Top US professional associations for academics have allowed antisemitism to “flourish unchecked” by excluding Jewish members and promoting antisemitic and biased anti-Israel narratives in their work, according to a new report.

The Anti-Defamation League (ADL) on Thursday published the new study, which found that 42 percent of Jewish faculty feel that these organizations, including the Middle East Studies Association, alienate Jews intentionally if they publicly align with Zionism.

According to the data, 25 percent resort to concealing their Jewishness due to the hostile environment, and another 45 percent say their colleagues lectured them on what does and what does not constitute antisemitism.

The report “reveals alarming, patterns of marginalization, leadership failures, and systematic exclusion of Jewish members from their professional communities and academic homes,” the ADL said in a statement.

Some academic bodies, such as the American Philosophical Association and the American Political Science Association, were conferred high ratings based on Jewish faculty not reporting any “major incidents,” while others, including the American Anthropological Association and several others, were labeled as “major concerns” requiring significant remedial action.

“Antisemitic biases in progressional academic associations are widespread and reveal a problem that goes far beyond traditional scholarly circles,” ADL chief executive officer Jonathan Greenblatt said in a statement. “When antisemitism and biased anti-Israel narratives are normalized within these influential spaces, they seep into curricula, research, and public discourse, quietly but profoundly shaping how students and future professionals interpret the world.”

He added, “By assessing these associations and how they are responding, we are delineating a path forward to ensure that academic spaces remain intellectually rigorous, inclusive and free of antisemitism, and accountable to the public they serve.”

The Middle East Studies Association (MESA), which was categorized as a group with “major concerns,” has a long history of alienating Jewish members and politicizing the discourse of a field of study which explores some of the most nuanced and complex subjects in all of academia.

In March 2022, it endorsed the Palestinian-led boycott, divestment, and sanctions (BDS) campaign against Israel. The association’s president, Eve Troutt Powell, later said that its members clearly decided “to answer the call for solidarity from Palestinian scholars and students experiencing violations of their right to education and other human rights.” MESA’s board would seek to “ensure that the call for an academic boycott is upheld without undermining our commitment to the free exchange of ideas and scholarship,” she added.

Launched in 2005, the BDS campaign opposes Zionism — a movement supporting the Jewish people’s right to self-determination — and rejects ‘right to exist as a Jewish nation-state. It seeks to isolate the country comprehensively with economic, political, and cultural boycotts. Official guidelines issued for the campaign’s academic boycott state that “projects with all Israeli academic institutions should come to an end,” and delineate specific restrictions that adherents should abide by — for instance, denying letters of recommendation to students who seek to study in Israel.

An overwhelming majority of Middle East scholars support boycotting Israel, according to a survey published in November 2022, which shows that only nine percent of 500 responding experts from MESA and the American Political Science Association (APSA) would “oppose all boycotts of Israel.” A striking 91 percent said they “support at least some boycotts,” and 36 percent responded they favor “some boycotts” but not against Israeli universities.

In 2023, the American Anthropological Association, established in 1902, endorsed BDS. It had considered doing so before, but the idea was rejected in November 2015, when a measure similar was defeated by razor thin margin of 39 votes, with 4,807 total votes cast.

Another academic association, the American Association of University Professors (AAUP), which has promoted anti-Zionism through its work and expressed support for academic boycotts, was not named in the ADL’s report, but The Algemeiner has covered its activities extensively.

In October, the AAUP, the largest and oldest US organization for defending faculty rights, picked a fight over the University of Pennsylvania’s efforts to combat antisemitism, arguing that a range of faculty speech and conduct considered hostile by Jewish members of the campus community are key components of academic freedom.

In a letter to the administration regarding antidiscrimination investigations opened by Penn’s Office of Religious and Ethnic Interests (OREI), the group charged that efforts to investigate alleged antisemitism on campus and punish those found to have perpetrated can constitute discrimination. Its argument reprises recent claims advanced by the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) group, notorious for its defense of Sharia law and alleged ties to jihadist groups such as Hamas, in a lawsuit which aims to dismantle antisemitism prevention training at Northwestern University.

Additionally, the AAUP described Penn’s efforts to protect Jewish students from antisemitism as resulting from “government interference in university procedures” while arguing that merely reporting antisemitism subjects the accused to harassment, seemingly suggesting that many Jewish students who have been assaulted, academically penalized, and exposed to hate speech on college campuses across the US are perpetrators rather than victims. The group also argued that other minority groups from “protected classes,” such as Arabs and African Americans, are disproportionately investigated for antisemitism.

The AAUP had defended allegedly antisemitic speech before.

In 2014, for example, it accused the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign of violating the tenets of academic freedom when it declined to approve the hiring of Steven Salaita because he uttered a slew of antisemitic, extramural comments on social media, such as “Zionists transforming ‘antisemitism’ from something horrible into something honorable since 1948,” “Every Jewish boy and girl can grow up to be the leader of a murderous colonial regime,” and “By eagerly conflating Jewishness and Israel, Zionists are partly responsible when people say antisemitic s—t in response to Israeli terror.”

An AAUP report that chronicled the incident, which mushroomed into a major controversy in academia, listed those tweets and others but still concluded that not hiring Salaita “acted in violation of the 1940 Statement of Principles of Academic Freedom and Tenure” and “cast a pall of uncertainty over the degree to which academic freedom is understood and respected.” At the same time, the AAUP said that it was “committed to fighting systemic racism and pursuing racial justice and equity in colleges and universities, in keeping with the association’s mission to ensure higher education’s contribution to the common good.”

Follow Dion J. Pierre @DionJPierre.

Douglas Kelley, the real-life U.S. Army psychiatrist portrayed by Rami Malek in the recently released motion picture Nuremberg, wrote a book titled 22 Cells in Nuremberg that came out in 1947, a year after he finished his five-month stint at the Nuremberg trials.

Nearly 60 years later, interviews conducted by Leon Goldensohn, a Jewish psychiatrist who replaced Kelley at the historic war crimes trials, were published in The Nuremberg Interviews: An American Psychiatrist’s Conversations with the Defendants and Witnesses. Goldensohn who spent more time with Nazi prisoners than Kelley did, and this book, translated into 16 languages, arguably sheds more light on the Third Reich criminals.

Goldensohn and Kelley were responsible for monitoring both the physical and mental health of the Nazi prisoners, and both their lives ended tragically: Goldensohn died of a heart attack in 1961, five days after his 50th birthday; Kelley died by suicide in front of his family at the age of 45.

Leon Goldensohn’s son Dan, now 77, said that his father’s interactions with the prisoners were deeper than the ones Kelley had.

“There’s a couple of defendants who say in Leon’s book how much they preferred talking to him,” Dan Goldensohn told me.

One of those defendants was Hermann Goering, the commander of the Luftwaffe, the German air force, who complimented Goldensohn on his technique as a psychiatrist.

“I feel freer to talk to you than to some other psychologists,” Goering told him.

I checked in with Leon Goldensohn’s sons and daughter and their cousins when the movie Nuremberg opened and the actor portraying Douglas Kelley appeared larger than life on the silver screen. The movie was about “the wrong psychiatrist,” Dan Goldensohn told me over the phone.

“We lost our chance to have Leon’s work once again in the public eye, because of Kelley,” Dan said. “When people talk about an Army psychiatrist at Nuremberg, Kelley’s name comes up. Leon’s name hardly does. Anyway, we have our jealousies.”

A French production company did make an hour-long program based on the Goldensohn book that aired on The History Channel, but the psychiatrist’s surviving relatives said it was not well done. Dan Goldensohn said the family came close to signing a deal with an Italian company for a film or TV series based on the book.

“It suddenly collapsed as soon as they heard that this other movie was signed with real actors and a real director,” he said.

‘The best brother in the world’

Dr. Eli Goldensohn, a world-renowned neurologist at Columbia University who died in 2013 at 98, took up the book project when he retired at the age of 83. Eli, who was four years younger than Leon, spent 10 years gathering and organizing materials, writing short summaries of all the interviews, and transcribing all those that hadn’t been transcribed. Eventually, he donated his brother’s papers to the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum.

When the book was published in the fall of 2004, Eli Goldensohn told me his only disappointment was that it “didn’t really describe Leon’s wonderful war record.” Leon Goldensohn had been Division Psychiatrist of the 63rd Infantry Division, which fought in France and Germany, and received several decorations for service on the front lines.

Eli remembered his older brother fondly.

“The Nazi prisoners respected Leon because he was an objective person and was fundamentally a gentleman who was able to meet them on any level,” Eli told me back in 2004. “He was the best brother in the world. I did this book to memorialize the existence of one of the finest people I ever knew.”

Anticipating Hannah Arendt

Eli Goldensohn’s son and daughter assisted him on the book. Ellen Goldensohn, who had served as editor-in-chief of Natural History magazine for many years, helped with the copyediting. Her brother Marty Goldensohn, a veteran of public radio newsrooms, introduced Eli to his friend Jim Bouton, the former Yankee pitcher and best-selling author, who convinced Eli to pursue a deal with a major commercial publisher. (Eli ended up signing with Knopf, where the interviews were turned into a book by Ashbel Green, the editor who had worked with such dissident writers as Andrei Sakharov, Jacobo Timerman and Vaclav Havel.)

Ellen Goldensohn said her uncle Leon’s work was prescient, given that it came 17 years before Hannah Arendt’s Eichmann in Jerusalem: A Report on the Banality of Evil.

“In 1946 he really knew the banality of evil and what was asked of these people who ran the Nazi regime,” she told me.

Marty Goldensohn remembers that his mother Betty, who lived to be 101, complained about her husband commandeering the extra bedroom in their assisted living apartment for the book project.

“Eli, get these file boxes out of here or I’m going over to the other side,” she joked, the other side being the Third Reich.

Marty said his father’s labor of love on the book was motivated, in part, by a sense of history, something he shared with his brother Leon.

“Leon was a Jewish doctor and he had compassion,” Marty told me. “He was in the middle of something that the historian Tony Judt once described as ‘a seam of evil.’ He was at the seam and how could he resist asking the key questions that had to do with the horror that had been perpetrated?”

The ‘Good’ German

Of the 476 pages in The Nuremberg Interviews, 33 are devoted to Goering, who told Goldensohn he was nauseated by Picasso, referred to the virulently antisemitic newspaper Der Sturmer as “that stupid journal” and claimed that of all the accusations leveled against him, the charge of looting art treasures caused him the most anguish.

In conversations with Goldensohn, Goering insisted that he was never antisemitic, that Adolph Hitler was a great leader who was betrayed by some of his subordinates and that he, Goering, would go down in history as a man who did much for the German people.

When Leon Goldensohn pressed Goering on his culpability in the genocide of European Jewry, the prisoner gave a classic “Good German” defense: “Certainly, as second man in the state under Hitler, I heard rumors about mass killings of Jews, but I could do nothing about it and I knew that it was useless to investigate these rumors and to find out about them accurately, which would not have been too hard, but I was busy with other things,” he said. “And if I had found out what was going on regarding the mass murders, it would simply have made me feel bad and I could do very little to prevent it anyway.”

The post Is the movie ‘Nuremberg’ about the wrong Jewish psychiatrist? appeared first on The Forward.

The armed wings of Palestinian terrorist groups Hamas and Islamic Jihad said on Thursday they would hand over the body of a hostage at 8 pm local time (1800 GMT), though Israel said it had not received any official notification of a planned transfer.

Islamic Jihad, which is allied with Hamas and also seized hostages during the Oct. 7, 2023, attack that precipitated the Gaza war, said the body was recovered in the southern Gaza city of Khan Younis.

Under an October ceasefire deal, Hamas released all 20 surviving hostages still held in Gaza in exchange for nearly 2,000 Palestinian prisoners and wartime detainees held by Israel.

The agreement also provided for the return of the remains of 28 hostages in exchange for the remains of 360 militants.

Until Thursday, the remains of four hostages were still held in Gaza.

An Israeli government spokesperson told reporters Israel was unaware of any planned return, despite media reports suggesting the handover could take place later on Thursday.