Tlaib Rashida response to Antony Blinken, a Jewish man...

[BlueLucy]

Last edited Mon Nov 23, 2020, 04:19 PM - Edit history (1)

Link to tweet

[SouthernCal_Dem]

1. How can Blinken suppress her first amendment right to speak?

What a strange statement.

[Hortensis]

59. "Strange" response indeed for a Sec of State. nt

[Demsrule86]

67. And what makes her think he would attempt to stop her first amendment rights. because he is

Jewish?

[NurseJackie]

76. We can only guess... but that certainly sounds like a reasonable and likely guess to me.

[Hortensis]

78. Ask her new colleague, viciously antisemitic Marjorie Taylor Greene?

Greene'd be able to explain the many ancient threats Jews pose to good people, including the updated QAnon versions. As a Republican she doesn't have to hide behind carefully vague allusions to them.

[tritsofme]

98. Politics making for strange bedfellows...and all of that.

[Demsrule86]

125. God, I can't believe Marjorie got elected.

[Hortensis]

133. Neither can our friends in that district. A new low and god knows...

[Demsrule86]

137. Yeah, I lived in Georgia for over 10 years...missed the Marietta miracle

(where Newt's seat is now occupied by a Democrat) We had a entire group who were secret Democrats...hubs would have lost his job I expect had anyone known. I worked elections by calling Democratic areas...we moved to Cherokee after a year... in Georgia and out of states.

[Hortensis]

138. The Cherokee area's lovely, love to be up there.

And we would be if I could as my husband likes rural areas, and so does our budget.

Our kids are in Gwinnett County, though, and they're the reason we're here at all, so GA we stay. Gwinnett's Atlanta-metro, pretty diverse. Cons still dominate, but our grandson's two best friends were Vietnamese and AA until Han moved out of state. Same for good friends of the others in AR; which you wouldn't assume, but it's the Bentonville-Rogers area which gets people from all around the nation, and world. Layers and blocs of different cultures both places, consult demo maps before buying.

[Demsrule86]

148. Gwinnett is nice too...many from GM lived there when we were there.

I lived in Town Lake...the cheap part-wyngate.

[bdamomma]

142. I'm sure

Nancy will put her in her place. Qanon

[catbyte]

3. Not helpful. What made her think she had to say such a thing?

[Indykatie]

4. All of the "Squad" Need to Learn Sometimes it's Best to Just STFU.

[brush]

11. Don't include Pressley in that. She's wiser and more mature than the others.

I don't recall her making any inflammatory statements like the others have.

[BGBD]

24. I've also rarely, if ever, heard her say something dumb

[still_one]

46. I really don't care for the term squad. That term is used to imply they all walk with the same

mindset, and that simply is not true, and especially in regard to Rep. Presley as you point out, Presley has always walked to her own drummer

[Hortensis]

61. Yes. Pressley distanced herself long ago, for good reason.

[Demsrule86]

68. She should distance herself from the squad.

[sheshe2]

151. For the most part.

I think she has.

I am so proud of her here in MA. Just wish she was my congressional Rep. since Joe took off we ended up with a D, turned R to vote for Baker and then back to D. I won't forgive Joe for abandoning my very blue district to run against Markey.

[LenaBaby61]

45. All of the "Squad" Need to Learn Sometimes it's Best to Just STFU.

Not all of them, as Pressley doesn't seem as if she's tone deaf politically.

But the other 3 members of the squad 😣

[George II]

145. Don't forget, she booed Hillary Clinton and laughed about it, and also refused to endorse Biden.

[Progressive Jones]

5. I speak out on my hatred of Naziyahoo, but nobody's ever tried to suppress me. nt

[Hekate]

6. That was the first thing that came to her mind? That he's Jewish? And would oppress her?

Based on what, exactly, Congresswoman Tlaib?

There’s a name for that, in these parts.

[Hortensis]

62. And one self-proven appropriate. For shame, MI-13!

[Demsrule86]

70. She is a Democrat so I won't go there either but I agree.

[Mossfern]

91. Wait a second here!

I'm Jewish and I loathe Netanyahu and the right wing Israelis and the illegal expansion into Palestinian territory. She has her first amendment rights, just as I do for calling her out on her religious bigotry.

[George II]

146. Blinken's step father was a survivor of both Auschwitz and Dachau. Disgusting comments by her.

[brush]

7. After she booed Hillary and bragged about it, I hoped someone would pull...

her to the side and give her some advice about unwise statements dissing other Democrats.

Looks like no one has. She's still a loose cannon with her statements. This one about the new SoS is just not smart and didn't need to be put into the public sphere.

[BainsBane]

14. Booed Hillary?

[brush]

16. Oh, you don't know about that? See the video below.

[BainsBane]

19. I can't say what I think about that

Last edited Mon Nov 23, 2020, 12:22 PM - Edit history (1)

in public.

[brush]

21. I get what you mean.

[Thekaspervote]

48. I have..it didn't go well

[AmericanCanuck]

53. That was sick

Hillary has more knowledge, intellect, experience than Rashida.

[BainsBane]

118. 1000%

[George II]

147. She also refused to endorse Biden for President.

[tritsofme]

8. Shameful and disgusting.

Also not particularly surprising.

[Behind the Aegis]

39. Yup.

It's like saying, "the sun rose this morning."

[NurseJackie]

79. Yes... and yes.

And yes.

[grantcart]

93. +1

[BainsBane]

9. Unfucking real

He's a Jew; therefore he must be her enemy. That's bigotry. How would she feel if people said, "I hope she doesn't impose Sharia law"?

Granted, I don't follow her closely, but I've never seen her do anything but attack Democrats.

[jcgoldie]

17. There's a policy difference behind this

People are assuming she said that because he is Jewish but that doesn't tell the story. While I do not really understand her implication that someone is going to try and infringe upon her 1st amendment rights to speech. And the cause she supports is absolutely controversial, I do not think its fair to assume she is saying what she's saying out of Anti-Semitism. Here is an article that explains why she is not a fan of this pick:

On June 17, Biden’s top foreign policy adviser, Tony Blinken, declared that Biden “would not tie military assistance to Israel to things like annexation or other decisions by the Israeli government with which we might disagree.” This would be an important statement on any given day, but takes on added weight in the midst of the vigorous debate about Israel’s possible extension of sovereignty to parts of the West Bank.

https://www.jpost.com/american-politics/biden-blasts-bds-why-it-matters-632301

[BainsBane]

18. Well, then her problem is with Biden

Isn't it?

[jcgoldie]

23. Obviously she has a difference of opinion with Biden over this...

But Blinken is likely an early sign of Biden's intentions in the region based on his past statements. The choice signals a certain path for the administration right or wrong its not just an unknown career diplomat or whatever that folks here seemed to think.

[BainsBane]

28. None of that dispels my original comment

She has a difference of opinion with Biden. I share that difference of opinion. However, I'm not worried that a Jewish Secretary of State will infringe on my First Amendment rights. The comment is bizarre to say the least.

I manage to express my opposition to US policy in Israel without conspiracy theories. I would think a US congresswoman could figure that out, but that requires her to want to do so.

[Hortensis]

64. What "people here think" is of her long history of this stuff,

Last edited Mon Nov 23, 2020, 10:49 AM - Edit history (1)

which she has continued during the dangerous rise in antisemitism -- both across the right and the far left -- in our nation and around the planet. Vicious and scary bedfellows.

In more decent times, bigoted politicians elected as Democrats (!) find it wise to confine their remarks to issues, leaving setting fires with bigoted tropes to Republicans and others. But in these dangerously mean times of rising extremism, these behaviors are spreading and becoming increasingly empowered.

Those who don't see what's wrong with this (or even support it!) are receiving feedback from those who do.

[Metatron]

112. Yes, our party should never have a problem like the UK's Labour party

re: antisemitism. I would rather be in the minority than let it slide.

[jcgoldie]

120. I'm not supporting it

I'm also not assuming she said it based on anti-Semitism. See Celerity's post #117 in this thread please and thank you.

[Hortensis]

131. Good people tend to believe others are like them. nt

[tritsofme]

25. What does a policy difference have to do with her ridiculous accusation tinged with anti-Semitism?

[jcgoldie]

29. I didnt say it wasnt ridiculous

But its only Anti-Semitic because you are making the assumption she said it because he's Jewish.

[tritsofme]

31. It is far more fantastical to pretend it is just a strange coincidence.

This one has lost the benefit of the doubt, long ago. Her dog whistle is more like a bullhorn, we are not fooled.

[LizBeth]

33. +1

[NurseJackie]

80. There are no coincidences. This was intentional.

And had it not been, there would already be a deletion of clarification or apology. (It's been 12 hours.)

[ehrnst]

100. Absolutely. She has been told how it appears, and has not changed or clarified her statement. (nt)

[NurseJackie]

104. Based on that, we can conclude a few different things...

... and not one of them is flattering.

[Celerity]

50. the tie-in to her comments is due to BDS. Blinken and Biden are very much anti-BDS, and Tlaib

and Omar are amongst its biggest supporters in Congress. Blinken was also one of the biggest Syria hawks in the Obama administration (granted that has nothing to do with 1st Amendments rights, but I am sure is another point of disagreement between Blinken and Tlaib and many others.)

I am replying to this btw:

While I do not really understand her implication that someone is going to try and infringe upon her 1st amendment rights to speech.

Also, Blinken was Biden's chief foreign policy advisor during the campaign, so I am sure had a hand in some of the policy points made on Biden's website:

https://joebiden.com/joe-biden-and-the-jewish-community-a-record-and-a-plan-of-friendship-support-and-action/#

[Demsrule86]

73. Nope...won't make excuses for her words.

What you posted would in no way impact her first amendment rights. We know what this is.

[NurseJackie]

81. It was deliberate and completely ridiculous. And so clumsy with its lack of ambiguity...

... she and her defenders would have a difficult time in claiming that readers are misinterpreting her words or intent. This is straight-up exactly what ordinary and rational people perceive it to be. Just absurd. Nobody should be making excuses for this.

[Demsrule86]

85. You are absolutely correct Jackie. I am disgusted honestly.

[LizBeth]

27. You said it. I wanted to and deleted, but yes plain and simple,

Bigotry. Dems don’t behave like that and she needs to be called out on it.

[still_one]

42. Yes, the outrageous thing is that he would somehow suppress her first amendment rights, implying

the Secretary of State somehow has the power to even do that

[NurseJackie]

83. I'd expect our elected representatives to have a better understanding of things like that.

I guess my expectations are too high.

[still_one]

86. One sure would expect that Jackie

[LizBeth]

10. Not good.

[mr_lebowski]

13. That's a really ... ummm ... not smart thing to say ...

I WANT to like the Squad, I really do.

It's hard sometimes.

This is one such time.

Of many.

If you MUST make a point along these lines, you could just say something like "I will be encouraging our new SoS to hold Bibi accountable for his treatment of Palestians'

Without this 'he's going to suppress my free speech' nonsense.

[smirkymonkey]

35. +1000

Ditto.

She's not winning any points here, and it's getting to be a habit. Sometimes, it's just best to keep your mouth shut if you don't have anything constructive to say.

[RockRaven]

15. The SecState has no capacity to infringe upon 1st Am rights. This sort of statement is

embarrassingly incoherent. Well, amongst those capable of embarrassment.

[BainsBane]

22. It shows

complete and absolute ignorance of the 1st Amendment.

[still_one]

44. +++

[Rice4VP]

20. She's so annoying

[SunSeeker]

26. Oy.

[BGBD]

30. Criticizing Netanyahu's government

is justified....but she found a way to make it very anti-Semitic by assuming that, because Blinken is Jewish, he would somehow suppress her right to speak out..

This is just the old trope that Jews can't be loyal to the United States because of loyalty to Israel.


And to whoever surely gets to judge this post in the jury.....ask yourself if anything I said is wrong.

[sfstaxprep]

36. Nothing You Said Is Wrong nt

[kcr]

57. You are 100% not wrong

[uponit7771]

136. +1

[Tech]

32. Has she endorsed Biden/Harris yet?

[Demsrule86]

74. I don't think she ever did... she needs to run again in two years and should consider that fact.

[NurseJackie]

84. I knew it was tardy, but I thought that surely this had already happened. Well, now...

... that explains the bitterness and hostility.

[Demsrule86]

89. Yeah, Democrats need to support the the president and his Vice President ...no exceptions.

2010,2014 and 2016 Demonstrate clearly the cost if we don't.

[EllieBC]

37. Disgusting comment. Apparently she doesn't know the difference

between someone Jewish and an Israeli. I’m sure she would be delighted if people assumed all Muslims were terrorists.

[still_one]

43. It also appears that she thinks the SOS ha the power to suppress her first amendment rights

[msongs]

38. does she know the difference between jewish and israeli? nt

[NurseJackie]

87. 💥

[still_one]

41. Sounds like Rep Tiaib has a "Jewish" problem. Why would she even suggest this unhinged

comment that her first amendment rights would be infringed upon by the Blinken appointment

[JI7]

51. She is a member of Congress and intelligent people are often bigoted. And anti semitism has already

succeeded on the left .

She isn't some random person in their teens or 20s just learning about the world. She is also in the US. NOt in some Muslim Country where she didn't come across different views.

These are just excuses.

Jon Stewart is a fool . He is one of those who is reluctanct to call out the Republicans as being the problem and instead says things like "congress" is the problem.

And I am from a HIndu family also and HIndu nationalists are trash .

I don't see the point of most of your comparisons .

How about just calling out shit for what it is ?

[JI7]

60. Who gives a shit about Romney . I don't feel any compassion for HIndu Nationalists .

Romney being opportunistic has nothing to do with other people being shitty fucking assholes. And I don't call people that work for corporations trash or whores.

I see no reason to feel compassion for bigots . Especially if they are members of Congress .

[EllieBC]

77. People are complicated? Do you give a pass to other bigots?

Soft racists? How about islamophobes?

Stop making excuses for her bigotry and also her appalling lack of knowledge about the constitution and the role of the SOS.

[JI7]

157. White supremacists, Hindu nationalists, anti semites are worse than Romney

The reason we have so many problems it's becsuse of bigotry .

[JI7]

160. Romney didn't support Trump. And voted to Remove him. He benefited from Trump's economic bs

I don't see bigots as victims. Stop making excuses for them.

[JI7]

163. The Response to fucked up Bigotry is to condemn it . Not treat them like victims or deserving

of a respectful debate as if it's just a matter of difference of opinion .

[still_one]

63. The fact is she is bringing up a possible infringement of her first amendment rights by the new SoS

who happens to be Jewish

She is the one doing the suggesting

This isn’t the first time she has done something like this

[still_one]

97. I understand. What I am saying is her comment wasn't a very smart thing to do, not only

because it has no relation to her first amendment rights, but it is subject to various interpretations

[still_one]

105. Also, I wish Democrats, left, middle, or right would wait until after The Georgia runoffs before

we engage in these debates

Take care

[Meowmee]

47. terrible statement, but not surprising at all...

[AmericanCanuck]

52. Neither mature nor nuanced nor diplomatic.

The squad has a lot to learn beyond tweeting. The same could have been put in different words like:

"Tony Blinken is an excellent choice by PE Biden. I am extremely hopeful that he will play a role in bringing equality and justice to the palestinian people."

[NurseJackie]

75. When people do things like this, they alienate their natural allies...

... and isolate themselves. Others do the same thing, and then wonder "why-oh-why" don't people like me. All politicians need to think before they Tweet. Or at the very least, they should count to ten (minutes) before tweeting something impulsively. This really is a divisive Tweet and I do not understand why anyone thinks things like this are acceptable. Biden hasn't even been sworn-in yet for Pete's sake.

[MoonRiver]

54. Ugh, not helpful

[Demonaut]

55. I lose more respect for her every day

[kcr]

56. Ugh

Can't stand her.

[JonLP24]

65. I think this is in response to Pompeo's BDS decision

I'm thinking she hopes the new Secretary of State overturns it.

[Demsrule86]

66. She is a Democrat and I support all Democrats, but I don't like her.

How would the SOS impact her ability to speak out?

[JonLP24]

72. Because of Pompeo and BDS

Does anyone not remember that story? I'm thinking she hopes the next SOS overturns that BDS decision.

[AmericanCanuck]

102. Why couldn't she say that instead?

Bringing up his religion is divisive and not fit for a Democrat.

It is shocking that people are defending her behavior on DU.

[NurseJackie]

108. That's an excellent question.

Why couldn't she say that instead?

That's an excellent question. And in consideration of the fact that she's had over 12 hours to think about things, and to see the responses and admonitions, and scolding... she has offered no "correction" or "explanation" or apology or follow-up... nothing at all. --- This suggests to me that she's perfectly fine with what she said. That she meant what she said. That she doesn't care how it's being interpreted. Or that the interpretations are correct and she has zero interest in making a correction or explanation.

It is shocking that people are defending her behavior on DU.

Well, it's disappointing, that's for sure... but not shocking to me.

There can be no doubt that this type of rhetoric is divisive and it will only result in continued suspicion and distrust... and being alienated and disregarded. She's not helping herself or her constituents (or our party) with Tweets like that.

All I'm trying to say is that this whole thing is just so very bizarre. It wouldn't have taken much effort to smooth things over or to even make a half-hearted "apology" (the typical "I'm sorry you were offended" kind of thing).

[ripcord]

156. Even Pompeo didn't violate her 1st Amendment rights

The U.S., along with many other countries, are refusing to fund BDS activities, that's all.

[NurseJackie]

69. Oh good grief! What a ridiculous thing to say! How, exactly, could he suppress anyone's 1A rights?

So long as he doesn't suppress my First Amendment right to speak out against Netanyahu's racist and inhumane policies.

Oh good grief! What a ridiculous thing to say! How, exactly, could he suppress anyone's First Amendment rights? What has he ever done or said that would make anyone think that it was appropriate to make a comment like this? How does this help? What good purpose does it serve for anyone to make comments like this?

[MineralMan]

71. How could he suppress her rights in any way?

He has no authority to do any such thing. That was a poorly considered statement.

[radius777]

82. Her position is no different than white leftists on this

issue (the BDS movement, Blinken is anti-BDS) - yet she gets attacked in the typical weird ways simply for voicing her opinion - one which I don't necessarily agree with, but do agree with her right to her opinion, which is a valid political position.

[JonLP24]

88. Thank you for the explanation

[BainsBane]

110. Since you agree with the poster

Perhaps you can explain to me how a SOS could violate any one’s First Amendment rights, let alone a congresswoman’s.

[JI7]

94. She is a member of Congress. And White leftists are called out like Jeremy Corbyn

[JonLP24]

96. About Jeremy Corbyn

They are beating a dead horse over in the UK. Whatever point they wanted to make with Corbyn, that point has already been made. Meanwhile Boris Johnson is the PM.

Boris Johnson said that seeing ‘bunch of black kids’ makes alarm bells go off in his head, in old column

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/boris-johnson-bunch-black-kids-racist-column-guardian-a9213356.html

Boris Johnson urged to apologise for 'derogatory and racist' letterboxes article

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/sep/04/boris-johnson-urged-to-apologise-for-muslim-women-letterboxes-article

So it is pretty clear the continuation of trying destroy Corbyn is more about the socialism than with any sort of bigotry. That same Corbyn that was against apartheid in South Africa in the early 80s.

[Metatron]

114. Corbyn came out and basically DENIED the findings of EHRC report

It wasn't about destroying him. Because he wouldn't take any responsibility, let alone even acknowledge that the antisemitism had occurred under his leadership, there had to be consequences for his actions. And then to blame Starmer's people for not giving him a head's up was ridiculous.

The reason that buffoon is in Number 10 is that Corbyn was still Labour leader. But their far left (Momentum) still had control of the party and so they lost control for the next 5 years due to purity politics.

[NurseJackie]

101. ...a logical fallacy that tries to discredit opposition by claiming they're entitled to their opinion...

but do agree with her right to her opinion, which is a valid political position.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I%27m_entitled_to_my_opinion

I'm entitled to my opinion or I have a right to my opinion is a logical fallacy in which a person discredits any opposition by claiming that they are entitled to their opinion. The statement exemplifies a red herring or thought-terminating cliché. The logical fallacy is sometimes presented as "Let's agree to disagree". Whether one has a particular entitlement or right is irrelevant to whether one's assertion is true or false. Where an objection to a belief is made, the assertion of the right to an opinion side-steps the usual steps of discourse of either asserting a justification of that belief, or an argument against the validity of the objection. Such an assertion, however, can also be an assertion of one's own freedom or of a refusal to participate in the system of logic at hand.[1][2][3]

[Celerity]

115. that is a mis-framing of what the poster said

They simply said (in regards to the BDS movement)

simply for voicing her opinion - one which I don't necessarily agree with, but do agree with her right to her opinion, which is a valid political position

they are not using a red herring at all, they are simply saying they may politically disagree on the subject, but that her stance is a valid one, which it happens to be, in this case


pro-BDS versus anti-BDS is a political issue

neither one is inherently right nor inherently wrong

it is an ideological-driven and policy-oriented set of stances, stances that are subject to political control when it comes to implementation

to out-of-hand deny anyone the right their opinion (on this particular issue, as it is the subject of debate), regardless of whether they are for BDS or against BDS, is to take an inherently anti freedom of thought and anti freedom of expression position

[NurseJackie]

122. If that's what she mean, then why didn't she say it? Or clarify 12+ hours later?

neither one is inherently right nor inherently wrong

She may be of the "opinion" that he can "suppress her First Amendment right" ... but that doesn't make it true or valid or correct. It's simply ridiculous. It is "inherently wrong".

pro-BDS versus anti-BDS is a political issue

Nobody said it wasn't.

to out-of-hand deny anyone the right their opinion (on this particular issue, as it is the subject of debate), regardless of whether they are for BDS or against BDS, is to take an inherently anti freedom of thought and anti freedom of expression position

Oh brother! Nobody is doing that.

[Celerity]

126. I was referring to the poster mostly, but let me say this about

Tlaib's claim of 1st Amendment suppression. That is exactly what many anti-BDS forces want to do. They want to criminalise it. Obviously I have to add that I do not know if Blinken is one of those. I would hope he is not and would tend to seriously doubt he is.

I do agree wholeheartedly agree that Tlaib should have been more specific. It was a very poor tweet. I am not a fan of hers at all. I am not a Clinton fangirl, BUT Tlaib leading the booing of Sec. Clinton was fucking outrageous. Pure petty, shitty dross. I am adding Tlaib to Cuellar as the only 2 incumbent Dems (both are in safe seats) I would love to see primaried amd defeated. We need to find good opponents for both of them.

I do love AOC and Pressley, and I am neutral on Omar. So my Squad scorecard is 2 wins, 1 draw, and a loss, lolol.

Finally, just to be clear, I was not talking about Tlaib's claim (of suppression) at all in regards to inherent rightness or wrongness, I was talking about BDS itself, as was the poster, I am sure. Ask them (the poster) if you need clarification I suppose, but my stance is clear now hopefully.

Cheers

[NurseJackie]

127. Okay.

[AmericanCanuck]

103. She is a one issue politician - palestine.

She should focus on the needs of her constituents instead. Getting into international affairs is not an average congresscritter's job. She is not on any committee that deals with foreign affairs.

[radius777]

111. Congresspeople speak about all types of issues

of national and international significance.

She can focus on whatever she wants to.

[BainsBane]

107. Most leftists

Think a SOS will suppress their 1st Amendment rights? Why would you assume leftists know so little about with the 1a means? What a strange comment.

[radius777]

109. Reread my post and Celerity's post#50 above.

Tlaib's objection is to Blinken's anti-BDS stance, which some see as limiting free speech (the right to boycott).

[BainsBane]

116. You'll need to explain that to me

How does a SOS determine what I do with my money or speech? A government policy--whether the US cuts off aid to Israel--is not one's free speech right. One's free speech rights is what one says about government policy or anything else. No one will force her or anyone else to spend her personal money on Israeli products. That a SOS carries out a President's policy that she doesn't like is not a violation of her free speech. She certainly exercised her free speech when she booed the Democratic presidential candidate, Hillary Clinton.

I oppose US policy toward Israel, but I don't have bizarre views about the 1A. I also manage to express my opposition without blowing dog whistles or engaging in conspiracy theories.

Additionally, Tlaib's problem is with Biden, since the policy is his. Yet it's the Jew she thinks will control her. Another poster here has linked that to long-standing tropes.

People are reacting because her comment is bizarre. Your defense of it is strained, to say the least.

[radius777]

119. Read this Wikipedia page

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boycott,_Divestment_and_Sanctions
The Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement (BDS) is a Palestinian-led[6] movement promoting boycotts, divestments and sanctions against Israel. Its objective is to pressure Israel to meet what it describes as Israel's obligations under international law,[7] defined as withdrawal from the occupied territories, removal of the separation barrier in the West Bank, full equality for Arab-Palestinian citizens of Israel, and "respecting, protecting, and promoting the rights of Palestinian refugees to return to their homes and properties".[7] The movement is organized and coordinated by the Palestinian BDS National Committee.[8]

BDS is modeled after the anti-apartheid movement in South Africa.[9] Its proponents compare the Palestinians' plight to that of apartheid-era black South Africans.[10] Protests and conferences in support of the movement have been held in several countries.[citation needed] Its mascot, which features on its logotype, is Handala, a symbol of Palestinian identity and defiance.[11]

Critics say that BDS is antisemitic,[12] delegitimizes Israel,[13] and resembles historical discrimination against Jews.[14][15][16][17][18] Countering BDS is a top priority for the Israel lobby; it has successfully lobbied for laws targeting BDS supporters in many U.S. states.[19]

The pro-BDS movement (such as Tlaib and most pro-Palestinian leftists) views the anti-BDS people as attempting to limit their free speech.

Again, I support the nomination of Blinken. But was simply pointing out that Tlaib is not a radical or antisemite in expressing the view she does.

[BainsBane]

121. Criticism is not a violation of 1A

Calling someone anti-Semitic, even if untrue, is not a violation of free speech. It's an opinion, even if a rather unfortunate one in the case of opposition to US policy toward Israel.

As an aside, one point I always make about the US pro-Likud policy and claims that opposition to it are anti-Semitic is that there is a sizable portion of Israelis who likewise oppose settlement policy and Likud more broadly. I point out that a broader range of opinion is seen as acceptable within Israel than in the US. I don't like the claims that opposing Likud is anti-Semitic, but I never claimed that view to be a violation of my 1a rights because it's not.


What is evident on the part of the view you defend is a shocking unfamiliarity with the First Amendment. If, as you say, these views are prevalent among "all leftists," people have some serious need of basic civics education.

Your entry does not serve your argument, at all. It relies on the right-wing notion that criticism is a violation of one's First Amendment rights.

[radius777]

123. The anti-BDS people seek laws to punish BDS.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-BDS_laws
Anti-BDS laws and resolutions are laws and resolutions to oppose boycotts of Israel. The name comes from the BDS movement, which calls for boycotts, divestment and sanctions against Israel to pressure Israel to meet what it describes as Israel's obligations under international law.[1] Anti-BDS laws are designed to make it difficult for people and organizations to participate in boycotts of Israel while anti-BDS resolutions are symbolic and non-binding parliamentary condemnations, either of boycotts of Israel or of BDS itself. Generally, such condemnations accuse BDS of being anti-Semitic and are often followed by laws targeting boycotts of Israel.

Proponents of anti-BDS laws claim that BDS is a form of anti-Semitism, and so such laws legislate against hate speech. Opponents claim that Israel and its supporters are engaging in lawfare by lobbying for anti-BDS laws that infringe upon the right to free speech.[2]

The specific provisions of anti-BDS laws varies widely.

Anti-BDS laws in the United States
As of 2020, 32 states have passed bills and executive orders designed to discourage boycotts of Israel.[3] The majority of them have been passed with broad bipartisan support.[citation needed] Most anti-BDS laws have taken one of two forms: contract-focused laws requiring government contractors to promise that they are not boycotting Israel; and investment-focused laws, mandating public investment funds to avoid entities boycotting Israel.[4] There has been debate over whether the laws violate the First Amendment-protected right to free speech. Many of the laws have been challenged in court cases, mainly from organizations such as the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and the Council on American–Islamic Relations (CAIR).[5]

According to University of Maryland's Critical Issues Poll from October 2019, a majority of Americans oppose anti-BDS laws; 72% opposed laws penalizing people who boycott Israel and 22% supported such laws. The poll also found a strong partisan divide on BDS; among those who had heard of BDS, 76% of Republicans opposed the movement, while 48% of Democrats supported it.[6] In a 2019 poll from Data for Progress 35% to 27% opposed anti-BDS laws. Split by party affiliation, 48% of Democrats opposed anti-BDS laws and 15% supported them; 27% of Republicans opposed anti-BDS laws and 44% supported them. 70%-80% believed boycotts were a legitimate protest tactic.[7]

[BainsBane]

134. Are you saying Biden will impose these laws?

Post 50 says Biden will reject the BDS movement. It doesn't mention passing any laws.

It took you a while to get to it, but I now see how this could be a violation of the First Amendment. How that rests on Blinken's appointment, however, is another matter. Laws are passed by congress, not the SoS.

[Celerity]

117. I broached this subject up above, as well

https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=14604779

The OP poisoned the well of debate by inferring that it was simply due to antisemitism and ignoring the policy history of both Tlaib and Blinken on the subject of BDS (regardless of where you come down on the issue)

The OP also did not take care to even spell Blinken's name correctly (not that it has material impact on their positing)

[NurseJackie]

124. Then why bring it up?

The OP also did not take care to even spell Blinken's name correctly (not that it has material impact on their positing)

Then why bring it up? What purpose does it serve? Unless there was any actual confusion regarding who the OP was referring to, I think it's a rather trivial matter to be concerned about. Not worth mentioning at all except as a passive-aggressive swipe at the OP (to insinuate carelessness perhaps?)

[Celerity]

128. Because it is annoying to see a name misspelt in an OP, when the person is one of the two main

subjects of said OP, simple as that. I have said the same about Stacey Abrams (so often misspelt as Stacy). I suppose it is a character defect of mine to be annoyed by it. I shall endeavour to be less snarky.

[NurseJackie]

129. I fight the impulse too.

[Celerity]

130. I normally just PM the person. I should have done so here, or simply not brought it up at all.

Damn impulses, lolol.

hugz

Cel

[Paladin]

113. Back off, Rep. Tlaib.

In the extraordinarily unlikely event that Mr. Blinken suppresses your constitutional rights, we'll be here to listen and respond. Up until then, don't embarrass yourself.

[Hortensis]

132. Tlaib's stance on BDS is well known, and irrelevant to the issue of antisemitism,

which in her case predates the current issue.

It's entirely possible to be a person of good will toward all men and to fight to end the plight of the Palestinians, with various plans for how best to do that. Hundreds of millions around the planet are.

Many millions of Israeli Jews are. The Israeli versions of our trumpsters and other religious and racist bigots are the problem, because in these mean times the mean people have been prevailing there as they have here.

Tlaib, unfortunately, is not. She wants the state of Israel eliminated and the Jews gone. However much I might wish that the Jewish diaspora had been to part of Germany to establish a homeland there, it wasn't, and what it would take to destroy the state of Israel is extremism from any angle.

One could say she's not really for that -- because, after all, it's impossible! -- but what if it seemed to become...possible, perhaps as the ME continues to destabilize over the coming decades? What will people like her call for as fresh water, livable and arable lands, and wealth disappear and the whole region threatens to go up in climate flames?

People who mistake bad trouble for good and religious bigotry for truth need to be contained, not excused. There are plenty here who have no trouble recognizing those syndromes in passionate Christian nationalists, but they're hardly limited to one religion or one ethnicity.

[brush]

153. Well said. The far right in Israel are controlling things now...

and have for what seems forever, but it may not always be thus. Tlaib is a loose cannon with much to learn.

[AmericanCanuck]

135. Some are getting frustrated that the looney BDS movement is not going anywhere

Even Arab countries are slowly normalizing relations with Israel.

Palestinians have themselves to blame. They had their best agreement in hand at Camp David and they rejected it.

Their all or nothing approach is diplomatically unsound and gets no one's sympathy.

[ecstatic]

139. But she endorsed Bernie Sanders back in Oct 2019

when there at least a dozen Democrats to choose from.

Is it possible her tweet was not an unhinged reaction to Blinken's religion/ethnicity but instead a reaction to his record as Deputy Secretary of State under the Obama Admin?

I don't know anything about Blinken's record or Tlaib's, to be honest. I'm simply wondering why everyone assumes the worst regarding her intentions.

It would be wrong for Tlaib to make snap judgments based on Blinken's heritage, and just as wrong for us to immediately assume that Tlaib, a Palestinian-American Muslim, is a bigot when discussing Netanyahu or Israel.

[Cha]

143. Why would you speculate it's about

"Blinken's record" if you don't know anything about it?

[ecstatic]

149. I don't think I speculated. I'm just saying that he was

Dept SOS and I'm sure Tlaib is more familiar with his record than most of us. Her tweet may have been a reaction to specific comments or actions he took during that role. It's either that or that she's an anti-semitic Bernie supporter?

[Cha]

150. I think she's speculating..

[aidbo]

140. I see it is time to bash the squad again.

[Hekate]

152. Pffft. As someone upthread already said, I want to like The Squad. But a comment like this...

...makes it damn difficult.

Like the time early on when one of them said of another Democratic American Jew, “It’s all about the Benjamins,” in another unthinking and very ancient anti-Semitic trope.

It isn’t clever to substitute “the Benjamins” for rubbing ones’ fingers and muttering “money-grubbing,” and it isn’t humorous to question to which country they are loyal when they are an American sworn to high office.

“Oh, I sure hope the Congresswoman isn’t intending to try to impose Sharia Law on us.” Yeah, it really is that nasty.

[mtnsnake]

141. Nancy will probably have a little talk with her soon. Anyway here's a recent article about her tweet

https://forward.com/fast-forward/459020/rashida-tlaib-warns-tony-blinken-not-to-suppress-my-first-amendment-right/

[George II]

144. He's not only Jewish, but his stepfather was a survivor of both Auschwitz and Dachau....

Where do people come up with these rash accusations about which they know nothing?

[Hekate]

155. Having read thru the whole thread by now, it looks like the apologists are outnumbered...

I’m pretty sure that if Rashida Tlaib ever joined DU, that post of hers would be deleted by a jury.

[Hekate]

158. Here's a little something about that stepfather...

https://www.democraticunderground.com/100214609282

[Rustyeye77]

154. Gee... could that be anti-Semitic ??

I really dont want to be alerted on but that really pisses me off and i wish i knew how far I could give my opinion.

[DFW]

162. To dispel any doubt about Blinken's ability to handle the issue

Just go to dalton99a’s post with the interview in France, and listen to it. If Rashida understands no French, she should get someone who does, find out his views, and THEN make comments. Since he is about five times as smart as she is, she might refrain from making remarks that refer, even if indirectly, to his ethnic make-up before listening to him speak.