Uncategorized
Hating Israel Isn’t New; How the CIA and State Department Undermined the Jewish State
“Teddy Roosevelt’s great-great-great grandson is an anti-Israel protester at Princeton,” blared a New York Post headline on May 4, 2024.
The Post reported that Quentin Colon Roosevelt, an 18-year-old freshman, and descendant of the 25th President, is an anti-Israel activist at the Ivy League university. But far from being hip and new, Quentin’s brand of anti-Zionism is old hat — he is merely continuing a long family tradition of anti-Israel activism.
There is an abundance of literature on Franklin D. Roosevelt’s views on Jews and Zionism, the belief in Jewish self-determination. Both FDR and his wife Eleanor had made antisemitic remarks. In a private conversation in 1938, then-President Roosevelt suggested that by dominating the economy in Poland, Jews were themselves fueling antisemitism. And in a 1941 Cabinet meeting, FDR remarked that there were too many Jewish Federal employees in Oregon. In his final days, FDR promised Saudi leader Abdul Aziz Ibn al Saud that he would oppose the creation of Jewish state in the Jewish people’s ancestral homeland.
FDR is the president who led the United States to victory against Adolf Hitler. He also employed Jews in high-ranking positions in his government. But he is also the president whose administration failed to save more Jews fleeing Nazism, and who refused to bomb the railway tracks leading to Auschwitz and other death camps where millions of Jews met a ghastly end. Accordingly, it makes sense that his beliefs regarding Jews have been the subject of books and belated study.
Less examined, however, is the Oyster Bay branch of the Roosevelt clan, and their beliefs regarding Zionism. In part, this is easily explained by the unique place that FDR holds in American history. He is the only president to serve four terms, and presided over both the Great Depression, World War II, and arguably the beginning of the Cold War. His branch of the family, the Hyde Park Roosevelts, were Democrats and remained active in public life for decades after his 1945 death.
At first glance, the Oyster Bay Roosevelts were more of a turn of the 19th century affair. They were Republicans, and their scion was Teddy Roosevelt, a war hero turned governor of New York state who, thanks to an assassin’s bullet, found himself as the nation’s leader in 1901.
The famously ebullient Roosevelt helped redefine the country’s idea of a president, and served as an inspiration for his cousin Franklin. But Teddy largely presided over an era of peace and tranquility, not war and upheaval.
Teddy was a philosemite. He was the first occupant of the Oval Office to appoint a Jewish American to the Cabinet. He championed the rights of Jews, both at home and abroad, and was harshly critical of the numerous pogroms that unfolded in czarist Russia.
As Seth Rogovoy has noted, Roosevelt’s “special relationship with Jews was forged during his time serving as police commissioner in New York City, a post he assumed in 1904.” When an antisemitic German preacher named Hermann Ahlwardt gave speeches in the city, Roosevelt assigned a contingent of Jewish police officers to guard the man.
Roosevelt was also a Zionist. In 1918, shortly after the Balfour Declaration, he wrote: “It seems to me that it is entirely proper to start a Zionist state around Jerusalem.” He told Lioubomir Michailovitch, the Serbian Minister to the United States, that “there can be no peace worth having … unless the Jews [are] given control of Palestine.” Six months later Roosevelt died in his sleep.
Not all his descendants would share his belief in Jewish self-determination, however.
Two of Teddy Roosevelt’s grandchildren, Kermit and Archie, served their country in the CIA during the early years of the Cold War. Both were keenly interested in Middle East affairs, and were fluent in Arabic. Both were well read and highly educated, authoring books and filing dispatches for newspapers like the Saturday Evening Post, among others.
They were also prominent anti-Zionists.
Kermit Roosevelt, known as “Kim,” played a key role in anti-Zionist efforts in the United States and abroad. He was not, by the standards of his time, an antisemite. But he was ardently opposed to the creation of Israel.
As Hugh Wilford observed in his 2013 book America’s Great Game: The CIA’s Secret Arabists and the Shaping of the Modern Middle East: “the anti-Zionism of the overt Cold War foreign policy establishment is well known” but “less widely appreciated is the opposition to Jewish statehood of the individuals responsible for setting up the United States’ covert apparatus in the Middle East.”
This began with the OSS, the CIA’s precursor. And it included men like Stephen Penrose, a former American University of Beirut instructor, and Kim Roosevelt’s boss during his wartime service in the OSS.
“Documents among Penrose’s personal papers reveal him engaged in a variety of anti-Zionist activities at the same time that he was commencing his official duties with the OSS,” Wilford notes.
Like many of his fellow Arabists, Penrose was the son of American missionaries who, failing to convert the native population to Christianity, sought to foster Arab nationalism instead. Penrose described himself as a “chief cook” who was “brewing” opposition to Zionism. He became one of Kim Roosevelt’s mentors.
In a January 1948 Middle East Journal article entitled, “Partition of Palestine: A Lesson in Pressure Politics,” Kim called the 1947 UN vote in favor of a Jewish state an “instructive and disturbing story.”
Roosevelt believed that the US media was unduly supportive of the creation of Israel, and claimed that almost all Americans “with diplomatic, educational, missionary, or business experience in the Middle East” opposed Zionism.
Kim’s pamphlet was reprinted by the Institute for Arab American Affairs, a New York-based group whose board he sat on. He also began working with the Arab League’s Washington, D.C., office and “turned elsewhere for allies in the anti-Zionist struggle, starting with the Protestant missionaries, educators, and aid workers.”
This nascent group soon received financial support from the American oil industry, which maintained close links to Kim’s OSS/CIA colleague, William Eddy.
As Wilford noted, the Arabian consortium ARAMCO “launched a public relations campaign intended to bring American opinion around to the Arab point of view.”
In addition to missionaries and big oil, Kim gained another important ally in the form of Elmer Berger, a rabbi from Flint, Michigan. Berger served as executive director of the American Council for Judaism, an anti-Zionist group that, among other things, opposed the creation of a Jewish army during World War II at the height of the Holocaust. Berger and Roosevelt became drinking buddies and close collaborators on their joint effort against the Jewish State.
Kim eventually became “organizing secretary” for a group called The Committee for Justice and Peace. The committee’s original chair, Virginia Gildersleeve, was both a longtime friend of the Roosevelts of Oyster Bay and the dean of New York City’s Barnard College, which today is part of Columbia.
Gildersleeve was “also a high-profile anti-Zionist” who “became involved with the Arab cause through her association with the Arabist philanthropist Charles Crane and the historian of Arab nationalism George Antonius.”
Crane, a wealthy and notorious antisemite, had lobbied against the creation of a Jewish state since the beginning of the 20th century, even advising then-President Woodrow Wilson against supporting the Balfour Declaration.
By 1950, the Committee had managed to recruit famed journalist Dorothy Thompson to their cause. Thompson was reportedly the basis for actress Katharine Hepburn’s character in the 1942 movie Woman of the Year. A convert to anti-Zionism, Thompson’s extensive network of reporters and celebrities proved crucial to Kim and Berger’s efforts to rally opposition to the Jewish State. In a 1951 letter to Barnard College’s Gildersleeve, Thompson wrote: “I am seriously concerned about the position of the Jews in the United States.” People, she claimed, “are beginning to ask themselves the question: who is really running America?”
Another ally emerged that year: the Central Intelligence Agency.
The CIA began funding the Committee, as well as its successor, the American Friends of the Middle East (AFME). Beginning in June 1950, Kim’s correspondence with Berger began making veiled references to the ACJ head taking on “official work” in Washington. This, Wilford believes, is a reference to working with the CIA. Indeed, the well-connected Kim and Archie Roosevelt had known top CIA officials like Allan Dulles since childhood.
With support from figures like Eddy, AFME also began encouraging Muslim-Christian alliances — ostensibly to counter Soviet influence, but also to attack the Jewish state. This led to some awkward alliances, including with Amin al-Husseini, the founding father of Palestinian nationalism and an infamous Nazi collaborator.
Husseini had ordered the murders of rival Palestinians, incited violence against Jews since the 1920s, and had led forces, equipped with Nazi-supplied arms, to destroy Israel at its rebirth in 1948. Now, along with the Secretary General of the Arab League, and Saudi King Ibn Saud, he was meeting with Eddy to discuss a “moral alliance” between Christians and Muslims to defeat communism. Kim himself knew Husseini, having interviewed him for the Saturday Evening Post after World War II.
AFME lobbied for the appointment of anti-Zionist diplomats and in favor of Eisenhower administration efforts to withhold aid from Israel. And both Berger and Thompson pushed for favorable coverage of the new Egyptian dictator, Gamal Nassar, who would wage war on the Jewish state for nearly two decades. Initially, they were successful, with TIME magazine writing that Nasser had the “lithe grace of a big, handsome, all-American quarterback.” Of course, there was nothing “all-American” about Nasser, who would become a Soviet stooge.
AFME officials like Garland Evans Hopkins would draw rebukes after claiming that Jews were bringing violence against themselves — a staple of antisemitism. Hopkins claimed that Zionists “could produce a wave of antisemitism in this country” if they continued acting against “America’s best interests in the Middle East.”
AFME itself would eventually lose influence, particularly after its boosting of figures like Nasser was revealed as foolhardy. Berger would go on to advise Senator J. William Fulbright (D-AR) in his efforts to get pro-Israel Americans to register as foreign agents.
In 1967, as Arab forces gathered to annihilate Israel, Berger blamed the Jewish State, accusing it of “aggression” and its supporters of “hysteria.” Top ACJ officials resigned in protest. That same year, Ramparts magazine exposed CIA support, financial and otherwise, of AFME.
Kim and Archie Roosevelt, however, would continue their careers as high-ranking CIA officers before eventually starting a consulting business and making use of their extensive Middle East contacts.
For some college protesters, attacking Israel — and American support for Israel — might seem new and trendy. Yet, both the CIA and big oil were precisely doing that, decades ago, forming alliances with anti-American dictators, antisemitic war criminals, the press, Protestant groups, academics, university administrators, and fringe Jewish groups claiming to represent “what’s best” for American Jewry.
As William Faulkner once wrote: “The past is never dead. It’s not even past.”
The writer is a Senior Research Analyst for CAMERA, the 65,000-member, Boston-based Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting and Analysis
The post Hating Israel Isn’t New; How the CIA and State Department Undermined the Jewish State first appeared on Algemeiner.comhttps://www.algemeiner.com/.
Uncategorized
Federal Officials Dig in on Minneapolis Shooting Narrative Despite Video Evidence
A person reacts at a makeshift memorial at the site where a man identified as Alex Pretti was fatally shot by federal immigration agents trying to detain him, in Minneapolis, Minnesota, U.S., January 25, 2026. REUTERS/Tim Evans
Senior Trump administration officials on Sunday defended the fatal shooting of a US citizen by immigration agents in Minneapolis even as video evidence contradicted their version of events and tensions grew between local law enforcement and federal officers.
As residents visited a makeshift shrine of flowers and candles in frigid temperatures and snow to mark Saturday’s fatal shooting of Alex Pretti — the second shooting death by federal officers in Minneapolis this month — the Trump administration argued that Pretti assaulted officers, compelling them to fire in self-defense.
Gregory Bovino, Border Patrol commander-at-large speaking on CNN’s “State of the Union,” could not offer evidence that Pretti was trying to impede a law enforcement operation, but focused on the fact that the ICU nurse was carrying a gun, which he had a license to carry.
“The victims are border patrol agents,” Bovino said. “Law enforcement doesn’t assault anyone.”
Bovino and Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem accused Pretti of assaulting the agents, rioting and obstructing them.
“We do know that he came to that scene and impeded a law enforcement operation, which is against federal law,” Noem told Fox News’ “Sunday Briefing” program. “It’s a felony. When he did that, interacting with those agents, when they tried to get him to disengage, he became aggressive and resisted them.”
That official line, echoed by other Trump officials on Sunday, triggered outrage from local law enforcement, many in Minneapolis and Democrats on Capitol Hill, because of bystander videos that appear to show a different version of events.
HOLDING A PHONE, NOT A GUN
Videos from the scene verified and reviewed by Reuters showed Pretti, 37, holding a phone in his hand, not a gun, as he tries to help other protesters who have been pushed to the ground by agents.
As the videos begin, Pretti can be seen filming as a federal agent pushes away one woman and shoves another woman to the ground. Pretti moves between the agent and the women, then raises his left arm to shield himself as the agent pepper sprays him.
Several agents then take hold of Pretti — who struggles with them — and force him onto his hands and knees. As the agents pin down Pretti, someone shouts what sounds like a warning about the presence of a gun.
Video footage then appears to show one of the agents removing a gun from Pretti and stepping away from the group with it.
Moments later, an officer with a handgun pointed at Pretti’s back and fired four shots at him in quick succession. Several more shots can then be heard as another agent appears to fire at Pretti.
Darius Reeves, the former head of ICE’s field office in Baltimore, told Reuters that federal agents’ apparent lack of communication is troubling. “It’s clear no one is communicating to me, based on my observation of how that team responded,” Reeves said.
One of the officers appeared to have taken possession of Pretti’s weapon before he was killed, Reeves said. “The proof to me is how everyone scatters,” he said. “They’re looking around, trying to figure out where the shots came from.”
‘VIDEOS SPEAK FOR THEMSELVES’
Brian O’Hara, the Minneapolis police chief, told CBS’ “Face the Nation” that “the videos speak for themselves,” adding the Trump administration version of events was “deeply disturbing.” He said he had seen no evidence that Pretti brandished a gun.
Tensions in the city were already running high after a federal agent fatally shot US citizen Renee Good on Jan 7. Trump officials claim she was trying to ram the agent with her car, but other observers have argued that bystander video suggests she was trying to steer away from the officer who shot her.
Federal authorities have refused to allow local officials to participate in their investigation of the incident.
US Senator Amy Klobuchar, a Democrat from Minnesota, told ABC News’ “This Week” that Trump’s surge of federal agents into Minneapolis was “completely out of control and out of balance,” and that they should leave Minnesota. She described the shooting of Pretti as “simply horrific.”
The deaths of Good and Pretti have sparked large protests in the Democrat-run city, although on Sunday morning the area where Pretti was shot was calm.
A woman wearing nursing scrubs ventured out in Sunday’s frigid temperatures to pay homage to Pretti, who she said worked with her. When asked what brought her out, the woman began to sob.
“He was caring and he was kind. None of this makes any sense,” said the woman, who asked not to be identified by name, saying she feared retribution from the federal government.
In addition to large protests in Minneapolis since Good’s death, there have been rallies in other cities led by Democratic politicians, including Los Angeles and Washington, D.C., since Trump began sending immigration agents and National Guard troops to those communities last year.
Trump has defended the operations as necessary to reduce crime and enforce immigration laws.
Pretti’s shooting triggered legal filings on Saturday night from state and local officials, as well as others.
A US district judge issued a temporary restraining order prohibiting federal officials from destroying or altering evidence related to the shooting in response to a lawsuit filed by Minnesota’s attorney general, the Hennepin County Attorney’s Office and the Bureau of Criminal Apprehension. A full hearing is set for Monday.
Lawyers representing protesters in Minnesota also asked an appeals court to reinstate a lower court’s order that prevented violent retaliation by federal agents against protesters, citing Pretti’s death and the likelihood of a surge of people taking to the streets.
Uncategorized
Iran Health Officials Say Death Toll Far Exceeds Official Figures During Protests
Cars burn in a street during a protest over the collapse of the currency’s value, in Tehran, Iran, Jan. 8, 2026. Photo: Stringer/WANA (West Asia News Agency) via REUTERS
i24 News – Senior sources inside Iran’s Ministry of Health have told the American publication TIME that an internal government tally shows as many as 30,000 people may have been killed in Iran on January 8 and 9 alone, far exceeding the official death toll announced by the authorities. According to the report, the figure is based on accounts from two unnamed senior Health Ministry officials and could not be independently verified.
The officials said the scale of the killings by Iranian security services during those two days overwhelmed state systems. Stocks of body bags were depleted, the officials said, and eighteen-wheel semi-trailers were used in place of ambulances to transport bodies.
According to the report, the internal government count has not been previously revealed and far exceeds the figure of 3,117 deaths announced on January 21 by Iranian authorities and state media aligned with Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei. TIME noted that Iran’s ministries, including the Health Ministry, formally report to the country’s elected president.
The reported internal figure also surpasses counts being compiled by independent activists documenting fatalities by name. As of Saturday, the US-based Human Rights Activists News Agency (HRANA) said it had confirmed 5,459 deaths and was investigating an additional 17,031 cases.
The two Health Ministry officials described the internal tally as reflecting only a portion of the broader unrest, highlighting January 8 and 9 as particularly deadly. The report mentioned the deaths cited occurred “in the streets of Iran,” underscoring the intensity of those two days. Iranian authorities have not publicly commented on the internal figures cited by TIME.
Uncategorized
UN Rights Body Censures Iran’s ‘Brutal Repression’ of Protests
Members of the UN Security Council meet on Iran at the request of the United States at U.N. headquarters in New York City, US, January 15, 2026. Photo: REUTERS/Eduardo Munoz
The U.N. rights body condemned Iran on Friday for rights abuses and mandated an investigation into a recent crackdown on anti-government protests that killed thousands of people.
“I call on the Iranian authorities to reconsider, to pull back, and to end their brutal repression,” High Commissioner Volker Turk told an emergency session of the U.N. Human Rights Council in Geneva, voicing concerns for detainees.
The council passed a motion extending a previous inquiry set up in 2022 so U.N. investigators could also document the latest unrest “for potential future legal proceedings.”
Rights groups say bystanders were among those killed during the biggest crackdown since Shi’ite Muslim clerics took power in the 1979 revolution. Tehran has blamed “terrorists and rioters” backed by exiled opponents and foreign foes the US and Israel.
Iran’s mission decried the rights council’s “politicized” resolution and rejected external interference, saying in a statement it had its own independent and robust accountability mechanisms to investigate “the root causes of recent events.”
Twenty-five states including France, Mexico and South Korea voted in favor, while seven including China and India voted against and 14 abstained.
“This is the worst mass murder in the contemporary history of Iran,” Payam Akhavan, a former U.N. prosecutor of Iranian-Canadian nationality, told the meeting. He called for a “Nuremberg moment”, referring to the international criminal trials of Nazi leaders following World War Two.
Iran’s ambassador to the U.N. in Geneva, Ali Bahreini, told the Council its emergency session was invalid and gave Tehran’s tally of some 3,000 people killed in the unrest.
One Iranian official, however, has told Reuters that at least 5,000 people, including 500 members of the security forces, had been killed.
The U.S.-based HRANA rights group said it has so far verified 4,519 unrest-linked deaths and had 9,049 additional deaths under review.
China, Pakistan, Cuba and Ethiopia also questioned the utility of the rights session, with Beijing’s ambassador Jia Guide calling the unrest in Iran “a matter of internal affairs”.
It was unclear who would cover the costs of the extended U.N. inquiry amid a funding crisis that has stalled other probes.
