For those who don’t have time to read all of Jeffrey Goldberg’s long, preemptive, Bible-n-Holocaust-drenched piece about Netanyahu/Obama on the Times Op-Ed piece today

by on May 17, 2009 18
0sharesFacebook
0tweetsTwitter
0stumbledStumbleUpon
0sharesReddit
0recommendGoogle

"no one will defend the Jews except the Jews themselves"

About Philip Weiss

Philip Weiss is Founder and Co-Editor of Mondoweiss.net.
Posted in Beyondoweiss, Israel Lobby, Israeli Government, US Politics

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

  1. RichardWitty says:
    May 17, 2009 at 3:16 pm

    It was written as descriptive of the relationship, of the prospect, not as recommendation. Do you think his description was innaccurate, how? I do not subscribe to the Amelak reference in the slightest. It is the frankly misinterpreted root of "everyone's against us" psychology. For those that are actually inclined towards peace, this would have been a promising time, in the renewed energy for the Arab peace plan proposing to sincerely and confidently normalize relations between all the Arab states and Israel. Both the left, and the uber-Zionists can fetch a disaster out of a promise.

  2. dalybean says:
    May 17, 2009 at 4:07 pm

    Mr. Witty says that Goldberg's piece was written as "descriptive" and "not as a recommendation" I disagree entirely. The purpose of the piece is to prop up Netanyahu, demonize Iran and to tell President Obama what he is "required" to do, what he "needs" to do and what he "must" do. Here is Goldberg: "As the crisis worsens, Mr. Obama will find his options few, and those that exist will require him to bring to bear all his talents of persuasion. In his effort to engage Iran, he will need to promise a complete end to its international isolation in exchange for a halt to its nuclear program. But at the same time, he must be ready to threaten Iran with total estrangement from the West — the limiting of its gas imports, the choking-off of its banking system — if it continues its nuclear program. To do this, he must convince Europe, China and Russia that a nuclear Iran will be catastrophic for Middle East stability as well as for their own economies. If he’s unwilling to take military action against Iran, President Obama might soon enough be forced to design a containment strategy meant to scare a nuclear Iran into something resembling quiescence." Let us not forget that Jeffrey Goldberg has little credibility in pushing for wars on behalf of Israel. In pushing for the war on Iraq, Mr. Goldberg wrote a long discredited piece in The New Yorker all about Iraq's ties to Al Qaeda. He has never apologized for that. No one should listen to him now as he pushes for war and a crippling embargo on Iran. He is a discredited propagandist.

  3. LeaNder22 says:
    May 17, 2009 at 4:29 pm

    Do you think his description was innaccurate, how? Look, can't be so difficult to answer this for yourself. This is all there is about Phil and Adam's main issue: especially the escalating pressure from the Obama administration to curb Jewish settlement on the West Bank. Not a peep about it after this initial side allusion. Let's hope with Roger Cohen that Obama has read Trita Parsi's book. Have you? What is Jeffrey Goldberg "a leftist" (Euston Manifesto-style school?) or a über-Zionist? Or more as Phil puts it a PEP?

  4. Richard Witty says:
    May 17, 2009 at 4:32 pm

    Then it also shouldn't be too difficult for Phil.

  5. Richard Witty says:
    May 17, 2009 at 4:33 pm

    I haven't read the Trita Parsi book. I've read more than a couple articles that have been posted in various blogs.

  6. LeaNder22 says:
    May 17, 2009 at 4:33 pm

    My favorite quote:

    To do this, he must convince Europe, China and Russia that a nuclear Iran will be catastrophic for Middle East stability as well as for their own economies. If he’s unwilling to take military action against Iran, President Obama might soon enough be forced to design a containment strategy meant to scare a nuclear Iran into something resembling quiescence.

  7. LeaNder22 says:
    May 17, 2009 at 4:35 pm

    you should. I have just finished reading it.

  8. samuelburke says:
    May 17, 2009 at 5:21 pm

    jews think that racism is all about the jews…..but then again they think that everything is all about the jews… what about the blacks…arent they discriminated against…at least the jews can blend into western societies…..what about the orientals? do the jews think that orientals dont get discriminated against….how about the hispanics, arent they also a scourge on lily white america.. what jews do have is the op ed pages of americas newspapers and the fact that they are a very activist race, this allows for their voices to be heard above the crowds as they lament their woes around the world. all one has to do is look at the masacres of humanity around the world in different nation on other races not jewish to see that racism is of the human race and is the offspring of power and abuse. get over yourselves and consider yourselves lucky to live in a dynamic america.

  9. Ed says:
    May 17, 2009 at 5:25 pm

    The views and morality of the mainstream "elite" in this country as represented by the New York Times are so far out of sync with the views and interests of average Americans, no wonder they don’t want to hear what the latter have to say. But really, the Zionists and their enablers, from the Judeophile Neoliberals to the Neocon Right, don't care what "yokels" out in the provinces think about their upside down, "right is wrong" belief system. They're too busy bringing culture and progress to the Middle East via “affirmative action for Jews.” The only people that can possibly object to that must be unenlightened knuckle draggers. But I'll take Christian peasant morality over that of these "progressives" who get off on gassing Palestinian women and children (or looking the other way with their fingers in the ears while their Zionist heroes do so) any day of the week. Besides, global warming means there are too many people around already, so all they’re really doing is culling the surplus population.

  10. samuelburke says:
    May 17, 2009 at 6:05 pm

    who will defend the palestinians from the jews?

  11. MRW says:
    May 17, 2009 at 6:35 pm

    All Goldberg has succeeded in doing is enflaming Obama. Bad move. Goldberg in his arrogance neglected to raise his wet finger above his head and gauge the wind.

  12. dalybean says:
    May 17, 2009 at 6:39 pm

    It seems pretty clear that Israel's intent is that no one be permitted to defend the Palestinians, certainly not the Palestinians themselves. Israel will not let anyone help the Palestinians, period. It is extraordinary the lengths they are willing to go for this endeavor.

  13. ThorsProvoni says:
    May 17, 2009 at 7:40 pm

    Jewish Financial Aggression, Worldwide Economic Nakba starts out with a discussion of Benzion Netanyahu's ridiculous understanding of Spanish Jewish history.

  14. Richard Witty says:
    May 17, 2009 at 7:48 pm

    Its a good move that Obama's motivation is clarified. He needs backbone, and now he is reminded of that.

  15. ThorsProvoni says:
    May 17, 2009 at 8:05 pm

    It is of course worth reiterating that the Jewish and American understanding of the Holocaust and WW2 is highly flawed: Jewish Peril: 1933 Versus 2009.

  16. dalybean says:
    May 18, 2009 at 1:16 am

    I don't know about Obama, and I hope what you say is true. But, after Iraq, I have little doubt that Goldberg, or should I say Netanyahu, has really inflamed public opinion in America.

  17. _Sarah_ says:
    May 18, 2009 at 4:12 am

    What I would have put in the comments section of that article, had the NY Times been willing to allow the unwashed masses to comment, is that that whole Amelakite narrative is an entirely racist construct and that what it all boils down to is that anyone who stands in the way of Jewish manifest destiny as understood by people like Jeffrey Goldberg and the government of Israel, become the Amelakites and are subject to the same fate.

  18. Saleema says:
    May 18, 2009 at 5:57 am

    "orientals?" Many people find that word offensive. It's kinda like calling them nigger. But, good post,

Leave a Reply