The Iran Deal is an African American achievement

US Politics
on 69 Comments

The Iran Deal is an African-American achievement.

At every stage it was led by black Americans. It was advanced by our first African American president, who entered politics calling for change, who is highly sensitive to racism against people of color, who found the isolation of Cuba and Iran for decades out of spite destructive to the American future and needed to do something about those policies before he left the White House.

The Deal was bolstered when the Congressional Black Caucus stood up to the Israeli Prime Minister, who came to Congress to dismiss the president’s initiative in March. The Black Caucus was angry about the appearance, as many Americans were, but they were keener to call out the Dis. Many boycotted the speech, calling it an insult: which it was! National Security Adviser Susan Rice warned Netanyahu then that it was a “destructive” act, and he ignored her; as DeWayne Wickham, head of Morgan State’s journalism school, wrote at the time, citing a history of racism among Israeli leaders.

And when Netanyahu later won an election with last minute racist appeals, telling his voters that Arabs were going to the polls “in droves,” our black legislators heard him loud and clear.

The Deal was sealed by the votes of black east coast politicians who are dependent on money from the Israel lobby but who stood up for their president in the end. Senator Cory Booker and Congressman Hakeem Jeffries were both once thought to be voting against the Deal. Hakeem Jeffries cried, Israel today, Israel tomorrow, Israel forever at a rally during Israel’s massacre in Gaza last summer, and Booker has turned the same blind eye again and again. Even the New York Times says that Jeffries’s big contributors are against the Iran Deal (meaning conservative Jews). But the two legislators lined up with the president, with appropriate symbolism. Jeffries rode Air Force One with the president. Booker tweeted out his respect for his adversaries even as he affirmed the historic shift.

And the Deal was heralded in a triumphant tweet by Gwen Ifill, a leading journalist who as a black woman has championed civil rights in the U.S. and surely was upset by Netanyahu’s racist appeals: “Take that, Bibi!”

Of course a broad coalition for change supported the Iran Deal, from American realists to leftwingers to feminists to Iranian-Americans to liberal Zionists. We all want to see a new American relationship with the world.

But the Ifill tweet reminds us of the deal’s special resonance for black Americans. Iran is the signature foreign policy achievement of the first black president, struggling against the most powerful political forces in the land.

Will the deal change the black-Jewish relationship? I believe it will. Black Elites Matter. The Dream Defenders went from Ferguson to Palestine, and the black elites will follow. The isolation of Iran is of a piece with the isolation of Palestine, and Egypt, and Iraq, and Syria. Anyone that doesn’t like Israel has to be sequestered in U.S. political life– and suprrise, a lot of them are people of color.

This order is in great danger today. A rightwing Jewish foreign policy coterie –that had “inexcusable prejudice” against the black president, in Sandy Berger’s words — is giving way to a far more diverse elite. Democratic senators such as Cory Booker may have broken forever with the neoconservatives and Islamophobes and expansionist Zionists who helped get Booker et al into high office in the first place. The new Israel lobbyists, liberal Zionists, are willing to work with American interest types and progressive groups. As Jennifer Rubin laments in the Washington Post on Booker’s defection, AIPAC and Israel put all their weight against the deal and they could not win Democrats.

If “African-American values” came to bear on the Iran situation – and by that I mean humanistic values, sensitivity to the underdog, to the victim of prejudice, to the non-European—these same values can now come to bear on the Israel Palestine conflict. The battle will only grow more pitched in years to come, as funding apartheid becomes an issue for our politicians. And African Americans will play the leadership role they did in the South Africa situation, and the great Iran Deal of 2015.

P.S. A word about Gwen Ifill’s wonderful tweet. How can you expect an intelligent person to work as many years in our flawed and unfair world as she has, with the seriousness and awareness she has projected, and not develop opinions. Of course she has opinions. But they are supposed to be private, even as a foreign prime minister is making racist appeals to win his election and trying to undermine the first black president. The internet is making journalists’ private opinions our business. Because we are curious, yes, but because we understand that private opinions have enormous bearing on the news and we have the right to know what powerful journalists really think. Many journalists seek this transparency, and social media, which is popular for the most traditional journalistic reasons (it has news on it) has exerted great pressure to which Ifill succumbed. Applaud her for exposing her views, honor her views, and hope that PBS makes room for her to express them more often.

About Philip Weiss

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

Other posts by .


Posted In:

69 Responses

  1. HPH
    September 5, 2015, 11:46 am

    A very good synthesis of observations. Your main point seems obvious now that it has been articulated.

    Another factor, often stated here, that links the groups, or causes, is the militarism of the police. It is an argument that can be made by simply looking at pictures.

    • Citizen
      September 5, 2015, 12:39 pm

      Who trains the US police these days, and why do they? That’s not clear enough by simply looking at pictures.

      • MRW
        September 7, 2015, 2:48 am

        Who trains the US police these days, and why do they?

        THAT needs to come out.

        Watch from 35:12 minutes for the answer to Citizen’s question: “An Israeli Soldier’s Story – Eran Efrati”
        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=93hqlmrZKd8

        The entire presentation is worth watching. He made this talk in 2014. What he says is already happening.

  2. Pixel
    September 5, 2015, 1:07 pm

    Uh, yeah, and Ifill was immediately smacked down for it.

    PBS Ombudsman: Gwen Ifill Tweet Mocking Netanyahu Was ‘Inexcusable’

    • Pixel
      September 5, 2015, 1:16 pm

      “Black elite…”

      Now, there’s a loaded phrase/word…

    • RobertHenryEller
      September 7, 2015, 8:19 am

      “Inexcusable?”

      Ms. Ifill need make no excuses. For what? Calling out a racist?

      From day one, and even before Barack Obama became President, Netanyahu has treated our President as if it were Netanyahu’s schvartze maid’s nappy-headed wayward little boy. Or worse.

      Netanyahu is the one who owes an apology. Which we’ll never see or hear. All Netanyahu ever sees is “anti-Semitism.” He never sees himself.

      • Mooser
        September 7, 2015, 1:12 pm

        ” Netanyahu has treated our President as if it were Netanyahu’s schvartze maid’s nappy-headed wayward little boy.”

        I’m sorry, but I’ve just got to ask. Did that comparison come naturally to you, or did it take any effort to compose it and frame it in those terms?

  3. a blah chick
    September 5, 2015, 1:18 pm

    Ifill’s smack down is a reminder about how the white media elites are always policing the black media elites, but don’t you dare let it go the other way!

    Also can I just give Cory Booker to the Jewish community? He’s not doing us any good.

  4. Pixel
    September 5, 2015, 1:18 pm

    By the way, great piece, Phil.

  5. Krauss
    September 5, 2015, 2:03 pm

    Democratic senators such as Cory Booker may have broken forever with the neoconservatives and Islamophobes and expansionist Zionists who helped get Booker et al into high office in the first place.

    Maybe, but then it is not out of principle as you suggest but for the same reason why they relied on the bigots in the first place: power politics/shifting sands. Who’s up, who’s down etc.

    But I agree 100% that the Iran deal can mostly be ascribed to black pols. When the going got tough, Obama had the CBC in his corner in March. White liberals were flailing around, unsure whether they could oppose or not. The black dems didn’t flinch and I think Obama appreciated that.

    I certainly did.

  6. Kay24
    September 5, 2015, 3:25 pm

    REWARDING ISRAEL FOR BAD BEHAVIOR?

    “I’ve often described Netanyahu’s bad behavior to that of a spoiled child who knows that when he misbehaves not only will there be no punishment, instead the over-indulgent parent will offer more love. The net effect has been the recognition that bad behavior not only makes you the center of attention, it also has the potential of reaping rewards.

    And speaking of rewards, the Administration is now offering Israel an enhanced security package totally $1.8 billion (Note: the Arabs will pay for their compensatory package, Israel will not). This new aid will be in addition to increases in US arms assistance and other add-ons, like Iron Dome, that Congress annually appropriates for Israel.

    Senators and members of Congress will also now be inclined to make clear their support for Israel. Many Democrats who announced their intention to support the president made sure that their statements declared undying support for Israel. The myth that “AIPAC will beat you if you don’t toe the line” continues to hold strong, and so it can be expected that many members, despite their resentment of AIPAC and Netanyahu’s pressure, will spend excessive time and energy between now and next November playing “make up” by proving their support for Israel.”

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/james-zogby/obama-won-so-did-netanyah_b_8091984.html

    • MHughes976
      September 5, 2015, 6:00 pm

      Thanks for the reference to this article by Mr. Zogby, Kay. I think he’s right that pro-Israel protestations will be duly made, but they will mean less than they used to now that the huge campaign has ‘dropped a ton of money’ without effect.

      • Kay24
        September 5, 2015, 7:18 pm

        True that. They wasted tons and tons of money when Netanyahu’s stooge Adelson tried to buy the election for Romney, and now this. I guess they are the types that simply cannot learn hard lessons. :))

      • RobertHenryEller
        September 6, 2015, 1:34 pm

        If AIPAC dropped $40 million, even $100 million, and Israel gets even one billion in additional aid (I assure you it will be much more.), that’s a pretty sweet Return on Investment.

        Not so good for Palestinians, however.

      • Kay24
        September 6, 2015, 3:10 pm

        RHE, it is never good for the Palestinians. It is as if they don’t exist, are inhuman, and are at fault for everything that happens to the occupiers.

      • RoHa
        September 6, 2015, 7:51 pm

        “It is as if they don’t exist, are inhuman, and are at fault for everything that happens to the occupiers. ”

        This is, of course, an inconsistent set, but Zionists care no more for logic than they do for morality.

  7. hophmi
    September 5, 2015, 4:23 pm

    “A rightwing Jewish foreign policy coterie –that had “inexcusable prejudice” against the black president, in Sandy Berger’s words”

    I see you’re going to try to turn this into a Big Lie, even though you know well that this is not what Berger said.

    If the Iran Deal is an African-American achievement (a claim which I find racist), does that mean that you’ll be blaming the African-American community if Iran cheats and gets a nuclear weapon? Or do you just level those kinds of hateful accusations at Jews?

    • Annie Robbins
      September 5, 2015, 4:59 pm

      it doesn’t mean is was exclusively an African-American achievement. and why do you think it’s racist to say that? would it not have been considered an achievement for the lobby had the iran deal gone down? and if Iran cheats and gets a nuclear weapon wouldn’t everyone supporting this diplomatic achievement share responsibility? and generally don’t the people boldly out in front of initiatives get the lion share of blame or kudos — which ever way it goes?

      • echinococcus
        September 5, 2015, 5:06 pm

        Well, Mister Hophmi defends to the death that the Zionist entity is a Jewish achievement and that it is not racist.

      • hophmi
        September 7, 2015, 12:22 am

        I find the idea of viewing American foreign policy achievements or failures as the achievement of one racial or religious group to be a form of bigotry. It’s an American achievement. Period. And if it fails, it will be an American failure.

      • Annie Robbins
        September 7, 2015, 12:33 am

        me: it doesn’t mean is was exclusively an African-American achievement.

        hops:the idea of viewing American foreign policy achievements or failures as the achievement of one racial or religious group to be a form of bigotry.

        ok, but whose idea was it to frame the claim solely an such? yours. it’s nothing phil said. this is like talking to a brick wall, why do i bother? later

    • Mooser
      September 5, 2015, 5:40 pm

      “If the Iran Deal is an African-American achievement (a claim which I find racist),”

      There, there, Hophmi, it’s a Jewish achievement, too, if it makes you feel better. But would it be gracious to take all the credit?

    • Mooser
      September 5, 2015, 6:25 pm

      ” does that mean that you’ll be blaming the African-American community if Iran cheats and gets a nuclear weapon?”

      Gee, let me see, which would I think was more likely? That Iran felt compelled to cheat and get a bomb because of some African-Americans, or Iran feels compelled by the illegal, un-controlled, un-inspected Israeli nuclear arms arsenal near them?

      I don’t get you, Hophmi. Considering Israel stole a bomb and all the rest, where the hell does a Zionist get off raising a peep about nuclear ethics or threats? I hesitate to ask, but is there something essentially different about Israel having A-bombs (and ESPECIALLY under the ill-un-un circumstances) from Iran eventually possibly acquiring a nuclear weapon?

    • piotr
      September 7, 2015, 8:16 am

      Hereby, I, hohmi, solemnly promise the go door to door in minority low income neighborhoods if Iran will not get a nuclear weapon in ten years.

      By the way, anti-Palestinian arguments rely on a big dose of cultural racism, so the disadvantaged minorities are largely immune to them. Mind you, people like Justice Thomas, and Dr. Ben Carson amply justify “self-hating” label (more precisely, they despise the majority of “their folks” and made carriers out of it.)

  8. Kathleen
    September 5, 2015, 6:17 pm

    Love this vantage….spot on. The Black Caucus led the way on challenging BB. They led the way Brought this up on many websites,

    • MHughes976
      September 6, 2015, 12:50 pm

      I believe that the term ‘Black Caucus’ first came to prominence in 67, at a turbulent ‘Conference of New Politics’, and that the most prominent demand of the group concerned was for a commitment to Palestinian liberation. MLK addressed the meeting but left quickly and tactfully. Hosea Williams then took the lead in persuading the Caucus to withdraw its proposal, but King was searchingly questioned by some correspondents. His letters which made his commitment to Zionism pretty absolute came in response, towards the end of September 67.
      The name ‘Congressional Black Caucus’ – was it in use before? – seems to allude to this episode and on the whole the CBC has In many ways followed MLK’s lead, which was in this case calamitous. I think I’ve seen it on Friedman’s authority that it has been a steadfast supporter of aid to Israel. Its members did nothing to protect Jeremiah Wright when he was so disgracefully vilified.
      If current events mark a change of heart, very good. If it means that Black thinkers like Wright – and perhaps Ifill? – who have not been able to make themselves heard or understood for some time can now gain voice, there is hope for the cause of genuine moderation and anti-racism (genuine anti-anti-Semitism too).

  9. JWalters
    September 5, 2015, 6:40 pm

    The Zionist argument – “Shut up and collect your check!”

    But as the facts spread to more and more minds, that strategy carries less and less weight.

    Thanks Phil for this wonderful article.

  10. yonah fredman
    September 5, 2015, 7:26 pm

    A rightwing Jewish foreign policy coterie –that had “inexcusable prejudice” against the black president, in Sandy Berger’s words — – See more at: http://mondoweiss.net/2015/09/african-american-achievement#sthash.YwOJgD0K.dpuf so phil continues to imply that sander berger was indicting the entire right wing jewish foreign policy coterie as having inexcusable prejudice. berger’s words clearly indicated that it included people who were influenced by such bigotry, but this attempt to paint the entire coterie as bigoted is phil weiss’s intent, but not sandy berger’s intent.

  11. yonah fredman
    September 5, 2015, 7:43 pm

    But Gwen Ifil’s tweet included real information. it was not just take this, bibi. it was take THIS and included a graphic showing the real achievement achieved by the pact. phil weiss omits this because he wants Ifil’s tweet to sound personal. take this from a proud black female who objects to your opposition to a proud black male. that was not ifil’s tweet. it was: here are some stats that show that it is a good deal. take this: meaning facts. but phil weiss strips ifil’s tweet of the facts and makes it purely personal. weiss’s interest in facts is minimal in this case. he is interested in stirring up trouble. do you think gwen ifil would read this column and say right on, or would she say. phil weiss, former journalist and current propagandist.

    • Mooser
      September 5, 2015, 8:43 pm

      ” take this from a proud black female who objects to your opposition to a proud black male”

      First of all, As Annie points out, you are misquoting her. It is “Take that” not ‘Take THIS’.

      Gee Yonah, why didn’t you put quotes around “proud black female” and “proud black male”?
      But of course, not only aren’t they quotes, Phil never referred to either Gwen Ifil or President Obama in those terms, they are entirely yours. The word “proud” or the phrase “black male” or “black female” does not even appear in the article, or any place on the thread- until you introduced it. And Phil is the one who is trying to “make trouble”? I don’t think so.

      • echinococcus
        September 5, 2015, 8:56 pm

        I simply love the official propagandist Mister Fredman. Calling Weiss a “propagandist” in a post with racist bullshit in quotes as if it wasn’t his own production. Where he has the gall to distort the very quote his post is based on. And he’ll go on undeterred.

      • Kris
        September 5, 2015, 10:07 pm

        @ Yonah: “take this from a proud black female who objects to your opposition to a proud black male.”

        Really? Would you say, “Jewish female” and “Jewish male?”

        Try “proud black woman and “proud black man.” Though I don’t see why you’re saying any of this in the first place.

      • Kris
        September 5, 2015, 10:48 pm

        Yonah, think about who in history would have described black women and men as “females” and “males.”

        Then think about who would have described Jewish women and men as “females” and “males.”

        Using “female” and “male” in place of “women” and “men” is dehumanizing.

    • Annie Robbins
      September 5, 2015, 8:46 pm

      it was not just take this, bibi. it was take THIS and included a graphic

      not really. she wrote “Take that” — which (as opposed to “take this”) is an idiom with a specific (cultural) meaning. for example:

      http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Take+That&defid=585578

      A coined phrased used commonly by P.Diddy meaning to take great thought to what was previously said
      you a B**ch!… (some one over to the side, “TAKE THAT TAKE ThAT!”)

      http://esl.about.com/od/vocabularyreference/a/put_expressions.htm :

      Put that in your pipe and smoke it!

      Definition: Phrase meaning: You see! Take that!

      You’re wrong!

      http://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/take-that :

      said as someone ​hits someone ​else, ​especially in ​humorous ​films or ​cartoons

      and more blatantly, it means:

      http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Take+that+bitch

      Take that bitch
      Something to say when you have upstaged someone

      and it’s that last one i think she meant. she just switched out the bitch for “Bibi”. and the idiom is used in a personal way (not to be confused with ‘that this cup of coffee’ vs ‘take that’ and slashing coffee on someone’s face).

      ;) touche!

    • MRW
      September 7, 2015, 2:53 am

      Ifil is spelled Ifill, fredman. Honor her name.

  12. echinococcus
    September 5, 2015, 10:50 pm

    The new Israel lobbyists, liberal Zionists, are willing to work with American interest types and progressive groups

    They aren’t new, they were there before the others, drumming up support and ensuring impunity to invasion, war and genocide way before 1920. They always tried to work with American interest types and progressive groups (and unfortunately were very successful.)

    One can hope that, as the focus moves back from the openly genocidal to the liberal-looking genocidal with a human face, Phil Weiss will continue to oppose them at least as hard as he has done with the JDL types.

  13. Kay24
    September 6, 2015, 9:37 am

    Debbie Wasserman-Schultz to VOTE FOR THE IRAN DEAL. YES!

    She was in tears on CNN this morning with Jake Tapper. She said it was a hard choice, but after speaking to so many experts decided this is the best. She says she is a “Jewish mother” who cares for Israel. I am glad she did the right thing for the US this time.

    • Kathleen
      September 6, 2015, 11:22 am

      Total surprise. Good for her. Ultimately better for Israel too. Good for her. Shocking really

      • Kay24
        September 6, 2015, 11:37 am

        Yes, wasn’t it? I saw her on mute first, and thought she was going to say she was against it, but when I heard what she said, I was totally floored.

        I think (maybe) coincidentally Obama has made members of Congress openly make a choice between what is good for the US/world, and the eventuality of war (which obviously ONLY Israel supports), by being against the deal.

      • echinococcus
        September 6, 2015, 11:41 am

        Mama crocodile was in tears, was she? All the stupid theater, as if getting to cancel the NPT, to justify arbitrary intervention on complying nations, and to legitimate Zionist nuclear -arming were not what all the Zionists, including the Yahoo, intended anyway!
        I was looking rather leniently on this “deal” because of easing of the sanctions on Iran but after you reminded me that it is “[u]ltimately better for Israel too” I start seeing it as a middle-term catastrophe brought about by skillful comedy.

      • just
        September 6, 2015, 11:58 am

        Biden was down in FL coaxing her and others this week:

        “Democratic National Committee Chairwoman, Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz, D-Fla., left, looks on as Vice President Joe Biden discusses the Iran nuclear deal with Jewish community leaders at the David Posnack Jewish Community Center in Davie, Fla. on Thursday, Sept. 3, 2015”

        see the pretty pic @ http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/photos/joe-bidendebbie-wasserman-schultz-33520457

        The time and energy that has been spent by these guys on only a certain segment of the US population is astonishing and distressing, imho.

        ~and~

        “Wasserman Schultz calls in Biden to pitch Iran deal

        … A visit from the vice president wouldn’t usually be required to convince the DNC chair to back a major foreign-policy initiative of a president from her own party. But Wasserman Schultz and the White House have had an unusually dysfunctional relationship at times, and the Iran agreement is heavily opposed by groups like the American Israeli Public Affairs Committee, a strong ally of Wasserman Schultz, who was the first Jewish woman elected to the U.S. House from Florida. …”

        http://www.capitalnewyork.com/article/florida/2015/08/8575341/wasserman-schultz-calls-biden-pitch-iran-deal

      • just
        September 6, 2015, 1:36 pm

        Wasserman Schultz is constantly referred to as the first Jewish woman elected to Congress. There was another Jewish woman who did serve and was elected in a special election. I think it’s kind of a neat factoid.

        “Florence Prag Kahn (November 9, 1866 – November 16, 1948) was an American teacher and politician who in 1925 became the first Jewish woman to serve in the United States Congress. She was only the fifth woman to serve in Congress, and the second from California, after fellow San Franciscan Mae Nolan. Like Nolan, she took the seat in the House of Representatives left vacant by the death of her husband, Julius Kahn.”

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Florence_Prag_Kahn

      • Kay24
        September 6, 2015, 3:23 pm

        Maybe she realized she could lose her position as Chairperson of the National Democratic Committee, if she does not go along with the other Dems, and not supporting her own President. Secretly I bet some of these Israeli firsts are mad at Netanyahu for putting them in this awkward position. It is time they cut off the puppet masters strings.

      • just
        September 6, 2015, 3:32 pm

        Ergo the tears this morning, Kay. She definitely should have lost her position as DNC chairwoman had she not backed the President and this negotiated agreement.

        Hard choice, eh? Either DNC chair or well- funded AIPAC shill… what to do?

        Terrible.

      • Kathleen
        September 6, 2015, 4:29 pm

        Just you are so right. Politico reported some time ago that “DWS had lined up supporters in 2013 to portray any decision by President Obama to replace her as DNC chair as “anti woman and anti- semitic.” Knew there was friction between DWS and the White House. Would like to think she voted for the Iran deal based on its merits although sounds more likely she may have voted for it because she may have faced being being tossed out on her rump.

      • yonah fredman
        September 6, 2015, 9:54 pm

        wasserman-schultz is the first Jewish congresswoman from florida,. not the first Jewish congresswoman period. Two famous Jewish congresswomen who preceded her were Liz Holtzman and Bella Abzug.

      • Annie Robbins
        September 7, 2015, 12:23 am

        boxer and feinstein

      • piotr
        September 7, 2015, 8:37 am

        “Mama crocodile was in tears, was she?”

        They also bleed, you know? It could be even a political suicide for her (not likely, IMHO) but for sure she will be “Goldstoned”. We online trolls sneer at communities, all those chubby nieces, crazy uncles, wacky rabbis (yes, that’s you Rav Shmuley) etc. but also the brilliant ones etc.

        I predicted that Debbie will declare support, and while it does not make her a saint, it is a good thing. (And crazy uncles in her district already pre-condemned her.)

      • Mooser
        September 7, 2015, 1:14 pm

        “Mama crocodile was in tears, was she?”

        And cried a veritable rainbow.

      • echinococcus
        September 7, 2015, 2:23 pm

        Piotr,

        The Zionists are the winners here with the “deal” or against the deal. The Obama “deal” is a de facto cancellation of the NPT and legitimation of the Zionist nukes, almost guaranteeing Iraq-like treatment in the future. As for Wassermann, she can cry and bleed but she used the opportunity for more war propaganda and to legitimate tribalism in US politics, by a DNC head, no less. I don’t know if she’ll be Goldstoned: after all, Goldstone had been critical of Zionist war crimes. One thing is sure, the treatment she’s getting from Weiss almost sounds like praise.

    • Kay24
      September 6, 2015, 4:52 pm

      To some here, I agree that her fear of being tossed out of her prestigious position in the DNC might have been the main reason why she decided to vote this way. I think Schumer must be also regret supporting Benjy over his own President. I hope he is prevented from taking over Harry Reid’s job. His loyalties are now well known, and it is not for his own country.

      Menendez hopefully, will be kicked out because of his own folly (associating with slime balls).

    • Kay24
      September 6, 2015, 7:25 pm

      For those who are interested, here she is on CNN today:

    • Marnie
      September 7, 2015, 12:22 am

      Oh, the Jewish mother bit with tears and all. She maybe saw the petition to remove her as DNC head? Maybe her children told her “Mom, for God’s sake do the right thing this time. We’re Americans, not Israelis and this is the right thing to do and you know it”.

      • Marnie
        September 7, 2015, 1:13 am

        By Ryan Lovelace
        09/07/15 12:01 AM

        “Most importantly, I had the privilege of talking with President Obama last night, who assured me that as we move forward and discuss with Israel the enhanced security package that will absolutely be essential for us to provide to Israel, as well as ensure that we tighten our ability to enforce this deal that I’ll be part of a group of members of Congress that’s working with his administration on that,” said Wasserman Schultz.

        There’s no end to the crocodile tears and the expressions of loyalty to the real masters of Washington DC, the GoI. There will be no end to the “enhanced security packages” that will be the price to be paid by American taxpayers as punishment for supporting Pres. Obama. Even all of the excuses by types like Wasserman-Schultz – kind of a “I didn’t wanna do it Bibi, but my hands are tied here, we’re still cool right?” will not soothe the bruised ego of the GoI, which demands absolute loyalty. The 3 billion they get each year now is nothing compared to what they’ll be getting now. Why can’t the US just cut Israel loose and be done with them? They’ve got nukes, US has nukes, moreover, US has used theirs before. Why continue to allow this parasitic state to lord over Americans too?

      • Kay24
        September 7, 2015, 6:41 am

        Here is a list of congresspeople and how they stand. Obviously those who are against or undecided are more Republicans. It is hard to understand how they can be so undecided, they have to vote to avoid another war, and give diplomacy a chance. Even the Saudis are now on board. It is Bibi meddling that has made those against this deal look like the only idiots left in the world.

        http://www.haaretz.com/news/world/1.673646

      • MHughes976
        September 7, 2015, 9:45 am

        I have the impression that Obama is having the experience, rare for him, of watching the opposition crumble at every level, Congress, the wider Establishment, the American public, world opinion. The logical next step would be for him and his liberal Zionist allies to put a 2 state proposal, in which the heart and soul of liberal Zionism appear to be invested, on the table and call for referenda in Israel and the Territories. It would be extraordinarily hard for any party, from beyond Likud to further than Hamas, to refuse to heed that call. That’s not to say that the plan would be approved or be put into effect but even so the experience would be desperately clarifying. I have no confidence in 2ss but unless a serious attempt is made we won’t ever know what it might come to – and the evil status quo will continue.

      • Kathleen
        September 7, 2015, 10:02 am

        Hughes…Agree. What does Obama have to lose at this point? They would just be making it even more apparent that BB and team, many Israeli’s and right wing Zionist in this country do not want a two state solution. Never have wanted a two state solution. Never will.

    • MRW
      September 7, 2015, 2:53 am

      She was in tears on CNN this morning with Jake Tapper.

      BFD.

      • Kathleen
        September 7, 2015, 9:58 am

        As Gregg Rubin said on a post about DWS support for the deal over at Huff Po “Shouldn’t be that hard if your allegiance is to the USA and your President.”

        Reading about all of the tension between the WH and DWS. Sounds like P Obama would have liked to give DWS the boot out of her DNC chair position. Bet that possibility steered her towards doing the right thing. One would have hoped that her vote for would be based on the merits of the deal. However from what I know about the way DWS has voted about anything having to do with Israel there would be no evidence that she makes decisions based on facts.

  14. b.grand
    September 6, 2015, 1:05 pm

    1,000 Black activists, scholars and artists sign statement supporting freedom and equality for Palestinian people
    http://www.blackforpalestine.com/press-releases/1000-black-activists-scholars-and-artists-sign-statement-supporting-freedom-and-equality-for-palestinian-people1

    MHughes976, thank you for historical context. The CBC is also conflicted due to past support of Jewish activists for civil rights. But times are changing

  15. just
    September 6, 2015, 1:23 pm

    “Colin Powell and top Jewish Democrat back Iran deal in triumph for Obama

    … “It’s a pretty good deal,” Powell said on NBC’s Meet the Press. “These are remarkable changes, and so we have stopped this highway race that they were going down – and I think that’s very, very important.”

    While critics of the deal insist Iran cannot be trusted to comply with the terms of the deal, Powell expressed his confidence in the process agreed upon by Tehran and six world powers in July.

    “I think a very vigorous verification regime has been put into place,” Powell said. “I say, we have a deal, let’s see how they implement the deal. If they don’t implement it, bail out. None of our options are gone.”…”

    http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/sep/06/iran-deal-colin-powell-debbie-wasserman-schultz#comment-58927409

    What “highway race”??? Like Powell/any of Bushco has ANY credibility left, but he’s encouraged to pontificate on MTP.

    Perhaps he’ll change a few Republican minds/not. Where’s Condi Mushroom Cloud?

  16. just
    September 6, 2015, 2:24 pm

    O/T

    “Bernie Sanders leads Hillary Clinton in New Hampshire by nine points – poll

    Senator would receive backing of 41% of Democrats to Clinton’s 32%
    Clinton holds shrinking lead in Iowa, NBC finds”

    http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/sep/06/bernie-sanders-hillary-clinton-new-hampshire-poll#comment-58929663

    • echinococcus
      September 6, 2015, 4:00 pm

      So Sanders the Zionist leads Clinton II the Zionist. So what?

      • Marnie
        September 7, 2015, 12:24 am

        @echinococcus

        Really, isn’t there a 3rd choice out there?

      • echinococcus
        September 7, 2015, 12:34 am

        Marnie, I have no intention of debating US politics on this site.
        Yes, there is one candidate this far with a clear and fair non-Zionist Palestine policy (up to a point, being within the UN-imposed limits), Dr. Jill Stein. Others might come up later.

      • Marnie
        September 7, 2015, 1:17 am

        @echinococcus –

        Chill – I wasn’t looking for answers.

  17. Kathleen
    September 6, 2015, 4:30 pm

    Quite the conversation and comments on DWS shocking announcement to support the Iran deal over at Huff Po

  18. Scott
    September 6, 2015, 6:26 pm

    Important observation by Phil, really glad someone made it. Being semi-reactionary myself, I don’t embrace everything about black politics these days — but Obama, the Congressional Black Caucus. . . Andrew Young, it’s all good.
    If I were holding forth in my living room and trying to explain, I’d say that blacks are much less likely than gentile whites to be impressed/intimidated/cowed into silence and compliance by the narrative of Jewish suffering, the Holocaust, etc used by Israel’s right wing spokespeople.

  19. eGuard
    September 7, 2015, 8:25 am

    Phil: The new Israel lobbyists, liberal Zionists, are willing to work with American interest types and progressive groups.

    Horrifying. Why would those Zionists be less discriminatory? Being PEP is OK? First Phil describes the sensitivity to racism by the Black Caucus, and then suggests that “liberals” are free of racism? Recognise the leopard spots: Zionist firsters.

Leave a Reply