قالب وردپرس درنا توس
Home https://server7.kproxy.com/servlet/redirect.srv/sruj/smyrwpoii/p2/ World https://server7.kproxy.com/servlet/redirect.srv/sruj/smyrwpoii/p2/ We know that Ilhan Omar is an anti-Semite. The question is, do the Democrats care?

We know that Ilhan Omar is an anti-Semite. The question is, do the Democrats care?



T hat Rep. Ilhan Omar, D-Minn., Has made another statement always an anti-Semitic trophy on Twitter is not particularly surprising. His anti-Semitism became obvious to any faithful observer since he became a public figure. The only remaining question is: Do the Democrats care?

On recap, on Sunday night, the new Democratic imperial, given a slot at the House Foreign Affairs Committee, responded to a story about the plan of the Republican Minority Board Kevin McCarthy to "act" against in anti-Semitism presented on a regular basis by Omar and his "sister" new province Rep. Rashida Tlaib, D-Mich. "It's all about baby Benjamins," he wrote, using a song reference and slang for $ 1

00 bill to attack the influence of politics in Jews.

Then he followed it with another tweet saying he meant, " AIPAC," a reference to the pro-Israel lobbying group.

The idea of ​​Jews who uses money and power to advance foreign interests and carry out an abominable policy influence is an old old anti-Semitic smear. It is also not true, by the way, that Omar refers only to AIPAC. Later retweeted former deputy chief of staff Harry Reid attacking Sheldon Adelson's influence – the article linked to the article did not mention AIPAC. So it was clear that his attack was on the money and influence of the Jews.

It was also expanded by Omar in some form or another for years. For example, he once tweeted, "Israel has fallen on the earth, may God raise people and help them see the bad deeds of Israel." Later, he ignored ignorance of how anyone was hurt, but obviously did not learn anything from secular liberal Jews trying to explain him the implications of what he said.

It's not worth the persecution of why his latest statement is anti-Semitic in the painful detail. However, it is worth declaring certain items for the record. To begin, the "PAC" at AIPAC does not stand for the "Political Action Committee" but for the "Public Affairs Committee." That is, AIPAC does not donate money to candidates, it tries to lobby members of Congress on both sides to ensure that support for Israel is two parties. Furthermore, Republicans do not require AIPAC to convince them to be pro-Israel. In fact, this is quite the opposite. I've had many Republican lawmakers and staffers who trust me over the years that they are increasingly disappointed with AIPAC for working on water-down different Israeli support letters to get those Democrats on the board and thus maintain the idea of ​​support for Israel are two parties, although a republican-only letter at one time may further support Israel. The fact is that the Republicans are pro-Israel because their voters are too much-all you have to do is look at polling data (shown below), or go to conservative conferences where support statements for in Israel often gets the top clap.

Also, there is nothing wrong with any group that enters democratic processes to influence the policy. And it is not even if AIPAC is particularly influential or all powerful. President Obama's Iran nuclear deal went against all AIPACs that had been promoting for years, strong opposition to Israel, and he pushed it further and secured the support of the critical mass of Democrats in Congress.

However, it is not about Omar. He was a member of Congress from the district who sent anti-Semite Keith Ellison to the House for 12 years. None of his statements against Semitics will cause his home problems. Rather, with the help of the media, his statements can get the classification as the only criticism of Israel, and his situation as a hard-working Detective fact will only grow.

What is more interesting is this about the Democratic Party. For many years, I warned about how liberals were able to normalize anti-Semitism by expanding the kind of discourse emitted by Israel's only criticism. Obama's Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel expressed the influence of the "Jewish Lobby" in Congress. In dealing with Iran's dealings, Obama suggested that conflicting deals are influenced by donors, and they do not think of what matters most on US liberal websites accused by Sen. Chuck Schumer has dual loyalty for criticizing his dealings with Iran. Everything that happens in Omar and Tlaib is that they are just a bit more clear.

So the question is, when Democrats draw a line on the sand, in case? The hesitation to say anything to this point reflects on an understanding of an ugly truth: that these views represent where their parties are, and at a time They are trying to present a unified front, they want to avoid all the war in a tense issue.

Data from Pew Research Center refers to a widespread gap between Republicans and Democrats, and particularly conservative and liberal, coming to Israel. Although the parties were only once likely to be Republicans to say that they sympathized Israel with Palestinians, the gap had expanded over time, with 79 percent of Republicans now saying they sympathize over Israel , compared to only 27 percent of the Democrats (who are almost now likely to say that reflects more on Palestinians). But ideological breakdown is deeper. Conservatives return to Israel with a 81 percent to 5 percent margin, whereas liberals actually favor Palestinians almost two-one. Political parties want to talk about issues that are united in their party, but Israel is a matter that defines separately from the Democrats, as the polar opposition – conservative / moderate Democrats – favoring Israel two-in-one.

  Pew Israel

So Omar and Tlaib really show a test of the Democrats about what kind of party they want to be. The British Labor party has been taken by anti-Semitic leader Jeremy Corbyn, and there is no reason why the same thing can not happen in the US Rising star Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-NY, just this month touted what an "honor" to have " like a lovely and deep conversation " talking to her .

Just last week, the opposition calls against his anti-Semitism, Omar said, "Our policy values ​​within the country should be aligned with our rules of external policy. exception! " The obvious suggestion is that if you want to join the re-liberal agenda, it's not enough to back up the adjustment of economic and social policies at home, you have to use his hatred for Israel.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Sen. Chuck Schumer can not share a vision of Omar's external policy, but if they do not call anti-Semitism within their own range, they will justify others that it is perfectly acceptable as long as' t it simply means criticism of Israel. Function (f, b, e, v, n, t, s) {if (f.fbq) return; n = f.fbq = function () {n.callMethod?
n.callMethod.apply (n, argument): n.queue.push (argument)}; if (! f._fbq) f._fbq = n;
n.push = n; n.loaded =! 0; n.version = & # 39; 2.0 & # 39 ;; n.queue = []; t = b.createElement (e); t.async =! 0;
t.src = v; s = b.getElementsByTagName (e) [0]; s.parentNode.insertBefore (t, s)} (window,
document, & # 39; script & # 39 ;, & # 39; // connect.facebook.net/en_US/fbevents.js');
fbq (& # 39; init & # 39 ;, & # 39; 224132531296438 & # 39;);
fbq (& # 39; track & # 39 ;, "PageView");

Source link