Year End Reflections, Part III (Do We Now Celebrate Murder?)

Following the murder of Charlie Kirk, a local teacher wrote on her personal social media this post:  "Sorry, not sorry.  Karma is a bitch.  Real Christians, real people of faith, would never support this fake Christian who was so un-Christ-like and full of hatred for people of color, LGBTQIA+ people, and women."  The school district then suspended her; but after two months she was reinstated.  The local paper then published an editorial supporting the teacher's right to expression with this headline:  "Free speech for all:  even the voices we dislike."  

It did not appear that the teacher thought much of Charlie Kirk's right to free speech.  Nor was she accurate in her assertions that Kirk hated so many people.  I wrote a letter to the editor, which they did not publish.  Most of the letters they did publish were simply supportive of the teacher.  One letter writer, however, agreed with me.  First, my take, in pertinent part:

"All three of our children attended school in (the district where Mrs. McKagan teaches).  As such, we came to know Mr. (also a teacher) and Mrs. McKagan.  You argued that Rachel McKagan 'criticized a public figure's political behavior and moral character,' when criticizing Charlie Kirk.  As an attorney, and a defender of the First Amendment, I am not disputing your point.

However, I believe the editorial misses a much larger societal point.  When McKagan says about Kirk's murder:  'Sorry, not sorry.  Karma is a bitch,' then she has lost her moral compass.  Disagreeing is one thing.  Celebrating a murder is quite another.  Was there not a time in our country when it was universally understood that murder was bad.  Murder was evil.  Murder was a violation of law and the 10 Commandments.  Was there also not a time when we understood that we have the right to disagree with one another?  That's what America was all about.  

It was not very long ago that Brian Thompson, CEO of United Healthcare, was shot dead in the back in New York City.  Yet the accused now has somewhat of a following, because who hasn't had a problem with insurance companies.

But is this what we want?  If I disagree with you, and you get murdered, I should celebrate?  Juries should no longer convict murderers if they agree with the perpetrator's political philosophy?  Is that how we are to now understand 'justice?'  Because the alternative seems to be that we are headed for anarchy."

While my letter was not published, a letter by a clinical psychologist with a similar take was published.  That writer took exception to the editorial concluding that McKagan's words did not qualify as "hate speech."  Then he made this point:  "This kind of violent rhetoric effectively shuts down the open exchange of ideas.  Students with opposing views may be afraid to speak up, ask questions, or participate fully in class discussions for fear of judgment or retaliation.  Such inflammatory language destroys the teacher's ability to be viewed as a neutral and fair educator, especially on controversial subjects.  Again, if your teacher effectively wants you dead, this might be a tad intimidating."  

I would ask Mrs. McKagan this question:  "You referred to Charlie Kirk as a 'fake' Christian.  I am not a Christian.  But do you believe 'real Christians, real people of faith,' should be celebrating a cold-blooded murder?"

Year End Reflections, Part II (This Is A Deal?)

I cannot understand the proposed Russia-Ukraine peace proposal put forth by Trump and the Russians.  My initial reactions - if this is not a joke, then it's insane.  Some background.  Ukraine had possessed some nuclear weapons as part of the Soviet Union.  Following the breakup of the USSR, these now independent countries, such as Ukraine, agreed to give up the nukes that were held on their soil.  

So, in 1994, Ukraine signed onto the Budapest Memorandum, agreeing to give up its nukes and agreeing to non-proliferation of nuclear weapons.  In exchange, Ukraine was given "security guarantees" by the US, the UK and Russia.  Of course, we know that "agreements" made by dictators are nothing more than worthless promises.  As such, Russia invaded Ukraine in 2014 and seized the Crimea.  Who provided the security guarantee to Ukraine at that time?  No one.  Not the USA.  Not the UK.  

Now, we are told that after 4 years of fighting, during which the "mighty" Russian army has been unable to defeat Ukraine, the Ukrainians must give up much of their territory.  Forego the Crimea.  Forego even parts of the Donbas that Russia has yet to conquer.  Give up other territories as well.  Ukraine must reduce the size of its army by one half.  And Ukraine must agree, and NATO must agree, that Ukraine shall never be a member of NATO.  What does Ukraine get?

Ukraine gets "reliable security guarantees."  Right.  Just like before.  Anybody believe that when Russia attacks again (not if but when) the US will send soldiers to Ukraine to fight the Russians?  Not a chance.  And the Europeans?  This is in their backyard.  Pretty much consistently worthless.  As the conservative New York Post opined:  "Kyiv could demand the ouster of Putin's regime and it would still be less one-sided than this nonsense."  

An Op-Ed by one writer really resonated with me.  "In Munich in 1938, the UK and France likewise pressured Czechoslovakia into giving up the mountainous region of Sudetenland, together with its advanced system of fortifications, which had made a previous invasion by Nazi Germany impracticable.  Less than seven months later, Czechoslovakia ceased to exist."

Putin has repeatedly and openly said that the end of the Soviet Union was the biggest tragedy of the 20th century.  He has repeatedly said that he seeks a return to the old Soviet Union.  If Ukraine falls, who's next?  If next up are NATO members on the Baltic Sea, Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania, who will come to their defense?  Whatever treaty commitments there are as a member of NATO (an attack on one shall be treated as an attack on all), I do not see any NATO countries coming to their defense.  Definitely not the US.

What's the alternative?  Let the fighting continue?  Trump says he wants to end the killing.  But Russia started this war.  Russia has no problem targeting civilians and even children.  So that's where the pressure should be - all on Russia.  (The fact that the Ukrainian government has issues regarding corruption is irrelevant to this fight, and to the right of the Ukrainian people to self-determination.)  Greater sanctions on Russia are needed.  Provide more offensive weapons to Ukraine.  Or, be like Neville Chamberlain, and believe that appeasement results in "peace for our time."  Because it doesn't.  Peace through strength is the only sure path to peace.  Like George Washington said.  Like Ronald Reagan said.  Like I thought Trump believed.

Teddy Roosevelt had it right:  "Peace is generally good in itself, but it is never the highest good unless it comes as the handmaid of righteousness; and it becomes a very evil thing if it serves merely as a mask for cowardice and sloth, or as an instrument to further the ends of despotism or anarchy."   

Year End Reflections, Part I (What's In The News)

(I know.  I usually start these Year End Reflections in December.  But it's been 3 weeks since my last posts - busy trying to retire and being sick - and there is so much to cover, that I thought I'd cover a lot this way.)

It was rather shocking to see six members of Congress (two Senators and four House members) in an ad telling our military and intelligence community that they need to disobey illegal orders.  In the ad they say:  "stand up for our laws," and "refuse unlawful orders."  They finish with "you can refuse illegal orders," and "you must refuse illegal orders."  While it's true about not following illegal orders, it's also clear that this ad was intended to undermine any orders given by the current Commander in Chief.  

As Senator Eric Schmitt (R-Mo) said:  "At the end of the day, they're mad the American people chose Trump and now they're calling on the Military and Intelligence Community to intervene.  Sounds a little subversive to democracy-ish."  Sounds a lot subversive to me.  Participating in the ad were the following two Senators:  Elissa Slotkin (D-Mich), and Mark Kelly (D-AZ).  The four House members were:  Chris DeGuzio (D-Pa), Maggie Goodlander (D-NH), Chrissy Houlahan (D-Pa) and Jason Crow (D-CO).  

There was an interesting news item reported by ABC.  The average cost of a McDonald's menu item jumped 40% from 2019 to 2024.  A friend and I have both noticed this, as we occassionally go to McDonald's.  It is fairly easy to spend 10 dollars or more there.  I suspect some of the price increase was a result of the pandemic.  But whatever the cause, it is clearly just one example of the affordability issue now being discussed by both sides of the political spectrum.  And anyone who dines out has undoubtedly noticed the jump in prices (except at In 'N Out).  Jackie Mason used to joke about how you could order a fancy coffee at Starbucks, and then be told it was 9 bucks!  We're not that far away.   

A lot of news items surprise me, although I suppose nothing should surprise me anymore.  The Palestinian flag was recently raised outside the Toronto City Hall.  Apparently, the idea was to commemorate the 37th anniversary of the Palestinian Declaration of Independence, which occurred on November 15, 1988.  You know what else was happening at that time in Israel?  The first intifada, when Palestinians were killing and injuring Israelis.  As usual, the Palestinians did not hesitate in attacking civilians.  Sad to say that other cities in Canada also raised the Palestinian flag.  Calgary.  Winnipeg.  Brampton.  I guess it should not be surprising as Canadian PM Mark Carney recently joined the UK and France and others in recognizing a Palestinian state.  As previously discussed in this blog, the West has lost its way.

Meanwhile, Fox reported that in 2025 to date, over 7000 Christians have been killed in Nigeria,  That number soars to 125,000 killed since 2009.  Where is the world outcry over the murders of these black Christians?  Where indeed.  As a Jew I know, as many Jews know, "no Jews, no news."  These Nigerian Christians are being slaughtered by radical Muslim terrorist groups.  Muslims killing Christians.  No Jews involved.  So no news.  Fox also reported that over 19,000 churches in Nigeria have been burned down since 2009.

I saw a post by someone on LinkedIn that said Lebanon used to be a Christian country, Pakistan was Hindu and Afghanistan was Buddhist.  Now they are all Islamic.  Then the post referred to the "Path of Islam":  1.  Establish a mosque, 2.  Create an enclave, 3.  Grow the population, 4.  Claim victimhood, 5.  Resist host authorities and customs, 6.  Exploit lawfare, 7.  Institute Shariah law, 8.  Secede, 9.  Take control.  LET ME CLEAR ONCE AGAIN - I do not believe that every Muslim agrees with the above.  I do not believe that every Muslim in America is disloyal to America.  That should be obvious to everyone.  But I do believe that Islam today has a problem with a substantial radical, terrorist element.  And I also believe what Dennis Prager (quoting Viktor Frankl) has frequently said:  there are only two groups of people in the world, the decent and the indecent.   

I saw a disturbing story in the Jerusalem Post about about a group called "The Punishment for Justice Movement."  Apparently, they have a website that targets Israeli academics.  The "rewards" are as follows:  $1000 for posting notices on the targets' homes, $5000 for information on the targets, $20,000 for committing arson on the targets' homes or vehicles, $50,000 for the murder of a target, and $100,000 for the murder of a "special" target.  

According to JPost, "The group lists the alleged home addresses, phone numbers, email addresses, social media accounts, and even identification numbers of hundreds of academics from Ben Gurion University of the Negev, the Technion, Weizmann Institute, Hebrew University in Jerusalem, Tel Aviv University, Harvard University, Oxford University, and the European Organization for Nuclear Research."  These academics are to be targeted anywhere in the world, even when living in the USA.    

Dissension on the Right, Conclusion

There were other conservatives who criticized Fuentes and Carlson and Roberts.  I am not going to repeat all their comments here.  Rather, I want to end this three part post with a few personal words.  I start my day with saying the "Modeh Ani" prayer.  It is a prayer that I say in Hebrew, although I do then repeat it in English.  Here is the prayer:  "I gratefully thank You, O living and eternal King, for You have returned my soul within me with compassion - abundant is your faithfulness."  Amen.    

I then say what is considered to be the most important prayer in Judaism, the "She'ma."  I say it twice a day, in the morning after the Modeh Ani, and at bedtime.  Here it is:  "Hear, O Israel, the Lord is our G-d, the Lord is one (or the only one)."  The second verse is as follows:  "Blessed is the Name of His glorious kingdom for all eternity."  Amen.  Yes, I say the She'ma in Hebrew, and then I repeat it in English.  Just my habit.  

Rabbi Elliot Cosgrove is the Rabbi at the Park Avenue Synagogue in New York City.  In terms of religious affiliation, it is considered to be a conservative shul (synagogue).  While there are some Jews supporting NYC mayoral candidate, Zohran Mamdani (honestly, I can't believe it), Rabbi Cosgrove eloquently stated where he stands:  "I believe Zohran Mamdani poses a danger to the security of the New York Jewish community."

He continued:  "Mamdani's refusal to condemn inciteful slogans like 'globalize the intifada,' his denial of Israel's legitimacy as a Jewish state, his call to arrest Israel's Prime Minister should he enter New York, and his thrice-repeated accusation of genocide in Thursday's debate - for these and so many other statements, past, present, and unrepentent - he is a danger to the Jewish body politic of New York."

And, hopefully this next paragraph of the Rabbi's clarifies things for my non-Jewish friends and readers:  "Zionism, Israel, Jewish self-determination - these are not political preferences or partisan talking points,  They are constituent building blocks and inseparable strands of my Jewish identity.  To accept me as a Jew, but to ask me to check my concern for the people and State of Israel at the door is as nonsensical a proposition as it is offensive - no different than asking me to reject G-d, Torah, mitzvot, or any other pillar of my faith."

My dear readers, our country is at a crossroads.  All of us individually are at a crossroads.  For us conservatives, do we stand against the likes of Carlson, Owens, Bannon and now, unfortunately, even the head of the Heritage Foundation, Roberts?  Roberts, who refused to criticize Carlson for not standing up to the hateful and antisemitic comments of Fuentes.  Or, do we let these individuals tear the conservative movement apart?  

For my fellow Jews, I want to give you a quote from one of my Chabad Rabbis, Rabbi Moshe Bryski:  "Never again is now.  Never again is not an easy oath to make.  It's not going to be simple - you're (not just) going to register your protest and sign a petition.  It would mean sacrifice.  It would mean courage.  It would mean standing up to the world.  It would mean not being intimidated by the world."  Are you up to the challenge?  

For conservative Jews, it means refusing to tolerate antisemitism and Jew hatred just because it comes from "our side."  It means being willing to condemn the likes of Fuentes, Carlson and the rest.  It means refusing to support them just because they are pro-Trump.  For liberal Jews, it is past time for you to condemn the likes of Ilhan Omar, Rashida Tlaib, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Bernie Sanders - and not support them just because they are anti-Trump.

How we react, what we do and say, may well determine the future of this great country.  

Dissension on the Right, Part II

Watching Carlson's interview with Fuentes, I thought that Fuentes came across as relatively controlled in his demeanor.  Not so, in separate videos I watched.  In a video shared with "Iron Dissent," we are told by the narrator (I've heard this before) that today's Jews are not the Jews of the Bible.  No?  We have the same Hebrew language.  We have the same Torah.  We have the same tefillin.  We have Shabbat.  We have the laws of Kosher.  True, we no longer have the Temple in Jerusalem, and therefore some of the ancient commandments cannot be done.  But none of that can explain the hatred directed at the Jews.  

Fuentes allegedly called conservative Jews such as Mark Levin, Ben Shapiro, Josh Hammer and Laura Loomer "despicable pieces of shit."  I say allegedly because some places say yes, others say no evidence.  He also is to have said that none of them will ever be American, and they should "get the fuck out of America and go back to Israel."  Notwithstanding they are not from Israel.  

I did see a clip showing Fuentes declaring that Jews are unlikeable people.  Fuentes:  "We don't care about your bitching, your whining, your squealing about antisemitism.  Nobody's listening anymore.  Nobody cares."  And this:  "You don't care about this country.  You don't respect this place.  You don't respect our ancestors.  You don't even worship our G-d."

Let's see.  Just in my family, my brother served this country in Vietnam, and was a Purple Heart recipient.  My uncle served in WWII, and was a POW.  My wifes's Dad served in WWII.  And a dear friend's Dad (also Jewish) was a Lt. Col. in the AF Reserves.  Countless Jews have served this country.  Jews don't respect this place?  Mark Levin and Ben Shapiro have frequently spoken of the greatness of America.  This blog has done the same.  Jews don't respect the country's ancestors?  Is this for real?

Levin knows far more than Fuentes does about the Founders, the Constitution and the Federalist papers.  Here was our second President, John Adams:  "The Hebrews have done more to civilize men than any other nation."  Here was George Washington, in a letter to the Jews of the Touro Synagogue in Newport, Rhode Island, the oldest synagogue in America:  "...the Government of the United States, which gives to bigotry no sanction, to persecution no assistance, requires only that they who live under its protection should demean themselves as good citizens, in giving it on all occasions their effectual support."  And this:  "May the Children of the Stock of Abraham, who dwell in this land, continue to merit and enjoy the good will of the other Inhabitants..."  Jewish people settled in Newport as early as 1658.  

Our Founders would not have thought very much of people telling the Jews to "get the fuck out."  Fuentes said:  "You don't even worship our G-d."  Who does not know anything about our Founders?  I would suggest Fuentes read the First Amendment to the Constitution:  "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof..."  I would also remind Fuentes that it was the Jewish people who brought to the world the belief that there is but one G-d - a belief in monotheism - and not all the false idols worshipped by many ancient peoples.

Then I heard Fuentes assert that "the Jews pushed us to this point."  Right.  Sort of like "I didn't want to beat my wife to a pulp - she made me do it."  Yes, the Jews pushed him, how?  "For opposing genocide?  (This is a lie.)  For not putting America first?  (Another lie.)  Because they are preoccupied with Israel? (You bet we are since the 10/7/23 terrorist attacks and subsequent two year war)."   

I don't see Fuentes as being any different from the Jew haters of the 1930's and 1940's.  We had the America First Committee back then.  Charles Lindbergh.  Father Edward Coughlin.  The various isolationists.  Even the German American Bund.  But the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor kind of burst the bubble of the isolationists.  

So here are a couple of questions for Fuentes and Carlson and their ilk.  Clearly, you do not agree with the Democrats on anything.  Yet, you are saying the Jews should get out of America.  Why not the Democrats?  Clearly, there are shared Judeo-Christian values.  Yet, you are saying the Jews should get out of America.  Why not the Muslims?  They do not share the Judeo-Christian values.  I think the answer to these questions is rather straightforward - you are simply old-fashioned antisemitic Jew-haters.  Nothing new there.    

Dissension on the Right, Part I

(Note.  Readers will recall that I have previously criticized Tucker Carlson in 2 posts.  On 12/31/23, I posted "My Beef With Tucker Carlson."  In that post, not long after the terrorist attack in Israel on 10/7/23, I discussed the lies Carlson told about Ben Shapiro not caring about America.  Then, on 9/23/24, I wrote "Let's Talk Turkey - I Need To Talk About Some People, Part I."  There, I criticized Carlson for hosting Darryl Cooper, a "historian," who blamed Churchill - not Hitler - for WWII.  And the Holocaust?  According to this "historian" millions of people just ended up dead.  Gee, I wonder why.)

Now, on 10/27/25, Carlson hosted Nick Fuentes for a full 2 hours on his podcast.  I watched much of it.  To say that Fuentes is an antisemite would, in my opinion, be a serious understatement.  Why Carlson went from conservatism to right-wing lunacy, I do not know.  Why would he give air time to people like Cooper and Fuentes?  Again, I do not know.  But Carlson's latest interview of Fuentes (if it can be called an interview, given that there was virtually no pushback by Carlson on any of the outrageous comments Fuentes has made) turned into a more public fight among conservatives.  

After Carlson was the target, rightfully, of criticism for hosting Fuentes, the President of the conservative Heritage Foundation, Kevin Roberts, came to Carlson's defense.  Roberts said he would not distance himself from Carlson, and that "Christians can critique the state of Israel without being antisemitic."  Certainly true, as Jews do it all the time.  But Fuentes, and Carlson, have gone far beyond any reasonable critique of Israel.  Roberts also said:  "We will always defend our friends against the slanders of bad actors who serve someone else's agenda."  Someone else?  Is Roberts referring to the Jews?  Israel?  What is going on here?  Why is there this fixation on the Jews?

Roberts subsequently condemned Fuentes:  "Fuentes knows exactly what he is doing.  He is fomenting Jew hatred, and his incitements are not only immoral and un-Christian, they risk violence."  Perhaps Roberts saw that people like Fuentes might tear the conservative movement apart.  A shame that he does not see that with regards to Carlson, Candace Owens, Steve Bannon and others, as he refused to condemn Carlson for hosting this white supremacist Jew-hater for two full hours on his podcast.  

But not everyone at Heritage agrees with Roberts.  Unfortunately, this dissenter asked to remain anonymous, but made this comment:  "Nick Fuentes is a disgusting, anti-American, antisemitic loser.  He is not a conservative, not America first, and not an ally of President Trump or any conservative organization.  (Yes, I know that Trump unfortunately shared a meal with Fuentes and Kanye West.  Shame on him for doing that.)  In his own words, Nick Fuentes is an ally of Stalin, Hitler, and the Taliban.  That is not someone with ideas worthy of debate."  And that, dear readers, is what Kevin Roberts should have said.   

Here was Senator Ted Cruz (R- Tx):  "Now is the time for choosing.  If you sit there with someone who says Adolf Hitler was very cool and that their mission is to defeat 'global Jewry' and you say nothing, then you are a coward, and you are complicit in that evil."  Carlson, in turn, said that he opposes Christian Zionists; and said that Cruz and US Ambassador Mike Huckabee have a "brain virus" and are guilty of "Christian heresy."  

A brain virus?  For supporting Israel?  Here was a whopper said by Carlson:  "It's great to criticize and question, like our relationship with Israel, because it's insane, and it hurts us, and we get nothing out of it."  Nothing out of it?  The Mossad has often proven to be invaluable to the US military with their intelligence sharing.  Nor do I doubt that Israel provides our leaders with intelligence on possible terrorist attacks.  The US worked with Israel to develop the sophisticated missile defense systems of Iron Dome, David's Sling and Arrow.  Israel buys US made airplanes and weaponry, helping our defense industry.  Israel then uses those weapons, having to always fight wars, and is able to make improvements based on actual battlefield experiences - all to the benefit of the US.  

It should be too obvious to have to state that Israel shares the same Western, democratic values with the US.  And, Israel is on the front lines fighting against terrorist groups and regimes that are also enemies of the United States.  Israel's counter-terrorism techniques are no doubt shared with the US.  Israel is well-known for its sophistication in the field of high tech.  Intel, Dell, Google, Cisco, IBM, Motorola and others all have R&D centers in Israel.    

No Kings? When Will The Democrats Wake Up?

I'm always amazed at how Democrats/Leftists will concern themselves over trivia.  Trump said a bad word.  Trump insulted someone.  The horrors.  Meanwhile, he succeeded in bringing home the living hostages.  Thank G-d for Trump.  He may have succeeded in remaking the entire Middle East, even though Hamas is determined to not let that happen.  It is clear that Hamas will not agree to all of the terms of Trump's peace plan.  But if the Saudis, and others, are tiring of them enough, then maybe Trump will get them to join the Abraham Accords.  

So, while some of my friends and family, and Democrats in general, want to believe that Trump is a threat to the country, they ignore the real threats.  It's not just the drug traffickers and human traffickers that Biden let into our country.  How many terrorists got in?  How many Chinese and Russian sleeper agents got in?  Biden never seemed to care about that, as he even allowed that Chinese spy balloon to fly across the entire country.  Biden did not fulfill his obligation to protect the American people.  To care about our national security.     

But is there an even bigger threat?  I believe so.  Whether you call it radical Islam, Islamism, political Islam, whatever.  It is fundamentally opposed to the American way of life, and to our Constitution.  People like Rashida Tlaib and Ilhan Omar are very well versed in using American ideals against us, while demonstrating their lack of belief in those very same ideals.  They know how to play to our emotions.  Oh, the poor Palestinians.  The oppressors in the U.S. and Israel.  They share the same textbook as the Democrats/Leftists.  

Now we have a radical Muslim about to become the mayor of our largest city.  Does this frighten anyone else?  Does it frighten any Democrat?  Or, have you fallen for the threat of being accused of being "islamophobic?"  What is islamophobia?  It's a made up term, created to compete with antisemitism and racism and sexism.  

As for Mamdani's policies, see Part I of "No Kings," as well as my 2 part post of  July 4, 2025, and the follow up post of July 27, 2025.  But is that it?  A few elected Muslim officials?  There are actually 4 Muslim members of the House.  As of 2023, CAIR reported a total of 235 elected officials in the U.S. who are Muslim.  Doesn't sound like many in a country of 330 million people?  Maybe.  But their influence is growing beyond their numbers.

And what about Dearborn, Michigan?  The mayor and city council members are all Muslims.  When a Christian resident complained about a street sign honoring someone with alleged terrorist ties, Dearborn's Muslim Mayor told this Christian he was "not welcome" in Dearborn.  The Mayor called the man a "bigot" and a "racist," and, of course, an "islamophobe."  Then the mayor added this:  "The day you move out of the city will be the day I launch a parade celebrating the fact that you moved out of this city."  Because a Muslim Mayor gets to speak to non-Musims like that.  Is that what you want?  If so, keep voting Democrat.  

I'll say it yet again.  NO - I do not believe that all Muslims are anti-American.  I do not believe that all Muslims support radical jihad.  But what about the ones who do?  What about the likes of Tlaib and Mamdani who are unwilling to condemn a terrorist organization that has killed Americans; and are unwilling to say that Israel has a right to exist as the Jewish state?  What about that?