Connect with us

Uncategorized

In Indiana, a vaunted Jewish studies program is upended by red-state politics over Israel and speech

A sudden change in leadership at Indiana University’s Jewish studies program has erupted into a bitter internal feud, pitting a new interim director against faculty and students who say he is undermining academic freedom and reshaping the program’s direction amid national tensions over Israel and campus speech.

The turmoil began with the abrupt replacement of the department’s longtime director, continued with a clash between the new director and an ardently pro-Palestinian graduate student, and culminated last week with a statement of support for the new director from the college’s dean.

The conflict, first reported by the student newspaper, began in August, when the longtime director of the Borns Jewish Studies Program, Mark Roseman, unexpectedly stepped down a year before his term ended. Roseman said he was told, without explanation, that IU’s newly installed chancellor, David Reingold, sought to replace him. 

Günther Jikeli, a scholar of antisemitism and associate director of IU’s Center for the Study of Contemporary Antisemitism, stepped into the role.

Soon after taking over, Jikeli clashed with graduate student Sabina Ali, who identifies as Jewish and supports the Palestinian cause. He expelled her from a Zoom seminar for displaying a “Free Palestine” image and later denied her travel funding to present a paper critical of “Jewish indigeneity” claims related to Israel. Jikeli said her work was “political activism, not scholarship.” 

Many of the Borns Jewish Studies faculty and graduate students have publicly sided against Jikeli, fearing that his actions will threaten academic freedom and damage the reputation of one of the oldest and most storied Jewish studies programs in the country.

“We used to have a Jewish studies program where we knew we had political differences, but we had really great academic working relationships,” said Sarah Imhoff, a tenured professor who has been at IU for 16 years. “And that has significantly deteriorated.” 

At the same time, dozens of faculty at universities around the world, most of them in Jewish studies, have signed a letter to the dean supporting Jikeli. They wrote that he was “facing an entirely unwarranted political assault on his professional integrity and judgment.”

“What Professor Jikeli is trying to do is restore rigor and objectivity in the department,” Allon Friedman, a medical school professor on IU’s Indianapolis campus and leader of multiple pro-Israel advocacy groups in the state, told JTA. 

Friedman continued, “We’ve seen over the last few decades a real deterioration — not only the quality of scholarship in Jewish Studies in particular, but also an injection of politics that is oftentimes anti-Israel, if not overtly antisemitic. That’s what we’re seeing here.”

A professor speaks outside on a college campus

Mark Roseman, former director of Indiana University’s Jewish Studies program, in a promotional video for the program, Oct. 28, 2015. (Screenshot via YouTube)

Jikeli, who is not Jewish, declined to comment to the Jewish Telegraphic Agency for this story. Representatives for IU and the dean’s office did not return repeated requests for comment.

Jikeli’s appointment in August came as a surprise to Roseman, who directed Jewish Studies at IU from 2013 to 2020 before reassuming the position last year. Roseman, who unlike Jikeli is Jewish, told JTA he stepped down after Jikeli told him that Reingold, who was named chancellor in June, had privately offered the director role to him. 

This was considered a highly unusual arrangement for an academic program, where directors are not typically forced out before the end of their term and any replacements would typically be vetted by committee. 

“I was surprised by it, obviously. It didn’t make sense to me to continue not having the confidence of the campus leadership,” Roseman said. He added that, in his eyes, “the program operated very harmoniously.” He remains affiliated with the program as a tenured faculty. 

Jikeli told the Indiana Daily Student that he, too, was given no reason for the leadership change. Seemingly no one in the program was. At a meeting with Rick Van Kooten, the dean of the College of Arts and Sciences, Jewish studies faculty asked why their director was being replaced now.

“I can’t tell you that,” the dean responded, according to multiple accounts of the meeting.

This scene was part of a broader cultural shift at IU, where around 12% of the student body is Jewish — and where new personnel and new oversight have been installed at various levels in a broader effort to comply with the nationwide campus crackdown led by President Donald Trump. 

Indiana’s Republican state legislature, following Trump’s model, has wrested control of public university governance and pressured IU to curb the power of faculty decision-making, leading to a broader revolt over free speech on campus. During last year’s pro-Palestinian encampments, state police dispatched snipers to campus rooftops as a peacekeeping measure in a much-criticized move. 

After the encampments, IU, like other schools, convened an antisemitism advisory board. Roseman and Jikeli served on it together, along with Dean Van Kooten and others including an Indianapolis congregational rabbi. (Unlike similar antisemitism task forces at other schools, IU’s has not produced a formal report.)

One Jewish professor who had played a leading role in the encampments was disciplined over the summer after being found in violation of an “intellectual diversity” law recently passed by the state senate. That professor, Benjamin Robinson, has since been sanctioned by the school. The complaint said that by sharing his views on Israel and Gaza in one of his Germanic studies classes, he violated a state law that forbids faculty from discussing their views in the classroom if they are unrelated to the professor’s expertise. 

Many saw the recent shutdown of the student newspaper as a further attempt to quash dissent. (IU walked back its decision last week, but not before having fired the student media director.) 

At the same time, not all speech has been silenced on campus. Recently Tucker Carlson, the former Fox News host, spoke to 3,000 IU students  as part of the Turning Point USA tour days before releasing a chummy interview with avowed antisemite Nick Fuentes.

Roseman alluded to such pressures in the Jewish studies program’s most recent alumni newsletter, dated fall 2025. In a “director’s report” written before he stepped down, he warns of recent actions from the state legislature forcing public universities to close programs that enroll under a certain threshold of majors. Such actions, he told alums, could jeopardize the program’s future. 

The same newsletter included an “editor’s note” stating that Roseman would no longer be serving as director — and a welcome note from Jikeli. His primary concerns were different.

A professor lectures at a podium

Günther Jikeli, a professor of antisemitism, addresses an audience in Cleveland, Ohio, Dec. 7, 2018. In 2025 Jikeli was installed as interim director of Indiana University’s Jewish Studies program over the wishes of some of his colleagues. (Screenshot via YouTube)

“Rising antisemitism is a challenge on campuses across the country,” Jikeli wrote. “While IU is not immune, we are fortunate to have strong partnerships and resources to address these concerns, and we will continue to work together to ensure that Jewish Studies remains a place of learning, resilience, and community.”

Roseman, a renowned British scholar of the Holocaust who most recently edited a comprehensive four-volume Cambridge history of the Shoah, had tried to keep a low profile on campus in the two years since the Hamas attacks and outbreak of war in Gaza. Even as IU, like many other schools, contended with encampments and accusations that Israel was committing genocide, the resident genocide scholar sought to keep his own views out of the spotlight, colleagues said.

That has not been the case with Jikeli, whose research specialties include monitoring antisemitism among pro-Palestinian supporters on Instagram and in European Muslim communities, including Syrian refugees. Last year he helped to organize a “Rally Against Hamas Propaganda” on campus, alongside the leaders of IU’s Hillel and Chabad centers and the president of Hoosiers for Israel. At the time, Jikeli told the Indiana Daily Student that the rally was not intended as a direct counter to the encampments. 

Speaking to the Combat Antisemitism Movement, an activist group, over the summer prior to his appointment as director, Jikeli warned that tensions on campuses like his own were “entering a more dangerous phase.” He painted anti-Zionist activists in stark terms. 

“We’re not just dealing with protests,” he said then. “We’re facing a hardened core of ideologically driven actors, empowered by digital amplification and real-world networks, who are reshaping campus discourse — and possibly campus safety — in deeply troubling ways.” 

In the two months since Jikeli took over the Jewish studies director post, he has taken a harder line against a strain of pro-Palestinian activism that had been running through some aspects of the program. In his view, expressed in emails viewed by JTA, he is protecting the program from influence or activism that could harm its mission. 

A graduate student stands on a picket line with a sign reading "Sabina Ali is on strike"

Indiana University graduate student Sabina Ali holds a sign with her name on it as members of the Indiana Graduate Workers Coalition and its supporters picket while striking for union recognition in Bloomington, Indiana, April 25, 2022. (Jeremy Hogan/SOPA Images/LightRocket via Getty Images)

His efforts soon focused on a chief adversary: Sabina Ali, a sixth-year doctoral student pursuing a Ph.D. in religious studies with a minor in Jewish studies and a former managing editor of the American Religion Journal, a scholarly publication based at IU. 

Over email, Ali told JTA she identifies as “post-Soviet Jewish,” with a mixed family including Muslims. “My Jewish identity is inseparable from the struggle against all forms of oppression, including Israel’s ongoing occupation, apartheid, and genocide against Palestinians,” she wrote.

Last year Ali was one of dozens to sign an open letter from “Jewish Faculty, Staff, Students, and Alumni” protesting the university’s breaking up of a student encampment — a letter not signed by Roseman, Imhoff or any other current Jewish studies faculty save one. (An emeritus professor who is on the Jewish studies faculty advisory board also signed.) She supports a movement pressuring IU to divest from Israel, and her Zoom profile picture, visible when her camera is off, is a drawing of a woman wearing a keffiyeh accompanied by a Palestinian flag and the words “Free Palestine.”

Ali was drawn to Jewish studies, she said, “because my research engages core questions within the field while also expanding the field’s boundaries through critical approaches.” She also admired the work of the faculty, particularly Imhoff. “It matters deeply to me to be part of Jewish Studies because it is a field where I feel I can make meaningful contributions and connect it to broader interdisciplinary conversations,” she said.

When on campus she routinely wore a keffiyeh, the traditional Palestinian headscarf that has been adopted by protesters on the left, to Jewish studies events — something she said she did without incident before Jikeli’s appointment. 

“I am fully aware that not everyone in the program shares my political views or my fundamental moral conviction that occupation, apartheid, and genocide are unacceptable,” Ali told JTA. “Academic freedom does not require that everyone is comfortable.”

Before the leadership change, Ali’s politics encountered little pushback within Jewish studies — although some faculty and students had expressed discomfort behind closed doors. But under Jikeli, it quickly became an issue.

Her Zoom picture became a sticking point in September when it was visible during a program event, as Imhoff prepared to present her own latest research to colleagues. According to those in attendance at the Zoom lecture, Jikeli ordered Ali to remove the pro-Palestinian image or he’d kick her off the call. When she refused, he booted her — prompting a mass exodus from nearly all of her colleagues, who reconvened in a separate Zoom meeting, sans Jikeli, to discuss the research. 

The incident infuriated many on campus who viewed Jikeli’s actions as a violation of academic freedom, with one professor calling his behavior “autocratic.” 

In an email obtained by JTA, Ali wrote, “The irony is not lost on me that I — a Jewish student — was excluded from a Jewish Studies event for expressing solidarity with Palestinians, while you, a ‘scholar’ of antisemitism, used your authority to decide what kinds of Jewish expression are acceptable.”

Some, however, supported Jikeli.

“I do not think it was wrong of Dr. Jikeli to ask, or to insist, that a Zoom profile with said imagery and said language be removed, given the program that we’re in, given the times that we’re in,” Joanna Martin, a second-year doctoral student with a Jewish studies minor, told JTA. 

Things shortly escalated when Jikeli vetoed Ali’s request for funding to present her research paper, “Weaponizing Indigeneity,” at a conference on religious studies. According to the paper’s abstract, “claims about ‘Jewish indigeneity’ to Palestine…are appropriated to justify the existence and actions of the settler-colonial nation-state of Israel and deployed to legitimize the possession of Palestine.”

The funding request, typically pro forma, had already been approved by the faculty committee overseeing graduate studies. The program director’s decision to unilaterally override the committee was, observers said, unprecedented. 

No one before Jikeli had raised a flag about her research proposal. “In fact,” Ali said, “my advisors and committee members have told me that my research is innovative for Jewish studies.” 

Jikeli defended his decision to faculty in a September email, obtained by JTA, saying Ali’s research was too politicized. He suggested that the Department of Religious Studies, Ali’s primary doctoral home, could fund her travel instead. 

Jikeli explained in a follow-up email that he had to act “in the best interest of Jewish Studies as a program,” and believed that funding Ali “could have harmed Jewish Studies.” He added, “I understand that reasonable people may disagree on where exactly to draw such lines.”

Many in the program weren’t persuaded.

“Many of us feel like this current arrangement is not one we would want to continue,” Imhoff said. “I would like to find a way forward where we can support all graduate students and faculty who are doing serious research, regardless of their politics.”

“She’s a graduate student. We’re all graduate students. Part of our job here is to learn how to fit within this discipline, fit within the field, and push boundaries of what that’s supposed to look like,” Daniel Reischler, a third-year doctoral student, told JTA. 

Ali’s activism, long tolerated in the program, was now a flashpoint. “My sense is this is just what he was hired to do, to deny Sabina funding,” one member of the Jewish Studies faculty said of Jikeli. Some have argued it is, in fact, Jikeli who is imposing personal politics on Ali’s research. 

“People are paranoid,” Claire Richters, a sixth-year Ph.D. student, told JTA. She was one of three members of the Jewish Studies graduate student executive committee, including Reischler, who signed an open letter to Jikeli protesting his decision to withhold funding to Ali.  “There’s just a worry that this will start extending to any issue that the director has a political disagreement with.” 

Those concerns aren’t shared by everyone. “There’s a lot of, like, ‘Will my research be denied?’ And it’s like, you’re doing Holocaust studies. I doubt it,” Martin said. Declining to share her thoughts on Ali’s research and its appropriateness for Jewish Studies, she added, “The majority don’t have reason to be worried.”

The letter from outside faculty supporting Jikeli also defends the actions he took against Ali.

“First, there was good reason, we believe, to turn down a request for travel support to deliver a programmatic indictment of Israel as a colonialist power. Nothing in the abstract demonstrates any original arguments,” the letter states. “Second, the decision to disallow a student in an online seminar to replace her face with a political slogan and an anonymized portrait in a keffiyeh was responsible and appropriate.”

Among the letter’s signatories: Alvin Rosenfeld, who founded Jewish studies at IU.

Armed police officers step on a Palestinian flag as they corral campus protesters

A police officer with a gun stands on a Palestinian flag during the arrest of an activist on the third day of a pro-Palestinian protest camp at Indiana University, Bloomington, Indiana, April 27, 2024. (Jeremy Hogan/SOPA Images/LightRocket via Getty Images)

Dean Van Kooten weighed in on the disputes with Ali in an internal email on Oct. 29.

He tried to walk a fine line. “I concur with the director’s decision to not use Borns Jewish Studies Program funding, particularly an IU foundation account[,] to fund the travel of the graduate student,” Van Kooten wrote in an email viewed by JTA. However, he added, Ali’s travel to the conference would still be funded, just from a different IU piggy bank. This would be done, he wrote, in the name of “respecting academic freedom.”

When it came to Zoomgate, Van Kooten was more circumspect. “Regarding the governance of the use of Zoom in department/program seminars, colloquia, etc., the college does not have a policy on this, and we don’t recommend one,” he wrote. Any Zoom policy going forward, he added, “should be voted on by the entire core faculty, and in consultation with Indiana University’s general counsel.”  

The dean added that, in absence of any clear policy, “the convenor of an event must exercise sound judgment in balancing the importance of freedom of speech and expression [following university policies] with the obligation to maintain an inclusive learning environment, and limit disruptions when they occur.”

One graduate student told JTA the email felt like a “stalemate.” The work of the program goes on: This week its contemporary antisemitism center hosted a symposium on campus antisemitism, with many of its featured speakers having also signed the letter supporting Jikeli. 

Unusually, the conference was supported with a grant from the National Endowment for the Humanities. Under Trump the NEH has defunded virtually every other Jewish humanities program, with the exception of the conservative Tikvah Fund. The current acting chair of the NEH was expected to attend IU’s conference.

For some broader observers of the Jewish studies space, who’d long seen Indiana as a beacon for the field, the situation is deeply troubling. 

“Indiana is more than a red state. It has an incredible history of white supremacy,” said Riv-Ellen Prell, an emeritus professor at the University of Minnesota who has studied the history of Jews on campus. “And here is IU, in the middle of this world, as this incredible magnet for Jewish students — because the Jewish studies program was so great, because they had a big Hillel.” 

But with the forced changes, Prell said, the forces that shape higher education were sending a message: “‘We like these kinds of Jewish studies people. We don’t like those kinds of Jewish studies people.’”

Prell said that concerns about the appropriateness of Ali’s graduate studies were missing the point: that there were other ways the program’s director could have addressed them.

“This is where she is housed as a student, admitted as a student, and there is academic freedom, and there are faculty who wish to supervise and work with her,” Prell said. “If we are to begin saying, ‘Well, the faculty who work with these students aren’t allowed to teach or supervise people with this kind of work,’ then that is the death of academic freedom.”

Friedman sees things differently.

“It’s insane that we would even consider to pay for something like this,” he said, of Ali’s research. “What’s the point of a Jewish studies department if the students in the department are demonstrating that, not only do they know nothing about the history of the Jewish people, but they’re actively trying to undermine it? No one else would tolerate this.”

Jewish studies has increasingly been a growing lightning rod for Jewish campus politics, even before Hamas’s Oct. 7, 2023, attack and Israel’s assault in Gaza; the spike in campus antisemitism, and Trump’s college crackdown. 

At other schools, donors have pulled funding for Jewish and Israel studies programs over political disagreements with faculty on Israel. Some Jewish studies faculty have been targeted or muscled out of campus antisemitism task forces because of their perceived views on Israel, while others have led protests against their own task forces. At Columbia, which reached a settlement with the Trump administration to protect its funding after becoming the epicenter of student protests, some angry Jewish donors have opted to support Jewish Studies, but not the rest of the university.

Yet Jikeli’s fear that the IU controversy “could harm Jewish Studies” seems to some a self-fulfilling prophecy. On social media, current and former IU Jewish Studies faculty were bemoaning the spiritual end of the program. And citing the interim director’s actions, some prospective graduate students have told faculty they are no longer interested in enrolling.


The post In Indiana, a vaunted Jewish studies program is upended by red-state politics over Israel and speech appeared first on Jewish Telegraphic Agency.

Continue Reading

Uncategorized

Turkey Preparing Law to Let PKK Fighters Return Under Peace Plan

A portrait of jailed Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK) leader Abdullah Ocalan and a sign with the words “Serok Apo,” are displayed on a hillside in the Qandil mountains, Iraq, Oct. 26, 2025. Photo: REUTERS/Thaier Al-Sudani

Turkey is preparing a law to let thousands of Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK) fighters and civilians return home from hideouts in northern Iraq under negotiations to end generations of war.

A senior Middle East official and a Kurdish political party source in Turkey said the proposed law would protect those returning home but stop short of offering a general amnesty for crimes committed by former militants. Some militant leaders could be sent to third countries under the plans.

Bringing PKK guerrillas and their families home from their bases in mountainous northern Iraq is seen as one of the final hurdles in a peace process launched a year ago to end a war that has killed 40,000 people.

While officials have spoken publicly about reconciliation efforts in general terms, the sources disclosed details that have not previously been reported, including proposals for returns to take place in separate waves of civilians and fighters, and for commanders to be sent to third countries.

The Middle East official, describing the sensitive negotiations on condition of anonymity, said legislation to allow the returns could come before the Turkish parliament as soon as this month.

PLAN COULD INCLUDE SEPARATE WAVES OF RETURNS

Turkey‘s intelligence agency MIT, which has led talks with the PKK, did not immediately comment on the proposal. The PKK did not immediately comment.

Since Kurdish militants launched their insurgency in 1984 – originally with the aim of creating an independent Kurdish state – the conflict has exerted a huge economic and social burden on Turkey and neighboring countries.

Ending it would boost NATO member Turkey‘s political and economic stability, and ease tensions in Iraq where the PKK is based, and Syria where Kurdish fighters have been allied with US forces.

In a major breakthrough, the PKK announced a decision in May to disarm and disband after a call to end its armed struggle from its jailed leader Abdullah Ocalan.

In July the group symbolically burned weapons, and last month it announced it was withdrawing fighters from Turkey as part of the disarmament process. It called on Ankara to take steps to let its members participate in “democratic politics.”

But the terms of reconciliation have been sensitive, with Turkey wary of offering a wide amnesty for what it considers past crimes of a terrorist organization.

Numan Kurtulmus, who heads a reconciliation commission set up by Turkey in August, said last week that any legal steps would come only after Turkey verifies that the PKK has completed its dissolution process.

“Once Turkey’s security and intelligence units have verified and confirmed that the organization has truly laid down its arms and completed its dissolution process, the country will enter a new phase of legal regulations aimed at building a terror-free Turkey,” he said.

According to the senior Middle East official, the proposal now being discussed would see roughly 1,000 civilians and non-combatants return first, followed by about 8,000 fighters after individual screening.

Beyond that, the official said Turkey had so far rejected taking back around 1,000 senior and mid-level PKK figures, and wants them relocated to a third country, possibly in Europe.

Talks were ongoing on that issue, with some parties involved in the negotiations concerned that excluding PKK top brass from repatriation could eventually fuel a renewed insurgency, the official said.

Legislation to enable returns could come before the Turkish parliament as early as the end of November, the official added.

Tayip Temel, deputy co-chair of the pro-Kurdish DEM Party – which though an opposition party has worked closely with the government on the peace process – said the ongoing negotiations focused on a formula personally emphasized by Ocalan.

“Work is underway on a special law for the PKK to enable the democratic and social reintegration of its members,” Temel told Reuters.

“The law will cover everyone returning from the PKK, whether civilian or militant. There is no plan for a phased return. The formula being worked on is comprehensive and applies to all.”

He confirmed that Turkey had raised the idea of some PKK figures being sent to third countries, but said this would have to be discussed with the potential hosts.

DIFFERENT PROCEDURES FOR DIFFERENT GROUPS

Another source at DEM, parliament’s third-biggest party, said the commission drafting the proposal was working on a single, PKK-specific law that would avoid the language of a general amnesty.

“Different procedures will apply to different groups of returnees,” the source said, adding that some returning PKK members will likely face investigations and trials. “Otherwise, it will be hard to reach common ground among parties in the commission.”

Once the parliamentary commission completes its work, it is expected to recommend the special PKK law to parliament, paving the way for potential legislation.

Human Rights Watch urged lawmakers to use the peace process to reform laws that have long been used to charge and incarcerate non-violent Kurdish activists.

The commission “has a unique opportunity to help shape a post-conflict society and should make bold recommendations to repeal abusive laws used to silence and marginalize people,” said Hugh Williamson, Europe and Central Asia director at HRW.

Continue Reading

Uncategorized

Media Amnesia: Zohran Mamdani’s Extremism Forgotten as Pro-BDS Socialist Wins New York City Mayoral Race

Democratic candidate for New York City mayor Zohran Mamdani reacts after winning the 2025 New York City Mayoral race, at an election night rally in the Brooklyn borough of New York City, New York, US, Nov. 4, 2025. Photo: REUTERS/Jeenah Moon

The clean-up has begun.

As votes rolled in and it became clear that Democratic nominee Zohran Mamdani had secured the big victory long predicted, the media whitewash was already underway.

Mamdani’s rise — from relative unknown to mayor of America’s largest city — is, politically speaking, extraordinary. He won more votes than any candidate in a New York City mayoral race in 50 years.

But it was also a campaign haunted by allegations of antisemitism, anti-Israel extremism, and sympathy for radical Islamist movements and chants like, “Globalize the intifada.” Those allegations were well-founded, which is precisely why the media — until now — felt obliged at least to mention them, if only to dismiss them as “smears.”

Now that he’s won, even that pretense of scrutiny is vanishing.

The Record the Media Are Erasing

These facts are not in dispute — and they have all been previously documented by HonestReporting and others:

  • May 2021 – Pro-Palestinian rally, Manhattan:
    Led BDS chants and attacked city officials who traveled to Israel.

    Aug 4–6, 2023 – DSA National Convention, Chicago:
    “When the boot of the NYPD is on your neck, it’s been laced by the IDF.” (Video resurfaced Oct 2025)

    2023–2025 – Multiple posts and interviews:
    Repeatedly labeled Israel an “apartheid” state and accused the US of “subsidizing genocide.”

    June 5, 2025 – Media interview:
    Refused to affirm Israel’s right to exist as a Jewish state, saying instead that he supports “a state with equal rights for all” and opposes any “hierarchy of citizenship… on the basis of religion.”

    June 8, 2025 – Cornell Tech boycott call:
    Urged a boycott over the university’s partnership with Israel’s Technion.

    June 2025 – NBC’s Meet the Press:
    Refused to condemn the slogan “globalize the intifada,” saying it’s “not language I use,” but stopping short of disavowing it.

    July 16, 2025 – Private meeting:
    Said he wouldn’t use the phrase “globalize the intifada” going forward, but defended it as “a protest slogan against occupation.”

    Oct 1–2, 2025 – ABC’s The View:
    Called the Gaza war a “genocide” to audience applause.

    Oct 27–28, 2025 – Debate fallout:
    Told an emotional story about a hijab-wearing “aunt” who stopped riding the subway after 9/11 over “Islamophobia” fears — but discrepancies later emerged, forcing him to walk back the claim and clarify that he had actually been referring to a cousin.

    Nov 4, 2025 – MSNBC’s Morning Joe:
    Declared, “I support BDS.”

The Whitewash in Real Time

Now that Mamdani has won, much of the media is pretending none of this ever happened.

What were once documented facts about his statements and positions are being rewritten as mere accusations by political opponents.

This is how media rehabilitation works: reframe the record, dilute the facts, and gaslight the public into thinking the extremism was never there.

Take CNN, which described Mamdani as having “reached out to New York’s Jewish community, which had been roiled by his criticisms of Israel’s government.”

Criticisms of Israel’s government?

Is claiming that Jews thousands of miles away are somehow responsible for police violence in New York — that “the boot of the NYPD is laced by the IDF” — merely a policy critique?

According to CNN, yes.

Meanwhile, the Wall Street Journal insisted Mamdani “says Israel has a right to exist,” while the New York Times wrote that he simply “declined to say it should be a Jewish state.”

That is dishonest framing.

Mamdani has explicitly rejected the legitimacy of Israel as a Jewish state — which is what Israel is. To say you support Israel’s existence only if it stops being Jewish is not to affirm its existence at all.

It’s like declaring support for Japan’s right to exist — just not as a country run by Japanese people or speaking Japanese.

Then there’s Rolling Stone, which bizarrely claimed Mamdani “hasn’t said or done anything antisemitic” and “did not call to ‘globalize the intifada.’”

Such media examples aren’t hard to find. They are everywhere now — each one sanding off the rough edges of Mamdani’s record.

The Image Laundering Has Begun

The mainstream press has shifted into image-rehabilitation mode, presenting Mamdani as a unifying progressive rather than a divisive ideologue.

This isn’t so much journalism as it is public relations for an extremist whose record is a matter of record.

Make no mistake: the same outlets now gaslighting Jewish readers about who Mamdani is are the ones already hinting that this “Muslim socialist mayor” could one day be president.

And for that to happen, his Jew-hating, pro-terror past must be scrubbed from memory.

Welcome to the memory-holing of Zohran Mamdani.

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

Palestinian Authority Admits It Prioritizes Terrorists Over Children’s Education

Lebanese President Joseph Aoun meets with Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas at the presidential palace in Baabda, Lebanon, May 21, 2025. Photo: REUTERS/Mohamed Azakir

It is more important to the Palestinian Authority (PA) to provide terrorists with millions of dollars in rewards than to provide Palestinian children with an education, admits a senior PA education official.

The official confirmed what Palestinian Media Watch (PMW) has long been reporting — that the PA prioritizes terrorists over its children’s education.

In an interview on PA television, the official declared that teachers refrain from working full-time because they are not paid their full salaries by the PA.

The teachers are not paid in full because Israel freezes the tax money that it collects for the PA as long as the PA financially rewards terror. This is known as Israel’s Anti Pay-for-Slay Law, which she called “theft of funds” by Israel.

What the official did not mention is that if the PA would not prioritize terror payments, there would be no Israeli deductions, and teachers would work full-time.

Click to play

Official PA TV host: “Dr. [Suhair Qassem], tell us more details about the obstacles facing the [education] system or the educational training programs.” …

PA National Institute for Educational Training Director-General Dr. Suhair Qassem: “If we talk about the reason why we are reducing the [teachers’] work hours, why the teacher refrains from working, the reason for this is the theft of funds [i.e., Israel’s freeze of PA taxes used for Pay-for-Slay].”

[Official PA TV, Educational Podcast, Oct. 15, 2025]

The PA teachers’ union had announced two months ago that if the PA did not pay the teachers their full salaries, they would only work three or four days a week. The PA has only paid 70% of the salaries of its employees, which include these teachers, since the start of the school year.

Therefore, teachers have not been working full time, and the children are only receiving a part-time education.

PMW has explained that were the PA to stop its “Pay-for-Slay” terror-rewards program, the PA’s entire financial crisis would be resolved and its employees would all be able to regularly receive their salaries in full.

The PA runs its Pay-for-Slay program with full knowledge that it will not have money left to pay its teachers. These terror salaries come to a tune of 30 million USD a month.

Earlier this year, PMW exposed that the PA was lying about having changed its system to become need-based and that families of prisoners and Martyrs continued to receive terror payments as they have in the past.

The PA’s financial crisis is self-inflicted — the result of its “terrorists first” ideology institutionalized from the very top by Mahmoud Abbas, who has repeated again and again that “even if we have [only] one penny left, it is for the prisoners and Martyrs.”

Ephraim D. Tepler is a contributor to Palestinian Media Watch (PMW). Itamar Marcus is the Founder and Director of PMW, where a version of this article first appeared.

Continue Reading

Copyright © 2017 - 2023 Jewish Post & News