Uncategorized
Why American Eagle now has a mezuzah at its Times Square flagship
(New York Jewish Week) — American Eagle Outfitters now has a mezuzah on the front door of its flagship Times Square location, courtesy of Chabad, the Hasidic outreach movement.
The parchment with Jewish holy text in an oblong metallic case, traditionally a marker of a Jewish home or establishment, was affixed on the apparel brand’s door as part of the recently concluded convention of CTeen, Chabad’s youth group. At a concert in Times Square on Saturday night, thousands of teens from more than 30 countries gathered to sing Jewish songs — and witness the mezuzah being hung.
Out of all the retailers in Times Square, how did Chabad choose American Eagle?
That question has proven surprisingly hard to answer, as representatives of neither Chabad nor American Eagle agreed to speak on the record about the relationship between the Hasidic movement and the apparel brand.
But a clue to the reason lies with American Eagle CEO Jay L. Schottenstein, a Jewish philanthropist whose family has donated tens of millions of dollars to a range of Jewish organizations. ArtScroll’s translations of the Talmud, for example, bear the name “Schottenstein,” and the family has given to a range of Jewish institutions in Columbus, Ohio, where the Schottenstein family is based. American Eagle’s revenue for fiscal year 2022 was projected at nearly $3.5 billion, according to Forbes.
Chabad is among the beneficiaries of the Jay and Jeanie Schottenstein Foundation, which gave more than $200,000 to the movement’s institutions in 2020, the most recent year for which tax documents are available. Since 2014, American Eagle has also given Chabad access to the retail giant’s gigantic advertising screens in Times Square.
Rabbi Aryeh Klattman, a Chabad rabbi from Columbus, told the New York Jewish Week that American Eagle “is now the most inclusive brand in America” due to its hanging of the mezuzah.
“I salute them,” Klattman said. “It meant so much to every teenager who was there. It was an expression of Jewish pride.”
Stefan Schiff, a senior and tennis star at Bexley High School in the Columbus area, was the conference attendee who placed the Jewish ritual object on the store’s doorpost.
“This is a big honor for me,” Schiff said in a statement. “I am proud to be a part of such a tremendous display of Jewish pride together with my Jewish brothers and sisters from around the world.”
Chabad said that the ritual object is “Times Square’s first-ever mezuzah,” a bold claim that is almost certainly inaccurate. The New York Jewish Week did not determine conclusively whether a mezuzah is, at present, affixed to any doors in one of the busiest public spaces of the most Jewish city in the country. But less than a decade ago, a building on 40th Street and Seventh Avenue was home to a synagogue, the Garment Center Congregation. That building’s address currently boasts the Margaritaville Resort Times Square. (The synagogue, incidentally, is suing the building’s developer).
Additionally, which set of blocks, exactly, counts as “Times Square” is up for debate, though an expansive definition proposed last year by New York City itself includes parts of the Garment District, which was once heavily Jewish. Those borders also include at least one synagogue.
Rabbi Mendy Kotlarsky, the Chabad director of outreach, told the New York Jewish Week that Chabad “sent out a couple of the guys to scout the area” to search for a mezuzah.
But Kotlarsky acknowledged that the claim might be debunked.
“We’re walking around Times Square, and in Duffy Square, and we didn’t see any,” he said. “Nobody ever claimed to have put up the first mezuzah. We are the first to claim it. If somebody came to me and said, “‘I put up the first mezuzah,’ I would say, ‘You’re right.’”
“That’s not what’s important to me,” Kotlarsky added. “What’s important was we were able to do that and the teens were able to connect with it.”
The event also took place at the end of a Shabbat that a small white supremacist group in Iowa had promoted as a “Day of Hate,” prompting police warnings. The day ended with no discernible uptick in antisemitic activity, both in New York and across the country.
“This day was designated by other people as the ‘Day of Hate,’” Klattman said. “The best response to darkness is light and love.”
—
The post Why American Eagle now has a mezuzah at its Times Square flagship appeared first on Jewish Telegraphic Agency.
Uncategorized
Gaza ‘Board of Peace’ to Convene at WH on Feb. 19, One Day After Trump’s Meeting with Netanyahu
US President Donald Trump speaks to the media during the 56th annual World Economic Forum (WEF) meeting in Davos, Switzerland, January 22, 2026. Photo: REUTERS/Denis Balibouse/File Photo
i24 News – A senior official from one of the member states confirms to i24NEWS that an invitation has been received for a gathering of President Trump’s Board of Peace at the White House on February 19, just one day after the president’s planned meeting with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
The meeting comes amid efforts to advance the implementation of the second phase of the Gaza ceasefire, following the limited reopening of the Rafah crossing, the expected announcement on the composition and mandate of the International Stabilization Force, and anticipation of a Trump declaration setting a deadline for Hamas to disarm.
In Israel officials assess that the announcement is expected very soon but has been delayed in part due to ongoing talks with the Americans over Israel’s demands for the demilitarization of the Gaza Strip. Trump reiterated on Thursday his promise that Hamas will indeed be disarmed.
Uncategorized
If US Attacks, Iran Says It Will Strike US Bases in the Region
FILE PHOTO: Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi meets with Omani Foreign Minister Sayyid Badr Albusaidi in Muscat, Oman, February 6, 2026. Photo: Omani Ministry of Foreign Affairs/ Handout via REUTERS/File Photo
Iran will strike US bases in the Middle East if it is attacked by US forces that have massed in the region, its foreign minister said on Saturday, insisting that this should not be seen as an attack on the countries hosting them.
Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi spoke to Qatari Al Jazeera TV a day after Tehran and Washington pledged to continue indirect nuclear talks following what both sides described as positive discussions on Friday in Oman.
While Araqchi said no date had yet been set for the next round of negotiations, US President Donald Trump said they could take place early next week. “We and Washington believe it should be held soon,” Araqchi said.
Trump has threatened to strike Iran after a US naval buildup in the region, demanding that it renounce uranium enrichment, a possible pathway to nuclear bombs, as well as stopping ballistic missile development and support for armed groups around the region. Tehran has long denied any intent to weaponize nuclear fuel production.
While both sides have indicated readiness to revive diplomacy over Tehran’s long-running nuclear dispute with the West, Araqchi balked at widening the talks out.
“Any dialogue requires refraining from threats and pressure. (Tehran) only discusses its nuclear issue … We do not discuss any other issue with the US,” he said.
Last June, the US bombed Iranian nuclear facilities, joining in the final stages of a 12-day Israeli bombing campaign. Tehran has since said it has halted uranium enrichment activity.
Its response at the time included a missile attack on a US base in Qatar, which maintains good relations with both Tehran and Washington.
In the event of a new US attack, Araqchi said the consequences could be similar.
“It would not be possible to attack American soil, but we will target their bases in the region,” he said.
“We will not attack neighboring countries; rather, we will target US bases stationed in them. There is a big difference between the two.”
Iran says it wants recognition of its right to enrich uranium, and that putting its missile program on the negotiating table would leave it vulnerable to Israeli attacks.
Uncategorized
My university wants me to sign a loyalty oath — am I in America or Vichy France?
As a historian of modern France, I have rarely seen a connection between my everyday life in my adopted state of Texas and my work on my adopted specialization: the period we call Vichy France. Apart from the Texan boast that the Lone Star Republic is bigger than the French Republic, and the small town of Paris, Texas, which boasts its own Eiffel Tower, I had no reason to compare the two places where I have spent more than half of my life.
Until now.
Last week, professors and instructors at the University of Houston received an unsettling memo from the administration, which asked us to sign a statement that we teach rather than “indoctrinate” our students.
Though the administration did not define “indoctrinate,” it hardly takes a PhD in English to read between the lines. Indoctrination is precisely what our state government has already forbidden us from doing in our classes. There must not be the slightest sign in our courses and curricula of references to diversity, identity and inclusion. The catch-all word used is “ideology,” a term Governor Greg Abbott recently invoked when he warned that “Texas is targeting professors who are more focused on pushing leftist ideologies rather than preparing students to lead our nation. We must end indoctrination.”
This is not the first time in the past several months that I have been reminded of what occurred in France during the four years that it was ruled by its German occupiers and Vichy collaborators.
Very briefly, with Germany’s rapid and complete defeat of France in 1940, an authoritarian, antisemitic and collaborationist regime assumed power. Among its first acts was to purge French Jews from all the professions, including high school and university faculties, and to impose an “oath of loyalty” to the person of Marshal Philippe Pétain, the elderly but ramrod straight and clear-headed hero of World War I.
The purpose of the oath was simple and straightforward: By demanding the fealty of all state employees to the person of Pétain, it also demanded their hostility to the secular and democratic values of the French republican tradition. Nevertheless, an overwhelming majority of teachers signed the oath —even the novelist and feminist Simone de Beauvoir, who needed her salary as a lycée teacher, as did the writer Jean Guéhenno, a visceral anti-Pétainist who continued to teach at the prestigious Paris lycée Henri IV until he was fired in 1943.
Vichy’s ministers of education understood the vital importance that schools and universities played in shaping citizens. Determined to replace the revolutionary values of liberty, equality and fraternity with the reactionary goals of family, work and homeland, they sought to eliminate “godless schools” and instill a “moral order” based on submission to state and church authorities. This radical experiment, powered by a reactionary ideology, to return France to the golden age of kings, cardinals and social castes came to an inglorious end with the Allied liberation of the country and collapse of Vichy scarcely four years after it had begun.
The French Jewish historian Marc Bloch — who joined the Resistance and sacrificed his life on behalf of a very different ideology we can call humanism — always insisted on the importance of comparative history. But comparison was important not because it identified similarities but because it illuminated differences. Clearly, the situation of professors at UH is very different from that of their French peers in Vichy France. We are not risking our jobs, much less our lives, by resisting this ham-handed effort to demand our loyalty to an anti-indoctrination memo.
But the two situations are not entirely dissimilar, either. Historians of fascism like Robert Paxton remind us that such movements begin slowly, then suddenly assume terrifying proportions. This was certainly the case in interwar France, where highly polarized politics, frequent political violence and a long history of antisemitism and anti-republicanism prepared the ground for Vichy. In France, Paxton writes, this slow, then sudden transformation “changed the practice of citizenship from the enjoyment of constitutional rights and duties to participation in mass ceremonies of affirmation and conformity.”
As an historian of France, I always thought its lurch into authoritarianism was shocking, but not surprising. After all, many of the elements for this change had existed well before 1940. But as a citizen of America, I am not just shocked, but also surprised by official demands for affirmation and conformity. One day I will find the time to think hard about my naiveté. But the time is now to think about how we should respond to these demands.
The post My university wants me to sign a loyalty oath — am I in America or Vichy France? appeared first on The Forward.