The Rush to Judge Ilhan Omar

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Also, what up with the "dual loyalty is a myth and it's a hateful attack to suggest it exists..."

How about y'all get back to me in a couple days when everyone is wearing green and professing their loyalty and love of Ireland and all things Irish.

Meanwhile do you know how many American Jews I know who have spent time in Israel, on kibbutz, et cetera? How many know their right of return and of guaranteed Israeli citizenship? A lot. "Myth" indeed.

You sound jealous of people who believe in something.

Aha. Dual loyalty.

You are an empty vessel.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There’s lots of gaslighting going on. Will she serve up another trope in a couple weeks? You betcha!

I don't think "gaslighting" means what you think it means. Gaslighting means people trying to make you believe something that is false. Ilhan Omar isn't promoting anything that is false.

By "trope" you mean factual and accurate statement about Netanyahu's policies? Or another factual and accurate about the political influence of AIPAC?

Look, just because you don't like acknowledging something doesn't make it wrong, and for sure doesn't make it "gaslighting"

Some argue, it seems, that there is othing that could be interpreted in her comments as hinting toward antisemitism when viewed from the perspective of a reasonable listener. If some Jews think there is a suggestion of antisemitism there, then that ends the debate for me. But that’s just me. To be fair, I think the Democrats made an unforced error. Omar is, I think, much more in step with today’s Democratic Party on this issue then the party’s ancient leaders are. Hoyer? Give me a break. Is he woke? So I just don’t get the rush to implicitly ondemn her through some really weird resolution.

Seems so much of a stretch that it's not even a hint from the perspective of a reasonable listener. It's like "I like cheese" and then "Oh, but he probably likes meat too and meat and cheese together are not kosher and therefore he is obviously an anti-Semite."

You seem weirdly overinvested in cheese.

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Some argue, it seems, that there is othing that could be interpreted in her comments as hinting toward antisemitism when viewed from the perspective of a reasonable listener. If some Jews think there is a suggestion of antisemitism there, then that ends the debate for me. But that’s just me. To be fair, I think the Democrats made an unforced error. Omar is, I think, much more in step with today’s Democratic Party on this issue then the party’s ancient leaders are. Hoyer? Give me a break. Is he woke? So I just don’t get the rush to implicitly ondemn her through some really weird resolution.

Oh, anyone can always interpret anything anyway they want. Obviously some Jews are interpreting Omar's remarks in such a way. What I have been trying to say is that Omar said this:

“So for me I want to talk about the political influence in this country that says it is ok for people to push for allegiance to a foreign country.”

The Washington Post reported this:

"Omar suggested last week that Israel’s supporters have an 'allegiance to a foreign country'.

Notice the difference? Omar is obviously discussing the pro-Israel lobby and how it pushes people to support Israel. The example that provoked her is Marco Rubio's anti-BDS bill that allows state and local governments to punish Americans who don't support Israel's interests. For instance, in Texas a school teacher was fired because she refused to sign a pledge not to support BDS.

Omar said nothing about the loyalty of American Jews. To the contrary, earlier in her talk she discussed how she understands the passion her Jewish constituents have for Israel and compared it to her children's passion for Somalia.

If there is any gaslighting going on, it is by the Washington Post which is mischaracterizing Omar's words.

I that if she had used the word “support” instead of “allegiance” in the above quotation, that any potential ambiguities would not have occurred.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There’s lots of gaslighting going on. Will she serve up another trope in a couple weeks? You betcha!

I don't think "gaslighting" means what you think it means. Gaslighting means people trying to make you believe something that is false. Ilhan Omar isn't promoting anything that is false.

By "trope" you mean factual and accurate statement about Netanyahu's policies? Or another factual and accurate about the political influence of AIPAC?

Look, just because you don't like acknowledging something doesn't make it wrong, and for sure doesn't make it "gaslighting"

Some argue, it seems, that there is othing that could be interpreted in her comments as hinting toward antisemitism when viewed from the perspective of a reasonable listener. If some Jews think there is a suggestion of antisemitism there, then that ends the debate for me. But that’s just me. To be fair, I think the Democrats made an unforced error. Omar is, I think, much more in step with today’s Democratic Party on this issue then the party’s ancient leaders are. Hoyer? Give me a break. Is he woke? So I just don’t get the rush to implicitly ondemn her through some really weird resolution.

Seems so much of a stretch that it's not even a hint from the perspective of a reasonable listener. It's like "I like cheese" and then "Oh, but he probably likes meat too and meat and cheese together are not kosher and therefore he is obviously an anti-Semite."

You seem weirdly overinvested in cheese.

PP is from Wisconsin.

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Some argue, it seems, that there is othing that could be interpreted in her comments as hinting toward antisemitism when viewed from the perspective of a reasonable listener. If some Jews think there is a suggestion of antisemitism there, then that ends the debate for me. But that’s just me. To be fair, I think the Democrats made an unforced error. Omar is, I think, much more in step with today’s Democratic Party on this issue then the party’s ancient leaders are. Hoyer? Give me a break. Is he woke? So I just don’t get the rush to implicitly ondemn her through some really weird resolution.

Oh, anyone can always interpret anything anyway they want. Obviously some Jews are interpreting Omar's remarks in such a way. What I have been trying to say is that Omar said this:

“So for me I want to talk about the political influence in this country that says it is ok for people to push for allegiance to a foreign country.”

The Washington Post reported this:

"Omar suggested last week that Israel’s supporters have an 'allegiance to a foreign country'.

Notice the difference? Omar is obviously discussing the pro-Israel lobby and how it pushes people to support Israel. The example that provoked her is Marco Rubio's anti-BDS bill that allows state and local governments to punish Americans who don't support Israel's interests. For instance, in Texas a school teacher was fired because she refused to sign a pledge not to support BDS.

Omar said nothing about the loyalty of American Jews. To the contrary, earlier in her talk she discussed how she understands the passion her Jewish constituents have for Israel and compared it to her children's passion for Somalia.

If there is any gaslighting going on, it is by the Washington Post which is mischaracterizing Omar's words.

An individual is the sum total of their statements.

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Some argue, it seems, that there is othing that could be interpreted in her comments as hinting toward antisemitism when viewed from the perspective of a reasonable listener. If some Jews think there is a suggestion of antisemitism there, then that ends the debate for me. But that’s just me. To be fair, I think the Democrats made an unforced error. Omar is, I think, much more in step with today’s Democratic Party on this issue then the party’s ancient leaders are. Hoyer? Give me a break. Is he woke? So I just don’t get the rush to implicitly ondemn her through some really weird resolution.

Oh, anyone can always interpret anything anyway they want. Obviously some Jews are interpreting Omar's remarks in such a way. What I have been trying to say is that Omar said this:

“So for me I want to talk about the political influence in this country that says it is ok for people to push for allegiance to a foreign country.”

The Washington Post reported this:

"Omar suggested last week that Israel’s supporters have an 'allegiance to a foreign country'.

Notice the difference? Omar is obviously discussing the pro-Israel lobby and how it pushes people to support Israel. The example that provoked her is Marco Rubio's anti-BDS bill that allows state and local governments to punish Americans who don't support Israel's interests. For instance, in Texas a school teacher was fired because she refused to sign a pledge not to support BDS.

Omar said nothing about the loyalty of American Jews. To the contrary, earlier in her talk she discussed how she understands the passion her Jewish constituents have for Israel and compared it to her children's passion for Somalia.

If there is any gaslighting going on, it is by the Washington Post which is mischaracterizing Omar's words.

An individual is the sum total of their statements.

That's fine. But it still does not justify saying that someone said something she didn't say.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:an interesting article (dated Feb.) addressing pro-Israel lobbying
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/feb/15/pro-israel-donors-spent-over-22m-on-lobbying-and-contributions-in-2018
Pro-Israel donors spent over $22m on lobbying and contributions in 2018

don't know if someone cited this article earlier . . . some interesting number crunching . . .

Omar incorrectly suggested Aipac makes campaign contributions to candidates. However, records show it did spend about $3.5m lobbying during the 2018 election cycle. In total, pro-Israel lobbying groups spent about $5m in 2018, the highest tally since tracking began in 1998.

Aipac spent the most of the lobbying groups, and is known for funding junket trips to Israel for freshman lawmakers and senators, as well as state legislators. Aipac also lobbied against the Iran nuclear deal in 2015 and supported the Trump administration’s withdrawal from the agreement.

. . .

Democratic leaders who criticized Omar and demanded an apology also receive a high level of contributions from the pro-Israel lobby. Eliot Engel, chair of the House Foreign Affairs Committee on which Omar sits, received $1.07m from the pro-Israel lobby during his career, more than he’s received from any other industry. In a Tuesday statement, he said “… it’s shocking to hear a Member of Congress invoke the anti-Semitic trope of ‘Jewish money.’”

Meanwhile, the pro-Israel lobby has contributed $514,000 to Pelosi throughout her career and it’s given $1.02m to Hoyer.

Interests are interests, right?

Yes, AIPAC pumps millions into both sides of the aisle. And that's why we treat Israel like as if it were practically the 51st state. Probably treated even better than places that are actually the US.

Could test that - Last year Israel was given $3.7 billion in US dollars
Compare that to what, say Puerto Rico gets - Puerto Rico gets $13.5 billion in federal dollars for medicaid, social security, pell grants, veterans benefits et cetera. BUT it pays in to the federal government to the tune of $58 billion in the form of $22.6 billion in registered imports, $34 billion in capital gains from manufacturing and other industries in PR, and $1.5 billion in Cabotage law, to the tune of a net loss of $44 billion for PR. So in fact Israel gets more federal dollars than US territories do. That AIPAC lobbying is working pretty damn well.

an interesting way to put things into perspective - for me at least

speakers at the AIPAC 2018 policy conference - http://www.policyconference.org/gallery/speakers2018.asp

one of the speakers: Mr. Binyamin Zomer, Country Manager for Noble Energy Inc.
https://www.reuters.com/article/noble-energy-israel/corrected-noble-energy-says-to-expand-israel-activity-amid-natgas-success-idUSL8N1PJ2OO?elqTrackId=51778ff0b5e440b3a07f65d047f76744

JERUSALEM, Jan 24 (Reuters) - U.S.’s Noble Energy said on Wednesday it plans to expand in Israel ahead of the 2019 start of production at the large Leviathan natural gas site off Israel’s Mediterranean coast.

Texas-based Noble owns some 40 percent of Leviathan, which has estimated gas reserves of 622 billion cubic meters — mostly earmarked for exports — while Israeli conglomerate Delek Group owns another 45 percent through two subsidiaries.

Noble also holds 32.5 percent of the Tamar field, Israel’s primary supply of natural gas, although it must reduce its holding to 25 percent by 2021 under government plans to open the market to competition.

Big Business always wins, and the little people are caught in the middle. So I see Omar's point. She's not 100% wrong, but unfortunately, with the split in this country, matters have become way too black and white - which makes people ultra sensitive.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Also, what up with the "dual loyalty is a myth and it's a hateful attack to suggest it exists..."

How about y'all get back to me in a couple days when everyone is wearing green and professing their loyalty and love of Ireland and all things Irish.

Meanwhile do you know how many American Jews I know who have spent time in Israel, on kibbutz, et cetera? How many know their right of return and of guaranteed Israeli citizenship? A lot. "Myth" indeed.

to be fair there is a pretty strong irish-american lobby. Remember during the troubles?

but yes, i made a thread about this years ago - inquiring how i don't really see other dual citizens or diaspora people have the same multi-generational engagement with the country of their ethnicity nearly to the same extent as jews and israel.

for example if indian americans, who have a ton of money as well, had an organization as powerful as aipac/zoa/rjc/etc and were politically as engaged on issues directly affecting india in the region, pakistan would be in a lot larger world of hurt.

During the troubles, the IRA was getting more money from Boston than it was from Dublin. Cultural loyalties can run deep. So to try and suggest it's absurd and a heinous myth is in itself absurd.

To be fair, Dublin probably would not send money to the IRA from the republic of Ireland since it was Northern Ireland involved in the Troubles. Belfast, on the other hand, may have given less than Boston.

And speaking of divided loyalties, what about all the money transfers from the US to Central American countries? They are a sizable portion of their GDP.

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Some argue, it seems, that there is othing that could be interpreted in her comments as hinting toward antisemitism when viewed from the perspective of a reasonable listener. If some Jews think there is a suggestion of antisemitism there, then that ends the debate for me. But that’s just me. To be fair, I think the Democrats made an unforced error. Omar is, I think, much more in step with today’s Democratic Party on this issue then the party’s ancient leaders are. Hoyer? Give me a break. Is he woke? So I just don’t get the rush to implicitly ondemn her through some really weird resolution.

Oh, anyone can always interpret anything anyway they want. Obviously some Jews are interpreting Omar's remarks in such a way. What I have been trying to say is that Omar said this:

“So for me I want to talk about the political influence in this country that says it is ok for people to push for allegiance to a foreign country.”

The Washington Post reported this:

"Omar suggested last week that Israel’s supporters have an 'allegiance to a foreign country'.

Notice the difference? Omar is obviously discussing the pro-Israel lobby and how it pushes people to support Israel. The example that provoked her is Marco Rubio's anti-BDS bill that allows state and local governments to punish Americans who don't support Israel's interests. For instance, in Texas a school teacher was fired because she refused to sign a pledge not to support BDS.

Omar said nothing about the loyalty of American Jews. To the contrary, earlier in her talk she discussed how she understands the passion her Jewish constituents have for Israel and compared it to her children's passion for Somalia.

If there is any gaslighting going on, it is by the Washington Post which is mischaracterizing Omar's words.

An individual is the sum total of their statements.

That's fine. But it still does not justify saying that someone said something she didn't say.

If only she had not used the word allegiance. But she did. As I said, she’ll continue, and now she feels protected. Should be interesting

[Anonymous]

Her statement on the useless resolution. Will the WaPo fact check the 99% statement? I would love to know where that stat came from.

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:Her statement on the useless resolution. Will the WaPo fact check the 99% statement? I would love to know where that stat came from.

The 99% number comes from FBI data. It is reported here:

http://theconversation.com/new-data-shows-us-hate-crimes-continued-to-rise-in-2017-97989

and also here:

https://www.splcenter.org/hatewatch/2017/11/14/latest-fbi-numbers-show-anti-muslim-hate-crimes-continue-rise-suggest-growing-shift-toward

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Her statement on the useless resolution. Will the WaPo fact check the 99% statement? I would love to know where that stat came from.

Wow! So a Muslim's antisemitic comments precipated a resolution, and she turns it around into being a resolution against anti-Muslim attitudes? She added in antisemtisim as an afterthought, lumping it in with everything else.

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Her statement on the useless resolution. Will the WaPo fact check the 99% statement? I would love to know where that stat came from.

The 99% number comes from FBI data. It is reported here:

http://theconversation.com/new-data-shows-us-hate-crimes-continued-to-rise-in-2017-97989

and also here:

https://www.splcenter.org/hatewatch/2017/11/14/latest-fbi-numbers-show-anti-muslim-hate-crimes-continue-rise-suggest-growing-shift-toward

I’m Jewish. The anti-Semitism out there is creepy. The way Omar worded her statement was a little creepy, although the context you provided was helpful.

But the Islamophobia here and in Europe is way louder, creepier and hurtful to people’s everyday lives than the anti-Semitism.

I know there are people on groups for former Muslims that there are actual problems in various Muslim communities. It’s not all
sweetness and light there.

But people who are Muslim have the right to act according to their conscience and to be judged for their own actions. I think it’s great and important that the House put a statement against Islamophobia in this resolution. My kid’s school has many great students who are Muslim, and they deserve to grow up in a world where they can have every opportunity my kid has, without worrying about whether wearing a hijab will cause problems.

I think we also need a statement speaking up for the rights of people born in Russia who now live in the United States.

I see some really terrible anti-Russian posts posted on social media these days. I’m pretty paranoid about Putin’s efforts to manipulate us and Europe. But that concern isn’t any excuse for prejudice against or rudeness toward individual Russians. If there are any actual Russian spies manipulating us (as opposed to just collecting information), that ought to be dealt with politely and in compliance with the rule of law, not through Russianphobia.

Right now, that problem is a niche problem, but maybe it will get bigger as understanding of the Mueller investigation spreads.

[Anonymous]

The big question is can anyone criticize or question Israel, it policies or its relations with the US and not be called anti-Semitic? It always seems if there is anything negative said about Israel there is always someone saying it’s anti-semitic.

[Anonymous]

I agree with her, Israel has an outsize influence in American politics, it is very much of a dual allegiance situation, and money is an important part of the support. Israel didn't boycott South Africa during its apartheid years, it has dirty hands now, treats Ethiopian Jews like the South Africans treated their blacks.. Would you ever see a bill in the US Congress punishing US citizens for boycotting any other country? France or Britain?