Category Archives: USA

Americans Welcome the Philosophy of ISIS

Posted on by
5

Just five years ago, the world watched in horror as Islamic fanatics went on a rampage through Iraq destroying artifacts. Headlines read “History in Ruins” and “Casualties of War” as the whole world cringed as physical history was obliterated.

Jim Cuno of the J Paul Getty Trust said of the vandalized artifacts: “it roots us in our origins. It understands that we are part of a much larger picture; a picture that is as diverse as the world itself.” Gayle King of CBS News added that “it is hard to watch the glee that goes into destroying something.”

The militants felt justified in their vandalism, saying on camera: “these statues are idols to people in previous centuries which were worshiped other than God. God Almighty says ‘And we sent a messenger to you, just to reveal no God but I. Worship Me.’ The Prophet ordered us to get rid of statues and relics. His companions did the same when they conquered countries after him.”

Members of ISIS destroy statues in Iraq in 2015

Bernard Haykel of Princeton University said “it is a gratuitous and barbaric act frankly, but one that is intended to appeal to an audience looking for some sort of authenticity.” PBS News noted that “the act [of destruction] fits into a broader campaign by the Islamic State to brazenly and publicly destroy cultural relics in the name of religious purity.”

And so it seems today with a new religion with a single truth which demands complete purity. #BlackLivesMatter #WhitePrivilege #DontSayAnythingCounterToWokeNarrative

While there is a rationale and appeal to common decency to remove statues on US soil of people who fought against these United States such as generals of the Confederacy who were famous specifically for such acts, it is preposterous to attack statues of America’s founders like Thomas Jefferson and James Madison because they were not perfect. To read the Declaration of Independence or the Federalist Papers is to be a witness to the crafting of not only a new country but an entirely new construction of government: the break with monarchy and authoritarian rule to set a course for a government by the people for the people. The founders mission was liberty from tyranny and oppressive government.

Neither those documents nor the people who wrote them were perfect, and no one has ever claimed as much. To make a statue of perfection is indeed to craft an idol, the very objection of ISIS and other religious purists.

America names schools and has busts of leaders because of their positive contribution to the society we live in. We celebrate the achievements of the people who helped create and protect our great nation with their likeness which reminds us of the events that “root us in our origins… that we are part of a much larger picture,” as Cuno said of artifacts in Iraq.

Today’s woke movement answers to a higher authority. Like ISIS, it wraps itself in righteous smugness while it destroys anything viewed as impure, be it statues of the dead or reputations and livelihood of the living. It has no patience for a common past as it launches a crusade “intended to appeal to an audience looking for some sort of authenticity.”

Defenders of the rioters claim there is no common past in America and that “systemic racism” built into the founding of the country manufactured disparate societies. A constitution that advocated for free speech while ignoring enslaved people was never a template for justice. They seek a fresh start, a revolution of sorts, where diversity of people will trump diversity of opinion. Their New America will shatter Old America’s imperfect idols and enforce the Gospel of Wokeness. Liberty for all people will require a new form of tyranny: a Crusade to either destroy or convert non-believers.

Statue of Thomas Jefferson is removed from its base in front of Jefferson High School in Northeast Portland on June 14, 2020. Jamie Goldberg/Staff

UNESCO called the wanton destruction of cultural relics by ISIS in Iraq “a war crime” but it is highly doubtful it will do the same regarding the anarchists destroying statues of America’s founders. More importantly, is whether Americans themselves will let the philosophy of ISIS permeate its streets enabling the caliphate of cancel culture to raise its flag over every government building in the land.

Related First One Through articles:

The End of Together

The Monumental Gap between Nikki Haley and Donald Trump

BLM: Truth, Relevance and Association

Subscribe YouTube channel: FirstOneThrough

Join Facebook group: Israel Analysis and FirstOneThrough

Genes Versus Leadership in the Pandemic

Posted on by
4

The COVID-19 pandemic has received a lot of ink. Much of the writings from the liberal press has had virtually nothing to do with science and much to do with promoting a liberal narrative.

The New York Times pushed forward the idea that radical right-wing men were the worst kind of leaders in a pandemic in a June 2, 2020 article called “Where the Virus is Growing the Most: Countries with ‘Illiberal Populist’ Leaders.” It must have gotten rave reviews because Nicholas Kristof decided to write a similar piece in an Op-Ed story on June 14 called “Nations May Be Safer Under Women.”

These stories are utter nonsense as described in “Where the Virus is Killing the Most: Countries with Socialist Leaders,” which uses actual statistics to show the exact opposite of what the Times conveys. This was not #AlternativeFacts; it was the essence of #FakeNews.

The news today has a set narrative that aggressively seeks an anchor in current events. If the facts don’t fit, the editors will reframe them somehow. Would the Times ever write that the worst hit country in the world by the pandemic is headed by a liberal woman? Never! (For those playing at home, it’s Sophie Wilmès of Belgium).

And it’s beyond a shame; it’s a crime. People are dying all around the world and the Times is playing politics rather than educating its readers and possibly helping point to a cure by looking at figures honestly.

Genes Versus Leadership in the Pandemic

During this election year, the mainstream media is pushing the notion that right-wing autocratic men like Donald Trump literally kill people, while progressive women save people. It’s a narrative tailored to November.

A more honest appraisal of why people are dying from COVID-19 has seemingly little to do with government leadership as much as circumstances. Age, season and genes are statistically the leading indicators of mortality.

AGE: According Worldometers, only 4.5% of all deaths in NYC occurred in patients under 65 years old who did not have underlying health conditions, even while almost 86% of the population is under 65. There is a direct correlation between advanced years and probability of dying from COVID-19.

SEASON: The northern hemisphere was rocked by the coronavirus. Countries like Belgium, the United States, Spain, Italy, Sweden and France were all hit hard. Meanwhile, countries in the Southern hemisphere were barely touched through May. That may be changing together with the seasons with winter coming to South America, Africa, Australia and New Zealand.

GENES: The liberal media has written about the higher mortality rate of Black people in the United States and has both implied and stated outright that it is because of systemic racism. But an examination of Jews and Arabs in the Middle East may point to a very different reason: genes or cultural habits.

The death rate in Israel is roughly 33 people per million as of this writing. Meanwhile, the mortality rate for Arabs in the West Bank and Gaza is only 0.6 per million and in Jordan it is 0.9 per million. A deeper examination into the numbers in Israel by the Taub Center in Israel, shows that Arab infections were less than half of Jewish infections inside of Israel.

Israeli Arabs, Palestinian Arabs and Jordanian Arabs are from a very similar gene pool and live next door to each other but each live in very different circumstances in regards to leadership, yet had roughly the same mortality rate. Meanwhile Israeli Jews living nearby died at a rate roughly 50 times as high. This suggests that either genes or cultural habits account for the dramatic differences in death rates, not whether the leader is male or female (the way that Kristof posits) or a monarch, autocrat or Democratically-elected (unless the liberal media wants to reframe its entire narrative about the besieged poor Gazans).

Seem too far fetched? Tests are beginning to show that people with Type A blood are more likely to be infected by COVID-19 and those with type O blood, much less.

People are dying in a pandemic and the New York Times is feeding its readership complete fabrications in order to secure a Democratic victory. It’s both sad that liberals have such little faith in their party leaders that they need to manufacture tales, and that they use a global tragedy for political ends.

Related First One Through articles:

The CoronavirUS is Not Us Versus Them

“The Death of George Floyd” Opera and The Humanity of Derek Chauvin

Toronto Star Sanitizes Hamas During Pandemic

Liberal Senators Look to Funnel Money into Gaza

The U.N. Doesn’t Care About Middle-Aged White Male Victims of Covid-19

Subscribe YouTube channel: FirstOneThrough

Join Facebook group: FirstOne Through Israel Analysis and FirstOneThrough

Pelosi’s Vastly Different Responses to Antisemitism and Racism

Posted on by
19

The most powerful Democrat in the United States, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, is probably the sharpest politician in America today. She knows how to make Washington move to her beat, directing her party and challenging Republicans in both policy and directly for their jobs.

It has been quite a display watching how she has handled antisemitism and racism.

Congresswoman Ilhan Omar (D-MN) made a series of antisemitic remarks in early 2019. Fellow members of Congress were appalled and wanted her called out and sought a resolution clearly condemning Jew hatred. But Pelosi sought to shield her fellow Democrat, especially a Black Muslim Woman. She managed to have Omar’s named pulled from the resolution and rather than specifically condemn antisemitism, the final wording covered ALL forms of hatred including “Islamophobia, racism and other forms of bigotry.”

Omar and fellow female Muslim Congresswoman Rashida Tlaib (D-MI) were thrilled by the wording and said “It’s the first time we have voted on a resolution condemning Anti-Muslim bigotry in our nation’s history.” Rather than being scolded and embarrassed, Omar emerged as a proud victor.

She received a lesson that hateful words and actions do not matter: it’s power that protects, and Nancy Pelosi is both powerful and astutely political.

Ilhan Omar and Nancy Pelosi (photo: J. Scott Applewhite/AP Images}

On June 8, 2020 Pelosi sought to address another case of bigotry regarding the killing of an unarmed Black man by a police officer in Minnesota. Pelosi issued a clear statement that “Black Lives Matter,” and said that only “House Democrats” seek justice on behalf of George Floyd’s family and other African-Americans.

So when a Black elected member of Congress made a series of antisemitic tropes, Nancy Pelosi came to her defense and said ALL hatred is terrible, but when a local White police officer killed a Black man, Pelosi stated that ONLY Black lives mattered. When Omar was vilified, Pelosi said she was particularly worried about Omar’s safety, as though Jews were murderers coming to get her, but now seems nonplussed by the nationwide riots and violence – including the killing of police officers – after the killing of George Floyd and Omar’s chant that police are a “cancer” that should be rooted out.

Leading Democrats alongside Nancy Pelosi donning African garb and bending a knee

Pelosi knows politics and knows the 2020 election will be determined by turnout. There are seven times as many Black as Jews in the USA and the number of Muslims will surpass Jews in a decade. This crafty politician knows where her power ultimately lies, and it’s not with the ever-shrinking Jewish minority, two-thirds of whom vote for Democrats regardless of who is running.

If you want an unvarnished view of America’s concern for antisemitism today, consider the cold calculus of America’s leading politician.

Related First One Through articles:

Covering Racism

Examining Ilhan Omar’s Point About Muslim Antisemitism

Anti-Semitism Is Harder to Recognize Than Racism

Fact Check Your Assumptions on American Racism

Black Antisemitism: The Intersectional Hydra

Criticizing Muslim Antisemitism is Not Islamophobia

Subscribe YouTube channel: FirstOneThrough

Join Facebook group: FirstOne Through Israel Analysis and FirstOneThrough

The New York Times Recognizes the Problem of Municipal Unions, Selectively

Posted on by
1

In light of the recent killing of a Black man by police in Minnesota, the NY Times belatedly came to the realization that municipal unions protect their union members and not the public at-large. While this should be obvious to anyone, it is remarkable for the liberal media.

On June 7, 2020, a front page article led with a sub-title “Unions Using Their Outsize Political Power to Resist Checks on Officers’ Behavior.” The article continued:

“as demands for reform have mounted… unions have emerged as one of the most significant roadblocks to change.”

The Times was fine writing negatively about this particular union – law enforcement – but these are words that are true for ALL MUNICIPAL UNIONS, especially the one that the Times cherishes the most: the Teachers Unions.

Front page story of The New York Times on the police unions

For years the Teachers Unions has fought against necessary changes for millions of young Americas. They have fought against Charter schools which outperform public schools. They have fought to keep weak teachers on payroll and make it virtually impossible to fire someone who would have been quickly dismissed in any other profession. They have been sued for corruption by its own members who are forced to pay dues which end up into the coffers of politicians who may not be of the individuals liking.

The union negotiates for raises and incredible pension benefits for its retirees. The United States has a real divided society which no one talks about: those with secure guaranteed pensions who work for government unions, and the rest of America which is worried about retirement.

Meanwhile, millions of students are falling behind students in Europe and Asia in reading, math and science. According to a person administering the exams “About a fifth of American 15-year-olds scored so low on the PISA test that it appeared they had not mastered reading skills expected of a 10-year-old.”

Politicians are too scared to take on these powerful unions. The union leaders have the muscle to deliver millions of dollars and votes, so government officials are forced to give in to their demands. They look like they’re taking action by investing billions into a broken system.

The teachers unions will say they are fighting for our kids but it’s plainly untrue; they are fighting for their public school teachers, just as the police unions fight for their members. While Americans have come to question whether the police are providing safety for all people, we have known for years that the public school system is failing millions of children yet we fail to point the finger and demand reforms of the teachers’ unions.

In fact, the liberal media DEFENDS the teachers over America’s children consistently.

Consider the teachers strike in Los Angeles last year. The Times wrote about the sad state of students while failing to talk about the huge salaries and pensions that LA teachers receive. Teachers strikes are for teachers, not students. The Times acted like an open mic for union leaders, deflecting the entire issue.

This week, the Times turned on its very first municipal union and called for reform of police unions. All Americans should take that momentum and forcefully push for a complete dismantling of the broken educational system which is a direct result of the corrupt and inept public teachers’ unions.

Related First One Through articles:

The Democratic Socialists Tell Lies and Half Truths About Lobbyists

When Only Republicans Trust the Police

NY Times, NY Times, What Do You See? It Sees Rich White Males

Leading Gay Activists Hate Religious Children

Subscribe to YouTube channel: FirstOneThrough

Join Facebook groups: Israel Analysis and FirstOneThrough

Adam Schleifer Shares His Positions on Israel

Posted on by
2

Adam Schleifer is running for Congress in New York’s 17th District.

In response to the First One Through article posted on June 5 about the Israel positions of the various Democrats competing for Nita Lowey’s seat, Schleifer’s team updated the candidate’s website with a section called “Strong, Sustainable US-Israel Relationship.” The section contained over 1,000 words and covered Schleifer’s Jewish background, the benefits to America from its relationship with Israel, thoughts about peace in the region and analysis of how best to deal with Iran and its threat to the region.

Schleifer also spoke with me directly about his positions on Israel which are shared in a condensed, summarized fashion below.

First One Through: Question on Jerusalem: As recently as 2008, the Democratic platform stated “Jerusalem is and will remain the capital of Israel.” The statement was contested at the Democratic convention floor of 2012 but approved. In 2016, President Obama let a United Nations Security Council resolution pass which declared that Israel’s control of the eastern half of Jerusalem was “illegal.” However, President Trump later recognized Jerusalem as Israel’s capital and moved the US embassy there. What is your position about the city? Would you move the US embassy out of Jerusalem or change the recognition of the city?

Adam Schleifer: Jerusalem is the capital of Israel. While I am not the president, I will take no action to undue the recognition of Jerusalem nor would I move the US embassy from the city.

FOT: Borders: President George W Bush wrote a letter to Ariel Sharon in 2004 that stated “it is unrealistic to expect that the outcome of final status negotiations will be a full and complete return to the armistice lines of 1949.” Virtually identical language was used in the official Democratic platform of 2008 only to be removed under Obama’s presidential tenure. For his part, Trump stated that “the establishment of Israeli civilian settlements in the West Bank is not per se inconsistent with international law.” What do you think should be the basis for the borders and how does it impact your view of Israelis living east of the Green Line?

AS: I will not dictate or opine where the borders should be. The goal of America should be to get two parties [Israel and the Palestinians] to start negotiating with each other. They need to figure out out a number of details about how to exchange various parcels of land, and how to accommodate the demographic realities of various areas versus the legal claims to the same, including how to get the disconnected occupied territories to become connected by a transit route.

Right now we don’t have good parties in the mix. Arafat walked away from a historic opportunity in 2000 (I was in DC watching with sadness as the deal unraveled) and Hamas is terrible and not a partner for peace. I won’t get into whether I think Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu is a good guy or not; that’s not our role. We just need to be constructive in getting the parties talking.

The reality is that under international law most legal opinions conclude that the territories are “occupied” in violation of that law, whatever the historical, moral and practical realities of the situation. It’s also true that the Israeli government’s actions of building settlements in far out places and areas that are almost certain to conflict with an orderly peace process and is a recipe for difficulty both for the Palestinians and Israel to ultimately dismantle.

FOT: Palestinian State: The UN Declaration of Human Rights states that all people should have self-determination, however, the UN declared that Palestinians also have a unique “inalienable right” to sovereignty, a sentiment that no other people in the world have. Do you believe that Palestinians have such inalienable right to have their own country, or just citizenship in some country, whether their own, Israel, Jordan or Egypt?

AS: That is not a useful question. The Palestinians operate and view themselves as having a unique culture and desire an independent state. The reality is that that aspiration will need to be accommodated as a pragmatic matter for a sustainable solution. Many other people similarly have aspirations for statehood, though, and one particularly legitimate additional example in the middle east appears to be the Kurds, who we have failed to stand by after they stood by us, and we should work to see them at least have autonomous regions permitting self-rule and determination of some form.

FOT: UNRWA: Refugees from around the world are managed by the UNHCR, taking care of over 60 million people fleeing war-torn areas, forced to resettle, build shelter and schools. Meanwhile, a distinct UNRWA handles grandchildren of Palestinian refugees who have a long-established infrastructure. UNRWA has bloated itself to provide services for people who are not even descendants of refugees and has arbitrarily extended its mandate to run until the establishment of a Palestinian State, rather than getting these descendants resettled. Do you think UNRWA should be dissolved or folded into the UNHCR?

AS: I have no opinion and would need to explore the issue further. It is clear that the UN has a very troubling double standard for all things related to Israel. Consider the UN Human Rights Committee which condemns Israel while ignoring the brutality of Libya, Saudi Arabia, Turkey and Sudan.

FOT: USA as Moderator: Do you believe that the US should be the sole mediator of the peace process or should it be part of the “Quartet” of the European Union, UN and Russia? How should the America’s role change in situations of it acting alone or in concert with others?

AS: The United States is now viewed as weak and ineffective on the world stage because of the current president. I am a big believer of multi-lateralism and will take the UN involvement whenever we can get it. It will lead to reigning in regional chaos and injustice.

The current president of the US unduly relies on personal relationships to manage foreign policy, but such approach cannot endure beyond his tenure. We need to map out policies beyond the particular individuals. We are in a situation now where the US has no credibility and to be effective, you have to have credibility.

Being effective also means being honest. When it comes to Israel, America is a strong friend but being a friend doesn’t always mean being a non-critical friend.

We need to include other parties as part of the peace process and be an honest credible moderator to the parties.

FOT: Iran: What do you think of Iran and the Iranian nuclear deal and the withdrawal from it? 

AS: The U.S. cannot allow Iran to obtain nuclear weapons. It is a malignant autocratic regime. We cannot allow such an autocratic regime to arm themselves. We need to drive a hard bargain for a new and better deal.

More so, the U.S. must get the whole world to empower the people of Iran. Through various means, the U.S. should push for hard sanctions to pressure the regime to make real change towards the rule of law.

FOT: Antisemitism: How do you plan on fighting antisemitism?

AS: Antisemitism is a thread that unites extremists around the world. All forms of extremism are inherently dangerous. In France they self-define as left-wing and in Poland and Hungary they self-define as far right. They are united only in antisemitism.

Education is key to fighting the hatred. Holocaust education is critical, as are instituting new laws like the Hate Crime Prevention Act. We need to be creative with actively fighting against all kinds of antisemitic attacks.

It is worth reviewing Schleifer’s prepared AIPAC remarks which are now on his website.

Adam Schleifer on a trip in Israel

Subscribe to YouTube channel: FirstOneThrough

Join Facebook groups: Israel Analysis and FirstOneThrough

U.S. Police Are Killing Men

Posted on by
1

The United States is going through an analysis of the possible causes of police departments disproportionately killing Black people and considering methods of dealing with the situation. It is certainly past time to consider the reasons that police are killing men at a significantly more disproportionate rate than women.

According to Statista, police killed about twice the number of White people than Black people between 2017 and 2020. However, accounting for the fact that there are 5.7 times the number of Whites (76.5% of population) than Blacks (13.4% of population), the adjusted ratio implies that an average Black person is three times more likely to by shot by a cop than a White person.

Exhibit 1: People Shot to Death by Police, by Race

Year White Black W/B Multiple B/W Adj Multiple
2017 457 223 2.0x 2.8x
2018 399 209 1.9x 3.0x
2019 370 235 1.6x 3.6x
2020 YTD 172 88 2.0x 2.9x

The numbers for police killings are much worse when examining the numbers by gender. There are slightly more women (50.8%) than men in the United States. However, men are almost exclusively shot to death by police according to data by Statista.

Exhibit 2: People Shot to Death by Police, by Gender

Year Men Women M/W Multiple M/W Adj Multiple
2017 940 45 20.9x 21.6x
2018 942 53 17.8x 18.4x
2019 961 43 22.3x 23.1x
2020 415 13 31.9x 33.0x

An average male is 33 times more likely to be shot and killed by a police officer than an average woman, while an average Black person is three times more likely to be killed than an average White person. As society examines how to reduce the disproportionate killing of Black people, we must no longer be blind and silent to the catastrophe impacting men in this country.

An image taken from video shows Walter Scott shortly before he was shot dead by North Charleston, S.C., Police Officer Michael Slager in 2015.(Associated Press )

Related First One Through articles:

BLM: Truth, Relevance and Association

NY Times, NY Times, What Do You See? It Sees Rich White Males

The U.N. Doesn’t Care About Middle-Aged White Male Victims of Covid-19

Older White Men are the Most Politically Balanced Demographic By Far

Subscribe YouTube channel: FirstOneThrough

Join Facebook group: Israel Analysis and FirstOneThrough

 

 

Will A Reliable Pro-Israel Congressional Seat Flip?

Posted on by
4

Congresswoman Nita Lowey has served in the United States Congress for several decades. Representing New York’s 17th District covering Lower Westchester County and all of Rockland County, Lowey has been and consistent supporter of Israel since she entered Congress in 1989. Now, at age 82, she is retiring.

A long list of Democrats are lining up to compete for her seat. Almost all are quite to the left of Lowey politically, unabashedly “progressive” with the exception of David Carlucci. The candidates’ records and statements on Israel have been quite mixed as well. Below is a summary.

First, the Pro-Israel and Anti-antisemitism candidates: Buchwald and Carlucci

David Buchwald

David Buchwald, 41, is the most aggressively pro-Israel candidate among the Democrats.

He fought actively against the Iran nuclear deal as it left Iran’s pathway to nuclear weapons intact. He co-sponsored the anti-Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) bill in the New York State Assembly and notably supported President Trump’s declaration that “the establishment of Israeli civilian settlements in the West Bank is not per se inconsistent with international law.”

Moreover, Buchwald has stated that U.S. military aid to Israel cannot be used “as a bargaining chip” to pressure Israel into making decisions which it feels undermines its security.

New York State Assemblyman David Buchwald

Justin Brasch, a member of White Plains City Council said that “David is by far the most pro-Israel candidate by every measure. He also is the most vocal against Iran due to their support of global terror and the terrorist group Hezbollah.”

Buchwald’s full position paper on Israel is here.

David Carlucci

David Carlucci, 39, is a New York State Senator with an Italian father and Jewish mother. He is probably best known for working across the aisle with Republicans in New York State government for years, often making him an outsider with the current Democratic party pushing to the far left.

Carlucci has been active fighting antisemitism, including introducing the Social Media Hate Speech Accountability Act after Jews in Monsey (in Rockland County) were attacked during Channukah, and a bill that would categorize graffitiing as a hate crime if it targets a person’s race, color, national origin, ancestry, gender, religion, age, disability or sexual orientation. He was particularly appalled by NYC Mayor Bill de Blasio calling out the Chasidic community during the pandemic.

Regarding Israel, he is in favor of a two-state solution. He co-sponsored the anti-Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) bill in the New York State Senate and notably supported the decision to move Israel’s capital to Jerusalem. He was critical of a letter sent by Democratic leaders to President Trump opposing Israel applying Israeli law to parts of Judea and Samaria. Like Buchwald, he is against any conditioning of aid to Israel.

In regards to the Iranian deal, Carlucci’s campaign office sent me the following to clarify his position:

“I oppose re-entering the Iran Nuclear Deal of 2015 for many reasons, including  most concerning is that it did not stop Iran’s path to nuclear weapons, it did not address Iran’s sponsorship of terrorism, it lacked inspections at military sites, it allowed Iran to continue its research into what could lead to the development of weapons of mass destruction, and it did not prohibit development of ballistic missiles.  Now that we have been removed from the Iran deal, we must restart negotiations as soon as possible with the goal being that Iran never get control of nuclear weapons or weapons of mass destruction.  These new negotiations must have these parameters in place to guide a productive resolution.”

Meh-Israel candidates: Farkas, Fine, Jones and Schleifer.

Evelyn Farkas

Evelyn Farkas, 52, is supported by J Street, a far-left group that was in favor of sanctioning Israel at the United Nations, labeling Jewish Israelis living east of the Green Line as “illegal settlers,” and the Iranian nuclear deal which gave the leading state sponsor of terrorism which calls for the destruction of Israel, a legal pathway to nuclear weapons.

Farkas worked in the Obama administration’s Defense department and has been endorsed by former Secretary of State John Kerry and US Ambassador to Israel, Dan Shaprio.

Not surprisingly, Farkas’s positions on Israel are similar to the Obama administration: in favor of a two state solution and at odds with various Trump initiatives in the region.

Allison Fine

Allison Fine, 55, is also supported by J Street. She is far more left-wing than Farkas, having served as past chair of NARAL, a pro-abortion organization and also less sophisticated about international relations.

Fine views everything through a feminist lens, stating about her run for Lowey’s seat, “this is a woman’s seat and I think it should stay a woman’s seat.” Speaking in defense of the four progressive members of “the squad” who have been critical about Israel, she said “I think we need to support women once they are in office because the level of harassment that elected women receive is far larger than what men receive.”

She has been happy to visit Israel several times and her website states “We must stand with the State of Israel and ensure both economic assistance and political support are never in question.”

Mondaire Jones

Mondaire Jones, 33, is even more alt-left than Allison Fine, endorsed by Senator Elizabeth Warren, Rep. Ayanna Pressley and others on the extreme fringe. Not surprisingly, he is also supported by J Street.

Jones viewed Obama’s Iranian nuclear deal as “great” and was strongly opposed to Trump’s withdrawal.

While his website states nothing about Israel, he worked with the Jewish Insider to post his position about the Jewish State. In it he states “I strongly oppose the building and expansion of Israeli settlements in the West Bank.” He opposed Trump’s recognition of Israel’s capital in Jerusalem and believes the city should be divided by Israel and the Palestinians. He does, however, recognize that Hamas is a terrorist organization.

Adam Schleifer

Adam Schleifer, 38, has a background in law as a former US assistant attorney in California and NY State Consumer Protection Regulator. He is most famous for his parents – Leonard, who is the CEO of Regeneron, the Tarrytown-headquartered pharmaceutical giant and Harriet, President of the American Jewish Committee.

Schleifer doesn’t have much to say about Israel other than he disagrees with President Trump’s “style” and doesn’t believe it will create an enduring peace.

He is vocal about combating antisemitism, placing it in the number 7-of-12 slot on his policy goals.

For those people who want to see Nita Lowey’s seat remain in pro-Israel hands, there are really only two choices: David Buchwald and David Carlucci. Democratic primary date is June 23.

Related First One Through articles:

Liberal Senators Look to Funnel Money into Gaza

J Street is Only Considered “Pro-Israel” in Progressive Circles

Will the 2020 Democratic Platform Trash Israel?

The Insidious Jihad in America

Subscribe YouTube channel: FirstOneThrough

Join Facebook group: FirstOne Through  Israel Analysis

BLM: Truth, Relevance and Association

Posted on by
13

“Black Lives Matter” is seemingly a simple statement of fact. To disagree with such notion would be the mark of a racist.

But BLM is not just a slogan. It is also the name of an organized movement, and it is sometimes perceived to be a racist sentiment itself as it may imply that non-Black lives don’t matter. It is important to unpack each of these at this time of social unrest and rioting after the killing of George Floyd.

The BLM Movement

The BLM movement has a range of statements and demands which are disturbing. To highlight a few from it’s website:

  • Defunding the police. While people are justifiably angry at specific actions of police brutality, the call for “a national defunding of police,” is a call for pure anarchy. It is unsafe, unwise and an assault on everyone.
  • Anti-“family”. The BLM agenda seeks to “disrupt the Western-prescribed nuclear family structure requirement.” People should be free to live a life of their choosing so the desire to fight against a “traditional” two-parent family is immoral, and is also counterproductive when studies and statistics have shown consistently that children raised in such a structure do better.
  • Anti-Israel. The movement states that Israel is committing a “genocide… against the Palestinian people” and that “Israel is an apartheid state.” That’s not just outrageously incorrect; it is insulting to Blacks in South Africa who suffered under genuine apartheid and Holocaust survivors who faced a true genocide.

In short, one can be a believer in the inherent value of Black lives but loudly denounce the radical movement.

BLM versus All Lives Matter

It is a truism that all lives matter, whether Black, Brown, White or Yellow. If someone arbitrarily states that “Yellow Lives Matter,” the comment and person would likely be scorned as it would appear elitist and racist. However, to state that “Black Lives Matter” in reaction to hate crimes against Blacks is appropriate. It is a directly relevant statement about a racist situation.

Consider a discussion about the Holocaust. While there were non-Jews killed by the Nazis in World War II including homosexuals, Catholics, Poles and Roma, they were not the obsession and target for annihilation the way that Jews were, and did not suffer so horribly. While It is perfectly fine to have a discussion about Nazis killing thousands of gays, it is inappropriate to insert such a discussion in the middle of a Holocaust Memorial focused on Jews.

Yes, all lives matter, but when engaging in a discussion with people in a moment of pain and reflection, it is important to give them their space to concentrate on their trauma. It is a time for empathy, not self-absorption.

Protest in 2016 (picture from Vanity Fair article, photo by Scott Barbour/ Getty Images)

“Black Lives Matter” is a true declaration that should be given the appropriate space at this time, which in no way undermines the general fact that all lives matter. It is also true that the statement echoes the name of a radical movement which advances horrible ideas which should be shunned. Perhaps a different expression like “Blacks Are Just As Innocent Until Proven Guilty,” might appeal to a basic American credo and unite everyone to concentrate on the legal system to advance and perfect a just society.

Related First One Through articles:

Black Lives Matter Joins the anti-Israel “Progressives” Fighting Zionism

When Only Republicans Trust the Police

Mayor De Blasio is Blind to Black Anti-Semitism

If a Black Muslim Cop Kills a White Woman, Does it Make a Sound?

Subscribe YouTube channel: FirstOneThrough

Join Facebook group: FirstOne Through Israel Analysis

Africans in Minnesota

Posted on by
Reply

The United States has always been a country of immigrants since its founding days. During the Industrial Revolution of the 1880’s to 1910 the wave of immigrants from Europe made the country have a large white majority. The push back against immigrants during World War I and the Great Depression mostly sealed U.S. borders for decades which only began to change meaningfully in the 1960’s.

The Immigration and Naturalization Act of 1965 removed the quota system that capped immigration from each country, greatly benefiting non-European countries. While U.S. immigration in the 1960’s was split 75%, 9% and 5% for Europe, Latin America and Asia, respectively, by the 1980’s the continents of origin were 23%, 44% and 26%, respectively.

Africa has not been a major source of immigrants over the past 100 years. In 2018, just over 2 million of the country’s 44.7 million immigrants came from sub-Saharan Africa. While small, this figure has grown rapidly, from 691,000 in 2000 and 130,000 in 1980. The largest number of immigrants comes from Nigeria, the African country with the largest population, followed by Ethiopia, Ghana and Kenya.

Many of these immigrants live in the large states, including New York, California, Texas, Florida, Ohio and New Jersey. Others have settled into smaller states including Georgia, Connecticut, Maryland and Virginia.

But nowhere has the African immigrant population been felt as dramatically as in Minnesota.

Exhibit 1: Black Population, by Place of Birth

State Foreign-born US-born Multiple
Minnesota 27.4% 4.6%        5.96
Washington 6.5% 3.4%        1.91
Connecticut 16.5% 10.0%        1.65
Ohio 16.7% 12.2%        1.37
New York 19.4% 14.6%        1.33
Pennsylvania 14.3% 10.9%        1.31
Florida 15.9% 16.0%        0.99
Indiana 8.9% 9.6%        0.93
Maryland 26.8% 30.5%        0.88
New Jersey 11.7% 14.1%        0.83
Wisconsin 5.0% 6.4%        0.78
United States 9.5% 13.2%        0.72
Tennessee 10.6% 17.1%        0.62
Virginia 11.6% 20.2%        0.57
Georgia 18.6% 33.0%        0.56
North Carolina 9.2% 22.5%        0.41
Michigan 5.8% 14.4%        0.40
Alabama 8.1% 27.4%        0.30
Illinois 4.2% 15.7%        0.27
California 1.7% 7.3%        0.23
South Carolina 5.7% 27.7%        0.21
Louisiana 6.7% 33.5%        0.20
Mississippi 7.3% 38.8%        0.19

As seen on Exhibit 1, overall in the United States, Black people account for 13.2% of the U.S.-born population and 9.5% of the foreign-born population. In southern states like South Carolina, Louisiana and Mississippi, Blacks make up a significant percentage of the population, almost all being born in the United States. In several northern states like Ohio, Washington, Connecticut and New York, the Black population born in Africa is significant, surpassing the overall mix of U.S.-born Black people in the state.

In Minnesota, the immigrant population is driven by Blacks from Africa, accounting for six times the percentage of U.S.-born blacks in the state. While Africans account for under ten per cent of the overall US immigrant population, they account for 27.4% of the immigrant population in Minnesota, nearly three times the rate.

Exhibit 2: Foreign-born Population in Minnesota by Continent

Exhibit 2 shows how Africa’s share of the Minnesota immigrant community has grown from 4.3% in 1990 to 27.2% in 2018. Since 2000, it is the only region which has grown its share, reversing the trend even for immigrants from Latin America. It is the only state in the country with this phenomenon.

African-born immigrants have moved to Minnesota at a scale not seen anywhere else in the United States. The percentage far surpasses US-born Blacks and eclipses Latin American and European immigrants. In 2018, they helped elect the first immigrant from Africa to Congress, Ilhan Omar from Somalia. Will their numbers impact future elections as well?

Related First One Through articles:

The Explosion of Immigrants in the United States

There’s No White Privilege for Prostitutes in Minnesota

If a Black Muslim Cop Kills a White Woman, Does it Make a Sound?

Republican Scrutiny and Democratic Empowerment of Muslims in Minnesota

The Insidious Jihad in America

When Only Republicans Trust the Police

Subscribe YouTube channel: FirstOneThrough

Join Facebook group: Israel Analysis and FirstOneThrough

Conditional U.S. Support in The Middle East

Posted on by
9

In late 2019, some Democratic candidates for president stated that they would condition American support for Israel with Israel’s behavior regarding Palestinian Arabs. Former Vice President Joe Biden considered the suggestion made by Senator Bernie Sanders (as well as Elizabeth Warren and Pete Buttigieg) to be “bizarre.”

Biden seemed to further cement his position of not compromising on military aid to Israel in a recorded message to an AIPAC conference on March 1, 2020 when he reiterated that “I will never boycott [Israel]…. Israel must be able to defend itself. It’s not just critical for Israel’s security, I believe it is critical for America’s security.”

As Biden tries to court the Sanders supporters who are highly critical of Israel, it remains to be seen how far Biden will tilt towards the anti-Israel stance of Team Sanders who demand a boycott of Jewish homes and businesses east of the Green Line and funneling Israeli military aid towards rebuilding Gaza.

To appreciate the “bizarre” Sanders conditional approach to Israel, consider America’s approach to the Middle East overall.

American Blood

The United States has thousands of troops deployed throughout the Persian Gulf.

Country U.S. Troops Operations
Bahrain 5,000 Headquarters of the U.S. Fifth Fleet and U.S. Naval Forces Central Command (USNAVCENT)
Qatar 10,000 Home to the Al Udeid Air Base, which includes the forward headquarters of U.S. Air Forces Central Command (AFCENT)
Saudi Arabia 2,500 Prince Sultan Air Base
Kuwait 14,500 U.S. uses Camp Arifjan, Camp Buehring, Ali Al Salem Air Field and the naval base Camp Patriot
Iraq 6,000 Remaining troops after Operation Inherent Resolve to fight ISIS
Oman 600 Relatively small footprint
UAE 5,500 Al Dhafra Air Base hosts several U.S. fighter, attack and reconnaissance aircraft of the U.S. 380th Air Expeditionary Wing.

There are over 225,000 U.S. troops stationed abroad but the United States has no permanent base in Israel and no troops are stationed there. Based on the shared principles of democracy and trust, the United States relies on Israel as a partner in the region and supplies it military aid to defend itself.

The figures of American dead and wounded reflect these facts. The data below is from October 2001 to April 18, 2020 from the U.S. Department of Defense:

Military Operation  Killed   Wounded 
Iraqi Freedom             4,431             31,994
New Dawn (Afghanistan)                  74                  298
Enduring Freedom (Afghanistan)             2,353             20,149
Inherent Resolve (ISIS)                  96                  224
Freedom’s Sentinel (Afghanistan)                  92                  570
            7,046             53,235

No Americans have died protecting Israel.

In June 1996, a truck bombing killed 19 Americans at the Khobar Towers barracks near Dhahran, Saudi Arabia.Credit…U.S. Navy, via Associated Press

Treasure

The United States spent roughly $2 trillion to fight wars in Iraq and has spent over $2.5 trillion fighting in Afghanistan. It has spent tens of billions of dollars maintaining its various bases throughout the Persian Gulf and supporting and protecting the Arab and Muslim Persian Gulf countries.

In Egypt, the United States has provided over $40 billion in military aid and $30 billion in economic assistance since 1980. The United States also provides over $1 billion of aid to Jordan every year, in addition to billions of dollars of loan guarantees.

In total, the United States has spent roughly $5 trillion since 2001 on countries in the Middle East, excluding Israel. Almost all of that money has been expenses to stabilize failing regimes and protect U.S. interests. There has been almost no investment in technology development to advance the U.S. military.

However, when it comes to Israel, the United States has benefited from an INVESTMENT in a close ally. As described by the U.S. State Department,

“Israel has long been, and remains, America’s most reliable partner in the Middle East. Israel and the United States are bound closely by historic and cultural ties as well as by mutual interests.”

The U.S. gives Israel over $3 billion per year in military assistance, much of which is spent procuring American products. Israel shares the technological advancements that it develops to enhance America’s military capabilities. In total, the U.S. has given Israel roughly 1/80th of the funds it has spent on the rest of the Middle East, while receiving over 80 times the benefits in technological advancement.

Conditionality

The United States has spent $5 trillion this century on Middle Eastern countries that do not share American values, yet the progressive wing of the Democratic Party has been mum.

Saudi Arabia, a major trading partner, executes minors – in public. It kills people for basic human rights like converting religion. It executes men for engaging in homosexual sex (it only beats woman who are lesbians). Women are forbidden to drive and cannot leave the house without a male escort or approval.

No one seems to care.

Qatar and the United Arab Emirates also have a death penalty for apostasy, converting from Islam. Kuwait, Oman and the UAE have capital punishment for people dealing in drugs. The Palestinian Authority has capital punishment for Arabs who sell land to Jews.

Yet there have been no calls from Sanders or other Democratic Socialists to condition aid to these countries which KILL people for basic human rights. There are over 70 countries – mostly Arab and Muslim – which consider homosexuality a crime, and there is not a peep about placing any conditions on trade and assistance.

The singling out of Israel for allowing a basic human right of a family living in a home and protecting itself from missiles is both hypocritical and antisemitic. Threatening to withhold or divert military aid to Israel which directly benefits American security interests while saying nothing to spending 80 times as much on Arab and Muslim countries is insane. And putting thousands of American lives in danger for backwards regimes while denying Israel the ability to protect Israeli and American interests with ITS OWN SOLDIERS is outright un-American.

Team Sanders and the Democratic Socialists of America including Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Rashida Tlaib should not be allowed on any foreign policy committee or have any hand in crafting the Democratic Platform. They are dangers to America on multiple levels.

Related First One Through articles:

Bernie Sanders’ Antisemitic and Anti-Zionist Friends

Bernie Sanders is Less Sophisticated Than Forrest Gump

Bernie Sanders is the Worst U.S. Presidential Candidate for Israel Ever

Related First One Through videos:

The Crime of Being Gay (music by Boy George)

The Anthems of the Middle East (music by Enya)

BDS Movement and Christian Persecution (music by Hovaness)

Subscribe YouTube channel: FirstOneThrough

Join Facebook group: Israel Analysis and FirstOneThrough