Yes it's ok, just not for you.
I have to say I'm a little annoyed by the people participating of the current conversation. Yes, it's true that IIhan Omar could have worded things better, but to say there is absolutely no point to her words is literally dishonest.
I'm inclined to believe the bigger issue here is her faith, which of course does not allow for most people attacking her to give her the benefit of doubt, but coming out and saying that would be bigoted, honest, but bigoted, so there's this annoying political dance people are playing at the moment.
Nobody who values human life above all, would sit here and say that a nation has no right to exist, because this would discard the value of the people who are part of it. But I don't know how this was somehow implied by the tweets mind you, tweets that called into question the financial influences over our politicians.
Let's be honest here, yes Israel does have a special seat at our table, yes they are our strong Ally in a region that is pretty much anti-west, but does that mean we should not ask any questions? Does that mean that if we do, we hate the Jewish people? It's obvious that I'm confused about this, or maybe I'm being naive, but it seems to me this was a perfect opportunity to tar and feather someone and scream righteousness from a pulpit, actions that mean absolutely nothing in the grand scheme of things.
This is what discourse has become, a snowball fight of I got you moments with little to no substance.
Posted using Partiko Android
A truism of politics is that rhetoric doesn't mirror action. I would be alarmed if Omar's opening of this discussion weren't marked by every disinfo tactic in the book. Who wrote that book? Folks intent on political power, and our meager capacity to be rational as peoples and nations is very effectively disrupted and destroyed by shill/disinfo tactics.
Established power will resist effectively attempts to disrupt the status quo, because that is the mechanism that empowers it. I am not dismayed by the dishonesty and venal attempts to smear Omar as antisemitic - even though her ethnic heritage is semitic - and I bet she isn't either. She would be impossibly naive to expect to challenge AIPAC without exactly the shitstorm she has stirred up. Were I her, I'd have expected far worse. She may think things are going swimmingly. I think they are.
There is an enormous gulf between the party leaders on the left and the party members regarding Israel, Zionism, and AIPAC. Party leaders are wholly in the pocket of AIPAC. Party members aren't directly profiting, and many are appalled at what is happening in Palestine, for one example. Not a few are extremely alarmed at the kinds of corruption that was brightly shining in 2016, when the party sold Bernie down the river - and Bernie bought it. AIPAC is exemplary of that corrupting power of money in politics, and it's not something that the party members on the left defend on principle. Rather the reverse.
Some on the right have speculated that Omar and AOC are actually in cahoots with Trump and the right cryptically, because of the spectacular division the issue has caused on the left. Since I'm neither and could hardly trust any politician less than I do, I see it as a win just because of that very disruption of the blind faith of party members in their leadership - on both sides, hell on every side - of the aisle.
One of the most revealing tweets came from Rothschild regarding the Trump castigation of Omar. He basically said that Trump opposing antisemitism was antisemitic. LOL I cannot even estimate how many people saw that and thought 'WTF?'.
Couple that cognitive dissonance with Trump's familial ties to Zionist warhawks, pictures of him wearing a beanie and reverently fondling the Wailing Wall, and the extraordinary disruption of all political trust is amazing.
This issue is forcing people to confront the duplicity and corruption that degrades American government - indeed all government everywhere.
What I hope to see come from this may dismay you, but I want this division to expand, and diversify across issues to reveal the corrupt influence of money in politics. Unless that happens, we're not going to get to politics that isn't all about divide and conquer, and blind support for leaders no matter how poorly their actions match their rhetoric.
Sorry if that is the opposite of what you would like to see, but my lack of faith in the present political circus will not be improved without far more exposure of the corruption and dishonesty in government.
Thanks!
I think you are tight on the money there.
Posted using Partiko Android
Hi meno, I was brought up to treat everyone well, just like we like to be treated. Judgement is easier than acceptance, hate is easier than love and war is easier than peace. It only takes resolve to do the right thing and I would much prefer to live in a peaceful, loving and accepting way respecting everyone else.
I had no idea of this going on which probably tell me more about my interest in news these days...
Posted using Partiko iOS
It is narrated in the hadith that the Prophet said: “The Hour will not begin until you fight the Jews, until a Jew will hide behind a rock or a tree, and the rock or tree will say: ‘O Muslim, O slave of Allah, here is a Jew behind me; come and kill him." ----- Muslims in general are not big fans of jews to put it mildly and it is scriptural. There have been many surveys too. This stuff is just a snippet of whats to come with more "diversity" - code for less white people in their own countries. diversity + proximity = violence. Historically this is a fact. Expecting "multiculturalism" to work when all the facts are against us is delusional. I can go on and on with interracial violence stats/segregation and examples from history like Zimbabwe or the fall of Rome but ill leave it at that. Just something to think about an research.
Good points, but at the same time. I would never judge all judeo Christian Faith's using the old testament. I mean, asking for some objective look to criticism is not a bad thing.
Posted using Partiko Android
I dont really think one can be objective to be honest, not fully. I am a christian myself and we dont mind if you judge Christianity with the old testament where it applies but the new testament is a new covenant, after Christ came many of the old laws no longer applied. Here is a video about Omar
Being from a Christian background, I can respectfully say I was taught different. I was taught Jesus came to fulfill the prophecy not to abolish the law, he even said so himself. That being said, we have grown to a more compassionate understanding of holy scriptures (for the most part), since there are still fringe elements in all religions. My point is, I would not assume anyone with the label Christian is a fundamentalist that is calling for the death of homosexuals as the old testament commands, my default perception is that I'm probably dealing with a moral/ethical human. I do make the same assumptions when I meet people from different Faiths, not because of naivete, but because for the most part, most people want to do good, or at least this has been my personal experience.
I will check out the video once I get home.
Posted using Partiko Android
Ok, christ does fulfill the law but also brings the new covenant "A new commandment I give unto you, That ye love one another; as I have loved you, that ye also love one another. By this shall all men know that ye are my disciples, if ye have love one to another." The fundamental unarticulated presupposition that underpins what you are saying is that modern liberalism provides an ethical framework and overarching lens through which we see all other moralities as subordinate. When you say "most people want to do good" is that 'good' in the sense of what fits into a modern liberal framework? a kind of mediocre standardised ethic that allows markets to function smoothly but doesn't really try and justify itself, because different religions have very different ideas of what is moral.
Oh yes, morality is somewhat subjective no doubt. And we don't actually have to go to extremes to find point of controversial disagreement. That being said our current communication systems are closing that gap. It's a slow process no doubt, but the idea of human rights is constantly evolving.
Posted using Partiko Android
I believe it is a wrong statement for someone to say a nation does not have the right to exist
She did not say that though.
Why you hate Jews ?
Man, funny stuff! You've got a talent for humor.
Thanks for compliment. ..
To listen to the audio version of this article click on the play image.
Brought to you by @tts. If you find it useful please consider upvoting this reply.
Liked it. Live and let live.
Welcome to the shit storm that is politics...
Posted using Partiko Android