RSS
‘Shofar’s Call to ‘Rehabilitate’ Zionism
The blowing of the shofar, traditionally done on Rosh Hashanah. Photo: Wikimedia Commons.
JNS.org – Shofar, an interdisciplinary journal of Jewish studies whose editors are committed “to publishing a diversity of beliefs, ideas and opinions,” is a project of cooperation with Purdue University. The academic institution was beset, as were many campuses, last year with pro-Palestine rallies and demonstrations, and even set up a “Liberation Zone,” although it would seem none for any Israeli hostages. I have no information that those events had a direct influence on the publication of an issue dedicated to anti-Zionism, but it exists.
Shaul Magid of Dartmouth College led that Shofar special issue, which was devoted to “Zionism and Its Jewish Critics.” He claimed that “while some scholars argue that the concept [of Zionism] has biblical origins, most acknowledge that it is a modern Jewish iteration of Western European nationalism that emerged in the mid-nineteenth century.” Who are these “most” scholars who champion perverse purposeful ignorance? What is their academic weight? Are these the instructors properly suited to lecture university students, Jewish and non-Jewish?
Magid and fellow travelers would have us believe that the many dozens of Torah commandments, hundreds of verses of Tanach, thousands of Midrashic, Talmudic and Second Temple literature pieces, as well as thousands of rabbinic dicta and responsa spanning some 2,500 years of Jewish core religion, culture and ritual revolving around Zion, Jerusalem, the Land of Israel and a Jew’s obligations to the same are to be erased and ignored. Similarly, the constant presence of Jews residing in the Land of Israel—immigrating and traveling to it, and sending charitable dollars to those living there all during the 1,800 years of our Exile, not to mention the Return to Zion during the sixth-century BCE—is to be disregarded.
In a follow-up response, Lior Sternfeld of Penn State University addresses the topic of “Settler Colonialism, From the River to the Sea, and the Israeli Case After October 7.” He intends “to offer a way to unpack some of the volatile concepts often used to analyze the Israel-Palestine conflict.” Nevertheless, he promptly engages in a volatile position and, as if objectively, observes that “well-meaning scholars and activists have sought to rehabilitate the concept of Zionism.”
And what is the need for that? Sternfeld knows and suggests that “Zionism, at least in its twenty-first-century form, negates the very existence of Palestinian identity and Palestinian nationalism. As such, the peaceful existence of the two peoples, enjoying freedom, independence, and self-determination, could never be achieved.” All the fault of the Jews. Sorry, the Zionists. For what is Zionism if not, according to Sternfeld, “settler-colonialism”?
As Sternfeld asserts—and we could assume teaches his students—the nakba (Arabic for “catastrophe”) that refers to the creation of the modern-day State of Israel in May 1948 was an “attempt … to eliminate the native people.” The next stage of his paradigm came with the influx of immigrants—Holocaust survivors from Europe and Jews who came from the Middle East, North Africa and many other locations. As he puts it, these “settlers became indigenous.” The next stage followed the Six-Day War in June 1967, when “the definition of colonial power became much more apt.”
Israel after 1967, Sternfeld insists, “became a colonial state.”
Why, supposedly, did it become such a state? His reasoning is that “Israel sought to control the land by sending settlers and exploiting the indigenous population and the resources to the benefit of Israel proper.” Moreover, the “native population did not get citizenship, any political rights, or equal legal status.” If one starts out without knowing the basics, like Sternfeld, then it will be no surprise that his conclusions and assertions are not only erroneous but dangerous.
Israel sent no one post-1967 to Judea, Samaria and Gaza. Yes, there were soldiers and even Nachal units, but it was the “settlers”—those of Gush Emunim and other groups, some not at all religiously motivated—who forced upon the government an extensive civilian Jewish residential presence there. Moreover, there was no exploitation of the population (and as for being “indigenous,” that requires another article altogether). Why should a group of people demanding to be separated from Israel deserve, in Sternfeld’s mind, to gain Israeli citizenship or political rights such as voting for Knesset representation?
What truly irks Sternfeld is the criticism voiced to the slogan chanted by pro-“Palestine” protestors that that presumed country should extend “from the river to the sea.” He ignores its eliminationist purpose in doing away with Israel altogether and probably a majority of its Jewish residents, preferring to highlight a parallel Israeli version of that slogan, an overlooked Israeli map covering the land “from the river to the sea,” unlike the pro-Palestine one “has political practice and military power.” That is an irrational presentation.
First of all, the Palestinian Authority maintains a political practice as well as military power. In addition, its educational system and media propaganda arms inculcate its population much better than Israel’s government does regarding territorial and legal heritage not to mention that in the P.A. area, there are no parallel Peace Now/B’Tselem groups that argue against land expansionism.
More importantly, historically speaking, the area of the “river to the sea” possesses an international Jewish legal status in that the League of Nations Palestine Mandate decision, Article 25, specifically awards that area for a reconstituted Jewish state. In addition, that was the territory left over after a fictitious “Transjordan” was created for a Saudi ruler expelled from his own country and received all of what was to be eastern Palestine—an Arab state. Does not Sternfeld know basic Zionist history, not to mention post-Oslo Accords diplomatic history?
One other of Sternfeld’s nonsensical arguments is that “the left must stop collaborating with the blame game of the right wing and stop seeking approval (that would never come) for disavowing any kind of resistance, especially the nonviolent one.” Especially? As that word means “more than usual; more than other people or things,” are we to understand that Sternfeld could permit a non-blaming of a less than non-violent resistance? Or is it just that his writing is obtuse at this point?
Sternfeld has a vision. It is one of a “time to move beyond Zionism into Israelism … to build a thriving Israeli society for the entirety of its population, next to an equally thriving society of dependent Palestine.” I admit to harboring a suspicion that Sternfeld’s grasp of the Israel-Arab conflict requires rehabilitation.
The post ‘Shofar’s Call to ‘Rehabilitate’ Zionism first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Jamaal Bowman Launches New PAC in Attempt to Unseat Pro-Israel Politicians
US Rep. Jamaal Bowman (D-NY) speaks during the National Action Network National Convention in New York City, US, April 7, 2022. Photo: REUTERS/Eduardo Munoz
Former US lawmaker Jamaal Bowman has started a new political action committee (PAC) in an attempt to raise funds for progressive candidates and unseat pro-Israel incumbents.
On Thursday, Bowman, who served in the US House of Representatives as a New York Democrat from 2021-2025, announced the creation of the “Built to Win PAC,” a new attempt to boost aspiring left-wing candidates by galvanizing minority voters. The progressive firebrand hopes that the political committee will serve as an effective competitor against groups that elevate moderate congressional candidates who, he argued, neglect the needs of working-class constituents.
“For too long, the system has failed the people. Built to Win is here to change that. We’re mobilizing Black, Arab, Asian, and Latino communities to reclaim our power. Join the movement – because when we vote, we win,” Built to Win wrote on its official X/Twitter account.
“Today, I am officially launching the Built to Win PAC. I’m back, and I’m coming back to win,” Bowman added on his own person X/Twitter page.
This is Jamaal Bowman, former Congressman from New York, reaching out to let you know that today, I am officially launching the Built To Win PAC. I’m back, and I’m coming back to win. pic.twitter.com/0JeWggAyQE
— Jamaal Bowman Ed.D. (@JamaalBowmanNY) February 27, 2025
While speaking to City & State, a media company that covers New York politics, Bowman confirmed in a new interview that the Built to Win PAC will likely prioritize targeting sitting lawmakers who support Israel.
“Any candidate that supports [Israeli Prime Minister] Benjamin Netanyahu and genocide more than their constituents, any candidate that’s tied up with corrupt crypto money, any candidate tied up with the real estate lobby as opposed to renters, we’re going to go after those candidates very aggressively,” Bowman said.
The former lawmaker has also tapped Lexis Zeidan, co-founder of the anti-Israel “Uncommitted National Movement” to help build out and manage his PAC.
The Uncommitted National Movement emerged in 2024 as a result of frustration stemming from the Israel-Hamas war. The initiative sought to encourage voters to abstain from voting first for US President Joe Biden and then for his vice president, 2024 Democratic presidential nominee Kamala Harris, unless they adopted anti-Israel policies.
During Bowman’s time in Congress, he established a reputation as a stalwart progressive and intense critic of American foreign policy. However, since the Palestinian terrorist group Hamas’s Oct. 7, 2023, invasion of and massacre across southern Israel, Bowman narrowed his focus onto the Jewish state.
In the past year, the ex-congressman has made unsubstantiated allegations that Israel has conducted a “genocide” in Gaza while accusing the Jewish state of committing “apartheid” and “ethnic cleansing” against Palestinians in the West Bank. He also came under fire for initially dismissing widely corroborated accusations of rape against Israeli women by Hamas terrorists during their Oct. 7 onslaught as “propaganda.”
Bowman lost his Democratic primary election in June to Westchester County executive George Latimer by a staggering margin of 58 percent to 41 percent.
In contrast to Bowman, Latimer attempted to woo residents of the affluent, heavily Jewish Westchester County community by positioning himself as an ally of Israel. Furthermore, the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), the foremost pro-Israel lobbying group in the United States, assisted Latimer in the primary, unleashing an eye-popping $14.5 million torrent of cash to benefit his campaign.
In the months following his loss, Bowman has repeatedly criticized AIPAC, whose mission is to foster bipartisan support for the US-Israel relationship, for involving itself in the primary battle, condemning the organization as a “Zionist regime” operated by “racist Republicans.”
Bowman, alongside former Congresswoman Cori Bush, are also set to headline a new show on the anti-Israel Zeteo network. According to the duo, the show will deliver an unvarnished look into the “corruption, the lobbying, the big money” that influences federal politics, “and how it could all be working better for you.”
The post Jamaal Bowman Launches New PAC in Attempt to Unseat Pro-Israel Politicians first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
BBC Apologizes for ‘Unacceptable’ Mistakes With Gaza Documentary, Admits Palestinian Interviewees’ Ties to Hamas
The BBC logo is seen at the entrance at Broadcasting House, the BBC headquarters in central London. Photo by Vuk Valcic / SOPA Images/Sipa USA via Reuters Connect
The British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) on Thursday apologized for “unacceptable” and “serious flaws” during the filming of a documentary about Palestinian children living in the Gaza Strip.
The admission came after the BBC removed the documentary, titled “Gaza: How to Survive a Warzone,” from its iPlayer streaming platform on Feb. 21 when it was discovered that the film’s 13-year-old Palestinian narrator (now 14), Abdullah Al-Yazouri, was the son of a senior Hamas official.
The documentary was also taken down after it was revealed that two of the cameramen who worked on the BBC documentary had voiced support for Hamas, and following revelations about inaccurate translations in the film that masked the antisemitism of some participants. Examples of the latter issue include mistranslations in the film that refer to Hamas terrorists as an “army” and “jihad against the Jews” as “resistance against the Israelis,” according to Campaign Against Antisemitism (CAA), a British volunteer-based charity. The Telegraph cited at least five instances in the film where the Arabic word for “Jew”— “Yahud” or “Yahudy” — was mistranslated as “Israel” or “Israeli forces,” or removed altogether.
The BBC has also now admitted that licensing fee payments were given to the family of Al-Yazouri, who is the son of Hamas’s Deputy Minister of Agriculture Dr. Ayman Al-Yazouri. Pro-Israel researcher David Collier said the father and son come from the same family as Hamas founder Ibrahim Al-Yazouri. Hamas is designated as a terrorist organization by both the United Kingdom and United States.
Deborah Turness, the CEO of BBC News and Current Affairs, sent an e-mail to staff on Thursday that included a statement about the documentary, remarks which were publicly shared on Friday by a BBC spokesperson.
In the statement, the BBC said it takes complete editorial responsibility for the film and admitted that the corporation and Hoyo Films, the production company behind the documentary, have made “unacceptable” flaws in the making of the documentary. “BBC News takes full responsibility for these and the impact that these have had on the Corporation’s reputation. We apologize for this.”
The spokesperson added that the BBC was not informed in advance by Hoyo Films about Abdullah’s family connection to Hamas.
“During the production process, the independent production company was asked in writing a number of times by the BBC about any potential connections he and his family might have with Hamas,” the corporation explained. “Since transmission, they have acknowledged that they knew that the boy’s father was a deputy agriculture minister in the Hamas government; they have also acknowledged that they never told the BBC this fact. It was then the BBC’s own failing that we did not uncover that fact and the documentary was aired.”
Hoyo Films told the corporation that it paid Abdullah’s mother “a limited sum of money” for narrating the film by way of his sister’s bank account, according to the BBC. Hoyo Films “assured BBC” no payments were given to Hamas members or its affiliates “either directly, in kind, or as a gift,” and the corporation is “seeking additional assurance” about the film’s budget. The BBC said it will initiate a full audit of the film’s expenses and is asking Hoyo Films for financial accounts to help with the audit.
The BBC said the controversy surrounding the documentary had “damaged” public trust in the corporation’s journalism, and that “the processes and execution of this program fell short of our expectations.” The BBC also has “no plans to broadcast the program again in its current form or return it to iPlayer.” It added that it launched a review into the film, an initiative that the BBC Board discussed on Thursday.
Hoyo Films said it is working with the BBC to “help understand where mistakes have been made.” The production company added, “We feel this remains an important story to tell, and that our contributors – who have no say in the war – should have their voices heard.”
A separate statement from the BBC Board added, “The subject matter of the documentary was clearly a legitimate area to explore, but nothing is more important than trust and transparency in our journalism. While the board appreciates that mistakes can be made, the mistakes here are significant and damaging to the BBC.”
The CAA said on Friday the grave errors carried out by the BBC in connection to the documentary should result in resignations and a police investigation. The charity also called for an independent investigation into bias at the BBC and said pending the results of the investigation, the license fee should be suspended to stop additional funds from going to Abdullah’s family, and potentially Hamas. “Hundreds of people are contacting us telling us that they refuse to pay the license fee until they can be sure that the BBC is trustworthy,” the charity said.
A spokesperson for the CAA called BBC “a national treasure [that] has become a national embarrassment.”
“The BBC has now admitted that license fee funds were paid to the family of a senior Hamas official. It has not yet been able to rule out that further payments to Hamas were made as it continues to investigate where hundreds of thousands of pounds went,” the spokesperson noted. “The BBC’s statement is an exercise in desperate damage control and shows why an internal review is no substitute for an independent investigation into this documentary and the wider bias at the BBC that allowed it to be made and aired. Clearly those responsible must lose their jobs.”
“It is unconscionable that the British public should have to pay a license fee to an organization that gives that money to proscribed terrorists,” the spokesperson added. “It represents a shocking double standard in our law. Pending an independent investigation, the license fee must be suspended.”
During a press conference on Thursday, UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer said the secretary of state has had a meeting with the BBC regarding the documentary. On Friday, British Culture Secretary Lisa Nandy said she was going to have an “urgent meeting” with BBC Chairman Samir Shah that same day.
“I want assurances that no stone will be left unturned by the fact-finding review now commissioned by the BBC’s director general,” Nandy said. “This review must be comprehensive, rigorous, and get to the bottom of exactly what has happened in this case. It is critical for trust in the BBC that this review happens quickly, and that appropriate action is taken on its findings.”
The post BBC Apologizes for ‘Unacceptable’ Mistakes With Gaza Documentary, Admits Palestinian Interviewees’ Ties to Hamas first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Jewish Rocker David Draiman Calls Kanye West a ‘Pathetic Jew Hater Without a Soul’ for Non-Stop Promoting Swastikas
David Draiman of Disturbed at Summerfest Music Festival on June 30, 2022, in Milwaukee, Wisconsin. Photo: Daniel DeSlover/Sipa USA
The lead singer of the rock band Disturbed intensely criticized rapper Ye, formerly known as Kanye West, on Friday after the latter reiterated his desire to make a t-shirt that features a swastika, and now also a swastika necklace.
Ye returned to X on Friday to repeat his hopes of making a shirt emblazoned with the extremist symbol used by Adolf Hitler’s Nazi party. In one post, he wrote: “It was always a dream of mine to walk around with a Swastika T on.” In a separate post, he called on jewelers to reach out to him with designs for a swastika chain necklace.
David Draiman responded by writing, “Hey @kanyewest, Here’s a design for you” and he included an emoji of a middle finger. The “Sound of Silence” singer, who is Jewish, then attacked the rapper by saying, “You’re nothing but a Jew hating, misogynistic, pathetic, attention starved A–HOLE. You’ve destroyed any legacy you once had. You will be remembered as a sad, angry excuse of a man, without honor, without decency, and without a soul.”
In early February, Ye sold on his website Yeezy.com only one item – a white, short sleeve t-shirt that featured a large black swastika on the front. He purchased a commercial that aired during Super Bowl LIX on Feb. 9 that encouraged viewers to visit his website and purchase the offensive shirt. The shirt went live on his website — which has since been shut down – two days after Ye went on a rabidly antisemitic tirade on X in which he talked about his hatred of Jews and his admiration for Hitler. He even called himself a Nazi and a racist.
The rapper said last week he has had the idea for the swastika shirt “for over eight years” and has continued to promote his affinity for the Nazi symbol repeatedly on social media.
The post Jewish Rocker David Draiman Calls Kanye West a ‘Pathetic Jew Hater Without a Soul’ for Non-Stop Promoting Swastikas first appeared on Algemeiner.com.