Uncategorized
Learning Hebrew brought me closer to Judaism — and alienated me from Israel
(JTA) — Speaking to the media in the United States before and after his latest election as Israel’s prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu reassured American Jews and other supporters of Israel that their widely expressed fears of the undemocratic nature of the new Israeli governing coalition were overblown and would not in fact come to pass.
Netanyahu told the New York Times that he was still at least notionally committed to a peace deal with the Palestinians and told journalist Bari Weiss that policy would be determined by him, and not cabinet ministers like the self-described “proud homophobe” Bezalel Smotrich and convicted criminal Itamar Ben-Gvir, or the haredi Orthodox parties.
Then he returned to Israel, and promptly tweeted, “These are the basic lines of the national government headed by me: The Jewish people have an exclusive and indisputable right to all areas of the Land of Israel. The government will promote and develop settlement in all parts of the Land of Israel — in the Galilee, the Negev, the Golan, Judea and Samaria.” Netanyahu was asserting absolute Jewish sovereignty over the entirety of the West Bank, with no room for Palestinian statehood — as those politicians want and as his many American Jewish critics feared he would do.
That last tweet, despite reflecting the official position of Netanyahu’s newly inaugurated government, did not attract nearly as much attention in U.S. media as Netanyahu’s previous press tour. Because unlike Netanyahu’s fluent English-language interviews with numerous American press organizations, this tweet was in Hebrew — a language in which only 22% of American Jews possess an even minimal degree of fluency.
Like many non-Orthodox American Jews, I was once one of those other 78%. I was brought up attending a Reform synagogue, and I learned how to read enough Hebrew phonetically to have a bar mitzvah ceremony, reciting my Torah portion by rote memorization. I learned the aleph bet, and a few basic words here and there, but not much more. If I read Torah or Talmud at all, it was entirely in English translation.
But unlike many non-Orthodox American Jews, I became interested in learning Hebrew as an adult, as part of a broader interest in learning more about Jewish history, and I enrolled in courses starting in college to study Biblical, Mishnaic and modern Hebrew. Eventually, after years of study, I enrolled in a doctoral program in Jewish history at the University of Chicago, where I had to pass a rigorous Hebrew proficiency exam as a prerequisite to advance to doctoral candidacy status.
In many ways, this should have made me an ideal American Jew. After all, numerous commentators have opined on the need for more American Jews to learn Hebrew, to bring us closer to both Israeli Jewish culture and to Jewish history as a whole. As one Israeli educator stated, “Once you have Hebrew, all Israeli culture can be injected into your life.”
A wide array of American Jewish philanthropists and charities have identified funding Hebrew language education for American Jews as a priority. They should see someone like me — who went from knowing barely enough Hebrew to get through my bar mitzvah to now reading Haaretz each day in Hebrew — as a success story.
Except that this call for more American Jews to learn Hebrew often comes with an embedded political assumption: that if more American Jews learned to read and speak Hebrew, we would feel more closely linked to Israel and reverse the declining support for Israel among young American Jews.
There’s even a claim that American Jews do not have the right to criticize Israel without being able to follow Israeli political discussions in the original language. Daniel Gordis, of Shalem College in Jerusalem, complained that left-wing American Jewish journalist Peter Beinart should not be taken seriously as a commentator on Israeli affairs, as Beinart apparently “cannot read those [Hebrew] newspapers or Israeli literature until it is translated.”
The assumption is clear: If American Jews do not know Hebrew, we cannot be connected to the state of Israel, nor can we truly understand the Israeli politics we might wish to opine about. If we learned Hebrew, one Israeli-American advocate wrote, we would “be more united and support Israel in spectacular ways.”
Except that in my case, the exact opposite happened. As I learned more Hebrew, I saw how Israeli Jewish politicians often spoke in different terms in English and in Hebrew, tailoring their appeals for different audiences. Netanyahu’s recent sojourn to the United States is only one example. Take Ayelet Shaked, who sounded moderate notes to English-speaking audiences on a trip to Britain, while also telling Hebrew audiences that the “Jewish” character of Israel should supersede the notion of “equality.”
Of course, there’s nothing inherently wrong with code-switching. Politicians of all kinds do that. But the fact that some Israeli politicians think they have to sound more moderate in English than in Hebrew is telling. And when I opened myself up to what some Israeli politicians say in Hebrew, such as when Netanyahu falsely spread allegations of Arabs stealing votes in the last Israeli elections, something he did in Hebrew and not in English, or when new coalition partner Itamar Ben-Gvir put up a billboard reading, “May our enemies be gone” in Hebrew next to the pictures of three Israeli left-wing politicians, two Palestinian and one Jewish, it opened my eyes to a lot of aspects of Israeli politics that some American Jews would rather not hear.
So yes, it would be good for more American Jews to learn Hebrew. It would be a positive step for more American Jews to engage more heavily with Jewish culture and history. I certainly have no regrets about my time spent studying Hebrew.
But we should be honest about what the effects of that Hebrew language education would be. It might not be to simply make more American Jews “defend Israel” against its detractors. It might mean a more honest engagement with Israeli politics as they truly are, rather than how they are presented abroad to English-speaking audiences. And for some of us, that might even push us further away.
—
The post Learning Hebrew brought me closer to Judaism — and alienated me from Israel appeared first on Jewish Telegraphic Agency.
Uncategorized
Israel Targets Hezbollah Fighters Disguised as Paramedics as Terror Group Continues to Exploit Civilian Sites
Israeli soldiers walk next to military vehicles on the Israeli side of the Israel-Lebanon border, amid escalation between Hezbollah and Israel, and amid the US-Israeli conflict with Iran, in northern Israel, March 16, 2026. Photo: REUTERS/Avi Ohayon
Israel on Sunday night intercepted a Hezbollah operation in southern Lebanon, targeting a terrorist cell disguised as paramedics who tried to transport weapons in an ambulance toward Israeli forces.
The Israeli strike further exposed the Iran-backed Lebanese terrorist group’s use of civilians and even medical vehicles as cover for attacks.
According to Israeli intelligence, Hezbollah has fired thousands of drones and rockets toward the Jewish state since joining the war in support of Iran earlier this month, brazenly using ambulances and medical facilities as cover and embedding their weapons and operation hubs in various civilian sites.
“This incident is another example of Hezbollah’s cynical and systematic use of medical infrastructure for military purposes,” the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) said in a statement.
Last week, Israel discovered a tunnel used by Hezbollah in a church in southern Lebanon, where the terrorist group has spent years building infrastructure to attack the Jewish state.
Hezbollah tunnel at a church in southern Lebanon https://t.co/5mTGP7uSvz
— Matthew Levitt (@Levitt_Matt) March 27, 2026
Under international law, deliberately using medical teams and ambulances to conceal military activity constitutes a serious violation, as battlefield protections for medical personnel apply only when they act strictly within their humanitarian role.
As the conflict in Lebanon continues to escalate, Israeli officials have repeatedly warned that once ambulances and medical teams become part of Hezbollah’s weapons transport network, they lose their protected status and become legitimate military targets.
On Monday, the IDF destroyed more than 100 high-rise towers in southern Lebanon serving as Hezbollah’s command, control, and attack-planning centers against Israeli citizens – in what officials described as the terrorist group’s “cynical exploitation of Lebanese citizens,” embedding military infrastructure amid civilian areas.
PHOTOS: Israeli soldiers discover Hezbollah weapons cache—including RPGs, mortars, hand grenades, launchers, land mines, explosive bricks, and rifles—in southern Lebanon school. (IDF) pic.twitter.com/2HIpFtPLTQ
— Avi Mayer אבי מאיר (@AviMayer) March 27, 2026
With a ground maneuver underway to expand a defensive zone in southern Lebanon, the IDF says it has eliminated over 850 Hezbollah terrorists so far, while continuing to dismantle the group’s command and weapons infrastructure.
Last week, Israeli forces ordered the evacuation of the southern Lebanese city of Tyre, after identifying Hezbollah operatives launching heavy rocket fire from residential neighborhoods, issuing the order ahead of airstrikes to safeguard civilians from the escalating attacks.
“Hezbollah, which has dragged you into this war in service of Iran’s agenda, is deliberately operating within your neighborhoods, putting your safety at grave risk and bringing destruction to your homes and communities,” the military’s Arabic spokesperson, Col. (res.) Avichay Adraee wrote in a post on X, appealing to Lebanese citizens.
For years, Hezbollah has embedded command posts, weapons depots, snipers, and troops within Shiite villages, situating them in the heart of civilian centers near schools, hospitals, mosques, and main roads to turn entire communities into battlefields.
“We found them hiding weapons in a children’s school. We found them building a tunnel in the complex of a church in al-Kiam,” IDF International Spokesperson Lt. Col. Nadav Shoshani said during a briefing to journalists.
In recent weeks, Israel has intensified strikes targeting Hezbollah, particularly south of the Litani River, where the group’s operatives have historically been most active against the Jewish state.
Israel has long demanded that Hezbollah be barred from carrying out activities south of the Litani, located roughly 15 miles from the Israeli border.
The IDF is now moving into Lebanon to establish what officials described as a “forward defensive line,” targeting Hezbollah infrastructure and destroying buildings that were being used as operational “terrorist outposts.”
As reports surfaced of potential ceasefire talks between Lebanese and Israeli officials, Hezbollah Secretary General Naim Qassem warned Wednesday that negotiating under fire amounts to imposed surrender, adding that his fighters are prepared to continue operations “without limits.”
In just the first month of the conflict, Israeli officials report that Hezbollah has carried out more than 900 coordinated attacks, marking a sharp increase in cross-border activity and a broader expansion of its operations across the region.
So far, Israel has demolished five bridges in the Litani River area and taken effective control of three others, aiming to dominate the area from the air and prevent residents from returning south of the river until the threat of Hezbollah is removed.
Uncategorized
DNC to Consider Resolution Condemning AIPAC
Crews prepare the stage at the annual AIPAC Policy Conference in Washington, DC, March 6, 2018. Photo: Reuters / Brian Snyder
A newly introduced resolution within the Democratic National Committee (DNC) is putting the party’s relationship with pro-Israel lobbying money under renewed scrutiny, exposing a deepening divide between its progressive base and establishment leadership.
The measure, which is nonbinding, calls on Democrats across the US to reject or distance themselves from funding tied to the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), the premier pro-Israel lobbying group, and its affiliated political entities. While largely symbolic, the resolution would compel party officials and candidates to publicly take a position on whether to accept such financial support.
Allison Minnerly, a DNC member from Florida who sponsored the resolution, argues that the committee needs to take a more aggressive stance in fighting on behalf of Palestinians.
“At a time when Democratic voters might really not have felt represented or seen when it came to Gaza or seeing their party support Palestinian rights or stand against military conflict, this could be one step toward bringing those voters back into the party,” she told The Intercept.
Minnerly also presented a resolution last August which called for an arms embargo against Israel. That measure failed.
The new resolution comes as AIPAC and allied super PACs have become increasingly influential in Democratic primaries, spending millions to back candidates aligned with their positions. Critics within the party argue that this influx of money, including donations from Republican-aligned contributors, risks distorting Democratic contests and elevating outside influence.
The resolution condemns AIPAC for its purported attempts to influence Democratic politics surrounding the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and undermining efforts to fortify “Palestinian rights” in Israel. The resolution accuses AIPAC of pouring over $100 million into Democratic competitions in an attempt to shift overall results.
The resolution raises general concerns about the role of nonprofit and political groups that can obscure the origins of campaign funding, intensifying calls for greater transparency.
Progressive Democrats and grassroots activists are driving the push for the resolution, framing it as part of a broader effort to limit the influence of big money in politics. Many argue that AIPAC’s policy positions, particularly in the context of the Gaza conflict, are increasingly out of step with Democratic voters. The resolution specifically accuses AIPAC of influencing Democratic candidates to adopt positions on the Israel-Hamas conflict that are not adequately reflective of “the views of their constituents.”
Supporters say the resolution is less about enforcement and more about signaling, drawing a clear line on the type of financial backing the party should accept.
Party leaders and more moderate Democrats have approached discourse regarding the Israel-Hamas war cautiously. Centrist Democrats and those in heavily Jewish districts have balanced their support for Israel’s right to self-defense with concern over the humanitarian toll in Gaza. In progressive districts, however, anti-Israel positions have emerged as a litmus test in primaries, with candidates being grilled on whether they will vote to cease arms transfers to the Jewish state or whether they consider the military conflict in Gaza a “genocide.”
Despite the pressure campaign to dislodge the Democratic party from Israel, many moderate liberals point to AIPAC’s long-standing support for Democratic candidates and warn that rejecting its backing could put candidates at a disadvantage in competitive races. Others emphasize the importance of maintaining relationships with pro-Israel constituencies, suggesting that a sweeping break could carry political risks. However, others have accused AIPAC of bankrolling Republican and pro-Trump candidates to the expense of Democrats.
AIPAC contends that it supports pro-Israel candidates regardless of political affiliation, arguing the American-Israeli relationship is bipartisan and advances US interests. Further, other lobbying groups which support foreign countries, such as the National Iranian American Council (NIAC), donate funds and support to American candidates with little controversy.
The fight over the resolution reflects a larger transformation within the Democratic Party, as shifting voter attitudes and growing skepticism of large-scale political spending reshape internal dynamics. Polling suggests that the Democratic party has largely shifted against Israel, especially among younger voters. Ambitious Democratic hopefuls are reassessing their messaging and position on Israel, with progressive liberals aggressively condemning the country for committing a so-called “genocide” in Gaza.
As the DNC considers the measure, the outcome could serve as a signal of where the party stands in an evolving political landscape.
Uncategorized
Catholic University of America Under Fire for Requiring ‘Opposing Viewpoint’ for Combating Antisemitism Event
A general view of the Catholic University of America (CUA) campus in Washington, DC. Photo: Graeme Sloan/Sipa USA via Reuters Connect
The Catholic University of America (CUA) is being criticized for denying the Students Supporting Israel campus organization approval to host events on combating antisemitism and defending Israeli security unless it agrees to feature “opposing viewpoints.”
The episode began earlier this month when Students Supporting Israel (SSI), a national organization that has faced opposition from CUA before, publicly complained that the university refused to sanction both an event in which US Rep. Randy Fine (R-FL) would discuss “ending campus antisemitism” and another featuring an Israel Defense Forces (IDF) soldier with experience in resisting jihadist terrorism along Israel’s security fence with the West Bank.
According to university policy, civil dialogue on the contemporary issues can’t be held unless it includes “speakers representing both sides.” While the policy purports to promote intellectual exchange, critics say it has the effect of compelling speech or censoring it altogether by imposing conditions on free speech to which no group could agree without undermining its mission.
In SSI’s case, the group has said that CUA’s policy demands the participation of anti-Israel, even antisemitic voices who would leverage a speaking engagement to utter dehumanizing opinions about Jews or propaganda confected by the Hamas terrorist organization and other groups which seek to destroy the world’s only Jewish state.
The case has now become the cause of the Foundation for Individual Right and Expression (FIRE), a group which has at times disagreed with the pro-Israel community’s outlook on free speech issues.
“While CUA is a private university and therefore not bound by the First Amendment, it is legally and morally bound to adhere to the institutional commitments it has voluntarily made to protect students’ freedom of speech,” FIRE said on March 18 in a blistering demand letter to the university. “Forcing student organizations ‘to host or accommodate another speaker’s message,’ even in the service of providing a greater range of views, inevitable ‘alters the expressive content’ of the event. Having made these free speech commitments, it is no more appropriate for CUA to require Students Supporting Israel to host speakers who oppose Israel than it would be for the federal or state government to force CUA to couple its institutional pro-Catholic messages with anti-Catholic viewpoints.”
This is not the first time that the Catholic University of America has allegedly trampled on the rights of pro-Israel advocates.
In October, it allegedly used bureaucratic obstruction to suppress Jewish grieving and commemoration of the children, women, and men whom Hamas-led Palestinian terrorists murdered during the Oct. 7, 2023, massacre in southern Israel by canceling a memorial display that was approved in August.
According to the school’s SSI chapter, university officials cited an arcane policy which proscribes flying the flag of any foreign nation, except for that of the Vatican, on campus. However, SSI maintains that it was selectively applied to it with malice, citing that anti-Israel organizations have flown the Palestinian flag on campus numerous times, with and without official permission, as have many other organizations.
At the time, The Algemeiner requested photographic evidence of SSI’s claims of selective enforcement, to which the group responded by sending several pictures showing dozens of foreign flags flying on the campus, including those representing the nations of Brazil, France, and Ukraine. The group added that after canceling SSI’s memorial for the second anniversary of the Oct. 7 atrocities, university staff marched toward the event spaces and dismantled everything SSI had set up and topped off the act by stuffing Israeli flags into a plastic bag, which was left on a random office chair as an afterthought.
On Monday, SSI president Felipe Avila told The Algemeiner that CUA has a pattern of squelching pro-Israel speech.
“These event details are not isolated incidents; they represent a systemic pattern of discrimination we have faced since our founding,” Avila said. “From the dismantling of our Oct. 7 memorial to the unequal enforcement of event guidelines today, administrators consistently place insurmountable hurdles in front of our students. We should not be forced to platform competing viewpoints as a condition of discussing our own community’s safety and security.”
Citing the Second Vatican Council’s rejection of antisemitism in the Catholic Church, he added, “Students Supporting Israel will continue to vigorously defend our right to speak out against antisemitism, in the very spirit of the Church’s own teaching in Nostra Aetate.”
Follow Dion J. Pierre @DionJPierre.