"...that the Council on American-Islamic Relations “was founded after 9/11, because they recognized that some people did something, ...."
You called it out in a prior column Mr. Stephens.
Ilhan Omar knows exactly what she is doing.
She dog-whistles to her constituents who weaponize "Islamaphobia," which acts as a shield against the reality that tens of millions of Muslims world-wide, based on Pew research, really do identify with "extremist" Islamic ideology. In Pakistan, Indonesia, Philippines, Afghanistan, Iran (Shi'ite version), Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Hamas, Hezbollah (Shi'ite version), and even in Somalia (the Shabab).
Omar is riding the crest of Democratic "identity politics," which is eroding Democratic values faster than anything Trump could do or say. Instead of working toward the "color blind" society of MLK, Jr. "identity politics" takes us back to tribalism and the assertion of a "superior ideology," in much the same way of "white supremacism."
I don't care about Omar's ethinic identity, or the fact that she wears a hijab (everyday wear in the Middle East). But I do care that she either engages in bigotry such as anti-Semitism, or others seek to "excuse" her "ignorance."
I really enjoyed the news that Omar turned for "guidance" recently, on "speaking better to Jews," to Minnesota attorney general Keith Ellison, the Louis Farrakhan acolyte.
Soon, we can send white racists to David Duke for a "better understanding of how to speak with people of color."
69
You reap what you sow, voters: Ms. Omar was legally and legitimately elected, just as President Trump was.
10
I think the difference is that none of the men in the hypothetical counter examples Bret gives were ever victims themselves. Omar comes from a world where she and people like her were systematically and frequently attacked, physically and rhetorically. Bret has a particular fascination with Omar that he doesn’t have for Palestinian kids shot at the border with Israel. Omar understands those kids and their friends.
I can’t think of another member of Congress who has experienced what Omar has experienced. Her perspective brings home to the US that there are real people being shot at by the powers that be, powers that get a lot of material support from the US and people like Bret.
I don’t want another 9/11. But stopping terrorist attacks in the US requires more than simply arming Israel and Saudi Arabia and screaming “you support terrorism” if you say so. It’s more complicated than that and Omar is going to make sure people like Bret see that whether he wants to or not.
15
Mr Stephens, I'm sorry you don't like Representative Omar's wording. Her timing of the CAIR founding is a concern, however, NO Congressperson seems to get their historical facts correct. Neither does Fearless Leader. You aren't in Israel anymore. As a member of the US press, you could learn to be more tolerant. Stop espousing the Israeli cause. They already get too much of our tax money.
26
Ok, maybe we should "be insulted by the evasiveness of the something and someone" claims about the September 11 attacks in the USA. Let's put it to the test and see if we can fix ourselves of other historical whitewashes.
The forced illegal relocation of the Cherokee Nation was perpetrated by Christian White Men. (Approximately four thousand people were killed by the relocation and placement in concentration camps, a.k.a. "reservations." That was 1 /4 of the entire Cherokee Nation.)
The the beating, whipping, and enforced slavery of Africans and their torture under Jim Crow was perpetrated by Christian White Men. (We don't have good statistics on those deaths.)
The misogynistic denial of basic human rights to women has been perpetrated by Christian White Men.
The theft of land from and forced illegal relocation of the Lakota Nation was perpetrated by and has been defended by Christian White Men.
The murder of the elected leaders of Congo, Iran, Chile, and Iraq was perpetrated by Christian White Men.
The murders at Sandy Hook Elementary, Las Vegas, Columbine High School, and Marjory Stoneman Douglass High School we perpetrated by Christian White Men.
We shouldn't minimize the criminal activity of this group by using language that hides their actions. (By the way, Bret Stephens bears a striking resemblance to those terrorists, so watch his words carefully.)
So, who needs to speak more clearly?
24
What's wrong with this headline? What does it infer?
6
It seems fair to point out that the 9/11 hijackers may indeed not qualify as Muslims in the eyes of true Muslims, anymore than purported “christians” ,.like James Jones, to real Christians or any other fanatic using religion as an excuse and pretext for actions that under closer analysis really just stem from fear, hate and insecurity. Was Hitler really a Christian, or leaders of Isis really Muslim in faith. If Actions delineate faith then it’s understandable why Ilhan Omar would not want to give people like Trump one more tool to stir up the pot that religion has created for endless war and prejudice when emplyed
22
I couldn't be happier that you are so outraged about this. You see, I've been outraged at things Republicans have said and done for decades while you all just stood around laughing.
Mr. Steve King, best known for his "cantaloupe calves" descriptor, has been spewing his nasty rhetoric for years. Only now that he has become a Republican liability has he been censured. I think he would have gotten away with his 'what's wrong with white supremacy?' comment if the Republicans hadn't been kicked in the butt in November. All of a sudden, your outrage meter is in the red zone? Oh, please.
So, don't give me this 'imagine if Steve King had said any of this' nonsense. He's said plenty, and you all stood by and said nothing as long as he was useful to you. Same with Donald "Birther" Trump. Ilhan Omar is around for five minutes and you're already freaking out about basically nothing? Talk about snowflakes.
I am thankful, daily, for fresh young voices like Ms. Omar's. I vehemently disagree that comments she's made are antisemitic. She's begun a much needed conversation about Jews/Muslims that's long overdue. After Netanyahu came here to torpedo the Iran Nuclear Deal, many of us Americans started wondering about things. We're not as unquestioningly supportive of Israel anymore.
'....some people did something" is nothing compared with "Muslims were dancing on rooftops in New Jersey" when the World Trade Center was hit. Nowhere near. Get over it.
74
Wow, great column incorporating all the white, right wing, male prejudices about this group of not-so-white-females including this swipe about 'the anti-Israel wokesters typified by Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.'
I presume that's because AOC objected to Israeli snipers shooting thousands of Palestinian protesters in Gaza. How dare she! Shooting unarmed brown people, especially if they're Arabs, has always received bipartisan support in congress. Not just a harbinger of Democratic decline, maybe even of life itself!
46
demographics are changing your writing is from a bygone era.... the era of unquestioned, unrecognized white privilege.
42
Oh Please, she no more speaks for the Democratic Party than Steve King speaks for the Republicans. Further more being anti Israeli shameful policy does not make you antisemitic. Shooting children throwing stones makes you wrong no matter what, stealing land from people is wrong no matter what and you cannot call yourself a democratic country and a religious monopoly at the same time.
36
It's really breathtaking to see a freshman member of Congress provoke such hyperbolic criticism and white-hot anger.
This tells me one thing: Omar scares her crtics.
Why?
Because she is questioning accepted wisdom on all things Israel. Her being a Muslim woman adds to the fear. Omar has taken on the accepted wisdom and raised fundamental and long-overdue questions about blind American support for Israel's government, particularly with Netanyahu.
Then there's a March Gallup poll:
The majority of Americans remain partial toward Israel in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, with 59% saying they sympathize more with the Israelis whereas 21% sympathize more with the Palestinians. While still widespread, sympathy toward Israel is down from 64% in 2018 and marks the lowest percentage favoring Israel since 2009. Meanwhile, the 21% sympathizing more with the Palestinians, statistically unchanged from a year ago, is the highest by one point in Gallup's trend since 2001.
So American support for Israel remains high, but just might be trending down.
202
With a deft slight of hand and excellent linguist skills - Bret 'proves' his argument.
While Omar may very well be provocative and often inflammatory towards Jews and others - her marks were indeed taken out of context in this case - which may be why Bret simply says they were not as his proof of his argument. Interesting.
Brian Stelter played out a clear line on how her remarks went viral and how it became so "big"
https://www.mediaite.com/tv/brian-stelter-says-right-wing-rage-machine-fueled-omar-news-cycle-this-controversy-was-created/
The defense as Bret calls it, is for the right wing attacks on on her every word - her comments in this case were a call to unity actually and how easy it is to demonize one group.
Trump on the other hand - and this is not tit for tat - is far more incendiary through both his platform ad president and his words MEANT to divide.
This is not the decline of the Democratic Party - she will be voted out if she continues in this vein - on the other hand Trump is the Republican party and bret's conservatism, his blind embrace of Israel, not matter what it does - is the end of the republican party - and if trump wins again - its the end of our democracy as we have know it.
Omar is a blip in the wheel of the Democrat party - Trump, Bolton, Mulvanney, Steven Miller and Sanders. These are the faces of the Republican Party that is now.
This is the harbinger of end of the your party.
279
Lets face facts: The Democrats have an excellent opportunity to dethrone perhaps the most dangerous president ever in 2020. But that will only be accomplished if they give the American people a legitimate alternative to what Trump offers. Instead of turning to the middle and moderation where the bulk of the people reside, the left wing of the party has taken over, or at least grabbed the bulk of the headlines. Omar and AOC are all the news, two women from minority groups who believe they can say anything they want and change the dynamic on a dime.
Next year's Democratic convention will be a fiasco....one candidate after another trying to one-up each other with radical left wing follies and concepts that simply do not play in the heartland or even in more liberal areas of the country.
I am afraid all they are going to do is give the GOP four more years in the White House and turn more and more moderates like me into either Republicans or those who simply no longer associated with the party of their youth.
In other words, the DEMS are shooting themselves in the foot.
666
@Seth How quickly we forget the large number of candidates the GOP had in 2016. They didn’t lose did they?
48
@Seth
The media has focused a lot of attention on the left most wing of the party whereas most of the party really is left of center...however, the far left is useful as a counterbalance to just how far far right the Gop has gone, and may serve as the force that brings the country back to the middle.
47
@RMG They didn't lose because there was one candidate that so differentiated himself from the other 16 that he was able to take the focus to himself. The other 16 neutralized each other and left the field to the residual.
I don't think the Democrats have anyone who will be able to do that. I wish some of them could, and I hope one will, but ... I'm afraid it will collapse in a rabble of squabbles and recriminations.
50
Thank you Mr. Stephens. Omar is currently an elected member of Congress. Expecting her to speak in that role is part of her job. When she falls short of that mark she is open to criticism. Those who attempt to excuse her by citing her background hold her to a lower, not a higher, standard.
849
@Suzanne Bee And Republicans, includidng Stephens, hold Trump to no standards.
78
@Suzanne Bee
Then again, there's the lowest standard of all: that of the President and the lowlives who kowtow to his every ignorant and hateful statement.
66
@Suzanne Bee Have you really listened to your President lately? There’s no comparison to either Omar or AOC yet you let him get away with condoning Nazis and the Alt Right, claiming immigrants are Rapists, Murders and Drug Mules, and locking up children in cages?
66
Ms. Omar makes vile and bigoted comments and then hides behind her trifecta of intersectionality---female, black and Muslim---and the Democratic party indulges her.
Just one more reason Trump will be re-elected next year.
119
Can you imagine the attacks on her had she said the Saudis hit the world Trade Towers? Individual one's pals? Can you imagine? Can you imagine Fox News if she said a white terrorist burned the Baptist church? Can you imagine?? Can you imagine if she spoke further and said that a white terrorists attacked the mosque in New Zealand? Come on, NYT. Really? Is this opinion piece necessary? No, it is not. And now you have encouraged more death threats against this woman. Disgraceful all the way around.
45
"Harbinger of Democratic Decline"? Oh, only in your deepest, fondest dreams buddy.
43
Nothing Donald Trump could ever do, were he to shoot someone on 5th avenue, or murder a child and eat its heart on national TV, could ever outrage a rock-ribbed Republican the way a muslim congresswoman can, by merely existing.
47
Where is your OPED on the white supremacy rampant among Republicans like the president and republicans in congress? Yet like good Republicans you all have the knives out for the brown young women in congress who have a voice and use it.
I hand Republicans one thing: unshakable reliance on brainwash and propaganda. You all are lockstep and focussed. That is all I hand to Republicans.
33
"With political power comes rhetorical responsibility."
The projection of Stephens' column is stunning. Who, pray tell, in the Republican party displays "rhetorical responsibility"? Certainly no one in the White House.
Bret Stephens, Harbinger of NYT Decline?
39
What I'm disgusted by are the lies and slanders that are the central feature of this column. Shame on you.
37
All I have to do is see the pictures of how Palestinian’s live, under Israeli rule, to know Congresswomen Omar was not being anti-Israel in her speeches. No one besides Times op-ed writers and Fox News propagandists parse with fine tuned combs, Congressional comments, as Stephens has done in this piece. No one would have paid a minute’s attention to Omar’s words unless they were out to attack her and her religion.
24
Forgetting for a moment how obsessed you guys on the right are with Omar, I want to point out that the reason so many young folks are not afraid to criticize Israel (not "Jews") and don't hold it in such high regard, is not because of anti-Semitism. It's because of the actions of Netanyahu over the years. And, too, it is because so many Israelis unabashedly love Donald Tr-mp, which indicates that something profoundly wrong is going on there.
35
Bret, what about the democracy of the Palestinians? They seem to be getting shot every Friday.
23
The furor over Omar’s comments just proves her point, which is that all Muslims including her are being unfairly tarred by the September 11 attackers. I did not find her choice of phrasing offensive in the slightest. The equivalent would be someone saying about Christchurch, “do not judge all white people based on something one person did.” That statement would not only be inoffensive, it would be obviously true.
And Omar’s statements about Israel are not anti-Semitic. Trump’s trade advisor Peter Navarro has said similar things about China and no one calls them racist. It is never racist to criticize a foreign country or government; it would only be racist to attack an entire ethnicity or race, and I have not seen anything from Omar suggesting criticism of all Jews rather than just Israel.
Charges of anti-Semitism are being used to shut down Americans’ freedom of speech when it comes to Israel. Many Americans boycott and divest from many different countries—Obama openly accused Romney in the 2012 presidential debates of investing in Chinese companies, and there are tons of articles advocating divestment and boycotts on China. Some people refuse to get gas at Citgo because it is owned by Venezuela. And of course, the government forces people to boycott Cuba and Iran. None of this is ever considered racist, and the government does not penalize people who do it. Omar is right to question why we are free to criticize and boycott every country in the world except for Israel.
31
It's *SO CUTE* when the 'Times uses Republicans to explain to Progressives (etc.) why we're doing it wrong.
The younger non-white women who were just elected to Congress are the harbingers of a new age and all the editorializing in the world by Republicans and the NYTimes isn't going to halt the ongoing demographic changes anymore than King Canute was able to command the halting of the tide.
16
This column takes the cake for fake outrage and hypocrisy. Where is the outcry from the GOP over Trumps' daily lies, grifting, and ignorance? His contempt for education and the rule of law? Yet here is Mr. Stephens, beside himself with rage over a speech from a newly minted, almost powerless congressperson. This column reads like something an internet troll or Alex Jones would write.
24
Intentionally or not, Omar’s use of “some people”avoids referring to them as Muslims. Based on their malicious actions, she is correct.
10
"Our guns laws are changing because of what something someone did in Christchurch"
There now. Have I enraged all Muslims? Should I be held up as a bigot?
The racially nationalistic and Islamophobic attack in Christchurch was so horrendous it does not have to be spelled out. Evil speaks for itself.
9
Yet another attempt to smear a patriotic Congresswoman who "dared" to question AIPAC's actions.
17
Can we stop calling everything objectionable racist? American is not a race, nor is Muslim.
12
Rep. Omar is one of more than 200 Democratic representatives in the House.
One.
As Stephens admits, she is being singled out for being a Muslim. Now, add to that one inartful sentence in a speech.
One.
Yet this has to be blown up into some big serious incident for the Democrats, on the very same day, mind you, that we'll be getting a better look at the crimes of our crime boss president. A Republican.
Weigh the two in your hands. If you can wash the Fox News crud from the Republican hand, really, which is more important?
14
Cheap shot which adheres to the public line of the president who is the harbinger of death for our democracy. She may be clueless, but she’s not as evil as the GOP.
10
Why is it "political malpractice" for Republicans to pick a fight with remarks from one of the first two muslim, immigrant women in Congress over some remarks, but to let a President and blatant racist like Steve King slide for years, Bret?
Please stop pretending this attack on Omar is about Republicans defending their moral high ground. That's been under water since they nominated--but neglected to vet--Mr. Trump.
Omar is the Koch Brother's new favorite boogeyman to scare and inflame idiots with since Hillary's gone. Because if she weren't 1. Muslim, 2. An Immigrant, 3. A Woman, and 4. Speaking Out Instead of Cowering, we wouldn't even hear from her.
Do you really believe white men in Congress don't say basically the same offhand remarks in DC daily? The difference is that she has McCarthy's aides watching her every word to twist it and enrage Trump voters.
That's what this is about. Shame, Bret. You normally provide solid arguments. But not here.
17
Spot the problem:
The World Trade Center destruction and thousands killed was "something someone did" and all of maledom was blamed, castigated, threatened; many were killed.
The Oklahoma City bombing was "something someone did" and all of maledom was blamed, spat upon, threatened; many were killed.
Last month's attack on two mosques in New Zealand was "something someone did" and all of Trump supporters were blamed, harassed, shunned; some were killed.
Ah, but that didn't happen because men, white men, Donald Trump supporters are too much "like us." We look outside our own White, Christian, sane, sexist circle for someones to blame. And those someones, having had nothing whatsoever to do with the crimes, will always be of a different color or faith than our own. Every. Time. Unless of course they are our own and then they are mentally ill and that makes them nothing like us at all.
12
Some clarification:
"anti-Israel wokesters " = people who think that U.S. support of the slaughter of innocent Palestinians is wrong
13
Yes - Omar needs to go. She is a mistake and a disgrace. But she won’t go, she will stay, and yes, she is a harbinger of the left’s decline. Newsflash: the right is not the only side that’s gone down the drain. It’s a bipartisan pilgrimage.
27
Muslims committed 9/11. There is no amount of political correctness that can change that fact.
40
I could say-
Some people rape women
Some people cheat on their taxes
Some people are serial killers
Some people set fire to a black church
Some people bombed a clinic
Some people are adulterers
All of these statements avoid condemning an entire group just because someone in that group did something terrible.
Omar wears a hijab and because of that isn’t allowed to point that out.
20
What a wonderful occasion to hide disgusting comments of Trump under the carpet.
9
Wait, wait. You begin an article about Rep. Omar with three remarks in quotations, thus strongly implying that she said these. Then paragraphs later you characterize them as "hypothetical." Did she say these three things or did she not? If not, this is a smear and atypical for your writing.
7
Ilhan Omar’s incendiary behavior is indefensible, and yet the Democratic leadership cannot bring themselves to even rebuke her, much less demand her resignation.
In fact, lately, almost everything emanating from the so-called ‘progressive’ faction is incendiary ....such nauseating arrogance, sanctimony, and grandstanding. Yet while they drive the Democratic Party over a cliff, their disciples cheer them on.
Good job, Dems! You won’t be winning my vote again anytime soon.
30
There are good people on both sides.
Mexicans are rapists.
All Moslems should be barred from entering the U.S.
The press is the enemy of the people.
I could go on, but for the sake of rhetorical discretion, I won’t.
11
Shortly after 9/11, a work colleague was run down by a driver who called him a towel head and said it was “for 9/11”.
He survived with a badly broken arm.
I’m not a particular fan of Rep. Omar, but this is what she meant— the repercussions of other people’s crimes fell on harmless decent people.
17
As a private citizen, did Ms. Omar ever condemn the horrible atrocities committed by ISIS against Yezidis (rape, burnt alive & held as slaves under inhuman conditions), and people of other sects? Will she condemn Islam's sanctioning of death sentence (death by sword) on non-believers? Did she condemn unequivocally the deaths of innocent people in France and other parts of Europe by maniacal Islamists? Will she join the call for Fatwa against Muslims who commit such horrible crimes against humanity?
Until she does, Congresswoman Omar has no right to be a voice of the Democrats.
35
I would not be appalled especially in the context she was speaking. This article, like so many others, reeks of antI-Muslim paranoia, which is much more prevalent an hurtful than anti-semitism in the US.
14
in the context of Ilhan Omar's speech her words weren't offensive. But she could have chosen better wordIs.
In America, you can criticize any nation but it is a crime to criticize Israel, its human rights violations, crimes against humanity and apartheid lState. You will invariably be labeled antisemite or a denier of Israel's right to exist or Holocaust denier. Ilhan Omar and Rashida Tlaib crossed that line. Many Israel apologize ts can't take it. AIPAC and other powerful donors supporting Israel will make sure that Omar and Tlaib are defeated in the next election. Such is the state of American politics.
Now let's remember what was our great President's immediate reaction to 9/11. He called a TV station to boast that his building is now the tallest building in Manhattan because twin towers are in rubbles. That's not insensitive and trivializing a tragedy?
After Charlottesville Trump called neo-Nazis fine people. That's not supporting White terrorism and nationalism?
10
Mr. Stephens, would you have her substitute "barbaric, godless Saudi Arabians" for "someone"? I think that would have been the most accurate characterization of all.
6
Brett Stephens, and many in the main stream media should be taken to task for their cynical, insidious, attempts to stir conflict by equating a failure to observe political correctness, or a certain protocol with actual behavior. Serial false equivalency is not quality journalism. What happened to respect for the "free market place of ideas"? Are Mr. Stephens and his ilk the new "thought police "? Criticizing AIPAC is not anti-semitism, and what K street lobby isn't "all about the Benjamin's". Rhetorical insensitivity is not " The Protocols of Zion " or an attempt to endorse the horrors of 9/11.
8
Bret Stephens is a Climate Change denier and as far as I know still believes that Saddam Hussein had Weapons of Mass Destruction and the Iraq War was a Good Idea.
8
This sounds awfully like we have succumbed to Fox-News sound-bite reflex syndrome. Omar's speech was about anti-Muslim sentiment in this country -- which she has faced in the form of death threats. Is this sound bite really our greatest concern?
Many of your readers might not be aware that Ilhan represents a predominantly white district. They're not worried -- why are you?
9
Come down from your high horse, Bret! You are incensed by Ilhan Omar's disapproval of Israel's treatment of the non-Jewish people in the Israeli state and the occupied Palestinian territories.
A lengthy lament is not obligatory when referencing a tragic historical event in a speech about currents events. Besides, "someone did something" may be a regional Minnesota expression.
But I do wish she were more concerned with budgets and domestic policy than with foreign relations. Our foreign affairs are muddled enough by an inept President and his incompetent Secretary of State.
8
Omar is a harbinger of the democratic party only in the eyes of a voracious media looking for the next big story. She's a loudmouthed newbie getting far more attention than she deserves.
10
Suppose after the Oklahoma bombing, there had been a backlash against Scottish Americans, or against Gulf War veterans, with calls for banning their immigration, debates about whether it was safe to have them in the community. ... and then suppose one of them spoke out against the fact that the lives and standing in America for large numbers of good honest folk had been changed because of something one guy had done ... would you find that disgusting Bret?
You are still focused on what the terrorists did in 2001, and you are blind to what it is still doing to America and American values today. Division between Muslims and Infidels is what the terrorists intended, and you are helping.
11
The bigotry in this piece is astounding. Even more astounding is the fact that the Times chooses to publish this. In this instance, all Representative Omar is trying to say, if 19 people committed an act of terror, 1.3 Billion people of the same faith can be blamed by it. The dynamic of white terrorists being 'mentally ill," and 'lonely wolves' and Muslim terrorists representing a whole faith is too well described for me to go deeper into it again.
15
Mr. Stephens,
Since Israel and anti-semitism are frequently present in your columns, up front or in the background like today, please note Israel is many things, an idea, a nation, and a government with a distinct political bent, all emotionally attached to a religion--and no one of its parts is entirely identical to what it means to be a Jew or for that matter an Israelite. Anyone who can't or won't keep the parts separate when writing about either Israel or Jewry is simply lazy or deliberately erecting straw men to knock down.
Let me illustrate.
The United States is similarly complex, geographically, ethnically, religiously, economically, socially and politically. It is possible to criticize one aspect of that complexity (like its buffoonish and dangerous president or its current chest-thumping approach to Cuba) without being "anti-American."
One could even criticize Ms. Omar for her word choice, thoughtless or deliberate as it might have been, and leave it at that. No need to include a whole political party.
But time and again when it comes to matters of Muslims and Jews your brush is far too broad and your mind too narrow.
It's past time to break that pattern.
8
Seriously, Bret? Could Ihan Omar have chosen her wording more carefully? Yes. Of course. But we don't get to edit our utterances like we do a first draft of an op-ed. I suspect if she could take it back and say it differently, she would. And I suspect you know what she really meant, anyway. Probably you don't even disagree with her down deep. You're a decent guy or Gail wouldn't like you so much.
Instead of excoriating a decent person who fights against sexism and Islamophobia every day to stand up for democratic principles, please parse the language coming out of the White House on Twitter. That is a far more substantial source of our unpresidented democratic decline.
10
Spot On, as always, Mr. Stephens.
Thank you again for being the Voice of Reason in the beyond-left-leaning NYT pool.
And yes, President Trump is absolutely right in going after her callous and carefully worded minimizing of the horrific, muslim extremist terror attacks of 9-11. She does not speak for our nation, at all. The Dem leadership should have loudly admonished her for this disgusting action, which was not an innocent misstep, but a serious transgression.
Please keep up the good work. You have single-handedly earned the New York Times another renewal of my subscription.
28
She shows no compassion and plays herself as the victim when she says something offensive. Hrm... I wonder who else does that sounds like.
10
"She has demonized Israel, and American supporters of Israel, in terms that are unmistakably anti-Semitic."
Wrong. What she has is valid criticisms of...some lobbyists who do things.
14
Thank you, Bret!
12
I have not read or listened to any of Omar’s other speeches so cannot comment on the possibility that she frequently makes rhetorical gaffes. That doesn’t matter. For her not to give a full throated apology- something like ‘I know that almost 3,000 of my fellow citizens were murdered by a group of Muslim terrorists from Saudi Arabia and I apologize if it sounded as if I was minimizing this heinous act’ - makes it clear that she knew exactly what she was saying and phrased it intentionally. Every leading Democrat should demand that she apologize. They can and should express concern about the death threats she is receiving but only after she apologizes for trivializing the actual deaths that were caused by her co-religionists on 9/11. But those of you who are so offended by her words that you are saying you won’t vote for Democrats, wake up. Your Constitution, your way of life, and the future of you and your children are all being destroyed by the venal madman in the White House and the Republicans who are his enablers. Vote for Democrats for every office you can vote for so that the difficult, painful task of repairing our democracy and returning us to being a nation that actually follows the rule of law can begin.
9
I find her comment liberating. Slavery: some people did something – nothing to do with me. Find the perpetrators and hold them accountable. Jim Crow: some people did something – nothing to do with me. Find the perpetrators and hold them accountable. Lynchings: some people did something – nothing to do with me. Find the perpetrators and hold them accountable. All this “racism” and “privilege” nonsense: some people did something – nothing to do with me. Find the perpetrators and hold them accountable. I wasn’t even born then. Thankfully I no longer have to worry over something some people did – I used to, it was one of the reasons I read the New York Times, but now I realize I have the privilege of not having to. What a relief. Thank you Democrats.
3
There 3.5 million Muslims in the US, and the GOP is intent on alienating every last one of them. Her presence, despite her occasional inartful language, helps the Democrats hang onto them.
4
I find it baffling or maybe troubling is more the word I am looking for to hold Ilhan Omar to account for her words. We have been undergoing a barrage of intolerance, name calling, lies, etc from the Trump administration for some time now. Lets start at the top if we are going to be pointing fingers and clean house.
Ilhan Omar is not a career politician and should be given some slack as to her lack of polish.
2
Ilhan Omar has far bigger problems than anti-Semitic statements.
Omar knew CAIR was founded 7 years before 9/11, not because of post 9/11 bigotry. Why lie? Because CAIR was founded in 1994 with HLF money, a terrorist front masquerading as a charitable foundation. In the 2008 HLF leaders were convicted in the largest terrorism financing prosecution in US history.
Why does Omar insist she's the 1st refugee to serve in Congress when it's also a lie? (5 others served long before her, including Joseph Cao and Lincoln Díaz-Balart). Omar isn't ignorant, she's totally invested in seeing herself as a unique and special victim.
My whole family are refugees. We were verbally abused by bigots and constantly faced assault by racists. I became a civil rights attorney. I've received death threats. Still, I feel lucky. America is in real trouble thanks to Trump, but is great compared to where my family came from.
You'd think Omar would agree. Her family was being killed by Muslims, not Christians or Jews. As a Muslim woman in Somalia Omar had no chance and faced death. If bigotry/discrimination against her are so great how did she rise to one of the highest elected offices in the US? Omar's thanks to America for saving her life is a bundle of grievances against America and other American ethnic groups.
Omar incites then insists she's a victim. She pretends American bigotry exits only in relation to her. She acts as if it began with her, is specific to her, and grants her status.
38
Soft-pedaling terrorism and destructive deeds, as in "someone did something"?
Trump does this all the time.
Why oh why does this subject merit a column from anyone without mentioning that Omar's locution, though unfortunate, doesn't mean she doesn't understand that the 911 bombings were bad?
Please, NYT, we don't have time for this.
7
so well reasoned and unslanted, I find it hard to believe the NYT published it. The dems are playing into the hands of Trump. Moderate dems( like me) will reject identity politics at the polls. we say all the right things, we care about the environment, racism, income inequality etc. but we'll vote with our pocketbooks and are hypocrites just like the socialist millionaires that demand we redistribute our wealth as they hoard theirs.
10
Once again, a right wing apologist engages in bothsiderism. Anyone on the left who steps out of line 1 inch gets offered up as equivalent for what Trump and the republicans do on a daily basis...hourly for Trump.
“something someone did.” is Trump's mantra for any and all right wing terrorist acts. “something someone did.” is Trump and AIPAC's mantra for any act of violence against Palestinians.
Make no mistake, the actual point of this article is to forgive Trump for his constant and continuous inflammatory remarks. After all, one representative's insensitive remark equals hundreds...thousands of tweets from the President if that's is what you want to pretend.
And so many people in this country want to pretend exactly that...that Democratic politicians talk like Trump. Bothsiderism run rampant leading to the dissolution of this country.
4
I am progressive. I hate trump and his minions and the hate they constantly spew against minorities and they need to be called out on that every day. That issue, however, is distinct from Omar's speech where she grossly minimized the horror of 9/11. There is no other way to interpret "someone did something." She could have easily made her point that Muslims were being unfairly treated (yes, I realize that is an understatement) without being so callous towards the thousands who were killed by terrorists on United States' soil and the aftermath of the attack. Moreover, it seems to be overlooked that Omar knew exactly what she was saying. She knew her comment would go viral. It is causing dissension in the Democratic party. I hope that was not her intent.
17
As a yellow dog Democrat who will never again vote Republican, I hope that this is a teaching moment for Omar and for Stephens. Her statements show her ignorance and she needs education.
If she learns anything, and expresses it, will Stephens publicly forgive her?
This article makes an analogy between supporting racism against "Mexicans" and not supporting Israel.
Not supporting Israel is a legitimate political position. It is not racism, and racism is not legitimate.
There is no logical reason why Bret is still published in the NYT Opinions section that doesn't reflect badly on the paper's leadership.
7
How common are the feelings expressed in Rep. Omar's speech among the Muslim community?
6
I am progressive. I hate trump and his minions and the hate they constantly spew against minorities and they need to be called out on that every day. That issue, however, is distinct from Omar's speech where she grossly minimized the horror of 9/11. There is no other way to interpret "someone did something." She could have easily made her point that Muslims were being unfairly treated (yes, I realize that is an understatement) without being so callous towards the thousands who were killed by terrorists on United States' soil and the aftermath of the attack. Moreover, it seems to be overlooked that Omar knew exactly what she was saying. She knew her comment would go viral. It is causing dissension in the Democratic party. I hope that was not her intent.
3
Omar is probably not the brightest bulb in the room, but she is willing to work hard and has good intentions. She is making rookie mistakes, but I guarantee she has a brain that is willing to learn from her mistakes unlike the moron-in-chief we have as president. And by the way, our president has done more to divide us with hate and lies than Omar has. He has incited the white supremacists so much that they drove a car into a crowd and killed someone. Omar hasn't done that.
2
You can add the following outrages
The holocaust .. some people did something
Rwanda genocide ... some people did something
Black church burnings ...some people did something
Southern Lynching...some people did something
American slavery ..some people owned some other people
On and on
All hateful
12
Nice FOX News touch in your headline. Evil, tendentious conjecture, attempting to stain. You are very low. And you misrepresent Ms. Omar's thoughts, as if you knew them and they were the worst possible. On the other hand, your foul nature is rather in plain sight, is it not?
I do not know Ms. Omar, but that single sentence (which you stomp up and own upon while embroidering your own elaborate conjectures) does not mean in any way that she belittles 9/11. You are simply lying, sir.
13
The real problem is not what she said but how the press ran with it because it was made inflammatory and sells papers- just like every utterence by the idiot in charge. It's well past time for the press and the NYT to correct disinformation rather than print disinformation.
7
I don't agree with Omar and I think her comments were ambiguous at best and prejudiced at worst by playing on anti-Semitic tropes. I can't say with certainty what her intent was. But since you mentioned "shamelessness," Bret- Don't you think your column is shameless for comparing her comments to Trump's?
Omar couldn't have been more clear that she was discussing Israel's government and its policies, not Israeli citizens or Jews as a whole. Trump, on the other was describing Mexican people in terms that couldn't have been more explicit. Trying to draw some moral equivalency between the two is incredibly disingenuous. Not to mention Omar's comments were broadly condemned by Democrats across the spectrum, while Trump now enjoys the support of more than 80% of the GOP. Hardly a "Decline" of the Democratic Party- opinions on the left are incredibly diverse, and Omar isn't representative of anything other than her own opinions and constituency.
Shame on you.
4
Once again, the author blurs the lines between criticism of Israeli politics and antisemitism.
Omar has criticizes the Israeli government and AIPAC, I have not heard her criticize the Jewish people.
You can criticize Israel’s inhumane treatment of Palestinians and criticize lobbying efforts without being antisemitic, although you will be accused by the likes of the author from the hilltops.
Best defense is a good offense, rather than address those very troubling issues, scream accusations of bigotry at the messenger.
5
Or maybe she does not feel the need to bear the burden of something someone did using her religion as cover. In much the same way that I, as a white, Christian male, appreciate not being constantly held to account for the steady drip of terroristic acts by...white, Christian males. When it is a white, Christian male doing the terror, they get the benefit of the doubt since there are some very fine people on both sides. It's like a privilege, a white male privilege.
8
It's the new millennial left: if you are a member of an oppressed group (definitions may vary), then you can say whathever you want with no accountability, and if someone criticizes you, then they must be bigots and people full of hate. Then you add that all shared past must be erased because women and minorities didn't play a significant role, and tribality becomes inevitable. The Left worked for shared rights, the things that made us united. Not anymore.
8
American Conservatives again use the tragedy of 9/11 to score political points. It never ends. Shameful.
6
Ms. Omar is a typical troublemaker. She reminds me of Mr. King, the Republican in the House. Every time she opens her mouth there is a statement that will be used by Trump against the Democrats.
11
I don't disagree with Stephens' examples of anti-Semitism -- I just ask that the same standards be applied to anti-Palestinian and Islamophobic rhetoric. What would Stephens say if Ilhan Omar had hailed an attack that left 500 Israeli children dead -- and then sneered, “It’s the Jews’ own fault!” All his examples of anti-Semitism would pale in comparison with this outrage. Yet this is exactly what Stephens and virtually every other supporter of Israel said about the Gaza concentration camp massacre of 2014.
And what would Stephens say if a boastfully “democratic” Lebanon or Germany, say, had ruled millions of Jews for half a century and more — and openly asserted that they would never have the vote, or a fully independent state either. You know the truth: Stephens would say anyone who called that country a democracy was an anti-Semite, no question about it. Yet “no voting and no country” is exactly Netanyahu’s (and Stephens') position on the Palestinians.
5
Stop with the negativity. You’re reading too much into her comments. She’s a novice not a hater. I stand with other commenters - her statements didn’t offend me. I actually think she was trying to be neutral.
7
No, I'm not appalled. Our American Government is in thrall to special interest groups. She was right on that account. If pointing out one of those groups is AIPAC, it doesn't make Omar anti-Semitic.
7
After listening to the GOP’s continuous stream of lies and name-calling during President Obama’s years—which pales in comparison to the foul-mouthed bigot (and his cronies) who is currently the POTUS—any comparison to Rep. Omar’s comments are laughable. I take her remarks to mean a few people were responsible—not all Muslims. That said, she would do well to use more explicit descriptions in getting that message across.
4
Omar's words have been taken out of context, distorted into a meaning she did not intend, then magnified. How can her few debatable missteps be conflated into Democratic decline when we have a Republican in the White House who unashamedly lies, insults and demeans every day of the week in the vocabulary of a schoolyard bully?
9
What is particularly hypocritical about the so-called progressive response to Omar's comments is the condescending attitude that creeps into some of these defenders: "oh, she doesn't really get all the nuances of English," etc. Nonsense. She is rhetorically adept. She means what she says. The Republicans take her seriously. It is time for Democrats to do so as well--and rebuke her. We don't need any distractions as we head into 2020. The only thing that matters is beating Trump.
10
Wow - Brett is really grasping desperately at straws here. Republicans and conservatives must be terrified. The most notable thing about Ilhan Omar is how this young woman, merely a freshwoman in Congress, has been targeted unrelentedly by the right wing propaganda machine, To see the President continuously bully her on social media, knowingly encouraging violent attacks on her, is sickening. That Brett Stephens isn't condemning that is shameful.
6
I disagree with you, Brett. Do you ever talk to everyday Muslims? I daresay there are few Americans today who fear the consequences of 9/11 more that Muslims I know. They’re scared, and that’s a far more rational response than your column.
9
I think that Rep. Omar would probably be better off talking less and listening more, but I have reviewed her allegedly anti-Semitic remarks and I don’t think the accusations hold water. Criticizing the actions of the government of Israel is not being anti-Semitic. Criticizing the power and influence of the pro-Israel lobbying organization is no different than criticizing the NRA. And as far as I have understood , the expression “It’s all about the Benjamins” has always been a reference to greed for money as in C Notes irrespective of the greedy persons ethnic or religious background.
Maybe she is a bigot. I don’t know what’s inside her head or heart but vilifying her and calling her ugly labels is not the right thing to do.
2
Do you really expect her to think and feel about the world as you do?
1
We, Democrats, know that Omar and AOC are arrogant, irresponsible, freshman representatives who would be better advised to shut up and learn how government works before they spout off verbally and on social media. Unfortunately, if you're not in their district, there's not much that you can do about them.
13
The author’s pretense that Omar’s speech was a “deliberate attempt to conceal the scale of the horror [of 911], the identity of the perpetrators, and the racist ideology that motivated them” is plainly absurd. This sort of malicious taking words out of context and twisting them to mean something they clearly don’t is bigotry, astonishing in an article in which he thinks he is crusading against bigotry.
7
The issue is that Dems cannot criticize Omar because they are terrified of being labelled racist and homophobic. Same dynamic with people like Farrakhan. Omar knows this, so she plays the victim card when conservatives criticize her, and she silences the Dems.
11
Mr Stephens is one of the most ardent supporters of right wing extremist Israel and his obession with Ilhan Omar is rooted in that premise. He has become very boring. Why doesn't he look at Netanyahu's statements and actions which has much more consequential effects on world peace?
4
On the left, a single one out of 235 Democratic representatives that Stephens minutely parses and takes exception to.
On the right, the [so-called] President using his office to fire a constant salvo of tweeted or spoken insults and, where he thinks he has the power, actions against opponents; aided and abetted, with a few token exceptions, by the entire Republican membership of Congress.
With journalistic privilege comes rhetorical responsibility, Mr. Stephen. Sorry, but your heavy thumb on the scale can't make things balance.
10:35 EDT, 4/18
4
Two things can be true simultaneously; Rep. Omar will probably be a one-termer due to her rhetoric. But also conservatives are desperately trying to change the conversation from the truly horrible things the Trump administration is doing. Making Democratic women of color (Omar, AOC, Maxine Waters) into some sorts of “bogey-women” and scoffing at the Green New Deal isn’t equivalent to putting kids in cages, taking healthcare away from millions of Americans, and stoking the fires of bigotry (“good people on both sides”). Face it, the GOP is no longer the party of Brooks Brothers suits, country clubs and cobb salads. It’s a party for fascists. And no satin-slippered apologist like Mr. Stephens will convince me otherwise.
4
Conservative like Stephens have been hard at work sifting through everything Omar has been saying to find anything they can be appalled at. That's why they always have these short quotes without context that aren't actually explicitly offensive or bigoted or hateful. It's always hidden meaning which they attribute to her words. It's always "tropes". And it's always not what she's actually talking about. The same holds here: the speech is about why Muslims had to defend themselves against post-9/11 hostility. The quoted sentence very clearly serves to distance Omar and the Muslim community from those events, not to belittle or trivialize them.
Note that I, too, mentioned 9/11 above without detailing "the scale of the horror, the identity of the perpetrators, and the racist ideology that motivated them." Were you appalled? Did I do so deliberately? Or was this simply incidental to the subject, as much as it is self-evident?
This is the heart of the matter: when you are a Muslim, especially an open critic of Israel, it is assumed by people like Stephens that what you say is antisemitic or anti-Western unless proven otherwise. If you mention 9/11 you must include a disclaimer lest you be thought to trivialize it or worse. If you are criticizing Israel you must pick your words carefully and clarify that you are not against all Jews, or you will be assumed to be. Any time you fail to do so will be added to a list of quotes that will be held against you.
2
It is interesting to watch Republicans accuse Omar of anti-Semitism while pursuing a baldly anti-Muslim agenda. The author’s conclusions apply more broadly than he is willing to admit.
2
Odd. . .Rep Omar's comments do not in any way forgive or minimize what happened on 9/11. Her point is simply this: not all Muslims are terrorists, yet Muslims have been the target of bigotry because of something someone did.
Compare that to trump's response to Charlottesville . .there were fine people on both sides . . . which is clearly supportive of white supremacy . . don't believe that? watch David Duke's tribute to trump the day of that unrest.
So to you democrats who are threatening to vote for trump in 2020 because of all this? That is weak beer.
3
Well gosh, I sure hope the nytimes doesn't feed into a silly and overblown news cycle agai---oops, there it is.
The amount of media attention devoted to this ONE representative is absolutely ridiculous. Sure, her comments should be discussed. But we really don't need twenty articles/op-eds about her comments.
“...something some people did.”
Those are exactly the words Trump would use for all of those incidents Bret mentions at the start of his small minded article. And, in fact, Trump refused to identify the attacker at the two mosques as a white supremacist who regarded Trump as one of his inspirations.
Where is the outrage on the right? Non existent. So, it's fine for Trump supporters to talk like this, but Omar cannot.
It should not be surprising that there are many Muslims in this country who do not want to shoulder any responsibility for 9/11. I understand there are many Muslims around the world who do not want to take the blame for ISIS or the Taliban or any other Muslim based terrorist group. In the same manner, there are many Jews who are not happy with the current path of Israel and how it deals with the Palestinians.
It takes a lot of courage to speak out against excesses on "your" side when you are on top. What does it take to speak out on excess when your side is on the bottom? What do you expect from someone of a particular group to do when they are being terrorized for being a minority? You speak out against terrorism regardless of where it comes from. But if you expect any group of people to be in a constant state of mea culpa for an act that they weren't responsible for, you're expecting too much.
So here's an experiment for you. Ask your right wing friends how they feel about reparations to the children of former slaves. Let's see how woke they are.
2
Those three statements are NOT the same as what Omar said, even if they contain the same words. She was differentiating herself and the majority of Muslims from a evil group of people.
You're feeding into this Islamophobia, no matter how you want to cut it. She criticized a right wing government in Israel and she was fighting back against Islamophobia in America. Twisting it any other way reflects on that person, rather than Omar.
3
With political power comes rhetorical responsibility . . . !
This is rich, given the irresponsible rhetor presently sitting in the oval office (not to mention his cohort in Congress). Those on the right, like the Times' Mr. Stephens, seem to be aching for the Democratic Party to self-destruct the way the GOP did. They train their antennae on the heavens, looking and listening for the slightest gaffe, off-color remark, mistimed opinion, or political toxin on which to hang the demise of the "other party." It must feel lonely being a member of the only political party actually to debase itself.
Folks, don’t fall for this nonsense. It’s the typical Republican hit-job. Remember when Obama said (correctly) that when the situation gets difficult for people, they cling to their religion and their guns? The right wing went berserk, and that one phrase became their rallying cry. Now Rep Omar says “some people did something” and the Sean Hannitys, Tucker Carlsons and Bret Stephens of the world devote hours and hours of TV segments and newspaper columns on this one phrase and, oh by the way, how the Democrats are far worse than the GOP.
It’s propaganda, pure and simple. It’s Willy Horton all over again. Unfortunately it works, especially if the target is a minority. And it’s not just the Fox News crowd that buys this stuff. Just read the comments here of self-proclaimed “liberals” who regurgitate the right-wing talking points about Ilhan Omar. Don’t be fooled by this despicable ploy, even if it’s written in a NYT column.
5
Don’t be fatuous, Brett! Her claim that 9/11 was “something some people did” simply means that those who perpetrated the attacks are not representative of Islam. (Would you disagree?) Her statements must be taken in the context of our current political discourse, in which Islam is routinely mischaracterized as inherently violent.
I understand your reservations about Ilhan Omar’s views of Israel, but let’s not engage in punitive rhetorical nitpicking. After all, “with great power come great rhetorical responsibility,” or something like that...
2
The fact Mr Stephens has not written articles bemoaning the moral decline, lack of courage and curious lack of empathy for minorities amongst majority of Republican Congress members, esp. one saying... Mr Steve King of Iowa, is he the death knell for the GOP... or one about Mr McConnell’s hijacking of US Senate.
I don’t think he has the moral grounds to go criticizing any Democratic Congress member— even Ms Omar who should learn to mind her words. No, you don’t.
Fairness, logical reasoning and clear insight in journalism is what makes someone worth reading and listening to.
Forget about all above, he should have written an article to root out Trump agenda that lying human has ever concocted.
This is perhaps the last time I will read anything by this man.
I am done with Mr Stephens’ perfidious rhetoric!
4
Another predictable hit piece on a Congresswoman who dares to speak the truth -- and to be responsible. If anything, she, along with Ocasio-Cortez represents the rebirth of Democratic Party legitimacy.
3
Yes, I will defend her because this column is an obimination of twisted facts and outright lies. My God, Mr. Stephens, how deep does your loathing of "the other" run?
Ilhan Omar did not criticize Jews. She criticized Israel. Ms. Omar is a Semite in case you didn't know. Arabic speakers are Semites. Hebrew speakers are Semites. Please get your facts right. Semitism is a linguistic category and has nothing to do with any religion.
Furthermore, Mr. Stephens, you are the one who linked Ms. Omar's "something people did" to the incidents you cite in your column. Ms. Omar did not make those linkages directly or implicitly. And Ms. Omar is correct in citing that after 9/11 Muslims were starting to lose their civil liberties. They were and they still are. You refuse to recognize this fact.
Where is your outrage at Israel for not only denying Palestine a home but, now, also taking the homes foisted on them by the creation of Israel, shooting their children (7-to-1 ratio), destroying their olive fields, stealing their water?
If criticism of Israel is considered criticism of Jews it is only because Israel unilaterally declares the linkage as a "Jewish and Democratic state." Israel explicitly makes the linkage as a way to garner sympathy and support. Such a state is also a fabrication because a religious state is a theocracy not a democracy.
It is your column Mr. Stephens that is foul. You made those foul hypothetical remarks, not Ms. Omar.
3
A far-left progressive Democrat myself, I believe that Omar is showing us pretty much weekly that she is in no way fit to be in public office. She is clearly fixated on Jews, and I think she even dislikes her fellow Americans. (How else to explain her speaking so dismissively of the agony experienced by thousands as a result of 9/11? And please don't someone say her remark was taken out of context. I know the full context of her speech, and it was entirely unnecessary to refer to 9/11 in such an idiotic way.)
Indeed, if this person with Stockholm Syndrome (covering her hair, as she does, to obey the patriarchs who have implanted in her the thoroughly diseased belief that there is a god out there who hates female hair) becomes the future of the Democratic party, this life-long lefty will give up on the party permanently.
Since nothing on earth could persuade me ever to vote for the party of the bigoted orange buffoon, I'd have to either give up on voting altogether and just try to ignore the idiots running the country, or move elsewhere to a country that I feel has some hope.
I'm all for diversity. I passionately want to see more women and people of color in positions of power. But being female and/or ethnically/racially diverse does not automatically make you qualified to be in public office. Nor does criticizing Omar for the rubbish she keeps spouting make a person racist or sexist.
Fellow Dems: Omar is an unhealthy dead end for our party. Let's just not go there.
16
Bottom line is BOTH parties play the same games, when convenient . Both parties have double standards, when convenient. Both parties claim innocence when THEY do or say something questionable and both parties question the other when they do or say the exact same thing. Nothing that either party says or does is NOT political...it’s politics and EVERYTHING is political. For both Republicans and Democrats, it is always about positioning one’s party in a strategically more powerful place...double standards, hypocrisy and lies be damned. That is the reality, whether we like it or not.
1
I am worried that the Fox propaganda will drown out the center and Nancy's leglislative agenda. And in 2020 election Dems will loose the house again. That and the Dems dont have the kind of money to compete with the Koch band. Ilan is an Islamic bigot who doesnt represent Democrats. Nancy has been trying to contain her.
5
How many more of this blatantly partisan essays will it take before the owners of the venerable New York Times do the right thing and fire you Bret?
(Bob Dylan sings his famous refrain here)
The rhetorics in this piece are even more sophomoric than your usual ones. What İlhan Omar said is taken out of context. In any case, it takes only a certified progressive hater to think Omar is the harbinger of the Democratic Party’s Decline.
Focus on the disgusting GOP politics that is killing this country fast. Focus on the fascist party that is driving the bus into the abyss. Focus on the buffoon who lies his way through every single day.
And leave Omar and the progressives in this country alone.
5
Let us put this in perspective. A criminal terrorist attack on the United States by terrorist tied to and support by Saudi Arab (and longstanding ties of republicans to the saudis) was met with an all out war on terror. Remember WMD. That is an invasion by the US into Afghanistan and Iraq in which millions of Muslims have suffered and died. We have terrorized the Middle East. Israel has begun to grind its iron heel further into the Palestinian. We blow apart the Middle East and then wonder what the hell is wrong. Of course we are only protecting the white Judeo-Christian world order. Muslim lives just really don’t matter, do they Brett?
3
Why does Stephens have a column here? His spiel is more appropriate for Drudge or Breitbart.
6
Sorry, but this is a blatantly dishonest piece. By taking the phrase "some people did something" out of context, the author creates a strawman. In the larger context -- which can be paraphrased as "some people did something so the rights of a larger group of people that shared a trait with them were curtailed" -- in no way trivializes 9/11.
Moreover, he dishonestly takes criticism of Israel and declares it to be evidence of animus against Jews. It seems he believes that one can theoretically criticize Israel without being anti-Semitic, but that in practice all such criticism is tainted with Jew-hatred.
Shame on the New York Times for publishing such garbage.
7
I am a 80 year old Jew. I think I know what anti-semitism is. Most of my family in Europe disappeared. One who made it to Israel was in the founding government. The main rail station in Tel Aviv is named after him.
I grew up in a DuPont company town. At the time DuPont did not employ Jews. When my father ran for School Board, a letter was circulated urging people to vote against "the nigger loving jew."
I think I know what anti-semitism is. And the things that Rep Omar has been saying are not it.
9
The "evasiveness of 'something' and 'someone'" was obviously intended to emphasize the lack of any connection between the 9-11 events and the innocent Muslims who make up a quarter of the world's population. It implied nothing whatsoever about the crimes. With enough media and money you could turn my use of the word "events" in the sentence above into grounds for comparable faux outrage.
Right wing media and Republican politicians perfected this con under Obama. Words pulled out of context, repeated with fake anger ad nauseum, used to convince people that the speaker intended something they never dreamed of. The fact that an intelligent & literate writer like Mr. Stephens could be taken in by this cheap dishonesty proves that even the most transparent propaganda, repeated enough by the right people, is more powerful than honesty or argument, making this one of the most alarming & frightening things I've encountered on the Times op-ed pages.
6
The thing is, as a Jew, I'm pretty used to just about everyone hating me/us. So it isn't shocking Omar or Trump or any old person would say something hateful about me/us.
While democracy has been very helpful to Jews in the world we also know as a very small minority vs over a billion Christians and a billion Muslims we can be swept under in a moment.
The thing we just cannot seem to get to is, who cares about the fools like Omar and Trump? We need to talk about what leaders looks like who can envision another future for us and the world.
Omar would be so much better served is she spoke about loss of liberty post 9/11, because any idiot knows we sold our liberty for security-theater. She would be better off talking about money in politics with a tad bit of sensitivity and maybe stop and think about how little the pro-Israel lobbies spend vs. say oil, telecom, etc... and for this Mr. Stephens is right, she is Trumpian.
9
This is getting out of control. I am just trying to have my morning coffee and within less than 60 seconds I see another right-wing hit piece that grossly misrepresents statements made by a young woman of color because the authors wants to defend the status quo. Look, I totally believe in this whole freedom of opinion thing and stuff. But why is it often easier to find center-right, conservative and right-wing opinions in the NYT than any fresh and interesting insights?
This is not the first time that I close nytimes.com within less than three minutes and instead open my Twitter feed to read interesting journalism and thoughtful debate. I used to try to convince my students to begin following mainstream media outlets to become better informed citizens. Instead, I am slowly following their example of compiling my own interesting hodgepodge of news online. Yes, I do feel really post-modern when doing so. But it is increasingly dawning on me that today's "youth"--millennials, Generation Z, etc.--should be the ones teaching us and not the other way around.
26
@David seriously, you see Twitter as a reliable source of interesting journalism and thoughtful debate?
6
@David
Teachers know this! Spot on!
1
Well said. I will never vote for any candidate who has “stood with Ilhan”. The day Kamala Harris said she did, I withdrew my support for her campaign and deregistered from the Democratic Party. The Progressives can have fun in constant opposition talking about green new deals, welfare for the unwilling to work and Palestinian liberation, all the while heaping disdain upon the unwoke who just want responsible governance. They have ruined my party.
12
For all of Brett’s supposed “bravery” and “independence” for being a Republican who opposes Trump, now that we are in campaign mode, he’s baaaaack: lockstep with the President’s strategy of demonizing the scary Muslim woman. Once a Republican always a Republican, appealing to racism and fear, and the bogeyman (or bogeywoman) is always a person of color.
Glad that you can finally stop the charade, Brett, of reasonableness and moderation. Must have been exhausting.
4
Please, we now have a climate where political opinions are termed racism, even Trump has picked up on it, calling the Left racist. The level of ignorance is high, “some people” suggests that we still are not sure who committed acts of terrorism, something the Right is in sync with. It’s clear that this smart Muslim woman and politician is being singled out for just that.
2
Bret Stephens is a Republican flack, who in this column has doubled down on the Trump's continuous theme of inciting anti-Muslim hatred for political gain. It was the foundational principal of his travel ban. He is now weaponizing remarks of Rep. Omar critical of Israel to attack the Democratic party, whose support of Israel began with Truman's courageous recognition of Israel from its founding over the objection of Secy of state Marshall .
The irony of all this is that at the same time Trump has turned on its head our foreign policy toward Saudi- Arabia . Trump, his sycophantic son-in-law Kushner, and his pompous puppet Secy. of State Pompeo have apparently unbounded affection for Crown Prince MBS, this murdering monster's public -kidnapping and killing of a highly respected Saudi-born journalists and ignoring the wishes of Congress by continuing to support MBS in his Yemeni war that daily results in the death and destruction of hundreds of innocent women and children.
The final irony is that the subject of Omar's criticism is an Israel led by its corrupt longest -serving leader, Netanyahu , who owes his reelection to none other than the Suadi-loving Trump. Together they tolerate the Saudis world-wide export of the brand of Islam that daily incites anti-Semitism, they wrongly attempt to hang around the neck of Rep. Omar.
She like many friends of Israel are angered by the cynical double standard of the Trump administration on this issue.
4
I wonder what Stephens thinks is the right way to express outrage about Israel’s horrific abuse of the Palestinian people? Is there a way to do this without being accused of anti-semitism? Or is not possible to champion one human rights cause or civil right movement without championing every single one in the world in proper order of authority?
3
Mr. Stephens is wrong. Netanyahu, supported by Trump, will turn Israel into the 21st century’s South Africa. With plans to annex the West Bank and discard the two state solution, the choice for Israel will be to become a multicultural democracy or an apartheid state-segregating and discriminating on the basis of religion. The chances of Israel becoming a multicultural democracy are remote. As the US becomes multicultural, its one sided support for Israel will diminish. Israel will not be destroyed, but will remain among the world’s pariah states.
4
Spot on. The more the shrieking left shapes the narrative, the better the Orange one’s chances of being re-elected in 2020.
10
Well, if Omar’s rhetoric is less than accurate, what are we to do about Trump? Anyway, all this attention began with Omar’s statement about the overriding influence of Jewish lobbyists on American governmental policy. About that, she was very accurate.
5
Context.
Doesn’t context matter?
The situation and audience to whom Ilan Omar uttered that clause of a larger sentence matters.
Print that and see if your argument still holds water.
Please don’t Fox News this fragment of a sentence.
Ilhan Omar and her fellow traveler AOC are sadly emblematic of the Democrat psyche today. The new stars of the party use racism & bigotry against Americans of white European ancestry as a means to advance their agenda. The party who once railed against this kind of racist intolerance has now embedded it in their platform. Imagine if a white Republic politician said that slavery was ‘something some people did’. Or ponder that someone might opine that the Matthew Shepard murder was just ‘something that happened to somebody’.
I find the Democrat’s unwillingness to roundly condemn & censure Omar appalling. Democrat outrage over Steve King’s comment was loud & immediate. Republicans removed him from all committees as a punishment. Say what will you will about the GOP - their double standards are not nearly as ugly the Democrats.
14
The amount of oral obnoxiousness perpetrated by Republicans these days is astounding. I’m thinking here, for example, of Senator Massie’s snide interrogation of Senator Kerry regarding climate change. Methinks, Mr. Stephens that your headline speaks volumes about what you wish for the Democratic Party. Truth is, there is a very long, steep, downward rhetorical hill for the Dems to take before they can possibly catch up with the Republicans. And I hope the Republicans will have fallen over the verbal cliff by then.
1
I don't understand? Why are the comments "foul?" Would you not object if Omar had said "the Oklahoma City bombing was a vile act committed by a right wing terrorist?" Or if she had said ". . . attack on two mosques in Christchurch NZ was a vile attack committed by terrorists?" Nothing she said can be viewed as support for the terrorists nor did she condone these acts of terror. Omar has a valid agenda. Anyone who fails to recognize that much, perhaps most, of America hates Muslims and believes that no Muslim should be in Congress. Many believe that every Muslim wants to replace the American legal system with Sharia law. Try to build a mosque in a residential neighborhood, even in the most blue state, and see the reaction. Make an application to build a Christian church on the same site and you will have no objectors. Freedom of religion is a fundamental pillar of American Democracy. Omar recognizes that in today's America the concept is a myth, not a tenet of democracy.
3
Pelosi, her Democratic leadership in Congress and many of the aspiring Democratic candidates for the White House are selective and deliberate cowards in the face of, within their own ranks, unspeakable disrespect for the victims of 9-11 and Anti-Semitism. We know it and they know it. Just as Jeremy Corbyn in Britain is rightly hemorrhaging the support of many traditionally allied with a progressive approach to governance, we are watching a slow drip of waning confidence in the march to 2020. The decidedly-leaning left-wing NYT commentariat can keep putting on a brave face within a bubble but what we are watching are lemmings rush to the sea. It would actually be more productive to regain the levers of power.
7
It doesn't matter what Representative Omar says. Fox and the rest of the state propaganda media will seize on something out of context and repeat how terrible it is until their viewers believe it. It doesn't take much, they already categorically resent and fear muslims.
For the record, Representative Omar's language was not offensive: it served to underline the lack of connection between the people she was addressing (American muslims) and the 9/11 hijackers (Saudis who want the US out of the middle east). If you are offended, it is because you wish to be.
5
To say that a factual statement like "some people did ..." is intollerable because it is not specifically condemming enough and then list a number of ideas expressed by a few unspecified people makes the entirety of a very broad group too objectionable to consider over a leader that says and does far more eggregious things virtually everyday seems to me blindly biased and intellectually bankrupt.
Further I feel it needs to be pointed out that Ilhan Omar is an Arab, also Semites, so throwing around the label of being anti-Semitic at other Semites seems somewhat blindly and hypocritically anti-Semitic.
My wife and her family are forth generation Israelis of Northern European ancestry--Semites as native Hebrew speakers, with many family members lost in the Holocaust for the "crime" of being "Jews" but do not carry the anti-Semitic sensitivity that seems to cause the knee jerk labeling of others anti-Semitic because they do not share a staunch pro-Israeli bias.
I cannot help but see all this arbitrary collective group labeling and condemnations as no different from other forms of "racism".
Without being able to parse Ilhan Omar's deeper feelings and character from news reports of the words she used which seem deemed objectionable by their nuetrality and then labeling a Semite anti-Semitic seems, well just another form of "anti-Semitism". But if we are going to go the labeling route, I prefer to call it just another form of racial bias.
2
This is an excellent editorial, which every Democrat should read. Omar is as dreadful as Steve King and her party has to stop apologizing for her. The Democrats hypocrisy with Omar is flashing neon red and proves their moral soapbox regarding King and Trump is ridiculously flawed. She didn't "misspeak," she knew exactly what she was saying.
13
But why do you insist we say “Islamic terrorist” and not “Saudi Arabian terrorist” or “religious fundamentalist terrorist.” Anyhow. I think the headline is terribly prejudicial when the opinion piece turns out to be about semantics. Consider the official transcripts of the most recent person elected by Republicans to the Oval Office and get back to me about how an elected official’s semantics portend the end of democracy.
2
"Some people did something" is a phrase she frequently uses. English is not her first language. Omar's point was that blaming an entire religion for something that a a few (mostly Saudis) did, is not fair. It's a fair point. Some fanatic Saudis attacked us therefore all Muslims are persecuted. It is also true that our government is in the pocket of Israel's far right wing regime and if anyone alludes to that fact, they become a target.
5
If Donald Trump was dreaming, hoping, yearning for a new woman in his life to replace Stormy Daniels and Paula McDougal, his dream came true with the advent of Ilhan Omar. She is the too perfect foil for his rants which is why she (and AOC) are Fox News stars. The Democratic Party could not, in its own wildest dreams, have found a greater gift for this horrid man. The ugly racism of the Right gets amplified exponentially when it can be reverberated off the racism of the regressive Left. Thanks a lot Congresswoman Omar.
8
It is quite clear here that Mr. Stephens is using his column to pick up a personal fight and his real concern is not for the Democratic decline or (the more concerning) Republican decline alongside the decline of American value system, but Ilhan Omar's opinions about Israel. Apparently he is one of those columnists who can't really rise above his own agenda to make an analysis. Thought they mostly wrote for WSJ or appeared on FOX.
4
Gee Brett I remember some loudmouth GOP Congressman screaming at President Obama in his first State of the union address : “Liar”
I seem to recall ancient history when the president of the United States took responsibility for both their words and actions ( “ some good people there in Charlottesville on both sides )
Talk about responsibility
It cuts both ways. And I personally have tuned out the whining boy who cried wolf
I just hope America does as well in 2020
I can’t stomach the singling out of a single representative . Sounds like Fox news garbage talk all over with a more “ responsible” face to it
2
It is exactly these types of pieces that normalize hate and sow distrust among communities. An entire op-ed written around a turn of phrase which then extrapolates not only the horrors of female minorities in our midst (and talking while making mistakes, no less), but worse ... the very decline of society (sound of dramatic music). This "issue" has always been a strawman debate. Stop fanning the flames.
1
She could have easily said that 19 Islamic terrorists killed 2,983 innocent people in one of the most horrific attacks in recent history, but that is no reason to condemn an entire religion. But she didn't say that.
9
Time to review the part of the Constitution that requires a person to be born American in order to be POTUS but which enables immigrants to be Representatives and Senators from the day they become citizens. The Founding Fathers never anticipated the current attitude of some immigrants.
6
They also didn't expect women to be Representatives. That doesn't mean women in Congress is wrong.
2
So you support 2 classes of citizenship? Let me guess: The citizens with full rights are people like you? I'm not sure that is a proper democracy.
1
Let's make a deal:
Democrats hold Omar accountable, insisting that she label terrorists as evil and criticize murderous Muslim governments (Saudi Arabia, Iran) in addtion to Israel's brutal oppression of Palestinians. If she cannot be honest, she has no place in public office.
In return, Republicans will:
Stop treating immigrants as sub-human; stop lying about climate change; stop lying about economics; stop lying about their own policies; stop lying about how liberals are all a bunch of communists. If they cannot be honest, they have no place in public office.
Now of course, this should not be a "deal." Personal accountability shouldn't be contingent on what "the other guys" are doing. But it is important to note the stark contrast between how our two parties hold their members accountable: Omar makes a prejudiced statement, Dems condemn it; Al Franken makes lecherous "jokes," he loses his job. Meanwhile, Donald Trump---well, is President Trump.
My point is, the GOP has spent the past several decades using the flaws of liberals as an excuse to say and do Anything. In some ways, Mr. Stephens article feels like one more such effort. And so I wonder: when will it be time for conservatives to hold those they love, and have shared values with, accountable? Or have they, after decades of blaming the other side, simply forgotten what those values were in the first place?
2
Omar except for her speeches is a new Representative with minimal power who antagonises some because of her anti-semitic tropes which may be inappropriate. Meanwhile Trump's veto of a bill denying aide to barbarous Saudi Arabia gets not a word. I guess bigoted remarks by the largely powerless get more press than policies partially responsible for the death and and sickness of millions.
2
What many people have missed in the infamous “some people did something” remark is that it not only downplays the horrific nature of 9/11 terror attacks but also maintains ambiguity about who did it? There is a view amongst radical islamists and conspiracy theorists around the world that 9/11 was an insider job, a false flag operation of sorts to justify interventions in Iraq and Afghanistan and wider Muslim world. Given the kind of views Omar has on Islam, her narrative that Muslims are always persecuted and her worldview that seems to have been shaped by her religious zeal, that statement also hints at her raising doubts about who did it and why. Maybe she thought she could win the audience with such ambiguity which itself is quite disgraceful.
8
I believe that you understand the congresswoman’s point, which is that the 9/11 attacks made targets of innocent patriotic Muslim Americans.
That you claim she meant the opposite is an argument made in bad faith.
Be best.
I used to live in Rep. Omar's district and probably would have voted for her. That said, I am appalled by what she choses to focus upon. There are so many more important things to those who live in her district and I hope she is Primaried. What I find most upsetting is her lack of support for women living in Muslim-majority countries. Why don't honor killings and stoning attract her attention? If you've never been to Israel, I understand why you might think that it's an Apartheid state. The truth is that Muslims, who live in Israel have a higher standard of living than most do in Muslim-majority states, they also are elected and hold seats in parliament, unlike the mostly authoritarian Muslim countries (despite Netanyahu). She's not President, however, nor does she represent "the party".
11
Mr. Stephens comment reflects the schizophrenia of white males in which the "others" are all "criminals" and white males selectively commit crimes.
I do not know what "Islamist" terror is, but using Mr. Stephens logic is the Lynching Museum in Birmingham, AL. a moment to "Christian, White Male/White Supremacist Terror"?
Your issue Mr. Stephens is that Rep. Omar in her rhetoric did not accept/nor own the events of 9/11/2001 as a Muslim.
"If" she was evasive, then she was using the same rhetorical evasiveness that many whites engage in, when presented with the legacy of white supremacy racism (both violent and non-violent) over the past 500 years; (i.e. "that was something that my ancestors did.... don't look at me") .
So Mr. Stephens if it is good for the goose, than it is good for the gander.
The problem that many of you have with Rep. Omar is that she is both Black and a committed Muslim (in her appearance) and your bullying has not made her kowtow to you. She is entitled to her opinions, is she not? Is that not what the first Amendment affords her?
There have been plenty of GOP Congressional bigots like Delay, Gingrich, Helms, King, Thurman etc whose bigotry can fill up encyclopedias over decades in office, but yet they collectively received 1/50th the ink Rep. Omar has received in her first 100 days in office because some people do not like her, and look for everything that falls out of her mouth as a pretext to attack her.
Let's call a spade a spade here.
1
Agree that Ms. Ormar should be far more careful with her language, but let's look at how we might differ about to change the examples to reflect what Mr. Stephens seems to think such things should be phrased:
(1) Some white Christian men bombed a building in Oklahoma City
(2) Some white Christian people attacked two mosques in New Zealand
(3) Some Christian white man massacred people in a church in Charleston, S.C.
But our politicians don't say that, either, do they? They do not focus on the religion of lunatics who perpetrate these acts, ever.
Perhaps Rep. Omar should have said, "Some radical Saudi Arabians flew airplanes in to buildings in the United States". Would that fix if for us?
2
Bret Stephens is succumbing to the temptations of call-out culture, where you take someone’s words that, yes, might have been phrased more eloquently, and stoke outrage by interpreting them in the worst possible way.
He may be having his fun today, but when the Woke Twitter mobs come after him tomorrow, he won’t have a moral leg to stand on.
On bad apple spoils the rest. Dems need to ring fence her or it becomes a lightning rod in 2020 that will assure Trump's second term.
7
The point of “something someone did” was to point out how media and the public treats an obvious TREND of white men committing acts of terrorism versus how we treat those by men of color. It’s always a referendum on the faith or race of those men. Where are the think pieces and railing against Christianity or white culture leading to these terror acts? It’s all silly and that was her point in saying that actions by white people are always just something someONE did.
I suspect the author understands if he actually watched the speech in its entirety
At least she didn't say some 'very fine people'.
2
I'm surprised that none of the Time's columnists have analyzed Ilhan's "some people did something" comment in the context of a PEW survey that was cited by the New York TImes which documented that:
"disbelief was strong among Muslims that Arabs were behind the Sept. 11 attacks, with 65 percent in Indonesia and 59 percent in Turkey, for example, expressing that viewpoint. Even in Britain, 56 percent of the Muslims surveyed did not believe that Arabs carried out the attacks."
https://www.nytimes.com/2006/06/22/world/europe/22cnd-pew.html
PEW did a follow-up survey in 2011 that concluded that:
"Nearly a decade after September 11, 2001, skepticism about the events of that day persists among Muslim publics. When asked whether they think groups of Arabs carried out the 9/11 attacks on the U.S., most Muslims in the nations surveyed say they do not believe this.
There is no Muslim public in which even 30% accept that Arabs conducted the attacks. Indeed, Muslims in Jordan, Egypt, and Turkey are less likely to accept this today than in 2006."
https://www.pewglobal.org/2011/07/21/muslim-western-tensions-persist/
Do Omar's supporters really believe that its plausible that she wasn't being intentionally ambiguous when she referred to the perpetrators of 9/11 as "some people" in her prepared remarks.
5
Ms Omar is a bit wet behind the ears (like all first term congresspeople) and if she does not represent her constituents, they will turn her out next year (as is likely of the American electorate with Trump). What is unusual in her case is the media attention she (and AOC) are getting because they are social media junkies just like Trump. That said, the scrutiny of her political views being viewed through prejudicial religious views is akin to anti-Catholic and anti-Jewish hysteria about this same time a century ago.
1
Omar is copying Trump: Make bigoted statements, deny being a racist, then repeat.
Republicans who don't condemn Trump are morally equivalent with Democrats who defend Omar.
4
The Dems need to court moderate conservative voters like me who cannot abide by an unapologetically ignorant man like Donald Trump. If they cannot neutralize the “woke” trio of AOC, Omar, and Talib. They don’t represent “progress” simply because they know their way around an Internet meme, or seem to speak more genuinely to disenfranchised young people like their counterparts on the (alt) right. True progress is still building coalitions to get things accomplished. Being outraged, stoking rage is easy but compromise and building consensus is hard and courageous. More practically, if Dems continue to be apologists for Omar and her knowing pandering to radicals on the Left, then that tells this moderate that they do not want my vote!
2
And yet the man with the greatest power tweets out hate every day.
2
Omar is a gift to all Americans, if only because she taught us that charges of anti-semitism can't be levied by those, like Mr. Stephens, who support crimes against humanity—as long as it's done by his ancient tribe.
Echoing the alt-right, as he does here, is so telling.
1
We know a lot of specific things Omar hates passionately (e.g. Islamophobia, Zionism, Israel, Trump) but we know almost nothing of the things she loves. She is a destructive force that is motivated by hate. If Democrats stick with her, they will only have themselves to blame for the damage causes to the Party and their effort to retake the White House.
7
This article could just as easily have about been Steve King if you swap out a few words. Like a form letter.
2
The Democratic Party is a big tent. To hold the entire party responsible for the careless language of a freshman congressman is ridiculous. If Ilhan Omar is the Democratic candidate for President (which is a non-natural born American she cannot be), Brent Stephens is perfectly free to vote against her. Meanwhile, the actual Republican candidate has a history of careless language that is definitely not due to carelessness.
1
The echo chamber of media and politics is amazing to behold. Absolutely nobody on earth is talking about this woman besides Washington and the news media. Nobody.
1
And here one person did something and an entire right wing establishment has got itself lathered up. The point is not that it was innocent, inartful, or offensive, depending on your ideology. The point is that something is very wrong when some people — i.e., the entire right in this country from the WH to Fox News to the Post and now to the Times — are talking about that something and will talk about it because they couldn't govern and more fear is all they've got.
1
I do not agree with most of what congresswoman Omar says. She has a right to her opinions. Mr. Stephens critics smack of hypocrisy. While he does make some mention of Mr. Trumps own racism, it is glossed over. He also, makes no mention of the racist campaign run by newly re-elected Netanyahu. Bigotry is bigotry plain and simple. If you are denouncing Omar....then please do the same for all. Otherwise, it is just plain disingenuous.
2
Brett, you had a reasonably good opinion article underway until you attempted to tie this to Trump.
Remember, it was Moslems not Mexicans that attacked our lives and way of life. This was an outright attack on the lives of Americans and our agencies, the Pentagon. This is not someone sneaking over or under a fence, this is death coming to our door.
And yes, it is more important now than ever to build that wall, it is just not the Mexican migrants it is all of Central and South America, including shadowy figures from elsewhere .
1
This is rich. Look at your tagline, "With political power comes rhetorical responsibility." Then write a piece called, "Donald Trump, Harbinger of Republican Meltdown?"
Publishing this piece is irresponsible on behalf of the NYTimes. I understand freedom of speech and opinion, but with all of the threats against Rep. Omar's life, articles like this one are feeding the hatred and flames of racists across our country who are looking to cause her harm. Something this article misses in its comparison of Rep. Omar to "right wing public figures" is her position as a marginalized citizen who regularly faces hatred and vitriol. She is not a straight, white, Christian man like Steve King or Donald Trump (both named in the article). Rep Omar is a refugee and a woman of color, the two identities most frequently targeted in our current administration. Her comments were indeed taken out of context, and the context does indeed matter.
1
Funniest sub-title ever... made supremely ironic by the off-handed dismissal that they mirror "the early days of Trump".
Perhaps Mr. Stephens stopped listening, but Trump is still spewing obscenities.
1
Well, the Iraq and Afghanistan wars were 'something someone did' and millions of muslims were killed, maimed, displaced and we never reflect on this side of what we did.
1
I think one needs only look at the URL for this piece on a browser to see what game Bret Stephens and The New York Times is playing here. It isn’t good faith arguments or trying to inform us about the nature of Rep. Omar’s words, it’s just no-disguise ideology meant to silence a new and growing voice in American politics.
2
Omar's appearance on the public stage is deeply disappointing. I am a Minnesotan and a Democrat.
7
Well said. Democrats now use Trump as both a shield and a sword, justifying their attacks because he does the same, defending their attacks because they’re “not as bad”.
That’s rubbish. The reality is that politicians have abandoned the center because it does nothing to get them elected. This all looks more like Sox/Yankees fan bases hating each other than a country trying to govern itself.
2
Is this the same Bret Stephens who once wrote a piece calling for a “preemptive strike” on North Korea?
A move that would probably result in the deaths of millions of civilians if you consider that North Korea would retaliate.
So once you have the context that the author of this piece once called for millions of civilians to be killed, where is this moral high ground?
3
When the Democrats are right, nobody remembers. When they are wrong, nobody forgets. There is a big double standard in this country, Bret.
Bret Stephens here attacks not only Ilhan Omar but also Alexandra Ocasio-Cortez. I guess he feels Donald Trump needs a lot of his help in the demonization department.
Several months ago, he devoted a column to attacking Elizabeth Warren, in his argument likening her to Trump. He has also criticized Kamala Harris and Rashida Talib. As well as Linda Sarsour and Tamika Mallory. See for example,
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/08/opinion/sunday/israel-progressive-anti-semitism.html
What's the common denominator here? Too many womens' voices in the room for Brett's taste, especially those of women of color? If Brett Stephens can accuse many of these women of anti-Semitism, publicly, why can't he, publicly, be accused of racism and misogyny?
3
Really Mr. Stephens you have the temerity to write about the Democratic party decline when Trump is the Republican party? Really?
3
I get your point Mr Stephens, but somehow “something someone did” still does not rise to the level of evasiveness as “you also had some very fine people on both sides.”
3
Couldn’t agree more. Being non-white, female and Muslim doesn’t legitimize bigotry. Being a target of bigotry doesn’t justify bigotry against another ( and much smaller) minority. Democrats who defend this behavior may or may not lose the election but they will lose the moral high ground
7
Sad article very Sad...speaking of rhetorical responsibility!!! Ah but then we have a commander in chief with a media mind and elementary oratory (if you can even call it that) Taking a small phrase out of context, not taking into account who she is speaking before as well as the orators history is such a shallow way to criticize. She in no way minimized the twin towers or affect of terrorism..her aim was to point out the harmful affect on the many because of a few, however horrific that event was. Just as we did with Japanese internment camps on this country. Come on Brett, try complex thinking skills rather than being a horn for this administration
3
It's reasonable to discover a highly selective morality in Omar, so long as others are held to the same standard.
It's unreasonable to demand affection for Israel or support its foul suppression of human rights and condemn as anti-semitic anyone whose compassion extends to Palestinians.
3
Representative Omar is extremely intelligent and clearly chooses her words with great care.
One can only assume that she absolutely means what she says.
She has also already raised $830,000 for her re-election campaign:
https://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2019/04/16/us/ap-us-omar-fundraising.html
She may provide Mr. Trump with a convenient foil, but his tweets bring in votes and money for her.
What is more disturbing is her view on Jews and the views of those who defend her:" What is significant is that Omar’s defenders don’t consider her prejudices about Jews as particularly disqualifying, morally or politically, at least not when weighed against the things they like about her".
Anti-Semitism is in the eye of the beholder and "progressive" Democrats seem to be blind to anti-Semitism when it comes from Ms. Omar. Or put in a different way, "soft" anti-Semitism is the new progressive norm.
12
Uhhhh, I took the Bret Stephens challenge-
See how he's taken each quote horribly out of context to support the general thesis of dishonest bigots and hatemongers who are desperately targeting a member of the congress for who she is.
Who wins here, Brett?
2
Ilhan Omar is a harbinger of Democratic decline
<=>
Donald Trump is a harbinger of the death of the Conservative Movement in the U.S.A.
5
More like a desperate--e.g., DNC candidate corral--death spiral, a product of allowing the Clinton cohort to control the Politburo in 2016. Now it finds itself farther and farther from the cultural ethos that created the strongest economy and greatest human freedoms the world has ever seen.
1
We are all observing the slow suicide of the Democratic Party.
15
The news cycle moves so fast Bret, et al.
Ruby done flogged that one. An we taught Iraq a lesson.
Not one eighteen year old has a pic on the phone.
Yet another massive PR effort falls on its face with a tiny thud. You should hook up with Darryl Issa.
2
You yourself acknowledge that yes, Omar is a victim of Islamophobia; so why are you feeding it? And criticism of the expansionist policies of Israel is anti-Jewish? That hobbyhorse doesn't ride anymore...
6
Right on, brother.
5
I chalk up much of her speech to being "Young and Dumb." When I was her age I certainly put my foot in my mouth more than once.
Fascinating, an entire column about a freshman Dem expressing views that are fairly mainstream all over the world. Where the heck were you Brett when Trump was campaigning for President and saying horrific things that excited the Neo-Nazis and white supremacists among us? No, Dems don’t have to apologize, ALL Republicans should be continuously apologizing to the world for what they did and continue to do, support a sick, bigoted, ignorant, misogynistic, dangerous demagogue in the most powerful position on earth. Talk about false equivalency!!! You’ve got a lot of ground to make up Stephens before the rest of us agree to condemn her the way you do.
5
Hiya Brett! Glad to see your principled stance against a new congressperson. Meanwhile, our ignorant, grifting president yells racist lies, supports conspiracy theorists, enriches himself and destroys the republic every day, and the GOP treats him like a god-king.
6
Having fled Somalia, one would think Omar might be inspired to use her platform to fight Islamic terrorism.
Turns out the only foreign policy matter that seems to interest her is Israel. And the only thing that bothers her about 9/11 is its effect on Muslims. That’s pretty much all I need to know about this person.
15
I judge Congresswoman Omar’s comments less harshly than I do, say, Steve King’s; because the Democratic party which she represents isn’t built on a foundation of racial division, voter suppression, fraud, and lies. There is a difference between stupidity and malice.
4
It's guys like you who keep the Islamophobia going. She was referring to the prejudice and her words were in no way insulting or demeaning but yours are. You didn't condemn Bush for using very similar words and I don't see you condemning trump for telling Americans that Netanyahu is their premier.
You support Israel's crushing of Gaza. You are working a double standard.
Omar hasn't said anything about Israel that isn't true but any criticism is seen as anti-semitic.
It is the truth you are afraid of and that is why it is necessary to shut her up.
4
Opinions such as yours are the reason Democrats lose elections.
Good luck in 2020.
3
Fair enough. There should be just as much outrage for statements by any number of Republicans. I am convinced we are in a downward spiral to the bottom, where both sides pour on outrageous behavior. How does any of this make us a better country?
It's far too convenient to bundle Ms Omar's remarks and her identity into one neat little package, and then pass judgement on the whole thing. This is a tactic well-known by minorities, and widely used, a method by which commentators can excuse themselves from recognizing or acknowledging the underlying bigotry, while pointing to a kind of racist affirmative action --- imagine if [insert unpopular white person's name here] had said these things. In this technique, the writer is excused from examining or even mentioning this, except in passing ("...a victim of Islamophobia, which she no doubt is"). Mr Stephens sees no irony in bundling death threats, presidential incitement to violence, and the vitriol of hatred directed at Ms Omar under the generic heading "Islamophobia", while simultaneously railing at her for not being more sensitive and precise in her remarks. This is classic. It is dog whistle language for "she had it coming."
Ms Omar spoke injudiciously, and deserves to be taken to task for what she said. The difference here is that she is not being being vilified because of what she said, but because of what she is. There is a suddenness, and absoluteness to the condemnation that has poured forth, with a strong emphasis on qualifying the anger with denials of racism and examples of how we treat white people the same.
Well, we do not treat white people the same. This falls squarely under the heading of "know your place, young non-Christian woman of color."
3
Headlines, ratings, advertisers, all, feature and thrive on the sensational. The quieter politicians are not a good read, boring to an audience expectant of drama and outrage. From the social Democrats and the conservative Republicans and the smart business community, where is the well thought business plan with solid numbers for the popular advocacy for a better health care plan, affordable higher education, and controllable annual immigration? And how will these plans be funded and by whom and what sacrifices will be needed? No plan, just sensation after sensation. These ingénues and boy wonders with their little stinging speeches and with little life’s experiences are dominating the news when more proposals to solve compelling issues should be before us regularly for our edification. We have more sound bites than thorough studies. We send in the clowns for now. Hope? Well, maybe next year.
Trump is not the scariest thing. He's just the surfer. What's scary is the wave of fear, anger, tribalism, hate, divisiveness he's riding.
5
And what would Mr. Stephens' apology be for writing a lengthy op-Ed about Congresswoman Omar on the day of the announced "press conference" by Barr, having happened before Congress has even received the Mueller report?
I do not agree with Omar's remarks about 9/11 that is was "something someone did", while also being amazed her not knowing that CAIR was formed years earlier.
Yet Mr. Stephen's almost seems to follow Trump's and his cronies' confuse and deflect strategy today in order to deflect from the Mueller investigation becoming partially public for all to study.
2
Mr. Stephens points to Representative Omar's refusal to say, in plain language, that there is bigotry, among many Muslims, toward Jewish people. Or that Muslims planned and carried out the 9/11 attack, defending their faith. Her speaking out against the bigotry against Muslims in America, encouraged, over and over, by our President, is terribly important. Her speaking out against the treatment of Palestinians, by the Israeli government is just as important. But, her refusal to acknowledge that the people, who destroyed the towers, in New York, killing thousands, were self declared Muslims. Or, that declared defenders of the Muslim faith, have continued to call for the destruction of Israel and its Jewish people. This makes her statements, in defense of the Muslim faith, ring hollow. I have no problem defending the greatness of America and its founding vision, while acknowledging the racism that pervades our country and poisons that founding vision.
7
Al Gore also made a clumsy statement. By saying that he took the initiative to create the Internet, the right wing turned it into saying that he said that he invented the Internet. Then they said because of this, Gore is a delusional liar. Then Gore sighed into a microphone that was supposed to be turned off during a presidential debate.
Then we got GWB who raided the Social Security Trust Fund in the guise of a budget surplus to fund a tax cut that skewed to the wealthy. Then we got a war that is still going on plus a financial crisis.
9/11 was atrocious, but, the right-wing uses this, and, the like Gore example for political points and people will vote on them. You could list example after example.
1
Still pushing the untruth that Rep. Omar made any anti-Semitic comments.
If Stephens can't get that right--and no she didn't--why would he suppose himself credible on her?
"I live in lower Manhattan" is an ugly way of saying "I'm special because of a tragedy 17+ years ago". It reads almost like Stephens chooses to live there because of that.
Yes, some people did something, and the World Trade towers crumbled to dust, but it's real ugly to imply that all co-religionists of those some people are guilty of dustifying the towers. But that's what Stephens and his ilk at FoxNews do on a weekly basis. So Omar is right to object to their behavior.
4
Thank you for so articulately expressing what I have been thinking and trying to say since I heard Omar’s comments. To not see her “some people did something “ comment as trying to minimize 9/11 or ignore who its perpetrators were is, in fact, to read the comment out of context.
7
Her point was about unfairness of collective punishment-by-association. That unfairness does not depend on how bad the original event was, so she was not commenting on that.
In examples 1-3, there was no backlash-by-association against all white people. So the context is different.
Isn't it wonderful that a Republican is concerned about words. At some point we need to be concerned about actions and outcomes. Consider these words that represent the opinion of an Israeli on recents codifications of apartheid being legalized by law last year in Israel which appears in another Times article today. "It allows the state to differentiate among its citizens on the basis of race, ethnicity and religion. It is the polar opposite of Israel’s 1948 Declaration of Independence, which promised social and political equality to all of Israel’s inhabitants regardless of religion, race or sex." I would say "some people" in Israel supported this action. In fact a majority did who reelected Bibi. That is a fact isn't it. Just as much a fact is the taking out of context and hyperventilating comments of Republicans about things done to us, attacking our country, were not condoned or endorsed by a majority of American muslims and in fact, Muslims died in the attack. In fact, all of the attackers were Saudi Arabian, and relatives of Osama Bin Laden, were what, ushered out of the country for safety by who, Republicans. And yet there was no FOX news headlines on that. Giving credence to that demonization of a person is capitulation to the stunning lack of integrity and decency of that network. And we all know why they do it: to distract us from the real news of our country being undermined and destroyed by Trump and those complicitly supporting his actions for financial gain.
5
We all see the world through our own lens, uniquely shaped by our experiences. Bias and distortions in this lens are universal...no one can see the world as pure objective fact. For this reason, the greatest leaders are aware of their own distorted lens and surround themselves with people who can offer other perspectives that enable a view closer to the truth.
Omar is no different, and in her short tenure in Congress she has expressed possession by an ideology that is as distorted as the views of Trump on immigrants so rightly maligned by progressives. It is right to be critical of these views.
A better leader would have instead said that there were two tragedies on 9/11. The first a terrible act of terror perpetrated by ungodly fanatics claiming to act for God. The second a loss of our liberties, particularly for law abiding Muslims whose loyalty to America and patriotism were tainted by this horrible act of terror.
1
Mr Stephens, you are hitting upon the consequentialist nature of the political partisan these days, and unfortunately the consequentialist nature of the institutions of the deep state (which is even more injurious to our Republic). If our elected leaders are this bad, and they are, and if the so called professionals who sit in positions of leadership in the FBI, the IRS, the FEC, Intel community and more are as bad as this, and they are ---consequentialist to the extreme, then we are in serious trouble. We will not break out of this fever until Republicans are willing to hold their own to the higher standard of deontological ethics and so too the Democrats. Republicans gave up and elected Trump because they had experienced the hypocrisy of the Left for too long, but now the Dems have taken it to a new level. I fear we are slouching toward Gomorrah.
Political malpractice for Trump to pass up the opportunity to tweet so an elected member of Congress receives more death threats? This is the President and an a member of the US House of Representatives. Have we lost any pretense of acting like that matters anymore?
Regarding Trump's "ethnic prejudices", I think the word you're looking for is racism.
This column is a sad, cynical, winding journey of Mr. Stephens bad faith effort to engage in moral equivalency. Ilhan Omar's comments on Israel, etc. are NOT anti-Semitic. questioning our country's foreign policy relations does not automatically descend into being prejudiced against people who are Jewish. Nor have any of her statements even come close to our President saying "there were very fine people on both sides." (or the thousands upon thousands of other well-documented problematic statements he has said or tweeted)
2
President Trump wants to restore asbestos, illegally imprisons legitimate asylum seekers, publicly instructs his officials to break the law along with promises of pardons -- and that is just last week. The list of impeachable offenses mounts by the day.
Bret tells us that Omar's comment that American Muslims face discrimination and hatred because "some people did something" is what we should focus our attention on.
This is what is wrong with journalism and the media.
4
The author assumes to know human motivation when he writes, "the racist ideology that motivated them." Some people do good things for their family, community, church, team, cultural or national peers; but race and ethnic influence is downplayed when the act is deemed good. The left seems to find a way to view all bad acts as "racist ideology" that motivates human behavior like some sort of invisible hypnosis.
In truth, bad acts are done by good people all the time. People are tempted by misinformation about other cultures, churches, governments; and use guns, cars, bombs and planes to do what is just in their (misguided) minds - even at great personal risk and sacrifice.
The irony is that they believe they can judge the hearts, minds and motives of others with sufficient certainty to warrant becoming a warrior for their private (misguided) cause.
It is misguided to reduce the motives in Oklahoma; Christchurch, New Zealand or Charleston, S.C. to racism. The mental illness that leads to crime is fed by calling people names like "racist", homophobic, misogynistic, ect. when they have been deprived of loving alternatives over a lifetime. Rep. Omar's "someone did something" should be used as an invitation to go beyond simplistic and misleading labels that cause more harm than good. If you don't know why someone does something bad, admit you don't know what was missing rather than pretend you can read minds.
3
9/11 was something some people did. The Holocaust was something some people did. Slavery was something some people did. The statement is factually accurate. I'm mostly surprised someone as articulate as Ilhan Omar would use such imprecise language. If there is any fault, the fault lies there. She should know better than to speak about serious matters in vague language.
This is the first time I've actually read the quote in print. I honestly thought the "something" people did was CAIR. Except that would make the statement factually inaccurate. I guess the "something" has to be 9/11 then. I don't know. The statement doesn't make the point clear.
I think we can agree though accusing Omar of lingual imprecision is grossly hypocritical coming from Trump. We're talking about the man who routinely contradicts himself even within the same sentence. For instance:
"I’ve taken the position – and I don’t have to take the position and maybe I’ll change – that I will not be involved with the justice department."
What in the world is that supposed to mean?
We're talking about a President who uses linguistic imprecision as a legal defense. He obfuscates instead of lying directly or giving criminal orders. Michael Cohen said as much, under oath, in front of Congress. I really don't want to hear anything about Omar from partisans one way or the other. Until we have a President who actually speaks English, there's nothing anybody can say that requires this much scrutiny.
1
"Her views as a public figure, and what they signify for the party she represents, are fair game."
You say this without irony? The views of just about every single Republican on civil rights, on women's rights, on religious rights for anyone who is not a professed Christian lie somewhere in the mid-19th century, and you come in here like a tendentious wolf in sheep's clothing to focus on this one congresswoman? Give me a break!
4
A harbinger of the decline of Democrats? Hardly. An inexperienced and intemperate speaker, just elected, sure. Intemperance is all around us these days, and getting worse with the daily examples give by our not fit for office President. If the newly minted Congresswoman from Minnesota doesn't learn to communicate in a much better way Minnesotans have the ability to vote her out after one short term. And being critical of Israel, the government not the people, for wrong-headed policies is appropriate, just as we are criticized for our wrong-headed policies throughout the world. Criticism does not equate to anti-Semitism.
3
“No decent person can look at the portraits of the 2,983 victims of Islamist terrorists and say, by-the-by, that this was ‘something’ that ‘some people did.’”
Mr. Stephens has a point. It’s something that some [mostly] Saudi extremists did, in the name of violent sectarianism, which also happens to be primarily exported from Saudi Arabia.
Not every Muslim is an adherent of Wahhabism (or Salafism).
1
If Mr. Stephens contacts me, I'd be happy to explain to him how to use the copy and past functions in his word processor. That way next time he lifts an out-of-context-phrase and pastes it into a different context, he will at least get the phrase correct.
Omar said "some people did something" not "something someone did". And yes, the distinction matters; Mr. Stephen's (I'm sure entirely accidental) reordering of the phrase places the emphasis on the event, whereas the original wording emphasized the people. This journalistic dishonesty should never have made it past the editor.
3
At the end of the day, people like Brett Stephens will opt for Trump over an Omar every time. stephens knows he's more comfortable with Trumpian bigotry and criminality than he will ever be with a small African-American, Muslim woman who dares to speak truth to power, who dares to make us think about tragedies and terrorism in ways that affect all Americans in different ways. When you get right down to it, people like Stephens cannot really think with or empathize with Americans who do not share his narrow-minded view of democratic values and pluralist politics. His opinions are so humdrum and un-refreshing.
2
Yes, Ilhan Omar should have known better than to mention 9/11 without immediately putting an American flag pin on her lapel, saluting in the direction of Washington DC and kissing a copy of the Declaration of Independence while a single tear streams down her face. What a terrible gaffe this was! Surely, this means that Trump will win in 2020.
1
Ms. Omar’s words must be seen in the full context and meaning. She was stating in essence that a whole people and religion was condemned by the actions of some. No different than saying do not condemn all Jewish people for Netyanhu’s repressive policies towards the Palestinians but definitely different from the President’s assertion of “fine people” amongst the Charlottesville white Nationalists. The unfortunate thing for Miss Omar is that she will not get a pass for not using the most artful approach to expressing what in essence are truths and she has become a gift for those like this columnists to deflect from the abysmal state of his party.
1
One comment and one rhetorical question.
I don't think much of Omar, but she is only echoing Pat Buchanan. He was not criticized by the Republican Party or right wing Jews and, as I recall, received a speaking slot at the Republican National Convention. Just another example of Republican hypocrisy.
Do you think the far left would be as critical of Israel and there would be a BDS movement if Israeli civilians were not settling the occupied territories and the Israeli military only acted as a police force and let the Palestinians govern themselves and do what they wanted as long as there was no violence?
She was minimizing the evil doers and not the incident. I have to assume you want to hear the worst if you take it the other way.
1
Democrats need to keep their eye on the ball. Ilan Omar may end up as the Willie Horton of the 2020 election. The Republican campaign undoubtedly has 3 or 4 Lee Atwater types to make it happen.
2
I urge people to read the links in Stephens' inflammatory column. I read the link from the words "slurred Jews again " and for the life of me couldn't find any slurs. The representative, in fact, thanks her Jewish allies and nowhere does she equateJews and Israelis I suggest Stephens learn the difference as well.
4
Let's take brief comments completely out of context and talk about them endlessly. As recently pointed out, modern conservative discourse boils down to "If [insert Strawman], then why isn't [insert Red Herring]? Could it be that [insert Non-sequitur]?
1
Islamophobia is adspeak designed to run PR interference against the palpable fear terrorist attacks engendered in the West. Effectively saying if terror makes you afraid of a group or people who engage in it, you are being a bigot or a racist because even though it keeps happening Muslims are not a mono-culture. Fair enough as far as talking a frightened public exposed to Isis and ongoing nightmares off the ledge. But humans are human. Not so easily reprogrammed. The West has been engaged in a literal and cultural war with Islam for millennia. Our relationship with the culture is one of the most distorted and strange in history. Neither side in this conflict is an angel. It is a twisted interdependent and at times internecine relationship that leaves both parties a little dirty with regard to human rights violations. We get involved in wars we have no real role in or chance of understanding. Both sides use and are used. The West and the Middle East for now continue to need each other and yet seem to have contempt for each other. So it is unsurprising, and typically progressive American to have a person like Ilhan Omar in office to brow beat the public and gently mock their concerns. We put her there to signal our virtuous intent. But does she really love us? And if this is political masochism, do we need a safe word?
1
Nancy Pelosi is the most powerful woman in American political history. And the most powerful woman in the free world and the Democratic Party.
She doesn’t “say things”. She should. She should “stow” peace. She doesn’t. The outrage is the Democrats do nothing to stop her rhetoric. They should.
3
"Something that someone did" means "It wasn't me." Don't blame me, no matter how horrific the act. Her phrase has been blown way out of proportion.
As for her position on Israel, she says what many think privately but are afraid to speak.
2
This is a bogus issue that has everything to do with White America-centrism and implicit racism.
The point Rep. Omar made was quite clear and correct: SOME people -- not us! -- attacked the World Trade Center and ALL Muslims are being blamed for it.
The fact that America, in response to the attack that killed 3000 people, started wars in two countries that have killed and displaced millions does not seem to factor into the jingoist outrage we’re hearing daily.
The vaunted "American Exceptions" expect that everyone in the world stop and genuflect when mentioning our tragedy, even as we create far, far greater tragedies.
Here's another one: Climate Change.
America caused climate change with its extravagant use of oil since its harnessing as an energy source in the 19th century. As was reiterated by this newspaper in its excellent "Losing Earth" report of last August, we knew by the 1970s that we were seriously overheating the atmosphere and that we could correct that by moving to alternative fuels and technology.
OUR President Reagan, following his 1980 election, specifically chose to ignore and deny those facts, leading us to the calamitous situation to which we're subjecting the world and its future generations.
I suggest that instead of focusing on fake outrage over Rep. Omar's perfectly accurate remark, we rejoin the world, disgorge this racist, lying President and once again make common cause with our fellow humans.
2
Rep. Omar is the harbinger of truth and justice.
1
Omar's comment minimized the suffering caused by 9/11, it also underscored the assumption that 9/11 loss is a sacred grief for the American collective.
Socially, some grief is considered, by the collective, as more sacred than others. I remember crying for the families left behind on 9/11 because I had an idea what they were facing; my twin brother had died of AIDS 4 years earlier. Yet at my brother's memorial service, we feared protestors carrying signs reading, "God is AIDS punishment," would disturb the memorial service as that had happened to others.
Other examples abound. We have no national memorial to mourn the dead or comfort the survivors, usually children and extended family, of those murdered by their spouses or boyfriends.
We have no national monument to honor the dead who lost their lives through their employment - 5,190 deaths in 2016 in the US - https://www.newsweek.com/truck-drivers-workplace-fatalities-rate-fatal-injuries-771920
The Holocaust, rightly so, horrifies beyond words, including the fact that a million or so gays were also murdered, yet as far as I know, there is no collective, national memorial for them.
For certain groups, it may feel indeed as if our grief is not considered collectively sacred. I am sure there are other examples.
I think we would all be better served if we focused on sympathy and empathy for all those who mourn.
1
In 2004, I met and talked at length with two well educated entrepreneurs in Istanbul who insisted that the Twin Towers were bombed by the CIA together with Mossad. I later discovered that this is a very common conspiracy theory believed through much of the world. Omar's carefully pronounced phrase is consistent with that perverse fantasy. Is Rep. Omar unaware of this "alternative truth" or does she believe it? I don't know, but her constituents deserve to know.
10
As I read many of the letters below, the sense I get is this: that because Ms. Omar is a congressional representative but not the president of the united states, she should be exempt from criticism. By implication, because she represents many Islamic Americans, she is entitled to say anti-semitic things. A slander on good Americans! We should be outraged.
9
Kind of silly to say that a first-term rep who has no power other than what her opponents give her is the "harbinger of democratic decline." That prize seems more fitting for Bush, Rove, McConnell, Ailes, Miller, Trump -- people who held and wielded real power over a sustained period and six real, empirical damage to lives and democratic process.
I understand the nature of partisan commentary, but how about a little proportion, if not intellectual honesty?
1
I like a politician who wears their bigotry on their sleeve. At least you know where they stand! It’s refreshing to not have to figure out how they really feel when the microphone is turned off.
5
Trump harbinger of decline?
Yes!
Especially if you are an evangelical who thinks his sole purpose is to bring on the apocalypse.
1
Omar has an agenda, a single issue agenda and that is support of the Muslim population especially the immigrant population from Eastern Africa. Like trump, she is not interested in the majority of Americans. And she knows how to rouse her base. She is also very inexperienced. And she comes across as angry.
4
It took years for the GOP, as represented by those in Congress, to finally denounce and penalize Rep King of Iowa for his blatantly racist remarks, yet the GOP turns immediately on a newly elected representative for incautious remarks, demanding the Democrats penalize her immediately.
The events of 9/11 were very tragic, and I mourn for the victims (just as I mourned my friends who died in the Vietnam War), but let’s put this in context. We lost about .001% of our population because of the actions by 19 people (mostly Saudi Arabian), supported by thousands of others in the Al-Qaeda network. While in Yemen, .013% of their population over the last 3+ years has been killed by Saudi Arabian air attacks, actively supported by the U.S. And just this month, the GOP finally went on record in Congress opposing that support. Of course, this was undone by the second veto by the GOP Narcissist-in-Chief (who has had over two years to adjust to the gravity of the office and has consistently refused to do so).
As for her anti-Semitic remarks, just compare them to Netanyahu’s remarks about Palestinians, yet he is feted by the GOP.
Yes, Omar could have phrased the line better, but, looking at the whole speech and cherry picking that one remark to offer blistering attacks on the Democratic Party is hypocritical of the GOP in the extreme.
2
The three examples Stephens cites do not apply because white Christians as a whole were not made to answer for those actions the way the Muslim community has been made to answer for 9/11. The use of the word "someone" is intended to distinguish the acts of 19 fanatics from Muslims as a whole. Stephens is a smart enough reader to know this. It is disappointing that he chose to ignore it to make a point.
1
I'll make you a deal, Bret.
When the GOP stops promoting hate, lies and fear.
When the GOP stops suppressing voters who aren't with them.
When the GOP stops denying science.
When the GOP stops being the lapdogs of big business.
When Mitch McConnell finally stops abrogating his sworn duties under the Constitution...
THEN, I'll chastise Ms. Omar for her comments.
1
Mr. Stephens is obviously steeped in his own prejudices and doesn’t know the difference between ant-Semiticism and anti-Zionism. Nevertheless, Congresswoman Omar should have said “911 was something 15 Saudi citizens, 2 UAE citizens, 1 Egyptian, and 1 Lebanese citizen did, and these countries (with the exception of Lebanon) despite being brutal dictatorships remained and still are America’s number one allies in the Middle East and to this day still receive billions of dollars in
American military and civilian aid. Why is it that not even one of these countries were affected by Trump’s Muslim travel ban, because it’s never really been about religion, as religious superstition is merely a useful tool, it’s always been about power and money”.
2
Bret is getting very touchy because he perceives some members of Congress are daring to give the Sacred Cow of American politics, Israel, a poke or two. And of course it is a sacred cow because its supporters are among the big money cows of American politics.
If Stephens had said a word about how the recently re elected Prime Minister of Israel got elected by espousing anti Arab rhetoric and promising to annex land that Palestinians have lived on for centuries I would have not thought of Stephens as a hypocrite. But..
2
Rep. Ilhan Omar’s use of the flippant term “some people did something” to describe the terrorist attacks on 9/11 is absolutely worthy of valid criticisms for all the reasons brought up in this article. The narrative being pushed by her defenders that tries to suggest that she is somehow immune from any form of condemnation for her words because of her race, gender and religion is preposterous.
11
Okay, let's play this out. If, after the the Charleston shooting, the entire security apparatus descended upon white men, what would have Stephens made of that? Surely something like: "A whole category of people should not be repressed because of the act of one man."
At which point, Ilhan and other liberals would have agreed with this principle.
You know, instead of taking his writing out of context and saying, "Bret Stephens is minimizing what happened at the Charleston" or worse.
Stop with the bad faith interpretations, and perhaps we can take you seriously.
1
Rep. Ilhan Omar’s use of the flippant term “some people did something” to describe the terrorist attacks on 9/11 is absolutely worthy of valid criticisms for all the reasons brought up in this article. The narrative being pushed by her defenders that tries to suggest that she is somehow immune from any form of condemnation for her words because of her race, gender and religion is preposterous.
10
"Democratic [party] decline"?
This, from the guy who's promoted Reagan/Bush/ Netanyahu Republicanism his entire professional life, and is delighted with the Trump tax cuts, foreign policy and cabinet and judicial appointments -- demurring only at Trump's public rhetoric?
It is true that this powerless Somali refugee sees the world somewhat differently than a former WSJ op ed employee would -- disinclined as she may be to see American and Israeli suffering as paramount in the world today,
The Church of 9/11 can't serve the needs of everyone....
1
Tell me you're kidding, right Mr. Stephens? I say this because you're comparing a first term congresswoman who has little power except that which the media bestows with Donald Trump, POTUS, who with the avid support of most Republicans, is trying to take down the country and doing a pretty good job of it. Just a partial list:
Taking down the rule of law by demeaning laws and judges
Supporting our enemies from Putin's Russia to Saudi Arabia
Destroying our environment
Enabling theocracy
Weakening our alliances while boosting those countries who are against us
Denigrating our free press
Destroying the concepts of truth and facts
Making lies the default position of the president
Mr. Stephens I don't see how you could be more disingenuous
1
In the exact same speech, this is how Ilhan Omar described the terrorist attack by a white supremacist, on the New Zealand mosque.
“We are coming off a tragic, tragic nightmare that has happened in Nee Zealand.”
Contrast that with her characterization of September 11th as “some people did something and that all of us were starting to lose access to our civil liberties.”
Which civil liberties were lost after September 11th?
And why the selective outrage about two horrific events mentioned in the same speech.
Except for Saudi Arabia and recently Brunei, Ilhan Omar rarely uses her voice to speak out against the oppression of Muslims by other Muslims. Whether it is the suppression of women and girls in Muslim majority places (forced hijab, child marriage, FGM), blasphemy laws, the absence of freedom of speech (when Hamas jails and tortures Palestinian dissenters), no elections in Gaza for 12 years, honor killings - she is silent, as if speaking out would require her to commit tribal treachery.
As I listened to the video of Ilhan Omar’s speech at CAIR, it struck me that many of her remarks about Trump could also be applied - to her. Both pretend not to know the effect that their words have on people. But each knows exactly what they are doing and saying.
10
Race and religious hatred were not born in the Middle East. Modern terrorism may have started in the Russian Revolution, but it was perfected by the Irish Republican Army. The history of the Catholic Church is replete with examples of religious persecution all over the world. No sooner did the Puritans escape persecution in England than they began their own form of persecution in America.
Ilhan Omar has the right and the obligation to bring light to the Islamophobia that grows and festers in our nation.
The current administration in Israel is a serious threat to stability in the Middle East and the world. Americans can have that political opinion without hating or wishing to persecute Jews.
After three years of hatred spewed from the mouth of Donald Trump, especially during rallies reminiscent of those held by a certain German Chancellor, I find the hubbub over Omar's speeches to be disingenuous. Just looks like Islamophobia to me.
1
Seek help Bret. She represents one congressional district. As does Louie Gohmert.
1
You're kidding right? With all that Trump has said, all the nastiness and the anti-Constitutional things he's promoted, you're picking on a first-term Member of Congress whose religion has been vilified for years? Seriously? Is she inciting violence against anyone? like the President has done - repeatedly? Has she sought to dismiss the importance of the murder of a Washington Post journalist by the Saudi government? One that we are told is okay because Jared is friends with a prince?
1
With friends like this. . .
It was a dumb thing to say and plays into the hands of the hate-radio jackals who attempt to portray Democrats as communists, lepers, Nazis and any other pejorative that comes to mind. Trump is clearly unfit to be President, something he happiiy demonstrates every day. His re-election campaign will depend heavily on Democrats losing slight of what should be a unifying factor.
1
Of course, Ilhan Omar is an idiot and at least leans anti-semitic. We cannot support these things she says. She must change not just what she does but what she says in this regard.
But there's an important difference in the 9/11 massacre and the others: a good swath of the country identifies all Muslims as culpable, in some degree, for the attack, for any attacks by Muslims. No-one blames all white men for the bombing of the McMurtagh Building (or white men for being the vast majority of mass murderers and serial killers). In fact, efforts to even investigate white right-wing extremists was nixed by the GOP which asked, Where is the danger here?
I don't accept Omar's phrasing, but she's trying to sidestep blame for all Muslims, and doing it as poorly as she usually does.
3
Oh so your the inflammatory remarks police now Bret, why don't you start with your support for Trump who called "Mexicans are rapist, and criminals, oh and some of them are good people". How about justice Roberts screaming out "You Lie!" during the state of the union.
I hope the Representative Omar keeps up the heat on your GOP bully boys. And you can keep clutching your pearls, and bemoaning the rhetoric.
1
Why doesn't Bret like Omar?
Oh. Religion. Surprise.
3
stevens is picking a offensive fight of an overly intellectualized position of hypocrisy and false premise. i am jewish, not that i speak for all jews, but i don't find her pronouncements anti-semitic. logically, her argument does not condemn BEING JEWISH, which is the very essence of anti-semitism. her argument condemns the actions of the government of that other country, israel. therefore, all of that fancy analysis of what she said, what it means, is bogus. i wish the columnist would display a more curious mind in choosing legitimate topics to fill the pages of the times.
1
No I am not appalled. Would it have been better to call them "Islamic extremist" as you do? Is it understandable that she avoids this common wording? As to the left being anti Israel, it is time to stop falsely portraying this as antisemitism and blame it on the harsh policies of Netanyahu that promote land grabbing and killing of protesters for domestic votes. Tell him that he is responsible for jeopardizing steadfast liberal support for Israel.
1
Mr. Stephens is correct. Elections of Ilhan Omar and Rachida Tlaib by the people of Minnesota and Massachusetts, respectively, are signs of naivety and short-sightedeness. Both have -- on paper -- the political profiles of moles or agents of Islamism hating other religions, cultures, and modes of life.
To be politically balanced, one could draw a similar conclusion about Ram Emanuel, the outgoing Democratic Mayor of Chicago and former Obama's advisor, that he would be an agent of the Israeli Mossad.
3
CAIR recognized, Omar said, “that some people did something, and that all of us were starting to lose access to our civil liberties.”
Like it would be unfair to curtail Brett Stephens civil liberties because of the action of a sociopathic hater in New Zealand. Unless one was was just waiting for an opportunity to express bigotry.
Mr. Stephens can do better than this. Rep. Omar was speaking to an audience of Muslims who for two decades have been unfairly painted by many with the same brush as those who committed the atrocities of 9/11. To remove her comments from that context is to commit the same infraction of which she is accused: glossing over the hurt and pain of fellow Americans caused by injustice.
Let’s be more charitable to one another instead of writing inflammatory columns for clicks.
3
"With political power comes rhetorical responsibility."
Code for "let's shut her up."
No, Bret. If your beloved "conservatives" (code for white Christian males) want free speech, then even the uppity women and people of color get it, too.
1
When Peter Minuit bought Manhattan from a transient Indian Chief, who had no authority in the area(technically, this was the first time somebody bought the Brooklyn Bridge from a huckster)......the course of American history was set.
The Leaders would continually sell out the people who entrusted them with leadership.
Most recently, we have the sorry tale of the Clinton Admin selling everything in sight to Russia.....the Bush Admin attempted to sell the Port of NYC to the Saudis(who had most recently destroyed the World Trade Center!!)....
And now, the good people of Minnesota....attempted to posture as more pious and "tolerant" than the rest of the world....have elected a woman who entered the country under fraudulent pretenses and actually HATES her constituents GUTS.
3
I have to think this column was a failed attempt at humor, given the current occupant of the White House, and his “responsible rhetoric”. Lol
1
"The problem is that the remark is foul … . No decent person can look at the portraits of the 2,983 victims of Islamist terrorists and say, by-the-by, that this was 'something' that 'some people did.' " This is exactly right. It distresses me that it takes a conservative to say it while liberals not only run away from saying it but, instead, run to support Omar. See, e.g., the NYT's reporting on Omar's disgraceful comment immediately after it happened. That article did not print her words -- "Some people did something" -- but instead printed an elaborate circumlocution by way of rationalizing and excusing what she said. Words matter. Especially when they are uttered by a bigot who knows exactly what she's saying. It's too late now (and it always was patronizing) to chalk up Omar's bigoted remarks to ignorance or inadvertence. As Mr. Stephens notes: "She has demonized Israel, and American supporters of Israel, in terms that are unmistakably anti-Semitic. She has … claimed ignorance by way of apology, and then slurred Jews again — without apology." At every turn, her comments get worse. For example, the comment Stephens refers to in as slurring Jews "again -- without apology" was her attack on the vast majority of American Jews who support Israel as being disloyal to this country. I cannot tell you how sick I am of the notion that a love of Israel makes me, and all Jews, a fifth column. It is a hard core trope of Jew hatred.
10
Omar`s remarks were taken out of context. Bret Stephens is saying all Democrats are like Omar, because Omar was complaing about conservatives are saying all muslims are terrorists.
1
Passionately written, but counterfactual.
"Feb 12, 2019 - (CNN)Freshman Democratic Rep. Ilhan Omar of Minnesota publicly apologized Monday after she faced backlash for tweets condemned by both sides of the aisle as anti-Semitic.
'Anti-Semitism is real and I am grateful for Jewish allies and colleagues who are educating me on the painful history of anti-Semitic tropes,' Omar said. 'My intention is never to offend my constituents or Jewish Americans as a whole. We have to always be willing to step back and think through criticism, just as I expect people to hear me when others attack me for my identity. This is why I unequivocally apologize.'
She continued, 'At the same time, I reaffirm the problematic role of lobbyists in our politics, whether it be AIPAC, the NRA or the fossil fuel industry. It's gone on too long and we must be willing to address it.'"
Mr. Stephens, you excuse Trump's rhetoric as "fair game." Would you posit that Omar has inspired any domestic terrorist killers as Trump has? The Florida pipe bomber? The Squirrel Hill Synagogue massacre? Those threatening to put a bullet in Omar's head?
Really Mr. Stephens?
453
honestly this is clap trap equivocation. we don't always highlight Protestant or Catholic affiliations every time a "white" guy kills people. your call to participate in this media fueled persistent marking of Muslim extremism is at its core a major component of the hatred everyday wonderful Muslim Americans experience.
know that as long as we're engaging in school yard arguments: no, you sound like Trump.
6
"She has demonized Israel, and American supporters of Israel, in terms that are unmistakably anti-Semitic."
Quite the opposite Mr. Stephens. You, Israel, and other American blind supporters of Israel are demonizing Ms. Omar. And it's not just Ms. Omar. You fling the "anti-semite" label on any person, any organization, and government that dares to expose Israeli criminal activity in the ME and Israeli interference in the democratic processes of other nations.
6
Omar is both a bigot and the victim of bigotry. Her victimhood does not excuse her hateful speech. Simple as that.
Also, if one's brand is respect and dignity towards others, and yet one engages in classic anti-semitic canards then the hypocrisy is notable. Trump is a disgusting hatemonger, but he has never pretended to be "woke" unlike Omar and her blithely anti-semitic fellow travelers.
13
Mexicans are rapists was implied by the leader of the Republican party. The Dems are just Republican Light. Both in capitalist policy and inciteful rhetoric. Let this be the beginning of going radical. A little legal drugs. A little street demonstrations. If the system don't serve then serve the system.
Bret gets it. And now that Omar's remarks have found a less than approving ear at the NYT, many more will hear her vile remarks. They are not vile because of who she is (fill in all of the identifying criteria), the comments are vile because they show her beliefs are long held and not negotiable.
Dito Talib.
11
not a mumbling word about the actual death threats coming as a result of Trump's attack on a Muslim woman of color. Way to go Brett. Your need to conflate obviously valid criticism of Israel, the self described Jewish state with antisemitism and ginning up Omar's statements regarding 9/11 is not surprising. What is, is your need to continue to do so in the face of the real threats against a sitting congressperson.
3
Spoiler Alert. Rep. Omar has made several "insensitive" comments directed at Jews and Israel. Now she has minimized the greatest single attack on our country, since December 7th, 1941.
Throughout her life, she has been exposed to speech and ideas that are hostile to a specific demographic. If that were not true, shortly after her second "misstatement" she would have fine tuned her message.
Her voters will not remove her. They are of one mind. Her election proved that. And, she will be reelected. She is the Democrat Roy Jones. Remember Roy? Twice elected Alabama Supreme Court justice. And, twice removed. Mr. Jones was barely beaten in a sure to win election.
If Democrats don't cut her loose, they have just said her speech and ideology are acceptable. When will her appearance with Rev. Farrakhan be announced?
8
Harbinger of Democratic decline? Rep. Omar can defend herself. But if the only political party that stands for democracy in America is to decline and die, what will be left of America? GOP support of a totally unfit and unethical president has made America the greatest Banana Republic that ever existed. Bret, if you defend a thug and the party that defends his actions, you lose license to judge others.
Omar and Ocasio-Cortez will destroy our institutions and traditions as we know it. Should they pursue their radical views and push for Socialism, it will the beginning of the end to democracy and freedom in America. If their fellow Democrats and Congress members can't see between the lines of their pro-Muslim, anti-Semitic ideology and does nothing to call them out for it, the party itself is at risk for collapse.
6
'a few religious extremists did a really horrific thing' sure would have been better
3
Omar is not a harbinger of DNC decline, instead she is the natural reaction of an overtly racist, blood & soil POTUS. But she is smart enough to know better, I hope.
Yes, she gaffed terribly and compounded it by not apologizing for her racism against Israel. Israel deserves a smackdown for the same reason America does--a self obsessed belief in its own correctness while millions suffer as a result of their own policies in order to maintain its very small and out of touch elite class.
3
A paranoid tea leaf reading by a staunch OPEC defender. The second time in weeks you have tried to demonize this woman, now through the wider involvement of the whole Dem Party. A Trumpian distraction if there ever was one. journalistic license also comes with rhetorical responsibility.
1
Traditionally, most Jews voted Democrat.
Omar, among a few others, is driving more Jews to the Republican party. For years I voted all Democrats, or splitting my votes.
Many like myself are only voting Republican. More than a few Democrats have gone to far to the Left, anti Israel, and anti Semetic.
10
I would think an additional point would be the Obama double standard. Muslims that do bad things are not Muslims. Christians that do bad things did it because they are Christians.
2
What's wrong with this sentence?" Now Omar’s defenders are keen to paint her as a victim of Islamophobia, which no doubt she is." You got it! It's self-contradictory. Not only is Ilhan's life as a Muslim woman of color in danger (not "painted", not "no doubt", but actually and really) from white supremacists (those people responsible for the massacres you note at the top of the piece), but so are the lives of Muslims (and Sikhs, and black people, and Jews and women all around this country. AOC is an anti-Israel "wokester"? Whence this lack of respect or sense of history? People have been protesting Israel's apartheid state and Palestinian genocide for over half a century! AOC and Ilhan have nothing, absolutely nothing in common with this racist, misogynist President, nor do they pretend to represent the entire Democratic Party. That said, a great many of us are glad to hear some women speak unequivocally about social justice, our right to health care, a living wage, climate change. Such people are not "cranks, knaves, fools and bigots". Bret Stephens, I was a New Yorker, too. I watched the towers come down. The terrorists who did it were Saudi Arabians, who, oddly enough are some of this President's best friends. Your insistence on calling them Islamist is akin to calling KKK "Christian terrorists", which I suppose we could correctly do. With the job of journalist, Mr. Stephens, also comes rhetorical responsibility.
4
Ilhan Omar shows the ugly anti-semitic pro-arab side of the left leaning tree-hugging democrats. This virulent pro-arab agenda has warped the democratic party's agenda for decades. For the party's leadership to sidestep her comments and not fully denounce them is just one more reason that the democrats might rue the 2020 election.
7
Twisted rhetoric. Fewer than 3,000 Americans died on 9/11, and some Americans have used the event—perpetrated by Saudis—to slur all Muslims ever since. The U.S. then slaughtered more than 200,000 Iraqi civilians in the name of avenging 9/11. Is it any wonder Muslims are frustrated by these attempts to portray the U.S. as a victim? Only when people of colour commit a crime do commentators blame their religion or race. I don’t think she misspoke. If she did, she deserves a break.
2
If political power comes with rhetorical responsibility, so does publishing in a great and widely read newspaper.
Rep. Omar's comments listened to in context are unremarkable. She says that some people who were muslims attacked the towers, and the pentagon but all muslims are blamed.
Meanwhile Donald trump was telling the world, on September 11, 2001, that his building was now the tallest in lower Manhattan. He was also lying about seeing muslims celebrate, and ended up taking grant money intended for small businesses.
George Bush and Dick Cheney, on September 11 and 12, were rounding up Bin Ladin family members and Saudis and sending them out of the US and out of reach of American justice or investigation.
How can you look at yourself in the morning? You and your party have sunk into a moral cesspool, and you are trying to dive deeper down.
3
Great, Bret Stephens a conservative, Christian, white male, is scolding a woman of color of the Muslim faith for her lack of "rhetorical responsibility." That is rich and completely hypocritical and condescending for a writer whose own rhetorical irresponsibility is legendary.
As is the case with much of the coverage of Representative Omar's recent commentary what is missing is context and reasonable analysis. But because of her gender and color, those considerations are not important to Stephens and his ilk.
Just another example of the rightward drift of the New York Times. When we need the power of a free press that speaks truth to power, we have a reality show publication to match the reality show President and his Alice in Wonderland world.
3
She is only an example of anti-Semitism that is taking nasty root inside the left wing of the Democratic Party, leaching into the Party from factions that absolve the Palestinians from any blame for their plight and frame it solely as Israeli Likud led government colonialism and then tie that into a stance against Jews in the USA based on their support for Israel. Combined with the 'Anti 1%" faction and the easy stereotype connection with 1% to Jews and Jewish wealth and you have a toxic brew at the heart of the Progressive wing of the Democratic party. Not sure how to get it out, but it is deadly.
7
Oh come off it Bret. Ilhan Omar may be a congressional naif and clumsy in her language -- wish it weren't so -- but she has made some salient points about Islamophobia in this country and the rampant racism stoked by Trump. Wish you could get so worked up about AIPAC, the Israeli tail wagging the American dog, and what Bibi Netanyahu is doing to Israeli politics.
4
Brett Stephens:
Can you spot the problem with these remarks or are you wearing Rose tinted glasses seeing only what you want to see?
George Bush referred to 9/11 terrorists as those folks who committed this act.
https://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2001/09/20010911.html
Recently Trump referred to Benjamin Netanyahu as ‘ your prime minister’ while addressing Jewish American supporters which is a trope for Dual
3
No Brett. It was simply a statement....someone did do something...and most everyone who was alive at the time knows what that was. And BTW it wasn’t just in NYC. Should others be offended by YOUR lack of inclusion and specificity? No, because we know what you meant....maybe?
But perhaps, and actually, she was NOT talking to you. You, and anyone outside that room, were NOT her audience, so why does any speaker have to make sure they “dot the i” on all the possible global sensitivities that could be read into what was general and innocuous, but not inaccurate description.
The quotes in this piece, cited by the writer of a piece for The Wall Street Journal that used the phrase “the disease of the Arab mind”, are incorrect and are not even what Omar said at the CAIR gathering. He had to literally rework the words into a quote to fit his thesis.
How about “the disease of the Jewish mind”? See the problem?
How about “the disease of the Caucasian mind”?
See the problem?
Stephens does not engage in good faith here to begin with, but his central point (elevated by his mis-quoting of Omar’s words) is completely and utterly incorrect.
1
Mr.Stephens, is hoping Representative Omar's remarks lead to Democratic decline. I wonder if Mr. Stephens understands the difference between one's opposition to Israel's Zionism! Many Progressives are Pro-Israel and very much anti-Zionism! Representative Omar is approximately the same age as Donald Trump Jr. - you know one of the President's 'kids'! Conservatives more than willing to give the Trump 'Kids' breaks but not a Rookie Representative Woman of color!
"With political power comes rhetorical responsibility."
Tell that to the Republicans!!!!
1
Here we go again with another well-orchestrated anti-Ilham Omar piece by B. Stephens, formerly from the Jerusalem Post. Hard to see what he expects to achieve with this kind of character assassination.
To state that "someone did something" is an approach to deflect the ideology of collective crime, so pervasive in Israel against Palestinians.
Yes, "some" Muslims were responsible for the terrorist attack on Sept,11, 2001, does this make the more than a billion Muslims worldwide responsible? "Some" white people were responsible for the terrorist attack in Oklahoma City in 1996, does this make all white Christian Americans complicit or accountable?
Bret Stephens must get back to reality and stop misappropriating "some" people's words, and patronizing a young woman, too.
1
Politics is the game of subtle compromise and communications with adverse ideas - it is not a learned skill, it is more a cultural manifestation. The democratic politics is a new phenomena in Islamic culture - one pointed truth/false thoughts (Sharia, non-believers, idolatry, ...) are more ingrained in Islamic culture, and thus Islamophobia is common expression in them to express difference in views. It will take time to understand this art of subtle political expression by Congresswoman Omar. It is possible to win elections on a minority ghetto with the tag of ethnic commonness, it is very difficult to be successful Congresswomen in a competitive multiethnic political system. Gross expression of ideas is not the right tool of success - very quickly she will be tagged as an extremist in Democratic Party and there will be primary challenges. She has to learn fast to adopt this new profession or in few elections she will be thrown in history’s garbage like Ralf Nadder.
I'm surprised that you jumped on this particular bandwagon, Bret. I expected more of you. I didn't hear you or any other republican complain about Steve King, or Louie Gomert. Although King's most pointed comments were about Mexicans, not Jews. What is it about the new female congress people that causes such head explosions? And why have they come to represent the entire party?
Bret Stephens has no moral authority to criticize this particular individual in the NYT- given his party’s and his personal beliefs.
1
I usually agree with Bret Stephens, but he sounds like a rabbi to me, preaching all the time. I don't like rabbis or any clergymen. They are usually hypocrites.
Is English a second language for Representative Omar? I wonder if her lack of "rhetorical responsibility" can be attributed to English being a second language for her, making her less adept with her use of language.
1
The point was, don’t generalize about a whole people, based on what individuals do. We accept that about Jews; why can’t we accept it about Muslims? Instead, we wallow in the blame game.
Of all Omar's repulsive statements and all the Democrat rationalizations the worst is her smear of AIPAC, the willingness of the Democrats to agree with her, and the lack of the American people to acknowledge that Jews too have the right, guaranteed in our constitution, to petition our government.
She's upset that some people blame Muslims in general for September 11th? Then she supports an organization that petitions our government to defend Muslims in general? Sounds good except that organization has documented ties to terrorist organizations and the right to present her grievances to our government is exactly the right she attacks when supporters of Israel do it. And what is the Democrat defense, "yes...what she said could be offensive but all she was really doing was criticizing AIPAC and we agree."
What has AIPAC done that's illegal? How is AIPAC extorting the mantle of American Jews when there are many American Jewish organizations lobbying our government regarding policy towards Israel from every possible position?
5 generations of my family have fought for this country. And yes...we support the democratically elected leadership of Israel to decide what is in the best interest of the Israeli people, no we do not think Bibi is racist, and he is the Prime Minister and deserves to be treated with respect by our president.
No one will question my allegiance to this country.
The Democrats have called me and my family traitors so they can enable Omar's bigotry.
15
And does an infelicity of prose deserve the incendiary, rabid, life-threatening response that "someone" [aka "Individual-1"] did? The Democratic Party has it's problems, but it's in attacking Rep. Ilhan Omar first with their own misguided claims of antisemitism and not defending her as new, diverse voice representing the concerns of the large Muslim-American community. If the Democrats, like the Republicans, cannot embrace diversity and tolerance, then they will fail. If they cannot unite their progressive and establishment wings before 2020, then they will fail. But, to pile on a young Muslim women for saying 'something someone did' before a Muslim audience is to condone racist and religious bigotry. And for the record, the "someones" on 9/11 were radical Sunni Muslims from Egypt and Saudi Arabia ruled by two blood-thirsty despots who Donald Trump embraces even when it comes to the gruesome murder of someone named Jamal Khashoggi, a Muslim U.S. resident and like you an opinion writer, by the Saudi crown prince.
Almost a non-entity.
She "demonized Israel" and yet Netanyahu was hugely successful in the recent election there. The slaughter of Muslims in the Middle East continues to be carried out by Muslims and not Jews.
Her words clearly carry no weight. Ms. Omar needs a reset or she risks harming the very cause that she wants to champion.
2
Omar is a proven anti-Semite? Yes. Here's why: Did this Somali refugee learn the idiom re the benjamins in Somalia? She heard it first here and did not have a clue as to its meaning. So, she asked and she was told. Therefore, when she said it's the benjamins, baby, she knew EXACTLY what she was saying. She's an intentional, not an accidental, anti-Semite.
15
I am an old, white, male. When people of that description say stupid or bigoted things, people attack us with great fury. When a woman who is a person of color, as the saying goes, does this, they are often held to a different standard. Well, she is just a woman of color, the argument seems to be, so, cut her some slack. This seems pretty condescending to me. Either you are an anti Semite, or you are not. Either you make many stupid comments, or you do not. Give women and people of color the credit they deserve. They should not be judged by a lesser standard.
12
It pains me to agree with Stephens, but to a degree, I do. Omar will be a relentless distraction in a campaign that will be more consequential than any since 1932.
I must point out, however, that the Tea Party freshmen were a fountain of racial insensitivity, economic nonsense, and irresponsible self-righteousness. Nonetheless their legacy is Paul Ryan and Donald Trump.
4
For any of us, freedom of speech is not freedom from consequences.
So much more so for elected representatives. No so-called public servant should be above debate or criticism.
Recent attempts to absolve Rep. Omar from the repercussions of
her appallingly insensitive remarks and her obvious debasement of a national tragedy failed badly and only lead to backlash and increased tribalism.
Good for you Bret for sticking to principles and not advocating for politically convenient double standards. That doesn't just signal decline, it exposes moral rot.
5
I agree with the article. Further more I fear a process like of the labor party in the UK. I will rather abandon decades of voting for Democrats that allow for anti-Semitism. Being part of a minority doesn't justify, not we can condone it. And yes, this anti-Semitic representative plus AOC (Amazon blunder, damaging the people of NY and her anti-israel attitude), might turn the Democratic party irrelevant. I heard a lot of friends said they reconsider their vote. Me too.
11
Yes - a loose cannon does more damage to the ship than to the enemy.
7
The extent to which double standards are being applied leaves me (almost) speechless. Omar seems to be anti-Semitic. That is a terrible shame, and also worrisome is the way she is being used, politically, by those on the right looking for easy targets. But to even begin to equate her verbal missteps with the xenophobia and blatant racism the man in the White House (and his fellow politicians and supporters) spew every minute of every day shows a bias.
1
I do not live in New Jersey, that is my sin’s home. I live in Oklahoma City, less than two miles from the OKC bombing site. The cousin of my net friend died in the bombing, the husband of a salmon I worked with was severely injured, my kid felt the blast in their elementary school and saw the rubble downtown. I feel the pain every time I drive past the memorial, and remember that terrible day.
However, after the OKC bombing, white, male, Christian, Army vets were not demonized for their identity and faith. Bill Clinton came to OKC and brought comfort to a state were most did not vote for him. He did lie about seeing white Christians celebrating the bombing or try and prevent immigration from white Christian countries.
Omar was correct when she said that some people sis something and millions of others were blamed and vilified for it. The Muslims living I this country and those outside of it that had nothing to do with the bombing are not to blame, anymore than the Christians worshiping in the church down he street are responsible foe the OKC bombing. I know what she was saying and I supportr her.
1
I just wish Republicans were just as outraged with the hateful racist remarks by politicians on their team. (Steve King?) but there not.
2
Does it ever occur to Mr. Stephens that perhaps the reason the "old guard of pro-Israel liberals" is giving way to what he calls the "anti-Israel wokesters" might be because the old guard of Israeli liberals -- Yitzhak Rabin and Shimon Peres, for example -- have given way to the extreme right-wing government of Benjamin Netanyahu? Israel isn't just a concept, it's an actual country that's become extremely conservative, and progressives have noticed. Unless the political dialogue in Israel returns to something like its robust, diverse early state, U.S. liberals are not going to go back to their blind support of Israel.
3
The terrorist goals of 9/11 are well advanced by fermenting discord between Muslims and other Americans. If you want to show respect for the victims of 9/11, then fight that terrorism by fostering unity. Rep Omar's speech was about the isolation of American Muslims following 9/11 - you should help her, rather than those who attacked us.
3
In politics, what's bad for the goose is bad for the gander. One would think that, in this Year (decade? century?) of the Woman, these women politicians would be more careful with their speech, and no, they don't get any breaks because of their sex or race or religion.
1
Bret yet again demonstrates that conservatives are "a uniquely perfidious bunch". It is rich that he is so devoted to Israel that he actually sides with Trump.
The point that Bret ignores is that the Congresswoman is trying to help an enslaved population by calling out their oppressor. The same cannot be said of the 3 fictitious exemplars he fabricated.
1
I feel no more obligation to be tolerant of anti-semitism coming from the left than I do of that coming from the right or the center. Those who want to minimize or rationalize it in the rhetoric or actions of others become the fellow travelers—the enablers—of a force that poses a credible threat to me, to those I love, and to my people. The threat is credible because the history of such rhetoric leading from calumny through denial of rights to expropriation and murder has been repeated too many times. And it's pathetically naïve to believe it can't happen here.
5
All three of Bret's examples are out of context so I don't know if I would be outraged or insulted no matter who said them. Omar may be inarticulate but to take one or two statements out of context hardly compares with the things King or Trump have said in context. This game is beneath Bret's usual intelligent work.
After we've been subjected to alnost 4 years of Trump bluster, a lecture to the left about the need for rhetorical responsibility?
1
The summation of the comment goes something like this:
"She shouldn't have said what she said BUT..."
(insert some partisan, Republicans are worse argument here)
These are the same people who will jump down the Republicans for being tribal.
The hypocrisy of the left continues to shine through.
5
Stephens himself is a harbinger of democratic decline, a right wing extremist who pretends to be the voice of moderation. The ‘Stephens Method’ is a disingenuous rhetorical device of sounding reasonable and measured.
Stephens belongs at Fox News.
2
Several commentators have written that Omar is the flip side of the Trump coin. Fine. Let’s reject them both in 2020.
6
“With political power comes rhetorical responsibility.” Seriously? Have your observed Trump and his cronies for the past 30 months? What about that “spying” by the FBI? That was supposedly the chief law enforcement officer of our nation. There is a world of difference between what Republicans have recklessly blurted out and a legislator inartfully raising a legitimage criticism.
1
Omar sees Trump as a symptom of America's knee jerk foreign policy, which has inclined toward support & alignment with despotic regimes separated by degrees from a greater enemy, not as a singular dire threat to democracy.
Her implication that 9/11 was basically a wake- up call regarding America's Middle Eastern "involvement" shows an abject callousness & flies in the face of addressing her alleged concerns. I hope she'll be happy being a Congressional one-termer.
2
I have yet to hear the President apologize for any of the things he has said or lies he has uttered, regardless of the context. He and the Republicans who are too spineless to repudiate his insults and "alternative facts" are in the classic glass house when they complain about Ilhan Omar.
1
"Decent people", knew this all along. What is more surprising is how few "decent people" in the media report it with clarity.
1
I didn't read past the three hypotheticals. This is a dishonest rendering of what Omar said. Bret Stephens knows better, or should. With journalistic power comes responsibility.
1
Why is it that some commentators on the right conflate a few comments by newly elected back benchers in the Democratic Party as if they were immediately stepping into the presidency?
Notwithstanding lies told by Donald Trump in the aftermath of 9/11 about his “hearing” that Muslims in New Jersey were dancing in the streets, why not trust the voters of Ms. Omar’s congressional district to toss her from office at election time and the people of the United States do the same for the more egregious things said by Trump next year?
2
No, Brent, harbingers are foreshadowings of things that have not yet happened. This is not that because it's already happening. Anyone who compares who they felt about the 2020 elections last November with how they feel about them today cannot miss the huge setback. Of course Omar is not the whole reason, but she's a good quarter or fifth of the reason, and that is plenty bad enough.
Why is she so bad for the Democrats? Because she fulfills every opposition narrative about them, that they'll turn themselves into pretzels for the sake of their nonsense shibboleths, to the extent that they ignore Omar's jihadist view of Israel, Jews, 9/11 and on and on like that.
But really, she's not the fundamental problem. The problem is the pandering and sloganeering that so characterizes the Democrats today.
3
While Bret--who is regularly at pains to nimbly undergird the current Israeli government's demolition of real democracy and the two-state solution (may it rest with no peace)--is more right than wrong about the failure of clarity in Ms. Omar's remarks on March 23 at the CAIR gathering, I am simply unable to accept his main arguments here. If a strenuous--and entirely credible--defense of Muslim and Muslim-American belonging and political fortitude in the face of deep-seated prejudices and intimidation (including those articulated by the current President of the United States) is at the heart of Ms. Omar's critique, then I am with her. If an increasingly fearless and pointed interrogation of the many privileged forms of public support for a manifestly anti-democratic (some might even say anti-Zionist) trajectory in Israel-Palestine is at the heart of Ms. Omar's critique, then I am with her. He concludes with a facile affirmation of her stated conviction to "hold accountable those that we love"--and I propose that Bret take a dose of that medicine!
1
This writer comes from a western context, Omar does not. Decades ago, I spent time in a youth hostel in London filled with mostly Indians and Pakistanis. Their world view is not mine or the writer's. Yes, Omar sees Israel and the US allies of Israel as white colonials. By the way, the Native americas see us that way too. All of us view the other in a simplified way. Yes, Omar sees the mess in the middle east and Africa as the creation of Western Imperialism. They are not happy. And even if they come to the US, they will still be unhappy. That is entirely reasonable.
2
Bret Stevens and anyone else who's pushed disastrous wars in the middle east believe brown people to be disposable. Beginning from that point, it becomes easier to understand how he views Richard Spencer and Alex Jones's right to free speech as sacrosanct, yet dissects each and every syllable that Ilhan Omar utters.
First amendment for people like me and speech police for people like thee.
What Omar pointed out is that SOME Muslims did something bad and ALL Muslims in the US were held responsible for it. This is what easily happens to members of a minority group.
That Stephens does not get the point she was making (or willfully ignores it, trying to smear her with vile intentions), says more about him than about her.
The attacks Stephens mentions at the beginning of the article are chosen to appeal to a left wing readership, as they were all committed by white supremacists. But as comparisons to what Omar said about 9/11 they are totally off the point. They were all perpetrated by a member of the majority population. In such cases society condemns the act, not the entire population the attacker came, from as this is from the majority itself.
That he does not see that such acts have virtually no consequences for the treatment of the white majority, while 9/11 had enormous consequences for the Muslim minority tells us something more about his intellect or possibly his intentions.
3
One little problem Bret. Omar is not running for President.
2
The point of rhetoric is to make a point, a persuasive argument to enlighten an audience to an understanding of an issue.
Representative Ilhan Omar was making the point that ALL Muslims were being blamed for the acts of a few. Instead of acknowledging that point, Bret Stephens chose to be offended by her expression of the "few" in the clause leading to her point.
Is there any point in pointing out that Bret's reaction to Omar's rhetoric parallels the way Trump's supporters react to Trump's "speech?" Shallow listening, shallow understanding, shallow conclusions. And that doesn't begin to address the fact that Omar's rhetorical intent was noble, while Trump's "rhetorical" intent is mostly disgusting. (Dare I say deplorable?)
2
Wait a minute....How many thousands of innocent Muslims have been bombed, killed or considered collateral damage in America's wars in the Middle East? I am not in favor of Omar's comments but let's not paint ourselves in cloak of self-righteousness. Americans need to consider how we are perceived by the rest of the world when we rage about 9/11. We might be surprised to discover that they aren't as sympathetic to our pain as we might wish them to be.
1
I share your concerns. Nancy Pelosi’s recent meeting with Jeremy Cornyn caught my eye. At minimum tone deaf at worst validating the concerns you express.
5
If the Democrats what to see who is their enemy, they should look at Rep Ilhan Omar. She, AOC and Rashida Tlaib are causing great damage to the party at 2020 election.
9
Ilhan Omar is merely A democrat, not THE democrats.
Steve King is A republican, but Trump is THE republican party.
1
How quickly we forget that it was Ann Coulter, not Ilhan Omar than referred to 9/11 widows as phonies who were only interested in collecting benefits. If I remember correctly Ann Coulter has even made a few comments that could easily be construed as anti-Semitic. Most notable on Donny Deutch's TV show.
Spot on. Minnesota, please vote her out.
6
Omar made the point that while a few Muslims (some people) did something, all Muslims have been hounded.
No matter how compelling the other aspects of 9/11, they are not, logically, part of this point, which is that a whole community was blamed for the actions of a few.
There are many observations to be made about 9/11. For example: that it was carried out by Muslims; that 3000 people were killed; that it was the worst US slaughter since Pearl Harbor; that many more people were killed in the war in Afghanistan that followed.
And one feature was that all Muslims were victimized for the actions of a handful.
Unless you stick to one of these notions at a time, you confuse your point. Your editors probably explained this decades ago.
We don't have to talk about abortion all the time: Pope Francis. We needn't demand the destruction of Carthage in every speech.
To advert to the cases you list at the beginning:
I know who did Oklahoma City; you don't have to tell me. I also know it was inhuman; you don't have to tell me that either.
Likewise, I know who did Christchurch---just indicate the event and move on to your syllogism.
I know who did Charleston SC.
Appalled by King's or Trump's use of such formulations? By concise references? Of course not.
But, I should probably be appalled by whatever assertions about these events follow the simple and appropriate signifiers.
It's what they say, not how they say it.
I cut them slack; they do the hanging.
1
There you go again, Bret Stephens! As so many have pointed out, her out-of-context remark may not be eloquent, but is quite innocent. Many, including Trump, have said far worse.
No, the genesis of your furor swirls around her criticism of Israel. Please understand that Israel is a foreign country that through AIPAC and its cohorts manages our foreign policy to its benefit, including massive foreign aid. Each and every American has the absolute right to criticize it without constraint as with any other country, including the right to boycott it.
Save your energy instead for advising the Israelis from drifting away from American values, and for their abuse of Palestinians.
4
The amount of ink and outrage over our new brown Congresswomen serves one purpose; to sideline them so the old guard can carry on with the business of putting conservative judges in place, deregulating and cutting taxes for a donor class. If anyone objects to these sexist, intellectually lazy attacks, they will be branded as engaging in “identity politics” and blamed for Trump’s election/re-election. The swiftboating has jumped the shark gentlemen. I am done with this argument while the government utterly fails to serve the people and a foul President represents only an chronically inflamed racist base. We got 99 problems and Omar ain’t one of them.
1
Bret, how about giving new members of Congress, particularly women who have not a voice in politics, the benefit of the doubt and let them learn to speak in a more professional way.Trump , who has been in office for over two years “tweets” every day cruel and insulting messages-he has been demeaning Muslims from day one.His angry talk does not set a good example for anyone, including new members of Congress.
3
Mr. Stephens has joined the tribe which will hound Ms Omar relentlessly because she has committed the unpardonable act of criticizing Israel and Zionism.
American media that has promoted these voices is now witnessing the culmination of that frenzy. Israel that is becoming more and more undemocratic and more and more emboldened to treat the "other" as less than human.
We will see more and more contortions in the rhetoric to justify what Israel is doing. Such a pity that those who could have been a restraining influence on the worst instincts of Israeli politicians are instead doing their best to muzzle the critics of those policies.
4
I used to lean Democrat, voted Democrat in every election. I found those words deeply offensive. I lost friends in the WTC. The Democrats defended her. She should have spoken out against extremism and violence, not been so glib. Big disappointment. The Democrats are a lost cause. I would like to vote for someone who can speak truth. The field of Democrats is an embarrassment.
6
I am 65 years old and progressive. I think her statement was at least very clumsy, inarticulate, and insensitive. I also suspect that she may be rather young and inexperienced for the position she has been given by her constituency. What really bothers me is today's tendency to immediately jump to the defense of questionable statements made by someone who is "on your team". When did it become impossible to offer reasonable criticism of something one of our representatives said without becoming a "traitor to the cause"? All this shaming and virtue signaling destroys our ability to have a civil and intelligent conversation about important matters. When we buy into it we are being lead around like cattle.
1
"You’d be revolted that a right-wing politician would fail to speak forcefully against the bigotries too often found among his followers and fellow travelers." I am everyday revolted by this president, his sycophants, and his followers. I'm revolted that he and his sycophants took her comments out of context and that he has deliberately stoked hatred against her and shows no remorse that his words have put her life, literally, in danger. Her words may have been poorly delivered although I believe I understand what her intent was. But I have no doubt of the intentions of Trump and his ilk when they stoke hatred, because there is never an occasion when they apologize or make an attempt to tamp down the effects of their words. Your outrage, Mr. Stephens, is hypocritical at best.
Unfortunately, it is the 1%, those who speak loudest or act out in the worst possible ways, that get our attention. Meanwhile, we have the "silent majority", those that sit on their hands, and allow the rhetoric to foment.
Whose fault is this? We the people who do not speak up.
Whose fault is this? Our political representatives who are unwilling to take a stand?
Whose fault is this? Mainstream media and social media who promote this hatred, bigotry, racism, etc, to further their own agendas: PROFITS!
Yes, Representative Omar has much to learn about norms of expression and political realities. However, it is rather comic to hang upon the Democratic party responsibility for one of its most junior member and attempt to use her indiscretions to brand the party. It is not as though she has a history of out right lying, immoral behavior, promoting racists and anti-Semites, sexual assault, public misbehavior, undercutting our justice system and running a Putinesque foreign policy. In fact, it is fascinating how Trump has gone so far beyond what is considered normal and we have become accustomed to it enough to be desensitized even though he is President and runs a major political party. At the same time, we fall into the rabbit hole of attacking and elevating in importance a few relatively insignificant Muslim, Hispanic, and African women to help Trump scare American voters. Trump could not have written a better script himself.
Yes, Ilhan Omar is a harbinger of democratic decline. She is a mistake that should be rectified, but won't be. Run to your safety zones! The left has gone off the rails just as much as the right has through removing Al Franken, releasing half-baked plans and through clueless statements from clueless people like Omar who has no business in American politics. The left and the right have both gone to the gutter - it's a bipartisan pilgrimage. And what happened to separation of church and state???
4
If this one woman's comments bring down the Democratic Party then it should be brought down. Steven King's comments or Donald Trump's have not brought down The Right. Now we are to believe this woman has the power to bring down a party? The Dems need to get all of the newbies in a room and lock the door and read the riot act to them. Tell them if they don't want to go down in history as the people who helped re-elect Trump put a sock in it. This Chicken Little act by Bret should get the talk to the hand from the Dems.
2
Clean up your own backyard before looking over the fence to comment on your neighbor's. The question is whether or not we can survive as a country of laws; and that question arises from the actions of your party, not those of a representative elected by her constituents and exercising he right to self expression within those laws. Away with this silliness.
1
Your outrage would better be directed against a President and his base who have no trouble supporting a wealthy Saudi Arabia that continues to bully its way through the world by murdering journalists and incarcerating women who stand up for their rights. Note that women in Iran are much more free than their Saudi counterparts, and that we are now supporting a regime in Yemen that slaughters civilians with the arms and aid that we provide without a peep from our congressional reps and most of the Democrats who have declared their opposition to Trump in 2020.
1
Even for you, this column is shocking in its intellectual dishonesty. Omar didn't say 9/11 was "something someone did," as you put it here. She said:
"CAIR was founded after 9/11 because they recognized that some people did something and that all of us were starting to lose access to our civil liberties."
It doesn't take a particularly charitable interpretation to understand she meant a group of Muslims committed a terrorist attack, and after that, Muslims in general were vilified and had their civil liberties violated.
You had it right here:
"The bulk of Omar’s speech was devoted to preaching political empowerment for American Muslims and denouncing Islamophobia."
That's what you - and everyone else - should be focusing on.
Why have we lost the ability, in American politics - and often among journalists and opinion writers - to respond to what the speaker actually means to say, and instead feign outrage at what we want them to have said so that we can take offense and score political points?
Shame on you (and Rep. Crenshaw, and President Trump) for mischaracterizing her remarks and fanning the flames on this.
She's too mouthy and far outside what her constituents probably want in a House member, but nothing compares to Bret's party leader, Donald J. Trump, when it comes to debasing other people and destroying our institutions.
Spot the problem with the quoted remarks:
(1) The invasion of Lebanon and subsequent Sabra and Shatila massacre in 1982 was “something some people did.”
(2) Last January’s killing of Hamdi Naasan by Israeli settlers from Adei Ad was “something someone did.”
(3) The 2018 massacre of Palestinian protesters at Gazawas “something someone did.”
Now imagine that a public figure with a history of making racially inflammatory remarks had said any of this. Would you not be appalled?
Not if you knew what was good for you. Maybe if you were a U.N. envoy. Otherwise the public figure with a history of making racially inflammatory remarks would get instant redemption.
1
Another deliberate misconstruction of what Rep. Omar said to smear Ms. Omar, Muslims, Somalis, and by extension nonwhites with racist extremism. And an attempt to use the misconstruction as a 'harbinger of Democratic decline'. Particularly galling is Stephens's attempt to Photoshop Rep. Omar into Iowa's vile racist Steve King. While we're playing Stephens's game of 'Imagine,' imagine this: a Stephens column denouncing Steve King in particular and Republican party racism in particular.
You'd have to.
The hit job is to be expected but one would think it would be led by Fox News.
There's no point comparing remarks. That's the trap that this piece sets. Its trick lies in the headline "Democratic Decline." Stephen's then artfully invokes outrage by reminding us of his passion for the 9/11 Memorial.
But the real point is made a few paragraphs on. These remarks are part of the new "anti-Israel" crowd and the Democratic Party, which is supposed to be in the 'pro' column has allowed itself to be infected by the likes of Omar.
And let's throw in Oaccasio-Cortez just for good measure even though she hasn't said anything.
The pro vs. anti theme is clear. Those who defile American losses are part of this growing anti crowd. As Bush said, "you're either with us, or with the terrorists."
Sorry Bret. Those days are over and that is what this new crowd of Democrats is saying. They're not about to abandon Israel as a ally, but neither are they going to jump through AIPAC's hoops and quietly accept the subjugation of 4.5 million Palestinians.
What has changed isn't their influence in the Democratic Party as much as what has changed in Israel. The right wing government has openly and brazenly abandoned thirty years of American two state policy and said we will practice apartheid and ethnic cleansing and you will silence our critics.
Some will go along with that. Others like Omar and a new generation of young Americans will not. That's not decline. That's coming to ones senses.
1
Ms. Omar is one Congressperson who is just a smidgen different. She did not minimize the tragedy of 9/11 Mr.Stephens. Trump on the other hand is a Terrestrial Horror Show.
Your fellow journalist at the Times was shamefully ridiculed by that gross human being who became president. Trump staunchly defends that murderer prince who had another
journalist assassinated. You, sir, should condemn Trump daily and let Ms. Omar get her feet wet and come around. Oh yeah, Trump’s tweet with the accompanying video was one of his most despicable acts to date.
1
What if a white man experienced bigotry & discriminated all of their life based on race & religion, how would you relate yourself to Timothy McVeigh & the mass murder of 168 people. I doubt any white man can imagine this scenario.
Perhaps I should take Mr. Stephens writing out of context & exploit that he wrote....The Oklahoma City bombing in 1995 was “something some people did.”
I normally like Bret Stephens opinion, but this is just making a mountain out of a molehill. Such piling on is beneath him. Please offer constructive criticism on real issues that affect Americans.
Pat Kilroy
1
Here we go, again. Who more than the republican men in Congress, the conservative media outlets, the president, white nationalists, evangelicals and the angry white Limbaugh/Levine crowd can express their views in whatever outrageous, racist, misleading manner? Let a woman, no a qualified, bona fide elected, office holding Muslim woman, get real and it’s a smear. Really?
1
Dear Mr. Stephens,
Perhaps you should heed to your own dictum (that "with political power comes rhetorical responsibility"). And yes, by writing for the Times, you have plenty of political power--unfortunately, in my own opinion. By framing the discussion in this way, you ensure that remarks are stripped from the context in which they were originally made in order to bolster the kind of response you want readers to have. Need I remind you that reality is not the thought experiments you construct in your column? That Rep. Omar was speaking about something very real, the loss of civil liberties for citizens in our country, and that the reference to 9/11 was only tangential? Do you have evidence that Rep. Omar believes that 9/11 was not a tragedy, or do you just extrapolate from remarks stripped of their context to assume that about a rhetorically bold young congresswoman who also happens to be muslim and a person of color?
6
It seems to me that the harbinger of doom is the constant media reduction of intensely complex issues to soundbites we can use to point out the weaknesses of our “enemies.” It is impossible to have a fair understanding of anything in a tweet. But you can garner eyeballs, and make money of it. And the attitude that everything has to be monetized is pretty sick indeed.
3
This is spot on.
Ilhan Omar is the gift that keeps on giving to the GOP, who could effectively limit their 2020 campaign ads to videos of her speaking.
18
Wow, I didn't realized Stephens was part of the faux outrage/ cheap shot machine.
Instead of of Democratic decline, one might argue that Omar is part of a renewed Democratic vitality and resurgence, one that doesn't include Republican knee jerk support of Israel's right wing politics, or fawning over professional 9/11 hand wringers like Rudy Giuliani.
Taken in the context in which it was delivered, Omar's remark makes perfect sense.
6
“Perfect sense” for a hater, that is. The Democratic Party will, again, fail in 2020 mostly because the haters and scornmasters elected in the midterm are only a preview of nastiness to come.
3
It seems incredibly unwise for democrats to make Islamists like Omar and Tlaib the face of their party going into the 2020 elections.
I'm not sure what they have to gain, and it's obvious it's not going to be popular with voters outside of a few congressional districts.
The left needs to hold their own accountable, or voters will do it for them.
38
"There are good people on both sides"......Well I guess it is ok if you pander to white supremacists and not ok if you pander to the Muslim community. Never mind if one of the people involved is one of 435 House Representatives and the other is the President of the United States. This is a perfect example of where Republicans and their apologists are in promoting false equivalency and the notion that both sides are equally guilty. The real truth is that if you choose to criticize Omar than you also should be screaming for the immediate removal of Trump; and of you are not, you are the worst kind of hypocrite.
9
Can we quit talking about her until she does something else worth talking about?
7
In response to Bret Stephens' opening question, no I would not be appalled if I saw similar quotes from Donald Trump or Steve King. I am appalled by many of the things Trump and King say. But I cannot be bothered to be appalled when they simply slide over an issue, failing to make a clear statement when I think they should have made one.
One of the problems in our culture is that too many people are too easily appalled. This dilutes the effect of our outrage when someone makes a statement that really is appalling.
1
Well, Trump did say that Charlottesville was something "very fine people" did.
3
Representative Omar was elected with almost 80% of the vote, which implies that hers is a single-party district in which the Democratic nominee will not lose votes even if, to paraphrase the candidate Trump, they went out on the street and committed a crime. This is by way of saying that she and her more publicized colleague Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez simply should do not deserve the out-sized attention that they continue to get from anyone outside their own district. Representatives from districts like theirs do not have the fulcrum of power in Congress at their hands because there is no check on what they say, which is why their comments are politically irrelevant. The swing district Democrats are the ones who put their party in the majority and they are the ones should be scrutinized, quoted and taken seriously, for as they go will go the House in 2020.
4
"When you hate, you destroy yourself."
- Nixon on the day he resigned the presidency.
2
Comparing Trump's disparagement of Mexicans is completely different from Omar's critique of Israel.
Israel is a governing authority suppressing the rights of a group of people, the Palestinians.
Some people, even many Jews, agree that the status quo is unacceptable, unkind, unfair, inhumane.
In addition, Trump cast aspersions on Muslims and by strongly supporting Israel's actions on the embassy relocation and statements on the Golan Heights, Trump collaborates to further marginalize Palestinians who are Muslim.
Omar is speaking out to try to seek justice for the oppression that continues because "some people did something." Her point is well taken, in my opinion.
Why are we not justified in being angry with, singling out, restricting the rights of white men after Oklahoma City and the Unibomber and Charlottesville and Charleston and on and on?
6
Representative Omar's speech was focused on the "all of us" and not on the "some people did something," which all the conservative pundits and politicians have grabbed onto. Yes, I agree she needs a more nuanced speechwriter but please remember she is a freshman member of Congress and will learn and grow every day in this new role.
My biggest question is how can you demonize Representative Omar and let the hateful and directed rhetoric of our current President go without comment?
7
I think viewing her statements through a lens of what's happening in the Muslim and African worlds may grant people some important clarity. Just look at the situation in Somalia and the rest of Africa - the poverty, disease and violence are all vestiges of white western colonialism. Then look at the US sponsored war in Yemen. The US hegemony has directly resulted in the loss of life for millions of her people, yet no one takes to notice that. Instead people solely focus on the tragedy of 9/11 because all the other woes in this world are NIMBY. Perhaps if we discard the awfulness of the NIMBY approach we could have a more understanding view of non-white and non-Christian individuals.
2
Honestly, I can see how it looks calloused to some, but it looks more like she lacks an understanding of 9/11 and what happened. And, she wouldn’t be the first 20 year-old who ignored the news. She speaks as if it was ages ago, something she remark in, having read in a history book.
1
Wow, so many remarks downplaying her statements, either claiming that her ongoing bigotry is misunderstood, or that there is a bigger picture, or that the other side is even worse etc. It is Fox news in reverse.
Evidently many intelligent people cannot recognize an obvious bigot, or acknowledge it, just because the speaker is on their side politically. And this goes for both sides. Tribalism rules the day.
18
Thank you Mr. Stephens.
At the end of the day Ilhan offers little introspection. Rather than bringing to this country an insight into the problems that caused her parents to flee from Somalia she embodies the same blame others, rigid thinking that caused and is causing all the turmoil on the Horn of Africa.
It is a philosophy which at its heart says if I can’t make it, I will be sure to bring you down as well.
That at the end of the day is what, unfortunately, drives much of the left and is being given more and more expression within the Democratic party.
It is time for the downtrodden to recognize that even if they do not have the financial benefits that many successful people have, they still benefit from the huge sacrifices that are being given to help lift them up; not the least significant of which was accepting families such as hers into this country.
Israel exists because of the prejudice by people like Ilhan, her voice lends meaning to the words ‘never forget’.
At the end of the day from my exposure to Jewish (Talmudic) law what it espouses is to own up to ones wrongdoings and failings and to be just and righteous and merciful. It would be good to hear more words like that coming from the left of the Democratic party.
21
It’s quite impossible to make sense of the comparison Bret is making here.
When a white person commits an atrocity in the western world, the United States does not invade a random European nation. White folks aren’t ripped from their cabs and beaten in the streets of New York. There aren’t massive infiltration and surveillance initiatives of mayonnaise-based salad meetups.
If those things *had* happened after the church shooting Bret mentioned, white folks might describe those events with alarm, saying “just because some people did something doesn’t mean we should bomb hundreds of thousands of Finnish civilians and create an illegal offshore prison to indefinitely detain Swedes without trials or due process.”
When white people commit atrocities it goes without saying that white people at large bear no responsibility or suspicion. So they never have any need to explicitly disassociate themselves or their communities from the murderers and terrorists in their midst, as Omar did with her comment.
4
duh... NO!!!! She is NOT a harbinger of decline, rather she is a proof of the health of our democracy. All this angst about her shows how some people are unwilling to be inclusive. It's not about whether her ideas and opinions are good or bad, but she was elected so she has a right to speak. We are not required to agree, but we are required to listen. We can't reach healthy consensus if we don't respect and listen to all sides.
4
Rep. Omar should have more forcefully corrected her comments. I don't have a direct problem with her comments. She is under the microscope that she is because she is a Muslim and a woman. White men in Congress say things as disturbing and careless, but since there are hundreds of white men in Congress, their remarks are not analyzed over and over again. Rep. King has been in leadership and is a longtime member of Congress who has said things that he meant to be harmful and racist. The president's actions speak for themselves. Rep. Omar will learn how to use her platform more precisely. Give her time or vote her out, but stop this comparison when there really is none.
I think we'd all take the criticism of her more seriously if the GOP doesn't chide people for their "political correctness" whenever they made a peep about racism on the right.
1
I can appreciate the mirror you’re holding up to progressives. However, Israel is a nation harming its people and isn’t comparable to Mexico. People SHOULD be speaking out about the State of Israel. It is possible to be critical of a Government and not of its people — but Trump is doing the opposite. Trump attacks people — innocent people, for all he knows. Yes, Omar’s comment is offensive, but being offended is a subjective experience and in the last 2 years my metrics for what is offensive has drastically changed due to Trump.
Mr. Stephens' formulaic piling on against Rep. Omar - without even a nodding glance to Netanyahu's (and therefore Israel's) repudiation of any hope for a two state solution in the recent election is just one more indication that Omar's fundamental point about the excessive influence of Likud and AIPAC on the American establishment, and the establishment's consequent acquiescence in the progressive marginalisation of Palestinian suffering, is completely on target.
2
"With political power comes rhetorical responsibility."
I hope the author (or anyone else) can and will please, please explain that to President Trump.
4
“And despite claiming to be a champion of human rights, she has been oddly selective about the human-rights issues that elicit her outrage.” Thats odd, this sounds very much llike America itself and honestly aren’t we all, too varying degrees, “selective” in our outrage.
2
The reluctance of Democrats to distance themselves from Omar is very telling to myself. Although I have previously voted and supported Democrats, I find the rhetoric of some contemporary Democratic politicians hypocritical and disingenuous. Several Democratic politicians boldly call for "equal treatment under the laws" and "the rich and the poor should be treated under the laws" and "no one is above the laws." But then they make myriad excuses when illegal immigrants break the laws: "well... they just want a better life;" "well... they were saving their children;" "well... they just want to make more money." These rationalizations are not justifications for crimes, and they signal the double standards and hypocrisies of Democratic politicians. And Ilhan Omar does signal the decline of Democrats. I used to support Democrats since they held the moral high ground. When the Democrats like Omar simply reverse prejudices and biases, then the Democrats are quickly descending from this high ground. Omar's irresponsible denial of Muslim anti-Americanism and her inflammatory anti-Semitism mirror the unprofessional and undiplomatic narcissism of Trump.
8
Bret, give it a break.
“There are fine people on both sides” is far, far more revealing about Trump’s beliefs and values than anything Omar said. Not a contest whatsoever.
This is just another fake outrage from right wing America.
3
Oh my, poor Mr. Stephens is triggered by a relatively young, brown-skinned, immigrant Muslim woman who doesn't know that she's supposed to defer to her "betters" and not color outside the lines of acceptable Beltway discourse.
The fact that the right-wing noise machine is giving her and the young, brown-skinned, equally outspoken Latina Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez far more publicity than their newbie status would otherwise warrant suggests that the Republicans feel the need to cater to the prejudices of the Trump cult.
And what are those prejudices? Anti-immigrant, anti-Muslim, anti-Latino, anti-"uppity women."
That's why they're trying to portray Ilhan Omar as the new face of the Democratic Party.
As if it were a bad thing that two of the newest members of Congress are upsetting apple carts that are long overdue for upsetting.
5
"Harbinger of decline?"
Naw, merely the latest example of the Dukakis-ism that infects the Democrats' leadership.
Pelosi's refusal to impeach Trump is still the shining example of failure to fight, and it smells like victory to Trumpists everywhere.
1
This entire column is premised on a what seems like a willful misreading and misinterpretation of Rep. Omar's remarks. She was basically saying that the actions of a small handful of people should not be used as an excuse to persecute others, just because they share the same religion. It's really not that hard to understand in context at all. Mr. Stephens is not unintelligent, so what explains this column?
3
Representative Omar is a blunt and polarizing figure, but she's also a Congresswoman from a safe Democratic district. Still, at least some Democrats are wondering whether her lack of interest in playing rhetorically to the political center is a liability for the party.
Meanwhile, the Democrats are gearing up for a Presidential primary that will see a blunt and polarizing figure from the extreme left, the Independent Senator from Vermont, co-opt their party. He will campaign like the whole US is a safe Democratic district, which it clearly isn't.
So, yes, I have to agree that it's sexist, racist and Islamophobic for any Democrats to wring their hands about Ilhan Oman, when Bernie Sanders is looking ever more likely to torpedo the party, and the country, by enabling Trump's election for a second time.
Despite Stephens' claim to the contrary, he is taking Omar's statement out of context. What she said was, “CAIR was founded after 9/11 because they recognized that some people did something, and all of us were starting to lose access to our civil liberties.”
It should be clear the Omar's emphasis was not on 9/11 and minimizing that event. Rather, her statement was about the loss of civil liberties, particularly among Muslim Americans, since 9/11. That is a valid and real point.
By taking out the second half of this quote Stephens can try to offer his quotes about Oklahoma, Christ Church, or Charleston, but if US Omar's full quote then Stephen's examples fall apart.
1. The Oklahoma City bombing in 1995 was "something some people did, and all of us are starting to lose access to our civil liberties"
2. Last month's attack on two mosques in Christ Church was something someone did and all of us are starting to lose access to our civil liberties.
3. The 2015 massacre at a black church in Charleston is something someone did, and all of us are starting to lose access to our civil liberties.
Those are significantly different statements and they also show how absurd this whole thing is. The reality is that we are not losing civil liberties after white supremacist attacks. Dylan Roof was bought fast food on the way to prison, the Christ Church killer was humanized in articles, our president speaks of very fine people at a racist rally...
And that is our problem.
4
"That the president has chosen to target Omar"
"It would be political malpractice if he did not"
I am shocked by both those lines, how easily they are thrown into the article. Used to be that targeting people was the domain of dictators and tyrants. Have we become so habituated to the current tenant of the White House's divisiveness and hate, putting targets on whose ever back he feels will get him the attention needed to rally his crowd that it is now not only par for his course but acceptable, the norm?
And given the president's bent, It's disingenuous at best to say "it would be political malpractice" if he did not. Conversation, healthy debate fine. But he is not doing that, he is putting a target on her back with sensational propaganda posts, retweets and doubling down on it every chance he gets. Only a fool would think he does this to be responsible, it's all just red meat for him to throw at the rabid.
To quote another commentator: " "some people did something" was very clearly not to minimize the tragedy and the horror of 9/11. The point was that 19 people committed an act and 1.5 billion people bore the blame. "
3
It’s almost if she was planted to do most harm to US Muslims and inflame Trump supporters even more. Also many moderate Republicans and Democrats will be turned off by her radical approach.
5
"Those who profess to favor freedom and yet deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground. They want rain without thunder and lightening. They want the ocean without the awful roar of its many waters."
- Frederick Douglass
"No folly is more costly than the folly of intolerant idealism. "
- Winston Churchill
2
Here's the context you're missing. Her point was that millions of American Muslims shouldn't suffer civil injustices due to the acts of a few. She didn't say that what happened wasn't horrible. It's not like she said terrorists were "very fine people." Now, I find it much more offensive that a number trump allies still claim 9/11 was an inside job. How is that not incredibly offensive to you?
1
And where is Stephen’s condemnation of the video Trump trumped tweeted with the image of the Twin Towers and Omar’s words which led to increased death threats against her? That is so much more egregious than anything she said. In addition, Trump remains unapologetic for sharing this video. His actions threatens an America life and he gets away with it? Oh-and what about the lie that Trump lost “hundreds of friends” on 9/11 yet there’s no mention or record of him attending one funeral. That was used for his political gain. It’s Trump’s patriotism and honesty that needs to be questioned, not Omar’s. And remind me which Republicans tweeted their concerns about 3 Black churches in Louisiana which were recently burned? It’s easier to pick on one freshman, female, Congresswoman.
1
Why does this columnist continue on a circular, literary merry-go-round where everything he opines often, if not very often, seems to revolve around Israel and how the Netanyahu administration, now going into an unprecedented length of office, is so maligned, so terribly misunderstood?
Sure Mr. Stephens cites flimsy exceptions to his arguments, as shown in this piece, to assuage any detractors who might think he isn't fair and balanced, but his literary purpose in this esteemed publication is as an insidious arm of the Netanyahu administration and its terrible history of mistreating a displaced people who were guaranteed immunity from harm in the roadmap or white paper, if you will, toward Israel's creation.
I strongly encourage readers to research The Balfour Declaration.
4
'With political power comes rhetorical responsibility." Agreed. But look where Trump's rhetoric has led us in terms of today's political discourse.
As a Republican that still reads the NY Times, New Yorker Atlantic, etc., voted for Obama (once) and spends time with many friends that live in NYC yet spends time with the hunting, fire, police, and fishing communities, I am an alien in my own political party. Usually I keep my views silent with both sides. However, I do spend a lot of time asking questions in an effort to understand. I grew up blue collar but have worked in a professional environment for more than 30 years. I do not agree but I can understand the white male angst. For this upcoming election, Jimmy Carter warned the Democrats not to shift too far left. White males wrongly or rightly feel under attack and feel people like Trump are fighting for them. People like Omar, AOC and Bernie only continue to push both sides to extremes. Democrats are doing a good job convincing white males they will not help blue collar communities. As cited in the book the 4th Turning, we are heading towards the 80/100 year crisis.
3
I am an anti-Islamist and pro-Israel Muslim. I am not particularly fond of CAIR and its approach toward the problem of Islamic extremism. I don't share much of what Omar has said about Israel, Venezuela etc. And you are one of the most insightful columnists I have ever come across.
But sadly, I should tell you that your column is another piece of evidence that what Omar said in her CAIR speech about how ordinary Muslims ended up paying a price is basically true. The equivalency you've made between Omar's speech and Trump's hypothetical stance assumes that Omar doesn't care about the lives of ordinary Americans (as Trump most likely doesn't care about lives of ordinary Muslims as much as he should). Otherwise, there is no way you can read her speech as "deliberate attempt to conceal the scale of horror". And who knows? maybe she doesn't care about American lives as much as she should. But until we know that she doesn't, this presumption and the subsequent interpretations of her speech as the one in you column will only prove her point!
3
While I am a Democrat and somewhat progressive (if that is possible), I think Omar and AOC have, as my father used to say, been carried away by the vastness of it all. They-and all newly elected persons-need to listen and learn before they take on the world so that they can be effective, not simply newsworthy and often vilified.
4
Great piece! Wholeheartedly agree! Thanks Bret!
8
The most generous thing I can say is to allow Rep Omar the notion that her language amounts to an observation that people do bad things, that we collectively perpetrate evil and it comes around. I don't really know what she means, so I'm guessing. I can say she often sounds angry, so there is a context here that she does not articulate very well at all.
1
Our president has established the norm for public speaking at the fourth grade level. That is the new normal which we are all to accept and praise. Within those comments, name calling and bullying of people and groups is also to be expected because that's the way he is. With those standards in mind, I see the representative's comments well within norms and made because - well, that's who she is.
5
With the statement "Some people did something" Ilhan Omar downplayed the horror and tragedy of 9/11 terrorist attacks while also expressing ambiguity about who did it. Unfortunately, she is neither alone nor unique to express such views. I am more dismayed with the Democratic party who is defending and promoting such candidates and are in a way supporting such views. When you decide to portray someone as Progressive, at least try to understand what the person believes.
10
So the Reps have Steve King and the Dems have Omar. No one would suggest that King is a harbinger of Republican doom, so why make the same suggestion about Omar. Every party has had its fringe members. The parties will go on, driven by their wings until something really catastrophic happens to the country and a new party emerges that can unite the country.
8
So now the fringe elements of both parties are now represented by the worst elements of racism couched in ambiguous but easy to read populist language. It results in demonizing an unpopular or marginalized group for the greater good of the country.
The fringe elements must be treated as toxic to our national interests. Justice Brandeis said that bad speech must be countered with more speech. Now more than ever this should be the reaction.
4
Give me a break. Conservatism and the GOP, the principles and party supported by Bret Stephens, have become the standard-bearers of open bigotry. He is in fact NOT outraged by the directly racist remarks of Steve King, Donald Trump or the other disgraces to their office and our country.
This whole faux outrage over the remarks of a rookie Congresswoman is another attempt to divide Democrats, which the GOP has turned into a science. Don’t fall for it.
8
Who are the politically correct speech policers now? "Something some people did" is factual. Ms. Omar felt the need to say it in response to a widespread counterfactual: the idea that all Muslims were responsible. Stephens and others in his party aren't just demanding sufficiently maudlin language in the rare event where they identify with the victims. They believe, contrary to the facts, that Ms. Omar as a Muslim is herself responsible for the acts of some people. I am enjoying watching their tortured emotional reaction to the facts. How does it feel knowing your life doesn't matter to many, many, many people?
6
Real political power now rests with the banks, the corporations, the super rich, the oligarchs, and the people they pay –– the politicians and asset managers –– to look after their interests.
These people stand between the will of the people and those elected officials who are trying to look out for their constituents. Until we begin to look at the bottom 40% of the population who have no (zero) net worth and the next 40% (the fabled "middle class") who own about 15% of the wealth as "American citizens" and not Hispanics, Black, rural White, Gay, etc., we will continue to be easily manipulated by those at the top.
But most people are like young puppies or kittens who look at anything that moves.
3
@Al Mostonest
Gays do not suffer economically compared to most Americans.
Very the opposite.
They’re often dual-income-no-kids professional people at the cutting edge of gentrification.
1
Thank you for this. Too bad you felt the need to be a bit of an apologist at the end when you quoted the Congress Woman “to make sure that we are not only holding people that we don’t like accountable: We must also hold those that we love, have shared values with, accountable.” You call those words wise. I call them hollow and at odds with her general pattern of remarks.
4
This is one of the most shamelessly intellectually bankrupt arguments that you've put forward in a while Bret. The faux moral equivalency between the GOP's consistent drumbeat of jingoism and Islamophobia and a Democratic politician's phrasing is unreal.
Clearly the point Omar was making had to do with scapegoating. A few people did a thing, but a whole group of a billion people have been targeted because of it. She also denounced extremism in the same speech.
Please stop trying to turn molehills into mountains and introspect about the sad state of conservatism. The GOP and the right wing in this country is taking active steps every day to dismantle environmental protections and suppress voters. Maybe spare a few more words in your column for real issues facing Americans instead of straw man arguments signifying nothing.
15
It's amazing how the left of center continues to believe the nation is one gigantic faculty lounge, ready to listen to pure reason. Sorry, it's not. W was easily re-elected. Nixon had a tremendous landslide re-election. Trump threaded the electoral college needle and was elected in the face of all "wisdom". The Dems will never learn what "regular people" think.
4
Perhaps if Representative Omar, instead of saying, "some people did some things", had said something like 'there are good people on both sides' as another prominent politician said after Charlottesville – I wonder what our collective reaction would be?
5
Stephens' choice of examples at the beginning of this article illustrates Omar's point exactly. None of those events triggered a a wave of harassment of white people, or "caucasiophobia" in same manner as the general fear and prejudice surrounding American Muslims, fanned and fomented by conservative pundits and Fox News. Stephens' argument is one of convenience.
8
I certainly agree with Bret Stephens that Representative Omar's "some people did.." was a massive misstep, both personally and politically . Obfuscating the relationship between a warped concept of Islam and the massacre of 9/11 showed an unacceptable degree of political and personal cowardice .
To be fair, one should mention, though, that most of our right wing politicians were essentially silent on two of the other tragedies mentioned in this opinion , besides the compulsory thoughts and prayers, ignoring that the attacks were religiously motivated , and against faith communities, one Jewish, the other Muslim .
As to representative Omar's comments on AIPAC and more broadly on Israel, one may disagree about her politics, but I did not see them as antisemitic . There is much that is abhorrent about Israel's current regime and if donald trump himself calls Bibi "your prime minister" when speaking to mostly American AIPAC members, the question of shared loyalty is not completely out of bounds.
As to AIPAC itself, does anyone contest that it is, if not legally a pro Israel lobby, then at the very least an Israeli agent of influence ?
3
In general it become more evident, specially after Mr. Trump came to power, how the American society is racial and discriminatory. Army of paid and profiteering journalists and intellectuals tried to paint a different picture to benefit the policy making of the imperialist benefits and corporate interests. God help America and save the world. Mrs. Ilham rightly or wrongly dare to speak her mind.
1
Her primary focus on her speech was and is the loss of US citizens of Muslim religion civil rights after 9/11. It was not to describe 9/11. However, right wing media have chosen as they do in their echo chamber, to cherry pick parenthetical phrases and attack them as if they were the theme of the speech. Rep Omar and AOC need to aware of this rhetorical tactic as unprofessional as it is but so often employed in the age of Trump
3
Ms. Omar has been in this country 27 years, enough time for her to become a fully assimilated American. As such, I'm astonished that she has so little gut reaction to 9/11. "Some people did something" is *not* something a person who loves America would feel or say.
8
As a twenty-year-old Somali immigrant, Ms. Omar probably perceived 9/11 mostly in terms of the virulent prejudice against Muslims that arose afterwards.
It is also worth remembering that Iraq and Afghanistan have experienced the equivalent of hundreds of 9/11s at American hands in direct (and misplaced ) reaction to 9/11.
2
"Now imagine that a public figure with a history of making racially inflammatory remarks — someone like Representative Steve King of Iowa or, better yet, President Trump — had said any of this. (Neither of them did.) Would you not be appalled?" I am an observant Jew and Zionist and am of course disturbed by some of Omar's comments, but come on, Mr. Stephens! The "history of inflammatory remarks" includes many, many remarks far worse than this, and almost no Republican seems to be appalled by those. For example, the murder of a woman in Charleston was apparently carried out by "good people on both sides." Despite's Trump's effort to numb and befuddle us with his outrages, I rely on the mainstream media to be balanced and to give the big picture. Do better!
4
It has been fascinating to watch Republicans and some members of the media obsess about every word spoken by Omar and AOC, two young women who have been in Congress for less than four months. Just another example of Trump lining up the Pavlov's dogs to salivate at his every utterance. So now he has an opportunity to bash an immigrant who is a member of Congress. Not what she said but a take down of her very being. Interesting.
4
Now we are to teach people of color how to speak? These novices are to be taught acceptable rhetoric or The Party is going implode? Has Bret Stephens lectured The Right on The Rhetoric is uses? Along with diverse representatives comes diverse opinions. Omar has been over the top in some of her comments and I hope she tempers her future comments with an eye on how she comes across. I guess Stephens would like The Left to be more like The Lemming on The Right who are following Their Great Leader over a cliff. Lecturing a person of color about the proper rhetoric is so Paternal and something else.
5
I find this whole Omar debate fascinating and in large part an affirmation that to a large degree our democracy is still at work, evolving into an ever more robust form where all voices have agency. It's unfortunate that Omar is rather klutzy in her delivery but I hesitate to ask if that is not her intention as provocateur? She's forcing uncomfortable questions about who we are as a country and quite frankly, whatever the electoral outcome, her tack seems to be working. For myriad of complexities as a Jew and an Israeli I do wish she'd find a more a more graceful style to get her message across to the larger swath of the population and avoid the level of denigration but then again, this is her choice, she's not stupid, she wants a fight. So inevitably weather we on the left like it or not, if we're truly honest with ourselves, the push back she's getting is the discourse she volunteered to invite.
2
Uggh. Had to stop reading from the top, as all the examples were provided without context. It's journalistic irresponsibility not to frame Omar's comments in the context of the speech she was presenting and the audience. Maybe Stephens gets around to that in the column. Too late.
3
This opinion piece aggravates the very problem about which it claims to enlighten its readers.
It helps make one member of Congress, whether foolish or malevolent, into a symbol—a symbol some feel the need to defend and others to vilify.
It thereby adds to the distorted discourse that has become a substitute for democratic debate in the U.S.
Where is the reasoned condemnation of the majority of Republican senators who are lead by Mitch McConnell to further empower the most divisive and destructive president in modern times and to erode the rule of law at the core of the Constitution?
Anti-Semitism is a major problem. Anti-Muslim hatred is a major problem. This article does nothing to increase our understanding of those evils in our midst, nor to help the nation recognize how constricted our lives have become because of them.
A very strange thing to do, Mr. Stephens, on the day before Passover.
1
I think many are extrapolating from what actually was said and manufacturing offense. I think what Ilhan wanted to (and did) say was that the many in the Muslim world are being blamed for the actions of a very few. This has been the Republican approach for years, since 9/11 occurred on their watch. It was either stir the nation up about something other than themselves or possibly face public wrath. They waged a totally unnecessary second Iraq War, based on bogus intel assembled by Feith's newly created intelligence agency in the Pentagon, presumably for that express purpose. They gave up the war in Afghanistan before bin Laden and his top aides were captured or killed, they pooh-poohed the hunt for bin Laden, they shielded Saudi Arabia (the homeland of most of the 9/11 terrorists and the source of their radical interpretation of Islam).
Now, President Trump attacks Ilhan for imagined offenses, while supporting the Saudi war in Yemen and the assassination of an American journalist who was a legal resident of the United States. This is the same Saudi Arabia, whose financing of radical madrassa schools across the Islamic world has radicalized youth from moderate Muslim families and shifted the practice of Islam in nations, such as Indonesia, toward the most radical official form of Islam: the Wahhabi school of Sunni Islam, which is allied with the Saudi royal family. That is the well-spring of radical Islamic ideology and terror and we keep feeding it, more so under Trump.
2
Omar is a freshman Congressman with no actual power. Her supporters are, by and large, also freshman Congressmen with no actual power. Worst case, Omar is doing a good job of representing her district's views and anti-semitism and they will return her to Congress in 2020. In the meanwhile, the best media treatment of Omar and her ilk is none at all.
1
"With political power comes rhetorical responsibility".
Since when?
4
"Something someone did." Egregious understatement on her part. She'll be voted out.
2
Bret Stephens continues to disappoint me with his inability to write a column based solely on facts. I have read Omar's comments many times and everything he has accused her of are things others, such sas Steve King and Donald Trump have done more often and more inflammatory without Bret Stephens condemning them. I find his columns filled with much negativity and lacking context (at times). But the difference is Omar did not say anything anti-Semitic. She should have pointed out the specific parties (the Saudi's) who bombed the US on 9/11, but she did not, but the point of what she has said is that Muslims in the US took a hit on their civil liberties after 9/11 and that is time to stop the hits. In this context, she is right. I lived in NJ on 9/11 and many businesses that the non-Muslim people had perused before 9/11 stopped going to their stores or gas stations. Domestic terrorism is a much bigger threat to the US than we like to admit, but few criticize the domestic terrorists.
4
Spot the problem with the first paragraph of this essay:
It took a quote wildly out of context.
This shows that Mr. Stephens can support his own per-determined point of view only through unprofessional conduct.
3
I view worries about democratic decline in response to a few rhetorical missteps as a backhanded compliment to Democrats. No one could seriously make an equivalent criticism of Republicans because their rhetorical missteps are so pervasive, outrageous and continuous that such criticism would be an exercise in futility.
2
Those in denial about Democratic Decline due to comments of Ilhan Omar and other radical new congresswomen who do not pay attention to harbingers such as this one will be in for another surprise in 2020 and this time they will take the sole responsibility and credit for reelecting Donald J Trump. One of the promises Trump made to the American people was that he will surgically defeat the Islamic extremists from the planet. He never ever said he was against the law abiding Islamic people who are true followers of Islam a religion of peace and brotherhood/sisterhood. Trump unleashed his generals to decimate the barbaric radicals and intensified the war on terror in place of useless and costly regime change wars. Bush and Obama lost opportunities to make peace in Afghanistan. Trump is doing his best.
What nonsense is government run Medicare for all ages and getting rid of private insurance. We do have Medicare for all. when you turn 65 you can enroll in it because that is when most Americans are in need of full health care coverage than any time previously in their lives. One of the promises that Trump has kept was that he would not tinker with social security and so far he has kept his promise. If in 2020 he promises that he will not tinker with Medicare, he will win again. As complex as Medicare is right now it will be disastrous if Medicare for all becomes for all ages when already there is medicaid for all ages for the sickest Americans and spends 1 BILLION DOLLARS/DAY.
1
Mr. Stephens has so much to say about Ms. Ihan Omar but not a word about Mr. Trump and his irresponsibility of the use of inflammatory language. And by the way Mr. Stephens most of us do not need you to tell us what we must or should conclude about public official's statements.
6
Ms. Omar’s intentions are almost besides the point. Here we have an existential threat lurking in the White House, and she just prompted a certain percentage of voters to stick with Trump.
5
The real tragedy here is that partisan bias has so clouded so many Americans' judgment that they often do not think straight.
If Trump had talked like this, imagine the outrage!
4
Anytime you are new on the job you need to shut up and listen. You need to choose your words carefully as your colleagues don't know you well enough to see the nuance in your words or to know where you are coming from. Speak privately to a few of your colleagues and bounce your ideas off of them before going public. You are free to go against their advice, but you need their advice anyway. Finally, in the case of our elected representatives, remember you represent everyone in your district, not just those who agree with you. DJT hasn't learned this lesson and neither has Representative Omar.
5
Read Omar's speech in context. She was speaking before members of the Council on American-Islamic Relations of Greater Los Angeles. They knew very well the "someone" she was referring to. Her comments have provoked long-needed conversations. Instead of rebuking her, let's see what we can learn.
6
I take no offense at Rep. Omar’s comment. I do, however, take exception to the idea that (for example) because some people did something the federal government should know what I check out of my local library.
Muslims have paid the heaviest price for what those particular somebodies did, but we have all seen our civil liberties diminished by the “Patriot” act et al.
Where is Mr. Steven’s Republican outage at those government overreaches and intrusions?
10
Leave it to a neo-conservative writer to come up with a phrase as duplicitous as:" With political power comes rhetorical responsibility" and somehow fail to include this president, who abuses power by not taking any responsibility for what he says or tweets on almost a daily basis.
As for Representative Omar, who has become the perfect foil for the Republican-attack-machine by dint of the fact that in addition to being a woman of color, she's also Muslim, it seems like all cross-hairs and pitch-forks are trained on her.
Granted, she said things that could have been said differently, or not at all -- but that has been tossed overboard in the effort to demonize her to maximum effect.
And by the way, that 9-11 Trump video didn't help.
In any case, it's time to grow up and start looking at the bigger picture, because there's a lot more than this going on in the real world.
12
Religion and its identity politics is what is bringing down the nation and the world. Republicans don't care, because they know it's just a means to an end--and with Trump running their party, they embrace entropy, discord and its resultant destruction and chaos. Democrats appear highly vulnerable to identity politics--and because they're so busy listening to the vocal minorities, they are out of touch with their "base" that want real problems solved with realistic solutions. Reality thus appears to be the victim.
6
@JCX
Ilhan Omar is way more than religion/identity politics.
She is unusually refreshing, provocative, speaking truth to power and provoking much needed discussion on sacred cow subjects like Israel and the US's disastrous
military adventures in Central America that have never allowed those countries to thrive.
The discussion she provokes is important to understanding the problems and developing solutions,
4
I know that countries are not exactly like sports teams. I wonder, however, whether the US could trade Ilhan Omar for Abdullahi Dool, a senior Somali diplomat who was recently fired. I think that the trade would be a good fit for the US and Somalia as well as for Omar and Dool.
2
Prone as he is to false equivalences, thankfully Bret Stephens can at least see the Republican Transformation of 2016 for what it was: a "moral collapse. "
He apparently fails to appreciate, however, the magnitude and scope of that collapse. Prior to 2016, Republicans were pro-immigration, pro-free trade and anti-tariff. They were pro-family values, pro-ethical norms of political conduct, pro-Constitution, pro-rule of law, pro-equal rights for women and minorities, pro-civil liberties, anti-irresponsible political rhetoric, pro-international law, and pro-Nato. Or at least they pretended to be all of these things.
Ironically, Ilhan Omar still IS all---or most---of these things. Equating the potential moral collapse of the Democratic Party to the one that has already occurred in the Republican Party is like comparing apples to origins(sic).
15
@WmC
"... Prior to 2016 …"
Change 2016 to 1980 (the last time I voted GOP), then I'll agree with this comment.
3
@WmC
And Republicans still are pro immigration. Look how many of them are still hiring illegals and paying under the table, including Trump and Company!
Even if Omar had described the carnage of 9/11 in terms Stephens would approve, he would just find another avenue to discredit her.
The right needs a new boogeyman to blame. Hillary Clinton is yesterday's news and out of the picture. The newly elected Democrats in the house are what's needed to fill the role of a common enemy to keep the right wing coalition marching together.
14
Whatever one thinks of Ilhan Omar -- and I've been both a critic and a defender -- one could wish for less coverage of her.
There are 101 freshman members of the House of Representatives, 64 of whom are Democrats. They may include some who are already steeping themselves in important areas of public policy; others with first-hand experience of the natural disasters that are coming down the pipeline of climate change; others who can speak for districts that would be affected by a border wall; and still others with exemplary personal backstories.
Perhaps The Times and other news organizations could acquaint us with those people instead of giving us parallel feeds of Ilhan Omar's sayings and the Republican reactions to them. I'm sure Rep. Omar would agree that she has had as much special attention as she deserves pending substantive accomplishments in Congress. The trick will be getting the news media to decide that she has had her cycle.
9
@Longestaffe
This article is one of his many articles promoting his 1st priority and ethnic group, the foreign occupiers/colonists of Palestine.
The Israel Lobby has worked long & hard to pull the wool over the eyes of many US citizens but the rational world sees & understands who are the foreigners , colonists , land stealers , ethnic cleansers & brutal occupiers vs who are the indigenous people of Palestine who have been forced from their land or live gasping for life & freedom under the Zionist boot. (425 villages+12 urban centers were ethnically cleansed in 1948 alone, forcing 750K Pal`s from THEIR land to become refugees.) After the 1967 war Israel expelled ~260K Palestinians from the West Bank + 80K Syrians from the Golan.
The indigenous people of Palestine had nothing to do with the Holocaust yet via a rigged UN resolution #181 they have been made to pay for it. UN res. #181 passed by the bare minimum of votes needed (33). Historians record that many of these votes were obtained by coercion. Eg. Haiti`s vote (yes Haiti had a vote) was purchased by a loan. Liberia`s vote was obtained by threatening an embargo on it`s only export product.
. If UN Res 181 came up for re-ratification today it would fail miserably and rightly so based on all the atrocities and transgressions that the Zionist colonists have perpetrated on the indigenous people of Palestine.
Both Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and ilhan Omar have been singled out by the Republican hate machine to achieve political advantage through their vilification. This effort is lead by our President. They are not the head of the Democratic Congress, they are Congress members who offer their candid opinions, sometimes spoken in artfully, sometimes taken out of context, and sometimes dead on the mark. Let's get over it and stay focused on the most important political goal in our lifetimes, getting rid of Donald Trump. For that we need a unified Democratic Party. Interesting to see that Bret has re-aligned himself with the Republicans
14
If I heard a Republican politician say about a public massacre "some people did something, and now 'they' are taking away our right to bump stocks", (or just substitute "the 2nd Amendment" as they usually do), I wouldn't instantly feel fury. I wouldn't find my citizenship offended or my community threatened. Only if my job was to be a professional snowflake, up-ended by anything I could perceive as a slight, would I be able to tease that out of either Omar's comments or my hypothetical corollary. This is the source of the Omar hubub. But she should be more measured, knowing that the Right is looking for anything from her, and just about ANYTHING will do. The trouble originated in bad faith and bad faith ruins everything.
6
Well written by Mr. Stephens; especially explaining the nuances ( for a better word ) of this freshman congresswoman.
Hope her constituents see she is out for herself and does not represent them too well.
10
I fail to see how anything Rep. Omar has said or done indicates that she is out for her own intrests, not those of her constituents. Might you enlighten me?
Next you will tell me that she isn’t a real American (wait; Lou Dobbs did that one already).
4
"... I say you can’t hate up close. You can’t hate up close. Any time you have an opportunity to go talk with someone, the chances of them hating you lessen. So that is a practice we all should adopt."
This quote was also from Ms. Omar's speech, I can't imagine why it is not repeated more often....
14
Bret, I had started to warm to some of your recent columns, but today’s arguments are weak and partisan. You contradict completely your main premise of Omar’s “bigotry” by later quoting her denunciation of the people accountable for 9/11.
“Toward the end of her speech, she said it was vital to make sure that we are not only holding people that we don’t like accountable: We must also hold those that we love, have shared values with, accountable.”
Please explain how this is not the contextual balance that you and other critics of Omar claim is missing.
13
Bret Stephens is willfully ignoring the point of Omar's remarks. Were any large groups of people placed under surveillance after the Oklahoma City bombing, the Christchurch attacks, or the Charleston massacre because they shared a race, country of origin, or religion with the attacker? No.
19
@Jennifer Wrong. The people you mentioned were not under surveillance because you can't do that to everyone, BUT the FBI DOES keep right wing groups under surveillance routinely.
3
@Art You may have forgotten, but right-wing groups get a lot more of a pass than any other kind of group. The Times reported on this late last year:
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/03/magazine/FBI-charlottesville-white-nationalism-far-right.html
The uneven treatment is one reason why right-wingers feel empowered in today's USA. "The law is meant for thee, yet not for me!"
I would say the crazy right wing militia groups were under increased surveillance after the Oklahoma City bombing.
I don’t know why it’s so hard for people to admit they made a mistake. I think it goes back till George W. Bush, where he took the attitude that what he said was right, and would never apologize for anything. I’m sure this is the advice that is given by the political spin masters, who are probably about the most disdainful people on the planet.
The Jussie Smollett situation is particularly painful for me, because he did a terrible disservice to all people who are interested in civil rights.
To me points are scored when somebody reaches for a higher ideal then simply satisfying their movement.
Of course, Trump and the Republicans take this to a new level. They not only forget about apologizing, but they act as if they didn’t say things in the past. It truly is remarkable how they live by the idea that if you just keep repeating things, nothing else matters.
8
I'm sympathetic to Omar in that there has been such a concerted media pile up to try to shame her. Charles Blow's commentary a few days ago got at this really well - even the most eloquent among us make rhetorical mistakes or say something that doesn't exactly gel. It's only human.
At the same time, Omar has such a bad case of foot-in-mouth disease that it's very frustrating to watch. If she creates these weekly blowups with her casual / dismissive choice of language, then she's not a very skilled politician. I prefer to have skilled politicians represent my party.
9
I’m with you Mr.Stevens.
Thank you for your thoughtful, fair, and wise assessment.
Had Rep Omar misspoke once, received flak/counsel and learned from it one could agree with some of the comments made- defending her.
However repeated missteps in the same manner don't cut it.
29
I believe it's important to hear all viewpoints, and Omar clearly represents a constituency of Somali-Americans who see themselves as second class citizens who are blamed for the heinous acts of extremists on 911. Ignoring them is similar to dismissing Trump's agenda without considering the real issues behind it that are begging to be addressed.
13
I will only trust a Republican's opinion when they condemn the objectionable statement form the president. There is a big distinction between a freshman representative of Congress and leader of free world. Whose statements carry more weight?
22
@Kumar So you have no problem with a politician minimizing the events of 9/11?
1
While it remains to be seen what type of public profile Rep. Omar chooses to develop, I can't share this concern that "those wokesters" are going to eclipse the corporate neoliberal establishment anytime soon. For them to dislodge the softer-spoken handmaidens of the military-industrial complex will require an economic implosion and climate catastrophe not yet witnessed by us -- at which point Rep. Omar's choice of words will be low on our list of concerns.
13
it is not so much that i always agree with the congresswoman. It is more that I always disagree with the path of the GOP....
20
The media loves to hype it all, Stephens included. That said, Omar needs to learn that by bringing attention to herself, she's less likely to bring attention to issues that are dear to her.
19
"With political power comes rhetorical responsibility." She doesn't hold a candle to Trump, the leader of your party.
20
@M.S. Shackley Trump is not antisemitic. For me, that's the bottom line.
1
The title of this piece is "Ilhan Omar, A Harbinger of Democratic Decline?' The remarks of this Congress woman are her own and should be evaluated on that basis. That Mr. Stephens uses them to tar a whole political party reveals his own political prejudices as much as they reveal anything about Representative Omar and not the beliefs of an entire party.
That Democrats have rejected some of Ms. Omar's comments openly show their openness and respect for Democratic ideals. That Republicans march in lock step to anything the president does or says shows their rejection of that ideal and the fear of free thinking that underlies their refection of Democracy. Mr. Stephens pleas get your own party in order before trashing Ms. Omar for claimed offenses that your party does daily and as a matter of course.
42
@just Robert The democrats didn't reject her comments and those few who did were not strong enough.
5
Democrat. By no stretch of the imagination an Islamaphobe. Don’t always agree with Brett Stevens. But his assessment of the Democrats’ problem with her is correct. It is a problem for all of us, even her. Rhetoric matters. And hers, which I oppose, is not helping either her party’s or her own cause. Nor is it good for the country. I was happy to see young Muslim women I hope she is a one term wonder.
28
@ERH Same here. I'm a left of center independent. You took the words right out of my mouth. She definitely minimized the events of 9/11 and is very anti-Semitic. Why hasn't she criticized any Muslim country that routinely kills non Muslims or even the "wrong" kind of Muslim? The democrats once again will snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.
4
I agree that it was a badly worded and delivered remark. But all the focus in the criticism is on the single clause, not the complete sentence.
Even a small adjustment could have changed the way it was heard, to a significant degree, without changing what I believe she was saying. Try this:
" ... they recognized that a handful of people did something that made all of us start to lose access to our civil liberties."
George W. Bush's speech shortly after 9/11 aimed at just that point - that only some Muslims were at fault, and we should recognize that.
Alas, many Americans turned on their Muslim fellow citizens.
I agree with some of the assertions here, but I don't agree that it was not a matter of inapt phrasing. Even a confident public speaker with a knack for phrasing can stumble badly at times.
And don't disregard the fact that many Muslims HAVE suffered bad treatment for something that someone else did. Most of us learned in our childhood that one of the most upsetting things that can happen to us is to be blamed and punished for something we didn't do. Omar carries some regrettably justified anger.
And I understand that thousands suffered worse than indignities at the hands of haters, and for something they didn't do. But that doesn't make the indignities felt by Muslims feel any less painful.
14
Actually "something someone did" is the perfect characterization in the the context of her speech. It removes the emotional component that 9/11 adds and draws attention to the fact that unrelated and unknown people and events had promoted or enhanced the biases against her religion by her fellow citizens.
This faux outrage of the right-wing would be laughable were it not for their lack of concern for the first-responders and the others who have to fight tooth and nail to get the federal government to provide funding for their illnesses caused by 9/11.
46
More than 60 years ago, my parents taught me a phrase where the attribution is given to many and I think it still applies today.
“You’ll be known by the company you keep.”
Representative Ihlan and many others in congress and in Washington- and around the world - are failing to heed that advice, which I imagine was repeated to the, by their parents, too.
The end result will be - another old phrase here - is that “they will all be painted by the same brush.”
Those phrases usually are given with a negative context. I think it applies here.
8
Omar could have clarified, she could have apologized, she could have publicly expanded her thought in a better fashion to avoid misunderstandings.
She has not. She did not misspeak. She meant exactly what she said, and she meant to trivialize 9/11.
Deplorable.
43
@Edmund Dantes Amen
2
An excellent piece that exposes the "taken out of context" hypocrisy of some of her Democratic apologists.
The "some people" quote was not taken out of context at all. Omar's remarks were pretty clear -- don't blame me or the general Muslim community for 9/11. Fair enough. But, in an effort to strengthen that call, she adopted an inappropriate rhetorical element that in effect implied that what was done was no worse than many other atrocities going on in our world.
It would be a great help in Democratic efforts to oust Trump and his despicable cronies if this new crop of congresspeople could get over their egos and their hostility to realpolitik and recognize that succeeding in fulfilling their passion for change requires communicating effectively to a larger and less radical population.
10
I noticed that Mr. Stephens didn’t mention that Omar is a co-sponsor of a bill to reauthorize the medical support of the first responders to 9/11 and NOT one Republican Congressman has yet to sign on. ( and why does that have to be reauthorized every few years? If I remember correctly it was the Republicans who pit that in the original bill to get their support) And whatever happened to “sticks and stones may break my bones but words will never hurt me?” Does Mr. Stephens think that support for and Israel itself are so weak that a freshman congresswoman’s words will destroy that support? I think overtime we all will understand better why she said what she did and I agree with other commenters that she is one of 435 members of Congress and her words should not have the power that Stephens is giving them. She is NOT the President of the United States.
42
Omar's words have been heavily quoted out of context for political purposes. That is absolutely clear. The problem is that she should have had the presence of mind to realize that people like Bret Stephens would use her incautious turn of phrase against her and the Democratic Party she belongs to. Politicians know that they will be attacked by the opposition if they make tactical errors in their choice of words. Just ask Joe Biden.
12
@Jefflz The world has read the entire context and that phrase was not taken out of context. She meant it just as it sounded. What If a Japanese-American said, "Some people did something." when talking about Pearl Harbor?
2
As the Democrats continue to divide themselves, they will open the door to another four years of Trump. They are not seeing the big picture - win control of the house, senate and presidency in 2020.
19
Mr. Stephens,
As much as I frequently agree with many of your sane, and well-thought commentary, I find the whole premise of this exercise to be somewhat ridiculous.
Ilhan Omar is not a native-born American, and she speaks English as a second language. Just as many other non-native English speakers formulate their thoughts, first circulating in other-pathway patterns, the final, spoken thoughts sometimes sound stilted and odd to our native-English ears.
I'm a retired physician, who has spoken with many thousands of non-native patients and families, struggling in their non-native English, to express themselves in stressful situations.
I am not excusing Omar for the underlying basis of her thoughts. But I am imploring native-born English speakers to consider this factor when trying to decide about the meaning of someone's words, and where their hearts are, when speaking.
18
She has had plenty of time to clarify.
4
that's her cover. don't buy into it
3
@Betsy Sorry but even for native born speakers she knew what she was saying.
3
I am again surprised by the extent of common ground I, a committed Liberal and staunch Democrat, have with Mr. Stephens. My only quibble is that I doubt that my reaction to such unrepentant insensitivity and dismissiveness from a right-wing back bencher would be as animated as he suggests. The sad fact is that I have come to expect it from them and would see it as yet another worrisome but routine red-flag about the deterioration of our society and the degeneracy of Conservative politics in our country.
I am actually much more alarmed and exercised by Rep. Omar because it is fire front the rear, as it were indicates that the moral rot has become so pervasive that it threatens the party and factions that I have always identified with as well.
8
I imagine a lot of her fans like her because she is young and pretty, stylish, charismatic, adept at social media, and not afraid to make controversial or polarizing statements.
It's not what I look for in a representative.
19
Agree. Overlooked in this mess: what is a freshman rep from MN doing giving a speech in CA? I'd like to see these newbies mentored by experienced Congress people- not chosen for a match up in gender, faith, etc. But for real leadership and influence, an ability to show the ropes. This woman and the equally ride AOC are presenting themselves as poster kids for millennial narcissism. Instead of looking upon them as the future we hope they get voted out! Sadly, that may hurt dems in districts where either party can win.
1
Mr. Stephens and almost all of those who commented here have , to my mind, missed the point of all this debate about Ms. Omar. She is using her religion as a platform for judgement of the politics of others; and that is contrary to the letter and intention of The Declaration Of Independence and The Bill of Rights. Religion has no place in politics in the US. It is what the country was built upon. Those who use religion to defend it are as culpable as those who use religion to tear it down.
23
@Tim Newlin: The emergent theocratic oligarchy has brainwashed three generations of Americans to believe that the US is "under God".
1
If congresswoman Omar will not receive republican financial contributions to her reelection campaign then I will eat a broom.
There is no better way of ensuring the reelection of President Trump than Ms. Omar speaking her mind.
Bret Stephens wrote a very well balanced response to the furor surrounding Congresswoman Omar's comments.
20
There is a full out smear campaign in motion against this congressperson. I sense this column fits in to that campaign.
The Democratic Party declined a long time ago. It represents the past. All the good it was capable of has been done in the past. It now serves as facilitator of the Republican Party and not much more.
We need a new party that will embrace what she is saying!
Why the outrage? Let her speak! She will answer to her constituents in the next election.
This country needs that kind of dialogue desperately!
9
@Thomas What? She minimized the worst attack on Americans in our history and it was NOT taken out of context. People also forget that she was speaking to CAIR. CAIR supports Hamas and Hezbollah and refuses to condemn them for their terrorist acts. They also have close ties to the Muslim Brotherhood. That says volumes about her.
3
Thank you so much for your thoughtful essay, Mr. Stephens. I am increasingly disgusted with the Democratic Party, even though I've been a registered Democrat my whole life.
26
Agreed Bret. I also think the press gives her and the other two (you know who I mean) too much attention.
There are many other reps who should be heard but they may not be in fashion right now.
9
“With political power comes rhetorical responsibility.” An interesting quote from a man whose political party nominated Trump to run for president and which now fully supports the Trump presidency. Trump is the personification of rhetorical irresponsibility.
12
@Hubert Nash That’s really not fair as Bret Stephens has been a constant and courageous critic of President Trump
3
Except Mr Stephens never supported Trump , still doesn’t and voted for Hilary
3
When referring to 9/11 , maybe she should have said some thing like "But you also had people that were very fine people, on both sides."
That's a phrase that the GOP has already found acceptable.
29
@Rip
Trump was referring to protestors, not murderers.
And, of course, there have been billions of fine Muslims over the centuries, and that remains the same today.
Few people outside of Islamist supporters like Ilhan-Omar dismiss the attacks on 9/11 so casually.
1
Bret, and your point is?
That of the 235 Democratic Congresspersons, that thank God there is at least a few that might disappoint?
As for those rushing to defend her verbal missteps, I don't see a mob backlash. Here you are just echoing your own "something someone did" commentary.
I for trust the voters of Minnesota's 5th District to make a determination over the next year if they what her to re-run for office. Let's wait and see about that too.
Omar is not the Democratic Party and neither are some other young and newly minted Congresspersons. I would imagine that if they truly enjoy serving their constituents and are remotely interested in job security, they will learn quickly to that words have meaning.
I can only hope some of those voters in Trump country have come to realize that too.
14
Omar is to the Democratic Party what Steve King is to the Republican Party. The best course of action is for the Democrats to marginalize and minimize her influence within the party and within the House for the next 18 months. One can only hope that she will be removed in 2020 either by a primary contest or losing re-election.
24
Trump's response was, as usual, over the top and hateful. But her comments seemed pretty clear to me, and they dishonoured those killed or harmed in the attack. I don't understand the attempts to "interpret" or "contextualize" her very clear remarks.
10
"With political power comes rhetorical responsibility"
It is not that Rep. Omar is wrong. But her comments are impolitic and (perhaps) intemperate. And generally taken out of context, thanks largely to right-wing media spokespeople (ahem!).
But while we're on this topic, have you ever heard of a guy named Donald Trump?
12
@Steve Are ANY Of you people aware that Brett Brett Stevens is one of the most vociferous Republican critics of President Trump? Seriously.
Steve, did you read this article.
It's hard to believe this was a slip of the tongue, this use of trivial language to describe one of the worst tragedies in our country's history. Omar speaks her mind and is given credit for not backing down from her positions. We just saw inside her mind, and to my knowledge, no apologies have been offered. Democrats, please put a leash on representatives who talk before they think; otherwise, they start to sound like Trump.
30
@Daphne
The worst tragedies in our history were the murder of native Americans, theft of their property, slavery, the Civil War, followed by the fact that after 9/11 we declared war on Iraq and Afghanistan who had nothing to do with the attacks, killing hundreds of thousands of innocents, and now buddying up to the Saudis who actually financed the attacks! 9/11 was terrible, but so was Pearl Harbor, the Nazi's attempt to take over Europe and Russias persecution and virtual enslavement of Eastern Europe after WWII. But we are friends and allies with Japan, Germany and Trump wants to be Putin's best buddy as well as bin Salman's. So why should we hate on all ordinary Muslims?
I think Donald Trump is more a harbinger of the decline of the Republican Party than Ilhan Omar is a harbinger of the decline of the Democratic Party. She is, after all, a representative while he is the president.
15
Think about "something that some people did" and "you didn't build that" in conjunction.
She wants to claim it was a handful of people who carried out the 9/11 attacks. That's an understatement in itself. It was orchestrated by a terrorist group of some considerable size.
Now put that into a larger context. Much like American business success comes within a larger context that cannot, and should not be denied. So too the 9/11 attacks should be so positioned. It comes within a larger, enabling context.
It may take a city to raise a child. It also takes a community to raise a terrorist organization. And that community has shown little remorse over this fact.
9
I'm wary of any stifling of opinions -- especially those that run counter to conventional thought -- and if you think about it all Omar is doing is distancing herself and most Muslims from al-Qaeda and their Wahabist supporters in Saudi Arabia (our allies). She's clearly saying that she and other Muslims are tired of paying the price for their actions and she is more than likely right to do so. Most Muslims I know hide their religion for fear of being ill-thought of or discriminated against. AIG employees I know do the same thing. In the end, her constituents will decide. For the rest of us, we can clutch our pearls and cluck or denounce her on social media or whatever else we want to do -- as we have done for so many members of Congress who run for re-election every two years despite being bullhorns for the worst instincts and thoughts "we" have --left or right, it is up to their constituents to put an end to her public service or return her. She's not running for President and represents only her district -- not the Democratic Party, not the State of Minnesota, not the USA.
10
I love it, we are finally finding out what the Democratic Party is all about. Mr. Trump will have no problem getting re-elected. Hopefully the democrats learn something from this but I’m betting they won’t.
20
@Thomas Aquinas A comment by one Democrat congressional representative hardly defines "what the Democratic Party is all about." In fact, Omar's words are the exception to the rule in her party. On the other hand, in Mr Trump's party offensive speech is SOP.
6
She certainly is “ oddly selective” about the targets of her criticisms. I haven’t heard her about the oppression of women in Iran, Saudi Arabia and the overall lack of human rights in the Muslim world. You know, those same human rights and democratic processes that helped a refugee become a Congresswoman.
55
@MD Monroe. Saudi Arabia does not like her. They have attacked her and Rashida Tlaib.
https://www.minnpost.com/national/2018/12/whos-afraid-of-ilhan-omar-saudi-arabia-for-one/
1
Whiplash. Call it that if you like. A people tire of abuse, bigotry and prejudice. Anger often spills out in their words. With a measure of power, people find themselves corrupted by the opportunity to throw daggers at a wider audience and indulge themselves. In all cases in a democracy, the audience has a tool at their disposal to remove these bad actors. The vote.
2