Connect with us

Uncategorized

How the Media’s Antisemitism Machine Helped Take Down Josh Shapiro

Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro (D) holds a rally in support of US Vice President Kamala Harris’ Democratic presidential election campaign in Ambler, Pennsylvania, US, July 29, 2024. Photo: REUTERS/Rachel Wisniewski

We’ve been here before, and now Israel and the Jews are at the center of the US presidential election race.

Until Vice President Kamala Harris announced Minnesota Governor Tim Walz as her running mate on Tuesday, mainstream and social media outlets focused attention on Jewish Pennsylvania Governor Josh Shapiro, who was considered a front runner.

The New York Times “Draws Fresh Scrutiny” to Take Down a Proud Jew

Despite Shapiro’s capabilities, his effectiveness as a politician, and his policies on issues that matter to the American people, the media, including The New York Times, chose to focus on him as a pro-Israel Jew who has been outspoken on antisemitism on college campuses.

Is this really such a devastating a problem for American voters who are focused on the constantly rising prices of basic necessities?

It apparently doesn’t matter that this Statista poll shows foreign policy as second-to-last on the list of top voter issues:

Or likewise, that this ABC News/IPSOS poll shows that the Israel-Hamas war is the lowest priority of all issues among US voters.

All that matters, according to the Times, is that Shapiro has “been one of the Democratic Party’s staunchest defenders of Israel at a moment when the party is splintered over the war in Gaza” and that he considers himself “a Zionist.”

The Times tried to damn him by revealing on Saturday that he volunteered “in the Israeli army” when he was 20-years-old, when he actually just did some volunteer projects on an IDF base.

An op-ed Shapiro wrote for his college newspaper, written after his experience volunteering in Israel, was initially resurfaced by the Philadephia Inquirer. At the time, he wrote that he didn’t believe Palestinians were capable of peace because they are “too battle-minded.”

This is a view that 30 years later, created a rumble across the media, despite his attempt to take it back. Shapiro has been viewed as a centrist in the Democratic Party, and has been very outspoken about his support for a two-state solution.

Social media dictates the news agenda

Shapiro’s five-month stint doing volunteer service projects, including on an IDF base more than 30 years ago, spread across social media and the Twitterverse (or rather X-Universe). Of course, it was twisted into him “serving in a foreign military.”

Wikipedia is trying very hard to cover up that Josh Shapiro voluntarily served in a foreign military pic.twitter.com/l7A4rDrQCL

— ib (@Indian_Bronson) August 3, 2024

Josh Shapiro is likely to be our next vice president

Josh Shapiro volunteered for the IDF but not the US military

Many of these dual-citizens have more loyalty to Isreal than America pic.twitter.com/tXwrEA7R89

— Jake Shields (@jakeshieldsajj) August 3, 2024

Then, the media latched onto this antisemitic agenda, making it a central issue. The question of whether it was a good idea for Shapiro, a Jewish politician, to be up for one of the highest ranking US political positions has been an issue of debate on television broadcasts. Is this appropriate, they asked? Especially since he is pro-Israel? Is America ready for a Jewish and pro-Israel vice president?

As reports leaked of Harris’ official pick of Walz, celebrations kicked off for a Zionist losing out:

Yeah!!! A sigh of relief that Kamala Harris chose Minnesota Governor Tim Walz as her VP. He has a great record as governor. And it sends an important message that she did not chose Josh Shapiro.
Some of Walz policies as governor:
He cut child poverty by 1/3!!! universal school… pic.twitter.com/leBjDDvzk6

— Medea Benjamin (@medeabenjamin) August 6, 2024

Across the country, an inherent anti-Israel narrative has taken hold since October 7, and even those well-meaning, Jewish allies filled with concern have been duped into dividing Americans even more with this conversation.

.@RepAuchincloss: “Those in the overly online left who are attacking Josh Shapiro’s pro-Israel positions in a different way than they are attacking non-Jewish veep contenders’ positions, they’re just telling on themselves. There’s a strong undercurrent of antisemitism to that.” pic.twitter.com/tI1S2satLk

— CNN This Morning with Kasie Hunt (@CNNThisMorning) August 5, 2024

While there were CNN interviews on its news broadcasts like the one above — where anchors and analysts alike were quick to condemn this narrative and discuss its antisemitic nature — this goes beyond what would be acceptable or politically correct to discuss for any other group. The fact that Shapiro was singled out among a list of alternative options for Harris who have virtually the same stances on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and US aid to Israel and Gaza is antisemitic.

If Americans care about inflation, the economy and immigration most out of anything, why would they vote based off of whether or not he is a Jew?

HonestReporting’s executive director Gil Hoffman brings us back to the source.

Did this @nytimes article that exaggerated Josh Shapiro’s connection to Israel lead to him not being picked at @KamalaHarris‘s running mate? You decide. https://t.co/WSTgNsYU7G

— Gil Hoffman (@Gil_Hoffman) August 6, 2024

An important point, and one that will most likely not be addressed in mainstream media.

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.

The post How the Media’s Antisemitism Machine Helped Take Down Josh Shapiro first appeared on Algemeiner.com.

Uncategorized

Netherlands Boosts Security Funding for Jewish Institutions Amid Surge in Antisemitic Attacks

Police outside a Jewish school following an explosion that caused minor damages, in Amsterdam, Netherlands, March 14, 2026. Photo: REUTERS/Piroschka van de Wouw

The Netherlands is significantly boosting security funding for Jewish communities amid a relentless surge of antisemitic incidents, as synagogues, schools, and cultural institutions across the country face escalating threats and authorities move to reinforce protection in response to growing alarm.

During a parliamentary session on Tuesday, Dutch Justice and Security Minister David van Weel announced an additional €700,000 in the 2026 security budget to safeguard Jewish buildings and institutions nationwide, raising total annual funding to €2 million in response to a sustained wave of antisemitic incidents.

Van Weel explained these funds will support security at synagogues, Jewish schools, cultural institutions, and public events, noting that the existing €1.3 million allocation had already been exhausted in 2025, leaving dozens of applications unfunded, with further demand expected this year.

“The additional funding is intended to strengthen protection for the Jewish community and reinforce its sense of security,” the Dutch official said.

Van Weel’s announcement came in the wake of a series of antisemitic attacks last month, including small explosions at a synagogue in Rotterdam, a second blast two days later at a Jewish school in Amsterdam, and a third near a Zuidas office building housing the Bank of New York Mellon. 

During Tuesday’s session, lawmakers also reviewed proposals from an antisemitism taskforce aimed at strengthening protections for Jewish students and staff in higher education, alongside broader measures to counter rising hate incidents on campuses.

Mirjam Bikker, leader of the ChristenUnie, a Dutch Protestant political party, called for the government to fully cover security costs at Jewish institutions, describing the current system — under which synagogues and schools are expected to fund their own protection — as “a fundamental reversal of responsibility.”

Like most countries across Europe and the broader Western world, the Netherlands has seen a shocking rise in antisemitic incidents over the last two years, in the wake of the Hamas-led invasion of and massacre across southern Israel on Oct. 7, 2023.

According to newly released figures, Dutch authorities reported antisemitism remained at alarmingly high levels across the country last year, with 867 registered cases in 2025 — virtually unchanged from the 880 incidents recorded the previous year.

Even though Jews make up less than 0.3 percent of the Dutch population, anti-Jewish hate crimes account for 26 percent of all discrimination cases.

Eddo Verdoner, the Dutch national coordinator for combating antisemitism (NCAB), said the data reflects a worrying normalization of antisemitic incidents.

“We have been recording hundreds of antisemitic incidents each year for years now. What I fear is that we are slowly getting used to figures that are unacceptable, that hatred is becoming the new normal,” Verdoner said in a statement.

Continue Reading

Uncategorized

AIPAC Slightly More Popular Than Democratic Party, Poll Finds

Crews prepare the stage at the annual AIPAC Policy Conference in Washington, DC, March 6, 2018. Photo: Reuters / Brian Snyder

A new survey reveals that the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), the premier pro-Israel lobbying group in the US, may be viewed more favorably than the Democratic Party itself amid ongoing debate over whether liberal candidates should continue engaging with the organization.

According to an April 2026 national survey conducted by Echelon Insights, AIPAC posts a net favorable rating that indicates the group is slightly more favorable than the Democratic Party. Per the poll, 18 percent of respondents view the organization positively and 25 percent view the organization negatively. Meanwhile, 27 percent have no opinion of the lobbying group.

Conversely, 42 percent of Americans have a positive opinion of the Democratic Party, according to the poll, and 52 percent have a negative opinion.

AIPAC and the Democratic Party therefore have net favorable ratings among the public of -7 and -10, respectively.

While Democrats remain one of the two dominant political coalitions in the United States, their favorability has been weighed down in part by intensifying internal divisions, including over US policy toward Israel. The liberal wing of the party has grown increasingly hostile toward the Jewish state amid the war in Gaza, with far-left members pushing the party to establish an anti-Israel posture and falsely accusing the Jewish state of committing “genocide” against Palestinians.

AIPAC, by contrast, occupies a different space in the public mind. As a single-issue advocacy organization focused on strengthening US–Israel relations, it does not carry the same ideological baggage or breadth of policy responsibility as a national party.

However, as the war in Gaza deteriorated the popularity of Israel within the Democratic base, AIPAC became the target of scrutiny by party activists seeking to isolate the Jewish state. In primary competitions across the country, Democratic contenders have scrambled to distance themselves from AIPAC, oftentimes publicly vowing not to accept any funding or assistance from the group. 

Yet the polling from Echelon Insights suggests that this elite-level conflict has not translated into widespread public backlash against the organization itself, with 57 of respondents saying they either never heard of the group or have no opinion of it.

Indeed, although AIPAC has become unpopular, polling suggests that the organization has low salience with the general public. Few voters have strong opinions about it compared to other issues, suggesting that outsized attention has been given by progressive politicians and activists to the lobbying group.

Little evidence indicates that affiliation with AIPAC is an electoral liability within Democratic primaries. In March, several anti-Israel candidates lost to AIPAC-backed opponents, including Cook County Commissioner Donna Miller successfully winning the Illinois 2nd Congressional District race and former Rep. Melissa Bean winning the contest for the Illinois 8th Congressional District.

Continue Reading

Uncategorized

Israel Estimates US Blockade of Strait of Hormuz to Slash Iran Oil Exports by 80%

A vessel at the Strait of Hormuz, off the coast of Oman’s Musandam province, April 12, 2026. Photo: REUTERS

As Iran struggles to rebuild damaged military and energy infrastructure amid the current ceasefire, Israel estimates that a US naval blockade of Iranian ports will slash the regime’s oil exports by roughly 80 percent, nearly severing one of Tehran’s last remaining economic lifelines.

According to Israeli security assessments, the US closure of the Strait of Hormuz — a critical global energy chokepoint through which about one-fifth of the world’s oil supply passes — triggered an immediate and dramatic collapse in Iran’s revenue that will lead to a loss of more than $1 billion a month, Walla reported.

US President Donald Trump has claimed the regime is losing about $500 million a day as a result of the blockade. Some experts, such as Miad Maleki of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies think tank, have put the figure at roughly $450 million lost in daily economic activity for Iran.

Regardless of the specific amount, given that energy exports remain the backbone of the regime’s economy, what is left of oil revenues now amounts to little more than a fragile lifeline keeping Tehran temporarily afloat as financial pressure continues to mount.

Even with the naval blockade in place, Iranian authorities have managed to maintain a limited flow of exports by transporting oil from inland production fields to the Gulf of Oman through the multi-billion-dollar Gura–Jask pipeline, an overland route that moves roughly 300,000 barrels per day to global markets.

Israeli officials assess that the blockade and resultant shortfall for Tehran could set off a chain reaction of disruptions, including the shutdown of entire segments of the oil industry.

They also point to severe damage across Iran’s petrochemical and defense sectors, which together have cost an estimated 100,000 jobs at multiple levels, arguing that the cumulative impact is pushing the Iranian regime into a corner.

After repeated efforts to bring Iran back to the negotiating table, the Trump administration escalated pressure on Tehran earlier this month by imposing a naval blockade on vessels entering or leaving Iranian ports through the Strait of Hormuz, aiming to force a deal that would bring an end to the conflict.

Since the start of the war earlier this year, Iran has used control over the Strait of Hormuz as a major source of leverage, militarizing the waterway and sharply restricting maritime traffic through one of the world’s most critical shipping corridors.

Iran has also signaled it intends to maintain control over the strategic shipping lane even after the war ends, potentially imposing transit fees framed as compensation for wartime damage.

After Trump extended the ceasefire indefinitely on Tuesday to allow for renewed diplomatic efforts, it now remains to be seen whether Iran will agree to return to negotiations, as questions persist over whether both sides can bridge widening differences to restart talks.

According to The New York Times, US officials previously proposed a 20-year halt to Iranian uranium enrichment, which Iranian negotiators countered with a five-year suspension that Washington rejected. The White House has also reportedly insisted that Iran dismantle major enrichment sites and surrender more than 400 kilograms of highly enriched uranium.

Even as the regime faces one of its most severe economic crises in decades, Iranian authorities have continued pouring billions into rebuilding military and nuclear infrastructure and supporting regional proxy forces, prioritizing strategic confrontation with Israel over urgent domestic needs such as the country’s worsening water crisis.

The regime has spent billions of dollars supporting its terrorist proxies across the Middle East and operations abroad, with the Quds Force, Iran’s elite paramilitary unit, funneling funds to the Lebanese group Hezbollah, in defiance of international sanctions.

According to the US Treasury Department, Iran provided more than $100 million per month to Hezbollah in 2025, with $1 billion representing only a portion of Tehran’s overall support for the terrorist group, using a “shadow financial system” to transfer funds to Lebanon.

Continue Reading

Copyright © 2017 - 2023 Jewish Post & News