The Rush to Judge Ilhan Omar

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The cavalier attitude with which she views the events of 9-11 are deeply offensive to those of us who lost loved one in the attack and to any American who remembers the unprovoked attack by the terrorists.

Do you feel the same way about Donald Trump and his cavalier attitude in the immediate aftermath of the attacks, when his most pressing concern was to gloat that his building was the tallest in downtown Manhattan?

He actually didn’t do that. Only the most partisan idiots would think that. Read up:
https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/trump-bragged-tallest-building/

If Omar's critics have demonstrated anything in this thread, it is that they don't care about context. You are quite willing to completely ignore what she was actually saying and misrepresent her entire point. So, why do you expect different treatment for Trump? If you want to condemn Omar for a few words taken out of context, then it is hypocritical to expect Trump's words not to be handled likewise.

Last week, Omar reintroduced the flawed idea that Trump called all immigrants animals, when the larger context showed that he was talking about MS—13.

What is the context which would change how people perceive her words? Where they would say, had I heard that part, I would be comfortable with her word choice.

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The cavalier attitude with which she views the events of 9-11 are deeply offensive to those of us who lost loved one in the attack and to any American who remembers the unprovoked attack by the terrorists.

Do you feel the same way about Donald Trump and his cavalier attitude in the immediate aftermath of the attacks, when his most pressing concern was to gloat that his building was the tallest in downtown Manhattan?

He actually didn’t do that. Only the most partisan idiots would think that. Read up:
https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/trump-bragged-tallest-building/

If Omar's critics have demonstrated anything in this thread, it is that they don't care about context. You are quite willing to completely ignore what she was actually saying and misrepresent her entire point. So, why do you expect different treatment for Trump? If you want to condemn Omar for a few words taken out of context, then it is hypocritical to expect Trump's words not to be handled likewise.

Exactly. Funny how context matters now.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Remember when Donald Trump called into the local Fox station and bragged that because of 9/11, he had the tallest building in NYC?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PcKlPhFIE7w

Let's hold the disgust please.

Mmmm, yes and no. As you know, context matters.

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/trump-bragged-tallest-building/

"So it is true that during the course of that interview, in response to a query about whether his own buildings had sustained any damage, Trump stated, in reference to the Trump Building, that “now it’s the tallest” [in downtown Manhattan]. Whether that remark constituted “bragging” is a matter of subjective interpretation, however.

Critics maintain that Trump’s referencing the relative height of 40 Wall Street in the immediate aftermath of the World Trade Center towers’ fall was completely gratuitous and irrelevant to the discussion, the hallmark of an egoist with no compunctions about using tragedy as an opportunity for self-promotion.

But in the context of the full interview, Trump’s remarks could perhaps be considered defensible.

First of all, the newscasters to whom Trump was speaking were appealing to their audience by repeatedly referring to his status in the New York real estate community, describing him as the “man behind lots of real estate in Manhattan” and a “visionary in New York real estate,” and they specifically asked him about the Trump Tower and the Trump Building, which they termed “one of the great tourist attractions in the world” and “one of the landmark buildings down in the financial district,” respectively. It was to be expected that he would respond to those lead-ins with at least a little bit of subtle swagger (which he expressed matter-of-factly rather than hyperbolically).

Second, Trump’s remark was made in response to questions about whether his buildings had sustained any damage and whether he was taking any precautions to protect them. In the chaos of that day, it wasn’t too much of a stretch to think that Trump was pondering whether the (as yet unknown) terrorists, having destroyed the two tallest buildings in lower Manhattan, might be coming after the next-tallest.

But then again, the office building at 70 Pine Street is listed as being 25 feet taller than 40 Wall Street (although it has four fewer floors), so perhaps Trump could be considered to have been “bragging” for claiming an honor that wasn’t actually his."

Only a sick, narcissistic mind would even think about whether their building was tallest after 9/11 and actually lying about it. "Did your buildings sustain damage?" "No, they didn't." See how easy that is to answer?

No one in their right minds thinks he was "pondering" whether his building would be next to be destroyed. He is CONSTANTLY talking about being the best, the richest, the smartest, whatever superlative that makes up for whatever deficiencies he fears he has. It's HIS OWN HISTORY of bragging that everything associated with him is the absolute best that makes us know this. It's absolutely a reasonable assumption to make given his inclinations.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The cavalier attitude with which she views the events of 9-11 are deeply offensive to those of us who lost loved one in the attack and to any American who remembers the unprovoked attack by the terrorists.

Do you feel the same way about Donald Trump and his cavalier attitude in the immediate aftermath of the attacks, when his most pressing concern was to gloat that his building was the tallest in downtown Manhattan?

He actually didn’t do that. Only the most partisan idiots would think that. Read up:
https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/trump-bragged-tallest-building/

If Omar's critics have demonstrated anything in this thread, it is that they don't care about context. You are quite willing to completely ignore what she was actually saying and misrepresent her entire point. So, why do you expect different treatment for Trump? If you want to condemn Omar for a few words taken out of context, then it is hypocritical to expect Trump's words not to be handled likewise.

Exactly. Funny how context matters now.

Until someone gives context that changes the perception, I’m going to think that you don’t know what “context” means. What you seem to be saying is that we need to listen to her speech, understand her message and ignore the offensive words because they don’t matter. That is not the same thing as taking her words out of context. In that case, one could say concede that if people were insulted, perhaps she could have been more careful with her words, yet urge people to hear her message. It’s not clear why some will not make that concession.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The cavalier attitude with which she views the events of 9-11 are deeply offensive to those of us who lost loved one in the attack and to any American who remembers the unprovoked attack by the terrorists.

+1 I have a friend whose son innocently went to work that day and wound up as a cloud of dust. She's very offended by Omar's words and feels strongly that what occurred was far more than "some people doing something."

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The cavalier attitude with which she views the events of 9-11 are deeply offensive to those of us who lost loved one in the attack and to any American who remembers the unprovoked attack by the terrorists.

Do you feel the same way about Donald Trump and his cavalier attitude in the immediate aftermath of the attacks, when his most pressing concern was to gloat that his building was the tallest in downtown Manhattan?

He actually didn’t do that. Only the most partisan idiots would think that. Read up:
https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/trump-bragged-tallest-building/

If Omar's critics have demonstrated anything in this thread, it is that they don't care about context. You are quite willing to completely ignore what she was actually saying and misrepresent her entire point. So, why do you expect different treatment for Trump? If you want to condemn Omar for a few words taken out of context, then it is hypocritical to expect Trump's words not to be handled likewise.

Last week, Omar reintroduced the flawed idea that Trump called all immigrants animals, when the larger context showed that he was talking about MS—13.

What is the context which would change how people perceive her words? Where they would say, had I heard that part, I would be comfortable with her word choice.

Here is the full context of Trump's remarks. Party because Trump is a nearly incoherent speaker, his words can be interpreted exactly as Omar and many others have said:

SHERIFF MIMS: Thank you. There could be an MS-13 member I know about — if they don’t reach a certain threshold, I cannot tell ICE about it.

THE PRESIDENT: We have people coming into the country, or trying to come in — and we’re stopping a lot of them — but we’re taking people out of the country. You wouldn’t believe how bad these people are. These aren’t people. These are animals. And we’re taking them out of the country at a level and at a rate that’s never happened before. And because of the weak laws, they come in fast, we get them, we release them, we get them again, we bring them out. It’s crazy.

It is actually difficult to interpret Trump's remarks as referring to MS-13 because large number of MS-13 members are not coming into the country and being stopped and taken out. It makes much more sense that Trump is referring to immigrants in general. You may be correct in your interpretation, but it is clearly debatable.

As for Omar, her remarks were not aimed at describing 9/11, but rather the impact of the rise of Islamophobia after 9/11. Another way of expressing what she said would have been, "A small group of people committed a terrible act and all Muslims were blamed". When she said, "Some people did something", it was not to diminish what they did, but to emphasize that the act was committed by that group, not all Muslims. Yet, all Muslims suffered the consequences (and even some non-Muslims who were mistaken for Muslims).

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:[
Until someone gives context that changes the perception, I’m going to think that you don’t know what “context” means. What you seem to be saying is that we need to listen to her speech, understand her message and ignore the offensive words because they don’t matter. That is not the same thing as taking her words out of context. In that case, one could say concede that if people were insulted, perhaps she could have been more careful with her words, yet urge people to hear her message. It’s not clear why some will not make that concession.

Do you honestly think that if Omar conceded that she could have used better words that it would end the controversy? There are people actually producing videos that Trump is retweeting. Omar's opponents are absolutely gleeful at this opportunity. Do you think that if she conceded that they would say, "thanks for the concession, now let's discuss your point about all Muslims being blamed for the attack"?

But, let me turn this around. Here is Omar's complete sentence:

“CAIR was founded after 9/11, because they recognized that some people did something and that all of us were starting to lose access to our civil liberties.”

How would you rephrase that to not be offensive while still making the point that all Muslims were punished for the actions of a few?

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The cavalier attitude with which she views the events of 9-11 are deeply offensive to those of us who lost loved one in the attack and to any American who remembers the unprovoked attack by the terrorists.

Do you feel the same way about Donald Trump and his cavalier attitude in the immediate aftermath of the attacks, when his most pressing concern was to gloat that his building was the tallest in downtown Manhattan?

He actually didn’t do that. Only the most partisan idiots would think that. Read up:
https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/trump-bragged-tallest-building/

If Omar's critics have demonstrated anything in this thread, it is that they don't care about context. You are quite willing to completely ignore what she was actually saying and misrepresent her entire point. So, why do you expect different treatment for Trump? If you want to condemn Omar for a few words taken out of context, then it is hypocritical to expect Trump's words not to be handled likewise.

Last week, Omar reintroduced the flawed idea that Trump called all immigrants animals, when the larger context showed that he was talking about MS—13.

What is the context which would change how people perceive her words? Where they would say, had I heard that part, I would be comfortable with her word choice.

Here is the full context of Trump's remarks. Party because Trump is a nearly incoherent speaker, his words can be interpreted exactly as Omar and many others have said:

SHERIFF MIMS: Thank you. There could be an MS-13 member I know about — if they don’t reach a certain threshold, I cannot tell ICE about it.

THE PRESIDENT: We have people coming into the country, or trying to come in — and we’re stopping a lot of them — but we’re taking people out of the country. You wouldn’t believe how bad these people are. These aren’t people. These are animals. And we’re taking them out of the country at a level and at a rate that’s never happened before. And because of the weak laws, they come in fast, we get them, we release them, we get them again, we bring them out. It’s crazy.

It is actually difficult to interpret Trump's remarks as referring to MS-13 because large number of MS-13 members are not coming into the country and being stopped and taken out. It makes much more sense that Trump is referring to immigrants in general. You may be correct in your interpretation, but it is clearly debatable.

As for Omar, her remarks were not aimed at describing 9/11, but rather the impact of the rise of Islamophobia after 9/11. Another way of expressing what she said would have been, "A small group of people committed a terrible act and all Muslims were blamed". When she said, "Some people did something", it was not to diminish what they did, but to emphasize that the act was committed by that group, not all Muslims. Yet, all Muslims suffered the consequences (and even some non-Muslims who were mistaken for Muslims).

https://money.cnn.com/2018/05/17/media/media-trump-animals-immigrants/index.html?utm_source=CNN+Media%3A+Reliable+Sources&utm_campaign=dd34d0ce5f-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2017_06_06&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_e95cdc16a9-dd34d0ce5f-85679693

Media outlets take Trump out of context to suggest he called undocumented immigrants 'animals'. Several news organizations took remarks President Donald Trump made Wednesday out of context to suggest he was referring to undocumented immigrants at large as "animals," when in context it appears the President was likely referring to members of a violent gang.

Re Omar - If you say an offensive line within a speech, but those words weren't the crux of your speech, your words were still offensive. That does not mean your words were taken out of context, so people need to stop describing it that way. Your suggested words would have been perfect. That is what people expect. It matters not that she didn't mean to diminish what happened. She did. When people said that her words hurt them, if she accepted that, then she should have said so.

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:[
Until someone gives context that changes the perception, I’m going to think that you don’t know what “context” means. What you seem to be saying is that we need to listen to her speech, understand her message and ignore the offensive words because they don’t matter. That is not the same thing as taking her words out of context. In that case, one could say concede that if people were insulted, perhaps she could have been more careful with her words, yet urge people to hear her message. It’s not clear why some will not make that concession.

Do you honestly think that if Omar conceded that she could have used better words that it would end the controversy? There are people actually producing videos that Trump is retweeting. Omar's opponents are absolutely gleeful at this opportunity. Do you think that if she conceded that they would say, "thanks for the concession, now let's discuss your point about all Muslims being blamed for the attack"?

But, let me turn this around. Here is Omar's complete sentence:

“CAIR was founded after 9/11, because they recognized that some people did something and that all of us were starting to lose access to our civil liberties.”

How would you rephrase that to not be offensive while still making the point that all Muslims were punished for the actions of a few?

The way you did in your previous post.

[Anonymous]

I just reported this harassment on Twitter.
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1116817144006750209

Hope this douchebag is kicked off Twitter for pushing this hate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I just reported this harassment on Twitter.
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1116817144006750209

Hope this douchebag is kicked off Twitter for pushing this hate.

LOL! You call THAT harassment?

Showing clips of the horror that this nation faced on 9-11 with Omar's words, "Some people did something." That is what you see here. And, you think this is harassment? How?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I just reported this harassment on Twitter.
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1116817144006750209

Hope this douchebag is kicked off Twitter for pushing this hate.

I think Twitter already saw that tweet.

[Anonymous]

Latest tweet from Rashida Tlaib:

They put us in photos when they want to show our party is diverse. However, when we ask to be at the table, or speak up about issues that impact who we are, what we fight for & why we ran in the first place, we are ignored. To truly honor our diversity is to never silence us.

Democratic Party coming apart at the seams.

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:[
Until someone gives context that changes the perception, I’m going to think that you don’t know what “context” means. What you seem to be saying is that we need to listen to her speech, understand her message and ignore the offensive words because they don’t matter. That is not the same thing as taking her words out of context. In that case, one could say concede that if people were insulted, perhaps she could have been more careful with her words, yet urge people to hear her message. It’s not clear why some will not make that concession.

Do you honestly think that if Omar conceded that she could have used better words that it would end the controversy? There are people actually producing videos that Trump is retweeting. Omar's opponents are absolutely gleeful at this opportunity. Do you think that if she conceded that they would say, "thanks for the concession, now let's discuss your point about all Muslims being blamed for the attack"?

But, let me turn this around. Here is Omar's complete sentence:

“CAIR was founded after 9/11, because they recognized that some people did something and that all of us were starting to lose access to our civil liberties.”

How would you rephrase that to not be offensive while still making the point that all Muslims were punished for the actions of a few?

‘CAIR was founded after 9/11, because the recognized that radical Muslim terrorists killed civilians in a mass planned and executed a terror attack on US soil, and that all of us were starting to lose access to our civil liberties.”

[Anonymous]

I think it's fair to assume tha she has neither apologized nor clarified the words "some people did something" because she expressed her feelings and doesn't regret them. She can certainly make that choice, but in doing so, she is minimizing the pain and suffering that resulted from that terrible act.