« GOP Leader Expects Goolsbee and Rouse to be Confirmed This Week | Home | Legal Expert: Minnesota Court Likely To Rule By End of Month -- For Franken »
Both Surprising and Subtle
Hmmm? Where would Chuck Schumer come down on the withdrawal of Chas Freeman? In the shy and retiring style which Brooklynites and all New Yorkers know so well, the Senior Senator declared:
Charles Freeman was the wrong guy for this position. His statements against Israel were way over the top and severely out of step with the administration. I repeatedly urged the White House to reject him, and I am glad they did the right thing.
I will confess to being a total agnostic on Freeman's appointment to the National Intelligence Council. My friend James Fallows made a good case for him as did my boss, Josh Marshall. My former New Republic colleague and friend, Jonathan Chait, made the case against him here. All are pretty thoughtful looks at the guy, unlike Schumer's I-told-you-so.
Advertisement
Josh
Matt
Eric
Score one for the Isreali lobby!
March 10, 2009 6:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
a total disgrace that obama caved in on this.
confirmation that he can indeed be pushed around.
and no one can any longer argue that israel and its shills dont run americas foreign policy.
but some of us knew it all along.
is obama a weak coward?
March 10, 2009 6:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
There's no evidence that Obama "caved" on this. Freeman may have simply grown tired of getting trashed. The attacks take a toll on individuals and their families and friends. Freeman probably never anticipated that he would be skewered primarily for "contrarian" (but not radical) views on Israel.
March 10, 2009 6:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
Freeman probably never anticipated that he would be skewered primarily for "contrarian" (but not radical) views on Israel.
If Freeman didn't that coming he was the wrong guy for the job.
March 10, 2009 8:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
Don't disagree with that, but at the same time I hate to see the Israel lobby running our government.
March 11, 2009 12:57 AM | Reply | Permalink
It's extremely unlikely that President Obama was aware of Freeman's positions on Israel when he was appointed by Dennis Blair (he certainly wasn't well known outside rarefied policy circles). Obama has shown many times that he is a friend of Israel, including Israel's right to defend itself against attack, and he wouldn't have supported an appointment of someone who has spoken about Israel the way Freeman has. Since his advisors didn't adequately vet the appointment, he is now left with an embarrassment - what else is new? It's not the first time . . .
March 10, 2009 7:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
The statement "israel and its shills run americas foreign policy" [sic] is deeply paranoid and is akin to statements being made by rabid anti-Semites. I know that you are not an anti-Semite, but out of respect to the Jewish members of our community and out of respect for our progressive values, would you please watch how you express yourself?
Thank you in advance.
March 10, 2009 7:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
The statement "is deeply paranoid and is akin to statements being made by rabid anti-Semites. " is deeply paranoid and is akin to statements being made by Israel and its shills. How about we avoid the "anti-semite" and "Israeli shill" terminology.
March 10, 2009 8:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
I didn't use the word Israel Shill, and never have.
I will only use the word anti-Semite when someone makes a statement that sounds like it is a direct quote from Mein Kampf. We can all do better than that in the progressive community - we need to have respect for each other, including our Jewish neighbors and friends, who are also created in the image of God.
March 10, 2009 8:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
Then how about keeping God and his image out of this as well?
March 10, 2009 10:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well I didn't expect the Spanish Inquisition...
March 10, 2009 10:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
You mean our Jewish neighbors in Israel? Come on, it's a separate country. Should we back the IRA because there are Irish Catholics living in the USA?
March 11, 2009 12:59 AM | Reply | Permalink
We did for years.
March 11, 2009 8:39 AM | Reply | Permalink
SFCWallace,
who is "we"?
Are you equating the United States Government's backing of Israel to private entities in the US backing of the IRA?
March 11, 2009 10:30 AM | Reply | Permalink
AIPAC today. AIPAC tomorrow. And apartheid forever!!!
Yay, 4-8 more years of Israeli license to keep expanding settlements. No end in sight to Israelis disproportionately attacking Palestinians with hi-tech weapons in the world's largest open-air prison.
March 10, 2009 6:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
Right On
March 10, 2009 6:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
I guess it just makes sense to run every Middle East policy through IPAC so they can get Israels blessing. Let's just turn the Board over to them. Obama and Clinton seem in Israels camp in any case, so precooked intell. is no problem.
March 10, 2009 6:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
When Israel has been attacked, have you ever criticized its attackers?
Your invective against Israel seems one-sided and ugly.
March 10, 2009 7:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
Israel's treatment of the Palestinians is the true definition of ugly. In the recent "war" with Gaza (more like a one-sided slaughter), it was like, what, 1300 to 3 deaths. That's ugly. Using tanks and jets against souped up bottle rockets and guns from WWI. It's not fair, to say the least.
I have come to believe that the majority in Israel and their most gung-ho supporters around the world are completely cool with the status quo and have no interest in a one-state nor a two-state solution. Without appropriate external pressure, we'll be exactly where we are in another 40 years, except Israelis will slaughter Gazans with lasers fired from satellites at that time, and Palestinians will still be fighting back with slingshots and rudimentary bottle rockets.
You can blame it on the Palestinians all you want, but that's simply BS. It's like blaming the slave for their slavery because they don't "act right" in the slavemaster's mind.
March 10, 2009 8:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
here's another try at that slingshot link:
http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2009/03/07/18575462.php#18575480
March 10, 2009 8:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
Ugly is bad, no question. You seem to be saying one-sided is bad, too.
You're not one-sided, though, right? Not you?
March 10, 2009 9:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
ps. did anyone catch that the AIPAC line I used above was a play on lines from a speech made by George Wallace in 1963?
". . . and I say . . . segregation today . . . segregation tomorrow . . . segregation forever"
yee-haw
March 10, 2009 8:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
You can't even mention AIPAC on Huffpo. I think that Israel has become the fourth branch of our government.
March 10, 2009 10:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
I thought the media was the 4th branch, so that'll make Israel the 5th.
We need to revise the Constitution I think, to accommodate all these new branches!
March 11, 2009 1:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
I hope Obama picks someone else who criticizes Israel but is "cleaner" than Freeman was. Let's be honest, while his anti-Israel stance should be applauded, there were other factors which made him less appealing to human rights activists.
March 10, 2009 6:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
I know what you mean, but I wouldn't characterize Freeman as "anti-Israel". If the only way you can be pro-Israel is to applaud anything Israel does, then many people would be considered anti-Israel.
That is, if they had the courage to actually express any dissatisfaction Israel.
March 10, 2009 6:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
i think if you support labor, you're also anti-israel.
March 10, 2009 6:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
correction: if you support labor, you're an anti-semite.
March 10, 2009 6:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
...rabid Nazi?
March 11, 2009 8:41 AM | Reply | Permalink
Why do you hope that Obama chooses someone who criticizes Israel?
Did you mean to say "someone who fairly assesses the situation in the Middle East, and criticizes Israel when justified and the Palestinians when justified"?
I'm sorry to be rewriting your material, but I can't imagine any fair-minded person wanting an unthinking critic of Israel to be appointed.
March 10, 2009 7:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
Be careful to not misrepresent his views as you rewrite his material; Calchala did not refer to any "unthinking critic of Israel".
March 10, 2009 8:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
No, but he said he wants a critic of Israel appointed, where I would expect him to want someone who fairly assesses the situation and criticizes whoever deserves criticism at the time.
That's all I meant, but thanks for calling it to my attention to clarify.
March 10, 2009 8:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
For somebody dishing out little-bo-beep lectures about showing respect, you're pretty cavalier with libel like "unthinking." Seventeen senior officials including Thomas Pickering stood up for this guy.
You might be able to make people on here fear you with your busy, free-smearing libel brush. But it would be a different thing to obtain respect, and to have people take you seriously.
March 10, 2009 8:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
P.C. is like a big talking marshmallow or something.
-perhaps gathering blather for some other interest.
March 10, 2009 10:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm likin' that imagery!
March 11, 2009 12:05 AM | Reply | Permalink
I agree with your proposition for "someone who fairly assesses the situation in the Middle East, and criticizes Israel when justified and the Palestinians when justified" to hold the position.
Unfortunately, with individuals like this in powerful public opinion positions, that'll never happen.
March 11, 2009 1:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
Don't say things like "his anti-Israel stance should be applauded." That's awful. No one here should be anti-Israel.
We should be looking for balance and fairness, and policies that are in the U.S. interest.
March 10, 2009 9:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
Perhaps I misspoke. That was not my intent. I meant to reiterate that we need people who can be critical of friends as well as our enemies. That's the only way we can get unfiltered information. As far as what I stated as "critical to Israel", I meant critical when Israel is wrong. We need that.
March 11, 2009 1:39 AM | Reply | Permalink
This is why bigots can claim Israel runs the U.S...It's sickening how the Israeli's lobby can influence our government.
March 10, 2009 6:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
I hate to break it to you:
Every lobby can influence our government. That's a key part of the structure of democracy. If you want a government in which citizens can't organize to promote their interests, you're looking at a dictatorship.
Inveighing about the Israel lobby, which is one of many lobbies in our country, just makes you sound like an anti-Semite, which I'm sure you're not.
March 10, 2009 8:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
Come now, Tommyo's statement was not in anyway out of line. There is a very strong Israel lobby that uses quite dirty pool to get its way. For instance implying that Tommyo's opinion makes him sound like an anti-semite, is an offensive slur.
March 10, 2009 8:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
If you want a government in which citizens can't organize to promote their interests, you're looking at a dictatorship.
Israelis are citizens now?
I thought AIPAC was a foreign lobby (Israal) using American citizens as a front.
March 10, 2009 8:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
and promoting the interests of a foreign country at the expense of the interests of american citizens.
oh. and committing espionage, too! let's not forget about that!
fuck aipac and their traitorous extremist agenda of hate.
March 10, 2009 10:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
TheProgressive says:
This is oversimplification as some lobbies are much more powerful than others.
This is the gist of all that's being said here; you insinuate that one who criticizes the Israel lobby makes them sound anti Semitic. Why is that?
Doesn't legitimate non anti-semitic criticism exist?
March 11, 2009 10:40 AM | Reply | Permalink
thanks loads for mentioning schumer's Brooklyn roots, matt. a dagger in my jew heart.
March 10, 2009 6:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
You mean I can't be pro-labor and still be friendly to Israel? That's news to me and my family. 90+ years in the U.S. with those beliefs and now I am told that we can't believe in universal healthcare, equal pay for equal work, unions, Obama and the right of Israel to exist all at the same time.
Wake up you nutcakes!
The Israel support in the U.S. is not monolithic and is not just AIPAC. Plenty of us disagree with AIPAC positions, especially since many of their membership and leadership have ostracized those of us who love Israel but don't believe in the "Israel's always right" philosophy. I hope Peace Now and J Street are the future.
March 10, 2009 7:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
sorry, i meant pro-Labor, as in the party. damn capitals.
March 10, 2009 7:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
Another disaster for improved Israeli-Palestinians relations. Sen. Schumer, "The Senator from Israel," preaches a two-state solution but practices the creeping erasure of the Palestinian people.
March 10, 2009 7:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
I know Senator Schumer, and he doesn't practice or support the creeping erasure of anyone, including the Palestinian people.
Maybe we could stick to factual statements.
March 10, 2009 8:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
Isn't it pitiful we can't be in charge of our own government? China owns the Treasury and Israel own our foreign policy. What is worse, Schumer will lead the way to the Republicans making significant gains in 2010. I favor our relationship as far as our treaty goes. Not with them letting their agents in our government make their decisions where their country is concerned. I am not saying this as an appeasement but would we be having as difficult time with Islamic countries if our fovoring Israel wasn't so one sided? It didn't make a difference before we started invading them. And who were the neocons behind it. Aipac anyone?
March 10, 2009 7:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
China does not own our Treasury, and Israel does not own our foreign policy. What kind of nonsense is that? Are you saying that President Obama is corrupt and has been paid off?
March 10, 2009 8:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
Schumer's comment was merely an off-the-cuff remark - it shouldn't be compared with an analysis by an opinion writer.
The comment was no different than the comments that thousands of politicians, right and left, have made when an appointment they opposed foundered. I think you're reading a bit much into it, Matt, and being a bit uncharitable as well.
March 10, 2009 7:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
ugh. how i hate single-issue posters.
March 10, 2009 10:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
Snippet from Freeman's statement on this matter -
Full statement available here - http://www.dailykos.com/story/2009/3/10/191048/018/883/706943
March 10, 2009 7:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
"Way over the top?" Schumer, maybe better to be called "Shrillmer."
March 10, 2009 7:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
This country is just going to continue its foolishness with Israel. Israel is not interested in a two state solution. They are building and expanding settlements and will continue to do so, while the U.S. continues to say that they are "protecting themselves."
March 10, 2009 7:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
So a McKasey is good for America and a Freeman is not.
Apartheid is apparently good for America when Israel makes its policy.
March 10, 2009 7:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
The "My Israel Right or Wrong" lobby wins again. Apartheid, occupation, massacre, illegal settlements, destruction of Palestinian homes in East Jerusalem? So what? No problem. Be careful, Barak. They don't like George Mitchell and they're not so sure about you and Hillary.
March 10, 2009 7:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
If you are from Brooklyn, as I am, any other statement would have been a crock of shit.
March 10, 2009 7:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
well...that's our Schumer!
March 10, 2009 7:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
People should not be drawn into the conspiratorial view that Israel "controls" American foreign policy or ME policy. It's inaccurate and naive. American foreign policy would be deeply corrupt and violent whether Israel existed or not.
It's better to view the Israeli military -- which pretty much runs Israel as a garrison state -- as a part of the American state apparatus, like the FBI or CIA. Like those organisations, it lobbies to increase its own power and freedom to act, sometimes in cooperation with other sectors of the US state, and sometimes in competition with them. Sometimes it gets headstrong and confrontational, but this doesn't mean it is some kind of alien presence infecting US policy. Think of the FBI going after the Presidency during Watergate, or the Army attacking McCarthy -- nobody suggested that the Army or FBI were not part of the same "team" as the White House or the Senate.
When Israel fights aggressively for its interests, liberals often talk about the "lobby" as if it's some kind of unique problem, and that American foreign policy would be much better if it went away. But American foreign policy was vicious and destructive before Israel, and, if Israel ceases to be useful, it will be vicious and destructive after it as well. Don't blame Israel, and don't pretend America would suddenly wake up and have a conscience if it weren't for AIPAC. Israel's interests and the USA's are perfectly aligned more often than not, which is why Israel is funded so heavily - the same reason the FBI, CIA, NSA, and Army are given so much money.
What you're seeing now is a sector of the US elite starting to think Israel is getting a little too independent and should have its wings clipped. Unsurprisingly, Israel is fighting back politically, just as any US government agency would do to protect its funding and prestige; and, also unsurprisingly, it has a lot of allies in the legislature who are willing to help it out. But don't think that Israel is in control - it never has been and never will be.
March 10, 2009 8:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
The Israeli military does not run Israel as a garrison state.
Making a nonsensical statement like that is very disrespectful to your community members - do you think we're that ignorant?
Much of the rest of your comment I agree with - that US and Israel's interests are generally aligned. That comes from both being liberal democracies that oppose tyranny, something you'd think progressives would show more support for!
March 10, 2009 8:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
The Israeli military exercises a degree of control over Israeli politics and culture, not to mention the physical bodies of Israeli citizens, that would be considered totally unacceptable in any other "democracy". Even if the IDF were not treating the Palestinian Arabs as born prisoners, it would be incumbent on progressives, within and without Israel, to fight Israel's permanent military censorship and conscription.
March 10, 2009 8:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
That statement itself reeks of anti-Semitism and is sufficient reason to skewer his appointment.
All citizens of this country have a right, nay a duty to lobby the government over issues important to them without being accused of being disloyal.
March 10, 2009 8:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
I will give $10,000 to anyone who can find an anti-Semitic sentiment in my post.
March 10, 2009 8:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
Huh, no response from the most prolific commenter on this thread.
March 11, 2009 1:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
Skip - the above was meant to be in response to the comment from Walter Mitty above, and is in reference to Freeman's comment. I'm sorry that it appeared where it appeared - If I could figure out how to move it or delete it, I would do so.
March 10, 2009 8:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
Ha! Confused me. No harm done (you're still wrong though)
March 10, 2009 8:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
>>Skip - the above was meant to be in response to the comment from Walter Mitty above, and is in reference to Freeman's comment.
Which also contains no anti-Semitism.
March 10, 2009 9:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
Skip - back to you -
As you are well aware, Israelis are at the forefront of the arts and the sciences and would surely prefer to be doing better things that fighting wars.
It is not that, as you state, "the military" exercises control over them. It is rather that, to survive, Israelis have democratically voted for policies that require its citizens to become soldiers. This is done out of necessity - if it were not, Israel would not exist today, as you well know. If the threat against Israel were to abate (let's say the Palestinians stopped attacking, as the Egyptians and Jordanians have stopped attacking) you and I both know that Israel would democratically reduce the power and centrality of its military, which is a huge drain on a small nation.
This distinction, between a democratic state that has a military and a military garrison is so fundamental that I can't believe you don't see it.
March 10, 2009 8:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
>>If the threat against Israel were to abate (let's say the Palestinians stopped attacking, as the Egyptians and Jordanians have stopped attacking)
Yes, but neither Jordan nor Egypt are illegally occupied by Israel. Israel is not reducing the life of either country to that of that Native Americans, as it is with the Palestinians.
You mind as well blame the Native Americans for their "violence" against the white settlers as blame the Palestinians.
March 10, 2009 8:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
Lots of problems with this. Firstly, the polls do not support any suggestion that the Israeli government would "prefer to be doing better things". Israelis are generally supportive of military action - the attack on Gaza, which horrified the world, had huge support - and even crazily aggressive schemes such as the expulsion of Arabs from Gaza are well within mainstream opinion. You say that Israel would obviously step down its military aggression if "the Palestinians" - note that you talk about races and ethnicities; can you imagine if someone referred to the Israeli military as "the Jews"? - stopped attacking. This is laughable. The Israeli ruling elite's constant undermining of peace agreements, as well as the constant and accelerating expansion of settlements during ceasefires, are obvious to everyone who takes a look. A recent example would be the wilful and mischievous killing of 6 Hamas rank-and-filers during the "ceasefire" on the day of Barack Obama's election, when the international media were obviously distracted. When this (unsurprisingly) resulted in Hamas resuming rocket attacks (while saying they were open to renegotiation of the ceasefire), the IDF actually used the statistics of these rockets fired "during the ceasefire" as evidence that Hamas are impossible to negotiate with! My people have a word for this - chutzpah.
You suggest that Israelis are perfectly clearsighted democratic actors. But people's political consciousness is determined by the lives they lead. It is well known that Palestinians, particularly in Gaza, are forced to lead lives of poverty, oppression, starvation, homelessness, and violence. This obviously affects the way they see themselves and the world they live in. But Israelis lead special lives too. Their late teenage years and early adulthood - the years when most of us really coalesce as adult personalities, when our political and ethical outlooks come together - are spent in the military. They are exposed to, and made complicit in, the routine imprisonment, brutalisation, and general oppression of Palestinian Arabs, as well as the ordinary fascism of military life. If they refuse to participate in this political training program, they are put in prison. Can you imagine what the USA's political culture would be like if every teenager were forced to join the army? I bet it would be more aggressive, more hierarchical, more macho --- in short, more Israeli. If an Israeli miraculously emerges from this university-length course in the military mindset with their sense of morality totally intact, and -- let's say -- decides to become a crusading journalist, then their work is subject to the permanent regime of IDF censorship.
As I said, neither of these programs would be considered acceptable in any other state that claimed to be a first-world democracy. It is absurd to deny that the twin programs of censorship and conscription would have a huge impact on the outlook and mindset of Israeli voters, and it is obvious that any progressive should oppose both programs on civil rights grounds. If you think Israelis are unaffected by this military control of their bodies and their cultural expression, then you are left with the task of explaining why Israelis overwhelmingly supported George W. Bush, why Israelis say they'd refuse to live on the same street as an Arab, why Israelis are cmofortable telling pollsters that "Arabs are dirty", why Israelis support the shelling of refugee camps. It is obvious to anyone with eyes to see that the IDF runs Israel like the Church runs some European countries. It controls the minds and bodies of its citizens, not to mention its Palestinian Arab subjects.
March 10, 2009 8:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
>>why Israelis overwhelmingly supported George W. Bush, why Israelis say they'd refuse to live on the same street as an Arab, why Israelis are cmofortable telling pollsters that "Arabs are dirty", why Israelis support the shelling of refugee camps.
Nice post. The most troubling parallel exists between the Israeli seizing of native Palestinian lands, and the white Settlers doing the same in this country. How many decades were the Indians portrayed as the violent aggressors--all while the settlers ethnically cleansed them. If we look back, we see that Andrew Jackson was a very popular president. One reason for his popularity: he was a renown Indian killer.
So yes, militarization will brutalize and undermine a democracy.
March 10, 2009 9:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
Your comments are verily dripping with anti-Semitism and anti-Israeli sentiment.
Conscription and participation in the military of Israel's youth are inevitable when each day is a struggle for your country's existence. The absence of the need for wartime conscription in the U.S. has made your mind soft.
Gazans aren't "forced" to lead lives of violence. They lead the lives of provocateurs and their tactics have been quite successful on the world stage.
It would be fruitless to try to convince you that, were America in similar nightmarish circumstance (i.e. surrounded by countries unfavorable to your existence, recipient of public threats of annihilation by national leaders, open to random civilian rocket-fire attacks at your borders), that military obligation for your nation's youth and a countrywide culture of cautious defiance would be the rule.
March 11, 2009 12:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
The first order of business for any US President is not to swear to defend the Constitution of the United States, but to go before AIPAC and solemnly swear to do their bidding.
We should be devoting more stimulus money to Israel. I'm sure they have some roads and fences they would like to build to stimulate their economy.
March 10, 2009 8:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
The letter I just sent to my Senator (rapidly sinking to the status of New York's premiere toxic asset):
I am sickened by your McCarthyite smearing of Charles Freeman and your gleeful dance at the sinking of his nomination. I am the son of Holocaust survivors, and you should know that not all Jews share the one-dimensional perspective to which you so mindlessly and dangerously pander.
As was true for your support of the Iraq war; the nominations to high Federal office of Mukasey, Hayden, and (no, we haven't forgotten) Kerik; and the decimation of Glass-Steagall and related regulations that could have prevented the excesses that have brought the economy to ruin, you are on the wrong side of history and rectitude regarding Israel/Palestine generally and the Freeman nomination specifically.
I sincerely hope the President nominates an even more vocally even-handed critic of Mideast policy to replace Freeman, and if you torpedo that one, that the next nominee is more strident still, until you get the message.
March 10, 2009 8:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
Supporters of Israel has no problem with evenhandedness. They just oppose the appointment of people who bend over backwards to attack Israel, like Chas Freeman and most of the commenters on this thread.
Why would any supporter of Israel in his right mind not oppose the appointment of someone who bends over backwards to attack it?
March 10, 2009 8:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
I am reposting this as a reply to the Progressive Conscience to make sure he knows it is addressed to him (or her). I am learning my way around here.
To the Progressive Conscience,
I wish I could spend an hour or two with you to ask you some serious questions as to your education, your upbringing, the evolution of your political consciousness etc. I say this with respect. You seem to be an intelligent person and yet you have clearly aligned yourself with a fairy tale of a historical narrative. It is quite a common story that as Skip points out, most Israelis identify with namely that of the tiny nation state every day hanging on by a thread in the face of total annihilation by hostile "others" - that is to say non-Jews, savages, terrorists, murderers and the worst of them all anti-Semites disguised as critics of Israeli policy. The massive amounts of documented evidence to the contrary which Skip only begins to list is to be totally ignored or disagreed with as if we might be able to disagree with the science of evolution or that the earth orbits the sun.
I have been thinking and reading a lot lately with this in mind. What is the historical narrative we align ourselves with?
I was raised in a rather strict Roman Catholic and patriotic household in Southern California by parents who looked to the Pope and our government for guidance on how to think and view the world. And up until I was about 12 I felt myself relatively safe in the womb of these received "truths." I have spent the last forty years unlearning and shaking off this indoctrination (Skip, as I'm sure you're aware many Israelis have as well). It is a life long project in so far as I can still at times feel the tug of a deeply emotional pang of nationalism or Catholic guilt that will never go away. I have to consciously confront these feelings and breathe deeply to get them to go away so that I can get back to the business at hand - looking critically and honestly and what my government or what my (former) Church is doing. For lack of a better word I'd call it "detachment." More and more I look at people's stands or political ideologies or ways of viewing their homeland or religion or other things that are deeply personal to them in the context of them being detached sufficiently or not. Many are unable or unwilling to venture outside for more than five seconds the thought parameters they have internalized. It is for perhaps too many people something beyond their grasp due to their being so mired in the swamp of institutional doctrinal constraints. It requires tremendous time and effort.
There are many people smarter and more knowledgeable than I who have studied and written about this. So again, with all due respect Progressive Conscience, I would urge you to begin looking at your personal relationship to the historical narrative you seem to embrace and see if perhaps there is a way for you to step back and listen to well meaning people who offer evidence to the contrary. My feeling is, if you are serious about supporting Israel's right to live in peace and security as most people -including Arabs- are, you will begin the process of re-evaluating your personal and psychological relationship to her. Her survival is much more likely to be helped along by people such as yourself committing to this personal work than by falling back repeatedly into defensive posturing and lashing out by calling those who are appalled by Israeli policies "anti-Semites."
Peace,
MD
March 11, 2009 3:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
Israel House Rules
March 10, 2009 8:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
...They just oppose the appointment of people who bend over backwards to attack Israel...
how about opposing the appointment of people who bend over backwards to appease israel?? ross, and numerous others come to mind...
cut the bullshit about anti-semite ... it is getting really stale.. its desired intention of silencing all contrary views or views in opposition to israel in such a knee jerk way is really quite pathetic...
March 10, 2009 9:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
I really can't see a problem with the "Israel and shill" terminology. That Israel exerts an undue and influence upon US policy is documented beyond any doubt. That Americans shill for Israel in manipulating US views and policy is also beyond any question. What is the problem here?
Remember the USS Liberty.
March 10, 2009 9:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
This's what I'm worried about:
AItalianPAC
ABritishPAC
AGermanPAC
AJapanesePAC
AChinesePAC
ARussianPAC
AIrishPAC ... etc.
... this could get out of hand.
March 10, 2009 9:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
The specter of Israel....
March 10, 2009 9:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
Once again the so-called pro-Israel lobby uses its influence to take down a critic who had accused them of having too much influence on American policy, thus demonstrating that the criticism was dead on.
March 10, 2009 10:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well put.
March 11, 2009 1:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
To the Progressive Conscience,
I wish I could spend an hour or two with you to ask you some serious questions as to your education, your upbringing, the evolution of your political consciousness etc. I say this with respect. You seem to be an intelligent person and yet you have clearly aligned yourself with a fairy tale of a historical narrative. It is quite a common story that as Skip points out, most Israelis identify with namely that of the tiny nation state every day hanging on by a thread in the face of total annihilation by hostile "others" - that is to say non-Jews, savages, terrorists, murderers and the worst of them all anti-Semites disguised as critics of Israeli policy. The massive amounts of documented evidence to the contrary which Skip only begins to list is to be totally ignored or disagreed with as if we might be able to disagree with the science of evolution or that the earth orbits the sun.
I have been thinking and reading a lot lately with this in mind. What is the historical narrative we align ourselves with?
I was raised in a rather strict Roman Catholic and patriotic household in Southern California by parents who looked to the Pope and our government for guidance on how to think and view the world. And up until I was about 12 I felt myself relatively safe in the womb of these received "truths." I have spent the last forty years unlearning and shaking off this indoctrination (Skip, as I'm sure you're aware many Israelis have as well). It is a life long project in so far as I can still at times feel the tug of a deeply emotional pang of nationalism or Catholic guilt that will never go away. I have to consciously confront these feelings and breathe deeply to get them to go away so that I can get back to the business at hand - looking critically and honestly and what my government or what my (former) Church is doing. For lack of a better word I'd call it "detachment." More and more I look at people's stands or political ideologies or ways of viewing their homeland or religion or other things that are deeply personal to them in the context of them being detached sufficiently or not. Many are unable or unwilling to venture outside for more than five seconds the thought parameters they have internalized. It is for perhaps too many people something beyond their grasp due to their being so mired in the swamp of institutional doctrinal constraints. It requires tremendous time and effort.
There are many people smarter and more knowledgeable than I who have studied and written about this. So again, with all due respect Progressive Conscience, I would urge you to begin looking at your personal relationship to the historical narrative you seem to embrace and see if perhaps there is a way for you to step back and listen to well meaning people who offer evidence to the contrary. My feeling is, if you are serious about supporting Israel's right to live in peace and security as most people -including Arabs- are, you will begin the process of re-evaluating your personal and psychological relationship to her. Her survival is much more likely to be helped along by people such as yourself committing to this personal work than by falling back repeatedly into defensive posturing and lashing out by calling those who are appalled by Israeli policies "anti-Semites."
Peace,
MD
March 10, 2009 10:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think that P.C. smells a lot like P.R. , for whom? I don't know,... AIPAC? If you've got the money honey....
I'm out of here.
It just stinks.
March 10, 2009 11:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
AIPAC only exists for the the purpose of making sure every Israeli Jew gets a cute puppy for their kind, evenhanded approach to the Palestinian question.
You, sir, should watch what you say, as some might find your comment anti-Semitic.
Not that I'm trying to stifle debate here or anything.
March 10, 2009 11:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
MartinD,
Good post.
My feeling on the Israeli/Palestinian question is simple, a wish that they can find a way to live in peace and prosperity. I leave it to people of good will to find the way.
Today, I think the term "anti-semite" is much like the word "hero", each, it seems to me are thrown around too quickly and too often.
I've had personal experience with anti semitism, as practiced by the masters, and what is often labeled anti semitism today pales in comparison to what I saw. I've also had experience with heroes, men who risked their lives to save others, as compared to many "heroes" today who risk nothing or very little.
Anti semitism doesn't have to be the Holocaust, but it also doesn't have to be legitimate criticism of Israel or AIPAC.
March 11, 2009 11:16 AM | Reply | Permalink
I hope the Israeli government does not get too happy, and celebrate this political victory by trying to sink another US Navy ship.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Liberty_incident
We always have to take Israel's interest into consideration, when does Israel reciprocate? What other country gets to have US Senators in their pocket like Schumer and Lieberman are?
I just do not understand why that is considered acceptable behavior in our government. When you put another countries political interests ahead of the POTUS that comes from your own political party no less, what are you?
March 10, 2009 11:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
If Schumer, who thought so well of Mukasey, is against him, then I'm for him.
March 10, 2009 11:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
Let's get something straight. Anybody who toes the AIPAC line is no friend of Israel. Friends don't encourage friends to make disastrous choices.
March 11, 2009 8:34 AM | Reply | Permalink
It would seem that The Progressive Conscience has an agenda that is covered by its nice, self assuring moderate words and ideas. Essentially I am not sure about its cover story, The Progressive Conscience, since it is self created and at the same time self-congratulatory and back patting. I mean, can any "progressive thinker", criticize this self-styled "TPC," with its mannered, reasonable voice and ideas?
There will be more later whether or not TPC responds.
March 12, 2009 8:21 AM | Reply | Permalink