In the complex landscape of U.S. politics, where alliances often shift like the sands of the desert, Kamala Harris’ presidential campaign has found itself navigating turbulent waters once again. The latest stir comes from the appointment of Brenda Abdelall, an American attorney of Egyptian descent, to spearhead outreach efforts to Arab-American voters. Her mission is clear: to galvanize support from the influential Arab communities in swing states like Michigan, a state she calls home.

But in the relentless 24-hour news cycle, less than a day passed before Abdelall’s past remarks about Jews and Israel surfaced in conservative media outlets. These comments, dating back to a 2002 conference of the American Muslim Council (AMC), where Abdelall reportedly stated that “Zionists control much of American politics,” have ignited a firestorm. Her words were a reaction to a panelist’s more severe accusation that “Zionists are destroying America.” Abdelall nuanced her stance by suggesting that while “destroy” might be an overstatement, Zionists undeniably wield significant influence in American political spheres.

Further comments from Abdelall on the panel referenced the electoral defeat of Democratic Congressman Earl Hilliard in Alabama. His loss, she suggested, followed his opposition to a pro-Israel resolution condemning Palestinian suicide bombings. The defeat was, in Abdelall’s view, a testament to the “considerable Jewish influence in politics,” fueled by the support and fundraising efforts of pro-Israel groups and Jewish donors for Hilliard’s rival.

Columbia university activist Mahmoud Khalil is calling for more pro-Palestinian, anti-Israel protests this fall.  Perhaps he has been buoyed by the success he enjoyed as lead negotiator for campus protesters last April.  Maybe he has been further encouraged by the administration’s apparent revocation of his suspension.

In any case, Khalil vows to continue agitation against Israel.

The Times of Israel reports that he has stated, “As long as Columbia continues to invest and to benefit from Israeli apartheid, the students will continue to resist.  Not only protests and encampments, the limit is the sky.”  (Italics mine.)

Recently, Hamas leader Khaled Mashal also made it clear that there are to be no limits.  He has issued calls to renew “martyrdom” operations, a phrase that indicates that suicide bombings and surprise attacks on civilians such as the one that happened on October 7, 2023 are to continue.  No tactic is off limits, as Hamas’s recent execution of six innocent hostages proves.

Doubtless neither Mr. Khalil nor Columbia University’s anti-Israel protesters would dare to display a flag with a swastika on it.  Nor would they carry a banner with the word “Judenrein,” a term meaning a given territory is to be “clean of Jews.”

But there is no hesitancy on their part to employ terms and phrases that are the equivalent.  The board of Meta has debated the legitimacy of allowing the phrase “from the river to the sea” on the social media platform.  There has been a lot of hemming and hawing, with some saying the phrase can be used many ways.  But when said by Hamas and other terrorist groups, it unequivocally has but one meaning: the elimination of the state of Israel and the Jews who live there.

In other words, there is a reason Hamas and like-minded groups, including anti-Israel protesters, display maps of the Middle East that eliminate Israel entirely — “from the river to the sea.”

As a number of historians have pointed out, the Third Reich had plans for the extermination of the Jews in Palestine, a plan taken over by Islamists.

The anti-Jew hatred the characterized Nazi ideology remained influential and have been appropriated by Islamist terrorist groups since the 1930s.  German and American universities have been targeted by and influenced by that ideology for decades.  As Jeffrey Herf point out in his meticulously researched article “Nazi Antisemitism and Islamist Hate” in Tablet Magazine,

Nazism, which ended as a major political factor in Europe with defeat in 1945, had enjoyed a robust afterlife in the Muslim Brotherhood and its offshoots, such as Hamas and al-Qaida…their campaigns have had a continuing impact in Western universities, where they serve as the ideological foundation of academic anti-Zionism and the resulting BDS campaigns of recent decades, which have aligned the Western left with the afterlife of Hitler’s Nazi Party and its larger designs for the Middle East.

Herf adds that Hitler always intended the Final Solution “to be a global policy, implemented wherever his armies met with success and working through local allies like [Grand Mufti] Husseini, with whom the Nazi leadership had cultivated intimate political relations based on a shared passion for Jew-hatred.”

Administrators at America’s top universities may want to consider the Nazi origins of Hamas’s ideology.  Critical proof of the absorption of Nazi ideology by Hamas is the Hamas Covenant of 1988, which calls for the total rejection of the Jewish state and a religious war to destroy that state completely.

There is a reason academia has been and is being targeted by agitators influenced by Nazi ideology centered on Jew-hatred.  Academia is the seedbed of ideas that filter down to other institutions, including government.  In fact, it was academia’s support for Nazism that helped Hitler to effectuate his anti-Semitic agenda.

The capture of nearly all of Germany’s institutions began with the capture of academia, according to Paul Johnson.  As he noted in A History of the Jews, “the Nazis effectively controlled the campuses two or three years before they took over the country.”

Johnson added, “It was not that the professors were pro-Nazi.  But they were anti-Weimar and anti-democratic and, above all, they were cowardly in standing up to student acts which they knew to be wrong — an adumbration of the more general cowardice of the nation later.”

As pointed out in “University Student Groups in Nazi Germany,” Jewish and other “undesirable” faculty were dismissed as “political opponents” of the regime, partly because of the effectiveness of student radicals:

The passage of the “Law for the Restoration of the Professional Civil Service” on April 7, 1933, propelled the Student League to the forefront of university politics. … The law … authorized the release of Jewish and “politically undesirable” faculty members from service.

The National Socialist German Student League directly targeted Jewish students and the remaining Jewish faculty members, interrupting lectures and physically attacking Jewish students.  Anti-Jew protesters targeted Germany’s Frankfurt University, which was a leading academic institution of the West, much as today’s protesters are targeting Ivy League universities and other top-tier institutions of learning such as Columbia.

It is useful to consider the testimony of Peter Drucker, an economist who was a lecturer at Frankfurt University during the 1930s.  It was a Nazi-led faculty “restructuring” meeting that persuaded Drucker to leave.  Columbia and other universities might want to take notes from his experience:

Frankfurt was the first university the Nazis tackled, precisely because it was the most self-confidently liberal of major German universities, with a faculty that prided itself on its allegiance to scholarship, freedom of conscience, and democracy. The Nazis knew that control of Frankfurt University would mean control of German academia. And so did everyone at the university.

Drucker continued:

The new Nazi commissar wasted no time on the amenities. He immediately announced that Jews would be forbidden to enter university premises and would be dismissed without salary on March 15; this was something that no one had thought possible despite the Nazis’ loud antisemitism. Then he launched into a tirade of abuse, filth, and four-letter words such as had been heard rarely even in the barracks and never before in academia. … [He] pointed his finger at one department chairman after another and said, “You either do what I tell you or we’ll put you into a concentration camp.”

The results of “restructuring” were soon evident.  It was not long before Jewish professors and students were no longer teaching or learning in German academia.

As CBN Israel notes, what was happening at Frankfurt University was reflected in American campuses during the 1930s and is being reflected in today’s protests at places such as Princeton, Harvard, and Columbia:

Examples of pre-World War II anti-Semitism on elite campuses such as Columbia and Harvard are easy to find. Administrators welcomed Nazi leaders to campus, enrolled Nazi-trained German exchange students, and promoted the idea of American students studying in Germany under Nazi oversight. Some returned to the United States mesmerized into supporting Hitler’s “New Germany.”

The protesters who are calling themselves pro-Palestinian are modern examples of students who favor terrorist organizations committed to the eradication of Israel and Jewry worldwide.

As Johnson wrote, there is justifiable reason for the existence of the state of Israel:

The Jews had grasped that the civilized world, however defined, could not be trusted.  The overwhelming lesson the Jews learned from the Holocaust was the imperative need to secure for themselves a permanent, self-contained and above all sovereign refuge where if necessary the whole of world Jewry could find safety from its enemies. … Jews [knew] that such a state had to be created and made secure whatever the cost, to themselves or to anyone else.

Jews in America may not think Nazism restructured as Islamism would establish itself in America in any significant way.  But it has.  And if not stopped, it will be as dangerous to Jews as were the events that happened during the Weimar Republic and the Third Reich.

The radicalization of America’s universities must not continue.  Terrorist organizations must not have a cadre of young radical sympathizers who tacitly or directly support genocide and the eradications of nations.

Terrorist groups and sympathizers committed to genocide and terrorist tactics, be it directly or indirectly, must be banned from American’s campuses.

“Never again.”

Fay Voshell holds a M.Div. from Princeton Seminary, which awarded her the prize for excellence in systematic theology.  Her thoughts have appeared in many online magazines, including American Thinker.  She may be reached at fvoshell@yahoo.com.

Life is full of transitions; the world is in constant flux. As we are in the middle of the Yomim Norai’im, with ROSH HASHANAH almost upon us, it is natural to think of our own personal destiny, as well as to wonder what the future of our People, and the Yishuv in Eretz Yisrael holds in store: Who will lead us? Will the leaders of yesteryear move on, and new ones arrive on the scene? In which direction will they take us?

This week’s parsha CONTINUES with the words ‘Vayeilech Moshe’! – “And Moshe went and spoke these words unto all Israel, and he said unto them: ‘I am 120 years this day and can no longer go out and come in’…”, (Devarim 31:1-2).

With these words the Torah describes how the Jewish People’s leader par excellence, Moshe Rabbeinu, relates to the realization that it is time for him to go, and for another leader (-Yehoshua) to take the lead. In response to the unspoken question as to where did Moshe ‘go’, the Ibn Ezra explains that as could be expected from a true leader, Moshe was primarily concerned with the wellbeing of his flock. As a result, Ibn Ezra writes, Moshe went to tell the People that he was about to die, in order to prepare them in advance, so that they should not be afraid of the necessary changes to come. Moshe ‘went’ to encourage the people to be accepting of Yehoshua’s leadership, and to loyally follow his directives “for he shall cause them to inherit the Land”. The Alsheich adds that Moshe wished to convey the message that in his passing the People should not feel as if they are losing an irreplaceable leader, since Hashem – the true ultimate leader – will always be with them.

The Kli Yakar explains that Vayeilech refers to actual walking. He writes that Moshe was aware that the words “I can no longer go out and come in” could erroneously be understood by the people as a statement pertaining to his own physical health and stamina. Therefore, Moshe demonstrates his vigour: ‘Vayeilach Moshe’ – Moshe ‘went’ – i.e. he walked briskly through the entire length and breath of the camp to demonstrate that he still had the physical ability to lead, however his time had come and he now lacked the Almighty’s permission to continue on in his role. The baton had to be passed on to the next in line.  When a leader moves on – and others rise to take their place – their legacy may be forgotten with time. A historical footnote that I recently came across, brings us back to the first Rosh Hashana celebrated shortly after the establishment of the State of Israel in 1948. The scene is the city of Rechovot. The shul is the city’s central synagogue and the Rabbi was Zvi Yehuda Meltzer, zt”l, the city’s Chief Rabbi.

Rabbi Meltzer, the son of the world renowned Rav Isser Zalman Melzer zt”l (and brother in-law of R. Aharon Kotler), had been inducted to the position of chief rabbi one year earlier. He had come to Rechovot after having served as Rabbi of Pardes Chana where he had founded Midrashiyat Noam and the Kletzk Yeshiva. Coming to Rechovot he founded Yeshivat HaDarom – (Both Yeshivot Noam and HaDarom combined secular studies with Limuddei Kodesh, religious studies). Rabbi Meltzer’s independent and out-of-the-box approach, may have influenced his son-in-law, Rav Yehuda Amital zt”l (-of Yeshivat Har Etzion), who – amongst other things – breathed life into Rav Zvi Yehuda Meltzer’s belief that army service should be combined with Yeshivah learning, perfecting the model of the Hesder Yeshiva.

Three months after the founding of the State of Israel, as Rav Zvi Yehuda Meltzer zt”l rose to deliver his Rosh Hashana Drasha he was faced with a predicament: Should he deliver his prepared words emphasizing Teshuva and related topics, or should he first acknowledge the illustrious guest who had walked into the shul – Rechovot resident, and president of the nascent State of Israel – Prof. Chaim Weizman z”l. Although Weizman had been appointed to the position two days after the founding of the state, he had been delayed abroad and only stepped foot in the independent state, and arrived in his home in Rechovot, a few short days earlier. As Rabbi Meltzer stood up and headed towards the podium, a thought flashed through his mind, and thus he began: “During all the years in Galut, as Jews turned to Hashem their thoughts and prayers were always clouded by the primal and urgent fear of what the non-Jewish host nation may be plotting against them. Thus their prayers were focused – first and foremost – on a plea for compassion from the nations”. Rav Meltzer zt”l continued by saying that we no longer live in Galut, and here in Eretz Yisrael we are no longer ruled over by others. “Today”, he continued, “we are blessed to be in the presence of our own President, whose very existence symbolizes our ability to serve Hashem with a ‘Lev Shalem’, with a complete and pure heart; a heart unclouded with fear”. When asked how Prof. Weizman had responded to these words, R. Meltzer answered that the president’s eyes “welled up with tears”.The central figures in this historical vignette, have long gone from this world. – Worthy others have taken over their roles. As we pray to Hashem on this year’s Yamim Noraim, we pray that today too we be granted true leaders; leaders whose primary concern is the welfare and best interest of their people. We pray that we be granted an additional year of good health, and be allowed Latzeit Velavo – to come and go in the Holy Land, completing G-d’s will and finding favor in his eyes.

RABBI YERACHMIEL RONESS was born and raised in Montreal, Canada. After serving as a congregational Rabbi and as a Hillel Director in New York City, he made Aliyah in 1983 with his wife Dina and their five young children.

Ever since, Rabbi Roness has dedicated his life to promoting Aliyah. First, as Rabbi of the Jewish Agency’s Absorption Centers, and subsequently as the executive director of the Aloh-Naaleh organization.

This article was taken from Rabbi Roness’s new book: Aloh Na’aleh – Eretz Yisrael and Aliyah in the Weekly Parshah.  The book is for sale on Amazon.