Duke University. Photo: Wikimedia Commons

More than 100 Duke University alumni and parents have signed a letter to the university, expressing serious concerns about what they describe as “extremism” by Frances Hasso, Professor and Director of Undergraduate Studies in the Department of Gender, Sexuality and Feminist Studies.

The letter encapsulates details that I initially reported. It articulates serious concerns regarding Hasso’s upcoming instruction of the school’s Global Palestine course this Fall. They write:

Professor Hasso has a long and public history of hostility and antipathy toward Israel and Zionists. In just the past year and a half, Professor Hasso has questioned allegations of rape and sexual torture of Israelis from Hamas on October 7 asserting “No one was raped on October 7.” Hasso recently shared a post alleging that “Israel keeps trying to kill Israeli hostages… all as [an] excuse to prolong the Genocidal plan of erasing two million Palestinians from Gaza. Israel’s priorities are Nazi’s war-time policies – fastracking Genocide (Final Solution).” She also previously posted on X: “HAMAS OFFICIALLY DEFEATS ISRAEL!” and “The US empire cannot end soon enough.”

The alumni and parents add:

Surely Duke can find a more qualified and objective teacher for such a sensitive subject matter… At an absolute minimum, it should be co-taught by a historian with a background in Israeli and Middle Eastern studies to counter Professor Hasso’s extremism.

Following my reports earlier this month, additional information regarding Hasso has come to light.

Earlier this week, and also in February, Hasso publicly referred to Israel as “Israhell.”

In February, she posted, “Zionists should zip it, always” and earlier this month reposted, “It is our duty to confront zionists wherever they appear [sic].”

I firmly believe that Duke administrators would consider such statements — if directed towards any other group of people, such as Palestinians or Muslims — to be hostile.

The vast majority of American Jews support Israel. How exactly are Jewish and pro-Israel students expected to feel welcomed and valued in Hasso’s class, and in the gender studies department with her publicly stated belief that “Zionists should zip it, always”?

In April, Hasso alleged that Israel or Jews may have employed a “tactical nuke” in Lebanon. She wrote on X, “Thinking abt [about] ’20 Beirut port explosion, framed as corruption, but prob Zio use of tactical nuke.”

As reported by the BBC and Scientific American, tactical nuclear weapons have never been deployed in warfare, and no nuclear weapon has been utilized in conflict since World War II.

An investigation by Human Rights Watch, an organization recognized for its highly critical stance towards Israel, found that the 2020 Beirut port explosion was a “non-nuclear explosion” and attributed responsibility to Lebanese officials, recommending they face sanctions.

Yet Hasso publicly says that the port explosion in Beirut is probably due to “Zio use of tactical nuke.” Even if she were to later claim this was an exaggeration, this is clearly a hostile and aggressive environment for any student who supports Israel’s right to exist, like the vast majority of Jews, and also the vast majority of Americans.

In a further escalation of her assertion, Hasso employed the antisemitic term “Zio” in her statement. The Jewish Journal explains Zio is “a derogatory code word for Jews invented by white supremacists.”

Hasso has repeatedly made social media posts using this despicable slur.

In 2023, Hasso made a social media post calling the Auschwitz Memorial account on X “bullshit.”

On Sunday, Hasso reposted, “Israel and America are two of the most evil countries in the world.”

How can any students — besides that hate both America and Israel — feel they are in an open learning environment when they study with Hasso?

The Duke alumni and parents concluded their letter to President Price by writing:

We appreciate your leadership at Duke in preventing the campus antisemitism that has plagued so many other elite US universities. We continue to fully support your efforts to ensure that Duke remains a welcoming place for all students, including Jewish and pro-Israel students. We hope that you will agree that this course taught by Professor Hasso would surely not be commensurate with that important goal.

Given the prolonged time that Hasso has been allowed to spew these views, it is time for Duke President Vincent Price and his senior administration to be considered complicit. If Duke does not take serious action, the Federal government should focus on the Duke administration, much as it has done with Harvard and Columbia.

Peter Reitzes writes about issues related to antisemitism and Israel.

The post Duke Parents and Faculty Respond to Hate-Filled Indoctrination at School; Will Federal Government Act? first appeared on Algemeiner.com.

Police officers work at the site where two Israeli embassy staff were shot dead near the Capital Jewish Museum in Washington, DC, US May 21, 2025. Photo: REUTERS/Jonathan Ernst

The New York Times started the week attacking the Heritage Foundation for a project aimed at combating antisemitism.

It was poor timing, given the shooting Wednesday night of two staffers of the Israeli embassy in Washington by a gunman shouting “free Palestine.” Heritage was able to respond: “Many have been questioning why Heritage launched Project Esther, our national strategy to combat antisemitism in the United States. Because antisemitism is leading to Jewish people being assassinated on the streets of our capital, that’s why.”

The Times countered with a news article expressing anxiety that “the killings also risked painting all pro-Palestinian activists, the vast majority of whom do not engage in violence, with the same brush, which could lead to further repression of their movement.” That’s quite an angle on the murder of Israeli embassy employees in the streets of Washington, that it creates the “risk” of “further repression” of the anti-Israel protests that the Times insists on inaccurately describing as pro-Palestinian. You can’t make this stuff up.

The original Times attack on Heritage, breathlessly headlined “The Group Behind Project 2025 Has a Plan to Crush the Pro-Palestinian Movement,” quoted as an expert “Jonathan Jacoby, the national director of the Nexus Project, a watchdog group that works to combat antisemitism and protect open debate.” The Times didn’t say that Nexus got started with $75,000 in grants from the Open Society Foundations, the George and Alexander Soros outfit that also pays anti-Israel protesters.

The Times article, which appeared on page one of the print paper on Monday, May 20, was particularly strange because it included a passage that described Jewish Voice for Peace as a Jewish organization.

The Times reported that the Heritage project “has drawn criticism from many Jewish organizations amid increasing calls for them to push back against the Trump administration.”

After the introductory reference to “many Jewish organizations,” the Times report went on immediately to quote one:

“Trump is pulling straight from the authoritarian playbook, using tools of repression first against those organizing for Palestinian rights,” said Stefanie Fox, the executive director of Jewish Voice for Peace. “And in so doing, sharpening those tools for use against anyone and everyone who challenges his fascist agenda.”

Recent polling has shown the overwhelming majority of American Jews reject Jewish Voice for Peace. The Algemeiner reported on a study earlier this year finding the group had a “record of support for the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP), an internationally designated terrorist organization with the stated goal of dismantling Israel and replacing it with a Palestinian state.”

The Algemeiner has previously reported that JVP argued in a recently resurfaced 2021 booklet that Jews should not write Hebrew liturgy because hearing the language would be “deeply traumatizing” to Palestinians.

A Heritage Foundation staffer, Yehoshua Jason Bedrick, said the Times was “smearing the Heritage Foundation.”

“If you actually *read* Project Esther, you will find that it’s not the fascist nightmare of the NYT’s fever dreams, but rather a sober and thoughtful effort to address the very difficult problem of foreign terrorist groups and their government sponsors attempting to weaponize our freedoms against us–while preserving our freedoms and respecting constitutional norms,” Bedrick wrote in a Facebook post.

The Heritage Foundation wants to combat the Hamasniks and the antisemites who are cheering on them and their agenda. The New York Times apparently thinks it’s the Heritage Foundation, rather than the Hamasniks, who are the real problem. The sad events of the past week made clear how misguided that is. And it’s just short of unbelievable, and well beyond grotesque, that, rather than ceding the point or just being quiet, the Times is reacting to the shooting by fretting that it might have the unfortunate effect of “further” repressing the anti-Israel activists.

Ira Stoll was managing editor of The Forward and North American editor of The Jerusalem Post. He writes frequently at TheEditors.com. His media critique, a regular Algemeiner feature, can be found here.

The post New York Times Fears DC Shooting Could Fuel ‘Further Repression’ of Anti-Israel Activists first appeared on Algemeiner.com.

Members of the Iranian delegation leave the Omani embassy, where the fifth round of US-Iran talks took place, in Rome, Italy, May 23, 2025. Photo: REUTERS/Guglielmo Mangiapane

Iranian and US negotiators wrapped up a fifth round of talks on Friday, with mediator Oman saying there was some limited progress in negotiations aimed at resolving a decades-long dispute over Tehran’s nuclear ambitions.

Despite both Washington and Tehran taking a tough stance in public ahead of the talks on Iran‘s uranium enrichment, Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi said there was potential for progress after Oman made several proposals during the negotiations in Rome.

“We have just completed one of the most professional rounds of talks … We firmly stated Iran‘s position … The fact that we are now on a reasonable path, in my view, is itself a sign of progress,” Araqchi told state TV.

“The proposals and solutions will be reviewed in respective capitals … and the next round of talks will be scheduled accordingly.”

There was no immediate comment from the US delegation.

The stakes are high for both sides. President Donald Trump wants to curtail Tehran’s potential to produce a nuclear weapon that could trigger a regional nuclear arms race and perhaps threaten Israel. The Islamic Republic, for its part, wants to be rid of devastating sanctions on its oil-based economy.

Omani Foreign Minister Badr Albusaidi said on X the talks between Araqchi and Trump’s Middle East envoy Steve Witkoff had ended “with some but not conclusive progress.”

Ahead of the talks, Araqchi wrote on X: “Zero nuclear weapons = we Do have a deal. Zero enrichment = we do NOT have a deal. Time to decide.”

White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt told reporters on Thursday that Trump believes negotiations with Iran are “moving in the right direction.”

Among remaining stumbling blocks are Tehran’s refusal to ship abroad its entire stockpile of highly enriched uranium – possible raw material for nuclear bombs – or engage in discussions over its ballistic missile program.

STUMBLING BLOCKS

US Secretary of State Marco Rubio said on Tuesday that Washington was working to reach an accord that would allow Iran to have a civil nuclear energy program but not enrich uranium, while acknowledging that this “will not be easy.”

Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who has the last say on matters of state, rejected demands to stop refining uranium as “excessive and outrageous,” warning that such talks were unlikely to yield results.

Iran says it is ready to accept some limits on enrichment but needs watertight guarantees that Washington would not renege on a future nuclear accord.

Trump in his first term in 2018 ditched a 2015 nuclear pact between major powers and Iran. Since returning to office this year, he has restored a “maximum pressure” campaign on Tehran and reimposed sweeping US sanctions that continue to hobble the Iranian economy.

Iran responded by escalating enrichment far beyond the 2015 pact’s limits.

Wendy Sherman, a former US undersecretary who led the US negotiating team that reached the 2015 agreement, earlier said that Tehran presents enrichment as a matter of sovereignty.

“I don’t think it is possible to get a deal with Iran where they literally dismantle their program, give up their enrichment, even though that would be ideal,” she told Reuters.

The cost of failure of the talks could be high. Iran‘s arch-foe Israel sees Iran‘s nuclear programme as an existential threat and says it would never allow the clerical establishment to obtain nuclear weapons. Tehran says it has no such ambitions and the purposes are purely civilian.

Israel’s strategic affairs minister and the head of its foreign intelligence service, Mossad, were also due to be in Rome for talks with the US negotiators, a source aware of the matter told Reuters.

Araqchi said on Thursday that Washington would bear legal responsibility if Israel attacked Iranian nuclear installations, following a CNN report that Israel might be preparing strikes.

The post US, Iran Conclude Fifth Round of Nuclear Talks; Tehran Says Potential for Progress first appeared on Algemeiner.com.