RSS
Sponsoring Israeli missiles doesn’t fly for everyone in a Facebook group for ‘Kosher Restaurant Foodies’
(JTA) — Elan Kornblum, the creator of the popular Facebook group Great Kosher Restaurant Foodies, has not been shy about marshaling the group’s 98,000 members in support of a charitable cause.
The group, whose usual fodder focuses on the quality of food (and rabbinic certification) at kosher restaurants around the world, has mobilized in response to extreme weather events, community members’ medical expenses and to feed the hungry. In the days following Hamas’ Oct. 7 invasion of Israel, it sent boxes upon boxes of food to JFK Airport, to be loaded onto specially chartered flights to Tel Aviv.
Five weeks later, though, the group erupted over another of Kornblum’s donations to Israel: an IDF artillery shell headed for Gaza that was scrawled with the text, “GKR Foodies stands with Israel.” Kornblum said he was able to get the message on the missile via a gift of $180 to an Israeli charity.
“On behalf of the group, the IDF soldiers will be sending a present to Hamas tomorrow,” Kornblum wrote in a post on Nov. 12. “Specifically this 155 mm artillery shell. Yes, you can get writing on a missle [sic]. Jewish ingenuity at its finest– Introducing the MESSAGE IN A BOTTLE CAMPAIGN!”
Kornblum wrote that the money would go to purchase supplies for soldiers. The public post received more than 750 likes and was shared more than 60 times outside of the group. But not everyone agreed that it was a good idea.
“I hate it,” one member said. Another replied to the post, “May Hashem have mercy on us all.”
The discussion over the fundraiser, which spawned more than 200 comments, is an example of how debate over the Israel-Hamas war has seeped even into Jewish spaces that are meant to be a sanctuary from the sometimes all-consuming political discourse on social media. And, in a forum composed largely of observant Jews, who tend to be more centrist and right-wing, on average, than American Jewry at large, it threw the fault lines of communal discussion into stark relief.
Some commenters objected to the fundraiser because they support a ceasefire — a calling-card of left-wing Jews. But even some who support Israel’s campaign in Gaza said they were uncomfortable with having the name of their Facebook group written on a weapon of war.
“If somebody said, ‘Do you consent to being part of this?’ I would have said, ‘absolutely not,’ and I would probably have a much stronger reaction,” said Daniel Saleman, a New Jersey-based accountant and member of Great Kosher Restaurant Foodies since 2015. “I had absolutely no say in it.”
Great Kosher Restaurant Foodies isn’t the only social media operation to find itself dealing with matters of war and peace post-Oct. 7. Jewish influencers whose content does not typically center around Israel have found their roles shift over the past six weeks, as they feel compelled to use their platforms to weigh in on the war.
“I feel a moral responsibility to speak about it, specifically because I don’t feel like anyone who is not Jewish does talk about it,” Morgan Raum, a Jewish food influencer with more than 150,000 followers on Instagram, told NBC News earlier this month. “If I’m not talking about it, who is?”
The “Foodies” Facebook group was born from a print magazine, Great Kosher Restaurants, that has since become an online guide to kosher dining options. The Facebook group has 10 administrators, including Kornblum, along with one moderator, all of whom manage group membership, settings and posts.
Many dissenters on Great Kosher Restaurant Foodies objected to the tone of the post. Saleman commented that the post was “in poor taste.” He added that because the post settings were public, it could be used as anti-Israel propaganda. Other commenters shared similar sentiments.
Comments on the post called it “very misguided and in terrible taste,” and “abhorrent and gut wrenching.” A member who said they were a parent of two Israeli soldiers wrote, “Let’s not glorify war, let’s not make light of the war that is being fought for our country and our people.” Another group member wrote, “This is one of the most horrific things I have ever seen. That a Jew would do this.”
The backlash came quickly. Less than an hour after the post went up, Kornblum commented defending it. “I’ll say it again, IDF uses missles [sic] to destroy Hamas buildings and targets, it does not use it for civilians,” he wrote. “I can’t believe we need to explain that in this group.”
As discussion on the post devolved from criticism of the campaign to personal attacks on group members, Kornblum shut down the comments section, one of his tools when conversation gets too negative. He reopened the comment feed the following morning, then closed it down again — after posting another comment defending the missile message, at least his fourth since publishing the post.
“For the record, I’ll just note there are about 450 reactions on this post,” he wrote. “287 likes, 145 loves, 3 angry. We keep posts up dependent on what the group as a majority wants. I think the group has spoken. Thanks. Talk later.”
Kornblum told the Jewish Telegraphic Agency that he saw the donation as a standard way to demonstrate support for Israel at war — of a piece with the group’s other efforts.
“Being that we run the group and we stand behind Israel, this was my way of showing it,” Kornblum told JTA. He’s used the group’s name in other contexts such as deaths or lifecycle events, he said.
“A lot of times I’ll say, ‘On behalf of the group, we send condolences,’ ‘We send mazel tov,’” he added. “So when I speak on behalf of the group, it’s myself and my company and the group. So I thought it was a nice message.”
This is not the first time a message written on an Israeli rocket has spread online. On Oct. 29, the day after “Friends” co-star Matthew Perry died, an image of a rocket with the Hebrew message, “This one is for Chandler Bing,” appears to have first been shared on Instagram by comedian and digital creator Matan Zur, who is currently serving in the Israel Defense Forces. The image went viral when it was shared by Israeli tech blogger Hillel Fuld on X. That picture, too, generated backlash for making light of both the war and of Perry’s death.
Writing messages on rockets is a tradition that dates back at least to World War II. American soldiers in a Black platoon in 1945 famously posed for a picture with a basket of ammunition tagged with the words “Happy Easter Adolph.” Another famous photo from 1944 or 1945 shows Joseph Wald, who served in the Jewish Brigade of the British Army, holding an artillery shell bearing the Hebrew words “Gift for Hitler.”
Left: Technician Fifth Grade William E. Thomas and Private First Class Joseph Jackson pose with artillery shells on Easter morning, 1945; Right: Joseph Wald, a soldier in the Jewish Brigade of the British Army, holds an artillery shell inscribed with the words, “a gift for Hitler” in Hebrew, sometime in 1944 or 1945. (Images via Wikimedia Commons. Design by Jackie Hajdenberg)
And over the course of the Ukraine war, a project similar to the Israeli campaign run through SignMyRocket.com was created by Ukrainian information technology student Anton Sokolenko. The initiative has raised nearly $1.7 million dollars and written more than 5,100 messages across a variety of weapons, according to its website.
The donation page for the Israeli project, on the website of a charity called the Chesed Fund, says more than $12,000 has been raised for this particular fundraiser for IDF soldiers, which pays for protective gear. But the Chesed Fund did not respond to a JTA inquiry about the missile messages, and it isn’t clear from the webpage that having a message written on a bomb is an option. To tag a missile, donors must first donate through the webpage and then call one of two U.S. phone numbers to relay the proposed text. The phone numbers do not appear on the Chesed Fund site, and the missile initiative has spread only through word-of-mouth and social media posts like Kornblum’s.
Kornblum is unfazed by the debate over his post. He said this was not the first time discussion on the group has veered away from its namesake subject, kosher restaurants. He has no regrets, says he would write the same post again, and added that if members left the group over the missile message, “that’s totally up to them, that’s OK.”
“I’m not afraid to talk about hot topics,” he said. “We do it a lot. We’ve spoken about the Pride Parade and we’ve spoken about BLM on the group, we’ve spoken about, obviously, COVID.”
Saleman, who objected to Kornblum’s post, agreed that discussion of the war wasn’t necessarily out of place in the Facebook group.
“You can’t really separate Jewish culture and kosher food and Israel,” he said. “So obviously, as things are happening in Israel, it makes sense that there are definitely certain portions of the group that are kind of dedicated to that.”
And he said he’d seen more contentious arguments between the group’s users — about condiments.
“There’s definitely lots of controversy but it’s not this type of controversy,” Saleman said. “People can get very heated about charging for spicy mayo. And the people have probably gotten more heated about that than they did about the bomb thing.”
—
The post Sponsoring Israeli missiles doesn’t fly for everyone in a Facebook group for ‘Kosher Restaurant Foodies’ appeared first on Jewish Telegraphic Agency.
RSS
NYC Mayor Eric Adams Calls Zohran Mamdani an ‘Antisemite’ Who Has Embraced Hamas, Says Jews ‘Should Be Concerned’
New York City Mayor Eric Adams attends an “October 7: One Year Later” commemoration to mark the anniversary of the Hamas-led attack in Israel at the Summer Stage in Central Park on October 7, 2024, in New York City. Photo: Ron Adar/ SOPA Images via Reuters Connect
New York City Mayor Eric Adams has accused mayoral candidate Zohran Mamdani of spreading antisemitic views, citing Mamdani’s past remarks and anti-Israel activism as he starts his efforts to thwart the progressive insurgent.
Adams’s repudiation comes in the aftermath of a heated mayoral Democratic primary in which Mamdani, a 33‑year‑old democratic socialist, former rapper, and New York City Assembly member, achieved a stunning upset over former New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo on Tuesday. While Mamdani has denied being antisemitic, Adams argued that some of Mamdani’s rhetoric, including his defense of the phrase “globalize the intifada,” crosses the line into inflammatory territory and risks alienating Jewish New Yorkers.
In the Thursday interview with journalist Don Lemon, Adams slammed Mamdani for his “embracing of Hamas” in his public comments and rap lyrics. The mayor labeled Hamas a “murderous organization” that murders members of the LGBTQ+ community and uses “human beings as shields” when engaging in military conflict with Israel.
“You can’t embrace Hamas, and the mere fact that you embrace Hamas says a lot,” he said.
During his rap career, Mamdani released a song praising the “Holy Land Five,” a group of five men connected to the Hamas terrorist group. The men were accused of funneling millions in cash to Hamas through the Holy Land Foundation — a charity organization that was shut down by the federal government in 2001 for having links to terrorist groups.
The mayor added that the city’s Jewish community should be “concerned” with Mamdani’s comments.
Eric Adams after campaign kickoff calls his Democratic rival, Zohran Mamdani, “an antisemite” who, he says, has embraced Hamas.
“Those who are Jewish should be concerned.” pic.twitter.com/COZSF9jHXE
— Jacob N. Kornbluh (@jacobkornbluh) June 26, 2025
Adams is battling to keep his political future alive amid mounting legal and political troubles. A federal bribery probe into foreign campaign donations cast a shadow over his administration until charges were unexpectedly dropped by a Trump-aligned Justice Department, sparking accusations of political favoritism. Since then, Adams has leaned into right-wing rhetoric on crime and immigration, forging relationships with allies of US President Donald Trump and refusing to rule out a party switch, moves that have alienated Democratic leaders and progressives alike and caused his approval ratings to spiral.
Adams, who is running for reelection as an independent, had reportedly hoped for Mamdani to emerge victorious in the Democratic primary, believing that a face-off against the progressive firebrand would create an opportunity to revive his near-moribund reelection campaign by highlighting the democratic socialist’s far-left views.
Mamdani, a progressive representative in the New York State Assembly, has also sparked outrage after engaging in a series of provocative actions, such as appearing on the podcast of anti-Israel, pro-Hamas influencer Hasan Piker and vowing to arrest Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu if he visits New York.
During an event hosted by the UJA-Federation of New York last month, Mamdani also declined to recognize Israel’s right to exist as a Jewish state.
“I believe that Israel has a right to exist with equal rights for all,” Mamdani said in a carefully worded response when asked, sidestepping the issue of Israel’s existence specifically as a “Jewish state” and seemingly suggesting Israeli citizens do not enjoy equal rights.
Then during a New York City Democratic mayoral debate, he once again refused to acknowledge Israel’s right to exist as a Jewish state, sparking immediate backlash among the other candidates.
In 2023, while speaking at a Democratic Socialists of America convention in New York, Mamdani encouraged the audience to applaud for Palestinian American community activist Khader El-Yateem, saying, “If you don’t clap for El-Yateem, you’re a Zionist.”
High-profile Democratic leaders in New York such as Sen. Chuck Schumer, Gov. Kathy Hochul, and Rep. Hakeem Jeffries have congratulated and complemented Mamdani but have not yet issued an explicit endorsement. Each lawmaker has expressed interest in meeting with Mamdani prior to making a decision on a formal endorsement, indicating discomfort within Democratic circles regarding the presumptive Democratic mayoral nominee’s meteoric rise over the past few months.
The post NYC Mayor Eric Adams Calls Zohran Mamdani an ‘Antisemite’ Who Has Embraced Hamas, Says Jews ‘Should Be Concerned’ first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Civil Rights Nonprofit Slams Pro-Hamas Briefs Defending Harvard Lawsuit Against Trump
April 20, 2025, Cambridge, MA, USA: Harvard University and Harvard Square scenes with students and pedestrians. Photo: Kenneth Martin/ZUMA Press Wire via Reuters Connect.
A new amicus brief filed in the lawsuit that Harvard University brought in April to stop the Trump administration’s confiscation of some $3 billion of its federal research grants and contracts offered a blistering response to previous briefs which maligned the institution’s decision to incorporate the world’s leading definition of antisemitism into its non-discrimination policies.
As previously reported by The Algemeiner, legal briefs weighing in on Presidents and Fellows of Harvard College v. United States Department of Health and Human Services, et al. have been pouring in from across the country, with dozens of experts, think tanks, and student groups seeking to sway the court in what has become a historic confrontation between elite higher education and the federal government — as well as a showdown between Middle American populists and coastal elites.
Harvard’s case has rallied a team of defenders, including some who are responsible for drawing scrutiny of alleged antisemitism and far-left extremism on campus.
Earlier this month, the Palestine Solidarity Committee (PSC) — which blamed Israel for Hamas’s Oct. 7, 2023, massacre across southern Israel mere hours after images and videos of the terrorist organization’s brutality spread online — filed a brief which compared Zionists to segregationists who defended white supremacy during Jim Crow, while arguing that Harvard’s adoption of the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance’s (IHRA) definition of antisemitism — used by hundreds of governing institutions and widely accepted across the political spectrum — is an instrument of conspiracy and racist oppression.
“Adopting the IHRA definition, granting special status to Zionism, and penalizing pro-Palestinian student groups risks violating the Title VI rights of Palestinians on campus,” the filing said. “There is ample evidence that adoption of IHRA and other policies which limit speech supporting Palestinian rights are motivated by an intent to selectively silence Palestinians and students who advocate on behalf of Palestinians. Such action cannot be required by, and indeed appear to violate, Title VI [of the Civil Rights Act].”
The document added, “Though the main text of the definition is relatively benign, the illustrative examples — seven of the eleven which pertain to criticism of Israel — make clear that they are aimed at preventing Palestinians from speaking about their oppression.”
Similar arguments were put forth in other briefs submitted by groups which have cheered Hamas and spread blood libels about Israel’s conduct in Gaza, including the Middle East Studies Association of North America (MESA), Jewish Voice for Peace (JVP), and other anti-Zionist groups.
“Harvard’s incorporation of IHRA was an overdue and necessary response to the virulent and unchecked antisemitic discrimination and harassment on its campus,” the Brandeis Center said in its response to the arguments, noting that Harvard itself has determined that embracing the definition is consistent with its obligations under Title VI, which have been reiterated and stressed by the US Office for Civil Rights (OCR) guidance and two executive orders issued by President Donald Trump.
“Misunderstandings about what antisemitism means — and the form it takes — have long plagued efforts to address antisemitic conduct. Modern versions of antisemitism draw not only on ancient tropes, but also coded attacks on Zionism and the Jewish state, which often stand in for the Jewish people in modern antisemitic parlance,” the organization continued. “Sadly, this is nothing new: Soviet propagandists for decades used the term ‘Zionist’ or ‘Zio’ in this coded way. This practice has become commonplace among antisemites in academia who seek to avoid being labeled as racists.”
The Brandeis Center also argued that IHRA does not “punish or chill speech” but “provides greater transparency and clarity as to the meaning of antisemitism while honoring the university’s rules protecting free speech and expression.” The group stopped short of urging a decision either for or against Harvard, imploring the court to “disregard” the briefs submitted by PSC, JVP, and MESA.
As previously reported by The Algemeiner, Harvard sued the Trump administration, arguing that it bypassed key procedural steps it must, by law, take before sequestering federal funds. It also said that the Trump administration does not aim, as it has publicly pledged, to combat campus antisemitism at Harvard but to impose “viewpoint-based conditions on Harvard’s funding.”
The Trump administration has proposed that Harvard reform in ways that conservatives have long argued will make higher education more meritocratic and less welcoming to anti-Zionists and far-left extremists. Its “demands,” contained in a letter the administration sent to interim Harvard president Alan Garber — who subsequently released it to the public — called for “viewpoint diversity in hiring and admissions,” the “discontinuation of [diversity, equity, and inclusion, or DEI, initiatives],” and “reducing forms of governance bloat.” They also implored Harvard to begin “reforming programs with egregious records of antisemitism” and to recalibrate its approach to “student discipline.”
On Monday, the attorneys general of Iowa, Kansas, Georgia, Florida, and 12 other states said the Trump administration took appropriate action to quell what they described as Harvard University’s flagrant violation of civil rights laws concerning its handling of the campus antisemitism crisis as well as its past history of violating the Constitution’s equal protection clause by practicing racial preferences in admissions.
“Harvard both admits that it has a problem with antisemitism and acknowledges that problem as the reason it needs a multi-agency Task Force to Combat Antisemitism. Yet when the federal government acted to rectify that acknowledged violation of federal law through a negotiated practice, Harvard cried retaliation,” the attorneys general said in their own brief. “Its characterization of its refusal to follow federal nondiscrimination law as First Amendment speech is sheer chutzpah.”
They continued, “There is strong evidence of Harvard’s discriminatory animus, and the First Amendment does not shield it from consequences. This court should deny summary judgement and allow the federal government to proceed with enforcing the law. Perhaps if Harvard faces consequences for violating federal antidiscrimination law, it will finally stop violating federal antidiscrimination law.”
Trump addressed a potential “deal” to settle the matter with Harvard last Friday, writing on his Truth Social platform, saying a “deal will be announced over the next week or so” while praising the university’s legal counsel for having “acted extremely appropriately during these negotiations, and appear to be committed to doing what is right.” He added, “If a settlement is made on the basis that is currently being discussed, it will be ‘mindbogglingly’ HISTORIC, and very good for our Country.”
To date, Harvard has held its own against the federal government, building a war chest with a massive bond sale and notching a recent legal victory in the form of an injunction granted by a federal job which halted the administration’s restrictions on its international students — a policy that is being contested in a separate lawsuit. Garber has reportedly confirmed that the administration and Trump are discussing an agreement that would be palatable to all parties.
According to a report published by The Harvard Crimson on Thursday, Garber held a phone call with major donors in which he “confirmed in response to a question from [Harvard Corporation Fellow David M. Rubenstein] that talks had resumed” but “declined to share specifics of how Harvard expected to settle with the White House.”
The Crimson added, “He also did not discuss how close a deal could be and said instead that Harvard had focused on laying on steps it was already taking to address issues that are common ground for the University and the Trump administration. Areas of shared concern that have been discussed with the White House included ‘viewpoint diversity’ and antisemitism.”
Follow Dion J. Pierre @DionJPierre.
The post Civil Rights Nonprofit Slams Pro-Hamas Briefs Defending Harvard Lawsuit Against Trump first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
University of Virginia President Resigns Amid DEI Controversy With Trump Administration
US President Donald Trump speaks to the media as US Attorney General Pam Bondi and US Attorney General Todd Blanche listen, on June 27, 2025. Photo: Reuters Connect
The University of Virginia (UVA) is without a president following the reported resignation of James Ryan, a move which the US Justice Department stipulated as a condition of settling a civil rights case brought against the institution over its practicing racial preferences in admissions and hiring, a policy it justified as fostering “diversity, equity, and inclusion” (DEI).
As first reported by The New York Times, Ryan tendered his resignation in a letter to the university’s corporate board on Thursday, noting that he had originally intended to step down at the conclusion of the 2025-2026 academic year. Recent events hastened the decision, the Times added, including several board members’ insisting that Ryan leave to prevent the institution’s losing “hundreds of millions of dollars in federal funding” that the Trump administration would have impounded had he remained in office.
Ryan drew the scrutiny of the Justice Department, having allegedly defied a landmark Supreme Court ruling which outlawed establishing racial identity as the determinant factor for admission to the university as well as a series of executive orders US President Donald Trump issued to shutter DEI initiatives being operated in the public and private sectors. Such programs have been accused of fostering a new “anti-white” bigotry which penalizes individual merit and undermines the spirit of the 1960s Civil Rights Movement by, for example, excluding white males from jobs and prestigious academic positions for which they are qualified.
Another DEI-adjacent practice was identified at UVA in 2024, when the Equal Protection Project, a Rhode Island based nonprofit, filed a civil rights complaint against the university which argued that its holding a BIPOC (Black, Indigenous, and People of Color) Alumni-Student Mentoring Program is discriminatory, claiming no public official would think it appropriate to sanction a mentoring program for which the sole membership criterion is being white. UVA later changed the description of the program, claiming that it is open to “all races, ethnicities, and national origins” even as it stressed that it was “created with BIPOC students in mind.”
The university’s tactics were allegedly employed to hide other DEI programs from lawmakers and taxpayers, with Ryan reportedly moving and concealing them behind new names. He quickly exhausted the patience of the Trump Justice Department, which assumed office only months after the BIPOC program was reported to federal authorities.
“This is further demonstration that the Trump administration is brutally serious about enforcement of civil rights laws. This will send shock waves throughout higher education, and it should,” Kenneth Marcus, chairman of the Louis D. Brandeis Center for Human Rights Under Law, told The Algemeiner on Friday, commenting on the news. “It is a clear message that university leaders will be held accountable, personally and professionally, if they fail to ensure their institutions’ compliance.”
As previously reported by The Algemeiner, the Trump administration is leading a campaign against colleges and universities it has deemed as soft on campus antisemitism or excessively “woke.” Over the past several months, the administration has imposed catastrophic financial sanctions on elite universities including Harvard and Columbia, rattling a higher education establishment against which conservatives have lodged a slew of criticisms for decades. The actions coincide with a precipitous drop in public support for academia caused by an explosion of pro-Hamas demonstrations on campuses and the promotion of views which many Americans perceive as anti-meritocratic, anti-Western, and racist.
Since January, the administration has impounded $3 billion in Harvard’s federal funds over the institution’s refusal to agree to a wishlist of policy reforms that Republican lawmakers have long argued will make higher education more meritocratic and less welcoming to anti-Zionists and far-left extremists. Contained in a letter the administration sent to Harvard interim president Alan Garber — who subsequently released it to the public — the policies called for “viewpoint diversity in hiring and admissions,” the “discontinuation of [diversity, equity, and inclusion, or DEI, initiatives],” and “reducing forms of governance bloat.” They also implore Harvard to begin “reforming programs with egregious records of antisemitism” and to recalibrate its approach to “student discipline.”
Columbia University has announced that it acceded to similar demands put forth by the Trump administration as prerequisites for the restoration of its federal funds — including a review of undergraduate admissions practices that allegedly discriminate against qualified Jewish applicants, the enforcement of an “anti-mask” policy that protesters have violated to avoid being identified by law enforcement, and enhancements to the university’s security protocols that would facilitate the restoration of order when the campus is disturbed by unauthorized demonstrations.
Harvard is reportedly prepared to strike a deal with Trump as well, according to a Thursday report by The Harvard Crimson.
Garber, the paper said, held a phone call with major donors in which he “confirmed in response to a question from [Harvard Corporation Fellow David M. Rubenstein] that talks had resumed” but “declined to share specifics of how Harvard expected to settle with the White House.”
The Crimson added, “He also did not discuss how close a deal could be and said instead that Harvard had focused on laying on steps it was already taking to address issues that are common ground for the university and the Trump administration. Areas of shared concern that have been discussed with the White House included ‘viewpoint diversity’ and antisemitism.”
Meanwhile, others continue to argue that Trump’s reforms of higher education threaten to mire the university in politics while describing Ryan’s resignation as a setback for academic freedom.
“It is a sign that major public research universities are substantially controlled by a political party whose primary goal is to further its partisan agenda and will stop at nothing to bring the independence of higher education to heel,” Michigan State University professor Brendan Cantwell told Inside Higher Ed on Friday. “It undercuts both the integrity of academic communities as self-governing based on the judgement of expert professionals and the traditional accountability that public universities have to their states via formal and established governance mechanisms.”
Follow Dion J. Pierre @DionJPierre.
The post University of Virginia President Resigns Amid DEI Controversy With Trump Administration first appeared on Algemeiner.com.