The House passed a GOP-led resolution on Tuesday to censure Rep. Rashida Tlaib over comments critical of Israel and in support of Palestinians amid Israel’s war against Hamas.
The move amounts to a rare and significant rebuke of the Michigan Democrat, who is the first Palestinian-American woman to serve in Congress. The vote was 234 to 188 with four Republicans voting against and 22 Democrats voting in support of the censure resolution.
The resolution, which was introduced by Georgia GOP Rep. Rich McCormick, advanced earlier in the day after a Democratic-led effort to block the measure failed.
You must log in or register to comment.
The congresswoman included a link to a longer statement in which she went on to say, “I cannot uncritically accept Israel’s denials of responsibility as fact,” and said, “Both the Israeli and United States governments have long, documented histories of misleading the public about wars and war crimes.”
She told them the truth, and they hated and silenced her for it. Good job, America!
😞
Removed by mod
What is she laying about exactly?
See the problem is many people don’t consider Palestine as an occupied land. However, people who are from there, and those who read history, know that it is occupied. The fact that a kid need to go through 17 check points to access school ( west bank ), or not being able to be in the same bus as other Israelis (other region), or not granted essentials of live ( electricity only available 4 or 6 hours a day in Gaza for the last couple of years before this attack) are clear signs of people being occupied.
Not only Palestinian Arabs, but also Christians, and black jew suffers under this occupation.
They literally took Yemenian jew families kids from them, estimated number are between 1000 to 5000 kids. Many disappear with no documentation…
So yes please, librate the land from the river to the sea…
Dude… what you just said really hurt my feelings. Your phrase “let me guess” is used by anti-Palestinians all over the world, and what they really mean is “let me guess, you believe Palestinians are actual humans.”
It’s about time people F off with the antisemtic tripe. She was literally advocating for equality and peace, and here the Israeli lobby wants to censure speech that they are offended by because it calls for equality and peace.
After the House voted to block a resolution from GOP Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene to censure Tlaib last week, Greene put forward a new version of the resolution that drops a reference to a pro-Palestinian protest at the Capitol as an “insurrection,” which had made some Republicans uncomfortable.
Gotta love how the loon who was raving about Jewish Space Lasers starting forest fires in the west coast is now a grand defender of the Israeli point of view.
They hate Jewish people but support the fascist Israeli apartheid regime. The exact opposite of decent and empathetic people as always.
I don’t care for the precedent of censuring a Representative for an unpopular stance. Censure should be for things that actually bring disrepute on Congress itself, like obtaining a seat through false pretenses or violating decorum by screaming during the State of the Union.
Apparently there have been 9 (now 10?) censures in the House since 1966.
Our government is an embarrassment. This punishment is supposed to embarrass the censured member, but it embarrasses every member that voted Aye far more
Can’t embarrass someone who can’t feel shame
Our government is under siege.
And not the kind with the big tiddy blonde hiding in the cake.
Republicans no longer debate ideas, they hunt them down and kill them.
While I am not at all going to pretend it was the actual reason for the censuring, Tlaib went farther than just having an unpopular stance (which, like a lot of US politics, is actually what The People want in polls…).
“From the river to the sea” is a MAJOR dog whistle, if not outright hateful rallying cry. Because it very much is about getting rid of all Israelis “from the river to the sea”. Whether that means politely exiling them or engaging in ethnic cleansing is up to interpretation.
And… I kind of do think government representatives should at least get a slap on the wrist if they are spewing hateful bigotry. Even if it is unintentional (I see a LOT of leftists who think “this is just a figure of speech”…). Doesn’t matter what the target group is.
It is right up there with “all lives matter”. On its own… it is a saying that can be argued as “neutral”. But in context, it is real fucked. And people should at least get a whack on the nose for saying it so they can understand “don’t fucking say that”
Hey, she supports a 1 state solution. That’s from the river to the sea, ain’t it? Kind of doesn’t need to be a dog whistle
Edit: I googled this and unless someone has some more info, it’s definitely not a pro-hamas or anti-israel slogan. It’s a chant that originated with calls for the one state solution, no reason to think it’s a dog whistle.
Its most famous usage was the PLO in the 1960s when it explicitly was a call for the dismantling and expulsion of all the Jewish people in the old territory of Mandatory Palestine to generate an Arab ethnostate. That’s why people keep saying “It’s a dogwhistle” it’s not easy to say “Oh, the old call for ethnically cleansing the area just took a new, happier meaning!”
it’s not easy to say “Oh, the old call for ethnically cleansing the area just took a new, happier meaning!”
Tangential, but I think that is a uniquely millenial mindset.
Boomers and the like? They always just said “Stop being a snowflake, it is just words” or “Gay means stupid” and so forth.
Whereas millennials grew up learning “words have meaning and they hurt”. And basically everyone knows the homophobic slur that means “a bundle of sticks” and what the implication of that is.
Which… led to a strong push to argue that “we are taking the word back”. The obsessive focus on “wait, he used a soft ‘r’, not a hard ‘r’” with respect to the n-word. Or the completely asinine South Park Libertarian approach of “I am not talking about gay people. I am talking about obnoxious motor cyclists” and so forth. And we still see it show up. This is “a rallying cry for freedom” not a call for counter-genocide. Or “I am not saying being ‘gay’ is bad, I am saying it would be funny if this person I don’t like is gay” and so forth.
And a lot of it comes from influencers who wanted to keep saying slurs or doing racist caricatures basically arguing that they are using a different definition or whatever. And our parasocial relationships means we argue for it too.
Whereas gen z tends to acknowledge things are slurs and dog whistles. Now, there is the issue of people who just don’t care and are intentionally using the hateful interpretation but… at least they are honest bigots?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/From_the_river_to_the_sea
Yes, it is advocating for a “one state solution”. A Palestinian state. It is officially a part of the Hamas platform and has been increasingly associated with genocide of the Israelis who are “in the way”
This is literally the “all lives matter” bullshit all over again. “Well, here is this phrase that if you interpret in an incredibly literal sense and ignore all context of why it is being used or even what it would entail, is not bigotry.”
Interpretations differ amongst supporters of the slogan
According to Tlaib:
an aspirational call for freedom, human rights and peaceful coexistence, not death, destruction or hate
Hamas used the phrase. There’s a clear association, and it’s because of a concerted effort to make Palestinian freedom sound extremist. Have violent radicals adopt a normal phrase, it gets associated with them.
It was wrong to censure her, but she really shouldn’t have used the phrase. I’m sure she genuinely meant it in a free, peaceful sense, but there shouldn’t be any room for ambiguity – if people say it’s an antisemitic phrase, then don’t use it!
If we want criticism of Israel to be separate from antisemitism, you have to take a strict no tolerance policy on anything which could possibly be related to it, even an association like this. Criticizing Israel using phrases the opposition considers to be antisemitic is absolutely counterproductive for separating your criticism from antisemitism.
Yea… “From the river to the sea Palestine will be free!”
Angry Goose meme: “From what? From what motherfucker?
From being kept in an open air prison, denied self-determination.
Then accept any of the two state solutions that have repeatedly been proposed? Walking away with no counterpoint and immediately starting violence tells me the Palestinian self-determination isn’t as important as the other, unsaid, goal.
While I agree about her recklessness, congress shouldn’t try to reprimand speech. It is up to the public and the voters to show her the ramifications of her actions.
The Public generally gets one chance every couple years.
And I think “speech” very much should be reprimanded when it is hate speech.
Max Miller can say Gaza will be turned into a parking lot, but that’s fine and normal.
They agree with Max so they are okay with it.
Shame on any Democrats who joined the Repubs for this injustice. She speaks the truth against massive pressure from AIPAC. It’s a McCarthy atmosphere where anyone who dares speak a balanced perspective on Israel and Palestine gets crushed.
There has always been a big Zionist influence in the media and politics. It is ridiculous honestly. A repub could get caught saying the N word and they wouldn’t censure them, but don’t you dare say anything negative about Israel.
Republicans could call all jews the k word but as long as they still support Israel, they’d be fine, and probably get aipac donations for it.
This is what happens when politicians tell the truth about real issues. notice how there have been no censure for Qanon or Jan 6 bullshit.
deleted by creator
Freedom of speech, unless you’re brown
lEgiTiMaTE pOLiTIcAL diScOuRcE!!
Uh, can they vote on the budget, please?
Fuck the GOP and fuck those 22 Democrats! She’s speaking truth to power and they know it!
This is politicial theatre for the owner donors and the least informed/most misinformed voters, but with chilling real world consequences for not only Tlaib herself, but EVERYONE who dares speak up for the innocent victims of the Israeli apartheid regime or any other tyrannical government that happens to have business with rich and powerful Americans 🤬🤬🤬
It’s not like they’re not facing an imminent shut down or anything.
But their rabid fanbois, tho.
At this point, they could shit in their hand, say it came from Trump, and sell viewing tickets to fund their PACs. I don’t know why they bother with this obvious political theatre.
Doesn’t explain those 22 despicable Democrats, though…
As for why, that’s as simple as it’s depressing: because it’s the kind of thing their owner donors and the most un/misinformed voters love.
Doesn’t explain those 22 despicable Democrats, though…
Centrist Democrats work with Republicans against progressives.
Yup. The ratchet keeps turning.
Censure has no effect if anyone was wondering. Removal from committee and expulsion are the only real things Congress can do.
While you’re right about it having no practical effect in itself, it DOES have a symbolic effect that’s very chilling towards the free speech rights of those telling the truth about the Israeli Apartheid regime.
Bad faith actors will be able to point to it to legitimise all kinds of heinous suppression of divergent voices and the truth they’re spreading.
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
This is the best summary I could come up with:
Following the vote to advance the censure resolution, Tlaib delivered an emotional speech on the House floor and argued that her criticism of the Israeli government should not be conflated with antisemitism.
“We are human beings just like anyone else,” she said after a long pause, during which Democratic Rep. Ilhan Omar of Minnesota stood up to comfort her and put her hands on Tlaib’s shoulder as the congresswoman braced herself against the podium.
The Anti-Defamation League describes the chant “from the river to the sea, Palestine will be free,” as “an antisemitic slogan” and “rallying cry (that) has long been used by anti-Israel voices, including supporters of terrorist organizations such as Hamas.”
Tlaib has defended the phrase, writing on X, “From the river to the sea is an aspirational call for freedom, human rights, and peaceful coexistence, not death, destruction, or hate.
On October 25, Tlaib replied to her earlier post on X, saying, “Media outlets and third-party analysts have raised doubts about claims and evidence offered by both Israel and the Gaza Ministry of Health, and I agree with the United Nations that an independent investigation is necessary.”
“Rather than acknowledge the voice and perspective of the only Palestinian American in Congress, my colleagues have resorted to distorting my positions in resolutions filled with obvious lies,” Tlaib continued.
The original article contains 971 words, the summary contains 215 words. Saved 78%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!
yawn.
