anti-Semitic remark by Congresswoman

[The Operator]

10 minutes ago, DrP said:

I used to think the same way - but they can be damaging to the majority of a group that don't fit the stereotype as it they can fuel prejudices.

Not taking appropriate precautions against types of people who tend to exhibit certain types of behaviour can be damaging to you.

Edited February 14, 2019 by The Operator

[DrP]

30 minutes ago, The Operator said:

Not taking appropriate precautions against types of people who tend to exhibit certain types of behaviour can be damaging to you. 

Chris Rock says the same.   He said in a comedy routine once that when he's at the cash point at 2 am he's not looking over his shoulder for black people in suits or middle class white people.... he's looking over his shoulder for *i&&e%s.   It was comedy and it was about how white people still can't use the N word... but I see his point. If there are reports of a gang wearing green denim that are knifing people, you'd go wide on the sidewalk for people wearing green denim.

I will pre-judge a lion to be bitey and try to avoid a confrontation with it. I have over the years though tried to drop any prejudices with regard to skin colour, country of origin, accent of voice or sex... most are unfair and held up with propaganda and ignorance. My past prejudices were taught to me as facts and it takes time for a person to see that what they have been taught as a fact to be propaganda - a lie for political gain/sway.

 

 

 

 

Edited February 14, 2019 by DrP

[The Operator]

5 minutes ago, DrP said:

I have over the years though tried to drop any prejudices with regard to skin colour, country of origin, accent of voice or sex...

Because there's no correlation with behaviours, or because it's socially fashionable?

[swansont]

10 minutes ago, The Operator said:

Because there's no correlation with behaviours, or because it's socially fashionable?

!

Moderator Note

We are not going down this rabbit hole.

The topic is the congresswoman's comments being allegedly anti-Semitic

 

[The Operator]

https://www.wrmea.org/1992-december/january-1993/the-complete-unexpurgated-aipac-tape.html

[Ten oz]

1 hour ago, The Operator said:

https://www.wrmea.org/1992-december/january-1993/the-complete-unexpurgated-aipac-tape.html

AIPAC wasn't mentioned in Omar's tweet or the Tweet by Glenn Greenwald she was responding to. It may have been what was on her mind but she didn't specify it. That is part of what the issue with her tweet was. 

[The Operator]

54 minutes ago, Ten oz said:

AIPAC wasn't mentioned in Omar's tweet or the Tweet by Glenn Greenwald she was responding to. It may have been what was on her mind but she didn't specify it. That is part of what the issue with her tweet was. 

Yes she should have added several pages of supporting evidence in her tweet.

[Ten oz]

1 hour ago, The Operator said:

Yes she should have added several pages of supporting evidence in her tweet.

No, just a several more words. She could have just said something like It's all about the Benjamins for U.S. Politicians who are bought by lobbyist. Instead she left it ambiguous. 

[The Operator]

7 hours ago, Ten oz said:

No, just a several more words. She could have just said something like It's all about the Benjamins for U.S. Politicians who are bought by lobbyist. Instead she left it ambiguous. 

I thought it was clear. Are you sure you're just not just upset when people call out massive selfish Jewish interference with money ("anti-Semitism")?

Accurate criticism isn't "anti".

Edited February 15, 2019 by The Operator

[Ten oz]

3 hours ago, The Operator said:

I thought it was clear. Are you sure you're just not just upset when people call out massive selfish Jewish interference with money ("anti-Semitism")?

Accurate criticism isn't "anti".

You mean AIPAC interference? As a lobbyist organization they do not speak for all Jewish people. It is an important distinction that the criticism is launched at AIPAC and not Jewish people in general. One is a standard Politic opinion and the other is anti-Semitic. Jewish people and Jewish communities everywhere are not all responsible for or associated with AIPAC. 

 

[swansont]

4 hours ago, The Operator said:

I thought it was clear. Are you sure you're just not just upset when people call out massive selfish Jewish interference with money ("anti-Semitism")?

Accurate criticism isn't "anti".

!

Moderator Note

Take your bigotry elsewhere.

 

 

[Ten oz]

House leadership is trying to daft something to condemn anti-Semitism in response to further comments by Rep. Omar.

Quote

 

That moment of frustration reflects widespread anxiety in the caucus over how to handle the latest bout of remarks from Omar — one of the first Muslim women to serve in Congress — after she suggested that pro-Israel advocates had “allegiance” to Israel. The remarks offended multiple top Democrats, who said it alluded to painful, decades-old stereotypes that Jews had “dual loyalties.”

Multiple Jewish lawmakers, including Rep. Ted Deutch (D-Fla.) stood up in the caucus meeting to explain why Omar’s latest remarks were so offensive and potentially dangerous. But other Democrats — including a Jewish lawmaker — stood up to defend Omar and say they didn’t see the remarks as deeply offensive.

House Dems postpone vote rebuking Omar amid pressure from left

Omar did not speak in the meeting, multiple sources said, although she was spotted chatting with some Democrats one-on-one and received hugs from others.

Democratic leaders, including Pelosi, are attempting to soothe relations within the caucus after abruptly halting plans to vote on a measure condemning anti-Semitism, which some lawmakers complained would had gone too far in targeting Omar.

The House Foreign Affairs Committee is now rushing to rewrite that resolution to condemn hate speech more broadly to win over a group of lawmakers — including progressives and lawmakers of color — who have rushed to Omar’s defense. Link

 

 

[MonDie]

Jewish ⊇ Israeli ⊇ Israeli government ⊇ Benjamin Netenyahu, a far-right Israeli politician who bribed news outlets during his presidential campaign.

I think the appearance of this supporting evidence is partly responsible for our congress's change of heart.  https://www.vox.com/2019/2/28/18243493/israeli-prime-minister-benjamin-netanyahu-indictment-bribery-fraud

Israeli police recommended three times last year that Netanyahu be indicted on corruption charges — so Mandelblit’s decision didn’t come as a complete surprise. But it’s still pretty bad timing for the prime minister.

Israeli elections are coming up on April 9, and Netanyahu is running for his fourth consecutive term. The attorney general’s decision could lead to the conservative Likud party losing its grip on power, and also make it difficult for them to form a coalition after elections.

Similar to a certain US president, Netanyahu has accused investigators of leading a “witch hunt” against him and decried the “liberal” media for conspiring to undermine him.

In a speech on Thursday after the attorney general’s announcement, Netanyahu doubled down on these claims, calling himself “the most vilified person in the history of Israeli media,” according to the Jerusalem Post. He also vowed to continue serving as prime minister for years to come.

[Ten oz]

Politicians taking bribes or otherwise being unduly influenced by money is a real problem. Antisemitism is a real problem as well. It seems to me Omar's comments are accurate to a degree regarding lobbyist while also skirting the line on antisemitism. 

Making accurate statements about topic A) does mean one can't also be making inappropriate comments about topic B). We see it used in politics all the time.For example politicians will often accurately cite crime statistics in Chicago when discussing crime in the U.S. to inappropriately characterize specific groups of people or exaggerate dangers the country faces. There are numerous discussions that need to be had about foreign influence in elections, campaign finance, and lobbyist access to politicians. However Omar appear to be uniquely concerned with Jewish money. Omar makes ambiguous comments about and then when pressed for clarification cites Israeli lobbyists. Of course not all Jewish communities are in Israel nor do all Jewish people support the current Israeli govt. So the storm surrounding Omar's comments is messy. I think she needs to start doing a better job speaking in more concise terms and offering solutions which would universally address the influence of money in politics.  

[iNow]

2 hours ago, Ten oz said:

Politicians taking bribes or otherwise being unduly influenced by money is a real problem. Antisemitism is a real problem as well. It seems to me Omar's comments are accurate to a degree regarding lobbyist while also skirting the line on antisemitism. 

Good post. Good points. Would only add one thing: Many republicans on the right are clearly not acting in good faith. The concepts of audacity and hypocrisy spring to mind with how ferociously they’ve gone after Omar while in parallel being silent and not a peep about Trump, Steve King, and all the related others who have a history of extremist comments that are far less ambiguous.

[MonDie]

On 3/8/2019 at 3:00 PM, MonDie said:

Jewish ⊇ Israeli ⊇ Israeli government ⊇ Benjamin Netenyahu, a far-right Israeli politician who bribed news outlets during his presidential campaign.

Corrected error regarding Donamin Trumpyahu.

[MigL]

If it was that simple, MonDie, that you could judge all people of a nation based on the actions of their Prime Minister, or President, I would have to call all my American friends on this forum, 'lying, corrupt, ignorant, orange-haired buffoons'.

But I know D Trump is not representative of all Americans.
Not even most Republicans.

[iNow]

21 minutes ago, MigL said:

But I know D Trump is not representative of all Americans.
Not even most Republicans.

Representative of most? No. 

Supported by most? Oh, hell yes. 

 

 

Edited March 10, 2019 by iNow

[MonDie]

15 hours ago, Ten oz said:

[...] There are numerous discussions that need to be had about foreign influence in elections, campaign finance, and lobbyist access to politicians. However Omar appear to be uniquely concerned with Jewish money. Omar makes ambiguous comments about and then when pressed for clarification cites Israeli lobbyists. Of course not all Jewish communities are in Israel nor do all Jewish people support the current Israeli govt. [...]

Perhaps groups like Al Qaeda are disproportionately concerned about Israeli-occupied Palestine, but the oppression of muslims is apparent in Israel and beyond.

Watching Al Jazeera, I noticed the bias in the word "terrorist."  Although not "terrorism", muslims were targeted in various "genocides": the Boznian genocide (serbs mainly, muslims incidentally); the Gujarat riots (muslims mainly, Narendra Modi still got promoted); and the recent Burmese genocide.  AFAIK, the last muslim-perpetrated "genocide" was the Armenian genocide in 1910.  In this case Turkey, the former Ottoman empire, does not callously boast about it, but callously denies it.  Concerns about the oppression of muslims are real, although the Israeli-Palestinian conflict might involve an unusual mixture of religious fundamentalism and humanitarian concern.  Al Qaeda did reference the conflict in relation to an attack in Mali—and I did hear it on France 24 rather than Al Jazeera.  

Addendum: Maybe Al Qaeda's news source is as euro-centric as yours! 

Sorry Botswana.

Correction:  Boznians killed in Boznian genocide.  Rohingyan genocide perpetrated by Burmese military.

[MonDie]

Correction:  West Bank =/= Palestine

This is not a trolling! 

Obviously I rely on stimulus generalization to recognize related concepts, but the mechanisms of stimulus discrimination are failing me.  Hmm.  Could the people judging this matter have extra leeway in being more generalistic or more discriminative?

1 hour ago, MigL said:

If it was that simple, MonDie, that you could judge all people of a nation based on the actions of their Prime Minister, or President, I would have to call all my American friends on this forum, 'lying, corrupt, ignorant, orange-haired buffoons'.

But I know D Trump is not representative of all Americans.
Not even most Republicans.

We are a very, very big country united only by the national celebrity of the presidency.

[Ten oz]

13 hours ago, MonDie said:

Perhaps groups like Al Qaeda are disproportionately concerned about Israeli-occupied Palestine, but the oppression of muslims is apparent in Israel and beyond.

Watching Al Jazeera, I noticed the bias in the word "terrorist."  Although not "terrorism", muslims were targeted in various "genocides": the Boznian genocide (serbs mainly, muslims incidentally); the Gujarat riots (muslims mainly, Narendra Modi still got promoted); and the recent Burmese genocide.  AFAIK, the last muslim-perpetrated "genocide" was the Armenian genocide in 1910.  In this case Turkey, the former Ottoman empire, does not callously boast about it, but callously denies it.  Concerns about the oppression of muslims are real, although the Israeli-Palestinian conflict might involve an unusual mixture of religious fundamentalism and humanitarian concern.  Al Qaeda did reference the conflict in relation to an attack in Mali—and I did hear it on France 24 rather than Al Jazeera.  

Addendum: Maybe Al Qaeda's news source is as euro-centric as yours! 

Sorry Botswana.

Correction:  Boznians killed in Boznian genocide.  Rohingyan genocide perpetrated by Burmese military.

What does this have to do with a U.S. Congress Representative loosely implying Jewish associated lobbyist are greedy? 

Rep. Omar can address any issue she feels is important. I just wish she were more concise. 

[iNow]

7 minutes ago, Ten oz said:

Rep. Omar can address any issue she feels is important. I just wish she were more concise.

She used Twitter when this storm began, one tweet being a single word, the other about five. While she’s also spoken verbally with higher word count, I’d argue she needs instead to be more erudite than forthrite with thoughts unripe. 

Said another way, I wish she’d be more PREcise than CONcise.

[J.C.MacSwell]

14 hours ago, iNow said:

Representative of most? No. 

Supported by most? Oh, hell yes. 

 

 

What exactly is approval in this context?

[MigL]

She seems to be the Congressional equivalent of Dimreepr.
Certainly not in her views, but in the brevity and lack of context.
I don't think that makes either a racist.

[MonDie]

4 minutes ago, MigL said:

She seems to be the Congressional equivalent of Dimreepr.
Certainly not in her views, but in the brevity and lack of context.
I don't think that makes either a racist.

Yes, context.

1 hour ago, iNow said:

Said another way, I wish she’d be more PREcise than CONcise.

First tweet: Israeli lobbyists in the US.

Second tweet: Israel's anti-muslim prime minister.

No tweet: Nazi Germany, although the death toll really is unfathomable.

Speech is a two-way phenomenon.  It influences the listener's thoughts, and it's a window into the speaker's thoughts.  Generally, the speaker desires the former and the lsitener is more interested in the latter.

Edited March 10, 2019 by MonDie