Ever since the police murder of George Floyd in May 2020, Rep. Ilhan Omar has been a strong and admirable advocate for the rights of the accused and for reining in the abuses of U.S. law enforcement.
It therefore came a surprise when Omar brushed off blatant violations of due process and said the U.S. should not help the hero of Hotel Rwanda Paul Rusesabagina merely because he had been accused of a crime by a totalitarian regime well-known for assassinating and jailing its critics.
The House Foreign Affairs Committee approved a resolution Feb. 8 calling for Rusesabagina’s release from a Rwandan prison. Omar was one of the voices against it.
“While I acknowledge the reports of serious concerns related to due process relating to his arrest and trial,” she said. “This man is credibly accused of terrorism, tried and convicted.”
“Serious concerns” is an understatement, given what happened to Rusesabagina. On Aug. 29, 2020, he was lured away from his home in Texas and tricked into boarding a flight to Rwanda’s capital where he was then tortured and put on a show trial for phony charges of “terrorism” in which no credible evidence was presented, and coerced witnesses even recanted their accusations. He was sentenced to 25 years.
His only crime was speaking out. Ever since his heroism during the 1994 genocide received global attention, Rusesabagina used his platform to draw attention to the rampant human rights abuses of the dictatorship in his home nation, the routine kidnapping and murders of dissidents that caused Freedom House to rate the country a dismal 22 out of 100. Rwanda’s dictator, Paul Kagame, has long considered him an enemy.
[image_credit]MinnPost photo by Craig Lassig[/image_credit][image_caption]Rep. Ilhan Omar[/image_caption]
Omar’s vote came after a visit she made to Rwanda on Oct. 9, 2021 where she attended a meeting at Kagame’s office. The visit prefigured her shift in attitude from a congresswoman who has previously been fearless at denouncing human rights abuses – the murder of the Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi, China’s treatment of its ethnic Uyghur people, Israel’s occupation of Palestinian territories – into one that excuses an illegal kidnapping by a despotic regime that the State Department says has been proficient at “unlawful or arbitrary arrests and detentions, killings, and enforced disappearances.”
Rwanda is eager to do business with the U.S. It hosts a branch campus of Carnegie Mellon University and a startup minor league of the National Basketball Association. Goldman Sachs funds a women’s education program there and electric car manufacturers are eyeing the tin and tungsten produced from its Rutungo mines.
The regime’s 2020 kidnapping of their most prominent critic, Paul Rusesabagina, was a bit of a test: How much can they get away with? Can they silence a critic who happens to be a U.S. lawful permanent resident and a winner of the Presidential Medal of Freedom? If they can get away with this, imagine what they can do – and have done – to humble people without such standing.
Omar’s position on Rusesabagina comes with domestic complications, threatening to throw her entire stance on the U.S. criminal justice system into a light of hypocrisy. Is she saying that police abuses not acceptable in America are okay so long as they are carried out in Africa?
What is clear is that she can’t have it both ways. She can’t be a human rights champion while carrying the water of a brutal human rights abuser.
Tom Zoellner is the co-author of Paul Rusesabagina’s memoir “An Ordinary Man.” David Himbara is a former economic advisor to the Rwandan government now living in exile in Canada.
As with many things Omar, insight can be gained by “following the money”.
Welcome Don Samuels to the CD 5 race.
Yeah, and if Don Samuels is willing to be a lap dog for Israel, he can expect handsome campaign financing from AIPAC. Remember the $400K ($500K?) the Israel Lobby laid on Omar’s opponent Antoine Melton-Meaux in 2020?! . . .
Ilhan Omar is a sellout.She is in bed with the US military indrustrial complex.She is responsible for backing a canidate in Somolia who undid a peace agreement between 3 countries in Somolia.War breakouts,almost immediately ,US invades and oil contracts are signed at lightning speed.Omar is a snake,don’t let the FAKE progressive identity fool you.SELLOUT.
It’s hard for me to take articles like the above seriously when the female, non-white skinned congressional ‘progressive squad’ is constantly under attack from all sides. I don’t agree with their every stance, but I dont disagree with many others. What I do see instead are brave educated women who have risen and overcome many obstacles in their lives to get where they are. They are not insignificant. They are, indeed, way more influential than many white males care to see. It is blatant racism on display daily. The incessant need by many–again, esp white males–is yet another effort to maintain the white supremacy/nationalism status quo while putting great effort into taking these now powerful themselves women down many pegs. By badmouthing them incessantly. By constantly attacking them and nitpicking every single word and action. Women everywhere easily recognize the mode of behaviour; we’ve all been subjected to it many, many times ourselves.
Your reply has absolutely nothing to do with the substance of the article! It’s not about her as a person, it is about her vote on this. And we deserve a response from her, as she is an elected representative from Minnesota. Wouldn’t you like to know why she voted against a brutal dictatorship who set this man up?
Can’t criticize no matter what. Check.
Straight our of the trump playbook.
I think AOC would one day make a great Speaker of the House. Ayanna Pressley and Rashida Talib both have significant previous experience and represent their districts well. Inferring upon Omar the abilities, accomplishments and integrity of these 3 is an undeserved gift that she has yet to earn.
Here’s a link to the 37 cosponsors of the legislation she voted against.
https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-resolution/892/cosponsors?r=8&s=1&pageSort=alpha
Follow the money…
“Follow the money…”
Have you? And, if so, what have you found?
The allegations as outlined above are certainly sickening. But have we found evidence of her motivations – or just specious inferences?
I’m one of the co-authors of the piece, LK, and can speak to this. Before I heard what she said in the Feb. 8 meeting of the House Foreign Affairs Committee about Rwanda, I had a lot of admiration for Omar and — like you — was uncomfortable with the attacks on her by right-wing nutjobs. So I don’t have an especial axe to grind here except for one big one. My friend and former co-writer got kidnapped and tortured by a totalitarian regime that has done the same thing and worse to many other people. If a federal official is going to repeat the lies of that regime, I feel strongly their voters should know about it. That was my only motivation.
The criticism of Omar in the article seems justified. So does Edward Blaise’s brief comment. So does LK Woodruff’s commentary. I guess I’ll wait to find out more before I open my mouth and insert my foot.
Good plan, Ray, especially when someone else might push that foot. (I held back the other day from asking whether decisions would be made sooner and better if we had non-elected government at all levels.)
From her own quoted statement one can see that Omar simply doesn’t understand due process: here, it involves false arrest, trial by tainted jury, and conviction in a probably corrupt court. All three elements–arrest, trial, and conviction–are essential parts of our due process requirements in the Constitution.
Obviously, the majority of the U.S. House of Representatives seems to know differently than Omar; they voted to have this man released from prison while Omar dissented.
Omar has been saying she represents my Congressional District. I wish I could say I agree with her stands on things. Many that she takes seem just for show. Some carry taints of her own corruption, like this instance.
Just to get this straight and not be accused of anti-woman-of-color bias: How many of The Squad, or other minority members of Congress, voted with Omar on this? Did she provide any more rationale for her vote against the Resolution?
Democracy and honesty go hand in hand in terms of behavior. Bad behavior no matter your skin tone is bad behavior. It appears Ms./Mr. Woodruff has a chip on his/her shoulder and doesn’t understand what bad behavior is. Leaders are by necessity kept under the public eye as the public wants them to represent them and we are paying her salary. That is true no matter who you are in an elected position and is one of the benefits of living in a democracy with a free press. Think Russia right now without a free press. Constructive criticism for bad behavior and inconsistency needs to be called out unless you live in Russia, North Korea, or China. Thank God I don’t live there.
I see bad behavior daily. It’s becoming increasingly commonplace. So wrong about that. I dislike folks piling on without digging into matters more deeply. I strongly prefer facts over opinion. There is a strong bias against the squad because they are non-white females, ongoing. The authors could have written their piece without even mentioning Omar. And just because the House showed more unity in this one matter doesn’t mean they have shared wisdom generally. There are multiple factions within the unit showing more divisiveness than unity.
Wasn’t the article about Omar’s stand?
There is no bias against those in the Squad. The consistent criticism they get has nothing to do with gender or race.
Everything that they have been criticized for is because of their constant drumbeat of statements based in extreme ideology and sheer lunacy. The sheer fact that anyone would think that expected criticism is based in race is sad.
This white male appreciates your perspective. Thank you for articulating this.
I can assure you the only reason David Himbara and I wrote specifically about Omar is because her position on police injustices in the U.S. is dramatically and even crazily at odds with what she said in the HFAC on February 8. It has nothing to do with her identity and everything to do with a contradiction in policy.
Sorry, once again Omar is the story. Why would one of the most liberal members of congress and one of the most out spoken members on human rights find herself on the side of a known oppressor of human rights in a battle of one person against an entire state. Seems very curious to me. Only increased when you look at the 37 co sponsors of the legislation:
Rep. Allred, Colin Z. [D-TX-32]
Rep. Blumenauer, Earl [D-OR-3]
Rep. Carson, Andre [D-IN-7]
Rep. Cicilline, David N. [D-RI-1]
Rep. Cohen, Steve [D-TN-9]
Rep. Connolly, Gerald E. [D-VA-11]
Rep. Deutch, Theodore E. [D-FL-22]
Rep. Doggett, Lloyd [D-TX-35]
Rep. Eshoo, Anna G. [D-CA-18]
Rep. Fitzpatrick, Brian K. [R-PA-1]
Rep. Green, Al [D-TX-9]
Rep. Issa, Darrell E. [R-CA-50]
Rep. Johnson, Eddie Bernice [D-TX-30]
Rep. Kahele, Kaiali’i [D-HI-2]
Rep. Keating, William R. [D-MA-9]
Rep. Khanna, Ro [D-CA-17]
Rep. Kim, Young [R-CA-39]*
Rep. Lee, Barbara [D-CA-13]
Rep. Lieu, Ted [D-CA-33]
Rep. Lowenthal, Alan S. [D-CA-47]
Rep. Malinowski, Tom [D-NJ-7]
Rep. McCaul, Michael T. [R-TX-10]
Rep. McGovern, James P. [D-MA-2]*
Rep. Meeks, Gregory W. [D-NY-5]*
Rep. Meng, Grace [D-NY-6]
Rep. Meuser, Daniel [R-PA-9]
Del. Norton, Eleanor Holmes [D-DC-At Large]
Rep. Peters, Scott H. [D-CA-52]
Rep. Phillips, Dean [D-MN-3]*
Rep. Raskin, Jamie [D-MD-8]
Rep. Schakowsky, Janice D. [D-IL-9]*
Rep. Sherman, Brad [D-CA-30]*
Rep. Sires, Albio [D-NJ-8]
Rep. Stanton, Greg [D-AZ-9]
Rep. Sánchez, Linda T. [D-CA-38]
Rep. Titus, Dina [D-NV-1]
Rep. Vargas, Juan [D-CA-51]
Rep. Wild, Susan [D-PA-7]*
It would be nice to know how many of these people condemn Israel’s crimes against the Palestinians, wouldn’t it? Then again, considering the Israel Lobby’s control of Knesset West–er, uh, Congress–none of them do. . . .
The article fails to examine Omar’s position, or the ‘terrorism’ charges referenced Paul Rusesabagina.
It’s another serious accusation with unserious (absent) evidence. Who did the kidnapping? Why?
I would encourage Ilhan Omar to explain the facts as she knows them.
These guys don’t seem to understand her “hypocrisy”. I don’t either.
Here’s a good summary:
https://cfj.org/news_posts/hotel-rwanda-proceedings-were-a-show-trial/
Thank you.
“Paul Rusesabagina is a Rwandan politician. He worked as the manager of the Hôtel des Mille Collines in Kigali, during a period in which it housed 1,268 Hutu and Tutsi refugees from the Interahamwe militia during the Rwandan genocide. None of these refugees were hurt or killed during the attacks.”
Savior to terrorist? Looks like a T**** style move, discredit the opponent anyway you can! Does our Representative not have the ability to make clear commentary on that? Sure seems to have clear POV anytime a blue shirt is seen on the street in
Mpls.
I really can’t help but laugh at the presumption that any of Ilhan Omar’s opponents actually care about Rusesabagina or any compassionate release he might or might not receive from the Rwandan government. That’s not to say this issue isn’t important, but rather that it’s plainly obvious who actually cares about the issue, as opposed to those who latched onto this because they were already predisposed to not liking Omar. I would absolutely love the latter group to explain why this is a bad thing without the help of Google or Wikipedia.
Well TL, the A part is, shouldn’t a person get a little background, you know like make a decision/comment with more information vs less Since Omar is my Rep. yes, I am interested in her views, votes and opinions, and over the past few years have found them on many occasions to deviate from my perspective significantly. Regardless of RCC or NO as voters should we not be concerned about issues that come before our representative and how they address them?
I’m the co-author of the piece. My comment above to LK explained why I think it’s a bad thing. Omar is defending the kidnapping of a renowned humanitarian who dared to speak out against a vicious regime, and refusing to use the power of her Congressional office to challenge a government who had her on a visit last October as an honored guest. It’s an incredibly pertinent question to which her constituents (especially those who came here as refugees) deserve an answer. I hope she will give them a reply.
Thomas, hypocrisy is a bad thing. Didn’t even use Google.
Exacto Mundo. Its all about getting back at Ilhan Omar.
I am very much predisposed to liking Ilhan Omar. I voted for her three times, including the most recent primary. I was also very proud that my district elected Keith Ellison before her. Sending Ellison, a Muslim, to Congress was a huge civic statement that I am proud my district made at that time.
Ilhan Omar has not pleased this voter. She also voted against recognizing the the Armenian genocide as a genocide – the ‘timing’ was not right. She also voted, along with Trump-loving Biden-haters, against the infrastructure bill – as a lawmaking hostage situation. She has made some other bad votes that I am not taking the time to look up now (would need to use Google).
“It’s all about the benjamins baby” was the first I followed her actions as my representative. I found myself researching a rap song to try to make sense of this utterance! The comma was missing, not the apostrophe as I had assumed. Many people interpreted this cryptic remark as anti-Semitic.
I am not sure whether Omar’s actions should be scrutinized by ‘following the money’ or by inside knowledge of the latest woke trends in her inner circle – maybe she’s just impulsive – but I will be taking a hard look at Don Samuels in the upcoming election. Omar may have good reasons not to represent her district as the majority wish, but they are not apparent to me.
Omar voted against the Armenian genocide resolution because she is, of course, the only Somali in Congress, and perhaps the most prominent Somali in the U.S.; because Turkey is the principal source of foreign aid to Somalia; because the substantial Somali community that is a large part of her constituency would prefer that their families in Somalia not lose that aid; because the vote was symbolic; and because her vote was not necessary for it to pass. Members are given leave by their caucus all the time to cast a contrary vote when it isn’t needed.
Omar voted against the infrastructure bill because it jettisoned progressive needs disproportionately, and because her vote was not needed for it to pass.
Omar voted against the Russian fuel sanctions because, according to her statement, they could be imposed by the President alone, and doing it thru legislation likely would cause them to remain, harming the Russian population, long after they ceased their purpose. I would not vote the same way, but the pragmatic question of whom sanctions hurt, and whether they will serve their purpose, is an important one on which thoughtful people can differ.
Omar’s “All about the Benjamins” comment was not anti-Semitic, it was a reference to the corruption of the Republican party and, specifically, of the (Baptist, not Jewish) minority leader, Kevin McCarthy. Those who pile on here every time Omar’s name appears have refused to make their argument that the statement was anti-Semitic, they simply repeat it as a truth.
From reading Omar’s statements, it seems that much more than other elected leaders, most of whom are dunderheads in it for the power or the Benjamins, she takes nuanced positions consistent with a set of moral political principles. Of course no one reads those statements, and because of who she is and whom she challenges, she is much more vulnerable than others to having her positions misrepresented and attacked. And her statements, which generally are reasoned and eloquent, contrast severely with her tweeting habit, which is wholly unsuited to her idiosyncratic positions and her vulnerability, and which will be most responsible for her political downfall, if and when it occurs.
I’m hardly a blind defender of Omar. While symbolism and principle are important in a leader, I don’t know precisely what she’s accomplished in the realms of substantive legislative activity or constituent service. I’m open to other progressive candidates. But if people want to critique a person, it’s incumbent on them to examine the facts and context, and make careful judgments.
This is exactly the attention and analysis this situation needs. I particularly like the reasoning behind the Russian oil sanctions. I’m all for hurting the rich and powerful in Russia to the maximum extent possible. I’m sad, but not squeamish that the hurt will be shared with the average Russian, who does not deserve it. But I agree that we shouldn’t place permanent hurt on ordinary Russians should the situation be resolved sooner than later. What if things change? Putin isn’t a spring chicken (and he’s made certain that there will be NO clear successor), so there could suddenly be an opportunity for us to help ensure a free and fair election there. But if we have legislative blocks in place, we might not legally be able to.
What a surprise, Omar being hypocritical. What about her disgraceful lies about her opponent in the last primary, who was LEADING until Omar’s last-minute media blitz accusing her opponent, a long-time civil rights and housing attorney, of being a Republican in disguise. Utterly untrue, but the lies saved her position.
I hope that Don Samuels will be successful in ridding Minnesota of this person who has profited greatly from her position, while not being called to task on her several proven ethics violation, and giving her new husband’s company $1.3 million. What will it take to get us a representative who helps the people, not herself?
I don’t agree with most of Ilhan Ohmars policies. However i have to laugh at the AIPAC sponsored attempt to primary Ilhan Omar as some kind of virtuous endeavor. Her opponent had millions of AIPAC allied dollars to spew endless trash against her.
In the end he got trashed at the polls.
I associate myself with your comment.
I also disagree with Omar on most issues. However, she’s one of the few members of Congress who call out Israel’s crimes against the Palestinians, AIPAC’s control over Congress, and the like. The Israel Lobby doesn’t like it, either, as evidenced by the fact that they laid $400K on Omar’s opponent Antoine Melton-Meaux in 2020. . . .
The criticism seems fair enough to me. We’ll see if or how Omar responds or explains her position. I have to say however that given the nature of her political opposition within the Democratic Party, it would likely take more than this to budge my vote elsewhere. I don’t expect to agree with everything Omar does or says, and even if this a bad move on her part, I’m still with her on almost everything else, I can’t say that of Klobuchar, or Walz, etc. etc.
This article is yet another sham article. Do your own research (or lookup the link i provide)
There is plenty of evidence that Paul Rusesabagina isn’t the angel he’s being portrayed to be. That doesn’t also take away the fact that Rwanda’s, Paul Kagame is a dictator.
Mr Rusesabagina was caught on a German wiretap talking / colluding with a man Ignace Murwanashyaka, the F.D.L.R.’s leader, who was put on trial in Germany for war crimes. FDLR is considered a terrorist group.
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/03/02/magazine/he-was-the-hero-of-hotel-rwanda-now-hes-accused-of-terrorism.html
“Other indications of Rusesabagina’s involvement with the F.D.L.R. emerged in text messages from Murwanashyaka that were intercepted by German intelligence and submitted as evidence when, in 2011, Murwanashyaka went on trial in Stuttgart for war crimes.”
So it’s cool then to kidnap him, torture him, deny him legal counsel and not go through any established legal method to see if any of those allegations are true?
Mr Zoellner stick to FACTS. He was caught on a German wiretap colluding with a terrorist group. That is not an allegation. It is an established fact. It was presented in a German Court. I’m not relying on Uganda Courts cause i won’t trust them.
What Uganda does with him, i’m leery of Ugandan Courts. However that doesn’t negate the FACT he colluded with a terrorist group.
1) it’s Rwanda, not Uganda, 2) anything said against a dissident by a totalitarian government needs to be examined by an impartial court. This one was anything but.
I’ll repeat again Mr. Zoellner. It was a German Court where the evidence was presented. You simply cannot continually ignore that and keep talking about Rwandan Courts. He was dealing with terrorists.
I’ll repeat again — he was sentenced by a Rwandan “court” which no international observer would call an impartial judiciary.
Mr Zoellner, the credible evidence in a German Court of his terrorism connections is absolutely enough for Ms Omar to walk away from this guy. That is IRREGARDLESS of his trial in Rwanda.
Sounds like he should be extracted from Rwanda & tried in a fair court.
The wiretap detail you note should have been included by the authors. It soes not absolve Omar of hypocrasy, but implies the situarion is more nuanced than originally presented.
I can find no evidence of a “German wiretap.” Can you? I have no idea what Raj is talking about.
Mr Zoeller, I provided the New York Times link and the quote in the very article that references the wiretap. Yet you deny it. Everyone else on this thread has no problem finding is. Except you!
This only further proves that your article is a sham.
Thank you for this, Raj. Like anything else in Rwanda and nearby African countries, nothing is simple (work on an asylum case for an individual from DRC, and another from Ethiopia REALLY opened my eyes to just how complicated). Just because Rusesabagina did one heroic thing (I don’t actually believe the people who claim that he played no role–I agree with Zoellner that their “revised” statements are tainted by Kagame’s authoritarianism), doesn’t mean that he’s not capable of crimes. I mean, anyone who believes that Rusesabagina pulled off what the movie suggests he did, has got to believe that he’s an “any means necessary” type of guy. It appears that there is credible evidence that he supported FDLR in a meaningful way after leaving Rwanda, and certainly helped form FLN (another armed group that likely spun off from FDLR), and may have even done so while here in the US. It seems that support of FDLR and FLN might have been part of his bid for running for president of Rwanda in 2016. FDLR is sanctioned by the UN as being a terrorist organization (as of 2005). It may also find itself on the US Terrorist Exclusion List (as of 2004) under the aliases of Armeé de Libération du Rwanda (AliR), Forces Armées Rwandaises (ex-FAR), or Interahamwe, although it’s unclear whether the “modern” FDLR reflects those organizations. Either way, if it was known by immigration authorities in the US that Rusesabagina had ANY relationship with FDLR, it probably would have precluded him remaining here. Of course, that would have been a HUGE political embarrassment since GWB awarded him the Presidential Medal of Freedom. So, perhaps we have simply looked the other way?
In any case, the kidnapping of Rusesabagina was not ok (though, at least the American Bar Association wasn’t willing to say it was illegal). And Kagame is not a cool dude. BUT…Rwanda is an independent country with its own laws. Rusesabagina admitted to forming and funding an armed group (FLN) that he was aware committed a number of attacks. Despite his support and funding of the group, he claimed that /his/ role was diplomacy. Even here in the US, if you fund a terrorist group and they kill someone, you are likely to be convicted. Whether or not this was politically motivated (it probably was) or fair (probably not), the cries for his release also seem politically motivated. Heck, Rusesabagina’s residency in the US appears to be politically motivated, since funding of the FLN would probably get you bounced back out if you weren’t hailed as a hero based on a movie that was “based on actual events” (read: “fictionalizes reality to make it sexy”). I don’t know whether Paul Rusesabagina belongs in a Rwandan prison, but I’m not sure why our Congress is busy with this one individual when Rwanda has a whole lot of other problems that affect a whole lot of other people. Congress can’t be more sure that Rusesabagina is not guilty than they are that Rwanda has more systemic problems. So, why not approve a resolution that condemns Rwanda’s lack of due process more generally? Maybe because THAT would be hypocritical? I guess I’d have to ask Omar what her reasons were, but I can see reasons not to vote for THIS particular resolution.
Nice post Rachel. On my part, based on his recent activities, i have questions about his entire Hotel Rwanda spiel. Let me set that aside for now. His post Hotel Rwanda activities seem really, really shady. This guy, imo, was trying to hustle his fame into shady (and illegal) machinations to gain power in Rwanda.
Karma.
Another day, another out of touch vote by Rep. Omar, another set of fawning apologists.
Following the QOP playback is not the way to govern
Lord knows, as an American voter I don’t expect my Representatives to be perfect. Omar has a complex history and I expect complex reasons for her vote. The resolution passed without it, which is something that happens all the time, Representatives vote against something that they know will pass without their vote, I suppose she owes an explanation to her vote but for me its not something that is going to change my vote, she’s been as good a Representative as I could ask for. I do wonder why the authors are choosing to come onto her home turf to raise their concerns. The resolution passed, so it seems like a gratuit0us attack, with what as the end game? Damage her politically? I see a few Samuels supporters here trying to make a hay out of it so maybe that purpose has been served.
Yes, and these “resolutions’ carry almost zero weight or consequences, note: the authors are attacking Omar rather than celebrating it’s passage despite her vote.
Any politician who accepts a junket from an autocratic foreign government, then votes in accordance with that government’s false propaganda in direct contradiction to her domestic agenda, really ought not be surprised when that hypocrisy becomes a matter of public discussion.
“Damage her politically? I see a few Samuels supporters here trying to make a hay out of it so maybe that purpose has been served.”
What would she have to do to shake your confidence in her? Vote against something as universally accepted as supporting Ukraine against the Russian invasion?
Oh, nevermind….
She’d have to stop supporting working and low income people and start support big biz. Here’s something I wish more politicians would follow: “…criticizing and questioning is my job as a leader and a member of Congress. It’s the hardest part of the job, trust me it’s easy to just follow.”
Ilhan Omar
“is my job as a leader”
Leader of? Based on experience and qualifications she is the junior member of the squad, a group of 4.
I am reminded of one of my favorite politicians, Al Franken, who spent his first 6 years avoiding the limelight, learning how to get things done, understanding the needs of his constituents and how to advance them. All from a guy, based on his earlier history, who could have showed up on every media talk show and entertained the masses: He did do that, he just did his job with no visions of grandiosity.
I went over and read the NYT’s article that Raj provided (although I’m pretty sure I read it at the time) and it while it describes are murkier scenario than one might imagine, it doesn’t really establish Paul Rusesabagina’s role conclusively. The entire scenario is actually extremely complex so if Omar describes the accusations as: “credible” she might well be reflecting a deeper understanding of the scenario. Votes and resolutions like this are very much like PR exercises, you don’t really think every member that votes for this has done a deep into an inconsequential vote do you?
I would also point out the fact that countries run by dictators can be attacked by terrorist just like any other country. Innocent people in dictatorships aren’t legitimate targets of terrorism. Opposition to dictatorship isn’t a legitimate reason to endorse terrorism is it? Rusesabagina’s guilt isn’t completely irrelevant, regardless of the nature of his confinement.
Honestly, I think it’s kind of cool that Paul (clear progressive), myself (moderate progressive), and Raj (moderate conservative to clear conservative) all agree that there’s more to the story than the authors want anyone to realize. It feels like a hit piece, especially when you do a deeper dive. Thanks, Raj for bringing my attention to the NYT piece. I was able to do a little more of my own research, but that was a good start for understanding the nuances of the situation. Nothing is as it seems in that region of the world. Of course, nothing is as it seems here, either. But we have a better understanding of who is behind the curtain here because we live here.
What you didn’t read in that NYT piece was that the “evidence” leaked to the author, Joshua Hammer, was never introduced at the trial, nor was the appropriate skepticism applied to the word of an autocratic government that says and does literally anything to silence its critics. The piece was just awful and reflected a real 1990s mentality of Paul Kagame as the hero of the genocide. He turned out to be a monster.
Now Mr Zoellner claims the New York Times story is false. If there is proof that the story is wrong please provide links. Or, provide proof of New York Times correction/retraction. Also there is an American Academic Michelle Martin who testified about Rusesabagina’s activities. So now she’s a liar ?
The narrative being presented here is a total sham. There are other stories about Rusesabagina’s shady activities. Please do your research.
Please do your own research.
https://cfj.org/news_posts/hotel-rwanda-proceedings-were-a-show-trial/
Mr Zoellner, every time i point to evidence in a GERMAN court, you blithely point to proceedings in a Rwandan court. You are creating a false argument.
That evidence in a German court has credibility you cannot shake and points to support of terrorism.
Mr. Zoellner, you are assuming that the NYT piece was my sole source for information. It wasn’t even close. I found it, overall, hard to follow (surprisingly poorly written for a NYT article). So I did my own research, which shed a lot more light than either your piece here or the NYT piece. Since you were quoted in the NYT piece, I presume you are intimately familiar with its contents. And if you read my comments, you would know that I gathered far more information for myself than the NYT piece, which was simply a jumping-off point for me. You’re not dealing with your average commenters, here. There are commenters on MinnPost who could (and maybe should?) be writing their own well-researched pieces, but don’t because they prefer the banter. You might believe every word of your article here, but given that 3 very different commenters on here find your opinion wanting, you might spend some time reassessing your points. They don’t hold up to the scrutiny of several commenters that often otherwise disagree (quite vehemently, sometimes). MinnPost is where you go to peer review your opinions. 😉
I’m confused as to what is “wanting” here, Rachel. The NYTM piece was founded on prosecution leaks from a totalitarian regime which ruthlessly crushes and kills its critics. The equivalent would be assigning complete truth to what came out of the mouth of one of Stalin’s judges before he sentenced someone to the gulags. In fact, the information was so shaky it was not even presented in the kangaroo trial that occurs several months after the NYTM piece ran. You might also contrast the way Joshua Hammer (who has known and venerated Paul Kagame for 25 years) wrote his piece compared to the tone of the NYT’s daily coverage of the trial by Abdi Latif Dahir. I’ll let you Google it and judge for yourself. I’m also not inclined to change my view on a subject only because three commenters on MinnPost (as much as I love it) don’t happen to agree with me. And for that matter, what points are “wanting”? Think it’s okay that Omar is saying that an accusation from a dictator is all the police need to torture you and shred your civil rights? That’s the heart of the argument.
” The NYTM piece was founded on prosecution leaks from a totalitarian regime which ruthlessly crushes and kills its critic”
The wiretap that pointed Paul Rusesabagina’s support of terrorism came from German intelligence in a German court room. Discard / discredit the Rwanda trial all you wish. You cannot shake this damning piece of evidence.
The Rwanda trial is being used as a straw man argument on this forum. Each time point to the German intelligence evidence, it is blithely ignored….
You know who else “ignored” the German “evidence”? The Rwandan prosecutors when they actually presented the laughably thin case against Rusesabagina. And that aside, you continue to avoid the central topic, Raj.
Let’s say for the sake of argument that he’s guilty of funding terrorism (he’s not, but stay with me). Does that justify kidnapping, torture, solitary confinement and denial of due process? Omar seems to think so. Do you agree with her — that all it takes is an accusation from a police agency for them to treat suspects that way?
Mr Zoellner, you can try to divert from the German evidence all you want. But, but, but evidence is still evidence. Unless you can prove that the German evidence was proven false, it is still evidence.
Even if i accept your premise to discount the Rwanda trial, that still does not negate the German evidence. That evidence points to terror links. And i repeat that was NEVER rebutted.
” all it takes is an accusation from a police agency” – Ummm, here we go again. You omit the fact that the accusation was presented in a German trial. Not just an accusation.
Why was the “German” “evidence” not introduced at his sham trial in Rwanda?
You seem to have a really low bar for justifying kidnapping and torture.
OK, let’s say he is guilty of funding terrorism… do YOU think that’s irrelevant? Do you think innocent civilians in Rwanda deserve to be attacked and killed by terrorists? Why is the life and well being of one guy more important to you than the Rwandan victims of terrorism? He’s alive and in prison… they’re dead. Omar is morally consistent in condemning terrorism and the murder of innocents regardless what kind of regime they live under. YOU’RE claiming that Rusesabagina’s life and well being are more important than those who were killed and terrorized by those he supported. So we have to ask, if Rusesabagina funded terrorism against Israeli’s would you file the same complaint against Omar? Omar’s moral imperative is to condemn terrorism, what’s yours? Terrorism is OK for some people but not for others?
This is a massive straw man argument. Defending one person’s right to a fair judicial process does not equate to “supporting terrorism.” Please.