Pages

▼

Tuesday, February 10, 2026

02/10 Links Pt2: The case for a three-state solution; IDF brings Syrian child across border into Israel for emergency medical care; EU okays Google’s $32 billion Wiz deal

From Ian:

The case for a three-state solution
In the closing months of his first presidential term, Donald Trump pushed hard for an Israel/Palestine deal. Although well-intentioned, it was widely disparaged – perhaps unfairly – as unworkable, and there remained little opportunity to refine the terms before he left office. But he now has plenty of time to impose a sensible settlement. His rollercoaster approach to international relations may not be to everyone’s taste. Yet flagellation and flattery, bombast and bribery, and hard-cop-soft-cop may be just what is needed here.

The Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan would be a key player in any such deal. For almost its whole lifetime, the “Palestine” Mandate included Transjordania, the region east of the River Jordan. The British had initially earmarked the whole territory of the Mandate for the Jewish national homeland, but, to the despair of the Zionists, from the Mandate’s very inception they instead devolved autonomous control of Transjordania to the Hashemite Emir Abdullah. In April 1946, the Emirate was finally severed from the Mandate when the old League of Nations, at its last meeting, recognised the new Kingdom (“Transjordan” until 1949, when it took control of the West Bank).

That was the real partition. Jordan was the Mandate’s Arab legacy state. Britain’s Labour government then washed their hands of the problem of the Mandate’s western remnant and dumped it on the United Nations, which, in Resolution 181 of November 29, 1947, voted to sub-partition it. However, by an ironic twist of fate, Israel nonetheless attained sovereignty over the whole remnant. This was through the default operation of a long-established principle of customary international law known as uti possidetis juris.

The rule was automatically triggered by the failure of the Arab community’s leadership to declare a state of their own in the areas allocated under 181.

They knew that doing so alongside Israel would signal implicit agreement with the resolution, and they wanted the lot. But the decision had consequences. It left a sovereignty vacuum in two-thirds of the Mandate’s remnant territory, and as Israel was the only state which came into being on the critical date of the Mandate’s expiry – May 14, 1948 – its sovereignty automatically filled out the vacuum to absorb the whole remnant.

By the end of the 1948 war, Israel could probably have taken control of the Gaza Strip and the West Bank salient with comparative ease. But it preferred to concede their occupation, respectively, by Egypt and Jordan under the terms of the 1949 Rhodes Armistice, retaining sovereignty in absentia. Although it seized them in 1967, its statesmen have usually been reticent about making express claims of sovereignty for fear of alienating friendly powers. Most recently, Prime Minister Netanyahu vetoed moves in the Knesset to ratify Israel’s sovereignty over substantial areas of the West Bank after Donald Trump and J.D. Vance voiced stern warnings that it would jeopardise the Abraham Accords.

Yet decades ago, U.S. policy had been more indulgent of Israel’s sovereignty rights over at least some of the West Bank. In 1982, echoing the sentiments of Britain’s Lord Caradon at the UN in 1967, President Ronald Reagan movingly declared that he would never ask the bulk of Israel’s population ever again to live in a territory barely ten miles wide at its narrowest point, within artillery range of hostile Arab armies. Then, in the wake of the Oslo Accords, the terms of the Jordan/Israel peace treaty brokered by Bill Clinton in 1994 expressly recognised in Article 3 that the “international boundary between Israel and Jordan”, defined in Annex 1(a) as the River Jordan and the Dead Sea, was “the permanent, secure and recognised international boundary between Israel and Jordan, without prejudice to the status of any territories,” and as such was “inviolable.” The “without prejudice” saving merely reflected the possibility of an eventual negotiated settlement over sovereignty between Israel and the Palestinian Authority, envisaged under Oslo. The treaty could not have enunciated a clearer acknowledgement of Israel’s sovereignty over the West Bank, not merely that it was an occupier.
Arguing over Gaza war death tolls is a fool’s game that hides the real question
Why no one knows who were killed in Gaza. Hamas’s Health Authority, a notoriously untrustworthy source, estimates some 70,000 Gaza deaths, but it does not distinguish fighters from civilians. They would prefer the public to conjure an image of 70,000 dead women and babies, not tens of thousands of ruthless, raping terrorists. But separating bodies of fighters from those of innocents is highly imprecise since Hamas terrorists not only operate among civilians in civilian structures but also dress as them. Likewise, Israeli estimates, which are known for being reliable and made in good faith, suggest that 25,000 fighters were killed, though this number is also imprecise. Thousands of both fighters and innocents are still buried under tons of rubble from collapsed buildings.

Why we don’t know whether a death toll of 70,000 is good or bad. In the Armenian Genocide (1915-1917), some 600,000 to 1.5 million were killed, accounting for 90% of Ottoman Armenians. In the Cambodian Genocide (1975-1979) victims totaled 1.5 million to 3 million, including 99% of Vietnamese Cambodians. More recently, in the U.S.-Iraq war (2003-2011), total deaths are documented at around 460,000. That’s 650% more fatalities than estimated for the Gaza war.

Still, hearing that 70,000 people (of 2.2 million in the Strip) were killed in a war is disturbing, even with the clarifier that “only” 45,000 of them were innocent women, children and seniors. But we certainly can’t assess the magnitude of death without context compared to other modern wars. In perspective, the Gaza war toll, with its far more favorable combatant-to-civilian ratio, was a minor disaster—and certainly, no genocide—compared with Armenia or Cambodia.

Why arguments over blame for Gaza war deaths are nonsense. When a country like Israel is attacked, unprovoked, by its bordering neighbor, as Hamas did on Oct. 7, 2023, there’s little question of responsibility for the conflagration. Hamas was the aggressor. When that aggressor fails to take precautions to protect its citizens in case of war, as Hamas failed to do, responsibility is again clear. Finally, if the aggressor uses a war strategy of human shields—deliberately operating within or around its civilian population, in residences, schools, mosques and hospitals—which is a crime, then that becomes a trifecta of unforgivable barbarism.

In short, civilians who died under these circumstances, no matter the number, are the full responsibility of the aggressor: Hamas. To debate the actual death toll as though it has some inherent moral meaning is irrational. To blame any of the deaths on Israel, which fought strictly according to the rules of war—and, in fact, exceeded what is required in providing humanitarian aid—is irresponsible … and dead wrong.
United Hatzalah Treats Five-Year-Old Boy from Syria with Head Injury
United Hatzalah EMT first responders provided urgent medical care on Tuesday to a five-year-old boy from Syria who sustained serious injuries after falling from a height in the Syrian village of Hader.

The child was transferred across the border into Israel by an Israel Defense Forces ambulance and brought to a soccer pitch in Buq’ata, where United Hatzalah volunteer EMTs were awaiting his arrival.

According to United Hatzalah EMTs Ali Tarbiya and Amin Abu Saleh, the boy arrived in serious condition suffering from traumatic head injuries. Family members reported that he had fallen from a significant height prior to evacuation.

“Our teams immediately initiated emergency medical treatment upon his arrival,” the EMTs said. “Following stabilization efforts at the scene, the child was airlifted by an IDF medical evacuation helicopter to Rambam Health Care Campus for further treatment.”

Two Druze EMTs responded to the incident.

United Hatzalah volunteers provide humanitarian medical assistance regardless of nationality, religion, or background.

The child remains under medical care at Rambam Hospital, where he is undergoing further evaluation and treatment for his injuries.


City Journal Award 2026: Ben Shapiro
The Manhattan Institute and its flagship magazine "City Journal" have long fought to keep America and its great cities prosperous, safe, and free. In an age of conformity and cancellation, MI scholars and CJ writers boldly advance evidence-based arguments that challenge the status quo and enrich our nation’s public discourse.

The City Journal Award recognizes individuals whose ideas have pushed back on destructive policies and inspired efforts to protect the liberties of all Americans. This year, we honored the host of "The Ben Shapiro Show" and co-founder of The Daily Wire, Ben Shapiro.


Seth Mandel: Anti-Zionism and ‘Speaking Bolshevik’
The good news is that nine in 10 American Jews are Zionists. The bad news is that only a third of American Jews say they’re Zionists.

The data come from a survey by the Jewish Federations of North America, whose chief impact officer, Mimi Kravetz, recently wrote in JTA that the seeming contradiction comes down to “how Jews today understand what the term ‘Zionism’ means.”

According to Kravetz: “Only about a third of Jews believe that the definition of Zionism stops at Jewish self-determination. Many believe the term also means supporting the policies, decisions, and actions of the Israeli government, including actions they strongly disagree with. Others believe it entails claiming exclusive Jewish rights to the West Bank and/or Gaza, endorsing inequality between Jews and Palestinians, or embracing specific political ideologies.”

In other words, a great many Zionists don’t know they’re Zionists. Kravetz says that when you ask the specific question of whether they support Israel’s right to exist as a Jewish state, most everyone says yes. That, of course, makes them Zionists. The bloated interpretations of Zionism are more often than not the result of anti-Zionist projection.

Is this as bad as it sounds? It is. There’s an argument to be made, but it should be discarded, that the important thing is that American Jews are Zionists by definition regardless of what they call it in various peer settings. Jews are a minority, and the foundational biases against Israel in the media and academia mean that anti-Zionists have a built-in advantage in shaping narratives, so they can expect to be outvoted in such debates. And while anti-Zionism is rigidly enforced in progressive institutions, it is not, by and large, colonizing the minds of Jews: 70 percent said they felt emotionally attached to Israel, according to JFNA.

Further, says Kravetz, the Jewish world’s actions during the war correspond with the more optimistic numbers in the survey: “Across differences in politics and ideology, Jews came together to advocate for the release of the hostages, support their families, and stand with Israelis in moments of profound grief and uncertainty. That shared commitment did not require uniformity or the suspension of concerns — only a willingness to act together around what people broadly agreed on: Israel’s future and care for its people.”

But there are two ways to understand the self-identification disparity, and neither should be sugarcoated. The first is that, in the public debate over the term “Zionism,” the truth is getting clobbered and even Zionists don’t know what Zionism is anymore. The second is that Jews know they’re Zionists but don’t want to say so.

That this is “bad for the Jews” strikes me as obvious—both options show that anti-Semitism is surging, just to different degrees. A crisis of self-identification, furthermore, is necessarily a crisis of self-education. Every Jewish institution in the country should be asking itself what it is doing to reverse the plummeting understanding of Zionism in America.
Anti-Zionists are at war with themselves.
Anti-Zionists insist they are fighting power. In reality, they are fighting coherence.

They claim to oppose collective punishment, while practicing it rhetorically. They claim to defend minorities, while mobilizing crowds to intimidate one. They claim to reject essentialism, while treating nationality and identity as moral crimes. And they claim to champion peace, while erasing any distinction between those who wield violence and those who merely exist on the wrong side of their moral map.

At some point, the question must be asked: If even Left-leaning, ceremonial representatives of Israel are beyond the pale — if no Israeli voice is acceptable, no context sufficient, no role innocent — then what exactly is being opposed?

The answer reveals the final contradiction, and the deepest fracture.

There is now an internal fight underway within many Left-wing parties. On one side are those who still want anti-Zionism to function as a political position — however harsh, however misguided, but still anchored to policy, debate, and moral consistency. On the other side are those who are transforming anti-Zionism into a new, fashionable antisemitism: aestheticized, moralized, and detached from any obligation to truth or restraint.

The first group still believes in arguments. The second believes in erasure. The first insists it is possible to oppose Israeli policies while preserving liberal norms. The second has concluded implicitly, and increasingly explicitly, that Jewish collective presence is itself intolerable. That no Israeli may be untainted. That no Jewish connection to Israel may be innocent. That exclusion is not a tragic necessity, but a moral good.

This is why the movement feels increasingly unhinged even to some of its former allies. It is no longer clear what behavior would ever satisfy it, what concession would ever be enough, or what form of Jewish existence would be permitted. The goalposts move because the destination is not reform, but disappearance. A movement that cannot tolerate even the most anodyne representative of a people is no longer seeking justice. It is enforcing exclusion.

Anti-Zionism, in its current form, cannot sustain its own justifications. It demands universal moral standards while exempting itself from them. It invokes liberation while practicing erasure. And it insists on political critique while operating through collective condemnation.

That is what it means to be at war with yourself.

And until that contradiction is confronted, the movement will continue to radicalize — not toward justice or peace, but toward a politics in which identity replaces argument, accusation replaces analysis, and persecution is dressed up as principle.


The Yellow Line Will Remain a De Facto Border in Gaza for the Foreseeable Future
Four months after the Gaza ceasefire took effect, the enclave remains divided in half, with Israeli forces and Hamas fighters separated by the Yellow Line. President Trump's 20-point peace framework presented the line as a provisional security boundary, pending a phased Israeli withdrawal once specific conditions were met including the disarmament of Hamas. Even in a full withdrawal scenario, Israel would still retain a 1 km.-wide buffer zone along Gaza's perimeter, including the Philadelphi Route on the Egyptian border, which has long served as a major smuggling corridor.

Hillel Frisch, professor emeritus at Bar-Ilan University and former senior researcher at the Begin-Sadat Center for Strategic Studies, said the central challenge moving forward is "how to get rid of Hamas." Contrary to the U.S. push for a multinational force to ensure Hamas's disarmament, he argued that the IDF is the only actor capable of carrying out that mission. Look at "the 12,000-man UN force...in Lebanon since 2006...[that] did nothing. Forty-six countries [contributed to UNIFIL], and it didn't prevent the movement of one single Hizbullah terrorist."

With no realistic prospect for removing Hamas from power to Israel's satisfaction, Frisch predicted that the Yellow Line would remain a de facto border in Gaza for the foreseeable future.
US draft plan on Gaza would reportedly allow Hamas to keep some small arms
The Hamas terror group will reportedly be allowed to keep some small arms while surrendering most of its long-range weapons, according to a draft plan drawn up by officials involved in the US-led Board of Peace.

According to the report in The New York Times, a team including US envoys Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner and Nickolay Mladenov, the Board of Peace Gaza envoy, plans on sharing the document in question with Hamas in the coming weeks.

The report says that the draft of the plan would see a “phased disarmament” of Hamas, which is likely to take at least months if not longer. According to the newspaper, “it was not immediately clear” where any weapons Hamas handed over would go and how such a plan would be carried out.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who has said that no reconstruction can move forward in Gaza before Hamas is disarmed, is slated to meet with US President Donald Trump in the White House tomorrow. An Israeli source said earlier today that Netanyahu will stress to Trump that phase two of the Gaza ceasefire “is not moving.”

Israel has been telling the US that another IDF operation in Gaza is necessary in order to move to Trump’s vision for Gaza and the region, according to the source.
Indonesia says up to 8,000 troops being prepared for possible Gaza deployment
Indonesia is preparing for the potential deployment of 5,000 to 8,000 troops to Gaza under US President Donald Trump’s peace plan, the country’s army chief of staff, Maruli Simanjuntak, said Monday following a security meeting with Indonesian President Prabowo Subianto in Jakarta.

Maruli stressed that details on the force and deployment location were still being negotiated with relevant parties, but that one brigade, probably between 5,000 and 8,000 troops, was being prepared to assist Trump’s Board of Peace, in remarks cited by national news agency Antara.

The world’s most populous Muslim nation, Indonesia is among the countries with which the United States has discussed plans for an International Stabilization Force (ISF) in Gaza.

Under Trump’s Gaza peace plan, the first stage of which was signed into force in October, the ISF is tasked with providing security in the Strip, while gradually phasing out the Israel Defense Forces, which currently remains in control of 53 percent of the enclave. Hamas, which still controls the rest of Gaza, is to disarm, though the group has so far shown no inclination to do so, which has made it difficult to find countries to volunteer for the ISF, which will be headed by US Central Command Special Operations Commander Maj. Gen. Jasper Jeffers.

Maruli said that initial preparations within the Indonesian army were already underway. The personnel are being prepared to function as peacekeeping forces, he added, and deployment would focus on engineering and medical units.

The proposed multinational peacekeeping force for Gaza could total about 20,000 troops, Prabowo’s spokesman said.

The spokesman said, however, that no deployment terms or areas of operation had been agreed upon.
IDF readying new Gaza offensive to disarm Hamas by force
Four months into a ceasefire with Hamas, the Israeli military is drawing up plans for a renewed offensive in the Gaza Strip to disarm the terror group by force, The Times of Israel has learned.

The US-brokered ceasefire plan reached in October foresees the demilitarization of Gaza, including the disarmament of Hamas, along with a gradual withdrawal of Israeli forces from the Strip. However, implementation of the plan has remained unclear, with Israeli officials increasingly believing that stripping Hamas of its weapons will be impossible without the Israel Defense Forces taking action.

Should hostilities renew, fighting is liable to be more intense and more widespread than previous rounds, as Israeli forces will no longer constrained by the presence of hostages on Gazan soil.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and US President Donald Trump have both insisted that the terror group must give up its weapons in the near future. Trump has repeatedly asserted that Hamas “promised” to lay down its arms, and has threatened the group over the issue.

However, at least publicly, Hamas has never agreed to lay down its arms.

Israel also believes that left unchecked, the terror group will remain in power in the Strip and try to rebuild its militarily strength while tightening its grip on areas under its control. The military this month said that since the start of the ceasefire, Hamas “has violated the agreement and focused its efforts on restoring its military capabilities.”

Last month, a senior Israeli security official said that it was looking increasingly likely that the Israel Defense Forces would have to act militarily against Hamas to disarm it, as the military believed the terrorist organization will not do so of its own accord.

The official said the goal of disarming Hamas would be attainable by force, but would likely take many years.


In first, Israel to revoke citizenship of 2 Israeli terror convicts and deport them
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Monday morning signed the revocation of citizenship and deportation orders for two Israeli terrorists who carried out stabbing and shooting attacks against Israeli civilians, his office announced, with their destination reported to be the Gaza Strip.

The move marks the first implementation of a February 2023 law allowing the revocation of citizenship from convicted terrorists and their deportation. Defense Minister Israel Katz and Coalition Whip Ofir Katz, who initiated the law, announced last year that Israel was set to implement the law for terrorists who are receiving payments from the Palestinian Authority. Proceedings have been initiated against hundreds of citizens.

In a statement announcing the move, Netanyahu said the two terrorists “were rewarded for their criminal acts by the Palestinian Authority,” and thanked MK Katz for spearheading the legislation “that will expel them from Israel — and many more like them are on the way.”

The two terrorists are identified as Mahmoud Ahmad — sentenced to 23 years in prison for shooting attacks against soldiers and civilians — and Mohammed Ahmad Hussein al-Halsi — sentenced in 2016 to 18 years for stabbing elderly women in Armon HaNatziv, in a statement from MK Katz cited by the Ynet news site. Ahmad was released in 2024 and will be deported immediately, while al-Hals will be deported upon his release, the report added.

The Walla news site reported that the two terrorists will be deported to the Gaza Strip. The Prime Minister’s Office did not immediately confirm the deportation destination.

“After dozens of discussions I held over supervision and review for implementing the law, it is finally happening,” Katz said in a video statement. “This is how you fight terror.”


Low Likelihood of Success Seen in U.S.-Iran Talks
Diplomatic sources familiar with the U.S.-Iran talks say the Americans flatly rejected the Iranian attempt to set a lengthy timetable for "confidence-building" and to postpone discussion of all issues other than the nuclear file until after an agreement is reached on the nuclear question.

The Americans presented their positions, which include a complete halt to uranium enrichment and the transfer of enriched uranium, an end to the long-range missile project, a cessation of support for terrorist organizations, and an end to executions and the crackdown on protesters across Iran.

The Iranians are prepared to discuss the nuclear issue, missiles and support for their proxies, but only after the nuclear matter is resolved and substantial sanctions relief is granted. The overall picture points to a low likelihood of reaching agreements.

Diplomatic sources say there are disagreements between the Witkoff-Kushner team and Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and Vice President J.D. Vance. Witkoff and Kushner believe the negotiations should continue even if Iran appears to be stalling, and that a complete halt to the nuclear project would constitute a sufficient achievement. The others insist that missiles and proxy organizations are essential demands and broadly support a significant push toward toppling the regime.

The assessment is that Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei will not be able to persuade Iranian conservatives to accept a halt to the military nuclear program and the transfer of enriched uranium to a third country. He certainly will not succeed in convincing them to abandon the policy of supporting terrorist organizations across the Middle East, which serve as military and economic arms of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps.
Inside the Iranian Regime's Online 'Bot Army' Campaign Against Trump State Department Official
The Iranian regime is waging an online disinformation campaign against the Trump administration’s most senior-ranking Persian-American official, Mora Namdar, painting her as a pro-regime stooge and opponent of the dissident movement, according to four administration sources briefed on the matter and a Washington Free Beacon review of social media posts and accounts. The operation, the sources said, is meant to sow discord within the State Department and the Iranian dissident community at a time when the hardline regime is fighting to stay in power.

Several small X accounts began accusing Namdar—then the Near Eastern Affairs agency’s senior bureau official—of serving as an Iranian regime spy within the Trump administration late last year. Their campaign metastasized across X, Instagram, and other social media sites in the ensuing months as Namdar transitioned into her current role as assistant secretary of state for consular affairs, a position that allows her to restrict U.S. visas for Iranian regime allies. The cyber operation, one senior Trump administration official said, is a clear bid by the Iranian regime to tarnish Namdar’s reputation and "take her off the board."

"This has all the hallmarks of an IRGC disinfo op across social media platforms meant to sow discord in admin and among dissident and anti-regime communities," the official told the Free Beacon. "It’s clearly meant to divide. We’ve seen this before. Their fingerprints are all over this."

The "bot armies," which the administration believes are controlled by the Iranian state apparatus, have attempted to paint Namdar and other U.S. officials of Middle Eastern descent as Islamic Republic agents, enemies of popular opposition figure and son of the last shah of Iran, Reza Pahlavi, and even Kurdish separatists. The allegations have gained traction within the Iranian dissident community, suggesting that Tehran has found success in creating chaos among the wide swath of groups that would like the hardline regime to fall.


NPR Downplays Palestinian Authority’s ‘Pay-to-Slay’ Sheme as 'Controversial Program That Pays the Families of Palestinians Who Are Detained'
NPR is out with a report downplaying the Palestinian Authority’s pay-to-slay program that has long provided cash payments to terrorists, describing it as "a controversial program that pays the families of Palestinians who are detained in Israeli jails or killed or injured by the Israeli military." The report also suggests the PA has ended the program, in spite of evidence to the contrary.

"The Palestinian Authority, which governs much of the West Bank, has promised elections this year for the first time in 15 years," All Things Considered host Ailsa Chang said Monday, introducing a segment reported by NPR’s Emily Feng. "They want to prove that they are ready to run a full-fledged Palestinian state one day."

"And to prove that, they’ve also stopped a controversial program that pays the families of Palestinians who are detained in Israeli jails or killed or injured by the Israeli military," she said.

The piece quoted Qadura Fares, the former head of the PA’s prisoners’ affairs commission, who was imprisoned for trying to kill an Israeli soldier. "He says Palestinians will fight the Israeli occupation whether their families get paid or not. He himself was in prison starting in the 1980s for trying to kill Israeli soldiers."

"The money—it's mean nothing for those have believed that this occupation should be ended and to fight the occupation," Fares told NPR. "These people is a freedom fighter. These people—we feel proud."
Malinowski concedes New Jersey Dem primary to Analilia Mejia, who has accused Israel of ‘genocide’
Former congressman Tom Malinowski conceded last week’s contest to fill a U.S. House seat in New Jersey, leaving Democrats with a nominee who has said that Israel committed genocide in the Gaza Strip.

Malinowski, considered the frontrunner to win the seat vacated by New Jersey Gov. Mikie Sherrill, saw his advantage evaporate after the American Israel Public Affairs Committee spent $2.3 million in negative ads against him.

The latest Associated Press count showed him trailing by less than 1,000 votes in a race that was too close to call after the polls closed on Feb. 5. At press time, with 93% of votes counted, progressive activist Analilia Mejia had 18,584 votes (29.1%) to Malinowski’s 17,695 (27.7%).

“While the race has not been called, Tom Malinowski conceded on Tuesday to Analilia Mejia, a progressive organizer,” New York Times reporter Tracey Tully wrote. “He credited her with inspiring voters with a positive message in a race that was defined by outside spending by a pro-Israel group that targeted Mr. Malinowski.”

Mejia had the support of some of Israel’s biggest critics on Capitol Hill, including Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), and Reps. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) and Ayanna Pressley (D-Mass.).
Seth Mandel: AIPAC’s Loss in N.J. Is Only Part of the Story
The group has certainly made an enemy of Malinowski, who congratulated Mejia and then said that although his opponent ran a positive campaign, “the outcome of this race cannot be understood without also taking into account the massive flood of dark money that AIPAC spent on dishonest ads during the last three weeks.”

He unloaded on AIPAC, calling it “a pro-Trump-billionaire-funded organization that demands absolute fealty” and “smears those who don’t fall into line.” If any future candidate has AIPAC’s backing, he added, “I will oppose that candidate and urge my supporters to do so as well.”

So let’s sort this all out.

Did AIPAC’s strategy backfire in this race, helping to bring about the worst-possible result from the perspective of the organization’s core interests? The answer is yes. The winner was a candidate backed by the virulently anti-Zionist progressive arm of the party led by Bernie Sanders and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. Extremist anti-Israel rhetoric will once again be seen as no obstacle to elected office.

Additionally, the group has burned bridges with a politician who otherwise would have picked up the phone when AIPAC called to at least listen to what the group had to say. Then there is the fact that AIPAC has in some circles become a bogeyman representing the wider pro-Israel advocacy world, and therefore its mistakes have a wider blast radius than they might otherwise.

But the criticism of AIPAC should be balanced with an understanding of what it is trying to do in the post-October 7 world of American Jewish advocacy, and that is a more nuanced picture.

AIPAC’s failure in New Jersey comes during a reignited debate about anti-Semitism and anti-Zionism, and to what extent the Jews of America can overcome the challenges that lie ahead. In that discussion, there is a virtual consensus that the American Jewish establishment must adapt and evolve. The old models are dead and buried and should be left that way.

AIPAC, therefore, is not a dinosaur blithely awaiting its extinction. It is trying to adapt to the new environment. That, at least, should be encouraged conceptually. The old environment was one that AIPAC had learned to navigate masterfully. Such organizations almost never admit that their glory days are irrelevant and that if they want to survive they’ll have to learn to play a whole new game.

Which is to say, AIPAC is, at the very least, not resting on its laurels as the asteroid hits. It may fail, but it’s trying. It has shed its fear of taking on Democrats, and its participation in campaigns is still relatively new. The real question now is: Can AIPAC admit when it loses a round and make the right adjustments? The stakes for the American Jewish community are too high to let pride rule the day.
NC Gov. Josh Stein denounces antisemitic rhetoric by state Democrats’ Muslim caucus chair
North Carolina Gov. Josh Stein is speaking out against the leader of the state Democratic Party’s Muslim Caucus, Elyas Mohammed, who recently described Zionists as “modern day Nazis” and as a “threat to humanity,” among other incendiary social media posts drawing criticism from the local Jewish community.

“Antisemitic comments and conspiracy theories have no place anywhere, including in the North Carolina Democratic Party,” the governor said in a statement shared exclusively with Jewish Insider. “We must fight against antisemitism and all other forms of hate whenever and wherever we see them. We live in difficult times in our nation. Now is the time to come together and deliver results that improve the lives of all North Carolinians.”

Stein, a Jewish Democrat, had faced mounting pressure from Jewish leaders across the state to condemn the posts, which were first reported by The Algemeiner last week. Mohammed, who has frequently railed against Israel and Zionists on his Facebook page, has also shared a post arguing that Israeli civilians captured by Hamas during the Oct. 7, 2023, attacks were not hostages but “prisoners of war” because the invasion occurred in an “occupied zone.”

On Sunday, the leaders of several prominent Jewish groups in North Carolina distributed a joint letter to Stein and other Democratic officials and lawmakers that raised concerns over Mohammed’s “dangerous antisemitic rhetoric” and exhorted them to publicly condemn his recent statements.

“This is not a partisan appeal,” the Jewish leaders, including CEOs from three local federations in the state, said in the letter. “It is a civic and moral one. Jewish communities across our state must know, without ambiguity, that elected officials and party leaders reject rhetoric that vilifies them through historical distortion and collective accusation.”
Trump religious liberty panel’s first antisemitism hearing turns contentious over Israel
When the White House Religious Liberty Commission gathered in Washington on Monday for the body’s first public hearing focused on antisemitism, attendees expected an informative if subdued meeting, meant to gather testimony from Jewish Americans who have faced antisemitism. The commission’s members are tasked with drafting a report with recommendations for President Donald Trump about how to promote religious liberty.

The speakers were mostly conservative, like the 13 members of the commission, which was created by Trump last year.

The conversation was largely friendly, barring one member of the commission, Catholic conservative activist and former Miss California Carrie Prejean Boller, who acted as more of an interrogator. She pushed back on witnesses’ testimony, arguing that they had defined antisemitism too broadly and questioning whether she would be considered an antisemite because she does not support Zionism and because she believes the Jews killed Jesus.

She also defended right-wing influencer Candace Owens from accusations of antisemitism.

“I listen to her daily,” said Prejean Boller, who appeared to be wearing a Palestinian flag pin. “I haven’t heard one thing out of her mouth that I would say is antisemitic.” In 2024, Owens was dropped from a Trump campaign event where she was slated to speak alongside Donald Trump Jr. after the campaign faced backlash for including Owens, who regularly shares antisemitic commentary in social media posts and on her podcast.

The first panel of speakers featured former UCLA law student Yitzy Frankel, who sued the university over its handling of antisemitism during the 2024 encampments; Yeshiva University President Ari Berman; Harvard alum Shabbos Kestenbaum; and former Auburn basketball coach Bruce Pearl. Each of them talked about their experiences of antisemitism — or combating it — in the United States after the Oct. 7, 2023, attacks in Israel.

After nearly an hour and a half, Prejean Boller revealed that she had been counting each mention of Israel in the course of the discussion.

“Since we’ve mentioned Israel a total of 17 times, are you willing to condemn what Israel has done in Gaza?” said Prejean Boller. “You won’t condemn that? Just on the record.”

Prejean Boller insisted that she opposes Israel because of her Catholic faith.


Jewish Currents Gave Omar Shakir the Hero's Exit He Didn’t Deserve
Omar Shakir’s resignation from Human Rights Watch made headlines. Jewish Currents, where Shakir serves on the advisory board, published the most detailed account — a narrative of principled dissent against cowardly leadership. But the story being told about his departure is doing more work than it appears. It locates the crisis at HRW in the decisions of specific executives — Philippe Bolopion, Bruno Stagno Ugarte, Tom Porteous — rather than in the institutional architecture that produced those decisions. It rehabilitates HRW, by implication: if the problem is that good people left, then the solution is to get good people back in, rather than asking whether the institution can be reformed at all. And it avoids the financial ecosystem entirely — the board composition, the donor networks, the overlapping funding streams that connect HRW, Jewish Currents, and the broader liberal solidarity landscape.

Palestinian civil society was already here. In August 2024, over twenty Palestinian organizations called on people of conscience worldwide to reconsider their relations with HRW after its October 7th report — a report published while Shakir still led the Israel-Palestine team. In the words of the BDS National Committee’s assessment, HRW “chose to abstract the actions of the oppressed from the context of oppression in the service of Israel’s colonial domination.” The suppression of the right of return report confirmed the pattern. It didn’t create it.

This piece attempts something different. Rather than retelling the story of who blocked what report and when, we examine the organizational leadership, financial connections, and institutional incentives that make these outcomes predictable. The question isn’t whether HRW failed Omar Shakir. It’s what HRW’s structure tells solidarity movements about how to interface with human rights organizations embedded in the political economy of neoliberalism, and whether the liberal human rights industry, as currently constituted, is capable of serving Palestinian liberation at all.

Human Rights Watch did not begin as a universal human rights monitor. It began in 1978 as Helsinki Watch, founded by Robert Bernstein, a zionist, and Aryeh Neier, with the explicit purpose of monitoring compliance by the Soviet bloc with the 1975 Helsinki Accords. It was an anti-communist project, tracking “abuses” in the USSR, Czechoslovakia, Poland, and Romania while working alongside dissident groups like the Moscow Helsinki Group and Charter 77. It would make sense that the direction of HRW would be steered by former NATO commanders, CIA analysts, State Department officials who defended rendition, and corporate lobbyists for mining and banking giants — the architects and enablers of the very abuses a human rights organization should be confronting.
When Journalism Becomes Activism: Al Jazeera and PYM Publish Report Targeting Shipping Giant MSC
A new 26-page joint investigation published by Al Jazeera and Palestinian Youth Movement (PYM) targets the Mediterranean Shipping Company (MSC) and demands that the carrier “immediately cease all transport of goods” linked to Israeli settlements in the West Bank, arguing that failure to do so “may constitute a violation of international humanitarian law.”

MSC rejected the premise of the report, stating that it respects “global legal frameworks and regulations wherever it operates,” and that this applies to “all shipments to and from Israel.” Cover of the investigation. Al Jazeera's logo is absent, despite co-producing the investigation. Credit: PYM

Yet the more consequential story is not the shipping data itself. It is the alignment behind the project and the way it is being packaged and amplified.

Although PYM has portrayed the work as its own, Al Jazeera characterizes it as a joint investigation and identifies itself as a producing partner. For a media outlet, that level of partnership is notable because it can blur the distinction between independent reporting and advocacy, and it may frame a targeted corporate pressure effort as journalism.

In standard reporting, a newsroom can use an advocacy group’s research while independently verifying documents, controlling the framing, and adding balancing context. Here, it’s marketed as co-produced—implying shared ownership of the target, the framing, and the intended result.

That makes MSC’s ties to Qatar especially relevant. Qatar’s state ecosystem has promoted MSC as a logistics partner, even as a state-run Qatari media network joins a campaign targeting the company.
‘Outrageous’ anti-Israel group to train Ontario union leader on Jew-hatred
The Elementary Teachers’ Federation of Ontario has enlisted Independent Jewish Voices Canada, which accuses Israel of “apartheid” and calls for boycotting the Jewish state, to offer antisemitism training to union leadership, according to the Centre for Israel and Jewish Affairs, the advocacy arm of Jewish Federations of Canada-UIA.

“We have learned that Elementary Teachers’ Federation of Ontario has engaged a fringe, anti-Zionist organization to deliver antisemitism training to its executive,” CIJA wrote to Paul Calandra, the Ontario education minister, last week.

“Anti-Zionist organizations, such as Independent Jewish Voices, falsely claim to represent a substantial or growing segment of the Jewish community,” it said. “However, their positions do not reflect those held by most Canadian Jews. IJV is an organization that goes beyond criticizing Israel’s leaders, which is not inherently antisemitic. Instead, these groups dispute Israel’s very right to exist, a view rejected by the majority of the Jewish community.”

Matthew Taub, who runs an activist group called Unapologetically Jewish, told JNS that nothing qualifies Independent Jewish Voices Canada to teach about antisemitism.

“Absolutely nothing, other than having an opinion,” he said. “There’s no qualification of an organization that does more protests than they do education.”

The Canadian Jewish Labour Committee stated that it “strongly objects” to the “deeply problematic” decision.

“By elevating Independent Jewish Voices Canada as a stand-in for Jewish community expertise in antisemitism, Elementary Teachers’ Federation of Ontario is tokenizing a fringe ideological minority and presenting anti-Zionism as a representative Jewish perspective,” the committee said.

“This erases the lived experience of the vast majority of Jewish members,” it added. “At a time when antisemitism increasingly targets Jews because of their connection to Israel, this approach is not only inaccurate. It is harmful.”
Finalist for Columbia Middle East Job Was Put on Probation at Princeton for Holding Class in Anti-Israel Encampment
A finalist to become Columbia University’s Edward Said chair in Arab Studies was put on probation at Princeton University for holding class inside an anti-Israel encampment.

Max Weiss, a professor of history and an outspoken advocate of an academic boycott of Israel, led a walkout of his History of Palestine/Israel class in April 2024 into McCosh Courtyard, where an anti-Israel encampment was established earlier that day. He taught his lesson from there, making him the first faculty member to lecture from the encampment, the Princeton Alumni Weekly reported. Weiss told the publication he hopes the illegal encampment will one day be commemorated with "a plaque."

Princeton placed Weiss on probation through the 2024-2025 school year for the move, which dean of the faculty Gene Jarrett described as "unprofessional," "coercive," and "intimidatory" in a notice to Weiss, according to the PAW. Weiss's career advanced anyway—Princeton granted Weiss tenure around the same time he was notified that he had been placed on probation.

Weiss has been at the center of anti-Israel campus activism. When 13 students and 2 faculty members stormed and occupied Princeton’s Clio Hall in April 2024 "in solidarity with the Palestinian people of Gaza," Weiss served as their spokesman. He was filmed standing on the steps of the building, bullhorn in hand, leading a call and response with assembled activists cheering on the occupiers.

"We will stay here until the student demands are met," he proclaimed. The professors inside the building left voluntarily and the 13 students were arrested.

Weiss is one of four finalists for the Columbia job, according to a Jan. 22 notice to graduate students and faculty members in Columbia's Department of History, the Washington Free Beacon reported. He was scheduled to give a presentation on Jan. 28 as part of the selection process, according to the notice, which came seven months after Columbia reached an agreement with the Trump administration to restore the federal grant funding that had been put on pause in large part due to the school's response to its own encampment.
US Department of Defense to cut ties with Harvard University, claims campus ‘celebrated Hamas’
The US Department of Defense cut ties with Harvard University on Friday, citing instances of antisemitism at the university and sympathy with the Hamas terror organization.

The Trump administration has been repeatedly threatening to withhold federal funds from Harvard and several other universities in recent months over issues including pro-Palestinian protests against Israel's war in Gaza, campus diversity, and transgender policies.

The Friday statement, issued by US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, said that, beginning inthe 2026-2027 school year, all graduate-level professional military education, fellowships, and certificate programs will be discontinued, though military students already attending classes will be allowed to complete their studies.

"University leadership encouraged a campus environment that celebrated Hamas, allowed attacks on Jews, and still promotes discrimination based on race," said Hegseth.

The Department of Defense also claimed that Harvard’s relationships with foreign powers, such as China, and "an on-campus culture that is incongruent with military and American values and interests."

"Harvard is woke; The War Department is not." Hegseth wrote in a post on X/Twitter.
United Teachers LA Co-Sponsors “Resistance” Event at Bookstore Selling Pro-Terror Literature
The Navi K-12 Extremism Tracker released a report revealing that the United Teachers of Los Angeles (UTLA), which represents approximately 35,000 educators across the Los Angeles area, has agreed to co-sponsor an event titled “Solidarity Forum: Resistance, Repression, & Defense“.

The event is scheduled for February 16 at Midnight Books, a Los Angeles bookstore known for carrying radical and extremist political literature. Its inventory includes titles celebrating individuals designated by the U.S. government as terrorists, as well as foundational texts associated with communist and Islamist revolutionary movements.

The event brings together a coalition of co-sponsors including Educators for Justice in Palestine, the Educator Defense Network, and the Party for Socialism and Liberation. According to the event description, the forum aims “to discuss the coming battles in defense of workers, activists, and movements” and “to build a united front of organizations and movements to fight back against state repression.”

Midnight Books’ Promotion of Terrorist Propaganda
According to findings by Navi K-12 Extremism Tracker, Midnight Books describes itself as a “revolutionary bookstore“ and community space. Documentation of the bookstore’s inventory and marketing language raises concerns that it promotes propaganda materials that glorify members of U.S.-designated terrorist organizations.

Midnight Books sells an autobiography of Leila Khaled, a member of the U.S.-designated terror group the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP). The bookstore describes Khaled’s book as featuring “her exciting tale of plane hijacking,” referring to her involvement in the 1969 hijacking of TWA Flight 840.


The End of an Era: A Requiem for The Washington Post and Its Anti-Israel Bias
The world of media was recently shocked when The Washington Post announced that it was firing 300 employees, including all of those who worked for its Middle East bureaus.

As noted by Jerusalem Post editor-in-chief Zvika Klein, while it is a sad day for journalism when a legacy newspaper like The Washington Post cuts a large contingent of reporters and staff, it is also a cautionary lesson about what happens when your outlet is encumbered by ideology and fiscal irresponsibility instead of allowed to run according to the dictates of good and honest journalism.

For the past 25 years, HonestReporting has witnessed The Washington Post’s ideology-driven coverage of Israel, the Palestinians, and Middle Eastern conflicts, culminating in the building of a false anti-Israel narrative that has taken hold in the U.S. since October 7, 2023.

The Washington Post demonstrated institutional anti-Israel bias during the Israel-Hamas war in three different ways:
The subtle (and sometimes explicit) framing of articles, leading to the promotion of an anti-Israel narrative;
The reliance on and portrayal of anti-Israel sources as trustworthy and neutral;
The extreme anti-Israel bias held by certain members of The Washington Post team and how that manifested in the newspaper’s coverage.

The Washington Post’s Subtle (And Not-So-Subtle) Anti-Israel Bias

Anti-Israel framing and manipulation of terms in its Israel-related stories helped to create a narrative for the Post’s audience that whitewashed Palestinian terrorism, diminished Israeli suffering, and called into question the legitimacy of Israel’s actions and existence.
- Throughout its Israel-Hamas war coverage, The Washington Post downplayed Palestinian terrorism by repeatedly referring to terror groups such as Hamas and Islamic Jihad as “militant” or “resistance” groups. This terminology weakens the violent nature of these organizations and portrays them as less of a threat than they actually are.
- In one particularly spectacular episode, The Post captioned a martyr poster for a Palestinian terrorist with two rifles in his hands as a “poster of physician Abdullah Abu Tin,” completely ignoring the weapons staring its readers in the face.
- The Post also whitewashed arch-terrorist Marwan Barghouti, referring to him in one instance as a “senior militant” and “popular Palestinian political figure.” Hardly the way one should describe a terrorist leader responsible for the murder of five civilians and orchestrating other deadly attacks during the Second Intifada.
- The Post also used its platform to whitewash the phrase “Globalize the Intifada,” presenting its threat as only being of concern to “some Jews” and sanitizing it as possibly being simply an expression of support for the “struggle” for a Palestinian state (without detailing how that “struggle” usually expresses itself).
Russian-Israeli journalist removed from Netanyahu's US flight amid 'security concerns' A Russian-Israeli journalist was removed on Tuesday from Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's flight to the United States, which departed earlier on Tuesday.

Nick Kolyohin, who contributes to the Russian state-controlled international television network RT, was removed from the flight due to "security concerns," the Prime Minister's Office said in a statement given to The Jerusalem Post.

"Security officials decided not to approve the reporter's inclusion in the prime minister's flight to Washington due to security concerns that cannot be detailed at this moment," the statement read.

The PMO added that Kolyohin's participation in the press delegation was approved before the incident, which occurred when he arrived at the tarmac where Israel's state aircraft, the Wing of Zion, was preparing to take off.

In a separate statement, the Shin Bet stressed that it had decided to remove Kolyohin from the flight as part of its responsibility to "secure the prime minister."

Times journalist posts fake Jeffrey Epstein – Isaac Herzog picture
A UK media watchdog has called for The Times to take action against a journalist who posted a doctored picture of paedophile Jeffrey Epstein with Isaac Herzog – with the same reporter having written an article for the paper yesterday discussing the billionaire financier’s supposed connections to Mossad which appears to cite the ‘evidence’ of a notorious Holocaust denier.

The Campaign for Media Standards described what it called “unacceptable” behaviour by Gabrielle Weiniger, a Tel Aviv based journalist covering the Middle East for The Times, who posted the doctored picture of Epstein yesterday on Twitter/X. The photograph included the billionaire’s accomplice Ghislaine Maxwell, as well as three other people including Herzog, who is now the President of Israel. Accompanying the picture, Weiniger wrote: “Jeffrey Epstein rubbed shoulders with Israel’s top brass – pictured here with president Isaac Herzog. I know there’s more to investigate here. I have been following this closely since 2017. More to come.”

However, it emerged that the picture had been tampered with to add Herzog, who was not present. After receiving many responses pointing out that the photo had been doctored, Ms Weiniger issued a response on Twitter saying: “Just to clarify: the photograph was an AI fake. I can only apologise for the grave error in judgement for reposting the photo, and to the president for any harm this has caused.”

On Monday The Times published an article by Ms Weiniger, titled “Was Epstein a Mossad Agent? New files deepen mystery over Israel links”. The story included the following paragraph: “The files include claims from a confidential informant to the FBI that, far from disliking Israel, Epstein was in fact employed by its spy agency, Mossad. An FBI report from the Los Angeles field office written in October 2020 said the bureau’s source had become “convinced that Epstein was a co-opted Mossad agent”.

Commenting on Times story, Ben Smith, editor-in-chief of the Semafor investigative news outlet, posted information from a Semafor newsletter which directly addressed the Times piece, saying:

“The Epstein files are a trove of unconfirmed claims from questionable sources. One of the particularly incendiary threads comes from a serious-sounding “confidential source” recorded in a formal FBI document claiming that Donald Trump was “compromised by Israel” and that the Chabad Lubavitch network was “seeking to co-opt the Trump presidency…A Times of London article suggesting Epstein worked for Mossad relied heavily on the same material.

“The source offers no evidence, and their name is redacted in the document. But you can find the same case number (the redactions are incredibly sloppy!) in a related document, and it reveals that the source is Charles C Johnson, a famous troll and occasional Holocaust denier recently found liable in a fraud scheme that involved impersonating an intelligence agent.”


1 in 3 American Jews targeted by an antisemitic incident last year, survey finds
One-third of American Jews reported being the target of an antisemitic incident in 2025, according to a new survey published by the American Jewish Committee.

The finding marked no change over the previous year, suggesting that American Jews could be settling into a distressing new normal in the aftermath of 7 October 2023.

“Things aren’t getting markedly better,” said Ted Deutch, the chief executive of the AJC, in an interview. “I don’t think that we can afford to accept it as a baseline. We can’t accept that, and America shouldn’t accept that.”

Surveying 1,222 American Jewish adults from Sept. 26 to Oct. 9, the AJC found a plateau in several indicators of sentiment.

Overall, 55% of American Jews reported avoiding specific behaviours in 2025 due to fear of antisemitism, including steering clear of certain events and refraining from wearing or posting things online that would identify them as Jewish.

The finding also marked no change since 2024, when 56% of Jews reported changing their behavior for fear of antisemitism, but was up from 46% in 2023 and 38% in 2022.

This year’s respondents were also asked if they felt “less safe” as a result of several high-profile recent antisemitic attacks, including the arson attack on Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro’s home in April; the deadly shooting of two Israeli embassy staffers in Washington, D.C., in May; and the firebombing of a demonstration for the Israeli hostages in Boulder, Colorado, in June.

About a quarter of respondents said the attacks had made them feel “a great deal” less safe, while 31% responded “a fair amount” and 32% responded “a little.”

Overall, according to the report, two-thirds of respondents said that they believed Jews in the United States were less secure than a year ago.


Shaare Tefila congregation in Washington suburbs defaced with antisemitic graffiti
A synagogue in Montgomery County, Md., a suburb of Washington, was defaced with antisemitic graffiti on Tuesday.

A swastika, the word “genocide” and the phrase “AZAB,” an acronym standing for “All Zionists Are Bastards,” were spray-painted on street signs and banners outside of Shaare Tefila, a Conservative congregation in Olney. The graffiti covered large signs outside of the synagogue that read “Hate Has No Home Here” in several languages below a heart shaped American flag and another that read “We Support Israel.”

Ron Halber, CEO of the Jewish Community Relations Council of Greater Washington, called the act “outrageous.”

“While it is fortunate that no one was physically hurt, it is yet another sad reminder that antisemitic incidents have become common occurrences throughout our region,” said Halber. He added that local officials and police officers responded “immediately.”

Halber called for increased Nonprofit Security Grant Program funding to applicants in Maryland and specifically to Montgomery County, which has the largest Jewish population in the state.


EU okays Google’s $32 billion Wiz deal, in largest-ever buyout of Israeli-founded tech co
The largest-ever purchase of an Israeli-founded tech company on Tuesday passed a key hurdle after European antitrust regulators cleared the acquisition of cybersecurity unicorn Wiz by Alphabet’s Google for a staggering $32 billion.

The European Commission said it concluded that the Google-Wiz transaction would raise no competition concerns in the European Economic Area, paving the way for the completion of the deal, which is expected to inject an estimated NIS 10 billion ($3.2 billion) into Israel’s state coffers in tax proceeds. The final closure of the transaction is expected this year, pending regulatory approvals in Australia, South Africa, Turkey, and Israel.

The deal announced in March last year, amid Israel’s war with Hamas in Gaza, marks the largest purchase of an Israeli-founded company after US giant Intel Corp bought Mobileye, a Jerusalem-based developer of advanced vision and driver assistance systems, for $15.3 billion in 2017. For Google, it is the largest acquisition the search giant has ever made, more than double its record purchase of Motorola Mobility for $12.5 billion in 2012.

As part of the deal, Wiz will join Google’s Cloud business, but remain independent. The firm, which says that its cyber platform is tailored to secure any application developers build and run in the cloud, employs about 1,800 workers, a workforce that will remain in place following the closure of the transaction.

Wiz said in response that the European Commission’s approval is a “significant step toward our goal of joining Google Cloud to redefine the future of AI and cloud security.”

“Since this journey began, Wiz has remained steadfast in our mission to empower cloud builders and defenders,” said Wiz in an emailed statement. “By combining Wiz’s deep knowledge of cloud and code with Google’s expertise and scale, we will be able to offer customers more choice in defending against today’s complex threats.”
Israeli researchers uncover key to why breast cancer spreads to brain and turns deadly
About five years ago, two Tel Aviv University researchers met to discuss what happens when breast cancer spreads to the brain and forms lethal tumors.

The results of that meeting inspired 43 researchers in 14 laboratories across six countries to team up on a groundbreaking study in which they discovered a key mechanism that enables breast cancer to turn deadly by spreading to the brain and destroying healthy brain cells.

The scientists’ peer-reviewed findings, recently published in the scientific journal Nature Genetics, could help in the development of new drugs and aid in the early detection and treatment of breast cancer that metastasizes to the brain.

The research was led by Prof. Uri Ben-David and Prof. Ronit Satchi-Fainaro at Tel Aviv’s Gray Faculty of Medical and Health Sciences and their researchers, Dr. Kathrin Laue and Dr. Sabina Pozzi, and scientists from the United States, Italy, Germany, Poland, and Australia.

“This study is novel and potentially revolutionizing,” Prof. Stefano Santaguida, a professor of molecular biology at the University of Milan and group leader at the European Institute of Oncology, told The Times of Israel. Santaguida was not involved in the study.

The scientists analyzed data from tumors of breast cancer patients, experiments in cultured cancer cells, 3D cancer models, and functional experiments in mice.
Israeli‑led research unveils 'living' implant that could end insulin shots
A multinational research team led by an Israeli engineer and involving top U.S. universities has unveiled a pioneering implantable device that could someday eliminate the need for daily insulin injections for people with diabetes.

The study, published Jan. 28 in Science Translational Medicine, describes a living, cell‑based implant that functions as an autonomous “artificial pancreas.” Once placed in the body, the device continuously monitors blood glucose levels, produces insulin internally and releases exactly what the body needs — without external pumps, injections or patient intervention.

The breakthrough centers on a novel protective technology researchers call a “crystalline shield”, engineered to prevent the body’s immune system from rejecting the implant — a major hurdle that has stymied cell‑based therapies for decades. The shield allows the implant to operate reliably for years.

Tests in mice showed effective long‑term glucose regulation, and studies in non‑human primates confirmed that the cells inside the implant remain viable and functional, the researchers said. Those results, they added, provide strong support for future clinical testing in humans.




Buy EoZ's books  on Amazon!

"He's an Anti-Zionist Too!" cartoon book (December 2024)

PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism (February 2022)

    
 

 

at