Connect with us

RSS

Art, Protests, and Being Proud to Be Jewish

Demonstrators take their “Emergency Rally: Stand with Palestinians Under Siege in Gaza” out of Harvard University and onto the streets of Harvard Square, amid the ongoing conflict between Israel and the Palestinian Islamist group Hamas, in Cambridge, Massachusetts, U.S., October 14, 2023. Photo: REUTERS/Brian Snyder

On Oct. 8, Israeli artist Zoya Cherkassky, not knowing what was coming next in the Jewish State, took her 8-year-old daughter and fled to Berlin. Zoya, 47, who was born in Kyiv and emigrated to Israel in 1991, also took her art supplies. Creating art was how she processed tragedy.

The early images of the atrocities at Kibbutz Be’eri made Cherkassky think of “Guernica,” Picasso’s 1937 painting of the Basque town after the Nazi Luftwaffe bombed it. Picasso vividly portrayed the horror of inhumanity. Cherkassky began to draw her emotions and quickly produced 12 works that just as vividly show the shock, fear, and brutality of Oct. 7.

A family of ashen, burned bodies look at us in horror, hands pressed against gaping mouths, silently screaming. An elderly couple, hands bound behind their backs, embrace as blood and flames surround them. A mother holds her baby son close as she stares in disbelief at a mass of dead bodies.

“Museums exist to be custodians of world cultural heritage, and this kind of savagery and barbarism is the antithesis of that,” James Snyder, the new director of the Jewish Museum in New York City, said. “We need to speak out against them and do what we can to educate and engage.”

Snyder, who had worked with Cherkassky during his tenure at the Israel Museum, quickly installed her drawings in an all-black room, called “7 October 2023.” For most of us, this was entirely appropriate — in fact, I would love to see more work by Israeli artists. But for the art world, whose hostility toward Israel is renowned, this was considered a “colonial” move.

On the evening of Feb. 12, I went to the museum to hear Snyder interview Cherkassky. The event was packed. We had all gone through security, as every Jewish institution implemented after 9/11. But metal detectors don’t scan for pro-Hamas “disrupters,” and at three points throughout the evening, these disrupters screamed the usual epithets at Cherkassky. I’m sure everyone there did the same mental calculation: Metal detectors were present, so they couldn’t be armed. But none of us could be sure.

That made Snyder’s response all the more interesting. “Thank you for the dialogue,” he calmly told them, as security escorted them out. “This all helps counter polarization.” Cherkassky chose a different tactic: She cursed at the protestors. After another set was forced to leave, Cherkassky said: “I am very happy that there are privileged young people from privileged countries that can know how everybody in the world should act.”

After the third set, a young GenZer behind me screamed out: “This isn’t dialogue; this is antisemitism.” Shockingly, many in the audience screamed at her to “Shut up!”

The Jewish Museum is to the north of Temple Emanu-El, the site of the Kissinger memorial protests that led to white leftists throwing water in the faces of an elderly couple. There was no public condemnation of the protesters from the synagogue.

All of which begs the question: How should Jewish institutions respond to Oct. 7 and the daily, violent riots that have followed?

Last week, I went down to the Museum of Jewish Heritage to hear a panel discuss film clips from Feb. 20, 1939, when 20,000 pro-Nazi Americans filled Madison Square Garden. The footage is terrifying, especially when a Jewish man bravely jumps on the stage and is thoroughly beaten.

The panel made direct parallels to today’s alt-right — Charles Lindbergh became the leading voice of the America First Committee, an isolationist group of 800,000 that was against America entering World War II — and discussed the limits of freedom of speech. But despite the fact that thousands of “Globalize the Intifada” rioters filled Times Square on Oct 8, before Israel began to respond, the museum purposefully avoided any references to what New Yorkers are now living with on a daily basis.

How could a museum dedicated to the memory of the Holocaust hold an event that intentionally ignored the largest massacre of Jews since the Holocaust? Toward the end, the moderator even expressed shock that people were “conflating Israel and Jews.”

It turned out to be a prophetic statement, but not in the way he intended. At roughly the same time, a young Jewish dentist was murdered by a Muslim man in San Diego, which has been alleged to be a hate crime. Just like in the 1930s, Jews’ desire to conform — to distance themselves from their heritage — isn’t going to save them.

Many American Jews have a lot to learn from Israelis — not just about the necessity of fighting back, but that our 3,000-year connection to our homeland is integral to who we are. We’re beginning to see it from GenZers who are being bullied on campuses. They’re testifying before Congress about the antisemitic violence on campuses, and making videos inspiring other Jewish students to stand up for themselves.

Perhaps some of this was meant to be a lesson to those who still haven’t fully processed what being Jewish — ethnically Judean — means. And how allowing your soul to fully grasp that feeling can bring a type of strength, bravery, and resilience that no one can touch. For more secular Jews, Israeli artists, who understand all of this intuitively, may be the best teachers.

Karen Lehrman Bloch is editor in chief of White Rose Magazine. A version of this article was originally published by The Jewish Journal.

The post Art, Protests, and Being Proud to Be Jewish first appeared on Algemeiner.com.

Post Views: 456
Related Topics:
Continue Reading

RSS

Charlie Kirk Sought to Encourage Debate — His Murder Must Not Stop It

Charlie Kirk speaking at the inauguration of Donald Trump in January 2025. Photo: Brian Snyder via Reuters Connect

I first became familiar with Charlie Kirk after October 7, 2023, when my TikTok algorithm began showing me videos of him fiercely, and quite effectively, debating students on college campuses, often those in keffiyehs and with purple hair.

Thus began my fascination with what I soon learned was a man who was dedicating his life to debating and promoting what he believed in.

Charlie Kirk was the face of the young Republican movement, respected even by some Democrats. He had a promising future ahead of him. As Ben Shapiro wrote: “That kid is going to be the head of the Republican National Convention one day.”

Kirk dedicated his life to debate. To disagreement. To hearing the other side and persuading with facts and truth. And this, tragically, cost him his life. His assassination represents the meager and devastating state of the West, a state we have slowly, almost willingly, been accepting for years now.

There is a deep intolerance for differences. People do not want to be persuaded. They do not want to consider another perspective. Instead, they condemn what they believe is wrong, clinging to black-and-white narratives, even when an entire gray area holds the broader picture. They turn their heads away from nuance. Kirk aimed to change that. He devoted his life to it, fully aware of the risks.

As Adam Rubenstein wisely wrote for The Free Press: “Kirk was not naïve. In the video after he is shot, you can see a security team of at least half a dozen bodyguards surround him and spirit him away. Like anyone speaking their mind in public these days, he knew there was a risk.”

Kirk’s assassination signifies a low point for this country — and another attack on free speech. It was an assassination of dialogue, of diplomacy, of the ability to disagree without destruction. And perhaps the most bitter irony is that it all happened on a college campus, an environment that should foster growth mindsets and open-mindedness.

This attack was not only an attack on Charlie Kirk. It was an attack on freedom of thought and expression. And while it succeeded in killing the bright and young 31-year-old so many of us admired, I hope that is a rallying call to protect the broader freedom of speech we still enjoy — at least in part — in this country.

Alma Bengio is Chief Growth Officer at The Algemeiner Journal and founder and writer for @lets.talk.conflict

Post Views: 7
Continue Reading

RSS

Jews Are Indigenous to the Land of Israel — and Everyone Should Know It

The Western Wall and Temple Mount in Jerusalem. Photo: Wikimedia Commons.

Few words in modern political discourse carry as much distortion as “Palestine.” Today, the term is wielded not as history but as a weapon — designed to delegitimize the Jewish State and recast Jews as foreign colonizers in their own homeland.

Take away the propaganda, however, and one unshakable truth remains: the Jewish people are the indigenous nation of the Land of Israel. The Arab claim to “Palestinian indigeneity” simply does not line up with history.

The Jewish people trace their roots back over 3,000 years to the patriarchs Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, who lived in the land of Canaan — later Israel. By the time of King David, Jerusalem was the capital of a united monarchy, and Solomon’s Temple stood as the spiritual and political center of Jewish life. Even after the Babylonian exile, Jews returned, rebuilt, and re-established their national life in Judea.

Despite invasions, destruction, and exile, Jews never abandoned their homeland. They remained in Jerusalem, Galilee, Hebron, Safed, and along the coast. Their prayers, rituals, and festivals kept the bond to Zion alive. This is not the story of outsiders — it is the story of the land’s first and most enduring nation.

Rome tried to sever that bond by force. After the Bar Kokhba revolt in the second century, Emperor Hadrian renamed Judea as Syria Palaestina , borrowing the name of the long-vanished Philistines, and turned Jerusalem into Aelia Capitolina. It was an act of erasure, meant to punish the Jews by striking even their name from the map.

But the attempt failed. Jews continued to live, pray, and return to their ancestral soil. A new label could not undo thousands of years of rootedness.

The Arab story is very different; their origins lie in the Arabian Peninsula. The earliest records available to us describe nomadic tribes in Arabia and the Syrian desert. Their cultural centers were Mecca, Medina, Yemen, and Petra. It was only in the 7th century, with the rise of Islam, that Arab armies exploded out of Arabia and conquered the region. By 636 CE, they had invaded Byzantine Judea; within a century they ruled from Spain to Persia. Their presence in Judea was the result of conquest, not continuity.

For over a thousand years, under successive empires — Umayyad, Abbasid, Crusader, Mamluk, Ottoman, and finally British — the local Arab population never called itself “Palestinian.” They identified as Arabs, Muslims, Christians, or by their city and clan. In fact, during the British Mandate, the word Palestinian referred almost exclusively to Jews: the Palestine Post was a Jewish newspaper, the Palestine Symphony Orchestra was Jewish, and the Palestine Brigade that fought in World War II was Jewish.

Many Arabs in the region rejected the label, insisting instead that they were part of greater Syria or the wider Arab nation.

Only in the mid-20th century, particularly under Yasser Arafat and the PLO, did a separate “Palestinian” identity emerge. It was born not from centuries of shared history but from a political need: to create a narrative that could challenge Jewish nationhood and delegitimize Israel. It was, and remains, a tool of war by other means.

This is the historical bottom line: Jews are the only people with an unbroken, 3,000 year bond to the Land of Israel. The name Palestine was a Roman punishment, not an Arab heritage. Arabs arrived in the 7th century as conquerors from Arabia. The idea of a Palestinian people is a modern invention, forged in the 20th century as part of a political campaign against the Jewish State.

Israel is not a colonial project. It is the restoration of an ancient nation to its ancestral homeland. Jews are not foreigners in Judea; they are Judea’s people. By every measure — historical, cultural, and even genetic — the Jewish nation’s claim is authentic, continuous, and undeniable.

Sabine Sterk is the CEO of Time To Stand Up For Israel.

Post Views: 5
Continue Reading

RSS

Israel Attacked Terrorists in Qatar — and the Media Attacked Israel

Vehicles stop at a red traffic light, a day after an Israeli attack on Hamas leaders, in Doha, Qatar, Sept. 10, 2025. Photo: REUTERS/Ibraheem Abu Mustafa

On Tuesday, September 9, Israel targeted those who sought its destruction and planned the barbaric October 7, 2023 massacre.

Israel launched the daring attack on the Hamas leadership in their Qatari safe haven, after their ongoing refusal to agree to a Gaza ceasefire deal and in the aftermath of a deadly terror attack in Jerusalem, which Hamas claimed responsibility for.

But the media still shilled for Hamas by making Israel look like a rogue state attacking a key diplomatic player and destroying any chance for peace.

News outlets used three methods to achieve this goal:

  • Direct accusations
  • Subtle differentiation between a “legitimate” Hamas political wing and its military one
  • The glorification of Qatar as a business hub rather than a terrorist hub

The Independent and The Washington Post shamelessly employed headlines that portrayed Israel as the regional bully and an aggressor randomly attacking other Middle East countries in a bid for regional domination.

Sky News even blamed Israel for a previous attack on Qatar, although the Iranian regime carried it out:

After we publicly highlighted it, Sky quietly rectified its faux pas with no acknowledgment of the correction.

Meanwhile, the Economist was worried that attacking the very terrorists who ordered the mass murder of Jews on Oct. 7 was “a bridge too far” and that Israel had “crossed a line:”

And the BBC’s security correspondent called Israel’s surprising act of self defense “a campaign of score settling:”

NPR and The Wall Street Journal took the subtle approach of creating a false dichotomy between Hamas’ military and political wings — although the entire group is internationally designated as a terror organization.

This naive approach depicted the targeted Hamas leaders as legitimate officials simply because they carried pens and wore suits instead of AK-47s and green headbands.

They may not have got their hands dirty but this does not absolve them from orchestrating numerous bloody terror attacks, including the slaughter and kidnapping of thousands of people in Israel on October 7, 2023.

Finally, many outlets decried the violation of Qatar’s sovereignty, painting it as a peace-seeking state focused on business and regional cooperation, rather than a patron of terrorists.

The New York Times went as far as calling Qatar “a safe haven for business and tourism in a volatile region,” while it was, in fact, a safe haven for the region’s top jihadists.

How can this media distortion be explained? Why is a facade of legitimacy conferred upon terrorists in suits?

There are only two possible answers: Either the media believe the facade the terrorists want to sell, or they are carrying out an anti-Israel agenda.

Both options are detrimental to professional journalism, as well as to basic human ethics.

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.

Post Views: 8
Continue Reading

Copyright © 2017 - 2023 Jewish Post & News