Uncategorized
European Jewish student group sues Twitter over its handling of antisemitism and Holocaust denial
BERLIN (JTA) – Europe’s main Jewish student organization is fed up with the antisemitism, Holocaust denial and other hate speech burgeoning on Twitter — so they are taking the social media company to court.
The Brussels-based European Union of Jewish Students and the Berlin-based HateAid non-profit group on Wednesday announced they have sued Twitter in Berlin District Court for failing to uphold its own pledge to remove hate speech from the platform.
The action — which included the placement of a hashtag prop in front of the German parliament building, in an inversion of a symbol that Twitter itself popularized — was sponsored by the Berlin-based Alfred Landecker Foundation, as part of its Digital Justice Movement, started by HateAid.
The move comes as Germany prepares to mark International Holocaust Remembrance Day with ceremonies and events across the country.
But that is not enough, said Avital Grinberg, president of the EUJS, which represents some 160,000 European Jewish students. “Remembrance of the Shoah must not be merely expressed through emotional speeches, but also through clear positions, resolute action and protective laws,” she said.
The announcement of the lawsuit comes a day after Twitter reinstated the American Holocaust denier and white supremacist Nick Fuentes, the latest in a string of people who had posted antisemitic material to the platform to be allowed back since the billionaire Elon Musk bought it last year. Fuentes immediately tweeted antisemitic comments and was suspended again.
But the site does not remove antisemitism, according to the student group’s lawsuit. Armed with six specific cases in which they claim Twitter did not take complaints seriously, the Berlin law firm of Preu Bohlig sued Twitter on Tuesday, demanding the removal of antisemitic content that is illegal under German law, said Torben Duesing, a partner in the firm, at a press conference Wednesday in the German capital.
Their aim is twofold: to move a social media mountain, and to encourage targets of hate speech to speak up. The six cases — all of which were posted in the last three months — were not described, to avoid giving them further publicity, organizers said.
But the groups did say that in one case relating to Holocaust denial, Twitter had explicitly refused to remove the content.
Europe has been a challenging frontier for technology companies, which have had to take steps to ensure digital privacy and change their handling of misinformation because of European laws and regulations. Now, the students’ lawsuit aims to leverage Germany’s particularly vigorous laws barring Holocaust denial and the glorification of Nazi ideology to force the platform to remove it. There are similar laws in other EU countries.
The lawsuit focuses on clarifying whether Twitter has a contractual obligation to its users, under its legal terms of service, to remove antisemitic tweets that contain sedition, including trivialization and denial of the Holocaust.
Just because Twitter doesn’t respond adequately to complaints doesn’t mean one should give up trying, said German Jewish writer and activist Marina Weisband at the press conference. All Twitter users around the world agree to the terms of service, “which is designed to protect users” from hate speech, she said. But if Twitter doesn’t enforce these terms, what are they worth?
Twitter claims to share the view that “Jewish rights are human rights,” said Grinberg. “But the reality appears to be the opposite.”
There has as yet been no response to the suit from Twitter, which has not had a public relations team since shortly after Musk’s acquisition, when he slashed the staff. The company is already subject to an advertiser boycott that has sharply curbed its revenue, the result of a push by the Anti-Defamation League and others in response to Musk’s lack of action around hate speech on the platform.
The ADL released an analysis last year finding that Twitter removed only 5% of 225 tweets that it reported as “strongly antisemitic” — comments accusing Jewish people of pedophilia, invoking Holocaust denial, and sharing conspiracy theories — over nine weeks last summer. It also found that antisemitism spiked on the platform following Musk’s acquisition.
In 2021, a report by the British-based Center for Countering Digital Hate found that 84% of reported posts on social media platforms containing antisemitic hate were not reviewed by the platforms. According to the survey, Twitter intervened in only 11% of the cases.
Twitter does promise to police its platform and has lately has suspended the accounts of users whose antisemitic comments made headlines. That was true last year for Ye, the artist formerly known as Kanye West, and again on Wednesday for Fuentes after his reinstatement.
But more is needed, said the students and attorneys behind the European lawsuit.
“We know that one lawsuit is not enough to make Twitter a perfect place,” Josephine Ballon, HateAid’s lead attorney. “We know that it takes more than that, but we are convinced that it is precisely these kinds of lawsuits that will put new tools” in the hands of minority groups and individuals.
“Social media is the most important debate platform of our generation,” said Grinberg. The lawsuit, she said, is “the response of resilient Jews to the failure of Twitter, social media, politicians and the law.”
—
The post European Jewish student group sues Twitter over its handling of antisemitism and Holocaust denial appeared first on Jewish Telegraphic Agency.
Uncategorized
A quiet diplomatic shift in the Middle East, with monumental consequences for Israel
Something significant is happening between Israel and Syria, and it deserves more attention than it is getting.
With the backing of the United States, Israeli and Syrian officials have agreed to create what they call a “joint fusion mechanism” — a permanent channel for coordination on intelligence, de-escalation, diplomacy and economic matters — during meetings in Paris. It appears to be the beginning of institutionalized contact between two countries that have formally been at war since 1948.
If this process continues, it will count as a genuine foreign-policy success for President Donald Trump’s administration.
To understand how profound that change would be, it is worth recalling the two countries’ shared history.
Israel and Syria — which the U.S. struck with a set of targeted attacks on the Islamic State on Saturday — have fought openly or by proxy for decades. Before 1967, Syrian artillery positions in the Golan Heights regularly shelled Israeli communities in the Hula Valley and around the Sea of Galilee. After Israel captured that region in 1967, the direct shelling stopped, but the conflict did not.
Syria remained formally committed to a state of war; Israel entrenched itself in the Golan Heights; both sides treated the frontier as a potential flashpoint to be managed carefully. After Egypt and Israel made peace in 1979, Syria became Israel’s most dangerous neighboring state.
A 1974 disengagement agreement created a United Nations-monitored buffer zone, which mostly ensured peace along the border, but did not resolve anything fundamental. In Lebanon, Israel and Syria backed opposing forces for years, and their air forces clashed briefly during the 1982 Lebanon War. Later, Iran’s growing role in Syria and Hezbollah’s military buildup added new threats. The Syrian civil war then destroyed basic state capacity and created precisely the kind of militia-rich environment Israel fears along its borders.
Now, with the dictator Bashar al-Assad gone and the former rebel leader Ahmed al-Sharaa in power, Syria is a broken country trying to stabilize. Sharaa’s past associations, disturbingly, include leadership of jihadist groups that were part of the wartime landscape in Syria. But today he governs a state facing economic collapse, infrastructure ruin and a population that needs jobs and basic services. His incentives are simple and powerful: ensure the survival of his regime, invite foreign investment, and secure relief from isolation and sanctions. Those goals point toward the U.S. and its partners, including Israel.
The Trump administration has made it clear that it wants to see new Syrian cooperation with Israel, with the suggestion that progress with Israel will become a gateway to international investment, and to a degree of political acceptance that Syria has lacked for years. Al-Sharaa’s willingness to engage is therefore not a mystery.
Israel’s motivations are also straightforward. After the Gaza war, Israel is facing a severe reputational problem. It is widely viewed abroad as reckless and excessively militarized. The government is under pressure over not only the conduct of the war but also the perception that it has no political strategy and relies almost exclusively on force. A diplomatic track with Syria allows Israel to present a very different picture: that of a country capable of negotiations with ideologically opposed neighbors, de-escalation, and regional cooperation.
There are significant security incentives, too.
Israel wants to limit Iran and Hezbollah’s influence in Syria. It wants a predictable northern border. It wants assurances regarding the Druze population in southern Syria — brethren to the Israeli Druze who are extremely loyal to the state, and who were outraged after a massacre of Syrian Druze followed the installation of al-Sharaa’s regime. It wants to ensure that no armed Syrian groups will tread near the Golan. A coordinated mechanism supervised by the U.S. offers a strong diplomatic way to address these issues.
The U.S. will benefit as well. The Trump team is eager to show that it can deliver lasting diplomatic achievements in the Middle East after the success of the Abraham Accords in Trump’s first term. A meaningful shift in Israel–Syria relations would be a very welcome addition, especially as the U.S.-brokered ceasefire in the Gaza war faces an uncertain future.
The main questions now are practical. Can the “joint fusion mechanism” function under pressure? What will happen when there is, almost inevitably, an incident — a drone downed, a militia clash, a cross-border strike? Will the new system effectively lower the temperature, or will it collapse at the first crisis?
Will Iran — facing its own profound internal political crisis — accept a Syria that coordinates with Israel under U.S. supervision, or will it work to undermine al-Sharaa? How will Hezbollah react if Damascus appears to move away from the axis of “resistance” and toward a security understanding with Israel?
How would an Israel-Syria deal impact Lebanon’s moribund efforts to dismantle Hezbollah’s military capacity? Al-Sharaa has already helped significantly by ending the transfer of weapons to Hezbollah from Iran through his territory. Might he also actively help with the disarming of the group?
No one should expect a full peace treaty soon. The question of possession of the Golan Heights probably remains a deal-breaker. Public opinion in Syria has been shaped by decades of official hostility to Israel, and Israeli politics is fragmented and volatile.
But diplomatic breakthroughs can confound expectations. They usually begin with mechanisms like this one, involving limited cooperation, routine contact and crisis management.
If this effort helps move the border from a zone of permanent tension to one of managed stability, that alone would be a major shift. It would also send a signal beyond the region: U.S. engagement still matters, and American pressure and incentives can still change behavior.
The post A quiet diplomatic shift in the Middle East, with monumental consequences for Israel appeared first on The Forward.
Uncategorized
Israel’s Netanyahu Hopes to ‘Taper’ Israel Off US Military Aid in Next Decade
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu speaks to the press on Capitol Hill, Washington, DC, July 8, 2025. REUTERS/Evelyn Hockstein
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said in an interview published on Friday that he hopes to “taper off” Israeli dependence on US military aid in the next decade.
Netanyahu has said Israel should not be reliant on foreign military aid but has stopped short of declaring a firm timeline for when Israel would be fully independent from Washington.
“I want to taper off the military within the next 10 years,” Netanyahu told The Economist. Asked if that meant a tapering “down to zero,” he said: “Yes.”
Netanyahu said he told President Donald Trump during a recent visit that Israel “very deeply” appreciates “the military aid that America has given us over the years, but here too we’ve come of age and we’ve developed incredible capacities.”
In December, Netanyahu said Israel would spend 350 billion shekels ($110 billion) on developing an independent arms industry to reduce dependency on other countries.
In 2016, the US and Israeli governments signed a memorandum of understanding for the 10 years through September 2028 that provides $38 billion in military aid, $33 billion in grants to buy military equipment and $5 billion for missile defense systems.
Israeli defense exports rose 13 percent last year, with major contracts signed for Israeli defense technology including its advanced multi-layered aerial defense systems.
US Republican Senator Lindsey Graham, a staunch Israel supporter and close ally of Trump, said on X that “we need not wait ten years” to begin scaling back military aid to Israel.
“The billions in taxpayer dollars that would be saved by expediting the termination of military aid to Israel will and should be plowed back into the US military,” Graham said. “I will be presenting a proposal to Israel and the Trump administration to dramatically expedite the timetable.”
Uncategorized
In Rare Messages from Iran, Protesters ask West for Help, Speak of ‘Very High’ Death Toll
Protests in Tehran. Photo: Iran Photo from social media used in accordance with Clause 27a of the Copyright Law, via i24 News
i24 News – Speaking to Western media from beyond the nationwide internet blackout imposed by the Islamic regime, Iranian protesters said they needed support amid a brutal crackdown.
“We’re standing up for a revolution, but we need help. Snipers have been stationed behind the Tajrish Arg area [a neighborhood in Tehran],” said a protester in Tehran speaking to the Guardian on the condition of anonymity. He added that “We saw hundreds of bodies.”
Another activist in Tehran spoke of witnessing security forces firing live ammunition at protesters resulting in a “very high” number killed.
On Friday, TIME magazine cited a Tehran doctor speaking on condition of anonymity that just six hospitals in the capital recorded at least 217 killed protesters, “most by live ammunition.”
Speaking to Reuters on Saturday, Setare Ghorbani, a French-Iranian national living in the suburbs of Paris, said that she became ill from worry for her friends inside Iran. She read out one of her friends’ last messages before losing contact: “I saw two government agents and they grabbed people, they fought so much, and I don’t know if they died or not.”