RSS
Jews Aren’t White, and It Shouldn’t Matter
Members of the Ethiopian Jewish community in Israel dance during a ceremony marking the holiday of Sigd in Jerusalem, Nov. 11, 2015. Photo: Reuters / Amir Cohen.
The progressive worldview favors moral binaries such as oppressor and oppressed, colonizer and indigenous, etc. Instead of moving beyond the relevance of race, progressives claim that we need it in order to make sense of the world. In fact, the two groups that focus primarily on race are racists and progressives.
Where do Jews fit into this reductive calculus?
Jews are not racially homogeneous, but progressives don’t seem to appreciate that. Most Jews in the West are “white-passing” and well-off, so progressives throw them in with the list of oppressors. When looking at Palestinians, these uninformed progressives believe they see relatively weak, poor BIPOC people. If there is a conflict between powerful “white” people and poor brown people, the progressive worldview requires that they stand with the latter.
However, unlike American Jews who are largely of European descent, 55% of Israeli Jews are either Sephardi or Mizrahi. The former descend from Jews exiled during the Spanish Inquisition, and the latter are from North African and Middle-Eastern Jewish communities. They are not white. There are, for example, about 160,000 Black Jews living in Israel who emigrated from Ethiopia.
Jews don’t fit neatly into the overly simplistic worldview that has become gospel among progressives. In their attempt to make sense of the Mideast conflict using this reductive framework, progressives tend to ally themselves with terrorists and the most illiberal people on Earth, and denounce the only liberal democracy in the region.
If progressives support indigenous rights, they should support the State of Israel. After all, Jews are indigenous to that land, and the archeological record supports this. Hebrew was spoken and Judaism practiced on that land 1,00 years before Arabs came to the region with the Muslim conquest (i.e, colonization) of the 7th century. The only people with the same language and culture as the people living there over 2,000 years ago are Jews.
Jerusalem does not appear in the Koran, nor was it ever the capital of any Arab state. It is, however, mentioned in the Torah 700 times.
The land upon which Israel sits was a colony of empires, whose seat of power was elsewhere, such as the Ottomans and the Romans. Only the Jews ever had their seat of government in that place. When progressives deride Israel as a colonialist state, ask them what country Israel is a colony of. Israel isn’t an outpost of any other power.
Progressives do not acknowledge the more than 3,000 years of history and Jewish life on the land between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea, because it does not fit with their image of what indigenous people look like. If Palestinians are the weaker, browner people in this conflict, then they must have had their land stolen by the stronger, whiter group. Facts don’t matter. History doesn’t matter. Truth doesn’t matter.
This is the psychology animating the protests on college campuses and elsewhere across the country.
The fact that progressives use the whiteness of some Jews as an argument against Jewish indigeneity in Israel is especially repugnant. The only reason that white Jews exist is because Jews fled persecution in their ancestral homeland and bred with local populations in Europe. When progressives and antisemites make this argument, they are using the effects of ethnic cleansing against the actual victims of ethnic cleansing.
Some will claim that Israel is a pariah among nations because it is an apartheid state. However, this claim does not survive scrutiny. Twenty percent of Israel’s population is Arab. Arab Israelis vote, sit as judges in Israel’s courtrooms, and as legislators in Israel’s parliament. Moreover, they have equal rights — the same rights as every Jewish citizen — and they have more freedoms than citizens of any other state in the region. For example, they can attend the Middle East’s only gay pride celebrations in Tel Aviv.
So why do progressives protest when Israel defends itself, but not when Hamas beheads homosexuals in Gaza? Why do progressives protest the accidental and unintentional killing of civilians in Gaza but not the 230,000 civilians killed during the ongoing, decade-long Syrian civil war? Why have they not protested the 150,000 civilians killed in Yemen?
The most common explanations offered for this selective outrage are that these protestors are just virtue signaling hypocrites or that they are antisemites. And sure, some of them are. But it is too easy to simply dismiss them all in this manner.
Hanlon’s Razor is a principle of critical thinking, which states that one should not attribute to malice what can be explained by stupidity. In this instance, we should not brand all these protestors as antisemites when their actions flow directly from their flawed worldview.
The more charitable and intellectually satisfying explanation is that progressives don’t protest the wholesale slaughter of civilians in places like Syria and Yemen, because those conflicts don’t have a “white-passing” participant. Those conflicts don’t fit neatly into progressives’ simplistic worldview that everything is about race and oppression.
People who aren’t stuck in this misguided dogma were taken aback by the way that progressives sought to contextualize the Hamas massacre of October 7. But these progressives’ callousness is not just a function of antisemitism or confirmation bias. It stems from their adherence to the misguided belief that race and power are the most salient heuristic to determine who is right in any given situation. Israel has tanks and warplanes manned by “white pilots.” Palestinians are “brown” people hurling rocks at those tanks. From the progressive perspective, that’s all that matters.
Why is this way of thinking so predominant among young people? This is where conservatives had it right all along. Academia — and even lower levels of education — have been hijacked by progressive intellectuals who do not sufficiently respect their audience or their profession. It is a misuse of the trust placed in educators to indoctrinate impressionable young people. They should be teaching students information and concepts, so that students can reach their own conclusions. Instead, progressive academics grade their captive audience on how well they can regurgitate the conclusions that have been force-fed to them.
Students are encouraged to become activists, and told that “silence is violence.” For too long, the rest of us didn’t see the harm in the hypersensitivity to microaggressions, the self-flagellation of “white fragility” and “doing the work” of renouncing their privilege, or confessing their oppression. The harm is now apparent, and it’s scary.
What is the solution?
As they say, sunshine is the best disinfectant. The reason that terror apologists take down posters of children kidnapped by Hamas is because it shows the lie of their misplaced allyship. Those images create a painful cognitive dissonance that these progressives prefer to suppress. Make progressives keep tearing them down. Project them on buildings. Let those images haunt their dreams and weigh upon their conscience.
The Supreme Court recently invalidated affirmative action policies, but the Fourteenth Amendment does not prohibit policies designed to increase intellectual diversity on college campuses. These schools should publicly commit that they will stop hiring terror apologists, and that their employment contracts will require that professors not abuse their power by imposing their beliefs upon students. Let’s not forget that higher education in the US is a business, susceptible to the same market pressures as other businesses.
After the shocking testimony of the presidents of Harvard, UPenn, and MIT before Congress, donors are now aware of what is going on at these schools. They should continue to speak with their checkbooks. Students who value intellectual freedom on campus should divert their applications to institutions that welcome a diversity of opinions rather than the superficial diversity of complexion that these bastions of DEI have fostered.
Kenneth Blake teaches Critical Thinking and Government at a private high school in northern California.
The post Jews Aren’t White, and It Shouldn’t Matter first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand Slams Mamdani For Defense of ‘Globalize the Intifada’ Slogan as Pressure Mounts on Presumptive Mayoral Nominee

Senator Kirsten Gillibrand speaks during the second night of the first Democratic presidential candidates debate in Miami, Florida, US Photo: June 27, 2019. REUTERS/Mike Segar.
Senator Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY) has condemned presumptive New York City Democratic mayoral nominee Zohran Mamdani for his defense of the controversial phrase “globalize the intifada.”
During a Thursday appearance on Brian Lehrer’s WNYC radio show, Gillibrand called on Mamdani to distance himself from the phase, arguing that it endangers Jewish citizens of New York City. Gillibrand added that many of her Jewish constituents are “alarmed” at Mamdani’s defense of the slogan.
“As a leader of a city as diverse as New York City, with 8 million people, as the largest Jewish population in the country, he should denounce it,” she said. “That’s it. Period. You can’t celebrate it. You can’t value it. You can’t lift it up. That is the challenge that Jewish New Yorkers have had certainly since … Oct. 7. It is exactly what they have felt.”
Jonathan Greenblatt, CEO of The Anti-Defamation League (ADL) , issued a statement urging all participant in the Big Apple’s mayoral race to forcefully condemn antisemitism and anti-Jewish rhetoric.
“At this time of record antisemitism, our country needs leaders at all levels who are unequivocal in condemning this oldest of hatreds,” Greenblatt said in a news release. “We call on all candidates not only to condemn and avoid using language that is harmful to the Jewish community, but also to disassociate themselves and publicly disavow it.”
Greenblatt stressed that the ADL will be “forthright in calling out antisemitism during this campaign season, whatever the source,” and called on candidates to lay out specific plans to support New York’s Jewish community.
New York City, home to the largest Jewish population outside of Israel, experienced a surge of incidents in 2024 alone, more than any other U.S. metropolitan area, according to ADL’s annual audit.
The organization pointed to phrases like “globalize the Intifada,” the “Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS)” movement, and the slogan “From the River to the Sea” as examples of rhetoric that undermines Jewish safety and legitimacy. According to the ADL, such language invokes a decades-old history of attacks on Jews, denies the Jewish right to self-determination, and often serves to incite violence.
In addition to calling out antisemitic speech, the ADL is pressing candidates to explain how they will ensure the safety and security of the Jewish community while upholding their constitutional rights. This includes protecting the ability of Jewish New Yorkers to live, worship, work, and gather without fear of harassment, and to guard against the demonization of Jews, including Israelis.
“Antisemitic rhetoric should have no place in our electoral discourse,” Greenblatt said. “We need to know the specific plans of candidates to support the Jewish community. This is an issue for all candidates to explain in detail where they stand.”
Mamdani, a progressive representative in the New York State Assembly, has also sparked outrage after engaging in a series of provocative actions, such as appearing on the podcast of anti-Israel, pro-Hamas influencer Hasan Piker and vowing to arrest Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu if he visits New York.
During an event hosted by the UJA-Federation of New York last month, Mamdani also declined to recognize Israel’s right to exist as a Jewish state.
“I believe that Israel has a right to exist with equal rights for all,” Mamdani said in a carefully worded response when asked, sidestepping the issue of Israel’s existence specifically as a “Jewish state” and seemingly suggesting Israeli citizens do not enjoy equal rights.
Then during a New York City Democratic mayoral debate, he once again refused to acknowledge Israel’s right to exist as a Jewish state, sparking immediate backlash among the other candidates.
In 2023, while speaking at a Democratic Socialists of America convention in New York, Mamdani encouraged the audience to applaud for Palestinian American community activist Khader El-Yateem, saying “If you don’t clap for El-Yateem, you’re a Zionist.”
High-profile Democratic leaders in New York such as Sen. Chuck Schumer, Gov. Kathy Hochul, and Rep. Hakeem Jeffries have congratulated and complemented Mamdani, but have not yet issued an explicit endorsement. Each lawmaker has indicated interest in meeting with the presumptive Democratic mayoral nominee prior to making a decision on a formal endorsement.
The post Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand Slams Mamdani For Defense of ‘Globalize the Intifada’ Slogan as Pressure Mounts on Presumptive Mayoral Nominee first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Iran Rejects US Talks, Signals It May Block UN From Nuclear Sites as Trump Leaves Door Open to Future Bombings

Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi addresses a special session of the Human Rights Council at the United Nations in Geneva, Switzerland, June 20, 2025. REUTERS/Denis Balibouse
Iran announced Friday that it will not engage in nuclear talks with the United States, rejecting a two-week deadline set by US President Donald Trump for renewed negotiations aimed at resolving the ongoing standoff over Tehran’s nuclear program.
In a televised speech, Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi condemned what he described as Washington’s “complicity in the Israeli regime’s war of aggression against Iran,” and slammed recent US military strikes as a betrayal of diplomacy and a blow to any prospects for dialogue.
“Americans want to negotiate and have sent messages several times, but we clearly said that as long as [the Israeli] aggression doesn’t stop, there’s no place for dialogue,” the top Iranian diplomat said in an address on state television.
“No agreement has been made on the restart of negotiations. There has not even been any talk of negotiations,” Araghchi continued. “The subject of negotiations is out of question at present.”
However, he reassured that Tehran remains committed to diplomacy, but the decision to resume negotiations with Washington must be carefully evaluated.
“It is still early to say that the conditions are right for negotiations,” Araghchi said.
Meanwhile, Trump said he would consider carrying out further strikes on Iran if US intelligence reveals new concerns about the country’s uranium enrichment program.
“Sure, without question, absolutely,” Trump said Friday during a press briefing when asked if a second wave of bombings was possible.
During his speech, he also addressed the recent American and Israeli strikes on Iran’s nuclear facilities, acknowledging that the damage was significant but adding that the regime is still assessing its full extent.
For its part, US intelligence officials have reported that Tehran’s nuclear sites were “severely damaged” during the American airstrikes last weekend.
Araghchi’s comments came as he met on Friday with his counterparts from Britain, France, Germany, and the European Union’s Foreign Policy Chief Kaja Kallas in Geneva — marking their first meeting since the Iran-Israel war began.
Europe is actively urging Iran to reengage in talks with the White House in an effort to avert any further escalation of tensions.
In a post on X, Araghchi also announced that Iran may reject any requests by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), the UN nuclear watchdog, to visit the country’s nuclear sites.
He said this latest decision was “a direct result of [IAEA Director-General, Rafael Grossi]’s regrettable role in obfuscating the fact that the Agency — a full decade ago — already closed all past issues.”
“Through this malign action, he directly facilitated the adoption of a politically-motivated resolution against Iran by the IAEA BoG [Board of Governors] as well as the unlawful Israeli and US bombings of Iranian nuclear sites,” the Iranian top diplomas said in a post on X.
“In an astounding betrayal of his duties, Grossi has additionally failed to explicitly condemn such blatant violations of IAEA safeguards and its Statute,” Araghchi continued.
The Parliament of Iran has voted for a halt to collaboration with the IAEA until the safety and security of our nuclear activities can be guaranteed.
This is a direct result of @rafaelmgrossi‘s regrettable role in obfuscating the fact that the Agency—a full decade ago—already…
— Seyed Abbas Araghchi (@araghchi) June 27, 2025
Iran’s critique of Grossi comes as the Iranian parliament voted this week to suspend cooperation with the IAEA “until the safety and security of [the country’s] nuclear activities can be guaranteed.”
“The IAEA and its Director-General are fully responsible for this sordid state of affairs,” Araghchi wrote in his post on X.
The post Iran Rejects US Talks, Signals It May Block UN From Nuclear Sites as Trump Leaves Door Open to Future Bombings first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Argentina to Try Iranian, Lebanese Suspects in Absentia Over 1994 AMIA Bombing in Historic Legal Shift

People hold images of the victims of the 1994 bombing attack on the Argentine Israeli Mutual Association (AMIA) community center, marking the 30th anniversary of the attack, in Buenos Aires, Argentina, July 18, 2024. Photo: REUTERS/Irina Dambrauskas
A federal judge in Argentina has ordered the trial in absentia of ten Iranian and Lebanese nationals suspected of orchestrating the 1994 bombing of the Argentine Israelite Mutual Association (AMIA) Jewish community center in Buenos Aires.
The ten suspects set to stand trial include former Iranian and Lebanese ministers and diplomats, all of whom are subject to international arrest warrants issued by Argentina for their alleged roles in the country’s deadliest terrorist attack, which killed 85 people and wounded more than 300.
In April, lead prosecutor Sebastián Basso — who took over the case after the 2015 murder of his predecessor, Alberto Nisman — requested that federal Judge Daniel Rafecas issue national and international arrest warrants for Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei over his alleged involvement in the attack.
This legal action marks a significant departure from Argentina’s previous stance in the case, under which the Iranian leader was regarded as having diplomatic immunity.
Since 2006, Argentine authorities have sought the arrest of eight Iranians — including former president Ali Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani, who died in 2017 — yet more than three decades after the deadly bombing, all suspects remain still at large.
Thursday’s ruling marks the first time Argentina will try suspects in absentia, following a legal change in March that lifted the requirement for defendants to be physically present in court.
This latest legal move comes amid a renewed push for justice, with President Javier Milei vowing to hold those responsible for the attack accountable.
Among those accused of involvement in the terrorist attack are Ali Fallahijan, Iran’s intelligence and security minister from 1989 to 1997; Ali Akbar Velayati, former foreign minister; Mohsen Rezai, commander of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps between 1993 and 1994; and Hadi Soleimanpour, former Iranian ambassador to Buenos Aires.
Also implicated are former Al Quds commander Ahmad Vahidi; Iranian diplomat Ahmad Reza Asghari; Mohsen Rabbani, the former cultural attaché at Iran’s embassy in Argentina; and Hezbollah operatives Salman Raouf Salman, Abdallah Salman, and Hussein Mounir Mouzannar.
According to Judge Rafecas, the defendants were declared in contempt of court years ago, remain fully informed of their legal standing, and have consistently disregarded multiple extradition requests.
He said that trying the suspects in absentia would give the courts a chance to “at least uncover the truth and piece together what happened.”
This latest decision acknowledges “the material impossibility of securing the defendants’ presence and the nature of the crime against humanity under investigation,” Rafecas said.
“It is essential to proceed … to prevent the perpetuation of impunity,” he continued.
Despite Argentina’s longstanding belief that Lebanon’s Shiite Hezbollah terrorist group carried out the devastating attack at Iran’s request, the 1994 bombing has never been claimed or officially solved.
Meanwhile, Tehran has consistently denied any involvement and has refused to arrest or extradite any suspects.
To this day, the decades-long investigation into the terror attack has been plagued by allegations of witness tampering, evidence manipulation, cover-ups, and annulled trials.
In 2006, former prosecutor Nisman formally charged Iran for orchestrating the attack and Hezbollah for carrying it out.
Nine years later, he accused former Argentine President Cristina Fernández de Kirchner — currently under house arrest on corruption charges — of attempting to cover up the crime and block efforts to extradite the suspects behind the AMIA atrocity in return for Iranian oil.
Nisman was killed later that year, and to this day, both his case and murder remain unresolved and under ongoing investigation.
The alleged cover-up was reportedly formalized through the memorandum of understanding signed in 2013 between Kirchner’s government and Iranian authorities, with the stated goal of cooperating to investigate the AMIA bombing.
Last year, Argentina’s second-highest court ruled that the 1994 attack in Buenos Aires was “organized, planned, financed, and executed under the direction of the authorities of the Islamic State of Iran, within the framework of Islamic Jihad.” The court also said that the bombing was carried out by Hezbollah terrorists responding to “a political and strategic design” by Iran.
The court additionally ruled that Iran was responsible for the 1992 truck bombing of the Israeli embassy in Buenos Aires, which killed 29 people and injured 200 others.
Judges determined that the bombing of the Israeli Embassy was likely carried out in retaliation for then-President Carlos Menem’s cancellation of three agreements with Iran involving nuclear equipment and technology.
The post Argentina to Try Iranian, Lebanese Suspects in Absentia Over 1994 AMIA Bombing in Historic Legal Shift first appeared on Algemeiner.com.