George Soros Takes on AIPAC

[reprehensor]

From the New York Review of Books;
http://www.nybooks.com/articles/20030

"...The current policy is not even questioned in the United States. While other problem areas of the Middle East are freely discussed, criticism of our policies toward Israel is very muted indeed. The debate in Israel about Israeli policy is much more open and vigorous than in the United States. This is all the more remarkable because Palestine is the issue that more than any other currently divides the United States from Europe. Some European governments, according to reports, would like to end the economic boycott of Hamas once a unity government is successfully established. But the US has said it would not.

One explanation is to be found in the pervasive influence of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), which strongly affects both the Democratic and the Republican parties. AIPAC's mission is to ensure American support for Israel but in recent years it has overreached itself. It became closely allied with the neocons and was an enthusiastic supporter of the invasion of Iraq. It actively lobbied for the confirmation of John Bolton as US ambassador to the United Nations. It continues to oppose any dialogue with a Palestinian government that includes Hamas. More recently, it was among the pressure groups that prevailed upon the Democratic House leadership to drop the requirement that the President obtain congressional approval before taking military action against Iran. AIPAC under its current leadership has clearly exceeded its mission, and far from guaranteeing Israel's existence, has endangered it.

The Palestine problem does not have a purely military solution. Military superiority is necessary for Israel's national security, but it is not sufficient. The solution has to be political, as President Clinton recognized. He exerted enormous energy to bring about a peace settlement and his efforts were so successful that it took the murder of Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin in 1995 by an Israeli extremist to prevent an Israeli peace initiative with Arafat from being implemented. Even after Ariel Sharon's walk on the Temple Mount in September 2000 set off new violence, Clinton offered a peace deal several months later that was rejected by Arafat but probably suggests the shape of a future settlement.

President Bush has never tried. He has adopted the misleading metaphor of the war on terror and allowed Ariel Sharon to have his way. Sharon did not want a negotiated settlement. He came to realize that the military occupation could not be maintained forever and withdrew from Gaza, in part, it has been argued, to strengthen the Israeli position on the West Bank. But unilateral withdrawal led to the current chain of events. The Bush administration did not just passively acquiesce in the Sharon/ Olmert government's policies; it actively encouraged them. AIPAC must bear its share of responsibility for aiding and abetting policies such as Israel's heavy-handed response to Hezbollah last summer and its insistence on treating Hamas only as a terrorist organization..."

Continued...
http://www.nybooks.com/articles/20030

[orleans]

1. k&r n/t

[DCKit]

2. Just PERFECT for the wing-nuts on the right

When Jerusalem becomes an all-out war zone, the Dome of the Rock will fall, a new Temple will be built and Jesus will arrive from Heaven on a golden chariot pulled by Pegasus.

I love fairy tales.

[muntrv]

3. AIPAC doesn't connect the fact that Iran is stronger because of the

overthrow and killing of Saddham Hussein. He was a ruthless dictator, but he did keep Iran in check.

[DCKit]

4. So their right-wing nut jobs are no smarter than ours

Big surprise.

[bvar22]

22. Doesn't matter to AIPAC or Likud.

As far as AIPAC is concerned, the only good Muslim is a DEAD Muslim. The only good Palistinian is a DEAD Palistinian. MORE US children in the line of FIRE is GOOD!

They are ALL fucking NUTS!

[Canuckistanian]

5. What an anti-Semite!

Oh, wait.....

George Soros (pronounced <ʃoroʃ>) (born August 12, 1930, in Budapest, Hungary, as György Schwartz) is a Jewish-American financial speculator, stock investor, philanthropist, and political activist.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Soros

But then again, you can't trust Wikipedia....

[Behind the Aegis]

14. That makes no sense.

The only way it makes sense is if you are trying to say that Jews cannot be anti-Semites. If that is the case, then you are wrong.

[Canuckistanian]

18. Uh, you miss my point

I'm parodying the knee-jerk reaction of RW pundits whenever the motives of AIPAC are even questioned.

To them, anti-AIPAC means anti-semite.

[Tom Joad]

6. Why should we not speak out against a group that supports war and occupation?

Of course we should oppose aipac. It is not the whole problem, but it is part of the problem.
www.StopAIPAC.org

[Name removed]

7. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Jim Sagle]

8. Take your bullshit back to Stormfront. We don't need it here.

[Tom Joad]

12. What Jim Sagle said, DC Kits statement does not belong here.

[DubiousLee]

10. Here's your real straight talking AIPAC hater...just look right here. eom.

[rockymountaindem]

11. Yeah, don't look at any of the real issues or anything

just blame it on the usual "Jews guilt-tripping the rest of us rubes". That's a lot simpler.

[Justice Is Comin]

9. AIPAC

should stay the hell out of our government.

I don't believe we have lobbyists slinking around in theirs.

[orleans]

13. (maybe we just have our government "slinking" around in their government) n/t

[LeftishBrit]

20. Too right IMO

Olmert seems to dance to Bush's tune.

[cali]

15. kudos to Soros

for speaking out. He's a man who has the courage of his convictions and a lot of clarity on issues as well.

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

16. And being a Jew who despises AIPAC's influence on our government, this rings so true.

From Soros -

Whether the Democratic Party can liberate itself from AIPAC's influence is highly doubtful. Any politician who dares to expose AIPAC's influence would incur its wrath; so very few can be expected to do so. It is up to the American Jewish community itself to rein in the organization that claims to represent it. But this is not possible without first disposing of the most insidious argument put forward by the defenders of the current policies: that the critics of Israel's policies of occupation, control, and repression on the West Bank and in East Jerusalem and Gaza engender anti-Semitism.

The opposite is the case. One of the myths propagated by the enemies of Israel is that there is an all-powerful Zionist conspiracy. That is a false accusation. Nevertheless, that AIPAC has been so successful in suppressing criticism has lent some credence to such false beliefs. Demolishing the wall of silence that has protected AIPAC would help lay them to rest. A debate within the Jewish community, instead of fomenting anti-Semitism, would only help diminish it.

Anticipating attacks, I should like to emphasize that I do not subscribe to the myths propagated by enemies of Israel and I am not blaming Jews for anti-Semitism. Anti-Semitism predates the birth of Israel. Neither Israel's policies nor the critics of those policies should be held responsible for anti-Semitism. At the same time, I do believe that attitudes toward Israel are influenced by Israel's policies, and attitudes toward the Jewish community are influenced by the pro-Israel lobby's success in suppressing divergent views.

—March 15, 2007

[LeftishBrit]

21. I agree with Soros in 99% of what he says....

However, I don't think anyone, even a Jew, should imply in any way that 'attitudes to the Jewish community' depend on the actions of Israeli or other Jews. Anti-semitism is not an attitude based on rationality; and nothing that any group of Jews does or doesn't do is responsible for it. Attitudes to Israel itself, of course, can depend on what Israelis or their government do; but the idea of all-powerful Jewish conspiracies has been a hallmark of anti-semitism since long before Israel even existed. Soros does make something of a disclaimer, but not as much as I'd like.

For the rest, I agree with Soros about the current Israeli policies, and the American government's enouragement of them, and indeed egging-on. I suspect that all Bush has to do is say "Jump" and the not-very-clever Olmert says "How high?"

I hope Soros can do something constructive towards peace in the Middle East . I greatly admire his educational work in Eastern Europe and elsewhere, and know few Polish and Bulgarian people who have greatly benefitted from travel grants that he sponsored.
I

[Skidmore]

17. I predict a surge of cyberwarriors on this thread. nt

[leveymg]

19. George should put some money up for an alternative organization

One that more accurately reflects the majority of American Jews, and our attitudes and concerns about Israel.

It needs to have a mission as a counter-weight to the sort of extremist ideology, bigotry, disinformation, espionage, and shameless vote buying sponsored by AIPAC, which is now effectively an instrument of both the American and Israeli Rightwings.

[LeftishBrit]

25. There is such an alternative organization already

http://www.ameinu.net

It looks like a good organization, from the website!

[Senator]

23. k&r

[PhilipShore]

24. Only non-violent tactics -- will resolve conflicts in the Middle East

Wars -- and threats of wars will never resolve any conflicts, between the Palestinians and the Jews. The only way to get to the root of the problem, is to root out the violence, by non-violent means. The Republicans have a vested interest in keeping the conflicts going, because they are puppets of the Military-Industrial-Complex.

There will always be terrorists on the West Bank -- until they are kicked out. The Jews and the Palestinians existed peacefully on the West Bank until the terrorists came into the Middle East (The West Bank), so a non-violent five year plan, to evict all Palestinians from the West Bank -- is the only way to bring peace to the Middle East.

Then only "peace loving Palestinians" could move back to the West Bank over that period; and as long as no terrorist acts are done by anyone in the West Bank against Israel, or any Israelis anywhere in the World, for a period of 50 years -- then the Palestinians could have a country called Palestine.

[The Count]

26. Bush's Iran policy hurts Israel - Wes Clark - the relevant alternative view

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x3187552

[reprehensor]

27. Swami Beyondananda Takes on AIPAC

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=534327&mesg_id=534327

[provis99]

28. saw an aipac video, I think on Crooksandliars

where crazy apocalyptic Christian fundamentalist (is that redundant?) John Hagee was talking about fundamentalists support for Israel. Of course, he doesn't mention the fundamentalist creed that Israel should be supported so the Apocalypse can be kickstarted, and all the Jews who don't convert will be wiped out. But what really struck me was the reactions of the aipac audience; full of rebel yells and "yeehaah!" responses to Hagee! Jeez, they sounded like Southern rednecks at a nascar rally! (no offense to Southern rednecks meant, just a cultural observation).