Uncategorized
New all-digital Hunger Museum charts US response to food insecurity through a Jewish lens
An 1888 portrait of Ellen Swallow Richards and her all-female home economics class at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. A 1915 campaign poster that maps out the 20 states providing food assistance for widows and single mothers. A 1940 photo of Japanese-American children eating hot dogs at a World War II internment camp in Idaho. A video of the 1950 launch of the “Betty Crocker TV Show.”
These are among the fascinating artifacts and mementos on exhibit at the Hunger Museum, a new barrier-breaking museum that seeks to inform and raise awareness about hunger in the United States.
A virtual project of MAZON: A Jewish Response to Hunger, the museum’s six galleries chronicle well over a century of U.S. hunger and anti-hunger public policy, from the Civil War through 9/11, the 2018 government shutdown and the COVID-19 pandemic.
The all-digital Hunger Museum was conceived by Abby J. Leibman, president and CEO of MAZON, a national organization based in Los Angeles. It took three years to put together and opened on March 9.
“The Hunger Museum began as an idea, and it has exceeded my wildest expectations,” said Leibman, who has led MAZON since 2011. “It’s visually stunning and incredibly immersive, as if you’re in an actual exhibit space. There’s so much to learn as you move through the museum’s galleries and artifacts.”
The website, developed by Dan and Tamara Zimmerman of Loyal Design, has six galleries with multiple exhibits and hundreds of webpages. Leibman says there is growing interest in and awareness of the issue of hunger among Americans generally — and U.S. Jews in particular.
“Because of the pandemic, hunger registered in a far more present way than it ever has before — and not only because millions of people instantly became food-insecure as jobs were lost and businesses closed,” she said. “It was also evident in media coverage and photos of literally hundreds of cars waiting in line for free boxes of groceries.”
MAZON, which produced the all-virtual Hunger Museum, envisions it as on the National Mall in Washington, D.C. (Courtesy of Mazon)
Besides its galleries, the Hunger Museum, like any physical museum, also features venues such as a multistory lobby overlooking an atrium, an auditorium (for online events), the Terrace Restaurant and a Wishing Tree inspired by Yoko Ono’s Wish Tree that allows visitors to leave a wish for those who struggle with hunger. However, at this museum, all these features are virtual. There’s also the SNAP Café — where virtual diners can select dishes from the five major food groups and calculate how much that meal would cost, and whether they could afford it if they were on SNAP (the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program formerly known as food stamps).
“This is really an innovative initiative, not only in the way it’s being delivered as a virtual museum, but also because of the story it tells about hunger in this country — and our response — over a 100-year period,” said Mia Hubbard, vice-president of programs at MAZON, which has 23 full-time employees and an annual budget of $8.5 million.
“Food insecurity is a pervasive and persistent part of our history, and that becomes clear as you go through the galleries,” said Hubbard.
The Hunger Museum aims not only to raise awareness and inform people about hunger’s history in America, but also to create a Jewish call to action — to inspire people to help fight hunger.
“We are focused on social justice and repairing the world, and since hunger has been an enduring part of the American social condition, it requires constant vigilance,” Hubbard said. “Part of MAZON’s role is to rally the Jewish community, and in turn, create the political will to end hunger.”
Naama Haviv, MAZON’s vice-president of community engagement, said that while plenty of brick-and-mortar museums have created online exhibits, nobody has ever done an entirely virtual museum before.
The most significant changes in American society on hunger issues occurred during the 1960s and ‘70s, Haviv said, when bipartisan efforts shifted public understanding and political will to address hunger more comprehensively.
“Americans started to realize that hunger was not a personal moral failing. It was systemic and based on people’s lack of access to economic security, and oftentimes lack of access to government safety net programs,” Haviv said.
She added that hunger in America can be solved because it was solved once before, citing household surveys showing that just 3% of Americans went hungry in 1969. Today, by comparison, 12% of the population is on SNAP, and over 34 million people are food -insecure.
A wishing tree at MAZON’s new Hunger Museum is inspired by Yoko Ono’s Wish Tree project, inviting visitors to leave a wish for those facing hunger. (Courtesy of Mazon)
“During the first few months of the pandemic, that number skyrocketed to around 80 million, but then, because we had robust government investment in food safety-net programs, we saw those numbers drastically reduced,” Haviv said. “We are now below pre-pandemic levels.”
But instead of understanding the lessons of history, and learning from the recent experience of the pandemic, efforts to make it more difficult for those who struggle to find stability and food security are now underway, she warned.
For example, under current U.S. law, SNAP work requirements restrict essential benefits for “able-bodied” adults without dependents between ages 18 and 49. Rep. Dusty Johnson, a Republican from South Dakota, has introduced a bill to expand this category to age 65. Earlier this year, Sen. Rick Scott, a Florida Republican, introduced similar legislation that would raise the restriction to age 59. Both bills would also bar states from seeking a waiver to the “able-bodied adults” time limit—even if there aren’t enough jobs for all those in need.
“These changes are unacceptable and will make matters worse, because not only do they ignore history — they rely on narrow thinking about the lives of struggling Americans while ignoring the many systems that contribute to hunger, and thus to its end,” Leibman said.
“But,” Leibman added, “we know we can end hunger in America. The proof is in our history.”
—
The post New all-digital Hunger Museum charts US response to food insecurity through a Jewish lens appeared first on Jewish Telegraphic Agency.
Uncategorized
ADL retracts Tumbler Ridge shooting antisemitism claim
The ADL published and then retracted a claim that the alleged mass shooter at a school in Canada maintained a social media account with antisemitic posts, a day after it posted the erroneous information on its website.
The organization wrote Thursday at the bottom of an updated page about alleged Tumbler Ridge Secondary School shooter Jesse Van Rootselaar that it had incorrectly concluded that an X account containing the posts belonged to the alleged shooter. Nine people were killed in the shooting, including Van Rootselaar.
“A preliminary investigation uncovered an X account appearing to belong to the shooter. Upon further investigation, that X account has been found not credible. References to it have been removed,” the correction read.
Authorities in British Columbia said they could not speculate on the motive of the shooter.
The ADL, the most prominent U.S. antisemitism research and advocacy organization, had posted the claim Wednesday on its website. The Forward has reached out to the ADL for comment.
The error, from the ADL’s Center On Extremism, comes amid broader changes in the ADL’s approach.
The ADL’s original post said that on Sunday — two days before the attack — an X account connected to Van Rootselaar posted, “I need to hate jews because the zionists want me to hate jews. This benefits them, somehow.”
“The Tumbler Ridge shooter’s X profile photo also featured an image of the Christchurch shooter superimposed over a Sonnenrad, a neo-Nazi symbol, and a transgender pride flag,” the ADL wrote in the original post, referencing an antisemitic mass murder in New Zealand.
It did not link to the profile or include images of it, leaving the claim difficult to verify.
The Center On Extremism is a flagship program that has been overhauled in recent years as the organization has shifted toward a greater focus on fighting antisemitism. In September, it deleted its Glossary of Extremism, which had contained over 1,000 pages of background information on hate groups and ideologies. It said at the time that the entries were outdated.
The post ADL retracts Tumbler Ridge shooting antisemitism claim appeared first on The Forward.
Uncategorized
Can Trump save Israel from itself?
The Israeli government’s latest steps toward annexing the West Bank prove a dismal point: Catering to right-wing extremists has become the cabinet’s top priority — the rest of the country be damned.
In a blitz before Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s White House visit this week, Finance Minister Betzalel Smotrich and Defense Minister Israel Katz announced new decisions that will reverse decades-old real estate laws preventing Jews from buying Palestinian-owned land in the West Bank; expand Israeli authority in vast swaths of that territory; and make it easier for Jewish Israelis to buy land and start new communities in or near Palestinian enclaves there, among other subtle changes.
These changes may seem like bureaucratic rejiggering. But in fact, they mark the alarming development of a deliberate strategy to incrementally expand Israeli sovereignty over the West Bank, thus killing the two-state solution once and for all.
None of this serves Israel’s best interest. New laws pushing annexation forward will jeopardize Israel’s relationship with the U.S., damage its already faltering democracy, and eradicate any moral high ground the Jewish state still retains after its devastating military campaign in Gaza.
Yet while Israel struggles with a weakened international profile, an economy still recovering from the demands of war, impending talks with Iran, internal democratic conflicts and a re-emboldened Hamas within the decimated Gaza strip, proponents of the new decisions are celebrating the disaster they herald.
“We are deepening our roots in all regions of the Land of Israel and burying the idea of a Palestinian state,” Smotrich said in a statement.
The Yesha Council — the municipal representative for all Israeli settlements, which wants to expand Israeli sovereignty over the entire West Bank — declared the government’s move was “establishing Israeli sovereignty in the territory de facto.”
Energy Minister Eli Cohen might have put it most plainly, saying the changes “actually establish a fact on the ground that there will not be a Palestinian state,” in an interview with Israel’s Army Radio.
The only emergency brake on annexation Israelis have at this moment is sitting in the White House.
Although President Donald Trump flirted with Israeli annexation early in his second-term, he has consistently opposed such moves over the last few months. Asked on Tuesday about the Israeli security cabinet’s recent decisions, Trump spoke bluntly: “I am against annexation.”
He has powerful incentives to back up that statement.
Since returning to office last year, Trump has branded himself a peacemaker who will reshape the Middle East. He aims to expand the Abraham Accords, the trademark foreign policy achievement of his first term; curb a nuclear Iran; and create peace between Israel and the Palestinians. He will not tolerate any Israeli behavior that threatens those efforts — and these West Bank moves could upend them.
Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and five other Muslim countries condemned Israel’s new laws as accelerating “illegal annexation and the displacement of the Palestinian people” — a complaint Saudi Arabia previously lodged against Israel as its reason for refusing normalization, something Trump desperately wants.
Additionally, Trump’s peace plan for Gaza hinges on creating stability in the embattled Strip and the West Bank. Most importantly, it involves a commitment to Palestinian self-determination and statehood, which these moves in the West Bank may make all but impossible to realize.
All this, as American views of Israel are only growing more antagonistic, with real-world policy changes like conditioning military aid receiving more serious consideration than previously thought possible. Israel also faces domestic consequences over this decision. It has long defended itself against accusations of apartheid by saying that it cannot grant citizenship to the millions of Palestinians in the West Bank because the Jewish state cannot afford to lose its Jewish majority. Until trusted Palestinian partners for peace emerged, the narrative went, Israel would maintain control of the territory.
This is not maintaining control of the territory; this is laying claim to it, an action that demands Israel must treat the Palestinians who live there as full citizens. It is unlikely to do so. Which means Israel’s democracy is closer than ever to crumbling. If it insists on burying the two-state solution and annexing the West Bank without giving citizenship to millions of Palestinians, any defense it had against the argument of apartheid will be gone.
What might the Israeli government hope to gain with these moves, given how extraordinarily costly they could be — and seeing that annexation is widely unpopular in Israeli society, with only about a third of Israelis supporting it?
The answer: Netanyahu is going all-in for his far-right allies. It’s not about what Israel hopes to gain; it’s about what he does.
Smotrich, Katz, and others whose radical messianic conceptions dominate their politics have for years fantasized about expanding Israel’s borders without international or domestic law interfering. Throughout the Israel-Hamas War, far-right leaders routinely spoke enthusiastically about annexing the Gaza Strip.
If Netanyahu were putting Israelis before his own political interests, he would have squashed calls for annexation long before now. But doing so would threaten his political career. Smotrich and other far-right ministers put expanding Israeli control over the West Bank as a dealbreaker when they first entered his coalition; if they leave it, his last hope at retaining power will go with them.
When it comes to choosing between power or his country, Netanyahu has shown he will always choose power. Let’s hope Trump continues to stand in his way.
The post Can Trump save Israel from itself? appeared first on The Forward.
Uncategorized
Iran Races to Rebuild Missile Arsenal, Israel Tests Upgraded Defenses Amid Fragile US Nuclear Talks
Iranian missiles are displayed in a park in Tehran, Iran, Jan. 31, 2026. Photo: Majid Asgaripour/WANA (West Asia News Agency) via REUTERS
As the prospect of renewed conflict looms, Iran is scrambling to restore its battered missile capabilities while Israel tests upgraded air defenses and accelerates military preparations for a potential confrontation.
Iran had 25 key sites housing long-range ballistic missile capabilities, 19 of which were struck during last June’s 12-day war, when the US and Israel bombed the regime’s nuclear facilities, according to Israel’s Channel 14.
The outlet’s latest report, drawing on satellite imagery, research by the Alma Institute for Middle Eastern Studies, and confirmations from security officials, reveals that all sites were equipped with underground infrastructure and suffered extensive surface and subterranean damage.
Yet, with the shadow of a new conflict looming, Iran has rushed to restore its shattered defense capabilities, reportedly completing some partial repairs already.
As of last month, the country’s main launch bases — whose surfaces suffered moderate to severe damage — appear to show clear signs of recovery and resumed operational activity.
Israeli officials estimate that the Islamist regime now possesses at least twice the missile arsenal it deployed in past attacks.
However, Iran’s missile launch capacity remains limited by shortages of launchers and rocket fuel, even as it reportedly works to restore these critical components as well.
As Tehran works to rebuild its strategic threat against the Jewish state amid rising regional tensions, Israel has successfully upgraded its missile defense systems and expanded its arsenal of anti-missile batteries, effectively reinforcing its deterrence capabilities.
On Wednesday, the Israeli Ministry of Defense announced a successful test of the “David’s Sling” air-defense system, designed to intercept Iranian ballistic missiles with advanced evasive capabilities.
Built on operational lessons from last year’s war, Israeli officials said the upgraded system can intercept cruise missiles, ballistic missiles, aircraft, and drones at medium and long ranges, reaching altitudes of 50 to 70 kilometers (31 to 43 miles).
From the Arrow system to the Iron Dome, Israel is bolstering its defense capabilities with extensive logistical preparations to maintain operational readiness during prolonged and intense missile attacks, the Ministry of Defense said in a statement.
At the top of the country’s operational defense pyramid is the Arrow system, a strategic, exo-atmospheric shield designed to intercept long-range ballistic missiles while they are still outside the atmosphere, neutralizing threats at a distance and preventing environmental damage or the impact of unconventional warheads
Serving as the middle layer of Israel’s missile defense, the newly upgraded David’s Sling system works alongside the Iron Dome, which protects the home front and civilian settlements.
The country is also introducing the laser system Iron Beam, or “Magen Or,” capable of intercepting missiles quickly, accurately, and more efficiently than conventional systems
These latest developments come as regional tensions escalate over Iran’s nuclear program and fragile negotiations with the United States, raising concerns about a renewed conflict in the region.
Washington and Tehran resumed negotiations last Friday in Oman, marking the first direct engagement between US and Iranian officials since nuclear talks collapsed after the 12-day war in June.
With the chances of a deal still uncertain, US President Donald Trump has simultaneously launched a massive military buildup in the Gulf, pressuring the Iranian regime to return to the negotiating table if it wants to prevent a potential conflict.
On Wednesday, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu met with Trump to discuss the prospects of a potential nuclear agreement with Tehran and the next steps in the talks. Israeli officials have said they want any agreement with Iran to include zero enrichment of uranium, limits on ballistic missiles, and a pullback of the regime’s support for terrorist groups across the Middle East.
“There was nothing definitive reached other than I insisted that negotiations with Iran continue to see whether or not a Deal can be consummated. If it cannot, we will just have to see what the outcome will be,” Trump wrote in a post on Truth Social after their meeting.
“Last time Iran decided that they were better off not making a deal, they were hit with Midnight Hammer — that did not work well for them,” he continued, referring to the US operation to bomb Iranian nuclear sites in June. “Hopefully this time they will be more reasonable and responsible.”
Trump also told Axios in a Tuesday interview that he is considering deploying a second aircraft carrier strike group to the Middle East to prepare for military action if negotiations with Iran fail.
“Either we will make a deal or we will have to do something very tough like last time,” Trump said.
According to multiple media reports, Washington has set three conditions for a nuclear agreement with Iran: halting uranium enrichment, restricting the country’s ballistic missile program, and ending the regime’s support for terrorist groups and other proxies throughout the Middle East.
However, Iran has long said all three demands are unacceptable, but two Iranian officials told Reuters its Islamist, authoritarian rulers view the ballistic missile program, not uranium enrichment, as the bigger issue.
In recent days, the US has indicated it is primarily concerned with the nuclear program, leaving some observers concerned that the Trump administration will strike a deal that’s too narrow in scope.
The Iranian government has already publicly rejected any transfer of uranium out of the country and ruled out negotiations over its ballistic missile program or support for proxy forces.
Cautious optimism about diplomacy has also been shaken by reported clashes between US and Iranian forces at sea as tensions rise.
Last week, the US military said it shot down an Iranian drone that had “aggressively” approached the aircraft carrier Abraham Lincoln in the Arabian Sea. Hours later, forces from Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) harassed a US-flagged, US-crewed merchant vessel in the Strait of Hormuz.
Trump initially threatened to intervene in Iran if the regime killed anti-government protesters who took to the streets across the country in late December and early January. However, the Iranian government proceeded to crush the protests with a brutal crackdown, reportedly killing tens of thousands of people.
The US subsequently began its military buildup in the region, and Trump called on the regime to begin negotiations.