Washington — Forty-five minutes at the White House was all it took to crystallize the new paradigm defining the relations among the Obama administration, the Jewish community and Israel.
As Jewish leaders left their July 13 meeting with President Obama — “glowing,” according to one of the participants — it became clear that despite some misgivings regarding the tone Obama has used toward Israel, the bulk of the organized Jewish community is in full support of his peace efforts, including his demand for a complete freeze of Jewish settlements on the Israeli-occupied West Bank.
Furthermore, the meeting yielded a broad understanding that the administration’s decision to take its dispute with Israel to the public sphere will not be challenged by American Jews.
“I believe the president got the impression that there is broad support within the community for his policies, and some differences on the tactical level,” said Rabbi Steven Wernick, executive vice president of the United Synagogue of Conservative Judaism, after the meeting.
The meeting took place as Obama’s special Middle East envoy, former senator George Mitchell, continues talks with Israel on a possible compromise deal on the settlement-freeze issue. In negotiations with Mitchell, Israel has made the case for “normal life” (a term that Israeli leader Benjamin Netanyahu now uses in place of the previously used phrase “natural growth”) within the settlement blocs and argued against making concessions on the settlement issue without receiving anything in return from the Palestinians and the Arab states.
Yet this view seems to have no traction among Jewish supporters of Israel in the United States. Rabbi Eric Yoffie, president of the Union for Reform Judaism, said in the meeting with Obama that expanding settlements was not in the interest of Israel, of the United States or of the American Jewish community. “Nobody in the room questioned it,” Yoffie said of the response of the other 15 Jewish leaders in attendance. “Not one person in the room said to the president, ‘You’re wrong on that.’”
It is worth noting, however, that explicitly pro-settlement groups were not invited to the meeting.
Senior Israeli officials have argued in recent weeks that Obama’s administration has made a triple mistake in taking Israel to task on the settlement issue. In their view, Obama believed, wrongly, that Netanyahu’s government would crumble under pressure; that Arab states would offer partial normalization in return for the settlement freeze, and that the Jewish community would not fight the administration on this issue. While many Israelis believe that all these assumptions fell flat, it is clear from the meeting and from statements by Jewish leaders that the community is still strongly on Obama’s side in the settlement dispute.
“There’s a message here for Israel,” said Jeremy Ben-Ami, executive director of the dovish group J Street and one of the White House meeting participants. “The message is that there is no court of appeals, that the American Jewish community and the president share the same interest.”
In a conference call held a day before the meeting with the president, Jewish representatives tried to formulate a unified message to present to Obama. In this conversation, too, none of the participants raised any objection to the call for a settlement freeze per se. Abraham Foxman, national director of the Anti-Defamation League, took issue with the tone used by the Obama administration when dealing with Israel. And the next day, he raised his concerns with the president.
“I said it was the tone and the lack of intimacy with Israel,” Foxman said after the meeting. “The result is that people see Israel as the obstacle to peace. This is a very strong perception.”
According to those present, Obama was forthcoming in responding to the argument that he is perceived as applying uneven pressure to Israel. He said he was, in fact, pressuring both the Palestinians and the Arab states, and criticized Arab leaders for not showing more courage. The president put the blame on the media for reporting more about the dispute with Israel (which he referred to as an “inter-family difference”), and promised, according to participants, to fix that impression.
But Obama did not back off on the issue of publicly disagreeing with Israel. His response to Malcolm Hoenlein, executive vice chairman of the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations, was firm. To Hoenlein’s suggestions that Israel would be more likely to make concessions if it felt “there is no daylight” between Jerusalem and Washington, Obama made clear that he did not believe in hiding differences of opinion. He cited the past eight years of the Bush administration as evidence that no public differences does not necessarily lead to progress.
Keeping disputes with Washington private has been a key goal of Israel and its American supporters throughout the years. The underlying assumption was that public disagreements would only embolden Israeli resistance to policy changes. Steve Rosen, director of the Middle East Forum’s Washington Project and a former longtime pro-Israel lobbyist, said that experts who are now key Obama advisers, including Dennis Ross, shared this view. “Now they’ve bought into the approach that a public dispute with Israel is beneficial in proving America is not Israel’s lawyer,” he said.
In the White House meeting, Obama’s statement that he would not avoid public disagreements with Israel went unchallenged. But later, several participants expressed their concern.
In an email, Stephen Savitsky, president of the Union of Orthodox Jewish Congregations of America, wrote, “While allies may, of course, disagree on specifics, there ought not be significant ‘daylight’ between the United States and Israel that would give the nations’ mutual enemies comfort and encouragement.” Foxman added that he was concerned that “a relationship of intimacy is being destroyed. And for what?”
Rosen, who is now observing Jewish organizational life from the outside, argued that the Jewish leaders’ muted response to Obama on this issue stems from fear. “No one wants to be on the wrong side of the White House,” he said. “Groups that come and express themselves sharply against Israel are welcome, but those who don’t will not be welcomed next time.”
But reluctance to criticize the president could also be attributed to other factors, including the broad support for Obama among the Jewish community’s rank and file, and the president’s personal charm, which seemed to have worked wonders on participants. “It was extraordinary,” Wernick said. Ira Forman, CEO of the National Jewish Democratic Council, called Obama “masterful,” and Marla Gilson, Washington representative of Hadassah, said she felt “very much at ease” with the president.
But Obama’s charm has not been enough to win over the Israeli public, which is highly critical of the American president. A recent poll found that only 6% of Israeli Jews view Obama as pro-Israel.
“There is a need to talk not only to the Arab street, but to the Israeli street, as well,” said Lee Rosenberg, the next president of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee and a close friend of Obama, in the meeting. Debra DeLee, president and CEO of Americans for Peace Now, called on the president to speak directly to the people of Israel and to possibly make a visit to the Holy Land.
Obama did not respond directly to the call, but sources in touch with the administration said that the issue of a possible visit or address to the Israeli people is being considered by White House aides.
Contact Nathan Guttman at guttman@forward.com
The Forward welcomes reader comments in order to promote thoughtful discussion on issues of importance to the Jewish community. In the interest of maintaining a civil forum, the Forward requires that all commenters be appropriately respectful toward our writers, other commenters and the subjects of the articles. Vigorous debate and reasoned critique are welcome; name-calling and personal invective are not. While we generally do not seek to edit or actively moderate comments, the Forward reserves the right to remove comments for any reason.
Copyright © 2013, Forward Association, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Cleveland Kidnapping, Elizabeth Smart and Us
Tracing the Jewish Origins of the Holy Ghost
Ethical Kosher Seal Stalls Amid Orthodox Opposition
Baby Boomers’ Rocky Road to Jewish Love
Rama Burshtein Offers Rare Glimpse of Orthodox World
You've successfully signed up!
Come on now. Through many admistrations, giving the financial aid that made building the disputed settlements possible, while declaring that the US opposed them, made this government liars for the world to see. It's time somebody tells it like it is. Who can believe that it is possible for a Palestinian country can be formed on this fractured land. Either get out of what is supposed to be Palestinian territory, or annex the Gaza strip and the West Bank, and give equal citizenship to the inhabitents thereof. Better yet, stop taking our money, and do as you see fit, so that we no longer are looked upon as a co-conspiritor in whatever game is going on in the middle east.
The settlements are illegal. The Israeli government knew that in 1967, and openly acknowledged that among themselves.
They have to do more than just stop expanding the settlements -- they have to leave.
Don't complain that the Arabs are firing rockets at you when you're stealing their land.
Obama to U.S. Jewish leaders: Israel must engage in self-reflection http://calevbenyefuneh.blogspot.com/2009/07/obama-to-us-jewish-leaders-israel-must.html
all salient facts that i know of, show or even prove that a 'jewish state'[in whatever size] can be established only by expelling pals.
it seems that the angry cultists are afraid that it won't be allowed and, thus, whatever happens, a 'jewish' state cannot ever happen. so, these angry/fearfull people lash out- mostly by namecalling- against people who do not approve of expulsion and by extention, for a 'jewish' state.
but i think US has a plan! It has never revealed it! So, we await with fear what US wld allow! And, meanwhile, we'll be called "fascists", "jew haters", etc. and they think, do they, that seasoned thinkers/observers wld just run away? tnx
Alan,
You are using invective because you can't defend your position with facts and logic.
The settlements violate international law. Theodor Meron, the Israeli Foreign Ministry's legal advisor, wrote a memo in 1967 to top Israeli government officials which said that the settlements were "unequivocally" illegal. No one challenged him. http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/10/opinion/10gorenberg.html
Everybody in the Israeli government knows that. Their hasbara people would rather have American Jews like you confused about it.
Furthermore, the settlements violate Jewish law. Hillel, our great teacher, said that all of Jewish law could be summarized in one principle: That which is hateful to you, do not do unto others.
Obviously it would be hateful to us if (when) others treat us as the Israelis are treating the Palestinians.
So it is you who are not a practicing Jew, and not following Jewish law.
Your only response is to sputter insults.
Unless you agree with the Likud party you are libeled as being anti-Israel and a self hating Jew. Rahm Emmanuel was a volunteer working in Israel during the first Gulf War and his kids attend a Jewish day school full time. Self hater? Not hardly. Self haters don’t travel 12,000 miles roundtrip during a war to help a country they hate. David Axelrod as well has long term ties with the Chicago Jewish community and is proud of his Jewish identity.
Obama called on Israel to halt the settlements which every American administration has called an obstacle to peace and not only is Obama called anti-Israel (and worse by the right wing in Israel and America) but every Jew working for him is now called a self hater. In a democracy people are allowed different opinions and disagreeing with a particular policy of the Israeli government does NOT make you anti-Israel or a self hater. Do Americans agree with every policy of our government? Have we not at times disagreed with Obama, Bush, Clinton, Carter, Ford, Reagan, etc. etc.? Did this make us anti American?
Those who believe that Israel is always 100% right in everything it does are the ones who are harming Israel more than anyone else in the world. Unless you agree with Bibi Netanyahu you are a self hating Jew. Interesting opinion from a man who received only 27 votes out of the 120 member Knesset.
I am very, very concerned about what is going on now and it reminds me of the dark days that proceeded the Rabin assassination.
In Israel a general who was tasked with removing the outposts had his life and that of his family threatened. Jews who work for Obama are called self haters, anti-Israel, and anti-semites, and even Alan Dershowitz, who is one of the most avidly pro-Israel Americans was lambasted in the Jewish World Review because he supports Obama and a settlement freeze and even Dershowitz’s Jewishness and pro-Israel beliefs were questioned. This reminds me of right after 911 when Bush and Cheney made people feel that “if you do not support us 100% then you support the terrorists that are out to destroy us.“
I read The Jerusalem Post and Haaretz every day and there are vehement anti-Obama postings continuing to falsely accuse him of being a Moslem and most of the postings accuse him of hating Israel and a good number accuse him of wanting to destroy Israel. A columnist in todays Jerusalem Post calls Peace Now and J Street “extremist organizations.“ To the folks on the right if you support a settlement freeze and a two State solution then you are against Israel and your Jewishness is called into question, and all of these things are very, very dangerous. This attitude that you either agree 100% with us or you support the enemy should not be acceptable in the Jewish community. People scoffed at the concerns when this was going on right before Rabin was assassinated and said it was a tiny minority but I can tell you from reading hundreds of letters posted on Israeli sites that these comments represent a huge majority of the postings.
I hope and pray that Jewish organizations and Rabbi’s in our communities come out against intolerance and especially against calling a fellow Jew a self hater or anti-semite because they may not agree with a particular position of the current Israeli government. Enough good people did not come out publicly when poisonous remarks were being made about Rabin. Slandering our fellow Jews who work for the President and/or Jewish Americans who don’t agree with the current government in Israel as self haters and anti Israel must be stopped.
Alan is absolutely right. We, here in America, are indeed living on land taken from the indians. The difference is however, that we did not push the former occupants into the ocean (actually we had a choice of oceans). They stayed here, and became citizens with equal protection and rights. The Zionists just want the Palestinians to perform a disappearing act. How cold. And left to their devices, it will happen.
As news editor of the Forward, I would like to respond to Frank's comment that "contrary to the Forward's reporting, Abe Foxman's criticism of Obama went far beyond simply 'tone' and lack of 'intimacy.'"
Frank cites as evidence a statement Foxman put out regarding his thoughts and feelings about Obama after the meeting. But the news story reports on what Foxman and other Jewish leaders said inside the White House directly to the president at a meeting he convened to enable them to air their views. We did not mischaracterize this event.
The news story quotes Foxman saying in his own words what it was he told the president (“I said it was the tone and the lack of intimacy with Israel,” Foxman said after the meeting. “The result is that people see Israel as the obstacle to peace. This is a very strong perception.”)
It seems that after the meeting, Foxman issued a much tougher statement, as Frank notes. As to possible reasons for the difference in the intensity and tone of Foxman's comments in and outside the meeting, the article notes the view of Steve Rosen, who observed that Jewish leaders are afraid to speak their mind when it contradicts the view of the president. We also noted other views, "including the broad support for Obama among the Jewish community’s rank and file, and the president’s personal charm, which seemed to have worked wonders on participants."
American Jews need to start organizing and rallying to support Israel against the onslaught of attacks and propaganda from this White House. Jews are now (non-publicly) becoming extremely alarmed by an anti-Israel government that sees American Jews as a problem to be handled. The U.S. is still a democratic society, and Jews as an influential minority can act to at least try to protect ourselves and be heard.
Thus far, this president does not fear to blatantly, publicly attack Israel. The betrayal of Israel is obvious, and is aided and abetted by his own "Jewish" anti-Israel operatives, and now by virulent fringe extremist anti-Israel "Jewish" groups. American Jews need to face the painful fact that they were used and lied to. Israeli Jews no longer have any illusions. The question for American Jews is will they organize and rally to confront the danger before it is too late. The Forward says that Obama received no "push-back". It is time for American Jews to make it extremely politically expensive for Obama and Democrats to betray Israel.
The threats against Israel posed by an unfriendly U.S. administration are initially diplomatic, and ultimately the issue of military defense. Iran's nuclear program is on the verge of obtaining nuclear weapons, the result of which will be disastrous for the continued existence of the Jewish State of Israel. The immense security concessions Obama plans for Israel, to enemies who have no interest in giving up their plans to destroy Israel, will leave Israel with nothing but a loss of its physical safety and military security.
Jews should always have been aware that "it can happen here", and recognize that "Never Again" means nothing unless the Jewish State of Israel is protected against its enemies. Where are the "Jewish" Senators and Congressmen and local political representatives, community leaders, educators, young Jews, mainstream Jewish congregations, and (real) rabbis?
There may be disagreements among Jews about the appropriate tactics necessary to confront this danger, but there should be no disagreement as to the need to confront the danger, before it is too late.
Obama seeks to use extremist fringe anti-Israel groups to his advantage. There have always been self-hating "Jews" (and those who have long ago lost any sense of identification or kinship). From the extreme far-left there is now a recently well-funded small bunch of Israel-Jew-haters, the most notorious of which is now J Street. Obama sees this relatively small group of anti-Israel propagandists as his natural allies in his program to destroy the traditional alliance between America and Israel. Although they are not a legitimate part of the Jewish community, he pointedly invited them to his PR meeting (while refusing to meet with the large mainstream ZOA). Obama wants to legitimize these radical leftist extremists in order to undermine Jewish opposition to his anti-Israel policies.
Non-Jew-hating Jews need to know just who these anti-Semites are. So what is this "J Street"? It is a new group initially funded by George Soros, who had achieved notoriety for demonizing successive Israeli governments irrespective of their political leanings. During the Gaza offensive, J Street condemned the action against Hamas as "disproportionate." Refusing to "pick a side" and identify "who was right and who was wrong," it applied moral equivalency to both parties proclaiming that "we recognize that neither Israelis nor Palestinians have a monopoly on right and wrong... While there is nothing 'right' in raining rockets on Israeli families or dispatching suicide bombers, there is nothing 'right' in punishing a million and a half already suffering Gazans for the actions of the extremists amongst them."
J Street also opposes Israel's efforts to prevent Iran from becoming a nuclear power. Despite the fact that Israelis of all political opinions are united on this issue, J Street members were e-mailed and urged to actively lobby against a bipartisan congressional resolution calling for tougher sanctions to be applied against Iran.
It has been involved in resurrecting the bogus anti-Semitic charge of "dual loyalties," warning Jews that by continued "blind" support of Israel, they risked alienating the American public and would be condemned for displaying greater loyalty toward Israel than the US. It was almost hysterical in its condemnation of Jews who exercised their rights to protest against the proposed appointment of the fiercely anti-Israel Charles Freeman to head the National Security Agency.
(The Forwarad fraudulently describes J Street as a "peace group" and a "dovish pro-Israel lobby." A far-left extremist organization, whose purpose is to aggressively lobby against Israel, is with mind-boggling chutzpah described as "pro-Israel".)
While the Forward seeks to legitimate and whitewash J Street by describing it as within the, "left wing of the organized Jewish community", its extremist anti-Israel advocacy is directly in opposition to the mainstream Jewish community. To tolerate such a group within the framework of the Jewish community provides it with an aura of respectability to which it is not entitled. And when a "Jewish" publication attempts to support this virulently anti-Israel organization, its propaganda should be recognized for what it is, and condemned. When a president allies himself with it, alarm bells should be ringing.
Yes, it is happening here.
Oh come on, Sam. In fact, there is no comparison between the conflict in the Middle East and the fate of American Indians. The Jews and Arabs are the native peoples of the Middle East (their languages and cultures are closely related), whereas the European settlers (now called Americans) were total foreigners. Your interesting illusion, however, is just too much to swallow. The Americans pushed the Indians away, forcing them to move hundreds of miles to special areas - and later pushed them away even further into the reservations. What do you mean "they stayed here"? You have to be kidding when you claim that they received equal rights and protection. They were killed by the thousands, and then the Americans bragged about it in hundreds of books and films. It's a bit more honest to claim that you don't really know or care about such things, and that you only have Israel on your agenda. In any case, you claim that the Palestinians were pushed into the ocean, and the "proof" is that "the Zionists just want the Palestinians to perform a disappearing act..." Well, which way is it? Were they pushed into the ocean or will they be pushed into the ocean? Your hatred of Israel has given you the license to create your own version of history. The Americans are not guilty for what they really did, but the Zionists are guilty for whatever your imagine.
Norman-Thank you for your thoughtful response to Alan.
The posts here clearly demonstrate how sick the right wing is. While posters from the left talk about a settlement freeze, a two state solution of two peoples living side by side in peace in a Palestinian State and a Jewish State of Israel the right wing supporters of Israel resort to accusing those who do not agree with them of being anti-semites, self haters, and out to destroy Israel. For all those people who cannot control their emotions opinion polls in Israel show a majority of Israelis also support a two State solution as well as a settlement freeze.
There's a sickness among some of our fellow Jews who seek to tar and feather anyone who does not agree with them of being self hating left wing Jews. I have news for all those right wing fanatics: the overwhelming majority of Jews in America support a two State solution as do a substantial number of Israeli's. You will be looked at as lunatics if you continue to condemn more and more Jews and Jewish or Israeli online media as self haters because they espouse a view different than yours. Those who think they have the right to slander other Jews need to look at the opinion polls in Israel and America. Only a fool or a maniac would call the majority of Jews self haters and anti-Israel.
I feel only pity for those who call Jews who are for a two State solution self haters. When you start calling the eighty percent of American Jews who voted for Obama self haters, attack The Forward as being "the far-left extremist anti-Israel "Jewish" Forward", and continue to falsely accuse Obama of being a Moslem and out to destroy Israel you are showing the world how sick you really are.
We have a democracy in this country and people are supposed to be allowed to express different opinions without being personally attacked and especially without having their faith or support of Israel questioned. It was this exact kind of mentality that caused Rabin to be assassinated and it's time to stop fanning the flames before something terrible happens again. If you cannot disagree with someone's opinion without viciously and personally attacking them then you are a very, very sick individual. No one can judge another Jew except God and I don't think that any of these posters are so devout and learned that they can judge another Jew.
A good man, Yitzchak Rabin, lost his life because crazies like some of these posters had the utter gall to question a war hero and prime minister about his devotion to Israel and they accused him of being a sell out to Arafat and had pictures of him in a Nazi uniform. This only served to ignite the flames of the fanatics and resulted in a horrible event. This must never happen again in Israel or here.
Mark, Yasher Koach! Well said!
Frank,
Nice one. Give 'em hell!
Yashar Koach,
Alan
Thanks, Sephardiman. And thank you for your thoughtful response to Alan too.
One important and encouraging point:
For many years, the Israeli right wing had everybody bullied and afraid to challenge them. On a message board like this, peace advocates would be shouted down and chased away.
Now, Jews have had enough. They saw what war is like. The Israeli killings are too horrifying, and the Israeli arrogance and injustice is too obvious. Your excuses and hasbara don't work any more.
Now, when we read the comment pages of Jewish newspapers we can see that the real Jewish community is not willing to stand by silently while innocent people are being killed.
Now, through organizations like J Street and Americans for Peace Now, we're telling our elected representatives like President Obama that we want the killing to stop, now. And we want a two-state solution, now. And Obama is listening.
The real Jews follow Hillel:
That which is hateful to you, do not do unto others.
Frank, I do not have any desire to join J Street or Peace Now as they are too far to the left for me but I draw the line at calling people self haters or anti-Israel extremists. We have a serious problem in our community if we cannot respect different viewpoints even when they are totally different than what we believe ourselves. I hear the constant refrain that Israel is the only democracy in the Middle East but the minute a fellow Jew says something that supports a settlement freeze, or a two State solution they have their character attacked, and any person who is sane understands that is wrong. If some of the above posters cannot read or hear an opinion different than the one they espouse without flying off the handle like a lunatic something is very wrong and frankly, needs to be reported.
I have no problem whatsoever that some people don't agree with Obama's policy with Israel. I think he should be pressuring the Palestinians and Arab States a lot as well but I do have a problem with the constant lie that Obama is a Moslem and that he is out to destroy Israel. This kind of talk led to the murder of Rabin because he was accused of destroying Israel because he believed in land for peace. A month ago there was an Israeli general threatened by far right settlers (as was his family) for taking down illegal outposts.
We need, as a community, (those of us who are sane) to acknowledge that people have different opinions about the peace process. That does not make them self haters, anti-semites, or out to destroy Israel. What some of these sick people (their postings above tell the entire world about their problems) do not realize is that they are feeding the flames of the fanatics by their accusations.
When a person believes that those who do not share their opinions about Israel are self hating Jews who want to see Israel destroyed all of us in the Jewish community need to be concerned. Some of the things I have seen on this site and others are so filled with hatred towards our President and fellow Jews that I truly hope The Forward sends this information to our law enforcement agencies. Some of the above comments have crossed the line and some of these posters need to be held accountable.
In The New Republic, Martin Peretz relates this comment by Democratic party bank roller George Soros, as reported in the New York Times’ online “Davos Diary“:
America needs to follow the policies it has introduced in Germany. We have to go through a certain deNazification process.
No, says Peretz, “you are not seeing things. He said de-Nazification. He is not saying, in the traditional manner of liberal alarmists, that the United States is now where Weimar Germany was. He is saying that the United States is now where Germany after Weimar was . . . In the old days, the Amerika view of America was propagated by angry kids on their painful way to adulthood; now, it is propagated by the Maecenas of the Democratic Party.”
After noting that “nobody seems to have noticed” Soros’ remark, Pertz adds:
Imagine the outcry if Republican moneybags . . . had declared that Hillary Clinton is a communist or that Bill Clinton’s America had been in need of a certain de-Stalinization process. But I hear no outcry from Soros’s congregation . . . There seems to be a renaissance among liberals of the view that there are no enemies to the left. I hear no Democrats expressing embarrassment, or revulsion, at Soros’s comment. Whether this silence is owed to their agreement or to their greed, it is outrageous.
Now comes Peretz’s coup de grace. On December 20, 1998, there appeared this exchange between Soros and Steve Kroft on “60 Minutes”:
Kroft: “You’re a Hungarian Jew …”
Soros: “Mm-hmm.”
Kroft: “... who escaped the Holocaust …”
Soros: “Mm-hmm.”
Kroft: “... by posing as a Christian.”
Soros: “Right.”
Kroft: “And you watched lots of people get shipped off to the death camps.”
Soros: “Right. I was 14 years old. And I would say that that’s when my character was made.”
Kroft: “In what way?”
Soros: “That one should think ahead. One should understand that—and anticipate events and when, when one is threatened. It was a tremendous threat of evil. I mean, it was a—a very personal threat of evil.”
Kroft: “My understanding is that you went … went out, in fact, and helped in the confiscation of property from the Jews.”
Soros: “Yes, that’s right. Yes.”
Kroft: “I mean, that’s—that sounds like an experience that would send lots of people to the psychiatric couch for many, many years. Was it difficult?”
Soros: “Not, not at all. Not at all. Maybe as a child you don’t … you don’t see the connection. But it was—it created no—no problem at all.”
Kroft: “No feeling of guilt?”
Soros: “No.”
Kroft: “For example, that, ‘I’m Jewish, and here I am, watching these people go. I could just as easily be these, I should be there.’ None of that?”
Soros: “Well, of course, ... I could be on the other side or I could be the one from whom the thing is being taken away. But there was no sense that I shouldn’t be there, because that was—well, actually, in a funny way, it’s just like in the markets—that is I weren’t there—of course, I wasn’t doing it, but somebody else would—would—would be taking it away anyhow. And it was the—whether I was there or not, I was only a spectator, the property was being taken away. So the—I had no role in taking away that property. So I had no sense of guilt.”
Peretz’s conclusion:
So this is the psychodrama that has been visited on American liberalism. We learn Soros never has nightmares. Had he been tried in a de-Nazification process for having been a young cog in the Hitlerite wheel, he would have felt that, since other people would have confiscated the same Jewish property and delivered the same deportation notices to the same doomed Jews, it was as if he hadn’t done it himself. He sleeps well, while we sleep in Nazi America
Why is it that so many Jews immediately accuse others of 'anti-semitism', self-hate, hatred of Israel, etc. at the slightest hint of criticism?? This is absurd! Are you right wingers so paranoid that you want to stifle any debate by immediately crying 'anti-semite'?? Don't you realize this is only going to backfire against Israel and Jews in general when people get tired of having to treat Israel with kid gloves lest they be called anti-semite?
Enough is enough. Arabs are not going to disappear and need to be treated as humans. If saying that makes me an anti-semite, so be it!
why dosent obama give jewish poeple free land in alaska
I'd like Ben Levi to know that there are some things that I do dislike, but my attitude doesn't border hate. It takes too much energy to hate. If the Palestinians and Jews are so close alike, and of course they are practically family, why is there so much hate in that pair. Heck, my main concern is that my country should divorce itself from that perennial conflict, and use it's resources here at home.
germany should give jews land for free......to pay for what thay did to us
close to 50percent of land in usa is fedraly oned
All this discussion is a waste of time, there are no real new ideas.
1. Obama selects the people whom he consults. He pays no attention to Krugman, Roubini, or Stiglitz on the economy. 2. Rabin was no saint. I don't in any way condone his assassination anymore than that of President Kennedy. But he lied to the Israeli people during his campaign for prime minister. I remember when his spokespeople said that once a government is elected it is not obligated to keep its campaign promises. 3. There is no analogy with native Americans who were wiped out by white man's diseases. 4. What makes the Israeli presence in the West Bank anymore illegal than that of Jordan and Egypt before them? The British abused their authority under the mandate in creating Transjordan. The Arab nations supported by the Palestinians rejected the UN partition and attacked as soon as it took effect in an effort to wipe out Israel at birth. 5. Where in history does a nation which attacks another nation get to keep all its territory if it loses? The Germans didn't after World War II. 6. For those who support the "peace process" where is there any evidence that the Arabs want peace? In his latest statement, Abbas insisted on the "right of return" which is equivalent to wiping out Israel. 7. Why are Arabs allowed Judenrein states, specifically Saudi Arabia, Jordan, and the proposed Palestinian state, while Israel must treat Muslims as equal citizens?
8. I am an American Jew who voted for Obama. This does not mean I that supported his position on the Israeli-Arab dispute. I had two poor choices and feared a President Palin.
As of today there is no peace process and all the talk on both sides is just theater. When the Arabs decide that they want peace with Israel, it will happen. Israel would be foolish to make one-sided concessions to please Obama or world opinion whatever that is.
if the usa gave me 100acres of land for free i would move to the usa
yeah Sidney, you really provide some great logic...
Saudi Arabia is a racist backward state, so Israel should mimmick the Saudis and continue to treat Arabs like second class citizens. Way to go.
I also like your invented version of history. Just skip the part where Jews show up in Palestine and take over land belonging to others, often resorting to violence (Deir Yassin massacre and other cases). I guess it feels good to think of oneself as perfect.
I have no qualms about Arab/Palestinian leaders leaving A LOT to be desired, but come on, you can't constantly blame EVERYTHING on the evil Arabs. Israel, especially the Likud, has NEVER wanted a fair land for peace agreement, only a weak bantustan semi-state for Arabs may do as far as they are concerned and that can only mean more bloodshed.
For Dara, Mark Jeffrey, Shrimpie, and the rest of the garden variety Jew-haters.
Again, read your history. If Jews who have lived in the territories where the "settlements" - read: communities for time immemorial cannot live there, if Obama demands Judea-Samaria Judenrein, then what is next? Tel-Aviv, Haifa, West Jerusalem? (because of course the Old City and the Wailing Wall is in Paly territory, according to the Nazi-paid Ben-Ami and his fellows at Judenrat Strasse).
And if that is the case, then what gives you the damn right to live in America where you - and others, including the Kenyan Village Idiot - have lived on land appropriated by force from Native Americans. Difference is - the land you demand Jews leave - Juden Raus, right? - was Jewish for all time, the land you live in was ILLEGALLY seized.
Again, care for mustard on that hebrew national with the glass of milk, Liberals? Or would you prefer a pacifier instead (ok, FORWARD censors, don't forget to take a page from Streicher and delete this too).
Little Alan enough already. No one takes you seriously. My dog has more credibility when he barks at alley cats. It's time for you to leave and never come back.
If Mr Soros is indeed a Nazi collaborator, then his US citizenship should be stripped, just like it was for John Demjanjuk. Just because he is/was Jewish shouldnt be a factor in whether he is eligible for deportation to Hungary. If he took Jewish goods, he should pay reparations.
To Mr. Cohler-Esses: I truly do not understand. I responded to your post, in which you directly addressed my previous post. Why was the following post DELETED?
....
To Larry Cohler-Esses: I am surprised that the Forward News Editor has taken the time and interest to respond to a criticism of the accuracy of its reporting. I acknowledge the specific explanation, which appears to be reasonable. Perhaps you might take the time to explain the heavy spin, the interpretations and analyses and judgments, included in these News stories. As an example, this "news" seems more like editorial (and obviously not pro-Israel), when your lead is:
....
"Forty-five minutes at the White House was all it took to crystallize the new paradigm defining the relations among the Obama administration, the Jewish community and Israel.", and,
"(T)he meeting yielded a broad understanding that the administration’s decision to take its dispute with Israel to the public sphere will not be challenged by American Jews."
....
Yet your alleged "broad understanding", that American Jews will not challenge the Obama administration public attacks on Israel, is belied by the statements being issued by various attendees after the shock of the short meeting wore off. So much for the "paradigm". Are the story's broad claims and conclusions objectively warranted by the reported facts? Other news media, including Jewish media, has reported the same story without that spin or those dire conclusions.
It also appears that the sources chosen by the Forward to later comment on the meeting were slanted toward the anti-Israel camp. Of particular concern is the quote featured from J Street, (an extremist far-left hawkishly anti-Israel propagandist, which the Forward has often featured and quoted in other stories, and amazingly described it as a "peace group" and a "dovish pro-Israel lobby", and which the Forward's present editorial oddly suggests is not "disreputable"):
...
"While many Israelis believe that all these assumptions fell flat, it is clear from the meeting and from statements by Jewish leaders that the community is still strongly on Obama’s side in the settlement dispute.
“There’s a message here for Israel,” said Jeremy Ben-Ami, executive director of the dovish group J Street and one of the White House meeting participants. “The message is that there is no court of appeals, that the American Jewish community and the president share the same interest.”
...
My (earlier) posted comment was posted before I noticed your post, and includes some in depth information about J Street, which the Forward seemingly supports.
If, as News Editor you have any power or influence over the choice of News stories, perhaps you could comment on the choice of extreme anti-Israel stories by the Forward. They appear to routinely include some of the most blatantly anti-Israel propaganda of the sort not seen, and certainly not featured, in mainstream Jewish publications.
I think that not only should a professional news source strive to accurately report the facts, but also not to spin the story to support its biases and political agendas. I hope you will agree that the Jewish community deserves at least that. It may be asking too much, but how about fewer anti-Israel stories, and instead some truly pro-Israel stories?
And you may consider this well beyond the pale, but since this is probably the only chance a reader will get to make this point: How about, instead of casting American Jews' response to the Obama administration's public move away from supporting Israel to attacking it, not as a question of domestic politics of "liberal" versus "conservative", but instead as those who are pro-Israel versus anti-Israel. Traditional "liberals" (as distinguished from the far-left anti-Israel "progressives") have in the past been among the strongest Jewish supporters of the Jewish State of Israel. No matter which political party a president belongs to, American Jews must stand up to him and any party he belongs to, if their policies are (as Jews who have lived long enough to know say) "bad for Israel."
.....
Do my comments, above, not qualify as "vigorous debate and reasoned critique"?
Frank,
Don't get too upset. I might be a tad more shrill than you, but they're doing it to me too. Kind of like Obama and Emanuel's invite policy. If you're truly for Israel, if you truly believe that a Jew should live and build on THEIR OWN LAND, this is what you get to face from the oh-so-benevolent and tolerant Left.
Fact is, they'd tolerate a Nazi creeping in from stormfront.org before they'd tolerate a Jew standing up for the rights of Jews to live where they have lived for time immemorial. Just the way moral cowards act.
Dara, your ignorance is appalling. Try reading Mark Twain's "Innocents Abroad" to know what the Turkish province that included Palestine was like before Zionism was invented. Jerusalem was loaded with Jews. Contrary to the propaganda from the Arabs, the whole country was a wasteland. Under Muslim Turkish rule Jerusalem was an unimportant dirty backwater. There was never a time since the Roman conquest when Israel was completely abandoned by Jews. Moreover as my own DNA and that of almost all Ashkenazi Jews proves, we originated in the Middle East. We are the descendants of the aborigines, Canaanites, who have now returned after being expelled by invaders, including the sword of Islam.
Your statement "Israel, especially the Likud, has NEVER wanted a fair land for peace agreement" is either a bald faced lie or plain ignorance. Likud was founded in 1973 and did not control the government until 1977. Israel accepted the partition in 1948, it was the Arabs who rejected it. After the 1967 war, Israel offered to return the areas conquered in exchange for peace. The Arab answer was the famous three noes.
I wrote: "7. Why are Arabs allowed Judenrein states, specifically Saudi Arabia, Jordan, and the proposed Palestinian state, while Israel must treat Muslims as equal citizens?" You do not answer this question. Instead you raise the question of Arab second class citizenship in Israel. The answer to your question is that people who are not loyal to a country are not equal citizens. Name one country in the world that allows such a thing.
Frank, Allan --
I knew a few lawyers who argued in court all the time. A couple of them even argued before the Supreme Court.
They gave me one important rule:
Know when to shut up.
Irving Kristol once wrote an article entitled "On the Political Stupidity Of the Jews". After reading about the so-called "Jewish Leaders" in this article, and the comments here by those who apparently support them, I cannot help but think how penetrating Kristol's insight was.
The path ahead of us is not simple. We are in a state of war with the vast majority of Arab countries, with Islamic believers throughout the world supporting them. We are talking about tens of millions of enemies who are ready to go to war against us at any moment, and hundreds of millions more who voice support for it.
In such a situation, it is easy to be enticed by the false prophets who promise peace. However, one who examines the circumstances with open eyes will understand that withdrawal and compromise will not bring an end to the Arabs' war against us; on the contrary, it will only increase it. In order to understand this, the source of our enemy's motivation must be understood.
It is no coincidence that the Arabs have succeeded in imposing the Islamic religion on many nations, to the point where presently there are approximately 1,400,000,000 people who are believers. The genetic code of Islam is directed towards a steadfast war to impose the religion of Mohammad on the entire world by means of the sword. And to achieve this goal, everything is legitimate. If they need to lie, they will lie. If they need to kill, they will kill - hundreds of thousands or even millions. It was not the enchanting beauty of the Islamic religion which drew so many nations to accept it upon themselves, but rather the clear threat of death.
All nations reached their achievements through wars and victories; however, in Islam, unlike other cultures, the principle of compromise is unacceptable, especially a compromise over land. Therefore, even when the Muslims lack the power to defeat their enemy, they are not willing to accept compromise. If they make a cease-fire (tahadeya in Arabic), in the view of Islam, it is only a recess which must be utilized to prepare for the continuation of the war. If possible, in the meantime, they will weaken their opponent with terrorist attacks and ransacking. If not, at the very least they will attempt to anesthetize him with lies, until they are able to attack once again and defeat him.
This fundamental principle causes the Muslims never to lay down their sword; to always be ready for the continuation of the war. This is how the Muslims succeeded to impose their religion on many nations, who in turn, according to this code, continued to conquer additional territory.
According to the Muslim way of thinking, the world is divided into two areas: Dar al-Islam is the area already conquered by Islam. Dar al-Harb is the area of war, which the Arabs are commanded to conquer until it is turned into Muslim territory. After a certain territory has been conquered by Islam, it is declared as holy Muslim territory, which is forbidden to be relinquished under any circumstances.
Even if this territory is conquered by another nation for hundreds of years, according to Muslim law it is still considered holy land which must be returned to Muslim control. Accordingly, Muslims execute terrorist attacks in Spain and large parts of India, because the Islam which conquered them in the past, demands them in return now. And if unable to conquer them, Muslims will at least carry out terrorist attacks, so that normal life cannot be conducted there until they are returned to Islamic rule.
The State of Israel constitutes a double problem from their perspective, for it was established on territory that was conquered by Islam since its foundation (except for a period of approximately 100 years when it was ruled by the Dar al-Harb is the area of war, which the Arabs are commanded to conquer. Crusaders); and not only this, but the land of Israel is located in the heart of Muslim territory. Therefore, as far as they are concerned, this is the first place they must conquer - either by sword or by guile.
Some Muslims are more religious, others less; however, the central foundation which strives to conquer and rule remains alive to a great extent amongst all of them.
The present debate between the moderates and the extremists is over the question of whether it is necessary to implement agreements with the State of Israel in order to cause its collapse, or to crush it through extended guerilla warfare. Concerning the goal itself - the dismantling of the State of Israel and the conquering of the entire Land of Israel - none of them concede.
Yes Norm exactly. My Step-Dad, an accomplished trial lawyer, would have said the same thing to Alan & Frank. Shut the ------ up already. You are making yourselves look like idiots!
Thank you sidney.
I am sure Norman thinks giving up the Gush was a good idea too!
When there will be a 2 state salution (god forbid) i would like norman to live near the border!
Hanoch, Hillel, & Phil-Although, I disagree with you I would like to compliment you for the civility that you use to make your case.
no sane person cld or wld hate followers of sinoism, americanism, russism, germanism, zuluism, zionism; one can only vigorously reject their respective misteachings.
i don`t know ab. zulus, but russians, chinese, americans, et al have robbed peoples of their land. And sane people reject theft of land and with intent to murder their inhabitants.
and once your a diamonds, grave, or land thief, you`re on defensive eternally. And, if there is god, there is punishment waiting for all robbers.
we know that mosheists, being small in number and surrounded by semites or shemites, had been either eradicated or dispersed from n. kingdom. a few centuries later, judaists, being weak and scarse, also bit the dust; almost utterly disappearing.
and then an entirely nonsemitic peoples- some hundred ethnicities- took up the opium of hebrews; hoping to survive in the same enviroment in which once hebrews resided.tnx
All you Isreali haters have to do is read the article in this edition "Anti Semitic Rant" to see what the real situatation, that is if you think what the Imam said was anti-semitic. With you guys no telling.
On Monday, the High Court in Israel ruled in favor of the far-leftorganizations Peace Now and Yesh Din and ordered that 11 homes in theSamaria town of Eli be torn down. One of the homes in question belongs toIDF Major Roi Klein, who was killed in the Second Lebanon War when he jumpedon a live hand grenade thrown by Hizbullah forces, in order to save hissoldiers. Maj. Klein's last words, his soldiers later said, were "Shema Yisrael." Email readers, click here to view the video report. The Klein family home is located in the Hayovel neighborhood of Eli. Theneighborhood received government support and services over the course ofmore than a decade, but never received official authorization. Peace Now claims that some houses were built on Arab-owned land. Accordingto residents of Eli, a part of one building does extend onto Arab land, butthe other homes in the neighborhood, including the Klein family residence,were built entirely on state land. Klein's final act of bravery led the state to posthumously award him theMedal of Valor, the IDF's highest honor. Klein was the first to be awardedthe medal in more than 30 years. Klein's widow, Sarah, declined to respond to the High Court decision thatcould leave her and her two young children with no home. Neighbors describedthe news as "a harsh blow," particularly in light of the fact that it camealmost exactly three years after Roey's death, and shortly before ascheduled IDF memorial ceremony in his honor. 'Will Your Hand not Tremble?' Following the ruling, the Land of Israel Legal Forum sent an emotionalappeal to Defense Minister Ehud Barak, calling on him to honor Major Kleinby authorizing his family's home and making it legal. "Will your hand, asthat responsible for destroying the home of this hero of Israel, not trembleas you sign the demolition order?" asked Forum chairman Nachi Eyal. "With your signature, you could turn his home 'legal,' but you refuse... Thelaw does not require you to destroy the home of a hero of Israel who gavehis life for his people," the letter continued. "If there is any legal wayto prevent this travesty, you must make use of it." When he gave his life, Klein became a national symbol of bravery andsacrifice, Eyal noted. If Barak allows the Klein family home to bedestroyed, "the message sent will be disastrous, for both civilians andsoldiers," he warned. "If there remains any significance to 'our duty to the fallen' - now is thetime to prove it," he concludedPlease help prevent the demolition of Ro"i Klein's home where his widow and2 small children live.http://www.atzuma.co.il/petition/be770/1/
Gveret Ragen-As my friend in Maryland once noted, the problem with you is that you invalidate anyone who disagrees with you. You once said that you didn't want to spend your life making kugels. Klal Yisrael would have been better off had you done so.
jewish leaders dont care about poor jews.......poor jews are settlers ........thay need money so thay go and become settlers......
For Dara and others who think that Jews displaced a Palestinian civilization, here is Mark Twain on Jerusalem:
1867
Mark Twain, Innocents Abroad Chapter 53
Rags, wretchedness, poverty and dirt, those signs and symbols that indicate the presence of Moslem rule more surely than the crescent-flag itself, abound. Lepers, cripples, the blind, and the idiotic, assail you on every hand, and they know but one word of but one language apparently -- the eternal "bucksheesh." To see the numbers of maimed, malformed and diseased humanity that throng the holy places and obstruct the gates, one might suppose that the ancient days had come again, and that the angel of the Lord was expected to descend at any moment to stir the waters of Bethesda. Jerusalem is mournful, and dreary, and lifeless. I would not desire to live here.
Throughout Jewish history the embattled people of Israel have developed conditions and neuroses very similar to
They have eschewed uniqueness and national identity. victims of abuse. At times, they have begun to blame themselves for the hatred that they have experienced hurled against them. At other times, they have begun to assume that if they would adopt more universal ideals and become more connected to the greater whole they would cease to be persecuted. As a result of such a desire they have eschewed uniqueness and national identity for the safe anonymity of "sameness".
There is nothing inherently wrong in looking for commonality and initiating bridge building. In fact, the building of bridges of understanding between peoples is one of the critical goals of mankind's destiny and purpose. Yet, the collapse of identity and the slipping into the morass of blandness and anonymity has become a disaster, and an ever-present danger for the Jewish people.
There is an even darker side to the phenomenon. Throughout history, some of the greatest enemies of the Jewish people have been Jews who so wanted to identify with the world that the result was a deep hatred within themselves for Judaism and Jewish destiny. Some of the greatest persecutors of the Jewish people have been people of Jewish descent.
The road into such lethal and dangerous thinking can even begin with well-meaning and pure thinking. It usually begins with the desire to ensure that the Jewish people remain within the constraints of safe political correctness. Such groups in the past have taken it upon themselves, in the name of the Jewish people, to represent views and opinions that were in line with the interests of the ruling monarchy, even if they were antithetical to the needs of their people. These Jewish individuals, called shtadlanim or "court Jews", acted seemingly on behalf of the Jewish people, but were truly more interested in enhancing their positions of power and wealth within the political hierarchy of their day.
It is usually easy to spot them. They use Jewish concepts and ideals liberally, while showing no connection to any of these ideals in their private lives. The will usually speak on behalf of the Jewish people as a group and yet as individuals have very little to do with their local Jewish community. They will declare ideas and beliefs that will endear them to their politically correct environment, but will deny the unique character and survival needs of their own people.
In our days, they will demand full rights for all Arabs living inside Israel, while denying them for Jews living in areas of Biblical and historic import. They exhibit great concern for Arab pain and suffering, while barely offering lip service for Jewish pain. They will advocate Israeli territorial concessions, regardless of the security dangers such withdrawals have produced in the past. They will argue that any serious criticism of the preaching and teaching of hatred towards the Jews of Israel and the world in Arab schools and mosques is somehow disloyal to American interests. For them, support for Israel's security needs is viewed as tantamount to a betrayal of American concerns.
According to many, the J Street Political Action Committee, founded in 2008, seems to be walking this very dangerous and self-destructive path.
During the Gaza War, the Israeli newspaper Ha'aretz wrote that while the "left-wing Meretz party on Thursday issued a rare call for military action against Hamas in order to bring an end to cross-border attacks on Israel by Gaza militants," J Street called for superpower intervention to restrain Israel.
Reform Rabbi Eric Yoffie, president of the URJ, whose own views mirror the views of the Israeli Left, complained that the J Street lobby "could find no moral difference between the actions of Hamas and other Palestinian militants... and the long-delayed response of Israel, which finally lost patience and responded to the pleas of its battered citizens in the south."
J Street hit again this week. President Barack Obama - who truly believes that the magic of the spoken word can assuage any wound and cross over any chasm of disagreement - invited Jewish leaders for a talk. The president invited over 16 leaders, but excluded the strongly pro-Israel National Council of Young Israel and the Zionist Organization of America.
After the meeting, Obama's greatest admirers, the J Street lobby, declared:
"J Street commends President Barack Obama on restating today his commitment to a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and his serious intent to pursue a viable and sustainable resolution to the broader Arab-Israeli conflict.... President Obama should know that the majority of American Jews support the direction he outlined and his commitment to actively pursue peace and security." Is J Street truly speaking for the majority of American Jewry?
Is J Street truly speaking for the majority of American Jewry?
In a Newsweek article (May 27, 2008) highlighting the newly formed group, columnist Dan Ephron asked the lobbyists the following question:
Ephron: You're suggesting actually withholding aid?
J Street: No, I'm not saying that. I want to be really clear. I'm saying that when the US president closes the door with the Israeli prime minister, the US president has a lot more chips to play than any other person who closes that door. ...And it's time for the president to know that there's a group of people here who recognize that that is not only in Israel's best interests, it's in the US's best interests. We've got to step up and start to make this a more serious, meaningful policy.
Ephron: But my question is: Might J Street find itself in a situation where it would be lobbying on an issue that would be counter to what the Israeli government is doing?
J Street: Oh, absolutely. We have absolutely no problem taking a position that says the actions and policies of the Israeli government are counterproductive and not in the best interests, in our opinion, of either Israel or the United States....
Ephron: You'll have to face, I imagine, Israelis who will say, 'Wait a second, you don't live here, you don't send your children to the military here, you don't pay taxes. What right do you have to dictate or even to influence the debate?'
J Street: I think that's extremely fair [to argue]. But I think as long as the situation in Israel and Palestine is directly related to recruitment by extremist forces, by al-Qaeda, of the terrorists who then come here, I think it is an issue that has ramifications here.
Is J Street speaking out of concern for the destiny and security of the Jewish people, or are they suffering from the pain and wounds of exile? Are they concerned for the constituency that they claim to represent, or are they more interested in being accepted by the rulers of our time?
Either way, they can quickly become a very dangerous pawn in the war against the people of Israel.
Gveret Ragen-As my friend in Maryland once noted, the problem with you is that you invalidate anyone who disagrees with you. You once said that you didn't want to spend your life making kugels. Klal Yisrael would have been better off had you done so....didnt you just invalidate Mr Ragen? Do you support the demolition of the Klein household? Why are you wishing violent death to those who disagree with you (may your end be like Ceaucescu)? Someone might want to put a restraining order against you. At the very least, the Forward censor should stop you from wishing violence against others. You are the only commenter who is wishing violence against the other commenters.
Mr. Fong why is it that the Arutz 7ers are free to pour out the most hateful vitrol against their detractors but we aren't free to respond in kind? I'm sick of being called a "self hater, a coward, a traitor, a pro-Arab" etc. Mrs. Ragen and her friends need to understand the same lesson southern fire eaters learned during the Civil War. Be careful, with your rhetoric. Others just might grow tired of you and send your cause into the dustbin of history.
Normie, kindly take your own advice - and btw - stop goosestepping with the anti-Semites, unless you're one of course.
Two, Nadav, excellent. J Street are NO friends of Israel. To morally equate kidnappers, horse killers, terrorists with decent citizens of a democratic state proves they are not just morally bankrupt, they're scum. For an Obama to invite and cast legitimacy on those who are worst than the Jews who helped Stalin, or collaborated, for the most part unwillingly in the doomed ghettoes speaks volumes about what he is - and Emanuel too.
I have posed questions for the Normies, Sephardiboy Shrimp, Balkass's and others. Honestly I don't expect answers because like Obama and Emanuel and the Nazi-paid (Soros) J Streeters. they're afraid of the truth. But one more time:
One, If Jews cannot live in communities in Judea-Samaria, then what is to prevent Israel-haters from saying that they're cannot live in Tel-Aviv, Haifa, or Jerusalem in the future?
Two, Prove to me that land that was Jewish from time immemorial does not belong to the Jewish people, and should be given to terrorists!
Three, If Obama is "pressuring" the Palestinians as much as he is doing to Israel, then ask him about the 900 mil he and Hillary gave Hamas. Maybe some of us Americans want that money back, or if that's pressure, I'd like that kind of pressure too!
Four, And if Obama is so confident of his position, and yours too, then why wasn't there a single dissenting organization (AFSI, Chabad, Young Israel, JINSA, ZOA - all more relevant to the American Jewish Community than the Neo-Nazis of J Street) invited to the "sermon on the mount"?
Five, If Jews cannot live on their own LEGAL land, then why should you, self-haters and Fascists alike, live on Occupied NATIVE AMERICAN land? Answer that one without spewing crap.
OK, there it is - let's see if sephardiboy aka little fascist shrimp, Balkas, Normie, Teodoro, and the rest of the anti-Israel crew can reply without exaggeration and lying.
Still need mustard on those Hebrew Nationals with the milk? Or how many pacifiers do you require?
Clement,
Thank you. I did see your note after writing mine. Unfortunately the way of the Left Fascist of any kind is to stifle dissent, threaten violence (of course they'll scream and say you're doing the same). This is the way Democracies operate - even if they want to bring them down.
Just wait till you see Sephardiboys reply...he cannot even answer questions without spewing, lying, or threatening.
Alan-Enough already. The asylum is filled!
Well, Clement, and the more sane - and JEWISH ones here, that is, those who don't subscribe to a Judea-Samaria "Judenrein" or to the demands of a moral retard who sat in a pew for 20 years, the proof is in the pudding, or the comment above.
As usual, the little boy spews but cannot answer tough questions. Better get him and the other self-haters and their fellow fascists the pacifiers they're screaming for.
LOL.
Alan is a little man who sits behind his computer calling people names but is afraid to tell us his real name. He is a very mentally disturbed individual and all his postings show how sick he really is. Little man sits by his computer pretending to be important.
Alan Feldman,
Nice comments. Of course you probably never had a Jewish education, don't even know where Judea-Samaria is, what it means to the Jewish people. Just support someone who sat listening to a Jew-hater for 20 years and keep your ignorant head (or are you sitting on it?) in the sand, and support a truncated Israel. Heck, if Israel is - God Forbid -destroyed, you might - or might not say a prayer and go back to your lox, bagels, and cream cheese. Or maybe your Ham sandwich.
I'd gladly put my record in Israel-related activities and also, by the way, in the Civil Rights Movement, against you and other Self-Haters and your hero Obama any day. You're not fit to shine my shoes, pissant.
For Alan Feldman, (and for his like-minded friends)
There are a list of questions I posted for you (if that is YOUR real name) and the other self-haters who know how to applaud removing Jews from their homes and personally insult those who oppose Judenrein policies.
They're easy questions, but I guess that those who hate Jewish Settlers, Love Obama, don't know much about Judea-Samaria, or are just cowardly hypocrites in general have a very hard time answering them.
Gee, I wonder why...
Instead of trying to smear me, answer those questions. Or PISS OFF.
Thank You.
Memo to the Self-Haters who love Obama and J Street:
Better read the Jerusalem Post online edition...
www.jpost.com
OLMERT BLASTS OBAMA ON SETTLEMENTS.
Yep, the same Olmert, the darling of the Left, who was willing to cede much of Israel, and who allowed Sderot to experience firsthand the Palestinian ways of peace through THREE YEARS OF NON-STOP BOMBARDMENT.
Even Olmert, the arrogant Left Coward, is blasting Obama, his fellow arrogant Left Coward for lying about Settlement agreements.
This puts paid to the lies of the Nazi-funded J Street and other self-haters who have signed on to Rev. Wright's "son's" Judenrein Judea-Samaria" plans.
Read it and weep. And again, answer those questions or PISS OFF.
Yo Sidney, and the rest of you guys whose allegiance to America is at the very least, suspect: here is a lesson you should all absorb. Would we not all be better off if present day politicians said what they mean, and mean what they say, as this patriot illustrated.
America's Role In The World
On July 4, 1821, and on the 48th anniversary of our independence, John Quincy Adams, then the Secretary of State, said of our Country: "America does not go abroad in search of monsters to destroy. She is the well wisher to the freedom and independence of all. She is the champion and vindicator only of her own. She will recommend the general cause by the countenance of her voice, and the benignant sympathy of her own example. She well knows that by once enlisting under banners other than her own, were they even banners of foreign independence, she would involve herself beyond the power of extrication, of all the wars of interest and intrigue, of individual avarice, envy, ambition, which assumed the colors and usurped the standards of freedom. The fundamental maxims of her policy would insensibly change from liberty to force. She might become the dictatress of the world. She would no longer be the ruler of her own spirit."
following in the footsteps of israel, US is also starting to change names of US towns, cities, and states. From now on, cherokee will be cheery oak; seattle see tell; tennessee ten eye see; chicago chickegg; california call for [mama] mia; texas axis of change; israel will become either yisroel, shemojuda, or iz real. names like samuel, isaac, will become shmuel [or is it schlomo?] and ye djack respectively. tnx
Alan,
If you are such a committed Zionist, why aren't you living in Israel?
Sam: So my allegiance to the U.S. is suspect. I spent three years in the army during World War II. What is your record?
Sam, you smk. Do you even understand what you post? How does the John Adams quote support Obama's dictation to Israel on settlements or anything else?
Frank notes"It is happening here". I certainly hope he is right. It is about time.
I am assuming that Sephardiman, Frank, Lee, ALan, etc all support a strong Israel. One group feels that the settlement enterprise endangers the future of Israel. The second group feels that any concessions weaken Israel, ie Tel Hai. Whyd dont both groups marshall their arguments to see who is most convincing, instead of calling each other names?
Dara - You make the accusation that "Jews show up in Palestine and take over land belonging to others, often resorting to violence..." and then you add that the policy of Israel is to establish "only a weak bantustan semi-state for Arabs". Now, both points are false: the Jews are one of the native peoples of the country, and the Jews agreed already in 1947 to two states for the two national groups in conflict. What is amazing, however, is not the attack on Israel's legitimacy (which is the common among the anti-Israel crowd); rather, the false accusation against Jews does indeed fit the American story. The European settlers (today's Americans) "showed up in [America] and took over [an entire continent] belonging to others, often resorting to violence" and set up eventually reservations (bantustans) for the native population. Perhaps, someone could explain the source of such unabashed hypocrisy.
Israel, since I believe God ("I will bless them that bless you and curse them that curse you."), we will never side against you on anything because God will fight for you whether we (the USA) helps or not. According to my understanding of the Bible, all of that land "was yours" and "is yours",so God will fight for you if He has to use natural disasters.
A Christian Preacher
Mr. Fong-I totally agree with you and if "Alan" is willing to start conducting himself in a civilised manner I will be most happy to work with him, and anyone else, in the defence of Medinat Yisrael.
Alan Feldman, Norm-I share your assessments of "Alan."
There seems to be a lot of Meretz supporters in this country. It is too bad that they all don't move to Israel so that they could help put Meretz in powerr. Then we'd find out what the consequences of their lefty policies would be.
I wouldn't worry too much about that idiot Hussein in the White House. He's been talking a lot about a policy of non-interference in the internal policies of foreign countries when he talks about N. Korea, Iran, etc. Consequently, he's done notthing on those two fronts. So, would it really be very wise for him to reveal the lie to his foreign policy by singling out Israel for interference in domestic policies.
Yo Sidney! I don't usually flaunt my military service, but you are raising the subject causes me to do so in this instance. I served three years three months and three days during world war two, and have probably served more time in combat than you spent in the service. My first outfit was the 266th coast artillery, and we served in Alaska.we were later re-trained and were formed into the 541st field artillery, and went to Europe, where we were deployed in france, and wound up by war's end at Cologne. I'm not, and never considered myself a hero, and wish I had never had that experience.
Yo Sid. By the way, John Quincy Adams speech was kind of prophetic. Don't you think? It has everything to do with Israel's well being - at our expense financially, and in our reputation world wide. Without our help they wouldn't even be classified a banana republic. And don't give me the crap that they are a democracy. By what definition?
Actually Gary, given the inherent corruption of all of Israel's traditional parties I would vote for Alle Yarok, if I were able to cast a ballot in Israeli elections.
there are actually three major hells on our planet: they go under the names islam, mosheic laws, and christianity. their respective priests compete about, among mnay other inanities, also ab. which of these ideologies can put most angels on point of a needle.
the many minor hells {india, china, US, UK, pak'n, palestine] shld be juxtaposed to the three hellish cults; and only then be able to ascertain that they are more perilous for peace and our survival than any plutocracy ever was or will be. tnx
Sam, "She will recommend the general cause by the countenance of her voice". How is this consistent with dictating to Israel?
If you know any American history, John Adams is not very admirable. Learn about the "Alien and Sedition Acts". And this is what the people thought of Adams in 1800 when he ran for re-elction. Nominee Thomas Jefferson John Adams
Popular vote 41,330 25,952 Percentage 61.4% 38.6%
Banana Republic indeed! This is GDP and compare the populations. Gross domestic product 2008 Ranking Economy (millions of US dollars) 41 Israel 199,498 42 Malaysia 194,927 43 Singapore 181,948 44 Ukraine 180,355 45 Algeria 173,882 46 Chile 169,458 47 Pakistan 168,276 48 Philippines 166,909 49 United Arab Emirates 163,296 50 Egypt, Arab Rep. 162,818 51 Hungary 154,668 52 Kazakhstan 132,229 53 New Zealand 130,693 54 Peru 27,434 55 Kuwait 112,116 56 Libya 99,926 57 Slovak Republic 94,957 58 Vietnam 90,705 59 Morocco 86,329 World Development Indicators database, World Bank, 1 July 2009
Moreover, how do you dismiss this? Saudi Arabia has all that oil and South Korea and Taiwan are Asian tigers.
CIA World Factbook Gross domestic product per capita
Rank ↓ Country ↓ US$ ↓ Year
17 United States 47,103 2008 est 34 Israel 26,531 2008 est 42 Korea, South 17,724 2008 est. 44 China, Republic of (Taiwan) 17,521 2008 est. 46 Saudi Arabia 16,617 2008 est
And by what arrogance on your part do you question my patriotism? Personal attack is the mark of people like you.
Sam, more baloney from you. You wrote: "I served three years three months and three days during world war two, and have probably served more time in combat than you spent in the service. My first outfit was the 266th coast artillery, and we served in Alaska."
I wrote: "I spent three years in the army during World War II."
You spent, according to you, three more months in the army than I did. In those three months you did basic training and "My first outfit was the 266th coast artillery, and we served in Alaska.we were later re-trained and were formed into the 541st field artillery, and went to Europe." Otherwise how "have probably served more time in combat than you spent in the service."
You are a very remarkable person having spent three years in combat. I have known people who served in some of the worst campaigns in World War II and were medal winners and not one of them spent three years in combat, including a friend who was commissioned during the battle for Tarawa in a unit where all his officers were killed.
Contrary to what Pres. Obama and the Arab world believes, Israel was not created as a result of the Holocaust. The Jewish people have resided there for over 3,000 years, and where do you think the "Tzion" in the prayer book refers to? Haifa? Tel Aviv? Where are our matriarchs and patriarchs buried?
If even half the Jewish commentators here had any familiarity with the Torah, they'd understand why the "West Bank" as the media calls it, is our historical Judea and Samaria.
And who lived there before the Six Day War? Whose land was it then? If the Arabs had that land then, why did they need to wage war on Israel?
You people make me sick.
in the view that the three dead shemitic men, moshe, jesus, and mohammed still make so much havoc, the converts to mosheic laws shld be extremely happy that they have no connection whatsoever with any shemitic peoples.
euros' taking a name of an extinct people and their cult and not speaking moshe's tongue proves that today's 'jews' are not a bit shemitic. and 'jewish' business people in canda are not called schlomo, schmuel, yizhak, yehuda, amir, etc., for obvious reasons.
To bozh: Your comments reveal total ignorance of history and genealogy. First of all, a very large percentage of Jews have no ancestral connection with Europe. Secondly, where you are at one point in time says nothing about where your ancestral roots are. For example, the gypsies probably originated in India. And, on a more personal level, my father's ancestors all came from Prussia, but a DNA test showed my recent ancestral origins to be England, Scotland, and Germany on the Glaser side of the family. I'm a genealogist, but I have no idea how England and Scotland got into the picture.
gary glaser, respectfully, euro-khazarians who took up moshe's cult in tenth cent. had no connection, according to clergy, with the the ten vanished hebrew tribes. the ten tribes vanished w.o. trace, according to rabbis and clergy. i do not think so. At least some may have survived or taken into servitude in assyria, babylon, etc. have some, few, or many ever reached shores of the n.caspian? It doesn't seem so because they wld have converted arian peoples much earlier; i.e.,ca. 700bc. according to historians, conversion of khazars et al tok place in tenth cent ad.
the two remaining tribes, benjamins and judah were at the time of their near-total evanescence well mixed up with canaanitic peoples. According to torah, benjaminim began in tenth cent. bc to marry so many jebusitic women of j'lem that sanhedrin had to change the laws ab. who was a jew; from then on to be a judean or judaist, one had to have judean or judaist mother.
historians, unlike people of the book, know very little if anything ab. the fate of benjaminim, hittites, amonites, amorites, jebusites,juhdans, et al, after 70ad.
add to this the fact, that if the fierce cultists had ever settled in caucasus ca. 200ad in large numbers; let's say 5-10K, they wld not have ever abandoned their holy mosheic tongue. tnx
Favorable results and the illusion of "broad support" are bound to happen when you hand pick your audience. The fact that Peace Now and other liberal groups were invited to the table while National Council of Young Israel, Chabad and the National Zionist Organization were not is a telling if not frightening reality.
I find it despicable that all the left leaning leaders in attendance at the White House meeting sat there like sheep and let the President have his say and his way. There was an extreme lack of courage shown because everyone wanted to be pc and agreeable. This is the same kind of Jewish "leadership" demonstrated during WWII in showing total deference to FDR over the death camps issue. The stated foreign policy (stated in Cairo of course)of the US President to not recognize any "Jewish settlements" is naive, discriminatory, and unworkable. We are talking about half a million people and their homes,their families communities,etc. Now the result of that "policy" is the Pals feel they don't need to make any concessions at all...just the Israelis need to make concessions. International law my a$$, which legislature writes international law? Which "unbiased" court inteprets that law? Do you mean international law as interpreted by that unbiased organization called the UN? Do you mean the International Court of Justice(?) in Europe, that marvelously unbiased organization? Perhaps you mean the UN's Human Rights Committee which only and regularly condemns Israel as a human rights violator, but sees nothing wrong in the actions of the Sudanese, Chinese,Russian, Iranian, or Saudi Arabian governments violations of human rights, ever. Israel conquered and captured those territories in 1967 in a war which it did not choose to happen...The vast majority of those territories were rturned to their rightful owners in exchange for peace teaties. These other territories will remain a part of Israel until the day comes when the Arabs stop teaching hatred of all Westerners to their children. When the land can be used for peaceful pursuits rather than launching pads for mortars and rockets, peace will come. When the Arabs are truly interested in making peace (which they are not now) Israel will be happy to trade some land for peace, and the Pals will have their state. In the meantime, the President should require concessions from BOTH sides, not just from the Israelis.
To any non-Jew-hating Jews who read the Forward: Obama is the most anti-Israel president in history, and is now threatening Israel. American Jews had better wake up, now!
Obama is now threatening Israel with financial sanctions! His obscene claim that Jerusalem is a "settlement", and that the major Jewish communities which have always been understood will be a permanent part of Israel in any peace deal to avoid "Auschwitz borders", should both have no more Jewish growth, is now the subject of outrageous threats against Israel! http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1246443870665&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull
Obama lied when he promised to prevent Iran from going nuclear. George Bush was right in warning he was an appeaser. Jesse Jackson was right when he warned he was not a friend of Israel. Now his State Department, via Clinton, has made it clear that he intends to let Iran obtain its nuclear weapons (and we all know that it will use them). Clinton: Iran nuke could lead to defense umbrella | Iran news | Jerusalem Post ( http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1246443874760&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull )
American Jews had better wake up - now.
It is interesting to me that far more gentiles see the inequity of Obama's attitude toward Israel than the Jews do...particularly the left leaning reform congregants. Anyone who is/was familiar with the city of Chicago, which I am intimately knows, that where Obama comes from, and where his past associates came from, make it simply impossible for him to be anything other than anti-Israel, or anti-Jewish for that matter.
It is time for the endless retoric to cease, and time for people who care for the future of Jews in this world, both here in the US as well as Israel to start flooding their congressmen/women, and tell the Rahm Emanuels, and other Obama inner circle types, just how they feel. What we need is someone to send out a mass mailing of the email addresses of all that should get the message, so that we can mobilize, and let those namby pamby PC individuals who worry about the worthless and arrogant fascists, know that the greater population does not stand with them.
I hope that someone out there has access to those lists. I for will will gladly forward the email addresses to the few hundred on my lists.
I find it despicable that all the left leaning leaders in attendance at the White House meeting sat there like sheep and let the President have his say and his way. There was an extreme lack of courage shown because everyone wanted to be pc and agreeable. This is the same kind of Jewish "leadership" demonstrated during WWII in showing total deference to FDR over the death camps issue. The stated foreign policy (stated in Cairo of course)of the US President to not recognize any "Jewish settlements" is naive, discriminatory, and unworkable. We are talking about half a million people and their homes,their families communities,etc. Now the result of that "policy" is the Pals feel they don't need to make any concessions at all...just the Israelis need to make concessions. International law my a$$, which legislature writes international law? Which "unbiased" court inteprets that law? Do you mean international law as interpreted by that unbiased organization called the UN? Do you mean the International Court of Justice(?) in Europe, that marvelously unbiased organization? Perhaps you mean the UN's Human Rights Committee which only and regularly condemns Israel as a human rights violator, but sees nothing wrong in the actions of the Sudanese, Chinese,Russian, Iranian, or Saudi Arabian governments violations of human rights, ever. Israel conquered and captured those territories in 1967 in a war which it did not choose to happen...The vast majority of those territories were rturned to their rightful owners in exchange for peace teaties. These other territories will remain a part of Israel until the day comes when the Arabs stop teaching hatred of all Westerners to their children. When the land can be used for peaceful pursuits rather than launching pads for mortars and rockets, peace will come. When the Arabs are truly interested in making peace (which they are not now) Israel will be happy to trade some land for peace, and the Pals will have their state. In the meantime, the President should require concessions from BOTH sides, not just from the Israelis.
According to the anti-Israel faux-Jewish Forward , (which supports J Street):
....
"Forty-five minutes at the White House was all it took to crystallize the new paradigm defining the relations among the Obama administration, the Jewish community and Israel.
....
Fortunately for Jews, the Forward was entirely WRONG. Jewish leaders are making it clear that Obama's attacks on Israel are unacceptable. They are speaking out against Obama's attacks on Israel. American Jews are waking up to the fact that they were lied to by the candidate Obama, and that he has quickly shown himself to be the most anti-Israel president in history.
The Forward amazingly claims that the, "bulk of the organized Jewish community is in full support of his peace efforts, including his demand for a complete freeze of Jewish settlements on the Israeli-occupied West Bank." The anti-Israel Forward wishes that were true, but that is obviously, clearly, unequivocally WRONG. Jewish leaders across the board (anti-Semitic Jews such as J Street obviously not included as "Jewish leaders) are condemning those Obama's attacks on Israel.
Obama and his "Jewish" advisors' attempts to create a wedge between American Jews and Israel to deprive Israel of their support, and to damage Israel's coalition government lead by Netanyahu to weaken Israel, have FAILED.
Obama shouldn't push his luck with Israel making them cease building in East-Jerusalem. There is only one eternal capital of Israel and that encompasses the whole of Jerusalem. In 1948 the fledgling 'State Of Israel' couldn't hold on to the eastern sector of Jerusalem and it was surrendered to the Trans-Jordanian legion under the leadership of general Glubb Pasha, the Britisher later to become Sir John Glubb. All the 1,300 Jews in the old jewish quarter of jerusalem headed by Rabbi Mordechai Weingarten surrendered the Keys to major Tell. Under the Rhodes armistice agreement in 1949 diaspora jews aswell as Israeli jews would be allowed to pray at the (Kottel) last remainig wall of the 2nd Temple, however the Jordanians abrogated on that agreement, it would be another 19 years before any jew could again pray at the wall. Do you honestly think that Jerusalem will be a divided city once more. When was Jerusalem ever the capital of Palestine. If the Jordanians wouldn't have entered the war in 1967 jerusalem would still be in their hands. The whole of jerusalem was and will always be the eternal capital of 'The Jewish State Of Israel'.