Uncategorized
The Evidence Says That Al Jazeera Collaborates With Hamas
The Al Jazeera Media Network logo is seen on its headquarters building in Doha, Qatar, June 8, 2017. Photo: REUTERS/Naseem Zeitoon
Al Jazeera’s leadership shake-up has been in the headlines. But will its new executives direct the Qatari state-funded media arm to cease its cozy relationship with Hamas?
Allegations have been swirling that the royal family’s soft power news outlet is not merely reporting what Hamas says — but is actively collaborating with the terrorist organization.
Al Jazeera sells its content to major wire services like the AP and Reuters. Al Jazeera has resource-sharing agreements that allow outlets like CNN to access Al Jazeera’s footage and Al Jazeera to use CNN’s news feed.
Al Jazeera also has arrangements with BBC, France 24, and The Guardian that enable them to use Al Jazeera’s video footage and reports. Other media outlets, including Deutsche Welle and Euronews, have direct syndication arrangements, allowing them to use Al Jazeera’s content without intermediaries.
Credible reports indicate that Al Jazeera’s ties to Hamas extend well beyond journalism. Evidence points to coordination between the Qatari network and Hamas terrorists, raising serious reputational and policy questions for Al Jazeera and for media or corporate partners that cooperate with it.
Reporters Working for Both Al Jazeera and Hamas
Six Al Jazeera journalists simultaneously worked for Hamas or Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ), according to evidence seized by the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) that has been made public.
Three have since been killed in Gaza. At any credible outlet, concurrently working for a US-designated terrorist organization would result in immediate dismissal. Not so with Al Jazeera. The absence of accountability speaks volumes.
Some of these journalists reportedly participated in Hamas’ October 7, 2023, assault, joining the terrorists who breached and burned Israeli kibbutzim near Gaza, massacring nearly 1,200 and kidnapping 250 others.
Media and corporate partners should have immediately paused collaboration with Al Jazeera until a credible internal investigation was conducted. But it appears that no such credible investigation occurred. Instead, the network issued denials that its reporters were working with Hamas.
Al Jazeera’s Role in Hamas’ October 7 Plan
The New York Times reported that Hamas’ October 7 massacre involved a detailed media strategy. This appeared to include a role for Al Jazeera, which aired prerecorded messages from Hamas commanders during the attack to inspire Arabs outside of Gaza to join in the fighting.
Al Jazeera’s reported collaboration as part of Hamas’ media strategy was not some innocuous business deal. Documents seized by the IDF reveal the terror group sought to ignite uprisings among Palestinians in the West Bank, Israeli Arabs, and Iranian proxies like Hezbollah on Israel’s northern border. One seized memo from 2023 stated that “two or three operations in which an entire neighborhood, kibbutz, or something similar will be burned” must occur to galvanize others.
There could be no credible denial about what was taking place. Hamas actively sought to broadcast its atrocities. Intercepts show that around 10 a.m. on October 7, a Hamas battalion commander, Abu Mohammed, ordered his fighters to “start setting homes on fire,” shouting “Burn, burn” and “I want the whole kibbutz in flames.”
Another six-page handwritten plan attributed to Hamas leader Yahya Sinwar directed militants to “stomp on the heads of soldiers,” shoot them “at point-blank range,” and “slaughter some with knives.”
Commanders repeated and executed these orders in real time. “Slit their throats,” one said. “Kill everyone on the road. Kill everyone you encounter.” Another instructed, “Take a lot of hostages.”
According to a podcast featuring Ronen Bergman, a coauthor of the New York Times piece, Hamas wanted to showcase its “success” by showing Israelis dying, homes burning, and tanks exploding to convince allies that the destruction of Israel could be achieved.
Al Jazeera’s role was to spread this message, airing prerecorded communications from Hamas military chief Mohammed Deif, who proclaimed: “The day has come when anyone who has a gun should take it out. Now is the time. If you do not have a gun, take up your cleaver, axe, Molotov cocktail, truck, tractor, or car.”
Bergman explained that these speeches were “coordinated” and “perfectly synchronized” with Al Jazeera’s broadcasts.
A Hamas commander named Abu al-Baraa, according to intercepted communications, told Hamas terrorists invading Israel: “Document the scenes of horror, now, and broadcast them on TV channels to the whole world. Slaughter them. End the children of Israel.”
During and after the attack, Al Jazeera broadcast footage of the massacre while also airing Hamas’ messages, essentially serving as the group’s propaganda arm.
Throughout the war, Al Jazeera aired exclusive footage from Hamas tunnels, portraying the terrorist group as resilient rather than exposing its use of civilian areas for terror operations. It’s telling that Al Jazeera’s coverage portrayed Hamas as winning, while the network refrained from any criticism of the terrorist group’s leadership, tactics, hoarding of humanitarian aid, or harm done to Gazans for starting the war.
Internal Hamas communications dated before October 7 also show that the group instructed Al Jazeera to use specific terminology and limit visuals of failed rocket launches that fell inside Gaza. Al Jazeera reportedly complied with these instructions.
Direct Dial: Hamas’ Line Into Al Jazeera
Evidence found by the IDF and analyzed by the Meir Amit Intelligence and Terrorism Information Center reveals that Hamas and Al Jazeera maintained a structured communications pipeline throughout the Israel-Hamas war. The captured Hamas documents show the creation of a “secure phone line” — referred to as the “Al Jazeera phone” — linking Hamas’ military operations room in Gaza directly to “Al Jazeera’s management offices in Doha.”
The line reportedly allowed Hamas to “control coverage in real time” by transmitting instructions on which events to air, what terminology to use, and which images to suppress.
Additional documents revealed that Hamas operatives sent media directives to Al Jazeera’s newsroom with detailed guidance on editorial framing. One 2022 memo urged the network to “minimize” images from a failed rocket launch that killed Gazan civilians and to avoid using the term “massacre” to refer to the event.
A subsequent Hamas media directive requested that Al Jazeera journalists coordinate with the movement’s “military media unit” before broadcasting material about the PIJ, ensuring consistency with Hamas’ narratives.
The Meir Amit Center described this pattern of coordination as “neither random nor isolated but systematic, organized and continuous.”
Why the Journalism World Should be Alarmed
Those who partner and collaborate with Al Jazeera cannot dismiss these findings as mere considerations. Continued cooperation with a network that coordinates with Hamas carries reputational, ethical, and potentially legal consequences. The same scrutiny applied to financial institutions accused of directly or indirectly supporting terror should extend to media entities that amplify or assist it.
Toby Dershowitz is a senior advisor at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, where Asher Boiskin is an intern. Follow them on X @TobyDersh and @asherboiskin.
Uncategorized
With anti-Arab campaign ad, Netanyahu stoops to new moral and political lows
Israeli election campaigns have often been ugly. They have featured exaggeration, fearmongering and outright deception. But even by those standards, the first major campaign advertisement by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s Likud party, posted on Netanyahu’s X account on Tuesday, managed to shock much of the country.
The AI-generated video depicts former military chief Gadi Eisenkot, who has become the standard-bearer for the opposition, walking through a sunlit field toward a young Jewish man before passing him by to embrace Mansour Abbas of Ra’am, the United Arab List, instead.
The young man looks strikingly like Eisenkot’s son, Gal, who was killed fighting in Gaza in late 2023 — although Likud insists he isn’t meant to. Strictly speaking, there is enough difference to sustain the protestations. The young man has longer, wavier hair than Gal Eisenkot did — just enough, perhaps, to preserve plausible deniability. Yet almost everyone I know believed they were watching a father joyfully approaching his slain son, seemingly restored to life, only to ignore him in favor of an Arab political leader at a time when Arab political participation in Israel is particularly contentious.
The only possible explanation: Likud wants their campaign to be as mean as possible. Or perhaps that they believe that anything that creates a buzz — and therefore distracts from the governing coalition’s disastrous and controversial policies, including a wildly unpopular recent legislative blitz — is a good thing.
And buzz there is. The perception that a father’s personal loss had been weaponized for electoral gain struck many as a line that simply should not be crossed. “This is Netanyahu, and this is his machine of incitement”, wrote Einav Zangauker, whose son was held hostage in Gaza by Hamas, on social media. “This isn’t politics,” Zangauker added, but rather “an attack on a bereaved father and an assault on his dignity. It is the lowest of the low.”
“I turn to elected representatives, activists, and all candidates from all parties, and demand that you do not cross red lines. Do not turn rivals into enemies,” Israeli President Isaac Herzog said. “I call on the people of Israel, in a clear voice: Remember that elections are not a civil war.”
But even if one puts aside the controversy surrounding the young man altogether, the advertisement remains deeply troubling. It is, at its core, an exercise in incitement against Ra’am — and, by extension, against the very idea that Arab citizens may legitimately participate in governing Israel.
Abbas himself accused Netanyahu of “trying to incite between different parts of society”; about a fifth of Israelis are Arab, and the ad was obviously trying to delegitimize collaboration with the parties who generally represent them.
From Likud’s perspective, that too is logical — so long as they ignore the goal of Israel remaining a democratic country in which component ethnic groups live in harmony. It’s logical because Arab parties have always been part of the opposition to Likud and the chances are high that Eisenkot might need them, even passively, to successfully craft a coalition after the Oct. 27 election.
This isn’t just dangerous. It ignores the essential role that Arab parties have played in building toward a strong Israeli future.
Ra’am, under Abbas, has been the most integrationist Arab party Israel has ever seen. Abbas broke with decades of Arab political orthodoxy by arguing that Arab citizens should seek influence through practical cooperation with whichever Zionist government Israelis elected. He has repeatedly recognized Israel as the nation-state of the Jewish people while demanding full equality for its Arab citizens.
Whatever one thinks of his politics, these choices have represented one of the boldest experiments in Jewish-Arab partnership since the state’s founding.
That experiment briefly succeeded. Ra’am joined Naftali Bennett and Yair Lapid’s coalition in 2021 and demonstrated that Arab participation in government could become something ordinary rather than revolutionary.
More awkward still for Likud, Netanyahu himself spent some weeks after the 2021 election attempting to persuade Abbas to support — or even participate in — his own coalition. Those negotiations failed for one principal reason: Far-right firebrand Bezalel Smotrich — now Netanyahu’s finance minister — refused to countenance a government dependent on an Arab party. Without Ra’am, Netanyahu lacked a majority.
It is therefore surreal to portray Eisenkot’s willingness to work with Ra’am as somehow beyond the democratic pale, when not so long ago, Netanyahu himself tried to do precisely the same thing.
Nor should anyone pretend that Arab parties suddenly became relevant because of Eisenkot. Since the emergence of today’s political blocs, Arab parties have almost invariably belonged to the anti-Likud camp. Any center-left coalition aspiring to govern has depended, directly or indirectly, on their parliamentary support. That is not a distortion of Israeli democracy. It is one of its enduring structural realities.
Which brings us to the larger significance of this episode.
Many Israelis have long predicted that this Likud campaign would barely concern policy at all. They expected, instead, an effort to delegitimize any prospective change government by portraying it as illegitimate because it relied on Arab parties. They expected renewed attempts to cast Arab political participation as inherently suspect. They expected emotional manipulation to substitute for argument and personal attacks to eclipse serious debate. Some feared renewed efforts to discourage Arab turnout and disqualify Arab parties from the ballot.
That appears to be exactly what they’re getting.
The remarkable thing is not merely that Likud produced this advertisement, but that doing so was effectively its first act of the campaign, which kicked off after the Knesset recently went into recess.
Before voters had heard competing visions for Israel’s economy, security or diplomacy, the country’s governing party chose to launch its campaign by inflaming fears about Arab political participation while employing imagery that countless Israelis immediately interpreted as mocking one father’s unbearable personal loss.
By the next day, competing ads using a similar aesthetic were put out by opponents of Netanyahu. One depicted Netanyahu on a similar field running past a soldier to hug a Haredi politician holding a sign that says — as many Haredi anti-draft protesters chant — “we’d rather die than serve.”
One reason AI is so attractive to political strategists is because it blurs responsibility. Images can be carefully engineered to evoke a conclusion while remaining just different enough to deny that such a conclusion was ever the intention. The technology offers something every spin doctor craves: emotional impact coupled with plausible deniability.
“I do not think we can allow this to continue,” lamented David Lau, a former chief rabbi of Israel, who has served in the military. “We must stop all these disputes, all this talk, and all these behaviors. This path does not lead to building anything. It does not lead to peace. It is a bad path, and I am even more concerned about the next generation.”
It is entirely possible that this advertisement will prove to have established the moral tone of the campaign. Israel deserves better.
The post With anti-Arab campaign ad, Netanyahu stoops to new moral and political lows appeared first on The Forward.
Uncategorized
Reed College agrees to sweeping reforms as part of Title VI antisemitism settlement
(JTA) — Reed College has agreed to a host of far-reaching institutional changes, including asserting that targeting Jewish Zionists will be considered discriminatory, in order to settle multiple federal antisemitism investigations, parties to the complaint announced Wednesday.
The settlement was announced by the Anti-Defamation League and the Brandeis Center for Human Rights Under Law, which jointly filed the complaint, under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act, which prohibits discrimination at any institution receiving federal funds. It comes as campuses across the country, facing threats of losing federal funding under the Trump administration, have demonstrated willingness to negotiate new antisemitism protections.
As part of the agreement, the private Portland, Oregon, liberal arts school says it will insert language into its discrimination policy asserting that “for many Jewish people, Zionism is integral to their religious, ancestral and/or ethnic Jewish identity,” and that “targeting Jews on the basis of their Zionist identity” will be considered discriminatory.
The school will also contract a third-party consultant to monitor and report on its effectiveness in adhering to antisemitism protections, role that is unusual in similar Title VI agreements. The agreement says Reed will “consider” the International Holocaust Remembrance Association’s working definition of antisemitism, which includes some criticisms of Israel, and implement antisemitism training for faculty and staff.
“We take concerns about antisemitism, and all forms of unlawful discrimination, seriously, and we will continue to support the well-being, safety, and success of every member of our community,” a Reed College spokesperson told the Jewish Telegraphic Agency in a statement acknowledging the agreement. Reed declined to comment further.
ADL CEO Jonathan Greenblatt and Brandeis Center officials praised the agreement in a release as a potential model for other colleges.
“We believe it should serve as a model for other schools,” Denise Katz-Prober, director of legal initiatives at the Brandeis Center, told JTA about the agreement. The required language in Reed’s discrimination guidelines, she said, is “very clear about what constitutes anti-Zionist conduct in violation of civil rights and in violation of the policy.”
“This outcome demonstrates how the Title VI process can work to effectively protect Jewish students,” Greenblatt said in his own statement.
Around 100 students at Reed College are Jewish, or about 7% of the total student body, according to estimates from Hillel International. A request for comment to the director of PDX Hillel, which serves Jewish students at Reed and others in the region, was not immediately returned.
The resolution stems from two anonymous Title VI antisemitism complaints from Jewish former Reed students, both filed in 2024 under the Biden administration. One of those cases related to a student whose dorm-room mezuzah was vandalized, and who herself was later pelted with rocks, during a pro-Palestinian demonstration in spring 2024. The student later left the school out of concern for her safety.
Both of the described acts would have already been considered violations of school policy for reasons unrelated to the student’s Jewish or Zionist identity. Brandeis’s Katz-Prober argued both should have also been considered in the context of her targeting by anti-Zionist activists.
“It might be difficult for someone to, at first glance, understand whether it was simply an assault or an assault motivated by bias,” she said. The case, she said, demonstrated how in some cases, “‘Zionist’ is merely a codeword for Jew.”
Katz-Prober also touted the agreement’s mandate that the school bring on a third-party compliance consultant, separate from its Title VI coordinator. While she insisted that such a role would be “independent” and free of bias, she noted that both the ADL and the Brandeis Center would have a role in their selection.
“Both sides get a say,” she said.
The post Reed College agrees to sweeping reforms as part of Title VI antisemitism settlement appeared first on The Forward.
Uncategorized
Arizona Rep. Andy Biggs cruises to GOP nomination for governor amid allegations of antisemitism
(JTA) — Arizona Rep. Andy Biggs, who has drawn criticism for ties to white nationalist figures, will officially be the Republican nominee for Arizona governor, after winning the primary on Tuesday night.
Biggs, who is backed by President Donald Trump, has drawn criticism for encouraging Stew Peters, an internet personality, and appearing on his show. Peters has labeled Judaism a “death cult” and has called for a “final solution” that involves the deportation of American Jews, and multiple watchdogs identify him as promoting antisemitism.
“Keep preaching,” Biggs told Peters at the end of his June 2023 appearance on the show, during which they discussed government corruption and Biggs agreed with Peters that the FBI should be abolished.
Biggs, 67, who won handily with 73.4% of votes according to multiple media outlets, will challenge Democratic Gov. Katie Hobbs in what is expected to be a competitive race in November. Biggs has represented Arizona’s 5th Congressional District, which is outside of Phoenix, since 2017.
His opponent in the GOP primary, Rep. David Schweikert, had put out a campaign mailer in March tying Biggs to white supremacy and antisemitism. The mailer featured mentions of Biggs’ interview with Peters as well as Biggs’ endorsement of Texas GOP candidate Brandon Herrera, who owned a copy of “Mein Kampf.”
Biggs’ campaign did not respond to the Jewish Telegraphic Agency’s request for comment, but in a local TV interview last month he called the accusations politically motivated and said, “This notion that I am antisemitic is absolutely one of the most ludicrous, insane arguments ever.”
In 2024, Biggs opposed the bipartisan Antisemitism Awareness Act, which passed in the House of Representatives. Biggs wrote that he opposes antisemitism and that the “pro-Hamas, pro-genocide, anti-Israel events happening across the nation are sickening.” He rejected the legislation, he said, because it was “so poorly drafted that it violates the Constitution and could have serious ramifications for the Christian community.” Right wing Republicans objected especially to the bill citing a definition of antisemitism that included as an example the claim that the Jews killed Jesus.
That same year, Biggs attended a rally co-sponsored by the Proud Boys, an extremist militia style group. In 2019, he spoke at a “Patriotism over Socialism” rally in Arizona, which watchdogs warned would draw extremist groups.
Media Matters, a group that mostly monitors right-wing groups, in 2023 wrote that “the links between Biggs and far-right extremists have been well-documented,” citing among other things his ties to another far-right group, the Oath Keepers.
The Republican Jewish Coalition did not respond to a question over whether it would support Biggs’ run for governor.
At a campaign event on Tuesday, Hobbs skewered Biggs for his denial of Trump’s 2020 election loss, and for not acknowledging Hobbs’ narrow 2022 gubernatorial victory over Republican Kari Lake.
This article originally appeared on JTA.org.
The post Arizona Rep. Andy Biggs cruises to GOP nomination for governor amid allegations of antisemitism appeared first on The Forward.

