Podcasts about israeli palestinian

A new report on the crisis of Israel Studies at American universities highlights the near impossibility of teaching and studying about Israel and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict today. The report found that Israel Studies is the canary in the coalmine of dysfunction on campuses today, highlighted by antisemitism and cancel culture. KAN's Mark Weiss spoke with the author of the report Dr Sara Yael Hirschhorn. (Photo:Reuters)See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

In this episode of the Harvest Series Podcast, we dive into the concept of good stress with Jeff Krasno, founder of one of the largest conscious living communities, and author of Good Stress: The Health Benefits of Doing Hard Things. Jeff shares his personal journey of overcoming health challenges and how certain types of stress can be used for personal growth. From childhood struggles to health crises, Jeff explains how embracing discomfort can lead to resilience and overall well-being.He connects his experiences with ancient philosophies, including Buddhism and Stoicism, revealing how we can harness stress to find balance and meaning in life. Are you ready to transform your approach to stress?Check his podcast, CommuneChapters:00:00:00 – Introduction: Can stress actually be good for you?00:01:28 – Jeff's childhood and the impact of moving around00:03:12 – The challenge of people-pleasing and finding authenticity00:05:31 – The turning point: Health crisis and facing personal demons00:09:00 – Buddhism and the concept of impermanence00:12:03 – How understanding your body's impermanence can change your life00:15:10 – Why good stress is essential for health and longevity00:19:37 – How pushing your body to its limits can increase resilience00:25:01 – Building a psychological immune system through stress00:29:43 – Practical advice: Stressful conversations and healing through conflict00:33:03 – Lessons from the Israeli-Palestinian conflict: The power of difficult conversations00:36:16 – Courage: What it truly means to be courageous in the modern worldYou can follow us on Instagram at @HarvestSeries or @rose.claverie for updates.Watch our podcast episodes and speaker sessions on YouTube: Harvest Series.Credits:Sound editing by: @lesbellesfrequencesTechnician in Kaplankaya: Joel MoriasiMusic by: ChambordHarvest Series is produced in partnership with Athena Advisers and Capital PartnersHarvest Series Founders: Burak Öymen and Roman Carel

Donald Trump has said that the US will restart shipments of defensive weapons, including Patriot missile systems, to Kyiv. Trump appeared frustrated with Vladimir Putin, saying the Russian president's words were ‘meaningless'. Also on the programme: during a visit to the UK French President Emmanuel Macron calls for a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict; and we hear about the devastating environmental cost of China's rare earth mineral mining.

Topics:In this episode, the hosts return from a break to offer an in-depth and provocative discussion on recent global events, particularly the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. They critique media coverage, contrasting the attention given to chants against the Israeli Defense Force at a UK music festival with the underreported humanitarian crises in Gaza. The conversation extends to the broader implications of global politics, touching upon historical contexts, American foreign policy, and the influence of authoritarian regimes. The podcast also delves into the potential pitfalls of alliance with the U.S. under the Trump administration and the systemic issues facing American democracy.00:00 Introduction: Setting the Stage00:48 Vietnam Reflections03:05 Gaza and Israel Conflict05:44 Media Coverage and Bias18:45 International Reactions and Consequences25:06 US Politics and Global Implications30:46 Masked Men and Private Armies31:44 Travel Warnings and Horror Stories33:58 Farm Workforce and Immigration Policies36:55 Systemic Issues in American Politics38:42 Religious Influence and Social Issues43:22 International Relations and Defense Spending47:01 Rants on Global Politics55:07 Concluding Thoughts and Future TopicsTo financially support the Podcast you can make:a per-episode donation via Patreon or one-off donation via credit card; orone-off or regular donations via Paypal orif you are into Cryptocurrency you can send Satoshis. We Livestream every Monday night at 7:30 pm Brisbane time. Follow us on Facebook or YouTube. Watch us live and join the discussion in the chat room.We have a website. www.ironfistvelvetglove.com.auYou can email us. The address is trevor@ironfistvelvetglove.com.au

In Episode 426 of Hidden Forces, Demetri Kofinas speaks with Stephen Walt, Professor of International Affairs at Harvard University's John F. Kennedy School of Government, about American grand strategy, the Trump Doctrine of Coercive Primacy, and the implications of Washington's new Gunboat Diplomacy in the Middle East. Stephen is a prominent member of the realist school in international relations. He's been a long-time critic of American adventurism and an advocate for a more restrained approach to U.S. foreign policy. In the first hour, Stephen provides his assessment of recent events in the Middle East, how U.S. policy in the region improves or worsens America's global position, and what we can say with certainty about the Trump administration's approach to foreign policy. In the second hour, he and Demetri discuss: (1) America's policy in the Middle East (2) Iranian intentions and the potential for regime change (3) Solutions to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict (4) American grand strategy (5) The long-awaited U.S. pivot to Asia that has failed to fully materialize Subscribe to our premium content—including our premium feed, episode transcripts, and Intelligence Reports—by visiting HiddenForces.io/subscribe. If you'd like to join the conversation and become a member of the Hidden Forces Genius community—with benefits like Q&A calls with guests, exclusive research and analysis, in-person events, and dinners—you can also sign up on our subscriber page at HiddenForces.io/subscribe. If you enjoyed today's episode of Hidden Forces, please support the show by: Subscribing on Apple Podcasts, YouTube, Spotify, Stitcher, SoundCloud, CastBox, or via our RSS Feed Writing us a review on Apple Podcasts & Spotify Joining our mailing list at https://hiddenforces.io/newsletter/ Producer & Host: Demetri Kofinas Editor & Engineer: Stylianos Nicolaou Subscribe and support the podcast at https://hiddenforces.io. Join the conversation on Facebook, Instagram, and Twitter at @hiddenforcespod Follow Demetri on Twitter at @Kofinas Episode Recorded on 06/25/2025

How has the media distorted Israel's response to the October 7 Hamas attacks? In this powerful conversation from AJC Global Forum 2025, award-winning journalist and former AP correspondent Matti Friedman breaks down the media bias, misinformation, and double standards shaping global coverage of Israel. Moderated by AJC Chief Communications and Strategy Officer Belle Etra Yoeli, this episode explores how skewed narratives have taken hold in the media, in a climate of activist journalism. A must-listen for anyone concerned with truth in journalism, Israel advocacy, and combating disinformation in today's media landscape. Take Action: Take 15 seconds and urge your elected leaders to send a clear, united message: We stand with Israel. Take action now. Resources: Global Forum 2025 session with Matti Friedman:: Watch the full video. Listen – AJC Podcasts: The Forgotten Exodus: Untold stories of Jews who left or were driven from Arab nations and Iran People of the Pod:  Latest Episodes:  John Spencer's Key Takeaways After the 12-Day War: Air Supremacy, Intelligence, and Deterrence Iran's Secret Nuclear Program and What Comes Next in the Iranian Regime vs. Israel War Why Israel Had No Choice: Inside the Defensive Strike That Shook Iran's Nuclear Program Follow People of the Pod on your favorite podcast app, and learn more at AJC.org/PeopleofthePod You can reach us at: peopleofthepod@ajc.org If you've appreciated this episode, please be sure to tell your friends, and rate and review us on Apple Podcasts or Spotify. Transcript of the Interview: Manya Brachear Pashman: I've had the privilege of interviewing journalism colleague Matti Friedman: twice on this podcast. In 2022, Matti took listeners behind the scenes of Jerusalem's AP bureau where he had worked between 2006 and 2011 and shared some insight on what happens when news outlets try to oversimplify the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Then in 2023, I got to sit down with Matti in Jerusalem to talk about his latest book on Leonard Cohen and how the 1973 Yom Kippur War was a turning point both for the singer and for Israel.  Earlier this year, Matti came to New York for AJC Global Forum 2025, and sat down with Belle Yoeli, AJC Chief Strategy and Communications Officer. They rehashed some of what we discussed before, but against an entirely different backdrop: post-October 7. For this week's episode, we bring you a portion of that conversation.  Belle Yoeli:   Hi, everyone. Great to see all of you. Thank you so much for being here. Matti, thank you for being here.  Matti Friedman:   Thanks for having me.  Belle Yoeli:   As you can tell by zero empty seats in this room, you have a lot of fans, and unless you want to open with anything, I'm going to jump right in. Okay, great.  So for those of you who don't know, in September 2024 Matti wrote a piece in The Free Press that is a really great foundation for today's discussion. In When We Started to Lie, Matti, you reflect on two pieces that you had written in 2015 about issues of media coverage of Israel during Operation Protective Edge in 2014. And this piece basically talked about the conclusions you drew and how they've evolved since October 7. We're gonna get to those conclusions, but first, I'm hoping you can describe for everyone what were the issues of media coverage of Israel that you first identified based on the experience in 2014? Matti Friedman:   First of all, thanks so much for having me here, and thanks for all of the amazing work that you guys are doing. So it's a real honor for me. I was a reporter for the AP, between 2006 and the very end of 2011, in Jerusalem. I was a reporter and editor. The AP, of course, as you know, is the American news agency. It's the world's largest news organization, according to the AP, according to Reuters, it's Reuters. One of them is probably right, but it's a big deal in the news world.  And I had an inside view inside one of the biggest AP bureaus. In fact, the AP's biggest International Bureau, which was in Jerusalem. So I can try to sketch the problems that I saw as a reporter there. It would take me seven or eight hours, and apparently we only have four or five hours for this lunch, so I have to keep it short. But I would say there are two main problems. We often get very involved. When we talk about problems with coverage of Israel. We get involved with very micro issues like, you call it a settlement. I call it a neighborhood. Rockets, you know, the Nakba, issues of terminology. But in fact, there are two major problems that are much bigger, and because they're bigger, they're often harder to see. One of the things that I noticed at the Bureau was the scale of coverage of Israel. So at the time that I was at the AP, again, between 2006 and the very end of 2011 we had about 40 full time staffers covering Israel. That's print reporters like me, stills photographers, TV crews. Israel, as most of you probably know, is a very small country. As a percentage of the world's surface, Israel is 1/100 of 1% of the surface of the world, and as a percentage of the land mass of the Arab world, Israel is 1/5 of 1%. 0.2%.  And we had 40 people covering it.  And just as a point of comparison, that was dramatically more people than we had at the time covering China. There are about 10 million people today in Israel proper, in China, there are 1.3 billion. We had more people in Israel than we had in China. We had more people in Israel than we had in India, which is another country of about 1.3 billion people. We had more people in Israel than we had in all of the countries of Sub-Saharan Africa. That's 50 something countries. So we had more people in Israel than we had in all of those countries combined. And sometimes I say that to Jews, I say we covered Israel more than we covered China, and people just stare at me blankly, because it's Israel. So of course, that makes perfect sense.  I happen to think Israel is the most important country in the world because I live there. But if the news is meant to be a rational analysis of events on planet Earth, you cannot cover Israel more than you cover the continent of Africa. It just doesn't make any sense. So one of the things that first jumped out at me– actually, that's making me sound smarter than I am. It didn't jump out at me at first. It took a couple of years. And I just started realizing that it was very strange that the world's largest organization had its largest international bureau in the State of Israel, which is a very small country, very small conflict in numeric terms. And yet there was this intense global focus on it that made people think that it was the most important story in the world. And it definitely occupies a place in the American political imagination that is not comparable to any other international conflict.  So that's one part of the problem. That was the scope, the other part was the context. And it took me a while to figure this out, but the coverage of Israel is framed as an Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The conflict is defined in those terms, the Israeli Palestinian conflict, and everyone in this room has heard it discussed in those terms. Sometimes we discuss it in those terms, and that is because the news folks have framed the conflict in those terms. So at the AP bureau in Jerusalem, every single day, we had to write a story that was called, in the jargon of the Bureau, Is-Pals, Israelis, Palestinians. And it was the daily wrap of the Israeli Palestinian conflict. So what Netanyahu said, what Abbas said, rockets, settlers, Hamas, you know, whatever, the problem is that there isn't an Israeli=Palestinian conflict. And I know that sounds crazy, because everyone thinks there is.  And of course, we're seeing conflicts play out in the most tragic way right now in Gaza. But most of Israel's wars have not been fought against Palestinians. Israel has unfortunately fought wars against Egyptians and Jordanians and Lebanese and Iraqis. And Israel's most important enemy at the moment, is Iran, right? The Iranians are not Palestinian. The Iranians are not Arab. They're Muslim, but they're not Arab. So clearly, there is a broader regional conflict that's going on that is not an Israeli Palestinian conflict, and we've seen it in the past year. If we had a satellite in space looking down and just following the paths of ballistic missiles and rockets fired at Israel. Like a photograph of these red trails of rockets fired at Israel. You'd see rockets being fired from Iraq and from Yemen and from Lebanon and from Gaza and from Iran. You'd see the contours of a regional conflict.  And if you understand it's a regional conflict, then you understand the way Israelis see it. There are in the Arab world, 300 million people, almost all of them Muslim. And in one corner of that world, there are 7 million Jews, who are Israelis. And if we zoom out even farther to the level of the Islamic world, we'll see that there are 2 billion people in the Islamic world. There's some argument about the numbers, but it's roughly a quarter of the world's population. And in one corner of that world there, there are 7 million Israeli Jews. The entire Jewish population on planet Earth is a lot smaller than the population of Cairo.  So the idea that this is an Israeli-Palestinian conflict, where Israelis are the stronger side, where Israelis are the dominant actor, and where Israelis are, let's face it, the bad guy in the story, that's a fictional presentation of a story that actually works in a completely different way. So if you take a small story and make it seem big. If you take a complicated regional story and you make it seem like a very small local story involving only Israelis and Palestinians, then you get the highly simplified but very emotive narrative that everyone is being subjected to now. And you get this portrayal of a villainous country called Israel that really looms in the liberal imagination of the West as an embodiment of the worst possible qualities of the age. Belle Yoeli:   Wow. So already you were seeing these issues when you were reporter, earlier on. But like this, some of this was before and since, since productive edge. This is over 10 years ago, and here we are. So October 7 happens. You already know these issues exist. You've identified them. How would you describe because obviously we have a lot of feelings about this, but like, strictly as a journalist, how would you describe the coverage that you've seen since during October 7, in its aftermath? Is it just these issues? Have they? Have they expanded? Are there new issues in play? What's your analysis? Matti Friedman:   The coverage has been great. I really have very I have no criticism of it. I think it's very accurate. I think that I, in a way, I was lucky to have been through what I went through 10 or 15 years ago, and I wasn't blindsided on October 7, as many people were, many people, quite naturally, don't pay close attention to this. And even people who are sympathetic to Israel, I think, were not necessarily convinced that my argument about the press was right. And I think many people thought it was overstated.  And you can read those articles from 2014 one was in tablet and one was in the Atlantic, but it's basically the two chapters of the same argument. And unfortunately, I think that those the essays, they stand up. In fact, if you don't really look at the date of the essays, they kind of seem that they could have been written in the past year and a half. And I'm not happy about that. I think that's and I certainly wrote them in hopes that they would somehow make things better. But the issues that I saw in the press 15 years ago have only been exacerbated since then. And October seven didn't invent the wheel. The issues were pre existing, but it took everything that I saw and kind of supercharged it.  So if I talked about ideological conformity in the bureaus that has been that has become much more extreme. A guy like me, I was hired in 2006 at the AP. I'm an Israeli of center left political leanings. Hiring me was not a problem in 22,006 by the time I left the AP, at the end of 2011 I'm pretty sure someone like me would not have been hired because my views, which are again, very centrist Israeli views, were really beyond the pale by the time that I left the AP, and certainly, and certainly today, the thing has really moved what I saw happening at the AP. And I hate picking on the AP because they were just unfortunate enough to hire me. That was their only error, but what I'm saying about them is true of a whole new. Was heard. It's true of the Times and CNN and the BBC, the news industry really works kind of as a it has a herd mentality. What happened was that news decisions were increasingly being made by people who are not interested in explanatory journalism. They were activists. Activists had moved into the key positions in the Bureau, and they had a very different idea of what press coverage was supposed to do. I would say, and I tried to explain it in that article for the free press, when I approach a news story, when I approach the profession of journalism, the question that I'm asking is, what's going on? That's the question I think you're supposed to ask, what's going on? How can I explain it in a way that's as accurate as as possible? The question that was increasingly being asked was not what's going on. The question was, who does this serve? That's an activist question. So when you look at a story, you don't ask, is it true, or is it not true? You ask, who's it going to help? Is it going to help the good guys, or is it going to help the bad guys?  So if Israel in the story is the villain, then a story that makes Israel seem reasonable, reasonable or rational or sympathetic needs to be played down to the extent possible or made to disappear. And I can give you an example from my own experience.  At the very end of 2008 two reporters in my bureau, people who I know, learned of a very dramatic peace offer that Prime Minister Ehud Olmert had made to the Palestinians. So Olmert, who was the prime minister at the time, had made a very far reaching offer that was supposed to see a Palestinian state in all of Gaza, most of the West Bank, with land swaps for territory that Israel was going to retain, and a very far reaching international consortium agreement to run the Old City of Jerusalem. Was a very dramatic. It was so far reaching, I think that Israelis probably wouldn't have supported it. But it was offered to the Palestinian side, and the Palestinians rejected it as insufficient. And two of our reporters knew about this, and they'd seen a map of the offer. And this was obviously a pretty big story for a bureau that had as the thrust of its coverage the peace process.  The two reporters who had the story were ordered to drop it, they were not allowed to cover the story. And there were different explanations. And they didn't, by the way, AP did not publish the story at the time, even though we were the first to have it. Eventually, it kind of came out and in other ways, through other news organizations. But we knew at first. Why were we not allowed to cover it? Because it would have made the Israelis who we were trying to villainize and demonize, it would have made Israel seem like it was trying to solve the conflict on kind of reasonable lines, which, of course, was true at that time. So that story would have upended the thrust of our news coverage. So it had to be made to go away, even though it was true, it would have helped the wrong people. And that question of who does this serve has destroyed, I want to say all, but much, of what used to be mainstream news coverage, and it's not just where Israel is concerned.  You can look at a story like the mental health of President Biden, right. Something's going on with Biden at the end of his term. It's a huge global news story, and the press, by and large, won't touch it, because why? I mean, it's true, right? We're all seeing that it's true, but why can't you touch it? Because it would help the wrong people. It would help the Republicans who in the press are the people who you are not supposed to help.  The origins of COVID, right? We heard one story about that. The true story seems to be a different story. And there are many other examples of stories that are reported because they help the right people, or not reported because they would help the wrong people. And I saw this thinking really come into action in Israel 10 or 15 years ago, and unfortunately, it's really spread to include the whole mainstream press scene and really kill it.  I mean, essentially, anyone interested in trying to get a solid sense of what's going on, we have very few options. There's not a lot, there's not a lot out there. So that's the broader conclusion that I drew from what I thought at the time was just a very small malfunction involving Israel coverage. But Israel coverage ends up being a symptom of something much bigger, as Jews often are the symptom of something much bigger that's going on.  So my problems in the AP bureau 15 years ago were really a kind of maybe a canary in the coal mine, or a whiff of something much bigger that we were all going to see happen, which is the transformation of the important liberal institutions of the west into kind of activist arms of a very radical ideology that has as its goal the transformation of the west into something else. And that's true of the press, and it's true of NGO world, places like Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International, which were one thing 30 years ago and are something very different today. And it's also true of big parts of the academy. It's true of places like Columbia and places like Harvard, they still have the logo, they still have the name, but they serve a different purpose, and I just happen to be on the ground floor of it as a reporter. Belle Yoeli:   So obviously, this concept of who does this serve, and this activist journalism is deeply concerning, and you actually mentioned a couple other areas, academia, obviously we're in that a lot right now in terms of what's going on campus. So I guess a couple of questions on that. First of all, think about this very practically, tachlis, in the day to day.  I'm a journalist, and I go to write about what's happening in Gaza. What would you say is, if you had to throw out a percentage, are all of them aware of this activist journalist tendency? Or you think it's like, like intentional for many of them, or it's sort of they've been educated that way, and it's their worldview in such a way that they don't even know that they're not reporting the news in a very biased way. Does that make sense? Matti Friedman:   Totally. I think that many people in the journalism world today view their job as not as explaining a complicated situation, but as swaying people toward the correct political conclusion. Journalism is power, and the power has to be wielded in support of justice. Now, justice is very slippery, and, you know, choosing who's in the right is very, very slippery, and that's how journalism gets into a lot of trouble. Instead of just trying to explain what's going on and then leave, you're supposed to leave the politics and the activism to other people. Politics and activism are very important.  But unless everyone can agree on what is going on, it's impossible to choose the kind of act, the kind of activism that would be useful. So when the journalists become activists, then no one can understand what's what's going on, because the story itself is fake, and there are many, many examples of it. But you know, returning to what you asked about, about October 7, and reporting post October 7, you can really see it happen. The massacres of October 7 were very problematic for the ideological strain that now controls a lot of the press, because it's counterintuitive. You're not supposed to sympathize with Israelis.  And yet, there were a few weeks after October 7 when they were forced to because the nature of the atrocities were so heinous that they could not be ignored. So you had the press covering what happened on October 7, but you could feel it. As someone who knows that scene, you could feel there was a lot of discomfort. There was a lot of discomfort. It wasn't their comfort zone, and you knew that within a few weeks, maybe a month, it was gonna snap back at the first opportunity.  When did it snap back? In the story of the Al Ahli hospital strike. If you remember that a few weeks in, there's a massive global story that Israel has rocketed Hospital in Gaza and killed about 500 people and and then you can see the kind of the comfort the comfort zone return, because the story that the press is primed to cover is a story about villainous Israelis victimizing innocent Palestinians, and now, now we're back. Okay. Now Israel's rocketing hospital. The problem was that it hadn't happened, and it was that a lot of stories don't happen, and they're allowed to stand.  But this story was so far from the truth that even the people involved couldn't make it work, and it had to be retracted, but it was basically too late. And then as soon as the Israeli ground offensive got into swing in Gaza, then the story really becomes the same old story, which is a story of Israel victimizing Palestinians for no reason. And you'll never see Hamas militants in uniform in Gaza. You just see dead civilians, and you'll see the aftermath of a rocket strike when the, you know, when an Israeli F16 takes out the launcher, but you will never see the strike. Which is the way it's worked in Gaza since the very end of 2008 which is when the first really bad round of violence in Gaza happens, which is when I'm at the AP.  As far as I know, I was the first staffer to erase information from the story, because we were threatened by Hamas, which happened at the very end of 2008. We had a great reporter in Gaza, a Palestinian who had always been really an excellent reporter. We had a detail in a story. The detail was a crucial one. It was that Hamas fighters were dressed as civilians and were being counted as civilians in the death toll, an important thing to know, that went out in an AP story. The reporter called me a few hours later. It was clear that someone had spoken to him, and he told me, I was on the desk in Jerusalem, so I was kind of writing the story from the main bureau in Jerusalem. And he said, Matti, you have to take that detail out of the story. And it was clear that someone had threatened him. I took the detail out of the story. I suggested to our editors that we note in an Editor's Note that we were now complying with Hamas censorship. I was overruled, and from that point in time, the AP, like all of its sister organizations, collaborates with Hamas censorship in Gaza.  What does that mean? You'll see a lot of dead civilians, and you won't see dead militants. You won't have a clear idea of what the Hamas military strategy is. And this is the kicker, the center of the coverage will be a number, a casualty number, that is provided to the press by something called the Gaza health ministry, which is Hamas. And we've been doing that since 2008, and it's a way of basically settling the story before you get into any other information. Because when you put, you know, when you say 50 Palestinians were killed, and one Israeli on a given day, it doesn't matter what else you say. The numbers kind of tell their own story, and it's a way of settling the story with something that sounds like a concrete statistic. And the statistic is being, you know, given to us by one of the combatant sides. But because the reporters sympathize with that side, they're happy to play along. So since 2008, certainly since 2014 when we had another serious war in Gaza, the press has not been covering Gaza, the press has been essentially an amplifier for one of the most poisonous ideologies on Earth. Hamas has figured out how to make the press amplify its messaging rather than covering Hamas. There are no Western reporters in Gaza. All of the reporters in Gaza are Palestinians, and those people fall into three categories. Some of them identify with Hamas. Some of them are intimidated by Hamas and won't cross Hamas, which makes a lot of sense. I wouldn't want to cross Hamas either. So either. And the third category is people who actually belong to Hamas. That's where the information from Gaza is coming from. And if you're credulous, then of course, you're going to get a story that makes Israel look pretty bad. Belle Yoeli:   So this is very depressing. That's okay. It's very helpful, very depressing. But on that note, I would ask you so whether, because you spoke about this problem in terms, of, of course, the coverage of Israel, but that it's it's also more widespread you talk, you spoke about President Biden in your article, you name other examples of how this sort of activist journalism is affecting everything we read. So what should everyone in this room be reading, truly, from your opinion. This is Matti's opinion. But if you want to you want to get information from our news and not activist journalism, obviously The Free Press, perhaps. But are there other sites or outlets that you think are getting this more down the line, or at least better than some, some better than others?  Matti Friedman:   No, it's just The Free Press. No. I mean, it's a question that I also wrestle with. I haven't given up on everyone, and even in publications that have, I think, largely lost the plot, you'll still find good stuff on occasion. So I try to keep my eye on certain reporters whose name I know. I often ask not just on Israel, but on anything, does this reporter speak the language of the country that they're covering? You'd be shocked at how rare that is for Americans. A lot of the people covering Ukraine have no idea what language they speak in Ukraine, and just as someone who covers Israel, I'm aware of the low level of knowledge that many of the Western reporters have. You'll find really good stuff still in the Atlantic. The Atlantic has managed, against steep odds, to maintain its equilibrium amid all this. The New Yorker, unfortunately, less so, but you'll still see, on occasion, things that are good. And there are certain reporters who are, you know, you can trust. Isabel Kirchner, who writes for The New York Times, is an old colleague of mine from the Jerusalem report. She's excellent, and they're just people who are doing their job. But by and large, you have to be very, very suspicious of absolutely everything that you read and see. And I'm not saying that as someone who I'm not happy to say that, and I certainly don't identify with, you know, the term fake news, as it has been pushed by President Trump.  I think that fake news is, you know, for those guys, is an attempt to avoid scrutiny. They're trying to, you know, neuter the watchdog so that they can get away with whatever they want. I don't think that crowd is interested in good press coverage. Unfortunately, the term fake news sticks because it's true. That's why it has worked. And the press, instead of helping people navigate the blizzard of disinformation that we're all in, they've joined it. People who are confused about what's going on, should be able to open up the New York Times or go to the AP and figure out what's going on, but because, and I saw it happen, instead of covering the circus, the reporters became dancing bears in the circus. So no one can make heads or tails of anything. So we need to be very careful.  Most headlines that are out there are out there to generate outrage, because that's the most predictable generator of clicks, which is the, we're in a click economy. So I actually think that the less time you spend following headlines and daily news, the better off you'll be. Because you can follow the daily news for a year, and by the end of the year, you'll just be deranged. You'll just be crazy and very angry.  If you take that time and use it to read books about, you know, bitten by people who are knowledgeable, or read longer form essays that are, you know, that are obviously less likely to be very simplistic, although not, you know, it's not completely impossible that they will be. I think that's time, that's time better spent. Unfortunately, much of the industry is kind of gone. And we're in an interesting kind of interim moment where it's clear that the old news industry is basically dead and that something new has to happen. And those new things are happening. I mean, The Free Press is part of a new thing that's happening. It's not big enough to really move the needle in a dramatic way yet, but it might be, and I think we all have to hope that new institutions emerge to fill the vacuum.  The old institutions, and I say this with sorrow, and I think that this also might be true of a lot of the academic institutions. They can't be saved. They can't be saved. So if people think that writing an editor, a letter to the editor of the New York Times is going to help. It's not going to help. Sometimes people say, Why don't we just get the top people in the news industry and bring them to Israel and show them the truth? Doesn't help. It's not about knowing or not knowing. They define the profession differently.  So it's not about a lack of information. The institutions have changed, and it's kind of irrevocable at this point, and we need new institutions, and one of them is The Free Press, and it's a great model of what to do when faced with fading institutions. By the way, the greatest model of all time in that regard is Zionism. That's what Zionism is. There's a guy in Vienna in 1890 something, and his moment is incredibly contemporary. There's an amazing biography of Herzl called Herzl by Amos Elon. It's an amazing book. If you haven't read it, you should read it, because his moment in cosmopolitan Vienna sounds exactly like now. It's shockingly current. He's in this friendly city. He's a reporter for the New York Times, basically of the Austro Hungarian empire, and he's assimilated, and he's got a Christmas tree in his house, and his son isn't circumcised, and he thinks everything is basically great. And then the light changes.  He notices that something has changed in Vienna, and the discourse about Jews changes, and like in a Hollywood movie, the light changes. And he doesn't try to he doesn't start a campaign against antisemitism. He doesn't get on social media and kind of rail against unfair coverage. He sits down in a hotel room in Paris and he writes this pamphlet called the Jewish state, and I literally flew from that state yesterday. So there's a Zionist model where you look at a failing world and you think about radical solutions that involve creation. And I think we're there. And I think Herzl's model is a good one at a dark time you need real creativity. Belle Yoeli:   Thank God you found the inspiration there, because I was really, I was really starting to worry. No, in all seriousness, Matti, the saying that these institutions can't be saved. I mean the consequences of this, not just for us as pro-Israel, pro-Jewish advocates, but for our country, for the world, the countries that we come from are tremendous.  And the way we've been dealing with this issue and thinking about how, how can you change hearts and minds of individuals about Israel, about the Jewish people, if everything that they're reading is so damaging and most of what they're reading is so damaging and basically saying there's very little that we can do about that. So I am going to push you to dream big with us. We're an advocacy organization. AJC is an advocacy organization. So if you had unlimited resources, right, if you really wanted to make change in this area, to me, it sounds like you're saying we basically need 15 Free Presses or the new institutions to really take on this way. What would you do? What would you do to try to make it so that news media were more like the old days? Matti Friedman:   Anyone who wants unlimited resources should not go into journalism. I have found that my resources remain limited. I'll give you an answer that is probably not what you're expecting or not what you want here. I think that the fight can't be won. I think that antisemitism can't be defeated. And I think that resources that are poured into it are resources wasted. And of course, I think that people need legal protection, and they need, you know, lawyers who can protect people from discrimination and from defamation. That's very important. But I know that when people are presented with a problem like antisemitism, which is so disturbing and it's really rocking the world of everyone in this room, and certainly, you know, children and grandchildren, you have a problem and you want to address it, right? You have a really bad rash on your arm. You want the rash to go away, and you're willing to do almost anything to make it go away. This has always been with us. It's always been with us.  And you know, we recently celebrated the Seder, and we read in the Seder, in the Haggadah, l'chol dor vador, omdim aleinu l'chaloteinu. Which is, in every generation, they come at us to destroy us. And it's an incredibly depressing worldview. Okay, it's not the way I wanted to see the world when I grew up in Toronto in the 1990s. But in our tradition, we have this idea that this is always gonna be around. And the question is, what do you do? Do you let other people define you? Do you make your identity the fight against the people who hate you? And I think that's a dead end.  This crisis is hitting the Jewish people at a moment when many of us don't know who we are, and I think that's why it's hitting so hard. For my grandfather, who was a standard New York Jew, garment industry, Lower East Side, poor union guy. This would not have shaken him, because he just assumed that this was the world like this. The term Jewish identity was not one he ever heard, because it wasn't an issue or something that had to be taught. So if I had unlimited resources, what I would do is I would make sure that young Jewish people have access to the riches of Jewish civilization, I would, you know, institute a program that would allow any young Jewish person to be fluent in Hebrew by the time they finish college. Why is that so important? Why is that such an amazing key?  Because if you're fluent in Hebrew, you can open a Tanakh, or you can open a prayer book if you want. Or you can watch Fauda or you can get on a plane to Israel and hit on Israeli guys. Hebrew is the key to Jewish life, and if you have it, a whole world will open up. And it's not one that antisemites can interfere with. It does not depend on the goodwill of our neighbors. It's all about us and what we're doing with ourselves. And I think that if you're rooted in Jewish tradition, and I'm not saying becoming religious, I'm just saying, diving into the riches of Jewish tradition, whether it's history or gemara or Israel, or whatever, if you're if you're deep in there enough, then the other stuff doesn't go away, but it becomes less important.  It won't be solved because it can't be solved, but it will fade into the background. And if we make the center of identity the fight against antisemitism, they've won. Why should they be the center of our identity? For a young person who's looking for some way of living or some deep kind of guide to life, the fight against antisemitism is not going to do it, and philanthropy is not going to do it. We come from the wisest and one of the oldest civilizations in the world, and many of us don't know how to open the door to that civilization, and that's in our hands. And if we're not doing it, it's not the fault of the antisemites. It's our own fault. So if I had unlimited resources, which, again, it's not, it's not going to happen unless I make a career change, that's where I would be putting my effort. Internally and not externally.  Belle Yoeli:   You did find the inspiration, though, again, by pushing Jewish identity, and we appreciate that. It's come up a lot in this conversation, this question about how we fight antisemitism, investing in Jewish identity and who we are, and at the same time, what do we do about it? And I think all of you heard Ted in a different context last night, say, we can hold two things, two thoughts at the same time, right? Two things can be true at the same time. And I think for me, what I took out of this, in addition to your excellent insights, is that that's exactly what we have to be doing.  At AJC, we have to be engaging in this advocacy to stand up for the Jewish people and the State of Israel. But that's not the only piece of the puzzle. Of course, we have to be investing in Jewish identity. That's why we bring so many young people to this conference. Of course, we need to be investing in Jewish education. That's not necessarily what AJC is doing, the bulk of our work, but it's a lot of what the Jewish community is doing, and these pieces have to go together. And I want to thank you for raising that up for us, and again, for everything that you said. Thank you all so much for being here. Thank you. Manya Brachear Pashman: If you missed last week's episode, be sure to tune in as John Spencer, Chair of Urban Warfare Studies at West Point, breaks down Israel's high-stakes strike on Iran's nuclear infrastructure and the U.S. decision to enter the fight. 

Consider DONATING to help us continue and expand our media efforts. If you cannot at this time, please share this video with someone who might benefit from it. We thank you for your support! https://tinyurl.com/HereIAmWithShaiDavidai NEW ORDER MERCH!! https://here-i-am.printify.me/?fbclid=PAZXh0bgNhZW0CMTEAAadyxrG4LjvtjdxST9OlPhLrlkc98L0bnOwVevbq-B4YRP33yIQgwimjqE5bYw_aem_HDn3ScZcGWRnbD_8A36Zlg NEW SUPPORT ME ON PATREON! https://www.patreon.com/ShaiDavidai --------- Guest: Sheikh Musa Drammeh Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/sheikhmusadrammeh/ IG: https://www.instagram.com/halalfinder_com/ In this episode of "Here I Am," host Shai Davidai sits down with Sheikh Musa Drammeh, President of Muslims Israel Dialogue and Imam of the Co-op City Mosque. Sheikh Musa shares his inspiring journey from his childhood in West Africa to becoming a leading voice for peaceful coexistence and activism. He discusses his lifelong fight against misogyny, his efforts to promote equality and justice within the Muslim world, and his unique perspective on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Sheikh Musa boldly advocates for the rights of both Jews and Palestinians to live in peace and security, challenging cultural and religious norms along the way. This thought-provoking conversation explores faith, activism, and the pursuit of harmony among all people.

Subscribe now to skip the ads and get more content! Get our "Welcome to the Crusades" miniseries! Derek welcomes back to the show Dalia Hatuqa, a journalist specializing in Israeli/Palestinian affairs and regional Middle East issues, to talk about the situation in Gaza and the West Bank. They recap what has been happening to Palestinians in Gaza while the world was distracted by Israel's war with Iran, discuss the lost generations of Gazan children, the massacres at “aid distribution centers,” increased home demolitions and settler violence in the West Bank, the current relationships of the Palestinian Authority and Jordanian government with Israel, the regional dynamics after the recent war with Iran, and what Netanyahu's next move might be. Read Dalia's piece from March in The Guardian, “For Palestinians, this was never a ceasefire.”       Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Derek welcomes back to the show Dalia Hatuqa, a journalist specializing in Israeli/Palestinian affairs and regional Middle East issues, to talk about the situation in Gaza and the West Bank. They recap what has been happening to Palestinians in Gaza while the world was distracted by Israel's war with Iran, discuss the lost generations of Gazan children, the massacres at “aid distribution centers,” increased home demolitions and settler violence in the West Bank, the current relationships of the Palestinian Authority and Jordanian government with Israel, the regional dynamics after the recent war with Iran, and what Netanyahu's next move might be.Read Dalia's piece from March in The Guardian, “For Palestinians, this was never a ceasefire.” Advertising Inquiries: https://redcircle.com/brandsPrivacy & Opt-Out: https://redcircle.com/privacy

Send us a textThis prescient conversation with Richard Falk, international law expert and former U.N. Special Rapporteur on human rights in Occupied Palestine, anticipates the catastrophe that has been unfolding in Gaza for the past 18 months. In an interview recorded January of 2023, Falk discusses the significance of Israel's 2018 nation-state law and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's assertion that Israel possesses exclusive right to all of the Land of Israel. Brazenly defying international law, the assertion repudiates the two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian struggle that has been promoted by the international community for decades. Professor Falk says Netanyahu's claim on behalf of Israel to all of historic Palestine, including the West Bank, represents the final chapter in the Zionist enterprise. Like successful settler-colonial projects in the United States, Australia, Canada and New Zealand, it will entail the elimination or complete marginalization of the indigenous population. Falk paints a somber scenario of what it is likely to mean for the Palestinians unless civil society mobilizes to defend them. 

In this episode, I invite social & peace activist and former IDF soldier Adar Weinreb onto the show. Adar shares his thoughtful perspective on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, emphasizing the importance of humanization in creating the possibility of reconciliation. He reflects on his experiences as an IDF soldier and his evolution towards understanding the common humanity shared by both sides. We discuss the role of systemic change, his lessons from hosting debates on Israel/Palestine, and the potential of AI in facilitating civil discourse through his startup, Head On. Adar's insights offer a thoughtful approach to bridge-building based on the fundamental conviction in our ultimate oneness, a perspective we need more than ever.Timestamps:00:00 Introduction to a Nuanced Perspective02:19 The Role of Psychedelics in Perspective Shift04:57 Understanding Trauma and Its Impact on Conflict07:25 The Complexity of Humanizing the Other09:56 Exploring Solutions to the Conflict15:02 The Role of Institutions in Peace Building19:54 Grassroots Movements and External Influences25:10 Navigating the Narrative and Building Bridges30:05 Criticism and Humanization in Conflict Resolution37:40 Courageous Voices Against Terrorism38:31 The Complexity of Criticism and Identity39:27 Understanding Human Dignity Amidst Conflict40:21 Rights to Critique and Human Rights Abuses41:10 The Role of Collective Psychology in Conflict42:47 Mastering Peace Over War45:43 Introducing Head On: A Platform for Civil Discourse48:01 AI as a Facilitator for Understanding51:35 Lessons from Moderating Debates55:10 Evolving Perspectives Through Dialogue01:00:11 Misunderstandings Between Palestinians and Israelis01:06:10 Understanding the Palestinian Experience01:07:59 Finding Hope in ChangeAdar's YouTubeAdar's TwitterIf you'd like bonus material you can join the Patreon

From planting forests to refugee kitchens, Vicki Hansen reveals the stories of awardees from the 13th Luxembourg Peace Prize. Vicki Hansen is President of the Schengen Peace Foundation, a Luxembourg-based nonprofit dedicated to global peace-building through its two main initiatives: the World Peace Forum and the Luxembourg Peace. Today heralds the 13th Luxembourg Peace Prize, and the awardees come from all over the world. This is a story of hope and people with tremendous purpose and passion, despite so much our our world feeling fractured today. “Peace isn't just the absence of war—it's a culture, a choice, a way of life.” The foundation's origin rests with two men who realised they were the first generation not to pass on war stories. What if peace could become the new inheritance? The sad thought is that this might not be the case for our children today, which is why, I think, this conversation matters even more. Outstanding Award for Peace Tony Rinaudo is an Australian agronomist regenerating deserts through his concept of farmer-managed natural regeneration (FMNR). Tony lived in Niger Republic in the 1980s when he worked on this technique, and now it flourishes across 26 countries. Outstanding Peace Journalism Gloria Laker is a fearless journalist from Uganda. She's trained over 700 others to report in highly sensitive conflict zones. “Peace journalism is the art of choosing healing over harm,” she says. Outstanding Peace Process Dror Rubin and Ghardir Hani are an Israeli-Palestinian duo using interfaith dialogue to heal generations of division. Dror says “Trust will be built upon introduction, we were not forced to live next to each other, we were chosen to be neighbours in the holy land- not one on top of the other but next to one another.” Outstanding Peace Support Chiche! is a restaurant chain in Luxembourg run entirely by refugees, proving that inclusion can dignified. Food, says Vicki, is a universal language for peace. Their motto is ‘inclusion is delicious'! Outstanding Peace Activism Jennifer Teege, a German New York Times bestselling author was adopted but discovered that her grandfather was a Nazi commandant. She turned personal shock and trauma into a life of reconciliation. Her mantra is that “Peace starts in our heads.” Outstanding Peace Activism The World Central Kitchen is another story led to the connection through food and the grace a good meal bestows on all sides. This phenomenon, the WCF, is led by Michelin starred chef José Andrés. His team serve 500 million meals across war zones and disasters. “Everyone deserves a hot meal served with dignity,” Through it all, Vicki's voice is steady, hopeful, fierce. “We can't outsource peace, we must be that fourth leg at the table.” This is a reference to the prize's sculpture—three legs of a chair with the invitation to join the conversation and be part of the solution. Peace isn't a dream—it's a decision. And it's ours to make.

Prager University 5 Min Videos- Is Israel a Liability? The Cult of Death, What Is Birthright Citizenship? and Dinesh D'Souza- Fostering Iran Regime Change   PragerU 5 Minute Videos- Is Israel a Liability?  The Cult of Death What Is Birthright Citizenship? REGIME CHANGE? Dinesh D'Souza Podcast How Foreign Aid Keeps Africa Poor   Is Israel a Liability? | 5-Minute Videos | PragerU Watch this video at- https://youtu.be/-YR0ix_rMcY?si=3GFN3T6SzNQfE6rw PragerU 3.37M subscribers 144,687 views Premiered Jun 23, 2025 5-Minute Videos A growing chorus of voices—from the American left and right—now calls Israel “a liability.” They say it's time to walk away. Are they right? Or is Israel an indispensable ally? Michael Doran, Director of the Middle East Center at the Hudson Institute, confronts this controversy.

Why is it so hard to have civil conversations about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict? And can we break through the outrage culture, media tribalism, and polarization that dominate today's discourse?In this episode, we talk with Adam Boaz Becker, founder of Headon.AI, an AI platform designed to foster political dialogue and bridge divides. Adam shares what he's learned from years of street interviews in Israel and the West Bank, the challenges of creating conversations in conflict zones, and how social media and traditional media often make things worse.We also explore how AI might help us talk across divides, and why simply seeking common ground might not be the solution—sometimes, peaceful coexistence is powerful enough.Text me your feedback and leave your contact info if you'd like a reply (this is a one-way text). Thanks, DavidSupport the showShow Notes:https://outrageoverload.net/ Follow me, David Beckemeyer, on Twitter @mrblog or email outrageoverload@gmail.com. Follow the show on Twitter @OutrageOverload or Instagram @OutrageOverload. We are also on Facebook /OutrageOverload.HOTLINE: 925-552-7885Got a Question, comment or just thoughts you'd like to share? Call the O2 hotline and leave a message and you could be featured in an upcoming episodeIf you would like to help the show, you can contribute here. Tell everyone you know about the show. That's the best way to support it.Rate and Review the show on Podchaser: https://www.podchaser.com/OutrageOverload Intro music and outro music by Michael Ramir C.Many thanks to my co-editor and co-director, Austin Chen.

In this episode of the Z3 Podcast, host Rabbi Amitai Fraiman is joined by Rebecca Guzman and Shanie Reichman, contributing authors to the book Young Zionist Voices, for a candid conversation about how the younger generations experiences Israel, Zionism, and Jewish identity. What does it take to build understanding between generations, and how can we stay in relationship even when we don't see eye to eye? Don't miss this thoughtful episode that speaks directly to the challenges and possibilities of being young, Jewish, and politically engaged today.Want to hear more from Gen Z voices like Rebecca and Shanie? Get your copy of Young Zionist Voices now at z3project.org/books.About Our GuestsRebecca Guzman is a Straus Scholar and Tablet Fellow at Stern College for Women, where she is currently studying creative writing. Her work has appeared in Jewish Journal and The Jewish Press, and she has received recognition from the National Council of Teachers of English and The New York Times. She lives in New York City.Shanie Reichman is the director of strategic initiatives and director of IPF Atid at Israel Policy Forum, based in New York City, where she works to elevate the discourse around the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. She serves as the founding chair for the Forum Dvorah U.S. committee, an NGO that champions women's participation in national security and foreign policy decision-making spheres in Israel. She is a Wexner Field Fellow, a Schusterman ROIer, and serves on the boards of Queens College Hillel and the Center for Ethnic, Racial and Religious Understanding. Her work has been published in the Forward, the Jerusalem Post, Times of Israel, Hey Alma, Jewish Unpacked, and International Policy Digest. She is a participating author in the book “Young Zionist Voices” and is pursuing her MA in Middle Eastern Studies at CUNY Graduate Center.Chapters(00:00)Introduction(04:15) Defining Zionism: Personal Perspectives(08:47) Zionism and Judaism: Intersections and Distinctions(13:50) Generational Perspectives on Zionism(22:55) The Future of Israel Education(30:35) Understanding Emotional Connections to Israel(32:51) The Complexity of Zionism and Education(35:13) Navigating Criticism and Support for Israel(37:00) The Disconnect Between Heritage and Current Events(38:31) The Reality of Israel vs. Idealism(40:52) Shared Values and Diverging Perspectives(43:21) Empathy and Understanding in the Jewish Community(45:26) Defining Boundaries in Conversations about Zionism(48:41) Strategic Engagement with Young American Jews(52:14) The Impact of Perceptions on Zionism(55:45) The Need for Open Conversations(01:00:26) Hope for the Future of Jewish Identity

On this powerful episode of A Pod Named Kickback, No Brakes Nu and GetFitWithJack hold space for a raw and unfiltered conversation in honor of Men's Mental Health Month. Nu opens up about personal betrayals, mental health struggles, and what it means when your so-called “bros” move funny during your darkest hours.The convo widens into a deep dive on the importance of therapy, vulnerability, and the misunderstood power of manifestation — not just wishing, but working for what you speak into existence.Then things heat up as the squad breaks down Trump's latest military aggression and the U.S.'s thirst for war, especially in the Middle East. Nu doesn't hold back on the realities of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, calling out the historical and ongoing injustices with brutal honesty.But it's not all fire and fury — Billboard's Top 75 R&B Artists list brings the laughs, eye-rolls, and passionate debates. How you got a Top 10 with no Luther? No Babyface? Miss us with that.From deep soul wounds to soulful debates, this episode balances truth, humor, and healing. A grown-ass convo for grown-ass kickbackers. ★ Support this podcast on Patreon ★

Tucker Carlson and Senator Ted Cruz recently reignited a centuries-old theological debate: Should Christians automatically support the modern nation of Israel? In this thought-provoking episode, Joel Settecase dives deep into the Scriptures—Genesis, Romans, Galatians—to dissect whether the Bible actually teaches unconditional support for the state of Israel. What does it mean to be a descendant of Abraham? Has the land promise already been fulfilled? And how should Christians view the Israeli-Palestinian conflict in light of the Gospel?This is not just a political episode—it's a biblical one. Whether you're pro-Israel, skeptical, or just want biblical clarity, this episode will challenge and sharpen your understanding.

Researcher-educator Ali Michael, Ph.D., who has written about concepts such as Whiteness and White Privilege, unpacks what they mean, responding to common critiques. Michael defends educational investment in DEI programs as the U.S. federal government has actively sought to dismantle this work. Also, after spending more than a year meeting with American educators who whose work was impacted by the Oct. 7 attacks and the war in Gaza, she shares some surprising themes that emerged. She also shares how differences over the Israeli-Palestinian conflict surfaced in the early years of her marriage and how she and her partner managed to work through disagreement. Theme song, “Ilu Finu” by Rabbi Miriam Margles. Her album This is the Day is available for purchase at CDBaby: https://store.cdbaby.com/cd/miriammarglesandthehadarensemb Visit our home on the web — Evolve: Groundbreaking Jewish Conversations: http://evolve.reconstructingjudaism.org Subscribe by Email at http://subscribebyemail.com/evolve.fireside.fm/rss Read these show notes on the web at https://evolve.fireside.fm/1 This podcast is produced by Reconstructing Judaism. Visit us at ReconstructingJudaism.org (https://ReconstructingJudaism.org). Special Guest: Ali Michael, Ph.D. .

Since Israel launched Operation Rising Lion—a precise and defensive military campaign aimed at preventing the Iranian regime from acquiring nuclear weapons—Iran has responded with a barrage of ballistic missiles and drones, indiscriminately targeting Israeli civilians. Dr. Matthew Levitt, director of the Reinhard Program on Counterterrorism and Intelligence at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, and a leading expert on Iran's global terror network, explains what's at stake—and what could come next. Take Action: We must stop a regime that vows to murder millions of Israelis from gaining the weapons to do it. Urge your elected leaders to assure that Israel has all the necessary support to end Iran's nuclear threat. Resources and Analysis: Iranian Regime vs. Israel War Explained: What You Should Know AJC Advocacy Anywhere: Israel and Iran: Latest Updates, Global Responses, and the Path Ahead 5 Key Reasons Behind Israel's Defensive Strike on Iran's Imminent Nuclear Threat Listen – AJC Podcasts: The Forgotten Exodus: Untold stories of Jews who left or were driven from Arab nations and Iran People of the Pod: Latest Episodes: Why Israel Had No Choice: Inside the Defensive Strike That Shook Iran's Nuclear Program What Rabbi Lord Jonathan Sacks' State of the Jewish World Teaches Us Today Follow People of the Pod on your favorite podcast app, and learn more at AJC.org/PeopleofthePod You can reach us at: peopleofthepod@ajc.org If you've appreciated this episode, please be sure to tell your friends, and rate and review us on Apple Podcasts or Spotify. Transcript of the Interview: Israel's shadow war with the Iranian regime, the world's leading state sponsor of terrorism, erupted into open conflict last week following a stunning report from the International Atomic Energy Agency that confirmed Iran was much closer to obtaining nuclear weapons than previously known. Since Israel launched a wave of attacks on nuclear sites and facilities, Iran has fired missiles toward Israel's most populated cities. Joining us to discuss what this all means is one of the foremost experts on Iran and its global threats, and a regular guest when trouble arises with Iran. Dr. Matthew Levitt, director of the Reinhard Counterterrorism Program at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy.  Matt, welcome back to People of the Pod. Matthew Levitt:   It's a pleasure to be back, but I need to come sometime when the world's okay.  Manya Brachear Pashman:   That would be nice. That'd be nice. But what will we talk about? Matthew Levitt:   Yeah, just call me one of the Horsemen of the Apocalypse. Manya Brachear Pashman:   Well, you are one of the foremost experts on the dangers posed by Iran, especially its terror proxies. And you've written the definitive book on Hezbollah, titled Hezbollah: the Global Footprint of Lebanon's Party of God. And I say that whole title, I want to get in there, because we are talking about global threats here.  Can you explain the scale of Iran's global threat and the critical role that its terror proxies, like Hezbollah, Hamas, the Houthis, play in advancing that strategy? Matthew Levitt:   So I really appreciate the question, because it's really important to remind listeners that the Israel Iran war did not start Thursday night US time, Friday morning, Israel time. In fact, it's just the latest salvo where the Israelis, after years and years and years of Iranian we call it malign activity, but that's too soft a term. We're talking about Iran sending weapons and funds to proxies like Hamas to carry out October 7, like Hezbollah to fire rockets at Israel almost daily for almost a year. Like the Houthis, who were much more than a thorn in the Saudi backside until the Iranians came and gave them more sophisticated capabilities.  We're talking about an Iran that a few years ago decided that instead of making sure that every gun that it sent to the West Bank had to go to Hamas or Islamic Jihad. They decided to just flood the West Bank with guns. Who cares who's shooting at the Israelis so long as somebody is. And an Iran that not only carries out human rights abuses of all kinds at home, but that threatens Israel and its neighbors with drones, low altitude cruise missiles, short range ballistic missiles, and medium and long range ballistic missiles.  And so the totality of this, much like the totality of Hezbollah's striking Israel for almost a year, ultimately led Israel to do what most people thought couldn't be done, and just tear Hezbollah apart, that the Israel war on Hezbollah is the prequel to what we've been seeing over the past few days in Iran. Similarly, for the Israelis, it got to be too much. It wasn't even really that President Trump's 60 days expired and Israel attacked on day 61. It wasn't only that the IAEA came out with a report saying that the Iranians have refused to explain certain activities that can only be explained as nuclear weaponization activities.  It was that the Israelis had information that two things were happening. One, that Iran was working very, very hard to rebuild its capability to manufacture medium, long range ballistic missiles that can hit Israel. After the Israeli reprisal attack last October took out a key component of that program, the mixers that are important for the solid propellant, without which you can't make ballistic missiles. And Iran is believed to have, at least the beginning of this recent round of the conflict –Thursday, Friday–about 2000 such missiles. Far fewer now, the Israelis say they've taken out about a third of them, plus launchers, plus radars, et cetera. But that Iran had a plan within just a few years to develop as many as 8000 of these. And that simply was not tolerable for the Israelis.  And the second is that the Israelis say that they compiled evidence that Iran had a secret, secret nuclear weapons program that had been going on predating October 7, but was fast tracked after October 7, that they were planning to maintain this program, even as they were negotiating over the more overt program with the Trump administration. President Trump has even taken issue with his own Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard, who testified in March that the US intelligence committee does not assess that Iran is weaponizing. And President says, I don't care what she says, I think they were very close to weaponizing.  The Israelis say they have shared this information at least recently with their US counterparts and that was not tolerable. So the primary goals that Israel has set out for itself with this campaign is beyond the critically important shattering the glass ceiling. Think where people in particular, in Iran thought this would never happen, was two things, one, addressing and significantly degrading and setting back the Iranian ballistic missile production program, and second, doing the same to the nuclear program. They've already carried out strikes at Isfahan, Natanz, even at the upper parts of Fordow. And there is an expectation that the Israelis are going to do something more. The Israeli national security advisor said on Israeli television today, We are not going to stop without addressing the nuclear activities at Fordow. Manya Brachear Pashman:   You know, you called it a prequel, Israel's operations against Hezbollah last year. Did you know that it was a prequel at the time and to what extent did it weaken Iran and leave it more vulnerable in this particular war? Matthew Levitt:   I'm going to be the last person in Washington, D.C. who tells you when he doesn't know. And anybody who tells you they did know is lying to you. None of us saw what Israel did to Hezbollah coming. None of us saw that and said, Oh, they did it to a non-state actor right across their border. So they'll definitely be able to do it to Iran, 1000+ kilometers away, big nation state with massive arsenals and a nuclear program and lots of proxies. One plus one does not equal three in this.  In other words, the fact that Israel developed mind boggling capabilities and incredible intelligence, dominance and then special tools, pagers and walkie talkies, in the case of Hezbollah, did not mean that they were going to be able to do the same vis a vis Iran. And they did. The same type of intelligence dominance, the same type of intelligence, knowing where somebody was at a certain time, that the protocols would be that certain leaders would get in a certain secret bunker once hostilities started, and they'd be able to take them out in that bunker. As they did to a bunch of senior Hezbollah commanders just months ago. Drone operations from within Iran, Iran being hit with missiles that were fired at Iran from within Iran, all of it. One case did not necessarily translate into the other. It is exponentially impressive. And Israel's enemies have to be saying, you know, that the Israelis are just all capable. Now you're absolutely right. You hit the nail on the head on one critical issue. For a very long time, Israel was at least somewhat deterred, I would say very deterred, from targeting Iran. Because Iran had made very, very clear if Israel or the United States or anybody else targeted Iran or its nuclear program, one of the first things that would happen would be that Hezbollah in Lebanon, Israel, Iran's first, most important proxy would rain hellfire in Israel in the form of 1000s upon 1000s of rockets. Until Israel addressed the problem, Hezbollah is believed to have had 150 to 200,000 different types of projectiles, up to and including precision guided munitions.  Not only have the overwhelming majority of those been destroyed, Hezbollah still has 1000s of rockets, but Hezbollah leadership has been decimated. There's a new sheriff in town in Lebanon. There's a new government that immediately, when hostility started with Iran's, went to Hezbollah and said, You're not doing this, not dragging Lebanon back into a war that nobody wanted again. We are finally coming out of this economic crisis. And so Iran was faced with a situation where it didn't have Hezbollah to deter Israel.  Israel, you know, paved the way for a highway in the air to Iran, taking out air defense systems. It was able to fly over and through Syria. The Syrians are not shedding any tears as they see the Quds Force and the IRGC getting beaten down after what Iran did in Syria. And the Israelis have air dominance now. President Trump said, We, using the we term, air dominance now, earlier today. And they're able to slowly and methodically continue to target the ballistic missile program. Primarily, the medium and long range missiles that target Israel, but sometimes it's the same production lines that produce the short range missiles that Iran uses to target U.S. Forces in the region, and our allies in the Gulf. So Israel is not just protecting itself, it's protecting the region. And then also taking out key military security intelligence personnel, sometimes taking out one person, then a couple days later, taking out the person who succeeded that person, and then also taking out key scientists who had the know-how to potentially rebuild all the things that Israel is now destroying. Manya Brachear Pashman:   But Israel is also not hearing from the Houthis, is not hearing from Hamas. It's not hearing from other terror proxies either. Very few attacks from Iran's terror proxies in the aftermath of this wave. Why? Why do you think that is? Matthew Levitt:   The crickets are loud. The crickets are loud. Look, we've discussed Hezbollah. Hezbollah understands that if it were to do something, the Israelis will come in even harder and destroy what's left. Hamas is still holding hostages. This is still an open wound, but it doesn't have the capabilities that it once had, and so there have been a couple of short range things that they tried to shoot, but it's not anything that's going to do huge damage, and the Israeli systems can deal with those.  The Houthis did fire something, and it hurt some Palestinians near Hebron. You know, the Houthis and the Iranians in particular, in this conflict have killed Palestinians, and in one case, Syrians. They're continuing to hurt people that are not Israelis. One of the things that I think people are hopeful for is that as Iran tries to sue for peace, and it already is, it's been reaching out to Cyprus to pass messages, etcetera. The hope is that Iran will recognize that it's in a position whereby A) there has to be zero enrichment and the facilities have to be destroyed, whatever's left of them. And B) there's a hope that Israel and the United States together will be able to use this diplomatic moment to truly end the conflict in Gaza and get the hostages home. Manya Brachear Pashman:   Well, that was what I was going to ask. I mean, if Israel achieves its objectives in this war, primarily eliminating Iran's nuclear threat, how significant a setback would that be for Hamas and Iran's other terror proxies, and could it indeed pave the way for an end of the war in Gaza and the return of the hostages? Matthew Levitt:   Like everybody else, I'm so scarred, I don't want to get my hopes up, but I do see this as a distinct possibility, and here's why. Not Hezbollah, not the Houthis, not Hamas, none of them, and plenty of other proxies that don't start in the letter H, none of them could have been anywhere as capable as they've proven to be, were it not for Iranian money and weapons. Also some training, some intelligence, but primarily money and weapons.  And so Hamas is already on its back foot in this regard. It can still get some money in. It's still being able to make money off of humanitarian aid. Iran is still sending money in through money exchange houses and hawaladars, but not weapons. Their ability to manufacture weapons, their military industrial complex within Gaza, this is destroyed. Hezbollah, we've discussed, discussed, and a lot of their capabilities have been destroyed. And those that remain are largely deterred. The Houthis did shoot up some rockets, and the Israelis did carry out one significant retaliatory attack. But I think people are beginning to see the writing on the wall. The Israelis are kicking the stuffing out of Iran with pinprick attacks that are targeting the worst of the bad guys, including people who have carried out some of the worst human rights transgressions against Iranians. Let's not pretend that this is not affecting the average Iranian. It is. The president says, Everybody get out of Tehran. That's just not possible. People, average Iranians, good people. It must be just an absolute terror.  But Israel's not bombing, you know, apartment buildings, as Iran is doing in Israel, or as Russia is doing in Ukraine. And so it really is a different type of thing. And when the Houthis, when Hamas, when Hezbollah, look at this, you don't you don't poke the tiger when it's angry. I think they also understand now's the time to get into survival mode. What you want is for the regime in Iran not to be destroyed. This is no longer a moment, as it's been since long before October 7, but certainly since then, of how Iran as proxies, export Iran's revolution. This is now a question of how they maintain and preserve the revolution at home. And it's extremely important to the proxies that Iran remain, so that even if it's knocked down over time, hopefully, theoretically, from their perspective, it can regain its footing. It will still have, they hope, its oil and gas, etcetera, and they will get back to a point where they can continue to fund and arm the proxies in. Maybe even prioritize them as it takes them longer to rebuild their ballistic missile, drone, and nuclear programs. Manya Brachear Pashman:   Which is a scary prospect as well to know that terror proxies could be spread throughout the world and empowered even a little bit more. President Trump left the G7 summit a day early to meet with security advisors, and just a few hours ago, prior to this interview, President Trump called for Iran's, quote, unconditional surrender, saying that the US knows where the Supreme Leader is, and some other threatening language. But I mean, this appears to be a kind of a clear commitment to Israel. So I'm curious how you assess his administration's actions before and during the war thus far, and do you see the United States edging toward direct involvement? Matthew Levitt:   All politics is local, and there is a tug of war within the MAGA movement over whether or not the US should be getting involved. Not only in supporting an important ally, but in removing a critical threat. The President is clearly frustrated that Iran was not being more forthcoming in the negotiations. He said many times, we'd offered you a great deal, you should have taken the deal. He's very aware that his deadline ended, and they didn't particularly seem to care. There's also the background that once upon a time, they tried to assassinate him, I think, after the Israelis did what they did, the President appreciates capabilities. He appreciates success. He likes backing the winning horse. And so the New York Times is reporting that after getting off the phone with Prime Minister Netanyahu, President Trump reportedly turned to some aides and said, maybe we need to help him. Now it's not clear that's what's going to happen, and my understanding is that the Israelis have plans of their own for things like the heavily fortified facility at Fordow, which is the most important and highly fortified, protected of the nuclear installations. The Israeli National Security Advisor spoke today and said, you know, we're not going to be done until we do something with Fordow.  The United States can do multiple things only the United States has the MOP: the Massive Ordinance Penetrator, and the airplanes to deliver it, and they could end Fordow if they wanted. Short of that, they could do other things to support Israel. There's been defensive support for the State of Israel already, but there's other things they could do, refueling and other things if they wanted to. And at a minimum, I don't see the president restraining Israel at all. Now, I've heard some people say that so far, the President has fired nothing more than some social media postings, some of them even in all caps.  But the truth is, those do have an effect, and so long as Israel is not restrained. I think the Israelis went into this with a plan. That plan is not necessarily to entirely destroy the entire nuclear program, but if the ballistic missile program and the nuclear program are sufficiently degraded so that it will take them years and a tremendous amount of time and money to rebuild, knowing that Israel has broken the glass ceiling on this idea of targeting Iran, that if the Israelis feel they need to, they will come back. If the Iranians rebuild their air defense systems, the Israelis will address them and create a new highway going if they need to. I think the Israelis are making that clear. Knowing that it's going to be a little bit of a road for Iran, especially when it will have to deal with some domestic issues coming out of this.  Finally, the Israelis have started signaling there's other things they could do. The Israelis have not yet fully targeted oil and gas fields and facilities. For example, they had one set of attacks where they basically knocked at the front door of some of these facilities without walking in the house. That's signaling, and I think it's one of the reasons you're seeing Iran quietly trying to reach out for some type of a ceasefire. Other signaling, for example, is the Israelis deciding to fly all the way to Mashhad, which is in far eastern Iran, to take out an airplane. That airplane was not particularly important. It was the message. There is nowhere in Iran we can't go. It's not a question of distance, it's not a question of refueling, it's not a question of air defense systems. We can do what we need to do. And I think the Iranians understand that now. Manya Brachear Pashman:   So we talked about the commitment to Israel, and how clear, how important it is to clarify that commitment to Israel. How important is it to clarify the United States commitment to Arab partners in the Middle East to help defend them in other words, if this conflict escalates? Matthew Levitt:   This is critically important. You know, one of the individuals who was taken out, for example, was the person who was in charge of the drone attack on the Abqaiq oil facility in Saudi Arabia. If you look, for example, at the Saudi statement condemning the Israeli actions, it was issued by the Foreign Ministry without a single name attached to it. Wasn't issued by the Crown Prince, wasn't issued by the foreign minister. So I think you should expect a whole lot of public criticism. I imagine there's a different conversation going on behind closed doors. It's not necessarily, you know, pom-poming. This makes the Gulf states very, very nervous, in part because they understand that one way Iran could try and get out of this is to expand the conflict.  And that the reason they haven't is because, short of trying to prevent Iranians from taking to the streets and potentially doing something to maybe overthrow the regime, short of that, the number one thing that the Iranian regime is most desperate to avoid is getting the United States involved militarily. And I think the Iranians really understand and the messaging's been clear. If you target US Forces in the region, if you target our allies in the region, we'll get involved. If you don't, then we might not.  Now the President now is talking about potentially doing that, and as a lot of maybe this, maybe that, nothing very clear. I think what is clear is that the Israelis are going to continue doing what they need to do for another one to two weeks. Even going so far as doing something, though they haven't made clear what to address the really complicated problem of the fortified facility at Fordow. Manya Brachear Pashman:   So how important is it for global security if Israel is successful in eliminating the nuclear threat in Iran? Matthew Levitt:   Look, Iran has been the single most destabilizing factor in the region for a long time now. Imagine a region without a destabilizing revolutionary regime in Iran without a regime that is supporting Shia militants in Saudi Arabia and other Gulf countries.  Imagine the Shia militias in Iraq suddenly without a funder and a patron, enabling the Shia government in Iraq to actually be able to take control of the country and establish a monopoly over the use of force. At a time when the Shia militias, because of Iran's backing, are becoming more dangerous and more powerful in Iraq.  Imagine the Lebanese government being able to be more forward leaning in their effort to establish a monopoly over the use of force in that country, reclaim bases that Hezbollah has used for all this time, and establish a new Lebanon that is not beholden to Iran and Hezbollah.  And imagine an Israeli-Palestinian situation where you didn't have Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad as spoilers. Recall that October 7 happened in large part because Hamas and Hezbollah and Iran could not tolerate the prospect of Israeli-Saudi normalization. For most Palestinians, this was great news. The Saudis were demanding real dividends for the Palestinians from the Netanyahu government, which was likely going to do them. This was great for Palestinians, bad for Hamas.  Imagine Hamas no longer getting that support from Iran. Imagine Iran no longer able to send or being interested in sending millions upon millions of dollars to its proxies, and instead spending what money it has on helping its population, instead of cracking down on it with human rights violations. You could have a very, very different region, let alone imagine Iran no longer carrying out acts of terrorism, kidnapping plots, abduction plots of dissidents and Jews and Israelis and others around the world of the type that we've seen throughout Europe and throughout the Middle East and even in the United States over the past few years. Manya Brachear Pashman:   That's quite an imagination you have. But I take your point. Let me ask you this then. Did you ever imagine that Israel would take this dramatic step?  Matthew Levitt:   What the Israelis have achieved, when you are so against the wall and you're forced to come up with solutions, because it's a matter of life or death – you make the impossible possible. And I think that perhaps the Iranians assumed that the Israeli post-October 7 doctrine applied to non-state actors only. And that doctrine is very simple. Israel will no longer allow adversaries who are openly committed to its destruction to build up weapons, arsenals that they can then use at some point to actually try and destroy Israel. They will not allow that to happen.  They allowed it to happen with Hamas. It was a mistake. They allowed it to happen with Hezbollah. It was a mistake that they corrected. And Iran is the biggest, arguably, really, the only existential threat as huge, as a tasking as that was, clearly they invested in doing it. And the question became, not, why can't it be done? What is it that has to be overcome? And I don't think sitting here with you right now, you know, what is it, 3:30 on Tuesday, the 17th, that we've seen the last of the tricks up Israel's sleeve.  Manya Brachear Pashman:   I only have one last question for you, and that is about the United States. The importance of the United States getting directly involved. I mean, we've talked about previously undisclosed nuclear sites, and who knows how many there could be. We're talking about more than what, 600,000 square miles of Iran. If the goal is a non nuclear Iran, can Israel finish this war without the United States, or does it even matter? I mean, is this just a step to force Iran back to the negotiating table with virtually zero leverage? Matthew Levitt:   So look, I don't think the goal here is completely destroying the Iranian nuclear program, or even completely destroying the Iranian ballistic missile program. The goal is to so degrade it that it is set back many, many years, and break that ceiling. People now understand if Israelis need to come back, they're coming back. I think they would like to do as much damage to these destructive programs as possible, of course, and I don't think we've seen the end of it. I think there are more tricks up Israel's sleeve when it comes to some of these complicated problems.  Judged by this yardstick, by the way, the Israeli operation is a tremendous success, tremendous success, even though there have been some significant casualties back in Israel, and even though this has caused tremendous trauma for innocent Iranians who have no love for the regime. This is a situation that the Iranian regime has brought down on all of us.  I do think that the Israelis have made very, very clear that this doesn't end until something is done to further disrupt and dismantle Fordow, which is the most important and the most heavily fortified, underground, under a mountain facility. It's not clear what the Israelis have in mind. It seems they have something in mind of their own. It's clear they would love for the United States to get involved, because the United States could do real damage to that facility and potentially end the Iranian nuclear program. But at the end of the day, if it can't be completely destroyed, I anticipate it's going to be damaged enough to significantly set it back. This phase of the Israel-Iran war, which didn't start last week, is not about pushing them back a week or a month or two months. Manya Brachear Pashman:   Well, Matt, thank you so much for your wise counsel and perspective on this matter, and yes, hopefully we can have you back another time to talk about peace and love and things that have nothing to do with war and conflict with Iran or its terror proxies. Matthew Levitt:   I would really look forward to prepping for that interview. In the meantime, I want to thank AJC for all the important work it does, and thank you guys for having me on the podcast. Manya Brachear Pashman:   If you missed last week's episodes, be sure to tune in for our crossover episode with Books and Beyond: The Rabbi Sacks Podcast, a podcast of the Rabbi Sacks Legacy, and my conversation with AJC's Jerusalem Director Avital Liebovich. During a special breaking news episode the day after Israel launched Operation Rising Lion, the latest in Israel's ongoing war of self-defense against the Iranian regime.  

Since 2023, Aziz and Moaz have joined forces in their pursuit for peace, traveling globally and sharing their message of peace and hope with all who will listen. Together, they co-lead InterAct International, a non profit advancing sustainability, education, and cross cultural connections. Aziz and Maoz carry the weight of personal tragedies inflicted by the Israeli-Palestinian conflict but they are transforming their pain into a shared pursuit of peace for all. Hosted by Rabbi Chaim Koritzinsky of Congregation Etz Chayim, and Pastor Danielle Parish of Spark Church, both located in Palo Alto, CA

Since 2023, Aziz and Moaz have joined forces in their pursuit for peace, traveling globally and sharing their message of peace and hope with all who will listen. Together, they co-lead InterAct International, a non profit advancing sustainability, education, and cross cultural connections. Aziz and Maoz carry the weight of personal tragedies inflicted by the Israeli-Palestinian conflict but they are transforming their pain into a shared pursuit of peace for all. Hosted by Rabbi Chaim Koritzinsky of Congregation Etz Chayim, and Pastor Danielle Parish of Spark Church, both located in Palo Alto, CA

As protests against raids targeting illegal immigrants continue in Los Angeles, we hear the latest from the city and speak to a former director of the US border agency ICE, Ronald Vitiello. Also in the programme: the role of rare earth minerals in an apparent warming of trade relations between the US and China; and reflections of former Palestinian foreign minister Nasser al-Kidwa on finding a solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. And memories of Brian Wilson of the Beach Boys band, who has died at the age of eighty-two.(Photo: Members of California National Guard speak to a man outside the Edward R. Roybal Federal Building, after days of protests against federal immigration sweeps in Los Angeles, 11 June 2025. Credit: REUTERS/David Ryder)

After watching this entire recording of the Women of Earth Project Empowerment Call #8, please register the Matrix Code NCRADIO3.75 in your free account at StartOver.xyz. This Experiment is worth 1 Matrix Point. -------- The land holds a heartbreaking beauty that pulled the old Gods and Goddesses to appear here in their many shapes. Function follows form. This got me thinking. If I shape myself in a form attractive to the Archetypal, I might entice it to bless me with its intense caress of Love and its unshakable clarity of empowerment.  What if I can shape an entire gameworld in such attractive form? What if I can remind my fellow women that their natural shape is one that the Archetypal cannot resist? What if I interact with my sisters as if they were already so irresistible? Wouldn't that be quite something? This was our territory of exploration yesterday in the #8 monthly Women's Project Empowerment Call.  A longing for "More" is a call towards the Archetypal. "More" does not come from other people meeting you where you want them to be. "More" comes from allowing yourself the Radical Love of Consciousness pour through you. The bigger vacuum you create, the more life will be sucked into your wake. We started defining new Archetypal Conversations in addition to the Possibility Lab Process of the Archetypal Women - Men Conversation (The Masculine meeting the Feminine for healing). Archetypal Conversations are first meant as a profound healing to complete, integrate and place in the past a Low Drama that has lasted for hundred or thousand of years. We are talking here about the abuse of men on women, but also the abuse of white people on black and indigenous people during colonization time. Yesterday the conversation centered on the Jewish / Arab, Israeli / Palestinian war extending to any conflict happening now on Planet Earth.  What if instead of having Women and Men healing, we would bring Women and Women raging, grieving, completing their abuse with each other? Maybe at the end, they would stand panting, staring at each other, both side with their heart crack-opened and be able to truly SEE that the Women across from them are EXACTLY like them: Women, in pain, feeling, loving fiercely, and wanting to heal, but who also just like them have let their children being caught in the crossfire of psychopathic warmongers. Could this happen? I think it could. I think the women could do this.  -------- Women carry seeds for projects that are in fact bridges to regenerative cultures. It is time for these seeds to sprout, but obsolete thoughtware often interferes. If you think, 'I need to have it all figured it out before I start.', 'I do not know how it goes.', 'I am alone.' These patterns keep patriarchal structures in place. Something completely different from this is possible right now. The Women of Earth movement specializes in transforming old thinking and feelings patterns and weaving effective team collaborations.  Each month we will select two or three women's projects to amplify.  Your project does not need to be contexted in Possibility Management. The requirements are that your project is: 1. Source by one or more Women.  2. A Bridge to regenerative culture: we are interested in project that empower edgeworkers to reclaim their authority, regain their dignity, become the source-person of their life by exiting the Patriarchy, and occupying next culture.  Projects range from training programs, half-way houses, single mom's centers, permaculture projects, gameworld consulting, and more. You are invited to join without a project as an amplifier for your sisters' endeavor.  In monthly online Project Empowerment meetings we will distill next steps and immediately practice them.  SPACEHOLDERS: Anne-Chloé Destremau & Vera Franco WHEN: on the 3rd Tuesday of every month from @7.30-9pm CET Next meeting: Tuesday 17 June, 2025 INVESTMENT: monetary free. REQUIREMENTS: You already had a first contact with the Women of Earth movement through a WoE Possibility Team, WorkTalk, or Rage Club; or you have participated in an Expand The Box Training or a Possibility Lab in the last year. The Women of Earth context is centered on Radical Responsibility, Nonmaterial Value and Authentic Adulthood Initiations. We will apply Archan thoughtware. REGISTRATION: Please fill in the form at https://forms.gle/dijFk5wB8Tm5Wag57

Host Noam Weissman dives into one of the most emotionally and politically charged topics in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict: the Right of Return. Noam breaks down key historical events and grapples with tough questions: Was the Palestinian exodus of 1947–1948 a planned expulsion or a tragic byproduct of war? The first installment in this two-part series on the rise of Palestinian refugees explores the power of language, national narratives, and competing historical traumas with both facts and nuance. Click here for sources used in the episode. Please get in touch at noam@unpacked.media. This podcast was brought to you by Unpacked, a division of OpenDor Media. ------------------- For other podcasts from Unpacked, check out: ⁠⁠⁠⁠Jewish History Nerds⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠Soulful Jewish Living⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠Stars of David with Elon Gold ⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠Wondering Jews⁠⁠

When tracing the origins of today's war and devastation in Gaza, it may be easy to overlook economic inequality in favor of political or ideological explanations. In this episode, political analyst and public opinion expert Dahlia Scheindlin says a chief cause of the decades-long Israeli-Palestinian conflict was the severe poverty of Palestinians living in the West Bank and Gaza, where unemployment was sky high even before the Hamas attacks of Oct. 7, 2023. There was a time when Israelis believed peace was necessary for Israel's economy to thrive, and that Palestinian growth could substitute for a Palestinian state. A generation later, Gaza is rubble. Further reading: The Economic Foundation for Peace in Israel and Palestine by Dahlia Scheindlin for The Century Foundation. Dr. Dahlia Scheindlin is a political analyst and a public opinion researcher who has advised on nine electoral campaigns in Israel and worked in 15 other countries over 25 years. She is a Haaretz (English) columnist and a Century International policy fellow. She is the author of The Crooked Timber of Democracy in Israel: Promise Unfulfilled, listed on Foreign Affairs' Best Books of 2024.

It’s been said that the great challenge of diplomacy is to do and say the nastiest things in the nicest ways. Frank Lowenstein uses his experienced eye to consider if this challenge rings true for the United States under the second Trump administration. Lowenstein is an international policy expert with a concentration in policy development, strategic communication and legal practice. He has served as a special envoy for Israeli-Palestinian negotiations for the U.S. department of state and worked as a senior foreign policy advisor to Secretary of State John Kerry. He also directed the Senate Foreign Relations Subcommittee on Near East and South and Central Asian Affairs, a position which allowed him to travel extensively throughout the Middle East. Prior to this role, he was the director of national security policy for the Kerry-Edwards presidential campaign and practiced law in Boston, Massachusetts. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Professor Menachem Klein speaks on the radicalisation of Israeli society and its support for war crimes in Gaza. Klein, a veteran in unofficial Israeli-Palestinian negotiations and a signatory of the Geneva Agreement, discusses the historical and social transformations leading to the current conflict. He identifies three key structural changes in Israeli society: the establishment of an apartheid-like regime, elite transformation, and internal civil unrest. Klein suggests that both Israeli and Palestinian leaders have historically misjudged each other's strengths and motivations, contributing to ongoing conflict. He emphasizes the need for a two-state solution based on equality and partnership, with open borders and shared sovereignty. The webinar also discusses the broader implications of U.S. support for Israeli policies and the potential undermining of international law. Audience questions cover a range of topics, including the right of return for Palestinians, the role of U.S. foreign policy, and strategies for influencing Israeli public opinion. Klein calls for increased civil society pressure on politicians and the development of new, collaborative solutions to the conflict.Prof. Menachem Klein is active in many unofficial negotiations with Palestinian counterparts. In October 2003 Prof. Klein signed together with prominent Israeli and Palestinian negotiators the Geneva Agreement – a detailed proposal for a comprehensive Israeli-Palestinian peace accord. He is Senior Fellow in Bruno Kreisky Forum for International Dialogue and board member of Palestine – Israel Journal. Previously he was board member of B'tselem, The Israeli Information Center for Human Rights in the Occupied Territories.

Join Robert Scheer in this illuminating episode of Scheer Intelligence as he explores the complex truths of Jewish identity, the fight for religious and political freedom, and the urgent need for justice in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Through candid conversations with voices rooted in Jewish tradition and progressive activism, this series delves into how the principles of debate, human rights, and democratic liberty can guide us toward a more compassionate and equitable future. It's a heartfelt discussion about what it truly means to stand "Not in Our Name."

The Boston Consulting Group (BCG) is a consulting giant. The company recently apologized for the "undisclosed work" of two senior executives who were working with the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation.  BCG claimed the work was done pro-bono, but other sources claim that BCG was invoicing GHF (so many initials!) upwards of a million dollars a month.  BCG has said it will not accept any money paid to it for any work done on this project. GHF has come under criticism for not only sloppy operations that resulted in the deaths of 27 people, but close ties to former Trump advisors and the country of Israel (Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu worked for BCG in the United States prior to his political career in Israel).   In this thought-provoking discussion, Theo and Juliette analyze BCG's apology, examining the language, actions taken, and the broader implications in the context of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. They explore the challenges of navigating political sensitivity and the ethical responsibilities of global corporations engaged in humanitarian efforts. Tune in as they delve into the intricacies of public apologies and whether BCG's response measures up to the expectations of accountability and transparency.

In our episode of ROPESCAST, we feature Mohammed Daraghmeh, a veteran Palestinian journalist and bureau chief of Al-Sharq TV (Saudi Arabia) in Ramallah, who brings decades of experience covering the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, including his tenure as a senior correspondent for the AP in the West Bank. Daraghmhe offers a rare insider's perspective on how media coverage shapes—and often distorts—public understanding of one of the world's most scrutinized conflicts.With unflinching honesty, Daraghmeh explores the uncomfortable truths that remain hidden from both sides: What do Israelis really know about the horrific humanitarian situation in Gaza? What do Palestinians understand about the trauma and reality of October 7th? He reveals how information is filtered, manipulated, and sometimes deliberately concealed by various actors—from governments to media organizations themselves.Join us for this important conversation that challenges how we consume and understand conflict reporting, and explores what it would take to burst the information bubbles that prevent both peoples from seeing each other's humanity and suffering.

Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu may be grasping at straws in his hope that US President Donald J. Trump will continue to back his refusal to end the Gaza war and resolve the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The prime minister is placing a risky bet that Mr. Trump's recent suggestion that he is focussing on Iran nuclear negotiations, China, and Russia rather than Gaza means that the continued rise of Make America Great Again protagonists within his administration will not shift the president's attitude towards the war. Speaking about his feud with billionaire Elon Musk, Mr. Trump told reporters aboard Air Force One, "Honestly, I've been so busy working on China, working on Russia, working on Iran... I'm not thinking about Elon Musk.” By implication, Mr. Trump suggested that he was also not thinking of Gaza by not mentioning the war as part of his agenda. To be sure, by doing so, Mr. Trump was allowing Mr. Netanyahu to continue the war. Nevertheless, Mr. Netanyahu could be on shaky ground with pro-Israel figures in Mr. Trump's administration losing battles to Make America Great Again proponents.

Throw those horns up high, it's time to rock out.And who better to be leading the ferocious charge this week than former co-host Craig Fitzpatrick, as he returns to school Dave Hanratty and Sonic Architect Adam Shanahan in the finest, most commercially palatable metal songs to ever be released.And if that's simply not enough NO ENCORE for you, over on our Patreon feed you can find our latest Film Club episode where Dave and Andy carefully place Damien Chazelle's box office bomb Babylon under their proverbial microscope. Bonfire of the vanities or overlooked secret masterpiece? Sign up now to hear the boys attempt to make sense of it all. Next up on the Patreon feed this coming Monday, Adam will be chatting about the current state of the Irish music industry as Album Club takes a well-deserved break. Tune in for interviews with industry professionals across a number of disciplines to hear what the feeling is on the ground, what their hopes are for the future and what could be improved.You can sign up to the NO ENCORE Patreon now for a full year and get a whole month free, so get amongst it!But for now, it's time to dust off that Slayer t-shirt that never quite did fit right...ACT ONE (5:25): It's been a whole five years since David Guetta ended racism forever, Thom Yorke finally breaks his silence on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, Swedish House Mafia collab with AI to make their way into an Irish MEP's letter to the European Commission, the Bono Box bursts open once more as he sits down with Joe Rogan for a three-hour epic, Pusha T slams Kanye, Haim address their place in the 'rock community', Fyre Festival is back yet again, and we pay tribute to Simpsons composer Alf Clausen in the wake of his passing – it's the news.ACT TWO (56:39): Top 5 Metal for the Masses.-Follow Craig Fitzpatrick on Instagram / XListen to Craig's metal playlist Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In this episode of The Jordan Syatt Podcast, I speak with a Palestinian man from Gaza, Ahmed Fouad Alkhatib (IG: @afalkhatib) about The Israel-Palestine War in Gaza.Ahmed is a Palestinian-American humanitarian activist and peace advocate. When he was 11, he survived an Israeli airstrike that killed 2 of his friends. He has now lost 33 relatives in the ongoing war, and yet he continues to be an outspoken voice searching for peace on both sides. Ahmed offers a unique and powerful perspective on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and I'm excited to explore his personal story, unpack the realities of the current situation, and discuss practical steps toward a just and peaceful future for all. I hope you enjoy this episode and, if you do, please leave a review on iTunes or Spotify (huge thank you to everyone who has written one so far).Finally, if you've been thinking about joining The Inner Circle but haven't yet... we have hundreds of home and bodyweight workouts for you and you can get them all here: https://www.sfinnercircle.com/

Meet my friends, Clay Travis and Buck Sexton! If you love Verdict, the Clay Travis and Buck Sexton Show might also be in your audio wheelhouse. Politics, news analysis, and some pop culture and comedy thrown in too. Here’s a sample episode recapping four Tuesday takeaways. Give the guys a listen and then follow and subscribe wherever you get your podcasts. Biden Policies Aided a Terrorist Buck Sexton leads the hour with sharp commentary and analysis, emphasizing the growing strength of President Donald Trump in national polling across key issues like the economy, immigration, and border security. The segment highlights how recent CNN data reflects a significant shift in public sentiment favoring Trump, much to the dismay of Democrats and liberal media outlets. A major focus of the hour is the escalating crisis of antisemitism in America, particularly in the wake of a targeted firebombing attack in Boulder, Colorado. Buck discusses the ideological roots of this violence, linking it to radical anti-Israel sentiment and the broader rise of pro-Hamas activism on college campuses. He critiques the left’s framing of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, arguing that it is often reduced to a simplistic racial narrative that vilifies Israel and excuses terrorism. Overwhelm the System A deep dive into a recent terrorist attack in Boulder, Colorado, allegedly committed by an illegal immigrant who overstayed a visa. Buck uses this incident to underscore the broader crisis of illegal immigration and the exploitation of the U.S. asylum system. The conversation highlights how the Trump administration has dramatically reduced illegal border crossings—by as much as 99%—compared to the Biden era, which saw millions of illegal entries and “got aways.” Buck emphasizes the critical role of U.S. Border Patrol, debunking left-wing narratives that portray the agency as racist, and instead spotlighting its diverse and veteran-heavy workforce. A significant portion of the hour is dedicated to the ideological battle over antisemitism, particularly on college campuses, where anti-Israel sentiment is rising. Buck draws parallels between the situation in Gaza and Iran, arguing that while innocent civilians are caught in the crossfire, leadership and ideological extremism are to blame for ongoing violence. The show also critiques the Biden administration’s handling of immigration enforcement, asserting that lax policies have created a national security risk and opened the door to terrorist infiltration. Former ICE Director Tom Homan is quoted warning of the long-term consequences of these policies, calling for urgent reforms and a temporary halt to asylum claims. Our Favorite Data Nerd, Ryan Girdusky Polling data reveals that the Republican Party, under President Trump, has closed the gap with Democrats on middle-class support and economic trust. The discussion includes insights from data guru Ryan Girdusky, host of the “Numbers Game” podcast, who argues that Democrats lack a compelling economic message and are losing ground due to internal disarray and weak leadership. Ryan discusses interviewing Alex Thompson about his book with Jake Tapper, which reveals Jill Biden’s influence and the financial motivations behind Joe Biden’s continued political career. Buck discusses the party’s lack of a clear successor and the growing influence of figures like Bernie Sanders and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. Elon Knows Gov't is a Mess Elon Musk's criticism of the congressional spending bill, the state of the economy and inflation, the national debt and entitlement programs. Elon Musk pointed out that Big Government was going to happen no matter what party is in office. DOGE limitations. WH Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt with some positive economic news. The arrest of the family of the Boulder, CO terrorist. Buck's personal health and fitness journey. Make sure you never miss a second of the show by subscribing to the Clay Travis & Buck Sexton show podcast wherever you get your podcasts! ihr.fm/3InlkL8 For the latest updates from Clay and Buck: https://www.clayandbuck.com/ Connect with Clay Travis and Buck Sexton on Social Media: X - https://x.com/clayandbuck FB - https://www.facebook.com/ClayandBuck/ IG - https://www.instagram.com/clayandbuck/ YouTube - https://www.youtube.com/c/clayandbuck Rumble - https://rumble.com/c/ClayandBuck TikTok - https://www.tiktok.com/@clayandbuck YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@VerdictwithTedCruzSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Monday - Day 12 of the 40 day fast -- Veterans for Peace's "Fasting for Gaza.I met up with peacemaker Kathy Kelly as she was starting a Zoom call with Global Solidarity for Peace in Palestine. Afterward, I asked her about Dr. Mazin Qumsiyeh, who spoke at the meeting regarding his arguments for a one state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, her fears for one forgotten student picked up by Trump's ICE force -- Columbia student Leqaa Kordia -- and the dangers of breaking the Israeli blockade of Gaza by the Freedom Flotilla Coalition.I will be speaking with Kathy as she continues her 250 calorie-a-day fast about her concerns with the state of humanity. Let me know if there are any questions you would like to ask Kathy.Alan Winson -- barcrawlradio@gmail.com Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In this episode of Occupied Thoughts, FMEP Fellow Peter Beinart speaks with Dr. Feroze Sidhwa, who recently returned from spending the month of March, 2025, in Gaza as a trauma and critical care surgeon. The March trip was Feroze's second medical mission to Gaza in the last year. Peter and Feroze discuss why children in Gaza are shot in the head, why Gaza's medical workers expect to die, and what it's like to try to bring medical supplies into Gaza. Dr. Feroze Sidhwa is a general, trauma, and critical care surgeon in California. He is also a humanitarian surgeon, having worked most extensively in Palestine, but also in Ukraine, Haiti, Zimbabwe, and Burkina Faso. He most recently volunteered at the European Hospital in Khan Younis, Gaza from March 25-April 8, 2024 with the World Health Organization, and again from March 3-April 1, 2025 with American NGO MedGlobal. Feroze has written and spoken extensively about surgical humanitarian work, the United States' role in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, and the political consequences of medical relief work. He approaches the Israeli-Palestinian conflict as a secular American and as a humanitarian physician. Feroze can be followed on Twitter/X @FerozeSidhwa and Instagram/Threads @FSidhwa. Peter Beinart is a Non-Resident Fellow at the Foundation for Middle East Peace. He is also a Professor of Journalism and Political Science at the City University of New York, a Contributing opinion writer at the New York Times, an Editor-at-Large at Jewish Currents, and an MSNBC Political Commentator. His newest book (published 2025) is Being Jewish After the Destruction of Gaza: A Reckoning.

In this conversation, Jake and I delve into the complexities of empathy, accountability, and the influence of foreign powers on American culture, particularly in the context of the Israeli Palestinian conflict. We discuss the authenticity of public figures like Theo Von, the implications of toxic compassion, and the role of Qatar in shaping narratives within American universities. We also explore the concept of 'woke' politics from both left and right perspectives, culminating in a nuanced discussion about morality in warfare. - Timestamps:  00:00 Theo Von 06:04 Toxic vs. Rational Compassion 08:53 The Influence of Qatar on American Culture 12:04 Woke Politics  22:07 The Complexity of War and Morality 30:07 The Rise of Intifada and Global Tensions 42:22 Defending Western Civilization: A Call to Action - See discounts for all the products I use and recommend: https://everybodyspod.com/deals/ - Shop For Everybody  Use code SFE10 for 10% OFF

SLEERICKETS is a podcast about poetry and other intractable problems. My book Midlife now exists. Buy it here, or leave it a rating here or hereFor more SLEERICKETS, subscribe to SECRET SHOW, join the group chat, and send me a poem for Listener Crit!Leave the show a rating here (actually, just do it on your phone, it's easier). Thanks!Wear SLEERICKETS t-shirts and hoodies. They look good!SLEERICKETS is now on YouTube!For a frank, anonymous critique on SLEERICKETS, subscribe to the SECRET SHOW and send a poem of no more 25 lines to sleerickets [at] gmail [dot] com Some of the topics mentioned in this episode:Bob DylanBoyz II MenA Complete Unknown (2024)Timothée ChalametMalcolm Gladwell interviews Paul SimonDavid SimsJohn AshberyVisions of Johanna by Bob DylanJoan BaezA League of Their Own (1992)Pete Seeger The 2025 Super Bowl halftime showDubliners by James JoyceLegs by ZZ Top Megan Moroney profiled in The New Yorker A Bar Song (Tipsy) by ShaboozeyMatthew and Cameron discuss books about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict on the Secret ShowChalamet's SAG Awards acceptance speechAn Officer and a Gentleman (1982) Secret show notesJazz Chisholm Jr.So We'll Go No More a Roving by Lord ByronRichard Cory by Edwin Arlington Robinson and the Simon & Garfunkel versionTo the Virgins, to Make Much of Time by Robert HerrickJennifer Senior The King (2019)Frequently mentioned names:– Joshua Mehigan– Shane McCrae– A. E. Stallings– Ryan Wilson– Morri Creech– Austin Allen– Jonathan Farmer– Zara Raab– Amit Majmudar– Ethan McGuire– Coleman Glenn– Chris Childers– Alexis Sears– JP Gritton– Alex Pepple– Ernie Hilbert– Joanna PearsonOther Ratbag Poetry Pods:Poetry Says by Alice AllanI Hate Matt Wall by Matt WallVersecraft by Elijah BlumovRatbag Poetics By David Jalal MotamedAlice: In FutureBrian: @BPlatzerCameron: Minor TiresiasMatthew: sleerickets [at] gmail [dot] comMusic by ETRNLArt by Daniel Alexander Smith

Join us for a riveting debate with Shaiel Ben-Ephraim  @shaielb  of the Israel-Palestine Report as we tackle the urgent and polarizing question: Is Israel committing genocide? In this conversation, we'll dig deep into the legal and moral definitions of genocide, the historical and political context of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, and the complexities of labeling this war as such.But that's just the starting point. We also explore:Is this war just?What are the potential future effects in the region?Is this truly a clash between fundamentalism and liberalism?Can one be a Zionist and still stand against the war?What role does antisemitism play in how this conflict is discussed and understood?#Debate#IsraelPalestineConflict#MiddleEast#GenocideDebate#Zionism#Antisemitism#HumanRights#Liberalism#Fundamentalism#CurrentEvents#Podcast#NewsAnalysis#YouTubeDebate#ExpertInterview#PublicDiscussionFacebook: https://www.facebook.com/daniel.levine.31/Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/rabbidaniellevine/#Zionism #hillel #Judaism

Spain's foreign minister has called for an arms embargo against Israel, at the start of a meeting in Madrid aimed at bringing an end to the war in Gaza.Also in the programme: Events across the United States are marking the fifth anniversary of the death of George Floyd - whose murder by police sparked mass protests for racial justice; and Venezuela is holding parliamentary and regional elections - but opposition leaders have urged people not to vote, calling the process a sham.(Photo: Spanish Foreign Minister Jose Manuel Albares addresses the media ahead of the second meeting of the so-called 'Madrid Group', in Madrid, Spain, 25 May 2025. The 'Madrid Group' is integrated by European and Arab countries that promote the two-state solution as a way to overcome the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and achieve a ceasefire in Gaza. Credit: JJ Guillen/EPA-EFE/Shutterstock)

In a multipolar world where America wields less relative power, the United States can no longer get away with poor statecraft. To understand how the US can approach future national security challenges, I spoke with Dennis Ross, a senior US diplomat and the counselor and William Davidson Distinguished Fellow at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy. His new book, Statecraft 2.0: What America Needs to Lead in a Multipolar World (Oxford University Press, 2025) offers a revised toolkit for US foreign policy and global leadership. The United States may still be the world's strongest country, but it now faces real challenges at both a global and regional level. The unipolar world which was dominated by America after the Cold War is gone. Unlike the Soviet Union, China is both a military and economic competitor and it is actively challenging the norms and institutions that the US used to shape an international order during and after the Cold War. Directly and indirectly, it has partners trying to undo the American-dominated order, with Russia seeking to extinguish Ukraine, and Iran trying to undermine American presence, influence, and any set of rules for the Middle East that it does not dominate. The failures of American policy in Afghanistan and Iraq have weakened the domestic consensus for a US leadership role internationally. Traditions in US foreign policy, especially the American sense of exceptionalism, have at different points justified both withdrawal and international activism. Iraq and Afghanistan fed the instinct to withdraw and to end the “forever wars.” But the folly of these US interventions did not necessarily mean that all use of force to back diplomacy or specific political ends was wrong; rather it meant in these cases, the Bush Administration failed in the most basic task of good statecraft: namely, marrying objectives and means. Nothing more clearly defines effective statecraft than identifying well-considered goals and then knowing how to use all the tools of statecraft—diplomatic, economic, military, intelligence, information, cyber, scientific, education—to achieve them. But all too often American presidents have adopted goals that were poorly defined and not thought through. In Statecraft 2.0, Dennis Ross explains why failing to marry objectives and means has happened so often in American foreign policy. He uses historical examples to illustrate the factors that account for this, including political pressures, weak understanding of the countries where the US has intervened, changing objectives before achieving those that have been established, relying too much on ourselves and too little on allies and partners. To be fair, there have not only been failures, there have been successes as well. Ross uses case studies to look more closely at the circumstances in which Administrations have succeeded and failed in marrying objectives and means. He distills the lessons from good cases of statecraft—German unification in NATO, the first Gulf War, the surge in Iraq 2007-8—and bad cases of statecraft—going to war in Iraq 2003, and the Obama policy toward Syria. Based on those lessons, he develops a framework for applying today a statecraft approach to our policy toward China, Iran, and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The book concludes with how a smart statecraft approach would shape policy toward the new national security challenges of climate, pandemics, and cyber. Dr. Andrew O. Pace is a historian of the US in the world who specializes in the moral fog of war. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/political-science

Meet my friends, Clay Travis and Buck Sexton! If you love Verdict, the Clay Travis and Buck Sexton Show might also be in your audio wheelhouse. Politics, news analysis, and some pop culture and comedy thrown in too. Here’s a sample episode recapping four takeaways. Give the guys a listen and then follow and subscribe wherever you get your podcasts. Jewish Couple Shot in Hate Crime The Clay Travis and Buck Sexton Show delivers a powerful and emotionally charged discussion centered on the tragic antisemitic double murder of a young couple in Washington, D.C., and the broader implications of rising antisemitism in America. Clay and Buck open the hour with breaking news about the passage of a major bill in the House of Representatives, highlighting its narrow approval and the expected path forward in the Senate. However, the focus quickly shifts to the horrific killing of two Israeli diplomats, a crime the hosts attribute to the dangerous rhetoric and ideology spreading across college campuses and left-wing political circles under slogans like “Globalize the Intifada.” The hosts condemn the mainstream media and political figures for their silence or tepid responses, calling out Representative Ilhan Omar for refusing to comment. They draw parallels between this attack and the October 7 Hamas terrorist massacre in Israel, emphasizing the moral inversion and ignorance among younger generations regarding the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Buck Sexton, drawing on his background in Middle East studies and the CIA, provides historical and geopolitical context, arguing that Hamas’s actions are rooted in a desire to prevent peace in the region, particularly between Israel and Saudi Arabia. The conversation also explores the broader issue of selective outrage and hypocrisy in global human rights advocacy, pointing to the lack of attention to genocides in places like South Sudan. The hosts stress the importance of educating younger Americans about the realities of terrorism, antisemitism, and the existential threats faced by Israel. Sen. Rand Paul on the Big Beautiful Bill Later in the hour, KY Senator Rand Paul joins the show to discuss the implications of the newly passed House bill, particularly its impact on the national debt and fiscal conservatism. Paul criticizes the bill’s projected $4–5 trillion increase to the debt ceiling and warns that Republicans are abandoning their principles by supporting unsustainable spending. He advocates for entitlement reform and a return to fiscal responsibility, warning of the long-term consequences of unchecked deficits. Yael Eckstein reacts on hate crime from Israel Yael Eckstein, President and CEO of the International Fellowship of Christians and Jews, who offers a powerful response from Israel. She connects the attack to rising global antisemitism and the dangerous rhetoric emerging from pro-Palestinian protests on U.S. college campuses. Eckstein emphasizes the need for unity among Jews and Christians and praises former President Trump for his swift condemnation of the attack. Daniel Cameron on his Senate Run Former KY AG, Republican U.S. Senate candidate in Kentucky, on running to replace Mitch McConnell. Cameron discusses the recent tornado devastation in Kentucky, his campaign to replace Mitch McConnell, and his alignment with Donald Trump’s America First agenda. He emphasizes issues like border security, energy independence, and fighting DEI (Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion) policies. Cameron also addresses the shifting political landscape, particularly how younger men across racial lines are moving away from the Democratic Party due to its stance on masculinity and traditional values. Make sure you never miss a second of the show by subscribing to the Clay Travis & Buck Sexton show podcast wherever you get your podcasts! ihr.fm/3InlkL8 For the latest updates from Clay and Buck: https://www.clayandbuck.com/ Connect with Clay Travis and Buck Sexton on Social Media: X - https://x.com/clayandbuck FB - https://www.facebook.com/ClayandBuck/ IG - https://www.instagram.com/clayandbuck/ YouTube - https://www.youtube.com/c/clayandbuck Rumble - https://rumble.com/c/ClayandBuck TikTok - https://www.tiktok.com/@clayandbuck YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@VerdictwithTedCruzSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

In this reflective and fiery edition of the RattlerGator Report, J.B. White pays tribute to his late friend Dean Fowler, a proud Georgia native with deep historical roots and a surprising ancestral connection to J.B.'s own family line. Their unlikely friendship, born of shared respect, historical curiosity, and candid conversation, serves as a springboard into deeper reflections on race, heritage, and America's evolving cultural narrative. J.B. also continues his campaign to de-weaponize the N-word, urging white Americans to reclaim its usage among themselves as a form of linguistic sovereignty and cultural healing. He connects this movement to broader themes of narrative control, political inversion, and Trump's strategic spotlighting of both South African violence and Israeli-Palestinian propaganda. Additional commentary includes the rise of Bitcoin, Caitlin Clark's dominance as a cultural and athletic force, controversy over Florida A&M's new president, and the University of Florida's bold pivot under new leadership. Woven throughout is J.B.'s signature blend of humor, Southern storytelling, and unflinching analysis, making this episode a uniquely American meditation on memory, power, and truth.

Can joint Israeli-Palestinian health programs help build trust where politics have failed? According to a new paper published in the New England Journal of Medicine, the health care field can play a crucial role in building bridges between communities in conflict. Written by two Jewish Israeli and two Palestinian doctors during a period of temporary ceasefire between Israel and Hamas, the paper reviews 16 joint initiatives, highlighting in particular two programs: Road to Recovery and Physicians for Human Rights Israel. The authors also present recommendations on how cross-national health care programs can play a role in post-war peacebuilding. One of the paper's authors, Avner Halperin, a senior fellow at the Harvard Kennedy School's Middle East Initiative, spoke to KAN reporter Naomi Segal. (Photo: Billie Weiss)See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

History, Marshall Poe wrote in December 2023, shows that Israel will never win a “war of occupation”. Eighteen months later, with Israel on the brink of a full scale occupation of Gaza, Poe's argument is even more relevant. the Gaza war, the historian warns, is turning into Israel's Vietnam - an unwinnable occupation that will only bring shame on the invaders. Trust Poe on the Vietnam analogy. His last book was about the Mai Lai massacre in Vietnam, so he's all too familiar with the catastrophic consequences of imperial wars of counter-insurgency. Five Takeaways * Counterinsurgency operations typically evolve into prolonged occupations, as forces cannot easily identify and eliminate insurgents without alienating the local population.* Military occupations historically fail when the entire civilian population becomes hostile to occupying forces, leading to ethical compromises and potential atrocities.* The My Lai massacre in Vietnam exemplifies how poor intelligence and leadership can result in civilian casualties when soldiers cannot distinguish between combatants and non-combatants.* Population relocation, a strategy being discussed for Gaza, has historically been catastrophic whenever attempted in the 20th century.* The Israeli-Palestinian conflict has limited viable solutions, with Poe suggesting the two-state solution is no longer realistic and expressing skepticism that external powers like the US can resolve the situation.Marshall Tillbrook Poe is an American historian, writer, editor, and founder of the New Books Network, an online collection of podcast interviews with a wide range of nonfiction authors. He has taught Russian, European, Eurasian, and world history at various universities including Harvard, Columbia, University of Iowa, and, currently, the University of Massachusetts Amherst. Poe is the author or editor of a number of books for children and adults.Keen On America is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.Named as one of the "100 most connected men" by GQ magazine, Andrew Keen is amongst the world's best known broadcasters and commentators. In addition to presenting the daily KEEN ON show, he is the host of the long-running How To Fix Democracy interview series. He is also the author of four prescient books about digital technology: CULT OF THE AMATEUR, DIGITAL VERTIGO, THE INTERNET IS NOT THE ANSWER and HOW TO FIX THE FUTURE. Andrew lives in San Francisco, is married to Cassandra Knight, Google's VP of Litigation & Discovery, and has two grown children. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit keenon.substack.com/subscribe

In a multipolar world where America wields less relative power, the United States can no longer get away with poor statecraft. To understand how the US can approach future national security challenges, I spoke with Dennis Ross, a senior US diplomat and the counselor and William Davidson Distinguished Fellow at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy. His new book, Statecraft 2.0: What America Needs to Lead in a Multipolar World (Oxford University Press, 2025) offers a revised toolkit for US foreign policy and global leadership. The United States may still be the world's strongest country, but it now faces real challenges at both a global and regional level. The unipolar world which was dominated by America after the Cold War is gone. Unlike the Soviet Union, China is both a military and economic competitor and it is actively challenging the norms and institutions that the US used to shape an international order during and after the Cold War. Directly and indirectly, it has partners trying to undo the American-dominated order, with Russia seeking to extinguish Ukraine, and Iran trying to undermine American presence, influence, and any set of rules for the Middle East that it does not dominate. The failures of American policy in Afghanistan and Iraq have weakened the domestic consensus for a US leadership role internationally. Traditions in US foreign policy, especially the American sense of exceptionalism, have at different points justified both withdrawal and international activism. Iraq and Afghanistan fed the instinct to withdraw and to end the “forever wars.” But the folly of these US interventions did not necessarily mean that all use of force to back diplomacy or specific political ends was wrong; rather it meant in these cases, the Bush Administration failed in the most basic task of good statecraft: namely, marrying objectives and means. Nothing more clearly defines effective statecraft than identifying well-considered goals and then knowing how to use all the tools of statecraft—diplomatic, economic, military, intelligence, information, cyber, scientific, education—to achieve them. But all too often American presidents have adopted goals that were poorly defined and not thought through. In Statecraft 2.0, Dennis Ross explains why failing to marry objectives and means has happened so often in American foreign policy. He uses historical examples to illustrate the factors that account for this, including political pressures, weak understanding of the countries where the US has intervened, changing objectives before achieving those that have been established, relying too much on ourselves and too little on allies and partners. To be fair, there have not only been failures, there have been successes as well. Ross uses case studies to look more closely at the circumstances in which Administrations have succeeded and failed in marrying objectives and means. He distills the lessons from good cases of statecraft—German unification in NATO, the first Gulf War, the surge in Iraq 2007-8—and bad cases of statecraft—going to war in Iraq 2003, and the Obama policy toward Syria. Based on those lessons, he develops a framework for applying today a statecraft approach to our policy toward China, Iran, and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The book concludes with how a smart statecraft approach would shape policy toward the new national security challenges of climate, pandemics, and cyber. Dr. Andrew O. Pace is a historian of the US in the world who specializes in the moral fog of war. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

In a multipolar world where America wields less relative power, the United States can no longer get away with poor statecraft. To understand how the US can approach future national security challenges, I spoke with Dennis Ross, a senior US diplomat and the counselor and William Davidson Distinguished Fellow at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy. His new book, Statecraft 2.0: What America Needs to Lead in a Multipolar World (Oxford University Press, 2025) offers a revised toolkit for US foreign policy and global leadership. The United States may still be the world's strongest country, but it now faces real challenges at both a global and regional level. The unipolar world which was dominated by America after the Cold War is gone. Unlike the Soviet Union, China is both a military and economic competitor and it is actively challenging the norms and institutions that the US used to shape an international order during and after the Cold War. Directly and indirectly, it has partners trying to undo the American-dominated order, with Russia seeking to extinguish Ukraine, and Iran trying to undermine American presence, influence, and any set of rules for the Middle East that it does not dominate. The failures of American policy in Afghanistan and Iraq have weakened the domestic consensus for a US leadership role internationally. Traditions in US foreign policy, especially the American sense of exceptionalism, have at different points justified both withdrawal and international activism. Iraq and Afghanistan fed the instinct to withdraw and to end the “forever wars.” But the folly of these US interventions did not necessarily mean that all use of force to back diplomacy or specific political ends was wrong; rather it meant in these cases, the Bush Administration failed in the most basic task of good statecraft: namely, marrying objectives and means. Nothing more clearly defines effective statecraft than identifying well-considered goals and then knowing how to use all the tools of statecraft—diplomatic, economic, military, intelligence, information, cyber, scientific, education—to achieve them. But all too often American presidents have adopted goals that were poorly defined and not thought through. In Statecraft 2.0, Dennis Ross explains why failing to marry objectives and means has happened so often in American foreign policy. He uses historical examples to illustrate the factors that account for this, including political pressures, weak understanding of the countries where the US has intervened, changing objectives before achieving those that have been established, relying too much on ourselves and too little on allies and partners. To be fair, there have not only been failures, there have been successes as well. Ross uses case studies to look more closely at the circumstances in which Administrations have succeeded and failed in marrying objectives and means. He distills the lessons from good cases of statecraft—German unification in NATO, the first Gulf War, the surge in Iraq 2007-8—and bad cases of statecraft—going to war in Iraq 2003, and the Obama policy toward Syria. Based on those lessons, he develops a framework for applying today a statecraft approach to our policy toward China, Iran, and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The book concludes with how a smart statecraft approach would shape policy toward the new national security challenges of climate, pandemics, and cyber. Dr. Andrew O. Pace is a historian of the US in the world who specializes in the moral fog of war. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/world-affairs

For today's episode, Lawfare General Counsel and Senior Editor Scott R. Anderson sat down with Contributing Editor Joel Braunold, the Managing Director of the S. Daniel Abraham Center for Middle East Peace, for the latest in their series of podcast conversations delving into the latest developments relating to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and related regional issues.This time, they discussed the state of the Gaza conflict, what Trump's recent trip to the Middle East says about his relationship with regional leaders, his dramatic moves on Syria sanctions, his administration's increasingly direct role in hostage negotiations with Hamas, and what it all means for the stability of Israel's current government—among many, many other issues.To receive ad-free podcasts, become a Lawfare Material Supporter at www.patreon.com/lawfare. You can also support Lawfare by making a one-time donation at https://givebutter.com/lawfare-institute.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

On this week's episode, Israel Policy Forum Policy Advisor and Tel Aviv-based journalist Neri Zilber hosts Ambassador Dennis Ross, lead Middle East peace process negotiator in the H.W. Bush and Clinton administrations and current counselor and William Davidson distinguished fellow at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, to unpack President Trump's trip to the Middle East. They provide a high-level overview of U.S. foreign policy under the Trump administration and discuss the U.S.-Israel and Trump-Netanyahu relationships, the present and future of the Gaza war, prospects for a two-state outcome to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, and Dennis' new book, Statecraft 2.0: What America Needs to Lead in a Multipolar World.Support the showFollow us on Instagram, Twitter/X, and Bluesky, and subscribe to our email list here.

On Saturday, India and Pakistan announced a ceasefire, ending—at least for now—the latest bout of armed conflict between the two South Asian rivals. The announcement followed the launch of “Operation Sindoor”—India's response to the April 22nd terrorist attack in Kashmir, which claimed the lives of 26 innocent civilians.India's strike prompted a worrying tit-for-tat standoff which quickly escalated into the worst conflict between the two nuclear-armed nations in a quarter-century. The fighting has stopped for now, leaving policymakers, scholars, and analysts the task of deciphering the longer-term consequences of the recent crisis.To break things down, Milan is joined on the show this week by Christopher Clary. Chris is an associate professor of political science at the University of Albany. He's also a non-resident fellow at the Henry L. Stimson Center in Washington, D.C.Listeners may remember Chris from his 2022 appearance on Grand Tamasha, when he discussed his book, The Difficult Politics of Peace: Rivalry in Modern South Asia.Milan and Chris discuss why the Pahalgam episode marked a new chapter in India-Pakistan relations, how the recent conflict will serve as a template for the next crisis, and the possible motivations for U.S. intervention. Plus, the two discuss what the Israeli-Palestinian conflict in the Middle East can teach us about India and Pakistan's likely future.Episode notes:1. Christopher Clary, “India-Pakistan rivalry is old, but Pahalgam marked a new chapter,” Times of India, May 11, 2025.2. Sudhi Ranjan Sen et al., “Trump Truce Leaves India Furious, Pakistan Elated as Risks Loom,” Bloomberg, May 11, 2025.3. Karishma Mehrotra et al., “The U.S. helped deliver an India-Pakistan ceasefire. But can it hold?” Washington Post, May 10, 2025.4. “When and Why Do India and Pakistan Fight (with Christopher Clary),” Grand Tamasha, September 14, 2022.