RSS
How College Campuses Became Bastions of Extremism and Intolerance
Solidarity encampment at Columbia University, located in the Manhattan borough of New York City. Photo:
The 2023-2024 academic year will be remembered for its inept university presidents, antisemitic college deans, fringe left activist professors, and gullible, pro-Hamas students.
Collectively and individually, especially at the Nation’s top schools, they have twisted to the breaking point the carefully-curated reputations of their institutions. Across the country, campus sympathy has shifted from the victims to the perpetrators of terrorism. College students are waving Hamas and Hezbollah flags, and chanting their praise for Yahya Sinwar.
To specialists who follow the problems of Middle East studies, the displays on college campuses after October 7 were not surprising. But to the majority who do not follow the ins and outs of academic politics, watching college students and faculty members align themselves with political violence in the name of “resistance,” celebrate the murder of Israelis, and call for a “global Intifada” had many Americans questioning whether the results of a college education are worth the cost — and not just in dollars.
On one level, academic brands are merchandizing tools — bumper stickers and clothing displaying school mascots and logos. More importantly, though, is the intangible dimension of the academic brand — one part reputation, pointing to the past, and one part promise, pointing to the future. Universities with storied histories promise that their past success will be repeated with future success.
At the nation’s top schools, brands are focused on exclusivity. Only a very small percentage of students can attend these elite institutions. If the people who run them don’t appear to be the smartest, most impressive and erudite people in the nation, the brand suffers. Claudine Gay lost her job as president of Harvard because of the damage she did to the brand.
Academia could not have been brainwashed without Middle East studies programs and their leaders in the embattled Middle East Studies Association (MESA). Together, they are largely responsible for academia’s realignment against Israel and in favor of Palestinian “resistance.”
They are also responsible for much of last year’s academic brand deterioration. The more prominent the Middle East program at any given school, the greater damage to that school’s reputation.
Since the 1980s, academia has been dominated by leftists, many of whom view the US negatively and elevate America’s adversaries to heroic status. David Rapoport argues that, for many on the left, “When the Vietnam War ended in 1975, the PLO replaced the Viet Cong as the heroic model.” For today’s campus radicals, Hamas has replaced the PLO as the heroic model.
Middle East studies professors have spent the last several decades supporting academic boycotts of Israel, excusing or downplaying Palestinian violence, and “normalizing” Hamas.
They have dedicated their energies and expertise to creating a language that justifies “resistance” against “settler-colonial empires.”
MESA and the Middle East studies professors who control the profession lead by example, demonstrating how they expect their students to think and write and behave. Too many accept political violence by Palestinians as a form of “social justice” and expect their easily-influenced students to do likewise. After all, they also control how or if graduates have access to the job market.
In 1993, one of those professors at the University of California, Berkeley, founded the most virulent of all the student protest groups — Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP).
SJP is a leading vector of the antisemitism eroding academia. It published a “Toolkit for Resistance” on October 8th that provided the template for the first wave of anti-Israel, pro-Hamas protests and continues to be the most significant instigator of campus unrest. Schools that have an SJP chapter have protest problems. Most schools that don’t have an SJP chapter don’t have protest problems.
Schools that do not have an SJP chapter should do everything possible to prevent one from being established. Fordham University is the biggest winner in this category, since it didn’t allow an SJP chapter to take root on its campus.
Because Ivy League schools represent the top brands in academia, they also have the most to lose. Partly because of its location, Columbia has become the epicenter of anti-Israel protests. Consequently, its brand degradation has captured a great deal of media attention. Not surprisingly, Columbia is also a leader in the Palestinization of academia. Its Center for Palestine Studies, founded in 2010, employs ideologues like Joseph Massad and Rashid Khalidi, the former PLO spokesman.
The Columbia brand suffered a damaging blow when Judge Matthew Solomson of the US Court of Federal Claims announced in The Wall Street Journal that he and dozens of his colleagues will not hire law clerks from Columbia.
The new academic year began at Columbia with protests continuing, followed by news that the university had hired one of the pro-Hamas protesters who took over Hamilton Hall in April, to teach a class on Western Civilization.
Brown University has also suffered self-inflicted brand erosion, almost as long as Columbia. In 2020, it endowed the first ever chair for Palestinian studies at an American university, naming it the Mahmoud Darwish Chair, and installing a BDS-supporter.
Harvard was the first school to have its brand tarnished in the immediate aftermath of Hamas’ October 7 massacre of civilians. On October 8, a group of 31 student organizations issued a joint statement blaming Israel for the attack. They gathered on campus to have their photo taken, which subsequently went “viral.” It was the first of several devastating blows Harvard’s brand suffered last year. Another came when hedge fund billionaire and Harvard alum Bill Ackman announced that he would no longer hire graduates from his alma mater.
Now that the 2024-2025 academic year has begun, anti-Israel protests have resumed at some schools. Minus the tents, Columbia today looks like it did last year. Further brand erosion continues apace.
After enduring months of pro-Hamas encampments, Brown president Christina Paxon acquiesced to the undergraduate mob with a deal that brought temporary peace in return for entertaining student demands for divestment from Israel. Brown’s Advisory Committee on University Resources is scheduled to provide Paxon “with a recommendation on the matter of divestment by September 30, 2024.” If Paxon doesn’t make more concessions, expect more trouble. If she does make more concessions, the troubles may be worse.
Like Brown, Harvard too brought an end to its encampment problem by agreeing to discuss divesting from Israel. How long will that ceasefire last?
The administrations at these schools may think they have solved their problems, but by taking the demands of the students seriously, they have only emboldened them.
Not only are these administrators failing to convince most people that they are the most capable and wise among us; they are failing to demonstrate that they are competent stewards of the brands they inherited.
How soon until the majority concurs with William F. Buckley’s 1961 quip that he “would rather be governed by the first 2,000 people in the Cambridge telephone directory than by the Harvard University faculty”?
Chief Investigative Project on Terrorism (IPT) Political Correspondent A.J. Caschetta is a principal lecturer at the Rochester Institute of Technology and a fellow at Campus Watch, a project of the Middle East Forum where he is also a Milstein fellow. A different version of this article was originally published at IPT.
The post How College Campuses Became Bastions of Extremism and Intolerance first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
After Going to War with Iran, the US Must Keep Up the Pressure to Achieve Its Goals
People attend the funeral procession of Iranian military commanders, nuclear scientists and others killed in Israeli strikes, in Tehran, Iran, June 28, 2025. Photo: Majid Asgaripour/WANA (West Asia News Agency) via REUTERS
One of the consolations of an ancient society is that it provides long memories. For authoritarian leaders, that means the ability to patiently nurse old grudges and mete out revenge when the time is right.
After declaring victory in the 12 Day War with Iran, it would be wise for the US not to make the mistakes it made in dealing with China and post-Soviet Russia. That means working with Israel and other allies to do whatever can be done to help the Iranian people topple the Ayatollah and Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC)-led regime from within.
Until very recently, American policymakers badly misread the intentions of China’s leaders. The American side assumed that a prosperous China would become a kind of Belgium at scale — a good global citizen, reliable ally, and trading partner. For the Americans, that idea seemed reasonable. After all, that’s what happened with post-Imperial Japan, South Korea, and Singapore.
But the Chinese had learned different lessons from their much-longer history.
China boasted a massive navy in the early 15th century, and then inexplicably dismantled it. European powers filled the vacuum by taking much smaller ships across the Atlantic, colonizing the Americas, and prospering. For China, what came next was a series of humiliations that reduced them from accounting for one-third of the global economy in 1820, to the Opium Wars, to the poverty that plagued the country throughout the 20th century.
The lesson the Chinese learned from all this? Become an outward-looking superpower, dominate other countries that are resource-rich and institution-poor, and the bad times will be a minor blip in a long story of global hegemony.
Having spent decades helping China’s authoritarian leaders pursue their dream, the US is now scrambling to contain it.
Similarly, when Vladimir Putin emerged from the wreckage of Russia’s debt default in 1998, Western leaders assumed he wanted to make Russia a normal country and bring back foreign investment. As it turned out, what Putin really wanted was to be a Tsar.
History may not be destiny, but it certainly informs an adversary’s perception of itself.
There’s no question that Israel and the United States achieved impressive results in their brief war with Iran. The IRGC knows that it has been infiltrated by the Mossad, and the costs of the regime’s bad behavior have been personalized rather than imposed on the wider Iranian public.
No number of hasty executions of alleged Israeli spies will change the reality that the Israelis have freedom to operate, not just in Iranian skies, but in the highest reaches of Iranian society.
The physical infrastructure and human resources associated with Iran’s nuclear program have also been badly degraded, with promises for more of the same if there are signs that the program is starting up again. Top nuclear scientists have options, including emigration, and tend to prefer to stay alive. They are not like the suicidal membership of the terror proxies that Iran has nurtured in Gaza, Lebanon, and Yemen.
As long as the Americans and Israelis maintain credible deterrence, pursuing nuclear weapons will remain dangerous work.
But Iran’s leadership has signaled that their ambitions remain what they were before the defeats of the past year, and it would be a mistake not to take them at their word.
To convince themselves that they’re merely down but not out, they will likely look back to the first time their country warred with a stubborn democracy – 2,500 years ago.
In 490 BCE, Darius I hoped to subjugate the burgeoning democracies of Greece to Persian rule and punish the Athenians for supporting the Ionians in their revolt against him. Darius had superior numbers, but the Greeks had a better strategy and managed to encircle the Persians in the Battle of Marathon. The Persians suffered more than 6,400 casualties against just over 200 Greek dead, and promptly retreated back to Asia.
Marathon may have been a decisive Persian defeat, but the loss of blood and treasure was relatively small, and as a result, the loss did little to undermine Persia’s ability to wage war in the future.
War came soon enough.
In 480 BCE, Xerxes I, Darius’ son, brought an obscenely large army — estimated to be between 70,000 and 300,000 troops — to ensure that he could overwhelm the Greek defenses. A heroic army, led by King Leonidas and 300 Spartans, held off the invading Persians at Thermopylae in order to give the Greeks time to plan their next move.
After much debate, it was agreed that Themistocles would lead the Athenian fleet to a decisive battle off the island of Salamis. It was a risky move, and the future of what subsequently came to be known as Western civilization hung in the balance.
The outnumbered Greeks prevailed once again, largely due to superior tactics and an ability to swim. Salamis was the beginning of the end for the Persian campaign in Greece, and the following year, they were pushed out entirely.
The lessons of prior millennia have their limits. But there’s no question that the leaders of today’s Iran have broad regional ambitions, and they intend to pursue them with the unyielding resolve of the emperors who came before them.
We are now very likely in something akin to the period between Marathon and Salamis, in which a dented but not broken Iran will decide when, where, and how to attack next.
Fortunately, the regime is despised by its people, and that remains its Achilles’ heel. If Israel and the US don’t wish to be at war with Iran again, they shouldn’t proclaim victory too soon and ought to do everything they can to help the Iranian people topple the regime.
Ian Cooper is a Toronto-based lawyer.
The post After Going to War with Iran, the US Must Keep Up the Pressure to Achieve Its Goals first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
The Last Guardian of Morality in a Broken World
People wave Israeli flags following the release of hostages who were seized during the Oct. 7 attack by Palestinian terrorist group Hamas and held in the Gaza Strip, in Ofakim, Israel, Nov. 30, 2023. Photo: REUTERS/Alexander Ermochenko
In an era where propaganda often shouts louder than truth, where emotions replace facts, and where fear overrides reason, one country continues to stand firm in the face of global hypocrisy — the State of Israel. Its unwavering stance against terror, and its moral clarity in a confused world, deserve attention and admiration, especially at a time when so many powerful nations have chosen silence over action.
Over the past 25 years, Europe has been the target of a relentless series of terrorist attacks, nearly all committed by Islamist extremists. Cities like Madrid, London, Paris, Nice, Berlin, Stockholm, and Brussels have suffered horrifying tragedies at the hands of individuals radicalized by a violent strain of Islam, one that rejects Western values and democracy.
These attacks weren’t random acts of madness. They were part of a well-established pattern: suicide bombings on trains, mass shootings in concert halls, trucks used as weapons in public spaces. These were targeted assaults on freedom, modernity, and everything the West claims to represent.
Yet somehow, as the list of victims grows, the outrage fades. Western governments issue bland statements, lay flowers, light candles, and move on. Even worse, many of these same governments channel their energy not into confronting radicalization, but into condemning Israel, a country that is actively fighting this very ideology.
Who’s Really Fighting for Human Rights?
Israel is regularly accused of war crimes and even genocide, a term that is increasingly misused by activists and institutions who either don’t understand its historical weight or weaponize it for political gain.
Let’s be clear: genocide is not a tragic byproduct of conflict. It is the systematic extermination of a people. The Jewish people endured it, within living memory, under the Nazi regime. And now, while the world recycles the empty phrase “Never Again,” Israel is the one country acting to prevent a similar fate for others.
Take the Druze community in Syria. This minority group is under brutal attack by Islamist militias abducted, tortured, humiliated, and executed. Their only protection? Israel. While international organizations hold press conferences, issue non-binding resolutions, and express “deep concern,” Israel has stepped in with real action. Because Israel understands the cost of indifference.
What makes Israel different is not its strength, but its moral compass. Despite global criticism, sanctions threats, and relentless smear campaigns, it continues to act on principles—protecting life, upholding freedom, and defending the weak. These are not easy decisions. Israel pays a diplomatic and public relations price for every operation it launches to stop terror or defend minorities. But it chooses to act regardless.
Compare this to the so-called “enlightened” West: the UN, the EU, and major European nations. They have the resources, the platforms, and the military might but not the will. Their inaction in the face of rising extremism is not neutrality. It’s surrender.
Why is Israel punished for its moral clarity? Because it reminds the world of its failures. It exposes the cowardice of international bodies that stand idly by. It challenges the dominant narrative that appeasement leads to peace. And it rejects the twisted logic that labels self-defense as aggression.
But for those who still care about facts, justice, and moral responsibility, Israel remains a symbol of hope. Not because it is flawless — no country is — but because it dares to confront the evil others tolerate. It refuses to accept that terrorism is inevitable. And it will never stand by while minorities like the Druze are massacred.
The international community may continue to betray its own values. The media may distort the truth. Activists may chant slogans without understanding the consequences. But history will remember who stood up when others sat down. Who acted when others watched. Who protected the vulnerable when others turned away.
That country is Israel.
The post The Last Guardian of Morality in a Broken World first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Beyond the Crown: What I Learned at Miss Universe Israel 2025
Melanie Shiraz being crowned Miss Israel 2025. Photo: Simon Soong | Edgar Entertainment
This year has been nothing short of magical, and I’ve been completely full of Israeli pride wherever I go. As the titleholder of Miss Netanya 2024, I had the honor of returning to the Miss Universe Israel 2025 stage — not just to cheer, but to welcome the contestants at the opening-night gathering. The event kicked off a full week of rehearsals, excitement, and unforgettable moments leading up to the crowning of the next Miss Israel.
The sash ceremony was filled with Jewish pride, as Israeli and American Jewish women stood side by side with one mission: to represent their Israeli cities and compete for the crown.
Over the course of the week, I had the privilege of getting to know many of them personally through conversations and video interviews, and they truly inspired me. Each carried her own unique story — from Miss Be’er Sheva, a professional equestrian, to Miss Tel Aviv, who told me how much she loves meeting new people along the Tayelet, the seaside promenade in Tel Aviv. Every woman who stepped onto that stage represented her city with grace and courage.
On the final night, Miss Israel 2024, Ofir Korsia, passed the crown to the new queen, Melanie Shiraz, who represented Caesarea. Though she lives in Tel Aviv, she shared with me that Caesarea has always been her favorite place in Israel — a symbol of beauty and history — and that’s why she chose to represent it.
One of the most unforgettable moments came just after her crowning, when Miss Universe Persia stood on stage alongside Miss Israel to show her love and support. It was a powerful, moving reminder that even between countries like Iran and Israel — where politics so often divide — love and respect can still shine through.
Getting to know Melanie before the show, I was struck by her warmth, kindness, and humility as she shared her journey with me:
“Even though I grew up in the US, Israel has always felt like home. At UC Berkeley, I took on leadership roles and proudly advocated for Israel and the Jewish community on campus. After graduating with a degree in Data Science and Interdisciplinary Studies focused on Israel, the first thing I did was book a one-way ticket here. I came back because I wanted to feel that deep sense of belonging you can only find in Israel. This crown isn’t just about beauty — it’s about showing the world that Israeli women are smart, strong, bold, and full of heart. That’s what I hope to represent as Miss Israel 2025.”
She made me proud to be both Israeli and Jewish.
This journey reminded me that what’s most important is the stories we share, the friendships we build, and the deep bond between Israeli and American women who proudly represented Israel together. That unity — rooted in our shared identity and love for our homeland — is the heart of who we are as Jews and what we strive to show the world.
Ayelet Raymond is an Israeli activist and the creative force behind the @Kosher_Barbie social media persona. She also holds the title of Miss Netanya in Miss Universe Israel 2024.
The post Beyond the Crown: What I Learned at Miss Universe Israel 2025 first appeared on Algemeiner.com.