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
US Clamps Sanctions on Israel-bashing UN Rights Monitor Albanese
Francesca Albanese, UN special rapporteur on human rights in the Palestinian territories, attends a side event during the Human Rights Council at the United Nations in Geneva, Switzerland, March 26, 2024. Photo: REUTERS/Denis Balibouse
The Trump administration has imposed sweeping sanctions against Francesca Albanese, the United Nations Special Rapporteur for the Occupied Palestinian Territories, citing the UN official’s lengthy record of singling out Israel for condemnation.
In a post on X, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio announced the sanctions under a February executive order targeting those who “prompt International Criminal Court (ICC) action against U.S. and Israeli officials, companies, and executives.” He accused Albanese of waging “political and economic warfare” against both nations and asserted that “such efforts will no longer be tolerated.”
“Today I am imposing sanctions on UN Human Rights Council Special Rapporteur Francesca Albanese for her illegitimate and shameful efforts to prompt [International Criminal Court] action against U.S. and Israeli officials, companies, and executives,” Rubio announced on X/Twitter.
“Albanese’s campaign of political and economic warfare against the United States and Israel will no longer be tolerated,” declared the Trump administration’s top foreign affairs official. “We will always stand by our partners in their right to self-defense.”
Rubio concluded: “The United States will continue to take whatever actions we deem necessary to respond to lawfare and protect our sovereignty and that of our allies.”
The decision to impose sanctions on Albanese marks an escalation in the ongoing feud between the White House and the United Nations over Israel. The Trump administration has repeatedly accused the UN and Albanese of unfairly targeting Israel and mischaracterizing the Jewish state’s conduct in Gaza.
Albanese, an Italian lawyer and academic, has held the position of UN special rapporteur on human rights in the Palestinian territories since 2022. The position authorizes her to monitor and report on alleged “human rights violations” by Israel against Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza.
Last week, Albanese issued a scathing report accusing companies of helping Israel maintain a so-called “genocide economy.” She called on the companies to cut off economic ties with Israel and warned that they might be guilty of “complicity” in the so-called “genocide” in Gaza.
Critics of Albanese have long accused her of exhibiting an excessive anti-Israel bias, calling into question her fairness and neutrality.
Albanese has an extensive history of using her role at the UN to denigrate Israel and seemingly rationalize Hamas’ attacks on the Jewish state.
In the months following the Palestinian terrorist group’s atrocities across southern Israel on Oct. 7, 2023, Albanese accused the Jewish state of perpetrating a “genocide” against the Palestinian people in revenge for the attacks and circulated a widely derided and heavily disputed report alleging that 186,000 people had been killed in the Gaza war as a result of Israeli actions.
The action comes as Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu visits Washington, where he has received a warm reception from the Trump administration. Netanyahu has been meeting with US officials to discuss next steps in the ongoing Gaza military operation.
Gideon Sa’ar, Minister of Foreign Affairs for Israel, commended the Rubio announcement with his own post on X/Twitter, exclaiming: “A clear message. Time for the UN to pay attention!”
The post US Clamps Sanctions on Israel-bashing UN Rights Monitor Albanese first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Hardball: Trump Administration Reports Harvard to Accreditor Over Antisemitism Allegations
US President Donald Trump speaks during a Cabinet meeting at the White House in Washington, DC, July 8, 2025. Photo: Kevin Lamarque via Reuters Connect.
The Trump administration escalated its showdown against Harvard University on Wednesday, reporting the institution to its accreditor for alleged civil rights violations resulting from its weak response to reports of antisemitic bullying, discrimination, and harassment following Hamas’ Oct. 7, 2023 massacre across southern Israel.
The US Department of Education (DOE) announced the action on Wednesday. Citing Harvard’s admitted failure to treat antisemitism as seriously as it treated others forms of hatred in the past, the DOE called on the New England Commission of Higher Education to review and, potentially, revoke its accreditation — a designation which qualifies Harvard for federal funding and attests to the quality of the educational services its provides.
“Accrediting bodies play a significant role in preserving academic integrity and a campus culture conducive to truth seeking and learning,” said Secretary of Education Linda McMahon. “Part of that is ensuring students are safe on campus and abiding by federal laws that guarantee educational opportunities to all students. By allowing anti-Semitic harassment and discrimination to persist unchecked on its campus, Harvard University has failed in its obligation to students, educators, and American taxpayers.”
The DOE, McMahon added, “expects the New England Commission of Higher Education to enforce its policies and practices, and to keep the Department fully informed of its efforts to ensure that Harvard is in compliance with federal law and accreditor standards.”
As previously reported by The Algemeiner, Harvard’s Presidential Task Force on Combating Antisemitism has acknowledged that the university administration’s handling of campus antisemitism fell well below its obligations under both Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and its own nondiscrimination policies.
In a 300-plus-page report, the task force compiled a comprehensive record of antisemitic incidents on Harvard’s campus in recent years — from the Harvard Palestine Solidarity Committee’s endorsement of the Oct. 7 terrorist atrocities to an anti-Zionist faculty group’s sharing an antisemitic cartoon depicting Jews as murderers of people of color. The report identified Harvard’s past refusal to afford Jews the same protections against discrimination enjoyed by other minority groups as a key source of its problem.
Coming several weeks after President Donald Trump ordered the freeze of $2.26 billion in federal research grants and contracts for Harvard, the task force report found it was “clear” that antisemitism and anti-Israel bias have been fomented, practiced, and tolerated not only at Harvard but also within academia more widely.”
The university is now suing the federal government over the funding halt.
President Trump has spoken scathingly of Harvard, calling it, for example, an “Anti-Semitic, Far Left Institute … with students being accepted from all over the world that want to rip our Country apart” in an April post to his Truth Social platform.
In recent weeks, however, both Trump and McMahon had commended Harvard’s constructive response in negotiations over reforms the administration has asked it to implement as a precondition for restoring federal funds. The requested reforms include hiring more conservative faculty, shuttering diversity, equity, and inclusion [DEI] programs, and slashing the size of administrative offices tangential to the university’s central educational mission.
The administration has since changed its tone in the wake of a report by The Harvard Crimson that interim Harvard President Alan Garber has said “behind closed doors” that he has no intention of doing anything that would make Harvard more palatable to conservatives.
Earlier this month, the Trump administration’s Joint Task Force to Combat Antisemitism issued Harvard a formal “notice of violation” of civil rights law. Charging that Harvard willfully exposed Jewish students to a flood of racist and antisemitic abuse both in and outside of the classroom, it threatened to strip whatever remains of Harvard’s federal funding.
“Failure to institute adequate changes immediately will result in the loss of all federal financial resources and continue to affect Harvard’s relationship with the federal government,” wrote the federal officials comprising the multiagency Task Force. “Harvard may of course continue to operate free of federal privileges, and perhaps such an opportunity will spur a commitment to excellence that will help Harvard thrive once again.”
In Wednesday’s announcement, US Department of Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. said Harvard’s conduct “forfeits the legitimacy that accreditation is designed to uphold.”
“HHS and Department of Education will actively hold Harvard accountable through sustained oversight until it restores public trust and ensures a campus free of discrimination,” he said.
Follow Dion J. Pierre @DionJPierre.
The post Hardball: Trump Administration Reports Harvard to Accreditor Over Antisemitism Allegations first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
IDF Strikes Hezbollah Sites in South Lebanon as Terror Group Pushes to Rebuild Amid US Disarmament Talks
IDF operating in southern Lebanon. Photo: IDF Spokesperson
Israeli forces uncovered and destroyed Hezbollah weapons caches in southern Lebanon on Wednesday, as a new report indicated that despite ongoing U.S.-led efforts to secure a disarmament deal, the Iran-backed group is making repeated, largely concealed attempts to rebuild its military presence in the area.
Troops carried out several operations targeting Hezbollah infrastructure in southern Lebanon on Wednesday morning, destroying weapons depots, explosives and multibarrel launchers concealed in forested terrain, the IDF said, in violation of the November ceasefire, which requires Hezbollah to withdraw its forces 20 miles from the Israeli border.
A new report released this week by the Alma Research and Education Center found that Hezbollah is focused on rebuilding in three areas: operational deployment, weapons acquisition, and financial recovery.
“Hezbollah didn’t give up its resistance narrative and motivation,” Alma’s director, Lt. Col. (Res.) Sarit Zehavi, told The Algemeiner.
“It wants to rebuild its capabilities and infrastructures, whether it’s the villages that will be used as human shields or the military infrastructure in South Lebanon and in Lebanon in general.”
According to Zehavi, Hezbollah is attempting to return Radwan fighters to positions south of the Litani River as part of a wider plan to restore its elite forces to operational readiness. The IDF on Monday killed Radwan commander Ali Abd al-Hassan Haidar in a targeted strike. The action came hours after US Special Envoy for Syria Thomas Barrack met with Lebanese President Joseph Aoun, Prime Minister Nawaf Salam and Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri in Beirut to discuss a long-term deal that would include an Israeli withdrawal and complete disarmament of Hezbollah.
Barrack described the Lebanese response to the proposal as positive. Later, he issued a blunt warning to Hezbollah in response to a vow by the terror group’s leader, Naim Qassem, not to lay down its arms. “If they mess with us anywhere in the world, they will have a serious problem with us,” Barrack said in an interview with Lebanese news network LBCI. “They don’t want that.”
Zehavi said it was premature to predict the outcome of the diplomatic efforts. She warned that the challenge of disarming Hezbollah remains enormous and emphasized that the Lebanese Armed Forces have not demonstrated the capability or willingness to confront the group.
“It’s too soon to be optimistic or pessimistic,” she said, noting that no firm commitments have emerged from the Beirut talks.
Hezbollah’s efforts to smuggle and manufacture weapons have been complicated by both Israeli strikes and the regional realignment over recent months. While Israeli strikes have disrupted many supply routes, according to Zehavi, Syrian authorities have intercepted far more Hezbollah-bound weapons than the Lebanese Army, which claims to have uncovered 500 arms caches but has provided no evidence.
The financial front marks the third aspect of Hezbollah’s rebuilding effort. Last week, the group halted cash payments to Shiite civilians whose homes were damaged in the war, citing liquidity problems. Zehavi attributed the shortfall to disruptions in Iran’s funding networks — an outcome of the 12-day war against the regime in Tehran — and said the constraints would likely hamper Hezbollah’s ability to compensate its base and sustain operations.
“I hope they will continue to have problems with the cash flow, that way it will be very difficult for them to recover,” she said.
The post IDF Strikes Hezbollah Sites in South Lebanon as Terror Group Pushes to Rebuild Amid US Disarmament Talks first appeared on Algemeiner.com.