Ilhan Omar compares the boycott of Israel to boycott of Nazis and USSR

[OSR stands with Israel]

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/omar-introduces-resolution-defending-boycotts-of-israel-likens-it-to-boycott-of-nazi-germany-soviet-union

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/ilhan-omar-to-introduce-resolution-supporting-israel-boycotts


I want AOC and all the other Justice Democrats to be asked if they agree with her comments which they mostly likely will. Every SINGLE Justice Democrat should be primaried and thrown out of office. The TYT caucus is a disgrace in everyway. The Democrats must not turn into Jeremy Corbyn's Labour

[OSR stands with Israel]

The unfortunate reality is that (always invalid) Nazi Germany comparisons are extremely common in American politics. Donald Rumsfeld invoked it to justify war with Iraq, and it is used all the time by politicians and commentators on all sides of the political spectrum. I wish it would end. But since this is Omar, it'll be treated as a bigger scandal than if someone else said it about some other country.

Even comparing Israel to Suddam Hussain Iraq is terrible because Hussain's Iraq was obviously much much worse .

Also : http://www.eretzyisroel.org/~jkatz/baath.html



And lastly wasn’t the Ba’ath party full name the Arab National Socialist Party , so the comparison did make more sense. The main difference was was Iraq didn’t have the ability in 2003 to be a threat to peace as the Germans did 

[OSR stands with Israel]

And lastly wasn’t the Ba’ath party full name the Arab National Socialist Party , so the comparison did make more sense.

Haha what

Just checked full name was the : Arab Socialist Baʿth Party,

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ba%27ath_Party

Ba'ath meaning "renaissance" or "resurrection"), which is an ideology mixing Arab nationalist, pan-Arabism, Arab socialist, and anti-imperialist

[OSR stands with Israel]

The unfortunate reality is that (always invalid) Nazi Germany comparisons are extremely common in American politics. Donald Rumsfeld invoked it to justify war with Iraq, and it is used all the time by politicians and commentators on all sides of the political spectrum. I wish it would end. But since this is Omar, it'll be treated as a bigger scandal than if someone else said it about some other country.

Even comparing Israel to Suddam Hussain Iraq is terrible because Hussain's Iraq was obviously much much worse .

Also : http://www.eretzyisroel.org/~jkatz/baath.html



And lastly wasn’t the Ba’ath party full name the Arab National Socialist Party , so the comparison did make more sense. The main difference was was Iraq didn’t have the ability in 2003 to be a threat to peace as the Germans did 

Your first point is dead on correct. Sadly, your second one is flat out incorrect. Hussein was an absolute murderous dictator bastard who deserved his grisly end. As did his sons. However, the Socialist part of the Arab National Socialist Party has about as much to do with socialism as the Nazis official party name having the word socialist in it.

I’m not saying it has anything to do with socialism I’m just comparing how similar the name of the Ba’ath party was to the Nazis

[OSR stands with Israel]

The unfortunate reality is that (always invalid) Nazi Germany comparisons are extremely common in American politics. Donald Rumsfeld invoked it to justify war with Iraq, and it is used all the time by politicians and commentators on all sides of the political spectrum. I wish it would end. But since this is Omar, it'll be treated as a bigger scandal than if someone else said it about some other country.

Even comparing Israel to Suddam Hussain Iraq is terrible because Hussain's Iraq was obviously much much worse .

Also : http://www.eretzyisroel.org/~jkatz/baath.html



And lastly wasn’t the Ba’ath party full name the Arab National Socialist Party , so the comparison did make more sense. The main difference was was Iraq didn’t have the ability in 2003 to be a threat to peace as the Germans did 

Your first point is dead on correct. Sadly, your second one is flat out incorrect. Hussein was an absolute murderous dictator bastard who deserved his grisly end. As did his sons. However, the Socialist part of the Arab National Socialist Party has about as much to do with socialism as the Nazis official party name having the word socialist in it.

I’m not saying it has anything to do with socialism I’m just comparing how similar the name of the Ba’ath party was to the Nazis

Not sure of your point here....?

My point is why the comparison with Suddam Hussein Iraq with Nazi Germany made some sense even if the Bush Admin overstated that comparison by leaving out some key factors of why Iraq in the early 2000s wasn’t equivalent to the Nazis


On the other hand their is no comparison what so ever between Israel and the Nazis and stating so is I would say anti Semitic

[OSR stands with Israel]

But anyway, did anyone on this thread actually read what she said? She just said that "Americans of conscience have a proud history of participating in boycotts to advocate for human rights abroad including ... boycotting Nazi Germany from March 1933 to October 1941 in response to the dehumanization of the Jewish people in the lead-up to the Holocaust." I don't see what's wrong with this.

Edit: Hang on, the Examiner obviously cut the quote so it looked like that was the only item she listed. Let me find the whole recording.

Using the Nazis as an an example in this case is beyond terrible.

[OSR stands with Israel]

That Omar quote is terrible as well or just beyond idiotic.

[OSR stands with Israel]

Okay, spent an hour digging around for where it was said. Here it is:

https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/house-resolution/496/text?q=%7B%22search%22%3A%5B%22boycott%22%5D%7D&r=3&s=1

Okay, so all of the framing (news stories, etc.; hell, even the title of this very thread) around this resolution appears to be WAY off.

First, the resolution opens with examples of boycotts used for domestic reasons before then highlighting examples of boycotts carried out to try & impact foreign policy.

More importantly, though, this resolution is pretty explicitly not endorsing a boycott or advocating for one (the full text is short & the link is directly above, so you can read the whole resolution to confirm). The resolved section: affirms that people have the right to boycott; says laws regulating boycotts are counter to the Constitution & established precedent; & calls on people to oppose anti-boycott laws.

Yes, Texas passed a law that punishes people for boycotting Israel so that's (understandably) where most people go with this, but Israel, BDS, & Palestine aren't mentioned or referenced in the text. In fact, the text is explicitly broader because this isn't the only ban. There are states also looking at ways of banning protests on campus. President Trump famously wants people fired for protesting the national anthem. You think the next step isn't laws? They explicitly mention flag burning in their examples (also cake baking).

Again, read the whole resolution; it's super short. Stop taking partisan political pundits screaming about it at their word, because saying Omar is comparing Israel to Nazi Germany in this resolution simply doesn't stand up to a reading of the text, as the text *DOES NOT COMPARE* anything. That's not even the purpose of the resolution, for crying out loud.

Yeah, thanks for breaking it down. Obviously the hyperpartisans are going to throw everything they can at her, but it disappoints me that people like Badger are falling for it.

Fell for it. Past tense. I stand corrected. It was still tone deaf to a degree, but nowhere near the bullsh**t slant that Fox News in The Examiner Twisted it out of context to

Look at the quote posted earlier, she said it . It wasnt taken out of context , they provided the quote in the article and using that example is still terrible and anti semitic. Or Omar is extremely idiotic(Which she probably is because she did sign a pledge from TYT along with all the Justice Democrats)

[OSR stands with Israel]

Okay, spent an hour digging around for where it was said. Here it is:

https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/house-resolution/496/text?q=%7B%22search%22%3A%5B%22boycott%22%5D%7D&r=3&s=1

Okay, so all of the framing (news stories, etc.; hell, even the title of this very thread) around this resolution appears to be WAY off.

First, the resolution opens with examples of boycotts used for domestic reasons before then highlighting examples of boycotts carried out to try & impact foreign policy.

More importantly, though, this resolution is pretty explicitly not endorsing a boycott or advocating for one (the full text is short & the link is directly above, so you can read the whole resolution to confirm). The resolved section: affirms that people have the right to boycott; says laws regulating boycotts are counter to the Constitution & established precedent; & calls on people to oppose anti-boycott laws.

Yes, Texas passed a law that punishes people for boycotting Israel so that's (understandably) where most people go with this, but Israel, BDS, & Palestine aren't mentioned or referenced in the text. In fact, the text is explicitly broader because this isn't the only ban. There are states also looking at ways of banning protests on campus. President Trump famously wants people fired for protesting the national anthem. You think the next step isn't laws? They explicitly mention flag burning in their examples (also cake baking).

Again, read the whole resolution; it's super short. Stop taking partisan political pundits screaming about it at their word, because saying Omar is comparing Israel to Nazi Germany in this resolution simply doesn't stand up to a reading of the text, as the text *DOES NOT COMPARE* anything. That's not even the purpose of the resolution, for crying out loud.

Yeah, thanks for breaking it down. Obviously the hyperpartisans are going to throw everything they can at her, but it disappoints me that people like Badger are falling for it.

Fell for it. Past tense. I stand corrected. It was still tone deaf to a degree, but nowhere near the bullsh**t slant that Fox News in The Examiner Twisted it out of context to

Look at the quote posted earlier, she said it . It wasnt taken out of context , they provided the quote in the article and using that example is still terrible and anti semitic. Or Omar is extremely idiotic(Which she probably is because she did sign a pledge from TYT along with all the Justice Democrats)

Yeah, I'm not going to outright defend her. She needs to go.

Fortunately, she has next to no influence with the Democratic party as a whole. Wouldn't you agree?

Its not her its the Justice Dems as well and most of Omar's talking points come from TYT which unfortunatley now is gaining influence.

[OSR stands with Israel]

Okay, spent an hour digging around for where it was said. Here it is:

https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/house-resolution/496/text?q=%7B%22search%22%3A%5B%22boycott%22%5D%7D&r=3&s=1

Okay, so all of the framing (news stories, etc.; hell, even the title of this very thread) around this resolution appears to be WAY off.

First, the resolution opens with examples of boycotts used for domestic reasons before then highlighting examples of boycotts carried out to try & impact foreign policy.

More importantly, though, this resolution is pretty explicitly not endorsing a boycott or advocating for one (the full text is short & the link is directly above, so you can read the whole resolution to confirm). The resolved section: affirms that people have the right to boycott; says laws regulating boycotts are counter to the Constitution & established precedent; & calls on people to oppose anti-boycott laws.

Yes, Texas passed a law that punishes people for boycotting Israel so that's (understandably) where most people go with this, but Israel, BDS, & Palestine aren't mentioned or referenced in the text. In fact, the text is explicitly broader because this isn't the only ban. There are states also looking at ways of banning protests on campus. President Trump famously wants people fired for protesting the national anthem. You think the next step isn't laws? They explicitly mention flag burning in their examples (also cake baking).

Again, read the whole resolution; it's super short. Stop taking partisan political pundits screaming about it at their word, because saying Omar is comparing Israel to Nazi Germany in this resolution simply doesn't stand up to a reading of the text, as the text *DOES NOT COMPARE* anything. That's not even the purpose of the resolution, for crying out loud.

Yeah, thanks for breaking it down. Obviously the hyperpartisans are going to throw everything they can at her, but it disappoints me that people like Badger are falling for it.

Fell for it. Past tense. I stand corrected. It was still tone deaf to a degree, but nowhere near the bullsh**t slant that Fox News in The Examiner Twisted it out of context to

Look at the quote posted earlier, she said it . It wasnt taken out of context , they provided the quote in the article and using that example is still terrible and anti semitic. Or Omar is extremely idiotic(Which she probably is because she did sign a pledge from TYT along with all the Justice Democrats)

Yeah, I'm not going to outright defend her. She needs to go.

Fortunately, she has next to no influence with the Democratic party as a whole. Wouldn't you agree?

Its not her its the Justice Dems as well and most of Omar's talking points come from TYT which unfortunatley now is gaining influence.

How many of the other Justice Dems, other than Talib who likewise needs to go, have been making the same sort of anti-Semitic comments. You keep yammering on about Jeremy corbyn because you literally run out of Democrats to blame Beyond those two ( albeit justifiably)

If you held the Republican party based on literally dozens of anti-Semitic and racist comments throughout the party, over association with alt right Holocaust deniers through the Bannon and Mueller wing of the White House, and the leader of the party itself who the rank-and-file Embrace wholeheartedly as being an unabashed racist, you would have become an independent long ago.

Again, I know it's tough. You are a principal conservative who actually believes in the Laffer Curve. Does it is hard for you to accept that the party you so adamantly support, I hate to say it man, literally hates you and your family's guts. Again, they may at least outwardly say you were one of the good ones when they hear about what a conservative you and yours are, but it doesn't mean they would lose any sleep if you were all deported tomorrow. What's more, they would be categorically opposed even your closest route is from India coming here to join this country like you and your immediate family did.

I know that's hard, and you've made a commendable step unlike the vast majority of other Republicans in refusing to vote for Trump. It's despicable the way that so many people in your party have decided that given the choice of an outright Unapologetic virulent racist, they'll gladly choose him over, God forbid, a Democrat. You won't, and that demonstrates your character. That said, you can't absolve the Republican Party for Trump. Not all Republicans are represented by Trump, with a vast majority are, and almost all of the rest, present company excepted, gladly excuse such racism and anti-immigrant hysteria as long as they get their tax cuts and conservative judges. My point is don't make yourself look silly by trying to create an equal parallel we're literally none exists.

71% of Republicans voted to make it easier for Indian Immigrants to get green cards. So your point is straight up WRONG.

[OSR stands with Israel]

Okay, spent an hour digging around for where it was said. Here it is:

https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/house-resolution/496/text?q=%7B%22search%22%3A%5B%22boycott%22%5D%7D&r=3&s=1

Okay, so all of the framing (news stories, etc.; hell, even the title of this very thread) around this resolution appears to be WAY off.

First, the resolution opens with examples of boycotts used for domestic reasons before then highlighting examples of boycotts carried out to try & impact foreign policy.

More importantly, though, this resolution is pretty explicitly not endorsing a boycott or advocating for one (the full text is short & the link is directly above, so you can read the whole resolution to confirm). The resolved section: affirms that people have the right to boycott; says laws regulating boycotts are counter to the Constitution & established precedent; & calls on people to oppose anti-boycott laws.

Yes, Texas passed a law that punishes people for boycotting Israel so that's (understandably) where most people go with this, but Israel, BDS, & Palestine aren't mentioned or referenced in the text. In fact, the text is explicitly broader because this isn't the only ban. There are states also looking at ways of banning protests on campus. President Trump famously wants people fired for protesting the national anthem. You think the next step isn't laws? They explicitly mention flag burning in their examples (also cake baking).

Again, read the whole resolution; it's super short. Stop taking partisan political pundits screaming about it at their word, because saying Omar is comparing Israel to Nazi Germany in this resolution simply doesn't stand up to a reading of the text, as the text *DOES NOT COMPARE* anything. That's not even the purpose of the resolution, for crying out loud.

Yeah, thanks for breaking it down. Obviously the hyperpartisans are going to throw everything they can at her, but it disappoints me that people like Badger are falling for it.

Fell for it. Past tense. I stand corrected. It was still tone deaf to a degree, but nowhere near the bullsh**t slant that Fox News in The Examiner Twisted it out of context to

Look at the quote posted earlier, she said it . It wasnt taken out of context , they provided the quote in the article and using that example is still terrible and anti semitic. Or Omar is extremely idiotic(Which she probably is because she did sign a pledge from TYT along with all the Justice Democrats)

Yeah, I'm not going to outright defend her. She needs to go.
Fortunately, she has next to no influence with the Democratic party as a whole. Wouldn't you agree?

Its not her its the Justice Dems as well and most of Omar's talking points come from TYT which unfortunatley now is gaining influence.

How many of the other Justice Dems, other than Talib who likewise needs to go, have been making the same sort of anti-Semitic comments. You keep yammering on about Jeremy corbyn because you literally run out of Democrats to blame Beyond those two ( albeit justifiably)

If you held the Republican party based on literally dozens of anti-Semitic and racist comments throughout the party, over association with alt right Holocaust deniers through the Bannon and Mueller wing of the White House, and the leader of the party itself who the rank-and-file Embrace wholeheartedly as being an unabashed racist, you would have become an independent long ago.

Again, I know it's tough. You are a principal conservative who actually believes in the Laffer Curve. Does it is hard for you to accept that the party you so adamantly support, I hate to say it man, literally hates you and your family's guts. Again, they may at least outwardly say you were one of the good ones when they hear about what a conservative you and yours are, but it doesn't mean they would lose any sleep if you were all deported tomorrow. What's more, they would be categorically opposed even your closest route is from India coming here to join this country like you and your immediate family did.

I know that's hard, and you've made a commendable step unlike the vast majority of other Republicans in refusing to vote for Trump. It's despicable the way that so many people in your party have decided that given the choice of an outright Unapologetic virulent racist, they'll gladly choose him over, God forbid, a Democrat. You won't, and that demonstrates your character. That said, you can't absolve the Republican Party for Trump. Not all Republicans are represented by Trump, with a vast majority are, and almost all of the rest, present company excepted, gladly excuse such racism and anti-immigrant hysteria as long as they get their tax cuts and conservative judges. My point is don't make yourself look silly by trying to create an equal parallel we're literally none exists.

71% of Republicans voted to make it easier for Indian Immigrants to get green cards. So your point is straight up WRONG.

I think you are missing Badger's general point (re the GOP hating you). He is saying that the overall GOP electorate/citizenry would "hate you and your family's guts." The odds of someone on the street telling you or your mother/father to "go back to your country" would highly be more a Republican (trump Deplorable) voter, and not a Dem supporter.
trump (the leader of your party) has increased the odds that you and your family will be directly experiencing xenophobic, bigoted hate as you perform your everyday, normal living in society.

PS: Why is it that people only care about issues, when it is about "their kind" ("Indian Immigrants")? If it doesn't touch "their people," then many feel comfortable looking the other way when other groups of minority class are affected/wronged. And I see this across the entire spectrum, not just the GOP. It just kills me.

Mitt Romney had a much more favorable immigration plan for high skilled immigrants than Obama yet he was called anti immigrant because he was Anti Illegal Immigrant. That proves that much of the left cares more about illegal immigrants  than legal immigrants.

I am in favor of a merit based immigration plan as the economy benefits more from high skilled immigration than low skilled

[OSR stands with Israel]

Okay, spent an hour digging around for where it was said. Here it is:

https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/house-resolution/496/text?q=%7B%22search%22%3A%5B%22boycott%22%5D%7D&r=3&s=1

Okay, so all of the framing (news stories, etc.; hell, even the title of this very thread) around this resolution appears to be WAY off.

First, the resolution opens with examples of boycotts used for domestic reasons before then highlighting examples of boycotts carried out to try & impact foreign policy.

More importantly, though, this resolution is pretty explicitly not endorsing a boycott or advocating for one (the full text is short & the link is directly above, so you can read the whole resolution to confirm). The resolved section: affirms that people have the right to boycott; says laws regulating boycotts are counter to the Constitution & established precedent; & calls on people to oppose anti-boycott laws.

Yes, Texas passed a law that punishes people for boycotting Israel so that's (understandably) where most people go with this, but Israel, BDS, & Palestine aren't mentioned or referenced in the text. In fact, the text is explicitly broader because this isn't the only ban. There are states also looking at ways of banning protests on campus. President Trump famously wants people fired for protesting the national anthem. You think the next step isn't laws? They explicitly mention flag burning in their examples (also cake baking).

Again, read the whole resolution; it's super short. Stop taking partisan political pundits screaming about it at their word, because saying Omar is comparing Israel to Nazi Germany in this resolution simply doesn't stand up to a reading of the text, as the text *DOES NOT COMPARE* anything. That's not even the purpose of the resolution, for crying out loud.

Yeah, thanks for breaking it down. Obviously the hyperpartisans are going to throw everything they can at her, but it disappoints me that people like Badger are falling for it.

Fell for it. Past tense. I stand corrected. It was still tone deaf to a degree, but nowhere near the bullsh**t slant that Fox News in The Examiner Twisted it out of context to

Look at the quote posted earlier, she said it . It wasnt taken out of context , they provided the quote in the article and using that example is still terrible and anti semitic. Or Omar is extremely idiotic(Which she probably is because she did sign a pledge from TYT along with all the Justice Democrats)

Yeah, I'm not going to outright defend her. She needs to go.
Fortunately, she has next to no influence with the Democratic party as a whole. Wouldn't you agree?

Its not her its the Justice Dems as well and most of Omar's talking points come from TYT which unfortunatley now is gaining influence.

How many of the other Justice Dems, other than Talib who likewise needs to go, have been making the same sort of anti-Semitic comments. You keep yammering on about Jeremy corbyn because you literally run out of Democrats to blame Beyond those two ( albeit justifiably)

If you held the Republican party based on literally dozens of anti-Semitic and racist comments throughout the party, over association with alt right Holocaust deniers through the Bannon and Mueller wing of the White House, and the leader of the party itself who the rank-and-file Embrace wholeheartedly as being an unabashed racist, you would have become an independent long ago.

Again, I know it's tough. You are a principal conservative who actually believes in the Laffer Curve. Does it is hard for you to accept that the party you so adamantly support, I hate to say it man, literally hates you and your family's guts. Again, they may at least outwardly say you were one of the good ones when they hear about what a conservative you and yours are, but it doesn't mean they would lose any sleep if you were all deported tomorrow. What's more, they would be categorically opposed even your closest route is from India coming here to join this country like you and your immediate family did.

I know that's hard, and you've made a commendable step unlike the vast majority of other Republicans in refusing to vote for Trump. It's despicable the way that so many people in your party have decided that given the choice of an outright Unapologetic virulent racist, they'll gladly choose him over, God forbid, a Democrat. You won't, and that demonstrates your character. That said, you can't absolve the Republican Party for Trump. Not all Republicans are represented by Trump, with a vast majority are, and almost all of the rest, present company excepted, gladly excuse such racism and anti-immigrant hysteria as long as they get their tax cuts and conservative judges. My point is don't make yourself look silly by trying to create an equal parallel we're literally none exists.

71% of Republicans voted to make it easier for Indian Immigrants to get green cards. So your point is straight up WRONG.

I think you are missing Badger's general point (re the GOP hating you). He is saying that the overall GOP electorate/citizenry would "hate you and your family's guts." The odds of someone on the street telling you or your mother/father to "go back to your country" would highly be more a Republican (trump Deplorable) voter, and not a Dem supporter.
trump (the leader of your party) has increased the odds that you and your family will be directly experiencing xenophobic, bigoted hate as you perform your everyday, normal living in society.

PS: Why is it that people only care about issues, when it is about "their kind" ("Indian Immigrants")? If it doesn't touch "their people," then many feel comfortable looking the other way when other groups of minority class are affected/wronged. And I see this across the entire spectrum, not just the GOP. It just kills me.

Mitt Romney had a much more favorable immigration plan for high skilled immigrants than Obama yet he was called anti immigrant because he was Anti Illegal Immigrant. That proves that much of the left cares more about illegal immigrants  than legal immigrants.

Do you honestly believe that trump's Deplorable base of GOP voters would make a distinction between telling "illegal immigrants" to "go back to your country," from "legal immigrants" (or that they would even care to first make the distinction before spewing their abhorrence) ?
Their xenophobic bigotry has no boundaries; if you don't "look American," you will be a target of their hate.

71% of the GOP still voted to make it easier for Indian high skilled  Immigrants to get green cards . 71% isn’t some small number it’s an overwhelming number .

Also I don’t  Vote or support a party based on what the GOP base thinks , as I vote and support a party based on what the elected officials think and 71% of GOP agrees with me on legal immigration. On Illegal immigration I might be tougher than many in that 71%

 

[OSR stands with Israel]

Can we get a mod to correct the title of this thread now that we know it's quasi-#FakeNews?

Its not fake news at all

[OSR stands with Israel]

Can we get a mod to correct the title of this thread now that we know it's quasi-#FakeNews?

Its not fake news at all

(OSR then proceeds to not elaborate or provide a URL or ANYTHING else)

The quote is in the link I gave . It wasnt some interperation , it was her quote

[OSR stands with Israel]

Please, someone, change the headline.

No, it's literally correct. The Nazi comparison is in the resolution she put forward.

She does not "compare them". She just uses Germany as one of several examples of previous boycotts.

Then she did indeed make the comparison

[OSR stands with Israel]

She introduced a resolution in support of the BDS movement. She used the US boycott against Nazi Germany as an example of another justified boycott. That's a comparison.

Stop gaslighting us. We're not stupid. The cruelty is the point. If Jews are the new Nazis, then antisemitism is anti-fascism.

The fact is the far left doesnt care because their only goal it seems at this point is  shoving socialism down our throats