An interesting op-ed from an Israeli reporter, who understands that speaking out against Israel does not make you a Jew hater.

"Maybe Mogadishu will turn out to be the source of hope. This war-torn city was the birthplace of the most promising U.S. congresswoman today.

Ilhan Omar is not only one of the first two female Muslim members of the House of Representatives, she may herald a dramatic change in that body. “Hamas has entered the House,” Roseanne Barr was quick to cry out; “A black day for Israel,” tweeted Donald Trump. Neither Hamas nor a black day, but a glimmer of hope on Capitol Hill.

Maybe, for the first time in history, someone will dare tell the truth to the American people, absorbing scathing accusations of anti-Semitism, without bowing her head. The chances of this happening aren’t great; the savage engine of the Jewish lobby and of Israel’s “friends” is already doing everything it can to trample her.

The president mentioned removing her from the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, and Congress was set to pass a resolution, the second in one month, against uttering “anti-Semitic expressions,” specifically aimed at Omar’s statements.

When will Americans and Europeans stop running scared every time someone screams “anti-Semitism”? Until when will Israel and the Jewish establishment succeed in exploiting (the existing) anti-Semitism as a shield against criticism? When will the world dare to distinguish between legitimate criticism of an illegitimate reality and anti-Semitism?

The gap between these two is great. There is anti-Semitism one must fight, and there is criticism of Israel and the Jewish establishment it is imperative to support. Manipulations exercised by the Israeli propaganda machine and the Jewish establishment have managed to make the two issues identical.

This is the greatest success of the Israeli government’s hasbara: Say one critical word about Israel and you’re labeled an anti-Semite. And labeled an anti-Semite, your fate is obvious. Omar has to break this cursed cycle. Is the young representative from Minnesota up for it? Can she withstand the power centers that have already mobilized against her in full force?

Maybe it’s important that she knows there are people in Israel crossing fingers for her?

Her success and that of her congressional colleagues, Rashida Tlaib from Michigan and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez from New York, could be the first swallows that herald the coming of spring. This is the spring of freely expressing opinions about Israel in America. Cortez already asked this week why isn’t bigotry aimed at other groups condemned just like statements against Israel are.

What, after all, has Omar said? That pro-Israel activists demand “allegiance to a foreign country”; that U.S. politicians support Israel because of money they receive from the pro-Israel lobby group AIPAC, and that “Israel hypnotized the world.” What is incorrect in these statements? Why is describing reality considered anti-Semitic?

Jews have immense power in the U.S., far beyond the relative size of their community, and the blind support given by their establishment to Israel raises legitimate questions regarding dual loyalty. Their power derives from their economic success, their organizational skills and the political pressure they exert. Omar dared to speak about this.

Just imagine what Israelis and Jews would feel if Muslim Americans had the same political, economic and cultural power Jews have. Such power, above all the intoxication with power that has seized hold of the Jewish establishment, comes with a price. Omar and her colleagues are trying to collect on it.

Due to the Israel lobby, the U.S. does not know the truth about what is happening here. Congress members, senators and shapers of public opinion who are flown here ad nauseam see only Israeli victimhood and Palestinian terror, which apparently emerged out of nowhere. Islamists, Qassam rockets and incendiary balloons – not a word about occupation, expropriation, refugees and military tyranny. Questions such as where the money goes and whether it serves American interests are considered heresy. When talking about Israel one must not ask questions or raise doubts.

This cycle has to be broken as well. It’s not right and it’s not good for the Jews. Omar is now trying to introduce a new discourse to Congress and to public opinion. Thanks to her and her colleagues there is a chance for a change in America. From Israel we send her our wishes for success.

When will the world dare to distinguish between legitimate criticism of an illegitimate Israeli reality and anti-Semitism?"

Gideon Levy

Haaretz Correspondent

She is not opposed to Jews(nudge,nudge) just that Israel part that bothers her. She is perfect for guys like PeteF.,he admires her honesty...being an honest,straight shooter himself. Pull up a chair....

This is perfect as it is an opinion piece authored by an anti Israeli Jew who supports the Palestinian people. So the fact this unicorn supports this woman,who shares his disdain is actually not close to resembling news. Good for him as his own children have eschewed him for his drivel. Perhaps he will adopt PeteF.,or recruit him to copy and paste more of his musings.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

She is not opposed to Jews(nudge,nudge) just that Israel part that bothers her. She is perfect for guys like PeteF.,he admires her honesty...being an honest,straight shooter himself. Pull up a chair....

This is perfect as it is an opinion piece authored by an anti Israeli Jew who supports the Palestinian people. So the fact this unicorn supports this woman,who shares his disdain is actually not close to resembling news. Good for him as his own children have eschewed him for his drivel. Perhaps he will adopt PeteF.,or recruit him to copy and paste more of his musings.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

"the fact this unicorn supports this woman,who shares his disdain is actually not close to resembling news"

Hysterical.

Right, so if Pete can find one person somewhere who disagrees with conservatives, that's evidence that conservatives are wrong. Unless a conservative position is approved by every human being on the planet, that means the conservative is wrong, and probably bigoted, too.

Makes all kinds of sense.

brilliant.

Hardly a unicorn
There are more than a few people concerned about Palenstine and Israel
How many UN resolutions are there condemning Israel’s actions on the West Bank?
Look beyond the narrow narrative allowed to you by the media and politics.
She was not attacked by just conservatives, so you don’t need to play the victim card.
Though the comment that labels the author “anti Israeli” is telling as it resembles other conservative dog whistles that label people who disagree with the direction of their governments as Un whatever.
Conservative media’s emphasis on the scary Muslims in the House is interesting, since they have little concern about the anti Muslim tropes in the Virginias.
You’re both far more militant about denouncing her than the Israeli media.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

^^^ you crack me up...talk about narrow narratives :laugha:

She is not opposed to Jews(nudge,nudge) just that Israel part that bothers her. She is perfect for guys like PeteF.,he admires her honesty...being an honest,straight shooter himself. Pull up a chair....

This is perfect as it is an opinion piece authored by an anti Israeli Jew who supports the Palestinian people. So the fact this unicorn supports this woman,who shares his disdain is actually not close to resembling news. Good for him as his own children have eschewed him for his drivel. Perhaps he will adopt PeteF.,or recruit him to copy and paste more of his musings.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

That's the most content driven post I have ever seen you make in here... Who logged on to your computer and what have you done with Chris?

Lots of hats, but I don’t copy/paste🙄

Happy Birthday young buck!
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Hardly a unicorn
There are more than a few people concerned about Palenstine and Israel
How many UN resolutions are there condemning Israel’s actions on the West Bank?
Look beyond the narrow narrative allowed to you by the media and politics.
She was not attacked by just conservatives, so you don’t need to play the victim card.
Though the comment that labels the author “anti Israeli” is telling as it resembles other conservative dog whistles that label people who disagree with the direction of their governments as Un whatever.
Conservative media’s emphasis on the scary Muslims in the House is interesting, since they have little concern about the anti Muslim tropes in the Virginias.
You’re both far more militant about denouncing her than the Israeli media.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
You are every bit the clown whom you target. A petty baby! 🍼
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

You are every bit the clown whom you target. A petty baby! 🍼
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Ignorance is bliss
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Looks like this Trump guy is causing some to become a bit unhinged. Get well soon.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Any criticism of Israel has been Taboo in US politics for as long as I can remember and considered political suicide and being a Muslim and criticize Israel... you see the blow back



and its red meat for conservatives based on criticising Israel and pro-Israel lobbyists in Washington.


Republican suggesting that Democratic support of her could lead to violence. "Representative Omar embodies a vile, hate-filled, anti-Semitic, anti-Israel bigotry," House Republican Conference Chairwoman Liz Cheney, R-Wyo., said Wednesday. "This is a time for the Democratic leaders in this institution to do the right thing. They should remove her from the House Foreign Affairs Committee. They should stand up to her. They should stop empowering her disgusting hatred before it turns into horror."

Republicans being a bigots in their she's a bigot statement ... reinforcing stereotypes of the violent muslims Amazing

Republicans being a bigots in their she's a bigot statement ...

https://www.cnn.com/2019/03/07/politics/ilhan-omar-house-democrats-anti-semitism-diversion/index.html

Washington (CNN)Democrats have had the majority in the House of Representatives for just two months, but they've already been sidetracked by an ugly divide over anti-Semitism and other bigotry.


USA Today- Freshman Democrat Rep. Ilhan Omar is once again facing criticism and charges of anti-Semitism from her own party's leadership for comments about the political influence of Israel.

On Friday, the chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, Rep. Eliot Engel, D-N.Y., called on Omar to apologize for "a vile, anti-Semitic slur" she made at a town hall event in Washington, D.C.

Washington Post- House Democratic leadership condemns her comments as 'anti-Semitic tropes'




Keep It Up, Ilhan Omar
:rotf2:


not coincidentally, the Labour Party in Great Britain

Chuka Umunna, Luciana Berger, Chris Leslie, Angela Smith, Mike Gapes, Gavin Shuker and Ann Coffey announced their resignations at a press conference.

Ms Berger said she had come to the "sickening conclusion" that the party had become institutionally anti-Semitic and that she was "embarrassed and ashamed" to stay. Ms Berger's supporters, including deputy leader Tom Watson, claims she has been "bullied out of her own party by racist thugs".

Two days later, Joan Ryan quit Labour and joined the new Independent Group of MPs, claiming the party has "become infected with the scourge of anti-Jewish racism".

Ian Austin also left the party, blaming Mr Corbyn for "creating a culture of extremism and intolerance".

Still waiting to read these vile comments all I’ve read is people’s interpretation of what she said ... Seem when it comes to Israel any criticism is considered vile

They should stand up to her. They should stop empowering her disgusting hatred before it turns into horror

Now that a vile suggestion against a member of Congress all because she’s a Muslim

A clear reference of violence created by her shocking
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

As typical the right wing rhetoric is not based on fact
What Did Ilhan Omar Say? Here’s the Full Transcript of Her Response to a Question about Anti-Semitism
https://ips-dc.org/what-did-ilhan-omar-say-heres-the-full-transcript-of-her-response-to-a-question-about-anti-semitism/
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

criticizing specific Israeli policy is fine, fair game, not bigoted in any way.

Saying that Israel has hypnotized the world, and thatb it’s all about the benjamin’s, and that people who support Israel aren’t as loyal to the US, are thinly veiled dog whistles if bigotry, explicitly relying on classic anti semitic stereotypes that jews have magical powers and use money to buy allegiance.

I find Cortez amusing. This one...wow.

i wonder what Omar’s position is on gay marriage and homosexuality.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

As typical the right wing rhetoric is not based on fact
What Did Ilhan Omar Say? Here’s the Full Transcript of Her Response to a Question about Anti-Semitism
https://ips-dc.org/what-did-ilhan-omar-say-heres-the-full-transcript-of-her-response-to-a-question-about-anti-semitism/
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

if it’s a right wing fake thing, why have so many democrats specifically called her out? Hmmm?

Steve King has to go, but her bigotry is acceptable.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Pete, Ed Randell is the former head of the DNC. He called her out. is he part of the right wing conspiracy? the former head of the dnc?

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/former-pennsylvania-gov-ed-rendell-says-house-resolution-condemning-hatred-shouldve-name-rep-omar
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

A funny one
First the Dems dig a hole

Then they lay in the hole

Then they blame Republicans for the hole
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I find Cortez amusing. This one...wow.

Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I love her outfits...and I love a woman that isn't afraid to speak her mind...I like the sexy, young, crazy democrat women far better then the cranky, old, crazy democrat women....

A funny one
First the Dems dig a hole

Then they lay in the hole

Then they blame Republicans for the hole
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

That's pretty much it.

Here is the transcript, not the three word bit politicians on both sides always get fried for:

This is the transcript of the Rep. Ilhan Omar’s full response to the question about anti-Semitism from the Busboys & Poets event. Her response begins around 1:00:00:

Andy Shallal: [ question about dealing with accusations of anti-Semitism]
Rashida Tlaib – […] this conversation is about human rights for everyone, this conversation around what this looks like is not centered around hate, it’s actually centered around love.

Ilhan Omar – I get emotional every time I hear Rashida, and I think I’m just gonna stop hanging out with her, she’s messing with my [style?].

I know that I have a huge Jewish constituency, and you know, every time I meet with them they share stories of [the] safety and sanctuary that they would love for the people of Israel, and most of the time when we’re having the conversation, there is no actual relative that they speak of, and there still is lots of emotion that comes through because it’s family, right? Like my children still speak of Somalia with passion and compassion even though they don’t have a family member there.

But we never really allow space for the stories of Palestinians seeking safety and sanctuary to be uplifted. And to me, it is the dehumanization and the silencing of a particular pain and suffering of people, should not be ok and normal. And you can’t be in the practice of humanizing and uplifting the suffering of one, if you’re not willing to do that for everyone. And so for me I know that when I hear my Jewish constituents or friends or colleagues speak about Palestinians who don’t want safety, or Palestinians who aren’t deserving I stay focused on the actual debate about what that process should look like. I never go to the dark place of saying “here’s a Jewish person, they’re talking about Palestinians, Palestinians are Muslim, maybe they’re Islamophobic.” I never allow myself to go there because I don’t have to.

And what I am fearful of is that because Rashida and I are Muslim, that a lot of Jewish colleagues, a lot of our Jewish constituents, a lot of our allies, go to thinking that everything we say about Israel, to be anti-Semitic, because we are Muslim. And so to me, it is something that becomes designed to end the debate. Because you get in this space, of like, I know what intolerance looks like and I’m sensitive when someone says that the words you use Ilhan, are resemblance of intolerance. And I am cautious of that and I feel pained by that. But it’s almost as if every single time we say something, regardless of what it is we say, that it’s supposed to about foreign policy or engagement, that our advocacy about ending oppression, or the freeing of every human life and wanting dignity, we get to be labeled in something, and that’s the end of the discussion, because we end up defending that, and nobody gets to have the broader debate of “what is happening with Palestine?” [applause]

So for me, I want to talk about the political influence in this country that says it is ok for people to push for allegiance to a foreign country. And I want to ask, why is it ok for me to talk about the influence of the NRA, of fossil fuel industries, or Big Pharma, and not talk about a powerful lobby that is influencing policy? [applause] And I want to ask the question, why is it ok for you to push, for you to be… there are so many people… I mean most of us are new, but many members of Congress have been there forever. Some of them have been there before we were born. So I know many of them were fighting for people to be free, for people to live in dignity in South Africa. I know many of them fight for people around the world to have dignity to have self-determination. So I know, I know that they care about these things.

But now that you have two Muslims that are saying “here is a group of people that we want to make sure that they have the dignity that you want everyone else to have!” …we get to be called names, we get to be labeled as hateful. No, we know what hate looks like. We experience it every single day. [applause] We have to deal with death threats. I have colleagues who talk about death threats. And sometimes… there are cities in my state where the gas stations have written on their bathrooms “assassinate Ilhan Omar”. I have people driving around my district looking for my home, for my office, causing me harm. I have people every single day on Fox News and everywhere, posting that I am a threat to this country. So I know what fear looks like. The masjid I pray in in Minnesota got bombed by two domestic white terrorists. So I know what it feels to be someone who is of a faith that is vilified. I know what it means to be someone whose ethnicity that is vilified. I know what it feels to be of a race that is, like I am an immigrant, so I don’t have some of the historical drama of some of my sisters and brothers have in this country, but I know what it means for people to just see me as a black person, and to treat me as less than a human.

And so, when people say “you are bringing hate,” I know what their intention is. Their intention is to make sure that our lights are dimmed. That we walk around with our heads bowed. That we lower our face and our voice. But we have news for people. You can call us any kind of name. You can threaten us any kind of way. Rashida and I are not ourselves. Every single day we walk in the halls of Congress and we have people who have never had the opportunity to walk there walking with us. So we’re here, we’re here to stay and represent all the people who have been silenced for many decades and many generations. And we’re here to fight for the people of our district who want to make sure that there is actual prosperity, actual prosperity, being guaranteed. Because there is a direct correlation between not having clean water, and starting endless wars. It’s all about the profit and who gets benefit. There’s a direct correlation between corporations that are getting rich, and the fact that we have students who are shackled with debt. There is a direct correlation between the White House and the people who are benefiting from detention beds that are profitized. So, what people are afraid of is not that there are two Muslims in Congress. What people are afraid of is that there are two Muslims in Congress that have their eyes wide open, that have their feet to the ground, that know what they’re talking about, that are fearless, and that understand that they have the same election certificate that everyone in Congress does. [applause]

Thank you for the cut and paste PeteF. It helps clarify the message of inclusiveness. I wonder why her peers are so opposed.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I think the comment about the benjamins was worse and she needs to start watching what she says.

But......it would be nice to see a little consistancy what with the constant vile things Trump says.

Earlier this week, Representative Jim Jordan, Republican of Ohio, accused Representative Jerry Nadler of doing the bidding of the wealthy liberal donor “Tom $teyer,” whose father was Jewish. (To be clear, this tweet counts both as inane AND anti-Semitic,” Nadler responded.) Representative Matt Gaetz, a Florida Republican who is one of Trump’s fiercest defenders, once brought an internet troll who’d denied the Holocaust to the State of the Union. Omar gestured at the idea of dual loyalty, but Donald Trump, speaking to American Jews last December, referred to Israel as “your country.” Indeed, no president has done more to mainstream classically anti-Semitic ideas about an authentic volk at war with parasitical globalists. It’s maddening to watch men who’ve flirted with outright fascism — like former Trump aide Sebastian Gorka, who wore the medal of a Nazi-aligned Hungarian group to one of Trump’s inaugural balls — act like sanctimonious defenders of the Jews.

I think the comment about the benjamins was worse and she needs to start watching what she says.

But......it would be nice to see a little consistancy what with the constant vile things Trump says.

.

Right, because Trump always gets a free pass when he says something outrageous.

Where do you get the impression that no one on the right ever holds him accountable?

Right, because Trump always gets a free pass when he says something outrageous.

Where do you get the impression that no one on the right ever holds him accountable?

Bc the Rep. reps. sit on their hands an might say "that is inaproptiate" then go on giving Tump their undying love. 90% approval for the most vile, lying Pres. (and prob. person) in history. At least she said she is sorry.

This thread is prob. longer than any other thread about bad language and she is a 1st term rep. vs the Pres. of the US.

Bc the Rep. reps. sit on their hands an might say "that is inaproptiate" then go on giving Tump their undying love. 90% approval for the most vile, lying Pres. (and prob. person) in history. At least she said she is sorry.

This thread is prob. longer than any other thread about bad language and she is a 1st term rep. vs the Pres. of the US.

They sit on their hands? I guess where you get your news, you don't see Republicans routinely criticizing him for his awful comments.

"90% approval for the most vile, lying Pres. (and prob. person) in history"

Do they approve of the lying and vile behavior? Or do they approve of the economy, judicial selections, and handling of ISIS?

"This thread is prob. longer than any other thread about bad language "

It's not about profanity, it's about religious bigotry. Her religion, isn't known for their fondness of the Jews, maybe you heard something about that.

"she is a 1st term rep"

She is an adult who is responsible for her actions.

"vs the Pres. of the US"

Why? What does Trump have to do, with her hatred of Jews?

This is about her.

.

"vs the Pres. of the US"

Why? What does Trump have to do, with her hatred of Jews?

This is about her.

Right but Rep. constantly get free passes. - Jordan, Gaetz, I missed those threads. Can you link them?

They sit on their hands? I guess where you get your news, you don't see Republicans routinely criticizing him for his awful comments.
I certainly don't see anyone in Congress saying squat. And what I mostly hear is "This all boils down to, he beat them. he beat them at their own game - fighting dirty, lying, smearing, and insulting his opponents. He beat them at their own game, he pulverized them at their own game, by winning the election."

"90% approval for the most vile, lying Pres. (and prob. person) in history"

Do they approve of the lying and vile behavior? Or do they approve of the economy, judicial selections, and handling of ISIS?
See above

"This thread is prob. longer than any other thread about bad language "

It's not about profanity, it's about religious bigotry. Her religion, isn't known for their fondness of the Jews, maybe you heard something about that.
Your prejudice against Muslims shows again, Perhaps a little reflection on what Christianity's views of other religions and history of oppression might change your opinion, but I doubt it

"she is a 1st term rep"

She is an adult who is responsible for her actions.
And she took responsibility and apologized

"vs the Pres. of the US"

Why? What does Trump have to do, with her hatred of Jews?
Who has NEVER apologized

This is about her.
Go to the wall for Trump as usual

I certainly don't see anyone in Congress saying squat. And what I mostly hear is "This all boils down to, he beat them. he beat them at their own game - fighting dirty, lying, smearing, and insulting his opponents. He beat them at their own game, he pulverized them at their own game, by winning the election."

It's the first time I heard it expressed succinctly like that--and it's pretty right on. Your "mostly" angle is puzzling. You do seem to have this quantitative "more" meme buzzing in your brain.

Your prejudice against Muslims shows again, Perhaps a little reflection on what Christianity's views of other religions and history of oppression might change your opinion, but I doubt it

Do you have a prejudice against Christians? Why should Jim reflect on Christian views in respect to this Omar matter? And hasn't past Christian oppression been duly criticized and reversed?

And she took responsibility and apologized
Who has NEVER apologized

If you're referring to Trump, I recall that he apologized for his foul language in the Access Hollywood tapes. But requiring him to apologize for phony stuff like his supposedly white supremacist Charlottesville remarks, and Muslim violence in Sweden, etc. is pure politics. It was clear to any honest person that he didn't mean what the left claimed.

And wasn't King removed from his committee assignment for supposed white nationalist remarks?

Go to the wall for Trump as usual

As usual, you want to tear the wall down.

Jim said:
"It's not about profanity, it's about religious bigotry. Her religion, isn't known for their fondness of the Jews, maybe you heard something about that."
I said:
"Your prejudice against Muslims shows again, Perhaps a little reflection on what Christianity's views of other religions and history of oppression might change your opinion, but I doubt it"

Your comment:
"Do you have a prejudice against Christians?" No

"Why should Jim reflect on Christian views in respect to this Omar matter?"
To claim that because she is a Muslim, therefor she is a bigot and hates Jews is wrong.
Some Christian sects have and continue to conduct religious wars, torture and otherwise attack people of other religions, just as some sects of Muslims do to this day, don't tar everyone with the same brush.

"And hasn't past Christian oppression been duly criticized and reversed?"
Does that mean that self examination is bad or were you a "great" student like someone who must not be named and like him, do not understand that history repeats?

I think it is fine if she is not a fan of Israel/Jews whether or not she happens to be Muslim. But for a politician to actually open their mouth and prove it seems irresponsible.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Jim said:
"It's not about profanity, it's about religious bigotry. Her religion, isn't known for their fondness of the Jews, maybe you heard something about that."
I said:
"Your prejudice against Muslims shows again, Perhaps a little reflection on what Christianity's views of other religions and history of oppression might change your opinion, but I doubt it"

Your comment:
"Do you have a prejudice against Christians?" No

"Why should Jim reflect on Christian views in respect to this Omar matter?"
To claim that because she is a Muslim, therefor she is a bigot and hates Jews is wrong.
Some Christian sects have and continue to conduct religious wars, torture and otherwise attack people of other religions, just as some sects of Muslims do to this day, don't tar everyone with the same brush.

"And hasn't past Christian oppression been duly criticized and reversed?"
Does that mean that self examination is bad or were you a "great" student like someone who must not be named and like him, do not understand that history repeats?

"Your prejudice against Muslims shows again"

Nope.

"Perhaps a little reflection on what Christianity's views of other religions and history of oppression might change your opinion, but I doubt it"

You got anything about Christian oppression of other religions, from the last 200 years? Anything?

"To claim that because she is a Muslim, therefor she is a bigot and hates Jews is wrong."

That would be wrong. When I say she hates Jews, it' snot just because of her religion. It's because of her actions and words. I presume, and it's a safe bet, that the genesis of her animosity, comes from her religion. I could be wrong, maybe there's another source for her animosity. But I doubt it.

Go to the wall for Trump as usual

"I certainly don't see anyone in Congress saying squat"

Because you get your news from godforsaken places.

"And she took responsibility and apologized"

Bit she keeps doing it. She's not sorry, if she keeps doing it. She's sorry she got caught.

"Go to the wall for Trump as usual "

Pointing out a jew hating fanatic, is going to the wall for Trump? I thought Trump was also an anti-Semite? So how is defending Jews, going to the wall for Trump?

I think it is fine if she is not a fan of Israel/Jews whether or not she happens to be Muslim. But for a politician to actually open their mouth and prove it seems irresponsible.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

What kind of district elected her anyway? Man...

Jim said:
"It's not about profanity, it's about religious bigotry. Her religion, isn't known for their fondness of the Jews, maybe you heard something about that."
I said:
"Your prejudice against Muslims shows again, Perhaps a little reflection on what Christianity's views of other religions and history of oppression might change your opinion, but I doubt it"

Your comment:
"Do you have a prejudice against Christians?" No

Why do you connect prejudice against Muslims specifically with Christianity?

"Why should Jim reflect on Christian views in respect to this Omar matter?"
To claim that because she is a Muslim, therefor she is a bigot and hates Jews is wrong.
Some Christian sects have and continue to conduct religious wars, torture and otherwise attack people of other religions, just as some sects of Muslims do to this day, don't tar everyone with the same brush.

Your confusing sects of a religion with the tenets of the religion in its foundational structure. There is nothing in the founding tenets of Christianity that in anyway commands the oppression of Muslims or of anybody else. The foundational structures of Islam, the Koran, the Sunnah, and the Hadith, specifically command oppression, even death, of non-Muslims, including Jews and Christians.


"And hasn't past Christian oppression been duly criticized and reversed?"
Does that mean that self examination is bad or were you a "great" student like someone who must not be named and like him, do not understand that history repeats?

Are you suggesting that a Jesus Christ will be repeated? Or that the conquests and slaughter perpetrated by Mohammad will be repeated?

Still waiting on to see these vile comments.. from the evil Jew temptress

Seem this topic is the most consensus between republicans and democrats

Maybe she’s on to something
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

"Your prejudice against Muslims shows again"

Nope.

"Perhaps a little reflection on what Christianity's views of other religions and history of oppression might change your opinion, but I doubt it"

You got anything about Christian oppression of other religions, from the last 200 years? Anything? Bosnia 1995 8000 men and boys killed in Srebrenica is the most recent that comes to mind

"To claim that because she is a Muslim, therefor she is a bigot and hates Jews is wrong."

That would be wrong. When I say she hates Jews, it' snot just because of her religion. It's because of her actions and words. I presume, and it's a safe bet, that the genesis of her animosity, comes from her religion. I could be wrong, maybe there's another source for her animosity. But I doubt it.
You're wrong, read her words, not the sound bite.

You're wrong, read her words, not the sound bite.

"Bosnia 1995 8000 men and boys killed in Srebrenica is the most recent that comes to mind"

A sincere question...the leaders of what church, told the killers to do this? The leaders of what religion, told their followers to do this?

You can argue abortion clinic bombers are Christian terrorists, except there isn't a recognized leader of any sect of Christianity, telling them to bomb abortion clinics, because that's not in line with Christianity.

When the Pope tells me to kill Jews or Muslims, I switch religions.

"read her words, not the sound bite."

She said she wants Allah to show the world, that we are being hypnotized by Israel. That's not being opposed to Israeli policy, that's being opposed to Israel.

You claim I bend over backwards to defend Trump, when I bash him all the time. Yet you are twisting around like a contortionist, to avoid criticizing this vile hen.

Are you suggesting that a Jesus Christ will be repeated? Or that the conquests and slaughter perpetrated by Mohammad will be repeated?

What i am suggesting is that just as the Inquisition, the Crusades, was fomented by the Catholic Church, and other attacks done in the name of God by other religion or sects, that it can happen again and likely will.


Your confusing sects of a religion with the tenets of the religion in its foundational structure. There is nothing in the founding tenets of Christianity that in anyway commands the oppression of Muslims or of anybody else. The foundational structures of Islam, the Koran, the Sunnah, and the Hadith, specifically command oppression, even death, of non-Muslims, including Jews and Christians.


Men, in looking at religion, their own and others often read things into the writings that they want to see. That doesn't make it correct, except in their own mind.

Among the people there is he whose discourse on the life of the world pleases you, and he calls on God as witness to what is in his heart, yet he is an unyielding and antagonistic adversary. When he turns and leaves, he walks about corrupting the earth, destroying crops and livestock – God loves not corruption (Q2:204–205)

"Bosnia 1995 8000 men and boys killed in Srebrenica is the most recent that comes to mind"

A sincere question...the leaders of what church, told the killers to do this? The leaders of what religion, told their followers to do this?
No religious bearing when Christians kill Muslims except if your Pope tells them to?

You can argue abortion clinic bombers are Christian terrorists, except there isn't a recognized leader of any sect of Christianity, telling them to bomb abortion clinics, because that's not in line with Christianity.
Just what kind of card does this leader need to carry?

When the Pope tells me to kill Jews or Muslims, I switch religions.

"read her words, not the sound bite."

She said she wants Allah to show the world, that we are being hypnotized by Israel. That's not being opposed to Israeli policy, that's being opposed to Israel.

I too have said, God I wish people would smarten up. Particularly in discussions with you :heybaby:

You claim I bend over backwards to defend Trump, when I bash him all the time. Yet you are twisting around like a contortionist, to avoid criticizing this vile hen.

Because she is not anti Semitic, but wants people to be concerned about the situation in Palestine.
I agree with her that all people should be concerned about the situation there.
Don't be afraid to look
https://www.hrw.org/world-report/2018/country-chapters/israel/palestine

UN Resolutions on Palestine since the 67 war
1967:
July 4: Resolution 2252: Humanitarian assistance in the 1967 war.
July 4: Resolution 2253 (ES-V): Condemns Israel's measures to change the status of Jerusalem as invalid
July 14: Resolution 2254: "Deplores" Israel's failure to abide by UN General Assembly Resolution 2253 (ES-V)
July 21: Resolution 2256: The Situation in the Middle East
September 18: Resolution 2257: The Situation in the Middle East.
November 16: Resolution 2264-D: Accounts of UNRWA.
December 19: Resolution 2341: Palestinian refugees
1968:
November 1: Resolution 2380-D: Accounts of UNRWA.
December 19: Resolution 2443: Establishes the Special Committee to Investigate Israeli Practices Affecting the Human Rights of the Palestinian People.
December 19: Resolution 2452: UNRWA Report.
1969:
December 5: Resolution 2522-D: Accounts of UNRWA.
December 10: Resolution 2535: UNRWA Report. "Reaffirms" the "inalienable rights" of the Palestinian people and requests the Security Council to take "effective measures" to force implementation of previous UN resolutions
December 11: Resolution 2546: Condemns Israeli "violations of human rights and fundamental freedoms" in the occupied territories
1970:
November 4: Resolution 2628: Urges the speedy implementation of UN Security Council Resolution 242 and recognizes that "respect for the rights of the Palestinians is an indisputable element in the establishment of a just and lasting peace in the Middle East"
December 4: Resolution 2653-D: Accounts of UNRWA.
December 5: Resolution 2727: Calls on Israel implement the recommendations of the UN special committee investigating Israeli practices in the occupied territories
December 7: Resolution 2656: Establishment of a working group for the financing of UNRWA.
December 8: Resolution 2672: UNRWA Report.
December 15: Resolution 2728: Report of the Special Committee to investigate Israeli practices affecting the Human Rights of the population of the Occupied Territories.
December 16: Resolution 2729: Report of the working group on the financing of the UNRWA.
1971:
November 8: Resolution 2756-D: Accounts of UNRWA.
December 6: Resolution 2791: Working group for the financing of UNRWA.
December 6: Resolution 2792: UNRWA Report. Calls for the implementation of UN General Assembly Resolution 194, stresses the "inalienable rights of the people of Palestine", and calls on Israel to stop resettling the inhabitants of Palestinian refugee camps.
December 13: Resolution 2799: The Situation in the Middle East.
December 20: Resolution 2851: Report of the Special Committee to investigate Israeli practices affecting the Human Rights of the population of the Occupied Territories. Condemns Israeli practices in the occupied territories.
1972:
November 9: Resolution 2912-D: Accounts of UNRWA.
December 8: Resolution 2949: The Situation in the Middle East.
December 13: Resolution 2963: UNRWA Report.
December 13: Resolution 2964: Working Group on the financing of UNRWA.
December 15: Resolution 3005: Report of the Special Committee to investigate Israeli practices affecting the Human Rights of the population of the Occupied Territories.
1973:
October 17: Resolution 3053-D: Accounts of UNRWA.
December 7: Resolution 3089: UNRWA Report.
December 7: Resolution 3090: Working Group on the financing of UNRWA.
December 7: Resolution 3092: Report of the Special Committee to investigate Israeli practices affecting the Human Rights of the population of the Occupied Territories.
December 17: Resolution 3175: Permanent sovereignty over natural resources in the occupied Arab territories.
1974:
October 14: Resolution 3210: Invites the PLO to participate in General Assembly deliberations on the question of Palestine.
November 12: Resolution 3227-D: Accounts of UNRWA.
November 22: Resolution 3236: Recognizes the right of the Palestinian people to regain its rights, including the right to self-determination and the right of return.
November 22: Resolution 3237: Observer status for the PLO.
November 29: Resolution 3240: Report of the Special Committee to Investigate Israeli Practices Affecting the Human Rights of the Population of the Occupied Territories.
November 29: Resolution 3246: Affirms the legitimacy of armed resistance by oppressed peoples in pursuit of the right to self-determination, and condemns governments which do not support that right
December 16: Resolution 3330: Working Group on the financing of UNRWA.
December 17: Resolution 3331: UNRWA Report.
December 17: Resolution 3336: Permanent sovereignty over national resources in the occupied Arab territories.
1975:
October 30: Resolution 3370-C: Accounts of UNRWA.
November 10: Resolution 3375: Invitation to the Palestine Liberation Organization to participate in the efforts for peace in the Middle East.
November 10: Resolution 3376: Founding of the Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People (CEIRPP).
December 5: Resolution 3414: Calls for economic sanctions and an arms embargo on Israel until it withdraws from all territories occupied in 1967 and grants the Palestinians their "inalienable national rights".
December 8: Resolution 3419: UNRWA report.
December 15: Resolution 3516: Permanent sovereignty over national resources in the occupied Arab territories.
December 15: Resolution 3525: Report of the Special Committee to Investigate Israeli Practices Affecting the Human Rights of the Population of the Occupied Territories.
1976:
November 23: Resolution 31/15: UNRWA Report.
November 24: Resolution 31/20: Expresses deep concern that no "just solution" to the "problem of Palestine" has been achieved, refers to the problem as the core of the Middle East conflict, and reaffirms the "inalienable rights" of the Palestinians, including the right of return and the right to national independence.
November 29: Resolution 31/22-F: Accounts of UNRWA.
December 9: Resolution 31/62: Calls for an international Middle East peace conference under the auspices of the UN and co-chaired by the United States and Soviet Union.
December 16: Resolution 31/106: Report of the Special Committee to Investigate Israeli Practices Affecting the Human Rights of the Occupied Territories.
December 21: Resolution 31/186: Permanent sovereignty over national resources in the occupied Arab territories.
1977:
November 25: Resolution 32/20: Reaffirms previous calls for a full Israeli withdrawal from the occupied territories and an international peace conference with PLO participation.
December 2: Resolution 32/40: Reaffirms the "inalienable rights of the Palestinian people", including the right to national sovereignty and the right of return.
December 13: Resolution 32/90: UNRWA report.
December 13: Resolution 32/91: Report of the Special Committee to Investigate Israeli Practices Affecting the Human Rights of the Population of the Occupied Territories. Calls on Israel to respect the Geneva Conventions
December 15: Resolution 32/111: Health needs of Palestinian refugee children.
December 19: Resolution 32/161: Permanent sovereignty over national resources in the occupied Arab territories.
December 19: Resolution 32/171: Living conditions of the Palestinian people.
December 21: Resolution 32/212-III: Implications of extending to certain former staff members coverage by the UN Joint Staff Pension Fund for service with UNRWA.
1978:
December 7: Resolution 33/28: CEIRPP report.
December 7: Resolution 33/29: Reaffirms previous calls for a full Israeli withdrawal from the occupied territories and an international peace conference with PLO participation.
December 15: Resolution 33/81: Health needs of Palestinian refugee children.
December 18: Resolution 33/110: Living conditions of the Palestinian people.
December 18: Resolution 33/112: UNRWA report.
December 18: Resolution 33/113: Report of the Special Committee to Investigate Israeli Practices Affecting the Human Rights of the Population of the Occupied Territories.
December 20: Resolution 33/147: Assistance to the Palestinian people.
1979:
November 16: Resolution 34/29: Expressing concern over the deportation of the Bassam Shakaa, Mayor of Nablus, by Israel.
November 23: Resolution 34/52: UNRWA report.
November 29 and December 12: Resolution 34/65: CEIRPP report.
December 6: Resolution 34/70: Reaffirms previous calls for a full Israeli withdrawal from the occupied territories and an international peace conference with PLO participation.
December 11: Resolution 34/77: Calling for an establishment of a nuclear-weapon-free zone in the Middle East.
December 12: Resolution 34/90: Report of the Special Committee to Investigate Israeli Practices Affecting the Human Rights of the Population of the Occupied Territories.
December 14: Resolution 34/113: Living conditions of the Palestinian people.
December 14: Resolution 34/133: Assistance to the Palestinian people.
December 14: Resolution 34/136: Permanent sovereignty over national resources in the occupied Arab territories.
1980:
November 3: Resolution 35/13: UNRWA report.
December 5: Resolution 35/75: Living conditions of the Palestinian people.
December 5: Resolution 35/110: Permanent sovereignty over national resources in the occupied Arab territories.
December 5: Resolution 35/111: Assistance to the Palestinian people.
December 11: Resolution 35/122: Report of the Special Committee to Investigate Israeli Practices Affecting the Human Rights of the Population of the Occupied Territories.
December 15: Resolution 35/169: CEIRPP report.
December 16: Resolution 35/207: Reaffirms previous calls for a full Israeli withdrawal from the occupied territories and the establishment of a Palestinian state.
1981:
October 28: Resolution 36/15: Demanding that Israel desist any archaeological excavations in the Temple Mount.
December 4: Resolution 36/70: Assistance to the Palestinian people.
December 4: Resolution 36/73: Living conditions of the Palestinian people.
December 10: Resolution 36/120: CEIRPP report.
December 16: Resolution 36/146: UNRWA report.
December 16: Resolution 36/147: Report of the Special Committee to Investigate Israeli Practices Affecting the Human Rights of the Population of the Occupied Territories.
December 16: Resolution 36/150: Demands Israel to cease planning of a canal between the Dead Sea and the Mediterranean.
December 17: Resolution 36/173: Permanent sovereignty over national resources in the occupied Arab territories.
December 17: UN General Assembly Resolutions 36/226 A & B: Reaffirms previous calls for a full Israeli withdrawal from the occupied territories and the establishment of a Palestinian state.
1982:
February 5: Ninth Emergency Special Session ES/9-1: The situation in the occupied Arab territories.
November 16: Resolution 37/18: Condamns Israel refusal to implement Security Council resolution 487, and demands Israel to withdraw its threat to attack nuclear facilities of neighbouring nations.
December 10: Resolution 37/86: CEIRPP report.
December 10: Resolution 37/88: Report of the Special Committee to Investigate Israeli Practices Affecting the Human Rights of the Population of the Occupied Territories.
December 16: Resolution 37/120: UNRWA report.
December 16: Resolution 37/122: Demands Israel not to build a canal between the Dead Sea and the Mediterranean.
December 16: Resolution 37/123: Condemnation of Israel's alleged responsibility for the Sabra and Shatila massacre by Kataeb Party in Beirut, Lebanon; resolves that the massacre was an act of genocide; condemns acts of plundering Palestinian cultural heritage; condemns the occupation of the West Bank, Gaza and the Golan Heights; and condemns the annexation of Jerusalem.
December 17: Resolution 37/134: Assistance to the Palestinian people.
December 17: Resolution 37/135: Permanent sovereignty over national resources in the occupied Palestinian and other Arab territories.
December 20: Resolution 37/222: Living conditions of the Palestinian people in the occupied Palestinian territories.
1983:
December 13: Resolution 38/58: CEIRPP report.
December 15: Resolutions 38/79: Report of the Special Committee to Investigate Israeli Practices Affecting the Human Rights of the Population of the Occupied Territories.
December 15: Resolution 38/83: UNRWA report.
December 15: Resolution 38/85: Demands Israel not to build a canal between the Dead Sea and the Mediterranean.
December 19: Resolution 38/144: Permanent sovereignty over national resources in the occupied Palestinian and other Arab territories.
December 19: Resolution 38/145: Assistance to the Palestinian people.
December 19: Resolution 38/166: Living conditions of the Palestinian people in the occupied Palestinian territories.
December 19: Resolutions 38/180: Calls all nation to suspend or sever all diplomatic, economic and technological ties with Israel. Condemnation of Israel on various topics including occupation of the West Bank, Gaza and the Golan Heights, war in Lebanon and the annexation of Jerusalem.
1984:
December 11: Resolution 39/49: CEIRPP report.
December 14: Resolutions 39/95: Report of the Special Committee to Investigate Israeli Practices Affecting the Human Rights of the Population of the Occupied Territories.
December 14: Resolutions 39/99: UNRWA report.
December 14: Resolution 39/101: Demands Israel not to build a canal between the Dead Sea and the Mediterranean.
December 17: Resolution 39/169: Living conditions of the Palestinian people in the occupied Palestinian territories.
December 18: Resolution 39/223: Economic development projects in the occupied Palestinian territories.
December 18: Resolution 39/224: Assistance to the Palestinian people.
1985:
December 12: Resolution 40/96: CEIRPP report.
December 16: Resolutions 40/161: Report of the Special Committee to Investigate Israeli Practices Affecting the Human Rights of the Population of the Occupied Territories.
December 16: Resolutions 40/165: UNRWA report.
December 16: Resolution 40/167: Decides to monitor Israel decision to construct a canal between the Dead Sea and the Mediterranean.
December 17: Resolution 40/169: Economic development projects in the occupied Palestinian territories.
December 17: Resolution 40/170: Assistance to the Palestinian people.
December 17: Resolution 40/201: Living conditions of the Palestinian people in the occupied Palestinian territories.
1986:
December 2: Resolution 41/43: CEIRPP report.
December 3: Resolutions 41/63: Report of the Special Committee to Investigate Israeli Practices Affecting the Human Rights of the Population of the Occupied Territories.
December 3: Resolutions 41/69: UNRWA report.
December 8: Resolution 41/181: Assistance to the Palestinian people.
1987:
December 2: Resolution 42/66: CEIRPP report.
December 2: Resolutions 42/69: UNRWA report.
December 8: Resolutions 42/160: Report of the Special Committee to Investigate Israeli Practices Affecting the Human Rights of the Population of the Occupied Territories.
December 11: Resolution 42/166: Assistance to the Palestinian people.
December 11: Resolution 42/190: Living conditions of the Palestinian people in the occupied Palestinian territories.
1988:
April 20: Resolution 43/233: Expressing shock over killing of Palestinian civilians in Nahalin.
November 3: Resolution 43/21: The uprising (Intifada) of the Palestinian people.
December 6: Resolutions 43/57: UNRWA report.
December 6: Resolutions 43/58: Report of the Special Committee to Investigate Israeli Practices Affecting the Human Rights of the Population of the Occupied Territories.
December 7: Resolution 43/65: Calling for an establishment of a nuclear-weapon-free zone in the Middle East.
December 15: Resolution 43/175: CEIRPP report.
December 15: UN General Assembly Resolution 43/176: International Peace Conference; principles for peace
December 15: UN General Assembly Resolution 43/177: Acknowledges the proclamation of the State of Palestine on 15 November 1988.
December 20: Resolution 43/178: Assistance to the Palestinian people.
2012
United Nations General Assembly Resolution 66/225 (2012)
November 29: resolution 67/19: Made Palestine a non-member observer state.
2018
United Nations General Assembly Resolution 73/5 (2018): Appoints Palestine as presiding chair for the 2019 sessions for the Group of 77.

What i am suggesting is that just as the Inquisition, the Crusades, was fomented by the Catholic Church, and other attacks done in the name of God by other religion or sects, that it can happen again and likely will.

The Srebrenica massacre in 1995 was not done in the name of God. The Bosnian war was basically an ethnic war. It was "ethnic cleansing." The Bosniaks (Bosnian Muslims) were officialy accepted to be an ethnic or national identity by the Yugoslav government. When the Serbian dominated Yugoslavia was broken apart in WWII, the animosities between, Serbs, Croats, Bosnians flared up into violent internecine massacres which was quelled for a while under the Communist reunification under Tito. But the underlying ethnic hate for each other erupted when Yugoslavia was again dissolved into the different national entities. Ethnic Croats who were Christians were also killed by Serbs, and vice versa.

The Crusades were a thousand years ago. And they were not unprovoked Christian wars against Islam. Islam had been the invader of Christian Europe and the brutal massacre or conversion and oppression of Christians in the Middle East. The Crusades were a retaking of and return of land to Christians. They were not intended to eliminate Islam from the earth. When the U.S. fought the Barbary Pirates, it was a retaliatory war, not an attempt to eliminate or conquer Islam. When Bush invaded Iraq, It was not a Christian holy war. There is no indication, nor any inclination, that Christianity wants a war with Islam. Such a war is not mandated nor desired in the tenets of Christianity. But such a war against Christians, Jews, and all non-Muslims is mandated in the sacred scriptures and foundation of Islam.

You can fear Christians if you wish. I wouldn't want to waste time dissuading you. But I think your fears are exaggerated, and probably of the wrong religion.

Men, in looking at religion, their own and others often read things into the writings that they want to see. That doesn't make it correct, except in their own mind.

Among the people there is he whose discourse on the life of the world pleases you, and he calls on God as witness to what is in his heart, yet he is an unyielding and antagonistic adversary. When he turns and leaves, he walks about corrupting the earth, destroying crops and livestock – God loves not corruption (Q2:204–205)

I don't read anything into the Religion of Islam. I read what the leaders and ruling clerics of Islam say and have said. I've quoted them in previous threads about Islam on this forum. They say, categorically, that Islam is not compatible with democracy, especially Western style democracy. And the scripture they follow commands them to do Jihad against the unbelievers. Jihad of the sword if necessary and possible. It is only a religion of peace when it rules. And all the privileges of peace it speaks about applies to Muslims. Not to unbelievers.

And those good Muslims that want to get along with the rest of the world admit that their religion needs to be reformed. In their mind, there are Muslims who, personally, practice a reformed version. But the official hierarchies of the Religion have no illusions about reform. They recoil at the notion that their perfect religion needs any change. That would be blasphemy against Allah and Mohammad. So, until the high official leaders of the Religion say so, it has not yet been reformed.

As for Christianity, the religion seems to be transforming in many ways to a more secularly oriented social justice ministry. More and more in some cases to a Progressive ministry. That may be even more frightening to those who want to protect Western civilization

Actually, the loss of will to war against enemies that use our own laws against us, is more worrisome than the notion that Christians are now prone to go on some crusade.

Pete -

Detbuch is right, the notion that the Christians were the aggressors in the Crusades is, to be charitable, debatable.

I also asked about Bosnia because I wasn't sure if it was Christians massacring others in the name of religion. Your facts could use some shoring up.

"No religious bearing when Christians kill Muslims except if your Pope tells them to?"

Doesn't have to be the Pope, but needs to be an accepted leader. If I tell Catholics to bomb abortion clinics, and some nut listens to me, that's not the fault of the Catholic Church, because "the Church" didn't tell anyone to do such a thing.

With the jihadists, it's a very different story.

"I too have said, God I wish people would smarten up"

Yes, because that's exactly the same as saying "Allah, please let the world see how Isreal has hypnotized them."

I'm trying to treat you like an adult, you don't make it easy with insane equivalencies like that.

I'm trying to treat you like an adult, you don't make it easy with insane equivalencies like that.

that's pretty funny

I hope IO and AOC continue to be outspoken....I wish pete would be put on a word count

that's pretty funny

I hope IO and AOC continue to be outspoken....I wish pete would be put on a word count

I hear you, but I can't equate those two, AOC is as entertaining and harmless as a dim-witted puppy who chews its tail because it hasn't figured out that the back half is connected to the front half. . Omar is dangerous, I wouldn't want more than one of her. And clearly she thinks the Jews are a bit much.

The democrats really have a challenge on their hands, to contain those 2, plus that other Muslim nut from Michigan who thought it was funny that she called Trump an m-fer to her child. Ha ha ha, please stop my stomach hurts from laughing.

This freshman class of fanatical liberal hens is really something...whew. They make Obama look like Eisenhower.

rut...roh...

Minnesota Rep. Ilhan Omar ripped former President Barack Obama in an interview published Friday, belittling his “pretty face” and saying his agenda of hope and change was an illusion.

She cited the “caging of kids” at the Mexican border and the “droning of countries around the world” on Obama’s watch — and argued that he wasn’t much different from President Trump

“We can’t be only upset with Trump,” the freshman firebrand told Politico Magazine.

“And that’s not what we should be looking for anymore. We don’t want anybody to get away with murder because they are polished. We want to recognize the actual policies that are behind the pretty face and the smile.”

rut...roh...

Minnesota Rep. Ilhan Omar ripped former President Barack Obama in an interview published Friday, belittling his “pretty face” and saying his agenda of hope and change was an illusion.

She cited the “caging of kids” at the Mexican border and the “droning of countries around the world” on Obama’s watch — and argued that he wasn’t much different from President Trump

“We can’t be only upset with Trump,” the freshman firebrand told Politico Magazine.

“And that’s not what we should be looking for anymore. We don’t want anybody to get away with murder because they are polished. We want to recognize the actual policies that are behind the pretty face and the smile.”

well, well!!

I think it is fine if she is not a fan of Israel/Jews whether or not she happens to be Muslim. But for a politician to actually open their mouth and prove it seems irresponsible.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
It was clumsy politically but I don't think she said anything really that inflammatory. You're going to tell me that Israeli lobbyists don't influence US politics with their money or that our politicians are typically expected to turn a blind eye to much of their behavior?

Being a Muslim also worked against her. Hell, Republicans have conflated her with 9/11 and on FOX News it was said because she wears a headscarf she must subscribe to Sharia Law over the US Constitution.

There was a good segment on this poor decision this morning. She has little support but gets a lot of attention. Most would agree it was a bad idea politically and proves a lack of understanding as to why Israel gets the support from the United States.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device