The D.C. Jewish Museum Shooting Was Inevitable. The Time to Act on Antisemitism is Now
Yaron Lischinsky and Sarah Milgrim, a young couple, were murdered as they walked out of a Young Diplomats event hosted by the Jewish American Committee at the Capital Jewish Museum on Wednesday night. They had their whole lives ahead of them—set to be engaged in Jerusalem next week.
As Elias Rodriguez—the suspect who has since been charged with first-degree murder and other crimes—was taken into custody, he shouted: " Free, free Palestine.' It's a chant we have heard time and again across America in the past 18 months. Not just at political events but in front of synagogues, schools, hospitals, and cultural institutions that only have one thing in common—they have a connection to the Jewish community.
And so it doesn't come as a surprise that the suspect was allegedly involved with a range of radical causes; Anti-Defamation League (ADL) researchers have connected Chicago resident Rodriguez, with a high degree of certainty, to a manifesto with the heading 'Escalate For Gaza, Bring The War Home.' It confirms what we suspected. This wasn't random violence. This was targeted antisemitism. This was an attack, not just against the D.C. Jewish community, but against all Jewish Americans—and indeed all Americans. What is so infuriating and sad is that, in many ways, it was only a matter of time that a murderous incident such as this would happen.
The data has been staring us in the face.
Last year was the worst for antisemitic incidents since ADL began tracking over four decades ago. We recorded 9,354 antisemitic incidents across the United States—an increase of 5% from 2023, which was itself a record-setting year. That includes a 21% increase in violent assaults. This represents an 893% increase over the past decade.
Just six weeks ago, the home of Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro was firebombed as his family slept after celebrating the first Passover seder. The suspect then called 911 and referred to Shapiro as a 'monster' and blamed him for Palestinian deaths in the Israel-Hamas war. That alleged perpetrator reportedly then admitted to authorities that he had 'hatred' for Shapiro and would have attacked him with his hammer if he had the chance.
Just six months ago, the FBI arrested Forrest Pemberton of Gainesville, Fla., following a traffic stop during which they allegedly found multiple firearms in his rideshare vehicle. Authorities say he intended to travel to the south Florida offices of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), a pro-Israel advocacy group, with the intent of harming people there, possibly in a suicide attack.
That same week, FBI agents in Fairfax, Va., arrested an Egyptian citizen and George Mason University student, Abdullah Ezzeldin Taha Mohamed Hassan. According to the criminal complaint, Hassan operated several pro-ISIS and Al Qaeda accounts that promoted violence against Jews. He reportedly was planning a mass casualty attack at the Israeli consulate in New York City.
And a day does not go by when we do not witness a terrifying act. Jewish children bullied in public spaces. Jewish students confronted on college campuses. Jews harassed as they walk to synagogue. Jewish businesses and homes vandalized with red triangles, swastikas, or political slogans. Or Jewish people assailed and mocked over social media with unrelenting fervor.
We have an antisemitism crisis in this country. This ancient hatred festers on both sides of the political spectrum. It is incubated and grown in the cesspools of social media. It is fueled by people who excuse antisemitism as merely "anti-Zionism,' who dismiss our outrage as an attempt to serve another agenda, and contort themselves into pretzels as they claim a right to free speech – even as that speech crosses the line into incitement to violence, antisemitism and harassment.
And it has consequences.
When antisemitic rhetoric is normalized, tolerated, or amplified in our public discourse, it creates an environment where violence against Jews becomes not just probable but inevitable. When society allow lies about the Jewish state committing genocide to run rampant, when prominent voices dismiss inciteful rhetoric such as "glory to the martyrs" or 'globalize the Intifada' as youthful free expression, and when the public somehow confuses being anti-Hamas with being anti-Palestinian, it has consequences.
Social media platforms deserve more scrutiny as well. In the aftermath of the attempted pogrom against Jewish sports fans in Amsterdam last November, Hasan Piker, one of the most-watched streamers on Twitch, spent hours seemingly minimizing the attack. Earlier this month, the rapper Kanye 'Ye' West streamed a new song called 'Heil Hitler' and promoted it on X where it racked up millions of views.
In times like these, we need allies to stand with the Jewish community. Where are the voices of those who claim to fight hatred in all its forms? Where are those who speak out against other bigotries but remain silent when Jews are targeted? This silence is deafening. Stop excusing it. Stop looking the other way.
This attack must serve as a wake-up call for our nation to deal once and for all with this rising tide of hate.
This moment demands moral clarity. It requires all Americans, regardless of political affiliation, to condemn antisemitism without qualification or deflection. It requires leaders in government, academia, business, and civic life to take concrete action against hate. It requires each of us to speak out when we witness antisemitism in any form.
Every antisemitic statement left unchallenged, every double standard applied to Jews and the Jewish state, every instance of minimizing Jewish pain—all of it contributes to this environment where such violence is possible.
Yaron and Sarah deserved better. They deserved to live. They deserved to celebrate their impending engagement. They deserved a future. Instead, they became victims of the oldest hatred. We owe it to their memory to ensure no more lives are lost to antisemitism. We owe it to every Jew to create a society where attending a Jewish event doesn't make you a target.
The time for action is now. The stakes couldn't be higher.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hill
a few seconds ago
- The Hill
How Trump's tariffs could actually work
Economists prefer free trade because it is the best policy for global welfare. But what the debate around tariffs often fails to recognize is that there is an economic rationale for U.S. tariffs of 15 to 20 percent. Large countries like the U.S. have market power, which means U.S. demand affects global prices. Tariffs depress U.S. demand, pushing global prices down. As a result of tariffs, the U.S. imports goods at lower prices and also obtains revenue in the process. Most economists estimate that the optimal tariff for the U.S. is between 15 and 20 percent but could be as high as 60 percent. The major problem with imposing high tariffs is that if our trade partners retaliate with similarly high tariffs on imports from the U.S., the U.S. will be worse off. So, the U.S. wants a tariff if it can act alone, but cooperation on low tariffs is the best policy for all — and better for the U.S. — if the alternative is a trade war. To get a sense of the magnitudes, a recent study estimates that 19 percent tariffs could expand U.S. income by roughly 2 percent and boost employment if other countries don't retaliate. However, the effects on income and employment become negative when other countries also impose tariffs. The basic intuition for the tariff is that foreign sellers want access to the huge U.S. market and are willing to pay a fee for that access. Consider a German auto firm, say BMW, that sells lots of cars in the U.S. If the U.S. places a tariff on German cars, Americans will shift to buying more GMs and fewer BMWs. But the U.S. consumer is hard to replace, so BMW will lower the pre-tariff price of its cars to maintain competitiveness. U.S. consumers face somewhat higher prices on BMWs with the tariff, but the tariff revenue that the U.S. government collects more than compensates for the consumer loss, so the U.S. as a country is better off. Put differently, because the U.S. is large, some of the tariff is paid by BMW. The ability to pressure BMW and other German producers to lower prices only works because of the extraordinary buying power of the U.S. consumer. If, for example, a small country, say Ghana, puts a tariff on BMWs, it would negligibly affect total sales, so this effect would be absent. This market power is similar to the leverage that companies like Amazon and Walmart have to push down the prices of their suppliers because they control such a large share of the market. The problem with using market size to push down import prices is that the U.S. is not the only large country. If other large markets, like the European Union and China, also raise tariffs then everyone is worse off. In a trade war, U.S. exporters will also have a hard time selling abroad, while U.S. consumers will have fewer varieties to choose from and face higher prices. The biggest risk Trump took when he reversed decades of low, predictable tariffs was starting a trade war with tariffs spiraling out of control around the world. Given the recent news of U.S. bilateral trade deals with the United Kingdom, Indonesia, Vietnam, the Philippines, Japan, Korea and the EU, as well as a preliminary accord with China, the gamble may have paid off. One after another, our most important trade partners are accepting significantly higher U.S. tariffs without raising their own tariffs on imports from the U.S. Moreover, in addition to accepting higher tariffs on their exports to the U.S., Europe, Japan and Korea are committing to increased investment in the United States. Why are countries caving? The large market is part of it, but the gaping U.S. trade deficit with these markets also matters. It gives the U.S. additional leverage since American consumers are needed to buy foreign goods to a greater extent than American businesses need foreigners to buy U.S. goods. The U.S. military might also factor in, as many of the countries making deals depend on the U.S. for security. The unpredictability introduced may already be depressing investment and hiring, as investors and firms have no idea what policy will be tomorrow. Similarly, companies that rely heavily on imported parts and components may be unable to survive in the U.S., leading to job loss in import-dependent industries. Already high, U.S. inequality could get worse if care is not taken since low-income families spend more of their income on goods, making them more vulnerable to price increases. There are also major global threats. The bullying that was part of achieving these trade deals could lead to backlash against the U.S. and its brand with real consequences of sustained loss of U.S. leadership and power in all global matters. The unpredictability introduced may depress investment, as investors have no idea what policy will be tomorrow. Domestic political blowback in our trade partners against the U.S. could ultimately create pressure for higher tariffs on imports from the U.S., resulting in a trade war. Variable U.S. tariffs across trade partners — already ranging from 15 to 55 percent — will create trade diversion and administrative costs. Countries could look to other markets and make deals that exclude the U.S., reducing our global leverage. And the list goes on. But if the U.S. government moves on from these trade wins, facilitating a return to predictable policy, and shows more openness to global cooperation in other critical areas, Trump's trade policy could boost U.S. income without major damage to our global standing or global investment. Perhaps this is the hope that has been driving the stock market up. The risks are many and great. But given the (surprisingly) flexible response abroad to date, the policy is not guaranteed to fail as many assumed. One big bullet may have been dodged. .
New York Post
a few seconds ago
- New York Post
Israeli spy chief visiting Qatar to revive Gaza peace talks, officials say
The head of Israel's Mossad spy agency visited Qatar on Thursday to revive the cease-fire and hostage exchange talks with Hamas, officials said. David Barnea met with Qatari Prime Minister Abdulrahman al-Thani in hopes of restarting the peace talks, which were left frozen after Israel and the US exited Doha and accused Hamas of not negotiating in good faith, two officials with the Jewish state told Reuters. Barnea's trip comes as Hamas reportedly sent its own negotiation team to Cairo to try and revive the peace talks, with the terror group claiming it was open to ceding its power in Gaza, but not its weapons. Advertisement 4 David Barnea met with Qatari Prime Minister Abdulrahman al-Thani in hopes of restarting the peace talks, according to reports. AFP via Getty Images Hopes for a diplomatic end to the war, which has raged on for more than 21 months, were seemingly dashed last month after the US and Israel pulled out of the negotiating table, claiming Hamas showed 'a lack of desire to reach a cease-fire in Gaza.' The tension at the negotiating table stemmed from Hamas' refusal to give up its hold over the Gaza Strip and demilitarize, with Israel also rejecting any deal that would establish the groundwork for a full military withdrawal and permanent peace. Advertisement With the talks dead in the water, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu announced plans last week for a full military takeover of Gaza City, with the aim of pressuring the terror group to come back to the negotiating table. Hamas officials did just that on Thursday, with one official telling Reuters that the terrorist group was ready to relinquish governance on Gaza to a non-partisan committee. 4 Mossad Director David Barnea greets relatives of Israeli soldier Zvi Feldman, one of three Israeli soldiers who went missing during the 1982 battle of Sultan Yacoub, during his funeral in Holon military cemetery near Tel Aviv, Israel, on May 12, 2025. Middle East Images/AFP via Getty Images Hamas, which bills itself as a resistance group, however, said it would not demilitarize until a Palestinian state is formally established. Advertisement Netanyahu has long rejected the idea of a Palestinian state, claiming that recognizing one would only reward Hamas and the Oct. 7, 2023, terrorist attack, where the militants killed more than 1,200 people in Israel and kidnapped 250 others. 4 Hopes for a diplomatic end to the war were seemingly dashed last month after the US and Israel pulled out of the negotiating table, claiming Hamas showed 'a lack of desire to reach a cease-fire in Gaza,' according to reports. AFP via Getty Images 4 Smoke rises following an Israeli strike, in Khan Younis in the southern Gaza Strip, August 14, 2025. REUTERS Netanyahu has also indicated that the current cease-fire efforts are now all focused on securing a single, comprehensive deal to release all the remaining 50 hostages at once. Advertisement During his talks with Al-Thani, Barnea reinforced the idea that any 'partial deal is off the table,' a senior Israeli official told The Times of Israel. With Post wires
Politico
2 minutes ago
- Politico
Man charged for throwing sandwich at federal officer was a DOJ employee
Attorney General Pam Bondi said he was fired from his position after the incident. FBI and Border Patrol officers arrest a man, after he threw a sandwich at a law enforcement officer, along the U Street corridor during a federal law enforcement deployment to the nation's capital on Aug.10, 2025, in Washington. |By Nicole Markus 08/14/2025 02:00 PM EDT A man accused of throwing a sandwich at a federal officer patrolling a Washington street as part of President Donald Trump's takeover of law enforcement in the nation's capital was fired from the Justice Department, Attorney General Pam Bondi said Thursday. 'This is an example of the Deep State we have been up against for seven months as we work to refocus DOJ,' Bondi wrote on X. 'You will NOT work in this administration while disrespecting our government and law enforcement.' Some D.C. residents — and national Democrats — have reacted with fury to what they view as a federal incursion into their city, saying they feel Trump's steps are unnecessary given numbers which show declining crime in the area.
