Because I’m provocative, I want to do the next Daisy ad. You remember the nuclear ad that Johnson’s people came up with in ’64 to show that Goldwater was unstable? My ad has the little girl calmly pulling off the little daisy leaves and the voiceover says:
It killed Bobby Kennedy… it blew up the World Trade Center… it got us into the Iraq War… It killed 13 people at Fort Hood… It just blew up a CIA station, killing 7 agents… It’s our special relationship with Israel. When will you say enough?
David Ignatius has a good column in the Washington Post talking about the elephant in the room.
But in truth, the strategy that Obama proposed in Cairo is more important now than ever. Critics speak as if peacemaking and battling Muslim extremism should be seen as an either/or proposition. What Obama understood a year ago is that the two are linked. The best way to undercut extremists in Iran or al-Qaeda is to make progress on issues that matter to the Muslim world. Guns alone won’t do it; if it were otherwise, the Israelis would have battled their way to peace long ago. [This passes for a revelation, truly, in Washington; still we pump them with guns]
You can’t turn this anger around just by drinking tea or showering development money. The United States must address issues that people care passionately about, such as the Palestinian problem.
The administration is struggling to revive the stillborn Palestinian peace process. George Mitchell, the president’s special envoy to the Middle East, is said to be drafting terms of reference for negotiations and letters of assurance for the parties that will offer more clarity about U.S. positions on key issues. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton suggested the outlines last week when she called for "an independent and viable state based on the 1967 lines with agreed swaps" of territory. [is it viable, Ignatius? Go look and see. I'm not sure it is...]
Even as he fights al-Qaeda and its allies, Obama needs to be Obama. He needs to continue voicing the Cairo message of outreach to the Muslim world — not as an alternative to battling extremism but as a necessary component of that fight. We are confronting an enemy that wants to draw us deeper into battle, so that America is more isolated and unpopular. We avoid that spider’s trap by solving problems that matter.
Bobby Kennedy was killed by a Palestinian who was “peeved” at what had been done in his homeland and Kennedy’s advocacy of selling fighter airplanes to Israel.
What policy would you have advocated for the United States vis a vis Israel in June of 68?
Yes, WJ, that’s true; that Palestinian American also loved Bobby’s brother, JFK–for striving for a more balanced shake for the Palestinians. He said so at his trial. He also
had a newspaper article clip on his person when he was arrested; the article condemned Bobby for being against the Vietnam War but arming Israel to the teeth.
link to crimemagazine.com
What policy would you have advocated for the USA vis a vis Israel in June of 68?
I’d say, no settlement expansion, for starters. And you?
1968 was too late. The mistake was made in 1967, when the US backed Israel’s aggression in the 6 day war. 1967 was the watershed in both Israeli history and the history of Israel-American relations. The coverup of the attack on the Liberty was a huge opportunity missed – and to this day no one seems to know exactly why.
But there is almost no likelihood that the US would have listened to any advice. The Cold War dominated US strategic thought.
I’m with you. ’67 is when.
What policy would you have advocated for the United States vis a vis Israel in June of 68?
i’d start w/a similar policy i’d advocate for now, the same one bobby kennedy was in the process of implementing before his assassination: making aipac register under FARA.
In 1962, U.S. Attorney General Robert F. Kennedy ordered AIPAC’s parent organization, the American Zionist Council (AZC), to register as an Israeli foreign agent. The AZC had been found moving funding from the Jewish Agency in Jerusalem into lobbying startup groups across the US, as well as to AIPAC’s founder, Isaiah L. “Si” Kenen. Kenen was briefly a registered foreign agent of the Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs before moving to lobby for the AZC. After the FARA order the AZC shut down and passed lobbying functions to its “Kenen committee” currently known as AIPAC.
source
i meant ‘the same one bobby kennedy was in the process of implementing before JFK’s assassination’
here’s more re: The following chronology provides links to images of original Department of Justice case files released on June 10, 2008 under a Freedom of Information Act filing.
I like your “little ad,” Mssr. Le Provocateur.
It killed Bobby Kennedy, and likely JFK… it blew up the World Trade Center twice, the second time fatally… it got us into the nuclear stand off with the USSR in the early 70s–brought us gas lines; to this day we are still paying for this economically; it brought us the Iraq War… It brought us the USS Liberty event, the greatest insult to our own heroes; and Rachel Corrie–not worth a dollar; it means a blank check yearly to ungrateful foreigners and at the expense of our own poor; It killed 13 people at Fort Hood… It just blew up a CIA station, killing 7 agents… it muzzles our own spy network, our own best home security operatives; allows AIPAC spies freedom; It’s our special relationship with Israel. When will you say enough?
Maybe enough is after WW3 caused by USA-Saudi greenlight for Israeli attack on Iran, coupled with double dip recession cum depression in 2010?
Given the inconsistencies in the government’s case during the prosecution of Sirhan Sirhan, and coupled with the mountain of questions about the incident which remain unanswered, I’m not sure bringing RFK’s assassination into this discourse is fair.
I think your ad would be an absolute disaster the way you’ve written it. The AIPAC folks would say you are blaming Israel for the crimes of Islamic fanatics and that it’s good that the US support Israel, our only democratic ally in the Middle East and we have to stand side-by-side with them against the evil terrorists and what you are advocating is cowardly appeasement of mass murderers who hate both Israelis and Americans.
You have to point out that we are helping the Israelis practice apartheid, that we are complicit in an evil system that is oppressing and murdering innocent people. After pointing out that what we are doing is deeply immoral, then you can talk about how it encourages hatred of America. If all you mention is the hatred and how it comes from supporting Israel, you look like a cowardly appeaser and I guarantee that’s what the Lobby people are going to say.
I have to admit, that while it is true that the United States has gotten itself into a lot of crap because of its support for Israel, its still unfair to blame Israel for the actions of those groups of people that have decided to get vengeance on the United States due to Israeli actions. In the end, those groups are fully responsible for the actions they committed, even if they cited Israel as one of their primary motivators.
This doesn’t mean that we should not end our “special relationship” with Israel or act punitively against it (in a non violent fashion I must add, I don’t think violence is necessary). Israel is highly detrimental to American foreign policy in the Middle East, highly detrimental to Americas “perceived” moral values, and as a developed country Israel does not need our tax dollars especially when we are reeling from an economic crisis.
And while it may be true that 9/11 and other incidents would have never happened had it not been for American support for Israel, in the end there is no way to know for sure. I think the reasons stated in my 2nd paragraph alone are reason enough to end the special relationship without delving into the “what if” category of events.
Pingback: Osama to Obama: No security for US so long as Palestinians lack it