Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN) discovered that America, left and right, is still pro-Israel.

In a tweet, Omar had implied that “Republicans are being bribed into supporting Israel by AIPAC (American Israel Public Affairs Committee):

“It’s all about the Benjamins baby,” [Omar said] quoting Puff Daddy’s ’90s paean to cash money. Omar subsequently specified that she was talking about spending from the likes of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, better known as AIPAC, the powerful pro-Israel lobbying organization.

Neoconservative Nikki Haley piled on, pointing out (in broken English) that quips like the one made by Omar were an everyday occurrence at the UN.

My point is not to argue the substance of what Omar said—although I think her point against lobbyists for foreign states is a serious point.

My point here is to simply underscore how different the US is from the rest of the West, when it comes to Israel. It’s a lesson Ilhan Omar, who identifies as a Muslim refugee, has just found out, and will work to change, no doubt.

There will come a time, soon, with more Muslim immigration, when the tipping point will be reached and the US will be more like the UN which practically opens every one of its sessions with a pro forma resolution condemning Israel.

In Israel, they call it a “security fence.” That sounds less foreboding. But this is no fence.

What the US has on its southern border is, for the most, … some fencing.

And this manned, near- impermeable wall is on Israel’s South, meant to stop illegal African immigrants, not necessarily terrorists. Via Breitbart:

UPDATE (1/9/019): 

Aren't Jewish liberals religiously pro-immigration? Anti-Israel Democrat, #RashidaTlaib, daughter of Palestinian immigrants, is what you get with … unfettered, non-selective immigration. https://t.co/Ijg3Nva6ze

— Ilana Mercer (@IlanaMercer) January 8, 2019

NEW COLUMN IS  “Let’s Mobilize An Army Of Stone Throwers On Border.” It’s currently on Townhall.com, WND.com, The Unz Review. And, tomorrow, on American Greatness.

An excerpt:

In the United States, even Customs and Border Protection apologizes for doing its job. CBP is supposed to “protects the public from dangerous people and materials attempting to cross the border …”

On one of the networks that wants all people, dangerous or not, to cross the southern border into the U.S., if they so desire, a CBP officer was bending over backwards to appear like a “global force for good.” (That, believe it or not, was the U.S. Navy’s motto, between 2009 and 2015!)

Tear-gassing rubble-rousing migrants, who were charging his officers and breaching the U.S.-Mexico border, was in the service of protecting … the migrants, especially The Children. Perhaps that’s in the oath of office a CBP officer takes?

Law enforcement officers entrusted with the safety of the American people struggle to articulate pride in executing their mandate. Attached to the expected self-loathing repartee is, invariably, a declaration of loyalties to The World. (Of a piece with this confused loyalty is the typical argument made by the typical TV talker: Illegal immigration must be stopped, so as to … save migrants from the journey’s depredations.)

It’s instructive to contrast the apologetics around defending the U.S. border and the American people with the absence of apologies on Israel’s borders.

In May this year, “Tens of thousands of Palestinians massed near Gaza’s border fence, threatening to ‘return’ to the lands their forefathers lost when Israel was created in 1948.” They wanted in.

Israeli soldiers responded not with tear gas, but with bullets. They killed over 60 protesters who threatened to breach the border. The number has since risen to 120.

Most of us, this writer included, would condemn such excessive force.

Yet surprisingly, the Economist—a liberal, pro-Palestinian, most excellent weekly—pondered but briefly and nonchalantly about Israel’s army having used excessive force, concluding almost callously: “Every state has a right to defend its borders.”

Come again?!

This from the very same editorialists who never tire of protesting any disruption in the holy quest of weary columns of Christ-like caravanners, planning to defy the U.S. government, by illegally entering the United States of America. …

… READ THE REST.  NEW COLUMN IS  “Let’s Mobilize An Army Of Stone Throwers On Border.” It’s currently on Townhall.com, WND.com, The Unz Review. And, tomorrow, on American Greatness.

TRIVIA: The motto of the U.S. Navy from 2009 till 2015 was: “America’s Navy: A Global Force for Good.” Pretty sick, if you’re an America First Deplorable who thinks that “Defending America” is a better, more constitutional, motto to live by.

Of course Marc Lamont Hill shouldn’t be fired purely for his opinion, voiced “during a meeting at the United Nations held for the International Day of Solidarity with the Palestinian People on Wednesday.”

Hill “called for a ‘free Palestine from the river to the sea.'”

Not that stupidity has ever been cause for CNN to fire someone of late. (Chris Cuomo, anyone?) But the guy, Mr. Hill, is really dumb. And/or has an appetite for destruction. Has not Gaza already gone to the dogs? The dogs of war. Indeed it did, back in 2005.

At some point, a utilitarian calculus has to enter into the Palestinian equation. The M.O.P. E (Most Oppressed People Ever) only ever break stuff. (But that, too, is Israel’s fault.)

Most sane Americans look askance at those who suggest that the real estate between the River Jordan and the Mediterranean Sea should be turned over to the Palestinians.

Besides, that’ll be The last Stand, like the Hebrews’ stand against the Romans on Masada.

Naturally, having an opinion on a vexing problem is not to be confused with supporting a war in that cause. That’s crazy; even a sleight of hand.

To be charitable, perhaps Hill’s grasp of geography is just really bad. Most Americans didn’t know where “Eyeraq” was when we invaded Iraq, RIP.