Mahzor

New York Public Library

Churches

Sarajevo Haggadah

Mah Nishtanah

Sarajevo haggadah

Antaea Darom

Israeli women's art

Action

Torah as music

Ben Heine

Action

ceramic bowl

Mohammad Said Kalash, "Offering Reconciliation" exhibit (photo: Ilan Amihai)

Action

Punch and Judy/Pinchas and Jamila

Avi Katz

Action

David Grossman

Ben Heine

Action

Eldrige Street shul

Lower East Side

Action

Dove

Ben Heine

Action

Two birds

Hoda Jamal

Action

Israeli and Palestinian boys

from documentary, Promises

Action

Cat in the Hat

Yiddish version

Action

Daylight through the Wall

Banksy: graffiti art on Separation Wall

Action

Maurice Sendak's Brundibar set

New Victory Theater (photo: Nan Melville/NYT)

Action

Daniel Barenboim, West-Eastern Divan Orchestra

Palestinian-Israeli musical ensemble (photo: Kerstin Joensson/AP)

Action

Great Day on Eldrige Street

N.Y.'s klezmer greats celebrate shul rededication (photo: Leo Sorel)

Action

Joint Appeal for Peace

(Avi Katz)

Joint Appeal for Peace

Ketubah, Ancona, Italy (1772)

(Jewish Theological Seminary library)

Ancona ketubah

Posts Tagged ‘american-jews’

Is Israel’s Iranophobia Virus Contagious?

Saturday, February 4th, 2012
iran revolutionary guard

Coming soon to a synagogue or embassy near you...the IRG bogeyman (AFP/Getty)

ABC News today publishes a leaked (from whom?) memo drafted by Israeli intelligence sources warning of terror threats against Israeli government sites in this country and American Jewish communal facilities from the dreaded “Iran menace.”  If you heard this story on the TV news it would sound persuasive, until you began to examine the assumptions behind it.  It begins by declaring the alleged assassination plot against the Saudi ambassador as a given.  This passage quotes a federal official mouthing the Israeli line:

“The thwarted assassination plot of a Saudi official in Washington, D.C., a couple of months ago was an important data point,” added the official, “in that it showed at least parts of the Iranian establishment were aware of the intended event and were not concerned about inevitable collateral damage to U.S. citizens had they carried out an assassination plot on American soil.”

“That was an eye opener, showing that they did not care about any collateral damage,” the federal official said.

Note the vagueness of “parts of the Iranian establishment were aware of the…event.”  This doesn’t even place direct blame for the alleged plot on Iranian leaders themselves.  It only says they were aware of it and didn’t object.  What’s also ironic about this is that I haven’t seen any U.S. expression of concern for those Iranians murdered as “collateral damage” from Mossad and MEK terror attacks inside Iran. Perhaps when we do then we can expect Iranians to care about collateral damage to citizens in this country from acts of terror no one has even been able to prove were planned.

So from a single alleged planned act of terror, Israel and U.S. intelligence operatives have spun a narrative of ongoing threat from the Iranians.  They could strike anywhere at any time.  They’re out there, out to get us: New York City, Los Angeles, Boston, Chicago.  Wherever there are Jews there is danger.  We have to be vigilant.  Because they hate us.  They all hate us.  We have to put the threat of terror in the front of our minds.  We have to become paranoid, as paranoid as the Israeli and U.S. intelligence officials are postulated this nightmare scenario:

Israeli facilities in North America — and around the world — are on high alert, according to an internal security document obtained by ABC News that predicted the threat from Iran against Jewish targets will increase.

“We predict that the threat on our sites around the world will increase … on both our guarded sites and ‘soft’ sites,” stated a letter circulated by the head of security for the Consul General for the Mid-Atlantic States. Guarded sites refers to government facilities like embassies and consulates, while ‘soft sites’ means Jewish synagogues, and schools, as well as community centers like the one hit by a terrorist bombing in Buenos Aires in 1994 that killed 85 people.

The head of Shin Bet, Israel’s internal security service, told an audience at a closed forum in Tel Aviv recently that Iran is trying to hit Israeli targets…

Local and regional law enforcement and intelligence officials in U.S. and Canadian cities, including New York, Los Angeles, Philadelphia, and Toronto have been monitoring the situation closely for several weeks, and have stepped up patrols at Israeli government locations and Jewish cultural and religious institutions. They have issued awareness bulletins reminding officers to stay vigilant.

Federal officials in those cities told ABC News that they have also increased their efforts to watch for any threat stream pointing to an imminent attack on either Israeli facilities, Jewish cultural or religious institutions or other “soft targets.”

So because some mid-level Israeli security operative spins a tale of dread, every American Jew must start looking under his bed for hidden Iranian agents out to get him (or her). If you parse this carefully, there is absolutely no proven threat mentioned, no chatter in the terror networks, no identifiable enemy operatives. Just a load of paranoia from a bunch of spooks telling us the Iranian bogeymen are out there, somewhere, waiting, just waiting. For what?

So you want proof that there’s a threat? Here it is:

“In the past few weeks, there has been an escalation in threats against Israeli and Jewish targets around the world,” one regional document noted. “Open source has reported many demonstrations against Israel are expected to be concentrated on Israeli embassies and consulates. Such demonstrations have occurred internationally as well as domestically. These demonstrations could potentially turn violent at local synagogues, restaurants, the Israeli Embassy and other Israeli sites. … Law enforcement should be vigilant when making periodic checks at all Jewish facilities.

So get this: the “threat” is from protesters at Israeli embassies and consulates.  Why?  How?  Doesn’t say.  Are there Iranian agents who’ve infiltrated these protests?  And what protests?  I haven’t heard of any to speak of.  Are Iranians demonstrating at Israeli embassies over threats against Iran?  Hadn’t heard of that.  But the end result here is Israel is setting the stage for its own attack on Iran leading to such protests by Iranians and others who oppose violence, and these protesters will be seen as potential terrorist saboteurs out to get Israelis or any American Jew they can find.

What the hell will the Israelis do with all the American Jews who will be out there on the picket lines?  Perhaps we’ll be double agents betraying our people and nation by siding with the enemy.  It would suit the absurdist ultranationalist narrative represented by Netanyahu and the Israeli war party.  I’ve got news for them.  They can attempt to insinuate their own fears into American society and use us for their own interests in ginning up hate against Iran.  But I’m not buying it.  I’m not going to be party to the epidemic of war fever they’re trying to inject into the body politic.  I’m going to stay calm and rational.  If they want to cry wolf, let them.  The rest of us will be here to point out the hysteria and unfounded claims of Bibi’s hawkmeisters.

There’s another delightful (in a twisted sort of way) irony in the following:

…The Israeli bulletin warned that Israel’s own passports might be used by terrorists intent on carrying out a plot.

Now isn’t that cute.  Israeli caused a massive international scandal by cloning passports of its own citizens for use by the Dubai assassins who murdered Mahmoud al-Mabouh.  The Mossad violated the sovereignty of its own allies in the process.  Now they have the chutzpah to tell us that they accuse Iran of planning to do the same thing.  As if there’s no justice in that, and the whole world should be shocked, I say shocked that Iran might do to Israelis what Israel itself did to them by putting them in harm’s way.

Here’s the final coup de grâce of this charade:

…We operate according to the information that Iran and Hezbollah are working hard and with great intensity to release a ‘quality’ attack against Israeli/Jewish sites around the world.

Don’t you just love the use of that word “quality?”  It made me want to throw up.  Of course Iran may be “working hard” to attack Israel and its interests.  If enemy leaders and generals threatened your country virtually every day with violent attack, you’d plan the same thing as a response to an attack.  Aside from the purported Saudi assassination plot, Iran has shown no willingness to engage in any act of terror against Israeli or Jewish interests.  And I predict they likely will not do so until and unless Israel attacks.  But I invite Israeli intelligence officials to offer real evidence, instead of rumor-and fear-mongering.

Eric Cantor on 60 Minutes: ‘Why are Jews Democrats? It’s Tikun Olam!’

Friday, January 6th, 2012

Eric Cantor had his 60 minutes of fame on the show of the same name.  Lesley Stahl asked him why Jews are Democrats and not Republicans, as he is.  Shorter Eric Cantor: It’s the damn tikun olam!  It makes me so friggin’ proud!

“It’s Tikun Olam. That is a concept in Judaism which means repair the world – and it’s a very charitable concept. And it’s that way in the Christian faith and others as well, that you give back. And clearly there is the ability to characterize all the social programs that exist at the federal level as reflecting that need to repair the world and to help those who can’t help themselves.”

Yeah, right.  Jews are charitable, give back, need to repair the world, and help those who can’t help themselves.  Those are Democratic values.  What are Cantor’s values?  What are Republican values?  They’re the 1%. Isaiah wasn’t the 1%. Jeremiah wasn’t the 1%. The 1% are not the values of the massive proportion of American Jews.  Eat your heart out, Eric Cantor!

American Jewish Leaders Rake in Big Bucks Despite Failing Brands

Tuesday, December 27th, 2011
abe foxman

Abe Foxman

Just as many CEOs of major corporations manage to increase their compensation despite miserable profits and stock performance, so it is with the leaders of the largest and most influential American Jewish organizations. The Forward, earlier this month, reported the compensation  of many of the most prominent among them. Here are some of them (latest salary information is for 2010 unless otherwise noted and in a few cases I have updated information to include full compensation including benefits, if the Forward didn’t):

Anti-Defamation League’s Abe Foxman
$690,000  (2009)

American Jewish Committee’s David Harris
$736,000

Simon Wiesenthal Center’s Rabbi Marvin Hier
$760,000

Aipac’s Howard Kohr
$581,000

Republican Jewish Coalition’s Matt Brooks
$482,000 (2009)

Conference of Presidents’ Malcolm Hoenlein
$627,000 (2011)

Jewish National Fund
$410,000 (2009)

Zionist Organization of America’s Mort Klein
$363,000

Birthright Israel
$353,000

The Israel Project’s Jennifer Laszlo Mizrahi
$200,000

Most of the salaries listed above are borderline obscene. They place their recipients squarely among the Jewish 1% and distance themselves from the rest of us. This is yet another reason most of the organizations listed above have long passed their Jewish “sell-by” date.

One measure of this (though not the sole one by any means) is their fundraising. The two of the three highest paid executives on my list, Harris and Foxman, run organizations whose fundraising has dropped dramatically over the past several years. The ADL’s has declined by over 30% between 2006-2010. AJC’s funding levels dropped by a similar amount in the same period. Their executives’ salaries, of course, have not. While we shouldn’t make the mistake of judging a non-profit’s ongoing relevance solely by it’s fundraising prowess, it is one indication of how much excitement there is for the group’s mission among donors and other funders.

I would maintain that these groups have lost their way and their relevance to all but the oldest members of the community. While times have changed, they have not. They continue to attempt to be all things to all Jews, which actually means being nothing to anyone but the alter-kockers.

I also don’t buy the explanation/excuse offered by the groups themselves for the declines registered. They say it’s because donors want more control over their donations and no longer are willing to give unrestricted gifts. The more likely reason is that as Jews become more integrated into American life, with attendant higher income and social status, they are sought after as donors and directors to local, regional and national non-profits outside the Jewish sphere. Jews now give extensively to the colleges and universities they attended, museums, symphonies, operas, political parties, social justice and environmental groups than they ever did in the past. This is money that in previous generations would’ve gone directly to Jewish causes. Now, it’s gone and there is very little money from the younger generation to replace it. All this means that the general interest Jewish groups are in the midst of an inexorable decline. I’d predict that even the single-interest pro-Israel groups mentioned below will be effected by this decline eventually.

All of which means that as these groups lose funding, their missions will also suffer. The good deeds and projects that benefited the Jewish community, plus the positive values they represented (long ago, though less so now) will gradually disappear. I don’t know what, if anything, will take their place. All this could lead to an inexorable decline in the quality of American Jewish life.

The groups that have thrived in this environment have been the single issue, largely pro-Israel ones like Aipac (+30% over past five years), The Israel Project (+30% from 2008-2010), Stand With Us (+40% between 2007-2010), and J Street (its funding increased by 300% from 2007-2008, the J Street Education Fund increased 400% from 2009-2010, and the J Street PAC increased by 200% from 2008 to 2010). These statistics are an expression of the increasing fragmentation of the Jewish community and its realignment largely around a single issue: Israel. There seems little that holds much of the organized community together except the state formally-known as the Homeland of the Jewish People.

Partially, this reflects a certain impoverishment in Jewish identity. Partially, it represents a major error made by American Jews and their leaders of putting all their eggs in Israel’s basket. When Israel crushes these eggs, then what is left for Jews to believe in?

We need an identity that includes Israel, but is not limited to it. We need to jettison the single issue Jewish identity hawked by fat cat ideologues like Michael Steinhardt and Sheldon Adelson. Their Jewishness is a dead-end. Those who are fooled into following these Pied Pipers will discover in the long run that they’ve made a fool’s bargain. They may have fat coffers, but they will stand for nothing, or at least nothing that will nurture the next generation and offer it something substantial and value-based as sustenance.

Jewish Community Heroes Competition Violates Own Rules in Barring Surasky

Monday, October 10th, 2011
cecilie surasky

Cecilie Surasky: one Jew too hot (politically) for the Jewish federations to handle

Several days ago, the Jewish Federations of North America unceremoniously and without explanation dumped Cecilie Surasky from it’s  Jewish Heroes competition, where she was running neck and neck with Chabad Rabbi Manis Friedman, whose claim to fame is that he told Moment Magazine he supported the killing of Palestinian civilians in war.

JTA now provides a justification for JFNA’s inexplicable behavior. A staff member explained, though this is nowhere specified in the online page devoted to the rules for the competition, that the poll is meant to support Israel and since JVP allegedly supports BDS, that makes Cecilie treif:

“A central value of The Jewish Federations of North America is to support Israel, and the Jewish Heroes rules preclude us from accepting any nominees whose aims run counter to that mission,” Joe Berkofsky, the Federations’ managing director of communications, said in a statement.

“Our Israel Action Network is working to challenge the boycott, sanctions and divestment movement and other efforts to isolate and weaken the Jewish state. We cannot therefore support a group that seeks to harm Israel through its support for BDS.”

Here are the rules as specified on the Heroes website:

…This is our opportunity to celebrate the individuals who dedicate their lives to helping others…

We encourage you to nominate Heroes from all walks of life—the neighbor running nonprofit bake sales, a volunteer who serves the elderly at a local retirement home, a teacher building a school for the underserved, the community organizer bringing people together.

The essential criteria [for winning] will be:

  • The nominee shows exceptional qualities and commitment in line with the mission of The Jewish Federations of North America, strengthening the Jewish community, and the ideals of tikkun olam.
  • The nominee complies with the rules of the Jewish Community Heroes campaign.

Nothing about BDS.  Nothing about Israel.  Nothing about any political issue.  As far as the rules are concerned it’s an open competition.

So the JFNA statement offered to JTA is a nice bit of ex post facto hocus pocus, which is unworthy of any fair or reputable non profit organization. In fact, if she’s up for it I’d urge Cecilie to consider convening a Beit Din to adjudicate her complaint. It’s outrageous to prepare rules for a competition, and when something undesirable happens you change the rules in the midst of the voting.

In fact, what this PR flack is arguing is that there is an additional layer of unstated rules to which the candidates and competition have to adhere, that is, the Federation’s values (themselves unstated) which support Israel and oppose BDS.

I have stopped giving to my local Jewish federation for various reasons that are more economic than philosophical. But this schande doesn’t persuade me to change my mind.

One thing that does shock me is that no one has nominated any one from Stand With Us. Doesn’t the Jewish community believe that the group is doing heroic work on Israel’s behalf?

There are two good candidates in the running who I’ve voted for and would recommend. Though perhaps saying this publicly may even get my individual vote disqualified. They are Max Blumenthal and Rabbi Stuart Light.  The Republican Jewish Coalition has gotten wind of this and will likely torpedo Max’s candidacy as well.  I guess Cecilie and Max can’t be Jewish heroes in the insular world of Jewish federations.  Yet another reason why the organized Jewish community is rendering itself increasingly irrelevant.

A warning is also in order, voting in the Heroes competition will automatically add you to its mailing list.  There seems no option for opting out of it, which seems annoying.

Yesterday, I used Cecilie’s treatment at the hands of JFNA as a perfect example of how the affiliated Jewish community is circling the wagons and choosing only to deal with those within the increasingly narrow band of political consensus.  Instead of reaching out to all Jews who care about being Jewish and including them wherever possible, the Jewish leadership uses litmus tests to determine who’s worthy of entrance to the Holy of Holies of Jewish life.  This sort of thing turns Jews off, especially young Jews who look at our community and wonder why they should be involved at all.  In their world, there is so much freedom and openness to affiliate with whoever you want, to learn about any ideas you like, to consort with any person you find interesting.  How’re you keep these young Jews down on the farm after they’ve seen Paris, to quote an old WWI slogan?

Unfortunately, we Jews have a long history of banishing those who violate community standards.  The Jews of Amsterdam did it to one of the greatest philosophers in history, Baruch Spinoza.  But cherems don’t work these days.  There are too many options for Jews to choose from outside the community.  If you don’t want these Jews, they’ll go somewhere else and leave you alone crying in your beer about why all the good Jews are opting out, marrying out, etc.

I’ve reviewed JVP’s policies concerning BDS and it very specifically does not include support of any action that would harm Israel directly (or even indirectly for that matter).  It supports only divestment from, and boycott of companies that support or sustain Israel’s Occupation.  That is all.

Minneapolis JCRC: Brush Up Your Hasbara

Sunday, September 11th, 2011

The Minneapolis JCRC is trying to push the horse back in the barn after I reported (with the journalistic legwork of Mordecai Specktor) that its staff relayed negative information about Rep. Keith Ellison, the first Muslim-American member of Congress, to Israel’s Chicago consulate.  The Leibowitz transcripts revealed that the local JCRC brought the consulate up to date on Ellison’s travel schedule, including his leading a trade delegation to Saudi Arabia, which was viewed extremely negatively; and his participation in an upcoming post-Cast Lead tour of Gaza with Rep. Brian Baird.  The speakers in the transcript viewed the Gaza trip as antagonistic to Israel and its interests.  Clearly, the JCRC speaker viewed its proper role as monitoring the local Congressional delegation to detect any inkling of statements or activity that might harm Israel’s interests.  And in this case, Ellison’s travel schedule was viewed as proof of his hostility towards Israel.

Here is how Steve Hunegs, JCRC director, tries to weasel out of responsibility:

We were perplexed to read The American Jewish World’s internet story from September 8th repeating a two-year recollection of a Seattle-based blogger about an unnamed Jewish activist heard on a FBI wiretap claiming an affiliation with the Jewish Community Relations Council of Minnesota and the Dakotas (JCRC). To set the record straight, no one authorized to speak on behalf of the JCRC made the negative personal comments about Representative Keith Ellison attributed to the anonymous Jewish activist.

Hunegs isn’t quite accurate.  While I had the transcripts two years ago, I wrote blog posts about them contemporaneously and have a record of what I wrote about this matter, which confirms what I’ve claimed.  What Hunegs has is a two year-old recollection of a conversation with the Israeli consulate in Chicago.  So while Hunegs would like now to take back what was said in the transcripts (who wouldn’t?), he can’t.  Further, it may be that what was said to the Chicago consul was what the speaker thought the consul wanted to hear, and perhaps the speaker didn’t really share the extent of Israel’s negative views about Ellison.  But again, that’s not what’s on the printed page.  There was clear agreement on both sides that Ellison was bad news for Israel and American Jews.

This incident has forced Hunegs to eat humble pie and reaffirm his love and devotion to Keith Ellison which, unfortunately wasn’t as much in evidence in 2009.  So perhaps the leopard can change his spots.  But in the passage above he’s not really admitting the truth about those conversations, as I reported them based on those 2009 transcripts.  So I’m not sure he’s turned over a new leaf.  Earlier, when he released another statement in which he in effect conceded that his office did monitor Rep. Ellison on behalf of the consulate, he was speaking more honestly.

What Hunegs can do is start from here on and act and behave more fairly and carefully toward local political leaders with whom the Jewish community may have a complex relationship.  And he may want to have future conversations with the Chicago consulate on a more secure phone line.

Minneapolis JCRC Confirms Monitoring Activities, Travel Schedule of Congressman Israel Deemed ‘Hostile’

Thursday, September 8th, 2011
steve hunegs

Minneapolis JCRC director admits monitoring Rep. Keith Ellison's schedule on behalf of Israeli foreign ministry

Due to the excellent shoe leather journalism of Mordecai Specktor of American Jewish World in Minneapolis, the local Jewish Community Relations Council has confirmed that it regularly monitors the activities and schedule of local House members like Rep. Keith Ellison, who Israel considers hostile to its interests, on behalf of the Israeli foreign ministry.

Yesterday, Specktor and I had a long discussion about my recollection of conversations contained in surveillance transcripts I read.  After approaching the JCRC regarding this, Specktor drew a denial from JCRC director Steve Hunegs that it dealt with the Israeli embassy in Washington.  But then I recalled a tremendous amount of activity in the transcripts concerning the Israeli consulate in Chicago (which diplomats confirmed would become a key diplomatic outpost because it was the home of the new president and incoming Conference of Presidents leader).  When Spektor returned to the JCRC and asked whether it had had such conversations about Ellison with the Chicago consultate, Huengs released this statement:

As part of our work fostering a strong U.S.-Israel relationship, the JCRC communicates from time to time with the Consul General’s office in Chicago. As you might imagine, some of our conversations necessarily concern federal legislation and policy towards Israel and the Middle East. Accordingly, the JCRC’s conversations with the Consul General’s office have included discussions about members of Minnesota’s Congressional delegation, including Representative Ellison.

The transcripts showed that JCRC staff and consular officers evaluated Ellison as hostile to Israel’s interests.  They specifically pointed to his planned trip to Gaza with fellow House member Brian Baird (who formerly represented a hometown Seattle district) just after Operation Cast Lead and to his recent hosting of a trade delegation to Saudi Arabia.  They compared Ellison unfavorably to another new member of Congress who was also an African American Muslim, Andre Carson.  Carson was someone who, as Margaret Thatcher said about Gorbachev, “we can do business with.”  In other words, Carson was a “good Muslim,” Ellison not.

It appears from Hunegs statement that he’s attempting to put his best foot forward and suggest that the Jewish community’s interests overlap those of Rep. Ellison and his constituents.  I applaud this.  Let’s let the JCRC go back to doing what they do best, which is representing local Jewish interests.  If we put Israel above those local interests we will only make enemies, and unnecessarily.

If you read between the lines of Huneg’s statement above, you will find a confirmation of the monitoring the local Jewish community was offering as a service to the Israeli foreign ministry on behalf of Israeli interests.  One has to ask, if this type of activity is standard for the Minneapolis JCRC and presumably others across the country, where do the interests of Israel and those of the U.S. diverge?  Or do they at all?  Is it the role of the official representatives of the American Jewish community to consult with Israeli government officials about local Representatives who Israel (and they) feel are “bad for Israel?”  Is it right to peruse Congressmember’s travel schedules to inform the Israeli government when local Representatives may be taking trips deemed harmful to Israel’s interests?

Look, I hate the dual loyalty charge.  I think it’s a load of malarkey.  But when our Jewish federation staff members essentially collude with Israel’s official representatives on behalf of explicitly Israeli interests, it’s much harder to defend against this charge.

We have to understand as American Jews that there are times when American interests are different from Israeli.  When Israel asks us essentially to inform on our elected officials that’s not right and not in our interests as Americans.  And I’m not just including this specific incident.  The transcripts revealed that American Jewish leaders were willing to sign their names to ghost written op-ed pieces (written largely by embassy or consular staff) in the Boston Herald attacking Iran.  They revealed that Aipac and the foreign ministry were sponsoring “bash Iran” conferences in major cities throughout the country (as they did here in Seattle).  They revealed intense coördinated lobbying by Israeli diplomats and American Jewish leaders on behalf of harshly punitive legislation against Iran.

This isn’t right.  It isn’t kosher.  And it isn’t American.  I should make clear that I’m not opposed to American Jews lobbying on behalf of American Jewish interests.  I’m not opposed to American Jewish lobbying on behalf of a strong, safe Israel.  But I am opposed to crossing the red line so that we become mere extensions of Israel’s interests in this country.  I am opposed to those such as Aipac who claim that there is never such a distinction.  This is wrong and this is pernicious both for Israel and American Jews.

Gershom Gorenberg is a Liar

Monday, June 20th, 2011

I was shocked today when I saw in my site stats, a visit to this blog from The American Prospect and, following the link, read that Gershom Gorenberg has written an essay in which he’s blatantly lied about my political views, saying they represent “the grim anti-Zionist left.”  His essay is a bit of puffery written on behalf of J Street in which he sets up a false dichotomy between those who attack J Street from the far right (Daniel Gordis) and the far left (me).  Of course, Gorenberg neglects to mention that at one time I supported J Street, donated personal funds, and even organized a blogger panel at its first national conference.  Issac Luria even organized an online debate between Jeremy and I during which I’d looked forward to challenging him with my views of where J Street was going.  They debate never happened because they chose not to do it.  It was after this and a bit of lazy staff work on Luria’s part in response to a request for help in writing a post that defended J Street, that I decided that I was done with the group.  But all this reality would spoil the nice (false) juxtaposition he had going.

Any half-way decent human being whose spent five minutes reading this blog knows what I am, what I call myself, and what other reporters and publications (including Yediot, Walla and Maariv in Israel) have called me when they’ve written about my views. Progressive Zionist?  Yes.  Criticial Zionist?  Yes.  Some have called me a leftist and others liberal.  But the only people who call me anti-Zionist are settlers and their supporters.  Oh and how can I forget cretins like David Abitbol and Aussie Dave whose Zionist credentials are tarnished by their own proclivity for lying.  These hasbarists are going to love Gorenberg too.  I am NOT an anti-Zionist and calling me that is a low blow of the type I didn’t think Gorenberg had in him.

But writers harbor grudges and Gorenberg has one against me because he wrote an essay asking the fraudulent question: why are there no Palestinian Gandhis?  Even The Atlantic which was supposed to publish it, turned it down (wonder whether he peddled it to TAP as well and they turned it down?).  Gorenberg then had to go to The Weekly Standard, where Bill Kristol was happy to publish material by a liberal Zionist attacking the Palestinian movement.  I don’t think Gorenberg forgave me for that, even though I tried to couch my criticism as constructively as I could and confirmed my (then) respect for him.  He was waiting for an opportunity to repay me and now he’s taken it.

I’ve written to the TAP editor demanding a correction of this error and also demanded from Gorenberg that he do so.  Now I await a reply.  If they are willing to correct it then they will show themselves to be honorable people.  If not, then they will further tarnish the term “liberal Zionism,” which has taken an awful pounding over the past decade or so.  As things stand now, Gershom Gorenberg is a liar.  I hope he’s willing to correct himself so that I can acknowledge that when he makes a mistake he’s honorable about fixing it.

The fact that a liberal Zionist like Gorenberg needs to write me out of the Zionist tribe tells you a lot about the bankruptcy of liberal Zionism and almost nothing about my real views.  To some of you this may appear rather academic.  To those of you who may be to my political left it may be even slightly irritating.  But I assure you that when you write about the conflict as an American Jew what you call yourself and what others call you matters.  When someone lies about your views it damages your reputation.  When someone publishing in as respectable a publication as The American Prospect lies about your views it’s even more troubling.

The occasion of Gorenberg’s essay was in part to flack for Jeremy Ben Ami’s shining new opus on the beauty of liberal Zionism to be called: A New Voice for Israel.  Jeremy Ben Ami is not a new voice for Israel.  There is little that is new about liberal Zionism.  And besides, does Israel as currently constituted need so-called progressive voices speaking up on its behalf?  I find it interesting that his new book doesn’t contain the word “peace.”  It’s just “for Israel.”  That says it all, doesn’t it?  How many times do you want to bet you’ll see the word “Palestinian” in that new book of his?

In the weakness of his grasp of my views, Gorenberg doesn’t understand that I actually represent the views of those, if they remain involved, were/are on the left end of J Street’s politics.  At the first conference, which I attended, there were many more participants reflecting my politics than Jeremy’s as evidenced by the boos meted out to J.J. Goldberg and similar liberal Zionist speakers who embarrassed themselves with their Neanderthal reading of American Jewish Zionist thought.

Jeffrey Goldberg, Like a Broken Clock, Gets Things Right Once in a Great While

Thursday, April 29th, 2010

And it’s worthy celebrating when he does (since it happens so rarely):

“I don’t believe that time is on Israel’s side in the American Jewish community,” he said. “I think the average 55-year-old American Jew thinks something very, very different about Israel than the average 25-year-old American Jew. Just think of a kid today at Berkeley or Yale. Do they seem like the natural constituency for AIPAC?”?

–Gal Beckerman, Strain in U.S.-Israel Ties Spurs Anxiety About ‘Dual Loyalty,’ The Forward

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]
Performance Optimization WordPress Plugins by W3 EDGE