Congresswoman Ilhan Omar on Tuesday played a harrowing death threat recently left for her by voicemail, while imploring House Republican leaders to do more to tamp down "anti-Muslim hatred" in their ranks and "hold those who perpetuate it accountable."

Follow Israel Hayom on Facebook and Twitter

Omar, one of only a handful of Muslim members of Congress, has been the subject of repeated attacks by conservative pundits and some Republicans in Congress, which she says have led to an increase in the number of death threats she receives. The most recent instance came after a video of first-term Colorado Representative Lauren Boebert calling Omar a member of the "jihad squad" and likening her to a bomb-carrying terrorist went viral.

"When a sitting member of Congress calls a colleague a member of the 'jihad squad' and falsifies a story to suggest I will blow up the Capitol, it is not just an attack on me but on millions of American Muslims across the country," Omar said during a news conference Tuesday. "We cannot pretend this hate speech from leading politicians doesn't have real consequences."

Then Omar played the voicemail, laden with profanity, racial epithets and a threat to "take you off the face of the (expletive) earth," which she said was among hundreds of such messages she has reported since joining Congress. Omar said the voicemail was left for her after Boebert released another video on Monday attacking her.

In the grainy recording, a man can be heard saying, "You will not be living much longer, b——" while promising that "we the people are rising up." He also calls Omar a "traitor" and pledges that she will stand trial before a military tribunal.

Omar then concluded, "It is time for the Republican Party to actually do something to confront anti-Muslim hatred in its ranks and hold those who perpetuate it accountable."

Boebert's incendiary remarks are just the latest example of a GOP lawmaker making a personal attack against another member of Congress, an unsettling trend that has gone largely unchecked by House Republican leaders.

The chain of events was set in motion over a week ago when a video posted to Facebook showed Boebert speaking at an event and describing an interaction with Omar — an interaction Omar maintains never happened.

In the video, Boebert claims that a Capitol Police officer approached her with "fret on his face" shortly before she stepped aboard a House elevator and the doors closed.

"I look to my left and there she is — Ilhan Omar. And I said: 'Well, she doesn't have a backpack. We should be fine,'" Boebert says with a laugh.

Boebert's comment about Omar not wearing a backpack was an apparent reference to her not carrying a suicide bomb.

Reaction to the video was swift. Omar called on House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Republican Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy to "take appropriate action." But so far McCarthy, who is in line to become House speaker if Republicans retake the majority next year, has proven reluctant to police members of his caucus whose views are often closely aligned with the party's base.

Subscribe to Israel Hayom's daily newsletter and never miss our top stories!

Representative Andre Carson, who is also Muslim, said he is working with Democratic leadership on a House resolution that could address the issue.

Boebert initially took steps to ease the situation. Last week, she apologized "to anyone in the Muslim community I offended," but not directly to Omar.

But after declining to apologize directly to Omar during a tense phone call Monday, which Omar abruptly ended, Boebert again went on the attack.

"Rejecting an apology and hanging up on someone is part of cancel culture 101 and a pillar of the Democrat Party," Boebert said in an Instagram video.

So far, McCarthy is taking her side.

When asked Tuesday what he would do if Democrats tried to censure Boebert, McCarthy said: "After she apologized personally and publicly? I'd vote against it."

The post Ilhan Omar reveals death threat voicemail, calls for end of 'anti-Muslim hatred' appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.

Upcoming elections in the Netherlands and Germany in 2021 will test the strength of the radical right, which has a distinct vision of European identity. In contrast to those who view democratic values as essentially secular and universal, and not tied to specific cultural or religious roots, radical right parties typically say these values are anchored by the heritage of European or western civilization. And they claim that this heritage is being threatened by non-European cultures, particularly Islamic culture.

Research by Dr. Toby Greene of the Leonard Davis Institute for International Relations at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, into the international political world views of radical right parties reveals their widespread references to the "Judeo-Christian" roots of European values. The manifesto of the Alternative for Germany declares that the party:

"Opposes Islamic practice which is directed against our liberal-democratic constitutional order, our laws, and the Judeo-Christian and humanist foundations of our culture."

Follow Israel Hayom on Facebook and Twitter

Comparable claims can be found from Marine Le Pen in France and Nigel Farage in the UK.

What do these politicians mean by Judeo-Christian? This term's definition is fuzzy at best, and historical analysis shows that it has long been used and abused for political ends.

Though the Jewish roots of Christianity are clear, Jews were pariahs in pre-modern Christian Europe. As Europe gradually left behind the identity of "Christendom" from the 18th century onwards, efforts to make Jews a legitimate part of European society were a political struggle, resisted by religious conservatives and anti-Semites. In 19th-century Europe, Jews were still commonly grouped with Muslims as non-European "Semites" or "Orientals."

It was in mid-20th century America, especially after the Holocaust, that the idea of the west as Judeo-Christian gained wide acceptance. When President Dwight Eisenhower referred to the Judeo-Christian roots of "our form of government," he chose words that embraced different Christian denominations and Jews within a shared civic identity – one which contrasted with anti-Semitic and godless ideologies of fascism and communism.

This relatively benign use of the term – as an inclusive, lowest common denominator reference to the faith-based roots of western values – has since been applied by many mainstream European politicians.

But lately the term Judeo-Christian has been picked up by the radical right to serve a different political agenda. Their intent is seemingly to frame western values in a way that excludes Muslims, while at the same time distancing themselves from politically toxic associations with anti-Semitism.

Prior to his murder in 2002, Dutch anti-establishment politician Pim Fortyn was an early European adopter of this usage of the word Judeo-Christian. Exclusionary use of the word has spread as radical right politicians increasingly position themselves not just as defenders of their respective nations, but of European civilization. Radical right leaders, such as Dutch politician Geert Wilders, claim these are being threatened by mainstream politicians who are "promoting our Islamization" through multiculturalism and immigration.

Whereas historically the European far-right depicted Jews as a threat, many on today's radical Right claim to defend Jews against those they brand Europe's real anti-Semites: Muslims.

Subscribe to Israel Hayom's daily newsletter and never miss our top stories!

This remapping of Europe's cultural boundaries includes a change of view towards Israel. Until recently, Israel was commonly viewed negatively within radical right parties as an arm of malign Jewish and American power. Today, it is common for radical right parties to embrace Israel as Europe's frontline against radical Islam.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has at times aligned with this trend by framing Israel as the frontier of Judeo-Christian civilization against Islamist extremism. In 2017 he told European leaders: "We are part of the European culture … Europe ends in Israel."

The political scientist Samuel Huntington claimed in 1993 that a "clash of civilizations" was inevitable between Islam and the west. But his critics argue persuasively that civilizations evolve, and civilizational identities serve political agendas. Defining the west as Judeo-Christian, and in inevitable tension with Islam, is a clear political choice.

Many Muslims may face challenges reconciling their faith with pluralistic European society. But the faith of Muslims does not determine their attitude towards liberalism, just as the faith of Jews or Christians does not. If in doubt, watch how mayor of London and practicing Muslim, Sadiq Khan, celebrated Chanukah with London's Jews in Trafalgar Square.

European countries with growing Muslim minorities are facing challenges with radicalization. How politicians talk about European values in these places matters. The radical right claim that Europe's Judeo-Christian values are incompatible with Islam reinforces the parallel claim of Islamists, who seek to persuade Muslims that the west and Islam are inherently in conflict.

In the Arab world there are new attempts to counter this ideology and highlight commonality between western and Islamic traditions.

In September 2020, the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain signed historic peace agreements with Israel. These agreements are easily explained by strategic motivations, not least Arab concerns about the threat of Iran. But it was notable that the agreements were branded in religious-cultural terms as the "Abraham Accords."

This fits a wider agenda of the UAE, which announced plans in 2019 to build an interfaith Abrahamic Family House including monumental church, mosque and synagogue buildings. The country is choosing to emphasize cultural commonality between Judaism, Christianity and Islam, symbolized by Abraham who is revered by all three faiths.

It no doubt hopes this will boost their image in the west. But the move also counters the Islamist idea that the west and its culture is toxic to Islam, a claim that undermines the legitimacy of Gulf leaders who depend on US support and seek closer ties with Israel.

Framing Jews, Christians and Muslims as part of an Abrahamic family is no less a political choice than framing Judeo-Christian and Islamic civilizations as being in conflict.

But Arab attempts to build an Abrahamic narrative may challenge not only the anti-western agenda of Islamist extremists, but also European politicians who frame Muslims as inherently anti-western, anti-Semitic and threatening. It may present an opportunity to Europeans seeking to strengthen inclusive and pluralistic narratives of western identity, and counter Islamist radicalization.

This article originally appeared in The Conversation.

The post 'Abrahamic' instead of 'Judeo-Christian' appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.