dinsdag 26 januari 2016

'Little Jewboy' moment highlights coming divorce between US Jews and Israel


The War of Ideas in the Middle East

'Little Jewboy' moment highlights coming divorce between US Jews and Israel

US Politics 
 on 

Daniel B. Shapiro, US ambassador to Israel, called a "little Jewboy" by a former aide to Netanyahu


Daniel B. Shapiro, US ambassador to Israel, called a "little Jewboy" by a former aide to Netanyahu

You’ve surely seen the coverage of the “Jewboy” insult aimed at the US ambassador to Israel by a former aide to the Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu. Aviv Bushinsky was speaking on televisionabout Ambassador Daniel Shapiro’s criticism of Israeli settlements. “To put it bluntly, it was a statement typical of a little Jew boy,” Bushinsky said. What did Shapiro do wrong? Reuters:

Shapiro’s supposed misstep was to observe in a speech to a security conference that Israel applies the law differently to Israelis and Palestinians living in the West Bank. “There seem to be two standards…”
Shapiro was raised in Illinois but speaks Hebrew and studied at Israel’s Hebrew University. Yet his criticism is the most direct so far by an American official. Indeed it has led some to wonderwhether the US is giving up on Israel.
The flap demonstrates an important sociological trend: American Jews, even mainstream ones indoctrinated to love Israel, are breaking more and more publicly with the Jewish state. The Netanyahu government is proving to be embarrassing to American Jews; they do not want to be associated with rightwing apartheid policies.
The Netanyahu documentary on PBS was very mild, but a shot across the bow. The divorce that we have long predicted on this site is now on the horizon; and in years to come this separation will yield an even bigger reward: mainstream American Jews will declare themselves anti-Zionist.
But let me put away the crystal ball and list the new evidence for the divorce.
Gary Rosenblatt of the Jewish Week
Gary Rosenblatt of the Jewish Week
First, Gary Rosenblatt is a hard-core Israel supporter. But in the Jewish Week ten days ago, he reveals that Jewish leaders say it’s getting impossible to sell Israel to young Jews:
American Jewish leaders confide that generating support for the Jewish state is becoming increasingly difficult these days — even within the Jewish community, and especially among younger people.
The hard fact is that Israel’s leadership is moving in a direction at odds with the next generation of Americans, including many Jews, who want to see greater efforts to resolve the Palestinian conflict and who put the onus for the impasse on Jerusalem. It is not only President Obama who feels that way… Whether or not it is fair, the strong perception today is that the Israeli government is moving further right, and intransigent, at a time when the rest of the world is fed up with the Israel-Palestinian impasse
And this political change will be licensed by fundraisers.
Federation executives worry privately that when the generation of major funders who vividly remember Israel’s struggle for statehood and the anguish of the 1967 and 1973 wars passes from the scene, raising substantial dollars for the Jewish state will be that much harder.
Next, and again in the Jewish press — this trend is not very visible in the American mainstream yet– Haaretz has a Q-and-A with an Israeli leader describing her frustrations in getting U.S. Jews “to engage and support” Israel. Liran Avisar Ben Horin is head of Masa, a pro-Israel group, and she says that US Reform Jews tell her, “I will never set foot in Israel.” Did you hear that?  Ben Horin:
When Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu did his “silence” stunt in the United Nations [last October], I thought to myself maybe he was complaining about the world. But we are really entering an era in which the young Jewish people in North America are partners in this silence….
Anger and disagreement isn’t that bad, because it comes from concern. I’m worried not about Iran but those who are silent. They’re checking out from our discussion. We must ask ourselves how it will look in 30 years. The traditional Jewish leadership is aging, the young leadership is depleted and silent – that’s the story in a nutshell.
About all the anti-Israel stuff and the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions Movement. They say to themselves, “Israel isn’t a brand I want to identify with, so I’ll just quit the discussion.” We haven’t been able to develop a sense of belonging. All the battles of Birthright, Masa and others come down to this fight…
I met Reform Jews who told me, “I will never set foot in Israel.”
I always tell them, “Come and be part of the story, help find a solution.” I invite them to participate in the largest enterprise of the Jewish people.
[Once] they would have turned to youth movements as part of the Zionist discourse. Today, we tell them it will improve their résumé. They come here for half a year or a year, and intern at Google, Check Point, Waze, and in startups too.
Another item from Haaretz. Kathleen Peratis is a liberal Zionist, a former J Street board member who has been very clear-eyed about the occupation. In Haaretz, she authors a piece that is highly favorable to the BDS movement (boycott, divestment and sanctions) because it is the only thing that puts pressure on Israel. Her piece invokes an American civil rights struggle as a guide to Jewish response to Israel:
Progressive American Jews are generally not reluctant to criticize the occupation, but few in the “mainstream Jewish community” (those who get invited to the White House Hanukkah party) will advocate serious measures to hold anyone accountable. At the HaaretzQ conference in New York in December, for example, not a single Jewish speaker advocated any kind of BDS. A few vaguely referred to putting “pressure” on Israel (Colette Avital, former Israeli consul general to New York City; and Rabbi Sharon Kleinbaum) or to making sure there were “consequences” (Lara Friedman, legislative director Americans For Peace Now), but no one got too specific. BDS is high treif and they know it. Calling for it explicitly would be illegal in Israel and the kiss of death in America.
Too many progressive Jews think criticizing Israeli policies on the occupation is enough, but it’s not working. Challenging settler businesses to shut up shop is the new frontier for BDS……While the Jewish world dithers, the world is moving on, developing more consequential tools to hold accountable those who commit or are complicit in occupation-related abuses…
Does ending the abuse of Palestinian rights need to wait for the Israeli political elite to be convinced to change government policy?
As we have just celebrated Martin Luther King Day and Shabbat Tzedek, who thinks Palestinians and the rest of us should put justice on hold?
Right: if not now, when?
Next, even Todd Gitlin sees the writing on the wall. A religious liberal Zionist who is dedicated to opposing the BDS movement, Gitlin nonetheless makes an important concession in his latest assault on BDS in Tablet. He says that filmmaker Bruce Robbins of Columbia  is “right” about the growing international appeal of BDS. And not only that, Israel is undermining its “right to exist.”
He’s right, too, if he means that, outside Israel, belief in the nation’s right to exist has been undermined by Israel’s dreadful national policies and flagrantly illiberal direction.
Questioning Israel’s “right to exist” used to be a radical position. No more.
Again outside the US mainstream: Al Jazeera has published a piece focusing on several Jewish critics of Israel, including Brant Rosen, Tami Gold, and Henry Herskovitz. The piece cites the disquiet inside the Jewish community over Israel.
A study released in 2013 by the Jewish Council on Public Affairs found that almost half of the rabbis surveyed refrained in the preceding three years from publicly expressing their views on Israel. Nearly 40 percent of them sometimes or often avoided expressing “true feelings about Israel and its conflict with the Palestinians” for fear of offending their listeners or those around them, according to the study, entitled Reluctant or Repressed? Aversion to Expressing Views on Israel Among American Rabbis.

Tami Gold, documentary film maker
Tami Gold, documentary film maker
The article contains a crushing anecdote, about a conflict within filmmaker Tami Gold’s family on the right way to memorialize her late mother in 2012:
Her uncle arrived and approached Gold to give her an envelope. It contained a formal letter acknowledging that he had donated money in the name of her mother to the Friends of the Israel Defense Forces, a New York-based group that channels donations to the Israel Defense Forces.
“I was honouring my sister,” Raymond Rickman, the uncle, said of his action.
But for Gold, 66, that was a “horrible” gesture.
“My sister wrote a handwritten letter and sent it to him, saying what he did was a violation of my mother’s spirit and commitment in life, and that he sabotaged our memorial for my mother,” she said.”It is these kinds of grotesque atrocities against the Palestinian people that motivates me to speak out as a Jew,” she said.
Finally, there is this oblique report from England that suggests the brand is toxic all over.
The national pro-Israel rally supported by all major communal organisations has been cancelled because the venue has pulled out.
The “Say No To Terror: Stand With Israel” event was due to take place in Manchester’s Sheridan Suite function rooms on January 31, with around 2,000 people expected to attend.
But it will now happen in March at another location, after the venue in the north-east of the city decided against hosting the event.
Things are changing fast. Gosh when will the U.S. press catch up? We are pleased to be in the thick of this movement, as advocates and journalists, and pleased to see statements that were heretical a couple years ago come into the mainstream. Israel has no right to exist? Reform Jews refuse to set foot in Israel? Here is another prediction. This crisis will not end until American Jews declare, Zionism is racism. And one day they will.
Thanks to Dorothy Zellner, Max Blumenthal, Annie Robbins and Terry Weber.

maandag 18 januari 2016

Dark Money review: Nazi oil, the Koch brothers and a rightwing revolution


Afbeeldingsresultaat voor logo the guardian

Dark Money review: Nazi oil, the Koch brothers and a rightwing revolution

New Yorker writer Jane Mayer examines the origins, rise and dominance of a billionaire class to whom money is no object when it comes to buying power
David Koch
 David Koch listens to speakers at the Defending the American Dream Summit, in Washington DC in November 2011. Photograph: Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images
Lots of American industrialists have skeletons in the family closet. Charles and David Koch, however, are in a league of their own.
The father of these famous rightwing billionaires was Fred Koch, who started his fortune with $500,000 received from Stalin for his assistance constructing 15 oil refineries in the Soviet Union in the 1930s. A couple of years later, his company, Winkler-Koch, helped the Nazis complete their third-largest oil refinery. The facility produced hundreds of thousands of gallons of high-octane fuel for the Luftwaffe, until it was destroyed by Allied bombs in 1944. 
In 1938, the patriarch wrote that “the only sound countries in the world are Germany, Italy and Japan”. To make sure his children got the right ideas, he hired a German nanny. The nanny was such a fervent Nazi that when France fell in 1940, she resigned and returned to Germany. After that, Fred became the main disciplinarian, whipping his children with belts and tree branches.
These are just a handful of the many bombshells exploded in the pages of Dark Money, Jane Mayer’s indispensable new history “of the billionaires behind the rise of the radical right” in the US.
A veteran investigative reporter and a staff writer for the New Yorker, Mayer has combined her own research with the work of scores of other investigators, to describe how the Kochs and fellow billionaires like Richard Scaife have spent hundreds of millions to “move their political ideas from the fringe to the center of American political life”.
Twenty years after collaborating with the Nazis, Fred Koch had lost none of his taste for extremism. In 1958, he was one of the 11 original members of the John Birch Society, an organization which accused scores of prominent Americans, including President Dwight Eisenhower, of communist sympathies.
In 1960, Koch wrote: “The colored man looms large in the Communist plan to take over America.” He strongly supported the movement to impeach chief justice Earl Warren, after the supreme court voted to desegregate public schools in Brown v Board of Education. His sons became Birchers too, although Charles was more enamored of “antigovernment economic writers” than communist conspiracies.
After their father died, Charles and David bought out their brothers’ shares in the family company, then built it into the second largest privately held corporation in America.
“As their fortunes grew, Charles and David Koch became the primary underwriters of hardline libertarian politics in America,” Mayer writes. Charles’s goal was to “tear the government out ‘at the root’.”
Another man who studied Charles thought “he was driven by some deeper urge to smash the one thing left in the world that could discipline him: the government”.
Much of what the American right has accomplished can be seen as a reaction to the upheavals of the 1960s, when big corporations like Dow Chemical (which manufactured napalm for the Vietnam War) reached the nadir of their popularity.
In 1971, corporate lawyer (and future supreme court justice) Lewis Powell wrote a 5,000-word memo that was a blueprint for a broad attack on the liberal establishment. The real enemies, Powell wrote, “were the college campus, the pulpit, the media, the intellectual and literary journals, the arts and sciences”, and “politicians”.
He argued that conservatives should control the political debate at its source by demanding “balance” in textbooks, television shows and news coverage – themes that were echoed in inflammatory speeches by Richard Nixon’s vice-president, Spiro Agnew.
Ted Cruz at a Heritage Foundation event.
Pinterest
 Ted Cruz at a Heritage Foundation event. Photograph: Pablo Martinez Monsivais/AP
The war on liberals was so effective that practically everyone reacted to it: from the New York Times, which hired ex-Nixon speechwriter Bill Safire to “balance” its op-ed page, to the Ford Foundation, which gave $300,000 to the American Enterprise Institute (AEI) in 1972. The impact was cumulative: almost four decades later, Barack Obama was astonished by one of the first questions asked to him, by a New York Times reporter, after he became president: “Are you a socialist?”
The AEI was one of dozens of the new thinktanks bankrolled by hundreds of millions from the Kochs and their allies. Sold to the public as quasi-scholarly organizations, their real function was to legitimize the right to pollute for oil, gas and coal companies, and to argue for ever more tax cuts for the people who created them. Richard Scaife, an heir to the Mellon fortune, gave $23m over 23 years to the Heritage Foundation, after having been the largest single donor to AEI.
Next, the right turned its sights on American campuses. John M Olin founded the Olin Foudation, and spent nearly $200m promoting “free-market ideology and other conservative ideas on the country’s campuses”. It bankrolled a whole new approach to jurisprudence called “law and economics”, Mayer writes, giving $10m to Harvard, $7m to Yale and Chicago, and over $2m to Columbia, Cornell, Georgetown and the University of Virginia.
The amount of spent money has been staggering. Between 2005 and 2008, the Kochs alone spent nearly $25m on organizations fighting climate reform. One study by a Drexel University professor found 140 conservative foundations had spent $558m over seven years for the same purpose.
The next step for the radical right was to support the creation of the Tea Party movement, through organizations like Americans for Prosperity, which was funded by the Kochs.
“The Heritage Foundation, the Cato Institute and Americans for Prosperity provided speakers, talking points, press releases, transportation, and other logistical support,” Mayer writes. As the writer Thomas Frank has pointed out, the genius of this strategy was to “turn corporate self-interest into a movement among people on the streets”.
The last element of this multi-pronged campaign saw the direct investment of hundreds of millions of dollars in political campaigns at every level, from president to city councillor. In 1996, a last-minute $3m campaign of attack ads against Democrats in 29 races, a campaign which may have been financed by the Kochs, was considered outrageous and extravagant. But after the disappearance of virtually all restrictions on campaign contributions – another result of rightwing lobbying and the supreme court’s Citizens United decision – $3m is now a tiny number.
In the 2016 elections, the goal of the Koch network of contributors is to spend $889m, more than twice what they spent in 2012.
Four years ago, because Obama had the most sophisticated vote-pulling operation in the history of American politics, and a rather lackluster opponent, a Democratic president was able to withstand such a gigantic financial onslaught. This time around, it’s not clear that any Democrat will be so fortunate.

zaterdag 9 januari 2016

Cologne police chief fired as witness says NYE violence was coordinated

Afbeeldingsresultaat voor logo the guardian




Cologne police chief fired as witness says NYE violence was coordinated

City faces far-right Pegida rally as German government says 18 of 31 people identified were asylum seekers, but none suspected of sexual assault




ute
Loaded: 0%
Progress: 0%
Cologne police chief sacked after New Year’s Eve sex attacks – video

Cologne’s police chief has been removed from his post amid criticism of his force’s handling of a string of sexual assaults and robberies carried out by groups of men in the German city on New Year’s Eve.
His enforced departure came as a witness to the violence told the Guardian the events appeared to have been coordinated. Lieli Shabani, 35, said she saw three Arabic speaking males who were “clearly giving instructions and directing a lot of the males”.
The city braced on Saturday for a rally of the far-right Pegida movement, one of the groups that point to the assaults as proof that chancellor Angela Merkel’s liberal migrant policy is failing.
Police expect about 1,000 Pegida supporters and the local far-right group Pro NRW, as well as counter-demonstrators from the group “Cologne against Right-wingers”, local media said.
The protest is scheduled to start at 1pm in the central square where hundreds of women last week experienced assaults in violence that has shocked Germany.
Police chief Wolfgang Albers, 60, had been criticised for the handling of the violence, with a leaked police report describing this week how officers were initially overwhelmed by events outside the city’s train station, after which more than 100 women filed criminal complaints of sexual assault and robbery, including two accounts of rape.
Cologne police said on Friday that Albers is being sent into early retirement by the state government. They said North Rhine-Westphalia’s governing Cabinet will formally discuss the decision on Tuesday but Albers will not return to his job.
Albers had faced mounting criticism both for the police’s handling of last week’s events and of the fallout.
Cologne mayor Henriette Reker suggested on Friday that police had held back information from her, and said in a statement that her “trust in the Cologne police leadership is significantly shaken”.
The leaked police report, obtained by the German newspaper Bild, said women were forced to “run a gauntlet … beyond description” to reach or leave the station.
Shabani, the witness spoken to by the Guardian, said she had viewed the events from the cathedral steps, having gone to the city centre to experience her first German new year, eight months after arriving as a political asylum seeker from Iran. She said she had been astounded by the police’s nonchalance. “They seemed to just let it happen,” she said. “I watched as men fired large firecrackers horizontally into the crowd and they police just stood at the side of the square with their hands on their hips”.
Describing what she called “coordination tactics” among the men, Shabani said: “I watched for some time as three men who were smartly dressed gave out instructions
One time a group of three or four males would come up to them, be given instructions and sent away into the crowd. Then another group of four or five would come up, and they’d gesticulate in various directions and send them off again.”
The men occasionally paused to take selfies on their mobiles, she said, adding that they wore “sports chic” or “the type of clothing rappers might wear – smart trainers, baseball caps”.
“It looked to me like they were clearly directing the events,” said Shabani, describing the evening as “chaotic”.
The kindergarten teacher suffered a 5cm gash to her right hand, after intervening to stop a firework exploding in her three-year-old’s pram. “I saw it coming and put my hand up just in time to stop it,” she said.
Earlier, the German interior ministry said 31 people had been identified as being involved in the violence, of whom 18 were asylum seekers suspected of crimes ranging from theft to assault. None of the asylum seekers was suspected of committing sexual assaults of the kind that prompted outrage in Germany over the past week.





Mute
Loaded: 0%
Progress: 0%

Plate said the vast majority of the criminal acts documented by federal police on the night were related to theft and bodily injury. Three were related to sexual assaults, but police had no names linked to them.
Of the 31 people identified, nine were Algerian, eight Moroccan, five Iranian, four Syrian and two German, plus an Iraqi, a Serb and a US citizen.
In addition to the 31 suspects, the arrest of two men from north Africa was announced on Friday morning in connection to the attacks. They were later released due to insufficient evidence of their involvement.
The incidents in and around the square in front of the main train station have led to accusations of a police and media cover-up to avoid anti-foreigner sentiment following Merkel’s open-door policy towards refugees and migrants. More than a million refugees have entered Germany in the past 12 months.
The chancellor said on Thursday the New Year assaults were unacceptable and that deportation policy needed to be continually under review “to send a clear signal to people who do not want to stick to our legal framework”.



“The feeling women had in this case, of being at people’s mercy without any protection, is intolerable for me personally as well. And so it is important for everything that happened there to be put on the table.”
Merkel said she would change the law on deportations and increase police numbers. “We must also keep talking about the basis of our cultural coexistence in Germany and what people rightly expect is that actions follow words,” she added.
Victims have described their attackers as being Arab or north African in appearance but a Cologne lawyer joined a growing number of people on Thursday who insisted the description was incomplete.
“Clients I’ve spoken to who were there at the station to peacefully see in the new year say that there were also Albanian, Kurds, Montenegrins, Syrians and Iraqis involved in the tumult,” said Mehdi Labidi, a Tunisian-German.
Germany’s justice minister said asylum seekers could be deported if they were found to have participated in the attacks.
Evidence has emerged that similar attacks had taken place in seven other German cities. After Cologne, Hamburg appears to have been the worst affected. Out of a total of 167 complaints to police of attacks in the cities – around two-thirds of them being described as sexual assault, including two cases of rape – 100 relate to Cologne, and 53 to Hamburg.
Meanwhile, Finnish police reported an unusually high level of sexual harassment in Helsinki on New Year’s Eve and said they had been tipped off about plans by groups of asylum seekers to sexually harass women.
Helsinki’s deputy police chief, Ilkka Koskimaki, said: “There hasn’t been this kind of harassment on previous New Year’s Eves or other occasions for that matter … This is a completely new phenomenon in Helsinki.”
Security guards hired to patrol the city on New Year’s Eve told police there had been widespread sexual harassment at a central square where around 20,000 people had gathered for celebrations. 
Swedish police said at least 15 young women had reported being groped by groups of men on New Year’s Eve in the city of Kalmar. A spokesman said groups of men encircled women on a crowded square and groped them. He said no one was physically injured but many of those targeted were terrified.

My comments :
Question : What hidden agenda / power(s) shelters behind the organizers of the mass-attacks on women during NY Eve.
What interest may asylum seekers have had to risk, to jeopardize their chances  of asylum in Europe, by entering into the behavior that they displayed on NY eve in some major cities around Europe.
Question : Where did the organizations of human traffickers emerge from that initialized the - highly lucrative for them and highly expensive for the refuges - trips towards western Europe.
So - besides the criminals that did and still do physically organize the travel routes towards Europe - what powers (political or otherwise) have been operating behind the human traffickers and with what purpose.
Question : Are the political actors behind the Yinon / Clean Break / PNAC plans / projects, that are responsible for the recent violent conflicts in the Middle Eastern region - actors, that most certainly have to be awarded the full responsibility for the masses of desperate, displaced people in the ME area - the very same powers, that might try to benefit from the negative influence on the opinion of EU citizens and their political representatives on displaced people from the so-called Muslim countries.
If that is true, it might as well be true, that those powers are also behind the organization of the NY eve attacks on EU women.
Powers after all, that might have an interest in trying to generate a general negative attitude towards Muslims - and at the same time destroying the (increasingly pro-BDS) EU in the process, by poisoning the spirit of solidarity, that marks the foundation of this "community of high values" - in order to use that attitude for example, to try to execute a second Nakba.

A second Nakba, (unpunished by the West again), to finally entirely cleanse the former LoN / UN mandate Palestine from the remainder of the (systematically stigmatized as) "inferior" indigenous people of that very same mandate - the Palestinians - in order to achieve an exclusive Jewish State.

Just the way Herzl meant it to be when he wrote the pamphlet "der Judenstaat" in 1896..