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.
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.
If ever there was a champion of the woke, it is the author Ta-Nehisi Coates. He worked as a journalist for years at many left-wing publications including the Village Voice, Time and The Atlantic and has written a number of books. One of his books won the National Book Award.
His latest book, The Message is principally about his view on Israel which he believes is racist to the core. He spent ten days visiting cities in the West Bank and read reports about the country from Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch and B’Tselem, all organizations deeply critical of Israel to arrive at his conclusion.
His book tour took him to his favorite liberal outlets which could not heap enough praise on the author and his book.
The New York Times called Coates a “public intellectual” who could “wield his moral authority” to “call out injustice,” “especially regarding Israel and the occupied territories.” Why would the editor of a major news organization give a glowing review of someone completely unfamiliar with the region who based his entire view from talking to select individuals over ten days, and a number of publicly available jaundiced reports? That says much more about the Times than it does about the book and his analysis.
MSNBC gave him a glowing interview by a gushing Chris Hayes for sixteen minutes. Coastes called Israel an “apartheid state” which he said was immediately obvious since there were streets he could not walk down. Hayes chimed in that he agreed, having been on the “same streets and Hebron and had the same reaction which is that this is is obviously a moral abomination.” (5:20) The two of them were in violent agreement “obviously, obviously, obviously” they echoed to each other.
There was no discussion that 90 percent of Hebron is controlled by the Palestinian Authority and JEWS ARE FORBIDDEN from going there. No education that when the area was under Muslim control pre-1967, JEWS WERE FORBIDDEN from even entering their holy site of the Tomb of the Jewish Matriarchs and Patriarchs. No mention that the 1929 Arab riots which slaughtered Jews, led the British to ETHNICALLY CLEANSE ALL JEWS from the city, because the British concluded that the massacre was so savage and massive that the victims could not be protected from Muslim Arab mobs.
Hayes accidentally let out that the two of them are friends (7:35) and talked about writing together. That fact was not a disqualifier for the executives at MSNBC which wanted Coates to have a warm and glowing interview, pushing his book.
When Hayes asked Coates why he didn’t interview anyone pro-Israel (9:20), Coates offered that “it’s very very difficult to spend almost thirty years in media as I have, and not be very much exposed – and frankly to live in America as a thinking person and not be exposed – to the defenders of the ‘Zionist Project.'” A rich criticism that Jews who control the media have continuously lied to the American public to protect their racist ‘project.’
Hayes grunted in agreement.
He went on to say that because Israel is an apartheid state, nothing else matters. He doesn’t care what actions Arabs have taken or what they say because that inherent situation is evil.
Hayes pointed his finger and waved that Coates was right on point. He urged everyone to read the book.
Chris Hayes on MSNBC telling people to buy Coates’ book
At 11:50, Coates suggested that the Jewish State acts so bigoted and violent against Arabs because of “the humiliation of the Holocaust.” Stewart suggested (14:45) that Arabs around the Middle East were humiliated by the British and French chopping up the region post World War I. He thought the region needed to “reconcile humiliation” (16:50).
In this telling, the genocide of European Jewry was conflated with creating new nations. The extermination of six million Jews connected to the lack of a Palestinian State because the local Arabs want all of it. The return of Jews to their ancestral homeland could only be celebrated if Jews got to subjugate the people who had been living there.
If that premise were true, would Jews have accepted a partition for just part of the land in 1947? Granted all non-Jews Israeli citizenship in 1948? Handed the Jewish Temple Mount, the holiest site for Judaism, to the Muslim Waqf in 1967? Every other faith group which took the plateau for the past 2,000 years converted it to paganism, a church or mosque.
Until the Jews. They handed control to Muslims in the fervent wish for peace and coexistence.
Stewart, a professed “cultural Jew”, endorsed the book.
CNN’s Amanpour & Co. interviewed Coates in an 18 minute interview. He talked (5:00) about how Palestinian Muslims had to wait as much as 45 minutes to enter the Old City of Jerusalem, while those entering from Israel were able to just walk in. Notice: that’s called border controls; Israeli Arabs have no issues going to the Old City of Jerusalem and do so constantly.
He went on to say that Israel’s laws are like the Jim Crow era of separate and unequal. He called Israel an “illegal apartheid regime (8:00)… based on what I saw and read afterwards.” But in interviews Coates made clear that he only read from parties that lambast Israel. He defends himself by saying that the context was irrelevant and the situation is intolerable and inhumane. That has the intellectual and moral idiocy of criticizing a prison without understanding the crime of someone, or the harshness of what chemotherapy does to a person without considering the cancer that riddles a person’s body.
Israel has not annexed the area east of the 1949 Armistice Lines (E49AL/ “West Bank”) because it hopes to arrive at a two-state settlement. It has already given Gaza and the major Arab population areas to the Palestinian Authority to give Arabs there self-determination. Unfortunately, the Arabs made clear in the Second Intifada/ Two Percent Pogrom that they want all of Israel, not just pieces of it.
The interviewer pushed back at 9:00 that Coates was only there for ten days and Jews have indigenous claims to the land too. Coates said that “context… won’t make [it] okay.” He then compared defenders of Israel to American Southern racists telling northern White people condemning slavery that “you don’t know the Negro like we do.” (11:25) Coates implied that the pro-Israel community wants to treat Arabs like Black slaves. He said that in Israeli “citizenship is decided by ethnicity and religion, and rights are decided by ethnicity and religion” (16:05) showing that he is completely misinformed and ignorant about the country, where 26% of its citizens are non-Jews.
Coates went back to his theme (17:40) “that just because you went through some horrific experience you therefore have a kind of moral authority and are therefore then not capable of inflicting hurts on other people.” Coates seemingly thinks that Jews think themselves both “humiliated’ (Daily Show) and morally superior because of the Holocaust, and can therefore act with impunity.
The basic context that Coates refuses to acknowledge is that the Holocaust wiped out one-third of global Jewry. While he thinks of himself as a minority, there are over one billion Black people in the world. There are nearly two billion Muslims in the world. Jews are not majority-minorities that are discussed constantly, but a minority-minority of just 15 million people which are on the endangered humans list. When they returned en masse to their homeland, five Arab armies and the local Arab population tried to genocide the remaining rump of Jews. In the lands that Arabs conquered in the 1948-9 war, they ethnically cleansed the land of every single Jew and gave citizenship to people as long as they weren’t Jewish (1954 Jordanian Law, Article 3). They voted Hamas with a vile genocidal antisemitic charter to 58% of the parliament, and celebrated the group’s October 7 massacre.
CNN would not endorse the speaker or book.
The firestorm over the book came about recently when CBS interviewed Coates in a six minute interview by three interviewers. One of the three, Tony Dokoupil asked Coates why he omitted so much context (1:50) and Coates replied that the pro-Israel context is known so he didn’t feel compelled to repeat them, as well as making the arguments listed above in the other interviews. The staff at CBS went ballistic at the line of questioning so CBS News chief Wendy McMahon scolded Dokoupil for not meeting “our editorial standards.”
Perhaps Dokoupil was the only journalist who actually did his job, as most “news” organizations were no more than paid advertising spots.
The shame of Coates is the willful smugness of his ignorance. The horror of the media is the willful platforming of miseducation.
In the aftermath of the worst slaughter of Jews since the Holocaust, the United Nations decided that the killers are “peace-loving.”
On May 10, 2024, the United Nations voted and approved A/ES-10/L.30/Rev.1 which said “that membership in the United Nations is open to all peace-loving States,” and that Palestine fully qualifies. It endorsed Palestine as “peace-loving” despite Hamas committing a brutal slaughter of 1,200 people in Israel on October 7, as codified in its genocidal antisemitic charter which is embraced by Palestinians who elected the terrorist group to 58% of parliament in 2006.
The recorded vote was 143 in favour to 9 against (Argentina, Czech Republic, Hungary, Israel, Federated States of Micronesia, Nauru, Palau, Papua New Guinea, United States), with 25 abstentions.
On September 10, 2024, Palestine took its seat at the General Assembly of the UN’s opening session. Delegates from around the world embraced the Palestinian ambassador Riyad Mansour.
Delegates of member states line up to greet Riyad Mansour, top right, the Palestinian ambassador to the United Nations, as he arrives for the 79th session of the United Nations General Assembly, September 10, 2024 at the United Nations. (AP Photo/Yuki Iwamura)
The beheading of people is “peace-loving” if the victims are Jews. The burning of families alive is “peace-loving” if the family are Jews. The sexual abuse of women is “peace-loving” if the women are Jews. The abduction of babies as hostages is “peace-loving” if the infants are Jews.
So says the United Nations, an institution awash in moral rot which should be defunded and closed.
The anti-Zionist group IfNotNow was formed in July 2014 at the end of a war between Hamas and Israel. It concluded that Israel was an apartheid state that must be dismantled, as must American support for the racist Zionist project.
The goal of the organization is one state, in which Arabs and Jews live together. They want a complete “right of return” for millions of Arabs into Israel, with a Jewish minority between the Mediterranean Sea and the Jordan River.
IfNotNow website
Even after the savage October 7 massacre of Israelis by Palestinian Arabs, the organization has doubled down on its hypothesis, and is aggressively pushing its goals onto college campuses and into politics.
RACIST: Jewish Organizations and the Jewish State Are Right-Wing and Racist
INN believes that Jewish organizations are rife with “Ashkenazi dominance.” They believe that racism and antisemitism is only found among White people, and American Jews have been fed lies of “right-wing talking points” which have separated Jews from Arabs and people of color around the world.
INN believes that leading Jewish and Israeli institutions like the Anti-Defamation League, AIPAC and Conference of Presidents “exploit traumatic events of our past and present” to support and “protect Israel’s system of apartheid.” The organization believes that powerful White Jews are suppressing everyone else, including Jews of color and Palestinians.
This is anti-white racism and antisemitism.
First, Israel does not practice “apartheid”. It is the most liberal country for 1,000 miles in any direction.
Second, white Ashkenazi Jews account for less than one-third of Israelis, even after the mass migration from the former Soviet Union.
Further, why should someone’s skin color automatically make them a racist? INN believes that all White people – whether Jewish or non-Jewish – are “white supremacists”, while simultaneously believing that no people of color are racist. That’s absurd and racist.
Additionally, the idea that Jews are “powerful” has long been used to foster antisemitism and INN’s philosophy and advocacy directly feeds to more antisemitic attacks.
BLIND: A Movement of Mutual Liberation
IfNotNow thesis is that in the face of white racist Jewish institutions protecting a white racist Jewish State, “mutual liberation” was needed. American Jews must fight and mimic movements such as BlackLivesMatter. It also wants to be like the Jewish prophet Moses, fighting for the liberation of his people and the “liberation of all people.”
This is ridiculous.
The BLM movement was specifically about Black people; it was not about “mutual liberation.” Moses went to Egypt to specifically free the Jewish people. These were particular movements and not intertwined with other groups.
Moses did not free Jews from slavery without “a mechanism of destruction.” Egyptians were set upon with plagues and its army drowned in the sea. INN doesn’t know if it’s for particularism or universalism; for violence or non-violence.
LOST: October 7 Massacre Is Israel’s Fault
Many Jews were horrified by the October 7 massacre, not only for the horrible and massive loss of life, but additionally that it undermined the notion that Jews-with-power would be safe.
IfNotNow was horrified for a different reason: that Jews were fighting back.
On October 7, IfNotNow blamed the government of Israel for the slaughter of its own people. It bemoaned the Palestinian terrorists who were killed alongside their victims.
Within days, it was attacking Israel for using “grief… [to] justify revenge or genocide.”
Rather than reconsidering their thesis that Jews and Arabs can get along – after thousands of Palestinian Arabs burned Jewish families alive and mutilated women, old and young – INN doubled down that Jews should not use their power to seek justice for the slaughtered civilians and to protect Israelis from a regime sworn to its destruction.
Even the anti-Zionist group Code Pink was appalled by the October 7 bloodlust of Palestinians. But not INN and other jihadists who seek the end of both Jews and the Jewish State.
Politics and Colleges
INN has aligned itself with groups like Justice Democrats and Democratic Socialists of America in trying to elect anti-Zionist people of color like Rep. Cori Bush and Rep. Jamaal Bowman. They have signed onto the “Reject AIPAC” tagline and smeared white progressive politicians like George Latimer “a racist,” because he’s a white man taking a black man’s job.
The anti-Zionist group was very active on college campuses during the 2023-4 school year promoting anti-Israel actions. Even at campuses which saw wild antisemitic activity like Columbia, Barnard, NYU and CCNY, INN was proud to stand in support of the anti-Israel activities.
It will likely continue such activities in the next school year.
IfNotNow is part of the socialist-jihadi alliance which is becoming more active in politics and college campuses. INN wants Israeli Jews to shed their means of protection despite their lived experience. They similarly want white Jewish organizations to stop protecting white Jews in Israel and America to become a defenseless minority-minority which history has shown is easy fodder for attack.
Now that Jews have a country and army for the first time in 2,000 years, IfNotNow wants to see both dismantled. Now that some Jews have stature in the diaspora, IfNotNow wants them to renounce any power or privilege.
Rather than advancing the cause of non-Whites and Palestinians, IfNotNow wants to target and tear down Ashkenazi Jews and the Jewish State.
October 7 and the subsequent rise of antisemitism has left alt-left anti-Zionist groups like IfNotNow blind and lost like Samson before his death, and like the Jewish prophet, INN is intent on bringing down the Jewish people with them.
In May 2021, President Biden’s Jewish Engagement Director Aaron Keyak posted on X “It pains me to say this, but if you fear for your life or physical safety take off your kippah and hide your magen david (Jewish star),” in response to growing antisemitic attacks.
The government official did not state that governmental authorities would do whatever it can to protect Jews and prosecute those who harass, intimate and attack Jews. He told Jews to go undercover and erase their identity out of fear.
The situation for Jews has only worsened over the past three years as Jews are being forced from the public arena.
In September 2021, Hollywood opened a new museum, the Academy Museum of Motion Pictures. By design, the building exhibited a movie industry which was shaped by many Jews, showcasing virtually no Jews. Its desire to be “radically inclusive” of minorities’ contribution to the film industry stripped the minority-minority Jews of a place which they helped create.
Marvel Studios just announced that the introduction of the 1980s Jewish Israeli superhero Sabra in the upcoming movie Captain America: Brave New World, will be stripped of her identity and instead be recast with a Russian backstory.
Plays have been canceled because producers cannot pay the increased insurance premiums that arise out of fear that antisemitic protestors may attack the venue. It happens whether the production includes Israelis or it doesn’t. Jews have been declared the enemy, a too financially and morally expensive cohort to platform.
In April 2024, Columbia University opted to move its classes online after it concluded that it could not keep Jewish students safe on campus. After being sued, the Columbia administration said it would provide “walking escorts” and create a new position called a “Safe Passage Liaison” to help get Jewish students around the school campus, acknowledging that it could not/ would not control campus antisemitism.
Jewish fear of attacks is being met with a widespread canceling of Jews, not the perpetrators. It is reminiscent of the British response to the heinous slaughter of Jews in Hebron in 1929: rather than prosecute the Palestinian Arabs who committed the atrocities, they expelled the Palestinian Jews from their homes into other cities.
The explosion of antisemitism is not being confronted with forceful laws and actions to make Jews safe but a policy of abandonment. Few politicians and non-Jews have declared that this tsunami of antisemitism is un-American, the way Van Jones did in Washington D.C. in November 2023.
Worse, leading American Jews – Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) in particular – have not defended Jews from antisemitism. As the most politically powerful Jew in America, Schumer has refused to advance the Antisemitism Awareness Act of 2023 for a vote. Rep. Mike Lawler (R-NY17) introduced H.R. 6090 back in October 2023 which was passed by a wide bipartisan margin on May 1, 2024. It has been sitting idly on Schumer’s desk for two and one-half months without action.
Even the most powerful Jew in the United States is hiding, lest his advocacy for other Jews make him vulnerable.
Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY)
It has become institutionalized in the government.
Jews are being erased in the public sphere and being told to hide. As they do, they are vilified and slandered for hiding in the shadows and conspiring to harm people. Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-MI) said “they do it from Gaza to Detroit, and it’s a way to control people, to oppress people… open the curtain andlook behind the curtain, it’s the same people who make money and—yes they do—off of racism.” Her comrade Rep. Jamaal Bowman (D-NY16) said “Westchester is segregated. There’s certain places where the Jews live and concentrate,” vilifying Jews – and only Jews – for not living where he has determined they should buy homes.
The alt-left and alt-right are thrilled at the disappearing Jew. They painted the small minority as too powerful, too rich and too influential for many years. They want the American Jewish footprint to be as meager as their numbers, and the Jewish State eradicated from the global map.
Jews are left with two choices: to either 1) disappear as Jews, by concealing their identity or moving away, or 2) stand and fight for their basic human rights and dignity.
Astute western democratic leaders know those options.
After the killing of Jews in a Parisian kosher supermarket in 2015, French Prime Minister Manuel Valls said that “if 100,000 Jews leave, France will no longer be France. The French Republic will be judged a failure.”French President Francois Hollande made a similar statement a few days later: “French people of the Jewish faith, your place is here, in your home. France is your country.” Powerful statements from governmental officials to keep its Jewish citizens.
But where are such statements in America? How can Biden officials tell Jews to hide their religion and the leading Jewish politician refuse to bring laws to fight antisemitism?
Bret Stephens, said that the best ally for American Jewry is “America at her best.” Are we there or moving in the opposite direction?
Jews who refuse to disappear are fighting first-and-foremost for fundamental American principles, such as merit, free enterprise and creativity along with respect for tradition. America at her best will see a proud Jewish community thriving, while America unmoored will see its Jews disappear.
The fight against socialist, jihadi and alt-right antisemitism is to enact laws and elect politicians who want to see America focused on creating, not destroying; developing, not redistributing; respecting, not ripping down.
The disappearing Jew is a warning sign that western values are disintegrating, a dangerous omen for everyone.
This is from France, but it could be any Jewish community, anywhere in the world.
The Democratic Socialists of America rescinded its endorsement of Rep. Alexandria Ocasio Cortez for appearing to care about American Jews.
In its July 10, 2024 statement, the DSA focused on three offenses committed by AOC: “a vote in favor of H.Res.888”; cosigning “a press release on April 20, 2024, that “support[s] strengthening the Iron Dome and other defense systems”; and hosting “a public panel with leaders from the Jewish Council for Public Affairs.”
July 10, 2024 statement from the DSA as to the reason it has rescinded its endorsement of AOC
The reasons say much about the vile antisemitic extremism of the DSA.
For starters, H.Res 888 was a bipartisan resolution sponsored by many Jews and non-Jews. It had four key components in addressing Israel’s defensive war against Hamas which committed a brutal massacre of civilians in Israel and has promised to repeat the atrocities again and again. The four statements were that: Israel has a right to exist; denying such right is a form of antisemitism; rejects calls for Israel’s destruction; and condemns Hamas’s attack.
H.Res. 888 had broad Congressional support in defending Israel in its war against the U.S. designated foreign terrorist organization, Hamas
Secondly, Israel’s self-defense is a basic national responsibility and should be embraced by all of its allies. Denying self-defense systems in a region surrounded by radical jihadi regimes and terrorist groups is a call for the destruction of the Jewish State.
Lastly, finding AOC’s discussion of “Antisemitism and the Fight for Democracy” with two progressive Jewish women was not remotely controversial. The panelists and AOC repeatedly said that criticism of the Israeli government’s policies is not antisemitic, as does the IHRA definition of antisemitism. AOC is rightly appalled that too many far left comrades have decided to target Jews and Jewish institutions.
And such defense and association is unacceptable the socialist-jihadi group DSA.
The DSA is not simply targeting Israel for destruction but ostracizing any Zionist or people who associate with Zionists. The group has become an American front for Hamas, minus throwing gays off of rooftops.
The “Squad” of far-left American politicians pulled out all of the antisemitic dog whistles in their fight to defend the unpopular congressman Jamaal Bowman in the New York Democratic primary. In response to his resounding defeat, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio Cortez said “I think we need to have a real conversation about AIPAC,” the pro-Israel group supported by many Jews.
In truth, all the alt-left did was talk about AIPAC for the prior months and did so in the most vile and slanderous manner. As such, we must have a conversation about alt-left politicians’ repulsive antisemitism.
The smears were:
AIPAC is a bunch of White supremacist racist MAGA billionaires
AIPAC doesn’t want Black and Brown people to have positions of power
AIPAC supports genocide of Black and Brown people
The people behind AIPAC are operating in the shadows
AIPAC is buying off politicians and congress
AIPAC and backers are seeking to oppress minorities around the world
The Squad is operating to defend working class people from the AIPAC racist money machine
It’s a war of us versus them
This is repulsive and mimics Nazi propaganda against Jews in the 1930s and 1940s. These are carefully organized scripts to inflame a war against Jews in the United States and around the world.
White Supremacists and Racists
Bowman’s posts on X were replete with calling the backers of his opponent George Latimer, himself a progressive, as racists of the worst sort, who try to keep Black people down.
Comments included:
“White supremacists… targeting me, our first Black Representative with racist attacks & dog whistles… don’t want to see people like us in power.” [note that lower Westchester voted for Mondaire Jones, a Black gay progressive in 2020]
“Big-money groups like AIPAC don’t like seeing people like me in power.”
“AIPAC and their MAGA billionaires don’t want to see us in power. They don’t want to see Black and brown working class people rising up.”
“We’re fighting against AIPAC and their Republican billionaires… trying to buy NY-16… our communities are not for sale.”
Billionaires Buying Politicians
Bowman, AOC and Sen. Bernie Sanders made the fight about a handful of racist billionaires buying politicians, rather than discuss issues.
Comments included:
“AIPAC and their right-wing billionaires are trying to buy this district like they bought my opponent. They don’t want to see people in power.”
“AIPAC and their Republican billionaires are spending millions to try to buy our district… their money will never defeat the people.”
“My opponent sold out to AIPAC and their right-wing billionaires. They’re spending millions to try to buy our district.”
“He’s [Latimer] so bought out by AIPAC… pawns for special interests.”
“Fight back against AIPAC and right-wing billionaires.”
“AIPAC has already spent $6 million against us. Why? because we stand for peace and justice! MAGA Republicans are trying to buy NY-16… we decide the future of our district, not them.”
“Defeat MAGA billionaires trying to buy NY-16”
AOC wrote “Big money, from AIPAC to Wall Street have poured millions to buy this election.”
Bernie Sanders wrote “tell billionaires and their corporate PACs that no, they cannot buy our democracy.”
UAW wrote “The billionairess are coming for Jamaal Bowman because he stands up for the working class… they think they can buy off Congress.”
AIPAC Supports Genocide
Bowman and friends made clear that these wealthy racists are genocidal, coming for Black and Brown people in the U.S. and Israel.
Comments included:
“AIPAC’s attack campaign against us is breaking spending records every week… Our movement is scaring their pro-genocide, pro-Netanyahu, racist MAGA donors.”
“The Israeli government is committing a genocide and OUR taxpayer money is funding it. Why do we have billions to send to mass murder”
“This election is a working class educator… against a multimillionaire handpicked by MAGA to support genocide.”
“We won’t let AIPAC stop us from fighting for peace and justice.”
“Our struggles are all connected. The same evils harming our communities here are harming communities across the world.”
Comrade Rashida Tlaib shared “Palestinian liberation and Black liberation are interconnected. From Detroit to Cleveland to Gaza.”
AIPAC Is Coming After Black And Brown Communities
Bowman framed the primary race of two progressives, one Black who is extremist and anti-Israel, and the other White and pro-Israel, as an existential battle between peace-loving working class minorities against evil nefarious forces. It’s appalling and ridiculous as Latimer has decades of strong relationships and dozens of endorsements from Black and Brown politicians, and AIPAC is focused on Israel, not local race relations.
Comments included:
“AIPAC, a right-wing lobby… don’t care about us or our communities.”
“Big money doesn’t belong in our communities Reject AIPAC”
“Black and Brown communities have been left behind for too long. We don’t need more career politicians who only cater to their billionaire friends.”
Bowman retweeted “Thanks to funding from right-wing billionaires, AIPAC is targeting progressives of color”
The Working Families Party shared the article “No One Should Be Surprised a Black Politician Is the Canary in AIPAC’s Coal Mine”
Bowman added “The people are rising up against AIPAC and their republican billionaires. We won’t let them buy our communities in NY-16 or anywhere!”
Hiding In The Shadows
AOC made clear that these racist billionaires keeping minorities down are being funded by “dark money.”
Bowman retweeted AOC comments including:
“Dark money has spent the largest sum in history to unseat Jamaal Bowman… these lobbies don’t care about the Bronx and Westchester.”
“we rallied 1200 people in the Bronx to take on dark money”
“It’s time to fight back against AIPAC and their megadonors.”
The Alt-Left Against AIPAC
The far-left wing demonized a pro-Israel group as the epitome of evil: racist White supremacists who support genocide against minorities in the U.S. and Israel and who don’t care about anyone. They are agents who do not belong in the district or to have a voice in American politics.
Rep. Cori Bush said that these pro-Israel people “meddle in our Democratic elections,” meaning that they do not belong.
As such, they all ran under a banner of RejectAIPAC; to rally against a bipartisan organization that supports the only liberal democracy in the Middle East. To demonize the only Jewish state. To call anyone involved in pro-Israel activities pro-genocidal maniacs who should be cast from society. To strip the beleaguered Jewish State of all defenses.
No lobbying group is tarnished in such fashion by politicians. We don’t call Americans who are involved with the National Rifle Association or Planned Parenthood as “genocide supporters.” Elected officials do not slam teacher’s unions as “dark money” that “meddle” in the political process.
But the far-left has called open season on Jews loudly and repeatedly. It’s us versus them.
And it’s a completely manufactured lie. A vicious antisemitic campaign attempting to vilify Jews and push them from the public square.
We need to have a conversation about the vile antisemitism that is rife at woke colleges and among far-left politicians.
The single largest issue in the Israeli-Palestinian Arab conflict is the belief among those Arabs that they have a right to move into towns and houses where grandparents lived many decades ago. They call it a “right of return” and state that it is an individual right laid out in international law.
Everyone has the right to leave any country, including his own, and to return to his country.
Everyone has the right to freedom of movement and residence within the borders of each state.
As it relates to the first point, Palestine either was or was not a country before Israel declared itself a state in May 1948. If it was not a country, the UDHR right is irrelevant as it specifically relates only to countries. If it was a state, than the Arabs living in Gaza and the West Bank are already part of such state and have no right to move based on the first clause. Their right to move to Israel under the second clause of moving “within the borders of each state” would mean negating the very existence of Israel, a member state of the United Nations, which would undermine the institution upon which the clause exists (rendering such notion impossible).
If Palestine were considered a state pre-Israel, then the descendants of refugees (DORs) in Lebanon, Syria and Jordan could relocate to Gaza or the West Bank (Palestine), but not to Israel.
So under broad international law, there is no right of return for Palestinian Arabs to Israel regardless of whether one thinks Palestine was a country in 1947.
Palestinian Arabs and their supporters therefore try to use a specific clause within a particular UN General Assembly resolution. UNGA Resolution 194, Article 11 states “Resolves that refugees wishing to return to their homes and live at peace with their neighbours should be permitted to do so at the earliest practicable date, and that compensation should be paid for the property of those choosing not to return and for loss of or damage to property which, under principles of international law or equity, should be made good by the Governments or authorities responsible.”
This resolution has multiple legal issues regarding applicability.
UN General Assembly resolutions are not legally binding, but advisory at the most fundamental. Second, Resolution 194 includes many items including Articles 7 and 8 which places holy places – including those in Nazareth and Jerusalem – under UN control, which neither Israel nor the Palestinian Authority desire. One cannot cherry-pick specific items which one side prefers to make a case; the entirety of that resolution is passed its expiration date.
Significantly, the clause itself demands that those refugees desiring to return to “homes” – which may or may not exist anymore – must live in peace with their neighbors. The many wars and pogroms by Palestinian Arabs, including their overwhelming support for Hamas and the October 7 massacre, show them to reject basic coexistence with Jewish neighbors.
Yet UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres makes a mockery of reality and destroys a pathway to peace when he says the opposite. He often states “the need for tangible progress towards a two-State solution based on 1967 lines, with Jerusalem as the capital of both States, in line with UN resolutions and international law.” That clause makes Palestinian Arabs think that millions of Arabs will get to move to Tel Aviv and Haifa. Their frustration of not moving there leads to frustration and causes massacres as seen on October 7.
The United Nations must make clear that there is no “right of return” for any Palestinian Arab to Israel, full stop. The failure to do so causes bloodshed and suffering.
First One Through 