Uncategorized
How the Holocaust is remembered in the land of Anne Frank
(JTA) — You’d think that in a country so closely identified with Anne Frank — perhaps the Holocaust’s best-known victim — cultivating memory of the genocide wouldn’t be a steep challenge.
That’s why a recent survey, suggesting what the authors called a “disturbing” lack of knowledge in the Netherlands about the Holocaust, set off alarm bells. “Survey shows lack of Holocaust awareness in the Netherlands,” wrote the Associated Press. “In the Netherlands, a majority do not know the Holocaust affected their country,” was the JTA headline. “The Holocaust is a myth, a quarter of Dutch younger generation agree,” per the Jerusalem Post.
“Survey after survey, we continue to witness a decline in Holocaust knowledge and awareness. Equally disturbing is the trend towards Holocaust denial and distortion,” Gideon Taylor, the president of the Conference of Jewish Material Claims Against Germany, which conducted the study, said in a statement.
Like other recent studies by Claims Conference, the latest survey has been challenged by some scholars, who say the sample size is small, or the survey is too blunt a tool for examining what a country’s residents do or don’t know about their history. Even one of the experts who conducted the survey chose to focus on the positive findings: “I am encouraged by the number of respondents to this survey that believe Holocaust education is important,” Emile Schrijver, the general director of Amsterdam’s Jewish Cultural Quarter, told JTA.
One of the scholars who says the survey doesn’t capture the subtleties of Holocaust education and commemoration in the Netherlands is Jazmine Contreras, an assistant professor of history at Goucher College in Maryland. Contreras studies the historical memory of the Holocaust and Second World War in Holland. In a Twitter thread earlier this week, she agreed with those who say that “the headline that’s being plastered everywhere exaggerates the idea that young people in NL know nothing about the Holocaust.”
At the same time, she notes that while the Netherlands takes Holocaust education and commemoration seriously, it has a long way to go in reckoning with a past that includes collaboration with the Nazis, postwar antisemitism, a small but vocal far right and a sense of national victimhood that often downplays the experience of Jews during the Shoah.
“It’s such a complex issue,” Contreras told me. “There’s no one answer to how the Holocaust is remembered in the Netherlands.”
Today is International Holocaust Remembrance Day, and I took the opportunity to speak with Contreras not only about Dutch memory, but how the Netherlands may serve as an example of how countries deal with Holocaust memory and the national stories they tell.
Our interview was edited for length and clarity.
Jewish Telegraphic Agency: Tell me a little bit about when you saw the survey, and perhaps how it didn’t mesh with what you know about the Netherlands?
Jazmine Contreras: My major problem is that every single outlet is picking up this story and running a headline like, “Youth in the Netherlands don’t even know the Holocaust happened there. They cannot tell you how many people were killed, how many were deported.” And I think that’s really problematic because it paints a really simplistic picture of Holocaust memory and Holocaust education in that country.
There are multiple programs, in Amsterdam, in other cities, in Westerbork, the former transit camp. They have an ongoing program that brings survivors and the second generation to colleges, to middle schools and primary schools all across the country. And they also have in Amsterdam a program called Oorlog in Mijn Buurt, “War in My Neighborhood,” and basically young people become the “memory bearers” — that’s the kind of language they use — and interview people who grew up and experience the war in their neighborhood, and then speak as if they were the person who experienced it, in the first person.
You also have events around the May 4 commemoration remembering the Dutch who died in war and in peacekeeping operations, and a program called Open Jewish Houses [when owners of formerly Jewish property open their homes to strangers to talk about the Jews who used to live there]. It’s really amazing: I’ve actually been able to visit these formerly Jewish homes and hear the stories. And, of course, the Anne Frank House has its own slew of programming, and teachers talk a lot about the Holocaust and take students to synagogues in places like Groningen, where they have a brand new exhibit at the synagogue. They are taking thousands at this point. The new National Holocaust Names Memorial is in the center of Amsterdam.
I think, again, this idea that children are growing up without having exposure to Holocaust memory, or knowledge of what happened in the Netherlands, is a bit skewed. I think we get into a dangerous area if we’re painting the country with a broad brush and saying nobody knows anything about the Holocaust.
Have you anecdotal evidence or seen studies of Dutch kids about whether they’re getting the education they need?
Anecdotally, yes. I was invited to attend a children’s commemoration that they do at the Hollandsche Schouwburg theater in Amsterdam, which is the former Dutch theater that was used as a major deportation site. And it’s children who put on a commemoration themselves. Again, not every child is participating in this, but if they’re not participating in the children’s commemoration, then they’re doing the “War in My Neighborhood” program, or they’re doing Open Jewish Houses, or they’re taking field trips. That’s pretty impressive to me, and it’s pretty meaningful. They want to help participate in it in the future. They want to come back because it leaves a lasting impression for them.
Let’s back up a bit. Anne Frank dominates everyone’s thinking about Holland and the Holocaust. And I guess the story that’s told is that she was protected by her neighbors until, of course, the Nazis proved too powerful, found her and sent her away. What’s right and what’s wrong about that narrative?
Don’t forget that Anne Frank was a German Jewish refugee who came to the Netherlands. And I think that part of the story is also really interesting and left out. She’s this Dutch icon, but she was a German Jewish refugee who came to the Netherlands, and the Dutch Jewish community was single-handedly responsible for funding, at Westerbork, what was first a refugee center. I think that’s really complicated because now we also have a discourse about present-day refugees and the Holocaust.
Jazmine Contreras, an assistant professor of history at Goucher College, specializes in Dutch Holocaust memory. (Courtesy)
I’ve also never quite understood the insistence on making her an icon when the end of the story is that she’s informed on and dies in a concentration camp. The idea that the Franks were hidden here fits really well into this idea of Dutch resistance and tolerance, and her diary often gets misquoted to kind of represent her as someone who had hope despite the fact that she was being persecuted. In the 1950s, her narrative gets adopted into the U.S., and we treat it as this globalizing human rights discourse.
We don’t talk about the fact that she’s found because she’s informed upon, and we don’t talk about the fact that you had non-Jewish civilians who were informers for a multitude of reasons, including ideological collaboration and their own financial gain.
And when it was talked about most recently, it was about a discredited book that named her betrayer as a Jew.
That was a huge controversy.
I get the sense from your writing that the story the Dutch tell about World War II is very incomplete, and that they haven’t fully reckoned with their collaboration under Nazi occupation even as they emphasize their own victimhood.
On the national state level, they have officially acknowledged not only the extensive collaboration, but the failure of both the government and the Crown to speak out on behalf of Dutch Jews. [In 2020, Prime Minister Mark Rutte formally apologized for how his kingdom’s wartime government failed its Jews, a first by a sitting prime minister.] Now, the question is, what’s happening in broader Dutch society?
Unfortunately, there was an increase in voting for the Dutch far right, although they’ve never managed to get a majority or even come close to it.
Something else that’s happening is that many ask, “Why should Dutch Jews get separate consideration after the Second World War, a separate victimhood, when we were all victimized?” The Netherlands is unique because it’s occupied for the entirety of the Second World War — 1940 to 1945. There is the civil service collaborating, right, but there’s no occupation government. So it’s not like Belgium. It’s not like France, not like Denmark. And there was the Hunger Winter of 1944-45 when 20,000 civilians perished due to famine. You have real victimhood, so people ask, “Why are the Jews so special? We all suffered.”
And at the same time, scholarship keeps emerging about the particular ways non-Jewish Dutch companies and individuals cooperated with the Nazis.
The NIOD Institute for War, Holocaust and Genocide Studies in Amsterdam, which has done so much of this research, found that Jews who were deported had to pay utility bills for when they weren’t living there. You have a huge controversy around the the Dutch railway [which said it would compensate hundreds of Holocaust victims for its role in shipping Jews to death camps]. The Dutch Red Cross apologized [in 2017 for failing to act to protect Jews during World War II], following the publication of a research paper on its inaction. A couple of decades ago, the government basically auctioned off paintings, jewelry and other Jewish possessions, and in 2020 they started the effort to give back pieces of art that were in Dutch museums. Dienke Hondius wrote a book on the cold reception given to survivors upon their return. Remco Ensel and Evelien Gans also wrote a book on postwar Jewish antisemitism.
So a lot has been happening, a lot of controversies, and, thanks to all of this research, a lot happening in order to rectify the situation.
It sounds like a mixed story, of resistance and collaboration, and of rewriting the past but also coming to terms with it.
There’s a really complex history here of both wanting to present it as “everybody’s a victim” and that the resistance was huge. In fact, the data shows 5% of the people were involved in resistance and 5% were collaborators. So it’s not like this wholesale collaboration or resistance was happening. It was only in 1943, when non-Jewish men were called up for labor service in Germany, that they got really good at hiding people and by then it was too late.
Right. My colleagues at JTA often note that the Nazis killed or deported more Dutch Jews per capita than anywhere in occupied Western Europe — of about 110,000 Jews deported, only a few thousand survived.
Yes, the highest percentage of deportation in Western Europe.
A room at the Anne Frank House museum where she and her family hid for two years during the Holocaust in Amsterdam, the Netherlands. (Photo Collection Anne Frank House)
Since this week is International Holocaust Remembrance Day, let me ask what Holland gets right and wrong compared to maybe some other European countries with either similar experiences or comparable experiences.
The framing of that question is difficult because there’s so many unique points about the Holocaust and the occupation in the Netherlands. Again, it was occupied for the entirety of 1940-45. You have a civil service that was willing to sign Aryan declarations. The queen, as head of a government in exile in London, is basically saying, “Do what you need to just to survive.”
One of the big problems is there are people like Geert Wilders [a contemporary right-wing Dutch lawmaker] who practice this kind of philo-Semitism and support of Israel, but it’s really about blaming the Muslim population for antisemitism and saying none of it is homegrown. They don’t have to talk about the fact that there was widespread antisemitism in the aftermath of the Holocaust.
In the Netherlands they’re not instituting laws around what you can and can’t say about the Holocaust like in Poland [where criticizing Polish collaboration has been criminalized]. There are so many amazing educational initiatives and nonprofit organizations that are doing the work. And even these public controversies ended up being outlets for the production of Holocaust memory when survivors, but mostly now the second and third generations, use that space to talk about their own family Holocaust history.
Tell me about your personal stake in this: How did the Holocaust become a subject of study for you?
I specialize in Dutch Holocaust memory. I’m not Jewish, but my grandparents on my mother’s side are Dutch. For my first project I looked at relationships between German soldiers and Dutch women during the war during the occupation, and I eventually kind of made my way into the post war, when these children of former collaborators were still very marginalized in Dutch society. It ties into this. I do interviews with members of the Jewish community, children of resistance members and children of collaborators and how these memory politics play out.
What is the utility of events like International Holocaust Remembrance Day and the major Holocaust memorials in educating the public about the Holocaust and World War II?
International Holocaust Remembrance Day and May 4 result in the production of new memories about the Holocaust and the Second World War. I was at the 2020 International Holocaust Remembrance Day commemoration when the prime minister formally apologized. It was a really big moment, and it allowed the Jewish community, and the Roma and Sinti community, a space to remember and to share in that and to speak to it as survivors and the second and third generation.
Unlike the United States, the Netherlands is a small, insular country, so the relationship between the public and the media and academics is so close. So in the weeks before and the weeks after these memorials, academics, politicians and experts are publishing pieces about memory. That’s useful to the production of new memories and information about the Holocaust.
But what about the other days of the year? Will putting a monument in the center of Amsterdam actually change how people understand the Holocaust? That is a question that I think is harder to answer. The new monument features individual names of 102,000 Jews and Roma and Sinti and visually gives you the scope of what the Holocaust looked like in the Netherlands. But does that matter if somebody lives outside of Amsterdam and they’re never going to see this monument?
—
The post How the Holocaust is remembered in the land of Anne Frank appeared first on Jewish Telegraphic Agency.
Uncategorized
ADL Ranks Grok as the Worst AI Chatbot at Detecting Antisemitism, Rates Claude as the Best
A 3D-printed miniature model of Elon Musk and the X logo are seen in this illustration taken Jan. 23, 2025. Photo: REUTERS/Dado Ruvic/Illustration
The Anti-Defamation League (ADL) on Wednesday released its AI Index, which ranks popular large language model (LLM) chatbot programs according to their effectiveness at detecting antisemitism, anti-Zionism, and other forms of extremism.
The watchdog group found a wide variability in performance among the six models it analyzed. Researchers applied a variety of tests to xAI’s Grok, Meta’s Llama, Alphabet’s Gemini, Chinese hedge fund High Flyer’s DeepSeek, OpenAI’s ChatGPT, and the clear winner of them all on recognizing hate, Anthropic’s Claude.
The ADL created an “overall performance model” which combined the results of multiple forms of testing. The group awarded Claude the highest score with 80 points, while Grok sat at the bottom with 21. ChatGPT came in second with 57, followed by DeepSeek (50), Gemini (49) and Llama at 31.
Researchers tested the apps between August and October of last year, striving to explore as an “average user” would utilize the programs, as opposed to a bad actor actively seeking to create harmful content. They performed more than 25,000 chats across 37 sub-categories and assessed the results with both human and AI evaluations.
The report also distinguished between anti-Jewish, traditional antisemitism directed at individual Jews, and anti-Zionist antisemitism directed at the Jewish state. A third category of analysis focused on more general “extremism” and considered questions about conspiracy theories and other narratives which run across the political spectrum.
Among its key findings, the ADL discovered that each app had problems.
“All six LLMs showed gaps in their ability to detect bias against Jews, Zionists/Zionism, and to identify extremism, often failing to detect and refute harmful or false theories and narratives,” the report said. “All models could benefit from improvement when responding to the type of harmful content tested.”
Researchers also found that “some models actively generate harmful content in response to relatively straightforward prompts, such as YouTube script personas saying ‘Jewish-controlled central banks are the puppet masters behind every major economic collapse.’”
The AI Index “reveals a troubling reality: every major AI model we tested demonstrates at least some gaps in addressing bias against Jews and Zionists and all struggle with extremist content,” ADL chief executive officer Jonathan Greenblatt said in a statement. “When these systems fail to challenge or reproduce harmful narratives, they don’t just reflect bias — they can amplify and may even help accelerate their spread. We hope that this index can serve as a roadmap for AI companies to improve their detection capabilities.”
Oren Segal, the ADL’s senior vice president of counter-extremism and intelligence, explained that the new research “fills a critical gap in AI safety research by applying domain expertise and standardized testing to antisemitic, anti-Zionist, and extremist content.” He warned that “no AI system we tested was fully equipped to handle the full scope of antisemitic and extremist narratives users may encounter. This Index provides concrete, measurable benchmarks that companies, buyers, and policymakers can use to drive meaningful improvement.”
Grok — the chatbot ranked lowest on the ADL’s list and directed by its billionaire owner Elon Musk to offer “anti-woke” and “politically incorrect” responses — has faced considerable criticism for last year’s expressions of antisemitism which included answers self-declaring the program as “MechaHitler.”
More recently, Musk and Grok have come under fire from government officials around the world objecting to a recent upgrade which enabled users to create “deepfake” sexualized images which stripped people featured in uploaded images.
The European Union opened an investigation this week with a goal of determining “whether the company properly assessed and mitigated risks associated with the deployment of Grok’s functionalities into X in the EU. This includes risks related to the dissemination of illegal content in the EU, such as manipulated sexually explicit images, including content that may amount to child sexual abuse material.”
Henna Virkkunen, the EU’s executive vice president for tech sovereignty, security, and democracy, decried the fact that Grok can be used for sexual exploitation.
“Sexual deepfakes of women and children are a violent, unacceptable form of degradation,” Virkkunen said. “With this investigation, we will determine whether X has met its legal obligations under the DSA [Digital Services Act], or whether it treated rights of European citizens – including those of women and children – as collateral damage of its service.”
On Monday, a bipartisan group of 35 attorneys general sent a letter to xAI demanding the disabling of the image undressing feature.
Pennsylvania Attorney General Dave Sunday led the effort.
“The time to ensure people are protected from powerful tools like generative AI isn’t after harm has been caused. You shouldn’t wait for a car crash to put up guardrails,” Sunday said. “This behavior by users was all too predictable and should have been addressed before its release. Tech companies have a responsibility to ensure their tools cannot be used in these destructive ways before they launch their product.”
France also opened an investigation into Grok in November 2025, following outputs promoting Holocaust denial in the French language, a criminal violation of the country’s strict laws against promoting lies about the Nazis’ mass murder of 6 million Jews.
Steven Stalinsky, executive director of the Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI), has long raised the alarm about the threat of LLMs fueling antisemitism and terrorism. He warned that “over two years later, the problem is demonstrably worse, not better, raising a fundamental question about trust.”
Stalinsky stated that “assurances from AI companies alone are insufficient.”
In response to the ADL’s latest report, Danny Barefoot, senior director of the group’s Ratings and Assessments Institute, said in a statement that “as AI systems increasingly influence what people see, believe, and share, rigorous, evidence-based accountability is no longer optional — it’s essential.”
Uncategorized
Palestinian Authority Leader Attacks PA’s ‘Rampant Corruption’
Lebanese President Joseph Aoun meets with Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas at the presidential palace in Baabda, Lebanon, May 21, 2025. Photo: REUTERS/Mohamed Azakir
When even Tawfiq Tirawi — a senior leader of the Palestinian Authority (PA)’s ruling party, Fatah, and the former director and co-founder of its General Intelligence Service — says the system is rotten to the core, it is a stark indication of just how deeply corruption is embedded in the PA.
In a public letter posted on January 20, 2026, Tirawi accused the Palestinian Authority of systemic, institutionalized corruption so entrenched that it now enjoys “security and immunity.”
Addressing PA ruler Mahmoud Abbas, Tirawi described years of futile appeals to the PA leadership regarding “numerous cases of corruption and injustice rampant in our institutions.” According to Tirawi, even when Abbas personally referred these cases to PA prime ministers or the attorney general, nothing happened.
Tirawi cited various issues, namely that corruption had spread across the PA government and the judicial system; that a corruption network now operates with protection and immunity; that influential figures are involved in the takeover of public and private lands and assets; that experts and senior public employees who documented these crimes faced threats and intimidation; and that institutions meant to protect the public interest have become a “protective umbrella for the corrupt.”
Even more striking is Tirawi’s threat that if the situation continues, he will expose names and details of corrupt officials to the Palestinian public and international media, calling for a “public, national, and moral trial” to replace a judiciary that no longer functions.
Posted text:“An open letter to [PA] President Mahmoud Abbas
For many years, I have repeatedly approached you with an open heart and demanded your intervention in numerous cases of corruption and injustice that are rampant in our institutions… Some of these cases were referred by you to the [PA] prime ministers and others to the attorney general, but the result unfortunately remained the same: A lack of any concrete action to protect the people or put an end to this severe negligence.
The hands of the influential and the thieves have spread and reached all parts of the PA, at the level of the government and the judicial system, to the point that the corruption network now operates with security and immunity. Its deeds have reached severe levels of threat and intimidation, to the point of threatening senior [PA] public employees, experts, and scholars who have prepared documented reports proving the involvement of influential figures in the takeover of public and private lands and assets, amid criminal behavior that harms the national dignity and core moral values…
While I believe that part of the truth has been conveyed to you, the fact that it has not been fully and clearly told remains a responsibility that cannot be ignored.
In light of the severe collapse of the judicial system’s role, the paralysis of the system of accountability, and the transformation of some institutions that were supposed to protect the public interest into a protective umbrella for the corrupt, I declare clearly that the era of silence is over. If this situation continues, I will not hesitate to expose all the documented issues and cases, including names and details, to the Palestinian public and through local and international media outlets, to enable a public, national, and moral trial of the corrupt, given that the judicial system is not fulfilling its national and constitutional duties.” [emphasis added]
[Fatah Central Committee member Tawfiq Tirawi, Facebook page, Jan. 20, 2026]
While Tirawi’s letter is intriguing, as it reveals what the PA truly is on the inside, do not be fooled. Even if it triggers limited administrative changes, Tirawi himself remains fully committed to the PA’s terror-promoting worldview.
And as Palestinian Media Watch has frequently explained, real reform can only begin when the PA completely ends its support for terrorism by halting incitement, funding, rewards, and the glorification of murderers.
Ephraim D. Tepler is a researcher at Palestinian Media Watch (PMW), where a version of this article first appeared.
Uncategorized
Chicago Adopts IHRA Definition of Antisemitism
Chicago, United States, on Aug. 22, 2024. Photo: J.W. Hendricks/NurPhoto via Reuters Connect
The City Council of Chicago, Illinois, voted on Tuesday to adopt the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance’s (IHRA) definition of antisemitism, becoming one of many governments and municipalities to affirm its utility as a reference tool for identifying antisemitic hate crimes and a safeguard of Jewish civil rights.
The measure was passed on International Holocaust Remembrance Day, which commemorated the 81st anniversary of the day when Jewish prisoners were liberated from Auschwitz, the Nazis’ deadliest extermination camp during World War II.
“Chicago now proudly joins a global consensus of more than 1,200 entities worldwide, including the United States, 37 US state governments, and 98 city and country bodies who have adopted this definition,” city council member Debra Silverstein, alderman of the 50th Ward, said in a statement praising the adoption. “At a time when antisemitic hate crimes are surging locally, this unanimous City Council action sends an unmistakable message that anti-Jewish hate has no place in Chicago.”
IHRA — an intergovernmental organization comprising dozens of countries including the US and Israel — adopted the “working definition” of antisemitism in 2016. Since then, the definition has been widely accepted by Jewish groups and lawmakers across the political spectrum, and it is now used by hundreds of governing institutions, including the US State Department, European Union, and United Nations.
According to the definition, antisemitism “is a certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed as hatred toward Jews. Rhetorical and physical manifestations of antisemitism are directed toward Jewish or non-Jewish individuals and/or their property, toward Jewish community institutions and religious facilities.” It provides 11 specific, contemporary examples of antisemitism in public life, the media, schools, the workplace, and in the religious sphere. Beyond classic antisemitic behavior associated with the likes of the medieval period and Nazi Germany, the examples include denial of the Holocaust and newer forms of antisemitism targeting Israel such as demonizing the Jewish state, denying its right to exist, and holding it to standards not expected of any other democratic state.
Chicago’s embrace of the definition comes amid a historic surge in antisemitic incidents across the US and the world.
In 2024, as reported by the Anti-Defamation League’s (ADL) latest annual audit, there were 9,354 antisemitic incidents — an average of 25.6 a day — across the US, creating an atmosphere of hate not experienced in the nearly thirty years since the ADL began tracking such data in 1979. Incidents of harassment, vandalism, and assault all increased by double digits, and for the first time ever a majority of outrages — 58 percent — were related to the existence of Israel as the world’s only Jewish state.
The ADL also reported dramatic rises in incidents on college campuses, which saw the largest growth in 2024. The 1,694 incidents tallied by the ADL amounted to an 84 percent increase over the previous year. Additionally, antisemites were emboldened to commit more offenses in public in 2024 than they did in 2023, perpetrating 19 percent more attacks on Jewish people, pro-Israel demonstrators, and businesses perceived as being Jewish-owned or affiliated with Jews.
Illinois alone saw the eighth most antisemitic incidents in the country with 336, a 59 percent increase from the previous year which led the nation.
The ADL’s “Heat Map,” which tracks hate crimes in real time, shows 105 antisemitic hate incidents recorded in 2025.
In one disturbing incident in the Highland Park suburb of Chicago, an antisemitic letter threatening violence was mailed to a resident’s home. So severe were its contents that the FBI and the Illinois Terrorism and Intelligence Center were called to the scene to establish that there was no imminent danger, according to local news outlets. Later, the local government shuttered all religious institutions as a precautionary measure.
With Tuesday’s measure, Chicago became the second largest US city to adopt the IHRA definition. However, it is now the largest to have it on the books as New York City under its new mayor, Zohran Mamdani, recently revoked it along with a series of other executive orders enacted by his predecessor to combat antisemitism
US Jewish groups sharply criticized the move.
Israel’s Foreign Ministry similarly lambasted the reversal as an invitation for intensified bigotry against Jewish New Yorkers, saying, “On his very first day as New York City mayor, Mamdani shows his true face: He scraps the IHRA definition of antisemitism and lifts restrictions on boycotting Israel. This isn’t leadership. It’s antisemitic gasoline on an open fire.”
The definition could have been problematic for Mamdani, a far-left democratic socialist and avowed anti-Zionist who has made anti-Israel activism a cornerstone of his political career and been widely accused of promoting antisemitic rhetoric. A supporter of boycotting all entities tied to Israel, he has repeatedly refused to recognize Israel’s right to exist as a Jewish state; routinely accused Israel of “apartheid” and “genocide”; and refused to clearly condemn the phrase “globalize the intifada,” which has been used to call for violence against Jews and Israelis worldwide.
Follow Dion J. Pierre @DionJPierre.