Nobody but Ilhan Abdullahi Omar

[Bitter Clinger]

I will be dissenting and defend the 1stA. US is all about Freedom.

The moment we stop tolerating the expression of free speech of a free mind, which is protect by 1stA, the moment we destroyed the US constitution. Then, we self destruct and destroy the US from within.

Speaking your mind is the Freedom protected by 1stA. Insulting others even when it is protected by the 1st requires an apology.
That being said, there is no apology for stating a factual truth.

Each time one speaks his mind, there is the other side of the aisle that may agree or disagree.
If we ignore the gigantic roll of political lobbies and Super PAC in US Congress we would be kidding ourselves.

Omar claimed that Jewish lobbies were buying US government officials - are you repeating that same slander? I sincerely hope not. And then her apology was not even an apology. She is a Jew hater and a very ardent apologist for ISIS however. That kind of hate speech is not worthy of a Congressional representative and is should not be tolerated.

[srothstein]

I have to agree with most of what Beiruty said. I have freedom to speak my mind in the US, even when it is an unpopular opinion. In order to defend my right to free speech, I must defend Rep. Omar's rights to the same. Before I explain where I differ from him, I must ask how he meant one statement to be taken. He said:

That being said, there is no apology for stating a factual truth.

If this meant that Rep. Omar was simply speaking the truth when she said that the congressmen were being bought, I disagree with some of the implications. Omar implied that the lobbyists for a specific group were directly bribing the American congressmen. I doubt that is the truth. I also doubt the implication that it was just the one group of lobbyists, since it appears to me that many different lobbyists groups spend a lot of money working with all of the congressmen. I am confident that there are always going to be a few cases of outright bribery going on, but I also doubt that it is commonplace. There are too many legal ways to influence how politicians act or vote to need to resort to bribery.

Where I disagree with Beiruty is that the uproar we see is not a violation of Omar's 1A right to free speech. The Constitution is a limit on government action against a person for their opinion. It does not limit the people of the US from expressing their disagreement with the person's opinion, even to the point of calling for some action to be taken. Given her obvious bias, it seems reasonable to me that Omar should be moved from the Foreign Affairs committee since she cannot have credibility in her decisions on certain countries. This would not be punishing her for her opinions or expressions, just a lateral move to where she might have some credibility.

And of course, I would suggest that people from all over the country contribute to help whoever runs against her next election cycle. We can stop her re-election without it being a violation of her rights.

[mayor]

I will be dissenting and defend the 1stA. US is all about Freedom.

The moment we stop tolerating the expression of free speech of a free mind, which is protect by 1stA, the moment we destroyed the US constitution. Then, we self destruct and destroy the US from within.

Speaking your mind is the Freedom protected by 1stA. Insulting others even when it is protected by the 1st requires an apology.
That being said, there is no apology for stating a factual truth.

Each time one speaks his mind, there is the other side of the aisle that may agree or disagree.
If we ignore the gigantic roll of political lobbies and Super PAC in US Congress we would be kidding ourselves.

So you support Omar's dog whistling?

I have to agree with Beiruty on this one. We're either ALL free or none of us are free. That being said. Omar also took an oath of office to uphold and be faithful to the Constitution. The jury is still out on how well she carries out that duty.

[mojo84]

The Constitution is a limit on government action against a person for their opinion. It does not limit the people of the US from expressing their disagreement with the person's opinion, even to the point of calling for some action to be taken.

Hits the nail square on the head.

[Redneck_Buddha]

Nice to see so many are just fine with anti-Semites and terror sympathizers in Congress.

[Bitter Clinger]

I have to agree with most of what Beiruty said. I have freedom to speak my mind in the US, even when it is an unpopular opinion. In order to defend my right to free speech, I must defend Rep. Omar's rights to the same. Before I explain where I differ from him, I must ask how he meant one statement to be taken. He said:

That being said, there is no apology for stating a factual truth.

If this meant that Rep. Omar was simply speaking the truth when she said that the congressmen were being bought, I disagree with some of the implications. Omar implied that the lobbyists for a specific group were directly bribing the American congressmen. I doubt that is the truth. I also doubt the implication that it was just the one group of lobbyists, since it appears to me that many different lobbyists groups spend a lot of money working with all of the congressmen. I am confident that there are always going to be a few cases of outright bribery going on, but I also doubt that it is commonplace. There are too many legal ways to influence how politicians act or vote to need to resort to bribery.

Where I disagree with Beiruty is that the uproar we see is not a violation of Omar's 1A right to free speech. The Constitution is a limit on government action against a person for their opinion. It does not limit the people of the US from expressing their disagreement with the person's opinion, even to the point of calling for some action to be taken. Given her obvious bias, it seems reasonable to me that Omar should be moved from the Foreign Affairs committee since she cannot have credibility in her decisions on certain countries. This would not be punishing her for her opinions or expressions, just a lateral move to where she might have some credibility.

And of course, I would suggest that people from all over the country contribute to help whoever runs against her next election cycle. We can stop her re-election without it being a violation of her rights.

Did you read the article?
https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/272879 ... greenfield

Omar’s worldview is CAIR’s world. And CAIR’s worldview is that of the Muslim Brotherhood. The Brotherhood’s Sayyid Qutb had claimed that the Jews use money to control the world. Hamas, an arm of the Brotherhood, had claimed in its charter that, "with their money, they took control of the world media, news agencies, the press, publishing houses, broadcasting stations, and others... With their money they formed secret societies, such as Freemasons, Rotary Clubs, the Lions and others in different parts of the world for the purpose of sabotaging societies and achieving Zionist interests."

[mayor]

Nice to see so many are just fine with anti-Semites and terror sympathizers in Congress.

Omniscient much?

[Beiruty]

Nice to see so many are just fine with anti-Semites and terror sympathizers in Congress.

Do not let your imagination runs wild. We are talking about your constitutional rights.

[Beiruty]

"That being said, there is no apology for stating a factual truth"
It is a clear as the blue sky, as clear as dead sea water, and it has no implication to whether what congresswoman Omar said is true or not.

If I raised my voice and said, you are a corrupt because of this evidence, or by presenting Exhibit A in court of law. I owe no one an apology. It is matter of fact, not my biased or unbiased opinion. I am offending no one by stating the truth.

If I said, I am defending the weak against tyrants, or I am defending constitutional rights. I owe no one an apology.
Don't we all agree, that all Congress/Government lobbyists, PAC, Super PACs, even our NRA have been established for the sole purpose of influencing the US lawmakers and US Federal Government?

We elect them, and lobbyists would take over and "promise" election funding via PACs, and Super PACs and Corporate Contributions, AND endorsement? If not? How do the lobbyists exercise influence???

[mojo84]

Looking at the CAIR website and reading this thread, I see a prevalent double standard.

Here's an example. www.cair.com/cair_welcomes_withdrawal_o ... her_nauert

Seems some people's Constitutional Rights are more imoortant than others.

Does CAIR do any lobbying?



Just because something is said doesn't mean it is true or a fact.

[Bitter Clinger]

Looking at the CAIR website and reading this thread, I see a prevalent double standard.

Here's an example. www.cair.com/cair_welcomes_withdrawal_o ... her_nauert

Seems some people's Constitutional Rights are more imoortant than others.

Does CAIR do any lobbying?



Just because something is said doesn't mean it is true or a fact.

In 2007, CAIR was named as an unindicted co-conspirator in the Holy Land Foundation (HLF) trial, a Hamas financing case that would result in the FBI ceasing its working relationship with CAIR. The HLF trial was the largest terror-financing case in American history. In 2008, during a retrial of the HLF case, an FBI Special Agent labeled CAIR as “a front group for Hamas” during her trial testimony.

https://www.investigativeproject.org/18 ... atus-legit

[srothstein]

Did you read the article?
https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/272879 ... greenfield

Omar’s worldview is CAIR’s world. And CAIR’s worldview is that of the Muslim Brotherhood. The Brotherhood’s Sayyid Qutb had claimed that the Jews use money to control the world. Hamas, an arm of the Brotherhood, had claimed in its charter that, "with their money, they took control of the world media, news agencies, the press, publishing houses, broadcasting stations, and others... With their money they formed secret societies, such as Freemasons, Rotary Clubs, the Lions and others in different parts of the world for the purpose of sabotaging societies and achieving Zionist interests."

Sure I read it. I don't like Rep. Omar at all. But she does have the right to speak her opinion, even if it is one I strongly disagree with. Not only does she have that right, even while in Congress, but she actually has a duty to speak the opinions of the people she represents, whether I agree with those opinions or not.

The article makes some very interesting allegations about Omar. I am not going to say they are true, even though I tend to agree, because I have no evidence other than what she has said of her world view and what she said did not match what the article is claiming. I am not saying it is wrong or lying, just that I have not seen the evidence of this.

I think what is most telling about this situation is not what Omar said or how she feels. I believe that she is actually repeating the opinions of those who elected her. She is an immigrant and the first Somali refugee elected to Congress (that I know of). Her district appears to be a strongly Muslim, Somali refugee district. I have not seen anyone from her district saying she does not represent them and their opinions. This could just be the media coverage, of course, but this is telling because it leads me to think that most Muslim Somali refugees agree with her and are just as biased. So why are we not seeing more people saying to not accept these refugees since they do not agree with our way of life or our country's values?

It is very educational to note who has come out in her defense in the media also. Not in defense of her saying her opinion, but in defense of that opinion itself. It is not just the immigrants and refugees who feel this way. It appears to me that the liberal, left-leaning base of the Democratic party are saying that she is right too. This is also revealing to me. I can only hope that many other American Jews are seeing this and wondering if it has become time for them to leave the Democratic party, as it has left them.

[Bitter Clinger]

Did you read the article?
https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/272879 ... greenfield

Omar’s worldview is CAIR’s world. And CAIR’s worldview is that of the Muslim Brotherhood. The Brotherhood’s Sayyid Qutb had claimed that the Jews use money to control the world. Hamas, an arm of the Brotherhood, had claimed in its charter that, "with their money, they took control of the world media, news agencies, the press, publishing houses, broadcasting stations, and others... With their money they formed secret societies, such as Freemasons, Rotary Clubs, the Lions and others in different parts of the world for the purpose of sabotaging societies and achieving Zionist interests."

Sure I read it. I don't like Rep. Omar at all. But she does have the right to speak her opinion, even if it is one I strongly disagree with. Not only does she have that right, even while in Congress, but she actually has a duty to speak the opinions of the people she represents, whether I agree with those opinions or not.

The article makes some very interesting allegations about Omar. I am not going to say they are true, even though I tend to agree, because I have no evidence other than what she has said of her world view and what she said did not match what the article is claiming. I am not saying it is wrong or lying, just that I have not seen the evidence of this.

I think what is most telling about this situation is not what Omar said or how she feels. I believe that she is actually repeating the opinions of those who elected her. She is an immigrant and the first Somali refugee elected to Congress (that I know of). Her district appears to be a strongly Muslim, Somali refugee district. I have not seen anyone from her district saying she does not represent them and their opinions. This could just be the media coverage, of course, but this is telling because it leads me to think that most Muslim Somali refugees agree with her and are just as biased. So why are we not seeing more people saying to not accept these refugees since they do not agree with our way of life or our country's values?

It is very educational to note who has come out in her defense in the media also. Not in defense of her saying her opinion, but in defense of that opinion itself. It is not just the immigrants and refugees who feel this way. It appears to me that the liberal, left-leaning base of the Democratic party are saying that she is right too. This is also revealing to me. I can only hope that many other American Jews are seeing this and wondering if it has become time for them to leave the Democratic party, as it has left them.

Finally, we see what we had been hoping to see from the Muslim community:

Dems shouldn’t support anti-Israel Rep. Ilhan Omar – She doesn’t speak for me and other American Muslims
https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/dems-sh ... an-muslims

[The Annoyed Man]

It is very educational to note who has come out in her defense in the media also. Not in defense of her saying her opinion, but in defense of that opinion itself. It is not just the immigrants and refugees who feel this way. It appears to me that the liberal, left-leaning base of the Democratic party are saying that she is right too. This is also revealing to me. I can only hope that many other American Jews are seeing this and wondering if it has become time for them to leave the Democratic party, as it has left them.

I think this is a bigger question than just concerning American Jews. I think it is part of a larger winnowing of the harvest.

I am not Jewish, so I cannot claim to speak for Jews. But as a Christian, grafted onto Father Abraham’s vine, I can most certainly speak in support of Jews, and to issues affecting their wellbeing - most particularly their well-being as my fellow citizens. I am aware of the historical tradition of Jewish intellectual rigor, and the consequent presence of Jews in academic endeavor in numbers out of proportion to their representation in the population. In and of itself, that was never a bad thing. But I think I can say - because this affected my own family too - that intellectual pursuits, within the cloistered environment of academia, can tempt one into believing the lie that the power of one’s own intellect frees one of the need to follow a higher power. And by the way, some of this trend has affected Christianity too. It’s really - at least in my opinion - about the war between secularism and spirituality.

So in the end, just as we end up with 2 kinds of Christians under academic pressure, we also end up with 2 kinds of Jews. For purposes of describing this phenomenon, you can even lump Jews and Christians together into those two kinds.....

There are the kinds for whom intellectual rigor and pursuit is a spritual exercise, in which they seek to know more about, and draw closer to, their God. They understand obedience to scriptural precepts, and they actually seek the Deity’s help in achieving that obedience....on a personal level. It’s a faith of submission.

Then there are the kinds for whom intellectual rigor and pursuit is a liberation exercise, in which they seek to be freed from the “autocratic” precepts of Scrupture, so that they may pursue making the world a better place according to their definitions, not God’s. It’s not a faith of submission.

We ask why American Jews would tend to politically support those policies which are harmful to Judaism, or politicians who would gladly see them wiped out. But we also ask why a Catholic Pope or Cardinals would not excommunicate nominally Catholic governors or congresswomen who actively promote infanticide at birth. We ask why a prominent “evangelical” Protestant “thought leader” would use his pulpit to promote abortion, or same-sex marriage, under the false notion that both are sanctioned by Jesus, even when Scriptures very CLEARLY say differently.

So while we can keep asking that question, about when American Jews will see the writing on the wall and flee the democrat party, we could say the same thing about many alleged Christians, who pursue what is euphemistically called “liberation theology”, but literally has nothing to do with submission to the Lord, and everything to do with pushing a humanist doctrine in place of submission.

So I don’t think Jews are in this alone. I think that a lot of us are asking the same kinds of questions - Jews and Christians alike.


CAVEAT regarding Same-Sex marriage: in my own opinion, I do not believe that God sanctions same-sex marriages. But I also believe in the notion of civil/political liberty, and that is why I don’t think that the state can or should abrogate the right of same-sex couples to codify their relationships. This war is in the spiritual plane, and it will be won or lost there. I believe it has already been won - by God - and the rest of us just have some catching up to do. In a secular sense, it’s none of my business. In a spiritual sense, God won, and I just haven’t seen it yet.

[Redneck_Buddha]

She can spew hate, propaganda, and false narratives under the guise of the 1st Amendment all she wants, but is it right to let her do it on the taxpayer dime? Here is a sample of another trope that was propagated with German tax dollars awhile back: