RSSYes, Barack, But How Much Do You Hate the Palestinians?
I have long been appalled by the craven genuflecting before the altar of vicious nationalism that appears to have become a required ritual for would-be Democratic Party presidential candidates courting what they see as the “Jewish vote.” Not only are they required to outdo one another in the extent of support they pledge for Israel; given that the element they’re addressing (right-wing Zionists who don’t reflect even the Jewish-American mainstream) is steeped in the toxic racism common to ultra-nationalism of all stripes, what they’re really required to do is outdo one another’s pledges of hostility towards the Palestinians. Kind of like that scene in Monty Python’s “Life of Brian” where the basis for joining the People’s Front for the Liberation of Judea is your answer to the question “How much do you hate the Romans?”
And, it seems that in the case of Sentaor Barack Obama, the answer may be “Not enough.” That at least is the charge being leveled by some of this rabid nationalist self-appointed guardians of Jewishness. The New York Times reports the following:
Several Jewish conferencegoers said they were concerned by Mr. Obama’s remark Sunday in Iowa where, in a reference to the Middle East, he said, “Nobody is suffering more than the Palestinian people.” According to The Des Moines Register, Mr. Obama put the blame on the stalled peace efforts with Israel and on the refusal of the Palestinian government to renounce terrorism.
Mr. Obama has said in the past that both Israelis and Palestinians had “suffered” because of the lack of a peace agreement, and a spokesman said on Tuesday that Mr. Obama believed “the security of Israel should be America’s starting point in the Middle East.” Yet by singling out Palestinian suffering on Sunday, Mr. Obama could be tempting fate with some Jewish voters.
“Awarding first place in the suffering matrix is odious and infelicitous,” said Rabbi Steven Silver of Redondo Beach, Calif., after listening to Mrs. Clinton speak at a reception at the Aipac conference. “I think a lot of Americans would find that comment offensive, too.”
Mr. Silver’s son, Jesse, a college student who supports Mrs. Clinton, said he was spreading the word at the conference about Mr. Obama’s remark.
“It’s just clumsy of him to say that on the eve of the Aipac conference,” Jesse Silver said. “His inexperience is showing.”
Inexperience in what? In pandering to the cloud-cuckoo world of American right-wing Zionism? Go ask any Israeli who is suffering more, Israelis or Palestinians, and I guarantee you that 95% will say it is the Palestinians — the majority of them will probably blame the Palestinians themselves for that fact, but precious few would contest it for it is so blindingly obvious. “Odious and infelicitous” — where do they find these people?
Obama, of course, knows better. In an extended lament on how the Obama he once knew got drawn into the AIPAC sphere of influence, Electronic Intifada’s Ali Abunima recalls a time when the Senator was far more inclined to engage with the plight of the Palestinians than he is now that he’s running for the Democratic nomination. (Abunima even published a picture that will surely be jumped on by Hillary’s cynical oppo research people, of Obama chatting over dinner with the late, great Edward Said — see below.)
Obama, in earlier times, sups with the late, great Edward Said
Obama’s swing from demanding an even-handed U.S. policy in the Middle East to being a pro-Israel hawk is well documented in the Jewish Week, and it seems the AIPAC crowd seems to suspect that he’s faking it. Seems Ali Abunimah doesn’t want to let Obama forget where he’s from.
If disappointing, given his historically close relations to Palestinian-Americans, Obama’s about-face is not surprising. He is merely doing what he thinks is necessary to get elected and he will continue doing it as long as it keeps him in power. Palestinian-Americans are in the same position as civil libertarians who watched with dismay as Obama voted to reauthorize the USA Patriot Act, or immigrant rights advocates who were horrified as he voted in favor of a Republican bill to authorize the construction of a 700-mile fence on the border with Mexico.
Here’s my advice to Obama: AIPAC is a right-wing body, even on the Jewish-American political spectrum — in Israeli terms, its orientation is strongly Likudnik, aligning it with the right-wing fringe in Israel, too. Close to 80% of American Jews, according to surveys see the Iraq war as a mistake. (As opposed to the AIPAC crowd and Israeli government, which continues to support it.)
So, when you pander to the AIPAC crowd, you are not reaching the Jewish-American mainstream (even though most of the Jewish-American mainstream is loathe to directly challenge the AIPAC crowd, for fear of being labeled traitors are worse by rabid right-wingers like Alvin Rosenfeld). Nor are you really helping Israel, because its only chance of surviving rests in its ability to make peace with its neighbors, and Israeli peaceniks will tell you that the support of the U.S. (egged on by the AIPAC crowd) for the most belligerent and hawkish positions on the Israeli spectrum is actually working against Israel’s ability to make the compromises it will have to make in order to achieve peace.
And nobody will think any less of you, Barack, if you choose to speak the truth, and what you know to be the truth, rather than half-heartedly embrace falsehoods that aren’t doing anybody any good. The right-wing Zionists aren’t going to support you no matter how hard you pander, and the liberal mainstream will respect honesty and consistency. Israel needs American leaders that can march it back from its own self-destructive impulses, rather than cheerleaders of its march of folly.
Yeah, yeah, I know, I’m wasting my breath…
The Latest
99c Blogging
Hamas as 'Willie Horton'
By insisting that he never advocated talking to Hamas, Obama digs himself a hole -- anyone who seeks peace in the Middle East will have to talk to HamasHear! Hear!
Bush's 'Peace' Effort Imperils Peace
Daniel Levy explains why the farcical negotiations between Olmert and Abbas actually undermine the prospects for Mideast peaceFeatured Analysis
About That 'New' Middle East...
Could there be a more perfect image of the catastrophic self-inflicted rout suffered by U.S. Middle East policy under President George W. Bush? This week, the President will party with Israel's leaders celebrating their country's 60th anniversary -- and champion a phony peace process whose explici...A Skeptical Read
Beheading Barack
First, he couldn't be President because he's Muslim. Now, we're told, he can't be President because he's not Muslim enough!Shameless Cronyism
Sound Advice for the Next President
To grasp the challenge facing U.S. foreign policy, read Helena Cobban's new book Engage!A Wondering Jew
Israel is 60, Zionism is Dead, What Now?
Israel at 60 is an intractable historical fact. It has one of the world's strongest armies, without peer in the Middle East, and its 200 or so nuclear warheads give it the last word in any military showdown with any of its neighbors. Palestinian militants may be able to make life in certain parts...The 51st State
A Teachable Moment in Basra
It should come as no surprise that Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki's disastrous offensive against the Mahdi Army of Moqtada Sadr in Basra has had the exact opposite effect of that intended -- strengthening rather than weakening Sadr, and making clear that he, and the Iranians, have far greater in...Futures Market
Will Russia Partition Kosovo?
Why my tea-leaf reading suggests that Moscow has a nasty surprise in store for Washington in the BalkansGuest Columns
Iraq and U.S. Faith in Violence
Guest Column: Alastair Crooke warns of a dangerous fantasy that persists in Western capitals in which the West faces an "onslaught" from "radical Islam." The problem is that this intersects all too tragically with a the persistent belief in Washington and elsewhere that by applying its overwhel...Cuisine
Yummy yummy Umami
Why a leftover lamb bone turned a bean stew into an ecstatic eventGlancing Headers
Spare Us More 'Globalization & Football'
The claim that Egypt's Cup of Nations win "proves" that stronger domestic leagues make stronger international sides is not born out by football's bigger picture. In fact, the teams that do best internationally are those with weaker domestic leaguesHousekeeping
'Lost' Entries on Rootless Cosmopolitan
Previous entries that now register as "not available" are ones that got left behind in a server migration. We're working on retrieving themUnholy War
U.S. Pours Gasoline on Gaza Fires
Once upon a time, Israelis and Palestinians looked to the U.S. to intervene at moments of heightened confrontation to mediate between the two sides and contain the damage. The Bush Administration, however, has proved entirely incapable of playing this role, because its own interventions are hidebou...The Whole World's Africa
South Africa's Racist Present
Guest Column: Sean Jacobs. What to make of the racist torture incident at a South African campusAnnals of Globalization
Honey, I Shrank the Superpower
In a snide reference to Bill Clinton's 1992 promise to "build a bridge into the 21st century," Barack Obama recently quipped that what Hillary Clinton really offers is a bridge back into the 20th century. Yet, a bridge back into the last century may be what all the major candidates are offering when...Could Die Laughing
Mearsheimer, Walt and the Erudite Hysteria of David RemnickNew York Moments
The Debka Made ‘Em Do ItFrom Tony's Archive
A Playground Lesson for Bush
How a spontaneous alliance of jocks, do-gooders and lesser bullies against the biggest bully at the school changed the balance of power at Milnerton PrimaryRebellion Into Money
The Rebel Grace of Patti Smith
35 Responses to “Yes, Barack, But How Much Do You Hate the Palestinians?”
Absolutely, of course it’s not the “Jewish vote” that the Dems are courting; it’s some very particular “Jewish Money” that they desire for the purpose of buying the non-Jewish vote. They probably assume they can take the J-vote for granted. Then again, were they to offend the Money in question, who knows what might happen.
america has become what the people in South Is doing to your president “VAMOS GRINGOS”
Obama made a gaffe, defined by Michael Kinsley as speaking the truth.
And Silver, the college kid, is calling him inexperienced!
Now, Obama, are you experienced? Have you ever been experienced? Well, Nancy and HIllary have.
Their speeches were full of love and passion: delightful variations on a US politican’s favorite lyrics: “Excuse me while I kiss AIPAC’s ass.”
What the Democrats need is a “Sista Soljah” moment with AIPAC.
Some Democrat needs to say we will defend Israel but not initiate wars to please the far right of any country.
Our military aid to Israel should be disbursed the same way congress is talking about doing it for the Iraq War: with benchmarks.
Israel must take down the wall or at least move it back to the 1967 border. They must withdraw from the occupied territories. And they must at least talk to any neighboring countries that put forth good faith peace proposals.
We cannot correct historical racism against Jews by helping them practice racism on their Arab neighbors.
all of Wahington hates the Palestinians! The IAPAC has made sure of it with its money! It should be called Zionington instead of Washinton for Israel can do no wrong. Even thouh they have violated 66 Un Resolutuions concerning human rights, contradicated their Declaration of 1948 in all aspects of its text and is really not a state by the true definition of the word.
It is ironic that half the countries of the world respect and recognize the State of Palestine, including members of the EU.
It is dishearting to see the International Community turn its back on the refugee status of the Palestinian people due to EXTREME pressure of two governments, Israel and the US.
It proves power is about money and and ends to a means
No-one can or should live in perpetual hatred of all of their neighbors. Israel is doomed unless they make major concessions to their Arab neighbors. It doesn’t matter “who started it”, Israelis are the distinct minority and unless they prove theirselves useful to have around to their Arab neighbors, they will eventually get driven out. Petty land theft and blatant racism will not endear Israel to the Arabs.These are the “true facts on the ground”. And why should America waste itself on this Israeli foolishness?
We need to get AIPAC registered as a foreign government lobby. Period.
How is this done, Tony?
You keep dreamin’!
The Israeli Lobby (AIPAC) controls your system.
Even american jews CAN’T fight them.
Yeah… you guys are doomed…
The possibility for a Democrat to have a Sister Souljah moment is small. Whereas blacks are valuable for actual votes, they are not big financial donors. Jews are not as big a voting bloc (except in some states like Florida and New York), but they are big as donors. So, while Clinton could chastize black popular culture, he could do so knowing it would not affect his ability to raise funds.
Prior to the increased role of Evangelicals in the Republican Party - you saw a more nuanced approach to the Middle East. Oil and business interests were interested in regional stability, not upending the order for the sake of securing Israel. Of course, such consideration was branded as anti-Semitic by some.
What we see between Israel and her neighbors is the practice of the Biblical principal of “an eye for an eye.” So now we have two blind tribes forever trying to kill each other. Each tribe as devout followers of their respective Gods knows they are right.
With Gods such as these, who needs devils?
You can count on a lot more unholy war in the holy land. It just comes with the territory.
I have no idea why Barack decided to run at all. The guy has relatively ZERO political experience. Why doesn’t he wait until he’s at least been in office for a decade or so? 10-years-from-now Obama will be shaking his head at 2007 Obama for trying to run for president now.
THE GUY HAS NO EXPERIENCE WITH ANYTHING.
And as has been painfully exposed here, he doesn’t know shit about the political game. Or, at least what he does know about it (pandering) he doesn’t understand well enough to execute competently.
“Sell-out” doesn’t even begin to describe this political hackery of unbounded sillyness.
Barack is on my permanent shit list.
The Arab League proposal is on the table. If Israel does not agree to negotiate on that basis, it should be boycotted.
As disgusting as it is to see U.S. politicians pandering to the ultra-nationalist Israeli lobby, this is certainly not the first time that politicians have sold out the obvious national interest (and in this case, international interest) for the big donors.
Look at how easily that awful bankruptcy bill passed Congress in 2005: there was nothing in that for the average consumer, but a big bonanza for MBNA et al. Then you have the farm-subsidy lobby that results in a huge excess crop of corn that makes our children fat and keeps third-world farmers poor; the dudes at Raytheon and General Dynamics who’ve convinced the Army that the Crusader artillery program makes good military sense; etc. etc. Another foreign-policy example (a shameful one from my own community) is the fact that the IRA in its heyday got away with scant public criticism from the American government. We Irish have a lot of rich guys, too.
I guess what I’m trying to say is that until the Palestinian lobby can give literally billions to political causes the way that AIPAC’s donors can, little is going to get done. The best way to get a more balanced foreign policy may be for the Arab-American community to produce a surfeit of high-profile lawyers and publishing czars as fast as possible.
Pat — that’s pretty much what Ali Abunimah argues in the piece linked to — it’s less about moghuls than about the ability to corall and “bundle” hunrdreds and thousands of smaller donations into millions of dollars — so it may be as much about organization as about producing more moguls.
I think, also, that more Jewish-American voices need to speak out and make clear how ultimately dangerous not only for U.S. influence in teh Middle East but also for Israel the positions adopted by AIPAC are
Maybe we really need to start labeling people anti-palestinian every time they cater to the Israel lobby. I will support the first one that stops kissing AIPAC’s ass.
For such a long time it was said that social security was the third rail in American politics. Touch it and you die. Although we didn’t get any reform to entitlements-we at least were brave enough to touch the rail. Now it seems that Israel is the third rail that no politician is willing to touch. With so many Americans coming to realize how supporting AIPAC and its Zionist agenda is perverting our own politics; causing us Americans our treasury and our very lives. Maybe the timing of touching the third rail of blind Israeli support is a stroke of brave political genius.
I certainly hope that Marc is right. For years, I was a C-Span junkie, until I just couldn’t watch one more person sit there and be absolutely insulted by callers,as well as a host who sat there, letting the insults compound, without reaching for the button. This button cuts off callers, sometimes mid-sentence if there is a sense of ill will toward an Israeli undertaking. [the wall,bombing Lebanon,Gaza] For true ass-kissing,my own Sen.Mitch McConnel can’t be topped. But at least we finally find one group of people he DOESN’T hate.
How long AIPAC is going to control american foreign policy?
American people have to wake-up and to defend what is good for US and what is good for US is to enforce UN resolutions to be seen as legitimate broker even if it hurts Israel.
That is the only way for America to be respected all over the world, particularly in the Arab countries because enough is enough.
As AIPAC, the neocons and the right-wingers in the U.S. and Israel label defense of the humanity of the Palestinians as anti-Israel and anti-Jewish, it should be seen for what it is — unmitagated, manipulative BS. The Emperor wears no clothes here and begs for a calling out as he tries to stiffle just criticism of his unethical policies with a blatantly false association. Would that there were more corageous policy makers that value the honest futures of America and Israel.
[...] [...]
I would like to point out, if it isn’t already crystal clear, that ultimately the present tendency of AIPAC to blindly support the right wing likudnik forces is fundamentally against the long-term interests of Israel.
Thus, not just for the sake of the long oppressed Palestinians, but for the sake of Israel, we must find a way to rationally discuss possible solutions without debate being artificially stifled. I’m afraid it’s up to the Jewish community to raise their voices. Non-Jews and their views, will always be treated with suspicion by Israelis. But Israelis won’t be able to ignore Jewish voices. Tony is a shining example of rationality, but sadly there are not enough Tonys. I still believe that the Jewish community will rise to the challenge, yet time is growing short. We non-Jews, in turn, can do our part by strongly opposing anti-Semitism and supporting the rights of all people to life with peace and justice.
According to the Washington Post, Democratic presidential candidates “depend on Jewish supporters to supply as much as 60 per cent of the money” - http://www.lrb.co.uk/v28/n06/mear01_.html
This is all that really matters. 80% of American Jews, may disagree with the Iraq war, but that’s irrelevant. Israel/Palestine is a different issue. AIPAC make sure they advise (or coerce) the biggest spenders in the Jewish community to give their money to those candidates they believe to be “pro-Israel”.
I wrote at my blog about precisely this article & precisely this issue (see link). But my take was slightly diff. I think this is a very delicate dance that someone like Obama has to learn. Yes, you’re absolutely right about Aipac’s pernicious influence & about how unrepresentative it is.
But it does have power both in Congress and within the community. It’s like Chabad: many Jews may not adhere to its views, but they feel it protects Israel (however wrong they may be in this impression) & that, to most Jews, is good. So we have to work hard with our fellow Jews to expose AIPAC’s seamy underbelly.
The other massive influence AIPAC possesses is in terms of candidate financing. Jewish donors provide as much as 60% of donations for Dem. primary candidates. So Obama needs AIPAC at this pt. in the campaign.
I don’t think he has to do a “Hillary” in terms of becoming an AIPAC zombie spouting all their talking pts. He just has to maintain credibiity among progressives while not overtly alienating the AIPAC crowd.
I think he’s made a good start. And I feel his candidacy is promising. No, he’s never going to satsify Abunimah. But I think he can run a very credible campaign w/o the Abunimahs or Abe Foxmans or Howard Kohrs (AIPAC) of the world on his side.
I think you’ve missed the point . . . politicians don’t pander to AIPAC for the Jewish vote, which is miniscule: they want the $$!! For some reason the really wacko Zionists are also really rich and like to “donate” (i.e. bribe Senators). Then there’s also McDonnell Douglas and the other weapons manufacturers, who love Israeli business and don’t skimp on the bribes either.
Jews are not as big a voting bloc (except in some states like Florida…
Posted by KXB
A lot of good that did Al Gore. But an excellent point on how the “first black president” (Clinton) could sell out his own people and get away with it.
As for Barack, he’s a punk. The guy will say and do anything to get elected. All Hillary has to do is let him flip-flop his way to dejecting his base. By “staying the course,” she’s going to whittle away the opposition.
Vilsack is our only hope.
It seems the Zionist agenda in Southwest Asia has finally
made it into the public arena. The AIPAC conference this
week was attented by about 1000 Christian Zionists. Rev.
John Hagee spoke to the cheering crowd of Israel first attendees. Some Jews might wonder at this right wing
facist Christian Zionist being a featured speaker at an AIPAC
meeting. The Zionist ideology may be a threat to Jews and gentiles alike when the preachers of the apocalyse, with
their millions of voters, link arms with the financial power
of AIPAC. This political alliance is an existential threat to mankind with their doomsday theology and nuclear weapons pointed in all directions. The voices of antiwar
Jews makes it possible for gentiles to criticize Israel without the lonely fate of being labelled “anti-semitic.” Perhaps, at this late date the forces of reason and compassion will finally begin the process of exposing and ridiculing the primitive ambitions and beliefs of the monotheists of all stripes. There is a lot of information on the influence of American Jews in politics in the link below. I think the public debate on this issue is essential and I am encouraged to read Tony’s pointing at the emperors lack of clothes.
http://www.counterpunch.org/brenner10242003.html
Jorge,
Vilsack isn’t a candidate, he withdrew several weeks ago.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2007-02-23-vilsack_x.htm
Its’ amusing that one of the premises of this article seems based on a misinterpretation. When Obama said “no-one is suffering more than the Palestinians,” he seemed to show excessive concern for them because he said “nobody.” The statement was not a comparison with Israelis and in the wider world, there are many in far worse circumstances than the Palestinians.
In jumping on this you seem to be showing the same single-mindedness of which you accuse the AIPAC/ZIONIST “Sangomas”.
By the way the Israeli government seems to have been rather quiet on Iraq, taking a neutral stance. I don’t recall any active support. I in fact read that Ariel Sharon advised Bush against. (The article quoted an aide of Sharon’s. It’s just one data point though and being a reasonable fellow I’m not making any definitive interpretations based on it.)
Brad — the first point I simply don’t get. On the second, I also saw that Sharon advised against it, which I can believe. But this chump Olmert came out urging the US not to withdraw in his own AIPAC address
itzikl,
Yeah, I just found out. I was in the Philippines for three weeks and I just got back.
Damn. Who’s left? Edwards? How long before his campaign folds up?
Tony,
The idea that Sharon advised against it is based on nothing but an article by a journalist in the Jewish Week (I think) in which he claims to have been told this in secrecy by Sharon.
This flies against all the evidence that suggests Sharon was for the Iraq War, including all his stated positions at the time.
It is also quite curious that this article only comes up at the precise moment when American public opinion had turned decisively against the war (literally published a few weeks after the 06 election). It’s more curious that the author offers no substantiation, no supporting documents or even supporting opinions or testimonies from anyone else.
It is even more curious that none of this emerged when Sharon was alive, when he could’ve been asked about it, and his reply could’ve been weighed against what others (notably, Americans) had heard from him. Now it’s published in a forum where no one needs to reply to it, and no one will question it, but it will come at the right time to help distance Israel from the growing anger at Iraq. How entirely conventient.
SHOCK! HORROR! Could it possibly be that a supporter of Israel is bending the truth for political goals!? Isn’t that the exlusive purview of Arabs and Muslims to lie incessantly!
The reason why all politicians pander to AIPAC is not because of the Jewish vote but because of its ability to tear apart the politicians who question it. The label ‘anti-semitic’ conjures up all kinds of horrors in the modern American imagination and even the suggestion of it is enough to spook the most stalwart public representative. These people can turn your life into a hell, hounded into insanity by the rabid vindictiveness of this hate group.
May Almighty God forbid that Barak Obama becomes US president!
Little Dickie Richard Silverstein is to Islamofascist terrorists and jihadis as Monica was to Bill!!
Senetor Obama is the leader needed in America today, he has a heart that feels the pain of both Palestinians and the Israelis.
I predict, he would bring a better compromise between the two sides and he would encourage talks on the table than the use of guns that has never work better today.
If anybody cares, he or she should hang on one side but try to help both side. They both need help on the table and the children, mothers’s suffering has no end.
I pray that one day the world will learn that we are all one regardless of our believes.
God bless us all
Leave a Reply