Again and again since the Connecticut school massacre last Friday, the media have called out the gun lobby. Last night’s NBC Nightly news opened, for instance, with the NRA statement on the Connecticut shootings– after days of silence. Chris Matthews harped on this on MSNBC, saying that this is the NRA’s pattern. The gun lobby is clearly on the run, the murders of 20 children are being blamed on the lobby. And justifiably; the gun lobby is a key element of the permissive American gun culture that produced this massacre.
The contrast to coverage of the Israel lobby couldn’t be more stark. The NRA is a household name, for better or worse. AIPAC is a who-dat? But there have been countless outrages over the years involving Israel’s use of violence with impunity: the killing of American Rachel Corrie in 2003; the massacre of 16 children in Qana during the Lebanon War of 2006; the slaughter of nearly 400 children in Gaza in 2008-2009; the killing of American Furkan Dogan and eight others on the Mavi Marmara in 2010.
Many of these killings involved American armaments. But the condemnation is absent, and so is the finger-pointing at a powerful lobby. The Israel lobby has played a significant role in guaranteeing that impunity. How large a role we can only speculate, because it has escaped media scrutiny. Andrew Sullivan hopped on this point yesterday, and wrote: “But we are forbidden from calling AIPAC what it is the way we call the NRA what it is – because telling the truth about it has been stigmatized as anti-Semitism.”
It goes beyond AIPAC of course, to establishment institutions more broadly, and a culture of orthodoxy and omerta re Israel, lately experienced by Nicholas Dirks, who was compelled to eat his words in order to get a big job. I always say things are getting better. But they won’t really change till media begin to put the spotlight on the Israel lobby, for, say, the devouring of the West Bank, in the way that they’ve put the spotlight on the gun lobby’s role in the Connecticut massacre. When Jake Tapper states to the White House that there have been “no consequences” for Israel’s bad behavior in the West Bank, it’s a great first step, but he is still not addressing the core issue– Why are there no consequences? But he as a Jewish American knows, there is an orthodoxy within the Jewish establishment over supporting Israel, and it is enforced by whatever means, excommunication, blackmail, bribery, threat. Which is why I don’t think this knot will be untied without a serious conversation inside the Jewish community about when we married Zionism.
Exactly. Another excellent article, Phil.
America is filling the world with guns:
http://readersupportednews.org/opinion2/416-gun-control-/15084-america-is-filling-the-world-with-guns
Kind of a weird ending there.
Not for nothing Phil, but when you so effortlessly lay the blame on the american jewish establishment and say only a rehabilitation of these people can change US policy you’re (1) indirectly stating that it’s normal for a teeny tiny subset of the population to run roughshod over the rest of us and (2) you’re stating that’s its normal for Jews to be in this position, that Jews rightly deserve to direct societies they are tiny minorities in, you just want them to do so ethically etc.
But here’s the rub: People without familial or social attachments to this “American Jewish Establishment” read what you just wrote and think not, “wow, i wish they’d change their mind” they think: Let’s Get Rid Of These People. I’m writing this as a friend my brother, you can’t find tribalism with tribalism. These people should make your blood boil and your skin crawl, like Mooser always says to you, “Zionism must be fought, not debated.”
One other thing: You gotta hire a non white male. Like, yesterday.
The smear of Anti-Semitism tied to criticism of Likud-Beiteinu policies is rapidly losing its steam. It may be that the American-Jewish community needs to redefine its relationship with Zionism, but the United States, writ large, needs to redefine its relationship with Likud-Beiteinu. Sheldon Adelson has promised to double down in his support for Neocon causes and candidates, whose corruption is deeply apparent to anyone who is paying attention. Out of all the Jews I know, I only know one who identifies with Adelson and the Neocons. The Lobby retains some inertial effectiveness in putting out sheer propaganda in support of its objectives, in getting Congress to sign whatever its napkin of the day has to say, and continuing to intimidate lonely but ambitious individuals who must face the promise of adverse consequences for not knuckling under to their pressure, but the crowd is turning, Obama actually won despite the Israeli prime minister’s rude disagreements with him and active support for his opponent. Phil wants the American Jewish community to reexamine Zionism; I want Obama to let the Lobby condemn Hagel with all its might, then appoint him and get him approved anyway, preferably just before the Israeli elections, and then pursue the policies Hagel has voiced that so unwind the Lobby – like engaging with Iran, and pushing to resolve the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, replacing idiotic ideology with practical realism as the basis for our foreign policy. And maybe indict a few law-breakers, expose a few ideologues in journalists’ clothing while they’re at it.
RE: “Gun lobby in the headlights (Israel lobby in the brush)” ~ Weiss
THE HASBARIST SEZ: “Supporting a ban on assault weapons is tantamount to ‘deligitimizing’ Israel. First they go after our guns; the next thing you know, they start rounding up the Jews! ! !”
[In other words, look for the pro-gun lobby to make “common cause” with the pro-Israel lobby (and the rest of the military-industrial complex).]