Uncategorized
NYC voters elected a BDS mayor. Voters in my city went much farther.
I first declared myself a Zionist when I was 10 years old in 1981, singing the song of Camp Young Judaea Sprout Lake, which went like this: “We are Young Judaeans, we have a story to tell. Too young for Tel Yehudah, but Zionists just as well.” Tel Yehudah was the high school age camp of Young Judaea, the year-round, non-denominational Zionist “movement” founded in 1909.
I was deeply involved in Young Judaea through my high school graduation in 1988. At the time, 40 years after the creation of the state of Israel, being a Zionist was not controversial. But Zionism as a “‘movement” felt fossilized. Its main goal had been achieved generations earlier, but we were still learning about the pre-state ‘Zionist thinkers.” The question of Jewish political autonomy in our ancient homeland had long since been settled. Some Israelis laughed at us. Israel was their country, not a movement.
Flash forward another 35 years and Zionism is very far from being a consensus ideology. We have seen anti-Zionism rise to prominence in New York City with the election of Zohran Mamdani. But it has arguably has reached its highest pitch here in my current city of Somerville, Massachusetts, where 55% of the electorate recently answered “yes” to the following non-binding ballot measure:
“Shall the Mayor of Somerville and all Somerville elected leaders be instructed to end all current city business and prohibit future city investments and contracts with companies as long as such companies engage in business that sustains Israel’s apartheid, genocide and illegal occupation of Palestine?”
This is possibly the most vociferously anti-Israel ballot measure that has been passed by any municipality in the country, making Somerville the unofficial capital of anti-Zionism. Many may criticize this as radically outside the mainstream, but the leaders of Somerville for Palestine, who spearheaded the measure, would take such criticism as a badge of honor. They call it leading on the issue.
Since my high school days, until Oct. 7, 2023, I hadn’t given much thought to Zionism. I never had a great urge to move to Israel. I lived there for a year before and after college. I turned my Jewish engagement into more of a religious enterprise than a political one. But, like many Jews, I have a wide group of friends and family there, and Oct. 7 and its aftershocks rekindled my convictions that Jews cannot rely on anyone else to secure our own safety. I am once again an active Zionist.
But, being a Zionist in Somerville is, frankly, exhausting. My post-Oct. 7 “Stand with Israel” sign was repeatedly stolen and vandalized just a few months into the war. This included a note from someone taped to the sign that ended in “Heil Hitler.”
In Somerville, there have been an ongoing parade of actions meant to isolate Israel and label it as the sole aggressor in the conflict. This included a hastily organized ceasefire resolution in January 2024 that originally did not condemn Hamas’ original attack. Following some last-minute scrambling that led to some improvements in the text, such as condemning Hamas, the measure passed 9-2.
Brian Sokol holds a sign opposing an Israel boycott ballot initiative in Somerville, Massachusetts, in 2025. (Courtesy Sokol)
In response, a group called “Shalom Somerville” was formed. This group counters the anti-Zionist narrative and actions and shares a more nuanced view of the conflict. It includes people from across the religious and political spectrum, all of whom agree on the basic idea that Israel has a right to exist as a Jewish state. Within that framework, a large majority of the group does not support the current Israeli government or how Israel conducted the war.
Shalom Somerville has had its work cut out for it.
There has been a “standout” for Palestine outside the high school nearly every day. Throughout 2024 and 2025, many city community events have been disrupted by Palestinian activists. This includes Pride events, Disability events, film screenings, local markets, and festivals and an endless stream of graffiti. My own appointment to Somerville’s Human Rights Commission was also opposed by a letter-writing campaign on the basis of my professed Zionism. Protesters — Jewish and not — even showed up to the city’s Hanukkah celebration.
One additional key feature of local anti-Zionism is the extent to which it has divided the Jewish community itself. Somerville for Palestine has amplified the voices of Jews who agree with them. Several editorials signed by lists of self-identifying Jews have appeared in local newspapers. Local synagogues have had to struggle not to alienate either side in order to sustain their membership and some modicum of Jewish unity, with at least one issuing a formal non-statement that left frustrated people on both sides of the issue. Our sanctuaries are no longer sanctuaries.
But the biggest skirmish was the ballot measure. It was originally proposed in March 2025. The City Council meeting that voted whether the question could go directly to the ballot was attended by Somerville for Palestine activists, with their keffiyehs, signs, songs and chants. The City Council decided not to send the measure directly to ballot, but to require ballot supporters to gather the requisite number of signatures (approximately 5,800). As those opposing the ballot passed the chanting crowds while leaving the meeting, some were insulted and spat upon. The local head of the New England ADL, a Somerville resident who also spoke at the meeting, had to be escorted to her car by police officers. Thus began months of canvassing where the ballot measure was peddled in every major town square.
Meanwhile, Shalom Somerville focused on preparing for the November vote. We decided to highlight the impact of the measure on Somerville, while also noting that the measure would not have any real effect on Palestinians in Gaza. Despite our objections to the language of the measure, we did not want to be litigating the war. We wanted our local officials to “focus on Somerville,“ not Israel and Palestine. For example, we emphasized that boycotting the construction equipment giant Caterpillar would make it much harder to rebuild our schools and roads, and that boycotting HP, the supplier of laptops for our schools, would cost the schools more money and negatively affect local students and teachers.
We spent the summer organizing and raising funds. When we did start sending out mailers and creating social media ads and posts, we were called carpetbaggers. The campaign also raised several legal issues with the ballot approval process, including the lack of a 150-word pro and con discussion on the ballot itself. Lacking this, less engaged voters were more likely to see it as a simple vote for or against genocide, which the text proclaims as if this were a non-controversial, established fact. These court challenges were called anti-democratic. Both the outside influence and undemocratic charges also tapped into myths of hidden Jewish wealth and power.
The final election result should be understood as a split decision. The ballot passed, but not by a landslide. More importantly, Jake Wilson, the mayoral candidate who said he would not implement the measure, beat Willie Burnley, Jr., who pledged to enact it. This could be taken to mean that the majority of voters either were comfortable with the “statement of conscience” but not with the prospect of implementation. Or, more likely, voters simply had higher priorities in their choices for city government. Voters were focused on Somerville after all.
At left: Somerville for Palestine supporters celebrate a projected win for Question 3, a non-binding resolution imploring the Boston suburb to divest from companies that do business with Israel, Nov. 4, 2025; a still from an ad opposing the measure paid for by a local Jewish group. (Screenshot via Instagram; Screenshot via YouTube)
The ballot measure was just a beginning. The proponents will now push at every turn to implement it. And Shalom Somerville will push back. All of this, will happen regardless of events on the ground in the Middle East or issues we could be working on together in Somerville. The ceasefire currently in place made barely a ripple in the local political climate. Shalom Somerville is also exploring ways to not just react to anti-Israel efforts but to engage positively in creating spaces for dialogue and deeper understanding of Israel and Palestine.
As one of the leaders of Shalom Somerville said after the election, Jews know how to be in the minority and continue to fight for our own dignity. We have done that throughout history. We had grown unaccustomed to this need here in America, but we have tapped back into that deep, generational knowledge. As a first step, we have found each other, learned to support each other, disagreed civilly, relied on each other’s skills, built coalitions, and fought back. Like the first Young Judaeans way back in 1909, we have started a new movement.
—
The post NYC voters elected a BDS mayor. Voters in my city went much farther. appeared first on Jewish Telegraphic Agency.
Uncategorized
Israeli-Arab influencer behind ‘Nas Daily’: Anti-Zionism is antisemitism
(JTA) — DENVER – Israeli-Arab social media entrepreneur Nuseir Yassin, of the viral vlog “Nas Daily,” said he believes “anti-Zionism is a form of antisemitism” and stressed his commitment to overturning “misguided hate” against Jews, at a conference devoted to the subject this week.
Yassin, 34, was speaking with the Jewish Telegraphic Agency on the sidelines of the conference, hosted by the David Merage Foundation for Confronting Antisemitism. A self-described “village boy” from the Lower Galilee town of Arraba in Israel, he achieved massive success through viral short-form videos that attracted viewers from all over the world. Today he boasts more than 68 million followers across numerous social networks.
Yassin is a Muslim of Palestinian origin, although he said he is not religious. Asked why it was important for a non-Jewish person to participate in a conference about combatting antisemitism, Yassin equated this battle to fighting for his family, noting that “the success of Israel and the Jewish people is also my success as an Israeli citizen.”
“I’m not a fan of the Israeli government, and I’m not here to defend it, just like I’m not a fan of many governments,” Yassin noted, but he asserted that the reaction to the government “is absolutely fueled by antisemitism.”
“I do believe anti-Zionism is a form of antisemitism,” he added.
He said he views Zionism as “the most vanilla thing in the world – a group of people wanting a place to live,” and has therefore concluded that Israel’s detractors “just really don’t like Jews.”
Yassin, who first broke through in 2016, has become increasingly outspoken in recent years about his combined Israeli and Palestinian identity. During the conference, he recalled that he grew up labeling himself Arab-Israeli. After the Hamas attacks of Oct. 7, 2023, he started listing Israeli first and Palestinian second.
“I could not relate to the extremism that I saw, and I wanted to distance myself from it without erasing my identity connected to it,” Yassin said. “I’m not just Israeli because I think it removes a little bit of spice, but I’m also not just Palestinian anymore.”
“A lot of Israeli culture is inside me,” he continued. “I never agree with people. I’m always disagreeable. That’s Israeli. I speak up.”
Yassin noted that he was “the first guy to go study in the United States out of my entire lineage,” graduating from Harvard University in 2014 with a degree in economics and a minor in computer science. Despite having grown up in Israel, Yassin said that Harvard was the place where he made his first Jewish friend.
After working as a software developer for Venmo in New York, Yassin left his job in 2016 to travel and document his journeys. Ultimately, he launched a Facebook page called Nas Daily – using the word for “people” in Arabic – where he posted one-minute videos for 1,000 days, telling the stories of communities around the world.
What was once a personal brand has since expanded into the parent Nas Company, which offers platforms for solo entrepreneurs to build and monetize their online businesses.
Yassin earned an honorary degree from Ben-Gurion University of the Negev in 2025 in recognition of his advocacy work for Israeli and Palestinian coexistence. This past August, he also joined the advisory board for the Genesis Prize Foundation, which each year celebrates inspiring Jewish individuals for their achievements.
“I do not relate to hundreds of men on the street shouting ‘Allahu Akbar,’” Yassin told JTA, adding that there needed to be more women and fewer religious fanatics participating in the Israeli-Palestinian conversation.
Yassin argued that he’s “not a weird Arab for saying this” and that “the entire country of the UAE says the same thing,” referring to one of the Gulf countries that signed onto the Abraham Accords normalizing relations with Israel. He also challenged “Free Palestine” activists to envision a concrete future for Palestinians rather than fixating on Israel’s transgressions.
“We should all be ‘Free Palestine’ – but from what?” Yassin asked. “We disagree on the solution, not on the problem. We don’t want suffering. Nobody wants suffering.”
“I’m a free-Palestine-from-Hamas guy,” he continued. “Just free Palestine,” he said, ”is not an answer. I’m free-Palestine-from-extremism.”
Yassin affirmed that there is room for criticism of Israel’s government, noting, for example, that he would like to see an Israeli-Arab presence in the government.
But he marveled at the notion that an alien visiting Earth would likely guess that the most hated country in the United Nations is North Korea, when in fact “It’s not – It’s Israel.”
That struck him as absurd because “the Israel-Palestine conflict is not a big deal when you compare it to everything else that’s happening on planet Earth. The only thing that makes it a big deal is that we, as Palestinians, have the perfect enemy.”
That enemy, he continued, is “the most hated type of enemy, which is the Jews.”
As part of his appearance at the conference, Yassin presented a recap of a fellowship he launched this past spring in partnership with the David Merage Foundation to help 50 content creators – 25 Jewish and 25 Muslim – produce meaningful material.
Participants received $1,000 and spent a month learning from the Nas Daily team about viral and impactful storytelling during the fellowship, named for Yassin’s first Jewish friend, Zaki Djemal, who recently died of a sudden heart attack.
To Laura Merage, the Iranian-born Jewish co-founder of the foundation, Yassin was a natural partner for this bridge-building effort. Given his social media following and “infectious personality,” Merage said she felt “that’s what we need more of in the world.”
At the conference on Tuesday, Yassin announced two winners of the fellowship’s influencer competition: recent McGill University graduate Raihaana Adira, a Canadian Muslim, and Grace, a Jewish-American digital content creator who preferred to use only her first name for privacy reasons. Grace tells stories about unique public figures, such as the first Arab “Miss Israel.” Adira, meanwhile, began posting about antisemitism and Muslim-Jewish relations after witnessing anti-Zionist protests at McGill.
“When I see a Jewish person being attacked on campus or online, it feels like I’m watching someone from my own community hurt,” Adira told JTA, noting that she started posting because no one believed her when she talked about incidents on campus.
“I wanted the protests and the graffiti on the walls that said ‘Death to the IDF’ to be seen,” she continued. “I am a Canadian, I am a Muslim, and when people at school on the streets say, ‘Death to Canada, We are Hamas, Hamas is heroic’ – that is not me.”
Adira said she received many death threats when she first started posting. While acknowledging how difficult that was, she also emphasized an influx of support that has helped “drown out the hate.”
Yassin offered a similar perspective, noting that at the beginning of his career, he “used to amplify the blowback and talk a lot about it,” referring to the criticisms he’d receive for promoting coexistence and calling out antisemitism. But after realizing that this deterred others from speaking out, he deemed the threats insignificant, calling them “the smallest price to pay for the largest outcome you can possibly imagine.”
During his travels around the world, Yassin said he has witnessed how flawed people’s perceptions of Jews can be and that he feels “a responsibility to set the record straight.” He also noted that he is dating a Jewish woman, author and influencer Aija Mayrock, whom he is marrying next year and with whom he expects to have children.
“They’re going to be Jewish, so that’s my family – literally, my family,” Yassin said.
This article originally appeared on JTA.org.
The post Israeli-Arab influencer behind ‘Nas Daily’: Anti-Zionism is antisemitism appeared first on The Forward.
Uncategorized
Four Seats or No Seats? Why Israel’s Final Polls Disagree Over Amcha Yisrael
Conflicting projections for Ofer Winter’s party illustrate the uncertainty of measuring public support near an electoral threshold.
A Channel 12 poll gives Ofer Winter’s Amcha Yisrael four parliamentary seats.
An i24NEWS survey reaches the same seat total.
Other final polls find that the party does not qualify for representation.
How can surveys conducted close to the same election produce such different results?
The answer lies partly in the difference between measuring a vote share and converting it into parliamentary seats.
A Statistical Boundary
Israel’s electoral threshold is 3.25 percent.
For a party receiving substantially more than that percentage, modest sampling fluctuations may change its expected number of seats without calling its parliamentary presence into question.
For a party whose support lies near 3.25 percent, the same type of fluctuation may change its projected representation from several seats to zero.
This does not necessarily mean the polls are measuring completely different political realities.
They may be producing estimates close to the same threshold but on opposite sides of it.
Sample Size Is Only One Factor
The i24NEWS survey conducted on October 22 included 5,124 adult respondents and reported a sampling error of plus or minus 1.4 percentage points at the 95 percent confidence level.
That is a substantial sample by conventional political polling standards.
But a larger sample does not eliminate every source of uncertainty.
Different pollsters may employ different recruitment methods, weighting systems and procedures for estimating turnout.
They may also differ in how they handle respondents who are undecided or reluctant to state their preferences.
These choices can matter particularly for smaller parties.
The Problem of Turnout
Opinion polls generally estimate voting preferences before actual voting takes place.
Election results reflect the ballots cast by people who participate.
Differences between intended and actual turnout can affect parties in different ways.
Analysts must therefore consider not only how many respondents express support for a party, but also whether the poll’s turnout model accurately reflects the eventual electorate.
Without transparent, comparable information about the methods used by each polling organization, it is difficult to identify which methodological difference is responsible for a particular disagreement.
Reading the Final Surveys
The appropriate interpretation of Amcha Yisrael’s polling is neither that its parliamentary representation is guaranteed nor that exclusion is certain.
The available surveys demonstrate uncertainty around a legally decisive boundary.
The four-seat projections reported by Channel 12 and i24NEWS are meaningful observations.
So are the below-threshold findings published by Channel 13, Maariv and Zman Yisrael.
Each survey is a measurement of electoral intentions under a particular methodology, not a count of actual votes.
For readers following Israel’s election, this makes Amcha Yisrael an instructive case study in how polling uncertainty interacts with electoral law.
The final result will provide the definitive seat allocation. The polls explain why the outcome was difficult to measure in advance.
Uncategorized
As Trump betrays Ukraine, it’s beginning to feel a lot like Munich
In Munich on Sept. 30, 1938, the leaders of Britain and France signed an agreement with Adolf Hitler that caved to the Nazi leader’s demand that Germany be given a chunk of Czechoslovakia. Five months later, Hitler ordered the German military to forcibly take the remainder of the neighboring country.
On Oct. 9, 2026, Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin struck a deal allowing Russia to sell diesel fuel to global markets, most importantly to the US. Then Trump waived a package of sanctions on Russia that had been passed by Congress. By replenishing Russia’s war coffers, it is likely more Ukrainians will die because of these twin gifts from America’s president to the warmongering Russian autocrat.
Why is Trump doing this? He seems to be hoping the diesel deal will help him avert disaster in the upcoming midterms. Or maybe there’s more to it than that. Perhaps Trump seriously thinks that this will get him the Nobel Peace Prize by ending the war in Ukraine through helping Putin win it. Perhaps it’s one more scheme to further enrich himself and his family. Or maybe Putin really does have something on Trump.
In any event, it feels like Munich all over again.
There are some remarkable parallels between Czechoslovakia’s predicament in 1938 and Ukraine’s nine decades later: separatists in two vulnerable Central European democracies were encouraged and supported by a neighboring authoritarian regime that sought to seize adjacent territory under the pretext of protecting a minority from oppression.
And at the center of both narratives is betrayal: of Czechoslovakia by Britain and France, and Ukraine by Trump.
In the spring and summer of 1938, Konrad Henlein, leader of the Nazi-allied Sudeten German Party in Czechoslovakia, held secret meetings with Hitler and other Nazi officials. They concocted a plan: Cause so much disorder in the Sudetenland that the Czech government would declare martial law, thus creating an excuse for German troops to march in to protect the ethnic German minority.
Tensions that had long existed along the Czech frontier erupted into gunfire and death in the Sudeten town of Habersbirk on the morning of Sept. 13, 1938. A mob of German separatists hung a swastika banner from a church tower, stormed the police station, kidnapped the wife of a cop, and engaged in gunfights with police officers that lasted hours. Four Czech police officers and four insurgents died. Outbreaks of violence, terror and torture raged along the border for days, backed by Freikorps paramilitary troops who crossed from Germany and by SA and SS men who took part in cross-border sabotage and armed attacks.
The uprising had the desired impact. Just 17 days later — on Sept. 30, 1938 — Britain, France, Italy and Nazi Germany signed the Munich Agreement, yielding to Hitler’s demand that the Sudetenland be ceded to him. After landing at an airport outside London, Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain waved a document in his hand and jubilantly proclaimed:
“The settlement of the Czechoslovak problem which has now been achieved is, in my view, only the prelude to a larger settlement in which all Europe may find peace.”
“I believe it is peace for our time,” Chamberlain said later that day.
But it didn’t take long for Hitler to show he could not be trusted. Hitler’s army marched into Czechoslovakia on March 15, 1939. Germany’s invasion of Poland followed less than six months later, and by 1942 German forces controlled territory spanning from the Atlantic Ocean to deep inside the Soviet Union.
Ethnic Germans’ uprising in Czechoslovakia in 1938 found an echo nine decades later in Ukraine’s Donbas region, where unrest that began with pro-Russia protests in 2014 evolved into the war Russia has been waging on its neighbor for nearly five years.
In the spring of 2014, paramilitary units led by Russian intelligence officers stormed government office buildings in several towns and cities in Donbas, seizing weapons and clashing with police. In a scene reminiscent of the Habersbirk siege of 1938, on April 14, 2014, pro-Russian militants seized the police station in Horlivka, beat up the police chief, and murdered a member of the city council, whose body was found in a river. Similar clashes occurred throughout Donbas.
Two Kremlin-backed pseudo-states soon emerged: the Donetsk People’s Republic and the Luhansk People’s Republic. Russia funneled tanks, artillery, air defense systems and fighters into Donbas, fueling a war between separatists and Ukrainian forces that dragged on for years.
Like Hitler in the Sudetenland, Russia’s de facto occupation of Donbas was not enough for Vladimir Putin. His eyes were on all of Ukraine, and he spent years manufacturing pretexts for the full-scale invasion that began on Feb. 24, 2022.
Trump has been buttering up Putin for more than a decade, starting with his 2015 campaign for president, when he effusively praised the ruthless Russian autocrat’s leadership style. Putin is a “strong leader,” is “far more respected than our president,” meaning the immensely popular Barack Obama, and was someone he “would get along with very well,” Trump said back then.
Trump’s admiration for Putin took on ominous tones after becoming president. During a press conference after the two leaders’ 2018 Helsinki summit, Trump questioned intelligence findings on Russian election interference and said he believed Putin’s denial. “I don’t see any reason it would be Russia,” Trump told reporters, with the Russian strongman standing at his side.
After Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in 2022, during Biden’s presidency, Trump called it “a pretty smart move,” praised Putin as a “genius,” and also said it wouldn’t have happened if Trump was still president, remarks that were amplified by Russian state media.
During Trump’s second term, his buddy-buddy relationship with Putin has turned into a virtual strategic alliance, as the American president repeatedly makes moves and statements that seem designed to please the Russian autocrat. There are Trump’s threats to abandon NATO, his humiliation of Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelensky during a February 2025 meeting inside the Oval Office, and most recently Trump’s demand that Ukraine cease its drone attacks on Russian oil refineries, his call for Zelensky’s ouster, and envoy Steve Witkoff thanking Putin for being a “humanitarian.”
Putin has proposed a summit between himself, Trump, and Chinese leader Xi Jinping to discuss ending the war in Ukraine. It’s notable that Ukraine has not been invited. This is also what happened in Munich nine decades ago, when Czech delegates were excluded from the room, and others decided Czechoslovakia’s fate.
Last October, aboard Air Force One, Trump told reporters the Donbas region should be “cut up,” leaving most of it in Russian hands.
“Let it be cut the way it is,” he said. “They can negotiate something later on down the line.”
It seems the fate Trump envisions for Ukraine is similar to the one Hitler envisioned for Czechoslovakia. It would be naïve to think that Putin’s expansionist ambitions would stop there.
The post As Trump betrays Ukraine, it’s beginning to feel a lot like Munich appeared first on The Forward.
