Exposed in Lebanon? Tom Wegner Answers Lebanese Media Scrutiny of the Abrahamic Movement – Faith & Freedom News

FAITH & FREEDOM NEWSMiddle East · Interfaith · Press Freedom

“Exposed in Lebanon”: Tom Wegner Answers Lebanese Media Scrutiny of the Abrahamic Movement

After a Beirut investigation questioned an Israeli writer’s reports for Lebanese outlets and her role in the movement’s Israel–Lebanon Friendship Association, the movement’s CEO says grassroots trust-building, not a campaign, is the point.

By Khurram Ali RazaFaith & Freedom News (FFN) · October 20, 2026 · 6 min read

Tom Wegner holding a book — Tom Wegner, co-founder and CEO of the Abrahamic Movement. Photo provided.

BEIRUT / TEL AVIV — A dispute over who gets to address the Lebanese public, and on whose behalf, has put the Abrahamic Movement under an unusually bright spotlight. Tom Wegner, the movement’s co-founder and CEO, publicly acknowledged a Lebanese media investigation into Selena Ryan, an Israeli whom he appointed to head the movement’s Israel–Lebanon Friendship Association, and answered it in a post on X.

4reports published under Ryan’s name in six months

13media posts addressed to the Lebanese public

3Lebanese platforms named in the investigation

2leadership roles for Ryan inside the movement

What the investigation says

According to Wegner’s account, the legal journal Al-Mufakkira Al-Qanuniyya (The Legal Agenda) published an investigation by Hussein Shaaban on September 4, 2026, examining Ryan’s work for This Is Beirut, Ici Beyrouth and Huna Lubnan. The Lebanese daily Al-Akhbar carried its own summary in its culture section on September 9, 2026.

“At the end of the first report Selena Ryan prepared for the platform This Is Beirut, she thanked it for allowing ‘us’ to ‘send our message’ to the Lebanese. At the start of the report she had introduced herself as coming ‘from central Israel’…”Excerpt from the investigation, as quoted by Tom Wegner on X

The investigation argues that Ryan did not simply relay the views of Israelis in border areas; it says she counted herself among them and presented the result as a “general message” from Israel to the Lebanese people. Over six months, it adds, the three outlets published four reports and 13 media posts under her name, “all addressing the Lebanese public directly, not merely covering a subject.”

Timeline of dates cited in the investigation and in Wegner’s response.

How the investigation maps the movement

Tracing Ryan’s record beyond the Lebanese platforms, the investigation says it reached the “Israeli-Lebanese Friendship Association,” which she personally heads within the Abrahamic Movement. It notes that Wegner describes her as one of the movement’s founders and announced her appointment to a second leadership position, in the “Israel-Somaliland Friendship Association,” “to strengthen our operations on the ground.”

Structure as described in the investigation and the movement’s own materials. Illustration by FFN; it is a simplified summary, not an official organizational chart.

The movement’s stated aims

The investigation says the movement describes its work as running through media, education, economic cooperation, culture and “public diplomacy,” with branches and networks “extending to Lebanon, Iraq, Syria, Gaza and beyond,” plus Arabic, Hebrew and English platforms and groups on WhatsApp, Facebook and Telegram.

The movement’s own site presents a different emphasis. Its About page frames its vision as a region where Jews, Muslims, Christians and related minority communities turn shared Abrahamic heritage into a practical foundation for trust, cooperation, dignity and peace, through local branches, interfaith dialogue, delegations, publications and grassroots initiatives.

The investigation emphasizes Ryan’s direct address to a Lebanese audience, her dual role as writer and movement leader, and Wegner’s background in political communication and public relations.

The movement stresses people-to-people encounters, countering extremism, inclusion of minorities and what it calls “Political Abrahamism,” outlined in Wegner’s book The Abrahamic Revolution.

FFN has not independently verified the investigation’s full text. Whether audiences read Ryan’s Lebanese-platform work as personal expression, advocacy or organized outreach is the core of the disagreement.

Wegner’s background, as described

The investigation describes Wegner as a public relations and political communication professional who was a spokesman for Ehud Barak’s campaign for prime minister, media adviser to Amir Peretz, and later media lead for Eli Aflalo’s Likud primary campaign. It also notes his time as spokesman for the Peres Center for Peace and his military service in the Coordination and Liaison unit with the Palestinians. The movement’s team page likewise lists him as a former spokesperson for Barak and the Peres Center, and as an adviser to international bodies.

On the Middle East Center, the investigation says it offers public relations, advertising and social media campaigns in Arabic-speaking countries and among Persian and Kurdish speakers. It reports that in June 2025 the center coordinated the participation of Iranian leaders in a meeting initiated by Likud MK Dan Illouz, and that on September 3, 2025 the Israeli Foreign Ministry’s Arabic pages highlighted an interview with Wegner and his book.

“The Abrahamic Movement is a grassroots initiative, and its work is changing consciousness and building trust between people.”
— Tom Wegner, on X

Wegner’s response

Wegner did not dispute the existence of the investigation’s facts in his post; he disputed their meaning. “The revolution in the book’s title is not a campaign,” he wrote. “The Abrahamic Movement is a grassroots initiative, and its work is changing consciousness and building trust between people. For that, I do not apologize.”

Why it matters

The episode touches a live question in regional peacebuilding: where does personal outreach end and organized influence begin, especially when messages cross a border with no diplomatic relations? Supporters of people-to-people efforts argue that direct voices are essential where governments are silent. Critics, including the Lebanese outlets cited here, argue that audiences deserve clarity about the institutions behind the voices addressing them. Both positions are visible in this exchange, and neither has been settled by it.