[QUOTE]The February 27, 2019 performance of Mark Meadows, (R-NC 11th District) in [S]trying to discredit[/S] questioning Michael Cohen has IMO outdone Rep. Omar's abusive tactics in "questioning" Elliott Abrams.[/QUOTE]
Poor Elliot. What a sad situation that a powerful young woman of color should hold him to account for his blood-soaked past.

As to your outrage over her style, I submit that, to paraphrase Samuel Johnson,
Appeals to civility are the last refuge of the chronically uncivil.

Could you two tone it down for a while please? It's getting rather tedious and as a moderator I feel it's my duty to at leas skim through most posts of most threads.

[QUOTE=xilman;509793]Could you two tone it down for a while please? It's getting rather tedious and as a moderator I feel it's my duty to at leas skim through most posts of most threads.[/QUOTE]
Happily, if the consideration is reciprocated.

Guatemalan genocide
 

[URL]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guatemalan_genocide[/URL]
[QUOTE]The [B]Guatemalan genocide[/B], [B]Maya(n) genocide[/B],[URL="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guatemalan_genocide#cite_note-handbook-2"][2][/URL] or [B]Silent Holocaust[/B][URL="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guatemalan_genocide#cite_note-3"][3][/URL] refers to the massacre of [URL="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maya_peoples"]Maya[/URL] civilians during the [URL="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guatemala"]Guatemalan[/URL] military government's counterinsurgency operations. Massacres, forced disappearances, torture and summary executions of guerrillas and especially civilian collaborators at the hands of US-backed security forces had been widespread since 1965 and was a longstanding policy of the military regime, which US officials were aware of.[URL="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guatemalan_genocide#cite_note-4"][4][/URL][URL="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guatemalan_genocide#cite_note-Navarro-5"][5][/URL][URL="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guatemalan_genocide#cite_note-6"][6][/URL] A report from 1984 discussed "the murder of thousands by a military government that maintains its authority by terror."[URL="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guatemalan_genocide#cite_note-7"][7][/URL] [URL="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_Rights_Watch"]Human Rights Watch[/URL] has described "extraordinarily cruel" actions by the armed forces, mostly against unarmed civilians.[URL="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guatemalan_genocide#cite_note-hrw.org-8"][8][/URL]
[/QUOTE][QUOTE]An estimated 200,000 Guatemalans were killed during the [URL="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guatemalan_Civil_War"]Guatemalan Civil War[/URL] including at least 40,000 persons who "disappeared". 93% of civilian executions were carried out by government forces. Of the 42,275 individual cases of killing and "disappearances" documented by the Commission for Historical Clarification - La Comisión para el Esclarecimiento Histórico (CEH), 83% of the victims were Maya and 17% [URL="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ladino_people"]Ladino[/URL].[URL="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guatemalan_genocide#cite_note-GHCC-1"][1][/URL] A UN sponsored [URL="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_Clarification_Commission"]Commission for Historical Clarification[/URL] in 1999 concluded that a genocide had taken place at the hands of the US-backed Guatemalan army, and that US training of the officer corps in counterinsurgency techniques "had a significant bearing on human rights violations during the armed confrontation."[URL="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guatemalan_genocide#cite_note-Cooper-9"][9][/URL][URL="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guatemalan_genocide#cite_note-13"][13][/URL][URL="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guatemalan_genocide#cite_note-Navarro-5"][5][/URL][URL="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guatemalan_genocide#cite_note-14"][14][/URL][/QUOTE]See Also
[URL]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guatemalan_genocide#See_also[/URL]

[QUOTE=kladner;509860][URL]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guatemalan_genocide[/URL]
See Also
[URL]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guatemalan_genocide#See_also[/URL][/QUOTE]

I know someone who had a more personal view of what was going on in Guatemala, well before Elliott Abrams was on the scene. He (or she) was involved in a group making efforts to teach people in small rural communities methods of improving sanitation etc. in order to reduce the incidence of various diseases and parasites.

Guatemalan soldiers would show up, and tell the group to leave, because if they weren't gone by the next day, they would all be shot. It didn't matter exactly [i]what[/i] they were doing, you see, because they were [i]organizing[/i] the villagers. The group would return to continue their efforts year after year and, each succeeding year, people they had worked with the year before were no longer there...

I was reminded of this by an occurrence during the Reagan Administration. An American had been working in Nicaragua, showing farmers how to do small hydro projects... [i]Wait[/i] a minute, this is the Information Age! <google google>

Ahh, there it is! Yes, the whole sad story is there, pretty much as I remember it, with the details gone hazy in my memory springing back into sharp focus, in a Wikipedia page about the man, whose name was [url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ben_Linder]Ben Linder[/url]. It includes a mention of your favorite [i][b]bête noire[/b][/i] Elliott Abrams, and abuse of a Congressional witness by Connie Mack, R-FL that still makes my blood boil.

Engage brain before putting mouth in gear...
 

Ilhan Omar (D-MN) has put her foot in it again. (My emphasis on what's got folks so riled up) [quote]I want to talk about the political influence in this country [i][b]that says it is okay for people to push for allegiance to a foreign country[/b][/i]. I want to ask, why is it okay for me to talk about the influence of the NRA, or fossil fuel industries or Big Pharma, and not talk about a powerful lobbying group that is influencing policy?[/quote]No problem with that second sentence, but "allegiance to a foreign country" -- that's bad.

:soapbox:

[QUOTE=Dr Sardonicus;509929]Ilhan Omar (D-MN) has put her foot in it again. (My emphasis on what's got folks so riled up) No problem with that second sentence, but "allegiance to a foreign country" -- that's bad.[/QUOTE]

Is having one's constitutional rights curtailed to favor a particular foreign nation not a form of forced allegiance? And why do I get the sense that you would be on the opposite side of the argument were we talking about an "Anti-Russia Boycott Act" rather than an [url=https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/senate-bill/720]Anti-Israel[/url] one?

:popcorn:

[QUOTE=ewmayer;509932]And why do I get the sense that you would be on the opposite side of the argument were we talking about an "Anti-Russia Boycott Act" rather than an [url=https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/senate-bill/720]Anti-Israel[/url] one?[/QUOTE]I'll assume you're merely being rhetorical and let it ride. But, speaking of rhetoric, it isn't difficult to criticize the Israel Anti-Boycott act without overblown rhetoric like "allegiance to a foreign country." Heck, [i]I'll[/i] give it a go:

[quote]I remind my American brothers and sisters, that the brave men and women who helped gain this country's independence from allegiance to the British Crown, used the peaceful means of boycott as a protest against taxation before being pushed onto the road to war.

In more recent times, a boycott of grapes helped gain some measure of justice for hard-pressed farm workers. The boycott is recognized as an exercise of protected free speech. When our own government encourages the efforts of States to stifle this form of expression as a protest against injustice perpetrated by a foreign government, what does it say about our nation's commitment to liberty? And what of the dedication of the Constitution to establish justice?

For, no cause but an unjust one, would have our government use its powers to silence dissent. The Israel Anti-Boycott Act must be repealed![/quote]

Perhaps Rep. Omar was provoked by [url=https://www.grandforksherald.com/news/government-and-politics/4579286-poster-linking-rep-ilhan-omar-911-sparks-outrage-injuries-wva]this[/url]. Shame on the R's, and shame on them again for refusing to forthrightly disown it. Doesn't excuse her inflammatory rhetoric, though.

[QUOTE=xilman;509793]Could you two tone it down for a while please? It's getting rather tedious and as a moderator I feel it's my duty to at leas skim through most posts of most threads.[/QUOTE]I'll certainly try to avoid using unduly provocative language like "stupid"-related terms. I do [i]not[/i] make this effort contingent on "reciprocation." That sort of equivocation raises a red flag, as does excusing incivility on the part of others when one feels the victim "deserves it."

I would say that incivility, or at least being deliberately provocative, is the last refuge of someone whose attempts at rational argument have been ignored, or answered with personal abuse. But that's no excuse. I will endeavor to refrain from rising to the bait, and try to do better.

I would also say that incivility is the [i]first[/i] refuge of someone who hasn't got a good argument. Misrepresenting the disapproval of inflammatory rhetoric as taking the opposing position on an issue, [i]ad hominems[/i], deliberate personal disrespect, or personally demeaning insults, are no substitutes either for clarifying what one means, or for good arguments. There's a popular quotation, apparently from [i]Downton Abbey[/i], "Vulgarity is no substitute for wit." I know that [i]Il Duce[/i] might argue the contrary, and could, if he actually knows it, counter with the maxim that you can't argue with success. But I would hope the members of this Forum, including Yours Truly, will aim higher.