Ilhan Omar Continues Her Anti-Semitism

An accurate summation like it or not.

 

Reiver, In my post I did not specifically refer to the Global Terrorism Database. Therefore your comments were unjust.
The following is a partial list of Incidents about which the FBI said there was insufficient proof to consider them terrorist incidents:

On February 12, 2007, Bosnian Muslim immigrant Sulejman Talovic opened fire in Trolley Square, Salt Lake City, Utah. He killed 5 people and wounded 4 before being killed. Talovic had just left
Friday prayers at his mosque before he started his shooting spree.

Naveed Afzal Haq on July 28, 2006, opened fire inside a Jewish Community Center in Seattle, killing 1 woman and wounding 5 before surrendering. Haq told people inside the
center "I'm a Muslim-American: I am angry at Israel."

On July 4, 2002, an Egyptian Muslim, Hesham Mohamed Hadayet, opened fire at an Israeli airline ticket counter at Los Angeles International Airport. He killed two people and wounded five
before being shot to death by an EL AL security officer.

Saudi student Mohammed Ali Alayed was close friends with an American Jewish man Ariel Sellouk in college. They stopped seeing each other after school. Alayed became more religiously
involved and began attending mosque regularly - something he didn't do in college. About a year later, in August 2003, Alayed invited Sellouk to visit him, and slit his throat. No motive, other than
Alayed's religious awakening, was ever found for the murder. After the murder Alayed went to mosque.

The well-known Washington Beltway snipers John Muhammad and Lee Malvo - both American blacks who had converted to Islam - carried out a series of attacks that killed 13 people before
they were caught. Muhammad, who had praised the 9/11 attacks, called his actions "a prolonged terror campaign against America." That wasn't enough for the FBI.

Afghanistan Muslim Omeed Aziz Popal on August 30, 2006, went on a hit-and-run spree in San Francisco. He killed one person and injured seventeen others before being stopped and
arrested. When captured Popal called himself a "terrorist."

On January 31, 2007, Muslim Ismail Yassin Mohamed stole a car in Minneapolis and used it to ram several other vehicles. One woman was critically injured and others had minor injuries.While
ramming Mohamed continually yelled "Die, Die, Die, Kill, Kill, Kill." When captured he said he was following orders from Allah.

On March 3, 2006, an Iranian honors student, Mohammed Reza Tahen-azar, delberately rammed his SUV into a crowd at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, injuring 9 people.
When arrested he said he acted to "Punish the government of the United States" for invading Iraq.

Considering none of the above were considered terrorist acts by the FBI, I think it only fair to say Muslim terrorist attacks in the US are under-reported.

 

We know that fascists live in a fantasy world. Everything is out to get them and all knowledge was created to suppress them. They write their own version of history, hence are uninterested in facts, logic or reason. Not much one can do to help those drowning in the depths of irrationality.

 

You went for a red herring. GTD doesn't fit with your agenda and it's this type of source that is utilised in comparisons. Moreover, we actually know that any bias in the media refers to greater reporting of Islamic terrorism. Sorry.

 

You're referring to Trump's Charlottesville comment, a common talking point of misdirection to try to disparage this president. He was not talking about the people chanting those words; he was talking about the people who were legitimately, peacefully protesting the removal of Confederate statues, and it started out that way.

What is a white nationalist? And how is Stephen Miller a white nationalist?

If you're referring to Khizr Khan, then you must know that Khan attacked Trump first. It was perfectly OK for Trump to defend himself. Just because Khan lost a son, it does not mean he gets carte blanche to attack Trump. Trump has every right to defend himself.

 

I did not think that my post would be the landmark wherfrom her supporters on this forum finally saw the light, thereby accepting the reality of Omar's bigotry. In the left's vain attempts to turn this scandal into a perplexing imbroglio, they have used sophistry and misdirection in this battle royal.

The thesis of my salvo was that Omar was being anti-Semitic because she called Stephen Miller, who is a Jew, a white nationalist. In the tenor of my argument, I argue that calling a Jew a white nationalist without any evidence of such a radical charge is anti-Semitic; I argue this because the ideology of white supremacy is a fundamental characteristic of white nationalism. Hatred for Jews in the historical context of white supremacy is inarguable. Now, I will make a concession. Are there unreasonable people out there? Yes. For instance, there are people who are American that are anti-American (see leftists). I agree that there are self-hating misanthropes out there. But to call a Jew a white nationalist without any evidence to back up such an explosive charge is tantamount to a white person calling a black person an Uncle Tom. In fact, these same people who are defending Omar for calling a Jew a white nationalist without any evidence would be the same people who would be arguing that a white person calling a black person an Uncle Tom is a racist.

I will point out a couple of the vain, ludicrous attempts to muddy the waters that have been made in this colloquy.

One poster says that it is not anti-Semitic to call a Jew a white nationalist because a pro-Hamas outlet published someone saying that they were a proud Jewish Nazi. Here's why this is pure sophistry. One, that could have been satire used to expose the absurd notion that Jews can be in line with Nazis, despite the Holocaust in which millions of Jews perished. Two, there is no proof that that person is, in fact, a Jew. There was no proof or evidence given to corrobate that point. I, for one, can say on video that I am a proud Jewish Nazi, even though I am not, in fact, Jewish. In short, this is a disgusting, fallacious point to bring up in a vain effort to defend the crystal-clear bigotry of Omar.

Another poster mentions Dmitry Bogotich, a leader of an "Israeli neo-Nazi group." Now, at face value, this seems to be an effective counterpoint in that Jews can be anti-Semitic. But here there is a critical piece of information that the poster forgot to mention. Dmitry Bogotich is a Russian who emigrated to Israel. So removed from Israel ethnicity was Bogotich that he needed an interpreter to translate into Russian his sentencing: https://www.jpost.com/National-News/Neo-Nazi-gang-leader-gets-5-years-9-months-in-jail

In short, there is no evidence that Miller is not proud of his Jewish heritage to the point of being a self-hating Jew. If there was evidence to corroborate the charge that Miller is a self-hating Jew, I'm willing to reasonably discourse in that regard, analyzing the evidence, but no evidence has been made. The ill-used words on Omar's is a part are of a general pattern of anti-Semitic thinking; her using the word "white nationalist" to describe Miller was not made in vacuo but rather in a tapestry of anti-Semitic positions. There is a connivance on the part of the left, illustrated on this forum, to give this morally repugnant lawmaker carte blance to air her anti-Semitic views with no following consequences.

 

Stephen Miller is very much a nationalist. He is also white. By definition that makes him a white nationalist. That doesn't mean he is a racist, though he has been stone to spout somewhat racist BS in the past.

 

She is not using the term "white nationalist" to mean that he is a nationalist who happens to be white; she used it as a way to disparage Miller. If her intent was simply to call him a nationalist, then she could have simply called him a nationalist. Rather, she called him a white nationalist, which has a specific, negative denotation and connotations. It was used to disparage, not accurately describe, Miller.

 

That is just absurd.

Trump has repeatedly denounced white supremacists, in the strongest of terms. And yet, a day after he does so, ignorant people will claim otherwise and spew this nonsense that Trump has never denounced white supremacists.

The New Black Panthers is a larger organization than the KKK. White supremacists are, and always will be a tiny kook fringe. Meanwhile the two-faced Democrats actually embrace racial groups like La Raza.

 

Given data sources have approximately 3/4s of US terrorism down as crimes by right wing terrorists, I'm afraid your point of view doesn't deserve much consideration.

 

The KKK is certainly not in its heyday; they are very much in decline, yet the yellow journalism of the left continues to bring them up as a bugaboo to vilipend America.

 

Don't be ignorant. Pretending that Oakland CA did not happen is silly, since a simple Google search would bring back hundreds of hits on just San Jose alone.

 

Obviously there is no comparison.

Nothing like this happened during the 2008 campaign, and nothing like this happened after Obama was elected.

 

I don't know, ask the fascistic, left-wingers who self identify as "Democratic-socialists" like A.O.C., who are intolerant of anyone who dares espouse a different political opinion from theirs.

 

I think you are just trying to be obtuse. A person identified as a black nationalist, is not just a patriot who happens to be black, anymore than someone identified as a Jew hater, is thought to be a Jewish person who hates something.

Post after post, I have to wondering if I'm just dealing with people who really just genuinely ignorant, and asking to be informed. Or am I dealing with people on the left who are only pretending to be dumb as a brick, because once again they realize they have lost the argument, and reverting to their safe place, which is trolling.

 

I have been in these discussions before and was curious, so I did some research. The KKK for example, is losing membership, while black nationalist groups have gained in numbers. Even the Southern Poverty Law Center, whose ridiculously wide net identifies just about anyone and everyone as a member of a hate group, the SPLC says the KKK and neo-Nazi groups are losing members.

https://abcnews.go.com/US/kkk-groups-dwindle-white-nationalism-hip-2017-report/story?id=53244594

The reason I even bother to cite the SPLC, is because they are a totally discredited group, who exaggerates and conflates their numbers, that even they have to admit the truth. Even ABC realizes how false the statistics are from the SPLC, which is why so many their links in their news article that I linked, are broken.

 

Live in your own little bubble. You give no basis for your claims.

Let's see, just between the 9/11 attack, the Virginia Tech attack, and the Pulse night club shooting, and yet......... you think those only amounted 25% of terrorist shootings by right-wingers???

 

Why aren't you aware of your own country's data? The figure of 74% of attacks comes from tye US Extremist Crime Data between 2001 and 2016.

 

Just to keep this discussion on track, Ilhan Omar is an anti-Semite because she said Stephen Miller was a white nationalist with no evidence to back up her claim, which is an anti-Semitic expression.

 

Trump's Charlottesville incident showed us the true racist Trump was, a women was killed by racists that week and hardly a word of outrage from Trump, he had to be forced to say what he did and even then he had to add in that stupid "fine people" comment

 

No tricks I swear.
Definition of nationalism:
identification with one's own nation and support for its interests, especially to the exclusion or detriment of the interests of other nations.

Race has nothing to do with this. I won't let the left race bait on things that have nothing to do with race

 

Anybody who goes to the SPLC looking for the facts is on a fool's errand.

And this pretty much says it all.

If you want to look at hard numbers, take a look at the number of actual victims of "white nationals", and you'll count less bodies per year nationwide than the victims of street crime on a hot weekend in Chicago.

But let's all pretend that the Illinois Nazis are on the march, and a they're a huge threat to the poor Pee Oh Sees of America.

 

The researchers suggest otherwise. One chosen randomly...

"[We posit] that the radical right’s nationalism is different from that of the mainstream right in its radicalism (or far-reaching and fundamental nature), its obsession with the dominance of the main ethnic group, and its longing for homogeneous nations and states. In addition, this nationalism is often populist in tone; it is indebted to direct rather than representative variants of democracy; and in some cases it is ambiguous about its relationship to fascism, Nazism, collaborationist regimes, or the Holocaust. In short, without ethnic nationalism as its master concept, the radical right’s thinkers, political parties, and movements would lack a stable anchor" Bar-On (2018, The Radical Right and Nationalism, In The Oxford Handbook of the Radical Right, Edited by Jens Rydgren)

 

The definition of something is the definition of something..plain and simple...stop trying to claim people's own interpretations of a word as fact...try focusing on policy instead of skin color like you guys always do

 

The link between nationalism and racism is well researched. Apologies though! I forget sometimes that evidence is a difficult concept for right wingers.