RSS
Farrakhan follower on Florida city council leaves meeting rather than vote on antisemitism resolution
(JTA) – Days after a synagogue in St. Petersburg, Florida, was forced to evacuate services following a bomb threat, the local city council met to discuss a resolution about antisemitism.
The resolution was about whether to endorse a definition of antisemitism that its authors and local advocates both say can be a useful first step in fighting hatred of Jews.
Notably refusing to cast a vote: A controversial council member and member of the Nation of Islam who voiced multiple objections to the definition, questioned Jewish community leaders about who constitutes a Jew and left the chambers so that he would be marked absent during the vote.
“I do have concerns. And my concerns are rooted in my personal experience of being falsely accused of being an antisemite,” Brother John Muhammad said at the council meeting, explaining his objections to the proposal. He continued, “It was stated that I was not qualified to do the job that I’ve been doing for the last 11 months because somebody who I’m affiliated with is called an antisemite.”
Muhammad did not specify to whom he was referring, but local Jewish groups have opposed his seat on the city council since he was appointed last year. Their objections were rooted in his refusal to disavow the Nation of Islam’s current leader, the Black nationalist Louis Farrakhan, who has a long history of making antisemitic statements.
Still, Jewish leaders had hope that they could work with Muhammad and educate him on the topic of antisemitism. “When I see a situation like this, it screams ‘opportunity’ to me,” Michael Igel, chair of the Florida Holocaust Museum, located in St. Petersburg, told the Jewish Telegraphic Agency earlier this year. The local federation said it would push the council to make a statement about the dangers of antisemitism.
Thursday’s resolution, one day before Rosh Hashanah, seems to have been the result of that effort. It called on the council to adapt the International Holocaust Remembrance Association’s working definition of antisemitism, which dozens of countries, states and municipalities have done to date.
The council was set to vote on it days after the city’s Congregation B’nai Israel was the target of a bomb threat. The synagogue’s rabbi, Philip Weintraub, delivered the meeting’s opening convocation and spoke about the threat, and other city council members praised law enforcement’s response to it.
Igel and Stuart Berger, head of the local Jewish Community Relations Council, were among the local Jews who advocated for the resolution and rose during the public comment period to endorse it. The IHRA definition, as it’s known, itself has been a subject of controversy for its classification of certain kinds of criticism of Israel as antisemitic, which another public commenter addressed, saying: “I think you can have a bold working definition of antisemitism while not coddling a Middle Eastern government that has policies of separation and absolute brutality on the Palestinian people.”
Muhammad did not mention Israel in his objections to the antisemitism resolution. Instead, he suggested that its wording was too “loose” and that “its subjective nature determining what constitutes hatred towards Jews” could lead to “the suppression of legitimate free speech.”
While saying “I don’t support any acts of antisemitism,” Muhammad listed all the ways he considered himself an ally of the local Jewish community. He participated in a reading of the names of victims of the Holocaust during Yom HaShoah; he voted on a resolution to remember the victims; and he is a member of a Black-Jewish study group. Yet during the more than 15 combined minutes when he held the floor, Muhammad found a host of reasons not to support the proposed resolution.
He cited the Black liberation activist Malcolm X, a onetime member of the Nation of Islam who espoused antisemitic views throughout his life, as an example of someone “who was considered a leading antisemite of his day.” Muhammad also asserted that “a celebrity” had recently prompted “a debate within the Jewish community themselves” about whether they had said something antisemitic — a possible reference to Jamie Foxx.
During his comment Muhammad also brought Igel and Berger up to the podium and questioned them about some of the finer points of the resolution’s wording. He asked them who is considered Jewish: “Is it a religion? Is it a culture? Is it a race?”
Muhammad asked if Hebrew Israelites and Messianic Jews would be considered Jews who could be affected by antisemitism, to which Igel responded, “These questions are sometimes in the eye of the beholder.” Both groups are themselves often accused of antisemitism for misappropriating Jewish symbols and rituals; in addition, members of the former sometimes promote antisemitic conspiracy theories, while members of the latter often proselytize Jews.
He also prompted back-and-forth by questioning one passage of the resolution, which states that “the Jewish community has enriched our leadership through their contributions to the arts, business, academia and government.” What’s the difference, Muhammad wanted to know, between that passage and conspiracy theories about Jews controlling the media and government that the IHRA defines as antisemitic?
Muhammad concluded his objections by noting that the definition “could also have a chilling effect on our community members who might fear repercussions of expressing opinions that are not intended to be hateful but may be misconstrued as such. We have to protect the rights of those who may have unpopular or controversial views within the bounds of civility as long as they are not explicitly advocating for discrimination, persecution, hurt, harm or danger to members of the Jewish community.”
Soon after, another council member cut him off by “calling the question” to end debate on the subject. Muhammad thanked the room and immediately left before the vote could be called.
“During the proceedings I had several questions that were not able to be sufficiently answered by those who were present,” Muhammad told JTA in an emailed statement on Friday. “Unfortunately, my comments went over the time allowed and the question was called before I could conclude. Without having the answers to my questions, or sufficient responses to my inquiries, I chose to leave the proceedings and abstain.”
He continued, “While I recognize the intent behind the proposed resolution and the urgent need to combat antisemitism, especially in the face of increasing incidents involving white supremacists, I would like to ensure we do so without compromising our commitment to free expression and the peaceful exchange of diverse ideas within our community.”
The present members of the city council passed the resolution unanimously, with some citing both St. Petersburg’s historical record of antisemitic discrimination and the recent rise of antisemitic and white nationalist activity in Florida.
While no council members responded to Muhammad directly, one, Brandi Gabbard, gave a speech after he left that alluded to “inciting hate against any person in our community or any community.”
“We see people in positions of power specifically inciting this hate both publicly and behind the scenes,” Gabbard said. “It is dangerous. It is irresponsible. And quite frankly, it disgusts me.” Her remarks were met with applause.
Igel, the grandson of Holocaust survivors, told JTA that watching Muhammad’s objections to the resolution was “painful” and “emotional.” But he added that the experience “reminds us of the need for Holocaust education and for the IHRA definition and why it’s important, so we all can know and see antisemitism whenever it is.”
—
The post Farrakhan follower on Florida city council leaves meeting rather than vote on antisemitism resolution appeared first on Jewish Telegraphic Agency.
RSS
No Harvard Students Punished for Anti-Israel Encampments, US Congress Says in New Report
Anti-Zionist Harvard students taking part in a sit-in organized by a student group which favors the Islamist terror group Hamas. Cambridge, Massachusetts, US, Nov. 16, 2023. Photo: Brian Snyder via Reuters Connect
Harvard University disciplined virtually no one who was accused of perpetrating antisemitic harassment or participating in a “Gaza Solidarity” encampment last academic year, the US House Committee on Education and the Workforce alleged on Thursday.
As evidence supporting its claims, the committee cited documents obtained during its ongoing investigation of Harvard University, which was prompted by a succession of antisemitic incidents in the weeks after Hamas’s Oct. 7 massacre across southern Israel as well as allegations of antisemitism going back years. According to the committee, “not one of the 68 Harvard students referred for discipline conduct related to the encampment is suspended, and the vast majority is in good standing.”
Neither, it continued, were any of the students who chanted antisemitic slogans on campus property punished. Essentially slapped on the wrist, they were “admonished,” a verbal measure which, Harvard acknowledges, is not recorded in their records as a disciplinary sanction.
“Harvard failed, end of story. These administrators failed their Jewish students and faculty, they failed to make it clear that antisemitism will not be tolerated, and in this case, Harvard may have failed to fulfill its legal responsibilities to protect students from a hostile environment,” US Rep. Virginia Foxx (R-NC), who chairs the committee, said in a statement on Thursday. “The only thing administrators accomplished is appeasing radical students who have almost certainly returned to campus emboldened and ready to repeat the spring semester’s chaos. Harvard must change course immediately.”
The Algemeiner has previously reported that Harvard University was amnestying students charged with violating school rules which proscribe unauthorized demonstrations and disruptions of university business. During summer, it “downgraded” disciplinary sanctions it levied against several pro-Hamas protesters it punished for illegally occupying Harvard Yard and roiling the campus for nearly five weeks.
For a time Harvard University talked tough about its intention to restore order and dismantle a “Gaza Solidarity Encampment” — a collection of tents on campus in which demonstrators lived and from which they refused to leave unless Harvard agreed to boycott and divest from Israel — creating an impression that no one would go unpunished.
In a public statement, interim president Alan Garber denounced their actions for forcing the rescheduling of exams and disrupting the academics of students who continued doing their homework and studying for final exams, responsibilities the protesters seemingly abdicated by participating in the demonstration.
Harvard then began suspending the protesters following their rejection of a deal to leave the encampment, according to The Harvard Crimson. Before then, Garber vowed that any student who continued to occupy the section of campus would be placed on “involuntary leave,” a measure that effectively disenrolls the students from school and bars them from campus until the university decides whether they are allowed back. The disciplinary measures were levied one day after members of Harvard Out of Occupied Palestine (HOOP) created a sign featuring an antisemitic caricature of Garber as Satan, and accused him of duplicity.
During Harvard’s commencement ceremonies in May, reports emerged that some students had been banned from graduation and receiving their diplomas.
However, Harvard and HOOP always maintained that some protesters would be allowed to appeal their punishments, per an agreement the two parties reached, but it was not clear that the end result would amount to a victory for the protesters and an embarrassment to the university. Indeed, after the suspensions were lifted, HOOP proceeded to mock what they described as their administrators’ lack of resolve. Unrepentant, they celebrated the revocation of the suspensions on social media and, in addition to suggesting that they will disrupt the campus again, called their movement an “intifada,” alluding to two prolonged periods of Palestinian terrorism during which hundreds of Israeli Jews were murdered.
“Harvard walks back on probations and reverses suspensions of pro-Palestine students after massive pressure,” the group said. “After sustained student and faculty organizing, Harvard has caved in, showing that the student intifada will always prevail … This reversal is a bare minimum. We call on our community to demand no less than Palestinian liberation from the river to the sea. Grounded in the rights of return and resistance. We will not rest until divestment from the Israeli regime is met.”
The past year has been described by experts as a low point in the history of Harvard University, America’s oldest and, arguably, most important institution of higher education. Since the Oct. 7 massacre by Hamas across southern Israel, the school has been accused of fostering a culture of racial grievance and antisemitism, while important donors have suspended funding for programs. In just the past nine months, its first Black president, Claudine Gay, resigned in disgrace after being outed as a serial plagiarist; Harvard faculty shared an antisemitic cartoon on social media; and its protesters were filmed surrounding a Jewish student and shouting “Shame!” into his ears.
According to the US House Committee on Education and the Workforce, Harvard has repeatedly misrepresented its handling of the explosion of hate and rule breaking, launching a campaign of deceit and spin to cover up what ultimately became the biggest scandal in higher education.
A report generated by the committee as part of a wider investigation of the school claimed that the university formed an Antisemitism Advisory Group (AAG) largely for show and did not consult its members when Jewish students were subject to verbal abuse and harassment, a time, its members felt, when its counsel was most needed. The advisory group went on to recommend nearly a dozen measures for addressing the problem and offered other guidance, the report said, but it was excluded from high-level discussions which preceded, for example, the December congressional testimony of former president Claudine Gay — a hearing convened to discuss antisemitism at Harvard.
So frustrated were a “majority” of AAG members with being an accessory to what the committee described as a guilefully crafted public relations facade that they threatened to resign from it.
Currently, the university is fighting a lawsuit which accuses it of ignoring antisemitic discrimination. The case survived an effort by Harvard’s lawyers to dismiss it on the grounds that the students who brought it “lack standing.”
Follow Dion J. Pierre @DionJPierre.
The post No Harvard Students Punished for Anti-Israel Encampments, US Congress Says in New Report first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
If Eric Adams Steps Down, New York City’s Next Acting Mayor Will Be an Anti-Israel Critic
New York City Public Advocate Jumaane Williams. Photo: Screenshot
The next acting mayor of New York City might be a left-wing activist and staunch critic of the Jewish state.
US prosecutors charged New York City Mayor Eric Adams on Thursday with soliciting illegal campaign contributions from foreign nationals and bribery. Adams’s potential departure from office could prove consequential for New York City’s estimated 960,000 Jewish residents, representing roughly 10 percent of the Big Apple’s population, and supporters of Israel living in the city.
If Adams resigns as a result of the federal charges against him, New York City Public Advocate Jumaane Williams is widely expected to step into the mayoral role as his replacement. A review of Wiliams’s social media history reveals a pattern of denigrating Israel, raising questions over whether the public advocate would defend the city’s Jewish community.
Williams has condemned Israel’s defensive military operations in Gaza as a “war crime” and criticized the US Congress for inviting Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to speak in July.
“Aside from basic humanity, under accepted [international] Law Benjamin Netanyahu is quite literally, at this moment, engaged in [international] war crimes/human rights violations,” Williams posted on X/Twitter at the time. “Instead of Congress trying to stop it, they gave a platform.”
Williams issued a statement on Oct. 11 of last year, four days after the Hamas terror group’s Oct. 7 massacre across southern Israel, lamenteing the terrorist attacks on the Jewish state before calling on Jerusalem not to retaliate and shifting attention to alleged “oppression” of Palestinians.
“We can, we have to be able to, at once grieve the hundreds of innocent lives taken in Israel, and oppose the escalating violence of retaliation, the endless war, the systemic violence and oppression of Palestinians too often ignored, excused, or condoned,” Williams wrote.
On Oct. 14, one week after Hamas’s brutal slaughter of roughly 1,200 people in southern Israel, Williams condemned “shameful” New York elected officials that “won’t even mention [Palestine] or [Gaza].”
Five days later, less than two weeks after the largest single-day mass-murder of Jews since the Holocaust, Williams called for an immediate “ceasefire” between the Jewish state and the terrorist group. Israel had not yet launched its military offensive in neighboring Hamas-ruled Gaza to dismantle the terror group’s military capabilities and free the 251 hostages kidnapped from southern Israel on Oct. 7. He also drew an equivalency between Israel’s military operations to the Hamas atrocities.
“The moral compass of our leaders shows stunning irregularities,” Williams wrote on Instagram.
“On point in condemning horrendous attacks on Israel and demanding hostages be returned,” he added. “[Yet, failure] to recognize the [United Nation’s] description of a humanitarian crisis in Gaza, let alone support de-escalation and ceasefire.”
On Oct. 24, Williams declared Gaza a “humanitarian crisis” and added that “all of us who rightly condemned Oct 7 on Israel should be rightly demanding a [ceasefire] now and before any ground invasion.”
Israel began striking Hamas targets after repelling the Oct. 7 invasion but did not launch a ground offensive into Gaza until Oct. 27.
In February, Williams appeared at a press conference conducted by the “NYC 4 Ceasefire” coalition to demand an end to Israel’s military operations in Gaza. During the event, participants referred to the Gaza war as a “genocide” and honored Palestinian “martyrs.”
“We have gathered here today to show city-wide support for an immediate and permanent ceasefire and end to the genocide in Palestine,” said Jawanza Williams, organizing director of left-wing activist group VOCALNY.
Williams harbors ties to the vehemently anti-Israel Democratic Socialists of America group (DSA). In a 2018 interview with the left-wing media outlet Jacobin, Williams said, “I have no problem saying I’m a Democratic Socialist.”
Williams has solicited an endorsement from the group while running for office in New York City. DSA has routinely praised Hamas’s so-called “armed struggle” against Israel. The group issued an explicit endorsement of Hamas, stating that the terrorist organization is a cornerstone in the “resistance” against the “Zionist project.” DSA has also accused Israel of committing “genocide” and praised the Hezbollah terrorist group for attempting to pummel the Jewish state with missiles.
The post If Eric Adams Steps Down, New York City’s Next Acting Mayor Will Be an Anti-Israel Critic first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Book Event for Award-Winning Jewish Author Canceled After Co-Panelists Refuse to Appear Alongside ‘Zionist’
Illustrative: Pro-Hamas protesters in front of the Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center in New York City’s Upper East Side neighborhood. Source: X/Twitter
A book event for award-winning author Elisa Albert was canceled after two fellow panelists refused to appear alongside a “Zionist.”
The nixed event, which was set to take place at the Albany Book Festival, was going to cover the female “coming of age” experience. The organizers of the event New York State Writers Institute (NYS) wrote that they were “nonplussed” at the decisions of Aisha Gawad and Lisa Ko to refuse to attend the panel, but decided to cancel the event anyway.
Mark Koplik, NYS assistant director, sent Albert a letter saying that Gawad and Ko “don’t want to be on a panel with a ‘Zionist.’” Koplik added that Gawad and Ko’s decision not to share the event with Albert took the organization by “surprise” and that they “want to talk this out.”
Albert stated that the book event cancellation was the latest instance of discrimination she has experienced since the Hamas Oct. 7 attacks on the Jewish state.
“Unfortunately, I’m not surprised,” Albert said. “I’ve been really vocal from the get-go, and I’ve lost many friends. I’ve seen my whole professional life wildly altered. I’m not surprised at all. I’ve seen all kinds of people behaving in all kinds of ways that are on the spectrum of this exact same kind of bigotry, complicity, fear — all of it.”
Despite the heavily anti-Israel sentiment prevalent throughout the literary world, Albert has been a public and vocal supporter of the Jewish state since the Oct. 7 slaughter of roughly 1,200 people. She has criticized Hamas supporters on social media and penned articles defending the Jewish state. Weeks following Oct. 7, she wrote “An Open Letter to Hamas’ Defenders” in which she defended the need for a two-state solution to end the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
“We unequivocally condemn antisemitism,” Koplik said in an email to WAMC public radio. “I can’t tell you how sad and upsetting this is for me personally.”
Koplik added that the organizers refused to remove Albert from the panel, which resulted in two authors refusing to participate in the event.
“We no longer had a panel to be moderated. We fully support Elisa’s expression of outrage and disappointment. We believe in civil dialogue, and we condemn intolerance of any kind,” Koplik stated.
Zionists authors have faced a torrent of backlash from the literary industry in recent months. Joshua Leifer, the author of Tablets Shattered, was unable to hold a discussion at a New York City bookstore after the manager canceled the event over the presence of a “Zionist” rabbi on the panel. PEN America, a prominent literary society, was forced to cancel its annual awards ceremony after the organization refused to condemn the Israel-Hamas war as a “genocide” and agree to deplatform “Zionist” writers.
The post Book Event for Award-Winning Jewish Author Canceled After Co-Panelists Refuse to Appear Alongside ‘Zionist’ first appeared on Algemeiner.com.