#institutional antisemitism

[jewish-microwave-laser]

just got out of wicked. had an incredibly hard time enjoying myself bc every time they were like "oh no they're doing x to the animals" my brain was like "yeah something very similar happened to a jew not too long ago"

[the-garbanzo-annex-jr]

by Haim Rivlin, Shomrim

Billions in undisclosed funding

“In a short time, we identified over $3 billion in donations to Yale and other universities that were not properly reported as required by law,” Small said. In 2019, he presented his findings to senior officials in Washington, prompting a federal investigation that exposed extensive undisclosed foreign funding.

Three years ago, Small teamed up with retired Brig. Gen. Sima Vaknin-Gil, Israel’s former chief military censor and director-general of the Strategic Affairs Ministry. Along with a team of 10 researchers and an Israeli forensic accounting firm specializing in global financial investigations, they deepened their inquiry. Their research led to a series of reports detailing the influence of the Muslim Brotherhood and Qatari funding on academic content, the promotion of anti-democratic and anti-Israel agendas, and even antisemitic rhetoric in higher education.

Their latest report, released recently, highlights a previously overlooked dimension: Qatari involvement in U.S. elementary and secondary education (K-12).

Soft power in early education

Small, who now serves as CEO of the New York-based Institute for the Study of Global Antisemitism and Policy (ISGAP), describes Qatar’s strategy as one of “soft power,” using vast financial resources to shape narratives and policies through investments in infrastructure, lobbying firms, academia, research, and media.

“The fact that Qatar—a country with fewer than 350,000 citizens—donates more money to American universities, civil society organizations, and cultural institutions than any other nation in the world is deeply troubling,” he said.

According to ISGAP, Qatari funding has also reached K-12 education in the United States. One key example is a program called Choices, run under the auspices of Brown University, a prestigious Ivy League institution. Choices provides schools with curricula, books, and teacher training on history, international relations, and human rights.

ISGAP’s findings reveal that Choices collaborated with the Qatar Foundation International (QFI), an entity operating under the Qatar Foundation (QF), founded by Sheikha Moza, the mother of Qatari Emir Tamim bin Hamad Al Thani.

Documents uncovered by ISGAP show that QFI sponsored teacher training sessions that included Middle East history courses, covering travel and registration expenses for educators. At another event during the COVID-19 pandemic, QFI funded curriculum development for American middle and high school teachers, offering free Middle East studies lesson plans. Though a link to QFI’s website was initially embedded in Choices’ digital materials, it was later removed. ISGAP retained an archived version of the original reference.

Shaping narratives in schools

Vaknin-Gil, now vice president for strategy at ISGAP, called the findings “astonishing.” She said QFI, registered as a nonprofit in the U.S., ultimately influences lesson plans that reach about 8,000 schools and millions of children.

According to ISGAP’s research, over time, the Choices curriculum shifted from presenting a balanced history of the Middle East to incorporating an overtly anti-Israel narrative, including questioning Israel’s legitimacy. “This ranged from omitting historical details like the Balfour Declaration and the Abraham Accords to distorting Jewish ties to Israel and even erasing Jerusalem as Israel’s capital,” Vaknin-Gil said.

[blackstarlineage]

The Hypocrisy of the Kanye West Controversy: A Garveyite Perspective on Selective Outrage and the Dismissal of Black Suffering

From a Garveyite perspective, the backlash against Kanye West’s comments about Jewish people versus the lack of consequences for his remarks about Black people and slavery exposes the hypocrisy of mainstream outrage, the racial hierarchy in oppression discourse, and the devaluation of Black history and suffering. The reaction to his statements reveals how power structures operate, who is protected, and who is disposable in the global economic and media landscape.

Kanye West’s “slavery was a choice” comment in 2018 sparked heated debates but resulted in zero financial losses or sponsorship cancellations. In contrast, his anti-Semitic statements in 2022 and 2025 led to immediate termination of business partnerships, removal from platforms, and industry-wide condemnation. This double standard raises critical questions:

Why was the erasure of Black suffering tolerated, but insults toward Jewish people resulted in swift punishment?

If slavery was “a choice,” does that mean all other historical oppressions, including genocide, were also choices?

Who truly holds economic and institutional power in deciding what speech is unacceptable?

What does this selective outrage teach us about the value of Black people in society?

1. Kanye West Faced No Real Consequences for His “Slavery Was a Choice” Comment

Kanye West’s dismissal of Black suffering as a choice was met with anger from many in the Black community, but it did not threaten his wealth, corporate sponsorships, or mainstream influence. In fact, after making the comment, he continued receiving:

Business collaborations with Adidas, Gap, and Balenciaga

Media coverage and access to mainstream platforms

Continued billionaire status and financial growth

Example: When Kanye insulted the millions of enslaved Africans who suffered under colonialism and European chattel slavery, corporate America remained silent. No major companies distanced themselves, and his brand partnerships remained intact.

Garveyite Takeaway: The economic and media system does not consider anti-Black statements as serious enough to warrant punishment. This reveals how Black suffering is normalized and seen as “acceptable” within the power structures that govern industry and influence.

2. The Reaction to His Jewish Comments Shows Who Holds Real Economic Power

When Kanye made anti-Semitic remarks, the response was instant and severe. Within days, he:

Lost Adidas, Gap, and Balenciaga partnerships

Was dropped by his talent agency CAA

Was blacklisted from media platforms

Lost his billionaire status as corporate deals collapsed

Example: Adidas, a brand that worked with Kanye through numerous controversies, immediately severed ties after his Jewish comments—despite tolerating his anti-Black rhetoric for years.

Garveyite Takeaway: The fact that corporations took action only when another group was affected shows where true power lies in the global economic system. Black people do not own enough infrastructure to demand the same level of accountability when their suffering is dismissed.

3. If Slavery Was a “Choice,” Then All Oppression Must Also Be a Choice

The logic of Kanye’s “slavery was a choice” statement collapses under scrutiny. If millions of enslaved Africans “chose” to be enslaved, then by the same standard:

The Holocaust was a choice

The Armenian genocide was a choice

Apartheid was a choice

Colonial rule was a choice

Example: No one would ever dare say Jewish people “chose” to be put in concentration camps under Nazi rule. Why? Because history recognizes their suffering as systematic oppression, not voluntary submission. The same recognition is often denied to Black people.

Garveyite Takeaway: Kanye’s comment reflects a deeper issue: Black suffering is not taken seriously, and narratives that blame Black people for their own oppression are allowed to spread unchecked.

4. The Racial Hierarchy in Oppression: Why Black Suffering Is Dismissed

The difference in reaction between Kanye’s statements on slavery vs. his statements about Jewish people highlights an undeniable truth:

Jewish history is globally protected and respected.

Black history is frequently distorted, dismissed, and trivialized.

Example: Holocaust denial is a crime in several European countries, and even casual anti-Semitic remarks result in immediate backlash. Meanwhile, "slavery denial", African genocide denial, and anti-Black rhetoric are allowed, tolerated, and even rewarded in many mainstream spaces.

Garveyite Takeaway: The system treats some histories as sacred while allowing Black trauma to be mocked, debated, and disrespected. This is why Black people must control their own institutions and economic power.

5. The Solution: Black People Must Own Their Own Media, Businesses, and Economic Institutions

If Black people had the same economic power and institutional control as other groups, Kanye West would have faced immediate repercussions for saying “slavery was a choice”—just as he did for his later comments.

What Needs to Happen:

Black-owned media outlets must control narratives about Black history and refuse to platform anti-Black rhetoric.

Black-owned corporations must be strong enough to cancel business with celebrities who degrade Black people.

Pan-African economic unity must be prioritized so that Black businesses can hold global power, just like other communities protect their interests.

Garveyite Takeaway: Garveyism teaches that without economic independence and institutional control, Black people will always be at the mercy of external systems that do not prioritize their well-being.

Conclusion: The Kanye Controversy Reveals the Truth About Black Power in Society

The difference in reaction to Kanye West’s comments proves that:

Anti-Black statements do not carry consequences because Black people lack the economic and institutional power to enforce accountability.

Jewish suffering is protected, while Black suffering is treated as debatable or irrelevant.

Slavery and oppression are not choices—systemic forces determine who holds power and who remains marginalized.

Until Black people control their own media, businesses, and economic resources, they will remain vulnerable to exploitation and historical distortion.

Final Thought:

Marcus Garvey warned that Black people must be the masters of their own destiny—because if another group controls your economy, media, education, and historical narratives, they control your entire existence.

The selective outrage over Kanye’s statements is not just about him—it is about who gets to dictate the limits of acceptable speech, whose history is honoured, and who remains at the bottom of the power structure. Garveyism teaches that the only solution is Black economic sovereignty and global unity.

[troybarnesbucky]

actually no i don’t support every action of the israeli government or the IDF but i also don’t support every action of the canadian and american governments — where i am a voting citizen.

however, i do proudly support the country that is home to my family, my people; and i am not blind to the fact that i wouldn’t be alive without israel, and that jews deserve a homeland. it’s really that simple.

[eretzyisrael]

by Seth Mandel

Durbin’s seething resentment at being asked to talk about the threat of anti-Semitism was on display from one of his party’s two witnesses as well: Maya Berry, executive director of the Arab American Institute. She was made to look like a fool because she did exactly what Democrats asked her to do and said what they asked her to say. Her performance was atrocious from a moral standpoint but perfect from an “understood the assignment” perspective. Her main point was that focusing on any one group undermines the fight against all hate, a demonstrably false and frankly ridiculous belief.

But the key moment came during the witnesses’ questioning by Republican ranking member Lindsey Graham. Quoting the director of national intelligence regarding the pro-Hamas protests, Graham said: “We have observed actors tied to Iran’s government posing as activists online, seeking to encourage protest, and even providing financial support to protesters.” He asked if any of the three witnesses doubted the veracity of that report, and no one did. Graham then asked each witness the following: “Is it Hamas’s goal to destroy the Jewish state? Is it Hezbollah’s goal to destroy the Jewish state? Is it Iran’s goal to destroy the Jewish state?”

Two of the three witnesses—Kenneth Stern and Rabbi Mark Goldfeder—answered in the affirmative. All three entities mentioned in Graham’s question, after all, have said they want to destroy the Jewish state without shame or ambiguity. Which is what made Berry’s response so odd. “I think these are complicated questions,” she said—immediately earning a shake of the head from Graham and conjuring memories of the catastrophic answer given by several college presidents when asked before Congress if genocidal anti-Semitism counts as harassment: It depends on the context.

“If you think it’s complicated to figure out that Hamas, Hezbollah, and Iran want to kill all the Jews,” Graham responded, “I should not listen to anything else you’ve got to say. And I won’t.” And with that, Graham moved on to the next witness.

Berry was rattled. Though Graham left the hearing soon after, Berry referenced that exchange at least twice more with other senators, signaling that she’d realized how poorly her comments made her look and desperately trying to claw back some credibility.

The bad news for Berry was that she could not undo the damage. The good news was that she would eventually provide another quote that might make people forget about the first quote, if only because it was potentially even worse. Asked by Sen. Josh Hawley about the inherently violent implications of the phrase “Long live the intifada,” Berry argued for the slogan’s ambiguity. “‘Long live the intifada’ can mean different” things, she said, catching herself before she got to the word “things” but far too late to avoid the rest of the ridiculous comment, which was tailor-made for the sound-bite politics of congressional hearings.

She also defended “From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free,” a call for all Jews to be cleansed from the land.

[justinspoliticalcorner]

Lee Fang and Jack Poulson at The Guardian:

Last November, just weeks into the war in Gaza, Amichai Chikli, a brash, 42-year-old Likud minister in the Israeli government, was called into the Knesset, Israel’s parliament, to brief lawmakers on what could be done about rising anti-war protests from young people across the United States, especially at elite universities. “I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again now, that I think we should, especially in the United States, be on the offensive,” argued Chikli. Chikli has since led a targeted push to counter critics of Israel. The Guardian has uncovered evidence showing how Israel has relaunched a controversial entity as part of a broader public relations campaign to target US college campuses and redefine antisemitism in US law. Seconds after a smoke alarm subsided during the hearing, Chikli assured the lawmakers that there was new money in the budget for a pushback campaign, which was separate from more traditional public relations and paid advertising content produced by the government. It included 80 programs already under way for advocacy efforts “to be done in the ‘Concert’ way”, he said.

The “Concert” remark referred to a sprawling relaunch of a controversial Israeli government program initially known as Kela Shlomo, designed to carry out what Israel called “mass consciousness activities” targeted largely at the US and Europe. Concert, now known as Voices of Israel, previously worked with groups spearheading a campaign to pass so-called “anti-BDS” state laws that penalize Americans for engaging in boycotts or other non-violent protests of Israel. Its latest incarnation is part of a hardline and sometimes covert operation by the Israeli government to strike back at student protests, human rights organizations and other voices of dissent.

Voices’ latest activities were conducted through non-profits and other entities that often do not disclose donor information. From October through May, Chikli has overseen at least 32m shekels, or about $8.6m, spent on government advocacy to reframe the public debate. It didn’t take long for one of the American advocacy groups closely coordinating with Chikli’s ministry, the Institute for the Study of Global Antisemitism and Policy, or ISGAP, to score a powerful victory. In a widely viewed December congressional hearing on alleged antisemitism among student anti-war protesters, several House GOP lawmakers explicitly cited ISGAP research in their interrogations of university presidents. The hearing concluded with Representative Elise Stefanik’s viral confrontation with the then president of Harvard University, Claudine Gay, who later retired from her role after a wave of negative news coverage.

[...] Other American groups tied to Voices have pursued a range of initiatives to bolster support for the state of Israel. One such group listed publicly as a partner, the National Black Empowerment Council (NBEC), published an open letter from Black Democratic politicians pledging solidarity with Israel. Another group, CyberWell, a pro-Israel anti-disinformation group led by former Israeli military intelligence and Voices officials, has established itself as an official “trusted partner” to TikTok and Meta, helping both social platforms screen and edit content. A recent CyberWell report called for Meta to suppress the popular slogan “From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free”.

[...] Haaretz and the New York Times recently revealed that Chikli’s ministry had tapped a public relations firm to secretly pressure American lawmakers. The firm used hundreds of fake accounts posting pro-Israel or anti-Muslim content on X (formerly Twitter), Facebook and Instagram. (The diaspora affairs ministry denied involvement in the campaign, which reportedly provided about $2m to an Israeli firm for the social media posts.) But that effort is only one of many such campaigns coordinated by the ministry, which has received limited news coverage. The ministry of diaspora affairs and its partners compile weekly reports based on tips from pro-Israel US student groups, some of which receive funding from Israeli government sources. For example, Hillel International, a co-founder of the Israel on Campus Coalition network and one of the largest Jewish campus groups in the world, has reported financial and strategic support from Mosaic United, a public benefit corporation backed by Chikli’s ministry. The longstanding partnership is now being utilized to shape the political debate over Israel’s war. In February, Hillel’s chief executive, Adam Lehman, appeared before the Knesset to discuss the strategic partnership with Mosaic and the ministry of diaspora affairs, which he said had already produced results. “We are changing administrations. Just last week, MIT, the same president who was lambasted in front of Congress, took the step of fully suspending her Students for Justice in Palestine chapter for crossing lines, and for creating an unwelcoming environment for Jewish students,” said Lehmann, referencing the president of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Sally Kornbluth. Hillel International, CyberWell, the NBEC, the Israeli ministry of diaspora affairs and Voices of Israel/Concert did not respond to a request for comment.

This investigative report reviewed recent government hearings, Israeli corporate filings, procurement documents and other public records. While private individuals and foundations primarily fund many of the organizations devoted to pro-Israel advocacy, most likely without foreign direction, the records point to substantial Israeli government involvement in American politics about the Gaza war, free speech on college campuses and Israel-Palestine policy.

The Guardian reports that Israel Apartheid State has documents detailing efforts to shape US opinion on the Gaza genocide in favor of the pro-Israel position.

Read the full story at The Guardian.

[religion-is-a-mental-illness]

By: Bret Stephens

Published: Jun 25, 2024

The notable fact about the anti-Israel campus demonstrations is that they are predominantly an elite phenomenon. Yes, there have been protests at big state schools like the University of Nebraska, but they have generally been small, tame and — thanks to administrators prepared to enforce the rules — short-lived. It’s Stanford, Berkeley, Yale, Penn, Harvard, Columbia and many of their peers that have descended to open bigotry, institutional paralysis and mayhem.

Two questions: Why the top universities? And what should those on the other side of the demonstrations — Jewish students and alumni most of all — do about it?

Regarding the first question, some argue that the furor over the campus protests is much ado about not much. The demonstrators, they say, represent only a small fraction of students. The ugliest antisemitic expressions occasionally seen at these events are mainly the work of outside provocateurs. And the student protesters (some of whom are Jewish) are acting out of youthful idealism, not age-old antisemitism. As they see it, they aim only to save Palestinian lives and oppose the involvement of their universities in the abuses of a racist Israeli state.

There’s something to these points. With notable exceptions, campus life at these schools is somewhat less roiled by protest than the media makes it seem. Outside groups, as more than one university president has told me, have played an outsize role in setting up encampments and radicalizing students. And few student demonstrators, I’d wager, consciously think they harbor an anti-Jewish prejudice.

But this lets the kids off the hook too easily.

Students who police words like “blacklist” or “whitewash” and see “microaggressions” in everyday life ignore the entreaties of their Jewish peers to avoid chants like “globalize the intifada” or “from the river to the sea.” Students who claim they’re horribly pained by scenes of Palestinian suffering were largely silent on Oct. 7 — when they weren’t openly cheering the attacks. And students who team up with outside groups that are in overt sympathy with Islamist terrorists aren’t innocents. They’re collaborators.

How did the protesters at elite universities get their ideas of what to think and how to behave?

They got them, I suspect, from the incessant valorization of victimhood that has been a theme of their upbringing, and which many of the most privileged kids feel they lack — hence the zeal to prove themselves as allies of the perceived oppressed. They got them from the crude schematics of Diversity, Equity and Inclusion training seminars, which divide the world into “white” and “of color,” powerful and “marginalized,” with no regard for real-world complexities — including the complexity of Jewish identity. They got them from professors who think academic freedom amounts to a license for political posturing, sometimes of a nakedly antisemitic sort. They got them from a cheap and easy revision of history that imagines Zionism is a form of colonialism (it’s decidedly the opposite), that colonialism is something only white people do, and that as students at American universities, they can cheaply atone for their sins as guilty beneficiaries of the settler-colonialism they claim to despise.

They also got them from university administrators whose private sympathies often lie with the demonstrators, who imagine the anti-Israel protests as the moral heirs to the anti-apartheid protests and who struggle to grasp (if they even care) why so many Jewish students feel betrayed and besieged by the campus culture.

That’s the significance of the leaked images of four Columbia University deans exchanging dismissive and sophomoric text messages during a panel discussion in May on Jewish life on campus, including the suggestion that a panelist was “taking full advantage of this moment” for the sake of the “fundraising potential.”

Columbia placed three of the deans on leave. Other universities, like Penn, have belatedly moved to ban encampments. But those steps have a grudging and reactive feel — more a response to Title VI investigations of discrimination and congressional hearings than a genuine acknowledgment that something is deeply amiss with the values of a university. At Harvard, two successive members of the task force on antisemitism resigned in frustration. “We are at a moment when the toxicity of intellectual slovenliness has been laid bare for all to see,” wrote Rabbi David Wolpe in his resignation announcement.

That’s the key point. More dismaying than the fact that student protesters are fellow traveling with Hamas is that with their rhyming chants and identical talking points, they sound more like Maoist cadres than critical thinkers. As the sociologist Ilana Redstone, author of the smart and timely book “The Certainty Trap,” told me on Monday, “higher education traded humility and curiosity for conviction and advocacy — all in the name of being inclusive. Certainty yields students who are contemptuous of disagreement.”

And so the second question: What are Jewish students and alumni to do?

It’s telling that the Columbia deans were caught chortling during exactly the kind of earnest panel discussion that the university convened presumably to show alumni they are tackling campus antisemitism. They were paying more lip service than attention. My guess is that they, along with many of their colleagues, struggle to see the problem because they think it lies with a handful of extremist professors and obnoxious students.

But the real problem lies with some of the main convictions and currents of today’s academia: intersectionality, critical theory, post-colonialism, ethnic studies and other concepts that may not seem antisemitic on their face but tend to politicize classrooms and cast Jews as privileged and oppressive. If, as critical theorists argue, the world’s injustices stem from the shadowy agendas of the powerful and manipulative few against the virtuous masses, just which group is most likely to find itself villainized?

Not even the most determined university president is going to clean out the rot — at least not without getting rid of the entrenched academic departments and tenured faculty members who support it. That could take decades. In the meantime, Jews have a history of parting company with institutions that mistreated them, like white-shoe law firms and commercial banks. In so many cases, they went on to create better institutions that operated on principles of intellectual merit and fair play — including many of the universities that have since stumbled.

If you are an Ivy League megadonor wondering how to better spend the money you no longer want to give a Penn or a Columbia — or just a rising high school senior wondering where to apply — maybe it’s time to forgo the fading prestige of the old elite for the sake of something else, something new. That’s a subject for a future column.

==

Intersectionality is a "luxury belief"; that is, it signals a form of elite status. It's a form of academic masturbation which has no alignment with reality.

Luxury beliefs are ideas and opinions that confer status on the upper class, while often inflicting costs on the lower classes. – Rob Henderson

[eretzyisrael]

by Jessica Costescu

A Massachusetts Institute of Technology faculty member went on an anti-Semitic tirade after the House Committee on Education and the Workforce pressed the school to provide internal documents about its response to the outbreak of anti-Semitism on campus.

A postdoctoral associate working in MIT's Tonegawa neuroscience lab, Afif Aqrabawi, derided the committee chairwoman, Virginia Foxx (R., N.C.), as "a treasonous Zionist tool, a genocide enabler, and a disgusting shit stain of a human," and described other members of the House as "Israeli bootlickers."

Aqrabawi also referred to American politicians as "loyal prostitutes of Netanyahu," lamented the influence of Jewish political groups, and referred to Israelis as "parasites."

"I make it clear your representatives are eager cucks for defense contractors and AIPAC," he wrote. "My words are dangerous because they may alert a distracted American public to the parasites using their country as a host species."

Aqrabawi’s tirade came in the wake of a letter from Foxx to MIT president Sally Kornbluth that panned Kornbluth’s response to several anti-Semitic incidents on campus and pressed the school to provide internal documents shedding light on its policies and code of conduct.

The committee’s letter cited several tweets Aqrabawi sent, including one in which he said Israel "has no future in this world." In other posts highlighted by the committee, the MIT faculty member accused Israelis of "harvesting" the organs of dead Palestinians and called Zionists "Jewish fundamentalists who want to enslave the world in a global Apartheid system."

As a postdoctoral associate in MIT's Picower Institute for Learning and Memory, Aqrabawi earns a minimum salary of $66,950 and works under a "faculty mentor," according to MIT’s website. The head of Aqrabawi's lab is Susumu Tonegawa, a professor of biology and neuroscience.

[mashpotatoe]

its nauseating to see the star of david on that flag

[sivavakkiyar]

I’m bringing this back specifically *because* it’s less important: but *of course* when you open the wiki article on ‘controversies with Wagner’ with an epigram like this all the very clever internet conservatives who are less well read than they like to pretend think it’s self-evident that Wagner’s work has nothing antisemitic in it (much like Pound, they’ll trot out the ‘can’t we seperate the art from the artist!’ when both artists in question—-one the author of ‘Jews In Music’, the other having done broadcasts for Mussolini, would say frequently; no, actually, that’s a very important part of my work, why won’t you pay attention???)

[jeppiner]

...Not to say what it is doing to European interests. We need to wake up. Radicalized Islam is not compatible with Western society. Read the article. I don't care what you think about the Hoover Institution, the facts and the quotes are indisputable. Look at the statistics which prove the violence and the anti-Western sentiment of hardcore Islam. Even moderate Muslims want nothing to do with it and so obviously I am not referring to the eradication of all Muslims from the West. This Islamism is not just a threat to the Jewish people, but to all in the west who value freedom and democracy.

[theeviltriplet-fromao3]

It is completely ridiculous that this is up for debate.

People are dying.

There shouldn’t be any question, debate or hesitation when it comes to stopping genocide. Not now. Not after what happened to so many cultures in our world’s history. We know better, we should do better. We can’t keep letting the Israeli government kill innocent civilians, people like us.

[religion-is-a-mental-illness]

Since October 7, anti-Isral propaganda disguised as a "social justice" movement has flooded Instagram.

Influential individuals and organizations are working together to systematically promote a deliberate disinformation campaign aganst Israel that ultimately benefits Hamas.

They use social media to propagate false narratives, specifically targeting young left-leaning Americans, and orchestrating what might be the most significant propaganda offensive against the Jewish community since World War II.

Polls have found that half of young American adults side with the terrorist organization Hamas, responsible for the brutal October 7 massacre of over 1200 Israeli civilians and capture of over 200 hostages. And that their actions can be justified.

One organization responsible for disseminating the most deceptive anti-Israel propaganda aimed at influencing Americans' opinions is the Institute for Middle East Understanding.

The IMEU is backed by millions of dollars from wealthy donors like the Rockefeller Brothers Fund. The Rockefeller Brothers' father is John D. Rockefeller Jr., the "primary financier" of Nazi eugenics research.

The IMEU is extremely influential. They've gained hundreds of thousands of followers in just a few weeks. Their highly misleading posts get tens of thousands of Likes and Shares.

They accomplished this by copying the tactics of "anti-racist educators" on Instagram that launched the Black Lives Matter protests and riots in 2020.

In this 2021 panel, prominent anti-Israel activists explain how they use research from "Palestine Studies," a frivolous scholarship based on "decolonization" and Critical Theory, to create "social justice content" on Instagram to target American progressives.

IMEU Communications Director, Omar Baddar (salary: $100,000) explains their pivot from traditional media to social media, because social media offers greater control over the narrative.

He believes Palestinians should not be blamed when they instigate violence because:

"Israel as an occupying power is inherently the initiator of violence."

So, Israel simply existing is the real problem.

A key part of their strategy in targeting Americans involves drawing analogies to the USA's history of slavery and discrimination against black people:

"Jim Crow segregation is obviously something that every American understands, so explaining how the parallels between Israeli apartheid and that are very useful. For us, a central point is tying what is happening in Palestine to American moral responsibility."

Following these tactics, they saw a "massive explosion" in their following.

"The massive, massive, massive explosion in the shares and follows."

Their efforts succeed at deliberately misleading people and depriving them of key information and historical context that would allow them to better understand the nuances of the Israel-Palestine conflict.

Public opinion serves as Hamas' most potent weapon against Israel and American progressives are unwittingly being used as pawns in a scheme that ultimately benefits the terrorist organization.

Full investigation:

==

If it feels like western countries are in a re-run of the fanaticism and riots from three years ago, it's because they are. It's a shame they learned nothing from being conned by BLM propaganda.

At least it makes sense now how the "Be Kind" pronouns people who saw Nazis everywhere became pro-Sharia Nazis themselves, aligning with murderous, far-right Islamic jihadist terrorists, to the point of some of them even deciding Osama bin Laden was the good guy. FFS...

[the-lady-of-the-labyrinth]

You are playing right into their hands you so-called pro-Palestinian IDIOTS. You are doing EXACTLY what they want, parading around in your protestor cosplay. The craziest part is how you’re actually making a ceasefire LESS likely and thereby EXTENDING the period of suffering and death to the point of making it NEARLY IMPOSSIBLE to ever fucking remedy! And that’s in ADDITION to getting Trump re-elected because your priorities are further up your ass than your common fucking sense.

[eretzyisrael]

by Dion J. Pierre

The presidents of Harvard University, the University of Pennsylvania, and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) have been called to testify before the US House Committee on Education and the Workforce on Dec. 5 about rising antisemitism on college campuses in the wake of Hamas’ Oct. 7 massacre across southern Israel.

“Over the past several weeks, we’ve seen countless examples of antisemitic demonstrations on college campuses. Meanwhile, college administrators have largely stood by, allowing horrific rhetoric to fester and grow,” the committee’s chair, US Rep. Virginia Foxx (R-NC), said in a statement.

“College and university presidents have a responsibility to foster and uphold a safe learning environment for their students and staff,” the congresswoman continued. “Now is not a time for indecision or milquetoast statements. By holding this hearing, we are shining a spotlight on these campus leaders and demanding they take the appropriate action to stand strong against antisemitism.”

The announcement of the hearing came days after a new poll, released last week by Hillel International, found that 37 percent of Jewish college students have felt the need to hide their Jewish identity on campus since the Hamas atrocities, in which some 1,200 people, mostly civilians, were murdered and 240 others taken as hostages into Gaza. The survey also found that 35 percent of respondents said there have been acts of hate or violence against Jews on campus. A majority of those surveyed said they were unsatisfied with their university’s response to those incidents.

Kenneth Marcus — founder and chairman of the Louis D. Brandeis Center for Human Rights Under Law, who recently appeared before the committee himself to discuss campus antisemitism — told The Algemeiner on Wednesday that the hearing stands to give the college presidents a “dose of reality.”

“My sense is that a lot of college leaders are working within echo chambers,” said Marcus, whose organization filed a lawsuit this week against the University of California, Berkeley alleging the school failed to respond to “unchecked” antisemitism. “They’re surrounded by ‘yes men,’ and they can lose touch with reality. The fact is that their handling of antisemitism on their campuses has been extraordinarily deficient. Considering the quality of their respective institutions, they should be embarrassed.”