The Problem With Ilhan Omar

[leftynyc]

Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN) has an army of critics who want to silence anyone in mainstream American politics (which includes anyone elected to Congress) who is critical of Israel. Many of those critics are driven by or leverage hostility to Muslims, as evidenced just yesterday with this bigoted poster at a West Virginia GOP event tying her to 9/11. But it is also true that she routinely uses words or phrases charged with deep anti-Semitic histories.

snip
Listening to this come up again and again it is clear that what is being conflated are criticisms of Israeli policy, whether not one “supports” Israel and insinuations about “allegiance” to Israel and particularly the idea that certain people or some “political influence” either has an “allegiance” to Israel or demands “allegiance” to Israel. Behind all these vague references it is clear that we are referring to American Jews.

What’s often hard for me to figure out is whether this is intentional or the product of some confusion or misunderstanding. At this point, if it’s a confusion or misunderstanding it seems either willful or ingrained.

However that may be, Omar should be able to express criticism of Israeli policies and US policies of support toward the Israeli government without repeatedly waltzing into claims about dual loyalties or foreign allegiances. I’m certain she would be criticized from many of the same quarters even she did simply criticize Israel and push for different US policies. But she doesn’t. And it happens again and again. That is unfortunate and I wish it weren’t so. But it is.


https://talkingpointsmemo.com/edblog/the-problem-with-ilhan-omar


For for Josh's website to take this on. I'm tired of my side of the aisle excusing this bullshit by trying to pretend this is merely about criticism of Israel. It's not.

[ck4829]

1. A great example of flawless assimilation into American culture and politics

If she were not a Somali Muslim woman, but say a white man, talking about "cultural Marxists", "globalists", or "George Soros"; then it would go unchallenged in Fox News, Congress, and even from the White House.

[leftynyc]

2. You have Josh Marshall

Myself and others in very good standing on DU airing their concerns and yet you still want to bring up fox and the white house. She's accusing ME of disloyalty to MY country and all you want to do is deflect. That's a real problem for me.

[zaj]

5. I love Josh Marshall more than any other left writer...

... been reading him daily since the 2000 recount. My #1 trusted political voice because he is so thoughtful and reserved.

He's right, you are right, and I want to listen to your voices in this issue. But...

We have to be able to raise an issue like this somehow. And "public policy" as a frame is insufficient for intended, systematic patterns of lobbying in a global world where dual loyalties are there.

This complexity and pain is true for Catholics, Jews, Russians, and any immigrant related group with sufficiently powerful foreign policy voices.

So how do we handle it? I don't think Josh does much to address that.

[leftynyc]

7. There are plenty of ways

to talk about Israel, especially about the putrid bibi, without accusing Americans, Jewish and otherwise, of disloyalty or dual loyalty (a poster on another thread about this accused Eilliot Engel of being a dual citizen, also a disgusting lie). I trash bibi all the time. I honestly don't understand the problem of doing this without the disgusting dual loyalty charge. People here really need to start taking a close look at this or we're going to wind up with a British problem and a Corbyn problem. I would not have a political home in Britain and the thought the same thing happening here chills me to the bone.

[zaj]

6. I think we have to come up with something...

Because we need immigration, diversity and democracy. And all three create tensions with each other in a fast moving, globalized world.

[ck4829]

9. I'm pointing out she is assimilated 100%, she is

This has been the political situation for the past 2 years...

"Jewish people aren't loyal to the country."
"Liberals aren't loyal to the country." (That was pretty much the theme of CPAC this year)
"Muslims aren't loyal to the country."
"'Fake News' isn't loyal to the country."

I will admit this is true: Everyone, especially Rep. Ilhan Omar, needs to take a step back and count to 10 before saying something.

But at the same time, something else I am convinced is true: There are things that Rep. Ilhan Omar says that are given a focus that would not even be talked about if said by someone else. And it's because of what she believes in, what she wears on her head, the color of her skin, etc.

[zaj]

3. Replace Israel with Russia...

... and there is a lot less reason for objection to her words.

I'm ok not using the word allegiance, because it clearly evokes powerful memories for loyal citizens with a history of persecution. But the idea behind it isn't a generally unreasonable idea to discuss. It's problematic to make the idea off limits.

Foreign policy lobbying by foreign governments and foreign citizen groups really is a complicated situation. Not because laws are hard to follow, but because allegiances are hard to determine.

We write all of our laws based on a judgement of presumed allegiance. What do we do in an era where many actors are clearly defying this norm?

[leftynyc]

8. I trash bibi all the fucking time

and manage quite nicely without charging anyone with disloyalty to my country. Why is Rep Omar seemingly unable to do that?

[zaj]

10. Trashing Bibi doesn't tackle a related issue.

The system of foreign influence in our elections is a much more abstract, existential and complex issue.

Something that we need to be able to discuss, not in a divided way (due to policy preferences) but in a somewhat united way.

I accept your objection, and am simply asking for us to agree to discuss the best way to handle such discussions and respect history and trauma and not unduely attack anyone American's loyalty.

[leftynyc]

13. I would accept it was merely about

"foreign influence" if we had the same discussions about Britain, Germany, France or any other foreign ALLY of our country. Seems this only comes up about Israel which is a REAL problem.

[zaj]

19. Don't Muslim Americans' face their same "foreign influence" questions...

...that Jews are facing now, right?

I mean the entire discussion of Saudi Arabian influence on American policy is essentially the same. Trump protecting the Saudi King in the way of Jamaal Khashoggi. Bush protecting the Bin Laden family. I'm assuming some large pool of conservative voters are attacking Omar's loyalties to America as a form of foreign Muslim influence right now.

I can't speak to Illan Omar's personal intention. I don't think any of us can, without mind-reading.

But we should be able to talk about the system of foreign influence without attacking individual citizens with religious, ethnic, cultural or family ties to the sources of foreign influence.

It's a delicate question, that most won't handle with respect, but among us here at DU, I'm hoping we might be able to develop a way to have these discussions in a respectful, healthy way.

[leftynyc]

21. I was as disgusted as everyone else

when Rep Omar was tied to 9/11 recently in an ad https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/onpolitics/2019/03/01/ilhan-omar-tied-9-11-attack-poster-west-virginia-capitol/3033450002/

So why she can't herself manage to criticize Israel without accusations of disloyalty is beyond me. I was STILL fighting with someone here on DU who claimed Elliott Engel was a dual citizen of Israel. It's an age old canard and when it comes from my side of the aisle it offends me more than when it's cons because I think they're imbeciles anyway.

[zaj]

26. "accusations of disloyalty"... this is not fair.

I'm not aware of any such accusations...

Here's the quote referenced in the TPM article.

Last week at a panel discussion of Israel and charges of anti-Semitism she spoke of wanting to talk about “the political influence in this country that says it is okay to push for allegiance to a foreign country.” This afternoon in response to criticism of those comments she tweeted: “I should not be expected to have allegiance/pledge support to a foreign country in order to serve my country in Congress.”

Here's her clarification from the last time the issue came up:



Note her very specific emphasis on AIPAC and lobbying.

Doesn't she use the word "allegiance", not as an attack on American Jews for "disloyalty", but as a defense of herself as being a loyal American even while disagreeing with the world of AIPAC.

[leftynyc]

32. Go ahead an defend her

That's twice she's made stupid statements about the same thing. Maybe you're into giving people unlimited chances to prove they're not morons, I'm not.

[zaj]

34. I'm not trying to defend her, I'm trying...

... to discuss the issues at play, and do so with respect for your views, the complexity of the discussions we need to be able to have, and ensure we are focused on the actual facts of the matter.

Am I missing something important?

[leftynyc]

36. Yes, apparently you are

missing something important such as history. It's really not that complex at all.

[zaj]

37. Can you take a minute to...

... pull together the particulars that I'm missing? I'm asking sincerely.

I would appreciate the effort to help me understand history better and understand your thoughts better.

[leftynyc]

39. I really don't have the time for a history lesson

Accusations of dual loyalty have been thrown at Jews for centuries. They have been scapegoated throughout history for all of the evil's in the world - sickness, poverty, etc. So hearing an ignorant person who is part of our government make the charge TWICE now, I'm fed fucking up. I'll support a primary challenge to her without question. Try visiting a nearby synagogue in your area and speaking to the rabbi - perhaps his/her explanation will teach you what you're looking for.

[zaj]

40. I would like doing that.

And I do understand the basics of the history you describe. Please note my efforts to have this discussion with the sincerity, sensitivity and, respect for that history. My only request is to have a discussion about the solution to how to have a discussion of foreign influence without any unfair implications or attacks on loyalty.

I'm not sure of the answer, but I think we need to work on a solution, together.

[leftynyc]

41. I think you're honestly looking for answers

But there is a whole host of history that has to be part of those answers. My beef is the moronic canard that people can't trash Israel without being called anti-semites. That's nothing but bullshit because I do it all the time.

[karynnj]

42. The elephant in the room with regards to that is that AIPAC exists and has been extremely successful

The reason why it comes up with only Israel is because AIPAC IS one the most influential groups on Congress there is - with possibly only the NRA being stronger. I follow politics closely, but have NEVER heard of a lobby supporting the interests of England, France or Germany. Not to mention, Netanyahu spoke to the House and Senate against Obama's Iran policy. I have followed politics for decades and can think of no comparable action of any other country.

AIPAC, whose members are US Jews has as its charter to support the government of Israel. Years ago, when I lived in NJ, our synagogue had a group that brought in both J Street and AIPAC to speak to us on different days because AIPAC refused to send representatives for a joint day.

AIPAC's reason which several people told us was that where J Street had positions they lobbied on -- AIPAC didn't. They argued that they had no positions and did not "prescribe" what Israel should do as that would be arrogant as they did not live in Israel. They did not get that they were lobbying what the US should do -- because they advocated for supporting Israel. However, even that was not totally accurate -- they supported the Israeli government when Likud was in power.

Many people argued back then that it was more effective to speak with one voice -- and that the obvious voice should be AIPAC. We all knew that a huge number of Senators and Congressmen made AIPAC funded visits to Israel - often shortly after they were elected. In many case, they were invited by their own constituents. The goal to give the legislators a first hand view of Israel. Although AIPAC itself is not a PAC and does not fund anyone, there are many wealthy donors allied with AIPAC who do.

On the left, for many people that nuance is lost. They credit AIPAC with being even more powerful than they are. This leads to comments like the Representative's stating that AIPAC --> American Jews --> Israel "buy" support in the Congress. They ignore the obvious, Israel does not have to "buy" affection or support from many people. Most Congress people are Christian and for most of them first time heard the word Israel in conjunction with Jesus. For almost all, they were a young child and it was positive. In addition, unlike every other country in the middle east, it is perceived as having western values. It is far more like us, than Egypt or Saudi Arabia and from that we are more comfortable with Israel.

However, go back to the Iran deal and it is very clear that AIPAC was not all powerful. In the vote where we needed at least 41 votes, Dick Durbin was able to get the support of all but 4 Democratic Senators - even with Schumer, the then likely future leader, and Cardin and Menendez, the two top Democrats on the SFRC against it. I would use THIS as an example of the limit of AIPAC's power, both on Congress and on the Jewish population. AIPAC and many mainstream Jewish organizations went all out to push Jews to lobby our legislators against the Iran deal. J Street fought hard FOR the deal and significantly more than 50% of Jewish agreed with Obama and J Street against Netanyahu and AIPAC.

[leftynyc]

43. AIPAC is far less successful than the nra

mostly because they don't give money to candidates. But your example of the Iran deal is an excellent one. This is all going to be coming bubbling up at the end of March as bibi is coming for a visit and I expect he'll be speaking at aipac and this is right before his own election. His speaking before congress about the iran deal was despicable. I will never forgive him for making Israel a partisan issue.

[still_one]

12. Difference is there is probable evidence against the Trump administration. Representative Omar is

questioning the loyalty of members in Congress to the U.S. because they may disagree with her on U.S./Israeli policy, not because of any
"proof", and that is bullshit

Ironically, the same bullshit can be hurled at where Representative Omar's loyalty is?

Another fact is that Israel is an ally. Russia is NOT. Americans may agree or disagree with that, but that is the current U.S. policy

For those that want to continue to push that theme questioning the loyalties of those in Congress to the U.S. because they don't agree with them on policy, not because of evidence, see how well that plays in 2020

[zaj]

20. Another complication is that Trump and increasingly the GOP see Russia as an ally.

[still_one]

22. I would venture to say that the majority of republicans in Congress do not consider Russa an ally.

However, if you want to frame the argument that most republicans put party loyalty before country, that I would agree with

[zaj]

27. It's not just party loyalty, it's tribalism, ideology shared across the globe...

We are at the beginning of a globalism where conservatives and liberals around the world are more united than American's from across the political spectrum are.

[still_one]

29. I don't agree with your assessment. I will just leave it at that

[zaj]

31. I should say qualify better what I'm saying...

"We are at the beginning of a globalism where conservatives and liberals around the world are (increasingly) more united than American's from across the political spectrum are. "

I can't claim that this is universally true, just increasingly true.

[still_one]

33. An appropriate clarification. Thanks

[still_one]

4. Exactly.

[PeeJ52]

11. I'm not sure, but is what she saying that if 5th gen Jewish people are also loyal to Israel...

then people of German descent should be loyal to Germany, and Poles should be loyal to Poland, and Somali's should be loyal to Somalia? It seems to me that if she criticizes Israel, the country and their lobbies, then the other side is accusing her of criticizing all Jews. Netanyahu is under indictment in Israel. Evidently he may have done something wrong. Can she have an opinion on his actions or will she be accused of attacking all Jews? I agree, maybe it's best she doesn't have an opinion on anything to do with Israel, because anything she says will be twisted to be an attack on Israel and all Jewish people for eternity no matter what.

[still_one]

14. Sorry, but she is doing this to herself, but invoking into the discussion, alligence or loyalty

toward Americans who disagree with her.

[leftynyc]

15. Uh no

This has NOTHING to do with criticism of Israel - NOTHING. I do it all the time as bibi disgusts me. Why am I able to state that without accusing ANY Americans of dual loyalty? She has been given chance after chance of doing the same and she's seemingly unable to look at Israel without accusing AMERICANS of disloyalty. Why is that?

[PeeJ52]

17. Are you a Muslim Congresswoman in the public spotlight?

she does need to learn what battles to pick. It's a lose/lose proposition for her. Just as I can't tell a woman how to deal with her periods.

[still_one]

18. It isn't a question of learning to pick her battles, it is how to frame the argument. I believe

this is the second time she has done the same thing. The first time she issued an apology, and it would have ended there if she didn't repeat the allegiance rhetoric again.

Would some still be critical of her positions, no doubt, but they couldn't use the "questioning their loyalty" argument. That is a stupid argument anyway to use to argue for a certain position. You don't accuse someone of "not being loyal", you argue why it isn't in the best interest of the U.S. to take a certain position for instance. I can think of a half a dozen arguments to use without questioning someone's loyalty to their country

[zaj]

23. The idea of "Global Citizens" is new...

And a product of a globalized world we live in. And we are going to increasingly have this discussion. A global community of people who find more in common with people around the world than on the same geographic landmass.

And as that happens, the idea of "dual loyalty" is going to become more difficult, and more common. And not just a product of Jews and Israel policy.

I question that avoiding the issue entirely is the right response.

What can we do to discuss the issue in a way that honors history, trauma, and the sincerity of everyone in the discussion?

[leftynyc]

35. We already talk about being global citizens

with our European allies, our Asian allies, Australia. It's only when it comes to Israel that the charges of dual loyalty make their ugly appearance. And I'll call it out every single time I see it.

[Trumpocalypse]

46. An interesting read

https://mondoweiss.net/2019/03/invoking-loyalty-writers/

[leftynyc]

47. I'll take your word for it

as I find that site nothing but a sewer.

[Trumpocalypse]

50. Thanks

for keeping an open mind

[zaj]

28. She isn't saying any of these things... read her quotes

These are things others are ascribing to her, as far as I can tell.

[Trumpocalypse]

51. Very true

No where does she use the term or words dual loyalty that she is being accused of. These Accusations are just another way to shutdown any legitimate criticism of Israel.

[leftynyc]

53. She used the words pledging allegiance

Wasn't that clear enough for you? And really, just fucking stop it about it being about criticism of Israel. I'm all over this thread and others calling bibi the disgusting asshole he is and I manage to do it without charging anyone with pledging allegiance to Israel. For some strange reason, Rep Omar is unable to do that.

[Trumpocalypse]

54. Still sounds like

playing semantics games to shut down any criticism of Israel.

[leftynyc]

55. Perhaps to your ears

yet somehow I manage to trash bibi's administration all the time without accusing Americans of dual loyalty. Why can't everyone else? That repulsive list of all the Jews in congress having dual citizenship that floated around facebook last week and posted here smacks of nazism since NONE of them are actually dual citizens.

[Trumpocalypse]

56. She didn't accuse anyone of dual loyalty.

That is just a lie.

[leftynyc]

57. Did she or did she not say

she would not pledge allegiance to Israel with the implication being that was somehow necessary to serve in the US Congress? I'll let the party leaders take care of her and that stupid statement.

[Trumpocalypse]

58. Again

playing semantics games.

[leftynyc]

60. No games

Unless you're accusing the Democratic leadership in the House of playing games. You just don't like reality. That's not my problem.

[Trumpocalypse]

61. Actually they are.

And it’s not reality. It’s is just a way to silence criticism of Israel.

[leftynyc]

62. LOL

Go with the paranoia then. Makes no difference to me.

[Trumpocalypse]

63. No the only paranoia

is with those calling any criticism of Israel anti semitism.

[Kaleva]

16. Can't really say I care much about what Rep. Omar says. Not my fight.

People are free to get upset about her comments. I choose not to.

[Hortensis]

24. Twice is one too many to brush off. CHRISTIAN Americans

are the reason for our pro-Israel policy. The return of Jews to the "promised land" is foretold in the New Testament and has been accepted thinking among Christians on this continent for nearly 500 years now. Christian belief lead directly to the U.S.'s support for the establishment of the State of Israel, in an era when American Jews were mostly barred from influential positions in government and business.

Further, Zionism is an especially important belief right now for many Christians, who believe Jesus will only return to earth (and presumably rescue it and them from global warming) after the Jews have returned to Israel. And to Jerusalem under this Christian-right lead president. Netanyahu could shoot Americans down in the street and a Republican administration wouldn't withdraw support.

Omar's insistence on dishonestly stating her belief that 2% of the population corruptly control our Israel policy with Jewish money instead of a very powerful and dominating 75-85% Christian and conservative-leaning bloc is evidence of not just bias but active hostility toward Jews.

Notably, a tendency to hostile and irrational bias comes from within. Psychologists say people who have a problem with one group because it is "different," almost always have problems with others seen as different.

If Omar cannot or will not control her problem, it may cost her a seat she only got when Keith Ellison decided not to run for it and she inherited a fair amount of his establishment backing. MN's 5th is urban, young, educated, both well off and poor, and diverse.

[zaj]

30. This is a good point...

She's focused on AIPAC which is fair, but perhaps outsized. I imagine she might agree with you as well.

[Hortensis]

44. Zaj, we KNOW she's not focused on AIPAC for

honorable reasons. Of course, if a Muslim congresswoman chooses not to criticize the real problem, Christian zionism, that's understandable. Christian nationalist and dominionist groups are the Republicans' biggest voter bloc. But subbing in dog-whistle antisemitic phrases instead is despicable.

The Christian right is so huge and powerful that it currently dominates congress and the supreme court and has enormous influence on the president, who's been filling almost all appointments with right-wing Christian extremists off the lists they provide him.

Our newest AG, William Barr, one of them, claims we were established as a Christian nation and that government's primary function is to enforce his god's edicts. And again, the Christian right would never allow the U.S. to withdraw support from Israel or, of course, even particularly object to Israel's persecution of Muslims.

“In the Six Day War Jews finally took sovereignty over Jerusalem, and it’s absolutely crucial in terms of biblical prophecy that they maintain control over that.” That's Pat Roberstson talking to his listeners about doing what our secular nation refused for 7 decades: moving our embassy to Jerusalem as a symbol of Christian domination of Israel.

Omar is no kid newly full of what passes for political wisdom at 20, Zaj. She's 37 years old. The electorate can send all sorts to congress, including aggressive bigots if that's what local voters want. I believe that's the way it has to be. But her local voters need to recognize and approve these dog-whistle behaviors for what they are.

[tritsofme]

25. Everyone knows what Omar is doing with her giant dog whistle.

Her casual deployment of anti-Semitic tropes is extremely troubling, the implication of dual loyalty is particularly nasty and disgusting.

These aren’t one off statements, we’ve seen a clear pattern. It just appears that for the first time in her life, she is being held accountable for reliance on classic anti-Semitic tropes and canards in her rhetoric.

I can’t wait to contribute to her primary challenger and get this person out of Congress, she is an embarrassment to the Democratic caucus.

[Trumpocalypse]

45. Interesting read

https://mondoweiss.net/2019/03/invoking-loyalty-writers/

[Hortensis]

64. :) Her use of "granny" slang (Benjamins) suggests

she likely became a carrier of these tropes the old-fashioned way. When I read that comment the first time, a picture sprang up of little Ilhan surrounded by older generations rubbing their fingers together knowingly when talking about some problem in the news.

In any case, hopefully she will learn from the backlash, but at her age I don't expect her to grow out of her attitudes.

There is, of course, a possibility that this dog-whistle is employed for purpose. To grow populist movements, leaders must intentionally draw a lot of not-so-nice types. In fact, antagonism has been identified as a major contributing personality trait for those drawn to them.

The Personality Trait That Is Ripping America (and the World) Apart
People who are antagonistic resonate more with populist messages

https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/beautiful-minds/the-personality-trait-that-is-ripping-america-and-the-world-apart/

[samnsara]

38. im atheist so I dont follow this topic closely... but if i decide to follow it, what side do i take?

[wellst0nev0ter]

48. First, Take the side of anti-semitism

second, read Ilhan Omar's own words and make your own informed decision. If you see any explicit antisemitism, let me know.

[wellst0nev0ter]

49. It is clear as anything

that the United States needs a frank, ADULT reckoning with its policy vis-a-vis Israel. Arabs now outnumber Jews in Israel and the territories, creating an unsustainable situation on the ground. Yet Bibi has allied Likud with a genocidal racist party in order to hang on to power.

That means we will have to confront the constant spin-doctoring that puts Israel's worst policies in the best light.

We need to confront the fact that AIPAC is a lobbying group with outsized influence that directs political campaign contributions to lawmakers (the group even has a website dedicated to that purpose).

And we need to confront the fact that mideast policy is too often predicated with an unquestioning fealty toward Israel.

Yes, these topics are often poisoned with bad-faith anti-semitic critique, but you and Josh Marshall's rhetoric needlessly creates a chilling effect against what needs to be a necessary debate. I commend Omar for having the courage to stand up to the bullies.

[Trumpocalypse]

52. Very well said nt

For once I agree with you completely!

[Autumn]

59. Thank you for this.

I have much respect for Rep. Ilhan Omar. She is truly courageous and right to take on AIPAC.