UK condemns Trump’s racist tweets in unprecedented attack against US congresswomen - Page 23 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Talk about what you've seen in the news today.

Moderator: PoFo Today's News Mods

#15021465
blackjack21 wrote:I'm not avoiding the question. I was the first person on PoFo to champion AOC winning her primary. I knew what it would lead to. I'm not trying to shut these people up. Like Trump, I want them to be the face of the Democratic Party.

Actually, I think President Trump is trying to make them one face of the Democrat Party. Looks like another win for him.
#15021477
blackjack21 wrote:I don't find debates or demands intimidating. Put a gun in my face, and then I will feel intimidated.


You do find SpecialOlympian's satire intimidating enough to call for its censoring.

blackjack21 wrote:Racism is also about not agreeing with the Democratic party in the United States. It's not a meaningful term in the vernacular sense anymore.


Trump's tweet is racist in the meaningful sense of the term. It attacked these congresswomen on their ethnic-origins.

blackjack21 wrote:I'm not avoiding the question. I was the first person on PoFo to champion AOC winning her primary. I knew what it would lead to. I'm not trying to shut these people up. Like Trump, I want them to be the face of the Democratic Party. I'm repeating the fact that she's used what others call antisemitic tropes and they are calling her racist. I do not want her to stop doing that. I would like her to continue.
I claimed it was racist? Omar was certainly accused by Jewish Democrats of using antisemitic tropes. I don't care if she does that, because it causes problems for the establishment.


Yes you did:

blackjack21 wrote:Omar plays the PC game of apologizing and removing tweets to avoid censure, but then makes inflammatory statements weeks later. Ilhan Omar Doubles Down on Antisemitic Slur: No ‘Allegiance’ to Israel. She says American Jews have allegiance to Israel. Again, she's focusing on a particular American ethnicity.


But what you wrote about Omar was simply not true, she did not say that about American Jews and she did not focus on a particular American ethnicity as you falsely claimed. You just made that up so that you can accuse her for the same "racism" that you are excusing Trump for. Trump singled out these congresswomen based on their ethnicity.

blackjack21 wrote:I don't think I've done that either. I view the US-Saudi relationship in strategic/pragmatic terms.


Your fragility is preventing you from talking straight. I did not say that you did. I asked you if you would consider the criticism of the US-Saudi relationship as racist, the same way that you consider Omar's criticism of the US-Israeli relationship as racist.
#15021485
If we're being pragmatic, Israel is still important to American Jewish voters, whether we classify attacking it as racist or not. I also read that Ilhan Omar had a 9% approval rating among swing voters. She's basically an asset to the American right at this point.

Regarsing China and East Asia in general re: racism. What if I told you that racism, especially in its more recent expanding definitions, is a western concept?
#15021500
Hong Wu wrote:Regarsing China and East Asia in general re: racism. What if I told you that racism, especially in its more recent expanding definitions, is a western concept?


I seem to remember the concept going back to the Carthage Empire. You reactionaries know NOTHING about history, you just have a version of it to use as an ideological club!

Western political though in its foundations is from the Ancient Period remember! From Carthage to Ancient Athens to the Roman Empire, etc. These are not NEW concepts, they are all based on political formative events & thinking in Europe & North Africa before Jesus Christ was born!
#15021534
noemon wrote:You do find SpecialOlympian's satire intimidating enough to call for its censoring.

I was pointing out your seeming double standards. I live in the United States, which is majority white and where there are more private firearms than people.

noemon wrote:Trump's tweet is racist in the meaningful sense of the term.

The meaningful sense of the term involves preventing people from voting, manufacturing false charges, subjecting people to unfair trials, denying people access to housing and financing, segregation of restrooms, lunch counters, public transportation, public employee workspaces, the military and anything else of historical significance. What you are highlighting is the professional whining of today's political left.

noemon wrote:But what you wrote about Omar was simply not true

I was citing an article. Do you think the article is not true? Here's another one for you from Breitbart. Pollak: Why What Ilhan Omar Said About Jews, Israel, and Congress Was So Wrong

The Ilhan Omar anti-Semitism controversy, explained
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 said as part of a discussion about past anti-Semitism allegations lobbed at her.

In full context, Omar doesn’t explicitly identify who or what this “political influence” is coming from other than the pro-Israel lobbying community in general. But given her previous comments, the latest remarks struck many observers as playing into well-worn anti-Semitic tropes about Jewish attachments to Israel making them disloyal to the United States. Some were no longer inclined to give her the benefit of the doubt. On Monday, House Democrats unveiled plans to vote on a resolution condemning anti-Semitism that reads as a clear rebuke of Omar personally, criticizing the “insidious, bigoted history” of “accusations of dual loyalty.”

Again, I'm not the one accusing Ilhan Omar. I'm pointing out that others are doing that and echoing how they substantiate their claims.

noemon wrote:You just made that up so that you can accuse her for the same "racism" that you are excusing Trump for.

I support her making these statements. I think political correctness is bullshit. So I want to see the Democrats refuse to condemn Omar while condemning Trump. Incidently, I said she makes "inflammatory statements," just like Trump does. I didn't say they were racist. I did note that others say they are racist. As for me, I don't care because I'm not a big fan of the ridiculous "anti-racism" campaign of today's establishment.

Hong Wu wrote:If we're being pragmatic, Israel is still important to American Jewish voters, whether we classify attacking it as racist or not. I also read that Ilhan Omar had a 9% approval rating among swing voters. She's basically an asset to the American right at this point.

Obviously, noemon has no idea why Omar is promoted in right wing media. If right wingers said the same things she says, they would be condemned. That's why David Duke gave Ilhan Omar a thumbs up for her comments. Democrats were quick to point out when David Duke endorsed Trump. They seem to be having a hard time with David Duke's support of Ilhan Omar.

Hong Wu wrote:What if I told you that racism, especially in its more recent expanding definitions, is a western concept?

I completely agree.

redcarpet wrote:I seem to remember the concept going back to the Carthage Empire.

So would you like to elaborate on the Berbers and Phoenicians of antiquity?
#15021546
blackjack21 wrote:I was pointing out your seeming double standards. I live in the United States, which is majority white and where there are more private firearms than people.


You are confused. It is your double-standards that have been pointed out.

noemon wrote:You 're okay with that[Trump's racist intimidation of the congresswomen] because it is not intimidating you, if it was intimidating to you then you would not be ok with that as you have proven time and again.


blackjack21 wrote:I don't find debates or demands intimidating. Put a gun in my face, and then I will feel intimidated.


noemon wrote:You do find SpecialOlympian's satire intimidating enough to call for its censoring.


If you are looking for yet another demonstration as to how satire by white people against white people is not racism, sure knock yourself out.

blackjack21 wrote:The meaningful sense of the term involves preventing people from voting, manufacturing false charges, subjecting people to unfair trials, denying people access to housing and financing, segregation of restrooms, lunch counters, public transportation, public employee workspaces, the military and anything else of historical significance. What you are highlighting is the professional whining of today's political left.


I see you are in the rambling stage at this point. Your rambling is non-sensical. Trump's tweet is racist in the meaningful sense of the term because it attacks the congresswomen on their ethnic origins.

blackjack21 wrote:I was citing an article


Your denial is boring. You made the following statements:

blackjack21 wrote:Omar plays the PC game of apologizing and removing tweets to avoid censure, but then makes inflammatory statements weeks later. Ilhan Omar Doubles Down on Antisemitic Slur: No ‘Allegiance’ to Israel. She says American Jews have allegiance to Israel. Again, she's focusing on a particular American ethnicity.


And what you wrote about Omar was simply not true, she did not say that about American Jews and she did not focus on a particular American ethnicity as you falsely claimed. You just made that up so that you can accuse her for the same "racism" that you are excusing Trump for. Trump singled out these congresswomen based on their ethnicity. Omar did not single anyone out based on their ethnicity. Your double-standards are once again transparent.

blackjack21 wrote:I'm pointing out that others are doing that and echoing how they substantiate their claims.


That was not echoing, that was you articulating those arguments.

blackjack21 wrote:As for me, I don't care because I'm not a big fan of the ridiculous "anti-racism" campaign of today's establishment.


You only care when the people you support are accused but are quick on the trigger when it comes to others. You are not convincing at all and you fail to comprehend the very simple matter of fact. Omar did not attack anyone based on their ethnicity. Trump did and that cannot be discounted unless one is a racist of course and is all about discounting real racism.
#15021793
noemon wrote:This is very twisted priorities. You are accusing an author from the 1960's for prejudice for calling those who make racist comments as "smug and fat and entrenched in their affluent inertia" but at the same time you are trying to excuse those who make the actual racist comments as not really prejudiced. :?: The excuse of "I'm just using your logic" does not really cut it because if you were using that logic you would have already unequivocally called Trump's comments what they are.

My reply was directed at redcarpet, and under normal circumstances I wouldn't be fussed by a generalisation like this at all. Pronouncements like this, even about all Americans, are extremely common anyway and people should be able to keep perspective and deal with it.

noemon wrote:As long as someone is basing his remarks on demonstrated actions or beliefs, then it can hardly be called prejudice. From our very own Forum Rules.

I happy to look at the demonstrations that the people in question are "smug and fat and entrenched in their affluent inertia". I suspect that they are hardly predominantly affluent in an American context.

Rugoz wrote:I think the video makes it clear that essentialism flies in the face of postmodernism, hence calling identity politics "applied postmodernism" is wrong or misleading at best.

Contradictions tend to happen to political ideologies when they are used for popular consumption, and I think it's actually quite apt to view "applied postmodernism" as political activism disguised as scholarship. I'm not hung up about the terminology though as long as we acknowledge that they are an outgrowth of postmodernism, however vulgar it might be. Maybe we can call them post-postmodernists.
#15021837
Godstud wrote:More racist shit from Trump. of course, the Pofo Racists will dismiss it.

All but one of the references to "infested" by Trump are in the form of "crime infested" which is not an uncommon phrase. The guy clearly gets himself into a state and maybe he's prone to that in which case I do feel for him being upset. On the other hand, a normal person wouldn't tear up so easily in which case this should be regarded as a performance. In any case, there was a time when something like this would not have been paraded around to evoke superficial compassion and tribal instincts but would have been an embarrassment. Composure when watched by millions of people used to be a desirable trait.

Moreover, I can only imagine the laughter and derision or deliberate indifference from the left if a right winger ever started tearing up over harsh words or an insult.
#15021842
noemon wrote:It is your double-standards that have been pointed out.

I don't consider either Omar or Trump's statements to be particularly racist. I think they are both inflammatory. That is, I think they have both learned that there is utility in transgressing political correctness. You see a double standard, because I prefer one of them to the other. In principle, however, I think they are doing the same thing--and, I agree with them for doing it.

noemon wrote:I see you are in the rambling stage at this point. Your rambling is non-sensical.

Maybe that's nonsensical in the UK or in Greece. In the US, that's the historical legacy of racism. Tweeting something is relatively new. Tweets don't silence people. Sometimes the management at Twitter censors people it doesn't agree with politically. However, racism has real and historical meaning in the US, such as segregated schooling. Abstract definitions of what constitutes racism may be very compelling to you. To many people, it is just a semantic engine for generating outrage.

noemon wrote:And what you wrote about Omar was simply not true, she did not say that about American Jews and she did not focus on a particular American ethnicity as you falsely claimed. You just made that up so that you can accuse her for the same "racism" that you are excusing Trump for.

I didn't accuse Omar of racism, but of making inflammatory remarks. I interpret her remark "all about the benjamins" to be about Jews, because when she was pressed for clarification, she mentioned AIPAC. She's doing the same thing Trump is doing, and I applaud her for doing that just as I applaud Trump for doing that. I don't think her remarks are particularly racist, but they are politically incorrect.

noemon wrote:Trump singled out these congresswomen based on their ethnicity.

You keep repeating that. Apparently, it is very upsetting for you. Has it occurred to you that not everyone else finds it upsetting?

noemon wrote:Omar did not single anyone out based on their ethnicity.

That's your interpretation. Her remark was directly in response to questions about her being antisemitic. Who do you think she was talking about other than Jewish Americans with Israeli citizenship? Rahm Emmanuel is one such person with dual citizenship, and he was offended by Omar's remarks. He was White House chief of staff and served in the Israeli Defense Forces. He's not the only one upset by Ilhan Omar's remarks either. I don't think it's a bad thing that he's upset either. I'm glad Omar is creating friction.

Ilhan Omar ignites new anti-Semitism controversy with comments on AIPAC
Freshman Minnesota Democrat Ilhan Omar ignited a new controversy on Sunday night when she suggested GOP support for Israel is driven by campaign donations from a prominent pro-Israel group.

Omar singled out AIPAC, one of the most influential lobbying groups in Washington, as the source of those donations.

Omar's comments touched upon a long-running, and particularly ugly, thread of the anti-Semitic movement — that Jewish money fuels backing for Israel in the United States and elsewhere. A freshman Democrat, Max Rose of New York, said, "Congresswoman Omar's statements are deeply hurtful to Jews, including myself."

I grew up with "stick and stones will break my bones, but words will never hurt me." So I think today's snowflakes are humorously pathetic. I think people should be able to say whatever they like, provided they aren't inciting lawless behavior. Do you think that Max Rose is lying about his feelings and he's just trying to shut Omar up? Are you upset with him for what he's saying? I'm not. Nor am I upset with what Trump is saying.

Omar said on Twitter "Israel has hypnotized the world, may Allah awaken the people and help them see the evil doings of Israel."

Omar really doesn't seem to care for Israel--home to the Jewish people.

Omar and freshman Michigan Democratic Rep. Rashida Tlaib — the first two Muslim women elected to Congress — have signaled support for the Palestinian-led BDS movement (Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions) against the Israeli government over its treatment of Palestinians.

Omar and Tlaib support boycotting and divesting from Israel. That's creating enormous tension within the Democratic party.

In response to Greenwald's post, Omar tweeted, "It's all about the Benjamins baby," followed by a music emoji, which suggested that money was calling the tune for McCarthy.

When asked to explain where the money she was referring to came from, Omar tweeted: "AIPAC."

An Omar spokesman said the tweets "speak for themselves."

So Israel is a country with an ethnic and religious minority from the standpoint of the United States.

noemon wrote:That was not echoing, that was you articulating those arguments.

Well, if I don't do that, then I end up having to cite numerous people and get accused of posting a wall of text. Which would you prefer?

noemon wrote:You only care when the people you support are accused but are quick on the trigger when it comes to others.

Like all people, I have a prejudicial relationship to my own point of view.

Godstud wrote:More racist shit from Trump.

Trump didn't mention any races here. What part of Trump's comments do you find racist?

Many inner cities are dealing with significant homeless encampments, where rodents infestation is bringing the return of Medieval diseases like Typhus and the Bubonic plague. It's mostly happening in inner cities run by Democratic party politicians.
#15021845
I've come across some enlightened and pluralist left-wing views in the UK after the appointment of several minority cabinet ministers, which assert that your political views must be determined by your skin colour.

Corbynista:

Editor of far left publication:

Labour MP:
#15021881
blackjack21 wrote:I don't consider either Omar or Trump's statements to be particularly racist. I think they are both inflammatory. That is, I think they have both learned that there is utility in transgressing political correctness. You see a double standard, because I prefer one of them to the other. In principle, however, I think they are doing the same thing--and, I agree with them for doing it. I didn't accuse Omar of racism, but of making inflammatory remarks. I interpret her remark "all about the benjamins" to be about Jews, because when she was pressed for clarification, she mentioned AIPAC. She's doing the same thing Trump is doing, and I applaud her for doing that just as I applaud Trump for doing that. I don't think her remarks are particularly racist, but they are politically incorrect.


There is nothing identical between Omar's comment and Trump's racism. Trump singled out individuals based on their ethnicity which is racist. Omar is criticising a relationship with a foreign state and the influence of lobby groups and their money "all about the benjamin's = all about the money". If you want to see how real antisemitism is expressed you should read your own thread.

blackjack21 wrote:Abstract definitions of what constitutes racism may be very compelling to you. To many people, it is just a semantic engine for generating outrage.


There is a very simple method for not being called a "racist", by not making racist comments.

blackjack21 wrote:You keep repeating that. Apparently, it is very upsetting for you. Has it occurred to you that not everyone else finds it upsetting?


Kaiserschmarrn wrote:My reply was directed at redcarpet, and under normal circumstances I wouldn't be fussed by a generalisation like this at all. Pronouncements like this, even about all Americans, are extremely common anyway and people should be able to keep perspective and deal with it.


Has it occurred to both of you that if I start expressing my real uncut/unedited opinion on certain people in here, all these people will start crying that as a "moderator" I should not be doing that? These same people are also the ones who think the President should be saying all these racist things because they already do and it's fine for them. But that is not an actual argument, just because some racist uncle says it at the table, it does not mean that the President is okay with saying such racist comments. As I said it all comes down to whether is affecting you. If Trump(or another) had said something singling out white people, blackjack21 would be crying, whining, be outraged just like he(and Hindsite and the others) always are in here when they hear something they do not like regardless if it is actually racist or not, but now you take issue because some people have had real cause to be offended by the President's racist remarks. :roll:

blackjack21 wrote:That's your interpretation. Her remark was directly in response to questions about her being antisemitic.....So Israel is a country with an ethnic and religious minority from the standpoint of the United States.


First of all, it is not just my interpretation but also Jewish Academics defend Ilhan Omar but even if it were just my interpretation you would have to explain why it's wrong and you have not done that. What do you mean by the bolded sentence here? Are you saying that if you criticise Israel you are being racist because something about ethnic/religious minorities from the standpoint of the US? And you do not see the irony when you are the same person trying to defend Trump's racist tweet about these congresswomen's countries of origins? :lol: The fact is it is not racist at all to criticise other countries, it is racist however to tell people off for their countries of origin, because you are singling out that person due to the accident of their birth.

blackjack21 wrote:Well, if I don't do that, then I end up having to cite numerous people and get accused of posting a wall of text. Which would you prefer?


I do not know why you're denying reality once again, you are articulating these arguments in this post just as well.

Kaiserschmarrn wrote:I happy to look at the demonstrations that the people in question are "smug and fat and entrenched in their affluent inertia". I suspect that they are hardly predominantly affluent in an American context.


The people making the statement "go back where you came from" are making a demonstration of their smugness at the very least.

Yesterday this article fell upon on me and it contains a lot of historical information regarding the first Greek Masonic Order in the US. An Order that was founded with the explicit intent of combating the KKK and which counts among its ranks Franklin Roosevelt, Harry Truman & Gerald Ford. There is a lot of information in this article about the kind of people that were KKK members and were saying these stuff to minorities back in the day:

Forgotten History: The Klan vs. Americans of Greek Heritage in an Era of Hate and the Birth of the Ahepa written by Gregory Pappas wrote: Forgotten History: The Klan vs. Americans of Greek Heritage in an Era of Hate and the Birth of the Ahepa
The following story by James S. Scofield was published in numerous newspapers on the 75th anniversary of the American Hellenic Educational and Progressive Association (Ahepa) in 1997. The story, republished here, is a sobering reminder of the struggles Greek immigrants to the United States and Canada faced when they arrived in the New World.

It was 1922, Americans of Hellenic heritage were suffering personal and economic intimidation orchestrated by the revived Ku Klux Klan. It was time for them to unify and organize, to protect and defend life and livelihood.

The widespread and often violent discrimination against immigrants from Greece is an almost forgotten page of American history. This is probably because of their subsequent success and the great accomplishments of their descendants. Very few persons today, Hellenic or not, are even vaguely aware of the massive continental strength of the Klan of the 1920s and its intensive persecution of foreign-born Greeks, including those who had chosen to become American citizens.

They do not know how deeply the evil shadows of bigotry, hatred and intolerance cast their malignant darkness over North America. Perhaps it is time to remind them.

The newly-reorganized KKK rampaged against frightened immigrants and helpless minorities throughout the U.S. It dominated politics in states in both the North and South. In Canada, its dangerous wicked ways were transplanted and flourished, especially in the western provinces.

An estimated three million militant hooded Klansmen stalked across our continent, burning crosses and spawning terror.

During its reign of power, the Klan elected sixteen U.S. Senators, eleven Governors and an undetermined large number of Congressmen, both Republican and Democrat. It reportedly exerted considerable influence in the White House.

Klan organizations ruled local politics in the major cities of Dallas, Denver, Indianapolis and Portland, Oregon, as well as in such smaller communities as Anaheim, California; El Paso, Texas; Youngstown, Ohio and Portland, Maine.

In 1902, California and Oregon voters elected Klan-endorsed gubernatorial candidates. Then in 1924, a Klan candidate won the governorship in Kansas. The same year, the Klan endorsed U.S. Senate winners in Alabama, Colorado, Georgia, Indiana, Oklahoma and Texas. It also won the gubernatorial contests in five of these six states, barely losing in Texas.

At U.S. election polls, Klansmen passed out cards which crudely and defiantly declared:

When cotton grows on the fig tree
And alfalfa hangs on the rose
When the aliens run the United States
And the Jews grow a straight nose
When the Pope is praised by every one
In the land of Uncle Sam
And a Greek is elected President
THEN–the Ku Klux won’t be worth a damn.


Meanwhile, embattled but visionary Greek immigrant leaders met on July 26, 1922, in Atlanta to form the American Hellenic Educational Progressive Association, now better known as the Order of Ahepa. Not by coincidence, Atlanta was the home of the national Imperial Headquarters of the Klan.

The most important goal of the Ahepa founders was to quickly and solidly establish better relations with non-Greeks. They agreed to do this by taking the positive high road of reason emphasizing assimilation, cooperation, persuasion and unlike their marked foes, non-violence.

Their main discussion was how to best contain the wave of hostility which had almost drowned them. The ominous specters of twisted Americanism and KKK aggression spurred them to create a patriotic fraternal order espousing undivided loyalty to the United States. American citizenship, proficiency in English, active participation in the civic mainstream, economic stability, social unity and the pursuit of education. The latter was considered vital for its obvious gifts of knowledge and as the essential key to upward mobility.

The Ahepa founders were profoundly disturbed and alarmed by their bitter experiences with Klan prejudice and by reports of worse bigotry elsewhere. Even before the Klan reappeared, there had been senseless attacks on foreign-born Greeks, some fatal. However, the new Klan expertly and abrasively honed intolerance with brutal efficiency to silence and subdue all of its alleged inferiors.

Many Greek-owned confectioneries and restaurants failed financially or were sold at sacrificial prices to non-Greeks because of boycotts instigated by the Klan. Greek establishments doing as much as $500 to $1,000 a day business, especially in the South and Midwest, dropped to as little as $25 a day. The only recourse was to sell or close.

The Klan often bolstered its boycotts by openly threatening or attacking customers entering and leaving.

A Klan Imperial Lecturer told Klansmen in Spokane that Mexicans and Greeks should be sent back to where they came from so that white supremacy and the purity of Americans be preserved. Meanwhile, in Palatka, Florida, a Greek immigrant was flogged for dating a “white” woman.

The Royal Riders of the Red Robe was a Klan affiliate assembled “as a real patriotic organization” for approved naturalized citizens unluckily born outside the United States. However, in the ultimate snub of exclusion, immigrants from Greece, Italy and the Balkans were not eligible to join.

In Indiana, the state most politically controlled by the 1920s Klan, burning crosses were ignited in the yards of outspoken Hellenes. Unprovoked beatings of Greeks were not reported to police lest another beating soon follow. Others were warned of dire consequences if they spoke Greek in public, even in their own business establishments.

Hoosier Democrat and Republican leaders actively discouraged naturalized Hellenes from filing for public office, forcing them to run as Socialist Party candidates. Fearful Greek Orthodox Christians indefinitely postponed impending plans to organize parishes. To avoid constant confrontation, long and difficult to pronounce first and last names of Greek origin were shortened or changed to more acceptable Americanized versions. False rumors spread by the Klan about supposed unsolved murders of Greeks in other states produced the desired dread.

The Klan Grand Dragon of Oregon said in a spirited speech in Atlanta: “The Klan in the western states has a great mission to perform. The rapid growth of the Japanese population and the great influx of foreign laborers, mostly Greeks, is threatening our American institutions; and, Klans in Washington, Oregon and Idaho are actively at work to combat these foreign and un-American influences.”

Probably the most blatant hard-line bullying, almost humorous, occurred in Pensacola, Florida. A Klansman handed a note to a Greek restaurateur which read: “You are an undesirable citizen. You violate the Federal Prohibition Laws and laws of decency and are a running sore on society. Several trains are leaving Pensacola daily. Take your choice but do not take too much time. Sincerely in earnest, KKK.”

Today, according to sociologist Charles C. Moskos, Jr., of Northwestern University, American Hellenes proudly rank first among all ethnic groups in individual educational attainment and second in individual educational attainment and second in individual wealth. They have succeeded in every facet of American life. The Order of Ahepa has played the prime historic role in this ascent.

True to its original mission, Ahepa financially supports scholarships, educational chairs, housing for the elderly, medical research, community programs, charitable projects and other worthy endeavors through contributions of more than two million dollars a year from its chapter, district and national levels.

Ahepa validated its patriotic roots during World War II by selling over five hundred million dollars of U.S. War Bonds, more than any organization in America. Meanwhile, Ahepa officials first visited the White House to meet with President Calvin Coolidge in 1924 and have conferred with all twelve Presidents since Presidents Franklin Roosevelt, Harry Truman and Gerald Ford became Ahepa members.

More recently, Ahepa raised $400,000 for the restoration of Ellis Island and the Statue of Liberty and $775,000 for a sculpture commemorating the Centennial Olympic Games in Atlanta. Ahepa has received congressional and presidential recognition for promoting friendship and goodwill among the people of the United States, Canada, Greece and Cyprus. President George Bush hailed Ahepa as one of “the thousand points of light.”

Ahepa moved its headquarters to Washington DC in 1924 and later expanded its scope by adding three auxiliaries to complete the Ahepa Family: the Daughters of Penelope for women, the Sons of Pericles for young men and the Maids of Athena for young women. Its combined eight hundred chapters, consisting of about 35,000 members, cover the United States and Canada and have planted successful units in Australia and Greece. It held its 75th annual convention in Atlanta in August.

In 1990, Ahepa filed an amicus curiae (friend of the court) brief in the Georgia Supreme Court. It backed the legal position of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) and the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) of B’nai B’rith in support of a state law banning masks in public which was challenged by the KKK. The court ruled 6 to 1 to uphold the constitutionality of the anti-mask statute.

The significance of the favorable decision to a jubilant Ahepa was that it came in the city of its founding and helped seal the doom of another failed Klan revival. Moreover, it enabled Hellenes to join in victorious celebration with fellow black and Jewish Americans whose forbearers also were sadistically harmed physically, mentally and economically by the KKK of yesteryear.

Along with Roman Catholics, Asians and other immigrants considered unacceptable by the Klan, they were targeted separately and together then because they did not fit the rigidly narrow KKK concept of what constitutes a good and loyal American.

For Hellenes, it is supremely ironic that the six organizers of the original Klan in 1865 created the words Ku Klux from kuklos, a variation of the Greek kyklos meaning cycle or circle, and applied it to their own little circle.

Today the 1920s version of the KKK is long gone–and its flickering reincarnations are virtual nonentities. The Klan deserved to die–and died. The Order of Ahepa thrives three quarters of a century after its historic birth amid the fiery heat of hate–generated by the toxic Klan cauldron of insane fanaticism. Ahepa deserves to live–and lives.
#15021897
noemon wrote:There is nothing identical between Omar's comment and Trump's racism.

For someone incapable of abstract reasoning, this may be true. However, both Trump and Omar step on "taboo" subjects with the intent to inflame public sentiment. It's free publicity for them.

noemon wrote:Trump singled out individuals based on their ethnicity which is racist.

Omar singled out a country based on a religion and ethnicity, which could also be construed as racist to snowflakes.

noemon wrote:Omar is criticising a relationship with a foreign state and the influence of lobby groups and their money "all about the benjamin's = all about the money".

Yes. A foreign state created for an ethno-religious group. Again, you are dropping context to make your point. Note also that "Benjamin" is a Jewish name.

noemon wrote:If you want to see how real antisemitism is expressed you should read your own thread.

That was not an antisemitic thread. It was commenting on a fierce ideological struggle/rift within the American Jewish community that involved, among other things, left wing Jews using state power to suppress evangelical Christians, conservatives AND pro-Israel groups who consisted primarily of right wing Jews and evangelical Christians. Talking about Jews to the exclusion of other people is not itself antisemitic.

noemon wrote:There is a very simple method for not being called a "racist", by not making racist comments.

You are entitled to call anyone you like a racist in a political context. They just may not take you seriously.

noemon wrote:Has it occurred to both of you that if I start expressing my real uncut/unedited opinion on certain people in here, all these people will start crying that as a "moderator" I should not be doing that? These same people are also the ones who think the President should be saying all these racist things because they already do and it's fine for them. But that is not an actual argument, just because some racist uncle says it at the table, it does not mean that the President is okay with saying such racist comments. As I said it all comes down to whether is affecting you. If Trump(or another) had said something singling out white people, blackjack21 would be crying, whining, be outraged just like he(and Hindsite and the others) always are in here when they hear something they do not like regardless if it is actually racist or not, but now you take issue because some people have had real cause to be offended by the President's racist remarks. :roll:

Trump just reprised his remarks directed toward Elijah Cummings whose Congressional district is a mess--a common issue in inner city districts led by Democrats seemingly with no political interruption for more than half a century. The response? "Racism"! Why? Elijah Cummings is black. That doesn't mean the problems that Trump enumerates in Cummings' Baltimore district are factually incorrect. Trump is spot on. In fact, the response to ineffectual Democratic party leadership in America's inner cities has routinely been to call people "racist."

noemon wrote:First of all, it is not just my interpretation but also Jewish Academics defend Ilhan Omar but even if it were just my interpretation you would have to explain why it's wrong and you have not done that.

I have not done that, because I don't think it is wrong. I also don't think it is wrong for Trump to say similar inflammatory things.

noemon wrote:What do you mean by the bolded sentence here? Are you saying that if you criticise Israel you are being racist because something about ethnic/religious minorities from the standpoint of the US?

I'm saying that a lot of American Jews will assume that it is a bigoted trope. You seem to be implying that American Jews have no right to feel that way, because Omar didn't say "Jews" in her statement. Trump didn't say "black people" in his statement either.

noemon wrote:The fact is it is not racist at all to criticise other countries, it is racist however to tell people off for their countries of origin, because you are singling out that person due to the accident of their birth.

Countries aren't necessarily racially homogeneous. That requires a leap in logic. You may hold that opinion, but you may be surprised to find that not everyone agrees with you.
#15021900
Of course it is just a coincidence that Trump has launched all of his recent Tweet storm attacks against people of color and women. This in no way points to his being racist or misogynist. After all just less than one in four people in the house are people of color and about the same women. As I said, just a coincidence. I am sure he will get around to white males soon.

My party (republican) has fine representation in the house by women and minorities. Fully 10% of the women serving in the house are republicans. And people of color? Of the freshman class of representatives only a third of the democrats are people of color while a whopping 2% are republican.

When it comes to religion it should be no surprise that the republican party leader only goes after non Christian democrats. Why? Because more than 99% of republican lawmakers identify as Christian compared to 78% of democrats. He can't attack republican Buddhists, Muslims, Hindus and religiously unaffiliated lawmakers because, well, there aren't any. Even if he did attack Jewish members of Congress it would not be easy for him to attack republican Jews because less than 1% of republican legislators are Jewish while over 1 in 10 Democrats are.

That's what I love about my republican party. It is remarkably consistent. And as a white male I feel quite at home though I have to admit that a republican party meeting is a fucked up place to meet women.
#15021901
Drlee wrote:Of course it is just a coincidence that Trump has launched all of his recent Tweet storm attacks against people of color and women. This in no way points to his being racist or misogynist. After all just less than one in four people in the house are people of color and about the same women. As I said, just a coincidence. I am sure he will get around to white males soon.

My party (republican) has fine representation in the house by women and minorities. Fully 10% of the women serving in the house are republicans. And people of color? Of the freshman class of representatives only a third of the democrats are people of color while a whopping 2% are republican.

When it comes to religion it should be no surprise that the republican party leader only goes after non Christian democrats. Why? Because more than 99% of republican lawmakers identify as Christian compared to 78% of democrats. He can't attack republican Buddhists, Muslims, Hindus and religiously unaffiliated lawmakers because, well, there aren't any. Even if he did attack Jewish members of Congress it would not be easy for him to attack republican Jews because less than 1% of republican legislators are Jewish while over 1 in 10 Democrats are.

That's what I love about my republican party. It is remarkably consistent. And as a white male I feel quite at home though I have to admit that a republican party meeting is a fucked up place to meet women.

The Democrat party put the squad up to be their flag bearers exactly because any absurdity they say can be covered for by throwing back random allegations of racism. It is a cynical use of "colour" by the race baiters. LBJ would approve.
#15021905
Drlee wrote:I am sure he will get around to white males soon.

You're getting up there in age Drlee. Maybe you missed the last three years and are missing a step like Bob Mueller, who Trump routinely chastises. Let me refresh your memory: "Lyin Ted Cruz," "Little Marco Rubio", "Low energy Jeb Bush", "Sleepy Joe Biden", "Little Michael Bloomberg", "Da Nang Dick Blumenthal", "Wild Bill Clinton", "Slippery James Comey", "Shady James Comey", "Jeff Flakey", "Al Frankenstein", "Fat Jerry Nadler", "Crazy Bernie", and "Crying Chuck Schumer" are all white males.

Drlee wrote:He can't attack republican Buddhists, Muslims, Hindus and religiously unaffiliated lawmakers because, well, there aren't any.

Nikki Haley was raised Sikh and Bobby Jindal was raised Hindu. Jindal converted to Christianity. I'd say most of my Indian friends (who are mostly Republican) are Hindu. America is mostly a Christian country though, so I'm not understanding why you think that is significant.
#15021954
blackjack21 wrote:For someone incapable of abstract reasoning, this may be true. However, both Trump and Omar step on "taboo" subjects with the intent to inflame public sentiment. It's free publicity for them.


The difference between them is that Trump's comment here is racist, while Omar's isn't.

blackjack21 wrote:Omar singled out a country based on a religion and ethnicity, which could also be construed as racist to snowflakes.
Yes. A foreign state created for an ethno-religious group. Again, you are dropping context to make your point. Note also that "Benjamin" is a Jewish name.


Greece is an ethno-religious state as well, but I do not claim people are racist every time they criticise the Greek state. Criticising states(mono-ethnic ones or diverse) for their politics is not racist and you would not expect such arguments coming out of you dude. "Benjamin" refers to Benjamin Franklin the person on the $100 dollar bill. Are you seriously still arguing that Omar was being racist?

blackjack21 wrote:That was not an antisemitic thread. It was commenting on a fierce ideological struggle/rift within the American Jewish community that involved, among other things, left wing Jews using state power to suppress evangelical Christians, conservatives AND pro-Israel groups who consisted primarily of right wing Jews and evangelical Christians. Talking about Jews to the exclusion of other people is not itself antisemitic.


Your thread contains several antisemitic tropes far more than anything that Omar said.

blackjack21 wrote:You are entitled to call anyone you like a racist in a political context. They just may not take you seriously.


Indeed, just like you or others calling Omar racist cannot be taken seriously for the simple reason that what she said was not actually racist. What Trump said however in the tweets was racist because he was singling out congresswomen based on their ethnic-origins.

blackjack21 wrote:Trump just reprised his remarks directed toward Elijah Cummings whose Congressional district is a mess--a common issue in inner city districts led by Democrats seemingly with no political interruption for more than half a century. The response? "Racism"! Why? Elijah Cummings is black.


No, Trump's statement about Cummings is not racist. He did not single him out because he's got Black origins.

blackjack21 wrote:I'm saying that a lot of American Jews will assume that it is a bigoted trope. You seem to be implying that American Jews have no right to feel that way, because Omar didn't say "Jews" in her statement. Trump didn't say "black people" in his statement either.


Everyone has the right to feel as one wishes, but that does not mean that a statement is actually racist. Trump did say "the countries of their origins" as if their countries of origins are relevant to their ability to express their political opinions. That is racist because that is discrimination based on colour, descent, ethnic or national origins. Omar did not say anything about Jews or about Israeli citizens.

blackjack21 wrote:Countries aren't necessarily racially homogeneous. That requires a leap in logic.


Of course they aren't. What on earth are you talking about?
#15021962
Democrat race baiter: "if a white person criticises a brown person that's racism but if a brown person criticises a white person that is not racism. Also screw the jews who want their own country just because people like me hate them. Also I am totally not a racist for prejudging people on the basis of their skin colour because I have decided that my group identity has that privilege due to politically useful but imaginary oppression."
  • 1
  • 21
  • 22
  • 23
  • 24
  • 25

It feels like democrats are too preoccupied with […]

First time an Israeli PM got serious about peace w[…]

As is usually the case, y'all need to do yer homew[…]

This is about a new book written by the economist,[…]