Uncategorized
Anyone saying Jews face a simple choice in the NYC mayoral election is not paying attention
(JTA) — As a New York City voter, I’m preparing to cast my ballot in the upcoming mayoral election. But as a congregational rabbi and now the head of the largest Jewish movement in North America, I’ve never told congregants for whom they should vote.
I won’t start now, despite the Trump administration’s misguided efforts to weaken the Johnson Amendment, the longstanding rule that bars congregations and their leaders from endorsing or opposing candidates from the pulpit. Keeping partisan politics out of our politically diverse congregations feels more essential than ever in today’s polarized climate.
I respect rabbinic colleagues who have added their names to the letter “A Rabbinic Call to Action: Defending the Jewish Future” — as more than 1,100 from across the country have now done. Similarly, I respect colleagues who have principled reasons for not signing on. The fact is that there is more than one way for rabbis to express moral clarity and to speak about urgent issues facing our community.
Addressing moral issues has always been part of the art of preaching sermons. And as always, clergy can do this during campaign season without crossing the line into electioneering.
As a rabbi, I am deeply committed to living Jewish values and looking at contemporary issues through the prism of Jewish tradition and values. Matters of Jewish safety and security are of paramount importance to me, especially now with rising incidents of antisemitism. Following the Anti-Defamation League’s report of a record-breaking 976 antisemitic incidents in New York City in 2024, the highest count in any U.S. city last year, this year has also seen an alarming increase in antisemitism including harassment, vandalism and physical violence.
Given these increasing threats to our community, we need a mayor who will work tirelessly to protect us. This includes making sure that the NYPD continues to provide extra protection for our community on Jewish holidays and at other moments of Jewish gathering.
I can attest that Zohran Mamdani is not lacking in empathy for the Jewish community’s anxiety over regular threats to our safety. In public interviews and in a personal meeting, I’ve heard him pledge to protect the Jewish community. But his many comments about the intersection of antisemitism and anti-Zionism — issues that are not synonymous but do overlap — have been problematic.
Expressing criticism of the Israeli government’s policies is not foreign to me or to many other ardent Zionists. However, denying Israel’s right to exist as both a Jewish and democratic state crosses the line from criticism of Israeli policy to a rejection of Israel and the 3,000-year-old identification of Judaism with Israel as the Jewish people’s homeland. And in an atmosphere where Israel is regularly and harshly demonized, Jewish safety is threatened.
Mamdani has been consistent in saying that he believes Israel has a right to exist as a state of all its citizens, but not as a Jewish state. This argument might sound tidy in a seminar; in the real world it is cause for grave concern. Given centuries of global antisemitism — from age-old accusations of deicide to the Inquisition to the Holocaust to Oct. 7 — as well as the many wars and terrorist attacks emanating from Israel’s neighbors over the last seven decades, the “one-state” solution Mamdani espouses would put the lives of the 7 million Israeli Jews at great risk and end Israel’s identity as the Jewish people’s homeland.
While this is a moment when our vulnerable Jewish community is rightfully lifting up the needs and dangers before us, our tradition forbids us from ignoring the many other compelling areas of vital concern for the Jewish community. Primary among them is addressing the many threats to the core pillars of our democracy that have given Jews the rights and freedoms that have allowed us to flourish in America and in New York City. These are the very pillars that promise hope for groups facing discrimination, barriers, and threats to their safety and well-being. Those priorities also include the moral responsibility to reverse the ever-widening gap between rich and poor New Yorkers.
Judaism has never been about caring only for our own community or just personal piety but rather, as the prophet Isaiah reminds us, a societal commitment to:
To let the oppressed go free;
To break off every yoke.
It is to share your bread with the hungry,
And to take the wretched poor into your home;
When you see the naked, to clothe him,
And not to ignore your own kin.”
— Isaiah 58:6-7
And when we are considering whom to elect as leaders, a candidate who has been morally compromised should not easily collect our votes. As I have questioned what Mamdani might do based on his statements, so too I question what Andrew Cuomo might do in light of past findings of his pattern of harassment, as documented in the New York Attorney General’s 2021 report. According to Psalm 15, a person of moral character is someone:
whose tongue is not given to evil;
who has never done harm to his fellow,
or borne reproach for [his acts toward] his neighbor;
who has never lent money at interest,
or accepted a bribe against the innocent. (Psalm 15:3, 5)
If you think the choice for mayor is simple, I respectfully suggest that you are not paying attention. I implore our Jewish community and all New Yorkers to carefully consider the many urgent issues our city faces before casting your vote. The stakes couldn’t be higher.
The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of JTA or its parent company, 70 Faces Media.
The post Anyone saying Jews face a simple choice in the NYC mayoral election is not paying attention appeared first on The Forward.
Uncategorized
Lebanon Plans UN Complaint Against Israel Over Border Wall
A UN vehicle drives near a concrete wall along Lebanon’s southern border which, according to the Lebanese presidency, extends beyond the “Blue Line”, a U.N.-mapped line separating Lebanon from Israel and the Israeli-occupied Golan Heights, as seen from northern Israel, November 16, 2025. REUTERS/Shir Torem
Lebanon will file a complaint to the U.N. Security Council against Israel for constructing a concrete wall along Lebanon’s southern border that extends beyond the “Blue Line,” the Lebanese presidency said on Saturday.
The Blue Line is a U.N.-mapped line separating Lebanon from Israel and the Israeli-occupied Golan Heights. Israeli forces withdrew to the Blue Line when they left south Lebanon in 2000.
A spokesperson for the U.N. secretary-general, Stephane Dujarric, said on Friday the wall has made more than 4,000 square meters (nearly an acre) of Lebanese territory inaccessible to the local population.
The Lebanese presidency echoed his remarks, saying in a statement that Israel’s ongoing construction constituted “a violation of U.N. Security Council Resolution 1701 and an infringement on Lebanon’s sovereignty and territorial integrity.”
Dujarric said the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL) had requested that the wall be removed.
An Israeli military spokesperson denied on Friday that the wall crossed the Blue Line.
“The wall is part of a broader IDF plan whose construction began in 2022,” the spokesperson said, referring to the Israel Defense Forces.
“Since the start of the war, and as part of lessons learned from it, the IDF has been advancing a series of measures, including reinforcing the physical barrier along the northern border.”
UNIFIL, established in 1978, operates between the Litani River in the north and the Blue Line in the south. The mission has more than 10,000 troops from 50 countries and about 800 civilian staff, according to its website.
Uncategorized
Iran Says US Is Not Ready for ‘Equal and Fair’ Nuclear Talks
Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi speaks during a meeting with foreign ambassadors in Tehran, Iran, July 12, 2025. Photo: Hamid Forootan/Iranian Foreign Ministry/WANA (West Asia News Agency)/Handout via REUTERS
Washington’s current approach toward Tehran does not indicate any readiness for “equal and fair negotiations,” Iran’s foreign minister said on Sunday, after US President Donald Trump hinted last week at potential discussions.
Following Israel’s attack on Iran in June, which was joined by U.S. strikes on Iranian nuclear facilities, attempts at renewing dialogue on Tehran’s nuclear program have failed.
The United States, its European allies and Israel accuse Tehran of using its nuclear program as a veil for efforts to develop the capability to produce weapons. Iran says its nuclear program is for peaceful purposes only.
Tehran and Washington underwent five rounds of indirect nuclear talks prior to the 12-days-war, but faced obstacles such as the issue of domestic uranium enrichment, which the U.S. wants Iran to forego.
“The U.S. cannot expect to gain what it couldn’t in war through negotiations,” Abbas Araqchi said during a Tehran conference named “international law under assault.”
“Iran will always be prepared to engage in diplomacy, but not negotiations meant for dictation,” he added.
During the same conference, deputy foreign minister Saeed Khatibzadeh accused Washington of pursuing its wartime goals with “negotiations as a show.”
Uncategorized
Israeli Government Decides ‘Independent’ Commission to Investigate Oct. 7 Failures
The Israeli Supreme Court in Jerusalem. Photo: Wikimedia Commons.
i24 News – The Israeli government has approved the creation of an “independent” commission of inquiry to examine the failures that enabled the Hamas assault of October 7, 2023.
However, in a move sharply criticized by the opposition and contrary to the recommendation of the Supreme Court, the panel will not be a formal state commission of inquiry. Instead, its mandate, authorities, and scope will be determined directly by government ministers.
According to the decision, the commission will receive full investigative powers and must be composed in a way that ensures “the broadest possible public trust.”
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu will form a special ministerial committee tasked with defining what the inquiry may investigate, the time periods to be reviewed, and the authority it will receive. The committee has 45 days to deliver its recommendations.
For the past year, the government has repeatedly resisted calls to establish a state commission, arguing at first that such a body could not operate during wartime. Later, some ministers accused Supreme Court President Isaac Amit of being incapable of appointing an impartial chairperson.
But on October 15, the High Court of Justice ruled that there was “no substantive argument” against forming a state commission, giving the government 30 days to respond.
Netanyahu maintains that responsibility for the October 7 failures lies primarily with Israel’s security agencies rather than with political leaders.
His critics accuse him of creating a weaker, government-controlled inquiry designed to limit scrutiny of his decisions, undermining the prospect of full accountability for the deadliest attack in Israel’s history.
