Uncategorized
Israel’s dual crises, explained
If it feels like there’s an overload of news out of Israel — a sea of flags at a Jerusalem protest, police sirens outside of a synagogue — that’s because there is. Israel has been consumed by two escalating crises that both appear to be crescendoing at the same time. And even though they feel separate, they’re intertwined in at least one big way.
Allow us to explain:
Israel is simultaneously contending with two things: a wave of Palestinian terror attacks and Israeli military raids in the West Bank, and massive protests of a government plan to constrain the courts. Each of these two news stories is significant by itself, and would likely command the world’s attention if it were happening alone. But it’s not exactly a coincidence that they’re happening together.
What is happening right now?
The Israeli news that has captured the world’s notice over the past few weeks — and drawn criticism from President Joe Biden — is the ongoing right-wing effort to sap the power of Israel’s courts. The Israeli government that took power in December wants to take control over the appointment of judges and effectively remove the Supreme Court’s ability to strike down laws. Backers of the plan say the courts have essentially become an instrument of the country’s left-wing minority, leaving the right-wing majority unable to pass laws and govern.
But one poll found that just a quarter of Israelis support the plan in its current form, and hundreds of thousands have taken to the streets in protest. Satellite protests have sprung up in cities outside of Israel, organized by people who oppose Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu due to his ongoing trial for corruption.
Observers warn that the court reform will remove a key element of what makes democracies democratic — the separation of powers between the executive and judicial branches. Entrepreneurs in Israel’s tech sector are pulling their business out of the country in protest of the decision.
Nevertheless, in the face of a 100,000-person protest in Jerusalem on Monday, the government pushed the plan forward — though it has also signaled that it’s open to negotiations over the proposal.
Alongside the social unrest, a series of violent attacks have shaken the West Bank and eastern Jerusalem. Two Friday attacks by Palestinians in Israeli eastern Jerusalem neighborhoods — one in late January and one on Feb. 10 — killed 10 civilians, including three children.
The homes of the perpetrators will likely be demolished, and in response to the attacks, Israel authorized nine settlement outposts it had previously considered illegal. The United States condemned the decision.
On Monday, an Israeli border police officer died after being stabbed by a 13-year-old Palestinian and then being hit with friendly fire from a security guard. It’s the latest in a string of attacks by teenagers.
Those attacks have taken place against the backdrop of Israeli military raids in the West Bank that have killed dozens of Palestinians. According to Israel and its supporters, the dead are almost entirely militants. But last month, two civilians were killed in an Israeli raid on the northern West Bank City of Jenin that saw 10 total fatalities. Several teenagers have also been among the Palestinians killed. On Saturday, an Israeli settler shot and killed a Palestinian man following an altercation.
And this week, violence in the West Bank again received global attention when a staff writer for the New Yorker filmed an Israeli soldier beating a Palestinian activist in Hebron. The soldier was jailed for 10 days.
Are these two stories connected?
No, and yes.
On one hand, one of these stories is legislative and the other concerns the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The street protesters are, by and large, not coming out in opposition to Israel’s policies in the West Bank — and the Palestinian attackers almost definitely aren’t motivated by an opposition to judicial reform.
But on the other hand, both the judicial reform and the escalation are taking place under the watch of Netanyahu’s new government, the most right-wing in the country’s history. The same right-wing factions that are trumpeting the judicial reform are pushing for a harsher and more widespread crackdown on the Palestinian attacks — and looser rules of engagement for soldiers. Meanwhile, the same Supreme Court that the government wishes to restrain also rules on the legality of certain counterterrorism measures — including the demolition of attackers’ homes.
Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich, whose Religious Zionism party is leading the charge on constraining the courts, also tweeted on Monday that teenage Palestinian attackers “blossom in a violent and inciting society that brainwashes them with hatred of Israel.” He called on Israel to “exact a heavy price” for such incitement. His ally, far-right National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir, protested the military’s decision to punish the soldier who beat the Palestinian activist.
“I support the soldier who didn’t stay quiet with all my strength,” Ben-Gvir tweeted. “Soldiers need to receive support, not jail time.”
Is there going to be another intifada?
The second intifada — in which a series of Palestinian terror attacks in cafes, buses and other public spaces in the early 2000s killed approximately 1,000 Israelis — traumatized a generation of Israelis. Israeli retaliatory measures during that time killed thousands of Palestinians, and since then, hopes for peace have faded.
There have been waves of terrorism in the intervening decades, though none as intense as the intifada 20 years ago. It is too soon to tell whether attacks will rise to that level, though the violence does not appear to be ending anytime soon. According to Israeli reports, Palestinian terror groups are encouraging teenagers to carry out attacks on Israelis.
And members of Israel’s government are agitating for an escalation of counterterror measures in ways that recall Israeli actions during the intifada. In 2002, in response to the terror attacks, Israel launched Operation Defensive Shield, which saw Israeli soldiers enter Palestinian population centers in the West Bank to root out terror groups. Following Friday’s terror attack in Jerusalem, Ben Gvir proposed “Defensive Shield 2.”
“I am determined to bring about Defensive Shield 2 in Jerusalem,” he tweeted, pledging to “demolish illegal buildings, to arrest more than 150 targets and to spread out across the houses, to stop the incitement in the mosques, to stop those who owe tax money and much more.”
Is Israeli society collapsing?
Fears of a societal break are growing, and even President Isaac Herzog warned of looming disaster. Herzog, whose role is largely ceremonial, gave a landmark speech on Sunday begging for negotiations and compromise over the judicial reforms.
“For a while, we have no longer been in a political debate, but are on the brink of constitutional and social collapse,” Herzog, a former leader of the Labor opposition party who once ran against Netanyahu, said early in the speech. “I feel, we all feel, that we are in the moment before a clash, even a violent clash. The gunpowder barrel is about to explode.”
In response, the government delayed part of the bill’s legislative advance, but it remains to be seen whether there will be meaningful negotiations over its content. In the interim, Israelis are broadcasting fears of civil war. On Tuesday, former Prime Minister Naftali Bennett, an opponent of Netanyahu, shared a video from a Jewish think tank announcing a societal dialogue initiative.
Over the melody of Israel’s national anthem, the video reviews past moments of societal rupture — among them the assassination of Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin in 1995, and Israel’s withdrawal from Gaza a decade later — and then says, “February 2023: We did not begin a civil war.”
Netanyahu has responded to the protests by decrying calls for violence, accusing his opponents of fomenting anarchy, and calling for calm. But in a speech on Sunday, he reiterated that his government won a majority and intends to legislate accordingly.
“This government received the trust of the people in democratic elections, and a clear mandate from Israel’s citizens,” he said. “No one here can doubt that.”
It’s hard to say what the future will hold, but it’s clear that this moment has the potential to transform into something more dangerous than what has already taken place.
—
The post Israel’s dual crises, explained appeared first on Jewish Telegraphic Agency.
Uncategorized
The Guardian Clarifies ‘Misunderstanding’ About ‘Antisemitic’ Opinion Piece Targeting Israeli-Founded Bakery
April 4, 2025, London, England, United Kingdom: Exterior view of a Gail’s bakery in Covent Garden. Photo: ZUMA Press Wire via Reuters Connect
The Guardian edited an opinion piece on Tuesday about a popular Israeli-founded bakery in the United Kingdom after the column was widely criticized for claiming that the store’s location near a Palestinian bakery was an “an act of heavy-handed high street aggression.”
The opinion piece was originally published on Saturday and mentioned Gail’s Bakery, which was founded by British-Israeli baker Gail Mejia in the 1990s and turned into a café chain with the help of Israeli entrepreneur Ran Avidan.
Gail’s now has almost 200 locations across the UK, and neither Mejia nor Avidan are still involved in the business. Gail’s largest shareholder is the American venture capital firm Bain Capital, which invests in Israeli defense and cybersecurity companies. The firm signed an open letter in support of Israel after Hamas’s invasion of the Jewish state on Oct. 7, 2023, but Gail’s has repeatedly stated that it has no ties to any foreign entity or government outside of the UK.
A newly opened branch of Gail’s in London’s Archway area had its windows smashed twice within a week of opening, and the store was vandalized with graffiti that read “Free Gaza,” “reject corporate Zionism,” and “Boycott Gail’s Funds Israeli Tech.”” An anti-Israel demonstration also took place at the same Gail’s location, according to reports. No arrests have been made for the vandalisms.
The Guardian opinion piece originally published on Saturday by the publication’s columnist Jonathan Liew is titled, “A corner of north London where food has become a battleground in the Israel-Gaza war.” It claimed Gail’s “very presence” in the Archway neighborhood near a Palestinian cafe called Cafe Metro was “symbolic” of “heavy-handed high-street aggression.” The accusation was made in a paragraph that said Bain Capital “invests heavily” in Israeli security companies.
“Campaigners point out that its parent company, Bain Capital, invests heavily in military technology, including Israeli security companies,” the piece previously read. “And so even though Gail’s describes itself as ‘a British business with no specific connections to any country or government outside the UK’, its very presence 20 meters away from a small independent Palestinian café feels quietly symbolic, an act of heavy-handed high-street aggression.”
On Tuesday, the claim about Gail’s “heavy-handed high street aggression” was moved in the article and now follows accusations about the bakery “accelerating gentrification and squeezing out smaller outlets.” The article also now says that Gail’s is acting just “like the multinationals that landed before it.” The mention about Bain Capital and Gail’s having “no specific connections to any country or government outside of the UK” has been moved to its own paragraph.
Liew also wrote that Cafe Metro was “a marker of the Palestinian identity that Israel’s bombs and snipers are so intent on erasing” and described Gail’s as a “predator” in the neighborhood. Those references have not been edited or removed from the article.
Jonathan Liew’s opinion piece for The Guardian before it was edited. Photo: Screenshot
Jonathan Liew’s opinion piece for The Guardian after edits were made on March 17. Photo: Screenshot
A note from the editor, posted at the end of the article, explained that the reference to Gail’s new location in London mimicking “an act of heavy-handed high street aggression” has been “repositioned to clarify it meant to refer to the described fears about the chain’s impact on small traders.” The note also tried to clarify the notion among critics that the article mitigated the recent acts of vandalism targeting Gail’s.
“A comment contrasting activism that is capable of influencing global events with ‘small acts of petty symbolism,’ which was not intended to minimize local vandalism but rather to suggest its misdirected futility, has been removed to avoid misunderstanding,” it said. Editors also removed from the article its introduction, which read: “A smashed window here, a provocative sticker there. In an age when protest feels increasingly meaningless, it’s no wonder that acts of petty symbolism are on the rise.”
Before the changes were made, the article had been accused of perpetuating antisemitism and was heavily criticized by Jewish groups, pro-Israel activists, politicians, radio hosts, Gail Bakery’s chief executive Tom Molnar, and journalists, including Jewish staff members at The Guardian. Gail’s supporters claimed the article inappropriately targeted the bakery chain because it happened to open a branch in close proximity to a Palestinian cafe.
The article has also been accused of attempting to justify the vandalism it has faced recently.
The British charity Campaign Against Antisemitism said the piece was “encouraging anti-Israeli sentiment among its readers,” while the UK’s Conservative Party leader Kemi Badenoch called the article “antisemitic,” “utterly ridiculous,” and “appalling.” The media-monitoring organization CAMERA UK said the column was “downplaying the campaign of intimidation against a Jewish-linked business while presenting activists in a sympathetic light.”
Alex Gandler, the spokesperson for Israel’s Embassy in the UK, said the piece was “an astonishing exercise in bigotry disguised as moral commentary.”
“Beneath its surface lies a familiar and ugly trope: the re-packaging of antisemitic prejudice in fashionable political language … the insinuation that Jewish success or presence represents some form of encroachment by powerful ‘global’ forces,” he added. “For a newspaper that presents itself as a guardian of liberal values, publishing such rhetoric is deeply disappointing. Opinion pages should encourage debate and scrutiny. They should not revive centuries-old stereotypes under the guise of social commentary. This piece should never have been written, and it certainly should never have been published.”
The Board of Deputies of British Jews said: “It is not acceptable to relate to the opening of a bakery as an act of ‘aggression’ … Most people will find this article, seeped in tropes and innuendos, as deeply insidious, and will want to know why The Guardian thinks an op-ed seemingly justifying tensions between communities has a place on its pages.”
A pro-Israel protest was also held outside The Guardian headquarters in London on Wednesday in response to the offensive opinion piece.
The edits to the article were insufficient for many observers, including Camera UK. “So, it was all just a silly ‘misunderstanding,’” it posted on X. “No apology. Nothing to see here. And, certainly, NO antisemitism.”
“That is not how you correct this travesty of an ‘opinion,” Gandler wrote on X. “Correction in hindsight, after this failure should be a complete withdrawal, not a rewriting of history.”
Tom Molnar, the bakery chain’s chief executive, responded to the article on Monday.
“We live in a democracy that welcomes different opinions, but we will not accept hate and intimidation in our bakeries,” he said, as reported by The Times. “We are a neighborhood bakery that is on a mission to feed more people, better. We are firm believers that a healthy high street is a diverse one made up of many different businesses, from many different backgrounds, each playing its part. We want to serve the best possible food to our communities, and the vandalism we experienced in Archway serves as a distraction from doing just that.”
Uncategorized
WikiLeaks: From Classified Database to an Anti-Israel Propaganda Platform
WikiLeaks Julian Assange in an interview with Fox News. Photo: Screenshot.
Founded in 2006 as a platform for leaked documents exposing war, espionage, and corruption, WikiLeaks built its reputation on radical transparency.
Despite the controversy surrounding its publication of classified material, the organization gained global recognition, winning numerous awards and becoming best known for releasing documents related to the US wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.
Today, its X account tells a very different story.
With more than 5.6 million followers, WikiLeaks has increasingly become a hub for anti-Israel conspiracy theories — content that bears little resemblance to its original mission of publishing classified material.
Rather than exposing new information, the account now appears to construct narratives about Israel and the Jewish people using documents that are neither classified nor newly revealed, amplified through carefully timed posts.
The pattern is clear. Two months into Israel’s war with Hamas, WikiLeaks resurfaced a document it first published in 2010 claiming that an “Israeli intelligence chief encouraged Hamas’ takeover of the Gaza Strip” — a framing that shifts blame for the conflict onto Israel.
Since the start of 2026, the account has posted 15 times (excluding replies). Of those, 11 focused entirely on Israel or the Jewish people.
Its most recent example is particularly telling. WikiLeaks “leaked” a document dated July 21, 1947, written by US President Harry S. Truman, which includes derogatory remarks about Jews.
What the account failed to mention is that the document was made public in 2003 and is therefore not a leak. Nor did it provide the broader historical context, including Truman’s decision to recognize the State of Israel immediately after its founding.
Instead, the post highlights a willingness to promote inflammatory material to an audience primed to accept it. In doing so, WikiLeaks helps sustain an online echo chamber where misleading anti-Israel narratives circulate with little scrutiny.
This dynamic is amplified by high-profile activists such as Shaun King and Susan Abulhawa, who readily repeat and disseminate such claims to large audiences, transforming misleading posts into widely shared talking points.
The trend is not new. In October 2025, WikiLeaks helped spread the false claim that pro-Israel influencers were being paid $7,000 per post to “increase global influence.” Yet the documents cited provided no evidence for such payments or any breakdown of how funds were allocated.
WikiLeaks’ fixation on Israel is not limited to its social media output. Its founder, Julian Assange, has his own record of anti-Israel activism, raising further questions about the organization’s impartiality.
In 2012, Assange launched The Julian Assange Show, produced by the Russian state-controlled network RT. His first guest was Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah, whom Assange allowed to portray Israel as an “illegal state” while framing media coverage as a “war” against Hezbollah.
Assange’s activism has also been taken to the streets. More recently, in August 2025, Assange was seen leading a pro-Palestinian protest in Sydney that featured flags of terrorist organizations and imagery of their leaders.
If WikiLeaks was founded to expose censored information in the public interest, its current trajectory raises serious questions about its purpose. Rather than prioritizing transparency, the organization now appears increasingly focused on amplifying anti-Israel narratives detached from its original mission.
With a platform reaching millions – and bolstered by influential amplifiers – misleading claims are circulated and legitimized with little scrutiny. What emerges is not a commitment to truth, but an ecosystem in which information is selectively curated to reinforce an anti-Israel worldview.
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.
Uncategorized
Argentine Jewish Community Commemorates Deadly Israeli Embassy Bombing as Justice Remains Elusive, 34 Years Later
A display of posters at the AMIA Jewish center in Buenos Aires, Argentina, highlighting the plight of hostages seized by Hamas. Photo: Reuters/Añeli Pablo
Argentina’s Jewish community on Tuesday marked the 34th anniversary of the devastating bombing of the Israeli Embassy in Buenos Aires, a brutal attack that still casts a long shadow of unresolved grief and unanswered questions.
On March 17, 1992, a truck bomb exploded outside the embassy, ripping through the building and killing 29 people while injuring more than 240 others in one of Argentina’s deadliest terror attacks.
The blast was widely attributed to operatives linked to the Iran-backed Lebanese terrorist group Hezbollah with support from Tehran, though no one has ever been brought to justice for the tragedy.
A 34 años del atentado contra la Embajada de Israel en Buenos Aires, recordamos a las 29 víctimas asesinadas el 17 de marzo de 1992 y rendimos homenaje a todos los afectados por este brutal acto terrorista.
Esclarecer este ataque sigue siendo un deber irrenunciable de nuestra… pic.twitter.com/OXTUuTiL8w
— Casa Rosada (@CasaRosada) March 17, 2026
Just two years later, the country was shaken by another horrific attack when a bomb destroyed the Argentine Israelite Mutual Association (AMIA) Jewish community center, killing 85 people and injuring over 300 others.
More than three decades on, those responsible for either atrocity have yet to be brought to justice, leaving survivors and families still searching for accountability.
On Tuesday, the Israeli Embassy in Argentina hosted a remembrance ceremony where officials, including Argentine President Javier Milei, gathered to mark the anniversary, pay respects to the victims, and call for justice that has long been delayed.
“There can be no truce against terrorism. Iran despises life and seeks to destroy freedom,” Milei said during a speech at the ceremony.
“Argentina is Israel’s ally, and we are bound by the same values,” he continued.
The Argentine leader also reaffirmed his steadfast support for the United States and Israel in the ongoing war with Iran, describing it as a critical turning point and highlighting his dedication to international cooperation.
The Delegation of Argentine Israelite Associations (DAIA), the country’s Jewish umbrella organization, also paid respect to the victims while emphasizing the community’s enduring strength and unity.
“Memory is not just remembrance: it is a collective responsibility to build a society without impunity, where terrorism has no place,” DAIA wrote in a post on X.
A 34 años del atentado perpetrado contra la Embajada de Israel en Argentina, acompañamos un nuevo acto de memoria, recogimiento y compromiso.
Recordamos a las víctimas, abrazamos a sus familias y renovamos el pedido de justicia, que sigue siendo una deuda pendiente.
La memoria… pic.twitter.com/NhZZrUT71c
— DAIA (@DAIAArgentina) March 17, 2026
In 2024, Argentina’s second-highest court ruled that the 1994 attack in Buenos Aires was “organized, planned, financed, and executed under the direction of the authorities of the Islamic State of Iran, within the framework of Islamic Jihad.”
Argentine authorities concluded that the terror attack was carried out by Hezbollah terrorists acting on what they described as “a political and strategic design” orchestrated by Iran.
The court additionally ruled that Iran was also responsible for the truck bombing of the Israeli embassy.
Argentine investigators concluded that the 1992 bombing was likely carried out in retaliation for then-President Carlos Menem’s cancellation of three agreements with Iran involving nuclear equipment and technology.
Despite Argentina’s longstanding belief that Hezbollah carried out the devastating attack at Iran’s request, the 1994 bombing has never been claimed or officially solved.
Meanwhile, Tehran has consistently denied any involvement and has refused to arrest or extradite any suspects.
Earlier this month, the lead prosecutor in the case requested the indictment of 10 Iranian and Lebanese nationals suspected of involvement in the deadly attack.
Among those named was Ahmad Vahidi, who was recently appointed the new head of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), an Iranian military force and internationally designated terrorist organization.
He replaced Mohammad Pakpour, who was killed during the US-Israeli military campaign against Iran, which has resulted in the death of several high-ranking officials.
In 1994, Vahidi commanded the IRGC’s Quds Force, which is responsible for managing Iran’s proxies and terrorist operations abroad.
Despite Interpol issuing red notices for their arrest, neither Iran nor Lebanon has handed over any suspects, allowing them to remain beyond the reach of Argentine authorities.
For the first time, Argentina has now ordered that suspects be tried in absentia following a legal change in March that removed the requirement for defendants to be physically present in court.