‘LA Times’ says Republican rivals to challenge Senator Boxer are out-Israeling one another

by on March 3, 2010 15
4sharesFacebook
0tweetsTwitter
0stumbledStumbleUpon
0sharesReddit
0recommendGoogle

Jacob Heilbrunn covers the argument among Republicans over the Israel bona fides of Tom Campbell, the likely Republican nominee to take on Barbara Boxer. Note a few points: As the LA Times says, it's all about Israel. This is a reflection of one thing, Jewish power in the American political process, at least in California and New York (and Chicago and D.C. too!). Note that David Frum is backing Campbell to a faretheewell despite considerable evidence that Campbell has a record of opposing the Israel lobby. I believe Frum is backing Campbell in precisely the way that Marty Peretz backed Obama. He's the putative nominee. We have to claim him now. The worst thing is that he would get into office without Jewish support. (This is the effect of being a minority forever in western culture, and needing to study power.) Heilbrunn:

By all accounts, Campbell is the favorite to win the nomination against Carly Fiorina and former–State Assemblyman Chuck DeVore. But as the Los Angeles Times recently observed, “the participants are stuck on one subject: Israel.” Crocodile tears abound: Fiorina claimed that she was “deeply troubled” by Campbell’s record. DeVore simply called Campbell “a friend to our foes.” They figure that maybe the brouhaha will damage Campbell with evangelical Christian voters. Meanwhile, former–Secretary of State George Shultz has vouched for Campbell’s Israel bona fides, calling him an “unwavering” supporter of the Jewish state.

According to the LA Times, it began when “Former California Secretary of State Bruce McPherson said in an interview that when he called Fiorina manager Marty Wilson to tell Wilson he planned to endorse Campbell, Wilson replied, “Bruce, how can you do that? He’s an anti-Semite.” Wilson denies saying that.

But the fat was in the fire. Campbell’s critics point to a record that, they say, is evidence of a systematic bias against Israel. They adduce a welter of charges. Here are some of them: Campbell voted to slash foreign aid against Israel. He was also soft on Sami Al-Arian. Campbell accepted a $1,300 donation for his 2000 Senate campaign from Al-Arian. In 2006 Arian pleaded guilty to aiding terrorism. The Los Angeles Times states that Campbell, who was then the business school dean at UC Berkeley, “wrote a letter to the University of South Florida protesting its decision to fire Al-Arian over comments he made.” Campbell didn’t support making Jerusalem the capital of Israel. So far, about the only thing Campbell has not been accused of is refusing to don a kippah upon entering a synagogue.

One of Campbell’s public defenders and supporters observes, “on the basis of Campbell’s proven public record, such aspersions seem to have arrived from somewhere outside the space-time continuum, in some outer dimension created by wild and unchecked oppo research.” The defender is David Frum of the indispensable “FrumForum.” Frum, as ardent a supporter of Israel as there ever was, notes, among other things, that the sum that Campbell voted against in the foreign-aid bill was a mere pittance. Campbell didn’t want funds for Africa to be reduced. Furthermore, George W. Bush himself posed with a picture with Al-Arian and Campbell says he was unaware of his terrorist connections. But as Frum notes, Campbell’s detractors have produced new allegations, among them that he has lauded Alison Weir, the head of “If Americans Knew,” which can justly be described as anti-Israel. Campbell says his praise of Weir was offered years ago and that “I never stated agreement with any statement made by Alison Weir.” Frum patiently and forensically goes on to make the case for Campbell’s sympathy for Israel, including the fact that he flew to it on El Al in 1990 and stayed in the King David hotel to show solidarity with Israel as it was attacked by Iraq.

About Philip Weiss

Philip Weiss is Founder and Co-Editor of Mondoweiss.net.
Posted in American Jewish Community, Israel Lobby, Israel/Palestine, US Politics

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

  1. potsherd says:
    March 3, 2010 at 9:42 am

    The important thing is finally getting the issue out into the open.

    It can’t be long until the first person asks – why does support for Israel matter?

  2. Citizen says:
    March 3, 2010 at 9:51 am

    Re: “…the sum that Campbell voted against in the foreign-aid bill was a mere pittance. Campbell didn’t want funds for Africa to be reduced.”

    After, all the continent of Africa doesn’t really need any foreign aid because its so prosperous. And God forbid we cut back on any aid to poor Israel just because
    the USA is in its biggest economic crisis since the Great Depression. Cut back on everything–the US Post office is gonna go from 6 days weekly service to 5 days, eliminating delivery on Saturday, plus their employees are gonna be absorbing
    some of the current costs of their fat fringe benefits; but don’t touch aid to
    Israel or the unaudited massive funding of the US military-industrial complex, the war machine business machine. Yep, we have to keep our priorities straight!

    • Avi says:
      March 3, 2010 at 10:32 am

      After, all the continent of Africa doesn’t really need any foreign aid because its so prosperous

      Generally speaking, Africa was plundered for decades for its natural resources by imperial nations, many of whom supported local warlords and dictators. Today, corrupt corporations with no respect for basic human rights plunder and destroy the continent robbing the people of their oil, diamonds, gold and other valuable gems and metals.

  3. Citizen says:
    March 3, 2010 at 10:04 am

    One, two, three, four
    What are we fighting for?
    Don’t ask me ask my congressman.
    Next stop is Iran.
    Five, six, seven, eight
    Israel sucks up our foreign aid.
    Ain’t no time to wonder why
    Whoopie! We’re all going to die.
    – Country Trish and the Dish

  4. Pingback: Tucson Dentist Reviews

  5. RoHa says:
    March 4, 2010 at 12:44 am

    I don’t suppose anyone is interested in their views on the U.S.A.

  6. Cliff says:
    March 4, 2010 at 8:51 am

    In 2006 Arian pleaded guilty to aiding terrorism.

    More intellectual dishonesty. I guess there is no such thing as impartiality or sincerity when it comes to the American/Zionist/Israeli press (by and large).

    From Wiki, check the article yourself for sources:

    Al-Arian’s was tried with codefendants Ghassan Ballut, Hatim Fariz and Sameeh Hammoudeh in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida in Tampa, beginning in June 2005. At trial, FBI agent Kerry Myers testified that the Palestinian Islamic Jihad had planned an attack inside the United States but said all information about the plot was classified and he could not discuss it. Under cross-examination, Myers admitted that Palestinian Islamic Jihad had never carried out an attack outside Israel and the “occupied territories.” Agent Myers also testified that during its 10-year investigation of Al-Arian and his three co-defendants, the FBI intercepted 472,239 telephone calls on 18 tapped lines. However, none involved any discussion of an attack against the United States or show advanced knowledge of any attacks in the Middle East. Furthermore, the conversations occurred before Palestinian Islamic Jihad was designated as a Foreign Terrorist Organization in 1995.

    The six-month trial featured more than 80 witnesses and 400 transcripts of intercepted phone conversations and faxes. At the end of the prosecution’s case, Al-Arian’s attorneys rested without offering a defense. On December 6, 2005, after 13 days of deliberations, the jury acquitted Al-Arian on 8 of 17 counts, and deadlocked on the others with 10-2 favoring acquittal; another co-defendant also was acquitted or faced deadlocks. Two of his co-defendants were acquitted entirely. U.S. Justice Department officials said they were considering whether to retry Al-Arian and co-defendant Hatem Fariz on the jury deadlock charges, one of which carried a life sentence.

    Jurors had mixed reactions. One who voted for acquittal with the majority, said, “They have so little on [Al-Arian] that I’m disappointed. Most of us think he gave in because he was so sick of being in jail.” But one of the few jurors who wanted to find him guilty on nine counts, causing a mistrial, said:

    Like another person on the jury, I was convinced Mr. Al-Arian was still working with the PIJ after it was illegal. He was a very smart man and knew how not to be obvious. For me, the absence of evidence didn’t mean there was no evidence. For me, it suggested a coverup, which he admitted to, in the plea agreement.

    So one juror concludes there was virtually no evidence against him. Another thinks he knows what Al-Arian is thinking and considers him ‘clever’. So just because an 11 year investigation comes up short, doesn’t mean another 11 years would yield some proof.

    Sounds like if we keep looking for those WMDs we’ll eventually find them. We just gotta ‘believe’!

    I wonder if this juror was a Zionist, because in the Jewish State, Al-Arian would get thrown away to rot in one of Israel’s dungeons on much lesser charges.

    Here’s some more:

    On February 28, 2006, Al-Arian plead guilty to one count of conspiracy to contribute services to or for the benefit of the Palestinian Islamic Jihad, a Specially Designated Terrorist organization, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 371. In return, the U.S. Attorney agreed to dismiss the other eight remaining charges in the superseding indictment, agreed not to charge Al-Arian with any other crimes, entered no recommendation of a fine, and recommended “that the defendant receive a sentence at the low end of the applicable guideline.” As part of the deal, Al-Arian agreed to expedited deportation. The plea agreement was unsealed and accepted by Judge James S. Moody on April 17, 2006. Al-Arian’s sentencing was scheduled for May 1, 2006. Al-Arian remained in custody pending his sentencing and deportation.

    The deal came after 11 years of Federal Bureau of Investigation investigations, wiretaps and searches, three and a half years of trial preparation and process, time Al-Arian spent in jail, most of it in solitary confinement. Amnesty International said Al-Arian’s pre-trial detention conditions “appeared to be ‘gratuitously punitive’” and stated “the restrictions imposed on Dr. Al-Arian appeared to go beyond what were necessary on security grounds and were inconsistent with international standards for humane treatment.”

    At the plea agreement hearing, U.S. Magistrate Thomas B. McCoun said, “… if you’re satisfied you’re guilty or you believe it’s in your best interest to plead guilty … let me know that.” Al-Arian replied, “I believe it’s in my best interest to enter a plea.”

    Al-Arian admitted knowing “that the PIJ achieved its objectives by, among other means, acts of violence.”

    For its part, the government acknowledged that Al-Arian’s activities were nonviolent and that there were no victims to the charge in the plea agreement. Later that day, supporters of Al-Arian stated that the agreement was reached in part to end the suffering of the family and to reunite them in freedom.

    So the guy was mostly in solitary confinement. AI stated that his treatment was “inconsistent” with IHL. He was being investigated or being investigated partially as part of a larger 11-year case. Yet, they couldn’t get him. They had to make a deal and make several real and rhetorical concessions.

    He confesses to ‘knowing’ that these guys would use violence. Big deal. The US and Israel simply want whoever they are stealing from to sit down and take it. Israel commits much more ‘acts of violence’ and EVERYONE knows about it. Are we all guilty of something now?

    Anyways, he made this plea because he’s an Arab and Muslim and the government would f**k with him for another 11 years because THEY CAN. And all the Zios would write about how he’s a terrorist and blah blah blah.

    It’s so shameless that the author of this LA Times article can straw man the entire Al-Arian case to this plea bargain WHICH HE DOES NOT EVEN MENTION IS A PLEA BARGAIN.

    No context. They hate us for our freedoms. Swaddling clothes. Islam. ‘Jihadi’. Love your children more than you hate Israel. Most moral. Land without a people, people without a land. Yada yada, anti-dentite.

    Why do such corrupt, stupid, shallow people – have all this power?

Leave a Reply