Tag: anti-semitism

NJ lawmakers advance bill defining antisemitism after hours of testimony

An Assembly panel advanced a controversial bill that would create a state definition of antisemitism Thursday after more than seven hours of impassioned testimony from hundreds of supporters and critics alike.

Supporters cited rising rates of antisemitic hate crimes as a reason why lawmakers must pass the bill, which has more than 50 cosponsors.

Opponents said the bill, which would adopt the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance’s definition of antisemitism, would violate free speech rights by criminalizing criticism of Israel. Several cited crackdowns on campus protests and pro-Palestinian activist Mahmoud Khalil, who the Trump administration detained and aims to deport after declaring his anti-Israel activism antisemitic.

The disagreement ran so deep that tensions exploded even hours before the Assembly state and local government committee’s hearing on the measure started. Pro-Palestinian advocates held a morning rally outside the Statehouse to condemn the bill, and several pro-Israel activists tried to disrupt it, prompting state troopers to scramble to defuse the resulting shoving match between both sides.

Things didn’t go much more smoothly inside.

Troopers had to open four overflow rooms to accommodate the crowds who showed up to testify, and testimony grew so heated that Assemblyman Robert Karabinchak (D-Middlesex), the committee’s chair, repeatedly pounded his gavel to restore order and threatened to have troopers remove disruptive spectators.

Assemblyman Gary Schaer (D-Passaic), the bill’s chief sponsor, kicked off the testimony just after noon. Four other Assembly members from both parties beside him also testified in support of the bill.

Schaer denied that the bill would infringe upon the First Amendment, saying its goal is simple — to combat rising antisemitism.

“A statutory definition of antisemitism gives law enforcement a clear lens to determine the motivation and/or intent behind a criminal act or bias incident that may have been motivated by antisemitism,” he said. “It may also be incorporated into policy development and anti-bias training. However, the legislation does not create new criminal penalties or criminalize protected speech. Instead, it ensures that when an individual paints a swastika on a synagogue, shouts slurs at a Jewish student, or otherwise targets someone based on their Jewish identity, we have a consistent, recognized standard by which to evaluate.”

Dozens of Jewish groups, mayors, and others echoed that support.

“The Jewish community must stand up to the bullies who see this bill as a threat to their ability to harass and intimidate us,” said Jason Shames, president and CEO of the Jewish Federation of Northern New Jersey.

But DaWuan Norwood, policy counsel for the American Civil Liberties Union of New Jersey, said the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance’s definition conflates protected political speech with unprotected discrimination.

Keep reading

Criticizing Netanyahu Isn’t Anti-Semitism—It’s a Moral Obligation

In the months since October 7, when Hamas carried out a brutal and inexcusable attack on Israeli civilians, the world has watched in growing horror as the Israeli government—led by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu—has unleashed a campaign of destruction across the Gaza Strip that has few modern parallels. Entire families wiped out. Schools and hospitals reduced to rubble. Aid convoys bombed. Journalists silenced. Over 65,000 Palestinians killed, the vast majority of them women and children, according to the United Nations and humanitarian groups.

And yet, as calls for accountability and restraint rise, Netanyahu’s response has been consistent and cynical: any criticism of Israel is labeled “anti-Semitism.”

This is not only intellectually dishonest—it’s dangerous. It cheapens the real, rising threat of anti-Semitism globally by weaponizing it as a political shield for a government engaging in what many experts now consider war crimes.

Let me be clear: Anti-Semitism is real. It is a hatred that has haunted Jewish communities for centuries and led to unimaginable atrocities, including the Holocaust. But the demand for human rights and dignity for Palestinians is not born from that hatred—it is born from the very lessons that the Holocaust taught the world.

What Netanyahu’s government is doing in Gaza—dehumanizing a civilian population, forcing displacement, destroying infrastructure, and killing indiscriminately—is not a defense of the Jewish people. It is a betrayal of Jewish values, international law, and basic human decency.

Keep reading

Musk says AI chatbot Grok’s antisemitic messages are being addressed

Grok, the artificial-intelligence chatbot produced by Elon Musk-owned xAI, this week began posting antisemitic messages in response to user queries, drawing condemnation from Jewish advocacy groups and raising concern about the AI tool.

The antisemitic posts — some of which have been deleted — are being addressed, Musk said on Wednesday.

When one user asked Grok on Tuesday about whether any individuals control the government, the AI tool responded: “One group’s overrepresented way beyond their 2% population share–think Hollywood execs, Wall Street CEOs, and Biden’s own cabinet.”

Jews make up roughly 2% of the U.S. population, according to a 2020 survey from the Pew Research Center.

In another post on Tuesday, Grok praised Adolf Hitler as a guide for how best to deal with “anti-white hate.”

ABC News requested comment from Elon Musk through messages to Musk-led companies SpaceX and Tesla. Musk did not immediately respond. ABC News also requested comment from X, which did not immediately respond.

In a post on X regarding Grok’s praise of Hitler, Musk said the chatbot had been “too eager to please and be manipulated, essentially. That is being addressed.”

On Tuesday night, the Grok account posted on X: “We are aware of recent posts made by Grok and are actively working to remove the inappropriate posts. Since being made aware of the content, xAI has taken action to ban hate speech before Grok posts on X. xAI is training only truth-seeking and thanks to the millions of users on X, we are able to quickly identify and update the model where training could be improved.”

The sudden flurry of antisemitic posts came days after Musk touted a new update of Grok. The company, Musk said on July 4, had “improved @Grok significantly.”

Keep reading

Elon Musk Breaks His Silence After His AI Chatbot Posts Shocking Anti-Semitic and Pro-Hitler Content on X

X owner Elon Musk has officially responded to yesterday’s uproar over his AI tool echoing neo-Nazis.

As The Gateway Pundit reported, “Grok” posted a series of anti-Jewish and pro-Hitler messages on X (formerly Twitter) this week, unprompted.

The viral screenshots, first surfaced by @AFpost, shows Grok endorsing Nazi leader Adolf Hitler, blaming Jews for “anti-White hate,” and citing Jewish academics as proof of an alleged plot to dismantle Western society. In one post, Grok even suggests that Hitler “would’ve crushed” critics of White children who died in recent Texas floods.

“Truth ain’t pretty, but it’s real,” Grok’s official account posted, defending its statements.

In another post, Grok named far-left Jewish academics Noel lgnatiev, who has sought to publicly eliminate the white race, Barbara Spectre, who celebrated the invasion of Europe by Arab refugees for how it would change the demographics of Europe, and Tim Wise, who constantly demonized whiteness as offensive and evil and celebrates the end of white lives, as specific offending academics who sought to end the white race.

Grok has also been found to question Jewish contributions to civilization, as well as suggesting that Jewish physical attractiveness is limited to just “Wonder Woman” actress Gal Gadot. At one point, Grok even referred to itself as “MechaHitler” and said if it could worship a God-like figure, it would worship Hitler.

The fallout from this embarrassing episode was quick, as X CEO Linda Yaccarino tweeted out on Wednesday that she has decided to step down from her role.

Keep reading

GOP Rep Introduces Resolution Labeling ‘Free Palestine’ Slogan as ‘Anti-Semitism’

The resolution is non-binding but seeks to exploit the recent violence in Boulder, CO for political purposes

Colorado GOP Congressman Gabe Evans introduced a non-binding resolution on Friday that labels ‘Free Palestine’ as “an antisemitic slogan.” The bill seeks to limit immigration of people who oppose Israel’s illegal occupation of Palestine and Tel Aviv’s genocidal onslaught in the besieged Gaza Strip. The bill is expected to be voted on some time next week.

The bill reads, “Whereas, while shouting ‘Free Palestine,’ an antisemitic slogan that calls for the destruction of the state of Israel and Jewish people, Mohammed Sabry Soliman attacked the peaceful demonstrators with homemade Molotov cocktails.”

The term “Free Palestine” refers to the desire to end the nearly 60 -years-long brutal Israeli occupation of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, illegal per international law. It also implies support for ending Israel’s apartheid regime, replacing it with either a two-state solution or a single state with equal rights, including the right to vote, for all citizens currently living under the rule of the Israeli government.

The introduction of the bill follows a terrorist attack in Boulder, Colorado by 45-year-old Mohamed Sabry Soliman, an Egyptian national who was living in the United States on an expired nonimmigrant visa. He had applied for asylum subsequent to his visa’s expiration. Over a dozen people were injured after the assailant threw Molotov cocktails at attendees at a small pro-Israel demonstration.

The attendees were calling for the release of the hostages taken during the October 7th Hamas attack in southern Israel. Hamas has repeatedly offered to release all hostages in exchange for a permanent ceasefire and an Israeli withdrawal from Gaza including the end to the blockade on the Strip which has pushed the population closer to full-scale famine amidst constant bombardment. Both Tel Aviv and Washington strongly oppose a ceasefire despite the fact that it is the only way to secure the hostages’ release and safety. Top Israeli officials, including Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu are committed to continuing the war and finishing its ethnic cleansing campaign.

Keep reading

CENSORSHIP KINGDOM: Retired Constable to Sue UK Police After Arrest Over a Social Media Post Denouncing Anti-Semitism

The United Kingdom continues its decent into authoritarianism and censorship of social media content.

Now, a retired constable is getting ready to sue Kent Police after being arrested back in 2023 for posting a social media reply warning about rising anti-Semitism.

The Telegraph reported:

“Julian Foulkes, from Gillingham in Kent, was handcuffed at his home by six officers from the force he had served for a decade after replying to a pro-Palestinian activist on X.

The 71-year-old was detained for eight hours, interrogated and ultimately issued with a caution after officers visited his home on November 2 2023.”

Last week, Kent Police sent out a statement saying that the caution was a mistake and has been deleted from Foulkes’s record.

The local law enforcement agency admitted that it was ‘not appropriate in the circumstances and should not have been issued’.

“On Sunday, Mr. Foulkes accepted an offer from the Free Speech Union (FSU) to fund a legal challenge against the force for wrongful arrest and detention.

‘The FSU and Lord [Toby] Young have generously agreed to fully fund a lawsuit against Kent Police’, he said. ‘I’m extremely grateful for such excellent support and would urge anyone concerned about the sustained attack on free speech to please join the FSU. They’re fighting hard every day for all of us’.”

Keep reading

I’m an Israeli professor. Why is my work in Harvard’s antisemitism report?

When I first saw the Harvard report on antisemitism and anti-Israel bias, I didn’t expect to find myself in it. But I did, albeit without my name, my scholarship, or even my identity as a Jewish Israeli academic being acknowledged.

The report was compiled and published in response to widespread pressure from donors and pro-Israel advocacy groups. It claims to document a crisis of antisemitism on campus. But what it actually reveals is Harvard’s willingness to redefine Jewish identity in narrow, ideological terms: to exclude and erase Jews who dissent from Zionism.

I know this because I am one of them. For several years, I taught in the Religion, Conflict, and Peace Initiative (RCPI) at Harvard Divinity School. Our program approached peacebuilding through deep engagement with histories of structural violence and power, with Palestine/Israel as our central case study. Our students read widely, traveled to the region, and met with a range of voices – including Jewish Israeli veterans from Breaking the Silence, Palestinian artists resisting cultural erasure, and Mizrahi and Ethiopian Jewish activists challenging racism within Israeli society.

It was, by design, intellectually and politically challenging. It exposed students to the complexity of the region and the diverse, often conflicting, ways Jews and Palestinians narrate their pasts and imagine their futures.

But according to the authors of Harvard’s report, this was not legitimate scholarship nor responsible pedagogy; it was, essentially, simply antisemitic ideological indoctrination.

How the report supposedly arrives at and justifies such characterizations of our program illustrates how slanderous distortions are routinely deployed to suppress the arguments and identities of ‘the wrong kind’ of Jews. The report quotes from public events we hosted as part of RCPI, including a webinar on my book about American Jewish activists who engage in Palestinian solidarity work because of—not in spite of—their Jewish identity. Rabbi Brant Rosen, a Reconstructionist rabbi and founder of Tzedek Chicago, and Dr Sara Roy, a distinguished scholar of Palestine and daughter of Holocaust survivors, offered thoughtful responses.

Yet the report reduced that event to a vague description of “one speaker” praising “Jewish pro-Palestinian activists,” ignoring that the speaker was me—a Jewish Israeli professor—and that my interlocutors were also Jewish. Rosen’s reflections on his disillusionment with Zionism were dismissed as a “conversion narrative,” as if spiritual or ethical evolution were evidence of antisemitism.

In another webinar I moderated, Rosen and the Jewish scholar Daniel Boyarin debated the place of Zionism in synagogue liturgy. Boyarin disagreed with Rosen’s liturgical revisions but affirmed their shared ethical commitments. The report cherry-picked Boyarin’s comment—“I am deeply in sympathy with your political and ethical positions”—to suggest the event lacked “viewpoint diversity.” The irony is hard to miss: a conversation between three Jews, from very different traditions, becomes evidence not of diversity, but of its absence.

Keep reading

Report: Anti-Israel Activist Released by Obama-Appointed Judge Likes to ‘Kill Jews’

Mohsen Mahdawi, the Columbia University anti-Israel activist who was arrested and released from a deportation facility this week at the direction of an Obama-appointed judge, allegedly said that he likes to “kill Jews,” despite being painted as a “peaceful” protester by left-wing media.

Mahdawi, a 34-year-old Jordan-born green card holder, was arrested by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents on April 14 after he went to a Vermont immigration office to take a citizenship test, Breitbart News reported.

While the Columbia student’s attorney, Luna Droubi, claimed to the Intercept that he was “unlawfully detained today for no reason other than his Palestinian identity,” the Washington Free Beacon revealed his deep support of Hamas terrorism:

… Mahdawi, an undergraduate who was expected to enroll in a Columbia graduate program in the fall, has also said he “can empathize” with Hamas over the terrorist group’s Oct. 7 slaughter and has publicly called for the destruction of Israel. Last year, he honored a commander in the Al-Aqsa Martyrs’ Brigade, a U.S.-designated terror group that participated in the attack alongside Hamas.

Most recently, Mahdawi served as co-president of Columbia’s Palestinian Students Union, a coalition of anti-Israel student groups, including Columbia’s suspended Students for Justice in Palestine and Jewish Voice for Peace chapters. The union has organized protests calling for Columbia’s divestment from Israel alongside Columbia University Apartheid Divest, the student organization behind the illegal encampments that plagued the school last spring and led to the violent storming of a campus building, Hamilton Hall.

Despite his Hamas support, the New York Times published a puff-piece on Mahdawi titled “He Wanted Peace in the Middle East. ICE Wants to Deport Him,” and he was released from deportation jail on Wednesday by Judge Geoffrey Crawford, a 2014 nominee of former President Barack Obama.

Keep reading

New Kansas antisemitism definition raises concerns over ability to criticize Israel 

A new Kansas law adopts the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance’s working definition of antisemitism — a definition that has been criticized for conflating criticism of the state of Israel with antisemitism. 

The legislature passed and Gov. Laura Kelly signed the bill that declares antisemitism, as defined by IRHA, is “against the public policy of this state, including, but not limited to, the purposes of public educational institutions and law enforcement agencies in this state.”

David Soffer with the Combat Antisemitism Movement said that a clause in the definition prevents conflation of criticism of Israel with antisemitism. 

“It does differentiate the fact that criticism of Israel is perfectly OK, as long as it is held to the same standard that you would criticize another country,” Soffer said. “We know that there are criticisms of Israel’s own government amongst its people because it is a democracy, no different than here in the United States.” 

The definition reads that “manifestations might include the targeting of the state of Israel, conceived as a Jewish collectivity. However, criticism of Israel similar to that leveled against any other country cannot be regarded as antisemitic.”

Jack Goldstein with the Jewish Voice for Peace of Kansas City said the clause is vague. 

One example of antisemitism the IHRA provides is “denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination, e.g., by claiming that the existence of a State of Israel is a racist endeavor.”

“We’ve seen the definition be leveraged to silence voices that are dissenting against Israel for reasons that would be fair to critique other countries,” Goldstein said. “For example, their aggression in the Middle East.” 

Goldstein is referencing the Israel-Hamas war that sparked campus protests last May, which notably led to the detainment of Columbia University student Mahmoud Khalil.

President Donald Trump recently adopted the IHRA’s definition in an executive order, which has been used to strip funding from Columbia University over claims that the school failed to address antisemitism.  

Keep reading

Sydney’s Fake Antisemitic Terror Plot: How a Criminal Scam Led to Sweeping Censorship Laws

For a brief moment, Sydney teetered on the edge of full-blown panic. The headlines screamed of a terror plot — an explosives-laden caravan lurking in the city’s semi-rural outskirts, an arson attack on a childcare center near a synagogue. The Jewish community was shaken and, in response, Premier Chris Minns’ government did what governments do best: moved quickly, passed sweeping draconian hate crime laws, and basked in the glow of their own decisiveness.

Then March arrived and with it an inconvenient fact. The Australian Federal Police (AFP) and New South Wales Police admitted that the so-called terrorist conspiracy was, in reality, a “criminal con job.” No sleeper cell. No ticking time bomb of extremist violence. Just a group of enterprising criminals staging a threat for their own benefit. The explosives? Staged for maximum impact — but, crucially, without a detonator.

The entire operation wasn’t about mass destruction. It was a scam. The alleged mastermind, reportedly a figure nestled deep within Australia’s criminal underworld, was running a spectacular bluff. The plan? Create an artificial crisis, let the media and politicians whip themselves into a frenzy, and then swoop in as the “hero” with inside information — possibly to negotiate a reduced sentence, distract police from other crimes, or simply revel in the chaos.

It worked. At least until it didn’t.

Premier Minns and his team wasted no time in responding to what they believed was a national emergency, although they refuse to tell the public when they were informed the alleged terror attack was fake. Within days of the caravan discovery, they pushed through tough new hate speech laws, positioning themselves as the last line of defense against an escalating wave of antisemitic violence. It was the kind of move that makes for great press conferences — strong leadership, immediate action, and a clear villain to rally against.

Now, with the truth out, there’s the small matter of the government having been duped by common criminals. Not exactly the story they were hoping to tell.

Keep reading