Mideast War blowback

Post Reply New Topic

President Joe Biden responded to pro-Palestinian protesters who interrupted his health care speech on Tuesday, saying that "they have a point."

Two protesters were escorted out of the Raleigh, North Carolina, venue after they cut off the president mid-remarks, shouting, "What about the health care in Gaza?"

"Everybody deserves health care," Biden said, as the protesters yelled that hospitals in Gaza were being bombed and alleged that Biden was "complicit in genocide." The president asked the audience to "be patient with them."

"They have a point," Biden said after the protesters were escorted out. "We need to get a lot more care into Gaza."

Members of the audience cheered and gave the president a standing ovation.

Pro-Palestinian protesters were also gathered outside of the event space, a relatively common occurrence for the president in recent months.

Biden has faced numerous anti-war protests during his events in the months since the Israel-Hamas war began Oct. 7, and especially as calls have grown for his administration to take stronger action on the civilian death toll in Gaza. In the weeks after he was interrupted about a dozen times during a January abortion rights speech, his team worked to minimize disruptions by making Biden's events smaller and withholding their precise locations longer than usual.

The alleged detainment and verbal abuse of two October 7 massacre survivors at the Manchester airport on Sunday was the subject of debate in the UK House of Commons on Tuesday, with North Hampton MP Sir Michael Ellis demanding to know if "Jews and Israelis are still welcome to enter this country?"

"The terrorist attack on the 7th of October on Israel has provoked widespread antisemitisim in this country and around the world," Ellis said to fellow Conservative Party member and Minister of State for Development and Africa Andrew Mitchell. "The latest manifestation of this was at Manchester airport yesterday [sic] where a Border Force apparently did not want Israeli Jews to enter this country."

Ellis demanded accountability for the detainment of Neria and Daniel Sharabi, who had not only survived the Supernova festival massacre but had reportedly saved dozens of lives by administering medical aid and using weapons from a disabled tank to fend off Hamas terrorists. Ellis read an alleged quote of the Border Force officers that interrogated the brothers for two hours, in which they explained they had questioned them "they had to make sure that you are not going to do what you are doing in Gaza over there."

"Blaming all Jews for the action of their country is obviously antisemitic these are people in uniform acting for this country as border force officers," said Ellis. "It is a disgrace beyond all proportion, their detention was clearly unlawful for several hours, they're being offered free legal representation -- which I would urge them to take up."

Home Secretary James Cleverly told the Jewish Representative Council of Greater Manchester and Region on Monday night that "We do not tolerate antisemitism or any form of discrimination. This incident will be handled in line with our disciplinary procedures.”

Neria Sharabi told The Jerusalem Post on Tuesday that he and his brother had come to Manchester to share their experiences with the local Jewish community, and when the Border Force officers heard this, their attitude changed and the survivors were detained.
The survivors alleged aggressive and antisemitic treatment by the officers, who admonished them saying "I've made the decision, and you're coming in. Let us do the checks that we need to do and keep quiet...we're the bosses, not you."

After narrowly backing Israel’s military action in Gaza in November, Americans now oppose the campaign by a solid margin. Fifty-five percent currently disapprove of Israel’s actions, while 36% approve.

The latest results are from a March 1-20 survey.

Seventy-four percent of U.S. adults say they are following news of the Israeli-Hamas situation closely, similar to the 72% Gallup measured in November. One-third of Americans (34%) say they are following the situation “very closely.”

Disapproval of Israel’s military action is similar regardless of how much attention Americans are paying to the conflict. However, those paying less attention are more likely than their counterparts to have no opinion on the matter, resulting in lower approval than seen among people paying greater attention.

Republicans Retain Positive Stance; Independents Decidedly Negative
All three major party groups in the U.S. have become less supportive of Israel’s actions in Gaza than they were in November. This includes declines of 18 percentage points in approval among both Democrats and independents and a seven-point decline among Republicans.

Independents have shifted from being divided in their views of the Israeli military action to opposing it. Democrats, who were already largely opposed in November, are even more so now, with 18% approving and 75% disapproving.

Republicans still support Israel’s military efforts, but a reduced majority -- 64%, down from 71% -- now approve.

Biden’s approval rating for his handling of the situation in the Middle East, at 27%, is his lowest among five issues tested in the survey. This is because far fewer Democrats (47%) approve of how he is handling the situation between the Israelis and Palestinians than approve of his handling of the economy, the environment, energy policy and foreign affairs, broadly. On those issues, no less than 66% of Democrats approve of Biden.

Only further contributing to Biden’s low rating on the Middle East situation, just 21% of independents and 16% of Republicans approve of his performance on the issue.

Still, it appears that the Middle East conflict has not taken an obvious toll on Biden’s political standing. His overall job approval rating is 40%, compared with 37% in October and November surveys, perhaps being lifted by Americans’ greater confidence in the U.S. economy.

Columbia University is investigating a student event where speakers expressed support for Palestinian terror groups and encouraged students to back “armed resistance” against Israel.

The event on Sunday, titled “Resistance 101,” was led by Columbia University Apartheid Divest, a coalition of student organizations. The two lead groups in the coalition are the school’s chapters of Students for Justice in Palestine and the anti-Zionist Jewish Voice for Peace, which have been suspended from campus for violating university protest policies.

During the event, speakers repeatedly backed Palestinian “resistance,” which in their view included open support for Hamas. One of the speakers, Khaled Barakat, a Palestinian writer and activist, referred to his “friends and brothers in Hamas, Islamic Jihad, the PFLP,” according to a video of the entire event posted on X, formerly Twitter, by user Stu Smith.

Other speakers at the event also backed Palestinian terror groups. Some participants attended the event in person while others spoke via videoconference. It wasn’t clear from the video how many students attended.

There is nothing wrong with being a member of Hamas, being a leader of Hamas, being a fighter in Hamas,“ said Charlotte Kates, Barakat’s wife and a coordinator for Samidoun, a pro-Palestinian activist group that was banned from Germany in November for supporting terrorism, has been sanctioned by financial companies and, according to Israel, is linked to the terror group Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine.

Kates also urged attendees to show support for “Palestinian armed resistance” at demonstrations and backed the October 7 attack,

The event was originally scheduled to take place at the Center for Research on Women in Barnard College, the women’s school that is part of Columbia, but had to move because it was not authorized by the university, according to a Columbia spokesperson. Organizers instead held the event in a “residence” and online, the spokesperson told the New York Jewish Week.

“We are investigating this matter and will not tolerate violations of university policy,” the spokesperson said.

It wasn’t clear where the residence was located. Nerdeen Kiswani, the founder of Within Our Lifetime, another group that sponsored the event, said during the event that she was “sitting in Columbia University.”

Within Our Lifetime and its leadership have endorsed the Oct. 7 attack on Israel and expressed support for Hamas at the frequent rallies it has staged in New York City since the attack. At the event, Kiswani backed “armed resistance” against Israel and described the Second Intifada, a mass terror wave in the early 2000s, as “armed struggle.” Kiswani said that Palestinian groups that entered peace talks in the 1990s were being “puppeted by Israel and the US”

The speakers, including Kiswani, repeatedly rejected a two-state solution and criticized the Oslo Peace Accords.

“We have the right to return home and we will get that right by any means necessary,” Kiswani said, adding that she believed Palestinians had the right to “every inch of Palestine, from the river to the sea,” including cities within Israel’s internationally recognized borders such as Akko and Jaffa.

Anti-Israel Protesters threw rocks and fireworks at police as they attempted to disrupt an Israel-Norway under 19 soccer match in Skien on Tuesday

Video posted by pro-Palestinian activists showed protesters clashing with police in riot gear. Demonstrators banged on the gates to the Skagerak Arena while police doused them with pepper spray.
Protesters wearing keffiyehs and waving Palestinian flags berated the officers and picked up loose gravel to hurl through the gate.

"Norway and Israel played a football match, so how can Russia be boycotted from all sports arenas while Israel is still in every sports scene and Eurovision while committing genocide of the Palestinian people?? Double standards!" Photographer and activist Eyad Al Zaro wrote on Instagram on Tuesday.

Pro-Palestinian protesters repeatedly interrupted President Joe Biden’s fundraiser featuring former Presidents Barack Obama and Bill Clinton Thursday night — underscoring a serious electoral challenge for the incumbent Democrat even as he raked in $26 million.

The frequent protests — including shouts of “blood on your hands” — drew flashes of frustration from the former presidents on stage as Biden faces intensifying domestic fallout from the Israel-Hamas war.

“You can’t just talk and not listen. That’s what the other side does,” Obama said, according to pooled reporters in the room.

Clinton used the protests to push for Biden’s re-election, arguing that Biden cares about Palestinians’ self-determination and establishing a two-state solution. Obama, too, said Biden had the moral clarity to lead during this conflict.

Biden, for his part, called for stopping “the effort that is resulting in significant deaths of innocent civilians” in Gaza, adding that he’s working with Arab countries, who are “prepared” to “fully recognize Israel for the first time.”

Ahead of the event, hundreds of protesters marched past the line of Biden supporters waiting to enter Radio City Music Hall, calling for a cease-fire in Gaza and criticizing Biden. As attendees left, protesters lined up on Sixth Avenue chanted “genocide supporter” and “cease-fire now.”

Rep. Gregory Meeks (D-N.Y.), who attended the fundraiser, called the protests “minor,” adding that he “didn’t think that marred [the event] at all. It’s part of what our democracy is about.”

In the last several weeks, as parents have registered and paid for this summer’s camp season, a handful of families in New York City found themselves hung up on one day in their camp’s traditional programming.

“In the past, we know the Y has celebrated ‘Israel Day’ in various forms,” the families wrote in an open letter to Camp Twelve Trails, a Jewish day and overnight camp for 5- to 16-year-olds operated by three Jewish community centers in northern Manhattan, the Bronx and Westchester County.

“We call on you to honor your stated commitments to creating a welcoming environment in which all lives are respected by dropping any celebration of Israel from planned programming,” they continued. “We further note that in the current context there can also be no neutral celebration of ‘Israeli culture.’”

The camp has not said it is making any changes in response to the letter; it is continuing to hire Israeli staff as it has done in previous summers. And none of the signatories that JTA was able to identify responded to requests for comment. Still, the letter offers a stark sign of how Jewish camps are facing added pressure this summer over how they present and discuss Israel, given the ongoing Israel-Hamas war, which began when Hamas terrorists invaded southern Israel, slaughtered 1,200 people and abducted 253 on October 7.

Before the war, Jewish camps were already experiencing pressure from some graduates who said they had contributed to a sanitized and incomplete picture of Israel in the American Jewish imagination. An effort among lifelong campers-turned-counselors to infuse Palestinian and anti-occupation perspectives into Israel education gained steam several years ago.

In an anonymous op-ed published in The Forward titled “Dear Jewish summer camps: It’s time to tell our children the truth about Israel and Palestine,” one parent called for American Jewish camps to center Palestinian narratives alongside Israeli ones.

“This year, we wonder if the horrors of and since the October 7 attacks might shift the ways that camp approaches talking about Israel,” they write. “It seems that this period of intense grief and pain could drive camp’s leaders and educators to bring new nuance and complexity to the curriculum, emphasizing a sense of shared humanity, and acknowledging that Jewish and Palestinian freedom are intertwined.”

They add: “So far, we don’t have much reason for hope.”

Jamie Simon, the chief program officer for the Foundation for Jewish Camp, said that most Jewish camps are explicitly Zionist — putting them at odds with the minority of American Jews who identify as anti-Zionist. But she said each family should do research to choose the camp that they best align with on Israel education.

“There’s [sic] many camps doing it many different ways, and so if they’re looking for a pro-Israel approach with no questions and no thinking about different viewpoints, there’s some camps for them,” Simon said. “If they’re looking for camps that are thinking about Palestinians in Gaza, and the diversity of thought, and they might still love Israel, but also sometimes question Israeli policies, there’s [sic] camps for them.”

Striking the right notes isn’t going to be easy, Simon said. “All the camps are trying to sort of balance centering Israel education and their values around Israel with also being a big tent and trying to be inclusive of the diversity of their communities,” she added.

The Twelve Trails letter — which is addressed to the leadership of both the YM & YWHA of Washington Heights and Inwood and Camp Twelve Trails — appears to call for a wholesale exclusion of Israel from the camp curriculum. The letter says it comes from Jews and non-Jews, some of whom lost loved ones on October 7.

“We are horrified by Israel’s decision to use the tragedy of that day to justify great violence against the Palestinian people,” the letter says. “We also know that there is nothing in Judaism or Jewish culture which requires celebration of Israel.”

In a statement to JTA, Martin Englisher, CEO of the Y, one of the camp’s operators, pointed to the diversity of the community and his organization’s commitment to “providing high quality programming and services for all who choose to participate.” He did not directly refer or respond to the letter. The camp’s director did not respond to a request for comment.

“As a Jewish community center, the Y supports Israel’s right to exist as the homeland of the Jewish people,” the statement continued. “We affirm and celebrate our connection with the history and culture of Israel and the Jewish people, including programming for special days, and the inclusion of staff from Israel in various programs. We do not take political positions.”

Gal Atia, the director of a Jewish Agency for Israel program that places Israeli staff at North American Jewish camps, called the Twelve Trails letter, which he had seen, “a really extreme situation.” But he acknowledged that pushback from parents regarding Israel can be “a huge challenge.”

The bottom line, he said, is that when a camp chooses to hire Israeli staff, that itself is a statement — one that he said is worth the possible discontent.

The three top Democrats in the US House of Representatives endorsed Rep. Jamaal Bowman, a fierce Israeli critic, days after the party’s leading Jewish group endorsed his primary challenger.

The endorsement is not unusual — House leaders in both parties routinely favor incumbents facing tough primary races — but it comes as the New York lawmaker is facing a challenge from a popular local elected official, Westchester County Executive George Latimer, who has blasted Bowman’s Israel rhetoric and recently gained the backing of the Jewish Democratic Council of America.

The endorsement Friday, distributed by Bowman’s campaign, emphasized his local bona fides and did not touch on his condemnations of Israel, which he has accused of “genocide” in its war against Hamas in Gaza.

“Congressman Bowman’s life experiences — raised by a single mom in public housing and founding a public school serving low-income children in the Bronx — have shaped him into a public servant who fights for economic justice and in defense of historically underrepresented communities,” said the statement by Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries of New York, Whip Katherine Clark of Massachusetts and Caucus Chair Pete Aguilar of California.

Bowman was first elected in 2020 and is part of the Squad, the group of progressive Democratic representatives who are broadly critical of Israel. He represents a district that spans Westchester and part of the Bronx in New York City, and is home to a sizable Jewish community.

The Israel-Hamas war has become a focus of the campaign. Latimer has been firmly supportive of Israel since Hamas’s October 7 attack, in which terrorists slaughtered 1,200 people in southern Israel and seized 253 hostages.

In addition to the “genocide” charge, Bowman recently walked back a statement last year casting doubt on claims that Hamas committed rapes in its October 7 massacre on Israel, which launched the war. He has also lost the endorsement of J Street, the liberal Israel lobby.

The Jewish Democratic Council of America announced its endorsement of Latimer on Thursday alongside 21 other candidates, including New Yorkers Mondaire Jones in the 17th district and Josh Riley in the 19th district.

Latimer entered the race in December after months of speculation that he would mount a challenge to Bowman, who was first elected in 2020 and after receiving encouragement from Jewish supporters. He has also nabbed an endorsement from the pro-Israel lobby AIPAC. The Democratic Majority for Israel, an advocacy group, applauded his entry into the race.

Both candidates raised around $1.4 million in the last quarter of 2023.

Bowman, a former middle school principal, unseated longtime incumbent Eliot Engel, who is Jewish, in 2020. His ties with many Jewish constituents had frayed before October 7 due to his criticism of Israel. He angered Jewish voters early in the war by urging a ceasefire on October 16 in a statement that did not mention Hamas, terrorism or Israeli hostages.

Separate from the war in Gaza, the congressman has faced other controversies in recent months. In January, the Daily Beast reported that Bowman had promoted 9/11 conspiracy theories on his personal blog in 2011. The House formally censured Bowman in December for pulling a fire alarm at the US Capitol, which he said was an accident.

Violent clashes between Jordanian forces and protesters erupted in the past couple of days, including instances of stone-throwing and arson aimed at the country’s security forces.
These confrontations are taking place against the backdrop of the nation’s large anti-Israel protests, many of which included openly pro-Hamas chants.

One of the main promoters and leaders of these demonstrations is the Muslim Brotherhood in Jordan, a group aligned with Hamas for their shared ideological origins. It is active on both the social and the political level through its party, the Islamic Action Front (IAF).

Following the clashes, several activists of the Muslim Brotherhood were arrested, including two prominent members of the IAF’s youth sector, Moataz Al-Harout and Hamza Al-Shaghnoubi.
In a rare statement that implies criticism of the country’s leadership, Secretary General of the Muslim Brotherhood’s party, Murad Adaileh, denounced the arrests, deeming them “outdated” and adding that they would be “of no use in stopping the Jordanian youth movement which supports the Palestinian people’s jihad and heroic resistance, and rejects Zionist crimes in and state of Arab incompetence.”

One viral picture showed posters carried during a demonstration addressed to the Jordanian army, calling it to heed the calls of children and women in Gaza or take vengeance on their enemies and free the land, adding the hashtag: “Where’s the army of Al-Karamah?”

This is a word meaning both ‘dignity’ and the name of a 1968 battle in which the Jordanian army forced the IDF to retreat from a retaliatory operation on Jordanian soil.

“Flood of allegiance:” a patriotic counter-campaign
The scenes of violent rioters criticizing and targeting national symbols such as the kingdom’s security forces also stirred a wave of patriotism from Jordanians, some of whom referred to the violent demonstrations as “marches of sedition.”

Others started an online campaign under the hashtag “Flood of allegiance,” referring to Jordanian patriots’ allegiance to the Jordanian monarchy and security forces, and as a critical play on words against the “Flood of Al-Aqsa,” the name Hamas chose for its October 7th massacre.

One post featuring this hashtag showed an injured Jordanian police officer receiving treatment in an ambulance, with the user adding furiously: “These are the descendants of those who defended you [meaning: defended the Palestinians] in Bab al-Wad in Jerusalem and the Battle of Karameh. When we see threats and incitement from you to stab security personnel and throw Molotov cocktails... how did we get here? When will we see the red eyes of foundling demonstrators? Are we waiting for the time we start losing the lives of policemen?”

The Jordanian-Palestinian conflict
These scenes resurfaced the decades-long conflict between two major groups of Jordanian society: the “original” Jordanian population, which represents, according to estimates, roughly 20% of the population, and the Palestinians, who are believed by some to represent roughly 60% of the kingdom’s population.

Notedly, these two groups also differ in their influence within the country, as the “original” Transjordanians are represented in high-ranking posts across the political, military, diplomatic, and economic fields, while the Palestinian population is reportedly underrepresented in these areas and others.

The past saw many instances of violent clashes between the two populations, including the Black September events of 1970, in which then-young King Hussein ordered the liquidation of Palestinian terrorist organizations who were operating in the country and threatened his rule, with estimates of Palestinians killed ranging between 4000 and even 20000.

Other instances included the assassination of Jordan’s founder, King Abdullah the 1st, in 1951 and the assassination of Jordanian Prime Minister Wasfi Tal in 1971, both by Palestinians.
Jordan was the only country historically naturalized and granted citizenship to hundreds of thousands of Palestinian refugees and their descendants, though not to all of them.

This stands in stark contrast to the situation of Palestinians in other countries, such as Lebanon and Syria, where for generations, Palestinians have been ordered to remain enclosed in refugee camps, with harsh limitations on freedom of movement and even on their professional occupations.

Three protesters were taken into custody late Saturday for disrupting Easter Vigil Mass at Manhattan's St. Patrick's Cathedral, police said.

The 8 p.m. service, conducted by Cardinal Timothy Dolan, was interrupted roughly 45 minutes after its start when the three protestors approached the alter with a large white banner that read "Silence = Death."

Videos shared by Extinction Rebellion NYC showed the trio quickly escorted from the church seconds after unfurling the banner. "Free Palestine" chants could also be heard.

The three men, two in their 30s and one in his 60s, were arrested by police on charges of disrupting a religious service, the NYPD confirmed Sunday.

"War, occupation, and industrial pollution are poisoning the soil, air and water in Gaza and all over the planet, destroying the earth's capacity to sustain life," said Gregory Schwedock, one of the XR NYC Palestine Solidarity activists arrested Saturday.

US Congressman Tim Walberg (R) received condemnation for calling for Gaza to be treated like "Hiroshima and Nagasaki" in a video posted to X on Saturday.

In the video, Walberg is heard discussing his position on humanitarian aid and Gaza, saying that US aid to Israel should not be diverted to help Gaza.

In response to a question on the new humanitarian port being built off Gaza, he says that the US "shouldn’t be spending a dime on humanitarian aid" and that he prefers money to be spent on providing aid to Israel to help defeat Hamas.

Walberg then clarifies that "It should be like Nagasaki and Hiroshima. Get it over quick."
He also linked Iran and Russia to Hamas's war effort and added, "Probably North Korea and China's in there too."

The pain and tension from the war between Israel and Hamas continues to be on full display in our own backyard.

On Monday night, there were clashes at a New Jersey synagogue as pro-Palestinian demonstrators showed up in protest against an event.

The anger continues to rise between Palestinians and Israelis in Teaneck. The latest incident happened Monday at the middle of a residential corner outside of the Congregation Bnai Yeshurun Temple.

"Proud of the community, proud of the community. They are doing a great job and I stand behind Israel 100%," resident Steve Segal said.

Police were out in full force, keeping both sides apart and safe. But at times, things did get out of hand and officers were quick to sweep protesters from both sides off the streets.

"It's a sad world at the moment. Our country has been turned upside down, but our country will come through it," Segal said.

It has been months of anger between the two sides since the war broke overseas on Oct. 7.

On Monday night, an event run by ZAKA, an international organization that is central in providing those slaughtered a dignified burial, was being held at the temple when pro-Palestinian demonstrators converged.

"This organization ZAKA that these Israeli Zionists over here are saying are heroes are the biggest liars and war propagandists," Sayel Kayed said.

Monday wasn't the first time pro-Palestinian demonstrators have shown up in Teaneck. In October, the town council voted on a referendum to denounce Hamas.

Last month, hundreds protested an Israeli real estate event, saying they were selling stolen land.

"We are fighting against what's wrong and fighting for what's right within the Jewish and the world," resident Dov Adler said.

For an area with a large Israeli community, some feel these demonstrations are threatening and they're gong to stand strong.

"If there is antisemitism, there will be people acting on it and there are people acting on it," resident Nancy Joseph said.

An event for Israel Apartheid Month at Haverford College sounded like a mad lib of antisemitic conspiracies and international studies buzzwords: “COVID in Times of Genocide: How Israel uses COVID as a Tool for Settler Colonialism in Palestine.” But it was real, it happened, and the local Jewish federation is furious the school didn’t step in to stop it.

Hosted Wednesday by three student groups, the event was advertised as intended to show how “the Israeli state intentionally debilitates Palestinians through the spread of COVID and how we fight mass death on all fronts.”

The Jewish Federation of Greater Philadelphia said in a statement that the teach-in invoked a centuries-old antisemitic canard that Jews take advantage of global crises — like the COVID pandemic — as a means for their own advancement, and called on the Haverford administration to “take immediate action.”

Jason Holtzman, director of the federation’s Jewish Community Relations Council, said in an interview Thursday that the college’s response, which was to ask the student groups to change the name of the event, inadequately addressed the concerns of Jewish students.

The controversy re-escalated tensions on a campus where the Israeli-Palestinian conflict has felt uniquely personal. A Haverford junior, Kinnan Abdalhamid, was one of three Palestinian American students injured last November in Vermont in a shooting the victims say was motivated by Islamophobic hatred.

Jewish frustrations with Haverford, a liberal arts college of approximately 1,400 students, and its sister school Bryn Mawr resemble complaints made against universities across the country since Oct. 7. A Haverford board member resigned Nov. 4, reportedly because the college’s statement to students following the attacks, signed by Dean John McKnight and Nikki Young, the school’s vice president for institutional equity and access, did not in their eyes condemn Hamas strongly enough.

Pro-Palestinian students have also criticized the Haverford administration for not doing enough to limit what they characterized as a “proliferation” of anti-Arab and anti-Palestinian rhetoric on campus. Some Jewish community members saw the charge as blaming pro-Israel Haverford students for Abdalhamid’s shooting.

In March 2020, when much of the world was shut down due to the spread of COVID-19, Israel was accused by Palestinians of using the shutdowns to accelerate West Bank annexation. The Israeli human rights group B’Tselem said the same month that despite movement restrictions placed on Palestinians, Israeli border police were regularly entering East Jerusalem “for no apparent reason” to initiate friction with the residents.

Later, Israel was criticized by the human rights organization Amnesty International for making vaccines widely available to Israelis but not Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank. Israel agreed to send 1.4 million vaccine doses to the Palestinian territories in June 2021, but Palestinian leaders returned the first batch of 90,000 shots, saying they were nearly expired.

A number of antisemitic conspiracy theories emerged during the pandemic blaming Jews or Israel for creating the virus in order to target political enemies. Manfred Gerstenfeld, the late director of the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs’ antisemitism program, wrote that these baseless accusations were “the modern mutation of the ancient blood libel.”

A new bill in California would require public colleges and universities to ban students and employees from calling for genocide while on campus. It is part of a wave of proposed legislation aimed at combating antisemitism in the state.

The California Senate bill follows a December federal congressional hearing in which university presidents from Harvard, University of Pennsylvania and MIT appeared to waver when asked whether calling for the genocide of Jewish people would violate their codes of conduct.

The bill also mandates schools ban any harassment, intimidation, discrimination or violence that would interfere with students’ free exercise of First Amendment rights.

“Even in these difficult circumstances, all students should be able to freely express themselves without threat or intimidation on college campuses,” said State Sen. Steve Glazer, who sponsored the bill. “Unfortunately, there have been some events to the contrary.”

The bill, SB 1287, does not stipulate what would constitute a call for genocide, leaving open whether controversial slogans such as “From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free” would be included. (Some interpret the phrase as a call for the genocide of Israeli Jews, although its meaning is debated.) The bill requires that school policies ban forms of harassment that “are intended to [be], and are reasonably understood by the victims or hearers” as, calls for genocide.

In its current form, the bill would leave the determination of what language might qualify to school administrations in the state’s University of California, California State University and community college systems.

Glazer said the language of the bill was “carefully crafted to be responsive to the circumstances which we find ourselves in.”

David Bocarsly, executive director of Jewish Public Affairs Committee of California, which is supporting the bill, said the bill wasn’t intended to prescribe specific punishments for specific phrases.

But it is unclear whether any UC students have called overtly for genocide of Jewish people.

Bocarsly declined to say whether he thought a “From the river to the sea” chant would count as a call for genocide. Some Jewish groups say that it is a call to eliminate Israel and the millions of Jews who call it home. Defenders of the phrase say it is an aspirational call for human rights.

The share of U.S. adults who say there is a lot of discrimination against Jews in our society has doubled in the last three years, according to a new Pew Research Center survey, jumping from 20% in 2021 to 40% today. A somewhat larger share – 44% – say Muslims face a lot of discrimination, up 5 percentage points since 2021.

Many Americans particularly sense that discrimination against Muslims and Jews has risen since the start of the Israel-Hamas war. The vast majority of U.S. Muslims and Jews themselves agree: Seven-in-ten Muslims and nine-in-ten Jews surveyed say they have felt an increase in discrimination against their respective groups since the war began in October.

The survey, conducted Feb. 13-25 among a nationally representative sample of 12,693 U.S. adults that includes an oversample of American Jews and Muslims, also probed the public’s views on the limits of free speech related to the war.

It finds that Americans are broadly comfortable with speech both for and against Israeli and Palestinian statehood. But most U.S. adults are not OK with calls for violence against Jews or Muslims.

70% say expressing support for “Israel’s right to exist as a Jewish state” should be allowed.
58% say expressing opposition to Israel’s right to exist should be allowed.
66% say speech supporting “Palestinians having their own state” should be allowed.
61% say speech opposing a Palestinian state should be allowed.
One-in-ten say calls for violence against either Jews or Muslims should be allowed.

On the questions about speech related to statehood, substantial shares of respondents are not sure. For example, 23% say they aren’t sure whether speech opposing Israel’s right to exist as a Jewish state should be allowed. And 25% say they aren’t sure whether speech opposing Palestinian statehood should be allowed.

When it comes to speech advocating violence, however, there is less uncertainty. Roughly three-quarters of Americans say that calls for violence against either Muslims or Jews should not be allowed.

74% of U.S. Jews and 60% of U.S. Muslims surveyed say they have felt offended by something they saw on the news or social media about the Israel-Hamas war.

27% of Muslims and 26% of Jews in the survey say they have stopped talking to someone in person – or unfollowed or blocked someone online – because of something that person said about the war.

How much discrimination do U.S. Jews and Muslims see against their own group?
The vast majority of U.S. Muslims surveyed (85%) say there is at least some discrimination against Muslims in our society today, including 67% who say there is a lot. Overall, Muslim respondents are more likely to feel there is at least some discrimination against their own religious group than to say the same about Jews (50%).

An overwhelming majority of U.S. Jews (94%) say there is at least some discrimination against Jews in our society, including 72% who say there is a lot. And more say there is a lot of discrimination against Jews than say the same about Muslims (57%).

For Jews, this represents a shift: In our 2020 and 2013 surveys of American Jews, they were more likely to say that Muslims (as well as Black people) face a lot of discrimination than to say this about themselves.

The change in Jewish Americans’ perceptions appears to be tied, at least in part, to the conflict in the Middle East: 89% of Jewish respondents say they have perceived a rise in discrimination against Jews since the start of the Israel-Hamas war.

They are not alone in feeling the effects of the conflict. Seven-in-ten Muslim respondents say discrimination against Muslims has risen since the start of the war. (Jewish and Muslim Americans are also paying greater attention to news about the Israel-Hamas war than most other Americans.)

In addition, most Muslims and nearly half of Jews say discrimination has increased against Arabs since the war began.

Unlike most U.S. polls, this survey has enough Jewish and Muslim respondents to allow their opinions to be broken out separately. Although Arab Americans also are included in the survey, there are not enough of them to reliably represent the views of Arab Americans as a whole. All three groups are very small in proportion to the overall U.S. population, which makes it hard to get a representative estimate through random sampling alone.

In addition, most Muslims and nearly half of Jews say discrimination has increased against Arabs since the war began.

Unlike most U.S. polls, this survey has enough Jewish and Muslim respondents to allow their opinions to be broken out separately. Although Arab Americans also are included in the survey, there are not enough of them to reliably represent the views of Arab Americans as a whole. All three groups are very small in proportion to the overall U.S. population, which makes it hard to get a representative estimate through random sampling alone.

Free speech and the Israel-Hamas war
The survey included several questions to gauge tolerance for public speech about Israeli and Palestinian statehood, asking whether people in the U.S. should be able to express these sentiments – even if they might offend some people. Outright opposition to these expressions of opinion are relatively rare; instead, sizable shares say they are unsure. In contrast, most Americans say public speech calling for violence against Jews or Muslims should not be allowed.

Like the public overall, a large majority of U.S. Jews are in favor of allowing people to express support for Israel’s right to exist as a Jewish state (92%). Majorities of Jews also say speech either supporting (77%) or opposing (74%) Palestinians having their own state should be allowed. But Jews are less likely to say this about speech opposing Israel’s right to exist as a Jewish state: 55% say this kind of speech should be allowed, while 34% say it should not be allowed.

Similarly, a solid majority of U.S. Muslims say that speech supporting a Palestinian state should be allowed (70%). About half of Muslims say people should be allowed to express support for (47%) or opposition to (50%) Israel’s existence as a Jewish state. And 43% of Muslims say that speech opposing a Palestinian state should be allowed; 27% say this kind of speech should not be allowed, and 28% are unsure.

Like many public attitudes toward the Israel-Hamas war, opinions on these issues vary depending on people’s age, political party and education:

Age
Compared with other age groups, Americans 65 and older are more likely to say there is a lot of discrimination against Jews in our society today. Older Americans are far more likely to report an increase in discrimination against Jews than against Muslims or Arabs.

By contrast, Americans ages 18 to 29 are more likely to say that Black, Muslim, Arab and Hispanic people experience a lot of discrimination than to say the same about Jews. Adults under 30 are equally likely to perceive an increase in discrimination against Muslims, Arabs and Jews since the start of the Israel-Hamas war (47% each).

People ages 65 and older are the most likely to say they have felt personally offended by something they saw on the news or social media about the war (41%).

Adults under 30 are the most likely to say they stopped talking to someone, or unfollowed or blocked someone online, because of something that person said about the Israel-Hamas war (16%).

Partisanship
Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents are generally more likely than Republicans and Republican leaners to say there is a lot of discrimination against the groups asked about in the survey; Democrats are most likely to say there is a lot of discrimination against Black people (62%), Muslims (61%), Arab people (55%) and Jews (41%).

Republicans are most likely to say there is a lot of discrimination against Jews (40%), followed by Muslims (27%), evangelical Christians (24%) and White people (24%).

Democrats are about twice as likely as Republicans to say that, since the start of the Israel-Hamas war, discrimination has increased against Muslims (52% vs. 26%) and Arabs (49% vs. 23%).

Republicans (61%) and Democrats (57%) largely agree that discrimination against Jews has increased since the outbreak of the war.

Republicans and Democrats are also broadly in sync on the survey’s questions about speech. They largely are in favor of allowing expressions for or against statehood, but do not think calls for violence should be allowed.

Education
Americans with at least a college degree are more likely than those with less education to say discrimination against Jews, Muslims and Arabs has increased since the start of the Israel-Hamas war.

People with at least a college degree are far more likely than those with less education to say that speech supporting and opposing Israeli or Palestinian statehood should be allowed. Those with lower levels of education are much more likely to say they are unsure.


How the American public thinks discrimination has changed since the start of the Israel-Hamas war
A majority of Americans (57%) say that discrimination against Jews has increased since the start of the Israel-Hamas war, while 19% say it has stayed the same and 3% say it has decreased. Around one-in-five are not sure.

Meanwhile, 38% say discrimination against Muslims has increased since the start of the war, while 30% see no change, 5% say it has decreased and around a quarter are not sure.

Views of discrimination against Arabs are roughly similar to views about Muslims: 36% of U.S. adults say discrimination against Arab people has increased since the war began, while 31% say it has stayed the same, 5% say it has decreased and 27% are not sure.

Age
U.S. adults under 30 are about equally likely to say that discrimination has increased against Muslims, Jews and Arabs since the start of the Israel-Hamas war (47% say this about each).

These young adults are more likely than older Americans to say that discrimination against Muslims and Arabs has increased, and less likely than older Americans to say the same about Jews.

Among adults ages 65 and older, a significantly larger share say discrimination against Jews has increased since the start of the Israel-Hamas war (73%) than say the same about Muslims (41%) or Arabs (38%).

Partisanship
Americans aligned with both parties largely agree that discrimination against Jews has increased: 57% of Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents express this view, as do 61% of Republicans and Republican leaners.

But there are significant partisan differences when it comes to whether Muslims and Arabs have experienced more discrimination since the start of the war.

Democrats are about twice as likely as Republicans to say that discrimination has risen against Muslims (52% vs. 26%) and Arab people (49% vs. 23%). Among Republicans, a plurality say that discrimination has stayed the same in the case of both Muslims (41%) and Arab people (42%), and only about one-in-ten or fewer say discrimination against either group has decreased.

Religion
Religious groups differ in their perceptions of how discrimination has changed since the start of the Israel-Hamas war.

The vast majority of Jewish Americans (89%) think discrimination against Jews has increased since the start of the war. This is the highest share of any religious group we analyzed – although smaller majorities of White evangelical Protestants (66%), White Catholics (69%), White nonevangelical Protestants (62%) say the same. Fewer Muslim Americans agree (36%).

A large majority of Muslim Americans (70%) say discrimination against Muslims has increased since the start of the Israel-Hamas war. Around half of Jews (49%) share this view, while fewer Christians in any of the broad groups we can analyze – including White Catholics (36%) and Hispanic Catholics (42%) – agree. White evangelical Protestants (25%) are among the least likely of the religious groups studied to say that discrimination against Muslims has increased.

Views of discrimination against Arabs largely mirror views about Muslims.

How perceptions of increased discrimination since the conflict began vary based on people’s experiences with the Israel-Hamas war
Those who say they closely follow news about the war are more likely than those who don’t to perceive a rise in discrimination against all three groups (Muslims, Arabs and Jews) since the start of the war.

Chart shows Views on discrimination are related to how Americans engage with news and social media about the war, and also to their degree of sympathy for each side

The survey also asked whether respondents have ever been personally offended by comments about the war – either because of something they saw on the news or social media, or because of something someone said around them.

People who say they have been offended are more likely than those who haven’t to perceive a rise in discrimination against all three groups.

Some Americans also reported that they have stopped talking to someone, or unfollowed or blocked someone online, because of something that person said about the Israel-Hamas war.

People who have cut off communication with someone in this way are more likely than those who haven’t to say discrimination against both Muslims and Arabs has increased.

Where people say their sympathies lie in the Israel-Hamas war is also related to their perceptions about discrimination in the U.S.

78% of those who sympathize entirely or mostly with the Israeli people say discrimination against Jews has increased. Fewer say this among those who sympathize entirely or mostly with the Palestinian people (55%) or who sympathize equally with both groups (62%).

By comparison, those who sympathize entirely or mostly with the Palestinian people are more likely to say discrimination against Muslims (66%) and Arabs (64%) has increased. Fewer of those who sympathize predominantly with Israelis (29% and 25%, respectively) or equally with both groups (48% and 45%, respectively) say the same.

Acceptable speech and the Israel-Hamas war
On balance, Americans say the free public expression of opinions both for and against Israeli and Palestinian statehood should be allowed. But most draw the line at calls for violence against Jews or Muslims, which the vast majority say should not be allowed.

Seven-in-ten Americans say that speech supporting Israel’s right to exist as a Jewish state should be allowed. Two-thirds say the same about speech that supports Palestinians having their own state. In both cases, only about one-in-ten U.S. adults or fewer say these kinds of speech should not be allowed, though many more are unsure.

Smaller majorities say speech that opposes Palestinians having their own state (61%) or Israel’s right to exist as a Jewish state (58%) should be allowed. Fewer than one-fifth of U.S. adults say speech opposing Palestinian statehood (13%) or Israel’s existence as a Jewish state (17%) should not be allowed; around a quarter are unsure on these questions.

When we analyze various combinations of responses, we find that:

Most Americans who say that speech supporting Israel’s right to exist as a Jewish state should be allowed also say that speech opposing Israel’s existence should be allowed; 57% of respondents say both should be allowed.

Likewise, most who say it should be allowed to publicly support Palestinians having their own state also say it should be allowed to publicly oppose Palestinian statehood; 58% say both should be allowed.

An even larger share of Americans (63%) think that speech supporting both Palestinian statehood and Israel’s right to exist as a Jewish state should be allowed, while 55% say that speech opposing both should be allowed.

Religion
Most White evangelical Protestants, White Protestants who are not evangelical, White Catholics, Jewish Americans and religiously unaffiliated Americans (those who describe themselves as atheists, agnostics or “nothing in particular”) are broadly in favor of people being able to publicly express either support or opposition to Israeli and Palestinian statehood.

Black Protestants, Hispanic Protestants, Hispanic Catholics and Muslim Americans are less likely to say people should be allowed to voice these views, though these religious groups have a notably higher tendency to express uncertainty on the issue. For example, 33% of Muslims surveyed say they are not sure whether people in the U.S. should be allowed to express opposition to Israel’s right to exist as a Jewish state; about half of Muslims say this kind of speech should be allowed, and 18% say it should not be allowed.

Education
Most U.S. adults, regardless of age, support the free expression of opinions about Israeli and Palestinian statehood, though Americans ages 50 and older are somewhat more likely than adults under 50 to say people should be able to publicly express support for Israel’s right to exist as a Jewish state (74% vs. 67%).

Speech about violence
While most Americans favor free expression of opinions about Israeli and Palestinian statehood, most do not think calls for violence should be allowed. Just one-in-ten adults surveyed say that speech advocating violence against either Jews (10%) or Muslims (11%) is permissible.

Across a wide range of demographic groups, solid majorities of Americans feel that speech inciting violence against Jews or Muslims should not be allowed, though there are some differences. For example, U.S. adults under 50 are slightly more likely than older Americans to say that calls for violence against either religious group should be allowed.

Republicans and Republican-leaning independents are also, on average, slightly more likely than Democrats and Democratic leaners to say that public calls for violence against Muslims or Jews should be allowed – though most people in both parties view such speech as impermissible.

As with expressions of support or opposition to statehood, U.S. adults with some college or less education are more likely than those with at least a college degree to say they are unsure whether calls for violence against Jews or Muslims should be allowed.

How attention to the war and sympathy with each side are related to views on free speech
Americans who say they follow news about the Israel-Hamas war extremely or very closely are more likely than those who follow the news less closely to feel that people should be allowed to express speech that supports or opposes Israeli and Palestinian statehood.

But regardless of how closely they are following news about the war, most U.S. adults say speech advocating for violence against Jews or Muslims should not be permitted. (Though those who follow the news less closely are somewhat more likely to say they are unsure.)

As one might expect, Americans whose sympathies lie mostly or entirely with the Israeli people are especially likely to say that speech supporting Israel’s right to exist as a Jewish state should be allowed (88%). But 78% of Americans whose sympathies lie mostly or entirely with the Palestinian people say the same, as do three-quarters of those who say they sympathize equally with both groups.

Americans who sympathize mostly or entirely with Palestinians are somewhat more likely to say that speech opposing Israel’s right to exist should be allowed (73%). But 65% of those whose sympathies tilt toward Israel also favor allowing such speech, and so do 63% of those who sympathize equally with both.

Also, Americans who sympathize mostly or entirely with Palestinians are about as likely as those whose sympathies lie primarily with Israelis to say that speech opposing Palestinian statehood should be allowed: 72% of Palestinian sympathizers take this position, along with 71% of Israeli sympathizers.

Those who sympathize more with the Israeli people are as likely to say speech that calls for violence against Jews should be allowed (11%) as they are to say this for speech calling for violence against Muslims (13%). There is a similar pattern among those who sympathize more with the Palestinian people and those who sympathize equally with both.

Those who sympathize more with the Israeli people are as likely to say speech that calls for violence against Jews should be allowed (11%) as they are to say this for speech calling for violence against Muslims (13%). There is a similar pattern among those who sympathize more with the Palestinian people and those who sympathize equally with both.

Taking personal offense at speech or news about the Israel-Hamas war
One-third of Americans say that, since the start of the Israel-Hamas war, they have personally felt offended because of something they saw on the news or social media about the war. And 17% say they have personally felt offended because of something someone said around them about the war.

American Jews and Muslims are the only religious or demographic groups analyzed in this report in which a majority say they have felt offended because of something they saw on the news or social media: 74% of Jews and 60% of Muslims have been offended by news or social media related to the Israel-Hamas war.

Jews (49%) and Muslims (43%) are also far more likely than others to say they have felt offended by something someone said around them about the war.

U.S. adults ages 65 and older are more likely than their younger counterparts to say they have felt personally offended by something they saw on the news or social media about the war.

But U.S. adults under 30 are more likely than Americans ages 30 and older to say they have been offended by something someone said around them about the war.

Cutting contact with someone because of what that person said about the Israel-Hamas war
Relatively few Americans (8%) say they have stopped talking to someone in person, or unfollowed or blocked someone online, because of some comment that person made about the Israel-Hamas war.

But American Muslims (27%) and Jews (26%) are more likely than the other religious and demographic groups analyzed to say they have stopped talking to someone because of something that person said about the war.

This is a relatively uncommon experience across most demographic groups, though 16% of American adults under 30 have stopped talking to someone because of comments about the war.

Younger Americans are more likely to sympathize with the Palestinian people than the Israeli people. A third of adults under 30 say their sympathies lie either entirely or mostly with the Palestinian people, while 14% say their sympathies lie entirely or mostly with the Israeli people. The rest say their sympathies lie equally with both, with neither or that they are not sure.

Older Americans, by comparison, are more likely to sympathize with Israelis than Palestinians. For example, among people ages 65 and older, 47% say their sympathies lie entirely or mostly with the Israeli people, while far fewer (9%) sympathize entirely or mostly with the Palestinians.

Among those under 30, however, there are wide partisan differences in views on this question and others. Republicans and Republican-leaning independents under 30 sympathize more with the Israelis than the Palestinians (28% vs. 12%). Democrats and Democratic leaners sympathize far more with the Palestinians than the Israelis (47% vs. 7%).

Younger Americans have a more favorable opinion of the Palestinian people than the Israeli people. Six-in-ten adults under age 30 have a positive view of the Palestinian people, compared with 46% who see the Israeli people positively.

Older Americans, by contrast, are more likely to have a favorable opinion of the Israeli than Palestinian people.

Views of the Israeli people have soured among younger Americans in recent years. The share of adults under 30 with a favorable view of the Israeli people has fallen 17 percentage points since 2019, while views of the Palestinian people have not changed over this span. Older Americans’ views of both Israelis and Palestinians have remained largely unchanged.

Americans differ by age over why and how Israel is fighting Hamas. Adults under 30 are less likely than older Americans to say that Israel’s reasons for fighting Hamas are valid: 38% say this, compared with around half or more in each older age group.

Younger adults are also less likely than older people to see Israel’s response to Hamas’ Oct. 7 attack as acceptable – and more likely to see it as unacceptable. Some 46% of adults under 30 say the way Israel is carrying out its response is unacceptable, including 32% who call it completely unacceptable. Among older age groups, no more than around a third see Israel’s response as unacceptable.

Favorability of the Israeli government is also relatively low among the youngest U.S. adults. Around a quarter (24%) of Americans under 30 have a favorable view of the Israeli government, compared with half or more of those 50 and older.

There are notable age differences even among Jewish Americans: Younger Jews are more critical than older Jews of Israel’s approach to the war and have a less favorable view of Israel’s government.

Americans also differ by age over why and how Hamas is fighting Israel. Among younger Americans, 34% say Hamas’ reasons for fighting Israel are valid, while 30% say they are not valid and 35% are unsure. Older Americans are less likely to see Hamas’ reasons for fighting as valid – and far more likely to see them as not valid. Nearly two-thirds (64%) of Americans 65 and older, for example, say Hamas’ reasons are not valid.

When it comes to how Hamas carried out its attack on Israel on Oct. 7, a majority of younger Americans (58%) say it was unacceptable. But this view is more widespread among older Americans. For instance, 86% of people 65 and older say the way Hamas carried out its attack was unacceptable.

Few younger Americans think President Joe Biden is striking the right balance in the Israel-Hamas war. Only 12% of adults under 30 say this, while 36% say Biden is favoring the Israelis too much – up from 27% in December 2023 – and 10% say he is favoring the Palestinians too much.

Older Americans are somewhat more likely to say Biden is either striking the right balance or favoring the Palestinians too much.

Younger Americans are generally less supportive of a U.S. role in the conflict – and especially opposed to military aid to Israel. Only 16% of adults under 30 favor the U.S. providing military aid to Israel to help in its war against Hamas, compared with 56% of those 65 and older.

When it comes to humanitarian aid to Gaza, Americans under 30 are somewhat less likely than those 65 and older to favor it. (Much of this difference is because more younger Americans say they are unsure.)

Taken together, 46% of U.S. adults under 30 do not endorse either kind of aid asked about in our survey. This is more than twice the share among those 65 and older (21%).

In addition, adults under 30 are about twice as likely to say the U.S. should play no role in diplomatically resolving the Israel-Hamas war as they are to say the U.S. should play a major one (29% vs. 13%), though a third support a minor role. Older Americans, meanwhile, are more likely to support a major U.S. role.

Americans differ by age in their personal experiences related to the war. Adults under 30 are the most likely age group to say they have stopped talking to someone in person or unfollowed or blocked someone online because of something that person said about the Israel-Hamas war (16% say this).

A bar chart showing that younger Americans are more likely than older ones to have stopped talking to someone because of something they said about the Israel-Hamas war.

Younger adults are also particularly likely to have been offended by something someone said around them about the war (24% say this). More younger Democrats than younger Republicans report experiencing this (27% vs. 20%).

Older adults, for their part, are more likely to report having been offended by something they saw on the news or social media about the war. They are also much more likely to be closely following news about the war.

Younger Americans are less likely than older people to see increased discrimination against Jews since the start of the war, but they are more likely to see increased discrimination against Muslims and Arabs.

About half (47%) of adults under 30 say discrimination against Jews in the U.S. has increased since the war began. By comparison, 73% of adults 65 and older say the same.

But while 47% of adults under 30 also say discrimination against Arabs in the U.S. has increased since the beginning of the war, this view is less common among those 65 and older (38%).

Attitudes about discrimination have also changed over time. Today, 31% of adults under 30 say Jews are facing a lot of discrimination in American society – up from 20% who said the same in 2021. Over this same period, though, the share of Americans 65 and older who say Jews face a lot of discrimination has more than doubled to 50%, up from 21%. This now-sizable age gap in views of discrimination against Jewish people was not present in 2021.

There are some age differences in Americans’ views of what kinds of speech should be allowed when it comes to the conflict between Israelis and Palestinians. Across age groups, majorities say people in the U.S. should be allowed to express support for and opposition to Israel’s right to exist as a Jewish state, as well as Palestinians having their own state. Majorities across age groups also say that calls for violence against Jews or Muslims should not be allowed.

While most adults under 50 do not think people in the U.S. should be allowed to express calls for violence against Jews or Muslims, they are still somewhat more likely than those 50 and older to think such violent expressions should be allowed.

And among those under 30, there are some significant differences by party. In particular, around one-in-five young Republicans think calls for violence against Jews and Muslims should be allowed, while only around one-in-ten young Democrats take that position.

U.S. Muslims are more sympathetic to the Palestinian people than many other Americans are, despite the fact that relatively few Muslims in the United States are Palestinian themselves, according to a Pew Research Center survey conducted in February. And only about a quarter of Muslims in the survey identify as Arab or of Arab ancestry.

Muslim Americans are also highly critical of President Joe Biden’s handling of the war between Israel and Hamas.

Meanwhile, a majority of Muslim Americans (70%) say discrimination against Muslims in our society has increased since the start of the war, and about half (53%) say news about the war makes them feel afraid.

How U.S. Muslims view America’s role in the war
Only 6% of Muslim adults believe that the U.S. is striking the right balance between the Israelis and Palestinians, according to the February survey.

Most Muslims (60%) instead say Biden is favoring the Israelis too much, while just 3% say he is favoring the Palestinians too much. Another 30% are not sure.

Muslim Americans have been strongly Democratic in the past and remain so – 66% of Muslim registered voters in the survey identify with or lean toward the Democratic Party. (The survey includes 298 Muslim registered voters for an effective sample size of 94 and a margin of error of plus or minus 10.1 points.) But Biden’s handling of the war has led some U.S. Muslims to cast protest votes against him in Democratic primaries this year.

Muslims’ views of Biden are broadly negative, according to our survey: Only 36% view him positively. In fact, Muslims’ views of Biden are broadly similar to their views of former President Donald Trump (35% favorable), despite the fact that most Muslims felt Trump was unfriendly toward Muslims when he was president.

In the current war between Israel and Hamas, 69% of Muslim Americans favor the U.S. providing humanitarian aid to help Palestinian civilians. In contrast, most Muslims (65%) oppose America providing military aid to Israel to help in its war against Hamas.

How U.S. Muslims see the Palestinian, Israeli people and their leaders
While around a third of Muslim Americans (32%) have some sympathy for both the Israeli people and the Palestinian people, nearly two-thirds (64%) say their sympathies lie either entirely or mostly with the Palestinian people. Among the larger American public, by comparison, relatively few adults (16%) are entirely or mostly sympathetic toward the Palestinian people.

When it comes to the Israeli government, only 10% of U.S. Muslims have a favorable view. In fact, Muslims are more likely to have a favorable view of Hamas (37%), which has controlled Gaza, than of the Israeli government. Still, 58% of Muslims have an unfavorable view of Hamas.

A slight majority of Muslims (59%) have a favorable opinion of the Palestinian Authority, which some experts have suggested may take control of the Gaza Strip if Hamas is removed from power. The Palestinian Authority governs the West Bank and has not had control over the Gaza Strip since Hamas won elections in 2006.

How U.S. Muslims perceive discrimination in the U.S. since the start of the war
Most Muslim Americans (70%) believe discrimination against Muslims in our society has increased since the start of the Israel-Hamas war. A much smaller share of the U.S. public overall (38%) says the same.

How U.S. Muslims are engaging with and following the war
Muslim Americans are more likely than Americans overall to feel afraid when hearing or reading news about the war. Around half of Muslims (53%) say this, compared with 37% of all U.S. adults. Muslim Americans are also more likely than U.S. adults overall to feel exhausted when consuming news about the war.

Around four-in-ten Muslim Americans say they are following the war extremely or very closely, while another 27% are somewhat following it. Still, roughly a third of U.S. Muslims (32%) are not following the war too closely or at all. Jewish Americans, by comparison, are following the war much more closely, according to our survey: 61% say they are following it extremely or very closely and 11% say they are following it not too or not at all closely.

About a third of U.S. Muslims could not correctly identify Benjamin Netanyahu as the current prime minister of Israel. And about three-in-ten Muslims could not correctly identify Hamas as the group behind the Oct. 7 attack against Israel or knew that most of the deaths in the Israel-Hamas war have been among Palestinians and not Israelis. Even so, roughly seven-in-ten correctly answered each question.

American Jews report feeling a host of emotions – including sadness, anger, exhaustion and fear – in reaction to the Oct. 7 Hamas attack on Israel and the ensuing Israeli invasion of Gaza. Nine-in-ten say they think discrimination against Jews has risen in the United States since the Israel-Hamas war began. And three-quarters say they have felt personally offended by something they’ve seen in the news or on social media about the war.

But not all Jewish Americans are experiencing the conflict the same way. The survey, conducted Feb. 13-25, finds that younger and older Jews often view the war differently, mirroring patterns in the broader U.S. public. In both groups, younger adults tend to express much more negative attitudes toward Israel than older Americans do. U.S. Jews also differ by age when it comes to the level of connection they feel with Israel, as we found in our 2020 survey of Jewish Americans.

How and why the war is being fought
An overwhelming majority of Jewish American adults (93%) say that the way Hamas carried out its Oct. 7 attack was unacceptable.

But Jewish adults under 35 are divided over Israel’s military response: 52% say the way Israel has carried out the war has been acceptable, while 42% call it unacceptable, and 6% are unsure. Jews ages 50 and older are far more likely to say Israel’s conduct of the war has been acceptable (68%)

As for why the war is being fought in the first place, 77% of Jewish adults – including a majority in every age group – say Hamas’ reasons for fighting Israel are not valid. But Jewish adults under 35 are more likely than older Jews to say that Hamas’ reasons for fighting are valid: 31% of younger Jews take this position, compared with about one-in-ten of those ages 35 and older.

By comparison, 89% of Jewish Americans say Israel’s reasons for fighting Hamas are valid – far more than the 58% of all U.S. adults who say this. Younger Jews are less likely than their older counterparts to say Israel’s reasons for fighting Hamas are valid, though about eight-in-ten or more in every age group say this.

Views of the people and leadership involved in the war
Around nine-in-ten U.S. Jews (89%) express a favorable view of the Israeli people, and 54% have a favorable view of the Israeli government. Jews are far more likely than the broader U.S. public to have a favorable view of the Israeli people (89% vs. 64%) and are also more likely than Americans overall to express a favorable opinion of Israel’s government (54% vs. 41%).

Four-in-ten American Jews have a favorable view of the Palestinian people – somewhat lower than the 50% of Americans overall who say the same. Very few Jewish Americans have a favorable opinion of Hamas, which has controlled Gaza, or the Palestinian Authority, which controls the West Bank (3% and 12%, respectively).

Jewish Americans are divided by party in their views of the Israeli government. Jews who identify as Republicans or lean toward the Republican Party are about twice as likely as Jews who identify as Democrats or lean Democratic to say they have a favorable view of the Israeli government (85% vs. 41%). (Among Jews, 68% identify with or lean toward the Democratic Party and 29% identify with or lean toward the Republican Party.) On the other hand, Jewish Democrats are more likely than Jewish Republicans to say they have a favorable view of the Palestinian people (52% vs. 20%) and the Palestinian Authority (14% vs. 9%).

Jewish Americans also differ by age in their views of the people and leadership involved in the conflict. Compared with older U.S. Jews, younger Jews express less favorable attitudes toward the Israeli people and more favorable views of the Palestinian people. Younger Jews also hold somewhat more positive views of the Palestinian Authority.

When it comes to the Israeli government, there are age differences among Jewish Americans, as there are among American overall. For example, 45% of Jews under 35 have a favorable view of the Israeli government, while 53% have an unfavorable view. Jews ages 50 to 64 are the only age group in which a majority express a favorable opinion of the Israeli government (64%).

What role should the U.S. play in the conflict?
Most American Jews say the U.S. should play at least a minor role in diplomatically resolving the Israel-Hamas war. Majorities also favor providing military aid to Israel (74%) and humanitarian aid to Palestinian civilians in Gaza (61%). On all these questions, Jews tend to be more likely than U.S. adults as a whole to favor U.S. involvement.

Older Jews are more likely than their younger counterparts to say the U.S. should play a major diplomatic role in resolving the war: 54% of Jewish Americans ages 65 and older say this, compared with 33% of those ages 18 to 34. Older Jews are also more likely to favor the U.S. providing military aid to Israel to help in its war against Hamas (82% of those 50 and older vs. 61% of those 18 to 34).

When it comes to how U.S. President Joe Biden is handling the conflict, relatively few Jewish adults under 50 (35%) say he is striking the right balance between Israelis and Palestinians. By comparison, 53% of Jews ages 50 and older say Biden is striking the right balance.

Discrimination, taking personal offense at speech or news about the Israel-Hamas war
An overwhelming majority of Jewish Americans (94%) say there is at least some discrimination against Jews in America, including 72% who say there is a lot. Among Americans overall, a large majority (82%) also perceive at least some discrimination against American Jews.

Jewish Republicans and Democrats tend to perceive discrimination differently. Jewish Republicans are far less likely than Jewish Democrats to say that some groups – such as Muslims, Black people or Arab people – face a lot of discrimination in the U.S. today. Jewish Republicans are also far less likely than Jewish Democrats to say discrimination against Muslims and Arabs has increased since the start of the Israel-Hamas war.

Meanwhile, about three-quarters of U.S. Jews (74%) say they have felt offended because of something they saw on the news or social media about the Israel-Hamas war, and half have been offended by something someone has said around them about the war. A quarter say they have stopped talking to someone in person – or unfollowed or blocked someone online – because of that person’s comments about the conflict. Jews are far more likely than the U.S. public overall to say they have felt offended or stopped talking with someone under these circumstances.

Younger Jews are especially likely to say they have felt offended, both by something they saw on social media or by something that was said around them. Six-in-ten Jewish Americans ages 18 to 34 say they have been offended by both (62%), while half or fewer among older age groups say the same.

Similarly, 47% of Jewish adults under the age of 35 say they have stopped talking to someone in person or online because of something that person said about the war. Jews ages 65 and older are the least likely to have done this (11%).