Ma’alot: A Covenant of Fate and the Builders of the Galilee

Regarding the Ashkenazi-Sephardic tensions of the 1948 - 1980 era, this hostility reached a peak in the 1970s. It was a friction born from the divide between the pre-State "Old Yishuv" residents—predominantly of Eastern European descent—and the massive post-1948 influx of immigrants. This wave, which effectively doubled the population of the nascent state, was the direct result of the Arab world's rejection of Israel. It led to a massive "forced immigration"—what can only be described as the ethnic cleansing of Jewish communities from Arab Lands.

This influx flooded a small country with limited funds and housing. In 1951, Prime Minister David Ben-Gurion tasked Arieh Sharon with the "Sharon Plan." Sharon moved away from the idea of a few major cities, utilizing "Central Place Theory" to create a hierarchy of settlements: small agricultural villages supported by a central "Development Town" to provide schools, clinics, and factories. Ben-Gurion provided the ideological drive for "Pizur Ochlosin" (Dispersal of the Population) to secure the borders, while Levi Eshkol managed the logistics of the "From Ship to Settlement" policy.

The Birth of Ma'alot (1957)

Unlike other towns planned from afar, Ma'alot was born out of a specific need to provide a permanent home for the residents of Ma'abarat Tarshiha. In 1957, the Jewish Agency and the IDF Engineering Corps prepared the ground for the first 120 families—mostly from Morocco and Romania—who moved from temporary shacks into new concrete blocks on the ridge.

The town’s first manager, Eli Ben-Yaakov, navigated the town through its darkest hour: the 1974 Ma'alot Massacre. Alongside him was Moshe Bar-Shavit, the dedicated Secretary of the Council. Moshe was the backbone of the town’s administration; he was the man who kept the municipality functioning through crisis and growth, ensuring that the vision of a permanent city became a reality.

The Pillars of the Community

By the time I arrived in 1976, the town was only 19 years old but already deeply scarred. The "Old Ma'alot" was held together by legendary figures who became our mentors and friends:

Peter and Beronica Zilberstein: Peter was a "Chaver" (member) of the Egged cooperative, a position of great respect that linked our isolated town to the rest of Israel. More importantly, Peter served as the Local Security Commander during the 1974 Massacre, bearing the unimaginable weight of the town's defense. His wife, Beronica, was the legendary Tipat Chalav nurse—the guardian of the town's children. When my wife, Rena, arrived in 1978 to work alongside her, and eventually succeeded her upon Beronica's retirement, it was a sacred passing of the torch.

Chaim Benita: A central figure in the Histadrut (Labor Federation), Chaim was the voice of the residents, fighting for social justice and the dignity of the working class.

Rav Joseph Gabi: The spiritual pillar who provided the "glue" between Moroccan, Tunisian, and Romanian traditions. He officiated at our wedding and bridged every cultural gap through shared tradition.

The Women of Ma'alot: While men held official titles, the social fabric was managed by women like Hannah Rosen, Hassia Shifman (who later moved to Australia), and Beronica Zilberstein. They were joined by Sara Ben-Yaakov, who led Na'amat in Ma'alot. Sara was a force of nature, overseeing the daycare and social services that allowed women to work and families to integrate. The WIZO laundry and the Na'amat centers were the community's "soft" intelligence hubs where the welfare of every family was quietly monitored.

A Shared Future

In 1963, Ma'alot-Tarshiha became a unique experiment in coexistence, sharing a single municipal unit. By 1976—the exact year I arrived—Shlomo Bohbot began his long tenure as Head of the Local Council, representing a "new guard" of local Sephardic leadership that was pushing back against the old Mapai establishment.

As Rena stepped into Beronica’s shoes at the clinic, and as I grew to know men and women like Peter, Eli, Sara, Moshe, and Chaim, we realized we were being welcomed into the inner circle of the people who had kept Ma'alot alive. We weren't just building a new life; we were continuing the mission of the veterans who refused to leave, even when the ground was soaked with tears. To know these honored founders of Ma'alot and to be a part of this story was to understand what it meant to create a new home, a community in our ancient homeland of Eretz Yisrael.

From Alabama to Ma'alot – A Lesson in Unity I Will Never Forget

 I wish to present this personal, powerful testament to the "Ingathering of Exiles" in its most raw and human form.

It is deeply ironic and moving that it took a question from an Iranian student in Alabama to awaken my Zionism. This incident in my life reminds us that sometimes those outside the Jewish world see our connection to the land and each other more clearly than we see ourselves.

In my life story, I wish to relay two very different types of our existence as Jews:

The "Golden Medina" struggle: Facing the KKK as a youth growing up in the "Heart of Dixie" and the pressure to assimilate—the "self-deniers" Rav Meir Simcha wrote about in the Meshech Chochma.

The "Eretz Yisrael" struggle: The physical and social toll of building a nation from the ashes of the Holocaust and the trauma of terror.

By connecting my experience in Alabama to Mordechai’s experience in Auschwitz, I want to show that Jewish survival isn't just about escaping enemies—it’s about choosing to belong to one another in a "Covenant of Fate" (Brit Goral). This is the profound teaching of Rabbi Joseph B. Soloveitchik, who argued that our shared suffering and history bind us together even before we decide on our shared destiny.

Ma'alot—located in the Western Galilee of Israel, some 8 km south of "Hezbollah Land"—is a unique place. When I arrived here in 1976, I had not realized the great pain and sadness that existed here from the experiences of the Yom Kippur War and the "Massacre at Netiv Meir" in 1974. My story—our story—about "Old Ma'alot" is a story of unity. My marriage to Rena Brownstein and my friendship with Mordechai and Hannah Rosen represent the "knitting together" of the Jewish people—the very thing that the Nazis tried to destroy and that the "self-deniers" fail to value.

In a world that is once again becoming increasingly fractured and polarized, my story is a reminder that "the ash did not distinguish between us" is perhaps the most important lesson a Jew can teach today. It is a call to focus on our shared Covenant of Fate. My journey home transitions from the "tossing on the sea of hardships" to the solid ground of a home built on memory and love.

Many of you know me as someone who tied his fate to Ma'alot nearly fifty years ago, but few know what truly brought a young, totally secular "Driving Miss Daisy" Jew from the Deep South of Alabama to leave everything behind and build a home here. I was not even Bar Mitzvahed and knew no Hebrew.

In the aftermath of the Yom Kippur War, I was prompted by an Iranian exchange student I was assisting in English at Auburn University. While watching the news of the war, he asked me directly: "As a Jew, why are you not rushing to fight for your people and country?" Because of his question, I came to "visit" as a volunteer on a kibbutz. There, working in the banana fields, I fell in love with my people and Zionism. I arrived in Ma'alot in March 1976 as a "Single Soldier."

I arrived when the wounds of the 1974 Ma'alot Massacre were still raw. I saw a community that was broken but incredibly strong, and I chose to tie my destiny to yours. I met my wife Rena while on leave from my IDF unit in Lebanon during "Operation Litani" in 1978. Rena (who replaced the late Beronica Zilberstein as the legendary Tipat Chalav nurse) and I were married at the old WIZO center by HaRav Joseph Gabi z"l. Here we built our lives and raised our six children.

As a Jew who grew up facing crass anti-Semitism in Alabama, it pained me to see the Ashkenazi-Sephardic tensions in Ma'alot that peaked during the 1978 elections. To me, coming from a mixed Sephardic and Ashkenazi family, this division was unthinkable.

The story of the late Mordechai Rosen is the reason why we must never divide ourselves. In 1978, after my IDF service, I was helping Mordechai in his workshop. As we sat drinking coffee on a rainy afternoon, Mordechai told me about his arrival at Auschwitz in 1943:

"I was a naive 17-year-old Yeshiva Bucher when my family arrived at Auschwitz. We were over 70 people packed into a cattle car like sardines. As we were forced off the train, a frail Jew in a striped uniform whispered to me: 'If you wish to live, remove your payos and tell them you are a cabinet maker! Do not tell them you are a Yeshiva Bucher!'

At that moment, Josef Mengele flicked his hand to signal 'Left or Right'—life or death. My mother, father, and sister were separated from my little brother and me. I never saw them again. Later, as we stood in the freezing cold, grayish-white flakes of ash began to fall on us like snow. One of the Kapos pointed to the sparks flying from the chimneys and said: 'You see that? That is your loved ones fleeing to heaven.' I bowed my head, cried, and said Kaddish. I vowed that I would survive to honor their memory."

So why am I telling you this today? Because Mordechai survived to tell the story, and I was privileged to hear it. His message was clear: the ash rising from those chimneys did not distinguish between religious or secular, or between Ashkenazi or Sephardic. We were all there together.

We are one people, with a shared destiny forged in fire. Let us remember that every single day when we meet one another here in the streets of Ma'alot, the home of us all.

Why history and knownledge is required

For nearly 45+ years in my volunteer work (as a "Highly Paid Hasbarnik - still waiting for my check by the way) and as a reservist in the IDF in the quagmire of Lebanon. I began my journey to fully know the mindset of the enemy I am up against. 

In doing so I read and studied the Quran and basic Arabic specifically to know the actual intentions and mindset.In doing so I found that those in leadership (Intelligence Agencies) in the West look at conflicts through a socio-economic or political lens (land, borders, resources), while the enemy I learned about looks through a theological and civilizational lens.

In my lifetime I have witnessed the transition from the PLO's secular nationalism (Fatah) to the Brotherhood’s religious absolutism (Hamas/Hezbollah). While the CIA was focused on the "Red Menace" (Communism),as they funded the "Green Menace" (Islamism) in Afghanistan. By failing to read the Quranic justifications used by the Mujahideen, they built a bridge for Al-Qaeda.

During my time in the IDF in Lebnon I conversed many times with Major Saad Haddad, the founder of the South Lebanon Army (SLA). 

Haddad frequently used his radio station, The Voice of Hope (funded by American evangelicals), to broadcast to the people of Southern Lebanon. His rhetoric was designed to wake people up to what he saw as a "parasitic" force (Fatah) using Lebanon as a launchpad for their own war, regardless of the cost to Lebanese civilians.

His message was centered on a harsh, binary reality:

The "False" Enemy: The central Lebanese government in Beirut or other Lebanese factions.

He argued that the true enemy was the PLO/Fatah and their Syrian backers, whom he viewed as foreign occupiers destroying Lebanon from within.

He believed that if the Lebanese people—specifically Christians and moderate Muslims in the south—didn't realize that the Palestinian militants were an existential threat to their homes, they would be "defeated" (massacred or displaced).

I have noted how "Western Intelligence"(an oxymoron) suffers from mirror-imaging—assuming the adversary wants the same things (peace, prosperity, democracy). 

By studying the Quran and Arabic, I bypassed the "Propaganda" to see the Intent. As Major Haddad argued, if you treat a theological existential threat as a mere border dispute, you have already lost.

As an "Old Guy" I can also remember the "birth"of radical fundementalistic Wahhabism -an exonym for a Salafi revivalist movement within ultra-conservative Sunni Islam.

This rebirth of Sunni Islamic belief in the 1980's began in the rural backward Sunni areas of northern Afghanistan and spread to the Madrasasim (Islamic religious schools) in Pakistan and Bangladesh. It gained momentum with the Russian invasion of Afghanistan and the inept and utterly imbecilic acts by the CIA and MI-6 in their support of these Islamic extremists in the uttely stupid misconception of the Mujahideen as "Freedom Fighters" to fight the Russian which history has proven that the "freedom fighters" of the Cold War became the "Frankenstein’s monster" of the 21st century.

For all those, who have NO knowledge of the Middle East and the "Arab / Moslem Mind", it should be noted that Wahhabism, is a strict, fundamentalist interpretation of Islam, and is often cited as a contributing factor to the rise of terrorism, particularly by groups like Al-Qaeda and ISIS and their best student Osama Bin Laden.

Furthermore one must note that in the context of Wahhabism (founded by Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahhab) and the Muslim Brotherhood (Al-Ikhwan al-Muslimun), this concept of identifying the "True Enemy" is a central, recurring theme in their ideological development.

In the context of the Muslim Brotherhood and Hamas, the concept of identifying the "True Enemy" - the dreaded Zionists is the foundational logic of their survival and "resistance" strategy.

Some time before Operation Desert Storm in 1991, when Sadam Hussein was leading the idiots of "Western Intelligence" (an oxymoron) in circles regarding WMD. I was once asked by a forum of high ranking US "Officials" what I thought. My reply to them was: 

"As you are so evidently total imbeciles who bought, hook line and sinker, the false narrative of the so called Palestinians, as per the KGB Active Measures and SIG operational plans, and have absolutely NO knowlege of the Quran and Islamic tenets. I forsee the day your politicians and citizenry will be so blinded by their "Western Cultural" sympathetic view and ignorance of the Islamic concept of Hijrah (migration for the sake of spreading Islam) that you will allow the immigration of masses of "poor refugee" Moslems (like those who fled the Syrian Civil War)  into your countries who will with their tendency to have many children will one day destroy your "Western Christian Culture" from within."

In my humble opinion the West isn't just miscalculating; it is committing civilizational suicide by applying Western liberal logic to a theological framework that operates on a different timeline and a different set of rules.

I see the Abraham Accords or various "peace processes" as Taqiyya (strategic dissimulation),which follows the sted precept in the The Treaty of Hudaybiyyah. In this framework, a truce is not a final peace, but a tactical pause to gather strength when the "believers" are temporarily weaker than the Kāfir.

The West thinks the conflict is about "grievances" (land, poverty, lack of a state). when in fact it is about Status. Under the basic basic tenet of Islam to subjucate and or kill the Kāfir (Arabic: كافر) "unbeliever"doctrine. The Kāfir cannot be an equal; they must either be converted, subjugated under Dhimmi status, or eliminated.

In most of the "Western World" it is one minute to midnight and the second hand is moving swiftly and it will take an awakening which those in the west have failed to comprehend.

The "awakening" of those in the west is hindered by a fundamental paradox of "Universalism" entrenched in Western Christian/Liberal culture. The West assumes everyone, deep down, wants the same "Kumbaya" ending but in reality this is a a fatal projection.

As Sun Tzu famously wrote:

"If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the result of a hundred battles."

The sentiment that "those who do not learn who your true enemy is will die in defeat" was a hallmark of Major Saad Haddad and ideological justification for his alliance with Israel

Ridiculing - mocking the "useful idiots" of falestinian dezinformatsiya™

In my youth growing up in Alabama my Momma told me that one should not mock the "least able minded".

Yet, ridiculing - mocking the "useful idiots" of falestinian dezinformatsiya™ in my humble opinion is allowed.
Replying to them, requires "finese" since it is unfortunate that so many of them are most definately "least able minded".
It is regretful how a lie (fake news) spreads faster than true facts on social media.

The creators and spreaders of falestinian dezinformatsiya™ use: false narratives, fabricated sometimes ridiculous "farfetched" and absurd stories, AI produced videos, fake screenshots and easily debunked claims whose sole, callous purpose is to create an obsessive hatred of Israel.
When the real truth and facts are inconvenient, they simply resort to mendacious lies and fabrications and rely on their bots and minions of supporters to hide their incompetence as they continue to spread their lies.

So in my Hasbara work on "social media" I remembered my history and literary knowledge to honor one of the best who lampooned idiots.

Benjamin Franklin, at the age of 16, was was an apprentice in his older brother James’s printing shop. He chose the persona of Silence Dogood primarily to bypass the gatekeeping of his older brother.
Benjamin Franklin wanted to contribute to James's newspaper, the New-England Courant, but James had already made it clear that he had no interest in publishing anything written by his younger brother.
Benjamin Franklin choose the persona Silence Dugood - a character type of a "widowed grandmother" of a country minister who described herself as an "Enemy to Vice, and a Friend to Vertue" that commanded a certain level of respect and curiosity.

This "mask" of a "widowed grandmother" persona allowed him mock the local clergy or the intellectual elite (like those at Harvard) with less risk of direct retaliation.

"Silence Dugood" mocked the Puritan ideal that women should be seen and not heard.
"Dogood" was a direct jab at Cotton Mather, a prominent and strict Boston minister who had recently published a book titled "Essays to Do Good".

Franklin used the persona to gently parody Mather’s moralizing tone while actually promoting more liberal, Enlightenment ideas.

Benjamin Franklin created Silence Dogood to practice "ventriloquism"—the art of writing in a voice entirely different from his own—which became a lifelong habit (he later used names like Poor Richard and Polly Baker).

The letters of the "widowed grandmother" became a sensation in Boston.

The persona was so convincing that several male readers even wrote to the newspaper offering to marry the "widow" Dogood.

When Benjamin eventually confessed to being the author, his brother James was reportedly angry and jealous of the praise the letters had received. This tension contributed to Benjamin eventually breaking his apprenticeship and leaving for Philadelphia.

While Franklin is famous for his teenage wit as "Silence Dogood," his most impactful work was written decades later when he used his pen as a weapon against British colonial policy.

Initially, Franklin was a "loyalist" who wanted the colonies to remain part of a grand British Empire. However, as Britain tightened its control, his writing shifted from polite advocacy to biting satire and, eventually, revolutionary propaganda.

Franklin used humor to humiliate British officials and highlight the absurdity of their policies by works of masterful satire.

Here are some examples:

"Rules by Which a Great Empire May Be Reduced to a Small One" (1773): Written as if he were giving "helpful advice" to a king, Franklin listed twenty ways to lose an empire. He suggested things like:

• Treat your colonies like conquered enemies.
• Appoint corrupt and ignorant men to govern them.
• Ignore their petitions and punish them for complaining.

"An Edict by the King of Prussia" (1773): In this hoax, Franklin wrote a fake decree from the King of Prussia claiming that because the ancestors of the English people had originally come from Germany, Prussia had the right to tax England. It was a mirror of British logic toward America, and it famously fooled many British readers before they realized they were being mocked.

To me the most famous satirical work was Franklin’s satire of the Hessians, titled "The Sale of the Hessians" (1777)

"The Sale of the Hessians" is considered one of the most savage and effective pieces of propaganda from the Revolutionary War written while Franklin was in France.

The piece is a "hoax" letter purportedly written by a German prince, the Count de Schaumbergh, to his officer in America, Baron Hohendorf regarding blood bounty" bonus from the British for every one of their soldiers killed in action

The satire focuses on a dark reality of the war as the The Count calculates exactly how much money he will receive for the dead.

In his "lettter" the "Count" expresses pure joy over the high death toll of his own soldiers at the Battle of Trenton as he complains that the British "Lord North" is trying to cheat him by only counting 1,455 dead, when the Count believes he is owed for 1,605.

"I have learned with unspeakable pleasure the courage our troops exhibited at Trenton... and that of the 1,950 Hessians engaged in the fight, but 345 escaped."

He explicitly instructs the Baron to tell the surgeons not to save the wounded. He argues that a crippled soldier is a "reproach" to the profession and a financial burden, whereas a dead soldier is a profit.

"I do not mean by this that you should assassinate [the wounded]; we should be humane, my dear Baron, but you may insinuate to the surgeons... that there is no wiser course than to let every one of them die when he ceases to be fit to fight."

The Count hilariously (and chillingly) claims that his soldiers should be happy to die because "Glory is true wealth," while he stays safely in Europe to collect the actual gold.

Note how this attitude of NOT caring for the Count's soldiers "his subjects" in "The Sale of the Hessians" readily "fits" the discription of the actions of Hamas and their leadership towrds the "Innocent Civilians of Gaza".

Was President Franklin Deleanor Roosvelt anti-Jewish?

As I have always mentioned, that as an educator, truthsayer and as a histrorian. I spend hours doing research of historical documents in my hours of research to verify historical truth. 

As a case in point I wanted to clarify as to why there are arguments of FDR for being antisemitic. 

Many state it was because he did not move to challenge or significantly change the restrictive U.S. immigration quotas established in the 1920s, which severely limited the number of Jewish refugees fleeing Nazism who could not enter the U.S. even after the persecution began in Germany.

To fully comprehend the actions of President one must realize the pragmatic fears of the political anti-immigrant and antisemitic backlash, as well as the economic constraints of the Great Depression, that played a major role in his considerations.

To fully comprehend history one must focus on WHAT was during the period that were the major influences of an individual and their actions.

Appointments to Office: 

FDR appointed more Jewish people to high-level federal positions, including his cabinet (like Secretary of the Treasury Henry Morgenthau Jr.) and the Supreme Court (Felix Frankfurter, joining Louis Brandeis), than all previous presidents combined. This was seen by many American Jews at the time as a significant sign of support against the backdrop of widespread antisemitism.

A case in point was Sidney Hillman, the founding president of the Amalgamated Clothing Workers of America (ACWA). Hillman was a prime practitioner of Social Unionism and became one of FDR's most trusted labor and political advisors.

Hillman worked closely with Secretary of Labor Frances Perkins (the first female cabinet member and a strong New Deal proponent) to draft landmark legislation, including the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 (which established the minimum wage and the 40-hour work week).

FDR appointed Hillman to high-level positions in the administration, notably on the National Recovery Administration (NRA) boards and later as Associate Director General of the Office of Production Management during the buildup to WWII. This gave the philosophy of Social Unionism a seat at the highest tables of government

Political Support: 

American Jews overwhelmingly supported FDR, giving him the largest percentage of the Jewish vote in presidential history (up to 90% in some elections). He was often regarded as the "best friend" the Jewish people had in the White House.

Condemnation of Nazis and the Holocaust: 

FDR publicly condemned the persecution of Jews in Germany, recalling the U.S. ambassador after Kristallnacht in 1938. In 1944, he established the War Refugee Board (WRB), which was a government agency tasked with rescuing and providing relief for victims of Nazi persecution, including Jews. The WRB is credited with saving tens of thousands of lives.

Support for a Jewish Homeland: 

He publicly backed the idea of a Jewish homeland in the Mandated area of Palestine.

It was the concepts and leaders of "Social Unionism," particularly those coming out of the Jewish-led garment unions, that served as a significant and direct inspiration for key policies within Franklin D. Roosevelt's New Deal.

Jewish-led unions, particularly the ILGWU (International Ladies' Garment Workers' Union) and the ACWA, had spent the early 20th century building a "little welfare state" for their members—offering services like unemployment funds, healthcare, and education. 

When the Great Depression hit, these union leaders argued to FDR that the federal government needed to step in and apply that model of comprehensive social protection on a national scale.

The core principle of Social Unionism—that an organization must serve its members' total well-being, not just their wages—was integrated into the federal government's approach to the Great Depression during the FDR administration in the Social Security Act (1935), Public Works Administration (PWA), Civilian Conservation Corps (CCC), the National Industrial Recovery Act (NIRA, 1933) and the National Labor Relations Act (Wagner Act, 1935).

The percieved  NON pro-Jewish stance:

What many see as his NON pro-Jewish stance was embodied in the 1939 incident with the SS St. Louis, a ship carrying over 900 Jewish refugees, which was denied entry to the U.S. and forced to return to Europe, where many passengers later perished in the Holocaust.

The decision by President Franklin D. Roosevelt's administration to refuse entry to the Jewish refugees aboard the German liner SS St. Louis in June 1939 was a devastating consequence of several powerful forces at the time: strict immigration law, overwhelming public opposition, and political caution.

America during the post WWI period went through a severe "Isolationist  Period" followed by the deep financial crisis of the "Great Depression" Pragmatic fears about a political anti-immigrant and antisemitic backlash, as well as the economic constraints of the Great Depression, played a major role in this policy.

Furthermore, FDR was constrained by the political and legal environment, choosing not to use his presidential authority to circumvent those constraints for this specific group of refugees.

Here are the primary reasons for FDR 's administration's refusal

 The Immovable Quota System:

The single greatest legal barrier was the Immigration Act of 1924 (Johnson-Reed Act), which established strict national origin quotas.

Quota Already Filled: 

The German/Austrian quota for 1939 was already filled, and there was a massive waiting list for visas—reportedly nearly 140,000 people.

The Waiting List Precedent:

The U.S. State Department, which managed visa applications, argued that granting visas to the St. Louis passengers would be unfair and illegal, as it would allow them to "jump the queue" ahead of thousands of other German Jews who had been waiting for years. Officials insisted the passengers must wait their turn and qualify for visas before being admissible.

Lack of Documentation:

Most passengers on the St. Louis had valid entrance certificates for Cuba, not U.S. immigration visas. Therefore, legally, they were not eligible to enter the country.

Overwhelming Anti-Immigrant Public Opinion

FDR was a pragmatist and a politician keenly aware of public sentiment, especially as he was considering an unprecedented third term.

At the time the public opinion polls showed massive resistance to increasing immigration. A January 1939 poll, just months before the St. Louis sailed, indicated that 83% of Americans opposed accepting additional European refugees.

Isolationism and Nativism:

The prevailing mood in America was isolationist and nativist. Americans did not want to get involved in Europe's problems or introduce more foreigners who might upset the social or political order.

Congressional Resistance:

Congress was fiercely anti-immigrant. The President knew that any attempt to ask Congress to pass a special law to admit the passengers (like the failed Wagner-Rogers Bill, which sought to admit 20,000 refugee children outside the quota) would be swiftly defeated, costing him precious political capital needed for his New Deal programs and later, the war effort.

Economic and National Security Concerns

The Great Depression: The economy was still struggling, and there was widespread fear that immigrants would take scarce American jobs or become "public charges" (financially dependent on the government). The State Department strictly enforced the public charge rule.

Fear of Spies:

As tensions with Nazi Germany escalated, some U.S. officials, including in the State Department and FBI, expressed fears that Nazi agents or spies could be hidden among the Jewish refugees. Although this fear was largely exaggerated, it contributed to the rationale for strict security screening and refusal.

Conclusion: A Choice of Priorities

While FDR expressed sympathy for the plight of the German Jews (and his wife, Eleanor Roosevelt, actively lobbied him to help the St. Louis passengers), he ultimately chose political pragmatism and national unity over humanitarian intervention in this specific case.

He did not believe the crisis of the 937 refugees justified the massive political risk of challenging the will of Congress and the overwhelming anti-immigrant sentiment of the American public. This decision remains one of the most controversial and tragic moments of his presidency.

In the end tragically the SS St. Louis was eventually forced to return to Europe. 

Some of the hapless refugees were accepted by Belgium, the Netherlands, France, and the United Kingdom. 

In the end tragically, of the 620 passengers who landed on the Continent, 254 were murdered in the Holocaust after the Nazis conquered those countries.

The historical truth regarding the rise of anti-Jewish sentiments in America

As an educator, truthsayer and as a histrorian. I spend hours doing research of historical documents in my hours of research to verify historical truth.

To be truthful one must take an unbiased and neutral stance so as to comprehend the actions in the past and historical personas. Additionally, one must also take into account and understand the influences of the time period.

To fully comprehend, the historical truth regarding anti-Jewish sentiments in America requires that one must "wade" (read) through the biased point of view, dysinformation and revisonist history of others for comparison to the document truth.

Historical Background: "Isolationism"

The period following World War I saw the United States shift decisively back toward a policy of isolationism. This stance was not total withdrawal from the world, but rather a strong commitment to non-involvement in European political and military affairs, often referred to as non-entanglement.

This isolationist wave was driven by a deep disillusionment with the results of the war, returning soldiers who experience severe and profound PTFD and a desire to focus entirely on domestic issues.

The most famous act of post-WWI isolationism was the rejection of President Woodrow Wilson's vision for collective security.

The U.S. Senate refused to ratify the Treaty of Versailles, which formally ended the war and included the charter for the League of Nations. The Senate's opposition was focused primarily on Article X of the League's Covenant. Senators, led by Republican Henry Cabot Lodge, feared that Article X, which required member nations to protect the independence and territory of all other members, would:

• Infringe upon U.S. Sovereignty: Force the U.S. into foreign conflicts without a vote by Congress.
• Violate the long-standing American tradition of "no entangling alliances," a policy dating back to George Washington.

The election of Republican Warren G. Harding in 1920 was a popular repudiation of Wilsonian internationalism and a mandate for turning inward on a platform promising a "return to normalcy".

The exception to the rule of "Isolationism" was that the USA could not completely disentangle from the global economy. This period is sometimes called independent internationalism rather than pure isolationism.

During this period the U.S. initiated the Washington Naval Disarmament Conference (1921-1922), resulting in treaties (like the Five-Power Treaty) that limited the size of the world's major navies. This was an attempt to maintain peace and reduce military spending without entering into a binding alliance.

It should be noted that the U.S. participated in efforts to resolve the crisis over German war reparations, caused by the overly severe French demands in the Versailles Treaty most notably through the Dawes Plan (1924) and Young Plan (1929), which restructured German debt and stabilized the European economy. U.S. banks and businesses continued to invest heavily overseas. 

The financial collapse of the Weimar Republic with it's economic hardship, food shortages and government corruption led to the eventual rejection of the Weimar Republic and empowered the rise of Adolph Schickgrupper (aka Hitler) and the the National Socialist German Workers' Party better known as the Nazi Party. 

The desire to isolate the nation extended to the people and cause a wave of nativism and fear of foreign radicals. 

The causes behind the anti-Jewish fears:

One must remember the heavy participation of Jews in the Bolshevik revolution in Russia and throughout Europe -Rosa Luxemburg  a leading theorist of the Social Democratic Party of Germany (SPD) and later co-founded the anti-war Spartacus League, which evolved into the Communist Party of Germany (KPD). An influential member of the international socialist movement, she is remembered for her writings on imperialism and revolution, and as a champion of socialist democracy who famously stated, "Freedom is always and exclusively freedom for the one who thinks differently."

The rise and fear of Communnism inspired Congress to pass two major Restrictive Quota Acts the Emergency Quota Act of 1921 and the Immigration Act of 1924 (Johnson-Reed Act).

It should also be noted that during the mass immigration of Yiddish-speaking Jews from Eastern Europe (1880-1920), many had socialist or Bundist backgrounds. Many of these Jewish refugees provided the core membership and much of the leadership for the unions in the garment industry. 

These unions were often founded by the workers themselves to combat the notoriously brutal conditions of the New York sweatshops.

The most important Jewish founder in the history of American labor is Samuel Gompers who founded the American Federation of Labor (AFL) (1886).

• Gompers was a Sephardic Jew who arrived from London, his style of unionism—"pure and simple" unionism focused on "bread and butter" issues like wages, hours, and working conditions, rather than radical socialist revolution—defined the mainstream American labor movement for decades. He was integral to founding the Cigar Makers' International Union in the 1870s, which served as a model for the AFL.
• David Dubinsky organized the massive workforce of mostly Jewish and Italian women in the women's clothing industry the International Ladies' Garment Workers' Union (ILGWU) and led the famous "Uprising of the 20,000" strike in 1909.
• Sidney Hillman was the founding president of the Amalgamated Clothing Workers of America (ACWA) the leading union for the men's clothing industry. Hillman was one of the most powerful labor leaders in the country and a key advisor to President Franklin D. Roosevelt during the New Deal era.
• Bernard Weinstein, Morris Hillquit, Abraham Cahan Established in 1888, the United Hebrew Trades UHT was an umbrella organization that helped coordinate and establish over 20 separate Jewish unions in trades like cigar-making, shirt-making, and printing, often using Yiddish to organize workers.
• Abraham Cahan was a socialist and labor activist who founded and edited the influential socialist Yiddish-language newspaper, the Forverts (The Jewish Daily Forward), which was a vital tool for organizing and educating Jewish workers.

The unions led by the East European Jews went beyond the Gompers model of just wages and hours. They pioneered "Social Unionism," which treated the union as a comprehensive community and mutual aid society. This unique approach introduced a strong commitment to social justice and a broader vision for a more equitable society.

It was the concepts and leaders of "Social Unionism," particularly those coming out of the Jewish-led garment unions, served as a significant and direct inspiration for key policies within Franklin D. Roosevelt's New Deal.

The core principle of Social Unionism—that an organization must serve its members' total well-being, not just their wages—was integrated into the federal government's approach to the Great Depression in the Social Security Act (1935), Public Works Administration (PWA), Civilian Conservation Corps (CCC), the National Industrial Recovery Act (NIRA, 1933) and the National Labor Relations Act (Wagner Act, 1935).

Anti-Jewish sentiment and fear in the United States 

The anti-Jewish sentiment and fear in the United States during the 1920s was derived from the massive wave of immigration, particularly of Eastern European Jews and the involvement of Jews in socialism. 

The anti-Jewish sentiment reached a historical "high tide" due to a convergence of long-standing religious/racial prejudice and immediate post-WWI anxieties about immigration, social change, and political radicalism.

Eastern European Jews immigrants were often poorer, more religiously traditional, spoke Yiddish (not English), and were concentrated in urban centers like New York. This foreignness clashed with the idealized image of a homogenous, Anglo-Saxon Protestant America. Nativists viewed the new Jewish immigrants as unassimilable and a threat to "American homogeneity."

This fear directly led to the highly restrictive Immigration Act of 1924 (Johnson-Reed Act). By setting quotas based on the 1890 census, the law was intentionally designed to cut off the flow of immigrants from Southern and Eastern Europe, where the vast majority of Jews were coming from.

Anti- Jewish conspiracy theories:

A powerful tool for spreading anti-Jewish fear was the propagation of fictional, large-scale conspiracy theories like the notorious forgery, The Protocols of the Elders of Zion originating in Czarist Russia, that claimed to document a secret Jewish plot to achieve world domination by manipulating the economy, controlling the press, and instigating wars. It was treated as factual evidence of a Jewish global cabal.

The most prominent American figure to popularize this forgery was industrialist Henry Ford. Through his personal newspaper, The Dearborn Independent, Ford ran a series of articles from 1920 to 1927 titled "The International Jew: The World's Foremost Problem." Ford used his immense platform and distribution network (via his auto dealerships) to legitimize and widely disseminate the idea of a malignant Jewish financial conspiracy.

Following the Bolshevik Revolution in Russia (1917), American fears of domestic communist subversion and anarchism skyrocketed, leading to the First Red Scare. This ecause some prominent early communist leaders in Europe (like Leon Trotsky) were of Jewish descent, and many Eastern European Jewish immigrants held socialist or unionist views, the false and dangerous stereotype arose that Jews were synonymous with Communism and were actively trying to overthrow American capitalism and democracy. This conflation made Jews a target for those seeking to purge America of "un-American" political influences.

Anti-Jewish sentiment was prevalent at all levels of society, from the populist working class to the elite establishment.

• Jews faced rigid discrimination, known as "social antisemitism," from the elite. This included:
• Residential Restrictions: Exclusion from certain wealthy neighborhoods.
• "Restricted" Areas: Denial of service or accommodation at hotels, resorts, and social clubs.
• Educational Quotas: Leading universities, most notably Harvard, began instituting quota systems in the 1920s to limit the number of Jewish students admitted, claiming they needed to protect the universities' "Anglo-Saxon" character.

Because of these fears and old hatred The Ku Klux Klan (KKK) experienced a massive revival in the 1920s, expanding its focus beyond Black Americans to target Catholics and Jews as threats to white Protestant supremacy and American values. The KKK's power peaked during this decade with millions of members.

In the end ultimately, the anti-Jewish fear of the 1920s was fueled by a national reaction against perceived foreign and modern threats—from the foreign-speaking immigrant worker to the shadowy international financier—with Jews being cast as the scapegoat for all these unsettling changes.

Death Toll in Gaza

How many innocent civilians were verified as being killed and how many died of natural causes in Gaza these past two years?

The verification of casualties in Gaza is exceptionally difficult and highly contentious due to the ongoing conflict, lack of access for independent monitors, and the collapse of the healthcare infrastructure.    

Here is the list of sources I referenced in my reseach and as I mention in the Blog the "main source" for many news outlets is the Gaza Ministry of Heath run by the Hamas terrorist regime so I questioned the accuarcy of their information.

The Guardian - www.theguardian.com 

Revealed: Israeli military's own data indicates civilian death rate of 83% in Gaza war.

Australia/Israel & Jewish Affairs Council (AIJAC) - aijac.org.au Fact Sheet: Gaza's death toll:

The IDF estimates that, as of January 2025, about 20,000 Hamas combatants have been killed in Gaza.

Henry Jackson Society - henryjacksonsociety.org

Questionable Counting: Analysing the Death Toll from the Hamas-Run Ministry of Health in Gaza 

Only 5% of the surveyed media organisations cited numbers released by the Israeli authorities, while 98% cited fatality figures provided by the Hamas-run Gaza ...

The Washington Institute - www.washingtoninstitute.org- Here's the Real Problem with the U.N.'s Revised Gaza Death Toll 

It also cannot help assess the legality of individual Israeli strikes or operations. Nor is the claimed death toll a clear undercount: 40 percent of reported

United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs, OCHA -

www.ochaopt.org-Reported impact snapshot | Gaza Strip (25 March 2025) | 

The fatality breakdowns currently cited are those that the MoH in Gaza has fully identified as of 22 March 2025 out of the higher number of casualties they ...

The London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine

www.lshtm.ac.uk - Gaza: 64,000 deaths due to violence between October 2023 and June 2024, analysis:

The total death toll due to the war is likely to be higher(?) as the analysis does not account for non-trauma related deaths caused by disruption to healthcare, ...

German public state-owned international broadcaster Deutsche Welle -YouTube -www.youtube.com- 

New research puts Gaza death toll much higher than reported  

The numbers of dead released by the Hamas-run ministry of health have been dismissed by the Israeli government as being exaggerated, but recent research ...

Determining the exact number of innocent civilians killed in Gaza over the past two years (which primarily covers the ongoing war that began on October 7, 2023) is highly complex and depends on the specific source, methodology, and definition of "innocent civilian."

The request for verified numbers of "innocent civilians" killed and those who died of "natural causes" in Gaza over the past two years (predominantly the period since the October 7, 2023 war began) highlights one of the most contentious aspects of casualty reporting, as definitive, independently verified counts are not currently possible for the entire period.

The most commonly cited figures for total Palestinian deaths come from the Gaza Ministry of Health (MoH), which is run by the Hamas terrorist organization - controlled government. 

So how trust worthy are these figures generally used by the UN and other international bodies?

The consensus among major international organizations and neutral analysts is as follows:

The total figure of dead bodies reported by the MoH is likely an accurate baseline for the number of trauma deaths. It represents a massive loss of life that most sources believe is either correct or an undercount.

The civilian-to-combatant ratio and the claim that a specific high percentage are women and children is the least trustworthy aspect of the MoH's reporting. This breakdown is often politically motivated and has been shown to be inconsistent with the MoH's own detailed lists.

In short, the raw number is generally considered plausible, but the demographic breakdown requires external, independent analysis (which often involves comparing the ages and genders of the identified dead to the general population) to determine the actual civilian toll.

Several international organizations and academic studies have attempted to verify, cross-reference, or analyze this data, often leading to different conclusions about the exact number and the civilian-to-combatant ratio.

Here is a breakdown based on the available data from international organizations, academic studies, and reporting:

1. Verified Innocent Civilian Deaths (Trauma-Related)

There is no single, universally agreed-upon, and fully verified total number of innocent civilian deaths due to direct trauma (strikes, gunfire) for the entire conflict period (Oct. 2023 – Dec. 2025). The difficulty lies in independently verifying the combatant status of every adult male killed.

The most widely cited figures come from the Gaza Ministry of Health (MoH), run by Hamas, but these require external analysis to determine the civilian breakdown.

Sources:

United Nations (UN) Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) conducts its own verification process, which is often slower than the MoH's reporting.

They use a strict standard, verifying fatalities using at least three independent sources (such as hospital records, family members, local NGOs, and UN staff on the ground).

The total number of fatalities they can verify is significantly lower than the MoH's total, but their demographic breakdown for the verified victims has often supported the general claim that women and children make up a large portion of the dead. For example, one analysis found that 70% of the fatalities they verified in residential buildings were women and children.

UN Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA) (who we all know employs "local Innocent Civilians" read Hamas simpathizers or members) monitors and tracks casualties among its own staff and those sheltering in its facilities, providing a subset of verified victims.

Airwars a UK-based NGO meticulously tracks and investigates civilian harm in conflict zones, often using open-source monitoring, social media, and local reports. In the context of Israel and Gaza, Airwars documents civilian harm allegations caused by both the Israeli Military and Palestinian Terrorist Groups (such as Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad). 

Their data cited in media reports "due to the nature of the current conflict"( the highly cynical use of "Human Shields" within the context of "Asymetrical Warfare")  has been highly critical of the scope of Israeli military operations.

Conclusion on Verification: While the exact number of "innocent civilians" cannot be precisely verified, multiple independent and internal analyses (including some citing classified Israeli data) consistently show that the civilian proportion of the total trauma deaths is extremely high, likely between 75% and 85%.

2. Deaths from Natural Causes (Indirect Deaths)

The number of people dying from indirect causes—often referred to as non-trauma-related deaths or excess deaths—is rapidly growing and is not fully included in the main MoH casualty figures.

Estimated Figures for Indirect Deaths:

Famine/Malnutrition: 

As of late 2025, reports suggest thousands of people have died from complications related to severe malnutrition, dehydration, and lack of treatment, with figures of 10,000+ cited in some reports. The UN has highlighted that deaths of children due to starvation shame the world and demand urgent action.

Disease and Health Collapse: 

The breakdown of sanitation, lack of clean water, and the destruction of the health care system have caused deaths from treatable diseases, chronic conditions, and infectious outbreaks (such as cholera, Hepatitis A, and respiratory illnesses).

A study in The Lancet noted that their analysis underestimates the full impact because it "does not account for non-trauma-related deaths resulting from health service disruption, food insecurity, and inadequate water and sanitation."

It should be noted that "The Lancet" over the years has been reported to dedicate a disproportionate space to articles that criticize Israel and its impact on Palestinian health, while allegedly neglecting to highlight Israeli medical achievements or the context of Hamas's actions (such as the use of hospitals for military purposes or rocket attacks on Israeli civilians).

One analysis suggests the total number of deaths, including indirect deaths, is likely significantly higher than the reported trauma figures.

Natural Deaths in a Normal Year:

It is also important to consider the baseline. Before the war, Gaza had a large, young population, but a typical mortality rate would still result in a number of "natural deaths" (old age, heart disease, cancer).

One analysis estimated that the pre-war natural death rate in Gaza would account for approximately 5,000 deaths per year. These deaths may be included in the broad, unverified lists of total fatalities recorded by the MoH, complicating the data further.

In summary, the number of people dying from natural causes (indirect deaths) exacerbated by the war's conditions (famine, disease, lack of medicine) is not precisely verified but is "estimated" to be in the thousands and rising, adding significantly to the overall toll beyond the direct trauma deaths.

Furthermore, It should be noted that prior to the 7th 0f October 2023 from classified Israeli military intelligence database Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad had a pre-war strength of approximately 25,000 to 30,000 fighters.

Source Israeli Military Intelligence Directorate (Aman): 

ACLED (Armed Conflict Location & Event Data Project) cites this range (25,000 to 30,000) as the "pre-war estimate" for Hamas's military wing, the Izz al-Din al-Qassam Brigades.

Of those Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad known by name, some 8500 are confirmed as KIA. 

The Israeli Military Intelligence Directorate (Aman) verification method: used by the IDF to verify deaths of terrorists used intelligence data, unit reports from the field, cross-referencing names against known militant rosters, and sometimes by physical identification of bodies or captured documents.

Many times the Hamas and PIJ posted "obituaries" lauding the dead.

The IDF has estimated that around 17,000 to 20,000+ terrorists have been killed. This figure includes fighters from both Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ) as well as and other terrorist groups,

Poland the Ukraine and antisemitism

As a historian I learned the documented historical truth.

I saw where someone posted a Meme "statement", that misused the term Nazi -which has been symbolically linked to the "Final Solution" when attempting to refer "antisemitsm" in Poland today.

Allow me to inform you and those reading to the historical truth.

The presence of Jews in Poland is a story of over a millennium, driven by a combination of economic opportunity and, critically, a search for refuge from persecution in Western Europe.

Here is a breakdown of how the Jewish community came to be in Poland:

1. Early Trade and Settlement (10th-11th Centuries)

First Arrivals: The earliest known presence of Jews in the territory of modern Poland dates back to the 10th century. These were primarily Jewish merchants and traders, such as the Radhanites, who traveled along major East-West trade routes.

Initial Communities: The first actual mention of Jewish communities in Polish chronicles is in the 11th century, with early settlements in cities like Gniezno.

2. A Haven from Persecution (High Middle Ages)

The most significant influx of Jewish people occurred as they fled violence and intolerance in Western Europe.

The Crusades (11th-12th Centuries): The First Crusade (starting in 1096) triggered widespread massacres and expulsions of Jews in Western European lands along the Rhine and the Danube. Many of these persecuted Jews migrated east, finding a more welcoming environment in Poland.

Royal Protection and Charters: Polish rulers often saw the economic value of Jewish immigrants, who brought skills in commerce, finance, and crafts.

Bolesław III (1102–1139) encouraged Jewish settlement with a tolerant regime.

Bolesław the Pious issued the Statute of Kalisz (1264), a pivotal charter that granted Jews personal freedom, legal autonomy, protection from forced baptism, and the right to conduct trade and moneylending.

Casimir III the Great (1333–1370) ratified and expanded this charter, and his reign is often viewed as a "Golden Era" for Polish Jewry.

3. Mass Migration and The "Haven" (14th-16th Centuries)

The Black Death and Expulsions: Following the Black Death in the 14th century, Jews were often blamed and persecuted across Europe. Simultaneously, they faced expulsions from countries like England (1290), France (1394), Spain (1492), and parts of Germany, Austria, and Bohemia.

Poland's Tolerance: As Western Europe became increasingly intolerant, the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth offered a rare and vital refuge. Poland became known as "Paradisus Iudaeorum" (Latin for "Paradise of the Jews").

A World Center: By the mid-16th century, Poland was home to the largest Jewish community in the world, estimated by some sources to be as high as three-quarters of the global Jewish population at the time. This environment fostered a major center for Jewish culture, religious scholarship, and learning (Yeshivot).

In summary, the Jewish presence in Poland began with trade, but grew exponentially due to the push factor of severe persecution in the West and the pull factor of relative tolerance, legal protections, and economic opportunities offered by Polish monarchs who sought to develop their country.

So why did so much hatred against the Jews develope among the "lower class" -serfs - of Poland and the Ukraine?

The intense hatred directed at Jews by the serfs (peasant-slaves) in the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, particularly in the Ukrainian territories, was primarily due to the economic and social intermediary role the Jews were forced to play between the deeply oppressed peasantry and the powerful Polish nobility.

The serfs were often unable to distinguish between the Jewish agent who directly enforced the taxes and rules, and the Polish noble (magnate) who was the ultimate source of their exploitation.

Here are the key factors that led to this resentment:

1. The Arenda System (Leaseholding)  

The most critical factor was the Arenda system. Polish nobles, who owned vast tracts of land (latifundia), often preferred not to manage their estates directly. They would lease out economic rights, known as arenda, to Jewish entrepreneurs for a fixed cash sum.

The Jewish Role: As leaseholders (known as arendars), Jews managed various essential, and often monopolistic, elements of the noble's estate, including:

Taverns and Liquor Sales (Propinacja): This was a major source of conflict. The arendar often held the exclusive right to distill and sell alcohol. Since the serfs often spent their meager earnings on drink, the Jewish tavern keeper became the immediate face of the peasants' poverty and moral degradation.

Mills, Tolls, and Taxes: Jews collected duties for using the flour mill, crossing bridges, and gathering market tolls, making them the visible collectors of fees that strained the peasants' subsistence.

The Serf's Perception: The serfs had little or no direct contact with the distant noble. The person demanding their dues, extracting their grain, or collecting money for their drinks was the Jewish arendar. This created a "buffer of hatred," diverting the serfs' justified rage over their serfdom away from the noble landlord and onto the Jewish intermediary.

2. Proximate Enforcers of Serfdom  

While not the owners of the serfs, Jewish leaseholders and estate managers acted as the nobleman's stewards, effectively becoming the enforcers of the noble's will and the system of serfdom itself.

Corvée (Forced Labor): The serf's life was defined by the corvée, or compulsory unpaid labor on the lord's land. The Jewish manager often supervised this labor and ensured the serfs met their obligations, making him the direct supervisor of their exploitation.

Estate Management: In addition to managing specific enterprises like taverns, some wealthy Jews leased entire villages (dzierżawa), becoming the de facto rulers of the serf community, dictating their daily lives and economic transactions. This role made them synonymous with the Polish ruling class, despite being legally separate.

3. Religious and Ethnic Difference 

The economic tension was compounded by deep religious and ethnic divisions, especially in the Ukrainian lands:

Religious Conflict: The majority of the serfs in Ukraine were Orthodox Christian, while the nobility was primarily Polish Catholic. The Jews, being neither Orthodox nor Catholic, were viewed as yet another "alien" element allied with the Catholic Polish oppressors. This fueled the traditional, deep-seated Christian anti-Semitism that was already present in Europe.

Cossack Uprisings: This hatred exploded during major peasant and Cossack revolts, such as the Khmelnytsky Uprising (1648). The Cossacks and serfs, seeking to overthrow Polish rule, targeted Jewish communities with extreme violence. Jews were killed not just because of their religion, but because they were perceived as the direct "servants" and "sponges" of the hated Polish nobility, making them a primary symbol of the oppressive system.

In essence, the serfs saw the Jews as the immediate, tangible agents of the system that deprived them of freedom, wealth, and dignity, even though the ultimate source of their oppression was the Polish-Lithuanian nobility.

Hatred against Israel? Know the truth - SIG and Active measures

When Israel was founded in 1948, the USSR was among the first to grant it full legal recognition. Stalin believed Israel’s socialist kibbutzim model signaled an affinity for communism that might one day make it an ally and help Moscow push Britain out of the Middle East.

But those hopes collapsed within two decades. Israel sided symbolically with the United States during the Korean War, joined Britain and France in the 1956 Suez campaign, and most humiliatingly for Moscow, defeated Soviet-armed Arab militaries in the 1967 Six-Day War.

Within the USSR, antisemitism was already systemic; Jews were distrusted as potential “Western agents.” By exporting that prejudice to the Arab world, the Soviets could weaponize hatred of Israel to rally allies and weaken the West.

The culmination came in 1975, when Moscow pushed UN Resolution 3379 declaring that “Zionism is a form of racism” the ultimate  goal was to “instill a Nazi-style hatred for Jews throughout the world and especially the Islamic world.”

The double-speak which became the hallmark of the PLO and its successors was taught to Yasser Arafat by the Romanian dictator Nicolae Ceaușescu who advised him to “talk peace in English but wage war in Arabic.” 

Soviet defector Vasily Mitrokhin who was a former senior officer of the Soviet Foreign Intelligence service and later demoted to KGB archivist revealed that Mahmoud Abbas appears in Soviet archives under the codename “Krotov" (mole). 

While a student at Lumumba Peoples' Friendship University of Russia in Moscow, which promoted Holocaust-denial themes accusing Jews of colluding with Nazis. Mahmoud Abbas wrote his doctoral dissertation, "The Other Side: The Secret Relationship Between Nazism and Zionism"—a lampoon of blatant lies, including Holocaust denial and accusations that Zionists "assisted" Hitler—was completed in May 1982 and released as a book two years later.

In 1982 Abbas returned to Lebanon and used the PLO archive to spread Soviet propaganda prepared by the KGB and the Stasi, which accused "Western Imperialism and Zionism" of cooperating with the Nazis. 

This was done as part of a widespread propaganda campaign run by the KGB at the time, which attempted to create a link between anti-Soviet elements and the Nazis by flooding the Middle East with Arabic translations of The Protocols of the Elders of Zion, films portraying Jews as Nazis, and thousands of “agents of influence” spreading antisemitic conspiracy theories—the ultimate symbol of evil.

Israel was now recast as a racist oppressor. Soviet propagandists produced books such as Zionism and Apartheid, along with posters equating the Star of David with a swastika. This propaganda material was later seized in an Israeli Military Intelligence raid of the PLO archive in Beirut, and it constitutes, at the very least, additional circumstantial evidence attesting to the links between Fatah and Abbas and the Soviet intelligence services.

The Soviet Union may have collapsed, but its disinformation ecosystem survives, and now with a new sponsor. Today, Qatar funds the same ideology through Western universities, media outlets, and “human-rights” NGOs.

According to a 2024 Middle East Forum report, Qatar channels roughly $235 million per year into U.S. universities, hosts U.S. campuses in Doha, and has expanded its media reach beyond its state-sponsored Al Jazeera network, now hosting a state-of-the-art CNN bureau. 

The use of the KGB methodology, outlaid in the  Active Measures campaign of the 1960's. is used by the Qataris today: fund the institutions that shape minds, flood them with anti-Israel narratives, and let sympathetic academics and activists carry the message forward.

The slogans heard in anti-Israel demonstrations throughout the world first scripted in Moscow: “From the river to the sea,” “Israel is apartheid,” “Free Palestine,” turn a regional conflict into a global morality play where Jews are always cast as villains.

As seen today throughout the world Operation SIG succeeded beyond the Kremlin’s expectations as it reframed the lone Jewish state of Israel’s existence as that of a country of "Outsiders /Colonists" discrediting the indigenous reality of Jews from Judaea. It recast hatred of the Jews found in crass antisemitism as “anti-Zionism,” and taught the world to see a democracy fighting for survival as a pariah state.

What or how should one reply to vile antisemtic hatred on social media

The way to respond to vile antisemitic hatred on social This is one of the most common and challenging situations today. Dealing with vile antisemitic hatred on social media requires a strategic approach that prioritizes your well-being, uses the platform's tools, and aims to educate the broader audience (the bystanders), since the hater themselves is rarely open to reason.

Key Considerations- Who is the Audience? 

If you are in a public forum, your response is often more for the benefit of bystanders than the individual hater. In that case, Approach 1 (Factual Correction) is usually the most effective in neutralizing the claim.

1. The Factual Correction (Focus on Education)

This approach is best when the audience isn't the hater themselves, but observers who might be swayed by the claims. The key is to be calm and relentlessly factual.

"The statement you are making is based on a known antisemitic fabrication. The quote 'Libbre David 37' does not exist in any Jewish text. While the Talmud is a massive, complex, and ancient legal document that records centuries of debate, its legal and ethical conclusion is to treat all human beings, created in God’s image, with justice and respect. The claim that the Talmud universally promotes 'supremacy' or commands harm to non-Jews is historically and textually false and has been the foundation for antisemitic persecution for centuries."

2. The Direct Confrontation (Focus on Morality)

This approach focuses on calling out the behavior and the moral implications of spreading hate, rather than debating the text itself.

Example:

 "I will not debate the contents of a religious text with you when your intention is clearly just to spread hatred and bigotry. Using known fabrications and gross misrepresentations of the Talmud to demonize an entire group of people is the definition of antisemitism. I stand by the correction of the false quote, and I reject your attempt to pivot from a lie to a generalized attack."

3. The Boundary/Disengagement (Focus on Self-Preservation)

If the person is clearly not open to reason and is just looking for an argument, setting a boundary and disengaging is often the healthiest choice.

"I provided a factual correction to a lie. Your response makes it clear that your goal is not seeking truth but spreading hate. Since you are only interested in repeating antisemitic talking points, there is no productive discussion to be had. I will not be engaging further."

Here is a guide on how you should reply, combining Safety, Reporting, and Response.

1. Prioritize Safety and Disengagement (The Golden Rule)

The most effective "reply" is often not a reply at all. Antisemitic trolls on social media are seeking an emotional reaction and a prolonged debate to spread their hate further. Do not give them what they want.

• Block: Immediately block the user's account. This prevents them from seeing your posts and reduces your exposure to their hate.
• Do Not Engage (The Troll): Never debate the merits of their claims or their personal character. This validates their existence and exposes you to more toxicity.
• Your Own Safety/Well-being: If the interaction is causing stress or is escalating, Approach 3 (Disengagement) is the correct choice. You do not owe anyone an explanation or a debate about your humanity or religious texts.
• Protect Your Privacy: Ensure your personal information, location, and family details are not easily accessible on your profile.

2. The Essential Action: Report and Document

This is the most impactful step, as it can lead to the removal of the content and the suspension of the account.

Document Everything: Before you block or report, take a screenshot of the hateful comment/post and the user's profile. You need this evidence if the platform fails to act or if you need to report to law enforcement/advocacy groups.

Report to the Platform: 

Use the platform's specific "Report" function (for Hate Speech or Abusive Content). This is typically anonymous. Be specific in your report—mention the antisemitic tropes or threats used.

Goal: Get the post removed and the account suspended, limiting the hate's reach.

Report to Advocacy Groups: Report the incident to a dedicated organization that tracks and counters online antisemitism, such as:

• The Anti-Defamation League (ADL)
• The American Jewish Committee (AJC)
• Community Security Trust (CST) (in the UK)

Why? These groups have direct channels to social media companies and can often compel action when an individual report fails.

3. The Constructive Reply (If You Must Engage)

If you decide to post a public reply, do it after reporting and do it for the benefit of bystanders, not the hater. The reply should be a single, clear statement that sets a boundary and corrects the record. 

• Educate bystanders about the lie or trope being used. "This comment is spreading a known antisemitic fabrication and is based on a centuries-old lie. Do not fall for this type of hate speech."
• Moral Condemnation Clearly label the behavior as unacceptable. "I am reporting this comment for hate speech. There is no justification for spreading antisemitism online."
• Encourage allies and friends to step up. "I've reported this vile content. If you see this kind of hate, please don't be silent—report it immediately to the platform."

What to AVOID in a Reply:

• Emotional Responses: Avoid anger, sadness, or personal attacks, as this feeds the troll.
• Debating Theology/History: Do not engage in a back-and-forth about the Talmud, Jewish history, or Israeli politics. This is their trap to legitimize the hatred as a "debate."
• Sharing Personal Information: Never reveal personal details or location.

Final Takeaway: Your primary mission is to protect your own space and safety (by blocking/disengaging) and to make the platform safer (by reporting).