• Pelosi and Democratic Leaders Condemn Omar Statements as Anti-Semitic
    52 replies, posted
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/11/us/politics/ilhan-omar-anti-semitism.html
There's a difference between anti-semetism and being anti-isreal. Regardless of who the money is from, America's willingness to turn a blind eye to Isreals ongoing warcrimes is shameful and the American Israel Public Affairs Committee is part of the problem.
Remember: Not approving of Israel’s actions isn’t Anti-Semiticism.
She insinuated that the GOP only support Israel because they get paid off by rich Jews. It's just another example of the good 'ol anti-Semitic trope that Jews control the world through money. It's also patently false. The GOP support Israel because their constituents and voters support Israel.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Israel_Public_Affairs_Committee The AIPAC is literally an pro israel lobbying organization...? I mean they're quite literally putting money into the political discourse around this, and have for a good while now. Is it anti-semtic to acknowledge that there is money behind these political positions? They also spend on pushing a message of pro israel in media, so constituents simply supporting israel isn't entirely a full picture.
the dem leadership and pretty much everybody else on the hill iskind of missing the point, the Israeli lobby is fucking massive and nobody talks about it but for a country that receives an enormous amount of aid, for them to spend unlimited sums lobbying the US it seems like a conflict of interest.
Almost literally every issue has money going into it from both sides. To claim that the reason the GOP support Israel is because of lobbyist money is to ignore the huge general support from the voter base and the arguments actually being offered.
Unsurprising that the establishment dems are gonna try to railroad her about this. It's not anti-semetic in any way.
I didn't say it didn't. But you DID say that the only reason is public support. That isn't true, because it omits a large pressure point as to why they're pushing for that. Can you show me the billions the anti israel campaign is shovelling into this? Cause I can show you the AIPAC is shovelling billions into the US to alter foreign policy. Surely if "Money is going into it from both sides" this will be an easy task for you to accomplish.
Afaik there aren't any Republican Jews in Congress and the Democrats get about 3/4 of the Jewish vote in most elections, this is just making sure they stay voting blue
The gop has said the exact same thing about Soros for years.
Nevermind the lobbying, how much money are we making selling weapons to them? To say money is a factor here isn't anti-Semitic, it's realistic.
1) Would you say Ilhan Omar claimed money is the only reason the GOP supports Israel? If not, why are you applying that standard to me when I never used those words? I said the GOP supports Israel because their constituents support Israel. That is the main reason. Do other things interact with that? Of course. There are probably hundreds, if not thousands, of reasons that all play different sized roles. 2) Saying that money is spent to push something is not the same thing as demonstrating that it's a major cause of support. I never said equal amounts, or even comparable amounts, are spend on both sides of this issue. I said almost every issue has money on both sides. Would it be accurate to say democrats support pro-unions issues because of union money? No, of course not. Unions line up with democratic ideals, and their constituency supports unions as well. Can it have an effect, sure, but to say that it's the reason democrats support unions would be false. In the same way, to say the GOP supports Israel because of Jewish money is only relevant if you don't actually think the GOP has real reasons to support Israel, which they clearly do. To be even more clear, here's the list of Ilhan Omar's top donors: EMILY's List (Pro-Choice Super PAC) End Citizens United (Anti-Corporate PAC) Service Employees International Union (Union) Jeff Anderson & Assoc (Self-described "Clergy Sexual Abuse Attorneys") Moveon.org (Far left PAC) Does that mean it would be fair to say Omar supports pro-choice policy, ending citizen's united, unions, etc. because of "the benjamins?" No, of course not.
I'd say I can only interpret her statements from an outside perspective, and to me, she's pointing to excessive cash being a large part of it, yes. And I don't think that's wrong. You're right, but you'd be very naive to think that the amount of money spent has done nothing. You'd be especially naive to look at the US's policies regarding Israel, and military spending on Israel, and think "money didn't play a larger role than it did not". I'd say your average Democratic member of the House, or Senate do not support unions, but that's an aside. I'd say the GOP does have real reasons to support Israel, but takes funding to make the issue a higher priority to their party members than outside the party might want. Essentially, money exacerbates the size of the cause by quite a bit. I don't see how that's remotely controversial, as it's "Business as usual" for America to do that. You're right, I'd say she's taking money for those things because she supports those causes. I think, though, there is a radical difference between the budgetary allotments of say, EMILY's List, and the AIPAC. There's almost no competition in the scale of the funds given. And to ignore the scale of the funds spent, given, or donated in this context is, as I've been saying, pretty naive. Of course it has an effect.
Criticism of political funding is not exclusive to Israel support. There are definitely positions that the GOP takes up because of this sort funding that are not popular. To the extent which this funding plays a role in this specific issue is difficult to determine, but it shouldn't be assumed that its because of antisemitism that she is levying this criticism.
Just to be clear, you think the claim "It's all about the Benjamins baby" is a fair statement when it comes to GOP support for Israel? If so, can you provide any actual evidence that money is the major reason the GOP supports Israel (as opposed to the GOP voter base supporting Israel, for example)?
that's a lot of context from "all about the benjamins" and "AIPAC!"
Also because the weapons industry makes big money off of Israel. Targeting Jews for guilt by association like this is made especially ridiculous (and more blatantly antisemitic) when you take into account the fact that the majority of American Jews don't support the Israeli government. A feeling which is mutual as the Israeli government has in recent years refused to recognize the status of, and even barred from entry, American Rabbis. This is because Bibi has focused on appealing to the conservative orthodox community, who generally dislike the more liberal reformist sect that's most popular in America.
No, she implied that Israeli companies are doing that.
You're basically asking me to do some mind reading, which both of us know, neither of us are capable of. The problem is, neither of us can be proven right here. You say "Oh they only vote that way because the voters want it". I might ask you "Why do the voters want it?", and that answer is complicated, and comes down to a question of personal agency. I personally, dispute that the majority of people who "support israel" as a political position have a wealth of knowledge about the issue. Note: I am not saying it is impossible to support Israel and be informed, I'm only saying the average voter who may put pressure to be "Pro israel" is uninformed. The AIPAC has a large media budget, and has spent nearly 60 years in the US as a lobbying group building influence. They have media campaigns, they influence publications of all varieties, and they directly influence the voter by affecting the politician at the Pulpit. Someone may be pro-israel, but once they're paid to be pro-israel, they do so in a louder way. That's not a malicious assumption, it's a logical one, the same one you and I both agreed on previously regarding Omar's top donors. No one can provide evidence, including yourself, that the reason the GOP, and the votership behind the GOP are because they earnestly support Israel. I cannot providence evidence that they're only on that position because of money. But I strongly suspect an earnest belief has been bolstered by a financial incentive, that has been fueled by a very long term media campaign that has changed the state of the conversation to further bolster that earnest belief. It's essentially a positive feedback loop of manipulation, and we can see this in a multitude of America's venues. People in power manipulate the situation to further feed into their own power. I don't think for a second I'll change your view on this, but I don't believe you can prove your point, that these people only do this because 1) the voters want it and 2) they earnestly support Israel. So, if you're unable to prove your claim true, and I'm unable to prove Omars claim true(not that I ever tried to), but there are logical assertions about her argument that are hard to dispute, so I think we're left at an impasse.
In the big picture, AIPAC is a small player. Their highest year of donation was 2016. They donated $3.6 million. For comparison and context, the top 2016 organizational political donors were: Fahr LLC ($90,592,095) (Democrats) Renaissance Technologies ($59,752,807) (Mixed) Las Vegas Sands ($44,387,566) (Republicans) Paloma Partners ($41,954,800) (Democrats) Service Employees International Union ($39,415,329) (Democrats)
Lobbying Spending Database Sure, they only spent 3.6 in 2016. But between 2000, and 2015, they spent roughly 32.74 Million dollars on influencing american politics and american views of israel. No one can quantify the effect of their actions, that makes this argument virtually impossible to make air tight. But if you're saying that they're not spending enough to alter political opinion, I don't think you're looking at a big enough picture. Michael Oren writes in his book, Power, Faith, and Fantasy: America in the Middle East 1776 to the Present, "Though founded in 1953, AIPAC had only now in the mid-70s, achieved the financial and political clout necessary to sway congressional opinion. Confronted with opposition from both houses of Congress, United States President Gerald Ford rescinded his 'reassessment.'"[15] George Lenczowski notes a similar, mid-1970s, timeframe for the rise of AIPAC power. "It [the Carter Presidency] also coincides with the militant emergence of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) as a major force in shaping American policy toward the Middle East."[16] He further notes that this period also coincides with a major shift in Israeli government policies related to the election of Menachem Begin in Israel. It's pretty aparent that the stated goal of the group is to alter american foreign policy decisions about Israel, it's pretty clear that they have hit this mark by the history we can see from their beginning to the present. They have had a noticable effect, if difficult to quantify, on ameircan foreign policy decisions.
I'm not the one who made the original claim, Omar was. If the original claim can't be backed up via facts, then it's safe to assume there's a non-factual reason behind it. I've never said they had "no effect." You keep trying to deal in black and white when it isn't. I'm saying it isn't the main contributor, which was obviously Omar's intention. It says he supported Israel because they already held his views. He saw that the GOP was more aligned with him. So he started to support them. It wasn't the other way around. If anything, this example displays the exact opposite of what you're claiming. The money follows the ideology. The ideology didn't follow the money. Also, if you can give a complete timeline of the GOP's support for Israel without claiming that lobbying caused it, then you are implicitly saying that lobbying money wasn't the cause. Omar clearly claimed that money was the major motivating factor. "It's all about the Benjamins baby," can't be interpreted any other way.
Israel has hypnotized the world, may Allah awaken the people and help them see the evil doings of Israel.” Representative Ilhan Omar, who has been battling charges of anti-Semitism for weeks, apologized on Monday for insinuating that American support for Israel is fueled by money from a pro-Israel lobbying group — a comment that drew swift and unqualified condemnation from fellow Democrats, including Speaker Nancy Pelosi. Omar consistently invokes anti semitic tropes about Jews controlling things, whether through money or through "hypnotizing". She then gets called out about it, apologizes, and does it again. People are calling out trump for dog-whistling, why aren't they calling her out for dog-whistling? She's knowingly repeating anti semitic tropes and then crying when the natural consequences happen. American support for Israel is not solely based on money and to say that shows complete ignorance on the nuances of the relationship between Israel and the US. Christian American Zionists are way more supportive than the average Jewish American. What's shes saying is a lite version of this without anything really to back her up https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zionist_Occupation_Government_conspiracy_theory
This is very different from assuming its because of antisemitism. You're essentially are saying that because she can't be proven correct, then her motive must be in question.
Can you provide a different alternative? One that takes into account her other statements, like the one quoted by Svinnik? ("Israel has hypnotized the world, may Allah awaken the people and help them see the evil doings of Israel.")
This last line doesn't really sit well with me. You're conflating a pro-Israel lobby with "Jews" as a people. That is a pretty big leap of logic that you cannot substantiate.
he's making assumptions because his anti-semitic projection is forcing its way into his argument style.
No, no she isn't. She very specifically made a claim that Jewish lobbying controls the GOP position on Israel. It wasn't nuanced. It wasn't generalized.
What's just annoying is also why the disproportionate focus on israel? Allies spend money in their benefactor country in order to keep up that support, I don't see how that's okay for South Korea and Japan but suddenly becomes a problem when Israel is involved? How is spending money supporting Israel, an ally country, more concerning than the fact that countries that are tax havens like the Caymen Islands, Marshall Islands, and Ireland are spending tons of money lobbying while the official state paper of china, an enemy country, is spending more money than the Israeli government itself on lobbying? https://files.facepunch.com/forum/upload/58149/6528e046-f6ba-4f8b-b4c8-94b260c0bdc3/image.png Foreign Lobby Watch • OpenSecrets The fact is, most americans support israel and for their elected officials to ignore that is political suicide. Lobbying money might be involved but at the end of the day, politicians are concerned about winning the next election. Americans Remain Staunchly in Israel's Corner
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.