RSS
Glazed over: 2010s vibes abound in Ilana Glazer’s made-in-Toronto comedy special ‘Human Magic’
In 2016, the American comedian Ali Wong put out a comedy special. As reviewer Michelle Ruiz put it at the time for Vogue, “Until her, I’d never seen a pregnant stand-up. I’d never seen a pregnant stand-up pretending to trap a man’s head between her legs in simulated cunnilingus either, but this is the beauty of Baby Cobra.” Jason Zinoman of the New York Times meanwhile called Wong’s performance “something new, a pregnant woman in her third trimester delivering a deliriously filthy and funny hour of comedy woven into a sneakily feminist assault on the double standards of parenting.”
Going on a decade ago, it was refreshing, raw, what have you, to see a woman in this deeply domestic state, speaking about sex and bodies in a way more commonly associated with… well, with men. And a racialized woman, too—a further change of pace in the white, male world of stand-up.
During that era, American comics Abbi Jacobson and Ilana Glazer had moved their web series Broad City onto cable television, showing that young women—not just young men—could be hijinks-having stoners. We were still in the era (Knocked Up, 2007) where men (perhaps played by Seth Rogen) could be slackers and some no-nonsense woman, perhaps played Katherine Heigl, would be the responsible one. We’re kind of back in that era now, but for five minutes there, it was allowed that women sometimes slacked.
Like seemingly all Jewish women at the time, I was a huge fan of this show. I particularly loved the 2015 episode, “Knockoffs,” that weaves together a plot with Abbi’s character trying out a certain new act with a male partner and Ilana’s discount handbag shopping with her mother. It was the second of the two that truly made the episode, showcasing a part of the New York mother-daughter experience never before seen, or at least not seen since The Nanny. But you need both threads to make sense of what follows: The bargains turn out to be found underground, as in literally beneath the road, yielding one of the best comedic lines of all time: “All the good shit is always down a manhole.”
Art about slackerdom, told from the slacker’s perspective, is always a challenge, but they nailed it. Broad City was objectively delightful, but also innovative in a way of specific interest to me: it presented unambiguously Jewish, Jewish-looking young women as protagonists, not sidekicks. They were the comic relief and the ones out having sexual adventures, and going on a satirical version of Birthright Israel. After growing up surrounded by a Gwyneth-led beauty standard, I got a kick out of knowing that I now lived in a world where women like these were considered desirable. What’s it to me if men think Scarlett Johansson’s hot? Abby and Ilana, this is another matter.
I’m a few months older than Jacobson and (this will be relevant) a few years older than Glazer, but close enough in age to both that it was a bit like watching my own early-20s Brooklyn-dwelling life, except hilarious. I remember it as a kind of counterpoint to Lena Dunham’s Girls, about a not-dissimilar milieu and life stage, but just so much sillier, and therefore more my speed. While I can’t say I’m committed to realism or representation in my television viewing generally (or else why so devoted to Midsomer Murders?) there was something special about how this show was covering familiar-to-me territory and getting it so right.
***
As I will be the first in human history to observe, time passes. For most of us, it’s a bit who cares. It’s unremarkable if the classmate who partied hard at 19 is more settled-down at 39. Not so if you made a name for yourself as your own free-spirited slacker-stoner alter ego, the picture of unfettered youth. If you’re Ilana Glazer, if you played the less responsible of the Broad City broads, and had the audacity to grow up, get married, and have a kid, your fans may demand an explanation.
Glazer’s comedy special, Human Magic, filmed at the Elgin and Winter Garden Theatre in Toronto last May and released for streaming in the final days of 2024 (on Hulu in the U.S. but via the adult side of Disney Plus in Canada) , brings the fans up to speed. It reconciles the filthy-mind-possessing Ilana Wexler alter ego from Broad City with the grown-up, responsible, professionally accomplished Ilana Glazer before us today. It is also an attempt at making a 2010s… vibe? ethos? relevant to the 2020s.
Human Magic is the 2020s’ answer to Baby Cobra, which may be where things go awry. It’s no longer groundbreaking to be a pregnant woman or new mom who (glances around anxiously) does sex stuff. It is maybe slightly edgy to admit to being a mom who consumeth the marijuana, as Glazer does, as is central to her personal brand, but stonerdom itself isn’t the rebellion it once was, not with legal dispensaries surrounding the theatre she’s performing at on Yonge Street—to say nothing of the rest of North America—not with all the much-publicized research about alcohol as a carcinogen, making Team Weed seem as if they had the right idea all along.
That’s not to say there isn’t a twist. The twist is that Glazer is not like those other women who love their husbands and have babies with them and enjoy cleaning the house and help their inept-shopper husbands buy T-shirts. And I don’t just mean because she’s a famous person.
Glazer now describes herself as a “queer Jewy woman,” but does not elaborate on what sort of queer she—a woman with a husband—identifies as. A non-practising bisexual, one might guess. (Human Magic includes what might be the lewdest-ever way of expressing the fact that the speaker is monogamous, and much of the special is about her sexual history with men, though she does mime a sex act involving another woman, but only—hard to explain—to make a feminist point about microphones being too phallic.) And perhaps that as well, I have no idea.
A glance at Instagram and recent media coverage attests that Glazer uses she/her as well as they/them pronouns, suggesting that this is core to what Glazer’s referring to when speaking of queerness. Per a recent profile in The Independent—which was picked up by other clickbait headline outlets like it was still 2014—having a baby paradoxically tapped her into her own gender multitude (as versus the boring thing where it reminds you just how female you are), and today, “she identifies as a non-binary woman.”
“Broad City” star Ilana Glazer has opened up about their pregnancy, saying that the experience helped them realize that they are nonbinary. https://t.co/Q6bR2wkCfJ
— Them (@them) August 12, 2024
If this has you wondering who among us identifies as a binary woman, you are not alone. If you’re not wondering this, you are mad at me for having done so. Those are, you see, the only options.
But the interview got picked up, as they will, and held up as evidence that a beloved celebrity had Come Out As Queer. Fine, an assigned-female-at-birth, feminine-presenting, husband-having one, but why should any of that matter? It’s a big tent! Vogue publisher Condé Nast’s gender-celebrity website Them celebrated this revelation-of-sorts as follows: “We love a subtle nonbinary slay, especially when it comes from none other than Ilana Glazer.”
The subtlety is undeniable. Blink and you’d miss it.
***
You can never know, when talking about another person, what’s a tentative first step on a journey, and what’s a gesture taken on for symbolic reasons. It’s entirely possible that tomorrow, Glazer will announce exclusively they/them—or he/they, or he/him—pronouns, and whichever material transitioning in whichever direction, and I will feel like a terrible person for having even fleetingly interpreted this as a case of a functionally if not technically straight lady presenting herself as more interesting (or oppressed) than she is.
It is also possible that I will wake up tomorrow with the politics and inclinations of someone born a micro-era later than I was (Glazer was born in 1987, whereas I’m an ancient ’83er, and this seems a critical difference for this sort of thing) and be putting she/they into my bios and—despite nothing substantively changing about me or how I live my life—everyone will have to walk on eggshells when discussing me and my bog-standard hetero household.
Everyone apart from the right-wing rabble-rousers, who take a different tack. Well those, and people who from-the-left critique such things, often with the derisive term, spicy straights.
My commitment to the she/her (or, more precisely, to not stating my pronouns and letting others come to the likeliest conclusion) is more a matter of generation or sensibilities than place on any gender spectrum. I have no reason to believe I am more comfortable in my femininity, or however you want to phrase such things, than Glazer is in hers. My hunch here—and it can only be a hunch, I’m not in her brain—is that we have different frameworks for understanding the same kinds of experiences.
Why, then, am I walking on eggshells talking about this? Why am I questioning my choice to use she/her for Glazer, wondering at 9:15 p.m. whether the Wikipedia entry’s use of they/them (which it notes is for consistency, just to pick something) ought to have trumped the Independent profile’s she/her? If I had reason to believe Glazer consistently preferred they/them, I would use they/them, I have no whole thing about this, and believe in using the pronouns people request. Why do I feel like a bad guy here?
My jumpiness isn’t much of a mystery, though. It’s because I’m a repeat visitor to rodeos of this nature. There’s a subset of people who will be next-level furious at me for what they will call erasure, gatekeeping, transphobia. All this because of what is essentially a semantic difference of approach between two people whose lives are—apart from one of them being a famous person who helped create the brilliance that is Broad City—remarkably alike.
Who cares, and more to the point, what does any of this have to do with Human Magic?
The subtext of Human Magic is that Glazer is not just some straight-lady comic offering up relatable anecdotes. She’s someone you’d least expect to be leading such a conventional life. And she describes it all in this cool-kid tone that makes you almost forget that the things she’s talking about (loving your baby, enjoying sex with your husband) are, well, square.
***
I am not an Ilana Glazer-ologist, which is to say, my interest is the persona, not the person. And the persona she presents in Human Magic is no more or less conventionally feminine than the typical straight woman. It is not just the gushing about the husband (more on that in a moment), but visible to anyone with any familiarity with gendered self-presentation in our society. She’s dressed in a black, off-the-shoulder minidress or shirt-and-miniskirt (mini-skort?) combo, with black stockings, a chic necklace, and gorgeous shimmery eyeshadow.
Now someone could be as described and use any pronouns. But the overall effect—combined with Glazer’s own references to herself as a woman and “mom” throughout the special—suggests that one would not be misgendering Glazer to call her a woman. She calls herself a woman! (Why am I walking on eggshells?) And unlike her Broad City co-creator and co-star, who is married to another woman, Glazer is what one might call straight-passing. (A wife, if you’re a woman, is a dead giveaway about the not-straight thing.)
What I keep returning to is the T-shirt interlude. In this part of Human Magic, Glazer pokes gentle fun at her husband for his inability to buy his own clothes. She has to show him the websites and tell him what size he wears. Men!
This is standard stand-up fare. The bumbling husband, flummoxed by a domestic task, or maybe he deems it too trivial. There’s also something mildly absurd about how specifically I related to this (the scientist husband, those exact T-shirt websites). Queer Jewy women, straight Jewy women, not so different after all!.
Glazer is nothing if not a member of her moment. She admits that she’s married, but encourages applause for the divorcees in the audience at the start of the show, calling herself a “divorce enthusiast.” She performs—literally, she is on a stage—the requisite feminist ambivalence of being in an opposite-sex relationship. “I feel so lucky to be married to my husband, but it’s hard at baseline to be a woman married to a man. Cause I see him sometimes as [here she gets dramatically angry] SOME MAN, instead of the person I chose to spend my life with.”
It’s performative misandry, but it’s also heteropessimism—or what would be called that if the person experiencing it identified as heterosexual. Glazer negotiates a squickiness surrounding her quasi-straight-womanhood (straight quasi-womanhood?) by describing herself as pro-guys, anti-men, with a whole routine about the difference between guys and men. Something about guys wearing sweatpants to buy groceries and men wearing jeans to work out in.
The guys-good, men-bad bit is a little funny, maybe? Not earth-shattering. It taps into something in the culture, though. Specifically, to the loophole according to which you’re permitted to be a ban-men feminist and have a male partner, so long as you tell anyone who’ll listen that you’ve found one of the good ones. Where this is meant to leave the women married to less-good ones (are they victims or just bad feminists?) I’m never clear.
***
Human Magic has its moments, in the Baby Cobra mould. Glazer describes a medical exam she had before giving birth as being “fingered” and in a positive sense—something I think I might find unnerving to hear if I were the doctor who’d performed the exam, but it’s a comedy special, maybe this never happened! She recalls the expletives she uttered when in awe of the miracle of having just had her baby. She confesses—in a scandalous tone—that she enjoys performing oral sex. Is the audience meant to be scandalized because sex, or because the sex-haver is a mom, or is it that third thing: that it’s yeah kinda shameful to be into sex with men, if you’re a queer feminist?
Loving your husband, enjoying sex with him, liking that he can carry heavy items (“I’ll tell you one thing daddies can do: carry shit”) not liking that he can’t be bothered to order his own T-shirts, loving your baby, worrying about your baby eating solids and how that’s going, enjoying cleaning your house (this is, Glazer explains, her Shabbat ritual), these are all things that put Glazer in community with the wide world of basic straight ladies. (I detest cleaning my house, which puts me where on the gender spectrum?) She presents her preferences for ordinary things as shocking revelations—the subtext being, can you believe someone like ME is into this stuff?
The more I think of it, the stranger it all seems. Annoying, but also kind of brilliant? There’s a part about how the first time she had fully unprotected intercourse was when trying for a baby. She describes this entirely banal fact of how one plans a pregnancy in extremely funny terms that sound both erotic and sordid.
What Glazer does—and what puts her in the spirit of Ali Wong—is remind that getting older, moving through the various life stages, does not magically remove women’s humanness. (Human Magic the title refers to reproduction, but could as easily refer to what’s imagined happens to women when no longer 22 and carefree.) Human Magic reminds that mothers are also women, that women are also people. Not just as in, people deserving of human rights, but people whose minds go to places that our culture ascribes to teenage boys.
The breakthrough of Broad City was showing that what’s thought of as teenage-boy-ness exists in young women as well. Human Magic extends the privilege to slightly older women. In a way.
***
Is the special not that funny because it’s too sanctimonious? After all, Glazer is an outspoken progressive, Broad City had a Hillary Clinton cameo in 2016 (whole lot of good that did, but I digress), and is a supporter of the Palestinian cause.
But we are not in the realm of humourless scolding a la Hannah Gadsby’s 2018 anti-comedy comedy special, Nanette. Glazer’s comic timing is still there, her exaggerated expressions, and if some of her qualities that were charming on Broad City now inspire a bit of, you do realize you’re borderline middle-aged now yes?, like when she refers to her toddler as “dawg,” it is clear she does in fact realize this, and is in on the joke.
Glazer comes across as aware she’s known for having righteous left-wing politics, and uses this as a way of offering unexpected twists. She talks about how dreadful it was, developing breasts early—“shtetl titties,” she calls them—and being sexualized from a young age. She then pivots to how, in her 30s, she’s no longer gently patted in public spaces and how she misses this. That’s it, that’s the joke.
Then there’s the interlude where Glazer admonishes mainstream (non-feminist) pornography for its emphasis on incest. She digresses a bit and you think she’s about to condemn the 1995 movie Clueless for its step-sibling romance. Really, you think, she’s out here cancelling Clueless? Instead she mimes her then-pubescent self let us say really enjoying the film—and in doing so, going somewhere far franker than Clueless itself ever did.
I suppose a part of me reacted to the knowledge that Glazer doesn’t fully identify as a woman the way I would have had I learned that she no longer considered herself Jewish. (Note: she absolutely does consider herself Jewish; it’s an analogy.) Broad City was such a triumph of Jewish female representation that maybe I am, on some level, unjustly attached to the idea of its creators as female and as Jews.
The CJN’s opinion editor Phoebe Maltz Bovy can be reached at pbovy@thecjn.ca, not to mention @phoebebovy on Bluesky, and @bovymaltz on X. She is also on The CJN’s weekly podcast Bonjour Chai. For more opinions about Jewish culture wars, subscribe to the free Bonjour Chai newsletter on Substack.
The post Glazed over: 2010s vibes abound in Ilana Glazer’s made-in-Toronto comedy special ‘Human Magic’ appeared first on The Canadian Jewish News.
RSS
Should Jewish Students Stop Attending Sarah Lawrence College?
The Sarah Lawrence campus. Photo: Wiki Commons.
Sarah Lawrence College (SLC) — my alma mater — has an antisemitism problem that is driving Jewish students from campus and persuading others from attending.
On Oct. 7, 2023, Hamas-led Palestinian terrorists invaded southern Israel and perpetrated the biggest single-day massacre of Jews since the Holocaust.
On Oct. 9, 2023, the SLC campus chapter of Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP) celebrated the rapes, massacre, and hostage-taking of Israelis when it announced an “Hour of Solidarity with Palestine” event. The event flyer featured a Hamas bulldozer breaking into Israel through the security barrier.
As The Algemeiner reported, “Briana Martin — SLC director of diversity, equity, inclusion, and belonging (DEIB) — called on students to ignore Jewish suffering by attending” the event. According to the report, Martin was SJP’s advisor and “club’s advocate and liaison.”
I am a member of an independent Sarah Lawrence alumni social media group that has almost 3,500 members. When the topic of Israel is raised, graduates frequently engage in hateful, antisemitic, and intolerant commentary — which partially explains the college’s tolerance and even encouragement of antisemitism on its campus.
Let’s take a look at what graduates of the college are saying.
In late 2024, a Sarah Lawrence graduate posted concerns about what she called a “despicable” banner hung at Sarah Lawrence which read, “ZIONISM WILL FALL. REVOLUTION UNTIL VICTORY. FREE PALESTINE.”
Many Sarah Lawrence graduates chimed in to support the hateful banner with comments such as “Get over yourself” and “This is EXACTLY the Sarah Lawrence I went to.” One graduate explained, “I learned about the foundation of zionism as a colonial ideology At slc! [sic].”
Some graduates joined the conversation to agree that antisemitism is currently a huge issue at the college. One responded, “The SLC I knew did not make other students feel unsafe … The SLC administration continues to be asleep at the wheel with both blindfolds and earplugs.”
Another graduate wrote, “Many Jewish students do not feel safe to be known or visible as Jewish on the campus.” This graduate explained she has a child attending Sarah Lawrence and also communicates with other parents of SLC students.
Another graduate added, “I know of many Jewish parents who have now crossed Sarah Lawrence off of their schools to visit list.”
In another thread on this alumni group, a graduate shared, “A Jewish senior [in high school] I know was accepted to SLC. But he has chosen to attend elsewhere because they heard from other Jewish students at SLC that they don’t feel safe and they don’t feel the admin[istration] takes their concerns seriously.”
As I recently reported, at the anti-Israel encampment on its campus last year, Sarah Lawrence students planted a large banner promoting Samidoun, which was designated by the US government under President Biden as a “sham charity that serves as an international fundraiser for the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP) terrorist organization.”
In a 2024 zine written by “Anonymous Sarah Lawrence Students,” the authors state that they answered Hamas’ call for “escalation” by occupying a building on campus.
Sarah Lawrence students have masked up to conceal their identities and dressed up like Hamas — the very terrorists dedicated to killing Jews across the globe — to occupy the main administration building on campus in a failed attempt to have the college divest from Israel.
Ask yourself, would Sarah Lawrence or any college or university allow students to dress up like the Ku Klux Klan and conceal their identities while they occupy buildings, disrupt campus life, and terrorize the community? I surely doubt it.
In a column published this month, Sarah Lawrence professor Samuel J. Abrams discussed a student who is Jewish and a Zionist and afraid to return to campus. I shared Abrams’ column with the social media alumni group. A graduate responded, “imagine the kind of coward you’d have to be to be afraid to go to school.”
Such a total lack of empathy from a fellow Sarah Lawrence graduate helps explain why Jewish students don’t want to attend SLC, and why Jewish parents are looking elsewhere.
In the same thread, another graduate of the college responded: “i’m not a zionist but nevertheless … when i was at SLC someone graffitied a swastika onto my dorm and i had fake eviction notices slipped under my door, just because i celebrated jewish holidays. people threatened me because i went to hillel. it’s tough out there even for jews who 1000% support Palestine [sic].”
Recently, students at SLC have encouraged fellow students to boycott Abrams’ classes. Abrams explained that the boycott is because he supports “Israel’s right to exist and to defend itself” and because he is a “Zionist Jew.” Just last week, Abrams published a column detailing how the social media alumni group has allowed antisemitism directed at him.
In August, a graduate posted to the alumni group, “I asked the current Dean of Students what SLC was doing to make Jewish students feel safe. The answer was ‘nothing.’”
I emailed Dave Stanfield, the Dean of Students, about this. He responded:
While I do not comment on private conversations with students or on social media posts, I can say that the College remains committed to fostering an inclusive and supportive environment for all students, including our Jewish community. In my role, I regularly engage with students to understand their concerns and ensure their voices are reflected in our policies and programs.
This month, I reported in The Algemeiner that a graduate of Sarah Lawrence recently commented in the alumni group, “May no Zionist, be they Christian, Jewish, or atheist (because all of these exist) be safe from harassment just as white men who espouse white supremacy should not be safe from harassment either.”
Not a single graduate among the almost 3,500 who belong to this alumni group spoke up against this hateful, antisemitic comment.
This month, I also posted my first column detailing antisemitism at Sarah Lawrence on the alumni social media group. My fellow graduates regularly post our work and interests in the group, which is one of the reasons the alumni group exists. My post was initially published and then it was declined or removed. Apparently, Sarah Lawrence graduates do not like reading about their own intolerance and antisemitism.
Before my post was declined, a fellow graduate responded, “Peter Reitzes thank you for this brave post. It echoes my impression exactly and I will add that although I have given to SLC’s annual fund every year since 1983 I will no longer provide financial support to the college.”
Another graduate responded, “I wouldn’t send my dog there.”
Recently, several Sarah Lawrence graduates have denigrated the politically progressive Anti-Defamation League (ADL) in the alumni group by calling it a terrorist organization. The ADL is one of the leading organizations in the world fighting hatred and antisemitism.
Emmaia Gelman — Sarah Lawrence professor and Director of the Institute for the Critical Study of Zionism — has as her current Instagram profile picture a photo that reads “GO TO HELL ADL.” In 2024, Gelman shared a photo on Instagram that included the messages “NO ADL” and “SHAME ON GLAAD.” GLAAD is the Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation.
In August, Sarah Lawrence professor Suzanne Gardinier posted on X, “That sick uniformed glee in civilian suffering I used to call Nazi—watching a whole generation learn to call it Israeli.” According to the US Department of State, one example of antisemitism is “Drawing comparisons of contemporary Israeli policy to that of the Nazis.”
It may come as a huge shock to parents spending more than $66,000 a year in tuition to send their children to Sarah Lawrence that professors would espouse such views.
Some of my fellow graduates even rely upon gaslighting or trolling arguments in attempts to deny or diminish antisemitism. In one such absurd exchange, a graduate actually stated that it is a “weak argument” for Zionists to complain of antisemitism because Palestinians are Semites too.
In another such exchange, a graduate put forth the view that it is antisemitic if you do not ask if Sarah Lawrence has “any investments in Israel that we need to divest from?” To make such a noxious view even worse, it was made by a graduate who identified herself as an instructor or professor at a nearby university.
In his most recent column, published last week, Abrams concludes: “Those numerous alumni who have engaged in anti-Semitic behavior serve as a stark reminder that SLC has not instilled the critical thinking skills necessary to foster a truly open and tolerant society.”
In early 2025, the US Department of Education opened a Title VI antisemitism investigation in response to a complaint filed by Hillel accusing the college of fostering a hostile environment towards Jewish students.
Jewish families and our allies need to stop sending our children to Sarah Lawrence. The college has chosen its side. Now it is time for Jewish families to move on from Sarah Lawrence.
Peter Reitzes writes about issues related to antisemitism and Israel.
The post Should Jewish Students Stop Attending Sarah Lawrence College? first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Palestinian Authority: Jews Should Go to America or Europe, and Gazans Should Flood Israel
Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas attends the World Economic Forum (WEF) in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, April 28, 2024. Photo: REUTERS/Hamad I Mohammed
The Palestinian Authority (PA) is trying to garner international support for an alternative to President Trump’s plan to relocate the Arabs of Gaza to countries “with humanitarian hearts.”
The PA has called Trump’s plan “satanic,” and instead wants the Jews to leave Israel to make room for the Gazans in Israel — the place that the PA calls Gazans’ rightful home.
Official PA TV suggested that the Jews should go back to Poland or Russia, as Palestinian Media Watch (PMW) reported last week.
A senior PA official, Jibril Rajoub, is now suggesting that Trump take the Jews to America:
Fatah Central Committee Secretary Jibril Rajoub: “[US President Trump] is talking about expelling the original residents of Palestine and forgets that Israelis come from 76 countries, so let him take them to him.”
[Fatah Central Committee Secretary Jibril Rajoub, Facebook page, Feb. 15, 2025]
Rajoub also hopes for Fatah-Hamas unity to “besiege” Israel, “and those who stand behind the Jewish State, ” through “comprehensive popular resistance” — a term that also refers to the use of terrorism:
Jibril Rajoub: “We in the Fatah Movement support building bilateral rapprochement between Fatah and Hamas… so that our strategic option in the next stage will be comprehensive popular resistance and an organizational rapprochement that pertains to the PLO… What Netanyahu and Trump have said must constitute for us an incentive to achieve our unity and re-examine many political policies. I hope our brothers in Hamas will also understand that they need to do some self-inspection in a way that will allow building a future for our people and besiege this occupation (i.e., Israel) and those who stand behind it.”
The concept of Israel becoming Jew-free was also echoed in the PA’s official daily:
Instead of uprooting the Palestinians from the Gaza Strip, why don’t you return the Israelis to the countries from which they came?’
[Official PA daily Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, Feb. 7, 2025]
Senior PA officials, such as Mahmoud Abbas himself and his senior advisor, propose that Gazans flooding Israel would bring “comprehensive peace and real coexistence” and that “then there will be no problem”:
PA Chairman Mahmoud Abbas: “If the Americans want a solution, the only place they [the refugees] need to return to is their cities and villages from which they were expelled during the Nakba [i.e., “the catastrophe,” the establishment of Israel] … He [US President Trump] who thinks he has the power to impose a new deal of the century or to exile our people and take control of any inch of our land is deceiving himself.”
[Official PA TV News, Feb. 15, 2025]
PA Chairman Mahmoud Abbas’ Advisor on Religious Affairs and Islamic Relations Mahmoud Al-Habbash: “The solution is simple and easy: To return them to the cities and villages from which they were forcibly removed in 1948, then there will be no problem…”
[Mahmoud Al-Habbash, YouTube channel, Feb. 5, 2025]
PA Chairman Mahmoud Abbas’ Advisor on Religious Affairs and Islamic Relations Mahmoud Al-Habbash: “He should return them to the cities and villages from which they were expelled in 1948.”
[Mahmoud Al-Habbash, YouTube channel, Feb. 5, 2025]
PMW has reported numerous times that the Palestinian Authority does not recognize Israel’s right to exist within any borders. All of these statements by the PA leadership hoping for Israelis to leave and be replaced by so-called refugees reflect messages that the PA regularly broadcasts to its people and upon which it educates its children.
Ephraim D. Tepler is a contributor to Palestinian Media Watch (PMW). Itamar Marcus is PMW’s Founder and Director. A version of this article originally appeared at PMW.
The post Palestinian Authority: Jews Should Go to America or Europe, and Gazans Should Flood Israel first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
How Hamas Is Using Goebbels’ Propaganda Tactics in Gaza
US-Israeli Sagui Dekel-Chen and Russian-Israeli Sasha (Alexander) Troufanov, hostages held in Gaza since the deadly October 7, 2023 attack, are escorted by Palestinian Hamas terrorists and Islamic Jihad terrorists as part of a ceasefire and a hostages-prisoners swap deal between Hamas and Israel in Khan Younis, in the southern Gaza Strip, February 15, 2025. Photo: REUTERS/Ramadan Abed
“It would not be impossible to prove with sufficient repetition and a psychological understanding of the people concerned that a square is in fact a circle.”
That statement is often attributed to Joseph Goebbels, the Nazi propaganda minister, who understood the power of a lie, repeated over and over again. Whether the quote is accurate or not, Goebbels certainly used that very principle to cultivate the myth of the so-called Jewish-Communist betrayal that allegedly led to Germany’s defeat in World War I.
This propaganda enabled Hitler to tap into the frustrations of many Germans suffering from the Great Depression of the 1920s — and also fueled long-standing hatred toward Jews, which eventually culminated in the Holocaust.
It is doubtful that Goebbels, sitting in a Berlin bunker just before taking his own life along with his wife and six children, could have imagined how his principles would live on in the modern era — adopted by those far removed from the so-called Aryan master race. But reality proves that the method works: A lie repeated often enough becomes an absolute truth.
This past Thursday, we witnessed yet another instance of Hamas’ propaganda — this time regarding the return of the bodies of Oded Lifshitz, Shiri Bibas, and her two young children, Ariel and Kfir, who were kidnapped during the October 7 massacre. For months, Hamas operatives claimed that the family had been killed in Israeli airstrikes, even conveying this false information to the captive father. However, forensic examinations have now revealed the grim truth: They were brutally murdered by these terrorists. Yet, just as in 1930s Germany, the lie was repeated so frequently that it became a fact in the eyes of many.
Another example of Hamas’ propaganda unfolded last Saturday, when the release of six Israeli hostages was accompanied by a carefully orchestrated propaganda spectacle — when two other hostages were forced to watch, enduring yet another round of psychological terror. It is worth noting that Hisham Al-Sayed was released discreetly — perhaps because he is Arab or Muslim, or maybe because he did not fit Hamas’ propaganda narrative.
These events played out before crowds of Gazan families who came to cheer and praise the “heroism” of the kidnappers.
Israeli television, rightfully, refrained from broadcasting this spectacle, which echoed Goebbels’ tactics of creating a narrative in which Jews are portrayed as the real monsters. We have seen this before — in pro-Hamas posters depicting the Israeli Prime Minister as a bloodthirsty vampire.
The big lie continues to thrive: We are told that the Bibas family was kidnapped for their “protection”; that Hamas seeks to establish a peaceful Palestinian state alongside Israel; that a genocide is occurring in Gaza; and that Palestinians are the descendants of the Philistines and Jebusites. There is no truth here — only an endless repetition of falsehoods until they are ingrained in the global consciousness.
Thus, when Israel’s forensic institute confirmed that the Bibas children were brutally murdered as early as November 2023, and that Shiri Bibas’ body wasn’t returned but was instead replaced with that of an unidentified Gazan woman — it no longer came as a shock. The only question that remains is: What lie will they try to sell us next week?
What Joseph Goebbels pioneered in the 1930s has found new life in the age of social media. History proves that in the fight for truth, silence is not an option.
Itamar Tzur is the author of The Invention of the Palestinian Narrative and an Israeli scholar specializing in Middle Eastern history. He holds a Bachelor’s degree with honors in Jewish History and a Master’s degree with honors in Middle Eastern Studies. As a senior member of the “Forum Kedem for Middle Eastern Studies and Public Diplomacy,” he leverages his academic expertise to deepen understanding of regional dynamics and historical contexts.
The post How Hamas Is Using Goebbels’ Propaganda Tactics in Gaza first appeared on Algemeiner.com.