RSS
Against Racism, for Antisemitism: The Message of a March in Paris
Youths take part in the occupation of a street in front of the building of the Sciences Po University in support of Palestinians in Gaza, during the ongoing conflict between Israel and Hamas, in Paris, France, April 26, 2024. Photo: REUTERS/Gonzalo Fuentes
JNS.org – Thousands of people marched through Paris at the end of March in what was billed as a protest against racism. It was another display of the long-standing alliance between the far left and Islamist groups, exemplified by the numerous Palestinian flags dotted alongside the red banners deployed by the organizers.
The march illustrated how the term “racism” has been appropriated by parts of the left to describe measures aimed at combating the spread of Islamism. Many of the demonstrators lashed out at Bruno Retailleau, the French interior minister, for his allegedly racist statements about Algeria, a French colony until its independence in 1962, and his support for a ban on the wearing of the Islamic veil—a rule that is imposed on women alone—in French institutions of higher education.
Yet closer inspection of both issues reveals that Retailleau has not uttered racist comments on either. On Algeria, Retailleau’s complaint is that the authorities in Algiers have consistently refused to accept Algerian nationals slated for deportation by France, including one man who carried out a deadly terrorist attack in the city of Mulhouse in February, leading him to warn that a 1968 agreement facilitating Algerian immigration to France would be reviewed unless that position is reversed. On the veil, he has eschewed bigoted language about “Islam” and “foreigners,” arguing instead that the “veil is not merely a piece of fabric; it is a banner for Islamism and a symbol of the subjugation of women to men.”
Once upon a time, that was an assertion made by the left.
But perhaps the most egregious aspect of the demonstration was its contemptuous approach to the problem of antisemitism, which has risen precipitously in France, as elsewhere in Europe, in the 18 months that have elapsed since the Hamas mass atrocities in Israel. There were no banners, no chants, no signs condemning the worst slaughter of Jews since the Holocaust and its consequent unleashing of antisemitic rhetoric and violence against Jewish communities across the globe.
Indeed, the entire event suggested that in order to combat racism, the French far left—a large bloc that won 182 parliamentary seats in last year’s legislative elections—has embraced Jew-hatred as a strategy. A poster publicizing the march urged attendees to “fight the extreme right, its ideas and its networks.” To accentuate its point, the poster was dominated by an image of Cyril Hanouna, a right-wing pundit of Tunisian Jewish origin.
Hanouna was displayed in extreme close-up with his eyes narrowed in hostility and a curving, beak-like nose protruding over a snarling mouth. You don’t have to be an antisemitism expert to trace the lineage of an image like this one. In the French context, it is painfully reminiscent of the crude propaganda aimed at Capt. Alfred Dreyfus, the French Jewish army officer falsely convicted of espionage in 1894 amid a wave of bestial antisemitic violence.
It also brought to mind the Nazi demonization of the Jews and, more recently, social media memes like the “Happy Merchant,” an antisemitic caricature much loved by semi-literate, far-right delinquents like the American Holocaust denier Nick Fuentes.
The offending image of Hanouna was eventually withdrawn but not before the guilty party here—the far-left “La France Insoumise” (“France Rising”)—angrily voiced its outrage at the accusation of antisemitism (a routine tactic whenever someone has the temerity to suggest that the far left is hostile to Jews qua Jews.) The party’s leader, Jean-Luc Mélenchon, visibly lost his temper when asked about the image during a television interview, bellowing the words “Enough is Enough!” at news anchor Francis Letellier.
Yet for all of Mélenchon’s protestations, this is exactly what we have come to expect from him. Mélenchon has ventured into antisemitism several times in his career. Random highlights include his 2013 statement accusing the then-Finance Minister Pierre Moscovici, who is Jewish, of no longer “thinking in French but thinking in the language of international finance.” More recently, he leapt to the defense of his comrade Jeremy Corbyn, the antisemitic former leader of the British Labour Party, declaring that “Corbyn had to endure without help the crude accusation of antisemitism from the chief rabbi of England and the various Likud networks of influence.” He then added that Corbyn, “instead of fighting back, spent his time apologizing and giving pledges. (…) I will never give in to it for my part.”
Along with the various Islamist associations present in France, La France Insoumise has been a key transmitter of antisemitism in the wake of the Hamas-led terrorist attacks in southern Israel on Oct. 7, 2023, at the same time dismissing outright, much as Corbyn did in Britain, the concerns of the Jewish community. French President Emmanuel Macron alluded to this in a speech on April 2, when he presented an award on behalf of LICRA, a long-established French organization that combats racism and antisemitism. “The antisemitic poison consists of only one ingredient, hatred … a hatred born on the far right, which has prospered on the far right and has managed to spread beyond the far right,” Macron stated. “Today, unfortunately, it has reached certain ranks of the far left and the left, for whom anti-Zionism serves as an alibi for the expression of antisemitism.”
While these sentiments are laudable, the historical record shows that the far left has often trafficked in the hatred of Jews with the same enthusiasm as the Nazis and ultranationalists on the facing side of the horseshoe. As I wrote last year, anti-Zionism in our time has undergone a process of Nazification to the point where, in my view, we should remove the hyphen from this term to underline that what is presented as political opposition to the Zionist movement is more properly understood as a full-blown antisemitic conspiracy theory with the State of Israel at its core.
The unmistakable message delivered by the Paris march against racism, along with satellite marches in other French cities, was this: Jews are not allies; Jews fabricate claims of bigotry and discrimination against them; and Jews are guilty of perpetrating a “genocide” against Palestinians rooted in “Zionist ideology.” In the ultimate irony, the implication here is that to be a good anti-racist, it helps if you are an antisemite.
The post Against Racism, for Antisemitism: The Message of a March in Paris first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
What Does Implementing BDS Mean for American College Students?
The Activities and Recreation Center at UC Davis. Photo: Wikipedia Commons.
The Associated Students of the University of California Davis (ASUCD) have a lot of responsibility. They manage a $20 million budget, hire upwards of 1,600 students, and provide essential services for the entire community. This is why it’s so alarming that such a body would be used to further an unpopular and deeply antisemitic political movement rather than take its responsibilities seriously.
After the atrocities of October 7, 2023, student leaders chose to redirect their priorities toward promoting an agenda whose sole purpose was to target both Jewish and Israeli students through the guise of “solidarity with the Palestinian cause” and the anti-Israel Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) movement.
Official ASUCD Instagram accounts platform an explicitly pro-Palestinian agenda with their profile pictures. Additionally, current ASUCD senators have tried to pass resolutions to steer all departments into political positions with the threat of intervention — essentially an attempt to force members to endorse anti-Israel positions or lose funding.
ASUCD originally passed a BDS resolution in 2015, but in 2019, that resolution was deemed unconstitutional. Despite this, in February 2024, ASUCD took further action by creating a new committee tasked with implementing the resolution. The committee now faces the sweeping challenge of divesting over $20 million from any company with even a tangential connection to Israel. For some reason, current ASUCD members don’t seem to care about their own constitution or the authority of the school’s judicial council.
Why was it struck down in 2019? Three reasons: it is impossible to implement, it is antisemitic, and it is illegal under state law.
BDS at UC Davis calls for total divestment from Israel and all companies that have supposedly committed human rights abuses. This goal is simply not possible. Israel is deeply connected within the global trade network, and many large companies like Google, Microsoft, and others have realized the opportunities presented within the “Start-Up Nation.” If somehow BDS is fully implemented to its extreme positions, basic services would no longer be available. ASUCD could not use Google, computers that use Intel, or even Amazon to order basic items for student events.
BDS is also antisemitic in both theory and practice. A co-founder of BDS, Omar Barghouti, explicitly denies the right of the Jewish people to self-determination and the legitimacy of the Jewish state. The membership of the National Committee of BDS includes members and people affiliated with Hamas, Palestinian Islamic Jihad, and the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine — all of which are designated as terrorist organizations by the United States and other nations.
Furthermore, research has shown that the existence of BDS activity on college campuses is both a predictor of — and strongly correlated with — increased antisemitic incidents and the specific targeting of Jewish students on campuses. BDS also directly prohibits peaceful dialogues or interactions between pro-Israel and pro-Palestinian people unless Israelis are all labeled as oppressors and colonizers.
California made BDS illegal in 2016 under AB 2844, which states that entities under contract with the government worth $100,000 or more must be compliant with the Unruh Civil Rights Act and the California Fair Employment and Housing Act. Furthermore, the act seeks to ensure that any policy that has been adopted against any sovereign nation or peoples recognized by the United States, including Israel, is not used to discriminate. BDS discriminates explicitly on the basis of national origin.
ASUCD relies on Federal funding in order to run the Unitrans unit, which provides bus rides across the city of Davis to all students. Unitrans received $2,922,243 in 2023-2024 from both the Federal CARES Act (2020) and the Urbanized Area Formula Grants or FTA 5307. In order to implement BDS within ASUCD, it would seem like our elected student representatives would have to shut down 32% of Unitrans’ budget, potentially crippling its critical service to the student community at UC Davis and the rest of the city.
In early February 2025, legislation was introduced in student government to force all units within ASUCD to adopt a singular political position. While the bill was withdrawn, it speaks to the priorities of certain members within the ASUCD legislative branch. In the proposed bill, ASUCD would be able to take positions on political issues and force departments without those positions to “make changes necessary to bring them in compliance with the official position.”
In layman’s terms, this means that the student government could punish student workers for not adhering to a specific political ideology. Not only is this authoritarian and contrary to the democratic nature of our country and student government, but it is plain wrong. Anti-Israel ideologues are literally trying to force their opinions onto the rest of the student body.
If BDS was ever implemented, Jewish students would face increased antisemitic incidents and targeting on campus, all students would face dramatic cuts to the vital bus network, and ASUCD would likely face legal repercussions for passing illegal policies that discriminate based on national origin.
We want our student fees to go toward improving our campus, not tearing it down in the name of supporting Palestinians (though this act does not support Palestinians, but rather only discriminates against Israelis and Jews). ASUCD should spend their vast budget and manpower dedicating themselves to their given mandate: the needs of all students.
Raphael Myers is an undergraduate student at UC Davis and is a fellow for CAMERA on Campus.
The post What Does Implementing BDS Mean for American College Students? first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Trump Should Be Wary of the Mirage in Doha
US President Donald Trump meets with the Emir of Qatar during their bilateral meeting on May 21, 2017, at the Ritz-Carlton Hotel in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. Photo: Official White House Photo/Shealah Craighead.
As President Donald Trump prepares for his upcoming visit to Doha — the first by a sitting US president in more than two decades — he enters a carefully staged production. For Qatar, this is not just diplomacy; it’s branding.
Trump’s presence lends prestige, legitimacy, and a headline-grabbing affirmation of Qatar’s role on the global stage. But behind the polished welcome and rehearsed talking points, lies a regime whose actions often contradict its polished image.
Qatar has spent years cultivating influence not only in the Middle East, but across American institutions. Its strategy is subtle but pervasive. Billions have flowed from Doha into elite US universities, think tanks, lobbying firms, and real estate. Qatar is not merely investing in buildings or research — it’s investing in narrative control. From Ivy League campuses to policy roundtables in Washington, Qatari money shapes conversations, funds sympathetic analysis, and quietly steers public discourse in ways that protect its interests. This is soft power with sharp consequences.
In foreign policy, Qatar plays all sides. It hosts the largest US air base in the region, while maintaining open relationships with the Taliban, Hamas, and Iranian proxies. It markets itself as a mediator, yet many of the conflicts it “mediates” are ones in which it has a direct stake.
Its state-funded media outlet, Al Jazeera, speaks the language of press freedom while pushing deeply polarizing content across the region. These contradictions are not accidents — they are part of a broader strategy to appear indispensable to every player while being accountable to none. Trump, who built his political rise on challenging the foreign policy establishment and calling out global hypocrisy, should approach this visit with clear eyes.
He understands the cost of being used by regimes that speak the language of partnership while pursuing their own agendas behind closed doors. The president’s base expects candor, not ceremony. If this trip is to reflect the “America First” principles that Trump championed, it must not devolve into a PR victory for a country that has long evaded scrutiny.
Qatar’s defenders often point to its utility: its role in negotiating hostage releases, its open channels to groups no one else will speak to, its deep financial ties to the West. But utility is not the same as alignment. Hosting US troops does not entitle a regime to impunity. Providing access does not absolve complicity. Qatar’s ongoing ties to Hamas, framed as pragmatic diplomacy, have done little to disrupt the cycle of violence in Gaza. Its outreach to Iran has served its own hedging strategy, not American stability. These are not alliances — they are wagers.
This visit offers Trump the chance to reset expectations. He does not need to provoke or insult his hosts, but he must be direct. What has Qatar done to earn the deepening of strategic ties? Has it reined in the ideological extremism enabled by its networks? Has it improved transparency in its financial systems? Has it addressed legitimate concerns about its influence over American educational and policymaking institutions?
These are not hostile questions — they are the basic inquiries any serious leader should ask before elevating a partner.
Moreover, Trump must recognize how this visit will be used by Doha — not just regionally, but in Western capitals and media. Qatar excels at turning symbolism into leverage. A handshake becomes a headline, a summit becomes a signal. Trump’s image is powerful, and the Qataris know that projecting friendship with him bolsters their credibility far beyond the Gulf. But friendship requires mutual honesty, not staged harmony. If the visit glosses over core contradictions, it sends the wrong message — not just to Qatar, but to other authoritarian states watching closely.
While this trip is not focused on Israel, the implications are inescapable. Qatar’s longstanding support for Hamas — and its ambiguous stance toward normalization — reflect a broader refusal to take a definitive stand on peace. Its aid to Gaza, while framed as humanitarian, often functions as leverage over a population held hostage by its rulers. Trump does not need to lecture his hosts on Israel policy, but he must not ignore the regional impact of Qatar’s actions either. Any meaningful US-Qatar partnership must include a commitment to ending double-dealing with violent actors.
Qatar is not just a small Gulf state with money — it is a global operator with a sophisticated PR engine and an appetite for influence. From campus lecture halls to Capitol Hill, its footprint in American life is larger than most citizens realize. That influence deserves scrutiny, not celebration. Trump’s visit should be used to clarify boundaries, not blur them.
This moment gives Trump a choice: lend his brand to a carefully choreographed narrative, or reaffirm the disruptive clarity that has defined his foreign policy. Qatar needs Trump more than Trump needs Qatar. That leverage should be used not to flatter, but to demand more — more transparency, more accountability, and more alignment with the values that the US claims to defend.
Amine Ayoub, a fellow at the Middle East Forum, is a policy analyst and writer based in Morocco. Follow him on X: @amineayoubx
The post Trump Should Be Wary of the Mirage in Doha first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Exposed: The AP Sells Pictures By Photojournalist Identified as Hamas Terrorist, Kissed by Sinwar
Yahya Sinwar, head of the Palestinian terror group Hamas in Gaza, in Gaza City on April 14, 2023. Photo: Yousef Masoud / SOPA Images/Sipa USA via Reuters Connect
The Associated Press sells photos by a Gazan photojournalist whom Israel identified as a Hamas terrorist, an HonestReporting investigation revealed on Tuesday, in what legal experts say may be considered material/financial support of a designated foreign terrorist organization in violation of US law that prohibits such conduct.
Hassan Eslaiah was targeted and wounded in an Israeli strike on southern Gaza in early April, with the IDF publicly identifying him as a member of the Hamas Khan Younis Brigade who has been posing as a journalist.
This should have come as no surprise to the AP, which officially cut ties with the Gazan freelancer after our November 2023 exposé of his infiltration into Israel during the October 7 massacre, which also brought to light a photo of former Hamas leader Yahya Sinwar kissing him on the cheek.
However, the agency still offers for sale on its global platform more than 40 photos taken by Eslaiah inside Gaza during October-November 2023. Their prices range between 35 and 495 U.S. dollars.
HonestReporting has reached out to the AP for comment.
Hassan Eslaiah (r) with former Hamas leader Yahya Sinwar (l)
Whether Eslaiah still gets royalties when his remaining photos are purchased is unclear, but the credit he gets on a respected news outlet is certainly a reputation booster. And either way, AP can still make money off of his propaganda for Hamas:
Legal Questions
Disturbingly, AP staff seem to have known about Eslaiah’s Hamas links years before October 7, 2023. According to documents released in a US lawsuit in early April, they were worried about his reliability since 2018, but still used his work.
The AP is also the only Western agency that still platforms Eslaiah’s tainted work. Reuters and Getty Images have removed his content due to HonestReporting’s public campaigns, which proved effective even before his confirmation as a Hamas member.
But now, the AP must explain and follow suit. This is no longer just an ethical violation, but possibly also a legal one, particularly if US authorities come to determine that Eslaiah is sufficiently connected to Hamas and/or acts of terrorism.
Legal experts told HonestReporting that in purchasing Eslaiah’s content, the AP may well be in direct violation of anti-terrorism laws or financial sanctions enforced by the US Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC). These laws prohibit transactions with entities or individuals that are on terrorism-related lists, and these regulations extend to payments for content or goods. Violation of OFAC sanctions has the potential to result in both civil and criminal penalties, including hefty fines and possible imprisonment. Purchasing the material and continuing to publish Eslaiah’s work, with direct attribution, may also be a violation of Section 2339B of Title 18 of the United States Code, which makes it a federal crime to knowingly provide material support or resources to a foreign terrorist organization.
In December 2023, following HonestReporting’s exposure of photojournalists who infiltrated Israel on October 7, 14 state attorneys general wrote a letter to The New York Times, AP, CNN, and Reuters calling them out for using hires with ties to Hamas and reminding them that providing material support to terrorists and terror organizations is a crime.
The letter specifically mentions the case of Hassan Eslaiah and ends by calling on the media outlets to “ensure that you are taking all necessary steps to prevent your organizations from contracting with members of terror organizations. We urge you in the strongest terms to take care that your hiring practices conform to the laws forbidding material support for terror organizations.”
Subsequently, it may be time for US Attorney General Pam Bondi to take an interest.
The AP is based in New York. Will the Attorney General consider the possibility that, despite this warning, the AP may have been providing material support for a terrorist organization, even by continuing to feature the “work” of an alleged Hamas member who may have used it as a cover?
We think the answer is clear, if not legally, then morally. The AP should do the right thing, apologize, and remove all of Eslaiah’s content, unless they want to continue being associated with a terror-linked “journalist.”
HonestReporting is a Jerusalem-based media watchdog with a focus on antisemitism and anti-Israel bias — where a version of this article first appeared.
The post Exposed: The AP Sells Pictures By Photojournalist Identified as Hamas Terrorist, Kissed by Sinwar first appeared on Algemeiner.com.