You Have No Right to Exist Without My Consent

Abdul el-Sayed repeats the widespread lie that Israel is committing genocide and practicing apartheid. But he also states something far more subtle.

MSNOW: What is your message now to Jewish voters nationally and what you will do to protect them? Abdul El-Sayed: I’m committed to Jewish safety, and we are united against discrimination. The U.S. spends billions to carry out genocide and apartheid against Palestinians. The genocide in Gaza with our complicity is continuing right now. Nobody wants to talk about that.

— Drop Site (@DropSiteNews) November 5, 2026

In his 60 Minutes interview broadcast two nights before the election, el-Sayed refused to state definitively whether Israel  "right to exist". Ross Douthat could have added ".... as a Jewish state" but even without that clarification, the then-candidate remained cryptic, appearing  to suggest that Israel could exist if Palestinians approve. You the reader have a right to your safety as long as the mugger approves.

In the above video, Senator-elect Abdul el-Sayed is permitted by Morning Joe host Joe Scarborough to go on and on with feel-good rhetoric. However, at 2:23, he states "We have to separate between Judaism and the Jewish people, and Israel and its actions.

El-Sayed's comments on Morning Joe were verbal and not written, so it is impossible to detrmine if I added the punctuation- a comma between "people" and "Israel" accurately reflects el-Sayed's meaning. However, as he stated it- and considering prior comments- it appears the Senator-elect was equating Judaism and the Jewish people; and Israel and its actions. Jews are fine, he is likely saying- but Israel is not.  

For those of us old enough to remember, this should remind us of a famous headline from the (New York) Daily News of October 29, 1975:

Of course, Gerald Ford was President and his sentiment thus was far more significant than that of the incoming senator Abdul el-Sayed. Different jurisdiction, different time, same sentiment.

Share |

Bad Scene in The Midwest

If it seems I'm obsessessed about the US Senate race in Michigan, it's only because I am. The twists and turns in this general election campaign would sprain anyone's ankle and at each step, I've been surprised by the response from the main actors. On Friday, Jewish Insider reported

Michigan Democratic Senate candidate Abdul El-Sayed on Friday rejected an appeal from Rep. Haley Stevens (D-MI) for him to publicly condemn an antisemitic ad in support of his campaign, which Stevens had made a condition of appearing at a joint event on Sunday.

Instead, El-Sayed attacked Stevens, his former Democratic primary opponent, days before the general election.

Stevens said in a statement Friday that she had been told that El-Sayed planned to condemn the Rebellion PAC ad, which blamed support of Israel on higher food prices. She also asked him to apologize for his own rhetoric on Israel and take down a campaign ad featuring Tucker Carlson, after having warned that he was alienating undecided Jewish and Black voters.

El-Sayed rejected those requests, and sounded a defiant note against the Democratic lawmaker, who endorsed him immediately after the primary and maintained as of Wednesday that she still planned to vote for him. 

“While Congresswoman Stevens seems intent on relitigating a primary that ended three months ago, let’s all focus on the task at hand: that’s beating Mike Rogers, holding Trump accountable, and getting money out of politics, putting money in pockets, and passing Medicare for All,” he said.

The campaign added that El-Sayed has “always been focused on addressing the most critical challenges Michiganders are facing” which is “why our people-powered campaign defeated a historic $70M in outside spending from big corporations and AIPAC on behalf of Congresswoman Stevens.”

The campaign statement echoes El-Sayed’s own responses throughout the week to Stevens, her fiancé and other voters Stevens said are concerned about his rhetoric, arguing that anyone not supporting him isn’t focused on the issues that matter.

Stevens should have made her demands simpler, clearer, and sufficiently realistic for el-Sayed to meet. The immediate controversy began with posting of the offensive ad by the Pac headed by Cenk Uygur, uncle of Hasan Piker. The Democratic congresswoman from Michigan's 11th congressional district could have merely asked the candidate who defeated her in the primaryto denounce the ad. (El-Sayed's campaign had distanced itself from, but not repudiated, it.)

That request would have been relatively easy to accomodate and had el-Sayed refused, it would have told us more about him than about his critic. Instead, Stevens imposed upon her former rival a high bar to surmount, and el-Sayed  well, gave her the middle finger. Had he agreed, he would have seemed to have capitulated.

Agreement by el-Sayed may have been Stevens' condition for appearing at a campaign rally at an African-American church in Detroit on Sunday. Whether or not it was, the nominee disinvited the congresswoman, noting it would have been a "distraction" (sort of like referring to Hurricane Katrina as a "weather event").  For Stevens, that's called "overplaying your hand".

Rather than taking the "L" for now, Stevens, whose fiancee already had announced that he was voting for Mike Rogers, endorsed the Republican, to no little anger from fellow Democrats  It also will be of no benefit to Stevens, who previously had avoided el-Sayed directly while 

We can't know for sure why Stevens challenged the Democratic nominee to this extent. However, Rogers is partially right in the tweet below. It's wrong to suggest, without evidence, that Stevens was doing her husband's bidding or that is mentally ill or even merely emotionally fragile. The concept of feminism evidently is quite malleable.

It is wildly insulting that Debbie Dingell and Mallory McMorrow are insinuating that Congresswoman Stevens is mentally ill and that Jason influences her decision making in an unhealthy way. Congresswoman Stevens should be commended for her courage to stand up to hate and put Michigan first. https://t.co/7I9528TEWO

— Mike Rogers (@MikeRogersForMI) November 2, 2026

It is weird, though.  Stevens reportedly had assured fellow Democrats as late as Saturday night that she was still behind el-Sayed, reportedly, allegedly, then abruptly changed course overnight and appeared at an African-American church with Rogers on Sunday moring. And her decision to back Rogers at a point in which all opinion polls indicate el-Sayed leading by more than the margin of error has the smell of the late, formerTexas governor, John Connally 

Connally was a Democrat who endorsed Richard Nixon for re-election as President in 1972, primarily because of policy differences with Democratic nominee George McGovern. In May, 1973 he left the Democratic Party to become a Republican, possibly because he anticipated the departure from the vice presidency of Spiro Agnew while not foreseeing the forced resignation of the disgraced President Nixon in August, 1974. He was passed up then, as he was on two other occasions, probably because his switch in party satisfied virtually no one. Bad, bad timing.

The present sordid affair in Michiganhas covered nobody in glory, not Stevens, el-Sayed, Senate President Schumer (who had helped persuade Stevens to launch her bid for the nomination), not even Representative Dingell nor Mallory McMorrow. However, at least the latter got it right when 

Stevens could have made a continuing argument that she is one Democrat, among a minority in the Party, which not only rejects hatred of Jews but also supports Israel as a democratic nation and Jewish state. She does argue "I'm not turning my back on Democrats. It is this one vote."  The flaw in that reasoning, as everyone realizes, is that that one Senate race may determine control of the upper chamber. If it does, Stevens position will have proven to have been more dangerous, and roughly as wrongheaded, as the critics irresponsibly attributing her stance to mental or emotional defect.

Share |

This Would Have Been Easier If Michigan Primary Voters Hadn't Taken Leave of Their Senses

The clash between Haley Stevens and Abdul el-Sayed is one big cluster- well, you know. However, the powers that be in the Democratic Party are not covering themselves with glory by their unwillingness to take a clear position. With a few modifications, this tweet from David Frum on Halloween would be spot-on.

It would be more reassuring if national Democrats could say

"Everybody in Democratic leadership will combine to curb the ugliest instincts of a Senator el-Sayed. We'll vote funds to protect Jewish institutions from the antisemitic violence that el-Sayed made excuses for. We'll assign him to healthcare committees and keep him far, far away from Homeland Security. We desperately need this seat to hold the Trump administration accountable, but we're not going to lie to you and pretend the guy is anything other than what he is. That would be disrespectful and dishonest. Trump is the main issue here. You have our promise that this nomination is a one-time aberration - and that the rest of us will continue to uphold Jewish safety at home and the US-Israel alliance overseas."

He starts out very strongly with

Everybody in Democratic leadershp will combine to curb the ugliest instincts of a Senator-el-Sayed. We'll vote funds to protect Jewish institutions from the antisemitic violence that el-Sayed made excuses for. We'll assign him to healthcare committees and keep him far, far away from Homeland Security. We desperately need this seat to hold the Trump administration accountable.

The goal must be to hold the Trump administration accountable- "accountability," at least in the abstract, always is popular.  No one ever says "I'm not accountable" or even "we shouldn't hold X person or instituion accountable".

The idea of keeping el-Sayed off the Senate Homeland Security committee is excellent, and one can only hope a lack of imagination is the only reason no Democrat has recommended it.  And assigning him specifically to health care committes would be a stroke of genius because el-Sayed is- at least rhetorically- supportive of Medicare for All.  Great!

Nonetheless, "we're not going to lie to you and pretend the guy is anything other than what he is" is unnecessarily contentious. :While Donald Trump is in fact "the main issue here", describing el-Sayed's primary victory as "a one-time aberration" would send voter flocking to his opponent- and would do nothing to improve the Democratic brand, long-term or short-term.

So to clean Frum's idea up a little, we would have

Everybody in Democratic leadership will combine to curb the ugliest instincts of anyone, including our own members. We'll vote funds to protect Jewish institutions from antisemitic violence encouraged by either Republicans or Democrats. We'll assign Senator el-Sayed to healthcare committees and keep him far, far away from Homeland Security. We desperately need this seat to hold the Administration accountable because corrupt President Trump, king of the deep state, is the main issue here and across the country.

The current cliche is "two things can be true at once", which was shortened from the more precise "two contradictory things can be true at once".  Ideally, the Democratic Party would have been wise to work hard in the twelve of the thirteen Senate races which the Cook Political Report has deemed "leans Democratic", "toss up", or "leans Republican", which would exclude the contest in Michigan.  But prominent Democrats, led by President Obama- who disliked Israel but never had the backbone to challenge Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu- decided that boosting an anti-Semitic candidate would be a swell idea.

Maybe it's only simple math. With a victory by el-Sayed, Democrats probably would end up with 50, 51, or 52 Senators (53 in a tsunami).  Fifty is insufficient. Fifty-one theoretically is sufficient, but the concessions then offered John Fetterman to match those he'd be offered by Republicans might be excruciating.  Sadly, 52 thus may be necessary. Not stumping for the candidate in Michigan would be a big gamble.

That may be why Barack Obama and other Democrats- Haley Stevens an obvious exception- don't want to be the last to grab a seat on the anti-Semite train. If it's more than that, the Party's problems are going to prove much greater than one disreputable candidate in one Midwestern state.

     

Share |

Hatred of Jews Rolls on

James Fishback recently ran for the GOP nomination for governor of Florida and came in third, trailing Florida's Lieutenant Governor and the winner, Byron Donalds. More notably, he has a very sketch past and made Donalds seem like, well, the Executive Director of the (B'nai B'rith) Anti-Defamation League.

Sincere or not, Fishback is continuing to prmote himself as a hero of the anti-Jewish right.

A young student at Liberty University asked me a question about "the chosen people" My response: "There are people out there by the way, who do blame everything on the Jews. That's low IQ anti-Semitism. It is wrong, it should be condemned. The reason why banana prices are high, a new ad is running in Michigan, is not because of the Jews." "Now it just so happens that the reason why diesel prices are high is because Benjamin Netanyahu lied us into another war. But that's Israel and so I think that good faith Americans on both sides should, and largely are, separating genuine substantive criticisms of the Israeli government" "With respect to the Old Testament whether it's in Jeremiah or commonly in Genesis 12 this covenant that says that those who bless will be blessed those who curse will be cursed. I would ask you to turn to what St. Paul wrote in Galatians 6 which is that neither Gentile nor Jew neither man or woman, we are all one in Christ. That new covenant is Jesus Christ full stop end of story."

— James Fishback (@jamesfishback) October 29, 2026

Fishback alleged "Now it just so happens that the reason why diesel prices are is because Benjamin Netanyahu lied us into another war. But that's Israel and so I think that good faith Americans on both sides should, and largely are, separating genuine substantive criticisms of the Israeli government."

Banana prices are not high because of "the Jews". Diesel prices are not high because of "the Jews". And Benjamin Netanyahu did not "lie us into another war".

We do not know whether Prime Minister Netanyahu lied to President Trump and neither does James Fishback. He certainly did not "lie to us, the American people, which is precisely an event Fishback wants us to believe took place.

The Saudi government and the Israeli government both encouraged President Trump to make war against Iran because they believed that was in the interest of their respective countries, and very likely though it was in the best interest of the United States of America. The Saudis are still at it.

Donald Trump is quite capable of making his own decisions and this is one he made on his own. And he did it despite repeatedly telling the American people over the past ten years that he was anti-war to his core.

On at least three occassions he explicitly promised to keep the USA out of any war. On March 4, 2023 he told the CPAC convention "No new wars. I finished some old wars." In the first week of August, 2024, he told Kick streamer Adin Ross "And we won't have wars again". And in his acceptance speech on November 6, 2024, he declared "He will start a war.  "I'm not going to start a war. I'm going to stop wars."

The Scriptural references are merely a cover story. Fishback had two points to make, neither of them remotely valid.  He was not even trying to make it appear that he was blaming Israel and not Jews generally. When he say says "Benjamin Netanyahu lied us into another war" (another war?) and "but that's Israel," he knows that a receptive audience realizes he is blaming Jews.

Less obviously, he is sending this message: don't blame President Trump. He didn't lie us into war. It was Benjamin Netanyahu, again, though we aren't told when the first time was. So this is another Republican running interference for Donald Trump, and doing so as an anti-Semite. There are too many of them.

Share |

Of Big Picture Stuff

Whomever tweets for the leftist "Pod Save America" must be fired immediately.

Lovett: I just want to be very clear: Jews in Michigan have a moral obligation to support Abdul. They should do it to protect themselves from antisemitism and rising hatred in America. https://t.co/URjLmifhqh

— Pod Save America (@PodSaveAmerica) October 27, 2026

Lovett: I just want to be very clear: Jews in Michigan have a moral obligation to support Abdul. They should do it to protect themselves from antisemitism and rising hatred in America. https://t.co/URjLmifhqh

— Pod Save America (@PodSaveAmerica) October 27, 2026

As comments to the tweet/video indicate, many tweeters are responding not to the entire video, but merely to the remark about the moral obligation of Jews to support Abdul.  Electing an anti-Semite is no way to protect any individual or group from anti-semitism or rising hatred. The other is that the video included a statement which did not appear in the tweet:

And we need to have a check on Donald Trump in a Democratic Senate. Maybe Abdul is not, is going to be a reliable vote against Israel. Fine. We can handle that. But we canot handle a continued slide to this hateful, authoritarian right. It will be dangerous for us.

A slide to a hateful, authoritarian right would be dangerous for Jews, as Jon Lovett is emphasizing, though dangerous for a whole lot of other Americans.  There is no reason to believe, however, that Mike Rogers is anti-Semitic or in any way dangerous, but merely a toady for Donald Trump.... or as a longtime Philadelphia talk show host turned podcaster often put it, "a zero trying to be a one". There are worse things, and people, in the Republican Party and electing a hater of Jews- albeit a Democrat- also would not be a healthful for Jews, other minorities, or diversity in America.

Lovett cites the GOP's "othering" of Muslims, immigrants, "trans people", and Haitians. He then legitimately argues "and anyone who has allowed their concerns,, their legitimate concerns, to cloud that ultimate, larger point is missing the larger point is missing the big picture," a kind of politics on the  

We can argue about the impact of electing a compadre of Hasan Piker and the latter's cousin, Cenk Uygur, to the United States Senate would have a palliative effect on hatred of religious, racial, and sexual/gender minorities. We could, and I would if I knew Lovett. 

The recent pro-el Hasan ad has proven very controversial, in which "controversial" brings to mind the loathsome ad for Vivek Ramaswamy featuring the loathsome birth mother of opponent Amy Acton. I should have realized it did not come from the campaign itself. Rather

The ad comes from Rebellion PAC, which is fronted by left-wing political commentator Cenk Uygur. It depicts a couple in a supermarket saying they cannot afford groceries because they have to set money aside “for killing Palestinians.” It concludes by stating that the Michigan Democrat’s GOP opponent “is for they/them,” referring to Israelis.

In a statement to the Jewish Telegraphic Agency, an El-Sayed campaign representative said the ad “is not affiliated in any way” with his campaign and that it did not speak for him.

“Abdul is focused on pushing back against Trump’s agenda that is raising prices for Michiganders,” campaign spokesperson Roxie Richner said in the statement. “No one speaks for Abdul but himself and his campaign.”

The campaign did not address how El-Sayed viewed the messaging behind the ad, and did not respond to a follow-up from JTA about the ad’s content.

That's not enough. The campaign's spokesperson was merely stating a fact, that there had been no collaboration. Meanwhile, Rebellion PAC defiantly defends its ad while el-Sayed's people refuse actually to criticize it in any way.

The really big picture is the number: 51.  And unfortunately, the number may be 52 because if Republicans end up with 49 members in the new Senate, the inducements which would be offered Pennsylvania senator John Fetterman to change uniforms are beyond anyone's imagination.  That is enough to wish for Abdul el-Sayed's victory, and all that there is.

Share |

Repugnant

Please keep this is mind. And that it, too, was a final argument, played two years ago this month:

Viewers tuning into NFL and college football games in recent weeks have been bombarded with two Trump ads — running nationally and locally in swing states — that take issue with Vice President Kamala Harris’ past support for taxpayer-funded gender-affirming treatments. They’re running during baseball playoff games, too.

Both ads end with the same punchy tag line: “Kamala is for they/them; President Trump is for you.”

The thrust of the ad below is that Israel is to blame for the affordability crisis in the USA.  Assuming for the sake of simplicity that the two individuals are married to each other, the wife says to her husband "you're going to have to put those eggs back... We have to set that $7 aside for killing Palestinians." The husband responds "I mean, don't we give Israel four billion dollars a year, anyways?"

New low for normalized Jew-hate in the American Democratic Party. Very sad: Painting your political opponents as puppets of Jews, as this El-Sayed ad does, and as crazed baby-killers and money-grubbing villains who are the root cause of every bad thing not just in the world, but in your life—from wars to the price of eggs to the reason you can’t have free healthcare—is not just low-grade Jew-hate. It’s pure Third Reich stuff, translated directly from the original German. Do you remember when Jewish Democrats in Michigan explained that they would vote for El-Sayed despite his open disdain for Jews, since there are many other important issues they need him to fight for? That anything was worth it to “defeat MAGA”? Well, here’s El-Sayed’s answer to them: Don’t worry, all those issues we agree on, like healthcare, inflation, and climate change, I’m going to make them about Jews too! I will tell the public that the Jews are the reason they can’t have those things.

— Saul Sadka (@Saul_Sadka) October 25, 2026

Seven dollars? That is so 2025, when in February the average price of a dozen grade A large eggs, thanks to the Avian flu, rose to $5.90- still $1.10 less than alleged in the ad. Last month, they were $2.27.

The wife tells her husband "Yeah, and now we're giving them another 26 billion dollars. Do you know how much that is for every American taxpayer?.... Apparently, it's costing us a lot of money to drop bombs on Gaza."

Much of the increase in prices can be attributed to the war in Iran, as we justifiably have heard repeatedly. This is the first time a candidate has blamed Israel's attack upon Hamas in Gaza for the soaring cost of living- any candidate, that is, not named el-Sayed.

A secondary theme is jealousy of Israel- or perhaps indignation that Israelis receive health care. After his "wife" blames inflation on the Israel-Hamas war, her "husband" says "oh, that's terrible. Don't they get universal health care, too"?

Oh, the horror of it all! Residents of Israel are assured of health care. It is not single payer, but makes health care more available than it is in the USA. This is health care for every resident- Jews, Christians, and Muslims, including Palestinians, individuals of any religion.  A guess: this is not given to residents of Gaza under Hamas rule, and never was. This would hardly be of concern to el-Sayed, whose wife Sarah

Jukaku, who has a medical degree from Columbia University and a masters from the University of Oxford, worked as co-chief of psychiatry at University of Michigan Health—which does accept Medicare—before starting her own Ann Arbor, Mich.-based practice, Mind Work Psychiatry, in 2024. The following March, Jukaku opted out of Medicare, records show, meaning she cannot bill the program and requires Medicare patients to pay out of pocket. The same goes for patients with private insurance plans, though they can often submit bills to their providers and recoup some of the costs.

You might think that a Democratic candidate for the US Senate who advocates Medicare for All might suggest to his wife that she accept Medicare and some insurance plans, at least while he is running for office posing as a progressive. Having not done so, he remains a heartthrob of prominent progressives this autumn, which should concern individuals for whom universal health care is supposedly a priority.  But the health of Americans ravaged by a health care system controlled by insurance companies and for-profit hospitals no longer is the priority it once was. Case in point:

After learning the pro-Israel lobbying group plans to spend up to $9 million backing Republican Mike Rogers in Michigan's Senate race, (Senator Bernie) Sanders wired $1 million on Wednesday to Democrat Abdul El-Sayed and began calling allies for more, reports the New York Times. By day's end, he'd lined up an additional $300,000 in pledges from a dozen Democrats, including Sens. Martin Heinrich, Tina Smith, Chris Van Hollen, and Jeff Merkley.

Undermining Israel now is the main issue for the far-left, It certainly is not opposition to President Trump, for whom the candidate appears to have a soft spot. 

So el-Sayed now has an ad with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu depicted while "Mike Rogers for they/them And El-Sayed is for you" appears. The candidate is copying the 2025 GOP ad which blasted Kamala Harris' support for the LGBTQIA community with "Kamala is for they/them. President Trump is for us."  Only now the target is not transsexuals but Jews- uh, er, "Zionists".

Health care, an increase in the federal minimum wage, accessible daycare, and other issues once near and dear to the allegedly progressive camp are so 2024, evidently. concern for racial and sexual/gender minorities all take a back seat to animus for America's steadfast ally in the Middle East.

In the seventh chapter in Matthew's gospel, Jesus warns

Watch out for false prophets. They come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ferocious wolves. By their fruit you will recognize them. Do people pick grapes from thorn bushes or figs from thistles. Likewise, every good tree bears good fruit but a bad tree bears bad fruit. 

Support for el-Sayed is now the focal point for hatred of the Jewish state. On a positive note, he does not come to us in sheep's clothing. He is being quite obvious in his hatred and bigoty .

Share |

Embracing Israel Derangement Syndrome

If you take Twitter seriously, you would think that the centrists, center-left, or liberals in the Democratic Party are willing to sacrifice a House or Senate majority in order to make sure that anti-Israel/pro-Palestinian Democrats aren't elected. One tweeter argues about the el-Sayed vs. Rogers race in Michigan: 

The only dignified choice is to leave the Senate race blank—an undervote representing a rejection of ideological absolutism. This makes me no less a Democrat. I refuse to be complicit in excusing or accepting extremism to beat extremism. The madness has to stop somewhere.

Unsurprisingly, there is virulent criticism of this position, as indicated by the tweeters who responded to him.

The rule is blue no matter who, not blue only if they are ideologically centrist enough for me.

You’ll then spend the next couple of years blaming the left wing of the party for losing and not being able to do anything. I thought it was vote blue no matter who?

"Blue no matter who, unless they're brown"

“I’d rather the republican won than Israel possibly face sanctions.”  "I value Israel more than my own country." That is you.

Islamophobia needs to stop.  Bigotry needs to stop.  Racism needs to stop.  Just admit it, you are not a Dem you are an Islamophobe who hates this one person for his faith.  Disgusting.

Two of the last three mistakenly believe that the Democrats who oppose el-Sayed's candidacy are motivated by race, an odd notion given that Muslim is not a race. The other believes that opposing a candidate with a burning hatred of Israel makes the critic unpatriotic. That is disgusting.

Nonetheless, the first two make a valid point.  To be clear: supporting an anti-Semite is preferable to the possibility of giving Donald Trump a Senate majority, which would allow him to make the most atrocious appointments imaginable not only to the Supreme Court, but to other federal courts.

But also to be clear: Abdul el-Sayed does not agree with those of us who are committed to a Democratic majority. In the video tweet below, the Michigan Democrat states in part

Allies are supposed to care about you implicitly- not just use you. The government of Israel has done nothing but use us. Allies are supposed to care about you. They use us for our tax dollars. They use us to run cover at the United Nations. They use us to run cover at the I.C.C. to cover up their war crimes. Now they use us to go and fightr a war we have no business fighting. We're paying more in gas. We're paying more for groceries.....

This clarity is so important. This akin to Zohran's 'no apartheid state has a right to exist' moment. It moves the goal posts & permanently changes the conversation. Good on AES. Stay the course. I also appreciate that he didn't fall for the 'Bibi's the real problem' misdirect.

— Briahna Joy Gray (@briebriejoy) October 20, 2026

Do you see what is happening here? We have a Democratic candidate who is not blaming President Trump for the troubles we're in. He's blaming Israel. (Gee, I wonder why.)  Donald Trump, the leader of the Free World and one of the three most powerful individuals on the planet has no agency. He is the puppet of Israel, which always uses us. Affordability? That's not caused by tariffs President Trump imposed or the war in Iran he started. Those damn Jews!

And it's not because of Israel that we, the USA, are fighting this war. Trump already had decided to attack Iran but decided on the timing because of Israel- and Saudi Arabia, Iran's mortal enemy.  Yet el-Sayed mentions nothing about Saudi Arabia which is, possibly though not probably, because the Kingdom is Muslim. (All sorts of leftists blame Israel for pushing Trump into the war.)

Abdul el-Sayed believes, or purports to believe, that Israel manipulates or intimidates the USA. However, a law professor at George Mason University asks "what does Israel do for us, I keep hearing people ask."  He answers

Without Israel, Lebanon falls to Hezbollah, Jordan falls to Islamists, the PA falls to Hamas, Hamas links up with the MB to threaten Egypt, Iran gears up to dominate Iraq, the Houthis take over Yemen and along with the new government in Jordan threaten Saudi Arabia, and so forth. 

Israel,in short,is a linchpin of US security interests in the Mideast, keeping Islamists from seizing power region-wide, and keeping out Russian and Chinese influence.

Three minutes. In this three minute clip, there were three minutes without the words "Donald Trump", "the President", or "Trump" escaping el-Sayed's lips. That's because notwithstanding his most sensible supporters realizing that defeating Donald Trump's agenda is the most important objective, Abdul el-Sayed disagrees. He believes that above all, it is Israel which must be defeated.

Share |

Meet Melat Hamas Kiros

This candidate, who defeated the very good US Representative for the First District of Colorado, Diana DeGette, reminds me of the Coasters' "Yakety Yak". ("Take out the papers and the trash...") I'm not a fan of tweets which specify "only some accounts can reply" but it should be ignored, even though Democrats (D) must be elected everywhere possible.

This one makes me feel sad. I hate the suggestion at the end that we “can't keep Jews in Denver safe while Israel is executing a genocide.” I’ve got Jewish kids here in Denver. The safety of everyone in this city is an imperative, no matter what’s happening around the world. I appreciate that Melat acknowledges that the Boulder firebomber was “trying to incite terror in the Jewish community.” That makes it antisemitic. Jewish safety means the safety of all Jews, whether or not we talk about Israel/Palestine exactly the way someone wants us to. Look, we can be loud critics of Israel. I am. We can argue hard about US policy. We really have to. But the safety of our kids shouldn’t be part of that debate.

— David Seligman (@daveyseligman) October 19, 2026

To confirm that this was not taken out of context, here is the full segment of the interview conducted earlier this month by Politico with House candidates Avila Chevalier and Neelat Karos:

Dasha Burns: Look, you know, I bring up all of these points not to like relitigate the past, but um, to explore this idea that like a lot of your critics look at your comments as a whole and say that your support for the rights of Palestinians has breached into antisemitic territory. Do you understand, Melat, why some people might hear it that way, and is any of that criticism fair? I mean, I’m look...thinking back also so, you know, your reluctance to call the attack on October 7th hostage support demonstration in Boulder um, not calling it antisemitic, right? Do you understand why the aggregation of the stuff that we’ve talked about might make people feel this way? 

Melat Kiros: I do, and I think that is a product of, you know, what I have made abundantly clear that I’m against, which is ethnocracy. When you have created a state around, you know, one particular group, you are welcoming this you know...any kind of criticism against the state being erroneously applied to the entire people, which is wrong. And I have condemned that at every juncture that I have the opportunity to. What we’re talking about is the actions of a state and a government that we are against deeply and their violation of basic human rights of the way they are carrying out apartheid and now genocide on the Palestinian people. What happened in Boulder was a horrific, horrific attack that specifically put Jewish communities in more danger and really... 

Dasha Burns: Was it an antisemitic attack? 

Melat Kiros: ...invited more harm. I think it was a political attack, and I think it was one that specifically puts Jewish people in harm’s way because Israel portends to speak for and act on behalf of all Jewish people, which is not... 

Dasha Burns: But I’m just curious why...why not... 

Melat Kiros: ...the case. 

Dasha Burns: ...call it antisemitic when it was an attack on Jews. 

Melat Kiros: I think whether it was antisemitic or anti-Zionist, it was a hate crime, and it was a crime to insight terror in the Jewish community. And that is wrong, no matter what. I think it is really important that when we talk about these particular um, you know, attacks, that we are clear about why these attacks are happening so that we can actually prevent them from ever happening... 

Dasha Burns: Well, that...that’s... 

Melat Kiros: ...again. 

Dasha Burns: ...but that’s why I’m asking about the antisemitism of it all and why that there’s like a hesitance to call it that. 

Melat Kiros: I think it was a political attack against, you know, the support of Israel specifically. Could it...antisemitism have also been motivated in there? Absolutely. It’s entirely possible. But again, when we are talking about a political attack, we have to go back to the...the root cause of why this violence is happening at all. I want to end the violence so that Jewish people, no matter where they are, but especially to the Jewish neighbors that I have in my district, the Jewish community in my district, that they are safe and that they are protected. And we cannot do that when this state is executing a genocide on the Palestinian people and saying that it is for the safety of Jewish people. There is no liberation where it is not intertwined between you know, all of the people that live in that region, regardless of their faith. And our responsibility is to chart a path forward that recognizes equal rights and equal dignity for every single person and to condemn violence at every single juncture.

In June of 2025 the BBC had reported

An 82-year-old woman who was one of the 12 victims in an attack on a gathering in support of Israeli hostages has died from her injuries in Colorado, officials say.

Karen Diamond was severely injured after the suspect, Mohamed Sabry Soliman, shouting "free Palestine" tossed Molotov cocktails at the group in what federal officials have called a "terrorist attack".

The suspect told police after he was arrested that he wanted to "kill all Zionist people", according to court documents....

Diamond was among the 20 or so people gathered on 1 June to participate in a Run for Their Lives gathering at Pearl Street Mall in Boulder, Colorado, to generate awareness for the release of Israeli hostages in Gaza.

She died as a result of "the severe injuries that she suffered in the attack", the district attorney's office said....

Officials say the suspect planned the attack for a year, watching videos on how to make Molotov cocktails before driving from his home in Colorado Springs to Boulder to carry out the attack.

The suspect allegedly posed as a gardener wearing a construction vest to get close to the group ahead of the attack, prosecutors say.

Near the scene of the crime, officials say they found 16 unlit Molotov cocktails in a plastic container within arm's reach, as well as a weed sprayer filled with petrol.

Kiros does not know whether the act committed by Soliman (who has been prosecuted and sent to prison) was anti-Zionist. You would have thought  that "kill all Zionist people" would have been a clue. She doesn't know whether it was anti-semitic. Maybe the declaration "kill all Zionist people" directed at people who were not supporting the Israeli government but calling for the release of hostages- human beings like the Zionist Karen Diamond- could have been a clue that "Zionist" now is a synonym for "Jew".

The candidate chose not to condemn the attack unequivocally, opting instead to turn the questioning into a diatribe against the imaginary "apartheid and now genocide of the Palestinian people". 

The Israeli government in its bloodlust somehow overlooked the 13 Arabic members of the nation's legislature. Also, the Palestinians in Jordan, where the group comprises roughly half the population. Also, the 31 other nations in which substantial numbers of Palestinians reside; also, in the West Bank, where IDF soldiers are not regularly gunning down residents.  In Gaza,the population, through displacement or killing, ahs declined since the beginning of the war but by something less than 10%, in world history the most incompetent genocide of all.

Kiros is fixated on the "root cause" of "why this violence is happening at all".  The "root cause" is two-fold: hatred of Jews and hatred of the country which has given them safe harbor, and the freedom which no other nation in the Middle East does, and no other nation there ever has. The sense of superiority of Islamists is unsurprising given that

more than 850,000 Jews were forced to leave their homes in Egypt, Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, Yemen, Libya, Morocco, and several other Arab countries in the 20 years that followed the Arab-Israeli war of 1948. Another major forced migration took place from Iran in 1979–80, following the Iranian Revolution and the collapse of the shah’s regime, adding 70,000 more Jewish refugees to this number.

There is ample evidence that this conduct against Jews was orchestrated in tandem as a joint effort of all the involved Arab countries.

Kiros remarks "There is no liberation where it is not intertwined between you know, all of the people that live in that region, regardless of their faith."  Regardless of their faith, very few people in the region enjoy the freedom that Jews- or Muslims- do in Israel:

According to the measure of the level of democracy in nations throughout the world published by Freedom House, the Middle Eastern countries with the highest scores are Israel, Tunisia, Turkey, Lebanon, Morocco, Kuwait, and Jordan. The remaining countries of the Middle East are categorized as authoritarian regimes, though some have  certain democratic aspects.

Freedom House categorizes Israel and Tunisia as the only “free” countries of the region....

Lebanon, Turkey, Kuwait, Morocco, and Jordan are all categorized as “partly free"... 

None of the Middle Eastern countries received the “free” status from the Freedom House in their 2016 Freedom of the Press report, which measures specifically the level of freedom and editorial independence enjoyed by the press. Israel, Lebanon, Turkey, and Kuwait were determined “partly free” while all the other countries in the region received the “not free” status.

All the remaining Middle Eastern states are currently determined to be “not free” (including Western Sahara, which is controlled by Morocco).

This is an old report. Sadly, things have not changed much for the peoples, mostly Muslim, of the Middle East. In thirty countries, the head of state must belong to a specific religion. In two of the, he/she must be Christian; in two, Buddhist; and in 17 nations, he or she must be Muslim. Jewish? None. Quite the "ethnocracy:.

Yet Kiros doesn't care. Only the ill-defined "Palestinians" matter and for them, the candidate has no answer, only accusations against Israel.

The disconnect is unfathomable. The terrorist attack was a "hate crime" but possibly not anti-Semitic, which begs the question of whom the "hate" was directed against. This is a problem of the far, far left: simultaneously being equivocal about a murderous crime while being sure to label it a "hate" crime because the label "hate crime" will be the cool thing in Woke 2 as it was in Woke 1. 

Responding at the time to Soliman's attack, District Attorney Michael Dougherty stated "This horrific attack has now claimed the life of an innocent person who was beloved by her family and friends. Our hearts are with the Diamond family during this incredibly difficult time." The hearts of decent people were, but for Kiros and other members of the Democratic Socialists of America, not so much.

In the runoff in the 1991 gubernatorial election in Louisiana, Democrat Edwin Edwards, who had been indicted on criminal charges for which he was acquitted, faced former Grand Wizard of the Knights of the Ku Klux Klan and Republican David Duke. (Edwards later was prosecuted for other charges, found guilty, and sentenced to prison.) Some motorists wisely sported the bumper stickers "Vote for the Lizard, not the Wizard" and "Vote for the Crook, It's Important". 

It's critical that Democrats regain control of the House of Representatives and the U.S. Senate.  Unfortunately, in the 1st congressional district of Colorado, we're left with "Vote for the Bigot: It's Important".

Share |

It's Those Jews Again

Cenk Uygur of The Yong Turks is a virulent hater of Israel and of Jews- not necessarily the same thing, but both apply with him. However, that's not the issue here.

 

People claim “dual loyalty” is a trope, but here is large percentage of Jewish voters abandoning every other position they’ve had just for Israel. Many other Jewish voters aren’t doing this. But you can’t say Israel is more important than every other issue and still claim trope.

— Cenk Uygur (@cenkuygur) October 15, 2026

Uygur may or may not be aware of the following. However, even if he is, he wouldn't understand its applicability to the plunge of support among New York Jews for the Democratic Party:

The Arab American Institute (AAI) released polling at the end of October 2023 that showed support among Arab voters for President Joe Biden catastrophically plummeted from a high of 59% during the 2020 election to a scant 17%. His approval rating also dropped a precipitous 45 points, from 74% to 29% in that time frame. While positive feelings towards Biden had been dropping amongst Arabs steadily since he came into office, the AAI noted that his support fell by 18 points between April 2023 and October 23 alone, driven in part by widespread criticism of his administration's muted response to Palestinian suffering during Israel's initial military response to Hamas' terror attack. 

Support for Harris among Arab-Americans rose after she became the Democratic Party's presidential nominee. One rational reason would have been that Harris was not as fond of Israel as was Biden, as exemplified by the "bring them home" chant at the Democratic National Convention, more pithy than "sign the damn ceasefire, Bibi".

The precipitous drop of support among these voters for Biden- and perhaps even the increase for Harris- obviously was due to the federal government's sympathy for, and empathy with, Israel after the 10/7/23 attack by Islamist terrorists.  No one ever has suggested the that skepticism of Biden, and to a lesser extent, of Harris, was due to anything but that Mideast conflict.

These are called "single issue voters," Cenk. To make it simpler: Arab Muslims disliked Biden because he favored the predominantly Jewish state of Israel over loud and proud, murderous Muslims. And now Jews have lost faith in Democratic politicians because none has renounced Abdul el-Sayed, which is sensible because he is a candidate for Senate; and none has denounced his #1 booster, Hasan Piker, which is morally repugnant. 

There are single-issue voters for Israel, just as there are single-issue voters against Israel, euphemistically "Pro-Palestine" voters.  There are single-issue gun rights (euphemistically, "Second Amendment) voters, individuals who vote for or against candidates because the latter are pro-life or pro-choice, and it doesn't end with these. It may be foolish, but foolish is neither unconstitutional nor illegal.

Jews aren't guilty of the dual loyalty anti-Semites have historically accused them of any more than Uygur and his fellow travelers are guilty of dual loyalty because they support Palestine, unfortunately recognized by the United Nations as a non-member observer state.  Nor are  Italian-Americans guilty of dual loyalty because they zealously guard recognition of Columbus Day in recognition of someone who did not discover America.

There are American Jewish organizations in the USA. So, too, are there various organizations advocating for African-Americans, European-Americans, Hispanic-Americans, and Latinos. There also are Asian-American groups, one of them representing Turkish-American, which Cenk presumably is free to join, if he has not already done so. Fortunately, these do not get accused of "dual loyalties"; that designation is reserved for Jews. 

All of those are part of the rich mosaic of the United States of America.  Or as John Mellencamp recorded in the 1980s in "Little Pink Houses", "Oh, but ain't that America for you and me?"

Share |

Saudi Arabia, Disappeared

An important American ally in the Middle East again is encouraging President Donald Trump to join its forces in escalating conflict.  CNBC reports that the President

said he is considering joining Saudi Arabia in its retaliation against Tehran-backed Houthis in Yemen after a deadly attack on Riyadh’s main airport, a move that could draw the U.S. further into a second front in the Iran war.

“We may. We’re going to look at it,” Trump told reporters outside the White House on Saturday when asked if the U.S. would back Saudi Arabian strikes. “We just found out about the recent attack. So, we’ll make a decision. We move very quickly.”

Two Saudi Arabian government officials told MS NOW that the kingdom is requesting “urgent defense support” from the U.S. following the attacks.

The officials, including a senior member of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, did not want to be identified because of the matter’s sensitivity. They added that the U.S. needs to intervene “as soon as possible” to help the Saudi-led coalition in Yemen fight the Houthis.

This is nothing new because on September 10, Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, a real sweetheart kind of guy called President Trump twice   

urging him to launch strikes against the Houthis as the Iran-backed group closed in on a vital Red Sea chokepoint, two U.S. officials told Axios. Trump declined, and U.S. officials stressed the administration has no plans to intervene directly against the Houthis for now.

And that was nothing new, as applied elsewhere in the Mideast, for in February Trump launched a

wide-ranging attack on Iran after a weeks-long lobbying effort by an unusual pair of U.S. allies in the Middle East — Israel and Saudi Arabia — according to four people familiar with the matter, as Israeli and U.S. forces teamed to topple Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei after nearly four decades in power.

Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman made multiple private phone calls to Trump over the past month advocating a U.S. attack, despite his public support for a diplomatic solution, the four people said. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, meanwhile, continued his long-running public campaign for U.S. strikes against what he views as an existential enemy of his country.

The combined effort helped lead Trump to order a massive aerial campaign against Iran’s leadership and military, which in its initial hour led to the death of Khamenei and several other senior Iranian officials.

In March,Daniel C. Kurtzer and Aaron David Miller of the Carnegie Endowment For International Peace explained

Netanyahu was not the only foreign leader pushing for Trump to attack Iran. Foremost among these was Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed Bin Salman. Other reports indicate Arab Gulf leaders have been urging Trump not to stop before further degrading Iranian military capabilities. The difference between Netanyahu and Arab leaders was that the latter told Trump quietly what they wanted but would not be honest with their own people. Still, Trump alone is responsible for the United States’ participation.

Trump and Netanyahu are skilled politicians, and both are adept in the art of the con. In this case, however, there was no con. Trump proved to be a willing and full partner. He was risk-ready and caught up in a self-generated aura of military power and invincibility after taking President Nicolás Maduro from Venezuela. He was poorly advised by a coterie of advisers unwilling to say anything to him other than yes— perhaps with the exception of Vice President JD Vance, who has backed Trump publicly but has expressed reservations in the past.

Netanyahu may have determined the timing of conflict, but Trump was likely already on his way to war…

Whatever accountability Netanyahu should face for the Iran war, the fact is that the conflict the United States is now fighting against Iran is Trump’s doing. It is a war based on a false and unproven threat assessment of “imminent threats” to the United States. It is a war being waged without bipartisan support, congressional authorization, or the buy-in of allies or the majority of the American public. And it is a war being prosecuted without the president thinking through potential costs and consequences.

It's a wonder that Israel is often blamed by the ultra-left and the ultra-right for getting the USA to start the war against Iran. To be fair to Marco Rubi ( which he generally doesn't deserve), when the Secretary of State in early March pointed to Israel's role in facilitating our involvement, he was referring to the timing of our attack"  He remarked “We knew that that would precipitate an attack against American forces, and we knew that if we didn’t preemptively go after them before they launched those attacks, we would suffer higher casualties.”

Nonetheless, Netany and those evil "Zionists" get a lot of the blame on social media and otherwise for President Trump's disastrous mistake.But then, it's Israel's own fault that it has a lot of Jews.

Share |

Vile

Hey, everybody! Let's make it more painful!  Mayor Zohran Mamdani of New York City starts his tweet of three years since Hamas Genocide Day by noting "This day is profoundly painful for so many New Yorkers. It marks three years since the horrific war crimes of October 7."  Then he goes profoundly downhill from the sewer in which he lurks.

This day is profoundly painful for so many New Yorkers. It marks three years since the horrific war crimes of October 7. On that day, Hamas killed more than 1,100 Israelis and abducted 251 others. We grieve alongside our many friends and neighbors who still carry that unthinkable loss. The suffering did not begin nor end that day. It instead continued through the Israeli government’s devastating, ongoing genocide in Gaza, in which it has killed more than 74,000 Palestinians—including more than 21,000 children. Even since the so-called ceasefire, more than 1,400 Palestinians have been killed. That suffering has intensified with every Israeli bomb dropped on ambulances waiting outside hospitals, every drone strike targeting a residential building or journalist, and every shipment of food aid turned away at a border crossing. Many New Yorkers are reckoning with this unbearable grief, and we mourn alongside them – all while knowing that our tax dollars fund these war crimes. Three years later, we must refuse to accept a world in which occupation and apartheid continue, where war crimes are met with impunity, and our federal government continues its complicity with every arms shipment. To honor the dead, we must fight for a world in which every person can live with freedom, safety, and dignity.

— Mayor Zohran Kwame Mamdani (@NYCMayor) October 7, 2026

 Eight days after the attack, Robert Satloff of The Washington Institue for Near East Policy noted that it 

killed more than 1,300 Israelis and third-country nationals, including at least 29 Americans, in a country whose population is less than 10 million. In America, that would be equivalent to killing nearly 40,000—13 times more than the number of Al Qaeda victims on 9/11....

As terrible as 9/11 was, tens of millions of Americans woke up the following morning in our vast country not knowing any of the victims or their families. In Israel, a country whose width is less than the daily commute of many Americans, not a single family was untouched by the attack, either directly, through a neighbor, friend or classmate....

The comparison to the 1978 Iranian hostage crisis of 1979-1981 is apt. Satloff continues

Americans sadly recall how the taking of a much smaller number of hostages—diplomatic personnel at the American embassy in Tehran—paralyzed the U.S. government and dominated daily life in our country for 444 days. Obviously, the hostage factor was never a component of 9/11.

And yet, Zohran Kwame Mamdani decided to celebrate the massacre of October 7, not only by repeating the debunked charge of "genocide" but by going on in detail about the suffering of Palestinians he blames on the Israeli government.  Though mentioning (once) Hamas, the mayor did not acknowledge that none of the death and destruction he claims to be distressed by would have taken place without the terrorist group. The word "terrorist," nor any derivative, escapes his lips, nor does "Jew" or any of its derivatives.  Yet, he wields the term "Palestinian" with no concern about any Palestinian outside of Gaza. Hatred is made no more credible mixed with ignorance.

If Mamdani had any sense of decency, any denunciation of Israel would have been suspended for days- or at least one.  When a human being dies, there is no public criticism of the deceased before, nor during, the day of the funeral. When grieving on the anniversary of the death, out of respect, no one airs grievances against the person. 

The best thing, given the mayor's hostility to Jews, would have been for him to say nothing on this anniversary. I checked- it's legal.  Admittedly, in the age of individual self-absoprtion, he would have been denounced. So he could have issued a minimalistic statement, including the first four sentences of his tweet and ending with "we now must redouble our pursuit of peace and justice for all peoples of the Middle East".  The statement would not have been much dissimilar to that issued by the governor of New York State.

There has been much speculation as to why Mayor Mamdani and President Trump appear to like each other personally. It's now clear that they see some of themselves in each other.  Lack of character is a defining feature of both men.

There is a time and place for most things, and the time for condemnation of Israel on October 7 is not the time. Not the time, that is, for any decent person, which leaves Zohran Kwame Mamdani out.

 

Share |

Letting Them off The Hook

Remember: Donald Trump is not a bad guy. Jared Kushner is not a bad guy. The Saudis are not bad guys.

We know that because the "progressive" left has told us that, indirectly. This guy was sensible until "you're bombing Iran because Israel told you to.

North Korea has nukes and ICBMs that can hit the entire U.S. Iran has neither. If nukes were the point, you'd be bombing North Korea. You're bombing Iran because Israel told you to.

— James Fishback (@j_fishback) October 5, 2026

When in late February President Trump launched an attack on Iran, The Washington Post reported that it was

after a weeks-long lobbying effort by an unusual pair of U.S. allies in the Middle East — Israel and Saudi Arabia — according to four people familiar with the matter, as Israeli and U.S. forces teamed to topple Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei after nearly four decades in power.

Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman made multiple private phone calls to Trump over the past month advocating a U.S. attack, despite his public support for a diplomatic solution, the four people said. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, meanwhile, continued his long-running public campaign for U.S. strikes against what he views as an existential enemy of his country.

The combined effort helped lead Trump to order a massive aerial campaign against Iran’s leadership and military, which in its initial hour led to the death of Khamenei and several other senior Iranian officials.

That was Israel and Saudi Arabia. It seems that Donald's son-in-law and leading mediator in Gaza ceasefire talks, oligarch Jared Kushner, probably helped persuade Donald given that he

has an indirect financial connection through his private investment firm to a series of companies supplying weapons and equipment to the IDF, according to a CNN investigation published on Thursday and based on Israeli financial documents and Israeli transparency regulations.

According to the investigation, Kushner-owned Affinity Partners is the largest shareholder in Phoenix Financial. Documents reviewed as part of the investigation indicate that Phoenix has investments in nine companies connected to Israeli military activity, including manufacturers of ammunition, drones, vessels, and engineering equipment.

The most significant investment is in Elbit Systems, valued at at least $265 million. Other investments include more than $68 million in NextVision, which manufactures cameras for drones, and at least $40 million in Reshef Technologies, which manufactures electronic fuzes for shells. The list also includes Israel Shipyards, Ashot Ashkelon, Boeing, and Caterpillar.

Kushner does not directly own shares in the nine companies, but Affinity may indirectly benefit from their profits through its investment in Phoenix. According to CNN, the company sold about a quarter of its holdings in July for more than $340 million, generating a return of more than five times the original purchase price of the shares it sold.

Following the sale, Affinity remained Phoenix's largest shareholder, with a 7.4% stake valued at more than $1 billion.

The investigation raises questions about the intersection between Kushner's diplomatic activity and his private business interests. Kushner is carrying out his work on behalf of the president on a voluntary basis and does not hold an official government position. Alongside the diplomatic negotiations, he has presented a plan for Gaza's reconstruction that includes the development of tourism areas and opportunities for private investment.

The Iraq war has been very good business indeed for Jared Kushner. He has been given nearly a free pass, and Saudi Arabia a completely free pass, in parceling out blame for the destructive and unpopular war Jared's father-in-law and the Kingdom's friend has been waging in the Middle East.  

Saudi Arabia has been given a free pass, and Jared Kushner nearly a free pass  Nor has President Trump, in some quarters, assumed to have agency. The "Zionism is racism" crowd is glad to exempt the American president, his son-in-law, and the Saudis from responsibility for a chance to claim genocide, which these folks don't understand, or Zionism, which these folks don't understand.

"Woke 1 was crazy", Representative Alexandria Ocasi-Cortez acknowledged while smugly giggling. Welcome to Woke 2, its more dangerous sibling.

Share |

The New Pledge of Allegiance

Last month, Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez infamously stated "I have a local city councilman that has this saying 'Woke 1 was crazy.' I think that during this time, especially during COVID... the doors were really open in trying to entertain any and every policy that was going to get us to a better place."

Critics noted that the New York congresswoman herself was part of the problem. Overlooked was that her reference to "especially during COVID" was disingenuous. Covid-19 had little to do with woke statements or perspective. It was much more the black lives matter movement, spearheaded by the ethically questionable Black Lives Matter organization.

This is significant because there is an idea- vocalized by Ocasio-Cortez- that "woke is dead". This is a convenient notion, encouraging controversial opinions to be shielded from the accusation that it is "woke". Not taken in is the co-author of Regime Change because as Breitbart noted

On Friday’s broadcast of HBO’s “Real Time,” New York Times White House Reporter and author Jonathan Swan said that “there’s actually an effort to get away from what AOC has called woke one. But the new litmus test is Gaza and genocide. That’s replaced a lot of these old litmus tests.” And “It’s completely oriented itself around Israel.”

Swan said, “The interesting thing is that there were all these other litmus tests that existed in 2020, and you see politicians like Pete Buttigieg took out — he had his pronouns on his social media account. He got rid of them. So, there’s actually an effort to get away from what AOC has called woke one. But the new litmus test is Gaza and genocide. That’s replaced a lot of these old litmus tests.”

Later, Swan said that he “can’t really make sense of where the line is anymore or what gets you cancelled…but the one issue, as you said before, seems to be Gaza. That seems to be the one thing where they’ve oriented themselves around a litmus test. … Like, you don’t hear candidates say, mask mandates and defund the police, they’re actually running away from all of that stuff. It’s completely oriented itself around Israel.”

Unlike the black lives matter movement, which strongly implied that police practice widespread brutality against black people and only black people, not every Democrat has fallen in line with the "Israel=genocide" myth. Some have, however:

There are several things going on here:

1. When she says she comes from a family "that's been genocided in the 1940s by the Nazis," turning "genocide" into a verb, she indicates that she speaks the new radical speak, which is obviously important to progressives always fearful of… https://t.co/plUPZVzkdn

— Peter Savodnik (@petersavodnik) September 27, 2026

There are numerous reasons to reject the charge of genocide. Among them is the extraordinary child vaccination program in Gaza in 2024. Later suspended and now resumed, this was facilitated by Tel Aviv and carried out by UNICEF and the World Health Organization. Israel is one of nine nations in the world with nuclear warheads. If its enemy- Hamas- in this war were one of the other eight, Israel would be deterred from using them to wipe out Gazan Palestinians because of the fear of retaliation.

Thus, to be clear: with that advantage and an overwhelming advantage in conventional forces over Hamas, Gazans have not been wiped out, and not nearly so. If Israel were trying to wipe out a people, the country is roughly as inept as Hamas is, well, genocidal.

None of that is new, nor should it be controversial. But in the video clip below, the Democratic candidate for the House of Representatives in the second congressional district of Maine (the largest in area east of the Mississippi), Matt Dunlap remarks (at 1:00) "this has become the moral issue of our time."

Not the invasion of Ukraine by Russia. Not the persecution of non-Muslims in the Muslim world. Most of all, not the terrorist attack of October 7, 2023 with the intent by Hamas of raping and murdering as many Jews as possible. And not the numerous terrorist groups throughout Asia and Africa. They go unmentioned because they are not Jewish, acting on behalf of a democratic state in retaliation for a deadly attack.

In the future, the ignorance, bigotry, or fear of cancellation which undergirds the litmus test, the requirement to denounce Israel dishonestly, will be a matter of extensive debate. However, we do know now that either Woke 1 has been replaced by Woke 2 or that the original has taken a very ugly turn.

Share |