The Noxious Anti-Semitism Of “European Settler Colonialism”

There are some narratives that simply boggle the mind. Some are completely nonsensical and easily disproven. Others are seemingly spat out of desperation to belittle an enemy’s position. And a few are so twisted, they must have been hatched and sanctified by university professors.

Consider the phrase “European Settler Colonialism” to describe Jews moving to Israel.

Columbia University’s Rashid Khalidi was fond of the phrase. As recently as November 2017, on the 100th anniversary of the Balfour Declaration, he took the stage at the United Nations’ Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestine People. He used the expression in a number of ways:

  • “…Arab city dwellers, who observed with mounting concern the constant arrival of new European Jewish immigrants
  • the Declaration had been tailored to suit the desiderata of Zionism, a European colonizing project
  • The Palestinians were therefore in a triple bind, which may have been unique in the history of resistance of indigenous peoples to European colonialism. They faced the might of the British Empire in the era between the two world wars when not one single colonial possession, with the partial exception of Ireland, succeeded in freeing itself from the clutches of the European imperial powers.

A current professor at Columbia, Joseph Massad who teaches modern Arab politics, said much the same in an article in Middle East Eye on July 19, 2022 called “Algeria, Israel and the last European settler colony in the Arab world.”

  • Of the five European settler colonies established in Arab countries, only Algeria and Palestine remained colonised in the early 1960s
  • As the last two European settler-colonial powers in the Arab world, France and Israel formed a close alliance to coordinate the preservation of their settler colonies
  • Like France and Italy, the European Jewish Zionists claimed to be descendants of the ancient Palestinian Hebrews and to be merely “returning” to their ancient land.”
  • the pan-Jewishism of European Zionism, which sought to recreate the “Judaic” glories of the Palestinian Hebrews, who were appropriated as the ancestors of European converts to Judaism, was depicted as progressive and socialist.”
  • Unhappy with its isolation as the last European settler colony in the Arab world, the Israelis provided logistical support to the French colonists,...”

Students have caught on. At a vote to boycott Israel at the University of Wisconsin in March 2017, one of the students took the theme one step further:

The Israeli state was founded using the same nationalistic and exclusive principles that exploited Jews in Eastern Europe. The foundation built Israel to be as oppressive as the countries that destroyed Jewish homes, lives and pushed them out of Eastern Europe. Israel in its inception is not a Jewish idea but a European one.

Imagine the depravity of the anti-Zionist university mindset today, that Israel is not even considered a Jewish idea but simply a tool of European colonial imperialism.

The outrageous sentiments are given succor at the United Nations and anti-Zionist media. That they need to be addressed and disproved is shameful but it goes to the heart of the prevalent false anti-Israel narrative peddled by those who seek a Palestinian State and need an anchor for their anti-Semitic beliefs.

Colonialism – The Desire To Gain Versus The Desire To Rid

Many European countries set up colonies around the world, including France, United Kingdom, Spain, Portugal, the Netherlands, Belgium and Italy. Each country set up outposts to gain particular advantages in far away lands. Some sought raw materials like grain and minerals to export home. Some sought trade routes and new markets. Others brought missionaries to spread Christianity. Each country sought to exploit the new territory for selfish gain.

All, except for one case falsely-framed as colonialism: Zionism as “European settler colonialism.”

The anti-Semitic narrative describing Zionism as “European colonialism” is founded on two principle beliefs: that European countries desired to shed the continent of its Jews; and the further wish to weaken Muslim Arabs in the Middle East.

On the first concocted rationale, anti-Semitic anti-Zionists try to argue that the great powers of Europe wanted to collectively purge the region of its Jews. It is anti-Semitism at its most base and ugly, suggesting that Jews were universally unwanted foreigners in their midst.

The Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas pushed this argument in April 2018 that “[Lord] Balfour hated the Jews, but nevertheless, he gave them a state. The Russian foreign minister was well known for his hatred of the Jews, yet he said to [the Jews]: “Come, I will give you a state in Palestine.”” Abbas claimed that all European leaders hated the Jews and wanted to get rid of them and used Palestine as their dumping ground. The phrase “European settler colonialism” is deeply anti-Semitic in that it conveys that Jews are vile and unwanted.

The second premise of European colonialism in the desire to insert a foreign entity to weaken the supposed unity of Muslim Arabs in the Middle East is foolish as various European powers were dealing with many tribes in the region and building them up into functioning governments and countries. The British Mandate of Palestine is put forward by Arabists as something unique, when there were mandates for all of the lands that were to become independent countries like Lebanon, Syria and Iraq, with the fall of the Ottoman Empire.

Jews Have Nothing To Do With Ancient Israelites And Never Lived In Israel

The anti-Semitism of “European settler colonialism” extends beyond the invective that Zionism was launched by European leaders to ethnically-cleanse Europe of its Jews. It mocks Jewish history.

The acting President of the Palestinian Authority, Mahmoud Abbas wrote his doctoral thesis on a particular form of Holocaust denial, which claimed that Jews have no connection or history in Israel, so early Zionists conspired with the Nazis to make life unbearable so that the Jews would be forced to emigrate to a foreign land. Abbas falsely asserted that Jews are descendants of Khazars, much like Columbia University’s Massad absurdly claimed that Jews pretend to be descended from “Palestinian Hebrews” (whatever that ridiculous phrase means), but really are a bunch of European converts who “appropriated” someone else’s history.

This repulsive narrative is a critical component for anti-Zionists because the definition of a “colony” means an “area under full or partial control of another country.” While France may have set up a foreign colony in Algeria, it is nonsensical to say that the entire European continent set up a joint colony for everyone’s benefit. But what choice do the anti-Semites have? If they are forced to recognize that Jews are from Judea and the land of Israel, then by definition it is not a Jewish colony but a righteous return of Jews from their diaspora. The phrase “European settler colonialism” is anti-Semitic in denying Jews their basic history in the land of Israel.

Jews Came To Palestine Before The Palestine Mandate

Anti-Semitic anti-Zionists argue that the European colonial project launched with Lord Balfour’s 1917 declaration and then the Mandate of Palestine in 1922. Those slightly more knowledgeable about history might point to Theodore Herzl’s First Zionist Congress in 1897 in Basel, Switzerland.

The reality is that Jews have always lived and moved to the land of Israel. During the last century of Ottoman rule (1800 to 1914), the Jewish population jumped more than 13.4 times. The Christian population only grew by 3.2 times over that period while the Muslim population barely moved, increasing only 2.1 times, meaning that no Muslims migrated to the holy land during that time, as such growth is the natural trend of births minus deaths.

The reason the Jews moved to the land is that the land is holy to Jews. Jews from all over the world pray facing Jerusalem, the only religion to do so. Jews are commanded to visit Jerusalem three times every year. There are commandments that Jews can only keep in Israel.

Saying that Zionism is a “European colonial project” is anti-Semitic as it denies the centrality and holiness of the land to Jews.

Israeli Jews Are Not European

The smear that “Zionism is Racism” was hatched by Muslim nations in the 1970’s, after the Arab world failed to destroy Israel for the third time (1948-9, 1967 and 1973 wars). The outrageous UN resolution was overturned by the United States in 1991, but the charge has been re-launched in modern times under the banner of “white supremacy”, “imperialism” and “European colonialism.”

The simple fact is less than one-third of Israelis have ancestors from Europe. As of 2018, only 31.8% of Jews were Ashkenazi, of European heritage, and 12.4% were from the former USSR. That compares to 44.9% who are Mizrahi and 3.0% from Ethiopia. The balance of Jews (7.9%) are of mixed heritage. Then there are 21.1% who are Arab (Muslim and Christian) and 5% are other groups including Ba’hai (a religion banned in several neighboring countries), Samaritans and others.

Saying that Israel is a creature of “European colonialism” is non-sensical at its most fundamental, as most Israelis do not come from Europe.

Poor Attempt To Distract From Muslim Arab Anti-Semitic Edicts

The charge that Zionism is based on European colonialism is anti-Semitic on many levels. It is used in a pathetic attempt to advance the cause of a Palestinian state, when in fact, it does the opposite by showing that Arabs are terrible anti-Jewish neighbors.

  • Admitting that Jews predate Arabs by thousands of years does not mean that Arabs have no history in the land, so stop pretending otherwise.
  • Admitting that the Temple Mount is only the holiest place for Jews does not mean that it holds no significance for Christians or Muslims.
  • Admitting that Jordanian/Palestinian Muslim Arabs banned Jews from entering the Old City of Jerusalem and the Cave of the Jewish Patriarchs and Matriarchs in Hebron while they controlled it, does not mean that Jews will ban other religions from entering these sacred locations.
  • Admitting that Jordan issued an anti-Semitic citizenship law in 1954 that granted citizenship to people in Judea and Samaria, as long as they weren’t Jewish, doesn’t mean that the Jewish State of Israel will ban non-Jews from becoming citizens.
  • Admitting that most Israelis are not European Jews does not mean that Israel will constantly point out that the largest demographic in Israel are the Jews who came from Muslim Arab lands who were expelled and driven out of their homes.

The modern state of Israel is simply the reestablishment of Jewish sovereignty in their historic homeland. The attempts to vilify Israel as a product of European colonialism and imperialism is both false and deeply anti-Semitic, and actually hurts the Palestinian cause in showing their inability to live peacefully with the Jewish people.

Related articles:

Israel was never a British Colony; Judea and Samaria are not Israeli Colonies

Palestinians Are Still Actively Fighting The 1947-9 War Against The Jewish State. They’re Losing Again

Biden To Push Coexistence Agenda To Palestinian Arabs Not Interested

The UN Cannot See Palestinian ‘Lies and Loathing’

Antisemitism Includes the Denial of Jewish History

Palestinian Actions Matter

The Calming Feeling of Palestinian Refugees: Rashida Tlaib in Her Own Words

The Spark And The Fuel Of Anti-Semitism Of The Women’s March

The “Women’s March” has a deep history of anti-Semitism of its own making. The New York Times touched upon some of those points in an article about “Russian troll factories” which “put a sustained effort into discrediting the movement by circulating damning, often fabricated narratives around Ms. [Linda] Sarsour.” The article focused on the fuel which amplified her extremist anti-Zionist views which rocked the message of the movement.

The article stated that fractures in society, distrust in institutions and Sarsour’s dabbling in anti-Semitism were already present, and that the Russian bots added fuel to the fire by exaggerating Sarsour’s statements on social media. The Times even touched upon the anti-Semitic charges against other members of the Women’s March movement who support the notorious anti-Semite Rev. Louis Farrakhan.

But the article made the anti-Semitism embedded in the Women’s March appear minor; a couple of discrete and misunderstood comments by the founders, which were inflamed by a foreign government. In doing so, it absolved the organization for repeatedly inciting Jew hatred.

That’s the wrong conclusion.

Just a few months after the large January 2017 march in Washington, D.C., the city of Chicago held a rally where Jewish marchers carrying a rainbow flag with the Jewish star in the middle were asked to leave because the organizers said they “repeatedly expressed support for Zionism.” One of the people who was asked to leave told the Windy City Times that she was made to feel that “as a Jew, I am not welcome here.”

In June 2019, the Washington, D.C. march followed suit and prohibited marchers from carrying flags with the Jewish star on it. Organizers saidThe DC Dyke March is a pro-Muslim and pro-Palestinian space…We do ask that participants not bring pro-Israel paraphernalia in solidarity with our queer Palestinian friends.” Several Jewish groups including A Wider Bridge, Jewish Community Relations Council of Greater Washington, and Zioness wrote a joint statement that “We come together to strongly condemn the leadership of the DC Dyke March for their decision to ban the Jewish Star of David on a pride flag and Israeli iconography.

The repeated banning of Jewish pride at the marches stems from Linda Sarsour’s “activism,” as the Times calls it. She’s tweetedNothing is creepier than Zionism.” She equated the belief that Jews should be free of anti-Semitism as self-governing people in their ancestral home as the equivalent to being a Nazi, with “We will not be silenced by Blue Lives Matter, by white supremacists, by neo-Nazis, or right-wing Zionists.” She’s said that feminism and Zionism are incompatible.

Those are Sarsour’s words, repeated again and again, specifically meant to instill the discredited noxious “Zionism is Racism” libel into the fabric of the Women’s March movement.

The Times neglected to tell its readers that when Sarsour and her colleagues stepped down from their leadership positions of the organization, other anti-Semites took their place, like CAIR’s Zahara Billoo. She was in kindred spirit of Sarsour, having tweeted the grotesque “Israel is an apartheid, racist, terrorist state and it commits war crimes as a hobby.” An obvious choice to lead the Women’s March if it is hell bent on advancing anti-Semitism.

Billoo also offered this bit of advice for Muslims some time after leaving the Women’s March board, that Jews are the enemy: “Know your enemies, and I’m not going to sugar-coat that. They are your enemies. There are organizations and infrastructure out there who are working to harm you. Make no mistake of it. They would sell you down the line if they could, and they very often do behind your back. I mean the Zionist organizations, I mean the foreign policy organizations that say they’re not Zionists but want a two-state solution. I’m not a Palestinian myself but it’s my understanding that that is laughable. So know your enemies.” Billoo listed some of them: “We need to pay attention to the Anti-Defamation League. We need to pay attention to the Jewish Federation. We need to pay attention to the Zionist synagogues. We need to pay attention to the Hillel chapters on our campuses. Because just because they’re your friend today, doesn’t mean that they have your back when it comes to human rights. So oppose the vehement fascists but oppose the polite Zionists too. They are not your friends.

It could very well be that Russia added some fuel to the Linda Sarsour story, but the anti-Semitic toxicity prevalent among the group’s founders was their own. The insidious jihad fomented by the alt-left activists was a deliberate feature of their own making. Russia may have helped fan the flames, but the inferno of hatred came from within the movement itself.

Related articles:

Linda Sarsour as Pontius Pilate

New York Times Mum on Muslim Anti-Semitism

Columbia University’s Latest Anti-Semitic Inanity: “Palestinian Hebrews”

Antisemitism Includes the Denial of Jewish History

The War Against Israel and Jewish Civilians

Muslim Women Debate Anti-Semitism

Criticizing Muslim Antisemitism is Not Islamophobia

I See Dead People

The Economics Behind The Times’ Hasidic School Article

The New York Times printed a very long article about Hasidic schools in New York which took in roughly $1 billion of pubic money over the last few years, and claimed that they failed to provide a basic education on purpose. The Times mocked the terrible hiring practices at the schools and essentially urged the government to stop funding them until they improved their practices, as the paper released the article just two days before the New York State Board of Regents met on the matter.

The Board of Regents took notice and proposed tougher regulations aimed at these ultra Orthodox schools.

A deeper review of the Times article shows that the paper may have reached the wrong conclusion – that the schools require MORE money to succeed, not less.

The Times made its conclusion clear on the front page when it wrote “where other schools may be underperforming because of underfunding and mismanagement, these schools are different. They are failing by design.

The article made it appear that the Jewish schools are actually OVERFUNDED, calling out “$1 Billion. Amount of government money collected in the past four years by Hasidic boys’ schools, even though they appear to be operating in violation of state laws guaranteeing students an adequate education.” It mocked the hiring practices of the schools, writing “Often, English teachers cannot speak the language fluently themselves. Many earn as little as $15 an hour. Some have been hired off Craigslist or ads on lamp posts.” The article added that the schools “mostly hire only Hasidic men as teachers, regardless of whether they know English. One former student said he once had a secular teacher who doubled as the school cook.

The article made it appear that the schools are just pocketing the money, especially as it highlighted that one of the Hasidic school networks “controlled over $500 million in assets,” and showed a picture with accompanying text that one school building “takes up a city block.

But a deeper dive of these observations paints the opposite picture.

Small Subsidies Per Yeshiva Child

The $1 billion sounds like a huge headline figure going out to failing private schools. The accompanying Times’ commentary spelling out that the sum covers four years is perhaps lost in the momentary shock. It equates to roughly $250 million per year used to support 50,000 boys, or roughly $5,000 per student per year. That figure covers transportation, food, child care and special ed classes, in addition to general education.

By way of comparison, New York City has an annual budget of $38 billion for 919,000 students (a steadily declining number that was over 1 million just two years ago). That’s over $41,000 per student. It’s a gap of more than $36,000 per child compared to yeshiva boys.

The article hinted about this enormous gap in a few spots without sharing the math.

It first attributed the basic fact as a defense offered by the Hasidic schools, making the small subsidy seem biased: “They [the Hasidic schools] denied some of the Times findings,… that the schools receive far less taxpayer money per pupil than public schools do.” The qualified speaker tainted the observation.

Only on the fourth page of the Times’ article did the Times state two critical facts clearly: “Hasidic boy’s yeshivas receive far less per pupil than public schools, and they charge tuition.Public school students get more than 8 times the funding as these yeshiva boys, as detailed above. The fact that these private schools charge tuition needs further elaboration as well.

Enormous Yeshiva Tuition Bills Require Penny Pinching

The boys’ schools don’t operate on a budget of $5,000 per student. Parents pay tuition as noted by the Times.

These ultra Orthodox families typically have very large families. For example, on the fifth page of the article, the Times mentioned a family with six children. It also mentioned Naftuli Moser who started an advocacy group to improve secular education in yeshivas. The Times did not write that Moser is one of 17 children.

Consider the tuition bills for these families. If the yeshivas charged like the public schools, six children with a funding gap of $36,000 each would mean a tuition bill of $216,000 per year for the family. For Moser’s family, the annual tuition bill would be $612,000!

Needless to say, these schools cannot operate with the generosity afforded to public school teachers backed by powerful teacher unions. The yeshivas need to hire teachers on a budget to match the incomes of these large Hasidic families. The overall school budget is a fraction of the $41,000 spent per pupil in public schools. The schools also make accommodations for parents who cannot afford full tuition for all of their kids, by having the fathers teach at the school, accounting for Yiddish-speakers teaching English as featured in the article.

And yes, teachers do double-duty, including teaching and acting as the school chef. It keeps the school budgets down and the tuitions more affordable.

Wealth Amidst The Poverty

The Times article made the Hasidic community appear to be sitting on hundreds of millions of dollars and then taking a billion dollars from the government. Much of the wealth in the Hasidic community revolves around real estate holdings in Brooklyn. Educating nearly 100,000 boys and girls – roughly 1/10th the size of New York City’s public school students – requires many buildings. The dense communities where the Hasidim live drive up demand and therefore the prices.

This is a community whose wealth – to the extent there is some – is mostly illiquid. It is in the very homes and schools they live in every day.

Possible Solutions

Both the Times’ opening conclusion that Hasidic schools are neither underfunded nor mismanaged, and the timing of the article’s release before the Board of Regents meeting, had the desired impact of the city threatening to cut funding to the schools. As reviewed above, that is ill advised. Why take away transportation, food and other subsidies to a poor community already struggling?

More money needs to flow into the Hasidic school system, not less. That does not mean simply writing checks without accountability. The system needs to pivot to address the plain facts that yeshiva students are growing rapidly and now account for almost 10% of New York City students, as the public schools continue to shrink.

A few suggestions:

Bilingual Yiddish schools. New York City has 545 bilingual schools. They are mostly in Spanish, but also include French, Russian, Chinese, Bengali and Haitian-Creole. It is time to invest in distinct Yiddish schools in coordination with the Hasidic community. The schools would need to be segregated by gender and timed to allow for religious private school either in the morning or afternoon, switching off for different groups in the area to fully utilize the facilities.

Employ/ Pay Secular Teachers Directly. For those parents that do not want to use bilingual Yiddish schools, the city should pay for qualified secular teachers directly. As public school teachers are being retired due to the shrinking public school student body, reassign the teachers to teach secular subjects in these yeshivas.

Should the community fail to adopt these investments in secular education, punitive measures should be considered. However, immediately jumping to threaten poor Hasidic schools that get minimal funding is counterproductive and mean-spirited.

If we truly want all students to be educated and to succeed, we need to examine the situation honestly and invest appropriately. The New York Times and Board of Regents seemingly have chosen the opposite path, and acted abusively to a large impoverished minority. If it is simply a coincidence that these secular bodies opted to target ultra Orthodox Jews, I leave it to each reader to consider.

Related articles:

NY Times Horrible Take On Failing Hasidic Schools

Politicians In Their Own Words: Why We Don’t Support Defending Jews

Why Does the New York Times Delete Stories of Attacks on Jews?

Decrying Anti-Semitism While Blocking Jews

The Joy of Lecturing Jews

The Re-Introduction of the ‘Powerful’ Jew Smear

NY Times Horrible Take On Failing Hasidic Schools

The New York Times wrote a front-page elaborate article about the Ultra-Orthodox school system in New York. It described an extensive investigation performed over a long period to tell the world about the education received by a particular enclave that numbers about 200,000 people.

By all accounts, the reporting is very important for those who want to see schools succeed. To watch a media outlet like the Times perform such analysis though, an outfit long associated as anti-religion – especially Judaism – could make a person cringe.

And for good reason.

If the Times wrote about under-performing Hispanic schools, the tone would have been one of concern. How do we help these underprivileged students from a poor minority community? How should society devote more resources to help the school succeed? The article would have been peppered with adjectives-as-commentary masked as reporting that more work needs to be done in a collective effort to help these young people.

But not for the Jews.

The Times article wanted its readers to know that Jews are politically powerful. They take lots of money – your money; money from your children – and fail on purpose.

The Jews Are Taking Your Child’s Money, Illegally

Throughout the article – including in the titles and beneath the pictures – the liberal paper informed its secular readers that the Jews are taking public money (boxed in red in the pictures above).

  • Failing Schools, Public Funds“, read the front page headline
  • Failing Hasidic Schools Receive Public Funds“, reads each subsequent headline on following pages
  • Government money is flowing to private Hasidic academies, known as yeshivas, at a time when New York City’s public school system is cutting budgets” is the text beneath the next picture, urging the reader to feel outrage that the Jews are not just taking money, but money from the general public schools, as if one was dipping into the other
  • the Hasidic boys’ schools have found ways of tapping into enormous sums of government money, collecting more than $1 billion in the past four years alone,” as if the funds for education are not supposed to be used by Jews
  • they have received increasing amounts of government money, records show“, making the issue appear as a growing concern
  • $1 Billion: Approximate amount of government money collected in the past four years by Hasidic boys’ schools, even though they appear to be operating in violation of state laws guaranteeing students an adequate education.” was called out in the text, making the Jewish enterprise appear very illegal.
  • Despite the failings of Hasidic boys’ schools, the government has continued sending them a steady stream of funding.” seemingly leading a reader to demand that the funding stop, rather than urge improved education, something the Times would do for non-Jewish minorities.
  • Hasidic boys’ yeshivas, like other private schools, access dozens of such programs, collecting money that subsidizes their theological curriculum“, making the funding appear as breaking a line between church and state.
  • the money is flowing as New York City is cutting public school budgets,” paints the Jews as thieves robbing from the poor public schools, rather than part-and-parcel of a society that subsidizes education for everyone.
  • The city voucher program that helps low income families pay for child care now send nearly a third of its total assistance to Hasidic neighborhoods, even while tens of thousands of people have languished on waiting lists,” leans in to the theme of Jews stealing from poor around the city.
  • Hasidic boys’ schools also received about $30 million from government financial aid programs,”
  • The school got roughly $100 million through antipoverty programs to provide free breakfast, lunch, dinner and snacks every school day
  • Hasidic boy’s schools benefit from about $100 million annually from federal Title 1 programs and other sources of funding for secular education.”
  • Hasidic boys’ school received roughly $30 million in the last year before the pandemic to transport students
  • they collected about $200,000 in federal money for internet-related services, even though they forbid the students from going online.” ended the list of financial aid programs, many of which were not for education, but for concerns around school, like food, child care and transportation.
  • The money is subsidizing instruction that has regularly involved corporal punishment,” not that there is a problem of teachers hitting students, but your tax dollars are paying for it.
  • People from the state education department investigating the schools “started making notes in the margins of requests, questioning the wisdom of sending money.”
  • Some Hasidic men who went through the system were “awash in debt and supporting their families with government welfare,” taking government monies not only when young and in school, but throughout their lives.

That’s an awful amount of of ink about money, and not about education. The Times would never criticize government monies going to fund children’s education – unless it’s for private schools, especially parochial schools, and especially especially, Jewish private schools.

The Thieving Jews Are Very Powerful, None Can Stand In Their Way

The progressive paper laid out lots of information about the ultra Orthodox Jews taking $1 billion while public schools were struggling, and wanted its readers to understand how their elected progressive political leadership has been helpless to fend off the Jewish power (text boxed in black).

  • city and state officials have avoided taking action, bowing to the influence of Hasidic leaders who push their followers to vote as a block,” note that the progressive champions are forced to “bow” down to the all powerful Jewish leaders, propaganda perfected under Nazi Germany. This screed from a paper that bemoans that only 80% of Black men are voting for the Black woman Stacey Abrams, instead of 95 percent, which is the voting block they expect.
  • Mayor Eric Adams has not intervened in the schools – and has touted close ties to Hasidic leaders. In Albany, Gov. Kathy Hochul has taken a similar hands-off approach, as did her predecessor, Andrew M. Cuomo,” showing that no leader – Democrats no less – would mess with the Jewish lobby. Black and Hispanic communities would never be written about in such fashion by the liberal rag.
  • Before elections, teachers often give students sample ballots with the names of the grand rabbi’s chosen candidate filled in” is the text below one picture
  • Mayor Eric Adams won his primary campaign with the help of the Satmar Hasidic group. He embraced Moishe Indig, a Satmar leader, during his election night party last November,” was the text beneath another picture.
  • Politicians who might have taken action have instead accommodated a Hasidic voting block that can sway local races.”
  • “‘There’s a significant population that you ignore at your peril‘”, making Jews appear less as constituents and more as powerful adversaries.
  • Yeshivas play a central role in getting out the vote. Before elections, teachers often give students sample ballots with the names of the grand rabbi’s chosen candidate filled in.” The Times normally loves groups that get out the vote. Here, it seems to bemoan the fact that these ultra Orthodox Jews are part of Democratic process.
  • Shortly before winning an endorsement from one faction of the Satmar group, Mr. Adams…”
  • Campaigning this year, [Kathy Hochul] met with Hasidic leaders in Williamsburg.
  • the city Department of Investigation found that the mayor engaged in ‘political horse-trading’ by delaying publication of an interim report on the schools

The Times did its utmost to make the failing schools appear unworthy of concern, and even more, a target of disgust, led by a powerful force that “controlled more than $500 million in assets” which bullied locally elected leaders who were helpless to protect the under-funded public school system.

The Charge of ‘Failing By Design’

If these Jews are so powerful and crafty at getting money, why do their students fail basic skills in English and math? Are they stupid? Do they have terrible teachers?

The Times has the answer: “they are failing by design.

The secular paper asserts that the schools “wall [the Jewish children] off from the secular world. Offering little English and math, and virtually no science or history, they drill the students relentlessly, sometimes brutally, during hours of religious lessons conducted in Yiddish.” It added that “some teachers at religious schools said that they had become convinced that their yeshivas discouraged learning English because it was seen as a dangerous bridge to the outside world.” Further, “some Hasidic boys’ yeshivas do not offer any nonreligious classes at all. Others make attending the classes optional.

Do the opinions of a few teachers and students provide proof that the entire system of education of 50,000 ultra Orthodox boys are “failing by design”? Hardly. Did the investigation produce any documents showing that administrators forbade teaching English and science? That the vast majority of schools had no math instructors? No. Just some anecdotes.

There’s a noxious bias in the reporting: Jews are clever, so if they are failing, they must be doing so on purpose.

Insular By Design

Just two weeks ago, the Times wrote a story about the death of an indigenous man in Brazil, and bemoaned the loss of an “entire uncontacted tribe.” The people in the forests of the Amazon wanted to live a secluded life but some natural forces like disease, as well as man-made encroachment on their habitats, killed their community. A sad extinction for the tribe and for mankind.

With a less generous pen, the paper touched upon the desire of the New York Hasidic community to resuscitate the communities that they once had in eastern Europe which were wiped out by the genocide of the Jews at the hands of the Nazis and their supporters, and wrote about the community’s desire to not be interviewed for the article. But the journalists opted to draw a direct line between the wish to remain insulated in terms of religious practice, with the effort to starve their children of any secular education.

The reality is that many Hasidim are very successful. Many attend top law schools and are leading lawyers and judges. Many are successful real estate investors. Many have retail stores and commercial businesses.

They went unmentioned in the article.

A Uniquely Scorned Minority

If the Times wanted to accurately relay the situation of the education of Hasidic children, it would have compared the performance of poor Yiddish-speaking students, to other poor non-English speaking communities, not to poor students broadly.

If the Times cared about the welfare of the Hasidic children, it would not have portrayed the funding of their schools as taking money away from public school children.

If the Times sought to uplift the most persecuted minority in the world, it would not have charged the Jews as powerful puppet masters of progressive politicians, and would have used softer language it reserves for its preferred Black and Hispanic minorities.

The New York Times did important research about the poor education in the Hasidic community, but it crafted a story meant to incite hatred against the Jews and to punish its leaders, rather than find solutions to improve the situation for the poor persecuted minority.

Related articles:

Why Does the New York Times Delete Stories of Attacks on Jews?

Decrying Anti-Semitism While Blocking Jews

Orthodoxy in ‘Shtisel’ and ‘Nurses’

The Joy of Lecturing Jews

‘Her Unorthodox Brand’

The Re-Introduction of the ‘Powerful’ Jew Smear

The Nerve of ‘Judaizing’ Neighborhoods

New York Times Confusion on Free Speech

Anti-Semites Don’t Ride In Cattle Cars

Nablus

The young Arab men got into their car. The backseat had machine guns and bottles prepared with Molotov cocktails. They checked their watches and called friends that they were on their way to meet them at the designated spot on the highway.

Their colleagues got to the designated spot on dirt bikes. It was a favorite way of riding around the Judean Desert and this was a relatively cool morning which made for a pleasant ride. They arrived at the perch early and prepared for the attack.

The hill afforded them a nice view of the Israeli cars coming and going on a road they demanded be Jew-free. The Muslim Arabs considered the vehicles as daggers in the heart of a land they considered purely Arab, and they were mujahideen fighting for the liberation of their country from imperialist European colonial settlers.

Their fellow jihadists phoned that they were approaching the site for the attack. It was important to concentrate their efforts, as the Zionist Occupation Forces would swarm shortly after their actions.

The stationary Arab men began to pelt the cars carrying Jews with rocks. They watched as the rocks popped against the roofs and smash into pieces on the road. Cars behind them and in the opposite direction began swerving and accelerating away from the rockstorm. Soon the Jews would call in the location of the attack. They had no more than five minutes to kill as many Jewish settlers as possible.

While the barrage was underway, the Arabs in the car gathered their weapons. The passenger in the front seat took the machine gun while the driver grabbed a pistol. As their adrenaline caught up with the speed of the car, they saw a large bus coming in the opposite direction. A ripe big bus full of Jews.

They opened fire together. They chanted “Allahu Akbar” as they shot up the bus. At least a dozen hits they estimated as they zipped past. The driver shouted that he hit the bus driver, and sure enough, his jihadist passenger spun his head around to watch the bus crash into a hill on the side of the road. The Arabs cheered and sped away.

The scene of a shooting attack on an Israeli bus in the Jordan Valley, on September 4, 2022. (photo: Israeli Bus Drivers Union)

The Bronx

The Black Congressman was annoyed but not too worried. His district had been redrawn in the latest census, leaving him without much of his base in the Bronx and handing him a bunch of wealthy White suburbanites in Westchester County. Could his Socialist message still prevail amongst one of the most Jewish districts in the country?

He decided to change nothing. His staff was 100 percent made up of Black women, unique amongst all politicians. He wasn’t going to pivot to adding a White Jew to the team at this point. Maybe he’d meet with a local Jewish politician who was peeved at being ignored during the entirety of his first term. But he only would do it at the request of a local Black leader who swore that he was the right kind of Jew.

He stood on the subway platform to greet his people. It didn’t matter that he would only gather about 3,000 votes from the nub of New York City left in his district. He was delivering a message: he was a man of the people. Let the other candidates stand on the fancy Metro North train platforms in Westchester pandering the rich for votes. There were working class people in those towns too and his message would attract their votes as well.

Confident in his approach, he told his staffers that they should not respond to the invitation by the American Jewish Congress to hear from the congressional candidates. Let the two White people split the protest vote. It assured him of an easy path to victory.

He flew down to Washington, D.C. to confer with members of the “Squad”, fellow left-wing extremists making headway in the Democratic Party. Yes, he would co-sponsor a resolution calling the founding of the Jewish State of Israel, a “Nakba“, meaning a catastrophe. Yes, he would pull his support from the Abraham Accords, which advanced peace between Israel and four Muslim countries.

The Jews are now a loud annoying part of his district but ultimately an unimportant minority. He will make that abundantly clear to them as he votes against their wishes over his next term, letting everyone know that the “Jewish Lobby” is dead.

Rep. Jamaal Bowman (D-NY) hugging fellow anti-Israel Squad member Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN) (Photo by Drew Angerer/Getty Images)

Charlottesville

The White supremacists walked the streets with torches in hand. “Jews will not replace us!” they chanted, as several sported a Nazi salute. They called out the handful of Jews who were using their Jewish power to import non-Whites onto the White shores of America.

Their actions drew the national attention they sought. While they were few in number, they wanted to galvanize support against Jews and immigrants. Against racial preferences. Against giveaways to minorities that kept holding Whites back. They saw Donald Trump as the most vocal non-politically correct politician that ever held office, and they were going to embrace this man who coveted love and loyalty more than anything else.

This spark would catch fire.

White supremacists from around the country boarded their pickup trucks, now with flags perched high. They despised the woke culture finding its way into every facet of the Christian nation they loved. And the Jews. The Jews were abetting all of it.

Several hundred white nationalists and white supremacists carrying torches march in a parade at the University of Virginia. (Evelyn Hockstein for The Washington Post)

The Spouses, Kapos And Abettors

Not every Jew was hauled to their deaths in cattle cars during the European Holocaust. Some Jews remained in major Nazi-controlled cities, even Berlin.

While the Nazis were hell-bent on eradicating the untermenschen Jews, some Juden had all but abandoned their people and faith, and had married proper German women. The Aryans loved their Jewish spouses, for whatever reason. The Nazis reluctantly concluded that they could not haul the Jewish spouses off to concentration camps for extermination, while these Aryan brides had brothers and fathers fighting for the Nazi cause. They allowed some of the sub-humans to remain.

The interfaith couples were relieved, and paid back their masters with silence, as Jews from around Europe were carted off for liquidation.

Monument in Berlin, Germany for the German women who fought to save their Jewish husbands from death in the Nazi concentration camps. (photo: FirstOneThrough)

Some Jews who were hauled off in cattle cars to the camps managed to survive by working with Nazi overlords. These Kapos served as stand-in guards, working with the Nazis to hustle fellow Jews off the trains, into lines and into the showers. Heinrich Himmler, the Reichsführer of the SS, praised the Kapos as it saved critical German manpower during the war-effort, and helped divide the Jews amongst themselves. The irony was sweet poetry to the Nazis: Jews implementing the Final Solution upon themselves.

Jewish Head Kapo serving in the concentration camp of Salaspils in Latvia. (Photo courtesy Bundesarchiv)

Today, Jews continue to divide themselves. Some cling to jihadists. Some to anti-Semitic woke politicians. Some to bold racists, who nevertheless embrace common positions.

And the Jews know the history. They can see the highway to hell mapped by the terrorists on the ridge, the woke politicians standing on the platform, and the racists shouting from trucks.

And they have made up their minds. They are marrying these new Germanic lovers who will surely save them while fellow Jews are carted off. For them, “Ich bin ein Berliner” is a renewed slogan to be aired openly and publicly that they are not untermenschen. That’s those other Jews.

Some may look and others will turn away, but all will cleave to their Brides of Absolution while the anti-Semites send Jews off in cattle cars once again.

Related articles:

Excerpt of Hamas Charter to Share with Your Elected Officials

Peter Beinart is an Apologist for Anti-Semites

J Street’s Ben Ami Smears Moderate Jews As Racists

Jamaal Bowman Disgustingly Compares Israeli Actions in Jerusalem To A ‘Military Coup’, ‘Ethnic Cleansing’ And A “Genocide”

The March of Silent Feet

Reclaiming Zionism From Antisemites Will Not Occur With Tikkun Olam

Zionism, the ideological undergirding of Israel, is a debatable political philosophy.

– Keith Ellison, Attorney General of Minnesota, former Congressman (D-MN), former Deputy Chair of the Democratic National Committee


Over 1,000 Jews from around the world came to Basel, Switzerland this week to mark the 125th anniversary of the first World Zionist Congress. They celebrated the incredible success of the Modern State of Israel, now 75 years since its reestablishment, a mere 50 years from Theodore Herzl’s initial conference of inspiration was turned into a reality.

The kickoff speaker was Israeli President Isaac “Bougie” Herzog. His speech welcomed the Zionists from around the world, regardless of their religious denominations or political affiliation. He urged all of them to get involved in the Zionist project and questions regarding “the whole Jewish People… to debate them together, in a spirit of mutual responsibility, and most importantly, of full and institutionalized partnership.

He concluded his remarks that the broad community must “reclaim Zionism” from the vile smears that populate society today. Herzog offered his prescriptions which included uniquely Jewish and Israeli goals, as well as dealing with global issues such as climate change. He mentioned “tikkun olam (repair the world)” three times, as a mission (and potential balm) to combat the insidious woke anti-Semitism infecting the world. “[M]odern Zionism gives us our sense of not only shared fate but also shared destiny, as long as it remains anchored in our deepest roots, weaving together the inseparable threads of peoplehood, land, and state.

“Nothing is creepier than Zionism. Challenge racism”

Linda Sarsour, former executive director of the Arab American Association of New York, co-chair of the 2017 Women’s March

Herzog’s outreach to his diverse Zionist audience was sweet but showed that he has not internalized the anger and misconceptions about Zionism from the anti-Israel world. Joining the far-left in combatting climate change under the banner of Zionism sounds like he’s read a few articles about intersectionality and “allyship.” To be sure, fighting global issues is a responsibility Israel shares with the entire world, but was not a foundational matter for Herzl’s Zionism 125 years ago, and redefining Modern Zionism in such a manner today will do nothing to “reclaim” the definition from Israel haters who wish to tarnish and destroy the Jewish State.

“We need to pay attention to the Anti-Defamation League. We need to pay attention to the Jewish Federation. We need to pay attention to the Zionist synagogues. We need to pay attention to the Hillel chapters on our campuses. Because just because they’re your friend today, doesn’t mean that they have your back when it comes to human rights. So oppose the vehement fascists but oppose the polite Zionists too. They are not your friends.”

Zahra Billoo, SAN FRANCISCO EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF THE COUNCIL OF AMERICAN ISLAMIC RELATIONS (CAIR)

Herzog is correct that we need to “reclaim Zionism,” but not by stretching its meaning into something far afield from its core tenets. We need to educate the world about simple foundational truths, and what Modern Zionism actually means and created.

European Jewish Zionists claimed to be descendants of the ancient Palestinian Hebrews and to be merely “returning” to their ancient land.”

Joseph Massad, Professor at Columbia University

Universities and extremist media have painted Zionism as a violent nationalist effort by European Jews to steal Arab land. They claim Jews have no history or ties to the land and are simply the latest version of European colonialists. Does Herzog really believe that Israelis bonding over climate change help stop such inanity?

Zionism was never the gentlest of ideologies.

Steven Erlander, Journalist for the New York Times

The Israeli Defense Ministry’s research-and-development arm is best known for pioneering cutting-edge ways to kill people and blow things up

David Halbfinger, the new York Times’ Jerusalem Bureau chief

Jews, historians and all people of good will need to be clear about basic historical truths and the mission of Modern Zionism.

Modern Zionism did not steal Arab history or land. It is not a derivative of the forgery The Protocols of the Elders of Zion, which falsely asserts an aim to rob Palestinian Arabs as a subset of global domination. The simple fact is that Jews have thousands of years of history in the land of Israel, and have always lived and moved to the land because it is a central part of Judaism.

The Zionist idea to dominate the area from the Nile to the Euphrates was well known, but Israel realized that the two-State solution would not take it in that direction.”

Hiba Husseini, chairs the Legal Committee to Final Status Negotiations between the Palestinians and Israelis, and a speaker at the united nations

The Zionist plan is limitless. After Palestine, the Zionists aspire to expand from the Nile to the Euphrates. When they will have digested the region they overtook, they will aspire to further expansion, and so on. Their plan is embodied in the “Protocols of the Elders of Zion”, and their present conduct is the best proof of what we are saying.

HAMAS Charter, Article 32

Modern Zionism was launched by Herzl on only two ideas. First, that Jews will forever be targeted as minorities in countries around the world, whether they present as devout Orthodox Jews or assimilated secular ones, and second, that the only way for Jews to be secure and have a future is to have sovereignty in their homeland once again.

To be an anti-Zionist means that one doesn’t believe in one of those two things. To be against the first, is to ignore and belittle the horrific crimes committed against the most persecuted people in history. To stand against the second, is to urge for the destruction of the one Jewish State. Both are blatantly anti-Semitic.

The three basic characteristics of Zionism are: racism, expansionism and settler colonialism

UC San Diego speaker at Divestment vote

Israel in its inception is not a Jewish idea but a European one.

University of Wisconsin BDS Vote

“Reclaiming Zionism” as Israeli President Herzog desires is needed, but his prescription for joining woke causes is nonsensical. Such efforts will not reorient college campuses and the media away from their misconception that Israel is a violent European colonialist state.

Instead, we must state repeatedly the fundamental truths about Jews and the land of Israel. We must clearly articulate the meaning of Zionism, and that anti-Zionism is anti-Semitism. And we must loudly proclaim that we are proud Zionists, and amazed by the liberal democracy that thrives in the illiberal Middle East.


Related articles:

A Core Tenet of Zionism Is Combatting Anti-Semitism

Squeezing Zionism

Hamas And Harvard Proudly Declare Their Anti-Semitism And Anti-Zionism

In San Francisco Schools, Anti-Zionism is Anti-Racism

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

Jamaal Bowman Disgustingly Compares Israeli Actions in Jerusalem To A ‘Military Coup’, ‘Ethnic Cleansing’ And A “Genocide”

There are no people as persecuted as the Jews. Subject to pogroms, ethnic cleansing, blood libels and genocides throughout history and around the world, they have been the victims of the powerful and of the weak.

Rep. Jamaal Bowman represents New York State’s 16th Congressional District which covers lower Westchester County, just north of New York City. It is estimated to be over 20% Jewish and has one of the largest Jewish populations in the United States.

From his powerful podium, Bowman deliberately insults Jewish history and incites hatred for the Jewish State.

On May 11, 2021, while Israeli courts were attempting to handle a property dispute of an Arab family squatting (not paying rent to the Jewish landlords) in a Jerusalem apartment, and suppressing a violent Arab mob who objected to Jews being allowed onto their holiest site of the Temple Mount, Bowman published a particularly noxious anti-Semitic and anti-Israel statement. It opened:

“There’s so much we’re dealing with within our own borders that it’s often difficult for Americans to turn our attention to the problems of people overseas, but it’s hard at this moment not to be struck by the extent of suffering around the world. Whether it’s the infringement of human and civil rights of Palestinians living in Sheikh Jarrah, the violence against those praying in the Al-Aqsa mosque during the holy month of Ramadan in East Jerusalem, police violence against Colombians, a military coup in Myanmar, an ignored genocide in Ethiopia, or the ethnic cleansing of the Uyghurs in China, my heart is breaking for people around the world experiencing oppression and hurt.”

Bowman started with events in Israel – twice. He only referenced the perceived wrongs against Arabs, not the violent Arab attacks against Jews exercising their basic human rights to pray with dignity at their holiest location.

He then compared those relatively minor events to vicious global activities.

  • In Colombia, police attacked and killed peaceful demonstrators protesting income inequality
  • In Myanmar, the military essentially took over the entire government and arrested public officials
  • In Ethiopia, an estimated 500,000 people were killed
  • In China, hundreds of thousands of Uyghurs were imprisoned and shipped to “re-education camps”

How are any of these horrible actions against hundreds of thousands of peaceful civilians remotely close to Israel protecting Jews who want to visit the Temple Mount? Bowman deliberately abused language to stir up anger and violence against the Jewish State. Which is exactly what happened over the next days, with Jews around the world being attacked.

Further, to use words like “genocide” and “ethnic cleansing” against the Jewish State, when Jews just suffered a true genocide in Europe, and ethnic cleansing in Israel at the hands of the Jordanian and Egyptian army who expelled all of the Jews from Judea and Samaria and the eastern part of Jerusalem, is to spit in the faces of actual victims.

Jamaal Bowman standing in the center of the alt-left “Squad”, with Rashida Tlaib and Ilhan Omar on the left, and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Cori Bush and Ayanna Pressley to the right

Jamaal Bowman helped inflame violence against Jews around the world with malicious smears against Israel. He is unfit to serve in congress.

Related articles:

The Insidious Jihad in America

Vedat Gashi, Running To Unseat Jamaal Bowman in Congress, Talks to The Jewish Community

Why Does Rep. Jamaal Bowman Lie to Constituents?

Westchester’s Pro-Israel Community Is Livid With J Street

Westchester’s Pro-Israel Community Is Livid With J Street

On August 2nd, shortly after J Street-endorsed candidate Rep. Andy Levin (D-MI) lost in the Democratic primary, J Street lambasted AIPAC and Democratic Majority For Israel for supporting Rep. Haley Stevens. The progressive group took particular aim at the two groups’ “aggressive outside spending…[which] is harmful to American foreign policy, to the Democratic Party and ultimately to the State of Israel. (J Street’s emphasis)

It was obvious sour grapes coming from a group that had endorsed and funded a campaign just like AIPAC and DMFI, but lost.

Not three weeks later, J Street has entered the race of New York’s 16th Congressional District, in lower Westchester County. And in a very hypocritical and disgusting fashion.

Neither the bipartisan group AIPAC nor the centrist Democratic DMFI spent one dollar on the NY-16 race. Neither group even endorsed any of the three candidates running. While both groups strongly dislike the anti-Israel Rep. Jamaal Bowman who is the incumbent, they have refrained from engaging in the race as the odds of defeating him are low, so have opted to focus elsewhere.

J Street endorsed Bowman early but did not put in any money into the race. Until now.

Wealthy and Poor Voters Split

After witnessing the near loss of another anti-Israel incumbent member of “the Squad”, Ilhan Omar (D-MN) on August 9th, J Street became nervous. Omar won her Democratic primary by 2,400 votes out of 110,000 cast. Omar won the poorer, densely populated city area of Minneapolis but lost the wealthy suburbs. If AIPAC and DMFI had put resources into the race, Omar would likely have been defeated.

There are potential lessons for the NY-16 race, where Omar’s close colleague Bowman is the far-left incumbent.

J Street endorsed Bowman in January 2022 when NY-16 included a large section of the Bronx section of New York City. In May, the district was redrawn, removing almost the entirety of the Bronx which had been in the district, and replacing it with wealthier suburbs of lower Westchester. This dynamic could theoretically swap the rank-and-file reliable liberal voters of the Bronx with more moderate ones, threatening a far-left incumbent like Bowman.

A review of the 2020 presidential voting offers some color on how the new NY-16 towns of Westchester (many of which were in NY-17 previously), vote compared to the sections of the Bronx (now in NY-15) which were replaced.

Candidateold ny16 bronxold ny17 westchesterdifference
Buttigieg0.6%1.3%0.7%
Kloubachar0.5%0.6%0.1%
Biden75.7%69.3%-6.4%
Gabbard0.3%0.3%0.0%
Sanders11.7%10.8%-0.8%
Bloomberg2.7%1.4%-1.3%
Steyer0.1%0.1%0.0%
Bennet0.3%0.1%-0.2%
Warren3.0%4.0%1.0%
Yang0.8%0.9%0.0%
Patrick0.1%0.1%0.0%
Blank4.2%11.1%6.9%
Void0.0%0.0%0.0%
Voting in 2020 Democratic Presidential Primary from New York State Board of Elections June 23, 2020

There are a couple of takeaways from the voting patterns of the poorer sections of the Bronx which were removed from NY-16 relative to the wealthier sections of Westchester which were added. The biggest one is that Westchester was much more content to put in “protest” votes in leaving the choice blank (+6.9%), rather than follow the front-runner, Joe Biden (-6.4%).

The second is that the wealthier towns of Westchester, a county which is roughly 20% Jewish, did not rally to Michael Bloomberg. This observation should be discounted by the Bronx having him as mayor for three terms while Westchester did not.

Lastly, Westchester and the Bronx voted in a similar pattern for the far-left. While Westchester backed Warren more than the Bronx did (+1.0%), the Bronx voted in a similar percentage favoring Bernie Sanders (-0.8%).

The political strategists at J Street know these things: that Westchester is just as likely to vote liberal BUT is also likely to stay away and not support the frontrunner incumbent, especially in an off-cycle end of summer primary. The lower voter turnout and Westchester’s challenge to the frontrunner could spell the end of Bowman’s political career.

Westchester Jewish Community Rallying For Vedat Gashi

There are specific reasons for Bowman to be concerned beyond macro trend lines, which brought J Street into the action.

Bowman’s positions are very unpopular in lower Westchester. Those include:

  • Call to “Defund the police”
  • “Abolish ICE”, the immigration and customs enforcement department, and a call for “open borders”
  • Push for teaching “Critical Race Theory” in schools
  • Voting against the Infrastructure Bill, and then lying to constituents that he supported it
  • Sponsoring a bill that called the founding of Israel a catastrophe
  • Not signing a bipartisan letter to fight anti-Semitism on campuses
  • Not supporting the Abraham Accords which set peace and normalization agreements between Israel and four Muslim countries
  • His vote to condition aid to Israel, in contrast to President Biden’s pledge not to do so
  • Bowman’s being one of the least bipartisan members of congress, going into a session that will likely see a split in Democratic and Republican control

The vast majority of the Westchester Jewish community is against these policies. Further, reading of Bowman’s tight relationship with the noxiously anti-Israel group IfNotNow where he said “I couldn’t be more grateful that IfNotNow Movement has had my back in Congress this year and I know that our partnership is just beginning,” made people search for an alternative.

J Street wasn’t initially concerned by the anger of the Jewish community, as there were three candidates running against Bowman. His victory was a near certainty as people were likely to split the vote. With AIPAC and DMFI concluding the same and staying out of the race, J Street opted to place its money bets on other races.

However, over the last few weeks, Jewish grass roots efforts led to coalescing behind Vedat Gashi, a secular Muslim immigrant from Kosovo. The Jewish community was pulled in by his powerful story, his pledge for “commonsense” policies which would NOT defund the police, which would support investments in infrastructure and would support Israel. Gashi lawn signs began dotting the suburban landscape. The easy Bowman victory was now hotly contested.

So J Street came in to fight the local Jews.

J Street Pours Money Into Campaign Against The Local Jewish Community

With primaries scheduled for August 23rd, J Street announced on August 17 that it would pour $200,000 into the races of Rep. Jerry Nadler and Rep. Jamaal Bowman. The hypocrisy of funding Bowman in a race without any PAC involvement after slamming “aggressive outside spending” is just the beginning.

J Street’s flood of money in the final days of the race is not only going against the desires of the local Jewish community; it is trying to get the non-Jewish community out to vote. Its press release states that its “Bowman ad running across streaming platforms including ESPN, Vevo, MLB, NBC, CBS, ABC and BET.” BET is predominantly watched by the non-Jewish African-American community.

The Westchester Jewish community is rightfully outraged.

J Street is attempting to undermine the local Jewish community’s desire for a moderate pro-Israel candidate to represent them in congress, by spending tons of money to get the non-Jewish community to vote for a far-left anti-Israel candidate. It’s appalling, and the ramifications will likely last well beyond this immediate election.

Member of the far-left anti-Israel “Squad”, Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-MN), Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN) and Rep. Jamaal Bowman (D-NY)(Photo by Drew Angerer/Getty Images)

Related articles:

Vedat Gashi, Running To Unseat Jamaal Bowman in Congress, Talks to The Jewish Community

J Street Proves Again It’s Progressive, Not Pro-Israel

Israeli-German Jews Find Empathy For Descendants of Nazis

To spend time in Berlin, Germany is to be surrounded by echoes of the Holocaust. The silhouettes of Jewish victims can be seen in the memorials of concrete coffins emerging from the ground, brass plaques cemented into the sidewalks, sculptures of men, women and children atop pedestals, and the anti-Semitic edicts drawn on placards hoisted on street poles.

The small community of Israeli Jews who moved to the epicenter of the Jewish genocide since World War II have made a peculiar peace with this past. Some came when the city was divided in two and settled in West Berlin, and others are recent arrivals, former Ukrainians and Russians who prefer Eastern Europe to the Middle East.

They all know the city’s history and they know the oddity that they represent.

Speaking to these Israeli Jews about their relationships with German neighbors is a course of curiosity and incredulity. They offer that perhaps as many as 20% of Germans today are Nazi sympathizers much like their grandparents, and a similar percentage probably don’t think about the past at all. The Israeli-German residents estimate that most non-Jewish Germans are embarrassed about their legacy but don’t want to hate their own flesh-and-blood. Such Germans are left in an awkward situation when they talk with Jews: the unsympathetic descendants of murderers are engaged with the much more sympathetic descendants of their victims, creating an unbalanced state.

The Jewish Berliners dislike the dynamic, and argue that today’s generation of Germans cannot be held responsible for the sins of the past. They argue that today’s Germans have atoned as best they could through memorials and compensation to survivors. These Jews offer that they bemoan the preferred position they have in society as children of victims; they do not want such inherited status. Instead, they seek their righteous rank earned from sympathizing with the challenging constellation that places today’s Germans alongside Jews. The Jews and Germans are equally inheritors of the past, no more, no less.

Today in Berlin, I heard Jews talk about two different Children of the Holocaust. While I have long been familiar with children of Survivors like myself, it was shocking to hear some Jews relate to the grandchildren of Nazis as victims as well, albeit of familial reputational stain rather than of genocide. Perhaps that is how these new German Jews live surrounded by Jewish and Nazi ghosts: imagining that today’s Germans live with those same ghosts as well.

Berlin’s Memorial to the Murdered Jews of Europe, continues below ground with stories of Jewish families destroyed by the Nazis. It sits one block from the Brandenburg Gate, a monument used by Germans to celebrate their power and freedom.

Related articles:

Watching Jewish Ghosts

The Building’s Auschwitz Tattoo

The Beautiful and Bad Images in Barcelona

The New York Times Refuses To State Judaism’s Holiest Site

The New York Times used four journalists to cover the August 14 Arab terrorist attack on Israeli Jews in Jerusalem. The journalists reporting from Jerusalem, Seoul and Hong Kong (I have no idea why correspondents from thousands of miles away were needed) could not muster a clear and balanced report.

The article started with the usual anti-Israel bias with the headline “Eight Injured in Shooting in Jerusalem” which did not clearly label the attacker as an Arab Muslim nor the victims as Israeli and American Jews. While the article would eventually reveal that the attacker was a “Palestinian man”, it would never clearly state that the victims were all Jewish. Instead, the attack was crafted as between warring countries, continuing a trend of Palestinians and Israelis killed over the past few months.

Israeli security forces at the scene of a shooting attack outside Jerusalem Old City, August 14,2022.
(photo
: YONATAN SINDEL/FLASH90)

The Times then mentioned Silwan, the neighborhood from where the Arab terrorist came, as having tension “between its Palestinian residents and a small but growing number of Israeli settlers.” While the Palestinian Arabs and Israelis are both “residents”, the Times opted to use the biased Palestinian narrative to describe the Israelis.

At that point, the paper shifted squarely to religion:

Sacred to both Jews and Muslims, the nearby Temple Mount houses the third-holiest mosque in Islam and was the location in antiquity of two ancient Jewish temples that remain important to Jewish identity.

According to the Times, while the Temple Mount is “sacred to both Jews and Muslims”, the site is really more important to Islam, as it “houses the third-holiest mosque in Islam”. For Jews, the site is merely a talisman and “important to Jewish identity.”

That’s a deliberate insult to millions of Jews around the world. The Temple Mount is THE holiest location for Judaism.

Continuing the trend, the article mentioned that “Hamas, the Islamist militant group that runs the Gaza Strip” celebrated the attack, but did not quote Fatah, the party of Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas cheering the shooting as well, posting on Facebook “Praise to the one whose rifle only speaks against his enemy. Long live our people’s unity and long live the free hero. Praise to the rifle muzzles, our people will fight the occupation with all kinds of resistance. Save your bullets and use them against the occupation, only the occupation!!”

Why did the paper opt to only refer to the “Islamist” political-terrorist group but not the secular political one which controls the presidency and Areas A and B? Does the Times believe that the conflict is a religious one or a political one? It pivoted back-and-forth in the article inelegantly.

The four journalists contributing to the story made a final pivot at the end of the article, writing “Israeli efforts to build archaeological and tourism attractions in Silwan, mostly celebrating the area’s ancient Jewish heritage, are perceived by Palestinians as a means of eroding Palestinian claims to the city.” This pivoted the conflict as neither political nor religious but a historical one. In this case, the Times seemed more comfortable pointing out that Jews have a much longer history in the region than the Arabs who first came more recently. Perhaps it does so, questioning whether history truly fuels the conflict, or is a talking point between the parties.

The Times is dancing around the political and religious nature of the Israeli-Arab conflict. While the anti-Zionist paper is comfortable making political arguments which make Israel look like the larger and more powerful political actor, it is loathe to point out that Israel has a much deeper religious claim to the land and Jerusalem. Perhaps the liberal media fears that too much information will educate readers about the profound logic of Israel retaining full control of the Old City of Jerusalem, in direct opposition of Palestinian political goals of seizing the site from the Jewish State.

Related articles:

The Arguments over Jerusalem

Eight Attestations On Jerusalem

Evicting 70,000 Dead Settlers From Jerusalem

“Settlers” Now Means Jews Stepping Over The Green Line

NY Times Ignores Centrality of the Jewish Temple Mount

Dignity for Israel: Jewish Prayer on the Temple Mount

Tolerance at the Temple Mount