Keep Factually independent
Whether you agree or disagree with our analysis, these conversations matter for democracy. We don't take money from political groups - even a $5 donation helps us keep it that way.
How did Zohran Mamdani respond to the October 7 2023 Hamas attack?
Executive summary
Zohran Mamdani’s immediate public reaction to the October 7, 2023 Hamas attacks emphasized mourning for “the hundreds of people killed across Israel and Palestine” and did not, in its first day, include an explicit condemnation of Hamas in some accounts [1] [2]. Subsequent months and years show a pattern of strong criticism of Israeli policies and of the Gaza war — including labeling aspects of Israel’s conduct as genocide — alongside condemnations of the October 7 attacks in later statements [3] [1] [4].
1. The first 24 hours: mourning phrased as inclusive, disputed as insufficient
Mamdani’s initial statement, issued the day after Oct. 7, 2023, spoke of mourning “the hundreds of people killed across Israel and Palestine in the last 36 hours,” a formulation that several outlets highlight as noting Palestinian as well as Israeli deaths rather than explicitly condemning Hamas’s attack [1] [5]. CNN’s reporting says the statement “did not condemn Hamas or the attacks” and frames that omission as a central reason for criticism [2]. Critics and advocacy sites characterize the early response as tone-deaf or “half‑hearted,” while other outlets emphasize his expressed mourning [6] [5].
2. Accusations and context from conservative and activist trackers
Right‑leaning outlets and activist trackers present a far harsher portrait: Canary Mission and related pages allege Mamdani justified or minimized Hamas’s violence and participated in anti‑Israel demonstrations immediately after Oct. 7, including an arrest at a protest in October 2023 [7] [8]. Fox News and other conservative outlets cite those associations to argue Mamdani showed sympathy for Hamas or anti‑Israel extremism; one Republican lawmaker even called for investigations and denaturalization over his positions [9]. These sources frame his early remarks and later activism as part of a pattern of anti‑Israel organizing [7] [8] [9].
3. Mamdani’s later statements: explicit condemnations and international‑law framing
Other reporting documents that Mamdani later and repeatedly condemned the October 7 attacks — calling them “horrific” and a war crime — while also condemning Israeli government actions in Gaza and invoking international law, including characterizing Israel’s wartime conduct as genocide in later appearances [1] [3] [4]. The Guardian, Times of Israel and JTA detail that in subsequent years Mamdani has combined clear denunciations of Hamas’s Oct. 7 atrocities with sustained critique of Israel and U.S. policy [4] [10] [1].
4. Protests, alliances and political fallout that followed Oct. 7
In the weeks and months after Oct. 7, Mamdani participated in or was associated with pro‑Palestinian demonstrations and coalitions pressing for ceasefires and for cutting U.S. military aid to Israel; those activities included actions that drew arrests and sharp pushback from Jewish community leaders and pro‑Israel groups [7] [2] [8]. Media coverage shows this activism became a major line of attack during his later mayoral campaign, sharpening divisions among New York Jewish voters and prompting endorsements and rebukes from different Jewish and political figures [2] [4].
5. How different outlets interpret the same facts
Mainstream outlets such as JTA and Times of Israel highlight the textual fact of his Oct. 8 statement mourning deaths “across Israel and Palestine,” and they document later, explicit condemnations of Hamas alongside criticism of Israel [1] [5]. CNN emphasizes the initial lack of an explicit condemnation of Hamas as politically consequential [2]. By contrast, Canary Mission, JFeed and some opinion pieces portray Mamdani’s comments and associations as nearer to excusing or downplaying Hamas, a view used to argue he is unfit for office [7] [11] [8]. These divergent framings show how the same sequence — an inclusive mourning statement, protest activity, and later critical legal framing — is read very differently across the media and political spectrum [1] [2] [7].
6. Limitations, uncertainties and what current reporting does not say
Available sources do not mention every private conversation Mamdani may have had in the immediate aftermath of Oct. 7, nor do they provide a complete catalog of every statement he issued that day beyond the cited initial message and later public remarks [1] [5]. Some claims about his actions are presented by politically motivated trackers (e.g., Canary Mission) or partisan outlets and should be weighed against mainstream reporting that documents both his expressed mourning and his later explicit condemnations [7] [1] [2].
Conclusion: reporting shows Mamdani’s first public day‑after statement emphasized mourning for deaths on both sides [1] [5]; critics say he failed then to single out Hamas and point to protest activity as corroboration [2] [7]; Mamdani later issued clearer condemnations of the Oct. 7 attacks while continuing to denounce Israeli policies and to invoke international law [3] [1] [4].