Riaz Haq writes this data-driven blog to provide information, express his opinions and make comments on many topics. Subjects include personal activities, education, South Asia, South Asian community, regional and international affairs and US politics to financial markets. For investors interested in South Asia, Riaz has another blog called South Asia Investor at http://www.southasiainvestor.com and a YouTube video channel https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCkrIDyFbC9N9evXYb9cA_gQ
"Ana minkum wa alaikum" declared Zohran Mamdani, the mayor-elect of New York City in his victory speech on November 4, 2025. The phrase translates to "I am from you and and I am with you". "New York will remain a city of immigrants, a city built by immigrants, powered by immigrants and, as of tonight, led by an immigrant", he added. Mamdani is the first Muslim and first immigrant of South Asian descent elected New York City Mayor. At 34, he is not only the youngest but also the first mayor of the Big Apple who was born in Africa.
Zohran Mamdani Speaking Outside the Bronx Islamic Center
With his landslide victory in the mayoral race, Mandani will join London Mayor Sadiq Khan to become the second Muslim mayor of a major western city. Mamdani became the first New York mayoral candidate to win over a million votes since the 1960s — more than Rudy Giuliani or Mike Bloomberg ever received. Mamdani has received 50.4% of the votes counted so far. Cuomo is at 41.6%. Republican Curtis Sliwa is at 7.1%. Mayor Sadiq Khan is serving his third term as the mayor of London. He is of Pakistani descent, as are mayors of several other major British cities.
Zohran Mamdani beat former New York Governor Andrew Cuomo twice, first in the primary and then in the general election, to win on Tuesday. He won in spite of the fact that many prominent Democrats, including Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, the New York senator, refused to endorse him. Mamdani was also vastly outspent by Cuomo, who was backed by a group of Zionist billionaires. President Trump endorsed Cuomo and repeatedly threatened to cut off federal funds to New York if Mamdani won.
Mandani received strong support from Muslims in Silicon Valley and elsewhere. Muhammad Javed of AppLovin tech firm donated $251,500 to New Yorkers for Lower Costs, a super-PAC backing Zohran Mamdani. Omer Hasan gave $250,000 to this super PAC. Other Mamdani super PAC donors include Liz Simons, Philanthropist, and daughter of hedge-fund billionaire Jim Simons, who gave $250,000 and Unity & Justice Fund, the political arm of the Council on American-Islamic Relations CAIR, that gave $100,000. But the biggest support has come from small donors to the Mamdani campaign. It has received a lot more money from small-dollar donors. In August 2025, Mamdani's campaign had raised over $1 million from more than 8,600 private donors, with half of the individual donations being less than $25. His campaign also got millions in public matching funds due to this strong small-dollar donor support.
Mamdani was attacked by his opponents for his Muslim faith. In one appearance, Cuomo agreed with a racist radio host who suggested a Muslim elected official would ‘cheer’ another 9/11. In response, Mamdani made an emotional speech outside a mosque in which he said: "I will not change who I am. I will not change how I eat. I will not change the faith that I am proud to belong to. But there is one thing I will change: I will no longer look for myself in the shadows".
It is particularly noteworthy that Zohran Mamdani, a pro-Palestinian candidate who accuses Israel of carrying out genocide in Gaza, won in New York City which has the world's second largest population Jews after Tel Aviv. During his mayoral campaign, the Zionist-dominated US media kept asking him and other candidates whether Israel would be their first foreign visit if they got elected. Mamdani said no, he would stay in New York City to serve the people. All other candidates in the race pandered to the powerful Israel lobby by saying Israel would be their first foreign visit. Mamdani's win shows that total unqualified support of Israel is not essential to win elections in the United States.
Among the most vocal opponents of Mamdani are Zionist and Hindutva groups in America. This opposition is based on his strong criticism of Indian Prime Minister Modi and Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu. He has called Modi a "war criminal," drawing parallels between him and Netanyahu. He has repeatedly vowed that, if elected mayor, he would order the New York Police Department (NYPD) to arrest Netanyahu should the Israeli Prime Minister travel to New York.
Several Congressional Democrats have recently refused campaign contributions from AIPAC, the powerful Israel lobby, according to media reports. “Democrats who once counted AIPAC among their top donors have in recent weeks refused to take the group’s donations”, says a New York Times story titled "Democrats Pull Away From AIPAC, Reflecting a Broader Shift". “AIPAC is becoming an increasingly toxic brand for some Democrats on Capitol Hill," it says. It cites the example of Rep. Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., the minority leader, who has long been endorsed by the hardline AIPAC, has now chosen to accept the support of J Street, the competing Israel lobby that advocates a two-state solution.
A recent poll conducted by the Washington Post has found that "most (American) Jews (61%) say Israel is committing war crimes — and 39% say genocide — while often distinguishing between the country and its leadership". American Jews are particularly unhappy with the current right-wing government of Israel. 68% give negative marks to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s leadership of Israel, with 48% it “poor” — a 20-percentage-point jump from a Pew Research Center poll five years ago.
Zohran Mamdani's campaign for the New York City mayor has brought into sharp focus the rapidly falling support for Israel amid the ongoing Gaza Genocide being perpetrated by the Zionist state. Newsweek has reported that Mamdani enjoys a 17-point lead among New York City's Jewish voters. Mamdani's top opponent Andrew Cuomo, former New York State governor, continues to significantly lag Mamdani in the polls in spite of having a huge funding advantage. A CBS News/YouGov poll (September 7–13) put Mamdani at 43% to Cuomo's 28%, a 15-point lead. A Marist survey the same week showed Mamdani ahead 45% to 24%, while Quinnipiac gave him a 22-point lead at 45% to 23%. An Emerson College poll for PIX11 and The Hill had a nearly identical 43% to 28% margin, and a New York Times/Siena poll (September 2–6) showed Mamdani leading 46% to 24%, according to Newsweek.
Mamdani's resounding win in New York City, a city that has the world's second largest Jewish population after Tel Aviv, will be particularly significant. It will send a clear message to American politicians, particularly Democrats, that they don't have to bow to hardline AIPAC to win elections.
Although the rebellion against AIPAC is mainly among Democrats, there's also growing anger among Trump's "America First" base who see the Trump Administration's policies as "Israel First". Prominent among Republican critics of Trump's pro-Israel policies are Republican Representatives Thomas Massie and Marjorie Taylor Greene, talk show host Tucker Carlsen and former Trump advisor Steve Bannon.
Jonathan Greenblatt, the CEO of Anti-Defamation League, has blamed the shift in the US public opinion against Israel on popular social app TikTok. “We really have a TikTok problem, a Gen Z problem,” he said in a leaked audio recording. “The same brains that gave us Taglit, the same brains that gave us all of these amazing other innovations, need to put our energy towards this, like fast.”
TikTok is particularly popular among young people. It has carried viral short videos of the Gaza Genocide over the last two years. The pressure from the Israel lobby forced the sale of Chinese-owned TikTok to an American Zionist group led by Oracle's billionaire founder Larry Ellison. Ellison has given tens of millions of dollars to pro-Israel groups. He is reported to be among the six American Zionist billionaires supporting Israel's wartime economy.
Omer Hasan and Mohammad Javed are the top donors to Zohran Mamdani’s mayoral campaign in New York City, according to media reports. Both are former executives of Silicon Valley technology firm AppLovin. Born and raised in Silicon Valley, Omer is the son of a Pakistani-American couple who are long-time residents of Silicon Valley, California.
Omer Hasan, Top Donor to Mamdani Campaign
Muhammad Javed donated $251,500 to New Yorkers for Lower Costs, a super-PAC backing Zohran Mamdani. Omer gave $250,000 to this super PAC. Other Mamdani super PAC donors include Liz Simons, Philanthropist, and daughter of hedge-fund billionaire Jim Simons, who gave $250,000 and Unity & Justice Fund, the political arm of the Council on American-Islamic Relations CAIR, that gave $100,000. But the biggest support has come from small donors to the Mamdani campaign. It has received a lot more money from small-dollar donors. In August 2025, Mamdani's campaign had raised over $1 million from more than 8,600 private donors, with half of the individual donations being less than $25. His campaign also got millions in public matching funds due to this strong small-dollar donor support.
Andrew Cuomo, Mamdani's main rival, is bankrolled by Republican Zionist billionaires like Bill Ackman, a hedge fund manager who backs Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's genocidal war in Gaza. Mamdani has called Netanyahu a "war criminal". He has promised to order the New York Police Department to arrest the Israeli Prime Minister if he is elected.
Mother Jones reported that Cuomo's super PAC Fix The City got huge contributions from the rich and powerful donors like DoorDash ($1 million), along with Ackman ($500,000), and former mayor Michael Bloomberg ($8.3 million). Media mogul Barry Diller and Netflix chairman Reed Hastings gave a quarter of a million. Home Depot co-founder and Republican mega-donor Ken Langone gave $100,000. Pro-Trump hedge-funder Dan Loeb gave $350,000. James and Kathryn Murdoch offered $50,000 apiece. So did Stephen Ross, who lives in the borough of West Palm Beach, Florida and owns the Miami Dolphins. Alice Walton, of the Bentonville, Arkansas Waltons, pitched in with a humble offering of $100,000. Both Greenwich, Connecticut’s Jeff Wilpon, and the man he sold the New York Mets to—Stamford’s Steve Cohen—were good for $25,000.
Cuomo continues to significantly lag Mamdani in the polls in spite of having a huge funding advantage. A CBS News/YouGov poll (September 7–13) put Mamdani at 43% to Cuomo's 28%, a 15-point lead. A Marist survey the same week showed Mamdani ahead 45% to 24%, while Quinnipiac gave him a 22-point lead at 45% to 23%. An Emerson College poll for PIX11 and The Hill had a nearly identical 43% to 28% margin, and a New York Times/Siena poll (September 2–6) showed Mamdani leading 46% to 24%, according to Newsweek.
New York's Jewish-American Congressman Anthony Weiner's scandal has brought unwanted attention to his wife Huma Abedin, a 34 year-old Michigan-born Muslim-American woman with an Indian-American father and a Pakistani-American mother. The Congressman is alleged to have sent a lewd photo of his crotch from his Twitter account to a 21-year-old female student in Seattle, Washington.
A graduate of George Washington University, Huma Abedin has been a close aide to Secretary of State Hilary Rodham Clinton since 1996 when she was an intern in the White House and saw the Monica Lewinsky scandal from a front-row seat. President Bill Clinton officiated at her wedding in July 2010.
Abedin's father was of Indian descent and was an Iranian scholar who died when she was 17 years old, and her Pakistani born mother is currently a university professor in Saudi Arabia.
“Abedin has the energy of a woman in her 20s, the confidence of a woman in her 30s, the experience of a woman in her 40s, and the grace of a woman in her 50s,” Mrs. Clinton wrote in an email to Vogue Magazine which did Abedin's photo shoot in July 2007. “She is timeless, her combination of poise, kindness, and intelligence are matchless.”
As the American and the British tabloid and mainstream media appear to be having a field day covering the scandal, Abedin has returned to work as poised and unfaltering as ever, according to The Daily Mail.
Here is Anthony Weiner at a recent Congressional Correspondents Dinner proclaiming "I do the Weiner jokes around here":
Rampant corruption is believed to be a major factor impeding economic development in Pakistan and many other developing nations.
Is this corruption and lawlessness rooted in the absence of adequate law enforcement, or the lack of independent judges? Or is it a national culture of corruption that ranks such nations among the most corrupt in the world on Transparency International surveys?
A paper titled "Cultures of Corruption: Evidence from Diplomatic Parking Tickets" by Ray Fisman of Columbia University and Edward Miguel of University of California, Berkeley attempts to answer the above question by using parking violations data on international diplomats living in New York City during 1997-2005.
Since all foreign diplomats have immunity from prosecution in the host country, they do not have to pay fines for any parking violations in New York City. The authors argue that the way the diplomats from different nations behave in such a situation is entirely based on the cultural norms of the nations they represent.
The data presented by the authors shows that Pakistani diplomats with 69.4 tickets per diplomat are the tenth worst offenders, behind those from Kuwait (246.2), Egypt (139.6), Chad (124.3), Sudan (119.1), Bulgaria (117.5), Mozambique (110.7), Albania (84.5), Angola (81.7) and Senegal (79.2). The authors also report that diplomats from low corruption countries (e.g., Norway and Sweden with zero parking citations) behave remarkably well even in situations where they can get away with violations, suggesting that they bring the social norms or corruption “culture” of their home country with them to New York City. Others with no parking violations include diplomats from Oman, Turkey and UAE.
In addition to a strong correlation between number of parking tickets and TI's corruption index, Fisman and Miguel also find that officials from countries that have less favorable popular views of the United States commit significantly more parking violations, providing nonlaboratory evidence on the role that sentiment and affinity play in economic decision-making.
With 69.4 tickets for each official ranking them at number 10, Pakistani diplomats in New York are also the worst among fellow South Asian diplomats. Bangladeshi diplomats rank 28 (33 tickets), Sri Lanka ranked 40 (17.2 tickets), Nepal ranked 43 (16.5 tickets) and India ranks 79 (6.1 violations per diplomat).
Going by the highly persuasive data and arguments by Fisman and Miguel, it is hard to see how better law-enforcement and independent judiciary can solve the highly corrosive problem of widespread corruption in Pakistani society, unless it is also accompanied by a national campaign to promote a culture of honesty in the country. Such an effort must begin with open acknowledgment of the seriousness of the corruption crisis and an earnest desire to change, followed by wide-ranging ethics reforms in all spheres of life which are actively role-modeled and led by civil, social, political, business, military and religious leaders of the country.
A New York jury has convicted Dr. Aafia Siddiqui of shooting at American soldiers and FBI agents in Afghanistan during her arrest in 2008. The judge, the jury and the entire proceedings focused narrowly on shooting charges, and there was no discussion of how the accused ended up in Afghanistan. The trial has, in fact, raised more questions than it has answered.
The biggest question that remains unanswered is where was Aafia Siddiqui since her disappearance from Karachi in 2003 till the alleged shooting during her arrest in Afghanistan in 2008?
A Harper magazine story from last November, 2009 issue has a detailed report on Aafia Siddiqui's ordeal from 2003 to the start of her trial in 2009. It has multiple conflicting accounts from many sources including Pakistani officials and Aafia's family.
As the Harper reporter Petra Bartosiewicz explains it, "The charges against her stem solely from the shooting incident itself, not from any alleged act of terrorism. The prosecutors provide no explanation for how a scientist, mother, and wife came to be charged as a dangerous felon. Nor do they account for her missing years, or her two other children, who still are missing. What is known is that the United States wanted her in 2003, and it wanted her again in 2008, and now no one can explain why."
Bartosiewicz goes on to add:
The total number of men and women who have been kidnapped and imprisoned for U.S. intelligence-gathering purposes is difficult to determine. Apart from Iraq and Afghanistan, the main theaters of combat, Pakistan is our primary source of publicly known detainees—researchers at Seton Hall University estimated in 2006 that two thirds of the prisoners at Guantánamo were arrested in Pakistan or by Pakistani authorities—and so it is reasonable to assume that the country is also a major supplier of ghost detainees. Human Rights Watch has tracked enforced disappearances in Pakistan since before 2001. The group’s counterterrorism director, Joanne Mariner, told me that the number of missing persons in the country grew “to a flood” as U.S. counterterrorism operations peaked between 2002 and 2004. In that same three-year period, U.S. aid to Pakistan totaled $4.7 billion, up from $9.1 million in the three years prior to the U.S. invasion of Afghanistan. Correlation does not prove causation, of course, but Pakistan’s former president, Pervez Musharraf, did claim in his 2006 memoir, In the Line of Fire, that his country had delivered 369 Al Qaeda suspects to the United States for “millions of dollars” in bounties (a boast he neatly elides in the Urdu edition). It is reasonable to suspect this figure is on the low side.
Aafia Siddiqui’s elderly maternal uncle, Shams ul Hassan Faruqi, a geologist, says almost everyone the reporter spoke to is lying. Faruqi told her an entirely different story. He said Siddiqui showed up at his house unannounced one evening in January 2008, a time when, according to a Pakistani intelligence officer she was supposedly in the hands of the CIA. Her face had been altered, Faruqi said, as if she had undergone plastic surgery, but he knew her by her voice. She said she had been held by the Pakistanis and the Americans and was now running operations for both of them against Al Qaeda. She had slipped away for a few days, though, because she wanted him to smuggle her across the border into Afghanistan so she could seek sanctuary with the Taliban, members of which Faruqi had known from his years of mineral exploration.
Speculation is rife that Siddiqui could have been working as a double agent for at least part of the time she was gone missing. It's possible that she lost trust of her American handlers, which led to her arrest, shooting, and the recent conviction in New York.
The Harper reporter concluded by quoting Afia's sister Fowzia as saying," I’d love it if a real investigator would come and devote himself to the case. You know, really work on it.”
Even the evidence presented on the narrow shooting charges appeared to leave considerable doubt about the guilt of the accused, already labeled "Lady al Qaeda" by some of the American media. The statements by several witnesses were contradictory, and no credible evidence was presented linking the accused to the gun allegedly used by her in shooting. None of the soldiers or the FBI agents was hurt. Only the accused was shot in the stomach during the incident. But these holes did not prevent the jury from reaching a unanimous verdict of guilt.
Here is how a New York based human rights attorney Joanne Mariner described Siddiqui's trial:
A trial's narrative is always tightly circumscribed by the rules of evidence and the demands of relevance. In this instance, however, the constraints of the trial narrative have seemed especially limiting. Not only has the question of whether Siddiqui spent months or years in a secret prison not been thoroughly explored, the fate of her two missing children has not been clarified.
"If You Were in Secret Prisons"
To the extent that claims about a secret prison surfaced at trial, it was largely because Siddiqui herself – sometimes in courtroom outbursts – raised them. Siddiqui's defense lawyers did little to draw out information about Siddiqui's possible CIA detention, and the government clearly wanted the topic to go away.
If Siddiqui's lawyers had wanted to explore the question, they faced two major obstacles. First, the government was uncooperative; it refused to provide any information about the Bush administration's system of secret CIA detention, claiming that such information was classified. Second, Siddiqui did not cooperate with her legal team, leaving them without a possible firsthand source of information.
The issue nonetheless arose on the very first day of trial. Captain Robert Snyder, a US Army officer who was stationed in Ghazni at the time of Siddiqui's arrest, was describing the documents that Siddiqui was said to be carrying when she was arrested.
For much of the morning, Siddiqui had rested her head on the defense table, suggesting that she was not paying close attention to the testimony. But as Snyder began listing the writing on some of the documents –words like "dirty bomb," "lethal radiation," "deadly fallout," "Empire State Building," "Brooklyn Bridge" – Siddiqui suddenly interrupted him, upset.
"If you were in secret prisons," she said, her voice growing louder, "[and] your children were tortured ... " As the judge motioned for her to be removed from the courtroom, she continued: "This is not plans for New York City; I was never planning to bomb it! You're lying!"
The subject came up again the next week when Siddiqui herself was on the witness stand, tense and uncomfortable under grilling by the prosecutor.
During direct examination by one of her defense attorneys, the topic of secret prisons did not arise, but when the prosecutor started to discuss the documents that had allegedly been in Siddiqui's possession, Siddiqui interrupted her.
"If they're in a secret prison, they see their children tortured in front of them ... "
"That's not responsive," the judge ruled, after the prosecutor complained. "Strike the testimony."
"You Told Special Agent Sercer That You Had Been in Hiding for Several Years"
Later in Siddiqui's cross-examination, the prosecutor came up with a very different version of how Siddiqui spent her missing years. Describing Siddiqui's conversations with an FBI agent who spent time with her at Bagram Air Base while she was receiving medical care there, the prosecutor challenged Siddiqui's story of secret detention.
"At Bagram," the prosecutor insisted, "you told Special Agent Sercer that you had been in hiding for several years."
The prosecutor got a chance to develop the story further when Special Agent Sercer, an FBI intelligence analyst, took the stand. Asked whether Siddiqui had discussed her whereabouts during the years before her 2008 arrest, Sercer said that Siddiqui had said she'd been in hiding.
"She would move from place to place," Sercer said Siddiqui had told her. "She married someone so that her name would be changed. She stayed indoors a lot."
Sercer's version of the story coincides with what Siddiqui's first husband, from whom she divorced in 2002, has told journalists. He claims that Siddiqui was seen at her house in the years between 2003 and 2008, and that he himself saw her in Karachi.
A Diversion or a Crime
In his closing argument, the prosecutor dismissed Siddiqui's references to torture and secret prisons, calling them "a classic diversion." The case "isn't about that," he insisted: It's about what happened in a police station in Ghazni, Afghanistan.
What this case shows is that Muslims are currently a despised minority in the West these days. What we are seeing is reminiscent of the McCarthy era Red Scare or the WW II era anti-Japanese sentiments against Muslims in America. Even the US judiciary appears to have been swayed by the current environment, just as it was when the US Supreme Court approved of the internment camps to isolate and hold Japanese Americans during the second world war.
Given the environment of deep suspicion and fear of Muslims, all norms of fairness and rule of law are being ignored in the US when it comes to justice for any one with a Muslim name who gets accused of anything smacking of violence or terrorism.
Here's a video clip of Dr. Amjad Khan, ex-husband of Dr. Aafia Siddiqui, speaking with GeoTV news:
