Bernie Sanders aide defends Omar with term seen as anti-Semitic, apologizes

Fox News ^ | March 13 2019 | Joseph A. Wulfsohn

[knighthawk]

A top staffer to Bernie Sanders’ presidential campaign apologized Tuesday for invoking “a dual allegiance” of Jewish Americans while defending Rep. Ilhan Omar, D-Minn.

Belén Sisa, Sanders’ national deputy press secretary, was discussing the term seen as anti-Semitic in a Facebook thread over the weekend -- and argued that questioning it was legitimate, Politico reported.

“This is a serious question: do you not think that the American government and American Jewish community has a dual allegiance to the state of Israel? I’m asking not to rule out the history of this issue, but in the context in which this was said by Ilhan,” Sisa wrote.

[FrankR]

[nathanbedford]

When we shut down discussion, when we move to censor political opinion, we move toward totalitarianism and it doesn't matter whether the push comes from the left or from the right.

During the America First Movement, many ethnic Germans in America opposed involving America against Germany, did they do so out of divided loyalty? Is it racist to ask?

In World War II we locked up Japanese-Americans because we feared they had divided loyalties. We locked up some Germans as well.

During the time of the great Irish immigration into America, the Irish opposed Britain and it was the standard practice of big-city Democrat candidates to "twist the British lion's tail" in order to gain votes in the Irish slums. Did those Irish have divided loyalties when it came to World War I or World War II?

When Pat Buchanan questioned the wisdom of America's attachment to Israel, he was attacked from the left. I suppose Pat will now be attacked from both sides, or will the left swap positions and claim their former victim is now their hero?

I think it is necessary to examine the actual words complained of before we stifle speech or crucify the speaker. Meanwhile, I confess to a certain Schadenfreude as I watch the Democrat party tearing at itself.

[jmacusa]

Wow. Guess irony’s lost on you, huh? As well as hypocrisy?

[nathanbedford]

Wow? Wow what?

[jmacusa]

Seriously? You come to a conservative website using the screen name and out up a picture, in apparent veneration of a treasonous Southern bastard who took up arms against the duly elected government of the United States at the time, who fought to preserve an economic system based on the use of slave labor and was the first Grand Wizard of the Ku Klux Klan.

[nathanbedford]

What has anything you just wrote have anything to do with what I wrote?

[zeestephen]

Re: “When Pat Buchanan questioned the wisdom of America's attachment to Israel, he was attacked from the left.”

Really?

I must have been napping the day that happened.

I do recall many Conservatives, over many decades, attacking Buchanan for his borderline anti-Semitism.

[sparklite2]

The continuum went (goes) like this ...

Pat Buchanan > Robert Novak > Joe Sobran > David Duke

[jmacusa]

Really, you ARE serious? Read the history of the Confederacy. They were Democrats. You apparently venerate the Confederacy.

[nathanbedford]

Years ago the left was in support of Israel, therefore, when Buchanan questioned the wisdom of America supporting Israel he was attacked from the left, part of that attack was to accuse him of anti-Semitism. It is also true that the accusations of anti-Semitism against Pat Buchanan came from other matters besides opposition to support for Israel, such as support for the concentration camp guard.

Buchanan was attacked from both sides, my point has to do with why is it illegitimate, or worse -anti-Semitic, to question the wisdom of America's support for Israel?

[nathanbedford]

Read my about page.

[jmacusa]

Sorry. Not buying it.Long winded bs. My ancestor served in The Army Of The Potomac.

[sparklite2]

The Dems are reversing course so fast it’s hard to keep up.

It was just recently that, to the Democrats, bashing Israel and the ‘occupation’ was acceptable and not anti-Semitic. The resolution Congress cooked up is based on the House muzzie’s criticism of Israel, not of Jews. But in order to extend the resolution to the mythical backlash against muslims for Islamic atrocities, it was necessary that it morph into protection of peoples, not countries.

Congress now has its cake and gets to eat it, too. What was once, in their minds, two separate issues is now one issue, and one of the strands has been flipped on its head.

[jjotto]

Note that Buchanan had the support of Rabbi Yehudah Levin, a student of the famed Avigdor Miller.

Traditional Christianity is historically no friend of Jews, but the fear of God and God’s universal laws are so important for a nation that Rabbi Schneur Zalman of Liadi (founder of Chabad) supported the Russian Czar over the atheist Napoleon. Likewise Rabbi Levin with Buchanan.

Certainly this time of a crisis in rejecting God’s laws is even more extreme than examples from the past.

[nathanbedford]

Company I, 10th Virginia infantry, Army of Northern Virginia.

[jjotto]

Omar’s targets are American Jews, not Israel. Most countries who can afford to do so lobby Congress. It’s how former Congressmen and former bureaucrats get rich.

[sparklite2]

Of course, you’re right. But the comments that sparked this specific brouhaha were anti-Israel.

[jmacusa]

That doesn’t impress me. Nothing about the Confederacy does. What if the South had won? What would America look like today? Lee and Davis were lucky they weren’t hung.

[Doogle]

Bernie’s aide is also an illegal...