Connect with us

RSS

The Jewish Sport Report: Who’s the next Jewish MLB Hall of Famer? We asked the experts.

This article was sent as a newsletter. Sign up for our weekly Jewish sports newsletter here.

(JTA) — Good afternoon, sports fans!

I hope you’ve all been staying warm and dry during this week’s winter weather. If it’s any consolation, pitchers and catchers begin to report three weeks from today. Spring is just around the corner!

Who’s next to join Koufax and Greenberg in Cooperstown?

From left to right: Ryan Braun, Ian Kinsler, Hank Greenberg, Sandy Koufax, Max Fried and Alex Bregman (Getty Images; Design by Mollie Suss)

Only two Jewish players, Sandy Koufax and Hank Greenberg, have been inducted into the Baseball Hall of Fame. There are no Jews on this year’s ballot — the results of which will be announced on Tuesday — and it’s been 11 years since any Jewish player (Shawn Green) received any votes.

That could all change soon.

Ian Kinsler and Ryan Braun are set to appear on the ballot over the next two years. And active stars Alex Bregman and Max Fried are amassing records on the field that could vault them into the Hall conversation down the road.

So who’s got the best shot to be next? Are any of the aforementioned players worthy?

To find out, I reached out to a number of Jewish baseball writers and experts, including two Hall of Fame voters, to get their predictions. Ken Rosenthal, Jayson Stark, Jonathan Mayo and others weighed in.

Read our Hall of Fame deep-dive right here.

Halftime report

RE-ICED. The International Ice Hockey Federation has reversed its decision to bar Israel from next week’s youth world championships in Bulgaria, part of which Israel was originally supposed to host. The IIHF’s initial decision to remove Israel — a call the governing body said was made in the interest of safety —  drew criticism from hockey leaders in Israel and “concern” from the NHL.

NOT A FAN. Maccabi Haifa will play a Belgian soccer club next month in front of an empty stadium. The team’s Feb. 21 match against KAA Gent, which will be played in Ghent, Belgium, will have no fans because of safety concerns.

COLD TURKEY. Israeli soccer player Sagiv Jehezkel was detained in Turkey this week, where he plays for the top-tier Antalyaspor club, after he made a public gesture to mark 100 days since Oct. 7. Jehezkel was suspended from his club, which has said it will terminate his contract, and is now back in Israel.

CRICKETS FOR TEEGER. An executive at the South Africa headquarters of the sportswear company Diadora said the company would not sponsor any events including David Teeger, the Jewish cricket player who was stripped of his position as captain of the country’s Under-19 national team last week over anti-Israel protests against him.

TO THE NINES. Each offseason, MLB Network ranks the top 10 players at each position, and so far, two Jewish players have made the cut: Zack Gelof and Max Fried were named the ninth-best second baseman and starting pitcher, respectively. The third baseman list will be announced Jan. 31 and is likely to feature Alex Bregman, who was ranked sixth last year.

“B.Y.-JEW.” Jewish quarterback Jake Retzlaff — who we featured on our list of 36 Jewish Student Athletes to Watch — has made waves at Brigham Young University, where he’s one of only seven Jewish students. Retzlaff spoke with Haaretz about his experience as a Jewish player at the Mormon university.

RAISING THE BAR. Former Olympian Aly Raisman is joining ESPN as an analyst on its NCAA gymnastics broadcasts, where she’s set to make her debut today. “I’m so excited,” Raisman told People Magazine. “If I’m being honest, I’m also very nervous because I want to do a good job.”

Jews in sports to watch this weekend

IN FOOTBALL…

A.J. Dillon is the lone Jewish player still standing in the NFL playoffs. His Green Bay Packers take on the San Francisco 49ers in the divisional round tomorrow at 8:15 p.m. ET on Fox. Dillon, who did not play last week, is currently listed as questionable for the game due to injuries.

IN BASKETBALL…

Deni Avdija and the Washington Wizards host the San Antonio Spurs Saturday at 7 p.m. ET and the Denver Nuggets Sunday at 6 p.m. ET. Amari Bailey and his G League team, the Greensboro Swarm, face the South Bay Lakers Saturday at 8 p.m. E.T.

IN HOCKEY…

Goalkeeper Yaniv Perets, who made his NHL debut on Monday, and his Carolina Hurricanes host Jake Walman (who has missed time this week with an illness) and the Detroit Red Wings tonight at 7 p.m. ET, and the Minnesota Wild Sunday at 5 p.m. ET. Luke Hughes and the New Jersey Devils face the Columbus Blue Jackets tonight and host the Dallas Stars tomorrow, both at 7 p.m. ET. Star Jack Hughes remains sidelined with an upper-body injury. In the PWHL, Aerin Frankel and Kaleigh Fratkin and the Boston squad host Abbey Levy and the New York team tomorrow at 12:30 p.m. ET.

IN GOLF…

Daniel Berger returns to action this weekend at The American Express PGA tournament. The 30-year-old hasn’t competed since he missed the cut at the 2022 U.S. Open because of a back injury. Ben Silverman, who finished tied for 18th at last week’s Sony Open, and David Lipsky are also at the tournament in La Quinta, California.

Wrestlemania in Israel 

(Courtesy of the Ida Crown Jewish Academy)

Students from Ida Crown Jewish Academy in Skokie, Illinois, visited Israel earlier this month, participating in volunteer projects and competing alongside the Israeli national and Olympic wrestling team in Beersheva. (Courtesy of Ida Crown Jewish Academy)


The post The Jewish Sport Report: Who’s the next Jewish MLB Hall of Famer? We asked the experts. appeared first on Jewish Telegraphic Agency.

Continue Reading

RSS

Striking Hamas Leaders in Qatar Is 100% Legal Under International Law

Vehicles stop at a red traffic light, a day after an Israeli attack on Hamas leaders, in Doha, Qatar, Sept. 10, 2025. Photo: REUTERS/Ibraheem Abu Mustafa

Here are just a few of the absurd reactions from world leaders in the wake of Israel’s stunning strike on Hamas leadership in Doha, Qatar, last week:

  • A “blatant violation of international law.”
  • A “violation of sovereignty.”
  • A “flagrant breach of international law.”

France, Spain, the UK, the Qataris themselves, and others have joined in the hysterics.

Yet all these sloganizing leaders have one thing in common: an astonishing and total ignorance of actual, international law.

In future articles, I will dive into the far reaching implications and consequences of this stunning operation, but for now, here’s a quick review of international law.

  • Qatar is not technically at war with Israel, therefore the country could be considered a “neutral power” under the Hague Convention V and thus immune from attack.
  • However, under articles 2, 3 and 4 of Hague Convention V, a “neutral power” may not allow anyone on its territory to direct combat operations, run command and control centers, or even to communicate electronically with combatants.
  • For years, the Hamas leadership has been carrying out exactly those prohibited acts from within Qatar — with sustained and integral Qatari support. In other words, Qatar has been violating international law for years — before, during, and after the October 7 massacre.
  • Hamas is the internationally-designated terror organization that carried out the October 7 massacre of Israelis in 2023, and continues holding Israeli hostages in Gaza to this day. Though the Hamas leadership in Qatar claims the moniker “political wing,” it is consistently involved in directing combat operations against Israel.
  • Qatar cannot claim to be a “neutral power” under the Hague Conventions, because it provides sustained and integral support for Hamas — which aids Hamas combat operations against Israel — from Qatari soil.
  • Furthermore, Israel has an inviolate right to self defense under Article 51 of the United Nations Charter, and Hamas may not undermine that right simply by directing its combat operations from inside a third-party country.

In summary: Qatar has been providing sustained and integral support for Hamas combat operations — from Qatari soil — in violation of The Hague conventions.

These acts give Israel the inviolate right, under both the Hague Conventions and the UN Charter’s Article 51, to defend itself and its citizens by targeting Hamas leadership inside Qatar.

Daniel Pomerantz is the CEO of RealityCheck, an organization dedicated to deepening public conversation through robust research studies and public speaking. He has been a lawyer for more than 25 years.

Continue Reading

RSS

No, Mahmoud Abbas Did Not Condemn Jerusalem Terror Attack

People inspect a bus with bullet holes at the scene where a shooting terrorist attack took place at the outskirts of Jerusalem, Sept. 8, 2025. Photo: REUTERS/Ammar Awad

Last week, terrorists opened fire in Jerusalem, murdering six and injuring 12 innocent Israelis.

Palestinian Authority (PA) leader Mahmoud Abbas — the man the international community insists is a “peace partner” — then put out a statement that was labeled by much of the international media as a condemnation. In reality, it was anything but.

Abbas never once mentioned the terror attack. He never referred to the murders, never acknowledged the victims, and never expressed a word of sympathy for their families. His statement spoke in vague terms about rejecting “any targeting of Palestinian and Israeli civilians,” a formula carefully crafted to sound balanced while deliberately blurring the reality that it was Palestinians who carried out the terror attack, and Israelis who were its victims.

Worse still, 98% of Abbas’ statement was condemnation of Israel, the “occupation,” “genocide,” and “colonist terrorism.” Instead of using the attack to speak out against Palestinian terror, Abbas used it to criticize Israel without even actually mentioning the attack, and while portraying Palestinians as the victims.

Abbas’ remark is not a condemnation of terrorism. It is a cover-up. He is once again confirming the PA’s ideology that sees Palestinian attacks against Israeli civilians as justified.

The emptiness of Abbas’s words becomes glaring when compared to the response of the United Arab Emirates.

The UAE condemned the “terrorist shooting incident … in the strongest terms,” offered condolences to the victims and their families, and wished a speedy recovery to the wounded.

The UAE’s statement was clear, moral, and human. Abbas’ was political and self-serving, designed to enable gullible Westerners to delude themselves that Abbas was actually condemning terrorism. The UAE and Abbas’ statements follow. The difference speaks volumes.

UAE condemnation of terror Mahmoud Abbas’ sham
“The United Arab Emirates has condemned in the strongest terms the terrorist shooting incident which occurred near Jerusalem, and resulted in a number of deaths and injuries.

In a statement, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MoFA) reaffirmed the UAE’s strong condemnation of these terrorist acts and its permanent rejection of all forms of violence and terrorism aimed at undermining security and stability.

The Ministry expressed its sincere condolences and sympathy to the families of the victims, and to the State of Israel and its people, as well as its wishes for a speedy recovery for all the injured.”

[United Arab Emirates Ministry of Foreign Affairs, website, September 8, 2025]

“The Palestinian Presidency reiterated its firm stance rejecting and condemning any targeting of Palestinian and Israel civilians, and denouced all forms of violence and terrorism, regardless of their source.

The Presidency stressed that security and stability in the region cannot be achieved without ending the occupation, halting acts of genocide in the Gaza Strip, and stopping colonist terrorism across the West Bank, including occupied Jerusalem.

It emphasized the Palestinian people’s attainment of their legitimate rights to an independent and sovereign state with East Jerusalem as its capital, and the achievement of security and peace for all, is what wil end the cycle of violence in the region.

This came in the wake of today’s events in occupied Jerusalem.”

[WAFA, official PA news agency, September 8, 2025]

Ephraim D. Tepler is a contributor to Palestinian Media Watch (PMW). Itamar Marcus is the Founder and Director of PMW, where a version of this article first appeared.

Continue Reading

RSS

Carrying Charlie Kirk’s Torch: Why the West Must Not Retreat

A memorial is held for Charlie Kirk, who was shot and killed in Utah, at the Turning Point USA headquarters in Phoenix, Arizona, US, Sept. 10, 2025. Photo: REUTERS/Caitlin O’Hara

Charlie Kirk’s sudden death leaves more than grief; it leaves a void in a moment of profound civilizational danger. He was not just a political organizer or cultural commentator. He was a voice that gave the next generation permission to reject the lies of relativism, to reclaim confidence in the West, and to stand against the forces — both ideological and violent — that seek to dismantle it. To honor his life means refusing to let that mission fade.

Kirk understood that the greatest threats to freedom were not hidden in obscure policy debates, but in the cultural and spiritual health of the West. He saw that when a society abandons faith, mocks tradition, and treats national identity as a shameful relic, it becomes easy prey for movements that thrive on weakness and self-doubt. His genius was to frame this not as nostalgia, but as survival.

For him, defending family, faith, and moral order was not a luxury — it was the only path by which free societies could endure.

One challenge Kirk named very clearly was the rise of radical Islamism and terrorism. He warned that this was not merely a foreign problem, but an internal one. Radical ideologies, cloaked in the language of grievance, have found fertile ground in Western cities, universities, and political discourse. Under the cover of tolerance, they have grown bolder. Under the silence of elites, they have become entrenched. Kirk refused to bend to the false equivalence that excuses extremism as cultural difference. He understood that those who despise freedom should not be empowered to weaponize it.

His critics often called him polarizing, but what they truly feared was his clarity. He reminded audiences that not all values are equal, not all ideas are harmless, and not every ideology deserves space in a free society. In a climate where cowardice is praised as moderation, his directness was seen as dangerous. But the true danger lies in the refusal to speak plainly about the threats that face us. Civilizations do not collapse overnight; they are eroded when their defenders lose the courage to distinguish between what is worth preserving and what must be rejected.

Kirk never lost that courage. He confronted progressive elites who undermined confidence in the West from within, and he confronted radical Islamist sympathizers who justified violence against it from without. He saw that both positions, though different in form, worked toward the same end: a weakening of Western resolve, an erosion of shared identity, and the creation of a generation uncertain of its own inheritance. His refusal to allow that message to go unchallenged gave hope to millions of young people who might otherwise have drifted into cynicism or despair.

Now his death presents a stark choice. The forces he warned against are not pausing to mourn. They are pressing forward, eager to fill the space that was already under siege. If his legacy is not actively continued, it will not simply fade — it will be replaced by movements hostile to everything he fought to defend. To preserve his mission, the West must double down on the truths he carried: that strength is not arrogance, that tradition is not oppression, and that freedom without moral order is an illusion that collapses into chaos.

The stakes are high. If these principles are allowed to wither, we risk a generation unmoored from history, unprepared for the battles ahead, and unwilling to confront the ideological threats at our doorstep. But if Kirk’s legacy is embraced and advanced, his death will be the beginning of a renewal.  

The West cannot retreat. It cannot afford the luxury of silence or the temptation of compromise with those who seek its undoing. The path forward requires the clarity and courage that Charlie Kirk embodied. To carry his torch is not simply to honor his memory. It is to safeguard the survival of the civilization he loved and defended. The question is not whether we should continue his work. The question is whether we can endure if we do not.

Amine Ayoub, a fellow at the Middle East Forum, is a policy analyst and writer based in Morocco. Follow him on X: @amineayoubx

Continue Reading

Copyright © 2017 - 2023 Jewish Post & News