Rashida Tlaib Posts Video Of Protesters Calling For Gaza To Take Over Israel, Says Biden Is Supporting ‘Genocide’

[Ana the Ist]

I have never denied that "from the river to the sea" language might entail a call to genocide of Jews. And, in fact, I am convinced it probably does mean this in most cases overall over time.

Right....sorry.

If you're being extremely technical, there's at least a handful of ways it could be interpreted.

Also, those guys marching around Charlottesville with tiki torches yelling "jews will not replace us!"....weren't necessarily trying to intimidate anyone.

They could have been talking about....

1. Some sci-fi scenario where the Jewish people are engaged in human cloning.
2. Their apartments where they're tenants to Jewish landlords.
3. Their Jewish employers.

I mean, as long as you're willing to remove your brain from the equation....endless possibilities.

My objection has been to the shoddy logic used by some here - they equate approval of this phrase with a call to genocide without any reasonable supporting argument.

Well in the context by which Palestinians use it....it's certainly a call for genocide. If you were to argue however, that the vast majority of people on the left shouting it on college campuses and protests are so dumb they have no idea what they're supporting....

But let's talk about the crowds today in the streets of western nations. I cynically suggest that many of these people are chanting this chant with little to no knowledge of its connection to calls for genocide.

Is this the "liberal protesters are dumb argument"?

These are people who are fundamentally driven by tribal affiliation - wanting to signal their allegiance to "the oppressed" - and not by a nuanced understanding of all the history and context.

Right.

In short, I suggest it is exceedingly rash to presume that the use of this phrase necessarily entails support for rape, murder, and beheading.

Because? They're too dumb to understand what they're supporting?

But let's talk about Tlaib. She, unlike the college kids in the streets, should know better. And I agree it was highly irresponsible of her to affirm the use of the "from the river to the sea" language - she should know about its historical connection to calls for genocide.

She's Palestinian. It's basically a joke to suggest she doesn't know.

But, I suggest we both know that some posters here are licking their chops at any opportunity to "put it to the Libs" and have jumped all over this and made all sorts of unwarranted assumptions.

Again, I'll consider that those protesting on the left are in fact, extraordinarily stupid.

Are you really going to tell me that you think Tlaib supports rape, murder, and beheading? Maybe. But I think it far more likely she is an iconoclast who sees her cause as the Palestinians and she got caught up in the moment and exhibited dreadful judgment.

I've seen other issues Tlaib has supported....and I can only conclude she's a left wing fringe extremist unfit for public office.

 

[Ana the Ist]

I see no evidence for this. Just because there is a call to kill Jews in certain Scriptures does not necessarily mean that anyone who uses the phrase "from the river to the sea" sees such killing as the only means by which this land would be reclaimed for the Palestinians.

That's a section from the Hamas charter. Yes, it quotes their favorite part of the Koran which describes a time when trees and rocks start talking to the Muslim faithful to help them slaughter the Jewish people....but I was pulling the quote from the Hamas foundational document.

You are, it seems to me, putting forward the following faulty argument:

1. There is a call to Muslims to kill Jews to recover the land

There is.

2. The phrase "from the river to the sea" has been used by those who are willing to heed this call.

Right.

3. Therefore, anyone who uses this phrase must, therefore, be in favour of killing Jews.

Well it's being shouted by the same people who equated a "MAGA" hat with "white supremacy".

In other words....a group of people who very strongly believe in "guilt by association".

When you consider this is how they identify people with malicious intent...my "illogical" statement suddenly becomes 100% logical.

This reasoning is clearly incorrect since someone who does not want to kill Jews, but simply have them deported, might very reasonably use the phrase "from the river to the sea, Palestine will be free". It appears to me that you are overlooking this possiblity.

Deported where? The overwhelming majority were born there....and while the Palestinian people have dozens of Muslim nations to flee to, there's only one Jewish nation.

I would agree that historically, this phrase does indeed connect to a call for genocide.

Well then what's the argument you're making?

It's as if you were arguing that people yelling "Heil Hitler" were merely historical reenactment fans. Did you consider that?

And that it does so today for a certain class of fundamentalist Muslims. But I suggest the college kids who chant this in the streets of Manhattan are guilty mostly of ignorance and a desire to fit in with their "tribe".

Again....is this the "liberal protesters are just extraordinarily dumb" argument?

 

[ThatRobGuy]

I have never denied that "from the river to the sea" language might entail a call to genocide of Jews. And, in fact, I am convinced it probably does mean this in most cases overall over time.

My objection has been to the shoddy logic used by some here - they equate approval of this phrase with a call to genocide without any reasonable supporting argument.

But let's talk about the crowds today in the streets of western nations. I cynically suggest that many of these people are chanting this chant with little to no knowledge of its connection to calls for genocide. These are people who are fundamentally driven by tribal affiliation - wanting to signal their allegiance to "the oppressed" - and not by a nuanced understanding of all the history and context.

In short, I suggest it is exceedingly rash to presume that the use of this phrase necessarily entails support for rape, murder, and beheading.

But let's talk about Tlaib. She, unlike the college kids in the streets, should know better. And I agree it was highly irresponsible of her to affirm the use of the "from the river to the sea" language - she should know about its historical connection to calls for genocide. But, I suggest we both know that some posters here are licking their chops at any opportunity to "put it to the Libs" and have jumped all over this and made all sorts of unwarranted assumptions.

Are you really going to tell me that you think Tlaib supports rape, murder, and beheading? Maybe. But I think it far more likely she is an iconoclast who sees her cause as the Palestinians and she got caught up in the moment and exhibited dreadful judgment.

In the case of Tlaib, specifically? It's tough to say which bucket she would fall in with regards to "virtual signal vs. sincere hatred"

Her past comments (from well before this particular current conflict) would suggest that it's quite possible that she (being the child of Palestinian immigrants) has the same views about Jewish people that 93% of Palestinians hold. She's been on the hot seat numerous times over the past 3-4 years (a few occasions, facing backlash from even people in her own party, for using what they labelled "antisemitic dogwhistles"

If you understand the history behind the resentment that Muslims have for Jews, it's not surprising.

...and that's not to pick Tlaib or Islam in particular. First generation Americans (whose parents moved to the US for economic reasons as opposed to ideological ones) obviously aren't going to be that far removed from the prevailing ideologies of the former country or that of their parents.

For example, nobody would consider it to be controversial or shocking to assert that it's not surprising that 1st generation Americans born to Irish or Italian immigrants were staunchly Catholic...and still hold strong to a lot of those beliefs.

For instance, if you had a child of parents who moved here from Ireland during "The Troubles" and were staunch IRA supporters, would it be all that shocking to learn that their kids would harbor some hateful ideas toward protestants or had an "inherited bias" against British people? Obviously not...because if all they heard at home was "Loyalist Pigs!" talk around the dinner table, kids are going to pick up on that sort of thing.

"Learned hate" is one of those things where there's often not a fast-track in terms of "un-learning" it, and it often times takes a few generations to get removed from it.

 

[DaisyDay]

It didn't take them that long....

What Hitler and the Grand Mufti Really Said

The conversation didn't happen the way Benjamin Netanyahu said, but it still sheds light on a historical moment

time.com

There's the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem hanging with Hitler himself.

As it happens, the full German record of the meeting between al-Husseini and Hitler, on Nov. 28, 1941, was published half a century ago, and is readily available online. It is a fascinating and important document. Not only does it make clear that Netanyahu’s accusation is false, but it also sheds light on the true origins of the Holocaust, and why Hitler undertook it when he did.

...The full text of Netanyahu’s speech to the World Zionist Congress shows that he made this claim to argue that Palestinian Arabs are never really angry about specific acts taken by the Israeli government, but rather at the existence of Israel itself. For him to suggest that a Palestinian leader, rather than Hitler, conceived of the Final Solution, prompted a negative reaction. The German government responded with an almost instantaneous acknowledgement of Germany’s responsibility for the Holocaust. In our highly politicized age, facts are frequently a casualty of controversy, but for those who are Interested, the internet makes the truth nearer at hand than ever before.

In reality the dissolution of the Ottoman Empire which you could say occurred gradually for hundreds of years before Israel saw mass expulsions of Jews, mass murders of Jews, and rampant antisemitism despite Jewish people already being second class citizens in basically everywhere.

So now the Arab Israelis, Muslim and Christian, are the second class citizens with different rules than the Jewish Israelis have.​

 

[RestoreTheJoy]

Democratic Michigan Rep. Rashida Tlaib posted a video Friday featuring pro-Gaza protesters calling for the removal of the Israeli state.

The video, posted to Tlaib’s X account, showcases a number of different protests across the country, including one in Michigan in which protesters can be heard chanting the Palestinian phrase “from the river to the sea.” The phrase references a call for the wholesale elimination of the Israeli state, stretching from the Jordan River in the east to the Mediterranean Sea in the west, according to the American Jewish Committee.

Rashida Tlaib Posts Video Of Protesters Calling For Gaza To Take Over Israel, Says Biden Is Supporting ‘Genocide’

Democratic Michigan Rep. Rashida Tlaib posted a video Friday featuring a Palestinian protest in her home state calling for the occupation of Israel.

dailycaller.com

They know exactly what they are doing: Tlaib does, for sure, even if the ignorant among the sycophants are falling in line to protest when there is anything to protest (except something important, like the butchering of Israelis, dragged from a concert). We know many are incredibly ignorant because they have been stopped on the street and asked why they are there, and some cannot answer.

 

[Ana the Ist]

As it happens, the full German record of the meeting between al-Husseini and Hitler, on Nov. 28, 1941, was published half a century ago, and is readily available online. It is a fascinating and important document. Not only does it make clear that Netanyahu’s accusation is false, but it also sheds light on the true origins of the Holocaust, and why Hitler undertook it when he did.​

​

...The full text of Netanyahu’s speech to the World Zionist Congress shows ​

Well, let's see what it shows....

The following is an official German record of the meeting between Adolf Hitler and the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, Haj Amin al-Husseini, on November 28, 1941, at the Reich Chancellory in Berlin. (Source: Documents on German Foreign Policy 1918-1945, Series D, Vol XIII, London, 1964.)
GRAND MUFTI:
The Grand Mufti began by thanking the Fuhrer for the great honor he had bestowed by receiving him. He wished to seize the opportunity to convey to the Fuhrer of the Greater German Reich, admired by the entire Arab world, his thanks of the sympathy which he had always shown for the Arab and especially the Palestinian cause, and to which he had given clear expression in his public speeches.
The Arab countries were firmly convinced that Germany would win the war and that the Arab cause would then prosper. The Arabs were Germany’s natural friends because they had the same enemies as had Germany, namely the English, the Jews and the Communists. Therefore they were prepared to cooperate with Germany with all their hearts and stood ready to participate in the war, not only negatively by the commission of acts of sabotage and the instigation of revolutions, but also positively by the formation of an Arab Legion


​

​

​

So now the Arab Israelis, Muslim and Christian, are the second class citizens with different rules than the Jewish Israelis have.​

In conclusion....

Palestinians were big admirers of Hitler, hated Jews long before any "occupation".

So do tell @DaisyDay, why do you support these nazi-loving antisemitic Arabs who try to kill innocent Israeli civilians every single year?

 

[rjs330]

This is crazy! How did America become a country where everyone has the freedom of speech?

I would agree with you it there was consistency, but there isn't. I don't think even you believe in that.

 

[rjs330]

Last I checked people’s rights don’t depend on someone else’s feelings towards what they’re saying.

She may very well have said something cruel and hateful. I don’t know, I haven’t looked it up.

So what?

We either stand for free speech, even speech we don’t like and don’t agree with, or we don’t stand for it at all.

What do you stand for?

Oh this is rich! Do you then stand for people's freedom of speech not to use preferred pronouns or call a trans woman a man? What about the freedom of speech to use anti-lgbtq language or racist language?

Just wondering if you are consistent that's all.

 

[rjs330]

But let's talk about Tlaib. She, unlike the college kids in the streets, should know better. And I agree it was highly irresponsible of her to affirm the use of the "from the river to the sea" language - she should know about its historical connection to calls for genocide. But, I suggest we both know that some posters here are licking their chops at any opportunity to "put it to the Libs" and have jumped all over this and made all sorts of unwarranted assumptions.

Are you really going to tell me that you think Tlaib supports rape, murder, and beheading? Maybe. But I think it far more likely she is an iconoclast who sees her cause as the Palestinians and she got caught up in the moment and exhibited dreadful judgment.

Yes let's. As you stated you know good and well that Taliban knew what she was saying. She knew what it meant. She knows it calls for genocide. If she says a phrase that calls for genocide then there is no other way to take it than she supports whatever it takes to make that happen. Which of course still is an incredible lapse of judgement.

This defense of her is pretty interesting especially when people were whole heartedly believing Trump was calling for the events of Jan 6 when he was calling for people to fight. At least in his case you could easily show that "fight" had a lot of different meanings than a riot in the capital.

In Talib's case there isn't another meaning.

 

[GoldenBoy89]

Do you then stand for people's freedom of speech not to use preferred pronouns or call a trans woman a man? What about the freedom of speech to use anti-lgbtq language or racist language?

Yes.

Just wondering if you are consistent that's all.

Sure am, unless you could show otherwise.

 

[rjs330]

Yes.


Sure am, unless you could show otherwise.

Sounds good.

 

[expos4ever]

Yes let's. As you stated you know good and well that Taliban knew what she was saying.

No! That is NOT what I said! I said she should know better.

She knew what it meant.

How do you know this? She probably did know what it meant but we cannot be sure

She knows it calls for genocide.

Again, you make assumptions about what other people are thinking. I would guess that, yes, she knew that it is a call for genocide. But it is not fair to assume this is a certainty. There are some very dumb politicians in your country (MTG, for instance).

This defense of her

I am not really defending her.

 

[rjs330]

How do you know this? She probably did know what it meant but we cannot be sure

So her excuse is shes not very bright?

Again, you make assumptions about what other people are thinking. I would guess that, yes, she knew that it is a call for genocide. But it is not fair to assume this is a certainty. There are some very dumb politicians in your country (MTG, for instance).

If she didn't know then she is dumb indeed. That seems to be the lefts excuses now. All those marchers chanting are dumb defense.

am not really defending her.

Then what are you doing?

 

[expos4ever]

So her excuse is shes not very bright?

Why are you moving the goal posts? You claimed that she knew what she was doing was supporting a call to genocide. What is your evidence? Please stop evading.

If she didn't know then she is dumb indeed. That seems to be the lefts excuses now. All those marchers chanting are dumb defense.

It's funny how your unjustified conclusions get morphed into a critique of other people. Indeed, I, and perhaps others, have been arguing that many of these protesters are probably too ignorant to understand the historical connection between this phrase and a call to genocide. That has been precisely our point.

Then what are you doing?

Isn't it obvious? Challenging you on your unsupported assertions.

 

[rjs330]

Why are you moving the goal posts? You claimed that she knew what she was doing was supporting a call to genocide. What is your evidence? Please stop evading.

The evidence is clear. We all know what it means. Talib is Palestinian. So she either knows it is stupid. Which is it?

It's funny how your unjustified conclusions get morphed into a critique of other people. Indeed, I, and perhaps others, have been arguing that many of these protesters are probably too ignorant to understand the historical connection between this phrase and a call to genocide. That has been precisely our point.

Yes I understand "the left is stupid" defense.

Isn't it obvious? Challenging you on your unsupported assertions.

Okay, but apparently your challenge is based upon "the left is stupid" approach. If you want to stay there then be my guest.

 

[RestoreTheJoy]

Why are you moving the goal posts? You claimed that she knew what she was doing was supporting a call to genocide. What is your evidence? Please stop evading.

It's funny how your unjustified conclusions get morphed into a critique of other people. Indeed, I, and perhaps others, have been arguing that many of these protesters are probably too ignorant to understand the historical connection between this phrase and a call to genocide. That has been precisely our point.

Isn't it obvious? Challenging you on your unsupported assertions.

Of course Tlaib knows what it means. If she did manage to remain ignorant, she has been more than informed by now by the Jewish segment of the Congress what "From the River to the Sea" means to them.

I thought liberals were all about respecting the other's safety and viewpoints? That's what they continually demand of others.

 

[GoldenBoy89]

Of course Tlaib knows what it means. If she did manage to remain ignorant, she has been more than informed by now by the Jewish segment of the Congress what "From the River to the Sea" means to them.

I thought liberals were all about respecting the other's safety and viewpoints? That's what they continually demand of others.

What about the viewpoints of the only Palestinian-American member of Congress?

 

[rjs330]

What about the viewpoints of the only Palestinian-American member of Congress?

I suppose if we had a congressman who thought all the blacks should be shipped back to Africa that should be respected too huh?

 

[RestoreTheJoy]

What about the viewpoints of the only Palestinian-American member of Congress?

Well don't the progressives always argue all bets are off about respect when it comes to gender identity? Why not religious identity. The Jewish members know that "From the river to the sea" means the removal of Israel.

 

[GoldenBoy89]

I suppose if we had a congressman who thought all the blacks should be shipped back to Africa that should be respected too huh?

I think we used to have some. Not sure of any of them to have been censured for their abhorrent views.