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 ‘george-soros’

Taglit-Birthright and Birthright Unplugged to Merge

Monday, November 8th, 2010
taglit le'kulanu

New itineraries for revamped Birthright tours

One of the more riveting and unexpected announcements of this year’s General Assembly (GA) of Jewish federations is that the Taglit-Birthright program has decided to merge with Birthright Unplugged and welcome Jewish and Palestinian youth together to return to their ethnic roots in the Holy Land.  The group, to be renamed Birthright for All (Taglit Le’Kulanu), will adopt the slogan:

Israelis And Palestinians. Two People, One Future.

The new group is the inspiration of Youth Against Delegitimization (YAD), which is sponsored by the Jewish Council of North America (JCNA).  YAD believes that the real way to ensure Israel’s legitimacy is by embracing its identity as a nation of Jews, Muslim and Christians.  Hence the decision to add Palestinian youth and staff to the trips.

It is rumored that hedge fund titan and purported Israel-hater George Soros and Palestinian entrepreneur Sam Bahour engineered a coup, wresting control of Taglit from Sheldon Adelson and Michael Steinhardt, its current neocon funders.  When Soros promised the board that he would triple funding and bring an extra 100,000 Diaspora Jewish youth to Israel, it voted to endorse the radical shift in the group’s mission.

The struggle for control of the group has initiated a free-for-all among other right wing funders, with a rumor that Dr. Irwin Mieskeit, noted bingo king and hospital reseller, is angry at the loss of Birthright as a re-education tool for Diaspora Jewish youth.  He is rumored to be considering founding a competing group to be called, My Birthright Not Yours, which will only visit sites sacred to the settler movement.  Included in this group’s tours will be paramilitary training, personal audiences with Mossad hitmen, briefings with IDF commandos preparing them for their next targeted killing assignment.  Parents of tour participants will even be offered shares in Dr. Mieskeit’s real estate projects which are miraculously transforming East Jerusalem into a Jewish city once again.

In comments offered jointly to Arutz Sheva and New York Jewish Press, Mieskeit is reported to have said about the new group:

A bruch on them, we can never support this Birthright fraud nor an effort to bring a more balanced view of Israel.  Who needs balance?  We know right from wrong.  We’re right, they’re wrong.  With those Birthright shmegegees, the next thing you know they’ll be talking about Nakba and Palestinian suffering, wah, wah, wah.  Crocodile tears.  That’s what it is.

Look, let’s be honest.  A little Holocaust trauma goes a long way when you’re trying to steal the land of another people.  I’m not above making Jewish girls cry if it helps me buy the Shepherd Hotel for a song and a dance.

Birthright tours under the old regime were noted for making shidduchs and producing new Jewish couples to take their place proudly on the stage of Jewish history.  Dr. Mieskeit invoked a hidden fear of many Jews thinking about sending their children on intimate tours with Palestinians:

We’ve already got enough Jews marrying out.  Do we need those Palestinian boys shtupping our girls, knocking them up and producing little half-breed Jewrab babies?

Returning to Birthright for All–now, for the first time the program will be open to Palestinian youth as well, enabling them to rediscover their connections to the land of their forebears.  Instead of avoiding the Territories as previous Birthright tours did religiously, the new tours will include travel throughout Israel and the Territories.  In a first, the new Birthright proposes to visit both settlements and their next door neighbor Palestinian villages.  While a Birthright for All spokesperson said that tour participants may help with the Palestinian olive harvest, insurance and legal liability will prevent any of the young people from participating in the pogroms sponsored by the settler youth.

Here is a statement from the new organization about its goals:

Taglit Lekulanu will introduce a more realistic perspective on Israel by exposing participants to both Jewish and Palestinian narratives. The trip will be open to Palestinian and Jewish Americans and staffed by both Jews and Palestinians.

The trip will bear witness to the occupation, spending a morning with MachsomWatch at West Bank checkpoints and taking tours around the Separation Wall and Hebron. There will also be meetings with Palestinian human rights activists and a visit to Jewish settlements in East Jerusalem.

Inside Israel, meetings with IDF officers and Jewish Agency representatives will be complemented by meetings with Israeli anti-occupation activists and civil rights organizers struggling for equal rights for Israel’s Palestinian citizens. Participants will also visit unrecognized Bedouin villages in the Negev and learn about the social struggle of Arab Jews. And of course there will be time to explore Tel Aviv’s famed nightlife and shopping.

Make sure they tell ‘em about all the real estate opportunities available in Jaffo through evicting poor Arabs from their run down apartments, tearing ‘em down, and turning ‘em into luxury condos for white Jews.  This way they can realize their Zionist dreams of rebuilding the homeland while making a handsome profit at the expense of the lowly and downtrodden Arab usurpers.  That oughta keep ‘em comin’ back for more…

Note: Events related above may or may not take liberties with fact.  They certainly bear a greater resemblance to truth, at least as I see it.

‘Follow the Money’ of Jewish Neocons

Thursday, October 21st, 2010

I just came across this Ben Smith Politico post I missed when it came out during the J Street funding imbroglio.  It notes that, at least according to J Street, the IRS was at fault for posting publicly the names of the donors to its 501c4.  Here’s the organization’s statement:

We are also committed to protecting the privacy of our donors, which is guaranteed by law in the case of contributions to our 501(c)(4) and was egregiously violated by the Internal Revenue Service in erroneously and illegally making our donor schedule available to the public.

But there’s something here which doesn’t make sense (at least to me) and Smith notes it.  A 501c4 doesn’t have to report its donor lists to the IRS, so why did J Street?

…A politically conservative Jewish blogger, Jeff Dunetz…turned them [the donor list] up on a search for public form 990s on the Foundation Center’s database…which are the tax returns non-profit groups are required to make public. They are not, however, required to include publicly the pages listing their donors.

Personally, I’ve seen numerous 990s in which non-profits list their donors.  So blaming the IRS for this seems silly.  J Street didn’t need to include the names and it did.  Either it got bad advice from an accountant or it just bungled things.

matt brooks rjc

Matt Brooks, RJC's half-million dollar man

All of this is prologue though for some online digging of my own.  I did this because during my coverage of the Eli Lake-manufactured J Street story (especially in light of the U.S. Chamber’s massive infusion of foreign money into the current Congressional elections), I asked why journalists aren’t doing as much due diligence regarding the reports filed by right wing Jewish groups.  Unfortunately, my search didn’t bring up anything quite as explosive as George Soros’ “secret” gift, but there were a few eye-openers nonetheless.

A peek through Aipac’s 990 reveals that it raised $60-million in 2009 and $92-million on hand at that year’s end.  It paid Howard Kohr, its president, a cool $553,000.  And Richard Fishman, its executive director, $400,000 plus an unspecified “business transaction” totaling $370,000.  It also reveals transfers in the tens of millions to the American Israel Education Foundation, the Aipac arm which finances political junkets to Israel.

The Republican Jewish Coalition took in $6-million in 2009.  Of that, over $2-million went to Jamestown Associates for TV and print ads attacking Democratic candidates.  Ari Fleischer’s outfit made $120,000, a cool bit of change.  RJC paid Matt Brooks, its director, a paltry $500,000.   Some interesting names among its board of directors: Shelly Adelson, Jimmy Tisch, Bernie Marcus, Ken Mehlman, Fred Sands, Martin Selig, Mel Sembler, Ken Bialkin, Ari Fleischer, and David Frum.

The 990 form contains this hilarious RJC lie, which shows how such non-profits make a mockery of the non-profit tax code:

The coalition does not directly participate in political activities.

How Did Eli Lake Get Confidential IRS Documents for his J Street Story?

Sunday, October 3rd, 2010

I said my piece yesterday about Eli Lake’s fake expose on George Soros’ donations to J Street.  But a new question came to me today.  J Street is a 501c4.  As such the IRS does not publicly disclose donors to such groups.  So how did Lake get the names of Soros and the organization’s other major donors?  My money is on a few possibilities: a Republican operative (perhaps in Congress), a former J Street staffer, or someone at the IRS.  But however he got the data, my money is on Aipac, with its active intel capabilities, or the Republican Jewish Coalition (or someone perhaps freelancing who is closely associated with it) as playing a major role in facilitating this.

Think of the timing: there is only a month remaining before the mid-term elections.  Control of the House and possibly the Senate lies in the balance.  Even a few elections in states with large Jewish populations in which J Street could play a major role (think Joe Sestak)–even this could swing the balance from blue to red.  If J Street is wounded.  If its donations dry up at this vital juncture, then those few candidates will have less money to place ads on TV.  Their message will be stifled.  And even if there is only a marginal impact on the campaigns through this fake scandal, then big things could result for Republicans.

I’d guess my money would be on the RJC for that very reason.  They have everything to gain from these revelations.  Their past sleazy behavior has proven that they have little to lose in the scruples or morals department.  So there’s almost no downside for them even if eventually someone (not Eli Lake) discovers that they were involved.  The RJC is built on sleaze.  It thrives on it.  In fact, I bet, if they were involved, that Matt Brooks is high-fiving it up as I write this.

Yes, it’s true, this is speculation.  No smoking gun, yet.  But who knows.  The circle turns.  The joker is sometimes unmasked.

The media is rife with stories about how dirty political media campaigns have become in this election cycle, about how opaque the funding is.  But Lake’s story has proven that there can be a flip side.  If you have a highly motivated, well-funded, and skilled enemy, they can hurt you.  Once again, this proves the stupidity of the Supreme Court’s decision to turn U.S. federal elections into the Wild, Wild West.  It shows the virtue of full transparency in the sphere of campaign funding.  I say force J Street and every other 501c4 including ones financed by the fatcats of Aipac and RJC to publicly name their donors and how much they gave.

And I warn whichever Republican spook secured Lake’s scoop for him: what goes around comes around.  And I hope to God that you, and whatever 501c4 you’re affiliated with, are next.

NOTE: I just read Ron Kampeas’ fabulous blog post on this story.  Among his best lines is:

J Street has a “who am I” problem.

Which is precisely what I write above and have been writing here for a year or more.  Are they for Iran sanctions or agin ‘em (for ‘em now, agin ‘em before they were for ‘em)?  Are they for Goldstone or agin ‘im (a little of both)?  Are they independent and progressive or Obama’s “blocking back?”

Kampeas really nails Lake far better than even I can do, because he swims in the same pool as they do as a Jewish journalist and because Kampeas has far more experience covering this inside the Beltway political zone.  I apologize for including Ron in my challenge of yesterday as to journalists who should digging at this and related stories harder.  But I’d still like to see Ron and other work at unearthing the sugar daddies of the right wing pro Israel 501c4s.

Washington Times Smears J Street Over Soros Gifts

Sunday, October 3rd, 2010
DAVOS/SWITZERLAND, 27JAN10 - George Soros

George Soros: Israel lobby's Wicked Witch of the East

Before I begin this post let me make a few disclosures.  I once thought very highly of J Street.  I don’t anymore.  I think it’s a useful organization, but little more than that.  At one time, I believed it would be an independent progressive voice for a just Jewish approach to the Israeli-Arab conflict.  Instead, it has become a Jewish rooting section for the Obama presidency and its Middle East agenda or as Jeremy Ben Ami has proudly put it: “Obama’s blocking back.”

At least, that’s what its public statements reveal.  I suspect that its leadership and donors may actually have a more genuinely progressive agenda which they are too cautious to display.  But again, this isn’t the face they show the public so there’s little way to judge whether or not this is so.  All this to say that I have no special axe to grind one way or the other in what I’m about to write.

eli lake

Eli Lake: caught a big fish this time (Washington Time)

The Moonie Washington Times, and its pro-Israel neocon correspondent Eli Lake, have mounted a full frontal assault on J Street and its director Jeremy Ben Ami.  The charges?  J Street, after telling the world at its founding that George Soros would not be a leader or donor, actually accepted $750,000 from him over three years.  Apparently, right-wing Jews like Eli Lake think George Soros is a cross between Beelzebub and the Wicked Witch of the East.  But the last I checked he was a U.S. citizen entitled to fund political groups with which he feels compatible, just as John Hagee is.  Why anyone in their right mind would be scandalized that Soros has funded J Street is beyond me.  And Lake has stirred up a tempest in a teapot.

Besides this, Lake has made egregious errors in his reporting.  He claims that Soros’ gift was “secret” and that the group “repeatedly denied” it.  His proof?  This statement at the J Street website:

“George Soros very publicly stated his decision not to be engaged in J Street when it was launched — precisely out of fear that his involvement would be used against the organization.”

The worst that can be said about this is that it is misleading.  But only the most partisan and uncharitable reading would claim this is a deliberate attempt to conceal Soros’ gifts.  Further, J Street reported the gifts to the IRS, as it was legally required to do, which is how Lake discovered it.  In this day and age, it’s almost impossible to conceal such donors and J Street did not do so from the IRS.

Lake reported the gift was “one-third” of J Street’s overall financial support for the 2008-2009 financial year, when according to figures from J Street published in The Atlantic, it was actually around 20% if you count it towards 2008 around 5% if you count it toward 2009.  Even the 20% number is taken out of context because it only covers a single year of the group’s three-year existence, and not even its most recent one.

Yes, Ben-Ami made a bonehead decision in not publicly revealing that Soros supported J Street (though since 501 c 4 donors are usually not publicly divulged, he may not have had Soros’ permission to reveal his status).  The best approach to these potential controversies is to be transparent to a fault.  If you’re not, you’ll be made to pay.  And Jeremy, telling a group of Florida donors that Soros was a donor at an off the record fundraising event doesn’t constitute full public disclosure.

On a personal note, I want to reveal my own person connection to one of J Street’s major donors, Bill Benter.  Bill is not a mystery to supporters of Israeli-Arab peace though he appears to be a sinister force (see also, More Donations to Radical, Anti-Israel Causes) for much of the right-wing pro-Israel blogosphere that has taken to chanting his name at their covens.  The Wall Street Journal has him pegged as one of the world’s most successful sports bettors, as if this is a grave offense against decency.  They seem to forget that Shelly Adelson and Irving Moskowitz have each raked in more cash from betting than Bill Benter ever lost from their respective gambling empires.  And Bill Benter doesn’t prey on poor addicted saps willing to part with their life savings and ruin the lives of their families for good measure–all for the sake of the big score.  It should be mentioned that Bill has earned his fortune honestly as the CEO of a medical transcription company.

I have met Bill, sat next to him during last year’s J Street conference, and frankly without good souls like him the peace movement would be a shadow of what it is.

Bill solicited a large J Street gift ($800,000) from a Hong Kong resident of whom none of the pro-Israel right have ever heard.  She too is a ‘sinister figure’ liable to have roots in Arab terror if you believe the whisperings of some journalists who’ve reported on this.  It appears that if you are from Hong Kong and wish to support a friend’s philanthropic activities around Israeli-Palestinian peace, you do so on pain of being likened to Suha Arafat.  Again, there is nothing illegal about a Hong Kong resident contributing to J Street.

Here is what Lake writes:

President Obama and the White House have expressed concerns about untraced foreign influence on the U.S. political system through donations to tax-exempt “501(c)(4)” nonprofit organizations in recent months.

First, this gift is NOT untraced since it was fully reported to the IRS.  Second, if there is something wrong with foreign influence on 501 c 4s, then perhaps pro-Israel groups shouldn’t be accepting any gifts from Israeli citizens.  Do Aipac and the RJC wish to claim that such groups with which their donors are affiliated do not do so?  Perhaps they should start looking through their own donor lists to make sure THEY don’t have Hong Kong donors.

Lake further claims that groups and candidates that Soros supports have distanced themselves from him.  The proof?  An assistant to an assistant press spokesperson for the Obama presidential campaign said that in 2008 Obama didn’t agree with an unspecified Soros criticism of Israel, saying “we agree to disagree.”  Sounds like they’re rats fleeing a sinking ship, doesn’t it?

The unstated implication of all this is that J Street should distance itself too if it knows what’s good for it.  Nowhere does Lake specify what specific views of Soros should make him anathema for a group like J Street other than he has made “sharp criticism of certain Israeli policies.”  Well, that means that J Street should return my money too because I’ve done the same.  How many of its 10,000 donors too have done the same thing? Perhaps J Street should return all their money as well.

Lake further reported that J Street “facilitated meetings” and “was associated with” Judge Richard Goldstone’s visit to Washington to promote his report on Operation Cast Lead.  Ben-Ami responds that J Street employees called the staff of “two or three” Congress members asking if their boss would be interested in meeting Goldstone.  I’d call that something short of “facilitating meetings.”  But again, if I were Ben-Ami, I wouldn’t shy away from this.  Why not help Goldstone get a hearing on the Hill?  What’s wrong with this?  Is there some reason why Richard Goldstone should be in herem?  Does he have political leprosy?

Lake claims the Goldstone Report accused “the Jewish state of systematic war crimes.”  It did not.  It said that there was enough evidence that such crimes may have been committed that it urged Israel and Hamas to investigate their respective acts leading up to and during the war.  Here is further mischaracterization of the reception of the report by Jews and Israelis:

The Goldstone Report is widely viewed as slanderous toward the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) among the American Jewish community and in Israel.

This is not true.  The vast majority of the American Jewish community doesn’t know a thing about the report.  The majority of wealthy conservative pro-Israel American Jewish leaders consider it slanderous toward the IDF.  But that is different from what Lake reported.  He claims “at least” 1,000 Gazans were killed during Cast Lead, when the true number is 1,400.

Lake claims that Morton Halperin, a “senior officer” of J Street, played a key role in organizing Goldstone’s Washington visit.  What Lake neglects to mention that Halperin is not employed by J Street and did not do so in his capacity as a J Street director.  He did this in his capacity as a senior political strategist who works for George Soros.

It’s also interesting that instead of being an American like Lake or me, Soros is the “Hungarian-born billionaire.”  Interesting how Lake can resort to zenophobia when it suits his purposes.  Lake reminds me of the Maariv smearmeister, Ben Caspit, who worked together with Im Tirzu to drag Naomi Hazan through the gutter for NIF’s alleged collaboration with Judge Goldstone against Israel.  In fact, Jeremy better watch out–the Washington Times is liable to feature a full page ad with him sporting a horn as Im Tirzu did to Hazan in every major Israeli paper.  Maybe Lake can provide the copy and Aipac or the RJC can pay for it.

Lake rests a good deal of his case on an interview with Colette Avital, a former Labor MK and J Street’s Israel liaison, who he describes as having resigned her positions with the group.  When Avital, in her public response, claimed not to have resigned, Lake fried her by posting the audio recording of her interview (warning: audio quality is atrocious) in which she explicitly confirms she is no longer affiliated with the group.

Frankly, this is again the problem with attempting to be a liberal Zionist organization having liberal Zionist allies who are constrained by ideological blinders and cannot name reality for what it is.  When you have to rely on “luminaries” like Avital to give you juice you are also burdened by whatever limitations they bring.  And Avital appears to have brought plenty, namely that she doesn’t understand that you can’t say one thing in an interview and then deny it later.

I’d venture to say that Lake didn’t tell her he was taping the interview, which probably means he broke the law depending on what jurisdiction he lives in.  If she knew she was being taped, then she’s stupider than even I thought.

All this goes to my main problem with J Street: they’re being too smart by half in trying to hide their true progressive views under a bushel.  If you want to be a Democratic version of Aipac as J Street has been over the past year, then do so and don’t take money from Soros or aid Goldstone.  Make Colette Avital happy, play in the sandbox with the moribund Labor Party, etc.  But if you want to be a truly independent progressive Jewish group why attempt to hide from anyone what you’ve done in taking Soros’ money or helping Goldstone?  Why make common cause with an unreliable figure like Avital?

Personally, I’d rather be saddled with defending to the neocon press taking George Soros’ money, than having to explain why I was too afraid to tell the world I was taking it.  That is why Jeremy Ben Ami is now on the defensive when he should be on the offensive.

All of this comes because J Street is successful at what it does.  It offers a liberal alternative to Aipac.  That means there are powerful forces running all the way from the Israeli embassy to Aipac to Republican Party offices that want to cut it down to size.  This is a mere blip on the screen and will have no long-term impact on J Street.  Of course, I wish it would embolden Ben Ami to become more independent and forthright when it comes to the issues.  But that probably aint’ gonna happen.

Just as laughable as Lake though, is the breathless reporting (J Street Keeps Accumulating Scandals) of Aipac’s favorite Israeli media stenographer, Natasha Mozgovaya, who’s written two “exposes” recounting Ben-Ami’s less than candor.  Apparently, the Israeli embassy and Republican neocons have done a lot of heavy breathing and persuaded her that this is a killer story.  Her writing is so partisan in supposed news articles that it makes Ethan Bronner look like Lenny Brenner:

For some, Soros’ name might be a sufficient reason to cut ties with J Street because of his confrontation with AIPAC and his sharp criticism of Israeli policies. But J Street’s “less than clear” explanation regarding the issue is the reason even the organization’s most stringent supporters are raising their eyebrows.

Of course, she doesn’t manage to name a single “stringent supporter” who has raised their eyebrows over this non-story.  Why should she?  Should she be a journalist and actually dig up sources and do real research when she can just as easily call her pals Eli Lake and Ben Birnbaum at the Washington Times who can regurgitate the talking points for her?

I raise a challenge to every honest journalist who’s reported this story as if they’re uncovering Moses’ revelation of the Ten Commandments at Sinai.  Go find the same IRS documents and tell us the major funding sources for Aipac and the Republican Jewish Coalition, the two groups who appear to be crowing loudest about this revelation.  And while you’re at it why aren’t you screaming bloody murder about John Hagee’s tens of millions supporting settlements and Irving Moskowitz’s tens of millions supporting the Judaization of East Jerusalem, all with tax-deductible U.S. dollars.  And if you don’t do this then you’re nothing but partisan hacks feeding from the Israel lobby trough.

J Street Debut

Thursday, March 27th, 2008

Word is beginning to leak out about the imminent launch of J Street, the new liberal Israel lobby being founded by Jeremy Ben Ami and Daniel Levy. I reported on Gershom Gorenberg’s essay in Prospect Magazine yesterday. Today brings James Besser’s story in Jewish Week which provides a few more details:

…The new project kicks off with a hush-hush fundraiser next Monday hosted by former Clinton administration official Jeremy Ben Ami and Daniel Levy, director of the Prospects for Peace Initiative of the Century Foundation. The group will be publicly launched around the middle of April; organizers said they will not speak publicly about the group until then.

“For too long, the loudest American voices in political and policy debates have been those on the far right — often Republican neoconservatives or extreme Christian Zionists,” according to the invitation. “J Street aims to change that. We are the first and only lobby and PAC (political action committee) dedicated to ensuring Israel’s security, changing the direction of American policy in the Middle East and opening up American political debate about Israel and the Middle East.”

While sources say the structure and initial goals of the new group are still in flux, it is expected to raise money for congressional candidates who advocate a stronger U.S. leadership role in ending the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and multilateral solutions to the region’s problems.

The group will be headed by Ben-Ami, who served as deputy domestic policy adviser in the Clinton administration and later as a media consultant. Ben-Ami has worked with several Jewish peace groups, including the Center for Middle East Peace and the Geneva Initiative-North America.

Unlike similar attempts in the past the board of directors of J Street seems to have the Jewish “gravitas” and fundraising clout to make it a success. It includes leaders of the three main liberal Jewish peace groups (APN, Brit Tzedek and IPF), major Democratic fundraisers, a former U.S. ambassador to Israel, and perhaps most importantly, Mort Halperin, George Soros’ major domo. I’m hoping that Halperin’s participation implies at least Soros’ tacit support for the group.

Keep your eyes peeled for attacks from the Jewish right which will come as sure as the spring rains in the Pacific Northwest.

Baruch Ha-Ba: A Real Pro-Israel Lobby Arrives

Wednesday, March 26th, 2008

AIPAC is not a real pro-Israel lobby. It is a pro-Likud lobby. As Gershom Gorenberg points out in his fine essay in Prospect Magazine, A Liberal Israel Lobby, AIPAC’s positions are regularly at variance with the Israeli government. If you’re a true pro-Israel lobby that wouldn’t be the case.

Gershom makes a cogent case that we need such a true pro-Israel lobby. One that doesn’t look only to maintain Israel’s military power so it can continue the Occupation and subjugation of several million Palestinians. One that takes a long view of Israel’s interests and lobbies for peace between the two peoples; a peace that is stable and unshakable.

There are rumblings that such a lobby, which has been bruited about for over a year, is about to come to pass. I know more than I’m allowed to say here (for once I’m in on a secret), but since Gershom, who has his Jewish journalist ear to the ground, has all but announced the imminent formation of the group I can go at least that far. Nathan Guttman reported some time ago in The Forward that the name ‘J Street’ is one being used among the supporters of the project. I’m hoping that shortly more concrete information will be announced by the founders.

One thing that should (but probably won’t) reassure AIPAC. The new group will spend much more time raising funds for political candidates than it will lobbying for policy. As such, it will be doing things that AIPAC itself cannot even directly do (though AIPAC’s donors do this themselves and with a vengeance). But certainly a goal will be to provide a countervailing weight to AIPAC on policy issues so that politicians, hitherto petrified to cross the group, might realize that their political funding sources will not dry up if they take a position counter to AIPAC.

I’ve followed the ups and downs of this project. I’ve despaired when George Soros announced he wasn’t on board. I’ve fretted when I worried that David Saperstein would sap the heart out of it by temporizing its agenda. And now, I’ve finally got something to cheer about as the new new Jewish thing is about to arrive. This baby is long overdue. Long may it thrive.

Soros Drops Out of AIPAC Counter-Lobby Project

Friday, March 23rd, 2007

George Soros, after writing a blistering NY Review of Books essay slamming AIPAC’s pernicious influence on U.S. Mideast policy, disappointed liberal Jews by announcing he would not fund a project simmering over the past six months to create a Jewish counter-lobby to AIPAC:

Billionaire George Soros has no plans to put his money where his mouth is, a spokesman said Tuesday — two days after the philanthropist and political advocate assailed the pro-Israel lobby as a threat to Israeli and U.S. interests.

Rumors, rife since last October, that Soros would fund a dovish alternative to the influential American Israel Public Affairs Committee, quickened when Soros published a blistering attack on the lobby in the New York Review of Books this week. But Soros spokesman Michael Vachon rebutted the notion he would bankroll such an effort.

“He considered it,” said Vachon. “Many people wanted him to fund the effort. In the end he decided he should not be involved.

“On the other hand,” Vachon added, “Who can predict the future?”

That last statement is impossibly coy for me. I say, if you’re in get in; if you’re out, get out. Don’t do a Mario Cuomo Hamlet soliloquy. There’s already more than enough vacillation among key players in this conflict. We don’t need more of the same from Soros.

I can’t say that I’m surprised since on the day Soros’ NYRB essay was published I asked an inside DC source what role the essay played in his strategy regarding the counter-lobby project. The reply came back: “He’s out.”

Soros’ supposed reasoning for dropping out also isn’t fully convincing:

Vachon cited Soros’ lack of prior involvement in Jewish life as the prime reason for his decision. The 76-year-old Jewish hedge fund manager and prominent donor to liberal and Democratic causes has not been a major player in Jewish affairs over his long career, he said.

“He feels he would not have the necessary standing in the community,” said Vachon. “Some people might even be put off by his involvement in such an effort.”

It is certainly true that Martin Peretz will use this argument against Soros and others as well. But since when do we act according to what our enemies say? Since when do they determine the agenda? I’m guessing that Soros himself doesn’t feel the personal commitment to getting as deeply involved in internal Jewish communal politics as he would have to in order to really make the kind of impact that is necessary to take on AIPAC. I can’t say as I fully blame him. How many times can one bear being called a Hitler sympathizer because at the age of 12 you pretended to be a Christian and were sheltered by a government official who confiscated Jewish property?

But still, Soros’ withdrawal is terribly unfortunate. Many of us have that commitment but not the wherewithal to back it up. That’s what Soros would’ve brought to the table.

All I can say is that I somehow hope the initiative continues and proves viable and that somehow Soros is persuaded that it is the right thing to do and that he gets on board. “Ride on the peace train,” George.

I find Larry Cohler Esses’ work in Jewish Week to be impeccably incisive and lacking in the cant one can find in Jewish media outlets like JTA. But this passage, which followed his list of liberal writers who’d recently attacked AIPAC seemed oddly snarky and churlish:

Still, the cottage industry of criticism in the public square by these writers raises oxymoronic questions about their claims of suppression.

Besides the imprecise use of the term oxymoronic without clearly noting what he was referring to, he seems to say that the plethora of criticism of AIPAC gives the lie to the liberal complaint that the Israel lobby suppresses speech it views as anti-Israel. What this ignores is the clear evidence of multiple recent incidents of intimidation to silence or punish Israel critics chronicled here at this blog (Judt, Beinin, Kushner, Khalidi, Massad, Cole, etc.) and elsewhere online. It also neglects the possible explanation that perhaps liberal writers and those media which publish them are becoming less intimidated by the lobby’s reach and are showing some willingness to buck their wrath.

Tikun Olam in the Guardian

Monday, February 26th, 2007

My original post, Obama and the Jewish Vote, has been published at The Guardian’s Comment is Free blog where it’s now titled A Breath of Fresh Air. Thanks to Brian Whittaker for accepting it for publication.

Some wild notions in the comment thread. Did you know that the ‘smear Soros’ crowd claims he isn’t Jewish because he’s allegedly an atheist? Leaving aside that both his parents were Jewish, Judaism never has had a litmus test that required belief in God to be identified as a Jew.

Performance Optimization WordPress Plugins by W3 EDGE