RSS
Time for a Rethink on Holocaust Memorials
The Boston skyline stands behind the Tobin Bridge and the city of Chelsea as seen from Everett, Massachusetts, US. Photo: Brian Snyder via Reuters Connect
Sometime in late 2026, commuters who enter and exit Park Street Station in downtown Boston will be confronted with a daily reminder of one of the great catastrophes of the 20th century — the Holocaust.
A few levels above Tremont Street, pedestrians will be confronted with a rail car that was used to transport Jews to death camps in Eastern Europe during World War II. The rail car, brought to Boston from Macedonia via Arizona, will serve as a visual centerpiece of the Boston Holocaust Museum, established by the Holocaust Legacy Foundation.
When I saw the banner above Tremont Street announcing the museum’s 2026 opening a few days ago, I said to myself, “Great, another gathering point for the anti-Israel lunatics in this city.” On this score, I’m fairly certain: activists from local chapters of Students for Justice in Palestine and its affiliates will use the sidewalk in front of the museum as a stop for their rallies during which they will demonize Israel and its Jewish supporters in the US.
They’ll block traffic and use megaphones to tell everyone that they hate “genocide,” which is why they are protesting against Israel — which they falsely accuse of mass murder every time it defends itself.
Then, these agitators, who can’t be bothered to protest intentional mass killings elsewhere in the word — the Middle East especially –will head to the ADL offices just down the street, cause more trouble there, and then finally top off their odyssey of contempt by protesting in front of the Combined Jewish Philanthropies (CJP) a few blocks away.
Instead of serving as a bastion for empathy and justice, the sidewalk in front of the museum will become another platform for agitators intent on appropriating images of Jewish victimhood to demonize Israel, harass Jews, and promote propagandistic lies. A landmark used to highlight the suffering of the Jewish people will be hijacked to demonize them.
I hate to say it, but I’m fearful of another problem: Instead of arousing feelings of concern for Jews and empathy for humanity in general, it will arouse feelings of contempt for Jews and other minorities. The logic will go like this: “Oh, here they go again, trying to make us feel guilty over the Holocaust. When will it end? When can we move on?”
Let’s face it. Invoking the Holocaust no longer has the impact on people it once did. For a few decades after World War II, Holocaust memorials served as a powerful reminder of part of the reason why it was necessary for people’s fathers, uncles, and grandfathers to go overseas and to defeat the Nazis and their allies. It gave Americans a sense of pride in what their heroic ancestors had accomplished.
As Ruth Wisse wrote earlier this year: “America had come to the rescue of what was known as the Free World and, in simplest terms, had defeated evil and liberated the good. Jews were the emblem of those it had rescued, yet at the same time – here was the happy surprise – they were no longer in need of rescuing because they were doing it themselves in a spunky way reminiscent of the founding of the United States.”
Now that World War II is fading from memory, the Holocaust is no longer a reminder of American courage and Jewish resilience, but a victimization story that has been appropriated by Islamists and the far left to justify violence against Israel and Western democracies.
People, Americans especially, are tired of having the sins of Western civilization — like the Holocaust — shoved in their faces by a coalition of leftists and Islamists intent on perpetrating injustices of their own. This new museum, no matter how well-intentioned or operated, will become a prop in the campaign to demonize Western democracies and give Islamists a pass.
The museum’s organizers have said that their goal is to promote empathy in the minds of the people who visit the museum, but if the 2024 election, driven as it was by controversy over immigration, reveals anything it is this: empathy and compassion have their limits.
I offer this warning with great ambivalence. I have stood toe-to-toe with professional and amateur antisemites who periodically gather in Boston to demonize Israel and portray it as an enemy of all that is good in the world. I have walked through Yad Vashem in Jerusalem more times than I can count and have argued with an anti-Israel protestor outside the Holocaust museum in Washington, DC.
I’ve stood atop Masada lecturing my wife and children about Jewish toughness and resilience. But, God forgive me, I have concluded that we have hit the saturation point with Holocaust memorials. It’s time for a moratorium and a rethink.
Instead of building another Holocaust Museum, maybe it’s time to build a memorial for the victims of Islamist violence in the Middle East, Asia, and Africa or maybe a memorial to the victims of communism.
But don’t think for a second I won’t visit this museum once it’s built. Somebody has to keep an eye on the nutjobs who will try to hijack it.
Dexter Van Zile, the Middle East Forum’s Violin Family Research Fellow, serves as managing editor of Focus on Western Islamism (FWI).
RSS
South Africa Distances Itself From Army Chief’s Pledges of Military, Political Support to Iran
Iranian Major General Amir Hatami and South African General Rudzani Maphwanya meet in Tehran to discuss strengthening military cooperation and strategic ties. Photo: Screenshot
South Africa’s army chief has faced domestic backlash after pledging military and political support to Iran during a recent visit, prompting government officials to distance themselves from his remarks over concerns they could harm Pretoria’s efforts to strengthen ties with the United States.
Members of South Africa’s governing coalition have denounced Gen. Rudzani Maphwanya, chief of the South African National Defense Force (SANDF), for his trip to Tehran earlier this week, describing his remarks as “reckless grandstanding.”
The Democratic Alliance (DA), South Africa’s second-largest party in the governing coalition, has called for Maphwanya to be court-martialed for breaking neutrality and violating military law, saying his comments had gone “beyond military-to-military discussions and entered the realm of foreign policy.”
“This reckless grandstanding comes at a time when South Africa’s relations with key democratic partners, especially the United States, are already under severe strain,” DA defense spokesperson Chris Hattingh said in a statement.
“The SANDF’s job is to lead and manage the defense forces, not to act as an unsanctioned political envoy. Allowing our most senior military officer to make partisan foreign policy pronouncements is strategically reckless, diplomatically irresponsible, and economically self-defeating,” he continued.
“South Africa cannot afford to have its international standing further sabotaged by political adventurism from the military’s top brass,” Hattingh said.
Iran and South Africa held high-level military talks earlier this week as both nations seek to deepen cooperation and strengthen their partnership against what officials called “global arrogance and aggressive colonial approaches.”
During a joint press conference with Iranian Maj. Gen. Amir Hatami, Maphwanya called for deeper ties between the two nations, especially in defense cooperation, affirming that “the Republic of South Africa and the Islamic Republic of Iran have common goals.”
“We always stand alongside the oppressed and defenseless people of the world,” the South African general said.
He also criticized Israel over the ongoing war in Gaza, expressed support for the Palestinian people, and told Iranian officials that his visit “conveys a political message” on behalf of President Cyril Ramaphosa’s administration.
However, shortly after Maphwanya’s remarks drew media attention, the South African government moved to distance itself from his comments, with the Foreign Affairs Ministry stating that his comments “do not represent the government’s official foreign policy stance.”
The Defense Department, which described Maphwanya’s comments as “unfortunate,” confirmed that he is now expected to meet with the Minister of Defense and Military Veterans, Angie Motshekga, upon his return to provide explanations.
Ramaphosa’s spokesperson, Vincent Magwenya, clarified that the president was neither aware of the trip nor had he sanctioned it.
“The visit was ill-advised and more so, the expectation is that the general should have been a lot more circumspect with the comments he makes,” Magwenya told reporters during a press conference on Thursday.
“It is crucial to clarify that the implementation of South Africa’s foreign policy is a function of the presidency,” he continued. “Any statements made by an individual, or a department other than those responsible for foreign policy, should not be misinterpreted as the official position of the South African government.”
Maphwanya’s trip to Iran came after the Middle East Africa Research Institute (MEARI) released a recent report detailing how South Africa’s deepening ties with Tehran have led the country to compromise its democratic foundations and constitutional principles by aligning itself with a regime internationally condemned for terrorism, repression, and human rights abuses.
RSS
Democrat Pete Buttigieg Toughens Stance on Israel, Says He Backs Arms Embargo Following Left-Wing Pressure
Former US Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg speaks during an appearance on the “Pod Save America” podcast on Aug. 10, 2025. Photo: Screenshot
Former US Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg, a Democrat considered by many observers to be a potential 2028 presidential candidate, has recalibrated his stance on Israel, moving from cautious language to a far more critical position after facing backlash over recent comments on the popular “Pod Save America” podcast.
In his podcast interview on Sunday, Buttigieg called Israel “a friend” and said the United States should “put your arm around” the country during difficult times. He also sidestepped a direct answer on whether the US should recognize a Palestinian state, describing the question as “profound” but offering little elaboration beyond calls for peace.
That measured approach drew sharp criticism from progressives and foreign policy voices who argued that his words were too vague amid the ongoing war in Gaza and a shifting sentiment within the Democratic party base regarding Israel. Evolving fault lines within the Democratic Party over US policy toward its staunch Middle Eastern ally signal that the issue could loom large in the 2028 presidential primary.
Following Sunday’s interview, US Rep. Ro Khanna (D-CA) urged Buttigieg to show “moral clarity,” while Ben Rhodes, former White House aide to President Barack Obama, said he was left uncertain where the Cabinet official stood. Social media critics accused Buttigieg of offering platitudes that dodged hard policy commitments.
In a follow-up interview with Politico published on Thursday, Buttigieg took a decidedly tougher line. He said he supports recognizing a Palestinian state as part of a two-state solution and ending the decades-long practice of providing military aid to the Jewish state through sweeping, multi-year packages. Instead, he called for a case-by-case review of assistance, while emphasizing the need to stop civilian deaths, release hostages, and ensure unimpeded humanitarian aid to Gaza.
Perhaps most significantly, Buttigieg indicated support for a US arms embargo on Israel, saying he would have signed on to Sen. Bernie Sanders’s recently proposed resolution to prohibit arms sales to the Jewish state.
The shift places Buttigieg closer to the party’s progressive flank on foreign policy, a notable change for a figure often viewed as a bridge between the Democratic establishment and younger, more liberal voters. For a likely 2028 contender, the move reflects both the political risks of appearing out of step with an increasingly skeptical base and the growing influence of voices calling for sharper limits on US support for Israel.
Recent polling shows a generational divide on the issue, with younger Democrats far more likely to back conditioning aid to Israel and recognizing Palestinian statehood.
RSS
Former Algemeiner Correspondent Gidon Ben-Zvi Dies at 51
Gidon Ben-Zvi. Photo: Screenshot
Gidon Ben-Zvi, former Jerusalem Correspondent for The Algemeiner, has died at the age of 51 after a fight with cancer.
Ben-Zvi continued to write op-eds for The Algemeiner even after he left as a correspondent, including in the aftermath of Hamas’s Oct. 7, 2023, massacre across southern Israel.
An accomplished writer, Ben-Zvi left Hollywood for Jerusalem in 2009, moving back to Israel after spending 12 years in the United States. From 1994-1997, Gidon served in the Israel Defense Forces (IDF), in an infantry unit.
In addition to writing for The Algemeiner, Ben-Zvi contributed to the Times of Israel, Jerusalem Post, CiF Watch, and blogged at Jerusalem State of Mind.
Ben-Zvi joined HonestReporting as a senior editor in June 2020, becoming an integral part of the editorial department and writing dozens of articles and media critiques for the watchdog group exposing anti-Israel bias. He moved with his family to Haifa at the end of 2022.
Ben-Zvi’s final article for HonestReporting was published in January 2025, before he took a leave of absence for health reasons. HonestReporting said in a newly published obituary that staff believed he would eventually return, noting the positivity and perseverance he exuded. The advocacy group said it learned of Ben-Zvi’s passing late last month.
Ben-Zvi leaves behind his wife, Debbie, and four young children.
All Ben-Zvi’s articles for The Algemeiner can be found here.
May his memory be a blessing.