Connect with us

Democrats

Rashida Tlaib gets a ‘calming feeling’ whenever she thinks of the Holocaust

Published

on

Rashida Tlaib gets a 'calming feeling' whenever she thinks of the Holocaust

There are times when something a politician reportedly says is so shocking, one has to assume it was taken out of context. This happens regularly to politicians and it usually turns out all the fuss was over nothing. In the case of Representative Rashida Tlaib’s comments today regarding the Holocaust, there is no context in which her sentiment could be made to seem anything other than what it was: a blatant anti-Semitic attack veiled behind colorful epithets that expressed her feelings about the Jews while pretending it was no big deal.

It was a very big deal.

Here’s the statement that has those opposed to anti-Semitic bigotry up in arms (emphasis ours):

“There’s always kind of a calming feeling I tell folks when I think of the Holocaust, and the tragedy of the Holocaust, and the fact that it was my ancestors — Palestinians — who lost their land and some lost their lives, their livelihood, their human dignity, their existence in many ways, have been wiped out, and some people’s passports. And just all of it was in the name of trying to create a safe haven for Jews, post-the Holocaust, post-the tragedy and the horrific persecution of Jews across the world at that time. And I love the fact that it was my ancestors that provided that, right, in many ways. But they did it in a way that took their human dignity away and it was forced on them.”

Here’s the thing. Under no circumstance should someone get a calming feeling when thinking about the Holocaust. Following that statement up by mentioning briefly about the horrific persecution of the Jews does nothing to remove the overarching sentiment in the whole statement, the blatant anti-Semitism associated with her calming feeling, or the categorically false claim that her ancestors helped provide them safe haven.

Philip Klein at the Washington Examiner did an excellent job of breaking down the historical fallacies she was somehow able to squeeze into such a short statement:

  • The Jewish presence in the area currently known as Israel dates back thousands of years, and the modern migration of Jews back there pre-dated the Holocaust by many decades, starting with the migration of Jews from Yemen in 1881.
  • With the Balfour Declaration of 1917, the British government supported the establishment of a Jewish state in the area, an idea rejected by Arabs.
  • In 1937, the British Peel Commission proposed a two-state solution to Jews and Arabs, which the Arabs once again rejected because they could not accept any Jewish presence in the region.
  • During World War II, the Palestinian leader at the time, the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem Muhammad Amin al-Husayni, met with Adolf Hitler and allied with the Nazis. As the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum recounts, “al-Husayni collaborated with the German and Italian governments by broadcasting pro-Axis, anti-British, and anti-Jewish propaganda via radio to the Arab world; inciting violence against Jews and the British authorities in the Middle East; and recruiting young men of Islamic faith for service in German military, Waffen-SS , and auxiliary units. In turn, the Germans and the Italians used al-Husayni as a tool to inspire support and collaboration among Muslim residents of regions under Axis control and to incite anti-Allied violence and rebellion among Muslims residing beyond the reach of German arms.”
  • After World War II, when the Jewish people declared the state of Israel, their official proclamation said, “We appeal – in the very midst of the onslaught launched against us now for months – to the Arab inhabitants of the State of Israel to preserve peace and participate in the upbuilding of the State on the basis of full and equal citizenship and due representation in all its provisional and permanent institutions.” Instead of choosing to live peacefully, however, Arab leaders encouraged Arabs to flee Israel, and the next day, the young nation was invaded by Egypt, Syria, Jordan, Lebanon, and Iraq.
  • The terrorist group the Palestine Liberation Organization was founded in 1964, three years before Israel occupied the West Bank in the Six Day War, territories that we’re now led to believe is at the heart of the conflict.

If this statement were isolated, one might argue she was just being insensitive. But her short history on Capitol Hill combined with her long history before joining the House of Representatives betrays the reality of her feelings. She’s opposed to the nation of Israel and has a major problem with the Jewish people. Her Islamic roots have bled into her political style and fomented her core feelings into nearly everything she says and does in Washington DC.

Only a true bigot gets a calming feeling from the Holocaust. But this is part of the normalization of anti-Semitism within the Democratic Party. As some rush to defend her, they reveal their own internal hatred towards the Jews.

Update: Tlaib responded to the criticism. Our EIC had a snarky reaction to it.

Advertisement
Click to comment

Democrats

The 1st Democratic debate was worse than expected, which is saying a lot

Published

on

The 1st Democratic debate was worse than expected which is saying a lot

If you were going into the 1st Democratic candidates debate with hopes of seeing pandering, high-dollar policy proposals, pandering, cringeworthy attempts to generate memes, questions answered in Spanish, unhinged notions on sexuality, cheerleaders in the media, and pandering, you got it.

In lieu of highlighting the gaffes, attempts at soundbites, and uncomfortable moments, it’s better to leave it to Twitter hot takes to do the job. Presented in no particular order:

One of the biggest reasons this was so bad is because they did everything they could to one-up one another. I know that’s what’s supposed to happen in debates, but there was a strange feeling that so many of them were saying the exact same thing while contradicting one another. I’m not really sure how they were able to pull it off.

But the part for me that raised an eyebrow was Julian Castro’s invocation of “Reproductive Justice.” He wants to give equal rights to abortion for transgender women. He’s ahead of the curve on this one; medical science hasn’t advanced to make that even possible, yet.

It’s been said already many times, but it’s worth repeating. President Trump won tonight’s debate. He came out looking like someone with solid policies compared to the unhinged “solutions” being proposed by these Democratic candidates.

We are currently forming the American Conservative Movement. If you are interested in learning more, we will be sending out information in a few weeks.

American Conservative Movement

Continue Reading

Democrats

What is the source of the Democrats’ obstruction strategy?

Published

on

What is the source of the Democrats obstruction strategy

The evolution of the Mueller investigation and the overall Russian collusion hoax has been an interesting one to watch, especially for those of us who have a long enough memory to note this was supposed to be about the Trump campaign colluding with foreign entities to “steal” the 2016 election. That was the storyline for nearly two years, but since the release of the Mueller report, which indicated no collusion at all, the talking points of the Democrats have been 100% focused on obstruction.

Keep in mind, this was never supposed to be an obstruction investigation. That notion is, by its very nature, a separate occurrence that’s usually associated with wrongdoing to begin with, otherwise what was being obstructed? If there was no collusion, and the obstruction that was allegedly committed was supposed to stop the investigation into the collusion, then the only thing being obstructed was a bogus investigation. That doesn’t make obstruction right; even bogus investigations need to be allowed to reach their conclusion. But it’s a far cry from the narrative being pushed out by the Democrats, one which begs the question and relies on circular reasoning.

But that’s not being looked into by many, other than The Epoch Times.

This excellent video by Declassified’s Gina Shakespeare details a media investigation into the investigators that cuts to the heart of the matter. There was no collusion and any obstruction had to be manufactured. But the left continues to push it.

We are currently forming the American Conservative Movement. If you are interested in learning more, we will be sending out information in a few weeks.

American Conservative Movement

Continue Reading

Conservatism

Democrats are fighting enforcement of immigration laws for a more dangerous reason than you realize

Published

on

Democrats are fighting enforcement of immigration laws for a more dangerous reason than you realize

Immigration reform on multiple fronts is needed today, but not nearly as much as enforcement of current laws already on the books. But enforcement is becoming increasingly difficult as Democrats use every legislative roadblock they can muster to hamper ICE and keep border patrol under-resourced. Their motives are disingenuous; they claim to care for the migrants while doing everything they can to prevent them from receiving the help they need.

If we enforce current laws while working to improve them, the crisis at our southern border can be relieved a great deal. It’s not the full solution, but it would go a long way to stopping the massive migrant flow. As I noted on Twitter:

If you ask any conservative pundit, armchair politician, or keyboard warrior on social media why Democrats are obstructing enforcement of current immigration law, you’ll get a lot of correct (and some incorrect) replies. They’ll say Democrats want open borders, which is true. They’ll say they’re appealing to the Hispanic community for votes, which is true. They’ll even say they don’t care about America, which is partially true.

But there’s a bigger and much more dangerous reason I rarely hear, even from pundits. Unfortunately, conservatives are pragmatic in that we normally face the problems at hand. Progressives have an advantage over us from a strategy-perspective because they think in terms of decades instead of years. This is why they’ve been able to take control of the two primary information-providing industries in America: mainstream media and higher education. We’ve done a piss-poor job over the decades planting the right people in the right places. Progressives have been working on subverting 2020 since before Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez was born.

It’s important to note a distinction before I return to the topic at hand. I’m not suggesting Democratic politicians think ahead. They can’t think beyond the next cocktail hour. But the various leaders of the radical progressive movements have been working to subvert our nation since the 1960s or earlier. They’ve done so in a coordinated fashion, one that acted to benefit them at the time while clearly setting up a path for deeper radicalization in the future.

Today is the future they’ve planned for, one in which socialism is becoming more popular and truth is heading towards extinction.

The real danger in the actions of today’s Democrats as it pertains to the border is the normalization of “immigrant” to refer to anyone from a foreign land regardless of legal status. This is why they cry about detention centers but fight against giving them the funding they need. It’s why they refer to anyone opposed to illegal immigration, including legal immigrants like me, as racists. They are using a technique known as jamming to insert their ideology through terminology repeated to the masses and invading the collective consciousness.

Conservatives must do everything we can to reverse the course being set by radical progressives through their pawns in the Democratic Party. “Immigrants” are legal immigrants, period. “Illegal aliens” are people from foreign lands who have breached our borders, circumvented our immigration laws, and/or taken advantage of loopholes to enter and remain in this country illegally. These are not a unified body of people. There are clear distinctions between someone like me, who was born in another country and went through the process of entering the United States and becoming an American citizen legally, and those who choose to break our laws so they can garner the fruits of being in America.

The American Conservative Movement is forming to do many things, including nominating conservative candidates to defeat “RINOs,” helping conservatives win in elections for offices currently held by Democrats, and educating the people about dangerous policies like Medicare-for-All as well as ideologies like socialism. But we cannot simply sit back and try to fight fire with fire when it comes to combating many of the techniques utilized by progressives. As they use jamming to change the way Americans think about “immigrants” in general, we can’t just sit back and say, “that’s not true.” We have to demonstrate our message is correct by offering clear and concise reasons the progressives’ message is wrong.

Having the truth on our side is a start, but it’s not enough if the post-truth society the progressives are building is allowed to go unchecked. We must fight smarter and harder. This is why the conservative movement must grow. Will you help?

We are currently forming the American Conservative Movement. If you are interested in learning more, we will be sending out information in a few weeks.

American Conservative Movement

Continue Reading

Facebook

Trending