Latest news with #Islamists'
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
3 days ago
- Business
- Business Standard
Sequoia partner's social media post on Mamdani sets off chain reaction
Roelof Botha, managing partner at Sequoia Capital, attended the Allen & Company conference in Sun Valley last week amid a storm back home. Attendees repeatedly questioned him about colleague Shaun Maguire's July 4 post on X accusing Zohran Mamdani, a progressive Democrat and NYC mayoral candidate, of pushing an 'Islamist agenda' and being part of a 'culture that lies about everything.' Maguire's remarks were quickly condemned as Islamophobic. Over 1,000 technologists signed an open letter urging Sequoia to take action, while others defended his right to free speech. Botha remained neutral at Sun Valley, but the controversy has thrust Sequoia into a political firestorm it long tried to avoid. For years, Sequoia maintained institutional neutrality while rivals like Andreessen Horowitz and Founders Fund leaned into politics. But as Maguire's inflammatory views — including saying diversity, equity and inclusion 'kills people' — gained attention, that position has become harder to hold. Sequoia, which backed giants like Apple, Google, and Nvidia, has historically let its founders shine while partners stayed low-profile. But with Silicon Valley's evolution, political commentary by investors has become more common. Though Maguire's outspokenness is unusual at Sequoia, it reflects a broader trend seen in figures like Marc Andreessen and Peter Thiel. Sequoia has remained silent on the issue. Internally, senior partner Doug Leone appeared to defend Maguire, distinguishing between 'Islamists' and 'Muslims' in emails. 'Sequoia is backed into a corner and only has bad options,' said Paul Biggar, founder of Tech for Palestine. In a recent video, Maguire reiterated his comments, calling Mamdani 'an Islamist' and 'a wolf in sheep's clothing,' while offering a limited apology to Muslims not aligned with Islamism. Mamdani's campaign didn't comment. Founded in 1972, Sequoia built its reputation on early bets in firms like Cisco, YouTube, and Zoom. But as new investors flooded Silicon Valley, standing out meant being more vocal — including on politics. In recent years, Sequoia partners have broken from tradition: Michael Moritz criticised Trump in 2016, while Leone donated to and later denounced him. Maguire helped secure Sequoia's investment in SpaceX and other Elon Musk ventures. He has over 275,000 followers on X. After Hamas' October 7 attack, Maguire, a self-described 'Jew and a Zionist,' defended Israel and warned of rising antisemitism. Maguire's post on Mamdani came after The New York Times reported that the mayoral hopeful had described himself as 'Asian and African American' on a college application. The backlash included an open letter accusing Maguire of promoting anti-Muslim stereotypes. A counterletter supporting him, signed by Bill Ackman and others, called him a 'principled thinker.' Sequoia partners have tread cautiously. On July 10, partner Pat Grady posted on X, expressing support for both the Muslim community and Maguire, calling Sequoia's culture of 'healthy conflict of ideas.' Now, activists are pressuring Sequoia's financial backers — including major universities — to hold the firm accountable. 'If we're serious about building an inclusive future, it starts with holding power accountable,' the letter said.
New York Post
27-06-2025
- Politics
- New York Post
Who'll end Christian slaughter, grad schools will survive loan caps and other commentary
Foreign desk: Who'll End Christian Slaughter? 'On Friday June 13, over 500 Christians' were murdered by Islamic terrorists in Nigeria, reports The Free Press' Madeleine Kearns. 'The jihadists broke into homes and shelters, murdering people with machetes,' then 'doused their victims' bodies and homes in petrol and set them ablaze.' And, 'though exceptional in scale and barbarity,' it's just 'part of a pattern of persecution that Christians in Nigeria have come to expect.' Consider: 'Since 2009, Islamists' across Nigeria 'have destroyed over 18,000 churches,' 'murdered over 50,000 Christians' and displaced 'a further 5 million Christians.' Yet Western governments and media 'have turned away from the issue.' Will anyone move to stop the carnage? Libertarian: Grad Schools Will Survive Loan Caps Advertisement A provision in the Republican Big Beautiful Bill 'may make considerable inroads to correcting a decades-long student loan policy that has driven expensive programs and large debt burdens for students,' cheers Reason's Emma Camp. The House bill 'eliminates the Graduate PLUS loan program, which allows graduate students to borrow an unlimited sum of money from the government,' instead capping grad-student borrowing at $100,000, 'with a $150,000 limit for professional programs, and a lifetime cap of $200,000 for all students.' These caps could 'force colleges to lower their prices once their students no longer have access to an infinite pile of government money.' Indeed, If we want more affordable medical schools, 'the first step should involve actually incentivizing medical schools to stop overcharging students.' Conservative: Dems' NYC-led Coastal Elitism 'One interesting aspect of the rise of' socialist Democratic mayoral nominee Zohran Mamdani 'is what it says about New York City's dominance of national Democratic politics at this moment,' muses the Washington Examiner's Byron York. 'The New York contingent essentially is the leadership of the Democratic Party today,' since congressional leaders Hakeem Jeffries and Chuck Schumer as well as stars Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Bernie Sanders are all current or former New Yorkers. 'After the 2024 election, Democratic pollster Mark Penn wrote that Trump was elected by 'Americans who feel abandoned by the coastal elites and a Democratic Party that moved too far from mainstream America.'' 'There are probably a lot of things Democrats might do to broaden their appeal beyond the coastal areas, but' elevating Mamdani 'is definitely not one of them.' Advertisement Antisemitism beat: 'Kosherizing' Jew-Haters Just before New York's mayoral primary, late-night host Stephen Colbert's guests were Zohran Mamdani and City comptroller Brad Lander, notes Commentary's Seth Mandel. 'All three were there' to 'help elect Zohran Mamdani mayor.' Mamdani — 'the poster child for progressive anti-Zionism's conquest of the mainstream Democratic Party' — had defended the phrase 'globalize the intifada,' which calls for violence against Jews, and 'Colbert can be effective at shielding left-wing anti-Semites from criticism.' Then again, the TV host doesn't 'hold a candle in that department to Brad Lander': Indeed, the comptroller's 'alliance with Mamdani' is the 'culmination of years of Lander's efforts to kosherize anti-Semitism.' He's part of the story of 'the collapse of New York's Jewish-political establishment.' Sen. Chuck Schumer, who kissed 'Mamdani's ring,' is 'the capstone of this project.' From the right: Lefties' Chronic Mental Misery Advertisement Rep. Jasmine Crockett (D-Texas) 'said last week that Donald Trump supporters are mentally ill,' but 'it's her side that is not well,' snarks the Issues & Insights editorial board. 'Nine in 10 conservatives self-report their mental health to be excellent (51%)' versus only 20% of liberals. Meanwhile, 'only 19% of conservatives say their mental health is poor, while 45% of liberals say they have poor mental health.' 'This is not a new development related to Trump returning to the White House. A decade ago, University of Toronto researchers similarly 'found that conservatives are more emotionally stable than liberals.' 'Democrats, progressives, socialists, anti-capitalists, and the rest who reside under the leftist umbrella are unhappy, and they want everyone else to be just as miserable as they are.' — Compiled by The Post Editorial Board
Ya Biladi
07-05-2025
- Politics
- Ya Biladi
Moroccan MPs demand action on right to inform amid cybersecurity concerns
On Monday, May 5, the parliamentary group of the Justice and Development Party (PJD) expressed concern over the lack of scheduled speaking slots under the «right to inform», as outlined in Article 163 of the House of Representatives' internal regulations. Mustapha Ibrahimi pointed out that «under the two previous governments, this right was exercised four times during each weekly oral question session, whereas under the current government, it has been used only four times since the start of this legislature». He noted that his group had specifically requested to speak about the cyberattack targeting the CNSS database. In a surprising turn, the PAM group—part of the ruling majority—backed the Islamists' request. Ahmed Touizi, head of the PAM's parliamentary group, called on the Akhannouch government to respond to MPs' requests to speak at the end of oral question sessions. «The majority is not afraid», he declared emphatically. Article 163 of the lower house's internal rules defines this right: «Deputies may speak at the end of the weekly oral question session to address a topic of general and urgent interest that should be brought to the attention of national public opinion. The president of the parliamentary group must notify the President of the House in writing of any such request at least twenty-four hours before the session begins». The article further states: «The government may provide data, statements, and clarifications on the issues raised. A total of sixteen minutes is allocated for this purpose. The number of speakers is limited to two from the opposition and two from the majority, alternating between parliamentary groups, while respecting the rights of unaffiliated representatives. Based on these criteria, the Bureau establishes the list of speakers before each session. Each topic is presented in a two-minute intervention».
Ya Biladi
06-05-2025
- Politics
- Ya Biladi
Moroccan MPs demand action on right to inform amid cybersecurity concerns
On Monday, May 5, the parliamentary group of the Justice and Development Party (PJD) expressed concern over the lack of scheduled speaking slots under the «right to inform», as outlined in Article 163 of the House of Representatives' internal regulations. Mustapha Ibrahimi pointed out that «under the two previous governments, this right was exercised four times during each weekly oral question session, whereas under the current government, it has been used only four times since the start of this legislature». He noted that his group had specifically requested to speak about the cyberattack targeting the CNSS database. In a surprising turn, the PAM group—part of the ruling majority—backed the Islamists' request. Ahmed Touizi, head of the PAM's parliamentary group, called on the Akhannouch government to respond to MPs' requests to speak at the end of oral question sessions. «The majority is not afraid», he declared emphatically. Article 163 of the lower house's internal rules defines this right: «Deputies may speak at the end of the weekly oral question session to address a topic of general and urgent interest that should be brought to the attention of national public opinion. The president of the parliamentary group must notify the President of the House in writing of any such request at least twenty-four hours before the session begins». The article further states: «The government may provide data, statements, and clarifications on the issues raised. A total of sixteen minutes is allocated for this purpose. The number of speakers is limited to two from the opposition and two from the majority, alternating between parliamentary groups, while respecting the rights of unaffiliated representatives. Based on these criteria, the Bureau establishes the list of speakers before each session. Each topic is presented in a two-minute intervention».
Japan Times
31-03-2025
- Politics
- Japan Times
Israel must not ignore the anti-Hamas protests in Gaza
Typically, a small anti-war demonstration would not be front-page news unless it happened somewhere like Moscow, where few dare openly to oppose the Kremlin's ongoing aggression against Ukraine. But in war-torn Gaza, the stakes would be even higher. Even before the current conflict, Hamas responded to any criticism of its misrule with brutal repression and torture. Yet on March 25, hundreds of people took to the streets in Beit Lahiya (northern Gaza) to protest not only against the war, but against Hamas. With chants of 'stop war,' 'Hamas out,' 'Hamas terrorists,' the demonstrators sent exactly the right message: For the war to end, Hamas — which started it — must be removed from power. Nor were the Beit Lahiya protesters alone. As news and videos of this extraordinary event spread on social media, similar spontaneous demonstrations erupted elsewhere in Gaza, first in Jabalia and Khan Yunis, and then in Shejaiya, one of the enclave's largest communities. While most of the protesters refused to identify themselves by name to reporters, they nonetheless showed their faces. On Wednesday, over 3,000 people demonstrated again in Beit Lahiya. Anti-Hamas slogans were more visible, but protesters stressed that their main objective is for the war to end. 'We can't stop Israel from killing us, but we can press Hamas to give concessions,' said Mohammed Abu Saker, a father of three from the nearby town of Beit Hanoun. Even Hamas-controlled media covered the event, though only after editing out statements attacking the Islamists' rule. Though still relatively small in scale, the demonstrations clearly indicate a shift in opinion. After Israel withdrew from Gaza in 2005, Hamas took power the following year in the only free elections the Palestinians had ever had. Fatah, the secular nationalist party with majority support in the West Bank, had been tainted by corruption, so more Gazans voted for Hamas, which promised not terrorism, but clean government, even running under the name 'Change and Reform.' But after winning the election, Hamas violently expelled Fatah from Gaza — 345 people were killed in the process — and started firing rockets at Israel. This caused a series of wars, culminating in the current one — by far the most violent yet. Neither Gaza nor the West Bank has held an election in 20 years and Hamas's rule has proved no less corrupt than Fatah's (municipal elections have been held in the West Bank, but Hamas has boycotted all of them). Meanwhile, Israeli governments — led mainly by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu — have regarded Hamas's totalitarian rule in Gaza as advantageous. With terrorists in power in Gaza and corrupt incompetents in Ramallah (the seat of the Palestinian Authority), the argument goes, Israel has had no legitimate counterparty with which to negotiate. Then came Oct. 7, 2023. The scale and viciousness of the slaughter, which visibly had broad support in Gaza, seemed to prove Netanyahu's point. Even the country's moderate president, Isaac Herzog, said — in the shock of the immediate aftermath of the slaughter — that 'there is an entire nation out there that is responsible.' In a November 2023 poll conducted by the respected Palestinian Center for Policy and Survey Research, 72% of Palestinians thought Hamas was 'correct' to launch the Oct. 7 attack, while over 90% refused to believe that civilians were killed on that day. Yet it is worth noting that support was much higher in the West Bank (82%) than in Gaza (57%), which was already enduring Israel's counterattack. Similarly, overall support for Hamas had been consistently higher in the West Bank, where it is the opposition, than in Gaza, which has suffered under its rule. Since then, however, support for the attack and for Hamas has been systematically declining, though the difference between West Bank and Gazan attitudes remains. Last fall, only 39% of Gazans supported the attack and in January 2025 only around 20% supported Hamas rule. This disenchantment almost certainly reflects the high cost of the war — there have been more than 50,000 fatalities (civilian and combatant) in Gaza, according to the unverifiable data provided by Gaza's Hamas-controlled Ministry of Health — rather than a revaluation of attitudes toward terrorism. Still, the recent demonstrations indicate that a segment of Palestinian opinion in Gaza wants the war over and Hamas out. That means it shares Israel's own stated goals. Yet Netanyahu's government, embroiled in an internal political crisis of its own making, has failed to respond to the Gaza protests. Apart from a cursory remark by the defense minister, Israel Katz, there has been radio silence. With Israel having broken the ceasefire and reignited the war, Netanyahu's claim to want peace rings increasingly hollow. True, the Gaza protesters have not spoken out explicitly against the continuing detention of 59 Israeli hostages — only 24 of whom are believed to remain alive. But this issue, understandably, might not seem too important to them, just as the Gazans' fate is not a high priority for the Israeli anti-government protesters who want to free the hostages. What matters is that some Gazans and some Israelis have common ground — even if their governments do not share their goals. That is unprecedented. The demonstrators in Beit Lahiya and Tel Aviv cannot end the war. But they do represent the only possible path to a lasting peace. Konstanty Gebert is a Polish journalist, former anti-communist activist, and the author of 14 books on Polish, Jewish and international affairs.© Project Syndicate, 2025
