Mamdani Pledges to Fight Antisemitism — But What About People and Organizations Who Support Israel?

One Israel Fund executive, Scott Feltman describes being singled out by New York's mayor, security fears affecting his organization, and the controversy over charitable support for Jewish communities in Judea and Samaria. Meanwhile, similar questions about Israel and antisemitism surfaced at a Los Angeles mayoral forum.

September 30, 2026 

New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani (Photo: Moshe Davis, Fox News)

NEW YORK / LOS ANGELES — New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani unveiled a new strategy Tuesday, September 29, to combat antisemitism, pledging additional funding for security at synagogues and other houses of worship, expanded Holocaust education, and greater support for victims of hate crimes.

Yet his announcement arrives against the backdrop of a longstanding dispute over political opposition to Israel and the treatment of Jewish individuals and organizations whose charitable activities support Israeli communities in Judea and Samaria.

The issue is particularly relevant to One Israel Fund, a U.S.-based nonprofit that supports civilian security, emergency medical services, educational programs, and community development in those Israeli communities, located in territory widely known as the West Bank.

In an exclusive video interview with DemoCast, Scott Feltman, executive vice president of One Israel Fund, described his organization's work and accused Mamdani of repeatedly singling it out.

The interview was recorded before Mamdani's September 29 announcement, making Feltman's earlier account relevant to the questions now surrounding the mayor's policy.

Mamdani's Antisemitism Initiative: Protections and Unanswered Questions

According to the Mayor's Office announcement, the new initiative provides $6.4 million in community grants for hate-crime prevention and survivor support, along with $1 million for physical security at synagogues and other houses of worship.

It also supports increased Holocaust education, Jewish cultural programs, and expanded awareness of civil rights protections.

However, the strategy does not adopt a single definition of antisemitism, and critics have questioned its failure to specifically address how hostility toward Zionism or Israel can, in certain circumstances, become discrimination against Jewish people.

Supporters of the strategy argue that it addresses threats facing Jewish New Yorkers without treating criticism of Israeli government policies as inherently antisemitic. Critics maintain that the distinction remains insufficiently defined when Jewish institutions or individuals are targeted because of their associations with Israel.

The unresolved question is how city policy will protect individuals and organizations whose support for Israel becomes the object of intimidation, threats, or discriminatory treatment.

One Israel Fund: A Charity in Mamdani's Political Crosshairs

Mayor Zohran Mamdani                         Scott M. Feltman, Exec. V.P - One Israel Fund
                                                                  (Photo: Getty Fox News Digital)

Before his election as mayor, Mamdani sponsored legislation in the New York State Assembly known as the "Not On Our Dime" bill, intended to restrict certain activities by tax-exempt organizations supporting Israeli settlements.

The 2023 legislation, Assembly Bill A6943, proposed civil penalties and a private right of action involving prohibited settlement-related activities. It did not become law.

Supporters portrayed the measure as a means of preventing nonprofit funds from facilitating violations of Palestinian rights. Opponents questioned its implications for charities supporting Israeli communities, including organizations that provide medical assistance and civilian security equipment.

One Israel Fund was specifically named in advocacy surrounding the proposed legislation.

Feltman says his organization provides assistance ranging from ambulances and medical facilities to surveillance cameras, thermal drones, defensive equipment for civilian first responders, and community projects.

He emphasizes that One Israel Fund does not provide weapons and characterizes its security assistance as defensive and humanitarian in purpose.

Asked about opposition to the organization, Feltman turned directly to Mamdani:

"He has attacked us by name numerous times."

Feltman described Mamdani's earlier legislative effort as an attempt to interfere with charitable support for the Israeli communities his organization serves.

His remarks raise a broader question: under what circumstances can restrictions directed at settlement-related activity also affect organizations whose work includes humanitarian and medical assistance?

WATCH: Scott Feltman discusses Mamdani's criticism of One Israel Fund, the proposed restrictions on charitable donations, and his staff's subsequent security concerns.

Exclusive DemoCast interview: Part 1, 19:49–22:06. Watch on YouTube

From Political Controversy to Personal Security Fears

Feltman also described growing concerns about the safety of his employees.

In the interview, he recalled how staff members became visibly shaken following the May 2025 murders of two Israeli Embassy employees outside an event at the Capital Jewish Museum in Washington, D.C.

He said employees feared that a similarly motivated attacker might target One Israel Fund.

His explanation of the organization's resulting move was interrupted by a camera recording break, but continued immediately in the next video.

"Now I have to literally have my organization, a prominent organization for 32 years, hiding behind a PO box."

Feltman told this reporter off camera that One Israel Fund had also experienced harassment by telephone and at its physical offices. He further referred to criticism from an advocacy organization that he said had portrayed OIF in hostile terms.

The identity of that organization, the exact nature of any designation, and the particular harassment incidents have not yet been independently verified for this report.

Feltman had already expressed fears for employee safety in a July 23, 2025 Fox News Digital interview.

He also publicly criticized Mamdani in a July 8, 2025 article in American Thinker, objecting to the politician's remarks about OIF and defending the organization's civilian security projects.

The documented statements show that Feltman's concerns preceded his DemoCast interview. They do not establish that Mamdani personally caused threats or harassment directed at the organization.

WATCH: Feltman describes the relocation of One Israel Fund's offices and the security climate affecting his organization.

Exclusive DemoCast interview: Part 2, 0:00–0:58. Watch on YouTube

Is It Opposition to Israel, or Antisemitism?

During the interview, Feltman explained why he had previously avoided giving extensive public attention to the organization's political controversies.

He cited One Israel Fund's nonprofit status and its desire to keep attention focused on its humanitarian work.

But he said the broader political climate made continued silence increasingly difficult.

"It's Jew hatred. It's classic anti-semitism. And it has to stop."

This reporter then asked Feltman to explain why he believed Mamdani's conduct demonstrated hostility toward Jews, rather than opposition to Israel alone.

Feltman pointed to what he regarded as a wider pattern of rhetoric and actions, including Mamdani's approach to Israeli institutions and his relations with ethnic communities in New York.

His allegations concern the motives and implications of the mayor's political conduct. Mamdani, for his part, maintains that opposition to Israeli government policy and settlement-related activities should not be equated with antisemitism.

The distinction matters. Criticism of Israel is protected political expression and does not automatically constitute anti-Jewish prejudice. Conversely, targeting Jewish individuals or institutions through threats, exclusion, or discriminatory conduct because of their Jewish identity or perceived associations with Israel can raise serious antisemitism and civil rights concerns.

WATCH: Feltman explains his allegations of antisemitism and responds to questions distinguishing criticism of Israel from hostility toward Jews.

Exclusive DemoCast interview: Part 2, 1:04–2:46. Watch on YouTube

From New York to Los Angeles: Nithya Raman Faces Questions About Israel and Jewish Security

PHOTO 3 PLACEHOLDER

Mayor Karen Bass, left, and council member Nithya Raman, both participated in the environmental forum organized by the Los Angeles League of Conservation Voters at LA Trade Tech Culinary Arts Building in Los Angeles. (Etienne Laurent/For The Times)

The debate is not confined to New York.

On the same day Mamdani unveiled his antisemitism initiative, questions surrounding Israel, political activism, and Jewish communal security emerged at a Los Angeles mayoral candidate forum at the Skirball Cultural Center.

On Tuesday evening, September 29, Los Angeles City Councilwoman Nithya Raman, a Democratic Socialist challenging incumbent Mayor Karen Bass, faced pointed questions about her views on Israel, the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement, and her appearance on the livestream of political commentator Hasan Piker.

As reported by The Forward, Raman reiterated her characterization of Israel's military campaign in Gaza as genocide, drawing audible disapproval from members of the audience.

Bass, appearing separately at the forum, rejected that characterization.

Raman also defended BDS as a legitimate form of peaceful protest, while stating that it was not part of her mayoral campaign platform. That response drew another strong negative reaction from the audience.

Bass said she did not support BDS.

Democratic Socialists, BDS and Disagreements Within the Left

The Democratic Socialists of America supports BDS and has generally taken strongly critical positions concerning Israeli policies toward Palestinians.

Yet Raman's relationship with DSA demonstrates that the organization's members and affiliated elected officials do not necessarily agree on every issue.

After Hamas's October 7, 2023 attacks on Israel, Raman criticized the DSA response. She was subsequently censured by DSA's Los Angeles chapter following disagreements that included her pursuit of an endorsement from Democrats for Israel–Los Angeles.

At the Skirball forum, Raman defended her appearance on Hasan Piker's livestream, explaining that candidates should be willing to engage audiences with differing political views.

Piker has faced allegations of antisemitism concerning his public commentary, allegations he has rejected.

Raman also acknowledged that antisemitism can originate on the political left. She promised to protect Jewish Angelenos regardless of their political positions or views on foreign affairs.

Her statements create an important distinction between the New York and Los Angeles situations: Raman has not proposed legislation equivalent to Mamdani's restrictions on settlement-related charitable activities.

Nevertheless, the two controversies raise related questions about the treatment of Jewish institutions and supporters of Israel in cities where progressive political movements have substantial influence.

NYC Mayor Zohran Mamdani and L.A. mayoral candidate Nithya Raman.

What Would Similar Policies Mean for California?

Feltman's account provides an example of the concerns that can arise when charitable support for Israeli communities becomes the subject of political and legislative campaigns.

The New York bill specifically targeted certain nonprofit activities associated with Israeli settlements. Whether comparable restrictions could be proposed in California would depend upon the policies adopted by lawmakers, the authority of state or municipal government, and applicable constitutional protections.

No equivalent proposal by Raman against One Israel Fund has been established.

Still, the Los Angeles forum exposed significant disagreements about Israel, BDS, and the extent to which municipal leaders should address hostility toward Jewish residents whose support for Israel is publicly known.

Rabbi Noah Farkas, chief executive of Jewish Federation Los Angeles, observed during the forum that Jewish Angelenos may be held personally responsible for actions of the Israeli government regardless of their individual beliefs.

That concern provides a point of comparison with Feltman's account of the political controversy surrounding his organization.

For Jewish and non-Jewish supporters of Israel alike, the relevant questions concern whether lawful charitable donations, religious activities, political associations, and public advocacy can proceed without threats or unlawful discrimination.

Promises, Policies and Protections

Mamdani's new antisemitism strategy includes concrete commitments to Jewish institutional security, community support, education, and hate-crime prevention.

At the same time, his earlier sponsorship of the Not On Our Dime legislation demonstrates his willingness to pursue restrictions concerning certain charitable activities linked to Israeli settlements.

Those positions raise questions about how the administration will distinguish between legitimate policy disagreement, protected political protest, and harassment or discrimination directed at people or institutions because of their support for Israel.

In Los Angeles, Raman's positions on Gaza, BDS, and political engagement with controversial commentators have generated disagreement within the Jewish community, while she has also pledged to protect Jewish residents and opposed some positions taken by DSA.

The two political records are not identical, and the positions of individual candidates cannot automatically be attributed to every member of their party or political movement.

For One Israel Fund's Scott Feltman, however, the debate has already taken a personal dimension. He describes employees worried about their safety, an organization that relocated its offices, and a charitable mission he believes has been unfairly portrayed by political critics.

Whether government protections against antisemitism will apply consistently to Jewish individuals and institutions regardless of their positions on Israel remains an important question for both New York and Los Angeles.

Sources and Related Reporting

Official records

• New York City Mayor's Office: September 29, 2026 Strategy to Combat Antisemitism
• New York State Assembly Bill A6943: Not On Our Dime
• One Israel Fund: Mission and Leadership

Scott Feltman and One Israel Fund

• Scott Feltman, American Thinker, July 8, 2025
• Fox News Digital: Scott Feltman Interview, July 23, 2025

Antisemitism strategy and Los Angeles forum

• New York Jewish Week: Mamdani's Antisemitism Strategy
• The Forward: Nithya Raman at Los Angeles Jewish Community Forum, September 30, 2026
• Associated Press: Raman and Bass at the Los Angeles Mayoral Forum

Original video interviews conducted by DemoCast. Interviewee statements are attributed to the individuals making them. Reporting and commentary concerning public officials and organizations are distinguished from independently verified events.

UCLA Law Symposium's September 11th insult to the father of both UCLA's A.I. - and Daniel Pearl

 

Father of jihadist-slain Wall St. Journal reporter Daniel Pearl, Prof. Judea Pearl a globally renowned pioneer in artificial-intelligence, has invested 56-years on the U.C.L.A. campus

UCLA School of Law marked the 25th anniversary of September 11 with a two-day symposium, “25 Years After 9/11: Reimagining Freedom, Justice, and Security,” on September 10–11. The sponsors were five law-school centers: Critical Race Studies, International & Comparative Law, the Institute for Technology, Law & Policy, the Promise Institute for Human Rights, and the Miñana Family Center for Immigration Law & Policy. 

Melanie T. Partow, a defense attorney for Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, spoke Friday morning on the panel “Torture, Rendition, and Detention: The Erosion of the Rights Regime post 9/11.” She did not respond to the Los Angeles Times.¹

Partow is one of the defense lawyers for Mohammed, a terrorist who boasted about beheading Daniel Pearl.

Mohammed is the accused architect of the September 11 attacks. In a 2007 Pentagon transcript he said he beheaded Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl in Pakistan in 2002.² Daniel Pearl’s father, Professor Judea Pearl, has been at UCLA for 56 years.³ He founded and hosts the Daniel Pearl Memorial Lecture on that campus. Next month that lecture is scheduled to feature Wall Street Journal reporter Evan Gershkovich.¹

Pearl told the New York Post he was ashamed of his university. He accused the law school of “weaponizing the painful days of 9/11 and 10/7 to promote hateful ideologies.”⁴ He later told the Los Angeles Times: “To my esteemed colleagues at these five centers: Please find different dates to engage us with your political sophistry.”¹ He also said a September 11 event “should be used to commemorate the victims of that attack: Innocent Americans.”⁵

The program gave the dead fifteen minutes on Friday morning. Lunch got an hour.⁶ The panels addressed torture, detention, surveillance, immigration enforcement, “White Christian nationalism,” and “the ongoing genocide in Gaza.” Other speakers included Hussam Ayloush of CAIR-California, who after October 7 said “Israel should be attacked”; Yale’s Aslı Ü. Bâli, who called counterterrorism a “racist gravy train”; and Amna Akbar, who called the alleged murder of UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson a “spectacular act of protest.”⁷ No panel listed 9/11 families, first responders, or prosecutors.

A UCLA Law spokesman had said the school has a “longstanding commitment to academic freedom,” that program events do not speak for the school, and that it “does not withdraw invitations because a speaker or viewpoint is sensitive or controversial.”⁸

On Friday, September 11, Chancellor Julio Frenk issued a campus statement. He said Judea Pearl is “a deeply valued member of the UCLA community,” called Daniel Pearl’s murder “an act of unspeakable evil,” and said: “Nothing about this event at the UCLA School of Law, which we do not endorse, changes or qualifies those commitments.” He added: “Academic freedom does not require us to be neutral about antisemitism or terrorism.” He said he understood why Pearl and others were “deeply hurt.”⁹ He did not cancel the symposium. He did not remove Partow. She spoke that morning.¹

Organizers answered Frenk. Law professors Ahilan Arulanantham and LaToya Baldwin Clark said they were “enormously proud of the symposium we organized, and UCLA should be too.” They said critics who did not attend missed memorials, including Arulanantham’s account of being in Manhattan on September 11 and Jasleen Kohli’s account that her mother nearly boarded a hijacked flight. 

Law professor Aaron Littman said he was “profoundly disappointed in our chancellor, as a member of the UCLA law faculty and a Jew,” and that treating the invitation of a defense lawyer as an endorsement of the client’s deeds “is a threat to democracy.” 

Law professor Seana Shiffrin called the program “academically serious” and said a torture-and-rendition panel is stronger with counsel who has handled those cases. She did not attend Partow’s panel.¹

A defense lawyer may speak on campus any week of the year. Guantánamo counsel is a lawful job. September 11 is not an ordinary programming date. UCLA put Mohammed’s lawyer on that date, at Pearl’s university, while Pearl’s own lecture in his son’s name remains on the calendar. Frenk said the university does not endorse the event. The five centers held it anyway. Pearl asked them to pick different dates. They did not.

---

Notes

¹ Jaweed Kaleem, “UCLA chancellor rebukes law school event featuring attorney of alleged 9/11 ‘mastermind,’” Los Angeles Times, September 12, 2026. Link

² Pentagon transcript of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, released 2007, quoted in Ross O’Keefe, New York Post, September 10, 2026, and in Kaleem, Los Angeles Times, September 12, 2026.

³ “At 90, UCLA’s Judea Pearl is still asking the big questions,” UCLA Newsroom, September 11, 2026. Link

⁴ Ross O’Keefe, “UCLA professor blasts university for hosting lawyer tied to son’s murderer,” New York Post, September 10, 2026. Link

⁵ Ross O’Keefe, “UCLA chancellor condemns controversial 9/11 campus event,” New York Post, September 11, 2026. Link

⁶ UCLA School of Law, “25 Years After 9/11 Symposium” program, September 10–11, 2026. Link

⁷ Aaron Sibarium, “‘Israel Should Be Attacked’: UCLA To Host 9/11 Symposium Featuring Terror Apologists,” Washington Free Beacon, September 8, 2026. Link

⁸ UCLA Law spokesman, quoted in Sibarium, Washington Free Beacon, September 8, 2026.

⁹ Chancellor Julio Frenk, “Comment regarding media coverage on Sept. 10,” UCLA Newsroom, September 11, 2026. Link

```

A.I. pioneer, Dr. Judea Pearl, presents Daniel Pearl Journalism Award to Maria Ressa, at L.A. Press Club's Awards

Maria Ressa received the Daniel Pearl Award for Courage and Integrity in Journalism at the 68th Southern California Journalism Awards (late June 2026), presented by the Los Angeles Press Club and Judea Pearl (Daniel Pearl’s father).  It recognizes journalists showing exceptional courage and commitment to truth, and Ressa is the first Filipino recipient. 

Dr. Judea Pearl presented the award and delivered prepared remarks.

 Dr. Judea Pearl and Maria Ressa the 68th Annual Southern California
Journalism Awards Gala held at The Biltmore Los Angeles in Los Angeles
Sunday, ​June 28, 2026. (Photo By Sthanlee B. Mirador/Sipa USA)
Courtesy: AsianJournal.com 

He opened by expressing profound honor in presenting the 24th LA Press Club Daniel Pearl Award to Maria Ressa, describing her as synonymous with courage and the aspiration to protect press freedom.

He quoted her Nobel Prize lecture warning that “Data is no longer just information… it has been weaponized like plutonium. By allowing algorithms to structurally alter human behavior for profit, society has granted geopolitical powers and authoritarian leaders an open window to destroy democratic institutions from the inside out.” As a computer scientist specializing in AI and machine learning, Pearl said he felt partly responsible for creating this “digital plutonium,” but as a philosopher of science he believes AI tools can also help people understand and resist becoming complicit in its spread.

(Video courtesy: Los Angeles Press Club)

On a personal note, Dr. Pearl stated that over the past three years his heart and mind had been deeply occupied with Israel, “a nation clinging to life as she struggles to withstand not only physical threats, but a sustained, libelous assault on her moral standing, led by outlets like Al Jazeera and echoed even by our reputable Reuters and the Associated Press.” He then extended Ressa’s warning: “This dangerous plutonium is now used not just by authoritarian leaders, like Duterte and Putin, but by ideological forces like Iran, Qatar, and China who aim to re-engineer our perception of reality. They manipulate journalists to erode public trust in journalism, ultimately undermining both our democratic institutions and our shared humanistic values. Therefore, and urgently, we must seriously heed Maria’s warning and watch our steps carefully whenever we feel the temptation to echo this plutonium of disinformation, especially when it lures us to dehumanize my brothers and sisters in Israel.” He closed by thanking Ressa for honoring his son Daniel by accepting the award and for continuing to inspire with her courage, wisdom, and character. Maria Ressa’s acceptance speech focused on her personal connection to Daniel Pearl’s story, the evolving threats to journalism, and a call to action: Ms. Ressa explained why the award mattered: as CNN’s lead investigative reporter before Rappler and the Nobel, she “chased terrorists for a living.” Her first book, *Seeds of Terror*, tracked al-Qaeda networks linking Southeast Asia (including planning in Manila in 1994) to what became the 9/11 attacks. In November 2001 she was in New Delhi tracking Omar Sheikh; he offered her an interview in Karachi. Her CNN features editor deemed it too dangerous and denied the budget, so she did not go. Weeks later, Omar Sheikh lured Daniel Pearl to a meeting in Karachi, handed him to Khalid Sheikh Mohammed (whom Ressa had been chasing and who later confessed to masterminding 9/11), and Pearl was murdered. She said she has lived with that proximity every day since: the same network, the same city; her editor protected her, while no one made that decision for Pearl, who paid for the truth with his life. She described journalism as going to places no one else will go, asking questions no one else will ask, and carrying the truth back. Pearl’s killers filmed the murder to terrify others into silence—but it did not work. Courage spreads just as fear does. She praised Judea Pearl and his family for turning the worst thing that can happen to a family into a light for others. The threat has changed shape: from a camera and a knife to technology that floods the world with lies, turns truth-tellers into criminals, and operates at a scale Pearl’s killers could never have imagined. “The line now travels faster than the fact… And that is how democracy dies. Not with one blow, but… death by a thousand cuts.” Her call: “We hold the line. We don’t duck. We don’t hide.” She recounted her own 11 arrest warrants and criminal charges under Duterte (she still needed Philippine Supreme Court permission to travel to the event), the long fight to win most of those cases, and the irony that Duterte was later arrested under an ICC warrant for crimes against humanity and is awaiting trial in The Hague—while some of Rappler’s work forms part of the evidence against him. She warned of the “Philippine-ization of America” and described the current moment as an “Information Armageddon” (the battle is ongoing, not over). She closed by posing the question Pearl answered with his life—the same question she has posed to Filipinos and now to Americans: “What are you willing to sacrifice for the truth?”

Backroom Deal Could Let Paul Kessler’s Killer Walk-Away with Almost No Jail Time! Sentencing Tuesday, June 30

Facing Up to 4 Years, Controversial Backroom Deal would let Islamist Demonstrator Who Killed Jewish-American Paul Kessler 4-Weeks After Oct. 7 — Serve Almost No Jail Time. Update: Sentencing rescheduled moved to June 30th 9am

June 23: This is a landmark case. When Hamas invaded and massacred Israelis on October 7, 2023, the United States saw more than 12,000 anti-Israel protests in the following months. On November 5, 2023 — just 29 days later — Loay Alnaji, who had come from the Islamic Society of Simi Valley with other members, struck and killed 69-year-old Paul Kessler for the simple act of holding an Israeli flag at a “Justice for Palestine” protest in Thousand Oaks.

Paul Kessler holding the Israeli flag at the protest.

Just 29 days after the October 7, 2023 Hamas massacre, the Islamic Society of Simi Valley — from an area with too few Jews to annoy locally — deliberately returned to the more Jewish neighborhood of Thousand Oaks where they antagonized residents and incited people against their Jewish neighbors. It was during that protest that Loay Alnaji struck Paul Kessler in the face with a megaphone. The coroner found welt marks on Kessler’s face consistent with the blow. Mr. Kessler fell, suffered fatal head trauma, and died the next day.

Loay Alnaji, carrying the bullhorn he used to strike Paul Kessler, accompanied by Nashat Mshaiel from the Islamic Society of Simi Valley.

The case saw numerous continuances both before and after the death of original presiding Judge Ryan Wright in September 2025. Following Wright’s death, the case was briefly handled by Supervising Judge Anthony Sabo. In March 2026, it was reassigned to Judge Derek Malan, who had previously served as a Deputy District Attorney in the Ventura County DA’s Office during the same period as defense attorney Ron Bamieh.

On May 5, 2026, Alnaji entered a guilty plea to involuntary manslaughter. According to his attorney Ron Bamieh, Judge Derek Malan offered the plea deal — up to 365 days in county jail plus 3 years formal probation — after several private meetings with the defense attorney alone. Bamieh told reporters that Judge Malan had characterized the killing as nothing more than “two old guys had a dispute and an accident happened.”

Private meetings between a judge and only one side in a criminal case are highly unusual and generally considered inappropriate under California judicial ethics rules. Canon 3B(7) strongly discourages ex parte communications — discussions about a pending case with only one party (in this instance, only the defense) while excluding the prosecutor and the victim’s family. Canon 3E further requires a judge to disqualify himself if there is a reasonable basis for the public to question his impartiality. Judge Malan’s own reported characterization of this killing as nothing more than “two old guys had a dispute and an accident happened” — made after multiple private meetings with only the defense attorney and over the strong objections of the District Attorney and the victim’s family — significantly heightens the appearance of potential bias or favoritism.

This approach bypassed normal protocol in which plea negotiations are conducted by the District Attorney with input from the victim’s family. The Ventura County DA’s office and Paul Kessler’s family strongly objected, yet their position was overruled. Sentencing is scheduled for June 25, 2026.

This is the predictable outcome of a system that has repeatedly refused to treat antisemitic violence with the seriousness it deserves.

Look at the clear pattern of antisemitic crimes inflicted on Jewish people in Los Angeles in recent years:

• UCLA Encampment (Spring 2024): Over 200 arrests, but the only two people actually prosecuted were Jewish pro-Israel counter-protesters.
• 2020 BLM attacks on Jewish stores (Beverly Blvd, Fairfax Blvd, Pico Blvd): Numerous Jewish-owned businesses were smashed, looted, and robbed, many with explicit antisemitic targeting. Virtually zero meaningful prosecutions or sentences.
• Adas Torah Synagogue riot (June 2024): Muslims rioted and battered Jews outside the synagogue. Zero reported prosecutions or sentences for the attackers.

Yet in Paul Kessler’s case — the first prominent killing of a Jewish-American by a Muslim anti-Israel demonstrator — it was not merely “an accident between two old guys.” The eyewitnesses tell a very different story.

Jon Oswaks (eyewitness, standing with Rabbi Mark Blazer): “They tried with me first… they stalked us before this happened… they had it out for you 100%. Paul was holding his cell phone when Alnaji punched him with a megaphone… it was shown in court that it wasn’t self-defense.”

Jump to 0:44 – Stop at 1:20

Hal Eisner, KTTV (2023): “Paul Kessler was murdered for the simple act of carrying an Israeli flag.” A student at the scene also reported hearing: “we need to kill you all… you’re not belonging here.”

Jump to 0:09 – Stop at 0:55

Rabbi Mark Blazer at the 1-year vigil (Nov 2024): “...on the anniversary of his murder we're calling on the DA in Ventura County... to make sure that those who perpetrated this act of hate, this act of violence are brought to Justice. It’s incumbent on our community to exercise Justice, to practice mercy and Justice, to help create peace, to help create shalom.”

Jump to 0:00 – Stop at 0:25

Dor Shachar (Gaza-raised, now Jewish): “Muhammad came with the Quran… he slaughtered children, cut off their heads… exactly what he did on October 7… The Jew and the Nazarene — cut him into tiny pieces… The Jews in Gaza gave them money and treated them in hospitals… and on October 7 they slaughtered them.”

Jump to 0:25 • 1:12 (“cut the Jew into tiny pieces”) • 2:45 (Gaza betrayal) – Stop at 3:01

Rabbi Zvi Block (sitting with Jonathan Oswaks): “One man in a rage picked up an instrument and struck another man, and that striking caused his death… Our judicial system is insane if it gives only four years. This man should sit many years. This is a model case for Muslims across the world to see what Jews will do and what the court will do. I want 500 Jews in front of that courthouse on the sentencing day. Let the media take notice.”

Never Again is not a slogan — it is a command. If we allow this targeted killing of a Jewish man holding an Israeli flag to be reduced to a mere “accident,” with the killer potentially serving only a tiny fraction of an already lenient sentence while he continues to collect a paycheck, we betray Paul Kessler and send a clear message that Jewish lives are disposable.

Paul Kessler’s blood cries out from the ground in Thousand Oaks. Let it not cry in vain.

Where to Write This Week

Priority	Where to Send	Why It Matters	Contact Details
Highest	Presiding Judge of the Ventura County Superior Court	Can review how Judge Malan was assigned to the case and the appropriateness of the private meetings with defense attorney Ron Bamieh	Ventura County Superior Court 800 South Victoria Avenue Ventura, CA 93009 Attn: Presiding Judge
High	Ventura County Probation Agency	They prepare the Pre-Sentence Report that Judge Malan will rely on when deciding the actual jail time	Phone: (805) 654-2106 → Online Contact Form
Medium	Hon. Derek Malan (via Court Clerk)	Letters are placed in the official court file before sentencing	Ventura County Superior Court 800 South Victoria Avenue Ventura, CA 93009 Re: People v. Loay Abdel Fattah Alnaji
Medium	California Commission on Judicial Performance	Official state agency that investigates judicial misconduct and conflicts of interest	File online: cjp.ca.gov
Lower	Ventura County District Attorney’s Office	Limited influence now that the plea deal has already been accepted	Phone: (805) 654-2500 → Online Contact Form

Note:

Because sentencing is scheduled for TuesPday, June 30 at 9am, letters sent this week will have limited but still symbolic value for influencing the final sentence. 

However, letters requesting an investigation to the Presiding Judge have value even after the sentencing. They create a public record, pressure for transparency on the process, and can prompt a review of the judicial assignment and private meetings.

Sample Letter to Presiding Judge Guasco – Request for Review

[Your Full Name]  
[Your Address]  
[City, State, ZIP]  
[Email]  
[Phone]  
[Date]

Hon. Matthew P. Guasco, Presiding Judge  
Ventura County Superior Court  
800 South Victoria Avenue  
Ventura, CA 93009  

Re: People v. Loay Abdel Fattah Alnaji – Request for Review of Judicial Assignment and Conduct

Dear Presiding Judge Guasco,

I am writing regarding the handling of the above high-profile case.

Judge Derek Malan and defense attorney Ron Bamieh previously served as Deputy District Attorneys in the Ventura County DA’s Office during overlapping periods. After Bamieh entered private practice, Judge Malan was assigned to this case. It has been reported that Judge Malan held several private meetings with Mr. Bamieh alone before offering a lenient plea deal over the objections of the District Attorney and the victim’s family.

These circumstances raise a reasonable question about impartiality under Canon 3E of the California Code of Judicial Ethics. I respectfully request that your office review the assignment of this case and the appropriateness of the private meetings.

Thank you for your attention to this important matter.

Sincerely,  
[Your Full Name]

Sample Letter to Judge Malan – Demand Harsher Sentence

[Your Full Name]  
[Your Address]  
[City, State, ZIP]  
[Email]  
[Phone]  
[Date]

Honorable Derek D. Malan  
Ventura County Superior Court  
800 South Victoria Avenue  
Ventura, CA 93009  

Re: People v. Loay Abdel Fattah Alnaji – Sentencing June 25, 2026

Dear Judge Malan,

I am writing about the upcoming sentencing of Loay Alnaji in the killing of Paul Kessler.

Paul Kessler was the first Jewish-American killed by a Muslim anti-Israel protester after October 7, 2023. Given the seriousness of this crime, I respectfully urge you to impose the maximum sentence possible under the plea agreement.

A lenient outcome in this landmark case would send a dangerous message that attacks on Jewish Americans will not be treated seriously.

Thank you for your consideration.

Sincerely,  
[Your Full Name]

The Dragon's Long Game: How China Is Targeting America from Within

June 4, 2026 37th Anniversary — Tiananmen Square Massacre

Two women who survived China's communist machinery — one a Cultural Revolution survivor turned bestselling author, the other a libertarian activist and PRC émigré — offer a chilling, firsthand account of Beijing's ambitions on American soil.

Interviews with Xi Van Fleet (American Freedom Alliance, Los Angeles, March 31, 2025) and Mrs. Li Schoolland (FreedomFest 2025)  ·  Speech by Dr. Ming Wang (Anthem Film Festival at FreedomFest). Published June 4, 2026

Today is June 4th. In most of the world, that date means very little. In China, it means so much that the government has banned the numbers six and four from appearing together on the internet. The anniversary of the 1989 Tiananmen Square massacre — when the People's Liberation Army rolled tanks over unarmed students demanding democracy — is not merely a historical wound. It is, as two Chinese-American women explained in separate interviews, a template: a window into exactly how the Chinese Communist Party treats inconvenient truths, inconvenient people, and inconvenient nations.

Those women are Ms. Xi Van Fleet, Cultural Revolution survivor and author of the newly released Made in America: The Hidden History of How the U.S. Enabled Communist China and Created Our Greatest Threat, and Mrs. Li Zhao Schoolland, a PRC émigré, libertarian activist, and speaker at FreedomFest 2025. Their accounts converge on an unsettling conclusion: the CCP's campaign to weaken and ultimately dominate the West is not a future threat. It is already underway.

A Book America Needs to Read

Xi Van Fleet is used to being heard. In 2021, a two-minute speech she delivered to a Virginia school board against Critical Race Theory went viral, drawing comparisons between Mao's Cultural Revolution and America's woke movement. Her first book, Mao's America: A Survivor's Warning, became a conservative bestseller. Her follow-up — co-written with renowned Chinese dissident Yu Jie — goes further and deeper, tracing how American elites, over more than a century, helped build the very monster that now threatens them.

📖

Made in America — Xi Van Fleet & Yu Jie

The untold story of how misguided U.S. elites transformed China from a communist wasteland into a global superpower — at America's expense. Available wherever books are sold, including Amazon.

Xi van Fleet at American Freedom Alliance event 

"It's titled Made in America," Van Fleet explained at the American Freedom Alliance event in Los Angeles. "The subtitle — The Hidden History of How the U.S. Enabled Communist China and Created Our Greatest Threat — is very important." The book's central argument is that China's rise was not an accident of history or an inevitability of economics. It was built, piece by piece, with American money, technology, and willful blindness.

What Communism Is Really About

Van Fleet pushes back hard against the assumption that politicians aligned with socialist or communist ideology are simply misguided idealists who wish to improve other people's lives. That framing, she argues, fundamentally misunderstands the nature of the ideology.

"Communism is really about power. It's nothing about improving people's lives. Never. That's just a tactic — before they take over, that's how they try to convince the public. Once they get power, they will try to maintain power. That is their focus. Always."

Xi Van Fleet American Freedom Alliance, Los Angeles

The question of whether Western politicians who embrace socialist rhetoric are true believers or cynical opportunists, she suggests, may be less important than the structural outcome: one-party dominance. "State like California is good," she said pointedly, "but they want the whole country that way."

She also addressed the fear — common among critics of the left — that communist-style authoritarianism would require the kind of mass violence that characterized Mao's China. Not necessarily, she warns. "They don't have to kill millions. As long as they're in power, they can do all sorts of things." The Cultural Revolution's 20 million deaths, she noted, were mostly inflicted not by government agents with guns, but by ordinary citizens turned against each other — a fact she finds more disturbing, not less.

The Street and the Square: A Revolutionary Parallel

When the conversation turned to the wave of protest movements that have swept American cities in recent years — from the 2020 racial justice demonstrations to the "No Kings" rallies — Mrs. Li Schoolland drew an immediate and visceral parallel.

"That reminds me of the Chinese Cultural Revolution. Mao encouraged young people to go on the street and condemn everything good — knowledge, history, art, music, anything with culture or thinking or philosophy. They went on the street to condemn all that."

Mrs. Li Schoolland FreedomFest 2025

Li Schoolland, author of "A Survivor's Story" poses with
Dr. Ming Wang, author of "From Darkness to Sight" at
FreedomFest '25 in Southern California

But she stopped short of despair. America's constitutional foundations, she argued, provide a buffer that China never had. "Our country is founded on the principle of liberty, freedom, democracy, and the rule of law. So even though they have many demonstrations, it's not going to change anything." The critical difference, she emphasized, is that in America the demonstrators cannot become the government by force. In China, they already were.

Xi Van Fleet, meanwhile, traced the funding behind the current protest wave to sources far closer to Beijing than most Americans realize. She pointed to investigations by journalist Asra Nomani, which reportedly traced financing for recent "No Kings" protests to American tech billionaire Neville Roy Singham — a self-described Marxist living in Shanghai who reportedly funnels hundreds of millions of dollars through a network of pro-China activist groups. "That's how China is reaching out and influencing," Van Fleet said.

The Invisible Occupation

Perhaps the most startling claims in both interviews concern not geopolitical maneuvering, but the physical presence of CCP influence on American soil. Mrs. Schoolland did not mince words.

"They have Chinese police stations — not just in Chinatown, everywhere. On campuses. And they have students paid by the Chinese government coming here not to study, but to spy on other Chinese students and to make trouble."

Mrs. Li Schoolland FreedomFest 2025

She described Chinese nationals who drove luxury cars in 2020 protest parades — not out of solidarity, she argued, but out of satisfaction. "Anything that hurts the United States, they're happy about. But they're sitting in the United States, enjoying our taxpayer-funded benefits and technology and freedom. They cannot do the same thing back in China — there's no way."

On the question of CCP influence within American political parties, Mrs. Schoolland was careful but clear. "I don't know, but I'm sure there's a lot of money going to candidates. A lot of influence." When asked whether she would be surprised to learn the CCP was behind funding current demonstrations, she replied: "I won't be surprised at all. Because that's what they want. They think the US is the enemy. They want to hurt us in every means."

Racism, Envy, and the Psychology of a Rising Power

One thread that runs through both interviews, and that rarely surfaces in mainstream discourse, is China's internal racial hierarchy. When critics of Chinese government policy are dismissed as "racist," Mrs. Schoolland offered a pointed rebuttal.

"If you talk about racist — China is the most racist nation. Chinese people will not sit next to a person with darker skin than theirs. They think those people carry some kind of disease. That's the attitude. And they look at the West with envy — envy that leads to hate. So they have to put themselves up in order to look down at other people, especially the United States."

Mrs. Li Schoolland FreedomFest 2025

The goal, she argued, is not simply economic competition or geopolitical rivalry. "They want to be the world power — in control. But they also know they can't control America directly. What they can do is influence the politicians, the government. Bring America down enough that they rise by comparison."

CCP Chinese tanks fire upon civilian protesters in Tiananmen Square, June 4th, 1989

Wisdom about civic responsibility from diverse veterans at Memorial Day Ceremony

Veterans of South Korea at L.A. National Cemetery's Memorial Day Ceremony

How Argentinian-raised, Robert ("Bob") Johnson helps additional Allied veterans (living and deceased) who participated in defeating Nazism in France to receive Legion of Honor recognition at annual D-Day Ceremony there.

Reinhard Kargl (L) and James Kargl share thoughts on
the lawn where the ceremony chairs are being collected.
See the field of tombstones on the right, and association-
sponsored wreaths on the left

What the experience of enlisted US Marine, Col. James Field in Vietnam has motivated him to attend Memorial Day at a National Cemetery  annually (Arlington, Virginia until now) for decades. What this Marine vet-turned-Karate sensei thinks about the US impeding imperialist Iran's nuclear weapons program.

Brothers Braden and Payton Salazar of Boy Scout Troop 218 in Torrance, Calif. salute the
souls of veterans (and their spouses) by name after planting a flag above their marker
(photo courtesy: Axel Koester)

How Austrian-Immigrant, Reinhard Kargl, salutes US veterans (whether alive or deceased) who contributed to defeating National Socialism and Communism.

   

L.A. Cemetery Foundation chair, Glenn Schecter awards Luna Stolar-Calazara for helping coordinate 
Scouts of America who planted thousands of U.S. flags on the graves of those buried there

How Immigrant G.I. Vet Regards Immigrants and Youth Not Honoring Memorial Day.

Zoroastrian-Iranian veteran of US Army discusses his military service in Iraq and his views of whom he considers alien immigrant men who have not contribute to America through national service.

Buffalo Soldiers enactors teach history Memorial Day at Veterans Cemetery L.A. - Major A.J. Simien

The Cost of Freedom? Korean-American Chief Warrant Officer II Steve Cho, California State Guard