Alexandra Appelberg reported a lawsuit against Ezra Mor: how it all started and what is known

Legal disclaimer: At the time of publication, NANews does not have the case number, a copy of the lawsuit, or a court decision. The terms “sexual harassment” and “defamation” are presented as the position of Alexandra Appelberg and her lawyers. Ezra Mor’s guilt or civil liability has not been established by the court.

Israeli journalist and Orientalist Alexandra Appelberg reported on August 5, 2026, https://t.me/minarety/2073 that she filed a lawsuit against Russian-speaking blogger Maxim, known to the audience as Ezra Mor.

According to her, the basis was a publication on November 29, 2025. It included, quote:

“The post includes an image of my channel’s logo, my full name, as well as a frame from a pornographic film using the image of the sexualized humiliation of a woman, and corresponding vocabulary.”

“My lawyers and I believe that the post contains signs of sexual harassment and defamation,” Appelberg wrote.

She emphasized that the decision to go to court was not easy for her, as the publication, in her opinion, affected not only her professional reputation but also her human dignity.

Here is a screenshot from the Web Archive https://web.archive.org/web/20260105084318/https://t.me/EzraMorYoutubeShow/19629

Wayback Machine — a public web archive that began saving web pages in 1996 and was opened to users in 2001; the service belongs to the American non-profit digital library Internet Archive, founded by Brewster Kahle. Automated programs crawl open sites and create dated copies of pages, and users can also independently save an available page through the Save Page Now function. Using such a copy as evidence is legitimate: in Israel, it can be presented to the court as electronic material confirming that certain content was displayed at a specific address at a specific time. However, the archive link itself is not irrefutable proof of authorship or the date of the original publication — the court assesses its authenticity, completeness, connection with the defendant, and compares it with screenshots, metadata, witness testimonies, and other materials. Internet Archive regularly issues certified statements about the archive’s operation to lawyers: in 2023 alone, such confirmations were provided in approximately 450 court cases.

NANews studied the screenshot of the Web Archive page provided to the editorial office, checked the available feed of Mor’s channel, restored the socio-political context of the publication, and compared the statements of the parties with the norms of Israeli legislation.

What exactly did Alexandra Appelberg state

Appelberg does not claim that the court has already considered her claims or found Mor responsible. She only reports on the procedural action she took — going to court.

According to the published statement, the controversial post included:

• the full name of Alexandra Appelberg;
• a recognizable logo of her author’s channel;
• an image taken from a pornographic context;
• sexualized humiliation of a woman;
• accompanying publication vocabulary.

The journalist also stated that she intends to defend herself “by all legal and lawful means.”

Publicly, Appelberg has not yet named the court to which the lawsuit was filed, the case number, the amount of claims, or the names of her representing lawyers. It is also unknown whether the documents have been served to Mor and whether the first hearing has been scheduled.

This is an important limitation: for now, it is possible to reliably speak about Appelberg’s statement, but not about a court decision or even the content of the full lawsuit.

What the archive copy of the publication shows

The controversial material was published in the Telegram channel Ezra Mor Youtube Show on November 29, 2025. Its address was preserved in the Web Archive, where copies of the page made in December 2025 and January 2026 are available.

The screenshot provided to the editorial office shows an image of a woman surrounded by five men. Instead of the woman’s face, Appelberg’s channel logo is placed. The full name of the journalist and the phrase “anal about the Middle East” are superimposed on the picture.

Below the image was Mor’s text, in which he:

• discussed publications by other Russian-speaking authors about Appelberg;
• provided links to several related posts;
• used crude and sexualized vocabulary;
• explained the meanings of expressions describing group sexual actions;
• linked the attack to publications about the death of two Palestinians in Jenin.

NANews does not reproduce the full text of the sexual descriptions: to understand the subject of the dispute, it is enough to record their presence without re-disseminating “potentially degrading material.”

In one of the paragraphs, Mor wrote that the future video would be “not about Appelberg, of course.” However, this phrase was placed in a publication where the journalist’s name, her channel’s logo, and a reference to her position on Jenin were simultaneously present.

In other words, the question of whether the audience could unequivocally determine who the publication was about is likely to become one of the central issues in a possible court case.

Why the publication about Jenin appeared

The background of the conflict between Alexandra Appelberg and Ezra Mor is related to the operation of Israeli security forces in Jenin on November 27, 2025.

In a video distributed by Palestine TV and other media, two Palestinians exit a surrounded building, raise their hands, and lift their clothes to show that no weapons or explosive devices are visible on them. Then the men kneel. After that, they begin to move back towards the building, and the nearby Israeli security forces open fire on them at close range. Both men were killed. The recording does not allow establishing all the commands and conversations that preceded this, so the assessment of what happened also depends on investigation materials that have not been fully published.

In an official statement published by the IDF on the same day at 19:02, it was stated that border police and army fighters were conducting an operation to arrest wanted individuals. According to the security agencies, these people had previously participated in terrorist activities, including throwing explosive devices and shooting at security forces, and were part of a “terrorist structure in Jenin.” This was the official characterization of the IDF and police, not a court conclusion on the incident under consideration.

According to the same statement, the security forces surrounded the building where the suspects were located and conducted a surrender procedure for several hours. After using engineering equipment, two wanted individuals came out. The statement directly said: “After they exited the building, fire was opened on the wanted individuals.” Why the shooting began after their exit was not explained in the initial IDF publication.

The agency reported that the actions of the operation participants are being checked by commanders on the ground and will be submitted for review by competent authorities.

Later, in the Israeli media, a version from the security forces involved in the operation appeared: they claimed that the men acted contrary to received instructions and began to return inside the building, where weapons could be located. However, the video recording raised questions, as the men were moving slowly, and the fighters were at a short distance from them. This version was the explanation of the operation participants, not the final conclusion of the investigation.

National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir publicly supported the fighters and stated that they acted as expected. Palestinian representatives and the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, on the contrary, used the terms “apparent extrajudicial execution” regarding the incident. These assessments reflected the positions of politicians and international structures but were not a court decision.

After the recording appeared, it was reported that an investigation into the circumstances of the shooting had begun, and the fighters involved in the operation were being questioned. However, as of August 5, 2026, NANews did not find reports in open official sources about charges being filed, the case being closed, or published final investigation findings.

What Alexandra Appelberg wrote about the incident in Jenin

After the video recording appeared, Alexandra Appelberg published in her Telegram channel on November 28, 2026 a message starting with the words: “This has never happened before, and here it is again”.

She wrote that Israeli border police officers “shot two Palestinians in the city of Jenin on the West Bank when they came out of the building with their hands up.”

According to her description, the security forces ordered the men to lie down at the entrance and then opened fire at close range. Appelberg also quoted a joint statement from the IDF and police about the incident being handed over for review and Itamar Ben-Gvir’s statement in support of the fighters.

At the end of the first post, the journalist linked the incident to “a broader problem of impunity” and wrote that such cases become “not a bug, but a feature”. She attached her earlier text from 2023, where she listed other cases of Palestinians dying from the actions of Israeli forces.

Later, Appelberg published a continuation. In it, she already called the deceased “militants surrendering with their hands up” and retold the version of the preliminary investigation that appeared in Walla: the men came out unarmed, one of the commanders ordered them to be returned to the building for weapons, but one of the fighters did not know about this order and decided that one of them was heading for the weapon to attack.

At the same time, Appelberg formulated the conclusion more harshly than the initial official IDF statement: she claimed that “the army (unlike bloggers) acknowledges, that the soldiers’ actions were unlawful but attribute it to “poor coordination in the unit.”

She concluded the post with a question about whether an investigation would have started if the shooting had not been caught on video.

Then on November 29, 2026, Ezra Mor’s post appeared.

Thus, initially, it was about a public discussion on a socially significant topic: the permissibility of using force, the actions of the border police, and the limits of responsibility of security forces. However, then the dispute shifted from discussing the facts of the operation to a personalized sexualized publication.

Right-wing blogger and liberal-left journalist: why the dispute split the audience

The political divergence between Ezra Mor and Alexandra Appelberg arose long before the court story and largely explains why the publication about Jenin caused such a sharp reaction.

In Mor’s case, the definition of “right-wing blogger” is not an editorial assessment. In the description of his Instagram account, he directly calls himself: “Right. Honest. Angry”. His publications are built around right-wing Zionism, support for Israel’s tough security policy, and criticism of left-wing journalists, activists, and politicians. In Mor’s channel materials, he repeatedly used expressions like “leftist degenerates,” supported Itamar Ben-Gvir, and referred to the ideas of Meir Kahane, including the slogan “they must go.” All these formulations belong to the blogger himself or the materials he disseminates.

With Appelberg, the formulation requires more caution. In the sources studied by NANews, the journalist did not declare membership in a left-wing party and did not present herself as an official political activist. Therefore, categorically calling her a “left-wing political figure” would be inaccurate. It is more correct to say that based on the content of her public statements, Appelberg belongs to the liberal or center-left part of the Russian-speaking Israeli media space and is perceived by opponents as a left-wing journalist.

She consistently criticizes the government of Benjamin Netanyahu, Itamar Ben-Gvir, Bezalel Smotrich, settler violence, the continuation of the war to maintain the coalition, and Israel’s actions in the occupied Palestinian territories. In March 2025, Appelberg linked the resumption of hostilities in Gaza to Ben-Gvir’s return to the government and Netanyahu’s need to retain ultra-right partners. After the Hamas attack on October 7, she simultaneously condemned the terrorists’ crimes and argued that this does not negate the responsibility of the Israeli leadership and the need to discuss the situation of the Palestinians.

In her channel, Appelberg also recommended Russian-speaking projects related to anti-war protests, criticism of the occupation, protection of the rights of Arab citizens of Israel, solidarity with Palestinians, and the “Democrats” party. This further shows which part of the Israeli public discourse she is closer to, but it does not prove her membership in any movement or party.

This ideological divergence manifested itself in the discussion of the operation in Jenin.

Appelberg focused on the video showing two wanted individuals coming out with their hands up and then being shot, raising the question of the legality of using force and possible impunity for the security forces.

Mor started from the fact that the deceased, according to the IDF and police, were involved in terrorist activities and viewed the criticism of the fighters as part of a broader attack by left-wing authors on Israel.

Thus, the dispute was not only about the sequence of events in Jenin. Two different systems of evaluating one incident clashed.

For Appelberg’s audience, the main question was the state’s responsibility even during the fight against terrorism.

For Mor’s supporters, the priority was the protection of the fighters, the status of the deceased as wanted suspects, and distrust of journalists criticizing Israel’s actions.

After the lawsuit announcement, the public reaction also divided mainly along existing political lines. One Facebook user directly titled a publication about the story with the words: “Left and right will finally meet. True, in court”, calling Appelberg a journalist of the left camp and Mor a right-wing blogger. Other authors defended Mor or emphasized their dislike for Appelberg, even if the blogger himself was not their idol.

At the same time, Appelberg’s supporters and Mor’s critics stated that political disagreements do not justify using a woman’s name in a sexualized collage. In publications supporting her, the controversial post was described not as permissible right-wing satire but as a transition from political criticism to personal humiliation.

Therefore, there is no basis to say that “the Israeli audience is evenly divided” — no representative survey was conducted. However, open reactions show obvious political polarization: part of the right-wing audience perceives the lawsuit as a continuation of the fight against Mor and a restriction on harsh political satire, while the liberal and left-wing part sees it as an attempt to establish a boundary beyond which political polemics turn into targeted sexualized humiliation.

At the same time, the legal question does not have to coincide with the political one. Possible civil liability will depend not on who among the participants is right or left, but on the content of the publication, the possibility of unequivocally identifying Appelberg, norms on the protection of dignity and reputation, the arguments of the parties, and the assessment of the Israeli court.

Who is Alexandra Appelberg

Alexandra Appelberg is an Israeli Russian-speaking journalist, editor, and Orientalist specializing in Israel, Iran, Arab countries, Palestinian issues, and international relations.

Appelberg graduated from the Faculty of Journalism at Moscow State University and then received a master’s degree from Tel Aviv University in the Middle East Studies program. Before working in Israeli media, she published on Lenta.ru and in “Spectrum,” where she wrote about Israel, Iran, Syria, Russian-Turkish relations, the MH17 disaster investigation, the assassination of Qasem Soleimani, Donald Trump’s Middle East plan, religion during the pandemic, and digital surveillance.

In 2020, the editor-in-chief of the “Details” website, Emil Shleimovich, invited her to the editorial office. According to Appelberg, this was her first job in Israel after graduating from university. For almost six years, she worked as an editor of the international department, covering wars, elections, protests, diplomatic crises, and the politics of Middle Eastern countries.

At the beginning of 2026, Appelberg left the editorial office, and on February 8, the “Details” website ceased operations after layoffs and several months of limited publication mode. After that, she announced that she plans to develop her own projects and is ready to consider part-time work, freelance cooperation, work with analytical centers, non-profit organizations, and civil initiatives.

Appelberg’s main platform remains her Telegram channel, previously called “Minarets, Automata,” and now “Appelberg” – here it is – https://t.me/minarety.

At the time of verification, it had about 8.2 thousand subscribers. The channel is dedicated to geopolitics, Israel, and international relations in the Middle East.

Appelberg regularly appears in Russian-speaking media, including “Meduza,” Deutsche Welle, and Israeli channels. In 2026, she commented on the war with Iran, the state of the Iranian regime, US-Iran negotiations, Gaza, Lebanon, Israel’s relations with the US and Arab countries. On various platforms, she is called a journalist, Orientalist, or Arabist.

In LinkedIn, she is also listed as a Research Project Coordinator at the organization Windows — Channels for Communication, but the open profile does not allow confirming the dates and relevance of this work.

Appelberg’s publications show her critical position regarding the government of Benjamin Netanyahu, right-wing ministers, policies in the West Bank, and Israel’s actions in Gaza. However, there is no confirmation of her membership in any party: it is about a public journalistic position.

Who is Maxim, known as Ezra Mor

Maxim, using the public name Ezra Mor, is a Russian-speaking Israeli blogger, political commentator, and author of the media project Ezra Mor Show. On his YouTube channel, he emphasizes:

“I am not a journalist, not an ‘expert,’ not an analyst, and certainly not a politician. I am just a blogger.”

Therefore, it is more correct to present Mor as a blogger and author of socio-political content, rather than as a professional journalist or a certified Middle East specialist.

According to biographical texts published by the organizers of his lectures and other public platforms, Mor was born in Moscow under the name Maxim.

In the published biographies, it is said that in Maxim’s family, Jewish origin was almost not discussed for a long time. Until about the age of twenty, he was little interested in this part of the family history. A turning point, according to this version, was visiting a synagogue and a lecture on Jewish history, after which Maxim became interested in Judaism, Zionism, and Jewish identity. Later, he studied in a yeshiva, began using the name Ezra, and participated in the life of the Jewish community. Vladimir Ze’ev Jabotinsky is named as one of the authors who influenced his views in biographical materials.

Before finally moving to Israel, Mor lived for some time in Serbia and Spain and repeatedly visited Israel. In 2020, during the COVID-19 pandemic, he repatriated. The organizers of his lectures say that due to the restrictions of a special flight, he took a small amount of belongings and a cat with him. After moving, Mor settled in Rishon LeZion.

According to the published biography, after repatriation, he initially worked in a construction company, where he was engaged in advertising. Then he moved to work at the airport — in the customs control area. Mor himself said that he tried three times to enlist in the IDF but was refused. According to him, he regretted the late repatriation, due to which he did not acquire military experience. This information is primarily known from his own stories and secondary biographical publications.

Mor explained the creation of the YouTube channel by the desire to tell the Russian-speaking audience about Israeli politics and public life. Initially, he planned to release about two large videos a month with comments on internal and external events. Over time, the project expanded, and Mor began publishing videos, streams, and posts on several platforms.

After the Hamas attack on October 7, 2023, the blogger significantly changed the format of work. Instead of rare long releases, he began to publish short videos more often about Israel, the war, anti-Semitism, Hamas actions, international reaction, and regional politics. The organizers of his performances claim that the transition to a short format was associated with an attempt to respond more quickly to the changing agenda and cover a wider audience.

In addition to YouTube and Telegram – here it is – https://t.me/EzraMorYoutubeShow, Mor holds public meetings and paid lectures dedicated to Jewish identity, the history of anti-Semitism, and modern Israel. His project also uses paid YouTube sponsorship, donations, and the sale of branded merchandise. Official channel pages regularly post links to ways to financially support and the project’s store.

Mor positions himself as a right-wing Zionist author. In the description of his Instagram, the words “Right. Honest. Angry” are used. The blogger’s public manner is built on emotional presentation, sharp political polemics, provocative comparisons, and crude vocabulary. This is a characteristic of the open content of his channels, not a legal assessment of his personality or all his publications.

Why sexual harassment is mentioned in the statement

In Israeli law, the concept of sexual harassment is not limited to physical touches or sexual proposals.

The Prevention of Sexual Harassment Law refers to possible forms of such behavior as “offensive or degrading treatment of a person in connection with their gender or sexuality.” The law also considers visual and digital forms of treatment, including materials distributed via computer.

Moreover, sexual harassment can be considered a civil offense. However, the presence of a corresponding clause in the law does not automatically mean that a specific publication falls under it.

The court, if proceedings are indeed opened, will have to establish:

• whether the publication was unequivocally directed against Appelberg;
• whether the image was an appeal to her gender or sexuality;
• whether it was offensive or degrading in a legal sense;
• whether the exceptions or defenses provided by law apply to the publication;
• what damage could have been caused.

NANews — Israel News does not call Mor’s actions an established fact of sexual harassment. This is a legal qualification declared by Appelberg and her lawyers, which can only be confirmed or rejected by the court.

Why Appelberg Talks About Defamation

The Israeli Law on the Prohibition of Slander and Defamation applies not only to direct accusations of specific actions.

The law considers potentially defamatory information to include publications that can humiliate a person in the eyes of others, make them an object of contempt or ridicule, or cause harm to their work, occupation, or profession. A publication can be not only written text but also a drawing, image, gesture, or other means of conveying content.

The law simultaneously provides ways to defend the defendant, including proving the truthfulness of the information and the presence of public interest, and in certain cases, the good faith of the publication.

What Has Been Confirmed So Far

The editorial team of NANews was able to confirm several key circumstances.

First: Appelberg publicly stated that she went to court against Mor.

Second: The publication with the address she indicated existed and was saved by the Web Archive.

Third: The archived image contains Appelberg’s name, her channel’s logo, and a sexualized plot.

Fourth: The text of the publication links the attack to her professional position regarding the death of two men in Jenin.

Fifth: The incident in Jenin indeed became the subject of an official investigation after the video was circulated.

However, at the time of preparing the material, the following have not been publicly confirmed:

• the case number and name;
• the date of filing the lawsuit;
• the amount of the claims;
• the full list of legal grounds;
• the fact of serving documents to Mor;
• the written position of his lawyers;
• the date of a possible hearing.

What Ezra Mor Responded

The editorial team did not find a detailed public response from Mor to Appelberg’s statement in the accessible open feed of his channel.

This does not mean that a response does not exist or that the blogger refuses to comment. He may not have received the documents yet, be preparing a position with a lawyer, or be commenting on the situation on a platform that the editorial team could not find.

NANews is ready to add Ezra Mor’s or his representative’s substantive position without cuts if it is provided to the editorial team. The same rule applies to clarifications from Alexandra Appelberg and her lawyers.

Why This Story Is More Important Than a Personal Quarrel

The confrontation between Appelberg and Mor shows how much the Russian-speaking public discourse in Israel has changed after October 7, 2023.

Both authors work with the same audience and talk about the same events but use fundamentally different communication models.

Appelberg relies on journalistic and oriental studies education, editorial work, and an analytical format. Mor consciously calls himself a blogger and builds a media project on emotional videos, political mobilization, and provocative rhetoric.

Harsh criticism of a journalist, blogger, or political commentator is itself part of public discourse. Public status also implies a higher level of tolerance for criticism.

However, in this story, another question arises: where does political polemics end and targeted sexualized humiliation of a specific person begin.

The answer to this should not be decided by the crowd on Telegram. If the lawsuit is registered, the Israeli court will have to do this — after receiving the positions of both sides and examining the publication in full context.

NANews — Israel News will continue to follow the case, but until procedural documents appear, they will clearly separate established facts, participants’ statements, and editorial analysis.

How NANews Verified the Material

The article is based on:

• a public statement by Alexandra Appelberg;
• screenshots of the controversial post and her statement provided to the editorial team;
• the saved Web Archive page of the publication;
• the open feed of Ezra Mor’s Telegram channel;
• a Reuters publication about the incident in Jenin;
• an official Knesset publication on the Law on the Prevention of Sexual Harassment;
• Israeli government materials on defamation legislation;
• public pages and biographical descriptions of both authors.

The editorial team consciously does not reproduce the pornographic image in full and does not quote the most crude sexual descriptions: their repeated dissemination does not add facts but may multiply the alleged damage.