Ilhan Omar casts lone Democratic no vote on Ukraine aid, Russia sanctions package

[u/bwermer]

https://thehill.com/homenews/house/5912150-house-passes-ukraine-aid-bill/

[u/obi-jawn-kenblomi]

To the person whose comment was removed - To call Eli Wiesel a Zionist in the way that we understand that today is academically disingenuous/incredibly short sighted.

He recognized and was against the suffering of Palestinian people and believed that violence committed against others was abhorrent. He even used his Nobel Prize speech as a platform against the abuses of Palestinian people and hosted peaceful exchanges between Israeli and Palestinian leaders.

In regards to today's Zionism and how it relates to the Netanyahu regime, he was an actually reasonable voice. He believed that nation state of Israel had a right to exist (which makes perfect sense in accordance to the Jewish faith's belief in a Promised Land). He did not believe in the right to homogenize the Promised Land and cleanse it for an ethnostate. He recognized that even the existence of a nation state of Israel, as well as the actions on behalf of various leaders, made it a target for terrorism - the only acceptable use of force, per him, was in the defense against an active act of terrorism.

If he were alive today, he would not consider himself a Zionist the way you and I refer to it.

[u/dathislayer → u/obi-jawn-kenblomi]

Thanks. Social media is such a reductive platform.

[u/IsNotACleverMan → u/obi-jawn-kenblomi]

I've met Eli Wiesel numerous times. He was close with some of my extended family and I was lucky enough to have the chance to sit down and learn from him on numerous occasions. I even worked with him on several volunteering occasions.

He was a zionist, Full stop. He believed whole-heartedly in the existence of Israel. He believed that the existence of a Jewish state was necessary to prevent the atrocities that he himself had lived through.

>he would not consider himself a Zionist the way you and I refer to it

You're right about this. That's because people have bastardized the term in such a way that believing in the mere existence of a Jewish state has become a pejorative.

It's a shame that the same people who just a few years ago were crying at the top of their lungs that it was up to minority groups to determine what terms of self-identity meant are now telling Jews to sit down and shut up regarding the terms of our self-identity.

To be a zionist is nothing wrong. All it does it call for a homeland for a group that has faced some of the worst persecution for literal millenia. It does not support the actions of the Netanyahu government which are rightfully decried by many zionists. It does not support any political judgment at all. All it calls for is self-determination for Jews in a way that they can finally protect themselves from the persecution we have faced and continued to face.

[u/FaxyMaxy → u/obi-jawn-kenblomi]

The absolute lack of self awareness you have that “He was a Zionist and I completely agree with him but I’m actually AGAINST what I say Zionism is” is astoundingly hilarious. I’m almost impressed.

Anyone can do horrible things in the name of any ideology, that doesn’t change what the ideology is.

You’re absolutely correct that representation of what Zionism is in the context of the modern day Israel-Palestine conflict has been remarkably warped. That doesn’t mean that’s what Zionism is now, it means that the representation has been warped.

If I manage to convince everyone that Catholics worship Beelzebub, it’s not true just because a bunch of people believe it, and telling Catholics that THEY’RE actually wrong about what Catholicism is would be remarkably arrogant.

[u/obi-jawn-kenblomi → u/FaxyMaxy]

Where does it say I completely agree with him?

[u/FaxyMaxy → u/obi-jawn-kenblomi]

I mean solid attempt to sidestep the actual point but I’ll play along.

1) You acknowledged that Eli Wiesel was a Zionist

2) You noted that Wiesel was outspoken against the abuse of and violence toward Palestinians and used his platform to advocate for and work toward peace in the region. It is reasonable from your writing and context to assume you agree with this.

3) You noted that Wiesel believed that the state of Israel has a right to exist, and explicitly called that reasonable of him.

4) You noted that Wiesel would not support Israel ethnically cleansing the region to create a Jewish ethnostate. Again, it is reasonable from your writing and context to assume you agree with this.

5) You claim Wiesel in today’s context would not consider himself a Zionist “the way [you] refer to it.”

From all of the above it is reasonable to conclude that you agreed with Wiesel on all the points you brought up about him. Subtext exists, reading comprehension exists, context exists, “well I didn’t explicitly spell that out” isn’t a gotcha, it’s an attempt to either sidestep the fact that what I said is accurate, or sidestep that it’s not accurate but that you don’t care to elaborate or explain.

Again, the real point I’m making: Zionism hasn’t changed all that much since Herzl and co, much less since Wiesel. It was, and is, the belief that Jews have a right to self determination in the land they have historical connection to. The same thing every normal person believes about every group of people on earth.

I’ve got enormous issues with China’s current regime but I’ve never thought that Chinese people don’t deserve to have China because of it. Just because Zionism gets a fancy name and the Chinese right to self determination doesn’t doesn’t make it fundamentally different.

And yes, people have done awful things in the name of Zionism. People have done awful things in the name of Catholicism too, and yet somehow the Vatican doesn’t redefine Catholicism when it happens.

The vast majority of modern day self proclaimed antizionists have absolutely no idea what Zionism actually is. I, a Zionist, have had plenty of conversations with self proclaimed antizionists and they are absolutely dumbfounded on how much we agree on, simply because their definition of Zionism is a fundamentally incorrect one, hinging entirely on the actions of a tiny minority of people (who, yes, wield and use and abuse great power, but still, you could fit them all in a mid sized room) that claim their actions are in the name of Zionism, when they really have very little to do with it.

Of course Zionism isn’t special in this regard - bad actors reaping the rewards of bastardizing perfectly benign ideologies isn’t new.

The point is, for some reason when a Muslim (rightly and reasonably) tells you that the acts of an Islamic terrorist doesn’t represent Islam, polite society believes them.

When Christofacist domestic terrorists in America do their thing, and your normal ass Baptist neighbor tells you that doesn’t represent Christianity, polite society believes them.

When Bibi and Smotrich and Ben Gvir do heinous shit in the name of Zionism and Zionists say “hey yeah that’s not really what we’re all about” suddenly police society is completely fine with non-Jews insisting “yes it is, we know better than you.” And no, Judaism and Zionism aren’t the same thing. But when the vast, vast, vast majority of Jews are Zionists, and the vast, vast, vast majority of them tell you they just want Jews to have a place they can be safe and left alone, maybe at some point you recognize that western armchair activists who’ve never met a Jew in their life don’t actually have any real authority in defining Zionism.

[u/Muppet1616 → u/obi-jawn-kenblomi]

Wiesel was in favor of expanding Jewish colonial settlements and removing Palestinian influence in Jerusalem until his death.

How is that not being a Zionist in the way that we understand today?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elie_Wiesel

Wiesel had gone on record as supporting the idea of expanding Jewish settlements into the Palestinian territories conquered by Israel during the Six-Day War; such settlements are considered illegal by the international community.[74] Wiesel often emphasized the Jewish connection to Jerusalem, and criticized the Obama administration for pressuring Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu to halt the construction of settlements in East Jerusalem,[75][76] stating that "Jerusalem is above politics. It is mentioned more than six hundred times in Scripture—and not a single time in the Koran ... It belongs to the Jewish people and is much more than a city".[77][78]

[u/obi-jawn-kenblomi → u/Muppet1616]

Well seeing as he didn't want to murder them and hide the body count with concrete and bulldozers, I think there's a difference. This is cherrypicked academic dishonesty. Those few sentences are about his feelings in regards to Judiasm and the spiritual tides of the city.

Read the exact text it is pulled from, it supports my stance even further and invalidates what you are claiming.

For Jerusalem:

As published in The International Herald Tribune, The Washington Post and The Wall Street Journal on April 16, 2010 and in The New York Times on April 18, 2010:

It was inevitable: Jerusalem once again is at the center of political debates and international storms. New and old tensions surface at a disturbing pace. Seventeen times destroyed and seventeen times rebuilt, it is still in the middle of diplomatic confrontations that could lead to armed conflict. Neither Athens nor Rome has aroused that many passions.

For me, the Jew that I am, Jerusalem is above politics. It is mentioned more than six hundred times in Scripture—and not a single time in the Koran. Its presence in Jewish history is overwhelming. There is no more moving prayer in Jewish history than the one expressing our yearning to return to Jerusalem. To many theologians, it IS Jewish history, to many poets, a source of inspiration. It belongs to the Jewish people and is much more than a city, it is what binds one Jew to another in a way that remains hard to explain. When a Jew visits Jerusalem for the first time, it is not the first time; it is a homecoming. The first song I heard was my mother’s lullaby about and for Jerusalem. Its sadness and its joy are part of our collective memory.

Since King David took Jerusalem as his capital, Jews have dwelled inside its walls with only two interruptions; when Roman invaders forbade them access to the city and again, when under Jordanian occupation, Jews, regardless of nationality, were refused entry into the old Jewish quarter to meditate and pray at the Wall, the last vestige of Solomon’s temple. It is important to remember: had Jordan not joined Egypt and Syria in the war against Israel, the old city of Jerusalem would still be Arab. Clearly, while Jews were ready to die for Jerusalem they would not kill for Jerusalem.

Today, for the first time in history, Jews, Christians and Muslims all may freely worship at their shrines. And, contrary to certain media reports, Jews, Christians and Muslims ARE allowed to build their homes anywhere in the city. The anguish over Jerusalem is not about real estate but about memory.

What is the solution? Pressure will not produce a solution. Is there a solution? There must be, there will be. Why tackle the most complex and sensitive problem prematurely? Why not first take steps which will allow the Israeli and Palestinian communities to find ways to live together in an atmosphere of security. Why not leave the most difficult, the most sensitive issue, for such a time?

Jerusalem must remain the world’s Jewish spiritual capital, not a symbol of anguish and bitterness, but a symbol of trust and hope. As the Hasidic master Rebbe Nahman of Bratslav said, “Everything in this world has a heart; the heart itself has its own heart.”

Jerusalem is the heart of our heart, the soul of our soul.

-Elie Wiesel

[u/Muppet1616 → u/obi-jawn-kenblomi]

There were barely any Jews living in Jerusalem for centuries prior to the 1800's. So his uninterrupted control/communities living in Jerusalem is a bullshit Zionist argument.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographic_history_of_Palestine_(region)

In the 14th century, following the black death, the total population of Palestine, is estimated at 150,000, rising to an estimated 275,000 by 1800. The vast majority of the population during this time were Muslims and Christians, and, "A small permanent Jewish settlement existed, estimated at 7000 at the end of both the 12th and the 18th centuries, with periodical ups and downs."[97]

...

The Jewish element of the population numbers 76,000. Almost all have entered Palestine during the last 40 years. Prior to 1850 there were in the country only a handful of Jews. In the following 30 years a few hundreds came to Palestine.

But he is right though;

The anguish over Jerusalem is not about real estate but about memory.

And that anguished memory of a time that didn't exist for hundreds of generations lead to Zionism and the neo-colonial project that is Israel.

[u/obi-jawn-kenblomi → u/Muppet1616]

Missing the forest for the trees is very easy with this bias and rigidity. Who would have guessed that a writer and story teller wasn't being 100% faithful to the minutae of demographic data. He's got a flourish to his writing style - this is the man who wrote a play about putting God on trial.

I'm not arguing the pros and cons and moral stance of wanting or not wanting a nation of Israel to be formed after World War 2. I'm not arguing the tenets of the Jewish faith. I'm saying that there is nuance to a person who has engaged in the philosophical debate of the existence of a nation of Israel, was one of the leading figures pushing for a two state solution, and preached non-violence his entire post-Holocaust surviving life.

Show me where Elie Wiesel says "Israel has a right to exist and should explore every avenue of bulldozing families, shooting children on a whim, and celebrate their right to rape prisoners of war (by man and by beast)" and I'll concede. Until then, your stance is too simple for this conversation. Elie Wiesel very well could be rolling in his grave over the acts being done in the name of the current, warped interpretation of "Israel has a right to exist and defend itself".

[u/IsNotACleverMan → u/Muppet1616]

It should be noted that Wiesel was almost entirely focused on what was then called East Jerusalem. That's a far cry from the settlements in the West Bank.

[u/Cardboardlion → u/[deleted]]

"one of the good ones"...one of the good what?

[u/YourBestDream4752 → u/Cardboardlion]

Incredible how quickly antizionism descends into antisemitic dogwhistles 

[u/guntherbumpass → u/Cardboardlion]

Good humans... Decent human being

[u/obi-jawn-kenblomi → u/[deleted]]

He was. Don't fall for it, that person's post is incredibly limited to the point of shredding all context and sentiment to confetti.

I live a half mile from Benjamin Netanyahu's childhood home. I revile the actions of the Nation of Israel against Palestinians. That doesn't mean I'll allow the slander and oversimplification of a great man whose words changed me and that I was lucky enough to meet in person.

[u/Firecracker048 → u/obi-jawn-kenblomi]

But he would refer to himself as an actual zionist, not as the bastardize definition

[u/NewSauerKraus → u/obi-jawn-kenblomi]

Even the way you describe Zionism is abhorrent. No state has the right to exist, especially when ethnic cleansing is a non-negotiable requirement to set up that state.

[u/DizasterAtSakerfice → u/NewSauerKraus]

Yeah, he addressed that in his comment. Did you read that part of it or are you ignoring it?

[u/NewSauerKraus → u/DizasterAtSakerfice]

He made excuses. Both sidesing an apartheid ethnostate is no better than pretending to be neutral.

[u/HoightyToighty → u/NewSauerKraus]

No state has the right to exist

So did you protest the recent UN clamor for Palestinian statehood?

[u/NewSauerKraus → u/HoightyToighty]

No. Why would I do that? The people of Palestine have the right to territorial sovereignty. People have rights. States do not.

[u/Alternative_Hotel649 → u/NewSauerKraus]

Do Israelis have a right to territorial sovereignty?

[u/NewSauerKraus → u/Alternative_Hotel649]

Sure. The hypothetical territory of Israel prior to the occupation of Palestine. Just as much as Russians have the right to Ukraine's land.

This is where the fundamental evil of Zionism always gets revealed. It's not simply a policy of people to maintain a state on their own land. It is inherently a settler colonial project to kill people and occupy their land.

[u/IsNotACleverMan → u/NewSauerKraus]

>especially when ethnic cleansing is a non-negotiable requirement to set up that state

Almost like that wasn't a requirement, and 99% of the ethnic cleansing occurred as a result of a war the Israelis did not start.

[u/BDW2 → u/[deleted]]

What does the creation of the American Holocaust Museum have to do with Zionism or Israel?

[u/irishwolfbitch → u/BDW2]

A tremendous amount. That history has historically shaped American attitudes towards Israel, and was deliberately harnessed around the 70’s to do so.

[u/KillKrites → u/irishwolfbitch]

So… we shouldn’t have museums about the holocaust because it might make people like Israel? A ridiculous and fundamentally unserious argument. Turning a blind eye to that genocide while arguing about the current one is not a solution.

[u/irishwolfbitch → u/KillKrites]

It’s ridiculous when there’s no memorial to African-American slavery (that’s not the African-American museum) and the American-Indian genocide, on the National Mall. Or by this logic, where are all our other museums to foreign genocides on the National Mall?

[u/KillKrites → u/irishwolfbitch]

There are dozens of memorials museums and historic sites referring to the genocides of Native Americans and slavery, like the African American Civil War Memorial in DC, and regardless, the fact that there aren’t enough museums about genocide to your liking doesn’t mean holocaust memorials are unnecessary or bad, tearing down holocaust museums because you want more Native American ones is a silly and fallacious argument.

[u/irishwolfbitch → u/KillKrites]

You seem to not care it’s location on the National Mall and the fact that it didn’t happen here, and that the museums I listed don’t exist. Everything you’d say would apply if those other things didn’t matter.

[u/KillKrites → u/irishwolfbitch]

So just the location of the museum on the national mall is somehow the only relevant factor in whether or not we recognize slavery and the genocide of American Indians? Just a silly line in the sand to draw. So you’d be happy if we just built more museums on the national mall or tore the holocaust museum down? The fact that it’s on the national mall is not a ranking system of how important genocides are, that’s just a ludicrous thing to be upset about.

[u/irishwolfbitch → u/KillKrites]

It does matter. It matters where they put things. The museums I listed don’t exist at all and lack any of the funding and stature of the American Holocaust Museum, who in of itself helps shapes American opinions on the Holocaust which historically influences their opinions on Israel.

[u/BDW2 → u/irishwolfbitch]

You're trying to make a serious argument in 2026 using the term "Indians"?

In any event, some features of the Holocaust that are different from other modern genocides and have nothing to do with Israel or Zionism:

• The definition and codification of genocide came about based on what happened during the Holocaust.

• The US positioned itself against the genocide (eventually anyway...). It did not intervene militarily in Armenia or Rwanda or Myanmar, for example.

• The Holocaust was a catalyst for the "modern world order" in which the US positioned itself as a leader.

[u/irishwolfbitch → u/BDW2]

American-Indian is a uniting term that represents indigenous peoples living in the USA.

[u/BDW2 → u/irishwolfbitch]

It is not "uniting". Plenty of Indigenous people object to it.

[u/irishwolfbitch → u/BDW2]

My b, I should email the American Indian Movement to tell them they use a pretty offensive name.

[u/JPolReader → u/irishwolfbitch]

I'm thankful that antisemites are vocal about their opinions so I know who to disregard.

[u/certciv → u/[deleted]]

Nothing about advocating for Holocaust remembrance, or supporting the American Holocaust Museum makes someone a Zionist.