4 thoughts on “Aipac Favors Gutting Proposed Democratic Congressional Ethics Reforms – Tikun Olam תיקון עולם إصلاح العالم
task-attention.png
Comments are published at the sole discretion of the owner.
 

  1. Privately funded junkets pose a problem when they amount to what is a thinly veiled form of bribery. Thus, a ski trip to Aspen to attend an alleged conference of the insurance industry, or a week in Tahiti at behest of petroleum companies, are a serious problem. That is the laudatory purpose behind the ethics reforms.

    The trips to Israel funded by NJDC and the like are different. NJDC, AJC, and the other advocacy organizations are not hoping to win lawmakers’ favors because of the plush bedding at the King David Hotel, because it’s fun to float in the Dead Sea, or because they want to take Congressmembers clubbing to meet the incredibly beautiful women in Tel Aviv. Rather, these trips have a bona fide political and educational purpose.

    Richard’s complaint is that these trips do not include the advocacy that he wants to hear or the facts as he believes them to be. Specifically, he claims that these trips do not include any progressive voices. Even using his limited data, this is clearly false. The trips have included visits with Shimon Peres, a long time progressive and dove, as well as a recipient of the Nobel Peace Prize (personally, I don’t think this last fact makes him beyond reproach, but apparently Richard does. See his post on Desmond Tutu). They also showed that, as adeptly noted by Howard Dean, that while Peres and Netenyahu are both on opposite sides of the political spectrum, that just about everyone in Israel, liberal and conservative, agrees that Israel needs to take the measures it has taken to defend itself. The Uri Averny’s of the world are a rarity, and their popularity and relevance are hugely overstated by certain parts of the media, which is another reason it’s good to bring people to the country to actually meet leaders and see the consensus on both the left and the right.

    But ultimately, the real problem is that Richard just doesn’t get free speech. Free speech means that groups advocate their point of view. The fact that Richard doesn’t like what pro-Israel advocates say doesn’t mean they should not be able to advocate it to Congress by demonstrating, up close, the very very real threats that Israel faces from its neighbors. When congressmembers visit the Palestinian territories and meet with PNA leaders (which they did until the Palestinians elected representatives from an organization that is internationally recognized as a terrorist group), you wouldn’t expect those groups to take Congressmembers to the many Palestinians who oppose Palestinian policy. You wont see visits to the Christian communities who are desparately trying to keep people from fleeing PNA rule. You wont see meetings with Arabs in East Jerusalem who are positively horrified at the prospect of Israel being forced to cede sovereignty to Palestine.

    Ethics is a huge issue in the new Congress (or at least it should be). As such, the ban on privately funded travel has some appeal, because in many cases it really is just a form of legalized bribery. It would be a real shame, however, if the baby were thrown out with the bathwater by prohibiting bona fide educational and advocacy trips like funded by AJC and AIPAC.

  2. The trips to Israel funded by NJDC and the like…are not hoping to win lawmakers’ favors because of the plush bedding at the King David Hotel, because it’s fun to float in the Dead Sea, or because they want to take Congressmembers clubbing to meet the incredibly beautiful women in Tel Aviv. Rather, these trips have a bona fide political and educational purpose.

    Spoken like a true flack. If you don’t work for Aipac (I note you live/work in the DC area), then they should grab you up. Not that you’re a convincing propagandist. But by their standards you are.

    You’re trying to split hairs. A junket is a junket is a junket. If these junkets are so important–then organize them completely transparently. Offer them to legislators but w/o any subsidy whatsoever. Let them go to Israel on their own dime.

    As for how “educational” they are–my friend worked for Aipac & had other Hill staff positions & has been working there for over 20 years. If he says they are “All propaganda, all the time,” and you say otherwise, then I know who I believe.

    And if you’d care to maintain the junkets are diverse and multi-partisan would you care to provide me any full itineraries so I can judge for myself? Can you point to any junkets who met with a Hadash or Meretz member? How about a Peace Now representative? How about Palestinian NGOs? How about Neve Shalom leaders? Or B’Tselem? Or Rabbis for Human Rights? How many junkets met with any of these organizations?

    You see, this is precisely why these junkets are boondoggles & not bona fide educational missions. Congressmembers see what Aipac wants them to see and they “disregard the rest” in Paul Simon’s words. Aipac doesn’t want them to hear about peaceful co-existence. Aipac doesn’t want them to learn that Arabs and Israelis can live together peacefully. Aipac wants to show them a vision of eternal war in which Israel is always vulnerable, always sinned against & never sinning.

    Richard’s complaint is that these trips do not include the advocacy that he wants to hear

    Wrong again, These junkets are FULL OF ADVOCACY as I’ve described above. They’re full of advocacy for a nationalist, Likud political perspective on the Israeli-Arab conflict. Any junket will have advocacy. It’s just a question of whether you attempt to include all sides or whether you’re satisfied with presenting only one narrow one. You & Aipac are clearly satisfied with jingoism & propaganda. I’m hoping the majority Democrats ignore your pablum and do the right thing by ending porky junkets like those run by Aipac.

    The trips have included visits with Shimon Peres, a long time progressive and dove, as well as a recipient of the Nobel Peace Prize

    Oh, I see–a visit with Shimon Peres means you’ve covered all the progressive bases? Puh-leeze. Shimon Peres is a washed up has been who hasn’t represented a truly dovish or progressive political position in years. To say that seeing him means you’ve heard a truly diverse perspective is ludicrous and laughable.

    (personally, I don’t think this last fact makes him beyond reproach, but apparently Richard does.

    I never said ANY Nobel Peace Prize laureate was “beyond reproach.” In fact, if you’d bother to read the comments section of that post you would see that I did take Tutu to task for one of his comments about Israel. Either you ignored that, were too lazy to read it, or did read it & deliberately omitted it because it’s ever so much more convenient to take pot shots when you can alter reality to yr own peculiar specifications.

    And as for Peres being “beyond reproach,” guess you messed up on that one as well since I’m highly critical of Peres with or w/o a Nobel. You see the Prize doesn’t give you a free ride. It gives you a platform. It’s what you do with that platform that matters. Peres has done precious little with it esp. compared to others who’ve won it who’ve been featured here.

    just about everyone in Israel, liberal and conservative, agrees that Israel needs to take the measures it has taken to defend itself.

    Just about everyone agrees that the IDF should pound Beit Hanun & its civilian inhabitants into the ground? Just about everyone agrees that the IDF should strangle Gaza till old people die for lack of medical care and children develop malnutrition? Just about everyone agrees that Israel should not engage in final status negotiations with the Palestinians? Just about everyone agrees that Israel should not withdraw from W. Bank settlements? Just about everyone agrees with the policy of targeted assassinations & their concomitant taking of innocent human life? Just about everyone in Israel agrees that Israel should use DIME, white phosphorus and cluster bombs against civilians? Just about everyone agrees Israel should not negotiate with Syria?

    These are all policies and “measures it has taken to defend itself” which “just about everyone” does NOT agree with. Once again, you use specious rhetorical tricks to get out of what the real & true questions are–which are Israel has done next to nothing to resolve this conflict. Yes, the current ceasefire is worth commending. But even it was not based on an Israeli initiative. If you read Gideon Levy in today’s Haaretz he makes clear that it was the Palestinians who cooked up this idea. It was the U.S. which sold it to Israel. Olmert just waltzed in & took the credit. But we’ll see how long it lasts. Levy, once again, predicts an Israeli targeted assassination which will, as w. so many prior truces, will destroy this truce as well.

    The Uri Averny’s of the world are a rarity, and their popularity and relevance are hugely overstated by certain parts of the media, which is another reason it’s good to bring people to the country to actually meet leaders and

    You should only have done in yr entire life as much to promote peace & understanding between Israelis & Arabs as Uri Avnery has done in a single day of his. And while we’re on the subject–point me to a single junket which has met with him. Please prove me wrong. I’d love to be proven wrong. But you know I won’t be.

    What “consensus on both the left and the right???” Now, I know you’re out of yr mind. Possibly the only western democracy whose opposing political parties are more rancorously and partisanly divided than Israel would be here in the U.S. Oh, I see you’re claiming that Aipac will show junketeers the consensus bet. Netanyahu & Lieberman on the right and Peres on the so-called “left.” To believe this, you have to be hopelessly out of touch with the Israeli political scene. To say this, would be akin to saying Israeli legislators should take a U.S. junket to hear about the ‘consensus on both the left and right’ from Dick Cheney and Joe Lieberman. That’s an entirely plausible statement isn’t it?

    Richard just doesn’t get free speech.

    “Free speech?” Aipac’s junkets are expressions of “free speech?” Really, you must be joking. That would be $1.3 million worth of free speech. And behind that little nest egg lies another tidy little sum of a $50 million annual Aipac budget. That’s a helluva lot of free speech if you ask me.

    If Aipac really wanted to promote free speech it would arrange truly diverse, rather than propagandistic junket itineraries. Until they do so they are engaging in entirely partisan–and not free speech.

    The fact that Richard doesn’t like what pro-Israel advocates say doesn’t mean they should not be able to advocate it to Congress by demonstrating, up close, the very very real threats that Israel faces from its neighbors.

    I never said Aipac shouldn’t be able to advocate it’s partisan positions in the halls of Congress. But it shouldn’t get away with the false claim that it represents all Jews or that it represents a non-or un-partisan view of the Israeli-Arab conflict. And as long as it represents an entirely skewed view its junkets should not be underwritten by the U.S. taxpayer.

    When congressmembers visit the Palestinian territories and meet with PNA leaders (which they did until the Palestinians elected representatives from an organization that is internationally recognized as a terrorist group), you wouldn’t expect those groups to take Congressmembers to the many Palestinians who oppose Palestinian policy.

    This passage is so chock full of howlers I don’t know where to start. First, if a member of the U.S. Congress visits Palestinian areas I would hope he would speak to any credible representative political leader which would include Hamas, Fatah and other independents. That is more than I can say for those unfortunates who believe Aipac has shown them “the real Israel.” Second, who specifically are these “many Palestinians who oppose Palestinian policy???” Congratulations, you’ve made up a new political category among Palestinians. Or do you know about some secret cell of Hatikva-singing, Occupation loving Palestinians the rest of us have never heard of? Third, Hamas is currently being boycotted by the EU and U.S. Shortly, (in perhaps a month and certainly far less than a yr) this will change. And isn’t it interesting that while they refuse to negotiate with or recognize Hamas, a comfortable majority of the Israeli people want their government to negotiate directly with Hamas. Try explaining away that one would you.

    Arabs in East Jerusalem who are positively horrified at the prospect of Israel being forced to cede sovereignty to Palestine.

    Now, I know you’re out of yr mind. Which Arabs might these be? Who are they and how many are there? I can’t believe you’re trying to foist off the equivalent of the Walid Shoebats of this world as a significant or even credible political force in Palestinian society.

    It would be a real shame, however, if the baby were thrown out with the bathwater by prohibiting bona fide educational and advocacy trips like funded by AJC and AIPAC.

    I really like the image of anything Aipac does being associated with a “baby.” The notion of their junkets being “babies” really tickles the funny bone. Rather, I’d liken them to 900 lb. gorillas who get across their “educational” message with a suitably sized tree limb. I’d like to get these animals back to their native habitat and out of the halls of Congress and the legislative process.

  3. Richard, I hate to break it to you, but I neither work nor live in the D.C. area. And I have no connections to AIPAC. I am just, as you have said “Citizen Parkhurst.” (Why you use that as a derogatory term is beyond me. I consider citizenship to be a great privilege and responsibility).

    “A junket is a junket is a junket. If these junkets are so important–then organize them completely transparently. Offer them to legislators but w/o any subsidy whatsoever. Let them go to Israel on their own dime.”

    A non sequitur. I have no problem with disclosure and transparency (AIPAC’s educational affiliate apparently does disclose what it spends on these trips). That’s diferent from asking if these trips should be on “their own dime?” Who is “their?” Ultimately, you are asking the taxpayer to foot the bill. If a group wishes to lobby a congressmember, they can do so on THEIR own dime. But the experience is a lot more enlightening when someone can actually go to the country and see it up close for oneself (for one thing, one instantly realizes how Israel’s enemies are right on top of it).

    “And if you’d care to maintain the junkets are diverse and multi-partisan would you care to provide me any full itineraries so I can judge for myself? Can you point to any junkets who met with a Hadash or Meretz member? How about a Peace Now representative? How about Palestinian NGOs? How about Neve Shalom leaders? Or B’Tselem? Or Rabbis for Human Rights? How many junkets met with any of these organizations?”

    Again, you completely miss the point. I’ve never said that the trips give “equal time” to those who wish to drag Israel into disrepute. That’s not the purpose of organizing an educational trip. A lobbyist presents a point of view. A good one presents his or her points of view with facts and compelling argument. The case for Israel is a lot more compelling when you see it up close.

    If anyone wants to organize “fact finding” delegations to Palestine, they are free to do so. Go ahead and counter speech with more speech!

    “Just about everyone agrees that the IDF should pound Beit Hanun & its civilian inhabitants into the ground?”

    No, but just about everyone agrees that Israel has a right to go after Qassam rocket teams. And just about everyone agrees that the errant shell that hit civilians in Beit Hanoun was a terrible mistake that should be avoided if possible. And just about everyone agrees that the claim that Israel deliberately tried to kill those civilians, as has been claimed by the Palestinians, is ludicrous.

    ” Just about everyone agrees that the IDF should strangle Gaza till old people die for lack of medical care and children develop malnutrition?”

    No, but just about everyone agrees that, since Israel evacuated every single settlement in Gaza, that it has become a hotbed for smuggling weaponry and carrying out more rocket attacks and that Israel has to prevent such smuggling and attacks.

    ” Just about everyone agrees that Israel should not engage in final status negotiations with the Palestinians?”

    No, in fact Olmert has offered to engage in such final status negotiations.

    ” Just about everyone agrees that Israel should not withdraw from W. Bank settlements?”

    No, in fact the current lead party of the government came to power on a promise to withdraw from West Bank settlements. Such a promise becomes more difficult, however, in light of the increased violence that came from Gaza.

    ” Just about everyone agrees with the policy of targeted assassinations & their concomitant taking of innocent human life?”

    On this area, there is debate within Israeli society. But yes, most people agree that terrorists should be targeted, so long as efforts are taken to minimize harm to non-combatants.

    ” Just about everyone in Israel agrees that Israel should use DIME, white phosphorus and cluster bombs against civilians?”

    No, not everyone does.

    ” Just about everyone agrees Israel should not negotiate with Syria?”

    For the most part, most people are highly skeptical about negotiating with Syria. However, most of the pressure not to negotiate comes from the U.S. government on Israel, not vice versa.

    Beyond these meta-issues, however, the consensus on the left and the right is that Israel cannot simply repeatedly make the unilateral concessions that are demanded of it, and that for Israel to negotiate with extremist parties backed by other extremst nations is not particularly fruitful.

    “You should only have done in yr entire life as much to promote peace & understanding between Israelis & Arabs as Uri Avnery has done in a single day of his. And while we’re on the subject–point me to a single junket which has met with him. Please prove me wrong. I’d love to be proven wrong. But you know I won’t be.”

    You also should have done in yr entire life as much to promote peace and understanding. We all should, I suppose. Except that Uri Averny isn’t really promoting peace and understanding as much as promoting himself by trying to denigrate nearly everyone else in the country. Regardless of what Uri Averny has done, you again miss the point. Uri Averny simply does not represent a significant portion of Israeli thinking. For you to say otherwise demonstrates that you are significantly less tuned into the political scene than I. An educational trip does not have to promote hostile views to be educational.

    Your attack on Shimon Peres is particularly galling. Peres is a man who both in and outside of government has tirelessly worked to promote peace and coexistance. And quite often his political positions cost him electoral success. And you dare denigrate this man as a “washed up has been.” Have you even heard of the Peres center for peace, which for the past decade has funded countless numbers of coexistance projects? Gee Richard, you should only have done in yr entire life as much to promote peace & understanding between Israelis & Arabs as Shimon Peres has done in a single day of his.

    “This passage is so chock full of howlers I don’t know where to start. First, if a member of the U.S. Congress visits Palestinian areas I would hope he would speak to any credible representative political leader which would include Hamas, Fatah and other independents. That is more than I can say for those unfortunates who believe Aipac has shown them “the real Israel.” Second, who specifically are these “many Palestinians who oppose Palestinian policy???” Congratulations, you’ve made up a new political category among Palestinians. Or do you know about some secret cell of Hatikva-singing, Occupation loving Palestinians the rest of us have never heard of? Third, Hamas is currently being boycotted by the EU and U.S. Shortly, (in perhaps a month and certainly far less than a yr) this will change. And isn’t it interesting that while they refuse to negotiate with or recognize Hamas, a comfortable majority of the Israeli people want their government to negotiate directly with Hamas. Try explaining away that one would you.”

    I see, so Uri Averny is a legitimate representative but Walid Shoebat is not. It is admitedly difficult for Palestinian’s to speak out against their lives being handed over to the PNA, because the price for free speech is, how shall we say it, a bit more expensive in the territories. But that’s one kind of “open debate” that you don’t care about.

    Ultimately, your problem is not that AJC and the like are not engaging in education and advocacy, but that they don’t present the particular point of view that you like, and that the point of view that they do present is incredibly persuasive. So instead, under the subterfuge of “ethics reform” you want to ban it.

  4. I’ve never said that the trips give “equal time” to those who wish to drag Israel into disrepute.

    You truly disgust me. Israeli progressives do not “wish to drag Israel into disrepute.” This is a despicable lie. Rather, it is yr stupidity in the manner you defend Israel and twist everything reasonable critics say about it that drags yourself into disrepute & does no favors for Israel either.

    That’s not the purpose of organizing an educational trip. A lobbyist presents a point of view.

    Ah, I see–the purpose of an “educational trip” is NOT to hear a balanced perspective on the conflict which includes the major political strands of national debate. What is it then? To present a single unified vision of what one particular narrowly defined, ultra-nationalist, and politically conservative lobby group wishes the Jewish public and Congress to believe about Israel? I’ve got news for you, that’s not “education.” That’s propaganda.

    And the idea that “education” and “lobbying” can be yoked together is about as much an oxymoron as one of the most famous oxymorons, “military justice.”

    No, in fact Olmert has offered to engage in such final status negotiations.

    More sophistry. And you are dead wrong. Olmert has NEVER, I repeat NEVER “offered to engage in…final status negotiations.” And if by some chance someone can dredge up a quote showing that he has, the proof is in the pudding. He has never DONE it, not even negotiated with Abbas (let alone final status talks), ever. What he has agreed to–but never implemented–is to talk to Abbas. You apparently don’t understand the distinction bet. an offer to talk and final status negotiations or else you’re rhetorically careless (or both). He has made such offers to talk several times over a long period of time. A long enough period of time for the world to realize that he was not serious about about the offer. In other words, he was lying.

    It may be that Olmert will indeed at some point agree to meet with Abbas, perhaps even to negotiate with him. But I would almost be willing to bet my house that an Israeli delegation to final status talks with the Palestinians will never take place under an Olmert government. I’d be shocked if this were the case.

    For the most part, most people are highly skeptical about negotiating with Syria.

    I didn’t claim Israelis weren’t ‘skeptical’ about negotiating with Syria. What I said, or rather what Israelis said in a number of diff. public opinion polls, is that a clear majority are in favor of negotiating with Syria. You have not disputed that. You cannot because it is simply true and posts here which link to the poll results prove it. Again, you either don’t understand the clear language I used or else you’re rhetorically careless. It is just like an ideologue or a politician to take a statement they oppose and respond not to the statement but to what you wanted the statement to say.

    the consensus on the left and the right is that Israel cannot simply repeatedly make the unilateral concessions that are demanded of it, and that for Israel to negotiate with extremist parties backed by other extremst [sic] nations is not particularly fruitful.

    Again, you completely twist what is the actual truth. The majority of Israelis (again in polls linked in this blog) are IN FAVOR OF negotiating with Hamas, even if it is an “extremist party backed by other extremist nations.”

    You also should have done in yr entire life as much to promote peace and understanding.

    Don’t you dare talk to me about what I’ve done to promote peace and understanding between Israelis and Arabs. I’ve devoted my life to this subject since 1967. I’ve lived and studied in Israel. I’ve earned a graduate degree in Hebrew literature. I’ve both worked and volunteered for a score of Jewish groups promoting peace in the Middle East. This blog, which I’ve maintained for four years and which contains nearly 1,000 posts on the Israeli-Arab conflict–along with my site, Israel Palestine Blogs–are my blog-related projects on the same theme. I’ve produced radio programs on the subject. I produced a radio show this fall on Israeli and Lebanese peace music.

    What do you have to show? Please give us yr curriculum vitae when it comes to promoting peace between Israelis and Arabs.

    . Except that Uri Averny [sic] isn’t really promoting peace and understanding as much as promoting himself by trying to denigrate nearly everyone else in the country.

    Your lies are simply hopeless. Have you no shame? Really at long last have you no shame? Yes, you are truly worthy of those famous words delivered by Joseph Welch toward Joe McCarthy. Neither truth nor fairness nor intellectual accuracy matter a whit to you. You may not like Avnery. I’m not asking you to. There are things he writes that even I do not agree with. But to make the patently false claim you do about him shows you are entirely bereft of human decency.

    Peres is a man who both in and outside of government has tirelessly worked to promote peace and coexistance [sic].

    Utter bullshit. If only lying made it so. Peres hasn’t done anything serious to promote peace in yrs. And talk about someone who “isn’t really promoting peace and understanding as much as promoting himself,” that’s Old Man Peres to the max. He can’t get elected prime minister, Labor Party leader, or even president–hell, he might not even be able to get elected dogcatcher. If he was truly devoted to peace he would attract votes from Labor and Meretz voters who are the most devoted to this issue among the Israeli electorate. Instead, he goes and jumps ship to join Admiral Sharon on the Good Ship Kadima. He sure got a lot of peace votes out of that little sham sea voyage. Peres is about as devoted to peace as any standard issue Israeli politician–about as dedicated to it as Sharon or Olmert, which is to say, not very much.

    There may’ve been times in his career when he was dedicated to a vision of peace. But that was somewhere back in the 1990s. Ten years is an eternity in the Mideast. You don’t get to stake a claim to being a peacemaker for something you did 10 years earlier, especially when you haven’t done anything credible on the subject since.

    quite often his political positions cost him electoral success.

    No, not ‘quite often.’ But only once. When he was running for prime minister after Rabin’s assassination and Hamas and other Palestinian militant groups conspired to bring Netanyahu into the prime minister’s office. That was a sad day for Peres. And my heart went out to him then. I have no doubt that the Peres of the 1990s who ran for PM had the vision to attain peace if he’d been granted the job. But he wasn’t. And he’s made an abject mess out of the remainder of his career.

    Besides, one could easily argue that the vision of peace he pursued was the product of a partnership with Yitzhak Rabin. And that once Rabin died, Peres did not have the strength of will, probity of judgment, or wiliness of personal and political resources to realize the vision on his own. It was a case of Lennon-McCarthy redux. After John died what did you get? Band on the Run.

    Oh, and let’s not forget the fact that it was none other than Shimon Peres who provided the Labor government heksher (“official approval”) for the very first Israeli settlement in the West Bank as documented in Gershon Gorenberg’s latest book. The latter argues plausibly that had he not done so, the settler movement might never have succeeded.

    Uri Averny is a legitimate representative but Walid Shoebat is not.

    You’re damn straight. Uri Avnery is an ardent Israeli, a lover of his country while a hater of its serious moral imperfections. Avnery has published one of the most popular Israeli periodicals. He served several terms in the Knesset. He has never renounced Israel. He has never lived anywhere other than Israel. He has never renounced being a Jew though he doesn’t have much use for theocratic Orthodoxy. Again, there are positions of Avnery’s I don’t agree with. But if I lived in the time of Jeremiah or Isaiah I’m sure there would be positions of theirs I wouldn’t have agreed with. And this doesn’t lessen their (Avnery’s or the prophets) moral stature.

    What stature does the despicable Shoebat have? A former PLO terrorist, a former Palestinian, a former Muslim. Now a Christian convert to evangelical right wing Christianity–embraced and fully funded by the Christian Zionist community and Jewish ultra-nationalists. Living not in the Middle East, but in California and among his Christian zealot fellow believers. And how many followers does he have among Arabs? Really, could it be 100, even 1,000? That would really be a stretch. And what Arab parliament has he ever been elected to? What Arab political party or movement has ever embraced him? Who, in God’s name, does he represent among Arabs?

    your problem is not that AJC and the like are not engaging in education and advocacy, but that they don’t present the particular point of view that you like, and that the point of view that they do present is incredibly persuasive.

    On the contrary, yes, my problem IS that Aipac doesn’t present a fair and balanced perspective on Israeli society and political discourse. As for their “incredibly persuasive” point of view–I guess that’s in the eye of the beholder.

    And their success is rapidly diminishing with every Aipac staffer accused of spying for Israel, and every Aipac donor who lobbies the Minority Leader about internal House business (in a vain attempt to get an Aipac darling reappointed chair of a committee), and every bill that gets bottled up by a successful counter lobbying effort by opposing progressive Jewish groups. All these things happened in the past year or so. And more such failures will happen this coming year.

    Aipac’s days are numbered. They won’t die overnight or even in a year. But others will arise to challenge their hegemony and those others will eventually gain traction and represent a credible, persuasive and strongly expressed perspective that competes successfully with Aipac’s. “May it come soon and in our day.”

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *