DEMOCRATIC SOCIALIST WHO JUSTIFIED HAMAS ATTACK REFUSES TO CALL JEWISH FIREBOMBING ANTISEMITIC

A terrorist shouted “End Zionist” while hurling Molotov cocktails and wielding a flamethrower at Jewish families praying for hostages—yet the Democratic socialist who just won Colorado’s primary can’t bring herself to call it antisemitic.

Melat Kiros, who shocked the political establishment by defeating 15-term incumbent Rep. Diana DeGette Tuesday night, has spent her campaign downplaying antisemitic violence while championing the most extreme anti-Israel positions imaginable.

Her moral confusion reaches disturbing depths.

A Terrorist Attack She Refuses to Recognize

The facts are undeniable. On June 1, 2025, Mohamed Sabry Soliman attacked a peaceful Jewish gathering in Boulder aimed at bringing attention to Israeli hostages held by Hamas terrorists. He threw Molotov cocktails into the crowd while operating a flamethrower and screaming “End Zionist” and “Free Palestine.”

One person was injured. A dozen were killed.

The FBI reported that Soliman explicitly “stated that he wanted to kill all Zionist people.” He targeted Jews because they were Jews. He’s now serving a life sentence for this act of terror on American soil.

Yet Kiros sees ambiguity where none exists.

“I don’t know what was in the heart of the perpetrator,” she told 9News last month, performing verbal gymnastics to avoid stating the obvious. “All I know is that he went and attacked innocent people because of what they might have believed.”

What they might have believed? They were Jewish Americans asking for the return of hostages taken by terrorists. There’s no “might have” about it—they were targeted for being Jewish.

Doubling Down on Denial

When given multiple opportunities to correct course, Kiros dug deeper. She told NOTUS that the attack wasn’t “entirely obvious that it was just motivated by antisemitism.”

Read that again. A man who said he wanted to “kill all Zionist people” while firebombing a Jewish gathering, and she can’t see the antisemitism.

“It’s absolutely possible that that was a part of it as well, but I do think it’s important that we know exactly what the motivation was,” she added, as if the terrorist’s own words and actions left room for interpretation.

This isn’t nuance. This is willful blindness.

Kiros later acknowledged the firebombing was a “hate crime” and issued platitudes about protecting Jewish people being “non-negotiable.” But her instinct to minimize and obfuscate speaks volumes about her actual priorities.

A Career Built on Anti-Israel Extremism

The Boulder firebombing isn’t an isolated issue for Kiros. Anti-Israel activism defines her political identity.

Three years ago, she was fired from the prestigious Sidley Austin law firm after publicly attacking legal firms that opposed antisemitism on college campuses. While universities erupted with harassment of Jewish students, Kiros accused law firms of being “complicit in Israel’s weaponization of anti-Semitism.”

She turned this termination into a campaign credential.

During her victory speech, Kiros boasted about the letter that got her fired: “I didn’t flinch because I stood by every word and I always will.”

That’s not courage. That’s extremism worn as a badge of honor.

Justifying October 7th and 9/11

Kiros’ radical worldview extends beyond refusing to acknowledge antisemitism. She’s openly justified terrorist attacks against both Israel and the United States.

In May, she appeared on the show of far-left streamer Hasan Piker—a figure who claimed Hamas rape of Israelis “doesn’t change the dynamic for me” and declared “America deserved 9/11.”

Kiros told Piker that the October 7, 2023 Hamas massacre was an “inevitable consequence of apartheid.” She later claimed she wasn’t saying it was justified, but the semantic distinction collapses under scrutiny. Calling mass murder “inevitable” is a form of rationalization that removes moral responsibility from the perpetrators.

Over 1,200 Israelis were slaughtered that day. Women were raped. Families were burned alive. Children and elderly were kidnapped. Kiros sees this as “inevitable.”

She applied the same twisted logic to September 11th, suggesting to 9News that the terrorist attacks were an “inevitable consequence” of American actions.

“Inevitable in the sense that we destabilized a lot of the Middle East, which led people to believe that another act of violence was the only response,” she explained.

This is the language of apologists for terrorism. It places blame on victims and their countries rather than on the terrorists who chose to murder innocents.

The Democratic Party’s Extremism Problem

Kiros’ victory represents more than one troubling candidate winning one primary. It signals a metastasizing rot within the Democratic Party.

Her win comes amid a wave of far-left victories in Democratic primaries nationwide. The party’s base is increasingly embracing candidates who view America and Israel not as flawed democracies worthy of improvement, but as fundamentally illegitimate entities responsible for global terrorism.

This isn’t progressivism. It’s radicalism.

When a major party’s voters elevate someone who can’t call a terrorist attack on Jews antisemitic—someone who justifies October 7th and 9/11—that party has lost its moral compass entirely.

The Stakes for Colorado and America

Colorado voters now face a stark choice. Will they send to Congress someone who sees terrorism against Jews and Americans as “inevitable consequences” rather than evil acts requiring condemnation?

Kiros defeated a 15-term incumbent, suggesting significant support for her extremist views within Denver’s Democratic electorate. That should alarm every American who values our alliance with Israel and understands the threat of antisemitism.

The Democratic Party once stood firmly against antisemitism and supported Israel as America’s closest Middle Eastern ally. Leaders like Harry Truman recognized Israel’s founding. John F. Kennedy called the US-Israel relationship “special.” Even Barack Obama, despite tensions, maintained that bond.

Now, the party’s rising stars justify Hamas massacres and can’t identify obvious antisemitic terrorism.

A Test of Moral Clarity

This isn’t complicated. When someone attacks Jews for being Jewish, that’s antisemitism. When terrorists deliberately murder civilians, that’s evil—not an “inevitable consequence” of policy disagreements.

Melat Kiros fails this basic moral test repeatedly. Her inability—or refusal—to call antisemitic violence what it is disqualifies her from representing Americans in Congress.

The Democratic Party faces its own test. Will party leaders condemn Kiros’ extremism, or will they embrace her as part of their “diverse coalition”? Will they prioritize political expediency over moral clarity?

Early signs aren’t encouraging. The silence from Democratic leadership following her victory speaks volumes.

Colorado Republicans must make this campaign about fundamental values: standing against terrorism, supporting our Israeli allies, and protecting Jewish Americans from the rising tide of antisemitic violence that people like Kiros enable through their rhetoric.

Americans deserve representatives who can unequivocally condemn terrorism. Who don’t perform mental gymnastics to avoid calling antisemitism by its name. Who understand that moral clarity matters.

Melat Kiros is not that representative. Her victory in the Democratic primary should serve as a wake-up call about the dangerous direction of the modern left.

The general election will determine whether Colorado voters reject this extremism or embrace it.