web analytics
January 18, 2017 / 20 Tevet, 5777

Posts Tagged ‘democrats’

Exclusive: Huckabee Calls US Abstention at UNSC ‘Act of Hate Towards Israel’ By Obama Administration [video]

Tuesday, January 3rd, 2017

Former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee won’t say whether Israel has anything more to fear from the outgoing administration of U.S. President Barack Obama following the latest debacle at the United Nations Security Council; but he is absolutely certain that whatever happens, it can be fixed.

In the wake of last month’s American abstention on Resolution 2334(2016) allowing unanimous passage of a vote to condemn any Israeli presence in post ’67 territories, including numerous Jerusalem neighborhoods, the Western Wall and other holy sites in the Old City of Jerusalem, Israeli leaders are now waiting for the other shoe to drop.

In an exclusive interview in Jerusalem on Tuesday with Avi Abelow and the Israel Video Network, the Republican governor said in a philosophical tone, “Well, the good news is, Obama is gone in 17 days. But,” he added with a reassuring smile, “believe me, nothing that Obama can do, is permanent. Every bit of it can be undone. And I believe that most all of it will be undone.”

Gov. Huckabee called the move at the UN an ‘act of hate toward Israel on the part of the Obama administration,” but emphasized it was “not an act from the American people. Israelis need to know that,” he said, “because it was embarrassing to most Americans, and most Americans were outraged by the actions at the UN.”

An evangelical Christian, the governor is passionate about his faith, and about his love for Israel. He called the U.S. abstention “cowardly — underline — cowardly, because they did that without really advance notice, they did that really in spite of every action that we have historically taken with Israel, and we did that without any attempt to ameliorate the potential damage.

“It was,” he said, “disgusting.”

From the outset, the governor spoke of his intense dedication to the Holy Land, and his commitment to the State. This is the 44th year that Mike Huckabee is visiting Israel, and he noted that he has brought literally thousands of people to see this land over the years with him.

Evangelical Christians comprise the largest support base for Israel in the United States, he said, explaining, “It’s possible to be Jewish and have nothing to do with Christians. You cannot be Christian and not have everything to do with Judaism, because everything that’s in the Old Testament we embrace and believe.”

Gov. Huckabee first arrived in Israel at the age of 17, when Israel was still “a desert,” as he called it. But, “I grew up in the belief that Israel is not just another country, and the Land is not just another piece of real estate. God gave the title deed to Abraham 4,000 years ago. Yerushalayim is not just another city in the world. It’s a city that was uniquely the capital for the Jewish State.

“The only people for whom Yerushalayim has ever been a capital have been the Jews. And when I hear people use words like, “occupation” I think, ‘yeah, this has been occupied before – occupied by the Babylonians, the Assyrians, by the Turks, by the Brits… by the Romans,’ but when it relates to the Jews it’s not occupied, it’s owned. This is ownership,” he said.

“Not occupation.”

Hana Levi Julian

Democrats Firmly In The Grip Of Trump Derangement Syndrome

Wednesday, December 21st, 2016

We are certainly not indifferent to the possibility that Russian hackers infiltrated our recent presidential election and therefore we support congressional investigations into the mater – even if we are somewhat skeptical that they could or did improperly influence the election’s outcome.

What intrigues us, though, is the sanctimony oozing from President Obama, many Democrats, the Clinton campaign, and Green Party types.

After all, it was rather recently – in March 2015, to be precise – that President Obama, enraged by elements of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s reelection message, acted directly to defeat him, with the State Department doling out hundreds of thousands of dollars to Israeli groups like One Voice to organize anti-Netanyahu efforts.

One Voice was supposed to use the money to back Israeli-Palestinian peace negotiations but with a wink and a nod from the State Department, the money was spent on building a voter data base, training campaign activists, and hiring a political consulting firm with connections to President Obama.

Indeed, a congressional subcommittee said One Voice even told the State Department’s top diplomat in Jerusalem of its plans in an e-mail, though he claims never to have seen it.

And it was another Democratic president, Bill Clinton, who in the 1990s twice sent top political aides to Israel to work against Mr. Netanyahu – unsuccessfully in 1996 when Mr. Netanyahu defeated Prime Minister Shimon Peres, and successfully in 1999 when Labor’s Ehud Barak unseated Prime Minister Netanyahu.

So when we hear Democrats wail over alleged outsider attempts to influence the presidential election, it’s important to maintain some perspective and recognize it as their latest attempt to chip away at the president-elect’s legitimacy. As we’ve noted, the Clinton camp, unwilling to accept the election results, supported efforts to delegitimize the Trump victory – not by getting a reversal of the final tallies, which was virtually impossible, but to delay matters past the deadline for a vote in the Electoral College and thus force the decision into the House of Representatives. Even though the Republican majority in the House would doubtless have chosen Mr. Trump, the fact that Hillary Clinton won the popular vote would have made Mr. Trump the “double asterisk” president – no popular vote mandate and no Electoral College one either.

When that gambit failed, the target became the Electoral College itself with importunings to electors to become so-called faithless electors and vote for Mrs. Clinton even if their states had voted for Mr. Trump. Those machinations have failed as well, with Mr. Trump’s electoral victory having been certified earlier this week.

But we can expect the delegitimizing campaign to continue. Indeed, several prominent Democrats – including the increasingly erratic incoming Senate minority leader, Charles Schumer – have virtually declared across-the-board war against Mr. Trump’s nominees for cabinet level posts.

With their reluctance – refusal, in many cases – to accept the outcome of the election, and their hysterical fears of an impending apocalypse, Democrats are making Mr. Trump appear steady and statesmanlike in comparison, which should be as clear an indication as any that they are proceeding on a politically suicidal course.

Editorial Board

Sharpton Pushing Democrats to Go to War over Trump Nominations

Wednesday, December 7th, 2016

Rev. Al Sharpton and other Black activists are campaigning to convince Democrats in Congress to challenge President-elect Donald Trump’s appointments, which they argue would result in an Administration with an anti-civil rights agenda, The Hill reported Tuesday.

Congressional Black Caucus senior member Rep. Gregory Meeks (D-NY), issued a statement Monday, attacking the appointment of Ben Carson as Secretary of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). Meeks said that “Dr. Carson’s past statements on housing have not been consistent with the Congressional intent behind many of HUD’s programs.” He added that Carson had “lambasted the Department’s fair lending mission, calling our civil rights laws ‘mandated social engineering schemes.’”

Sharpton, for his part, is organizing a rally at the Martin Luther King Jr. Memorial in Washington six days before Trump’s inauguration. He told The Hill the rally is intended to “put the Democrats on notice that we expect them to use the nomination hearings to really go after” Trump’s picks.

Nancy Zirkin, executive vice president of The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights, argued that “Stephen Bannon’s white nationalist ties, Sen. Sessions’s clear record of antagonism to civil rights throughout a very long career, Betsy DeVos’s intent to defund public education, former labor secretary Elaine Chao’s rollback to worker protections, Ben Carson’s opposition to enforcing the Fair Housing Act, Rep. Tom Price’s efforts to roll back Medicare […] these are just some of our concerns about how this administration will govern. And every American who cares about their kids, their health care, their jobs or their housing should take notice.”

According to exit polls, Black voters supported Hillary Clinton over Trump by 89% to 8%. Sharpton said he expected “thousands” to turn out for his anti-Trump rally. “Our focus is not President Trump, who we don’t think we can turn around,” he added, “Our focus is that the Democrats should not weaken, and so weaken everything that Dr. King achieved and everything that President Obama has achieved.”

In August 1991, during the Crown Heights pogrom, Sharpton led a march of some 400 Blacks in front of the Chabad-Lubavitch headquarters, chanting “Whose streets? Our streets!” and “No justice, no peace!” During the pogrom Black youths looted Jewish stores, beat Jews in the street, and hurled rocks and bottles at Jews. Yankel Rosenbaum, a yeshiva  student from Australia, was stabbed to death while the Black mob chanted “Kill the Jew” and “get the Jews out.”

JNi.Media

ADL’s Statement on Ellison Proves They ONLY Care About Protecting DEMOCRATS (Not Jews)

Wednesday, November 30th, 2016

{Originally posted to the author’s website, The Lid}

The ADL finally weighed in on the Keith Ellison controversy, taking a stance which proved again it doesn’t give a rat’s arse about the Jewish community, they only care about the Democratic Party and progressive politics.

Earlier this week we profiled Keith Ellison and warned about his track record of anti-Semitism, association with Muslim Brotherhood groups such as MAS, CAIR, and ISNA. (MAS even paid for his Haj to Saudi Arabia), his anti-Israel actions in the House including being one of only eight members of congress voting against funding Iron Dome (whose only purpose is to block Hamas Rockets at civilian areas) and his infamous Gaza 54 letter asking Obama to lift the Gaza Blockade designed to prevent rockets and concrete for terrorist tunnels being shipped to Hamas.  Ellison is also a  featured keynote speaker at many BDS organization events including the American Friends Service Committee which runs a BDS boot camp, Progressives for Palestine, and is a favorite of the anti-Israel group ironically called Jewish Voice for Peace.

After spending the last two weeks bashing Steven Bannon with false charges of Antisemitism, the Anti-Defamation League finally spoke out regarding Ellison (sort of). In a confusing statement (see below) the CEO of the Anti-Defamation League Jonathan Greenblatt, said that Ellison has taken positions that concern them, but doesn’t he doesn’t  rip into Ellison (a Democrat) the way he ripped the unfounded claims against Bannon (a Republican) who has been proven to be a friend of the Jews and supporter of Israel. He ends his not by warning Ellison’s critics to slander him based on his race or faith.  Well Johnathan if you read my post from the other day you will understand why the ADL needed to take a much stronger stand on Ellison. And the post doesn’t mention his race, and the only thing about his faith mention is that the Muslim Brotherhood paid for his Haj.

But that isn’t the real reason for Greenblatt’s warning.  Beginning with the term of his predecessor Abe Foxman, the ADL has made progressive politics its primary concern. For example, in 2011 they led an effort asking Jews not to criticize Barack Obama’s anti-Israel policies. Other examples include:

  • Issued a “White Paper” promoting the progressive’s negative PR spin about the Tea Party movement. They said the Tea Party was part of the “New Rage in America”
  • Refused to recognize the anti-Semitism present within Occupy Wall Street, until public pressure embarrassed them into making a statement.

Please understand, the ADL is nothing but a tool for the progressive movement. If you wish to donate to the progressive movement that’s okay, but allow me to suggest you donate to Organizing for Action–they do it better.  If you want to donate to a Jewish Organization allow me to suggest you avoid the ADL, there are hundreds of Jewish Organizations dealing with Jewish, or other worthy charitable work, unlike the ADL those groups don’t waste their time and your donations being a political wannabes.

Read the statement below:

adl-ellison

Jeff Dunetz

Keith Ellison Supported the BDS Movement and Admired Louis Farrakhan. So Why Are Jewish Democrats Supporting Him for Chairman of the DNC?

Wednesday, November 23rd, 2016

{Appeared originally in Tablet Magazine}

In late 1993 and early 1994, Keith Ellison and I were both deeply involved in politics and policy, he as a civil rights lawyer and radio talk-show host in Minnesota, and I as legal counsel to a United States senator. During that time, Louis Farrakhan’s national adviser, Khalid Abdul Muhammad, gave a speech at Kean College in New Jersey in which he attacked Jews, Catholics, homosexuals, and others in the most shocking and violent way.

Here’s a sample of what Muhammad had to say in that speech, which he delivered Nov. 29, 1993, about the Holocaust:

You see, everybody always talk about Hitler exterminating 6 million Jews. … But don’t nobody ever asked what did they do to Hitler? What did they do to them folks? They went in there, in Germany, the way they do everywhere they go, and they supplanted, they usurped, they turned around, and a German, in his own country, would almost have to go to a Jew to get money. They had undermined the very fabric of the society.

And there was worse. I returned from a vacation to read a copy of the speech the ADL had left in my Senate inbox together with its New York Times full-page ad denouncing it. It so shocked and disgusted me that I stalked across the hall to my boss, Sen. John Danforth of Missouri, and asked what he thought of calling for a “special order” on the Senate floor; a block of time for members to make statements reacting to Muhammad’s speech. Known to his colleagues as “St. Jack,” Danforth was not only a senator, he was an active Episcopal priest, the author of the Civil Rights Act of 1991, and the legislator responsible for creating a permanent Holocaust Memorial Commission, leading to both America’s annual “Days of Remembrance” and the Holocaust Memorial Museum on the Mall in Washington.

I waited silently while Sen. Danforth read the speech. Finally, he looked up. “I don’t want a special order,” he said grimly. “I want an up-or-down vote. I want it now.” I rushed back to my desk and called the Senate cloak room to tell them what was coming.

I also called Rep. Kweisi Mfume’s office leaving an urgent message. Mfume chaired the Congressional Black Caucus, and I didn’t want to blindside the members. A few months earlier, in September 1993, the CBC had entered into what it called a “Sacred Covenant” with Farrakhan’s Nation of Islam for which it had been roundly criticized. Muhammad’s speech was so grotesquely beyond the pale that some members of the CBC had already distanced themselves from it. I thought the caucus deserved a chance to distance itself officially before the pressure that was likely to follow. Then I started drafting.

Moments later, the usually easygoing senator appeared at my desk to see what I had come up with. After all, this was alien territory—Sen. Danforth had also been Missouri’s attorney general, and this was a vote to condemn what we both knew to be constitutionally-protected speech. “Just give me what you have now,” Danforth said. I printed out my rough first draft, typos and all. He looked at it and said, “This works. Let’s go.” Then he strode out of the room to the Senate floor. I lingered just a moment to ask my colleagues to keep trying Mfume’s office, then I ran out after the senator.

As soon as we arrived at the Senate floor, I headed for the cloakroom. A number of messages were already waiting from offices that wanted to join with us. Suddenly I got a frantic message from my office—I was receiving personal threats from CBC staffers. I called one, trying to explain that this was not an attack on them; that had I been trying to hurt them, I would have just ambushed them. The response was a stream of invective-laden threats, and then the line went dead.

Sen. Danforth, along with four other Republicans and five Democrats as co-sponsors, offered the resolution: “To express the sense of the Senate that the speech made by Mr. Khalid Abdul Mohammed [sic] at Kean College on November 29, 1993 was false, anti-Semitic, racist, divisive, repugnant and a disservice to all Americans and is therefore condemned.”

It passed the Senate 97-0. Three weeks later, a more detailed and explicit bipartisan companion resolution was offered in the House by Holocaust survivor Rep. Tom Lantos. It passed 361-34.

Keith Ellison and I were then both 31 years old. He was on record as defending Farrakhan’s anti-Semitism since at least 1989, under the alias of Keith Hakim. But unlike the CBC, which immediately suspended its ties with the Nation of Islam after the vote, Ellison apparently saw no reason to rethink his position. In fact, he continued to identify with Farrakhan and work actively for the Nation of Islam for years after Muhammad’s speech.

In 1995, Ellison himself organized a rally featuring Muhammad—still an outspoken racist and anti-Semite—at the University of Minnesota. Muhammad apparently brought his A-game to the rally, promising that “if words were swords, the chests of Jews, gays and whites would be pierced.”

In 1997, Ellison defended a member of the Minneapolis Initiative Against Racism who said that Jews are “the most racist white people.” In his remarks, Ellison also defended America’s most notorious anti-Semite. “She is correct about Minister Farrakhan,” Ellison insisted. “He is not a racist. He is also not an anti-Semite. Minister Farrakhan is a tireless public servant of Black people…”

In fact, Ellison continued to publicly defend Louis Farrakhan and the Nation of Islam through at least the year 2000, by which time he was serving as a Minnesota state representative. But in 2006, while running for Congress, Ellison evidently had second thoughts about the usefulness of the main public affiliation he had maintained from his early 20s into at least his late 30s, when, responding to concerns voiced by the Jewish Community Relations Council, he claimed that his only involvement with NOI was during an 18-month period supporting Farrakhan’s October 1995 “Million Man March”; that he was unaware of NOI’s anti-Semitism; and that he himself never held nor espoused anti-Semitic views. Most of that is demonstrably false, the remainder begs skepticism.

Today, Ellison still traffics in libels and lies, but about the Jewish State—a form of anti-Semitic propaganda that, unlike calling Jews “bloodsuckers” or blaming them for the Holocaust, is now socially and politically acceptable on the left. There are rules to this game, of course. Thus, on a trip to Israel in June 2016, Ellison tweeted a photo of a sign, hung on a residential window in Hebron, that labeled Israel being guilty of “apartheid.” Ellison’s comment reinforced the libel.

In July 2016, at the Democratic National Convention, Ellison participated as a featured speaker in an event held by the anti-Israel group U.S. Campaign to End the Israeli Occupation—part of an alliance of anti-Israel groups, such as American Friends Service Committee, Students for Justice in Palestine, and Jewish Voices for Peace, who all promote the BDS hate campaign against Israel. Ellison also emerged as a key player in trying to make the Democrats’ official platform more antagonistic to Israel. [Update, Nov. 22, 4:00 p.m.: In response to publication of this piece, Rep. Ellison issued the following statement: “I have long supported a two-state solution and a democratic and secure state for the Jewish people, with a democratic and viable Palestinian state side-by-side in peace and dignity. I don’t believe boycotting, divesting, and sanctioning Israel helps us achieve that goal. I supported the Democratic Platform, which embraces this position.”]

It is clear that Ellison trafficked with incredibly virulent, open anti-Semites and supported and defended them until it became politically inconvenient. Then he lied about it—and once in office, he decided to target the Jewish state. Ironically, one of Ellison’s Democratic defenders, Steve Rabinowitz, acknowledges Ellison’s poor record on Israel—in addition to agitating against Israel’s blockade of Hamas-ruled Gaza, Ellison was one of the very few members of Congress who opposed aid to repair Israel’s Iron Dome missile defense system in a 395-8 vote. Rabinowitz gamely if patronizingly explains Ellison’s role on the Democrats’ platform fight thusly: “He fell in with a bad crowd.” So, is Keith Ellison an anti-Semite? I don’t know. But collaborating with the enemies of Jews and Israel does seem to be a lifelong habit.

Perhaps Ellison was running with the same delinquent crowd in 2012, when halfway across the country from his own district in Minneapolis, he worked to unseat pro-Israel New Jersey Congressman Steve Rothman—a fellow Democrat—in a nasty primary fight that pitted the district’s Arabs and Muslims against its Jews, and where Rothman’s support for Israel was explicitly the issue. The candidate supported by Ellison, who came to the district to campaign at a high-profile event at a mosque, was also supported by a local Hamas sympathizer and other Israel-haters. What could have motivated Ellison to go to such great lengths to try and defeat a sitting member of his own party?

Personally, I don’t care if Ellison ever did or still does hate Jews. He’s entitled to love and hate whomever he wants. What worries me is that a leading member of the extreme anti-Israel wing of the Democratic Party is poised to become the party’s chairman. What disturbs me is that the mainstreaming and elevating of this man—who, at the very least, is clearly more enthusiastic about Louis Farrakhan than he is about the State of Israel—is being done with the support of Sen. Chuck Schumer, and of organizations that claim to represent the interests of American Jewry.

It is also hard to miss the fact that these same politicians and groups are now diverting attention away from actual threats to a campaign of politically-motivated fictions and calumnies directed against Donald Trump, a man who has spent decades supporting an impressive array of Jewish causes and of the State of Israel—and whose daughter, son-in-law and grandchildren are Orthodox Jews. Trump’s daughter Ivanka chose to join the Jewish people, and she did so by all accounts with the approval and full support of her father. Perhaps Keith Ellison, despite his associations and activities, is secretly a great friend of the Jewish people and the State of Israel, and Donald Trump, despite his friends and family, is secretly the raving anti-Semite his detractors allege. But even the most extreme partisan would have to admit that the evidence for either proposition is quite thin. In fact, the ADL and friends have also had to withdraw their accusations of anti-Semitism against Trump’s adviser Steve Bannon and Breitbart news, which briefly flourished after Trump’s win, since they could not point to any actual evidence that either charge was true: In fact, Bannon and Breitbart have demonstrably been among the most dedicated supporters of the State of Israel and most vociferous opponents of BDS and campus hate in the America media.

Why is such a stance necessary? During the Obama years, real anti-Semitism—grotesque libels and actual violence—grew dramatically around the world. In Europe and the Middle East victims of Islamic terror were deemed “innocent victims”—unless they were Jews, in which case they were somehow combatants in a righteous struggle. Here in America, for the first time in our lives, as Obama and Kerry’s “Israel is our misfortune” rumblings grew, we heard rabbis and Jewish leaders—including ADL’s previous chief executive—discuss in agonized tones how the world was beginning to resemble the 1930s. Under Obama, for the first time, we witnessed older Jews huddle after synagogue for hushed debates about whether there was anywhere left for Jews to run now that America was growing inhospitable and Israel was being put under the existential threat of nuclear annihilation. Younger Jews became hesitant to wear yarmulkes on campuses and on the streets.

Donald Trump didn’t pave the way for Iran—a country that quite literally and repeatedly promises to commit genocide against Jews—to acquire a nuclear bomb. Nor did Trump and his close aides seek to demonize his opponents as “wealthy donors” and “warmongers” with loyalties to a foreign power. Nor did Trump ally the United States with Iran in Syria, Lebanon and Iraq. President Barack Obama did all these things, and he did them openly, with hardly a peep from the same people who now pretend to fear for their lives under Donald Trump.

Who knows? Maybe reasonable people can differ about these things. But here’s another thing to consider: The people who vouched for Obama to the American Jewish community are now vouching for Rep. Ellison, while condemning Donald Trump and his advisers for the sins of stoking hatred and anti-Semitism that Obama demonstrably committed, and the Democratic Party is now hoping to induce our community to forget.

Jeff Ballabon

Democrats Rediscover anti-Semitism

Tuesday, November 22nd, 2016

{Originally posted to the website, Israel Thrives}

The poster above represents a bit of anti-Zionist propaganda that has been around for decades and is among the negative images of Jewish self-determination that today’s college kids grew up with.
Although the western progressive-left generally supports anti-Zionism, American Jews still cling to the Democratic Party despite the fact that the party and the movement believes it has every right to tell Jewish people where we may, or may not, be allowed to live within our own homeland.
About 80 percent of American Jews, including me, voted for Barack Obama in 2008 and about 70 percent, not including me, did so in 2012. In the current cycle, American Jews voted for Hillary Clinton in similar numbers.
Given the fact that the western progressive-left has made a home of itself for malicious anti-Semitic anti-Zionists it becomes rather difficult to understand why American Jews continue to support a political movement, and its adjacent political party, that hold them in contempt.
The Washington Post has a piece from last September entitled, In the safe spaces on campus, no Jews allowed by Anthony Berteaux. Berteaux relates the story of Arielle Mokhtarzadeh, an Iranian-Jew who was made to feel unwelcome by the UCLA progressive community due to her caring for the Jewish people through caring for the Jewish State of Israel. As a student of Jewish-Persian background she therefore attended the annual Students of Color Conference in search of answers.
Mokhtarzadeh tells us:
Over the course of what was probably no longer than an hour, my history was denied, the murder of my people was justified, and a movement whose sole purpose is the destruction of the Jewish homeland was glorified. Statements were made justifying the ruthless murder of innocent Israeli civilians, blatantly denying Jewish indigeneity in the land, and denying the Holocaust in which six million Jews were murdered,” she said. “Why anyone in their right mind would accept these slanders as truths baffles me. But they did. These statements, and others, were met with endless snaps and cheers. I was taken aback.
The truth is that many Democrats despise the lone, sole Jewish state as a human rights monstrosity even though it has a far better record on human rights than any other country throughout the Middle East. This little fact, in itself, reveals the anti-Jewish racism within BDS and, therefore, embedded within the Democratic Party.
It is for this reason that progressives often support Hamas and the Palestinian Authority when they call for the murder of Jews in the streets of Jerusalem, Tel Aviv, and Haifa. Every time Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP) or the General Union of Palestine Students (GUPS) meet on some campus to call for yet another intifada they are, in fact, calling for the murder of innocent Jews in Israel.
Such calls for anti-Jewish violence tend to be supported not only by other progressive-left students, but also by sympathetic university administrators who could hardly care less that students are calling for violence against Jews on their very own campuses. They even provide thumb-sucking “safe-spaces” where those very same students can rest their heads on university provided pillows without having to deal with the richly deserved ramifications of their own behavior. Since no one is allowed to even question their judgment in these “safe spaces” they need not even consider the possibility that calling for violence against Jewish people – as a matter of social justice, no less – might actually be something other than liberal.
In fact, San Francisco State University president, Leslie Wong, is so enamored of anti-Semitic anti-Zionism that he even praised GUPS as representing “the very purpose of this great university.”  He did so despite the fact that, in their cries for intifada, they literally call for the murder of Jews in Israel. Sometimes they even call for bringing the intifada home, by which they mean support for the political murder of Jews in the United States. None of this fazes the progressive-left because offing Jews – particularly of the Israeli variety – is considered a rational and perfectly normal human response to alleged Jewish aggression against the bunny-like “indigenous” population in the Land of Israel.
And this is why Arielle Mokhtarzadeh was treated like filth at UCLA.
Berteaux writes:
The ramifications of ignoring the normalization of anti-Semitism cannot be understated: The most recent FBI hate crime report found that 58.2 percent of hate crimes motivated by religious bias were targeted at Jews. Jews make up 2.2 percent of the American population, so the FBI’s statistics make it clear that Jews are the most disproportionately attacked religious group in America. It should be troubling to everyone that an SJP member at Temple University physically assaulted a pro-Israel Jewish student two years ago, calling him a “Zionist baby killer.” But it should be far more troubling that the SJP chapter at Temple (like all SJP chapters) promotes itself as a progressive organization, claiming solidarity with movements such as Black Lives Matter.
The Democratic Party just got its ass kicked by a crude businessman-entertainer who they accuse of being everything short of the Devil and now they are not only screaming from the rafters about racism and white supremacy, but they even have the chutzpah to suddenly start whining about the alleged anti-Semitism of conservatives and Republicans.
The truth is that the Left and the Democratic Party are enemies of the Jewish people to the extent that they make a homes of themselves for anti-Semitic anti-Zionism. American Jews are, essentially, being told that they may contribute to the progressive movement but the price of admission is sitting across the Democratic Party table from anti-Zionists who have no respect for our history, no respect for the Holocaust, and who think that we are undeserving of self-determination and self-defense within our own homeland.
Requiring that Jews accept anti-Semitic anti-Zionism as part of the larger Democratic Party coalition is no different from asking black people to kindly accept Klansmen as part of that coalition. No self-respecting black person would ever do so and neither should any self-respecting Jew.
The progressive-left and the Democratic Party fling around charges of racism like they’re confetti. Throughout the recent American presidential campaign they lambasted Trump and his supporters as Neanderthal fascists representing the very worst of all humanity, which is why some of their devotees are beating the hell out of white people in the streets. But if the Democratic Party has suddenly rediscovered anti-Semitism it is strictly out of political convenience, nothing more.

 

Michael Lumish

Pro-Israel Jewish Democrats Oppose Keith Ellison’s DNC Bid

Friday, November 18th, 2016

By Rafael Medoff

A growing number of pro-Israel activists and Jewish community figures are expressing concern that Minnesota’s U.S. Rep. Keith Ellison will turn the Democratic Party away from Israel if he is elected party chairman.

The election of Ellison “would bode badly for Jews,” longtime Democratic consultant Dr. Hank Sheinkopf told JNS.org. “His positions on Israel fit the pattern, noted by recent research, of identified liberal anti-Israel bias and the movement of Democrats away from Israel.”

Defending Farrakhan

Ellison’s controversial statements and actions date back to the 1990s, when he served as a local spokesman in Minnesota for Louis Farrakhan’s Nation of Islam movement. Ellison raised eyebrows when he publicly claimed in 1995 that Farrakhan “is not an anti-Semite.”

Since his election to the U.S. House of Representatives in 2007, Ellison has emerged as one of the most vocal congressional supporters of the Palestinian cause. He has organized letters urging more U.S. pressure on Israel, voted against funding Israel’s Iron Dome anti-missile system, and spoken at fundraising events for the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), a hardline anti-Israel group. While visiting Hebron this past summer, Ellison tweeted a photograph of a placard accusing Israel of “apartheid.”

Rabbi Menachem Genack of Englewood, New Jersey, a prominent Jewish supporter of Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign, said he would be “disappointed” if Ellison is chosen as chairman of the Democratic National Committee (DNC) because that would “accelerate the process” of pulling the Democratic Party away from its traditional pro-Israel positions. Genack told JNS.org that he will be speaking to his colleagues in the party to explain his “concerns about Ellison’s views on Israel.”

New York State Assemblyman Dov Hikind, a Democrat who represents a heavily Jewish district in Brooklyn, strongly criticized the decision by New York’s U.S. Sen. Charles Schumer to endorse Ellison. In an interview with JNS.org, Hikind, asked, “Does Senator Schumer actually believe that there is literally not a single other person in the Democratic Party, anywhere in the country, who would be a better choice than Ellison? Why is Schumer in such a rush to support a candidate who is so unfriendly to Israel?”

Hikind said Ellison “is the most radical candidate imaginable, someone who represents the extreme left wing of the party, which is why he’s being promoted by Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren, and J Street—in other words, Ellison is being backed by all the wrong people if you care about Israel.” The assemblyman noted that Ellison has occasionally claimed to be a friend of Israel, “but if Israel has to depend on support from the Ellisons of the world, it would be in serious trouble.”

Possible defections

Some pro-Israel activists recall, with dismay, Ellison’s efforts to unseat a pro-Israel New Jersey congressman, Steve Rothman, in 2012. Dr. Ben Chouake, president of NORPAC, a Jewish political action committee in northern New Jersey, said it was “extremely unusual” for Ellison to target Rothman, “since Rothman was a fellow Democrat, in a district halfway across the country—what could motivate him to go to such great lengths?” Ellison spoke at mosques in New Jersey, urging Arab-Americans to vote against Rothman.

Chouake told JNS.org he fears that if Ellison is elected chair of the DNC, “one of his priorities will be to pull the party away from Israel.” Ellison represents “the fringe of the Democratic Party, not the center, and would it make even harder for the party to have broad appeal.”

The rise of Ellison could drive Jews out of the Democratic Party, according to Jeffrey Wiesenfeld, a private wealth manager who worked in the administrations of New York City Mayor Ed Koch, a Democrat, and New York Governor George Pataki, a Republican. “There are many longtime Jewish Democrats who are on the fence about whether to stay in a party that has been tilting away from Israel—and if Ellison is elected, I believe a good percentage of them will leave the party,” Wiesenfeld told JNS.org.

Wiesenfeld criticized Schumer’s endorsement of Ellison as “a crass political calculation—he sees the party succumbing to the far left, and he wants to go with the flow so he can retain his position.” He said that “Schumer’s phone should be ringing off the hook with calls from members of the Jewish community, asking ‘What happened to your promise to be a ‘shomer’ (guardian) of Israel?”
Ellison’s office did not return a request for comment from JNS.org.

The only other declared candidate so far for the chairmanship of the DNC is former Vermont Governor Howard Dean. A date for the election has not yet been set. According to party rules, it must take place prior to March 31, 2017. To win, a candidate needs the votes of a majority of the 447 members of the DNC. About one-fourth of the members are the chairs or vice chairs, of state branches of the Democratic Party.

JNS News Service

Printed from: http://www.jewishpress.com/news/breaking-news/pro-israel-jewish-democrats-oppose-keith-ellisons-dnc-bid/2016/11/18/

Scan this QR code to visit this page online: