The Anti-Defamation League's Abraham Foxman is taking on General David Petraeus for what Foxman calls the "dangerous and counterproductive" linkage that Petraeus made between American support for Israel and the United States' security.
During a recent Senate hearing, Petraeus, the commander of American troops in the Middle East and South Asia, said that the Israel/Palestine conflict "foments anti-American sentiment, due to a perception of U.S. favoritism for Israel." You can read the full testimony here (pdf).
Some mainstream news outlets have reported on the testimony, and the New York Times had a "news analysis" that included the above quote from Petraeus, though it was buried at the end of the article.
Petraeus' testimony to the Senate Armed Services Committee followed a March 13 report by Foreign Policy's Mark Perry that has caused a lot of buzz all over the Internet. Perry reported that Petraeus had dispatched a team on Jan. 16 of senior military officers to brief Admiral Michael Mullen on the fact that "there was a growing perception among Arab leaders that the U.S. was incapable of standing up to Israel, that CENTCOM's mostly Arab constituency was losing faith in American promises, that Israeli intransigence on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict was jeopardizing U.S. standing in the region, and that Mitchell himself was (as a senior Pentagon officer later bluntly described it) 'too old, too slow ... and too late.'"
Here's the full statement from Abe Foxman:
The assumptions Gen. Petraeus presented to the Senate Armed Services Committee wrongly attribute "insufficient progress" in the Israeli-Palestinian peace process and "a perception of U.S. favoritism for Israel" as significantly impeding the U.S. military mission in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan and in dealing with the Iranian influences in the region. It is that much more of a concern to hear this coming from such a great American patriot and hero.
The General's assertions lead to the illusory conclusion that if only there was a resolution of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, the U.S. could successfully complete its mission in the region.
Gen. Petraeus has simply erred in linking the challenges faced by the U.S. and coalition forces in the region to a solution of the Israeli-Arab conflict, and blaming extremist activities on the absence of peace and the perceived U.S. favoritism for Israel. This linkage is dangerous and counterproductive.
Whenever the Israeli-Arab conflict is made a focal point, Israel comes to be seen as the problem. If only Israel would stop settlements, if only Israel would talk with Hamas, if only Israel would make concessions on refugees, if only it would share Jerusalem, everything in the region would then fall into line.
The Israel lobby is extremely worried that a decorated military officer has explicitly made the connection between Israeli policies and the safety of the United States at home and abroad. John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt made the argument in their 2007 book on the lobby, and three years later, it's hitting the mainstream.
In Perry's report, he argues, rightly, that the Israel lobby can't take on the military's power. Foxman seems foolhardy to attempt to disparage Petraeus, who is highly respected in establishment circles. It will be interesting to see if AIPAC and other lobby groups pile on Petraeus now that Foxman has taken the first step, or if they will realize it's an issue where they can't win.
Earlier, Foxman told the Jerusalem Post that making a link between U.S. security and Israeli actions is a "particularly 'pernicious' argument that 'smacks of blaming the Jews for everything.'" As Matt Yglesias, Spencer Ackerman, and Andrew Sullivan have pointed out, Foxman was calling Petraeus an anti-Semite.
Over at Jim Lobe's blog, Eli Clifton has some good commentary:
Foxman’s decision to criticize Petraeus’s testimony seems foolhardy in two ways. First, it throws down a gauntlet for American supporters of Netanyahu. Foxman is forcing them to choose between a highly decorated U.S. General who, until recently, was a darling of neoconservatives for his “Surge” in Iraq and, on the other hand, AIPAC and the ADL’s belligerent condemnations of the Obama administration for taking offense at Netanyahu’s snubbing of Biden. An interesting strategy indeed!
Second, Foxman’s assertion that Petraeus, “erred in linking the challenged faced by the U.S. and coalition forces in the region to a solution of the Israeli-Arab conflict, and blaming extremist activities on the absence of peace and the perceived U.S. favoritism of Israel,” is simply not supported by recent polling data and news reports.
“The 2009 Arab Public Opinion Poll” (PowerPoint) found that 39% of respondents in the Arab world believe that “Israel decides its own interests and influences the U.S.” Twenty-five-percent believe that, “Israel is a tool of American foreign policy,” and 32-percent believe that, “The U.S. and Israel have mutual interests.”
Thirty-eight percent of respondents said the Palestinian issue was the most important issue for them, while another 38-percent said it was in their top three priorities and 23-percent said it was in their top-five.
The polling appears to corroborate Petraeus’s assertions that the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is very important in the region and that the U.S., all too often, is seen as exhibiting favoritism towards Israel.
(H/T to Spencer Ackerman at the Washington Independent.)
Let the swift boating… begin.
The Guardian is reporting that Obama got a climbdown from Netanyahu, that all construction is frozen for several years and that all Netanyahu got was the face-saving measure that he did not have to announce it publicly. I don’t know how reliable the reporter is. Could this be true? link to guardian.co.uk
I’ll believe it when the bulldozers stop, thank you.
I thought Generals were supposed to be dangerous.
Interestingly, General Petraeus is set to receive AEI’s 2010 Irving Kristol award. link to aei.org
Notice that Foxman isn’t claiming that Petraeus’s conclusions were false, only that he shouldn’t talk about them.
Stein
Oh. Sort of like how Palestinians supposedly “happened to leave.”
Good point. Foxman is on shaky ground and this could blow up in his face if he’s not careful. Notice the neocon response has been very muted. Thank Bibi and his band of fools. What a gift for the White House.
-Here’s Krauthammer wetting his diapers:
“So why this astonishing one-sidedness? Because Obama likes appeasing enemies while beating up on allies — therefore Israel shouldn’t take it personally “
The Looming Tower: Al-Qaeda and the Road to 9/11 p.172
Bin Laden would later say that the United States had always been his enemy. He dated his hatred for America to 1982, when America permitted the Israelis to invade Lebanon and the American Sixth Fleet helped them. He recalled the carnage: “blood and severed limbs, women and children sprawled everywhere. Houses destroyed along with their occupants and high rises demlished over their residents…The situation was like a crocodile meeting a helpless child, powerless except for his screams.” This scene provoked an intense desire to fight tryanny, he said, and a longing for revenge. “As I looked at those demolished towers in Lebanon , it entered my mind that we should punish the oppressor in kind and that we should destroy towers in America in order that they taste some of what we tasted.”
Bergen
Of all these themes, the notion of payback for injustices suffered by the Palestinians is perhaps the most powerfully recurrent in bin Laden’s speeches. It has become fashionable to assert that al-Qaeda’s attachment to the Palestinian cause is relatively recent, and has been cynical and deliberately manipulative. That is simply not true. As long ago as 1984, witnesses report bin Laden shunning American goods to protest American support of Israel. His fellow traveler Ramzi Yousef, who was convicted of the first assault on the World Trade Center in 1993, testified that his sole motive was US backing of Israel.
The 9/11 Commision asked what motivated 9/11, and the answer from the perps came back: the USA’s rubber-stamping of Israel (and this was edited in the final version of the Commission’s report to simply say the US should expect blowback from its foreign policy as actually implemented). Further, you can view on YouTube the testimony as to the main motive for 9/11 to the US Congressional investigating committee–they all said it was our rubber-stamping Israel’s actions. Never shown on USA MSM or primetime TV news.
2004 Two newly released blue-ribbon reports — one issued in Washington, the other in Jerusalem — are citing Arab and Muslim anger at Israel as a central factor in motivating Islamic terrorists
In 2007, citizens in various Middle Eastern nations were polled to find what Al Qaeda goals they agree with most. What made the overall top of the list? To push the US to stop favoring Israel in its conflict with the Palestinians (p.17)
Yousef ’s instant notoriety as the mastermind of the 1993 World Trade Center bombing inspired KSM to become involved in planning attacks against the United States. By his own account, KSM’s animus toward the United States stemmed not from his experiences there as a student, but rather from his violent disagreement with U.S. foreign policy favoring Israel. 9/11 commission p147
Once there is a bi-national state DHS can be all but shut down.
Too bad Israel has made that impossible.
The Department of Homeland Security should have never existed in the first place, and should certainly be shut down as soon as possible to stop federal tax dollars from being thrown down a money pit that gives Americans the theatrical illusion that they have been made safer. Besides, DHS is merely an umbrella department under which other federal agencies operate, like the FBI, the Coast Guard etc.. And there’s as much cooperation between these departments as there was before 9/11. Spend 30 minutes reading what former FBI field office heads and former directors have written about the DHS. The name should be changed to Department of Redundancy.
Oh and those scanners Chertoff’s firm just sold to hundreds of airports, they would have been useless against the type of explosives the Nigerian guy had on him. Theatrics (and lots of corruption).
Doesn’t Senator Lieberman still head the Homeland Security commitee in Congress?
You know, the same senator who held up Obamacare unless Obama too contined to rubber-stamp Israel’s whims?
Zionists in Congress hold most of the foreign policy positions.
Abe Foxman is an absolute fool. He is harming Jews everywhere and creating a self-fulfilling prophecy. My God, why dont American Jews tell him to STFU! Doesn’t he understand the psychology of people? Let this stuff air out and everyone will think they are not being muzzled. Being muzzled unfairly drives people off the deep-end (you can’t tell people not to talk about watershed experiences, neither their own nor someone else’s). But if you muzzle people in the interest of any foreign country, and then accuse our military commanders of assuming something vis-a-vis that foreign country, as in ‘Gen. Petraeus presented assumptions to the Senate Armed Services Committee’, when American lives are on the line in the commander’s theatre, you are dealing with dynamite.
Kane wrote: Earlier, Foxman told the Jerusalem Post that making a link between U.S. security and Israeli actions is a “particularly ‘pernicious’ argument that ’smacks of blaming the Jews for everything.’” Foxman is off his rocker throwing the kitchen sink at Petraeus. Hasn’t he learned a damn thing from history?
link to pulsemedia.org
has two video clips of CNN fallout on its homepage right now.
Here’s the full Pulse link:
link to pulsemedia.org
“Foxman is off his rocker throwing the kitchen sink at Petraeus. Hasn’t he learned a damn thing from history?”
Could it be that Foxman is tired of his mostly false accusations about antisemitism (see “The New Antisemitism”), and he is trying to incite real problems invoking the spirit of antisemitism?
Hey, it worked for Zionists the first time around, didn’t it? They literally got away with murder — of Jews and of Palestinians.
Why do you mean, VR? I dont understand you? (Maybe it’s the hour, and the day I’ve had…brain not working.)
What I mean is that the view of some, particularly in the Jewish community, is that the actions of Israel and Zionism is meant to tarnish who and what we are supposed to be. In other words, the pariah status of Israel is meant to incite hatred toward the Jews and cause isolation, and some say to cause another diaspora (Zionist hope) to Israel.
Oh, christ almighty. Foxman is a DDIQ.
[Double Digit IQ.]
I wish, sometimes we could get past this ‘Jews united against the world’ outlook on Zionism. Zionism is much, much more about Jews controlling other Jews, a privilege that democracy and civil rights took away from Rabbis and the elite.
Democracy in the US (first, and then in Europe) rendered an entire class of Jews superfluous, or rather rendered one of the profitable (in many ways) strategies for those Jews useless.
There must be a type of Jew I’m not familiar with: one who doesn’t trust the Jewish rulers of Israel, but is too afraid of everybody else to trust them.
These are very nebulous thoughts, but I’m on to something: Zionism was to be about Jews controlling other Jews, but the Arabs and their existential threat got in the way, when it proved too great to use as a controlling or motivating factor. Feh, too inchoate, if that’s the word I want.
Careful, Mooser. The thought police might come around and flag your comments as “anti-Semitic” for daring to forward a notion like that.
If you watch the film Defamation, Foxman sees Israel as their insurance policy for the Diaspora. They will need Israel when other cases of Anti Semitism are discovered. His quasi-AIPAC organization is playing a dangerous game, but let it ride and we’ll see what other idiots Neocon fascists will assail the military.
I suggest they go to self-proclaimed humanist zionist Dick Witty’s house; there are anti-semites blowing off the leaves from his driveway, just waiting to come in and kill him–all they need is a new Lindberg to stir them up as supported by Phil Roth’s novel.
If you watch the film Defamation, Foxman sees Israel as their insurance policy for the Diaspora. They will need Israel when other cases of Anti Semitism are discovered and they have a home base for the Diaspora. His quasi-AIPAC organization is playing a dangerous game, but let it ride and we’ll see what other idiots Neocon fascists will assail the military.
I find myself reminded of the Arthur Miller play The Crucible.
There is precedent for a demagogue trying to gain political gain by attacking the US Army. Joe McCarthy tried it when he was at the pinnacle of his power, at a time when nearly all national political leaders, including Dwight Eisenhower, lived in fear that McCarthy would attack them next. Then he struck the army. Literally within months McCarthhy’s political influence was destroyed.
Now Foxman is trying it. I can’t decide whether to be angry or just laugh at the ludicrous clown. However, we can be sure that Petreaus and his supporters will take this attack seriously and will orchestrate a response. This is real got popcorn moment — it will interesting to see how this game plays out.
I’m laughing at this clown, Syvanen, from one perspective; he’s killing himself. But I feel for American and worldwide Jews on the other, because what he’s doing is harming them. Europe is watching this charade. Asia. Mexico. India. China. Russia. Major countries around the world are watching how the Americans are going to respond to accusations made against their military that they already perceive as over-the-top and unacceptable. Israelis are not loved around the world. You need only travel outside the US to find that out. Then Netanyahu banged his shoe at the UN last September and declared insisted that Israel be spoken of as a nation of Jews, And Jews only, he said. So people around the world took him at his word and call Israelis ”Jews.” They dont make the distinction that careful people make here in the US. Anti-Semitism is on the rise in Europe. Even formerly gentle Sweden has had it with Israeli government mishagas and Jews, even if they aren’t Israeli, are experiencing the brunt of it. I dont pretend to know what is going on in Malmo right now, but if Foxman wants to diffuse something, he should start there. This is not a good omen. And the Israeli leadership is not innocent. It’s like when all of Europe hated us because Bush was Prez.
And even Canada. When I was driving around there with American plates on my car during the later Bush years, I got openly hostile reactions to me. Friends of mine on tours with Canadians were pariahs; no one would speak to them on boats.
US Department of Justice Asked to Regulate AIPAC as a Foreign Agent of the Israeli Government
Kudos to Grant Smith and IRMEP.
Abe Foxman should be arrested and tried for aiding and abetting crimes against humanity – as well as siphoning the fat our land to grease up a foreign war machine.
the hubris and unbridled arrogance of power is manifesting in these zionist operatives like Foxman who have had free reign for so long that it went to their heads – a little dose of reality intruded and they become positively unhinged – further exposing who and what they are (agents for a foreign government) and it is so completely satisfying to watch these parasites squirm in under the light of the sun
“the hubris and unbridled arrogance of power is manifesting in these zionist operatives like Foxman who have had free reign for so long that it went to their heads”
You are right on the money Raddii.
I’ve been on half a dozen blogs and the same asstitude still pervades the Zionist shills who’s heads are spinning, because no one is buying their BS. These people are so used to getting way with all manner of lies and propaganda at face value and all of a sudden, it’s lost it’s sting.
I think we’re going to bear witness to some serious psychosis from this camp.
True, they always operated in the dark, and will have a hard time debating in the light. Foxman can pen all the condemnations he wishes, but when it comes time to debate this issue in the public square, he’ll come up short.
Anti-Semitism: Zionism’s indispensable alibi
link to redress.cc
Maidhc Ó Cathail 15 March 2010
“Although Zionism typically represents itself as the solution to anti-Semitism, the truth is less flattering. In fact, hostility toward Jews is indispensable to the cause of Jewish nationalism. If anti-Semitism didn’t exist, Zionists would have to invent it. And in many cases that is precisely what they have done.”
Abe Foxman is desperate and he’s digging himself deeper and deeper. I have no problem with that.
I was listening to a talk show on the local NPR affiliate yesterday, and callers are becoming more and more brazen in their criticism of AIPAC in particular and the US/Israel relationship more generally. (This says something about the media as well I believe since similar callers that were curtly dispensed with in the past are shown more patience). Regretably there is more than a hint of anti-Semitism in some of the commentary. I have no sympathy for the public face of the war mongers, such as Dershowitz, Foxman and the like, but we must be sensitive to the treatment of the ‘little guy’ if things get hostile.
That’s a good point Marc, but not all anger is about anti Semitism. Israel has for too long argued that hating the sin is the same as hating the sinner.
It’s not going to be a soft landing, and Israel certianly don’t deserve one, but like you, I woudl be ashamed to see Jewish people dicriminated against in any way shape or form as a consequence. It’s going to be a challenge diffentiating between anti Semitism and right wing Israli supporters draping themseves in the flag of victim for the ideology they support.
Isn’t it the point of zionism to create anti-semiticism?
I’m afraid this is going to be inevitable to the extent that US Jews have insisted on identifying Israel with Judaism. The flags in the synagogues send a message of disloyalty.
What Christian church in the USA has or now does display the flag of a UN-recognized state other than the star-spangled banner? None. OTH, in many Jewish American temples, both the US flag and Israel’s flag have and are being shown. I’ve seen this myself when I lived in Chicago for 30 years. The justification given, when I asked (when I was not simply ignored), is that the Israeli flag symbolizes the spiritual homeland of the Jewish people. The fact that Israel is an economic and military power house, and uses armed force to get its way is totally ignored. See any difference between the Vatican and Israel? Well, yes, there is the Vatican guards, equipped with Swiss halberds…
Mark, do you believe the little guy is at risk here? From Bruce’s recent comments, I can see he is starting to worry about anti semitism, but I believe it’s anger towards a supposed ally. Israel is the one who threatens the little guy (minorities) in it’s religious hierarchical state, it has few friends in the world and now they are humiliating US leaders. Something really stinks about this unbreakable bond.
While we are enjoying seeing lunatics like Foxman implode, and I am IMMENSELY, we should not forget to have some empathy for American Jews who are bewildered and fear a rise in antisemitism.
I see no reason not to think that most Jews get their news from the same inept, biased, and self-censoring MSM from which most of the rest of America gets theirs. We shouldn’t take it for granted that they know the full truth about the activities of the Israel Lobby and Israeli ethnic cleansing and colonization.
Which is a really important point, Colin. Foxman, AIPAC et al have really hijacked the discourse. They aren’t even elected representatives (whose loyalty can be questioned in any event) and yet they make pronouncements as if they had authority conferred by divine right. This whole JStreet controversy is such high drama. I mean who the f*ck made AIPAC the boss? There isn’t the slightest inclination towards democratic principles in an organization like that. It is high time that hubris meets its nemesis.
For that matter, who made Zionist Israel the state of all the Jews? Was there an election?
Who made Zionist Israel the state of all Jews? No, there was no election. The answer is Rabbi Silver and his grease, Truman’s old Mom N Pop store partner.
Here’s a velvet glove treatment of the subject:
link to clevelandjewishhistory.net
If you want the dirty details, go to the Truman Library archive online; especially Truman’s diary.
From the Truman Archive. Long and well worth the historic read of Jewish interests gaining control of state department prior to Truman’s election and post election (i recall).
link to trumanlibrary.org
Edwin M . Wright 1974 – father was a missionary and was born in Iran.
I mean who the f*ck made AIPAC the boss? Word up.
Who did that sh*t anyway?
Money made them the shadow boss of the Congress.
Is there any other answer?
Colin, As a practicing Jew I appreciate your motivation but I disagree with your conclusion. The fear of anti-semitism is actually a positive ,/i> in the Jewish community. It plays a huge role in Jewish identity. Membership in the ADL is equal to joining a synagogue.
Earlier this week I was at a lunch with some Jewish friends. The subject quickly turned to anti-semitism. One of the older gentlemen said: “I didn’t experience anti-semitism growing up.” I quipped: “do you feel that you missed out on the full Jewish experience?” drew laughs around the table.
Without anti-semitism, Jews in search of a communal identity will have to scramble for a replacement belief. Social action, peace and justice, caring for the world rooted in Jewish texts and practice will serve us far better.
As I’ve posted previously, in my experience this is a generational thing. Most Jews under 55 don’t feel this way. Certainly for those below 35, anti-semitism is largely irrelevant.
Instead of empathy over Foxman I’d try introducing questions such as: would you still be Jewish in a world without anti-Semitism? What would your Judaism look like?
apologies for the italics. I messed up on the HTML tag.
I’ve linked this before, but in light of Elliot’s comment, it bears repeating:
Jews have faced dangers in the past, but this time we may be unprepared to confront the newest threat to our survival as a people, because its principal cause is our own success as individuals. Our long history of victimization has prepared us to defend against those who would destroy us out of hatred; indeed, our history has forged a Jewish identity far too dependent on persecution and victimization by our enemies. But today’s most serious threats come not from those who would persecute us, but from those who would, without any malice, kill us with kindness–by assimilating us, marrying us, and merging with us out of respect, admiration, and even love. The continuity of the most influential Jewish community in history is at imminent risk, unless we do something dramatic now to confront the quickly changing dangers.
This book is a call to action for all who refuse to accept our demographic demise as inevitable. It is a demand for a new Jewish state of mind capable of challenging the conventional wisdom that Judaism is more adaptive to persecution and discrimination than it is to an open, free, and welcoming society–that Jews paradoxically need enemies in order to survive, that anti-Semitism is what has kept Judaism alive. This age-old perspective on Jewish survival is illustrated by two tragic stories involving respected rabbinical leaders.
The first story takes place in 1812, when Napoleon was battling the czar for control of the Pale of Settlement (the western part of czarist Russia), where millions of Jews were forced to live in crowded poverty and under persecution and discrimination as second-class subjects. A victory for Napoleon held the promise of prosperity, first-class citizenship, freedom of movement, and an end to discrimination and persecution. A victory for the czar would keep the Jews impoverished and miserable. The great Hasidic rabbi Shneur Zalman–the founder of the Lubavitch dynasty–stood up in his synagogue on the first day of Rosh Hashanah to offer a prayer to God asking help for the leader whose victory would be good for the Jews. Everyone expected him to pray for Napoleon. But he prayed for the czar to defeat Napoleon. In explaining his counterintuitive choice, he said: “Should Bonaparte win, the wealth of the Jews will be increased and their [civic] position will be raised. At the same time their hearts will be estranged from our Heavenly Father. Should however our Czar Alexander win, the Jewish hearts will draw nearer to our Heavenly Father, though the poverty of Israel may become greater and his position lower.”
This remarkable story is all too typical of how so many Jewish leaders throughout our history have reasoned about Jewish survival. Without tsuris–troubles–we will cease to be Jewish. We need to be persecuted, impoverished, discriminated against, hated, and victimized in order for us to retain our Jewishness. The “chosen people” must be denied choices if Judaism is to survive. If Jews are given freedom, opportunity, and choice, they will choose to assimilate and disappear.
The story recurs, with even more tragic consequences, on the eve of the Holocaust. Another great Eastern European rabbi, Elchanan Wasserman–the dean of the Rabbinical College in Baranowitz, Poland–was invited to bring his entire student body and faculty to Yeshiva College in New York or to the Beis Medrish Letorah in Chicago, both distinguished Orthodox rabbinical colleges. He declined the invitations because “they are both places of spiritual danger, for they are run in a spirit of freethinking.” The great rabbi reasoned, “What would one gain to escape physical danger in order to then confront spiritual danger?” Rabbi Wasserman, his family, his students, and their teachers remained in Poland, where they were murdered by the Nazis.
link to nytimes.com
Now that ADL has unmistakably waded into politics (that have nothing to do with the combating of antisemitism, bigotry, discrimination, etc) by issuing a press release criticizing US government officials for their foreign and military policy positions, should they not lose their tax-exempt status?
The ADL would argue it is against all kinds of racial or ethnic discrimination, so that that was fluke, certainly nothing to make it lose its tax-exempt status–this asserted after a quick slew of statements suddenly mustered against various sort of discrimination seldom pushed by the ADL. The name of your organization is everything–hence the
switch in name of the Zionist org to AIPAC (when we all know it should be called IPAC) if the creed is in the deed.
Pingback: Now General Petraeus is ‘dangerous’ (Foxman on the case) | Headlines Today