People of the Pod

Imagine being spat on as you walk across your college campus simply because you’re Jewish or being asked whether you’re a “good Jew” or a “bad Jew.” As part of AJC’s State of Antisemitism in America 2024 Report, AJC and Hillel International partnered to document the experiences of Jewish students on campus over the past year. The findings are deeply troubling: nearly a third of Jewish students in the U.S. reported feeling uncomfortable or unsafe at a campus event because of their Jewish identity, and 43% avoided expressing their views on Israel due to fears of antisemitism. In the second installment of this two-part series, meet two students whose experiences reflect these alarming statistics: Evan Cohen, a senior computer science major at the University of Michigan and Vice Chair of Hillel International’s Israel Leadership Network, and Daniel Solomon, a junior studying political science and urban studies at Brown University who serves on AJC’s Campus Global Board. Resources: -AJC’s Center for Education Advocacy -5 Takeaways from AJC’s State of Antisemitism in America 2024 Report -Go Behind the Numbers: Hear directly from American Jews about what it’s like to be Jewish in America  Test Your Knowledge: -How much do you really know about how antisemitism affects Americans? Take this one-minute quiz and put your knowledge to the test. Start now. Listen – AJC Podcasts: -The Forgotten Exodus: with Hen Mazzig, Einat Admony, and more. -People of the Pod:  Unpacking Trump’s Gaza Plan The Oldest Holocaust Survivor Siblings: A Tale of Family, Survival, and Hope Israeli Hostages Freed: Inside the Emotional Reunions, High-Stakes Negotiations, and What’s Next Follow People of the Pod on your favorite podcast app, and learn more at AJC.org/PeopleofthePod You can reach us at: peopleofthepod@ajc.org If you’ve appreciated this episode, please be sure to tell your friends, and rate and review us on Apple Podcasts or Spotify. __ Transcript of Conversation with Evan Cohen and Daniel Solomon: Manya Brachear Pashman: As part of AJC's State of Antisemitism in America 2024 report, AJC and Hillel International partnered to document Jewish students' experiences during their time on campus. Last year, the report found that 43% of Jewish college students avoided expressing their views about Israel on campus or to classmates because of fears of antisemitism. 22% of Jewish students report feeling or being excluded from a group or an event on campus because they're Jewish, and 32% of American Jewish students said they have felt uncomfortable or unsafe at a campus event because of their Jewish identity.  Here to share their perspective on the ground are two students who have become advocates for their Jewish peers. Evan Cohen, a senior computer science major at the University of Michigan, is the vice chair of Hillel International's Israel Leadership Network. And Daniel Solomon, a junior political science and urban studies major at Brown University who serves on AJC's Campus Global Board. Evan, Daniel, welcome to People of the Pod. Evan Cohen:   I wish it was under better circumstances, but, you know, it's a pleasure to be here. Daniel Solomon:   Thank you so much for having me. Manya Brachear Pashman: So gentlemen, I just read a bunch of findings from the most recent report. Do they seem too high or too low based on your national vantage points? Evan? Evan Cohen:   So I think these findings are, sadly, not that surprising. We've seen and experienced an unprecedented amount of antisemitism over the past year and a half, give or take. Clearly, it's rising. Clearly students are experiencing this on their campuses, myself included. I definitely think that, you know, there's probably some cases where students are experiencing it more. In some cases it's less, but I think, you know, in general, it's way too high, like we should not be seeing as much antisemism on campuses. Manya Brachear Pashman: And Daniel, what do you think?  Daniel Solomon:   You know, the numbers seem about right. I have the opportunity of helping lead AJC's Campus Global Board, which really has a very wide perspective across the world and also across the United State. And we recently just met as a board in Lisbon where we discussed at length new trends over the past year in college antisemitism and around the world. And this really holds. We really found that this data is reflective of what we find in our qualitative experiences. Manya Brachear Pashman: One finding I did not just share at the beginning is that roughly 35% of American Jewish college students or recent graduates report having personally experienced antisemitism at least once during their time on campus. Did either of you have a personal encounter of your own over the past year?  Evan Cohen:   So a number of months ago, I was walking through the center of campus with a rabbi and a friend of mine, and we were spat at. And the unfortunate reality is, not only were we spat at, but when I tried to report this, I was basically told that, without identifying the individual by name, there was nothing that the university could do. And this was extremely frustrating, because we were spat at. That was a deeply upsetting experience.  It's something that no one should have to go through just for being Jewish, but the fact that there was almost nothing that could be done about it. Besides, you know, maybe you know, here's how we can support you, which was not something that I was particularly in need of. It was disappointing to see that there was no strong response to that. Daniel Solomon:   So shortly after October 7, my friends and I in our apartment, we held a small gathering, and you know, some friends brought mutual friends, and their friends brought mutual friends, which is totally fine. And so someone who I didn't know came up to me and looked at my door frame, and I have a mezuzah on my door frame. And she said, is that your Jew thing?  Which, yes, it is, but it's called a mezuzah. And she said, Well, are you a good Jew or a bad Jew? And I said, What do you mean by that? And I knew exactly what she meant by that. She meant, are you a Zionist? Or are you an anti-Zionist Jew? And the conversation ended shortly thereafter, and we asked her if she would leave.  Manya Brachear Pashman: This report came after the protests and the encampments that roiled college campuses, mostly in the spring of 2024 of the Jewish students who witnessed anti-Israel demonstrations after the October 7 terrorist attacks, 51% said that these protests or encampments made them feel unsafe on campus. How did your universities handle the encampments that popped up on your campuses? Evan Cohen:   There was an encampment on our campus, it sprung up the morning of the first Passover Seder of last year. And I remember receiving a text at six in the morning or something. I woke up, the first message I saw was, Evan, Do you know what's going on? And I said, Oh my god, another thing to deal with. You know, it's about to be Passover like we're supposed to be preparing for the Seder. And, you know, I think that at our university was handled extremely poorly, you know? We were told the encampment is contained, yet it grew in size, you know.  So at first it took over the main part of the center of the Diag, which is the main center of campus area at the University of Michigan, and slowly crept out into farther and farther areas of that center of campus Diag. And it was really disappointing, because at the end of the year, when it's finally warm, students are out there, they're hammocking, they're playing sports, even just reading and studying. And at that point, there was nobody besides those in the encampment. And so it really destroyed the end of year atmosphere that everyone always looks forward to. And again, like I said, I think it was handled very poorly. The university did not contain it. The university waited until after graduation.  They were hoping, I believe they were hoping, that if they waited until after graduation, there wouldn't be disruptions at the graduation. While I personally did not graduate last spring, I  had friends who did, and there were disruptions at that graduation. So clearly, that strategy did not work, did not pay off.  Sometime after graduation, they announced that the encampment was being removed because of fire hazards. Now these fire hazards were hazards the entire time the encampment was there, I saw students plugging in various electronic devices, keeping themselves warm with space heaters.  That's not something that you're supposed to be able to do there, and I do have experience, because I've had to reserve that space for, you know, pro-Israel activities in the past, and so I very much understand, first, what the rules and regulations are and how that process works. Very clearly, these rules were violated. And not only that, there was clear antisemitic imaging and speech that was spewing out of this encampment.  Daniel Solomon:   So, you know, first and foremost, our campus is a very big advocate of free speech, just collectively. So, you know, when the encampment originally went up, you know, the university made sure to emphasize the fact that, you know, it is free speech. But free speech, you know, has, you know, consequences, in the sense that setting up an encampment is against the university policy.  So, within those guidelines, you know, the encampment was up for probably a day or two, and then I remember one evening, the members of the encampment started yelling to globalize the Intifada. And this was sort of the call on the university's end to say this is actually not okay. This is when it teeters on free speech and free expression. And, you know, voicing your opinions, however different they might be than most, this is actually when it gets into hate speech. And so that's sort of the moment that our university leadership really, really took, took control of the encampment, and it ended shortly thereafter.  Manya Brachear Pashman: Of course, most antisemitic content and the anti-Israel vitriol is primarily spread online and on social media, and the data back that up, almost seven in 10 American Jews, 67% reported seeing or hearing anti semitism online or on social media in the past 12 months. The number jumps to 83% for young American Jews between the ages of 18 and 29 so your peers, how has social media, the digital landscape, shaped your encounters with antisemitism? Daniel Solomon:   Social media is a big part of of our generation, and a part of how we how we bond together. Similar to other universities, Brown has a platform called side chat. Other universities, they might be called Yik Yak or something else. But the only way to access this app, which is a private a private company, not, you know, affiliated with brown, but the only way to actually access the brown only channel in Sidechat is to use your Brown email. So it's sort of an anonymous message board where anyone can post whatever they feel, whatever they think. Sometimes it's funny memes. Sometimes it's satire.  In the context of the post October 7 world on Brown's campus, it was nothing, but, you know, atrocious really. It was really just a cesspool and a hotbed of antisemitism. And anti-Israel rhetoric that absolutely veered into antisemitism, but also really just classic, flat out antisemitism, you know, pointing out Jews in in, in great positions of authority in the country, and on college campuses specifically, and sort of trying to connect dots that really aren't connectable. And so Side chat was really just a really terrible hotbed of antisemitism.  And then also, you know, those who were more bold antiSemites would really just blatantly, you know, leave comments in Instagram posts, you know, with their profile name visible, so you knew exactly who they are. And so, you know, the digital, the digital landscape, was absolutely a pretty crucial part of what comprised, you know, the anti semitism happening.  You know, as I mentioned before, the campus, the campus that we see now is really the one, is really the one that I that I remember, you know, in my freshman year, the one that I made some of my closest friends, on the one where I developed some of my, you know, some of my academic ambitions. The campus that I really fell in love with is the one that I'm seeing now, and much different than the situation that we were in last year. Evan Cohen:   I could talk about, you know, two specific examples. One example was the president of our SJP chapter. Sometime, I want to say, around last March, posted something to her personal public account that said something along the lines of death to everyone who supports the Zionist state, death and more, death and worse. And I believe that Regent Acker, who was on the podcast relatively recently, actually spoke about this, I think.  And that was deeply disappointing to see, because, you know, studies have shown. I even read a study recently, I think it said that about 80% of American Jews support Israel, meaning they believe in Zionism, the right for Israel to exist safely and securely, for Jews to live there in our ancestral homeland. And so to say that, you know, that's basically calling for the death of Jews, the death of fellow classmates, fellow students. So that was, you know, extremely challenging to see and to deal with.  And ultimately, there were effectively no consequences. The student graduated last, last spring. And you know, we saw, we saw nothing, no repercussions from this, this activity. Another example of online anti semitism. What I experienced was during a trip to Israel last May. As part of this trip, I was going to be bearing witness to the atrocities of October 7, and so we were sharing, me and another student from the University were sharing some of our experiences, and a screenshot was taken of us, and then over, over, on top of it were overlaid messages like settlers scum, and these students were celebrating genocide.  Manya Brachear Pashman: Evan, how have these encounters, both on campus with the encampments and on social media? How have they informed your time working with Hillel on an international level? Evan Cohen:   You know, it's very clear that antisemitism is extremely prevalent. It's clear that anti-Zionism, anti-Israel sentiment, is very prevalent, and that we need to be constantly working toward combating it and supporting students on different campuses, this manifests in different ways. So it requires different tactics, different strategies, depending on what school you're at, depending on what your individual needs are.  But now being in this leadership position, it's amazing to be able to try to offer that support and use my experiences to then help other students on their campuses deal with the troubles that they are going through and what they are experiencing. Manya Brachear Pashman: I want to point out that a lot of this happened after the October 7 terrorist attack. A lot of what you're talking about, of course, the survey itself. But antisemitism doesn't just come from anti-Israel corners and Evan I know there were instances of demonstrators waving Nazi flags in Howell and Fowlerville outside a production of The Diary of Anne Frank. Those are small towns about 30 or 40 miles away from Ann Arbor. Have there been expressions of antisemitism from the far right on Michigan's campus? I think Evan Cohen:   I think it was like the 2022-2023, academic year, the students received hate mail specifically targeting Jews, saying that Jews run the media, that they're responsible for COVID messages similar to that. I want to say that was even around the High Holidays timeframe. And so this was found like, you know, passed out around off campus, student housing. And so a number of students received messages like that. You know, we also saw post October 7 swastikas on or near Jewish buildings, for example, at Hillel one time. And so, you know, we're definitely seeing anti semitism from both sides.  Manya Brachear Pashman: Daniel, your campus Antisemitism Task Force, for lack of a better term, it initially formed in response to hatred from the far right. Is that right or is that correct? Daniel Solomon:   Yeah. So when I was a when I was a freshman, in my freshman fall, a terrible anti semitic threat was sent to the campus rabbi and executive director of the Brown-RISD Hillel that serves both Brown University and the Rhode Island School of Design, and that's sort of where we sort of came together and started really having very proactive and very productive meetings with with Brown's administration.  Partially, I, you know, I will plug just a little bit that. I think that part, you know, the reason why I was so zealous to get involved was the training I received with American Jewish Committee, with the LFT program, the Leaders for Tomorrow High School Program.  So we really came together. Started having these conversations with Brown's administration, and created this really, really positive relationship, which I think is a pretty Hallmark component of being a Brown student, is this really, is this really great relationship that we formed? And I think that, you know, leading into October, 7, part of what made Brown's response so effective was that we had this really dynamic relationship with administrators already, and that, you know, there's really no gap in between Brown's institutional Jewish leaders and Brown's administration.  We have, you know, an incredibly supportive administration. And I think that was something that we saw following the incident and fall of 2022, and something that we continue to see all throughout you know, the post October 7 world. Manya Brachear Pashman: And Daniel, I'll ask you the same question I just asked Evan, how has that experience, that experience on Brown's campus, informed your time on AJC's Campus Global Board? Daniel Solomon:   To be honest, it's actually a little bit of the opposite. I feel as though my time on AJC's campus global board has really provided such an incredible opportunity to understand the global landscape of campus antisemitism. And also, of course, you know, we want to emphasize the global landscape of Jewish joy that's happening on college campuses, because that is definitely not in short supply. Manya Brachear Pashman: You know, I'm curious, do you get questions from your peers back home, your younger peers, questions about whether or not your campuses are the right choice, the right fit for them?  Evan Cohen:   I think it's really important to mention that the Jewish students on campus do absolutely have a home here. We're working extremely hard to ensure that there is Jewish joy on campus, and there are organizations here to support Jewish students. It's imperative that Jews come to campus, that we continue to build a supportive community and that, you know, we're not just hiding, we're not just shying away from this. We're actively working towards improving campus and campuses drastically improved in the 2024-2025 school year compared to the 23-24 school year. So, you know, we're standing strong. We're standing proud, and we're not going to back down.  There is a thriving Jewish community, and we're here to support you. We want you to come here. The University of Michigan has such a large Jewish population in part because a long time ago, the Ivy League schools had quotas on the number of Jews who could attend, and so the University of Michigan did not as such. We have a very strong Jewish community here, and I highly recommend coming here as long as you can bear, as long as you can bear and withstand the cold. Manya Brachear Pashman: Thank you both for joining us, and reflecting on the difficulties of 2024. May 2025 be more peaceful on your campuses.  Evan Cohen:   Thank you very much for having me.  Daniel Solomon:   Thank you for having me. 

What would you do if jars of urine were thrown through the windows of your house in the middle of the night? How would you feel if antisemitic messages were spray painted on your cars? How would you respond if you were targeted simply because you’re Jewish? In the first installment of a 2-part series, meet a face behind the alarming findings of AJC's State of Antisemitism in America 2024 Report, the first analysis of the impact of antisemitism on American Jews and the U.S. general public for the full-year following Hamas’ October 7, 2023 massacre of Israelis. In this week’s episode, Jordan Acker, a lawyer and member of the University of Michigan's Board of Regents, shares what happened to him and his family in late 2024 when they were personally targeted by anti-Israel and antisemitic protesters. He criticizes the broader campus climate and faculty’s response, while emphasizing the need for productive dialogue and understanding as a way forward, all the while stressing the importance of standing up to antisemitism. Resources: -AJC’s Center for Education Advocacy -5 Takeaways from AJC’s State of Antisemitism in America 2024 Report -Go Behind the Numbers: Hear directly from American Jews about what it’s like to be Jewish in America  Test Your Knowledge: -How much do you really know about how antisemitism affects Americans? Take this one-minute quiz and put your knowledge to the test. Start now. Listen – AJC Podcasts: -The Forgotten Exodus: with Hen Mazzig, Einat Admony, and more. -People of the Pod:  Unpacking Trump’s Gaza Plan The Oldest Holocaust Survivor Siblings: A Tale of Family, Survival, and Hope Israeli Hostages Freed: Inside the Emotional Reunions, High-Stakes Negotiations, and What’s Next Follow People of the Pod on your favorite podcast app, and learn more at AJC.org/PeopleofthePod You can reach us at: peopleofthepod@ajc.org If you’ve appreciated this episode, please be sure to tell your friends, and rate and review us on Apple Podcasts or Spotify. __ Transcript of Conversation with Jordan Acker: Manya Brachear Pashman:   For six years now, AJC has published the State of Antisemitism in America Report, and each year the findings become more alarming and sad. This year's report found that 77% of American Jews say they feel less safe as a Jewish person in the United States because of the Hamas terrorist attacks on October 7, 2023. A majority of American Jews, 56%, said they changed their behavior out of fear of antisemitism, opting not to wear a Star of David, or put up a mezuzah.  And a third of American Jews say they have been the personal target of antisemitism, in person or virtually, at least once over the last year. While the numbers alone are telling, the encounters with antisemitism behind those numbers are even more powerful.  Here to discuss these findings, and sadly, his own family's experience with antisemitism in 2024 is Jordan Acker, a member of the University of Michigan's Board of Regents. Mr. Acker, welcome to People of the Pod. Jordan Acker:   Thank you so much for having me. On such an unpleasant topic, but . . . Manya Brachear Pashman:   Despite the circumstances, it's a pleasure to speak with you as well.  So I want to tell our audience a little bit about what you experienced in the last year. Last May, the doorbell camera at your home showed a stranger, with their face covered, walking up to the front door, laying a list of demands, signed by the University of Michigan Gaza Solidarity Encampment. Laid those demands on your front porch.  And then a month later, your law office in suburban Detroit was vandalized with anti-Israel phrases, profanity, directed at you personally. And then in December, you and your family awoke one morning to a pretty horrifying sight.  So could you kind of walk through what you encountered last year?  Jordan Acker:   Yeah, absolutely. So you know, what's interesting about this is that as much as I oppose BDS, I was not the person on the board who was speaking about it, the people that were speaking about it were actually my non-Jewish colleagues. We’re an elected body, six Democrats, two Republicans, and universally, we oppose the idea of boycotts, divestment and sanctions, and we said so. We've affirmed this in 2018, we affirmed this in 2023.  And at some point, while we had an encampment on our campus, it remained relatively peaceful to what other campuses have dealt with, until they started showing up at our homes. We had this happen, a list of demands. Ironically, including, defunding the police was one of the demands. And then, you know, it went to a different level, when it went from all of my colleagues to just me getting the treatment.  My office is an Orthodox Jewish neighborhood. They went to my office in the middle of the night and spray painted messages all over it, including profanities. But they caused over $100,000 worth of damage. And I don't think that location was unintentional. I think that as people were waking up in the neighborhood, going to synagogue the next day, they wanted to make sure that people in that neighborhood saw what had been done. It was certainly on purpose.  And what was so disturbing about it was that three student groups actually posted photos of it in the middle of the night on Instagram, before the police knew about it, before we knew about it, and then quickly took them down, obviously, because, you know, they realize this is a crime. And then things had remained relatively quiet through the fall.  Experiences had been much different than prior semesters, until I was awoken about two in the morning to jars of urine being thrown through my window. And this had followed up several instances of similar incidents. On October 7, the president of our university, who's not Jewish, his personal home was vandalized. The Jewish Federation in Metro Detroit was also vandalized. The head of our endowment, a member of law enforcement, all of their homes were vandalized with pretty much the same messages. Ethnic related, calling them cowards, demanding divestment. Of course, the worst part for me was obviously the jars flying through my home. I have three small children, and having my oldest woken up to that was terrible. But they spray painted my wife's car with messages to divest, but also upside down triangles, which I think most Jews now take to see as a direct threat. That is a Hamas symbol for a target. And as I've said before, I'm not in the Israeli military. I'm not a military target. I'm not a target at all. I'm a trustee of a public university in the Midwest.  And this kind of behavior, frankly, is unacceptable. It's unacceptable from any members of our community, regardless of where you stand on the political spectrum. And frankly, it's deeply antisemitic. And the fact that there's some people that are questioning that, or wonder why, is part of the problem, part of why we've gotten here. It's a deeply troubling time, I think, for American Jews, for a lot of these reasons. Manya Brachear Pashman:   You said that you are the only Regent who has been targeted in this way any any sense of why. Jordan Acker:   It's a good question. You know, I think there's a few different layers to this. I think being Jewish is a big part of the layer, obviously. But also a part of it is that I have a public social media presence. It's something I've maintained since, frankly, when I was running for this office. This is an elected office, obviously, in Michigan. And I think that has something to do with it, for sure. But the degree in the manner is very, very different. And it's really hard to understand why it would happen in this particular way. Again, except for, you know, an excuse to engage in violent behavior. You know what's so disturbing about this, and what is so heartbreaking to me is that, I understand, you know, for those who are on the other side of this issue, who care deeply about Palestinian rights and Palestinians having their own state? I care about that. I'm the only regent that actually met with SJP prior to October 7. Not because we agree on everything. We do not. But because there's some things that we do agree on. And by the way, the vast majority of American Jews agree on. I think that's what's been so disturbing about everything that's happened since October the 7th in America, is that you probably have no group of Americans that's more empathetic or sympathetic to Palestinians than American Jews. And yet, there's obviously a large group of this protest movement, or the remains of it at this point, that are deeply antisemitic and are using Palestinians essentially as a weapon to go after and to isolate American Jews. Manya Brachear Pashman:   Are you the only Jewish regent? Jordan Acker:   I'm not. At the time, we had three actually, of our eight-member board, were Jewish. But our board is almost universally pro-Israel and almost universally opposed to BDS, and has been for a very long time. And there are lots of reasons for that, but this is, you know, perhaps the person who's been most outspoken about this, interestingly enough, is Denise Ilitch, who, you know, if they were looking to attack a pro Israel business. Well, there are two Little Caesars locations on campus. Right, again, this has nothing to do with being pro-Israel. Coming to my office has a very distinct, very specific message that they're trying to send. Manya Brachear Pashman:   You said there are a number of reasons why the Board of Regents is universally opposed to BDS. Can you explain those reasons?  Jordan Acker:   I think the first one, and I can only obviously speak for myself on this. The board speaks through its pronouncements and its decisions, but the biggest one actually is that, generally speaking, academic boycotts do not add anything to the conversation. They don't get people closer to resolving conflict. They don't even get people talking about conflict. And to me, that's antithetical to the purpose of the American University.  One of the incidents that has most disturbed me over the last few months, other than obviously, the physical violence, but what's disturbed me is a group of mass protesters went to a lecture by a professor named Marc Dollinger, a guest professor on campus, and Marc Dollinger was teaching, as he does, about the relationship between the black community and the Jewish community during the Civil Rights Movement. And a group of mass protesters came in and said, We don't engage with Zionists here. And what I've told people is actually the second part of that phrase is deeply offensive, but the first part of that phrase, “we don't engage with” is actually antithetical to the existence of the University of Michigan, and should be tossed aside.  We do engage. We engage with everyone, and we especially engage with the people that we disagree with. And so, that kind of speech and behavior is, to me, the most problematic. Because, again, American universities are places where deeply unpopular ideas should be thrown around. That doesn't give it as an excuse for violence, but it certainly is a place for deeply unpopular ideas, or for popular ideas, or for anyone who's different than you. That's the purpose of this.  And yet, this movement has again decided that Jews, or people who are affiliated with Israel are uniquely deserving of being tossed out. And it's unacceptable and it's un-American. Manya Brachear Pashman:   Is it just this movement, or has the campus climate been changing more and more in recent years, when it comes to a refusal to engage or the treatment of Jews on campus? Jordan Acker:   I think that. It's a great question. So what I think is that what has changed actually is not the values of the students. Because, look, college students protest lots of things. When I was a student, BDS was an issue 20 years ago. What's actually changed is the faculty. And that's actually what's most concerning to me, is the way that our faculty has behaved, not all of them, and certainly not even a majority or a minority, but a small group, has behaved since this happened. Throughout this process, throughout these protests, any criticism of the methods has been responded to by the faculty as criticizing everything about the movement. And so I think the faculty has actually, frankly, made the situation a lot worse.  You know, one of the things that I that I learn in conversations with other regents and other trustees across the country, and I'll never forget the story, because it's so telling about where we are here, a person was who's a professor at Columbia now, was telling a story about how he protested the Vietnam War. His mentor at Columbia, who was also opposed to the war, after they invaded Hamilton Hall, came up to him and said, I agree with you on what you're thinking. I don't agree with what you're doing.  And we've gotten to this place now for some reason that we can't do that anymore, that our faculty can't say this is bad behavior, period and deserves punishment, while we also may agree with the underlying politics. What has been most disturbing is, is that, for example, our faculty senate still hasn't condemned the attack on the academic freedom of Professor Dollinger, and only condemned the attack on what happened to my family after I called out the Faculty Senate Chair publicly because she feels the need to publicly defend open antisemitism. And yet, when it comes to the safety of Jews, she's too busy. And it's really disturbing, quite frankly, and it's a disturbing reflection on our faculty. But I will say that since I pointed this out, I've had dozens of faculty members reach out to me and say, Thank you, thank you for speaking out about this. I don't feel comfortable either, but I can be fired. You know, these promotion decisions come from this group of faculty.  So what I would say is, that there's real problems with the way faculty have been responding, and unlike students, they're grown ups, they're adults. And certainly, I don't want to infringe on academic freedom, but academic freedom does not include the freedom from criticism, and they deserve a lot of how we've gotten here. Manya Brachear Pashman:   That's interesting that you heard from faculty who were grateful that you spoke up. And I’m curious, you said in an interview last year that since the October 7 attacks in 2023 many of us have been asked to distance ourselves from our Jewish identity. And I'm curious if you are hearing that from some faculty, if you're hearing that from students, can you explain what you meant by that? Jordan Acker:   I will admit that I stole this phrase from Josh Marshall from Talking Points Memo, is ‘protest koshering,’ right? And that's a really interesting way, I think, of what has been asked of a lot of Jews, that Jews have to apologize for their heritage or for their love of the people of Israel, even if, like me, they don't like the government of the people of Israel, right? And that's, I think, been a big challenge.  But what I've seen mostly is, on our campuses, it's not so overt. It shows up in students avoiding certain classes, students avoiding certain professors, or students simply not speaking up at all. And again, those are really disturbing breaches of student academic freedom to have to choose. Oh, well, I can't take this class or that professor, even if that professor might be good, because I might be judged differently, or I might have to listen to a completely unrelated lecture about the Middle East.  Or even worse, we've had professors, and frankly, they're mostly graduate student instructors, canceling class and encouraging people to go to protests. It's an unacceptable place to be. And again, part of the issue here with the faculty is, knowing where the border of your own political activism is and your taxpayer funded job is, right? They're different, and we have to get back to a place where we respect both of those. We can't stop someone from going out, engaging politically, nor should we. But the person also has a responsibility to not bring that into the classroom, especially when it's not directly related to their class. Manya Brachear Pashman:   And so, what specific examples have you heard from students and faculty in terms of wanting to hide their Jewish identity? Are you hearing any examples of people who perhaps aren't wearing a Star of David necklace or aren't participating in Jewish events because they don't want to be identified as such? Jordan Acker:   I'm not seeing much of that, to be honest with you, and I think that's a great thing. You know, I was really worried about this myself. I attended the last Shabbat dinner at Hillel prior to the end of the previous school year, and there were hundreds of students there, and it felt like any other Friday night. What I've gotten most from students is that they've been annoyed by it, but they haven't necessarily been, they haven't been overwhelmed. It hasn't been like UCLA or Columbia. It's like I said, it's been less overt.  But I do think that there's been some level of, people keep their heads down right. And that's, I think, a big challenge and a big problem here. But I think, again, I think it's worse among the faculty, far worse among the faculty than it is among our students.  I mean, imagine being a Jewish or Israeli professor on campus right now and thinking that someone like this is going to be responsible for your promotion, for your tenure decisions. Those things are highly disturbing, and we see this all the time. Just last night, you know, we see an epidemiologist who people want to protest because he's Israeli.  Well, at some point it says, Well, how is this person able to get a fair shake on their own academic research at our university, if this is what happens every time you know, they're singled out in a way that, frankly, no Chinese student, or Chinese professor would ever be singled out. Because you would know that that would be clearly anti-Chinese racism. Somehow, this seems to be acceptable when it comes to Israelis and to Jews generally. And it's not. And you know, it's a big problem in the academy, quite frankly. Manya Brachear Pashman:   You had also said in a previous interview that there has been an intense policing of Jews’ ability to determine for themselves what is antisemitic and what is not. Is that one example, are people actually willing to say, Oh, that's not antisemitic, that just because we protest him, because he's Israeli or Jewish, I would do people, is that what people argue or are there other examples that you can share? Jordan Acker:   Well, you know, I had professors come to me and say, How could you say what happened to your office is antisemitic? How could you say what happened to your house is antisemitic? And I think that, honestly, in a lot of places, it doesn't come from a bad place. I think it comes from a place of not knowing, right? And I think it comes from a blind spot.  And I think that's really the big issue here, is that there's a real lack of education and interest on the far left with, engaging with us. And I think it's frankly, you know, to say, Oh, it's a failure, the far left is not actually doing the Jewish community generally, a service. I think the Jewish community has also, quite frankly, failed when it comes to helping people on the left who are not antisemitic, but have very real, legitimate criticisms of Israel, helping them do so and engage in a way so the conversations are productive, while pushing out actual antisemitism. And that's, I think, a big difference.  I think that we know, and we're very clear, and I know this, having just come back from from Israel about a month ago, that the criticisms of the Israeli government are quite harsh among other Israelis. And I don't think that stopping the Israeli government from being criticized in America is helpful at all either. I think it, frankly, deserves a lot of criticism, just like any other democratically elected government does. But it's the how, it's the what, who's the messenger? How does the message come across, that I think things are really lacking, and people are are really not understanding why it veers so frequently into antisemitism and how to tell people, you know, that language is not acceptable. The person who was the head of the coalition that did our encampment put out a bunch of posts on Instagram saying that anyone who believes in the Zionist entity should die and worse. The problem, obviously, is her own personal antisemitism, which is obvious. But more importantly, the problem here is that nobody says: that's not acceptable, you're gone.  That, to me, is the biggest failure. Because it says we are not policing ourselves in our own behavior, and it discredits movements. But more importantly, it shows what a utter failure this movement has been in order to get anything for Palestinians without hurting American Jews, which has ultimately been the target of so much of this.  Manya Brachear Pashman:   I want to share more findings from the antisemitism report. The survey found that 81% of American Jews are able to divorce their displeasure with the government from their spiritual connection to Israel. In other words, they say caring about Israel is important to what being Jewish means to them. I think this is perhaps, is what you mean, or maybe it isn't, by a blind spot. I mean, is part of the problem on college campuses, that lack of understanding about the American Jewish spiritual connection to Israel? Jordan Acker:   I think that's a big part of it. And I think that's I think that's a big thing that we're lacking when it comes to understanding the story of the Jewish people, but frankly, it's a story that could be told on the other side as well, about Palestinian connection to the land and to the region as well. You know when we talk about where Jews pray, what direction we pray, the importance of Jerusalem, the importance of so many places in Israel, and of that spiritual connection. I think that there is a lack of understanding of that.  You know, one of the things that I got out of my own trip to Israel and meeting with Jewish and Palestinian students, was, they understand, and they believe, correctly, in my view, that the protest movement America has simply Americanized a non-American conflict. This is not settler colonialism or, or some, you know, academic theory. These are two peoples with very deep connections to this land who have a very, very difficult challenge in front of them, and it's different.  And I think that, yeah, I think we have failed at that. I think the whole concept, you know, and I've had this conversation with my friends in the Arab American community, the whole concept of not knowing that, you know, they talk about the Nakba and this, you know, ejection of Palestinians in 1948 and, there is some truth to it, but what they don't know or speak about at all is the ejection of the Jewish communities that were also thousands of years old from the Arab world – at that exact same time. And so I bring this up not to say that one group has more of a claim than the other, or one group has more of a claim for having suffered than the other, but to say that we need to talk about both sides of this narrative, and we're not.  And you know, too much of this movement has brought forward Jews who say things like, you know, as a Jew, I blah, blah, blah, and I have no connection to the Jewish community, or in Israel. But it misses out what the vast majority of American Jews say, and the vast majority of world Jewry says, which is, they do have a spiritual connection to Israel. And it's fine not to, by the way, that's your personal belief, but there's been this mistaken belief that that viewpoint is representative of all of the Jewish community, and while it's a small group certainly, it is not the majority at all. Most American Jews do have an understandable connection to the land of Israel. Manya Brachear Pashman:   Has the conversation on campus been a debate or discussion about the two people who have a connection to the land, or has it focused more on whether Jews have a right to self determination? Jordan Acker:   So I met with students at Tel Aviv University, Ben Gurion University, and Hebrew University, all three of which have very large Palestinian and Arab and Muslim populations. And they recognize the complexity of the conflict. And when I left there, my first, my big feeling about this was deep embarrassment for the way that our students had or so it's not all of our students, but a group of students had acted, you know, this whole concept of genocide and settler colonialism and and it is completely removed from the everyday experiences and understandings of both peoples.  I think the conversation on campus has been wildly counterproductive. I think it has done no good for anyone over there and has only served to hurt people here. You know, I think there's a lot of folks on the other side who genuinely believe that protesting is helpful for the Palestinian people, and do not understand why these specific attacks are so harmful to American Jews. And I don't think, you know, again, I don't think the American Jewish community has done a great job in helping to educate and to push people into places that are not anti semitic, but I think generally, the conversations have been particularly unproductive that they just put people into camps, and people are not able to listen and talk to each other because they use extremely loaded language, and have are looking for social media points. They're not looking for discussions and understanding. Manya Brachear Pashman:   Well, I will say that the State of Antisemitism in America report found that a majority of Americans, 85% the same number of American Jews, agree that the statement Israel has no right to exist, that foundational core of anti Zionism, that that statement is antisemitic. So I'm curious, does that give you hope that meaningful dialog is still possible? It still could be on the horizon, or has that ship sailed?  Jordan Acker:   No. I think that. I think no ship has ever sailed permanently. I think we're in a far worse place off than we were before October 7. I think everyone is actually in a far worse place off. It gives me hope and understanding that Jews are an accepted mainstream part of American life, and I think that's for a lot of Jews myself included. There was a feeling that we were being intentionally isolated, that our allies weren't standing up and talking for us at the times when we needed them the most. But I think that it's pretty clear at this point that positions like that are a minority that harassing my family. And engaging in violent behavior. Those are a minority.  You know, the group that has been most that called me first, the leadership of the community called me first when this happened to me, was the Arab American community in Metro Detroit, community that I have long relationships with, good relationships with.  You know, I've had the mayor of Dearborn over for Shabbat dinner, and I appreciate and love those and cherish those relationships, but I think that it is totally separate from the question of Israel in whether Jews have a right to exist in America as full citizens, right that we don't have to take we're only citizens if we take certain positions, right? I think that's what, to me, that is most hopeful about, is it shows that that particular position is rejected by the vast majority of Americans. And I think that's a really good thing for American Jews at a time when world Jewry is in a pretty precarious state. Manya Brachear Pashman:   You mentioned that you have three young daughters who awoke to that vandalism in your home that morning. How are they processing all of this? Jordan Acker:   It's been really hard. You know, I think trying to explain to a nine and a seven year old why someone would do this to your family is really difficult. My seven year old said to one of her friends that there are people who are trying to bully daddy. And I guess that's true, and in the technical sense of the word, I think that that's right, but I think that it's really a challenging thing.  You know, my girls are fortunate to go to great public schools with Jews and non-Jews. They're fortunate they do gymnastics in a very diverse community on the east side, which we love. So they get to see and know people of all races, colors, religions, you name it. I mean, Detroit is a remarkable and diverse place, and to think that they were being singled out, I think, is something that they can't quite put their heads around, because it doesn't exist to them. You know, for them, you know, the black girls that they do gymnastics with are the same as the Lebanese girls who they do gymnastics with, same as the Jewish girls they do gymnastics with. It’s just, can you complete your round off, right? And that’s where I'd like them back to being again. But it's really, really challenging when you've had something like this happen to you. So because the sound is so visceral and it's just so violative of your family, and frankly, of the way America should work, it's, it's, that's why I said at the beginning of this pod, it's un-American to engage in this kind of violence. It's the kind of violence that the Klan would engage in. And you know, that's why we have laws like here we do in Michigan to prevent people from masking in public like this. It's for this exact reason, because that's what the Klan did. And we have to toss it out because it has no place in our society, period. Manya Brachear Pashman:   Jordan, thank you so much for joining us and for kind of explaining the situation on University of Michigan's campus, but also your own family's encounter. Jordan Acker:   Thank you so much for having me, and for your wonderful CEO, I have to end this with a Go Blue, and thanks again.

During a White House press conference with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, U.S. President Donald Trump made a stunning proposal: that the United States take control of Gaza. His remark sparked intense global debate. This week, we break down the implications with Jason Isaacson, AJC’s Chief Policy and Political Affairs Officer. Jason examines the proposal and shares AJC’s perspective on what it means for the future of the region. Resources: AJC Welcomes Trump Affirmation of U.S.-Israel Alliance; Expresses Concern over Proposal for Gaza Listen – AJC Podcasts: The Forgotten Exodus: with Hen Mazzig, Einat Admony, and more. People of the Pod:  The Oldest Holocaust Survivor Siblings: A Tale of Family, Survival, and Hope Israeli Hostages Freed: Inside the Emotional Reunions, High-Stakes Negotiations, and What’s Next Bring Them Home: Understanding the Israel-Hamas Hostage Deal and Its Impact Follow People of the Pod on your favorite podcast app, and learn more at AJC.org/PeopleofthePod You can reach us at: peopleofthepod@ajc.org If you’ve appreciated this episode, please be sure to tell your friends, and rate and review us on Apple Podcasts or Spotify. __ Transcript of Conversation with Jason Isaacson: Manya Brachear Pashman:   During a press conference with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu at the White House this week, US President Donald Trump proposed that the United States “take over and own the Gaza Strip”, suggesting long term control and suggesting the Israel Hamas war would soon come to an end.  Whether one considers the proposal innovative or absurd, the surprising declaration underscored the need for a new approach to Gaza's future. With us now to discuss the impact of the President's words is Jason Isaacson, AJC's Chief Policy and Political Affairs Officer. Jason, thank you for joining us. Jason Isaacson:   Thank you, Manya. It's good to be back. Manya Brachear Pashman:   So Jason, I'll just ask you straight up, is this proposal innovative or absurd? Jason Isaacson:   Well, of course, there are people who will say it's both. From my sense of the conversations I've been having in the Middle East over the last several days, last couple of days. First of all, it caught everybody by surprise. It does seem to be a little bit half baked, because there are many questions that arise when one starts digging into some of the details, which have been lacking.  And it's also very important to point out that the day after the President presented this very surprising, innovative, out of the box proposal, there were comments from various White House officials that suggested, you know, don't take it quite so literally as the way it was laid out by the President. Even Mike Waltz, the National Security Advisor, suggested that it really, in many ways, is an attempt to kind of change everyone's thinking in the region, and force, urge, somehow move the Arab states to put forward their own innovative proposals. Because clearly, we're stuck, and we've been in a rut for decades, certainly since the Hamas takeover of the Gaza Strip almost two decades ago.  And over the last year and a half of terrible conflict, the last 16 months of war, it's clear that no reasonable plan has been put forward that will really nail down not only the release of the hostages right away–which is insane that you've had hostages held for 16 months–but not even achieving the objectives that had been laid out at the very beginning of this conflict by the Israeli government, which was the necessity of Hamas no longer ruling Gaza. Because with Hamas ruling Gaza, you will never have a two state solution. You'll never have Palestinian rights. You'll never have peace in that region. You won't have 10s of 1000s of Israelis moving back to their homes in southern Israel, you will not be able to make the kind of progress toward regional peace that is necessary. Hamas is an extremist terrorist organization that wants to kill Jews. Wants to destroy the State of Israel. They don't want a 2-state solution. They want the end of Israel.  So they can no longer be in charge. They can no longer threaten the Palestinian people with their aspirations for political change, and they can no longer threaten the people of Israel. They can no longer govern Gaza. And no one has come up yet with the definitive path forward to eliminate that continued Hamas threat.  So there is a ceasefire agreement, ceasefire hostage release deal, that is in progress right now. Ultimately, the third stage of all of that, after we get through the second stage, which is yet to dawn, would be a new governing structure, but that is still in the future, and it's still not clear that we're going to get there anytime soon.  So the idea of putting forward something bold and new and totally different has a certain logic to it, even if elements of what the President was saying the other night seem to be wanting certain degrees of logic. But we're still trying to figure out whether it was a genuine proposal, or just a slap in the face of the region saying, Okay, let's do something different and bold. Let's move forward. Manya Brachear Pashman:   Even if we aren't supposed to take this proposal quite that literally, can you explain the proposal and what led to it? Jason Isaacson:   Well, the proposal, basically says, if I understand it correctly, that the United States would kind of take charge and would conduct demining and clearing of the rubble and coordinating the reconstruction of Gaza. Which would require, according to the President's formulation, the removal of the Palestinian population. Some 1.7, 1.8 billion Palestinians who live there and are living in terrible conditions right now because so much of the infrastructure and the homes have been either badly damaged or destroyed.  And so there's a certain logic, certainly, if you're a real estate man and you know how to redevelop property, if you're knocking down lots of buildings and you're trying to put up something new, you've got to get the people out of the way. So I can understand that reason, that reasoning. But this is a population that doesn't necessarily want to leave.  Obviously, maybe some do, but it's very clear that there is a long embedded national movement among the Palestinians, which clings to that land, as miserable as the conditions may be there. And so therefore, if you are going to follow the President's plan, which would require the removal of people, they will be removed against their will, many of them, at least, and where would they be moved to? Unclear. The President originally said several days ago that he thought that they should go to Egypt and Jordan.  Both countries have said clearly, as clear as day, no thank you, we do not want them. Palestinians belong in Palestine, which doesn't yet exist. They don't belong in our countries. This was a long standing position of both the Kingdom of Jordan and Egypt.  And then where else would they go? There is no market internationally for accepting hundreds of thousands, let alone more than a million Palestinian temporary dislocated persons. Not clear that they would be away for very long, although I think the way the President was describing this project, we could be talking about a 10 or 15-year redevelopment plan in which he envisions a Riviera on the Mediterranean, another Riviera on the eastern Mediterranean, which is, you know, a wonderful vision, but how we actually get from here to there with so many complications in the way is totally unclear.  There will be so much resistance. There already is. Within hours, there were immediate statements of pushback from the region. So what I hope this will mean is people across the region, and AJC is staying in the region. We've been in Israel for the last several days, we had an AJC Board of Governors solidarity mission to Israel earlier this week, and then a number of us are staying on and talking to people across the region.  We'll get a sense for how the region is responding and whether this plan to prod the region to come up with something decisive that will actually help resolve this problem in Gaza, end the terrorist scourge that makes it impossible to move forward on peace, makes it impossible for Israelis to live in peace alongside their Palestinian neighbors. We'll get a sense of that. Right at this point, really, the ball is in both courts. The American court, because clearly the president wants ownership of some kind of a solution to this problem. Israel obviously has a huge stake in this, a security stake, especially. And the region also wants to move forward, and wants to see a resolution of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, and frankly, relief for the Palestinians who have suffered through this terrible war over the last 16 months, brought about by Hamas' attacks on Israel of October 7, 2023. So it's a period in which the people in the region cannot tolerate the continued misery in Gaza, the continued threat that Hamas poses to Israel, the continued holding of hostages, dozens of hostages who have not yet been released. We need to see an end to all of this.  The President has put forward a dramatic proposal. It may or may not make sense. It's up for the region to actually step forward and see what else, what else could be put down that will allow us to move forward. Manya Brachear Pashman:   So you are on the ground there. What has been the reaction to it so far on the ground? Jason Isaacson:   Well, I mean, so far, there have been statements issued by regional governments. Some quite detailed. Others, just commentary. Making it very clear that they have no interest in the dislocation of the Palestinian population. And some have really been quite harsh in how they have phrased that. But I think there is also a realization, and I expect to dig into this further in the coming days, that something bold, something that we haven't tried before, is necessary. Because what we have tried before simply hasn't worked. And you even have, 16 months into this terrible war Hamas, still, as the basically the governing authority in Gaza. Even with the Palestinian population there, I think clearly understanding that this misery that they have faced for the last 16 months has been brought about by Hamas, by their cynical policy of placing their entire military infrastructure embedded in a civilian population, so that when they made this brutal series of attacks on October 7 and killed 1,200 people and captured 251 and kidnapped them and been holding them for months, knowing that there would be a massive Israeli retaliation, a massive Israeli effort to bring back these hostages and to punish those who came across the border and killed and raped and pillaged southern Israel.  They knew that that was going to bring about enormous destruction. Palestinians in Gaza recognize that it was Hamas that did this. But still, they're stuck in this terrible cycle of being governed by the very people who have brought about this terrible misery to the people of the Gaza Strip. So we all know that we have to move forward into something different. The ceasefire and hostage release deal allows us in stages, to get to a better place to release all of the hostages. Some 18 were released as of yesterday. I think we're on track to release several more in the coming days and we hope all of them and the conclusion of the second phase.  But we have to get through the second phase, and then we have to get to someplace else. So Hamas can no longer govern. We have to see a way forward to a resolution that allows us to envision peace between Israelis and Palestinians, the well being of the Palestinian population, the return of Israelis to the southern cities and towns and clearly, the release immediately, as quickly as possible, of the hostages who have been suffering for 16 months. Manya Brachear Pashman:   Why do you think the White House has tried to walk back his comments? Jason Isaacson:   Well, President Trump is famous for big ideas and bold statements and also sometimes saying things that kind of upset the norms of discourse. He's known for doing this in lots of different contexts, domestic policy, foreign policy. And it was very clear, the reaction from the region was so sharp, so immediate, that they had to find some way of explaining what the President intended. And the way they have framed it is that basically, this wasn't about the United States owning Gaza. It wasn't necessarily about the United States building luxury resorts and condominiums on the shores of the Mediterranean and Gaza, because there was also a statement that made it clear that there weren't going to be US troops involved, and maybe not even US investment involved.  So it was just clear that there were holes in this plan. It was a kind of a big, dreamy vision, intended as we are hearing from the White House in the days after the President spoke to kind of shake up the establishment, the establishment in the region, the establishment in the sort of the foreign policy community and and force people to come up with a better idea, a clear path forward that would rebuild Gaza without Hamas, and allow the Palestinian people some relief from all of this, and obviously assuring the security, the release of the hostages, and the security of the people of Israel. Manya Brachear Pashman:   You've mentioned the hostages coming home in the days to come. But do you think this declaration could derail the hostage agreement the first stage of it, especially given second stage negotiations have not even begun yet? Jason Isaacson:   Well, there is that danger, and that is one of the points that that AJC made in the statement that we issued immediately after, the day after the President spoke. While also recognizing that what he did say about the alliance between the United States and Israel was hugely important. The fact that he received Prime Minister Netanyahu as the first foreign visitor to the White House in this second Trump administration sends a powerful signal to the region. Certainly to our community, but to the region, that Israel's security is vital to the United States’ national interest. He was very clear about that, and also very clear about the threat posed by Iran and the necessity of pushing back against the Iranian nuclear threat, but also its support for proxies like Hamas and Hezbollah, of course, in Lebanon and others in Yemen and Iraq. And other changes that will have to be made to this ring of resistance, of fire that the Iranians tried to strangle Israel with.  The President's been very clear about all of that, and it's really welcome, and we welcome that. But we had to express concerns about the policy, the proposal that was put forward on Gaza, because it clearly rattled the region, and it could–if the signal to Hamas which is in negotiations with Israel through Qatar and Egypt and the United States, if Hamas, which continues to hold hostages, sees that there is some alternate universe that the administration is proposing in which they would just clear out the whole area–how does that affect their thinking about their hopes that they can still have some kind of a presence in Gaza, which we don't want. Israel can't stand. Frankly, the region doesn't want either. But it could be that if Hamas is negotiating with a sense that they have some future in which they will still have some role to play in the conduct of affairs in Gaza. This remaking of the entire map could force them to retreat and to say, You know what? Maybe we're not going to go ahead with these negotiations right now. We're going to rethink our position, and that would be terrible.  It is imperative that the process that was set in place on January 19, the last full day of the Biden administration, with very strong support from the incoming Trump administration, move forward. It is essential that we move forward on the hostage release deal. And Israel will continue to protect itself, will continue to have a security presence in the region.  But will end the war at least while this is going forward, assuming that Hamas abides by the agreement, and Hamas, then, in the next stage, no longer governs Gaza. Manya Brachear Pashman:   We've talked about the impact of this proposal on the hostage negotiations. What about expansion of the Abraham Accords, which was certainly one of the major milestone achievements of the first Trump administration.  You are in the region now, that is something that you have worked very hard for for decades. How could this derail the expansion of the Abraham Accords? Jason Isaacson:   Well, the Abraham Accords, the whole idea of expanding Arab-Israeli peace, of Israel's integration into the region, is so abundantly clearly in the interest of the region. We have seen again and again instances in which it's been proven, demonstrated of the advantage that accrues to the region by having Israel as part of the region, instead of pretending that it's somehow separate from the region. What happened last April, what happened last October, when Iran fired missiles and drones to Israel and the region joined Israel a couple of countries, not the entire region, couple of countries in the Arabian Gulf, joined with Israel and with Israel, but also with the United States and with the UK and other navies and air forces to combat this incursion. You have the creation, the emergence, of a regional security architecture in which Israel plays a significant role. The benefit of that is so clear to wise leaders across the region that I am completely confident that that progress will continue. Even if this weird statement was made by the White House the other day.  I want to read that, and I'm hoping that I will hear from contacts across the region that they want to hear that as just simply a clarion call for something new and bold and different that can break us out of the. Paralysis that we are suffering in Gaza without having any effect on the natural course of progress in Arab Israeli peace and cooperation, security infrastructure, exchange programs of various kinds, medical technology, the public health, education, water resources, environmental issues. There are so many things that are happening at a lower level right now that when the cover is removed and it's allowed to kind of move forward, is extremely exciting to people across the region. Which is why, by the way, last June, at the AJC Global Forum in Washington, AJC CEO Ted Deutsch announced the creation, launch of the AJC Center for a New Middle East, which builds on the work that we've been doing for decades to introduce people to each other across the Arab world, with Israel, with our community to talk about the benefits that will accrue to the people of the region from Israel's integration in the region, the contributions that Israel continues to make and will make in a much amplified way if it is accepted and normally interacting with its neighbors, as It does with now, in the last four years, with the UAE and Bahrain and Morocco. And of course, has had long standing peace agreements with Egypt and Jordan, with which, even though there are many disagreements and dissatisfaction with these agreements, they have been enormous contributors to regional peace and stability, and frankly, the welfare of both of those countries as well.  So the advantages are clear. We've been part of this process for a long time. We will continue to be part of this process. Whatever is said in the way of unusual statements from the White House about new ways forward that don't fit into the normal pattern of diplomacy. The leaders of the region understand that this is the direction that they should be pursuing, and we will continue to encourage that process. Manya Brachear Pashman:   Jason, thank you so much for joining us.  Jason Isaacson:   Happy to be here, Manya.

“To be a Jew is to know that because of who we are, because of our historical experience, we care for the other. This is really one of the great tensions of our moment. Of how to be eyes wide open to Israel's need for self-defense, and at the same time recognize the real suffering that's going on in Gaza and to know that we need to find a way to hold both of those together.” Rabbi Elliot Cosgrove, spiritual leader of Park Avenue Synagogue in New York, explores the complexities of Jewish identity in a post-October 7th world in his new book, For Such a Time As This: On Being Jewish Today. In this conversation, he unpacks the tension between Israel’s need for self-defense and the suffering experienced by Gazans and Israelis and the challenge of balancing empathy with vigilance. He also shares his personal journey to the rabbinate and what it means to live as a Jew in this pivotal moment. *The views and opinions expressed by guests do not necessarily reflect the views or position of AJC.  Sign up for AJC Global Forum: Register at AJC.org/GlobalForum2025 for the premier global Jewish advocacy conference of the year, in New York City, April 27-29 2025 Listen – AJC Podcasts: The Forgotten Exodus: with Hen Mazzig, Einat Admony, and more. People of the Pod:  The Oldest Holocaust Survivor Siblings: A Tale of Family, Survival, and Hope Israeli Hostages Freed: Inside the Emotional Reunions, High-Stakes Negotiations, and What’s Next Bring Them Home: Understanding the Israel-Hamas Hostage Deal and Its Impact Pack One Bag: Stanley Tucci and David Modigliani Uncover His Jewish Family’s Escape from Fascism and Antisemitism in 1930s Italy Follow People of the Pod on your favorite podcast app, and learn more at AJC.org/PeopleofthePod You can reach us at: peopleofthepod@ajc.org If you’ve appreciated this episode, please be sure to tell your friends, and rate and review us on Apple Podcasts or Spotify. __ Transcript of Conversation with Rabbi Elliot Cosgrove:  Josh Kramer: AJC Global Forum is returning to New York City, April 27 to 29th 2025. I'm Josh Kramer. AJC New York Regional Director, and I hope to see you there. You won't want to miss this opportunity to join with more than 2000 other activists and engage in thought provoking discussions on the future of the Jewish people, Israel, America, and the world.  Our program will feature large plenary sessions with headline speakers, smaller breakout sessions designed to explore the key political, strategic and social concerns affecting the global Jewish community, and exclusive opportunities to engage with diplomats, decision makers, interfaith partners, community leaders and more.  Will you be in the room? Register today at AJC.org/GlobalForum2025 to take part in the premier global Jewish advocacy conference of the year. Now is the time to join AJC in shaping a new future. Head to AJC.org/GlobalForum2025. Manya Brachear Pashman:   I've done quite a bit of soul searching in the 15 months since October 7. How do I grapple with the tragedy in Israel and Gaza and the hatred Jews face on American soil without scaring my children away from Judaism?  Then came our Temple's Purim spiel last spring. That story of Queen Esther's bravery, in some ways, helped. It was about that same time that Rabbi Elliot Cosgrove, the spiritual leader at Park Avenue Synagogue in New York, picked up his pen and began to write his latest book, named for a line in Queen Esther's tale – For Such a Time As This: On Being Jewish Today. Rabbi Cosgrove is with us now. Rabbi, welcome to People of the Pod. Elliot Cosgrove:   Thank you. It's great to be here.  Manya Brachear Pashman:   So I have to tell you, rehearsals began for this year's Purim spiel as I was reading this book, which made it all the more powerful. What inspired you to write this? Elliot Cosgrove:   Well, for me, I draw wisdom from text, and I was trying to think of what would be an analogous moment for what we were going through as American Jews from the ancient text.  And for me, as you say, this is now on the cusp of Purim 2025, it was the story of Esther that we read. And in many of our synagogues, we have Purim spiels, where we act out the story, which is basically the story of a Jewish community of ancient Shushan who believed themselves to have it good, that they were comfortable in the diaspora. And the wicked decree of Haman came down and Esther, whose name actually means to hide, she hid herself, her Jewish identity in the king's palace, and believed that she was comfortable there.  When the decree came down, Mordechai, her uncle, by way of an emissary, sent a message to her. “Don't think yourself to be safe from Haman's decree. Who knows, if it was not for such a time as this that you've arrived at your station.” And I saw this as really the calling card of our moment that we all felt ourselves in the wake of October 7, Esther-like called to action. The trauma of October 7, but also the call to action, to step up to the moment, the needs of our people. Manya Brachear Pashman:   Tell us about your writing process. Elliot Cosgrove:   I buried myself in my writing from before dawn until mid-morning, and then I would hit a wall. And I didn't take a sabbatical. I actually went into my day job as a congregational rabbi. It was a very intense writing process and then in the course of about three to four months sent the manuscript off to the publisher. Manya, the thing about the book is it was very disorienting to write as the events were playing out, both in Israel and in the States. And one of the worries that I had that I spoke to the publisher about was, well, what if this becomes dated? You know, it was not journalism, but I was writing as the news was happening, and the good news and the bad news is that the themes that I pick up on: the trauma of Israel, the blurred line between anti-Zionism and antisemitism, how we balance empathy and vigilance, the question of the hostages, of thinking about a day after for Israel and the Palestinians, these questions are not only still relevant, but they're actually more pressing than ever. So unfortunately, the themes that I hit on in the book, very much present right now. Manya Brachear Pashman:   How did that writing process help you personally process what you were witnessing and experiencing as a Jew in America? Elliot Cosgrove:   I'll say this, that as a rabbi, I often see my job–someone calls, they've just gotten bad news in the hospital, a loved one has passed away. Or a happy thing, that their child has just gotten engaged, or they themselves have just become new parents. And people turn to clergy to get the first line of constructing the narrative of what it is they are experiencing.  And for me, there is something deeply personal and deeply pastoral about this book, because I feel like it's seeking, hopefully, to give the language to American Jews as to how to construct this new reality of a post October 7 existence, the jumble of emotions, of trauma, but also the emergence of Jewish identity, the likes of which we've never seen before, the argument for continued defense of Israel's right to self determination, as well as an assurance that the traumas of October 7 never happen again. And in the same breath to think actively about what does the day after look like. I think we're all searching for language for these and other tensions of our moment, and I'm hoping that the book is sort of a vocabulary builder for our time. Manya Brachear Pashman:   One word that you used many times in the book, and it stuck with me, just because maybe it's one of my favorite words, and that is empathy. And you used it in different chapters, different contexts. And I'm curious if you could share with the audience the role of empathy and how it is a guiding force, how it has been a guiding force since October 7. Elliot Cosgrove:   Empathy, both its presence and its absence, has been a subplot of this moment, because I think empathy is ingrained into the Jewish DNA. You open up the Passover Haggadah, and on the one hand, we know that we are vigilant against every generation a pharaoh arises to destroy us. We are guards up. We are a people who knows the importance of ancient hatreds, of being vigilant against them, and also the ring of fire that Israel sits in by way of Iran and its proxies.  I mean, Israel's in a very tight spot, and American Jewry is in a very tight spot. And at the same time, empathy is who we are. You were once a stranger in a strange land. Therefore you should know the heart of a stranger. To be a Jew is to know that because of who we are, because of our historical experience, we care for the other. And I think that this is really one of the great tensions of our moment of how to, you know, be eyes wide open to Israel's need to self defense, and at the same time recognize the real suffering that's going on in Gaza and and to know that we need to find a way to hold both of those together. That Israel needs to fight this war as if there's no tomorrow, and Israel has to fight this war with an eye to tomorrow, with the same ferocity that it prosecutes this war, it has to pursue a day after plan. And I think that somewhere along the way, it's the voices on the extremes who are speaking with the loudest megaphones. And the goal of this moment is to realize that we need to find a way to embrace both.  I think it was Fitzgerald who said the test of a great mind is the ability to hold two opposing ideas and retain the ability to function. I think the test of the Jewish community right now is the ability to hold both vigilance and empathy at the same time and retain the ability to move forward with hope. Manya Brachear Pashman:   And how can empathy help here on American soil, where we're facing protesters, we're facing all kinds of opposition and questions and hatred because of what's happening overseas. How do we use empathy here on American soil? Elliot Cosgrove:   First of all, it's hard. It's hard. When you are under attack, the last thing anyone wants to do is feel someone else's pain. When someone is calling me a colonialist oppressor, when someone is calling for the destruction of the Jewish state, something which is part and parcel to my identity, core to my very being – my initial instinct is not to inquire into how they feel and have empathy. My initial instinct is to have shields of self-defense, prioritize the needs of my people over anyone else's. I think that's a human thing to do.  And as long as the hostages are hostages, as long as Israel stands in a vulnerable position, I think we need to be eyes wide open to that, and then we need to breathe, and we need to remember what it means to be a Jew.  And we need to remember that it takes two to tango, and that if we are going to create a future whereby Jews and Palestinians can live side by side in safety and self determination, then we need to realize that there are two peoples worthy of realizing that dream, and that requires empathy, Manya. Manya Brachear Pashman:   You were not always that religious or observant of your religious tradition. Can you tell our audience how you became a rabbi? Elliot Cosgrove:   How long do we have? This is a big question, but, look as with any way we construct our realities and tell our origin stories, there are a million ways to tell it. The truth of the matter is, I am the grandson of a congregational rabbi, an orthodox rabbi. So to say that I had somehow strayed from the path is a little bit of an overstatement. But I will say that I grew up in a traditional Jewish background. I'm very proud of the home I grew up in, but when I went off to college, it was very much something I did, Judaism was something I did at home. And I can't say that my first few years at my alma mater at University of Michigan were known by way of my religious affiliations and commitments. And then I got a phone call my junior year of college, that a figure from my youth, a grandfather figure I never really knew. My grandparents had passed away, and he was a guy who used to sit next to us in synagogue and slip me up peppermint candy as the rabbi was about to start the sermon or come over for Passover Seders or Shabbat dinner, Mr. Gendun, and he had passed away. And I got the phone call. I said, What would Mr. Gendun want me to do? And I thought, maybe I'll say Kaddish.  So I called one of my Jewishy friends. I had never been inside the Hillel building up until that moment. And I called up one of my Jewishy friends and I said, What's, where's the Hillel? And they said, you're an idiot, Elliot. It's this huge building right on campus at Michigan. And I went in and I said my Kaddish, and I was getting up like it was the end of an airplane ride just to run back out to whatever my evening plans were.  And a man stood between me and the door, boxing me out, and I was trying to shimmy one way and the other. And he said, I notice you've never been here before. And he said, Well, I'm wondering if you'd like to come to Shabbat dinner. And I lied, truth be told, because I figure he didn't want to know about dollar pitcher night. And I said, I already have Shabbat plans. And he said, Well, do you have Shabbat plans next week? And I was caught in my tracks, and I said, No, and before I could say another word, he said, Good, then you'll come over for Shabbat dinner.  And that man was Michael Brooks, who was the Hillel Director of the Michigan Hillel. I went over to Shabbat dinner. I got involved in the Israel group. I was an editor of the student journal. I sat on the Hillel governing board. One thing led to the other, and I became a rabbi. But important [as] that story is obviously in my own religious formation and choice of vocation, is how it informs my own life and my own rabbinate. It's that ability to look around the room when you're in a class, a Jewish event, a service, and who's the person who looks a little out of place like they might have been there for the very first time, and just do that small human act of reaching out to them, and whether you're going to invite them to Shabbat dinner or not, but just to acknowledge their humanity, that has been the north star of my rabbinate ever since. We're all just human beings looking for a place to hang our hats. Manya Brachear Pashman:   You talk about empathy. I think empathy caught my attention every time you mentioned it in the book, because I think it's so key to journalism. It's such an important component of it. And then I think hospitality is such an important component to Judaism and to congregational life, Elliot Cosgrove:   Absolutely. Hospitality is something that is key to our text at the beginning of the Passover Seder. But hospitality is also a spiritual demeanor that we welcome people into our souls, into our presence, into our life. Hachnasat Orchim in Hebrew, this idea that there's always space within our souls, within our hearts.  Manya Brachear Pashman:   Having had such an important turning point on a university campus, how did you interact with, council, university students during this time, as they were facing such pressures and such opposition, crushing opposition during this past year and a half? Elliot Cosgrove:   So there's a chapter about that in the book. It's really the part of the book that I think has struck a nerve, and appropriately so, because I'm the father of four college age or thereabouts children.  And that story I tell about Maya, and Maya is a young woman who, I joke, shares half a brain with my own college age daughter. She's grown up in my household, and she is what you or I might identify as a non Zionist Gen zer, and she approached me and perhaps reproached me for having a Israeli flag on the pulpit, for doing the prayer for the State of Israel in the midst of the service, and said, you know, and she grew up in the Jewish Day School. She grew up going to Jewish summer camp. She did gap year programs in Israel.  Not a small amount of money has been invested in the Mayas of the world, and she herself is asking whether or not her liberal, American Jewish self can be simpatico with the policies of this or that Israeli government, because they don't speak for her sensibility. And to this question of empathy, I think the first move one makes in any such situation is to try to understand where the other person is coming from.  And I think a 21, 22, 23 year old is coming of age in a moment of time where the only Prime Minister they know of is Bibi Netanyahu, who either is or is beholden to the most right-wing elements of Israeli society. The only policies they know of the Israeli government are an expansionist policy in the West Bank, which has precluded the possibility of a two state solution. The only paradigm they have is an Israel which is a Goliath to the Palestinian David, this is their reality.  You can't blame someone for the time into which they are born. I can pick apart and engage in a dialog on what's true and what's not true. But to tell someone that their reality is not, their reality is is not, you know, a move that one can make. And by the way, if they're during the time of the judicial reform, and to this day, there are 1000s of Israelis marching on the streets on a Saturday night protesting the Israeli government as an expression of their love of country.  To tell the Mayas of the world, a college age student today, that they are treif, they are beyond the bounds of Jewish discourse, for doing the exact same thing is just an argument that doesn't hold water anymore. And so the the the goal here, Manya, is to engage with their questions, to listen intently, to prompt that young mind to come up with their own answers for the defense and the well being of the Jewish people, given the harsh realities that Israel faces, and also to make room for their very real question. So I look long on the Maya generation. It's actually a controversial moment within the organized Jewish community –do we write them off, do we not write them off? I think they're our future, and I think we do terrible damage to ourselves if we write them off. Manya Brachear Pashman:   Because it is such a time as this. We have to pay attention to the context, right, and to where we are in history, without losing sight of history. Elliot Cosgrove:   Look, it's very easy to take pot shots from the left and from the right. You know where this brave space is. The brave space is standing in the middle and dignifying the claims and counterclaims of both sides, and knowing that real leadership is trying to keep our people together. Manya Brachear Pashman:   Your book does such a beautiful job of inspiring that sense, sparking those, those right emotions in my head. So thank you so much for writing it. And I encourage all of our listeners to pick up a copy of Rabbi Cosgrove's book–For Such a Time as This: On Being Jewish Today. It is full of challenges, and I think that the challenge is worth facing and taking on. Thank you. Elliot Cosgrove:   Thank you so much, Manya.

When the USC Shoah Foundation named three sisters and their brother from Sanok, Poland the oldest surviving siblings of the Holocaust, Canadian Jewish filmmaker Allan Novak, the son of one of those shvesters (sisters in Yiddish), realized it was time to use the footage he'd been collecting for years to tell their story.  The result? Crossing the River: From Poland to Paradise – a heartwarming short documentary about how members of one family miraculously survived the Holocaust by staying together with each other and their parents. Listen to this conversation with Novak on his family’s dream of moving to Israel, unwavering resilience, and positive outlook, despite losing 80 family members to the horrors of Nazism.  *The views and opinions expressed by guests do not necessarily reflect the views or position of AJC.  Resources: Watch the film: Crossing the River Artist Zoya Cherkassky print created in the spirit of the film: 250 signed and numbered prints will be sold with 100% of proceeds going towards Holocaust education through a series of initiatives developed and implemented in collaboration with AJC. The cost of the prints is $250.  They can be purchased by credit card by calling 212-891-1454 or by emailing contribute@ajc.org. Or, you can send a check made out to AJC to the address below. In all instances, please be sure to mention that this is for a Zoya print.  American Jewish Committee - 165 E. 56th St., New York, NY 10022 Listen – AJC Podcasts: The Forgotten Exodus: with Hen Mazzig, Einat Admony, and more. People of the Pod:  Israeli Hostages Freed: Inside the Emotional Reunions, High-Stakes Negotiations, and What’s Next Bring Them Home: Understanding the Israel-Hamas Hostage Deal and Its Impact Pack One Bag: Stanley Tucci and David Modigliani Uncover His Jewish Family’s Escape from Fascism and Antisemitism in 1930s Italy Gov. Josh Shapiro and AJC CEO Ted Deutch on Combating Antisemitism Follow People of the Pod on your favorite podcast app, and learn more at AJC.org/PeopleofthePod You can reach us at: peopleofthepod@ajc.org If you’ve appreciated this episode, please be sure to tell your friends, and rate and review us on Apple Podcasts or Spotify. __ Transcript of Conversation with Allan Novak: Trailer: Ruth Zimmer:  That's a camera. Allan Novak:  No, this records sound. Sally Singer: [in Yiddish: It's so small.] Ruth Zimmer:  Ok, Sally. Allan Novak: Meet the shvesters: Auntie Ruthie, Auntie Sally, and my mum, Anne. Anne Novak: I'm the quiet one. Ruth Zimmer:  And I'm the pisk (loudmouth). Allan Novak: Along with my uncle Saul, they've been together since the 1920s. As they began to hit 100 the media started to take notice, and when the USC Shoah Foundation named them the oldest Holocaust survivor siblings in the world, I knew I needed to tell their story now. Ruth Zimmer: What do you want us to . . you want to ask questions? Okay, that's easier.  Allan Novak: I want to talk about the war. ____ Manya Brachear Pashman:   When the Shoah Foundation named three sisters and their brother from Sanok, Poland the oldest surviving siblings of the Holocaust, filmmaker Allan Novak, the son of one of those sisters, realized it was time to use the footage he'd been collecting for years to tell their story. The result? Crossing the River: From Poland to Paradise – a heartwarming short documentary about how members of one family miraculously survived the Holocaust by staying together with each other and their parents. Allan is with us now to talk about his extraordinary aunts, uncle and mom and this equally extraordinary Holocaust story.  Allan, welcome to People of the Pod. Allan Novak:   Thank you, Manya, great to be here. Manya Brachear Pashman:   So you had been recording interviews and kind of a life with your family for decades, right, while kind of working on various other projects. But what finally moved you to make this a project? Allan Novak:   Sure, well, I've been filming them since I got my Bar Mitzvah Super Eight camera a while ago, in the 70s, actually. And, yeah, I've been collecting footage, you know, at different times. Was inspired to interview, to capture their story, but really, more is just kind of a personal archivist kind of project. But then when the Shoah Foundation identified them as the oldest Holocaust survivor siblings in the world, as you mentioned, I kind of posted that in my social media. And then there was a huge reaction.  People just loved this idea that these people survived all this, and we're still together and survived, and we're thriving, in fact. And actually had a producer friend of mine inquire about where the rights available to their story. So I had to laugh, because, you know, I'm a filmmaker, so I immediately realized that somehow, you know, my little family story had kind of broken in a way, and it didn't deserve to be told and shared with the world. Manya Brachear Pashman:   So without giving too much away, can you tell our listeners a little bit about these extraordinary family members and what your relationship with them was like growing up? When did you realize they had such an extraordinary backstory? Allan Novak:   Well, you know, they often talked about, you know, Siberia, which is where they survived the war. And they were, they were kind of small little stories. And I understood they were hungry and it was cold and that kind of a thing, but it was always kind of light hearted, and there was laughter. You know, my auntie Ruthie, who is prominent in the film, she was an actress in the Yiddish theater, and she's really a natural comedian, and so she would always, they would make it funny. And my uncle, Saul, I call him the most positive person in the world. He actually also would look on the bright side of things.  So although they went through, you know, really tremendous trauma, somehow the way they processed it was with a positive outlook. And that kind of rubbed off on me. So I never felt, you know, unlike the people whose parents were unfortunate enough to have been in places like Auschwitz and under the Germans, I didn't have that sort of really, really dark sense of a traumatic story, but rather kind of this sort of triumphant survivalist story. So survival is kind of the key word and positivity together. So that's how I saw them growing up, as sort of somewhat fun old country of uncles and aunts. Manya Brachear Pashman:   Now one of the reasons your mother and most of her siblings survived is because the river that ran through Sanok also divided it into German and Russian territory, and your family fled to your great grandparents home on the Russian side, but about 80 of your family members stayed on the Nazi occupied side of Sanok and were murdered. One of them was your uncle Eli? Allan Novak:   Yeah, yeah. Eli. Manya Brachear Pashman:   Eli, yeah. Who did not stay with the siblings and parents. He had a bad feeling about where the Russians might take them. Did you ever get a sense of why the rest of the family stayed on the west side of the river in Nazi occupied Sanok? Allan Novak:   You know, it's a sad thing, but part of it was economic. You know, my grandfather had a relatively prosperous butcher shop. It was unusual because he supplied meats to the Polish military regiment there, but also to Jews. So he sort of had a half kosher, half not kosher shop, which was, I didn't even realize that could exist, but it did. He was quite Orthodox, and so they were sort of comfortable, but they shared a house, for instance, with my grandfather's brother, and he had like nine kids, and he wasn't so successful.  And so when I asked them, like, Why didn't everybody go over to the other side? It's like they didn't have the money to hire a driver, horseman, get across the river. And so it was just unfortunate. And as well, it was my mother's grandmother that had the property, so on the father's side, they didn't really have that option to sort of show up on the other side of the family. So it was kind of cruel twists of family and economics and also nobody knew, like they didn't know that that would be the right side. Nobody knew what would happen. You know, the week the Germans marched into Poland in September. So, you know, they went with their instinct, stay with the grandmother. But nobody knew what would happen. And of course, Eli, the brother, thought he was making the clever choice. He thought he was going to survive because he didn't want to get on the train. Manya Brachear Pashman:   How old were these people when they made these decisions to stay together or stay in Sanok? Allan Novak:   So there were five siblings. Sally, the oldest, would have been 19. So they were like 1917--15, 13, and 11. So Eli was 11, so they stuck together. They were young, you know, it probably seemed like a bit of an adventure, you know, to a 13 year old Auntie Ruthie, they didn't know, nobody knew what was to come. But Eli was 11, and he was, by all accounts, a stubborn child and a willful kid. A tough cookie, as my uncle Saul says. And so there's a point in the story where everybody was told you have to get on this train by the Russians, and the family huddled together. And this 11 year old boy who thought he was smarter than everyone and was more willful, said, I'm not getting on that train. I'm going to stay with my grandparents, who were not being sent out. The others were deported because they were Polish citizens, and on the other side, they weren't. So that's what happened. So he was 11, strong willed, and he made a choice. And then in the end, obviously, like one of those sort of lessons of the story is families that stay together do better than not. Manya Brachear Pashman:   As you mentioned, your family ends up in Siberia. That's where this Russian train takes them. I'll let listeners kind of watch the film to find out exactly how that unfolds. There is a story that did not make it into the film, but I read about the spilled milk, and I'm hoping that you can share that story as I think it's so sweet, but it also just gives listeners an idea of the conditions that your aunts, uncle and mom survived.  Allan Novak:   I mean, they were living essentially in a small wooden room inside of a long wooden barrack, and every family didn't matter how many people you got this, this wooden room. There were no beds. There were just sort of boards that came down from the wall. And there was like a bucket where they would put wood in and that sort of all they had to kind of keep them warm. But sometimes they could do things like they could trade.  There were Siberian peasants around. And if you had an earring or something, you could get some milk, right, from a farmer nearby. And so, yeah, I think my Aunt Sally, she was able to kind of get this milk for the family. And it was this huge, huge treasure to have this small little pail of milk. And she put it under the bed for safekeeping until she could share it the next morning, and then she knocked it over in the night, and this precious, precious milk spilled on the floor, and she really like, for her whole life, she just had this deep sense of regret and shame for spilling this milk, because it was just so precious to have anything to eat other than the few grams of bread they were given. Manya Brachear Pashman:   She literally cried over spilled milk for decades.  Allan Novak:   Yes. Manya Brachear Pashman:   Did her siblings know about this? And I'm just curious, what was the dynamic? You actually asked this very question in the film. You asked them, what is the dynamic between all of you? And they interpreted that as the difference. But I'm curious, just from your perspective, what was the dynamic of these siblings through the years?  Allan Novak:   Well, you know, they came from a traditional family. The father was Orthodox, you know, Shomer Shabbos, kosher, as probably were most of the Jews in Poland at that time, in the 20s and 30s. So they had a great deal of respect for the mother and father, would be nothing like today. It was just pure respect and love. And so between them, Sally, who's in the film, they called her the smart one. She was the most educated one. So she kind of ruled the roost, in a way. But Ruth, the youngest, she was a troublemaker. She's my auntie Ruthie, the comedian. And so she would make trouble.  She would follow them. If somebody had a date, like if Sally had a date with a boy, you know, Ruthie would be sneaking up behind and, like, harassing them and not going home, or chasing after them. She was kind of wild and incorrigible. My mother was always the middle child, so she was the peacemaker, which you see in the film, always trying to bridge between Sally and the younger Ruth. And Saul was kind of, he was the boy, the only boy, and they really just cherished him. He was good with his hands. He could fix anything.  There's a story in the film of how he had to kind of steal little parts, pieces of wood and things to end up building a cart that he could sell to get milk, that kind of thing. So they really appreciated each other, and they each had their positions, you know, judging by birth order, in a way. Manya Brachear Pashman:   You also talk in the film about how Saul and your aunt Ruthie, they were determined to fulfill their dream of going to Israel and going to a kibbutz in Israel. Spoiler alert, they did not make it, because, again, they put family first. Was this family first theme, a through line of your upbringing? And also, did they ever make it to Israel as just tourists?  Allan Novak:   Yeah, family first, certainly. Yeah. I grew up with a lot of cousins, the uncles and aunts, and they all lived very close to each other for their entire adult lives. You know, every night, one of the uncles and aunts would be walking over down the street and sitting there, so yeah, and we would hang with my cousins during the summer. So yeah, family first, definitely. We were all very close with our cousins, and we still continue to be. With respect to Israel, I mean, it was really something. They really wanted to be in Israel. You know, they were part of Zionist groups called Akiba growing up. My father, this story isn't in the film, was actually the head of, like, a whole group of Kibbutzim in Poland, and he ran the organization getting people over to Israel, you know, in 1947-48 and it was actually a great embarrassment to him that he ended up going with his new wife to Canada versus Israel. And he was very embarrassed because, you know, Oscar, you know, she and Novak, the organizer, ended up going to Canada. So it was a bit awkward. But, you know, they went where they got their immigration, and there was already family there. And just a very quick sidebar, so my father had one sister. My father lost like nine siblings, but he had one sister who emigrated to Palestine at the time in the 20s, and she had one son. And so my only living relative in Israel was the greatest living soccer star of his era. It's the equivalent of like having Pele as your cousin. His name is Nahum Stelmach. They called him Rosh Zahav, the golden head, because he won a famous match against Russia in the 60s. And this small country beat Russia, and he won. Sidebar.  So they did get to Israel. It took until the mid 60s to get there to visit his, you know, Nahum, and then they went subsequently a few more times, but, you know, it was expensive, particularly, you know, in the 50s, and you know, until the 60s. So it took until the 60s, till they got there. But, yeah, it was a lifelong regret, but it was just kind of the twists of fate. Well, it's in the film. They might have ended up in Israel. They were on the Exodus. They were booked on the boat the Exodus, and then my grandfather had a stroke just before. So part of the themes of the film is kind of the random twists of fate and the choices that we make, and what happens is unknowable. Manya Brachear Pashman:   The film includes footage of your mother turning 100, the birthday party, and she would always say that the best revenge against Hitler was to live long lives. What do you think has kept your family members alive for so long, what has kept them alive? Allan Novak:   Coincidentally, Uncle Saul just had his 100th birthday party three days ago. Now, three of them hit 100 and over, and Ruthie just is gonna have her 90th birthday next week. One of the things I say is they live with intense moderation. Everything they did was moderate. They didn't eat too much, they didn't tan too much, they didn't smoke, they didn't travel, just everything was just kind of this moderate lifestyle and exercise, right? So I believe that's part of it. They really were well preserved, physically and mentally like, right to the end.  And then, of course, you know the closeness, I think, the social cohesion that the fact that they, three of them, moved in together to assisted living facilities, you know, in their late 90s together. You know, as they lived in a condo. They all had three apartments next to each other for 20 years as well, with Saul close by. So I think that family cohesion and closeness and they didn't fight. They never fought, never saw a feuding moment. So, you know, we know things like stress and all of that contribute to long lives. So I think they sort of had this mild and loving long life.  Manya Brachear Pashman:   I'm sure their experience gave them some perspective. There's nothing really worth fighting about when you've survived what you did together.  Allan Novak:   Yes, absolutely right.  Manya Brachear Pashman:   What has kept them so young, not so old? What lessons can we take away from the shvesters story today? Allan Novak:   Certainly take care of your siblings. Stay close. Keep them close, keep relations good. Choose togetherness over isolation when the chips are down. Positive spirit, Uncle Saul's positive spirit and their positive outlook. Again, never wallowing in what had happened to them and the things that were lost, even the family members that were lost, moving forward and cherishing what they have. And you know, loving your children, if you have them, and their caring family gave them a lot of meaning.  They did everything for us, everything for the kinder, even to the point of when the film initially premiered, actually at Lincoln Center last January, and my mother was in the hospital at 100 and a half, and she stayed alive and alert until we had this premiere. We flew back, and then it was kind of like three days later, she let herself go with us there and said proper goodbyes. And I firmly believe that she just held on for the kinder, as they would say, for the children. So I think that's part of what kept them vital and youthful and alive.  Manya Brachear Pashman:   Thank you so much. Allan, thank you for making this documentary and sharing it with the world.  Allan Novak:   My complete and utter pleasure, and I hope people take as much joy and uplifting positive and laughter, which is ironic for a film dealing with that time period, but they won. Hitler lost, and they won.  And so it's kind of a triumphant story. And there's a final image which people would see of them on their balcony, you know, all around 100. In the snow in Winnipeg, holding hands, just persistent and alive. And they're together, immortalized now in the film. Manya Brachear Pashman:   Thank you so much, Allan.  Allan Novak:   My pleasure.  Manya Brachear Pashman:   To watch the short film, head to the link in our show notes.  And a special thank you to Debi Wisch, AJC Board of Governors member and the producer of Crossing the River, for her work to further Holocaust education through the arts. If you missed our last two episodes, be sure to tune in for my conversations with AJC Jerusalem Director Avital Leibovich and AJC Managing Director of Policy and Political Affairs Julie Fishman Rayman about the high stakes negotiations to bring the October 7 hostages home.

After 471 harrowing days in Gaza, Israeli hostages Emily Damari, Romi Gonen, and Doron Steinbrecher are finally reunited with their families. Julie Fishman Rayman, AJC’s Managing Director of Policy and Political Affairs, discusses the emotional impact of these reunions, the high-stakes prisoner exchange deal, and the collaboration between the outgoing Biden administration and newly inaugurated President Donald Trump. This breakthrough highlights the broader societal trauma in Israel, the complexities of negotiating with Hamas, and the ongoing efforts to bring all hostages home. Learn how this pivotal moment could reshape U.S.-Israel relations and Middle East policy moving forward. Listen – AJC Podcasts: The Forgotten Exodus: with Hen Mazzig, Einat Admony, and more. People of the Pod:  Bring Them Home: Understanding the Israel-Hamas Hostage Deal and Its Impact Pack One Bag: Stanley Tucci and David Modigliani Uncover His Jewish Family’s Escape from Fascism and Antisemitism in 1930s Italy Gov. Josh Shapiro and AJC CEO Ted Deutch on Combating Antisemitism Mijal Bitton on What It Means to Be a Jew Today The Next Chapter in Catholic-Jewish Relations Follow People of the Pod on your favorite podcast app, and learn more at AJC.org/PeopleofthePod You can reach us at: peopleofthepod@ajc.org If you’ve appreciated this episode, please be sure to tell your friends, and rate and review us on Apple Podcasts or Spotify. __ Transcript of Conversation with Julie Fishman Rayman: Manya Brachear Pashman:   The world watched Sunday as three women held hostage in Gaza for 471 days reunited with their families. The moving footage was juxtaposed against the frightening prospect of more than 1000 Palestinian prisoners, many of them convicted murderers and terrorists, would eventually return to freedom as well in exchange for the hostages.  There was also the strange irony of a hostage crisis nearing an end amid a transition in the White House, just a week after President Carter, who departed the White House as the Iran hostage crisis neared the end, was laid to rest. Here to discuss the painful and painstaking process of bringing the hostages home is Julie Fishman Rayman, AJC's Managing Director of Policy and Political Affairs. Julie, welcome. Julie Fishman Rayman:  Thank you so much, Manya, for having me. I appreciate the opportunity to tell this amazing story. Manya Brachear Pashman:  It has been a long 470 days now for you and your team as you have worked so closely with hostages' families. What was it like for you to watch those reunion videos? Julie Fishman Rayman:   Pure, pure joy. One of the things that I talk about with my team a lot is that we missed an opportunity during the last agreement, during the last releases, to really celebrate. You know, we sort of thought, oh, okay, this, this is it. Now we're going to soon be able to celebrate everyone coming home. But what we missed in that moment was that that was just the end of the sprint and the start of the marathon that we've been in now for so long.  So being able to see these three released, all I could think was dayenu, this would be enough. You know, after all of this, after all the work, after all the agony, and certainly, you know, the families don't feel that way, and our work must continue. There's no question, we have to keep going until they're all home. But even, even if it were just Emily, just Romi, just Doron, this, to me, personally, feels enough. Manya Brachear Pashman:  There was also talk of the very high price that was paid for these, for these hostages to return. It was so wonderful to see Gilad Shalit return home, but at the cost of more than 1000 prisoners, including Yawah Sinwar, who was the architect of the October 7 attack. And so I know there is this huge fear among Israelis now and that there are efforts underway to prevent this kind of deal, specifically, this kind of deal, from happening again. But where do you stand on this? Where does AJC stand on this? And where do the families stand on this? Julie Fishman Rayman:   Well, I'll start by answering your question with regards to the families, because they are not a monolith. They're not unanimous in their opinions on this, and a lot of them, you know, even within families, feel very ambivalent, and don't even necessarily feel the same way in the morning that they do in the evening, because there's just so so so much emotion around this. Any deal to get hostages, to get political prisoners, to get anyone unjustly held, released, is ugly. If you peel back the onion layers or or look behind the curtain, you see all of the really yucky things that we don't want to acknowledge about, you know, negotiating with terrorists, about allowing people who have committed the most heinous crimes to be free. But that's the only way it works, right? That's the only way you get to an agreement.  So unless you are fully confident, as you know, a government or a power that has citizens held unjustly, that you are going to be able to complete many heroic rescues, as the Israeli Defense Forces has done, the only viable solution is to get to a deal. And I think that there is, there's a recognition in the United States, in Israel that a deal was the only way to get these folks released, finally. But there are really heavy costs to be paid, and I do feel as though there is, there's a nervousness, you know, what comes? What happens next?  Manya Brachear Pashman:   And then, of course, there's also the trauma that a number of survivors are feeling out there, whose family members were murdered by these prisoners who are going free. Has AJC worked with them in any way and connected with them in any way? Julie Fishman Rayman: I believe our Jerusalem office knows a number of those families. It has some of those connections on the ground. We have not engaged with them in Washington or in our work, sort of throughout the United States, in the same way that we have with hostage families. But one of the things that I think is incumbent, not just on AJC, but really on the Jewish community and all who care about Israel, is to lift up those stories and to sort of collectively hold the pain of those families who felt when the murderers of their family members, when they were imprisoned, they felt okay, we have justice, you know, like we have a sense of closure, and that this pain that we've endured has has not, has not been for, for no reason. And now they have to go back into that trauma and go back into that pain and without that sort of sense of closure. So there's a lot of trauma that those families are going to be going through. And if we've learned one major lesson from this big hostage ordeal that we're going through now, is that the pain of one family in Israel is not exclusive to that family, that it reverberates throughout society, that it ripples throughout the entire population. And so as one family is grieving or suffering, all of the families are. That's one thing that we've seen throughout the course of the last you know, 478 days in Israel. That the families are not alone, that the tragedy and the horror that they have experienced has created this terrific rift in a lot of ways, in Israeli society, this feeling of a lack of trust that the that the government, that the Israeli Defense Forces, that the population as a whole, could protect them to this point. And we can only hope that this deal will be concluded, that as we're in phase one, that phase two will continue to be negotiated. That we will get to the end, so that the families can all be reunited, and this feeling of cohesion in Israeli society and throughout the diaspora can continue. Manya Brachear Pashman:  Julie, can you share with our audience--I said you worked closely, you and your team worked closely with the hostages' families, and have been ever since this ordeal on October 7. Can you explain to our audience what that means? What have you been doing? What have you been working toward, and how have you been working toward it? Julie Fishman Rayman:  Absolutely. So since the very early days after October 7, we've been deeply engaged with families, and it started just, I think five or six days after the seventh, my phone rang, and it was a number from Israel. I didn't know the number, but of course, you know, it's a number from Israel. I'm going to answer, so my answer and the caller explained that he was Jon Polin, the father of Hersh Goldberg-Polin. That his son had part of his arm blown off by a grenade. They knew that, and that he was being held hostage, and that he was one of many, many parents who are going through this experience, and he didn't really know what to do, and could we help?  And choking back tears right, choking them back, I said, Yes, of course, we can help, like, what's Let's talk this out. Let's make you know, let's make a plan. But AJC is here. We're here for your family. We can be here for the families . And it started what I think none of us could have imagined, in terms of this ongoing, continuous support, not just for Jon and Rachel, although we continue to stay very closely engaged with them, but for more than 50 families who started seeing elected officials when they traveled to Israel, who started to come to Washington, DC.  Because they felt like in Washington, the elected officials that they could meet wit had power, had influence, would hear their stories and try to move heaven and earth for their children. So virtually, you know, every month, at least sometimes every week, every other week, we opened our doors in Washington, DC, we opened our rolodexes and said, we'll help you with meetings.  Whether that was with members of Congress, with the administration, with members of the media, with the diplomatic corps, with other partners. Sometimes the delegations were random. It was whoever, whichever family members wanted to come. Sometimes they were specific, right? Sometimes we would bring family members of female hostages to talk specifically about their concerns related to gender based violence, and just simply try to give them the biggest and broadest platform that we could to tell their stories. And that's what they've been doing for 470 days, and that's what needs to continue, really and truly, until every single hostage comes home. Manya Brachear Pashman:   Clearly, Monday was also a big day here in the United States, President Joe Biden left the White House, handed the keys back to Donald Trump, who was inaugurated as the 47th president. And really, I could not help but think about the Carter-Reagan transition and the Iran hostage crisis that came to an end soon after. Clearly, Trump has made the issue of releasing the hostage as a core foreign policy priority for his administration. What is the reaction you're hearing from the families about the Trump administration's efforts and as well as the efforts by the former Biden administration? Julie Fishman Rayman:  The families had really great access within the Biden administration, really at the very top. Know, a lot of the families, especially the families of the American hostages, met with some frequency with the President himself, with Jake Sullivan, with Roger Carstens, the special envoy for hostages, and really felt as though this administration was was with them on this horrific journey, and they always spoke with and continue to speak with a lot of gratitude towards the Biden administration.  But it also became very clear that when Trump was elected, that they were eager to seize on any opportunity. And so you talk about this, this Carter-Reagan sort of moment. The families, for some time, had been talking to the president elect, now President, and his team, and saying, we need a Reagan moment. This can be President Trump's Reagan moment. They've been planting that seed and really playing to the hope that this would be something that would be meaningful as well for him.  And I think we're deeply successful in doing this. We would not be where we are today without this amazing display of collaboration between the Biden administration and the incoming Trump administration. The ability for the two of them to work together, build on what the Biden administration had been doing for so long, and then also come in with the sort of bravado of President Trump, and a commitment, really, he said he’s going to rain hell down if the hostages aren't released. So sort of the combination of these efforts, I think, was so remarkable and really got us to where we are today, but we're not, we're not there yet.  And so, as we celebrate Emily and Doron and Romi’s return, their triumphant return. We also know that there's a lot that could continue to go wrong at any stage of this, of this agreement, and even President Trump himself said, I'm not confident. And this is from a man who is sort of eternally confident. So the fact that he's expressing that caution, that nervousness about the ability to get to the finish line, means that we still, and the families still have a lot of work to do. Manya Brachear Pashman:  I find it interesting that you are referring to it as a collaboration, because, because my next question was going to be, I mean, how much credit does the incoming administration deserve for the hostage deal versus the outgoing administration? Would you say it really was a genuine collaboration? Julie Fishman Rayman:   All signs point to a genuine collaboration. I think there's a lot that we don't know, and we will know for some time, just as when we look at, you know, the last 470 days, there's so much of this amazing story that needs to be told. I feel very proud about the role that AJC played. But success has many people to credit, always. And there were tons of players, not just in Washington, DC, across the country, across the globe, who made it possible to get to where we are today. So it will be very interesting at this point, we sort of see a jockeying for credit amongst the Biden administration and the incoming Trump administration. I am willing to give that credit out like candy on Halloween. Everyone who had the smallest part should be taking that victory lap, patting themselves on the back and then preparing themselves for the next round of advocacy and pressure. Manya Brachear Pashman:  President Trump did have former hostages at his rally at the arena on Monday night. What message do you think he was trying to send, and I'll follow that with, what message do you think they are taking back home to Israel? Julie Fishman Rayman: I am ecstatic that he brought the families up on stage with him. I think that was such a meaningful moment, and certainly deeply meaningful to them. Because amidst all of this, there must be some there must be some fear that, okay, we've started to bring people home. What if we don't get across the finish line, right?  So the commitment, even after Emily, Doron, and Romi were returned, to bring them up and to show the importance of their families and their cause, I think, was deeply, deeply important. Cynically, I think part of that was to show, look, I've just come into office and look at the win that I've already had. But if it takes that sort of seizing of credit to keep the push going, I welcome that 100%, without question.  The families will no doubt take tremendous comfort in the fact that they were called up to stage. That representatives of this really large and robust community, sad community, of the hostage families that they had representatives called up on that stage. I think they'll see that as a really important signal that their cause is not forgotten, that even as there are celebrations welcoming Romi and Emily and Doron back, that this is not a box that has been checked, but rather a recognition that this is a job not yet finished. Manya Brachear Pashman:   So with that in mind, Julie, what are your priorities? What are AJC's priorities with this new administration? Julie Fishman Rayman:   We are looking for every opportunity to engage with this administration, as closely as we did with the last around the issues that are really important to AJC. First and foremost, of course, that is support for Israel, that is making sure that the US-Israel relationship remains strong, that the United States is continuing to play a vital role in supporting Israel on the world stage, whether that's at the UN, with European partners and so on. And lifting up our vital ally in this moment.  And not secondarily, just secondarily in terms of how I'm talking about it, but of equal importance is working with this administration to counter antisemitism. In all its forms, from all its sources. We worked really hand in glove with the Biden administration on not just creating but implementing the first ever US National Strategy to Counter Antisemitism.  And I think it's, it's fair to say that there were a lot of phenomenal successes that came out of that strategy. And now it's a matter of working with the incoming administration officials, and the President himself, to make sure that we are moving forward. That this idea that it requires the whole of government and all of society to be working together, to be working in tandem and coordination, in lock step to counter antisemitism. That strategy in and of itself, is critical. So whether it's something written on paper or implemented in that way, or whether it's, you know, appointing a coordinator, or what have you, we are here, and we're ready to be a part of that process. Manya Brachear Pashman:   Julie, thank you so much for joining us the day after the inauguration and all of the many changes that began to unfold. Thank you. Julie Fishman Rayman: Thanks for having me, Manya.

After 467 days of anguish, Israel and Hamas have reached a pivotal agreement to begin releasing hostages. AJC Jerusalem Director Lt. Col. (res.) Avital Leibovich breaks down the deal's details, the phased approach to releases, and the emotional toll on families and the nation. Hear about the complexities of the negotiations, the potential political fallout, and the profound resilience of those waiting for their loved ones to come home. Listen – AJC Podcasts: The Forgotten Exodus: with Hen Mazzig, Einat Admony, and more. People of the Pod:  Pack One Bag: Stanley Tucci and David Modigliani Uncover His Jewish Family’s Escape from Fascism and Antisemitism in 1930s Italy Gov. Josh Shapiro and AJC CEO Ted Deutch on Combating Antisemitism Mijal Bitton on What It Means to Be a Jew Today The Next Chapter in Catholic-Jewish Relations Follow People of the Pod on your favorite podcast app, and learn more at AJC.org/PeopleofthePod You can reach us at: peopleofthepod@ajc.org If you’ve appreciated this episode, please be sure to tell your friends, and rate and review us on Apple Podcasts or Spotify. __ Transcript of Conversation with Avital Leibovich: Manya Brachear Pashman:  On Wednesday, the Israeli government and Hamas terror group, at long last, 467 days, to be exact, announced a deal to bring the hostages home. The deal, which will unfold in phases, calls for Hamas to ultimately release the 98 remaining hostages in exchange for Palestinian prisoners convicted of terrorism and serving life sentences.  The first exchange could happen as early as Sunday. Here, on day 468, to explain the deal and the mood on the ground in Israel, where families wait to see whether the Israeli cabinet will sign the agreement, is AJC Jerusalem director Avital Leibovich. Avital, thank you so much for joining us.  Wow. 468 days, and this seems like such a breakthrough, at least on this end. Can you walk us through the details of what has been agreed upon? Avital Leibovich:  So currently, the Israeli delegation is still in Doha in Qatar, and have not returned to Israel. When they will turn to Israel, after the agreement will be finalized, then the Cabinet will meet, the government will gather, and they will approve the agreement. So according to the draft that has been leaked to the Palestinian media, the agreement has a few stages.  The first one has to do with releasing 33 hostages. That's the first stage. The 33 hostages, as we know, most of them, are alive, but unfortunately, there will be around 10 hostages that either have been murdered on October 7 by Hamas, and their bodies hijacked to Gaza, or those that have been murdered in captivity by Hamas.  Now we know that the first ones to be released, hopefully on Sunday, we are praying for that, are women, children, female soldiers, and also men over the age of 50 with some illnesses or some health issues or humanitarian condition. Which, I think everybody is in a humanitarian condition after such a long time. So that is the first stage.  The first stage will last 42 days. 42 days is a long time, and as we've seen and based on our past experience, Hamas can actually turn away, decide to change things last minute, halt the agreement and so on. In the course of those 42 days, Israel will release Palestinian prisoners. I have to say that the price is extremely high, because I'm talking about around 1000 Palestinian prisoners. When I look at the scale of how many prisoners will be released, versus a hostage, it's unbelievable. The price, quote, unquote, of an Israeli soldier, a female soldier, is very high compared to just an ordinary civilian.  So around 1000 prisoners will be released in this duration. In addition to this, the IDF will gradually leave some areas, and then on day 16, there will be discussions regarding the second phase. Israel would like to see, on the second phase, the remaining hostages released. That's 65 additional hostages.  And then we're talking about the third phase, which will be the reconstructing of Gaza. So these are the three phases. This is what we know for now. There are other components, like humanitarian aid, increasing significantly the number of trucks filled with aid going into Gaza, and we can talk about the implications of these prices, which Israel will be paying. Manya Brachear Pashman:  Now a lot of American media are reporting this as a cease fire. Is that accurate? Avital Leibovich:  No, the Israeli policy is very clear. Only after the last hostage we leave Gaza, this means 98 hostages will be out of Gaza. Only then Israel will be willing to cease fire. That's the reason why it's called a hostage agreement, and not a ceasefire agreement. Now we know Hamas. Hamas is a vicious enemy. It's a cruel enemy.  You know, I just watched Palestinian media, and you'll be amazed to see how many civilians in Gaza, not Hamas related or Hamas oriented Palestinians, are saying that they wish that October 7 will return every year. They're supporting the repetition of October 7 year after year. And so, you know, this is the atmosphere that we are seeing.  And Hamas can be affected by this atmosphere, and this would maybe lead even to the possibility that there will never be a second phase to this agreement. So this is definitely something that Israel wants to be very, very cautious, and this is the reason why it's not called a ceasefire deal at this point of time. Manya Brachear Pashman:  So you said 33 hostages, but 10, possibly who have died either in captivity or on October 7, those are the hostages that will be released in the first phase. Do we know who those hostages might be?  Avital Leibovich:  We don't know who. I mean, there are some kind of lists, so there are some indications, but it's based on rumors, and until the agreement is signed, the families themselves do not know. So you can imagine what's going on in the homes of 98 families of hostages, and of course, the second circles of these families, not sleeping, not eating, not breathing, just waiting for any kind of an announcement, the potential light in their lives. The tension is really unbearable. Manya Brachear Pashman:  I cannot imagine. Can you also speak to the tension in the nation? What about those who don't have relatives in a hostage situation, but who are still part of this nation? Can you kind of talk about the emotion there.   Avital Leibovich:  Yeah, it's a great question. We know the hostages by name. We know what music they like. We know who the parents are. We know what their hobbies are. At this point of time, we all know the hostages, almost like it's another child of ours, or another aunt or another uncle or a grandfather or a son in law. This is how we feel. And if you were to visit now Israel, and you would take any road, you will most likely see yellow flags symbolizing the hostages alongside the road.  And if you'll enter a school, you'll probably hear in the yard the songs which the hostages love to play. And if you go to a supermarket and check yourself out at the self checkout counter, you want to swipe your credit card, you'll see a picture of a hostage. So the issue is surrounding us, 24/7. Manya Brachear Pashman:  Does the prospect of an agreement that would finally bring them home – has that generated a unified sense of hope or optimism there on the ground? Avital Leibovich:  Even among the families, there are different opinions. So today, for example, families of hostages blocked the main road to Jerusalem and protested later near the prime minister's office because they think that the agreement is a bad one. And they have kids held in Gaza.  They think it's a bad one because they think that we may never reach the second phase, and their loved ones will stay forever in Gaza. And then there are other parts of the families who protest in Tel Aviv to make sure that the government signs this agreement. And there is no right and wrong answer here. Families are torn. The country is torn. In order to patch the situation, we need the hostages back. There is no question about it.  Manya Brachear Pashman: You raise a very good point. There is a divide, and it is a political divide, and so I am curious what your thoughts are on the prospect of the cabinet actually signing this agreement and going forward with this–and then also what the political implications are if the cabinet does or does not sign the agreement? Avital Leibovich: It is a political divide, but both sides are blaming the same person, the Prime Minister, doesn't matter from which side of the political map they are, they still see one person responsible to get them out of the situation.  Look, I do think that there will be a majority in the government. I do think that the Cabinet will vote for the agreement. I think that most of the ministers understand there is really no chance. And this is the turning point. This should be a turning point. I can say that one of the ministers in the cabinet, Minister Zohar, which is the Minister of Culture, actually wrote a letter to all the other cabinet members and ask them to vote to support the agreement and release the hostages. So I do have reason to believe that it will be approved, by the way, according to the law in Israel, after it will be approved, both in the cabinet and in the government. Then the very long list of Palestinian terror prisoners will be published publicly. Because, according to the law in Israel, anybody who wants to object –t can be my next door neighbor, it could be a family of a hostage. It could be an NGO. They could go and sue. They have 48 hours to go and file a lawsuit against the release of a specific or a few people on the prisoners list. So the High Court of Justice will discuss these appeals, and it will take 48 hours maximum. This brings us to Sunday as the closest possible point of the return of the hostages. Manya Brachear Pashman:  Could those names change on that list, and would that void the agreement? Avital Leibovich:  So one of the arguments I understood that rose today in Doha in Qatar is exactly on that point Israel wants to veto the list, although it has agreed to release prisoners which are sentenced not to one life sentence, but even to two and three life sentences, so it is willing to pay the price, but it is not willing, for instance, to release those symbols of leadership of Palestinian prisoners, because there will be implications for that. And by the way, even to those who are only one sentence for only one life sentence, there's also implications. Because Hamas, from a military perspective, is in a very dire situation, and they need all the professional manpower they could get.  So this is a situation that we may see these prisoners return to the lines of Hamas tomorrow morning, right after they're being released. So it is, it is a heavy price. So I think that if this will come through, and I think it will come through, Israel will need to set up a whole list, a new kind of security measure, list that will be compatible with the new situation, the new challenge in Gaza, and take it from there. And of course, this cannot go back to what, where we were on October 6. Manya Brachear Pashman:  And just going back to the political implications, you said, everyone, no matter what side they're on, they all point to Prime Minister Netanyahu as being responsible, good or bad. So what are the implications for him, for his future as the leader?  Avital Leibovich:  So you’re basically asking me about the chance of survival for the Netanyahu government. Currently, they have 68 seats, because, as you remember, Gideon Saar, who was in the opposition, alongside three other politicians, members of Knesset joined Netanyahu’s coalition, and now it's more stable.  The coalition needs 361 seats to survive, and the planned elections will be in 2026, so the question is, what will happen with Ben Gvir and Smotrich? One is holding six seats. The other one is holding seven seats.  What I'm hearing now about Smotrich, that he will agree to the first phase of the agreement, the hostage agreement, and then he wants some guarantees regarding the second stage, mainly with security issues, which is kind of ridiculous, because this person who does not have any background in military or security or things like that.  And then Ben Gvir is a bit more on the radical side, and he is actually in a political landslide with Netanyahu for the past couple of weeks. So the situation with him is just deteriorating. Having said all of that, you know, he fulfilled his dream to be a minister, and he would never have dreamt of it a few years ago.  And now that he's there, and now that we have President Trump going in in a few days, he may understand that the potential here for him is a lot bigger, and then he should take advantage of it, rather than just walk away. So I think that, if I would have to bet, I would say that this government will stay until 2026. Manya Brachear Pashman:  I don't want to end with politics, so I want to go back to the personal side of this. You are there on the ground, as you said, you see the faces of the hostages when you check out at the supermarket.  You see these families pleading. You also are in a very key advocacy position there. Have you met with families recently? Have you spoken with anyone recently? And can you share that conversation? Avital Leibovich:  Yeah, I've been in touch with a few of the huh, maybe 20 of the hostages families. And I'll share one story, which, of course, a lot of the stories are very emotional, and you get attached to them. But once in particular is a young mother. Her partner is in hostage in Gaza, and she gave birth to a beautiful girl when he's in Gaza. And she was here, as a matter of fact, on October 7, 2023 when she was sitting hiding in the shelter with her two other kids, she was eight months pregnant, and for her, it's about an everyday kind of survival, because on the one hand, she needs to be strong mother for three toddlers, but on the other hand, she's fighting constantly to bring her husband home, and so there's a conflict there, and I keep on asking her, how does she not break down?  And she is surrounded by families and so on, but at the end of the day, when she goes to sleep, she's alone, and if the baby cries in the middle of the night, then it's only her. And of course, there is work to be done and the kids to be taken and picked up and going to the doctors and, you know, whatever kids need. And three small kids, I mean, one is in first grade.  And again, the first grade, for example, she started school, and she was only escorted by her mother and and also, the kids are asking these naive questions, but they understand they know because they've seen many times their parents being kidnapped. So this is something they will carry on for the rest of their lives, and the fact that a baby has never met her father, that's really heartbreaking.  But I do want to say that I think they're finding inner strength, inner sources of strength for themselves, which is maybe a symbol of resilience of the Israeli people. This resilience, I think, is something very common in Israeli society. So this is a little bit of positivity in all the darkness. Manya Brachear Pashman:  Absolutely well, I really do hope that her prayers are answered, that her partner returns home safely, as well as the other 97 hostages who are still in captivity. And those who do not return alive, may their memories be for a blessing. Avital, thank you so much. Avital Leibovich:  Thank you. 

As Stanley Tucci reflects, "Given the circumstances in today’s world, the parallels between then and now are impossible to ignore. It’s an incredible story, but it’s also happening today, to millions of people . . . It's a story about people in a certain place and time, and what happened to them, and what happened to them has happened before, and has happened since, and will continue to happen. Unless we as the human race begin to understand that we are all the same.” What would you do if fascism and antisemitism seized your homeland? In his award-winning podcast, Pack One Bag, documentarian David Modigliani takes listeners on a gripping journey through his family’s escape from Italy in 1938.  The podcast series features actor Stanley Tucci as Modigliani’s great-grandfather, who was known as Italy’s “King of the Books,” and once advised Mussolini but later turned against him.  As Modigliani retraces his family’s steps across Italy, he uncovers hidden Fascist spy documents, personal family diaries, and the poignant Jewish love story of his grandparents that echoes through time. *The views and opinions expressed by guests do not necessarily reflect the views or position of AJC.  Listen – AJC Podcasts: The Forgotten Exodus: with Hen Mazzig, Einat Admony, and more. People of the Pod:  Gov. Josh Shapiro and AJC CEO Ted Deutch on Combating Antisemitism Mijal Bitton on What It Means to Be a Jew Today The Next Chapter in Catholic-Jewish Relations What’s Next for the Abraham Accords Under President Trump? You can reach us at: peopleofthepod@ajc.org If you’ve appreciated this episode, please be sure to tell your friends, and rate and review us on Apple Podcasts or Spotify. __ Transcript of Conversation with David Mogdiliani and Stanley Tucci: Manya Brachear Pashman:   As a documentary filmmaker, David Modigliani has created a variety of works on politics in America, improv comedy, and the improv comedy of politics in America. But during the pandemic, he discovered the love letters of his grandparents, written moments before they fled fascist Italy. Those letters led him to produce a more personal project – an award-winning podcast series starring Stanley Tucci, titled Pack One Bag. David is with us now to talk about that journey.  David, welcome to People of the Pod.  David Mogdiliani:   Thank you so much for having me. I'm so glad to be here. Manya Brachear Pashman:  So, at the core of your podcast, Pack One Bag, is the story of your grandfather, a Nobel Prize winner who fled Italy in 1938 and this was a story that you heard as a young man, as a teenager, right? But if you could share with our listeners what that story was, when you originally heard it. David Mogdiliani:  Yeah, so my grandfather, I was just a five year old kid when he won the Nobel Prize for Economics in 1985. But as I became a teenager and started to grow up, I became sort of fascinated by their love story, the story of escape.  Which was basically that my grandfather, Franco Modigliani, had been a 19 year old kid in Rome when Mussolini passed the racial laws against Jews like him, and he didn't know quite what to do, and he was so fortunate that he had fallen in love with this girl from Bologna named Serena Calabi, whose family had really been planning for this moment for many years, had had the foresight and the privilege to move resources outside of the country, put together an exit strategy, and when they fled Italy for Paris in the fall of 1938 they invited him to join them. They invited their daughter's boyfriend to join them. And the family was in Paris for about nine months and then made it onto the Normandie, a French ocean liner that left the coast of France in August of 1939 and turned out to be the last boat out of mainland Europe before Hitler invaded Poland and World War II began. So that kind of fairy tale escape, a whirlwind romance, that getting married, you know, in Paris on the run, and arriving in the US, kind of just in the nick of time, was the kind of origin story that I grew up with as a kid. Manya Brachear Pashman:  And how did your grandmother's family know how to read those tea leaves?  David Mogdiliani:  My grandmother's father had been known as ile de libri, the king of the books in Italian because he had founded and run along with his wife, something called La messaggerie italiane, which was the biggest book distribution business in all of Italy. It gave him resources and an understanding of where things might be going in Europe in the 1930s so I had known all of that. But when I sort of became more interested in this project and wanted to learn more, and dug into some boxes that my dad had, 19 boxes of my family's documents, we found inside them, a couple of letters from Benito Mussolini to my great grandfather, the king of the books, and that kind of was a staggering moment to see the signature of the future dictator of Italy there at the bottom of the page.  Mussolini had been a lefty socialist newspaper editor in 1914, 1915, and when he had been kicked out of the Socialist Party for supporting Italy's intervention and involvement in World War I, the Socialist Party had kicked him out, and he had decided to start his own newspaper. He needed help doing that, and it turns out that my great grandfather had not only advised him on sort of launching his startup newspaper, but had also funneled a secret subsidy from the French government to Mussolini to fund this paper. So I was relieved to learn that he later had broken with Mussolini, you know, didn't follow sort of the whole fascist experiment, but that he had a sense of Mussolini's temperament, his character. And really, after Mussolini killed a political opponent of his in 1924, a couple of years after coming into power, that is when my great grandfather said, if things continue this way, there's no future for us in this country. Manya Brachear Pashman:  And when you say your great grandfather, the king of the books, concluded that there was no future for us, did he mean your family, or did he mean the Jewish community? David Mogdiliani:  I think at that time, in 1924, he meant our family, and I suppose also those who were not interested in kind of following a blindly fascist authoritarian dictator to the extent that he might transform the country. One of the things that I was sort of fascinated to learn in this project was that Italy was, in fact, a very inclusive place for Jews.  In 1870, the country was sort of unified, and the Jews who had been in ghettos across Italy for hundreds of years, were released, became really central part of Italian society, which was a very tolerant society. Mussolini, in fact, had a couple of Jews in his cabinet. As late as 1935 had a Jewish lover. And it was not really until a later stage of Mussolini's fascism that he very swiftly turned against the Jews, eventually passing the Leggi Razziali, the racial laws, which really instituted a whole set of restrictions that only got worse. Manya Brachear Pashman:  So talk a little bit about your process. I mean, how did you piece together this saga and all of the many pieces of this story that you had not known before, this saga that eventually became 10 episodes of your podcast. David Mogdiliani:  Yeah, you know, during COVID, a lot of people baked banana bread. I pulled out my grandparents' love letters. I had always wanted to interview them to document– I had been a documentary filmmaker for many years and to capture their story–and I kind of just never got around to it. Before I did it, they died. They passed away. And so I had kind of been living with a sense of guilt about that.  But I was in a new romance with a woman named Willa. We had become quarantine mates during the pandemic, she was really curious about the seeds of this family story that I'd shared with her. And we pulled out these love letters, which, in fact, my grandmother had translated into English for her grandchildren, because she really wanted them to know how you know, love had gotten them through the horror of that period. And pulling out those love letters, I was sort of stunned by how fresh and relevant they seemed. Not these kind of black and white mementos from a time gone by, but in a world where there was increasing authoritarian leadership around the world where antisemitism was on the rise, again, their letters to one another, which were going back and forth between Rome and Bologna. They were dealing with these questions, how do we deal with rising fascism? How bad is the antisemitism getting, and what do we do about it? And inside of those boxes, we found not only letters from Mussolini, but kind of the other part of the story. You asked me about the story I grew up with the fairy tale escape that was kind of the baseline that I was operating from. What I had not fully understood was that when my grandfather fled Italy with his girlfriend, and the king of the books, and was so fortunate to escape with them, he left behind his whole family, including his mother and his older brother, Giorgio. And eventually, as World War II kicked off, as they got into the Nazi occupation of Rome, all he could do was read about, you know, the Nazis invading his hometown, what was going on abroad, and he had lost touch entirely with his brother, and yet, what We found inside of these 19 boxes was a 25 page letter from my grandfather's brother, Giorgio, from the older brother that he'd left behind.  And that 25 page letter, it had come just after the war ended. And it said, essentially, you know, we survived. And there's so much to tell you, you know, here's how. And it was just this page turning epic of how my grandfather's brother had shepherded his young family through the war, how they had hid in a small hill town outside of Rome, how he had taken on fake identity, and his little children had learned their fake names and identities and how to cross themselves and go to church and pose as though they were Catholic, and ultimately, how they had made it all the way through to the liberation of Rome. And that, to me, felt like this whole other world, the kind of parallel universe that my grandparents had escaped, the experiences that they might have had if they'd not been so fortunate to be among. Those who were able to flee, and that, along with the question of, why do we have these letters from Mussolini, you know, in the basement, and what's going on with the king of the books, all of that made me want to go back to Italy to dig into my family's past, to better understand this story, to find, you know, answers that could inform my present moment.  At the time, you know, I thought, well, I'll need someone to help me, an audio engineer, at least if we're going to do a podcast. And Willa said, Well, you know, or I could do it. She had learned some audio skills in film school, and I had this question of, like, is this a good idea? Like mixing my budding romance with, you know, digging into my family's, you know, unknown history, but her curiosity had kind of inspired me to dig into this story in the first place, and so we set off together back to Italy with kind of no idea of just how far that adventure would take us. Manya Brachear Pashman:  So I should explain that that saga, you tell that saga in the 10 episodes of the podcast, and the voice of your grandfather is actually that of actor Stanley Tucci. How did you connect with Stanley about this project, and what was it about the project that appealed to him? David Mogdiliani:  I knew that we wanted to bring not only the personal investigative nature of kind of solving some of these mysteries, putting together the pieces, but also to bring to life the experiences and the stories of the characters in this podcast. And so I knew that I could bring to life the voices of my grandparents, which I remembered so well, but I really wanted to bring to life as well the king of the books, my great grandfather, and whenever I thought about him as this kind of debonair Italian, you know, media magnate who got his family out of dodge just in time, he seemed like this kind of cultured, congenial hero that someone like Stanley Tucci might play.  And I'd been in touch with Stanley Tucci a few years prior in regards to his searching for Italy series, we almost worked together on that the scheduling didn't work out, but we'd formed a relationship, and so I shared with him, Hey, I'm digging into the story. I'm finding all this incredible stuff. I want to tell it in audio. And he said, I'd love to help. How can I be part of this? In addition to those more standard documentary techniques. We also do a little bit of kind of creative storytelling, and it's wonderful to have Stanley Tucci do that.  We travel to London, where he lives, and did two long recording sessions with him, and he, having Italian parents and grandparents of his own, speaking Italian well, was able to snap right into that character. He needed very little direction, and it was a great joy to hear him kind of bring that character to life. Manya Brachear Pashman:  And in fact, you had a conversation with him about his own family history and the importance of connecting to that. And I want our listeners to hear a clip of that conversation.   __ David Mogdiliani:  Okay, so tell me, I guess what drew you to the story. Why spend some time doing this?  Stanley Tucci: Well, a number of things. I'm interested in Italian history, Italian stories, Italian people. I'm interested in World War II, and given the circumstances in today's world, you can't help but be interested in the parallels of that time and our time. It's your family story. It's an incredible story, but it's something that's happening today. It's happening as we speak. It's happening all over the world to literally millions of people. David Mogdiliani:  I know you get asked this a lot, but what was your first connection to learning about Italy and its history and what happened to there? Stanley Tucci: My mother's father fought in World War I. He was a corpsman, and he was up in the Alps, and I mean, like the worst fighting, but he never spoke of that. But we were always told about our family history. We were able to live in Italy when I was a kid, and we were able to go visit my family. This is in the early 1970s down in Colombia, and that was fascinating, because it wasn't even 30 years after the war. But that history was really important to us, and the way that those stories were really funny that they would tell, or really frightening that they would tell. And like basically every Italian family, those stories were always told at, you know, dinner parties, at gatherings, at holidays, and you always had a connection with your family. You were always doing things with your family.  Sometimes you were like, Why are we here? No one seems to be getting along, you know. But that said, it's invaluable. Understanding that history, knowing those people. And I really love this story because it's a universal story. It is an Italian story, but it's not an Italian story. It's a Jewish story, but it's not a Jewish story.  It's a story about people in a certain place and time, and what happened to them. And what happened to them has happened before and has happened since and will continue to happen. Unless we as the human race begins to understand that we are all the same. That's why I like this story. It's about hope for equality. ___ Manya Brachear Pashman:  David, you use the word refugee. I'm just curious if your grandparents considered themselves refugees, given the timing of their departure and then the timing of what their relatives that they left behind experienced. David Mogdiliani:  Yeah, and I know actually they specifically did. There's a letter, when my grandmother fled with her parents in early September of 1938. Her father had told her, we're going to leave in the morning. We're going to make this look just like we're going on vacation so we don't draw any undue attention. And I want you to pack one bag and we'll take off in the morning. And they went ahead to Paris, and they were joined there a few weeks later by my grandfather, who had to settle some of his affairs in Rome and get his act together.  And so there are letters from my grandmother, having just arrived in Paris, writing to her boyfriend back in Rome and hoping that he's going to come soon. And she says, quite specifically, we're in this tiny hotel room, and we're really refugees now, everything feels quite different. She, of course, had come from this privileged background. She grew up in this beautiful villa on the hill above Bologna that her father had built, a villa that they had to abandon very quickly. And so she was sort of encountering the reality of being outside of her comfort zone, of not having sort of the comforts that she had grown up with and wishing and hoping that her beloved would join her soon, which would kind of allay some of her anxiety as a refugee.  I think they also felt that sense of being unsettled through their nine months in Paris, from the fall of 1938 until the summer of 1939 being unsure of whether war might break out during that period, my great grandfather, my grandmother's father, the king of the books, he found that his bank accounts inside of Italy had been blocked by the fascist regime, something that we uncovered in more detail in the archives in Rome as we dug into these fascist documents that were kept about all of this persecution, and they had this sense of being unsure of quite when they would leave and how far kind of the tentacles of the fascist regime might extend. And so I do think that they felt like refugees, even if they themselves did not encounter one tenth of the horrors that the family members who remained behind did.  Manya Brachear Pashman:  We have a narrative podcast series called The Forgotten Exodus that really speaks to that. It's about Jews fleeing the Middle East and leaving their homes behind. I mean, that's what you're doing, is you're leaving your home behind, even if you were hated in your home, even if you faced violent antisemitism, it was still home. I'm curious how much your family was fleeing fascism, or were they fleeing antisemitism? Were they fleeing more of one than the other, or did they go hand in hand? David Mogdiliani:  Yeah, well, I think that their initial plans that my great grandfather, the king of the books, was making, were related more to fascism, to his understanding of Mussolini and to political violence and how far things might go. But in the summer of 1938 as he began to get information about the coming racial laws against Jews, and in early September of 1938 when the racial laws were passed such that Jewish children could no longer go to public schools. Teachers couldn't teach at public schools or universities if they were Jewish. Jews could not own a business with more than 99 employees. They couldn't have domestic help of non Jews.  And that initial, you know, set of restrictions against them only increased that fall in the following months, you know, obviously getting to the point eventually that Jews could own nothing, that even the debts that they owed to other people should be diverted to the state. But the beginning of those racial laws is quite literally what they were fleeing when they then decided to execute their exit strategy. It was the promulgation of the racial laws that caused them to leave. Manya Brachear Pashman:  In other words, they began to develop that exit strategy because of fascism. It was initially kind of envisioned as a flight from fascism, but when the culture became antisemitic. That was the trigger. David Mogdiliani:  Exactly. Manya Brachear Pashman:  What have I not asked you, David, that you think is a really important point to mention. David Mogdiliani:  I would say, just about the love and humor that's such a big part of this story. My grandparents were, you know, constantly bickering at one another in this very loving way that we capture in the podcast, just the jump start of their romance was amazing to me. I mean, my grandmother came into Rome with her father, the businessman. She encountered this young kid who she later called il tipo ridiculo, meaning the ridiculous character, because he was just sort of a pesky all over the place, you know guy. And when she came back a second time, he had this plan to take her out, and he had concocted this outing up the Via Appia Antica, which is the ancient road outside of Rome. They got to know each other a little better, and she let him just steal a little kiss at the end of that little date. And the next morning, when she was going back to Bologna, he showed up at the train station in this suit, you know, two sizes too big for him. He's pacing the platform, and he had come to declare his undying love for her.  He was so worried that she was going to get a marriage proposal from a fancy guy in Bologna, and he felt like he had to state his case. And she was like, you know, you got to calm down. You know, it was just a kiss. You know, this is really over the top. And she told him, I want you to not write to me for three months. She really wanted this kind of cooling off period. She said, then write to me if you want. And let's see, you know, if we really have a connection. And so three months later, she's in Bologna, and she gets this package from Rome, and on the top it says: Oh aspettato tre meze, signora di tatoreza. (I waited three months, Madam Dictator.) Ma ogna notte teo scritto. (But every night I wrote to you.) And she opens it up, and there's 91 little letters inside. So every night he had written to her, and then he had saved them and sent them all at the end. So these kind of dramatic, you know, acts of romance and love, the way that they got married inside of the fascist Italian consulate in Paris, that was a huge part of their story, and I think a huge part of what got them through that very anxious, you know, experience. Manya Brachear Pashman:  You talk about how this moment in history jumpstarted your grandparents' romance. Do you mind sharing with listeners what happened to that girlfriend who tagged along and helped you with this project? David Mogdiliani:  It's probably about 3% you know, of the overall story. We're really focused on the story of my grandparents, my great grandparents. But yes, this girlfriend Willa that I had, that had sparked curiosity about my grandparents story when we pulled out the love letters four years ago, as she then came with me as we went back to Italy, digging into the archives, interviewing our cousins, bringing this story to life, and of course, brought us a lot closer together.  Our own relationship continued on, and we were married last year. And just about three and a half months ago, we welcomed our first child, Marcello Vita Modigliani, Vita meaning life in Italian which was a family name. So yes, my own romance has been part of this story as well.  Manya Brachear Pashman:  David, thank you so much. I really appreciate you doing this project and then coming and speaking with us about that. It really is quite relevant and quite instructive. And so thank you so much.  David Mogdiliani:  Thank you. It's been a pleasure to be here, and folks can find pack one bag anywhere they listen to podcasts, Apple, Spotify, but really anywhere, including at packonebagshow.com. You can stream it straight from the website there at packonebagshow.com and thanks so much for this wonderful conversation. I really enjoyed it.  Manya Brachear Pashman:  If you missed the last episode, be sure to tune in for the conversation between AJC CEO Ted Deutch and Pennsylvania Governor Josh Shapiro. In that conversation on the ground in Philadelphia, Governor Shapiro and Ted talked about the antisemitism the governor has faced, the importance of nuance and how simply there is none when it comes to expressions of anti-Jewish hatred. 

Last week, AJC CEO Ted Deutch traveled to Philadelphia to meet with Pennsylvania Governor Josh Shapiro for an in-depth discussion on combating antisemitism, ensuring the future vitality of Jewish communities in Pennsylvania and beyond, and addressing the challenges posed by rising political polarization both locally and nationally. “When it comes to antisemitism . . . there is no nuance. Antisemitism, bigotry, and hatred in all forms is not okay. Everyone in a position of public trust . . . has a responsibility to speak and act with moral clarity and speak out against it,” said Governor Shapiro. AJC is a 501(c)3 not-for-profit organization. AJC neither supports nor opposes candidates for elective office. Watch: AJC CEO Ted Deutch, Gov. Josh Shapiro Say Fight Against Antisemitism Must Be Bipartisan Listen – AJC Podcasts: The Forgotten Exodus: with Hen Mazzig, Einat Admony, and more. People of the Pod:  Mijal Bitton on What It Means to Be a Jew Today The Next Chapter in Catholic-Jewish Relations What’s Next for the Abraham Accords Under President Trump? Honoring Israel’s Lone Soldiers This Thanksgiving: Celebrating Service and Sacrifice Away from Home The ICC Issues Arrest Warrants: What You Need to Know Follow People of the Pod on your favorite podcast app, and learn more at AJC.org/PeopleofthePod You can reach us at: peopleofthepod@ajc.org If you’ve appreciated this episode, please be sure to tell your friends, and rate and review us on Apple Podcasts or Spotify. __ Transcript of Conversation with Ted Detuch and Josh Shapiro: Manya Brachear Pashman: Last week, AJC CEO Ted Deutch traveled to Philadelphia and sat down with Pennsylvania Governor Josh Shapiro for a conversation about antisemitism, the future of Jewish communities in Pennsylvania and across the nation, and growing political polarization not only in Philadelphia but throughout the country. The conversation was so powerful, we wanted to share it with a wider audience. So, I turn it over to Ted and Governor Shapiro.  Ted Deutch:   I'm going to start just by fessing up to something that I tried to do, that I fortunately failed at. I don't often tout my failure, but there was a time some number of years ago, Governor, where I thought that your future should take you to the United States House of Representatives. I tried to convince you to run for Congress, and you had other plans. Fast forward many years, thank God I was wrong, and thank you for the remarkable job you've done as governor of Pennsylvania.  Josh Shapiro:   Thank you. It's so good to be with you.  Ted Deutch:   Obviously, it’s a really great to be with you. But I had, I wanted to break the ice just a little bit, if I may, with just some quick questions, just to lose, just to loosen you up a little, if that's alright. Josh Shapiro:   Do I not seem loose? I feel pretty loose.  Ted Deutch:   Alright, very quickly. Favorite eagle of all time? Josh Shapiro:   You know what I was on Eagles pregame live just yesterday, before the Birds played the Steelers. Birds beat the Steelers, by the way. And I got to sit next to Jaws. Ron Jaworski, and like, it was just a normal day. I was a little bit starstruck. So I guess I'd go with Jaws. Yeah.  Ted Deutch:   Alright. Better play-by-play announcer– Merrill Reese, Gene Hart? Josh Shapiro:   Oh my God, come on. All right. That’s like asking me to pick between my kids. Ted Deutch:   Alright, I’ll move on. Moving on, moving on, moving on. Some people here who don't, the handful who don't really get this at all, and my staff, who's saying, why are you doing this. Josh Shapiro:   Merrill Reese by the way is about to get inducted into the Hall of Fame for, they do once a year, they do an announcer, and Merrill just won that award this year. Pretty amazing.  Ted Deutch:   He is amazing. Best Philly movie ever made?  Josh Shapiro:   Rocky. Ted Deutch:   Easy. Thank you. Inappropriate question, perhaps at an AJC dinner, provolone or swiss? Josh Shapiro:   I do enjoy provolone, but I'm not a cheesesteak guy, so. We have a kosher governor's residence. I can't be out eating cheesesteaks.  Ted Deutch:   It was a bit of a trick question, I'll admit. And then we'll just finish this off. Favorite Israeli food? Josh Shapiro:   Falafel, but not from some fancy restaurant, though I do love Goldies and I love Michael, but on some like stand in the middle of nowhere in Israel, it's always delicious. Ted Deutch:   This also gives me an opportunity to acknowledge Tsach Saar, who is the Consul General of Israel. Thank you very much for being here. All right, I tried. Thanks for playing along.  Josh Shapiro:   Did I not do well? You did try.  Ted Deutch:  You did great. You did great. Thank you.  Josh Shapiro:   No more lightning round? Ted Deutch:  I have more. Josh Shapiro:   Now we got to do this serious stuff? Ted Deutch:   We do. And frankly, look, your answer to the silly question about cheesesteaks is the perfect lead in to my first question for you. The first governor, I grew up in Bethlehem, the first governor I remember was governor Milton Shapp, who was born Milton Shapiro. So in that respect, you're actually the second Governor Shapiro in Pennsylvania's history. He was governor from 1971 to 79.  But you are Governor Shapiro. You're a proud Jew who dismisses a question about cheesesteaks because you have a kosher home. You quote Pirkei Avot in your life as governor and the speeches that you give. It's so clear, and we and everyone has come to know how important Shabbat dinner is for you, with your family. Your Judaism matters to you a lot, and for those of us who are so involved in the community, it's something that obviously we admire. But I would love to hear a little bit more about how it informs what you do and why it's so important. Josh Shapiro:   I want to just say on a serious note, how grateful I am to AJC for the important work that you do every day, how grateful I am to Ted, who's been a friend for more than a decade. How thankful I am to the leaders here who raise money and do this important work. For Mark, who I think asked me to do this like a year ago, and has checked in with me each month to make sure he's going to do it. I'm proud to do it, and to the Liebmans, and everyone, I appreciate what you all do.  I just celebrated, Lori noted the other night that I've been in public office for 20 years, and I'm a proud public servant. I think public service is a noble profession, and the reason I am in public service, it's fitting that my dad is here tonight, is because of my family and because of my faith. Both draw me to service. Our faith teaches us that, as you mentioned, I quote Pirkei Avot. I quote it in a synagogue. I'll quote it at a Kiwanis Club. I was proud to quote it from the pulpit at Ebenezer Baptist Church in Atlanta, Georgia, just a couple months ago, that no one is required to complete the task, but neither are we free to refrain from it. Meaning each of us has a responsibility to get off the sidelines, get in the game and do our part.  Now, doing our part can come in a lot of different ways. Some people do their part in a courtroom. Some people do their part in a business. Some people do their part through charitable work, like here at AJC. For me, my part is through public service. My part is through serving my community, and I'm honored to do it. I share that with you because as I was getting ready to launch my campaign for governor, you may recall I was attorney general at the time, a group of us came together and said, Well, how do we want to kind of reintroduce you to the good people of Pennsylvania as you launch your campaign? You could start by talking about a policy or for some initiative you want to get past, but actually what I wanted to do was talk about the issue I just mentioned to you, what drew me to want to serve in the first place. Why I was even contemplating running to be your governor.  And so we had a long conversation about what motivates me, Ted, and why I do this. To me, being able to bring together family and faith was really important, and the best way to show that is by doing what I do every single Friday night since I was a kid, and what we continue to do, and that is having Shabbat dinner with my family.  And so the first ad in my campaign was all of us sitting around the Shabbat dinner table. Now, fun fact for all of you, I think we filmed it like on a Tuesday, so it really wasn't Shabbat. My kids remind me of that, but we did have everything on the table. And what was so interesting about it was, after the ad started running, and I would show up in communities where there aren't a lot of Jews, if any Jews, in Pennsylvania. Folks would grab me and say, Hey, I saw your ad. That was great. I want to tell you what Sunday lunch is like after I get home from church. I want to tell you what Christmas dinner is like in our family. I want you to know what we experience when we leave our place of worship.  And in a lot of ways, it actually brought me closer together with the community. We were able to see one another in a deeper way. I think faith has allowed me to get into living rooms and conversations and communities in a much deeper way than perhaps I ever could before, as I think it is critically important if you want to be a public servant, to be true to who you are and express that to folks. So I'm proud of who I am. I'm proud of the way I've lived my life. I'm proud of the way Lori and I are raising our four children, and I appreciate the fact that the good people of Pennsylvania acknowledge that and open themselves up and share that back with me as I go out serving them as their governor.  Ted Deutch:   The importance of Shabbat dinner, part of it, obviously is your Judaism, but it also anchoring for your family. And for everyone that you interact with to know that on Friday nights, that's the time for your family. There's something there in a time of really polarizing politics and fragmentation of society, there's something there that we should learn from, right? Josh Shapiro:   I just think making sure you're committed to family, you're committed to yourself at some key moments, each day, each week, is really important. Lori and I live crazy lives right now, running all over the place. I'm not complaining. I asked for this, and I love what I do. I hope you can tell the joy that I have every day in serving you as your governor. And no matter where we are during the week, we always know, Friday night we're going to be together. We always know that it's going to be a moment where we can be with the kids and have conversations with them.  And I'll be honest with you, Ted. I mean, some of it, of course, is the prayers and the rituals and the religious aspect of it, but so much of it is just the family part of it, and being grounded in that, and knowing that that will be our moment during the week, whether we're at the governor's residence or our home in Montgomery County, we are always together Friday night, and it's something we don't compromise on. I think it's important that you've got to set those boundaries. You got to say what's important. And that's exactly what we do. Ted Deutch:   It's especially important to have time to be together in this period where, for almost 15 months, the community has really, in so many ways, struggled. We had the deadliest attack on the Jewish community since the Holocaust, the equivalent, just in terms that people in America can try to understand. The 1200 people, the equivalent of 45,000 Americans, God forbid, if you use the same ratios, the equivalent of 7000 people being taken hostage. Now still, 100 hostages still being held beneath Gaza. It's been really hard for the community.  And yes, Israel has fortunately made advances, and from a geostrategic standpoint, is doing better. But this has still been really difficult for the community, for those of us who care about Israel, and then layer on top of that, the antisemitism that we've seen, that you've been so outspoken about in the work that you do. How, again, given what's at your core, is it hard sometimes with the way that we're feeling, the way that you feel as a committed Jew, in the face of all this, to speak about it? Do you ever feel that you need to hold back because this is all so personal to you? Josh Shapiro:   I never feel like I need to hold back. I think it is always important to speak out. But I also think it is important that we have two separate conversations, one about antisemitism and the other about Israel. When it comes to antisemitism, I think it is critically important that folks understand: there is no nuance in that conversation. Antisemitism, hatred, bigotry in all forms. It is not okay.  And everyone, everyone in a position of public trust, everyone has a responsibility to speak and act with moral clarity, to speak out against it, and it doesn't matter who is sharing those sentiments. If they're members of your own party, if they're people who you otherwise might agree with on some other issue, we have a responsibility to speak out against it, and we have a responsibility as a community to be unified against antisemitism, hatred, bigotry, in all forms. There is no nuance on that.  When it comes to the issue of Israel and foreign policy and Middle East policy, that's a far more gray area. And I think it is important to continue to speak out in support of Israel, and I think it is also acceptable, if one wants to respectfully criticize a policy coming from the Israeli government, there is a difference there. And so what I try and do is not hold back in any way, but to make sure folks understand we are having two different conversations.  We got to speak out and stop antisemitism in our communities, and yes, we can express an opinion as it relates to the policies in Israel or by the Israeli government. And I think it is also critically important to acknowledge the very real fact that there is antisemitism in this country. There is antisemitism in this Commonwealth, and it is on the left and it is on the right, and there is no one party that has a clean record on it, and we've got to make sure that no matter who is putting forth those words of hate, they are condemned. Ted Deutch:   AJC is fiercely non-partisan in the way that we do our work and recognize and talk constantly, try to make the point exactly the way you have. That there's antisemitism, wherever it is, we have to call it out. But that it's harder for some to see it or to call it out when it's among their friends, in their own party, than if it's in the other party. This was something that I dealt with as a member of Congress. But when it when conversations turn to you during the election and people refer to you as Genocide Josh. Josh Shapiro:   Yeah, I saw that.  Ted Deutch: Yeah. There are those, I think we have to acknowledge it's on both sides. And clearly there are those on the far left who don't want to criticize Israel, but have now taken the position that Israel essentially has no right to exist. That then bring that into that kind of language, which is clearly antisemitic in the way it's applied. How do you deal with that?  Josh Shapiro:   I must tell you, it did not upset me and it didn't affect me. What did upset me was the way those attacks against me made other people feel. As I was traveling across this commonwealth, across the country, folks would come over to me and tell me, you know, I saw what they said about you, and it was making them feel less safe in their communities. It was making them feel less safe in their schools or on their college campuses. That upset me.  And on that I felt a responsibility to try and lift them up and strengthen them, and let them know that they should be proud of who they are. I'm proud of who I am, and sort of help them brush off the noise and recognizing and I think this is an important point, that while a lot of that noise did exist, and it is empirically true that antisemitism is on the rise, and thank God for groups like AJC doing this work. The vast, vast, vast majority of people that I come across every day, they're good people. They're not bigots, they're not spewing hate, they're actually looking to try and figure out ways in which we can bring people together. That is what I see.  And so I'm comforted by that every day. I'm not offended or upset by the attacks that people make against me, even the antisemitic attacks against me. What I get upset about, what I worry about, is how it makes other people feel, and whether that causes them to retreat or causes them to maybe not do something they were going to do or not, go somewhere where they were going to go. That is upsetting to me, and I try and spend as much time as I can with the people who are affected by that, to try and make sure they have the strength to continue to go forward and lead by example in a way that gives them the strength that they need to move forward.  Ted Deutch:   And sometimes, while the overwhelming majority of people are good, I agree with you, and I think it's important for us to realize that the data tells us that the vast majority of Americans are supportive of Israel as well, and are overwhelmingly opposed to antisemitism. Small numbers can do real damage. And that's what we saw on a number of college campuses, where the the protests, some of them going back to October 8, which were not protests about, obviously, about the Israeli government, but just protests in support of Hamas, some of these protests in support of a terror group, really put people at risk.  And you were very clear in the way that you approach that, right here in Philadelphia and around the state. How should, now that we're 15 months in, AJC has worked with universities around the country to try to ensure that they're doing what they need to to fight antisemitism. From your perspective, how are they doing, how are we doing, 15 months later?  Josh Shapiro:   I commend AJC for the important work they've done on college campuses. And I don't know if John Fry is still here, the president of Temple University, and an outstanding leader who was at Drexel University for some time and now is at Temple. He's an example of a strong leader dealing with these challenges on campus. And there are others to be sure.  Look, I think it is critically important that we protect people's first amendment rights to be able to protest on campus, protest on our streets, they of course, have to follow the rules of the road, whether on campus or in a city, Commonwealth, you name it, but they should be able to express themselves. But that expression is not okay if you're violating the rules of the campus, the rules of the city or the community. It's also not okay if it puts other people at risk. Universities have a moral and a legal responsibility to the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and to this country to keep all students safe on campus. And for some universities, I think they were willing to forgo that responsibility, or it got a little bit out of balance. Some universities were willing to accept a little bit of hate over here, but no hate over here, and that's not okay. Hate and bigotry in all forms, needs to be condemned. All students need to be safe on campus, and yes, there should be places where students can express themselves and have their views heard. So while I realize there's a lot of gray area when it comes to figuring out exactly where that line is, I do think it's important everybody adhere to those basic principles.  And there are many colleges and universities here in Pennsylvania that are. I think, candidly, Penn lost its way. They are working to get back. I think Susanna Lachs-Adler and others. Susanna has done really wonderful work, and there's some important work there happening under their interim president. I think they are moving in the right direction there, and many other universities are as well.  And so I hope, to get to the heart of your question, 15 months later, we're in a position where students feel safe, to be able to both go to class and to be able to protest within the bounds of the rules on campus, and that we continue to be balanced in our approach there.  Ted Deutch:   When there is messaging sent, whether from faculty or from student groups or from other places on campus that say you are not welcome in this group, or, frankly, in this classroom, simply because you are a Zionist, simply because you believe in the modern state of Israel, that that also can't be acceptable because of what it says, the message that it sends to students, and how it puts people at risk. Josh Shapiro:   Without question. I mean, if you're a student on one of these campuses, you literally have a legal right to be safe in these communities and on these campuses. And university leaders have to remember that. I gotta tell you, these students, they're scared. You know, Hanukkah last year was sort of right around the time that these protests were really kicking up and students were incredibly scared. I heard from a number of students at Penn who reached out to me, reached out to my wife, and we decided to forgo lighting our hanukkiah for the first night at the governor's residence. Got in the trucks, drove to Penn, and we lit the hanukkiot at Penn's Hillel with those students. We wanted to make sure that they knew their governor, their first lady, had their backs, and that they were going to be safe on campus.  And that we were going to make sure that university leaders ensured their safety and their well being on campus. Again, I want to be really clear. Students have a right to protest. Their voices should be heard. I think students have helped usher in change in this country for generations. We want to hear their voices, but not at the expense of the safety and well being of any other student. That's where you got to draw a line. Ted Deutch:   You have, you've talked a lot about building a coalition to combat hatred, and you've invoked Rabbi Heschel, and you've invoked his work with Dr. King during the Civil Rights era. And it's, I think it's true for so many of us, that having invested so much time in those really important relationships, there was some disappointment with response after October 7, and yet, the only option, from our perspective, is to double down. One, because it's the right thing to do, and two, because the Jewish community represents .02% of the population in the world. We need allies. And this has been really central to AJC. And I know Stephanie Sun is here, co-chair of Papaja, and I think Anthony Rosado, co-chair of the Latino Jewish Coalition is here. And I appreciate their being here and their leadership. This is a really important way to continue to combat antisemitism and simultaneously to make sure that Zionists, the people who believe in Israel, aren't excluded.  Can you just talk about, I know this is important to you. Can you talk about how to build those kinds of coalitions that will help our community and and beyond? Josh Shapiro:   You have to build coalitions if you want to make any progress here in this Commonwealth and in the country. I'm actually the only governor in the entire country with a divided legislature, right? So I've got a State Senate led by Republicans, State House led by Democrats. I literally can't get a bill to my desk unless some number of Democrats and some number of Republicans support it.  And so you're forced to have dialogue. You're forced to come together. That's naturally who I am, trying to bring people together. But I want you to know it is. It is required here in Pennsylvania if we want to make progress. We made a hell of a lot of progress, fixing an unconstitutional education system, cutting taxes six times, hiring over 1000 new state troopers and police officers in Pennsylvania, and passing some of the most sweeping criminal justice reforms ever in the history of Pennsylvania. At the same time, we've been able to invest $3 billion in private capital investment to create over 130,000 new jobs. I've only been governor two years. We're getting a lot of stuff done.  I share this with you because we understand the critical importance of building coalitions. Now I'll tell you who else understood that, the person whose portrait hangs in my office right above my desk, William Penn. I share that with you because when William Penn helped build what is now the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, he built this as a place that would be warm and welcoming for all, where people of all different faiths would be forced together to actually work together to make progress in this commonwealth. That was his vision, and I view it as my responsibility, as someone who's been handed the baton from William Penn, and actually a whole lot of people in between, of course, to pick up on the work that was done before I got here and to continue it, in the spirit that that Penn started. A spirit where we want to make sure we respect people, no matter what they look like, where they come from, who they love, who they pray to, and that those folks are represented around the table.  And when they're around the table, and they feel like they have the freedom and the safety to be able to talk and to share their ideas and their views and their policies, that's what's going to allow us to build a coalition, to be able to get meaningful things done, to be able to make progress. You mentioned Heschel and King. I've had a lot of conversations about Heschel and King with Reverend Warnock, who I think is one of the great leaders in our country.  He gave me the privilege of being able to speak at the pulpit at Ebenezer Baptist Church where Dr. King was, of course, the prayer leader there. We spoke about Heschel and King from Ebenezer, the need to be able to bring the black community and the Jewish community closer together, to be able to do this important work. My friend David's here. He's done work with Operation Understanding and other organizations like that, that bring people from different walks of life together.  And if we can do that more, we can understand one another, we can reduce the amount of hate and bigotry in our community, and we can make progress in the spirit of William Penn, to fill in the work that Heschel and King started, and to be able to create a safer community for all of us. Ted Deutch:   I want to follow up on this note of bipartisanship. You talked about the division and the legislature in Harrisburg, and I want to just focus on Israel for a moment. We have, you have, sorry, it's been a long time since I lived in Pennsylvania. Josh Shapiro:   You're still one of us. You're a Birds fan.  Ted Deutch:  Thank you. Thank you very much.  Josh Shapiro:   And he went to Camp Ramah. This guy's got a whole pedigree. Ted Deutch:   Lehigh Valley, in my blood. Look, if you think about support for Israel in Pennsylvania, there were two pro Israel Democratic senators. There will now be a pro Israel Democratic senator in Senator Fetterman, whose support has been nothing short of spectacular. You have strong Republican support, including from my good friend, Congressman Fitzpatrick from the area as well. And in many ways, it's a good reminder of the importance of bipartisan support for Israel.  As we look into the future, given the challenges that Israel faces, is that Pennsylvania model of bipartisan support from both senators and bipartisan support from House members and a Democratic governor, is that the model that we should continue to expect to see around the country and will both parties continue to be as strongly pro Israel as they could be? Josh Shapiro:   Look, I'm a proud Democrat, and I want to make sure that the Democratic Party continues to stand with Israel, and I'm going to continue to do my part to raise my voice, to ensure that it does. I lament the fact that in recent years, the issue of Israel, so to speak, has become weaponized in our political system. I think Israel is far safer and far stronger when the relationship that elected officials in America have is on a really bipartisan or nonpartisan basis. And I think there have been some organizations, quite candidly, that have tried to throw a monkey wrench in that idea, and instead have injected too much partisanship into that relationship. In the long run that makes Israel less safe. Maybe in the short run, given the way the political dynamics are in the country today, it could work to Israel's advantage. But mark my words, in the long run, politicizing America's relationship with Israel is not in the best interest of Israel long term, from a safety and a security standpoint.  And so I believe the Pennsylvania model is the right way, where we've got Republicans and Democrats alike standing up and speaking out in support of Israel, and by the way, challenging Israel, where Israel needs to be challenged, and also making sure that we are speaking with a unified bipartisan voice against antisemitism, and where antisemitism rears its ugly head, no matter what political party or affiliation or left leaning or right leaning person said it, or group said it, that we join together in standing up and speaking out against it. I think there's something to our Pennsylvania model, and I'd like to see it more across the country.  Ted Deutch:   I want to thank you really so much for this conversation, and I want to give you a chance to end with this, for all of the challenges that we're facing, it's kind of a heavy conversation. What is it that you're most hopeful about at this moment, thinking about our community and the future and your life and your world? Josh Shapiro:   You know, I get asked a lot like, how do you stay so optimistic and so upbeat, given all the challenges there are out in the world, and there are so many challenges, there's challenges like what we're talking about here tonight with antisemitism. There's other challenges that the world is confronting, and probably in another 40 days or so, we're going to confront even more challenges in this country.  But what, what I think keeps me so up and so hopeful every day is the privilege I have to serve as your governor and travel around to different communities and different neighborhoods and just meet people who are doing remarkable things every day. It is a privilege I wish every Pennsylvanian had. To go and to see these nonprofits who are doing life saving and life changing work. To see the incredible work that's happening in some of our skyscrapers here in Philly and our farmlands out in rural communities across Pennsylvania. There are so many people who are literally changing the world, doing tikkun olam in their neighborhoods.  And you know what? They're not down by the news cycle that I know really can bum a lot of people out. These people give me hope, and these people fuel my energy every day to go out and do this work as governor, and they make me optimistic and hopeful. And so while I leave you with this, while I understand the critically important role AJC plays to continue to combat hatred and bigotry and antisemitism, and you do a great job doing that work, while we're focused on those negative things that we've got to combat, I hope you'll also take a moment to appreciate the positive in our communities and understand that there is so much good out there and so many people doing so much good. And that is what fuels me. That's what keeps me up and excited.  And that is what I think you know, really, in many ways, in the spirit of Penn, we get to see every day in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. So we need to continue to do this hard work that AJC calls us to do. But let's never lose sight of the positivity that's out there that fuels my optimism every day. Ted Deutch:   We're so grateful. Governor Shapiro, thank you very, very much.  Josh Shapiro:   Thank you. Thank you, Ted.   

As many Jews deepen their sense of Jewish identity, Dr. Mijal Bitton joins the podcast to explore the significance of our Jewish heritage, texts, and peoplehood and what it means as we enter the Hanukkah season. Bitton is a sociologist, storyteller, podcast host, and Jewish advocate who also serves as the spiritual leader of the Downtown Minyan in Manhattan.  As one of the first Sacks Scholars, she helps young people reclaim and reimagine Jewish traditions. In this week’s episode, Dr. Bitton discusses  Sephardic Jewry, Jewish peoplehood, academia, the needs of young Jews, and the realities of intergroup and interfaith after October 7. Resources: The Morality and Ethics of Global Jewish Advocacy: Lessons from Rabbi Lord Jonathan Sacks - AJC Advocacy Anywhere Jewish Unpacked - Wondering Jews podcast, with guest AJC CEO Ted Deutch Listen – AJC Podcasts: The Forgotten Exodus: with Hen Mazzig, Einat Admony, and more. People of the Pod:  The Next Chapter in Catholic-Jewish Relations What’s Next for the Abraham Accords Under President Trump? Honoring Israel’s Lone Soldiers This Thanksgiving: Celebrating Service and Sacrifice Away from Home The ICC Issues Arrest Warrants: What You Need to Know Follow People of the Pod on your favorite podcast app, and learn more at AJC.org/PeopleofthePod You can reach us at: peopleofthepod@ajc.org If you’ve appreciated this episode, please be sure to tell your friends, and rate and review us on Apple Podcasts or Spotify. __ Transcript of Conversation with Mijal Bitton: Manya Brachear Pashman:   Dr. Mijal Bitton is a sociologist, storyteller and Jewish advocate. As the spiritual leader of the Downtown Minyan in Manhattan and one of the first Sacks Scholars, she helps young people reclaim and reimagine Jewish traditions.  Michal is no stranger to our AJC audiences. Earlier this month, she delivered a powerful Advocacy Anywhere to commemorate Rabbi Lord Jonathan Sacks, for which the Sacks Scholars are, of course named.  And as co-host of Jewish Unpacked’s podcast Wondering Jews, she and Jewish educator Noah Weisman explore questions we all ask about the Jewish experience, from the mundane to the miraculous. In fact, just recently, they interviewed AJC CEO Ted Deutch. The podcast has covered topics spanning from how summer camp shapes Jewish lives, how to constantly juggle joy and pain, the impact of the Jewish vote in the most recent election, and in turn, the impact of Trump's resulting victory on Jewish America. Mijal is with us now in our Midtown Manhattan studio to rehash a little of that, but also to discuss what led her to take on her many roles, including her newest project. Mijal, welcome to People of the Pod. Mijal Bitton:  Thank you, thank you for having me. Manya Brachear Pashman:   If you could please share with our listeners about your heritage, about your upbringing. You were born in Argentina, correct?  Mijal Bitton: I was born in Argentina. My father's family moved to Argentina from Morocco and Syria. My mother is from Spain. And part of what shaped my interest in Jews from the Middle East and North Africa, is that when we moved to America, we moved to a Persian Jewish community. So that was like my introduction to American Jews, this very tight knit Persian community in Long Island.  Eventually, I met my husband, who is a Syrian Jew, with Egyptian and Iraqi background, and I wrote my PhD on the Syrian Jewish community in Brooklyn, which all just shows you a little bit my fascination. It's not just an identity, it's a tradition that I draw from and that I believe can actually give us very powerful tools right now. Manya Brachear Pashman:  Now, is this a Syrian Jewish community from Aleppo or Damascus?  Mijal Bitton: Historically, there is a big difference. I would say that a lot of these communities, you can think of them as pre-immigration and then new settlement in America. Right now in America, it's one community. The differences between Aleppo and Damascus are not that pronounced, maybe like when you cook a little bit the recipe that you use, or slightly different songs that you might have, depending where your family is from. Manya Brachear Pashman:  You are, in fact, a visiting researcher at NYU, and you are the director of the National Study of the Sephardic and Mizrahi in the United States. What is that study all about? Mijal Bitton: Yeah. So when I wanted to do a PhD at NYU, which I did, on Syrian Jews, and I wanted to study Sephardic Jews, what I realized very quickly, and you might have seen this from your other podcast, is that there is very little good scholarship, good literature to explain to us who these Jews are. This is a problem, both in terms of historical research, and for me, I'm really interested in contemporary Jewish life.  There was a huge gap of not having resources to understand Sephardic Jews in the United States. So I had to do my PhD, kind of trying to reconstruct, you know, even, like the categories of study, how do we think about Jewish observance and really religiosity with Jews from the Middle East. So this study is an early attempt by early I mean, we hope it's the first of many studies to begin to tease out the main pillars of what we need to know to understand Sephardic and Mizrahi Jews roughly.  And again, we'll go into this more in the actual report, which will come out in a couple of months, roughly 10% of American Jews are Sephardic or Mizrahi, very similar to, let's say, the Orthodox Jewish population, the Russian-speaking Jewish population, but much less understood, much less studied. So it's an important first attempt to begin to lay out the foundations of knowledge. Manya Brachear Pashman:  So would you say that study is overdue?  Mijal Bitton: Yes, very much overdue. I think it's overdue for many reasons. One of them is that in the American Jewish community we've had for many years now, conversations around diversity, around inclusion and the like. And Sephardic Jews have not really been part of this conversation. Or let me say this with more precision, they have not been part of this conversation in terms that they would want to be part of this conversation. Maybe I'll be a little bit more explicit as to what I mean.  Many of the Jews that we've cited that I know tend to reflect more socially conservative, Middle Eastern forms of Jewish life, and these communities don't fit in very neatly in diversity efforts that tend to align with progressive understandings of diversity. So that means that there's been a real gap in how Sephardic Jews are included or not included in many spaces that are trying to be more inclusive. So we really believe that diversity is not easy, and that it begins with listening and understanding, who are the individuals and communities that we want to include.  Manya Brachear Pashman:  I mean, how does kind of a deeper and broader knowledge of one's Jewish identity, one's Jewish history, how does your deeper and broader knowledge of your identity and history help you be a better advocate? And how can it help others be better Jewish advocates? Mijal Bitton: That's a great question. So you know, you mentioned before that I started a weekly Jewish wisdom Substack. It's called Committed and I'll be grateful to share the link with everyone. The first piece that I wrote there on Genesis was actually about Jewish pride, and it was an idea that I had been thinking for a long time about, and it was that, especially since October 7, I have been in all of these spaces with people who are newly reawakened, energized, outraged about what's been happening. And they speak constantly about the need for Jewish pride, Jewish pride. We need more Jewish pride, more Jewish pride, more Jewish pride.  And on the one hand, I love that. I love that awakening. It resonates with me strongly. On the other hand, I had like this little voice whispering to me, because, as a sociologist, I've actually done research that talks about pride as something, I want to try to say this carefully, as something that is sometimes the last thing a group holds on to before assimilating fully.  So in very simplistic terms, if you think about Italian Americans or Irish Americans right over three or four generations in this country, they will slowly lose a lot of their communal elements. They will move away from their neighborhoods. They will stop only cooking Italian food. They will stop working in certain professions. But they will still have a little bit of that Irish pride in St Patrick's Day.  So I have been concerned when we speak about Jewish pride, that Jewish pride can be seen as unsustainable if we don't know what we are proud of. There is a world of a difference between someone who says there's something here, that seems really good, and I think I'm proud. I'm proud. And it's different that if you're standing there and you say, I am proud of a heritage spanning 1000s of years, I stand on the shoulders of giants. I am continuing a legacy of Jews who have survived persecutions, who've survived assimilation, who've survived living in different countries and in different times, and I am holding all of this when I stand up as a Jew. That, to me, is the kind of confident pride that can help us as advocates when we are facing challenges, because we are facing challenges and we're going to continue to face challenges. So we desperately need that sense of Jewish history, that sense of spiritual sustenance. We have to know what we are proud of, what we are fighting for. Manya Brachear Pashman:  You wrote a piece shortly after October 7, and it was titled, The Pain You're Feeling is Peoplehood. And it was incredibly powerful. It went viral. Because it so perfectly captured what so many Jews were feeling at that moment. And for those who haven't read it, can you share what led you to write it and kind of summarize it for our listeners. Mijal Bitton: I lead a community, I’m the spiritual leader of a community called the Downtown Minyan. And like many spiritual leaders and clergy on that Simchat Torah. I had to, you know, I'm not saying anything new. Here I was, I was heartbroken, reeling. I don't use a phone on Shabbat didn't always happening. My family in Israel, the reports that were coming in, I felt like my soul, my heart was being ripped. I think many of us felt this. And I had a Shul to run, and I had to figure out, like, what Jewish wisdom can I use right now? And it was very primal and instinctive.  There was a teaching that I had taught before because I thought it was important, but at that moment, it felt essential, and it just like, came out. I stood in front of my community who were in pain, and I wanted to give them names to explain what was happening. And I described, I use a very famous teaching by Rav Soloveichik, who speaks about who asked the question, can we still speak of ourselves as Jewish people, even with all of our diversity and differences and disagreements?  And it brings up a Talmudic question about, if you have a man of two heads, is this considered one person or two? And it's a complicated question, if you take it seriously, and he offers a gruesome test to figure this out. You pour boiling water on one head, and then you look at the other, and if it cries out in pain, it is one people. If it doesn't, it is two. The reason that this teaching was important for me to say, and I think the reason you said it went viral is because, you know. I haven't said this like this before, so I am expressing this now, thinking with you. I think for very long, for us Jews in America, we have been pushed and compelled to think of Judaism along Protestant religious terms.  What I mean by this, it's a faith, it's a set of beliefs, it's a value system. It has to fit in like some universalistic framework, and that pain that we felt on October 7 was different. It was a reminder that to be a Jew is to be part of a family. That it doesn't matter how different we are from each other, how much we disagree. When your relative is in pain, you cry with them. And it's almost like that pain, to me was like a way of saying we are reminded that we're part of a family. And there's something. I don't have the right words here. There's something almost to treasure about the pain, because it reminds us that we are connected to each other, committed to each other, responsible for each other.  And I think we all felt it, and it took away some of the layers of conditioning that many of us have had, to pretend like we aren’t a family. That's what I think was one of the things that were so powerful about the tragedy that we all experienced. Manya Brachear Pashman:  Yeah, because we're so trained to be individuals, right, especially here in America, right, that individual spirit, and that's, that's not part of peoplehood. Or is it? I don’t know. Maybe that’s not the point.  Mijal Bitton: Yeah, listen, I think our tradition is amazing and complex, and there's strands of faith that brings up individualism and agency, but there's powerful strengths that talk about us as a family, as a collective, as a tribe, and there's powerful elements in our culture that have been pushing against that. And in many parts of our community, I think we drank the Kool Aid and we said we are not like, you know, that's backwards. That's not who we are anymore.  And then we were reminded that there's something there that we all felt was true. It existed before October 7, but I think October 7 kind of like woke it up. When I've shared this metaphor of the two headed men with people, many of them have offered an objection, and they've said, how awful is it for us to speak about who we are based on antisemitism? It shouldn't have to be like that. But, I mean, I would agree with that critique on theoretical terms. On sociological human terms, there is nothing that is more potent than having a shared enemy, a shared tragedy. Think about a family again, how tragedy brings us together.  So I think that unfortunately, the fact that there is still antisemitism vibrant in our societies and our streets has served to continue to reinforce that initial sense that we had after October 7. Of course, there are rifts. We can talk about debates that are happening. We are not as united as right after the tragedy. But, you know, I wrote a piece for CNN basically saying that the virulent anti semitism in the anti-Zionist movement is creating more Zionists. It's creating more Jewish solidarity. And it hasn't gone away. I am a religious woman. When I pray to God, I ask God that God should give us the challenge of having to remain connected in good times. I prefer that, but being that we don't have that right now, I do think that we have to double down on what our response is. Manya Brachear Pashman:  You wrote another piece for CNN that had to do with the anti-Israel protests on university campuses and the fear that it was inducing in so many Jewish young people, and the solidarity that was coming out of that. So with that in mind, one thing that the Jewish communal world is experiencing, we're certainly seeing it here at AJC, is an influx in involvement. Not just solidarity, but activism and advocacy, people who want to be more involved. Have you given any thought to this influx, and whether or not the infrastructure is in place here in America especially, to kind of sustain that, that level of involvement and activism.  Mijal Bitton: So one of the things that I've seen, and I'll be honest, that I'm still trying to understand it, but one of the things that I'm seeing is, there's, there's the thing called the organized Jewish community, okay? And it's a powerful ecosystem, you know, with lovers of power and influence. And I'm also privy, partially because of my work with young Jews, to a whole world of people who are wanting to be active, but who either don't have the access or the orientation to do so, you know, within the organized Jewish community And for me, part of what's still missing are the bridges between these different ecosystems. There's all of these people who are active on social media, right? The world of influencers, there's these groups of young Jews who are creating pop up Shabbat dinners, like all over the place, and like creating new clubs to celebrate Shabbat with each other and Jewish identity. And there is a lot of energy there. And what I'm trying to figure out is, I'm thinking of this as almost two powerful ecosystems, and I think that they would both be more powerful if they're in better conversation with each other.  So that, to me, again, it's a little bit abstract. I'm still thinking it through. I am a scholar in residence at the Maimonides Fund, and this is one of the questions that I have right now in this post-October 7 world: what would it mean to better bridge between these different ecosystems? Manya Brachear Pashman:  We just talked about the campus protests and the solidarity that they fuel, and we've also talked about the lack of research and scholarship out there about Jews in the Middle East and and North Africa and the diversity of the Jewish community. Do you think if young people had a better grasp of the thousands of years of history, of Jewish history in the Middle East, do you think that would shift the conversation at all, that education? And I don't mean obviously just within the Jewish community, I mean more broadly. Mijal Bitton: I mean, broadly speaking, yeah. So I would say two things I take to heart with my friend Haviv Retig Gur, who's a brilliant analyst. He speaks a lot about the fact that Jews, we don't know our own story. And I do think there is, like, huge lack of literacy in understanding that there were nearly 1 million Jews all across the Middle East and North Africa, and they left, fled, or were expelled in like massive Arab nationalist, anti-Zionist regimes that were propped up across the region. So I do think that for people to know these stories would be incredibly powerful.  I do want to note something, though, as someone who has been active in academia, I still have one foot there. I think that in many places, and we need to not be naive. In many places, people have vested interest in certain narratives, and they are emotionally attached to this narrative, and they have no incentive to change them, no matter how many counterfactuals you provide to them.  So there are definitely many parts in academia that want to think of the world as divided between the oppressors and the oppressed, and who want to think of Jews and Israel and Zionists as aligned with the oppressors, who they equate to Europeans and white and Westerners. And no matter how many counterfactuals you will give to them, they will find a way again, and I'm happy to explain this. They will find ways to make it fit into their narrative.  So we need a multi-pronged approach. One approach is to give the literacy to those who are seeking it as a way to have greater strength and intellectual tools at their disposal. Also, there's like a huge middle to convince, you know that can be moved. And when it comes to those ideologues, we have to battle their narratives. Manya Brachear Pashman:  In other words, offering that literacy to the Jewish community first, to those who actually want it, who are curious enough to want it, that's step one.  Mijal Bitton: Yeah, Jewish community, friends of the Jewish community, people who are intellectually honest and want to have a better discourse around Israel, the Middle East and current reality. Manya Brachear Pashman:  So Mijal, I am curious how your conversations have changed and evolved since October 7. Initially I wanted to ask you about interfaith dialog, but maybe intercultural dialog is a better way to put it. But did you have more intercultural dialog before October 7 or after October 7, or is your work really immersed in the Jewish community and Jewish dialog? Mijal Bitton: Yeah, so I would say like this: I think before October 7, I had spent many years focused on interfaith work. I think that the interfaith work was often anchored in more liberal and progressive spaces, and many of those efforts really imploded. And I think that I represent, because I've heard this from so many people who basically said, we've invested years into showing up for others and into relationships. And then if I can’t get someone to say that–you don't need to like Israel, you don't need to like Netanyahu, but just that Hamas raping and murdering is wrong and evil–then what am I doing here? So I think that definitely, I have been affected by that, by seeing that.  And right now, I think we're in a place a year out when there is new energy in trying to figure out, okay, like, who are those people that we can still talk to, and they exist. And also I think that, and this is like work that is ongoing, there is a real sense that we need to re-examine the work that we were doing. Perhaps we were investing in the wrong interfaith relationships and spaces. Which doesn't mean interfaith work is bad, but maybe we need to invest in other parts of interfaith work. Manya Brachear Pashman:  Can you expand on that a little bit? Mijal Bitton: I mean, yeah, this is like, personal. I am not going to be spending time in interfaith work with people who give Hamas a pass. I'll just say this, you know, like that. And I think there's a lot for me. I am much more interested right now in pursuing relationships with socially conservative leaders of other faiths, that perhaps in the past, we wouldn't have been in the same tables around interfaith work and who have spoken up with clarity when it comes to defending Jews and speaking up against antisemitism.  This doesn't mean, again, I don't want to imply that we should walk away from spaces you said before, it's important to have people fighting in many different areas. I think the real question we have to ask ourselves is, what are the lines, that if they are crossed, we walk away? Because I think too many Jews, for too long, have stayed in spaces where our basic story, dignity and humanity, was trampled, and we accepted that price. And that is not something we can do anymore.  So we have to figure out, how do we reconfigure relationships? How do we stand up for ourselves in different ways? How do we, and I’ll say this: in many places Jews showed up and agreed to, you know, like, pound their chest about, like, their white Jewish privilege as a price of entry into coalitions and relationships in ways that just were not honest. We need to fight all of this. Manya Brachear Pashman:  You recently hosted AJC CEO Ted Deutch on your podcast Wondering Jews, and I'm curious what you learned from that exchange with him, both on and off the air. Mijal Bitton: Yeah, it was wonderful. I co-host the podcast Wondering Jews with Noam  Weissman, and it was really nice. I mentioned this on that episode, but I have a very fond personal memory of my first encounter with Ted. It was the March in Washington. I was one of their earliest featured speakers at the March. You know, 300,000 people in person, many watching live. And I was very nervous. And I was like, pacing behind backstage. And I see Ted.  I've never met him before, but I had read about him. And when I read about him, I was very curious. I'm like, who leaves sitting Congress to go and work for the Jews? So I was already, fascinated by like, who would make this career switch? And then I saw him, and I don't know why, I turned to him, and I asked him if I could practice with him. And he literally had me practice my speech. I memorized it, and I practiced, and he gave me some feedback, and I changed some of the words, and his wife lent me a hostage tag necklace because I wanted to have one on stage. And it was early days, I didn't have one.  So my first encounter with him was that it felt like a very personal one, and that's what came across, I think, in the in the podcast, that Ted is this, you know, was a member of Congress, like runs AJC, but he just, he's so warm, and it is so obvious in everything that he says, that this is not like a job for him, but it is a passion and a life's mission. And the way that he spoke about just his love for the Jewish people, for spirituality, for what it means to stand up in the world, his hope and optimism. He speaks about relationships that you can insist on and make sure that you can have right now. It's very moving to find leaders who are running institutions and who themselves are able to embody a very powerful sense of conviction. We need more leaders like that. Manya Brachear Pashman:  So tell us about your newest project.  Mijal Bitton: Yeah, it’s called Committed. That's the name of the Substack. I started it on Simchat Torah. I'm still tinkering with it. Like you know, how long it should be, the tone, this, that. I'm very lucky to have a lot of readers and students who eagerly give me feedback as to what works and what doesn't, which is lovely, because I love learning Torah with them. But really, as many conversations that I've had with people about anti semitism and advocacy and Zionism on campus, as many conversations that I've been having around like antisemitism and Israel and politics, I have been having the same number of conversations about Judaism and spirituality and the soul and what it means to be part of this magnificent tradition.  I have been taken aback that often in my my classes and lectures, it will end with people coming to me afterwards and wanting to speak about their Jewish journeys, what it means to raise Jewish children, what it means to learn Torah, if you didn't grow up learning Torah, and now you want to what it means to to know that we are souls with bodies, as opposed to bodies with souls, all of these things.  I have felt that it's really important to try to to have weekly touch points that we can have to ask big questions and to be able to address them using Jewish tradition. So I've in my Substack so far, I've explored, like I mentioned before, Jewish pride, what it means to have Jewish pride. I've explored what it means to have, using the stories of Abraham and Rebecca, what it means to, when the world is burning, to know that we have multiple modes of responses. One of them is to provide justice, put out the flame.  Another mode is to help those who have burn marks and to just show care to them and be with them in times of need. The one that I wrote that I think went the farthest. One was around sacrifice, the binding of Isaac, which I wrote about what it means to from America. Look at Israeli parents and know that they are raising children who are willing to sacrifice in a way that American children are just not being taught.  I use the story of Jacob and Esau, and I did a beautiful thought experiment. What would have happened if a Chabad emissary would have met the bad twin of Jacob? And there's all of this text that actually allow us to imagine that Esau could have become a leader of the Jewish people if he would have been shown the kind of love that Chabad emissaries give. So I think there's amazing ways to approach Jewish tradition and to use those as and use Jewish tradition as a way to ask the most critical questions about what it means to live as a Jew today.  Manya Brachear Pashman: I imagine you’ll be lighting candles soon for Hanukkah. Any other special traditions? Mijal Bitton The one thing I would say that I love that we do in our Sephardic communities, we light a little bit differently. And this is a traditional way. There's some Sephardic Jews that have changed this a little bit, but traditionally we light one Hanukkiah (menorah) as a family. So in many Ashkenazic communities, each individual lights their own. Classically, in the Sephardic tradition, a family has one Hanukkiah, and we try to light it either by a window or, even better, outside. So my family, my parents, my siblings, they have a special Hanukkiah with glass panels, and we always light it outside the house, facing the streets in a very real way.  And I think that's an important symbol for us, what it means to insist on our lights in public spaces, what it means to fight for public spaces, and what it means, I would say . . . you know, Hanukkah has become such a commercialized holiday in America that, like lives alongside Christmas, and that feels good.  And it's become not just a watered down version of its original premise, but in many ways the opposite, because what the Maccabees did is they took on not just the Greek Empire in military terms. They took on the Greek Empire in cultural and spiritual terms, and they resisted assimilation with everything they had. So in a funny way, in America, to fit in, we've remade Hanukkah in terms that have been opposite in its original meaning.  And I think this last year asked us to reconsider what Hanukkah should look like, and what would it mean, you know, we shouldn't, I'm not saying we should be like the Maccabees exactly. You know, they're a complicated story as well. But what would it mean to make sure that we're not only lighting a light outside, but that we are expressing our Judaism in Jewish terms, even when it's a little bit uncomfortable for others.  Manya Brachear Pashman:  Mijal, thank you so much for joining us.  Mijal Bitton: Thank you for having me. Really great to be here.