Demonstrators take part in an “Emergency Rally: Stand With Palestinians Under Siege in Gaza,” amid the ongoing conflict between Israel and Hamas, at Harvard University in Cambridge, Massachusetts, US, Oct. 14, 2023. Photo: REUTERS/Brian Snyder

Harvard University has ties to anti-Zionist nongovernmental organizations and other entities acting as proxy organizations for terrorist groups that warrant scrutiny and reproach, according to a new “preliminary” report published by nonprofit watchdog NGO Monitor.

Titled, “Advocacy NGOs in Academic Frameworks: Harvard University Case Study,” the report presents copious evidence that Harvard’s academic centers, including Harvard Law School, have come under the influence of Al-Haq and Addameer — two groups identified by the Israeli government as agents and propaganda manufacturers for the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP), an internationally designated terrorist organization. The NGOs, the report added, influence research and institutional culture, tilting the ideological balance of the campus toward anti-Zionism.

“The report demonstrates the major contribution from prominent advocacy NGOs to the atmosphere of propaganda and antisemitism at Harvard, particularly through frameworks claiming human rights agendas,” Professor Gerald Steinberg, who authored the report alongside Dr. Adi Schwartz, said in a statement. “The close cooperation between prominent NGOs and Harvard academic programs warrants urgent scrutiny. The blurred lines between scholarship and advocacy threaten academic integrity and risk further inflaming campus tensions.”

He added, “In this context, it is important to highlight the urgent need for transparency regarding funding for the NGOs and these Harvard academic frameworks.”

One academic center named in the report is the Harvard François-Xavier Bagnoud Center for Health and Human Rights (FXB), which was until this year formally partnered with a higher education institution located in the West Bank. The center, it explains, farms its research from an interconnected network of anti-Zionist figures and nonprofits, such as Amnesty International. Moreover, it appears to focus less on improving health outcomes than on politics and Gaza, having devoted 40 percent of its public events to the topic.

FXB director Mary T. Bassett, is particularly problematic, the report alleges.

“A review of her publication record reflects the absence of any expertise on health issues in conflict zones, in general, or regarding the Israeli-Palestinian conflict in particular,” Steinberg and Schwartz write. “She has consistently displayed an anti-Israeli ideological bias, which is distributed widely through the center’s website and the media. For example, a week after [Hamas’s Oct. 7, 2023, invasion of Israel], she published an ‘End-of-year message’ on the FXB website (since deleted), in which she wrote of ‘the potential genocide facing civilians in Gaza.’”

Another academic center, the Harvard Law School’s International Human Rights Clinic (IHRC), has cooperated in presenting research to a United Nations commission of inquiry that has been widely accused of antisemitic bias. Additionally, an instructor there once worked as a fellow for Amnesty International, a human rights organization that legal experts and Israeli officials have lambasted for pushing anti-Israel “propaganda” and “antisemitic blood libels.” The academics and clinicians there, stationed both to teach and mentor students, use the classroom to replicate their biases, accoding to NGO Monitor.

“The clinic prides itself on finding jobs for its alumni at a variety of NGOs around the globe,” the report says. “In this sense, the clinic acts as a training framework and ‘feeder’ for the NGRO ideological advocacy network.”

Steinberg and Schwartz’s research comes amid concerns that Harvard University has become a hub for antisemitism and illiberalism that is glossed with a veneer of progressive values.

“Harvard is an Anti-Semitic, Far Left Institute, as are numerous others, with students being accepted from all over the World that want to rip our Country apart,” US President Donald Trump said last month, writing on Truth Social. “The place is a Liberal mess, allowing a certain group of crazed lunatics to enter and exit the classroom and spew fake ANGER and HATE [sic]. It is truly horrific. Now, since our filings began, they act like they are all ‘American Apple Pie.’ Harvard is a threat to democracy.”

In April, the university released a long anticipated report on campus antisemitism and along with it an apology from interim president Alan Garber which acknowledged that school officials failed in key ways to address the hatred to which Jewish students were subjected following Hamas’s Oct. 7, 2023, massacre across southern Israel.

The over 300-page document provides a complete account of antisemitic incidents which transpired on Harvard’s campus in recent years — from the Harvard Palestine Solidarity Committee’s (PSC) endorsement of the Oct. 7 terrorist atrocities to an anti-Zionist faculty group’s sharing an antisemitic cartoon which depicted Jews as murderers of people of color — and said that one source of the problem is the institution’s past refusal to afford Jews the same protections against discrimination enjoyed by other minority groups.

“I am sorry for the moments when we failed to meet the high expectations we rightfully set for our community. The grave, extensive impact of the Oct. 7, 2023, Hamas assault on Israel and its aftermath had serious repercussions on campus,” Garber said in the statement that accompanied the report. “Harvard cannot — and will not — abide bigotry. We will continue to provide for the safety and security of all members of our community and safeguard their freedom from harassment. We will redouble our efforts to ensure that the university is a place where ideas are welcomed, entertained, and contested in the spirt of seeking truth; where argument proceeds without sacrificing dignity; and where mutual respect is the norm.”

Follow Dion J. Pierre @DionJPierre.

The post Harvard University Maintains Ties to Terror Proxy Groups, Report Alleges first appeared on Algemeiner.com.

US Sen. John Fetterman (D-PA) gives an interview in his office in the Russell Senate Office Building in Washington, DC, Jan. 18, 2024. Photo: Rod Lamkey / CNP/Sipa USA for NY Post via Reuters Connect

Rep. Ritchie Torres (D-NY) defended Sen. John Fetterman (D-PA) amid an onslaught of attacks regarding the latter’s mental acuity, claiming that the mounting criticism against the US senator stems from his support for Israel. 

“I know a hit piece when I see one. The only reason for the coordinated campaign against Senator John Fetterman is his unapologetic pro-Israel politics. Let’s call it what it is,” Torres posted on social media on Friday. “As someone who has struggled with depression my whole adult life, I can tell you that if you truly care about someone’s mental health, leaking hit pieces against them is a strange way of showing it.”

Fetterman, one of the most strident supporters of Israel in the US Congress, has been the subject of a series of articles which have called into question his mental stability. An article published in New York Magazine depicted the senator as moody, irrational, and conspiratorial. Additionally, the article took a series of swipes at Fetterman’s stance on Israel, suggesting that the senator’s vocal advocacy of the Jewish state stems from his supposedly deteriorating mental health. It also portrayed Fetterman as racially biased against Palestinians, claiming that in conversations he compared Gaza civilians to “a carton of sour milk.”

Another article published in Politico called Fetterman “increasingly alone,” noting that “few fellow Democrats have rushed to Fetterman’s defense” following the publication of the bombshell article in New York Magazine. The publication asserted that “private chatter about primary challenges” against Fetterman have started and that some Pennsylvania Democrats are suggesting he step down.

Though Fetterman campaigned as a progressive, he has surprisingly emerged as a staunch ally of Israel in the months following Hamas’s Oct. 7, 2023, terrorist attacks across southern Israel. Fetterman has repeatedly condemned anti-Israel voices within his own party in the US Congress, as well as elite universities for tolerating what he has characterized as antisemitic and anti-Israel hate speech on their campuses.

Fetterman’s staunch support of Israel has incensed progressives and sparked an exodus of staffers from his Senate office. Last year, 16 former campaign staffers penned a letter urging the senator to “join the right side of history” by supporting a “ceasefire” between Israel and Hamas. Several of his top communications staffers have fled to join anti-Israel operations such as the Working Families Party or the office of Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson. 

Three Republican senators — Dave McCormick (D-PA), Tom Cotton (R-AK), and Chuck Grassley (R-IA) — publicly defended Fetterman, arguing that the Pennsylvania lawmaker has been subjected to unfair political hit-pieces. 

“It’s time to put politics aside and stop these vicious, personal attacks against Senator Fetterman, his wife, and his health,” McCormick wrote. “While we have many differences, we are both committed to working together to achieve results for the people of Pennsylvania and make their lives better.”

“John Fetterman and I have our differences, but he’s a decent and genuine guy,” he added.

“The radical left is smearing him [Fetterman] with dishonest, vicious attacks because h’’s pro-Israel and they only want reliable anti-Israel politicians. Disgraceful,” Cotton posted on X/Twitter.

“The media ought to lay off Senator Fetterman,” Grassley added.

Democratic Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (NY) also gave a vote of confidence to Fetterman, claiming the Pennsylvania lawmaker is “doing a good job, and he’s a good legislator.”

The post Ritchie Torres Defends John Fetterman, Says Israel Support Cause of Attacks Over Senator’s Mental Health first appeared on Algemeiner.com.

Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi attends a press conference following a meeting with Russia’s Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov in Moscow, Russia, April 18, 2025. Photo: Tatyana Makeyeva/Pool via REUTERS

Iran‘s foreign minister warned Britain, France, and Germany on Monday that a decision to trigger a UN mechanism reimposing sanctions on Tehran could lead to an irreversible escalation of tensions.

Under the terms of a UN resolution ratifying a 2015 nuclear pact, the three European powers could reimpose United Nations sanctions against Tehran before Oct. 18, known in diplomatic circles as the “snapback mechanism.”

“Iran has made its position clear. We have officially warned all JCPOA [nuclear pact] signatories that abuse of the snapback mechanism will lead to consequences — not only the end of Europe’s role in the agreement, but also an escalation of tensions that could become irreversible,” Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi wrote in a column in French weekly magazine Le Point.

US President Donald Trump exited Tehran’s 2015 nuclear accord with six world powers in 2018 during his first term and reimposed tough sanctions that have devastated Iran‘s economy.

The European powers are not part of current negotiations between Iran and the United States, the fourth round of which ended in Oman on Sunday.

But the three powers have sought to coordinate closely with Washington with a view to whether and when they should use the snapback mechanism to raise pressure on Iran over its nuclear program.

Trump said on Monday that Iran was “talking intelligently.”

“We want Iran to be wealthy and wonderful and happy and great, but they can’t have a nuclear weapon, it’s very simple. So, I think they understand that I mean business and I think they’re being very reasonable thus far,” he told reporters.

Talks between the so-called E3 and Iran in Rome earlier in May were postponed. Araqchi said that a meeting between Iran‘s deputy foreign minister and E3 counterparts had since taken place, describing them as a “promising, but fragile start.”

France’s foreign ministry declined to comment. The British and German foreign ministries were not immediately available to comment.

According to diplomats and a document seen by Reuters, the E3 countries may trigger a snapback by August if no substantial deal can be found by then. The window closes on Oct. 18.

Relations between the E3 and Iran have worsened over the last year despite sporadic meetings, against a backdrop of new sanctions imposed on Tehran over its ballistic missile program, its detention of foreign citizens, and support for Russia in its war against Ukraine.

Iran, which has long said its nuclear program is peaceful, has breached the 2015 pact’s nuclear curbs since 2019, including “dramatically” accelerating its enrichment of uranium to up to 60 percent purity, close to the roughly 90 percent level that is weapons-grade, according to the UN nuclear watchdog.

It denies it is seeking nuclear weapons.

The post Iran Warns Europeans That Reimposing Sanctions Could Have Irreversible Consequences first appeared on Algemeiner.com.