Uncategorized
Fake AIPAC’s endorsement of apartheid goes viral and top Jewish exec departs as Twitter turmoil mounts
(JTA) — For a short time Thursday night, Twitter users could see a post that would confuse anyone plugged in to the world of Israel advocacy.
“We apartheid,” tweeted an account with the handle AIPAC, the acronym for the American Israel Public Affairs Committee. The account’s profile picture was the same red-and-blue Jewish star that the organization has long used on the social media platform.
The message was shocking because AIPAC is a vociferous defender of Israel against criticism, including the argument that the country perpetuates an apartheid system through its treatment of Palestinians. But it was also fake: The group had fallen victim to a wave of spoofs, falsification and abuse unleashed by Elon Musk’s recent acquisition of Twitter.
Only by looking closely could a user see that the account belonged to “AIPAC_USA,” not “AIPAC,” where the group has long posted. The impersonating account was deleted but not before the tweet had been seen and amplified thousands of times. It even got engagement from accounts impersonating other prominent figures. “Totally agree,” responded @KariLakeAZ, a fake account purporting to belong to the far-right Republican candidate for governor who is lagging in Arizona’s vote count.
The spoof was one of countless instances of impersonation meant to provoke reactions or sow chaos that have unfolded since Musk paid $44 billion to buy the platform two weeks ago. He has swiftly made steep layoffs and abrupt changes to moderation and authentication rules, all while tweeting crass and controversial content himself. The turmoil has sent users, advertisers and employees packing, while opening the floodgates to bad actors on the site.
Musk has also continually tweeted out different sets of rules concerning impersonations on the platform; by Thursday, he said that “parody” accounts must include that word in their names.
A slew of top executives, including those responsible for privacy and legal compliance, have left the company in recent days, according to media reports. But until Thursday night, a top leader who had led efforts to keep hate speech off the platform, Head of Trust and Safety Yoel Roth, had remained in place and seemingly in Musk’s favor, tweeting explanations of his new boss’ decrees and assurances that the company was taking hate speech seriously. He even appeared alongside Musk in a meeting meant to placate panicked advertisers on Wednesday.
But at the same time as the fake AIPAC account’s “likes” mounted, Roth added a single word to his Twitter bio: “former.” Whether he quit amid the chaos or was pushed out is not clear, but his departure from the company was an especially worrying sign for those who have held out hope that the Musk-induced turmoil would ultimately recede.
Roth had been a polarizing figure at the company while also serving as the public face for its efforts to root out hate. A gay Jewish man who openly tweeted about his identity (he once tweeted that a DNA test revealed him to be “Extremely F—ing Jewish”) and his liberal views, he drew the wrath of Twitter’s right-wing critics. Right after the inauguration of Donald Trump, he tweeted that there were “ACTUAL NAZIS IN THE WHITE HOUSE.”
In his role, Roth led efforts to address surges of antisemitic harassment on Twitter. Last week, with bots and trolls surging again amid Musk’s takeover, he tweeted about efforts to remove them and said, “Twitter’s policies haven’t changed. Hateful conduct has no place here.” In his final tweet prior to his departure, he said efforts to suppress hateful content had been largely successful.
Some of Roth’s lighter tweets, which became less frequent in recent years as he became more of a public figure, include Jewish content. In 2017, he posted about a children’s book in Hebrew about a cat who sits on a rug and abides while other animals join it. Eventually it’s too much for the cat, who hisses at the other animals, scaring them away.
“So basically, this book is the most concise possible explanation of my personality,” Roth said.
Roth’s departure means that Twitter has lost virtually all of the executives responsible for ensuring safety and security on the site. With the disorder unfolding in public view, parodists and provocateurs are seizing every opportunity to add malicious content to the platform.
Along with AIPAC, other Jewish groups have been ensnared in the trend. Also on Thursday night, a fake account impersonating the Anti-Defamation League posted a picture of Henry Ford, the famously antisemitic car manufacturer, and tweeted, “We’re so glad to be here. Elon Musk is the #HenryFord of our time. Innovation is a miracle!”
The tweet, which came from @ADL_Official, not the actual @ADL account, did not last long on the site. It was a reference to a real comment from ADL CEO Jonathan Greenblatt from just a month ago, when he praised Musk on TV as following in Ford’s tradition of innovation and said he was cautiously optimistic about Musk’s then-approaching ownership. Greenblatt apologized for his comments exalting Ford immediately and publicly lost confidence in Musk shortly afterwards.
Last week, with antisemitism spiking on the platform, the ADL urged advertisers to boycott it, and many are doing so.
—
The post Fake AIPAC’s endorsement of apartheid goes viral and top Jewish exec departs as Twitter turmoil mounts 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.”