Connect with us

Uncategorized

What the Epstein files show about Jeffrey Epstein’s Jewish world

(JTA) — Sometime in the early 2010s, Jeffrey Epstein walked into Dr. Steven Kaplan’s office for a root canal.

The procedure took some time and required multiple visits. The two men got to chatting. “He was just another guy, that’s it,” Kaplan recalled to the Jewish Telegraphic Agency. The subject of Judaism came up.

“I wanted to put some yiddishkeit into him,” Kaplan said. “I was telling him, ‘You should meet a Jewish girl, because I think these girls are going to want you for your money.’ He said, ‘I would marry a Jewish girl.’”

Kaplan, who says he was unaware at the time of Epstein’s 2008 conviction and sentencing for sexual solicitation of a minor, sent Epstein several books on Judaism and offered to connect him with his rabbi. That meeting never happened, but when Epstein offered to help Kaplan fix up his office, a different proposal emerged: Kaplan asked his patient to donate to his children’s Jewish school or any Jewish institution.

Epstein agreed, telling Kaplan he would do it in honor of his mother. Soon his accounts wired $25,000 to Yeshiva Tifereth Moshe, in Queens, via the Jewish donation service MATCH. (He had initially promised $50,000, Kaplan said.) On a form for MATCH explaining his donation, included in the latest Justice Department release of files pertaining to his investigation, Epstein (or an assistant of his) wrote, “I AM IMPRESSED WITH THE CHILDREN I HAVE SEEN FROM THE YESHIVA.”

“Maybe that donation is helping him in the next world,” Kaplan told JTA. He added that, by the tenets of Orthodox Judaism that stipulate 10% of one’s earnings should go to tzedakah, or charity, Epstein’s donation was “nothing.” A spokesperson for the yeshiva told JTA they didn’t know anything about the Epstein connection. (JTA could not independently verify Kaplan’s account, but in emails revealed in the Epstein files, Epstein’s assistants relate conversations they had with Kaplan in which he urges the donation.)

Kaplan said he was of two minds today about Epstein’s support of Jewish causes throughout his life. “He still has a Jewish neshama,” Kaplan said, using the Hebrew word for soul, of the man who had orchestrated a wide-ranging network of underaged escorts; maybe giving money to Jewish causes was still a net good, regardless of where that money came from.

Yet Kaplan added that if Epstein were alive today and wanted to give to a yeshiva, knowing what he now knows about his crimes, he would have to ask his rabbi.

“I don’t know the answer to that,” the endodontist said. “I would go to the rabbi and say, ‘Is it a mitzvah for him to give it? Or is it bad for us to take it?’”

Kaplan’s ethical dilemma reflects one theme surfaced in the Epstein files released by Congress last month about the financier and convicted sex offender’s connections to the Jewish world.

Scrutinized for evidence of Epstein’s misdeeds, the files have enabled armchair sleuthing about Epstein’s associates, fueled antisemitic conspiracy theories and caused powerful players implicated in them to face new consequences — as when Harvard University broke ties with its former president, Larry Summers, on Wednesday.

The files also offer a window into Epstein’s workaday, small-scale networking, suggesting an almost obsessive effort to be involved in the affairs of his friends and associates. Jewish groups and individuals made up a significant share.

The files show that Epstein made donations to and connections with Jewish causes with which he had little to no personal relationship. They also show that some Jewish groups benefitted from donations from Epstein even after his 2008 conviction for sexual solicitation of a minor — though it remains unclear whether they knew about it. Some have said specifically that they did not.

Epstein served 13 months in a county jail following that conviction, which was largely swept under the rug thanks to a “sweetheart deal” between Epstein and former U.S. Attorney Alex Acosta. Many in the public had little knowledge of him or his misdeeds until investigative reporting about the deal emerged in 2018 and Epstein was arrested the following year.

Epstein sought to leverage his Jewish largesse as he also sought to improve his public image both before and after his conviction, the latest files show.

One email shows that he sought placement on the website eJewishPhilanthropy, then something of a directory for Jewish philanthropy insiders, for one of his foundations in 2013.

“The Foundation supports many jewish causes around the world as well as numerous Israli [sic] causes,” an Epstein staffer wrote in a draft letter sent to Epstein for approval.

Describing Epstein as “a financier and science philanthropist,” they trumpeted his support of the Jewish National Fund, the National Council of Jewish Women, the Columbia Jewish Foundation, UJA- New York, and Friends of the Israel Defense Forces, along with a few yeshivas that were not Kaplan’s. The bio goes on to note Epstein’s “long partnership with Leslie Wexner.”

Epstein’s only note: “no wexner affiliations please.” Six years later, Wexner, a prominent philanthropist to Jewish causes, would reveal that he had broken ties with Epstein years earlier after a decades-long relationship and forced him to repay $100 million he said Epstein had stolen from him. Epstein had previously served as a director of the Wexner Foundation, which funds fellowships for young people entering a career in Jewish communal service and intensive adult education programs for volunteer board members of Jewish organizations.

Now the latest Epstein files release has turned up the heat on Wexner, who again denied knowledge of Epstein’s alleged crimes in a congressional deposition last week. It has also thrown other major funders of Jewish causes into the spotlight, including some for the first time.

Epstein’s Jewish giving far predated his 2008 conviction, and had no clear ideology. Some of it was already known before the latest files release. He and his partner and co-conspirator, Ghislane Maxwell, cultivated relationships with both FIDF, which raises money for the welfare of Israeli soldiers, and Seeds of Peace, which holds summer camps bringing together Israeli and Palestinian youth. They gave large sums to Hillel International and YIVO, as well as $500,000 to the religious day school Ramaz, and backed an Israeli charity that distributed aid to the needy. (That group, Ziv Tzedakah Fund, received $100,000 from Epstein in 2006 before shuttering less than a year later.)

Other Jewish groups solicited Epstein for donations well after his conviction in 2008. Harvard Hillel, whose building Epstein had helped facilitate Wexner’s funds to build, made personal appeals to him in 2010 and 2011 — stoked in part by a Jewish dean, Henry Rosovsky, who brokered Epstein’s giving to Harvard Hillel and who Maxwell testified had received a “massage” at Epstein’s townhouse. (Rosovsky died in 2022.)

“We regret that anyone associated with our organization contacted Mr. Epstein during the years in question, and in the intervening years Harvard Hillel has revised our ethics standards to prohibit interactions of this nature,” Harvard Hillel’s current director, Jason Rubenstein, told the Harvard Crimson this month about the solicitations. Rubenstein added that the staff who sought the donations haven’t been involved with the organization in over a decade.

In 2015, a senior vice president of Touro College, the private Jewish New York institution, made a personal appeal to Epstein for him to fund a “medical incubator as well as resiliency in higher education.”

“I have read with interest about your prior philanthropic pursuits and the Jeffrey Epstein VI Foundation’s generous contributions to various causes,” wrote the official, Michael Newman. “A donation to Touro College would further your foundation’s goals in both education and medical research.” A Touro spokesperson told JTA that Newman’s letter “was a blind prospecting note to a philanthropist that went unanswered.”

Some of Epstein’s post-conviction Jewish giving was prosaic, the kind of mid-level donations made as favors that rarely trigger nonprofits’ due diligence mechanisms.

UJA-Federation of New York, for example, accepted a $50,000 donation from Epstein in 2017. The occasion: the UJA’s signature Wall Street Dinner, which drew more than 2,000 people and raised $29 million. Epstein made his donation in support of one of the honorees, Howard Lutnick, who was then chair of the financial firm Cantor Fitzgerald and is now President Donald Trump’s commerce secretary. (Trump himself is prominently mentioned in the Epstein files.)

Invited to fill a table at the event, Epstein declined, responding that Lutnick — who was also his next-door neighbor — could fill his. Lutnick recently admitted to a more extensive relationship with Epstein than he had previously publicized, including visiting his island after he had previously said he had cut ties; the White House has said it will stand by him.

A spokesperson for the UJA declined to comment further to JTA on Epstein’s donation.

For his part, Epstein did not appear to be wedded to UJA as a cause. Emailing with Summers in 2019, six months before his arrest, he discouraged the former U.S. Treasury Secretary from donating to the New York federation: “much rather you use you extra funds for your own benefit „ rather than the UJA,” Epstein wrote. “Agree re no UJA,” Summers wrote back. “Po=dering [sic] uses of money.”

The American Jewish Committee, meanwhile, invited Epstein to a gala dinner in 2013 in honor of Matthew Bronfman, a prominent Jewish philanthropist, though it was not clear whether he attended.

“AJC takes seriously this inquiry given Jeffrey Epstein’s reprehensible crimes,” a spokesperson told JTA in a statement. The spokesperson said that the 2013 invitation “is a standard form solicitation used routinely for honoree events and doesn’t reflect any AJC ties or relationship with Jeffrey Epstein.” The group added that it had two donations from Epstein on file, both predating his conviction: $15,000 in 2000 and $25,000 in 2003.

Nonprofit watchdogs are suggesting that groups that accepted Epstein’s money after 2008 should take a harder look at their practices.

“With respect to any donations accepted after the conviction, I find the compartmentalization truly astonishing,” said Laurie Styron, of the watchdog Charity Watch. “Throwing sex trafficking victims under the bus in service to revenue growth that will eventually support the mission of some unrelated charitable effort is not OK. Anyone who tries to justify this really needs to take a hard look in the mirror and ask themselves if they would feel differently about trading justice for money if it were their own daughter or mother or sister who was trafficked.”

Indeed, what should be done about Epstein’s Jewish donations now is another thorny question. Some of the Wexner fellowship’s alumni, responding to his Epstein ties, have begun lobbying for Wexner’s name to be dropped from the program; a few have made public reparations for benefitting from Wexner’s money.

And Za’akah, an advocacy group for Hasidic sexual abuse survivors, has harshly criticized the yeshivas and other Orthodox institutions that accepted funding from Epstein, even the ones that had no knowledge at the time of his conviction or the allegations against him.

“You can’t come into the holiest place in Judaism and say, ‘I’m paying for this with the wages of prostitution,’” Asher Lovy, the group’s founder, said in an Instagram video in which he cited Talmudic teachings.

Lovy added, “By doing that, Epstein was afforded the opportunity to launder his reputation — the reputation he had rightly earned as a sex trafficker.”

At least one yeshiva that received an Epstein donation has sought to distance itself from him. The Texas Torah Institute, a yeshiva in Dallas, recently issued a statement saying it was unaware that Epstein had paid out $28,000 in tuition payments across 2008 and 2009.

“Until the recent release by the Justice Department of over 3 million documents related to the Jeffrey Epstein investigation, Texas Torah Institute was unaware of any potential connection with Epstein,” Rabbi Eliyahu Kaufmann, the school’s dean, told the Houston Chronicle.

Kaufmann added that the school “conducted an internal review” and determined that the checks were not signed by Epstein himself, but instead by his financial advisor Harry Beller — who also facilitated other yeshiva donations over the years, the Epstein files show. (Other Jewish schools that received donations from Epstein did not return JTA requests for comment.)

Beyond the donations, the latest files have renewed scrutiny on Epstein’s Jewish associates — and induced a cascade of consequences for many of those named beyond Summers.

Casey Wasserman, the Jewish entertainment agent, has lost top clients over his relationship with Epstein and is currently facing calls to step down from the Los Angeles Olympics planning committee.

Thomas Pritzker, a cousin of Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker, has stepped down from his role as chair of Hyatt Hotels over his Epstein connections, while Norwegian diplomat Mona Juul, who played a large role in facilitating the Oslo Accords between Israel and the Palestinian Authority, has also resigned from government after emails revealed Epstein had left her children millions in his will.

Financier Leon Black, whose foundation publishes the Jewish Lives series of biographies from Yale University Press; World Jewish Congress president Ronald Lauder; art curator David A. Ross; renowned linguist and pro-Palestinian advocate Noam Chomsky; and former Israeli prime minister Ehud Barak are among the other Jewish names also facing a new round of scrutiny over their Epstein ties. The latest files show that Epstein and an Israeli security delegation had had a New York apartment, in which Barak stayed on multiple occasions, outfitted with hidden cameras.

Bard College, meanwhile, has opened an investigation into its longtime president (and former Jerusalem symphony director) Leon Botstein. Botstein has said his interactions with Epstein — whose dinner invitation his spokesperson said he had turned down in 2013 because of a Rosh Hashanah obligation — were part and parcel of the difficult job of raising funds to keep a struggling liberal arts college in business.

Some of Epstein’s interactions on Jewish topics had more to do with status than money.

The files show that he was invited to a “very private screening for friends and family” of the 2017 drama “Disobedience,” about closeted lesbian Orthodox women. The invitation had come through Peggy Siegal, a publicist who was a key power broker in his affiliations with celebrities — while also, the files show, cracking Jewish-inflected jokes to him about his sexual predilections.

Epstein indicated that he would attend. The screening, held at New York’s Museum of Modern Art, had a guest list packed with celebrities, including the film’s co-stars Rachel Weisz and Alessandro Nivola, as well as showbiz royalty like Daniel Craig, Jennifer Connelly, Steven Soderbergh, Naomi Watts, and Jeffrey Wright. Also on the guest list: Israeli writer-director Oren Moverman and director Mira Nair, the pro-Palestinian advocate and mother of current New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani.

Other files show that he got involved in 2013 in seeking a conversion to Judaism for one of his female associates.

“Jeffrey says he needs a Rabbi who does conversions for Shiksa’s ….might you know of one!” his assistant wrote to an intermediary, using a Yiddish term for a non-Jewish woman.

The intermediary, who had pitched Epstein to finance a variety of deals over the years, was quick to oblige. “Yes, What level Orthodox, Conservative or Reform,” he responded. “Obviously the Orthodox is the most rigid but accepted by everyone, as you go down the scale the work gets easier but less acceptance. Not a real issue unless one has a child and the question of religious acceptance of that child. Pick a flavor and I will find.”

The emails show that the intermediary then reached out to a prominent Orthodox conversion advocate, Rabbi Adam Mintz, who advised him to approach Rabbi Lisa Rubin at Central Synagogue, a Reform congregation in Manhattan. A connection evidently took place, as Epstein later made a reference to a contact being enrolled in “Jew class.”

Reached for comment, Mintz told JTA he never interacted with Epstein and didn’t know the particular conversion request was connected to him.

Rubin directed questions about Epstein to a spokesperson for the synagogue. “Rabbi Rubin has no awareness of any of her conversion students having had any connection to Epstein. She is not aware of any past contact with him,” the spokesperson said.

The year after the initial introduction, Epstein urged the intermediary to apply pressure to speed the conversion. “lisa rubin the rabbi you gave [redacted], its important that [redacted] gets her conversion asap,” Epstein wrote, a day after receiving an email from someone who said she had “missed a third of the classes” taught by Rubin.

In response, the intermediary offered to find another rabbi. Over the following two years, Epstein would personally authorize reimbursements for classes with a female rabbi. It is unclear if the classes ever led to a conversion.

The would-be convert’s name is redacted in most of the files, indicating that she may have been a potential victim or co-conspirator. Epstein’s reasons for seeking a conversion for her are unknown, though he was known to have arranged sham marriages, including same-sex ones, for some of his victims in order to help them obtain American citizenship.

Epstein appears to have had closer relationships to at least one other rabbi. Between 2010 and 2011 he frequently advised contacts to connect with Rabbi Sam Klagsbrun, a former Jewish Theological Seminary professor, who died in 2023. In the emails Epstein occasionally referred people to Klagsbrun, a practicing psychiatrist, seemingly as patients; other times he authorized payments to him.

Synagogue representatives, including some rabbis, also made direct appeals to Epstein at many points, according to the latest files. In 2014, a co-founder of The Beis, an upstart Orthodox synagogue on the Upper West Side geared toward South African Jews, asked Epstein for help with seed money to purchase a building. He drew on his perception of Epstein’s Jewish background in his appeal.

“I couldn’t help but notice your ‘Israel’ chalkboard in the dining room – and I have a feeling that you grew up like me in the City – more culturally Jewish than religious,” the pitchman, film producer Daniel M. Rosenberg, wrote to Epstein. He later added, “The rabbi told me that we all needed to go out of our comfort zones on this one. So this email certainly qualifies. Want to meet with an amazing, worldly, brilliant (and very connected) rabbi?”

Requests for comment to Rosenberg and to The Beis’ rabbi were not returned.

Additional pleas for Epstein’s cash or other forms of largesse came from a Naples, Florida, Reform synagogue president, now deceased, as well as two synagogues located on the U.S. Virgin Islands where Epstein frequented — one Reform, one Chabad.

While it was unclear whether Epstein ever donated to the synagogues, the files showed that Orthodox schools beyond Kaplan’s received his money.

Some donations appear to have come in the form of tuition reimbursements for specific students — such as one redacted attendee of Bais Yaakov of Ramapo, a Jewish girls’ school in New York. A bill for $22,600 in tuition to the school in 2015 was included in Epstein’s files.

Beller, Epstein’s assistant, facilitated multiple donations from Epstein to yeshivas, sometimes specifically for tuition. He signed a check for $15,000 from Epstein’s holdings to Yeshiva Aderes Hatorah in Jerusalem in 2010. The next year Beller signed a check for $1,000 to Chabad Neshama Hebrew School in Brooklyn, and sent another $6,000 of Epstein’s money to American Yedidim, an Israeli aid group based in Florida. In 2014 Beller signed another $18,610 cash withdrawal to Yeshiva Mercaz Hatorah, a Jerusalem school catering to English-speaking Orthodox boys.

Another Epstein associate, Darren Indyke, signed a $24,500 check from Epstein’s office to Yeshiva Gedola Ohr Yisrael, in Brooklyn. The check is dated 2016. Indyke, a co-executor of Epstein’s estate, last week settled a class-action lawsuit Epstein’s victims filed against him for up to $35 million. The suit had claimed that Indyke and fellow co-executor Richard Kahn used financial maneuvers to aid Epstein’s abuses and pay victims and recruiters.

Indyke has also been subpoenaed by Congress in connection with the Epstein investigation. Attempts to reach Beller and Indyke were unsuccessful.

The post What the Epstein files show about Jeffrey Epstein’s Jewish world appeared first on The Forward.

Continue Reading

Uncategorized

The BBC Used Mike Huckabee’s Interview to Attempt to Defame Israel

Mike Huckabee looks on as Donald Trump reacts during a campaign event at the Drexelbrook Catering and Event Center, in Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania, US, Oct. 29, 2024. Photo: REUTERS/Brendan McDermid

On February 22, the BBC News website published a report by Maia Davies titled “US ambassador’s Israel comments condemned by Arab and Muslim nations.

The report is made up of three elements, the first of which is a presentation of what that headline calls the “US ambassador’s Israel comments.”

Davies begins by telling BBC audiences that: [emphasis added]

Arab and Muslim governments have condemned remarks made by the US Ambassador to Israel, Mike Huckabee, who suggested Israel would be justified in taking over a vast stretch of the Middle East on Biblical grounds.

In an interview with conservative US commentator Tucker Carlson, Huckabee was asked whether Israel had a right to an area which the host said was, according to the Bible, “essentially the entire Middle East”.

The ambassador said “it would be fine if it took it all”. But he added Israel was not seeking to do so, rather it is “asking to at least take the land that they now occupy” and protect its people.

Davies later adds:

In the interview, released on Friday, Carlson pressed the ambassador on his interpretation of a Bible verse which the host claimed suggested Israel had a right to the land between the River Nile in Egypt and the Euphrates in Syria and Iraq.

Huckabee said “it would be a big piece of land” but stressed that “I don’t think that’s what we’re talking about here today”.

He later added: “They’re not asking to go back to take all of that, but they are asking to at least take the land that they now occupy, they now live in, they now own legitimately, and it is a safe haven for them.”

He also said his earlier remark that Israel could take it “all” had been somewhat “hyperbolic”.

The relevant section of that “interview” can be found here.

BBC audiences were not informed that — as was noted by Lahav Harkov — Carlson put out an edited clip on social media.

The Tucker Carlson Network posted a clip of the video in which Carlson expostulated at length about Genesis 15:18, in which God tells Avram, “to your descendants I will give this land, from the River of Egypt to the great river Euphrates.” The Biblical kingdoms of Israel and Judea never included all of the land promised in Genesis, even at its historically largest size.

Carlson asks if Huckabee believes that Israel was promised to the Jewish people and they therefore have the right to take all of the land promised, which covers modern-day Jordan and parts of Syria, Lebanon, Iraq and Saudi Arabia.

In the clip, which cuts Huckabee off mid-sentence, he says in a facetious tone of voice, “It would be fine if they took it all.”

The second half of the ambassador’s sentence, as heard in the interview, is: “but I don’t think that’s what we’re talking about here today.”

The second element to Davies’ report is the statement put out by various Arab countries and organizations, which she describes as follows:

Following the interview’s release, the UAE’s foreign ministry released the statement on behalf of various governments and other actors expressing “strong condemnation and profound concern” regarding the comments.

The statement said Huckabee had “indicated that it would be acceptable for Israel to exercise control over territories belonging to Arab states, including the occupied West Bank”.

It said the remarks violated international law and directly contradicted US President Donald Trump’s plan to end the war in Gaza, including efforts to create “a political horizon for a comprehensive settlement that ensures the Palestinian people have their own independent state”.

The statement continued: “The ministries reaffirmed that Israel has no sovereignty whatsoever over the Occupied Palestinian Territory or any other occupied Arab lands.”

“They reiterated their firm rejection of any attempts to annex the West Bank or separate it from the Gaza Strip, their strong opposition to the expansion of settlement activities in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, and their categorical rejection of any threat to the sovereignty of Arab states.”

The statement said it was signed by the UAE, Egypt, Jordan, Indonesia, Pakistan, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Kuwait, Oman, Bahrain, Lebanon, Syria and the State of Palestine, as well as the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation, the Arab League and the Gulf Cooperation Council.

Davies makes no effort to clarify to her readers that “the occupied West Bank” has never been included in “territories belonging to Arab states”; that it has never been “Palestinian” in the sense of belonging to a sovereign state; that it was part of the territory allocated to the creation of a Jewish homeland by the League of Nations; or that it was illegally occupied for 19 years by one of the signatories of the statement she promotes: Jordan.

Neither does she bother to point out that Huckabee’s responses to Carlson’s statements and questions concerning the principles underlying Christian Zionism have no bearing on the US “plan to end the war in Gaza.”

The third element of Davies’ report is the provision of supposed context, with readers told that:

Israel has built about 160 settlements housing 700,000 Jews since it occupied the West Bank and East Jerusalem – land Palestinians want, along with Gaza, for a hoped-for future state – during the 1967 Middle East war. An estimated 3.3 million Palestinians live alongside them.

Notably, Davies avoids explaining why what she described two paragraphs earlier as “the State of Palestine” is now “a hoped-for future state” and, in line with usual BBC practice, she again avoids the issue of the Jordanian occupation of the areas the corporation chooses to call “the West Bank and East Jerusalem,” as well as the attacks on Israel by Jordan and other Arab countries in June 1967.

Davies continues with the BBC’s usual partial presentation of “international law” together with an interpretation of a non-binding ICJ advisory opinion: “The settlements are illegal under international law – a position supported by an advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice in 2024.”

Davies’ report closes with a new version of the BBC’s usual “frozen in time” portrayal of casualties resulting from the war that began as a result of the Hamas-led invasion of Israel — this time erasing Israeli casualties and hostages altogether:

Successive Israeli governments have allowed settlements to grow. However, expansion has risen sharply since Netanyahu returned to power in late 2022 at the head of a right-wing, pro-settler coalition, as well as the start of the Gaza war, triggered by Hamas’s deadly 7 October 2023 attack on Israel.

More than 72,000 Palestinians have been killed in Israel’s subsequent military offensive, according to Gaza’s Hamas-run health ministry.

In addition to failing to provide readers with appropriate historical background, Davies refrained from properly explaining the context to the nine words that prompted the “condemnation” that is the topic of her report, including the fact that discussion of a Biblical passage has no contemporary relevance.

She also avoided providing information about other issues arising from that long conversation or the populist record of the person she describes as a “conservative US commentator.”

Obviously the prime aim of Davies’ reporting on this “much ado about nothing” story was to amplify the statement delegitimizing Israel that was put out by a collection of countries and organizations.

Hadar Sela is the co-editor of CAMERA UK – an affiliate of the Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting and Analysis (CAMERA), where a version of this article first appeared. 

Continue Reading

Uncategorized

Prince Harry & Meghan Visit Jordan NGO Employing Staff Who Posted Pro-Hamas Content

Britain’s Prince Harry, Megan, Duchess of Sussex, and Lady Sarah Chatto attend the National Service of Thanksgiving held at St Paul’s Cathedral, during Britain’s Queen Elizabeth’s Platinum Jubilee celebrations, in London, Britain, June 3, 2022. Photo: Victoria Jones/Pool via REUTERS.

Prince Harry and Meghan, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, arrived in Jordan this week on a surprise visit reportedly coordinated with World Health Organization (WHO) Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus.

The trip, announced under 24 hours in advance, included meetings in Amman with WHO representatives and participants from various humanitarian bodies, including the United Nations. The couple also visited the sprawling Za’atari Refugee Camp, home to tens of thousands of displaced Syrians.

But it was their final stop — a youth center operated by the Jordanian NGO Questscope — that raises serious questions.

The Questscope Connection

Questscope presents itself as a youth-focused humanitarian organization operating across Jordan.

However, a review of publicly available social media posts from several individuals identified as staff members reveals content that goes far beyond humanitarian advocacy.

HonestReporting has verified that the Facebook accounts in question belong to the individuals identified as Questscope staff.

Among the material shared:

  • Images glorifying Hamas-affiliated militants
  • Posts praising armed “resistance”
  • Graphics celebrating rocket attacks launched from Gaza
  • Repeated assertions that “Jerusalem is the capital of Palestine”
  • Imagery associated with organizations designated as terrorist groups by the United States and the United Kingdom

In one instance, a staff member shared an image of masked militants wearing Hamas headbands. In another, posts echoed messaging closely aligned with Hamas narratives during periods of escalation.

In October 2024, one staff member posted the phrase, “And in October, we came to have a deep-seated love.” The wording does not explicitly mention the October 7 massacre in Israel, yet in the current political climate — where October has become shorthand in some circles for the Hamas attack — the sentiment raises further concerns about the ideological framing at play.

Supporting Palestinian civilians is legitimate. Sharing content that glorifies Hamas is not.

Hamas is not a protest movement or a symbolic resistance brand. It is a US and UK-designated terrorist organization responsible for mass murder, hostage-taking, and the systematic targeting of civilians.

When individuals affiliated with a humanitarian NGO publicly amplify such material, the issue ceases to be political expression. It becomes extremist alignment.

A Humanitarian Visit – Or a Failure of Due Diligence?

Ahead of the trip, a source close to the Sussexes reportedly told British media that the visit was “not political” and should not be interpreted as taking sides.

That assertion now warrants scrutiny.

When global public figures publicly platform an organization whose staff have shared material aligned with a designated terrorist group, neutrality is no longer a shield. It becomes a question of vetting, and judgment.

Were Harry and Meghan aware of the social media histories of individuals connected to the NGO? Did their team conduct due diligence before lending royal prestige to the organization? If not, why not?

If they were aware, what message does that send?

Humanitarian engagement does not grant immunity from scrutiny. In a region where symbolism carries enormous weight and propaganda travels faster than fact, public association has consequences.

This is not about opposing aid. Humanitarian support for civilians is necessary and legitimate. It is about standards. When public figures who claim neutrality choose to elevate institutions whose staff have circulated material aligned with a terrorist organization, the burden of care rises — not falls.

At a time when antisemitism is surging globally and Hamas — a terrorist organization responsible for the largest massacre of Jews since the Holocaust — continues to perpetrate violence, casual association is not neutral.

That tension becomes even more acute given Meghan’s longstanding public advocacy for women and girls. As patron of Smart Works, through initiatives supporting menstrual health in India, funding for Afghan women refugees, and projects focused on girls’ education and empowerment, she has positioned herself as a global champion of women’s rights and dignity.

Hamas’ October 7 atrocities included documented acts of sexual violence against women, as well as abuse of Israeli hostages in captivity. For a public figure whose brand is rooted in advancing women’s rights, even indirect association with messaging aligned with such an organization raises serious and unavoidable questions.

Advocacy cannot be selective. It cannot be unequivocal in some contexts and incurious in others.

If the Sussexes believe this visit was purely humanitarian, this revelation raises a number of questions: What vetting was conducted? What safeguards were in place? And what message do they believe this association sends?

Because humanitarian credibility depends not only on compassion — but on judgment.

The author is a contributor to HonestReporting, a Jerusalem-based media watchdog with a focus on antisemitism and anti-Israel bias — where a version of this article first appeared.

Continue Reading

Uncategorized

In Iran, a Revolution Against a Revolution

Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei attends a meeting with students in Tehran, Iran, Nov. 3, 2025. Photo: Office of the Iranian Supreme Leader/WANA (West Asia News Agency)/Handout via REUTERS

Forty-seven years is but a fleeting moment in the life of an ancient civilization — but it is long enough for a revolution to confront its own reflection.

The fall of the Iranian monarchy in 1979 seemed to close a civilizational chapter, bringing to an end a form of rule long intertwined with Iran’s historical identity. Iran, one of the world’s longest continuous nation-states from antiquity to the modern era, had been governed by successive monarchies throughout its history.

Many dynasties and ruling houses held power in Iran for long stretches of history. They differed in their methods of governance and in their political codes, but they all shared a single unifying feature: the royal form of rule.

The 1979 Islamic Revolution marked the end of a longstanding historical period and established a republican regime in Iran. The revolution emerged from a range of social and political developments. These included rising Shia Islamist sentiment within parts of the population and expanding leftist political activism. Political liberty remained limited during this period. The outcome was the founding of a theocratic republic.

Since then, three generations have been raised under the ideological rhetoric of this regime. A government that seized power with promises of democracy and a fair life for all gradually extended its authority into nearly every aspect of citizens’ lives. Endless intrusions into personal matters and the imposition of a rigid social order have shaped daily existence, while economic and political crises have affected millions of Iranians.

Within the current governing structure, the suppression of Iranian national identity has become one of the defining characteristics of the theocratic system. In recent years, a visible shift has emerged among many young Iranians who openly express their rejection of this imposed lifestyle and signal a desire to move beyond the current authoritarian structure once and for all.

Amid deepening societal frustrations, numerous protests have erupted across the country over the past few years. Among them, the demonstrations following Mahsa Amini’s death and the protests of late December 2025 and early January 2026, now widely referred to as the Sun and Lion Revolution, stand out for their scale and intensity. These recent movements have been extensively energized by the participation of the country’s youth.

Signs of civil disobedience among young people are now widespread. Refusal to adhere to mandatory hijab regulations is increasingly visible in public spaces. Protesters invoke historical and epic figures from Iranian literature and traditions rather than the cultural ideals promoted by the regime. The revival of older national symbols reflects a broader attempt to reclaim an identity that many feel has been overshadowed.

At present, people of all ages, social classes, and professional backgrounds are involved in the uprising in different ways. This breadth of participation gives the Sun and Lion movement a popular mandate that many supporters regard as the foundation of a national revolution.

Some of the most frequently heard chants during the ongoing protests call for the return of Crown Prince Reza Pahlavi, whose father, Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, ruled Iran prior to the 1979 revolution. The Crown Prince has stepped forward in response to these calls and has expressed readiness to help guide a transitional process in a post-Islamic Republic era.

The massive protests of January 8 and 9, 2026, which extended across cities throughout the country, became a defining moment. Millions of Iranians gathered in the streets. At the time of this writing, students at a college campus in Iran have been championing Pahlavi and the Sun and Lion flag. This is an act that carries particular weight given that university environments have long been associated with left-oriented activism and revolutionary discourse.

This development represents a significant turning point in the progression of anti-regime protests. Academic spaces that once served as strongholds of leftist ideologies are now directly calling for an end to the Islamic Republic. The shift highlights how profoundly political sentiments have evolved within Iranian society.

Occupying a central role in this movement, Generation Z appears largely unmoved by ideological narratives or rigid dogma. Its members seek the restoration of national identity and the opportunity for a better life shaped by practical realities rather than doctrinal prescriptions. That impulse has become a guiding force across wider segments of society.

It is therefore unsurprising that many of those who lost their lives during the violent crackdown of January 8 and 9 were young protesters demanding fundamental rights. Despite the severity of the crackdown, the continuation of demonstrations more than forty days after those tragic events illustrates the persistence of public resolve. It is emblematic of a broader unwillingness among many Iranians to retreat from their demands.

The Islamic Revolution of 1979 abolished monarchy as a political order in Iran. Now, after 47 years, that same revolutionary system faces citizens who openly call for the return of the monarchical framework that was once overthrown. The historical irony is striking. Once again, history reminds us that political systems grounded in contradiction often struggle to sustain themselves indefinitely.

Perhaps that is why this moment stands as a pivotal juncture. Seen in a longer perspective, it resembles the completion of a cycle, a revolution against a revolution.

Ali Karamifard is a PhD student in Industrial Engineering at the University of Massachusetts Dartmouth. His research and writing focus on political systems, institutional change, and contemporary developments in the Middle East.

Continue Reading

Copyright © 2017 - 2023 Jewish Post & News