In Jewish tradition, mixed dancing — men and women dancing together — is not banned because the act itself is necessarily sinful. Rather, it’s prohibited by Orthodox rabbis as a safeguard, a geder (protective fence) to keep people from straying into deeper moral danger. The actual target of the ban is adultery. The sages, with profound psychological insight, warned against behaviors that might lead to the destruction of intimate relationships. If lust can spark with a glance, how much more so with physical proximity, rhythmic movement, and emotional energy?
This ancient rabbinic logic should feel very familiar today. We are watching a tragic parallel unfold among secular and progressive Jews in America and the West, who, ignoring the early signs of danger, are “dancing” with partners who wish to destroy them and their relationships with the Jewish community.
In the UK, members of the Masorti movement — the equivalent of Conservative Judaism — watched impassively as anti-Israel protestors screamed “Death, death to the IDF!” Rather than draw a red line against those openly calling for the annihilation of Israel and its defenders, these leaders tiptoed around offense, unwilling to rupture intercommunal alliances that feed their progressive sensibilities.
In New York, the problem took a sharper form. A candidate for public office — Zohran Mamdani, a Democratic Socialist and vocal supporter of anti-Israel slogans — dodged criticism over the genocidal phrase “Globalize the Intifada.” Far-left Reform rabbis in the city, self-anointed moral voices of the Jewish community, rushed to endorse him. They danced around the danger, preferring the fantasy of social justice alliances over the hard truth of growing antisemitism within their political home.
Article in the Times of Israel co-authored by co-authored by Rabbi Rachel Goldenberg, Rabbi Andy Kahn, Rabbi Abby Stein, Rabbi Barat Ellman, PhD, Rabbi Ellen Lippmann, Rabbi Nancy H. Wiener, and Rabbi Miriam Grossman.
The slope isn’t just slippery anymore — it’s greased with blood and cowardice. Mamdani’s continued place in the progressive tent is welcomed not only by radicals but by establishment Democrats, including Jews like Rep. Jerry Nadler. The Democratic National Committee embraces Mamdani with open arms, eyes shut tight to the threat he and his fellow “democratic socialists” pose to Jews in New York and beyond.
What’s most astonishing is not that radicals hate Jews — an old story — but that Jews are oblivious. Or worse, they see it and prefer the warmth of progressive adulation over the cold loneliness of standing apart.
This is not a moment for nuance or middle-ground moral posturing. The bell curve of American political identity has collapsed into a barbell — a society without a center and where extremes dominate. The Left hosts open antisemites under the banner of “justice,” while the Right has become a safer harbor for traditional Jews who value Israel and religion.
Still, many Jews still won’t leave the party. The music is loud, the slogans intoxicating, and the identity politics too thrilling to resist. They are reveling in center stage, swaying to the rhythm of the mob, arms locked with people who chant for Jewish blood. It is dirty dancing in every sense of the phrase.
While UK’s Glastonbury music festival condemned the violent chants, Masorti Jews excused the vitriol
The sages understood that proximity leads to temptation, and temptation leads to destruction. The rabbis who banned mixed dancing did not hate fun but feared the cost of heedless joy — of dancing with people who don’t have your best interest at heart. That entrance you with intoxicating passions that undermine foundational bonds.
Today, Jews must ask: Who are we dancing with, and how long until the music stops and we realize we are profoundly alone?
Zohran Mamdani, a rising star of the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) and winner of the Democratic primary for mayor of New York City, is a vocal critic of Israel, consistently aligning himself with those who deny the Jewish state’s legitimacy. The DSA’s New York chapter, to which Mamdani belongs, infamously demanded that candidates pledge never to visit Israel, a democratic country that has long been an ally of the United States and home to nearly half of the world’s Jews. DSA-NYC only targeted the Jewish State in its campaign; not a single American adversary was listed.
This is not policy criticism—it is ideological exclusion.
Mamdani often speaks in terms of equality for all in the Holy Land, especially being opposed to a “hierarchy of citizenship on the basis of religion.” But it’s worth pressing on what that actually means. In Jerusalem today, at the holiest site in Judaism—the Temple Mount—only Muslims are allowed to pray. Jews, Christians, and all other non-Muslims are banned from uttering a prayer or even moving their lips in spiritual devotion on the site where the two Jewish Temples once stood, and which remains sacred to Jews.
The Old City of Jerusalem including the Jewish Temple Mount/ Al Aqsa Compound
This discriminatory policy is issued by the Jordanian-run Islamic Waqf, which holds administrative control of the Temple Mount under a decades-old, uneasy “status quo.” The United Nations repeatedly reinforces this Islamic exclusivity, often omitting any Jewish connection to the Temple Mount altogether. Both the Palestinian Authority and Hamas vocally oppose any Jewish prayer there, calling it a “provocation.” Jews just visiting the site are denounced by Palestinian leadership with denunciation that Jews are “storming al Aqsa” in an attempt to rile up 2 billion Muslims to jihad Jews.
So, what does “equality” mean to Mamdani in this context?
Does he believe Jews should have the same right to worship – at their holiest site – as Muslims do at a site they consider less holy? Would he support Jewish prayer on the Temple Mount? Or would he continue the pattern of defending Islamic supremacy over Jewish heritage, consistent with the positions of his political allies?
More pointedly: would Mamdani support turning the Dome of the Rock, an Islamic shrine that sits on the very spot of the Jewish Temples, into a synagogue? And would he support giving Jews preference to the site on Saturday, comparable to Muslim access granted each Friday?
Mamdani’s party and political base support antisemitic edicts. They have increasingly mirrored the rhetoric of Palestinian leaders who call for the complete “de-Judaization” of Jerusalem. Hamas and the Palestinian Authority both deny any Jewish historical connection to the site. Any mention of rebuilding a synagogue—let alone a Temple—is immediately labeled “incitement” and met with threats of, and actual, violence.
The DSA has never condemned this apartheid of worship. Instead, it condemns Israel for even maintaining security on the Mount after violent jihadi riots. That Mamdani would remain silent or complicit on this speaks volumes.
The deeper truth is that equality in Mamdani’s rhetoric masks a goal for a radical reordering of the Middle East in which Jewish identity and history are subordinated or erased altogether. It is not about equal rights—it is about erasing Israel. Supporting open Jewish prayer on the Temple Mount would be a minimal step toward showing that his ““equality” includes Jews.
Will he denounce Hamas’s threats of violence against Jews praying in Jerusalem? Will he demand the Waqf end its ban on Jewish prayer? Will he advocate for genuine religious pluralism on the Temple Mount?
Or will he continue to chant slogans of “equality” in the language of Islamic supremacy, complicit in religious apartheid?
In the book of Numbers, the Moabite king Balak summons the non-Jewish prophet Bilaam to curse the Israelite nation which was traveling near Moab. What unfolds, is one of the most mysterious blessings in the Bible.
As Bilaam gazes upon the people of Israel, he declares:
“How can I damn whom God has not damned, How doom when God has not doomed? As I see them from the mountain tops, Gaze on them from the heights, There is a people that dwells apart, Not reckoned among the nations,” “הֶן־עָם֙ לְבָדָ֣ד יִשְׁכֹּ֔ן וּבַגּוֹיִ֖ם לֹ֥א יִתְחַשָּֽׁב“(Numbers 23:8–9)
The statement is peculiar – a nation which dwells alone – has befuddled rabbis for centuries. Is it a curse? A blessing? A prophecy?
At first glance, the idea of being alone evokes discomfort. In Genesis, God explicitly declares, “It is not good for man to be alone” “לֹא־ט֛וֹב הֱי֥וֹת הָֽאָדָ֖ם לְבַדּ֑וֹ” (Genesis 2:18). From this verse, Jewish tradition emphasizes the centrality of community, companionship, and connection. So why would Bilaam say something seemingly negative—and continue with a positive blessing in Numbers 23:10 “Who can count the dust of Jacob, Number the dust-cloud of Israel? May I die the death of the upright, May my fate be like theirs!”
Jan Jansson (1588-1664) map of the Holy Land (c. 1630) showing the life of Moses in vignettes and the organization and route of the Israelites through the desert and then Moab above the Dead Sea on the map on their way to the Promised Land
The answer may lie in context of the event and the deeper meaning of distinctiveness. Bilaam was not commenting on mere social isolation. He was marveling at the singularity of an entire people traveling together through the desert, in unison, yet set apart in character and destiny. He was struck by the sight of an entire nation—young and old, rich and poor—not scattered as refugees or as imperial conquerors, but moving as one, under a divine mission. This was a nation on a journey, and yet already a people. They were not defined by geography, wealth, or military might—but by a relationship with God.
close up of Jansson map
In Jewish tradition, blessings are tied to recognition and distinction. Consider the rules of berachot (blessings): when a person eats an apple, it receives the blessing “borei pri ha’etz”—a specific blessing for fruit of the tree. If the apple is altered, like mashed into applesauce or mixed with other foods, the blessing remains the same ONLY if the fruit can still be identified. But if the fruit is so blended or processed that its original form can no longer be distinguished, it receives the general blessing of “shehakol“. The highest form of blessing is given to that which is most clearly recognizable.
In this light, Bilaam’s words take on added meaning. The Jewish people, by dwelling alone, are not to be pitied but admired. They are not a mashed mixture indistinguishable from general society but a clearly defined people, worthy of the highest blessing. Their uniqueness—religiously, culturally, and morally—is their spiritual signature.
Moreover, Bilaam wasn’t simply remarking on ethnic isolation. He noted the nation’s relationship with the Divine. Even when they seemed to be isolated, they were never truly alone—they were accompanied by God. The camp of Israel may have appeared vulnerable in the wilderness, but it was surrounded by divine presence, protected by a covenant older and stronger than any human alliance. As a prophet, he could not help but shout “How can I damn whom God has not damned” and “May my fate be like theirs!”
close up of Jansson map
This point is emphasized by commentators like Rashi (1040-1105), who notes that Bilaam’s phrase can be read as prophetic: “They do not come under the same reckoning (לא יתחשב) with other nations. — Another explanation is: When they rejoice, no other nation rejoices with them.”
This is certainly the case today, as Israel defeats one enemy after another. Each – Hamas, Hezbollah, Iran – armed with both weaponry and genocidal intent, have been neutralized. The Jewish world is relieved and gives thanks, while the United Nations runs to condemn the Jewish State for its defensive war.
The aloneness feels like isolation but is it? Is the success – and “aloneness” – to be read as a glory to God? Bilaam’s blessing isn’t merely poetic—it is theological. He sees a people whose separation from other nations isn’t a curse but a connection to God – for those, like him, who can appreciate the holy tie.
For those who recognize this divine connection, the Jewish people become a source of blessing. As Bilaam says later, “Blessed are those who bless you, and cursed are those who curse you” (Numbers 24:9). But for those who fail to see the holiness of that distinction and connection to God—who seek to blend, suppress, or erase it—the reading is a curse. The uniqueness is condemned as outside societal standards.
In the end, Bilaam’s words are not a curse in disguise. They are a prophetic blessing that reveals a truth that many overlook: there is holiness in standing apart when one stands with God. The Jewish people, though often alone among the nations, are never alone in essence. They are accompanied by the Divine, distinguished by faith, memory, and mission.
The October 7 Hamas-led massacre by thousands of Gazans did not spark antisemitism on American campuses. It merely exposed how deeply embedded it already was. At CUNY, UC Berkeley, and Georgetown, students and professors came out to celebrate the torture and murder of Israeli victims of terror — with institutional protection, foreign funding, and a growing network of terror-affiliated faculty and student activists.
UC Berkeley protestors come for Jews
Organizations like Canary Mission have tracked and documented the alarming volume of antisemitic activity from students and professors — revealing how extremism isn’t on the fringe anymore. The Brandeis Center for Human Rights Under Law and StandWithUs have brought lawsuits against the universities. Now, the House Education & Workforce Committee is bringing the presidents of these three universities to Washington, D.C. on July 9.
CUNY: A Campus Captured by Hate
Canary Mission has documented dozens of CUNY students and professors who:
Featured speakers from U.S-designated foreign terrorist groups like Samidoun
Praised Hamas and Islamic Jihad
Supported Intifada
Called for the extermination of Zionists and Israelis
Calls Zionists “White Supremacists”
One notable example is Nerdeen Kiswani, a CUNY law graduate and founder of Within Our Lifetime (WOL), a group which openly calls for “globalizing the intifada” and “confront Zionists” wherever they are, including their homes and workplaces. Despite – or because of – this, she was chosen as the keynote speaker for the 2022 CUNY Law commencement — a decision defended by the law school.
Professors at CUNY have supported Hamas terrorism and protect antisemitic groups like Students for Justice in Palestine. They include Saadia Toor, Eve Tuck, Danny Shaw and Lucien Baskin. They have:
Called Israelis “Nazis”
Called to “Globalize the intifada”
Posted on social media the desire for destruction of Israel
They proudly teach this in their classrooms in departments that include “Center for the Humanities,” rebranding their noxious antisemitism as a component in the fight for human rights. This isn’t just tucked into a comment during a class; there are literally classes on globalizing the intifada.
UC Berkeley: The Legalization of Hate
Influence Watch has tracked Faculty for Justice in Palestine (FLP) which was founded in the 2023-4 school year. It is a network of professors which is associated with the U.S. Campaign for the Academic and Cultural Boycott of Israel (USACBI) and “advocates that universities end study abroad programs with Israeli universities, and advocates that universities end disciplinary action against students involved in pro-Palestinian campus protests.” There are chapters at UC Berkeley and Georgetown, among others.
Coordinate with Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP)
In December 2022 – before the October 7, 2023 massacre – the Office of Civil Rights for the U.S. Department of Education (OCR) launched a formal investigation into UC Berkeley Law School over a controversial anti-Zionist bylaw adopted by several student groups in August. The groups sought to ban Zionists – individuals and groups – from campus.
Professors like Hatem Bazian are affiliated with several antisemitic and anti-Israel groups. He regularly calls out Jews and pro-Israel advocates as the leading spreaders of “Islamophobia” who are evil manipulators of Congress. He teaches courses at Berkeley on “Islam in America: Communities and Institutions” and “De-Constructing Islamophobia and Othering of Islam.” He addresses audiences and asks why there hasn’t been an intifada in the United States.
The school has been sued over its “unchecked antisemitism.”
Georgetown: Foreign Funds, Foreign Values
Georgetown – located in the nation’s capital of Washington, D.C. – is one of the most bought universities in America. It has received roughly $1.3 billion from foreign actors, with over $1 billion coming from Qatar, one of the leading sponsors of the U.S.-designated terrorist group Hamas.
Robert Groves, the interim president of Georgetown, is a regular in Qatar. Georgetown opened a campus in the sheikhdom and Groves interacts regularly with the royal family, seemingly as a conduit for influence in the nation’s capital.
Though Georgetown has a more diplomatic tone, Canary Mission has documented:
Students and guest speakers who supported Hamas and BDS
Faculty like Jonathan Brown, who have repeatedly called Israel practicing “apartheid” and “ethnic cleansing.” He said Jews and Christians view the Middle East through an anti-Muslim lens but Muslims do not think of the conflict as stemming from antisemitism. It’s a remarkable dynamic considering Brown is a director of the Prince Alwaleed bin Talal Center for Muslim-Christian Understanding in the School of Foreign Service and the Department of Arabic and Islamic Studies in the College of Arts & Sciences. The prince is a Saudi billionaire.
Georgetown has hosted a number of people with links to jihadi terrorism:
Ribhi Karajah, affiliated with terrorist group PLFP, who was convicted in 2019 for his involvement in a bombing which killed a 17 year old girl.
Georgetown professor Badar Khan Suri with Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh as covered by CAMERA
Unsurprisingly, Georgetown students have rallied to the terrorist group Hamas and its supporters in the aftermath of October 7, joining in the Global Intifada against Jews.
The Middle East Forum did a 30 minute video about Georgetown’s ties to Hamas sympathizers. It is worth watching:
Conclusion: Universities Incubate And Spread Antisemitism
The picture is clear. Professors promote terror. Students celebrate slaughter. Hostile governments fund it, and administrations on the take allow it to fester.
If these universities continue to protect hate under the banner of “academic freedom,” they will soon graduate leaders who believe murder is resistance, and Jewish life is expendable.
“We are going to have an intifada on every college campus! We are going to shut down all the Zionist events!”
Husam Kaid, YouTube, Nov 15 2019
People from CUNY in Times Square in 2019 calling for an intifada in every classroom and the destruction of Israel
This is not a free speech issue. It’s a moral emergency.
ACTION ITEM
Call Rep. Tim Walberg’s office at (202) 225-6276 to thank him for holding the session on campus antisemitism.
Call your senator to support the DETERRENT Act and call Sen. Thom Tillis’s office at (202) 224-6342 to thank him for sponsoring it.
In May 2024, Time Magazine ran a story decrying “How Weaponizing Antisemitism Puts Jews at Risk.” This idea has become fashionable among progressives, Islamists, and campus radicals. According to this twisted narrative, the real threat isn’t antisemitism—it’s the accusation of antisemitism, supposedly being used to “silence” criticism of Israel. They cite the House Education Committee’s task force on antisemitism as proof, calling it a vehicle to crack down on “pro-Palestinian” protests rather than protect Jewish students. They lobby to prevent the IHRA definition of antisemitism to be accepted in government cases, because Jews shouldn’t be allowed to decide for themselves what defines antisemitism.
Who gave them such privilege?
The charge against Jews is explicit and comes from Jews and non-Jews. UC Berkeley associate professor of history and Jewish studies Ethan Katz was part of the Nexus Project which put words like “Intifada” into various buckets and grades of antisemitism, in an attempt to jettison IHRA’s widely adopted definition. Katz took aim at the House Education Task Force and said “the overarching motivation for many of these people [Republicans on the committee] is to use this as a way of attacking higher education. This means that they are using Jews as a kind of pawn to play a political game.” It’s as though antisemitism doesn’t exist or politicians (read THOSE politicians) couldn’t possibly care about Jews.
We are being reeducated: Jews aren’t victims; they’re tools. Republicans don’t care; their racists using Jews to attack minorities and liberal institutions.
Worse, Jews are no longer victims in this reading but complicit in attacks on progressive causes. The expectation (read demand) from the socialist-jihadi alliance is therefore for Jews to accept the indignities, harassment, intimidation and discrimination lest they speak up, and victims of preference possibly be held responsible or pay a price.
This inversion of reality is extreme – and deadly.
The true weaponization of antisemitism is not rhetorical; it is literal. It is found in the chants of mobs in Western capitals calling to “Globalize the Intifada“—code for bringing the murder of Jews from Israel to the streets of New York, London, and Toronto. It is etched in graffiti that reads “Gas the Jews” in Paris and Melbourne. It is breathed into masked agitators who storm Jewish neighborhoods, businesses, and houses of worship.
Car in Australia with antisemitic graffiti
It is not new. For over a century, Arab leaders have worked to deny the Jewish people their rights. The Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, Haj Amin al-Husseini, incited riots in the 1920s and 1930s to prevent Jews from praying at their holiest site, the Temple Mount. In 1929, that incitement culminated in the massacre of 67 Jews in Hebron. His riots from 1936 to 1939 kept hundreds of thousands of Jews in Europe to die in the Holocaust.
Fast forward to 2023 to Hamas’s October 7 pogrom—an antisemitic massacre that was a direct descendant of that same ideology. Jews, in the Hamas worldview, are not simply an occupying force—they are an infestation. Hamas’s 1988 charter calls for Muslims to fight and kill Jews wherever they may be. The 2006 Palestinian elections, in which Hamas won a majority, validated and empowered that genocidal ethos.
A majority of Gazans have always supported killing Jewish civilians in Israel, according to every Palestinian poll taken since 2000
This hatred has never been about borders or policy. It is about Jewish existence. Jewish presence.
Palestinian Arabs are almost uniformly antisemitic according to Antidefamation League (ADL) polls. They have weaponized their antisemitism and come to ethnically cleanse the land of Jews.
For calling out Muslim antisemitism, the three million-member powerful National Education Association (NEA) teacher union voted on July 6 to cut ties with the ADL. In rejecting using any materials from the ADL, the NEA stated that “despite its reputation as a civil rights organization, the ADL is not the social justice educational partner it claims to be.” NEA delegate Stephen Siegel said “allowing the ADL to determine what constitutes antisemitism would be like allowing the fossil fuel industry to determine what constitutes climate change.”
Only comrades of the socialist-jihadi alliance should be allowed to define antisemitism.
So when House Republicans call a hearing to investigate antisemitism on college campuses after mobs trap Jewish students in libraries and bar entry to Hillel buildings, outlets like Time spin it as a crackdown on speech. When Jewish students file Title VI complaints because professors and deans dismiss their fears and excuse calls for a new Holocaust as “political expression,” activists call it censorship.
Jewish students hide from mob at Cooper Union in New York City
The charge that “antisemitism is being weaponized” is not a defense of speech—it’s a shield for Jew hatred. It inverts the aggressor and victim and gaslights the world into thinking that Jews are too powerful, too organized, and too vocal in defending themselves.
It is not only in the Jewish Diaspora. The Islamic Republic of Iran – sworn to the destruction of the Jewish State which it calls a “cancer” – has literally weaponized its nuclear program. Not willing to be exterminated, Israel preemptively took out the infrastructure of the weapons of mass destruction. And the world came after Israel as if it were the aggressor.
Because there is a corrupt belief that Jews must accept their fate silently.
UN claims that Israel cannot defend itself from the political-terrorist group Hamas which rules Gaza and has 58% of the seats in parliament
The world has been trained that Jews have too much – whether power, money, land, rights – even pride. People believe that Jews should be stripped of those items and absorb the abuse. To demand basic human rights, dignity or protection is not considered defense but an assault on the attackers.
Are Jews hunting Palestinians on Western campuses or are Palestinian flag-wavers cornering Jewish students? Did Israel issue a fatwa against Arabs and Muslims, or was it Osama bin Laden who said that Jews will never be safe, Hamas that declared in its charter that it is an obligation for every Muslim to kill Jews, and Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas who demanded a land ethnically cleansed of every Jew?
The world knows that antisemitism has been weaponized but not by Jewish students or congressional investigators. It has been weaponized by Hamas with bullets, knives, and fire. By “anti-Zionists” who shout genocidal slogans and assault Jews in the the streets of the Global North. By media figures who gaslight Jews to stay silent to protect the indefensible in the name of free expression.
Antisemitism has been weaponized and Jews are dying. Hamas’s willing executioners are telling you to move along.
Rep. Tim Walberg (R-MI), the chairman of the 45-person committee, said the “hearing will focus on the underlying factors instigating antisemitic upheaval and hatred on campus. Until these factors — such as foreign funding and antisemitic student and faculty groups — are addressed, antisemitism will persist on college campuses. Our committee is building on its promise to protect Jewish students and faculty while many university leaders refuse to hold agitators of this bigotry, hatred, and discrimination accountable.”
This Republican-led hearing will have the following witnesses:
Dr. Robert M. Groves, Interim President, Georgetown University
Dr. Félix V. Matos Rodríguez, Chancellor, The City University of New York
Dr. Rich Lyons, Chancellor, University of California, Berkeley
Here we will review foreign funding of universities.
Foreign Funding
Americans for Public Trust (APT) produced a report in March 2025 focused on foreign funding to universities. It found that “$60 billion in foreign gifts and contracts have been funneled into American colleges and universities over decades.” In particular, $20 billion went to ten elite schools with transparency laws being “lightly enforced” leading many universities to not report. Alarmingly, “many of the countries that top the list of foreign gifts… are long-standing adversaries and enemies of the U.S..”
The American Enterprise Institute (AEI) noted in February 2025 that “a key culprit [for so much foreign money coming into universities] is universities’ failure to comply with the provisions of Section 117 of the Higher Education Act, which requires US institutions of higher education to report income from foreign countries valued at over $250,000, such as gifts or research contracts. But American universities have failed to report billions in foreign funding, which drove the first Trump administration to launch several investigations into Section 117 noncompliance.”
The databases from the Education Department Office of Federal Student Aid Section 117 compliance can be found here.
AEI found “US schools reported over $4 billion in Qatari funding, making it easily the largest foreign donor to American universities. Looking at Qatari money together with China and Saudi Arabia further highlights how entangled these sources are with US higher education—seven of the universities investigated under Section 117 received most of their foreign funding from these three countries alone.”
APT reported that several “foreign adversaries” have donated to U.S. education, with “China, Russia, Iran, Qatar, Venezuela and Yemen have collectively syphoned billions into American schools.”
APT raised a red flag on the number of university researchers who have been arrested for illegally collaborating with China, including the chair of Harvard’s chemistry department. AEI was alarmed by the association of these foreign funders to universities doing work in artificial intelligence (AI). The COVID pandemic and risks from AI to society are reasons enough to clamp down on this funding, before even approaching foreign money stoking antisemitism.
“influenced… the academic environment, research priorities, and faculty recruitment, particularly within the School of Foreign Service (SFS), the Center for Contemporary Arab Studies (CCAS), and the Prince Alwaleed Bin Talal Center for Muslim-Christian Understanding (ACMCU).”
created centers that mainstreamed “political Islam, minimizing the threat of Islamist extremism, and advancing anti-Israel narratives.”
Georgetown, based in the nation’s capital of Washington, D.C., thereby produced a large cohort of alumni who “occupy prominent positions in the U.S. State Department, intelligence agencies, media, and NGOs, effectively introducing and reinforcing these ideological perspectives within American foreign policy-making processes.” It has also led to a spike of anti-Jewish actions on campus.
The ISGAP report specifically called out Qatar, “from being a major funder of the Muslim Brotherhood’s global operations to providing resources to Hamas—the Palestinian branch of the Muslim Brotherhood—and harboring the remnants of its leadership, Qatar has consistently positioned itself as both an ideological incubator and logistical facilitator of Islamist extremism. The Muslim Brotherhood is committed to destroying democracies, including the United States and Israel, and to replacing them with a distorted version of an Islamist caliphate.”
The funding works two ways – monies flowing onto American campuses as well as building campuses of American schools in foreign countries. Six American universities maintain campuses in Doha’s Education City: Georgetown, Carnegie Mellon, Virginia Commonwealth, Cornell, Northwestern, and Texas A&M, although Texas A&M is scheduled to close in 2028 (bolded countries in top 10 receiving foreign money). The state-run Qatar Foundation finances the campuses and personnel in Doha.
There have been numerous studies which analyze whether funding from foreign institutions – and those from countries which might be viewed as hostile to the U.S. – have an increased level of anti-American and antisemitic activity. A comprehensive statistical study showed “consistently strong evidence that institutions that received Section 117 funding from OIC (Organisation of Islamic Cooperation) member countries or authoritarian countries had much higher levels of antisemitic/anti-Zionist activity.” Interestingly – and counter to the argument of liberals – the study added “that there is minimal evidence here that foreign funding, per se, is associated with erosion of liberal democratic norms around campus speech.”
The Jew hatred was not confined to the universities’ campuses. In additional analyses, the study found “that as campus antisemitism goes up or down, so does antisemitism in the surrounding communities.”
While the study cautioned about drawing direct conclusions about the direction of antisemitism (perhaps society has caused antisemitism to spike in schools rather than vice versa), it was clear with its conclusion:
“The present research highlights two troubling possibilities that deserve further investigation. The first is that receipt of Section 117 funding from foreign sources, especially authoritarian ones, has contributed to these [antisemitic] developments. The second is that providing massive financial support to campuses with ascendant illiberalism serves the interests of foreign actors hostile to the U.S. in particular or liberal democracy in general.”
These are profound concerns not just for American Jews but America.
Biased Think Tank Fig Leaves: Brookings Institute
There are a number of “think tanks” that offer opinions and research papers about a variety of issues, including antisemitism at universities and the impact from foreign funding. Many are deeply conflicted. For example, the Brookings Institute had a center in Doha for 14 years, until it was closed in 2021. It often works in partnership with Georgetown University which takes significant money from Qatar. It is therefore not surprising that Brookings publishes defensive reports on Qatar which paint the sponsor of terrorist groups as a partner for the United States against bad actors in the Middle East, rather than a fountain of funding for evil: “a window may still be apparent whereby Qatari policymakers would welcome inventive U.S. suggestions as to ways that they could make themselves useful to American counterparts, all in the name of firming up their U.S. partnership in the face of hostile local states.”
Considering the Brookings-Qatar-Georgetown dynamic, it is not surprising that the group published a study that the Trump administration’s efforts to root out antisemitism at universities was really about Trump attacking his critics, not combatting Jew hatred.
Recommendations
AEI recommended that the government “move the enforcement of Section 117 out of the Office of Federal Student Aid (the office that gave us the FAFSA debacle) and return it to the Office of the General Counsel, which is better equipped to investigate and address non-compliance with federal statutes. The Education Department should also audit far more universities to ensure adequate reporting of foreign funds. Finally, department investigators should work closely with their counterparts in the Department of Justice and FBI to tackle this issue—especially when foreign funding could be linked to influence campaigns, technological espionage, or other efforts to undermine national security.”
The Senate should pass the DETERRENT Act (Defending Education Transparency and Ending Rogue Regimes Engaging in Nefarious Transactions Act) which seeks greater transparency of foreign funding in universities, especially from a “foreign country of concern.” It was passed by the House on March 27, 2025 with a vote of 241 to 169 (with 20 abstentions). Nearly 97% of Republicans voted for the measure while fewer than 15% of Democrats voted for the bill. It is before the Senate as S. 1296, sponsored by Sen. Thom Tillis (R-NC) with 13 Republican co-sponsors.
Conclusion
Billions of dollars are seeping into American universities from countries which are undermining American society and values. Qatar and China are particular actors which deserve heightened scrutiny regarding their potential nefarious efforts in artificial intelligence, biochemical research and promoting antisemitism.
ACTION ITEM
Call Rep. Tim Walberg’s office at (202) 225-6276 to thank him for holding the session on this important matter.
Call your senator to support the DETERRENT Act and call Sen. Thom Tillis’s office at (202) 224-6342 to thank him for sponsoring the bill.
The situation for Jews in Australia is rapidly becoming intolerable. Much of it is because of violence directed at Jews. And much of it because of the reactions that rally to the attackers.
In the immediate aftermath of the genocidal jihad of Gazans against Israelis in October 2023, a mob assembled at Australia’s Sydney Opera House shouting what sounded like “Gas the Jews”, “F*ck the Jews”, and “Allahu Akhbar.” The local police concluded that the mob only wanted to know where the Jews were and did not pursue charges against anyone.
Riot of people in Australia carrying Palestinian, Lebanese and ISIS flags calling for a jihad in the aftermath of the October 7, 2023 massacre in Israel by thousands of Gazans.
In response, the Muslim community said the incident “caused significant damage and distress to Arab and Muslim communities in Australia,” inverting victims and perpetrators.
This week, Australians looked to England for new inspiration.
After a music festival in England featured a band leading the audience in chants of “death, death to the I.D.F.,” the Israeli Defense Forces, scores of people echoed the call on the streets of Melbourne, Australia. A few days later, as Jews began their Sabbath, a man set fire to the front door of a synagogue in Melbourne with people inside. At the same time, around 20 people ransacked an Israeli restaurant, throwing tables and food while screaming the death chant and that they don’t want Zionists in Australia.
Australian news reports discussed the Jew hatred… while adding that Muslims have also faced hate lately.
Australian news reporting on antisemitic attacks from July4, adding comment that “anti-Arab hate” (3:25) also has spiked
The New York Times also felt compelled to add several paragraphs about “Islamophobia” in an article about the two antisemitic attacks. As it did, it recharacterized the antisemitic chants of the mob after the October 7 attack at the Sydney Opera House as simply “accusations of hate speech” and “new laws restricting protestors rights and criminalizing certain types of statements,” seemingly rallying around the haters.
Jews are under direct attack yet the public is attempting to misdirect and rationalize the situation to their Victims of Preference. Somehow, concerns for 2 billion Muslims who market themselves as “minorities” in the West, overshadow 15 million Jews under violent assault.
In February 1998, Osama Bin Laden called for a “Jihad Against Jews And Crusaders.” In it, he issued a ruling to “kill the Americans and their allies — civilians and military — is an individual duty for every Muslim who can do it in any country in which it is possible to do it.” It is an echo of Hamas’s 1988 foundational charter which calls to “raise the banner of Jihad in the face of the oppressors, so that they would rid the land and the people of their uncleanliness, vileness and evils, (Article 3)” and “It is necessary to instill the spirit of Jihad in the heart of the nation so that they would confront the enemies and join the ranks of the fighters. (Article 15)” Hamas doesn’t demand that everyone kill Jews; fostering fertile ground is also a key part of the jihad: “Jihad is not confined to the carrying of arms and the confrontation of the enemy. The effective word, the good article, the useful book, support and solidarity – together with the presence of sincere purpose for the hoisting of Allah’s banner higher and higher – all these are elements of the Jihad for Allah’s sake. (Article 30)”
Yes, the news is part of the jihad.
Years after his death, Bin Laden – together with Hamas – are conducting western music festivals and choirs outside opera houses to come for “the Jews and Crusaders.” The infidels love the energy and are screaming the chorus as they incinerate their own societies.
The West has enlisted in the jihad upon itself, starting with Jews.
On May 22, 2013, the streets of London ran red with the blood of a British soldier. Lee Rigby, a young drummer and veteran of Afghanistan, was savagely killed and hacked in broad daylight by two men shouting “Allahu Akbar.” The killers were converts to Islam, driven by jihadist ideology, determined to murder a British soldier as vengeance for the United Kingdom’s involvement in the War on Terror.
Lee Rigby (1987-2013) didn’t die while a soldier fighting in Afghanistan, but while walking on the streets of London
The attackers didn’t flee the scene. They stood there, hands dripping with blood, speaking calmly to a bystander’s camera, stating their religious motivation and intent. Rigby was targeted not for who he was as a person, but because of the uniform he wore — because he was part of a democratic nation that dared to fight radical Islamism abroad.
Flash forward to UK’s Glastonbury Festival in June 2025.
A crowd of thousands cheered and danced as the band Bob Vylan stood on stage and led them in a chant: “Death, death to the IDF.” Cheers. Applause. Raised fists. The UK’s biggest music festival turned into a public bloodlust rally, reminiscent not of peace and love but of Tehran rallies and Hamas parades in Gaza.
The same United Kingdom that once mourned Lee Rigby now hosts musical mobs screaming for Israeli soldiers — who are, like Rigby, young conscripts — to be hunted down and murdered. The shift is not just disturbing; it’s revelatory. The British public has not simply forgotten Rigby. It has been slowly conditioned to join the other side.
Bob Vylan celebrated by thousands at British music festival after calling for the murder of Israeli soldiers
What changed? The two Nigerian-born converts who killed Rigby were once on the fringes, denounced by the press and public as monsters. But the ideology that drove them — jihadism blended with anti-Western, anti-Semitic venom — is no longer beyond the pale in western cities. It’s broadcast on stages, shouted from union podiums, printed on placards at “Free Palestine” marches, and justified in classrooms as “decolonization.”
From the beheading of a soldier in Woolwich to mobs calling for the deaths of Jews in Glastonbury, Britain has not gone soft; it has gone sick.
Islamist terror was once the enemy of the nation. Now, it’s being mainstreamed and rebranded as some twisted form of “justice.”
The chants at Glastonbury weren’t about military critique or foreign policy. They were blood chants. Calls to murder the soldiers of the world’s only Jewish state. Just like Rigby, IDF soldiers are conscripts. They are fighting a defensive war on radical Islam — Hamas, Islamic Jihad, Hezbollah, the Islamic Republic of Iran — just as Rigby once fought al Qaeda and the Taliban. Their enemies are the same; their battlefields different.
But instead of solidarity, Jewish soldiers are demonized. Instead of mourning victims of jihad, Brits chant in chorus with the same ideology that murdered their own.
This is not coincidence. It is the result of years of ideological infiltration. Islamism, wrapped in the cloth of anti-imperialism, has become fashionable among youth and elites. Hamas propaganda has found its way into British classrooms, British parliaments, British airwaves — and now British music festivals, not dissimilar to the Nova Festival in Israel in which thousands of Gazans mowed down and raped concert goers.
Consider that the UK banned Hamas as a terror group in 2021, yet its slogans are alive and well in 2025. “Globalize the Intifada” has more sway than Democratic law.
The murderers of Lee Rigby told the British public they were coming for them. “You people will never be safe,” they said. Over the next twelve years, Brits have responded: We won’t only abandon the war on radical Islamism, we’ll join the jihad.
News report from 2013 by the jihadists who murdered Lee Rigby on the streets of the UK
The jihadist dream was never just about bombs and blood. It was about conquest — ideological, demographic and territorial. That process has been in motion across Europe, but the UK is perhaps its most advanced test case.
From Rigby to Glastonbury, Britain has undergone a chilling conversion. Not to Islam, but to jihadism — masked as progressive, broadcast as pop culture, and absorbed by a population eager to cheer with the mob.
A country that once mourned for its murdered soldier now cries for the death of others. That is not a battle lost but a societal surrender.
Anti-Jewish attacks in the United States have escalated from words to actions over the past two years. While antisemitism has always been the most prevalent hatred in the United States, the alarming escalation has even caught the attention of media that helped promote the Jew hatred for years.
In June 2025 articles and opinions, the New York Times called out attacks on Jews, seemingly ignoring its past of ignoring the scourge, and encouraging attacks with smears that Jews are “powerful” and steal money from public schools and taxpayers.
Yet it rationalized the attacks, even as it condemned people for making excuses for it.
The Times – which has long attempted to argue that despising the Jewish State is not antisemitism – said that Israel’s treatment of Palestinian Arabs is the reason that American Jews are being attacked. In a June 2 article, the author noted that in three recent attacks, “In Colorado and Washington, authorities said, the suspects shouted “Free Palestine” on the scene. In Pennsylvania, the arsonist later said he had set the fire as a response to Israeli attacks on Palestinians.”
Rather than state the obvious, that the antisemitic chants to “globalize the intifada” have gathered supporters who are killing Jews, it placed the blame on the Jewish State. It therefore made Jews responsible for antisemitic hate crimes rather than condemn the globalization of Jew-hatred. It’s a form of blood libel, where Jews only have themselves to blame for the world hating them.
The Times would do no such acrobatics about anti-Muslim verbal attacks on Democratic mayoral candidate Zohran Mamdani.
New York Times article on June 27, 2025
The Times did not mention the latest US battle against the Islamic Republic of Iran which refers to America as the “Great Satan.” It did not bring up possible Iranian sleeper cells attacking Americans. It did not mention Houthi Muslims in Yemen attacking American ships. It did not mention the US-designated terrorist political jihadi group Hamas launching a war on Israel, an American ally, slaughtering 1,200 people and taking 250 people hostage.
There was no global backdrop of Muslim countries and groups attacking Americans and American interests in contextualizing “anti-Muslim attacks” as it did about attacks on Jews.
Instead, the Times sought to recast the discussion into an issue of racism from the “right” and “Republicans.” It repeats the narratives of the paper: only White Republicans are racist, and anti-Muslim attacks are real and recognizable.
The Gap In Storytelling in Anti-Jew and Anti-Muslim Attacks
In the Times’ accounts, Jews are a monolith. Every Jew is responsible for the action of any other Jew on the planet unless they actively and publicly shed such association. For example, for centuries, Jews were labeled as Christ killers – unless they converted to Christianity. Today, they need to declare themselves anti-Zionists to shed blood libel accusations.
Not so for Muslims. A Palestinian-American need not account for the barbaric crimes of Hamas. It is similarly understood that a Muslim in the U.S. should not be vilified for the antisemitic actions of Iran or any other Islamic country.
To suggest that all Muslims are accountable for the action of any Muslim around the world would be labeled racist. Yet it is rationalized for Jews. Jews are viewed as a single unit while distinctions are made for other religious groups.
The gap in the Times’ storytelling is itself telling.
Korach And Tzitzit
In this week’s Torah portion, Korach incites a mini rebellion against Moses (Numbers 16). He charged Moses of elevating himself above the rest of the Jews, even though “all the community are holy” (16:3). Korach argued that everyone should be viewed as equals, with no distinction or ranking.
Rabbi Jonathan Sachs pointed out that this story comes immediately after the law of tzitzit in the Torah. That commandment called for a unique single blue thread amongst others on the garment on one hand, but on the other, everyone had the same commandment to wear such garment. Korach argued that just like everyone wore tzitzit with the royal blue color thread, everyone had the same level of holiness.
Korach used tzitzit as a metaphor to undermine Moses’ leadership. Whether the tzitzit garment is all blue or all white, the attached threads still need to have a single thread of blue upon which to focus. Whether everyone or a single person wears the tzitzit, the matter is the same: the distinction of the blue thread is what drives the attention and direction towards God.
Korach turned the concept of uniqueness on its head: from a focus on the heavens to centering on earth. From a means to inspire prayer to a tool to encourage a rebellion.
The Jewish Distinction And Anti-Jewish Rebellion
No religious group in the world is obligated to account for the actions of co-religionists – except for Jews.
As the “Chosen people,” Jews are held apart – like the blue thread of tzitzit. While the other monotheistic religions are built upon the Jewish Bible, they see Jews as Korach saw the blue thread of tzitzit: a distinction without purpose. While it may have been ordained by God in the scriptures, the commandment is common to everyone. The supposed uniqueness becomes a subject of mockery. And leads to an uprising.
While each faith is unique, Jews are the subject of examination. Their small number – like the single blue thread in tzitzit – makes the focus more singularly intense. Until and unless Jews bleach themselves of their special color, they are considered a single unit separate from others.
There are times and certain groups who focus on Jews as a source of inspiration, such as Evangelical Christians. Yet there are others like secularists who despise Jewish particularism in favor of universalism. Still others like Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-MI) and Hamas who simply see Jews as enemies which persecute them and therefore targets for attack.
Rationalizing Jew-hatred strips it of antisemitic intent. It morphs Jew-hatred into a “perceived antisemitism,” a problem for Jewish “Karens.” It simultaneously grants absolution to the antisemites. In contrast, anti-Muslim hatred gets no backstory, so the racism and “Islamophobia” is laid bare.
Antisemitism is so ingrained in society, that even stories meant to address the disgusting hatred are infused with the venom.
Zohran Mamdani, a radical socialist won the New York City Democratic primary for mayor. He did it on the strength of young voters who turned out to vote in Brooklyn and Queens. It was not solely about race or income level as commonly thought (Bronx is poorest and went +18 for Cuomo and Manhattan has the greatest percentage of Whites and went for Mamdani). The young people in liberal districts who came out in droves and secured his victory.
Poor Hispanics generally preferred Cuomo; Asians preferred Mamdani. But the real divide was in age: both in candidate preference and coming out to vote
America’s young people – especially in urban areas like New York City – are much more likely to be non-White than older Americans. They are more likely to get their news from social media influencers than credible news outlets, know little about the Holocaust, don’t remember the terrorist attacks of 9/11, and have been indoctrinated in a public school system that has advanced an “oppressor/oppressed” narrative in which “White privilege” has not only intentionally placed young non-White people at a disadvantage, but stolen their wealth and power in a racist generational kleptocracy.
Today’s youth have been indoctrinated by a socialist public school system which has compulsory attendance. Powerful teacher unions block alternatives like new charter schools and fight any monies going to private schools, thereby making them out-of-reach for many and frequently non-viable. Further, the teacher unions demand that they have total control of the education and block parental involvement.
This forced indoctrination of youth into a divisive ideology has a historic parallel: Nazi Germany.
When people think of black-and-white images of Hitler Youth, they instinctively recoil. The idea of a government-run school system indoctrinating children with a twisted dogma, demonizing whole groups of people, and eliminating parental rights is rightfully condemned. But the problem of the real world modern incarnation is ignored. Western democracies employ the same mechanisms, just with different terminology and new targets.
Germany’s National Socialist Party Educational System
In Nazi Germany, schools were not really about education—they were about indoctrination. From an early age, children were taught racial supremacy, loyalty to the Führer, and hatred of Jews, communists, and other so-called “enemies of the state.” Textbooks were rewritten to glorify White Aryans and dehumanize others. History was a fable of German victimhood and revenge. Biology became eugenics.
Parents were sidelined and teachers were party enforcers. Loyalty was not to truth or family, but to ideology.
America’s Democratic Socialist Party Indoctrination
Today, we do not see classrooms preaching eugenics or worshipping a dictator. But we do see a disturbing echo of the same approach: children are being indoctrinated to hate fellow classmates and members of society.
Public schools across the United States and other Western democracies increasingly push a worldview centered around oppressor and oppressed—not in terms of deeds or choices, but by skin color and gender. Critical Race Theory, once an obscure legal theory, has bled into K–12 education in the form of “equity-based learning,” and “antiracism,” approaches that specifically elevate non-White and low income students, and sideline Whites and Jews.
White children are taught they benefit from “privilege,” regardless of their life experience. Minority children are taught that their struggle is rooted in systemic bias. And the lesson is rarely a call for unity or shared values—it is a call for reordering society through grievance and power struggle.
History is reframed as nothing more than a record of Western oppression. Heroes like Washington, Lincoln, and Churchill are minimized or vilified. Meanwhile, activists are lionized regardless of method or truth. There is no longer a shared civic narrative—only the mantra of “deconstructing power structures.” The language of “revolution” and “liberation” are instilled in America’s youth.
And the teachers – and only the teachers – are in charge. Parents and politicians who push back against the curricula are demonized under a banner of “disguised censorship” who are “trying to dictate what teachers say and block kids from learning about our shared history.”
But it’s not shared history; it’s divisive history.
Teachers as Activists
During the Nazi regime, teachers were required to join the National Socialist Teachers’ League and toe the ideological line. They encouraged teachers to intimidate and harass perceived enemies: Jews. Today, public school teachers are forced to join powerful teacher unions. It promotes teachers becoming open activists that feast on current enemies, such as attacking “Zionist” Jews.
Holocaust Museum review of education in Nazi Germany
These teacher unions aggressively fight against charter schools and school vouchers, keeping millions of students trapped in underperforming, politically biased and morally deformed systems. Parents who speak up at school board meetings could be tarred as “domestic terrorists” by the National School Boards Association (NSBA), as happened in September 2021.
In Nazi Germany, dissent was criminal. In the modern West, dissent is canceled.
Michael Mukasey reviewed attempt by NSBA to shut down parental involvement in classrooms, vilifying parents who “disrupt” school board meetings as engaged in “domestic terrorism.”
Compulsory Attendance, Controlled Curriculum
In both Nazi Germany and America today, attendance was (and is) compulsory. Children cannot simply walk away and parents are similarly held captive. And in most school districts, there is no alternative—no charter school, no voucher for private education, no support for homeschooling. The state dictates the curriculum. The unions staff the classrooms. And the ideology is enforced, not debated.
Then and Now
Feature
Nazi Germany
Modern Public Schools
Curriculum
Racial supremacy, hatred of Jews
Oppressor vs. oppressed, white guilt, DEI focus
Control
Total state monopoly
Union-dominated, resistance to school choice
Teachers
Nazi enforcers
Ideological activists protected by unions
Enemies
Jews, Slavs, Communists
“Whiteness,” traditional values, parents who dissent
Dissent
Criminalized
Canceled, ignored, or labeled extremist
Outcome
Fanatical loyalty to regime
Cultural division and civic unraveling
Indoctrination by Any Other Name
Today’s teachers are not training students to become SS officers but they are shaping how children see their country, their history, their families, themselves – and their neighbors. And when a government-backed education system insists that children adopt one political ideology, demonize dissent, and question parental authority, we are no longer talking about education—we are talking about indoctrination.
ACTION ITEM
Get involved in your local school board. There are elections every year and public fora held throughout the year.
First One Through 