BLM: Truth, Relevance and Association

Posted on June 4, 2020 by First.One.Through

“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 May 31, 2020 by First.One.Through

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 April 20, 2020 by First.One.Through

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

Ramat Shlomo, Jerusalem and Joe Biden

Posted on April 18, 2020 by First.One.Through

In March 2010, Vice President Joe Biden visited Israel with the hope of pushing the Palestinians and Israelis towards a peace agreement. A 10-month settlement freeze which Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu announced in November 2009 was just drawing to an end with no engagement by the Palestinian Authority over the duration, but Biden was trying to move the parties forward.

Not long after he arrived, Israel announced the advancement of 1,600 homes in the Jerusalem neighborhood of Ramat Shlomo which is located north of the 1949 Armistice Lines. In response, Biden scolded Israel, saying “I condemn the decision by the government of Israel to advance planning for new housing units in East Jerusalem.” The statement using “condemn” was shocking, as it is normally only used regarding terrorism. Netanyahu’s 10-month freeze also never included any construction in any part of Jerusalem, so the Israeli activity was not surprising.

Further, it is important to understand Ramat Shlomo.

Ramat Shlomo, Jerusalem

Ramat Shlomo is not a vacant plot of land, it is not privately owned by Arabs and it is not located in the middle of Judea and Samara / the West Bank. It is an established Jewish neighborhood in Jerusalem.

This “East Jerusalem” neighborhood is located northWEST of Hebrew University which was built in 1925.
It is located southWEST of Pisgat Ze’ev, the second largest neighborhood in Jerusalem and just next to Ramat Alon, the largest neighborhood
it is located northWEST of the Jewish Temple Mount, Judaism’s holiest location
It is located just on the other side of Highway 1 from Mobileye, a company which Intel bought for over $15 billion

The population in Ramat Shlomo is mostly ultra-Orthodox, and include Chabad and Litvish communities. The neighborhood has a median age among the youngest in Jerusalem and highest birth rates. Yet from 2006 to 2017, the population of Ramat Shlomo was flat at around 14,700 people. The lack of new homes and flat population growth despite the high birth rates meant that families actually had to leave their neighborhood. The Jerusalem Institute noted “The highest negative migration balance in relation to the size of the neighborhood’s population was recorded in Ramat Shlomo.”

Things finally turned around in 2018 with 500 new apartments commencing construction, the most in Jerusalem according to the Jerusalem Institute. The neighborhood also had the largest voter turnout for municipal elections in 2018, with 83% of eligible voters, indicating a highly engaged populace.

As the U.S. presidential election season moves into high gear, people will consider Biden’s relationship with Israel and the 2010 Ramat Shlomo incident will surely be discussed. It is therefore worth reviewing how Biden’s highly critical comments slowed the natural growth of that residential Jewish neighborhood in Jerusalem for many years until just recently.

Related First One Through articles:

Time to Define Banning Jews From Living Somewhere as Antisemitic

Joe Biden Stabs a Finger at Israel

“Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem”

The New York Times All Out Assault on Jewish Jerusalem

The Jews of Jerusalem In Situ

Ending Apartheid in Jerusalem

Arabs in Jerusalem

The Arguments over Jerusalem

The Subtle Discoloration of History: Shuafat

J Street: Home for Pro-Palestinian, Pro-Peace Americans

Posted on April 3, 2020 by First.One.Through

J Street is a progressive political lobbying group which bills itself as the “political home for Pro-Israel, Pro-Peace Americans.” It is a marketing ploy designed to sell pro-Arab propaganda to undermine the government of Israel.

Consider a current snapshot of the lobbying group’s current press releases:

J Street’s press most recent press releases from its website on April 3, 2020

Not one off the six articles which J Street felt were the most pressing of the day related to advocating for Israel. There was no support for the country’s battle against the Covid-19 pandemic which has shut down the country, the successful democratically-held elections in the country or America’s recent elections for the World Zionist Congress.

Instead J Street published pro-Arab and pro-Muslim press releases:

Block Israeli application of sovereignty over any part of Area C
Give financial support to Palestinians
Condition US aid to Israel on its not demolishing illegal Arab homes
No war with the Islamic Republic of Iran
A push for US Democratic presidential candidates to not be too supportive of the policies of the current government of Israel
A call to ban Jews from living in and around the Old City of Jerusalem

This snapshot is not surprising for anyone who has followed the far-left lobbying group since its founding in 2008. This group lobbied the Obama administration to censure Israel at the United Nations and to sign an Iranian nuclear deal which the government of Israel opposed. The lobbying efforts were so extremely anti-Israel with the flimsiest Jewish veneer that even devout liberal politician Gary Ackerman (D-NY) said

“I’ve come to the conclusion that J-Street is not an organization with which I wish to be associated….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.”

There are many people who argue that one needn’t be anti-Palestinian to be pro-Israel. I would agree as it relates to Palestinian Arabs who want to make peace with Israel and respect the Jewish people’s history, dignity and security needs in their holy land. On can similarly be both pro-Israel and pro-Palestinian, which is J Street’s contention.

But it shows J Street’s deliberate dishonesty to only state it is “pro-Israel” in its tagline when it is primarily focused on a pro-Arab agenda which it believes benefits Israel. Either drop the “Pro-Israel” claim or add “Pro-Arab” to be clear what the far-left lobbying group actually represents.

Related First One Through articles:

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

J Street is a Partisan Left-Wing Group, NOT an Alternative to AIPAC

The Evil Architects at J Street Take a Bow

J Street: Going Bigger and Bolder than BDS

The Fault in Our Tent: The Limit of Acceptable Speech

J Street’s Select Appreciation of Transparency

A Review of the Fifteen US Slates for the World Zionist Congress

Subscribe YouTube channel: FirstOneThrough

Join Facebook group: Israel Analysis and FirstOneThrough

Rumor Contagion on Coronavirus in Congress

Posted on March 5, 2020 by First.One.Through

Yes, it’s me.

Like many news articles, there are facts, assumed facts, projections and innuendo to sell papers and serve as click-bait. Because coronavirus has captured people’s imaginations, it has become a wonderful vehicle to instill fear and capture headlines.

A friend of mine – who has mostly been kept anonymous by media outlets to protect the family’s privacy – has tested positive for coronavirus. The news media is correct that he lives in New Rochelle, is a lawyer and is in the hospital. His wife and son have also tested positive but are home and feel relatively fine as does the neighbor (lives on the same street, a number of homes away) who drove them to the hospital. Only the 50-year old lawyer is in the hospital as he had some prior medical issues which made him much more vulnerable to the strain.

It is also true that he attended the Modern Orthodox synagogue, the Young Israel of New Rochelle, on Shabbat February 22 and a funeral and bat mitzvah on Sunday February 23rd. It was there that he came into contact with many people who would later attend the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) conference in Washington, D.C. the following week. Some of those people at the conference went on to lobby members of Congress, so AIPAC sent a warning memo to members of Congress.

This was done as an act of major precaution, and there is virtually no reason to fear.

The synagogue in New Rochelle is a large one. Many of the people who are now self-quarantined – myself included – were just in the same building or same room as the infected man. The term “contact” is sometimes used very broadly as it has been now to be the most cautious, but 99% of the people who attended services on February 22 and 23 were not within ten feet of the man and feel perfectly fine.

I attended the funeral at YINR on the 23rd, for a parent of a friend from elementary school and high school. I did not see the infected man at that time but was merely in the same 50 foot-by-50 foot room with him for an hour, as were my parents.

On Saturday February 29th, I decided last minute to go down to AIPAC when I learned of three guys from my shul in a different community in Westchester county driving down to D.C. with an empty seat. During the car ride I reached out broadly to see how I could register for the conference and find a place to stay. Coincidentally, the victim’s wife responded to me that she had cancelled her trip to AIPAC as her spouse was feeling sick; she suggested I try to book their Marriott hotel room. I was unable to get into that hotel which was adjacent to the convention center but found one a few blocks away.

No news about coronavirus in Westchester had broken at that time. I hugged, shook hands and conversed with several hundred people at AIPAC on Sunday and Monday, some of whom went to lobby in Congress. I did not lobby, and returned home Monday afternoon in the car with the same three men with whom I drove down. We got back to Westchester at 8:30pm.

Vice President Mike Pence (head of coronavirus task force) addressing AIPAC March 2, 2020 (photo: First One Through)

Initial news of the virus in the community broke the following morning just before 7:00am as my son was getting ready to head on the bus to school. Additional information would flow throughout the day about who had gotten sick and the need to self-quarantine.

I have remained at home, as have my sons who attend two of the schools which were closed because of the virus. None of us has shown any signs of illness, but we are following the guidelines of the health commissioner as a matter of best practices.

Of course, I am not the only one who attended Young Israel of New Rochelle over the weekend of February 22/23 who then went on to AIPAC but I’m sure my story is fairly common: the “contact” we had with the sick man was neither close nor direct. That is true for my interactions with most of the 18,000 people at AIPAC and, in turn, the people at AIPAC with members of Congress.

But stoking fear and the urge for ad revenue seems too great for most. Don’t fall for it.

Please pray for the people who are indeed sick, including Eliezer Yitzchok ben Shifra.

Subscribe YouTube channel: FirstOneThrough

Join Facebook group: Israel Analysis and FirstOneThrough

Ever-Elections, Never-Elections and Controlling Elections

Posted on March 3, 2020 by First.One.Through

On March 1, 2020, the Israeli public went to the voting polls – again. It was the third time in just a year in which the Jewish State sought to establish a government. While the final results are not in, it looks like Israeli Prime Minister’s Likud Party won 36 seats while the Blue and White Party won 32 seats. Overall, the Right-Religious block appears to have secured 59 seats, short of a 61 seat majority.

Israeli elections again?

Meanwhile, the Palestinian Authority continues to do nothing. The PA last held elections for Parliament in 2006, in which the Hamas, a U.S., a designated terrorist organization, won 58 percent of the seats, an over-whelming majority. In 2005, the Palestinians voted for president and elected Mahmoud Abbas of Fatah to a four-year term. That term expired in January 2009, over eleven years ago, but Abbas refuses to relinquish power or hold elections.

The Palestinians have divided their areas of control with Hamas ruling in Gaza and Fatah administering Palestinian territories in the West Bank. The two parties cannot reconcile between themselves to form a unity government and refuse to let the people hold new elections as a way out of the impasse, as each party fears losing the little control it does wield.

And in the United States, the presidential contest is set like clockwork, moving towards a November vote, as it does every four years. This year, the Democratic establishment is so fearful of the leading position of Socialist Bernie Sanders, that it effectively pushed two moderates – Amy Klobuchar and Pete Buttigieg – off of the Super Tuesday ballots and to endorse Vice President Joe Biden for president, in the hopes of giving the moderates of the party a chance to coalesce behind a single person to defeat the extremist Bernie Sanders. The leaders of the Democratic Party know that a brokered convention will tear their party apart – either in blocking Bernie Sanders and making the progressive wing of the party go to war, or by giving the ticket to Bernie and watching all of the Democratic candidates around the country go down to defeat.

Such is the state of elections today: Israel forever holding elections, Palestinians never having elections and the United States attempting to control the election outcome. It brings to mind a quote by Winston Churchill, “Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all the others.”

Related First.One.Through articles:

Naked Democracy

Liberal’s Protest Bubble Harms Democracy

The U.S. is Stealing Real Choices from the Voters

A Country Divided

John McCain 2008 / 2018

Let’s Make America VOTE Again

Michael Bloomberg Talks to America about Marrying a Prostitute

Subscribe YouTube channel: FirstOneThrough

Join Facebook group: Israel Analysis and FirstOneThrough

At AIPAC, Joe Biden Waves His Finger While Bernie Sanders Flips the Bird

Posted on March 2, 2020 by First.One.Through

The annual American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) gathering kicked off in Washington, D.C. on March 1, 2020 during the highly unusual backdrop of both an election in Israel (March 2nd) and the thick of the presidential campaign in the United States (March 3rd). It was an highly opportune time for politicians and candidates to feed red meat to the pro-Israel crowd.

The politicians with some sanity understood that.

House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-MD) addressed the audience in an unambiguous style that Israel is a strongly bi-partisan matter for Republicans and Democrats alike. He said that a strong Israel is vital for American interests and that he would always stand shoulder-to-shoulder with the strong American ally and oppose any notion of boycotting the Jewish State. Unfortunately, his time slot was right before dinner so much of the crowd was already out the door and didn’t hear it.

In the morning, Senator Amy Klobuchar who is running for president spoke to the crowd via a pre-recorded message. With the U.S. Capital placed on the green screen behind her, she spoke of her long, strong support for Israel and her desire to see peace emerge in the Middle East.

Foreign leaders took the stage to address the 18,000 people, including from Serbia and Congo, who spoke of their strong affinity for the Jewish people. The president of Serbia recalled how his country was quick to back the Balfour Declaration and has always been proud of its relationship of the Jewish community and stated his desire to deepen the connections to the Jewish State. The leader of the Congo quoted scriptures and spoke of his country’s expanding ties with Jerusalem.

President of Serbia, Aleksandar Vučić, addressing AIPAC in Washington, D.C., March 1, 2020 (photo: First On Through)

President of Congo, Felix Tshisekedi, saying he will appoint an ambassador to Israel during the AIPAC conference on March 1, 2020 (photo: First One Through)

And then there was former Vice President Joe Biden. He spoke to the audience via a pre-recorded message that looked like he stepped out of a tour bus into an alleyway to quickly say something to a crowd of people he really preferred not to address. While he said he was pro-Israel, he was not convincing, as he sternly warned the crowd that actions by the Israeli government to approve Jewish housing east of the Green Line risked making Israel a wedge issue in American politics. His meaning was clear: only Republicans would give Israelis unconditional support and the green light to live in Judea and Samaria; a Biden administration would come down hard on Israel.

Vice President Joe Biden addressing AIPAC in a pre-recorded message

The Biden video went off with a thud. Whereas the president of Serbia received a standing ovation, the audience was puzzled why Biden would opt to give a speech that was seemingly crafted by staffers from Code Pink and the New Israel Fund.

The thinning Democratic herd just lost Pete Buttigieg and Tom Steyer, and the leaders of AIPAC were faced with the realization that despite their repeated assertions that the group works closely with both Democrats and Republicans, the two front runners of the remaining Democrats were either hostile or ambivalent about Israel and the US-Israel relationship: Bernie Sanders called AIPAC a racist “platform for bigotry,” and Joe Biden said that real friends told friends when they were drunk and took away their car keys.

The new president of AIPAC, Betsy Berns Korn sounded the alarm bell. The emergence of politicians against the U.S.-Israel relationship is not limited to a few fringe freshmen members of Congress. It is working its way through the entire political power structure.

In November 2015, Vice President Biden addressed a progressive Jewish crowd and stabbed a finger at Israel, admonishing the entire Jewish State for something a private Israeli citizen had once said about Obama. In March 2020, Biden continued to admonish the Jewish State with a wave of his finger that the American-Israeli bond was very, very conditional, while Senator Bernie Sanders flipped AIPAC the bird. Will the pro-Israel community raise their hands in surrender or take a fighting stance?

Related First One Through articles:

While Joe Biden Passionately Defends Israel, He Ignores Jewish Rights and the History of the Jewish State

The Invisible Anti-Semitism in Obama’s 2016 State of the Union

Mike Bloomberg, Where #NeverTrump Meets #NeverBernie

The New York Times’ Select Defense of a Civilian

Subscribe YouTube channel: FirstOneThrough

Join Facebook group: Israel Analysis and FirstOneThrough

Bernie Sanders’ New Book: Nazi Germany Had Clean Streets

Posted on February 26, 2020 by First.One.Through

A satire.

In response to the attacks on him about comments he made about Cuba’s Fidel Castro overseeing a great educational system, Senator Bernie Sanders opted to double down with a short book about his top dozen favorite leaders. It is called “Nazi Germany Had Clean Streets.” The Table of Contents is below.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Libya’s Muammar Gaddafi Eradicated Evil Large Multinational Corporations
Iraq’s Saddam Hussein Significantly Reduced the Size of His Standing Army More Than any Leader in Modern History
Uganda’s Idi Amin Had a Free Public Transportation System, Especially for Jews Entering the Country
Korea’s Kim Jong II Oversaw the Single Largest Decrease in any Country’s Carbon Footprint
Vladimir Lenin Was Efficient at Separating Church and State
China’s Mao Zedong Instituted the Greatest Redistribution of Wealth Over the Past Century
Chile’s Augusto Pinochet Provided Free Child Care
Pol Pot Provided Free Burial Services to Everyone
Hitler Introduced Taxidermy as an After-School Program
Joseph Stalin Had More White People Than Blacks in Prison
Syria’s Bashar al Assad Leveled the Housing Market for Everyone
Finally, My Hero: The Architect of the French Revolution, Maximilien Robespierre, was at the Vanguard of Grass Roots Socialism

When asked by reporters why he didn’t include Israel’s Benjamin Netanyahu in the book, he responded “I cannot find a single positive thing to say about that racist.”

Related First One Through articles:

“Protocols of the Elders of Zion – The Musical”

Ben & Jerry’s New Flavor: Milano Zio

ObamaCar to Address Garage Inequality

Ilhan Omar and AOC Try To Reclaim The Word ‘Holocaust’

How Many Polacks Does it Take to Deny the Holocaust?

Netanyahu’s Doctoral Thesis on the Nakba

Subscribe YouTube channel: FirstOneThrough

Join Facebook group: Israel Analysis and FirstOneThrough

Mike Bloomberg, Where #NeverTrump Meets #NeverBernie

Posted on February 25, 2020 by First.One.Through

It was a mild January evening in Westchester County, New York, and a number of people assembled in a private home to consider promoting the former mayor from New York City, Michael Bloomberg, to become the Democratic candidate for president.

The Democrat Party already had an over-supply of people running for president but people in this liberal enclave were concerned that none of them could defeat Donald Trump. So thirty middle-aged Jews assembled to consider how they could help propel Mike into the coveted role to challenge the president.

A member of Bloomberg’s campaign responsible for bringing out the Jewish vote was already speaking when a Libertarian who had walked away from the Democratic Party and his teenage son joined the presentation. The two grabbed seats and listened.

The audience was clearly liberal and talked about how they wanted anyone but Trump but feared that none of the candidates could actually beat him. Bloomberg’s point man essentially said that Bloomberg gave Jews all of the things they liked about Trump (the strong economy and support of Israel), without any of his terrible policies regarding immigrants, the LGBT community, the environment and a host of other failures. The audience nodded in approval.

Except for the Libertarian.

“I’m not here as an anyone but Trump person. I’m here as an anyone by Sanders or Warren person. Those two will lead this country into a civil war and/or an abyss. If Sanders wins the nomination, not only will I vote for Trump, I will actively campaign and raise funds for him.”

An awkward silence filled the air. The liberals could not fathom a fellow Jew despising a progressive.

The Bloomberg point man broke the tension by asking people to bring up items which were most important to them. A hand sprang up and a 60-year old man yelled “abortion!” Another person said “income inequality.” A third said “gun control.”

The sole teenager in the room offered “addressing the ballooning national debt.” People paused and noted that they appreciated that a young person was concerned about the outrageous debt he was being handed as an inheritance, but one sensed that they were disappointed that he did not say “climate change.”

When the moderator asked about people’s concerns about the mayor, several people talked about his stop-and-frisk policy which seemed racist, and whether the country was interested in voting for a Jewish billionaire. The Libertarian silently took notes and didn’t offer up his concerns, of which there were plenty:

Stop-and-frisk was not a policy designed to attack minorities but one designed against gun ownership. One could call it the Beto O’Rourke “Hell Yes, I’ll Take Your Gun” plan, which narrowly targeting minority neighborhoods in New York City where crime and gun ownership was highest. Will that be Bloomberg’s plan nationwide?
The mayor banned super-sized sodas, in what was called “Nanny-gate.” How many freedoms will this man shut down as president because he thinks he knows better what’s good for you?
He rammed through his third term as mayor, even though there was a two-term limit in New York City. He’s every bit as pompous and egotistical as Trump.

But that night was not about trashing Bloomberg as much as trying to get him off of a slow and cold start.

Bloomberg’s Jewish liaison made a point that Bloomberg was not going to run a campaign focused on attacking his Democratic rivals; he believed that they were already too weak, with the exception of Sanders who Bloomberg felt could never win. But left unsaid was the objection of Bloomberg and the attendees that night to the other moderates running:

Former Vice President Joe Biden is clearly showing his age, and not in a good way. He was famous for putting his foot in his mouth during a long political career, but now nobody thinks he can even find his mouth today. Add his propensity for smelling women’s hair in the #MeToo moment and his son’s sweetheart deal in Ukraine and all realize he has as much of a chance at a return to political office as W Bush.
Pete Buttigieg clearly is a very sharp debater, but everyone knows that vast swathes of the country – including religious and black communities – will not vote for a gay person. Yes it’s 2020, but those are the facts and would you rather acknowledge them or go down with them?
Amy Klobuchar seems to have no truly objectionable traits and could gather broad appeal from moderates in the Democratic and Republican parties. But she may have as much charm as fellow Minnesotan Walter Mondale who was routed in his presidential run.

So enter sandman, Mike Bloomberg, playing Yankee reliever Mariano Rivera in the late innings. Will he save the Democratic Party from embracing the alt-left? Will he do it by ultimately putting his money behind either Klobuchar or Buttigieg, rather than backing himself?

Time will tell.

For now, Bloomberg is the only name which brings #NeverTrumpers and #NeverSanders into the same room.