Their argument has been that by mentioning that Omar seems to water down terrorism by comparing Israel and America to Hamas and the Taliban, AIPAC is unfairly linking Omar with terrorism itself.
Obviously, AIPAC's ad didn't go that far. If they felt that she was a terrorist, the tagline "Condemn terrorists, not America" wouldn't make much sense.
There is a good reason why Omar's anti-Israel supporters want to change the argument from what Omar actually has said to identity politics, where a Muslim woman of color is untouchable and any criticism is twisted into Islamophobia, misogyny, racism and incitement.
However, the record shows that during the short time Omar was in the Minnesota Senate she consistently chose to defend and support terrorists.
As soon as Omar was elected in November 2016, before she actually took office as a state senator, Omar wrote a letter to Judge Michael Brown asking for leniency for 9 nine Somali men facing sentencing for trying to join ISIS.
In her letter, Omar wrote that the men do not deserve long sentences in prison, as this would destroy their lives. She suggested instead a rehabilitation program, saying “the desire to commit violence is not inherent to people — it is the consequence for alienation.”
However, Judge Brown had already tried a deradicalization program for at least one of the men, placing him in a halfway house. He violated the terms of parole and was sent back to prison.
Either Omar was not aware of this - which is unlikely, since the Somali community in Minnesota is tight-knit - or she tried to use her influence to release nine men who intended to join ISIS.
In April, 2017, Omar showed with her own vote that she supported terrorists.
In 2015, terrorist Syed Rizwan Farook verified his life insurance policy was up to date before going on a shooting rampage that killed 14 people in San Bernardino, California. He was shot dead by police at the scene. Farook's mother attempted to get the insurance payout
The Minnesota Senate introduced legislation to close any loopholes that would allow insurance companies to pay for people killed while performing terrorist acts.
There were only two votes against that bill. One was by John Lesch, who described his concern about a theoretical situation where insurance companies could decide that a borderline case was terrorism to avoid a payout. He felt there should be a conviction in court making that determination. However, Lesch said, “Terrorists should not be able to send life insurance benefits to beneficiaries based on bad faith recent policy purchases. I think we can all agree on that.”
The other person who voted against this bill was Ilhan Omar.
Unlike Lesch, she refused to give a reason for her vote. Unlike Lesch, she never said that she was against life insurance benefits for terrorists.
These two examples in Omar's record show a pattern of support for Muslim terrorists.
For some reason, the media doesn't talk about Omar's record as a state senator supporting terror, but anything she says nowadays as a member of Congress that minimizes international terrorism must be seen through the lens of her existing record. That record is damning.
If anything, AIPAC's ads do not go far enough.
She may not be a terrorist herself, but Ilhan Omar has a consistent record of using her political position to stand on the side of terrorists. People who support her support that agenda.
