Fwd: Re: [Peace-discuss] Today's Letters to N-G = Radical Cult blindly follows research of Carl Estabrook!

David Green davegreen84 at yahoo.com
Thu Apr 12 12:24:42 CDT 2007 


    It has been interesting to see that the percentage of Jews expressing opposition to the occupation of Iraq has exceeded the level in the general population, even though at the inception of the war support among Jews reflected that of the general population. That is, while the general population has turned against the war, Jews have turned against the war even more.
   
  Again, however, I fear that some portion of this opposition reflects a discomfort that our continued occupation of Iraq, and the bad light it sheds on American ambitions, will reflect badly on the Israeli occupation and Israeli ambitions, as well as on Jews in this country, who have been so "well" represented in the neocon War Party. Thus I fear that some portion of Jewish opposition to the Iraq war reflects a tactical discomfort with the war, rather than an attitude that portends future opposition to military adventurism. They sense that at some point that it might be blamed on the Jews. Again, that's why it's important to reject the notion that the Israel Lobby was responsible for the invasion of Iraq.
   
  This can be taken as intuitive speculation on my part.
   
  DG

Robert Naiman <naiman.uiuc at gmail.com> wrote:
  I am certainly aware that, among some Jews in our community,
historically the evidence threshold for publicly declaring that
particular critics of Israeli policies are guilty of anti-Semitism has
been rather low. I don't think that there is any danger that I will
forget that. ;)

I certainly agree that the accusation of (intrinsic) anti-Semitism
against critics of Israeli and U.S. policies in the Middle East should
be confronted, here and elsewhere.

It would be interesting, I think, to put some of these issues to the
test in the form of a practical organizing project.

National poll data suggests that the opposition of American Jews to
the Iraq war is quite strong, stronger even than in the population as
a whole.

Now we have a referendum coming up on cutting funding for the U.S.
occupation of Iraq. We could, for example, try at some point to
circulate a broad statement in support of the referendum, and try to
get local Jewish organizations, and/or individuals active in the local
Jewish community, to sign on.

[By "broad statement" I mean statement crafted to try to win the
broadest support - e.g. it should not call for dismantling the U.S.
empire in 6 months.]

On 4/12/07, David Green wrote:
> Bob, I also appreciate your tireless efforts, and I do appreciate the idea
> that the tone of rhetoric is important, that it be consistent with our goals
> of peace and justice. I thank Carl for describing in clinical terms what I
> expressed in a more vernacular sense, although with some sense that what is
> most central does not get talked about, but displaced, and is being
> displaced on AWARE, not to mention Annette Williams. I would even admit to
> being neurotic myself by focusing on the peculiar relationship between Jews
> and the antiwar movement, rather than more fundamental issues of class and
> racial domination, including those that manifest themselves on a daily basis
> in our community.
>
> But let's not kid ourselves by denying that a significant number of Jews in
> our community who would call themselves liberal simply take for granted that
> AWARE is anti-Semitic. That's the connotation for AWARE at Sinai Temple and
> Jewish Federation. It might be good if this were confronted more openly.
>
> At the AWARE-sponsored panel in October, which I watched on television, Fred
> Jaher said that he opposed the invasion of Iraq from the start, but that
> Israel should have invaded Lebanon more aggressively than it did. What's
> being denied is the nature of U.S. hegemony in the Middle East, which he
> basically supports, and which makes his opposition to the Iraq invasion
> meaningless--I suspect he preferred to defame the antiwar movement for
> anti-Semitism rather than actively support it, whatever his tactical
> objections. I think that also characterizes the nature of the belated
> criticism of mainstream Jewish organizations, such as the Reformed Movement,
> of the invasion of Iraq. Indeed, they still claim that removing Hussein was
> correct, but that the occupation has been mishandled. At the same forum,
> Michael Shaprio described our invasion of Iraq as a "blunder," the most
> annoying and disingenuous word in the liberal lexicon. Again, this serves to
> deny the nature of U.S. policies, and to avoid drawing a connection between
> U.S. and Israeli polcies.
>
> The implied notion of some essential Jewish innocence or goodness, and the
> concurrent evil of anti-Semitism, is being used to avoid confronting the
> nature of American foreign policy.
>
> David
>
>
> Robert Naiman wrote:
> Let me say what I should have said earlier: that there is no limit to
> my appreciation of David's tireless defense of Palestinian rights.
>
> Still, I think that publicly ascribing mental illness to one's
> political opponents as an explanation of their stated political views
> is neither ethical nor in the interests of justice.
>
> It is unethical because it is dehumanizing.
>
> It is not in the interests of justice because, if there is to be any
> significant change in U.S. policy towards the Palestinians in the
> direction of justice as a result of domestic pressure, many more
> people have to be involved in the discussion than have been involved
> in the discussion in the past. In my experience, a significant barrier
> to the involvement of more people in the discussion is the credible
> belief that entrants to the discussion will be subjected to vicious
> personal attacks. Overwhelmingly, the responsibility for this
> situation belongs to so-called "supporters of Israel," for many of
> whom it appears to be a deliberate strategy to silence debate. But
> that is no reason to add to the problem.
>
> On 4/11/07, C. G. Estabrook wrote:
> > I don't think it's an insult but rather an acute analysis of the source
> > of these comments in opposition to us.
> >
> > David describes liberal Jews "struggling ... neurotically" with the
> > problem of resisting "cognitive dissonance while supporting U.S. and
> > Israeli depredations"; and he says he means "liberal in the positive
> > connotations of the word."
> >
> > "Neurosis" refers to anxiety from an unadmitted (often unconscious)
> > source, attached to another object, which is then misperceived (e.g., a
> > pathological fear of dogs or germs). That seems to me a precise
> > description of the attitude of those who think that the Bush war in the
> > ME is in Israel's interest, but without mentioning Israel, furiously
> > attack opponents of the war. Their anxiety's source is what they take
> > to be the interests of the Israeli state, but it's manifested as an
> > attack on the opponents of the war (which know is highly objectionable
> > and so don't "dare to offer a word in support" -- hence their "cognitive
> > dissonance"). --CGE
> >
> >
> > Robert Naiman wrote:
> > > Mightn't it be possible to disagree with views stated by Michael
> > > Shapiro and Fred Jaher without describing them as "neurotic"? What is
> > > accomplished by these personal insults?
> > >
> > > I find this personally offensive. Might it be possible to raise the
> > > standard of discourse around here?
> > >
> > > P.S. I like Michael Shapiro. Could the enemies list be pruned a bit? I
> > > figured there was no harm in askin'.
> > >
> > > On 4/11/07, David Green wrote:
> > >> Linda Kurtz is actually the same woman who a couple of years ago openly
> > >> insulted Hibba Leseman (sp?) at the Wal-Mart regarding her Islamic
> > >> apparel.
> > >> I believe that she or her husband is a Democratic precinct leader in
> > >> Champaign.
> > >>
> > >> Unfortunately, both of these writers appear to be at least nominally
> > >> Jewish,
> > >> and probably not by accident. It's become harder and harder for
> > >> liberal Jews
> > >> to resist cognitive dissonance while supporting U.S. and Israeli
> > >> depredations, a problem we saw both Fred Jaher and Michael Shapiro
> > >> struggling with rather neurotically while posturing as liberals (I mean
> > >> liberal in the positive connotations of the word) at the recent AWARE
> > >> panel.
> > >>
> > >> Both of these letter writers are crackpots, but neither of them dares
> to
> > >> offer a word in support of the Iraq war. What gets their goat is that
> > >> AWARE
> > >> promotes criticism of Israel, and threatens their triumphalist vision
> of
> > >> Judeo-Christian civilization. Their support for Israel allows them to
> > >> maintain the illusion that somehow U.S. motives in the Middle East have
> a
> > >> moral basis, and to see the world in moralistic terms. The useful role
> of
> > >> American support for Israel in serving to silence or tone down so much
> > >> potential dissent from influential people to general foreign polices
> > >> is just
> > >> one more reason to understand that it is not the Israel Lobby that is
> > >> fundamental to that support.
> > >>
> > >> DG
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> Jan & Durl Kruse wrote:
> > >> AWARE members offering bad advice
> > >>
> > >> Wednesday April 11, 2007
> > >>
> > >> With increased Democratic Party representation throughout government,
> > >> we can hope for policies that recognize that the function of a national
> > >> economy is not merely to increase the production of goods and services
> > >> but to distribute this plenty throughout the nation.
> > >>
> > >> But it is even more important that our representatives safeguard U.S.
> > >> interests worldwide by avoiding bad advice, such as that offered by a
> > >> local cult that calls itself AWARE.
> > >>
> > >> Its Web site professes a concern with the global spread of American
> > >> power, and its goal is to decrease American power. When AWARE members
> > >> peddle a plan to the Urbana City Council, they do not disclose their
> > >> belief that the U.S. has too much global power, and that's an excellent
> > >> strategy. Even Urbana residents realize that the U.S. has a moral
> > >> obligation to use our power for right, not wrong. Without that power,
> > >> someone else's notions of right will prevail. At present it is radical
> > >> Islam that has an opposing notion of right and wrong.
> > >>
> > >> AWARE also professes a concern with the increased militarization of
> > >> society. Al-Qaida, Taliban, Hezbollah, Sunni insurgents in Iraq, Shiite
> > >> death squads – AWARE is onto something here. These groups, however,
> > >> hate the U.S. and hate the existence of Israel, so AWARE cuts them
> > >> endless slack. To AWARE, they are resisters of foreign domination and
> > >> protectors of sacred heritages. It is the sight of a U.S. serviceman
> > >> proudly wearing his uniform while speaking at a school that sends AWARE
> > >> members into a foot-stamping snit.
> > >>
> > >> AWARE supporters do not belong in any position of public
> responsibility.
> > >>
> > >> I. DAVID BERG
> > >>
> > >> Urbana
> > >> Find this article at:
> > >>
> > >>
> http://www.news-gazette.com/news/opinions/letters/2007/04/11/
> > >> aware_members_offering_bad_advice
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> Council candidate a member of AWARE
> > >>
> > >> Wednesday April 11, 2007
> > >>
> > >> Champaign voters be AWARE. Annette Williams, candidate for Champaign
> > >> City Council, is an active member of the radical group AWARE. She is
> > >> endorsed by and admits to blindly following the research of Carl
> > >> Estabrook. Is this a person you want on your city council? I hope not.
> > >>
> > >> LINDA KURTZ
> > >>
> > >> Champaign
> > >> Find this article at:
> > >>
> http://www.news-gazette.com/news/opinions/letters/2007/04/11/
> > >> council_candidate_a_member_of_aware
> > >>
> >
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> 8:00? 8:25? 8:40? Find a flick in no time
> with theYahoo! Search movie showtime shortcut.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Peace-discuss mailing list
> Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net
> http://lists.chambana.net/cgi-bin/listinfo/peace-discuss
>
>

    
---------------------------------
  Don't be flakey. Get Yahoo! Mail for Mobile and 
always stay connected to friends.

       
---------------------------------
It's here! Your new message!
Get new email alerts with the free Yahoo! Toolbar.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.chambana.net/cgi-bin/private/peace-discuss/attachments/20070412/71e3477b/attachment.htm

More information about the Peace-discuss mailing list