Features
Trump Raises Questions About Miriam Adelson’s Priorities and Sparks Debate Over Donor Influence on Politics
During a speech in the Knesset, Donald Trump unexpectedly pointed to the special role of Miriam Adelson in shaping U.S.–Israel relations. His remarks addressed not only the well-known philanthropist herself, but also a broader issue: how significant is the influence of private donors on a country’s foreign policy becoming? Society once again turns its attention to the boundaries of what is acceptable in the alliance between politics and big capital.
Who Is Miriam Adelson and Why She Receives So Much Attention
Dr. Miriam Adelson is a physician, scientist, and millionaire of Jewish origin, born in Israel and living in the United States for many years. She actively supports educational, medical, and cultural projects related to Jewish and Israeli identity, as well as programs aimed at combating drug addiction. Her foundation finances scholarships, memorials, and medical research.
Miriam Adelson is known for having continued her late husband’s political course after the death of Sheldon Adelson, a businessman and the founder of the casino company Las Vegas Sands, by maintaining strong support for the U.S. Republican Party. Over recent decades, the Adelson family has donated hundreds of millions of dollars to election campaigns, becoming one of the leading donors to the conservative wing of American politics. It is precisely the scale of her influence and her close contacts with the Trump administration that draw particular interest from experts and observers.
How Miriam and Sheldon Adelson Influenced U.S. Decisions on Israel
A series of cases is widely discussed in which funding from the Adelson family coincided with major political decisions made by the White House. Among the most prominent examples is the relocation of the U.S. embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem in 2018. According to reports by Reuters and The New York Times, this move was actively lobbied by Adelson and her circle, and the opening ceremony itself took place in the personal presence of the philanthropists.
In addition, Miriam Adelson has repeatedly been honored for her philanthropy and support of Israeli military organizations. In 2018, Trump awarded her the Presidential Medal of Freedom, one of the highest state honors in the United States. It is known that Adelson regularly visited the White House and maintained personal contact with the president on key issues.
The term “major donor” in this context refers to an individual or organization that contributes substantial sums to the campaigns of politicians or political parties. Lobbying is the activity of promoting the interests of private entities through lawful mechanisms of influence on those in power.
What Donald Trump Said and Why His Words Caused a Stir
During his speech, broadcast on Israeli and American channels, Trump stated: “Every president for decades said they would move the embassy to Jerusalem, but I got it done. Right, Miriam? Look, here’s Miriam—stand up, Miriam.”
Trump then spoke about how the Adelson couple frequently visited his office and actively participated in discussions on issues related to Israel. He added: “I once asked Miriam: which do you love more—Israel or the United States? She didn’t answer. Maybe it’s Israel.” These remarks became the subject of heated debate: can a donor with such priorities be considered capable of influencing U.S. foreign policy?
The context of the speech intensified the overall atmosphere—on the eve of the address, a temporary ceasefire regime between Israel and Hamas had been agreed upon, and Trump presented himself as a peacemaker. His jokes and rhetorical questions energized the audience, but also generated new suspicions regarding the transparency of the decisions being made.
Reaction of Public Organizations and Experts
Immediately after Trump’s speech, the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) issued a statement condemning such close ties between politicians and private donors. In a comment to Casino.org, CAIR representatives noted: “We welcome Trump’s candor in openly acknowledging the level of influence Miriam Adelson has on policy. We urge all U.S. politicians to refuse support from donors who place the interests of a foreign state above national ones.”
CAIR’s primary mission is to protect the interests of American Muslims and to combat discrimination and double standards. The council actively responds to any manifestations of interference in U.S. politics by foreign lobbyists. According to experts, such statements reflect growing public concern about the transparency of the political process.
The Debate Over Donor Influence and Possible Consequences
Public anxiety is increasing over whose hands hold the levers of control over foreign policy. Some experts argue that donations are a way of exercising civic engagement and supporting chosen politicians. Others see this as a threat to national interests and a risk of substituting public demand with private interests.
Where is the line between lawful support for a candidate and manipulation of foreign policy? What measures can prevent conflicts of interest between donors and state institutions? There are still no clear answers to these questions. Discussions of lobbying, donor ethics, and the influence of capital are becoming increasingly intense amid global challenges.
Similar mechanisms of influence also exist in less large-scale but no less illustrative forms, including in the gambling sector. In various countries, politicians and government officials often receive financial support from the gambling business, including casino owners and online platform operators. In return, such industries expect favorable regulation: license extensions, relaxed requirements, more lenient tax legislation, or delays in restrictive measures. Formally, such relationships fall within the bounds of the law, yet they increasingly become the subject of public debate about conflicts of interest and the transparency of decision-making.
Against this backdrop, it is hardly surprising that the gambling industry is developing not only in offline formats but also in the digital sphere, where state oversight is often weaker. Online casinos and live games attract audiences through mobility and ease of access, while the projects themselves quickly build up an ecosystem of apps and services. For example, through FunkyTimeGame.org Apps, users can download Funky Time applications and play in a live show format directly from a smartphone, without being tied to physical casinos or a specific location.
In a broader context, this once again brings the discussion back to the core issue: the influence of capital—whether from major political donors or the gambling industry—gradually permeates various spheres of public life. That is why questions of transparency, regulation, and public oversight are becoming increasingly relevant, regardless of whether the issue concerns foreign policy, domestic legislation, or the entertainment industry.
Context and Explanations for a Broad Audience
The Knesset is Israel’s parliament and the country’s highest legislative body. The relocation of the American embassy to Jerusalem was perceived as a historic victory for Israeli diplomacy; it signified the official recognition of the city as the capital. For the United States, this step became the subject of sharp criticism from other Middle Eastern countries as well as allies in the European Union.
World history has seen other instances in which major donors, such as George Soros or the Koch brothers, exerted notable influence on politics by financing campaigns, think tanks, or media outlets. The Adelson case only underscores that such practices have become universal, while questions of transparency remain unresolved.
Who determines strategic foreign policy decisions—presidents, parliaments, or shadow donors with their own preferences? Do parallels arise with other countries where political elites are closely intertwined with big capital? Behind the façade of philanthropy often lie complex mechanisms of influence that require public oversight and reflection.
During
a speech in the Knesset, Donald Trump unexpectedly pointed to the
special role of Miriam Adelson in shaping U.S.–Israel relations.
His remarks addressed not only the well-known philanthropist herself,
but also a broader issue: how significant is the influence of private
donors on a country’s foreign policy becoming? Society once again
turns its attention to the boundaries of what is acceptable in the
alliance between politics and big capital.Who Is Miriam Adelson and
Why She Receives So Much AttentionDr. Miriam Adelson is a
physician, scientist, and millionaire of Jewish origin, born in
Israel and living in the United States for many years. She actively
supports educational, medical, and cultural
projects related to Jewish and Israeli identity, as well as programs
aimed at combating drug addiction. Her foundation finances
scholarships, memorials, and medical research.Miriam Adelson is known for
having continued her late husband’s political course after the
death of Sheldon Adelson, a businessman and the founder of the casino
company Las Vegas Sands, by maintaining strong support for the U.S.
Republican Party. Over recent decades, the Adelson family has donated
hundreds of millions of dollars to election campaigns, becoming one
of the leading donors to the conservative wing of American politics.
It is precisely the scale of her influence and her close contacts
with the Trump administration that draw particular interest from
experts and observers.How Miriam and Sheldon
Adelson Influenced U.S. Decisions on IsraelA series of cases is widely
discussed in which funding from the Adelson family coincided with
major political decisions made by the White House. Among the most
prominent examples is the relocation of the U.S. embassy from Tel
Aviv to Jerusalem in 2018. According to reports by Reuters and The
New York Times, this move was actively lobbied by Adelson and her
circle, and the opening ceremony itself took place in the personal
presence of the philanthropists.In addition, Miriam Adelson
has repeatedly been honored for her philanthropy and support of
Israeli military organizations. In 2018, Trump awarded her the
Presidential Medal of Freedom, one of the highest state honors in the
United States. It is known that Adelson regularly visited the White
House and maintained personal contact with the president on key
issues.The term “major donor”
in this context refers to an individual or organization that
contributes substantial sums to the campaigns of politicians or
political parties. Lobbying is the activity of promoting the
interests of private entities through lawful mechanisms of influence
on those in power.What Donald Trump Said and
Why His Words Caused a StirDuring his speech, broadcast
on Israeli and American channels, Trump stated: “Every president
for decades said they would move the embassy to Jerusalem, but I got
it done. Right, Miriam? Look, here’s Miriam—stand up, Miriam.”Trump then spoke about how
the Adelson couple frequently visited his office and actively
participated in discussions on issues related to Israel. He added: “I
once asked Miriam: which do you love more—Israel or the United
States? She didn’t answer. Maybe it’s Israel.” These remarks
became the subject of heated debate: can a donor with such priorities
be considered capable of influencing U.S. foreign policy?The context of the speech
intensified the overall atmosphere—on the eve of the address, a
temporary ceasefire regime between Israel and Hamas had been agreed
upon, and Trump presented himself as a peacemaker. His jokes and
rhetorical questions energized the audience, but also generated new
suspicions regarding the transparency of the decisions being made.Reaction of Public
Organizations and ExpertsImmediately after Trump’s
speech, the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) issued a
statement condemning such close ties between politicians and private
donors. In a comment to Casino.org, CAIR representatives noted: “We
welcome Trump’s candor in openly acknowledging the level of
influence Miriam Adelson has on policy. We urge all U.S. politicians
to refuse support from donors who place the interests of a foreign
state above national ones.”CAIR’s primary mission is
to protect the interests of American Muslims and to combat
discrimination and double standards. The council actively responds to
any manifestations of interference in U.S. politics by foreign
lobbyists. According to experts, such statements reflect growing
public concern about the transparency of the political process.The Debate Over Donor
Influence and Possible ConsequencesPublic anxiety is increasing
over whose hands hold the levers of control over foreign policy. Some
experts argue that donations are a way of exercising civic engagement
and supporting chosen politicians. Others see this as a threat to
national interests and a risk of substituting public demand with
private interests.Where is the line between
lawful support for a candidate and manipulation of foreign policy?
What measures can prevent conflicts of interest between donors and
state institutions? There are still no clear answers to these
questions. Discussions of lobbying, donor ethics, and the influence
of capital are becoming increasingly intense amid global challenges.Similar mechanisms of
influence also exist in less large-scale but no less illustrative
forms, including in the gambling sector. In various countries,
politicians and government officials often receive financial support
from the gambling business, including casino owners and online
platform operators. In return, such industries expect favorable
regulation: license extensions, relaxed requirements, more lenient
tax legislation, or delays in restrictive measures. Formally, such
relationships fall within the bounds of the law, yet they
increasingly become the subject of public debate about conflicts of
interest and the transparency of decision-making.Against this backdrop, it is
hardly surprising that the gambling industry is developing not only
in offline formats but also in the digital sphere, where state
oversight is often weaker. Online casinos and live games attract
audiences through mobility and ease of access, while the projects
themselves quickly build up an ecosystem of apps and services. For
example, through FunkyTimeGame.org
Apps, users can download Funky Time applications and play in a
live show format directly from a smartphone, without being tied to
physical casinos or a specific location.In a broader context, this
once again brings the discussion back to the core issue: the
influence of capital—whether from major political donors or the
gambling industry—gradually permeates various spheres of public
life. That is why questions of transparency, regulation, and public
oversight are becoming increasingly relevant, regardless of whether
the issue concerns foreign policy, domestic legislation, or the
entertainment industry.Context and Explanations for
a Broad AudienceThe Knesset is Israel’s
parliament and the country’s highest legislative body. The
relocation of the American embassy to Jerusalem was perceived as a
historic victory for Israeli diplomacy; it signified the official
recognition of the city as the capital. For the United States, this
step became the subject of sharp criticism from other Middle Eastern
countries as well as allies in the European Union.World history has seen other
instances in which major donors, such as George Soros or the Koch
brothers, exerted notable influence on politics by financing
campaigns, think tanks, or media outlets. The Adelson case only
underscores that such practices have become universal, while
questions of transparency remain unresolved.Who determines strategic
foreign policy decisions—presidents, parliaments, or shadow donors
with their own preferences? Do parallels arise with other countries
where political elites are closely intertwined with big capital?
Behind the façade of philanthropy often lie complex mechanisms of
influence that require public oversight and reflection.
Features
The Torah on a Lost Dog: Hashavat Aveidah in a Modern Canadian City
A neighbour’s dog wanders into your yard on a Wednesday morning in May, dragging a leash and looking confused. You have a choice. You can close the door and assume someone else will deal with it, call the city, or take a photo, knock on a few doors, and try to find out where he belongs.
For most people in Winnipeg and elsewhere in Canada, that choice plays out in a flash of moral instinct rather than reflection. The hand reaches for the phone and the walk around the block begins. The neighbour, if it goes well, is at the door before lunch. The decision feels minor, but it matters more than it looks.
In Jewish tradition, the act of returning a lost animal sits at the centre of one of the oldest practical commandments in the Torah. Deuteronomy 22, near the end of Parashat Ki Teitzei, contains a passage that has become the foundation for an entire body of Jewish ethical law: “If you see your fellow’s ox or sheep going astray, you shall not hide yourself from them; you shall surely bring them back.” The verse goes on to extend this duty beyond animals to any lost property. “So shall you do with every lost thing of your brother’s which he has lost and you have found.” Then comes the line that has occupied rabbis for two thousand years: “You may not hide yourself.”
The Hebrew name for this mitzvah is hashavat aveidah, the returning of a lost thing. It is one of the more practical commandments in a tradition full of practical commandments, and the rabbinic literature surrounding it is unusually thick.
A small commandment with big implications
The reason hashavat aveidah occupies so much rabbinic attention is that, on closer reading, it sets a high ethical bar. The Talmud, particularly the second chapter of tractate Bava Metzia known as Eilu Metziot, devotes pages to questions a modern reader would immediately recognize. How long must you wait for the owner to claim the item? How hard do you have to look for them? What if the animal needs feeding while you search? What expenses can you recover, and what counts as fair? What if the item is too inconvenient to safely return?
The rabbis answer all of these. The answers are not always intuitive. The finder is obligated to feed and shelter the animal while looking for the owner. The animal must not be put to work for the finder’s profit. The owner, when found, repays reasonable costs but is not on the hook for unreasonable ones. If the search takes too long, there are procedures for what to do next, none of which involve quietly keeping what is not yours.
Underneath the legal detail is a moral assumption that is easy to miss in a hurried reading. The Torah does not say to return the animal if it is convenient. It explicitly forbids the act of hiding yourself, of pretending you did not see, of crossing to the other side of the street. The commandment is as much about the person who finds as it is about the animal that is lost.
What this looks like in 2026
Most people who encounter a stray dog in a Winnipeg neighbourhood today are not thinking about Bava Metzia. They are thinking about whether the dog is friendly, whether they should call the City, whether they have time. The instinct to help is usually present. The question is what to do with it.
The practical infrastructure for hashavat aveidah in this country has changed considerably in the last decade. A finder in Winnipeg in 2026 has access to a regional humane society, a network of local Facebook groups, neighbourhood newsletters, and a handful of national platforms that gather sightings and missing-pet alerts across more than 180 Canadian cities. The mechanism is straightforward. A clear photo and a location pin can reach the right owner within hours when the system works, which it usually does.
The most underused of these resources, in any community, is the simple act of posting a sighting. Many people who find a stray feel they need to first catch the animal, find it food, take it home, or in some way solve the problem in full. The rabbis would actually disagree with that framing, and so does modern pet-recovery practice. The first responsibility is to make the sighting visible. The owner is almost certainly already looking. The finder’s main job is to surface what they have seen.
For people in Winnipeg looking for a place to start, a practical guide for what to do when you find a stray walks through the basic steps. Take a clear photo, note the cross-streets and time, check for a tag, and post the sighting where local owners will see it. The work is small. The effect, on the owner who has been awake for two nights and then sees a photo of their dog with a phone number underneath, is much larger than the work itself.
The ethical centre of the commandment
There is a strain of Jewish thought that reads hashavat aveidah as a kind of training in noticing. The deeper commandment goes beyond returning what is lost. It asks the finder to be the kind of person who sees what is lost in the first place, who does not cross to the other side of the street, who does not pretend not to have noticed.
That reading lines up with another Jewish ethical concept that often gets paired with this one: tza’ar ba’alei chayim, the obligation to prevent unnecessary suffering to animals. The Talmud derives this principle from several places in the Torah, including the rest commanded for animals on Shabbat. The two principles overlap in the case of a lost pet. The animal is suffering. The owner is suffering. The finder is, briefly, the only person in the position to do anything about it.
In a small way, the entire Canadian volunteer ecosystem around lost pets, from neighbourhood Facebook groups to national platforms to the dog walker who recognizes a posted photo, is an example of this ethical structure in action. People do not necessarily think of it in those terms. The framework is there anyway, doing its quiet work.
A community-scale point
Winnipeg’s Jewish community has always understood itself as a network of responsibilities to others, the kind that get described as chesed when they are visible and assumed when they are not. The work of returning a lost animal sits comfortably in that frame. It is not heroic, does not make the bulletin, and is exactly the kind of small obligation that knits a community together when nobody is paying attention.
The dog in the yard on a Wednesday morning in May, leash trailing, is one version of the question Deuteronomy asks. The answer, then and now, is the same. Do not hide yourself.
Features
Basketball: How has Israel become one of the best basketball countries in Europe in the last few years?
When Israeli Deni Avdija became the first Israeli to be drafted as the highest Israeli draftee in NBA history in 2020 – then emerged as a key NBA wing in Portland, it was not so much the breakthrough it appeared to be, but a portent of things to come. Israeli basketball development has been decades in the making, and in recent years its clubs have made Europe take notice.
This is why Maccabi Tel Aviv, Hapoel Tel Aviv, and the national basketball team of Israel are now the subjects of serious discussion in European basketball. It is only natural that fans and bettors reading form, depth of the roster, and momentum would look at our Euroleague predictions and then evaluate how Israeli teams would fit into the continental picture.
A rich history: The Maccabi Tel Aviv mythos
The contemporary narrative dates back to before Avdija. Maccabi Tel Aviv won its maiden European Cup in 1977, beating Mobilgirgi Varese and providing a nation under pressure with a sporting icon. Tal Brody’s declaration: “We are on the map” became not just a quote, it became a declaration of Jewish confidence, Israeli strength and a basketball dream.
Maccabi turned out to be the team of the nation since it bore Israeli identity past the borders. Maccabi has been a cultural ambassador before globalization transformed elite lists into multinational conundrums. Its yellow jerseys were the symbol of excellence, rebellion, and identification for the Israeli people at home and Jewish communities abroad.
The six European championships for the club provided a benchmark that has influenced the Winner League and Israeli basketball. Children were not just spectators of Maccabi, they dreamed of Europe as something accessible. Coaches studied in the continental competition. Sponsors and broadcasters realized that basketball had the potential to be the most exportable Israel team sport.
The modern pillars of Israeli basketball’s success
The recent ascendancy of Israel is no magic. It is the result of history, astute recruiting, youth-building and pressure-tested league culture. The nation has made its size its strength: clubs find talent at a young age and enhance the potential with foreign professionals.
Nurturing homegrown talent: The Deni Avdija effect
The most obvious example is that of Avdija. He was a high-ranking contributor in the system of Maccabi Tel Aviv, was chosen as a teenager, and was picked number 9 by Washington in the 2020 NBA Draft. His career was a reminder that an Israeli prospect could be more than a local star; he could be a lottery pick with two-way NBA potential.
Israeli NBA player Omri Casspi had already opened that door, and Avdija opened it even further for the next generation. Their achievements captivated the expectations of youthful players in Tel Aviv, Jerusalem, Holon, Herzliya, etc. An Israeli teenager is now able to envision a path from youth leagues to the Winner League, the EuroLeague, and ultimately – NBA minutes.
It is that dream that has been followed by investment. Israeli clubs put more emphasis on skills training, strength training, and analytics, as well as international youth tournaments. The success of the national program in the face of the best of Europe has also helped.
A global approach: The role of international and naturalized stars
The other pillar of the Israeli basketball program is the openness of Israel to global talent. The Winner League has been an important destination, not a stopover, for American guards and forwards. Most come in with NCAA or G league experience and become leaders due to the fact that the league requires scoring, speed and tactical flexibility.
It is enriched with naturalized players and Jewish players, who are able to use the Law of Return to come to Israel to play. Inspired by legendary players like Tal Brody, current imports who can bond both professionally and personally with Israelis have provided teams with uncharacteristic diversity in their rosters. The outcome has been a mixture of Israeli competitiveness, American shot making, Balkan toughness, and European spacing.
Making waves in Europe: Israel’s modern Euroleague footprint
Even in challenging seasons, Maccabi Tel Aviv has remained the flagship team. Currently, Maccabi is out of a playoff spot in the EuroLeague, but Hapoel Tel Aviv has shot up in playoff discussion. That juxtaposition speaks volumes: Israel is no longer represented by one lone, iconic club. Its profile has expanded.
Nevertheless, it is true that the reputation of Maccabi in the EuroLeague does count. Menora Mivtachim Arena in Tel Aviv is one of the most intimidating arenas for EuroLeague teams to play in: loud and emotional. Recent security and travel realities have affected the usual home-court advantage but the name of the club is still a potent brand.
It is the reason why there is an interesting betting discussion within Israeli teams. The name Maccabi still retains a historical impact, but analysts also need to quantify the present defensive performance, injuries, substitution of venues and guards, and fatigue in the schedule. The emergence of Hapoel has provided another Israeli point of reference and markets have to regard the nation as a multi-club force.
What’s next? The future of Israeli basketball on the world stage
Sustainability is the second test. The Israeli national basketball team desires more serious EuroBasket performances and a future world cup. It requires Avdija types – fit and powerful, more domestic big men, and guards capable of playing elite defense to get there.
The pipeline is an optimistic one. Israeli schools are more professional, teams are bolder with young talents, and the Winner League is a test ground where potential talents have to contend with older, tougher imports each week. Not all players will turn into an Avdija, yet additional players ought to be prepared to participate in EuroCup, EuroLeague, and even NBA games.
To the Jews in the Canadian diaspora, the impact is not only sporting, it is also emotional. Israeli basketball brings pride, drama and a common language to the continents. To the European fan, it provides tempo, creativity and unpredictability. To analysts, it provides a sign that a small nation, with memory, ambition and adaptation, can rise to become a true basketball power. Israel has ceased to be the unexpected guest on the table of Europe. It is a part of it, season after season.
Features
In recent years, we have been looking for something more than a house in Israel – we have been looking for a home
For many Jewish families in the diaspora, Israel has always been more than a destination. It is the land of tefillah, memory, family history and belonging. But in recent years, many families have begun asking a practical question too: should Israel also become a place where we have a home?
Not necessarily immediate aliyah. Sometimes it begins with a future option, something good to have just in case, or simply roots with a stronger connection to Eretz Yisroel.
But what does it mean?
A Jewish home is shaped not only by what is inside the front door, but by what surrounds it: neighbours, synagogues, schools, parks, local services, safe streets and the rhythm of Jewish life. For observant families, these are not small details. They are the things that turn a house into a place of belonging.
This is not a new idea. It is a need that has helped shape Jewish communities in Israel before. The Savyonim idea is rooted in the story of Savyon, the Israeli community established in the 1950s by South African Jews who wanted to create a green, safe and community-minded environment in Israel. It was a diaspora dream translated into life in the Jewish homeland.
That idea feels relevant again today. Many Jewish families abroad are now making plans around where they can feel connected in the years ahead.
Recent figures point in the same direction. Reports based on Israel’s Ministry of Finance data showed that foreign residents bought around 1,900 homes in Israel in 2024, about 50% more than the previous year, with Jerusalem emerging as the most popular place to buy. In January 2026, foreign residents still purchased 146 homes, broadly similar to January 2025, even as the wider housing market remained cautious.

For Lior David, International Sales & Marketing Manager at Africa Israel Residences, part of the continued interest may lie in the fact that today’s residential projects are increasingly built around the wider needs of Jewish families abroad: not only buying a property in Israel, but finding a setting that can support community, continuity and everyday Jewish life. That idea is reflected in Savyonim, the company’s residential concept, which places the surrounding environment at the heart of choosing a home.

This can be seen in Savyoney Givat Shmuel, where the surrounding environment includes synagogues, parks, educational institutions, local commerce, playgrounds and transport links, and in Savyoney Ramat Sharet in Jerusalem, located in one of the city’s established green neighbourhoods.
For families abroad, these things matter. Jerusalem and Givat Shmuel are never just another location. They are home to strong Jewish communities, established religious life and surroundings that allow a family to imagine not only buying property, but building a Jewish home in Israel.
Together, these projects reflect a broader understanding: that for many Jews in the diaspora, the decision to create a home in Israel is not only practical, but rooted in identity, continuity and community. The Savyonim story began with a Zionist community from abroad that succeeded in building a real home in Israel; today, that same vision continues in a contemporary form.
