Twice in a recent ten-day period this summer, suspects were arrested for deadly terrorist attacks while invoking "Free Palestine." For them, the phrase served as a rallying cry sanctioning violence.
Their targets were a young couple outside the D.C. Jewish Museum and, in Boulder, Colorado, people attending a vigil for Hamas' hostages.
For the two suspects--neither of whom is Palestinian--the phrase "Free Palestine" is a license to kill.
They are not the only ones who understand it that way. The Pennsylvania Governor's Mansion of Josh Shapiro was set ablaze after a Passover Seder. The perpetrator, who has confessed, cited the governor's views on Palestine. Another "Free Palestine" chanter struck and killed an elderly California Jew with a bullhorn eighteen months ago.
Not all "Free Palestine" chanters understand it as a call to violence.
Yet the phrase's intentional lack of specificity is part of its utility: what the user means is left to the audience's subjective 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 and prosperity, that all peoples are entitled. It can thus be understood as 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 key question: would a "Free Palestine" be A) alongside Israel or B) instead of Israel?
Hamas and its allies reject the "alongside" option. In Gaza and elsewhere, they threaten anyone supporting such a peaceful compromise.
Other cynical "Free Palestine" proponents are unwilling to pay the negative public relations cost of acknowledging they want the "instead of" option. Why? Because their "instead of" option can only be realized with the annihilation of Israel.
The "instead of" option glorifies killing Jews, be it on October 7, 2023, in Israel, in Harrisburg, D.C., Boulder, and…G-d knows where next. While we don't know where the next "Free Palestine"-inspired attack will happen, we do know it isn't a matter of whether it will happen, but simply 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 (and too many others), is it not unreasonable for us to ask those promulgating it to own up to what it means to them? And for us Jews.
Politicalized catchphrases are proliferating. While many may seem innocuous, they can be dog whistles that are understood differently by different audiences. Think BLM or MAGA. 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. 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 several over the last few months understood the phrase's murderous imprecision.
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 for us to bear. We Jews are just trying to freely celebrate a Seder, visit a museum, and rally for hostages. That yearning, unlike "Free Palestine," involves no duplicity or threats to others.
An earlier version of this essay appeared June 10, 2025, in the Chicago Tribune.
