Home Blog Page 239

Radical Anti-Israel Campus Group Formed by Jewish Voice for Peace Dissidents

Palestine Protest in Chicago (Aveedibya Dey/ Unsplash)

Former members of Jewish Voice for Peace (JVP) have launched a new student organization called the Anti-Zionist Jewish Student Front (AJSF), promoting a more extreme anti-Israel agenda. The group explicitly supports the “dismantling of Zionism in its entirety” and embraces the Palestinian Thawabit ideology, which denies Israel’s right to exist and calls for the full “liberation” of all land now constituting the Jewish state.

AJSF accuses Zionism of being a “white supremacist weapon of war” and calls for Zionism to be criminalized. The group’s launch statement urges confrontation with “Zionist institutions on campus,” demands full divestment from Israel, and commits to resisting “genocide and apartheid.” It also condemns Israel’s response to Hamas’s October 7, 2023 terrorist attack, framing it as genocide while labeling the attack itself as legitimate “resistance.”

The group’s Thawabit-based platform includes a call for the right of return for all Palestinians, the redefinition of Jerusalem as a Palestinian capital, and support for resistance “in all its forms.” This echoes long-standing goals of groups hostile to the existence of Israel and rejects a peaceful two-state solution.

The Anti-Zionist Jewish Student Front distances itself from JVP by criticizing it as too moderate. JVP, while itself often condemned for anti-Israel rhetoric, has drawn internal criticism for engaging with liberal Zionist organizations. AJSF sees such engagement as a betrayal of its mission and a compromise with what it describes as a “genocidal” ideology.

Campus observers note that AJSF’s language and goals mirror the rhetoric of groups that have publicly celebrated Hamas and Hezbollah. The group does not merely oppose Israeli policy but frames Israel’s existence as inherently illegitimate. It treats support for Israel, or even Jewish self-determination, as oppression. Their public statements call for the eradication of Zionism through academic, legal, and activist means.

This development follows a year of escalating anti-Israel activism on college campuses, where Jewish students have reported growing harassment. Institutions such as Harvard and Columbia have already faced federal investigations for failing to protect Jewish students under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act.

The emergence of AJSF highlights a deepening ideological shift among campus activists who no longer cloak their anti-Israel positions in terms of policy criticism. Instead, groups like AJSF aim to eliminate the Jewish state entirely, while wrapping their message in the language of anti-racism and decolonization.

Harvard Warns Students: Calling Out ‘Terrorist Sympathizers’ May Violate Policy

Harvard University
Harvard University (Somesh Kesarla Suresh/Unsplash)

Harvard University now warns students that calling someone a “terrorist sympathizer” could potentially violate school policy. This guidance is part of a mandatory anti-discrimination training, raising new concerns about free speech restrictions and ideological enforcement on campus.

The training slide—reported by the Washington Free Beacon and Legal Insurrection—tells students that labeling others as “terrorists or terrorist sympathizers, supporting genocide, or urging them to self-harm based solely on their race, ethnicity, religion, or other protected characteristic” may be considered discriminatory. The policy is vague and broad, appearing to suggest that such speech could trigger disciplinary action even if based on political or ideological disagreements.

The university’s guidance follows recent pro-Hamas student protests and statements from over 30 Harvard-affiliated student groups that blamed Israel for the Hamas-led October 7 attacks. In response, the U.S. Department of Education and Department of Health and Human Services found Harvard in violation of Title VI, citing the school’s failure to protect Jewish and Israeli students from targeted harassment.

Legal analysts have criticized the policy’s ambiguous language. David Bernstein, professor at George Mason University, warned that Harvard’s phrasing, including the clause “based solely on,” gives administrators leeway to censor speech based on subjective judgments. Bernstein questioned whether criticism of political symbols like the keffiyeh or even satire from Monty Python could now be considered harassment.

Nadine Strossen, former ACLU president, also raised alarm, noting that such overbroad rules can suppress constitutionally protected speech and allow ideological bias to shape enforcement. Critics argue the school is imposing rules that extend beyond what federal civil rights laws require.

The training also targets other forms of expression. It warns students that mocking institutions such as the Mormon Church or denying the ancestral history of other groups could qualify as verbal abuse. This includes statements challenging identity-based historical claims—a category so open-ended that it could encompass theological disagreements or public policy debates.

This expanded approach to speech policing appears to reflect a broader shift at Harvard and other elite institutions toward regulating student expression under the banner of “equity” and “inclusion.” However, the implications stretch far beyond academic etiquette. By enforcing vague and ideologically charged policies, universities risk suppressing dissenting viewpoints—including religious, conservative, and pro-Israel perspectives—while emboldening radical activism that escapes scrutiny.

Taika Waititi and Rita Ora Producing Musical on Fyre Festival Fiasco

hollywood sign
(Ahmet Yalçınkaya/Unsplash)

Director Taika Waititi and his wife, singer-songwriter Rita Ora, are producing a stage musical based on the infamous 2017 Fyre Festival disaster. The project aims to turn one of the most notorious event failures in modern history into a theatrical production.

According to Playbill, the musical will be directed and co-produced by Bryan Buckley, who is also writing the book for the show. Acclaimed songwriter and producer Paul Epworth is composing the music. Waititi and Ora confirmed their involvement by sharing the announcement to their Instagram Stories on Monday.

The Fyre Festival, promoted as an ultra-luxurious music festival in the Bahamas, collapsed into chaos after organizers failed to deliver on virtually every promise. Attendees were lured by flashy social media campaigns and celebrity endorsements, paying thousands of dollars for what was billed as an elite experience. Instead, they arrived to find FEMA tents, boxed sandwiches, and no performances—most artists had pulled out well before the event was canceled.

The mastermind behind the failed event, Billy McFarland, was convicted of wire fraud and sentenced to six years in federal prison. He was accused of intentionally defrauding investors and ticket buyers with false promises and fake documents. The event’s collapse became a cultural flashpoint, spawning multiple documentaries and serving as a cautionary tale about hype culture and influencer marketing.

The upcoming musical adds a theatrical twist to the saga, blending entertainment with satire. With Waititi’s history of blending comedy with social commentary, and Ora’s musical background, the production is expected to draw considerable attention once it hits the stage.

Hochul Hides Cost of “Frankie Focus” Mascot as Backlash Grows

(Riccardo Savi/Getty Images for Concordia Summit)

New York Governor Kathy Hochul is under fire for refusing to disclose how much taxpayer money is being spent on a fuzzy, cartoon-like mascot dubbed “Frankie Focus.” The character, part of a campaign to promote cellphone bans in public schools, debuted last week at a Brooklyn middle school. Critics across the political spectrum are blasting the initiative as wasteful and “tone-deaf.”

While Hochul’s office confirmed that “Frankie Focus” is part of a $13.5 million public awareness campaign, officials would not say exactly how much was spent to create, costume, and promote the mascot. The campaign includes $4 million directed to the New York City Department of Education. Despite repeated requests, no itemized budget for “Frankie” has been released.

Educators and parents alike are pushing back. Queens high school teacher Moshe Spern said the approach misses the mark. “We all agree that the cellphone ban would be great for students and learning,” Spern told the New York Post. “But having a silly cartoon character be the focus of the promotion loses the target audience: middle school and high school students.”

Parents also voiced frustration. Yiatin Chu said, “The use of a mascot doesn’t appeal to parents and certainly not high school students. It doesn’t appeal to me.” Another parent echoed those concerns, saying, “I don’t know any 13- to 18-year-old who could be convinced with a mascot like that.”

Despite the backlash, Hochul’s office has stood by the mascot. A spokesman jokingly told reporters, “Frankie just kind of showed up at our office last week and did this perfect double backflip, which was pretty wild.” He added that the character is unaffiliated with any brand and is committed to discouraging smartphone use in schools.

The initiative is part of Hochul’s broader push to ban cellphone use from the opening bell to the final dismissal. While many support the policy itself, the mascot’s rollout has raised serious questions about government spending priorities and the administration’s ability to connect with its constituents.

Calls for transparency are growing, with critics demanding Hochul release a full breakdown of how the $13.5 million was allocated—including how much went into producing “Frankie Focus.” Until then, taxpayers are left wondering how much they’re paying for a puppet.

Support for Capitalism Falls as Socialism Gains Ground Among Young Voters

Trump Paris Climate Accords withdrawal
Lucas Sankey/Unsplash

A new Gallup poll shows declining support for capitalism in the United States, especially among Democrats and younger Americans, as socialism continues to gain traction. The shift in public opinion follows the rise of socialist figures like Zohran Mamdani, who recently won New York City’s Democratic mayoral primary.

Only 54 percent of Americans now view capitalism positively, down from 60 percent in 2021. This marks the second time in the last decade that support for capitalism has dropped below 60 percent. By contrast, socialism is viewed positively by 39 percent of respondents, matching previous highs from 2012 and 2019.

The partisan divide is stark. For the first time, less than half of Democrats—just 42 percent—say they have a positive opinion of capitalism. Independents aren’t far behind, with only 51 percent expressing favorable views. Republican support remains firm at 74 percent, virtually unchanged in recent years.

The gender gap is also notable: 63 percent of men say they support capitalism compared to just 45 percent of women. Age is another dividing factor. The younger the respondent, the more likely they are to reject capitalism. Among adults 18 to 34, 54 percent hold a negative view of capitalism. That number falls to 44 percent for those aged 35 to 54 and 35 percent for those 55 and older.

Support for socialism is also rising among the young, with 46 percent of Americans aged 18 to 34 viewing it positively. College graduates are more likely to support socialism than those with only a high school education—47 percent versus 38 percent, respectively.

Despite the rise in pro-socialist sentiment, Americans remain strongly in favor of small businesses, with 95 percent viewing them positively. In contrast, 62 percent hold a negative view of big business, suggesting the shift is more about rejecting corporate power than embracing government control.

The Gallup survey was conducted from August 1 to 20, polling 1,094 adults nationwide with a margin of error of 4 percent.

Pennsylvania Electric Grid Outages Hit 30-Year High

Power Lines (Fré Sonneveld/Unsplash)

Pennsylvania experienced its worst year for electric reliability in over three decades, with 71 major outage events reported in 2024, according to the Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission’s latest Electric Service Reliability Report. The sharp increase from 49 events in 2023 highlights the growing strain on the state’s aging electrical infrastructure, compounded by severe weather and poor vegetation management.

More than 2.8 million Pennsylvanians lost power at some point in 2024—up from 1.67 million the previous year. PPL Electric Utilities recorded 17 reportable outage events, the most by any single provider since the PUC began keeping records 32 years ago.

The report points to downed trees, particularly from outside utility rights-of-way, as a primary cause of outages. The PUC’s Bureau of Technical Utility Services is now urging electric distribution companies (EDCs) to overhaul their vegetation management and capital improvement plans to confront these persistent threats.

Only three of the state’s 11 EDCs—PECO, UGI, and Wellsboro—met performance benchmarks in all three major reliability categories for both 2024 and the preceding three-year average. These categories include average restoration time, outage duration, and outage frequency. Two additional providers, Penn Power and Duquesne Light, met the standard for 12-month outage frequency, bringing the total to just five utilities with passing marks in that metric.

The report also notes that while advanced grid technologies can help reduce the number of customers affected during outages, they can also extend repair times due to system complexity. This trend of fewer customers losing power per event—but longer outages for those who do—suggests that systemic vulnerabilities are worsening.

Most utilities in the state have implemented Long-Term Infrastructure Improvement Plans aimed at addressing aging equipment and enhancing grid resilience. However, even providers with robust improvement strategies struggled in 2024, raising questions about the effectiveness of current approaches and the urgency of further investment.

The commission emphasized the need for a balance between reliability and affordability. Utility companies are being urged to evaluate cost-effective ways to strengthen their grids, including undergrounding power lines, deploying advanced monitoring tools, and enhancing protective technologies.

As severe weather patterns intensify and Pennsylvania’s grid continues to age, the PUC’s findings serve as a warning that without decisive investment and better management practices, the state’s energy reliability will continue to deteriorate—leaving millions of residents vulnerable.

When Men Without Chests Walk Among Us

Subway Stabbing
(Photo by Win McNamee/Getty Images)

In his 1943 book The Abolition of Man, C.S. Lewis warned of a society producing “men without chests,” individuals stripped of moral sentiment, where intellect and appetite rule without the mediating force of virtue. Lewis argued that by dismissing universal moral laws, we erode the “chest,” the seat of magnanimity, honor, and compassion, leaving behind beings who are mere animals in their actions.

The tragic murder of Iryna Zarutska on a Charlotte subway is a chilling manifestation of this prophecy, exposing a society frayed by moral decay, where criminal justice reforms have faltered, and the absence of love, kindness, or Good Samaritan instinct left a young woman defenseless.

Iryna Zarutska, a vibrant Ukrainian immigrant, was stabbed to death in a subway car, her life extinguished in an act of unimaginable cruelty. Her attacker, a man arrested 14 times yet freed under no-cash bail policies, embodies the failure of a system that prioritizes leniency over accountability.

Criminal justice reform, intended to address inequities, has instead enabled repeat offenders to roam unchecked, leaving victims like Zarutska to pay the ultimate price. This is not justice; it is negligence dressed as compassion. Lewis’s words ring true: “We make men without chests and expect of them virtue and enterprise. We laugh at honour and are shocked to find traitors in our midst.”

The moral decay extends beyond the perpetrator. Witnesses stood by, watching the scene from afar or leaving altogether rather than intervening on behalf of Zarutska. Where was the Good Samaritan, the person driven by the “trained emotions” Lewis deemed essential to humanity?

The subway car, a microcosm of our society, revealed a collective atrophy of the chest—a refusal to act with courage or compassion. This absence of moral sentiment reflects what Lewis called the “tragi-comedy” of a civilization that demands virtues it systematically undermines. We champion individual freedom and relativism, yet are stunned when empathy and responsibility vanish.

Zarutska’s murder is a mirror held up to our moral landscape. A society that fails to cultivate “just sentiments” in its people—through education, culture, or law—produces not only perpetrators devoid of conscience but also bystanders who lack the moral fortitude to act. Lewis warned that without the chest, “the head rules the belly through nothing,” leaving us with intellect unmoored from virtue and appetites unchecked by honor.

This moment demands reflection. We cannot restore Zarutska’s life, but we can honor her by confronting the moral void her death exposes.

Criminal justice must balance reform with accountability, ensuring that those who repeatedly harm are not free to destroy again.

Society must revive the chest—teaching and celebrating virtues like courage, compassion, and sacrifice. We need not just laws but a culture that fosters Good Samaritans, not silent spectators.

Lewis’s warning is clear: “In a sort of ghastly simplicity we remove the organ and demand the function.” Without a return to objective moral values, we will continue to mourn victims like Iryna Zarutska, left defenseless in a world of men without chests.

Louisiana Dominates Finalists List for $50M Gulf Resilience Prize

American flag (David Everett Strickler/Unsplash)

Four Louisiana-led projects are among the top 10 finalists for a $50 million award from the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine’s Gulf Futures Challenge. The prize seeks to boost resilience, sustainability, and public safety across the Gulf Coast, and Louisiana institutions have emerged as clear frontrunners.

Three of the selected proposals involve Louisiana State University, showcasing the state’s leadership in climate and energy innovation. One of the LSU-backed projects, the Community Co-Financed Flood and Energy Resilience initiative, aims to develop infrastructure and financing strategies in partnership with community groups to tackle flooding and energy insecurity in four Gulf communities.

Another finalist, the Community Lighthouse project, is led by the Greater New Orleans Foundation and LSU’s School of Social Work. It proposes building neighborhood-scale solar and battery-powered microgrids at 80 local hubs. These would function as a decentralized “Virtual Power Plant” to ensure power availability during grid failures, a growing concern during hurricanes and severe weather events.

A third LSU initiative, in collaboration with the University of Louisiana, targets Iberia Parish with a clean energy hub combining solar energy, carbon capture, and workforce training for economically underserved populations.

Also representing Louisiana is the Gulf Hub project by the Louisiana Public Health Institute. It plans to convert health centers across four states into resilience hubs, benefiting an estimated 400,000 people. The project also aims to enhance research into disaster recovery and public health outcomes.

The Gulf Futures Challenge is administered by the National Academies’ Gulf Research Program in partnership with Lever for Change. It received entries from all five Gulf states, with the Louisiana projects standing out for their community-driven and science-based solutions.

The $50 million award winner will be announced in 2026. Funding will support projects that use applied science and engineering to address critical environmental and public health challenges along the Gulf Coast.

Nuevos Nombramientos del 6 de Enero Señalan una Guerra Renovada contra Trump

Jan 6
January 6, 2021 Protest (AP Photo/John Minchillo, File)

El líder de la minoría en la Cámara de Representantes, Hakeem Jeffries, anunció los nombramientos de varios demócratas para el subcomité del 6 de enero, con el representante Eric Swalwell (D-CA) como miembro de mayor rango.

Las representantes Jasmine Crockett (D-TX) y Jared Moskowitz (D-FL) formarán parte del subcomité, mientras que el representante Jamie Raskin (D-MD) participará como miembro ex officio.

“En lugar de reducir los costos para los estadounidenses comunes, los republicanos de la Cámara una vez más están tratando de reescribir la historia y corromper nuestro sistema electoral. Los demócratas de la Cámara continuaremos respondiendo con fuerza y agresividad, tal como lo hicimos con el segundo juicio político a Donald Trump y el trabajo realizado por el Comité Selecto para Investigar el Ataque del 6 de enero al Capitolio de los Estados Unidos”, dijo Jeffries en un comunicado. “No permitiremos que Donald Trump y los republicanos MAGA encubran la violencia y el vil ataque contra el modo de vida estadounidense que ocurrió el 6 de enero”.

Los nombramientos se producen después de que los republicanos de la Cámara se movieran para crear un subcomité selecto que revisara las investigaciones del 6 de enero. Será presidido por el representante Barry Loudermilk (R-GA).

“Me siento honrado de continuar la investigación sobre los acontecimientos en torno al 6 de enero de 2021 y las fallas que llevaron a la irrupción en el Capitolio de EE.UU. A partir de la investigación de mi subcomité en el 118º Congreso, descubrimos que lo que sucedió en el Capitolio ese día fue el resultado de una serie de fallos de inteligencia, seguridad y liderazgo en múltiples niveles dentro de numerosas entidades”, dijo Loudermilk en julio después de que los republicanos introdujeran una resolución para establecer el subcomité.

“Aunque mi subcomité hizo un trabajo increíble el Congreso pasado, aún queda mucho por hacer. Agradezco al presidente Johnson por confiarme la continuación de esta importante investigación, y espero trabajar con el presidente Jordan y su equipo”, continuó. “Es vital que sigamos descubriendo los hechos y comencemos la tarea de implementar las reformas necesarias para garantizar que este nivel de fallas de seguridad nunca vuelva a ocurrir”.

La FDA Revisará la Vacuna contra la Hepatitis B para Lactantes

abortion pill
(Photo by Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images)

El comisionado de la FDA, Dr. Marty Makary, sugirió que la agencia revisará si los lactantes deben recibir la vacuna contra la Hepatitis B.

“Si una mujer tuviera un bebé hoy en la ciudad de Nueva York y el médico estuviera a punto de darle la vacuna contra la Hepatitis B, ¿qué le aconsejaría a esa madre?”, preguntó Martha MacCallum de Fox News a Makary.

“Personalmente no creo que la evidencia sea sólida para decir que la vacuna contra la Hepatitis B deba administrarse al nacer”, respondió el comisionado de la FDA. “Se trata de una infección de transmisión sexual que se está intentando prevenir. Los niños no son sexualmente activos hasta que llegan a la edad sexual. Así que muchos padres dicen que van a esperar hasta que tengan 10, 11 o 12 años”.

“Si la madre es positiva para Hepatitis B, eso es diferente”, señaló, añadiendo que “estos son temas matizados”.

“Creemos en las vacunas, pero ¿eso significa que la gente necesita la vacuna contra el ántrax? Por supuesto que no, fue un desastre y se retiró del mercado. Una de las vacunas contra el rotavirus fue un desastre y se retiró del mercado”, añadió Makary. “Tenemos vacunas probadas y verdaderas, y tenemos vacunas como el refuerzo de Covid en personas jóvenes y sanas sobre las que podemos hacer preguntas”.

Un comité asesor de los Centros para el Control y la Prevención de Enfermedades (CDC) se comprometió a reevaluar los calendarios de vacunación infantil.

“El número de vacunas que nuestros niños y adolescentes reciben hoy supera lo que reciben los niños en la mayoría de las demás naciones desarrolladas y lo que la mayoría de nosotros en esta sala recibimos cuando éramos niños”, dijo durante una reunión el copresidente del Comité Asesor sobre Prácticas de Inmunización (ACIP), Martin Kulldorff, Ph.D. “Además de estudiar y evaluar vacunas individuales, es importante evaluar el efecto acumulativo del calendario de vacunación recomendado”, explicó. “Esto incluye los efectos de interacción entre diferentes vacunas, el número total de vacunas, la cantidad acumulada de ingredientes de las vacunas y el momento relativo de las diferentes vacunas”.