… for visiting countries on vacation that fund anti-Israel NGOs and condemn Israel at the United Nations;
… for not listening to kids’ recommendation to invest alongside Pelosi, and for listening to them about investing in crypto;
… for calling my uncle a crazy racist and my niece a lazy woke-tard;
… for still not having a proper name for my in-laws, after many years of being married;
… for not calling my parents enough, even when they remind me of that fact constantly;
… for pretending I’m preoccupied when my spouse asks for something I’m not interested in;
… for telling my spouse to change attire; for not listening to spouse’s recommendation on attire; for listening to spouse’s recommendation on dress; for being late to events because of attire;
for these sins and thoughts related to family, please pardon us
… for the arrogance of believing that people read my postings including annoying Wordle scores;
… for believing Shabbos calories don’t count;
… for thinking I’m younger than my age, and not living each day fully;
… for internalizing that living my best life means selfish overindulgence;
… for trying to do too much; for trying to do too little;
… for not spending more time with family, friends, community and You;
The New York Times decided to print the obituary of Yusuf al-Qaradawi, a fiery leader of the Muslim Brotherhood, an advocate for violence and vocal anti-Semite. The paper opted to use a balanced approach in covering his life saying some thought of him as “a moderate” while others considered him “an extremist.”
The Times did not offer any commentary about his anti-Semitism nor calls for a global jihad against the Jews.
New York Times obituary on fiery anti-Semite never discussed his Jew hatred.
In regards to this violent bigot’s views about Jews, all the Times would offer was “During the second Palestinian intifada, or uprising, in 2001, he declared that suicide bombings by Palestinians against Israelis were permissible.“
Were permissible? He actively encouraged a global jihad against the Jews, he didn’t simply say killing Jews was allowed during their Arab pogroms.
Here are his statements that the Times ignored:
Los Angeles Times, May 2001
“[Suicide bombings] are heroic martyrdom operations, and the heroes who carry them out … are driven by an overwhelming desire to cast terror and fear into the hearts of the oppressors.“
AFP, June 2001
“These martyr operations led by the Palestinian fighters against Israel spring from resistance and all Muslims who kill to defend their land, honor and religion are martyrs.”
Al Jazeera, January 2009:
“Allah lies in wait for [Jews], and He will not forsake [Islam]. He will not allow [Jews] to continue to spread corruption in the land. We wait for the revenge of Allah to descend upon them, and, Allah willing, it will be by our own hands…This is my message to the treacherous Jews, who have never adhered to what is right.“
“Oh Allah, take your enemies, the enemies of Islam. Oh Allah, take the Jews, the treacherous aggressors. Oh Allah, take this profligate, cunning, arrogant band of people. Oh Allah, they have spread much tyranny and corruption in the land. Pour Your wrath upon them.“
“Throughout history, Allah has imposed upon the [Jews] people who would punish them for their corruption. The last punishment was carried out by Hitler. By means of all the things he did to them – even though they [the Jews] exaggerated this issue – he [Hitler] managed to put them in their place. This was divine punishment for them.“
The Atlantic, February 2011
“The conquerors [of Palestine, the Jews] are those with the greatest enmity toward the believers [Muslims], and they are supported by the strongest state on earth – the USA, and by the world Jewish community.“
“The least the Muslim can do is to boycott the enemies’ goods.”
“Receiving enemies in our own countries and visiting them in the occupied lands would remove such a psychological barrier that keeps us away from them, and would bridge the gap that keeps the desire for Jihad against them kindled in the hearts of the Ummah.”
“We believe that the battle between us and the Jews is coming … Such a battle is not driven by nationalistic causes; it is rather driven by religious incentives. This battle … is between Muslims and Jews… This battle will occur between the collective body of Muslims and the collective body of Jews.“
“It [is] obligatory upon every Muslim wherever he is to defend Jerusalem, and al-Aqsa Mosque. This is an obligation upon all Muslims to participate in defending Jerusalem with their souls, money, and all that they possess, otherwise a punishment from Allah shall descend on the whole nation.“
The New York Times recast a man who praised Hitler’s annihilation of European Jewry and sought a violent religious war of 1.8 billion Muslims against a paltry 15 million Jews, as simply a supporter of the second Palestinian “intifada.” It is a vile recasting of sickening Muslim jihadi anti-Semitism as supporting violent Palestinian national aspirations.
Shame on the Times anti-Semitism washing. #NoAntisemitismWashing
The final results are now in, and Rep. Jamaal Bowman (D-NY16) won the Democratic primary with a slim 52% majority. It’s an embarrassing showing for an incumbent, who might have lost had he faced a single opponent. The result is actually not surprising, as his district was redrawn just a few months earlier, with many voters unfamiliar with him and many not coming out to vote in the final weeks of summer.
He is also disliked by a huge portion of the district.
A lot of money was raised by one of Bowman’s opponents, Vedat Gashi, who came in second with 27% of the vote. Catherine Parker, well known in her local town came in third with 20%, while Mark Jaffe, who had dropped out of the race, gathered 2%.
Much of lower Westchester is slightly left-of-center, way to the right of the extreme left-wing views of Bowman. As such, people are beginning to assess how to replace this representative in the next election in two years.
A deeper dive into the numbers yields some clues.
Bowman won a majority of only five of the 12 towns and cities in his district. He managed to secure the overall win because those five municipalities accounted for 64% of the Democratic voter turnout. Greenburgh and Yonkers had 20% and 19% of the votes, respectively, and Bowman took them with 56% and 61% of the vote, respectively. New Rochelle was the third largest municipality with 13% of the primary votes, and Bowman took it with 51% of the votes.
Gashi won Scarsdale with 60% of the votes, but the town only accounted for 4% of the total votes. Parker took her hometown of the City of Rye with 64% of the votes, and also beat the other candidates in Mamaroneck with 44% of the votes, however, those two municipalities only accounted for 10% of the total votes. Factoring the large amount of money raised by Gashi, and Parker having a local base of constituents and being the only woman in the race right after the Supreme Court threw out the constitutional right to abortion, both candidates did much worse than should be expected against such a poor incumbent.
So if the answer is not to back either of these candidates next time, how do moderates beat Bowman in 2024?
1. Back a single candidate, EARLY
Politicians are politicians, so they will always be running for office and fund-raising. If a politician thinks they have some shot at winning and can build political capital, they will enter the race. After all, they are spending other people’s money at the end of the day.
If there are multiple moderates running against Bowman, the split in the vote all but assures Bowman’s victory. In the 2022 race, had Parker not entered the race late as a spoiler, Gashi might have prevailed.
The key is therefore to get centrists out to push local politicians and community leaders to back a single candidate early. With enough endorsements from mayors and local officials from lower Westchester, it could prevent lesser known politicians from entering the fray lest they be tarred as a spoiler, and hand Bowman a victory once again.
2. Get Harrison to register Democratic and vote
As the chart below demonstrates, the average voter turnout in each municipality was 6.4%. Mamaroneck, part of Parker’s County District 7, led with 9.4% voter turnout – but she barely won on her home turf with 44%, compared to 35% Bowman / 20% Gashi. Scarsdale also had a great turnout with 9.2%, with an impassioned Jewish vote backing Gashi where he won with 60% of the vote compared to just 18% for Bowman.
Municipality
Votes
Population
Turnout
Eastchester
1,737
33,033
5.3%
Greenburgh
7,395
91,338
8.1%
Harrison
731
28,363
2.6%
Mamaroneck
2,770
29,563
9.4%
Pelham
940
12,470
7.5%
Town of Rye
1,727
Scarsdale
1,642
17,890
9.2%
Mt Vernon
3,367
67,623
5.0%
New Rochelle
4,885
79,367
6.2%
City of Rye
1,070
15,769
6.8%
White Plains
3,864
58,171
6.6%
Yonkers
7,168
200,183
3.6%
TOTAL
37,296
633,770
6.4%
Voter turnout for August 2022 Democratic Primary
Meanwhile, Harrison had just a 2.6% voter turnout, the worst in the district. With 67% of the town’s voters opting for someone other than Bowman, a concerted effort must be placed to get Harrison voters (really everyone) to register with the Democratic Party and get out to vote during the primaries. Recall that this district is now D+40, meaning Biden beat Trump in the last election by roughly 40 points, so the Democratic primary is the battlefield, not the November election.
3. Support a centrist minority from Greenburgh, Mount Vernon or Yonkers
The Jewish vote stands at roughly 25% of the district, Hispanics at about 28% and Blacks at 21%. As the overall Jewish vote does not vote as a block, chipping away at Bowman’s base in the Black community could be part of a winning strategy.
Bowman won a whopping 86% of the vote in Mount Vernon. It is the fourth largest municipality with a population of 67,000, trailing Yonkers at 200,000, Greenburgh at 91,000 and New Rochelle at 79,000. Backing a Black centrist politician from one of those cities, or a Hispanic woman, could peel away important votes away from Bowman.
4. Build a loud Orthodox Jewish voting block
The Orthodox community coalesced late in the 2022 campaign around Gashi. He won 60% of Scarsdale, 35% of White Plains and 33% of New Rochelle – the towns where he secured the highest percentage of votes were those with the greatest number of Orthodox Jews. The community should continue to build upon that political momentum and become a reliable block to bring the district more towards the center.
The community should also become more active locally. For example, it should lead the charge in getting Westchester County to adopt the IHRA definition of anti-Semitism. Leaving local politics and organizations to progressives, mainstreams some extremists’ opinions and fractures society. That historic approach brought anti-Israel speakers to local synagogues where local rabbis serve on boards of directors of far left-wing groups. The intersectional bonds the progressive Jewish community leaders are cementing with anti-Semites and anti-Zionists should be denounced by members of the synagogues and the local community.
In addition to bringing the non-Orthodox Jewish community towards the center, Westchester’s Orthodox community should build relationships with the local Hispanic, Asian and religious Christian community which sends their children to parochial schools. They are more conservative than the Black and liberal non-Orthodox communities, and can expand the sphere of influence in local elections.
Here are just a few actions for the people of lower Westchester to retire Jamaal Bowman, the extremist congressman who now mis-represents them.
There are some narratives that simply boggle the mind. Some are completely nonsensical and easily disproven. Others are seemingly spat out of desperation to belittle an enemy’s position. And a few are so twisted, they must have been hatched and sanctified by university professors.
Consider the phrase “European Settler Colonialism” to describe Jews moving to Israel.
Columbia University’s Rashid Khalidi was fond of the phrase. As recently as November 2017, on the 100th anniversary of the Balfour Declaration, he took the stage at the United Nations’ Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestine People. He used the expression in a number of ways:
“…Arab city dwellers, who observed with mounting concern the constant arrival of new European Jewish immigrants“
“the Declaration had been tailored to suit the desiderata of Zionism, a European colonizing project“
“The Palestinians were therefore in a triple bind, which may have been unique in the history of resistance of indigenous peoples to European colonialism. They faced the might of the British Empire in the era between the two world wars when not one single colonial possession, with the partial exception of Ireland, succeeded in freeing itself from the clutches of the European imperial powers.“
“Of the five European settler colonies established in Arab countries, only Algeria and Palestine remained colonised in the early 1960s“
“As the last two European settler-colonial powers in the Arab world, France and Israel formed a close alliance to coordinate the preservation of their settler colonies“
“Like France and Italy, the European Jewish Zionists claimed to be descendants of the ancient Palestinian Hebrews and to be merely “returning” to their ancient land.”
“the pan-Jewishism of European Zionism, which sought to recreate the “Judaic” glories of the Palestinian Hebrews, who were appropriated as the ancestors of European converts to Judaism, was depicted as progressive and socialist.”
“Unhappy with its isolation as the last European settler colony in the Arab world, the Israelis provided logistical support to the French colonists,...”
Students have caught on. At a vote to boycott Israel at the University of Wisconsin in March 2017, one of the students took the theme one step further:
“The Israeli state was founded using the same nationalistic and exclusive principles that exploited Jews in Eastern Europe. The foundation built Israel to be as oppressive as the countries that destroyed Jewish homes, lives and pushed them out of Eastern Europe. Israel in its inception is not a Jewish idea but a European one.”
Imagine the depravity of the anti-Zionist university mindset today, that Israel is not even considered a Jewish idea but simply a tool of European colonial imperialism.
The outrageous sentiments are given succor at the United Nations and anti-Zionist media. That they need to be addressed and disproved is shameful but it goes to the heart of the prevalent false anti-Israel narrative peddled by those who seek a Palestinian State and need an anchor for their anti-Semitic beliefs.
Colonialism – The Desire To Gain Versus The Desire To Rid
Many European countries set up colonies around the world, including France, United Kingdom, Spain, Portugal, the Netherlands, Belgium and Italy. Each country set up outposts to gain particular advantages in far away lands. Some sought raw materials like grain and minerals to export home. Some sought trade routes and new markets. Others brought missionaries to spread Christianity. Each country sought to exploit the new territory for selfish gain.
All, except for one case falsely-framed as colonialism: Zionism as “European settler colonialism.”
The anti-Semitic narrative describing Zionism as “European colonialism” is founded on two principle beliefs: that European countries desired to shed the continent of its Jews; and the further wish to weaken Muslim Arabs in the Middle East.
On the first concocted rationale, anti-Semitic anti-Zionists try to argue that the great powers of Europe wanted to collectively purge the region of its Jews. It is anti-Semitism at its most base and ugly, suggesting that Jews were universally unwanted foreigners in their midst.
The Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas pushed this argument in April 2018 that “[Lord] Balfour hated the Jews, but nevertheless, he gave them a state. The Russian foreign minister was well known for his hatred of the Jews, yet he said to [the Jews]: “Come, I will give you a state in Palestine.”” Abbas claimed that all European leaders hated the Jews and wanted to get rid of them and used Palestine as their dumping ground. The phrase “European settler colonialism” is deeply anti-Semitic in that it conveys that Jews are vile and unwanted.
The second premise of European colonialism in the desire to insert a foreign entity to weaken the supposed unity of Muslim Arabs in the Middle East is foolish as various European powers were dealing with many tribes in the region and building them up into functioning governments and countries. The British Mandate of Palestine is put forward by Arabists as something unique, when there were mandates for all of the lands that were to become independent countries like Lebanon, Syria and Iraq, with the fall of the Ottoman Empire.
Jews Have Nothing To Do With Ancient Israelites And Never Lived In Israel
The anti-Semitism of “European settler colonialism” extends beyond the invective that Zionism was launched by European leaders to ethnically-cleanse Europe of its Jews. It mocks Jewish history.
The acting President of the Palestinian Authority, Mahmoud Abbas wrote his doctoral thesis on a particular form of Holocaust denial, which claimed that Jews have no connection or history in Israel, so early Zionists conspired with the Nazis to make life unbearable so that the Jews would be forced to emigrate to a foreign land. Abbas falsely asserted that Jews are descendants of Khazars, much like Columbia University’s Massad absurdly claimed that Jews pretend to be descended from “Palestinian Hebrews” (whatever that ridiculous phrase means), but really are a bunch of European converts who “appropriated” someone else’s history.
This repulsive narrative is a critical component for anti-Zionists because the definition of a “colony” means an “area under full or partial control of another country.” While France may have set up a foreign colony in Algeria, it is nonsensical to say that the entire European continent set up a joint colony for everyone’s benefit. But what choice do the anti-Semites have? If they are forced to recognize that Jews are from Judea and the land of Israel, then by definition it is not a Jewish colony but a righteous return of Jews from their diaspora. The phrase “European settler colonialism” is anti-Semitic in denying Jews their basic history in the land of Israel.
Jews Came To Palestine Before The Palestine Mandate
Anti-Semitic anti-Zionists argue that the European colonial project launched with Lord Balfour’s 1917 declaration and then the Mandate of Palestine in 1922. Those slightly more knowledgeable about history might point to Theodore Herzl’s First Zionist Congress in 1897 in Basel, Switzerland.
The reality is that Jews have always lived and moved to the land of Israel. During the last century of Ottoman rule (1800 to 1914), the Jewish population jumped more than 13.4 times. The Christian population only grew by 3.2 times over that period while the Muslim population barely moved, increasing only 2.1 times, meaning that no Muslims migrated to the holy land during that time, as such growth is the natural trend of births minus deaths.
The reason the Jews moved to the land is that the land is holy to Jews. Jews from all over the world pray facing Jerusalem, the only religion to do so. Jews are commanded to visit Jerusalem three times every year. There are commandments that Jews can only keep in Israel.
Saying that Zionism is a “European colonial project” is anti-Semitic as it denies the centrality and holiness of the land to Jews.
Israeli Jews Are Not European
The smear that “Zionism is Racism” was hatched by Muslim nations in the 1970’s, after the Arab world failed to destroy Israel for the third time (1948-9, 1967 and 1973 wars). The outrageous UN resolution was overturned by the United States in 1991, but the charge has been re-launched in modern times under the banner of “white supremacy”, “imperialism” and “European colonialism.”
The simple fact is less than one-third of Israelis have ancestors from Europe. As of 2018, only 31.8% of Jews were Ashkenazi, of European heritage, and 12.4% were from the former USSR. That compares to 44.9% who are Mizrahi and 3.0% from Ethiopia. The balance of Jews (7.9%) are of mixed heritage. Then there are 21.1% who are Arab (Muslim and Christian) and 5% are other groups including Ba’hai (a religion banned in several neighboring countries), Samaritans and others.
Saying that Israel is a creature of “European colonialism” is non-sensical at its most fundamental, as most Israelis do not come from Europe.
Poor Attempt To Distract From Muslim Arab Anti-Semitic Edicts
The charge that Zionism is based on European colonialism is anti-Semitic on many levels. It is used in a pathetic attempt to advance the cause of a Palestinian state, when in fact, it does the opposite by showing that Arabs are terrible anti-Jewish neighbors.
Admitting that Jews predate Arabs by thousands of years does not mean that Arabs have no history in the land, so stop pretending otherwise.
Admitting that the Temple Mount is only the holiest place for Jews does not mean that it holds no significance for Christians or Muslims.
Admitting that Jordanian/Palestinian Muslim Arabs banned Jews from entering the Old City of Jerusalem and the Cave of the Jewish Patriarchs and Matriarchs in Hebron while they controlled it, does not mean that Jews will ban other religions from entering these sacred locations.
Admitting that Jordan issued an anti-Semitic citizenship law in 1954 that granted citizenship to people in Judea and Samaria, as long as they weren’t Jewish, doesn’t mean that the Jewish State of Israel will ban non-Jews from becoming citizens.
Admitting that most Israelis are not European Jews does not mean that Israel will constantly point out that the largest demographic in Israel are the Jews who came from Muslim Arab lands who were expelled and driven out of their homes.
The modern state of Israel is simply the reestablishment of Jewish sovereignty in their historic homeland. The attempts to vilify Israel as a product of European colonialism and imperialism is both false and deeply anti-Semitic, and actually hurts the Palestinian cause in showing their inability to live peacefully with the Jewish people.
September 20, 2022 started off much better than usual for the Middle East. A region, normally aflame with hatred seeking the end of the Jewish State, began with calmer voices.
The Palestinian Arabs published their quarterly poll of sentiment on the street. It showed a more moderate, albeit still troubling, tone regarding making peace with Israel.
Palestinian Arabs favored the political terrorist group Hamas over the more moderate Fatah in theoretical presidential elections, by 15 points, down from 22 points three months earlier. Support for a two-state solution rose to 37% from 28% in the prior quarter (60% still oppose a two-state solution). Currently, 48% support armed attacks against Israel, down from 55% in favor of returning to intifada-terrorism, just three months prior.
The pollsters believe that the rise in moderating positions stems from “greater appreciation of the [Israeli confidence building] measure in which a larger number of work permits are issued by Israel for laborers from the Gaza Strip.” It added that there was also “negative public assessment of the last armed confrontation between Islamic Jihad and Israel [in which most Arabs believe Palestinians lost and noted Hamas stayed out of the fight], the findings indicate a significant decline in support for armed attacks or a return to an armed intifada and a significant rise in support for Palestinian-Israeli negotiations.“
So far, so good.
At the United Nations in New York City, the General Assembly got underway in an annual ritual in which leaders of the world explain why their country was noble and everyone else was terrible.
Qatar, a state sponsor of the Palestinian terrorist group Hamas, did not slam Israel, but only called for a two-state solution. Turkey, which also has supported Hamas, took a softer tone about Israel. It obnoxiously called for a two-state solution that only could have the contours of the 1967 “borders” (they were never borders) with eastern Jerusalem as its capital, but still, a far better statement than in years past.
Unfortunately, the positive direction fell apart with the address from the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan. While his English was wonderful and his voice soothing, King Abdullah II disappoints every year.
Jordan’s King Abdullah II addresses the 77th session of the United Nations General Assembly, Tuesday, Sept. 20, 2022 at U.N. headquarters. (AP Photo/Mary Altaffer)
As he’s done frequently, Abdullah incorrectly said several things such as UNRWA helping Palestinian “refugees” rather than compelling them to remain wards of the world. But the king went so much deeper than a bad opinion, as he waged an attack on the Jewish State regarding Jerusalem. At 9:09 of his speech, he ramped up the temperature:
“Today, the future of Jerusalem is of urgent concern. The city is holy to millions of Muslims, Christians and Jews around the world. Undermining Jerusalem’s legal and historical status quo triggers global tensions and deepens religious divides. The holy city must not be a place for hatred and division.
“As custodians of Jerusalem’s Muslim and Christian holy sites, we are committed to protecting the historical and legal status quo and to their safety and future. And as a Muslim leader, let me say clearly, that we are committed to defending the rights, the precious heritage, and the historic identity of the Christian people of our region. Nowhere is that more important than in Jerusalem.
“Today, Christianity in the holy city is under fire. The rights of churches in Jerusalem are threatened. This cannot continue. Christianity is vital to the past and present of our region and the holy land. It must remain an integral part of our future.”
This is outrageous and pathological.
At the most basic, churches in Jerusalem and all around Israel are not threatened. Israel actually helped build the Mormon church in Jerusalem. Christian pilgrims are found everywhere, as Christian tourists to Israel outnumber Jewish ones. There is not a single Muslim-majority country in the world where Christian tourists outnumber Muslim visitors.
“in accordance with the Washington Declaration, Israel respects the present special role of the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan in Muslim Holy shrines in Jerusalem. When negotiations on the permanent status will take place, Israel will give high priority to the Jordanian historic role in these shrines.“
Jordan has no “custodianship” and no role to “protect” any shrine, let alone non-Muslim sites which are never mentioned. To assert a special role as savior of Christians from fabricated non-existent threats is delusion of the highest order.
The king not only suffers from a messiah complex, he is abrogating the peace treaty signed with Israel. The following sentence, Article 9.3, clearly states that the countries will work together to promote religious cooexistence:
“The Parties will act together to promote interfaith relations among the three monotheistic religions, with the aim of working towards religious understanding, moral commitment, freedom of religious worship, and tolerance and peace.“
The Jordanian monarch is promoting the opposite, seeking a religious confrontation of Muslims and Christians against the Jews.
The Jordanian king is inciting a religious war against the Jewish state, seeking to alarm the Christian world that ‘Jerusalem is in danger’ the same way radical jihadists scream ‘al Aqsa is in danger’ to Muslims, in the hopes of killing Jews and the Jewish State. It is an alarming development and one which must be addressed swiftly, such as demanding a public recanting and apology from the king, or risk the 1994 peace treaty which he defecated upon.
On December 18, 1992, the United Nations adopted the Declaration on the Rights of Persons Belonging to National or Ethnic, Religious and Linguistic Minorities. This year marks the 30th anniversary of that declaration which recalls that such minorities often “suffer disproportionately from the effects of conflicts resulting in the violation of their human rights and are particularly vulnerable to forced displacement through, interalia, population transfers, revocation of previously held identity documents, refugee flows and forced relocation.“
The history of Jews around the world is proof of this sentiment. They have been the most persecuted religious group in every country in which they’ve lived over many centuries.
The reestablishment of Jewish sovereignty in their homeland was supposed to put an end to such discrimination. Finally ruling over themselves, Jews were not going to be subject to the rash of anti-Semitic edicts passed by many countries such as banning kosher meat, banning circumcision, forcing Jews to give live in ghettoes, expulsions, forced conversions, limiting their fields of employment, etc.
Alas, people of ill-will have inverted the situation of the Jewish State in an accusatory fashion, claiming that Israel should be censured for supposedly discriminating against the one-quarter of its population that is non-Jewish. While roughly one-eighth of the vast Muslim world abuts Israel, anti-Zionists shout the slur of “apartheid” and “ethnic cleansing” at the Jewish State, even while it affords its non-Jewish citizens full rights far in excess of any of its neighboring countries, and where the Muslim population has soared – both in excess of the Jewish population and outpacing Muslims in adjacent countries.
Today, 85% of the world belongs to an organized religion. The majority are Christian, although forecasts predict that Islam will catch up with Christianity by 2050. There are dozens of Christian-majority countries and fifty Muslim-majority ones, with more expected.
In sharp contrast, Jews, the most persecuted religious group in history, make up less than 0.2% of the global population. Roughly half of them, about 7 million, live in the State of Israel, immediately surrounded by 140 million Muslims. That’s a neighborhood where Muslims outnumber Jews by 127 times.
To consider an analogy, if one were to go to a mall with 500 parking spaces, there would be an equivalent of 4 spots for Jews and 496 for Muslims. By way of comparison, US regulations would require 10 spots be allocated for handicap people, or 2.5 times as many. If one were to stand amongst the ten handicap spots, it would look like the mall has many spots for this subset of the population but to look on a broader basis, one sees that the allocation is very small.
Israel is surrounded by most of the Muslim world. Just among its immediate neighbors, Jews are outnumbered by 127 times.
According to the United Nations own goals in the Declaration, Jews must have the right to pray at their holiest site of the Temple Mount in Jerusalem, as “fundamental freedoms for all, without distinction as to race, sex, language or religion,…. [noting] that the constant promotion and realization of the rights of persons belonging to national or ethnic, religious and linguistic minorities, as an integral part of the development of society as a whole and within a democratic framework based on the rule of law, would contribute to the strengthening of friendship and cooperation among peoples and States.”
As it relates to organizations and countries that seek to boycott Israel and its supporters, the declaration asserts that “Persons belonging to minorities have the right to establish and maintain, without any discrimination, free and peaceful contacts with other members of their group and with persons belonging to other minorities, as well as contacts across frontiers with citizens of other States to whom they are related by national or ethnic, religious or linguistic ties.” The BDS movements targeting Jews and Jewish groups that support Israel, such as the one passed by Berkeley Law in August 2022, clearly run afoul of the UN action meant to protect marginalized groups, and to help foster friendship and cooperation.
The anti-Semitic public chant to “Globalize the Intifada” is an illegal direct incitement to violence against Jews, but was not prosecuted in the US or elsewhere. Absolution Via Inaction.
The fundamental reality is that Jews in every country and in the one Jewish State are simultaneously regional and global Ethnic, Religious and Linguistic Minorities that must be protected by every single member state of the United Nations.
“Zionism, the ideological undergirding of Israel, is a debatable political philosophy.“
– Keith Ellison, Attorney General of Minnesota, former Congressman (D-MN), former Deputy Chair of the Democratic National Committee
Over 1,000 Jews from around the world came to Basel, Switzerland this week to mark the 125th anniversary of the first World Zionist Congress. They celebrated the incredible success of the Modern State of Israel, now 75 years since its reestablishment, a mere 50 years from Theodore Herzl’s initial conference of inspiration was turned into a reality.
The kickoff speaker was Israeli President Isaac “Bougie” Herzog. His speech welcomed the Zionists from around the world, regardless of their religious denominations or political affiliation. He urged all of them to get involved in the Zionist project and questions regarding “the whole Jewish People… to debate them together, in a spirit of mutual responsibility, and most importantly, of full and institutionalized partnership.“
He concluded his remarks that the broad community must “reclaim Zionism” from the vile smears that populate society today. Herzog offered his prescriptions which included uniquely Jewish and Israeli goals, as well as dealing with global issues such as climate change. He mentioned “tikkun olam (repair the world)” three times, as a mission (and potential balm) to combat the insidious woke anti-Semitism infecting the world. “[M]odern Zionism gives us our sense of not only shared fate but also shared destiny, as long as it remains anchored in our deepest roots, weaving together the inseparable threads of peoplehood, land, and state.”
“Nothing is creepier than Zionism. Challenge racism”
Linda Sarsour, former executive director of the Arab American Association of New York, co-chair of the 2017 Women’s March
Herzog’s outreach to his diverse Zionist audience was sweet but showed that he has not internalized the anger and misconceptions about Zionism from the anti-Israel world. Joining the far-left in combatting climate change under the banner of Zionism sounds like he’s read a few articles about intersectionality and “allyship.” To be sure, fighting global issues is a responsibility Israel shares with the entire world, but was not a foundational matter for Herzl’s Zionism 125 years ago, and redefining Modern Zionism in such a manner today will do nothing to “reclaim” the definition from Israel haters who wish to tarnish and destroy the Jewish State.
“We need to pay attention to the Anti-Defamation League. We need to pay attention to the Jewish Federation. We need to pay attention to the Zionist synagogues. We need to pay attention to the Hillel chapters on our campuses. Because just because they’re your friend today, doesn’t mean that they have your back when it comes to human rights. So oppose the vehement fascists but oppose the polite Zionists too. They are not your friends.”
Zahra Billoo, SAN FRANCISCO EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF THE COUNCIL OF AMERICAN ISLAMIC RELATIONS (CAIR)
Herzog is correct that we need to “reclaim Zionism,” but not by stretching its meaning into something far afield from its core tenets. We need to educate the world about simple foundational truths, and what Modern Zionism actually means and created.
“European Jewish Zionists claimed to be descendants of the ancient Palestinian Hebrews and to be merely “returning” to their ancient land.”
Universities and extremist media have painted Zionism as a violent nationalist effort by European Jews to steal Arab land. They claim Jews have no history or ties to the land and are simply the latest version of European colonialists. Does Herzog really believe that Israelis bonding over climate change help stop such inanity?
Jews, historians and all people of good will need to be clear about basic historical truths and the mission of Modern Zionism.
Modern Zionism did not steal Arab history or land. It is not a derivative of the forgery The Protocols of the Elders of Zion, which falsely asserts an aim to rob Palestinian Arabs as a subset of global domination. The simple fact is that Jews have thousands of years of history in the land of Israel, and have always lived and moved to the land because it is a central part of Judaism.
“The Zionist idea to dominate the area from the Nile to the Euphrates was well known, but Israel realized that the two-State solution would not take it in that direction.”
Hiba Husseini, chairs the Legal Committee to Final Status Negotiations between the Palestinians and Israelis, and a speaker at the united nations
“The Zionist plan is limitless. After Palestine, the Zionists aspire to expand from the Nile to the Euphrates. When they will have digested the region they overtook, they will aspire to further expansion, and so on. Their plan is embodied in the “Protocols of the Elders of Zion”, and their present conduct is the best proof of what we are saying.“
Modern Zionism was launched by Herzl on only two ideas. First, that Jews will forever be targeted as minorities in countries around the world, whether they present as devout Orthodox Jews or assimilated secular ones, and second, that the only way for Jews to be secure and have a future is to have sovereignty in their homeland once again.
To be an anti-Zionist means that one doesn’t believe in one of those two things. To be against the first, is to ignore and belittle the horrific crimes committed against the most persecuted people in history. To stand against the second, is to urge for the destruction of the one Jewish State. Both are blatantly anti-Semitic.
“The three basic characteristics of Zionism are: racism, expansionism and settler colonialism”
“Reclaiming Zionism” as Israeli President Herzog desires is needed, but his prescription for joining woke causes is nonsensical. Such efforts will not reorient college campuses and the media away from their misconception that Israel is a violent European colonialist state.
Instead, we must state repeatedly the fundamental truths about Jews and the land of Israel. We must clearly articulate the meaning of Zionism, and that anti-Zionism is anti-Semitism. And we must loudly proclaim that we are proud Zionists, and amazed by the liberal democracy that thrives in the illiberal Middle East.
There are no people as persecuted as the Jews. Subject to pogroms, ethnic cleansing, blood libels and genocides throughout history and around the world, they have been the victims of the powerful and of the weak.
Rep. Jamaal Bowman represents New York State’s 16th Congressional District which covers lower Westchester County, just north of New York City. It is estimated to be over 20% Jewish and has one of the largest Jewish populations in the United States.
From his powerful podium, Bowman deliberately insults Jewish history and incites hatred for the Jewish State.
“There’s so much we’re dealing with within our own borders that it’s often difficult for Americans to turn our attention to the problems of people overseas, but it’s hard at this moment not to be struck by the extent of suffering around the world. Whether it’s the infringement of human and civil rights of Palestinians living in Sheikh Jarrah, the violence against those praying in the Al-Aqsa mosque during the holy month of Ramadan in East Jerusalem, police violence against Colombians, a military coup in Myanmar, an ignored genocide in Ethiopia, or the ethnic cleansing of the Uyghurs in China, my heart is breaking for people around the world experiencing oppression and hurt.”
Bowman started with events in Israel – twice. He only referenced the perceived wrongs against Arabs, not the violent Arab attacks against Jews exercising their basic human rights to pray with dignity at their holiest location.
He then compared those relatively minor events to vicious global activities.
In Colombia, police attacked and killed peaceful demonstrators protesting income inequality
In Myanmar, the military essentially took over the entire government and arrested public officials
In China, hundreds of thousands of Uyghurs were imprisoned and shipped to “re-education camps”
How are any of these horrible actions against hundreds of thousands of peaceful civilians remotely close to Israel protecting Jews who want to visit the Temple Mount? Bowman deliberately abused language to stir up anger and violence against the Jewish State. Which is exactly what happened over the next days, with Jews around the world being attacked.
Further, to use words like “genocide” and “ethnic cleansing” against the Jewish State, when Jews just suffered a true genocide in Europe, and ethnic cleansing in Israel at the hands of the Jordanian and Egyptian army who expelled all of the Jews from Judea and Samaria and the eastern part of Jerusalem, is to spit in the faces of actual victims.
Jamaal Bowman standing in the center of the alt-left “Squad”, with Rashida Tlaib and Ilhan Omar on the left, and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Cori Bush and Ayanna Pressley to the right
Jamaal Bowman helped inflame violence against Jews around the world with malicious smears against Israel. He is unfit to serve in congress.
The New York Times used four journalists to cover the August 14 Arab terrorist attack on Israeli Jews in Jerusalem. The journalists reporting from Jerusalem, Seoul and Hong Kong (I have no idea why correspondents from thousands of miles away were needed) could not muster a clear and balanced report.
The article started with the usual anti-Israel bias with the headline “Eight Injured in Shooting in Jerusalem” which did not clearly label the attacker as an Arab Muslim nor the victims as Israeli and American Jews. While the article would eventually reveal that the attacker was a “Palestinian man”, it would never clearly state that the victims were all Jewish. Instead, the attack was crafted as between warring countries, continuing a trend of Palestinians and Israelis killed over the past few months.
Israeli security forces at the scene of a shooting attack outside Jerusalem Old City, August 14,2022. (photo: YONATAN SINDEL/FLASH90)
The Times then mentioned Silwan, the neighborhood from where the Arab terrorist came, as having tension “between its Palestinian residents and a small but growing number of Israeli settlers.” While the Palestinian Arabs and Israelis are both “residents”, the Times opted to use the biased Palestinian narrative to describe the Israelis.
At that point, the paper shifted squarely to religion:
“Sacred to both Jews and Muslims, the nearby Temple Mount houses the third-holiest mosque in Islam and was the location in antiquity of two ancient Jewish temples that remain important to Jewish identity.“
According to the Times, while the Temple Mount is “sacred to both Jews and Muslims”, the site is really more important to Islam, as it “houses the third-holiest mosque in Islam”. For Jews, the site is merely a talisman and “important to Jewish identity.”
That’s a deliberate insult to millions of Jews around the world. The Temple Mount is THE holiest location for Judaism.
Continuing the trend, the article mentioned that “Hamas, the Islamist militant group that runs the Gaza Strip” celebrated the attack, but did not quote Fatah, the party of Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas cheering the shooting as well, posting on Facebook “Praise to the one whose rifle only speaks against his enemy. Long live our people’s unity and long live the free hero. Praise to the rifle muzzles, our people will fight the occupation with all kinds of resistance. Save your bullets and use them against the occupation, only the occupation!!”
Why did the paper opt to only refer to the “Islamist” political-terrorist group but not the secular political one which controls the presidency and Areas A and B? Does the Times believe that the conflict is a religious one or a political one? It pivoted back-and-forth in the article inelegantly.
The four journalists contributing to the story made a final pivot at the end of the article, writing “Israeli efforts to build archaeological and tourism attractions in Silwan, mostly celebrating the area’s ancient Jewish heritage, are perceived by Palestinians as a means of eroding Palestinian claims to the city.” This pivoted the conflict as neither political nor religious but a historical one. In this case, the Times seemed more comfortable pointing out that Jews have a much longer history in the region than the Arabs who first came more recently. Perhaps it does so, questioning whether history truly fuels the conflict, or is a talking point between the parties.
The Times is dancing around the political and religious nature of the Israeli-Arab conflict. While the anti-Zionist paper is comfortable making political arguments which make Israel look like the larger and more powerful political actor, it is loathe to point out that Israel has a much deeper religious claim to the land and Jerusalem. Perhaps the liberal media fears that too much information will educate readers about the profound logic of Israel retaining full control of the Old City of Jerusalem, in direct opposition of Palestinian political goals of seizing the site from the Jewish State.
Israel’s biggest critics in Congress came out to support Rep. Andy Levin (D-MI) in his Democratic primary against Rep. Haley Stevens (D-MI). They included Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-MI), Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) and J Street.
Far-left Rep. Rashida Tlaib,, Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) and Rep. Andy Levin (D-MI) in a rally to support Levin’s primary race, August 2022.
Tlaib often falsely slanders Israel as an “apartheid government” committing “ethnic cleansing” of Palestinian Arabs. She calls the founding of the Jewish State a “Nakba” (catastrophe) and opposes countries normalizing relations with Israel.
Those sentiments make her a favorite of the extremist fringes of the left and right.
Members of anti-Israel IfNotNow together with Rep. Tlaib and Rep. Levin
J Street, a far-left pro-Palestinian group marketed as “pro-Israel”, poured over $700,000 into Rep. Levin’s progressive campaign against moderate pro-Israel Rep. Haley Stevens, who was backed by the bipartisan group AIPAC. Stevens won 59.5% of the Democratic primary vote on August 2nd, which brought out roughly 110,000 voters.
When Stevens prevailed over Levin, J Street issued a press release claiming that AIPAC’s involvement in the race was a “sad moment for diplomacy and democracy.” J Street was appalled that AIPAC spent $5 million on the race and had labeled Levin as “fringe”. Therefore, the progressive fringe group asked Democratic politicians to stay far away from AIPAC in the future.
“Candidates in future primaries should disavow and decline the support of AIPAC and its SuperPAC”
J STreet, august 2, 2022
J Street is peddling its extremist socialist policies as “mainstream” as it tries to become the sole voice regarding Israel in the Democratic Party. It is aggressively attempting to defeat any politician with moderate and pro-Israel views and replace them with alt-left voices who adhere to their socialist principles.
It’s completely within their right to lobby and say what they want, but they are both hypocrites and liars. The group lies when it says it is pro-Israel when in fact it is pro-Palestinian first and foremost, and when it claims its policies are mainstream. They are hypocrites when they state a desire for a “political space for open and healthy debate over US foreign policy” and then attempt to shut down AIPAC.
A long-time liberal Democrat, Gary Ackerman (D-NY) once said that J Street is “so open-minded about what constitutes support for Israel that its brains have fallen out.” He concluded that “America really does need a smart, credible, politically active organization that is as aggressively pro-peace as it is pro-Israel. Unfortunately, J-Street ain’t it.”
J Street, Rashida Tlaib and Bernie Sanders worked their hardest to defeat a moderate pro-Israel Democrat, and they are continuing to publicly push Americans to “disavow” bipartisanship and moderate solutions to today’s problems.
Some of Rep. Haley Stevens comments about Israel and anti-Semitism which seemingly offended pro-Israel progressives:
“I am deeply concerned by the persistent and growing effort to demonize Israel, the world’s only Jewish state and a close American ally, on the international stage. Whether through the chronic bias displayed by the United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC) or accusations put out by groups like Amnesty International, I stand opposed to efforts to unjustifiably brand Israel as an “apartheid state,” and I will always work to mitigate the threat of delegitimization against our closest friends in the Middle East.” – February 2, 2022
“Make no mistake about it: a strong and enduring partnership between the United States and the State of Israel is paramount to our interests at home and abroad. Bipartisan support for Israel and a two-state solution promotes lasting peace and democracy in the Middle East. I’m eager to reaffirm my support for Israel, condemn anti-semitism in all its forms, and make clear that my beliefs on Israel and any other policy topic for that matter will never be bought and paid for.” – February 11, 2019
Quite a contrast from Levin saying “Unless Palestinian human rights are respected, we cannot fight antisemitism.” Levin’s appalling statement was rebuked by Liora Rez, director of Stop Antisemitism.org, saying “Neo nazis and radical Islamists quite frequently hold Jews in America responsible for the Israel/Palestinian conflict. For a sitting U.S. Congressman to mirror this horrific rhetoric does nothing but feed the Jew hating machine. Andy Levin should be ashamed of himself!”
And in even sharper contract to Levin-supporter Rashida Tlaib:
First One Through 