Fake outrage and real crimes.

After weeks of outrage at the close ties between top Democrats and Louis Farrakhan, the leader of an anti-Semitic hate group, the media finally condemned anti-Semitism by a top political official.

President Trump and OMB Director Mick Mulvaney had referred to outgoing NEC Director Gary Cohn as a “globalist.” And “globalist,” according to Think Progress, the Huffington Post, Salon and Vox, is an “anti-Semitic slur.”  Those are the same media outlets that had no problem using “globalist” as a slur when targeting Trump. HuffPo had published a piece tarring him as “Trump: The Globalist Plutocrat” and Vox had described Trump going to Davos, “the world’s biggest party for globalist elites.”

Both Trump and Mulvaney were praising Cohn and minimizing a globalist-nationalist split. That’s why President Trump said, “He may be a globalist, but I still like him. He’s seriously globalist, there’s no question, but you know what, in his own way he’s also a nationalist because he loves our country.”

And why Mulvaney wrote that, “I never expected that the coworker I would work closest, and best, with at the White House would be a “globalist.” Gary Cohn is one of the smartest people I’ve ever worked with. Having the chance to collaborate with him will remain one of the highlights of my career in public service.”

Can’t you just spot the “anti-Semitic dogwhistles”?

There are some in the alt-right who use “globalist” as an anti-Semitic slur, just as there were those on the left who used neo-conservative as an anti-Semitic slur. But that’s not what those terms mean.

When Stephen Miller, a Jewish Trump adviser, told CNN’s Jim Acosta, a Cuban-American, that he was suffering from a “cosmopolitan bias,” Politico accused Miller of using an “anti-Semitic dog whistle.” While “cosmopolitan” was an anti-Semitic euphemism in the USSR, Miller isn’t a Russian Communist, he’s a Jewish conservative.

But a congressional Democrat recently did use an anti-Semitic dogwhistle.

Rep. Danny Davis defended his ties to Farrakhan, the anti-Semitic leader of the Nation of Islam, by arguing, “The world is so much bigger than Farrakhan and the Jewish question and his position on that.”

About the only people who think there’s a “Jewish question” these days are anti-Semites. When Hitler and Marx weighed in on the Jewish question, it was to denounce the Jews. Unlike “globalist,” when the term is used by the alt-right today, (shortened to JQ), its meaning is unambiguously hostile.

But the national media chose to ignore Rep. Davis’ remarks. It embargoed the story, just as it embargoed the recent release of a photo of Obama and Farrakhan and the controversy over Women’s March leaders’ ties to Farrakhan. And Farrakhan, who once praised Hitler, has been venting a stream of anti-Semitic invective at the “Satanic” Jews because he knows that the national media won’t touch him.

The controversy over Obama, Davis, Keith Ellison, Linda Sarsour and Tamika Mallory has played out in the Jewish and conservative media. But no one in the mainstream media is willing to ask why Obama, the No. 2 man at the DNC, the Congressional Black Caucus and the next generation of intersectional feminist leaders are comfortable hanging out with a racist who suggested that Jews use pot to make black men gay. But the  media will only discuss anti-Semitism is when it serves its political agenda.

ThinkProgress had the chutzpah to accuse President Trump of using an “anti-Semitic dogwhistle” when the lefty advocacy site had been forced to clean house over actual anti-Semitic dog whistles. The uproar over the use of “Israel firsters” by the site led its editor-in-chief to denounce the “terrible, anti-Semitic language”. But Salon, which also denounced Trump’s “globalist” remark, had published pieces defending TP’s anti-Semitic language while smearing the lefty group’s Jewish critics. Some of the same culprits are now targeting Bari Weiss at the New York Times for her willingness to call out anti-Semitism on the left.

But while its personnel were using anti-Semitic dog whistles, TP accused Sarah Palin of using an “anti-Semitic term” when she defended herself against false accusations of being responsible for the Arizona shooting by accusing the media of a “blood libel”. The accusation that Palin was being anti-Semitic made as much sense as Politico suggesting that Stephen Miller was using Soviet anti-Semitic slurs against CNN.

But the left is happy to invent fake anti-Semitism while refusing to address its own real anti-Semitism.

It will pretend that Mulvaney, Trump and Miller are using anti-Semitic language, but it won’t speak up when a member of the Congressional Black Caucus talks about a Hitler-lover and the “Jewish question”.

The left doesn’t just use anti-Semitism as a political weapon while refusing to renounce it. It will even deploy accusations of anti-Semitism as a political weapon in support of anti-Semites like George Soros.

The same media outlets that won’t talk about the genocidal threats by Iran’s regime and by its terror proxies in Gaza, have been accusing the critics of Soros, a billionaire lefty donor, of anti-Semitism. Soros, a former Nazi collaborator, had called his wartime activities “the most exciting time of my life.”

Soros described growing up in a “Jewish, anti-Semitic home” with a mother whom he called, a “typical Jewish anti-Semite” who hated his first wife because she was “too Jewish.”

After he compared Israeli Jews to Nazis at an event honoring a Holocaust survivor, Elie Wiesel had declared, “I heard what happened. If I’d been there—and you can quote me—I would have walked out.” That same year, Soros had blamed the Jewish State for a “resurgence of anti-Semitism in Europe”.

And Soros’ J Street, an anti-Israel group, is still mulling whether to stop endorsing Rep. Danny Davis. That’s their version of the Jewish Question. How much anti-Semitism by a progressive ally is too much?

The left treats anti-Semitism as another identity politics counter to be tossed in whenever convenient. It wants to be racist while accusing Republicans of racism. It wants to assault women while accusing Republicans of sexism. And it wants to be anti-Semitic while accusing Republicans of anti-Semitism.

Even while it appropriates anti-Semitism, treating it like another microaggression, triggered by terms like “globalist”, “cosmopolitan” or “blood libel” that have some anti-Semitic associations, but not in the context where they are presently being used, the left ignores what anti-Semitism actually is.

Anti-Semitism is not just another of the many intersectional expressions of bigotry as the left sees it. That misguided view of anti-Semitism makes it too easy to dismiss it as part of a bundle of attitudes that progressives don’t share. Emphasizing “globalist” and “cosmopolitan” appropriates anti-Semitism and reduces it to the worldview of people who don’t think about the planet the way that progressives do.

But anti-Semitism is ubiquitous. It’s not just a general phenomenon, but a specific one. It can pop up in any political worldview. It’s a black hole that curves ideologies and religions around its event horizon.

Appropriating anti-Semitism as a partisan political weapon lends cover to internal anti-Semitism within a political movement by externalizing it. The media can spot anti-Semitism in a random Trump quip, but not in the affinity of a former president, the second-in-command at the DNC and numerous members of Congress for Louis Farrakhan, a racist who praised Hitler and accuses Jews of running the country.

When Islamic terrorists kill Jews, when campus BDS thugs intimidate Jewish students, when their own party pals around with an anti-Semitic racist, they’re nowhere to be found. The left traffics in classic anti-Semitic stereotypes, supports rabid bigots and aids anti-Semitic regimes, but the moment they hear a whistle from the other side of the fence, they come barking as loudly as they can.

It’s bad enough that the left aids anti-Semitism from Berkeley to Tehran. It’s even worse when it appropriates anti-Semitism as a political weapon even while it remains an anti-Semitic movement.

Originally published in FrontPageMag.


Everyone in Congress claims to be pro-Israel.

When Keith Ellison, a former Farrakhan acolyte who accused Israel of being an Apartheid state, can claim to be pro-Israel… then the term has absolutely no meaning.

Currently members of Congress who…

1. Are affiliated with the anti-Israel Soros lobby, J Street, claim to be pro-Israel

2. Senators who voted to let Iran go nuclear claim to be pro-Israel

3. Members of Congress who voted to pressure Israel to relax the embargo on Hamas claim to be pro-Israel

… all claim to be pro-Israel.

i think Bernie Sanders is one of the opponents of Israel who hasn’t claimed to be pro-Israel. But it wouldn’t surprise me too much if he had.

The Congressional Israel Victory Caucus wants to make the term pro-Israel mean something again. For a long time, pro-Israel has been sinking into the two-state solution swamp in which supporting the PLO is the best way to support peace and is therefore pro-Israel. The Congressional Israel Victory Caucus takes another stance. It wants Israel to win.

Congressmen Ron DeSantis (R-FL) and Bill Johnson (R-OH) will launch the Congressional Israel Victory Caucus (CIVC) at 9 a.m. on Thursday, April 27. The goal of the caucus will be to introduce a new US strategy to re-shape the discourse of the Arab-Israel peace process to be more focused on Israel’s needs.

“Israel is America’s closest ally in the Middle East, and the community of nations must accept that Israel has a right to exist – period,” said Rep. Johnson. “This is not negotiable now, nor ever. The Congressional Israel Victory Caucus aims to focus on this precept, and better to inform our colleagues in Congress about daily life in Israel and the present-day conflict. I look forward to co-chairing this very important caucus with Cong. DeSantis.”

“The current approach to achieving a resolution to the Israel-Palestinian conflict has consistently failed because it allows Palestinian rejectionism to be met by a call for further concessions from Israel, thus pushing peace further away because of the entrenchment of a Palestinian denial of the Jewish people’s right to sovereignty,” said Professor Daniel Pipes, President of the Middle East Forum. “As Ronald Reagan said regarding the US fight against communism, the only way to ‘win is if they lose.’ The launch of the Israel Victory Caucus will help bring about a catalytic change in the way America pursues peace in the region: Putting its allies priorities first.”

That would be the definition of being pro-Israel. If you put the PLO or Hamas ahead of Israel, you’re not pro-Israel. You’re pro-terror.

Originally Published on FrontPageMag.

Understanding the Left’s Language Inversion

As noted by many, there is a striking double standard that is applied to the far-Left. The world seems to allow their statements and views to be heard and treated seriously, while the far-Right is correctly shunned and treated as a pariah.

Why is this?

Let’s look at the British Labour party as an example. The far-left ‘Momentum’ movement within the party is the reason why Jeremy Corbyn has once again been elected as its leader. This is a man who called Hamas and Hezbollah “my friends” and had his picture taken with Hezbollah leaders in Lebanon. This is the man the Momentum movement has kept in leadership and they have basically taken over a centre Left party, not in some third world country, but in the United Kingdom. With such a man at the head of the party they will never win a national election especially when many MP’s from his own party have no confidence in him.   

Another example is the Democrat party in America, where the runner up to the chairman of the party was Keith Ellison, who was a member of the radical Nation of Islam, a virulent racist and anti-Semitic organisation. He has said things himself, even as late as 2010, that are anti-Semitic and he is known to hold far-Left views. As the runner up of the chairman elections he was made Deputy Chair of the Democrat party. This is yet another example of how the far-Left have shockingly managed to become mainstream.

The reason for all this lies in their use of inverted language, which is rooted in relativism, the Lefts’ idol. When they speak of equality, liberation, freedom and other such liberal concepts they do not mean it in the way a normal democratic liberal would. Rather; equality, liberation and freedom in the way they mean often equals the mirror opposite. This inversion of language is used to cover up their radical views and it then gains them access to the mainstream political parties.

This was a gift given by Fidel Castro to the PLO. While it is known that Fidel’s secret police trained hundreds of Palestinian terrorists, it is not so well known that Fidel trained Yassar Arafat in the art of language inversion. Using the language of human rights and liberation as a cover, Fidel trained Arafat how to take the moral high ground away from Israel. He learned to portray Israel as the aggressor, a colonial and imperialistic creation. He depicted that the Palestinians are the victims of many crimes and are justified for their “resistance” against the State of Israel. This tactic seems to have spread to the Islamic terrorists like Al Qaeda and to the terror state of Iran who use the same language inversion to attack America and the West for their “imperialism”. This in itself would not be such a problem, because it is unlikely they would be listened to based upon their reputation, but the major problem is when this kind of language is used by the far-Left in Western countries. This provides a cover for the terrorists and makes defeating them significantly and incomparably harder.

It must be emphasised that the real war is a war of concepts, not just words. When concepts lose their meaning and are free for interpretation by anyone it is a very small step away from nihilism, which should never be allowed to take root in any liberal democracy.

In order for the West to survive spiritually it must make a firm commitment to absolutism and a firm rejection of relativism.


In the end there will be only two types of Democrats: anti-Semites and cowards.

The Democrats care about anti-Semitism.

They care so much that they had a presidential candidate and convention speaker who led an anti-Semitic riot through a Jewish neighborhood. “If the Jews want to get it on, tell them to pin their yarmulkes back and come over to my house,” he had taunted his victims.

He became a close presidential adviser whose endorsement is sought after by every Democrat running for the White House.

They care so much that they had a presidential candidate and speaker at two conventions who had used racial slurs against Jews and declared, “I’m sick and tired of hearing about the Holocaust.”

They care so much that the new deputy DNC chair, who had also spoken at a convention, has a long history with anti-Semitic hate groups.

From Al Sharpton to Jesse Jackson to Keith Ellison, there’s a safe space for anti-Semitism on the left.

Keith Ellison’s people are blaming the Jews for his defeat. They aren’t blaming themselves for having put forward a “progressive” candidate with a long history of anti-Semitism which continued to come out during the campaign forcing even the ADL and other liberal Jewish groups to back away from his hatred.

It’s not Keith Ellison’s 11 years in the anti-Semitic Nation of Islam hate group that they object to or his planned appearance at the MAS-ICNA Islamist convention in Chicago alongside an Islamist cleric who had called for killing all the Jews. Nor is it his ties to CAIR which has invited a Holocaust denier to its conferences and whose leader made anti-Semitic remarks.

It’s not Ellison’s anti-Semitism that they object to. They object to the Jews for objecting to it.

There’s a long proud history of that sort of thing on the left. Cynthia McKinney’s backers blamed her setbacks on the same folks as Keith Ellison’s backers. As her father put it, “Jews have bought everybody. Jews. J-e-w-s.” If the Jews “bought everybody”, they didn’t get a good deal since McKinney was succeeded by Hank Johnson who compared Jews living in Israel to termites.

“You see one home after another being appropriated by Jewish people,” Johnson ranted. “…almost like termites can get into a residence and eat before you know that you’ve been eaten up.”

And so the left has decided to blame the “Jewish termites” for eating up Keith Ellison’s candidacy. But his anti-Semitism didn’t prevent him from becoming the leading candidate to head the DNC. Anti-Semitism is not a disqualifier on the left. If anything, it’s a qualifier.

Keith Ellison lost because Obama’s people campaigned against him. Ellison’s backers, most of whom are white leftists, can’t say a bad thing about Obama. But blaming the Jews is always a safe bet.

When it comes to anti-Semitism, the Democrats aren’t just bigots, they’re cowards. Take Bernie Sanders, the son of a Polish immigrant, who panders to anti-Semites and refuses to stand up to them.

In an address to the anti-Israel hate group, J Street, which has hosted BDS supporters, Bernie Sanders blamed President Trump for anti-Semitism and complained that he hadn’t condemned it enough.

No one is a bigger coward when it comes to condemning anti-Semitism than Bernie Sanders.

When an audience member at one of his own events began ranting about “Zionist Jews” running the Federal Reserve and Wall Street, Bernie responded by launching into an attack on Israel.

When NPR’s Diane Rehm accused him of having dual citizenship in Israel based on a “list” from some anti-Semitic site, he mumbled his way through a response. Instead of condemning this bigotry, he praised her as a “good interviewer”.

What good interviewer, with a background of hating Israel, doesn’t accuse a Jewish candidate of dual loyalty? What good progressive leftist whose Jewishness is limited to his accent doesn’t praise her for it?

Bernie Sanders shrilled that it was “imperative” that Trump and members of his administration “be loud and clear in condemning anti-Semitism”.

Where was Bernie’s condemnation when his Sandinista comrades were chanting, “Death to the Jews”, when a synagogue was firebombed and in an echo of Hitler’s Germany, its president was forced to scrub the streets? Instead his voice was raised loudly in support of the Marxist regime that wiped out the Jewish community of Nicaragua.

While Bernie Sanders honeymooned in the USSR, Soviet Jews were being oppressed by the leftist regime. The same year that Bernie Sanders was touring the USSR, Soviet Jewish protests were being broken up by the KGB and Josef Begun, a prominent refusenik, met with President Reagan.

Reagan was vocal in condemning the abuse of Jews by the USSR and the Sandanistas. But where was Bernie’s “loud and clear” condemnation?

It was nowhere to be heard.

Bernie Sanders supported Jesse Jackson despite his “Hymietown” slur. He refused to directly condemn his anti-Semitism when he was asked about it.

But why blame Bernie Sanders for being a miserable coward? The left is an anti-Semitic movement. To be a part of it, you either have to be anti-Semitic or very good at not hearing certain things.

Bernie Sanders is very good at not hearing certain things about Jews running the banks or being dirty ‘Hymies’. But he’s hardly alone. Senator Schumer was very good at not hearing the things that Keith Ellison was saying even when they were on tape. But that’s what you have to do if you want to be Jewish and get ahead in a party overrun by anti-Semites who are very concerned about anti-Semitism.

As the Democrats become a radical left-wing party, there will be room only for anti-Semites and those who pretend not to see them. And that will become harder and harder to do.

But there will always be lefties with Jewish last names who find it lucrative or fulfilling to pander to anti-Semitic bigots. Bernie Sanders rode his selective blindness to the leadership of the left. The old Bernie used his unemployment benefits to buy a dilapidated maple sugar shack with a dirt floor. The new one can afford a $600,000 summer home. The old Bernie used to fly coach. The new Bernie took to flying around in a private 767 jet with lamb loin, crab salad and lobster sliders on the menu.

Chuck Schumer was pressured into standing up to the Iran deal once by his Jewish constituents. And the left threatened his career. So the new Senate majority leader went all in on Keith Ellison.

Bernie, Chuck and the rest of the gang have a good life. But the price of their careers is turning a blind eye to anti-Semitism. Meanwhile they will pretend to care a great deal about anti-Semitism as long as it doesn’t come from the left, from Iran, from the Palestinian Authority or any Islamic organization.

Because the Democrats care about anti-Semitism. They care so much that they insist on funding Islamic terrorists in the Palestinian Authority who get paid based on how many Jews they kill.

They care so much that they want money to keep flowing to Iran’s genocidal nuclear program and through it, to Hamas and Hezbollah, who have called for exterminating the Jews.

They care so much that they fought on behalf of Muslims convicted of terror plots against synagogues.

In the end there will be only two types of Democrats: anti-Semites and the cowards too afraid to stand up to them.

Originally published in FrontPageMag.


The left opposes bombing synagogues except when it supports it.

Keith Ellison is suddenly very concerned about anti-Semitism.

The former Nation of Islam member who appeared on stage with Khalid Abdul Muhammad (“that old no-good Jew, that old imposter Jew, that old hooked-nose, bagel-eating, lox-eating… just crawled out of the caves and hills of Europe, so-called damn Jew”) and defended the anti-Semitism of Louis Farrakhan (“Do you know some of these satanic Jews have taken over BET?”) is worried about the hatred of Jews.

The leading candidate to head the DNC who used to rant about, “European white Jews…  trying to oppress minorities all over the world” denounced President Trump for having, “taken… so long to even say the word ‘anti-Semitism.’”

How long did it take Ellison to stop defending the anti-Semitism of Farrakhan or of Joanne Jackson?

And Ellison isn’t through yet. He associates with CAIR, a hate group that has defended terrorists who target synagogues, and touts an endorsement from Jesse “Hymietown” Jackson.

Keith Ellison put out a press release after the bomb threats to Jewish centers declaring, “To all those who have felt threatened: I stand with you.”

Speaking of threats, the Minnesota Daily opinion editor, Michael Olenick, had described Ellison’s writing as “a genuine threat to the long-term safety and well-being of the Jewish people, a threat that history dictates must not be ignored.”

Except it was ignored.

Ellison is currently opposed to bomb threats to Jewish centers. That’s progress. But he’s closely allied with CAIR and other Islamist groups that have defended actual synagogue bomb plotters. CAIR has spread claims that the Muslim terrorists who plotted to bomb the Riverdale Jewish Center and Temple were really the victims of government entrapment.

When Ahmed Ferhani was arrested for a plot to attack a synagogue, CAIR held a rally to support him.

Linda Sarsour, who had described throwing stones at Jews as “the definition of courage”, accused the Trump administration of anti-Semitism. Sarsour claims to be raising money to repair a vandalized Jewish cemetery. While the campaign was touted by the media, it is unclear who the actual donors are.

What is clear is that Linda Sarsour supported Ahmed Ferhani. Sarsour insisted on calling the anti-Semitic terrorist a “boy” or a “kid”. She also defended the Riverdale Jewish Center bomb plotters.

At his trial, Ahmed Ferhani had boasted, “I intended to create chaos and send a message of intimidation and coercion to the Jewish population of New York City.”

“Look at the Jewish guy. You’re not smiling no more, you f___r. I hate those bastards. I hate those m______s. Those f____g Jewish bastards. I’d like to get one of those. I’d like to get a synagogue. Me. Yeah. Personally,” James Cromitie had ranted.

This is what Linda Sarsour and the left have been defending for some time now. The vast majority of the accounts you will read about Cromitie, the Newburgh Four, and Ahmed Ferhani, will be positive. Their innocence has been defended by CBS, HBO, the New York Times and countless other media outlets.

Like Keith Ellison and Linda Sarsour, the media is momentarily opposed to burning and bombing synagogues.

It wasn’t always.

In New York City, a year before September 11, Muslims threw firebombs at a synagogue in the Bronx. “A bias-motivated attempt to firebomb a synagogue?” the New York Times asked. “Or a misguided message critical of Israeli policies against Palestinians?”

If the cemetery vandals or JCC callers turn out to be Muslims, the media will ask whether desecrating Jewish graves was bias or a “misguided message critical of Israeli policies against Palestinians?”

That is what makes the sudden outpouring of concern about anti-Semitism shamelessly opportunistic.

Real anti-Semites are fighting fake anti-Semitism as a publicity stunt to attack the first administration to question the wisdom of financing the anti-Semitic mass murder of Jews by Islamic terrorists.

Linda Sarsour is a bigot who supports the anti-Semitic BDS movement and assorted Islamic terrorists. At a pro-Hamas event, she called for limiting friendships with Jews to opponents of the Jewish State. She is expected to share a stage at a BDS event with a woman who played a role in the murder of two Jewish college students.

This is anti-Semitism.

The left has a studied disinterest in true anti-Semitism. It views Linda Sarsour and Keith Ellison as heroes. It makes excuses for Ahmed Ferhani or James Cromitie. It has opportunistically decided to exploit accusations of anti-Semitism to attack President Trump. But if the bomb threats to Jewish centers or the cemetery vandalism turn out to be the work of Muslims, then the hot potato will fall.

Stories about the incidents will quickly go away. The Muslim perpetrators will become victims of entrapment. HBO will air a documentary blaming the whole thing on overzealous FBI agents.

Anti-Semitism also has its fellow travelers. These are the people who are very selective about the anti-Semitism that they reject. They will oppose bombing synagogues only as long as the wrong sort of people are doing it. If the right sort of people bomb synagogues, the issue will become nuanced.

Bombing synagogues will suddenly cease to be a “black and white” issue.

The media has decided to spend a few weeks accusing President Trump of anti-Semitism. Its sudden concern about fake anti-Semitism goes hand in hand with normalizing real anti-Semitism.

Fighting fake anti-Semitism consists of fake left-wing organizations, like the Anne Frank Center for Mutual Respect, a group run by two gay rights activists from New Jersey that no one in the Jewish community had ever heard of before, getting airtime on the Fake News media to attack Trump.

Fighting real anti-Semitism would mean holding Linda Sarsour and Keith Ellison accountable for their long history of hating Jews instead of providing them with a platform for their publicity stunts.

The previous administration sent billions of dollars to two terror states, the Palestinian Authority and Iran, which finance the murder of Jews. Not a single of the organizations attacking Trump said a word of protest when our tax dollars were used to pay the salaries of Islamic terrorists in proportion to how many Jews they killed. None of them had a word to say when Obama sent billions in illegal payments to the Iranian paymasters of Hamas and Hezbollah in foreign currency on unmarked cargo planes.

Previous administrations had funded the Palestinian Authority. Obama was the first to fund the PLO, Hamas and Hezbollah. It’s quite an accomplishment for a Nobel Peace Prize winner.

Opposing anti-Semitism doesn’t mean opposing it from people you don’t like. That’s no great challenge. It means opposing it from those you do like. And the media likes Keith Ellison and Linda Sarsour.

The left has always celebrated its anti-Semites. Stop by an event celebrating the literary legacy of Amiri Baraka (“I got the extermination blues, jew-boys. I got the Hitler syndrome figured”) or Alice Walker (“May God protect you from the Jews”… “It’s too late, I already married one.”)

The left doesn’t oppose anti-Semitism. It opposes the right. It will accuse the right of anti-Semitism when convenient even while its ranks swell with the blackest and ugliest bigotry imaginable. It is rotten with anti-Semitism. It can’t and won’t reject it. It won’t even reject the murder of Jews, the bombing of synagogues and membership in anti-Semitic hate groups when its own heroes are doing it.

Behind the fake outrage is a real outrage. Behind the fake anti-Semitism is real anti-Semitism.

Originally Published on FrontPageMag.

[watch] Dershowitz: If Ellison Is Appointed Dnc Chair, I Will Resign My Democratic Party Membership

Image Source Alan Dershowitz: The Huntington

Friday on Fox Business Network’s “Mornings With Maria Bartiromo,” while discussing Rep. Keith Ellison (D-MN), who is under fire for his praise of the controversial Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan in light of his bid to become the Democratic National Committee chair, author and emeritus law professor at Harvard University Alan Dershowitz said if Ellison is elected, he would resign from the Democratic Party.

Dershowitz said, “If they now appoint Keith Ellison, who worked with Farrakhan, to be chairman of the DNC, you’re going to see a lot of people leave. I’m going to tell you right here on this show, and this is news, if they appoint Keith Ellison to be chairman of the Democratic party, I will resign my membership to the Democratic party after 50 years of being a loyal Democrat. I will still vote my conscience and mostly I will vote for Democrats, but I will not be a member of a party that represents itself through a chairman like Keith Ellison, and through policies, like that espoused by John Kerry and Barack Obama.”

The Democratic party remains fractured, with the Ellison camp desiring to take it farther to the left. If Dershowitz and others jump ship then the Democratic party would cease to be a vehicle for pro-Israel Liberal Jews. With Trump as President, this constituency would have no political home unless Trump is able to reach and draw them into a far larger Republican political party.

Trump or Hamas

The Islamic Society of North America was named by the Justice Department as an unindicted co-conspirator in funding Hamas. It was linked to two Hamas funding fronts, the Holy Land Foundation and KindHearts. ISNA’s checks were made payable to the “Palestinian Mujahadeen” or “Holy Warriors” which was a name used by Hamas.

ISNA’s co-founder Sami Al-Arian was the local head of Palestinian Islamic Jihad and Mousa Abu Marzook, a top Hamas official listed by the Treasury Department as a Specially Designated Terrorist, received tens of thousands of dollars from ISNA.

This should have come as no surprise as both ISNA and Hamas are arms of the Muslim Brotherhood.

But the American Jewish Committee has decided to team up with the financiers of the murder of Jews to oppose Trump. The left wing Jewish group and an Islamist organization that wrote out checks to Islamic terrorists enabling them to kill Jews have formed the “Muslim-Jewish Advisory Council”.

Statements from both ISNA and the AJC made it clear that this was a reaction to Trump’s win.

“We are uniting to help the administration navigate in the proper constitutional manner, to uphold freedom of religion and constitutional rights for all American citizens,” Eftakhar Alam of ISNA said.

“It is a reaction to some of the bigotry and hate speech that came out of the campaign,” Robert Silverman, the AJC’s director of Muslim-Jewish relations said. “We’re concerned about the public discourse in the whole country. We’re also concerned about messages that originated within the two communities. The Trump phenomenon is only going to make it come together more quickly.”

The love affair that birthed the Wolf-Sheep Advisory Council is mostly unrequited. While the AJC loudly trumpets its new friendship, as of this writing ISNA has yet to inform its brethren of the alliance with the sons of apes and pigs in its news section. ISNA’s list of interfaith partners doesn’t even mention the AJC.

But appeasing those who hate you wins more enthusiasm from the appeasers than the appeased.

Farooq Kathwari, the Muslim co-chair of the Muslim-Jewish Advisory Council, had his name on a report by the American Muslim Task Force which defended Muslim donations to Islamic terrorist groups including Hezbollah. “It was difficult for Muslim Americans… to ease the plight of Lebanese civilians without risking scrutiny by the U.S. government for aiding organizations connected with Hezbollah,” the report complained.

The Muslim council members include ISNA’s Imam Mohamed Magid who gave a diversity award to a CAIR official who had declared that Jews had incurred the wrath of Allah. Magid had called for an end to Israel’s blockade of Hamas in Gaza and the ISNA statement it was appended to had decried that Islamic terrorists had not been consulted in ceasefire negotiations.

Also on the Council is ISNA’s Sayyid Syeed who had declared, “Our job is to change the Constitution of America”. He had formerly headed up the Muslim Students Association and worked in a senior position at the International Institute of Islamic Thought, another unindicted co-conspirator in funding Hamas whose ranks included a number of Islamic terrorists fighting against Israel.

But it’s more interesting to note who in ISNA’s leadership isn’t on the Council.

There’s Iqbal Unus whose home had been raided in connection with an investigation into Hamas and Islamic Jihad funding. There’s also the co-founder of ISNA, Muzammil Siddiqi, who hosted and translated a speech by the infamous Blind Sheikh, linked to the World Trade Center bombing, in which he declared, “If you are not going to the jihad, then you are neglecting the rules of Allah.”

Siddiqi predicted the Islamic conquest and destruction of Israel. “In a few years we will be celebrating with each other the victory of Islam in Palestine. Insh’allah, we shall be celebrating the coming of the Masjid al-Aqsa under the Islamic rule. We shall be celebrating insh’allah the coming of Jerusalem and the whole land of Palestine insh’allah and the establishment of the Islamic State throughout that area.“

It would be a little awkward to have the man who praised suicide bombers and called for the destruction of the Jewish State on the Muslim-Jewish Advisory Council.

But no doubt a way could be found to finesse the problem.

Siddiqi is still a prominent figure in ISNA. The Muslim-Jewish Advisory Council is a sick sad joke in which Jewish lefties ally with Jihadists against a pro-Israel administration while claiming that they share goals.

Which goals exactly does the American Jewish Committee share with Siddiqi? Is the AJC also anticipating the creation of an Islamic State in Jerusalem?

Instead of representing the needs of the Jewish community, the AJC has dived into the left-wing gutter, wailing against Trump and making alliances with the enemy to protect them from Trump.

Heading up the AJC’s effort is Robert Silverman. Silverman is a State Department veteran with plenty of experience in the Muslim world. From the start he seemed far more intent on agitating on behalf of Muslims and against the critics of Islam than for Jews.

His pitch to Jews was collaborate now and perhaps our new Muslim overlords will be grateful.

“Showing support at this critical time will lead to good results for the Jewish people down the road,” Silverman said. It didn’t work with Mohammed or in Israel or Europe. But it’s bound to work this time.

He warned American Jews not to complain about the risk of Muslim migration. “American Jews should be careful not to add to a climate of fear that exists in our country regarding immigrants.”

The joint group will, among other things, lobby for refugees. The remaining Jewish refugees are fleeing Muslim violence and hate in Europe. If America is swamped by Muslim migrants the way Europe was, where will American Jews flee all these “refugees” to?

Meanwhile Silverman retweeted a message of approval from Glenn Greenwald who had criticized the inclusion of Hamas and Hezbollah on the terror list and described them as being “dedicated to protecting their citizens against the State of Israel.” He complained, “and yet it is criminal in the United States to do anything that is deemed to be material support for Hamas and Hezbollah.”

Greenwald had also spoken of “the role Judaism plays in the decades-long oppression by the Israelis of Palestinians.”

Instead of fighting anti-Semitism, the American Jewish Committee was allying with anti-Semites.

While Muslim hate groups supported by ISNA terrorize Jewish students on campuses, the AJC expressed concern about “hate” against Muslims on campuses.

The media and left-wing groups are bombarding Jews daily with alarmist warnings about Trump while urging them to ally with our Muslim “friends”. Here’s what an alliance with those friends looks like.

Left-wing groups like the AJC have sold out the Jewish community by taking the side of Muslims over their Jewish victims. They have allied with Islamic hate groups supportive not of Jews, but of the murder of Jews.

And now they are screaming their heads off about Donald Trump.

Their Muslim friends, whether it’s Keith Ellison or ISNA, have defended anti-Semitism and attacked the Jewish State. American Jews have a choice between trying to appease Hamas or fighting against it.

The AJC has chosen its side. It has sided with the financiers and inciters of the murder of Jews.

American Jews have a simple choice to make. They can either believe the lies or hear the truth. They can either side with their killers or resist.

The AJC has made the choice very clear and simple. It’s either Hamas or Donald Trump.

Originally posted on Sultan Knish.

Deepening Israeli-Indian Ties Find Their Way Into US Politics

The following petition shows the growing the strength of Indian and Israeli cooperation and its influence on US politics.

Please read, sign and share this petition:

  • We the undersigned are supporters of strong relations with important U.S. democratic allies, India and Israel;
  • We recognize that the strength of such alliances with these partners, whose governments are exemplars of democratic ideals, depends upon U.S. policy and action that works to respect those nations’ sovereign decisions to protect the security of their citizenries and grow their own national interests;
  • Further, we wish to acknowledge the deep and abiding ties that the Hindu-American and Jewish-American communities have to India and Israel, as well as the the long-standing and loyal support that members of both these communities have given to the Democratic Party in the U.S. political arena;
  • The Hindu and Jewish traditions both hold the values of plurality, inclusivity and egalitarianism in the highest regard and wish to have these values reflected in the words and actions of the leaders who are chosen to represent the United States and its political parties.

With respect to all of the aforementioned, we the undersigned hereby voice our opposition to Representative Keith Ellison’s bid to become the new Chair of The Democratic National Committee.


From the statement by the Hindu American Foundation (HAF), December 5, 2016

**Please reference the entire statement at:

//The nation’s largest Hindu American advocacy organization, the Hindu American Foundation (HAF), today joined prominent human and civil rights organizations in expressing concerns over the bid by Congressman Keith Ellison (D-MN) to head the Democratic National Committee (DNC).

The Foundation announced that it was disturbed by Rep. Ellison’s decade long legislative activism against India, portraying inter-religious conflicts exclusively as one-sided, with the Hindu majority population depicted only as victimizers and religious minorities as victims. Rep. Ellison’s record of co-sponsoring resolutions, congressional letters and statements countered the interests of many Hindu Americans and the broader Indian American community, HAF leaders said, and also gave a platform to certain activists previously accused of Hinduphobia …

“Surveys confirm that nearly 65 percent of Indian Americans are registered or lean Democrat, so leadership of the DNC is a matter of great importance in further engaging the community,” added Suhag Shukla, HAF’s Executive Director. “Mr. Ellison’s record on India over the last decade raises many concerns, but we believe that beginning a constructive dialogue between the Indian and Hindu American communities and Mr. Ellison are important first steps in realizing unity and inclusivity urgently needed today.”//


From the PRESS RELEASE by the Anti-Defamation League (ADL), December 1, 2016

**Please reference the entire text at:

//New York, NY, December 1, 2016 … The Anti-Defamation League (ADL) today said new information that has come to light since Rep. Keith Ellison’s announced candidacy for chair of the Democratic National Committee raises “serious doubts” about his ability to faithfully represent the party’s traditional support for Israel.

Jonathan A. Greenblatt, ADL CEO, issued the following statement:

When Rep. Ellison’s candidacy to be chair of the Democratic National Committee was first reported, ADL did not rush to judgment.  Instead, we took a hard look at the totality of his record on key issues on our agenda. We spoke to numerous leaders in the community and to Mr. Ellison himself. ADL’s subsequent statement on his candidacy appreciated his contrition on some matters, acknowledged areas of commonality but clearly expressed real concern where Rep. Ellison held divergent policy views, particularly related to Israel’s security.

New information recently has come to light that raises serious concerns about whether Rep. Ellison faithfully could represent the Democratic Party’s traditional support for a strong and secure Israel. In a speech recorded in 2010 to a group of supporters, Rep. Ellison is heard suggesting that American foreign policy in the Middle East is driven by Israel, saying: “The United States foreign policy in the Middle East is governed by what is good or bad through a country of 7 million people. A region of 350 million all turns on a country of 7 million. Does that make sense? Is that logic? Right? When the Americans who trace their roots back to those 350 million get involved, everything changes.”

Rep. Ellison’s remarks are both deeply disturbing and disqualifying.  His words imply that U.S. foreign policy is based on religiously or national origin-based special interests rather than simply on America’s best interests. Additionally, whether intentional or not, his words raise the specter of age-old stereotypes about Jewish control of our government, a poisonous myth that may persist in parts of the world where intolerance thrives, but that has no place in open societies like the U.S. These comments sharply contrast with the Democratic National Committee platform position, which states: “A strong and secure Israel is vital to the United States because we share overarching strategic interests and the common values of democracy, equality, tolerance, and pluralism.”//


Originally Published in Reflections of Indwelling Light

Cablegate Exposes the Real Face of Keith Ellison

Minnesota Rep. Keith Ellison is a front-runner for chairman of the Democratic National Committee. If you are following the ongoing developments in Rep. Keith Ellison‘s bid to become the next chair of the DNC, you may be interested in some primary source information from Wikileak’s Cablegate.


Public Library of US Diplomacy (“Cablegate” document set search)


“…. On April 5, U.S. House of Representatives Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Rep. Tom Lantos (D-California), Rep. Henry Waxman (D-California), Rep. Nick Rahall (D-West Virginia), Rep. Louise McIntosh Saughter (D-New York), Rep. Dave Hobson (R-Ohio), and Rep. Keith Ellison (D-Minnesota) met with Majlis Al-Shura (Consultative Council) Chairman Sheikh Dr. Salih bin Humaid, Saudi Ambassador to the U.S. Adel Al-Jubeir, and eleven other Shura Council members.  Humaid … is also the imam of the Grand Mosque in Mecca …

… Before entering the meeting room, the U.S. delegation was greeted by the 11 Council members who participated in the main meeting. At one point during the meeting, Speaker Pelosi noted that when Congressman Ellison took the oath of office in January 2007, he did so on a Qur’an originally owned by President Jefferson. She pointed out that she told King Abdullah that Jefferson studied Arabic after he left the White House and that U.S. interest in Islam is at least 200 years old. (COMMENT: The Majlis members were visibly and audibly impressed. END COMMENT.) …

…. Shura Council representative Al-Hilwa conveyed his optimism regarding the Arab Peace Initiative, asking for USG support and initiative in pushing it forward.  He noted that the Arab Quartet (Saudi Arabia, UAE, Egypt, and Jordan) supports it and requested that the international Quartet do the same.  Al-Hilwa emphasized the necessity for Israel to accept the initiative, hoping that the U.S. Congress would press the Israelis to do so. Congressman Lantos said he was deeply impressed with the King’s proposal for a comprehensive settlement of the Arab-Israeli dispute, emphasizing his importance as a regional leader, as well as vis-a-vis the region’s religious hierarchy.  Congressman Lantos stressed that governments such as Egypt and Jordan that have relations with Israel would be useful in this process, adding that it is also important to involve United Nations Secretary General  Ban Ki-Moon because he enjoys global respect and can help move the proposal forward.  He warned that settling this dispute will not happen overnight and will require a great deal of give and take, consultation, and negotiation.

… Council member Fadhel said that everyone is very worried about military developments in the region, especially as they relate to nuclear weapons. He said people are especially worried about Israeli nuclear weapons that are ready for use, saying that the populace wants the region, including Iran, clear and free of nuclear weapons.  However, he doubted that this would happen unless the Arab-Israeli conflict is resolved comprehensively and justly.  He emphasized that most countries in the region do not accept that Israel’s possession of nuclear weapons is ignored while Iran is sanctioned.

… Noting that there are a number of initiatives in Congress to address energy needs, Speaker Pelosi emphasized that for environmental, energy, economic, and security reasons, the U.S. must increase its energy independence and reduce its dependence on oil.  She pointed out that there is not an endless supply of oil and that the U.S. must prepare for the future, adding that the U.S. must also stop global warming.  However, she welcomed further discussion, saying that the issue is important to all countries.”


“… As Chair of the K.S.A.- U.S.A. Friendship Committee, Al-Aiban announced that he is developing a series of exchange visits to the U.S. Congress because there is a “need for greater contacts between Congress and the Majlis.”  He also confided that Minnesota Representative Keith Ellison, who accompanied Speaker Pelosi in April 2007, may be invited to take part in the annual Hajj.  Citing the current NOPEC legislation (ref A), Al-Aiban said it is vital to also bring “non-friends” to Saudi Arabia.  In closing, Al-Aiban shared that he and a small delegation will be traveling to the U.S. in early October to prepare logistics for the planned visit of Majlis President Sheikh Dr. Salih bin Humaid in late 2007. Referring to House of Representatives Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s verbal invitation in April 2007 (ref B) for Humaid to visit Congress, Al-Aiban requested official invitations from Speaker Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid in order to follow up on that invitation.”


“… Codel Tierney (Representatives John Tierney, Keith Ellison, Jim Moran, Betty McCollum, Maurice Hinchey, and Barbara Cubin), accompanied by Charge and Polcouns met March 27 with President Pervez Musharraf.  Also attending were General Shaufkat and MFA Additional Secretary for Americas Attiyah Mahmood.”



“… Codel Tierney (Representatives John Tierney, Keith Ellison, Jim Moran, Betty McCollum, Maurice Hinchey, and Barbara Cubin), accompanied by Polcouns, met March 27 with Ahsan Iqbal, the newly elected National Assembly member and former Chief Coordinator and Information Secretary for the Pakistan Muslim League – Nawaz (PML-N), and congratulated him on his new position within the National Assembly.

… Representative Tierney asked whether the new government would give the international community access to A.Q. Khan, the mastermind behind Pakistan’s nuclear
capability development.  Iqbal quickly pointed out that no political party within Pakistan would ‘give him over.’ However, both the PML-N and the PPP are committed to nuclear non-proliferation.  In addition, during his term as Prime Minister, Nawaz Sharif rejected the idea of selling the nuclear technology capabilities to other countries, as he was pressured to do.  Iqbal was quick to note that had the world’s super powers created a legitimate means of nuclear technology transfer, Pakistan would not have had to create their program using back channels.  Iqbal believed that Pakistan was willing to work with the US on creating such a legitimate system of technology transfer for other interested countries.”



“… Congressman Keith Ellison (DFL-MN) spoke on a panel devoted to the Administration’s approach to the Muslim world …

… On the margins of the Forum, Ellison appeared on Al Jazeera’s Arabic channel as the “mid-day guest,” and was also interviewed by Turkish national television and Egypt’s Al Hayat TV … Ellison also granted an interview to Qatari Arabic daily ‘Al Watan’ …

… Ellison spoke to the dean, faculty and students at Qatar University’s Sharia College and responded to questions about religious freedom and the lives of ordinary Muslims in the United States.  The Congressman also spoke to a gathering of young Qatari men organized by the General Youth Authority.”



“… During a February 17-18 visit to Amman, Congressmen Brian Baird and Keith Ellison (both members of the Friends of Jordan Caucus) took the pulse of Jordanian feelings on Gaza …

… During a reception hosted by UNRWA Commissioner-General Karen Abu Zayd, Baird and Ellison announced their intention to ‘bear witness’ to the impact of Israel’s operations in Gaza by traveling there.

… During a phone call with Prince Ghazi, the King’s primary advisor on religious issues, Baird and Ellison spoke about possibilities for advancing interfaith dialogue under the “Common Word” initiative, which identifies commonalities in the Muslim and Christian scriptures.  Ghazi flagged an upcoming Georgetown University conference on the subject and urged the Codel to write a letter to President Obama, asking  him to attend.  Ghazi also outlined his attempts to formulate a UN resolution declaring a World Interfaith Week — a cause he hopes to formally launch at the Georgetown conference. Ghazi plans to accompany the King on a sought-after visit to meet President Obama and hopes to lobby for the President to attend the conference on the side. 

… Baird voiced concerns that Judaism was not a part of the Common Word initiative, adding that the cause would be stronger if the common beliefs of three rather than two religions were included.  Ghazi responded that Judaism was left out of Common Word due to political sensitivities among Muslims, saying, ‘It’s a tough sell on my side.’”  

In 2009, the U.S. House ethics panel completed an investigation of Minnesota Rep. Keith Ellison, a front-runner for chairman of the Democratic National Committee, “after he failed to disclose that a group founded by members of the Muslim Brotherhood paid for him to make a pilgrimage to the Islamic holy site of Mecca in Saudi Arabia.

“After a months-long review by a U.S. House ethics panel, Rep. Keith Ellison, D-Minn., has disclosed the amount of his privately-paid trip to Mecca in December.

The trip, paid for by the Muslim American Society of Minnesota, cost $13,350, Ellison said Thursday.

The two-week trip to Saudi Arabia, which Ellison described as a personal religious pilgrimage, or Hajj, prompted little discussion until June when Ellison filed financial travel reports that failed to disclose the amount the Muslim group had paid for his travel.

In releasing the amount on Thursday, Ellison held to his previous assertion that he was following the instructions of the House Committee on Standards of Official Conduct, commonly known as the ethics committee.

‘I never had a moral objection to giving the number out,’ said Ellison, the first Muslim elected to Congress. ‘But the rules said I didn’t have to, so I didn’t. Now I am.’”

(from: “Ellison reveals cost of trip to Mecca: $13.5K”, Star Tribune – Oct. 2009)

However, it is unclear whether the U.S. House ethics panel during their review was privy to information contained in an August 8, 2007 diplomatic cable which mentions — within the context of discussion of plans for relationship-building between Majlis Al-Shura and U.S. Congress — the intention of Majlis Al-Shura member Dr. Bandar bin Mohammed Al-Aiban in speaking to Political Counsel to extend an invitation to the annual Hajj to Representative Ellison — and if they also reviewed related information in other cables:

** Note: internal links in the following added by this author for terminology and source references/context


“As Chair of the K.S.A.– U.S.A. Friendship Committee, Al-Aiban announced that he is developing a series of exchange visits to the U.S. Congress because there is a ‘need for greater contacts between Congress and the Majlis.’  He also confided that Minnesota Representative Keith Ellison, who accompanied Speaker Pelosi in April 2007, may be invited to take part in the annual Hajj.  Citing the current NOPEC legislation (ref A), Al-Aiban said it is vital to also bring ‘non-friends’ to Saudi Arabia.  In closing, Al-Aiban shared that he and a small delegation will be traveling to the U.S. in early October to prepare logistics for the planned visit of Majlis President Sheikh Dr. Salih bin Humaid in late 2007. Referring to House of Representatives Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s verbal invitation in April 2007 (ref B) for Humaid to visit Congress, Al-Aiban requested official invitations from Speaker Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid in order to follow up on that invitation.”

If the House ethics panel did not, in fact, have this information for context during their review, it is this author’s opinion that members of the panel should reopen the investigation to ensure that all relevant background information is considered.  It appears that the House ethics panel’s initial review was focused on whether the Rep. Ellison’s travel expenses were reported according to procedure insofar as the nature of private or public business conducted during the trip. In light of all of the background context revealed in the diplomatic cables, especially the information regarding Al-Aiban’s statement that revealed it was Majlis Al-Shura’s intention to bring Rep. Ellison over for Hajj, there are other questions that arise as to procedure — for instance, about the source of the funding for the travel and whether it was channeled or arranged by a foreign government.


Originally published on Reflections of Indwelling Light


The ADL’s new bedfellows

In an interview this week with the Australian media, Jordan’s King Abdullah became the latest Arab leader to express hope that President-elect Donald Trump and his team will lead the world’s to date failed fight against jihadist Islam.

Like his counterparts in Egypt and Saudi Arabia, Abdullah effectively ruled out the possibility that President Barack Obama will take any constructive steps to defeat the forces of global jihad in his last months in power.

Speaking of the humanitarian disaster in Aleppo for instance, Abdullah said, “I don’t think there’s much we can do until the new administration is in place and a strategy is formulated.”

Egyptian President Abdel Fatah a-Sisi was among the first Arab leaders to welcome Trump’s victory. Sisi has been largely shunned by the Obama administration. President Barack Obama supported the Muslim Brotherhood regime that Sisi and the Egyptian military overthrew in 2013.

Sisi was the first foreign leader to speak to Trump after his victory was announced. He released a statement to the media saying that he “looks forward to the presidency of President Donald Trump to inject a new spirit into the trajectory of Egyptian-American relations.”

The support that the incoming Trump administration is garnering in the Arab world stands in stark contrast to the near wall-to-wall opposition to Trump expressed by the American Muslim community. According to a survey of Muslim American opinion taken in October by the Council for American Islamic Relations, (CAIR), 72 percent of American Muslims supported Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton. Trump was supported by a mere 4 percent of the Muslim community.

Muslim American activists played key roles in the Clinton campaign. They were particularly active in swing states like Ohio and Michigan where Trump won by narrow margins.

As the Jerusalem Post reported Wednesday, since the election, Muslim American leaders have expressed concern and hostility towards the incoming Trump administration. Muslim Democrat activist James Zogby, who also heads the Arab American Institute published an op-ed in the Jordan Times to this effect after the election. Zogby expressed concern that the Trump administration would harm the civil rights of Arab Americans.

The gap between the Arab world’s support for Trump and the Muslim American community’s opposition to him is particularly notable because it reverberates strongly the growing cleavage between the Israeli government and public and large swathes of the American Jewish community.

Led most prominently by the Anti-Defamation League and its executive director Jonathan Greenblatt, in the wake of the election, American Jews are at the forefront of efforts to delegitimize Trump and his senior advisors. Unlike their Muslim American counterparts, who are keeping their criticism of Arab regimes to themselves, Greenblatt, the ADL and their allies on the Left have linked their opposition to Trump to legitimizing opponents of Israel.

Before assuming his role at the ADL, Greenblatt worked in Valerie Jarrett’s political influence shop in the Obama White House. As ADL chief, Greenblatt has used his position as the head of a major Jewish organization to support the Obama administration’s policies. To this end, since the election, the ADL has worked to tar the incoming Trump administration as anti-Semitic, focusing its fire on Trump’s senior strategist, former Breitbart News CEO Stephen Bannon.

The ADL spearheaded the campaign to label Bannon an anti-Semite. When its claims were shown to be entirely spurious, this week the ADL quietly acknowledged that Bannon has actually never made any anti-Semitic statements. But its quiet admission of spreading lies didn’t stop the ADL from continuing to traffic in them.

Even after it admitted that “We are not aware of any anti-Semitic statements from Bannon,” the ADL continued to insist that Breitbart has been a home for anti-Semites because some Jew haters wrote anti-Semitic responses to Breitbart articles.

The ADL’s smear campaign against Bannon is a hard sell because Breitbart is among the most pro-Israel websites in the US. But this brings us to the second aspect of the ADL-led campaign against President-elect Donald Trump and his team.

With each passing day, it becomes increasingly clear that the ADL and its allies are using the Trump victory as a means to draw a distinction between pro-Israel and Jew friendly while arguing that anti-Semites support Israel and that people who hate Israel are not anti-Semites. This was the clear goal at the ADL’s summit on anti-Semitism last week.

As Daniel Greenfield reported Thursday in Frontpage Magazine, ADL used the conference to legitimize the so-called BDS campaign to boycott Jewish Israeli products and divest from businesses that do business with Jewish owned Israeli businesses. It similarly normalized the general argument that there is nothing inherently anti-Semitic about opposing the Jewish state.

In a panel with the disturbing title, “Is Delegitimization of Israel Anti-Semitism?” the ADL featured anti-Israel activist Jill Jacobs and the Jane Eisen. Both women argued that BDS is legitimate. At the same time, they denounced fervent supporters of Israel like Bannon and Center for Security President Frank Gaffney.

Greenfield reported that the ADL gave a prominent platform at the conference supposedly dedicated to fighting anti-Semitism to Ford Foundation CEO Darren Walker. The Ford Foundation is one of the leading contributors to anti-Israel organizations in the US and to anti-Zionist political front groups in Israel.

Other speakers explained that it isn’t that Israel’s foes are anti-Semitic. It is just that Israelis and their supporters have become “hypersensitive” to criticism.

All in all, Greenfield concluded, “Instead of tackling anti-Semitism, the ADL was tackling Israel and pro-Israel Jews” and “normalizing anti-Israel rhetoric and organizations.”

A few days after the conference, the ADL took the next step towards normalizing hatred for Israel in America when it announced its support for Rep. Keith Ellison’s candidacy to serve as the next chairman of the Democratic National Committee.

Ellison became the first Muslim American elected to the House of Representatives in 2006. In the decades that preceded his election, Ellison built a long and documented history of membership in and advocacy and employment for the anti-Semitic Nation of Islam. In his capacity as a Nation of Islam spokesman, Ellison made anti-Semitic statements and promoted anti-Jewish and anti-Israel positions and activists.

Since joining the House of Representatives, Ellison has been one of the leading anti-Israel voices in Congress. He has spearheaded multiple anti-Israel initiatives. He openly supports the boycott of Israeli Jewish products and has castigated Israel as an apartheid state.

Together with James Zogby, last August Ellison served as a member of the Democratic Party’s platform committee. The men attempted to purge the platform of language in support of Israel.

Yet Wednesday the ADL released a statement extolling Ellison as “a man of good character.” The ADL praised him as “an ally in the fight against anti-Semitism and for civil rights.”

It even said that Ellison “has been on record in support of Israel.”

ADL is supporting Ellison – and opposing Trump and his pro-Israel advisors – because Greenblatt and his backers support Obama’s policies in the Middle East and want to make it difficult for Trump to abandon them.

Ellison and the leading American Muslim groups oppose Trump for the same reason. The difference between the two groups is that the ADL and its Jewish backers are acting in this manner because they support the Left, which Obama leads. Ellison and his allies at CAIR, the Islamic Society of North America, and the Arab American Institute and other groups oppose Trump because they support the substance of Obama’s policies.

The chief characteristics of Obama’s Middle East policies have been support for the Muslim Brotherhood and Iran against Israel and the US’s Sunni allies.

Former FBI agent and counterterrorism expert John Guandolo estimates that upwards of 80 percent of Islamic centers and mosques in the US are controlled by the Muslim Brotherhood.

The major American Muslim groups, including CAIR, ISNA and the Islamic Circle of North America are tied to the Muslim Brotherhood. The Muslim Brotherhood in turn supports Iran.

During his year in power in Egypt, the Muslim Brotherhood’s Muhammad Morsi permitted Iranian warships to travel through the Suez Canal, hosted Iranian leaders and Hezbollah commanders in Cairo and took a series of additional steps to embrace Iran.

Trump’s foreign policy advisor Walid Phares gave an interview to Egyptian television after Trump’s election stating that Trump will support a bill introduced by Senator Ted Cruz to outlaw the Muslim Brotherhood in the US as well as its offshoots CAIR, ISNA and others due to their support for jihadist terror groups formed by Brotherhood members. Al Qaeda, Hamas and a host of other jihadist groups have all been formed by Muslim Brotherhood followers.

Trump’s National Security Advisor, Lt. Gen. Mike Flynn, Rep. Mike Pompeo, whom Trump has selected to serve as his CIA Director as well as Marine Gen. James Mattis, the leading contender to serve as Trump’s Defense Secretary are all outspoken opponents of Obama’ nuclear deal with Iran.

Given the stakes then, it makes perfect sense that the Arab American groups oppose Trump.

It also makes sense that Arab regimes threatened by the Muslim Brotherhood and Iran support Trump and eagerly await his inauguration.

And it clearly makes sense for Israel to welcome Trump’s election.

The only thing that makes no sense is the American Jewish campaign to demonize Trump. The ADL’s leadership of the campaign to smear Trump and his advisors while legitimizing BDS and supporting Israel bashers is antithetical to the interests of the American Jewish community.

In adopting these positions, Greenblatt and the ADL along with their allies in J Street, Jewish Voices for Peace, If Not Now, the Forward, other far left groups and mainstream groups that have lost their way show through their actions that they have conflated their Judaism with their support for the Left. To the extent that the interests of the Jews of America contradict the positions of the Left, the Jews of America are behaving in an “anti-Semitic” way.

It is the responsibility of the segment of the community that understands “Jewish” is not a synonym of “leftist” to oppose the ADL and its backers. If they fail to do so, they will contribute to the descent of the community into powerlessness and irrelevance, not only in the era of Trump, but into the future.

Originally published in The Jerusalem Post.