By Seth Mandel
Friday, March 13, 2026
A remarkable exchange took place yesterday on GBN, the
British news network. Regarding the attempted mass shooting at Temple Israel in
Michigan yesterday, Stephen Kent and Angela McCahey went back and forth
on whether, essentially, the synagogue was an understandable target:
McCahey: “This was an Israeli temple, it was aligned with
Israel.”
Kent: “A Jewish temple. A Jewish synagogue is not
an Israeli temple.”
McCahey: “It’s called the ‘real Israel temple.’”
Kent: “They’re Jewish, they’re the people of Israel.”
McCahey repeated herself once more: “So, they’re called
the ‘real Israeli temple,’ yes? And they do align with Israel and their
beliefs.”
Kent’s heroic attempts to correct McCahey went nowhere,
but bless him for trying.
This exchange is important because we tend to take for
granted that of course it’s wrong to kill random Jews because of
something that happened thousands of miles away. But this is not actually a
universally held principle. It seems barbaric, but it’s true: whether or not
all Jews anywhere are considered an outpost of the armed forces of the state of
Israel is considered a legitimate debate.
Yesterday, as the terrorist’s identity was released,
English-language pro-Hamas propaganda sites reported that the man had lost
relatives in an Israeli strike in Lebanon. Thus began a reframing of an
attempted massacre of young children as some kind of tit-for-tat. The mayor of
the terrorist’s town, Dearborn Heights, put out a statement
that mentioned this detail right at the top and never mentioned the words
“Jews” or “anti-Semitism.” He did, however, mention Ramadan.
This mayor, Mo Baydoun, said he reached out to the town
supervisor of the town where the attack took place. Perhaps the town
supervisor can pass on his message to the local Jewish community.
To call Baydoun’s statement cynical would be too kind. It
is a sign that the anti-Semitic “collective guilt” rule, as applied to Jews, is
gaining purchase in American politics. And it is because there are lots of
people out there like McCahey, who are simply blundering out of ignorance or
naivete into repeating versions of this calumny.
Yet the designation of synagogues as legitimate subjects
of grievance is not new. In early December, a mob descended
on a synagogue in New York City that was having an event for those considering
making aliyah. Mayor Zohran Mamdani infamously responded: “every New Yorker
should be free to enter a house of worship without intimidation,” but that
“these sacred spaces should not be used to promote activities in violation of
international law.”
There was no promotion of activities in violation of
international law, of course. Mamdani didn’t even bother to check. He just fed
the mob’s idea that synagogues are fair game in the new global intifada.
The most prominent Islamic pressure group in America is
the Council on American-Islamic Relations. In 2021, its San Francisco director,
Zahra Billoo, said
that “we need to pay attention to the Zionist synagogues.” She told the
audience to “know your enemies,” which included “the Zionist organizations” and
shuls and “polite Zionists.” In response to the ensuing outcry, CAIR said it
would “proudly stand by Zahra and all American Muslim leaders who face smears
and threats because they dare to express an opinion about Palestinian human
rights.” A synagogue in Texas was taken hostage a month later.
Jewish institutions have since October 7 been attacked
for being “Zionist institutions.” Campus Hillels, the centers for Jewish life
on campus along with Chabad houses, continue to be widely targeted. Chabad
too—witness the recent target put on those houses of worship by Tucker Carlson.
Kosher restaurants and Jewish-owned cafes are a common target too.
Meanwhile, in the wake of the Michigan attack, the
deranged rationalizations for going after synagogues caught on. For example,
influencer Wally Rashid posted a
picture of Temple Israel staff visiting the Temple Mount, as many Jews do.
Responding to that post, University of Utah economics professor Marshall
Steinbaum said
of Temple Israel: “And don’t forget we taxpayers are paying for their
security.”
So the synagogues of Jews who visit Israel are fair game
for attack? Or is Steinbaum just upset that American Jews will be protected
from terrorist attacks?
The fact that the concept of Jewish collective guilt is
getting a hearing in America is a pretty clear indication of the direction of
anti-Semitic discourse. And it’s why Jews must increasingly fortify their
houses of prayer.
No comments:
Post a Comment