Showing posts with label Michael Oren. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Michael Oren. Show all posts

Sunday, 16 October 2011

Israel Matzav: It's better to be alone than in bad company


It's better to be alone than in bad company

Israel's ambassador to the United States, Michael Oren, says that it's better to be alone than in bad company. Nevertheless, he denies recent claims on the New York Times' editorial page that Israel is alone.
Israel, in fact, is significantly less isolated than at many times in its history. Before the 1967 Six-Day War, Israel faced a belligerent Egypt and Jordan and a hostile Soviet bloc, Greece, India and China — all without strategic ties with the United States. Today, Israel has peace treaties with Egypt and Jordan; excellent relations with the nations of Eastern Europe as well as Greece, India and China; and an unbreakable alliance with America. Many democracies, including Canada, Italy and the Czech Republic, stand staunchly with us. Israel has more legations abroad than ever before and recently joined the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, which comprises the most globally integrated countries. Indeed, Egypt and Germany mediated the upcoming release of Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit, who had been held hostage by Hamas for five years.

Israel is not responsible for the upheavals in the Arab world or for the lack of freedom that triggered them. Israelis did not elect Turkey’s Islamic-minded government or urge Syria’s army to fire on its citizens. Conversely, no change in Israeli policies can alter the historic processes transforming the region. Still, some commentators claim that, by refusing to freeze settlement construction on the West Bank and insisting on defensible borders and security guarantees, Israel isolates itself.

The settlements are not the core of the conflict. Arabs attacked us for 50 years before the first settlements were built. Netanyahu froze new construction in the settlements for an unprecedented 10 months, and still the Palestinians refused to negotiate. Settlements are not the reason that Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas signed a unity pact with Hamas in May, or why, in his address to the U.N. General Assembly last month, Abbas denied the Jews’ 4,000-year connection to our homeland. As Abbas wrote in the New York Times in May, the Palestinian attempt to declare a state without making peace with Israel was about “internationalization of the conflict . . . to pursue claims against Israel” in the United Nations, not about settlements.

As for borders and security, Israel’s position reflects the 2005 withdrawal from Gaza. After uprooting all our settlements, we received not peace but thousands of Hamas rockets fired at our civilians. In Lebanon, a U.N. peace force watched while Hezbollah amassed an arsenal of 50,000 missiles. Israel’s need for defensible borders and for a long-term Israeli army presence to prevent arms smuggling into any Palestinian state is, for us, a life-and-death issue. Moreover, in a rapidly changing Middle East, we need assurances of our ability to defend ourselves if the Palestinians who support peace are overthrown by those opposed to it.
Well, yeah.

Israel Matzav: It's better to be alone than in bad company

Tuesday, 9 March 2010

Love of the Land: Anti-Israeli student 'activists' don't take risks – they just give smug interviews to Iranian TV

Anti-Israeli student 'activists' don't take risks – they just give smug interviews to Iranian TV


Stephanie Gutmann
Telegraph.co.uk
09 March '10

“Stand with the Irvine 11!” blared the email in my inbox this morning. “OK,” I thought groggily, “but which one of the dozens of activists sending me email are you and why are you appropriating the jargon of Sixties activism?”

As I read the bold type and caps-filled missive it turned out that the Irvine 11 are some of the students, the ones who were actually arrested, a few weeks ago at the University of California, Irvine campus when they refused to let an audience of nearly 500 hear Israeli ambassador Michael Oren deliver a speech.

The young activists used a tactic I’d never seen before, one that can superficially represent it self as “vocalizing dissent” in a “non-violent and non-threatening manner” (as their press release puts it) but actually works quite effectively to silence.

Oren had just began his lecture when a solitary student popped out of the crowd and began yelling (”killer”, “war criminal” etc.). Eventually an obsequious campus officials persuaded him to leave the room. Oren resumed, but then another howler sprung to his feet from a different part of the room. Calm was restored – for a second. And then, again: a man, popping throat veins, pumping fist, screaming, unintelligibly but very loud.

It was a particularly nerve-jangling tactic because one had no idea when and where the next screamer would pop up, if the disruption was really over or just on hiatus. This tension alone was enough to thoroughly shift the focus away from Oren even when the room seemed to be under control. The activists had, in effect, made themselves the subject. There was, of course (due process and all) no way to remove them en bloc, so the audience had to wait till each and every demonstrator had done his bit.

(Read full article)

Related: Muslim students disrupt Israel Amb. Michael Oren's talk


Love of the Land: Anti-Israeli student 'activists' don't take risks – they just give smug interviews to Iranian TV

Sunday, 21 February 2010

Love of the Land: The ADL Is Wrong: Boycotts Can Be Kosher

The ADL Is Wrong: Boycotts Can Be Kosher


Jonathan Tobin
Contentions/Commentary
19 February '10

A long simmering dispute about the level of anti-Israel and anti-Semitic incitement going on at the University of California at Irvine has prompted a debate between Jewish groups about the propriety of academic boycotts. After the latest incident in which heckler disrupted a speech being given by Michael Oren — Israel’s ambassador to the United States — at the school’s campus, the Zionist Organization of America has called for donors to cease making contributions to the institution and for students to stop applying to the school. But the Anti-Defamation League says this is a mistake, since such boycotts are a “double-edged sword that legitimizes a tactic so often used against Jews and Israel.”

The problem with UC Irvine goes deeper than just the bunch of loudmouths who interrupted Oren. For a number of years, the Irvine campus’s Muslim Student Union and its leftist allies have made the school a haven of Israel-and-Jew bashing without the university’s administration doing much or anything about it. The result has apparently been the creation of a hostile atmosphere for Jewish students. Repeated attempts to get the university to address the grievances of the Jewish community have failed. After years of talking about the problem, the ZOA has apparently concluded that the only thing the school will understand is a boycott that will bring home to them that their indulgence of radical anti-Israel and anti-Jewish elements has consequences. The ADL prefers to keep the lines of communications open with the university and, in its usual manner, spends as much time complimenting the administration for the little it has done as it does criticizing them for their obvious failures.

(Read full post)


Love of the Land: The ADL Is Wrong: Boycotts Can Be Kosher

Wednesday, 17 February 2010

Love of the Land: J Street’s Agenda Remains Irrelevant to Middle East Realities

J Street’s Agenda Remains Irrelevant to Middle East Realities


Jonathan Tobin
Contentions/Commentary
16 February '10

The Jewish Telegraphic Agency reports that Israel’s ambassador to the U.S., Michael Oren, threw the left-wing lobby J Street a few bones in an interview last week. JTA quotes Oren as telling a California Jewish newspaper that the “J Street controversy has come a long way toward resolving. The major concern with J Street was their position on security issues, not the peace process. J Street has now come and supported Congressman [Howard] Berman’s Iran sanction bill; it has condemned the Goldstone report; it has denounced the British court’s decision to try Tzipi Livni for war crimes, which puts J Street much more into the mainstream.”

By refusing to appear at J Street’s conference last fall and saying that its views on Israel were “dangerous,” Oren demonstrated Israel’s impatience with a lobby whose agenda was solely focused on instigating pressure on Israel from the Obama administration while foiling pressure on Iran. It’s understandable that Oren would attempt to reward some moderation in their stands. His priority is to aid the assembly of the largest possible coalition of support for Israel, not to punish those whose efforts are, at best, less than helpful. However, to the extent that J Street is trying to behave like a mainstream organization — an assumption that is certainly open to debate — this change reflects two important factors.

First is the complete irrelevance of J Street’s main idea: that there is a need for a Jewish lobby whose purpose is to push Washington to push Israel to make peace. As the events of the last year continue to prove, the obstacle to peace remains the Palestinians and their political culture of violence and hatred for Israel. As much as the Jewish Left has gained in the United States during the Obama presidency, the Left in Israel is as close to dead as it can be. That’s because the overwhelming majority of Israelis understand that after Oslo’s false promises, Arafat’s refusal of a state in the West Bank and Jerusalem in 2000 and 2001, and Mahmoud Abbas’s refusal of an even more generous offer in 2008, the Palestinian nationalist movement Fatah has proved it is not interested in a state as long as that state must live in peace alongside Israel. That the even more extreme Hamas terrorist movement controls Gaza and might expand someday into the West Bank if Israel abandons its security presence there has rendered the idea of further concessions and withdrawals absurd. This is a political reality that no amount of pressure from either Obama or the American Left can alter.

(Read full post)


Love of the Land: J Street’s Agenda Remains Irrelevant to Middle East Realities

Thursday, 11 February 2010

Love of the Land: Muslim students disrupt Israel Amb. Michael Oren's talk

Muslim students disrupt Israel Amb. Michael Oren's talk


Democast
09 February '10

Israel's U.S. Ambassador Oren withstands 10 antagonistic disruptions by Univ Calif Irvine Muslim Students Union to deliver speech about middle-east relations to capacity audience. Police Chief comments on arrest of 12 Muslim agitators. Palestinian and Zionist attendees comment on audacious conduct of alleged Muslim Brotherhood-linked, M.S.U. Full speech and interviews - 48 min.

(Quite a circus, but Amb. Oren handled it well. A very interesting interview at 39:44 of Ghazi Brighith, formerly of Beit Lechem, who now has refugee status in the U.S. and attended Oren's presentation. Very outspoken and well spoken. Y.)



Related article: Another wild night on campus reminds college adminstrators why they daren't displease their Islamist students


Love of the Land: Muslim students disrupt Israel Amb. Michael Oren's talk

Wednesday, 10 February 2010

Love of the Land: The Middle East Comes to Irvine

The Middle East Comes to Irvine


Jeffrey Goldberg
The Atlantic
09 February '10

Michael Oren, the Israeli ambassador to the U.S., tried to give a speech at UC Irvine but was shouted down by Muslim protesters, who apparently weren't equipped to argue with Oren, just drive him from the stage. All this is par for the course, but I did find this one bit of information amusing:

The Muslim Student Union said in its statement: "We strongly condemn the university for cosponsoring, and therefore, inadvertently supporting the ambassador of a state that is condemned by more UN Human Rights Council resolutions than all other countries in the world combined."


To the Muslim Student Union, the fact that the UN Human Rights Council has condemned Israel more than all the other countries of the world combined means that Israel is worse than all the other countries of the world combined. To more rational, less prejudiced people, this fact means that the UN Human Rights Council is not a serious organization, but one under the control of dictators and despots. (See: Banned Speech: The UN Council That Created the Goldstone Report)

Related Article/Video: 12 arrested for disrupting Israeli ambassador
.

Love of the Land: The Middle East Comes to Irvine

Tuesday, 9 February 2010

Love of the Land: 12 arrested for disrupting Israeli ambassador

12 arrested for disrupting Israeli ambassador


Orange County Register
Gary Robbins
08 February '10

Twelve people were arrested this evening during a raucous lecture at UC Irvine where Israeli Ambassador Michael Oren came to talk about U.S.-Israel relations. Oren was interrupted 10 times while trying to give his speech before 500 people at the UCI Student Center, where there was heavy security. Oren took a 20 minute break after the fourth protest, asked for hospitality and resumed his speech, only to be interrupted again by young men yelling at him every few minutes. Many members of the audience also applauded Oren.



After the 10th interruption, several dozens students who opposed Oren’s talk got up and walked out and staged a protest outside. It is not clear whether they were members of the UCI Muslim Student Union, which issued an email earlier in the day condemning Oren’s appearance on campus.

(Read full article)

Hours earlier, UCI’s Muslim Student Union said in an email today that its members “condemn and oppose the presence of Michael Oren, the ambassador of Israel to the United States, on our campus today. We resent that the Law School and the Political Science Department on our campus have agreed to cosponsor a public figure who represents a state that continues to break international and humanitarian law and is condemned by more UN Human Rights Council resolutions than all other countries in the world combined.

Related viewing: Obsessive and Compulsive, The Obsession with Israel

Love of the Land: 12 arrested for disrupting Israeli ambassador

Wednesday, 30 December 2009

Love of the Land: Blaming Israel First

Blaming Israel First


P. David Hornik
FrontPageMag.com
30 December 09

From Van Jones to Valerie Jarrett, the Obama has made a series of politically extreme personnel appointments that it has since come to regret. Its latest hire bids fair to continue the pattern. President Obama has appointed an “anti-Semitism czar,” Hannah Rosenthal, who appears singularly unqualified for the job. Her first target of criticism has not been an anti-Semitic exponent or event. Rather, it is Israel’s Jewish ambassador to the U.S., Michael Oren, who has drawn her ire for the offense of disparaging a liberal group with which Rosenthal has been affiliated.

Not surprisingly for a liberal-Democratic administration, Rosenthal has a liberal-Democratic background. She worked for the Department of Health and Human Services during the Clinton administration, and in 1992 and 1996 was a leader of the Wisconsin Clinton-Gore campaigns. From 2000 to 2005 she was executive director of the liberal Jewish Council for Public Affairs. More recently she’s been on the advisory council of the ostensibly “pro-Israel, pro-peace” J Street and JStreetPAC.

Ideally, it shouldn’t matter. Isn’t “to monitor and combat anti-Semitism”—from the “anti-Semitism czar’s” official job title—a bipartisan concern for Jews and a consensus concern for all decent people? Unfortunately, it’s not that simple. Some Jews define themselves highly invidiously in opposition to other Jews. Rosenthal appears to be one of them.

(Read full article)


Love of the Land: Blaming Israel First

Tuesday, 29 December 2009

Love of the Land: Hannah Rosenthal's new problem

Hannah Rosenthal's new problem


Shmuel Rosner
Rosner's Domain
29 December 09


Hannah Rosenthal ("officially a burden") tells Tablet that A. she's still going to Washington, B. that the headline "exaggerated what she actually said" and C. that “I don’t think a reporter asking me about J Street is out of bounds, and I don’t think my answer was out of bounds.”


A isn't at all surprising. With B I tend to agree (Kampeas explains why the Haaretz piece was somewhat problematic). But C is a downer. Rosenthal either denies what she knows to be the obvious truth: she was out of bounds. Or - even more problematic - she doesn't get it. Maybe reading Jeffry Goldberg's recent post can assist:


I asked three people who currently work in the State Department if they could recall an instance in which an official of their department ever criticized a foreign ambassador for such a thing -- or for anything -- and they said no. In fact, the State Department is fairly upset at Rosenthal for speaking at all about the alleged political proclivities of a foreign ambassador, not about her specific criticism. It is this behavior that has put her beyond the pale...


(Read full post)


Love of the Land: Hannah Rosenthal's new problem

Sunday, 27 December 2009

Love of the Land: Obama Anti-Semitism Czar's First Target: Israeli Ambassador to the US

Obama Anti-Semitism Czar's First Target: Israeli Ambassador to the US


Michael Goldfarb
The Weekly Standard
24 December 09

About a month and a half ago we noted that President Obama's choice to serve as the administration's "anti-Semitism czar" was Hannah Rosenthal, a J Street board member who had herself been criticized by the Anti-Defamation League. Being rebuked by the ADL (and being a J Streeter) did not bode well for Rosenthal's tenure. A month later and Rosenthal is already causing headaches for the administration. Surprise, surprise, the anti-Semitism czar's first target is none other than the Israeli Ambassador to the United States, Michael Oren (who -- sources tell me -- is Jewish). What was Oren's offense? Slighting Rosenthal's friends at J Street:

Remarks by Israel's ambassador to the United States, Michael Oren, against the liberal Jewish lobby J Street were "most unfortunate" according to Hannah Rosenthal, head of the U.S. administration's Office to Monitor and Combat Anti-Semitism....

Rosenthal, who also served on the board of directors of left-wing group Americans for Peace Now, said she believed Oren "would have learned a lot" if he had participated in J Street's conference.

An official with a leading Jewish organization in Washington emails to say that "this is a matter of deep concern and raises real questions about her ability to do the job. There is no precendent that I can recall for a US official -- let alone a diplomat -- to so recklessly criticize another nation's ambassador from any country, ever, like this. While it seems obvious she was not reading from a State Department speech, it begs the question -- is she expressing offical American policy? If not, one would certainly hope the administration would say so. How would one know otherwise? People are outraged and they are telling the White House that, I am sure."

Are there not enough anti-Semites to keep Rosenthal busy even for a month before she starts attacking the Jews? It's as if Melanne Verveer had attacked Ayaan Hirsi Ali during her first month on the job, or if Carol Browner had gone after the head of Greenpeace. Still, I'm less interested in whether Rosenthal was acting in an official capacity when she attacked the Israeli Ambassador, but whether she was carrying out her official duties to combat and monitor anti-Semitism while she attended the J Street conference -- and when can we expect her report.


Love of the Land: Obama Anti-Semitism Czar's First Target: Israeli Ambassador to the US

Friday, 25 December 2009

Love of the Land: Hannah Rosenthal is officially a burden

Hannah Rosenthal is officially a burden


ShmuelRosner
Rosner's Domain
25 December 09
Posted prior to Shabbat

For those used to worry about big-mouth Israeli officials - especially those Americans who constantly complain (and rightly so) about the inability of official Israel to just shut the hell up - here's a refreshingly rare opportunity for some pay-back. Apparently, Obama's head of the anti-anti-Semitism office, Hannah Rosenthal, has decided that her real battle should be against Israel's ambassador to Washington, Michael Oren. Here's what she had to say:

Remarks by Israel's ambassador to the United States, Michael Oren, against the liberal Jewish lobby J Street were "most unfortunate" according to Hannah Rosenthal, head of the U.S. administration's Office to Monitor and Combat Anti-Semitism... Rosenthal, who also served on the board of directors of left-wing group Americans for Peace Now, said she believed Oren "would have learned a lot" if he had participated in J Street's conference. "I came away realizing what a generational divide there is and I don't know how it is in Israel. Young people want to be part of the discussion, they feel they have fresh ideas and they feel that we have to end the stalemate," she said. Rosenthal strongly believes that new and different voices need to be heard regarding Israel in the American Jewish community. "We need to have as many people coming together to try and put an end to this crisis, the matzav [situation] can not continue - it's unacceptable and that's why I always paid my membership to AIPAC, but I have always paid my membership to Americans for Peace Now - because they all need to be supported and they all need to be at the table."

Rosenthal was already criticized by some Jewish organization. And Alan Solow of the Conference of Presidents, with measured and well crafted statement, had it just about right:

It is inappropriate for the anti-Semitism envoy to be expressing her personal views on the positions Ambassador Oren has taken as well as on the subject of who needs to be heard from in the Jewish community. Such statements have nothing to do with her responsibilities and, based upon comments I am already receiving, could threaten to limit her effectiveness in the area for which she is actually responsible.

(Read full post)

Love of the Land: Hannah Rosenthal is officially a burden

Love of the Land: US diplomat slammed for criticizing Oren

US diplomat slammed for criticizing Oren


Haviv Retig Gur
International/JPost
25 December 09

(No surprises here. See related article below.)

Major Jewish organizations on Thursday blasted an Obama administration diplomat with connections to J Street for criticizing Israeli Ambassador Michael Oren in a newspaper interview.

Hannah Rosenthal, a former J Street board member, currently serves as the State Department's director of the Office to Monitor and Combat Anti-Semitism.

Rosenthal criticized Oren for refusing to attend the recent conference of the left-wing Jewish group J Street because of deep disagreements between the organization's platform and the Israeli government's positions on issues ranging from Iran to peace negotiations with the Palestinians.

Rosenthal called Oren's refusal "most unfortunate" and said he "would have learned a lot" had he attended the conference, which was held in Washington in October.

"I was surprised to see an official of the American government commenting on the positions taken by Ambassador Oren," said Alan Solow, who is a long-time supporter of US President Barack Obama, is considered close to the administration, and is the chairman of the New York-based Conference of Presidents.

Rosenthal's comments "go beyond her responsibilities," he said, and reflected only her "personal feelings."

(Read full article)

Related: Obama picks deaf person to tune piano

Love of the Land: US diplomat slammed for criticizing Oren

Saturday, 17 October 2009

Love of the Land: Now I'm Not Going to Be as Nice as My Partner...

Now I'm Not Going to Be as Nice as My Partner...

posted by parrhesia
Jstreetjive.com
14 October 09




The BAD COP just walked into the interrogation room. Ben Ami buddy and beneath- the- radar J Street operative, M J Rosenberg got tag-teamed by his boss to apply the brass knuckles to Ambassador Michael Oren. Screeding on the Huffington Post, Rosenberg, who, like his comrade, Jim Gerstein, pretends not to be intimately connected to the nexus propelling the anti-Israel group, delivered the "or else" message to the Israeli Foreign Ministry. There are obviously serious doubts about the existence of The Israel Lobby, but now there are no doubts concerning the existence and influence of The
Anti Israel Lobby
.

Imagine the effrontery of the distinguished scholar and statesman, Michael Oren, declining to attend a three day lynching of the country that he has put his life on the line for multiple times. Imagine his reluctance to hobnob with phony "supporters" of Israel who appear to be more supportive of Ahmadinejad and the Mullahs than of the democratically elected government of Israel. Imagine the gall of this man hesitating to attend the "destroy the settlements" soiree directed by Obama and carried out by his toadies. What nerve for Ambassador Oren to not lend his prestigious name to a group of "Pro Peaceniks" who want fair play for Iran.

Rosenberg is a Senior Fellow for the George Soros funded (via his Democracy Alliance group) Media Matters hard left organization. Among other accomplishments, Rosenberg was a staunch defender of the unqualified supporter of the Walt/Mearsheimer conspiracy canard, Chas Freeman, whose nomination for head of the National Intelligence Council by Obama was derailed when his intense anti-Israel and pro Chinese track record came to light.

Ben Ami delivered the condescending "plea" to Ambassador Oren while his bad cop partner applied the rubber truncheon.

Heady days for J Street, flush with funny money, Saudi lobbyists and State Department Arabists. Look for the background involvement of the shadowy Tides Foundation and the Grass Roots Policy Project (Anne Bartley) all interlocking with the puppet master, the bizarre and deep pocketed Soros.

Love of the Land: Now I'm Not Going to Be as Nice as My Partner...

Friday, 16 October 2009

Love of the Land: J Street’s Threat to Israel

J Street’s Threat to Israel


David Hornik
Frontpagemag.com
15 October 09

As if Richard Goldstone wasn’t enough, the community of loyal Jews also has to cope—increasingly—with J Street.

J Street is holding a conference in Washington later this month, and it’s trying to get the Israeli ambassador to the U.S., Michael Oren, to come to it. Oren has yet to accept.

Granted, the dimensions of the conference don’t look too imposing: over a thousand people including 250 college students, a predictable rostrum of lefty organizations like the New Israel Fund, the Israel Policy Forum, and Americans for Peace Now. Of more concern is that over 160 members of Congress are on the host committee for the Gala Dinner that’s part of the conference.

In other words, with this sort of AIPAC-aping, J Street wants to wield influence on the Hill and challenge the traditional lobby’s power. J Street very much wants Oren—even though he holds, and would express, non-J Street views—to show up and bestow Israeli-government legitimacy on the proceedings. The difference, though, between AIPAC and J Street is that while the former is deferential to Israeli democracy as embodied by elected Israeli governments, J Street knows no such humility.

Indeed, the Israeli embassy in Washington has reportedly “informed J Street of its concern that the new lobbying group advocates policies that could ‘impair Israel’s interests.’” Those include not only backing President Obama’s—recently softened—demand for a complete “settlement” freeze even in sovereign Jerusalem but also opposing sanctions on Iran. Or as J Street’s website puts it:

J Street believes that the immediate imposition of harsher sanctions on Iran would be counterproductive.… We do not rule out the option of deeper and more targeted sanctions in the future.… But at this time we urge Congress and the President to exercise strategic patience. We ask Congress not to move forward at this time with further sanctions….

J Street, that is, has a patience—even regarding sanctions—that is not shared by Israelis in Shihab-range amid continuing reports of Iran’s rapid progress toward the bomb.

J Street, however, keeps going after Oren and now its director, Jeremy Ben-Ami, has published an open letter to him “to reiterate an invitation to you to address” the upcoming conference.

Ben-Ami, who has a persistent “protesting too much” tendency when avowing his devotion to Israel, apprises Oren that J Street is “a burgeoning movement that loves Israel, cares about its future, and believes only peaceful and immediate resolution of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict can secure Israel’s future as the democratic home of the Jewish people.”

He goes on:

You seem well aware…that the connection to Israel for a large number of Jewish Americans has become strained over time…. There is a generational dimension to these trends as well…. Young, liberal Jews have even less connection to Israel than their parents and grandparents, and they talk more openly about the challenges and difficulties facing Israel and about its responses.

But Ben-Ami assures Oren that help is on the way:

There is good news, however. The excitement that J Street has generated and its rapid early growth indicates that there is a thirst in the progressive Jewish community—and among young liberal Jews—to find a way to relate to, to talk about and, yes, to advocate for Israel that is consistent with progressive Jewish values…. Public comments by your spokesman last week indicate that you have “concerns over certain policies [of J Street’s] that could impair Israel’s interests.” I’m sure you also have concerns and disagreements over policies advocated by certain political parties and their leaders in Israel. That’s democracy….

Yes, and that’s what Ben-Ami doesn’t get—or more accurately, doesn’t care about: the Israeli parties and leaders Oren may disagree with are currently not in power because they did badly in the last Israeli elections. J Street is not Israeli and not part of Israeli democracy. That American Jews are, like everyone else, free to disagree with and criticize policies of democratically elected Israeli governments is obvious. Ben-Ami claims quite a different prerogative: to exploit his Jewish background in order to override Israeli policy, by getting the U.S. government to foist policies on Israel that Israel doesn’t want.

If that isn’t clear enough, Ben-Ami goes on to make it so by assuming toward Oren—that is, Israel—what can only be called a threatening posture:

We too have our own serious concerns over the policies of the present Israeli government and its impact not just on Israel’s interests but on our interests as Americans and as American Jews. As Jews who care about Israel [there it is again—protesting too much], we fear that, on Israel’s present path, we will see our shared dream of a Jewish, democratic home in the state of Israel slip through our fingers.

As Americans, we worry about the impact of Israeli policies on vital US interests in the Middle East and around the world.

Finally, as American Jews, we worry that the health and vitality of our community will be deeply affected by what happens in the region, how the world perceives Israel and by how our community here at home deals with increasingly complex conversations around Israel.

That gets closer to the real J Street message to Israel, which is: “We want peace over there in Israel and Palestine, and we want it now. (As for the Israeli reasons for skepticism about such peace—Hamas, rockets, Palestinian Authority rejection of all peace offers, Fatah belligerency, incitement, no Israel on Palestinian Authority maps, etc.—don’t bore us with facts.) You ruffian Israelis are embarrassing us progressive American Jews and if you don’t stop, we can get you to stop. Your calls for sanctions on Iran are more of the same pugnacious behavior that’s discomfiting us over here, and you’d be well advised to desist from it.”

Considering its well-documented Saudi ties, still-darker motives can of course be attributed to J Street. “Love” for Israel would somehow have to be mixed with respect. Genuine friends of Israel, outside and inside of government, Jewish and non-Jewish—who need not agree with all of its policies but respect its autonomy and democracy—should beware of what J Street really is and the threat it poses.


Love of the Land: J Street’s Threat to Israel

Thursday, 24 September 2009

Israel Matzav: Israel's Gaza civilian to military kill ratio much lower than NATO's in Serbia

Israel's Gaza civilian to military kill ratio much lower than NATO's in Serbia

In an op-ed in Thursday's Boston Globe, Michael Oren, Israel's ambassador to the US, discusses the number of civilian casualties caused by Operation Cast Lead.

Despite Hamas’s cynical use of civilians as human shields, the Israel Defense Forces repeatedly called off operations deemed too dangerous to civilian populations and endangered its own troops by warning Palestinian neighborhoods of impending attacks. Yet even the most moral army can make mistakes, especially in dense urban warfare; for every Serbian soldier killed by NATO in 1999, for example, four civilians died. By comparison, more than half of the Palestinian casualties in Gaza were military. Still, Israel launched investigations into some 100 cases of alleged misconduct by its soldiers, 23 of which continue. If found guilty, as one soldier already has been, the perpetrators will be brought to justice under Israel’s internationally respected legal system.

I'll bet many of you who are not news junkies didn't know that the military to civilian kill ratio was 1:4 in Serbia as compared with 1:less than 1 in Gaza.

But of course, Oren is using the Israeli figures of who is a civilian and who is a terrorist, since they are by far the most reliable. What's more amazing is that even had he accepted the Hamas figures, the ratio would still have been less than 1:4. And I doubt that anyone in the West would accuse the US military of deliberately perpetrating a massacre.

The fact that the IDF's civilian kill ratio was much lower than other Western armies is something that needs to be stressed in the media in the post-Goldstone Report period.

The picture at the top is an example of a terrorist whom Hamas classified as a civilian. You can find out more about him here.

Israel Matzav: Israel's Gaza civilian to military kill ratio much lower than NATO's in Serbia

Monday, 21 September 2009

Israel Matzav: Ambassador Michael Oren's Rosh HaShana letter to the Jewish community

Ambassador Michael Oren's Rosh HaShana letter to the Jewish community

This open letter to the American Jewish community below was sent by Israel's ambassador to the United States, Michael Oren (Hat Tip: Lance K).
Notice how much of the letter is devoted to Iran. I hope you all had the threat to Israel from Iran in mind during your prayers this weekend, and that you will do so on Yom Kippur as well. For those who are familiar with the Shmoneh Esrei prayer, I personally find the the three paragraphs that begin "u'v'chein tein" to be the most appropriate place to have this in mind. Your mileage may vary.

For those who cannot read it from the picture above, here is the full text of Ambassador Oren's letter:
September 17, 2009

Dear Rabbis, community leaders and friends:

This month, Jews throughout the world will celebrate the New Year of 5770. Both Rosh Hashanah and Yom Kippur instruct us to reflect on our previous year and prepare for the year to come.

This past year, Israel has made significant accomplishments. Our scientists are unlocking the secrets of the human body to discover new cures for diseases. Israeli art, film, and literature received prestigious recognition from internationally renowned institutions. The Israeli economy was one of the first countries to emerge from the economic recession.

In spite of a year of many achievements in a variety of fields, these are challenging times for the State of Israel and the Jewish people. The direst threat to Israel—indeed to the Middle East and the world—is a nuclear armed Iran.

Iran's support for terrorism, its commitment to Israel's destruction, and its determination to produce nuclear weapons represents the most pressing issue of our time. Iran has repeatedly demonstrated its refusal to accept norms of democracy and civility. Iranian security forces killed dozens of their fellow citizens in the aftermath of the recent elections and Iranian judges routinely sentence juvenile offenders to death. Last month, President Ahmadinejad appointed an internationally-wanted terrorist, the mastermind of the murderous attack on the Jewish Center in Buenos Aires in 1994, as his defense minister. The president has publicly called for a world without Zionism and America.

While uniting against the Iranian threat, Israel also seeks American and international support in moving toward a permanent, sustainable peace. Israel will continue to reach out to Palestinian leaders without preconditions in the hope of realizing this dream in our lifetime.

We are facing a critical juncture in our history. The Jewish community must confront this unprecedented threat before it is too late. I urge you as leaders of the Jewish community to impress this situation on your congregations. It is imperative to act now, at the start of a new year, and to join our voices in doing what absolutely necessary to stop the Iranian nuclear threat.

L’Shana Tova U’Metuka,

Michael Oren
Israeli Ambassador to the United States


Israel Matzav: Ambassador Michael Oren's Rosh HaShana letter to the Jewish community

Thursday, 17 September 2009

Israel Matzav: Michael Oren on the Goldstone Report

Michael Oren on the Goldstone Report

Israeli ambassador to the United States Michael Oren was interviewed by PBS about the Goldstone report. Here is part of that interview.

GWEN IFILL: Why didn't Israel participate, cooperate, tell its side of the story to this U.N. commission?

MICHAEL OREN: Well, first of all, the Human Rights Commission has condemned Israel more frequently than all other nations in the world combined, more than Libya, more than North Korea, more than Saudi Arabia. It's hardly an impartial body. This is the same Human Rights Commission that completely ignored Hamas rocket fire into Israel over the course of four years.

The mandate of the commission said that Israel was guilty of war crimes, said nothing about Hamas in the actual mandate. Even one of the judges involved in the commission had published a letter accusing Israel of unwarranted aggression.

And then, finally, the commission itself, the report, the investigation took place under the auspices of the Hamas-run government in Gaza. Hamas actually picked the witnesses for this commission. So Israel basically was the equivalent of being summoned to a court in which its guilt was already presumed, in which one of the jurors had already declared Israel guilty, and which the witnesses for the prosecution were, in fact, the murderers.

I can't think of any country in the world which would participate in such a farce of justice.

...

GWEN IFILL: Pardon my earlier interruption. Justice Goldstone said that those internal investigations were not independent and therefore not reliable.

MICHAEL OREN: This is an independent judiciary of a democratic country. I think that, once you start establishing the precedent that democratic countries can't investigate themselves, I think you've got a problem.

I think this report creates a problem not just for Israel, but for all free democracies in the world. It's a victory for terror. It is a major setback for any country, democratic country that is having to face war against an un-uniformed terrorist organization in a densely populated civilian area. I don't think the United States would like to see a similar report mounted against its conduct of its operations in Afghanistan.

Of course, in the age of Obama, the United States would accept the idea that not all democratic countries can investigate themselves. After all, in the age of Obama there is nothing special about the United States or any other democracy - they are all equal to dictatorships like Iran, Venezuela, Cuba, Syria, Bolivia and others.

What could go wrong?

Israel Matzav: Michael Oren on the Goldstone Report
Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...