RSS
Another Jewish ‘Timesman’ Doesn’t Let Facts Affect His Opinion
The New York Times newspaper. Photo: Wikimedia Commons.
JNS.org – I’m beginning to think that The New York Times must have a diversity, equity and inclusion policy that allowed the hiring of Bret Stephens as its token Jewish journalist without an anti-Israel agenda. It’s hard to otherwise explain how he got a column when you read the rest of the op-ed writers and reporters. The latest example is Ezra Klein, who, like a typical “Timesman,” opined on Israel’s failings while ignoring history and omitting inconvenient facts.
Like Old Faithful Thomas Friedman’s weekly eruptions expressing disdain for Israel’s democratically elected prime minister, Klein goes off on a rant against Benjamin Netanyahu. And, like Friedman, he is in high dudgeon over Netanyahu’s opposition to a Palestinian state.
Interestingly, he undermines the column’s entire case immediately after quoting Netanyahu’s position by citing Gallup’s finding that only 25% of Israelis support a two-state solution. Unsurprisingly, he omits the equally salient fact that only 34% of Palestinians favor it.
Klein blames Netanyahu for a state not existing because he “allowed settlers to run wild and rendered Hamas’s rival, Al Fatah, feckless.”
There are some 500,000 Jews in Judea and Samaria (does he consider the 340,000 in Jerusalem wild settlers as well?). A tiny fraction are troublemakers, and I’ve written about the need to rein them in, but they are not the reason that the Palestinians don’t have a state. And like the U.S. Secretary of State, Klein doesn’t say where they’re supposed to go to make way for one.
Also, Netanyahu did not make the Fatah Party “feckless.” Palestinian Authority leader Mahmoud Abbas did that all by himself. He allowed Hamas to take over the Gaza Strip, made himself a dictator by preventing elections and created a kleptocracy. An overwhelming majority of Palestinians want him to resign.
The Palestinians don’t have a state for one simple reason: They have rejected every opportunity to have one because they insist on replacing Israel. Hamas wants to destroy Israel, not live beside it, and Fatah wants to “liberate” Palestine in stages.
Like others making the argument lately that Netanyahu was strengthening Hamas at the expense of the P.A. to prevent the creation of a state, he makes misstatements and omissions. Klein says Netanyahu “allowed Hamas to hold Gaza” and “kept the Palestinian leadership divided.”
First, Hamas took over Gaza without Israel’s help. Afterward, Abbas refused to confront Hamas to avoid a Palestinian civil war. Netanyahu didn’t need to do anything to keep the Palestinian leadership divided. Hamas and Fatah repeatedly talked about reconciliation and never could agree because of disagreements unrelated to Netanyahu.
Second, until the massacre, Netanyahu preferred to keep Israel out of a war to eliminate Hamas, which was popular with everyone but the far-right. Those now complaining about what Israel is doing would have been even more upset if Israel had taken the same steps before Oct. 7.
Third, as Klein says, it is true that the P.A. cooperates on security with Israel, but he leaves out that it also has prevented Hamas from taking over the West Bank and thereby strengthens the P.A.
Fourth, if Israel was so determined to weaken the P.A., why did it repeatedly take steps to improve the economic situation, including allowing more than 100,000 Palestinians (and now we know potential spies) into Israel to work?
Fifth, he refers to slain Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin as representing a time when Israel “seemed to be trying to find its way toward peace and coexistence.” True, but Rabin also opposed the creation of a Palestinian state.
Sixth, does Klein know that despite his rhetoric about PLO leader Yasser Arafat and Oslo, Netanyahu shook the terrorist’s hand, adhered to the agreement’s terms, and agreed to an international force in the holy city of Hebron and the withdrawal from additional territory in the West Bank?
Seventh, Klein ignores that Israel is threatened every day by terrorists in the West Bank who are no more interested in peace than Hamas. Is he unaware of the fighting there now?
Klein says, “rather than raise Al Fatah up as a negotiating partner, he humiliated it.” The opposition to Abbas in the P.A. is partly related to Israel but primarily a function of his corrupt rule. What could Israel have done to “raise” him up? Abbas has refused to negotiate with Netanyahu since 2008. That’s right, the man being held up as Israel’s peace partner has spent the last 15 years avoiding talks while incentivizing terror, demonizing Israel and promoting the Al-Aqsa mosque is in danger libel.
Klein transitions to discussing why younger Americans are less supportive of Israel than their elders and more sympathetic towards the Palestinians. He gets this right. Those of us who lived through the period when Israel was David facing the Goliath of the entire Arab world recognize its vulnerability and therefore emphasize ensuring its security. Younger people see Israel as Goliath and the Palestinians as David. They don’t know the history or recognize today’s threats, and therefore can’t understand why Israel doesn’t just give the Palestinians whatever they want in the interest of “justice.”
Just because that’s the way young people see the region doesn’t make it so.
This generation wants to go along to get along. Hence, you find students joining protesters chanting “from the river to the sea” who don’t know which river and sea they are talking about. When informed that they’re calling for Israel’s destruction, most change their opinion.
We may have reached a turning point in American attitudes towards Israel, but historically, young people have always been less supportive of Israel than their parents and grandparents. As they get older, however, their views often change and mirror them.
Rather than focusing on young Americans who have no say in the future of Israelis and Palestinians, Klein should be examining the views of young Palestinians. Israelis have long placed their hopes on a new generation coming to power to replace Arafat and Abbas, and the rest of the old-timers who devoted their lives to a futile effort to liberate “Palestine.”
The problem, as we see from the revelations about UNRWA schools—and what we already knew about the P.A. education system, its media and summer camps—is that young Palestinians have been indoctrinated with hatred for Jews and Israel, the gloriousness of jihad and martyrdom, and the belief that “resistance” will make Israel disappear, as it has from their maps. Why would any Israeli leader agree to a Palestinian state controlled by people educated in this system?
The entire Israeli population shifted to the right after “land for peace” was proven to be a myth following the disengagement from Gaza. Does Klein—or U.S. President Joe Biden, for that matter—seriously believe Israelis are more inclined to accept a Palestinian state after Oct. 7?
Like young Americans, Klein doesn’t know or care about how Palestinians are treated by their fellow Palestinians, the Lebanese or the Syrians. He only blames Israel for their plight. This selectivity and double standard exemplify the antisemitism problem today.
Klein represents the “on the one hand, but on the other hand” Tevyeism prevalent among the left, especially left-wing Jews. They cannot distinguish between right and wrong, or facts and myths. Whatever negative trait you can see in Palestinians can be matched or exceeded by the sins of the Israelis. Thus, Klein sees Hamas and suicide bombers, whose objective is genocide, akin to “messianic settlers” who want to settle in their homeland and Netanyahu, who represents the views of his constituents who oppose the creation of Hamastan abutting their capital. This is the same moral confusion and obliviousness we see from college presidents.
Klein suggests that Gen Z is best attuned to today’s situation because they listen more closely to what Israeli leaders are saying (though they don’t understand Hebrew). Hearing maybe, but certainly not understanding given their ignorance of the Middle East of the past and present. Also, like Klein, they ignore what Palestinian leaders say, like the ones from Fatah—the party he thinks Netanyahu should strengthen—who praised Hamas and bragged about their members participating in the massacre of Jews.
Fortunately, Israeli policy is not determined by the views of ill-informed young Americans or pompous Times columnists pontificating thousands of miles from the people whose lives they would recklessly put at risk.
The post Another Jewish ‘Timesman’ Doesn’t Let Facts Affect His Opinion first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Hamas Says No Interim Hostage Deal Possible Without Work Toward Permanent Ceasefire
Explosions send smoke into the air in Gaza, as seen from the Israeli side of the border, July 17, 2025. Photo: REUTERS/Amir Cohen
The spokesperson for Hamas’s armed wing said on Friday that while the Palestinian terrorist group favors reaching an interim truce in the Gaza war, if such an agreement is not reached in current negotiations it could revert to insisting on a full package deal to end the conflict.
Hamas has previously offered to release all the hostages held in Gaza and conclude a permanent ceasefire agreement, and Israel has refused, Abu Ubaida added in a televised speech.
Arab mediators Qatar and Egypt, backed by the United States, have hosted more than 10 days of talks on a US-backed proposal for a 60-day truce in the war.
Israeli officials were not immediately available for comment on the eve of the Jewish Sabbath.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s office said in a statement on a call he had with Pope Leo on Friday that Israel‘s efforts to secure a hostage release deal and 60-day ceasefire “have so far not been reciprocated by Hamas.”
As part of the potential deal, 10 hostages held in Gaza would be returned along with the bodies of 18 others, spread out over 60 days. In exchange, Israel would release a number of detained Palestinians.
“If the enemy remains obstinate and evades this round as it has done every time before, we cannot guarantee a return to partial deals or the proposal of the 10 captives,” said Abu Ubaida.
Disputes remain over maps of Israeli army withdrawals, aid delivery mechanisms into Gaza, and guarantees that any eventual truce would lead to ending the war, said two Hamas officials who spoke to Reuters on Friday.
The officials said the talks have not reached a breakthrough on the issues under discussion.
Hamas says any agreement must lead to ending the war, while Netanyahu says the war will only end once Hamas is disarmed and its leaders expelled from Gaza.
Almost 1,650 Israelis and foreign nationals have been killed as a result of the conflict, including 1,200 killed in the Oct. 7, 2023, Hamas attack on southern Israel, according to Israeli tallies. Over 250 hostages were kidnapped during Hamas’s Oct. 7 onslaught.
Israel responded with an ongoing military campaign aimed at freeing the hostages and dismantling Hamas’s military and governing capabilities in neighboring Gaza.
The post Hamas Says No Interim Hostage Deal Possible Without Work Toward Permanent Ceasefire first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Iran Marks 31st Anniversary of AMIA Bombing by Slamming Argentina’s ‘Baseless’ Accusations, Blaming Israel
People hold images of the victims of the 1994 bombing attack on the Argentine Israeli Mutual Association (AMIA) community center, marking the 30th anniversary of the attack, in Buenos Aires, Argentina, July 18, 2024. Photo: REUTERS/Irina Dambrauskas
Iran on Friday marked the 31st anniversary of the 1994 bombing of the Argentine Israelite Mutual Association (AMIA) Jewish community center in Buenos Aires by slamming Argentina for what it called “baseless” accusations over Tehran’s alleged role in the terrorist attack and accusing Israel of politicizing the atrocity to influence the investigation and judicial process.
The Iranian Foreign Ministry issued a statement on the anniversary of Argentina’s deadliest terrorist attack, which killed 85 people and wounded more than 300.
“While completely rejecting the accusations against Iranian citizens, the Islamic Republic of Iran condemns attempts by certain Argentine factions to pressure the judiciary into issuing baseless charges and politically motivated rulings,” the statement read.
“Reaffirming that the charges against its citizens are unfounded, the Islamic Republic of Iran insists on restoring their reputation and calls for an end to this staged legal proceeding,” it continued.
Last month, a federal judge in Argentina ordered the trial in absentia of 10 Iranian and Lebanese nationals suspected of orchestrating the attack in Buenos Aires.
The ten suspects set to stand trial include former Iranian and Lebanese ministers and diplomats, all of whom are subject to international arrest warrants issued by Argentina for their alleged roles in the terrorist attack.
In its statement on Friday, Iran also accused Israel of influencing the investigation to advance a political campaign against the Islamist regime in Tehran, claiming the case has been used to serve Israeli interests and hinder efforts to uncover the truth.
“From the outset, elements and entities linked to the Zionist regime [Israel] exploited this suspicious explosion, pushing the investigation down a false and misleading path, among whose consequences was to disrupt the long‑standing relations between the people of Iran and Argentina,” the Iranian Foreign Ministry said.
“Clear, undeniable evidence now shows the Zionist regime and its affiliates exerting influence on the Argentine judiciary to frame Iranian nationals,” the statement continued.
In April, lead prosecutor Sebastián Basso — who took over the case after the 2015 murder of his predecessor, Alberto Nisman — requested that federal Judge Daniel Rafecas issue national and international arrest warrants for Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei over his alleged involvement in the attack.
Since 2006, Argentine authorities have sought the arrest of eight Iranians — including former president Ali Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani, who died in 2017 — yet more than three decades after the deadly bombing, all suspects remain still at large.
In a post on X, the Delegation of Argentine Israelite Associations (DAIA), the country’s Jewish umbrella organization, released a statement commemorating the 31st anniversary of the bombing.
“It was a brutal attack on Argentina, its democracy, and its rule of law,” the group said. “At DAIA, we continue to demand truth and justice — because impunity is painful, and memory is a commitment to both the present and the future.”
31 años del atentado a la AMIA – DAIA. 31 años sin justicia.
El 18 de julio de 1994, un atentado terrorista dejó 85 personas muertas y más de 300 heridas. Fue un ataque brutal contra la Argentina, su democracia y su Estado de derecho.
Desde la DAIA, seguimos exigiendo verdad y… pic.twitter.com/kV2ReGNTIk
— DAIA (@DAIAArgentina) July 18, 2025
Despite Argentina’s longstanding belief that Lebanon’s Shiite Hezbollah terrorist group carried out the devastating attack at Iran’s request, the 1994 bombing has never been claimed or officially solved.
Meanwhile, Tehran has consistently denied any involvement and refused to arrest or extradite any suspects.
To this day, the decades-long investigation into the terrorist attack has been plagued by allegations of witness tampering, evidence manipulation, cover-ups, and annulled trials.
In 2006, former prosecutor Nisman formally charged Iran for orchestrating the attack and Hezbollah for carrying it out.
Nine years later, he accused former Argentine President Cristina Fernández de Kirchner — currently under house arrest on corruption charges — of attempting to cover up the crime and block efforts to extradite the suspects behind the AMIA atrocity in return for Iranian oil.
Nisman was killed later that year, and to this day, both his case and murder remain unresolved and under ongoing investigation.
The alleged cover-up was reportedly formalized through the memorandum of understanding signed in 2013 between Kirchner’s government and Iranian authorities, with the stated goal of cooperating to investigate the AMIA bombing.
The post Iran Marks 31st Anniversary of AMIA Bombing by Slamming Argentina’s ‘Baseless’ Accusations, Blaming Israel first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Jordan Reveals Muslim Brotherhood Operating Vast Illegal Funding Network Tied to Gaza Donations, Political Campaigns
Murad Adailah, the head of Jordan’s Muslim Brotherhood, attends an interview with Reuters in Amman, Jordan, Sept. 7, 2024. Photo: REUTERS/Jehad Shelbak
The Muslim Brotherhood, one of the Arab world’s oldest and most influential Islamist movements, has been implicated in a wide-ranging network of illegal financial activities in Jordan and abroad, according to a new investigative report.
Investigations conducted by Jordanian authorities — along with evidence gathered from seized materials — revealed that the Muslim Brotherhood raised tens of millions of Jordanian dinars through various illegal activities, the Jordan news agency (Petra) reported this week.
With operations intensifying over the past eight years, the report showed that the group’s complex financial network was funded through various sources, including illegal donations, profits from investments in Jordan and abroad, and monthly fees paid by members inside and outside the country.
The report also indicated that the Muslim Brotherhood has taken advantage of the war in Gaza to raise donations illegally.
Out of all donations meant for Gaza, the group provided no information on where the funds came from, how much was collected, or how they were distributed, and failed to work with any international or relief organizations to manage the transfers properly.
Rather, the investigations revealed that the Islamist network used illicit financial mechanisms to transfer funds abroad.
According to Jordanian authorities, the group gathered more than JD 30 million (around $42 million) over recent years.
With funds transferred to several Arab, regional, and foreign countries, part of the money was allegedly used to finance domestic political campaigns in 2024, as well as illegal activities and cells.
In April, Jordan outlawed the Muslim Brotherhood, the country’s most vocal opposition group, and confiscated its assets after members of the Islamist movement were found to be linked to a sabotage plot.
The movement’s political arm in Jordan, the Islamic Action Front, became the largest political grouping in parliament after elections last September, although most seats are still held by supporters of the government.
Opponents of the group, which is banned in most Arab countries, label it a terrorist organization. However, the movement claims it renounced violence decades ago and now promotes its Islamist agenda through peaceful means.
The post Jordan Reveals Muslim Brotherhood Operating Vast Illegal Funding Network Tied to Gaza Donations, Political Campaigns first appeared on Algemeiner.com.