This to me is interesting. also try to be a little careful i already see the anti semi card being played.
This story appeared in the online magazine, Salon.
It is a big story, much more so than the weak press it has so far gotten. NY Times had something on it, not too much else.
By Gary Kamiya
April 29, 2008 | For years, liberal American Jews who have chafed under the taboo against criticizing Israel have dreamed of starting a political organization that would speak for them. Now, with the launch of J Street, that dream has become a reality.
Jeremy Ben-Ami, the group's founder, says that the incident that drove him over the edge took place when he was working as policy director for Howard Dean's 2004 presidential campaign. Dean said the U.S. should take an "evenhanded" approach to resolving the Israeli-Palestinian crisis, Ben-Ami recalled. He was immediately, and predictably, savaged as anti-Israeli and a coddler of terrorists. "All hell broke loose," Ben-Ami said. "And this from a man who's married to a Jewish woman, who's raising kids in the Jewish faith, and is extremely pro-Israel in everything he'd ever said and done. But to use that one word, and then to have that cascade into a torrent, was just amazing to me. And it's certainly been repeated and magnified with the attacks on Obama and some of his aides, some of them crossing any line that any of us should have about civil discourse."
There are few political relationships more fraught than that between American Jews and Israel. As the national emblem of Jewish identity, Israel is seen by many Jews as sacrosanct. Some Jews passionately identify with Israel and its policies and angrily reject any criticism of it, often attacking critics as anti-Semites or self-hating Jews. But even those Jews who privately harbor misgivings about Israel's policies often keep their opinions to themselves because the subject is simply too charged. Anyone, Jewish or not, who dares to say or write anything critical about Israel quickly learns that they have poked a hornet's nest.
What makes the subject especially sensitive -- and keeps many people, including most journalists, from going anywhere near it -- is that, far more than any other issue, it splits the progressive and intellectual community. Speaking more plainly, it divides one's friends and colleagues -- sometimes even one's family. Jews have always played a prominent role in America's progressive and intellectual circles. And if you have a connection to those circles and you criticize Israel, you are almost certain to deeply offend or anger someone whom you respect, like, and have many things in common with. Small wonder that, as former Israeli official Daniel Levy told me, most people, Jews and non-Jews alike, "decide to sit this one out. It's more of a headache than it's worth."
The taboo isn't only enforced by such personal matters, of course. It's also aggressively enforced by powerful Jewish lobbies like AIPAC, mainstream Jewish groups and leaders like Abraham Foxman, national director of the Anti-Defamation League, who claim to speak on behalf of all Jews. Congress, intimidated by the moral authority (or moral blackmail) and political clout wielded by these organizations and afraid of offending Jewish donors who are a major force in Democratic fundraising, invariably falls into line. The fact that Congress has staked out a position on Israel to the right of the Bush administration's pretty much says it all. The default right-wing position on Israel is holy writ in American politics, and explains why Hillary Clinton can pander to the right-wing pro-Israel lobby by casually threatening to "totally obliterate" Iran -- vaporize 70 million men, women and children who have nothing to do with their leaders' anti-Israeli posturings -- without paying any political price for such irresponsible statements.
Nothing is more urgently needed in our political discourse than for the taboo against speaking forthrightly about Israel to be overthrown. After all, notwithstanding its profound connection to some American Jews and its (partly justified) status as a beloved icon with whom we have a "special relationship," Israel is not the 51st state -- it is a foreign country, and one smack-dab in the center of the Middle East, a region in which we have some considerable national interest. The enforced silence about Israel has prevented us from thinking clearly about the Middle East, and helped enable both the disastrous war we are now fighting in Iraq and a possible future one against Iran.
But because of the highly sensitive nature of the subject, American Jews must lead the way.
Which is why the birth of J Street, whose goal Ben-Ami says is "to redefine what it means to be pro-Israel," is cause for unalloyed celebration. "Over the course of a quarter century of doing American politics, I've seen the way in which the Israel issue plays out," Ben-Ami said in a phone interview from J Street's Washington, D.C., office. "And it greatly disturbs me and it greatly disturbs a very large number of progressive American Jews, who believe very strongly in Israel but feel that the way in which the American Jewish community's voice has been expressed on these issues doesn't reflect our values or opinions. Only the voices of the far right have been heard. They've really hijacked the debate when it comes to Israel."
This is the first page of the story.
Any wishing to read the full piece can google the author's name, or go to Salon.
The big question for J Street is whether they can ever hope to match AIPAC in money, to pay the Washington whores to see things their way.
This story has two aspects. One is that Jewish tradition has tended to be liberal for centuries. Except, in th last half-century or so, on the matter of Israel. Then, we have seen the emergence of militaristic hawks.
Second, Jews are a very intelligent people, who well know their history.
So potent has The Lobby become in America (Pat Buchanan calls Congress, "Israel-Occupied Territory") that even the dullest tack in the box are startng to perceive that the voices that were most vocal in calling for he invasion of Iraq (and now for war on Iran), were those of Jewish nationalists masquering as good Americans (and often useing uselful idiot frontmen like Cheney and Rumsfeld).
Other peoples who at one time welcomed the persecuted Jews into their midst, later turned against them. England expelled them (they were mentioned negatively in the founding document of democracy, the Magna Carta) an Spain also booted them the same year that Columbus set sail to the New World.
With so much say in Congress and so much influence in the media, many American Jews have become nervous, and want to tone it down. Understandably so.
I wish J Street very good luck. They have their work cut out for them, trying to become an effective counterweight to AIPAC.
This story appeared in the online magazine, Salon.
It is a big story, much more so than the weak press it has so far gotten. NY Times had something on it, not too much else.
By Gary Kamiya
April 29, 2008 | For years, liberal American Jews who have chafed under the taboo against criticizing Israel have dreamed of starting a political organization that would speak for them. Now, with the launch of J Street, that dream has become a reality.
Jeremy Ben-Ami, the group's founder, says that the incident that drove him over the edge took place when he was working as policy director for Howard Dean's 2004 presidential campaign. Dean said the U.S. should take an "evenhanded" approach to resolving the Israeli-Palestinian crisis, Ben-Ami recalled. He was immediately, and predictably, savaged as anti-Israeli and a coddler of terrorists. "All hell broke loose," Ben-Ami said. "And this from a man who's married to a Jewish woman, who's raising kids in the Jewish faith, and is extremely pro-Israel in everything he'd ever said and done. But to use that one word, and then to have that cascade into a torrent, was just amazing to me. And it's certainly been repeated and magnified with the attacks on Obama and some of his aides, some of them crossing any line that any of us should have about civil discourse."
There are few political relationships more fraught than that between American Jews and Israel. As the national emblem of Jewish identity, Israel is seen by many Jews as sacrosanct. Some Jews passionately identify with Israel and its policies and angrily reject any criticism of it, often attacking critics as anti-Semites or self-hating Jews. But even those Jews who privately harbor misgivings about Israel's policies often keep their opinions to themselves because the subject is simply too charged. Anyone, Jewish or not, who dares to say or write anything critical about Israel quickly learns that they have poked a hornet's nest.
What makes the subject especially sensitive -- and keeps many people, including most journalists, from going anywhere near it -- is that, far more than any other issue, it splits the progressive and intellectual community. Speaking more plainly, it divides one's friends and colleagues -- sometimes even one's family. Jews have always played a prominent role in America's progressive and intellectual circles. And if you have a connection to those circles and you criticize Israel, you are almost certain to deeply offend or anger someone whom you respect, like, and have many things in common with. Small wonder that, as former Israeli official Daniel Levy told me, most people, Jews and non-Jews alike, "decide to sit this one out. It's more of a headache than it's worth."
The taboo isn't only enforced by such personal matters, of course. It's also aggressively enforced by powerful Jewish lobbies like AIPAC, mainstream Jewish groups and leaders like Abraham Foxman, national director of the Anti-Defamation League, who claim to speak on behalf of all Jews. Congress, intimidated by the moral authority (or moral blackmail) and political clout wielded by these organizations and afraid of offending Jewish donors who are a major force in Democratic fundraising, invariably falls into line. The fact that Congress has staked out a position on Israel to the right of the Bush administration's pretty much says it all. The default right-wing position on Israel is holy writ in American politics, and explains why Hillary Clinton can pander to the right-wing pro-Israel lobby by casually threatening to "totally obliterate" Iran -- vaporize 70 million men, women and children who have nothing to do with their leaders' anti-Israeli posturings -- without paying any political price for such irresponsible statements.
Nothing is more urgently needed in our political discourse than for the taboo against speaking forthrightly about Israel to be overthrown. After all, notwithstanding its profound connection to some American Jews and its (partly justified) status as a beloved icon with whom we have a "special relationship," Israel is not the 51st state -- it is a foreign country, and one smack-dab in the center of the Middle East, a region in which we have some considerable national interest. The enforced silence about Israel has prevented us from thinking clearly about the Middle East, and helped enable both the disastrous war we are now fighting in Iraq and a possible future one against Iran.
But because of the highly sensitive nature of the subject, American Jews must lead the way.
Which is why the birth of J Street, whose goal Ben-Ami says is "to redefine what it means to be pro-Israel," is cause for unalloyed celebration. "Over the course of a quarter century of doing American politics, I've seen the way in which the Israel issue plays out," Ben-Ami said in a phone interview from J Street's Washington, D.C., office. "And it greatly disturbs me and it greatly disturbs a very large number of progressive American Jews, who believe very strongly in Israel but feel that the way in which the American Jewish community's voice has been expressed on these issues doesn't reflect our values or opinions. Only the voices of the far right have been heard. They've really hijacked the debate when it comes to Israel."
This is the first page of the story.
Any wishing to read the full piece can google the author's name, or go to Salon.
The big question for J Street is whether they can ever hope to match AIPAC in money, to pay the Washington whores to see things their way.
This story has two aspects. One is that Jewish tradition has tended to be liberal for centuries. Except, in th last half-century or so, on the matter of Israel. Then, we have seen the emergence of militaristic hawks.
Second, Jews are a very intelligent people, who well know their history.
So potent has The Lobby become in America (Pat Buchanan calls Congress, "Israel-Occupied Territory") that even the dullest tack in the box are startng to perceive that the voices that were most vocal in calling for he invasion of Iraq (and now for war on Iran), were those of Jewish nationalists masquering as good Americans (and often useing uselful idiot frontmen like Cheney and Rumsfeld).
Other peoples who at one time welcomed the persecuted Jews into their midst, later turned against them. England expelled them (they were mentioned negatively in the founding document of democracy, the Magna Carta) an Spain also booted them the same year that Columbus set sail to the New World.
With so much say in Congress and so much influence in the media, many American Jews have become nervous, and want to tone it down. Understandably so.
I wish J Street very good luck. They have their work cut out for them, trying to become an effective counterweight to AIPAC.
