MJ, the amount of damage is much more than you mention here. At some point the fundamentalist Christians here decided to back anything violent Israel wanted to do, in order to achieve the Rapture, when all Jews would either convert or go to hell. The Likud factions here and abroad decided to partner with these people, based on their belief that the Bible is an enforceable land deed (but only the old testament), and that the Rapture wouldn't happen... they were both 'playing' one another in an insane apocalyptic dysfunctional alliance. That torpedoed the peace process as soon as Bush was elected. When 9-11 happened, they all agreed on the Iraq war, and the cable channels were full of American neocons and Israeli likudniks ginning up war against Saddam Hussein. We never did find out who faked those yellowcake documents, did we? And of course there have been three other wars since, and we are in for yet another round of Iran the bogeyman, hoping to gin up a fifth.

Yes, these people are insane. But the good news is that they had their chance and have played out their string, their old tactics don't work any more, and they don't know it. You should encourage them to try even harder and do even more, because they're deep in boomerang territory. What is needed is for pro-peace, pro-Israel writers like yourself, Eric Alterman, Joe Klein and many others to continue, giving your goyim supporters cover on the Hitler thing. The momentum is all on our side now. That whole side, Limbaugh, Rove, the neocons and AIPAC... it's epic fail time.

I know it's shocking that we disagree, but some folks on the left might think it "creepy" that certain lefties, with an axe to grind with an alleged coordinated effort by some Jewish guys to derail this appointment, are sticking up for a man like Chas Freeman who, on the face of the record, is really cozy financially and otherwise with the despotic regimes of China and Saudi Arabia. That's not to say that he's not the right man for the job. To me, he appears to be brilliant on foreign affairs in a very eclectic sense. But I'm telling you, this is the wrong battle for folks who place the two-state solution at the forefront. MJ, it is not a good thing when you are now fighting with a guy like Jeffrey Goldberg. It's that simple. I know lots of reasons not to like Goldberg (for example his position pre-Iraq War which was the same of course as Senator Kerry's and Clinton's was in a non-Senatorial way). Still, the Goldbergs of the world are needed for the real battle ahead and this dispute should not have been about the Israel Lobby. Repectfully, and on this issue I mean that MJ, you have joined issue on the wrong battlefront.

Very simply put, M.J., you're absolutely correct, despite what fear-loving and fearmongering apologists will say ad nauseum.

MJ, there's every reason for concern, as I'm sure you know. No powerful entity has ever stood by to see its power eroded. There's no doubt that the freeman appointment was a direct challenge to the lobby and its friends. That they would send out Rosen - of all people - an indicted man suspected of spying for israel - to toe the line on this issue is telling.

What I fear - and you should too - is that the lobby-and-friends may go even more irrational before this is over. After all, they fear being severely compromised by a series of potentially unfavorable developments, of which the freeman issue is but a symptom. These include the coming Lieberman appointment as FM (should that not be derailed) and the mounting n criticisms of israel in the wake of gaza - from both within the jewish community and without. One could even include the ongoing economic collapse as another of those unfavorable events - now unfolding in front of our eyes as the grand wall street heist of the bush era

The smart question is - what would a party used to the wielding of power do if it feels its back is against the wall?

As one who has considered some worst-case-scenarios in response, I'd advise those who applaud the signs of change and take comfort in the rise of J Street and the the forum to not quite count their chickens yet. There are still way too many of the powerful who busy themselves going around trying to destroy the hatchlings.

"...think that American Jews have divided loyalties. We don't. But crusades like this, not surprisingly, leave the impression that we do."

I'm sorry MJ, most American Jews don't have divided loyalties, but many clearly do, including some very prominent ones.

I know this is hard to say out loud because it plays into "Elders of Zion" conspiracy theories. But face the obvious, right-in-front-of-your-face, fact: many American Jews have divided loyalties and face basically no censure in this country for acting on them (see Steven Rosen).

Would you really say that someone like Alan Dershowitz is more loyal to the U.S. than Israel? Really? Do you really think that someone like Dershowitz wouldn't move to Israel if he saw irreconcilable differences between his two countries?

Many American Jews have dual loyalty, and given the prominence and power of Jews here top actually influence polity, it becomes a problem.

Kol HaKavod, MJ!

When the history of this transformational era is written, the name of M.J. Rosenberg will occupy an important page.

Simply put, you are a hero, and an essential voice to countless who have been voiceless for far too long.

So thank you for everything you do, for all the hard risks you take to continue to fight the good fight every day...

MJ: "Why can't they just shut up?"

ME TO MJ: HOW dare you! How DARE you! How dare YOU! HOW DARE YOU! (LOL) The answer is that their identities are so inextricably intertwined with...

"Every miserable fool who has nothing at all of which he can be proud, adopts as a last resource pride in the nation to which he belongs; he is ready and happy to defend all its faults and follies tooth and nail, thus reimbursing himself for his own inferiority."
—Arthur Schopenhauer, Aphorisms

M.J., just want to congratulate you on another great discussion provoking post.

In my opinion, your efforts are the second best way to fight anti-Semitism, the first best being a majority of Jews doing the same thing, weakening the lobby and steering its focus back towards sanity.

Someday at the vast majority of Jewish family reunions it will be the racists and warmongers who sensor themselves when discussion turns to politics, and not the peaceniks who recognize the legitimacy of Palestinian grievances and respect them as equals.

Right now the tide is turning big time, and I apologize to those who would argue that my hope for the future is and always has been a reality.

Ooops. Can't leave without including this. Now, the brave Chinese freedom fighters have spoken out against Ambassador Freeman. What do the alleged progressives do now that it's not just some Jews? Stay tuned folks, for more sophistry and hair splitting, as those committed to a battle about the Lobby and disloyal Jews strain to distinguish and discredit the heroes of Tianamen Square. Pass the challah, this is gonna be good! Let me guess, it will begin by discrediting the source who published letter signed by the 87 brave Chinese dissidents, the neo-con dually loyal Jew Marty Peretz, to which I respond that my hunch is that those committed to making this a Lobby thing wouldn't have the stones to publish this and concede a principal point in their battle, to wit, that Ambassador Freeman, however qualified (we'll never know perhaps), has views that would make a hard-ass right-wing war monger proud, and whose prospective appointment has shocked the conscience of the brave Chinese of Tianamen Square.

http://blogs.tnr.com/tnr/blogs/the_spine/archive/2009/03/06/the-freeman-matter-will-not-die.aspx

Buckle up free-thinkers.

Let me get this straight. MJ Rosenberg supports Freeman not so much because of what he stands for as because he doesn't want those who are critical of Freeman's positions on Israel to block the appointment. He is afraid that if Freeman's opponents - whom he lumps together as the pro-settler "Lobby," though they seem to comprise many who, like him, oppose the occupation and favor a two state solution - prevail, because he is concerned that outspoken supporters of Israel imperil him and his family by making them appear to be foreign saboteurs risking some sort of anti-semitic backlash.

All I can say is this twisted logic calls more for a shrink than policy analysis.

Personally, I don't really care very much about Freeman either way and I suspect most Americans have never heard of him. I have read a speech in which he appears to lay the blame for strife in the Middle East squarely on Israel - a view that I strenuously take issue with. Those who Freeman's view are of course entitled to do so without having their loyalty as Americans questioned or being blamed for potentially instigating a modern day pogrom.

No, that is not what I fear.

I fear that this type of gang up on an American official based solely on Israel leads to the suspicion that Jews like this gang are typical and that our loyalties are split. Vut only in the context of hundreds of other incidents where the same, or similar gangs, go into frenzies over Carter, Walt-Mearsheimer, kids at Hampshire or Ithaca colleges, etc.

I don't fear pogroms. I fear that Americans will look at us as less than American because of the perception of dual loyalties.

I am not afraid of Americans. I just am, as I said, nauseated at the idea that anyone ever lump me in any way with that gang. As a pro-Israel Jewish American, I just don't want thugs like Perle and Feith (who belong in the Hague) affecting anyone's view of 99.9% of the rest of us.

Hey bslev, this from M.J., regarding whether there are American Jews whose loyalty is severely compromised:
"I agree.
Certainly Doug Feith and Richard Perle."

Should we self-censor ourselves and never say word about these people, because people like you will assume they are being lumped in, and will think we're anti-Semitic for criticizing any disloyal Jews?

What about when they are caught spying for Israel (Perle) are then placed at the highest levels of government, and they start arguing from the highest soap boxes that we should pre-preemptively invade countries that pose no threat to us? What about when they forge evidence, and hire charlatans like Chalabi to provide fake witnesses?

What should we think/do when we find out these same people wrote papers for Netanyahu 10 years previously that promoted the same pre-emptive invasion of the same country because it was viewed to be in Israel's interest, and would further strengthen Israel's negotiating power with the Palestinians?

Should we remain silent, because people like you want to pretend the accused are infallible? Wouldn't this give people like Perle and Feith free reign to commit American lives and treasure to other conflicts they see as being in the interest of Israel, even if they threaten the fiscal solvency of the U.S. and risk a global depression of unimaginable scale?

I'm talking about Iran here.

So do you still want us to sensor ourselves because it makes you feel uncomfortable to know there are such Jews?

Maybe you should direct that frustration at Perle, Feith, Kristol, and Krauthammer. They think that Iraq was totally worth it, even though it cost 1 million Iraqi lives, created 4 million Iraqi refugees, cost more than 4,000 American lives, and cost the U.S. Treasury more than $2,000,000,000,000.00 by the time all is said and done.

They know attacking Iran would cause the global economy to collapse much more than it already has, and yet they still want the U.S. to let Israel to invade Iran, because Iran MIGHT someday acquire highly enriched uranium, and MIGHT then be suicidal enough to bomb Israel with it pre-preemptively, thus guaranteeing the total destruction of their society by Israel's untold dozens of Nuclear bombs.

You still want us to be quiet and self-sensor ourselves, or only the non-Jews among us?

I get the feeling you're a go along-get along kind of guy. I wonder if you spoke out in the lead up to the Iraq invasion. I wonder if you see the pro-Iran invasion lobby for what it is.

I don't suspect you of being disloyal, but I wonder if you sing childrens' songs in your head whenever you're faced with overwhelming evidence of disloyal behavior by Jewish individuals.

And the fact is there are true anti-Semites who would point to the same evidence about Perle and Feith as I did above. Does THAT mean I should sensor myself? At the risk of total global economic devastation, and the likely implementation of martial law in a devastated U.S.?

I'm more brave than that, and I'd hope you are too.

"...I want them thought of as Americans and not coming under suspicion because a few hundred activists gives the impression that our loyalties are divided when they are not..."

According to Douglas Bloomfield, a former AIPAC staffer:

"...JTA quoted tax records showing AIPAC raised $86 million in 2007, doubling 2003’s $43 million. Not all of that money was a result of the espionage case, but many millions were..." h/t Mondoweiss

Do you think the reason for this is because existing AIPAC members have been increasing their contribution, or do you think it might be because AIPAC has been dramatically increasing its membership? Or, I guess it could be both?

That said, I'm also interested if the PAC Christians United for Israel has seen an increase in coffers and membership?

Hey M.J., what do you think it would take for genocide denier Abe Foxman booted from the top of the ADL?

What kind of movement could overcome the flood of money he'd receive to fight it?

Mszost,

While I can't retract my (inflammatory) belief that there are other Pollards running around our government, I do regret including that statement one paragraph after noting Rahm's service for (not in, apparently) the IDF. It could easily be inferred that I was talking about him, even though I said "not that I'm talking about Rahm."

It is certainly the case that disloyalty of all kinds are the root of our problems. Disloyalty to the long term fiscal and democratic health of our country.

When the "innovative financial products" were created, marketed, and deregulated, it is undoubtedly the case that their potential problems were considered, and ultimately disregarded, because those involved knew it wouldn't be them personally that would be cleaning up the mess. They would have already pocketed untold millions or billions of dollars. The banks also knew they had enough control over both political parties that there would be no consequences that would come close to canceling out the benefits.

As Doug Feith said about Iraq when asked about our invasion not working, the bankers who introduced these "financial weapons of mass destruction" (TM Warren Buffet) probably also concluded, "we are not planning for failure, we are planning for success."

The bankers knew that they could install Geithner atop the treasury even after the roots, breadth, and depth of the financial crisis was realized by the American public, and the bankers knew they would be rewarded, not investigated and punished for their reckless endangerment of the entire global economy.

The exact same can be said about the people who brought us the Iraq war. They knew they could forge Iraqi ties to al Queda, forge documents from Niger (with assistance from Michael Leeden and Italian Intelligence), provide fake witnesses, and get co-conspirators like Judith Miller and NYT Editor Bill Keller to print the lies on the front page of the most influential paper in the land.

They knew they could do all this, lie before Congress and the U.N., and completely get away with it. That's the definition of all powerful, both the bankers and the cabal that brought us Iraq.

We should all be incredibly worried not only about the banks next moves, but also the people who would now like to help Israel provoke a sufficient provocation to provide "justification" for an Israeli attack on Iran with U.S. approval.

Obama and his Bush affiliated Legal Counsel believe in much of the Cheney interpretation of Executive power.

Israel provoked the 1967 war, and the U.S. collaborated with Israel on the false flag attack on an American ship, the U.S.S. Liberty. Our C.I.A. director at the time and our Secretary of State later admitted the obvious truth to that, as previously stated by the American crewmen and the Israeli pilots ordered to fire on the American ship.

If the Lobby(ies) pressures Congress to pass more provocative legislation designed to trigger or set the stage for future Iranian retaliation, to justify a presently unpalatable (to the American public) attack on Iran, that will be a major problem.

If those who want to invade Iran, and trigger the devastating domino effect that would follow think they can get away with it, that is a major problem.

Just like democracy and human and constitutional rights suffered all over the world in the wake of 9/11, these things would suffer much more in the wake of a conflict of Iran.

It would also be a great excuse to divert blame for the financial crisis away from those responsible, and it would also give Netanyahu a great excuse to ethnically cleanse Gaza and the West Bank.

The Obama Administration could then have an excuse for keeping in place the Bush assaults on the constitution, which they are already fighting for tooth and nail. Continued warrentless wiretapping? No problem. Continued arrest without trial, or citizens and non-citizens alike? No problem. Another Executive Order secretly claiming dictatorial powers? Privatization of Social Security? Blame it on Iran and their acts of aggression.

Hopefully Obama is able to resist this entire scenario, but we would be foolish to think that some around him are not looking at the possible "benefits" of an Iranian conflict, and talking with Israel about how best to at least theoretically provoke Israel.

I know nobody in the Obama Administration has criticized Israel for it's current dirty war in Iran, and I haven't heard anything about the U.S. stopping it's own dirty war on Iran.

Just before Geithner was officially nominated as Treasury Secretary, he said something like 'times like these are what we (bankers) live for.'

Crises like that which is being planned with Iran are what entire other (and often overlapping) groups live for.

Remember that the Patriot act was written before 9/11, and that the U.S. Military has been training to quell civil unrest in America for more than 10 years. These efforts have been ratcheted up significantly in recent years, and Obama hasn't said anything about slowing them.

So I agree that our problems are not limited to just those motivated by loyalty to Israel. Many others are motivated by greed, power, and less accountability to citizenry. Imagine that, lol.