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 ‘ron-kampeas’

News Flash: New Israel Fund Refuses to Fund Hamas

Wednesday, September 22nd, 2010

Yup, that’s about the extent of the new funding guidelines unveiled by the New Israel Fund this week after much controversy, with the right saying the group had finally seen the error of its ways and the left saying the group seemed to be renouncing the political nationalism of its Palestinian grantees. Based on my read of the new guidelines, all they say is that NIF won’t support Hamas.  In other words, the NIF will not support Palestinian groups which reject the notion of Jews having the right to self-determination in Israel.  That would exclude an Israeli Palestinian equivalent of Hamas if there ever were such a thing.  The problem is that there is no such group and for the life of me I can’t ever see one existing.  Not to mention that if it did exist it would see NIF as lackeys of the Zionist state and would spit on such funding anyway. At any rate, here is the kicker that everyone’s yelling about:

Organizations that engage in the following activities will not be eligible for NIF grants or support: Works to deny the right of the Jewish people to sovereign self-determination within Israel…

So one has to ask the question: why did they do this?  Why did they wade ever deeper into the mire spewed by the rightist smearmongers at Im Tirzu?  If there is hardly any likelihood that any truly one-state anti-Zionist Palestinian group would apply for funding, why?  Frankly, I think they shot themselves in the foot on this. Ron Kampeas’ new interview with NIF CEO Daniel Sokatch doesn’t do much to reassure.  After Naomi Paiss, in this blog’s comment threads assured us that NIF would continue funding Adalah and that the new guidelines had nothing to do with Adalah, Sokatch contradicted her in a manner of speaking:

“Whenever anyone applies to the New Israel Fund for funding or when they apply for re-funding, that will be the lens through which we make that evaluation,” Sokatch said, referring to the entirety of the guidelines, including passages that promote equal rights. The guidelines are not retroactive, which exempts Adalah and a number of Israeli-Arab groups that submitted contributions to the Arab-Israeli constitution project. Going forward, Sokatch suggested that NIF would not be as sanguine as in the past about such activities. In the past, the NIF leadership has said it does not agree with all that its grantees say or do, but it would support their right to speak as they wish in a democratic society.

In a previous disputed statement, Sokatch had told Kampeas that any Palestinian group whose mission was to create a national constitution that threatened sovereign Jewish self-determination in Israel, NIF would defund it.  In his latest “clarification,” he only slightly assuages the concern of the progressive Jewish left about his motives:

…Sokatch subsequently contacted JTA to clarify, saying that such a “mission” would have to be central to an organization’s activities in order to result in a suspension of funding…

So the way I read this is that if Adalah today were to apply to NIF for funding they would be rejected.  Somehow this does not reassure.  And if Adalah ever became a group, the centrality of whose mission was to advance a democratic constitution of the type formulated by Adalah, it would also be defunded

I haven’t heard from any Palestinian NIF grantee who is concerned about this.  Either they’re talking away amongst themselves and want to leave me out of the conversation (which is perfectly fine) or they know something I don’t.  But if I were them, I’d be hoppin’ mad.  Mainly because Sokatch and Kampeas are totally misreading Adalah’s Democratic Constitution, which a source who should know, told me it was unlikely Sokatch had read (he’s only had 11 months to do so as NIF’s new CEO).  As I wrote earlier, the Constitution advocates a multicultural Israel, not a binational or one-state Israel.  So what’s the problem?  What’s the big deal?

Again, I think this goes back to NIF’s freak-out in the face of the massive attack launched against it by Im Tirzu and their Knesset allies.  Some in the organization are worried possibly that Israel’s parliament will penalize its work or signficantly hobble it.  So they’re trying to do damage control by showing that they’re loyal Zionists, even if they do support Palestinians who aren’t.  Frankly, I don’t think it’s going to work.  The hate will continue.  They’ll continue to villify Naomi Hazan.  If they don’t have a Goldstone Report on which to pin NIF, it’ll be something else.  NIF is the punching bag of the Israeli right. The question is how will the group react to that.  In my opinion, they’re not doing a good job.  They should be steadfast.  Instead they waffle.  They should say what they support, not what they won’t support as they do in the fateful guideline above.  Bullies can smell fear.  And Im Tirzu and NGO Monitor know that NIF has blinked.  They battle is not over.  And these guidelines will do nothing to help NIF curry favor with Israel’s powers that be.

Tags: , ,
Posted in Mideast Peace | 3 Comments »

AP Breaks Anat Kamm-Uri Blau Story

Thursday, April 1st, 2010

Today, the media took a few more whacks at the pinata that is the Anat Kam-Uri Blau story and all the goodies are about to drop.  The Independent published its second story on the affair and reported that Haaretz was negotiating with Israeli authorities for Blau’s return from exile.  Interestingly while the first Independent story was written by Donald McIntyre and bylined in Israel, the second was written by a Britain-based reporter.  I’m guessing that this means that McIntyre no longer felt able to resist the gag order that usually affects all Israel-based reporters.  I’m glad to see that this attempt by Israel to suppress the story was resisted by Independent editors in London.

Perhaps the biggest hit came from AP which broke the story with a long piece covering the major details though it didn’t break any new ground.  There is one egregious error which a commenter has noted here today and which makes me steamed:

The U.S.-based Jewish Telegraphic Agency, which is not subject to the gag order, first reported the story earlier this week.

Ah, no.  The U.S.-based blog Tikun Olam first reported the story over two weeks ago and Ron Kampeas in his JTA story even acknowledges the role I played.  You remember Rodney Dangerfield?  “I just don’t get no respect.”   A rhetorical question: why is it that the MSM believes that a story isn’t a story until one of their brethren report it?  And why are blogs considered lower form of journalistic life, even if they are the ones who break a major story like this?  Well, at least we know who broke it, right?

I wrote to AP asking them to correct their attribution.  In which lifetime do you think it’ll happen?

In The Independent story I’ve become “Jewish blogs,” and it makes me feel that I “encompass multitudes:”

The move to gag Israel-based media has sparked fevered debate on Jewish blogs, which have freely reported the story. Bloggers have railed against the blackout, saying it represents a critical challenge to the freedom of the press.

Idan Landau is one of the first Israeli bloggers to write about this.  He jokingly asked his readers to destroy the blog post when they were done reading it.  We had a nice exchange earlier today and I told him I hope I don’t find that tomorrow he’s gone off on holiday to Hong Kong or London (like Uri Blau).  He’s actually in Santa Cruz, CA. and so safe from the eye of the military censor (though his blog is hosted in Israel I believe and if people can disappear in Israel at the hands of the Shin Bet, so can blogs I guess).

There are a lot of good folk who contributed to my knowledge about this affair and did so with fortitude.  The Israelis I think it prudent at this point not to acknowledge individually but they know who they are.  Sol Salbe first made me aware of the story and Avner Cohen not only provided information, he helped me avoid some rather large mistakes.  George Hale at Maan was selfless in sharing his information over the past few days.

There are a number of journalists and editors who I’d like to single out for refusing to play any role when I asked them to, but that would be rather churlish, wouldn’t it?  The next time someone tells you journalism is all about the scoop, tell ‘em they’re wrong.  For some reason, some scoops are too hot to handle.

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Tags: , , ,
Posted in Mideast Peace | 5 Comments »

Ron Kampeas Breaks Anat Kamm Story in Jewish MSM

Sunday, March 28th, 2010

Avner Cohen brought me news that Ron Kampeas broke the Anat Kam story today in JTA for the mainstream Jewish media.  Kol ha-kavod to him.  And thanks also for his tip of the hat acknowledgement of my contribution to the story.

Ron does provide some “value-added” reporting noting that Kam faces up to 16 years in prison for her alleged role in leaking top secret IDF memos to Haaretz.  Those memos proved that the army was ignoring a major Israeli Supreme Court ruling that prohibited targeted assassinations except under certain limited conditions.  I’ve been told by an Israeli who spoke to her that her attorneys are hoping that she can cop a plea for no jail time.

Is Uri Blau a wanted man?

Which leads me to ask how can someone spilling such important IDF beans ever hope to get no jail time?  I speculate (emphasis on the word “speculate”) that she may be offering, or the IDF/Shin Bet/Attorney General may be seeking to use her to fry a much bigger fish: the Haaretz reporter to whom she leaked the memos, Uri Blau.

I’ve been mystified how the Haaretz story passed military censorship, given that it included physical reproductions of the two secret memos.  I’ve never heard of the IDF allowing such material published before this.  There has to be a reason we’re not aware of that the IDF felt compelled to allow this through censorship.  At any rate, after allowing it to be published it would seem to me that Uri Blau would have to have a target on his back as far as the IDF and Shin Bet was concerned.

Today, brings an unconfirmed (by me) report via a knowledgeable journalistic source that Uri Blau has left Israel.  [UPDATE: I have heard several somewhat conflicting reports about this.  One says that left Israel in December (the same month Kam was arrested) on a trip to China with his girlfriend.  Another report says that he was on an extended honeymoon.  His Facebook page says that he'll be returning to Israel today.]  Again, one can only speculate why, but we should have a pretty good idea.  It’s the same reason that Azmi Bishara left Israel before he was charged by the Shin Bet with the equivalent of treason.  Blau would not have left the country unless he had a strong conviction that the Shin Bet and police were about to either arrest him or charge him in the case.  He knew what they’d done to Kam by secretly arresting her and slapping an infinite regress gag order preventing publication about her detention and the reasons for it.  He chose to leave rather than face prison for merely doing his job.  As in the Bishara case, if Blau did leave the country one might ask why the Shin Bet allowed him to do so?  I suspect it would’ve faced a massive firestorm of protest from the few Israeli democrats remaining inside the country.

My only hope, and one first offered to me by Avner Cohen, who’s experienced some of the same harassment by the intelligence services, is that disclosure of this sorry mess by Ron Kampeas will force the security services to back off.  That’s the reason I have reported this story myself.  I only hope that what Kampeas and I have done, and hopefully the follow-up reporting by the thus-far spineless Israeli and foreign press corps, will stop this thing before it turns into a real mess and stain on Israeli democracy.

Keep in mind that Walla until recently was owned by Haaretz.  I’m sorry to raise such cynical speculation but it may be warranted.  Can it be an accident that Kam leaked the memos to Haaretz during her military service and that after she left the army she went to work for a Haaretz subsidiary?  Instead of a do-gooder whistleblower, might we have a mole seeking to build a career for herself as a journalist?  I’m not dismissing the chance that there was some moral motivation in her actions.  But given that she wrote a disparaging Walla piece about Israeli conscientious objectors, one wonders how strong that motivation might’ve been.

Another interesting matter: one Israeli source said that Kam, after her arrest was suspended without pay.  A different source tells me that Kam was actually fired.  If you were a Haaretz or Walla editor would you suspend or fire a journalist who’d been arrested for leaking documents to one of your reporters?  It doesn’t make sense if you value whistleblowers and hope to have any turn to your reporters in the future.  I’m guessing that there was some major parting of the ways involving the legal manuvering in this case, that caused Walla to dump her.

The fact that a source told me that Kam has blamed Haaretz for ‘outing’ her is yet another indication that all is not well between these two parties.

Finally, Kampeas quotes Haaretz’s editor denying any connection between Kam and the IDF memo story:

Dof Alfon, the editor in chief of Haaretz, said the linkage between Kam’s arrest and the 2008 article, made in a number of blogs, is “absurd.” He implied that the investigative reporter, Uri Blau, had obtained the information without assistance from Kam.

I hesitate to say this since so much of this story is based on rumor and speculation, but Alfon’s denial doesn’t seem credible.

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Tags: , , , , , ,
Posted in Mideast Peace | 18 Comments »

Republican Jewish Coalition: Kampeas, Besser ‘Leftist Propagandists, Weasels’

Friday, February 12th, 2010

The RJC tweet smeared round the world

The RJC may not realize it but if there is any justice in the world they’ve just stepped in a big pile of dog poop and some staffer’s head should roll.

First a little back story: recently 54 members of Congress and major peace groups (among them Peace Now, J Street and B’Tselem) sent separate letters to Pres. Obama urging him to pressure Israel to relieve the siege of Gaza.  The letters were groundbreaking for several reasons. First, I can’t remember the last time a large group of Congress members and Mideast peace groups coordinated any political activity so publicly and forcefully.  Second, never before have members of Congress been so bold as to call outright for the end of the savage suffering inflicted by this illegal siege.  This is yet another nail in the coffin of the Israel lobby and its stranglehold over such discourse in Washington DC.  In the past, publicly advocating a position sympathetic to Palestinians would have been absolute anathema.

I’m proud to declare that Jim McDermott, my House member, drafted this statement and spearheaded it together with the first Muslim-American member, Keith Ellison.  The Forward covered the story.  Here is a portion of the statement directed to Pres. Obama:

Thank you for your…commitment of $300 million in U.S. aid to rebuild the Gaza Strip. We write to you with great concern about the ongoing crisis in Gaza.

The people of Gaza have suffered enormously since the blockade imposed by Israel and Egypt following Hamas’ coup, and particularly following Operation Cast Lead. We also sympathize deeply with the people of southern Israel who have suffered from abhorrent rocket and mortar attacks. We recognize that the Israeli government has imposed restrictions on Gaza out of a legitimate and keenly felt fear of continued terrorist action by Hamas and other militant groups. This concern must be addressed without resulting in the de facto collective punishment of the Palestinian residents of the Gaza Strip. Truly, fulfilling the needs of civilians in Israel and Gaza are mutually reinforcing goals.

The unabated suffering of Gazan civilians highlights the urgency of reaching a resolution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, and we ask you to press for immediate relief for the citizens of Gaza as an urgent component of your broader Middle East peace efforts. The current blockade has severely impeded the ability of aid agencies to do their work to relieve suffering, and we ask that you advocate for immediate improvements for Gaza…

The peace groups’ letter is slightly more forceful in addressing the siege:

We urge, therefore, that your administration use America’s unique relationship with Israel to persuade it to lift the closure of its border crossing with Gaza now.

Of course, the counter-attack has been hot and heavy.  Yvette Clark (D, Brooklyn), who is African-American renounced her support when Agudath Israel, the far-right pro-Israel Orthodox group, organized constituents to read her the riot act and publicly humiliated her at a meeting they called.  She obediently announced her capitulation.

Further, the slimeballs at the Republican Jewish Coalition have gotten in on the act.  And when they do you know something really, really dirty will come out of it.  The RJC has done nothing less than accuse two veteran Jewish journalists, Ron Kampeas (JTA) and James Besser (Jewish Week) of being “leftist propagandists and weasels.”

Why?  Because they dared to question the truth and accuracy of claims the RJC made in attacking the Congressional letter.  Kampeas had the temerity to accuse the RJC of telling an “untruth” in this statement:

These 54 Democrats expressed no concern whatsoever about the consequences their ideas might have for Israelis living under the threat of terrorism from Gaza!

Anyone who can read can see from the above passage that the Democrats who signed this letter expressed strong support for the residents of Sderot.

Besser also did something unpardonable: he implied the RJC was being racist and misleading in identifying the letter solely with its Muslim-American co-sponsor, Ellison.  The latter is a convenient target for the Republican Jewish anti-minority machine.  They don’t have much use for African-Americans OR Muslims and Ellison is the ‘daily double’ as far as they’re concerned.

Besser adds this interesting perspective to the controversy about Ellison:

…Everybody wants to blame Ellison, which raises some interesting questions, starting with this one: does being pro-Palestinian automatically mean a politician is anti-Israel? Can someone be friendly and sympathetic to both sides?

…Every time I’ve heard him speak…he’s stressed his belief that both sides in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict need to do more to live up to past commitments and take greater chances for peace. He’s spoken clearly about Israel’s need for security as part of any ultimate settlement.  He speaks the language of compromise – for both sides.

In short, he sounds pro-Palestinian without sounding anti-Israel.

Still, many castigate him  as just another Israel hater, which they seem to find even easier because of his religion.

So I wonder: are pro-Israel forces only interested in working with those who are 100 percent on their side, and defining everybody else as beyond the pale?

So for penning some relatively mild and thoughtful questions for the Israel lobby about why it demonizes everyone it can’t control, you get tarred and feathered and practically called anti-Israel.  Next thing you know they’ll be calling for Kampeas and Besser’s heads on a platter.

I know this is going to sound strange but…in a perverse way this is a good thing.  Yet another example of the lobby overreaching.  They see a chance to go for the jugular and point out the perfidy of Democrats toward Israel.  But by the very nature of their attack they’ve discredited themselves among the lion’s share of American Jewry who are more fair-minded and lucid on these same matters.

So I say: whichever RJC goon tweeted that message about Besser and Kampeas–promote him.  The higher this guy rises to his level of incompetence and pro-Israel fury, the quicker the lobby will be vanquished or turned into something truly pro-Israel.

Related articles by Zemanta
Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Tags: , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Mideast Peace, Politics & Society | 3 Comments »

Settler Knesset Member Threatens Sedition Trial Against TV Satirists

Thursday, January 7th, 2010


I recently wrote a post about a skit on Israel’s Eretz Nehederet TV political satire program which takes on the settler movement.  In the skit, settlers have take a Gilad Shalit-type IDF soldier hostage and are making demands of the Israeli government.  Suddenly they realize the government has already conceded every demand they’ve made.  The satiric message is that the settlers have taken not just a solider hostage, but the entire Israeli population.  And by doing so the settlers have achieved almost all of their interests and demands.

In the skit, one of the kidnappers is a dead ringer for settler Knesset member, Yaakov Katz (Ketzeleh).  As can be expected, Katz was not amused, especially since he is a wounded IDF veteran himself.  In this YouTube video of a Knesset education committee hearing on the broadcast, Ketzeleh goes apoplectic.  He was going so fast and furious that it challenged my own translation abilities and I didn’t notice this absolute nugget which Ron Kampeas discovered on the tape:

“When the day comes, and we will be in power, there will be retroactive laws against all those who were anti-Semitic against settlers and against the people of Israel and against the army, they will face trial.”

Hardly anyone has ever made the mistake of accusing settlers of supporting Israeli democracy, so this outburst of Jewish quasi-fascism shouldn’t surprise.  Actually, this is pure Kahanism, in which secular Jews and other peaceniks are not just political opponents but a cancer in the body politic.  Because Israelis like the actors and writers for Eretz Nehederet constitute such a poison and danger to Israel, there is no need to observe the niceties of democracy in dealing with them.  Lock ‘em up and throw away the key.

Note in the Knesset member’s diatribe, the satiric portrayals of the settlers political positions become “anti-Semitic” through a magical transformation in demagogue Katz’s mind.  Further, any insult against the settlers is an insult against the entire people of Israel because the settlers ARE Israel.  Lest anyone object to my use of the term fascist above, please note that it is the Pinochets and Argentine generals who made insulting the military a crime punishable by prison or death.  What Ketzeleh is suggesting for the future when he comes to power is nothing less: an Israel controlled by settlers in collaboration with police and military forces and in which the judiciary is a handmaiden to the security forces.

Yidn: this is not the way.

Tags: , ,
Posted in Jews & Judaism, Mideast Peace | 1 Comment »

Kampeas Criticizes J Street for Being Out of Touch on Iran Sanctions

Monday, September 7th, 2009

Ron Kampeas has written a new JTA piece in which he uncovers a supposedly major story about the disconnect between the Israeli and American Jewish left on sanctions.  The purpose, whether intentional or unintentional, is to point out to readers that J Street is out of touch with the Israeli left on the issue of Iran; and that a dovish pro-diplomacy strategy has no support on the Israeli left.

The article makes a few fundamental mistakes like this one:

Israel’s highest-ranking female soldier, Brig. Gen. Yisraela Oron…at the tail end of a U.S. tour for the left-wing pro-Israel lobby [J Street] [ had a] conversation with a group of reporters th[at] turned to Iran and its nuclear potential, and Oron was unequivocal: yes to engagement, but on a timetable that would be tied to punishing sanctions.”The thing that worries me and that worries other Israelis is that it is not limited in time,” Oron said as the faces of her J Street hosts turned anxious, adding that “I’m not sure I’m expressing the J Street opinion.”

She was not. J Street explicitly opposes a timetable and has reservations about proposed additional sanctions.

The awkward moment pointed to a potential split between left-wing pro-Israel groups and the Israeli constituents for whom they claim to speak. Unlike the Israeli-Palestinian issue, little dissent exists among Israeli politicians over how to deal with Iran.

Kampeas, a veteran Jewish journalist, has the same press releases I have which made clear that J Street is an AMERICAN JEWISH organization.  Unlike Aipac, it does not pretend to represent Israeli political opinion or parties.  It represents the views of American Jews and seeks to impact U.S. policy on that basis.  Of course it is helpful if there are Israelis who support the views that J Street espouses.  That’s why Oron came to the States.  But on no account should J Street’s positions be judged on whether there is support or opposition to them within Israel.

Equally important is that there essentially is no organized Israeli left within Israeli electoral politics.  Labor’s Knesset faction is minuscule compared to the ones it fielded in past Knessets.  Meretz is down to 3 seats I believe.  This is a pitiful showing and indicates the traditional Israeli liberal (not “left,” Ron) parties are virtually dead.  And one of the reasons they are is because they long ago stopped representing an alternative in Israeli politics.  Their endorsement of sanctions against Iran is yet another example of their problem.  The Israeli liberals outdo themselves to represent the left of the Israeli nationalist movement.  They ape the Likud in a liberal guise because they have no program of their own.

So for Kampeas to make the claim that the Israeli left endorses punitive sanctions against Iran is a misnomer.  Again, Kampeas should know this being an experienced reporter in dealing with Israeli politics.  Does Ehud Barak support a sanctions regime?  Yes.  Is he the Israeli left?  Hardly.  Maybe the left wing of the Likud governing coalition, but that hardly constitutes being on the left.

I’m very sad to say that if the American Jewish peace movement waits for its Israeli liberal counterparts to revive and develop their own effective political agenda we’ll be waiting till God tells Elijah at the gates of Rome the time has come to welcome the Messiah.  That’s why it’s important that J Street be an independent American Jewish organization that collaborates with Israelis when possible, but doesn’t coordinate or officially join with any Israeli counterpart.

To put this in other terms, J Street’s endorsement of diplomatic engagement is good policy, period.  The fact that one Israeli general or the Labor party believes differently has no bearing on whether diplomacy is the best policy for the U.S. government to pursue.

Kampeas also mischaracterizes U.S. policy in this passage:

…The administrations of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and President Obama are virtually on the same page on the need to confront Iran, and soon.

Pres. Obama has talked about the need to revisit U.S. policy in the fall if diplomacy fails.  But he has never said explicitly that the U.S. “needs to confront Iran, and soon.”  That is Kampeas’ interpretation of statements Obama has made.  And it exaggerates those statements to make Bibi and Barack appear to be on the same page when they aren’t.  Not yet  and hopefully not ever.

Here Kampeas creates a hypothetical to again falsely make J Street appear to be a group without a mandate:

“If Iran engages and the Obama administration argues that a deal has been made, the Israeli government will be very wary,” [Yossi] Alpher said. “This could immediately create a whole world of suspicions.”

Under those circumstances, the vast majority of American Jewish voters who backed Obama last year would be faced with the first either-or U.S. vs. Israel issue in decades, and groups that describe themselves as pro-Israel and pro-peace will find themselves for the first time speaking for virtually no one in Israel on a critical issue.

First, the idea that Obama will accept a deal that Iran proffers and that Israel will reject it and that all Israelis will fall into line and accept the rightist Netanyahu government’s view on the matter is wildly speculative.  Second, the idea that American Jews will also fall into line behind Israel because there will be no American Jewish groups besides J Street supporting the U.S. administration’s deal is also arguable.  If 80% of Jews voted for Obama they aren’t all (or even most) going to abandon him because he has a disagreement with Bibi.  Even over an issue as important (for Israel) as Iran.

The reason Kampeas’ reporting is especially pernicious is that Israel is engaging in a massive campaign here in the U.S. that would lay the groundwork for a massive Israeli attack on Iran.  Articles like this attempt to weaken those forces working to avert such an Israeli attack.  I’m not saying that this was Kampeas’ conscious intention.  But that’s the effect it has and that’s why it’s especially important to rebut these media hit pieces that take aim at the one group that might slow down Israel’s march toward war.

Tags: , , ,
Posted in Mideast Peace, Politics & Society | 3 Comments »

Israel Lobby Smears Obama Intelligence Appointee

Wednesday, February 25th, 2009

JTA has launched the first salvo in the Jewish war against proposed Obama intelligence appointee, Chas. Freeman.  Freeman is a friend of Obama intelligence chief, Adm. Dennis Blair, who asked the former to chair the National Intelligence Council.  Freeman’s background as former U.S. ambassador to Saudi Arabia and vocal critic of the Israeli Occupation renders him deeply suspect in the pro-Israel community.

JTA’s Ron Kampeas dredged up a highly dubious “expose” published by his newspaper in 2005 which purported to find hatred of Israel in many educational materials created by Arab groups and circulated for use in U.S. schools.  Among them was a book funded by the Middle East Policy Council, chaired by Freeman.

Here is Kampeas’ lurid prose today inveighing against Freeman:

The Obama administration’s reported pick for a top intelligence post helped peddle a Saudi-funded school study guide decried by Jewish groups and educators for having anti-Jewish biases…

Freeman is president of the Middle East Policy Council, a Saudi-funded think tank. A JTA investigative series in 2005 exposed how the council, led by Freeman, joined with Berkeley, Calif.-based Arab World and Islamic Resources in peddling the “Arab World Studies Notebook” to American schools. In the version examined that year by JTA staff, the “Notebook” described Jerusalem as unequivocally “Arab,” deriding Jewish residence in the city as “settlement”; cast the “question of Jewish lobbying” against “the whole question of defining American interests and concerns”; and suggested that the Koran “synthesizes and perfects earlier revelations.”

Then I went back to the original 2005 story to see whether its claims were any better documented.  They weren’t:

The “Arab World Studies Notebook” is…billed by its creators as an important tool to correct misperceptions about Islam and the Arab world, the manual for secondary schools has been blasted by critics for distorting history and propagating bias.

…The…publication was created as the joint project of two organizations – both of which receive Saudi funding.

Some of the references are subtle, say critics, making them all the more harmful. For example, the manual:

• Denigrates the Jews’ historical connection to Jerusalem. One passage, describing the Old City, says that “the Jerusalem that most people envisage when they think of the ancient city is Arab. Surrounding it are ubiquitous high-rises built for Israeli settlers to strengthen Israeli control over the holy city.”

• Suggests that Jews have undue influence on U.S. foreign policy. Referring to Harry S. Truman’s support of [Israel] it says: “Truman’s decision to push the U.N. decision to partition Palestine ended in the creation of Israel. The questions of Jewish lobbying and its impact on Truman’s decision with regard to American recognition – and indeed, the whole question of defining American interests and concerns – is well worth exploring.”

• Suggests that the Koran “synthesizes and perfects earlier revelations,” meaning those ascribed to by Christians and Jews.

• Leaves out any facts and figures about the State of Israel in its country-by-country section, but refers instead only to Palestine.

So here is the extent of the charges against the book that Freeman, as Kampeas would have you believe, personally peddled to impressionable American school children:

1. It correctly notes that much of Jerusalem’s Old City is Arab.  Also notes that Jerusalem’s suburban communities across the Green Line are “settlements” and that those who live there are “settlers.”  The JTA report would have you believe that the textbook is calling every Jewish resident of Jerusalem a “settler.”  Considering that they have not provided enough context in their quote to know precisely what the text is specifically saying, I judge the reference to “ubiquitous high rises” to refer to newer Jerusalem neighborhoods across the Green Line, which are generally understood by everyone except Israel to be settlements.

2. Correctly suggests that lobbying by American Zionists had an effect on Truman’s decision to recognize Israel and that this subject is “well worth exploring.”

3. Correctly notes that Muslims see the Koran as “perfecting earlier revelations” of Christianity and Judaism, just as Jews see their religion as progressing from previous pagan religions common to ancient Israel.

4. Correctly notes that a textbook about the Arab Middle East doesn’t feature a great deal of information about Israel.

So what have we here?  Where’s the smoking gun?

To his credit, the JTA reporter does quote a figure sympathetic to Freeman like M.J. Rosenberg.  And I suppose I should be thankful that Freeman’s chief “accuser” in this story is none other than putative Aipac spy, Steve Rosen.  I find it rich that Rosen in effect accuses Freeman of having “dual loyalty” to Saudi Arabia, when the U.S. government is currently accusing Rosen of stealing secret intelligence documents to give to Israel.  One man’s dual loyalty is another’s filial duty to the Jewish state.

Among Freeman’s other offenses were to defend Walt-Mearsheimer’s The Israel Lobby, along with accepting $750,000 in Saudi funding for MEPC.  Kampeas does note a fact previously reported by Politico’s Ben Smith–that pro-Israel analysts like Dennis Ross also work in a similarly partisan environment funded by heavily pro-Israel donors.  Ross also worked for a think tank affiliated with the Jewish Agency for Israel, a quasi-government group.

So it seems that for Rosen and Freeman’s other detractors, what’s good for a goose like Ross isn’t for a gander like Freeman.  Seems fair to me.

Tags: , ,
Posted in Jews & Judaism, Mideast Peace, Politics & Society | 16 Comments »

Lantos: White House Pressured Olmert to Deny Israeli Peace Message to Syria

Monday, April 9th, 2007

Josh Marshall reports something I surmised almost from the beginning of the flap over whether or not Nancy Pelosi carried a message from Israel to Syria saying the former wanted peace talks with the latter. As soon as Pelosi made the diplomatic demarche public, Olmert denied it had ever existed. But no less an Israel hawk than Tom Lantos not only confirms that Pelosi delivered exactly the message conveyed to her by Olmert in Jerusalem, he also lays blame for the Olmert denial squarely at the feet of the White House. Marshall quotes Rom Kampeas at JTA:

Lantos suggested there was pressure from the White House.

“It’s obvious the White House is desperate to find some phony criticism of the speaker’s trip, even though it was a bipartisan trip,” said Lantos, a Holocaust survivor who is considered the Democrat closest to the pro-Israel lobby. “I have nothing but contempt and disdain for the attempt to undermine this trip.”

The White House had no comment on the allegations by Lantos that it pressured Olmert to offer a clarification.

Such backdoor statecraft between the White House and Olmert would not be unprecedented.

Last year, U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice talked Olmert into a 48-hour cease-fire during the war with Hezbollah to allow humanitarian relief, but within hours Israeli planes were bombing again, to Rice’s surprise and anger. Olmert had received a call, apparently from Cheney’s office, telling him to ignore Rice.

Olmert’s message seemed calibrated to cast Pelosi as a naive novice.

I was never aware of the story of Cheney’s sabotage of Rice’s ceasefire proposal. That’s sure an eye-opener.

And I have nothing but disdain for all the dopey CNN reporters and Washington Post editorial writers who accept at face value that it was Pelosi who had the rug pulled out from under her in Damascus; that she somehow overplayed her hand in telling the world that Israel wanted peace with Syria. If she did fall down (and I don’t even accept this premise) it’s because Ehud Olmert set the rug on the floor and Dick Cheney yanked it at the proper moment.

Tags: , ,
Posted in Mideast Peace, Politics & Society | No Comments »

Performance Optimization WordPress Plugins by W3 EDGE