Democrats in New Jersey have handed a primary win to Adam Hamawy, a candidate whose past involvement with a group tied to al Qaeda has raised serious red flags.

Hamawy, who boasts endorsements from the far left “Squad,” managed to secure victory for the seat being vacated by retiring Rep. Bonnie Watson Coleman.

The question that will now haunt the Garden State is how a man connected to a terror linked organization could find himself this close to the halls of Congress.

Hamawy’s political rise has been both fueled and clouded by his background.

Trump's Sovereign Wealth Fund: What Could It Mean For Your Money?

While he is often hailed for his military service and credited with heroically aiding Sen. Tammy Duckworth after a helicopter crash during the Iraq War, his volunteer work and outspoken criticism of Israel are stirring outrage.

Many conservatives view his success as the latest example of the Democratic Party’s open embrace of radical anti Israel rhetoric.

At the center of the controversy is Hamawy’s 1994 experience with the Benevolence International Foundation in Bosnia, an organization cited in the 9/11 Commission Report as part of a network that secretly aided Osama bin Laden’s operations.

The group was later shut down after authorities discovered it provided cover for terrorist financing and logistics.

FREE Gun Law Map: Laws Don't Pause During Social Unrest

That is not the kind of “humanitarian service” most Americans want to see from a congressional hopeful.

Hamawy’s campaign insists the questions about his past are groundless, calling the scrutiny “absurd” and “bigoted.”

Yet the facts are hard to ignore. The Benevolence International Foundation was not simply a charity gone astray; according to a 2003 court filing, it was allegedly used by al Qaeda “to establish a base for operations in Europe against Al Qaeda’s true enemy, the United States.”

A candidate who once had any association with such a group should expect public scrutiny, particularly when seeking a national security sensitive position in Congress.

The Democratic establishment, ever eager to downplay any controversy on its side, rushed to shield Hamawy from criticism.

Instead of addressing legitimate concerns about his past, they accused conservatives of Islamophobia and smear tactics.

Conveniently, they failed to mention the connection between Hamawy’s brief time volunteering with the foundation and the group’s later exposure as an al Qaeda front.

Records uncovered by Jewish Insider added another layer of intrigue, linking the Bosnian mission’s second deputy ambassador at the time, Saffet Catovic, to the same organization.

Catovic, a New Jersey native, was quoted as the foundation’s spokesman during federal raids in 2001.

That timing raises fair questions about who Hamawy was working with and what he knew at the time.

Hamawy’s critics argue that his pattern of behavior fits the broader drift of the Democratic Party toward radicalism on foreign policy.

Once the party of strong national defense, Democrats now seem more comfortable making excuses for individuals with questionable ties and anti Israel sympathies.

Hamawy’s vocal criticism of the Jewish state fits perfectly into that mold.

The irony is that while Democrats cheer their “diverse” candidate, they are turning a blind eye to the very connections that jeopardize national security.

It is yet another example of identity politics overshadowing judgment.

Voters in New Jersey’s Twelfth Congressional District may want to ask themselves whether sending such a candidate to Washington is truly in their best interest.

WATCH:

Supporters point to Hamawy’s military record as proof of his patriotism.

Yet patriotism is not a shield that blocks legitimate questions.

No one denies that Hamawy served honorably overseas. The issue is the company he once kept and the ideology he now promotes, both of which are deeply concerning.

For all the spin, it is telling that the campaign’s first reaction to inquiry was to cry discrimination rather than to present proof of innocence.

When the facts are uncomfortable, the left prefers to silence the critics rather than confront the reality.

The stakes, however, are too high to allow that tactic to work. America cannot afford leaders who romanticize anti Western movements or associate with groups later found to be arms of terrorism.

New Jersey voters have now elevated such a figure to the front of the Democratic ticket.

It is a sobering reminder of how far the party has drifted under the influence of the progressive activist class.

The Squad’s backing of Hamawy signals that his worldview aligns with theirs, one driven more by grievance politics than by love of country.

In the months ahead, Republicans will likely seize on Hamawy’s record as proof of Democrats’ moral blindness when it comes to national security.

While liberals will continue painting critics as intolerant, the facts remain stubborn.

The Benevolence International Foundation’s track record is written in federal documents, not partisan blogs.

No candidate should be above accountability, especially one linked, however indirectly, to a group once described as aiding bin Laden’s operations.

Yet within today’s Democratic Party, the only sin seems to be being questioned.

Hamawy may soon learn that voters outside his activist bubble see things differently when November rolls around.

The choice for New Jersey is becoming clear.

It is not merely between Republican and Democrat, but between vigilance and complacency, between a nation that remembers September 11 and one that forgets.

The Democrats have chosen to forget. Voters still have time to remember.

The opinions expressed by contributors and/or content partners are their own and do not necessarily reflect the views of Objectivist. Contact us for guidelines on submitting your own commentary.