D.C. speakers: Walt and Siegman on the conflict, Madar on Bradley Manning

on 27 Comments

I’m headed to D.C., where I’m part of a special conference tomorrow on expanding the debate over the conflict, organized by the Middle East Policy Council. We’re in Rayburn House Office Building, Room 339, from 9:30 to noon, and I believe the discussion will be livestreamed at the link. The lineup includes two power hitters, Henry Siegman and Steve Walt, as well as myself and Hussein Ibish of the American Task Force on Palestine. I will speak about conditions I have witnessed in the occupation and in American politics that have foreclosed the possibility of partition, then bring it back to my belief that this problem won’t reach a just resolution until American Jews walk away from Zionism.

Meanwhile, tonight in D.C., Chase Madar will be speaking about The Passion of Bradley Manning, his story of the American war hero who knew that what he was seeing was wrong and was willing to put himself on the line to stop it. The book has just been reissued with a new last chapter all about Manning’s court-martial, which is likely to begin later this spring.

Madar will be talking about his book tonight at Busboys and Poets in Washington. The 5th and K location, from 6-8.

And he’ll be doing an event next week in Brooklyn that I’m going to try to make. Details below:  
April 30, 2013
St. Joseph’s College

The New Inquiry, Verso Books and Brooklyn Voices present The Passion of Bradley Manning

Sarah Leonard and Chase Madar will examine why a nation’s whistleblowers are less popular than its war criminals

On Tuesday, April 30th The New Inquiry, Verso and Brooklyn Voices present a discussion between The Passion of Bradley Manning: The Story Behind the Wikileaks Whistleblower author Chase Madar and Sarah Leonard, New InquiryEditor and Associate Editor at Dissent….

Over the past three years, Wikileaks has released thousands of classified documents about the Iraq War, the Afghan War and American statecraft in general, the basis for thousands of important stories in major media across the world. The source? A 25-year-old US Army Intelligence Private First Class from Crescent, Oklahoma by the name of Bradley Manning. After three years of pretrial detention, his court martial will begin June 3rd of this year. He faces 22 charges including espionage and Aiding the Enemy, carrying a possible life term.
The case of Bradley Manning is both a coda and a key to the long debacle of America’s militarized response to the 9/11 attacks. What are the consequences of charging–and perhaps convicting–Pfc. Manning with the capital offense of “Aiding the Enemy”? Why aren’t the New York Times and other Establishment media vigorously defending the source of so many of their important stories? What power does information have to change policy and halt wars? What power doesn’t it have? And why are whistleblowers usually less popular than war criminals? 

This event is free and open to all. 

CHASE MADAR is a civil rights attorney in New York who writes for The London Review of Books, Le Monde diplomatique, TomDispatch, CounterPunch, The Nation, The American Conservative (where he is a contributing editor), and theNational Interest. 
SARAH LEONARD is an editor at The New Inquiry. She is also an editor atDissent magazine, and a co-editor of Occupy!: Scenes from Occupied America(Verso, 2011).
THE NEW INQUIRY is a space for discussion that aspires to enrich cultural and public life by putting all available resources—both digital and material—toward the promotion and exploration of ideas. The New Inquiry is a 501(c)3 non-profit and is not affiliated with any political party, government agency, university, municipality, religious organization, cadre, or other cult. TNI was co-founded by Mary Borkowski, Jennifer Bernstein, and Rachel Rosenfelt….
6.30pm – 8.00pm
St. Joseph’s College
245 Clinton Avenue (btw. DeKalb & Willoughby), Tuohy Hall
Brooklyn, NY
About Philip Weiss

Philip Weiss is Founder and Co-Editor of Mondoweiss.net.

Other posts by .

Posted In:

27 Responses

  1. Ellen
    April 24, 2013, 10:05 am

    Wish I could be there……

  2. American
    April 24, 2013, 10:30 am

    I’m headed to D.C., where I’m part of a special conference tomorrow on expanding the debate over the conflict, organized by the Middle East Policy Council. We’re in Rayburn House Office Building, “”

    Hoo-rah! ..let us know if there is a showing of staffers and any politicians at the debate.

  3. seafoid
    April 24, 2013, 11:11 am

    May 9th upcoming
    Dersh and Beinart, mano a mano


    I think the situation has deteriorated since Beinart wrote his book and that it won’t be possible for a “moderate” Zionist to stop things getting progressively worse. Dersh and co bet the house on Zionism and the data is coming in now and it looks like they lost.

  4. pabelmont
    April 24, 2013, 11:22 am

    Phil: You say you will argue that Israeli actions have foreclosed 2SS? Does that mean that you wish to accept the irrevocability of the so-called facts-on-the-ground (FOTG) which constitute the settlement project? I hope you will at least compare and contrast, with attention to likelihood,

    Unlikely Scenario 1:

    If 2SS on the green-line model is not dead, bringing it to life would require removal of all settlers (10% of Israel’s Jewish population), dismantlement or destruction of the wall and of all the settlements buildings, disentangling the electric gid and water system, etc. This seems pretty impossible or at least very unlikely to occur.

    Unlikely Scenario 2:

    The “nice” alternative to 2SS on the green line model is a democratic 1SS to replace the apartheid 1SS now in place. Some people think a true democracy allowing for an Arab voting majority is more “possible” or “likely” than 2SS by removal of all the FOTG. Not sure I agree.

    Likely Scenario:

    Most likely is a permanent non-democratic apartheid model, the Palestiniabns more and more squeezed off their lands, murdered, tortured, imprisoned, and in every way encouraged to leave Palestine. This seems by far more likely than either of the previous scenarios.

    • MHughes976
      April 24, 2013, 2:13 pm

      A substantial resettlement fund will be created, of course, and generosity will be much mentioned, though the bill will be attached to the foot of a carrier pigeon instructed to fly westward. When (no, I’ll say if) the Palestinians have gone – or reduced to a sort of museum piece remnant, there will be a beautifully designed Museum of Palestinian Life and Art, suffused with a gentle mourning over the fact, so sad, that rather unpleasant things have to be done sometimes and a gentle reproach to the Islamic religion for restricting life and art so much. It will win awards by the bucket load.

    • seafoid
      April 24, 2013, 2:49 pm

      “Most likely is a permanent non-democratic apartheid model, the Palestinians more and more squeezed off their lands, murdered, tortured, imprisoned, and in every way encouraged to leave Palestine. This seems by far more likely than either of the previous scenarios.”

      I don’t think Zionism has the capacity to pull that off.
      I think they are more like the Ulster Unionists. The price of their pig headed obstinacy will be the slow emigration of the young people they need to pay for the militarisation of their society.

    • HarryLaw
      April 24, 2013, 3:25 pm

      pabelmont, @ “Most likely is a permanent non-democratic apartheid model”, I agree with you, if the Israelis consider a reasonable two state solution unacceptable then the notion that they would accept a one state solution [which would mean the end of “the Jewish state”] is fanciful in the extreme, don’t get me wrong, in an ideal world a one state solution would be perfect, but in my opinion Bantustans or fried chicken as a former Israeli minister called what the Palestinians would be left with is one of the Israelis options. Can they get away with it, that is the question? Here in the United Kingdom, our parliamentary system, who some people call the mother of all parliaments, we have our own Bantustan, Northern Ireland, a place supposedly within the UK, but kept at arms length, nobody resident in NI could vote for or against the parties that govern them, [in effect they had no vote], Labour, Conservative or Lib Dem, they were compelled to vote for their provincial sectarian parties, Unionist [mainly Protestant] or Nationalist [mainly Catholic] even though all the important legislation effecting them taxation, the health service, war and peace was decided by the main GB parties at Westminster, after a speakers conference in the seventies the number of MP’s from the sectarian parties was increased to bring NI into line with the rest of the UK, eighteen, but these parties were for the most part independent, only concerned about the constitutional position of NI within the UK, their votes only mattered when,usually in the case of a hung parliament or a close vote at Westminster, did the major parties court one or other of them and even then it was a distasteful thing for them to do, and they said so. If the mother of parliaments can get away with treating one and a half million residents of Northern Ireland and citizens of the UK as second class citizens for the past 90 years by excluding them from the party political system, why won’t the Israelis try to do the same to the Palestinians?

      • HarryLaw
        April 24, 2013, 5:01 pm

        I suppose the equivalent in an American context, would be if representatives from Alaska or Hawaii were told they could send representatives to congress but they could not join the Democratic or Republican political parties or involve themselves in the decision making policies of those parties at either a local or National level, and yet those National policies were applied in full force in those states, that would not be democratic.

      • ToivoS
        April 25, 2013, 7:29 pm

        Harry, surely Labor and the Torries could run candidates in NI? I thought the problem was that neither side would vote for them?

      • HarryLaw
        April 26, 2013, 5:56 am

        Toivos @ “Harry, surely Labor and the Tories could run candidates in NI? I thought the problem was that neither side would vote for them?” It has never been tried, but we have had a similar situation to Belfast in some Liverpool constituencies, “Scotland constituency” by the docks for instance returned an Irish Nationalist T P O’conner to parliament from 1918 to 1929 unopposed, sectarianism was also rife in many other constituencies in fact we had Protestant and Catholic parties in Kirkdale and Exchange constituencies where unless you were of the right faith you did not get elected, socialists like Sydney Silverman and Bessie Braddock in Exchange gradually broke the stranglehold of the sectarian parties but not until about 1970 here is an example,at a by election in 1971 in Scotland constituency ever since 1885 all the successful candidates had been Catholic, but in 1971 Frank Marsden a Protestant was chosen to contest the seat, this annoyed Peter Mahon, a Catholic former MP for Preston South, who felt he should have received the official nomination. And so Mahon stood against Marsden as a “Labour against abortion” candidate, but economic affairs and housing were now the sovereign issues and caused Mahon to lose his deposit. Marsden won convincingly, because he knew well the history of the constituency and therefore kept strictly to the party line, and carefully avoided any comment with religious overtones. The defeated Conservative candidate, Barry Porter was able to say after the election that “the electors could now forget their differences as Catholics and Protestants and vote on ordinary class issues”. The previous twenty years had transformed a century’s history. In Protestant districts the trend was even more evident with the collapse of the Protestant party, no Protestant Party candidate has stood for election since they were beaten by Labour in 1971 and 1972. So it was proven in Liverpool that sectarianism could be overcome, the same could happen in Belfast, why should Catholics and Protestants be excluded from the politics of the state they live in, it makes no sense, it is discrimination.

      • HarryLaw
        April 26, 2013, 8:16 am

        TavioS, Just a reference to Another progressive of Jewish origin in the 1930’s who did not receive much appreciation. Liverpool born Sidney Silverman contested exchange constituency in 1933, he faced a conservative, JJ Shute, a prominent Catholic and a friend of the former MP for exchange, and privy chamberlain to the pope Sir J P Reynolds. Local labour leaders, however were conscious that Silverman was not the best possible candidate for Catholic exchange, but they were ill-prepared for the sectarian nature of the campaign which followed against Silverman (who was of Jewish origin). Thomas White, the conservative leader, regarded the candidature of Silverman as “a blunder of the first magnitude” for labour, as it ignored the susceptibilities of the large Catholic vote in the constituency. JJ Shute had obviously been chosen because of his religion and because there was no large orange vote in the constituency, they could exploit his religion for all they were worth. A public declaration issued by well known Catholic politicians favouring the candidature of JJ Shute was distributed outside Catholic churches. It read:-
        “Catholics must vote for JJ Shute because;
        1. As Catholics you cannot accept the extreme socialist policy of Mr Silverman, it is not sound, it is not good for the working class.
        2. As Catholics you cannot expect Mr Silverman to further the just claims of our Catholic schools”.
        Altogether, ten Catholic councillors as well as several priests and layman, publicly reproved Silverman for opposing state aid for church schools and for his brazen socialism, but regardless of these attacks, or maybe because of them, prominent Catholic labour politicians like David Logan and veteran docker’s leader, James Sexton (now MP for St Helens) did campaign for him. But during the door to door canvassing attacks on Silverman as an enemy to the Catholic religion and as a Jew went on relentlessly. Silverman said after his defeat that:-
        “This was a triumph of religious prejudice over political conditions. My opponent throughout fought the campaign purely on a religious basis and managed to persuade enough hungry, ill clad, badly housed people to vote for him on the basis of the similarity of their religions”. (“Sydney Silverman” by Emrys Hughes).

    • Nevada Ned
      April 24, 2013, 11:26 pm

      Any solution that results in a Palestinian state will be resisted by Israel, because a Palestinian state will be hauling Israel into courtrooms all over the world, and advocating for the Palestinians. (Unless it’s a tiny rump statelet, a Bantustan, with no power at all.) So either 2SS or 1SS would have to be forced onto Israel.

      Think about the civil rights movement in the US in the 1960’s. African-Americans won the right to vote, after “only” a couple of centuries. If it were up to the white Southerners, it wouldn’t have happened, ever.

  5. lysias
    April 24, 2013, 12:24 pm

    Bradley Manning was mentioned in the second installment of the interview with Jeremy Scahill (whose book Dirty Wars has just been published) on Democracy Now! this morning. Scahill learned that Eric Prince, the head of Blackwater, was about to leave the U.S. in an e-mail that he got from Bradley Manning.

    • Citizen
      April 24, 2013, 2:25 pm

      Huh? Why is Eric Prince about to leave the US? Any more data, anyone?

      • Citizen
        April 24, 2013, 2:36 pm

        Oh, ok, I see Bradley Manning (what a hero, says me, who was once young, and in the enlisted US army ranks just like him) gave Scahill a contact to get the data about Prince, who’s motive for going over there to the little Arab country, the harbor for a US naval fleet, to train mercenaries in behalf the US 1% elite & Israel. http://dissenter.firedoglake.com/2013/04/24/bradley-manning-sent-jeremy-scahill-scoop-on-blackwaters-erik-prince-going-to-united-arab-emirates/#

        Or, am I missing something?

      • Rusty Pipes
        April 24, 2013, 3:20 pm

        It’s a good interview. Scahill was relating a story about Bradley Manning from a few years ago, before Manning became known through Wikileaks . Manning sent Scahill a tip that he knew about through a personal friend, not a classified source, about Prince’s planned trip.

      • Walid
        April 24, 2013, 4:20 pm

        That was in 2010. Reasons at the time were to distance himself from inevitable prosecution for Blackwater stuff in Iraq and from IRS problems. At that time, he had also landed a contract with the UAE Emir to hire and train a small private militia for Abu Dhabi.

      • Sumud
        April 24, 2013, 6:08 pm

        I thought he had settled in Dubai or Abu Dhabi several years ago now…?

  6. tokyobk
    April 24, 2013, 2:21 pm

    I have come to see Hussein Ibish as one of the brightest, most consistent and fair minded spokesmen on the I/P issue.

    • seafoid
      April 24, 2013, 3:04 pm

      Like that means anything.
      I think Zionism is too abusive to work long term as the official ideology of the Jewish people.
      By all means pretend that Palestinians do not exist but don’t expect people to buy it indefinitely.

      • tokyobk
        April 25, 2013, 3:49 am

        Are you saying Ibish holds these positions? That would mean you have never read him.

      • seafoid
        April 25, 2013, 2:21 pm

        I was thinking about you, Tokyo. Ibish is more of a housetrained (sand) niggah.
        Israel has a few of those. The token Arab who says Zionism is wonderful.
        I suppose regular bots buy it, god love them.

    • PeaceThroughJustice
      April 24, 2013, 10:13 pm

      “I have come to see Hussein Ibish as one of the brightest, most consistent and fair minded spokesmen on the I/P issue.”


      • tokyobk
        April 25, 2013, 2:01 am

        ? why uh-oh?

      • Inanna
        April 26, 2013, 7:59 am

        Yes, uh-oh is right. Hussein Ibish is not liked by his fellow Palestinians and Arabs. He’s the quisling of the quisling PA. He spends more time schmoozing with zionists and raising money from oil monarchies (since Arab-Americans won’t support him) than doing anything actually meaningful for Palestinians. No wonder bk likes him.

  7. Citizen
    April 24, 2013, 6:16 pm

    Does anyone here have the slightest clue just how hard it was for a lowly enlisted man in the US Army to do what Bradley Manning did? I wish our US “journalists” had as much bravery in their little finger as Manning had in his heart.

  8. Kathleen
    April 24, 2013, 6:23 pm

    Sorry to miss. Will be great to watch later. Hope you link to Mondoweiss

Leave a Reply