Uncategorized
Prominent Jewish leaders add to drumbeat of criticism of Israel’s new government
WASHINGTON (JTA) — A slate of 169 prominent American Jews, including former leaders of major mainstream Jewish organizations, called on U.S. politicians not to conflate criticism of Israel with antisemitism, a signal of worsening relations between the new far-right Israeli government and the U.S. Jewish community.
The statement Wednesday signals increased anxiety among Jewish leaders about how to maintain support for Israel when it is led by a government promoting policies alien to the values of an overwhelmingly liberal American Jewish community. It also departs substantially from a pro-Israel community that has sought to label various forms of criticizing Israel as antisemitic.
It comes just days after 134 historians of Jewish and Israeli history, based both in Israel and the United States, accused Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of threatening the country’s existence through his agreement to far-reaching reforms advocated by his coalition partners on the far right.
It also comes just weeks after hundreds of rabbis from Reform, Orthodox and Conservative congregations said they would not allow extremist ministers in the new Cabinet to address their congregations and would encourage their Jewish communities to boycott them as well.
The statement by the prominent American Jews addresses the newly installed Congress, and anticipates increased U.S. Jewish criticism of Israel because of the new government in Jerusalem. Among its signatories are past leaders of mainstream Jewish organizations that have traditionally shied from Israel criticism, among them the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations and the Jewish federations system, as well as past leaders of the Reform and Conservative movements.
Notably absent are current leaders, who have been reluctant to speak out about new members of the Israeli government who want to greatly expand Jewish settlement in the West Bank, curb advocacy for minority rights and weaken Israel’s Supreme Court.
“As the 118th Congress begins its work, we believe it is important to state our concerns — which are widely shared by supporters of Israel here and around the world and by a significant number of Israelis — regarding some of the policies proposed by members of Israel’s new government,” the statement says.
It lists among those policies proposals by Netanyahu’s new government to weaken the independence of the judiciary, add restrictions to the Law of Return determining Jewish immigration, restrict non-Orthodox religious practice in Israel and expand Israeli sovereignty in the West Bank.
“Our criticisms emanate from a love for Israel and a steadfast support for its security and well-being,” said the statement. “Some will try to dismiss their validity by labeling them antisemitic.” Instead, the statement said, the criticisms “reflect a real concern that the new government’s direction mirrors anti-democratic trends that we see arising elsewhere — in other nations and here in the U.S., rather than reinforcing the shared democratic values that are foundational to the U.S.-Israel relationship.”
The statement notably appends a guide to detecting what is and isn’t antisemitic in discourse about Israel that differs markedly in its emphasis from a definition adopted by the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance.
The IHRA definition, which pro-Israel organizations have sought in recent years to introduce into legislation in the United States and elsewhere, focuses on Israel criticism that its authors deem antisemitic; the guide attached to Wednesday’s statement focuses instead on criticism of Israel that does not merit being called antisemitic.
“Mistaking political disagreements about Israel for antisemitism is counterproductive,” it says. “It diverts the debate away from the substance to whether something is — or is not — antisemitic. It hinders policy debate about Israel. It distracts from addressing real instances of antisemitism and bigotry.”
The guide issued alongside the statement also says anti-Zionism and Israel boycotts may in some instances not be antisemitic, a sharp difference from ministers of the new Israeli government who say unequivocally that those things are always antisemitic.
“Boycotting goods made in the West Bank and/or Israel is not antisemitic unless it specifically singles out Israel because of its Jewish character,” said the statement. Anti-Zionism can be antisemitic if it specifically denies the Jewish right to self-determination or it employs an antisemitic trope. But opposition to Zionism in and of itself is not necessarily antisemitic.”
Among the signatories are Tom Dine, the executive director of AIPAC in its period of massive growth in the 1980s; Alan Solow, who chaired the Conference of Presidents during the Obama presidency; Rabbi David Ellenson, the former president of Hebrew Union College-Jewish Institute of Religion, and Rabbi Ismar Schorsch, the chancellor emeritus of The Jewish Theological Seminary.
Other signatories include Rabbi David A. Teutsch, the former president of the Reconstructionist Rabbinical College; Rabbi Eric Yoffie, the former president of the Union for Reform Judaism; Rabbi David Saperstein, formerly the longtime head of Reform’s Religious Action Center; Joel Tauber, a former chairman of United Jewish Communities and the United Jewish Appeal, and Joe Kanfer, a former chairman of the Jewish Federations of North America.
Earlier this week, a slate of 134 historians of Jewish and Israeli history in Israeli American universities accused Netanyahu’s new government of “endangering the very existence of the State of Israel and the Israeli nation.” The statement said Netanyahu and his allies are dismantling the protections against government overreach that Israel’s founders deliberately put into place.
“Israel can be likened to a ship sailing the high seas,” the statement says. “The current government is taking out the keel, consciously dismantling the state’s institutions.”
—
The post Prominent Jewish leaders add to drumbeat of criticism of Israel’s new government appeared first on Jewish Telegraphic Agency.
Uncategorized
Anti-Israel Streamer Hasan Piker Reaffirms Hamas Support
Hasan Piker. Photo: Wikimedia Commons
Controversial streamer Hasan Piker raised eyebrows Monday after reaffirming his support for the Hamas terrorist group during an interview on the popular left-wing podcast “Pod Save America.”
While speaking with Jon Favreau, former speechwriter to US President Barack Obama, Piker doubled down on his assertion that Hamas is a preferable governing entity compared to Israel.
“This [quote] is from January,” Favreau said while reflecting on previous comments made by the streamer. “‘Hamas is a thousand times better than a fascist settler colonial apartheid state.”
“I stand by that,” Piker responded.
Favreau then asked Piker to clarify whether his comments were genuine or hyperbolic.
“[T]his is the one that bothered me most when I first heard it …. Even if you believe what happened in Gaza is genocide and what’s happening in the West Bank is apartheid, those are different claims from ‘Hamas is a thousand times better,’ because Hamas is an organization that has massacred, raped, kidnapped civilians on Oct. 7,” the former Obama speechwriter said, referring to Hamas’s invasion of and massacre across southern Israel in 2023. “They’ve also been catastrophic for Palestinians by almost every measure … Do you actually mean that or is that a rhetorical move or like a solidarity signal?”
“I mean, it’s all of the above. I do mean it,” Piker affirmed. “I’m a lesser-evil voter and therefore I would vote for Hamas over Israel every single time.”
Jon Favreau: “When you say Hamas is a thousand times better, do you mean that?”
Hasan Piker: “I do mean it … I would vote for Hamas over Israel every single time.” pic.twitter.com/1dNxvOGslo
— Shannon Watts (@shannonrwatts) April 13, 2026
Hamas, which openly calls for the destruction of Israel and the murder of Jews, has launched a brutal crackdown on dissent among fellow Palestinians in recent months. Social media videos widely circulated online show Hamas members brutally beating Palestinians and carrying out public executions of alleged collaborators with Israel and rival militia members.
Piker also suggested that Hamas is “entirely comprised” of orphaned children whose parents were killed in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict — remarks that critics say distort reality and risk minimizing the group’s violent actions. He framed Hamas as a product of trauma, arguing that many of its members are driven by personal loss tied to Israeli military operations. The comments quickly drew backlash from analysts, policymakers, and pro-Israel advocates, who say the characterization is both factually inaccurate and morally problematic.
Piker continued, comparing Israel to Nazi Germany and repudiating Zionism as “an ethno-religious supremacist ideology that is exterminationist.”
The US and several countries around the world designate Hamas as a terrorist organization. On Oct. 7, 2023, Hamas-led Palestinian terrorists murdered 1,200 people, kidnapped 251 hostages, and perpetrated widespread sexual violence during their rampage
Piker’s remarks are the latest in a series of contentious statements on Israel and the broader Middle East, which have drawn scrutiny from both media watchdogs and political figures. His large online following has amplified the impact of his commentary, fueling debate over the responsibility of digital influencers in shaping public understanding of global conflicts.
Piker has drawn immense scrutiny in recent months as his popularity has surged and mainstream Democratic politicians have increasingly appeared on his livestream show.
Beyond Hamas, Piker has also expressed support for authoritarian regimes in China, Russia, and Iran.
Uncategorized
Iran Executed More People in 2025 Than Any Year in Nearly Four Decades, NGOs Find
A February 2023 protest in Washington, DC calling for an end to executions and human rights violations in Iran. Photo: Reuters/ Bryan Olin Dozier
The Islamic regime in Iran has continued to accelerate its execution machine into a steady grind of state-ordered killings, now rising again to a peak unseen since 1989.
According to a joint-annual report released by the European groups Iran Human Rights (IHR) in Norway and Together Against the Death Penalty (ECPM) in France, Iran executed at least 1,639 people in 2025, a 68 percent leap from the 975 killed in 2024 and the highest seen since tracking began in 2008. All known executions were reportedly conducted by hanging.
The number of executed women also rose to 48, a jump from 31 in 2024. Courts convicted 21 of these women for murdering their husbands or fiancés.
The figure of 1,639 human beings represents an average of four executions each day; however, IHR warns that the full body count is likely much higher, as the group requires two sources to confirm an execution.
“By creating fear through an average of four to five executions per day in 2025, authorities tried to prevent new protests and prolong their crumbling rule,” IHR director Mahmood Amiry-Moghaddam said in a statement.
“The death penalty in Iran is used as a political tool of oppression and repression, with ethnic minorities and other marginalized groups disproportionately represented among those executed,” added Raphaël Chenuil-Hazan, executive director of ECPM.
The report cites the higher levels of executions targeting Sunni Muslims such as Kurds in the west and Baluch in the southeast.
A significant number of executions involved non-lethal offenses, with nearly half of documented executions – 747 people – convicted of drug crimes. While most executions took place inside prisons, the number of public hangings more than tripled to 11.
The report begins with a foreword written on Feb. 20 by human rights lawyer Nasrin Sotoudeh. On April 1, Iranian police arrested her and today her whereabouts remain unknown.
Beginning by noting that Iran has ranked highest in executions per capita for many years and remains one of the highest for total killings, Sotoudeh writes that “the reasons for opposing the inhuman punishment of execution are so clear that they hardly require repetition. Nevertheless, governments such as the Islamic Republic of Iran often invoke public opinion to justify this inhuman punishment.”
Sotoudeh explains that the regime justifies executing murderers and drug traffickers because of a supposed public demand, “as though that settles the matter.” She points out that historically executions can rise after revolutions following dictatorships.
“We experienced this ourselves within the past half-century. After the 1979 Revolution, many officers and senior officials of the monarchy were executed without fair trials,” Sotoudeh writes. “Yet the cycle of violence did not end, and the execution machine went on to claim the lives of others, including those who had contributed to the revolution’s victory. This cycle has not ceased to this day, nearly half a century later, and has in fact accelerated.”
Invoking one of history’s most famous victims of unjust execution, Sotoudeh adds, “This is precisely why death sentences should never be issued under the influence of public opinion. Socrates, too, was sentenced to death at the age of 70 by a vote of the Athenian majority and chose to drink the cup of poison rather than leave Athens.”
The report reveals the extent to which the regime has sought to conceal its bloody hands. Official government sources only announced 113 executions (less than 7 percent), down from 9.7 percent in 2024 and 15 percent in 2023.
Rape is a capital offense in Iran, with 37 people killed after convictions. The report notes that “as in previous years, people accused of crimes were tortured and forced to confess. Criminal convictions are frequently based on information extracted under torture.”
The execution increase established in 2025 appears to have continued into 2026.
On Monday, for example, the Human Rights Activist News Agency announced that Judge Iman Afshari of the Tehran Revolutionary Court had sentenced to death protesters Mohammadreza Majidi-Asl, Bita Hemmati, Behrouz Zamaninejad, and Kourosh Zamaninejad.
The charges which Afshari judged as worthy of execution included “destruction of public property,” “chanting protest slogans,” “throwing objects including bottles, concrete blocks, and incendiary materials from rooftops,” and “participation in protest gatherings on Jan. 8 and 9, 2026.”
The Iranian regime unleashed a brutal, nationwide crackdown on anti-government protesters in January, resulting in the deaths and arrests of tens of thousands of people. Activists fear that many of those detained will be executed.
The report cites Max du Plessis, a UN Fact-Finding Mission expert, who said in October after observing the increase in killings, “if executions form part of a widespread and systemic attack against a civilian population, as a matter of policy, then those responsible – including the judges who impose capital punishment – may be held accountable for crimes against humanity.”
Uncategorized
Hampshire College closure reverberates for alumni who treasured a Yiddishist hub
Hampshire College, once a hub for Yiddish scholarship thanks to its proximity to the Yiddish Book Center, will close by the end of the year amid financial challenges.
The Yiddish Book Center will not be affected by the closure, said spokesperson Rebecka McDougall, noting that the Yiddish Book Center owns its land and building, located adjacent to campus.
Even so, the closure signals the end of an era for Yiddishists who found their footing at Hampshire. Among its alumni are Yiddish singer Miryem-Khaye Seigel, the Yiddish Book Center’s academic director Madeleine (Mindl) Cohen, and the Forward’s archivist, Chana Pollack.
“It connected me to other people that were very instrumental to my broader Yiddish interests,” said Lana Adler, a 2013 Hampshire graduate who went on to work at the YIVO Institute for Jewish Research, which houses the largest collection of Yiddish-language works in the world. “It was an incredibly important space for Yiddish.”
Hampshire and Yiddish
Founded in 1970 in Amherst, Massachusetts, Hampshire College was conceived as an experiment in alternative education, offering self-designed concentrations instead of traditional majors and “narrative evaluations” rather than grades.
A decade later, it became home to a major Yiddish revival effort when alum Aaron Lansky returned to found the Yiddish Book Center. Alarmed that American Jews were discarding irreplaceable Yiddish books, Lansky set out to save them.
New York City seemed the obvious base. But mentors warned he might “get swallowed up” among the city’s many Jewish institutions, recalled Penina Migdal Glazer, a former Hampshire professor, in a 2024 interview.
Instead, Lansky chose Amherst — a place he knew from his college years, with faculty mentors who could support the project, and more affordable land. He purchased 10 acres on an apple orchard next to the Hampshire campus and, in 1997, built the Harry and Jeanette Weinberg Building, designed to evoke an Eastern European shtetl.
In the years that followed, the Yiddish Book Center and Hampshire College became a magnet for students interested in Yiddish. The two partnered to host Yiddish language classes and programs like the Yiddish Book Center’s Steiner Summer Yiddish Program, where participants immerse themselves in seven weeks of Yiddish language and culture while staying in Hampshire College dorms.
The closure’s impact
Facing declining enrollment and mounting debt, Hampshire College’s Board of Trustees voted to permanently close the school following the fall 2026 semester, president Jennifer Chrisler announced Tuesday.
McDougall told the Forward that the Yiddish Book Center’s summer residential programs are independent of Hampshire College and will continue, adding, “There is currently no programmatic partnership with Hampshire College.”
“We are saddened by Hampshire College’s announcement,” Susan Bronsin, president of the Yiddish Book Center, said in a statement. “Hampshire has been a valued neighbor for many years, and we recognize the significance of this moment for its community.”
For Aleks Ritter, co-founder of the student group Hampshire Jewish Life, the campus’ proximity to the Yiddish Book Center was a large part of the school’s appeal when he first applied. Ritter had studied Yiddish through YIVO in high school and hoped to continue in college.
He and his friends would often go to the Yiddish Book Center to study and hang out, and several of his friends worked part-time jobs there.
“The school has been really wonderful for Jewish students,” Ritter said.
Now, Ritter will have to transfer to another college in the area.
For alumni like Adler, the loss also feels personal. Hampshire was the first time she had formally studied Yiddish — an experience that shaped her career.
“There was something special happening at Hampshire,” Adler said. “It was very important to me and to a lot of other people. I’m just so sad. I can’t believe it’s closing.”
The post Hampshire College closure reverberates for alumni who treasured a Yiddishist hub appeared first on The Forward.