Twice in a recent two-week period, two men were arrested for terrorist attacks while invoking “Free Palestine.” For them, the phrase served as a rallying cry sanctioning violence.

Their targets were, in the deadly Washington, D.C., attack outside the Jewish Museum, a young couple, and in Boulder, Colorado, people attending a vigil for the 58 hostages held by Hamas.

For the two suspects — neither of whom is Palestinian — the phrase “Free Palestine” was a license to kill.

They are not the only ones who understand it that way. It was just two months ago when the official residence of Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro was set ablaze after a Passover Seder event. The perpetrator, who has confessed, cited the governor’s views on Palestine. Another “Free Palestine” chanter struck and killed an elderly California Jewish man with a bullhorn in November 2023.

Not all “Free Palestine” chanters understand it as a call to violence.

Yet the phrase’s intentional lack of specificity is a big part of its utility: What the user means is left to the audience’s interpretation. There are several prevalent understandings, ranging from noble to murderous.

“Free Palestine” can mean the justified yearning for Palestinians to enjoy the full freedoms, prosperity and security to which all people are entitled.

It can be a desperate plea for new, elected leaders. Hamas has governed Gaza with an iron fist — and no elections — since 2007, and the West Bank hasn’t voted since 2006. This indifference to basic democracy does not portend well for what freedom would look like in a free Palestine.

For others invoking it, the phrase’s imprecision is precisely the point. “Free Palestine” can be exploited for misleading purposes. The lack of specificity avoids answering the most revealing question: Would a free Palestine be alongside Israel or instead of Israel?

Of course, Hamas and many of its global advocates shamelessly reject the “alongside” option. In Gaza and elsewhere, they threaten anyone willing to accept such a peaceful compromise.

Other “Free Palestine” supporters are unwilling to pay the negative public relations cost of acknowledging that “instead of” is their nonnegotiable option. Why? Because their “instead of” option can only be realized with the annihilation of a sovereign United Nations member country populated by 10 million Jews, Muslims, Christians, Hindus, Druze and others.

The “instead of” option glorifies killing Jews, be it on Oct. 7, 2023, in Israel; in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania; in Washington; in Boulder; and God knows where next. While we don’t know where the next “Free Palestine”-inspired attack will happen, we do know, tragically, it isn’t a matter of whether it will happen. It is simply a matter of when.

In most instances, “Free Palestine” is protected free speech in the United States.

But after this most recent series of “Free Palestine”-motivated attacks and with an accompanying deafening silence of condemnation from most pro-Palestinian groups, is it so unreasonable to ask that those promulgating it own up to what it does and doesn’t mean to them? And for us Jews.

The murderers do not indulge the lie of most pro-Palestinian advocates that there is a distinction between Jews and Zionists. Neither the California, Washington, Harrisburg or Boulder offenders bothered to inquire about their victims’ identities or ideologies before attacking. Whether the victims were even Jewish or Zionist, or how they understood “Free Palestine,” was irrelevant.

Politicalized catchphrases are proliferating. While many may seem innocuous, they can be dog whistles that are understood differently by different audiences. Our business, civic, educational, faith, media and political leaders have learned how to navigate these linguistic minefields. They now need to tune their antennas to the violent impact that “Free Palestine” and the demonization of Zionists are having on American Jews.

Those of us yearning for both Israeli-Palestinian peace and Jewish safety worldwide understandably want to know what “Free Palestine” means to those in our midst.

The Boulder attacker planned his violence for a year, authorities say. There are undoubtedly others right now planning their own attacks to “Free Palestine.”

Such would-be assailants should know whether their attacks are endorsed or opposed by the “Free Palestine” campaign they have adopted. We already know how two people over the last three weeks understood the phrase’s imprecision. And we have seen and heard all too many applauding this resistance.

Attempting to define the meaning of another group’s self-understanding is likely to evoke accusations of mansplaining. But in the absence of a widely embraced peaceful definition of “Free Palestine,” being accused of insensitivity is easy to bear. We Jews are just trying to freely celebrate a Seder, visit a museum and rally for hostages. That yearning involves no duplicity or threats to others.

_____

Jay Tcath is executive vice president of the Jewish United Fund.

_____

©2025 Chicago Tribune. Visit at chicagotribune.com. Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.