What could be more fun on a weekend than to listen to a debate about the Israel Lobby, just after the AIPAC conference in Washington where Netanyahu laid down the law about settlements.
This debate on current Israel-US relations could never be seen in the United States, given that we are subject to so much censorship by our mainstream media. But here it is, on Al Jezeera-English. For reference sake, The Israel Project is a lobbyist organization whose focus is to advise on disseminating pro-Israel propaganda in the US (one of its advisors is Frank Luntz, the Republican pollster famous for devising pro-Israel propaganda or “talking points” like “say they’re “disputed not occupied”).
The Zionist lobby, an honest look on Al-Jazeera
27 March 2010
As Loewenstein advises, this kind of debate can only happen on news outlets like Al-Jazeera, not in America. It is a discussion about the Israel lobby, Iran, settlements, and Palestine between John Mearsheimer, the co-author of The Israel Lobby,. Electronic Intifada co-founder Ali Abunimah, and Israel lobbyist Meagan Buren of The Israel Project.
After the AIPAC conference, Benjamin Netanyahu returned to Israel where he may have a problem.
Here’s Akiva Eldar in Haaretz:
The messages coming to the White House from Riyadh and Amman, then, were starkly clear: If you don’t rein in your Israeli friends, Tehran won’t be the only Middle East capital where American flags will burn.
Netanyahu had been hoping to buy time until November’s Congressional elections, which coincide with the deadline he set for the settlement freeze. But with America’s strategic interest on the line, Bibi’s favorite political game (playing the Jewish community and Congress against the White House and the State Department) isn’t working anymore. Obama decided his moderate Middle East coalition is more important than Netanyahu’s extremist one. This is a point of no return.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-v-Tpg9xN5k
Thanks.
.
(ADL Op-Ed by Foxman) – Jimmy Carter’s recent Hanukkah letter to the American Jewish community is a beautiful expression of support for the state of Israel and personal apology for the harm he has caused in the past.
The former president struck many of the right chords. He specifically referred to Israel’s right to exist as a Jewish state. He called for Israel’s right to live with secure and recognized borders. Most relevant, he said that criticism of Israel intended for “improvement” must not be used “to stigmatize Israel.”
Finally, using the Yom Kippur term regarding sins one may have committed, he offered an “Al Het for any words or deeds of mine” that may have stigmatized Israel.
… I am pleased by the words and tone. I hope they will be matched by future words and deeds. When I say “testing,” I do not mean that we are going to evaluate every word he says on Israel. He has a right, like everyone else, to be critical at times. My objection is when criticism becomes stigmatizing, in Carter’s own words.
Here is what I will watch for in Carter’s words and deeds. First, when explosive terms such as “apartheid” or “Jewish control and power” are inappropriately used …
Apology Not Withstanding, Carter Reverts To Anti-Israel Rhetoric
On March 18, however, at a conference on U.S.-Arab relations in Atlanta, Carter accused the U.S. of being “much more attuned to the sensitivities of the Israelis” and of having “yielded excessively to the circumstances in the Holy Land as Israel has confiscated several lands within Palestine.”
“I do not believe further discussions between us will be fruitful,” Mr. Foxman wrote President Jimmy Carter. “I continue to hope the day will come when you have truly repented of your insensitive views of Israel and the Jewish people.”
"But I will not let myself be reduced to silence."IMO, the apology was a mistake, as far as I am aware, politically motivated. It was not Jimmy Carter like because his book started a more open debate in this country about what Israel is doing in the Palestinian territories, and just what we are helping to support.