Reason.com

Free Minds & Free Markets

It’s All About the Ad Hominems, Baby

Anti-Semitism aside, Ilhan Omar’s comments about Israel illustrate a pernicious, bipartisan tendency to attack motives instead of arguments.

Ilhan Omar says she did not realize her statements about Israel could be construed as anti-Semitic. Maybe we should take the Minnesota congresswoman at her word—except that she is manifestly unwilling to give people who disagree with her the same courtesy.

Omar's comments, which last week yielded a broad, anodyne House resolution against bigotry that satisfied no one, evoked a trifecta of anti-Jewish stereotypes. But they also embodied a bipartisan tendency to question people's motives rather than rebutting their arguments, a tactic that is poisonous to civil and rational debate.

"Israel has hypnotized the world," Omar, who was elected to Congress last fall, said on Twitter in 2012. "May Allah awaken the people and help them see the evil doings of Israel."

Last month, in response to a tweet about congressional support for Israel from journalist Glenn Greenwald, Omar said "it's all about the Benjamins baby," alluding to the financial influence of Jewish donors. After she deleted and apologized "unequivocally" for that tweet, Omar provoked fresh controversy by saying she wanted to talk about "the political influence in this country that says it is OK for people to push for allegiance to a foreign country."

Many people, representing a wide range of views on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, heard in those comments echoes of charges that Jews use occult powers to manipulate world events, use their wealth to buy political influence, and cannot be trusted because they place tribal loyalties above their country's interests. Putting those interpretations aside, Omar's statements clearly portrayed Israel's supporters as mesmerized dolts or paid shills—and in either case, unworthy of engagement.

Such ad hominem attacks are logically irrelevant, since a person's motives tell us nothing about the merits of his opinions. They encourage the demonization of political opponents, reinforcing a reflexive mutual hostility that makes a productive exchange of ideas impossible.

That's what Donald Trump was doing when he averred, during a March 2 speech at the Conservative Political Action Conference, that "we have people in Congress that hate our country." It is what Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) was doing when he suggested the next day that House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerry Nadler (D-N.Y.) lends credence to the charge that Trump is guilty of obstructing justice only because billionaire Tom Steyer, who favors impeachment, is a major supporter of Democratic candidates.

Nadler called Jordan's tweet "inane AND anti-Semitic"—the latter because Jordan had replaced the S in Steyer's last name with a dollar sign, and Steyer's father was Jewish. I'm not sure about the anti-Semitic part, but Jordan's accusation certainly was inane, both because Democrats hardly need a financial incentive to entertain claims about a Republican president's misdeeds and because Jordan substituted a red herring for an actual argument against those claims.

Coming to Omar's defense last week, Glenn Greenwald suggested there is nothing wrong with attacking "the Israel Lobby," since "everyone feels fine saying members of Congress place guns over Americans due to fear of NRA." He thereby illustrated the pitfalls of attacking motives instead of arguments.

Greenwald's "everyone" excludes all the people who sincerely disagree with him about gun control. His framing assumes such people do not exist, that the debate pits sensible, well-intentioned guardians of public safety against cowards who shrink from doing the right thing lest they antagonize the National Rifle Association.

Unlike Greenwald, New York Times columnist Michelle Goldberg thought Omar "deserves criticism" for her "mild anti-Semitism," but she was angrier at the legislator's Republican critics. Noting that 23 Republicans voted against the anti-bigotry resolution, Goldberg said "Republicans don't seem to recognize" the "ideals of multiethnic democracy."

That is not exactly a charitable interpretation, since the resolution's opponents complained it had been watered down so much that it became meaningless. When you are convinced that you are fighting for all that is good and right against the forces of darkness, you can't agree with your opponents even when you agree with them.

© Copyright 2019 by Creators Syndicate Inc.

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  • hfader||

    I love the last sentence in this piece. Who hasn't encountered this attitude?

  • Don't look at me!||

    It's Tony's biggest problem.

  • Finrod||

    My ex-wife had this habit of arguing until you agreed with her whereupon she would then start arguing the opposite side. It's a major factor as to why she's my ex-wife.

  • Rob Misek||

    Emotion supersedes reality in a post truth environment. The best environment for being manipulated by propaganda.

    Women prefer to make decisions based on emotion.

    That shouldn't be tolerated.

  • sharmota4zeb||

    Yep, Americans have gotten to the point of demanding right-speak as a way to enforce rules about right-think. It's a strategy for people who gain power through complaining, because it's practically impossible to refute an accusation about one's thinking. How much does a thought weigh?

  • Eddy||

    That depends, is it made of wood?

  • sharmota4zeb||

    200 kg of ebony wood. Suck it, Whitey.

    Hmmm ... I'm typing in the library on Chrome. Why am I not surprised that "whitey" is in the standard spellcheck dictionary for a Google product?

  • Red Rocks White Privilege||

    Sullum is completely overthinking this. This goes back to what I said a few days ago--she's a Somali Muslim, expressing thoughts that are typical of Muslims, particularly from the Middle East and East Africa, that Israel is the center of evil in the world (next to the United States and Europe, in that order). There's a legitimate discussion to be had regarding the US's alliance with Israel, but Omar is too dim for anything more complex than what her imam is spoon-feeding her.

    Ilhan Omar is not a deep thinker. She's a third-world dumpster fire who lucked out by living in a Somali-dominant refugee terrorist recruitment district, and there's really nothing more to it than that.

  • vek||

    Pretty much!

  • Quixote||

    Regardless of her excellent education (which reflects the fashionable "theory," Marxist, postmodernist, etc. appropriately taught as dogma in American colleges today) and her paradoxical lack of intellectual depth, clearly she should be arrested and charged with use of false, deceitful, and reputation-damaging tropes. If she had sent out "tweets" in the name of AIPAC's director to make her point, she would be in jail by now. See the documentation of our nation's leading criminal "satire" case at:

    https://raphaelgolbtrial.wordpress.com/

  • Uncle Adolf’s Gas and Grill||

    Get used to it. This is our new Enlightened™ Future. And remember - Diversity is our greatest strength!

  • Libertymike||

    She may be a hijab wearing Muslima, but she had the stones to say it like it is. She should not have apologized nor walked her statements back an iota.

  • AER1972||

    You miss the point that she really just regurgitated pro Muslim/anti-Israel talking points. None of the new 7 Justice Democrat Congressional plants are intellectually deeper than a paper cut. They lack critical thinking skills and for the most part are unaccomplished nit wits.

  • Red Rocks White Privilege||

    None of the new 7 Justice Democrat Congressional plants are intellectually deeper than a paper cut. They lack critical thinking skills and for the most part are unaccomplished nit wits.

    That's really all there is to it. Even in areas where they might have legitimate points, they express them in the dumbest ways, as if they just wandered into Congress regurgitating talking points from a college campus rally. There's no substance or thought to any of it, just the same old SJW boilerplate.

  • Red Rocks White Privilege||

    More to the point, it's centered exclusively around religious/ethnic identity. Amash is hated by Palestinians, despite being Palestinian himself, because he doesn't parrot these same talking points. By contrast, Rashida Tlaib is admired because she's seen to represent the interests of Palestinians and Arabs exclusively. She, Omar, and AOC don't identify with the United States at all.

  • Azathoth!!||

    She may be a hijab wearing Muslima, but she had the stones to say it like it is. She should not have apologized nor walked her statements back an iota.

    This is just sad.

    Are jews beaming messages into your head, too?

  • Stephen54321||

    Azathoth!!: "Are jews beaming messages into your head, too?"

    That's a strange comment given that AIPAC, like all lobbies, is all about "beaming" messages into someone's head in order to influence their decision.

  • Last of the Shitlords||

    Nope. Israelis are the good guys in the ME, and the Muslims ar the bad guys. It really isn't more complicated than that. I remember debating the son of a Palestinian immigrant at a Junior Statesman convention when I was in high school back in 1987. He was a violent, venomous, nasty piece of shit. Full of hatred and a desire to exterminate the Jews.

    When he pressed me, asking how dare I support Israel, I replied "I look at both sides. And I figure it's best to back the one that doesn't want to kill me for existential reasons, and that sure as Hell isn't the Palestinians.".

    The asshole could barely contain himself. Had he been able, I think he might have attacked me right there. That's largely how they are.

    Fuck the Muslims. And god bless the Israelis.

  • itsjustbob||

    ""I look at both sides. And I figure it's best to back the one that doesn't want to kill me for existential reasons, and that sure as Hell isn't the Palestinians.".

    I may have to quote you on that. Well done.

    "Fuck the Muslims. And god bless the Israelis."

    Another gem, they are not our friends

  • Last of the Shitlords||

    No, they're not. They frequently even hate each other. However, at no point in my life have the Israelis, or Jews in general wanted to kill me, especially on existential grounds.

  • sunset||

    You bigots need to get out more and quit broad stroking a quarter of the world's population.

  • Last of the Shitlords||

    Really? Have YOU ever been to the ME? I have. It isn't all bad, it any large group of Muslims tends to be problematic.

    Maybe you should learn what you're talking about before you open your mouth.

  • sunset||

    There are 3.5 million of them living in the US, so I've met quite a few. You'd probably meet some as well if you got out of your echo chamber, basement, or whatever other excuse you have for your narrow-minded thinking.

  • Finrod||

    This is a perfect example of "so open-minded that their brain leaked out".

    All you have is whining and invective, fucko. You didn't address the issue of Muslim hate because even admitting it blows your whiny diatribe to pieces. Get the 2x4 out of your eye before you worry about the splinter in his.

  • Stephen54321||

    Last of the Shitlords: "Israelis are the good guys in the ME"

    Really? Now you sound like you're simply regurgitating an AIPAC talking point.

    What exactly have the Iraeli's done, least of all for America, which makes them "the good guys" in that part of the world? Have they offered their help in ANY of America's wars in that part of the world?

    Last of the Shitlords: "I remember debating the son of a Palestinian immigrant at a Junior Statesman convention when I was in high school back in 1987. He was a violent, venomous, nasty piece of shit. Full of hatred and a desire to exterminate the Jews."

    Given that some of his people were killed, and millions of others evicted by force from their own homeland, BY the Israelis in 1948 while those who remained have been steadily and relentlessly persecuted by those Israelis over the decades since to the point where Gaza is now little more than an open air prison while those Palestinians who live in the West Bank keep having their lands taken and their homes bulldozed every time Israel wants to create a new Jewish settlement, why should he have a good opinion of Israelis?

    It'd be like expecting Jews who survived the Holocaust to have a good opinion of the Nazis--as opposed to expressing "a desire to exterminate" said Nazis.

  • Last of the Shitlords||

    You are so full of bullshit, it is breathtaking. Do you just puke up everything Media Matters tells you to, or are you just personally stuck on stupid too?

    Israelis are the good guys, period. They are peace loving and industrious. When bad things happen to the Muslims in their country, it is because they can't behave, forcing the Israeli's hand. As a progressive I know you hate the victim and champion murderers, but that's not how good people see things.

    Israel has also provided us with Gal Gadot, a true international treasure, and living work of art.

  • Stephen54321||

    Last of the Shitlords: They are peace loving and industrious:"

    Tell that to the Palestinians!

    Last of the Shitlords: "When bad things happen to the Muslims in their country, it is because they can't behave, forcing the Israeli's hand."

    Is that your excuse for why Israeli snipers slaughtered men, women, and children at Gaza last year? "[B]ecause they can't behave"?

    Last of the Shitlords: "As a progressive I know you hate the victim and champion murderers..."

    Says the guy who champions Israeli murderers of women and chidren, whilst pouring scorn and derision on the victims of Israeli aggression.

    Last of the Shitlords: "Israel has also provided us with Gal Gadot, a true international treasure, and living work of art."

    She's also no friend of Nertanyahu! Has that tarnished her image for you? See: "Gal Gadot Steps Into Political Fray, Backing Actress Against Netanyahu" at forward.com

  • JesseAz||

    Stephen, are you dumb or just proudly ignorant? Are you ignorant to the thousands of rockets fired into Israel from Palestine? The raid last year was an intentional incitement by Hamas to get Israel to respond. They were launching smoke and chemicals near the border which is an attack as well as a security risk. They were trying to overrun the border dumb fuck. This was literally what Hamas told media reporters. So either you're dumb or intentionally ignorant.

  • Stephen54321||

    JesseAz: "Are you ignorant to the thousands of rockets fired into Israel from Palestine?"

    First of all, thiose rockets werte a response to Israel's ongoing blockade of Gaza.

    Secondly, AFAIK they were fired from Gaza only--as opposed to Gaza AND the West Bank..

    In other words, you are, by inference, smearing ALL Palestinians for the actions of a small group. Namely, Hamas.

    JesseAz: "The raid last year was an intentional incitement by Hamas to get Israel to respond."

    None of which justified the use snipers by Israel, let alone LIVE ammunition!

    Or are you suggesting that that is how the Obama federal government should have responded to the "intentional incitement" by armed ranchers during the the Bundy protests back in 2014?

    Should Obama have sent the Marines in to mow them down. Men, women, and children. Is that what you would have advocated?

    Because if not, then why would you support what Israeli did? Provocation is NO excuse for cold blooded murder.

    After all, if Hamas's "launching smoke and chemicals near the border" constitutes "an attack" and a "security risk", which in turn justified Israel's use of live ammunition, then why shouldn't what the Bundys did also constitute a "security risk" as well and therefore justify the use of US troops and live ammunition to slaughter them?

  • Stephen54321||

    JesseAz: "They were trying to overrun the border dumb fuck."

    Really? Is that the solution you would advocate American governments use for America's own border problems? Slaughter anybody who tries to cross.

    Because if it isn't, then why would you support Israel for doing it.

    JesseAz: " dumb fuck...So either you're dumb or intentionally ignorant."

    Hurling insults doesn't enhance your argument. It just makes you sound desperate.

  • Finrod||

    Ignoring their points because it blows your fantasy spin away makes you worse than desparate.

  • Finrod||

    Desperate. My kingdom for an edit button.

  • Rob Misek||

    The US taxpayers give more military aid to Israel than anyone else.

    Existential my ass.

    Myopic.

  • AZ Gunowner||

    She is just a Jew hating Muslim.

    50% of Islam is Jew hatred, @ is the enslavement of women, and is killing everything else.

    Islam is 0 hatred.

    And you though increasing the number of Muslims in the country was just going to spice up your restaurant life huh?

  • AZ Gunowner||

    sorry, @ is the enslavement of women, don't know where the @ came from.

  • Quo Usque Tandem||

    "Diversity is our greatest strength!"

    Coming soon, to a billboard near you.

  • Ken Shultz||

    In my experience talking to Muslims from all over the world here in the U.S. (at mosque and elsewhere), my sense is that average Muslims are pretty clear about Israel mistreating Palestinians, and I'm not sure that criticism is entirely misplaced. No doubt, there are plenty of fundamentalists who are susceptible to antisemitic conspiracy theories and you can find people who promulgate them. I grew up hearing anti-Catholic conspiracy theories from fundamentalist protestants about how the assassination of Abraham Lincoln was a papist conspiracy, too. That stuff is still out there. I'm not sure how prevalent actual belief in that stuff is among Christians.

    I will say that Omar's statements haven't done much to help buck the stereotype. The Somali community she represents in Minnesota had an embarrassing problem of so many of its youth sneaking off to go join ISIS

    "Rresearchers at George Washington University's Program on Extremism found that Minnesota, particularly the Twin Cities, has seen an unusually active rate of jihadist mobilization with roots in an earlier wave of departures to join Somalia's Al-Shabab militants in the late 2000s."

    http://www.startribune.com/stu.....472820363/

    The immigrant Somali community of Minnesota does not appear to be typical of American Muslims generally.

  • Juice||

    average Muslims are pretty clear about Israel mistreating Palestinians, and I'm not sure that criticism is entirely misplaced

    There's no sugarcoating it. Israel is a tad unkind to Palestinians.

  • MatthewSlyfield||

    As if the Palestinians are trying to be kind/friendly with Israel.

    It's not easy being kind to people who openly advocate your own destruction.

  • Seamus||

    Palestinians are unkind/unfriendly toward Israel for exactly the same reasons that American Indians were unkind/unfriendly toward Americans. (It's small consolation that the Israelis have left the Palestinians with reservation that's a bigger proportion of pre-1948 Palestine than our Indian reservations are of the United States.)

  • JesseAz||

    For fuck sake. The population of Palestine in 1948 was in the thousands. Muslims immigrated there after Israeli statehood. Is it required to be retarded to be pro palestine?

  • Finrod||

    They sure seem to be dominated by the double-digit-IQ crowd.

  • John||

    And Mulsims hate Jews. I have met some of the kindest most responsible and thoughtful Muslims over the years and every single one of them hated Jews with a passion that would make Father Coughlin blush.

  • vek||

    Well, really, they both have legit reasons TO hate each other.

    One of the things that people seem to like to ignore with a lot of rivalries between groups is that MANY things are legitimately IN THE INTERESTS of one group and AGAINST the interests of another.

    Many of the tensions in the USA are over similar things. High tax rates are specifically BAD for white and Asian Americans, and GOOD (at least short term) for blacks, Hispanics, and others that use welfare at higher rates and pay fewer taxes. That's a legit point of contention.

    It is good for the Jews to jack land there... It is NOT in the interests of the Palestinians or Arabs surrounding Israel. Therefore they have a hard and concrete interest at stake on both sides.

    They both also apparently seem willing to kill each other over that interest. Often times people can be at odds over a legitimate concern, but not be willing to take it that far.

    The whole "Why doesn't everybody just get along!" thing ignores that there often IS NOT a solution that is good for both sides, so one side just has to win and the other lose. In Israel the Jews have to give something up they have the power to take to make the Palestinians happy. Sometimes there is no solution that will make everybody happy.

  • Jury Nullification||

    "...the Jews have to give something up they have the power to take..."

    No, because the only thing Jews can give up to make muslims happy is their Jewish lives.

  • AZ Gunowner||

    Islam has been about Jew hatred since Mohammed vomited up his excuse for theft, rape, and violence.

    The perfect criminal organization - a death cult married to a crime syndicate.

  • Jury Nullification||

    What's with the Father Coughlin reference?

    I had to look that up but in my defense I did drop out of 2nd grade and 1930's radio broadcasters had not been covered. Was the reference to show off how erudite you are, some kind of Christian bashing under the guise of religious relativism or just trying to broaden the appeal of antisemitism?

    "...the kindest most responsible and thoughtful Muslims over the years and every single one of them hated Jews with a passion..." It's anonymous, I mean, unanimous and how can a billion muslims be wrong.

    Sounds like an endorsement.

  • John||

    Coughlin is a notorious anti Semite. The reference is meant to convey that the Muslims I have known really hate Jews. I wasn't aware it was an obscure reference. And I don't see how so many of them hating Jews is a good thing or pointing that out some kind of endorsement.

  • Seamus||

    It's not that obscure. And even if it were, people with easy access to Wikipesia have no grounds for complaining, as they might have back in the old days.

  • Obama ate a dog||

    "Jury Nullification|3.13.19 @ 1:11PM|#

    What's with the Father Coughlin reference..."

    What an interesting screed. You seem committed to proving you're vastly ignorant and proud of it, so much so that you wear your ignorance like z nadge of honor in your post.

  • Teddy Pump||

    If one replaced the term JEW with ROTHSCHILD ZIONIST (see David Icke) there would be a lot more clarity on this subject!...JEWS are OK & like any other group there are good ones & bad ones & the same goes for Israelis, but, ROTHSCHILD ZIONISTS are POWERFUL & PURE EVIL & sad to say but, many of them run the USA & Israel & several other nations & central banks & much of the Media & Academia, etc...& they are for Collectivism, Communism, Cultural Marxism, Globalism, etc...

    It's like Chris Rock said in his comedy routine years ago: "I love black people, but, I hate Niggers!".....I like Jewish people, but I hate Zionists!

  • Azathoth!!||

    There's no sugarcoating it. Israel is a tad unkind to Palestinians.

    Yes, this a common reaction when someone is trying to kill you. That they are just 'unkind' is something the Palestinians should thank Allah for.

  • Last of the Shitlords||

    Ken, some stereotypes are true.

  • ace_m82||

    "I'm not sure how prevalent actual belief in that stuff is among Christians."

    Never heard it before, so likely not that prevalent.

  • Mickey Rat||

    From I what understand, her district is not Somali dominant except maybe in the Democrat primaries. Otherwise it is a yellow dog Democrat district.

  • Ed Grinberg||

    You're correct.
    (I used to live there. Don't know why I bothered voting...)

  • middlefinger||

    "Israel is the center of evil in the world next to the United States and Europe"...But we must come by the millions and live in the evil empires and fight to install theTheocratic Socialist Dictatorships we fled!

  • mtrueman||

    " There's a legitimate discussion to be had regarding the US's alliance with Israel"

    With whom? If discussion with a moran and terrorist like Ilhan Omar is illegitimate and not in the cards, who is going to legitimately discuss the issue?

  • Teddy Pump||

    How about we discuss it with the plethora of war mongering Globalist Zionists that have been in the Presidential Administrations & Cabinets of BOTH PARTIES starting with Bush #1 thru Trump....The Dual Citizens of both the USA & Israel that have engineered the IMMORAL & UNCONSTITUTIONAL War on Terror that the US is fighting on Israel's behalf?...I'd like to discuss it with them!

  • mtrueman||

    ".I'd like to discuss it with them!"

    After they censure you for anti-semitism, holocaust denial, and membership in hamas, they won't be discussing anything with you.

  • Teddy Pump||

    True Dat!!!

  • Billy Bones||

    All I hear out of all of this is a bunch of kindergarten children arguing over who's imaginary friend is better. Can we please start electing adults?

  • Don't look at me!||

    No rational person wants those jobs.

  • Mickey Rat||

    Just what this needs, input from the asshole atheist quarter.

  • ShotgunJimbo||

    Pretty much. Far too many few in congress with degrees involving critical thinking / problem solving (engineers, scientists, physicians, mathematicians) and far too many with their thought processes controlled / motivated by silly ancient books.

  • Eddy||

    Like Das Kapital and Pikkety?

  • Azathoth!!||


    All I hear out of all of this is a bunch of kindergarten children arguing over who's imaginary friend is better. Can we please start electing adults?

    Hey! Look everyone! Billy is an Atheist! Congratulations, Billy.

    Thanks for letting us know!

    You be sure to chime in with the Atheist Perspective whenever you think that we're not getting just how smart you are for being an Atheist.

  • OneSimpleLesson||

    The easiest religion to troll is Atheism.

  • TLBD||

    Intelligent atheists are hard to spot because the only way to know is to ask them directly.

    Billy and his type find something they think is smart and regurgitate it in a transparent attempt to gain intellectual credibility.

  • Last of the Shitlords||

    Any atheist who starts using terms like 'imaginary friend', or 'sky daddy' to refer to God is a retard and a fool, not worthy of respect or civility.

    As an example, see:

    Tony
    PB
    Rev. Arty Costco
    Chemjeff (I think, he's a disingenuous race abiting moron anyway)
    Chipper

  • Finrod||

    Amen to that.

  • Jury Nullification||

    And nobody knows about imaginary friends better than Billy Boy. Kindergarten? Probably about the time that your birthday parties were attended solely by imaginary friends.

  • Ken Shultz||

    Jewish support is crucial to Democrat candidates early in primaries, like the NRA or Americans for Tax Reform is on the Republican side. It isn't about the fairness of Omar's critics. It's about the Democrats banding together for a key constituency when one of their fellow Democrats shits the bed. This is Pelosi and the Democrat leadership trying to curb the SJWs and train them not to bite the hand that feeds them. Being a party leader is about seeing the big picture, and if Omar had tried to think up an excellent way to undermine the Democrats nationally, she could hardly have come up with anything better than what she did and said.

  • Chipper Jones||

    In other words, it's all about the Benjamins?

  • Red Rocks White Privilege||

    Like a lot of things Omar says, that's a pretty simplistic view on the history of Jewish political activism in the US. It probably shouldn't be a surprise to anyone that a group of people who have largely voted Democrat since the migration of communist/anarchist Eastern European Jews to the US in the late 1800s would donate large sums of money to that party in this day and age.

  • Teddy Pump||

    But, AIPAC pays off BOTH PARTIES!!!!....That is why no one in Congress can criticize Israel!

    "To learn who rules over you, find out who you are not allowed to criticize"
    -Voltaire

  • Red Rocks White Privilege||

    But, AIPAC pays off BOTH PARTIES!!!!

    Doesn't change the fact that Jews still largely vote Democrat and most political donations go to Democrat campaigns and causes. Republican support for Israel is mostly bound up in boomer-con religious nostalgia.

  • Eddy||

  • Diane Reynolds (Paul.)||

    It's always about the Benjamins, just as it is for for Omar... or Ocasio-Cortez

  • AZ Gunowner||

    For Omar, it is about hating Jews.

    Something she's been taught to do by her "religion of peace".

  • Teddy Pump||

    But, AIPAC pays off BOTH SIDES!

  • Leo Kovalensky II||

    Just based on the headline, I expected this to be a complete rundown of the HnR comments section.

  • Brainsphere||

    Thanks for sharing,

    HR Software Company in Dubai

  • vek||

    The truth is that there ARE a lot of major issues with the "Jewish Lobby" in the USA. They DO use their money and power AS A GROUP to influence US policy. Usually in bad ways. This is the very nature of lobbying though, so can't fault them toooooo much. But they also DO seem to put the interests of Israel above those of the USA a good amount of the time, both the left wing and right wing ones. Whether this is intentional or simply them being misguided in their own minds because of their love of their people's land probably varies from person to person. Many gentiles seem to find Israel infallible too.

    The left wing Jewish groups tend to be some of the very worst in the country supporting commie crap... And the right wing Jews that are pretty awesome on lots of stuff tend to have the worst foreign policy attitudes in the universe... So while ya certainly can't lump them all together, Jewish influence in the USA and the west in general is a pretty dicey thing as both sides of the political spectrum tend to push for policies that are awful for western interests.

    That said, it seems pretty clear this chick is just a moron Muslim who hates Jews because they're Jews. I wouldn't be surprised if she couldn't even articulate all the problems with Israel 1/100th as well as I could.

  • Libertymike||

    That is why the hijab wearing Minnesota Muslima should be applauded. She had the stones to say what so many thousands of white congressmen and women have been frightened to articulate for decades.

    She should not have apologized. It is utterly unbecoming to grovel to the hasbara.

  • Tony's Mom||

    You clearly didn't read the post you think you're agreeing with.

  • vek||

    She probably shouldn't have apologized for the quotes I have seen, I don't know if there are worse ones. Everybody needs to stop apologizing for things that shouldn't be a big deal IMO, both the left and the right. This whole endless stream of everybody being offended about everything needs to end.

    But she's still a moron who probably doesn't know what she's talking about.

    I have MAJOR problems with "Jewish Power" (if you care to use that term) in the western world. But I think one should be realistic, intellectual, and have actual arguments. She's no better than a "Fuck all them white people cuz they're white!" types.

  • Last of the Shitlords||

    There are around fifteen million Jews worldwide. Even if they are disproportionately wealthy and connected, there simp,y aren't enough of them to take over much of anything, except a film studio or a law firm, and maybe some dentistry practices.

    There are over 1.5 BILLION Muslims. They are an existential threat to the rest of us. If you don't believe that, look at every country where they have migrated in large enough numbers to become a significant minority or more of that country's population. It doesn't go well for the infidels.

    People better get a sense of proportion and get their fucking heads in the game.

  • itsjustbob||

    spot on. And if they continue to reach positions of power in countries that have a lot of really big guns, it could be game over for us infidels

  • Last of the Shitlords||

    Possibly. I do have to give credit to the Pakistanis for not losing their shit and trying to nuke India, or anyone else. So there is some slim hope at least.

  • ShotgunJimbo||

    +10

    I mean maybe not an existential threat in that I probably don't feel as strongly as you about likely eradicating them, but enough that I see their religion/beliefs cause a significant enough problem that it is a significant threat to people that want to be free (which they hate, with a passion)

  • Ed Grinberg||

    re: "...people that want to be free (which they hate, with a passion)"
    Just like Democrats. Which explains why they put people like Ms. Omar in office.

  • Last of the Shitlords||

    I have no interest in eradicating 1.5 billion Muslims. On the other hand, treating them like everyone else doesn't work either. I would definitely not let them immigrate to the Us in any significant numbers. Also, America should be made very uncomfortable for any Muslims who display radical fundamental tendencies. Like Omar.

  • Ken Shultz||

    Neoconservatives are as likely to put the interests of the people they're invading over the interests of the United States. Going back to the beginning of the Iraq War, even before the insurgency solidified, the war was being justified by neocons in terms of what was best for the Iraqis. That war supporters adamantly defended the idea that what the Iraqi people wanted was to be bombed, invaded, liberated, and occupied seems absurd now, but go to the archives here, circa 2005, and you'll find necon supporters calling me a racist for questioning whether the Iraqi people really wanted American style democracy.

    Even today, you'll find people here in the comments at Hit & Run look at me like I'm crazy for suggesting that whether we invade Syria or let our defense contractors sell weapons to the Saudis, etc. should be determined by whether doing so is in the best interests of the United States. I maintain that having Israel as an ally continues to be in the best interests of the U.S. In fact, Israel's best interests and our best interests are so closely aligned, that's it can be hard to differentiate between them. If Israel serves as a check on Iran in the region and an attack dog we can use as a front against terrorists, and that serves the best interests of the USA, then faulting neocons for being pro-Israel is missing the point.

  • Ken Shultz||

    They're wrong for other reasons.

    The people who are putting the interests of the Palestinians above the strategic interests of the United States may be more vulnerable to questions of loyalty.

  • Ken Shultz||

    Are the people who want to divest from Israel because of the way they treat the Palestinians want us to let Israel go--regardless of whether doing so is in the best interests of American security?

    I suppose they may argue that bringing peace to "Palestine" will make ISIS in Iraq and Syria, Hezbollah in Syria and Lebanon, the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, Iran's nuclear and missile programs, etc., etc. will mean that all these things no longer present a threat to American security. Seems an absurd assumption to me, and why should I make their case for them.

    Seems to me that our relationship with Israel is in our best interests strategically, and they want to put the interests of the Palestinians above our own security interests. Even so, I don't question their loyalty. I just question their judgement.

  • vek||

    So without getting into TOO big a discussion:

    First, half of the big Neocons ARE Jewish. It is widely accepted as almost being a thing that came out of Jewish circles in the US, which isn't inherently a bad thing, but it is what it is.

    And yes, gentile Neocons are idiots too. Never said otherwise. They should ALSO be chided for their stupidity. However, 2 people can hold the same opinion on taking an action, but have entirely different reasons for wanting to do so. I personally DO think that most American Jews (that are in politics at least) want to back Israel, even if it is worse for the USA, SPECIFICALLY because they're Jewish and want to back "their people."

    Motives DO matter, and I don't think any Americans in positions of power should be willing to screw America over to help other nations because of having a feeling of loyalty to that nation over the USA. This applies to any and all ethnicities, religions, etc IMO, not just Jews.

    Here's the thing though, the ONLY reason Israel is seemingly our greatest ally in the ME is BECAUSE we irrationally backed this tiny, basically useless little nation to the hilt, gave them endless money and support, because of (I would say) people feeling bad about the holocaust AND Jewish influence being so great in the west. Neither is a great reason for such a decision IMO.

  • vek||

    Had we remained neutral, and let things land where they land, and maintained GOOD relations with the Muslim world, it is highly likely we'd be in fine standing with 1 billion + Muslims, instead of considered a sworn enemy by many/most of them.

    We've now backed ourselves into a corner where we almost have to rely on Israel, because we pissed everybody off so bad! It would take decades of concerted effort to fix relations with the Arabs, and we aren't even trying to, we're just making it worse.

    I don't have a problem with Jews, but I do think backing Israel over the entire Muslim world was a MASSIVE strategic blunder. I hope we fix it someday by stopping our idiocy in the ME, and if that means Israel suffers... Well maybe without us backing them they'll actually sign off on reasonable terms with their neighbors.

  • TLBD||

    Nobody gets along with them and they do not get along with each other.

    The idea that Israel really has much to do with it is wrong. Israel is just a scapegoat. The west is just a scapegoat.

    This is just one of many methods authoritarian regimes use to maintain power. Your country doesn't suck because of us leaders, it sucks because outside influences. Dont be mad at me, be mad at the Jews.

    If we and the west abandoned Israel, Muslim leaders would murder them and then find another scapegoat that they would murder later. This is what authoritarians do.

  • vek||

    Maybe... But there were lots of Jews in the Ottoman empire, and they never attempted to kill every single one.

    I don't disagree with your general premise, but if you think direct, real, material problems don't contribute to issues in the real world... Not so much. Had we not backed Israel, the Muslims would probably be busy killing each other, instead of wanting to jihad the west. Israel may or may not have been able to survive without our backing. But why is it our responsibility to ensure a random ethnic group gets to reconquer land their people held 2,000 years ago? It's not.

    That's all I'm saying. I wish the Jews the best of luck, they are a LOT better people than most middle eastern Muslims, but that doesn't mean I want to screw up our own affairs to their benefit.

  • Last of the Shitlords||

    "Had we remained neutral, and let things land where they land, and maintained GOOD relations with the Muslim world, it is highly likely we'd be in fine standing with 1 billion + Muslims, instead of considered a sworn enemy by many/most of them."

    That's wishful thinking at best, and very naive. Muslims in any large population simp,y do not coexist peacefully with others. They dominate, assimilate, and kill. Having nothing to do with Israel. Look at India and Pakistan. Look at the Islamic problems all around the world.

    Islam is scripturally xenophobic. In ways unlike any other world religion. No policy you're going to come up with will change that.

  • msimmons||

    "Had we remained neutral, and let things land where they land..."

    We, the United States, or we, the United Nations?

  • awildseaking||

    You could replace Jewish lobby with any other group and the content of your post wouldn't change.

  • vek||

    Which is why I said it's kind of the whole POINT of a lobby, didn't I?

    The thing is, I don't think, practically speaking, most other lobbies have had quite the same effect, or just the same amount of raw power.

    The Israel lobby has probably impacted our foreign policy more than any other in the last several decades, other than just generally being Anti Communist back during the cold war, but that wasn't the result of any given lobby.

    Personally, I think we should have remained neutral on the question of Israel, and not pissed off over 1 billion Muslims for the sake of a couple million people who stole a country from other people... But the holocaust making us feel bad, and Jewish power in the west, made us decide to piss off one of the biggest blocks of people on earth (Muslims, specifically middle eastern and north African ones) for essentially a pet issue.

    HORRIBLE CALL. Not that I dislike Israel. If I was a Jew I'd be ALL ABOUT taking back our homeland through force, and holding it by any means necessary. But that doesn't mean it's good policy for a world power to back such a movement over far greater interests. We probably never would have had the issues with Islamic terrorism, or any of the wars had the chain of events been different.

  • vek||

    Then there's the reality that the Jewish lobby is pretty much objectively more powerful, influential, and vastly better funded than damn near any other group anybody can think of.

    Whether anybody likes to admit it or not, it is literally a matter of statistics that Jews in the west are disproportionately wealthy, largely control media and banking, and are far over represented in academia and politics. The stats are indisputable. IMO this isn't inherently good or bad, but it is true... You can say it's purely because of good cultural practices, because they have higher IQs in all IQ tests, or say they're evil and clannish... Doesn't really matter why, because it is factually accurate. They're FAR more influential than their raw numbers suggest.

    It's not that they shouldn't have the right to do it, but they also should not be free from criticism for their actions if they're doing dumb shit with their power.

  • Teddy Pump||

    +1,000!!!

  • Libertymike||

    "the ideals of multiethnic democracy"

    Diversity + Proximity = War

  • vek||

    Yup. The leftist open borders Jews suuuure are going to be feeling stupid as more and more synagogues start getting vandalized... I guess it's been happening like crazy in Europe lately...

  • blameline||

    I find it interesting that the diversity-enthusiastic Democrats feel so free to strike at the one country in the Middle-East that does not discriminate against women, gays, or ethnic, racial, or religious minorities.

  • Mickey Rat||

    The Muslims are greater victims because they are "brown" people in their eyes and Israelis are white colonialists, despite there being a substantial Jewish population in the region even from after the Roman Empire's Jewish Wars.

  • Longtobefree||

    Please provide a comprehensive list of countries colonized by Israel.

  • Mickey Rat||

    They think Israel is the colony intruding on Arab lands.

    I did not say it made much sense.

  • Longtobefree||

    Well, making sense is not a requirement, I guess.
    Still, only one country was created by UN mandate in the middle east.

  • CptNerd||

    The rest were created by British and French mandate.

  • vek||

    Well, it is true and it isn't.

    I mean, when you haven't held a territory for around 2,000 years, do you REALLY have a legit claim on it?

    If so, I guess Italy should be ruling most of Europe and the Med?

    Or maybe it should be the Turks? Why don't we go just a touch further back, and give the Greeks back their empire? Or jump forward, and give it to the Mongols?

    The truth is, it gets absurd real quick playing this game. The reality is that it is all about PURE FORCE. If you can take a land and hold it, then it's yours for as long as you can hold it. That's all there is to it.

  • BearOdinson||

    Except the part that most people forget is that a majority of the land in Israel was purchased from the Ottoman Empire from the 1880s until the British took over Mandatory Palestine. Israelis didn't steal anything from anyone. 1948: The UN endorsed the creation of 2 states! In the region west of the Jordan river: One Jewish, one Arab (in addition to the already existing state of Jordan on the East side of the Jordan river). Jews danced, happy to have their little piece of land to call their own. The Arabs from all the countries surrounding it invaded. Israel ended up with a net gain in territory (but of course lost the Old city of Jerusalem).
    1967: Egypt blockaded the Strait of Tiran (itself an act of war) and kicked out the UN Peacekeepers in the Sinai. Nassar threatened the destruction of Israel on radio daily. If Israel hadn't struck first, they might have been annihilated,. As a result ended up with Gaza and the West Bank. They TRIED to give them back in return for peace treaties with Egypt, and Jordan! The Arabs proclaimed the three "Nos" in the Khartoum Resolution : No peace with Israel, No recognition of Israel, No negotiations with Israel.
    1973: Egypt and Syria launched a surprise attack on the holiest day in the Jewish Calendar. Almost succeeded. This was the first time major support for Israel was supplied by the US.

    I could keep going....

  • msimmons||

    Let me...

    Arguments against US support for Israel frequently point out that we (?) stole land from Palestine. Historic Palestine as we know it today is derived from a map drawn up by the British at the end of World War I—in particular by British Christians whose understanding of the geography of Palestine was largely based on the Bible, which, as we all know, is derived from the Jews.

    So, it is the height of irony when we hear the militant Islamists of Hamas insisting that any compromise about the land that constitutes "historic Palestine" is impossible, for, as they argue, the entire land is a waqf, or Islamic trust, bestowed by God. Think about it: a border drawn by British Christians based on their reading of the Jewish Bible is now interpreted by Muslim fundamentalists as God-given and unchangeable!

    But surely, for many centuries before the land fell into British hands, there must have been a country called Palestine, right?

  • msimmons||

    In fact, historically, there was never an independent country named Palestine. There was for a time a Roman province named Palestine, when the Romans bestowed that name in the second century A.D. on an area that was previously called Judea, and which had been sovereign for a time. Having defeated the Jews in what the ancient historian Josephus labeled "the Jewish Wars," the Romans then expelled the Jews from Jerusalem and renamed the province after the Jews' archenemy, the Philistines.

    Never was a Palestine. Never any Palestinian land to steal.

  • Red Rocks White Privilege||

    Having defeated the Jews in what the ancient historian Josephus labeled "the Jewish Wars," the Romans then expelled the Jews from Jerusalem and renamed the province after the Jews' archenemy, the Philistines.

    Never was a Palestine. Never any Palestinian land to steal.

    Two thousand years from now, a bunch of cranks are likely going to claim that the "United States" never existed for this same reason.

  • Red Rocks White Privilege||

    Having defeated the Jews in what the ancient historian Josephus labeled "the Jewish Wars," the Romans then expelled the Jews from Jerusalem and renamed the province after the Jews' archenemy, the Philistines.

    Never was a Palestine. Never any Palestinian land to steal.

    Two thousand years from now, a bunch of cranks are likely going to claim that the "United States" never existed for this same reason.

  • Eric||

    The Palestinians living behind the green line in the West Bank would like to have a word with you.

  • Tony's Mom||

    No thanks.

  • Last of the Shitlords||

    Fuck them. If they were committed to peaceful coexistence, life would be decent for them. Instead, so many of them are fixated on destroying Israel.

    Fuck you progtards and your antsemtic bullshit.

  • vek||

    As mentioned, they don't use thinks, just feelz! It doesn't have to make sense.

    They ARE far better on lots of stuff than their neighbors... But Israel is actually an explicitly racial state. They won't even grant you citizenship if you're not a Jew, and they have all kinds of other racial/ethnic/religious laws.

    Israelis ARE NOT like Jews who live in the west.

  • BearOdinson||

    WRONG. ANYONE can apply for Israeli citizenship. The process is about the same as any other country. It is just the Law of Return allows Jews automatic citizenship.

    And considering the fucking history of the Jews, it is only fair that there is one little piece of fucking land in the world (and the only country in the ME without a lot of oil) that Jews can call their own.

    And 1/5 of Israeli citizens are Arab Muslims. There are no racial or ethnic laws. There are religious laws, but most of these only apply in terms of official support of houses of worship and affect Jews much more than any other religion. And Arabs are not required (but are allowed) to serve in the IDF.

  • Last of the Shitlords||

    Yeah, Israel treats non Jews about as well as one can expect without giving up their security. And without security, the Muslims would have exterminated them a long time ago.

  • James Pollock||

    "And considering the fucking history of the Jews, it is only fair that there is one little piece of fucking land in the world (and the only country in the ME without a lot of oil) that Jews can call their own."

    A long-dead relative of mine once had his house burn down. Therefore, I deserve a house, provided by somebody else. I just want a place to call my own.

  • Last of the Shitlords||

    Yeah, that's the same Pollock. Another bullshit analogy from a figurative pile of bullshit.

  • Teddy Pump||

    There is plenty of discrimination in Israel against the Non-Palestinian Arabs that make up 20% of their nation!

    Some Democrats hate Israel because they are for the most part White Europeans ignorantly loved by many Christians!

  • Eric||

    Criticism of Israel is proof of anti-semitism as much as support for free association proves one is racist.

  • Tony's Mom||

    In her case, the anti-semitism was the proof of anti-semitism.

  • Eric||

    She's probably an anti-Semite. But people like you would screech that regardless of evidence.

  • Obama ate a dog||

    "people like you would screech that regardless of evidence."

    Another Reason mind-reader. John this loser is stealing your act.

    Meanwhile, we don't have to guess with Omar, she has made it clear she hates jews. And Eric is defending her for it.

  • Eric||

    I'm actually criticizing the mindless automatons who equate Israel the nation-state with Jewish persons. People like you.

  • Obama ate a dog||

    AKSHULLY you're an anti-semit jew hater and bad and hiding it.

  • Last of the Shitlords||

    Eric, it's a Jewish state. That IS the organizing principle behind Israel. So yes, they do equate.

  • Eric||

    Think about what you are saying: That the state defines the individual...And that you admire that, and espouse that on a libertarian website.

  • Last of the Shitlords||

    I dont 'admire' statism. I said Israel is a Jewish state. Which is the point of Israel. A country based around a Jewish identity. Most of the surrounding countries are the same, except based on Islamic identity. Yet I don't hear you criticizing that.

    Probably because you support is,impact murderers, and hate peace loving Jews. Which is part of your progtardation. You people are sick soulless fucks, and the source of all the evil in the world. Directly, or by enabling it.

  • Ed Grinberg||

    Crudely stated, but spot-on!

  • Finrod||

    "Because some people are always wrong, you can't be right."

    Yes, that's the stupidity you're spewing. Fools like you and AOC can't call an anti-Semite an anti-Semite without also whining like a stuck pig about someone else at the same time, like the four-year-old brat you are.

  • BearOdinson||

    Fuck you. Anyone can criticize specific policies of any nation. But when one criticizes Israel, but doesn't say anything about how bad the 22 other Arab/Muslim states are is proof of some underlying anti-Semitism.

  • James Pollock||

    "Fuck you. Anyone can criticize specific policies of any nation. But when one criticizes Israel, but doesn't say anything about how bad the 22 other Arab/Muslim states are is proof of some underlying anti-Semitism."

    That's fucking stupid. I'm criticizing you, but not saying anything about how bad anyone else is. That's not anti-Semitism, that's calling you out for saying something stupid. The fact that billions of other people have said something stupid, some of them saying things that are way more stupid, does not make YOUR comment any less stupid.

  • Teddy Pump||

    YES!!!!

  • Alan Vanneman||

    Uh, I think Reason has attacked people and organizations over the years as being motivated by profit rather than principle--like teachers' unions, etc. Reason has also championed "robust" debate in the public sphere, which certainly includes exaggeration. In the outrage that followed Omar's "Benjamins" comment, would it have been rude to point out that Sheldon Adelson has veto power over the Republican nomination, achieved (probably) because of his wealth rather than his principles? I believe Reason has suggested that Adelson's opposition to online gambling was entirely financial and that he was attempting to buy support for that position in Congress by making large donations to malleable candidates. In fact, I think Reason has often argued that people have the right to spend as much money as they like to influence public policy. And when they do so, don't have others the right to comment on their behavior? Omar is cranky and conspiratorial in her comments (Jews don't "hypnotize" people), but the outcry provoked by her comments demonstrate the extent to which (some) people want to forbid full discussion of the relationship between the U.S. and Israel. I think I'm on the same page as most Reason writers in opposing "BDS" as well as laws attempting to punish those who support it and efforts to prevent on-campus discussion of it.

  • awildseaking||

    Criticism of Omar wasn't adhom and her statements didn't have "echoes" of anti-Semitism. She was clear and concise. She didn't "remind" me of times where people questioned our allegiance to the nations we lived in. She literally said the same exact shit that Jew haters of all stripes have said for several millennia. Jews are parasites who feed on their host nations, global solidarity, ZOG, etc. The only thing she didn't get into that Nazis can't shut up about are white genocide conspiracy theories.

  • Anomalous||

    ^THIS^**1,000,000

  • vek||

    I didn't see anything that hard from her... Quotes?

    As far as white genocide, technically the current immigration trends in the western world actually meet the official UN definition of genocide through policy.

  • Quo Usque Tandem||

    "Such ad hominem attacks are logically irrelevant, since a person's motives tell us nothing about the merits of his opinions. They encourage the demonization of political opponents, reinforcing a reflexive mutual hostility that makes a productive exchange of ideas impossible."

    Welcome to 21st Century America; next up, political crimes and struggle sessions

  • creech||

    To question the actions of the current Israeli government are no more automatically anti-Semitic than to question the actions of the Obama administration were automatically anti-"people of color. " Plenty of practicing Jews, here and in Israel, don't like Netanyahu's policies. They aren't anti-Semitic. I doubt Omar can rationally discuss her opposition to Israeli policies but those who can should not be broad brushed as anti-Semites.

  • Eric||

    Most Americans have been conditioned to cast aside rational thought when it comes to Israel. So for now, Likud policies == Israel == Jewish people. Speak outside that truth statement and you get tagged as an anti-Semite.

  • Tony's Mom||

    I'm sorry you're an anti-semite and bad at hiding it.

  • Eric||

    I'm not sorry that you're a PC Thug. It reassures me that there are brainless NPCs on both sides of the isle.

  • Obama ate a dog||

    I'm sorry that pointing out how anti-semitic you are makes you salty.

  • Eric||

    OK, I'll bite. What have I said that is even remotely anti-Semitic?

  • Obama ate a dog||

    I'm sprry you're so stupid and anti-Semitic that you don't already know the answer to that.

  • Eric||

    That's what I thought.

  • Obama ate a dog||

    "I'm sprry you're so stupid and anti-Semitic that you don't already know the answer to that.

    reply to this report spam
    Eric|3.13.19 @ 12:18PM|#

    That's what I thought."

    You thought you were "so stupid and anti-Semitic that you don't already know the answer to that?"

    Good. So does everyone else.

  • awildseaking||

    Ever notice how nobody actually questions policies and they just focus on the principle of questioning instead? You're being played like a fiddle.

  • John||

    She didn't criticize Isreal. She said American Jews or traitors who are buying off the government. Whether or not Isreal is a good country has nothing to do with that.

  • vek||

    Well, not ALL American Jews do... But I think one would have to have some massive blinders on to not realize that many influential Jews HAVE pushed hard for stuff that is good for Israel, and probably not for the USA.

    I mean, I can't blame them. But it is a thing that happens. Several member of congress of duel Israeli citizens FFS.

    I don't like the idea of ANY duel citizen of ANY country being in congress, because conflicts of interest/loyalty are a real issue.

  • John||

    I don't agree that a large number of Jews are traitors who put the interests of Isreal over America's.

  • lap83||

    Here's what I don't understand about her comments... if Israel has hypnotized all of us then why would they need to pay us to do what they want as well? They are supposed to be so miserly but they recklessly throw money at people who are already their political slaves? She needs to workshop that antisemitism a bit more until it makes some sense

  • AZ Gunowner||

    Islam is the epitome of irrational thought.

    It is common for Muslims to call Jews "apes and pigs" and then blame them for sophisticated schemes to harm them in the next sentence.

    Hatred doesn't need, nay doesn't want, rational thought.

  • James Pollock||

    "Omar said "it's all about the Benjamins baby," alluding to the financial influence of Jewish donors"

    Oops. Perhaps you meant to say "alluding to the financial influence of Israel supporters who donate to political campaigns"

  • John||

    She said that Jews are in a conspiracy to use their money to buy off the American government and get it to act in the interests of Isreal. That is not criticizing Isreal. That is calling American Jews traitors and fifth columnists. It is more than a bit ironic for Reason after spending the entire election cycle of 2016 and much of the aftermath warning of Trump's evil white nationalism and antisemitism to now apologize and excuse one of the oldest and worst slanders leveled at Jews. Reason continues to excel in finding ways to disgrace itself.

  • vek||

    As I said above, I don't think ALL Jews do anything of the sort... But the entire point of lobbying is to do EXACTLY THAT.

    Do you think their aren't people from the UK (even ones who live here now) who try to influence our government to the benefit of the UK? Of course there are.

    The difference is that the Jewish lobby is very successful at it, and because of the holocaust Jews are above criticism. Which I call bullshit on.

  • Bubba Jones||

    Motives matter because you can't win a debate with a disingenuous opponent.

    How many times are we going to discuss the "ratchet effect" in politics without recognizing this fact?

    See also "perjury trap."

  • Longtobefree||

    Advice from Luck, in the Peanuts comic strip so long ago you could make fun of some things;

    "If you can't be right, be wrong at the top of your voice"

  • Longtobefree||

    And of course, Luck is really Lucy, minus the edit function, and old eyes doing their own proofreading - - - - - -

  • Quo Usque Tandem||

    Thanks, I was wondering "who the hell is 'Luck?'"

  • Dillinger||

    has no point, tries to be loudest. zzzzz.

  • chemjeff radical individualist||

    And right on cue, this article brings out the alt-right "libertarians".

  • John||

    The only alt right Libertarian I see is the author of this article. What she said was straight up antisemitism. If she wants to attack Israel that is her right. That doesn't make her antisemitic. What does is her claim that Jews are using their money and engaging in a conspiracy to betrey the country. She attacked Jews not Isreal.

    Did you even read the article?

  • Obama ate a dog||

    Of course he didn't read the article. He was busy importing child rapists.

  • Last of the Shitlords||

    Now, now, that isn't necessarily true. Jeffy also could have been jacking it to the child rape videos given to him by the child rapist illegals he helps smuggle in.

  • vek||

    Read what I wrote above. Betray may be a strong word, but lobbyists do it all the time! It is their whole purpose.

  • Obama ate a dog||

    And right on cue you show up to bitch about them.

    How is your plan to import child rapists going? We all remember that you are very eager to do that.

  • chemjeff radical individualist||

    Shoo.

  • Obama ate a dog||

    Eat my asshole with jelly.

    Then stop bitching about literally everyone and stop trying to import child rapists.

  • Last of the Shitlords||

    Little Jeffy has started his own chapter of NAMBLA, for his illegal friends.

  • chemjeff radical individualist||

    You're both annoying pests. Shoo.

  • James Pollock||

    ... and you're mad at him for coming here and taking your job?

  • Last of the Shitlords||

    Stupid Pollock. Always aspiring to be a bigger piece of shit than you already are.

  • vek||

    Would it surprise you Jeff, to know that I support the right of Israel to maintain their existence? Because I'm not a hypocrite. I think all peoples have the right to keep their homelands... Even if they had to steal it back from other people 2,000 years after the fact. I'm just not big on my tax dollars funding it.

  • chemjeff radical individualist||

    No I'm not surprised that you are consistent in your defense of ethnostates.

  • Last of the Shitlords||

    Yes Little Jeffy, I'm sure if you had your way, the Israelis would be pretty much wiped out and their children given to your foreign pedophile friends for their sick evil pleasure.

    You are just a loathsome creature.

  • chemjeff radical individualist||

    Buzz buzz buzz. All I hear is a buzzing pest.

  • hayek > friedman||

    just curious. is suicide just not an option for you? if not, why haven't you tried it? i mean, it's pretty clear you're not a hit at parties. Sometimes it's for the best. Don't be ashamed....

  • Diane Reynolds (Paul.)||

    "Israel has hypnotized the world," Omar, who was elected to Congress last fall, said on Twitter in 2012. "May Allah awaken the people and help them see the evil doings of Israel."

    I remember when a congress-critter invoking "god" during public discourse, especially in a way uttered above was cause for great alarm. I'm glad to see the Democratic party has evolved on this issue.

  • Diane Reynolds (Paul.)||

    Coming to Omar's defense last week, Glenn Greenwald suggested there is nothing wrong with attacking "the Israel Lobby," since "everyone feels fine saying members of Congress place guns over Americans due to fear of NRA." He thereby illustrated the pitfalls of attacking motives instead of arguments.

    Again why Greenwald may be one of the greatest journalists of our time.

  • vek||

    Yup. The ENTIRE PURPOSE of lobbying is to get what you want out of the government. To say that Jews don't do this is insane... Why would they employ all these people in lobbying if they WEREN'T trying to get the US to do shit they're in favor of?

  • Azathoth!!||

    Can we stop with the Israel shit, please?

    There WAS no fucking Israel and there WAS no fucking Israeli/Palestinian conflict when all the jew-hate was written into the quran.

    She hates jews because it's a big part of her faith to hate jews and has been since the inception of that faith.

    Let's stop pretending that this has anything at all to do with the current state of Israel.

  • Last of the Shitlords||

    I should think that is obvious. Omar is a xenophobic, comstioned from early childhood to be driven by hatred and xenophobia. She, and everyone like her should never have been allowed into the US. That she is now in congressis more proof of a need to return to McCarthyism.

  • Ron||

    I personally don't think Omar's words were anti semetic and no worse than when any other politician claims some other politician is in big corps pockets or other countries tool or is Puttin's Puppett true or not its a 1A right and should not be punished let fools show their foolishness

  • OneSimpleLesson||

    Right or wrong, her words were directed towards a distinct ethnic group, that has faced a large amount of discrimination in the past due to that group identity. Her comments were in line with common tropes/stereotypes commonly associated with that group.
    Right or wrong, that's going to bring a lot more offense and scrutiny in this age than targeting a group like college students or gun owners.

  • vek||

    "Right or wrong, that's going to bring a lot more offense and scrutiny in this age than targeting a group like college students or gun owners."

    I'm going to go with it being wrong. Jews are THE MOST privileged people in the western world. Look up their per capita income, levels of education, etc. And almost all actual racism against them was basically non existent, at least until we started importing Muslims.

    I get that they got a free pass for awhile because of the Nazis, but in all honesty that can't last forever. They're very well off in the west today, and face almost no persecution from anybody. The victim card has been overplayed.

  • Azathoth!!||

    And in 700?

    What were they doing then to the poor muslims?---wait, Islam had just started, but right out of the gate they were jew-hating.

    Doesn't that resonate at all? This started before they were privileged at all, before there was a West.

    The muslims BUILT it in, literally, by name.

  • Last of the Shitlords||

    "And almost all actual racism against them was basically non existent, at least until we started importing Muslims."

    WTF????

    Are you insane? Do some research. That is an incredibly ignorant statement.

  • mtrueman||

    Hotels in the first part of the last century used to post a sign "Church nearby" to subtly show that they didn't accept Jewish customers. I believe racism against them started when Americans started importing Christians.

  • Finrod||

    They also used to have separate Whites and Coloreds entrances and drinking fountains and that kind of shit, but all of that went away decades ago. Why are you whining about it now, other than to be an idiot?

  • ||

    Except they've been persecuted for centuries. It goes back to being expelled from Egypt to being massacred by Rome to pogroms in Europe to facing an anti-Israel UN.

  • vek||

    Which is relevant how? My Germanic ancestors were treated as second class citizens AT BEST by the Romans, and slaughtered like dogs in numerous wars, enslaved, etc... So does that mean Germans should be getting special treatment from the Italians? Or does it not count because my people later went on to conquer Rome, so that got them on the level with each other?

    This kind of thinking is bullshit. Honestly, I think you can go about a single persons lifetime at the most... After people who suffered actual persecution are dead, the whining about it needs to be thrown into the dustbin of history. I COULD go whining about how my native American ancestors got shafted, but what's the point? We live in the world today, where any Native can do WTF ever they want in this country. I know some very successful natives... Who tend to shit talk the ones who decide to be useless drunks and stay on the rez and make excuses for their failure. Same thing with blacks who have their shit together.

    Whining about the past gets nobody anywhere.

  • Mr. JD||

    " Look up their per capita income, levels of education, etc. "

    That's a communist's definition of privilege.

  • vek||

    Well, I'm just sayin'. I mean I think being born into a rich, successful, well educated family IS being privileged. It is the very definition of the word, commie or not. The whole thing is there is no such thing as universal privilege based on skin color or whatever... But there ARE differences in the percentage of people who are born on 3rd base depending on ethnicity. Jews are number 1, Asians number 2, and other whites number 3.

    My point is merely that the "Woe is me!" angle for Jews is bullshit, and completely contrary to reality in 21st century America. If white people are well off, then Jews are doubly so according to the stats.

  • James Pollock||

    "I personally don't think Omar's words were anti semetic and no worse than when any other politician claims some other politician is in big corps pockets or other countries tool or is Puttin's Puppett true or not its a 1A right and should not be punished let fools show their foolishness"

    The freedom to say things doesn't imply the freedom for having people complain about what it was you said. Fairly, or unfairly, and some people will even go ahead and decide before actually hearing anything you say, and believe some weird stuff about what you said, that you never said.

    Just like we're free to laugh at the President for calling Tim Cook "Tim Apple", or to laugh at him for whining about "PRESIDENT HARASSERS, or whatever the stupid thing of the moment happens to be.

  • Last of the Shitlords||

    Trump is so much better than you could ever be Pollock. When the other more rabid progtards eventually turn on you, I hope your end is slow and agonizing.

  • ||

    I do agree with the notion there are people who hate America as currently configured (and its historical origins) are in Congress.

  • Mr. JD||

    The evidence is overwhelming.

  • hayek > friedman||

    a nation founded by rich, white supremacists who didn't want to pay their taxes? what could have possibly gone wrong?

  • Rob Misek||

    When people actually become aware of what Jews/Zionists have done over the last 100 years to further their own agenda, that western governments are complicit with, it won't be just about ad hominems.

    It isn't about ad Hominems.

  • Last of the Shitlords||

    You're right. Those Jews should have marched proudly into the ovens instead of trying to survive, because leftist bullshit.

    Fucking bigoted idiot.

  • Rob Misek||

    Except there is zero evidence anywhere of "ovens" that could handle anywhere near the number of bodies claimed in your popular narrative.

    It's not about ad hominems.

  • Last of the Shitlords||

    I know several WW2 vets, now deceased, that helped liberate the camps. So you can take your holocaust revisionist bullshit and go straight to Hell.

    You really are an anti Semitic piece of shit Rob. No wonder I instinctively disliked you for so lomg. Now you've shown who you really are.

  • Rob Misek||

    They probably saw weak starving people and some dead.

    The allies had been bombing the area for months, destroying all infrastructure. The Germans were long gone when the allies "liberated" the rubble.

    Surely they were taking pictures yet not one photograph of evidence of genocide.

    Ask your friends if they saw the "ovens" or the technology that activated the cyanide in zyklon B and dispersed the gas through the shower heads only moments before spraying water as testified at Nuremberg. Why didn't they photograph this impossibility?

    Dipshit.

  • Rob Misek||

    With all that allegedly occurred, over such a long period of time, not a single photograph of evidence of genocide.

    Just contradictory, changing impossible claims by people being paid as victims.

  • Rob Misek||

  • Rob Misek||

    The link above referencing an official letter from the head of British propaganda warning the war office from referencing "gassing, for which there is no evidence".

    It is a matter of record. It isn't about ad hominems.

  • Rob Misek||

    They were the ones first reporting it, admitting it was all BULLSHIT.

    Only now generations of brainwashed people having had truth censored under threat of imprisonment, can no longer handle the truth.

  • Last of the Shitlords||

    You really have to do a lot of mental gymnastics to say the holocaust didn't happen.

    You are the worst kind of person. Not even really human

  • Rob Misek||

    Recognizing and accepting the truth as demonstrated by the evidence of logic and science isn't so hard.

    When the people who made the claim admit that it was bullshit propaganda, it takes mental gymnastics NOT to believe them.

    When the official story is protected from conflicting evidence, censored by law, it takes myopia not to be suspicious.

    There is so much more evidence that refutes the story.

    Try reading a copy of Nickolas Kollerstroms book "Breaking the spell". You might learn something.

    http://www.goodreads.com/book/.....-the-spell

  • Finrod||

    Go stand over with the Flat Earthers, cretin.

  • Rob Misek||

    Would you be as eager to make it a crime to share the evidence of logic and science that demonstrates the earth is round?

  • buybuydandavis||

    "bipartisan tendency"

    Both Sides!

    That's all I need to read.

  • CE||

    Benjamin Franklin was a Quaker. And questioning the motives of the state of Israel doesn't make anyone anti-Semitic (although odds are the Congresswoman is).

  • Mr. JD||

    Quit allowing Democrats to employ an extraordinarily broad definition of bigotry when it suits them without being held to their own standard.

  • Underzog||

    My gold ole Rhoemite friends do not disapoint in saying antisemitism is not such a big problem. That millions of Jews were killed by such rhetoric is a groovy thing to the antisemitic, Libertarian wandervogel wannabes. I see a lot of Libertarians are joining the alt right (actually a Leftwing organization). This is understandable since the alt right is full throated in its antisemitism, instead of playing the deceptive only hate Israel not the Jews nonsense you and Illan Omar spout. .Your cozying up with the Muslims will not help you because they rightly despise you and please tell the ISIS informer, Cathy Young,is too ugly for Barghouti. Cathy Young will not be made the wife -- replacing antisemite Kayla Mueller -- of ISIS leader Barghouti no matter how hard the ISIS informer tries to locate Pamela Geller's residence for them. ISIS wants younger and prettier brides than Cathy Young so she should give up her evil informing for them.

    There's no need to fear. Underzog is here.

  • hayek > friedman||

    probably shouldn't live anymore. you're not worth it.

  • Mr. JD||

    If all of the things that the Left says are racist are racist, than Omar and her ilk are extremely racist. The Left is forever hoisted on its own petard.

    Any "libertarian" who tries to equate Left and Right on this issue is intellectually dishonest in the extreme. That includes the author of this article and his weak attempt to equate Trump to the Democrats on the subject of messenger shooting.

    "Everyone who opposes gun bans is afraid of the NRA" is messenger-shooting because the actual subject of the criticism is the opposition to gun bans, and the "fear of the NRA" is the reason being implied in order to shoot the messengers. But "we have people in Congress that hate our country" is not messenger-shooting. It's an accusation. Trump is criticizing some other thing and implying hatred as a reason. He's criticizing the hatred itself.

    The evidence that Leftists hate America has been chronicled for generations, and the case is particularly strong today. Their attacks on core principles are no longer indirect, but direct, and they plainly demonstrate tribal allegiance against America at every turn. Making that case is not "messenger-shooting", as it is the argument itself, not an unsupported allegation of motivation for taking a separate position.

  • Mr. JD||

    If all of the things that the Left says are racist are racist, than Omar and her ilk are extremely racist. The Left is forever hoisted on its own petard.

    Any "libertarian" who tries to equate Left and Right on this issue is intellectually dishonest in the extreme. That includes the author of this article and his weak attempt to equate Trump to the Democrats on the subject of messenger shooting.

    "Everyone who opposes gun bans is afraid of the NRA" is messenger-shooting because the actual subject of the criticism is the opposition to gun bans, and the "fear of the NRA" is the reason being implied in order to shoot the messengers. But "we have people in Congress that hate our country" is not messenger-shooting. It's an accusation. Trump is criticizing some other thing and implying hatred as a reason. He's criticizing the hatred itself.

    The evidence that Leftists hate America has been chronicled for generations, and the case is particularly strong today. Their attacks on core principles are no longer indirect, but direct, and they plainly demonstrate tribal allegiance against America at every turn. Making that case is not "messenger-shooting", as it is the argument itself, not an unsupported allegation of motivation for taking a separate position.

  • hayek > friedman||

    1.) multiple white trash citations missing from your post
    2.) Libertarianism started on the left and remains a leftist movement.
    3.) you are not a libertarian. you are at best a paleo conservative
    4.) if you want to stop being called racist, stop doing/saying racist things.
    5.) making the case that leftist politicans hate america is messenger shooting - the unspoken implication is that these politicians cannot be trusted and therefore their policy proposals should be rejected, but it was cute to see you perform your white trash mental gymnastics to convince yourself and ad hominem implication isn't an ad hominem implication. Does water run up hill in your world?

  • Last of the Shitlords||

    You sound like a progtard.

  • BioBehavioral_View||

    Assumptions?

    As are all postulates, condemnation of anti-Judaism (aka "anti-Semitism") assumes the validity of an underlying assumption — anti-Judaism inherently is evil. Is it?

    As with all other groups, there are Jews, and there are Jews. After WWI, Germanic Jews of The Left fueled the Nazis' anti-Judaism to the extent that nationalistic, Germanic Jews supported the Nazis. Yes, in Germany there were "Jews for Hitler".

    Similarly in the USA, Jews of The Left, exemplified most vividly by the Hungarian-born George Soros, undermine traditional, American ideals and values in violation of Hebraic scripture; e.g., traditional marriage.

    "The Hebrews have done more to civilize men than any other nation. If I were an atheist, and believed blind eternal fate, I should still believe that fate had ordained the Jews to be the most essential instrument for civilizing the nations." -President John Adams (1797-1801)

    In judging American Jewry, consider that which they have accomplished to improve the well-being of this nation now on fire. Jews of The Right oppose The Left as fervently and more skillfully than most.

  • hayek > friedman||

    A Jewish state is incompatible with democracy, liberty, and basic human rights. It is an ethno-religious state. I understand that Jews have faced anti-semitism in many areas of the world throughout history, but that doesn't justify stealing land from Arabs, forcing many of them into a ghetto, and building an ethno-religiously based state that considers the victims of said land grab second class citizens.

  • Last of the Shitlords||

    Good. Except that isn't really what happened, and I doubt after what the Jews went through they give a fuck what you think.

  • Finrod||

    Being a progtard is incompatible with rational thought and living in the real world.

    Go back to your Community-Based Reality,

GET REASON MAGAZINE

Get Reason's print or digital edition before it’s posted online