Connect with us

Northeast

New Jersey high school allegedly banned yellow ribbons honoring Israeli hostages: 'Deeply offensive'

Published

on

New Jersey high school allegedly banned yellow ribbons honoring Israeli hostages: 'Deeply offensive'

A New Jersey high school is accused of banning yellow ribbons, aimed at honoring Israeli hostages abducted by Hamas, at a club fair, a move critics described as “deeply offensive” and “blatant antisemitism.”

Fair Lawn High School also prohibited Israeli flags at the event, because administrators believed the flags were too political, some parents and the group StopAntisemitism allege, noting that members of the Muslim Student Association were permitted to display a keffiyeh, a traditional headdress worn by men from parts of the Middle East, according to the New York Post.

The event, according to the report, was partly promoting a trip to Israel.

“What happened at Fair Lawn High School is an alarming case of hypocrisy and blatant antisemitism,” StopAntisemitism founder Liora Rez told the outlet. “This incident is nothing short of a direct violation of Jewish students’ rights to express their identity and humanitarian concerns.”

AMERICAN FATHER OF HAMAS HOSTAGE ITAY CHEN PUSHES US, ISRAEL ON ‘PLAN B’ AS NEGOTIATIONS FALTER

Advertisement

A flag of Israel with a yellow ribbon added is seen near Frishman beach on October 03, 2024, in Tel Aviv, Israel. (Getty Images)

Between 33% to 40% of the 35,000 residents in Fair Lawn are Jewish. Fair Lawn in Bergen County is located about 17 miles from New York City.

This comes a year after Hamas terrorists’ Oct. 7, 2023, attacks against Israel, which led to military retaliation from Israel and sparked a still-ongoing war in the Middle East. More than 250 people, including some Americans, were abducted by Hamas during the Oct. 7 attacks. Many hostages have since been released, rescued or killed, while dozens are still held by Hamas.

One parent said the school district’s failure to address complaints about alleged antisemitism is not a new concern.

“The incident at Fair Lawn High School’s Club Fair is not an isolated event but part of a disturbing pattern of antisemitism that I and other parents have been battling for years,” Adi Vaxman, founder and president of Operation Israel, which provides humanitarian relief to Israel, told the New York Post.

Advertisement

“Despite numerous meetings with the board of education and the superintendent, promises of inclusion in anti-antisemitism efforts have gone unfulfilled,” added Vaxman, whose daughter Maya attends the school.

Vaxman continued: “The administrator’s claim that the yellow hostage ribbon — a humanitarian symbol calling for the release of innocent civilians abducted from their homes and held in subhuman conditions by Hamas — is ‘political’ is deeply offensive and unacceptable.”

ONE-YEAR ANNIVERSARY OF OCT. 7 ATTACKS ARRIVES WITH LASTING TRAUMA FOR ISRAELIS, AMERICAN JEWS: EXPERT

A bring them home necklace with a yellow ribbon pin during a tribute to the victims of the Oct. 7, 2023, attack on Israel by Hamas, on October 6, 2024. (Getty Images)

Claiming a double standard, Vaxman said that the black-and-white keffiyeh, which she says is “a symbol of the armed resistance against Israelis,” was allowed to remain on display at the club event for hours.

Advertisement

“This glaring double standard exposes the bias of the school and the administrator in question,” she said. “It’s alarming that the school supports the Muslim Student Association identifying as Palestinian while censoring the Israeli flag for the Jewish Student Union. Israel is the world’s only Jewish state, naturally associated with Judaism and relevant to the [Jewish Student Union’s] advertised trip to Israel.”

Fair Lawn High Principal Paul Gorski released a statement defending the school’s response to ribbons and flags.

“We take pride in our Student Activities program as well as the leadership shown by both students and faculty,” Gorski wrote. “During this year’s event, both the Muslim Student Association and the Jewish Student Union were asked to adjust items that were not part of their original displays. Both groups received the same instruction and were treated equally.”

Gorski said no students were disciplined in connection with their participation at the club fair.

The Israeli flag with the yellow ribbon symbolizing solidarity with abductees in the camp set up by the families of the abductees, near Benjamin Netanyahu’s house, on August 13, 2024, in Jerusalem, Israel. (Getty Images)

Advertisement

The principal also said the high school participates in the Anti-Defamation League’s “No Place for Hate” initiative and that the school was “proudly recognized” with a Gold Star distinction from the group during a ceremony earlier this year.

“We condemn antisemitism and remain steadfast in our commitment to creating an inclusive community where hate is not tolerated,” he said. “When we return to school after being closed for the Jewish holidays, we will engage in dialogue with our students and community. Hate has no home at Fair Lawn High School.”

Vaxman, however, maintains that the school discriminated against Jewish students during the club fair.

“This selective application of rules further demonstrates the discriminatory treatment of Jewish students,” Vaxman said. “The school’s response is extremely disappointing and fails to address these core issues. Their participation in the ‘No Place for Hate’ initiative rings hollow when Jewish students face such blatant discrimination and intimidation in their school on a regular basis. We demand concrete actions, not empty platitudes, to combat antisemitism and ensure true equality for ‘all’ students.”

Advertisement

Read the full article from Here

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Vermont

A Vermont bill meant to help music fans could do the opposite – VTDigger

Published

on

A Vermont bill meant to help music fans could do the opposite – VTDigger


This commentary is by David Balto, an antitrust commentator and a former assistant director for policy and evaluation in the Bureau of Competition at the Federal Trade Commission and trial attorney in the Antitrust Division of the Department of Justice.

Supporting small businesses over big companies is in Vermonters’ DNA. The Green Mountain State was the first state to ban roadside billboards, and our tax code is written to support mom-and-pop shops over large corporations. Montpelier is the only state capital without a McDonald’s or a Starbucks. So why, days after a federal jury sided with Vermont Attorney General Charity Clark and more than 30 other states, ruling that Ticketmaster and its parent company Live Nation were operating an illegal monopoly, is the state Legislature advancing a policy that will help this corporation invade our state while undercutting our attorney general’s antitrust suit?

Live Nation, which owns and operates some of the largest music venues across the country, and Ticketmaster, which controls roughly 80% of the country’s initial ticket sales, merged in 2010. Since then, ticket prices are up 120%. 

Since the merger, Live Nation-Ticketmaster has used tactics like the “velvet hammer” — withholding concerts from venues they do not control or work with — to consolidate power. Then they force fans to pay sky-high fees, from marking up parking passes to forcing venues to only sell water from a brand Live Nation owns. In internal messages, employees even bragged about how they “gouge” fans and joked they were “robbing them blind.” 

It’s no surprise that, after a decade and a half of antitrust violations, the Live Nation-Ticketmaster monopoly made $25 billion last year. 

Advertisement

Now, the company, which doesn’t own any venues in Vermont, appears poised to establish a foothold in the Green Mountain State with the help of a well-intentioned but poorly executed bill working its way through Montpelier.

Lawmakers are considering legislation that would cap the price of event tickets being resold at no more than 10% above face value. The measure was recently approved by the House and is currently moving through the Senate. 

On its face, the idea sounds appealing: Cracking down on excessive markups should be a win for fans. But the fact that Live Nation-Ticketmaster, which was just found to be operating an illegal monopoly that harmed fans, venues and artists, has supported price caps like those proposed in H.512 in Washington, D.C., California, New York, Minnesota and Ontario should give Vermonters pause.

This billion-dollar corporation doesn’t support ticket resale price caps because it’s good for fans. The company advocates for this policy because the caps don’t apply to “primary” ticket sales: the original point of sale, of which Ticketmaster controls 80%. Instead, the price caps would only apply to resale marketplaces — hitting the only companies that compete with the Live Nation-Ticketmaster monopoly.

Less competition means more power and higher profits for Live Nation-Ticketmaster.

Advertisement

In most states, price caps would consolidate Live Nation-Ticketmaster’s control and allow it to raise ticket prices even further. In Vermont, H.512 may be the final ingredient it needs to enter the state, and, to quote its executives, “boil the frog” — using monopoly power to slowly squeeze out our independent music venues.

With this legislation moving through the Statehouse, Live Nation-Ticketmaster is already establishing a foothold in the Green Mountain State. Earlier this month, it announced a partnership with CashorTrade, a Vermont-based ticketing platform.  

But Live Nation-Ticketmaster doesn’t even need to operate in our state to benefit if Vermont passes this law. If Vermont, which prides itself on pushing back against corporate power, enacts resale price caps, we hand Live Nation-Ticketmaster a powerful talking point to advance its power grab in additional states. We become a critical data point; an example of what “good policy” looks like.

H.512 includes some real, positive policies that help venues and consumers, but the price cap provision that came along for the ride squarely benefits Live Nation-Ticketmaster. Vermont can, and should, have the former without the latter.

Vermont needs to stand up to this corporate bully. If any state knows how to, it’s this one.

Advertisement





Source link

Continue Reading

New York

Protesters Tried to Block an Eviction. But Was It a Case of Deed Theft?

Published

on

Protesters Tried to Block an Eviction. But Was It a Case of Deed Theft?

When activists gathered last week outside a townhouse in Brooklyn, ready to block law enforcement officers from carrying out an eviction, they were there to fight back against something larger than just one case: the nefarious practice of deed theft, which appears to be on the rise in New York City.

The protest and the ensuing arrests of several people, including the local city councilman, underscored just how fraught the topic is, particularly in historically Black areas of the city that are now rapidly gentrifying. Mayor Zohran Mamdani last week created an office dedicated to fighting deed theft.

But while the episode, in the Bedford-Stuyvesant neighborhood, reflected concerns about a very real problem, the specifics of the case involving the townhouse are anything but clear.

The office of the attorney general, Letitia James, said the case was not an example of deed theft. (When asked about that determination, Ms. James herself said, “It emanated from deed theft”; a spokesman later clarified that she had been referring to the protest and not the case.)

The fact that a woman, Carmella Charrington, was living in the home, which her father had partly owned for decades, is not in dispute. Neither are the facts that an eviction case against Ms. Charrington began nearly two years ago and that she was recently jailed in connection with a separate civil case related to custody of her father, who is 84 and a ward of the State of Georgia.

Advertisement

Still, comments from a number of high-profile city leaders have been confusing and contradictory. The councilman who was arrested, Chi Ossé, has said deed theft took place. So have State Senator Jabari Brisport; Brad Lander, the congressional candidate and former comptroller; and a host of others.

What is the truth? Public records reveal a sad and complicated saga involving several court cases and law enforcement agencies, and spanning generations and at least two states.

The term “deed theft” is used to describe fraudulent behavior that can result in longtime homeowners’ losing the rights to their homes. The New York State attorney general’s office received more than 500 complaints of deed theft in New York City last year, more than in the previous two years combined.

The practice can involve thieves misrepresenting themselves as brokers or lenders and tricking someone into signing documents that transfer ownership. Many thieves target older people, sowing confusion over complicated property records or exploiting their trust.

After taking control of the home, the new owner could look to sell it for a profit, rent it out at a high rate, or take out a loan against the property to buy something else.

Advertisement

The home at the center of the current debate, at 212 Jefferson Avenue, is a three-story brownstone that was built in 1909, according to Landmarks Preservation Commission records.

At some point in the 1980s, it was owned by two people, property records show: Allman Charrington, Ms. Charrington’s father, and Gertrude Keene, Ms. Charrington’s great-aunt.

Ms. Keene later transferred her share of the property to Clinton Morrison, her son, who in turn passed it to his children when he died.

As recently as 2024, the property was owned jointly by several Morrison children and Mr. Charrington, according to the records.

In 2020, with Mr. Charrington’s health declining, two of his daughters, including Carmella, filed a petition in probate court in Fulton County, Ga., asking for a court-appointed guardian and conservator to manage his affairs “by reason of mental disability,” according to court records. (Mr. Charrington traveled frequently between New York City and Georgia, where some of his relatives lived.)

Advertisement

Ms. Charrington asserted in the filings that she wanted to be the conservator, saying that her father’s wife, Karen Charrington, was not looking after his best interests. Court records indicate that Mr. Charrington’s wife had signed his property into her name and transferred thousands of dollars out of his bank account. His wife insisted that she had not acted nefariously, but she agreed to return the money and restore the deed, the records show.

Ultimately, the court appointed a lawyer, Luanne Bonnie, in 2021 to be Mr. Charrington’s conservator and to help him manage his property. The court records say that the parties agreed to Ms. Bonnie’s appointment.

Court records filed in Brooklyn show that in 2019, the Morrison family wanted to sell the Bedford-Stuyvesant home, putting them at odds with Mr. Charrington. Mr. Charrington fired back in court papers that he wanted to be reimbursed for money he had spent over the years on property taxes and maintenance. Both parties failed to show up at court dates and the case was never resolved.

But several years later, with Mr. Charrington under a conservatorship, the probate court in Georgia gave Ms. Bonnie permission to sell the property. In an October 2022 order, Judge Barbara J. Koll said that at least a dozen possible buyers had shied away in previous years because of “the legal difficulties surrounding the existing tenants of the property.” The property had been for sale since 2018, the judge said; it is unclear who listed it, given Mr. Charrington’s opposition.

Property records show that the home was sold in January 2024 to a limited liability company called 227 Group, about which not much is publicly known.

Advertisement

Ms. Charrington, 54, who grew up on the block — in the townhouse and another relative’s home across the street — called the sale fraudulent and unlawful.

She asserts that her father was taken advantage of, and says she brought him to New York in November 2023, without the permission of the state of Georgia, and put him into hiding. She also says that Ms. Bonnie was “unlawfully appointed” and had not followed the proper procedures before agreeing to the sale.

“I think that everything will be able to be peeled back and things will become more concrete,” Ms. Charrington said in an interview. “We want to expose them. I’ve been screaming out for two years that this is deed theft.”

But a lawyer for the Georgia Department of Human Services said in a March 2025 court filing that Ms. Charrington and other relatives had “essentially kidnapped” her father, and were “detaining him against his will.”

Ms. Charrington is still living in the townhouse. It remains unclear where Mr. Charrington is, but his daughter said he was staying with friends and relatives in the New York City area.

Advertisement

She recently posted a video of her father on social media, in which he says he is safe and wants to be left alone.

According to records filed with the New York Secretary of State, 227 Group is associated with the investors Simon Blitz and Daniel Gazal. Property records list one of its leaders as Andrew Kastein, who is also associated with the investment group P11 Management.

One point of intrigue is that the property records appear to show that 227 Group shares an address with another limited liability company, Brooklyn Gates. That company is linked to a group of investors known to target properties in gentrifying, historically Black and Latino neighborhoods like Bedford-Stuyvesant.

An investigation by the news website The City found that while Brooklyn Gates’s practices were largely legal, the company had ended up displacing “dozens of longtime city residents.”

Property records indicate that Brooklyn Gates had moved to buy the townhouse at 212 Jefferson Avenue from the Morrison children in 2021. Video and photographs that Ms. Charrington provided to The New York Times show a man, who Ms. Charrington said is one of the owners of Brooklyn Gates, trying to gain entrance to the property, and then leaving when Ms. Charrington threatens to call the police. The contract was later canceled, and the sale did not go through.

Advertisement

Through a spokesman, 227 Group denied any association with Brooklyn Gates, saying it had been made aware that the property was for sale by a lawyer for the Morrisons and Ms. Bonnie.

The company said in a statement that it had never interacted directly with the Morrison family or with Ms. Bonnie. It also said it does not share an address with Brooklyn Gates, and that the fact that the property records show the same address for both entities stemmed from a filing error.

“We are weighing our legal options against those who are spreading the false and malicious ‘deed theft’ narrative,” the statement reads.

The company said Ms. Charrington had continued “to illegally occupy the property rent-free for over two years” and had prevented representatives of the company from gaining access to it.

Before the protest, neighbors and activists had been keeping watch outside the home for months in case officers showed up to evict Ms. Charrington. But the conflict last week involving Mr. Ossé, who said he sustained a concussion after officers wrestled him to the ground for blocking the gate, put a public spotlight on her story.

Advertisement

The announcement of the city’s new office to fight deed theft — though it was already planned when the protest took place — also fueled interest in the case.

And Mr. Ossé has continued to publicly push Gov. Kathy Hochul to issue a moratorium on evictions in cases where deed theft is suspected.

“The community has come together in a way that shows that they are scared,” said William McFadden, Ms. Charrington’s son, who also lives at the Bedford-Stuyvesant house. “How did so much deed theft happen under our noses?”

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Boston, MA

In a hot housing market, Boston buyers are being more strategic

Published

on

In a hot housing market, Boston buyers are being more strategic


Home Buying

Data shows Greater Boston borrowers spent at least 30 percent of their income on their mortgage payment in 2025.

Ken Mellott – stock.adobe.com

Mortgage payments in Greater Boston still rank among the highest in the nation. But a shift has taken place. No longer are prospective buyers getting caught up in the frenzy of bidding wars and stretching their purchase price and mortgage payment to the maximum they can afford. Instead, real estate professionals say that buyers are taking a more cautious approach today, thinking twice about what they’re willing to pay.

According to data recently released by LendingTree, the average mortgage payment on home purchases fell 2.4 percent in 2025, from $1,990 in 2024 to $1,942 per month (for principal and interest only). Still, home affordability remains a challenge: LendingTree reported that one in 10 borrowers are significantly cost-burdened, with 10.2 percent of borrowers nationwide spending 40 percent or more of their income on new mortgage payments.

Advertisement

According to the data, Greater Boston ranked seventh for metros with the highest average new mortgage payments in 2025. The average mortgage payment in the area was $2,784 a month, and 31.4 percent of borrowers spent at least 30 percent of their income on their mortgage payment.

Of course, if you add the other costs that get rolled into mortgage payments — property taxes, home insurance, and private mortgage insurance — that monthly housing cost goes up even higher, and that doesn’t even include utilities and homeowners association fees. While LendingTree couldn’t provide a total monthly housing cost for the Boston metro, WalletHub recently released data on the states where people spend the most and least for housing, and Massachusetts ranked third on that list, with average homeowners there paying about 34 percent of their income on housing costs, second only to Hawaii and California.

“Boston’s core issue is simple: too many people are chasing too few homes,” said Matt Schulz, LendingTree’s chief consumer finance analyst. “The area has struggled with housing supply for years, and that is unlikely to change anytime soon.”

The good news is that despite the price pressure and challenge of bidding wars, local experts say that buyers today are not stretching their budgets just to get into a home and then find that they became cash-poor in the process.

“People today are a little more strategic,” said Melvin A. Vieira Jr., a real estate agent with Re/Max Real Estate Center in Boston. “Buyers are more educated, and they’ve heard about the bidding wars of the past, so they’re making reasonable decisions rather than emotional ones.”

Advertisement

Consider Sarah, 36, and Mike McCracken, 38. When they were searching for their first home, they were approved for a $900,000 mortgage and could have easily afforded the four-bedroom, three-bath Colonial in Sudbury that they fell in love with. But Sarah was nervous about owing more than $650,000. So, they expanded their search and found a smaller Cape Cod-style home in Walpole, which they purchased for $575,000.

“We could have made the numbers work with the original house,” said Sarah, who has since become a real estate agent for Coldwell Banker. “But being more conservative and making a decision that made sense for the present, rather than a hypothetical future, allowed us to have a smaller mortgage payment and keep other costs lower so we could travel when we want to and were able to do a renovation when we needed to. Giving ourselves the flexibility to make decisions as they came up because we hadn’t locked in that higher payment was the best decision.”


Profile image for Robyn A. Friedman

Robyn A. Friedman is an award-winning freelance writer who has covered real estate and personal finance for over two decades. Follow her @robynafriedman.





Source link

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending