The Anti-Hate Resolution

The Anti-Hate Resolution began its legislative life as a resolution to condemn Congressperson Ilhan Omar for her supposed anti-Semitic statements. That is…to condemn the actions but not condemn her by name, although everyone knows what it was all about.

In truth, the only actual hate message Omar is responsible for, in this manufactured crisis, is her 2012 tweet: “Israel has hypnotized the world, may Allah awaken the people and help them see the evil doings of Israel.”

-which we will note is not anti-Semitic, but it certainly is anti-Israel. She has since apologized multiple times for this message. The apology does not negate any desire anyone may have to judge her by this statement.

Since Ilhan Omar, whom happens to be a Muslim, has entered the House of Representatives this year, there have been several other instances in which her colleagues, both Democrat and Republican, as well as many media outlets, have once again charged her with antisemitism.

She is not anti-Semitic and has made no such statements, although according to many she has by tweeting this statement, “It’s all about the benjamins baby,” a mislabeling which I have thoroughly dissected in an earlier post. <–read it. The true origin of this entire controversy, is this ill considered, pro-Israel/anti-Palestinian/anti-Free Speech legislation which Rep. Omar and many others have issue with, including myself.

The Anti-Hate Resolution, is originally the Anti-Semitism Resolution with enough additions and illustrated examples to address a smattering of hate for nearly everyone to enjoy. I would call it a well meaning resolution, but because of its origin and the fact it’s new found inclusivity is only due to pressure, I’d prefer to wipe my ass with it.

*The full text of the resolution is below*

It wasn’t too hard to tease out what this document originally looked like. It’s final form is a mishmash of many classes of people whom may be victims of hate or discrimination and supported by hastily added examples as proofs. The final product in seeking consensus, due to inter-party pressure, does not solely address the original “misdeed” and will succeed in nothing except perhaps the desired effect of silencing dissension where Congress will accept none.

What still exists, by proof of this document is-

-The inability of members of our government to differentiate between the State of Israel as a geopolitical entity and the Jewish faith; whereas Ilhan Omar has no such difficulty. To project their own confusion to Omar as if she shares the same bewildered condition and condemn her for that defect.

-The unwillingness of members of our government to allow for the application of the same type of scrutiny to Political Action Committees (PACs) whose intentions they might find questionable, such as: the NRA or the American Petroleum Institute or Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers, etc., to a PAC they might give deferential treatment. -The inability to recognize the same reasonable scrutiny may be applied equally from anyone to any such entity seeking the attention of Congress.

-And further, to presume to declare that questioning a PAC’s desire for “allegiance,” must surely be questioning that PAC’s member’s national loyalty (and therefore implying a dual loyalty) instead of recognizing a particular, dubious piece of legislation desired by that PAC is a subject in which we are announcing our government’s loyalties, which could only be supported if a war or embargo had been declared, a war or embargo of which none of us were aware.

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

  • I am returning to highlight this statement again. To point out these false narratives be bounced all around as fact. Omar used the word “allegiance” not “loyalty” and certainly not by implication “dual loyalty”. Secondly, and perhaps more important, the direction of her statement is to congresspeople influenced by PACS, not the one whom is seeking to influence. Read the sentence again. She is not talking about someone who represents Israel or by inferred extension Jews, she is talking about congresspeople.
  • “To push congresspeople for allegiance to a foreign country.” Understand?
  • She did not say, “I want to talk about political influence in this country that says it is ok for PAC members to have allegiance to a foreign country.” Get it? THE ALLEGIANCE BEING “PUSHED” IS THAT OF THE CONGRESSPEOPLE. So stop this nonsense. FFS.

There is something wrong with her statement. It is that she omitted, –at the expense of another recognized group of people and in contravention of the first amendment, although in the context of her speech, “at the expense of another recognized group,” is more than fucking apparent as what she was discussing was Palestinians.

How about if we clutch our pearls over what else she had said, in that anti-semitic speech? “Every single time we say something, regardless of what it is we say, that is supposed to be about foreign policy or engagement; our efficacy about ending oppression, or the freeing of every human life and wanting dignity, we get to be labeled in something that ends the discussion, because we end up defending that (the label), and nobody ever gets to have the debate of what is happening with Palestine. We get to be called names, we get to be labeled as hateful. No, we know what hate looks like.”

Omar never implied that Jews controlled the government or made any reference to such a conspiracy. She neither stereotyped Jews for having money nor “troped” them for spending it. She did, however, question our government representatives for being influenced by it.

******

Here’s the full text of the resolution if you care:

116TH CONGRESS 1ST SESSION H. RES. ll Condemning anti-Semitism as hateful expressions of intolerance that are contradictory to the values and aspirations that define the people of the United States and condemning anti-Muslim discrimination and bigotry against minorities as hateful expressions of intolerance that are contrary to the values and aspirations of the United States. IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Ml. llllll submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on lllllllllllllll RESOLUTION Condemning anti-Semitism as hateful expressions of intolerance that are contradictory to the values and aspirations that define the people of the United States and condemning anti-Muslim discrimination and bigotry against minorities as hateful expressions of intolerance that are contrary to the values and aspirations of the United States. Whereas the first amendment to the Constitution established the United States as a country committed to the principles of tolerance and religious freedom, and the 14th amendment to the Constitution established equal protec
tion of the laws as the heart of justice in the United States; Whereas adherence to these principles is vital to the progress of the American people and the diverse communities and religious groups of the United States; Whereas whether from the political right, center, or left, bigotry, discrimination, oppression, racism, and imputations of dual loyalty threaten American democracy and have no place in American political discourse; Whereas white supremacists in the United States have exploited and continue to exploit bigotry and weaponize hate for political gain, targeting traditionally persecuted peoples, including African Americans, Native Americans, and other people of color, Jews, Muslims, Hindus, Sikhs, immigrants, and others with verbal attacks, incitement, and violence; Whereas the Reverend Martin Luther King, Jr., taught that persecution of any American is an assault on the rights and freedoms of all Americans; Whereas on August 11 and 12, 2017, self-identified neo-Confederates, white nationalists, neo-Nazis, and Ku Klux Klansmen held white supremacist events in Charlottesville, Virginia, where they marched on a synagogue under the Nazi swastika, engaged in racist and anti-Semitic demonstrations and committed brutal and deadly violence against peaceful Americans; Whereas a white nationalist murdered nine African American worshipers at the Emanuel African Methodist Episcopal Church in Charleston, South Carolina, on the evening of June 17, 2015, in the hopes of igniting a nationwide race war;
Whereas on October 27, 2018, the perpetrator of the deadliest attack on Jewish people in the history of the United States killed 11 worshippers at the Tree of Life Synagogue building in Pittsburgh and reportedly stated that he ‘‘wanted all Jews to die’’; Whereas anti-Semitism is the centuries-old bigotry and form of racism faced by Jewish people simply because they are Jews; Whereas in 2017 the Federal Bureau of Investigation reported a 37 percent increase in hate crimes against Jews or Jewish institutions and found that attacks against Jews or Jewish institutions made up 58.1 percent of all religious-based hate crimes; Whereas there is an urgent need to ensure the safety and security of Jewish communities, including synagogues, schools, cemeteries, and other institutions; Whereas Jews are the targets of anti-Semitic violence at even higher rates in many other countries than they are in the United States; Whereas it is a foreign policy priority of the United States to monitor and combat anti-Semitism abroad; Whereas anti-Semitism includes blaming Jews as Jews when things go wrong; calling for, aiding, or justifying the killing or harming of Jews in the name of a radical ideology or extremist view of religion; or making mendacious, dehumanizing, demonizing, or stereotyped allegations about Jews; Whereas Jewish people are subject in the media and political campaigns to numerous other dangerous anti-Semitic myths as well, including that Jews control the United
States Government or seek global, political, and financial domination and that Jews are obsessed with money; Whereas scapegoating and targeting of Jews in the United States have persisted for many years, including by the Ku Klux Klan, the America First Committee, and by modern neo-Nazis; Whereas accusing Jews of being more loyal to Israel or to the Jewish community than to the United States constitutes anti-Semitism because it suggests that Jewish citizens cannot be patriotic Americans and trusted neighbors, when Jews have loyally served our Nation every day since its founding, whether in public or community life or military service; Whereas accusations of dual loyalty generally have an insidious and pernicious history, including— (1) the discriminatory incarceration of Americans of Japanese descent during World War II on their basis of race and alleged dual loyalty; (2) the Dreyfus affair, when Alfred Dreyfus, a Jewish French artillery captain, was falsely convicted of passing secrets to Germany based on his Jewish background; (3) when the loyalty of President John F. Kennedy was questioned because of his Catholic faith; and (4) the post-9/11 conditions faced by Muslim-Americans in the United States, including Islamophobia and false and vicious attacks on and threats to Muslim-Americans for alleged association with terrorism; Whereas anti-Muslim bigotry entails prejudicial attitudes towards Muslims and people who are perceived to be Muslim, including the irrational belief that Muslims are inherently violent, disloyal, and foreign;
Whereas Muslims and people perceived to be Muslim are subjected to false and dangerous stereotypes and myths including unfair allegations that they sympathize with individuals who engage in violence or terror or support the oppression of women, Jews, and other vulnerable communities; Whereas in 2017, mosques were bombed in Bloomington, Minnesota, and burned in Austin, Texas, Victoria, Texas, Bellevue, Washington, and Thonotosassa, Florida, and mass attacks on Muslim communities were planned against communities in Islamberg, New York, in 2019, Jacksonville, Florida, in 2017, and Garden City, Kansas, in 2016; Whereas the Federal Bureau of Investigation reported that hate crimes against Muslims or Muslim institutions in the United States increased by over 99 percent between 2014 and 2016; Whereas attacks motivated by bigotry against those who are Muslim or perceived to be Muslim have substantially increased since the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks; Whereas the violation of an individual’s civil rights based on his or her actual or perceived membership in a particular religious group clearly violates the Constitution and laws of the United States; and Whereas all Americans, including Jews, Muslims, and Christians and people of all faiths and no faith, have a stake in fighting anti-Semitism, as all Americans have a stake in fighting every form of bigotry and hatred against people based on religion, race, or place of birth and origin: Now, therefore, be it 1 Resolved, That the House of Representatives—
(1) rejects the perpetuation of anti-Semitic 2 stereotypes in the United States and around the 3 world, including the pernicious myth of dual loyalty 4 and foreign allegiance, especially in the context of 5 support for the United States-Israel alliance; 6 (2) condemns anti-Semitic acts and statements 7 as hateful expressions of intolerance that are con- 8 tradictory to the values that define the people of the 9 United States; 10 (3) reaffirms its support for the mandate of the 11 United States Special Envoy to Monitor and Combat 12 Anti-Semitism as part of the broader policy priority 13 of fostering international religious freedom and pro- 14 tecting human rights all over the world; 15 (4) rejects attempts to justify hatred or violent 16 attacks as an acceptable expression of disapproval or 17 frustration over political events in the Middle East 18 or elsewhere; 19 (5) acknowledges the harm suffered by Muslims 20 and others from the harassment, discrimination, and 21 violence that result from anti-Muslim bigotry; 22 (6) condemns anti-Muslim discrimination and 23 bigotry against all minorities as contrary to the val- 24 ues of the United States;
1 (7) condemns the death threats received by 2 Jewish and Muslim Members of Congress, including 3 in recent weeks; 4 (8) encourages law enforcement and govern- 5 ment officials to avoid conduct that raises the spec- 6 ter of unconstitutional profiling against anyone be- 7 cause of their race, religion, nationality, political, or 8 particular social group, including the assignment of 9 blame or targeting members of an entire religious 10 group for increased suspicion, based on the conduct 11 of a single individual or small group of individuals; 12 and 13 (9) encourages all public officials to confront 14 the reality of anti-Semitism, Islamophobia, racism, 15 and other forms of bigotry, as well as historical 16 struggles against them, to ensure that the United 17 States will live up to the transcendent principles of 18 tolerance, religious freedom, and equal protection as 19 embodied in the Declaration of Independence and 20 the first and 14th amendments to the Constitution.

7 thoughts on “The Anti-Hate Resolution

  1. Hello Sean. The vote is looking really bad for the republicans and some are changing their no votes to yes for passage. Seems that it is hard to explain why the are voting against a resolution to not discriminate. After all they thought this was going to be a big win for them. Steve King voted present. Hugs

    Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s