Letters to the Editor

The Anti-Semitism Epidemic Must Be Stopped

Dear Editor:

It is long past time for meaningful action against the epidemic of anti-Semitism infecting America’s college campuses—and that means cutting off taxpayer funding to universities that refuse to crack down on the harassment, intimidation, and outright violence targeting Jewish students.

Columbia University (including Barnard College) and The New School have proven, time and again, that they are unwilling—or perhaps unwilling—to enforce even the most basic standards of decency and campus safety when it comes to Jewish students. According to a damning new report by the Anti-Defamation League (ADL), these institutions are among the absolute worst offenders, earning D and F grades for their handling of campus anti-Semitism.

It is time to stop the endless cycle of task forces, investigations, and toothless statements of “concern” and instead defund any institution that tolerates, excuses, or enables Jew-hatred.

The ADL study examined 135 colleges across the United States, finding that a shocking 30% received D or F grades in their efforts (or lack thereof) to combat anti-Semitism. Columbia, Barnard, and The New School stand out as some of the worst offenders, having turned a blind eye to escalating acts of anti-Jewish hostility on their campuses.

Take what happened just last week at Barnard College, where a mob of radical anti-Israel agitators stormed Millman Hall, disrupted classes, and physically assaulted a school employee so severely that they had to be hospitalized. And what was the administration’s response? Feeble condemnation and weak disciplinary measures that amounted to nothing more than a slap on the wrist—just as they have done time and time again.

At The New School, things are no better. Last year, anti-Israel radicals took over a campus building, set up two separate encampments (one of which was specifically designated for faculty!), disrupted the university president’s speech, and displayed violent anti-Semitic propaganda—including Hamas’ inverted red triangle, a terrorist symbol used to mark targets for death.

Meanwhile, Columbia University has become the national poster child for institutional anti-Semitism, hosting an open-air anti-Israel occupation that lasted for weeks, culminating in the violent takeover of Hamilton Hall and an attack on yet another campus employee. The university administration’s cowardly response? More task forces, more committees, and more empty rhetoric—while Jewish students continue to be harassed, threatened, and physically attacked.

No more excuses. No more taxpayer funding for anti-Semitic institutions.

Sincerely
Aaron Abramson
Forest Hills, NY

Trump’s Firm Stance on Ukraine Is a Stand for Global Peace

Dear Editor:

The recent Oval Office meeting between President Donald Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has sparked widespread debate and controversy. While some criticize President Trump’s approach, it is imperative to recognize the necessity and prudence of his actions in the pursuit of global stability.​

President Trump’s insistence on a ceasefire in the ongoing Russia-Ukraine conflict is not merely a diplomatic maneuver but a crucial step toward preventing a potential escalation into a broader, more catastrophic war. His warning to President Zelenskyy about the real possibility of World War III is not hyperbole; it is a stark reminder of the stakes involved. The President’s primary responsibility is to safeguard American interests and, by extension, global peace. Encouraging a ceasefire is a responsible strategy to halt further bloodshed and create a foundation for lasting peace.​

Furthermore, President Trump’s decision to pause all foreign aid to Ukraine until all parties agree to come to the negotiating table is a judicious use of American resources. The United States has been a steadfast ally to Ukraine, providing substantial military and financial support. However, it is reasonable to expect that such support be contingent upon a genuine commitment to peace and stability. By withholding aid, President Trump is leveraging American assistance to encourage meaningful dialogue and resolution.​

President Zelenskyy’s reluctance to agree to a ceasefire raises concerns about his commitment to peace. While Ukraine’s sovereignty and security are paramount, an unwillingness to engage in ceasefire negotiations prolongs the suffering of the Ukrainian people and heightens the risk of a larger conflict. Diplomacy requires compromise and a readiness to engage with all parties involved.​

In addition, President Zelenskyy’s demeanor during the meeting, perceived as disrespectful and ungrateful, undermines the diplomatic relationship between our nations. The United States has stood by Ukraine in challenging times, and a display of gratitude and respect is not only appropriate but essential for continued support. Diplomatic engagements are built on mutual respect, and any deviation from this standard hampers progress toward common goals.​

President Trump’s approach is a testament to his commitment to peace and responsible governance. By advocating for a ceasefire and conditioning aid on genuine efforts toward negotiation, he is steering the international community toward a more stable and secure future. It is crucial to support these efforts and recognize the importance of decisive leadership in times of global uncertainty.​

In conclusion, President Trump’s firm stance with President Zelenskyy is a necessary and strategic effort to promote peace, ensure the responsible use of American resources, and prevent the escalation of conflict. His actions reflect a deep commitment to global stability and the well-being of nations worldwide.​

Sincerely
Chava Petroskaya
Brookline, Mass

Israel’s Moral Duty to Permanently Eradicate Hamas

Dear Editor,

The horrors of October 7, 2023, when Hamas terrorists unleashed an unprecedented wave of brutality against Israeli civilians and soldiers, will forever be seared into the national consciousness of Israel and the broader civilized world. The mass slaughter of over 1,200 innocent people, the unspeakable sexual violence, and the mass abduction of Israelis—many of whom still remain captive in the dark tunnels of Gaza—were not acts of war. They were acts of calculated savagery designed to terrorize a nation, to break its spirit, and to remind the world that Hamas does not operate as a governing authority but as a barbaric terrorist entity with no regard for human life.

Israel, as a sovereign state, not only has the right but the absolute moral obligation to ensure that an atrocity of this scale never happens again. This is not about vengeance—it is about survival. No nation can exist under the perpetual threat of annihilation by a terrorist organization whose stated charter calls for its destruction. For too long, Hamas has been allowed to fester, emboldened by international appeasement, financial backing from Iran, and the misguided notion that a ceasefire or a temporary truce could ever yield long-term peace. It has been proven time and again—whether in 2009, 2014, or after countless missile barrages on Israeli towns—that Hamas views Israeli concessions as weakness and pauses in fighting as opportunities to regroup and rearm.

Some voices have suggested that Israel should place the full focus of its military operations on securing the release of the remaining hostages before resuming its fight against Hamas. While every hostage must be returned and their safe repatriation is of utmost importance, Israel cannot be blackmailed into abandoning its primary responsibility: the protection of its people. To suggest that the fate of the hostages should override Israel’s fundamental right to eliminate the terrorist group responsible for their abduction is to hold Israel hostage as well. Hamas thrives on this strategy, using human lives—Israeli hostages and its own civilian population—as bargaining chips in a cruel game of psychological warfare.

Sincerely
Theodore Raskow
Washington Heights, NY