Uncategorized
Some thoughts on Netanyahu’s speech before Congress – and the Jewish Federation allocations to agencies
By BERNIE BELLAN After just having watched Prime Minister Netanyahu’s speech to Congress, I’m left wondering – as are probably most pundits, just who it was that Netanyahu was trying to reach?
There certainly wasn’t anything new in what he had to say. He offered his oft-repeated litany of warnings about the dangers posed by Iran and its surrogates in the Middle East and insisted that Israel will continue its war in Gaza until it has achieved its aims.
By now though, Netanyahu has backed down from his initial goal of “totally eradicating” Hamas to instead pressing for the removal of Hamas from power – to be replaced by some sort of Palestinian civilian administration (of course, without even giving a hint of which Palestinians could be expected to form that administration).
The timing of Netanyahu’s appearance before Congress was indeed strange. No doubt, he expected to be coming to America when President Biden was still determined to continue his hopeless quest to defeat Donald Trump, so Netanyahu was for sure anticipating that he could coddle up to a soon-to-be-elected President Trump by issuing heaps of praise in his speech for how much Trump had done for Israel.
There have been many reports that even Netanyahu – who has bent over backwards to flatter as supreme a narcissist as Donald Trump, had angered Trump when he issued congratulations to President Biden over his winning the 2020 election. (Anyone who refused to go along with Trump’s insistence that the election was stolen ended up on the wrong side of Trump.) Netanyahu’s coming to the US was meant largely to patch up those damaged feelings – especially when until Sunday, July 20, it seemed all but certain that Trump was headed to victory this coming November.
Then that darned Biden had to go and throw all of Netanyahu’s calculations into the dumpster. Now, instead of being able to offer a non-stop series of remarks intended to flatter the man who was all but certain headed to a sweeping victory in November, Netanyahu had to modulate his speech to also thank President Biden for the strong support he had shown Israel since October 7. Better to keep one foot in the Democrats’ camp too, Netanyahu realized.
Still, will Netanyahu’s speech make any difference at all in the coming US election? Not at all. Anyone who knows Trump understands that he really could care less about the Middle East – unless there’s money to be made for the Trump organization there.
What about Trump’s much ballyhooed “deal of the century,” which he kept talking about back when he was President – and on which his son-in-law Jared Kushner was working (quite constructively, I’ll admit) to bring about a larger peace deal that would have included Saudi Arabia, but which also got stuck on the thorny issue of creating a Palestinian state? Is there any likelihood that a Trump administration would want to revisit that plan? Not while Netanyahu and the right-wing fanatics who are keeping him in power are still calling the shots.
While the Republican Party is sure to give staunch support to Israel – no matter who is in charge in Israel, what can be said about the Democrats?
Kamala Harris is likely to try and steer clear of enunciating any kind of clear policies when it comes to providing support for Israel. Sure, she’ll repeat the standard mantra of America standing behind Israel, but when it comes to translating that policy into concrete action, I expect that Harris will bob and weave. The mere announcement that Biden was dropping his determination to remain in the presidential race – thus leaving the floor clear for Harris to step into the role as candidate, led to a huge torrent of support from among American Jews for Harris.
So, if Harris can count on the roughly 80% of American Jews who voted for Biden in 2020 to come around again – what does that mean for her working to gain back some other constituencies who had lost interest in voting for Biden? Are Arab Americans in Michigan – where they form a sizeable group of voters, now likely to return to the Democrat fold? We’ll have to wait for polls to tell us how likely that is – and just how much Harris’s entering the race instead of Biden will have narrowed the fairly large gap that existed between Trump and Biden. I rather tend to think that Harris will be able to continue building momentum and that the 5% of Americans who, to this point, have remained undecided about which presidential candidate they will vote for will largely swing her way. On top of that, large numbers of voters who indicated they would vote for Trump – largely because they found him less unattractive than Biden, will begin to switch over to Harris.
And, where does that leave Netanyahu and his Machiavellian calculations? Based on what has happened to date, when he has consistently torpedoed deals that would have led to a cease fire, he is likely simply to procrastinate – which will keep him in good stead with those two right wing fanatics who are propping him up: Smotrich and Ben Gvir.
Switching gears – there will be many interesting stories in the days to come on this website about different members of our Jewish community – both current and former – in particular, stories that Myron Love has written about relatively young members of our community who have stepped up to assume leadership roles, including brothers Harley and Bradley Abells, Jonathan Strauss, and Elena Grinshteyn. (So, if you’re reading this on July 24, keep an eye out for new stories soon to appear.)
I have to add a note of caution though – which I’m prone to doing when it comes to discussing the long term health of our Jewish community. And that note emanates from my own report on allocations to the beneficiary agencies of the Jewish Federation in this issue.
As I observe in my story about those allocations, while the total amount to be distributed has remained fairly constant the past two years, it is somewhat lower than what it was three and four years ago, and when inflation is taken into account, it is far less than what it was 10 years ago.
While the Combined Jewish Appeal has been successful in realizing its goals each year for the past many years, again, when inflation is taken into account, what the community is raising relative to what it raised 10 years ago is far less.
But, as I’ve also noted in my reports about the Jewish Foundation each year that it announces the total value of grants it has distributed, it is the Foundation that has been very much stepping into the breech between what the needs of the community are and what has been raised by the Combined Jewish Appeal.
This past year the Foundation distributed just under $7 million in grants. That was also approximately how much the Foundation distributed the previous year, but it was a huge increase from just two years prior (2020) when the Foundation distributed a little over $5 million in grants.
And, as I reported in the July 3 issue, the Foundation is now committed to distributing 5% of the total value of its investment portfolio next year. Considering that the portfolio is now valued at over $160 million, that means the Foundation is likely to distribute over $8 million in grants in the coming year. Add to that the fact that the Foundation continues to receive a very large number of contributions each year ($5.8 million this past year), and the Foundation has become the bedrock of the financial sustainability of our Jewish community. Where would be without the Jewish Foundation? I’d hate to think.
Uncategorized
Minnesota man charged with ISIS-inspired plot on Jewish-owned Mall of America
(JTA) — The FBI accused an 18-year-old man of buying an AK-47 assault rifle with plans to commit a mass shooting in support of ISIS at the Mall of America in Bloomington, Minnesota, the largest indoor shopping mall in North America.
Sheikhdoon Abdullahi Mohamud, of Richfield, Minnesota, was charged on Wednesday with one count of knowingly receiving a firearm and ammunition in order to commit a federal crime of terrorism, according to a federal complaint filed on Wednesday.
Mohamud’s attorney did not respond to JTA’s request for comment.
Mohamud wanted to attack the Mall of America because he believed its owners to be Jewish, the FBI said in a statement. He planned to kill between 30 and 60 people, according to messages he exchanged with a confidential source, according to the complaint.
Mall of America is owned and operated by Triple Five Group, controlled by the Ghermezian family, a Canadian family of Iranian Jewish origin.
Messages sent in September 2026 included a video in which Mohamud pledged allegiance to ISIS, the complaint said. He planned his attack for Oct. 24 because he expected a crowd at the Hmong Arts Celebration scheduled for that day.
The complaint said an undercover FBI agent sold an AK-47 rendered inoperable, four 30-round magazines and 200 rounds of ammunition to Mohamud for $600 on Oct. 6. During the sale, Mohamud confirmed his plans to commit a mass shooting. Mohamud was arrested shortly after the sale.
The complaint said Mohamud wanted to commit an attack similar to the 2016 Pulse nightclub shooting in which 49 victims were killed; the Bondi Beach mass-shooting in Sydney last December, during which 15 victims were killed during a Hanukkah celebration; and a New Orleans truck-ramming attack that killed 14 victims in New Orleans on Jan. 1, 2025.
The investigation into Mohamud began around December 2024, when he messaged the confidential source on multiple social media platforms, according to the complaint, detailing his desire to travel to Somalia to join a group that the U.S. has designated a foreign terrorist organization. If travel was not possible due to financial constraints, he said would move forward with an attack in Minnesota.
This article originally appeared on JTA.org.
The post Minnesota man charged with ISIS-inspired plot on Jewish-owned Mall of America appeared first on The Forward.
Uncategorized
Is Israel or Iran a bigger threat to the U.S.? Michigan’s Abdul El-Sayed won’t say
(JTA) — Michigan Democrat Abdul El-Sayed was asked multiple times by a debate moderator on Thursday which country he considers a bigger threat to the U.S.: Iran or Israel.
Each time, he parried.
“That’s a ridiculous hypothetical because here’s what’s happening right now: Our ostensible ally in Israel has lobbied us to go to war with Iran,” said El-Sayed, Michigan’s Democratic nominee for U.S. Senate.
“I don’t consider an ally a country that takes us to wars we don’t need to fight, and I don’t want to be fighting wars we don’t need to fight,” he added, describing both as “kind of dangerous.” Another attempt yielded a similar response, with El-Sayed denouncing “one at risk of attacking us, one getting us into wars we have no business fighting.”
El-Sayed, a former county health official, was responding to a question repeatedly posed by WOOD TV8 political reporter Rick Albin, in a debate against his Republican opponent, former U.S. Rep. Mike Rogers. The two candidates hurled insults at each other during the hourlong discussion, often returning to issues related to Israel and the Middle East.
After making criticism of Israel a top issue in his primary campaign, El-Sayed eked out a victory against U.S. Rep. Haley Stevens in that early August race. Although he has earned the support of many democratic socialists, including Vermont independent Sen. Bernie Sanders, El-Sayed has stated that he is not a member of the Democratic Socialists of America.
Rogers, on the other hand, has the official endorsement of President Donald Trump. However, the candidate has been distancing himself from the president, including by criticizing the trade war with Canada.
Results of a CBS News poll published earlier this week showed El-Sayed leading Rogers, by 45.6% to 41.4%, with a 3.8% margin of error. A Quantus Insights poll released on Wednesday, meanwhile, gave El-Sayed a slightly narrower lead, with 47.6% to Rogers’s 46.5%, and a 7.8% margin of error.
While El-Sayed has been meeting with Jewish voters and leaders, he has not budged on certain issues of concern to many Jewish voters. For example, he has indicated only a willingness to recognize Israel’s identity as a Jewish nation-state if Israelis and Palestinians jointly agree to it..
Liberal Michigan rabbis last month signed a petition from the Zioness Action Fund, a progressive Zionist group, calling upon the Democratic Party to agree to “nonnegotiable” principles related to Jewish safety and Israel. A separate cohort of Michigan Jewish leaders urged community members to reject El-Sayed entirely.
Rogers and his representatives in August indicated that they would like AIPAC to refrain from spending directly on him in the general election, according to media reports. Asked about this at the Thursday debate, he said he’d welcome “anybody that wants to help my campaign stop a guy who can’t condemn terrorism in our own country.”
El-Sayed condemned the March attack on Temple Israel in West Bloomfield Township, but added that “hurt people hurt people,” which critics interpreted as justifying the attacker’s actions. He later apologized for those remarks.
Rogers has repeatedly slammed his opponent for taking funds from donors affiliated with the Council on American-Islamic Relations, the Unity & Justice Fund super PAC and other groups and individuals.
El-Sayed, on the other hand, accused Rogers on Thursday of accepting corporate PAC money and labeled him the “guy who’s going to rubber stamp everything Donald Trump tells him to rubber stamp.”
The two candidates criticized each other’s policies and interrupted each other so often that Albin, the moderator, needed to step in.
“We’ve got dozens of questions we want to get to,” Albin said. “You can’t litigate all of these with 14 different rebuttals.”
Even prior to a pause for ads, Albin announced that the station is going “to take a break from this pleasant conversation.” When they returned, he declared that “in 30 years of doing debates, I’ve never seen it continue during the commercial, but it did.”
The candidates continued to clash over Iran, with El-Sayed accusing the U.S. government of teaching “the Iranian regime that they had a choke [hold] on the Strait of Hormuz.”
“That’s the kind of policy you’re going to get from a guy who wants to be a sock puppet for the Trump administration,” El-Sayed added.
Rogers, meanwhile, claimed that the U.S. had set back Iran’s nuclear program by at least 20 years, adding that “this would be the time to wrap it up.”
As for Israel, Rogers said he supports “the right to exist for the Jewish state, and the right to defend itself in a very difficult neighborhood.” The only way Israel could lose his support, Rogers stated, would be if the country talked about using nuclear weapons.
Israel is widely assessed to possess an arsenal of approximately 90 nuclear warheads, according to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute. The country is not a party to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. Israel has never acknowledged possessing nuclear weapons.
Albin then turned to El-Sayed, noting the politician’s opposition to direct U.S. military funding for Israel. He asked, however, whether that position could change “if Israel were attacked tomorrow by Iran or another state actor.”
“I want our tax dollars spent here,” El-Sayed responded. “Israel has pushed us to go to war in Iran, and of course, my colleague, who thinks there’s a war for everything, went right along with it.”
When Albin pushed again for a yes or no answer, El-Sayed replied that he doesn’t want the U.S. “buying weapons for other countries.”
Toward the end of the discussion related to the Middle East, Rogers recognized the third anniversary of the Oct. 7, 2023, Hamas attack on Israel. He blasted his opponent for failing “to even acknowledge the pain, the terrorism, the rape, the murders.”
To this accusation, El-Sayed responded, “I’ve condemned that. I didn’t turn it into theater like you did.”
This article originally appeared on JTA.org.
The post Is Israel or Iran a bigger threat to the U.S.? Michigan’s Abdul El-Sayed won’t say appeared first on The Forward.
Uncategorized
Ossoff says IDF violated law of armed conflict in Gaza, but genocide is an issue for international courts
(JTA) — Democratic Sen. Jon Ossoff and Republican challenger Rep. Mike Collins clashed over Israel’s conduct in Gaza, U.S. weapons sales to Israel and the war in Iran during Thursday’s debate in Georgia’s closely watched Senate race.
The race could help determine control of the Senate, with implications for U.S. policy toward Israel.
The incumbent Ossoff, who is Jewish, has long supported Israel’s security, but over the last two years he has criticized its conduct in the Gaza war and voted to block some U.S. arms sales to the country.
A day after the third anniversary of the Oct. 7 Hamas-led attack, Ossoff was asked whether Israel had committed genocide in Gaza, whether he was concerned about growing anti-Israel sentiment within the Democratic Party and whether he would support a proposed $2.8 billion U.S. weapons package for Israel.
“The question of genocide is a question of whether a government has the specific intent to destroy a national or ethnic group, and that is a question for the International Criminal Court,” Ossoff responded. “There is no doubt in my mind that Israeli forces prosecuting the war in Gaza violated the law of armed conflict and international humanitarian law, and I care deeply about the security of the Israeli people, among whom are members of my family.
“I also care about innocent Palestinian life,” Ossoff continued, “and make no apology for my votes.”
Collins accused Ossoff of having aligned himself with anti-Israel figures including Twitch streamer Hasan Piker and Michigan U.S. Senate candidate Abdul El-Sayed.
“Imagine being a U.S. senator, and out there recruiting, endorsing, and supporting these people that want to see Israel wiped off the map,” Collins said. “They would rather be for Iran than for Israel — now that’s who Jon Ossoff is supporting.”
Piker had previously called Ossoff a possible contender for the 2028 Democratic presidential nomination. He subsequently disavowed Ossoff after the senator condemned antisemitic comments, Jewish Insider reported in August.
During the hourlong debate, Ossoff repeatedly condemned the U.S. war in Iran while highlighting Collins’ support for it. At least three times Ossoff called the war in Iran a “disaster” or “disastrous,” and he blamed the war for rising gas prices in the state of Georgia.
Collins, on the other hand, said he supported the war as necessary to prevent Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons. “The president had every right to go in there and make sure that Iran does not get a nuclear weapon,” Collins said. “The IAEA [International Atomic Energy Agency], they had already sounded the bells, the alarms that Iran was close to getting a nuclear weapon. And the thing is, Iran doesn’t only want to decimate and kill Israel, they want us as well.”
The evening was not without its personal attacks. Collins described Ossoff as “a radical” and a “trust-fund kid who has never had a job in his life,” while Ossoff repeatedly spotlighted the alleged ties between Collins and white nationalists. A recent report alleged that Collins’ former aides were involved with antisemitic and white nationalist rhetoric.
Ossoff leads Collins by about nine percentage points in FiftyPlusOne’s polling average as of Oct. 9.
The candidates are scheduled for a second debate hosted by the Atlanta Press Club on Oct. 13.
This article originally appeared on JTA.org.
The post Ossoff says IDF violated law of armed conflict in Gaza, but genocide is an issue for international courts appeared first on The Forward.
