Uncategorized
The PBS series ‘Black and Jewish America’ gets it right — except the Black and Jewish part
The opening scene in the first of four episodes of the PBS series “Black and Jewish America: An Interwoven History” captures a truly wonderful event: a Passover Seder led by culinary genius Michael Twitty that also includes his fellow rock-star Jews of Color Jamaica Kincaid and Rabbi Angela Buchdahl, among others. Rabbi Shais Rishon regales the group with a brief accounting of his Black and Jewish ancestry going back to the 1780s — an origin story that would seem to offer a natural entry point into the history of Black and Jewish life in America, at least through the 20th century.
Except we never hear from him again — or any other Jew of Color seated at that table.
What we do get in the four-hour series presented by Harvard historian and “Finding Your Roots” host Henry Louis Gates Jr. is a reductive depiction of the histories of Blacks and Jews as two separate groups. That’s despite the incessant reminder that I, and countless other Jews of Color, including those seated at that Seder table, have been making for decades: “Blacks and Jews” is a misnomer. The two are not mutually exclusive. Jews can be Black and Blacks can be Jews — and you cannot talk about the relationship between the two without acknowledging those who inhabit that intersection and have been influencing each group’s attitudes about the other for millennia.
Someone who has lived in both of those spaces all his life is University of Connecticut philosophy professor Lewis Gordon, who describes the binary as endemic in academia.
“They’re really invested in an ongoing stereotypical discourse, in which Blacks are represented by Christians and Jews are represented by whites,” he said. “Ultimately, they’re always talking about it as ‘Blacks and Jews,’ even when Black Jews are in the room.”
To be sure, there are other Black Jews in the program’s interview rooms, including Rabbi Capers Funnye of Chicago’s Beth Shalom B’nai Zaken Ethiopian Hebrew Congregation. But Funnye is one of many luminaries asked to comment on facts, incidents, or dynamics specific to one or both of the communities, rather than on the history of his own: a historically rich congregation that has served as a bridge between largely Black Israelite groups and predominantly white Jewish denominations.
And Funnye aside, Israelites aren’t mentioned at all, even as Israelite communities have crossed paths with mainstream Jewish congregations around the country for more than 150 years — a history the producers told me they were aware of but didn’t have the time or space to address.
“The Hebrew Israelite community is so complicated in and of itself that it felt almost like we could only bite off just the smallest piece of it,” co-producer Sara Wolitzky told me over Zoom. “We didn’t want to get that wrong, because it’s such a complicated set of experiences in its own right.”
That may be, but that’s like saying Jerusalem is claimed by both Jews and Palestinians; let’s talk about Tokyo instead.
As for that binary discussion, the series is competently told and offers deep dives into areas not widely covered in other Blacks-and-Jews works. In particular, it recognizes that Black and Jewish allyship wasn’t always a one-way street, in which more privileged Jews came to the aid of downtrodden Blacks. In the early 20th century, it notes, Black newspapers editorialized against pogroms in Europe and against the rise of Nazism.
The vein continues with the recording of Billie Holiday’s anti-lynching standard, “Strange Fruit,” though in a curious understatement it describes its Jewish songwriter Abel Meeropol — writing as Lewis Allan — as a schoolteacher, rather than as the fiercely progressive adoptive father of the sons of Ethel and Julius Rosenberg who also wrote lyrics for Paul Robeson.
A lesser-known story the series does allow room to breathe is that of the other Brown v. Board of Education: Esther Brown, a Jewish housewife in Merriam, Kansas, whose successful school-desegregation efforts in partnership with African American parents helped lay the groundwork for the landmark 1954 Supreme Court case — named, as it happens, for a different Brown.
To each of these peaks of progress and partnership are valleys of dispute and discontent. Jewish support of Black entertainers was often accompanied by economic exploitation; Jews fighting against restrictive covenants were undermined by others building whites-only Levittowns.
The alliance reached its zenith, of course, in the Civil Rights Movement, though the program largely confines that story to the 1960s, omitting crucial Black-Jewish collaborations that preceded it — including that of the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. and his Jewish adviser and fundraiser, Stanley Levison. And while it briefly mentions one Black Jewish civil-rights leader, Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee chairman Chuck McDew, he’s described as a “Jew by choice” — a moniker not used in reference to Jews in the program void of melanin.
At least he’s included. Sammy Davis Jr., who was also intensely involved in the movement, is nowhere to be found.
“Sammy Davis was a convert, right?” Wolitzky said, suddenly imposing a standard that apparently wasn’t a problem when talking about McDew, whose Judaism very much informed his decision to become a movement leader. “When you’re talking about Black Jews or Jews of African descent, there are so many different versions of that. Highlighting only one example like a Sammy Davis Jr. can misrepresent that.”
I’m sorry. You can laugh at, laugh with, or make one-eyed–Black–Jewish–Nixon-loving jokes all you want about Sammy, but you can hardly deny he was a major force in bringing awareness to the entire world — let alone to Blacks and Jews — that a person could be both, and proud of it. There is no way to deny his existence shaped the attitudes of both Blacks and Jews about the other.
Following the movement came the inevitable breakup, with Civil Rights morphing into Black Power and white activists expelled. A particular flare-up is highlighted in New York’s Ocean Hill–Brownsville school dispute between largely Jewish teachers and Black parents. Yet again, a key figure in that conflict who would later become a Black Jewish darling of mainstream Judaism is missing: Julius Lester, who during the dispute was accused of stoking antisemitic flames on his radio show before his Conservative conversion two decades later.
The series finally does return to Black Jews in the final episode, briefly, to recount Israel’s airlift of Ethiopian Jews in the 1980s, an act presented as if a more than 2,000-year-old community had suddenly been discovered. That segues into the revelation that there are Black Jews in America, and that it is suddenly acceptable to be one — a conversation that is quickly swallowed up by euphoria over the biracial phenomenon of Barack Obama.
If it sounds like I’ve been incessantly harping on where are the Black Jews?, co-producer Phil Bertelsen expressed exactly that.
“Do you have any questions beyond that?” he asked.
I did. I was curious about the mechanics of the production, and whether or not he and Wolitzky had documented how many times they showed the alliance holding hands versus reaching for each other’s throats.
“I didn’t count them,” he said.
Viewers don’t have to either; we get the point. It’s “I love you,” “I never want to see you again!” “I love you…” and on and on. And in that, the series is instructive. What’s missing is a strong summation that countless others who have written about the perpetual Black-Jewish makeup-and-breakup ritual have noted: If the two communities didn’t truly care for each other, they wouldn’t be talking about each other so much.
That’s something nearly every Black Jew I’ve ever met would tell you — including the ones at the Seder table. It’s too bad they didn’t get the chance.
The post The PBS series ‘Black and Jewish America’ gets it right — except the Black and Jewish part appeared first on The Forward.
Uncategorized
Al Jazeera Forum Platforms Terrorist Leaders and Their Sympathizers
The Al Jazeera Media Network logo is seen on its headquarters building in Doha, Qatar, June 8, 2017. Photo: REUTERS/Naseem Zeitoon
At the 17th annual Al Jazeera Forum in Doha, Qatar, familiar faces took the stage to discuss the aftermath of October 7 and its broader regional and global implications. These figures are familiar not for their credibility, but because the lineup included terrorist leaders and their sympathizers.
Upon entrance to the forum, an “in memoriam” lined the halls filled with faces of Al Jazeera journalists who died during the Israel-Hamas war.
Eitan Fischberger, who first exposed the terror-filled line up of speakers at the conference, found that five of these so-called journalists are also familiar faces. These “journalists” didn’t become well-known for trustworthy and accurate reporting, but rather because all five of them had well-established ties with terrorist organizations such as Hamas in the Gaza Strip.
Five. The answer is five Al Jazeera terrorists
https://t.co/2MjtM3MW9V pic.twitter.com/PQzULPF5zF
— Eitan Fischberger (@EFischberger) February 6, 2026
Hamas terrorist leader Khaled Meshaal and Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi were two of the biggest attractions at the event. UN Special Rapporteur Francesca Albanese, sanctioned by the US for her pro-terror rhetoric, also took part in a session via video call.
Despite the mass slaughter of Iranian civilians, the focus of every speaker at the conference was laser-focused on Israel. This was not accidental. After all, Abbas Araghchi, who, given his position in the Iranian regime, has stood by as thousands of Iranian citizens were murdered, was given a spotlight.
From that platform, Araghchi blamed Israel for regional instability, saying that “Israel’s expansionist project requires that neighboring countries be weakened” and amounts to the “enforcement of permanent inequality.”
For this, he called for Israel to be “punished.” The irony would be laughable if it weren’t so grotesque. A senior official of a regime that jails dissidents, executes protesters, and bankrolls terrorist proxies across the region stood before an audience and positioned himself as a moral authority on justice and stability.
Iran’s FM Abbas Araghchi slammed the double standard allowing Israel to expand its military while others in the region are asked to reduce their defensive capabilities.
Araghchi spoke at the Al Jazeera Forum in Doha, an event focusing on geopolitical shifts in the Middle East. pic.twitter.com/sRQ8khI5D4
— Al Jazeera English (@AJEnglish) February 7, 2026
Predictably, in Hamas terrorist leader Khaled Meshaal’s session, he similarly dodged any blame for the ensuing war. What he did was suggest that “the flood” — the operation name chosen for the October 7 massacre — successfully brought the Palestinian cause back to global consciousness. He specifically praised the outrage seen on university campuses and across social media, treating international unrest as a strategic victory.
Naturally, as a terrorist leader, Meshaal deflected the requirement for Hamas to disarm, saying “criminalizing the resistance” is not something it can accept. As long as Israel exists, Hamas will not disarm.
It is the most recent example of Hamas leaders being explicit in their absolute unwillingness to adhere to the ceasefire agreement to which they signed.
Beyond actual terrorists, terrorist sympathizer Francesca Albanese was invited to speak, joining a session abroad via video. Unsurprisingly, her words echoed those of the terrorist leaders listed above, as she spoke of Israel as the “common enemy” of the world.
It is dangerous enough that a UN Rapporteur shared a platform at the same conference as terrorists. That her language is barely distinguishable from that of designated terrorists should probably come as little surprise given Albanese’s previous actions.
Humanity has a “common enemy” in Israel, Francesca Albanese tells Qatar’s Al Jazeera forum pic.twitter.com/l1wXNiS7yP
— Hillel Neuer (@HillelNeuer) February 8, 2026
Mustafa Barghouti, who has similarly expressed support for Palestinian terrorism in the past, discussed how the Palestinian will could not be broken, and how the fact that people stayed in Gaza throughout the war displayed the “failure of Israel” despite the “genocide.” In reality, this only goes to show that Palestinian civilians were never the target of Israel, which fought tirelessly to root out Hamas and other terrorists, while doing its utmost to avoid harming civilians.
Mustafa Barghouti, secretary-general of the Palestinian National Initiative, said that the steadfastness of Palestinians in Gaza despite genocide, shows ‘the failure of Israel’.
Barghouti is at the Al Jazeera Forum, an event focusing on geopolitical shifts in the Middle East. pic.twitter.com/X9Fjex3kWc
— Al Jazeera English (@AJEnglish) February 7, 2026
Al Jazeera’s support for terrorism is not new. What makes this moment particularly alarming is the scale of its influence on the world, and how it brings terrorists and their sympathizers onto a stage in light of global events. This was not a conference about the future of the Middle East. It was an echo chamber where terrorism got the platform.
The author is a contributor to HonestReporting, a Jerusalem-based media watchdog with a focus on antisemitism and anti-Israel bias — where a version of this article first appeared.
Uncategorized
Erdogan’s Atomic Ambition: Why Turkey Is the Middle East’s Next Proliferation Crisis
Riot police walk outside the Istanbul provincial office of the main opposition Republican People’s Party (CHP), as CHP supporters gather near the office, after a recent court ruling that ousted the CHP’s Istanbul provincial leadership, in Istanbul, Turkey, Sept. 8, 2025. Photo: REUTERS/Dilara Acikgoz
As the global community remains transfixed by the diplomatic theater in Oman, a more ominous atomic shadow is lengthening across the Eastern Mediterranean.
While Western envoys chase a “nuclear framework” with a defiant Iran, Recep Tayyip Erdogan is quietly executing a multi-decade roadmap to transform Turkey into the region’s next nuclear-threshold state.
We are witnessing the birth of a sophisticated, NATO-embedded “Iran 2.0” — yet the international community continues to treat Ankara as a standard ally rather than the primary proliferation risk it has become.
Unit 1 of the Akkuyu Nuclear Power Plant stands at 99 percent completion. While marketed as a civilian energy panacea, Akkuyu represents a strategic Trojan Horse of unprecedented proportions. It is the world’s first “Build-Own-Operate” nuclear project, entirely financed and controlled by Russia’s Rosatom. This arrangement has not only granted the Kremlin a permanent nuclear anchor on NATO’s southern flank, but has also provided the Turkish state with the technical laboratory necessary to master the full nuclear fuel cycle under the guise of commercial cooperation.
The most alarming development in Turkey’s nuclear trajectory is not found in its power reactors, but in its naval shipyards. By officially prioritizing the “NUKDEN” initiative — Turkey’s nuclear-powered submarine program — Erdogan has discovered the ultimate legal loophole for domestic uranium enrichment. Under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, “peaceful” enrichment remains a contentious grey area, but the production of highly enriched uranium for naval propulsion is a recognized military necessity that bypasses many traditional civilian safeguards.
By pursuing a nuclear navy, Ankara is signaling its intent to stockpile the very fissile material required for a warhead, all while maintaining a veneer of maritime sovereignty. This is a tactical evolution of the “Iran Model.” Where Tehran chose a path of open defiance, Ankara is choosing a path of “Legalist Proliferation,” using its status as a naval power to justify a fuel cycle that would otherwise trigger immediate international sanctions.
This “Stealth Proliferation” is backed by a massive, nine-billion-dollar cash injection from Moscow, ensuring that the infrastructure for this “naval requirement” is built with the highest Russian expertise.
A nuclear reactor is merely a forge; its true threat is realized only when paired with a delivery system. In June 2025, Erdogan issued a decree to massively expand Turkey’s production of medium- and long-range missiles. This was not a random military upgrade. When paired with the 2026 commissioning of Akkuyu, the picture becomes clear: Turkey is building the two halves of a nuclear deterrent in parallel.
The “Araghchi Doctrine” currently being debated in Doha — Iran’s refusal to negotiate on its own missile program — finds a mirror image in Ankara’s “National Missile Program.” Erdogan has been vocal in his disdain for the “nuclear OPEC,” arguing that it is unfair for some nations to possess nuclear-tipped missiles while others are barred from the club. By developing indigenous missile technology capable of reaching any capital in the Middle East or Europe, Turkey is ensuring that once its “breakout” occurs, the delivery mechanism will already be in place, tested, and ready.
For too long, Turkey has been granted what can only be described as a “NATO Pass.” Washington has consistently hesitated to enforce the Countering America’s Adversaries Through Sanctions Act with the necessary vigor, fearing the loss of the Incirlik airbase or a total rupture in the alliance. This hesitation has been read in Ankara as a green light. Erdogan views the international order not as a set of rules to follow, but as a set of constraints to be dismantled.
The strategic reality is that Turkey is no longer content to sit under the American nuclear umbrella. It seeks to build its own, potentially in a trilateral partnership with Saudi Arabia and Pakistan. This “Islamic Nuclear Axis” would combine Turkish high-tech delivery systems, Saudi capital, and Pakistani technical blueprints to create a new center of gravity that is entirely independent of Western control.
Amine Ayoub, a fellow at the Middle East Forum, is a policy analyst and writer based in Morocco. Follow him on X: @amineayoubx
Uncategorized
Map of Israeli targets goes up in Tehran as tensions simmer ahead of Netanyahu’s White House visit
(JTA) — Iran has erected a map showing Israeli targets for potential strikes in a prominent propaganda spot as another week dawns with uncertainty over whether it will face a U.S. attack.
The map went up over the weekend in Tehran’s Palestine Square, a frequent site for billboards meant to broadcast the Islamic Republic’s bravado when it comes to Israel and the United States. It includes the words “You start, we finish!”
It comes as President Donald Trump continues to weigh military intervention against Iran and as Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu plans to visit the White House to press for his demands in Trump’s negotiations with Iran.
“Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is expected to meet with US President Donald Trump this Wednesday in Washington, and will discuss with him the negotiations with Iran,” Netanyahu’s office said in a statement on Saturday. “The Prime Minister believes any negotiations must include limitations on ballistic missiles and a halting of the support for the Iranian axis.”
A will-he-or-won’t-he air has pervaded for weeks as Trump has considered different strategies for dealing with Iran, which has said it would view both U.S. and Israeli targets as legitimate if the United States strikes to curb its nuclear ambitions, less than a year after the last U.S. attack on Iranian sites, which came during a war between Iran and Israel.
On Friday, Jared Kushner, Trump’s son-in-law and Middle East advisor, and Steve Witkoff, his Middle East envoy, met directly with Iran’s foreign minister in Oman. The foreign minister, Abbas Araqchi, said the talks had gotten off to a “good start” but that Iran was willing to negotiate only about the nuclear program, not the missiles that concern Israel.
Trump, too, told reporters that there had been “very good talks” that indicated that Iran was prepared to make more concessions than it had offered in the past. Still, he said, “They know that if they don’t make a deal the consequences are very steep.”
The next day, Kushner and Witkoff also visited a U.S. naval carrier that has been moved to the region as part of what Trump has called an “armada” that would enable U.S. military action in the event that Trump decides it is needed. Netanyahu has moved up his planned White House visit — which will be his fourth since Trump retook office last year — to advocate for Israel’s interests in the negotiations. It was at a previous visit, last April, that Trump disclosed for the first time that the United States had opened direct talks with Iran. Just over two months later, Trump joined Israel’s campaign against Iran with a bombing attack that came a day after he said he had not decided whether to strike.
The post Map of Israeli targets goes up in Tehran as tensions simmer ahead of Netanyahu’s White House visit appeared first on The Forward.