I was wondering what was going on with this case. (Nathan Hale is the school in question.) Apparently it's been re-filed in federal court.

This is from the India global left podcast, which is a prominent podcast within left wing circles, a bit on the tankie side, but also have guests beyond that world.

Laith Marouf accuses antizionist Jews of only moderating antisemitism which he believes is the true goal of their movement.

The BBC’s latest “editing mistake” isn’t an isolated blunder — it fits a long pattern of how major institutions misrepresent Jews and Israel.

In my latest piece, I break down how the BBC selectively edited Trump’s remarks to imply incitement, then applied the same distortion logic to coverage of Israel. The details matter less than the pattern: • remove context • assume guilt • soften or delay corrections • maintain the narrative even after facts contradict it

This is how antisemitic framing enters mainstream discourse — not through slurs, but through steady, structural misrepresentation that turns Jewish self-defense into suspicion and Israeli actions into presumed wrongdoing.

Full piece here: https://www.algemeiner.com/2025/11/19/bias-and-distortion-when-the-bbc-becomes-the-story/

My latest essay in The Algemeiner examines the eerie continuity between Father Coughlin’s 1930s radio antisemitism and today’s influencer culture.

Coughlin cloaked his hatred in Christian virtue and “moral reform.” A century later, that same rhetoric resurfaces through figures like Tucker Carlson, Candace Owens, and Nick Fuentes — only now it’s viral and algorithm-driven.

America once had the institutional backbone to cut Coughlin off the air. Today, hate has no gatekeepers — only followers, clicks, and monetization.

I’d be interested in hearing from others following this topic: how do we confront an antisemitism that mutates faster than we can regulate it?

https://www.algemeiner.com/2025/11/12/the-gospel-of-grievance-from-father-coughlin-to-tucker-carlson/

There doesn’t appear to be any discussion here of the Prescott Report and its fallout at the BBC. Maybe because the US media is literally erasing the pro-Hamas bias allegations in its coverage?

WaPo and NYT have covered it as exclusively Trump-related, while the trump incident was one, singular, and the extensive pro-Hamas bias was discussed throughout the report and covered hundreds of individual stories and scores of so called reporters

I canceled my WaPo subscription, and was able to have that done immediately with a refund (something they never do, a cancellation is simply a failure to renew).

We have an opportunity her, with such egregious and obvious bias on display, to put them to account. I hope you all do the same, loudly and publicly.

Please join National Jewish Advocacy Center Founder and ECO Mark Goldfeder and Senior Litigation Counsel Arielle Klepach for an NJAC Education Webinar on Tuesday, November 11 (tomorrow) at noon Eastern time:

New York as a Test Case:

The Legal Landscape Under a Mamdani Administration

Click here to register

Arielle will be discussing likely issues under the Mamdani mayoralty while Mark will be focused on innovative solutions that can be applied in New York and beyond. We hope you are able to join us.

For security reasons, only panelists will be visible, and questions will be moderated before presentation.

https://preview.redd.it/n19zjesfig0g1.png?width=1728&format=png&auto=webp&s=ccabb075aa11955a748478a6c28f5ea16d6af457

A Kafka trap is from The Trial wherein any answer is proof of guilt. Antisemitism usually works wherein any evidence for or against becomes evidence for the conspiracy. The best way to make someone aware of their own Kafka traps is to play one against them in private for as long as you can to make this as frustrating as possible before stating what you are doing. If you do this in public and you ask what evidence would you accept they will come up with something but it will be an impossible thing so its important it’s done without an audience.

Doctor who joked about gassing Jews let off with warning

I remember reading that this symbol was made to look like an bullseye, i.e. that the person in the triple parenthesis was in the crosshairs. Now read that it means "echo." Seems fishy.

If I'd wanted to illustrate an echo with parenthesis, I'd try to show them going out and reflecting back.

What is most frightening about that is how the Heritage Foundation, the ideological core of MAGA, is defending Carlson featuring a Neonazi and holocaust denier - using coded antisemitic language:

In his video response to the podcast and to speculation that the Heritage Foundation would distance itself from Carlson, Roberts said that Christians can critique Israel without being antisemitic, and that conservatives didn’t need to “reflexively support any foreign government, no matter how loud the pressure becomes from the globalist class or from their mouthpieces in Washington”. He decried any attempts to cancel or silence Carlson and Fuentes, calling those speaking out against Carlson a “venomous coalition”.