The Righteous Indignation of Selective Outrage
Pro-Israel Protestors Racism and Vile Threats Go Unnoticed in the Queens Protest
[KACH protestor The Center for Jewish History in Manhattan on October 18, 2017, protesting David Myers appointment to direct the center. - photo credit - Shaul Magid]
The protest at a Queens synagogue January 8, 2026, included pro-Hamas chants that were rightly, and unequivocally, condemned by the new mayor of New York City, Zohran Mamdani. In my view, any protest of the war in Gaza that supports the massacre on October 7 loses any credibility of a legitimate protest against the destruction of Gaza.
Shaul’s Substack is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.
The fact that too many in the Jewish community remained unsatisfied with Mandani’s unequivocal condemnation is also reprehensible, but not unexpected, as it suggests that the issue isn’t really Mamdani’s lack of condemning (but not supporting) things such as “globalize the Intifada” but Mamdani himself. One may disagree with Mamdani’s policies, or his position in Israel. But that does not disqualify him from being mayor of New York City any more than NYC mayor Mike Bloomberg’s avidly pro-Israel stance.
But I am writing for a slightly different reason. If one reads the myriad responses to the Queens protest in the Jewish media, one will notice something troubling. There is in almost all cases, with one exception that I have seen (T’ruah), no mention of a pro-Israel counter-protest that was happening at the same time. The only place that was reported that I saw was in the NYT coverage buried in paragraph 15 of the article. I reproduce it in full here (with the previous paragraph): https://www.nytimes.com/2026/01/09/nyregion/mamdani-hamas-israel-gaza-protest.html.
Here are the relevant paragraphs:
At the protest on Thursday, pro-Palestinian demonstrators chanted their opposition to the sale of land in Jerusalem that they said had been “stolen” from Palestinians during the creation of the state of Israel. Later, they hurled antisemitic slurs at pro-Israel protesters across the street, expressing the view that Israel either should not or did not really exist.
The pro-Israel demonstrators chanted “death to Palestine,” “we love ICE” and expletive-laced slogans about Mr. Mamdani. They also threatened to rape or kill individual people in and around the crowd of protesters, including a journalist, and waved flags in support of President Trump and of the far-right Orthodox Kach movement, which was banned from participating in Israeli elections in the 1980s for inciting racism.
Setting aside the legitimacy of protest and the right to demonstrate, and here I acknowledge the pro-Israel counter demonstration had, in principle, as much right as the demonstration itself (the right to demonstrate is part of our national culture), but the hateful and racist rhetoric of the pro-Israel counter-protestors was certainly worthy of condemnation, as was the hateful rhetoric of the protestors (which was rightfully condemned), by Jewish supporters of Israel and the larger community, including the mayor of NYC an the governor on NY state.
But “Death to Palestine,” racist distortions of Mamdani’s name (I have seen Mamzerdani (lit. but with nuance, “Mamdani the bastard”) numerous times on social media), threats to “rape or kill” protesters, waving a KACH (Kahane) flag went largely unnoticed. Is waving a KACH flag really much different than “Hamas is welcome here”? What really is the difference between Hamas and KACH? Hamas wants Jews out of Palestine, KACH wants Arabs out of Israel. “The easy way or the hard way.” Hamas is guilty of violence against Jews. KACH is guilty of violence against Palestinians (think of the Herbon massacre in 1994 – and Baruch Goldstein’s grave is adjacent to “Kahane Park” in Kiryat Arbah). KACH was deemed a racist and illegal political party in Israel in 1986. Setting aside the almost 70,000 Gazan’s killed in the past two years, many of them civilians and children, think of how many Palestinian civilians have been killed in the West Bank in the past two years alone? How many house demolitions? The pogrom of Hawara, under the watchful eye of the IDF?
I am quite certain many of those who condemned the pro-Hamas chants in Queens would readily condemn the pro-Israel counter-protester’s racist rhetoric. But with the exception of T’ruah, they didn’t. In fact, in most reports of the Queens protest the counter-protest was not even mentioned. And that is precisely the point.
It is difficult to take the American Jewish attention to the hateful rhetoric of some pro-Palestinian protestors seriously when they refuse to publicly condemn equally hateful rhetoric coming from their own camp. Yes, I know, people will say, “these are outliers.” But are they? And “pro-Hamas” sentiment is integral to all anti Gaza War protests.? But is it? To me that is a convenient obfuscation of what we are experiencing.
I share the condemnation of any protest that openly advocates violence in Israel-Palestine. I don’t care if they are Palestinian, Palestinian adjacent, Jewish. or pro-Israelist. If you can only call out hateful rhetoric on one side and overlook, excuse, or even deny hateful rhetoric of your side, you are not a serious voice in this debate and your voice should not be taken seriously by the myriad people on both sides who want to find a way out of this mess.
The unwillingness to condemn the hateful, racist rhetoric of the pro-Israel counter-protestors in Queens is yet another layer of Gaza denial that has infected our people. We ignore it at our peril; politically, and spiritually.
Shaul
An interesting piece. Not unlike when the MAGAts, especially at the top, rail on about the “radical left scum” or “antifa” while unleashing some of the worst public violence (and rhetoric) in decades against the people they claim are ruining America. In the latter case, however, there is little evidence that the said “scum” are doing much to harm this country; rather they are objecting to the destruction of a society by quasi-fascist representatives of an authoritarian government.
Equally, the divide Magid refers to has been somewhat mischaracterized. Anyone genuinely familiar with HAMAS will know that the movement has never called for all Jews to get out of Palestine. Despite a now superseded charter & the angry claims of some people - possibly sympathetic to HAMAS - the latter movement has long expressed its willingness to coexist peacefully with the Jewish State under circumstances that are reasonable, such as having their own independent state or the end of Israel’s crippling occupation & the right to govern themselves. As with Islam in general, there is no innate hatred of Jews as Jews within the HAMAS movement despite the comments of some of its members. The ire is reserved for Zionism and the supremacist nature of its modern incarnation.
This is not to exonerate HAMAS or whitewash its crimes. Having lived in Gaza both before and after the HAMAS victory in 2006, I can point out many specific examples of why HAMAS should be condemned. For example, before it came to power one could visit Gaza and go wherever one liked- walk along the beaches, visit different refugee camps, shop along Omar Al Mukhtar street or step into cafes and restaurants, etc. for a pleasant conversation or meal. After HAMAS’ victory, a foreigner needed a “minder” to go anywhere like in the old East Bloc countries. People would often whisper to me their objections to HAMAS telling me awful stories of its treatment of anyone not openly supportive of the movement. A good (Gazan) friend of mind wrote an article critical of HAMAS’ censorship and failure to respect universal human rights. He was met that night by masked HAMAS henchmen who beat him bloody. When he did not retract his article even after this experience, he was set upon another night by an even more violent gang and was stabbed so severely he ended up in hospital for days. This is what HAMAS is on a day to day basis for the people of Gaza. It is ruthless against anyone critical of it and intolerant of political pluralism on all levels. These are reasons to object to the movement not some imagined universal hatred of Jews. [Perhaps I should mention I’m Jewish and interviewed - back in 2006 - Ghazi Hamad, Ismail Haniyeh, & Mahmoud Zahar (a seriously unattractive personality) and was always treated respectfully. Of course I know people will say this was only because I was a westerner. The fact of HAMAS’ many writings & public statements stating explicitly that their objections were not to Jews, people of the book [Bible], but to Zionists, is always glossed over by it’s detractors who say “yeah, right” -dismissing the facts that exist. What I am describing here is what I’ve seen with my own eyes or read in documented materials.]
After the horrors of the past 2-3 years especially, it remains to be seen if HAMAS’ official statements will change, but until then it is simply untrue that HAMAS wanted all the Jews out of Palestine, as Magid writes above. The KACH party is a far worse example of hatred and violence than HAMAS ever has been. Perhaps I should also mention that I met Rabbi Meir Kahane personally and attended two of his horrific lectures in which he voiced his hateful & supremacist views as blatantly as one can imagine. This was a man who spoke of the children of mixed marriages as “cancer”. I’ve never heard or read anything as revolting out of the mouths of HAMAS officials or supporters. This should have been brought out in the article.
One has to wonder at those calling for a “one state” or even “two-state” solution to the Israeli Palestinian crisis after watching, in real time, a genocidal strategy being implemented by the government of Israel on the people of Gaza - and to an only slightly lesser extent in Jerusalem and the West Bank. No sane people in the world would want to live in or beside a Nazi state that has literally attempted their physical destruction and wholesale expulsion from their land. Before anything can move in a positive or healing direction the present Israeli state must be completely dismantled the way Germany was after WWII. Palestinians should not be expected to reside in or alongside a state that has called for and attempted to implement their extermination. I would have thought this an obvious point, but to date I’ve only heard one serious scholar of these issues (Mouin Rabbani) make a strong and convincing case for this.
One can view 10/7 as an unforgivable act of violence on the part of Hamas, or an inevitable byproduct of 77 years of oppression. The second case is more comprehensive and condemnable. 77 years during which the inevitable could have been forestalled and thousands of young Palestinian men prevented from being driven to resist by any means vs expecting them to accept being cheated out of full lives forever.
You've chosen to view the last case as acceptable because it serves your purpose. They chose violence even though that served your purpose as well, that because you didn't really give them a choice, did you?