Thursday, July 18, 2019
BY STEPHEN GREEN | PJ Media
(Photo courtesy of Scherie Murray for Congress)
The Republican Party is the most racist, woman-hating, immigrant-fearing party ever, am I right?
The not-so-inside talk has been whether Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez's four-woman war against Nancy Pelosi would earn her a Democratic primary challenger next year, but her high-profile antics have drawn another Republican into the race to represent heavily Democratic NY14.
Fox News reports that Scherie Murray, a 38-year-old New York businesswoman and Jamaica native (she emigrated as a child), has launched a campaign to unseat AOC next year. She told Fox, "There is a crisis in Queens, and it’s called AOC." Murray went on to say, "Instead of focusing on us, she’s focusing on being famous. Mainly rolling back progress and authoring the job-killing Green New Deal and killing the Amazon-New York deal."
The polls might just bear out Murray's complaint against Ocasio-Cortez. The first-term congress critter was put on the defensive earlier this week, blasting a negative new poll -- conducted by her own party -- as a "mass distortion of reality."
In a nationwide survey, it was revealed that 74% of people recognized AOC by name, but only 22% viewed her favorably.
The poll was conducted by Democrats hoping to identify potential swing voters for 2020. Instead what they found was that the party's oh-so-public up-and-comers are almost universally loathed.
Ellie Bufkin reported for the Washington Examiner:
Fellow "squad" member Rep. Ilhan Omar was recognized by 53% of participants and viewed favorably by only 9%. Other questions on the poll included approval of socialist policies, which showed only 18% of participants viewed favorably. Democrats looking ahead to the 2020 election characterized the results as, "Socialism is toxic to these voters."
Back in the Bronx, Murray agreed, saying that socialism is "far to the left and it is not connecting with everyday Americans."
You'll notice that Murray doesn't mention Donald Trump or her own party affiliation, which might be smart given that Cook rates New York's 14th Congressional District at D+29 -- a daunting figure for any Republican to overcome.
Nevertheless, Murray is actually the fifth Republican to announce a challenge. She joins a crowded field already including former police officer John Cummings, contractor Miguel Hernandez, journalist Ruth Papazian, and businessman Antoine Tucker.
Ocasio-Cortez is unpopular even at home, where people presumably know her best. The Daily Caller reported in May that her favorability rating was just 20% with her own voters, with an unfavorable rating of 44% -- and climbing.
Establishment Democrats strategy might be to endure the embarrassment of primarying their own member, in order to save a safe seat from a possible GOP upset.
No matter how it plays out, you can be sure AOC will ride the national headlines all the way to her final destination, wherever and whenever that might be. Given her sky-high negatives, it's hard to see how that could be bad news for Republicans, and may be even good news for exhausted voters in the Bronx.
As for Scherie Murray, the GOP is always in need of a fresh faces, and a female-minority-immigrant-millennial-entrepreneur might be one the freshest of all.
Wednesday, July 17, 2019
'The President Won This One': CNN's Tapper Details How Trump Outflanked Ocasio-Cortez And Her Leninist Girl Scout Troop
By Matt Vespa | Townhall.com
Source: AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite
House Democrats may have appeared united in the resolution condemning President Trump for a series of tweets aimed at Reps. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY), Ilhan Omar (D-MN), Rashida Tlaib (D-MI), and Ayanna Pressley (D-MA), but behind the scenes we have chaos.
A few talked to Tapper off the record and noted this whole fiasco has been a massive win for the Trump White House.
There was infighting between AOC and Speaker Pelosi, which is good, but what’s even better is forcing the Democratic leadership to re-embrace this Leninist Girl Scout Troop from Hell and their extremist agenda and anti-Semitic remarks. Oh, and Omar made sure to make it clear to CBS’s Gayle King that she doesn’t regret her remarks.
"The president won this one,” said one House Democrat to Tapper, “What the president has done is politically brilliant. Pelosi was trying to marginalize these folks and the president has now identified the entire party with them."
There were also worries that AOC and her crew’s antics won’t help moderate House Democrats keep their seats in 2020. With them defining the party, that’s very possible. Have you seen the polling? The agenda peddled by these women are viewed as straight trash.
“Anything that takes away from bread and butter issues is playing into his [Trump’s] hands, said another Democrat.
There’s also great hesitancy to defend this quartet over their absurd claims that we have concentration camps on the southern border in a not so subtle reference to the Nazi Holocaust.
The irony is that soon after these allegations were lobbed by AOC, she quoted a Nazi sympathizer on Twitter. And defending these women means defending their anti-Semitic antics, which Omar has been their top quarterback.
While some tried to work on a package to help the overcrowding in the detention centers, this crew attacked them for being complicit for putting kids in cages. Why? Well, anything that enforces immigration law is seen that way. It’s evil in their eyes. They’re for open borders.
“I can't tell you the number of Members who are angry and annoyed about them criticizing us,” said another Democrat.
Where were these people when the House tried to condemn anti-Semitism. Over the weekend, Trump said that these women should go back to their crime-infested places from whence they came, fix it, and come back. He later doubled down and said if they don’t like it here, they can leave.
Oh, and there’s the whole part about this four-headed monster backing primary challenged. AOC and her Justice Democrats have said they are in no way backing off from possibly challenging incumbent Democrats next year. Needless to say, that hasn’t sat well with their Democratic colleagues. It looks like Trump just outflanked them.
House votes to kill Rep. Al Green's resolution to impeach Trump
The House of Representatives on Wednesday voted to set aside a resolution by Rep. Al Green, D-Texas, to introduce article of impeachment against President Trump – the third time the Houston-area lawmaker has taken a shot at impeaching the president, but the first since Democrats regained control of the House.
Lawmakers voted 332-95 to table Green’s resolution, which was widely opposed by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., and other top Democrats worried that the measure would force vulnerable swing-district lawmakers into peril ahead of the 2020 elections.
The bipartisan vote shelved any chance of bringing forth articles of impeachment against Trump in the near future.
"The president has committed an impeachable offense," Green said on the House floor earlier on Wednesday. "Yesterday, we condemned him for that. Today is our opportunity to punish him."
137 Democrats voted in favor of tabling the resolution compared to just 95 who voted against shelving it. Only one lawmaker, Rep. Peter DeFazio, D-Ore., voted present.
Trump tweeted afterward, "The United States House of Representatives has just overwhelmingly voted to kill the Resolution on Impeachment, 332-95-1. This is perhaps the most ridiculous and time consuming project I have ever had to work on."
Green later denied he was playing into the president's hands. "The president, at some point, will be impeached... people are starting to pay attention," the congressman said.
Instead of moving ahead with articles of impeachment, most Democrats have appeared to prefer waiting to see if a stronger case for removal could be developed that would win broader public support, and they're eagerly awaiting next week's scheduled testimony to two House committees by former Special Counsel Robert Mueller.
"With all due respect in the world for him, we have six committees that are working on following the facts in terms of any abuse of power, obstruction of justice and the rest that the president may have engaged in," Pelosi said. "That is the serious path that we're on."
Recent polling has shown majorities opposed impeachment. Even if the House voted to impeach Trump, which would amount to filing formal charges, the Republican-run Senate would be unlikely to remove him from office.
The showdown over Green's resolution also came amid tensions between Pelosi and the same four progressive congresswomen of color whom Trump singled out in a tweet and implored them to "go back and help fix the totally broken and crime infested places from which they came. Then come back and show us how it is done."
All four of the women Trump apparently singled out – Reps. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York, Ilhan Omar of Minnesota, Rashida Tlaib of Michigan and Ayanna Pressley of Massachusetts – are American citizens and three of the four were born in the United States.
The four have waged an increasingly personal clash with Pelosi over how assertively the House should try restraining Trump's ability to curb immigration.
But, if anything, Trump's tweets may have eased some of that tension, with Pelosi telling Democrats at a closed-door meeting Tuesday, "We are offended by what he said about our sisters," according to an aide who described the private meeting to The Associated Press on condition of anonymity.
The freshman lawmakers also have been vocal advocates for Trump’s impeachment.
"Opening an impeachment inquiry is exactly what we must do when the President obstructs justice, advises witnesses to ignore legal subpoenas, & more," Ocasio-Cortez tweeted last month.
The House late Tuesday voted to condemn Trump’s comments after a bizarre floor fight when Pelosi was found to have violated a House rule over decorum.
Despite a lobbying effort by Trump and party leaders for a unified GOP front, four Republicans voted to condemn his remarks: moderate Reps. Brian Fitzpatrick of Pennsylvania, Fred Upton of Michigan, Will Hurd of Texas and Susan Brooks of Indiana, who is retiring. Also backing the measure was Michigan's independent Rep. Justin Amash, who left the GOP this month after becoming the party's sole member of Congress to back a Trump impeachment inquiry.
Fox News' Mike Arroyo, Chad Pergram and The Associated Press contributed to this report.
Tuesday, July 16, 2019
By Sandra K. Yocum
Photo: Black Architects from the 19th and 20th Centuries, Getty Image
Before the Civil War, blacks learned the building trade to benefit their owners, but after the Civil War, they passed their skills to their children and these budding architects would eventually attend school and lead the way for other black architects.
Robert R. Taylor (1868 – 1942), Getty Image
One of these pioneer architects, Robert R. Taylor (1868 – 1942), became the first accredited black architect and a graduate of Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) in 1892. Booker T. Washington recruited him to establish the Tuskegee Institute in Alabama. Later, the school of architecture would be named the Robert R. Taylor School of Architecture and Construction Science (TSACS).
Other architects would follow such as Wallace A. Rayfield (1873 – 1941), Moses McKissack III (1879 – 1952), and Julian Abel (1881 – 1950). Many of these architects did not sign their work and did not receive credit for their efforts.
Julian Abel (1881-1950), Getty Image
Julian Abel was not given credit in his lifetime for the beautiful works of art on the Duke University campus such as the gothic Duke University Chapel. At the time he designed these buildings for the campus, Duke was a whites-only university. It would be the 1980s until Abel was given credit for his work at Duke University and in 2016, Duke named a campus quad after him.
Rayfield was the second formally trained black architect and his buildings played an essential role in the Civil Rights Movement; his 16th Street Baptist Church (completed in 1911) was the site of the 1963 bomb that killed four black teenage girls.
McKissack III established one of the earliest black-architecture firms in the U.S., today the firm, McKissack & McKissack managed the building of the National Museum of African American History and Culture in Washington D.C.
Norma Merrick Sklarek (1928 -2012), Getty Image
Norma Merrick Sklarek (1928 -2012) called the “Rosa Parks of architecture,” was one of the first black women in architecture; she co-founded one of the first women-architectural firms, Siegel-Sklarek-Diamond in 1985, with two other women-architects, Margot Siegel (1925 – ) and Katherine Diamond (1954 –).
Paul R. Williams (1894 – 1980), Getty Image
The twentieth century would include Paul R. Williams (1894 – 1980), the architect of the stars as well as designing the LAX Theme Building, and a significant architect for the city of Long Beach, California. Click here to view a video about Williams.
Marshall Purnell (1950-), Getty Image
J. Max Bond ( 1935 – 2009) who was also involved with the National Museum of African American History and Culture; and Marshall Purnell(1950 – ) considered one of the most accomplished architects in United States today with projects that include Washington Convention Center, Washington Nationals Baseball Park, Washington NBA and NHL Venue Verizon Center, and the National Martin Luther King Memorial.
In 1930, there were only 60 registered black architects, but today, there are more than 2,278.
About the author: Sandra K. Yocum is the Founder/President of the Yocum African-American History Association (YAAHA) that is dedicated to the restoration and preservation of the events which shaped the lives and contributions of African-Americans. Information can be found at: www.itsmorningagain.com
Other Articles by Sandra K. Yocum:
Siege of Vienna, 1683 (via Wikipedia)
According to Turkish historian Erhan Afyoncu, “Austria acts against Muslims almost every day because of their subconscious fear of Turks. Austrians have not forgotten the fear and their emperor’s escape in the Battle of Vienna in 1683. When Turks were defeated in the Battle of Vienna, Europeans were so happy…”
This is true.
As such, a brief refresher on the Siege of Vienna—the anniversary of which is today—is in order:
The largest Islamic army ever to invade European territory—which is saying much considering that countless invasions preceded it since the eighth century—came and surrounded Vienna, then the heart of the Holy Roman Empire and longtime nemesis of Islam, around July 15, 1683.
"Some 200,000 Muslim combatants, under the leadership of the Ottomans—the one state in nearly fourteen centuries of Islamic history most dedicated to and founded on the principles of jihad—invaded under the same rationale that so-called “radical” groups, such as the Islamic State, cite to justify their jihad on “infidels.” Or, to quote the leader of the Muslim expedition, Grand Vizier Kara Mustafa, because Vienna was perceived as the head of the infidel snake, it needed to be laid low so that “all the Christians would obey the Ottomans.”
This was no idle boast; sources describe this Mustafa as “fanatically anti-Christian.” After capturing a Polish town in 1674 he ordered all the Christian prisoners to be skinned alive and their stuffed hides sent as trophies to Ottoman Sultan Muhammad IV.
Such supremacist hate was standard and on display during the elaborate pre-jihad ceremony presaging the siege of Vienna. Then, the sultan, “desiring him [Mustafa] to fight generously for the Mahometan faith,” to quote a contemporary European source, placed “the standard of the Prophet…into his hands for the extirpation of infidels, and the increase of Muslemen.”
Once the massive Muslim army reached and surrounded the walls of Vienna, Mustafa followed protocol. In 628, his prophet Muhammad had sent an ultimatum to Emperor Heraclius: aslam taslam, “submit [to Islam] and have peace.” Heraclius rejected the summons, jihad was declared against Christendom (as enshrined in Koran 9:29), and in a few decades, two-thirds of the then Christian world—including Spain, all of North Africa, Egypt, and Greater Syria—were conquered.
Now, over a thousand years later, the same ultimatum of submission to Islam or death had reached the heart of Europe. Although the Viennese commander did not bother to respond to the summons, graffiti inside the city—including “Muhammad, you dog, go home!”—seems to capture its mood.
So it would be war. On the next day, Mustafa unleashed all hell against the city’s walls; and for two months, the holed-up and vastly outnumbered Viennese suffered plague, dysentery, starvation, and many casualties—including women and children—in the name of jihad.
Then, on September 12, when the city had reached its final extremity, and the Muslims were about to burst through, Vienna’s prayers were answered. As an anonymous Englishman explained:
After a siege of sixty days, accompanied with a thousand difficulties, sicknesses, want of provisions, and great effusion of blood, after a million of cannon and musquet shot, bombs, granadoes, and all sorts of fireworks, which has changed the face of the fairest and most flourishing city in the world, disfigured and ruined [it] . . . heaven favorably heard the prayers and tears of a cast down and mournful people.
The formidable king of Poland, John Sobieski, had finally come at the head of 65,000 heavily-armored Poles, Austrians, and Germans—all hot to avenge the beleaguered city. Arguing that “It is not a city alone that we have to save, but the whole of Christianity, of which the city of Vienna is the bulwark,” Sobieski led a thunderous cavalry charge—history’s largest—against and totally routed the Muslim besiegers.
Although a spectacular victory, the aftermath was gory: before fleeing, the Muslims ritually slaughtered some 30,000 Christian captives collected during their march to Vienna—raping the women beforehand. On entering the relieved city, the liberators encountered piles of corpses, sewage, and rubble everywhere.
It is this history of Islamic aggression—beginning in the fourteenth century when Muslims first established a foothold in Eastern Europe (Thrace), and into the twentieth century when the Ottoman sultanate finally collapsed—that informs Eastern European views on Islam. As one modern Pole, echoing the words of Sobieski, said, “A religious war between Christianity and Islam is once again underway in Europe, just like in the past.”
Whereas Western nations cite lack of integration, economic disparities, and grievances to explain away the exponential growth of terrorism, violence, and sexual assaults that come with living alongside large, resistant-to-assimilation Muslim populations, Eastern nations tend to see only a continuity of hostility.
Note: The above account is excerpted from Sword and Scimitar: Fourteen Centuries of War between Islam and the West — a book that CAIR and its Islamist allies did everything they could to prevent the U.S. Army War College from learning about.
Monday, July 15, 2019
President Trump doubled down Monday after taking heavy fire for inflammatory tweets calling on Democratic congresswomen to "go back" to where they came from … as he called on those same lawmakers to "apologize" and chastised the party for defending them.
"When will the Radical Left Congresswomen apologize to our Country, the people of Israel and even to the Office of the President, for the foul language they have used, and the terrible things they have said," Trump tweeted Monday. "So many people are angry at them & their horrible and disgusting actions."
He continued: "If Democrats want to unite around the foul language & racist hatred spewed from the mouths and actions of these very unpopular & unrepresentative Congresswomen, it will be interesting to see how it plays out. I can tell you that they have made Israel feel abandoned by the U.S."
Infighting between the Democratic establishment led by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and young progressives led by Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., effectively paused Sunday when they united to condemn the president's Twitter broadside as racist. The offending tweets had said "Democrat Congresswomen" should go back and fix the "corrupt" and "crime infested places" they came from and then "come back and show us how it's done."
Those women, Ocasio-Cortez, Rep. Rashida Tlaib, D-Mich., Rep. Ilhan Omar, D-Minn., and Rep. Ayanna Pressley, D-Mass., had recently been at odds with Pelosi, with Ocasio-Cortez accusing the speaker of targeting young women of color in Congress with dismissive comments she made in a New York Times interview.
But Pelosi came to their defense after Trump's tweets.
"When @realDonaldTrump tells four American Congresswomen to go back to their countries, he reaffirms his plan to 'Make America Great Again' has always been about making America white again," she tweeted Sunday. "Our diversity is our strength and our unity is our power."
Ocasio-Cortez also wrote Monday: "It’s important to note that the President’s words yday, telling four American Congresswomen of color 'go back to your own country,' is hallmark language of white supremacists. Trump feels comfortable leading the GOP into outright racism, and that should concern all Americans."
Of the four freshmen, only Omar was born outside the United States.
Trump appeared unbowed Sunday night, suggesting it was "so sad" to see Democrats sticking up for the lawmakers.
AOC ACCUSES CONGRESS OF USING WOMEN, MINORITIES AS 'BARGAINING CHIPS' WHO HAVE BEEN 'AUCTIONED OFF' FOR DECADES
"So sad to see the Democrats sticking up for people who speak so badly of our Country and who, in addition, hate Israel with a true and unbridled passion. Whenever confronted, they call their adversaries, including Nancy Pelosi, 'RACIST,'" Trump tweeted. "Their disgusting language... and the many terrible things they say about the United States must not be allowed to go unchallenged."
He continued, "If the Democrat Party wants to continue to condone such disgraceful behavior, then we look even more forward to seeing you at the ballot box in 2020!"
Trump's mentions of Israel are likely in reference to multiple comments made by Omar, who was chastised by Republicans for tweeting messages with anti-Semitic tropes. The "disgusting language" may have been referring to Tlaib, who said upon taking office, "We're going to impeach the motherf-----."
Fox News' Frank Miles contributed to this report.
Sunday, July 14, 2019
By Ayaan Hirsi Ali | The Wall Street Journal
Democratic Rep. Ilhan Omar at a news conference in Washington, April 10. PHOTO: JIM BOURG/REUTERS
I was born in Somalia and grew up amid pervasive Muslim anti-Semitism. Hate is hard to unlearn without coming to terms with how you learned it.
I once opened a speech by confessing to a crowd of Jews that I used to hate them.
It was 2006 and I was a young native of Somalia who’d been elected to the Dutch Parliament.
The American Jewish Committee was giving me its Moral Courage Award. I felt honored and humbled, but a little dishonest if I didn’t own up to my anti-Semitic past.
So I told them how I’d learned to blame the Jews for everything.
Fast-forward to 2019.
A freshman congresswoman from Minnesota has been infuriating the Jewish community and discomfiting the Democratic leadership with her expressions of anti-Semitism.
Like me, Ilhan Omar was born in Somalia and exposed at an early age to Muslim anti-Semitism.
Some of the members of my 2006 AJC audience have asked me to explain and respond to Ms. Omar’s comments, including her equivocal apologies.
Their main question is whether it is possible for Ms. Omar to unlearn her evident hatred of Jews—and if so, how to help.
In my experience it is difficult, perhaps impossible, to unlearn hate without coming to terms with how you learned to hate.
Most Americans are familiar with the classic Western flavors of anti-Semitism: the Christian, European, white-supremacist and Communist types.
But little attention has been paid to the special case of Muslim anti-Semitism.
That is a pity because today it is anti-Semitism’s most zealous, most potent and most underestimated form.
I never heard the term “anti-Semitism” until I moved to the Netherlands in my 20s. But I had firsthand familiarity with its Muslim variety.
As a child in Somalia, I was a passive consumer of anti-Semitism.
Things would break, conflicts would arise, shortages would occur—and adults would blame it all on the Jews.
When I was a little girl, my mom often lost her temper with my brother, with the grocer or with a neighbor. She would scream or curse under her breath “Yahud!” followed by a description of the hostility, ignominy or despicable behavior of the subject of her wrath.
It wasn’t just my mother; grown-ups around me exclaimed “Yahud!” the way Americans use the F-word.
I was made to understand that Jews—Yahud—were all bad.
No one took any trouble to build a rational framework around the idea—hardly necessary, since there were no Jews around. But it set the necessary foundation for the next phase of my development.
At 15, I became an Islamist by joining the Muslim Brotherhood. I began attending religious and civil-society events, where I received an education in the depth and breadth of Jewish villainy. This was done in two ways.
The first was theological. We were taught that the Jews betrayed our prophet Muhammad.
Through Quranic verses (such as 7:166, 2:65 and 5:60), we learned that Allah had eternally condemned them, that they were not human but descendants of pigs and monkeys, that we should aspire to kill them wherever we found them.
We were taught to pray: “Dear God, please destroy the Jews, the Zionists, the state of Israel. Amen.”
We were taught that the Jews occupied the Holy Land of Palestine. We were shown pictures of mutilated bodies, dead children, wailing widows and weeping orphans. Standing over them in military uniform were Israeli soldiers with large guns. We were told their killing of Palestinians was wanton, unprovoked and an expression of their hatred for Muslims.
The theological and the political stories were woven together, as in the Hamas charter: “The Prophet, Allah bless him and grant him salvation, has said: ‘The Day of Judgment will not come about until Muslims fight the Jews (killing the Jews), when the Jew will hide behind stones and trees. The Stones and trees will say, “O Muslims, O Abdulla, there is a Jew behind me, come and kill me.” ’ . . . There is no solution for the Palestine question except through Jihad.”
That combination of narratives is the essence of Muslim anti-Semitism.
Mohammed Morsi, the longtime Muslim Brotherhood leader who died June 17 but was president of Egypt for a year beginning in 2012, urged in 2010: “We must never forget, brothers, to nurse our children and our grandchildren on hatred for them: for Zionists, for Jews”—two categories that tend to merge along with allegations of world domination.
European anti-Semitism is also a mixture.
Medieval Christian antipathy toward “Christ killers” blended with radical critiques of capitalism in the 19th century and racial pseudoscience in the 20th. But before the Depression, anti-Semitic parties were not mass parties. Nor have they been since World War II.
Muslim anti-Semitism has a broader base, and its propagators have had the time and resources to spread it widely.
To see how, begin at the top.
Most men (and the odd woman) in power in Muslim-majority countries are autocrats.
Even where there are elections, corrupt rulers play an intricate game to stay in power.
Their signature move is the promise to “free” the Holy Land—that is, to eliminate the Jewish state.
The rulers of Iran are explicit about this goal.
Other Muslim leaders may pay lip service to the peace process and the two-state solution, but government anti-Semitism is frequently on display at the United Nations, where Israel is repeatedly compared to apartheid South Africa, accused of genocide and demonized as racist.
Media also play their part.
There is very little freedom of expression in Muslim-majority countries, and state-owned media churn out anti-Semitic and anti-Israel propaganda daily—as do even media groups that style themselves as critical of Muslim autocracies, such as Al Jazeera and Al-Manar.
Then there are the mosques, madrassas and other religious institutions.
Schools in general, especially college campuses, have been an Islamist stronghold for generations in Muslim-majority countries. That matters because graduates go on to leadership positions in the professions, media, government and other institutions.
Refugee camps are another zone of indoctrination.
They are full of vulnerable people, and Islamists prey on them. They come offering food, tents and first aid, followed by education. They establish madrassas in the camps, then indoctrinate the kids with a message that consists in large part of hatred for Jews and rejection of Israel.
Perhaps—I do not know—this is what happened to Ms. Omar in the four years she spent in a refugee camp in Kenya as a child. Or perhaps she became acquainted with Islamist anti-Semitism in Minnesota, where her family settled when she was 12. In any case, her preoccupation with the Jews and Israel would otherwise be hard to explain.
Spreading anti-Semitism through all these channels is no trivial matter—and this brings us to the question of resources. “It’s all about the Benjamins baby,” Ms. Omar tweeted in February, implying that American politicians support Israel only because of Jewish financial contributions.
The irony is that the resources available to propagate Islamist ideologies, with their attendant anti-Semitism, vastly exceed what pro-Israel groups spend in the U.S.
Since the early 1970s, the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia has spent vast sums to spread Wahhabi Islam abroad. Much of this funding is opaque, but estimates of the cumulative sum run as high as $100 billion.
Thousands of schools in Pakistan, funded with Saudi money, “teach a version of Islam that leads [to] anti-Western militancy,” according to Connecticut Sen. Chris Murphy—and, one might add, to an anti-Semitic militancy.
In recent years the Saudi leadership has tried to turn away from supporting this type of religious radicalism.
But increasingly Qatar seems to be taking over the Saudi role. In the U.S. alone, the Qatar Foundation has given $30.6 million over the past eight years to public schools, ostensibly for teaching Arabic and promoting cultural exchange.
For years, Qatar has hosted influential radical clerics such as Yusuf al-Qaradawi and provided them with a global microphone, and the country’s school textbooks have been criticized for anti-Semitism.
They present Jews as treacherous and crafty but also weak, wretched and cowardly; Islam is described as inherently superior. “The Grade 11 text discusses at length the issue of how non-Muslims should be treated,” the Middle East Media Research Institute reports. “It warns students not to form relationships with unbelievers, and emphasizes the principle of loyalty to Muslims and disavowal of unbelievers.”
The allegation that Jewish or Zionist money controls Congress is nonsensical.
The Center for Responsive Politics estimates that the Israeli government has spent $34 million on lobbying in Washington since 2017.
Saudis and Qataris spent a combined $51 million during the same period.
If we include foreign nongovernmental organizations, the pro-Israel lobbying figure rises to $63 million—less than the $68 billion spent lobbying for Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates.
In 2018 domestic American pro-Israeli lobbying—including but not limited to the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, or Aipac—totaled $5.1 million.
No comparable figures are available for domestic pro-Islamist lobbying efforts.
But as journalist Armin Rosen observes, Aipac’s 2018 total, at $3.5 million, was less than either the American Association of Airport Executives or the Association of American Railroads spent on lobbying.
Aipac’s influence has more to do with the power of its arguments than the size of its wallet.
Now consider the demographics. Jews were a minority in Europe in the 1930s, but a substantial one, especially in Central and Eastern Europe. Today Jews are at a much greater disadvantage.
For each Jew world-wide, there are 100 Muslims.
In many European countries—including France, Germany, the Netherlands and the U.K.—the Muslim population far exceeds the Jewish population, and the gap is widening. American Jews still outnumber Muslims but won’t by 2050.
The problem of Muslim anti-Semitism is much bigger than Ilhan Omar.
Condemning her, expelling her from the House Foreign Affairs Committee, or defeating her in 2020 won’t make the problem go away.
Islamists have understood well how to couple Muslim anti-Semitism with the American left’s vague notion of “social justice.”
They have succeeded in couching their agenda in the progressive framework of the oppressed versus the oppressor.
Identity politics and victimhood culture also provide Islamists with the vocabulary to deflect their critics with accusations of “Islamophobia,” “white privilege” and “insensitivity.”
A perfect illustration was the way Ms. Omar and her allies were able to turn a House resolution condemning her anti-Semitism into a garbled “intersectional” rant in which Muslims emerged as the most vulnerable minority in the league table of victimhood.
As for me, I eventually unlearned my hatred of Jews, Zionists and Israel.
As an asylum seeker turned student turned politician in Holland, I was exposed to a complex set of circumstances that led me to question my own prejudices.
Perhaps I didn’t stay in the Islamist fold long enough for the indoctrination to stick. Perhaps my falling out with my parents and extended family after I left home led me to a wider reappraisal of my youthful beliefs. Perhaps it was my loss of religious faith.
In any event, I am living proof that one can be born a Somali, raised as an anti-Semite, indoctrinated as an anti-Zionist—and still overcome all this to appreciate the unique culture of Judaism and the extraordinary achievement of the state of Israel.
If I can make that leap, so perhaps can Ms. Omar.
Yet that is not really the issue at stake. For she and I are only two individuals.
The real question is what, if anything, can be done to check the advance of the mass movement that is Muslim anti-Semitism.
Absent a world-wide Muslim reformation, followed by an Islamic enlightenment, I am not sure I know.
Ms. Hirsi Ali is a research fellow at Stanford University’s Hoover Institution.