The Mayor Who Cannot Name the Murderers

There are occasions when a politician is required to say what happened. September 11 is one of them.

Nearly 3,000 people were murdered by Islamist terrorists. They were not unfortunate extras in some abstract pageant of global suffering. They were not incidental casualties of an unspecified “war that followed.” They were murdered by men who hijacked passenger aircraft and flew them into buildings on purpose. It is hard to think of a historical fact that requires less interpretation.

Yet the words of New York City’s Mayor, Zohran Mamdani, have raised the awkward question of whether he means to mark the day as an act of remembrance or as another occasion to lecture the public about the consequences of American foreign policy.

A post from 2023 has resurfaced. “Nearly 3,000 New Yorkers died on 9/11; 22 years later, the death hasn't stopped. We mourn our neighbors who died that day. The hundreds of thousands who died in the wars that followed. The unknown millions injured & displaced. In their memory, we work toward a better world,” Mamdani wrote on X in 2023.

There is nothing objectionable in mourning civilians killed in later wars. There is nothing objectionable in wanting a better world. There is something peculiar, however, in commemorating the greatest terrorist attack in American history without mentioning the terrorists.

The sentence contains the dead. It contains the wars. It contains the injured and the displaced. It contains the pious hope of a better world. What it does not contain is the word “terrorists.” Nor does it say that the nearly 3,000 New Yorkers were murdered. This may appear a small matter of wording. To the families of the dead it is not.

Some of those families are now asking that Mamdani stay away from New York’s 25th-anniversary commemoration. Their unease has only grown after his interview with Hasan Piker, who said in 2019, “America deserved 9/11.”

Mamdani first declined to condemn the remark. He later called it “objectionable and reprehensible.” One might have thought that identifying as reprehensible the claim that America deserved to be attacked by terrorists would be the easy part. Apparently even that required a pause for reflection.

Marc Thiessen, who was inside the Pentagon when the planes hit, was less given to philosophical hesitation. “As someone who was in the Pentagon when the planes hit, this is absolutely disgraceful. You have no business ever setting foot at Ground Zero, much less on 9/11. If you dare show up, I hope you are greeted with such a Bronx cheer that you slink away in shame,” wrote Thiessen.

New York City Councilwoman Inna Vernikov was no more impressed. “I guess they all just ‘died’ in an accident? And then you wonder why the families of 9/11 victims don’t want you at the ceremony. Stay home, Mamdani,” wrote Vernikov.

Florida Rep. Randy Fine was blunter still. “Nearly 25 years later, NYC’s Mayor is in bed with Muslim terrorists and refuses to call out evil for what it is. Unfortunately, it seems the city forgot when they elected Jihadi Mamdani mayor. But we never will,” wrote Fine.

Fox News contributor and former NYPD officer Paul Mauro offered the mayor some advice. “You've made this easy. Don't show up on 9/11 this year -- or any year. We're not interested in your moral equivalency, nepo baby. Stick to the parlor communism daddy taught you. You and your buddy Piker can spend the day practicing Mandarin,” he said.

Michael La Rosa, a former spokesman for first lady DOCTOR Jill Biden, captured the general reaction with economy. “Is this real?”

Nancy Mace had no interest in economy of that kind. “Americans were MURDERED by TERRORISTS in the most horrific way,” she wrote.

Joey Jones, co-host of “Big Weekend Show,” put the matter more personally. “What a coward. They were murdered and sleep well at night knowing I and thousands of my brothers did our part to even the f—–g score,” he wrote.

The argument is not about whether wars produce suffering. Everyone knows that they do. It is about whether September 11 can be spoken of without first stating the most elementary moral fact of the day.The terrorists did this. They chose their targets. They chose their victims. They chose to murder thousands of people. And those who died were not responsible for the wars that followed their deaths.

That is why the language used to commemorate September 11 matters. There are many days in the year for arguing about American foreign policy. There are fewer for remembering 3,000 people who were murdered because Islamist terrorists decided they should die.

Mamdani says he intends to attend the commemoration to honor the victims, survivors, families and first responders alongside Vice President JD Vance and former presidents, including Biden and Bush. Some of the families would prefer that he think again.

A petition organized by several victims’ families asks the organizers to consider whether his presence is appropriate to the purpose of the ceremony. “We respectfully ask that the organizers carefully consider whether Mr. Mamdani’s participation would align with the intention of the ceremony and the expectations of the families most directly affected by the tragedy,” a Change.org petition states.

It is a reasonable question.

There is a difference between remembering that thousands of people were killed and remembering why they were killed. The first requires memory. The second requires moral clarity.

On September 11, 2001, New York did not suffer an unfortunate episode in the general history of human misery. It was attacked. And nearly 3,000 people were murdered. For the families who lost them, that remains difficult to forget. One would hope the mayor of New York could manage the same.

I will always remember the soot from office papers that ended up in the gutters of my Brooklyn home.

What do you remember about that day 25 years ago?

Thanks for following Brain Flushings. Please take time to check out the sponsors on this page--it's one way to support my work and you don't need to purchase anything to do so. Of course, you can Buy Me A Coffee at any amount if you want to support me directly. And finally, don't be afraid to subscribe if you enjoy the blog--it's free, and worth the cost.

Tweet

Biden's autopen went nuclear while the media pretends otherwise

The Biden autopen scandal just went nuclear, and the media is pretending it's no big deal because Orange Man Bad did something about it. But let's be real here.

Donald Trump just dropped the hammer on Friday: every single document Joe Biden allegedly "signed" with that little robot pen in his final days has been terminated. And suddenly that Axios report from September that everybody memory-holed is back from the dead, because now there are actual consequences.

Kayleigh McEnany absolutely torched it on Saturday, pointing out the obvious: yeah, every president uses an autopen sometimes. That's not the issue. The issue is when your own staff secretary is basically screaming into the void, "Wait, did the vegetable in the Oval Office actually approve this or are we just making it up now?"

Marc Thiessen, who actually having worked in a real White House under George W. Bush, laid it out perfectly: "Bush didn't want to have any doubts about things. So I remember once there was a continuing resolution to keep the government open, and he was at the APEC summit out in Asia, and they actually took an aide and flew the bill out to Asia so that he could physically sign the bill. So, you know, that's how seriously [Bush] took this."

Compare that to Biden World, where the staff secretary, Stef Feldman, is frantically emailing: "When did we get [Biden's] approval of this?"

And then two weeks later: "I'm going to need email from... original chain confirming [Biden] signs off on the specific documents when they are ready."

Translation: Nobody knew if Joe even understood what planet he was on, much less what he was "signing."

Thiessen didn’t hold back: "The staff secretary clearly had concerns about this and was aware of it and wasn't sure that Biden was actually issuing these orders… And so, you know, the pardon is a power of the president himself. And to have pardons signed by autopen when the people running the autopen weren't even sure the president had agreed to pardon somebody, that's pretty bad stuff."

"Pretty bad stuff" is putting it mildly. We're talking about a guy who was clearly non compos mentis (Thiessen's exact Latin, because even he couldn’t find an English phrase gentle enough) having his name stamped on record-setting numbers of pardons and commutations while his handlers ran around in a post-Hunter-pardon "mad dash" to find random people to let off the hook without even looping in DOJ.

And now Trump says none of those autopen "signatures" count anymore.The same people who spent four years telling us January 6th invalidated the entire 2016 election are about to discover the sacred sanctity of the autopen. 

I can't wait for the meltdown.

If you like Brain Flushings and want to Buy Me a Coffee, I would appreciate it, as it supports my work. Obviously, there is no pressure but I certainly wouldn't stop you.

Tweet

Zohran 'the magnificent' had wanted to abolish private property, but not his or his family's

Comrade Mamdani 

Well, look who’s back to remind us why New York City is headed for the dumpster fire of the century. Zohran Mamdani, the communist darling running for mayor, just got caught on a resurfaced video waxing poetic about . . . wait for it . . . abolishing private property. Although it's highly likely he doesn't mean his or his wealthy family's property. 

This guy’s out here channeling an anti-Semitic version of Karl Marx like it’s 1848, and he’s too dumb to hide it.

In the clip that’s now blowing up conservative social media faster than a Trump tweet, Mamdani lays it all bare: "My platform is that every single person should have housing, and I think faced with these two options, the system has hundreds of thousands of people unhoused, right? For what?" 

Okay, fine, housing’s a problem. But then he goes full hammer-and-sickle: "If there was any system that could guarantee each person housing, whether you call it the abolition of private property or you call it, you know, just a statewide housing guarantee, it is preferable to what is going on right now." Which is people who work and earn money, save for housing or a home, need to get over themselves and forget about it. Let's all live together in a commune. In fact, the word 'communist' is derived from 'commune.'

Oh, and don’t miss the cherry on top: "People try and play like gotcha games about these kinds of things, and it’s like, look, I care more about whether somebody has a home." Like sure, Zohran, nothing like screams like "I care" by like seizing everyone’s property.

Cue the conservative pile-on, and boy, did they bring the heat. Republican Rep. Nicole Malliotakis, whose mother fled Cuba’s communist nightmare, didn’t hold back in an interview with Fox News Digital: "He claims to be a socialist, whether it’s wanting to abolish private property or wanting to seize the means of production, these are communist ideas right out of the playbook of Karl Marx."

And did I mention he's an anti-Semite?

Malliotakis then added, "The fact that too many members of the media, too many members of the Democrat Party, are willing to go along instead of calling him out on it is disturbing, and I think that if the majority of New Yorkers knew what this guy truly stands for and how destructive and dangerous his policies are, there’s no way that they vote for him." 

Then there’s Rep. Mike Lawler, who’s not exactly thrilled about Mamdani’s plan to turn the Hudson Valley into Havana-on-the-Hudson: "Zohran Mamdani’s call to abolish private property is dangerous and un-American. It’s the kind of radical socialist nonsense that would destroy livelihoods in the Hudson Valley and across New York. This will bring economic chaos, and New Yorkers deserve better than out-of-touch extremists pushing communist agendas that threaten our way of life." 

Rep. Claudia Tenney piled on, telling Fox News Digital: "Mamdani’s call to abolish private property isn’t just radical, it’s dangerous. Stripping this fundamental right would devastate families, close small businesses, and destroy entire communities, all while handing more power to the government. Private property is a cornerstone Constitutional principle. It represents the essence of personal freedom, economic opportunity, and the American Dream. We must defend it."

But the commie has nothing to personally worry about. His parents are very wealthy and communism will not affect the rich and powerful--it rarely does.

And Rep. Nick Langworthy isn't here for Mamdani’s utopian fever dream either: "Mamdani isn’t offering a housing plan--he’s pushing a communist manifesto. The idea of abolishing private property is fundamentally anti-American and wildly out of touch with the real issues New Yorkers face. Families are fleeing the City and our State because of high costs, crime, and broken leadership, not because there’s too much freedom."

The X platform, naturally, turned into a digital Thunderdome. Donald Trump Jr. couldn’t resist the low-hanging fruit, posting, "Yea, this guy is definitely not a communist," dripping with sarcasm. 

Sen. Ted Cruz kept it short and sweet: “He is a communist.” Fox News contributor Marc Thiessen echoed, “Like I said he’s a communist.” 

And Rep. Elise Stefanik brought the fire: "Yes, you heard that right. Like the true Communist he is, Commie Mamdani supports the ‘abolition of private property.’ This is the NY Democrat Party
@KathyHochul you lead and you have failed to condemn this dangerous insanity." 

Sen. Roger Marshall summed it up: "Meet the new leader of the Democrat party, everyone. He’s a literal communist."

Mamdani’s been dodging "communist" labels since his shock primary win, but clips like this aren’t helping his case. New Yorkers are already fleeing skyrocketing costs, crime, and a city that feels like it’s one bad policy away from collapse. Now they’ve got a mayoral candidate who thinks the solution is torching the very concept of ownership. Good luck selling that one, comrade.

All in all, this toad is still going to get a lot of Muslim votes simply because he is a Muslim. Do not allow him to get his foot in the door because he and his comrades [no pun intended] are not going to let you close that door.

Hey amazing readers! If you enjoy my content, please consider supporting Brain Flushings. A quick coffee donation via Buy Me a Coffee fuels late-night writing sessions and fresh ideas. Every sip—er, dollar—helps me create more of the posts you enjoy. Join the crew, toss in a coffee, and let’s keep the good vibes brewing! 

Tweet