The United States, Israel, and Christian Nationalism

Neo-antisemite and Christian Nationalist, Tucker Carlson (Mishpacha)

Let me once again restate the obvious. There are few commentators with the brilliance, education, and eloquence to analyze current events than is the University of Chicago and Yale educated Jonathan Rosenblum. That he writes for Mishpacha – a magazine not known for placing great value on secular education - does nothing to diminish his erudition. His work would earn approval from readers of far more scholarly publications. Anyone who believes a serious college education is a waste of time is, quite simply, a grobbeh am ha’aretz (look it up). But I digress.

Jonathan rarely disappoints. He does the research, and as a result, refuting him without resorting to tired partisan tropes is nearly impossible. Facts are facts, and when he makes a claim, he backs it up. He does so again in his latest column, in which he systematically dismantles several common lies about Israel. Lies routinely promoted by antisemites and most recently amplified by neo-antisemite Tucker Carlson.

What makes Carlson’s falsehoods especially dangerous is that he is a hugely popular podcaster with millions of followers. He platforms fringe antisemites as so-called ‘experts’, lending legitimacy to claims that are both demonstrably false and deeply malignant. As a result, these lies are gaining unprecedented traction. And they demand clear, unassailable refutation that exposes both their falsity and their antisemitic roots...

Emes Ve-Emunah is no longer fully available here. To finish reading this post, future posts, and comment on them - click on this link: substack. To receive posts - you must subscribe. But it's easy and it's free.

Is it Over for Iran?

Iran is burning 

Lorenzo Peter Berra - one of the great philosophical minds of the 20th century - once said, 'It ain’t over till it’s over'.

That sentiment captures how I am watching events unfold in Iran: with hope, prayer, and deep trepidation.

Iran is experiencing its largest uprising since the 1979 Islamic Revolution—the revolution that brought radical Islamists to power and imposed a brutal theocratic regime that still rules with a deadly iron fist. Dissent is not tolerated. Violations of Sharia law can carry the death penalty, as tragically demonstrated when a couple of years ago  a woman was executed for refusing to wear a hijab.

For 46 years, Iranians have lived under a government supported by the devout and feared by every other Iranian yearning to be free. Brave protesters have risen before, only to be crushed—often executed. That is how the regime has survived.

Iran’s tyranny has not been confined to its own borders. Its openly declared goal is the establishment of an Islamic caliphate, beginning with the destruction of Israel. It labels the United States the ‘Great Satan’ for defending the ‘Littler Satan’. Israel. And they have relentlessly pursued nuclear weapons to that end.

After years of sanctions, in 2015 the Obama administration bet on a deal that would remove sanctions in exchange for delaying nuclear development for 10 years. A deal that allowed Iran to continue funding and arming terror proxies like Hamas, Hezbollah, and militias in Yemen, Syria, and Iraq. All aimed at Israel. Naively assuming the regime would mellow in the interim.  That illusion ended when the new US administration scrapped the deal and harsh sanctions were reinstated.

That uneasy status quo collapsed on October 7, 2023, when Hamas invaded Israel, brutally massacred over1,200 innocent civilians, and abducted over 250  more.

That day changed everything...

Emes Ve-Emunah is no longer fully available here. To finish reading this post, future posts, and comment on them - click on this link: substack. You must subscribe. But it's easy and it's free.

The Trouble With Vance

Tucker Carlson hosting Holocaust revisionist Ian Carroll (JTA)

I take it back. Not long ago, I agreed with those who argued that Tucker Carlson is the most dangerous antisemite in the world. I no longer believe that.

Not because Carlson has changed. His antisemitism is as ugly as ever. He continues to platform antisemites, Holocaust revisionists, and conspiracy theorists on his podcast, praising them. As he did most recently about antisemitic Holocaust revisionist, Ian Carroll. Whom he described as a “diligent researcher” sincerely interested in the truth.

No, I haven’t changed my view of Carlson at all.

What I have changed my mind about is who poses the greater danger. And that, in my view, is the current vice president of the United States, J.D. Vance.

My initial impression of Vance was positive. His memoir Hillbilly Elegy, his stated support for Israel despite isolationist instincts, and even his personal life all suggested a man far removed from racial or religious bigotry. That is why his repeated defenses of figures like Carlson - when challenged about antisemitism - are so troubling. Consider the following excerpt from JTA:

Vance’s latest comments, made Tuesday during an interview with conservative radio host and CNN pundit Scott Jennings, came in response to the question:

“Does the conservative movement need to warehouse anybody out there espousing antisemitism in any way?”

“No it doesn’t, Scott,” the vice president replied.

Vance then asserted that conservatives, drawing on Christian influences, were welcoming of all backgrounds.

“I think we need to reject all forms of ethnic hatred, whether it’s antisemitism, anti-Black hatred, anti-white hatred,” he said. “And I think that’s one of the great things about the conservative coalition, is that we are, I think, fundamentally rooted in the Christian principles that founded the United States of America.”

He added, “And one of those very important principles is that we judge people as individuals. Every person is made in the image of God. You judge them by what they do, not by what ethnic group they belong to.”

This is not the first time he has made comments that signal tolerance for antisemites while simultaneously repudiating antisemitism itself.

First – as I have said in the past - I don’t believe Vance is an antisemite. But his defense of allowing antisemitic voices within the conservative political sphere is really no defense at all..

Emes Ve-Emunah will no longer be fully available here. To finish reading this post and future posts - and comment on them - click on this link: substack. You must subscribe. But it's easy and it's free.

Whose Fault is it Really?

Yosef Eizental - run over by a bus and killed during a Charedi protest (VIN)

As must have been the case for anyone who became aware of this tragedy, my first reaction was one of profound sadness. Yosef Eizental, a 14-year-old Charedi boy, was killed after being run down by a city bus in Jerusalem during a recent protest by members of his community against the draft. A frustrated bus driver drove through a large crowd that was blocking the street and struck and killed young Yosef. I cannot begin to imagine what his parents are feeling right now.

This young man was simply acting on the directives of his religious leaders. Many of whom have engaged in truly over-the-top and deeply disturbing exaggerations about the supposed ‘evils’ of the IDF.

My sadness, however, quickly gave way to anger. Anger at those who are ultimately to blame for this tragedy (beyond the bus driver himself).

I don’t know whether any specific Charedi religious leader or group of leaders explicitly called for this protest. But it would not surprise me if they did since they have done so in the past. But even if they did not directly call for it, they certainly inspired it through their constant and vile anti-IDF and anti-government rhetoric.

One thing seems certain: they did not urge restraint, nor did they call for the protest to be halted once it began. They likely took pride in the fact that so many of their young protégés participated in what they viewed as a ‘just’ cause. Even though many non-Charedi religious leaders believe that cause is anything but just.

That said, they are certainly entitled to their opinion. As religious leaders – publicly addressing what they view as a religious issue is surely seen as an obligation to speak out forcefully on a matter they feel so strongly about, especially given the immense influence they wield.

But with the power to motivate tens of thousands of young students to act - comes responsibility. Responsibility that must be shared when the consequences turn tragic. And that is clearly the case here.

Of course, the primary fault lies with the bus driver, who panicked as a chaotic crowd began attacking his bus while fires were being set in the street around his bus. He is rightly being charged with manslaughter. There is no excuse for driving at an unsafe speed through a street packed with people. He had to know that someone would almost certainly be hurt or killed.

But the responsibility does not rest with him alone...

Emes Ve-Emunah will no longer be fully available here. To finish reading this post and future posts - and comment on them - click on this link: substack. You must subscribe. But it's easy and it's free.

Is Iran Now in Trump's Crosshairs?

Secretary of State Marco Rubio speaking at a press conference (JTA)

One of the more striking aspects of the media coverage surrounding the capture, arrest, and eventual trial of Venezuelan dictator and drug trafficker Nicolás Maduro was the way it was framed as ‘controversial’, as though opposition to the operation were as morally valid as support for it.

What the mainstream media largely ignored - though it was obvious from those interviewed -  was that the supporters were overwhelmingly expatriate Venezuelans. They were openly grateful, even emotional, thanking the president for finally acting and expressing hope of returning home once democracy is restored.

The protesters opposing the operation, by contrast, were the familiar collection of leftist activists reciting well-worn platitudes about violations of international law, seemingly indifferent to the reality that a brutal dictator ruling by force over an impoverished population would otherwise have remained in power. The same reflexive condemnation was echoed at the UN by predictable European voices eager to portray the beginning of Venezuela’s liberation from socialist dictatorship as a crime.

Despite public denunciations for domestic consumption, Venezuela’s current leadership has pledged cooperation with the United States. Predictably, however, the president’s political opposition in Congress is also outraged. Most acknowledge that Maduro was a vicious dictator responsible for facilitating drug trafficking that has killed countless Americans. They are glad he is gone. Yet still condemn the president for acting without congressional consultation. Once again, they want it both ways.

The irony is hard to miss: Republicans now side with the Venezuelan people, while Democrats effectively side with the dictator by insisting the president was wrong to act and should have left Maduro in power.

Meanwhile, voices on the left - especially in academia - insist with absolute certainty that the operation had nothing to do with drug trafficking or liberation. The real motive, they claim, was oil.

I have rarely seen such anxiety over the supposed collapse of American democracy. Critics warn that the president is becoming a dictator by flouting the Constitution. They are entitled to that view. I do not share it.

In fact, I am encouraged by how world events are unfolding. Ironically, one of the president’s greatest flaws—his unpredictability—has become America’s greatest strategic asset. That mercurial style has helped end the war in Gaza and has put the fear of God into Iran. As I have said before: Iran should be worried. VERY worried. 

Israel has taken notice. And it isn’t only Netanayhu As reported by JTA:

The Venezuela operation drew attention in Israel, where leaders used it to signal a warning to Tehran amid mounting unrest inside Iran. Opposition leader Yair Lapid wrote on X that “the regime in Iran should pay close attention to what is happening in Venezuela,” framing the U.S. action as a broader message to a government facing intensifying protests and riots at home.

That sentiment was reinforced by Secretary of State Marco Rubio:

Speaking on CBS’s “Face the Nation,” Rubio said the United States will exert leverage, including continued sanctions and pressure on Venezuela’s oil sector, to ensure that the country “no longer cozy up to Hezbollah and Iran in our own hemisphere.”

On NBC’s “Meet the Press,” he offered a shorthand for U.S. goals: “No more drug trafficking, no more Iran Hezbollah presence there, and no more using the oil industry to enrich all our adversaries around the world.”

Those who are wringing their hands over a supposed constitutional crisis need not worry. Much - if not most - of the criticism coming from Congress and academia is driven by ideological bias. If there truly were a constitutional emergency, Republicans would not be lining up to support the president.

Some will argue that they do so only out of fear of retaliation. While that may be true about some of them, It is not true about all of them. The idea that an entire party would abandon the Constitution simply to stay in Trump’s good graces is absurd. Much of this debate ultimately comes down to interpretation—of both presidential authority and the Constitution itself. Claims of ‘obvious’ and ‘blatant’” violations are opinions, not settled facts, and are heavily filtered through the ideology of those making those assertions.

This is why I am not worried.

And while Iran once believed the U.S. would never put boots on the ground, it now believes the president might be ‘crazy’ enough to do so, even at legal risk...

 Emes Ve-Emunah will no longer be fully available here. To finish reading this post and future posts - and comment on them - click on this link: substack. You must subscribe. But it's easy and it's free.

Judging a Leader by Character Alone

The president addressing the Knesset (CNBC)

One of the most troubling aspects of our time is how extreme our political divisions have become. There is an increasing inability to recognize any good in one’s ideological opponents. Once opposition to an individual hardens, it becomes almost inevitable that anything positive he does will be interpreted negatively. Viewing political adversaries through a perpetually hostile lens - an ‘evil eye’ so to speak - is a corrosive way to see the world.

Which brings me to Donald Trump.

At the outset of his first campaign, I largely agreed with the prevailing view that Trump would be a disaster for the country and an embarrassment of historic proportions. His demeanor and lack of moral character were obvious and disturbing. My conviction was strong enough that I held my nose and voted for Mrs. Clinton.

My thinking was simple: as flawed as she was, she at least appeared to possess some basic decency and an understanding of how to conduct herself in high office. On Israel, I expected more of the same. No worse than her predecessor, who was not really anti-Israel as many of my co-religionists have said. Just misguided about what was in Israel’s best interests. I assumed it would be four more years of continuity.

She lost. And I thought the world had come to an end.

It didn’t.

Trump’s character never improved. In many ways, it worsened. But his policies often did not reflect that character. Instead, they reflected values I support as someone who leans politically conservative.

Nowhere was he more positive than in his Middle East policies. Without delving into excessive detail, the evidence speaks for itself: Trump is widely admired across Israel’s political spectrum. That became unmistakable when he addressed the Knesset shortly after securing Hamas’s agreement to release all living hostages. An agreement that was, in fact, carried out.

Yet the animus toward Trump here remains so intense that many of his opponents refuse to acknowledge any accomplishment.

None of this is to argue that Trump is above criticism. Far from it. Some of his actions have been deeply damaging... 

 Emes Ve-Emunah will no longer be fully available here. To finish reading this post and future posts - and comment on them - click on this link: substack. You must subscribe. But it's easy and it's free.

Nicolás Maduro, the US, and Israel

Nicolas Maduro, and Palestinian Ambassador Linda Ali (Liberation news)

U.S. military power is back. No longer will America be viewed as a paper tiger—a description often applied to U.S. military strength during and after the Cold War. The idea was that despite our advanced military technology and military might - which included unparalleled intelligence and surveillance capabilities, we lacked the will to use them, haunted by the fear of another Vietnam. More than 40,000 American troops were killed there propping up a weak democracy that never had a realistic chance of survival.

There were exceptions. Iraq was one. That experiment in regime change proved chaotic and fell far short of expectations. Afghanistan followed, reinforcing the perception that despite immense military power on paper, the United States was unwilling - or unable - to use it decisively. The paper tiger theory seemed confirmed.

Until now.

Nicolás Maduro was captured in a military operation whose precision and success mirrored that of Israel’s most daring actions. The results have produced enormous benefits for the world in general and the United States in particular.  Not the least of which was the restoration of control over oil refineries built and operated by U.S. companies and nationalized under Maduro’s predecessor, Hugo Chávez. And perhaps more importantly is the restoration of American dominance in the Western Hemisphere.

But the biggest prize belongs to the Venezuelan people themselves. Both those living in Venezuela and expatriates here in the United States. Their reaction was ecstatic. They thanked the president for this action and celebrated the fact that, for the first time in decades, there is a real chance democracy will be restored to their country.

This operation also sends a clear message to regimes like Iran: They should be worried. Very worried. No longer can they rely on the paper tiger theory of American power. No longer can they assume the United States will never pursue regime change for fear of putting boots on the ground and risking American lives. While it may still be true that the U.S. prefers to avoid large-scale deployments, we have now demonstrated that – under this president - when the stakes are high enough, hesitation is no longer an option. That has in fact already established by the US precsion attack against an underground nuclear en rchment facility in Iran – thanks to Israel paving the way. This time it was the US military alone that did it.

By coincidence, at this very moment - a popular uprising is underway in Iran. It began as a protest against runaway inflation that has pushed much of the population below the poverty line. But it has since grown into a broader revolt by Iranians who despise their government. Many of them protested in the past, only to watch fellow demonstrators executed for doing so. That fear - of death simply for protesting - had long kept them silent.

No longer.

Their collapsing economy appears to have pushed them past desperation...

Emes Ve-Emunah will no longer be fully available here. To finish reading this post and future posts - and comment on them - click on this link: substack. You must subscribe. But it's easy and it's fre

The Myopic Charedi View of Daas Torah

One of the many signs denigrating the IDF seen at Charedi protests (eJP)

By now, I should be used to this attitude. And yet, I still can’t quite wrap my head around it. The default posture of the Daas Torahniks is the total suspension of one’s own common sense in deference to authority - simply because someone older and presumed wiser in Torah knowledge says so, without explanation. They call this Daas Torah. Questioning it is treated not as disagreement, but as near heresy.

This mindset was once again on full display in the backlash to a letter signed by over 100 Charedi donors stating they would no longer support Yeshivos and Kollelim that denigrate the IDF. Notably, the letter did not challenge the Charedi position opposing military service. Their demand was far more basic: do not disparage those who are risking - and in many cases sacrificing - their lives for the Jewish people.

That should be self-evident.

While I personally believe Charedim should serve as a general rule, with exemptions where appropriate, this letter was not about conscription. It was about ending rhetoric that goes beyond ideological opposition and crosses into outright contempt for soldiers and their families.

First, let me be clear: if organizers misled signatories or attached names without consent, that would be wrong and indefensible. But beyond one or possibly two claims, there is no evidence that this occurred. In any event, that controversy is not the real issue. The reaction to the letter is.

You don’t need to be a Gadol to understand the motivation behind it. How Charedi leadership can tolerate - let alone engage in - denigration of people who protect not only secular Israelis or religious Zionists, but the Charedim themselves, is astonishing...

Emes Ve-Emunah will no longer be fully available here. To finish reading this post and future posts - and comment on them - click on this link: substack. You must subscribe. But it's easy and it's free

The Cost of Belonging

(Mishpacha)

If I had to choose one word to define 2025, it would be ‘affordability’. Contrary to popular Jewish belief, it wasn’t anti-Zionism that propelled Zohran Mamdani to victory. It was the crushing cost of living in New York City. Housing and food have become unaffordable for the average wage earner. That’s what he ran on and why he won.

And this is not just a New York problem. Across the country, prices for nearly everything have steadily risen over the past five years. While economists predict improvement going forward, those projections have yet to translate into lived reality.

Orthodox Jews feel this pressure more acutely than most. In addition to ordinary living costs, we shoulder expenses unique to religious life. Most notably Jewish education. A school that provides a solid religious and secular education can easily cost upwards of $25,000 per child per year. For a family with four children, that translates into a theoretical annual tuition bill of $100,000.  And many Orthodox Jewish families have more than four children.

Add to that the higher cost of kosher food and the extraordinary expense of Pesach, when households must restock their kitchens entirely. Even this partial accounting makes one thing clear: living a middle-class Orthodox life increasingly requires an upper-middle-class income.

How can an entire community sustain that?

Emes Ve-Emunah will no longer be fully available here. To finish reading this post and future posts - and comment on them - click on this link: substack. You must subscribe. But it's easy and it's free

How Bad is Antisemitism, Really?

Vice-President Vance and Tucker Carlson (Business Insider)

I don’t think now is the time to panic. I still believe that the vast majority of Americans are not antisemitic. I don’t even think most are anti-Israel. A lot of whom are upset at how they think Israel conducted the war in Gaza.  Although I now admit I underestimated the extent of both.

That said, it is impossible to ignore the growing influence of antisemitic voices on the right, led most prominently by Tucker Carlson and Candace Owens. They are attempting to shift the national conversation in a dangerous direction. Still, their millions of followers represent only a small fraction of the American public.

The same dynamic exists on the left. Antisemitism there is usually disguised as anti-Zionism, providing plausible deniability for motives that are often anything but benign. While there are rare cases of people who oppose Israel without harboring animus toward Jews, those cases are the exception.

Detaching Israel from Jewish identity reflects a fundamental misunderstanding of Judaism itself. Jews who claim Israel has no bearing on their Jewishness are typically ignorant of their own heritage. An ignorance that has fueled a growing number of anti-Zionist Jewish organizations, often composed of younger Jews whose progressive political values have replaced Jewish ones they were never taught.

Many commentators point to the election of Zohran Mamdani, a fiercely anti-Zionist Muslim, as mayor of New York City as evidence of rising antisemitism. Some argue his victory gives antisemites tacit permission to emerge more openly and cause harm to Jews. That concern is legitimate.

Yet I do not believe Mamdani is inherently antisemitic, nor do I believe he will abandon his promise to protect New York’s Jewish community. Even while relentlessly condemning Israel. In fact, as troubling as Mamdani is, I would trust him with my life sooner than I would Tucker Carlson.

So why am I still confident that most Americans are not only not antisemitic, but actually appreciate Jewish contributions to society - historically and today, at least to the extent they are aware of them?

Start with evangelical Christians... 

Emes Ve-Emunah will no longer be fully available here. To finish reading this post and future posts - and comment on them - click on this link: substack. You must subscribe. But it's easy and it's free