This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
![]() | This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | The
contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people, which has been
designated as a contentious topic. Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page. |
![]() | The
contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to articles about
living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles, which has been
designated as a contentious topic. Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page. |
![]() | Warning: active arbitration remedies The contentious topics procedure applies to this article. Parts of this article relate to the Arab–Israeli conflict, which is a contentious topic. Furthermore, the following rules apply when editing the parts of the page related to the contentious topic:
Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page. If it is unclear which parts of the page are related to this contentious topic, the content in question should be marked within the wiki text by an invisible comment. If no comment is present, please ask an administrator for assistance. If in doubt it is better to assume that the content is covered.
|
![]() |
Daily pageviews of this article
A graph should have been displayed here but
graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at
pageviews.wmcloud.org |
|
||
This page has archives. Sections older than 390 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 5 sections are present. |
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Could you add {{ Wikiquote}} to external links section please? A23423413 ( talk) 14:23, 23 December 2022 (UTC)
Michigan's 12th does not appear to cover ANY of downriver, let alone "much of" downriver. 72.196.126.193 ( talk) 20:35, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Tkaib is an honorary member of Zeta Phi Beta Sorority, Incorporate as of September 19, 2023. 2603:6081:6344:1B00:DFB:7210:762F:BA77 ( talk) 01:00, 23 September 2023 (UTC)
There are now eight representatives in The Squad, not six. Can someone who can edit this page please update the second paragraph? 206.204.236.102 ( talk) 17:27, 15 October 2023 (UTC)
Can we NOT add that her and members of the squad are considered far left individuals? 2603:8080:B102:489A:24E1:9CE7:3C16:58CE ( talk) 06:16, 20 October 2023 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
At the end of the section on the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict, this press report should be added, “ Democratic Rep. Rashida Tlaib, of Michigan, refused to apologize Wednesday for saying a day earlier that Israel is to blame for the hospital explosion that day in Gaza, despite evidence from the U.S. defense department that the blast was likely caused by an errant projectile from Palestinian Islamic Jihad”. 2601:401:4280:29E0:A1A5:53A3:D909:4E66 ( talk) 12:19, 20 October 2023 (UTC)
How about this https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/tlaib-refuses-apologize-blaming-israel-gaza-hospital-blast/story?id=104085727 207.180.140.243 ( talk) 14:16, 15 November 2023 (UTC)
Hi, @ ThaddeusSholto:. Why did you revert the recent edits I made? Tlaib's opposition to President Trump is not particularly notable for a Democratic politician. (Essentially all Democrats supported both.)
Her opposition to the Biden administration is (in my mind) much more notable for inclusion in the lead. KlayCax ( talk) 16:52, 20 October 2023 (UTC)
Tlaib, a Palestinian American who does not believe Israel should exist as a Jewish state...
The word widely in relation to the perception of the phrase "from the river to the sea" comes from a Hakeem Jeffries quote and should not be posited as fact as it currently is in the wording of this article. -- 203.211.79.215 ( talk) 04:31, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
Regarded by Israel, and most not terrorist countries. 207.180.140.243 ( talk) 14:17, 15 November 2023 (UTC)
The recent censure (November 7th, 23), that passed in the house must be added to her political part of the profile... 2601:400:C180:670:5171:E5FF:7BE8:973B ( talk) 04:43, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
The claim that "From the river to the sea" is a reference to a one state solution is false and misleading.
There are two in known suggested solutions to the current situation with regard to the Israel and Palestinian conflict.
1) Two state solution references the case where two states will reside aide by side, one Israeli and another Palestinian, with well defined borders.
2) One state solution references the case where Israelis and Palestinians will live within Israel as a single state.
The saying "From the river to the sea" does in fact not reference any of the aforementioned suggested solutions but rather is a genocidal saying demonstrating the intent of the Hamas terrorist organization to eradicate the state of Israel and kill all Jewish citizens, thus eliminating their presence on all geographical locations from the Jordan river and to the Mediterranean sea, equating to all territories that are part of the Israeli sovereign state.
This is neither a two or one state solution but rather part of the murderous charter of the Hamas that can be easily looked up.
Stating that this has any relation to any solution is misleading, wrong and is sugarcoating a genocidal claim.
It is offensive and no different and analogous to claiming that "Arbeit Macht Frei" (in German "work shall set you free" and famously hung in the entrance to Auschwitz) is a reference to saving income for old age. 2A0D:6FC0:1DFB:3700:D328:79BB:8DB7:93EE ( talk) 11:04, 18 November 2023 (UTC)
Currently there is no mention of rep. Tlaib's comments or resolutions related to the recognition of the Nakba. I had initally added the follwing addition towards her position under the 'Israel-Palestine' subheading however it was reverted due to some questions on the neutrality of sources. This is of course totally valid and I understand why it was done. That being said, I believe her position regarding the Nakba is both relevant from a political view, as her attempt to provide recognition to it is the first in U.S. history, and as personal, as it is clearly a leading personal reason behind her positions relating to the conflict. I had attempted to have a variety of perspectives among the sources used but I just wanted to verify if these sources may be leading in any way that takes away from the factual content behind her positions:
In 2022 and 2023, Tlaib introduced resolutions aimed at recognizing the
Nakba with the proposal stating that "A just and lasting peace cannot be established without addressing the Nakba and remedying its injustices towards the Palestinian people" while endorsing the
Palestinian right of return.
[1]
[2]
[3] The introduction of the resolution resulted in sharp rebukes by fellow congress members such as
Senators
Rosen and
Kennedy who respectively stated that the "establishment of the only Jewish state a ‘catastrophe’ is deeply offensive" and that "The Capitol grounds should not be a pedestal to legitimize anti-Semitic bigotry".
[4] Tlaib responded to criticism against her introduction of the resolution by acknowledging organizations such as
Amnesty International and
Human Rights Watch as having concluded a system of
Aparthaid as having been imposed on Palestinians.
[5]
LosPajaros (
talk)
03:37, 23 December 2023 (UTC)
References
After I made this January 5 edit, the lead included the following paragraph: "Tlaib was censured by the House of Representatives on November 7, 2023. The House's censure resolution indicated that Tlaib had put forth false narratives about the October 2023 Hamas terror attack on Israel and had expressed support for the destruction of Israel; Tlaib claimed that the resolution contained falsehoods".
After a series of major edits by Historyday01, the lead now includes only one sentence about the censure, which reads: "The Republican-controlled House of Representatives censured Tlaib on November 7, 2023".
I believe that the current sentence fails to provide due weight in the lead to Tlaib's House censure, creates an NPOV problem, and also unnecessarily forces readers into the body of the article to find out why Tlaib was censured. Rather than getting into an edit war, I am raising the issue here. What do other editors think? MonMothma ( talk) 19:53, 6 January 2024 (UTC)
"The Republican-controlled House of Representatives censured Tlaib for her views on the 2023 Israel–Hamas war, on November 7, 2023; Tlaib claimed that the resolution contained falsehoods."
Tlaib has called for an end to U.S. aid to Israel and supports the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions campaign in order to lead to a one-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Her comments on the conflict led to a 2023 censuring by the House of Representatives.
On January 1, I added content describing Tlaib as "far-left". For this proposition, I cited The New York Times, Politico, and The Hill. Historyday01 and Plumber have each reverted this edit. While Plumber offered no justification for the removal, Historyday01 contends that the term is both "not relevant" and a violation of WP:NPOV. I disagree on both counts. Descriptions of a political figure's ideology are highly relevant to that political figure's Wikipedia page, especially in sections on that figure's political positions. As to NPOV, I merely used the same adjective that has been used by multiple reliable sources. I welcome the insights of other editors on whether this adjective should be included. MonMothma ( talk) 20:25, 6 January 2024 (UTC)
We should not be overmuch concerned about whether or not the term far-left is applied to Tlaib. Since her most prominent current political stance—a ceasefire in Gaza—is
supported by 66% of Americans and 80% of Democrats, it did feel inappropriate. Are 80% of Democrats far-left? Probably not.
Far more important is the removal of her accusation that Joe Biden supported the genocide of the Palestinian people. A sitting member of Congress calling the president of their own party a genocidaire is unprecedented in the history of the United States. It is easily the most prominent moment of Tlaib's entire career. Tlaib's statements belongs in the lede but was removed without explanation. --
Plumber (
talk)
01:10, 7 January 2024 (UTC)
Supporters and opponents of Tlaib posted messages on social media. Opponents included Representatives Marsha Blackburn and Brad Schneider. Blackburn said that Tlaib should "want freedom for Palestinians, which starts with eradicating Hamas." Schneider stated that although Tlaib's censure resolution was not "perfect" in form or language, he claimed that she used "inflammatory language" that "amplifies Hamas propaganda”, and said that the resolution was the "only vehicle...to formally rebuke the dangerous disinformation and aspersions" by Tlaib. [1] Supporters included MuslimGirl.com founder Amani Al-Khatahtbeh, Justice Democrats spokesperson Usamah Andrabi, Jewish Currents editor-at-large Peter Beinart and Representatives Cori Bush, Ilhan Omar, and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. Some thanked Tlaib or encouraged people to donate to her re-election campaign, while others called out the U.S. Congress for not endorsing a ceasefire, criticized lack of condemnation for Palestinian casualties, or called the censure "shameful" and "disgusting." [1]
References
Let's not elaborate on the censure in the lede if we are not going to elaborate on her responses to the censure. Best way is to keep it concise and the details for the body. Makeandtoss ( talk) 10:45, 12 January 2024 (UTC)
Why is it that after every listed position Tlaib has made about Israel, an ADL “criticism” is listed? Are the ADL an unbiased organization? Obviously not, and mentioning them after every Tlaib stance constantly reinforces this “antisemitic” opinion into the reader’s mind. MoMoChohan ( talk) 22:52, 17 February 2024 (UTC)
Given the recent development at WP:RSPADL the constant reference to the ADL w/r/t Tlaib's positions on Israel/Palestine and antisemitism is no longer a simple issue of NPOV as previously treated. This page is in need of major revisions. andrew.robbins ( talk) 13:55, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
![]() | This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | The
contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people, which has been
designated as a contentious topic. Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page. |
![]() | The
contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to articles about
living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles, which has been
designated as a contentious topic. Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page. |
![]() | Warning: active arbitration remedies The contentious topics procedure applies to this article. Parts of this article relate to the Arab–Israeli conflict, which is a contentious topic. Furthermore, the following rules apply when editing the parts of the page related to the contentious topic:
Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page. If it is unclear which parts of the page are related to this contentious topic, the content in question should be marked within the wiki text by an invisible comment. If no comment is present, please ask an administrator for assistance. If in doubt it is better to assume that the content is covered.
|
![]() |
Daily pageviews of this article
A graph should have been displayed here but
graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at
pageviews.wmcloud.org |
|
||
This page has archives. Sections older than 390 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 5 sections are present. |
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Could you add {{ Wikiquote}} to external links section please? A23423413 ( talk) 14:23, 23 December 2022 (UTC)
Michigan's 12th does not appear to cover ANY of downriver, let alone "much of" downriver. 72.196.126.193 ( talk) 20:35, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Tkaib is an honorary member of Zeta Phi Beta Sorority, Incorporate as of September 19, 2023. 2603:6081:6344:1B00:DFB:7210:762F:BA77 ( talk) 01:00, 23 September 2023 (UTC)
There are now eight representatives in The Squad, not six. Can someone who can edit this page please update the second paragraph? 206.204.236.102 ( talk) 17:27, 15 October 2023 (UTC)
Can we NOT add that her and members of the squad are considered far left individuals? 2603:8080:B102:489A:24E1:9CE7:3C16:58CE ( talk) 06:16, 20 October 2023 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
At the end of the section on the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict, this press report should be added, “ Democratic Rep. Rashida Tlaib, of Michigan, refused to apologize Wednesday for saying a day earlier that Israel is to blame for the hospital explosion that day in Gaza, despite evidence from the U.S. defense department that the blast was likely caused by an errant projectile from Palestinian Islamic Jihad”. 2601:401:4280:29E0:A1A5:53A3:D909:4E66 ( talk) 12:19, 20 October 2023 (UTC)
How about this https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/tlaib-refuses-apologize-blaming-israel-gaza-hospital-blast/story?id=104085727 207.180.140.243 ( talk) 14:16, 15 November 2023 (UTC)
Hi, @ ThaddeusSholto:. Why did you revert the recent edits I made? Tlaib's opposition to President Trump is not particularly notable for a Democratic politician. (Essentially all Democrats supported both.)
Her opposition to the Biden administration is (in my mind) much more notable for inclusion in the lead. KlayCax ( talk) 16:52, 20 October 2023 (UTC)
Tlaib, a Palestinian American who does not believe Israel should exist as a Jewish state...
The word widely in relation to the perception of the phrase "from the river to the sea" comes from a Hakeem Jeffries quote and should not be posited as fact as it currently is in the wording of this article. -- 203.211.79.215 ( talk) 04:31, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
Regarded by Israel, and most not terrorist countries. 207.180.140.243 ( talk) 14:17, 15 November 2023 (UTC)
The recent censure (November 7th, 23), that passed in the house must be added to her political part of the profile... 2601:400:C180:670:5171:E5FF:7BE8:973B ( talk) 04:43, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
The claim that "From the river to the sea" is a reference to a one state solution is false and misleading.
There are two in known suggested solutions to the current situation with regard to the Israel and Palestinian conflict.
1) Two state solution references the case where two states will reside aide by side, one Israeli and another Palestinian, with well defined borders.
2) One state solution references the case where Israelis and Palestinians will live within Israel as a single state.
The saying "From the river to the sea" does in fact not reference any of the aforementioned suggested solutions but rather is a genocidal saying demonstrating the intent of the Hamas terrorist organization to eradicate the state of Israel and kill all Jewish citizens, thus eliminating their presence on all geographical locations from the Jordan river and to the Mediterranean sea, equating to all territories that are part of the Israeli sovereign state.
This is neither a two or one state solution but rather part of the murderous charter of the Hamas that can be easily looked up.
Stating that this has any relation to any solution is misleading, wrong and is sugarcoating a genocidal claim.
It is offensive and no different and analogous to claiming that "Arbeit Macht Frei" (in German "work shall set you free" and famously hung in the entrance to Auschwitz) is a reference to saving income for old age. 2A0D:6FC0:1DFB:3700:D328:79BB:8DB7:93EE ( talk) 11:04, 18 November 2023 (UTC)
Currently there is no mention of rep. Tlaib's comments or resolutions related to the recognition of the Nakba. I had initally added the follwing addition towards her position under the 'Israel-Palestine' subheading however it was reverted due to some questions on the neutrality of sources. This is of course totally valid and I understand why it was done. That being said, I believe her position regarding the Nakba is both relevant from a political view, as her attempt to provide recognition to it is the first in U.S. history, and as personal, as it is clearly a leading personal reason behind her positions relating to the conflict. I had attempted to have a variety of perspectives among the sources used but I just wanted to verify if these sources may be leading in any way that takes away from the factual content behind her positions:
In 2022 and 2023, Tlaib introduced resolutions aimed at recognizing the
Nakba with the proposal stating that "A just and lasting peace cannot be established without addressing the Nakba and remedying its injustices towards the Palestinian people" while endorsing the
Palestinian right of return.
[1]
[2]
[3] The introduction of the resolution resulted in sharp rebukes by fellow congress members such as
Senators
Rosen and
Kennedy who respectively stated that the "establishment of the only Jewish state a ‘catastrophe’ is deeply offensive" and that "The Capitol grounds should not be a pedestal to legitimize anti-Semitic bigotry".
[4] Tlaib responded to criticism against her introduction of the resolution by acknowledging organizations such as
Amnesty International and
Human Rights Watch as having concluded a system of
Aparthaid as having been imposed on Palestinians.
[5]
LosPajaros (
talk)
03:37, 23 December 2023 (UTC)
References
After I made this January 5 edit, the lead included the following paragraph: "Tlaib was censured by the House of Representatives on November 7, 2023. The House's censure resolution indicated that Tlaib had put forth false narratives about the October 2023 Hamas terror attack on Israel and had expressed support for the destruction of Israel; Tlaib claimed that the resolution contained falsehoods".
After a series of major edits by Historyday01, the lead now includes only one sentence about the censure, which reads: "The Republican-controlled House of Representatives censured Tlaib on November 7, 2023".
I believe that the current sentence fails to provide due weight in the lead to Tlaib's House censure, creates an NPOV problem, and also unnecessarily forces readers into the body of the article to find out why Tlaib was censured. Rather than getting into an edit war, I am raising the issue here. What do other editors think? MonMothma ( talk) 19:53, 6 January 2024 (UTC)
"The Republican-controlled House of Representatives censured Tlaib for her views on the 2023 Israel–Hamas war, on November 7, 2023; Tlaib claimed that the resolution contained falsehoods."
Tlaib has called for an end to U.S. aid to Israel and supports the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions campaign in order to lead to a one-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Her comments on the conflict led to a 2023 censuring by the House of Representatives.
On January 1, I added content describing Tlaib as "far-left". For this proposition, I cited The New York Times, Politico, and The Hill. Historyday01 and Plumber have each reverted this edit. While Plumber offered no justification for the removal, Historyday01 contends that the term is both "not relevant" and a violation of WP:NPOV. I disagree on both counts. Descriptions of a political figure's ideology are highly relevant to that political figure's Wikipedia page, especially in sections on that figure's political positions. As to NPOV, I merely used the same adjective that has been used by multiple reliable sources. I welcome the insights of other editors on whether this adjective should be included. MonMothma ( talk) 20:25, 6 January 2024 (UTC)
We should not be overmuch concerned about whether or not the term far-left is applied to Tlaib. Since her most prominent current political stance—a ceasefire in Gaza—is
supported by 66% of Americans and 80% of Democrats, it did feel inappropriate. Are 80% of Democrats far-left? Probably not.
Far more important is the removal of her accusation that Joe Biden supported the genocide of the Palestinian people. A sitting member of Congress calling the president of their own party a genocidaire is unprecedented in the history of the United States. It is easily the most prominent moment of Tlaib's entire career. Tlaib's statements belongs in the lede but was removed without explanation. --
Plumber (
talk)
01:10, 7 January 2024 (UTC)
Supporters and opponents of Tlaib posted messages on social media. Opponents included Representatives Marsha Blackburn and Brad Schneider. Blackburn said that Tlaib should "want freedom for Palestinians, which starts with eradicating Hamas." Schneider stated that although Tlaib's censure resolution was not "perfect" in form or language, he claimed that she used "inflammatory language" that "amplifies Hamas propaganda”, and said that the resolution was the "only vehicle...to formally rebuke the dangerous disinformation and aspersions" by Tlaib. [1] Supporters included MuslimGirl.com founder Amani Al-Khatahtbeh, Justice Democrats spokesperson Usamah Andrabi, Jewish Currents editor-at-large Peter Beinart and Representatives Cori Bush, Ilhan Omar, and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. Some thanked Tlaib or encouraged people to donate to her re-election campaign, while others called out the U.S. Congress for not endorsing a ceasefire, criticized lack of condemnation for Palestinian casualties, or called the censure "shameful" and "disgusting." [1]
References
Let's not elaborate on the censure in the lede if we are not going to elaborate on her responses to the censure. Best way is to keep it concise and the details for the body. Makeandtoss ( talk) 10:45, 12 January 2024 (UTC)
Why is it that after every listed position Tlaib has made about Israel, an ADL “criticism” is listed? Are the ADL an unbiased organization? Obviously not, and mentioning them after every Tlaib stance constantly reinforces this “antisemitic” opinion into the reader’s mind. MoMoChohan ( talk) 22:52, 17 February 2024 (UTC)
Given the recent development at WP:RSPADL the constant reference to the ADL w/r/t Tlaib's positions on Israel/Palestine and antisemitism is no longer a simple issue of NPOV as previously treated. This page is in need of major revisions. andrew.robbins ( talk) 13:55, 21 June 2024 (UTC)