Uncategorized
If Mamdani is the future of the Democratic party, how will Jews respond?
Many Jewish New Yorkers are hoping that Zohran Mamdani’s candidacy is an aberration and that Democrats will soon return to candidates who embrace a close alliance with Israel and express a heartfelt understanding of the relationship many American Jews feel toward the country.
That aspiration describes many of the city’s most prominent Democratic officials, from Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer and House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, to Reps. Ritchie Torres and Dan Goldman. Eric Adams, the outgoing mayor, also fits the bill.
For these Jews, defeating Mamdani is especially urgent because loss could hasten a return to this norm, while a victory could signal a more permanent shift.
“Mamdani poses a danger to the security of the New York Jewish community,” Rabbi Elliot Cosgrove told Park Avenue Synagogue congregants in his Shabbat sermon Saturday. “And if you play out the chess game of Democratic politics, a danger that could have much wider consequences.”
For Jews like Cosgrove, Mamdani’s political positions are the problem — they view his opposition to Zionism as antisemitic, and his efforts to reassure the Jewish community as an implicit confession that Jews would have something to worry about if he was in charge.
Other leaders, like Rabbi Rachel Timoner at Congregation Beth Elohim in Brooklyn, are making a different calculation. Her synagogue hosted Mamdani for a private conversation with members, part of his Jewish outreach that has included synagogue and sukkah visits plus private meetings with clergy.
***
The divergent approaches — rallying congregants against Mamdani versus engaging with the candidate — showcase two different models for handling political candidates who are hostile toward Israel.
Timoner said she owed it to her congregants to bring Mamdani to the synagogue for a conversation. “I’m hoping that he is going to listen with an open mind and an open heart to the real pain and fear and experience of the Jewish community,” she told JTA.
Cosgrove acknowledged that Mamdani was likely to win but said that was no reason to try and extend an olive branch. “I understand the pragmatic instinct,” he said. “I choose principle instead.”
I expect many more Jewish leaders will be confronting this hard decision in the years to come, because polling shows that Mamdani’s views toward Israel are starting to align with a majority of Democratic voters.
Three times more Democrats in New York City sympathize with the Palestinians over Israel (57% to 18%), while nationally 69% of Democrats have an unfavorable view of Israel.
Sympathizing with Palestinians is not the same thing as opposing Israel’s existence, but 67% of Democrats also think Israel’s military actions in Gaza should be defined as either genocide or major war crimes akin to genocide, while only 7% considered them to be legitimate self-defense, a stance that does call Israel’s legitimacy into question.
And while many party leaders remain stalwart supporters of Israel, there is evidence some are starting to feel the heat. Sen. Cory Booker squirmed during an interview with liberal podcaster Jennifer Welch last week as she grilled him on receiving donations from AIPAC and taking a friendly photograph with Benjamin Netanyahu over the summer. “‘What in the actual f—-?” Welch asked.
Hakeem Jeffries, the House Minority Leader, has been tagged “AIPAC Shakur” by popular radio host Charlamagne Tha God, and recently accepted an endorsement from J Street, a liberal AIPAC alternative, while other prominent Democrats are turning down AIPAC funding.
***
The pressure may ease if the ceasefire holds in Gaza, but it’s hard to see the overall trends reversing without an improbable breakthrough in the Israeli-Palestinian peace process.
That suggests the kind of red lines that Jewish leaders have long sought to maintain around Israel and antisemitism — opposing Israel’s right to exist as a Jewish state, for example — will start to lose their power.
If more Mamdanis start running for office, will concerned Jewish leaders shift their focus from these candidates’ views on Israel to how they treat their Jewish constituents?
One of the themes I’ve found in reporting on campus antisemitism is that students are often bothered more by how some of their peers act out their anger toward Israel — often by shunning Jews who don’t completely buy into anti-Zionism — than by the anger itself.
Is there anything that candidates who oppose Israel can offer Jewish leaders and voters who support Israel, short of changing their foreign policy positions?
Mamdani has tried. In addition to his charm offensive, he has sought to reassure Jews in New York City that he will not demonize Jews he disagrees with, telling Beth Elohim members that he would not impose a litmus test around Israel at City Hall and anticipated hiring Zionists of all different political persuasions if elected.
That comment only served to provoke Cosgrove, who said Mamdani had revealed an “assumption that Jewish self-determination is an ideology to be tolerated, rather than a birthright to be respected.”
But perhaps it comforted some of those in the audience at Beth Elohim.
Of course, Mamdani is still in campaign mode. The bigger test will come if he wins. How a Mayor Mamdani would ultimately relate to the city’s Jews— and whether antisemitic incidents spike, fall or remain flat — will almost certainly inform how other rabbis and Jewish leaders react to future candidates who share his views.
The post If Mamdani is the future of the Democratic party, how will Jews respond? appeared first on The Forward.
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.
