Uncategorized
The Quiet Antisemitism: My Experience as a Jewish College Professor
There are plenty of examples of blatant antisemitism and attacks on Jews that have occurred over the past 10 months. It seems that every day, we read about a synagogue being attacked, a Jewish student being spat on or assaulted, or the all too mainstream protester chants calling for Intifada or for Jews to go back to Poland — and the list goes on.
Perhaps less obvious — but more frequent — is the antisemitism that’s happening under the radar: things that are circumstantial and much harder to prove.
I’m not talking about Jewish writers having their lectures cancelled out of concern “for their safety” — it’s clear to everyone (except the organizers) where the motivation comes from.
No, this is the kind of discrimination that Black people and others experienced before the Civil Rights movement — and even after: being rejected as a tenant on a lease to an apartment, passed over for a job or promotion based on the color of their skin , or — as in my case — perhaps not having a contract renewed at a college after speaking out against their policies regarding “free speech.”
Do I have proof that me being Israeli or Jewish had anything to do with my dismissal?
Absolutely not.
But are the circumstances suspicious? Yes.
Two years ago, I accepted a Visiting Assistant Professorship in the English Department of a private Midwestern college in the United States. It was a one-year contract, and following the first year, the Chair of the Department notified me how much he appreciated my work — noting the anonymous student evaluations that gave me high marks, that a large number of students requested to take a second class with me, and that I helped raise the visibility of the college through public performances by my students. He also informed me that there was restructuring going on in the English Department, which would result in some of the classes I was teaching being offered only periodically.
In short, he asked me if I would be interested in remaining affiliated with the school, and return either every other semester, or, for instance, if another English teacher took a sabbatical. That suited me fine, as it allowed me to continue teaching, but also gave me time for my own creative endeavors back in Los Angeles, where I was commuting from every week.
On October 7, I was not teaching on campus. But like so many other colleges, a segment of the student population rose up to protest Israel. And even though I was a thousand miles away, I received an email from a student member of Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP) notifying all faculty that the group was calling for a one-day strike to protest, accompanied with a list of atrocities Israel had allegedly committed, even listing the bombing of the Al-Shifa hospital in Gaza two weeks earlier, which had already been attributed to a stray missile from Palestinian Islamic Jihad.
How was it possible for one student to access the entire faculty and student body to spew their propaganda?
I contacted the Provost and Dean of the college to inquire. She replied that this was a recent policy change put into place two years earlier to encourage freedom of expression. I asked how this policy might play out if I rebutted the student’s charges through the college-wide email system, only to have another student rebut my defense, and so on and so on?
She replied that if it got out of hand, the school would shut it down.
I replied that the situation had already gotten out of hand, and trusted I wouldn’t be receiving anymore emails from such organizations.
The student newspaper got wind of this, and contacted me for my opinion. Here’s what they wrote in their article:
Safdie, who is of Israeli and Syrian Jewish descent, found sections of the message antisemitic and questioned why he received the email. “I’m all for freedom of expression, but I’m not sure this decision was able to foresee such a situation where students might abuse the privilege and create a hostile work/study environment for other members of the community.”
Fast forward several months, when I returned to campus for the Spring semester. Within a week of arrival, I received an email from the new chair of the English Department (who was also the associate Dean of the Race and Ethnic Studies program). She wanted to set up a Zoom meeting with me — even though our offices were 10 feet apart.
In a carefully worded statement that sounded like it was crafted by an attorney, she got to the point. Although the college was extremely pleased with all the work that I’d done, and that all my students loved my teaching, the college was making budget cuts and were not going to be able to renew my contract.
When I tried to explain to her my prior arrangement with the previous Chair, she simply replied that she’d be happy to write me a letter of recommendation.
Something about the Zoom call and her demeanor felt suspicious.
On a whim, I did an Internet search on my new Chair.
The first thing that came up on her Twitter Feed was a statement on the masthead of a literary magazine she edited, condemning the alleged mass killing and displacement of Palestinians in the wake of Hamas’s October 7, 2023, attacks.
As I explored further, I discovered other parts of the statement:
The Israeli military—with the support of the U.S. government—has bombarded Palestinian civilians relentlessly, in violation of international law, and deprived Palestinians of food, water, fuel, and electricity.
And:
Because we work to “bring our readers into the living moment, not as tourists, but as engaged participants,” we believe that Palestinians need space to speak directly, whether from siege in Palestine or in diaspora. So too do others who bear witness to the ongoing settler-colonial violence in Gaza and the occupied West Bank.
Two days after the Zoom meeting, I figured I might as well take the Chair up on her offer to write me a letter-of-recommendation; it was March, and I could still apply to other universities for employment the following year. (Universities can be suspicious if you leave a position after just two years, so a letter would be crucial to securing a position.)
After a week of email silence, the Chair wrote me back, saying that she wasn’t familiar with my teaching and requested to attend one of my classes to observe my skills. I invited her the following week to attend a class, which fit her schedule, but she did not show, and didn’t even write to give an explanation.
I followed up with an email to offer her another opportunity, followed by a second and third, but there was nothing but email silence.
I should also mention that, at the one faculty meeting we had, she stayed as far away from me as possible, and if I approached, she would quickly engage in discussion with another professor. The topic that day was adding a requirement for English Majors to take an anti-Racism class. One of the new offerings for the following year was focused on racism against Palestinians.
By the end of April, I decided to contact the Associate Dean of Humanities who oversaw the English Department, and sure enough, within an hour of my email, I finally received an email back from the Chair of the English Department, offering to attend my class, but letting me know that she was too busy to write me a letter of recommendation until the end of May — well past the end of the semester, and too late to help with a teaching application for the following year.
If there was ever a thought of going to the administration to complain about my treatment, that was quickly extinguished following an SJP demonstration that demanded that the college divest from Oracle. Apparently, Oracle’s website had stated support for Israel, and the Head of Financial Aid for the college felt the need to apologize for the school’s actions.
A response from the school’s administration read thus:“The business strategy or public statements from Oracle do not represent the viewpoints of the College. Due to the College’s contract with the business and the cost it took to make such major system changes, the College does not have any feasible or affordable alternative.
It also went on to assure protesters:
Less than 0.5 percent of the College’s investments are tied to Israeli companies and that none of these investments are directly held by the college.
As the semester ended, on another whim, I searched the Human Resources page of the college, and sure enough, there was a listing for a new English professor. The skills they were looking for were for someone who taught poetry as well as Race and Ethnic studies courses — none of which I was qualified to teach.
Was the college looking to shift away from courses like Screenwriting, Playwriting, and Non-Fiction — three popular courses I had taught that were always in high demand and had long waiting lists?
I guess I’ll never know.
Oren Safdie is a playwright and screenwriter.
The post The Quiet Antisemitism: My Experience as a Jewish College Professor first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
Uncategorized
Israel Warns Lebanon of Strikes if Hezbollah Enters Any US-Iran War, Lebanese Officials Say
A man works on an electric pole next to a damaged building, in the aftermath of an Israeli strike on Friday, in Tamnine el Tahta, Bekaa valley, Lebanon, Feb. 21, 2026. Photo: REUTERS/Mohamed Azakir
Israel has warned Lebanon that it would strike the country hard, targeting civilian infrastructure including the airport, in the event that Hezbollah gets involved in any US-Iran war, two senior Lebanese officials said on Tuesday.
The Lebanese officials, speaking on condition of anonymity, said the Israeli message was delivered indirectly. The office of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and the Lebanese presidency did not immediately respond to requests for comment.
Iran and the US will hold a third round of nuclear talks on Thursday in Geneva, Oman’s Foreign Minister Badr Albusaidi said on Sunday, amid growing concerns about the risk of military conflict.
Lebanese Prime Minister Nawaf Salam, whose government has sought the disarmament of Iran-backed Hezbollah since taking office a year ago, urged the terrorist group not to take Lebanon into “another adventure,” speaking in a newspaper interview published on Tuesday.
Israel dealt heavy blows to Hezbollah during a war in 2024, killing its leader Hassan Nasrallah along with thousands of its fighters and destroying much of its arsenal.
Shi’ite Muslim Hezbollah was established by Iran‘s Revolutionary Guards in 1982.
Hezbollah‘s new leader Naim Qassem said in a televised address last month that the group was “not neutral” in the standoff between Washington and Tehran, and that it was “targeted by the potential aggression.”
“We are determined to defend ourselves. We will choose in due course how to act, whether to intervene or not,” Qassem said.
Hezbollah‘s last war with Israel began after it opened fire in solidarity with its Palestinian ally Hamas at the start of the Gaza conflict in 2023, prompting months of cross-border fighting before Israel mounted its devastating offensive.
PM SALAM WARNS HEZBOLLAH AGAINST ‘ANOTHER ADVENTURE’
“The Gaza adventure imposed a big cost on Lebanon. We hope that we will not be dragged into another adventure,” Salam told Nida al-Watan newspaper in the interview published on Tuesday.
The US State Department is pulling out non-essential government personnel and their eligible family members from the US embassy in Beirut, a senior State Department official said on Monday.
Since a US-backed ceasefire between Israel and Lebanon in 2024, Israel has carried out regular strikes against what it has identified as Hezbollah targets in Lebanon, accusing the group of seeking to rearm.
Israeli strikes have killed around 400 people in Lebanon since the ceasefire, according to a Lebanese toll.
Hezbollah says it has respected the ceasefire in southern Lebanon. In January, the US-backed Lebanese army said it had established operational control over the south, in line with the objective of establishing a monopoly on arms.
Israel said the effort was an encouraging beginning but far from sufficient.
Uncategorized
EU Memo Raises Security Concerns Over Mass Escape From Islamic State-Linked Syria Camp
Members of the Syrian government security forces stand guard as a group of female detainees gather at al-Hol camp after the government took control of it following the withdrawal of Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF), in Hasaka, Syria, Jan. 21, 2026. Photo: REUTERS/Khalil Ashawi
An EU internal memo has raised security concerns about the escape of thousands of people from a detention camp holding relatives of suspected Islamic State fighters in northeastern Syria, suggesting terrorist groups could recruit from them.
The memo, sent from the Cyprus presidency of the Council of the European Union to member states and dated Feb. 23, said the status of third-country nationals who had fled the camp at al-Hol remained unclear and that it was reported that a majority of them had escaped.
“This raises concerns about how terrorist groups might seek to capitalize on the current situation to increase recruitment efforts among escapees,” said the memo, which was reviewed by Reuters.
PRISONERS INCLUDED THOUSANDS OF FOREIGNERS
Al-Hol, near the Iraqi border, was one of the main detention camps for relatives of suspected Islamic State fighters who were detained during the US-backed campaign against the jihadist group in Syria.
Control of the camp changed hands in January, when Syrian government forces under President Ahmed al-Sharaa drove the Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces from the area.
The SDF had guarded the facility for years.
The camp‘s population was 23,407 people the day before the government takeover, including 6,280 foreigners from more than 40 nationalities, Reuters reported last week, citing official data from the camp.
The US military said on Feb. 13 it had completed a mission to transfer 5,700 adult male Islamic State fighters from jails in Syria to Iraq. It had originally said up to 7,000 prisoners could eventually be transferred. The EU memo noted that the initial target was not met.
‘CHAOTIC TAKEOVER‘
In a section entitled “Security concerns stemming from the evolving situation in northeast Syria,” the EU memo said the “chaotic takeover led to the collapse of security and services in the al-Hol camp, triggering the escape of a significant portion of its population.”
The UN refugee agency in Syria and the Syrian government “have confirmed that an uncontrolled exodus has occurred over the past few weeks,” it added.
Damascus has accused the SDF of withdrawing from al-Hol on Jan. 20 without any coordination. The SDF has said its forces had been “compelled” to withdraw from the camp to areas surrounding cities which it said were under threat.
A Syrian government security source told Reuters last week that the security authorities, working in cooperation with international partners, had established a unit to “pursue those who are wanted.”
The SDF had guarded prisons holding thousands of Islamic State militants in northeast Syria, in addition to al-Hol and a second camp at Roj, which also holds relatives of suspected jihadists.
The EU memo said the capacity of Damascus “to manage these facilities is assessed as limited and facing significant operational challenges.” It noted that the government’s stated intent to gradually phase out al-Hol camp had “been overtaken by recent events, which raise grave security concerns.”
The EU memo said that al-Hol and Roj camps were hosting around 25,000 people, primarily women and children, “with many of these being highly radicalized and living in degrading humanitarian and security conditions.”
Roj camp remains under the control of the SDF for now.
Last week, the SDF released 34 Australian nationals from Roj, only for them to return later. The Australian government has ruled out helping families of IS terrorists return home. Roj is also home to British-born Shamima Begum.
The EU memo said there was “reason for concern regarding the possible escape of families” from Roj once the Syrian government takes control.
Syria‘s Information Ministry and the US Central Command did not immediately respond to requests for comment.
The memo came amid an uptick of Islamic State violence in Syria.
Islamic State terrorists killed four Syrian government security personnel in northern Syria on Monday, the Syrian state news agency reported, in what would be the group’s deadliest attack on government forces since the ouster of President Bashar al-Assad.
The assault on a checkpoint west of Raqqa city underlined an escalation in attacks by the jihadist group against President Ahmed al-Sharaa’s government, two days after the jihadist group declared “a new phase of operations” against it.
Islamic State issued no immediate claim of responsibility for Monday’s attack. On Saturday, the group claimed two attacks targeting Syrian army personnel in northern and eastern Syria, in which a Syrian soldier and a civilian were killed.
The Syrian state news agency said forces foiled Monday’s attack and killed one of the militants. It quoted a security source as saying Islamic State carried out the attack.
The terrorist group, however, only claimed responsibility on Tuesday for a separate attack on an army headquarters in the city of Mayadin in Deir al-Zor in eastern Syria that killed one soldier.
The group had carried out an attack in the same city days earlier.
The Syrian government joined the US-led coalition to combat Islamic State last year. In January, government forces seized control of Raqqa from the Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces, along with much of the surrounding territory in northern and eastern Syria.
Meanwhile, US forces on Monday began withdrawing from their largest military base in the northeast, according to three Syrian military and security sources – part of a broader pullout of US troops who deployed to Syria a decade ago to fight Islamic State.
Uncategorized
Iran Nears Deal to Buy Supersonic Anti-Ship Missiles From China
An Iranian newspaper with a cover photo of an Iranian missile, in Tehran, Iran, Feb. 19, 2026. Photo: Majid Asgaripour/WANA (West Asia News Agency) via REUTERS
Iran is close to a deal with China to purchase anti‑ship cruise missiles, according to six people with knowledge of the negotiations, just as the United States deploys a vast naval force near the Iranian coast ahead of possible strikes on the Islamic Republic.
The deal for the Chinese‑made CM‑302 missiles is near completion, though no delivery date has been agreed, the people said. The supersonic missiles have a range of about 290 kilometers and are designed to evade shipborne defenses by flying low and fast. Their deployment would significantly enhance Iran’s strike capabilities and pose a threat to US naval forces in the region, two weapons experts said.
Negotiations with China to buy the missile weapons systems, which began at least two years ago, accelerated sharply after the 12‑day war between Israel and Iran in June, according to the six people with knowledge of the talks, including three officials who were briefed by the Iranian government as well as three security officials. As talks entered their final stages last summer, senior Iranian military and government officials traveled to China, including Massoud Oraei, Iran’s deputy defense minister, according to two of the security officials. Oraei’s visit has not been previously reported.
“It’s a complete gamechanger if Iran has supersonic capability to attack ships in the area,” said Danny Citrinowicz, a former Israeli intelligence officer and now senior Iran researcher at Israel’s Institute for National Security Studies think tank. “These missiles are very difficult to intercept.”
Reuters could not determine how many missiles were involved in the potential deal, how much Iran had agreed to pay, or whether China would go through with the agreement now given heightened tensions in the region.
“Iran has military and security agreements with its allies, and now is an appropriate time to make use of these agreements,” an Iranian foreign ministry official told Reuters.
In a comment sent after publication, China‘s Ministry of Foreign Affairs said it was not aware of the talks about a potential missile sale that Reuters had reported. China‘s defense ministry did not respond to a request for comment.
The White House did not directly address the negotiations between Iran and China over the missile system when asked by Reuters. US President Donald Trump has been clear that “either we will make a deal or we will have to do something very tough like last time,” a White House official said, referring to the current standoff with Iran.
The missiles would be among the most advanced military hardware to be transferred to Iran by China and defy a United Nations weapons embargo that was first imposed in 2006. The sanctions were suspended in 2015 as part of a nuclear deal with the US and allies, and then reimposed last September.
US FORCES GATHERING NEAR IRAN
The potential sale would underscore deepening military ties between China and Iran at a moment of heightened regional tension, complicating US efforts to contain Iran’s missile program and curb its nuclear activities. It would also signal China’s growing willingness to assert itself in a region long dominated by US military might.
China, Iran, and Russia hold annual joint naval exercises, and last year the US Treasury Department sanctioned several Chinese entities for supplying chemical precursors to Iran‘s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps for use in its ballistic missile program. China rejected those allegations, saying it was unaware of the cases cited in the sanctions and that it strictly enforces export controls on dual-use products.
While hosting Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian for a military parade in Beijing in September, Chinese President Xi Jinping told the Iranian leader that “China supports Iran in safeguarding sovereignty, territorial integrity, and national dignity.”
China joined Russia and Iran in a joint letter on Oct. 18 to say they believed the decision to reimpose sanctions was flawed.
“Iran has become a battlefield between the US” on one side and Russia and China on the other, said one of the officials who was briefed by Iran’s government on the missile negotiations.
The deal comes as the US assembles an armada within striking distance of Iran, including the aircraft carrier USS Abraham Lincoln and its strike group. The USS Gerald R. Ford and its escorts are also heading to the region. The two ships together can carry more than 5,000 personnel and 150 aircraft.
“China does not want to see a pro-Western regime in Iran,” said Citrinowicz, the Israeli specialist on Iran. “That would be a threat to their interests. They are hoping that this regime will stay.”
Trump said on Feb. 19 he was giving Iran 10 days to reach an agreement over its nuclear program or face military action. The US is preparing for the possibility of sustained, weeks-long operations against Iran if Trump orders an attack, Reuters reported on Feb. 13.
A DEPLETED ARSENAL
The CM-302 purchase would be a significant improvement in an Iranian arsenal depleted by last year’s war, said Pieter Wezeman, a senior researcher at the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute.
China’s state-owned China Aerospace Science and Industry Corporation (CASIC) markets the CM-302 as the world’s best anti–ship missile, capable of sinking an aircraft carrier or destroyer. The weapons system can be mounted on ships, aircraft, or mobile ground vehicles. It can also take out targets on land.
CASIC did not respond to a request for comment.
Iran is also in discussions to acquire Chinese surface‑to‑air missile systems, so-called MANPADS, anti‑ballistic weapons, and anti-satellite weapons, the six people said.
China was a major arms supplier to Iran in the 1980s, but large‑scale weapons transfers dwindled by the late 1990s under international pressure. In recent years, US officials have accused Chinese companies of providing missile-related materials to Iran but have not publicly accused it of supplying complete missile systems.