Uncategorized
Documentary explores the ‘Talmudic’ relationship between writer Robert Caro and his famous longtime editor
(New York Jewish Week) — Bob Gottlieb, who as editor-in-chief of Simon & Schuster, Alfred A. Knopf and The New Yorker ushered into print some of the 20th-century’s most accomplished writers — Nora Ephron, Toni Morrison, Salman Rushdie, John Cheever and Ray Bradbury, to name a few — believes editing is a service job, one that should go unnoticed by the reader.
And yet, it is the relationship between editor and writer that his daughter Lizzie Gottlieb, a documentary filmmaker, explores in her latest film, “Turn Every Page: The Adventures of Robert Caro and Robert Gottlieb,” which premiered at the Tribeca Film Festival in 2022 and is now screening at theaters across the country.
Lizzie’s documentary sets out to explore the sometimes tense but ultimately caring relationship between her father, Bob, and one of his longest running authors, Robert Caro, who over the course of 50 years has produced “only” five major books: “The Power Broker,” a classic biography of urban planner Robert Moses, and four volumes of “The Years of Lyndon B. Johnson.”
Jews born and raised in Manhattan, Caro and Gottlieb have worked together since Gottlieb helped cut 350,000 words out of the first draft of “The Power Broker,” bringing it down to a book that ultimately ran 1,338 pages when it was published in 1974.
The thing they squabble over most often? Semicolons, still. Or, maybe, Caro’s overuse of the word “looms.”
The film, seven years in the making, takes on the ways Moses shaped New York City, the mysteries of LBJ’s political power, the sausage-making of bestselling books and the idiosyncrasies of two workaholics. It is also a story of two now elderly men — Caro is 87, Gottlieb is 91 — in what Bob Gottlieb calls an “actuarial” contest to finish Caro’s highly anticipated fifth volume of his Johnson biography.
“My dad and I are very close. We’re in constant contact with each other. If something funny happens, I call my dad. If something sad or confusing happens, I’ll call him. We’re just in each other’s lives all the time, so I didn’t feel that there was a secret I needed to uncover or something unexamined in our relationship,” said director Lizzie Gottlieb, who also teaches documentary filmmaking at the New York Film Academy.
“But the one thing I really knew nothing about in his life was his relationship with Bob Caro,” she said. “Because it was so different from anything else, and it was so kind of private. So really, the whole movie is the process of me understanding something that I didn’t understand before.”
The New York Jewish Week recently caught up with Gottlieb to talk about the making of the film, what it was like growing up in a high-profile family and how Jewishness impacts the work of the two men.
This interview has been lightly edited for length and clarity.
Lizzie Gottlieb is a documentary filmmaker who previously directed “Today’s Man” (2008) and “Romeo Romeo” (2012).
New York Jewish Week: You’ve been working on this movie for seven years. When did you realize you needed to make this movie and how did it get from start to finish?
For a long time, people would say to me, “You should make a film about your father.” I have an incredible father. He’s done a lot of great things. He’s interesting and funny. But I just thought, a film whose message is “look how great my dad is” is not a movie that anybody wants to see.
And then my father was given some award and Bob Caro was presenting the award. Bob Caro gave a speech about working with my dad over what was then 45 years. He talked about how he needs him, and he respects him and how they’re so productive. Then he started talking about their arguments. Somebody in the audience asked what they fought about and he said, “We have very different feelings about the semicolon.” Everybody erupted into laughs and it just hit me like a bolt of lightning. I thought, “This is the movie, this is the story.”
I wanted a story that had forward momentum and had something big at stake. A film about two men in their 60s who had done a lot of great stuff is not that interesting. But a film about two men who are hovering around 90 and are still in it, and engaged in their work, who have a dedication and passion and are in a race against time to finish their life’s work, felt really, really compelling to me.
People say, “Are you sure you should be wasting [Caro’s] time with a movie? He needs to be writing.” My producer Jen Small said we should put on the poster, “No Lyndon Johnson books were harmed in the making of this film.”
Do you think you had a perspective that made you the best person to try and talk about their relationship and document it, or was it challenging to make the leap of them being willing to open up to you?
There was definitely a pursuit of them. I called my father and I was like, “I have the best idea ever. I’m going to make a film about you and Robert Caro.” He said, “No way. Absolutely not. Never. It would not be good for our relationship.”
I just kept pestering and pestering and pestering him. Finally, he said I could call Bob Caro but he would say no and of course Bob Caro did initially say no. Then he said that he’d seen another film of mine and I could come and speak to him. Eventually, Caro said, “I’ve never seen a film about a writer and an editor, and I think this could be meaningful. I don’t think anyone’s ever seen this before.” So he let me start, but he had this kind of hilarious condition, which was that he didn’t want to ever appear in the same room as my father. That seemed funny and a little maddening and sort of endearing. It also seemed like an irresistible challenge to try to make a buddy film where they don’t appear in the same room as each other. A woman came to a screening recently and she said, “It’s a love story, and they don’t get together until the last scene.”
They both say that somehow the making of this movie has brought them closer together and that they have developed a real friendship after 50 years. Maybe just having to articulate what their relationship has meant to each other has made them appreciate it more.
What was it like to grow up in your household, with your father as this major editor and your mother (actress Maria Tucci) on Broadway?
I grew up in a really incredible household. My mother’s an actress, my father’s a publisher and editor. Our house was this kind of vibrant, boisterous household that was always filled with eccentric, incredible people — actors and writers. My dad’s writers would come for dinner and then my mother would go off and do a play on Broadway and then come back at midnight and make another dinner. It was incredible. So I feel that both of their work was kind of integrated into our life and into our family. All of his writers were really like family members, except for Bob Caro, who never came over and who I never met. I think that there’s something particular and peculiar about their relationship that they needed to stay apart and only come together over work. I guess that was something that intrigued me and that’s part of why I wanted to make the movie.
“Turn Every Page: The Adventures of Robert Caro and Robert Gottlieb” (Courtesy Tribeca Film Festival)
The Jewishness in the film is a bit more implicit, though you discuss it when talking about their upbringings. How do you think their Jewish identities have impacted their work?
I don’t want to presume to speak for either of them about their Jewishness. I know they both very strongly identify as New York Jews, which probably means something slightly different to each of them, but I think it’s essential to their definitions of themselves. Their humor may be particularly Jewish as well. David Remnick uses a word at the end of the movie, where he says Caro needs to have “sitzfleisch” in order to finish the book. It’s this Yiddish [and German] word that means the ability to sit for long, long periods of time and apply yourself to something. I think that that is something that these two guys have: It’s almost a Talmudic focus on their craft, and without that they wouldn’t be who they are. So to the extent that that’s a Jewish quality, I think that’s essential to their being, to their achievements. There’s something like a Talmudic scholar in going over all these things, the industriousness and the empathy as well, this sort of looking at a thing from all sides and dedicating yourself to this pursuit.
Bonus question: You briefly show the various eccentric collections your dad has, including plastic handbags and kitschy Israeli record albums from the ’60s and ’70s. What is that about?
Yes, he has a lot of collections. He also has a collection of macramé owls. There are many that are not in the movie. Maybe that’s a Talmudic thing as well, like a deep dive into whatever it is that is interesting to him. He says that every subject gets more interesting the deeper you get into it. When something strikes him as charming or funny or curious, he goes all the way with it. My mother doesn’t love them. There’s a little bit of a power struggle there, but he wins. You grow up with something and you don’t really think about it. But I knew I had to find a way to put this in the movie. People kept saying it’s irrelevant, it’s to the side, but I knew I had to because it’s so weird and says so much about him.
—
The post Documentary explores the ‘Talmudic’ relationship between writer Robert Caro and his famous longtime editor appeared first on Jewish Telegraphic Agency.
Uncategorized
Prominent rabbi and fierce Mamdani critic turns his criticism toward Jews and Israel
(JTA) — In the lead-up to New York City’s mayoral election last month, Elliot Cosgrove emerged as one of the most outspoken rabbinic critics of Zohran Mamdani, the anti-Zionist activist who is now the mayor-elect.
On Monday, speaking to a convention of Zionists, Cosgrove turned his critique toward U.S. Jews, saying that supporters of Israel “shouldn’t be surprised” by Mamdani’s roughly 33% tally among Jewish voters.
“For a liberal Zionist disillusioned by the Israeli government, Mamdani’s anti-Zionism is a difference of degree, not of kind,” said Cosgrove, who leads Park Avenue Synagogue on the Upper East Side. “He understood the fissures of our community better than we ourselves did, and the question we face now is, what are we going to do about it?”
Speaking at the the convention of the American Zionist Movement, Cosgrove laid out a vision for a “new chapter of American Zionism,” calling for his audience to “avoid the reductive and destructive tactic of labeling people with whom we disagree either as self-hating Jews or colonialist aggressors.” He said a rigid vision of what Zionism should look like had been damaging for the Jewish people.
“By making unconditional support for the Israeli government a litmus test for Jewish identity,” Cosgrove said, “we ourselves have inflicted harm on the Jewish future.”
Cosgrove’s speech capped a two-day conference for the AZM, an umbrella organization for 51 U.S. Zionist groups that also serves as the American affiliate to the World Zionist Organization. Tensions were running high at the national assembly as Cosgrove took to the podium to call for the Zionist movement to widen its tent.
Speaking to the conference’s roughly 250 attendees in the East Village, Cosgrove lamented what he described as the increasing ideological divide between American and Israeli Jewry as a result of the war in Gaza. He criticized some Israeli policies in laying out why many in the liberal Jewish majority are feeling distanced from Israel.
“Leaving aside the role of historical revisionism and progressive identity politics, the unresolved status of the Palestinians, lacking as they are in freedom of movement and access, self determination and other accoutrements of sovereignty, forms a wedge issue between an increasingly liberal-leaning American Jewry and an increasingly right-leaning Israeli Jewry,” said Cosgrove.
During his address, Cosgrove also criticized the lack of recognition of the Conservative and Reform movements in Israel, adding that the country “neither supports, defends nor recognizes Judaism as I teach it and preach it.”
“The fact that the same government that fails to recognize American Jews also fails to recognize the Palestinian right to self determination only serves to increase American Jews’ sense of estrangement,” said Cosgrove.
The AZM Biennial National Assembly, which was titled “Zionism: Many Visions, One Dream,” brought together representatives from a wide range of U.S. Zionist groups. An hour before Cosgrove’s remarks, Israeli President Isaac Herzog also gave a talk where he lamented growing antisemitism within the United States.
In a Jewish environment shaped by the Oct. 7 attacks and the war in Gaza that followed, Jews have been buffeted by intense criticism on the left, a rise in antisemitism and internal fissures. Cosgrove both referenced and reflected these divisions, which often pit Jews offering full-throated support for Israel, its military and its government, against those like Cosgrove who are committed Zionists but expressed doubts about the conduct of the war and Israel’s political direction. Far to the left of both groups are increasingly visible Jewish anti-Zionists and younger Jews deeply disillusioned with the Jewish state, whom Cosgrove also referenced in his talk.
To address the growing divide within American Jewry over support for Israel, Cosgrove called for “heshbon hanefesh,” or a “self audit.” But the onus for “heshbon hanefesh,” Cosgrove added, “goes both ways” — and he reinforced red lines that he laid out in a October sermon against Mamdani and his Jewish supporters that spurred a rabbinic statement that drew more than 1,300 signatures.
“For such a time as this, when Israel is surrounded by enemies, Jewish critics of Israel need to be judicious in how they voice their dissent,” continued Cosgrove. “It’s one thing to attend a pro-democracy rally in a sea of Israeli flags that begins and ends with the singing of ‘Hatikvah.’ It’s another thing to stand in an encampment next to someone calling for global intifada.”
But within the broad Zionist tent, Cosgrove argued, all views should be taken seriously in the quest to build a future for Zionism while it is under attack..
“The future dream of American Zionism depends not on my vision or yours, not on the right or the left, religious or the secular,” said Cosgrove. “It’s a dream that depends on all of us together, an American Zionism for such a time as this, bold enough to embrace the voices, complexities, paradoxes and even contradictions of our age.”
At the conclusion of his speech, dozens of audience members stood to applaud, though a couple of “boos” could be heard across the room.
During a brief Q&A following the keynote speech, Marc Jacob, a member of the Haredi Orthodox slate Eretz HaKodesh, said he felt “ostracized” by Cosgrove for “wanting to open the door to those who are sitting in camps that are against the Jewish state.”
In response, Cosgrove clarified that he was “trying to stand firm in my convictions, but also embrace those views to the left of me who don’t represent my views.”
“I was not speaking about those outside of the camp who seek the ill will and destruction of the Jewish people,” said Cosgrove. “I was speaking about the ability of those within the tent to find an opportunity, a platform to support Israel in a way that need not be aligned with every policy of this or that Israeli government.”
The post Prominent rabbi and fierce Mamdani critic turns his criticism toward Jews and Israel appeared first on The Forward.
Uncategorized
Israel faces a most dire threat, and there’s only one solution
Most discussions about “saving” Israel revolve around geopolitics and security from the dangers posed by the rest of the Middle East. But the most vexing of the challenges facing the Jewish state is internal.
The burgeoning military and economic crisis surrounding Haredi communities risks destabilizing the entire state. What is needed is an organized effort, across all sectors of society, to incentivize hundreds of thousands of Haredi Jews to participate in Israel’s shared life in ways that, while honoring their practice, will prevent the social and economic disintegration that looms if no drastic changes are made.
This effort should be organized through a new ministry, tasked with encouraging and assisting Haredim in pursuing a more modern education, employment, military service and active citizenship. Ideally, it would be an independent statutory body, shielded from daily politics.
An unavoidable demographic problem
The significantly higher-than-average Haredi birthrate means the Haredim are projected to make up a third of Israel’s citizens by 2050, and a majority soon thereafter.
This creates a major economic problem. Right now, Haredi communities are broadly subsidized by the Israeli government: As one indicator, Haredi men have a participation level in the workforce of just around 50%. Many of those who do work do so in jobs in the religious establishment — as kashrut supervisors, mikveh workers, and so on.
That lack of economic productivity is made up for by governmental spending. For the 2023–2024 budget cycle, some reporting estimates that spending directly targeting Haredi communities — including through stipends for scholars and funding for yeshivas and religious institutions — was on the order of NIS 13.7 billion, about $4 billion. But more spending on the community is not officially recorded — for example, that on the child subsidies, which overwhelming benefit the Haredim, whose birthrate is almost three times higher than that of other Israelis.
The Haredi leadership is entrenched in its refusal to change. They reject all calls to have yeshivas integrate a core curriculum that would enable the next generation to be employable in a modern economy, insist on Torah study as the main vocation for men well into adulthood, and have practically sanctified draft evasion.
The implications are existential. Already today, as the productive sector bears an ever-heavier burden, there is growing emigration among non-Haredim — engineers, doctors, and entrepreneurs taking with them the talent and capital that drive Israel’s economy. According to recent data, about 125,000 Israelis have left since 2022.
And as the Haredi share of the population rises, it is likely they will help secure the political right — for which they overwhelmingly vote, in large part because of support for a continuing Haredi draft exemption — as something like the permanent ruling bloc.
That outcome is all but sure to further accelerate emigration. The result will be deepening poverty, and further military insecurity, as less Orthodox portions of the population increasingly rebel against a system they see as unjustly demanding they put their lives on the line to protect the Haredim from the dangers of war.
At present, every incentive structure encourages the Haredim to persist in this madness. The Haredi community, to a large extent, ostracizes those who leave the flock — estimated as between 5% and 15% of the community — and in many cases even the tiny minority who merely enlist in the army.
A radical solution
With communal leadership so averse to change, what can the rest of Israel do?
The incentive structure must be turned on its head, through a series of radical but necessary governmental moves.
- Tie all school funding to compliance with a national core curriculum. Haredi youth, particularly boys, currently experience little to no instruction in modern subjects. This cannot continue. It creates a crippled society that is beholden to the rabbis, and ensures the Haredi community cannot contribute meaningfully to Israel’s economy, as new generations are not given the knowledge and skills to work. This lack puts an unbearable economic burden on the ever-shrinking rest of Israeli society.
- Phase out study stipends past university age. Some will object that this move will destroy the yeshiva lifestyle. But that lifestyle is a result of power politics, not tradition: in the West, many Haredim are working members of society and thrive as such.
- Redesign child subsidies. Haredim currently have an average of almost seven children per family, which is financially possible largely because of child subsidies issued by the state. To encourage workforce participation, this system must be adjusted, such that families cannot subsist primarily on these subsidies: If this trend continues, the state will buckle under the economic burden of supporting the rapidly expanding community. This must be done with great sensitivity, and apply only to future births.
- And, critically, mandate full national or military service for all citizens, with some tailored options for Haredi sensibilities.
The message would be that modern Israel will not continue to fund its own destruction. In charge of implementing it would be the new ministry. Its main areas of responsibility would include:
- Public outreach and culture — Enshrining the message that integration is not betrayal of faith, but rather an expansion of opportunity: Torah and modernity can coexist, and work, service and education are deeply Jewish values.
- Military and national service — In coordination with the IDF, establishing dedicated Haredi military tracks, alongside national service paths for some men and women who insist on that route. This would involve expanding existing routes, including the number of dedicated Haredi units in the military, and providing housing and psychological support for recruits facing ostracism.
- Adult education — Establishing adult education institutions offering full core studies to Haredim who never learned math, English or science. State scholarships and stipends during the transition period, would encourage participation.
- Employment and entrepreneurship — Creating partnerships with employers to fund professional training, apprenticeships, and personal mentorship, as well as tax incentives for companies hiring Haredim or ex-Haredim — especially in high-tech, healthcare and education, fields where Haredim have already made some inroads.
- Social and family support — Forming a national network of counselors, social workers and career coaches to accompany Haredim through their increasing integration into the modern world. Many Haredim will be deeply resistant to this change; establishing thoughtful routes to help them will be crucial to the initiative’s success.
The necessity of adaptation
Integration does not mean the Haredi lifestyle must end — only that it must adapt, so that the society in which it exists can sustain into the future. The goal would be to make integration safe and feasible.
The scale of the initiative must match that of the threat. It will cost tens of billions of shekels — but the money must be found, just as it was found for the endless Gaza war, which, for all its importance, posed a lesser risk to Israel’s continuance. Israel already spends vast sums each year subsidizing unemployment and ignorance in the Haredi sector. Redirecting some of these funds to integration will yield immense economic and social returns. I hope that many donors, secular and religious alike, will join the effort.
A great confrontation over such an ambitious effort would be unavoidable. Many Haredim, including their elected officials, will rage and accuse the government of waging war on Judaism. Protests, petitions to the Supreme Court, and even charges of antisemitism will follow. The Haredi leadership will claim the government seeks to “convert” them. But this fight must be fought at some point; the options are to fight it now, or to risk an even worse version of it in the future.
The irony is that the current situation is bad for the Haredim themselves. They are trapped in a system that denies them opportunities, and leads them instead to enforced poverty and dependence on rabbinic leadership. This leadership has built a structure of control that survives only by keeping its public helpless.
For too long, powerful parties, including the governing Likud, have kicked this issue down the road, sacrificing the nation’s future for coalition stability. It is a moral and strategic disaster. Israel’s place in the modern world hangs in the balance.
The post Israel faces a most dire threat, and there’s only one solution appeared first on The Forward.
Uncategorized
Qatar, Turkey Try to Circumvent Hamas Disarmament as Terror Group Escalates Crackdown in Gaza
Palestinians walk past the rubble of destroyed buildings, amid a ceasefire between Israel and Hamas, in Jabalia, northern Gaza Strip, November 6, 2025. Photo: REUTERS/Mahmoud Issa
As the United States pushes for the second phase of President Donald Trump’s Gaza ceasefire to begin, Israel is warning that Qatar and Turkey are trying to shield Hamas from disarmament as the Palestinian terrorist group seeks to reassert control over the war-torn enclave.
Qatar and Turkey have proposed alternatives to a central provision of Trump’s peace plan, according to Israeli media reports. Rather than requiring Hamas to disarm, Qatari and Turkish officials have pushed for the Islamist group either to hand over its weapons to the Palestinian Authority or place them in secure storage under international oversight.
As part of this plan, Qatar and Turkey are reportedly advocating a two‑year grace period during which Hamas could legally retain its weapons.
However, Israeli officials have rejected these options as unacceptable, arguing they would allow the terrorist group to maintain its influence in Gaza, which Hamas has ruled for nearly two decades.
Israel has made clear it will allow Hamas just a few months to give up its weapons, warning it will act unilaterally if the group is not disarmed promptly.
Turkey and Qatar, both longtime backers of Hamas, have been trying to expand their roles in Gaza’s post-war reconstruction, which experts have warned could potentially strengthen Hamas’s terrorist infrastructure.
Israeli officials have repeatedly rejected any Turkish or Qatari involvement in post-war Gaza.
The first stage of Trump’s peace plan, which took effect in October, included Hamas releasing all the remaining hostages, both living and deceased, who were kidnapped by Hamas-led Palestinian terrorists during their Oct. 7, 2023, invasion of and massacre across southern Israel. In exchange, Israel released thousands of Palestinian prisoners and detainees, including many convicted terrorists serving life sentences, and partially withdrew its military forces in Gaza to a newly drawn “Yellow Line,” roughly dividing the enclave between east and west.
Currently, the Israeli military controls 53 percent of Gaza’s territory, and Hamas has moved to reestablish control over the other 47 percent. However, the vast majority of the Gazan population is located in the Hamas-controlled half, where the Islamist group has been imposing a brutal crackdown.
The second stage of the US plan is supposed to install an interim administrative authority — a so-called “technocratic government” — deploy an International Stabilization Force — a multinational force meant to take over security in Gaza — and begin the demilitarization of Hamas.
As the international community works to implement phase two of the ceasefire deal, Qatar and Turkey are now insisting that Israel must withdraw from Gaza before Hamas can disarm — a demand Jerusalem vehemently opposes, warning it would give the terrorist group time to reassert full control over its half of Gaza and remove any incentive to disarm later on.
On Saturday, Qatari Prime Minister Mohammed bin Abdulrahman Al Thani said the international community has only achieved a “pause” in fighting, but not a full ceasefire, stressing that Israel would need to withdraw from the entire enclave to make it possible.
“A ceasefire cannot be completed unless there is a full withdrawal of the Israeli forces, there is stability back in Gaza [and] people can go in and out, which is not the case today,” Al Thani said during a press conference.
The Qatari leader also said that the mediating countries, including Turkey, Egypt, and the US, are “getting together in order to force the way forward for the next phase.”
However, Al Thani emphasized Qatar considers phase two to be “temporary,” arguing that addressing the immediate situation in Gaza alone is insufficient without tackling what he described as the underlying causes of the conflict.
“This conflict is not only about Gaza, but also the West Bank. It’s about the rights of the Palestinians for their state,” he said. “We are hoping that we can work together with the US administration to achieve this vision.”
According to the ceasefire plan, the Israeli army is required to withdraw further as the disarmament process unfolds. However, Israel has made clear that it will not pull back until Hamas disarms and other conditions are met.
“We will not allow Hamas to reestablish itself. We have operational control over extensive parts of the Gaza Strip, and we will remain on those defense lines,” Lt. Gen. Eyal Zamir, chief of staff of the Israel Defense Forces (IDF), said on Sunday. “The Yellow Line is a new border line, serving as a forward defensive line for our communities and a line of operational activity.”
Meanwhile, Turkish Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan said a credible Palestinian civil administration and a vetted, trained police force should be established before Hamas can disarm.
In a press conference, Fidan emphasized that without these conditions, expecting Hamas to disarm is neither “realistic nor doable.”
However, Hamas continues to reject full disarmament, saying the group is only open to storing or freezing its weapons in order to preserve “the Palestinians’ ability to defend themselves.”
“Hamas is willing to discuss these ideas in the context of a ceasefire or long-term truce within a political process that will lead to the establishment of a Palestinian state,” senior Hamas official Basem Naim said in a statement.
In Gaza, Hamas’s brutal crackdown has continued to escalate dramatically as the terrorist group moves to reassert control over the enclave and consolidate its weakened position.
Following the death of Yasser Abu Shabab, the leader of an armed anti-Hamas Palestinian faction, last week, Hamas has given militants a 10-day ultimatum to surrender in exchange for promises of amnesty, according to Israel’s Channel 12 and reports on social media.
Abu Shabab, a Bedouin tribal leader based in Israeli-held Rafah in southern Gaza, had led one of the most prominent of several small anti-Hamas groups that emerged in the enclave during the war that began more than two years ago.
He died last week while mediating an internal dispute between families and groups within the militia, dealing a setback to Israeli efforts to support Gazan clans against the ruling Islamist group.
Since the ceasefire took effect two months ago, Hamas has targeted Palestinians who it labeled as “lawbreakers and collaborators with Israel,” sparking widespread clashes and violence as the group moves to seize weapons and eliminate any opposition.
Social media videos widely circulated online show Hamas members brutally beating Palestinians and carrying out public executions of alleged collaborators and rival militia members.