Uncategorized
NYC mayoral candidate Curtis Sliwa has a mixed record with Jews. Catch up on it here.
Curtis Sliwa, the Republican nominee for mayor of New York City, is best known for founding the Guardian Angels — and he credits a Jewish group with inspiring the movement.
As a teenager going to high school in Crown Heights, a heavily Orthodox Jewish neighborhood, Sliwa says that he saw a group of men chasing out antisemitic gangs. That group was the Maccabees, founded by Rabbi Samuel Schrage to patrol the streets for crime in the 1960s.
“People leaving shul, running down Kingston towards Empire Boulevard, and these gangbangers were running for their lives,” Sliwa recalled in a 2021 interview with journalist Yitzi Weiner. “I said: ‘Wow, this really works! These guys are not coming back in here messing with the Lubavitchers!’”
That image remained with him until he started the Guardian Angels, a citizen patrol group on New York City subways and streets whose members wear a red beret, in 1979. It would become one of many stories about Jews in Sliwa’s public life, during which he has alternately talked about Jewish communities with admiration and disdain.
The radio host, amateur subway patroller and local celebrity is raising two Jewish sons, wearing his red beret as a kippah at their bar mitzvahs. (He and their mother, Melinda Katz, separated in 2014.) But he has also faced his share of controversies with Jewish communities, including accusations of antisemitism.
Sliwa is highly unlikely to become mayor of the overwhelmingly Democratic city. Since incumbent Mayor Eric Adams dropped out, he is now the lowest-polling candidate, trailing frontrunner Zohran Mamdani and former Gov. Andrew Cuomo by a wide margin. Still, Sliwa has cast himself as a champion for Republicans in the outer boroughs and a sizable minority of disaffected, politically homeless New Yorkers — including Jews who don’t like their other options.
We are breaking down for you what Sliwa has actually said about Jews, antisemitism, Israel and the Gaza war.
Jewish security and antisemitism
Long before Sliwa’s foray into politics, he worked alongside Jewish patrols such as Shmira and Shomrim, whose unarmed volunteers respond to emergencies in Jewish neighborhoods and assist police. He talks proudly about the Guardian Angels’ efforts to defend Chabad-Lubavitch Jews during the anti-Jewish Crown Heights riots of 1991.
While Sliwa says he would bulk up the NYPD’s personnel as mayor, volunteer groups like these are central to his vision for security — especially in Jewish communities.
“I, unlike any of the candidates, have said Jews must protect themselves,” he told the Jewish Telegraphic Agency. “If you depend strictly on Gentiles, history is replete with instances where you’re going to be horribly disappointed.” In another recent interview with the Queens Jewish Link, Sliwa said to Jews that he would not be “your Gentile mashiach,” using the Hebrew word for messiah.
The patrols that Sliwa views as key to public safety have been subjects of controversy over the years. In 2008, a 20-year-old Black man was beaten by a pair of Shmira patrollers. Another young Black man, Taj Patterson, was brutally attacked by a group of haredi Orthodox men that included members of Shomrim in 2013.
The Guardian Angels, meanwhile, have been criticized for fabricating stunts. In a 1992 interview, Sliwa admitted to manufacturing crimes and injuries for the group’s publicity.
New York City mayoral candidates Scott Stringer, Curtis Sliwa and Brad Lander attend a memorial event for seniors who died during the Covid pandemic in nursing homes, March 23, 2025, in the Cobble Hill neighborhood of the borough of Brooklyn. (Andrew Lichtenstein/Corbis via Getty Images)
Sliwa told JTA that he wants to introduce students to understanding antisemitism at a young age. As a child himself, he described a fork in the road when he lost an academic award to a Jewish classmate. His uncle suggested the classmate had a deal with their Jewish teacher, but Sliwa’s father corrected him, saying, “‘Curtis, he studied a lot harder than you. Lesson? Study harder.’” Sliwa said this kind of correction should be formally implemented in schools.
“There is no curriculum that addresses the problem of antisemitism,” he said. “Me? I would do it in third and fourth grade.”
Israel and the Gaza war
Israel and its ongoing war in Gaza have loomed large over the mayoral race. Mamdani’s pro-Palestinian advocacy and staunch criticism of Israel shook up New York City politics — and in response, his opponents have proffered the support for Israel that has long been tradition across both parties.
Sliwa talks about his visits to Israel as a thread that connects him to Jewish New Yorkers. During a trip there in 1998, he was offered free rides from bus drivers who mistook him for an Israeli paratrooper with his red beret, he told the Jewish News Syndicate. He applies his theory of Jewish-led security for Jews to Israel, telling The Jewish Press, “Jews have to organize among themselves. That’s why the State of Israel came about.”
He has criticized Mamdani’s views, saying the frontrunner has “no love in his heart for the State of Israel and for Israelis.” Like other candidates, he has rebuked Mamdani for declining to condemn the pro-Palestinian slogan “globalize the intifada” during the primary. (Mamdani has since clarified he does not personally use the language and would “discourage” it because of interpretations that it could incite violence against Jews.)
Sliwa went a step further by extending his attacks to Mamdani’s Jewish supporters. “I would say the Jewish community must look internally,” he said to JNS. “Why are some of our children and grandchildren following this guy and giving him absolution and exemption when he is using the language of an antisemite?”
But Sliwa has also said that he is more focused on his “law and order” platform than foreign policy. In an interview with The Forward, he pointed out that Cuomo’s focus on antisemitism accusations against Mamdani failed during the Democratic primary, which Mamdani roundly won.
And he recently acknowledged the intensity of pro-Palestinian sentiment in New York City, citing a New York Times/Siena poll that found voters are more sympathetic to Palestinians than to Israel. In an interview with City & State, he suggested that President Donald Trump could dampen Mamdani’s momentum by brokering peace in the Middle East.
“If he can bring peace to Gaza, he can definitely take one political plank away from Zohran Mamdani, who has used that effectively during the primary and will now use it in the general campaign,” said Sliwa.
Controversies
Sliwa has clashed with Jewish New Yorkers over the years. In a 2018 speech, he described Orthodox Jews as a drag on the tax system and warned suburban residents that they were trying to “take over your community.”
Curtis Sliwa, the Guardian Angels founder and now a New York mayoral candidate, responds in a video to accusations that remarks he made in 2018 were antisemitic, July 25, 2021. (Screenshot)
“We’re not talking about poor, impoverished, disabled people who need help. We’re talking about able-bodied men who study Torah and Talmud all day and we subsidize them,” he said in a videotaped meeting in the Hudson Valley. “All they do is make babies like there’s no tomorrow and who’s subsidizing that? We are.”
This speech resurfaced when Sliwa ran for mayor in 2021. He responded with a video in which he did not apologize or disavow his comments, but offered to meet with Orthodox leaders to “resolve our differences.”
“My two youngest sons have been raised Jewish. They need to read this? To say to themselves, my father is an antisemite? Come on, even my worst critics out there would recognize that’s a shanda,” he said in the video.
Despite his offense at being called an “antisemite,” Sliwa sparked backlash again at a 2024 event by saying that antisemitism was innate to “Gentiles.”
“It’s in our DNA,” he said at an event supporting then-presidential candidate Donald Trump in Staten Island. “I also have to hold myself back sometimes. And I have two Jewish children.” He later told JTA that he “used the wrong term” in those remarks, meaning to say that antisemitism was often “fed into the minds” of non-Jews.
—
The post NYC mayoral candidate Curtis Sliwa has a mixed record with Jews. Catch up on it here. appeared first on Jewish Telegraphic Agency.
Uncategorized
Israeli and diaspora Jews live in different realities. The Israel Day parade proved it
If Sunday’s Israel Day Parade in New York City had been held in Israel, with the same Israeli leaders in attendance, there is no way that so many people would have shown up — unless it was to protest.
The fact that tens of thousands of American Jews seemed to have no problem marching alongside far-right Israeli ministers — including Bezalel Smotrich and Amichai Eliyahu — is a clear indication of the ever-widening gap between Israelis and diaspora Jews, whose support for Israel is, for the most part, conceptual. And that gap isn’t exclusively, or even primarily, about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
Yes, there are many Israelis who oppose the messianic, anti-Palestinian rhetoric and policies pushed by Smotrich, Eliyahu and the rest of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s far-right cabinet — although not nearly enough, if you ask me. But the broad disdain for this government has more to do with domestic issues.
Israelis are furious over the ongoing Haredi draft exception; the government’s effective abandonment of citizens on the northern border; its refusal to take any accountability for the failures surrounding the Oct. 7 attack; a collapsing education system; a narrowing of religious freedoms; soaring murder rates in Arab communities; an epidemic of violence among Israeli teenagers; and police ineptitude and brutality.
From Israel, it seems clear that diaspora Jews have been unwilling to confront just how much damage Smotrich and his fellow coalition partners have done inside Israel.
Which is perhaps why Israel Day in New York City felt so disconnected from Israeli life.
The discourse around Israel’s delegation to the parade, at least on my algorithm, seemed to involve two contrasting beliefs: Either the ministers’ presence invalidated the legitimacy of the entire event and no one should have participated, or the parade was not a show of support for the Israeli government but a celebration of culture and heritage — and therefore these politicians should not be allowed to define it.
That debate largely took place around Mayor Zohran Mamdani’s decision not to attend the parade. To some pro-Israel Jews, his choice read as a rebuttal of Israel’s right to exist. In response, they spoke in the sweeping language of Jewish self-determination. This is nothing new: pro-Israel diaspora Jews often find themselves defending Israel against those who call for its destruction.
And yet, when it comes to the people who are actually destroying it, many are remarkably silent.
The full list of problematic statements and behaviors from members of Israel’s political the delegation is too long to detail in full. Among the most shocking items: Eliyahu, a member of Itamar Ben-Gvir’s far-right Jewish Power party, has publicly called for the ethnic cleansing of Gaza and suggested that dropping a nuclear bomb on the strip was a possibility. His fellow party member, Negev and Galilee Development Minister Yitzhak Wasserlauf, who also attended the parade, has led several provocations at the Al-Aqsa Mosque compound, in violation of Israel’s own clear norms regarding the holy Muslim site.
And Smotrich — whose attendance organizers said they had not been told about in advance — has doggedly worked to enable the de facto annexation of the West Bank.
Obviously, diaspora Jews have a different relationship with Israel than those of us who live here. We exist in completely different contexts, with different needs, fears and responsibilities. I do not believe our concerns need to be exactly identical. I am not telling anyone it was wrong to go to the parade.
But the question is what happens after.
How will the thousands who poured out to celebrate Israel in Manhattan on Sunday use their voices and energy to fight not just for Israel’s right to exist, but also for it to have a better future? After mainstream Jewish institutions have taken apart their floats, what resources will they allocate to protecting Israeli democracy, supporting the communities this government has abandoned and opposing the extremists dismantling the country from within?
After the parade, I kept seeing a brief clip of Democratic Sen. Chuck Schumer speaking from the dais. He ended his speech with the popular refrain “Am Yisrael Chai,” which he then translated into English.
Except he stumbled a bit over the words. Instead of saying, “The people of Israel live,” it came out as “the People Israel live.”
His flub inadvertently captured a deep truth. Israel, as a peoplehood, as an idea, is alive and kicking. Despite what some online ideologues want you to believe, our ancestral homeland is not going anywhere.
Nor do we need to fight quite as hard as we seem to think for the right to self-determination, seeing as we already have it and are not in any real danger of losing it.
But the people of Israel — the ones who actually live inside the country — are suffering. We are at the mercy of the most extreme government this country has ever seen.
We want to raise our children in security: real, long-lasting, diplomatically achieved security. We want to send them to decent schools in the morning and get them back in one piece at the end of the day. We want to live in a democracy, with a free press and an independent judiciary, where our daughters can read from the Torah if they want to and our sons can marry men if they want to.
The people of Israel do not need you to stand with Israel in a show of blanket solidarity.
We would much rather you stand with us, in active opposition to our government.
The post Israeli and diaspora Jews live in different realities. The Israel Day parade proved it appeared first on The Forward.
Uncategorized
North Carolina Democrats reject Gaza genocide resolution following campaign by Jewish caucus
(JTA) — For weeks, Jewish Democrats in North Carolina worked to block the state’s Democratic Party from passing a resolution declaring Israel’s actions in Gaza a genocide.
On Saturday, they narrowly prevailed.
The measure, titled the “Genocide Accountability Resolution,” was struck down by members of the North Carolina Democratic Party’s State Executive Committee with a vote of 163-130.
For Amy DeLoach, the first vice chair of the North Carolina Democratic Party Jewish Caucus, the victory marked a sign that Jewish Democrats still have a place in the party, even as debates over Israel have roiled Democratic politics across the country.
“Most Jews vote Democratically, and we were feeling abandoned, and now we feel like we have a home again,” said DeLoach, who also sits on the party’s international subcommittee.
The defeat of the resolution comes as support for Israel has dropped dramatically among Democrats, and the U.S.-Israel alliance has increasingly emerged as a third rail within the party.
While resolutions condemning the pro-Israel lobby AIPAC and calling to halt arms sales to Israel have been blocked by the Democratic National Committee over the past year, last June, the North Carolina Democratic Party passed a resolution calling for an immediate arms embargo on Israel.
Joel Wanger, the chief political officer of the Democratic Majority for Israel, welcomed the outcome of the genocide resolution in a statement to the Jewish Telegraphic Agency Tuesday.
“This resolution would have divided Democrats at a time when we should be united in opposing Donald Trump, while doing nothing to advance peace between Israelis and Palestinians,” he said.
The resolution was introduced earlier this year by a member of the progressive, Arab and Muslim caucuses of the North Carolina Democratic Party. It advanced from the precinct level through county, district and state bodies before reaching the State Executive Committee for a final vote Saturday.
The resolution would have added language to the state party platform calling for the “prosecution” and “vetting” of individuals and entities in the United States who “may have participated in or enabled genocide.” The resolution also cited a United Nations Commission of Inquiry that concluded for the first time in September that Israel had committed a genocide in Gaza.
The resolution’s defeat Saturday followed an extensive campaign by the party’s Jewish Caucus to block its adoption.
In a May 27 letter to members of the executive committee, leaders of the Jewish Caucus urged them to reject the resolution, arguing that state parties “should not adopt contested international policy positions” and that its timing would hurt 2026 Democratic candidates and divide voters.
“Jewish, Muslim, Palestinian, Christian, and secular Democrats are united on affordability, public education, healthcare, voting rights, and reproductive freedom,” the letter said. “This resolution forces them to take sides on something most did not join the party to fight about.”
The letter cited “serious factual and legal problems” with the resolution and said Jewish Democrats would support a substitute “affirming NC Democrats’ commitment to ending civilian suffering in Gaza, supporting humanitarian aid, and opposing antisemitism, Islamophobia, and political violence in all forms.”
But the Jewish Caucus was not the only group within the party invested in the outcome of the vote.
Last month, the leaders of the Muslim, Arab, interfaith and progressive caucuses of the North Carolina Democratic Party issued its own a letter calling on members of the State Executive Committee to support the resolution in order to “affirm our party’s commitment to human rights and the protection of civilian life.”
“All too frequently, the burdensome narrative of genocide denial has been heard from those persons and organizations who have 1) either acquiesced to genocide or 2) feared the worst reprisals from those who have supported it,” the letter read. “This silence compromises the faith of many voters in our party.”
The letter, which cited a recent study that found 80% of Democrats have an unfavorable view of Israel, was undersigned by the head of the state party’s Jewish Democrats, a non-Zionist Jewish subgroup within the Interfaith Caucus.
Mark Bochkis, the communications chair of the Jewish Democrats, told JTA that his group and the Jewish Caucus “fundamentally disagree about the divisiveness” of the resolution.
“We believe this is actually an issue that galvanizes the younger base of the party and other other important key voting blocks for the Democratic party,” Bochkis said. “We believe not speaking out on something like this is actually holding the party back.”
Paul McAllister, the chair of the Interfaith Caucus, told JTA that “we don’t want to see anything happen to any member of any community, Jewish or otherwise, but we do want accountability.”
While McAllister said that the language concerning “prosecution” in the resolution could have been “clarified,” he said the Jewish Caucus’ suggestion of an alternative to the resolution attracted little support because he felt it “waters down the need to hold a nation accountable for what it is doing to another people.”
“My major concern is that we have a faction within the party that wants justice for all people equally, Jews and Palestinians, and that there’s some in the party, namely members of the Jewish caucus, who do not comprehend how critical it is that we not only look after our own interest or our own group’s interest, but the interest of others, and this is the struggle,” McAllister said.
DeLoach said the scheduling of the vote last week on Shabbat had bothered members of the Jewish caucus. But she said they had “let that one go” to focus on fighting the resolution.
“We talk about that amongst ourselves, but we’re in a war right now,” she said. “We’re going to pick and choose the battles we fight.”
DeLoach said her group viewed the resolution as a political liability that could potentially force Democratic candidates in the state to either distance themselves from the party or embrace a “difficult divisive issue” on the campaign trail.
“No politician is going to want to run on a platform that includes this,” DeLoach said. “Platforms don’t win elections, and this is going to risk us losing an outrageously important election.”
DeLoach pointed to the campaigns of Roy Cooper, the state’s former governor who’s running for a Senate seat, and Anita Earls, who is running for reelection to the North Carolina Supreme Court.
“Most Democrats in North Carolina really are more concerned about their electric bill right now, and the cost of food,” DeLoach said. “As the vote shows, you know, nobody likes what’s going on in the Middle East. We don’t like what’s going on in the Middle East, but we know that’s not where our focus should be right now.”
Looking ahead, DeLoach said she hoped that the resolution’s defeat would serve as a warning against rhetoric she saw as “adding to a drumbeat of antisemitism that is so prevalent in the country.”
“There’s war crimes on both sides here, but it’s not a genocide, and y’all pounding this drum is making it more and more dangerous for Jews to live in this country,” DeLoach said. “We see the defeat of this resolution not only as a chance for us to start just electing Democrats, but as a hopeful pause, at least, if not a stop to this horrible rhetoric.”
This article originally appeared on JTA.org.
The post North Carolina Democrats reject Gaza genocide resolution following campaign by Jewish caucus appeared first on The Forward.
Uncategorized
Tidbits: For the first time, a kosher restaurant has won a Michelin star
Tidbits is a Forverts feature of easy news briefs in Yiddish that you can listen to or read, or both! If you read the article and don’t know a word, just click on it and the translation appears. Listen to the report here:
צום ערשטן מאָל געווינט אַ כּשרער רעסטאָראַן אַ „מישעלין־שטערן“
ייִט״אַ. — ווען מע האָט באַשאָטן דעם ישׂראלדיקן קוכער רז שבתי (ראַז שאַבטײַ) מיט קאָנפֿעטי האָט ער זיך ממש צעוויינט — און זײַנע מיטאַרבעטער האָבן אים וואַרעם אַרומגענומען.
מיט עטלעכע מינוט פֿריִער האָט מען געמאָלדן, אַז זײַן רעסטאָראַן אין מיאַמי, וואָס הייסט „מוטראַ“, איז געוואָרן דער ערשטער כּשרער רעסטאָראַן צו באַקומען אַ „מישעלין־שטערן“ — דעם גרעסטן כּבֿוד אין דער רעסטאָראַן־אינדוסטריע.
„דאָס איז אַ מאָמענט פֿון שׂימחה און פֿון שטאָלץ,“ האָט שאַבטײַ געזאָגט דער ייִדישער טעלעגראַפֿישער אַגענטור. „דעם שטערן באַקומט נישט בלויז ׳מוטראַ׳, נאָר דאָס גאַנצע ייִדישע פֿאָלק.“
שבתי, וואָס האָט שוין געאַרבעט אין אַ צאָל קיכן איבער ניו־יאָרק און ישׂראל, האָט געעפֿנט „מוטראַ“ אין פֿעברואַר 2025, געבנדיק דעם רעסטאָראַן אַ נאָמען נאָך זײַן ירושלים־געבוירענער באָבען, וועמעס קאָכן האָט אינספּירירט זײַן מעניו.
„איך האָב ליב צו באַצייכענען דאָס עסן אין דעם רעסטאָראַן ווי ׳ירושלימער מאכלים׳ אַנטקעגן ׳מיטל־מיזרחדיקע אָדער ישׂראלדיקע מאכלים׳ ווײַל די טעמען וואָס איך פּרוּוו ברענגען צום טיש זענען די טעמען וואָס זענען פֿאַרבונדן מיט מײַנע זכרונות און מיט מײַנע עקסקורסיעס אין מאַרק מיט דער באָבען,” האָט שבתי געזאָגט. „איך דאַרף זײַן געטרײַ די פּאָטראַוועס וואָס די באָבע האָט מיך געהאָדעוועט.“
אַ באַשרײַבונג פֿונעם רעסטאָראַן אויף דער „מישעלין“־וועבזײַט לויבט זײַנע „פּרעכטיקע בוריקעס אין ‘אַהאָ בלאַנקאָ’ (אַ קאַלטע זופּ געמאַכט פֿון מאַנדלען, קנאָבל און עסיק)“ און „שאָפֿנפֿלייש־קאָבאַב מיט גערייכערטן פּאַטלעזשאַן־קרעם און פּאָמידאָרן־בוימל“.
אַ דאַנק דער אָנערקענונג איז „מוטראַ“ געוואָרן איינער פֿון די אָנגעזעענסטע רעסטאָראַנען און באַטרעפֿט אַן אמתן ווענדפּונקט פֿאַר דער כּשרער קיך. פֿאַר שבתי, וואָס האָט אָנגעהויבן היטן כּשרות מיט מער ווי 10 יאָר צוריק, איז די פּרעמיע אַ קלאָרער באַווײַז, אַז קולינאַרע אויסגעצייכנטקייט קען בליִען אין די ראַמען פֿון דער כּשרער קיך.
„איך האָף אַז די דערגרייכונג וועט אינספּירירן אַנדערע כּשרע קוכערס,“ האָט ער געזאָגט.
צו זען דעם אַרטיקל אויף ענגליש, גיט אַ קוועטש דאָ.
To see the article in English, click here.
The post Tidbits: For the first time, a kosher restaurant has won a Michelin star appeared first on The Forward.