Connect with us

Uncategorized

Fake Massacres, Skewed Stats & Misleading Claims: The 25 Lies The Media Told You About The October 7 War

An Israeli military tank prepares to move atop a truck, after US President Donald Trump announced that Israel and Hamas agreed on the first phase of a Gaza ceasefire, on the Israeli side of the border with Gaza, Oct. 9, 2025. Photo: REUTERS/Ammar Awad

The media has been rife with misinformation and libels about Israel’s conduct during the war that was triggered two years ago by the Hamas-led massacres in southern Israel on October 7, 2023.

HonestReporting has worked day and night to combat these anti-Israel lies as they spread through mainstream discourse, shaping a context-free narrative that promotes Israel as the sole aggressor and whitewashes Hamas’ terrorism.

While some lies quickly emerged in the mainstream media and then evaporated after a couple of days, others have persisted in one form or another.

Regardless of their longevity, each lie serves as a building block for the anti-Israel narrative that cast Israel’s defensive war as a crime against humanity and has sought to turn the Jewish State into a pariah within the international community.

The following are the top 25 lies promoted by the mainstream media since October 7:

Lie #1: Israel is committing genocide in Gaza.

Truth: The claim that Israel is committing genocide in Gaza goes back almost as far as the beginning of Israel’s war against Hamas.

However, all these claims (whether by Amnesty International, scholar Omer Bartov, the International Association of Genocide Scholars, or the UN Commission of Inquiry) fail to meet the legal bar for determining genocide: That the only reasonable inference that could be drawn from Israel’s actions in Gaza is genocidal intent.

Those who claim that Israel is committing a genocide appear to pre-determine that conclusion and then attempt to twist the evidence and legal definition of genocide to find Israel guilty of this heinous crime.

Lie #2: Israel is responsible for famine/starvation in Gaza.

Truth: Throughout the war in Gaza, the media and aid organizations have forecast an imminent famine in the Gaza Strip, intent on finding Israel guilty of starving Palestinians in Gaza.

However, despite the imminent and alarmist nature of these forecasts, famine was never declared in any part of the Gaza Strip until August 2025, and there was no evidence of mass starvation in the enclave.

In an August 2025 report, the UN-backed body that monitors hunger declared famine in the Gaza Governorate, which includes Gaza City and its environs. However, analysts have noted several questionable aspects of the report’s methodology and analysis, which call into question its conclusions.

For a full takedown of the famine report, see here.

Lie #3: Gaza is one of the most densely populated areas on Earth. On October 7, it had a population of 9 million.

Truth: On October 7, 2023, the Gaza Strip had a population of 2 million people. At the size of 141 square miles, the Gaza Strip does not even crack the top 200 most populated areas on Earth.

Lie #4: After warning them to leave northern Gaza, Israel bombed Palestinians fleeing to the south.

Truth: In October 2023, some media outlets echoed Hamas’ claim that Israel was bombing Palestinians fleeing northern Gaza, publishing images that showed explosions amid convoys heading south.

Analysts noted that there was no evidence for an Israeli airstrike on the convoys and that the explosions could have been caused by IEDs planted by Hamas (in an effort to deter civilians from fleeing the combat zone) or faulty fuel containers that were being transported by those heading south.

Lie #5: Israel bombed Al-Ahli Hospital and killed 500 people.

Truth: On October 17, 2023, an explosion occurred at Al-Ahli Hospital in Gaza City. The media initially reported on Hamas’ claim that the hospital had been bombed and hundreds of people had been killed.

In reality, a misfired Islamic Jihad rocket hit the hospital’s parking lot, causing minimal damage to the hospital itself and tragically killing some Palestinians who had taken refuge in the area of the rocket’s impact.

Lie #6: Israel targets Palestinian journalists.

Truth: Since the beginning of the war, various media rights organizations, including the Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ) and Reporters Without Borders (RSF), have claimed that Israel is targeting Palestinian journalists in Gaza.

It is true that, according to the CPJ, nearly 200 journalists and media workers have been killed during the Israel-Hamas war. However, an analysis of these names shows that roughly 40% of those killed had an affiliation with terror groups (including working for terror-run media organizations) and that several had participated in active combat against Israel.

With the embedding of Hamas forces in civilian areas, it is tragic but inevitable that civilians (including journalists) will be killed during military activities. This is not, however, evidence of intentional targeting of journalists.

Lie #7: 500 trucks are needed to meet Gaza’s pre-war levels of aid.

Truth: The claim by the United Nations and aid organizations that prior to October 7, 500 trucks entered Gaza daily, and that number is needed to meet the needs of Gaza’s civilian population, is misleading.

Before October 7, an average of 500 trucks entered Gaza daily, but the vast majority of them carried commercial goods, agricultural products, textiles, and construction materials. Only 100 trucks contained humanitarian aid, which is roughly the same number of trucks that have entered Gaza daily for most of the war.

Lie #8: Israel’s evidence that Hamas used Al-Shifa Hospital as a base is not compelling.

Truth: Contrary to media claims, the IDF has provided considerable evidence that Hamas used Al-Shifa Hospital for terror purposes.

This evidence includes testimonies from captured terrorists, intercepts of communications discussing Hamas’ use of Al-Shifa, the discovery of weapons and military gear in the hospital area, the unearthing of a terror tunnel beneath the hospital, and video footage showing hostages being brought to the hospital on October 7.

Lie #9: UNRWA is not a problematic aid organization and is one of the key humanitarian resources in the Gaza Strip.

Truth: Despite media and UN denials, there is incontrovertible evidence that the UN aid organization for Palestinian refugees, UNRWA, plays a problematic role in the Gaza Strip.

1,200 UNRWA employees are members of either Hamas or Islamic Jihad, the organization’s schools teach antisemitism and promote anti-Israeli violence, and the globally-funded agency turns a blind eye to the placement of terror infrastructure and weaponry near its facilities. Even underneath UNRWA’s headquarters, there was a Hamas command center, of which the body claimed blissful ignorance.

Lie #10: Israel slaughtered Palestinian civilians waiting for aid during the “Flour Massacre.”

Truth: On February 29, 2024, scores of Palestinians died while waiting for aid to arrive in Gaza City. The media initially echoed Hamas’ claim that they had been killed in a targeted Israeli strike.

In reality, the vast majority of those who died were either crushed by the crowd during the chaos that erupted upon the arrival of the aid trucks, or were run over by the trucks themselves. Roughly 10 Palestinians were killed by Israeli gunfire when they rushed toward nearby IDF positions.

Lie #11: During the Israeli operation in Al-Shifa Hospital in March 2024, Israeli forces raped Palestinian women and brutally murdered other civilians.

Truth: This lie was perpetrated by a Gazan woman named Jamila al-Hessi during an interview with Al Jazeera Arabic’s top news presenter.

Less than 24 hours after the interview, al-Hessi’s claim was denounced by both a former director of Al Jazeera and Hamas itself. Al-Hessi admitted to spreading this lie to “arouse the nation’s fervor and brotherhood.”

Lie #12: Mass graves outside two Gazan hospitals are evidence of Israeli executions and desecration of bodies.

Truth: In late April 2024, mass graves were unearthed outside Al-Shifa Hospital in Gaza City and Nasser Hospital in Khan Younis.

Analysts noted that the graves had actually been dug before the arrival of Israeli forces, to bury those who had died in the hospitals but could not be interred in a formal cemetery. It is possible that newer bodies were added during the battles between Israeli forces and Hamas, but they were most likely buried by fellow Palestinians.

Despite claims by some that bodies had been found with their hands tied behind their backs, no independent evidence was ever provided for this claim.

In addition, while Israeli forces did dig up some graves while searching for Israeli hostages, the IDF re-interred any bodies that had been temporarily removed and did not destroy any identifying markers or desecrate the graves.

Lie #13: The Hamas-run Gaza Ministry of Health provides accurate casualty figures.

Truth: Since the beginning of the war in Gaza, the media and the United Nations have sought to convince people that the casualty figures provided by the Gaza Ministry of Health are accurate.

However, there are several indications that the Ministry of Health and its claim of 70% of casualties being women and children are unreliable.

Examples of this unreliability include unverifiable and anonymous “media reports” in the Ministry’s figures, the low proportion of non-combatant men among casualties, and discrepancies between the figures for one day and the next.

For an example of the last point, between December 2 and December 5, 2023, the number of women and children’s deaths surpassed the total number of deaths, an absurd statistical anomaly.

Lie #14: The ICJ ruled that there is “plausible” evidence for genocide in Gaza and that Israel must cease its operations in Rafah.

Truth: In December 2023, South Africa brought a case before the International Court of Justice (ICJ) claiming that Israel was committing genocide in Gaza. In January 2024, the ICJ issued its initial ruling on the matter. As clarified by Joan Donoghue, the Court’s former President, there was no finding of “plausible genocide” in Gaza, only that the Palestinians “had a plausible right to be protected from genocide.”

In May 2024, the ICJ issued a decision on Israeli military activity in southern Gaza, ruling that Israel would have to cease any military activity that “may inflict on the Palestinian group in Gaza conditions of life that could bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part.”

This was not a blanket restriction on Israeli military activity, and Israel’s war against Hamas was allowed to continue in the enclave’s south.

Lie #15: Israel purposefully bombed a refugee camp in Rafah and caused a tent fire that killed tens of civilians.

Truth: In late May 2024, Israel targeted two senior Hamas commanders who were hiding near a civilian population but outside of a designated safe zone.

Based on Israeli and US reports, it is likely that shrapnel from the targeted strike hit something flammable (either munitions or a fuel container) that ignited and led to the lethal fire that swept through the tents. As Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu commented, this was a “tragic accident.”

Lie #16: Israel massacred more than 200 Palestinians while rescuing four Israeli hostages in the Nuseirat refugee camp.

Truth: On June 8, 2024, Israeli security forces rescued four hostages (Noa Argamani, Almog Meir Jan, Shlomi Ziv, and Andrey Kozlov) from civilian homes where they were being held in the Nuseirat refugee camp. During the rescue operation, local Hamas forces attacked the rescue team and hostages as they attempted to escape, leading to a firefight in the middle of a civilian area.

There was no independent evidence to back Hamas’ claim that hundreds of Palestinians had been killed during the rescue operation or that the majority of those killed were civilians and not combatants who took part in the firefight.

Lie #17: Studies in The Lancet prove that many more Palestinians have been killed than is claimed by the Hamas-run Gaza Ministry of Health.

Truth: In July 2024, The Lancet published a non-peer-reviewed correspondence that claimed that the number of dead in Gaza could be as high as 186,000. This faulty analysis reached this number by taking Hamas’ questionable casualty count (at the time, 37,000) and then multiplying it by five on the baseless assumption that there will be five times as many indirect deaths as those actively killed during the war.

The pushback to the piece was so great that one of the authors had to admit that it was not a scientifically-based analysis but was “purely illustrative” of what could be.

In January 2025, The Lancet published an article purporting to prove that the Gaza Ministry of Health’s casualty count was an under-reporting of reality.

However, this study came under scrutiny due to several flaws, including that its algorithm comparing social media-reported deaths to other casualty lists was faulty in 30% of cases, that the three casualty lists that were used by the study were intertwined (thus skewing the results), and that the authors disregarded analytic models that showed the estimated casualty figures to be lower.

Lie #18: Ismail Haniyeh was a moderating and pragmatic voice within Hamas that Israel silenced when it assassinated him in July 2024.

Truth: Contrary to how he was depicted in media reports at the time of his death, Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh was not a moderate.

Haniyeh was a cold-blooded terrorist who celebrated the October 7 attacks, called for “resistance” (i.e. terrorist) activities across Israel, and encouraged the death of Palestinian civilians for the greater cause of fighting Israel and ultimately destroying the Jewish state.

Lie #19: As shown in a New York Times essay, Israeli forces are purposefully targeting children.

Truth: The New York Times published a guest essay entitled “65 Doctors, Nurses, and Paramedics: What We Saw in Gaza.” Written by medical personnel who had served in Gaza, the piece claimed that they had seen evidence for Israel intentionally targeting children by shooting them in the head.

However, several military, medical, and forensics experts called into question certain aspects of the piece, including x-ray images that purported to show 5.56 caliber bullets lodged in the skulls of these children, but which did not appear to comport with the impact of a bullet of that size. For example, there were no exit wounds, skull fractures, or changes in the bullet’s shape.

In addition, there is no evidence that the bullets were fired from an Israeli gun rather than one operated by a Palestinian terrorist. To further cast doubt on the piece, one of its authors responded to the criticism by falsely claiming that Hamas does not use human shields but that Israel does.

Lie #20: Israel forces burned Kamal Adwan Hospital in December 2024.

Truth: During a counter-terror operation at Kamal Adwan Hospital in Beit Lahia, which saw the arrest of 240 Hamas and Islamic Jihad members and the confiscation of a considerable amount of weaponry, a fire broke out in an empty part of the hospital and was quickly contained.

An initial IDF investigation determined that there was no connection between the fire and Israeli forces operating in the area.

Lie #21: Unless aid workers got to them immediately, 14,000 babies would die in the next 48 hours.

Truth: This absurd claim was put forward by the UN’s humanitarian chief, Tom Fletcher, in May 2025 during an interview with the BBC.

When pressed on it, Fletcher provided no evidence for his claim except for asserting that they have capable teams on the ground.

It was further discovered that Fletcher’s claim was a misrepresentation of an IPC report that projected that 14,000 Gazan children could experience acute malnutrition between April 2025 and March 2026.

Lie #22: Israel is planning on interning 600,000 Palestinians in camps in southern Gaza.

Truth: In July 2025, Israeli Defense Minister Israel Katz announced plans to build a “humanitarian city” in southern Gaza that would house 600,000 Palestinian civilians from the Al-Mawasi area who would have better access to humanitarian aid. To guarantee the civilian nature of this city, all people would be processed to ensure that they had no affiliation with Hamas. At no time did Katz use the word “camp” when discussing this plan.

According to Israeli reports at the time, Katz’s idea was a contingency plan for aiding civilians while fighting Hamas, but no work had been started on it.

Lie #23: Images of malnourished children are evidence for widespread starvation in Gaza.

Truth: In late July 2025, various media organizations published photos of emaciated and malnourished children, passing them off as evidence of widespread starvation in Gaza.

However, many of these children who were showcased suffered from pre-existing conditions, some of which (such as muscular dystrophy and cerebral palsy) have a heightened risk of malnutrition even in times of peace.

In some instances, photos of malnourished children included their well-nourished siblings standing in the background.

While the humanitarian crisis in Gaza is certainly tragic, images of malnourished children with pre-existing conditions are not evidence for widespread starvation.

Lie #24: Israel is preventing aid from entering Gaza.

Truth: Aside from the first two weeks of the war and a two-month blockade in 2025 that was an attempt to force Hamas to surrender, Israel has allowed for the continuous entry of aid into the Gaza Strip.

In fact, between the beginning of the war and the end of August 2025, over two million tons of aid were facilitated into the Gaza Strip. This is one of the largest humanitarian operations during a war in modern history.

Any delay in Gazans receiving this aid is due to the inherent difficulties in delivering it in combat zones, Hamas stealing aid, the UN refusing to pick up the aid, and the refusal of the UN to use Israeli-approved routes.

Lie #25: Israel is massacring Gazans as they seek aid from GHF sites.

Truth: When Israel restarted delivering aid to Gaza in May 2025, both it and the United States backed a new aid organization, the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF), that would deliver aid to Palestinian civilians while ensuring that Hamas could not get its hands on it.

While it has delivered millions of meals to Palestinians, it has been maligned by the media, the UN, and other aid agencies.

One of the chief libels about the GHF is that Israel routinely massacres those who are seeking aid. While the IDF does sometimes fire warning shots at those who stray from the designated paths near the aid centers, and sometimes have fired on those who get too close to their positions in unfortunate situations, many cases of reported massacres have proven to be unfounded or have been misreported instances of fire not related to the aid site.

The author is a contributor to HonestReporting, a Jerusalem-based media watchdog with a focus on antisemitism and anti-Israel bias — where a version of this article first appeared.

Continue Reading

Uncategorized

I was born after 9/11. I still carry the memories of that day.

Earlier this week, I was talking with my mother over the phone about her experience on 9/11. She walked me through the familiar parts — how she was in our Upper West Side apartment when she learned about the attacks from a relative, how she went to the garage to get the car so they could drive to a friend’s house upstate once she realized the attacks were acts of terror. There were still hijacked planes in the air, and she worried New York City might be targeted again. Then, she said, “This part is going to make me cry.”

I hadn’t remembered what came next, but suddenly it came back to me. “Oh no, me too,” I said.

While she waited for my father to come back uptown from his office in the Financial District, she stopped inside a fire station across from the garage. Inside was a lone firefighter, who’d stayed behind to man the station while the rest of his company was inside the towers. He was watching the news on television, and my mom stood next to him, watching too, when the towers fell.

“We just lost so many men,” he said.

I wasn’t there when it happened; I wasn’t even alive. But I’d heard this story before, I’d walked dozens of times past that same fire station, which now has a plaque commemorating the seven firefighters who died on 9/11. Hearing the story again on the phone, I found myself walking down the streets of Washington D.C., bawling.

I’m 23, born a year-and-a-half after 9/11. Most Americans my age learned about the attacks in school, as history. I’m part of the 16% who learned through family or friends.

The discovery happened by accident, when I was in kindergarten. My mom and I were in a children’s store on the Upper West Side, when we started flipping through a picture book about the history of New York City. Most of the book was unremarkable, but the end was unexpected: a scene of the smoldering twin towers.

I forget what exactly happened next, but here’s what I do remember: My mom was upset that the shop hadn’t provided a warning about the book’s end, and I was confused about why she was upset. I was five, too young to understand the image and never one to let a question go unanswered; I must have pestered her until she offered up an explanation.

The author, as a five-year-old. Photo by Sage Lattman

She hadn’t been prepared to tell me about terrorism. She’d been evading the topic for some time, telling half-truths to avoid it. When I’d ask her why we had to take our shoes off in line at the airport, she’d just say it was to make sure no one had anything dangerous, leaving out the part about how a man had tried to get on a flight with bombs hidden in his shoes.

“9/11 is a huge thing for a parent to have to tell a kid about,” my mom told me this week. “You were a happy kid, and I didn’t want you to get scared or traumatized.”

The events, and impacts, of that day slowly unfolded for me as the years passed. I learned that my father had watched from Battery Park as the South Tower fell; he ran westward as plumes of smoke billowed toward him. I learned that my parents had friends who’d died in the towers, one of whom was the father of a boy I grew up with. I remember going to the 9/11 Memorial and Museum when it opened in 2014, feeling sick as I watched footage of people jumping out of the towers.

The New York Times recently interviewed dozens of Gen Z Americans about 9/11. I was struck by how disconnected many felt from the event. “It’s hard to feel sad about something that you don’t remember,” said Annika Heegaard, a 25-year-old now living in New York.

But for me, 9/11 doesn’t feel quite so far away. By now I’ve lived through other mass casualty events, like the Parkland shooting and the Oct. 7 Hamas attacks. But 9/11 is the only tragedy that my family members had such a direct connection to. “It was devastating,” my mom said.

I think the reason I can remember the exact moment I found out about 9/11 is because it changed my view of the world. I remember being almost unable to comprehend that anyone would do what the hijackers did. I wasn’t, as my mom feared, traumatized by learning about the attacks; I didn’t fear for my safety each day. But the knowledge was in some ways a loss of innocence — a discovery that people could do awful things and that the world wasn’t as safe a place as I had assumed.

The post I was born after 9/11. I still carry the memories of that day. appeared first on The Forward.

Continue Reading

Uncategorized

The DSA’s latest win was not about Israel — and it hurts the Jewish community to insist it was

When Democratic socialist David Morales defeated the incumbent mayor of Providence, Brett Smiley, in a historic primary win this week in Rhode Island, the election quickly became part of a narrative that has been coalescing around progressive political wins in the last year — the election of Zohran Mamdani as mayor of New York City, Abdul El-Sayed’s primary win in Michigan, the sweep of DSA-backed candidates in New York City’s recent primaries. The idea is that  this race was all about Israel — that it turned on a struggle between Zionists and pro-Palestinian activists.

A Jewish Telegraphic Agency story on Morales’s win features a quote from the founder of the Rhode Island-Israel Collaborative that Morales’s campaign was “fueled by pro-Palestinians and Israeli haters.” The founder of the far-right Rhode Island Coalition for Israel called some of Morales’ stances “anti-Israel and anti-Jewish.” Jewish Insider published a story the day before the primary headlined, “Antisemitism roils Providence mayoral race.” The Times of Israel’s story on the election is titled, “Jewish mayor of Providence loses Democratic primary to anti-Israel challenger.” (Smiley converted to Judaism in 2024, and made a controversial visit to Israel in 2025.)

But this narrative is false: Israel did not play a decisive role in this election. In reality, Morales was laser-focused on affordability, and — like most progressive candidates this year — rarely, if ever, brought up Israel unprompted. Indeed, the defining issue for the Morales campaign was not Israel, but rent stabilization.

Last April, Smiley vetoed legislation passed by Providence’s City Council to cap annual rent hikes at 4%. This ordinance is desperately needed: A recent study found that Providence is the least affordable city for renters in the country. Longtime residents are getting priced out, and essentially everyone who rents — and renters comprise 59% of the households in the city — understands that our trajectory is simply not sustainable.

By vetoing the most significant-ever attempt to bring this crisis under control, Smiley made this a race about a challenger fighting to make Providence affordable and an incumbent prioritizing his corporate donors, who gave Smiley a historically large $1.3 war chest for his campaign. (Morales had less than $300,000, largely from individual donors.)

This issue served as precisely the kind of defining contrast that pro-Israel Super PAC spending became in recent congressional elections elsewhere. Support from AIPAC has provided an impossible-to-obscure contrast to Democratic primary voters in races such as Illinois’s 9th Congressional District, New York’s 10th Congressional District, and Michigan’s Senate primary. But in Providence, the scandal wasn’t AIPAC donors — it was the wealthy developers and corporate landlords who funded Smiley’s campaign.

It is true that Morales criticized Smiley’s active participation in the Combat Antisemitism Movement, a project so Trumpian that the Jewish Federations of North America and Jewish Council for Public Affairs both left the group after it released a video claiming that diversity, equity, and inclusion efforts are antisemitic. Morales also came out in support of a ballot initiative that would require the City of Providence to divest from the debt of foreign countries “conducting ethnic cleansing, apartheid, illegal military occupation, or genocide,” as determined by U.S. and international law. Some of Morales’s supporters — and in particular some portion of his army of campaign volunteers — were undoubtedly motivated by an appreciation for Morales’s willingness to take a moral stance. But it simply wasn’t a top five, or even (by my estimation) a top 10 issue in this race.

And I don’t understand the inclination to claim otherwise. Certainly it doesn’t make sense for members of the Israel lobby; after all, having another election be lost due to voters’ anger over a politician’s fealty to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is not good for their political project. But more importantly, these allegations — particularly the false claim that this race was somehow “roiled” by antisemitism — are harmful to Rhode Island’s Jewish community as a whole.

Take, for example, the “antisemitism” referenced by Jewish Insider, which consisted, in total, of a few instances in which a Hitler mustache and devil horns were drawn on Smiley’s campaign signs. Of course, defacing political signs is never good, and Morales immediately condemned the vandalism. But as a Jewish former elected official who experienced actual antisemitism over the course of my time in Rhode Island politics, I have to laugh at the idea that this graffiti was antisemitic.

To compare someone to Hitler is basically to say they’re the worst person ever. It’s often a problematic comparison (because almost nobody is actually as evil as Hitler), but it’s not antisemitic to say, in effect, “Hitler was bad, and so is this other guy.” And vandals were drawing devil’s horns on pictures of Smiley years before he converted. In fact, I don’t think the average Providence voter even knows Smiley is Jewish; it’s certainly not an important part of his political identity, given that he literally wasn’t yet Jewish when he first won election to the mayor’s office in 2022, or during his prior run for the seat in 2014.

Antisemitism is a real and growing problem — in our country, and here in Rhode Island. Just a few years ago, dozens of swastika-brandishing neo-Nazis rallied a block from my home. Every time that cynical politicians cry wolf on this threat, they are minimizing its danger in the eyes of most people, making our community less prepared to respond to actual incidents of antisemitism when they occur.

Even worse, when some partisans of Israel claim that everyone who dares to say Israel is committing genocide and apartheid is an antisemite — that is, someone who hates all Jews — the implication is that Israel’s wars and violence against Palestinians are somehow projects undertaken by all Jews, rather than the crimes of a specific far-right government and its supporters. And if you repeat that message often enough, some people are going to start believing it — which certainly does not make me or my young Jewish sons safer.

David Morales ran on a pledge to build a Providence for all. “All” includes members of the Jewish community, many of whom — including myself, and Morales’s campaign manager and field director, to name just a few — are excited to support his vision. It is to no one’s benefit — least of all Providence’s Jews — to try to seed conflict and distrust in what should be a moment of profound hope and possibility for our whole city.

The post The DSA’s latest win was not about Israel — and it hurts the Jewish community to insist it was appeared first on The Forward.

Continue Reading

Uncategorized

Jewish and Muslim leaders avoided the hardest interfaith topic for years, and now face a ‘massive fault line’

It’s been a quarter century since a wave of distrust and violence against Muslims swept across America in the wake of the Sept. 11, 2001 terror attacks. But in some pockets of New York City and across the U.S., Jewish neighbors extended a hand of friendship and an interfaith movement was reborn.

Dialogues turned into dinners. Dinners spawned theatrical collaborations. Collaborations turned out volunteers to feed the homeless and sent interfaith teams to Capitol Hill.

Still, as the Palestinian uprising known as the Second Intifada continued to unfold in the Middle East, even the most promising partnerships avoided the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

“We deliberately parked it on the side,” said Daisy Khan, the former executive director of American Society for Muslim Advancement and founder of the Women’s Islamic Initiative. “We called it the elephant in the room that none of us could handle.”

Now, 25 years after the terrorist attacks that inspired a movement, leaders realize that silence was a critical mistake.

As this year’s Jewish High Holidays, a time of remembrance and repentance, begin at sundown on the 25th anniversary of the Sept. 11 attacks, American Jewish leaders are reflecting on mistakes made and words they wish they could take back, confronting rising antisemitism, and along with their longtime Muslim partners, asking: Where do we go from here?

“Rosh Hashanah is known as Yom Hazikaron, the day of remembrance,” said Rabbi Joshua Davidson of Manhattan’s Temple Emanu-El, adding that remembrance usually refers to the hope that God will remember the covenant with the Jewish people. “When you talk about a day of remembrance, you also talk about the experiences that have shaped us into who we are. 9/11 certainly is an experience that has shaped us into who we are. Anyone who lived in New York is forever changed by that day.”

Interfaith bridge-building

On Sept. 11, 2001, Davidson was a young associate rabbi at another Manhattan institution, Central Synagogue. Feeling otherwise helpless that morning as the towers fell, he headed straight to the nearby mosque on 55th Street to assure his Muslim neighbors that they would not be judged by the actions of the terrorists – his instinct born from years of interfaith dialogue already underway.

The same instinct led President George W. Bush to the Islamic Center of Washington D.C., a week later to proclaim, “Islam is peace.” But that perspective did not prevail in all corners.

Prominent evangelical figures condemned Islam as “evil and wicked.” Mosques were set ablaze, and the Justice Department in the three months after the attacks labeled nine murders as “possible hate crimes.” Despite the community’s fear, the term “Islamophobia” was not widely embraced, as if it was a product of Muslims’ imaginations.

“So many American Muslims were experiencing the anxiety that President Bush recognized right away,” Davidson told the Forward. “So 9/11 crystallized for many the importance of the work of interfaith bridge building … We can learn from one another. When the world becomes complicated and your own community is in jeopardy or is being targeted, you realize how valuable it is to have those friendships.”

Those existing friendships and the ground rules that had sustained them laid the foundation for the aftermath of Sept. 11 and propelled many individuals and groups working behind the scenes to publicly counter what seemed to be an anti-Muslim zeitgeist. While the previous approach to interfaith work had been intimate Shabbat dinners, Ramadan iftars, and discussion groups, the new approach involved rallies, live performances and large-scale programs.

On the morning of Sept. 12, Israeli cellist Udi Bar-David called someone with whom he had collaborated a few times – Majid Alsayegh, an Iraqi-born Muslim engineer and architect in Philadelphia. Determined to offer a constructive response, they formed a team and in Spring 2002 launched a nonprofit for creative intercultural exchanges.

“Because of the tensions of Muslim and Jewish, Arabic and Jewish communities, because of the violence, we felt we needed to speak up and do more,” Alsayegh told the Forward, “to help them understand that dialogue in many forms, including music, is much more powerful than shooting each other.”

Seeking to help audiences listen with less anger, more empathy, artists from B’nai Jeshurun, a synagogue on New York’s Upper West Side, teamed up with Methodists and Muslims to present hard truths gathered from more than 100 New Yorkers. The project titled “Same Difference” later became a documentary.

In the years that followed, connections became more purposeful and direct. In 2008, Rabbi Marc Schneier’s Foundation for Ethnic Understanding launched an annual Weekend of Twinning, which paired scores of synagogues and mosques to explore the parallels and similarities within their traditions. It also enabled them to compare notes about the discrimination each faced as religious minorities and band together to fight the hatred that targeted both.

Khan cherishes the time she spent in synagogues and the friendships she formed there.

“We had such deep ties and such deep relations we weren’t afraid to go to bat for one another,” Khan said. “I think those relationships have even served us to this day.”

‘A massive fault line’

Still, cracks began to show. In 2010, Khan and her husband at the time, Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf, proposed Cordoba House, a mosque and community center in Lower Manhattan. Modeled after JCCs across the country and named for a city in Spain that once had been a center of peaceful coexistence, the proposed facility would offer prayer space, a wedding venue and a swimming pool.

Opponents focused on the location: two blocks from Ground Zero. Many Jewish leaders endorsed the project. Abe Foxman, longtime leader of the Anti-Defamation League, did not.

“We believe that in this place of tragedy and pain and anguish … if you want to heal, the best way to heal is not to do it in your face.”

Foxman, who died in May, never apologized for his remarks, but his successor Jonathan Greenblatt later acknowledged “we were wrong, plain and simple.”

In 2011, when U.S. Congressman Peter King of New York, then-chairman of the Homeland Security Committee, held hearings on Capitol Hill denouncing the radicalization inside American mosques, Jewish friends showed their support by helping to organize a “Today, I am Muslim too” rally in Times Square.

Those shows of solidarity grew throughout the years. Jewish partners joined crowds at airports to protest the Trump administration’s executive order on immigration. Congregations helped each other pick up the pieces when their houses of worship or sacred sites came under assault. But the tougher conversation, probing where people stood on the Middle East conflict and why, remained largely untouched.

As anyone  in interfaith relations or diplomacy of any kind will tell you, constructive conversations are best had before there’s a crisis. That crisis arrived on Oct. 7, 2023, when Hamas attacked Israel, murdering more than 1,200 and taking 250 hostages. The war that followed in Gaza sparked virulent protests on college campuses and in public squares and a spike in antisemitic incidents. It also created a chasm of grief too deep and wide for many partnerships to survive.

“When Gaza happened, it created a massive fault line,” Khan said. “For Jews it reinforced existential fears about Jewish safety. For the Palestinians: ‘It’s our existential thing too. We feel we’re getting wiped out.’”

But because many conversation partners had for years avoided the hardest topic of all, they missed the opportunity to feel the emotional weight carried on both sides and hold that tension. When the grief, trauma and fear of Oct. 7  was thrust upon them, leaders could not adequately navigate the emotional landscape to offer moral clarity or comfort, Khan said.

“We could have called for calm,” she said. “We could’ve said that human loss is terrible. We could’ve said a lot of things that calmed people down. None of that happened. It became very tribal.”

Laboratory phase

Dr. Ari Gordon, director of Muslim Jewish Relations for American Jewish Committee, said while some Muslim partners have walked away from their joint advocacy work, some have stayed in touch. Khan and Alsayegh remain committed and hold out hope that their Muslim peers will return and give it another try.

“Everyone in this space has had the hits they’ve taken after Oct. 7,” Gordon said. “Relationships are a long-term investment. They can take dips and turns, peaks and valleys. On a personal level, as a friend, you have the right to say I want to engage with a person. I don’t want to. As a Jewish community we have a responsibility to keep our doors open.”

But it’s also important to keep the trajectory and time frame in perspective. The transformation of Christian-Jewish relations offers a lesson in that regard.

“The idea that a relationship can be beset by conflict and challenges for centuries and undergo transformation,” he said, “is one that I carry in my mind all the time.”

Gordon calls the past 25 years a “laboratory phase of Muslim-Jewish relations.” The Shabbat dinners, iftars, dialogue groups, coalitions, concerts – they all have fortified a connective tissue between American Muslims and Jews that did not exist 25 years ago.

“That trust may not have been sufficient to meet the stress test of October 7 and the continued war but it was definitely there and it didn’t go away,” he said. “After October 7 we entered a new phase and it’s one where we’re not going to go back to the way it used to be, but build something new.”

The post Jewish and Muslim leaders avoided the hardest interfaith topic for years, and now face a ‘massive fault line’ appeared first on The Forward.

Continue Reading

Copyright © 2017 - 2023 Jewish Post & News