News

Group that promoted Gingrich sells ‘liberal case’ for Israel

The Israel issue is beginning to bedevil the Democratic base. Worried about the left’s effect on Democrats, the rightwing Israel Project is hosting a conference call this Wednesday that features an up-and-coming Democrat, Jonathan Miller, the former Kentucky state treasurer (said to be the first Jew to hold statewide office in Kentucky), who lately wrote a book promoting Israel.

The Israel Project promotes Newt Gingrich and Michele Bachmann and the Israeli settlements and a militant response to Iran. It’s liberal like Alan Dershowitz is liberal. But if your only issue is Israel, then you need to jump back and forth between parties to keep them both on board. Bill Kristol supports legalizing immigrants. Sheldon Adelson is pro-choice. These things don’t matter next to the crucial business of keeping both major political parties rightwing on Israel. Bill Clinton supported settlements. Carl Levin pushes the country toward war on Iran. 

Note the awareness in the Israel Project’s p.r. material that the left is lost to support for Israel. Also note the hysteria about Israel’s total destruction. TIP:

Author, lawyer and longtime public servant Jonathan Miller spent nearly two decades in politics before joining the private sector last year. A former two-term elected Kentucky State Treasurer, he is the author of the recently released book The Liberal Case for Israel: Debunking Eight Crazy Lies about the Jewish State,” in which he highlights deep factual misunderstandings, media disinformation, and the perpetuation of “Eight Crazy Lies” by those who seek the Jewish State’s total destruction.

Here’s a description of the book:

The type of progressive, enlightened government to which most American liberals desperately aspire can actually already be found in the reality of modern Israel. Indeed, there’s been no civilization or government in world history that has struggled more diligently to reflect the values that American progressives cherish: from gender equality, to gay and lesbian rights, to freedoms of speech and press, to a more compassionate capitalism. And yet, over the past several decades, some of the loudest voices on the American Left have directed much of their rhetorical foreign policy outrage against the Jewish State.

In “The Liberal Case for Israel,” Jonathan Miller — the former Kentucky State Treasurer and author of “The Compassionate Community: Ten Values to Unite America” — blames this disconnect on deep factual misunderstandings, media disinformation, and the perpetuation of “Eight Crazy Lies” by those who seek the Jewish State’s total destruction.

Miller exposes each of these “Crazy Lies” — which range from “apartheid” to “pinkwashing” to “vulgar capitalism” — and explains with concrete, incontrovertible evidence how in each case, a kind of perverse reversal of reality has taken hold, where Israel is blamed for violating the values that it has often been at the forefront of upholding….

5 Comments
Most Voted
Newest Oldest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Free Palestine. That’s the test. If the isrealis won’t do that — if they continue to hold half of the people under its control powerless, without recourse to the vote or the political or legal proceses while israel ships massive numbers of its people to steal the land out from under the Palestinians’ feet — then they deserve absolutely no support from liberals. Because no matter how progressive they are on other issues, it does not matter if they fail this one.

I just had a curious thought.

Since the pro-amnesty Kristol and the pro-abortion Adelson aren’t really conservative in the most classical sense(rather they are liberals in the classical sense, but that is obscured by the fact that most of those in America who call themselves liberals are actually social democrats, but I digress).

But what unites them and those on the more purebred version on the left is Israel. Israel is what makes their day go around. It’s almost literally what makes their life worth living, it seems.

So what would happen if the state as a Jewish state would give way to a genuine democracy, i.e., one citizen, one vote. Regardless of race, creed, religion or gender.

Would we see Adelson try to personally intervene and invade, with somekind of mercenary army, the territories and whip up civil war? Would Kristol and the boys coax the Republican donors within the Jewish community(Mel Sembler, Julian Singer et al) to pressure Congress to help the effort? Even attach U.S. armed forces?

And what if these efforts failed? What would be left of Adelson’s and Kristol’s meaning of their lives? It’s sort of hard seeing Adelson not becomming a completely broken man.

RE: “The Israel Project promotes Newt Gingrich and Michele Bachmann and the Israeli settlements and a militant response to Iran.” ~ Weiss

SEE: “Focus Grouping War with Iran”, by Laura Rozen, Mother Jones, 11/20/09

(excerpts) Laura Sonnenmark is a focus group regular. . .
. . .when she was called by a focus group organizer for a prospective assignment earlier this month, she was told the questions this time would be about something “political.”
On November 1 [2007], she went to the offices of Martin Focus Groups in Alexandria, Virginia, knowing she would be paid $150 for two hours of her time. After joining a half dozen other women in a conference room, she discovered that she had been called in for what seemed an unusual assignment: to help test-market language that could be used to sell military action against Iran to the American public. “The whole basis of the whole thing was, ‘we’re going to go into Iran and what do we have to do to get you guys to along with it?” says Sonnenmark, 49. . .
. . . According to Sonnenmark, two fliers distributed at the focus group session bore the logo and name of Freedom’s Watch, a high-powered, well-connected group of hawks [and largely funded by Sheldon Adelson] . . .
. . .Sonnenmark assumed Freedom’s Watch had arranged for the session. . .
. . . After an earlier version of this story attributing the focus group to Freedom’s Watch was posted, Jennifer Laszlo Mizrahi, the founder and president of the Israel Project, contacted Mother Jones and said that her group had commissioned the focus group and that it was designed by Public Opinion Strategies, a Republican polling firm. The Israel Project is a nonprofit group that supports Israel and conducts extensive polling on American public attitudes toward Israel and the Middle East. Its board of advisers includes 15 Democratic and Republican members of the House and the Senate, plus actor Ron Silver.
Mizrahi says that her group and Freedom’s Watch share a common interest in “thwarting the threat of Islamic extremism” and in “dealing with the threat of Iran.” But Freedom’s Watch “in no way is directing our work, and it’s not funding our work.” She pointed out that the Israel Project is not “involved with Iraq,” a major concern of Freedom’s Watch. But the two outfits, she said, “shared information” produced by this focus group. She insisted the focus group was designed to help the Israel Project promote “our belief in pushing sanctions.” She added, “We’re working day and night to persuade people the options [concerning Iran] are very limited. We’re pushing really aggressively on the economic and diplomatic fronts.”
Mizrahi confirmed that Freedom’s Watch material was distributed to members of the focus group but insisted that ads from “lots of other groups” were handed out. “We test a lot of messages,” she said. . .
. . . “Of all the focus groups I’ve ever been to,” Sonnenmark wrote in a subsequent email. . . “I’ve never seen a moderator who was so persistent in manipulating and leading the participants.” The gist of the event was “anti-Iranian,” says Sonnenmark. . . Sonnenmark left the session wondering if foreign policy hawks would soon be pushing publicly for military action against Iran using language that had been tested on her. . .

ENTIRE ARTICLE – http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2007/11/focus-grouping-war-iran