‘House and Senate compete to be more [slavishly] pro-Israel’

{ 4 comments... read them below or add one }

1. D. says:

   January 8, 2009 at 3:20 pm

   + Show content

   There's more and more talk about U.S. involvement on the Egypt border.

   "The House's resolution "calls on Egypt to intensify its efforts to halt smuggling between Gaza and Egypt and affirms the willingness of the United States to continue to assist Egypt in these efforts""

   As Jim Haygood (the smart one) warned us, it seems pretty clear the lobby wants to get the U.S. entangled in the job of concentration camp guards. Should be good for a couple more generations of "clash of civilizations."

   Log in to Reply
2. MM says:

   January 9, 2009 at 12:28 am

   + Show content

   Such a good idea, D., that I believe it's a point of agreement between the lobby and its eternal nemesis, J Street.

   Log in to Reply
3. MM says:

   January 9, 2009 at 12:41 am

   + Show content

   Glenn Greenwald (emph mine):

   Since the Israeli attack on Gaza began, the advocacy of J Street — the new Jewish-American organization designed to break AIPAC's monopoly on speaking for American Jews — has been superb. They have gone much further than any Jewish group that is taken seriously by the establishment, continuously expressing opposition to the Israeli offensive and infuriating those who want to maintain a neoconservative stranglehold over speaking for American Jews. Earlier today, I asked them for their position on the Senate Resolution and, just now, this is what they sent me:

   Since the first days of the crisis in Gaza, J Street has consistently called for strong American leadership to reach a ceasefire that ends all military operations, stops the rockets aimed at Israel, institutes an effective mechanism to prevent weapons smuggling into Gaza, and lifts the blockade of Gaza. Since J Street's founding, we have consistently advocated for active American diplomacy to resolve the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

   We support Congressional action that endorses these aims.

   That statement — by design, I would guess — is unclear in the extreme. It seems intended to imply — without actually stating — support for the Congressional Resolutions. They say they "support Congressional action that endorses these aims," but — conspicuously — they don't actually say whether the Resolution passed by the Senate and to be passed by the House does so. It's hard to see how either of the two Resolutions could be deemed to do so, given that neither even mentions, for instance, a lifting of the blockade of Gaza. But that's the statement J Street issued.

   Log in to Reply
4. MM says:

   January 9, 2009 at 12:49 am

   + Show content

   The phrasing "ends all military operations" in the J Street statement would be impressive if it were what J Street actually means.

   Of course the "mechanism" for dismantling the tunnels between Egypt and Gaza will be some combination of army engineers, soldiers with guns, probably some aerial bombardment… My guess is that someone's gonna be getting killed, and they'll probably be Palestinian.

   Just don't call it a military operation.

   At least J Street didn't endorse the language about Gilad Shalit that's apparently in the House draft of the resolution.

   Who knows, maybe Corporal Shalit is the only reason the Gazan death toll is 700 and not 7,000.

   Log in to Reply