Uncategorized
Israel’s home demolitions after terrorist attacks, explained
(JTA) – Less than a hour after a terror attack in eastern Jerusalem on Friday killed three people, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu delivered a succinct message: Destroy the Palestinian attacker’s home.
“Prime Minister Netanyahu has decided to take immediate action to seal and demolish the home of the terrorist,” said the statement from Netanyahu’s office.
Home demolition orders have almost become a matter of course following Palestinian attacks. They don’t usually make headlines, nor do they tend to spark public outcry. For decades, Israel has used the tactic as a routine instrument of punishment, claiming that the effect of tearing down the homes of terrorists deters future attacks.
But critics question that claim, and say that home demolitions constitute collective punishment that violates international law. At a moment of deep political strife in Israel, the home demolition practice, like many others related to security, generates little political opposition. And while the Israeli Supreme Court, whose power Israel’s right-wing government hopes to limit, can delay home demolitions, it almost always ultimately permits them to go forward.
Here’s how the practice of Israeli home demolition began, how it’s viewed in Israel and abroad, and how it may be changing under Israel’s new government.
Why does Israel destroy the homes of terrorists?
Israel began demolishing homes of Palestinian attackers after it captured the West Bank and eastern Jerusalem, along with other territories, in the 1967 Six Day War. Since then, according to a 2019 assessment by the Israel Democracy Institute, Israel has demolished some 2,000 homes due to terrorism. The demolitions have taken place in the West Bank and eastern Jerusalem, not within Israel’s internationally recognized borders.
Israel claims that demolishing the homes of terrorists acts as a deterrent, a rationale cited last month in a bill introduced by lawmaker Eliahu Revivo, a member of Netanyahu’s Likud Party who also wants to deter attacks by deporting the families of terrorists.
“The national security establishment and the Israeli army have conducted research over the years into dozens of suicide attackers, and it emerged that the one deterrent for suicide attackers is what the consequences for their families will be after the attack,” the text of the bill said.
Home demolitions were largely suspended in 2005 after the Israel Defense Forces found that the practice had no discernible deterrent effect. The demolitions were sporadically reinstituted a few years later and fully brought back by Netanyahu in November 2014 during a wave of Palestinian attacks.
A 2010 research paper by political scientists at Northwestern University and Hebrew University suggested that home demolition works as a deterrent. The authors of the study based their findings on an examination of home demolitions in the five years prior to the army’s 2005 suspension, a period that coincided with the second intifada.
“We show that punitive house demolitions (those targeting Palestinian suicide terrorists and terror operatives) cause an immediate, significant decrease in the number of suicide attacks,” the paper said. “The effect dissipates over time and by geographic distance.”
This year, Netanyahu’s new government, the most right-wing in Israeli history, has indicated it will accelerate and expand the demolition of the homes of terrorists. It recently ordered the closing-off of an apartment belonging to the family of a 13-year-old who shot and wounded two Israelis near Jerusalem’s Old City. The move was unusual because Israel had previously reserved home demolition for attackers who killed people.
Does Israel demolish the homes of Jewish terrorists?
No. The Palestinian family of a boy murdered by a Jewish terrorist sued to have his killer’s home destroyed. The High Court in 2017 rejected the lawsuit, saying too much time had passed since the 2014 murder. The government argued that deterrence was not necessary in the case of Jewish terrorism, because, in the words of Judge Neal Hendel, Jewish terrorists are “a minority of a minority of a minority.” The Israeli government counted a total of 16 Jewish attacks of terrorism in 2015, according to the Jerusalem Post. Israeli Arab politicians, including Knesset member Ahmed Tibi, had called on the government to demolish the Jewish terrorist’s house as a matter of fair treatment.
Is demolishing terrorists’ homes legal?
Yes, according to Israel. No, according to experts in international law.
Israel bases its argument on a regulation from 1945, when Britain controlled what is now Israel, that was carried over into Israeli law when the state was established in 1948. It is known as “Defense regulation (emergency) 1945, regulation 119.”
The regulation is broadly written, allowing a “A Military Commander” to destroy the home of “anyone who offended, or attempted an offense, or assisted offenders or abetted offenders after the fact,” as determined by a military court.
Multiple international law experts say that home demolition is illegal under international law because it is a form of collective punishment, which is banned by the Geneva Conventions. Israel has long argued that the Geneva Conventions do not apply to its presence in territories it has captured, because the land in question was not the internationally recognized territory of any state prior to 1967.
The Biden administration also considers home demolitions to be collective punishment. “We attach a good deal of priority to this, knowing that the home of an entire family shouldn’t be demolished for the action of one individual,” State Department spokesman Ned Price said in 2021.
Israeli human rights groups, including B’tselem and the Israeli Committee Against House Demolitions, agree with international scholars that the practice violates international law. B’tselem cites both the Fourth Geneva Convention and a verse in Deuteronomy that reads, “Parents shall not be put to death for children, nor children be put to death for parents: they shall each be put to death only for their own crime.”
Who owns the land once a home is demolished?
Under the 1945 regulation, military authorities maintain control of the land, and it reverts to the original owners — if they are present — once military authorities leave.
How long does it take for a home demolition to take place? What happens to the family?
Generally, the military consults with Israel’s intelligence services before ordering a home demolition.In the case of high-profile attacks, however, the order may come down immediately, as it did on Friday. Families have 48 hours to appeal a demolition to the military commander or another relevant authority.
However, Israel’s Supreme Court has reserved the right to review demolition orders. This may delay demolition for months or years, but B’Tselem reports that in the majority of cases, the court ultimately upholds the demolition. In one notable case in 2018, the court stopped the demolition after the family presented evidence showing that the assailant suffered from a mental illness.
Homes may be demolished by bulldozers. Apartments or rooms are generally filled with cement, rendering them unlivable. Families sometimes split up among relatives, at least in the near term, according to a United Nations report.
According to the Jerusalem Post, the army commission that recommended ending the practice in 2005 reported that families of the terrorists often rebuild their homes with compensation funds from the Palestinian Authority and other sources. The Palestinian Authority pays monthly stipends to the families of Palestinians imprisoned by Israel or killed while committing violent attacks. Israel and its advocates decry the payments as an incentive for terrorism.
How many home demolitions have taken place? Are homes demolished for reasons other than deterrence?
According to the Israel Democracy Institute, more than 50 homes “have been either fully or partially demolished” between 2014 and 2019 as a deterrent to terrorism. Hamoked, an Israeli human rights group, placed the total since 2014 at 75, according to Haaretz.
Israel has demolished a far greater number of Palestinian buildings due to lack of a building permit. Palestinian groups and Israeli human rights organizations argue that Palestinians face discrimination in obtaining such permits. Israel also has a policy of demolishing Palestinian dwellings for being built in a closed military zone.
The same academic paper that concluded demolishing the homes of suicide attackers was an effective deterrent also found that home demolitions for other reasons — including as a preventative measure — spurred an increase in terror attacks.
—
The post Israel’s home demolitions after terrorist attacks, explained appeared first on Jewish Telegraphic Agency.
Uncategorized
ADL Ranks Grok as the Worst AI Chatbot at Detecting Antisemitism, Rates Claude as the Best
A 3D-printed miniature model of Elon Musk and the X logo are seen in this illustration taken Jan. 23, 2025. Photo: REUTERS/Dado Ruvic/Illustration
The Anti-Defamation League (ADL) on Wednesday released its AI Index, which ranks popular large language model (LLM) chatbot programs according to their effectiveness at detecting antisemitism, anti-Zionism, and other forms of extremism.
The watchdog group found a wide variability in performance among the six models it analyzed. Researchers applied a variety of tests to xAI’s Grok, Meta’s Llama, Alphabet’s Gemini, Chinese hedge fund High Flyer’s DeepSeek, OpenAI’s ChatGPT, and the clear winner of them all on recognizing hate, Anthropic’s Claude.
The ADL created an “overall performance model” which combined the results of multiple forms of testing. The group awarded Claude the highest score with 80 points, while Grok sat at the bottom with 21. ChatGPT came in second with 57, followed by DeepSeek (50), Gemini (49) and Llama at 31.
Researchers tested the apps between August and October of last year, striving to explore as an “average user” would utilize the programs, as opposed to a bad actor actively seeking to create harmful content. They performed more than 25,000 chats across 37 sub-categories and assessed the results with both human and AI evaluations.
The report also distinguished between anti-Jewish, traditional antisemitism directed at individual Jews, and anti-Zionist antisemitism directed at the Jewish state. A third category of analysis focused on more general “extremism” and considered questions about conspiracy theories and other narratives which run across the political spectrum.
Among its key findings, the ADL discovered that each app had problems.
“All six LLMs showed gaps in their ability to detect bias against Jews, Zionists/Zionism, and to identify extremism, often failing to detect and refute harmful or false theories and narratives,” the report said. “All models could benefit from improvement when responding to the type of harmful content tested.”
Researchers also found that “some models actively generate harmful content in response to relatively straightforward prompts, such as YouTube script personas saying ‘Jewish-controlled central banks are the puppet masters behind every major economic collapse.’”
The AI Index “reveals a troubling reality: every major AI model we tested demonstrates at least some gaps in addressing bias against Jews and Zionists and all struggle with extremist content,” ADL chief executive officer Jonathan Greenblatt said in a statement. “When these systems fail to challenge or reproduce harmful narratives, they don’t just reflect bias — they can amplify and may even help accelerate their spread. We hope that this index can serve as a roadmap for AI companies to improve their detection capabilities.”
Oren Segal, the ADL’s senior vice president of counter-extremism and intelligence, explained that the new research “fills a critical gap in AI safety research by applying domain expertise and standardized testing to antisemitic, anti-Zionist, and extremist content.” He warned that “no AI system we tested was fully equipped to handle the full scope of antisemitic and extremist narratives users may encounter. This Index provides concrete, measurable benchmarks that companies, buyers, and policymakers can use to drive meaningful improvement.”
Grok — the chatbot ranked lowest on the ADL’s list and directed by its billionaire owner Elon Musk to offer “anti-woke” and “politically incorrect” responses — has faced considerable criticism for last year’s expressions of antisemitism which included answers self-declaring the program as “MechaHitler.”
More recently, Musk and Grok have come under fire from government officials around the world objecting to a recent upgrade which enabled users to create “deepfake” sexualized images which stripped people featured in uploaded images.
The European Union opened an investigation this week with a goal of determining “whether the company properly assessed and mitigated risks associated with the deployment of Grok’s functionalities into X in the EU. This includes risks related to the dissemination of illegal content in the EU, such as manipulated sexually explicit images, including content that may amount to child sexual abuse material.”
Henna Virkkunen, the EU’s executive vice president for tech sovereignty, security, and democracy, decried the fact that Grok can be used for sexual exploitation.
“Sexual deepfakes of women and children are a violent, unacceptable form of degradation,” Virkkunen said. “With this investigation, we will determine whether X has met its legal obligations under the DSA [Digital Services Act], or whether it treated rights of European citizens – including those of women and children – as collateral damage of its service.”
On Monday, a bipartisan group of 35 attorneys general sent a letter to xAI demanding the disabling of the image undressing feature.
Pennsylvania Attorney General Dave Sunday led the effort.
“The time to ensure people are protected from powerful tools like generative AI isn’t after harm has been caused. You shouldn’t wait for a car crash to put up guardrails,” Sunday said. “This behavior by users was all too predictable and should have been addressed before its release. Tech companies have a responsibility to ensure their tools cannot be used in these destructive ways before they launch their product.”
France also opened an investigation into Grok in November 2025, following outputs promoting Holocaust denial in the French language, a criminal violation of the country’s strict laws against promoting lies about the Nazis’ mass murder of 6 million Jews.
Steven Stalinsky, executive director of the Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI), has long raised the alarm about the threat of LLMs fueling antisemitism and terrorism. He warned that “over two years later, the problem is demonstrably worse, not better, raising a fundamental question about trust.”
Stalinsky stated that “assurances from AI companies alone are insufficient.”
In response to the ADL’s latest report, Danny Barefoot, senior director of the group’s Ratings and Assessments Institute, said in a statement that “as AI systems increasingly influence what people see, believe, and share, rigorous, evidence-based accountability is no longer optional — it’s essential.”
Uncategorized
Palestinian Authority Leader Attacks PA’s ‘Rampant Corruption’
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
When even Tawfiq Tirawi — a senior leader of the Palestinian Authority (PA)’s ruling party, Fatah, and the former director and co-founder of its General Intelligence Service — says the system is rotten to the core, it is a stark indication of just how deeply corruption is embedded in the PA.
In a public letter posted on January 20, 2026, Tirawi accused the Palestinian Authority of systemic, institutionalized corruption so entrenched that it now enjoys “security and immunity.”
Addressing PA ruler Mahmoud Abbas, Tirawi described years of futile appeals to the PA leadership regarding “numerous cases of corruption and injustice rampant in our institutions.” According to Tirawi, even when Abbas personally referred these cases to PA prime ministers or the attorney general, nothing happened.
Tirawi cited various issues, namely that corruption had spread across the PA government and the judicial system; that a corruption network now operates with protection and immunity; that influential figures are involved in the takeover of public and private lands and assets; that experts and senior public employees who documented these crimes faced threats and intimidation; and that institutions meant to protect the public interest have become a “protective umbrella for the corrupt.”
Even more striking is Tirawi’s threat that if the situation continues, he will expose names and details of corrupt officials to the Palestinian public and international media, calling for a “public, national, and moral trial” to replace a judiciary that no longer functions.
Posted text:“An open letter to [PA] President Mahmoud Abbas
For many years, I have repeatedly approached you with an open heart and demanded your intervention in numerous cases of corruption and injustice that are rampant in our institutions… Some of these cases were referred by you to the [PA] prime ministers and others to the attorney general, but the result unfortunately remained the same: A lack of any concrete action to protect the people or put an end to this severe negligence.
The hands of the influential and the thieves have spread and reached all parts of the PA, at the level of the government and the judicial system, to the point that the corruption network now operates with security and immunity. Its deeds have reached severe levels of threat and intimidation, to the point of threatening senior [PA] public employees, experts, and scholars who have prepared documented reports proving the involvement of influential figures in the takeover of public and private lands and assets, amid criminal behavior that harms the national dignity and core moral values…
While I believe that part of the truth has been conveyed to you, the fact that it has not been fully and clearly told remains a responsibility that cannot be ignored.
In light of the severe collapse of the judicial system’s role, the paralysis of the system of accountability, and the transformation of some institutions that were supposed to protect the public interest into a protective umbrella for the corrupt, I declare clearly that the era of silence is over. If this situation continues, I will not hesitate to expose all the documented issues and cases, including names and details, to the Palestinian public and through local and international media outlets, to enable a public, national, and moral trial of the corrupt, given that the judicial system is not fulfilling its national and constitutional duties.” [emphasis added]
[Fatah Central Committee member Tawfiq Tirawi, Facebook page, Jan. 20, 2026]
While Tirawi’s letter is intriguing, as it reveals what the PA truly is on the inside, do not be fooled. Even if it triggers limited administrative changes, Tirawi himself remains fully committed to the PA’s terror-promoting worldview.
And as Palestinian Media Watch has frequently explained, real reform can only begin when the PA completely ends its support for terrorism by halting incitement, funding, rewards, and the glorification of murderers.
Ephraim D. Tepler is a researcher at Palestinian Media Watch (PMW), where a version of this article first appeared.
Uncategorized
Chicago Adopts IHRA Definition of Antisemitism
Chicago, United States, on Aug. 22, 2024. Photo: J.W. Hendricks/NurPhoto via Reuters Connect
The City Council of Chicago, Illinois, voted on Tuesday to adopt the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance’s (IHRA) definition of antisemitism, becoming one of many governments and municipalities to affirm its utility as a reference tool for identifying antisemitic hate crimes and a safeguard of Jewish civil rights.
The measure was passed on International Holocaust Remembrance Day, which commemorated the 81st anniversary of the day when Jewish prisoners were liberated from Auschwitz, the Nazis’ deadliest extermination camp during World War II.
“Chicago now proudly joins a global consensus of more than 1,200 entities worldwide, including the United States, 37 US state governments, and 98 city and country bodies who have adopted this definition,” city council member Debra Silverstein, alderman of the 50th Ward, said in a statement praising the adoption. “At a time when antisemitic hate crimes are surging locally, this unanimous City Council action sends an unmistakable message that anti-Jewish hate has no place in Chicago.”
IHRA — an intergovernmental organization comprising dozens of countries including the US and Israel — adopted the “working definition” of antisemitism in 2016. Since then, the definition has been widely accepted by Jewish groups and lawmakers across the political spectrum, and it is now used by hundreds of governing institutions, including the US State Department, European Union, and United Nations.
According to the definition, antisemitism “is a certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed as hatred toward Jews. Rhetorical and physical manifestations of antisemitism are directed toward Jewish or non-Jewish individuals and/or their property, toward Jewish community institutions and religious facilities.” It provides 11 specific, contemporary examples of antisemitism in public life, the media, schools, the workplace, and in the religious sphere. Beyond classic antisemitic behavior associated with the likes of the medieval period and Nazi Germany, the examples include denial of the Holocaust and newer forms of antisemitism targeting Israel such as demonizing the Jewish state, denying its right to exist, and holding it to standards not expected of any other democratic state.
Chicago’s embrace of the definition comes amid a historic surge in antisemitic incidents across the US and the world.
In 2024, as reported by the Anti-Defamation League’s (ADL) latest annual audit, there were 9,354 antisemitic incidents — an average of 25.6 a day — across the US, creating an atmosphere of hate not experienced in the nearly thirty years since the ADL began tracking such data in 1979. Incidents of harassment, vandalism, and assault all increased by double digits, and for the first time ever a majority of outrages — 58 percent — were related to the existence of Israel as the world’s only Jewish state.
The ADL also reported dramatic rises in incidents on college campuses, which saw the largest growth in 2024. The 1,694 incidents tallied by the ADL amounted to an 84 percent increase over the previous year. Additionally, antisemites were emboldened to commit more offenses in public in 2024 than they did in 2023, perpetrating 19 percent more attacks on Jewish people, pro-Israel demonstrators, and businesses perceived as being Jewish-owned or affiliated with Jews.
Illinois alone saw the eighth most antisemitic incidents in the country with 336, a 59 percent increase from the previous year which led the nation.
The ADL’s “Heat Map,” which tracks hate crimes in real time, shows 105 antisemitic hate incidents recorded in 2025.
In one disturbing incident in the Highland Park suburb of Chicago, an antisemitic letter threatening violence was mailed to a resident’s home. So severe were its contents that the FBI and the Illinois Terrorism and Intelligence Center were called to the scene to establish that there was no imminent danger, according to local news outlets. Later, the local government shuttered all religious institutions as a precautionary measure.
With Tuesday’s measure, Chicago became the second largest US city to adopt the IHRA definition. However, it is now the largest to have it on the books as New York City under its new mayor, Zohran Mamdani, recently revoked it along with a series of other executive orders enacted by his predecessor to combat antisemitism
US Jewish groups sharply criticized the move.
Israel’s Foreign Ministry similarly lambasted the reversal as an invitation for intensified bigotry against Jewish New Yorkers, saying, “On his very first day as New York City mayor, Mamdani shows his true face: He scraps the IHRA definition of antisemitism and lifts restrictions on boycotting Israel. This isn’t leadership. It’s antisemitic gasoline on an open fire.”
The definition could have been problematic for Mamdani, a far-left democratic socialist and avowed anti-Zionist who has made anti-Israel activism a cornerstone of his political career and been widely accused of promoting antisemitic rhetoric. A supporter of boycotting all entities tied to Israel, he has repeatedly refused to recognize Israel’s right to exist as a Jewish state; routinely accused Israel of “apartheid” and “genocide”; and refused to clearly condemn the phrase “globalize the intifada,” which has been used to call for violence against Jews and Israelis worldwide.
Follow Dion J. Pierre @DionJPierre.
