Uncategorized
A new version of the famous Holocaust diary is being called ‘Anne Frank pornography’ and getting banned from schools
(JTA) – Among the many books that conservative parents have recently asked their children’s schools to remove is a lushly illustrated version of the most famous Holocaust diary.
The graphic adaptation of Anne Frank’s diary, published in English in 2018, has found itself at the center of a growing number of controversies involving book removals from school libraries. A small number of passionate activists have pushed for the book to be removed from schools in Florida and Texas, calling it “pornography” and even “antisemitic.” Sometimes, they’ve succeeded.
The movement to police children’s literature — particularly graphic novels — on the basis of race, sex and gender has encompassed thousands of different titles, and it has grown to become a potent political force with potential reverberations for the 2024 presidential race. The official who has played one of the biggest roles in enabling parents to challenge school library books, Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, is now running for president.
To defenders of the illustrated book — including the foundation created in Frank’s memory, historians and Jewish groups — the inclusion of Anne Frank’s diary among the list of banned books is a sign that the movement is bigoted and misguided.
Proponents of removing the book from schools say the graphic adaptation is essentially an obscene version that distorts Frank’s legacy and aids in “grooming” children. Even some Jewish parents and at least one Jewish lawmaker have objected to the book’s presence in schools.
“I read the diary of Anne Frank many times as a kid. I don’t remember any of that stuff that they put in that graphic novel,” Florida Rep. Randy Fine told the Jewish Telegraphic Agency.
Calling the adaptation an “Anne Frank pornography book,” Fine continued, “And frankly that graphic novel is antisemitic. To sexualize the diary of Anne Frank in that sort of inappropriate way, it is antisemitic.”
Here is what you need to know about the book, the criticism it’s facing and the context that has made it a flashpoint in a deepening culture war.
What is ‘Anne Frank’s Diary: The Graphic Adaptation’?
Published in 2018, “Anne Frank’s Diary: The Graphic Adaptation” is a new, abridged version of Frank’s famous diary presented in comic-book format. The project was authorized by the Anne Frank Fonds, the Switzerland-based foundation started by Anne’s father Otto Frank, which controls the copyright to the diary Otto rescued after he survived the Holocaust. Anne herself perished in the Bergen-Belsen concentration camp after hiding out for most of the war with her family in an Amsterdam annex.
The Oscar-nominated Israeli filmmaker Ari Folman, together with illustrator David Polonsky, put the new book together. It was intended as a companion piece to the 2021 animated film “Where Is Anne Frank,” which Folman directed.
While the film tells the fanciful story of Anne’s imaginary friend Kitty coming to life and wandering through modern-day Amsterdam, the book is a straightforward, though heavily truncated, rendition of Anne’s original diary. All of the entries it reproduces are taken from her original text, and dialogue between the characters in the annex is based on Anne’s own recollections of their conversations. Some of its supporters resist the label “graphic novel,” which they say implies the story is fictional.
The new book, the foundation says, is not meant to replace Frank’s original diary, first published in Dutch in 1947 as “The Secret Annex” and in English in 1952 as “The Diary of a Young Girl.” That book, along with subsequent editions that restored some passages edited out of the first publication, continues to be published and widely read in dozens of languages.
Why and how is the book being challenged?
A handful of parent activists, the largest “parents’ rights” group in the country and at least one Republican state lawmaker — Fine — have specifically gone after “Anne Frank’s Diary: The Graphic Adaptation” as part of their larger campaign against what they say is obscene and pornographic content in schools. After a few isolated incidents of parental opposition to the book over the last year, their efforts have gained steam in recent months.
Organized by members of “parents’ rights” groups such as Moms for Liberty and No Left Turn in Education, parents nationwide have brought challenges against thousands of books in school libraries, the vast majority of which deal with topics of race, gender and sexuality. This movement began as parents organized to oppose COVID-19 mask mandates in public schools, and picked up steam in the aftermath of the 2020 racial justice protests following George Floyd’s murder, as well as recent political controversies involving LGBTQ-focused issues such as medical procedures for trans children.
The groups operate under the presumption that their children’s educators and librarians might be trying to sneak leftist viewpoints (including what they call “critical race theory” and “gender ideology”) into the classroom, or even that they are “grooming” their children.
Increasingly, such parents have trained this focus on books, and have become particularly sensitive to any literary depictions of sex and/or LGBTQ identity — particularly in graphic or comic-book format. Some of the most-banned books in schools across the country are graphic novels and memoirs with LGBTQ themes, including “Gender Queer” and “Fun Home.”
“People are just so uncomfortable with the idea of seeing anything represented visually,” said Kasey Meehan, director of the Freedom to Read program at the literary free-speech activist group PEN America. “Time and time again, when graphic novels are taken, an image is pulled out of context or an image is held up and declared as porn.”
Florida has emerged as a frontier for this movement under the leadership of DeSantis, who is a Republican. Under new laws he championed, educators can face felony charges for making obscene material accessible to students; the state also has a new law, dubbed “Don’t Say Gay” by its critics, that prohibits any classroom instruction on sexual identity or orientation in elementary and middle school, and limits it in high school.
Why are parents complaining specifically about the graphic adaptation?
Critics of the book say they are objecting to the small handful of passages in which Anne describes sexual matters. In one, she discusses a time she asked a female friend if they could show each other their breasts, but was rebuffed. (“If only I had a girlfriend,” she muses.) In another, she describes clinical details of her own vagina.
These passages are Anne’s own writing, and were part of her actual diary. Folman and Polonsky reproduce them in the book and show a full-page illustration showing her wandering through a garden of female nude statues in the Greco-Roman tradition.
This illustration, which is presented as coming from Anne’s imagination, has garnered the most intense blowback from parents. In Facebook groups devoted to book challenges, some members have shared screenshots of the page as evidence of the adaptation’s obscene qualities, questioning why any parent would want their child to read it.
Some people challenging the book have offered other explanations. Tiffany Justice, a co-founder of Moms For Liberty whose Florida district has removed the book, told JTA that she was troubled by the fact that the adaptation only replicates a small percentage of the original diary, while leaving out what she believed to be crucial context: the original epilogue that shifted from Anne’s first-person narration to a larger study of the victims of the Holocaust. (An afterword does appear in the graphic adaptation.)
Inveighing against current child literacy levels she said are woefully low, Justice was also infuriated by the idea that Frank’s diary needed an illustrated version to begin with.
“Anne wrote the diary when she was 13,” she said. “So the diary is written at a level where children of that age can completely understand it.”
What has happened when parents have challenged the book?
The book first grabbed headlines in August 2022, when administrators at Keller ISD, a public school district in the Dallas-Fort Worth area of Texas, ordered staff to remove it (along with a selection of other books) from their shelves. The book had been challenged by a single parent the previous year, and the school’s new board, backed by right-wing special interest groups, had ordered its review policy for classroom materials to be completely overhauled. Any books that had ever been challenged in the district were to be removed from circulation until the matter had been resolved. Following public outcry, the book was returned to Keller’s shelves a week later.
A second Texas school district, Katy ISD outside Houston, had also placed the book under review during the 2021-22 school year, ultimately determining it was only appropriate for high school students.
The book soon landed on the radar of parent activists in Florida. One Florida school district, Indian River County Schools on the state’s Atlantic coast, ruled in April that the book was “not age-appropriate” at any level of instruction, including high school. A parent there had challenged it, claiming that the book “minimizes the Holocaust.”
After a review, the district agreed with the parent, telling JTA it had determined the book to be “a fictional novel,” “not the real diary of Anne Frank,” and filled with “inappropriate content.” The district superintendent issued a statement backing the ruling, citing Florida’s statewide Holocaust education mandate as a reason why the school should not make the book available to students.
The national leadership of Moms For Liberty issued a statement siding with the district — and emphasizing that Anne Frank’s diary is not itself objectionable.
“There are multiple versions of Anne Frank’s diary of varying age appropriateness available to students,” the statement said. “Only this ONE version was removed.”
Justice, the Moms for Liberty cofounder, is a former board member for Indian River County Schools and still lives in the area. She told JTA she does not like the book either and said its removal was a sign of the system working as it should: School administrators took a parent’s challenge seriously and came to a decision.
“If the superintendent and the school board wanted it there, it would be there,” she said. “If the Holocaust education group in the county had wanted it there — these are Jewish people — had wanted it there, it would be there.”
Another Florida school district, Clay County Public Schools outside Jacksonville, has kept the book restricted from student access for some five months and counting, following a single parental complaint earlier this year. That parent, Bruce Friedman, is Jewish, and has become a leading voice of the broader book challenge movement. He challenged the graphic adaptation along with hundreds of other books in his district that he deemed to be inappropriate for students. “As far as I’m concerned, it’s grooming,” he told JTA about the adaptation.
Facing a backlog of book challenges, Clay County in April altered its challenge policy to make it harder for parents like Friedman to file blanket requests to remove many books at once for broadly defined reasons. But notably, the district retained the pending challenge to “Anne Frank’s Diary: The Graphic Adaptation” even after its policy change. A final decision on the book is still pending.
How are the book’s supporters responding to the criticism?
Activists opposed to the book banning movement and experts on the diary’s publication history say critics of the Anne Frank adaptation are wrong even about the most basic facts of their objections.
First, while the visual format of the graphic adaptation (which incorporates some surreal imagery) arguably lies somewhere between fact and artistic interpretation, and its rendition of the diary is severely abridged, the book did not invent the passages these parents find objectionable, as some have alleged. Those came, word for word, from Frank herself. Both passages were fully restored to her English-language diary beginning with versions published in the 1980s, largely without incident.
A crucial part of the argument against the graphic adaptation is the idea that both of these passages were excised from the initial English-language edition of the diary. Both Friedman and Fine have told JTA they have no recollection of having read the passages with sexual content in their own childhood memories of the diary.
They almost certainly did, said Ruth Franklin, a book critic and author who is writing a book about Frank and her diary to be published next year by Yale University Press. According to Franklin’s research, the very first English-language edition of the diary did indeed include one of the two passages the parents are now objecting to: the part where Anne discusses her attraction to another girl.
Franklin said that, contrary to popular belief, Otto Frank was the one who pushed for the passage to be included in the diary’s first English-language edition after it was excised from the Dutch original. Otto is often portrayed as having been responsible for removing the passage so as to sanitize Anne’s language for a general audience.
Contemporary parents who insist they did not read the passage as children, she said, are “misremembering.”
“If they were to actually go to the library and open up the edition that has been in print since 1952, they would be unhappily surprised to find what’s there,” Franklin said. “It seems inconsistent to me to go after the graphic adaptation and not the diary itself.”
At least one parent has objected to the unabridged text-based version of the diary before. In 2013, a Michigan mom challenged an unabridged edition of the diary, citing the same passages that today’s parents are objecting to in the graphic adaptation. She argued that the unabridged diary was “inappropriate for the middle school,” and tried to push her daughter’s district to swap out the “definitive” edition of the diary for the original version that excised one of the objectionable passages. The parent’s objection made national news, was the subject of much condemnation and was ultimately rejected by the district.
Conditions in schools have changed in the last decade, with parents in multiple states newly empowered to challenge books in their children’s schools. The movement has caught up not only the graphic version of Anne Frank’s diary but a growing number of other titles with Jewish and Holocaust themes.
Meehan of PEN America suggested that the parents who objected to Anne exploring her sexuality were doing so because of the passages’ latent LGBTQ themes, meaning that the text had become an example of “intersectionality,” or representing more than one marginalized group. Some of the book’s opponents, including Justice, have separately attacked the idea of intersectionality.
“When there are multiple themes represented in a book,” Meehan said, “then that book becomes even more a focus of efforts to remove it.”
For the Anne Frank Fonds, the Swiss group that controls the diary and authorized the adaptation, the situation is clear-cut. From across the Atlantic, the group issued a statement responding to challenges of the diary in all its forms: “We consider the book of a 12-year-old girl to be appropriate reading for her peers.”
—
The post A new version of the famous Holocaust diary is being called ‘Anne Frank pornography’ and getting banned from schools appeared first on Jewish Telegraphic Agency.
Uncategorized
Cycling team Israel–Premier Tech is ditching the ‘Israel’ brand. But was it entirely their decision?
After a tumultuous season, international cycling team Israel–Premier Tech, co-owned by Canadian-Israeli billionaire Sylvan Adams, is officially going to change its name and remove the word “Israel”. The decision comes after repeated anti-Israel protests across Europe disrupted the team—whose international roster of 31 cyclists includes just three Israelis—during their open-road events, which can last hundreds of kilometres across the continent. Several cyclists crashed due to protester intervention. The decision to remove Israeli branding from Israel–Premier Tech led co-owner Adams to announce he would step away from day-to-day involvement with the team.
There’s a lot to be said about the political ramifications of wearing the Israeli name on your shirt in 2025, but our sports podcasters have a different theory about the shift. Israel–Premier Tech enjoyed a successful season that brought them back to full status with the UCI World Tour, after being relegated down to the secondary UCI ProSeries since 2023. That means the stakes are higher, the stage is bigger, and the league’s propensity for risk and disruption may well have shrunk. Is this purely a political decision, or are UCI executives trying to prevent more bad press in the coming year?
Also on the docket: the boys talk about the Toronto Blue Jays’ run to the American League championship series, big baseball moves, early NHL impressions and a quick NFL check-in.
Transcript (excerpt)
James Hirsh: We want to talk about a recent story. There’s been some news with a cycling team, Israel Premier Tech, which is owned by Canadian billionaire Sylvan Adams. And it’s not going to be Israel Premier Tech anymore.
Gabe Pulver: They’ve been called Israel Premier Tech for, I guess it’s been around five years. They’ve been an official UCI squad, you know, for the last, I think, since 2020—
James Hirsh: Which means they compete in the big cycling races like the Tour de France and Giro d’Italia, things like that.
Gabe Pulver: Exactly. They were called Israel Start-Up Nation for a number of years and Israel Cycling Academy before that. They were a part of the Vuelta a España that had to be shut down due to anti-Israel protests going on across Spain. And for a while, they took the name off the jersey and just called themselves Premier Tech for the week. That seemed to not assuage the protesters, and they’ve decided to, as a quote, “move away from its current Israeli identity”.
James Hirsh: And part of that is Sylvan Adams, we should say, who has a pretty big job right now as president of the World Jewish Congress, has said that he can’t continue to be part of the team that’s not putting Israel in the name. It seems like they acquiesced to demands, I think, based on his statement.
Gabe Pulver: So what’s interesting is that Premier Tech is a Canadian company. They’re, you know, a Quebecois tech company, and Premier Tech and its president own a chunk of it. A good chunk of the riders are Canadian and previously have been pretty supportive of the team’s Israeli identity. Another interesting part of this is that Sylvan Adams is sort of, like you said, busy with his other job, but you wonder what the future of the team holds given that, you know, sort of the face of their team and, you know, a huge part of their Canadian connection is no longer going to be day-to-day running things, you know, with their identity. Sylvan Adams is a pretty proud guy, and as their identity changes and he steps back, you wonder if he’ll continue to support the team financially as much as he has.
James Hirsh: Yeah, I think it’s very interesting to see this. This is sort of a test case for Israel’s continued involvement in certain international sports or sports that have an international component. We’ll see if that will change. Obviously, there’s been great news today about the peace deal being signed. And if anyone is getting that news on that from a Jewish sports podcast, you’ve got to tune in a little bit more.
Gabe Pulver: Yeah, yeah, yeah, exactly. Check out, close this and go to CNN and see what’s happening with that.
James Hirsh: But look, there have been calls for Israel to be removed from FIFA. We’ve talked about that. There have been calls for Israel to be excluded from other international sporting events. There have been on-the-ground protests that we’ve covered, you know, including at lower-tier sporting events. We’ll see what will come. This certainly seems like the first step of an Israeli team removing—continuing to be owned by an Israeli, is affiliated with Israeli coaches, owned by Israeli teams, all Israeli people, all that. But no longer having Israel in the name is not just a symbolic gesture.
Gabe Pulver: No. And I have a theory. It’s not a very charitable theory, but Israel Premier Tech had sort of been relegated to semi-conditional status on the World Tour this year. They had riders at a bunch of events, but they weren’t at every single event. They weren’t full Tour members. Next year, they have regained their position back in full Tour members. And after the disaster where virtually every rider on Tour was furious about all of the protesters in the Vuelta, I think they’re choosing to decide, I think they’re choosing to say we’re not going to have this shit anymore.
Like they’re going to get rid of Israel, the name, when you’re back on the Tour. Because we didn’t like the news, we didn’t like the coverage, we didn’t like the protests. You know, you can stay involved, the Israeli money. Obviously, they’ll take the Israeli money, they’ll support the Israeli riders. However, they’re very unlikely—they just don’t want the name Israel to be running around on the Tour so more people can show up and disrupt the Tour de France, which would be an enormous disaster for the sport. Maybe there are enough Jews in France and enough harmony in the international community in France that that won’t be a problem. I doubt it. But I think it’s probably a self-preservation move by the UCI before something a little bit bigger than the Vuelta a España has to get cancelled.
James Hirsh: Yeah, that makes total sense. And if there’s one thing, I don’t know much about the cycling federations and whoever runs that, but there’s one thing I know about European technocrats who run sporting organizations is that they’re all cowards and will always do the easiest thing in the goal of self-preservation.
Gabe Pulver: Yeah, self-preservation.
James Hirsh: They are about cycling, but I believe it, no matter what.
Gabe Pulver: No, they are all there. The show must go on in any possible way.
James Hirsh: Yeah.
Gabe Pulver: You know, I think if a single rider was to ever say something political, they would literally, you know, deflate their tires, like to, you know, steal a metaphor.
James Hirsh: Yeah. So when countries like Spain decide to, you know, continue their millennia-old tradition of anti-Semitism and protesters start protesting Israeli teams and non-Israeli riders at cycling events that they don’t care about in the first place—
Gabe Pulver: Yeah.
James Hirsh: —You can bet that whoever’s in charge of that cycling event is going to cave to those protesters. Absolutely.
Show Notes
Credits
- Hosts: James Hirsh and Gabe Pulver
- Producer: Michael Fraiman
- Music: Coby Lipovitch (intro), chēēZ π (main theme, “Organ Grinder Swing“)
Support The CJN
- Follow the podcast on Twitter @menschwarmers
- Subscribe to The CJN newsletter
- Donate to The CJN (+ get a charitable tax receipt)
- Subscribe to Menschwarmers (Not sure how? Click here)
The post Cycling team Israel–Premier Tech is ditching the ‘Israel’ brand. But was it entirely their decision? appeared first on The Canadian Jewish News.
Uncategorized
The answered prayers of Trump’s artful ceasefire deal
On Yom Kippur, millions of Jews around the world prayed for the release of the hostages. A week later, those prayers are on the verge of being answered
President Donald Trump’s announcement Wednesday evening that Hamas and Israel have accepted the first phase of his peace deal — including the release of all the living hostages at once, likely this weekend, in exchange for Palestinian prisoners — is as shocking as it is wonderful.
Just over two years since Oct. 7, 2023, when Hamas invaded Israel, killing almost 1,200 people and abducting 251, there has been scant good news. As the death toll mounted on both sides, we’ve had little reason to expect anything except for more bloodshed, more vengeance and more destruction.
“History teaches us that men and nations behave wisely once they have exhausted all other alternatives,” the late Israeli diplomat Abba Eban once said — and Trump saw that Israel and Hamas were both exhausted, with no alternatives.
Israel faced mounting domestic unrest, a steep decline in international support as its allies lined up to back a Palestinian state, cultural and diplomatic isolation, and a war-weary military.
Hamas lost every battle but the one it started on Oct. 7, and found itself cornered in Gaza City without the weapons lifeline of Iran and the cash infusions from Qatar. Hamas had also lost popular support. After Oct. 7, 71% of Palestinians said they supported the attack. In a May 2025 poll, that number was 51%. Support for Hamas among all Palestinians has dropped to 32% from 43% in Dec. 2023.
The outline of the current deal is similar to one President Joe Biden offered a year ago. What’s different: Trump understood that both parties were at the end of the road, and used that knowledge wisely.
He increased American leverage over Hamas by bringing Qatar closer than ever into the United States’ embrace. Skeptics said that part of that closeness came from the economic ties between Qatar and the Trump family and its associates. If that’s what brings the hostages home, I’m frankly not sure I care.
At the same time, Trump finally stood up to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. According to news reports, he lost his temper with Netanyahu following Israel’s September assassination attempt against Hamas leaders in Doha, Qatar. That shocking expansion of the war threatened the Abraham Accords, the singular diplomatic achievement of Trump’s first term, as well as direct U.S. interests: Qatar hosts the largest American air base in the Middle East.
The first clue that Trump’s deal might really come through, after so many failed efforts to secure a lasting ceasefire, was that Trump successfully forced Netanyahu to make a personal apology to Qatar last week — something almost unprecedented in Middle East diplomacy. He then extended the promise of a NATO-like American defense shield to Qatar, also unprecedented.
All that maneuvering has led to an agreement that, if it holds, will be a stunning victory against extremism.
Hamas and other Palestinian militant groups have reaped the fruits of violent resistance. Could they be more rotten and bitter?
Far-right Israeli leaders and their supporters who fantasized about re-occupying Gaza — which would’ve been almost inconceivable without consigning the remaining hostages to death — will not get their way. “I said ‘Israel cannot fight the world Bibi, they can’t fight the world,’” Trump said.
And the longer term implications of Trump’s plan provide a pathway to peaceful coexistence between Israelis and Palestinians, which would almost certainly deprive those same Israelis and their supporters of dominion over the West Bank and the almost 2 million Palestinians who live there.
The deal is a blow to extremists outside the region as well — those online social media warriors who have been trashing the deal, eager to fight the Zionist entity into nonexistence. The prospect of peace and coexistence must be a huge disappointment for them.
“Let it be known that Western leftists who oppose the ceasefire plan in Gaza are now more radical and rigged than Hamas itself,” wrote Palestinian activist Khalil Sayegh last week, “Hamas sounds reasonable compared to the keyboard warriors in the West.”
For the rest of us, the deal is a giant leap in the right direction.
In January, when Trump oversaw a deal to release 33 hostages with the same promise of a long-term Israeli Palestinian accord, I wrote that if it came to pass, I would be the first in line to hang the Nobel medal around his neck. I still think he is a clear and present danger to democracy in the U.S. and to the well-being of the most vulnerable Americans, as the current government shutdown makes clear.
But credit where credit is due. This is an artful deal, one that returns hope to a region where it had all but disappeared.
That last deal fell apart when Netanyahu refused to enter the second phase of negotiations. This one has more of the necessary threats and benefits behind it to keep all the parties in line. Here’s praying it holds — for the hostages, for Israelis and Palestinians, and for the world.
The post The answered prayers of Trump’s artful ceasefire deal appeared first on The Forward.
Uncategorized
Deal to release ‘ALL of the hostages’ from Gaza has been struck, Trump announces
Dozens of Israeli hostages held for two years in Gaza, including 20 who remain alive, are set to be released imminently following an agreement between Israel and Hamas that could lead to a permanent ceasefire.
U.S. President Donald Trump announced the deal on Wednesday evening, saying that both sides had signed off on a “first phase” of the peace proposal he unveiled last week. The agreement came a day after the second anniversary of Hamas’ attack on southern Israel, when the group that has controlled Gaza took about 250 hostages. Of them, 48 remain.
“This means that ALL of the Hostages will be released very soon, and Israel will withdraw their Troops to an agreed upon line as the first steps toward a Strong, Durable, and Everlasting Peace. All Parties will be treated fairly!” he wrote on Truth Social. “This is a GREAT Day for the Arab and Muslim World, Israel, all surrounding Nations, and the United States of America, and we thank the mediators from Qatar, Egypt, and Turkey, who worked with us to make this Historic and Unprecedented Event happen. BLESSED ARE THE PEACEMAKERS!”
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu confirmed the agreement in a post on X. “With the approval of the first phase of the plan, all our hostages will be brought home. This is a diplomatic success and a national and moral victory for the State of Israel,” he wrote.
Soon, social media began to fill with footage of celebrations. In Israel, hostage families who have battled for their loved ones’ return could be seen dancing in jubilation and the hostages freed in past ceasefires posted videos of themselves weeping as they addressed the men they were forced to leave behind. In Gaza, Palestinians who have endured two years of deadly bombing, pressing hunger and mass displacement expressed hope that the pressing dangers they face could soon recede.
Einav Zangauker, Michel Iluz, Hagai and Anat Angrest, and Ayelet Samerano– all parents of hostages– in a huge group hug at Hostages Square. They fought like lions. pic.twitter.com/yotiYggzDC
— Noga Tarnopolsky נגה טרנופולסקי نوغا ترنوبولسكي (@NTarnopolsky) October 9, 2025
An exact timeline for the hostage release was not immediately clear, but Israeli media reported that urgent preparations were underway with the expectation that hostages could come home by the weekend — ahead of the Simchat Torah holiday that marks the two-year anniversary of the attack in the Jewish calendar. Family members abroad were being flown to Israel and hospitals were being prepared to receive 20 men who have experienced two years of brutality and hunger.
Special attention was being paid, Israeli media reported, to the families whose loved ones would not immediately return — while Hamas committed to returning the bodies of deceased hostages, it has reportedly not yet located all of them and there is a widespread expectation that some may never be found.
U.S. Jewish groups as well as Israeli hostage advocacy groups welcomed the announcement in press releases and videos that expressed appreciation for Trump’s aggressive efforts to press for a deal. Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner and his Middle East envoy Steve Witkoff joined the Gaza talks earlier on Wednesday, in a sign that an agreement was potentially imminent.
The exact terms of the deal were still emerging on Wednesday evening but Israeli media was reporting that Israel would retain control of a majority of Gaza until the last hostage is released and that Israeli would not be required to release from its prisons anyone involved in the Oct. 7 attack.
Many elements of Trump’s peace proposal, including demands that Hamas disarm and that a postwar governance structure be established, are expected to be negotiated after the first phase. Israel ended the last ceasefire, in February, rather than continue negotiating. But Trump has indicated that he plans to maintain pressure on both sides to extend their truce into a permanent peace.
—
The post Deal to release ‘ALL of the hostages’ from Gaza has been struck, Trump announces appeared first on Jewish Telegraphic Agency.