Uncategorized
Soviet Jewry protest leaders in San Francisco secretly recruited help from Jews for Jesus, FBI file says
(JTA) – Organizers of protests on behalf of Soviet Jewry in San Francisco in the early 1970s might have bolstered crowds by secretly recruiting participants from Jews for Jesus.
The explosive revelation that Jewish leaders turned to a Christian missionary group for help appears in a 1973 FBI memo that the Jewish Telegraphic Agency recently obtained through a freedom of information request.
The FBI file details an apparent relationship between Martin Rosen, the founder of Jews for Jesus, and Joel Brooks and Harold Light, two prominent San Francisco Jewish leaders at the fore of local efforts in the movement to get Soviet authorities to end restrictions on the emigration of the country’s Jewish population. The relationship outlined in the declassified memo has not appeared in scholarship on the Soviet Jewry movement, nor is it known to activists of the movement who were interviewed by JTA. Light, Brooks and Rosen are deceased.
If the FBI’s intelligence is accurate, a successful and cherished social movement that unified much of the global Jewish community in common purpose for decades relied at least to some extent in San Francisco on the support of a group, rejected by nearly all of that community, whose mission is to proselytize to Jews.
“The first thing I thought of was, I’m reading something from ‘The Twilight Zone’ — in my many years in the Soviet Jewry movement, I don’t know if I’ve seen a document as strange as this,” said Morey Schapira, who served in leadership positions in the Student Struggle for Soviet Jewry, the Bay Area Council for Soviet Jews, and the Union of Councils for Soviet Jews. “The idea of working with a slimy group like Jews for Jesus, it’s beyond my comprehension.”
The public can request any FBI files that may exist pertaining to deceased individuals. An FBI memo relating Rosen arrived last November in response to one of about 50 freedom of information requests on prominent figures in recent Jewish history submitted by JTA almost two years ago. Most of JTA’s requests are still pending. TO DOWNLOAD THE FBI FILE, CLICK HERE.
Dated May 24, 1973, and written by an FBI informant whose name was redacted by staff at the U.S. National Archive, the memo focuses on Brooks, who was the Northern California director of the American Jewish Congress for about 30 years starting in 1967.
“[Brooks] has heavily utilized the services of the young Jews in the Jews for Jesus group,” the informant wrote. “[He] has used these services to turn out people in his Soviet Jewry demonstrations.”
The informant also cites Brooks as saying that Light, leader of the Bay Area Council for Soviet Jewry, used members of Jews for Jesus in a “hush-hush way” to distribute leaflets and participate in demonstrations.
The memo spells out why such an arrangement would be best kept out of the public eye.
“All of this, of course, is secret, because organized Jewish groups, and the various rabbinical councils have proclaimed that Jews for Jesus are no longer Jews but have become apostates, and should not be palled around with, nor buried in Jewish cemeteries,” the informant writes.
Martin “Moishe” Rosen, founder of Jews for Jesus in 1975. (Denver Post via Getty Images)
The upside for Rosen was obvious: His group would gain a foothold in a popular Jewish movement, offering a potential avenue toward legitimacy and a pool of possible recruits. In his 1974 memoir, titled “Jews for Jesus,” Rosen openly discussed being accepted into the movement by Jewish organizers, but he did so without naming Brooks, Light or any others.
He wrote that Jews for Jesus were invited because of their reputation as the “best qualified, best disciplined demonstrators in the San Francisco community. We’ve had more experience than other Jewish groups and are familiar with the applicable laws and regulations.”
Rosen’s group committed to not use the demonstrations as an opportunity to evangelize and didn’t bring any Christian literature or wear outfits that would identify them, according to the memoir.
“Many Jews for Jesus believe in the freedom of Soviet Jewry just as strongly as any other Jews, and we want to be as effective as possible when we demonstrate to support that cause,” Rosen wrote.
To Schapira, who led the Bay Area Council for Soviet Jews for years and knew both Brooks and Light, however, it’s unclear why the Soviet Jewry movement would have wanted or needed Jews for Jesus. Schapira didn’t recall it ever being especially difficult to turn out demonstrators organically. There didn’t seem to be a need to resort to secret deals.
“If you look at the picture of the rallies in those days, they even had people like [American folk music legend] Joan Baez,” Schapira said. “They developed a relationship with her and she would come to the rally and bring her guitar and sing songs for freedom.”
He added, “If we needed an instant rally, we were a grassroots organization and we could produce 10 or 12 people, which might be enough to send a message to the Russians and get some publicity in the local papers.”
At least a few people in the Bay Area’s Jewish community caught wind of the secret relationship between Brooks and Jews for Jesus at the time, according to the memo.
Stephanie Rodgers was a coordinator of the Jewish Defense League, an extremist right-wing Jewish group that was under heavy FBI surveillance. Founded by Rabbi Meir Kahane, the JDL applied its often violent tactics to resist Jews for Jesus’ public campaign to convert Jews. Rodgers visited Brooks’ office ahead of a planned demonstration in front of the Soviet consulate in San Francisco and asked about his connection to Rosen and Jews for Jesus, according to the memo.
After Brooks explained how they had been useful, Rodgers “smiled and was very pleasant on the surface,” the memo says. But at the demonstration, Rodgers and a group of other JDL activists showed up even though they said they would stay away, and they found Rosen in the crowd and proceeded to attack him and “kicked him in the groin.”
JDL regularly disrupted Jews for Jesus events; the organization would ultimately claim responsibility for firebombing a bus operated by Jews for Jesus in Brooklyn and abducting an adherent. In the Bay Area, where both groups were active, tensions were particularly high; the Jewish Defense League would sue the local Jews for Jesus chapter over what it charged was the group’s misuse of the JDL’s name and imagery.
Brooks, meanwhile, had more affable ties with Jews for Jesus. It’s unclear how or when Rosen and Brooks developed a relationship, but Brooks noted in a July 25, 1972, letter he wrote to the office of the American Jewish Congress in New York that their ties had started “some time ago.” The letter is found in the records of the Northern California branch of the American Jewish Congress, which are archived at the University of California Berkeley’s library.
A prominent advocacy group in its heyday, the American Jewish Congress — not to be confused with the American Jewish Committee — took a more liberal political stance than that of Jewish establishment groups on many issues.
Brooks had learned that his organization’s national headquarters wanted to undertake a study of Jews for Jesus and he wished to provide insight. He was under no illusion about the group’s objective: “The sole aim of these men is to enlist new converts to Christianity,” Brooks wrote in the letter.
“Through contact with Rosen I have developed a great deal of insight into how his organization operates, their source of funding, budget, etc. which I wish to share with you,” he added.
Then as now, members of Jews for Jesus and other Messianic groups felt unfairly rejected by the Jewish world, arguing that their Christian beliefs should have a place in the community.
In the early 1970s, when Jews for Jesus’ conversion drive was prominent and well funded, Brooks was perceived as more lenient, according to the foreword to the 2017 book “Converging Destinies: Jews, Christians, and the Mission of God.”
“Brooks tried to keep some of us connected to the Jewish community and Jewish life,” Calvin J. Smith wrote in the foreword. “I remember going with another Jew for Jesus to a Jewish consciousness raising session he held at a home in Marin County in the early 1970s.”
Glenn Richter was one of the founders of the Student Struggle for Soviet Jewry and operates as a walking encyclopedia of the movement.
Protestors dressed as prisoners behind bars, alongside a man holding a placard reading “Solidarity with Soviet Jews,” stand together with members of New York’s Jewish community as they take to the streets during the Solidarity Sunday for Soviet Jewry demonstration in protest at the Soviet Union’s treatment of Jewish people, in New York City, April 18, 1975. (Images Press/Keystone/Hulton Archive/Getty Images)
He said the movement did collaborate with many Christians outside of Jews for Jesus. For example, he said there were Scandinavians, who, on weekend trips to Leningrad (today St. Petersburg), brought in Jewish material that was banned in the Soviet Union. Others set up safe houses in Finland in expectation of fleeing Soviet Jews. And the International Fellowship of Christians and Jews raised millions of dollars from evangelicals to help transport Soviet Jews to Israel.
“Of course, among these goodhearted souls are those who have conversion of Jews in mind, but I suspect most have wanted to fulfill their prophecy of ingathering Jews to Israel so that a Christian messiah could return,” Richter said.
In his eyes, Jews for Jesus represented a red line.
“Our Student Struggle for Soviet Jewry office on Manhattan’s West 72nd Street was down the block from a church with a Jewish Messianic constituency, and we would never, ever, try to work with them,” Richter said.
Andrew Esensten contributed research to this story.
—
The post Soviet Jewry protest leaders in San Francisco secretly recruited help from Jews for Jesus, FBI file says appeared first on Jewish Telegraphic Agency.
Uncategorized
Britain to Legislate to Tackle Threats From Hostile State Proxies After Wave of Antisemitic Attacks
Orthodox Jews stand by a police cordon, after a man was arrested following a stabbing incident in the Golders Green area, which is home to a large Jewish population, in London, Britain, April 29, 2026. Photo: REUTERS/Hannah McKay
Britain will legislate to strengthen its ability to deal with proxies for malign state actors, taking powers to make it possible to ban them in light of increased activity in Britain and a rise in antisemitic attacks.
Prime Minister Keir Starmer has said the government has to “deal with malign state actors” in the wake of a series of attacks on Britain‘s Jewish community.
In a speech outlining the government’s agenda, King Charles said it would “introduce legislation to tackle the growing threat from foreign state entities and their proxies,” and would also take urgent action to tackle antisemitism.
POSSIBLE BAN ON THE IRGC?
Several British lawmakers have called for the proscription of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC).
The IRGC is an elite military force whose purpose is to protect Shi’ite Muslim clerical rule in Iran. It controls large parts of Iran’s economy.
While Starmer has not publicly named the IRGC as being the target of the legislation, in an introduction to the King’s Speech, he said that Britain would tackle extremism “including where it is sponsored by foreign powers that are hostile to the UK, such as Iran.”
The move comes after a spate of arson attacks on sites in London linked to the Jewish community and the targeting of Iranian dissidents, with police saying they were examining possible Iran links.
Britain‘s security chiefs have for years warned about threats from “hostile“ states such as Iran, Russia, and China, with a number of convictions of people who had been accused of carrying out spying or other offences on their behalf.
The new law would allow the government to specify state-backed organizations that threaten national security through espionage, sabotage, interference, or other means. A review last year found that Britain‘s existing framework had a legal difficulty in proscribing state entities.
There will be new offenses created for belonging to such organizations or raising support for them, and the government said that collectively the measures would create a “tougher operating environment for foreign intelligence services and their proxies.”
The king’s speech also promised a new National Security Bill which would address those who were fixated on violence and planning mass killings, but were not obviously inspired by a particular ideology.
The new law would aim to criminalize the creation and sharing of the most harmful online material.
As part of an approach to align countering state threats with addressing terrorism risks, the bill would add “polygraph testing as an available license condition for state threat offenders,” the government said.
Uncategorized
‘Shame on Hollywood’: Cannes Jury Member Defends Actors ‘Backlisted’ for Anti-Israel Activism Over Gaza War
Workers set up a giant canvas of the official poster featuring actors Geena Davis and Susan Sarandon from Ridley Scott’s road movie “Thelma & Louise” on the facade of the Festival palace before the start of the 79th Cannes Film Festival in Cannes, France, May 10, 2026. Photo: REUTERS/ Marko Djurica
A jury member of the 79th Cannes Film Festival on Tuesday condemned the Hollywood film industry for “blacklisting” actors who have spoken out against Israel’s military actions in the Gaza Strip during the country’s war against Hamas terrorists controlling the enclave.
At the festival’s jury press conference, Cannes award-winning Scottish screenwriter Paul Laverty mentioned Susan Sarandon, Javier Bardem, and Mark Ruffalo, all three of whom have been outspoken in criticizing Israel’s military campaign against Hamas in Gaza. Sarandon’s character in “Thelma & Louise” is on the official 2026 Cannes poster.
“The Cannes Film Festival [and] the wonderful poster they have,” Laverty said at the end of the press conference on Tuesday, held before the opening of the film festival in France. “Absolutely iconic. Brilliant. And isn’t it fascinating to see some of them like Susan Sarandon, Javier Bardem, Mark Ruffalo blacklisted because of their views in opposing the murder of women and children in Gaza? Shame on Hollywood people who do that. My respect and total solidarity to them. They’re the best of us, and good luck to them.”
“I just hope we don’t get bombed now, because we’ve got this poster in Cannes,” the BAFTA winner added in conclusion.
Sarandon was dropped by her talent agency for castigating Israel while participating in a pro-Palestinian demonstration in New York City in November 2023. At the protest, the Oscar winner accused Israel of war crimes, encouraged others to have the “courage to speak out” in support of Palestinians, and compared the Hamas-led Oct. 7 massacre across southern Israel just weeks earlier to hardships Palestinians endure in Gaza.
She talked about the fallout with her agency during an interview in 2024, saying: “I was dropped by my agency, my projects were pulled. I’ve been used as an example of what not to do if you want to continue to work.” Earlier this year, Sarandon further spoke about being shunned in Hollywood for her views about the Israel-Hamas war.
“I was fired by my agency, specifically for marching and speaking out about Gaza, for asking for a ceasefire. And it became impossible for me to even be on television,” she said at a press conference in February before receiving a career achievement honor at the 40th Goya Awards in Spain. “I don’t know lately if it’s changed, but I couldn’t do any major film, anything connected with Hollywood. I found agents ultimately in England and in Italy, and I work there … I know this Italian director that just hired me — he was told not to hire me, so that’s still recently. He didn’t listen, but they had that conversation. Right now, I kind of specialize in tiny films with directors who have never directed, in independent films.”
At the Cannes jury press conference on Tuesday, Laverty further talked about Gaza in remarks about this year’s film festival.
“You see so much violence, genocide in Gaza and all these terrible things,” he said. “The idea of coming to a festival – which is a celebration of diversity, imagination, tenderness — when there’s such vulgar, vicious, systematic violence. The idea of attending to a festival where there’ll be contradiction and nuance and beauty and inspiration. It knocked me out, to be honest.”
Before the start of the Cannes Film Festival last year, more than 350 members of the film industry — including Bardem, Sarandon, Ruffalo, and Richard Gere — signed an open letter condemning the festival’s “silence” over Israel’s military campaign in Gaza targeting Hamas terrorists.
Emmy-winning actress Hannah Einbinder recently criticized Hollywood’s silence about the Israel-Hamas war during a guest appearance on an episode of Zeteo’s “Beyond Israelism” podcast that was released in full on Tuesday.
“It pisses me off,” said the “Hacks” actress. “Because I’m sitting here with [Algerian-Palestinian activist] Mahmoud [Khalil], who has so much to risk and who has risked so much who has sacrificed so much … And I look at these people who have absolutely every privilege imaginable to mankind and they cannot utter a single word. I guess it makes me naive, but I cannot understand it. I really can’t understand it. And I hear people say that they don’t know enough and I — I don’t, it’s like, OK, so what do you do all day?”
“People in Hollywood, unfortunately, need these issues to affect a white person for them to see it as relating to them,” she stated. “Like, they see Jimmy Kimmel getting taken off the air suddenly, they see Stephen Colbert’s show being canceled by CBS, which is owned by the Ellisons, and they go, ‘How could this possibly happen?’ And it’s like, we know how because we saw students and professors and journalists and authors and Palestinian folks be silenced and fired and expelled and imprisoned … it took it happening to these white men for people to be like, ‘Oh my God.’”
In her acceptance speech at the Emmys last year, Einbinder declared “Free Palestine.”
Uncategorized
Netanyahu Held Secret Meeting With Emirati President in the UAE During Iran War, PM’s Office Says
Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu speaks during a ceremony commemorating Israel’s Remembrance Day for fallen soldiers, or Yom HaZikaron, at the Military Cemetery on Mount Herzl in Jerusalem, April 21, 2026. Photo: ILIA YEFIMOVICH/Pool via REUTERS
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu visited the United Arab Emirates and met the Emirati president during the war with Iran, the Prime Minister’s Office said on Wednesday in what would be their first confirmed meeting.
According to the statement, the meeting resulted in an “historic breakthrough” in relations between Israel and the UAE.
A source familiar with the meeting said Netanyahu and Sheikh Mohammed bin Zayed (MBZ) met in Al-Ain, an oasis city by the Oman border, on March 26 and that their meeting lasted several hours.
The source said that Mossad Chief Dedi Barnea made at least two visits to the UAE during the war with Iran to coordinate military actions. The intelligence chief’s visit was first reported by the Wall Street Journal.
Especially after coming under attack during the Iran war, the UAE has strengthened its relationships with the United States and Israel, with which it opened ties in the 2020 Abraham Accords. It views the relationship with Israel as a lever for regional influence and a unique channel to Washington.
Israel sent batteries for its Iron Dome interception system and personnel to operate them to the UAE during the war, US Ambassador to Israel Mike Huckabee said on Tuesday.
The UAE is a regional business and financial hub and one of Washington’s most important allies. It has pursued an assertive foreign policy and carved its own sphere of influence across the Middle East and Africa.
Iran‘s strikes on Gulf states in response to the US-Israeli attacks targeted the UAE more than its neighbors, hitting civilian infrastructure and energy facilities.
Unlike several Gulf peers, the UAE has a pipeline that allows it to divert some oil exports around the blockaded Strait of Hormuz, making it more able to withstand prolonged disruption. But the war risks severely damaging its role as a global economic center that offers security and ease in the region.
