RSS
Red Pins at the Oscars: Is the Call for a Ceasefire Antisemitic?
Director Jonathan Glazer, of the United Kingdom, poses with the Oscar for Best International Feature Film for “The Zone of Interest” in the Oscars photo room at the 96th Academy Awards in Hollywood, Los Angeles, California, US, March 10, 2024. Photo: REUTERS/Carlos Barria
JNS.org – A handful of celebrities wore ceasefire pins to the annual Academy Awards ceremony in California on March 10. The red pins represent the organization Artists 4 Ceasefire, which has crafted a letter to U.S. President Joe Biden that has been signed by roughly 400 actors, musicians and other Hollywood personalities. Many pro-Israel activists have taken issue with the pins, some alleging that their wearers are expressing subtle, if not blatant, antisemitism.
While it may be true that some of the signatories to the Artist 4 Ceasefire letter are indeed antisemitic, it is also certain that many of those who have taken up the ceasefire cause—both Hollywood luminaries and average citizens—are motivated not by any animus to Jews, per se, but by an underlying opposition to war of any kind. To recognize this is not to justify or validate the calls for a ceasefire, but it is an important distinction to make for a number of reasons.
First, it is important to reserve the label of antisemite for those who are actually hateful of Jews. To ascribe this virulent bias to those to whom it does not apply isn’t helpful to the Jewish and/or Israeli cause. It waters down the term by equating true racists with those who oppose the war in Gaza for less malicious reasons. It also deafens the public to genuine claims of antisemitism by crying wolf too often. Furthermore, it immediately alienates those who are falsely accused and decreases the likelihood of productive dialogue in which they may be willing to hear an alternate perspective and eventually alter their opinion.
In order to effectively communicate with those who are calling for a ceasefire for reasons other than antisemitism, it is important to maintain objectivity and to discern their authentic motives and feelings. While Jews generally, and Israelis in particular, are extremely sensitive to the ultimate ramifications and consequences of a ceasefire, many who have no direct relationship to the conflict are not. A ceasefire to the vast majority of Israelis (and to the 82% of Americans who support Israel’s continued war against Hamas) means the following:
Hamas will be left intact to commit future Oct. 7-style massacres as they have stated explicitly that they will do;
The 130-some hostages that remain in captivity will not be released;
And the Iranian mullahs, the Muslim Brotherhood and other fascistic extremist groups around the world will be emboldened to carry out further terrorist attacks throughout the world.
There are certainly those within the ceasefire camp who understand these consequences and continue to assail Israel’s right to defend itself because of an antipathy for Jews and/or the Jewish state. Yet to many Western liberals, including some percentage of the 400 Hollywood figures who signed the Artists 4 Ceasefire letter and/or wore red pins to the Oscars, a ceasefire means, quite simply, the end of war and the cessation of civilian casualties. This, in itself, is a noble goal. If one genuinely believes that a ceasefire will result in this humane outcome, then one would be callous to ignore the suffering and horror of war, and to refrain from advocating for a stoppage of violence.
Yet this belief is shortsighted and unrealistic. The reality, of course, is that a ceasefire will result not in fewer casualties but in far more deaths and carnage. Left in power, Hamas will not only regroup and commit further atrocities against both Jews and Palestinians alike; it, along with a host of other terrorist organizations and Iranian proxies, will be emboldened by what it will deem a victory against Israel and the West. This is not merely speculation. The U.S. director of national intelligence, Avril Haines, testified on Monday that groups like ISIS and Al-Qaeda have been motivated by Oct. 7, and this will occasion an upsurge in terrorist attacks around the world. Anything less than a crushing and disabling defeat of Hamas will thus beget additional bloodshed for years and possibly decades to come.
Hollywood endings do not exist outside of Hollywood.
Rather than antisemitism, the refusal of many ceasefire activists to acknowledge this reality can be attributed to naiveté and wishful thinking. The opposition to war and an aversion to violence are shared by all people of morality and conscience. War is indeed horrific, and innocents necessarily suffer—particularly in a case where combatants knowingly embed themselves in civilian populations to exploit them as human shields. Yet there is a time when inaction is not an option. There is a time when a country must defend itself against an enemy that refuses to coexist peacefully. The choice for Israel is not peace or war; it is war now or the inevitable massacre of its innocent civilians again and again until the implacable threat is eliminated once and for all.
It is the obvious reality of Israel’s impossible conundrum that makes it easy to ascribe malice and bias to those promoting a ceasefire: The heinous acts of Oct. 7 (all recorded, publicized, and then scrubbed and denied by the perpetrators); the continued captivity of more than 130 kidnapped and brutalized hostages; the explicit guarantees of future massacres; the clear historic record of Israeli concessions and attempts at peaceful coexistence all met with additional violence and intransigence; the documented indoctrination of Palestinian children with hatred and bloodlust for their Jewish neighbors. How is it possible that a rational person could assess these facts and determine that Israel should be hamstrung in its efforts to finally resolve this conflict by eliminating those who have perpetuated it for generations, and who promise to perpetuate it until there is not a single Jew that remains anywhere in the land?
Yet Hollywood is not known for its moral clarity, and artists are not generally admired for their rationality. They are, rather, feted for their creativity and the pathos that is reflected in their imaginative work. Artists are dreamers, not realists. Israelis, on the contrary, do not have the luxury of indulging in fantasy and ignoring the cold, hard reality that comes from living on the front lines. While all people of hope are inclined to dream of a time of peace, Israelis have long been disabused of the notion that laying down weapons will foster harmony. Sadly, there are those who respect nothing more than force and who perceive any attempt at reconciliation as a sign of weakness and an invitation to further aggression.
Hollywood is not known for its moral clarity, and artists are not generally admired for their rationality.
Western liberals, of whom the Hollywood elite are frequently the most vocal and visible representatives and mouthpieces, do not understand the culture of death and radicalism that pervades Hamas and other terrorist fundamentalists. They are under the thrall of the parochial illusion that all populations think and believe as we do. They are convinced that just as we value life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, so do those who refer to America as the Great Satan. If only we would lay down our weapons and extend our arms to them, then they would abandon their grievances and welcome our embrace. But Hollywood endings do not exist outside of Hollywood.
Israel supporters and Jews worldwide are facing the greatest challenge they have known in generations. Oct. 7 was the largest massacre of Jews since the Holocaust, and in the past five months, antisemitic incidents have skyrocketed by hundreds of percentages across the Western world. There is certainly the need for vigilance and the development of strategies to combat the resurgence of antisemitism in places where it was erroneously thought to be no more. Yet simultaneously, we must be careful not to cry wolf and misidentify the motives of those who have been misinformed or who have not yet taken the time to rationally evaluate the long-term outcomes of their position.
War is horrific, and the cessation of violence is absolutely the proper goal. Yet were the signatories of the Artists 4 Ceasefire letter presented with the facts of the conflict and reality of the long-term consequences of Israel’s inability to finish Hamas, there is reason to believe that at least some of the red pins would be replaced by yellow ribbons. If one truly cares for humanity—for the lives of Jews, Palestinians, and people of all backgrounds and persuasions—then the only answer is to fight against those who refuse to coexist and to cease fire only when they are unable to murder, maim, rape and torture those who do not accept their tyrannical rule.
The post Red Pins at the Oscars: Is the Call for a Ceasefire Antisemitic? first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Syria’s Sharaa Says Talks With Israel Could Yield Results ‘In Coming Days’
Syrian President Ahmed al-Sharaa speaks at the opening ceremony of the 62nd Damascus International Fair, the first edition held since the fall of Bashar al-Assad’s regime, in Damascus, Syria, Aug. 27, 2025. Photo: REUTERS/Khalil Ashawi
Syria’s President Ahmed al-Sharaa said on Wednesday that ongoing negotiations with Israel to reach a security pact could lead to results “in the coming days.”
He told reporters in Damascus the security pact was a “necessity” and that it would need to respect Syria’s airspace and territorial unity and be monitored by the United Nations.
Syria and Israel are in talks to reach an agreement that Damascus hopes will secure a halt to Israeli airstrikes and the withdrawal of Israeli troops who have pushed into southern Syria.
Reuters reported this week that Washington was pressuring Syria to reach a deal before world leaders gather next week for the UN General Assembly in New York.
But Sharaa, in a briefing with journalists including Reuters ahead of his expected trip to New York to attend the meeting, denied the US was putting any pressure on Syria and said instead that it was playing a mediating role.
He said Israel had carried out more than 1,000 strikes on Syria and conducted more than 400 ground incursions since Dec. 8, when the rebel offensive he led toppled former Syrian leader Bashar al-Assad.
Sharaa said Israel’s actions were contradicting the stated American policy of a stable and unified Syria, which he said was “very dangerous.”
He said Damascus was seeking a deal similar to a 1974 disengagement agreement between Israel and Syria that created a demilitarized zone between the two countries.
He said Syria sought the withdrawal of Israeli troops but that Israel wanted to remain at strategic locations it seized after Dec. 8, including Mount Hermon. Israeli ministers have publicly said Israel intends to keep control of the sites.
He said if the security pact succeeds, other agreements could be reached. He did not provide details, but said a peace agreement or normalization deal like the US-mediated Abraham Accords, under which several Muslim-majority countries agreed to normalize diplomatic ties with Israel, was not currently on the table.
He also said it was too early to discuss the fate of the Golan Heights because it was “a big deal.”
Reuters reported this week that Israel had ruled out handing back the zone, which Donald Trump unilaterally recognized as Israeli during his first term as US president.
“It’s a difficult case – you have negotiations between a Damascene and a Jew,” Sharaa told reporters, smiling.
SECURITY PACT DERAILED IN JULY
Sharaa also said Syria and Israel had been just “four to five days” away from reaching the basis of a security pact in July, but that developments in the southern province of Sweida had derailed those discussions.
Syrian troops were deployed to Sweida in July to quell fighting between Druze armed factions and Bedouin fighters. But the violence worsened, with Syrian forces accused of execution-style killings and Israel striking southern Syria, the defense ministry in Damascus and near the presidential palace.
Sharaa on Wednesday described the strikes near the presidential palace as “not a message, but a declaration of war,” and said Syria had still refrained from responding militarily to preserve the negotiations.
RSS
Anti-Israel Activists Gear Up to ‘Flood’ UN General Assembly
US Capitol Police and NYPD officers clash with anti-Israel demonstrators, on the day Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu addresses a joint meeting of Congress, on Capitol Hill, in Washington, DC, July 24, 2024. Photo: REUTERS/Umit Bektas
Anti-Israel groups are planning a wave of raucous protests in New York City during the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) over the next several days, prompting concerns that the demonstrations could descend into antisemitic rhetoric and intimidation.
A coalition of anti-Israel activists is organizing the protests in and around UN headquarters to coincide with speeches from Middle Eastern leaders and appearances by US President Donald Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. The demonstrations are expected to draw large crowds and feature prominent pro-Palestinian voices, some of whom have been criticized for trafficking in antisemitic tropes, in addition to calling for the destruction of Israe.
Organizers of the demonstrations have promoted the coordinated events on social media as an opportunity to pressure world leaders to hold Israel accountable for its military campaign against Hamas in Gaza, with some messaging framed in sharply hostile terms.
On Sunday, for example, activists shouted at Israel’s Ambassador to the UN Danny Danon.
“Zionism is terrorism. All you guys are terrorists committing ethnic cleansing and genocide in Gaza and Palestine. Shame on you, Zionist animals,” they shouted.
BREAKING: PRO-PALESTINE PROTESTORS CONFRONT “ISRAELI” AMBASSADOR DANNY DANON AT THE UNITED NATIONS
1/5 pic.twitter.com/4G1VYEMGzV
— Within Our Lifetime (@WOLPalestine) September 14, 2025
The Combat Antisemitism Movement (CAM), warned on its website that the scale and tone of the planned demonstrations risk crossing the line from political protest into hate speech, arguing that anti-Israel activists are attempting to hijack the UN gathering to spread antisemitism and delegitimize the Jewish state’s right to exist.
Outside the UN last week, masked protesters belonging to the activist group INDECLINE kicked a realistic replica of Netanyahu’s decapitated head as though it were a soccer ball.
US activist group plays soccer with Bibi’s mock decapitated HEAD right outside NYC UN HQ
Peep shot at 00:40
Footage posted by INDECLINE collective just as UN General Assembly about to kick off
‘Following the game, ball was donated to Palestinian Genocide Museum’ pic.twitter.com/TQ84sgZhKr
— RT (@RT_com) September 9, 2025
Within Our Lifetime (WOL), a radical anti-Israel activist group, has vowed to “flood” the UNGA on behalf of the pro-Palestine movement.
WOL, one of the most prolific anti-Israel activist groups, came under immense fire after it organized a protest against an exhibition to honor the victims of the Oct. 7 massacre at the Nova Music Festival in southern Israel. During the event, the group chanted “resistance is justified when people are occupied!” and “Israel, go to hell!”
“We will be there to confront them with the truth: Their silence and inaction enable genocide. The world cannot continue as if Gaza does not exist,” WOL said of its planned demonstrations in New York. “This is the time to make our voices impossible to ignore. Come to New York by any means necessary, to stand, to march, to demand the UN act and end the siege.”
Jewish Voice for Peace (JVP) and Palestinian Youth Movement (PYM), two other anti-Israel organizations that have helped organize widespread demonstrations against the Jewish state during the war in Gaza, also announced they are planning a march from Times Square to the UN headquarters on Friday.
“The time is now for each and every UN member state to uphold their duty under international law: sanction Israel and end the genocide,” the groups said in a statement.
JVP, an organization that purports to fight for “Palestinian liberation,” has positioned itself as a staunch adversary of the Jewish state. The group argued in a 2021 booklet that Jews should not write Hebrew liturgy because hearing the language would be “deeply traumatizing” to Palestinians. JVP has repeatedly defended the Oct. 7 massacre of roughly 1,200 people in southern Israel by Hamas as a justified “resistance.” Chapters of the organization have urged other self-described “progressives” to throw their support behind Hamas and other terrorist groups against Israel
Similarly, PYM, another radical anti-Israel group, has repeatedly defended terrorism and violence against the Jewish state. PYM has organized many anti-Israel protests in the two years following the Oct. 7 attacks in the Jewish state. Recently, Sen. Tom Cotton (R-AK) called for a federal investigation into the organization after Aisha Nizar, one of the group’s leaders, urged supporters to sabotage the US supply chain for the F-35 fighter jet, one of the most advanced US military assets and a critical component of Israel’s defense.
The UN General Assembly has historically been a flashpoint for heated debate over the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Previous gatherings have seen dueling demonstrations outside the Manhattan venue, with pro-Israel and pro-Palestinian groups both seeking to influence the international spotlight.
While warning about the demonstrations, CAM noted it recently launched a new mobile app, Report It, that allows users worldwide to quickly and securely report antisemitic incidents in real time.
RSS
Nina Davidson Presses Universities to Back Words With Action as Jewish Students Return to Campus Amid Antisemitism Crisis
Nina Davidson on The Algemeiner’s ‘J100’ podcast. Photo: Screenshot
Philanthropist Nina Davidson, who served on the board of Barnard College, has called on universities to pair tough rhetoric on combatting antisemitism with enforcement as Jewish students returned to campuses for the new academic year.
“Years ago, The Algemeiner had published a list ranking the most antisemitic colleges in the country. And number one was Columbia,” Davidson recalled on a recent episode of The Algemeiner‘s “J100” podcast. “As a board member and as someone who was representing the institution, it really upset me … At the board meeting, I brought it up and I said, ‘What are we going to do about this?’”
Host David Cohen, chief executive officer of The Algemeiner, explained he had revisited Davidson’s remarks while she was being honored for her work at The Algemeiner‘s 8th annual J100 gala, held in October 2021, noting their continued relevance.
“It could have been the same speech in 2025,” he said, underscoring how longstanding concerns about campus antisemitism, while having intensified in the aftermath of Hamas’s Oct. 7, 2023, massacre across southern Israel, are not new.
Davidson argued that universities already possess the tools to protect students – codes of conduct, time-place-manner rules, and consequences for threats or targeted harassment – but too often fail to apply them evenly. “Statements are not enough,” she said, arguing that institutions need to enforce their rules and set a precedent that there will be consequences for individuals who refuse to follow them.
She also said that stakeholders – alumni, parents, and donors – are reassessing their relationships with schools that, in their view, have not safeguarded Jewish students. While supportive of open debate, Davidson distinguished between protest and intimidation, calling for leadership that protects expression while ensuring campus safety.
The episode surveyed specific pressure points that administrators will face this fall: repeat anti-Israel encampments, disruptions of Jewish programming, and the challenge of distinguishing political speech from conduct that violates university rules. “Unless schools draw those lines now,” Davidson warned, “they’ll be scrambling once the next crisis hits.”
Cohen closed by framing the discussion as a test of institutional credibility, asking whether universities will “turn policy into protection” in real time. Davidson agreed, pointing to students who “need to know the rules aren’t just on paper.”
The full conversation is available on The Algemeiner’s “J100” podcast.