Connect with us
//pagead2.googlesyndication.com/pagead/js/adsbygoogle.js (adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

Latest

Radical Democrats Omar and Tahlib given a pass by the MSM

The cover that the press gives these two Democrats may expose and force a hard look at the excessive power Israeli concerns play in the US.

Seraphim Hanisch

Published

on

2018 saw a new movement to the hard left in the Democrat party. radical, openly socialist candidates succeeded in getting elected to US House of Representatives posts. Among these, two – Rashida Tlaib and Ilhan Omar – are particularly worthy of note.

Both are women, and both claim to be adherents to Islam, which represents some movement in the representation of Muslim interests in the US. Mrs. Omar makes the news every few days with her statements about Israel, commonly taken by the US mainstream media (mostly Fox News) to be “anti-Semitic”, though a closer look at the bulk of the representative’s remarks actually reveals a different aspect.

Of these two, Omar appears to be the more observant Muslim. A Somali immigrant hailing from Mogadishu, she and her family resettled in Arlington, Virginia in 1995. She was fourteen years old at the time. She learned and appears to have a flair for political activism, having been quite active in the Minnesota House of Representatives from 2017 to her election to the US House. She started serving as Representative on a national level in January of this year.

Ilhan makes the news for saying statements such as these:

  • Those concerns were confirmed this week when Omar suggested on Twitter that members of Congress support Israel for money, igniting a bipartisan uproar in Washington that included criticism from President Donald Trump and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. (AP 2-15-2019: Omar’s edgy Israel tweet no surprise to some back home)
  • Omar, 37, was responding to a tweet from New York Congresswoman Nita Lowey when she made the alleged anti-Semitic comments Sunday. “I should not be expected to have allegiance/pledge support to a foreign country in order to serve my country in Congress or serve on committee,” Omar tweeted. (New York Post 3-5-2019: Ilhan Omar blasted over latest ‘anti-Semitic’ tweet about Israel)

There are many examples, but this one, reported by The Atlantic, is the most interesting, and we offer the lede to that piece here:

  • In the anti-Semitic imagination, Jews run the world through a global conspiracy of cash and power. This belief is both old and resilient, and in the past seven decades, anti-Semites have relied on this framework to explain the tight alliance between the United States and Israel.On Sunday night, a freshman representative from Minnesota, Ilhan Omar, cheerfully repeated this anti-Semitic trope, implying that AIPAC, the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, pays politicians to support Israel.

    Top Democrats, including House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, have called on Omar to “reject anti-Semitism in all forms,” according to The Washington Post, while Republicans have argued that her comments reveal the depth of anti-Israel sentiment in the Democratic Party.

    “I unequivocally apologize,” Omar said in a tweeted statement on Monday. “At the same time, I reaffirm the problematic role of lobbyists in our politics, whether it be AIPAC, the NRA, or the fossil-fuel industry. It’s gone on too long and we must be willing to address it.”

In other words, “I am sorry, but I am not sorry.”

The Atlantic’s piece attempts to make a point that Mrs. Omar’s remarks are damaging to the cause of having a “nuanced” conversation about Israel. It goes on to point out that her remarks are inaccurate:

Along with perpetuating anti-Semitic stereotypes, Omar’s comments were inaccurate and incomplete: AIPAC’s influence, which does not include payments to politicians, is only a small part of why the U.S.-Israel alliance is almost universally supported in Congress. Her comments, and the backlash they provoked, show how fractured the American debate over Israel has become. Omar is the new face of anti-Israel criticism on the left, and yet her use of anti-Semitic tropes undermines her credibility. Her comments have provoked a cycle of outrage, amplifying the most extreme voices on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, and limiting the chances for more nuanced debate over America’s support for Israeli policies. Instead of creating more space for critical debate about Israel, Omar has added credence to a common caricature of the anti-Israel left: that opposition to Israel is partly fueled by conspiratorial anti-Semitism.

This analysis appears “proper” but a closer look at the situation regarding Israel and the Palestinians and other aspects reveals something a bit different. Oddly enough, Mrs. Omar saying what people who understand the situation in Palestine have known for decades.

The story of Palestinian oppression and the continuing war between the Palestinians and Israelis is a long, bitter tale, with the Palestinians getting the butt end of the deal most often. It is also true that in just about every case, the strength of American conservative leadership is strongly supportive of Israel.

This idea is conceptual. It does not really matter what Israel does with that support, and the Israelis know this, and freely take advantage of it. More to the point, the matter is religious in nature, as many American Protestant evangelicals hold as true various expressions of a prophecy that says that whoever helps Israel will be blessed, because the people of Israel are God’s chosen.

The charge of anti-Semitism is no different here than the charge of “racist” was when used to attack anyone who didn’t support President Obama’s policies. Israel is, of course, largely a Jewish state; indeed, the inception of the new state in 1948 was based on this premise.

However, for many people that are Jewish, the issue of being Jewish is not centered on how they serve God, but rather as an ethnic identity.

We see similar ethnophyletism among other groups in the world as well, such as some Greek communities and Arab communities, Polish and Russian, and there is nothing wrong with it in certain aspects. After all, these groups are bound by common culture and traditions, and all of the above listed have also been severely persecuted in history.

But the idea that ethnic “specialness” should grant any “special rights” to any group is wrong. While it is easy to brand this “racism”, one ought to be very careful before doing so.

The reason is that racism no longer means simply “the idea that one race is better / worse” than another. Now it is that plus a whole lot of passionate anger, senseless rage, and eternal expressions of victimization.

As long as this sort of rhetoric continues, no progress will be made. No one wants to be called a racist, and most people will overreact to the charge by going totally silent when perhaps something indeed needs to be said.

This is potentially where we find Representative Omar. 

She has not expressed any notion (yet) of real anti-Semitism. She may, for her own religious upbringing does likely come with a manifesto about what is to be done about such people, but she has not crossed that line yet.

However, it should also be noted that Omar supports aberrant sexual identity politics, the “LGBTQrstuv…” and all the other letters anyone cares to add on to that nonsense. Islam has a very different message about sexual perversion. What is not known here is whether or not Ilhan Omar is playing the game, or if she really is a liberal first and Muslim second. That is a major fact that is not yet known about this Representative.

But so far, the only thing that diminishes – and yet also verifies her statements about the at-all-costs alliances with Israel, is precisely the fact that Omar comes from a region in the world where this situation is understood far differently than in the United States. It is for this reason that many Palestinians – both Muslims and Christians – are likely to wholeheartedly support her statements. This has echoes of “the enemy of my enemy is my friend”, a topic we will focus on at another time.

We mentioned Rashida Tahlib earlier, and we refer back to her now. As a representative, Ms. Tlaib has not been in the news too much, aside from her opening day rant with expletives about President Trump. She also professes Islam, but her understanding of it is very suspect. According to a bio given in Wikipedia, she feminizes her “Allah” which is probably a big no-no in Islam. She is often criticized for “not being Muslim enough.”

As she does not wear a hijab, her Muslim identity is easy to see “in name only” and she has been very highly thought of among Palestinian / Syrian / Lebanese circles in the United States. For Tlaib, the main ideology again is liberalism. She, along with colleague Alexandrea Ocasio-Cortez, are members of the Democrat Socialists of America. As such, Tlaib has not been much of a newsmaker since her rant.

There appear to be two issues in play, mostly centered on Ilhan Omar. The first is that the Representative, regardless of motive, is saying the right things regarding the excessive, “blank-cheque” type favor that Israel and its concerns receive from the United States. In fact, her claims appear to be gaining verification by virtue of the reaction of the House body, which, under Speaker Nancy Pelosi, has put forth a resolution to reject anti-Semitism “as hateful expressions of intolerance that are contradictory to the values that define the people of the United States.

In other words, the House is trying to shut Ilhan Omar up. Further, reading reports of the reaction of the House, and of Jewish or Israeli leaders, it seems apparent that Omar is stirring a pot they do not want stirred.

However, the fact that she is Muslim and a liberal also means that she gets a relatively light hand from the press. She gets reported when she says something, then she gets reported when she offers these non-apologies. But her repeated claims are absolutely consistent, and that is simply because there is a problem.

While it is indeed insulting to brand this situation with Israel in the truly bigoted fashion of calling the Jewish people out in pejorative terms, the pseudo-racist term evades the real political point: that there is something off-balance in the relationship between the US and Israel. Israel gets away with a great deal, and one of the big failures in conservative politics is to treat this matter as though it does not exist. 

This is not an issue that can be resolved in a ten second soundbite. It requires real thinking and honesty, but the use of dishonesty and name-calling is being employed to prevent the needed conversation from taking place.

 

 

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Advertisement //pagead2.googlesyndication.com/pagead/js/adsbygoogle.js (adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});
2 Comments

2
Leave a Reply

avatar
2 Comment threads
0 Thread replies
2 Followers
 
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
2 Comment authors
Georg ShtelnCudwieser Recent comment authors
  Subscribe  
newest oldest most voted
Notify of
Cudwieser
Guest
Cudwieser

It is worth checking out Rabbi Shappiro on YT and his views on Zionism and why Israel doesn’t speak for all Jews. A huge part of the conspiracy stems from the arrogance of Israel standing for all Jews and the oppressions Jews suffered throughout history, another point that has led to the stigma of Jews (namely usury). A lot of Jews don’t believe in Israel, the country and oft protest Bibi’s posturing. It is oft made clear Bibi is also a Jew in name only and his campaign cares little for Jews. It seems more that religion and suffrage is… Read more »

Georg Shteln
Guest
Georg Shteln

Well then. The author seems to downplay genuine anti-Semitic tropes. When did the Duran go MSM?

Latest

Germany Wants Nuclear Bombers

Germany does not manufacture atomic weapons but has come to consider itself as a nuclear power because it has vectors to use them.

The Duran

Published

on

Via VoltaireNet.org:


Germany’s armed forces are currently studying the possibility of acquiring nuclear bombers capable of using the new American B61-12 atomic bombs.

Meanwhile, the Pentagon itself plans to deploy these new atomic bombs in the German region of Eifel, in violation of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.

The German air force already has multi-tasking Tornado warplanes, which are already capable of deploying American atomic bombs. But those aircraft are going to be replaced, possibly, by European-developed Eurofighters, or by United States manufactured F/A-18 Super Hornets.

Either way, the warplane that Germany selects will have to be equipped with the AMAC (Aircraft Monitoring and Control) system, which allows the use of the new American atomic bombs and enables the regulation of the power of the explosion as well as at what height the bombs explode after they are launched.

Germany does not manufacture atomic weapons but has come to consider itself as a nuclear power because it has vectors to use them, and believes that this gives it the right to sit on the UN Security Council sharing the permanent member position occupied by France.

Both countries would thus represent the European Union, under the auspices of NATO.

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Continue Reading

Latest

1st since Notre Dame: Yellow Vests back despite ‘unifying’ disaster & they are angry

‘Yellow Vests’ march in Paris for 23rd straight week.

RT

Published

on

By

Via RT…


Yellow Vests protests brought clashes and tear gas back to the streets of Paris, despite politicians’ calls for “unity” in the wake of the Notre Dame fire. For protesters, the response to the fire only showed more inequality.

Saturday’s protests mark the 23rd straight weekend of anti-government demonstrations, but the first since Notre Dame de Paris went up in flames on Monday. Officials were quick to criticize the protesters for returning to the streets so soon after the disaster.

“The rioters will be back tomorrow,” Interior Minister Christophe Castaner told reporters on Friday. “The rioters have visibly not been moved by what happened at Notre-Dame.”

For many of the protesters, grief over the destruction of the 800-year-old landmark has made way for anger. With smoke still rising from Notre Dame, a group of French tycoons and businessmen pledged €1 billion to the cathedral’s reconstruction, money that the Yellow Vests say could be better spent elsewhere.

“If they can give dozens of millions to rebuild Notre Dame, they should stop telling us there is no money to respond to the social emergency,” trade union leader Philippe Martinez told France 24.

Saturday’s protests saw a return to scenes familiar since the Yellow Vests first mobilized in November to protest a fuel tax hike. Demonstrators in Paris’ Bastille district set barricades on fire and smashed vehicles, and police deployed tear gas to keep the crowds at bay.

Sporadic incidents of vandalism and looting were reported across the city, and some journalists even reported rioters throwing feces at police.

60,000 police officers were deployed across the country, and in Paris, a security perimeter was set up around Notre Dame. A planned march that would have passed the site was banned by police, and elsewhere, 137 protesters had been arrested by mid afternoon, police sources told Euronews.

Beginning as a show of anger against rising fuel costs in November, the Yellow Vests movement quickly evolved into a national demonstration of rage against falling living standards, income inequality, and the perceived elitism and pro-corporation policies of President Emmanuel Macron. Over 23 weeks of unrest, Macron has made several concessions to the protesters’ demands, but has thus far been unable to quell the rising dissent.

After Notre Dame caught fire on Monday, the president postponed a television address to the nation, during which he was expected to unveil a package of tax cuts and other economic reforms, another measure to calm the popular anger in France.

Macron’s address will be held on Thursday.

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Continue Reading

Latest

O Canada! The True North Strong and Free – Not

Maybe it’s past time for Canadians to get serious again about their independence.

Jim Jatras

Published

on

Authored by James George Jatras via The Strategic Culture Foundation:


Canadian visitors to Washington sometimes wonder why their embassy stands at the foot of Capitol Hill.

The answer? To be close to where Canada’s laws are made.

A main showcase of Ottawa’s craven servility to Washington is Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s complicity in the US-led regime change operation being conducted against Venezuela. Not content with ruining his own country with multiculturalism, polysexualism, and the like, Li’l Justin has acted in lockstep with Big Brother to the south inslapping sanctions on Venezuelan officials and serving as a US agent of influence, especially with other countries in the western hemisphere:

‘A Canadian Press report published at the end of January revealed that Canadian diplomats worked systematically over several months with their Latin American counterparts in Caracas to prepare the current regime-change operation, pressing [Venezuelan President Nicolás] Maduro’s right-wing opponents to set aside their differences and mount a joint challenge to the government. “The turning point,” said the Canadian Press [Global News], “came Jan. 4, when the Lima Group … rejected the legitimacy of Maduro’s May 2018 election victory and his looming January 10 inauguration, while recognizing the ‘legitimately elected’ National Assembly.” The report cited an unnamed Canadian official as saying the opposition “were really looking for international support of some kind, to be able to hold onto a reason as to why they should unite, and push somebody like Juan Guaidó.”

‘One day prior to Maduro’s inauguration, [Canadian Foreign Minister Chrystia] Freeland spoke to Guaidó, the newly-elected National Assembly speaker, by telephone to urge him to challenge the elected Venezuelan president.’

But that’s not all. Canada is out front and center in the “Five Eyes” intelligence agencies’ war on China’s Huawei – with direct prompting from US legislators and intelligence.  As explained by Col. Larry Wilkerson, former chief of staff to Gen. Colin Powell, it’s not that Huawei violated any law when circumventing US sanctions but it is the US that is acting illegally by unilaterally imposing sanctions that were never agreed to internationally. But that’s OK – when it comes to Washington’s claims of jurisdiction over every human being on the planet, Justin and Chrystia are happy to oblige!

Also, let’s not forget Chrystia’s role in keeping the pot boiling in Ukraine. It would of course be cynical (and probably racist) to attribute anything relating to Ukraine to her own interesting family background …

To be fair, the lickspittle attitude of Canadian officials towards their masters south of the 49th parallel is hardly unique in the world. Also to be fair, it’s natural and would be generally beneficial for Canada to have a positive relationship with a powerful, kindred neighbor rather than a negative one. Think of Austria’s ties to Germany, or the Trans-Tasman relationship of Australia and New Zealand, or the links that still exist between Russia and Ukraine despite efforts by the west to set them against each other (as, for example, Spain and Portugal were at loggerheads for several centuries, when the latter was a loyal ally of Spain’s foe, Great Britain, to such an extent that Portugal was sometimes shown on maps and globes in the same pink as British possessions; a similar situation existed between Argentina and British ally Chile).

A close and mutually advantageous relationship is one thing, but Canada’s de facto loss of independence is another. Not only does the US control Canada’s diplomacy, military, and intelligence but also her financial system (with, among other levers, the notorious FATCA law, which places Canadian institutions under the supervision of the IRS, with Canada’s revenue service acting, care of the Canadian taxpayer, as a cat’s paw for not only the IRS but the NSA and other snooping agencies). As explained by one Canadian nationalist (yes, they do exist!), the redoubtable David Orchard, trade is also a critical issue:

‘Canada …, after almost three decades of “free trade” with the U.S., has more than $1.2 trillion in federal and provincial debt, large deficits at every level, no national child or dental care, high university tuition, miserly old age pensions, years of massive budget cuts, and giveaway prices for its exports of oil, gas, timber and minerals.

‘For 150 years, great Canadian leaders have warned that without an economic border with the United States, we would soon no longer have a political border.

‘We once owned the world’s largest farm machinery maker, Massey Harris, headquartered in Toronto; built the world’s largest and most respected marketer of wheat and barley, the Canadian Wheat Board, based in Winnipeg; created a great transcontinental railway system, beginning in Montreal, which tied our country together; and saw Vancouver’s shipyards produce the beautiful Fast Cat ferry.

‘Instead of spending hundreds of billions on foreign-made machinery, electronics, automobiles, ships, fighter jets and passenger aircraft (even payroll systems for federal employees!), we can build our own, both for the domestic and export market.

‘We once designed and built the world’s most advanced jet interceptor, the Avro Arrow, so we know it can be done. [Emphasis added] With Canada’s resources and ingenuity, it could create a prosperous, domestically controlled economy that would give Canadians multiple benefits, security and pride of ownership. All that is required is some of the will that drove our ancestors to create an alternate power in North America. As George-Étienne Cartier, the great Québécois Father of Confederation, put it, “Now everything depends on our patriotism.”’ [Note: Orchard is the author of the must-read book The Fight for Canada: Four Centuries of Resistance to American Expansionism. To begin at the beginning, in the late 1680s, as part of English-French rivalry in North America, Massachusetts Puritans sought to root out the nest of popish deviltry known as Quebec. Following their disastrous 1690 defeat, they decided to fight Satan closer to home by hanging witches. The rest, as they say, is history…]

Scratch a Canadian patriot and you’ll hear about the Avro Canada CF-105 Arrow. As a watershed moment in Canada’s downward slide into subservience, the cancellation of what by all accounts was a magnificent aircraft – and a snapshot of what Canada’s international competitiveness (including in advanced aerospace) could have looked like had it been able to develop independently – might have been the point of being sucked into the American vortex. As noted by one response to my suggestion that Ottawa’s stance on Venezuela amounted to Canada’s annexation by the US: “Canadian here…unfortunately, the above is true (not literally of course, but in practice). It goes back even before the time of Diefenbaker, who canceled our Avro Arrow program on demand from the US – thus destroying our aerospace industry and causing brain drain to the US/Europe.”

To this day, the decision of then-Prime Minister John Diefenbaker to kill the Arrow project (and “put 14,528 Avro employees, as well as nearly 15,000 other employees in the Avro supply chain of outside suppliers, out of work”) on what came to be known as “Black Friday,” February 20, 1959, remains controversial and shrouded in mystery. A mix of budgetary, political, technological, and personality factors has been cited, none of them conclusive. Pressure from the US side, including unwillingness of Washington to purchase a Canadian aircraft when the US could pressure them to buy American planes and missiles, no doubt played a key role: “Instead of the CF-105, the RCAF invested in a variety of Century Series fighters from the United States. These included the F-104 Starfighter (46 percent of which were lost in Canadian service), and (more controversial, given the cancellation of the Arrow) the CF-101 Voodoo. The Voodoo served as an interceptor, but at a level of performance generally below that expected of the Arrow.”

While we may never know reliably why Diefenbaker cancelled the Arrow or how Canada or Canadian industry might have followed a different path, there’s no question of the superior capabilities of the Arrow. As it happens, one of the few pilots who had a chance to test the Arrow in an impromptu friendly dogfight is now-retired USAF fighter pilot Col. George Jatras, later US Air Attaché in Moscow (also, this analyst’s father). As he related in 2017:

‘I’ve received a number of messages in the last couple days about this bird, including some that say it may be revived. I don’t know how The Arrow would compare to today’s aircraft, but I had a first-hand lesson on how it faired against the F-102.

‘In 1959, I was stationed at Suffolk County AFB on Long Island with the 2nd Fighter Interceptor Squadron. We had an informal exchange program with a Canadian fighter squadron stationed near Montreal. From time to time, two or four aircraft from one of the squadrons would fly to the other’s base on a weekend cross country.

‘On one such exchange, I was #3 in a four ship formation led by [former Tuskegee airmanErnie Craigwell (I don’t recall who the other pilots were). As we entered Canadian airspace, cruising at about 40,000 ft., we spotted a contrail well above our altitude (probably at 50,000ft.) and closing very fast.  As the other aircraft appeared to be passing by, we could clearly see the delta shaped wing and knew it was the Avro Arrow that the Canadian pilots had told us about. Then, instead of just passing by, he rolled in on us! Ernie called for a break and we split into elements. When we talked about the encounter afterwards we all agreed that our first thought was, “This guy is in for a surprise; he doesn’t know that he’s taking on the F-102.”  Well, we were the ones in for a surprise. Even with two elements covering each other, not one of us could get on his tail. His power and maneuverability were awesome.  After he had played with us for a few minutes, like a cat with four mice, he zoomed back up to about 50K and went on his way. What an aircraft! What a shame that it never went into production.’

What is perhaps most curious about the Arrow’s demise is that “everything was ordered brutally destroyed; plans, tools, parts, and the completed planes themselves were to be cut up, destroyed, scrapped and everything made to disappear.”  Why? Well, security of course! Don’t engage in conspiracy theories …

The Canadian national anthem finishes with a pledge: “O Canada, we stand on guard for thee.” It should be noted that understandably resentful Loyalists fleeing the US following the American Revolution were a major contribution to the growth of Canada’s English-speaking population. American troops – back when we were the plucky underdog fighting the mighty British Empire – invaded Canada in 1775 and during the War of 1812 but were defeated. Relations got testy during the American Civil War as well, and even afterwards the US was wary of a proposed united “Kingdom of Canada,” hence the choice of the name “Dominion” in 1967. If today’s Canadians think we-all down here don’t know whom they’ve mostly had in mind to “stand on guard” against all this time, they’d better think again.

Maybe it’s past time for Canadians to get serious again about their independence – eh?

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Continue Reading

JOIN OUR YOUTUBE CHANNEL

Your donations make all the difference. Together we can expose fake news lies and deliver truth.

Amount to donate in USD$:

5 100

Validating payment information...
Waiting for PayPal...
Validating payment information...
Waiting for PayPal...
Advertisement

Advertisement

Quick Donate

The Duran
EURO
DONATE
Donate a quick 10 spot!
Advertisement
Advertisement

Advertisement

The Duran Newsletter

Videos

Trending