Uncategorized
Sarah Lawrence College: When Students Come Back to Campus and Find Hate on the Wall
A vandalized wall at Sarah Lawrence College, which also contained other expletives. Photo: provided by the author.
I walked onto the Sarah Lawrence campus after Thanksgiving break and I saw it immediately — an entire wall covered in spray paint: “ZIONISM IS RACISM + GENOCIDE,” “F** NORMALIZATION,” and at the bottom, in red, “FREE PALESTINE.”
It was not a poster that could be removed, nor a handheld sign carried by students for an hour and then forgotten. It was painted directly onto the physical heart of the college, on a building that every student must pass on the way to classes, dorms, the dining hall, and the library.
I stopped walking — not out of shock, which is hard to muster after the last 14 months, but out of something closer to recognition. This is what Jewish students have been telling me for years: the hostility is no longer atmospheric or abstract. It is literal. It is on the wall.
There are many ways to debate the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. On a truly open campus, students would do exactly that: argue, challenge, learn, read history, confront complexity. They would take intellectual risks, not moral shortcuts. But graffiti like this is not an argument. It is an accusation — an act of ideological reductionism that targets not ideas, but people.
For Jewish students, especially those who identify as Zionist, this lands one way: You are unwelcome here. You are immoral. You are dangerous.
This is the part administrators pretend not to understand: Zionism is not an exotic ideology. For most Jewish students, it is the simple belief that the Jewish people — like any other people — have a right to self-determination and safety. It is an affirmation of peoplehood, identity, and continuity.
Even students who criticize Israeli governments, who oppose settlements, who long for a two-state solution, still recognize the legitimacy of a Jewish homeland. To equate that belief with racism and genocide is to cast those students — by virtue of something core to their identity — outside the bounds of moral community.
When that message is spray-painted on a central wall, its effect is not symbolic. Every student sees it — and not just Jewish students. Its message — that Israel commits genocide and is inherently evil — is etched into the mind of every student who sees it. And many will just accept it as fact. In 20 years, these students will be the ones running American governments and corporations.
For years, Sarah Lawrence has struggled with the dynamics this moment exposes. I have written repeatedly about the school’s culture of ideological sorting and quiet intimidation — an environment where the loudest voices enforce the narrowest moral boundaries.
Students report that they self-censor. They tell me they avoid certain courses. They confide that dissent is treated as betrayal. They describe a campus where activism substitutes for analysis, and where social risk-taking is punished far more swiftly than academic laziness.
Jewish students hesitate before raising their hand in class. They scan the room before mentioning Israel. They avoid posting anything online about their identity. They watch friendships quietly erode. They walk campus angry and also in fear (and after all the violent attacks on Jewish students, those fears are justified).
One student told me she now takes a longer route to her dorm each evening — not because she fears debate, but because she is tired of being told, in giant letters, that her very existence is genocidal. Another confided that she now speaks in one course only when she’s certain no one will turn her comments into accusations. These are not abstractions. They are the lived experiences of 18-, 19-, and 20-year-olds trying to learn on a campus that tells them they are a moral problem.
University leaders, by contrast, often default to vague bromides about free discussion and open dialogue.
In theory, those are admirable commitments. But in practice, they evade the real issue: the climate created when a minority community’s identity is treated as inherently illegitimate. Administrators know perfectly well how group-based invective affects other communities. They know how words can undermine belonging. They would never allow a wall to remain covered in sweeping condemnations of any other minority group.
Only when the target is Jews do they behave as if the harm is ambiguous, as if the insult might still count as “conversation.”
Nor is Sarah Lawrence alone. Across the country, campuses have seen similar eruptions of anti-Zionist hostility. The pattern is national: the word “Zionist” has become a socially permissible euphemism for “Jew,” giving cover to old prejudices dressed in the language of justice.
Universities cannot resolve the geopolitics of the Middle East. But they can absolutely control how they respond to explicit acts that undermine trust, safety, and dignity. They can distinguish between critique and dehumanization. They can insist that campus discourse meet the minimal standards of civility. They can refuse to let slogans replace scholarship. And they can recognize that Jewish students deserve the same institutional protections as any other minority community.
This requires courage — moral, civic, and institutional. It requires telling activists on all sides that a university’s purpose is not to reenact global conflicts, but to learn about them with rigor and respect. It requires resisting the drift toward ideological litmus tests. It requires defending the idea that disagreement should not mean denigration.
At Sarah Lawrence, where the ideals of openness and inquiry are already fragile, it becomes a warning. Either the college recommits itself to pluralism, open inquiry, and mutual respect, or it allows a new orthodoxy — one rooted in fear, exclusion, and performative moralism — to become permanent.
Jewish students will remember which path their institution chooses. And so should everyone else.
Samuel J. Abrams is a professor of politics at Sarah Lawrence College and a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute.
Uncategorized
IDF Warns of Growing West Bank Threat, Presence of Iranian Weapons Amid Major Counterterror Operations
Israeli soldiers walk during an operation in Tubas, in the West Bank, Nov. 26, 2025. Photo: REUTERS/Mohamad Torokman
The Israel Defense Forces (IDF) is sounding the alarm over a growing terrorist threat from the West Bank, warning that Iranian-backed arms smuggling could spark an Oct. 7-style attack.
Concerns over the presence of significant Iranian-supplied firepower in the hands of Palestinian terrorists in the West Bank has prompted Israeli intelligence and security forces to intensify operations across the territory.
According to a new report from Israel’s Channel 14, a senior IDF official warned that the West Bank presents a growing threat to Israeli communities, with the potential to spark an attack similar to the Hamas-led invasion of and massacre across southern Israel on Oct. 7, 2023.
“We have to start from the clear fact that weapons in Judea and Samaria [Israel’s preferred name for the West Bank] could upset the current stalemate,” the IDF official told Channel 14.
However, while the military has prioritized preparing for large-scale scenarios, such as an Oct. 7-style attack, the senior IDF official also warned that more attention needs to be paid to “smaller” threats — like a situation in which a small group of terrorists infiltrates a settlement home and kills an entire family — an event he described as “highly probable.”
“We shouldn’t see this scenario only as an attack on dozens of communities. A single deadly strike is enough — we must also prepare for lethal, localized attacks,” the IDF official said. “Our responsibility is to protect both individuals and the broader community.”
He warned that terrorists in the West Bank are believed to possess arms capable of breaking Israeli defenses, including what he called “standard Iranian weapons.” However, he also noted that security forces are actively working to intercept these arms and dismantle any terrorist cell in the area.
On Tuesday, the IDF uncovered a major terrorist infrastructure in the Tulkarem area in the northern West Bank, including three rockets at various stages of assembly, explosive devices, operational equipment, and materials for making bombs.
According to Joe Truzman, a senior research analyst at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies (FDD), a Washington, DC-based think tank, Israeli officials should be closely monitoring the West Bank as the Palestinian terrorist group Hamas regroups and rearms in the Gaza Strip after two years of war.
“Hamas and its allied factions understand that igniting violence in the territory would divert Israel’s attention during a critical time of rebuilding the group’s infrastructure in Gaza,” Truzman said last month.
“The release of convicted terrorists to the West Bank under the ceasefire agreement may be a factor in the resurgence of organized violence in the territory,” he continued.
At the time, the IDF completed a three-day, multi-branch military exercise in the West Bank called “Lion’s Roar,” designed to enhance operational coordination and joint capabilities in the region, with scenarios shaped by lessons learned from the Oct. 7 atrocities.
More than 180 Israeli Air Force aircraft supported ground troops during training for over 40 scenarios, including attacks on outposts, simultaneous terrorist infiltrations into multiple communities, urban combat, mass-casualty rescue and medical evacuation, multi-casualty response, intelligence integration, and real-time command and control.
“We have many lessons to implement from this exercise and from Oct. 7,” the IDF spokesperson said in a statement at the time.
“The IDF will continue to conduct regular exercises to ensure high readiness, strengthen cooperation among all troops, and maintain the security of residents in the area and of all Israeli civilians,” the statement read.
According to a survey released earlier this year by the Jerusalem Center for Security and Foreign Affairs, 70 percent of all respondents — and 81 percent of Jewish respondents — expressed fear of an Oct. 7-style attack coming from the West Bank. In contrast, 53 percent of Arab respondents said they were not worried about such an attack.
“The stipulations of the ceasefire in Gaza, mainly the requirement for Hamas to fully disarm in future phases, should also be applied to the terrorist organization’s operatives in the West Bank,” Aaron Goren, research analyst at FDD, said at the time.
“Otherwise, Israel may face a threat from Hamas, which, unlike in Gaza, where it is relatively contained, is dispersed amongst Israeli communities in the West Bank,” he continued.
Earlier this year, the IDF arrested a Hamas and Fatah terror cell from Ramallah that was planning a bombing attack on a bus in Jerusalem, with investigators saying the group intended to remotely detonate an explosive device smuggled into Israel.
As of February, Israeli security forces had foiled nearly 1,000 terrorist plots over the past year, with senior military officials increasingly worried that the volatile situation in the West Bank could lead to a large-scale attack similar to the Oct. 7 onslaught against Israeli settlements and communities near the security barrier.
In response to these concerns, the IDF has established a special command to address potential threats in the West Bank and launched a nearly unprecedented counterterror operation in the northern part of the territory.
Uncategorized
Brad Lander launches run for Congress against pro-Israel Jewish incumbent Dan Goldman
(JTA) — It’s official: Brad Lander is running for Congress — and he says he won’t be “doing AIPAC’s bidding” in representing his district if he’s elected.
The line from Lander’s campaign launch video was a dig at Rep. Dan Goldman, who has represented the 10th Congressional District since 2023, that underscores the degree to which Israel is likely to play a role in the battle for the seat.
Lander’s announcement tees up a showdown between a Jewish progressive challenger and an incumbent Jewish centrist. He enters the race with support from Zohran Mamdani, following weeks of speculation over whether he or Alexa Aviles — a member of Mamdani’s Democratic Socialists of America who was also weighing a run against Goldman — would get the mayor-elect’s high-profile endorsement.
“I’m running for Congress because we need leaders who will fight, not fold,” Lander wrote on X. (Lander’s X account was subsequently hacked and made temporarily private.)
Lander, the outgoing city comptroller, has day-one endorsements from major progressive names including Mamdani, Sen. Bernie Sanders and Sen. Elizabeth Warren, as well as the city’s Working Families Party.
Lander shared a video that touted his ability to fight back against Donald Trump, which featured footage of his ICE arrest. The video took on a gentle tone, with Lander referring to himself as “Dad Lander” and quoting the TV personality Mister Rogers. He talked about his roots in the district, which includes central Brooklyn neighborhoods such as Park Slope, where he served as a three-term City Council member.
But the video also previewed how Israel will play a role as Lander, a self-described liberal Zionist who now calls Israel’s war in Gaza a “genocide” and stumped for the anti-Zionist Mamdani, takes aim at Goldman. The incumbent has been endorsed and received funding from the pro-Israel lobby AIPAC; he also refused to endorse Mamdani because of Mamdani’s stances on Israel.
Goldman has become one of the primary targets of progressives looking to replace moderate Democrats with candidates more aligned with their politics in the wake of Mamdani’s victory. Challengers are also emerging against the vocally pro-Israel Rep. Ritchie Torres, with his AIPAC donations being a point of emphasis of his opponents.
Lander did not name Goldman but referred to his AIPAC ties in the video, saying the “challenges we face” can’t be solved by “doing AIPAC’s bidding in a district that knows our safety, our freedom, our thriving is bound up together.” Two photos of Lander holding signs at Gaza war ceasefire rallies appeared on-screen — one in Hebrew, the other in English.
The 10th Congressional District covers Lower Manhattan, as well as parts of western and central Brooklyn, which Lander represented on the City Council. While Lower Manhattan was more split in the mayoral general election, most of the district’s Brooklyn neighborhoods voted overwhelmingly for Mamdani. The district also includes part of Borough Park, a neighborhood with a large Orthodox Jewish population that strongly supported the centrist mayoral candidate, Andrew Cuomo.
In the video, Lander alluded to Goldman’s refusal to endorse Mamdani, saying that if he beats Goldman, “Our mayor can have an ally in Washington instead of an adversary in his own backyard.”
Mamdani told the New York Times on Wednesday that Lander is a “true leader” who has “unwavering principles, deep knowledge and sincere empathy.”
Lander has been Mamdani’s most prominent local Jewish ally since the pair cross-endorsed each other before the Democratic primary.
Critics said Lander’s efforts, including bringing Mamdani to his synagogue and reinforcing his commitment to the safety of Jewish New Yorkers, merely “kosherized” antisemitism at a time when fierce reaction to the war in Gaza led to Jews feeling unsafe and isolated, and anti-Jewish attacks rose.
Following Mamdani’s general election victory, reports emerged that Lander, who’d been angling for a top position in the new administration, was being left out in the cold without a role. Rumors suggested that Lander might have Mamdani’s support if he pivoted to a congressional run against Goldman. But that support was complicated by the presence of Aviles — Mamdani’s fellow DSA member — who was entertaining a run herself.
All that was put to rest Wednesday, when Lander officially entered the race with the support of Mamdani — who went against the DSA’s endorsement of Aviles, to the chagrin of some of the DSA’s rank-and-file — and Aviles released a statement announcing that she would not be running.
“A split field runs too great a risk of allowing him another damaging term,” she wrote about Goldman, who won his first election in 2022 by two points against a crowded field that split votes between progressive candidates.
Before running for office, Goldman, a millionaire and Levi Strauss heir, drew praise from the left when he served as lead majority counsel on the first impeachment inquiry against Donald Trump in 2019. He has co-sponsored progressive legislation like the Medicare for All Act and the Green New Deal for Public Housing Act, as well as a recent bill that would protect immigrants’ right to appear in immigration court.
But progressives have soured on Goldman, who calls himself a “proud Zionist and steadfast supporter of Israel,” and is criticized for receiving funding from AIPAC — a group whose brand has become increasingly toxic in American politics.
Goldman also faced criticism after Donald Trump Jr. tweeted about a friendly interaction between the two in the Bahamas, following Trump’s Israel-Gaza peace deal.
“Thank you Congressman @danielsgoldman for your kind words today when you saw me, about the incredible job my father did delivering historic peace to the Middle East and bringing the hostages home,” the president’s son tweeted. “Safe travels back from the Bahamas.”
Speculation of a potential Lander challenge had been building since September, when a poll by Data for Progress surveyed voters in the 10th congressional district; in a two-man race between Goldman and Lander, the poll found that Lander would win 52-33.
Democratic strategist Trip Yang advised pumping the brakes in a November interview, pointing out that polls taken so far in advance of an election “don’t matter as much” and that incumbents bring an advantage.
In addition to big names like Mamdani, Sanders and Warren, local politicians have begun throwing their support behind Lander including Assemblymember Robert Carroll — who was an early endorser of Goldman in the 2022 election — and State Sen. Andrew Gounardes.
The post Brad Lander launches run for Congress against pro-Israel Jewish incumbent Dan Goldman appeared first on The Forward.
Uncategorized
‘America Last’: Report Reveals Suspicious Foreign Support Amplifying Nick Fuentes Online
Nick Fuentes during an interview in December 2025. Photo: Screenshot
Amid ongoing debates about the rise of antisemitic voices on the US political right, recent investigations into social media activity suggest the potential involvement of inauthentic amplification by anonymous actors in India, Pakistan, Nigeria, Malaysia, and Indonesia.
On Monday, the Network Contagion Research Institute (NCRI) released new research showing the techniques used by overseas operatives to promote the authoritarian ideologies of antisemitic podcaster Nick Fuentes, who claims he seeks to preserve the white, European identity and culture of the US.
Titled “America Last: How Fuentes’s Coordinated Raids and Foreign Fake-Speech Networks Inflate His Influence,” the 23-page report dissects how the 27-year-old influencer “consistently amasses far more retweets than any comparable figure, including Elon Musk, despite having a fraction (<1%) of the follower count.”
The report was co-drafted with the support of the Rutgers University Social Perception Lab. Previous research collaborations between NCRI and Rutgers have also explored how far-right influencers hijacked the religious phrase “Christ is King” to advance their ideology and how Tik-Tok content promotes the Chinese Communist Party’s international objectives.
The researchers reviewed Fuentes and compared him with other prominent accounts. They discovered that “within the critical first 30 minutes, Fuentes routinely outperformed accounts with 10-100× more followers.” The report explains that “in a sample of 20 recent posts, 61% of Fuentes’s first-30-minute retweets came from accounts that retweeted multiple of these 20 posts within that same ultra-short window – behavior highly suggestive of coordination or automation.”
The accounts are characterized as entirely anonymous and seemingly single-purpose for promoting Fuentes.
While Fuentes has grown most well-known for his endorsement of Adolf Hitler, Holocaust denial, and pre-Vatican II, Catholic-reactionary antisemitism, the report highlights the podcaster’s endorsements of terrorism and enthusiasm for sexual violence. He has stated that he seeks a 16-year-old wife, desiring an underage woman “when the milk is fresh.” This aligns with his support for the Taliban in Afghanistan, a nation which has now seen the return of child marriage. Fuentes also claims that rape within marriage is impossible, since he believes that a wife’s body belongs to her husband.
Fuentes also “praised Vladimir Putin for the invasion of Ukraine, expressed support for China taking Taiwan, and described the Taliban’s victory over US forces as a positive development.”
The researchers in their analysis seek not to explain Fuentes’s views but rather to “assess how synthetic engagement, real-world events, and media incentives converged to elevate a fringe figure into a central subject of national attention.”
Looking into Fuentes’s history and disclosures from former insiders within his organization support the suggestion of artificial engagement.
“Additional evidence shows that Fuentes has a prior history of coordinated digital manipulation. In 2022, two former associates described internal group chats where Fuentes directed interns and loyalists to carry out online tasks on his behalf, and a former technical aide alleged that viewer counts on his streaming platform were artificially inflated using a built-in multiplier,” the report states.
The researchers explain that “Fuentes did not deny the inflation itself. These documented practices demonstrate a willingness to orchestrate controlled teams and manipulate digital metrics — behavior entirely consistent with the coordinated amplification patterns observed on X.”
The report features images of “America First” Fuentes appearing on different foreign TV networks including the Iranian regime’s Press TV and Russia Today (RT). On the former he sided with Iran during an American attack in support of Israel, and on the latter, he claimed that support for Ukraine was based on “Russophobia.” He also reportedly stated that he would “fight on the side of China against America.”
Another picture shows Fuentes in 2022 at the America First Political Action Conference, where he stated in his introduction to US Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA): “And now they’re going on about Russia and Vladimir Putin, saying he’s Hitler – they say that’s not a good thing. Can we get a round of applause for Russia?”
The analysts describe how “Fuentes’s defense of authoritarian adversaries — Russia, Iran, China — is not a minor contradiction. It represents a coherent pattern in which his anti-American worldview aligns more closely with America’s enemies than with its interests. His self-proclaimed patriotism crumbles in the face of performative contrarianism, where any regime that resists liberal democracy becomes, in his eyes, preferable to the current United States.”
According to NCRI, the Russian and Iranian media’s approval of Fuentes “underscores the broader point: the figure elevated by algorithmic manipulation and mainstream media grooming as a voice of nationalist revival is, in reality, one of the most reliable public defenders of America’s geopolitical foes.”