producer into an interrogation room “and then demanded to know what we spoke to Ambassador Huckabee about.’
Not so, says the ambassador: What Carlson’s team experienced was simply a routine security measure.
“EVERYONE who comes in/out of Israel (every country for that matter) has passports checked & routinely asked security questions,” Huckabee wrote on X, refuting his former Fox News colleague before their conversation could go live.
Israel’s airport authority also denied the allegations, saying Carlson’s team “were politely asked a few routine questions, in accordance with standard procedures applied to many travelers.” A longer statement from the U.S. Embassy in Israel also said Carlson’s decision to stay in Israel only a few hours without leaving the airport was his alone.
Carlson’s complaints drew withering reactions from Jews and others who said they recognized the intense security practiced at Ben Gurion. The conservative commentator John Podhoretz, for example, recounted on X how he had been questioned for 20 minutes because he was couriering a dress for a relative. “I’ve known Tucker was an asshole for 30 years but this takes the f–king cake,” he wrote.
The back-and-forth was a preview of the hotly anticipated interview between the two divergent flanks of the Christian MAGA coalition, whose public disagreements on Israel have paralleled a larger fissure in the Republican party. Carlson, the influential GOP kingmaker, has increasingly embraced anti-Israel talking points on his show at the same time as he has platformed conspiracy theorists and antisemites including Nick Fuentes. A growing number of young right-wing influencers and candidates are lining up behind his views.
Huckabee, meanwhile, is a leading evangelical Christian Zionist who has argued in favor of Israeli sovereignty over the West Bank. He publicly lobbied Carlson for a sit-down after Carlson used his podcast to criticize him for what Carlson described as a failure to intervene in Israeli demonization of Christians. Carlson agreed to a talk, and posted a picture of himself arriving Wednesday prior to the interview.
“Greetings from Israel,” Carlson posted to X, captioning a photo of him posing outside near an Israeli flag with his arm around business partner Neil Patel. (“Sell out,” Sneako, a livestreamer and Internet personality with a long streak of antisemitic and anti-Israel comments, wrote in reply.)
Greetings from Israel. pic.twitter.com/1uBWvqBNST
— Tucker Carlson (@TuckerCarlson) February 18, 2026
To some seasoned travelers, the location was obvious.
“That’s the walkway to the private jet terminal for VIP entry,” tweeted David Friedman, who was U.S. ambassador to Israel during President Donald Trump’s first term.
“After the Western Wall, the Temple Mount, the City of David, the Church of the Holy Sepulcher, the Garden of Gethsemene, Capernaum, the Sea of Galilee, Nazareth, Bethlehem, Yad Vashem, the Knesset and about 2 million other places, this walkway is an important site (but only if you fly on private jets),” he continued. “Too bad Tucker stayed in the airport in the face of so many invitations to see so many wonderful places. A huge and obviously intentional missed opportunity.”
Trump, an ally of both Carlson and Huckabee, may have also played a hand in arranging the interview, according to a former Fox News reporter who told the Times of Israel that Trump wanted to prevent an intra-party spat over Israel that could benefit Democrats. The source, Melissa Francis, also described the interview as “emotional” and said Carlson’s team had tried and failed to also arrange an interview with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
Little about the interview process had been straightforward. The week before Carlson touched down in Israel, according to local reports, Israeli authorities had indeed briefly discussed whether to bar Carlson from entering the country over his past comments — something they routinely do for non-Jewish critics of Israel, even for prominent figures. They ultimately decided to avoid a diplomatic incident, according to reports.
In the days since agreeing to an interview with Huckabee, Carlson has posted new interviews with Ryan Zink, a pardoned Jan. 6 rioter and Texas congressional candidate; billionaire hedge-fund manager Ray Dalio; conspiracy theorist Ian Carroll; and former U.S. Rep. Ron Paul.
Carlson has not yet published his interview with Huckabee. But late Wednesday, he shared an interview about Israel, continuing the vendetta that started their exchange. “How does Israel treat Christians? We spoke to one whose family has lived there since Jesus. His story is shocking,” Carlson wrote to promote the video.
For Carlson’s Jewish critics, the whole day offered yet more evidence that whatever he ultimately says about Israel should be discounted.
“Tucker Carlson is a chickens–t. The guy who’s been spouting lies about Israel for the past two years, landed today at Ben Gurion airport, took a quick picture in the logistics zone, tweeted it to pretend he’s actually IN Israel (so he can later claim that he’s a serious reporter who toured Israel), didn’t even step foot in country, then made up a story that he’s being supposedly harassed by our security (didn’t happen), whined about it, got back into the private jet and flew off,” tweeted Naftali Bennett, the Israeli politician. “Next time he talks about Israel as if he’s some expert, just remember this guy is a phony!”
The post Tucker Carlson draws scorn for claiming he was ‘detained’ at Israeli airport after Mike Huckabee interview appeared first on The Forward.