Trending Topics:

Ilhan Omar is charged with invoking ‘myth of dual loyalty’ — but many Jewish writers say it’s no myth

Media Analysis
on 96 Comments

Ilhan Omar, by Katie Miranda.

In an appearance at Busboys and Poets two nights ago Minnesota Congresswoman Ilhan Omar called out Israel supporters for advocating for a foreign country:

“I want to talk about the political influence in this country that says it is okay to push for allegiance to a foreign country.”

Omar’s critique is similar to Rep. Rashida Tlaib saying in January that Senate supporters of anti-boycott legislation “forgot what country they represent.”

Both congresswomen have come under a rain of attack from Israel supporters for these comments. Which is no surprise, given that the two Muslim women are Israel’s strongest critics in the Congress.

Jonathan Chait writes at New York Magazine that Omar’s statement is “much worse” than her last controversy, when she ascribed Israel support to financial contributions from the lobby and then apologized for doing so.

Accusing Jews of “allegiance to a foreign country” is a historically classic way of delegitimizing their participation in the political system….Omar is directly invoking the hoary myth of dual loyalty, in which the Americanness of Jews is inherently suspect, and their political participation must be contingent upon proving their patriotism.

But many Jewish writers and thinkers have raised precisely this “hoary myth” very seriously. They have cited “dual loyalty” as a real factor in the Israel-supporting community, and some have termed it a potential problem. Here’s a list:

–John Judis said in The New Republic in 2007 that the Israel lobby demands “dual loyalty” –and said the Chaits of the world are operating with bad faith when they attempt to blackball the issue:

[Jewish leaders] want to demand of American Jewish intellectuals a certain loyalty to Israel, Israeli policies, and to Zionism as part of their being Jewish. They make dual loyalty an inescapable part of being Jewish in a world in which a Jewish state exists…

Many Jews now suffer from dual loyalty–the same way that Cuban-Americans or Mexican-Americans do. By ignoring this dilemma–and, worse still, by charging those who acknowledge its existence with anti-Semitism–the critics of the new anti-Semitism are engaged in a flight from their own political selves. They are guilty of a certain kind of bad faith.

–Joe Klein cited the supposed myth of “divided loyalties” in 2008 in the context of the push for the Iraq war by the neocons:

The fact that a great many Jewish neoconservatives – people like Joe Lieberman and the crowd over at Commentary – plumped for this war, and now for an even more foolish assault on Iran, raised the question of divided loyalties: using U.S. military power, U.S. lives and money, to make the world safe for Israel.

–Rabbi Melissa Weintraub cited the supposed myth when she told a Jewish panel in 2014 that the Iran Deal was a “dual loyalty test” for American supporters of Israel:

Are Israeli interests and American interests actually aligned here? If our American interests do diverge from Israeli interests, what then for us as American Jews?… There are several positions that have been articulated in the American Jewish community around this agreement, one of which is that this was the ultimate dual loyalty test actually because what arose here was actually a divergence between American and Israeli interests, in which the agreement helped America avert a war and did place Israel in existential danger.

Assailed by other panelists for using the words “dual loyalty,” Weintraub doubled down:

The importance of the phrase is that it gets at something that has been articulated in those terms by many Jews whether we use those terms or not, which is a sense of real competing interests….a real sense of being torn. Because there are those who think that American and Israeli interests don’t align here.

MJ Rosenberg

–MJ Rosenberg said in 2014 that dual loyalty is a legitimate issue:

I most certainly do believe that dual loyalty is a valid consideration when any group knowingly chooses the interests of a foreign country over their own. Like Israel Firster, it describes reality. The good news for me is that this is not a Jewish community problem but rather the problem with a small group of Jewish organizational hacks, neocons, and rank-and-file true believers (mostly old), etc. The reason [some] go nuts about “dual loyalty” and “Israel Firster” is because they know how valid the charge is when, as with Iran, people knowingly put the interest of Israel’s Likud government above America’s.

–Douglas Rushkoff said he was confused by dual loyalty issues as a boy attending Larchmont Temple and looking at the flags on the altar. (From “Wrestling With Zion,” 2003).

The flag on the left was American, and the one on the right was Israeli Which one was I supposed to be looking at when I worshiped? Which one deserved our allegiance…

I figured the one we Jews really believed in was the Israeli flag. The one with the Jewish star. That was our country, after all….

So the Jewish flag was our real flag–our secret flag–and the American flag was our conspicuous nod to the nation that we called home…

The dual flags in temple became a metaphor for me of the role of Jews in America.

Douglas Rushkoff, by Rebecca Ashley.

–Eric Alterman made extended remarks in 2009 at the 92d Y, celebrating his dual loyalty:

You know, one of the touchiest words you can say when you’re discussing Jews and Israel is the word dual loyalty. It’s sort of one of those words that American Jewish officialdom has ruled out of the discourse. If you say dual loyalty, you’re playing into the hands of anti-semites, because it’s been a consistent trope among anti-Semites that you can’t trust Jews. etc. etc. And I find this very confusing because I was raised dually loyal my whole life. When I went to Hebrew school, the content of my Hebrew school was all about supporting Israel. When my parents who I think are here tonight sent me to Israel when I was 14, on a ZOA [Zionist Organization of America]-sponsored trip… [laughter/backtalk] that was a bad idea, yeah– it was drummed into me that I should do what’s best for Israel.

I was at the Center for Jewish History not long ago where I heard Ruth Wisse, the Yiddishist professor at Harvard who happens to be the Martin L. Peretz professor, instruct a group of young Jewish journalists that they should think of themselves as members of the Israeli army. …

I am a dual loyal Jew and sometimes I’m going to actually go with Israel, because the United States can take an awful lot of hits and come up standing. Whereas if Israel takes one serious bad hit it could disappear. So there’s going to be some cases where when Israel and the United States conflict I’m going to support what’s best for Israel rather than what I think is best for the United States.

Then-editor of the Forward Jane Eisner: Can you imagine a time where you would feel that dual loyalty and go with Israel?

Alterman: I just said, there are many occasions.

Eisner: Can you give us an example?

Alterman:… I think that bin Laden and 9/11 were to some degree inspired by U.S. support of Israel. I think a great deal of the terrorist attacks and the sort of pool of potential terrorists who want to attack the United States are inspired by the United States support for Israel. I’m not saying we shouldn’t support Israel for that reason. I’m saying, Dammit if that’s the price we have to pay, then I’m willing to pay it. I’m just saying Let’s be honest about it.

Eric Alterman

–Alterman named Harvard Yiddish Professor Ruth Wisse as a fellow dual loyalist, for her comments in 2007 at the Center for Jewish History that American Jewish students should serve in the Israeli army:

Every Israeli has to be in the Army for two or three years of his training at least and then a month of every year at least afterwards. I think that American Jews ought to think of themselves the same way, that for a certain part of your life you are just part of that army. Now army life is rotten, it asks you to do things like this [Wisse uses her hands], not to keep thinking. You’re not asked to analyze every situation from anew. You have to exercise, you have to learn. That kind of fight that we have to wage takes a totally different kind of advocacy training, of systematic thinking …

Wisse gave as an example of serving in that army, countering “Arab students” on a college campus.

–Gary Rosenblatt in the NY Jewish Week in 2016 described many Trump voters as “Israel Firsters.”

Among “Israel firsters” — those who vote primarily on what they believe is best for Israel — I find more and more people saying they may well vote for Trump, based on their dislike and distrust of Clinton and their reasoning that Trump will stand up for Israel more forcefully and openly than Clinton.

–Elliott Abrams wrote in 1997 that Jews must “stand apart from the nation in which they live”:

Outside the land of Israel, there can be no doubt that Jews, faithful to the covenant between God and Abraham, are to stand apart from the nation in which they live. It is the very nature of being Jewish to be apart–except in Israel–from the rest of the population…

–In 2016 Dennis Ross told a NY synagogue that American Jews must be advocates for Israel, not for Palestinians:

when we raise questions about what Israel needs to do it shouldn’t be seen as if somehow we’re advocates for the Palestinians. Plenty of others are advocates for the Palestinians. We don’t need to be advocates for Palestinians. We need to be advocates for Israel.

What all these writers and thinkers are saying is that allegiance to Israel is actually an important factor in the support for Israel in the United States, to the point that some support Israel’s interests over America’s.

None of them is saying that it’s treasonous, by the way; some praise that allegiance, some regard it as problematic. But all think it’s a real issue. Just as Theodor Herzl and later Arthur Balfour did when they assured British Jews that establishing a Jewish state in Palestine would not undermine their British loyalty.

And Judis makes the necessary correlation: When you characterize such discussion as anti-Semitic, you’re acting in bad faith, denying something you know to be true, and seeking to set a redline on an important argument.

That’s just what is happening to Omar and Tlaib. Because they have taken the historic step of supporting Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) targeting Israel, a first for American politicians, they must be maligned at every turn.

John Judis, in lower Manhattan, June 1, 2014

Philip Weiss

Philip Weiss is senior editor of and founded the site in 2005-06.

Other posts by .

Posted In:

96 Responses

  1. eljay on March 1, 2019, 11:41 am

    Ms. Omar says “I want to talk about the political influence in this country that says it is okay to push for allegiance to a foreign country.”

    Nothing to see here: American politicians (who routinely trip over themselves to show just how strong is their loyalty) and organizations like AIPAC do promote “no light between” loyalty to Israel.

    Nevertheless, Jonathan Chait deliberately and dishonestly distorts her words to fit his Zionist agenda:
    – first, he anti-Semitically “singles out” Jews; and, then,
    – he accuses her of accusing Jews of having dual-loyalty.


    • JWalters on March 1, 2019, 4:14 pm

      And those politicians recite EXACTLY the same bogus claims as their Zionist funders. Coincidence? It CANNOT be chance that they ALL make exactly the same factual errors. So there MUST be some other explanation.

      • Citizen on March 1, 2019, 11:56 pm

        Some of the biggest donors influencing our government’s policies don’t have dual loyalty. For example, Sheldon Adelson and Haim Saban are both on public record saying they only have one agenda: Israel. Maybe they should look up the word “treason”?

      • JWalters on March 3, 2019, 2:58 am

        Citizen, LOL! Excellent point.

    • annie on March 1, 2019, 10:36 pm

      chaits got jews on the mind. this is not about jews. if allegiance to a foreign country were only required of jews it would hardly make a dent of influence. oh no, allegiance to a foreign country is expected of EVERY politician and every single american. that’s what she talking about. check out this headline:

      Tackling anti-Semitism must be Labour’s number one issue, says Tom Watson

      #1 issue! this is for real. you’ve got brexit, health care, poverty, everything. and we all know this has nothing to do with antisemitism and everything to do with getting corbyn out because he supports palestine. because he wants to end weapons sales to israel. so the ENTIRE PARTY is being instructed to put the witch hunt first. and in the article he says straight up “I don’t think we can apologise enough for anti-Semitism”, which is true. corbyn could be apologizing 24/7 and it would never be enough. ever. imagine a newspaper with 99.5 percent of the content about anti semitism. that’s what they’d like labour to be about, even if people were starving in the streets. but as long as you love israel it doesn’t matter what you say.

      imagine if someone said this about the democratic party. that anti semitism should be its #1 issue. skip the green new deal, skip everything else, the muslim ban? so what. just skip it all and focus on anti semitism. this is what’s being suggested, from within the party, in the UK.

      • Keith on March 2, 2019, 11:22 am

        ANNIE- “corbyn could be apologizing 24/7 and it would never be enough. ever.”

        Yes, and he shouldn’t be apologizing at all. This is really about ongoing class warfare where bogus charges of anti-Semitism are being used to divert attention away from the effects of neoliberalism on the political economy. Tom Watson is a member of the notorious Labour Friends of Israel whose loyalty lies with Zionist fat-cats. What is truly shocking is how pathetically weak Corbyn appears to be. Stand by while Jewish Zionists throw your progressive friends under the bus and soon the bus will come for thee. This second string quarterback seems lost now that he is actually in the game.

      • JWalters on March 3, 2019, 2:59 am

        annie, good focus, sure looks like the end goal IS to have us all pledging allegiance to Israel.

      • JWalters on March 3, 2019, 3:08 am

        Keith, I agree it’s about economics at the bottom.

        I’m wondering, is it possible that Corbyn’s plan is to disarm the Zionist accusations with niceness to the point where the public sees all the Zionist accusations for the BS that it is? It’s infuriating to them that despite their withering attacks he’s not pledging allegiance to Israel.

      • JWalters on March 3, 2019, 3:27 am

        “I don’t think we can apologise enough for anti-Semitism”

        annie & Keith, I agree nothing will be enough for this gang. They have no intent whatsoever of engaging in discussion. It’s just war by another means. But I can imagine Corbyn referring to true anti-Semitism in that statement.

        But these bogus anti-Semitism accusations are also irrelevant. Regardless of whether some Jews had dual loyalty in the past, today there is a large amount of evidence that points quite directly to such a picture. At the very least, there is definitely enough to raise the question in a reasonably well-informed and thoughtful person. So there’s no need to assume anti-Semitism to explain why a person would contemplate that today.

      • pabelmont on March 3, 2019, 3:37 pm

        Yep, maybe OMAR and TLAIB can write up a short draft statute — saying that NO American shall be required by any government, business, or other entity to declare loyalty to any country outside the USA, and no American shall be required by any government, business, or other entity to refrain from criticizing any country outside the USA.

        Sort of reinforcing freedom of expression, doncha know.

      • hophmi on March 3, 2019, 8:14 pm

        As usual, Annie, you refuse to recognize that antisemitism is an actual problem. You’re a poster child for why there is no difference between anti-Zionism and antisemitism.

      • annie on March 3, 2019, 8:33 pm

        seems like events really kicked off over the weekend. elliot engels asked her to apologize again over what he thought were the dual loyalty charges and bret stephens put in his two cents worth (called her vile), everybody (who’s anybody in my book) came to her defense, eli clifton posted a quote from stephens saying every american citizen should consider their promise to safeguard israel (paraphrasing) and how was that not a demonstration of dual loyalty. beinart came to her defense, everybody stepped all over stephens in the thread and a tweet of w/nita lowey got thoroughly trashed. and about an hour after i sent her a tweet (don’t apologize!) , and i am sure that’s what did it, she started tweeting away and was a genuine twitter star all day wracking in thousands of rt’s and likes. what a day! check out her feed

        it feels like we’ve turned a corner!

      • Keith on March 4, 2019, 3:07 pm

        HOPHMI- “As usual, Annie, you refuse to recognize that antisemitism is an actual problem.”

        It is not a problem compared to other more serious problems. Violence against Jews as Jews is almost negligible. According to Haaretz, “Lethal attacks on U.S. Jews in their homeland have been very rare, with Saturday’s mass shooting in Pittsburgh more than doubling the total number of fatalities” Arguably, a more serious problem would be strong pro-Jewish and pro-Zionist bias resulting in Jews significantly over-represented in the elite strata of the political economy and in influencing imperial policy in the Middle East. And when it comes to shootings, it seems to me that we are seeing an unprecedented wave of mass shootings, particularly in our schools. This is a much more serious problem.

        As for Annie’s comment regarding Britain and Corbyn, the big problem there is the dishonorable use of charges of anti-Semitism to attack an icon of progressive policies, someone who could conceivably fight against neoliberalism, the bane of the 99%. So the Jewish Zionist elite are not attacking Corbyn because he thinks it is wrong to screw the 99% to benefit the 1%, that would not be realistic. Therefore, he is being attacked on bogus charges of anti-Semitism, as if Jews weren’t relatively safe and privileged in the UK. Unfortunately, Corbyn is weak and the richest, most powerful UK ethnicity will likely score a major victory for the 1%.

      • Talkback on March 4, 2019, 6:43 pm

        Mayhem: “As usual, Annie, you refuse to recognize that antisemitism is an actual problem. You’re a poster child for why there is no difference between anti-Zionism and antisemitism.”

        As usual, Mayhem, you refuse to recognize that Jewish Apartheid is a bigger problem.
        You’re a poster child for for conflating anti-Zionism and antisemitism. And Zionist bullying.

      • annie on March 4, 2019, 7:14 pm

        hey, i’ll be back to respond to this later. right now #IStandWithIlhan is trending in the US

        i urge everyone with twitter accounts to add your tweet of support. the tweets are literally flooding in: it’s a site to behold

      • annie on March 4, 2019, 7:34 pm

        Annie, you refuse to recognize that antisemitism is an actual problem

        ha! antisemitism is an actual problem. all better now? i didn’t think so. and it has absolutely nothing to do with the shitshow going on regarding Omar’s remarks. nothing!

        you don’t scare me hops. antisemitism is being used as a diversion, that should trouble you but unsurprisingly it doesn’t. there’s other stuff going on right now, try to keep up.

    • Misterioso on March 2, 2019, 10:44 am

      @eljay, et al

      As I’m sure you know, the question of “dual loyalties” regarding the U.S. and “Israel” has been under discussion for many years.

      Counterpunch, December 13, 2002

      “Bush’s Dual Loyalties”

      “Since the long-forgotten days when the State Department’s Middle East policy was run by a group of so-called Arabists, U.S. policy on Israel and the Arab world has increasingly become the purview of officials well known for tilting toward Israel. From the 1920s roughly to 1990, Arabists, who had a personal history and an educational background in the Arab world and were accused by supporters of Israel of being totally biased toward Arab interests, held sway at the State Department and, despite having limited power in the policymaking circles of any administration, helped maintain some semblance of U.S. balance by keeping policy from tipping over totally toward Israel. But Arabists have been steadily replaced by their exact opposites, what some observers are calling Israelists, and policymaking circles throughout government now no longer even make a pretense of exhibiting balance between Israeli and Arab, particularly Palestinian, interests.

      “In the Clinton administration, the three most senior State Department officials dealing with the Palestinian-Israeli peace process were all partisans of Israel to one degree or another. All had lived at least for brief periods in Israel and maintained ties with Israel while in office, occasionally vacationing there. One of these officials had worked both as a pro-Israel lobbyist and as director of a pro-Israel think tank in Washington before taking a position in the Clinton administration from which he helped make policy on Palestinian-Israeli issues. Another has headed the pro-Israel think tank since leaving government.

      “The link between active promoters of Israeli interests and policymaking circles is stronger by several orders of magnitude in the Bush administration, which is peppered with people who have long records of activism on behalf of Israel in the United States, of policy advocacy in Israel, and of promoting an agenda for Israel often at odds with existing U.S. policy. These people, who can fairly be called Israeli loyalists, are now at all levels of government, from desk officers at the Defense Department to the deputy secretary level at both State and Defense, as well as on the National Security Council staff and in the vice president’s office.

      “We still tiptoe around putting a name to this phenomenon. We write articles about the neo-conservatives’ agenda on U.S.-Israeli relations and imply that in the neo-con universe there is little light between the two countries. We talk openly about the Israeli bias in the U.S. media. We make wry jokes about Congress being ‘Israeli-occupied territory.’ Jason Vest in The Nation magazine reported forthrightly that some of the think tanks that hold sway over Bush administration thinking see no difference between U.S. and Israeli national security interests. But we never pronounce the particular words that best describe the real meaning of those observations and wry remarks. It’s time, however, that we say the words out loud and deal with what they really signify.

      “Dual loyalties. The issue we are dealing with in the Bush administration is dual loyalties-the double allegiance of those myriad officials at high and middle levels who cannot distinguish U.S. interests from Israeli interests, who baldly promote the supposed identity of interests between the United States and Israel, who spent their early careers giving policy advice to right-wing Israeli governments and now give the identical advice to a right-wing U.S. government, and who, one suspects, are so wrapped up in their concern for the fate of Israel that they honestly do not know whether their own passion about advancing the U.S. imperium is motivated primarily by America-first patriotism or is governed first and foremost by a desire to secure Israel’s safety and predominance in the Middle East through the advancement of the U.S. imperium.

      “’Dual loyalties’” has always been one of those red flags posted around the subject of Israel and the Arab-Israeli conflict, something that induces horrified gasps and rapid heartbeats because of its implication of Jewish disloyalty to the United States and the common assumption that anyone who would speak such a canard is ipso facto an anti-Semite. (We have a Jewish friend who is not bothered by the term in the least, who believes that U.S. and Israeli interests should be identical and sees it as perfectly natural for American Jews to feel as much loyalty to Israel as they do to the United States. But this is clearly not the usual reaction when the subject of dual loyalties arises.)

      “Although much has been written about the neo-cons who dot the Bush administration, the treatment of the their ties to Israel has generally been very gingerly. Although much has come to light recently about the fact that ridding Iraq both of its leader and of its weapons inventory has been on the neo-con agenda since long before there was a Bush administration, little has been said about the link between this goal and the neo-cons’ overriding desire to provide greater security for Israel. But an examination of the cast of characters in Bush administration policymaking circles reveals a startlingly pervasive network of pro-Israel activists, and an examination of the neo-cons’ voluminous written record shows that Israel comes up constantly as a neo-con reference point, always mentioned with the United States as the beneficiary of a recommended policy, always linked with the United States when national interests are at issue.”

      • just on March 2, 2019, 12:41 pm

        PNAC, FPI and on and on in various iterations and think tanks/media outlets… all marching for Israel and against the indigenous people of MENA. They also march against US citizens’ interests and national security.

        Kristol is still invited to his reserved grand poobah seat at the table. Kagan and Nuland are still very active. The Podhoretzes (Norman, John and Mommy Midge Decter) are still around protecting Israel first. There is not enough room to name all of them. I don’t need to mention the slanted coverage that we are all treated to in US & other western papers, magazines, radio, and teevee. How is it possible that during the massacres of Palestinians that only Israel’s stooges are put forward? When the majority of the UN stands with Palestine and Palestinians, the US runs away/quits and claims an anti- Israel bias and more. Others abstain like cowards.

      • JWalters on March 3, 2019, 5:36 pm

        Cicero had a similar complaint.

  2. US Citizen on March 1, 2019, 12:39 pm

    “Accusing Jews of “allegiance to a foreign country” is a historically classic way of delegitimizing their participation in the political system. ”

    But it’s ok when members of Congress and the MSM equate pro-Palestinian advocates and Muslims as siding with Iran or supporting Palestinian people a.k.a ‘terrorists’ who want to ‘wipe israel off the map’ as if such a thing were even possible in 2019. I’m so sick of these hypocrites and stand with Omar and Tlaib.

  3. JLewisDickerson on March 1, 2019, 1:29 pm

    RE: Ilhan Omar is charged with invoking ‘myth of dual loyalty’

    ■ Oscars Film Shows 1939 Nazi Rally at Madison Square Garden
    Inside Edition
    Published on Feb 14, 2019
    It’s an unlikely Oscar contender. Marshall Curry’s “A Night at the Garden” has been nominated for an Academy Award for Best Documentary Short. The film, entirely comprised of archival footage, shows a 1939 rally of American Nazis at New York City’s Madison Square Garden. The rally drew 20,000 people on the eve of World War II. “The lesson of the film,” Curry told, is that “we are vulnerable to leaders who will stir us up against each other.”

  4. Talkback on March 1, 2019, 3:17 pm

    “Accusing Jews of “allegiance to a foreign country” is a historically classic way of delegitimizing their participation in the political system.”

    Yes. But back then there was no “Jewish state” to allign with which isn’t even a “foreign” country to Jews who can easily acquire its citizenship.

    And no. Even Jews can be accused of dual loyality.

    • oldgeezer on March 2, 2019, 2:28 pm


      “But back then there was no “Jewish state” to allign with ”

      Back then there wasn’t a GoI whose members repeatedly call for solidarity and support in the media. There was no media making the same calls. There were no Jews deciding that other Jews were bad Jews or Jews in name only for having the temerity to support Palestinian rights or object to Israel.

      Anyone know why Israel forces people to drop other citizenships before taking a seat in the Knesset? Can you imagine the outrage if other countries did that and affected the zionists?

      It’s not dual loyalty. Israel is the priority. zionists are willing to undermine other nations rights to self determination but pushing their priority project. They undermine human and civil rights to enforce that on a public which is not in agreement with the actions or priorities of the state of insanity called Israel.

      Tropes and canards are not a defense against actual actions. Just as someone being Jewish is not sufficient grounds to accuse them of any single thing. Enough.

    • Jackdaw on March 3, 2019, 1:09 am

      @Talk the talk

      Before the ‘dual loyalty’ canard, there was the equally mendacious, ‘rootless, cosmopolitan Jew” canard.

      So the creation of the State of Israel has nothing to do with Jew hatred.
      The State of Israel is just another log to throw on the bonfire of anti-Semitism.

      Feel the heat?

      • Talkback on March 3, 2019, 9:27 am

        Jackdaw: “@Talk the talk”

        Ok, Jackass, so it’s tit for tat insults, again.

        Jackass: “Before the ‘dual loyalty’ canard, there was the equally mendacious, ‘rootless, cosmopolitan Jew” canard.”

        Jackass, Jews can have dual duality, too. Don’t be an antisemite.

        Jackass: “So the creation of the State of Israel has nothing to do with Jew hatred.”

        Antisemitism is always created by antisemites. But the Apartheid Junta creates hatred which isn’t even antisemitism. Like the US creates hatred all over the world.

        Jackass: “Feel the heat?”

        Do you suffer from encephalits Zionica?

  5. JWalters on March 1, 2019, 3:34 pm

    This article, with its MANY supporting statements by Jewish Americans, CONCLUSIVELY refutes the Zionist attacks on Omar about this issue. Thank you.

    These attacks are another Zionist Theater staged production featuring the Zionist cult choir. These choir members cannot possibly be unaware of the Jewish “Americans” who have spied for Israel, stolen America’s nuclear secrets and nuclear materials for Israel, character assassinated for Israel, lied for Israel, and bribed for Israel. The evidence is simply too overwhelming at this point.

    Mel Brooks could make a hilarious comedy about these absurd people, if they weren’t promoting the mass terrorism, murder, and robbery of innocent people. They all belong in prison.

  6. DaveS on March 1, 2019, 3:49 pm

    It seems to me that the only time a “dual loyalty” reference can be anti-Semitic is when it is leveled at an entire Jewish community. Accusing individuals who happen to be Jewish of loyalty to Israel can never be anti-Semitic. And as frequently pointed out, many boast of their devotion to Israel.

    A most grotesque manifestation of a genuinely racist dual loyalty accusation was the wholesale internment of Japanese-Americans during WWII. Forcing an entire population to suffer based on their ethnicity is evil, whether for Japanese-Ams, Jewish-Ams, or anyone else. But accusing individuals of doing bad things or criticism of their political opinions doesn’t signify any bigotry. The whole “dual loyalty canard” is BS designed to deflect.

  7. [email protected] on March 1, 2019, 6:16 pm

    It’s like Cinderella, If the shoe fits types analogy? And with some Jewish Americans, yes it does. But one does have to be careful. It is not unique to Jewish Americans. Some Irish Americans in my lifetime supported the IRA in a way where their Irishness was more important than their Americaness. And in the midwest, there were some German Americans in the upper plains who were more than happy at the changes that were going on in Germany in the 1930’s.

    One thing is clear to me. Support of Israel clearly is defined by support for an ideology an “ism”, Zionism. Support for Palestine isn’t an “ism” its an idea that pluralism and multicultural political expression needs to win out over any supremest ideology. For example, no one on here talks about Jewish babies as being a threat to civilization. So an accusation of dual loyalty can and often is appropriate especially if it calls for a rejection of the pluralistic and egalitarian presuppositions of the American experiment.
    Yes, I believe many Zionists have duel loyalty. But it is not a position that is unique to Jews and applies to anyone who would support a race based ideology anywhere.

  8. Boomer on March 1, 2019, 8:53 pm

    I commend your courage. This topic may well be the most powerful taboo, both for Jewish Americans and for non-Jews. But it isn’t limited to Jews. In today’s world, with an increasing number of immigrants from many other cultures, and with active campaigns (like Mr. Putin’s) to fragment and disrupt our society, it may well an issue of consequence. So long as a group is small and powerless, dual loyalty may pose no issue of public policy. But that isn’t the case today for Jewish Americans, and increasingly it isn’t true of many other groups as well.

    “Diversity” is honored as an unassailable virtue in our courts and universities. I haven’t seen much in the way of dispassionate analysis of whether, at some point, there are risks of Balkanization. I have seen and heard critics of immigration, of course, those who appeal to fear or animosity. They are rightly condemned. I’ve no brief for bigots and fascists. But it does seem that is room for informed discussion of such issues of group dynamics, social psychology, sociology and politics without descending to bigotry and hate.

  9. RoHa on March 1, 2019, 10:19 pm

    I have dual loyalty. I am a dual citizen of Australia and Britain, born in Britain, grew up in Australia, and I have lived for long periods in both countries.
    When living in Australia, my primary loyalty is to Australia. When living in Britain, my primary loyalty is to Britain.

    That is, I think, a reasonable and respectable position.

    Working from social contract theory, I think my primary loyalty should be to the community that sustains me and treats me as a full member. When in Australia, Australia sustains me and treats me as a full member. Britain does not sustain me, so my primary loyalty goes to Australia.

    When living in countries where I do not have citizenship (Sweden, Japan, the USA) I owe at least basic loyalty (obedience to the local law, not to act against the morally legitimate interests of the country) to the country, even though it might not be my primary loyalty. If my residence is to be very long-term, or permanent, then loyalty to that country should become my primary loyalty even without citizenship.

    So far, so good. Or goodish, at least.

    What does seem extraordinary is loyalty to a country (country X) in which one was not born, in which one does not have citizenship, and in which one has never resided.

    Even more extraordinary is making that one’s primary loyalty, so that one gives preference to the interests of that country over the morally legitimate interests of one’s country of birth, citizenship, and residence (country Y).

    What could be the moral justification for that?

    The only justifications I can see is are:

    (a) country Y oppresses the individual(s) concerned, or formal citizenship does not constitute full membership (do we know of a country where formal citizenship does not constitute full membership?) and country X offers relief from that oppression.

    (b) country Y is exceptionally morally corrupt, and country X is virtuous and acts against that moral corruption.

    As far as I can tell, neither of these considerations apply to justify the loyalty of American Jews to Israel.

  10. vanmet on March 1, 2019, 10:22 pm

    There’s an obvious “intimidation lexicon” trotted out for use in all these incidents. I venture to doubt that the honorable senator Rubio (apart from one of his aides) knows what a “canard” is or has ever used the word himself in his personal or professional life. We can probably credit Mr. Chait for his “hoary” myth. On the other hand there was an interesting moment recently when Bari Weiss, talking to Joe Rogan, referred to Tulsi Gabbard as an “Assad toady”; when Rogan asked what that meant, Weiss the NY Times journalist had to turn to an off-camera assistant, and within a couple of seconds a page from a dictionary appeared on screen–“sycophant” was then chosen as the best synonym in this case. When Rogan then asked how or why Gabbard should be described that way, Weiss again reflexively looked toward her assistant, while saying she didn’t have any particular evidence at hand, but that “everyone knew” Gabbard was an avid supporter of Assad.

    Such words send a signal that might be spelled out as something like: “Serious, thoughtful and informed people recognize that the public statements in question are beyond the pale. End of discussion.” That’s the point–to end discussion with a few shorthand references to a supposed consensus of right-thinking people. Fortunately it’s wearing very thin as an effective trick.

    • Citizen on March 2, 2019, 12:12 am

      Yes, I saw that Rogan podcast. Rogan should have followed up with, “What do you think she thought she could gain by toadying up to Assad?”

    • Marnie on March 2, 2019, 10:46 pm

      I watched Tulsi Gabbard on The View and was really impressed with her calm, thoughtful and knowledgeable response to questions that were at times not questions but accusations. WTF is wrong with people? There is no filter, just the ugliest noise full of lies and hatred, recklessly thrown into the atmosphere and polluting as many minds as possible. I hope the people who voted for Ms. Omar stand with her during her endless trial and tribulation by forces that are in place to distract, undermine and tear humanity apart.

      On a positive note, the world is being destroyed at a much faster pace than previously thought due to the actions of human beings.

      • Citizen on March 3, 2019, 10:38 am

        Yes, I saw how they ganged up on Tulsi on The View. Jimmy Dore dissected what they tried to do to her very well. Disgusting. Tulsi was clearly the commanding presence despite their boilerplate insults.

      • Marnie on March 3, 2019, 11:14 pm

        Just saw this yesterday –
        #Netanyahu #IsraelPalestine #TheJimmyDoreShow
        Israel Committed War Crimes Against Palestine Says UN

        Sorry, I don’t know what I’m not doing correctly to get the video.

  11. annie on March 1, 2019, 10:45 pm

    speaking of dual loyalty i am reminded of richard goldberg’s address to Ida Crown Jewish Academy, Class of 2011. currently goldberg is senior advisor at Foundation for Defense of Democracies and ex senior aid to senator mark kirk.

    Ten years ago, we watched the explosion of the second Intifida – we prayed for the safety of three Israeli soldiers kidnapped on the Lebanese border – and our parents trembled as we prepared to set out for Israel or college campuses to face unknown danger and persecution.

    Today, we prepare for a political tsunami in September with the potential to spur a third Intifada – we pray for the safety of an Israeli soldier kidnapped in Gaza – and I’m certain your parents are feeling the same trepidation that ours felt before them.

    This morning, I returned from a week-long Jewish Federation mission to Israel led by one of the greatest champions of the U.S.-Israel relationship in Washington, Senator Mark Kirk.

    Our focus was on the strategic relationship between the United States and Israel – and the range of threats now facing the Jewish state.

    After meetings with Prime Minister Netanyahu, Defense Minister Barak, IDF Chief of Staff Gantz and many others, I can tell you one thing for certain – Israel needs you now more than ever.


    Al tikra banaich ela bonaich. Do not call them your children, call them your builders. Take with you what you learned at the Academy – and together, build a life filled with Torah, chesed, yiddishkeit and an undying commitment to the safety and security of the State of Israel. You are the builders now – and, together, you will succeed.

  12. Katie Miranda on March 1, 2019, 11:17 pm

    let’s hear it for yappy chihuahuas in in Congress and elsewhere (Chelsea) defending Israel’s honor. 👏🐕👏🐕👏

  13. Citizen on March 1, 2019, 11:49 pm

    “Alterman:… I think that bin Laden and 9/11 were to some degree inspired by U.S. support of Israel. I think a great deal of the terrorist attacks and the sort of pool of potential terrorists who want to attack the United States are inspired by the United States support for Israel. I’m not saying we shouldn’t support Israel for that reason. I’m saying, Dammit if that’s the price we have to pay, then I’m willing to pay it. I’m just saying Let’s be honest about it.”

    Let’s be more honest: What price has he ever paid?

  14. RoHa on March 2, 2019, 1:29 am

    An interesting article here.

    The writer alleges that Rabbi Menachem Margolin, General Director of the European Jewish Association, has asked that Europeans revise their gun licensing laws “to allow designated people in the Jewish communities and institutions to own weapons for the essential protection of their communities.”

    The writer hints that the sight of armed Jews among disarmed Gentiles might just inspire a bit of anti-Semitism. His second to last paragraph is worth reading, regardless of one’s view on the specifics of gun control.

    No doubt it is anti-Semitic of me to refer to it.

    • Citizen on March 3, 2019, 8:37 am

      This paragraph:
      “I find myself torn these days between two lines of thought: a) that Jewish leaders, through their words and actions, deliberately stoke anti-Semitism in order to achieve certain objectives they see as beneficial; and, b) that Jewish leaders–blinded maybe by their sense of supremacy and chosenness–remain essentially oblivious to how they are perceived by others, making resultant rises in anti-Semitism simply the inevitable byproduct of their words and actions.”

      • RoHa on March 3, 2019, 10:00 pm

        I’m glad you were able to publish that, Citizen. I didn’t think I would be allowed to.

        (I’m not allowed to comment on Elliot Abrams’ statement, or connect it with Modern Hebrew.)

      • Citizen on March 4, 2019, 12:53 pm

        Do comment on Abrams’ statement–I bet it gets through.

  15. umm al-hamam on March 2, 2019, 1:48 am

    “Which is no surprise, given that the two Muslim women are Israel’s strongest critics in the Congress.”

    Not even true—they are targeted on account of being Muslims. The congresswoman from Ilhan Omar’s next-door district, Betty McCollum, has introduced bills seeking to restrict Israel’s use of American military aid & frequently speaks up about the imprisonment of Palestinian children. But she is largely ignored by these same critics because they can’t use her to imply something about Sharia Law, Muslims Dancing On 9/11 and so on—arguably even accusing a muslim person of antisemitism has become a dogwhistle for islamophobes of various stripes.

  16. Brewer on March 2, 2019, 2:28 am

    Fisk seems to be wiping the sleep out of his eyes. He’s had a couple of good articles lately. This is from January:
    Why American figures like Michelle Alexander are breaking their silence on Israel

  17. Ossinev on March 2, 2019, 6:43 am

    “Tackling anti-Semitism must be Labour’s number one issue, says Tom Watson”

    Yes and his latest wheeze is to ask that all complaints of “Anti – Semitism” be forwarded to him for” monitoring”.
    No doubt he would by rote forward the “complaint” to his HC liaison officer for evaluation and instructions on how to maximise the potential “A/S” benefit.
    After all as he himself says in the link you gave:
    “The only way we will rebuild trust with the British Jewish community is to deal with anti-Semitism as the number one issue in my party”
    Forget Brexit,crisis in our National Health Service , austerity cuts depriving the country of teahers , care workers and police officers these are minor issues compared to the rampant (sic) allegations of “anti – Semitism” in the Labour Party
    The man is a disgusting sewer rat and along with his fellow Zionised sewer rats I can only hope that he is deselected by his constituency party before the next UK election. He can then perhaps join with other deselected Labour “Friends of Israel” MP`s as a member of a newly formed UK Zionist Party
    For example:
    “Catherine McKinnell, Labour MP for Newcastle upon Tyne, told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme: “I, for one, have hugely welcomed Tom’s intervention in this.”
    Well she would woudn`t she being surprise surprise another leading “Friend of Israel” within the Labour Parliamentary group.

    • gamal on March 2, 2019, 7:42 am

      have you seen this Watson on lbc being questioned by a Jewish Labour party member, first time I’ve seen Watson, smug.

    • Bumblebye on March 2, 2019, 2:40 pm

      Ossinev, you are behind the times!
      Watson was forced to backtrack on that within 24hours – it broke multiple party rules as well as being potentially criminal. That’s why the very next day he was yapping on about antisemitism again and reporting Chris Williamson to the Chief Whip and Gen Sec.

      The day following *that*, Jennie Formby (General Secretary) sent him a letter copied to *all* Labour MPs and *all* Labour Lords detailing exactly what he had done wrong, with regard to party rules *and* the law.

  18. Ossinev on March 2, 2019, 9:19 am

    Thanks for the link. Brilliant. The caller absolutely nailed him . Scrolling down through the comments was enlightening .And the picture of Watson holding an Israeli flag with” Let`s be Clear ” Regurgitev sums up what he is – nothing less than an Israeli mole within the Labour Party actively working to undermine the party.. A petition has been started to get shot of him as Deputy Leader but with or without a petition his days are numbered.

    • gamal on March 2, 2019, 3:20 pm

      John Wight makes some observations about Watson, Mr Wight has been reading The Crucible so…

      “For what is Zionism if not racism, a species of white supremacy responsible for relegating the humanity of five million men, women and children of the illegally occupied West Bank and besieged Gaza Strip to that of latter day Helots?

      Adding to the mountain of intellectual and moral ordure erected in service to this miasma of untruth and base hypocrisy, are the findings of a UN investigation into the Palestinians killed and wounded by Israeli snipers during last year’s Great Return March in Gaza. According to the UN’s Santiago Canton, “Israeli soldiers committed violations of international human rights and humanitarian law. Some of those violations may constitute war crimes or crimes against humanity.”

      In diplomatic-speak, Mr Canton is here referencing the manner in which Israeli soldiers shot down dozens of unarmed Palestinians — among them children, medics and journalists — like deer in a forest, with some of those Israeli soldiers caught on tape laughing and celebrating their ‘kills’.

      It is to this monstrosity of an apartheid state Tom Watson and his friends are giving succour and sanction; and it this supremacist juggernaut of oppression we are expected to accept as compatible with left wing progressive values.

      There is nothing more grotesque than being lectured to about antisemitism, or any other form of racism, by apologists for a racist apartheid state. Yet this grotesquerie is precisely where we have arrived at in response to Corbyn’s unlikely elevation to the leadership of the Labour Party. His legacy as a staunch supporter of Palestinian human rights and self determination has been weaponised against him and his supporters by a pro-Israel lobby within and without the Labour Party, plumbing depths of indecency last witnessed during the era of McCarthyism across the Atlantic.”

  19. just on March 2, 2019, 11:56 am

    Wow, that Wisse is a certifiable Zionist neocon, Israel- firster, anti- Palestinian, and recruiter for the IOF and pro- Israel US media all rolled up into one. One wonders how she has time for her day job. Her loyalty to Israel is unquestionable. It’s a wonder that she has not moved there permanently, but I guess her stint in the US and Canada proved more fertile grounds for what she’s been planting and nurturing since her beginning. And then there is the despicable Ross and Abrams (among so many others). Ugh.

    Is there any doubt that US citizens (and citizens of other countries) who elect to serve in the IOF are exhibiting dual loyalty?

    “Palestinian minister: investigate foreign citizens serving in Israel’s army …

    The Palestinian government has urged foreign states with citizens serving in the Israeli military to investigate them for alleged war crimes committed during the current war in Gaza.

    Riad al-Malki, the Palestinian foreign minister, wrote to the governments of the UK, US, France, Australia, Canada, South Africa and five Latin American countries on Tuesday, reminding them that all states are obliged under international law to investigate alleged violations, including war crimes, committed by their nationals. Malki said that governments should warn their citizens that they could be liable for investigation and prosecution.

    Thousands of soldiers with dual nationality are conscripted into the Israel Defence Forces, while non-Israelis also volunteer under the IDF’s Mahal programme, which invites Jews from other countries to serve in combat and support roles for up to 18 months. The IDF did not respond to a request for figures.

    Malki’s letter, which was also sent to Ban Ki-moon, the UN secretary-general, sets out the requirements under international law for governments to investigate alleged violations over which they have jurisdiction, including the actions of their nationals. …”

    How many folks in US government and Congress hold Israeli citizenship? I know it’s hard to tell from the way that they vote, propose anti- Palestinian, pro- Israel, and anti- Constitutional legislation, and jump up and down for Netanyahu in Congress, @ the UN, and @ AIPAC./s

    It’s not a ‘myth’ at all.

  20. John Douglas on March 2, 2019, 12:00 pm

    What is the purpose of the Birthright program if not to get Jewish American teen and college students and embed in them the idea that Israel is their true homeland, in other words to, if not obliterate loyalty to their own country, at least create another loyalty.

    How many people who rail against the charge of dual loyalty have dual citizenship? How many loyalties do they have?

  21. Jasonius Maximus on March 2, 2019, 12:05 pm

    The attacks on Omar and Tlaib can be likened to the President Trump’s regular and ridiculous cries of “Witch hunt!” and “Hoax!” Their supposed dual loyalty “dog whistles” certainly have a lot of dogs barking.

    Heck! Tlaib tells Rubio and Manchin that… “They forgot what country they represent. This is the U.S. where boycotting is a right & part of our historical fight for freedom & equality”, and suddenly Rubio and The ADL are claiming that’ it’s an anti-Semitic dual loyalty canard? WTAF? Rubio is of Cuban decent and Manchin is of Italian decent!

    The two of them together wouldn’t be able to tell the difference between and Menorah and a pitchfork if their lives depended on it!

  22. Sulphurdunn on March 2, 2019, 2:06 pm

    “Outside the land of Israel, there can be no doubt that Jews, faithful to the covenant between God and Abraham, are to stand apart from the nation in which they live. It is the very nature of being Jewish to be apart–except in Israel–from the rest of the population…” Elliot Abrams

    Abrams should be doing time in federal prison for war crimes and treason. How does such a creature rise to a position of power in the United States, fall from grace, and then be resurrected to perpetuate the same crimes he was once convicted of?

  23. klm90046 on March 2, 2019, 3:28 pm

    Dual loyalty, dual loyalty, dual loyalty–that’s all I read. Fact is, the Jewish establishment in this country, the group that claims to speak for all American Jews, is not obsessed with this conflict of interest. It has complete, absolute, undivided loyalty to just one entity: That sliver of a state built on land forcibly taken from its original inhabitants.

  24. Jackdaw on March 3, 2019, 12:39 am

    One million Chinese Muslims are now in concentration camps, undergoing ‘re-education’.

    Is Ilhan Omar concerned? No.
    Is BDS calling for boycotts and sanctions against China? No

    Only Israel.

    What could be behind Omar’s animus against Israel, and Omar’s total indifference to oppression of Muslims worldwide? What could be behind Oma’s total total indifference to suffering minorities in her own Somali homeland?

    • eljay on March 3, 2019, 8:32 am

      || Jackdaw: … Is BDS calling for boycotts and sanctions against China? No

      Only Israel. … ||

      Once again, you are absolutely right: Calls for boycotts and sanctions against China or Iran or North Korea (among others) must include calls for boycotts and sanctions against Israel.

    • Citizen on March 3, 2019, 8:48 am

      Last time I looked the US was not gifting China endless billions of US tax dollars and immunizing it from accountability at the UN. No US leaders constantly declare there’s no sky between US and China.

      • just on March 3, 2019, 9:09 am

        Spot- on, Citizen!

      • Jackdaw on March 3, 2019, 10:52 am


        You’re right.

        The United States goods and services trade with China totaled an estimated $710.4 billion in 2017. Exports were $187.5 billion; imports were $522.9 billion. The U.S. goods and services trade deficit with China was $335.4 billion in 2017.

        So $335 billion left the United States and went to China.

        Are you going to boycott Chinese goods and services, or are you going to let a million Chinese Muslims languish in concentration camps?


    • Donald on March 3, 2019, 9:13 am

      Actually, Omar has been very critical of Saudi Arabia, so your accusation about total indifference to oppression of Muslims elsewhere is false.

      • Jackdaw on March 3, 2019, 10:53 am

        Critical to the extent of calling for an international economic boycott of Saudi oil?


        Only Israel.

      • eljay on March 3, 2019, 2:01 pm

        || Jackdaw: Critical to the extent of calling for an international economic boycott of Saudi oil?


        Only Israel. ||

        Are Zionists critical of Israel to the extent of calling for harsh economic sanctions, destabilization, military action and regime change?


        Only Iran.

        Jackdaw, you’re absolutely right to insist that Israel shouldn’t be “singled out” for special treatment and that whatever’s good for Iran (or Saudi Arabia or Venezuela or any other country) is good also for Israel.

      • Talkback on March 4, 2019, 6:36 pm

        Jackdaw: “Critical to the extent of calling for an international economic boycott of Saudi oil?


        Only Israel.”

        Yes, Jackdaw. We allready know that you would love to silence everybody who criticize your beloved Apartheid state by accusing them of antisemitism. Unfortunately this is all you can do to support Israel after its Hasbara collapsed. And if Israel goes fascist, why shouldn’t you become an opinion fascist, right?

    • Talkback on March 3, 2019, 9:18 am

      Jackdaw: “What could be behind Omar’s animus against Israel, and Omar’s total indifference to oppression of Muslims worldwide? What could be behind Oma’s total total indifference to suffering minorities in her own Somali homeland?”

      Why don’t you support the oppression of Nonjews worldwide?

    • Talkback on March 3, 2019, 10:04 am

      Jackdaw: “Is BDS calling for boycotts and sanctions against China? No

      Only Israel.”

      OMG. When it comes to the fabrication of antisemitism it simply doesn’t get more stupid than that, does it?

      BDS was created by Palestinians against Israel’s occupation and violation of international and human rights law. Why on earth would they call for boycott and sanctions against China??? China is neither occupying them, nor violating their international and human rights.

      I sincerely hope that you are not stupid enough to understand how stupid your comment is. It literally hurts anyone with an IQ >= 80.

    • umm al-hamam on March 4, 2019, 4:25 pm

      the idea that there are one million (or whatever the number the US State Dept is putting out now) Chinese Muslims in concentration camps is pure anticommunist propaganda, being spread mostly by media outlets owned by people like Jeff Bezos and Rupert Murdoch. Neither of whom are Jewish incidentally, but both of whom are barred from making additional profits off Chinese customers thanks to China’s socialist government, and who are extremely upset about this. Corporate interests + US foreign policy insiders have been pushing this line for ages in the hope that they can foment an actual rebellion in “East Turkestan” which would destabilise and lead to the balkanisation of China. This is also why far-right Uyghur paramilitary groups in Syria have received US funding, in the hope they will radicalise the rest of their community.

      Needless to say, there is no actual evidence of mass internment of Muslims or Uyghurs in Xinjiang & every source that says otherwise ends up citing the CIA or other Western intelligence agencies—or simply having no sources whatsoever. So Omar should no more call for boycotts and sanctions against China than she should call for boycotts and sanctions against, say, the Palestinian Authority on charges that it “funds terrorism” or whatever. (It doesn’t.)

  25. Brewer on March 3, 2019, 1:04 am

    Re the British scene, something to look forward to:

    • just on March 3, 2019, 8:50 am

      Super! It has implications all over the West, including the US. It should open more than a few eyes and conversations. It’s great that the title is “witchhunt”~ this is so obviously true wrt Corbyn, Jackie Walker, and Labour. Why do Netanyahu and Trump use it so often? Because they are cowardly liars. Thank you for the information, Brewer. May the ‘Lobby’, the media, and the Israeli sycophants be exposed for what they are.

      • gamal on March 3, 2019, 10:52 am

        ” It should open more than a few eyes and conversations”

        as should this record of the fight against ‘anti-israelism’

        “2005: ‘Luciana Berger, 23, who has been romantically linked with Tony Blair’s eldest son, was one of three leading NUS members who quit their posts last week’.

        The row: a university Palestinian society’s attempt to launch an academic boycott of Israel”

        Girlfriend of Euan Blair quits NUS in racism row

        “The row follows reports of growing conflict on some campuses, notably at the School of Oriental and African Studies, part of the University of London. Jewish students objected to the hosting of a conference last year, organised by the school’s Palestinian society, to launch an academic boycott of Israel. They objected to its title – “Resisting Israeli Apartheid: Strategies and Principles” – arguing it incited hatred.

        There was also a student union attempt to ban a speaker from the Israeli embassy in London addressing students, on the ground that it would contravene union policy which states that Zionism is racism”

        Pretty tawdry.

      • Brewer on March 3, 2019, 6:31 pm

        I look forward to watching this film if, for no other reason than the participation of Mark Thomas. If you haven’t come across this courageous and very funny guy before, take an hour to watch one of his shows:

  26. Jackdaw on March 3, 2019, 4:42 am

    I support Venezuela’s fight against tyranny, that doesn’t make me loyal to Venezuela.

    Many American Christians support Israel. Are they dual loyalists?

    It come down to one thing here at Mondoweiss, Jews.

    • eljay on March 3, 2019, 8:27 am

      || Jackdaw: I support Venezuela’s fight against tyranny, that doesn’t make me loyal to Venezuela. … ||

      You support Israel’s fight for tyranny. That makes you a hateful and immoral Zionist hypocrite.

      || … It come down to one thing here at Mondoweiss, Jews. ||

      It’s true: You Zionists are obsessed with anti-Semitically conflating Zionism and Israel with all Jews and all Jews with Zionism and Israel.

    • Citizen on March 3, 2019, 8:53 am

      You are confused. You grasp the wrong J-word. The accurate J-word at Mondoweiss is: Justice

    • Talkback on March 3, 2019, 9:37 am

      Jackdaw: “I support Venezuela’s fight against tyranny, …”

      Who doesn’t support Venezuela’s fight against US tyranny? But why don’t you support the Palestinian’s fight against Zionist tyranny?

      Jackdaw: “… that doesn’t make me loyal to Venezuela.”

      Do you even understand what dual loyality means? ROFL.

      Jackdaw: “Many American Christians support Israel. Are they dual loyalists?”

      You do understand that they could only be dual loyalists, if – in their case – they had (dual) Israeli citizenship, don’t you? They are Christians, not Jews.

      Jackdaw: “It come down to one thing here at Mondoweiss, Jews.”

      It could be also your stupidity.

      • Jackdaw on March 3, 2019, 10:46 am

        @Talk the talk

        Rep. Eliot Engel is an American citizen, not a dual citizen, so Rep. Omar must be mistaken in her insinuation that he has a dual loyalty.

        Who’s stupid?

      • Talkback on March 4, 2019, 6:32 pm

        Jackdaw: “Rep. Eliot Engel is an American citizen, not a dual citizen, …”

        But he is a not a Christian, but a Zionist Jew. So if anyone accuses him of dual loyality it means that he’s accused of being an Israeli firster and that he puts Israel’s national interest above US national interests.

        Jackdaw: “Who’s stupid?”

        Someone who continues to fail to understand the meaning of “dual loyality”.

    • pjdude on March 4, 2019, 3:32 am

      you do realize the main active support among christians in the us for israel is from evangelical protestants who just want the jews to be in israel so they can all die in the end times when the evangelicals get raptured. in other words Israel biggest most ardent supporters in the us do so out of anti semitism.

  27. just on March 3, 2019, 8:22 am

    “Anti-Muslim Signs Featuring Ilhan Omar at W. Va. Capitol Roil State, Draw Outrage …

    An anti-Muslim poster outside the West Virginia House of Delegates chamber falsely connecting a freshman congresswoman to the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks has drawn strong rebukes from local and national lawmakers, while causing the resignation of a Capitol staffer and the reported injury of another.

    The sign, which loomed over a table loaded with other Islamophobic flyers on a “WV GOP Day” at the legislature Friday, bore an image of the burning World Trade Center juxtaposed with a picture of U.S. Rep. Ilhan Omar, one of the first Muslim congresswomen ever elected.

    ‘Never forget’ — You said,” was written over the Twin Towers. On Omar’s picture, a caption read, “I am the proof you have forgotten.”

    “No wonder why I am on the “Hitlist” of a domestic terrorist and “Assassinate Ilhan Omar” is written on my local gas stations,” Omar, a Minnesota Democrat, wrote on Twitter as the images went viral. “Look no further, the GOP’s anti-Muslim display likening me to a terrorist rocks in state capitols and no one is condemning them!”

    On Saturday, the West Virginia’s Republican party condemned the appearance of the anti-Muslim flyers and posters.

    “Our party supports freedom of speech, but we do not endorse speech that advances intolerant and hateful views,” West Virginia Republican Party Chairwoman Melody Potter wrote in a statement, which added that they did not approve of the sign and had asked the exhibitor to remove it. No one acknowledged permitting the display.

    The group whose name appeared on a sign next to the display, ACT for America, has been designated as a hate group by the Southern Poverty Law Center. The organization, which describes itself as a national security advocacy group, issued a statement Saturday saying it was not behind the images.

    “Anyone who claimed to be with ACT for America was doing so without the permission and approval of ACT for America,” the statement read. “ACT has one million members and 45,000 activists and chapter leaders. It is impossible for our National headquarter for monitor the behavior of every single individual who claims to represent us.”

    Onlookers outside the House chambers Friday snapped photos of the poster and the additional literature.

    “Readin’, Writin’, And Jihadin, The Islamization of American Public Schools,” read one of the pamphlets. Another flyer warned of “The Four Stages of Islamic Conquest.”

    Many House delegates denounced the display just as the body convened. One lawmaker admitted to getting so mad that he kicked a House door open, which resulted in a doorkeeper being physically injured, according to the speaker of the House. Another delegate grew furious, saying he had heard a staffer make an anti-Muslim remark.

    “The sergeant of arms of this body, that represents the people of the state of West Virginia, said, ‘All Muslims are terrorists.’ That’s beyond shameful,” said Del. Michael Angelucci, a Democrat, his voice rising to a shout. “And that’s not freedom of speech. That’s hate speech, and it has no place in this house.”

    The sergeant of arms, Anne Lieberman, resigned later Friday. She has declined to comment after being reached by phone by The Associated Press.

    Republican House Speaker Roger Hanshaw questioned how things had gone so wrong.

    “We owe it to ourselves; we owe it our constituents; we owe it to the men and women and children and families that we represent to do better than we are,” Hanshaw told lawmakers.

    “We have allowed national level politics to become a cancer on our state, to become a cancer on our legislature, to invade our chamber in a way that frankly makes me ashamed,” Hanshaw said.”

    Included in this AP article is this tweet from S.E. Cupp:

    “I lived 9/11 and the hateful anti-Muslim-American rhetoric that followed. Exploiting our national tragedy in this way is bigoted, awful and indefensible. I’ve been critical of Rep. Omar, because her anti-Semitic rhetoric and policy support is inexcusable. But so is this.”

  28. Ossinev on March 3, 2019, 1:21 pm

    “Rep. Eliot Engel is an American citizen, not a dual citizen, so Rep. Omar must be mistaken in her insinuation that he has a dual loyalty”

    I take it you mean this Eliot Engel:
    “In January 2017, Engel introduced a House resolution condemning the UN Security Council Resolution 2334, which condemned Israeli settlement building in the occupied Palestinian territories as a violation of international law”

    I think that the only clear differences between him and the notorious Israel Firster Sheldon Adelson are:
    1) He is quite a few billions poorer
    2) To his credit he has ( not yet ) called for an Israeli ” style ” roof knocking scorpion eliminating nuclear bomb drop in the Iranian desert.
    3) Again to his credit he has not yet lamented the fact that he didn`t serve in a Foreign Country`s Army as opposed to that of his own country.
    4) He doesn`t (as yet ) sport an irritatingly gymnastic toupee.

    Both clear Israeli Firsters who haven`t (as yet) got round to “claiming” their ancient historic blah blah “right” to Israeli citizenship.

    In fact Jackanory ironically your argument underpins that of Rep Omar. One didn`t have to be a card carrying member of the Communist Party to be a closet supporter of Stalin`s USSR.

    Go back to rehearsing your ZioCentral scripts. PS You can get small teleprompters quite cheaply online nowadays. In fact Ziocentral would probably fund one if you ask them nicely.

  29. pabelmont on March 3, 2019, 3:02 pm

    A recent email, on a CLIMATE CHANGE list, introduced (to me) a new word for an old concept — “totschweigtaktik” meaning a deadly taktic of silencing opposition, denying media coverage to opposition, etc.

    Here, we see people who know full well that they are dual loyal (if they are loyal to USA at all, let it be noted or questioned) saying that opponents cannot refer to “dual loyalty”. They want it to be part of a private in-group conversation, within the tribe so to speak, but like Masonic secret passwords and handshakes, not to be shown in the wider world.

    Here we have a lot of quotes — enough in my opinion, sorry IMO — to establish the truth of the “dual loyalty” observation and to show that Tlaib and Omar are by no means the only (or the first) to mention it publicly.

    In the climate change arena, it turns out that there is (or so i is claimed) a “climate establishment”, big shots who wish to govern what can be said, and what must not be said, about the dangers of climate change and about reasonable or necessary work to be done to combat climate change while there is still, so to speak, “time”. And how sad that “climate establishment” folks, folks who get prizes and invited to speak, etc., wish to suppress new views and new data, at a critical moment when time is running out and all voices should be heard. (Probably some fossil-fuel money playing footsie with the “climate establishment”, or just folks who’ve made their reputation saying ONE THING not wanting to be contradicted, not wanting to lose reputation to the new guys on the block.

    Anyhow, hats off the Tlaib and Omar. And to everyone who tells it like it is — about Israel, about Palestine, and about the climate — where if not enough is done in the next 10 years it may be all over except the tears, rending of clothing, and moaning.

  30. hophmi on March 3, 2019, 8:15 pm

    It’s always incredibly amusing when red diaper babies accuse people of dual loyalty.

    • RoHa on March 4, 2019, 12:00 am

      I don’t know what you mean by “red diaper babies”, but it is just silly to see people demanding loyalty to Israel and denying their dual loyalty in almost the same breath.

    • pjdude on March 4, 2019, 3:34 am

      i sincerely doubt anybody claiming this was a member the the communist party.

    • Mooser on March 4, 2019, 11:26 am

      “I don’t know what you mean by “red diaper babies”…”

      “RoHa”, “red diaper babies” is an anti-semitic trope. It is used to allude to left or liberal Jews, usually by right-wing anti-semites.

    • Keith on March 4, 2019, 2:37 pm

      HOPHMI- “It’s always incredibly amusing when red diaper babies accuse people of dual loyalty.”

      You are amused when Jewish Marxists accuse Jewish Zionists of dual loyalty? Point taken. By the way, what color were your diapers, Hophmi? Good old Yankee brown?

    • Talkback on March 4, 2019, 6:49 pm

      Mayhem: “It’s always incredibly amusing when red diaper babies accuse people of dual loyalty.”

      That’s a very stupid comment.
      1.) A red diaper baby obviously doesn’t share the ideologies of its parents. Otherwise it wouldn’t be called that way.
      2.) It’s always amusing when Zionists argue on the base of kinship liability.
      3.) Since the term “red diaper babies” in a wider context means to be a child of radical parents I wonder which Israeli Jew ISN’T a red diaper baby.

  31. wondering jew on March 4, 2019, 3:16 am

    I am willing to discuss the issue of split loyalties without getting hysterical and accusing everyone who raises the topic of antisemitism. But I don’t think focusing on these split loyalties is of the essence. Of the essence would be a calculation of what an unbiased American Middle East policy would look like. What should be the goal of US policy in the region? Certain things might seem simple: Such as withdrawing aid to Israel would save the US taxpayers some dollars, but then again, how much money is the US ideally going to be spending on its defense department under this new thinking? If the US stops its Israel-centric policy who will be the new focus of US alliance in the region? I do not think that an alliance with Iran is a slam dunk, nor do I think that it is very natural (given the experience of 1979 to 1980). Maybe the US policy has been mistaken since 1954, but lacking a time machine no one has explained how a nuclear Iran is to the benefit of US policy. No one has explained how an Iran supported Hezbollah in Lebanon is to the benefit of US policy. Or how Assad backed up by Iranian forces in Syria is to the benefit of US policy. In fact my thinking regarding foreign policy might be limited. (I am not sure what the benefit of the overthrow of Maduro in Venezuela or alternately the acceptance of Maduro in Venezuela is to the benefit of US policy. ) In other words I think that explaining what US policy should be is a difficult chore, but it does not seem like pointing out the wrong headedness of US support for Israel should come first. First should come the explanation of what a right headed US policy would be and only then would the US be able to shift from wrong headed to right headed. But Ilhan Omar is focused on the perfidy of supporters of Israel rather than on convincing Americans of the general direction of a right policy. Maybe it is easier to yell “dual loyalty” rather than explain a new policy. Maybe it is easier to yell “dual loyalty” than it is to have a new policy, even without explaining it. There is nothing that indicates that Omar and Tlaib have a concept of what the new US policy should be. For example BDS. If BDS is successful then Israel Palestine might well devolve into a Lebanon like chaos. Is that really in the best interest of US policy? Is a strong Iran really in the best interest of US policy? These things are certainly unclear to me. Are they clear to Omar and Tlaib? Can they make it clear to the rest of us? It seems that they are not even trying. Instead they are trying to repeat the phrase “dual loyalty” and this is the replacement for a policy and the replacement for educating how we will arrive at this new policy. Omar seems focused on attacking Israel and Israel supporters and not on what the new policy should be. This seems like demagoguery rather than sensibility. Walt and Mearsheimer at least seemed to conceive of an Israel that would still be a part of the US foreign policy, but with the Palestinians given a stake in statehood, that problem would no longer serve to exacerbate the enmity of the region. That at least makes some sense, although the peacefulness of a Palestine next door to Israel is no sure thing, at least this seems to be a policy aimed at what is best for the US. But have Omar and Tlaib enunciated what their new Middle East would look like? I say they haven’t, but instead they are merely concentrating on the rabble rousing of the “dual loyalty” attack. If we don’t know where we want to head, this attack on Israel and Israel supporters is only an attack without an attempt to recalibrate. I would think that a clear explanation of what a New Middle East would look like and an attempt to galvanize support for such a New Middle East would be the way to go. I think that merely advocating chaos, which is the upshot of the lack of a new policy is not advocating for the United States, but merely advocating for chaos. And this is destructive rather than constructive. (Loyalty to chaos is certainly no great innovation and should certainly not be confused with loyalty to the US.)

    • Mooser on March 4, 2019, 11:31 am

      ” But I don’t think focusing on these split loyalties is of the essence” “WJ”

      Very true, “Yonah”. what is “of the essence” are the crimes, the violation of US law and policy, connected with supporting Zionism by US citizens. Illegal transfer of funds, supporting illegal enterprises, avoiding all kinds rules and regulations.

    • RoHa on March 5, 2019, 2:13 am

      “I do not think that an alliance with Iran is a slam dunk, ”

      An alliance isn’t necessary. Simply normal relations will do.

      “no one has explained how a nuclear Iran is to the benefit of US policy.”

      Since there is no prospect of a nuclear Iran, no explanation is necessary.

      “No one has explained how an Iran supported Hezbollah in Lebanon is to the benefit of US policy. Or how Assad backed up by Iranian forces in Syria is to the benefit of US policy.”

      Neither of these are detrimental to the US. The US objects to these because Israel demands it.

      “First should come the explanation of what a right headed US policy would be and only then would the US be able to shift from wrong headed to right headed.”

      When you know what you are doing is wrong, the first move is to stop. Then you can try working out what to do right. But first the US has to be convinced that what it is doing is wrong.

  32. Ossinev on March 4, 2019, 7:52 am

    Thanks for the info – had missed that. Have done some research however and have found no evidence of him backing down.
    Have found this however:
    “But in his response, Mr Watson said he had no intention of backing down.

    He said: “The constant concern of those complaining about anti-semitism in our party is that there is no transparency about the process. This opacity and the delay in processing complaints has led to a complete loss of trust. Too often those who have suffered antisemitic abuse have not heard anything about the outcome of their complaint.

    “It is my responsibility as deputy leader of the Labour party to ensure people have confidence in our complaints system and our ability to deal transparently with the scourge of anti-semitism. I will continue to do everything I can to achieve that.”

    He also seems to be cosying up to backers of the TIG group = the Labour and Tory Defectors who have set set up their own “independent ” LOL group so he may be preparing to jump ship before he is pushed.

    Loathsome individual.Extreme good riddance in due course.

    • Bumblebye on March 4, 2019, 2:50 pm

      The “transparency” and “opacity” issues are probably something to do with not knowing the names of most of the accused. Those that have a public profile have been hounded and vilified (like Jackie or Tony Greenstein). Jennie GenSec has fully explained the process to MPs, how they’ve been sped up, etc, at the NEC panel stage, how many are due to go before the NCC. The whining is because they can’t let their attack dogs destroy people’s lives on the basis of accusation only imo.
      And Watson has backed down – he’s not gonna put his scam into practice due to legal issues. He’s just not gonna shut up about it.

Leave a Reply