The Democratic Party’s “Progress” into Antisemitism (Part Two)
“The halls of power bowed to the pulse of the street. This moment marks a new future for American Muslims,” crowed a recent mass email from the Hamas-derived Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR). CAIR’s executive director, Nihad Awad, had every reason to rejoice, for Democratic representatives had just transformed a congressional censure of antisemitism into a resolution that actually protected pro-jihad Muslim anti-Semites like him.
The CAIR email condemned the original intention of the resolution that Congress passed on March 8. In a “twisted logic, Democratic leadership planned to release a resolution condemning anti-Semitism as a public rebuke of Congresswoman Ilhan Omar,” who has consistently made anti-Semitic statements, as previously discussed. Adopting hackneyed arguments that Omar and others, including her Democratic colleague Rashida Tlaib, are merely legitimate critics of Israeli policies, the email celebrated an end to the “silencing of criticism of Israeli apartheid.”
While the resolution had its origins in national outrage over Omar’s years-long recidivist string of anti-Semitic remarks, the ultimate text did not mention her and buried antisemitism. As the prominent orthodox Rabbi Dov Fischer observed, in the resolution the “Democrats will not name the Jew-hater,” but “condemn everything except for apple pie” in what the New York Post called a “meaningless…Pablum.” Yet his fellow rabbinical luminary, Shmuley Boteach, noted that this “milquetoast resolution condemning nearly every form of bigotry (anti-Christian prejudice was notably missing)” passed 407-23, including with her support. Condemnation of white supremacists like the Ku Klux Klan had a prominent textual place, while rampant antisemitismamong her Muslim coreligionists worldwide received no mention.
Instead, the text condemned “Islamophobia,” a late twentieth-century neologism that has consistently served its totalitarian purpose of suppressing any critical inquiry into the beliefs and behaviors of Muslims. Accordingly, the resolution cavalierly dismisses “unfair allegations that they sympathize with individuals who engage in violence or terror or support the oppression of women, Jews, and other vulnerable communities.” While Omar and Tlaib’s insinuations about divided Jewish loyalties had angered many, the resolution’s statement that “imputations of dual loyalty threaten American democracy” could equally encompass concerns about illiberal Islamic ideologies.
Unsurprisingly, CAIR celebrated the fact that the resolution “is the first piece of legislation mentioning Islamophobia to pass either chamber of Congress.” CAIR’s allies in the fight to change the resolution’s contents also touted their successful efforts. These included the anti-Semitic Muslim-American political activist Linda Sarsour and the anti-Israel US Campaign for Palestinian Rights, a supporter of Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) against Israel.
Thus the Democrats “hijacked a condemnation of Jew-hatred and twisted it to make Muslims, not Jews, the victims,” noted this author’s colleague and anti-sharia activist, Deborah Weiss. Correspondingly, Mehdi Hasan, a BDS-whitewashing reporter for the Qatar-based television channel and fount of antisemitism Al Jazeera, decried the “Islamophobic and racist attacks” upon Omar in an interview with her. Tlaib likewise blamed “Islamophobia” for Omar’s public troubles.
Such statements reflected how Muslims such as Omar used religious identity to deflect criticism. “Many on the left believe that as a woman of color, a Muslim, and an immigrant, Omar cannot, by definition, be a purveyor of hate and prejudice,” conservative Jewish commentator Jonathan Tobin explaineed. Such “identity politics” means that “those who are considered oppressed receive immunity to do things that those considered more privileged cannot do.”
As one anonymous Democrat critic of Omar told Breitbart, “Islamophobia has become the knee jerk reaction to anyone who dares criticize her.” An online open letter from Sarour’s Mpowerchange organization in support of Omar rejected any worries about Islamic antisemitism as an “Islamophobic stereotype that Muslims are inherently antisemitic.” Correspondingly, the anti-Semitic writer CJ Werleman denounced the “phony and scurrilous charges of anti-Semitism” that” targeted “two Muslim women representatives,” Omar and Tlaib, “moral leaders in their party.” Conservative commentators such as FrontPage contributor Daniel Greenfield therefore noted Omar’s status as a “member of the Democrat’s protected victim class.”
Muslim reformer Shireen Qudosi observed the dangerous implications of such ideological untouchables. A week before the resolution’s passage, a political poster appeared in the West Virginia capitol building that juxtaposed Omar’s picture with an image of the September 11, 2001, Al Qaeda attacks upon New York’s World Trade Center. Contrary to the claims that this was a slanderous association of her with 9/11, Qudosi accurately saw thereby that with Omar and her allies the “ideology that goes ‘tick tick boom’ went from crashing into the Twin Towers to walking the halls of Congress.”
A March 6 confrontation outside of Tlaib’s congressional office between Qudosi’s fellow Muslim reformer Asra Nomani and Omar supporters following their Capitol Hill rally proved Qudosi’s point. As Nomani and others videoed, rally participants including Sarsour, CAIR national outreach manager Jinan Shbat, and former CAIR Connecticut chapter leader Mongi Dhaouadi conferred with Tlaib and/or prevented Nomani from entering Tlaib’s office. Her choice of consulting anti-Semitic, Israel-hating, pro-jihad individuals over Nomani clearly showed the political influencesthat so devastatingly distorted the congressional reaction to Omar.
As Jihad Watch’s Robert Spencer has explained, the ability of the Democrats’ emerging radical political base to squash censure of Omar shows that she “stands victorious as the new master of the Democratic Party.” Especially the freshman congresswoman’s coveted position on the House Foreign Affairs Committee reveals that “open anti-Semitism has become mainstream and normalized on the Left today” and it is “not just mainstream, either: it’s the future.” On this committee she will have a “sort of bully pulpit that Israel-haters have lacked up until now,” Tobin has warned.
Spencer’s aghast summation is that Omar “has achieved the normalization of a paranoid Jew-hatred not seen in the political mainstream since the Third Reich.” “I don’t believe that anyone in the history of Congress has so openly and vilely attacked Jews and Israel,” Boteach has concurred, an assessment supported by factual evaluation of her many falsehoods. The congressional resolution has worked merely to “cement Omar’s criticism as on the kosher side of the line when it comes to what may constitute antisemitism,” analyzed Jerusalem Post editor Seth Frantzman. Moreover, she showed little willingness to reform during a March 5 meeting of congressional Democrats where, among other things, she refused to endorse Israel’s right to exist as a Jewish national homeland.
Democrat leaders will most likely want to continue to ignore any of Omar’s offenses, as she has proven her undivided loyalty to the new red-green political alliance of Leftists and sharia supremacists. She has particularly offered no objection to “Pelvic Left” agendas so central to the modern Democratic Party’s “Sexual State,” even as individuals like Judge Jeanine Pirro speculateabout the significance of Omar’s hijab and Islamic modesty culture. Especially incongruous is the Left’s embrace of homosexuality while Muslims such as Siraj Wahhaj, her ally Sarsour’s mentor, espouse brutal Islamic orthodoxy towards gays.
Omar notably has recommended legal action against athletic organizations for not allowing “transgendered” biological males to compete against women. Thereby she absurdly argued that the “myth that trans women have a ‘direct competitive advantage’ is not supported by medical science.” Additionally, she evinces no concern about how “transgenderism” threatens females’ most intimate privacy, both Muslim and non-Muslim.
Thus anti-Semites such as Omar will remained ensconced in the Democratic Party. Her haughtiness towards the media likewise reflects that the press has previously shown little interest in substantial evidence that The Democratic Party’s “Progress” into Antisemitism (Part Two)she engaged in marriage fraud with her immigrant brother. This dire political arrangement raise critical questions for Jews, traditionally a stalwart Democratic constituency, as the last article in this series will examine.