Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

So in your mind it’s a minor spat and Palestinians aren’t second class citizens of nowhere right?

It is a major conflict that has great cost to both sides, and the failure to resolve it is due to actions by people on both sides.

But we are not going to solve it hear, and we should not have to solve in order to condemn a US congress member saying (yes, sorry, I do not agree with Jeff's interpretation) hateful things about US citizens.

Jeff this is precisely what my friends tell me happens in the UK - people say over the top hateful things (worse than what Omar said, BTW) and when a Jew complains, the subject is changed to Israel (and often as here, a shallow, one sided approach)

I have news for you. The harassment of Jews in Europe has only accelerated the movement of Jews to Israel. If its not already happening in the UK, it is likely soon. And believe me, the people chased out of Europe are not inclined to sympathy for the left when they arrive in Israel.

You know that this is not why Jews are leaving Europe, particularly London. The growing populations of Muslims bothers them.

Uhhhhh, I'm pretty neutral on Israel, but it is not accurate to say that the growing pop of Muslims bothers them. The ones I know who have left don't feel safe/comfortable as a Jew In the UK right now. Fwiw, a couple acquaintances (friends of friends) who are Jewish and moved to Israel are involved in pretty intensive peace work with Palestinians in Israel.

Fun Fact: The same type of comment by Chuck Schumer today about Omar was chastised when 45 said in about Charlottesville.

jsteele wrote:Bernie Sanders and Kamala Harris have both just issued statements supporting Ilhan Omar. Both are images in my Twitter feed so a bit hard for me to quote, but check their Twitters feeds if you are interested.

bernie's statement is a lot better.

KH statement reads like someone who really doesn't want to support Omar.

one good thing in my time living in asia is politics isn't consumed by israel like it is in the US and Europe.

People in asia don't care and is really a non-entity for the most part. It's pretty refreshing to be honest.

Criticizing the Saudi Arabian government isn’t Islamophobic. Criticizing the Israeli government isn’t anti-Semitic.

jsteele wrote:Bernie Sanders and Kamala Harris have both just issued statements supporting Ilhan Omar. Both are images in my Twitter feed so a bit hard for me to quote, but check their Twitters feeds if you are interested.

Harris' statement, in part, reads, "But like some of my colleagues in the Congressional Black Caucus, I am concerned that the spotlight being put on Congresswoman Omar may put her at risk."

So, in other words, calling out anti-Semitism (or bigotry, or racist) is putting the anti-Semite (or bigot or racist) at risk.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am sick of hearing every criticism of Israel or those who demand unconditional support for Israel recast as an anti-Semitic “trope.” It is largely simply an effort to silence criticism or debate. Omar has the same right to speak out as every other member of Congress, including older Jewish members in their 60s and 70s.

Your first sentence is simply not true. It is certainly the case that not every criticism of Israel is equivalent to anti-semitism. But some criticism of Israel is in fact grounded in anti-semitism.

Just like those that state that every person who criticizes Israel is anti-semitic, are dead wrong, so too are those who say that to be anti-Israel (or anti-zionist) never has anything to do with anti-semitism. We don't live in a world of absolutes.

You just rephrased what the PP said, after saying it's simply not true.

Uh, not quite. PP literally said "I am sick of hearing every criticism of Israel... recast as an anti-Semitic trope." That's an absolute statement that is not true. Not every criticism is recast as anti-semitic.

“I am sick of hearing so many of the criticisms...”

With that edit to scrub the statement of hyperbole, I think it’s very true.

Bernie Sanders and Kamala Harris have both just issued statements supporting Ilhan Omar. Both are images in my Twitter feed so a bit hard for me to quote, but check their Twitters feeds if you are interested.

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In America, is there space to be anti-Israel and not be anti-semetic? From the controversy surrounding Rep. Omar's comments, it appears to me that the only choice for Americans is to be pro-Israel, or be labeled anti-semetic. Lastly, not all jewish people are semetic. Judaism is a religion, not an ethnicity. Just because Ivanka is jewish, dioesn't mean she's semetic.

Right. Sort of like, I’m opposed to gay marriage but I don’t think that makes me homophobic or “hateful.”

The reality is that all the people who care enough to be anti-Israel, to even bother being concerned about issues pertaining to Israel, are motivated by anti-Semitism.

There really isn't anyone who just decides they have some animus towards Israel, but isn't anti-Semitic.

That comes from both the Left and the Right.

Omar and her ilk want to wipe Israel off the face of the map. That means killing lots and lots of Jews. That's the official position of all entities which represent the so called Palestinian people--Hezbollah, Fatah, Hamas, you name it.

So yes--anti-Israel = anti-Semitic.

There are no exceptions.

This is completely wrong and does long term damage to Israeli and Jewish interests. Whether you choose to acknowledge it or not, 2.5 million Palestinians live under Israeli control in the West Bank and another 1.7 million in Gaza with Israel's boot on their necks. Support of their rights does not make one anti-Semitic. Omar has never suggested that Israel should be wiped from the map. That is not the official position of Fatah or the PLO. You are spreading misinformation and lies.

+1
What is scary is how no one is allowed to speak out and our own government is trying to suppress free speech in this country. We are supposed to be a democracy in the hopes of bringing all people together and being a country that promotes world peace.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

So in your mind it’s a minor spat and Palestinians aren’t second class citizens of nowhere right?

It is a major conflict that has great cost to both sides, and the failure to resolve it is due to actions by people on both sides.

But we are not going to solve it hear, and we should not have to solve in order to condemn a US congress member saying (yes, sorry, I do not agree with Jeff's interpretation) hateful things about US citizens.

Jeff this is precisely what my friends tell me happens in the UK - people say over the top hateful things (worse than what Omar said, BTW) and when a Jew complains, the subject is changed to Israel (and often as here, a shallow, one sided approach)

I have news for you. The harassment of Jews in Europe has only accelerated the movement of Jews to Israel. If its not already happening in the UK, it is likely soon. And believe me, the people chased out of Europe are not inclined to sympathy for the left when they arrive in Israel.

You know that this is not why Jews are leaving Europe, particularly London. The growing populations of Muslims bothers them.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In America, is there space to be anti-Israel and not be anti-semetic? From the controversy surrounding Rep. Omar's comments, it appears to me that the only choice for Americans is to be pro-Israel, or be labeled anti-semetic. Lastly, not all jewish people are semetic. Judaism is a religion, not an ethnicity. Just because Ivanka is jewish, dioesn't mean she's semetic.

Judaism, according to some, is an ethnic religion.

It is a religion based on the relationship of a people to G-d. A concept alien to Christianity, and handled somewhat differently in Islam.

That gentiles are debating what Judaism is should I hope make people uncomfortable. Peace means Jews stop questioning Palestinian identity, and Palestinians and their supporters stop questioning Jewish identity.

Isn’t peace that Israelis stop taking Palestinian land and allow Palestinians to work as Israelis do?

There is still some minor land confiscation on the West Bank, tied to some disputes over state and private land ownership. There is also the construction of settlements on state land (under Turkish law, most vacant non farmed land was state owned, and the Occupation Authority controls that land, and sometimes leases it to settlers) I expect that a govt under Benny Gantz (the centrist challenging BiBi) would stop that, though he will disappoint American lefties in most ways).

Not sure what you mean work as Israelis do. Israeli arabs have the same legal right to work as Israeli Jews. There are naturally limits on work permits for people from the territories. Passage from the territories to Israel by people who are not Israeli citizens is naturally impact by day to day security issues.

But I was not speaking to what we as participants in the discourse must do. I will admit to having said "Palestinians are really just Arabs, its a made up identity for political purposes" I have become convinced that trying to define the other is not helpful, and have stopped doing that. I think that gentiles trying to decide, based on limited familiarity with the history and culture, whether Jews are a nation or religion or what, and then decide their political rights based on that, are engaging in the same mistake I used to make wrt Palestinians.

How disingenuous! How obtuse! How ignorant!

Anonymous wrote:But we are not going to solve it hear, and we should not have to solve in order to condemn a US congress member saying (yes, sorry, I do not agree with Jeff's interpretation) hateful things about US citizens.

Could you please quote the her "hateful" sentence?

Anonymous wrote:

So in your mind it’s a minor spat and Palestinians aren’t second class citizens of nowhere right?

It is a major conflict that has great cost to both sides, and the failure to resolve it is due to actions by people on both sides.

But we are not going to solve it hear, and we should not have to solve in order to condemn a US congress member saying (yes, sorry, I do not agree with Jeff's interpretation) hateful things about US citizens.

Jeff this is precisely what my friends tell me happens in the UK - people say over the top hateful things (worse than what Omar said, BTW) and when a Jew complains, the subject is changed to Israel (and often as here, a shallow, one sided approach)

I have news for you. The harassment of Jews in Europe has only accelerated the movement of Jews to Israel. If its not already happening in the UK, it is likely soon. And believe me, the people chased out of Europe are not inclined to sympathy for the left when they arrive in Israel.

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't always agree with Tom Friedman, but this is a very concise summation of where he thinks Omar is on the issue. It's worth the two minute read.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/06/opinion/israel-ilhan-omar.html?action=click&module=Opinion&pgtype=Homepage

His main issue seems to be that she supports BDS, while also having criticisms of it. But, he like her, doesn't believe in passing laws against it. But, in this part he is completely wrong:

"And one issue she seems to have seized on is the alleged dual loyalty of Jews to America and Israel."

As I have said repeatedly, this is a mischaracterization of what she said at Busboys and Poets. She didn't question or suggest dual loyalty among Jews. To the contrary, she said she understood their support for the country and compared it to her children's support for Somalia. What she questioned was political pressure to support another country, the example being the anti-BDS law which enables punishing US citizens for exercising their 1st Amendment rights in order to protect the interests of Israel.

And one more time, the FEDERAL law does not punish anyone. The anti BDS bills in states vary. Opponents of BDS believe that BDS is not just a threat to Israels interests, but to US interests and to justice. And if her issue was support, she did not need to use the word allegiance. And yes, its fully appropriate for US citizens to pressure their representative to support causes they believe in. As it happens I believe Omar gets support from CAIR, which supports things not everyone agrees with.

Regardless of whether BDS is good, bad, or ugly, it is a non-violent movement that Americans should be able to support, or at a minimum, not be required to oppose. The idea that American school teachers or newspaper publishers should be required to sign a pledge not to exercise their 1st Amendment rights in order to protect Israel's interests is unAmerican. If you believe BDS is bad, use your 1st Amendment rights to oppose it. You can even start a thread on DCUM. Just don't pass laws making me sign pledges to protect Israel. For the record, while I agree with many of BDS's position, I don't boycott Israel myself. One of our advertising partners is an Israeli company. They don't pay much and I could easily give up the revenue. But I like the folks and have found them to be good partners.

Individual states are allowed to put all kinds of criteria into contracting that would not be acceptable as general law for all private citizens. Again its possible some state level anti BDS laws violate the 1st amendment, and very likely that some do not. All would in theory be impact by the Commerce clause and federal preemption. If you believe that an anti BDS law where you live or do business or bid for contracts violates the 1st amendment, you can take the state to court.

You are also free to believe that such laws are in general so bad that you wish to exercise your rights and lobby your congressmen to oppose the deconflicting legislation. But others are free to lobby in support of such deconfliction laws (I personally do not lobby in either direction - while I think BDS is harmful to peace and the two state solution, I think the campaign against it is a waste of energy, relative to more important things I can do for Israel and for peace) And to lobby without being accused of something nefarious, disloyal, or disgusting.

I do think the power of lobbyists should be reduced - not only by changes to campaign finance law, and to the revolving door, but by increases in congressional staff (one of the real sources of lobbyist power is NOT money, but information and time to help draft legislation) This would impact all lobbyists, and not just the favorite targets of the left.

I am not particularly afraid that that will hurt Israel, as I believe support for Israel is based on something much stronger and deeper.

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't always agree with Tom Friedman, but this is a very concise summation of where he thinks Omar is on the issue. It's worth the two minute read.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/06/opinion/israel-ilhan-omar.html?action=click&module=Opinion&pgtype=Homepage

His main issue seems to be that she supports BDS, while also having criticisms of it. But, he like her, doesn't believe in passing laws against it. But, in this part he is completely wrong:

"And one issue she seems to have seized on is the alleged dual loyalty of Jews to America and Israel."

As I have said repeatedly, this is a mischaracterization of what she said at Busboys and Poets. She didn't question or suggest dual loyalty among Jews. To the contrary, she said she understood their support for the country and compared it to her children's support for Somalia. What she questioned was political pressure to support another country, the example being the anti-BDS law which enables punishing US citizens for exercising their 1st Amendment rights in order to protect the interests of Israel.

And one more time, the FEDERAL law does not punish anyone. The anti BDS bills in states vary. Opponents of BDS believe that BDS is not just a threat to Israels interests, but to US interests and to justice. And if her issue was support, she did not need to use the word allegiance. And yes, its fully appropriate for US citizens to pressure their representative to support causes they believe in. As it happens I believe Omar gets support from CAIR, which supports things not everyone agrees with.

Regardless of whether BDS is good, bad, or ugly, it is a non-violent movement that Americans should be able to support, or at a minimum, not be required to oppose. The idea that American school teachers or newspaper publishers should be required to sign a pledge not to exercise their 1st Amendment rights in order to protect Israel's interests is unAmerican. If you believe BDS is bad, use your 1st Amendment rights to oppose it. You can even start a thread on DCUM. Just don't pass laws making me sign pledges to protect Israel. For the record, while I agree with many of BDS's position, I don't boycott Israel myself. One of our advertising partners is an Israeli company. They don't pay much and I could easily give up the revenue. But I like the folks and have found them to be good partners.

BDS is not a violent organization? The people behind it sure are!