It has now been revealed that Democratic Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer told the administration of Columbia University to “keep heads down” and ride out the controversy of antisemitism on campus. He said that issue of rampant Jew hatred were “political problems are really only among Republicans,” and that Jews and the country would soon move on.
To unpack those statements, the most powerful Democratic politician outside of the Executive branch dismissed the Jew-hatred at Columbia despite one of the rabbis on campus telling Jewish students to go home, “no one should have to endure this level of hatred, let alone at school.” He encouraged the university to do nothing to assist the beleaguered Jews, and that once Democrats took over the House of Representatives, university presidents would no longer be dragged to Washington.
Others also believe that only Republicans cared about the systemic Jew hatred at American universities. Rep. Virginia Foxx, Chairwoman of the House Committee on Education and the Workforce, said that Democrats would drop investigating Jew hatred at universities should they win the House in the November 2024 election.
Schumer’s suggestion that leaders wait out setbacks in attacking Jews has precedent.
During Donald Trump’s term in office, former Secretary of State John Kerry under Democratic President Barack Obama passed a message to Mahmoud Abbas, President of the Palestinian Authority “that he should stay strong in his spirit and play for time, that he will not break and will not yield to President [Donald] Trump’s demands.” Kerry predicted that Trump would last a single term and then a Democratic Administration would go easy on the PA, and apply hard pressure on Israel.
Sen. Chuck Schumer and Secretary of State John Kerry discuss the Iranian nuclear deal in 2015
Democrats know that Jews are a minority-minority, a very small and forgiving people. The old guard Democratic leaders like Schumer and Kerry believe that Jews’ ongoing quest for “tikkun olam / repairing the world” would include self-annihilation, if so required. They believe they know history that Jews (non-Orthodox at least) will look past any insult and cleave to the Democratic Party regardless of actions. Jews will give up land, rights and dignity just as they handed over the Judaism’s holiest site of the Temple Mount in Jerusalem, if peace so dictated.
The new generation of Democratic leaders is less convinced. It is waging a war to strip Jews of power, position, wealth and property in a broad redistribution to majority-minority groups like Blacks, as chanted by Reps. Alexandria Ocasio Cortez and Rashida Tlaib, and their sponsor at Justice Democrats.
The cleft in the Democratic Party between the old and new guards is a tactical decision whether to wait for Jews to hang themselves or to give clearance to rob, rape and murder them immediately. Regrettably – no, frighteningly – the party’s view of Jews has been buried under an avalanche of DEI (diversity, equity and inclusion) that elevates Victims of Preference, even when those groups are directly coming for Jews.
Like many Jewish Americans, I am a registered Democrat. Unlike many, I have no party loyalty and vote for the person I think is best suited for the job.
My friends were shocked when I voted for the libertarian candidate for president in 2016. They rattled off the many offenses of Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump, and that I was wasting my vote. I did not disagree. But I could not vote for Trump or Clinton. Not only had Clinton proven herself to be awful but Trump was a vulgarian wildcard. I believed Trump was such a “deal guy” that he had no sense of the compromises that are needed to run a country of 330 million. He would be bad for America, Israel and the whole world.
I ended up being quite wrong about Trump on Israel. Surrounded by a strong team of advisers, he understood what was required for an ENDURING PEACE in the Middle East, not just the paper to get to a peace agreement. He delivered an amazing array of achievements for America and the Middle East over his term, including the fewest deaths of Arabs and Jews over any four year stretch in modern history.
Yet I remained worried. America was deeply divided and I could not imagine Trump being the solution to bring the country together. Four years on I looked for an alternative.
I cast my lot initially with Mike Bloomberg as a centrist, who had pushed aggressively for Hillary over Trump in 2016 under the premise that she was basically like a prostitute who is deeply unloved but gets the job done. Bloomberg was my version of #NeverTrump meets #NeverBernie Sanders. But he was eliminated early on.
I settled on Biden as the “centrist” to help address the “Mason-Dixon Plaid” that pitted neighbor against neighbor. I wanted to stop the brewing civil war, and too many people hated Trump for him to be the solution. I similarly voted for centrists in Congress, rejecting mainstream media’s endorsement of far left-wing radicals like Jamaal Bowman. I picked a winner at the top of the ticket but saw extremist radicals taking over Congress.
Those radical members of Congress had no need to compromise the way a president must. They incited their base, and brought antisemitism to deplorable levels after the October 7, 2023 massacre of 1,200 people in Israel. Fading Biden had no idea or desire to stem the vicious tide.
Jewish members of Congress like Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT), Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) and Rep. Jerry Nadler (D-NY) turned on Israel and refused to combat the wave of antisemitism. Young Democrats and liberal universities revealed themselves to be deeply hostile to Israel and Jews.
The divide in America now felt more personal. It was no longer about Republicans versus Democrats, but more immediately, radical antisemitic extremists which had metastasized inside the Democratic party and liberal institutions against American Jewry. The general tension in the country is no longer my priority, but the specific targeting of minority-minority Jews which made even leading Jewish politicians hide in fear.
Pundits like Bret Stephens may argue that Trump continues to be a danger, and I was a NeverTrumper just like him. Many friends who are devout liberal Jews continue to believe that the antisemitism is really just a minor issue which will subside when the Iranian proxy war against Israel ends.
Sen. Bernie Sanders explaining that Kamala Harris will side with the alt-left when she is not bound by Biden’s preferences as it relates to Israel
Israel is laying the groundwork for an enduring peace in the Middle East by ridding the region of jihadi extremists who intend on annihilating local Jewry. It is tragic and ugly but essential. Americans – DEMOCRATS – need to similarly take actions which may seem displeasing, including voting for Trump, to end the toxic antisemitism drowning Jews today.
There are only a handful of tight races in the November 2024 election that have clearly superior candidates: New York’s 17 district has been incredible well-served by incumbent Republican Mike Lawler.
Rep. Mike Lawler (R-NY17)
Lawler is one of the most bipartisan members of congress, drafting numerous pieces of legislation with a number of Democrats including Ritchie Torres (D-NY) and Josh Gottheimer (D-NJ). He has fought aggressively for his constituents and for actual peace in the Middle East. He has been ranked as a leader by the non-partisan group GovTracks.
GovTracks ranking of Mike Lawler as a middle-of-the-road Congressional leader
This is in sharp contrast to his competitor Mondaire Jones who has been running around New York State to find a district to run in. He lost badly in the last cycle when he decided he ran in Manhattan’s Chelsea district.
When Jones did last serve in Congress, he was ranked as a highly partisan left-wing radical. He was not considered a leader and drafted little legislation.
GovTracks scored Mondaire Jones legislative record as far left-wing and with little leadership credentials
Vote for bipartisan Mike Lawler, a leader in Congress and fighter for New York.
The plight of Jews today can be traced directly to President Barak Obama’s second term from 2013 to 2016. The rampant antisemitism in the United States and death and destruction in the Middle East today stem from Obama’s failed and deliberate strategies as outlined below:
Obama’s minimization of antisemitism
Enabling Iran to have a legal pathway to nuclear weapons
Handing billions of dollars to Iran and its terrorist proxies
Not encouraging the Iranian revolution to topple the government
Throwing Middle Eastern allies under the bus
Changing Democratic Party position that Stateless Arabs from Palestine (SAPs) should move to Israel instead of a new Palestinian state
Stating that the presence of Jews in Jerusalem caused problems rather than Arab antisemitism
Making Jews living in Jerusalem illegal
Fostering the Islamic takeover of American universities
Bringing many refugees from Syria and Somalia to the US
Minimizing Antisemitism
Obama’s desire to minimize the problem of antisemitism stemmed from his focus on repairing relations with the Muslim world which he felt was badly damaged by the prior administration’s war on terror in Iraq and Afghanistan. It later extended to prioritizing other victims of preference, Blacks and other majority-minorities in the United States over Jews.
The most glaring example of Obama’s blindness to Muslim antisemitism was the February 2015 shooting in a kosher store in Paris, France. Obama said the shooting was “random” and his spokesperson then doubled down in clarifying the comment that there was no anti-Jewish motivation of the jihadi radicals.
At his final State of the Union address in 2016, Obama said nothing about antisemitism and only flagged ‘Islamophobia’ despite anti-Jewish hate crimes being 2.2 times more frequent than anti-Muslim hate crimes according to the FBI. Obama said nothing about the Islamic Republic of Iran’s rampant anti-Jewish smears and Holocaust denial contests as he cozied up to the Islamic zealots.
Enabling Iran to have a legal pathway to nuclear weapons
Despite aggressive sanctions which started under President George Bush in 2005, Obama signed an agreement which left Iran’s entire nuclear program intact including its uranium mines, milling and enrichment facilities and nuclear reactors. Iran’s ballistic missile capabilities coupled with its emerging nuclear weapon program has enabled it to act with near impunity throughout the Middle East. It has put the region on edge with Saudi Arabia now insisting on getting weapons of mass destruction to balance the Shiite-Sunni regional dominance.
While Israel had relative peace for the past fifty years as the only country with nuclear weapons, we are seeing the ramifications of large Muslim Arab countries also possessing such weaponry, courtesy of Obama.
Handing billions of dollars to Iran and its terrorist proxies
Iran has been using its proxies to kill and terrorize Jews for years, especially in the aftermath of Obama giving billions of dollars to Iran. The first installment of $1.7 billion in 2016 was sent in cash. Estimates for the amount of money that was ultimately released as part of the Iranian nuclear deal are as much as $150 billion from several countries according to FactCheck.org, with more conservative figures being $50 billion.
The funds released to Iran have helped fund Iranian proxies like Hamas in Gaza, Hezbollah in Lebanon and the Houthis in Yemen. Each group has intentionally killed Israelis over the past year, with Hamas’s savage massacre of October 7, 2023 being the most heinous and gruesome.
Not encouraging the Iranian revolution to topple the government
The ascendency of the antisemitic genocidal regime in Iran was not a foregone conclusion. The Iranian people had started a ‘Green Revolution’ in 2009 with the expectation that Obama would give America’s support to install a moderate regime. Obama declined to do so, and thought he could negotiate a nuclear arms deal with the radical zealots. That decision led to Secretary of State John Kerry concluding one of the worst foreign policy deals in American history a few years later.
Throwing allies under the bus
As opposed to toppling genocidal regimes, Obama supported the ouster of friends.
Obama started his presidency with a trip to Cairo, Egypt in 2009, but ultimately stabbed the American ally in the back. When Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak faced pressure to resign in 2011, Obama let him fall. It welcomed the democratically-elected head of the terrorist group Muslim Brotherhood Mohammed Morsi instead. Saudi Arabia and other allies in the region became alarmed “with the U.S. position, publicly pushing Mubarak out. And frankly so are we—this isn’t how you handle issues in region.”
Obama made his focus on Iran known to the whole world from the outset when he first met Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in May 2009 at the White House. Rather than strongly stand by his ally Israel, he used the opportunity to say “Iran is a country of extraordinary history and extraordinary potential, that we want them to be a full-fledged member of the international community and be in a position to provide opportunities and prosperity for their people.”
President Obama meeting with Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu in 2009
This narrative of Iran being “extraordinary” has continued to be pushed by the liberal mainstream media. When the New York Times publishes articles about Israel and Iran, it doesn’t show images of Iranian missiles but female shoppers, making Israeli leaders look foolish for being alarmed for no reason.
Screenshot of New York Times article on October 28, 2024
The Times even had vacation packages to Iran which it advertised as “Persia. Iran. For 2,500 years, this powerful country has entranced, mystified and beguiled the world. Discover the ancient secrets and modern complexities of this influential land on a 13-day itinerary, visiting some of the world’s oldest archaeological sites and the family home of the religious leader who engineered Iran’s transition to an Islamic republic. Welcome to the once-forbidden land of Iran.” It similarly called Saudi Arabia, Egypt and Morocco amazing places to visit. But not Israel which it only promotes through a Palestinian lens as a place of “struggle” (jihad in Arabic).
Changing Democratic stance that Stateless Arabs from Palestine (SAPs) should move to Israel instead of a new Palestinian state
When Obama was elected to his first term, the official 2008 Democratic party platform had a few key statements about Israel and the region:
On Hamas: “The United States and its Quartet partners should continue to isolate Hamas until it renounces terrorism, recognizes Israel’s right to exist, and abides by past agreements.”
On “Refugees: “The creation of a Palestinian state through final status negotiations, together with an international compensation mechanism, should resolve the issue of Palestinian refugees by allowing them to settle there, rather than in Israel.”
On borders: “All understand that it is unrealistic to expect the outcome of final status negotiations to be a full and complete return to the armistice lines of 1949.”
On Jerusalem: “Jerusalem is and will remain the capital of Israel.”
Hamas’s current war on Israel to descend on Jerusalem, destroy the Jewish state and bring millions of SAPs into Israel was essentially blessed under the second Obama administration.
Stating that the presence of Jews in Jerusalem caused problems rather than Arab antisemitism
In October 2014, the Obama Administration’s Josh Earnest said “The US condemns the recent occupation of residential buildings in the neighborhood of Silwan by people whose agenda provokes tensions.” The message was clear: Jews buying homes and living in eastern Jerusalem is terrible because the Jews are stirring tensions, not because Arab Muslims are consumed with Jew hatred.
The New York Times followed Obama’s lead a few days later and portrayed the residents of Silwan as peaceful Arabs who were set upon by a few crazy Israelis moving next door: “An influx of right-wing Jewish settlers who have acquired property in the area in recent years have made the neighborhood a flash point in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.” The Jews were the extremists and caused violence, not the other way around.
Obama’s inversion that Jews are the racist right-wing troublemakers while Palestinian Arabs (who voted the antisemitic genocidal group Hamas to a majority of parliament) as peace-seeking individuals has become mainstreamed in the media today.
Making Jews living in Jerusalem illegal
As Obama ended his second term, he decided to cap his vilification of Jews and Israel by allowing United Nations Security Council Resolution 2334 to pass in December 2016, which declared it illegal for Jews to live east of the 1949 Armistice Lines (E49AL), including in the Judaism’s holiest city of Jerusalem. It called for countries to treat E49AL/ West Bank as distinct from the rest of Israel, despite the Palestinian Authority signing the Oslo Accords which recognized Israeli control over parts of the region.
Fostering the Islamic takeover of American universities
While Obama was restricting where Jews could live in the Jewish holy land, he was welcoming tens of thousands of Muslims from the Middle East into American universities.
The Kennedy-Lugar Youth Exchange and Study Program was launched in 2003 to soften the image of America’s war on terror. Obama ramped up the program in 2009. By the 2015/6 academic year, 61,000 Saudi students were in American universities. That high figure represents 0.2% of the entire population of Saudi Arabia to a single country. By way of comparison, the ENTIRE American students abroad cohort all over the world is around 162,000, or 0.05% of the U.S. population. Imagine 650,000 American students all learning in India for the year!
Along with the Muslim students came billions of dollars. Qatar, Saudi Arabia and other Muslim Arab countries funded departments, handed scholarships and enabled the growth of Students for Justice in Palestine hate groups to gather strength on over 200 campuses. These groups have led the harassment and intimidation of Jews at levels over five times higher than campuses without these groups according to analyses by the AMCHA Initiative. These universities routinely teach that Israel is a “imperialist colonialist power,” as though Jews do not have thousands of years of history in the holy land.
Bringing many refugees from Syria and Somalia to the US
In addition to the influx of money and students from Muslim countries into American universities was the growth in the number of refugees from the Middle East around the United States. While prior administrations had never permitted more than 25,000 refugees into the US from the Middle East, by 2016, Obama had welcomed nearly 45,000, primarily from Syria and Somalia.
The current war on Jews in the United States and Israel, home to 85% of world Jewry, was fueled by President Obama’s push to elevate the Muslim world, and the Islamic Republic of Iran in particular. The empowerment of Iran and its proxies in the Middle East have killed thousands of Jews, while the encouragement of Islamic power in the US has fueled antisemitic hate crimes here.
On December 21, 2020, United Nations Secretary General Antonio Guterres appointed Tor Wennesland to be the Special Coordinator for the Middle East Peace Process. The appointment was headlined over and over again in the official UN announcement. However, Wennesland was also appointed as Guterres’s Personal Representative to The Palestinian Liberation Organization and the Palestinian Authority, which was not highlighted.
Wennesland’s appointment as the UNSG’s representative to the PLO and PA has made his involvement in the “Middle East Peace Process” a sham. He has shown favoritism to the Palestinian Arab point of view repeatedly, and made his official coordinator for the peace process completely biased and unworkable.
Wennesland’s horrific bias was most glaring in the immediate aftermath of Hamas’s brutal slaughter of 1,200 people in Israel and abduction of over 250 hostages. On the day after the savage massacre, Wennesland said the “priority now is to avoid further loss of civilian life & deliver much needed humanitarian aid to the Strip.” His “priority” was not on Israeli hostages. His “priority” was not on wounded Israelis. His “priority” was not on securing the safety of Israelis. His “priority” was not no bringing Hamas terrorists to justice. The UN Secretary General’s priority was on Gazans.
Wennesland repeated his priorities for Gazans a few days later on October 11, not on the Israeli victims.
When the Hamas mastermind of the October 7, 2023 massacre was finally killed a year later, Wennesland would simply “take note of the killing” and not call it a “watershed moment in our common global fight against terrorism,” the way Ban Ki Moon stated about the killing of Osama Bin Laden. That’s because Guterres thinks that Hamas speaks for the Palestinian people, as UN Under-Secretary-General for Humanitarian Affairs and Emergency Relief Coordinator Martin Griffiths said specifically “Hamas is not a terrorist group for us, of course, as you know. It’s a political movement.”
On October 2, 2024, Israel’s Foreign Minister Israel Katz decided to bar Guterres from the country because of Guterres’s anti-Israel statements and actions, the last being Guterres refusal to condemn Iran’s launching of 180 missiles at Israel. Guterres later condemned the attack and the UN Security Council said it continued to back Guterres.
Yet the fact remains that Guterres has surrounded himself with people who support Hamas and the PLO more than Israeli civilians. His gross bias and ineptitude has led to the worst loss of life in the region in centuries.
As well as a horrible spike in antisemitism around the world.
Another Guterres antisemitic/anti-Zionist ally is Francesca Albanese, the UN’s “Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the Palestinian Territory occupied since 1967.” She has repeatedly been condemned for antisemitic remarks, including that Jews have no history in the holy land and are “colonizers.” UN Watch has tracked her comments supporting Hamas and their “resistance” against Israelis and the ADL has monitored her repeated antisemitism and Holocaust distortions.
The United Nations – spearheaded by its Secretary General – is endorsing a war against a member state and normalizing a violent jihad against Jews everywhere. The United States should call for the immediate removal of Guterres as well as his henchmen and women, or announce that it is defunding the global body and closing the headquarters in New York City.
Watch Holocaust denier and Hamas promoter Francesca Albanese talk at the September 2024 webinar at Brown University below. She will be speaking throughout the US in the coming weeks.
Alt-left anti-Zionist Jews were once again given a major platform on the anti-Israel Amanpour & Co. on PBS. This week, it was Arielle Angel, Editor-in-Chief of Jewish Currents, a magazine devoted to progressive causes and more increasingly, the destruction of the only Jewish State.
Michelle Martin acted as a fair interviewer and gave Angel numerous attempts to criticize Hamas and rampant antisemitism (6:05). Angel would not take the bait and instead responded (6:55) that “30% of the Jewish community holds views that are consistent with non- or anti-Zionism, and that number rises to 40% for those under 44 [years old].” Angel did not provide any source for her figures. When she went for a source, she quoted deeply antisemitic and anti-Zionist Brown University which claimed that there are close to 100,000 Gazans killed by Israel, a figure which is more than two times quoted by Hamas.
At 8:30, Martin asks Angel to define Zionism. Angel didn’t answer and instead simply insisted that Zionism and Judaism are completely distinct, “there was a Judaism before Zionism and there will be one after. (9:15)”
Pressed by Martin again at 10:00 to define anti-Zionism, the core of Angel’s narrative, Angel was flummoxed. She offered that Zionism is “hazy” as “a marker of belonging without a firm definition.” She then answered that anti-Zionism for her now means understanding the Palestinian point of view, meaning “apartheid,” “being killed or massacred at will,” and “ethnic cleansing and mass murder.”
Angel went on to say that she is against an “ethnocentrist state” and that millions of Stateless Arabs from Palestine (“SAPs” or “Palestinian Refugees”) should be allowed to move into Israel regardless of what the government of Israel wants. She argued that the world must stop Israel’s war against Hamas in Gaza which feels like the silent world which allowed the Holocaust of Jews to transpire in the 1940s.
Martin asked Angel to explain how Israel could allow itself to become a multi-ethnic society when it is completely surrounded by ethno-states, which have also repeatedly gone to war against Israel. Angel replied that Israel isn’t safe now anyway and incorrectly said that Hamas has accepted “1967 borders,” but it’s the Israeli government that wants all of the land between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea.
It would appear that extremist left-wing Jews have deeply internalized the 1988 foundational charter of Hamas which stated in Article 31, “Peace and quiet would not be possible except under the wing of Islam… It is the duty of the followers of other religions to stop disputing the sovereignty of Islam in this region… The Zionist Nazi activities against our people will not last for long.”
Anti-Zionist left-wing Jews have become the spokespeople for Hamas, advancing narratives and policies to facilitate the destruction of the Jewish State. They wish for Jews to become dhimmis once again, living under the wing of jihadists. It’s a small price for Israeli Jews to pay for the mental health of progressive diaspora Jews.
Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-MI) was censured by a bipartisan Congress for making a statement “from the River to the Sea, Palestine will be free,” generally understood to be a demand for the destruction of Israel, a strong American ally in the Middle East. Tlaib defended her comment as “an aspirational call for freedom, human rights, and peaceful coexistence, not death, destruction, or hate. My work and advocacy is always centered in justice and dignity for all people no matter faith or ethnicity.”
What are Tlaib’s parameters for freedom and human rights for all people regardless of faith?
Will Tlaib support Jewish prayer on the Temple Mount, complete with a synagogue, much like Muslims have the right to pray at the compound?
Will Tlaib support Jews living throughout the land, including in Bethlehem, Hebron and Jericho, like Muslims are capable of doing?
If so, Tlaib should urge the U.S. administration to work to rescind United Nations Security Council Resolution 2334 – allowed to pass by the Democratic administration of President Obama – which specifically made it illegal for Jews to live east of the 1949 Armistice Lines in the Old City of Jerusalem. Such action coming from a Palestinian-American member of Congress would carry particular weight.
If Tlaib says her call for freedom for everyone in the holy land means that Jews can live and pray throughout the holy land, including worshipping on the Jewish Temple Mount, the censure against her should be revoked. If she cannot support full rights for Jews, she is revealed as being an antisemitic jihadist waging a religious war in the holy land.
New York State is putting forward a proposal on the November ballot to change the state’s constitution. Specifically, it adds categories of “protected classes” and enables judges to override them if they feel that a situation is warranted.
Concurrent Resolution of the Senate and Assemblyproposing an amendment to section 11 of article 1 of the constitution, in relation to equal protection
Section 1. Resolved (if the Assembly concur), That section 11 of article 1 of the constitution be amended to read as follows:
§ 11. a.No person shall be denied the equal protection of the laws of this state or any subdivision thereof. No person shall, because of race, color, ethnicity, national origin, age, disability, creed [or], religion, or sex, including sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression, pregnancy, pregnancy outcomes, and reproductive healthcare and autonomy,be subjected to any discrimination in [his or her] theircivil rights by any other person or by any firm, corporation, or institution, or by the state or any agency or subdivision of the state, pursuant to law.
b. Nothing in this section shall invalidate or prevent the adoption of any law, regulation, program, or practice that is designed to prevent or dismantle discrimination on the basis of a characteristic listed in this section, nor shall any characteristic listed in this section be interpreted to interfere with, limit, or deny the civil rights of any person based upon any other characteristic identified in this section.
§ 2. Resolved (if the Assembly concur), That the foregoing amendment be submitted to the people for approval at the general election to be held in the year 2024 in accordance with the provisions of the election law.
Explanation – Matter in underscored is new; matter in brackets [ ] is old law to be omitted.
New York State is a Democratic super-majority trifecta: The Democratic Party controls the office of governor and both chambers of the state legislature, of Assembly (100 to 48) and Senate (42-21). Democrats are using their muscle to push forward a controversial proposal which sounds benign but gives judges wide latitude to advance preferred classes of people over others.
Advocates for the constitutional amendment like Governor Hochul argue that its about abortion rights. Yet many have written articles suggesting that such argument is absurd as New York already amended the constitution to permit an abortion until the moment of birth for any reason. Asian New Yorkers see the proposition as “reverse racism” which will kick qualified Asian students out of better schools in favor of preferred minorities. Others argue that this is a “pernicious” attempt to “throw out the New York human rights act,” in favor of pushing DEI everywhere (diversity, equity and inclusion).
Religious institutions are alarmed by the proposition and urging voters to vote ‘no.’
The president of Houghton University, a 141-year-old Christian university, said “the proposed amendments to the state constitution would adversely affect our institution, our students and our employees. The most significant of those adverse effects are related to parental rights, women’s athletics and religious liberty…. Proposal 1 and other similar inclusion measures overstep constitutional religious liberty protections when they prevent people of faith from freely exercising their religion. It is not inclusive to force people of faith to believe or behave in a manner that is inconsistent with their religious beliefs, to force them to raise their children in a manner that contradicts their religious beliefs, or for the state to attempt to raise their children in a manner that contradicts their religious beliefs while hiding state actions from their parents.”
Jewish institutions are similarly against the proposition, with Agudath Israel releasing a statement on October 15 urging everyone to reject the amendment to the constitution.
The Empire Center produced a detailed and balanced analysis of equal rights laws and the ramification of Prop 1. It concluded that the language in this proposition is so vague that it will pit one class of protected persons against another, spur constant litigation and give judges tremendous leeway to create policy of their personal preferences. It suggested that New Yorkers vote ‘no’ and “hold out for an equal rights amendment that solves more problems than it creates.”
The Deep Blue super-majority trifecta of New York State government is attempting to upend protections that have existed since 1938 to enforce DEI mandates in every aspect of New Yorker’s day-to-day lives. Vote ‘no’ to Proposition 1 and send a clear message that New Yorkers reject the government pitting citizens against each other.
Have you ever heard of anyone refer to themselves as a Yugoslavian citizen of Slovenia? Of Montenegro? Can you imagine the media using such language for those people?
I am sure that there are some people who live in the various lands of former Yugoslavia – the six republics of Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia, Macedonia, Montenegro, Serbia and Slovenia, as well as the two regions of Kosovo and Vojvodina – who are not happy with the current configuration of the region. Some may dislike their ruling government or have been forced to relocate from one part of former Yugoslavia to another to be near kinsmen, maybe Croats moving from Serbia or vice versa.
Former Yugoslavia before being broken up in 1992
But no one uses “Yugoslavian citizen of Croatia” to make the point that they are an ethnic Serb living in Croatia. To do so would mean that they cannot incorporate the actual partition of the country into their worldview, and imagine that they are living in the past, in a pre-Yugoslavian break-up. Those people would be mocked as unable to deal with the dissonance of their current situation to their preferred reality.
Roughly 9% of Montenegro is Bosniak and they refer to themselves as Montenegrin or Montenegrin Bosniaks. Should they call themselves “Yugoslavian citizens of Montenegro,” people might wonder if they were rebels looking to wage war against the current government or mentally unstable.
That is exactly what anti-Israel jihadists have chosen to do, calling Israeli Arabs “Palestinian citizens of Israel.”
Before Israel declared itself a state in May 1948, there were Palestinian Jews, Muslims, Christians, Bedouins and Druze. But after the armies of the neighboring Muslim countries came to pitch battle with the local Muslim Arabs to destroy Israel, the region of Palestine ceased to exist, and became Egyptian-controlled Gaza, Jordanian-annexed West Bank, and the State of Israel. Those were the 1949 Armistice Lines until the Muslim countries waged war against Israel again in June 1967 and lost those regions.
1949 Armistice Lines with Egyptian-controlled Gaza and Jordan’s illegally annexed western bank of the Jordan River
People who discuss an “Ongoing Nakba” like Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-MI) think of the 1948-9 war to destroy Israel as an ongoing project. Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas calls all of Israel a “painful settlement,” an affront to Muslim-superiority. Tlaib and Abbas want Israeli Arabs to not give any legitimacy to the Jewish State, and to time travel to 1947 when the region of Palestine still existed.
Israeli Arabs aren’t interested.
According to a 2019 Israel Democracy Institute survey, over three-quarters of Israeli Arabs think of themselves primarily as Arab or Muslim, with a nationality of “Palestinian” (13%) and “Israeli” (10%) far behind, and almost indistinguishable.
Muslim women ready to enter the Kotel / Western Wall Plaza (photo: First One Through)
Anti-Israel troublemakers from around the world continue to deny the reality of a thriving State of Israel and use language of “Palestinian citizen of Israel” that imagines that Palestine was once a country, only consisted of Muslim Arabs and still exists underneath the racist veneer of a Jewish State. Such language is not only wildly delusional but a rejection of peaceful coexistence.
When notorious terrorist Osama Bin Laden was killed by U.S. forces in May 2011, United Nations committees issued various congratulatory statements.
UN Secretary General said “The death of Osama bin Laden, announced by President [Barack] Obama last night, is a watershed moment in our common global fight against terrorism. The crimes of Al Qaeda touched most continents, bringing tragedy and loss of life to thousands of men, women and children. The United Nations condemns in the strongest possible terms terrorism in all its forms, regardless of its purpose and wherever it is committed.”
UN Security Council statement read: “Recalling the “heinous” terrorist attacks of 11 September 2001 in New York, Washington, D.C., and Pennsylvania, as well as the numerous attacks perpetrated by the Al-Qaida network around the world, the Security Council welcomed today the news that Osama bin Laden would never again be able to perpetrate such acts of terrorism.”
“The Security Council’s Al-Qaida and Taliban Sanctions Committee welcomes the news on 1 May 2011 that Usama Bin Laden will never again be able to perpetrate acts of terrorism and refers to the Presidential Statement of the Security Council dated 2 May 2011 in this regard.”
Israel did not receive a similar wave of congratulations in successfully killing Yahya Sinwar, the head of Hamas and chief architect of the gruesome October 7, 2023 massacre. As opposed to the commentary above, the UN used its various panels on October 17 and 18, 2024 to condemn Israel.
In a discussion about “Global Poverty,” Mauritania offered “Israeli aggression in Gaza and Lebanon has led to inhuman conditions, high levels of food insecurity and extreme poverty. Israel has targeted valuable infrastructure, including schools, mosques and churches as well as water and sanitation facilities.”
In a discussion about the “Rule of Law,” Oman “condemned Israel’s bombardment of hospitals, schools and other sites in which Gazan civilians have sought refuge, also warning against pursuing a policy of collective punishment,” while the representative from Palestine said “For 76 years, the Israeli exceptionalism has haunted the development of the rule of law and the advancement of the protection of civilians in an effort to make might right.”
In a discussion about “Machine Autonomy,” the representative from the League of Arab States “proposed an embargo on arms supplies to Israel.”
In a discussion about “Internally Displaced People,” Algeria called Israel a “killing machine,” while a Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression said that Israel was killing journalists “with total impunity” and was alarmed that Israel was attempting to call anti-Zionism a form of antisemitism.
In a discussion about “Colonialism,” Pakistan’s representative said “No Israeli massacre and brutality will extinguish the struggle for freedom and self-determination of the people of Palestine.”
In a discussion about “Food Rights,” a Special Rapporteur on the right to food said “Israel’s war proved to be a genocidal campaign against the Palestinian people.”
For those scoring at home, the Taliban in Afghanistan and China’s treatment of Rohingya were never mentioned. Russia’s invasion of Ukraine was only referenced once in the report on food rights.
For his part, UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres admonished Israel about the importance of UN’s military force in Lebanon, which has not prevented Hezbollah from digging tunnels to Israel or stockpiling weapons.
The UN Security Council hasn’t issued any statement since the October 17 killing of Sinwar.
No one at the UN denies that Sinwar planned and called for the massacre of over a thousand people and abduction of hostages. But since they also believe the targeted victims were Jews who perpetually carry some guilt like the mark of Cain, that he is absolved of all crime.
First One Through 