RSS
How Facebook Whitewashes ‘From the River to the Sea’
The brilliance of the slogan “From the river to the sea,” is that it allows protesters to call for dismantling the State of Israel, and then insist that they have articulated nothing more than “an aspirational call for freedom, human rights, and peaceful coexistence.”
Or at least that’s how Michigan Congresswoman Rashida Tlaib (D) describes the hateful chant.
Even if Tlaib’s argument doesn’t carry the day, it does a very effective job of persuading uninformed observers that the meaning of the slogan is disputed — and that it’s a perfectly acceptable phrase to use.
The latest authority to validate this artifice is Facebook, which used its Oversight Board to adjudicate the issue.
Last month, its board issued a decision stating that “From the river to the sea” does not violate the platform’s rules governing hate speech or violence and incitement.
The fundamental premise of the decision is that the phrase has “multiple meanings,” and is “often used as a political call for solidarity, equal rights and self-determination of the Palestinian people.”
The Oversight Board should have known better.
In May, the board announced that it was taking up the case and invited the submission of written comments from all quarters. The board received 2,142 comments, most of which simply take a side, yet dozens of civil society organizations submitted polished opinions.
Defenders of the slogan included the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), American Muslims for Palestine (AMP), Jewish Voice for Peace (JVP), Human Rights Watch, and the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE).
Organizations on the other side included the World Jewish Congress (WJC), the American Jewish Committee (AJC), the Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting and Analysis (CAMERA), and my own organization, the Foundation for Defense of Democracies (FDD).
The FDD submission, which I co-authored with my colleague Ahmad Sharawi, sought to pre-emptively dismantle the claim that the meaning of the phrase is in the eye of the beholder. Rather, the phrase originated as a call for the use of force to replace Israel with a Palestinian state. We also emphasized that, in its original Arabic form, the phrase explicitly calls for Arab supremacy.
Footage from this past spring shows protesters at Harvard and MIT chanting “Min al-mayah lil-mayah, Falastin arabiyah” — literally, “From the water [the Jordan River] to the water [the Mediterranean Sea], Palestine is Arab.”
Yet in English, what follows “From the river to the sea” is invariably “Palestine will be free.” Influential media outlets have devoted considerable space to parsing this slogan, generally noting its use by Hamas and other advocates of violence, then retreating to the comfortable relativism of the view that its meaning is uncertain or disputed.
The FDD brief also explained that the effort to reframe the slogan as a call for justice began 20 years ago in a bid to sanitize it for use on campus. The earliest dispute for which there is a solid documentary record took place at Rutgers in 2003, when Jewish students challenged protesters who unfurled a banner bearing the slogan in the university’s student center.
Protest leader Charlotte Kates told The New Jersey Jewish News that the slogan “is about liberation” and “doesn’t have to do with kicking anybody out.”
In a separate interview with The New York Times, she refused to condemn suicide bombings and said that all of the land between the Jordan and the Mediterranean should be returned to Palestinians. Kates would go on to become a career activist; Canadian police arrested her earlier this year on hate crime charges for leading a Vancouver crowd in chants of “Long live October 7.”
In their submissions to Facebook, the slogan’s defenders do not just ignore its history as a call to dismantle Israel by force of arms. Rather, they insist it is actually an expression of a desire for a “Palestinians and Israelis to live together in a single state with equal rights for all,” as CAIR would have it.
Yet CAIR is an unlikely advocate of co-existence. In November, its national executive director, Nihad Awad, declared that on October 7, “I was happy to see people breaking the siege” of Gaza and denied Israel has a right of self-defense.
Even the Biden White House, amid its scramble for Arab-American votes in Michigan and other swing states, felt compelled to denounce Awad’s comments as antisemitic.
In its brief, AMP described the slogan “as a call for liberation from all forms of oppression and as a call for equality for all.”
This rings hollow when coming from a group which issued a statement on October 7 that did not even mention Hamas, while asserting that the “unfolding crisis in Gaza” had been “precipitated by increased Israeli aggression.”
Strangely, AMP even claimed, regarding “From the river to the sea,” that “Critique of this slogan has only emerged after October 7,” demonstrating the critics’ disingenuity. A more accurate description of the situation would be that CAIR, AMP, and their fellow travelers are simply gaslighting Facebook.
To be sure, the slogan’s defenders also include genuine civil libertarians, like those at FIRE. Yet their scant knowledge of history leads them into error.
FIRE acknowledges that the slogan’s association with Hamas has led to some “to hear it as a call for genocide and ethnic cleansing,” but “the phrase predates Hamas and holds different meanings depending on who is using it.” Human Rights Watch also notes the tie to Hamas while crediting the good intentions of those who use the phrase to “demand that Palestinians, wherever they live, including in Israel, be free.”
As numerous Jewish community organizations pointed out in their submissions, the interpretation of the slogan as innocuous depends on ignoring its plain, direct meaning.
If one insists that the land between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea constitute an entity known as Palestine, then one must dismantle the entity known as Israel. Given that Israelis prefer their country continue to exist, it requires a good measure of ingenuity to claim that its dismantling would occur through peaceful means, especially given the actual conduct of those who sought to initiate the dismantling on October 7 or previous occasions.
Still, even if one grants that “From the river to the sea” is inherently offensive, one might argue that Facebook should allow offensive speech, hewing closely to the First Amendment.
Yet Facebook’s community standards warn it will not tolerate “content that threatens people.”
The platform’s policy on hate speech prohibits “calls for exclusion or segregation” as well as “statements advocating or calling for harm.” There is even a ban on “aspirational or conditional statements” advocating “Political exclusion, which means denying the right to political participation.” This seems to fit a slogan whose aspiration is to terminate a political entity against the will of its people.
Of course, one should not be surprised when intellectual and moral consistency prove to be less important to a major corporation than remaining in the good graces of progressive opinion. That, too, is a part of how free markets operate. So those who understand the history and meaning of “From the river to the sea” should focus on making their case in the marketplace of ideas ,despite the prospect of an uphill battle.
David Adesnik is a senior fellow and director of research at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies
The post How Facebook Whitewashes ‘From the River to the Sea’ first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Trump Signs Major Deals With Qatar as New Report Reveals Doha’s $40 Billion Influence Network Across US
US President Donald Trump and Qatar’s Emir Tamim bin Hamad Al Thani attend a signing ceremony in Doha, Qatar, May 14, 2025. Photo: REUTERS/Brian Snyder
As US President Donald Trump visited Qatar on Wednesday as part of his three-country tour of the Middle East, a new report exposed the extent of Qatar’s far-reaching financial entanglements within American institutions, shedding light on what experts describe as a coordinated effort to influence US policy making and public opinion in Doha’s favor.
According to the report, which was published by the Middle East Forum (MEF), a US-based think tank, Qatar has attempted to expand its soft power in the US by spending $33.4 billion on business and real estate projects, over $6 billion on universities, and $72 million on American lobbyists since 2012.
“Qatar, a tiny Gulf emirate with just 300,000 citizens, has deployed nearly $40 billion across our nation’s institutions since 2012. This is not mere investment. It is calculated influence,” MEF executive director Gregg Roman wrote in the report’s foreword. “The pattern is clear: Qatar targets critical infrastructure, including our energy grid. It bankrolls academic departments that foment campus unrest, buys Manhattan skyscrapers, and infiltrates Silicon Valley. Its capital flows to Washington insiders who shape Middle East policy.”
The report, written by the MEF’s Benjamin Baird, came amid mounting scrutiny over Trump’s announcement that he plans to accept a $400 million luxury private jet from Qatar as a gift. It was also published as Trump was in the Middle East this week visiting Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and the United Arab Emirates to speak with regional leaders and strike several economic deals.
On Wednesday, when Trump was in Qatar, he signed what the White House touted as a sweeping “economic exchange” worth at least $1.2 trillion with the Qatari government.
The agreement will likely fuel criticism from experts and lawmakers who have warned about Qatar’s long-standing support for Islamist terrorist organizations such as Hamas and extensive investments in the US.
In 2015, for example, the Qatar Investment Authority (QIA), the country’s sovereign wealth fund, announced plans to invest $45 billion in the US over five years. According to MEF’s analysis, that target has likely been met — or exceeded — amid the continued growth of QIA’s global asset base.
Of the $39.8 billion in Qatari money traced by MEF, an estimated $33.43 billion went into commercial ventures like real estate, private equity, and hedge funds. The QIA acquired stakes in the Empire State Building and the Plaza Hotel, with QIA’s Manhattan real estate investments alone totaling at least $6.2 billion.
Qatar has also invested deeply in US critical infrastructure, including the power grid, liquified natural gas production, oil pipelines, and plastics manufacturing, raising concerns among national security experts.
The report also revealed that Qatar has emerged as the largest foreign donor to American higher education, giving US universities a staggering $6.25 billion since 2012. Between January 2023 and October 2024, Qatari contributions totaled roughly $980 million.
Qatar’s financial ties to American universities have come under intensifying scrutiny following the surge in pro-Hamas, anti-Israel Israel campus protests in the aftermath of the Hamas-led Oct. 7, 2023, massacre across southern Israel. Observers argue that foreign actors, including Qatar, have used generous donations to encourage universities to hire radical academics and startup anti-Israel academic programs.
A 2023 from the Study of Global Antisemitism and Policy found that concealed donations from foreign governments, especially Qatar, to US educational institutions have been associated with an increase in antisemitic incidents on campus and the erosion of liberal norms.
Despite the prevalence of what MEF described as Qatar’s “influence network” in the US, Trump on Sunday announced that the Department of Defense would receive a luxury Boeing 747-8 jumbo jet as a “gift, free of charge” from Qatar. According to Trump, the jet will serve as a replacement to “the 40-year-old Air Force One.” It will be considered property of the US federal government until the end of Trump’s term in office, after which ownership of the aircraft will be transferred to the Trump presidential library foundation.
On Monday, Trump defended his controversial decision to accept the $400 million luxury jet.
“I think it’s a great gesture from Qatar. I appreciate it very much,” he said while speaking to reporters in the Oval Office. “I would never be one to turn down that kind of an offer. I mean, I could be a stupid person and say, ‘No, we don’t want a free, very expensive airplane.’ But it was — I thought it was a great gesture.”
The US president argued that the Qatari government gifted him the jet because he has “helped them a lot over the years in terms of security and safety.”
Trump’s plan to accept the splashy airliner set off a firestorm of criticism among foreign policy experts and some lawmakers, especially Democrats, with skeptics accusing the president of violating the Emoluments Clause of the US Constitution, which prohibits federal officials from accepting gifts from foreign countries without the consent of Congress. Others expressed concern that Doha could use the gift as leverage to influence US policy in the Middle East.
Democratic Senate leader Chuck Schumer (NY) suggested that the gift from Qatar is an attempt to bribe Trump and gain “influence” in the US government.
Rep. Ritchie Torres (D-NY) also lambasted Trump’s announcement and called for a probe into Qatar’s gift. In a letter addressed to the Government Accountability Office comptroller general, the Defense Department acting inspector general, and the Office of Government Ethics acting director, Torres suggested that the gift likely runs afoul of the Emoluments Clause.
“With an estimated value of $400 million, the aerial palace would constitute the most valuable gift ever conferred on a [resident by a foreign government,” Torres posted on X/Twitter. “Just as troubling as the gift itself is the identity of the benefactor. Qatar is not a neutral party on the world stage. It has a deeply troubling history of financing a barbaric terrorist organization that has the blood of Americans on its hands.”
Meanwhile, Trump on Wednesday signed a series of agreements totaling at least $1.2 trillion with Qatar’s Emir Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad Al Thani in Doha.
The deal includes a $96 billion order of Boeing jets and GE Aerospace engines. Beyond aircrafts, the deals encompass over $243.5 billion in trade and infrastructure agreements with companies such as McDermott and Parsons, and a $1 billion joint venture in quantum technologies.
Alongside commercial investments, the US signed major defense deals with Qatar, including nearly $3 billion for advanced drone systems and counter-drone technology from Raytheon and General Atomics. A broader $38 billion framework agreement for military cooperation, including potential expansion at Al Udeid Air Base, further cements Qatar’s strategic influence in US defense planning.
The post Trump Signs Major Deals With Qatar as New Report Reveals Doha’s $40 Billion Influence Network Across US first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Canadian Man Sentenced to Jail for Antisemitic Assault on Jewish Couple After Synagogue Visit
People attend Canada’s Rally for the Jewish People at Parliament Hill in Ottawa, Ontario, in December 2023. Photo: Shawn Goldberg via Reuters Connect
A Canadian man has been sentenced to one year in jail and two years of probation after being convicted of assault in an antisemitic attack on a Jewish couple walking home from synagogue last year.
On Monday, the Ontario Court of Justice sentenced 36-year-old Kenneth Jeewan Gobin after his March conviction on two counts of assault and one count of breaching probation.
According to court evidence, Gobin — who has an extensive criminal record and was on probation for a previous crime at the time of the attack — deliberately planned the assault against the Jewish couple, driven by antisemitic hatred.
The incident took place on Jan. 6, 2024, when Gobin, riding an electric bicycle, approached four Jewish adults returning home from synagogue and deliberately mounted the curb to target them. He then began assaulting the two couples, hurling antisemitic slurs during the attack.
As he continued hitting the victims, he performed a Nazi salute and shouted antisemitic insults, including “Hitler should have killed you all” and “You should have died in the Holocaust,” striking one of the women in the process.
The sentencing came after a months-long trial, during which the court heard multiple victim and community impact statements.
Among several testimonies submitted to the court, Friends of Simon Wiesenthal Center (FSWC) — a nonprofit human rights organization dedicated to Holocaust education and antisemitism programs — described Gobin’s attack as an “unprovoked, hate-motivated assault.”
“When expressions of hate are paired with physical acts of aggression, they pose a grave threat to public safety and social cohesion,” Jaime Kirzner-Roberts, FSWC’s senior director of policy and advocacy, said in a statement. “History has repeatedly shown that when this kind of hatred is ignored or minimized, it paves the way to more widespread and dangerous violence.”
“These acts are not isolated incidents — they’re part of a deeply troubling historical pattern whose gravity must be taken seriously,” Kirzner-Roberts continued. “Today’s sentence sends a strong and necessary message: hate-fueled violence cannot and will not go unpunished.”
As several other countries around the world, Canada has witnessed a surge in antisemitic incidents following the Hamas-led invasion of and massacre across southern Israel on Oct. 7, 2023.
In 2024, the country recorded a record-breaking 6,219 anti-Jewish incidents, according to B’nai Brith Canada, up from 5,791 the previous year. Although members of the Jewish community make up less than 1 percent of the country’s population, they were targeted in one-fifth of all hate crimes.
The post Canadian Man Sentenced to Jail for Antisemitic Assault on Jewish Couple After Synagogue Visit first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Yale University Leaves Pro-Hamas Hunger Strikers Hanging After Refusing Meeting
A Palestinian flag hangs over the doors of the Schwartzman Center with stickers covering Woolsey Hall during a demonstration at Yale University. Photo: Derek French/Sopa Images via Reuters Connect.
A pro-Hamas student group at Yale University has launched another disruptive protest to cap off the final weeks of the academic year, choosing this time to starve themselves inside an administrative building in lieu of establishing an illegal encampment.
“Hunger strikers have consumed nothing but water since Saturday,” Yalies4Palestine said in a press release explaining the action. “They have become hypoglycemic, are experiencing dizziness, faintness, extreme fatigue, inability to regulate their temperatures and concerningly low blood pressure, in addition to immense psychological pressure and stress.”
Yale administrators are refusing to meet with the students for a discussion of their demands that the university’s endowment be divested of any ties to Israel, as well as companies that do business with it, according to the Yale Daily News. On Tuesday, the fourth day of the demonstration, Yale student affairs dean Melanie Boyd briefly approached the students at the site of their demonstration, Sheffield-Sterling-Strathcona Hall, advising them to leave the space because “the administration does not intend to hold any additional meetings.”
A member of the Yale Corporation, the university’s board of trustees, previously met with a group of anti-Zionist students last September, to discuss their demands for the school to disclose and divest from any Israel-linked entities and military weapons manufacturers.
Now, however, Yale has no intention of holding another such meeting. School officials said that the latest hunger strike is being held in “violation of university policy,” noting that Yalie4Palestine was stripped of its recognized-organization-status due to similar, past transgressions — including an aborted attempt to camp out on the grounds of Beinecke Plaza in April.
In that case, the students eventually abandoned the demonstration after Yale’s assistant vice president for university life, Pilar Montalvo, walked through the area distributing cards containing a message which implored students to “Please stop your current action immediately. If you do not, you may risk university disciplinary action and/or arrest” and a QR code for a webpage which explains Yale’s policies on expression and free assembly.
The cards triggered a paranoiac fit, the News reported. Upon receiving them, the students became suspicious that the QR code could be used to track and identify those who participated in the unauthorized protest. “Do not scan the QR code!” they chanted in response. They decamped moments later, the paper added, clearing the way for public safety officers to photograph and remove the tents they had attempted to pitch.
This time, the students say they will not budge and are imploring their supporters to flood the phone lines of high-level Yale officials with calls demanding that they meet with the students.
Yalie4Palestine have provided the would-be callers a script. It says: “It is unconscionable that Yale administrators are more concerned about nonsensical university policies than the basic welfare of their own students and their complicity in the ongoing famine in Gaza. Yale must divest from military weapons companies aiding Israel’s genocide, end partnerships that normalize apartheid and occupation, and protect student protest rights.”
Yale University’s Advisory Committee on Investor Responsibility (ACIR) has before ruled against divesting from armaments manufacturers, saying in April 2024 that “it does not believe that such activity meets the criteria for divestment” because “this manufacturing supports socially necessary uses, such as law enforcement and national security.” The decision set off a raging protest which resulted in the assault of a Jewish student and the arrest of some 47 students who had trespassed Beinecke Plaza, where they vowed to abstain from food, as they are now, unless the university acceded to their demands.
The campus has seen a heightening of anti-Zionist and antisemitic behavior since Hamas’s invasion of southern Israel on Oct. 7, 2023. Less than a month after the onslaught, the Yale Daily News came under fire for removing what it called “unsubstantiated claims” of the Palestinian terrorist group Hamas raping and beheading Israelis on Oct. 7 from an article written by Sahar Tartak. Published on Oct. 12, the column — which lambasted Yalies4Palestine for defending and seemingly applauding Hamas’s atrocities — was at some point afterward censored to no longer include a portion describing reports and eyewitness accounts of Hamas raping and beheading Israeli civilians. The paper later apologized.
Additionally, on the day of the massacre, Zareena Grewal — an associate professor of American Studies, Ethnicity, Race & Migration, and Religious Studies at Yale who describes herself as a “radical Muslim” — defended Hamas, saying it had “every right to resist through armed struggle” while denouncing Israel as a “murderous, genocidal settler state.”
In another incident, a pro-Hamas activist spat in the direction of Jewish students, a group which included Jewish civil rights activist and Yale student Sahar Tartak.
In December, Yale University students voted in favor of a referendum calling for the school’s divestment from Israel — a core tenet of the boycott, divestment, and sanctions (BDS) movement.
“The referendum, proposed and written by the pro-Palestine Sumud Coalition, asked three questions. The first two ask whether Yale should disclose and divest from its holdings in military weapons manufacturers, ‘including those arming Israel,’ and the third asks whether Yale should ‘act on its commitment to education by investing in Palestinian scholars and students,’” the Yale Daily News reported at the time, noting that while each item received overwhelming “yes votes,” they equaled just over one-third of the student body.
The low threshold is, however, sufficient for the referendum questions being codified and passed as a resolution by the Yale College Council (YCC), which facilitated the referendum and spoke positively of it before students cast their votes. It also rings loudly to the school’s Jewish community, senior Netanel Crispe told The Algemeiner during an interview at the time, explaining that some 2,500 students voted for a policy aimed at compromising Israel’s national security to precipitate its destruction.
Yale University told The Algemeiner it will continue to foster intellectual diversity and a robust Jewish student life without discussing the merits, or lack thereof, of the referendum.
Follow Dion J. Pierre @DionJPierre.
The post Yale University Leaves Pro-Hamas Hunger Strikers Hanging After Refusing Meeting first appeared on Algemeiner.com.