CCP or Democratic Party Line? Who Can Tell?

On a number of issues, it is getting hard to tell the difference between the Chinese Communist Party line and the Democratic Party line. As, for example, the current conflict in the Middle East and America’s historic support for Israel.

The Jerusalem Post quotes a Chinese government English-language outlet:

Israel is a US military proxy that enjoys US support because of the influence of wealthy Jews, Chinese government-affiliated English-language news channel CGTN said Tuesday in a video posted online.

In a video titled “Why does the US act as a diplomatic shield for Israel?” presenter Zheng Junfeng floated a version of the theory, found in The Protocols of the Elders of Zion and other antisemitic tracts, that Jews control government policies by nefarious means.
***
“Some people believe that US pro-Israel policy is traceable to the influence of wealthy Jews in the US and the Jewish lobby on US foreign-policy-makers,” Zheng said.

The CGTN presenter said there are “over five million Jewish people in the US,” and that 18 of the top 40 people on the Forbes World’s Billionaires List are Jewish. [Ed.: That isn’t true, actually, but who’s counting?]

In other words, as Ilhan Omar put it so memorably, it’s all about the Benjamins baby. The CCP is fully in tune with the Squad. And as it happens, Ilhan Omar is currently busy defending the Chinese Communists on Twitter, as well as standing up for Hamas.

Is Omar just a radical backbencher with little influence in her party? Unfortunately, no. AIPAC published this Facebook ad that is mildly critical of her:

The ad is correct; Omar did indeed call Israel’s effort to defend itself against rocket attacks an “act of terrorism.” But these days, being right is of limited value. The wrath of the Democratic Party came down on AIPAC’s head. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said:

I don’t agree with Congresswoman Omar’s comments, but it’s very disappointing to see [AIPAC’s] deeply cynical and inflammatory ads twisting her words.

“Twisting” by accurately quoting.

As for Joe Biden, Caroline Glick weighs him in the balance and finds him wanting. Her whole piece is worth reading.

From the moment Hamas launched its current offensive against Israel, radical Democrat lawmakers in Congress have escalated their anti-Israel rhetoric and actions to unprecedented levels. On Monday, Congresswomen Rashida Tlaib, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Cori Bush and others adopted rank anti-Semitic language against Israel referring to Israel as an “Apartheid” state and insisting that Israel is not a democracy because “Apartheid states aren’t democracies.” The State Department itself has determined that accusing Israel of being an “Apartheid” state is an anti-Semitic act.

No “responsible adult,” not Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer or House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, and definitely not Biden, called them out for their bigoted behavior.
***
If that weren’t bad enough, Monday, Chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee Gregory Meeks announced his intention to place a hold on a routine sale of $735 million worth of precision guided missiles to Israel that Biden approved. Meeks was acting under pressure from the likes of Omar, Cortez, Tlaib and Betty McCollum. … His stunning interference in a routine arms sale that enjoys the support of a wide majority of members of Congress indicates that the radical wing of the Democratic Party controls the party’s discourse on Israel today.

That is, unfortunately, true.

Biden himself underlined this point on Tuesday. As Tlaib was expanding her anti-Semitic assaults on Israel, Biden praised her in a speech in Detroit. He referred to the woman who has made rejecting Israel’s right to exist her signature issue as a “fighter.” Biden said to Tlaib, “I want to say that I admire your intellect, I admire your passion and I admire your concern for so many people.”

To coin a phrase, you don’t have to be a weatherman to know which way the wind is blowing in today’s Democratic Party. It is blowing in step with the Chinese Communist Party and Hamas.

Responses