SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
kirsten gillibrand
Why Mamdani and Other US Muslims Now Refuse to Play the Condemnation Game
The NYC mayoral candidate and other Muslim Americans should no longer be expected to condemn words that we have never used.
Jul 06, 2025
You must condemn the phrase "globalize the intifada."
That's the demand that some pro-Israel politicians, reporters, organizations, and activists keep making of Zohran Mamdani, New York City's presumptive Democratic nominee for mayor.
The manufactured controversy surrounding Mamdani and this phrase began days before the June 24 election, when a radio host asked Mamdani for his thoughts about unnamed pro-Palestinian activists who supposedly use such language.
For decades, Muslims in America have been held to a ridiculous, bigoted double standard which demands that we condemn violence that we had nothing to do with and renounce comments that we have never made.
Instead of outright condemning the phrase, Mamdani said, "I know people for whom those things mean very different things." He said that some who say it are trying to express a "desperate desire for equality and equal rights in standing up for Palestinian human rights,” and noted that the U.S. Holocaust Museum had used the word "intifada” in Arabic-language descriptions of the 1944 Warsaw Uprising against Nazi Germany.
Former New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo and other Mamdani opponents seized on his nuanced response, embellished and exaggerated what he said, and loudly condemned him. By the time the dust settled, members of the public and even prominent politicians like Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.) were claiming that Mamdani himself had actually used the phrase. He hadn't.
In fact, no member of his campaign staff had ever used the phrase or even said "intifada," an Arabic word often translated as revolution or uprising that has been used to describe the largely peaceful Arab Spring protests and that was indeed used by the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum until it quietly dropped the phrase.
Yet, even after Mamdani's stunning victory in the Democratic mayoral primary, reporters and some politicians keep demanding that Mamdani condemn the phrase.
During an interview with "Meet the Press” on Sunday, June 29, Mamdani was repeatedly asked why he has declined to do so.
This time, Mamdani said it was not a phrase he would use and that he understood concerns about it, but that he did not want to police speech as the mayor of New York or legitimize President Donald Trump's efforts to deport activists based solely on their pro-Palestine speech.
In other words, Mamdani doesn't want to end up as an evidentiary footnote in a Justice Department deportation filing against a student protester or set a precedent that makes him responsible for condemning every problematic chant shouted at a pro-Palestine rally over the next four years.
Fair enough. But there's another, even more important reason Mamdani shouldn't have to condemn the phrase: Put simply, no one would ask him to do so in the first place if he was not a Muslim.
Think about it. There are plenty of other politicians opposed to the genocide and critical of the Israeli government, including Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Rep. Alexandria Ocasio Cortez (D-N.Y.) and former Rep. Jamaal Bowman (D-N.Y.).
Has anyone ever asked them to condemn the phrase "globalize the intifada?” Of course not. Why should they have to answer for a phrase they have never used, that none of their staffers have ever used, and that hardly anyone else ever uses?
What's the difference with Mamdani? He's a Muslim in America, and for decades, Muslims in America have been held to a ridiculous, bigoted double standard which demands that we condemn violence that we had nothing to do with and renounce comments that we have never made.
The irony is that Muslims actually have voluntarily and consistently spoken out against acts of unjust violence committed by Muslim extremists so that Americans unfamiliar with Islam understand that such violence does not represent the faith. However, speaking out voluntarily is different from being forced to do so as a condition for participation in American public life.
Only Muslims face this heightened double standard. When's the last time someone asked Sen. Gillibrand—a steadfast supporter of the Israeli government who has voted to fund its genocide—what she thinks of the pro-Israel protesters who recently chanted racist anti-Arab and anti-Muslim slogans while chasing a woman they misidentified as a Palestinian down the streets of New York City
Better yet, when's the last time someone asked former Gov. Cuomo—who literally joined the defense team of indicted war criminal Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu—whether he condemns the various racist, genocidal statements that Netanyahu and his hand-picked government ministers have made?
To be clear, there are plenty of reasons why most pro-Palestine activists would not use the phrase "globalize the intifada.” The phrase can signify peaceful civil disobedience to one group of people and violent uprising to another group of people. The debate about the phrase distracts from the struggle against the genocide. Most importantly, there is no pressing need to use such a phrase. That's why, again, no prominent leaders in the Palestinian freedom movement have ever said it.
The only people who should have to answer for the phrase "globalize the intifada" are the people who supposedly use it, whoever they are. Mamdani and other Muslim Americans should no longer be expected to condemn words that we have never used, especially while politicians critical of him can vote to fund the Israeli government's genocide without being forced to constantly answer for its crimes.
When he was first asked about "globalize the intifada," Zohran Mamdani could have done what many other Muslim Americans have done over the past 25 years: condemn something he never said, and then move on.
By refusing to play the condemnation game this time and still winning the Democratic primary, he may have helped free Muslims in political life from a double standard that has haunted them for decades.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Senators Demand Answers About 'Reckless' Trump Admin Use of AI Social Security Chatbot
Artificial intelligence systems, the four senators argue, "represent a troubling pattern that if continued, would significantly impede Americans' ability" to access their benefits.
Jul 01, 2025
Four U.S. senators—three Democrats and Vermont Independent Bernie Sanders—demanded answers Tuesday from the Trump administration about its "reckless rollout" of artificial intelligence chatbot technology into phone systems "that have blocked people from accessing their earned Social Security benefits."
"These AI programs, which the agency deployed with little consultation with Congress, advocates, or other key stakeholders, appear to have been developed in haste and represent a troubling pattern that if continued, would significantly impede Americans' ability to access their Social Security and Supplemental Security Income (SSI) benefits," the senators said in a letter to Social Security Administration (SSA) Commissioner Frank Bisignano.
While Sanders, Senate Finance Committee Ranking Member Ron Wyden (Ore.), and Sens. Elizabeth Warren (Mass.) and Kirsten Gillibrand (N.Y.) acknowledged that "AI can be a helpful tool to simplify some workloads," they contended that artificial intelligence "is not a panacea for all challenges facing SSA."
The letter continues:
SSA is entrusted with ensuring accurate and timely payment of mtore than $1 trillion in Social Security and SSI benefit payments to over 73 million seniors, individuals with disabilities, and their families each year. Considering the agency's important mission, it is critical that SSA is responsibly deploying any technology system, including AI. For example, whether incorporating newer technology like generative AI to improve customer experience and increase efficiency or leveraging predictive AI to provide disability examiners support in the disability determination process, it is critical that SSA meaningfully engage stakeholders, including its customers and employees, the advocacy community, and members of Congress, throughout the entire process to avoid harm to claimants and beneficiaries.
"The agency's hasty AI rollouts on its national 1-800 number phone system and the phone system for its 1,200 field offices, which resulted in significant impediments for Americans simply trying to access their earned benefits, demonstrate our concern," the senators wrote. "In April, SSA announced it would be deploying an anti-fraud AI algorithm to verify the identity of callers seeking to file for benefits on its national 1-800 number, arguing—without providing any evidence—that its telephone service was rife with fraud."
"However," the lawmakers noted, "the proposal was scrapped shortly after implementation after the system found it identified two claims out of over 110,000 as potentially fraudulent. Moreover, the new program slowed claim processing by 25% and led to a 'degradation of public service.'"
The senators are asking Bisignano to:
- Provide a detailed description of the new AI-based chatbot, including how it determines whether it has successfully answered a caller's questions before hanging up;
- Describe which metrics is SSA using to determine whether this AI-based chatbot is successful at improving service delivery at the national 1-800 number;
- Explain the metrics SSA used to evaluate the successes or challenges of this AI-based chatbot before rolling it out nationwide to field offices;
- Disclose which stakeholders, especially those who represent beneficiaries and employees, were consulted pre- and post-deployment of this AI-based chatbot;
- Explain whether SSA is planning to procure, develop, or implement any new AI systems this year; and
- If the answer to the above question is yes, list and provide a detailed description of these AI systems.
The AI rollout is part of Bisignano's "technology agenda" to boost productivity at SSA amid staffing and other cuts implemented by the Trump administration and its Department of Government Efficiency, or DOGE. In February, SSA announced its intent to fire 7,000 workers, or about 12% of its historically low staff.
Many SSA staffers also resigned, including nearly half of the agency's senior executives. This has adversely affected SSA beneficiaries. An analysis published last week by the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities revealed that one SSA staff member must now serve 1,480 beneficiaries—over three times as many as in 1967.
Last week, Warren sent a letter to Bisignano—who one advocacy group described as "a Wall Street CEO with a long history of slashing the companies he runs to the bone"—accusing him of misleading the public about longer beneficiary wait times resulting from the Trump administration and DOGE taking a "chainsaw to Social Security."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Even Dems Who Initially Backed Crypto GENIUS Act Block It Over 'Outstanding Issues'
"Democrats held firm against this corporate power grab. We're fighting for fairness, not billionaire greed!" said Our Revolution said—though the effort to pass the bill is not over.
May 09, 2025
In a win for progressive groups and lawmakers who have been sounding the alarm about legislation that would create a regulatory framework for stablecoins, the U.S. Senate Democratic Caucus—along with a couple of Republicans—blocked the cryptocurrency bill from advancing on Thursday in a 49-48 procedural vote.
A stablecoin is a digital asset whose value is tied to traditional currency, such as the U.S. dollar, or a commodity like gold. Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.) co-sponsored the Guiding and Establishing National Innovation for U.S. Stablecoins (GENIUS) Act, which advanced out of the Senate Banking Committee in March with support from five other Democrats.
Meanwhile, the committee's ranking member, Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), has blasted the bill—as has Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), who caucuses with Democrats and warned this week that the GENIUS Act would make it easier for President Donald Trump "and his family to continue to engage in corrupt dealmaking enabled through their cryptocurrency."
Our Revolution, a group formed as a continuation of Sanders' 2016 presidential campaign, has similarly panned the legislation, with executive director Joseph Geevarghese calling it a "laughably weak and toothless regulatory bill—a sham crafted by cryptocurrency giants that is certain to line the pockets of the Trump family's crypto empire."
Concern over the bill has grown since the revelation last week that a stablecoin developed by the Trump family crypto firm, World Liberty Financial, would be used for a $2 billion deal between an investment firm established by the government of Abu Dhabi, MGX, and the world's largest crypto exchange, Binance.
In recent days, several crypto-friendly Democrats said they couldn't support the GENIUS Act in its current form, and ultimately, no members of the party's caucus voted for it. Thursday's vote was welcomed by Our Revolution, which said on social media that "Democrats held firm against this corporate power grab. We're fighting for fairness, not billionaire greed!"
Gillibrand, a key target of Our Revolution ahead of the vote, said in a statement that "I believe it is essential to the future of the U.S. economy and to everyday Americans that we enact strict stablecoin regulations and consumer protections where none currently exist. Over the past few years, I have worked in good faith with Republicans to author robust stablecoin legislation that protects consumers, enables innovation to thrive, and maintains the dominance of the U.S. dollar."
"The bipartisanship of this effort was on display when the bill passed out of the Banking Committee with strong support from Democrats and Republicans," she continued. "However, developments over the past week made it clear that there were a number of outstanding issues that needed to be addressed before this bill could pass the full Senate."
"I fully support my colleagues' efforts," Gillibrand said, specifically applauding Sen. Bill Hagerty (R-Tenn.) "for his tireless work across the aisle to improve and strengthen this bill." She added that "I remain extremely confident and hopeful that very soon we can finish the job."
According to Axios: "Key Senate players have been meeting all week, trying to land a deal to appease Democrats. Senate Republicans reviewed Democrats' proposed changes to the GENIUS Act, with Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) and Sen. Mark Warner (D-Va.) negotiating up until the last minute."
Warner, one of the Democrats who voted the bill out of committee in March, said in a Thursday statement that "while we've made meaningful progress on the GENIUS Act, the work is not yet complete, and I simply cannot in good conscience ask my colleagues to vote for this legislation when the text isn't yet finished."
"I remain fully committed to getting this right," he said. "I plan to continue working with my colleagues to strengthen this legislation and move it forward in a way that promotes innovation while protecting the interests of the American people. It is my sincere hope that we can start floor consideration next week after we have finalized our work and given our colleagues adequate time to review."
While Thune reposted social media statements from his GOP colleagues expressing disappointment over the result and accusing Democrats of "hypocrisy," he also signaled that the effort to pass a stablecoin bill will continue by changing his vote from yes to no, which enables him to bring up the GENIUS Act at a later date.
Given expectations that the fight for the bill will go on, Democrats are still pushing for key reforms and additions. Citing recent reporting about Trump agreeing to attend a dinner with major investors in his cryptocurrency, Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.) said on social media Friday that "access to the White House shouldn't be up for sale to the highest bidder!!"
"This kind of blatant corruption takes a sledgehammer to public trust—we need to add my End Crypto Corruption Act to the GENIUS Act NOW!" added Merkley, pushing
legislation that would ban the president, vice president, top executive branch officials, members of Congress, and their immediate families from issuing, endorsing, or sponsoring crypto assets.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular