RSS
The Washington Post Outright Lies About BDS and Anti-Israel Boycott Movements
Anti-Israel demonstration supporting the BDS movement, Paris, France, June 8, 2024. Photo: Claire Serie / Hans Lucas via Reuters Connect
The Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions effort — known as BDS — singles out Israel for opprobrium. BDS portrays the Jewish State as both uniquely evil and solely responsible for the lack of peace between Israelis and Palestinians. BDS has been endorsed by Hamas and other US-designated terrorist groups, and prominent BDS supporters have called for Israel’s destruction.
These are well-established facts. And they’re entirely missing in a recent Washington Post report.
Post correspondent John Hudson’s Aug. 12, 2024, dispatch is about Coca-Cola’s efforts to fend off a boycott based on the company’s links to Israel (“How Coca-Cola Tried and Failed to Suppress a Boycott Over Gaza”). Yet the article is littered with misleading omissions and, in some cases, outright falsehoods.
Hudson writes that “sales of Coca-Coa began to plummet in parts of the Middle East and Asia this summer in response to boycotts of corporations with alleged ties to Israel.” This led to the soda company’s franchise in Bangladesh launching an advertising campaign to blunt boycott efforts. The campaign starred actor Sharaf Ahmed Jibon, known for roles in South Asian soap operas, as a shopkeeper who assured viewers that Coca-Cola was not an Israeli product, and said that “even Palestine has a coke factor.”
But “there was a problem,” Hudson tells readers. “The so-called Palestinian factory is an Israeli-owned bottling company that operates on an Israeli settlement in East Jerusalem considered illegal under international law.”
Hudson adds that there’s “widespread anger over Washington’s military and political support for Israel’s offensive in Gaza,” resulting in backlash against American companies like Coca-Cola. Hudson argues that that anger has fueled the BDS movement, which he calls merely a “nonviolent activist movement opposed to Israel’s occupation.”
For good measure, the Post reporter even uncritically quotes Omar Barghouti, a self-described “co-founder” of BDS.
But the Post’s description of BDS is completely — and verifiably — false. BDS isn’t nonviolent. And it is not simply opposed to an “occupation.” Indeed, what exactly is being “occupied” is left unsaid by Hudson. Rather, BDS is opposed to Israel’s very existence — and its founders, including Barghouti, have admitted as much.
As CAMERA has noted, terrorist organizations like Hamas, whose charter calls for the genocide of Jews and the destruction of Israel, have stated, “We salute and support the influential BDS movement.” And according to sworn US Congressional testimony, some BDS groups have links to terror groups like the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP).
Indeed, CAMERA’s Ricki Hollander painstakingly documented the true motivations, and disturbing terror ties, of the BDS movement in her 2022 backgrounder “The Intrinsic Bigotry of BDS.”
In 2022, BDS groups in Boston even launched the so-called “mapping project,” a target map of Jewish cultural, educational, and religious institutions and organizations that included high schools, teen and college groups, the Jewish Arts Collaborative, the Synagogue Council of Massachusetts, groups dedicated to helping disabled Jewish individuals, and others. All were singled out by the BDS group at a time of rising antisemitism and attacks on Jews and Jewish institutions.
The “mapping project” was so dangerous that it prompted condemnation from Rep. Jake Auchincloss (D-MA), among others, who warned that such lists “can incite violence” and “inflame the deranged among us to take the next step from contemplating to acting upon violence.” But, for a movement that is wholesale endorsed by Hamas, that is perhaps the point.
In fact, BDS activists have, on numerous occasions, openly called for violence, from chanting “shoot the Jew” at Israeli jazz musician Daniel Zamir’s performance at Johannesburg’s Wit University to threatening Justin Bieber’s Jewish manager after the pop star played in Tel Aviv, warning that “the Jew manager will die.” There are dozens of other examples. But again: this isn’t surprising for a movement that, per sworn Congressional testimony, has links to terror groups that call for Israel’s destruction and the genocide of its citizens.
The Post’s decision to parrot Barghouti’s claims that BDS is peaceful fall further apart upon closer examination of Barghouti’s own statements. As CAMERA has documented, at a BDS conference in Chicago in 2011, Barghouti declared: “The media focuses only on one form of resistance, which we’re proud of.” He added: “We’re not ashamed to have armed resistance in addition to peaceful resistance throughout our existence.”
But as Hollander has observed, Barghouti’s pride in terrorism is not at all surprising, given that members of designated terrorist organizations are part of the Palestinian BDS National Committee (BNC) leadership. Heading the list of the 29 Palestinian NGO members that comprise the leadership committee is the Council of National and Islamic Forces in Palestine, which includes Hamas, the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP), PFLP-General Command, Palestine Liberation Front (PLF), and Palestinian Islamic Jihad, among other designated foreign terror organizations. The US BDS wing, which calls itself the US Campaign for Palestinian Rights, does not merely advocate “to stop US support for Israel” as it claims, but facilitates US donations to the terrorist-member BDS National Committee.
A Tablet investigation even documents how this branch, registered as a 501(c)3 charitable organization, enables tax-exempt fundraising in the US for the foreign terrorist-member entity.
An Israeli government report on the BDS movement’s terrorist links names some of the terror group leaders who have taken prominent roles in the the BDS movement abroad, while downplaying or concealing their affiliation with the illegal groups. Among them are senior Hamas operative Muhammad Sawalha, who heads Muslim Brotherhood front organizations and promotes BDS in the UK; PFLP terrorist Leila Khaled, notorious for her role in the hijackings of international airlines, who has worked on behalf of the South Africa BDS chapter to raise funds and advocate for BDS; and Khalida Jarrar, a senior PFLP member who has been indicted for inciting attacks on Israelis.
All of this is open-source information and is well documented, including in Congressional testimony; it is widely available for the Post’s perusal. But the newspaper is seemingly uninterested.
Indeed, singling out the Jewish State for opprobrium and economic punishment is, in and of itself, antisemitic.
Boycotts have been used against Jews for centuries. Indeed, as CAMERA has documented, boycotts were used to pressure Jews against living in their ancestral homeland as early as 1909 — nearly 40 years before Israel was recreated and more than half a century before Israel took control of the West Bank (Judea and Samaria) from Jordan in the 1967 Six-Day War. This begs the question: what is the “occupation” that BDS activists oppose? The answer: Jewish political and social equality in the Jewish people’s ancestral homeland.
These facts about BDS are well-established. BDS, like its terrorist supporters, wants the destruction of the Jewish State. They believe that all of Israel is an “occupation.” Barghouti, and his interlocutors at the Post, failed to mention all these relevant details. It is unsurprising then, that Hudson parrots terrorist talking points elsewhere in his report.
Hudson writes that “since Oct. 7, when Hamas-led militants killed more than 1200 people in Israel and took more than 240 hostage, the Israeli military has killed more than 39,000 Palestinians, according to local health officials, and the country’s restrictions on access to humanitarian aid have created a famine in parts of Gaza.”
There is an impressive number of falsehoods in this one sentence.
Hamas are not “militants.” Rather, they are terrorists. Precision matters, both in journalism and good writing. And Hamas did not “kill” more than “1200 people in Israel.” Rather, as part of a complicated operation, they invaded the Jewish State and murdered them — many in the most barbaric ways imaginable. Women were raped en masse, before having their genitals mutilated and then executed. The elderly were set on fire in their own homes. Parents were tortured in front of their children, and vice versa. Babies were murdered in their rooms. Per capita the death toll from Oct. 7 was multitudes larger than the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attacks that led to the Global War on Terror and the invasions of both Iraq and Afghanistan.
And, as barbaric as 9/11 was, it did not include Islamists proudly filming their atrocities, including dismembering parents in front of children, or using the phones of the slain to call their family members and brag that they had been murdered. Oct. 7 was the largest massacre of Jewish civilians since the Holocaust—yet Hudson seeks to equate it with Israel’s righteous response. Worse still, he misleads Post readers.
Those “local health officials” that Hudson cites are, in fact, Hamas. The Gaza Health Ministry that puts out casualty counts is controlled by Hamas, a US-designated terrorist group. And it has a clear incentive to exaggerate casualty counts, as well as a long and documented history of doing precisely that — including during this recent war. CAMERA has highlighted the Post’s penchant for regurgitating unverified claims made by a genocidal terror organization — a penchant that has led to the newspaper receiving both considerable criticism and a loss in subscribers. Hudson’s report is emblematic of that failure.
Further, the claim about an impending famine, as well as the assertion that the so-called “settlements” are illegal under international law are also incorrect. As CAMERA has documented, there is a strong basis in international law for Israel to lay claim to Judea and Samaria, or, as it has been popularly known in more recent decades, the West Bank. David Adesnik, a senior fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, a Washington D.C.-based think tank, thoroughly debunked the myth of a famine in Gaza in a July 7, 2024, Washington Examiner op-ed. Indeed, as Adesnik documents, Israel actually helped prevent a famine and has been providing key humanitarian assistance. Hamas, by contrast, has been hijacking and hoarding aid and food stuffs.
“Writing is easy,” Mark Twain allegedly said. “All you have to do is cross out the wrong words.” If so, the Post’s report on BDS would be a blank page –and readers would be better off for it.
The writer is a Senior Research Analyst for CAMERA, the 65,000-member, Boston-based Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting and Analysis.
The post The Washington Post Outright Lies About BDS and Anti-Israel Boycott Movements first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Pro-Palestine Demonstrators Blast Sanders as ‘Genocide Denier’
US Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) speaks to the media following a meeting with US President Joe Biden at the White House in Washington, US, July 17, 2023. Photo: REUTERS/Evelyn Hockstein
Sen. Bernie Sanders (D-VT) has been targeted by left-wing protesters over his supposedly insufficient support for Gaza.
Pro-Palestine activists crashed one of Sanders’s “The Fighting Oligarchy” rallies in Bakersfield, California last week to grill the senator about his position on the Israel-Hamas war. During Sanders’s speech, activists associated with United Liberation Front for Palestine (ULFP) berated Sanders for his reluctance in accusing Israel of committing so-called “genocide” against the civilians of Gaza.
“Are you going to call it a genocide, when it’s a genocide?” the activist bellowed.
“And you defend Israel when Palestinians are being killed every single day and all you do is criticize Netanyahu! Israel does not have a right to exist or fight while Palestinians are dying,” she continued.
Other protesters then interrupted Sanders’s speech, condemning the progressive lawmaker as a “liberal Zionist,” accusing him of being “complicit with ICE,” and castigating him for voting in favor of the confirmation of Secretary of State Marco Rubio.
“Bernie, why don’t you let your fans know that you’re a settler, that you occupy Palestinian land?” the activist said.
Sanders does not possess dual citizenship with Israel. However, rumors about Sanders, who is Jewish, possessing Israeli citizenship have circulated around the internet since his 2015 presidential campaign.
In recent weeks, anti-Israel protesters have grown increasingly critical of Sanders over his refusal to adopt more adversarial rhetoric against the Jewish state. Last week, Sanders incensed progressives after authorities removed an activist which unfurled a flag reading “free Palestine” during a tour stop in Idaho.
During that rally, Sanders said, “Israel, like any other country, has the right to defend itself from terrorism, but it does not have the right to wage all out war against the Palestinian people” and “not one more nickel to Netanyahu,” triggering more outrage among his leftist supporters.
Sanders, who is among the most vocal critics of the Israel-Hamas war in the federal government, spearheaded a number of failed efforts to implement a partial arms embargo on the Jewish state, citing supposed “indiscriminate bombing” in Gaza. However, progressive activists have grown increasingly vocal about their dissatisfaction with Sanders’s position on Israel, complaining that the senator has isolated his criticisms to Israel Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and has refused to repudiate Israel’s existence.
The post Pro-Palestine Demonstrators Blast Sanders as ‘Genocide Denier’ first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Harvard Sues Trump Administration Over Massive Cuts Amid Campus Antisemitism Crisis
US President Donald Trump, Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., Secretary of the Interior Doug Burgum, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, and Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick attend a cabinet meeting at the White House. Photo: Nathan Howard via Reuters Connect.
Harvard University filed suit against the Trump administration on Monday to request an injunction that would halt the government’s impounding of $2.26 billion of its federal grants and contracts and an additional $1 billion that, reportedly, will be confiscated in the coming days.
In the complaint, shared by interim university president Alan Garber, Harvard says the administration bypassed key procedural steps it must, by law, take before sequestering any federal funds. It also charges that the Trump administration does not aim, as it has publicly pledged, to combat campus antisemitism at Harvard but to impose “viewpoint-based conditions on Harvard’s funding.”
As previously reported by The Algemeiner, the administration has proposed that Harvard reform in ways that conservatives have long argued will make higher education more meritocratic and less welcoming to anti-Zionists and far-left extremists. Its “demands,” contained in a letter the administration sent to Garber — who subsequently released it to the public — called for “viewpoint diversity in hiring and admissions,” the “discontinuation of [diversity, equity, and inclusion, or DEI, initiatives],” and “reducing forms of governance bloat.” They also implore Harvard to begin “reforming programs with egregious records of antisemitism” and to recalibrate its approach to “student discipline.”
Harvard rejects the administration’s coupling of campus antisemitism with longstanding grievances regarding elite higher education’s “wokeness,” elitism, and overwhelming bias against conservative ideast. Republican lawmakers, for their part, have maintained that it is futile to address campus antisemitism while ignoring the context in which it emerged.
Speaking for the university, Harvard’s legal team — which includes attorneys with links to US President Donald Trump’s inner circle — denounced any larger reform effort as intrusive.
“The First Amendment does not permit the Government to ‘interfere with private actors’ speech to advance its own vision of ideological balance,” they wrote in the complaint, which names several members and agencies of the administration but not Trump as a defendant. “Nor may the government ‘rely on the ‘threat of invoking legal sanctions and other means of coercion … to achieve the suppression of disfavored speech.’ The government’s attempt to coerce and control Harvard disregards these fundamental First Amendment principles, which safeguard Harvard’s ‘academic freedom.’”
The complaint continued, arguing that the impounding of funds “flout not just the First Amendment, but also federal laws and regulations” and says that Harvard should have been investigated by the Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights (OCR) to determine whether it failed to stop and, later, prevent antisemitism in violation of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act — a finding that would have warranted punitive measures. Rather, it charges, the Trump administration imposed a “sweeping freeze of funding” that, it contends, “has nothing at all to do with antisemitism and Title VI compliance.”
Garber followed up the complaint with an exaltation of limited government and the liberal values which further academia’s educational mission — values Harvard has been accused of failing to uphold for decades.
“We stand for the truth that colleges and universities across the country can embrace and honor their legal obligations and best fulfill their essential role in society without improper government intrusion,” Garber said in a statement announcing the lawsuit. “That is how we achieve academic excellence, safeguard open inquiry and freedom of speech, and conduct pioneering research — and how we advance the boundless exploration that propels our nation and its people into a better future.”
For some, Harvard’s allegations against the Trump administration are hollow.
“Claiming that the entire institution is exempt from any oversight or intervention is extraordinary,” Alex Joffe, anthropologist and editor of BDS Monitor for Scholars for Peace in the Middle East, told The Algemeiner on Tuesday. “It would seem to claim, at least by extension, that the government cannot enforce laws regarding equal protection for individuals — namely students in minority groups — and other legal and regulatory frameworks because they jeopardize the institution’s academic freedom.”
He continued, “Moreover, the idea that cutting voluntary government funding is de facto denial of free speech also sounds exaggerated if not absurd. If an institution doesn’t want to be subjected to certain requirements in a relationship entered into voluntarily with the government, they shouldn’t take the money. Modifying a contract after the fact, however, might be another issue … At one level the Trump administration is simply doing what Obama and Biden did with far less controversy, issuing directives and threatening lawsuits and funding. But the substance of the proposed oversight, especially the intrusiveness with respect to curricular affairs, has obviously touched a nerve.”
Harvard’s fight with the federal government is backed by its immense wealth, and the school has been drawing on its vast financial resources to build a war chest for withstanding Trump’s budget cuts since March, when it issued over $450 million in bonds as “part of ongoing contingency planning for a range of financial circumstances.” Another $750 million in bonds was offered to investors in April, according to The Harvard Crimson, a sale that is being managed by Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley.
A generous subsidy protects Harvard from paying exorbitant interest on the new debt, as investors can sell most bonds issued by educational institutions without being required to pay federal income tax.
Other universities have resorted to borrowing as well, issuing what was reportedly a record $12.4 billion municipal bonds, some of which are taxable, during the first quarter of 2025. Among those which chose to take on debt are Northwestern University, which was defunded to the tune of $790 million on April 8. It issued $500 million in bonds in March. Princeton University, recently dispossessed of $210 in federal grants, is preparing an offering of $320 million, according to Forbes.
“If Harvard is willing to mortgage it’s real estate or use it as collateral, it can borrow money for a very long time,” National Association of Scholars president Peter Wood told The Algemeiner on Tuesday. “But it could destroy itself that way.”
Follow Dion J. Pierre @DionJPierre.
The post Harvard Sues Trump Administration Over Massive Cuts Amid Campus Antisemitism Crisis first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Russia Ratifies Strategic Partnership With Iran, Strengthening Military Ties
Russian President Vladimir Putin and Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian attend a documents signing ceremony in Moscow, Russia, Jan. 17, 2025. Photo: REUTERS/Evgenia Novozhenina/Pool
Russian President Vladimir Putin on Monday signed a law officially ratifying a 20-year strategic partnership agreement with Iran, further strengthening military ties between the two countries.
Signed off by Putin and Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian in January, the Strategic Cooperation Treaty will boost collaboration between Moscow and Tehran in areas such as security services, military drills, warship port visits, and joint officer training.
According to Russian and Iranian officials, the treaty is a response to the increasing geopolitical pressure from the West. Iran’s growing ties with Russia come at a time when Tehran is facing mounting sanctions by the United States, particularly on its oil industry.
Iran’s Ambassador to Russia, Kazem Jalali, said the agreement “stands as one of the most significant achievements in Tehran-Moscow relations.”
“One of the most important commonalities between the two countries is the deep wounds inflicted by the West’s unrestrained unilateralism, which underscores the necessity for broader cooperation in the future,” Jalali told Iranian state media last week.
Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi also praised the agreement, saying that Iran and Russia “are strategic partners and will continue to be so in pursuit of shared interests and for the good of the two nations and the world.”
“We are at the apex of collaboration with Russia in the history of our 500-year-old relationship,” Araghchi wrote in a post on X.
“This does not mean that the two countries recognize the legitimacy of the sanctions, but they have designed their economic cooperation in such a way that even in the presence of sanctions, they can achieve desirable results,” the top Iranian diplomat continued, apparently referring to US economic pressure on both countries.
The cooperation treaty was approved by the State Duma – the lower house of Russia’s parliament – earlier this month and passed by the Federation Council – Russia’s upper house of parliament – last week, with the presidential signature remaining as the final step.
Under the agreement, neither country will permit its territory to be used for actions that pose a threat to the other, nor will they provide assistance to any aggressor targeting either nation. However, this pact does not include a mutual defense clause of the kind included in a treaty between Russia and North Korea.
The agreement also enhances cooperation in arms control, counterterrorism, peaceful nuclear energy, and security coordination at both regional and global levels.
As Russia strengthens its growing partnership with the Iranian regime, Moscow’s diplomatic role in the ongoing US-Iran nuclear talks could be significant in facilitating a potential agreement between the two adversaries.
Indeed, Russia, an increasingly close partner of Iran, could play a crucial role in Tehran’s nuclear negotiations with the West, leveraging its position as a veto-wielding member of the UN Security Council and a signatory to a now-defunct 2015 nuclear deal that imposed limits on the Iranian nuclear program in exchange for sanctions relief.
Tehran and Washington are set to have a third round of nuclear talks in Oman this weekend.
After Saturday’s second round of nuclear negotiations in Rome, Araghchi announced that an expert-level track would begin in the coming days to finalize the details of a potential agreement.
“Relatively positive atmosphere in Rome has enabled progress on principles and objectives of a possible deal,” Araghchi wrote in a post on X. “For now, optimism may be warranted but only with a great deal of caution.”
According to a Guardian report, Russia could be considered a potential destination for Iran’s stockpile of highly enriched uranium and a possible mediator in any future nuclear deal, particularly in the event of breaches to the agreement.
This option would allow Russia to “return the handed-over stockpile of highly enriched uranium to Tehran” if Washington were to violate the deal, ensuring that Iran would not be penalized for American non-compliance.
Some experts and lawmakers in the US have expressed concern that a deal could allow Iran to maintain a vast nuclear program while enjoying the benefits of sanctions relief. However, US President Donald Trump’s special envoy Steve Witkoff recently said that Iran “must stop and eliminate its nuclear enrichment and weaponization program.” The comment came after Witkoff received criticism for suggesting the Islamic Republic would be allowed to maintain its nuclear program in a limited capacity.
Several Western countries have said Iran’s nuclear program is designed for the ultimate goal of building nuclear weapons. Tehran claims its nuclear activities are only for civilian energy purposes.
The post Russia Ratifies Strategic Partnership With Iran, Strengthening Military Ties first appeared on Algemeiner.com.