In my latest piece for Souciant, I look at the potential for change that Mitt Romney, Sheldon Adelson and Benjamin Netanyahu have created by trying to break the bipartisan consensus in the US on Israel. It will come to nothing if people don’t take this and run with it from within the Democratic Party, but there is a chance, if time, energy and lots of money get to work on it, that there could be a sufficient change among Democrats toward a US policy that is more sensible.
This week at Souciant, I got a different view from a well-placed source on the potential of an Israeli attack on Iran. I haven’t changed my view–I don’t think it will happen. But I still thought it sufficiently important to explore what this source told me, even if it didn’t sway me to his view. You might find it interesting…
I don’t often use this space for recommending articles by other writers. You can follow me on Twitter or Facebook for that. But these two bear special mention.
The more recent one is Tom Friedman’s piece in the Times today, “Why Not In Vegas?” where Friedman exposes the pathetic farce that was Mitt Romney’s trip to Israel, a voyage which was not about US interests but about Bibi Netanyahu’s designs on getting his friend in the White House and Romney’s shameless shilling for Sheldon Adelson’s money. It’s the kind of piece we need to see more of from Friedman and others among his cadre.
The second is an outstanding piece by Noam Sheizaf about the awful tactics being used by the National Jewish Democratic Council, which, in attacking Romney as not being pro-Israel enough, sounds more right wing and hawkish than the worst neoconservatives. It’s a classic example of how liberals sell out all of their values when it comes to Israel, and Noam examines it most deftly. Please check it out.
The head of the Yesha Council has stated the obvious–the settlers have won. In this week’s piece at Souciant, I examine his op-ed and its implications. Ultimately, until progressives, leftists and liberals can find some common ground to work together, there will be no solution until a cataclysmic event decides it. The right is marching steadfastly toward institutional apartheid, and if the left doesn’t get its act together, they will shift the terms of the discourse and the politics yet again, to everyone’s detriment.
In my latest piece for Souciant, I take on the growing use of Holocaust rhetoric to support an Israeli attack on Iran. In particular, the idea that Jews are more justified in drastic acts of self-defense because of the traumatic effect of the Holocaust that still lingers.
Also, Souciant has weathered another attack. Please help support this site that is drawing fire from the far right (current evidence suggests ultra-right/neo-Nazi groups are attacking it) by not only reading my piece, but the many other worthwhile articles on the site, and tell your friends.
In my piece this week at Souciant, I look at the rather ludicrous controversy around the Center for American Progress regarding a blogger’s use of the term “Israel-firster” to describe people whose view of US foreign policy is driven by their (or Netanyahu’s) view of Israel’s strategic interests. It’s a phony argument meant to extend the right-wing campaign against CAP, and it seems to have had some success. That is something that not only liberals, but anyone who believes in free and open political debate should take very seriously.
In a piece on LobeLog today, I look at Sheldon Adelson, Newt Gingrich’s savior and radical anti-peace financier.