RSS
Do We Have the Courage to Follow the New Route Home?
One of ancient Greece’s earliest philosophers, Heraclitus, is recorded as having said: “There is nothing permanent except change.” Along the same lines, he stated: “No man ever steps in the same river twice.”
The sentiment of this ancient wisdom is simple – those who stay in the same place and never embrace new realities are doomed to disaster.
There are numerous examples from history of those who refused to change when catastrophe loomed. But far more refreshing are those who understood, when faced with disaster, that a correction was needed, sometimes urgently.
One famous example is the sixteenth-century Dutch leader, William of Orange. In 1566, William faced an impossible choice. The king of Spain, Philip II, was tightening his iron grip on the Low Countries – crushing religious freedom and centralizing power in ways that had never been attempted before. The old system – accepting foreign rule while hoping for gradual reform – had failed spectacularly.
William could have clung to the familiar, doubling down on diplomatic appeals and hoping for the best. But instinctively, he knew that this wouldn’t work out well. Instead, he did something revolutionary: he acknowledged that the old route wasn’t working and opted to change course.
The Dutch Revolt that followed could be viewed as a military campaign, but actually it was much more than that: it was a complete reimagining of what could be and how that could be achieved. William became the first Stadtholder of what would become the Dutch Republic, creating a new model that bore little resemblance to the monarchical systems that had preceded it.
The change was radical, and initially it was both uncomfortable and uncertain. But it worked – because William and his supporters dared to honestly assess what wasn’t working and make the necessary adjustments until they got it right. What followed was a century of prosperity, known as the Dutch Golden Age.
This willingness to recalculate in the face of potential failure isn’t merely a political strategy – it’s a fundamental principle of how progress can proceed. And nowhere is this principle more beautifully illustrated than in Parshas Devarim.
Modern technology has given us an unexpected teacher in resilience. When you set your GPS to a destination, it sets your course – but inevitably, you will make a mistake and take a wrong turn. Without a fuss, your GPS will recalculate, offering you a new route to your destination. There’s no judgment, and no disappointment.
Occasionally, the GPS will try to send you back to the original route, but more often it will simply offer you another pathway. Now, imagine if life worked like that. Imagine if every time we found ourselves going off course, we were offered the new route back to the best version of ourselves.
This is precisely the approach Moshe Rabbeinu takes in Devarim. As the Jewish people stand on the threshold of the Promised Land, about to change course completely from the secure existence they had enjoyed for four decades, Moshe offers them a platform to succeed in their new situation. Not criticism or recrimination. Instead, he offers something far more valuable: a retrospective that focuses not on blame but on learning from mistakes and charting a new route ahead.
Yes, there were the spies who brought back a discouraging report, and the repercussions were devastating. So, beware of those whose advice will set you back.
Yes, there was the golden calf, and you almost went off a cliff before your journey even started. So, don’t fall into the trap of attractive ideas that will end up taking you down.
Yes, there was the rebellion of Korach. So, don’t allow yourself to be drawn into self-destructive insurrections.
Moshe acknowledges these missteps, not to draw attention to the mistakes, but to explain that every misstep is just a stumble along the way to your predetermined destination.
For forty years, the Israelites had lived as perpetual wanderers, always looked after by God – manna falling from heaven, water flowing from rocks, clouds providing direction and protection. They had become accustomed to a kind of spiritual dependency, where their basic needs were miraculously provided, and their major decisions were made through divine signs.
Now, as they prepared to enter the Land of Israel, everything was about to change. They would need to plant crops and harvest them, dig wells and maintain them, establish courts and ensure justice, defend borders and govern cities. The wilderness mindset – reactive, dependent, whiny – had to give way to a completely different approach: proactive, responsible, and focused on building a society.
Perhaps no figure in Jewish history understood this principle better than Rabbi Yochanan ben Zakkai. As Jerusalem collapsed under the weight of the Roman siege in 70 CE, he understood that the Temple would imminently be destroyed.
Unless there was a drastic adaptation to new realities, Judaism would disappear. The old system – Temple-based Judaism centered in Jerusalem – was collapsing. The rebels who presided over Jerusalem, including his own nephew, refused to consider any alternative. They clung to the familiar, convinced that doubling down was the only honorable path.
But Rabbi Yochanan ben Zakkai chose to recalculate. His famous request to the Roman general Vespasian – “Give me Yavneh and its sages” – was an acknowledgement that a new route was required to get to the same destination.
The route through Temple worship was no longer available. So, instead of doggedly pursuing the same path and pretending that the destruction wasn’t happening, Rabbi Yochanan ben Zakkai calmly assessed the new landscape and found an alternative route: a Judaism that could survive and thrive without the Temple, a Judaism centered on study and scholarship rather than animal sacrifices and pilgrimage.
The transformation was radical. The Judaism that emerged from Yavneh may have been significantly different from what had come before, but it worked — spectacularly. And the proof is that it has survived for nearly two millennia. Meanwhile, those who refused to change course disappeared without a trace once the Temple was destroyed.
This theme resonates powerfully with Shabbat Chazon, the Shabbat of Isaiah’s Vision that precedes Tisha B’Av. The haftarah from Isaiah that gives this Shabbat its name is predominantly a prophecy of doom, and a divine indictment of Jewish failures.
But if you look more carefully, you’ll see something else entirely: embedded within the rebuke is the ultimate recalculation. Isaiah acknowledges that the Jewish people are off course and the consequences for that will be severe – exile, destruction, and the loss of the Temple.
But the prophet’s message isn’t “Game Over.” Instead, his underlying message is “Come now, let us reason together” (Is. 1:18) — even after destruction, we can recalculate. The vision Isaiah presents isn’t only about destruction, it’s also about reconstruction.
The entire concept of Tisha B’Av embodies this principle. When we fast and mourn, it’s not just about wallowing in historical tragedy. It’s about engaging honestly with our missteps so we can find our way back to the correct route.
Our day of mourning is about the destruction of the past, but simultaneously it is also a day of recalculation, a hopeful acknowledgement that while we may have taken wrong turns, we remain on course for our destination.
Moshe’s retrospective in Parshat Devarim and Isaiah’s vision in the haftarah of Shabbat Chazon both carry the same essential message: it’s never “Game Over.” No matter how far off course we’ve traveled, no matter how many wrong turns we’ve taken, the GPS of divine providence is always ready to find the route that will get us back on track.
The question is only whether we have the wisdom to listen and the courage to follow that new route home.
The author is a rabbi in Beverly Hills, California.
RSS
Why Do Western Countries Treat Qatar Better Than Their Jewish Citizens?

Qatar’s Prime Minister and Minister for Foreign Affairs Sheikh Mohammed bin Abdulrahman bin Jassim Al-Thani attends an emergency meeting of the United Nations Security Council, following an Israeli attack on Hamas leaders in Doha, Qatar, at UN headquarters in New York City, US, Sept. 11, 2025. Photo: REUTERS/Eduardo Munoz
Growing up in communist Prague, I was exposed to antisemitism expressed largely by government officials and communist outlets, rather than by citizens themselves.
I learned in school about three major enemies of the socialist republic of Czechoslovakia: Germans seeking to conquer back the Sudetenland, American imperialists, and, you might have guessed, Zionists. And I was one of them.
The propaganda during the Six-Day War was unrelenting and hostile to Israel. Some years later, during my studies in medical school, I was invited to continue as a graduate student at the genetics institute after obtaining my MD degree. However, a year or so later, I was disinvited because I was Jewish.
Surprisingly, the old Jewish quarter in Prague was relatively well maintained — it was a big tourist attraction, especially for Germans, and a good source of Western currency for the state. There was also a permanent exhibit of art by Jewish children imprisoned in Theresienstadt during World War II. And we did read Anne’s Frank diary. Prague was still much better than the Soviet Union and Romania.
At that time, Western Europe, the US, and Canada were the beacons of freedom for everybody, including Jews. A few decades later, it appears to me that the sides have switched.
Central and Eastern Europe (not counting Russia) have become more hospitable to Jews, and Western Europe and Canada are outright hostile. The situation in the US is somewhat mixed. What happened?
Most Western officials and leaders blame Israel for the war in Gaza, and they accuse Israel of genocide, intentional famine, and starvation of Gazans. Hamas has become — or at least is becoming — a beacon of freedom, especially among younger generations. In the meantime, the EU, UK, and Canada are threatening Israel with sanctions and recognizing a State of Palestine, which is basically a reward for Oct. 7.
Affairs have further deteriorated after Israel’s bombing of a meeting of Hamas leaders in Doha last week. Everybody runs to the defense of Qatar — after all, Qatar is considered an “honest” mediator between Israel and Hamas. This is the same Qatar that is the instigator of anti-Zionism and antisemitism by infiltrating Western institutions, particularly universities and subverting the education of Western values into support for radicalism, and is also the host of Hamas leaders and financiers, including those who planned the October 7 massacre.
Do Western countries really believe that Qatar, led by an emir with three wives, with a track record of slave working conditions of its foreign workers and with funding of Hamas terrorists, deserves support?
Furthermore, the hate in Western Europe is not being directed just at Israelis (which is still wrong, since Israel is not a monolith) — but against all Jews.
Jews, and particularly Israeli Jews, are disinvited from conferences, art performances, collaborations with their colleagues, sports events, and more. They are dehumanized and physically attacked on the streets of Western cities. The Spanish Prime Minister has been attempting to throw out Israeli athletes from several competitions because they were attacked by pro-Palestinian demonstrators rather than preventing demonstrators from attacking Israelis.
What is going to happen to Jews living in the West? Will they really be protected? Overall, Western governments appear to be willing to throw their Jewish citizens under the bus. Why is that? Do they really trust Qatar as an honest mediator, and even more as the most important non-NATO ally? Do they pretend they’ve never heard about Qatar’s subversive role in Western countries and support of the Muslim Brotherhood? Are they afraid of their increasing Muslim populations due to immigration and high birth rates in their own countries? Don’t they realize that they are falling into a moral morass at an accelerating rate?
It is unclear how long Western outrage at Israel will last. Is it going to be short-lived, like when Israel bombed Iraq’s nuclear reactor in 1981? Or will the West try to humiliate Israel and force (or at least attempt to do so) a solution to the war that leaves Hamas in power and isolates Israel internationally? One can only hope that the West, led by the US, will make the right decision not only for Israel, but for all democratic countries.
Dr. Jaroslava Halper has been a professor of pathology at The University of Georgia in Athens, GA for many years. She escaped from communist Prague because of antisemitism, and lack of freedom and free speech. The gradual increase of antisemitism and anti-Zionism in certain circles in her second homeland, and the devastating October 7 massacre by Hamas, led her to realize that more active engagement is necessary to combat antisemitism, including anti-Zionism.
RSS
Palestinian Authority: Marco Rubio’s ‘Invasion’ of the Western Wall Is a Crime Against Islam
On Sunday, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Ambassador Mike Huckabee visited the Western Wall of the Temple Mount, together with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
The Palestinian Authority (PA) was incensed by this visit, and publicized a long condemnation by the PA Jerusalem Governorate against what they called a “crime” against Islamic holy places:
The participation in these invasions by high-ranking American officials in an official capacity constitutes unacceptable collusion with the occupation’s policy, and dangerous willful blindness to the daily crimes committed against the holy city, its residents, and its holy places.
When Jews and Christians pray at the Western Wall or on the Temple Mount, the PA condemns what they call “Talmudic ceremonies.” The visit “offends the feelings of our Palestinian people”:
The Jerusalem Governorate viewed the invasion of the occupation’s Prime Minister — Benjamin Netanyahu, American Secretary of State Marco Rubio, and American Senator [sic, Ambassador] Mike Huckabee into the Western Wall plaza, and the fact that they held Talmudic ceremonies at this purely Islamic site, as a provocative step that offends the feelings of our Palestinian people and constitutes a blatant violation of the historical and legal status quo in the occupied city of Jerusalem.
Even though Muslims built a mosque in Jerusalem on the site of the Temples specifically because it was a Jewish holy site, today the PA proclaims that the Western Wall is a solely Islamic site:
The governorate emphasized that the Western Wall is an inseparable part of the blessed Al-Aqsa Mosque and that it is part of the Islamic Waqf lands under Palestinian sovereignty. It further stressed that there is no legitimacy for any Israeli or foreign presence within it, without the approval of the relevant Palestinian authorities.
The PA even threatened that this “escalation” would have “consequences”:
The governorate warned of this escalation’s consequences on the situation on the ground within the city. It emphasized that the Palestinian people would not agree to any harm to the Arab identity of Jerusalem or its Islamic and Christian holy places, and that they would resist all attempts to impose the occupation’s sovereignty over the land and the people. The governorate called on the international community… to curb the occupation’s violations and stop the American involvement in support for the Judaization projects of the occupied city.
[PA Jerusalem Governorate, Facebook, September 14, 2025]
The author is the Founder and Director of Palestinian Media Watch, where a version of this article first appeared.
RSS
What Charlie Kirk Meant to Jewish Conservatives

Charlie Kirk speaking at the inauguration of Donald Trump in January 2025. Photo: Brian Snyder via Reuters Connect
The horrific assassination of activist Charlie Kirk has left Jewish conservatives asking who will weaken the anti-Jewish hostility brewing in some corners of the far right now that Kirk has left us.
The 31-year-old, a devout Christian and founder of the organization Turning Point USA (TPUSA), understood that a society that turns on its Jews is a society that is rotting at its core.
When it came to quieting the antisemitic energies of the far right, Kirk knew that the conspiratorial scapegoating was a symptom of a serious malady, aggravated by an anxious and unhappy generation living in a digital den within an increasingly secularized America.
Kirk said that rejecting antisemitism, which he called “demonic,” was directly tied to defending Western civilization and protecting America’s Judeo-Christian identity.
That’s sadly ironic, given that many far right conspiracists online have blamed the Jewish people or Israel for Kirk’s murder.
In what may have conveyed a warning to the crop of influencers seeking to manipulate the Kirk assassination to advance their anti-Jewish objectives, US President Donald Trump released an image on Friday, showing the US leader and Kirk embracing against a backdrop of a US and Israeli flag with the caption reading, “Everybody Loved Charlie!”
Kirk’s speaking engagements at college campuses across the country drew thousands of students, admirers, and protestors. The informal open-air events provided participants with a platform to ask the late conservative influencer his thoughts on a host of issues, with many questions focused on Israel, Gaza, and the Jews.
Always respectful, Kirk carefully articulated why antisemitism is anti-Americanism.
Whether coming from the progressive left or the far right, Kirk defended Israel through a strategic and historical lens, and rejected the slew of libelous accusations leveled against the Jewish State.
Most recently, the TPUSA President exposed liberal media outlets for their role in fomenting the lie that Israel was starving the citizens of Gaza.
I just debated at Cambridge and Oxford. At Cambridge, instead of focusing on their own decaying country, they are obsessed with Israel. The lack of moral clarity on this topic is chilling. I decided to put this bouncy Brit in his place.
Watch: pic.twitter.com/RRnLiXJE2X
— Charlie Kirk (@charliekirk11) May 21, 2025
He also inspired Jewish conservatives to confront toxic positions with serious rebuttals, rather than with reflexive smears, while affirming that the path to a healthier country required responding to unsavory ideas through thoughtful and critical reason.
Acknowledging that it’s “hunting season for Jews right now in this country and that is a sick thing,” Kirk recently instructed an Israeli student who was harassed on a US campus to get “tougher.”
Indeed, he encouraged Jews to fight hate not with grievance, but with grit.
Jewish victimhood may have worked as a convenient tool of the political left, but Kirk saw the necessity and beauty in Jewish strength.
He emboldened Jewish Americans to lean into faith, and showed us that religion is the moral and divine anchor in today’s complicated and liberalized world.
Kirk advocated for issues that were in American Jews’ best interest, even as many of our own leaders resisted departing from the liberal sensibilities that undermined Jewish safety, and refused to acknowledge the dangers embedded in liberal immigration regulations.
As mainstream Jewish groups ignored the challenges associated with the increasing number of Muslims with radical ideologies entering the US, Kirk was firm in his assertion that radicalized Islam was incompatible with Western civilizational values.
Kirk granted right-leaning American Jews the space and the courage to sharpen our arguments as to why adopting strict immigration provisions was sound policy. He also defended Israel his whole life, and was an astute observer of the cracks in the emerging debate among younger conservative cohorts as it relates to safeguarding the US-Israel bond.
Warning of an “earthquake coming on this issue”, Kirk convened a focus group over the summer featuring Gen Z conservatives to discuss America’s alliance with Israel.
It was a candid discussion, and the panel provided a blueprint for what constituted “persuadable” pro-Israel arguments, and why, according to the young TPUSA supporters, focusing on shared values, radical Islamist threats, and intelligence cooperation was more of a motivator for bolstering support for Israel than unveiling public campaigns that underscored the progressive policies undertaken by the Jewish State.
The horrific assassination of Charlie Kirk has left Jewish Americans with an intense sadness over losing a friend who was critical to sidelining the anti-Jewish rumblings occurring across the cultural and political landscape.
As an Evangelical Christian, Kirk also taught American Jewry the value of adhering to our Jewish inheritance. He delivered a roadmap for how strong Jews, who commit to channeling conservative ideals through robust debate, are crucial to preserving the Judeo-Christian character of our country and will organically yield a US-Israel alliance that will be a bulwark against the enemies of Western civilization.
Irit Tratt is a writer who resides in New York. Follow her on X @Irit_Tratt.