Shulem Deen 🎗️

This is ridiculous. Albanese is no Raoul Wallenberg. What’s more, Albanese is backed by a worldwide campaign of MILLIONS. You can say all you want about Zionist propaganda, but apples to apples, pro-Palestine activism is gargantuan, while pro-Israel activism is minuscule by comparison. What the latter do have is focus, which the Zionist movement had from the beginning, even when Zionism was fringe even among Jews. Pro-Palestine activists like yourself can learn a thing or two from that. Sappy faux-lyricism doesn’t compare to doing work on the ground for people’s actual lives. With all the millions backing her worldwide, how many lives has Albanese impacted? How many has she saved? Appearing on global TV and acting the martyr is hardly the stuff of heroes and legends.

The Bund is fascinating but this review like Bund itself is a triumph of wish over reality. Bundists who werent killed by Hitler were shot by Stalin inc Alter Erlich Feffer Markish Bergelson many in the Night of Murdered Poets 1952. A dangerous world. Yet oddly the review just says: ‘Bund ceased operating in 1949.’

Fun fact: most Jews who ended up in Palestine/Israel were on the spectrum of “meh” to decidedly opposed to Zionism. Whether it was assimilated German Jews fleeing the Nazis or the fiercely anti-Zionist Orthodox from Hungary/Romania, they ended up in Israel anyway. Ask why.

This is ridiculous. Albanese is no Raoul Wallenberg. What’s more, Albanese is backed by a worldwide campaign of MILLIONS. You can say all you want about Zionist propaganda, but apples to apples, pro-Palestine activism is gargantuan, while pro-Israel activism is minuscule by comparison. What the latter do have is focus, which the Zionist movement had from the beginning, even when Zionism was fringe even among Jews. Pro-Palestine activists like yourself can learn a thing or two from that. Sappy faux-lyricism doesn’t compare to doing work on the ground for people’s actual lives. With all the millions backing her worldwide, how many lives has Albanese impacted? How many has she saved? Appearing on global TV and acting the martyr is hardly the stuff of heroes and legends.

IN PRAISE OF FRANCESCA ALBANESE There is a question that visits me in the small hours, when sleep will not come and the mind turns over old stones. The question is this: “What would I have done in the 1930s, on the morning after Kristallnacht?" Not what I say I would have done. Not what I hope I would have done. But what would I actually have done—when the trains began to run, when the neighbours grew quiet, when the cost of decency became the loss of everything? Most of us, I think, would have done little. Not from malice. From fear. From the soft, creeping conviction that someone else will speak, that the situation is complex, that we must be 'reasonable'. Lest we forget, the ordinary is the extraordinary's alibi. And how we have clung to that alibi! How we still cling to it! And then, every once in a terrible while, someone appears who does not cling. Someone who steps forward when others step back. Someone who speaks the name of the thing when everyone else is busy naming something else. Francesca Albanese is that someone. She stands before the world—alone, unarmed, armed only with law and language and a rare courage—and she says what the centrists will not say, what the foreign ministries will not say, what the editorial boards will not say. She says: "This is a genocide. And we are watching it happen." Do not tell me that is hyperbole. Do not tell me the term is contested. She has not used it lightly. She has used it as a physician arrives scientifically at a diagnosis—not to wound, but to warn. Not to inflame, but to name. And for that, they have come for her. Oh, how they have come for her. Smears. Investigations. Vicious editorials. Frozen bank accounts. Dispossession of the only apartment she had ever owned. The machinery of the respectable turned to crush her. Because the respectable cannot abide what she represents: a mirror held up to their complicity. Let us, once again, travel back to the 1930s. Back to the few who stood up when the trains began to run laden with Jewish people. There was Aristides de Sousa Mendes, a Portuguese consul in Bordeaux. He defied his own government. He signed thousands of visas, by hand, for hours, until his fingers bled. He saved more lives than Schindler. And he died penniless, disgraced, erased. There was a German officer in Warsaw named Wilm Hosenfeld. He hid a Jewish pianist in the rubble. He did not save thousands. He saved one. But that one—Władysław Szpilman—carried the memory. And memory is "the only haven from which we cannot be expelled." There was Raoul Wallenberg. There were the villagers of Le Chambon. There were the anonymous, the quiet, the furious few who said: “Not on my watch.” Francesca Albanese is their heir. Not because she carries a gun. Not because she hides refugees in her basement. But because she does something equally dangerous in a world that has perfected the art of not seeing. She sees. And she speaks. She does not speak as a diplomat. Thank Goodness she doesn't! Diplomats have given us the language of "there are arguments on both sides" and "restraint" and "proportionality." Diplomatic language is the perfumed grave of moral clarity. No, she speaks as a jurist. As a human being. As a woman who has looked into the abyss and refused to call it a "complex geopolitical landscape". Edna O'Brien once described a character who "had the recklessness of those who have already lost everything worth losing." Francesca Albanese has not lost everything. She has her dignity, her office, her voice, her family. But she has calculated the cost of speaking truth to power. And she has decided that that cost is infinitely less than the cost of silence. What is that cost? Let us name it. She has been called antisemitic—she, who stands on the ground of international law forged in the ashes of Auschwitz and the fires of Nuremberg. She has been called a conspiracy theorist—she, who cites every source, every footnote, every UN resolution. She has been called naive—she, who understands better than most the machinery of realpolitik. These accusations are not arguments. They are the spittle of the threatened. Because Francesca Albanese threatens something very precious to the powerful: the right to commit atrocity without being named. Friends, the 1930s did not arrive with jackboots and pogroms on day one. They arrived in small increments. With "reasonable" restrictions. With "proportional" measures. With the silence of the respectable. We tell ourselves that we would have been different. That we would have been Sousa Mendes. That we would have been Wallenberg. But most of us, I fear, would have been the neighbours who later said, "I didn't know." Francesca Albanese knows. And she refuses to pretend otherwise. So let us praise her. Not with statues or awards she does not seek. But with something harder: with our own refusal to look away. With our own voices, raised in places that are safe for us but dangerous for her. With our own bodies, if it comes to that. A brave woman, who was injured while demonstrating outside a US nuclear military base in 1982, the infamous Greenham Common, had told me that "the heart is a hunter for what it cannot have." But I say the heart is a hunter for what it will not lose. And what we will not lose is the memory of those who stood up when standing up cost everything. Francesca Albanese is standing up now. In our time. In our name. Under our indifferent sky. Let us stand with her. Not tomorrow. Not when it is safe. Now. [Extract from a speech in Athens on Sunday 3rd May 2026]

There are more Muslims living in Israel as full-citizens than there are Jews living (as citizens or not) in the 49 Muslim majority countries put together. This should be the only argument you need to debunk the false claim that Israel is an ethnostate.

@turdducken @WEschenbach It means bullshit in the way that “govt press office” or “PR dept” means bullshit—which, yes, it is that, and also there’s a curious lack of hissing against “press-office-ists” of the non-Israeli kind. PR isn’t a clean business anywhere but it’s literally all hasbara ever meant.

For all you charming people whining about Israeli "genocide", here's a clear explanation. w. PS—If you want to get blocked, just attack me instead of the ideas. Any references to "Zio", "hasbara", or the like will also get a block.

I lost a cousin on 10/7. I didn’t go attack a mosque. Stop excusing antisemitism

I first learned Ohr Hachaim on Parshat Yitro 37 years ago, but these words remained indelible: הגיע חשוק ונחשק לחושק וחשוק... All kinds of theological knots to unpack, but the raw power of the passage encapsulates the 3000-year-old story of one people.

Herodotus mentions it as a much broader region called Syria Palestina. Not a land of a specific people. What IS notable about Herodotus’s description is that that *among its inhabitants* are the Phoenicians, who practice the “odd custom of circumcision,” which they got from the Egyptians(!) Modern scholars generally believe the ancient Israelites largely originated among the Canaanites (with some possible admixture of Egyptian). And the Phoenicians, of course, referred to themselves as the “kanaani.” As is clear from the sarcophagi of the kings of Sidon, Phoenician and Biblical Hebrew were virtually the same language. Ultimately, history is complicated and fascinating and makes mincemeat of *everyone’s* sacred cows. Whatever your dogma, it doesn’t survive first contact with the enemy: those who bring primary sources not as a Twitter gotcha but as genuinely interesting insights into the past, even if many end up confirming no one’s favorite narratives.

@marwilliamson Herodotus writes about Palestine 6 centuries before Jesus was born. Stop with this retrospective erasure.

I can't believe I have to remind anyone of this, but here goes: Jesus was a Jew. He was born in a land called Judea. The word Palestine was coined by the Romans 135 years later. Muhammad was born in 571 AD. Both peoples should be considered indigenous to the region. Both peoples belong there. Both peoples deserve a state of their own.

Not saying it’s chiefly religious. There were prominent Muslims who were suspicious of Zionism but took a “wait and see” attitude (e.g. Emir Faisal ibn Hussein, though that’s it’s own story…) And plenty of Arab Palestinian nationalists were Christians (e.g. founders/editors of “Falastin” فلسطين—the El-Issa family). But the greatest animating force against the Jewish state, in the 100+ years of opposition, was always rooted in a strong Islamist component. The religious rhetoric was always there, ready to be exploited. A distorted version of Islam perhaps, but still claiming to be in its name. It’s true that a countervailing religious extremism exists among Zionists, but it was historically a fringe component. And the ascendancy of right-wing religious Zionism to real power is largely post-Intifada 2. On the whole, Zionism isn’t and wasn’t a religious movement. But religious factors can’t be discounted, is my point. (Not an opinion about Islam at all.)

@shdeen You are right, but this connection is artificial, it has nothing to do with religion. Haj Amin was looking for a way to drag the uninterested Palestinians to his cause.

We are a religious culture, but our struggle for independence is not a religious one. If Israel tells me that after the holocaust the Jews need a refuge I will accept it and welcome them as neighbours, but if they say this land was promised to them by god, this i can not accept.

Arab Palestinian leaders like Hajj Amin al-Husseini, who led Arab Palestinian nationalist movement, explicitly framed it as a religious issue. It was definitely NEVER about “freedom,” because Arab and Muslim Palestinians would’ve had their own state under the UN plan. It was the Arab world rather than Israel that prevented the establishment of such an Arab Palestinian state post-1948 (despite Husseini’s pleas). Jordan explicitly disallowed it in the West Bank, annexing the territory immediately for themselves. Even Egypt, which allowed Husseini a nominal “All-Palestine government” as an Egyptian protectorate in the Gaza Strip, insisted its government be located in Cairo(!)—and the whole thing lasted effectively all of three months. It was simply NEVER about Palestinian “freedom.” Never, ever. Not once, not for a moment. Not in 1948, not in 1967, not in 1973, not during Intifada 1 or 2, and it still isn’t now. Palestinians could have had a state today, right now, and many times in the past, if that was all they ever wanted. Except it simply isn’t and wasn’t ever the goal.

@shdeen The second part.

@Palestinia12961 Which part?

@shdeen Please forgive me 🙏 I do not understand.

@Md_Vall @GuitarDaddioOnX @gghamari Would you respond to the burning a Koran by saying it’s a minor breach compared to the 400,000 slaughtered by Muslims in Sudan? Curious for an actual response.

Muslim woman blows out the candles on a Menorah. Why do we import 7th century savages into modern, westernized Judeo-Christian countries? These people are not compatible with Western Civilization. They bring nothing but hatred, Jihad and terrorism wherever they go.

This is an astute take, although it’s likely a miss on predicting a split vote between Satmar and other Hasidic groups. (Although the Haredi non-Hasidic vote is a different story.) It is rare for a NYC mayor to win without the Satmar vote, and it’s usually a strong leading indicator. These are odds you can bet on. This isn’t because Satmar itself is all-powerful. But Hasidic “voting blocs” are nearly always aligned among subgroups, whose political calculus is nearly identical and 100% pragmatic. (Rare exceptions exist, eg Clinton/Lazio 2000, but they’re super anomalous.) What’s key is that Hasidic leadership endorsements reflect neither conventional left/right politics, nor where they stand on Israel, nor even nominal internal ideologies (eg LGBT views). They turn on one single question only: “will this candidate deliver for our communities’ particular needs and strengthen the survival of our chosen way of life.” Very little else matters. And elected officials in NYC-metro know and understand this.

Rock solid argument: why is she so condescending to people spreading lies instead of understanding their scornful disregard for boomer concepts like history/reality/truth/facts.

יזכור קהילת ניר עוז / ליאת אצילי נזכור את קהילת ניר עוז בימי תפארתה, את הבתים, את הדשאים, העצים והשבילים. את הבריכה ואת הכלבו, מקומות בהם נפגשנו באקראי וניהלנו את שיחות החולין שהיו חלק כה מרכזי ברקמת החיים המשותפת שלנו. ואת הפאב עם הערקיטו, והגולדסטאר מהחבית. את בית הילדים על גלגוליו, מטפלות אהובות, מדריכים בברוש ובנעורים, את הסטודנטים והש"שינים את ארוחות ההקמה והמשחקים על הדשא בבילוי. את חדר האוכל! צ'יפס לנפש בחמישי ופלאפל בשישי. את השדות, הפרדסים והמטעים שכל אחד בעונתו סיפק לנו את הירקות והפירות הכי טעימים בעולם. את השקיעות המרהיבות. את הנווה, שמי ייתן ועוד נשוב לשמוח בו ושתהיה בו חתונה! את הדוג' ראם של הגד"ש, עם כל הכלבים בארגז מאחורה. את החגים שחגגנו יחד, את הריבים והוויכוחים שחלקם בוודאות נראים עכשיו חסרי חשיבות. את הפרח של ניר עוז. את היצירה והעשייה שהפכו את ניר עוז לפנינת תרבות בנגב, את התערוכות בבית הלבן ואת ליין ההופעות הכי שווה ever נזכור את השער הצהוב שהגן על המקום המיוחד שלנו, אך ביום פקודה, כרע תחת המתקפה הרצחנית ולא הצליח לשמור עלינו. נזכור שכולנו גיבורות וגיבורים, מהתינוקות ועד הוותיקים. כולנו! נזכור שאנחנו חזקים באלף דרכים ושכעוף החול, מתוך האפר נבנה חיים חדשים. נזכור את היום. את היום בצהריו. את השמש שעלתה על מוקד הדמים את השמים שעמדו גבוהים ומחרישים נזכור את תלי האפר אשר מתחת לגנים הפורחים. יזכור החי את מתיו יזכור בן החורין את אסוריו כי הנה הם מנגד לנו הנה ניבטות עיניים סביב סביב ואל דומי, אל דומי לנו עדי יהיו חיינו ראויים לזכרם. יזכור בית ניר עוז את לוחמי כיתת הכוננות שחרפו נפשם בקרב על ביתנו: תמיר אדר אביב אצילי דולב יהוד רביד אריה כץ יזכור בית ניר עוז את:   יצחק (איציק) אלגרט  רונן (טומי) אנגל  רבקה בן חורין  אמיתי בן צבי מיה גורן אבנר גורן יוסף (יוסיניו) גרוס  כרמלה דן  נויה דן  אלכסנדר (אלכס) דנציג  דניאל דרלינגטון  קרולין בוהל  יוסף (יוסי) והב  אריה (זלמן) זלמנוביץ'  ג'ודי ויינשטיין חגי  גדי חגי  ויטלי טרופנוב  אוהד יהלומי  יאיר יעקב  אפרת כץ    ברכה לוינסון  עודד ליפשיץ  אברהם מונדר רועי מונדר  יורם מצגר  אליהו (צ'רצ'יל) מרגלית  סעיד (דוד) משה  שפרה נוי    קרול סימן טוב  יהונתן (ג'וני) סימן טוב  תמר שרה קדם סימן טוב  ארבל סימן טוב  שחר סימן טוב  עומר פרדי סימן טוב  שירי סילברמן ביבס אריאל ביבס כפיר ביבס מרגיט סילברמן יוסף (יוסי) סילברמן גדעון פאוקר חיים פרי עמירם קופר אברהם (רמי) קציר אלעד קציר חנה קציר דוד שלו  טל שלו ירמיהו (ירמי) שפיר  נזכור את עובדינו המסורים: קְלֵמֶנְס פֶלִיקְס מַטַנְגָה פּוֹנְגְטֵפּ קוֹסְרָם טוּ סָא־לִי סַקְדָה סוּרַאקַאי גוֹסְרָאם אֲפִּיצ׳ָאר סָארִיטַט קוּאָוּ פִּיצ׳ִיט נָאג׳ָאן פִירוֹן תָּאנוֹנְפִים תַּנְקְרִיט פְּרַקְטְוַנְג פַּפּוֹנְטָאנִי פּוֹנְגְקְרוּ וּוֹטִיפַאט וִיסְטְדְּנָאוִי נַאטְפוֹנְג פִּינְטָה בֶּנְצ׳ָה דַּצ׳ְטָאוַואט יהי זכרם ברוך.

Absolutely. I’d add re the haredi world: even though formally anti-Zionist, when it comes to Israel’s security issues, the overwhelming majority are somewhere between right and far right—in the Israeli sense, ie from a Likud-like mindset to admiration for hilltop settlers to… perhaps best left unsaid. The point re Orthodox demographics is also strong. It applies to orthodox broadly but there’s a demographic fact about haredim that few are fully aware of and even fewer realize the ramifications. Haredi world doubles roughly every 14 years. Demographic projection done a few years ago showed that sometime between 2030 and 2040 one out of three children in New York City will be a haredi child. People don’t have an intuitive understanding of exponential growth, and even haredim probably don’t realize this. But the nature of such things is to arrive “gradually, then suddenly.” You don’t see it coming even when you think you see it coming. The ramifications of this can’t be overstated. (Obviously, they go well beyond Israel. It’ll have a massive impact on NY public life generally.)

Add one point: Around half of self-identified college-age Jews on campus have one non-Jewish parent. This further dilutes memories of persecution etc. But also note: Around 25% of American Jews under 30 are Orthodox, and that percentage is growing. Among those who are actively Jewish, the percentage is much higher. Ramifications for American Jewish life will be immense, including far *stronger* identification with Israel. (Even "non-zionist" Haredi sects have close ties to kin and institutions in Israel and travel there a lot).