Atlas bifurcated. AIPAC celebrates the Obama administration for describing Netanyahu’s obstructionism on the West Bank colonies as "unprecedented" progress, in Hillary Clinton’s Jerusalem presser Saturday. But J Street is obviously troubled by the Obama administration’s climb-down. It couched its criticism in praise:
we echo the Secretary [of State]’s statement today in Morocco that offers made to date fall far short of the Obama administration’s position and preference. Any settlement expansion is a threat to Israel’s future as a democratic home for the Jewish people and undermines American national interests.
Note the marriage of progressive Zionism and American realism. And speaking of the American interest, J Street reminds Obama of one of the most thrilling statements at its conference last week:
As the President prepares for his first major address to the American Jewish community next week, we flag for him the words of his own National Security Advisor, Jim Jones, who said just last week that if he could urge the President to solve one problem in the world, it would be the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. [emphasis mine]
UPDATE: Here is American Jews for a Just Peace statement on Clinton’s cave:
American Jews for a Just Peace strongly opposes yesterday’s statement by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton congratulating Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu on his alleged agreement to limit settlement expansion. This is a direct change in the United States’ call for a total freeze of all Israeli settlement activity, including "natural growth," as expressed in President Obama’s Cairo speech on June 4, 2009. All such settlement building is in direct and undeniable violation of the Fourth Geneva Convention.
Maybe I’m a bit dim, but how do you define ‘progressive zionism’ exactly? No sarcasm intended.
It kills Palestinians in the dead of the night, while right wing Zionists do it in broad daylight.
Short answer? Oxymoron.
Here is another one for you marc b. :
The hard liner Zionist says to those in Washington, “you better keep that aid coming or we will set AIPAC on you;” the progressive Zionist says “we love Israel so keep the money coming.”
Through threat or love the money still goes to weaponry to kill Palestinians
In fact, it is so transparent that it is insulting – you get tired of it really fast, it is about as enlightening and progressive as the democratic party on this subject as compared to the republican party – wait a minute when it comes to Israel there is no difference, I almost forgot…
If the question is indeed a serious one, the basic tenet of “progressive” Zionism (as opposed to the garden variety) is that everything is the fault of the post-’67 occupation, settlement and the settlers (especially the religious ones). To the extent that Israel is undemocratic and violates international law and human rights – the argument goes – it is due to “necessities” created by the occupation, and the ways in which the occupation has corrupted “authentic Zionist values.” The “progressive” Zionist panacaea is thus a two-state solution that will leave the “good old” Israel intact, and merely excise the cancer that is the post-’67 occupation. It is a rather broad category, in which there is room for Uri Avnery and Ehud Barak, Michael Lerner and J-Street, but the basic tenet is the same.
These people often make good allies in fighting some of Israel’s worst abuses, and some may even be convinced that consistency demands that they extend their values and sense of justice to Zionism and Israel in general (’48 as well as ’67). On the other hand, they are often the fig leaf that keeps Israel within the family of nations.
Progressive Zionism is the confident and assertive application of the Israeli basic law supporting Israel as a Jewish state (ethnic) and with equal due process under the law internally.
It is non-expansive, but non-suicidal.
It values Jewish association, and seeks it to be humane and progressive application.
It actively undertakes reform to realize its highest application in law.
It seeks a mutual respectful peace.
Chaos put it best:
RW: Progressive Zionism is the confident and assertive application of the Israeli basic law supporting Israel as a Jewish state (ethnic) and with equal due process under the law internally
Progressive Zionism is a complete and total sham, then. Israel is an expansive, inhumane, reactionary ethnocentric entity that has sabotaged peace at every turn (when it wasn’t being forced to the negotiation table by pre-Clintonite Democratic Presidents, anyway, and then the reaction was to sabotage the American political process with lobbying dollars)
New “Fast Track” for Construction Permits in the Settlements
link to peacenow.org.il
“Jim Jones, who said just last week that if he could urge the President to solve one problem in the world, it would be the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. ”
So many middle east leaders have been repeating this over and over again for decades. When will we listen?
Philliip all check this out
link to drupal.zhonka.net
Congressman Baird steps up to the plate and states that Congress should invite Judge Goldstone to address the report
Representative Baird Defends Goldstone Report in Congress
Submitted by Berd on Mon, 11/02/2009 – 5:01pm.
* Gaza
* goldstone
* government
* investigation
* Israel
* Palestine
* peace
* US Congress
* war
For those who may not know, the Goldstone Report (AKA United Nations Fact Finding Mission on the Gaza Conflict) is an investigation into allegations of crimes against humanity that might have been committed in Gaza during an escalation in hostilities, which began in late December of last year and continued into January. The report has been subjected to irrational attacks by many people, including some in the US Congress. Washington State 3rd District Congressman Brian Baird has gone on record as a clear defender of the Goldstone Report. Congressman Baird visited Gaza earlier this year (in February). While there, the Congressman witnessed the aftermath of the destruction. He saw the situation on the ground, and heard people’s testimonies.
Here’s a statement from Baird’s website about the Goldstone report:
Israel and Gaza Deserve Better than a Misguided Resolution
Before House Members vote on H.Res. 867, regarding the U.N. Goldstone report on the Gaza conflict, there are a few questions worth asking.
First, why are we bringing this resolution to the floor without ever giving former South African Constitutional Court Justice Richard Goldstone a hearing to explain his findings? Have those who will vote on H.Res. 867 actually read the resolution? Have they read the Goldstone report? Are they aware that Justice Goldstone has issued a paragraph by paragraph response, available on my Web site at www.baird.house.gov, to H.Res. 867 pointing out that many of its assertions are factually inaccurate or deeply misleading?
Since scarcely a dozen House Members have actually been to Gaza, what actual first-hand knowledge do the rest of the Members of Congress possess on which to base their judgment of the merits of H.Res. 867 or the Goldstone report?
What will it say about this Congress and our country if we so readily seek to block “any further consideration” of a human rights investigation produced by one of the most respected jurists in the world today, a man who led the investigations of abuses in South Africa, the former Yugoslavia, Rwanda, Kosovo and worked to identify and prosecute Nazi war criminals as a member of the Panel of the Commission of Enquiry into the Activities of Nazism in Argentina?
As one of the first two American officials, along with Rep. Keith Ellison (D-Minn.), to enter Gaza shortly after the conclusion of major bombing from “Operation Cast Lead,” then again several months later, I have seen firsthand the devastating destruction of hospitals, schools, homes, industries and infrastructure. Much of that devastation was wrought using U.S. manufactured and paid for weaponry. I have also spoken with health workers, average Gazans, NGO relief workers and many others.
In addition, I have been to the Israeli town of Sderot, which has been the target of repeated rocket attacks, and to a number of Palestinian towns and Israel settlements in the West bank. Colleagues who have not been to the region may wish to view some of the images and interviews from these visits on my Web site.
With the information from these personal visits and on the ground knowledge, I read with care and interest the Goldstone report in its entirety and my firm conclusion is that, although the findings may be unpleasant and troubling, they are, unfortunately, consistent with the facts and evidence. In my judgment, far from meriting the obstruction called for in H.Res. 867, the Goldstone report is without question worthy of further investigation.
I know this conclusion is not easily accepted and I know it raises serious charges against entities and individuals on both sides of this conflict, Israel and Hamas. But if our own country is truly to stand for human rights and the rule of law, and if facts matter, how can we do other than insist that legitimate questions and evidence are followed by further investigation and, if necessary and warranted, appropriate consequences?
H.Res. 867 is very serious business. If, as Goldstone asserts and the evidence I have seen supports, there were in fact gross violations of international law and human rights on all sides, we cannot in good conscience support H.Res. 867.
This is about much more than just another imposed political litmus test that we are all too often asked to perform. This is about whether we as individuals and this Congress as an institution find it acceptable to drop white phosphorous on civilian targets, to rocket civilian communities, to destroy hospitals and schools, to use civilians as human shields, to deliberately destroy non-military factories, industries and basic water, electrical and sanitation infrastructure. This is about whether it is acceptable to restrict the movement, opportunities and hopes of more than a million people every single day.
At the end of the day, this is also about our own domestic security. If we are seen internationally as condoning violations of human rights and international law, if our money and our weaponry play a leading role in those violations, and if we reflexively obstruct the findings of someone with the credentials, history and integrity of Justice Goldstone, it can only diminish our international standing and our own security.
Rep. Brian Baird (D) represents Washington’s 3rd district.
Click here to read Justice Goldstone’s response to the resolution
Click here to see pictures from my trips to Israel and Gaza
Click here to see interviews I conducted with residents and relief workers in the region
That was a very encouraging site Kathleen
link to israeli-occupation.org
2009/10/goldstone-sends-letter-to-berman-ros.html
2009/10/goldstone-sends-letter-to-berman-ros.html
… And the archangel Gabriel yelled out to Mr. Baird:
Hallafukinlooya!
Someone had the courage to speak the truth! Now let’s hope more people have the courage to hear it.
WTF?:
U.S. stance on Israeli settlement unchanged: Mitchell
link to news.xinhuanet.com
The wind blows, the weathercock spins, so do the politicians.
Of course, our policy of aiding in the funding and construction of these illegal settlements and the ethnic cleansing of the West Bank — East Jerusalem included — hasn’t changed either.
I’ve taken to refering to this quality of claiming one thing, and taking action completely opposite one’s professed values and beliefs, as “Wittyesque.”