• Introducing Image Options for ResetEra 2.0! Check the left side navigation bar to show or hide images, avatars, covers, and embedded media. More details at the link.
  • Community Spotlight sign-ups are open once again for both Gaming and EtcetEra Hangout threads! If you want to shine a spotlight on your community, please register now.

Congresswoman Omar ignites new anti-Semitism controversy with comments on AIPAC

Status
Not open for further replies.
Dec 3, 2018
1,835
The difference isn't nearly big enough to justify the blinders you're putting on in order to convince yourself that substituting "Jewish" with "Israel" barricades your rhetoric from evoking anti-Semitic tropes.

I've actually specifically tailored my wording to avoid calling you anti-Semitic, by the way. As someone who has criticized AIPAC in this very thread, my problem isn't with the act of criticism. My problem is that you seem to believe "guys, you can't be anti-Semitic toward AIPAC because it's an Israel lobbying firm, so let's speak in ways that would be pretty problematic were it a Jewish lobbying firm to make a point" is somehow a constructive approach.
Rep. Omar was not talking about Jewish people. She was talking about a right wing lobbying group and the government policies
 
Oct 25, 2017
5,079
Because it's only a "gaffe" if you attribute the worst possible interpretation to her motives, rather than her accurately addressing the situation.

As I pointed out before, the fact that Thomas Friedman can say it without registering a blip but Omar gets vilified for saying the *exact same thing* has less to do with what she's saying, and more to do with who she is while she says it.

AIPAC has the same language on their own website. Haim Saban, one of the largest donors to Democrats, famously says "I'm a one-issue guy, and my issue is Israel." Sheldon Adelson has openly donated hundreds of millions of dollars to pro-Israel causes. Are we not able to point out that Trump gave the Medal of Freedom to Miriam Adelson, whose husband happens to be his biggest donor, because it would be anti-Semitic to point out that his donations secured him undue influence with the President?

Just as much as we have to avoid using anti-Semitic canards in discussing these subjects, we equally have to come to the defense of those who are being attacked in bad faith. Ilhan Omar, the first black Muslim-American woman in Congress, is being attacked for speaking about what is an open fact. We should be defending her from the bad faith attacks, not enabling the language policing that has been used to silence pro-Palestinian advocates for decades.
Well said. The left is ready to burn her over this because they are as much supporters of Israel's monstrous policies as the Right.

How convenient that you cant call out a lobbyist group for having monetary influence (literally what they do in order to get votes) just because this one so happens to be Israeli

Twats have done a great job of diverting public opinion into thinking critique towards them is antisemitism.
 
Oct 25, 2017
3,475
These are the words I think evoke anti-Semitic tropes:



What am I twisting?
How do they evoke anti-Semitic tropes? see this is were. The conflation comes in, even though you know exactly. What is being said and yet you want to make it seem like, posters are evoking something against Jewish folk. When it's about AIPAC, which is a Israeli government lobby that endorses Bibi right wing politics. Which has made an effort to stop criticism against and even out right ban criticism against that type of politics and actions that promote those actions.
 
Oct 27, 2017
4,399
Waiting for the bipartisan outcry on this:

Upstate New York Yeshiva Set on Fire and Painted With Swastikas

https://www.haaretz.com/us-news/ups...-on-fire-and-painted-with-swastikas-1.6919613


FILE PHOTO: Neo-Nazis give Nazi salutes while taking part in a swastika burning in Georgia, U.S. on April 21, 2018.GO NAKAMURA/ REUTERS
and the first recommended article below your article is about the tweet. :/

Also that image is so disorienting since it’s from an entirely separate event. Both horrific obviously, just confusing.
 
Oct 25, 2017
1,455
Rep. Omar was not talking about Jewish people. She was talking about a right wing lobbying group and the government policies
I don't take much issue with Rep. Omar. I think she made an innocent mistake.

Or as I wrote earlier in this thread:

Everyone should be siding with Omar. It's pretty obvious she didn't intentionally lean into anti-Semitic tropes, that she wasn't driven by anti-Semitism, and that she's generally on the right side of history when she calls out the popular consensus on Capital Hill regarding Israel and Palestine.

But while you call out the people smearing her in bad faith, the people unfairly demonizing a black Muslim woman while pretending to care about bigotry, and the people who always seem ridiculously allergic to any criticism of Israel, you can also gently point out Omar could have easily been more careful in her commentary.

And it's not about tone policing. I don't know where this "smh, tone policing while innocents are being killed" narrative came from. As far as I can tell, no one is saying Omar was too uncivil, too aggressive in her language, or whatever else. People in this thread are using the term tone policing in the same way certain other folks use the term political correctness. The issue here is that Omar invoked money in a way that was reductionist, that reductionism centered support for Israel around a single factor in a way that erased all the complexity that actually exists, and all of this so happens to intersect with harmful stereotypes that should actively be avoided.

I don't even know why this has to be explained, and it's a shame that it does because it means people like me end up spending more time discussing Omar's totally understandable mistake and less time telling Republicans and certain Democrats to fuck off.

Again: AIPAC fucking sucks, the Israeli government fucking sucks, and Omar's heart is in the right place. I think "avoid reflexively reducing support for Israel to the idea that people are bought" and no one reasonable can have a problem.
 
The difference isn't nearly big enough to justify the blinders you're putting on in order to convince yourself that substituting "Jewish" with "Israel" barricades your rhetoric from evoking anti-Semitic tropes. .
I've done nothing in this thread other that acknowledging and recognizing that AIPAC's influence is a massive part of why unconditional support towards Israel is so pervasive among the people of power in the US government (I just find it strange how it seems like you're trying to undersell AIPAC's influence like it's not such a big deal, to be honest)

If you find that by stating such a thing means that I am evoking anti-Semitic tropes, then well, c'est la vie, that's on you. If you truly feel that I am anti-semitic in my rhetoric, feel free to report me to the moderation team. If they agree with you, then there's nothing I can do about it.

And yes, the difference is actually big enough, enough that we even have examples of people from Jewish community in this very thread stating that such a distinction is very important to be made, lest the tiresome rhetoric of 'criticizing Israel = anti-semites' rears its ugly head all over the place again and again.
 
Oct 26, 2017
2,615
It's more complicated than that because of the regional politics- Bernie and I actually are on the same "Sanctions a la South Africa are good, but need to be done independently of the BDS framework" page here. When Israel was originally attempting to form, the Arab League put in place a boycott aimed at preventing that from happening. (It obviously didn't succeed.) The BDS movement involves many of those same countries that originally participated in the original Arab League boycotts. And so some view the current BDS stuff as an spiritual successor of those original anti-Israel-existing boycotts, which is why some who would support action don't support those specific ones, because they don't want to give that impression to people inadvertently.
BDS is not ran by countries, it has some support in Muslim countries, but I'm really not sure I understand why that should be disqualifying.
Also, this is not the first time I see people saying the BDS is continuation of the Arab League boycott, but I never seen any compelling evidence for that. I mean, the Arab Boycott was a collection of Arab League council decisions and government actions,
BDS started mostly in the US and Europe by Palestinians.

But like, why would that matter?
Like, let's say that BDS is indeed a secret astroturf operation that is started by..... who? Syria? Iraq? KSA? maaaan, there aren't really good candidates for that in the Arab League. But whatever, let's say that they did and they covered their way so good that there isn't definitive evidence for that, how would you imagine things play out?
Like, BDS will achieve its fake stated goals and the Palestinians gets equal rights, and then they say "hahahaha, tricked you liberals, we really want to kill all the jews, and you must continue to boycott Israel now because you promised!"
I mean, how would that work?
What the actual fear here?

p.s.
I always hear people "I'm for totally for sanctions against Israel, just not with BDS", but I never hear which other boycott campaign they will participate.
So come on, pick one, it's not hard, I mean, it's just a fucking list of products made in Israel, you can google it yourself and start right now boycott movement, one that is 100% clear of the influence of the Arab league.
 
Oct 26, 2017
6,690
and the first recommended article below your article is about the tweet. :/

Also that image is so disorienting since it’s from an entirely separate event. Both horrific obviously, just confusing.
Yeah it is a bit confusing so I included the image source.

That made it more confusing in retrospect.
 
Oct 25, 2017
4,150
Pelosis comments were a fucking embarrassment. Fuck the democrats for alienating Ilhan like that.

Only saving grace is that liberals are becoming more and more critical of the Israeli lobby as time goes on. Out with democratic establishment.
 

nomis

Banned
Member
Oct 27, 2017
989
AIPAC has the same language on their own website. Haim Saban, one of the largest donors to Democrats, famously says "I'm a one-issue guy, and my issue is Israel." Sheldon Adelson has openly donated hundreds of millions of dollars to pro-Israel causes. Are we not able to point out that Trump gave the Medal of Freedom to Miriam Adelson, whose husband happens to be his biggest donor, because it would be anti-Semitic to point out that his donations secured him undue influence with the President?
Schrödinger's Donors, because they’re Israeli Jews
 
Oct 25, 2017
1,455
How do they evoke anti-Semitic tropes? see this is were. The conflation comes in, even though you know exactly. What is being said and yet you want to make it seem like, posters are evoking something against Jewish folk. When it's about AIPAC, which is a Israeli government lobby that endorses Bibi right wing politics. Which has made an effort to stop criticism against and even out right ban criticism against that type of politics and actions that promote those actions.
Jewishness is not incidental to Israel. Jewishness is not incidental to AIPAC. The fact that American Jews make up the core of AIPAC's leadership and membership is not at all incidental.

When you simplify where support for Israel comes from to a nonsensical degree, and attribute it to the singularly powerful puppet master that is AIPAC, you're evoking an anti-Semitic trope. Period.

And I'm not making an effort to stop criticism, so please don't engage in unnecessary conflation.

I've done nothing in this thread other that acknowledging and recognizing that AIPAC's influence is a massive part of why unconditional support towards Israel is so pervasive among the people of power in the US government.

If you find that by stating such a thing means that I am evoking anti-Semitic tropes, then well, c'est la vie, that's on you. If you truly feel that I am anti-semitic in my rhetoric, feel free to report me to the moderation team. If they agree with you, then there's nothing I can do about it.

And yes, the difference is actually big enough, enough that we even have examples of people from Jewish community in this very thread stating that such a distinction is very important to be made, lest the tiresome rhetoric of 'criticizing Israel = anti-semites' rears its ugly head all over the place again and again.
I'm not going to report you.

My inability to get through to you on this point just frustrates me.
 
I'm not going to report you.

My inability to get through to you on this point just frustrates me.
The sentiment is mutual--although perhaps I should specify that it's not so much of a frustration but rather than acknowledgment that continuing to engage with you is a fruitless endeavor, so perhaps it would be better if we're just disengage from one another going forward in this particular topic.
 
Oct 27, 2017
728
I was watching majority report and a listener brought up that those who would opt for racially tinged for other statements were quick to call her statements unequivocally anti semitic.
 
Oct 25, 2017
4,192
Jewishness is not incidental to Israel. Jewishness is not incidental to AIPAC. The fact that American Jews make up the core of AIPAC's leadership and membership is not at all incidental.

When you simplify where support for Israel comes from to a nonsensical degree, and attribute it to the singularly powerful puppet master that is AIPAC, you're evoking an anti-Semitic trope. Period.

And I'm not making an effort to stop criticism, so please don't engage in unnecessary conflation.



I'm not going to report you.

My inability to get through to you on this point just frustrates me.
I've read your arguments with Laughing Banana

Probably one of the reasons why I'm very frustrated with this argument about Omar. There seems to be more concern on the language people use than the topic itself. His post touched on an antisemitic trope, but we know that it was unintended.
 
Oct 27, 2017
829
It fucking stuns me to see basically all of Congress fail to stand behind Ilhan. We are likely to never see any significant criticism of Israel within our government for many decades to come. More war crimes to completely ignore.
 

Stinkles

343 Industries
Verified
Oct 25, 2017
11,644
If she legitimately didn't realize the "Benjamin" pun then she just unintentionally hamstrung any attempt to criticize aipac for a decade.
 
Nov 14, 2017
1,456
I don't understand how criticizing any other government or country is exactly that while criticizing anything Israel is anti-Semitic. Dem leaders, republicans, and MSM are trash with this news.
 
Oct 26, 2017
2,615
If she legitimately didn't realize the "Benjamin" pun then she just unintentionally hamstrung any attempt to criticize aipac for a decade.
Only if people on the left fall for this shit.
No one on the right would have treated a black Muslim woman as a legitimate critic of Israel anyway.

Like, who fucking care, you don't honestly think that she's secretly an antisemite, right?
 

Stinkles

343 Industries
Verified
Oct 25, 2017
11,644
Only if people on the left fall for this shit.
No one on the right would have treated a black Muslim woman as a legitimate critic of Israel anyway.

Like, who fucking care, you don't honestly think that she's secretly an antisemite, right?
No I'm literally describing the behavior of Congress. Personally I would retweet that tomorrow but without the name pun? AIPAC deserves huge scrutiny as does its spending and power over both parties and houses.

They are using her pun to avoid answering her question and if it had been a Mohammad or Arab name pun about Saudi Arabia it would have created a similar scale of stir.

I believe that our officials are grabbing that as a straw to shunt their responsibility to the side in favor of outrage. I have no idea if that was her intention. It's only obvious in retrospect with the reactions. First time I saw the headline it didn't twig. Five craven congressmen ignoring the underlying issue later and here we are.
 
Oct 27, 2017
9,213
If she legitimately didn't realize the "Benjamin" pun then she just unintentionally hamstrung any attempt to criticize aipac for a decade.
I don't understand what this post means. Am I an antisemite?

Wait, like Benjamin Netanyahu?

I guess I still don't understand this post. Tweet still reads to me as criticizing the Israeli lobby, and I'm not really sure how you do that without talking about money. If you can't talk about isreal and money in the same sentence without being called an antisemite, well, that seems a bit much. And how does that tweet hamstring anything for a decade?
 
Last edited:
If she legitimately didn't realize the "Benjamin" pun then she just unintentionally hamstrung any attempt to criticize aipac for a decade.
That doesn't make any sense. Who created that lyric?

There is no trope. You bunch of dupes.


Broad shot, coming thru.

How hard is it to get your shit correct on what is happening here? You claim to be liberal and allies and this is what you do? Fuck outta here with that.
This is why NOBODY TRUSTS YOU TO DO THE RIGHT THING EVER. Cos you won't. You are not allies. You aren't even liberal. You're just all delusional.
 

nomis

Banned
Member
Oct 27, 2017
989
If she legitimately didn't realize the "Benjamin" pun then she just unintentionally hamstrung any attempt to criticize aipac for a decade.
You know that Netanyahu is the prime minister of Israel not of The Jews, right?

I’m also assuming this is what the hell you are on about
 

THE GUY

Banned
Member
Oct 27, 2017
4,223
User Banned (Permanent): Hostile comments towards staff. Long history of infractions for antagonistic behaviour.
That Clipjoint ban is bullshit. Mods need to stop acting like cunts who throw out bans when conversations are not to their liking because they can't handle the conversation taking place. Shut the fuck up and let the conversation flow rather than trying to stifle it. He ain't done anything in the discussion worthy of a ban. And citing some bullshit reason as "misrepresenting information" along with some vague allusions to past incidents, which if this ban was anything to go by, may be similarly bullshit, ain't justifying it. It basically reeks of "I'm tired of this fucker and this discussion, let's just ban him to stop him coming at it".
 

Stinkles

343 Industries
Verified
Oct 25, 2017
11,644
You know that Netanyahu is the prime minister of Israel not of The Jews, right?

I’m also assuming this is what the hell you are on about
No. Read my previous post. I don't think she's antisemitic I think our congress is craven and pathetic.
 

Stinkles

343 Industries
Verified
Oct 25, 2017
11,644
That doesn't make any sense. Who created that lyric?

There is no trope. You bunch of dupes.


Broad shot, coming thru.

How hard is it to get your shit correct on what is happening here? You claim to be liberal and allies and this is what you do? Fuck outta here with that.
This is why NOBODY TRUSTS YOU TO DO THE RIGHT THING EVER. Cos you won't. You are not allies. You aren't even liberal. You're just all delusional.
I think you already made up your mind before reading my post. I actually think you should edit because it's so far off. Read what I responded with.
 
Oct 28, 2017
1,355
Wait just to make sure ....we are talking about the benjamins song by puff daddy that knocked throughout every high school and college party when it came out? Was I an anti Semite when I danced to this? Fuuuuu
 

nomis

Banned
Member
Oct 27, 2017
989
That Clipjoint ban is bullshit. Mods need to stop acting like cunts who throw out bans when conversations are not to their liking because they can't handle the conversation taking place. Shut the fuck up and let the conversation flow rather than trying to stifle it. He ain't done anything in the discussion worthy of a ban. And citing some bullshit reason as "misrepresenting information" along with some vague allusions to past incidents, which if this ban was anything to go by, may be similarly bullshit, ain't justifying it. It basically reeks of "I'm tired of this fucker and this discussion, let's just ban him to stop him coming at it".
it’s “misrepresenting information” to compare racism to racism, and to call a PAC that lobbies for people to turn a blind eye to war crimes “warmongering”
 
It's more complicated than that because of the regional politics- Bernie and I actually are on the same "Sanctions a la South Africa are good, but need to be done independently of the BDS framework" page here. When Israel was originally attempting to form, the Arab League put in place a boycott aimed at preventing that from happening. (It obviously didn't succeed.) The BDS movement involves many of those same countries that originally participated in the original Arab League boycotts. And so some view the current BDS stuff as an spiritual successor of those original anti-Israel-existing boycotts, which is why some who would support action don't support those specific ones, because they don't want to give that impression to people inadvertently.
Hold up, let me sure I've got you straight. So, because some countries in the Arab League are bad, which is a problematic jumping off point, supporting a boycott movement that some people in some of the Arab League countries also support must be avoided because of the "impression" that this boycott movement is a "spiritual successor" to resistance movements against the two-state solution from last century. Even though, the two state solution has been a political and humanitarian disaster ever since it happened and has obviously failed.

Lose me with every single world of this.

By the way, it's pretty simple to do BDS - avoid barcodes starting with 729, Caterpillar, Sodastream, Hewlett-Packard, and Sabra Hummus. The end.
 

Stinkles

343 Industries
Verified
Oct 25, 2017
11,644
Wait just to make sure ....we are talking about the benjamins song by puff daddy that knocked throughout every high school and college party when it came out? Was I an anti Semite when I danced to this? Fuuuuu
Yes. We are. And probably Omar was. And the Benjamin she was referring to was a white Christian man. But congress is using it as if it were an intentional slur about Jewish names instead of answering questions about the outsize influence of AIPAC under Netanyahu's disgraceful race baiting invasion and illegal occupation and theft of land - and that's going to be their lean back position for the rest of the cycle.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.