RSS
A pop-up art gallery celebrating Shabbat transcends the fight over defining Zionism
When discussing the anthology On Being Jewish Now—and anti-antisemitic outreach more generally—I have expressed skepticism of the term, “Jewish joy.” (Akin to Black joy, queer joy, etc.) It comes across as a way of saying, see, it’s not all bad!, where the effect is reminding of just how bad the speaker thinks it is. I can’t entirely articulate why it doesn’t sit right, but it doesn’t.
Then I was picking my kids up from school on Friday, in Toronto, and heard a small airplane overhead. It was flying—what else?—a big Palestinian flag. I tried to photograph this, but let’s just say there’s a reason the great photojournalists do not multitask in this manner. The best I could get was a picture where it looks like it’s a tiny flag hanging from a power line, which would have been far less dramatic and really par for the course.
I did some feeling of feelings that would not have been out of place in a book like the one edited by Zibby Owens. I thought about how to explain this to my children, before remembering that they are not at a point in childhood where there’s anything registering beyond, look, a plane. I thought about my own anxiety, and also about what a joke that was compared to parents of young children in Gaza—or in Israel for that matter—with far more substantive worries about what’s overhead.
Whatever the case, I was put in a mindset where I became determined to attend a photography exhibition slash Shabbat candle lighting happening down the street from me. I had known about this and thought it seemed… very much the sort of thing I’m happy to know exists, but is for people who don’t have all-hands-on-deck childcare situations. But my desire to get out of my own head led to my entire household getting out of our own home in the evening and seeing what this was about.

Petrina Blander’s photography exhibit Shabbat Shalom Toronto turned out to be like nothing I’ve ever seen. She Said Gallery is a pop-up-type space in a space that’s otherwise a laundromat. But there was a big spread with such items as cured ham (if you want Orthodox services on Roncesvalles, mes excuses) and wrapped confections with Cyrillic writing and drinks and more. Some of the photographs have obviously Jewish content, and an artist bio explains the artist’s Israeli background.
And the space was absolutely packed with what my square self would describe as an art crowd. Jews and non-Jews—I think? While I identified myself as being at The Canadian Jewish News, I was not there reporting-reporting, I was more trying to assess whether a specific Russian (?) chocolate had alcohol in it and intercepting a three-year-old who’d have otherwise put it in her mouth.
For obvious reasons, I wasn’t able to stay that long, but was there long enough for a Shabbat candle-lighting ceremony, involving a cameo by none other than one-time Bonjour Chai guest Elise Kayfetz aka Vintage Schmatta. Then some magnificent, enormous challahs came out.
It was powerful to see this big group assembled to do something Jewish, in a neighbourhood not exactly famed as go-to destination for Jewish joy—or Jewish anything for that matter. The event wasn’t pretending to be anything other than Jewish, wasn’t doing any kind of pro-Diaspora erasure of the existence of Israeli Jews. It wasn’t doom and gloom, it wasn’t draped in flags. It was quite simply orthogonal to the omnicause.
If the event felt refreshing, it was as much because “Jewish joy” was a contrast to whatever exactly has been happening in Roncesvalles Village since Oct. 7, 2023, as because the pandemic lockdown era still feels so recent, and there’s something a bit novel (to me, at least) about such festivity IRL. Something that would have struck me as normal to the point of unworthy of remark in, say, circa 2006 Brooklyn, seemed frankly a bit awe-inspiring.
***
“Fuck Zionists” So read some early-2024 graffiti several blocks from where the above action took place, a huge spray-painted message on a local overpass. Whoever put it there presumably has an idea, in their head, of who Zionists are. From the context, this was not someone crudely expressing a bog-standard fantasy about Gal Gadot, but rather an expression of ill will towards Zionists. But who do they mean by Zionists?
A new survey commissioned by the New Israel Fund, JSpaceCanada, and Canadian Friends of Peace Now asked 588 Jewish Canadians where they stood on various not at all contentious topics like Israel and antisemitism and such. The blockbuster finding was that while 94 percent believe Israel has the right to exist as a Jewish state, and 84% are emotionally attached to that state, a paltry 51 percent identify as Zionists.
Our latest survey, in partnership with @JSpaceCanada
and @peacenowcan is out!Read the full report here: https://t.co/UVZ8l1azT7 https://t.co/9dcba8A2l7 pic.twitter.com/lVhWleAphs
— New Israel Fund of Canada (@nifcan) December 10, 2024
Rabbi Avi Finegold and I spoke with Ben Murane of the New Israel Fund and Maytal Kowalski of JSpaceCanada to learn more, a conversation you can hear on Bonjour Chai. And they confirmed that the survey offers the what, but not the why. The “Zionism” question is ultimately a bit of a red herring, as no survey had ever asked this of Jewish Canadians previously. So, as Murane pointed out when we spoke to him, for all we know, the 51 percent figure was an increase.
When I saw the disparity, my first thought was that this was all a bit silly. Who are the people making up the difference, who think Israel has a right to exist as a Jewish state, but reject the term that is shorthand for precisely that belief? (Presumably no one is saying they are a Zionist but they don’t think Israel has a right to exist.) A kind of, who are they kidding? Obviously you’re a Zionist to the people mad at “Zionists,” whether you want to call yourself one or not. Because I don’t think “Zionist,” when sneered, is necessarily always a euphemism for “Jewish.” It is, however, a euphemism for “Jewish and supports Israel” and yes, I am aware of the far greater ranks of non-Jewish Zionists. Given the locations where protests cluster, it rather seems Jewish Zionists are the ones of antizionist interest.
And… given that nearly all Jewish Canadians support Israel’s right to exist, I suppose I do think that if you’re a Canadian Jew who believes Israel should exist, but doesn’t self-id as a Zionist, and you think “Fuck Zionists” graffiti isn’t about the likes of you, you’re fooling yourself. I also think it’s possible I have just invented a person to be mad at, because I sort of think however we
I also knew, even before I knew, that the 49 percent figure was going to be trotted out as evidence that see see see antizionism isn’t antisemitism! Which is true in a literal sense, but not if you let your mind be nimble enough to realize that someone who hates Zionism with all their might is almost certainly someone who objects to the existence of Israel as a Jewish state. There’s other language to convey that someone dislikes the current Israeli government, or opposes the occupation of the West Bank, or the war in Gaza. No good shorthand, perhaps—the term critical of Israel conflates criticisms of Israel with critiques of its very existence—but at any rate, I have never known “antizionism” to refer to the belief that instead of one Israeli politician being prime minister, it ought to be a different one.
Or have I? I suppose there is also, within the Jewish community, a subset of people who think of liberal or progressive Zionists as antizionists, so in a sense who could blame such people for saying, you’re right, I’m not a Zionist. This appears to be the hope from the survey’s organizers: to show the multiplicity of the Canadian Jewish community. To show that contrary to what certain self-appointed community leaders would have you believe, rah-rah, uncritical sorts who want Israel to annex whatever’s at arm’s reach represent only a fraction.
By some definitions, virtually no one alive today is a Zionist. Modern political Zionism was the belief that a Jewish nation-state should exist in Palestine. I say “was” because such a state has existed in that location since 1948. The thoughts of someone living in 2024 about whether this ought to have happened are the stuff of dorm-room musings but nothing more. There are Israeli nationalists, and supporters of Israel who are not Israeli themselves, but Zionism itself, well, it’s complicated. A deeper exploration can be found in a recent essay by Rabbi Avi Finegold.
I took a class in college, Zionism and its Critics, and both wish I remembered more about the early history of modern Zionism and… am not sure how much any of it has to do with what’s up for discussion today. The antizionism of let’s not do that thing is such a different entity than the antizionism of let’s dismantle what exists.
Zionism is used these days to mean support for Israel. Sometimes it suggests enthusiastic or uncritical support, other times just support in the sense of, wishing Israelis well, and not wanting the state itself obliterated. ‘I’m not a Zionist, but I believe in Israel’s right to exist’ is—as came up recently on Bluesky—similar to ‘I’m not a feminist, but I believe in equal rights for women.’ It is—among other things—a way of distancing yourself from an identity label that you anticipate will lead people to stop listening to you (on the topic at hand, or in general) before you’ve had a moment to say what it is you actually think.
I’m not much of a joiner, but nor am I someone who strives to transcend labels. I call myself a feminist and a Zionist because this is the most effective way of conveying that I believe women are people and that Israel is a country. I’m also in the privileged position of someone who opines for a living, so what I specifically think about a range of issues is no great mystery, and not something that must be inferred from single-word summations. I don’t need to put emojis in bio because people can read absolute reams of my holdings-forth, not to mention listen to the podcasts.
And I don’t get out much, but am 100 percent in favour of there being fun Jewish stuff going on in Roncesvalles, and would hope that 100 percent of the Jewish Canadian population is with me on this.
The CJN’s opinion editor Phoebe Maltz Bovy can be reached at pbovy@thecjn.ca, not to mention @phoebebovy on Bluesky, and @bovymaltz on X. She is also on The CJN’s weekly podcast Bonjour Chai. For more opinions about Jewish culture wars, subscribe to the free Bonjour Chai newsletter on Substack.
The post A pop-up art gallery celebrating Shabbat transcends the fight over defining Zionism appeared first on The Canadian Jewish News.
RSS
Colorado Attack Suspect Charged with Assault, Use of Explosives

FILE PHOTO: Boulder attack suspect Mohamed Sabry Soliman poses for a jail booking photograph after his arrest in Boulder, Colorado, U.S. June 2, 2025. Photo: Boulder Police Department/Handout via REUTERS
A suspect in an attack on a pro-Israeli rally in Colorado that injured eight people was being held on Monday on an array of charges, including assault and the use of explosives, in lieu of a $10-million bail, according to Boulder County records.
The posted list of felony charges against suspect Mohamed Sabry Soliman, 45, in the attack on Sunday also includes charges of murder in the first degree, although police in the city of Boulder have said on social media that no victims died in the attack. Authorities could not be reached immediately to clarify.
Witnesses reported the suspect used a makeshift flamethrower and threw an incendiary device into the crowd. He was heard to yell “Free Palestine” during the attack, according to the FBI, in what the agency called a “targeted terror attack.”
Four women and four men between 52 and 88 years of age were transported to hospitals after the attack, Boulder Police said.
The attack took place on the Pearl Street Mall, a popular pedestrian shopping district near the University of Colorado, during an event organized by Run for Their Lives, an organization devoted to drawing attention to the hostages seized in the aftermath of Hamas’ 2023 attack on Israel.
Rabbi Yisroel Wilhelm, the Chabad director at the University of Colorado, Boulder, told CBS Colorado that the 88-year-old victim was a Holocaust refugee who fled Europe.
A Department of Homeland Security spokesperson said Soliman had entered the country in August 2022 on a tourist visa that expired in February 2023. He filed for asylum in September 2022. “The suspect, Mohamed Soliman, is illegally in our country,” the spokesperson said.
The FBI raided and searched Soliman’s home in El Paso County, Colorado, the agency said on social media. “As this is an ongoing investigation, no additional information is available at this time.”
The attack in Boulder was the latest act of violence aimed at Jewish Americans linked to outrage over Israel’s escalating military offensive in Gaza. It followed the fatal shooting of two Israel Embassy aides that took place outside Washington’s Capital Jewish Museum last month.
Ron Halber, CEO of the Jewish Community Relations Council of Greater Washington, said after the shooting there was a question of how far security perimeters outside Jewish institutions should extend.
Boulder Police said they would hold a press conference later on Monday to discuss details of the Colorado attack.
The Denver office of the FBI, which is handling the case, did not immediately respond to emails or phone calls seeking clarification on the homicide charges or other details in the case.
Officials from the Boulder County Jail, Boulder Police and Boulder County Sheriff’s Office did not immediately respond to inquiries.
The post Colorado Attack Suspect Charged with Assault, Use of Explosives first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Iran Poised to Dismiss US Nuclear Proposal, Iranian Diplomat Says

Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi attends a press conference following a meeting with Russia’s Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov in Moscow, Russia, April 18, 2025. Photo: Tatyana Makeyeva/Pool via REUTERS
Iran is poised to reject a US proposal to end a decades-old nuclear dispute, an Iranian diplomat said on Monday, dismissing it as a “non-starter” that fails to address Tehran’s interests or soften Washington’s stance on uranium enrichment.
“Iran is drafting a negative response to the US proposal, which could be interpreted as a rejection of the US offer,” the senior diplomat, who is close to Iran’s negotiating team, told Reuters.
The US proposal for a new nuclear deal was presented to Iran on Saturday by Omani Foreign Minister Sayyid Badr Albusaidi, who was on a short visit to Tehran and has been mediating talks between Tehran and Washington.
After five rounds of discussions between Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi and President Donald Trump’s Middle East envoy Steve Witkoff, several obstacles remain.
Among them are Iran’s rejection of a US demand that it commit to scrapping uranium enrichment and its refusal to ship abroad its entire existing stockpile of highly enriched uranium – possible raw material for nuclear bombs.
Tehran says it wants to master nuclear technology for peaceful purposes and has long denied accusations by Western powers that it is seeking to develop nuclear weapons.
“In this proposal, the US stance on enrichment on Iranian soil remains unchanged, and there is no clear explanation regarding the lifting of sanctions,” said the diplomat, who declined to be identified due to the sensitivity of the matter.
Araqchi said Tehran would formally respond to the proposal soon.
Tehran demands the immediate removal of all US-imposed curbs that impair its oil-based economy. But the US says nuclear-related sanctions should be removed in phases.
Dozens of institutions vital to Iran’s economy, including its central bank and national oil company, have been blacklisted since 2018 for, according to Washington, “supporting terrorism or weapons proliferation.”
Trump’s revival of “maximum pressure” against Tehran since his return to the White House in January has included tightening sanctions and threatening to bomb Iran if the negotiations yield no deal.
During his first term in 2018, Trump ditched Tehran’s 2015 nuclear pact with six powers and reimposed sanctions that have crippled Iran’s economy. Iran responded by escalating enrichment far beyond the pact’s limits.
Under the deal, Iran had until 2018 curbed its sensitive nuclear work in return for relief from US, EU and U.N. economic sanctions.
The diplomat said the assessment of “Iran’s nuclear negotiations committee,” under the supervision of Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, was that the US proposal was “completely one-sided” and could not serve Tehran’s interests.
Therefore, the diplomat said, Tehran considers this proposal a “non-starter” and believes it unilaterally attempts to impose a “bad deal” on Iran through excessive demands.
NUCLEAR STANDOFF RAISES MIDDLE EAST TENSIONS
The stakes are high for both sides. Trump wants to curtail Tehran’s potential to produce a nuclear weapon that could trigger a regional nuclear arms race and perhaps threaten Israel. Iran’s clerical establishment, for its part, wants to be rid of the devastating sanctions.
Iran says it is ready to accept some limits on enrichment, but needs watertight guarantees that Washington would not renege on a future nuclear accord.
Two Iranian officials told Reuters last week that Iran could pause uranium enrichment if the US released frozen Iranian funds and recognized Tehran’s right to refine uranium for civilian use under a “political deal” that could lead to a broader nuclear accord.
Iran’s arch-foe Israel sees Iran’s nuclear program as an existential threat and says it would never allow Tehran to obtain nuclear weapons.
Araqchi, in a joint news conference with his Egyptian counterpart in Cairo, said: “I do not think Israel will commit such a mistake as to attack Iran.”
Tehran’s regional influence has meanwhile been diminished by military setbacks suffered by its forces and those of its allies in the Shi’ite-dominated “Axis of Resistance,” which include Hamas, Hezbollah, the Houthis in Yemen, and Iraqi militias.
In April, Saudi Arabia’s defence minister delivered a blunt message to Iranian officials to take Trump’s offer of a new deal seriously as a way to avoid the risk of war with Israel.
The post Iran Poised to Dismiss US Nuclear Proposal, Iranian Diplomat Says first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
The Islamist Crescent: A New Syrian Danger

Syrian President Ahmed al-Sharaa speaks during a joint press conference with French President Emmanuel Macron after a meeting at the Elysee Palace in Paris, France, May 7, 2025. Photo: REUTERS/Stephanie Lecocq/Pool
The dramatic fall of the Assad regime in Syria has undeniably reshaped the Middle East, yet the emerging power dynamics, particularly the alignment between Saudi Arabia and Turkey, warrant profound scrutiny from those committed to American and Israeli security. While superficially presented as a united front against Iranian influence, this new Sunni axis carries a dangerous undercurrent of Islamism and regional ambition that could ultimately undermine, rather than serve, the long-term interests of Washington and Jerusalem.
For too long, Syria under Bashar al-Assad served as a critical conduit for Iran’s destabilizing agenda, facilitating arms transfers to Hezbollah and projecting Tehran’s power across the Levant. The removal of this linchpin is, on the surface, a strategic victory. However, the nature of the new Syrian government, led by Ahmed al-Sharaa — a figure Israeli officials continue to view with deep suspicion due to his past as a former Al-Qaeda-linked commander — raises immediate red flags. This is not merely a change of guard; it is a shift that introduces a new set of complex challenges, particularly given Turkey’s historical support for the Muslim Brotherhood, an organization deemed a terror group by Saudi Arabia and many other regional states.
Israel’s strategic calculus in Syria has always been clear: to degrade Iran’s military presence, prevent Hezbollah from acquiring advanced weaponry, and maintain operational freedom in Syrian airspace. Crucially, Israel has historically thought it best to have a decentralized, weak, and fragmented Syria, with reports that it has actively worked against the resurgence of a robust central authority. This preference stems from a pragmatic understanding that a strong, unified Syria, especially one under the tutelage of an ambitious regional power like Turkey, could pose much more of a threat than the Assad regime ever did. Indeed, Israeli defense officials privately express concern at Turkey’s assertive moves, accusing Ankara of attempting to transform post-war Syria into a Turkish protectorate under Islamist tutelage. This concern is not unfounded; Turkey’s ambitious, arguably expansionist, objectives — and its perceived undue dominance in Arab lands — are viewed by Israel as warily as Iran’s previous influence.
The notion that an “Ottoman Crescent” is now replacing the “Shiite Crescent” should not be celebrated as a net positive. While it may diminish Iranian power, it introduces a new form of regional hegemony, one driven by an ideology that has historically been antithetical to Western values and stability. The European Union’s recent imposition of sanctions on Turkish-backed Syrian army commanders for human rights abuses, including arbitrary killings and torture, further underscores the problematic nature of some elements within this new Syrian landscape. The fact that al-Sharaa has allowed such individuals to operate with impunity and even promoted them to high-ranking positions should give Washington pause.
From an American perspective, while the Trump administration has pragmatically engaged with the new Syrian government, lifting sanctions and urging normalization with Israel, this engagement must be tempered with extreme caution. The core American interests in the Middle East — counterterrorism, containment of Iran, and regional stability — are not served by empowering Islamist-leaning factions or by enabling a regional power, like Turkey, whose actions have sometimes undermined the broader fight against ISIS. Washington must demand that Damascus demonstrate a genuine commitment to taking over the counter-ISIS mission and managing detention facilities, and unequivocally insist that Turkey cease actions that risk an ISIS resurgence.
The argument that Saudi Arabia and Turkey, despite their own complex internal dynamics, are simply pragmatic actors countering Iran overlooks the ideological underpinnings that concern many conservatives. Turkey’s ruling party, rooted in political Islam, and its historical ties to the Muslim Brotherhood, present a fundamental challenge to the vision of a stable, secular, and pro-Western Middle East. While Saudi Arabia has designated the Muslim Brotherhood as a terrorist organization, its alignment with Turkey in Syria, and its own internal human rights record, means that this “new front” is far from a clean solution.
The Saudi-Turkey alignment in Syria is a double-edged sword. While it may indeed serve to counter Iran’s immediate regional ambitions, it simultaneously risks empowering actors whose long-term objectives and ideological leanings are deeply problematic for American, Israeli, and Western interests. Washington and Jerusalem must approach this new dynamic with extreme vigilance, prioritizing the containment of all forms of radicalism — whether Shiite or Sunni — and ensuring that any strategic gains against Iran do not inadvertently pave the way for a new, equally dangerous, Islamist crescent to rise in the heart of the Levant.
Amine Ayoub, a fellow at the Middle East Forum, is a policy analyst and writer based in Morocco. Follow him on X: @amineayoubx
The post The Islamist Crescent: A New Syrian Danger first appeared on Algemeiner.com.