Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
You called them "a fringe of far-left, progressive Jews" and implied that they don't have a grasp on what antisemitism is. As if being far left means they haven't experienced what it is to be Jewish like you have.
Why should they have any less right to define it than you do? This is what I mean about how you are incapable of recognizing your own hypocrisy.
And you....yours.
You took what they said and announced that people of Jewish descent are the ones to decide what antisemitism is, ignoring that I and other Jews on this forum have decided differently. You fully ignored what we said, since it disagrees with the far-left opinion. Why should OUR opinion count any LESS?
Amazing how you are accusing me of the very thing you're doing, but it's a common tactic among liberals. I think it must have been an Alinski rule.
My thing is this. It is apparent that Ilhan Omar has some sort of vitriol against Israel, and those that support Israel. I don't think Ilhan Omar is ant-Semitic, but she might be anti-Zionist. However those that be in both camps of left and right politics have fused anti-Semitism and anti-Zionism as anti-Semitism. Say anything against Israel, one will be labeled an anti-Semite and his or her life is ruined, especially if one lives in places like New York city where 1/5 people are Jewish.
I'm no fan of Ilhan Omar, however she has her right to speak. My thing is this is that she is using her platform to speak on topics that is not associated with her district. She needs to stay in her lane and represent her constituents instead of having a personal vendetta against a nation. Should congress look into AIPAC, of course but AIPAC already has Congress, Senate, and even states like NY under its yoke due to high levels of Jews in such regions and support from Evangelical Christians like in the South.
Last. As a society. We need to find a way how to navigate around speech, especially now we are in an cultural, social and political climate where when on person says something out of line. WE do knee jerk reactions to get the fired, or expelled school, or evicted from dwellings. And thus such persons livelihood is ruined temporally or forever due courts of public opinion controlled by ideological wings of left and the right. Ilhan Omar is speaking Truth to Power Without Fear. And nothing wrong speaking Truth to Power in my opinion. But for those that be, Speaking Truth to Power can get someone fired, have their entire livelihood ruined. Right now as a society, we need to find away how navigate around Truth to Power, and the same could be said about jokes/comedy. Speaking Truth to Power contains poetic offensive language and words that might be viewed as racists, sexist, anti-Semitic, etc but the context and optics is not that at all in the message. People are having their lives destroyed for speaking truth and jokes. Also the Court of Public Opinion is far more dangerous than real courts. Say something out of line and the Court of Public Opinion will make sure you will never have a job again.
Other than that. Ilhan Omar has the right to speak on certain things. If her speech bothers you, that's not my problem, that is your problem to figure out. And I say this as some one is not very fond of the intersectional left.
My thing is this. It is apparent that Ilhan Omar has some sort of vitriol against Israel, and those that support Israel. I don't think Ilhan Omar is ant-Semitic, but she might be anti-Zionist. However those that be in both camps of left and right politics have fused anti-Semitism and anti-Zionism as anti-Semitism. Say anything against Israel, one will be labeled an anti-Semite and his or her life is ruined, especially if one lives in places like New York city where 1/5 people are Jewish.
I'm no fan of Ilhan Omar, however she has her right to speak. My thing is this is that she is using her platform to speak on topics that is not associated with her district. She needs to stay in her lane and represent her constituents instead of having a personal vendetta against a nation. Should congress look into AIPAC, of course but AIPAC already has Congress, Senate, and even states like NY under its yoke due to high levels of Jews in such regions and support from Evangelical Christians like in the South.
Last. As a society. We need to find a way how to navigate around speech, especially now we are in an cultural, social and political climate where when on person says something out of line. WE do knee jerk reactions to get the fired, or expelled school, or evicted from dwellings. And thus such persons livelihood is ruined temporally or forever due courts of public opinion controlled by ideological wings of left and the right. Ilhan Omar is speaking Truth to Power Without Fear. And nothing wrong speaking Truth to Power in my opinion. But for those that be, Speaking Truth to Power can get someone fired, have their entire livelihood ruined. Right now as a society, we need to find away how navigate around Truth to Power, and the same could be said about jokes/comedy. Speaking Truth to Power contains poetic offensive language and words that might be viewed as racists, sexist, anti-Semitic, etc but the context and optics is not that at all in the message. People are having their lives destroyed for speaking truth and jokes. Also the Court of Public Opinion is far more dangerous than real courts. Say something out of line and the Court of Public Opinion will make sure you will never have a job again.
Other than that. Ilhan Omar has the right to speak on certain things. If her speech bothers you, that's not my problem, that is your problem to figure out. And I say this as some one is not very fond of the intersectional left.
many average people cant seem to fathom anti-zionism and trying to explain it gets one the old semanticist label lol
it seems when you ARE of Jewish descent you have a better grasp on what antisemitism actually is and to point out AIPAC and the influence of the Likud party is NOT anti-semantic
It's worth noting that there were Jews that collaborated with the Nazis as well. A handful of the far left signing a letter proves nothing about the majority of Jews in this nation.
You took what they said and announced that people of Jewish descent are the ones to decide what antisemitism is, ignoring that I and other Jews on this forum have decided differently. You fully ignored what we said, since it disagrees with the far-left opinion. Why should OUR opinion count any LESS?
I have declared nothing. I'm simply pointing out to you that Jews have differing opinions on what constitutes antisemitism versus anti-Zionism. Disagreeing with you on that front doesn't make them any less Jewish, nor does it make their opinion any more or less valid than yours. I am perfectly willing to admit that. Are you?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rachel976
Amazing how you are accusing me of the very thing you're doing, but it's a common tactic among liberals. I think it must have been an Alinski rule.
LOL. You can always tell a Conservative is losing an argument when they bring up Alinsky, someone no one ever heard of until the Conservatives dug him up and started pretending he was someone liberals adhered to. That is a common tactic among Conservatives.
Last edited by HeyJude514; 03-09-2019 at 12:25 PM..
It's worth noting that there were Jews that collaborated with the Nazis as well. A handful of the far left signing a letter proves nothing about the majority of Jews in this nation.
i am very well aware of the kapos..i hadnt even realized it but it is ironic that for the last three hours i have been watching web lectures on the politics of Germany between ww1 and ww2...very illuminating
historically the Zionist believed ISRAEL first as that would be permanent the Zionist are known to have collaborated with the Nazis for this purpose even at the expense of fellow Jews...
there were other organizations that represented jews that opposed the Zionists as well in THIS country they tried to get help and FDR was rebuked..so one can be sympathetic to Israel while still thinking the Zionist have gone to far..as power corrupts anyone yes even Zionist
there is nothing to prove other than people have different opinions
there are similarities but they end with the fact that Germany had no experience with democracy and WE do
Last edited by elvis44102; 03-09-2019 at 12:34 PM..
You called them "a fringe of far-left, progressive Jews" and implied that they don't have a grasp on what antisemitism is. As if being far left means they haven't experienced what it is to be Jewish like you have.
Why should they have any less right to define it than you do? This is what I mean about how you are incapable of recognizing your own hypocrisy.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rachel976
And you....yours.
You took what they said and announced that people of Jewish descent are the ones to decide what antisemitism is, ignoring that I and other Jews on this forum have decided differently. You fully ignored what we said, since it disagrees with the far-left opinion. Why should OUR opinion count any LESS?
Amazing how you are accusing me of the very thing you're doing, but it's a common tactic among liberals. I think it must have been an Alinski rule.
Here is my take on this. And this is coming from someone who voted for two progressive Jews in 2016. Bernie Sanders and Jill Stein. Should Jews be the only ones to define what anti-Semitism is because they are the only ones who experienced such actions towards? That is a hard question to answer. Like black people of American slave descent are the only ones to define what racism is, or black women are the only ones to define what intersectionality is. Such people especially Jews are highly represented in the university system, their doctrine goes from the college campus, into books and all sorts of media. However, other people to want to be in on the conversation to define what is what, or is what is. These rules are not laid in stone by the government or state, but are rules laid and spread from word to mouth by the Courts of Public Opinion.
I understand that Jews faced 3000 years of persecution and oppression by the following states. Assyria, Bablyon, Persian Empire, Greek Diadochi Seleucid Kingdom of Post Alexander the Great, Roman Empire, Byzantine Empire, Crusader States, Kingdom of Spain, Kingdom of Portugal, Russian Republic of Venice, Russian Empire, Austrian Empire, Nazi Germany, Soviet Union, Cuba, Arab Republics and so forth. Jews have a lot of history of their orals throughout time. For them to have say what is anti-Semitism, no. But for what defines as anti-Semitism? I'm not sure.
I can see on Facebook that my relatives ( who are all Jewish) are hurt and frightened by her remarks. None would agree with this letter of support. I have to wonder just how far Omar would have to go before these Jews quit supporting her.. If she said the Holocaust never happened would they still be behind her? I bet some of them would.
Location: Live:Downtown Phoenix, AZ/Work:Greater Los Angeles, CA
27,606 posts, read 14,439,498 times
Reputation: 9169
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jay F
I can see on Facebook that my relatives ( who are all Jewish) are hurt and frightened by her remarks. None would agree with this letter of support. I have to wonder just how far Omar would have to go before these Jews quit supporting her.. If she said the Holocaust never happened would they still be behind her? I bet some of them would.
You are reaching. Criticizing the Likud party and Netanyahu as well as APAIC is not anti-Semitic.
Are you saying that what Omar said is not anti-Semitic and that you embrace that line of thinking... Just be honest... I would like to know who I would classify as an anti-Semite are on this forum...
This Jew understands that different life experiences produce different points of view.
As we all know, one persons terrorist is another's freedom fighter.
Whatever she did or said the key is whether her district wants to send her to Congress and/or back to Congress.
It's always interesting that many of the same people who love Trump (or anyone) who they feel "speaks their mind" then don't like when someone else does.
We have much more important agenda items to consider IN THE USA than debating the exact influence of AIPAC or other such orgs.
As far as "where she came from" - heck, Paul Ryan had no problem with the hypocrisy of trying to end gubment help for others even tho his entire existence (family when he was young) depended on it. What else is new?
Anti-this Anti-that. It's going to all stop working sooner or later. Too many people who cried wolf.
In the general sense, speaking truth (or even opinion) to power is a good thing. The very idea that we are all supposed to agree on foreign affairs is troubling.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
